Can you talk me out of becoming a Catholic?

[spockrates]

Regarding the issue of the truth of Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist, I’ve found this helpful discussion thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=6774443

 

[jmcrae]

So the conversion of Russia and most of the Slavic nations doesn’t count as far as evangelization?

I was under the impression that the Russians went looking for them; not the other way around.

 

[tomarin]

I was under the impression that the Russians went looking for them; not the other way around.

I’m a little fuzzy on this, but I thought it was Saints Cyril and Methodius – the “apostles to the Slavs” – who introduced Byzantine Christianity to the Slavic world beginning with the Bulgarians but culminating in the conversion of the Russians (not as a whole – the leaders converted first and the ordinary people later – and not in a single generation). The fact that there were pre-existing trade routes that linked the Greek world and the pagan Slavs also played a role. But Orthodox missionaries did the heavy lifting.

 

[JonNC]

It’s like Noah’s Arc all over again!

 

[jmcrae]

I’m a little fuzzy on this, but I thought it was Saints Cyril and Methodius – the “apostles to the Slavs” – who introduced Byzantine Christianity to the Slavic world beginning with the Bulgarians but culminating in the conversion of the Russians (not as a whole – the leaders converted first and the ordinary people later – and not in a single generation). The fact that there were pre-existing trade routes that linked the Greek world and the pagan Slavs also played a role. But Orthodox missionaries did the heavy lifting.

Wasn’t it Prince Vladimir who, when he converted to Christianity, went seeking throughout the world to find the religion that best expressed his ideas of Christianity, and then decided to establish the Russian Orthodox Church based on the Byzantine model? Not saying that the Orthodox Bishops didn’t do a lot of hard work, but wasn’t it by invitation of Prince Vladimir, rather than by their own evangelistic efforts that they arrived in Russia, to begin with.

 

[tomarin]

Wasn’t it Prince Vladimir who, when he converted to Christianity, went seeking throughout the world to find the religion that best expressed his ideas of Christianity, and then decided to establish the Russian Orthodox Church based on the Byzantine model? Not saying that the Orthodox Bishops didn’t do a lot of hard work, but wasn’t it by invitation of Prince Vladimir, rather than by their own evangelistic efforts that they arrived in Russia, to begin with.

I don’t want to go out on a limb about something I’m not too knowledgable about, but it seems to me that while his decision was pivotal, it was predisposed by the historical connection between Greek culture and the Slavic world and by the conversion of the Eastern Slavs to Byzantine Christianity. His own grandmother was a convert to Eastern Christianity, for example.

 

[AmateurPianist]

You have not missed much. No TV show since the first compares to the original 52 episodes. The Start Trek movie that was released in 2009 was extremely well done, however. It’s worth a watch, if you don’t have a religious conviction against seeing movies rated PG-13.

Speaking of the movie, I have seen it 3-4 times and am not convinced I have “got it” yet.

My friend says that what the movie did was wipe out all of the Star Trek history starting with the original 52 and going foreward. And that leaves us free for a set of movies again with Kirk, Spock, Scotty and the gang.

I don’t see that, but I might have missed it. The young Spock in this movie notwithstanding, Spock will always be Leonard Nimoy.

Now reading this thread, I am reading that there is a domestic situation with your wife. I sort of understand. There is a wide range of churches I could conceivably attend, but my wife has a much smaller circle of possibilities. Which is why I will always go to a church in her circle of possibilities. Now that is as long as I continue to believe…

…that God is not a respector of organizations…that the church of Jesus Christ can exist in many organizations…that all Christian organizations are equally flawed as it were…that there are no organizations out there that God gives special benefits/graces to that He can/will not give to other organizations.

…it just makes sense that I align myself with something we both are comfortable with.

Now if I became convinced that God has revealed one and only one organization must be exclusively the church of Jesus Christ, and that God has revealed what that organization is, all bets are off. In that case I must align myself with that organization no matter what the cost.

My suggestion to you is that you follow similar logic.

