Catholics switching to Protestant

[Sy_Noe]

If I might turn it around, why is it strange that we believe that?

What Protestant denominations do you know that state “Becoming Catholic is a sin, even for someone who is sincerely convinced that they’re making a decision based on truth as he or she understands it”?

I don’t think it’s strange. I was actually thrilled to see the CC believes people can switch to a Protestant faith when looking for a faith that fits with their understanding and that it is not a sin.

 

[Peter_J]

I don’t think it’s strange.

Alright, that answers *one *of my questions.

I was actually thrilled to see the CC believes people can switch to a Protestant faith when looking for a faith that fits with their understanding and that it is not a sin.

Um … You basically changed everything around with that statement. (Granted, “traditionalist” Catholics would probably say it makes no difference whether you put it like that or the way you did in the OP.)

 

[Sy_Noe]

Alright, that answers *one *of my questions.

Um … You basically changed everything around with that statement. (Granted, “traditionalist” Catholics would probably say it makes no difference whether you put it like that or the way you did in the OP.)

I don’t know enough about all Protestant denominations to have answered more than your one question.

 

[Sy_Noe]

I am assuming that whoever writes an opinion on this thread is “educated” and this is a blessing from God. The question is not so much as switching to Protestant as it is not using one’s blessing (education) from God to search for the truth before switching. The problem is that majority of Catholics, Protestants, Moslems, Jehovah Witness, Mormons, Atheists, etc. etc. do not know their faith and do not put in much effort in finding out the truth about what they believe. In switching from one faith to the other, did you make an honest, sincere effort to compare the two faiths before switching or are you switching because one is more convenient. Being sincere is not enough; you can be sincere but sincerely wrong. The 9-11 bombers died for their belief; they were sincere but boy were they wrong.

In addition to being sincere, one has to be open-minded and use one’s blessings in the quest for the truth before switching one’s faith. There has to be a comparison between the faith one is switching from and the faith one is switching to.

For the majority of humans who are not “educated”, God provides them a way, through us who are “educated”, to find the truth. Therefore, we “educated” ones have a responsibility to God to seek the truth and use it to educate the “uneducated”.

Believers in good faith can search and still end up not believing in what the CC believes is truth.

 

[Peter_J]

I don’t know enough about all Protestant denominations to have answered more than your one question.

Okay, that’s fair enough. But I think it’s safe to safe that most reasonable Protestants don’t say “Becoming Catholic is a sin, even for someone who is sincerely convinced that they’re making a decision based on truth as he or she understands it.”

 

[Peter_J]

Believers in good faith can search and still end up not believing in what the CC believes is truth.

Wait, I’ve always thought that all Protestants were bad people.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Okay, that’s fair enough. But I think it’s safe to safe that most reasonable Protestants don’t say “Becoming Catholic is a sin, even for someone who is sincerely convinced that they’re making a decision based on truth as he or she understands it.”

Right. I’d agree the Protestants I’ve been around for the most part probably wouldn’t. Not that’s it’s been something we’ve discussed. But then I do only mostly hang with the “reasonable” ones.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Wait, I’ve always thought that all Protestants were bad people.

You’re playing with me now PJ. You’ll never hear me say that.

 

[Ignatius]

I was actually thrilled to see the CC believes people can switch to a Protestant faith when looking for a faith that fits with their understanding and that it is not a sin.

Is that what The Church teaches, that it’s OK to convert to a Protestant church?

 

[Sy_Noe]

Is that what The Church teaches, that it’s OK to convert to a Protestant church?

All I know is Fr Grondin seemed to at least say in his answer I linked to, that doing so may not be mortal sin if one converts because they are sincerely convinced based on their understanding of God’s truth. And that only the person and God knows.

 

[Peter_J]

All I know is Fr Grondin seemed to at least say in his answer I linked to, that doing so may not be mortal sin if one converts because they are sincerely convinced based on their understanding of God’s truth.

Indeed. For example, I’ve known both Catholics who have converted to Eastern Orthodoxy, and also Orthodox who have converted to Catholicism. Although I cannot see anyone’s soul, I’m convinced that it is possible for someone in either of those situations to be sincerely doing what they think right.

 

[steve_b]

Please note that “leaving the Church” is different than “leaving the faith”, (or ‘rejecting the faith’). The Church is indeed an integral part of the Faith, but it is not itself, “the Faith”.

