Ex-Catholic Fundamentalists

[Catherine_S]

This “fellowshipping” is understandable in churches where “worship” means a sermon, a prayer or two, and a couple of songs.

I go to Church to worship the Living God who is truly, really, and substantially present on the altar in the Blessed Eucharist. I kneel before Him and do not pay the slightest attention to anyone else. I am totally absorbed in adoration. With the priest, I offer the Holy Sacrifice and receive in return the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ.

Fellowshipping is fine outside the Holy Sacrifice. Make friends in groups that serve the Church. Join the men’s club, sodality, St. Vincent de Paul or another group.

All the “fellowshipping” that goes on in Protestant groups is to compensate for the loneliness of Protestant worship. All they have is each other, when it’s really God they seek. But He is in His Church and is not to be found there.

Catholics are united in belief, not by how many hands they shake on Sunday.

JMJ Jay

.

 

[submittedjoy]

When I first became a “Christian” a term I don’t apply to myself as much as I use to, I was just so grateful to find life I tended to love everyone and accept everyone. I learned this was stupid and I need to change. I became brethren, very very good people, and I deeply miss them. It was in the Early 80’s and the Jesus is coming back trade was in high swing. We were very zealous and wanted to preach to the world. But I knew Catholics as well; I had no great love for the church and many reasons to hate it, very personal reasons of which none were doctrinal.

I hated to hate so I made an effort to understand what Catholics thought. I found many Catholics think much like we did except they did not have this desire to convert people. Well as we all started to grow and people got married and the zeal started to fade the singles groups was pretty much tossed on the heap because it committed the unpardonable sin, it became irrelevant. That blunted alot of people, actually that gutted alot of people and ruined a many lives, that of course is irrelevant to but back to your question.

You see Jesus did not come back, and we really wanted him to, it was a profound disappointment. I was spared from this to some degree because God lead me to a ministry with the elderly and as far as I was concerned I saw Jesus ever day I was there, like you Catholics think of Jesus in the Eucharist, I see Jesus in these folks. I am on my face day after day thanking God for keeping a bottom feeder like me around, despite me not because of me.

Well to get back to where the anger comes from, you see, againstnest just can not build, being in a constant state of againstness, with full zeal, with afterburners on, fighting the enemy at every turn. It makes you angry, it also can make you crazy, suicidal, depressed, hate filled, etc. I have seen many run through the grinder, I helped turn the hand crank on some to my shame.

That is where the anger comes from, the older faiths, though they have their zealots as well, tend to be more relaxed and into the move for the long hall. That is what revivalism can do to people, there is always a new theme and we all march to it or at least try.

For many this tends to mellow and people grow. For some of us it kills in a spiritual sense. Now this is a simplistic, emotional, and somewhat jaded view, which I admit up front so take it with a grain of salt.

Take care.

My friend… Jesus will come back again. No one can “set a date” for his return. But he will come back. He promised he would and He is true to his word. He will come back in an hour that we think not!

 

[submittedjoy]

I understand what former Protestants go through. I’m a former Protestant myself. I have no hatred nor anger towards Protestant denominations. All I feel is that I somewhat wasted a lot of my life–but I didn’t know better. You kinda can’t help it when you’re 11 and the Baptist church is all you knew. Investigation was out of the question, for I didn’t know other churches existed. I thought ALL churches were Baptist.

I can’t tell you how EASY it is to be Protestant. You’re led to believe a certain translation of verses or a certain Bible, or the King James Version…and that once you’re saved, you’re always saved…and that Baptism is symbolic and indicates entering membership in the church…and other things that aren’t Biblically supported. I went to a Christian school at the time. My favourite subject was Bible study. We were taught the Creation, the 10 Commandments, Solomon, David, Ruth, Jesus, a list of his apostles yet no mention of Judas’ being replaced, and about the End Times and the Rapture. With each year, these subjects were further explained. Bible memorisation for soulwinning was also included. I had much joy in all this.