 

[catholic-rcia]

Regarding the issue of the truth of Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist, I’ve found this helpful discussion thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=6774443

12 years ago my wife and I were asked by a Nun, Sister Maryland if we would consider taking Holy Communion to a dying man in the hospital, a world war two Veteran. We said yes, as I was just off my own conversion to Baptism. Little did I know what we were in store for. I have taken Communion to the dying ever since. Some I got to know, others I got to just be with, those who could no longer speak. My first encounter with the Consecrated Host took place after Mass. Our Father was supposed to place it on the Alter for me so I could pick it up afterwards.

He forgot. So he showed me how to open the Tabernacle in case he forgot again in the future. Here I am at the Tabernacle where in our old Parish was directly under the Crucifix. As he opened it I felt for the very first time in my life what it means to be un worthy. (Do you want to talk about a burning in your heart?) I could here the words spoken at Mass “Lord I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the words and I shall be healed” I heard the words, “Rich I love you, its ok, take, give it”

This is a side miracle, how Jesus would have me, a sinner be part of this, and love my wife and I all the way through it. The pain of being with a dying man who could only look into our eyes, the pain of such silence, who wants to be here. Crucifixtion can be un comfortable. Then you make a special place for the Host, you pray deeply, you start “ Peace be with you Surge”, he motions with all he has, and you can hear his words “and also with you” …let us call to mind our sins…Lord Jesus you forgive sinners, Christ have mercy….You continue on, you learn to want to be there because you have helped to bring Christ to one in need of Him, you have stepped aside yourselves and it just happens.

Eucharist is very much real and it never stops giving, it never stops loving.

The experience of Holy Communion weather receiving it or giving it is the most profound Miracle the Church that Christ built has to offer us mere mortals. It leads us to Confession, It truly is transforming. No body can argue against this miracle using the Holy Scriptures, the Old and New Testaments. Jesus clearly spoke on it, in clear words to His Disciples; the translation can not be mocked or distorted in any way. The only question really is do you believe in Miracles? All of the Miracles of healing made way for it. Walking on the water, the fish and the bread multiplied.

Eucharist is the food that feeds us, it is our daily bread. When you come to a slight understanding of this miracle yet reject it, try to prove it false with human reasoning it is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Eucharist is true food from Christ, it is a Miracle given that has brought His church into the hear and now, and which Miracle do you want to be able to fully explain?

Spiritual food. We know this as Catholics. Why? Because we partake of it, that’s how you know. I have been blessed to help many Mormons come to the table of our Lord. They have all told me that there is nothing like it in the world. “Do (this) in memory of me” We do it exactly the way our Lord and God told us to do it, and we believe in it heart and soul.

Can I fully explain it? I have to leave this up to God. I don’t have to know everything so I can sleep better at night. I don’t need blocks all stacked in perfect order. All I know is that it has produced thousands of Saints spanning 2000 years. People who came to know they were sinful, then they came to know their Savior, they then proceeded to die to themselves, their pride and their ego because its not at all about progression, about going up to an exalted state. No it’s about going down on to your knees, into the dirt, calling upon His mercy. How else can you truly expect to be embraced by Jesus, by His Father?

By receiving Christ in the Eucharist sinners can become saints, they are able to pick up their Crosses as instructed, to die well for Him, in Him and through Him.

Jesus left us His Church, He feeds His Church with His body and His Blood, soul and Divinity. Who says His flesh is of no avail as our flesh is? Those who eat His Body and drink His blood worthily will live forever just as He told us. Worthily meaning you know you are a patient of Jesus, that He is the doctor. You have this understanding with Him. Thus “Lord I am not worthy to receive you, only say the words and I shall be healed …”Your sins have been absolved, go in peace and sin no more” Its Confession that makes us worthy to receive Him in the Eucharist, so that we know how much we are loved.

While all of the others left the 12 stayed. They believed, He had the words of eternal life. Who does not wish for a Miracle? In all honesty we can get it daily; we all get it daily, because we believe.

 

[spockrates]

Speaking of the movie, I have seen it 3-4 times and am not convinced I have “got it” yet.

