Converting from Catholic to Protestant...

[PJM]

Bengoshi;6303338:

You are correct; there are some Protestant denominations who frown upon membership in Freemasonry. I don’t know of any mainstream denominations who explicitly prohibit membership. There is major disagreement between the Masons and the various religious bodies over the reasons therefore, but Masons figure that its between the church and their parishioners.

***The CC prohibits such a relarionship

In reply to the OPQ…***

Fallen away catholics are the second largest group in America WHY:shrug:

They lack FAITH that Jesus is LORD and REALLY in the Eucharist

They lack HOPE because they deny the validity of the Sacraments Institued by Christ

They lack Charity feeling that they “are not loved” and therefore they do not need to love

Nearly always they are “Secular Humanist” also called Rationalist. Its only right or wrong if I say so; don’t judge me and I woun’t judge you. They claim to know more and to know better.

As the bible was birthed by Catholics, and written specifically for Catholics [we can know this as there was no other church when it was written] it therefore must apply to Catholics is a MOST SPECIFIC MANNER.

**Heb.6 Verses 4 to 8 **“For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift,[Catholic holy Communion] and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, [Confirmation] and have tasted the goodness of the word of God [Mass] and the powers of the age to come, if they then commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt. For land which has drunk the rain that often falls upon it, and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed; its end is to be burned.” :crying:

 

[JonNC]

“There seems more respect for each other’s view of the Eucharist amongst our leaders, and a growing consensus that we are not far apart.”

JonNC, I’d be very interested in reading the supporting documents for this assertion if you would provide them.

Happy to, Elizabeth, and I hope you’ll let me know what you think.
Jon

48.Catholic and Lutheran Christians together confess the real and true presence of the Lord in the Eucharist. There are differences, however, in theological statements on the mode and therefore duration of the real presence.

49.In order to confess the reality of the eucharistic presence without reserve the Catholic Church teaches that "Christ whole and entire"34 becomes present through the transformation of the whole substance of the bread and the wine into the substance of the body and blood of Christ while the empirically accessible appearances of bread and wine (accidentia) continue to exist unchanged. This “wonderful and singular change” is “most aptly” called transsubstantiation by the Catholic Church.35 This terminology has widely been considered by Lutherans as an attempt rationalistically to explain the mystery of Christ’s presence in the sacrament; further, many suppose also that in this approach the present Lord is not seen as a person and naturalistic misunderstandings become easy.

50.The Lutherans have given expression to the reality of the Eucharistic presence by speaking of presence of Christ’s body and blood in, with and under bread and wine�but not of transsubstantiation. Here they see real analogy to the Lord’s incarnation: as God and man become one in Jesus Christ, Christ’s body and blood, on the one hand, and the bread and wine, on the other, give rise to a sacramental unity. Catholics, in turn, find that this does not do sufficient justice to this very unity and to the force of Christ’s word “This is my body”.

51.**The ecumenical discussion has shown that these two positions must no longer be regarded as opposed in a way that leads to separation. **The Lutheran tradition agrees with the Catholic tradition that the consecrated elements do not simply remain bread and wine but by the power of the creative Word are bestowed as the body and blood of Christ. In this sense it also could occasionally speak, as does the Greek tradition of a “change”.36 The concept of transsubstantiation for its part is intended as a confession and preservation of the mystery character of the Eucharistic presence; it is not intended as an explanation of how this change occurs37 (see the appendices on “Real Presence” and “Christ’s Presence in the Eucharist”).

prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/l-rc/doc/e_l-rc_eucharist.html

 

[12kstj51]

Thank you, everyone, for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

As I explained in my earlier post, my family, although regular “practicing” Catholics, deviated from the teachings of the Church. My mother had her “own” religion so to speak, that is, she became involved in the occult, had seances and odd, scary individuals over at the house when my father was at work. At my parochial school, I was considered “the Holy Joe” with the odd mother…I was not allowed to have friends over, especially when these “odd people” were over, but I prayed a lot and stayed away from things the other kids did, i.e, go to parties, drink, date, etc. I did love Jesus, and attended Mass faithfully, but got no support either at home, at church, or at school. My church and school were busy with social events, and the priest whom everyone liked later turned out later to go to prison as a convicted pedophile. That is another story. Going to Mass was just a routine but it did give me time to pray in total silence (something I didn’t have at home in a large, dysfunctional family) and I am grateful for that. When I met my husband, he introduced me to a world where people were like me, who loved Jesus, welcomed me with open arms and confirmed that my mother’s odd behavior was totally against Christ’s teachings. Praying was very acceptable (which it was not amongst my Catholic friends), and I learned more about scripture than I had ever learned in Catholic school, particularly in high school where we focused more on social justice than Christ’s teachings. (remember, this was the early 70’s).

