Catholic unsure of his Catholicism

[inzoozfab]

Hello,

I’m a member of my local parish, I’m almost an adult, and I was confirmed a few months ago. I sincerely believe the gospel and love Jesus and the scriptures. I serve in my church’s choir and love its people. But more and more I have been having trouble with Catholic doctrine. I understand Catholics and Protestants are both Christians but it’s the uniquely Catholic beliefs that have me stumbling. If you could, I would like help understanding some of these and why we believe them as Catholics. There are many but I’ll start with a few.

The Mass Sacrifice - As far as I have read from many sources, Catholic and non-, the mass is a re-presentation of the sacrifice of Christ. This is the hardest idea for me to understand and sometimes I even find it somewhat offensive. I think of passages in Hebrews like:

9:25-26 - Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

and

10:12-14 - But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, and since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool. For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

When I read these, what the priest does and says at mass sounds ridiculous to me because I don’t understand how his actions are a “re-presentation” and not a completely new sacrifice. I also don’t understand what he means when he says it is our sacrifice also (I believe I’ve heard him say this). So what makes the best sense to me is to see the mass as a representation (not re-presentation) and celebration of Jesus’ sacrifice.

Prayer to Mary and Saints - This is difficult for me for two reasons. First, I’ve heard it said that Mary is a Mediatrix who can intercede to God for us. But doesn’t scripture say that’s absolutely not true?

• 1 Timothy 2:5 - For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus*

The verse says one mediator. I don’t understand if the Church is in direct conflict with this or these is a confusing explanation for this. This issue also offends me because I see that scripture teaches contrary to the Church. The second thing I wonder is how we know the Saints can receive our prayers in heaven. If the saints can hear our prayers, does that mean all in heaven hear our prayers (meaning all in heaven are saints in the biblical sense)? Or is it only Canonized saints?

The Immaculate Conception - This may be the last of the major difficulties I have. I find no basis for this in scripture at all. In fact, isn’t it true that Romans says:

3:23 - For all have sinned and all are in need of the glory of God.

Why does Mary not fall into the category of “all”? The only rationale I’ve known for this is that Mary had to be absolutely sinless to bear the sinless incarnation of God. But why? God being so infinitely powerful and good, why couldn’t he birth a sinless man from a sinner’s womb? This belief, I think, only raises Mary higher on a pedestal, detracting from the glory of Christ.

Now, I know I may sound…angry. I’m not, but I am sincerely frustrated with these teachings. I have spent many nights reading on these forums and other places about these issues and never have I been satisfied. I don’t hate the Catholic church or its people. I love my parish community, my peers, my youth minister, deacons, priests, choir directors and the congregation. They are probably the reason I have not left to worship and serve at a Protestant church I have attended a few times and agree with much more.

I know this is a lot, but if anyone can help me, I would very much like to listen.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

The Immaculate Conception - This may be the last of the major difficulties I have. I find no basis for this in scripture at all. In fact, isn’t it true that Romans says:

‘Full of grace’ is tradionally quoted as scriptural support. But nonetheless, sola scriptura is the heresy of heresies. Fact is that the Theotokos never sinned.

The Mass Sacrifice - As far as I have read from many sources, Catholic and non-, the mass is a re-presentation of the sacrifice of Christ. This is the hardest idea for me to understand and sometimes I even find it somewhat offensive. I think of passages in Hebrews like:

9:25-26 - Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

and

10:12-14 - But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, and since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool. For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

When I read these, what the priest does and says at mass sounds ridiculous to me because I don’t understand how his actions are a “re-presentation” and not a completely new sacrifice. I also don’t understand what he means when he says it is our sacrifice also (I believe I’ve heard him say this). So what makes the best sense to me is to see the mass as a representation (not re-presentation) and celebration of Jesus’ sacrifice.

Ah, but this is not uniquely Catholic teaching. The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox too believe this. Even Lutherans believe it (correct me if wrong). It is a calvinist novelty to deny the Sacrifice of the Mass. The Christians of the first century, some even who were taught by the apostles themselves, wrote about how they believed in it. St. Ignatius of Antioch for example, you should read his letters.

Prayer to Mary and Saints - This is difficult for me for two reasons. First, I’ve heard it said that Mary is a Mediatrix who can intercede to God for us. But doesn’t scripture say that’s absolutely not true?

• 1 Timothy 2:5 - For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus*

The verse says one mediator. I don’t understand if the Church is in direct conflict with this or these is a confusing explanation for this. This issue also offends me because I see that scripture teaches contrary to the Church. The second thing I wonder is how we know the Saints can receive our prayers in heaven. If the saints can hear our prayers, does that mean all in heaven hear our prayers (meaning all in heaven are saints in the biblical sense)? Or is it only Canonized saints?