Hence one could leave the Church–by ceasing to attend mass for instance, and instead, attending Protestant services (for example) out of consideration of/for family harmony…without rejecting any fundamental tenet of the Faith.

That’s wrong!

[2178 (Catechism of the Catholic Church - Paragraph # 2178) , 2181

Heb 10: (all emphasis mine)
23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful; 24 and let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, 25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. 26 For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27* but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries. 28* A man who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy at the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29* How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace?

Look at the words in red.

• What are they doing when they meet together? Celebrate the Eucharist John 6:56-69 instituted by the Son of God
• What day do they meet? The Lord’s Day…Sunday
• What is the sacrifice for sins ? the Eucharist Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.(i.e. sacrifice for sin)
• by deliberately missing mass THEY spurn the Son of God 1 Corinthians 11:25
• by deliberately missing mass THEY profane the blood of the covenant Mark 14:24 , Luke 22:20
• by deliberately missing mass THEY outrage the spirit of grace John 1:16 ,

The reasons for all that is, after receiving the *knowledge of the truth, by deliberately missing mass on Sunday, *they are deliberately not participating in the celebration of the Eucharist. And THAT’s already a grave sin, and they are being warned with consequences, in the most graphic terms.

When one deliberately doesn’t celebrate the Eucharist on Sunday then, those consequences mentioned are the realities and results on that person’s soul. This is also why Sunday is a holy day of obligation.

 

[Ignatius]

Ignatius;13002281:

Is that what The Church teaches, that it’s OK to convert to a Protestant church?

All I know is Fr Grondin seemed to at least say in his answer I linked to, that doing so may not be mortal sin if one converts because they are sincerely convinced based on their understanding of God’s truth. And that only the person and God knows.

I suggest you post to Fr. Grodin and ask this direct question:
“Does the Church teach that it is OK to convert to Protestantism?”

 

[Goya]

That’s wrong!
…

When one deliberately doesn’t celebrate the Eucharist on Sunday then, those consequences mentioned are the realities and results on that person’s soul. This is also why Sunday is a holy day of obligation.

Sorry sir, but you’re wrong–at least in so much as what you appear to have read into my post.

Again, note the qualifier that you (as well as the other poster responding to that same post) seem to have read right past, as though it wasn’t even there:

…WITHOUT REJECTING ANY FUNDAMENTAL ASPECT OF THE FAITH.

Neglecting to attend mass does NOT amount to declaring Christ a liar, the Church, a fraud, or the Faith, a farce, or anything of the sort.

Not attending mass does NOT amount to taking souls away from the Church, leading souls away from the Truth, or leading souls to perdition. It doesn’t even amount to leading your own soul to perdition, necessarily.

That is not to say that ‘neglecting to attend mass’ is therefore kosher, recommended, or even approved–simply that it is a far cry from REJECTING THE FAITH.

Hypo/e.g.: Charles was a devout Catholic for 35 years, attending mass religiously, participating in parish events, in fundraising for his parish, etc. Then Charles got married, had a pile of kids, and had to work on Weekends, including Sundays, to provide for his children. Charles never ceased being Catholic, or upholding his faith. Charles taught his children the Faith, reads the Bible with them most nights, insists on them going to Sunday School (Faith Formation), participate in the Sacraments, and pays for all of this. Charles’ wife, the children’s mom, takes them to mass each Sunday. But again, for Charles to attend mass, would require that he give up his weekend income, and this is not economically feasible (note that I’m specifically not making it “impossible”–just not feasible).

Now…is Charles a ‘poor’ Catholic? Is Charles a negligent Catholic? Is what Charles doing, on par with “going protestant”? Agnostic? Atheistic? Buddhist? Islamic?

You be the judge (seeing as you appear to deem yourself qualified).

Counter e.g.:

Charles’ brother, “James”, goes to mass every Sunday. Hungover. He gets laid regularly, with different girls. His live in girl friend (whom he paid for an abortion of his child for), works on Saturday nights, so he (unbeknownst to her) can, and regularly does, shack up with bimbos, when ever he can.

…but there he is, religiously, every Sunday, AT MASS…in line, for Holy Communion, partaking of the Holy Eucharist …dutifully putting his money in the collection basket… shaking hands and smiling, during the peace offering…

So Mr. “B”…since you appear to view yourself as qualified to judge the better Catholic…and having the advantage that I’ve served you up a harmless, benign hypothetical…have at it.