I have to say that many Protestant churches, however divided, do teach their members about their beliefs through Sunday School, small home groups, or bible studies. Oh, how I wish Catholics had these same reinforcements for its members. Ideally, I think it would be really cool to have classes (other than RCIA) for long-standing Catholics to teach them about their faith and why Catholics believe what they believe. For example, I’d like to learn/talk about the individual Saints, why Catholics reject Sola Scriptura, why we have extra books of the bible, Marion dogma…so I could answer intelligently my Protestant friends and husband. I spend hours reading to get answers, but I’d like to sit down with others in study groups to discuss these things. Where is the enthusiasm for our Lord and faith? I see it expressed on this website, but not around me.

Also, at Mass…everyone seems to be there just to be there. No one sings, half of the church leaves after they receive the Eucharist, and only a handful stay for the rosary. A few weeks back, the gentleman who reads the announcements told an “off-color” joke which was appropriate for a porn radio station. I was mortified. (He was the leader of our local Knights of Columbus-Hopefully, our priest said something to him.)

As far as my husband goes, he is slowly mellowing out…he was totally against the idea of marriage convalidation a few years ago. The Holy Spirit is working and I believe He will lead both of us down the right path. It’s getting better…just not there yet. Thanks for you prayers and for listening.

 

[Emerite]

To “Ugly Gal,” a/k/a potential Pretty Woman:
Surely those Catholics who think they are freeing themselves from systematic abuse, must have had traumatic, warping experiences in their childhoods. I admit that life, in general, has become more difficult to live in a less Christ-centered world, especially since the 1960’s. With passing years, and better understanding of my faith and Holy Mass and the Eucharist, by living according to the Ten Commandments of God, I feel as though I’m living in a heaven-centered theology. I feel secure, at great peace with the world, and feel totally happy and safe, in my life as a practicing Catholic. I had a good childhood, with loving parents who taught us about God, how to pray and took us to church every Sunday. Following my faith, on the contrary, gave me self-esteem, and I was always proud to tell high school and college boyfriends that I was saving myself for the man I’d marry someday. I fear that too many of the girls who are promiscuous actually lack self-esteem. So, I think those who felt destructed by their faith, actually may have self-destructed, and, unfortunately, might have never fully understood their Catholic faith. In this, I believe you. God welcomes prodigal sons and daughters, God really loves you, I love you, and I sincerely invite you to come home.

 

[Bengoshi]

I’ve been a lurker for quite a while. This thread stirred me to add some thoughts. One of the reasons I did not see here for converting from Catholicism to Protestantism is the foolish decision some of us make when we are very young to follow our spouse’s faith. When I married 33 years ago, I was in my teens, very young, and very gullible. By marrying out of the Church, I avoided pre-marital classes which my husband-to-be wanted nothing to do with. He was hardcore Baptist, very involved in that church, and wanted me to be the same. My parents were poor examples of Catholicism when I grew up, and the Catholic environment in which I lived was very liberal (we’re talking early 70’s here) and wealthy (my family was not); and to top it off, all of the priests during my elementary years were later accused of molestation. When I began to attend my husband-to-be’s church, I was overwhelmed with a loving church family which had a passionate love for God and who were basically in the same social class as me. It was easy to leave at the time, and over the years I became very active in my protestant church and very close to God, something which I could not do on the path I was on before I met my husband. Fast forward 33 years later, and I find myself returning to the Catholic Faith. I have attended Mass every week for the last 3 years with my widowed mother. I have learned a lot off of this website, and can see both sides of the apologetics wall that stands between Catholics and Protestants. Who is right? Only God knows. I love the Church and miss the liturgy, yet I am torn by leaving a church family I love, and a husband who is reluctant to be married before a priest. I wish I had had a strong Catholic upbringing and a supportive church family when I was young. I pray every day that God will show me the right thing to do, and I know He will.

You’re fine where you are. Why don’t you try reading books by leading Baptist pastors such as Charles Stanley, Anthony Pezzotta and theologians such as Louis Berkhoff, Wayne Grudem, John Frame, Cornelius Van Til, and even the classics of John Calvin, Charles Spurgeon, R.C. Sprowl and C.S. Lewis.

 

[ElisabethM]

Happy to, Elizabeth, and I hope you’ll let me know what you think.
Jon

prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/l-rc/doc/e_l-rc_eucharist.html

Yes, I understand that and believe that is why I had no trouble embracing the Catholic teaching of the Eucharist.