So does one mediator mean that you can’t pray to the Holy Spirit, who is God as well? Asking the saitns to pray for you is no different than asking your friend to pray for you. Again, the Eastern- and Oriental Orthodox pray to the saints as well. How do we know that the saints can hear us? Apostolic Tradition and the testimony of those threes Apostolic Churches.

 

[Chuck1]

I suggest you visit this link : catholicscomehome.org/ and click on ‘answers to your questions’ which has all the church teaching etc explained in a way you can understand it , it certainly helped me , take a look at the whole site , it’s amazing !

Hope it’s helpful
Chuck

 

[Paul_theApostle]

• 1 Timothy 2:5 - For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus*.

and Mary mediates between mankind and Christ which is her son

We are all persons,and the saints are persons close to Christ who can work miracles and wonders and pray/intercede for us,

When you read the lives of Saints you can see how they helped others while they were still alive and after death also by their prayers and holiness

Jesus says we are the ‘salt of the earth’

and if we believe in him we will perform great works also like he did

he said also we dont put a lamp under the bed but its for shining light

the saints become these things and perform great works also

 

[A_Truth_seeker]

Hi,

I am also new and have very similar questions which are causing me great concern at the moment and I have been a catholic for over 45 yrs.

Have you made any progress with your questions that you have listed here?

 

[annspazz]

Hello,

The Mass Sacrifice - As far as I have read from many sources, Catholic and non-, the mass is a re-presentation of the sacrifice of Christ. This is the hardest idea for me to understand and sometimes I even find it somewhat offensive. I think of passages in Hebrews like:

9:25-26 - Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

and

10:12-14 - But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, and since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool. For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

When I read these, what the priest does and says at mass sounds ridiculous to me because I don’t understand how his actions are a “re-presentation” and not a completely new sacrifice. I also don’t understand what he means when he says it is our sacrifice also (I believe I’ve heard him say this). So what makes the best sense to me is to see the mass as a representation (not re-presentation) and celebration of Jesus’ sacrifice.

Try this link: catholicbible101.com/theeucharist.htm

There are many other categories on this site that should answer all your questions…I found it very helpful.

 

[tafan]

To the OP: how do you define “re-representation” as opposed to “representation”?

 

[faerie114]

Asking the saitns to pray for you is no different than asking your friend to pray for you.

this one!

God bless!!

 

[sw85]

Hello inzoozfab,

I’m going to do my best to answer some of your questions. However, there’s one thing that needs to be made clear: you are approaching these with exactly the wrong attitude.

You use words to describe Church teachings like “offensive” (twice), “ridiculous,” and frustrating. The main issue is that (a) you read Scripture, (b) you look at Church teaching, and (c) perceive a disconnect. (a) is mediated to (c) by way of an unstated step – you apply your own, authoritative interpretation to what Scripture is saying, and then presume to declare that the Church’s teachings are deficient because they don’t align with your interpretation.

I say this is an issue because you have exactly zero authority to interpret Scriptures, much less to demand that the Church – the oldest, largest, continuous human organization in history, populated from start to finish with saints, theologians, doctors, martyrs, etc., collectively under divine protection from error – adhere to that illegitimate interpretation. They compiled the Bible, under the protection of the Holy Spirit. They authorized its translations (though not, I cannot help but notice, the one you’re using – the NIV is a Protestant translation and Catholics should not be using it; get yourself a NABRE or Douay-Rheims Bible). They alone are protected from error in its interpretations. You, on the other hand, are not God’s Church. You are not protected from error. You are not, by your own admission, even a theologian. Even by the relatively low standards we have for purely human exegesis, you are in no position to be declaring what Scripture means. That’s prideful. So a bit of humility is in order here.

Now, to your questions:

The Mass Sacrifice - As far as I have read from many sources, Catholic and non-, the mass is a re-presentation of the sacrifice of Christ. This is the hardest idea for me to understand and sometimes I even find it somewhat offensive. I think of passages in Hebrews like:

9:25-26 - Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

and

10:12-14 - But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, and since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool. For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

When I read these, what the priest does and says at mass sounds ridiculous to me because I don’t understand how his actions are a “re-presentation” and not a completely new sacrifice. I also don’t understand what he means when he says it is our sacrifice also (I believe I’ve heard him say this). So what makes the best sense to me is to see the mass as a representation (not re-presentation) and celebration of Jesus’ sacrifice.

To “represent” is to “re-present” something. That’s why they’re same word. It means “to present again.”

God exists eternally, i.e., outside of time, meaning He experiences all moments simultaneously and continuously, forever. This includes the moment of Christ’s death at Calvary. Now, Christ’s death was a sacrifice, wasn’t it? A sacrifice for all of us, who could not hope to satisfy the debt of justice accrued as a result of our sins? Of course it was. So in a sense, Christ’s sacrifice (though singular historically) is continuous and ongoing, in the mind and experience of God. Through the Mass, the priest appropriates that sacrificial grace for the benefit of his parish and the Church. He literally “re-presents” the sacrifice of Christ to the Father.