Who is the better Catholic? Or worse, if you prefer—“Charles”? Or “James”?

 

[Ignatius]

as though it wasn’t even there:…WITHOUT REJECTING ANY FUNDAMENTAL ASPECT OF THE FAITH.

That is a specious argument. Protestantism does reject fundamental aspects of the Catholic Faith therefore to convert from The Catholic Faith to Protestantism is, de facto, to do so. If someone is misguided about this they need to be corrected, not encouraged to continue down the path of error and told everything is acceptable.

It is not OK to convert to Protestantism!

This from Jimmy Akin would be good further reading to clarify the subject:
ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/did-pope-francis-say-it-doesnt-matter-what-kind-of-christian-you-are-9-thin/

 

[Goya]

That is a specious argument. Protestantism does reject fundamental aspects of the Catholic Faith therefore to convert from The Catholic Faith to Protestantism is, de facto, to do so. If someone is misguided about this they need to be corrected, not encouraged to continue down the path of error and told everything is acceptable.

It is not OK to convert to Protestantism!

This from Jimmy Akin would be good further reading to clarify the subject:
ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/did-pope-francis-say-it-doesnt-matter-what-kind-of-christian-you-are-9-thin/

Again, I’m simply pointing out a distinction between leaving the Faith, vs. leaving the Church, which can manifest in a matter of degrees. Conversion (what you’re discussing) implies leaving the Faith. What Steve B was addressing, which I triggered, was a matter of leaving the Church-which may entail conversion (and therefore may entail a rejection of the Faith); but may also entail something far more benign, like simple ‘negligence’, as in a lapsed Catholic, or one who’s priorities become skewed, such that Church/religion take(s) a back seat to more pressing, -]real/-] this world concerns–without entailing a rejection of the Faith.

Illustrations:

Lapsed Catholic–maintains the Faith…may not feel himself worthy to partake of Christ…drifts away…but points others to the Church, because he still recognizes it as the True Faith, and Christ’s Church.

Convert to Protestantism–sees Christ as savior, but rejects the Church He bequeathed to us;

Convert to Islam–rejects Christ’s divinity; only sees him as a prophet, inferior to Mohamed.

X/Former Catholic atheist–rejects the very notion of God, let alone Christ’s divinity, and the rest of the Faith.

I never suggested that converting to protestantism is good, or acceptable; just pointing out that there are different degrees of ‘leaving the Church’, and they don’t all entail rejecting the Faith.

Let me put it to you this way–if any of my children, or my brothers were considering converting to Protestantism–(like your daughter is) I would view that as less egregious than if they were converting to turning to Islam, or becoming atheist.

e.g.–I have a nephew, is at the very least, drifting away from the Church. He still believes in God…but he has pretty much rejected Christianity, en toto.

Now, between your daughter, and my nephew…do you see a difference in degrees/distance, as to which one appears to have drifted farther from the Faith? or the Church?

Both of us have our work cut out for us, in bringing back our respective loved one back into the fold; but one of us (me) will likely have to swim further out (significantly further), to bring mine back–if I’m able.

 

[Ignatius]

Again, I’m simply pointing out a distinction between leaving the Faith, vs. leaving the Church, which can manifest in a matter of degrees. Conversion (what you’re discussing) implies leaving the Faith. What Steve B was addressing, which I triggered, was a matter of leaving the Church-which may entail conversion (and therefore may entail a rejection of the Faith); but may also entail something far more benign, like simple ‘negligence’, as in a lapsed Catholic, or one who’s priorities become skewed, such that Church/religion take(s) a back seat to more pressing, -]real/-] this world concerns–without entailing a rejection of the Faith.

Illustrations:

Lapsed Catholic–maintains the Faith…may not feel himself worthy to partake of Christ…drifts away…but points others to the Church, because he still recognizes it as the True Faith, and Christ’s Church.

Convert to Protestantism–sees Christ as savior, but rejects the Church He bequeathed to us;

Convert to Islam–rejects Christ’s divinity; only sees him as a prophet, inferior to Mohamed.

X/Former Catholic atheist–rejects the very notion of God, let alone Christ’s divinity, and the rest of the Faith.

I never suggested that converting to protestantism is good, or acceptable; just pointing out that there are different degrees of ‘leaving the Church’, and they don’t all entail rejecting the Faith.