But as I got older and older, I had questions. “What about this section in the Bible? Why doesn’t the textbook cover this? Why am I learning more about Moses in the *Ten Commandments *than in Bible study? Jesus taught these -wonderful- things… but where are they in the textbook? Why doesn’t the Youth Pastor/Bible teacher talk about this topic?” etc. It was as if I was surrounded in a tortilla named Artificial Christianity. [please do not take offense. Just using my own word-pictures here]

I finally learned there was more than one church out there. I researched them. I found many of the same problems with the others. Their following of the Bible and Jesus wasn’t complete and their teaching seemed lacking. “Have faith!” they’d say. Do you suggest I have faith in the pain of a strange empty feeling I have? I hunger for Christ! But…what’s wrong with my baby food? I don’t understand it. Catholicism never occurred to me. I don’t know why. I just know all the Baptists I knew were bashing it and saying it was manmade, blah blah blah.

In despair, I checked out other religions. When I was sick of shopping around, I checked out the one I wouldn’t check. Catholicism. Imagine my shock. I felt a pulling of my soul and an uneasy sense of satisfaction! Uneasy because I was scared. To become Catholic would mean I would become “crucified” with Christ. It also meant that salvation was a “fruit” I must receive from Christ’s “tree” and maintain it carefully within the “refrigerator” of my soul. Otherwise, it would spoil and be lost.

Its not easy, though. It requires a lot of work and constant dying to yourself. I’m scared easily by evangelisers. I always want to hide under the table and say “Please stop, in the name of Christ!”

My heart cries out for you. The truth is not difficult. It is simple. Even a child can understand it. All we have to do is read God’s Word for ourselves. If our heart is open he will speak to us through his Word. Blessings.

 

[honeysuckle]

Submitted Joy, I am a little confused. I had never spoken to you before, but out of the blue you sent me an email message. (text below).

*Hello, I just read your post and was curious as to how long you have been affiliated with the Catholic Church? I liked your comments. It struck me that you are a honest and sincere
person. I am not a Catholic. I just consider myself to be a Born Again Christian. To tell you the truth, I don’t even know how I stumbled onto this site. I just did. I don’t remember clicking on any particular link. I sure didn’t do a google search on it or anything.

Anyway, I trust Jesus and the Word of God alone (I’ve been riduculed for that) as my infallible road map to Heaven.

I believe that Jesus died on Calvary for my sins. I believe that
Salvation is a fee gift. I believe that when I accept that gift, by repenting of my sins (by having a contrite spirit, confessing them to Jesus, and Turning from them.) that Jesus forgives those sins and comes into the heart of that
believer. Please forgive me if I have offended you. I just sensed such honest sincerety coming from your post.

If I haven’t offended you then please reply.
God Bless

Submittedjoy*

I responded to you by telling you that I believe that Jesus is my Lord and Savior, just exactly as you do, and explained to you that Catholicism is not a works-righteousness “religion”. We are actually Christians. Real Christians with real relationships God who are saved by grace. Not Muslims. Not Mormons. Not a cult. Too bad you were not at the Easter Vigil on Saturday. It was incredibly moving, and several people commented on how special the service was, and how present the Holy Spirit was.

I then sent you a private message on the Church’s view of justification along with a link to an excellent article from staycatholic.com

You didn’t respond to me.

So what are you doing here?

 

[vocatio]

It is my impression that converts to a faith (regardless of religion), tend to be more zealous about their new beliefs than those who were “born” into a faith.

Think about it. from another perspective, many of the finest and most articulate Catholic apologists today are in fact converts **from **Protestantism.

Gerry

That’s because they were already practicing their faith. Fallen away Catholics are similar but different. I beleive leadership has been lacking in the Cahtolic Church. I personally believe that the Church should seriously considering allowing at least some married priests to the priesthood and as one poster put it offer some paid full-time youth ministers to grace our parishes. As much as I love priests, they still feel threatened even by deacons and grossly underuse their abiliities. If the priests would not only allow but encourage the deacons to administer the sacraments at their hands and get more involved with the youth it would turn the church inside out. Otherwise the deacons could get more involved in youth ministry. It exists, but too little to late. It will take time but we are beginning to see openess to it. I heard a very old Monsignior say the other day that he believes the Church should lift the discipline of married priests. But that is really not the only fix that would help. We forget that married priests have 3 vocations now…Priest, husband, father. They pull at each other and lets face it a wife wants attention and she deserves it as well. So a married priest would be grossly limited, but it is possible if the Church recongnizes that fact and makes allowances for time off with family.