This isn’t hard to grasp when you understand that, like virtually everything else God does for the benefit of man, Christ’s sacrifice requires human cooperation to be efficacious.

Prayer to Mary and Saints - This is difficult for me for two reasons. First, I’ve heard it said that Mary is a Mediatrix who can intercede to God for us. But doesn’t scripture say that’s absolutely not true?

• 1 Timothy 2:5 - For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus*

The verse says one mediator. I don’t understand if the Church is in direct conflict with this or these is a confusing explanation for this. This issue also offends me because I see that scripture teaches contrary to the Church. The second thing I wonder is how we know the Saints can receive our prayers in heaven. If the saints can hear our prayers, does that mean all in heaven hear our prayers (meaning all in heaven are saints in the biblical sense)? Or is it only Canonized saints?

First, the idea of Mary as comediatrix is not particularly offensive in any way. When I pray for my family, I am mediating grace between them and God. It is absolutely true, however, that my mediating role derives from Christ, it does not replace it. What power I have to mediate grace for them is power conceded to me by God. This, presumably, is true of Mary as well. There may be a difference of degree (because she is Christ’s Mother, after all – simply by bearing Him, she mediated grace into the world), but not one of kind. Christ, on the other hand, is the only one who mediates between man and the Father by his own power. But Mary’s is secondary and contingent.

Second, yes, a “saint” is anyone who is in Heaven. “Canonized saints” are simply those we know with certainty are in Heaven. For instance, Pope St. Pius X we know with certainty is in Heaven, hence we call him saint. On the other hand, Bl. John XXIII may or may not be in Heaven. All we can say is that, if he is in Heaven, he is a saint.

The Immaculate Conception - This may be the last of the major difficulties I have. I find no basis for this in scripture at all.

Let’s clear up another issue at this point. Scripture can be said to be the “highest authority” of knowledge. But “highest” means “there is no higher.” It does not mean “there is no equal.” God is capable of revealing truth to us by a number of means. Sometimes He does this by Scripture, other times by ecumenical council, sometimes by papal encyclicals, etc.

So when one says “it’s not in Scripture!”, besides the problem of pride mentioned above (i.e., you have no authority to interpret Scripture), it doesn’t even follow that “it” would be false even if it were true that “it” wasn’t in Scripture.

In fact, isn’t it true that Romans says:

3:23 - For all have sinned and all are in need of the glory of God.

Why does Mary not fall into the category of “all”? The only rationale I’ve known for this is that Mary had to be absolutely sinless to bear the sinless incarnation of God. But why? God being so infinitely powerful and good, why couldn’t he birth a sinless man from a sinner’s womb?

If He wanted to, He could just as easily have caused Christ to materialize out of nothing. He could simply have appeared in the Heavens and ordered us to repent directly and we would have had no choice. He could have appeared to all of us individually, directly, and incontrovertibly.

What He could do has no limit. Which means it’s irrelevant. For whatever reason, God elects to act in a limited fashion in the world – to act largely through natural processes. We call the rare and extraordinary exceptions to this “miracles,” because they are rare, extraordinary, and exceptional.

So God willed that Christ live as a man did – being conceived (that was the miraculous part), born, experiencing all the phases of human life. This being so, it is fitting that Mary be sinless. Christ was inside her, therefore she is a tabernacle. Tabernacles are sacred things, set aside for and consecrated explicitly to God. Protestants struggle with this because they have a deficient understanding of the sacred and the profane, because their religion is Christianity perverted for the sake of the world.

This belief, I think, only raises Mary higher on a pedestal, detracting from the glory of Christ.

It’s not a competition, man. Love for Mary glorifies God further, it doesn’t detract from it.

 

[inzoozfab]

Thank you everyone, for your replies. I especially appreciate how you addressed each of my concerns, sw85. God bless you and every one posting. I read these this morning and it’s still difficult for me. I understand that the Church has been around for a very long time and is an authority on the interpretation of scripture. But I have trouble accepting all of its teachings as correct.

I feel bad for mentioning this on this Catholic forum, but most of my spiritual nourishment has come from sermons from evangelical Protestant churches. So though I’ve been attending my beloved Holy Cross, I never felt satisfied with the homilies and readings. For a long time I didn’t like the mass because I didn’t feel nourished as much by it as by dense Protestant sermons. I understand as Catholics the Eucharist plays a large role in our spiritual nourishment, but even that was difficult for me. Now, I take Communion but more frequently find myself feeling like I shouldn’t receive because I’m not sure about it.

I think someone will say that I’ve hurt myself by straying from the Church’s teachings. I don’t know what to say to that. I’ve always thought learning the Bible was more profitable than the Church’s teachings.

Wow, okay, a lot of this is likely offensive to sure Catholics. I’m sorry, I don’t want to be arrogant. This is my heart, though. I want Jesus but it’s hard for me to trust the Catholic Church more than reformed Bible teachers.