I’m afraid I don’t know how to explain the difference without sounding argumentative but I’ll give it a go. I think the difference between Catholic and Lutheran teachings of the Eucharist has more to do with Holy Orders than what anyone believes about the Real Presence. Catholics believe only an ordained priest can change the bread and wine into Christ’s Body and Blood and therefore Christ is only present in the Eucharist in a Catholic or Orthodox church. This is why I used the term “light years” (which I regret because it didn’t mean anything helpful)–Christ either IS present with his Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity or He is not. Other churches may practice the form of the Eucharist, but they lack the reality of Christ in Holy Communion that the Catholic Church has.

This is the same issue with the Sacrament of Confession. Only a priest can forgive sins in the sacrament. So another church may practice the form of Confession but the absolution is not possible. This power was given to the Apostles and their successors by our Lord Himself.

I’d be happy if someone can explain this better or correct me if I’m not speaking correctly.

 

[Emerite]

Reply to 12KSTJ51:

I’d like to know what State you’re living in. Maybe you should find your bishop or another church pastor adjoining your area for answers. Churches here certainly have reinforcements for our members: bible studies, retreats, lectures, dinners, coffee Sundays, lots of membership activities, etc., and more planned for the future. Besides, our current pastor is extremely well educated in matters of faith, as well as our former pastor, who served on the Vatican II Council. They’ve always had time for me whenever I asked any questions. From your writing, it sounds like your Masses are out of control. Here, most of us join in singing at Masses and celebrations, very few leave after Communion, many stay for the Rosary and attend Rosary Groups; and on Ash Wednesday this week, our church was packed, all aisles filled, vestibule totally filled and a large overflowing crowd outside the church building.

I regret comments that you’re planning to leave the church – wish you could contact wise counsel first. I’m seeing a trend of trying to lure Catholics away from the Church, often with lots of propaganda/falsehoods that I read about in ex-catholics.org. Remember, if a cradle Protestant lives according to the Ten Commandments and truly believes his/her faith is Jesus-created, this person can merit salvation. Not so true for former Catholics. You may want to look this up in the Catechism, written by our present Pope Benedict when he was a Cardinal. May God bless you!

 

[climer97007]

I think the difference between Catholic and Lutheran teachings of the Eucharist has more to do with Holy Orders than what anyone believes about the Real Presence. Catholics believe only an ordained priest can change the bread and wine into Christ’s Body and Blood and therefore Christ is only present in the Eucharist in a Catholic or Orthodox church…

This is the same issue with the Sacrament of Confession. Only a priest can forgive sins in the sacrament. So another church may practice the form of Confession but the absolution is not possible. This power was given to the Apostles and their successors by our Lord Himself.

I’d be happy if someone can explain this better or correct me if I’m not speaking correctly.

During the eucharistic prayer, the Priest offers the bread and wine to Christ in heaven so that this miracle can be made manifest to all present through the power of the Holy Spirit. The priest is there saying the Words, but, it is God performing the miracle of Transubstantiation.

Next, Christ is not present in the bread or in the wine, more accurately, the substance of the bread and the substance of the wine have been changed into the substance of His Risen and Glorified Body and Blood. This is transubstantiation and it is what all the Orthodox churches have been teaching for 2,000 years, including the Roman Catholic Church.

I make a point of transubstantiation because many protestants believe in what is called Consubstantiation. In this teaching, Jesus is made present with the bread, and with the wine. And when the Protestant service is over, His presence leaves the bread and leaves the wine. There is no substantial change. The bread is always bread, and the wine is always wine. And his presence is only fleeting, that is, there is no abiding presence of Christ in the Protestant form of worship, only a temporary presence.

Again, the ordained Priest is not the one doing the forgiving. Jesus is doing the forgiving. When a protestant asks why we Catholics don’t just go directly to Christ, he is asking this from his own ignorance. And when the Catholic says he needs to confess his sins to the priest so that the Priest can forgive him his sins, he too is speaking from his ignorance. The Priest is the ordained minister given the faculties to administer and witness this miracle of Christ’s love and compassion. The Priest in this case is standing in for the Body of Christ, for the Church, because the body has been injured by the sins committed or omitted. This priestly ordination, this consecration of the man who God makes into a Priest, is the action of God setting apart a particular man for a Holy purpose. This ordination is even different between the Catholic and protestant faiths.

In the protestant formulations of the worship service, the sacrifice of Christ is not taking place. There is no “passover” happening of God passing over his people due to the Blood of the Lamb of God being given to them. The protestant minister sees and speaks only of a symbolism. He has to be reformed to say mass in a Roman Catholic liturgy, because the protestant minister has never presided over the One Sacrifice of Christ, and knows not what it means to do so from his own experience, formation or ordination.