Paid ministry is helpful, but still not the answer. Most protestant churches have volunteer ministers. Occasionally a congregation gets lucky enough to afford paid ministers. But they do not make very much unless they are part of a large mega church. And then it’s not that much. The preacher gets the money in large congregations. Two of my brother-in-laws are preachers and I was planning on becoming a preacher, even though my wife resisted it. Only one makes $60K and he’s in his 60’s now. The other has flopped around from congregation to congregation because if the elders get angry they fire you… Bet you Catholics didn’t realize that. Some churches have very high turn over rates.

[edited to add]
I too was a knucklehead Catholic that left and was very verbose. The problem with me was that I didn’t know even one Catholic that truly followed the teachings of the Church as I learned them on my own. Not even priests would follow the rules. I still see it today, but at least I hear people in large numbers now speak up. This time even priests. But after spending time on the dark side of the fence I realize more fully what I was missing. Lot’s more to it, but in essence it is true. Ex-Catholics are the worst kind of Fundamentalist Protestant.

 

[Hisalone]

Why was this thread resurrected after 4 mos of burial?

 

[vocatio]

Because you showed up?

 

[submittedjoy]

This is an interesting point, and one over which I and the other members of the Adult Faith Formation Team at my parish bang our heads regularly.

At my parish we have an abundance of bible studies, prayer groups, groups reaching out to different populations (divorced/widowed, young mothers, etc), and the like. There is very literally something for everyone yet relatively few people take advantage of the wonderful opportunities to grow in a relationship with Christ and as a faith community. We build it, but they don’t come. It’s like people just want to fulfill their Sunday obligation (which they don’t really see as an actual obligation) and then not bother with anything else until the following Sunday. I can’t even begin to describe how frustrating it is!!

In Christ,
Nancy

I really like your signature…

 

[submittedjoy]

Thanks Jimmy for being concerned with my soul. I can only come home when He calls me. God Bless

All you have to do is believe on JEsus and ask him to forgive you of your sins… and come into your heart and he will give you the strength and the ability to turn from those sins and live in fullness of life!

 

[submittedjoy]

How can having a Methodist pastor know your name compare with the beauty of the seven sacraments? I wouldn’t give up the Eucharist for anything. I do agree though, that Catholics have a long way to go as far as welcoming newcomers into the Church.

Shannin

Having a shepherd know his sheep is very beautiful. Not near as beautiful as the Shepherd of all Shepherds knowing your name but beautiful still.

 

[honeysuckle]

Submitted Joy, I am a little confused. I had never spoken to you before, but out of the blue you sent me an email message. (text below).

Hello, I just read your post and was curious as to how long you have been affiliated with the Catholic Church? I liked your comments. It struck me that you are a honest and sincere
person. I am not a Catholic. I just consider myself to be a Born Again Christian. To tell you the truth, I don’t even know how I stumbled onto this site. I just did. I don’t remember clicking on any particular link. I sure didn’t do a google search on it or anything.

Anyway, I trust Jesus and the Word of God alone (I’ve been riduculed for that) as my infallible road map to Heaven.

I believe that Jesus died on Calvary for my sins. I believe that
Salvation is a fee gift. I believe that when I accept that gift, by repenting of my sins (by having a contrite spirit, confessing them to Jesus, and Turning from them.) that Jesus forgives those sins and comes into the heart of that
believer. Please forgive me if I have offended you. I just sensed such honest sincerety coming from your post.

If I haven’t offended you then please reply.
God Bless

Submittedjoy

I responded to you by telling you that I believe that Jesus is my Lord and Savior, just exactly as you do, and explained to you that Catholicism is not a works-righteousness “religion”. We are actually Christians. Real Christians with real relationships God who are saved by grace. Not Muslims. Not Mormons. Not a cult. Too bad you were not at the Easter Vigil on Saturday. It was incredibly moving, and several people commented on how special the service was, and how present the Holy Spirit was.

I then sent you a private message on the Church’s view of justification along with a link to an excellent article from staycatholic.com

You didn’t respond to me.

So what are you doing here?
Reply With Quote

 

[submittedjoy]

Submitted Joy, I am a little confused. I had never spoken to you before, but out of the blue you sent me an email message. (text below).