 

[sw85]

I understand not being satisfied by Catholic homilies. They are some of the uniformly worst things I have ever experienced. Long, vapid, boring, etc. May as well just read us children’s stories. (Oh, wait, some actually do that).

But while Catholic homilies stink, they are rooted in a tradition that is basically correct and true. Protestants sermons may be interesting but they are rooted in a theological tradition of falsehood.

I strongly recommend you stop attending Protestant services and instead find a way to get your theology fix that is… sounder. Spiritual direction here may be especially useful, but take care to find a good one. I do not actually recommend going to a priest, who have severe time crunches, who often lack formation in this area (believe it or not!), and some of whom have very unsound opinions as a result of bad seminary instruction. Most dioceses certify spiritual directors and publish directories of them. My own diocese also has things like “Theology on Tap” (monthly meetings where young’uns get together at a restaurant or pub, listen to presentations on theology, and ask questions), “Cafe Catholica” (dinner + a theology presentation – my girlfriend went to one in her diocese last week where the speaker was the Cardinal), etc.

But yes, definitely stop going to Protestant services. They have already polluted your understanding of Catholic theology by leading you to believe that the Bible alone contains all theological knowledge to the exclusion of everything else.

 

[jschutzm]

First off, inzoozfab, Welcome! those are very common questions. A lot could be said on each of those topics. Entire BOOKS to be precise. I’d encourage you to dive into some good apologetics and try to clarify your questions through research. But in the meantime, I’ll do my best to answer each question in the short format we have here on this forum.

The Mass Sacrifice - As far as I have read from many sources, Catholic and non-, the mass is a re-presentation of the sacrifice of Christ. This is the hardest idea for me to understand and sometimes I even find it somewhat offensive. I think of passages in Hebrews like:

9:25-26 - Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

and

10:12-14 - But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, and since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool. For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

When I read these, what the priest does and says at mass sounds ridiculous to me because I don’t understand how his actions are a “re-presentation” and not a completely new sacrifice. I also don’t understand what he means when he says it is our sacrifice also (I believe I’ve heard him say this). So what makes the best sense to me is to see the mass as a representation (not re-presentation) and celebration of Jesus’ sacrifice.

I believe it is in Revelations that it shows that the sacrifice of the Lamb is offered up continuously for the sake us sinners, in heaven. - The Apostles taught the earliest Christians to break bread together and that this was MORE then mere symbolism. Christ took time to explain this in John chpt 6 and some of his Disciples left over this issue.
Christ also gave Peter the command to ‘feed my sheep’ and it is obvious from history that the Apostles didn’t take this figuratively or think that Communion was merely a re-enactment of a historical event. We have the writings of the Christians in the catacombs which date to early 1st century. We have the writings of the Bishop of Antioch, St. Ignatius, who specifically warns us NOT to follow those who deny the Eucharist.
We have the Didache, an early Christian document giving us instructions on HOW to say the Mass. - All these things, both Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition agree – Communion is MORE then merely re-enacting a historical event as most non-Catholic Christians see it.

Prayer to Mary and Saints - This is difficult for me for two reasons. First, I’ve heard it said that Mary is a Mediatrix who can intercede to God for us. But doesn’t scripture say that’s absolutely not true?

• 1 Timothy 2:5 - For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus*

The verse says one mediator. I don’t understand if the Church is in direct conflict with this or these is a confusing explanation for this. This issue also offends me because I see that scripture teaches contrary to the Church. The second thing I wonder is how we know the Saints can receive our prayers in heaven. If the saints can hear our prayers, does that mean all in heaven hear our prayers (meaning all in heaven are saints in the biblical sense)? Or is it only Canonized saints?

OK, everyone is basically saying the same thing. Just because I go through you and ask for your help, in no way dilutes Christ’s power or authority. You don’t DO anything on your own… in fact you simply pray FOR me TO Christ…RIGHT?

So WHY do that? - because it actually glorifies God MORE. I can go to Christ myself…but I am only one. I can keep my problems secret and not involve anyone besides God. RIGHT?

BUT… by going to another, I not only bring in 2 people who are turning to God for help, which we all know… 2 is better then 1, BUT, I show humility and TRUST - by admitting that I need help to another person.

Lastly, I give THAT person a chance to actually live their Christian duty by praying for me.

Catholics simply don’t presume that this role and ability ends with physical death.

The bible makes it clear that God is NOT the God of the dead but the living. Those in heaven are not dead and therefore deft. They are alive and connected to God in a more intimate way. IF any of those people could or would feel concern for us while here on Earth… and we know that God is concerned for us in heaven… WHY would we assume that those in heaven would NOT have concern for us NOW…when they are more intimately connected to God?

The Catholic view is much simpler then the Protestant, in some ways. It simply doesn’t make a distinction between heaven and Earth when it comes to seeking help. It sees ALL of us as part of ONE BIG Family. A UNITED family, not a dysfunctional or separated family, where one side (those in heaven) don’t care about the rest, simply because of where they reside.