My friend says that what the movie did was wipe out all of the Star Trek history starting with the original 52 and going foreward. And that leaves us free for a set of movies again with Kirk, Spock, Scotty and the gang.

I don’t see that, but I might have missed it. The young Spock in this movie notwithstanding, Spock will always be Leonard Nimoy.

Yes, but can someone be some other one? In the Star Trek 2009 movie, the young Spock meats Leonard Nimoy. Ergo, he cannot possibly be Lenard Nimoy. Perhaps he is Lenard Newboy?

 

[spockrates]

… Now reading this thread, I am reading that there is a domestic situation with your wife. I sort of understand. There is a wide range of churches I could conceivably attend, but my wife has a much smaller circle of possibilities. Which is why I will always go to a church in her circle of possibilities. Now that is as long as I continue to believe it just makes sense that I align myself with something we both are comfortable with.

Now if I became convinced that God has revealed one and only one organization must be exclusively the church of Jesus Christ, and that God has revealed what that organization is, all bets are off. In that case I must align myself with that organization no matter what the cost. My suggestion to you is that you follow similar logic.

Agreed. I’m thinking all bets are off. The reason why is John, chapter 6.

 

[spockrates]

12 years ago my wife and I were asked by a Nun, Sister Maryland if we would consider taking Holy Communion to a dying man in the hospital, a world war two Veteran. We said yes, as I was just off my own conversion to Baptism. Little did I know what we were in store for. I have taken Communion to the dying ever since. Some I got to know, others I got to just be with, those who could no longer speak. My first encounter with the Consecrated Host took place after Mass. Our Father was supposed to place it on the Alter for me so I could pick it up afterwards.

He forgot. So he showed me how to open the Tabernacle in case he forgot again in the future. Here I am at the Tabernacle where in our old Parish was directly under the Crucifix. As he opened it I felt for the very first time in my life what it means to be un worthy. (Do you want to talk about a burning in your heart?) I could here the words spoken at Mass “Lord I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the words and I shall be healed” I heard the words, “Rich I love you, its ok, take, give it”

This is a side miracle, how Jesus would have me, a sinner be part of this, and love my wife and I all the way through it. The pain of being with a dying man who could only look into our eyes, the pain of such silence, who wants to be here. Crucifixtion can be un comfortable. Then you make a special place for the Host, you pray deeply, you start “ Peace be with you Surge”, he motions with all he has, and you can hear his words “and also with you” …let us call to mind our sins…Lord Jesus you forgive sinners, Christ have mercy….You continue on, you learn to want to be there because you have helped to bring Christ to one in need of Him, you have stepped aside yourselves and it just happens.

Eucharist is very much real and it never stops giving, it never stops loving.

The experience of Holy Communion weather receiving it or giving it is the most profound Miracle the Church that Christ built has to offer us mere mortals. It leads us to Confession, It truly is transforming. No body can argue against this miracle using the Holy Scriptures, the Old and New Testaments. Jesus clearly spoke on it, in clear words to His Disciples; the translation can not be mocked or distorted in any way. The only question really is do you believe in Miracles? All of the Miracles of healing made way for it. Walking on the water, the fish and the bread multiplied.

Eucharist is the food that feeds us, it is our daily bread. When you come to a slight understanding of this miracle yet reject it, try to prove it false with human reasoning it is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Eucharist is true food from Christ, it is a Miracle given that has brought His church into the hear and now, and which Miracle do you want to be able to fully explain?

Spiritual food. We know this as Catholics. Why? Because we partake of it, that’s how you know. I have been blessed to help many Mormons come to the table of our Lord. They have all told me that there is nothing like it in the world. “Do (this) in memory of me” We do it exactly the way our Lord and God told us to do it, and we believe in it heart and soul.

Can I fully explain it? I have to leave this up to God. I don’t have to know everything so I can sleep better at night. I don’t need blocks all stacked in perfect order. All I know is that it has produced thousands of Saints spanning 2000 years. People who came to know they were sinful, then they came to know their Savior, they then proceeded to die to themselves, their pride and their ego because its not at all about progression, about going up to an exalted state. No it’s about going down on to your knees, into the dirt, calling upon His mercy. How else can you truly expect to be embraced by Jesus, by His Father?