There are many technicalities that could be discussed. In the end, it is just simply ignorant to say that the protestant worship service is the same, or that the same thing is happening, or that the same eucharist is being shared, that the same Communion of Saints exists, or that a Catholic can get the same thing from either faith. The worship of the protestant faith denies the power of God at some level, and the Catholic depends soley upon this power.

I offer the same invitation, if someone can say this better than I, go ahead.

Gene

 

[hope_7]

Dear Roman Catholic in answer to your question Do I believe that there are any in the roman catholic church that are born again? The answer is yes I do but I also believe there are many that are not. Please remember that I was simply stateing what I had found to be a common thread in those who left the roman catholic church and became part of the protestant church. Some of thease people loved the catholic church dearly and were very devout catholics. It was very hard for them to leave the church they loved. It was the issue of being born again. When they were born again this seemed to be the main reason that they left the catholic chutch.

When you ask me if I think any catholics are born again It is something that one should ask themselves in light of scripture. I find that many on this site have no real concept of what it means. I hear alot of preconcieved ideas about it and alot of talk against it. but Jesus said that we must be born again.

 

[ElisabethM]

During the eucharistic prayer, the Priest offers the bread and wine to Christ in heaven so that this miracle can be made manifest to all present through the power of the Holy Spirit. The priest is there saying the Words, but, it is God performing the miracle of Transubstantiation.

Next, Christ is not present in the bread or in the wine, more accurately, the substance of the bread and the substance of the wine have been changed into the substance of His Risen and Glorified Body and Blood. This is transubstantiation and it is what all the Orthodox churches have been teaching for 2,000 years, including the Roman Catholic Church.

I make a point of transubstantiation because many protestants believe in what is called Consubstantiation. In this teaching, Jesus is made present with the bread, and with the wine. And when the Protestant service is over, His presence leaves the bread and leaves the wine. There is no substantial change. The bread is always bread, and the wine is always wine. And his presence is only fleeting, that is, there is no abiding presence of Christ in the Protestant form of worship, only a temporary presence.

Again, the ordained Priest is not the one doing the forgiving. Jesus is doing the forgiving. When a protestant asks why we Catholics don’t just go directly to Christ, he is asking this from his own ignorance. And when the Catholic says he needs to confess his sins to the priest so that the Priest can forgive him his sins, he too is speaking from his ignorance. The Priest is the ordained minister given the faculties to administer and witness this miracle of Christ’s love and compassion. The Priest in this case is standing in for the Body of Christ, for the Church, because the body has been injured by the sins committed or omitted. This priestly ordination, this consecration of the man who God makes into a Priest, is the action of God setting apart a particular man for a Holy purpose. This ordination is even different between the Catholic and protestant faiths.

In the protestant formulations of the worship service, the sacrifice of Christ is not taking place. There is no “passover” happening of God passing over his people due to the Blood of the Lamb of God being given to them. The protestant minister sees and speaks only of a symbolism. He has to be reformed to say mass in a Roman Catholic liturgy, because the protestant minister has never presided over the One Sacrifice of Christ, and knows not what it means to do so from his own experience, formation or ordination.

There are many technicalities that could be discussed. In the end, it is just simply ignorant to say that the protestant worship service is the same, or that the same thing is happening, or that the same eucharist is being shared, that the same Communion of Saints exists, or that a Catholic can get the same thing from either faith. The worship of the protestant faith denies the power of God at some level, and the Catholic depends soley upon this power.

I offer the same invitation, if someone can say this better than I, go ahead.

Gene

Gene,

Thank you for explaining this so much better than I. Of course it is Christ, not the priest as a man, offering Himself in the Eucharist, and it is Christ, not the priest as a man, forgiving sins in the Sacrament of Penance.

But, still, don’t we speak of the priest as “Alter Christus”? This is the sense in which I meant the priest consecrates the bread and wine, and the priest forgives sins in Confession. And my real point was this “Alter Christus” is only brought about through the Sacrament of Holy Orders–is that correct? So it is primarily the absence of Holy Orders in Protestant churches that distinguishes them from the Catholic Church.

Again, better explanations, and clarifications, welcome!

 

[12kstj51]

Emerite, I just wanted to clarify that I left the church 33 years ago and returned to Mass about 3 years ago. I am coming back, not leaving. Currently, I attend both the protestant and Catholic church. I live in the Bible Belt, in a rural area. Our local parish serves many small towns within a large radius. I grew up in a large city where there were choices, but out here, one has to travel many miles to get to another Catholic church. There are a plethora of protestant churches, but only one Catholic parish served by an elderly priest. In a large rural area, you have many devout older Catholics, but it seems like the young people go elsewhere, if at all. Unlike with suburban and urban parishes, there are few young folks, married or single. I think that with any church, you have programs if there is a need for them. Unfortunately, with older folks, they like to keep things the way they were (or are), so those who are in charge probably feel no need for additional programs.