NOTE: This is part of what makes the Catholic faith “universal” that is… it is on Earth AND in Heaven, because it is Christ’s church and we are ALL part of his body. Those in heaven even MORE SO.

When Christ gave his Mother to the Apostle John, who was NOT his brother… he gave Mary to us ALL… as OUR spiritual mother. Christ repeatedly calls us “children of God” and “his brothers and sisters” – if this is TRUE, then Mary is OUR mother too.

Tell me that you’ve never ONCE gone to your Earthly Biological mother for help…
Then why not turn to your Heavenly mother and ask her for help too?

Mothers NEVER want what is bad for their children. Mary intercedes for us and asks her son for help. The bible shows that Jesus will do ALOT for his mother, including his first miracle, even though it was not yet time for his public ministry.

Lastly, by asking someone in heaven, we know that only GOOD intentions will be offered up. So often what we want is selfish. The bible says that God will give us anything we ask for, SO LONG AS, it is in accordance with HIS will. By asking a person in heaven to intercede for us… we make sure that our intentions are honorable and good. Because a Saint in heaven won’t ask God for something which is selfish and sinful.

The Immaculate Conception - This may be the last of the major difficulties I have. I find no basis for this in scripture at all. In fact, isn’t it true that Romans says:

3:23 - For all have sinned and all are in need of the glory of God.

Look at that Scripture in context… was the author really TRYING to make a statement about Mary? - What about Adam and Eve and Jesus… we know they were human but sinless. Was the author TRULY trying to say that everyone is sinful… or simply using a literary device called “hyperbole” to make a point?

There are verses in that same section which also say that NO ONE has sought God and that NO ONE is righteous. However, we know that many have sought God and that at least Moses and Elijah were found righteous before God. – So perhaps in context the author was trying to make a powerful point.

Why does Mary not fall into the category of “all”? The only rationale I’ve known for this is that Mary had to be absolutely sinless to bear the sinless incarnation of God. But why? God being so infinitely powerful and good, why couldn’t he birth a sinless man from a sinner’s womb? This belief, I think, only raises Mary higher on a pedestal, detracting from the glory of Christ.

IF Mary was sinful or had sin within her, then SHE would surely die. This is WHY the Apostles make a connection between Mary and the Tabernacle which housed the 10 commandments.
Chris is said to be the WORD of God… The Tabernacle held the tablets which held the commandments etched by the hand of God. They were NOT the word made flesh…but simply the words of God etched in stone. But NO ONE could touch them who had ANY sin within them or they would DIE. This is why the ARK of the Covenant was made and WHY wood rods had to be slid through rings and it carried from a distance by 2 men.
No one could even TOUCH the ark, let alone the tablets themselves.

IF Mary had sin within her… in all likelihood she would have DIED one Jesus entered her womb.

We ALSO know from the bible that a New Eve would come and that this new Eve would crush the head of the serpent and that God would put indemnity between her and the serpent. These old testament professes seem to foreshadow that Mary would be sinless.

Lastly, we know this is how the early Christians interpreted and were taught by the Apostles because we never see anyone contesting this until thousands of years later. Even AFTER the Protestant reformation… the sinless nature of Mary was not questioned. I think your interpretation or view of Mary and that she MUST have sin… was only a 18th century idea…which in the scheme of things is a pretty NEW and RADICAL idea.

So WHY if it is a Catholic belief and it is SO WRONG… was it not initially contested by the Protestants and why didn’t we see MORE objections to this idea early on? Why didn’t the early Christians squash this belief, like they did so many other heresies when it first popped up?
We have councils to settle which books to include. Councils to settle if Christ was divine or not. Councils to settle if the Trinity was true or not. Why not a council to squash the Immaculate Conception heresy/cult ??

 

[inzoozfab]

wow, jschutzm, I really, really, appreciate your reply. That REALLY helps me feel more comfortable with prayer to Mary and the saints. In my head I was often thinking “How do we know they even hear us at all?” But you’re probably right, why couldn’t they? I will keep thinking about this.

As far as the Mass and Immaculate Conception, I need to do some study of these things you’ve mentioned. If Mary were sinful, why would she die while Christ was in her womb, but not by touching him outside of the womb after birth? Sinners who touched Christ didn’t die.

I will humble myself and keep searching scripture.

 

[JRKH]

Thank you everyone, for your replies. I especially appreciate how you addressed each of my concerns, sw85. God bless you and every one posting. I read these this morning and it’s still difficult for me. I understand that the Church has been around for a very long time and is an authority on the interpretation of scripture. But I have trouble accepting all of its teachings as correct.