*Hello, I just read your post and was curious as to how long you have been affiliated with the Catholic Church? I liked your comments. It struck me that you are a honest and sincere
person. I am not a Catholic. I just consider myself to be a Born Again Christian. To tell you the truth, I don’t even know how I stumbled onto this site. I just did. I don’t remember clicking on any particular link. I sure didn’t do a google search on it or anything.

Anyway, I trust Jesus and the Word of God alone (I’ve been riduculed for that) as my infallible road map to Heaven.

I believe that Jesus died on Calvary for my sins. I believe that
Salvation is a fee gift. I believe that when I accept that gift, by repenting of my sins (by having a contrite spirit, confessing them to Jesus, and Turning from them.) that Jesus forgives those sins and comes into the heart of that
believer. Please forgive me if I have offended you. I just sensed such honest sincerety coming from your post.

If I haven’t offended you then please reply.
God Bless

Submittedjoy*

I responded to you by telling you that I believe that Jesus is my Lord and Savior, just exactly as you do, and explained to you that Catholicism is not a works-righteousness “religion”. We are actually Christians. Real Christians with real relationships God who are saved by grace. Not Muslims. Not Mormons. Not a cult. Too bad you were not at the Easter Vigil on Saturday. It was incredibly moving, and several people commented on how special the service was, and how present the Holy Spirit was.

I then sent you a private message on the Church’s view of justification along with a link to an excellent article from staycatholic.com

You didn’t respond to me.

So what are you doing here?

I apologize… I must not have received it or something. I didn’t “ignore” it if that’s what you think… I am sincerely sorry. Now I feel for sure that I offended you. It was not my intention. Please send me that link again!

 

[honeysuckle]

You’ve exceeded your PM quota, so here’s my response. I’m happy to discuss these issues with you.

Even RC Sproul and accepts infant baptism, as did Martin Luther. (can’t find my reference on this now, hope I didn’t mention the wrong theologian) It’s a debatable issue among Christians, and nobody is denying the baptized infant must grow up and embrace their faith intellectually (if they are able to). It’s a way of bringing your child into the promised grace of God.

What about those who are mentally incapable of understanding baptism? Do they need to be baptized or not? The point of the question is that it is a debatable issue. Protestants have re-created the intention of infant baptism by dedicating babies when they are born.

The point is the Catholic church belives God can save by rescuing one out of sin or preserving one from sin before they fall into it. We believe in baptizing our babies to preserve them through God’s grace if they choose to accept the grace bestowed on them. We don’t believe that you have to turn away and be mired in sin and come back to God necessarily, you can be raised to accept your sacrament and live salvation as a gift even as a baby.

If you ever attend Mass for a regular period of time you will see that your preconceptions that Mary is the focus on the Catholic chruch instead of scripture is TOTALLY wrong and based on just flat-out misinformation and prejudice. I saw that when I began to attend Mass. The Mass is totally focused on worship and scripture. I heard much more scripture in Mass than I ever heard in traditonal s. baptist churches.

In my short time preparing to be a Catholic, I have never met one who trusted Mary more than their salvation in Jesus, though I don’t deny there are some cradle Catholics who were taught this way. I don’t accept all of the private revelations of Mary, and I certainly don’t trust her for my salvation. I do believe she is our spiritual mother and prays for us in heaven, as did Martin Luther.

The idea that people worship graven images is just stupid. That’s reactionary thinking. Most people don’t do anything close to worshipping graven images. The “graven images” are reminders and ways to focus on the spiritual realities. They are not being worshipped by the majority of people. If they are, that is error on their part.

If you carry that idea to it’s logical conclusion you shouldn’t watch movies about Jesus or put up any pictures of Him in your home.

Besides, NOBODY VENERATES a graven image, and if anyone told you that, they misrepresented a teaching of the Chuch.

We venerate (honor) our brothers and sisters in Christ, who are Saints, NOT their images.

I believe in the real presence in the Blessed Sacrament, as do Lutherans, and did the Church for 1500 years. There is no scriptural support to imagine anything else. This is one of the weakest scriputural positions of Protestantism.

It is a spiritual real presence, by the way.

 

[submittedjoy]

Transubstantiation is based on mere tradition. It is not biblical. The idea, or dogma entered into the church gradually. It wasn’t actually accepted as doctrine until of 1215 A.D. by the Lateran Council.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

Transubstantiation is based on mere tradition. It is not biblical. The idea, or dogma entered into the church gradually. It wasn’t actually accepted as doctrine until of 1215 A.D. by the Lateran Council.