Ya know, I think someday it will all work out. It is good to be back at Mass, and I learn on my own, without groups, because I wWant to. My husband is slowly coming around, and my daughter, who was raised in our Protestant tradition, recently married a wonderful, devout Catholic man in the Catholic church. My husband was very impressed with the ceremony and with this young man, who treats our daughter like a princess. These things I see as positive steps toward convalidation of our own marriage. Sometimes the Holy Spirit works in baby steps, not overnight. If it is to be, it will happen.

 

[IrishEddieOHara]

You’re fine where you are. Why don’t you try reading books by leading Baptist pastors such as Charles Stanley, Anthony Pezzotta and theologians such as Louis Berkhoff, Wayne Grudem, John Frame, Cornelius Van Til, and even the classics of John Calvin, Charles Spurgeon, R.C. Sprowl and C.S. Lewis.

I wouldn’t recommend that stuff for a DOG to read, much less a human being!!

You know, there is such a thing as TRUTH, and those in Protestantism have left it. How serious is this?

Luther’s Germany became an absolute SEWER of immorality after he published his ideas. Why? Because if you are saved by “faith alone” and it doesn’t matter what you do, then you can pretty much do what you like and Jesus will save you. Thus, the German peasants, in their simple way of looking at things, correctly surmised that if they were indeed so saved by faith alone that they could never lose their salvation, then they could do pretty much anything they wanted. And they turned Germany into a moral sewer.

The same thing applies to living out our lives. We are called to do good works. Most Protestants don’t have the time to do good works because A.) they’re saved and sure of it and therefore, why bother B.) it doesn’t affect their state before God C.) they are busy chasing every dollar they can lay their hands upon. This is why we have some of the WORST scoundrels ever seen running Wall Street and the banks and our wars – they have drunk deeply of Calvinist theology and the theology of its children, the Evangelicals, and believe that having success in business is a sure sign that you are “one of the elect of God”. A good book to read on this phenomenon is THE PROTESTANT ROOTS OF CAPITALISM by Max Weber. He shows how demonic Capitalism, which is in complete antipathy to the Christian Gospel, developed from Calvin’s theories of Christianity.

Then there are the issues of proper worship. How many dog and pony shows will you have to go to before you realize that Protestant worship is NOT what God intends for us? It is a sick joke, a truncation of what we are supposed to be doing to show the beauty and majesty of Heaven by our worship.

I could just write pages and pages here. Protestantism is to proper Christian praxis in all areas of our lives what a beat up Volkswagon with flat tires is to a Greyhound bus. Both can get you where you want to go…but only the Catholic Faith, as given to the Apostles and handed down through the generations, can do the proper job of it.

You wanna be “fine” in the Volkswagon…rock on! I prefer the elegance, the beauty, the great ride of the Greyhound bus.

 

[IrishEddieOHara]

To really understand the necessity of the substantial change of the elements of the Eucharist, it is necessary that you understand the analogy of marriage as our relationship to Jesus. He speaks of Himself as the divine Bridegroom. We are, both corporately and individually, His Bride. We look forward to the Wedding Feast of the Lamb.

Go to: Jewish Wedding Feast. What happened on that night, after all the celebration and joy? The couple got down to making real in their flesh that which they felt in their spirits – the becoming of one flesh in the nuptial embrace. This embrace is meant as a picture of the eternal embrace of love which is our eternal union with Christ our Lord. We will ever enjoy a unity of which the nuptial embrace is but a poor picture.

The nuptial embrace lasts briefly. The eternal union lasts forever.

The nuptial embrace is not complete union. The eternal union is a complete union.

The nuptial embrace is parted by death. No death and no end in Heaven.

The nuptial embrace does not change us ontologically. The eternal union changes us in to His likeness.

The Eucharist is nothing less than the beginning, here in time and on earth, of the eternal embrace of God’s love in Christ Jesus. This is why Archimandrite John Ziziuoulis, in his marvelous little book BEING AND COMMUNION calls it the “premier eschatological event” in our lives. It will simply become permanent upon our death. We will not have to partake daily or weekly anymore. We will, upon death, enter into the eschaton event for which we were all made – the everlasting “one flesh” experience of permanent union with Christ which we experience only briefly and imperfectly in the Eucharist.