Allow me to chime in with a couple of points on this.
First, let me suggest that your read Mt 18:15-18…
15 "If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. 16 "But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. 17 "If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church (Singular); and if he refuses to listen even to the church let him be as a tax collector. 18 "Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.
Contained in this passage is the strongest and most direct evidence that Christ gave authority to teach and that what “The Church” decides, we are to “listen to” - and if we don NOT listen to the Church, - - - Well - - - not good…:sad_bye:
And just to clarify, since the passage talks about “sin”, I think we can all agree that false teaching is a definite sin…So that means this passage applies to matters of doctrine. Tied into this instruction is a wonderful example of it in action. Read Acts 15 and see how the Church worked together to actually set aside much of the OT law as it pertained to Christ’s followers.

Second, let me ask why there seems to be this need (on the part of many people) to reject a teaching because they can’t convince themselves it is correct…Why not accept the teaching because a) the Church has the Christ given and biblically supported authority to “Bind and loose” - “Whatever” and b) because you can’t prove it is incorrect…

Something to consider…

I feel bad for mentioning this on this Catholic forum, but most of my spiritual nourishment has come from sermons from evangelical Protestant churches. So though I’ve been attending my beloved Holy Cross, I never felt satisfied with the homilies and readings. For a long time I didn’t like the mass because I didn’t feel nourished as much by it as by dense Protestant sermons. I understand as Catholics the Eucharist plays a large role in our spiritual nourishment, but even that was difficult for me. Now, I take Communion but more frequently find myself feeling like I shouldn’t receive because I’m not sure about it.

Keep praying and keep receiving…Also I suggest going to confession or making an appointment to discuss these things with your pastor.
As for being “nourished” by evangelical sermons…One has to wonder - How much of your current doubt is due to these non-Catholic sermons…They may be “filling” but are they truly nourishing or are they more like “junk-food”
In any case, Welcome to CAF. You WILL be nourished here…

I think someone will say that I’ve hurt myself by straying from the Church’s teachings. I don’t know what to say to that. I’ve always thought learning the Bible was more profitable than the Church’s teachings.

Our suggestion is that you don’t try to go it alone.
I too spent many years away from the Church. I studied on these matters some on my own as well. Read the bible, talked to others, read things from other faith sources etc…And it was profitable…to an extent…But I discovered there were many errors in my conclusions too. So keep reading, keep studying, but make your focus more Catholic…YouTube has many good Catholic sermons on it…If you can get EWTN either on TV or on your computer, there are a number of good programs there…
In short what I am saying is that you can get the kind of good meaty sermon and learning without leaving Catholicism…Just look around a bit…

Wow, okay, a lot of this is likely offensive to sure Catholics. I’m sorry, I don’t want to be arrogant. This is my heart, though. I want Jesus but it’s hard for me to trust the Catholic Church more than reformed Bible teachers.

You have not insulted us - we’ve heard much worse believe me…

Just hang out here awhile and I think you will be wonderfully and delightfully engaged and will learn a great deal…CAF is the best on the web…

Peace
James

 

[zz912]

wow, jschutzm, I really, really, appreciate your reply. That REALLY helps me feel more comfortable with prayer to Mary and the saints. In my head I was often thinking “How do we know they even hear us at all?” But you’re probably right, why couldn’t they? I will keep thinking about this.

*Revelation 8:3 Another angel came and stood at the altar, holding a gold censer. He was given a great quantity of incense to offer, along with the prayers of all the holy ones, on the gold altar that was before the throne. 4The smoke of the incense along with the prayers of the holy ones went up before God from the hand of the angel.

Revelation 5:8 When he took it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each of the elders held a harp and gold bowls filled with incense, which are the prayers of the holy ones.*

Scripture is explicit, the saints and angels present our prayers to God.

Also, note that Scripture tells us that Mary is in Heave, is the Ark of the New Covenant, and is Queen of Heaven.

Revelation 11:19 Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm. 12:1 A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars

(Remember, the chapter and verse numbering was added in the Middle Ages to make reading and use in the Mass easier.)

 

[jschutzm]

Thank you everyone, for your replies. I especially appreciate how you addressed each of my concerns, sw85. God bless you and every one posting. I read these this morning and it’s still difficult for me. I understand that the Church has been around for a very long time and is an authority on the interpretation of scripture. But I have trouble accepting all of its teachings as correct.

I feel bad for mentioning this on this Catholic forum, but most of my spiritual nourishment has come from sermons from evangelical Protestant churches. So though I’ve been attending my beloved Holy Cross, I never felt satisfied with the homilies and readings. For a long time I didn’t like the mass because I didn’t feel nourished as much by it as by dense Protestant sermons. I understand as Catholics the Eucharist plays a large role in our spiritual nourishment, but even that was difficult for me. Now, I take Communion but more frequently find myself feeling like I shouldn’t receive because I’m not sure about it.

I think someone will say that I’ve hurt myself by straying from the Church’s teachings. I don’t know what to say to that. I’ve always thought learning the Bible was more profitable than the Church’s teachings.

Wow, okay, a lot of this is likely offensive to sure Catholics. I’m sorry, I don’t want to be arrogant. This is my heart, though. I want Jesus but it’s hard for me to trust the Catholic Church more than reformed Bible teachers.