1. it is biblical, it just may not fall in line with your interpretation.
2. Even if I were to grant to you that it entered into the Church “gradually” (which after reading the Church fathers and scripture, this is a very large stretch)Is there something wrong with a belief entering gradually into the Church. Isn’t this how the belief and doctrine of the Trinity progressed? How about the canon of the Bible? To circumcise or not to circumcise?

God bless

 

[honeysuckle]

I felt stupid for saying nobody venerates images in this post this afternoon, because afterward I went to a special Diocesean Mass for Divine Mercy Sunday, which is the 2nd Sunday of Easter.

In today’s feast, we do “venerate the Divine Mercy image” of Jesus’ heart flowing with blood and water, and the words, “Jesus, I trust in you”. In fact, the very words, “veneration of the image” were printed in the bulletion.

So, I looked up the issue in the Catechism. Here is what the Catechism says about veneration of images and the commandment not to make graven images:

2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, “the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype,” and "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it."70 The honor paid to sacred images is a “respectful veneration,” not the adoration due to God alone:

Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is

As you can see, even though the phrase “veneration of an image” is used, it is assumed that everyone understands that purpose of the image is to remind the heart of the loved one who is not really there, in the same way that we have pictures of our children in our offices and homes. We might even kiss a picture of our child but we understand the picture is not our child.

I would disagree with you that the Real Presence is soley based on tradition, but even if it were, why is that a reason to reject the dogma? Added: There is no evidence that the belief “gradually” crept into the Church. There is no evidence that the early Church celebrated the Eucharist symbolically.

Jesus left us a Church, not a book. It is our received communication of the Holy Spirit that saves us, something we receive internally, whether we receive Him through our understanding of Scripture or we receive it through acceptance of a Sacrament that has been handed down from apostle to apostle through the ages.

I am sure you are aware that the genius of Protestantism in the past 500 years has been its ability to take advantage of the printing press and the mass education that has gradually transformed the First World over the past 500 years. In ancient times, salvation was communicated orally and sacramentally, because the masses could not read and study the Bible.

While some place too much emphasis on the Church in the Catholic Church, as you mentioned, and not on their internal relationship with God, other caricaturize and worship the Bible, and try to make it magical. It really is the same error, either way. There is nothing magical about the Bible. Our understanding of the Word is where the real power is.

 

[submittedjoy]

So, I looked up the issue in the Catechism. Here is what the Catechism says about veneration of images and the commandment not to make graven images:

2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, “the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype,” and "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it."70 The honor paid to sacred images is a “respectful veneration,” not the adoration due to God alone:

Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is

It’s still just a smoke screen to hide what it really is… idol worsip… It doesn’t matter what the catechism says… What matters is what the Bible says. The Bible may not be our ONLY authority but it is our FINAL authority. All other authority MUST come under it’s authority and agree with it.

Romans 3:4a God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar;…

Exodus 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:

Exodus 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

 

[honeysuckle]

Yes, it does matter what the Catechism says, because the Catechism defines and explains theology, and that is what we are discussing. Theology should not be based on what Pastor Joe down the street told you when you were in Awana class. Theology should be a systematic, careful study and exegesis of scripture.

You are very blind if you cannot see that the Catechism is about scripture.

You are highly irrational about this. If you believe this is idol worship, then you better take down every picture you have of your child in your house, because there is no difference whatsoever between the two.

It does not appear as if you are even hearing any of this, which begs the question, what are you doing here?

 

[honeysuckle]

From the Diary of St. Faustina, the words of Our Lord about the Divine Mercy Image (Jesus, I trust in You)

“Not in the beauty of the color, nor of the brush lies the greatness of this image, but in My grace.” (Diary, 313)

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

It’s still just a smoke screen to hide what it really is… idol worsip…

Highly offensive.

The Bible may not be our ONLY authority but it is our FINAL authority.

Says who? We know it is not the Bible which states this.

All other authority MUST come under it’s authority and agree with it.

Says who? BTW ‘all’ authority ‘must’ come under it… Even Jesus’? Hmmmm now I would call this idol worship if I wanted to be as offensive as you.

God bless