Therefore, any “church” which offers anything less than the Eucharist is doing its people a massive disservice, for they are not being united to Jesus, they are not experiencing ontological change in their very being, and they have

 

[climer97007]

To really understand the necessity of the substantial change of the elements of the Eucharist, it is necessary that you understand the analogy of marriage as our relationship to Jesus. He speaks of Himself as the divine Bridegroom. We are, both corporately and individually, His Bride. We look forward to the Wedding Feast of the Lamb.

Go to: Jewish Wedding Feast. What happened on that night, after all the celebration and joy? The couple got down to making real in their flesh that which they felt in their spirits – the becoming of one flesh in the nuptial embrace. This embrace is meant as a picture of the eternal embrace of love which is our eternal union with Christ our Lord. We will ever enjoy a unity of which the nuptial embrace is but a poor picture.

The nuptial embrace lasts briefly. The eternal union lasts forever.

The nuptial embrace is not complete union. The eternal union is a complete union.

The nuptial embrace is parted by death. No death and no end in Heaven.

The nuptial embrace does not change us ontologically. The eternal union changes us in to His likeness.

The Eucharist is nothing less than the beginning, here in time and on earth, of the eternal embrace of God’s love in Christ Jesus. This is why Archimandrite John Ziziuoulis, in his marvelous little book BEING AND COMMUNION calls it the “premier eschatological event” in our lives. It will simply become permanent upon our death. We will not have to partake daily or weekly anymore. We will, upon death, enter into the eschaton event for which we were all made – the everlasting “one flesh” experience of permanent union with Christ which we experience only briefly and imperfectly in the Eucharist.

Therefore, any “church” which offers anything less than the Eucharist is doing its people a massive disservice, for they are not being united to Jesus, they are not experiencing ontological change in their very being, and they have

Very, very good answer. Well said!

I listen to misinformed people telling me that I could have a more intimate relationship with Jesus in some non-Catholic church, and I just have to cry.

To continue with your explanation, it would be like being married and sleeping in separate beds for eternity. The protestant gets baptized and then skips the honeymoon, and moves into separate rooms, unaware of the intimate union and communion that Christ has invited them to experience, which they can ONLY experience in a Catholic Church.

And the non-Catholic is supposed to be happy with this, and to instead lift up their minister, lift up their friendship and fellowship with each other, lift up their singing, lift up their welcoming and hospitality, because that is all that they have, not indeed having the very nuptial bed of Christ, not having the Groom to truly come Home to.

And so they flit like butterflies from flower to flower never having His nuptial bed to land upon. This nuptial bed of Christ, Holy Communion, is the intimacy with Christ far beyond the mere reading of His Word. It is relationship far beyond the sleeping in separate beds of protestantism, and the honeymoon suite with a giant VOID sticker pasted across it.

Gene

 

[Carlan]

During the Eucharistic prayer, the Priest offers the bread and wine to Christ in heaven so that this miracle can be made manifest to all present through the power of the Holy Spirit. The priest is there saying the Words, but, it is God performing the miracle of Transubstantiation.

Next, Christ is not present in the bread or in the wine, more accurately, the substance of the bread and the substance of the wine have been changed into the substance of His Risen and Glorified Body and Blood. This is transubstantiation and it is what all the Orthodox churches have been teaching for 2,000 years, including the Roman Catholic Church.

I make a point of transubstantiation because many protestants believe in what is called Consubstantiation. In this teaching, Jesus is made present with the bread, and with the wine. And when the Protestant service is over, His presence leaves the bread and leaves the wine. There is no substantial change. The bread is always bread, and the wine is always wine. And his presence is only fleeting, that is, there is no abiding presence of Christ in the Protestant form of worship, only a temporary presence.

Again, the ordained Priest is not the one doing the forgiving. Jesus is doing the forgiving. When a protestant asks why we Catholics don’t just go directly to Christ, he is asking this from his own ignorance. And when the Catholic says he needs to confess his sins to the priest so that the Priest can forgive him his sins, he too is speaking from his ignorance. The Priest is the ordained minister given the faculties to administer and witness this miracle of Christ’s love and compassion. The Priest in this case is standing in for the Body of Christ, for the Church, because the body has been injured by the sins committed or omitted. This priestly ordination, this consecration of the man who God makes into a Priest, is the action of God setting apart a particular man for a Holy purpose. This ordination is even different between the Catholic and protestant faiths.

In the protestant formulations of the worship service, the sacrifice of Christ is not taking place. There is no “passover” happening of God passing over his people due to the Blood of the Lamb of God being given to them. The protestant minister sees and speaks only of a symbolism. He has to be reformed to say mass in a Roman Catholic liturgy, because the protestant minister has never presided over the One Sacrifice of Christ, and knows not what it means to do so from his own experience, formation or ordination.