The problem is that many people who read these threads do not realize that you are discussing hypothetical, speculative situations. This only generates false excuses and confusion. This allows them to think “it’s OK, as long as I don’t admit totally reject everything”. The problem is we are not bringing clarity and clarity is needed. The academic discussion of the hypothetical should stay in the classrooms of graduate theology programs, not out where lost people are flailing around trying to find the right answer.

IOW, all of this speculation about hypothetical situations is causing confusion and doing more harm than good to real people in real situations.

Again, for readers who may have been confused by all of the speculation here, This from Jimmy Akin should clarify the subject:
ncregister.com/blog/jimmy…ou-are-9-thin/

 

[Peter_J]

From this do I understand correctly that a Catholic can indeed leave the faith for a Protestant one and even the Church would not consider it mortal sin if the person is sincerely convinced that they’re making a decision based on truth as he or she understands it?

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=12989451&postcount=2

Please note that “leaving the Church” is different than “leaving the faith”, (or ‘rejecting the faith’). The Church is indeed an integral part of the Faith, but it is not itself, “the Faith”.

Hence one could leave the Church–by ceasing to attend mass for instance, and instead, attending Protestant services (for example) out of consideration of/for family harmony…without rejecting any fundamental tenet of the Faith.

Conversely, one can reject fundamental tenets of the Faith–e.g.–believe that the Eucharist is just symbolic bread and wine (and partaking of it); or have had an abortion, and justify it as a matter of choice, and not a sin (and therefore not confessing it as such)…and attend Mass regularly. That, imo, would constitute a rejection of the Faith–while, outwardly, hypocritically, pretending to remain in the Church–or in communion with the Church.

The latter, imo, would most likely constitute mortal sin, while I don’t believe the former scenario would.

Sadly, that latter, and far more egregious scenario, is far more common than most of us would ever care to admit.

JMHO.

Hi Goya.

Let me preface my response by saying that it’s somewhat reluctant, both because I can see that this ^^ post has already received some replies (which I haven’t read) and also because what I want to say may sound a bit odd: I think we need to get past, at least partially, terminology like “Church” and “Faith” for the conversation to proceed. Specifically, despite his use of the phrase “leave the faith”, it’s clear that Sy Noe is talking about a situation of someone switching from Catholicism to Protestantism. What’s less clear in this thread is the distinction between saying something is objectively wrong, and the subjective guilt of the person doing it.

 

[steve_b]

Sorry sir, but you’re wrong–at least in so much as what you appear to have read into my post.

What follows is the statement I responded to. Keep this quote of yours in mind as I respond to you in this post

Originally Posted by Goya forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
Please note that “leaving the Church” is different than “leaving the faith”, (or ‘rejecting the faith’). The Church is indeed an integral part of the Faith, but it is not itself, “the Faith”.

Hence one could leave the Church–by ceasing to attend mass for instance, and instead, attending Protestant services (for example) out of consideration of/for family harmony…without rejecting any fundamental tenet of the Faith.

I said that statement is wrong and it is. And I quoted the CCC and scripture to show why it was wrong…#32
G:

Again, note the qualifier that you (as well as the other poster responding to that same post) seem to have read right past, as though it wasn’t even there:

…WITHOUT REJECTING ANY FUNDAMENTAL ASPECT OF THE FAITH.

Neglecting to attend mass does NOT amount to declaring Christ a liar, the Church, a fraud, or the Faith, a farce, or anything of the sort.

I’m not reading past what you wrote. You’re now rewriting what you wrote. Look at the quote I’m resp[onding to.

Regarding your quote, I would also say, leaving the Church IS leaving the faith.
G:

Not attending mass does NOT amount to taking souls away from the Church, leading souls away from the Truth, or leading souls to perdition. It doesn’t even amount to leading your own soul to perdition, necessarily.

I gave these quotes ( 2181 & Heb 10:23-29) on #32

here’s another,

**1035 **The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, “eternal fire.” The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

therefore, deliberately missing mass (unless excused for a serious reason) is a grave (mortal) sin, and If one dies with grave sin on their soul they go to hell.

thus

• missing mass deliberately is grave sin 2181 ,
• dieing in grave (mortal) sin means hell for that soul 1035

G:

That is not to say that ‘neglecting to attend mass’ is therefore kosher, recommended, or even approved–simply that it is a far cry from REJECTING THE FAITH.