SHOCKER! – NOT

Don’t worry… I think your questions sounded sooo Protestant that everyone assumed this anyways. I did.

You are amongst family… even if we are separated by distance and sometimes dsyfunctional. – We are still a family and so you can be honest here… especially on this forum.

It will help us understand where you are coming from. So God Bless you for opening up to us. It takes courage sometimes.

Please keep opening up and sharing your struggle. “A burden shared is a burdened halved” as the old saying goes (another reason to seek intercession, even from Saints.)

There are plenty of Catholic bible studies and free materials. Why not try and start a Bible study at your parish… or watch in the Church bulletin and see if there are already some going on?

I always find it strange when people seek something outside, rather then within. I guess it is the “grass is always greener” tendency in us all.

YES… Protestant sermons are different…because they have to be. They lack the Eucharist and Holy Tradition. Bible is all they have… so they focus more intently on it.

However, if you are well catechized (trained/educated) you will see where their interpretation and conclusions are a bit flawed. - They will typically emphasize 'faith alone" and “bible alone” and 'all sinned and fall short of the glory of God" and that the bible ‘equips us fully for good works’ and that our good deeds are but ‘filthy rags before God’, less we ‘boast like the pharises’ etc. etc.

I will agree with you that many are more practically aimed, while Catholic homilies seem more theological in nature. IN GENERAL.
But that’s not always the case.

My parent’s parish, which I sometimes attend, just 11 miles down the road, has a Priest who came to the Priesthood VERY late in life.
He is a Professor who adopted 2 daughters, and so he is not only a Priest, but an actual Father and has children.
His sermons are often more practical, funny even, and aimed at what we can ALL do better… including himself.

So try another Catholic church or parish… if there is one within driving distance.

And if you believe that what you listen to, do with your body and see with your eyes, INFLUENCES what you think and feel – then you probably owe it to yourself to guard what you allow to influence you.

It is one thing to occasionally try other foods… let’s say ice cream for lack of a better example. It is another to eat it exclusively.

So while I can’t tell you to NOT attend Protestant services… I can caution you about what you are filling your heart and mind with… and if that is truly healthy for the soul.

That’s all…just a strong caution against it.

---

P.S. this is coming from a Catholic who is married to a Baptist and has attended over a dozen different non-denominational Christian churches while my Wife ‘urged’ me to try them out for the sake of our marriage.

So I am not cautioning you without any experience…but FROM experience.
I now go to my Catholic church by myself while my wife attends her Baptist church.
Lonely…but I will not compromise on the truth.

 

[Church_Militant]

Hello,

I’m a member of my local parish, I’m almost an adult, and I was confirmed a few months ago. I sincerely believe the gospel and love Jesus and the scriptures. I serve in my church’s choir and love its people. But more and more I have been having trouble with Catholic doctrine. I understand Catholics and Protestants are both Christians but it’s the uniquely Catholic beliefs that have me stumbling. If you could, I would like help understanding some of these and why we believe them as Catholics. There are many but I’ll start with a few.

The Mass Sacrifice -

I found the following good responses with a simple search of the Ask an Apologist forum.
Is Christ sacrificed again at Mass?
Isn’t the sacrifice of Jesus as high priest over and done with?
How do I explain the Mass as a living sacrifice?

Prayer to Mary and Saints -

I have an article on my blog on this. The Intercession & Communion of Saints

CA has this. Saint Worship? & Do Catholics Worship Statues?

The Immaculate Conception -

I know this is a lot, but if anyone can help me, I would very much like to listen.

This is also answered in articles on CA’s main site. Immaculate Conception and Assumption
Mary: “Full of Grace”

You need to stop listening to n-Cs about our most holy faith. They generally don’t know what they are talking about and I suggest that you begin actively studying the faith.

Here are some other links that will give you very good help.
A Biblical Walk Through the Mass
Catholic Home Study Service
San Juan Catholic Seminars
Catholic Answers Tracts
Top Ten Questions Catholics are Asked

Thank you everyone, for your replies. I especially appreciate how you addressed each of my concerns, sw85. God bless you and every one posting. I read these this morning and it’s still difficult for me. I understand that the Church has been around for a very long time and is an authority on the interpretation of scripture. But I have trouble accepting all of its teachings as correct.

Consider: Who’s more qualified? You? The n-Cs you have been listening to whose errors are modern new winds of doctrines of men that only came into being some 500 years ago at best…and many of them very much more recently?

I feel bad for mentioning this on this Catholic forum, but most of my spiritual nourishment has come from sermons from evangelical Protestant churches. So though I’ve been attending my beloved Holy Cross, I never felt satisfied with the homilies and readings. For a long time I didn’t like the mass because I didn’t feel nourished as much by it as by dense Protestant sermons. I understand as Catholics the Eucharist plays a large role in our spiritual nourishment, but even that was difficult for me. Now, I take Communion but more frequently find myself feeling like I shouldn’t receive because I’m not sure about it.