There are many technicalities that could be discussed. In the end, it is just simply ignorant to say that the protestant worship service is the same, or that the same thing is happening, or that the same Eucharist is being shared, that the same Communion of Saints exists, or that a Catholic can get the same thing from either faith. The worship of the protestant faith denies the power of God at some level, and the Catholic depends soley upon this power.

I offer the same invitation, if someone can say this better than I, go ahead.

Gene

Thank you Gene for an excellent post, I will be putting it in my notes. A wonderful teaching of theTruth for the poorly Catechized Catholics in this thread who have left the Apostolic faith for less than the whole Truth.Peace, Carlan

 

[JonNC]

Yes, I understand that and believe that is why I had no trouble embracing the Catholic teaching of the Eucharist.

I’m afraid I don’t know how to explain the difference without sounding argumentative but I’ll give it a go. I think the difference between Catholic and Lutheran teachings of the Eucharist has more to do with Holy Orders than what anyone believes about the Real Presence. Catholics believe only an ordained priest can change the bread and wine into Christ’s Body and Blood and therefore Christ is only present in the Eucharist in a Catholic or Orthodox church. This is why I used the term “light years” (which I regret because it didn’t mean anything helpful)–Christ either IS present with his Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity or He is not. Other churches may practice the form of the Eucharist, but they lack the reality of Christ in Holy Communion that the Catholic Church has.

This is the same issue with the Sacrament of Confession. Only a priest can forgive sins in the sacrament. So another church may practice the form of Confession but the absolution is not possible. This power was given to the Apostles and their successors by our Lord Himself.

I’d be happy if someone can explain this better or correct me if I’m not speaking correctly.

You are correct about Catholic teaching concerning orders. It is a disagreement we have that, as dialogue goes forward, would have to be resolved. Take note that the issue of validity is essentially one way, in that we recognize Catholic orders as valid, but you don’t recignize ours (except those Lutherans in northern Europe who have apostolic succession). While we would like and prefer Rome’s recognition of our clergy, we don’t view it as a necessity.

Interestingly,this issue is addressed in the ongoing dialogue between Lutherans and Catholics:
usccb.org/seia/koinonia.shtml

In it, quote of note:

I count among the most important results of the ecumenical dialogues the insight that the issue of the eucharist cannot be narrowed to the problem of ‘validity.’ Even a theology oriented to the concept of succession, such as that which holds in the Catholic and in the Orthodox church, need not in any way deny the salvation-granting presence of the Lord [Heilschaffende Gegenwart des Herrn] in a Lutheran [evangelische] Lord’s Supper

Cardinal Ratzinger

And the paritcipants of the dialogue:

If the actions of Lutheran pastors can be described by Catholics as “sacred actions” that “can truly engender a life of grace,” if communities served by such ministers give “access to that communion in which is salvation,” and if at a eucharist at which a Lutheran pastor presides is to be found “the salvation-granting presence of the Lord,” then Lutheran churches cannot be said simply to lack the ministry given to the church by Christ and the Spirit. In acknowledging the imperfect koinonia between our communities and the access to grace through the ministries of these communities, we also acknowledge a real although imperfect koinonia between our ministries.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=IrishEddieOHara;6309388]
Luther’s Germany became an absolute SEWER of immorality after he published his ideas. Why? Because if you are saved by “faith alone” and it doesn’t matter what you do, then you can pretty much do what you like and Jesus will save you. Thus, the German peasants, in their simple way of looking at things, correctly surmised that if they were indeed so saved by faith alone that they could never lose their salvation, then they could do pretty much anything they wanted. And they turned Germany into a moral sewer.

When Luther went to Rome, he found exactly what you imply Germany became, an open sewer of immorality and corruption. Seems like “faith and works” wasn’t working there any better.

The same thing applies to living out our lives. We are called to do good works. Most Protestants don’t have the time to do good works because A.) they’re saved and sure of it and therefore, why bother B.) it doesn’t affect their state before God ".

Sola Fide does not, 1) exempt from doing good works, 2) give license to an ungodly lifestyle.
[bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php#IV. Good Works.](http://www.bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php#IV. Good Works.)

We believe, teach, and confess also that all men, but those especially who are born again and renewed by the Holy Ghost, are bound to do good works.

9] 4. In this sense the words necessary, shall, and must are employed correctly and in a Christian manner also with respect to the regenerate, and in no way are contrary to the form of sound words and speech.

10] 5. Nevertheless, by the words mentioned, necessitas, necessarium, necessity and necessary, if they be employed concerning the regenerate, not coercion, but only due obedience is to be understood, which the truly believing, so far as they are regenerate, render not from coercion or the driving of the Law, but from a voluntary spirit; because they are no more under the Law, but under grace, Rom. 6:14; 7:6; 8:14.