Again, look at the quote you wrote that I responded to. We cannot swap the mass for a protestant service.
G:

Hypo/e.g.: Charles was a devout Catholic for 35 years, attending mass religiously, participating in parish events, in fundraising for his parish, etc. Then Charles got married, had a pile of kids, and had to work on Weekends, including Sundays, to provide for his children. Charles never ceased being Catholic, or upholding his faith. Charles taught his children the Faith, reads the Bible with them most nights, insists on them going to Sunday School (Faith Formation), participate in the Sacraments, and pays for all of this. Charles’ wife, the children’s mom, takes them to mass each Sunday. But again, for Charles to attend mass, would require that he give up his weekend income, and this is not economically feasible (note that I’m specifically not making it “impossible”–just not feasible).

Now…is Charles a ‘poor’ Catholic? Is Charles a negligent Catholic? Is what Charles doing, on par with “going protestant”? Agnostic? Atheistic? Buddhist? Islamic?

NONE of that is what I responded to. Read your quote again.

But lets take your new hypothesis. The Church spreads mass times over 2 days to make it as easy as possible for Catholics in the parish to make it to mass. Saturday evening mass and probably 4 masses on Sunday with the earliest sometimes at 6 A.M on Sunday a.m… Can “Charles” take a lunch break on Sunday? Can he go to mass on Saturday evening?
G:

Counter e.g.:

Charles’ brother, “James”, goes to mass every Sunday. Hungover. He gets laid regularly, with different girls. His live in girl friend (whom he paid for an abortion of his child for), works on Saturday nights, so he (unbeknownst to her) can, and regularly does, shack up with bimbos, when ever he can.

…but there he is, religiously, every Sunday, AT MASS…in line, for Holy Communion, partaking of the Holy Eucharist …dutifully putting his money in the collection basket… shaking hands and smiling, during the peace offering…

So Mr. “B”…since you appear to view yourself as qualified to judge the better Catholic…and having the advantage that I’ve served you up a harmless, benign hypothetical…have at it.

Who is the better Catholic? Or worse, if you prefer—“Charles”? Or “James”?

Again, look at the quote I responded to. NONE of these hypotheticals you serve up, have anything to do with what I responded to.

 

[Goya]

What follows is the statement I responded to. Keep this quote of yours in mind as I respond to you in this post

…

Again, look at the quote I responded to. NONE of these hypotheticals you serve up, have anything to do with what I responded to.

We appear to be posting past each other, Steve.

I’m not saying it’s kosher, or ok, or acceptable to refrain from attending mass–nor was I suggesting that protestant services are an adequate or acceptable substitute for attending mass. Just saying that it may not be (and often is not) as egregious a sin, as rejecting the Faith.

That’s what my hypo’s sought to illustrate–not that “Charles”, let alone “James”, were therefore saints, nor that attending pro. services, is an acceptable sub. for mass.

But neither amounts to declaring the Church a fraud, the Eucharist, merely symbolic, the faith, a farce, etc. Those, imo, are far more offensive and egregious offenses.

You (along with some others above) seek to dismiss my “hypotheticals” as useless and meaningless, or misleading or confusing…whatever…the bottom line is that if we only speak in platitudes and general principles without ever putting them to the test in the real world…then our faith IS a farce. If it has next to no application in the real world, then it isn’t preparing us for the Kingdom; it’s merely serving as a cudgel to beat people over the head with, and then we’ve become the Sadducees and/or Pharisees, that Christ critiqued constantly.

NB: Christ spoke in parables–which is akin to my hypo’s–and which, as you may have discerned, were not fabricated from whole cloth, but actually inspired by real world people (not actually brothers, and I was not represented by either, fwiw).

…and specifically in regards to the Protestantism that the OP specifically mentioned, I believe this is supported by the general spirit of ecumenism that has defined our relationship since Vat. II–why we refer to our Protestant counterparts as ‘separated brethren’, and not heretics.

Because there is a huge difference between what our ‘separated brethren’ hold and champion, versus what the true enemies of the Church–the relativists, secularists, materialists, agnostics, and atheists–hold and champion, as they seek not only to deny Christ His divinity–but to deny divinity itself.

fwiw.

But yes sir…duly acknowledged…

neglecting to attend mass, IS a grave sin.