This is about 9/10 of your problem then. First, you really don’t know your Catholic faith very well at all. Second, you are listening to well meaning people with Bibles who are actually faking you out and deceiving you with their teachings. Stop going there. Take a close look at this. What does the church day about attending scripture study in a Protestant church?

Two things are wrong right off the top.

1. 
   *]You are being led astray by preachers who accept the error of the fundamental modern error of Sola Scriptura. and
   
   *]going to a religious service that lacks the Eucharist is very much like going to restaurant and paying from a meal only to get served an empty plate. That is not what Authentic Early Christian Worship was Really Like.
   

   I think someone will say that I’ve hurt myself by straying from the Church’s teachings. I don’t know what to say to that. I’ve always thought learning the Bible was more profitable than the Church’s teachings.

   News Flash! Where do you think the Bible we have today came from? The Catholic Church sorted through all the early manuscripts and writings over about 400 years and by the guidance of the Holy Spirit discerned what was inspired and canonized it. Moreover, what do you think that the Church bases its teachings on?
   

   Wow, okay, a lot of this is likely offensive to sure Catholics. I’m sorry, I don’t want to be arrogant. This is my heart, though. I want Jesus but it’s hard for me to trust the Catholic Church more than reformed Bible teachers.

   You have been deceived by them because they themselves are deceived, , even though they carry and teach from their Bible (which BTW lacks 7 of the books the Church canonized from the beginning.) I spent about 35 years in that deception, so I know what I’m talking about. (See My Testimony)
   See also: Who REALLY Preaches “A Different Gospel”?
   The Eucharist IS Scriptural
   How Is A Catholic Saved?
   “I Find No Sacraments In the Bible” he said.
   Catholic Confession
   Scriptures About Penance

 

[blakjak12]

It looks like you have already received some great advice, and thank you for bringing your questions here! I think it is really neat that you are taking your Faith and your beliefs seriously.

I would guess that many Protestants you have come in contact with criticize the beliefs of Catholics and use Biblical evidence to support their cases. Many Protestants, and especially Evangelicals, seem very centered on a literal interpretation of the Bible. I am not trying to criticize these groups, but that has been my experience with them.

That being said, it is VERY important to remember the origins of the Bible. Ask yourself, did Jesus give us the Bible and a book of rules, or did he found a church and a community of believers? Jesus’ apostles and early followers, who formed the early Catholic Church, preceded the origination of the Bible as we know it today. Remember, the Bible didn’t just fall out of the sky one day around Jesus’ time, and he did not write out an explicit list telling the Apostles to make sure they include this, that, and those books in the Bible.

Rather, through Faith and with God’s grace, the Church (the Early Catholic Church) compiled the writings of the Bible that are the sacred text and source of truth we have today. It is important to note that Protestants removed a series of texts from the original Bible as well.

Given this bit of history, I do not think it is illogical to conclude that faith in the Catholic Church/apostolic tradition presupposes belief in the Bible as God’s Word. If you do not hold that belief, the view that the Bible is the ultimate source of truth seems untenable. If God cannot work through man, how can we possibly trust in the Bible?

I hope that helps, and to the others here, if I am erring in any way, please feel free to correct me. I am still learning my stuff, and it was my intention to help, not to misstate information or the beliefs of the Church.

God bless!

 

[inzoozfab]

Okay, after some thinking, let me ask this. I’ve struggled with the meaning of Jesus’ words in John 6 concerning the Eucharist, specifically, that his blood is true drink and his flesh true food. But how should we understand this in light of Paul’s and Peter’s language in 1 Corinthians 3:2 and 1 Peter 2:2? Paul and Peter couldn’t have meant that they literally fed believers milk. Why are we inclined to take Jesus’ words about food as literal then?

 

[Church_Militant]

Okay, after some thinking, let me ask this. I’ve struggled with the meaning of Jesus’ words in John 6 concerning the Eucharist, specifically, that his blood is true drink and his flesh true food. But how should we understand this in light of Paul’s and Peter’s language in 1 Corinthians 3:2 and 1 Peter 2:2? Paul and Peter couldn’t have meant that they literally fed believers milk. Why are we inclined to take Jesus’ words about food as literal then?

Dude, did you even read what I posted above? You need to take the time to read the links given to you because we don’t offer this stuff just for show. Look again at my article The Eucharist IS Scriptural because the scriptures are very clear, as is the teaching of the early church which in no way resembles most of the modern n-C communities.

Get away from those n-C preachers and start learning your faith. You can start off with the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church because it’s short and concise. The Bible backs up everything the Catholic Church teaches and anyone who says different doesn’t know what they are talking about.

Oh…and by the way, Catholic IS Christian. We are the original, New Testament, “full Gospel” Christianity and have been for 2,000 years.