11] 6. Accordingly, we also believe, teach, and confess that when it is said: The regenerate do good works from a free spirit, this is not to be understood as though it is at the option of the regenerate man to do or to forbear doing good when he wishes, and that he can nevertheless retain faith if he intentionally perseveres in sins.

Most importantly, your accusation here deserves statistical support and empirical evidence. Perhaps you can provide it.
The Catholic Church does wonderous and marvelous things in charity. The LCMS, does at least as much, per capita, as any Christian communion.

C.) they are busy chasing every dollar they can lay their hands upon. This is why we have some of the WORST scoundrels ever seen running Wall Street and the banks and our wars – they have drunk deeply of Calvinist theology and the theology of its children, the Evangelicals, and believe that having success in business is a sure sign that you are "one of the elect of God

Perhaps a Wagner would work better than your broad brush.

Then there are the issues of proper worship. How many dog and pony shows will you have to go to before you realize that Protestant worship is NOT what God intends for us? It is a sick joke, a truncation of what we are supposed to be doing to show the beauty and majesty of Heaven by our worship.

I have been to Catholic Mass on numerous occasions. It is a beautiful liturgy, deep in scripture and sacrament. I can easily compare the Lutheran divine service to it in its depth of scripture, and beauty of music.

I could just write pages and pages here. Protestantism is to proper Christian praxis in all areas of our lives what a beat up Volkswagon with flat tires is to a Greyhound bus. Both can get you where you want to go…but only the Catholic Faith, as given to the Apostles and handed down through the generations, can do the proper job of it.

You wanna be “fine” in the Volkswagon…rock on! I prefer the elegance, the beauty, the great ride of the Greyhound bus.

I know in that Greyhound bus there is quite a bit more charity than you exibit here. Guess I should be thankful that you recognize that we get there, too.

Jon

 

[climer97007]

I know in that Greyhound bus there is quite a bit more charity than you exibit here. Guess I should be thankful that you recognize that we get there, too.
Jon

The difficulty is the degree of our assurance of Salvation. What we Catholics recognise is that all salvation proceeds from Christ, and that Christ can save anyone whom He chooses.

Even though we understand that Jesus has this freedom, we also understand that in Catholicism, there is a deeper level of surety, a lesser chance of someone being caught in the End crying “Lord, Lord” and being turned away from the gates of Heaven.

It is the teaching of Jesus concerning this final possibility that ought to cause every Christian to give pause, to reconsider the state of their soul, and of the lost opportunities to meet Christ in a depth not yet plumbed in their experience so that the Last Day will not leave them crying “Lord, Lord”.

Gene

 

[Holly3278]

Probably the main reason a person would do that is ignorance. Ignorance of what the Church teaches. And it is sad. There are so many people in today’s Church that have been poorly catechized that it isn’t even funny. Lord, have mercy on us all.

 

[Emerite]

Referring to Irish Eddie OHara’ statement,
“… Protestantism is to proper Christian praxis in all areas of our lives what a beat up Volkswagon with flat tires is to a Greyhound bus. Both can get you where you want to go…,”

and JonNC’s reply,

“I know in that Greyhound bus there is quite a bit more charity than you exhibit here. Guess I should be thankful that you recognize that we get there, too,”

I’d like to clarify the Roman Catholic’s position regarding the salvation of non-Catholics, and “getting where you want to go”: A non-Catholic can merit salvation (1) if he is a cradle Protestant, who truly believes that his Protestant faith is the correct method of salvation, and through no fault of his own, does not realize the truth of the Catholic Church; and (2) if he lives a good Christian life according to the Ten Commandments. [The 1994 Ligouri publication of Catechism of the Catholic Church, with imprimi potest by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict, himself), as Interdicasterial Commission for the Catechism of the Catholic Church, states, at No. 847, “This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church. Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience — those too may achieve eternal salvation.”]

On the other hand, the Catechism states that fallen-away, ex-Catholics, who refuse to remain in the Catholic Church, could not be saved. [See Part One in this Catechism of the Catholic Church, The Profession of Faith, in its affirmation (at page 224, Nos. 846 and 847), “ … they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.”]

Jesus Christ established the Catholic Church when He told St. Peter, “…thou are Peter, and upon this rock, I will build my church.” Peter, and all of the successor Popes of the Catholic Church, are said to be infallible when speaking on faith and morals (i.e., the Catholic Catechism). I believe this.

Therefore, JonNC, I trust you meet the above criteria, and can get where you want to go. God bless!