By receiving Christ in the Eucharist sinners can become saints, they are able to pick up their Crosses as instructed, to die well for Him, in Him and through Him.

Jesus left us His Church, He feeds His Church with His body and His Blood, soul and Divinity. Who says His flesh is of no avail as our flesh is? Those who eat His Body and drink His blood worthily will live forever just as He told us. Worthily meaning you know you are a patient of Jesus, that He is the doctor. You have this understanding with Him. Thus “Lord I am not worthy to receive you, only say the words and I shall be healed …”Your sins have been absolved, go in peace and sin no more” Its Confession that makes us worthy to receive Him in the Eucharist, so that we know how much we are loved.

While all of the others left the 12 stayed. They believed, He had the words of eternal life. Who does not wish for a Miracle? In all honesty we can get it daily; we all get it daily, because we believe.

Excellent thoughts, RCIA.

 

[spockrates]

And they went, two-by-two, rolling hysterically into the Arc. And God said, “We better make sure they don’t roll of the deck into the sea of oblivion, suffering extinction forever.” So God sealed the door shut behind them.

 

[AmateurPianist]

Agreed. I’m thinking all bets are off. The reason why is John, chapter 6.

Curious…why?

 

[spockrates]

Curious…why?

It seems to me that if the Eucharist really is the body and blood of Christ, then all of Protestantism is based on the mistaken belief that it is not. And when Jesus says, “I am the bread of life,” I don’t see how His words can be taken figuratively. But perhaps you do?

 

[gcnuss]

It seems to me that if the Eucharist really is the body and blood of Christ, then all of Protestantism is based on the mistaken belief that it is not. And when Jesus says, “I am the bread of life,” I don’t see how His words can be taken figuratively. But perhaps you do?

Not all of Protestantism. We Lutherans affirm the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. We take literally the words “this is my body” and “this cup is the new covenant in my blood.” Here is article X of the Augsburg Confession: Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach otherwise.

Can’t get too much clearer than that.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

QUOTE=spockrates;6773068]Thanks for the reply, Gabriel. So you don’t believe that the Catholic Church has three rocks as it’s foundation–Peter, Christ, and the truth about who Christ is?

Your welcome No, I don’t believe that the Catholic Church has three rocks as its foundation, only one Holy Catholic and Apostolic church Jesus built upon Peter. Your 3 rock foundation is not what Matthew 16 reveals Jesus building his Church upon. The Catholic church is the body of Jesus Christ which is a mystery that can not be defined from 3 foundations. Foudation is apart from what Jesus builds upon Peter.

Prior to Peter, God had layed the foundation built upon the law and the prophets. Your foundation analogy becomes fulfilled in Jesus Christ who is the corner stone the builders rejected. Jesus now rejected, begins to build his own Church upon Peter and then the apostles, which scripture reveals not 3 foundation stones but 12 foundation stones. Yet this is not what Jesus is revealing in Matthew 16 with Peter alone.

Here is why? Ephesians 5: **29 For no one hates his own flesh but rather nourishes and cherishes it, even as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 32 This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church. **

1 Corinthians 12: 25 so that there may be no division in the body, but that the parts may have the same concern for one another. 26 If (one) part suffers, all the parts suffer with it; if one part is honored, all the parts share its joy. 27 **Now you are Christ’s body, and individually parts of it. 28 Some people God has designated in the church to be, first, apostles; 6 second, prophets; third, teachers; then, mighty deeds; then, gifts of healing, assistance, administration, and varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work mighty deeds?

Acts 20: 28 Keep watch over yourselves and over the whole flock of which the holy Spirit has appointed you overseers, 6 in which you tend **the church of God that he acquired with his own blood. **

Colossians 1:24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking 14 in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church,

1Cor.15: 28 When everything is subjected to him, then the Son himself will (also) be subjected to the one who subjected everything to him, so that God may be all in all.

1Cor 6: 17 But whoever is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.

John17: 14 I gave them your word, and the world hated them, because they do not belong to the world any more than I belong to the world.
15
6 I do not ask that you take them out of the world but that you keep them from the evil one.
16
They do not belong to the world any more than I belong to the world.
17
Consecrate them in the truth. Your word is truth.
18
As you sent me into the world, so I sent them into the world.
19
And** I consecrate myself for them, so that they also may be consecrated in truth. **20 "I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in me through their word,
21
so that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me. 22 And I have given them the glory you gave me, **so that they may be one, as we are one, 23 ****I in them and you in me, that they may be brought to perfection as one, that the world may know that you sent me, and that you loved them even as you loved me.

 

[AmateurPianist]

It seems to me that if the Eucharist really is the body and blood of Christ, then all of Protestantism is based on the mistaken belief that it is not. And when Jesus says, “I am the bread of life,” I don’t see how His words can be taken figuratively. But perhaps you do?

Me, I am not sure theologically. I approach communion as though it is the body and blood of Christ and then leave what does and doesn’t happen up to the Lord.

But for your information, several Protestant traditions do believe in the real presence. Here is a little Wiki article for your browsing.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

QUOTE=gcnuss;6775460]Not all of Protestantism. We Lutherans affirm the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. We take literally the words “this is my body” and “this cup is the new covenant in my blood.” Here is article X of the Augsburg Confession: Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach otherwise.

Can’t get too much clearer than that.

The Catholic faith does, because the bread and wine are no longer, to the Lutheran the bread and wine remain as bread and wine. Transubstantiation clarifies the true presence of Jesus body and blood in the Eucharist, while the Lutherans (and other protestants) position believe the bread and wine “co-habit” (consubstantiaton) with the true presence of Jesus Christ? which is a very hard concept to believe (accept) from a Catholic perspective, that Jesus co-habits with natural bread and wine? I believe more clarification is needed in this Lutheran belief.

Peace be with you

 

[Izdaari]

Just trust the leading of the Holy Spirit. If you have investigated and studied Catholicism and are convinced that you belong there, go for it.

May God bless you on your journey in faith.

That would be my advice. Follow the Holy Spirit wherever He leads you. Catholic or non-Catholic, makes no difference to me, so long as you follow Jesus the Messiah.

 

[Contarini]

It seems to me that if the Eucharist really is the body and blood of Christ, then all of Protestantism is based on the mistaken belief that it is not.

I don’t see why it “seems” that way to you at all. I can’t see much historical or theological basis for such a belief.

Many Protestants have come to believe that it is not. But Lutherans clearly believe that it is, and many others believe it in a somewhat more spiritualized sense. And even those who don’t are not usually “basing” their Protestantism on this, but on something like sola fide or sola scriptura.

And when Jesus says, “I am the bread of life,” I don’t see how His words can be taken figuratively. But perhaps you do?

I do–I think that the interpretation saying that “eating my flesh” means “believing in me” is actually supported in the text itself. I don’t think that on purely exegetical grounds one can determine whether John’s general lack of overt sacramentalism is because the sacramentalism is all-pervasive (the Catholic view) or because John is genuinely non-sacramental.

I believe in the Real Presence because of Sacred Tradition, with Scripture (as the most undisputedly authoritative part of Sacred Tradition) testifying to it in at least three places (counting all the institution narratives as one place). In order of clarity, I would put 1 Cor. 10:16 first (together with the passage about “not discerning the body and blood of the Lord”), the Institution Narratives second, and John 6 third. In other words, I read John 6 Eucharistically because I read it in the context of the early Fathers (though even there, Augustine spiritualizes it to some extent) and other passages which I take to be clearer. I do not find the Catholic apologists’ interpretation of John 6 convincing. The claim that “eat my flesh” figuratively means to insult or abuse someone is worth something, but I don’t think it’s enough. I seriously doubt that we know enough about the linguistic context of John 6 to put too much weight on such an argument, especially given the questions about whether any of the long speeches in John are anything like verbatim transcripts of what Jesus said.

Edwin