How do I choose a Church?

[johnnydigit]

Oviously, the sacraments don’t make like easier, because I know Catholics whose lives are just as hard if not harder than mine.

You are totally wrong about Protestant parents or at least mine.

I have and it took me to a church that is anti-denominational thinking and that is where I attend now.

most Catholics are pretty clueless as to what the Sacraments even are, and you get out of them as much as you put into them. the ones that put in nothing, get nothing. the fortunate ones who know, are immensely blessed beyond measure. the thing that people find the most confusing and absurd, is actually the “source and summit” of the Church - the Eucharist.

it would probably be almost impossible to convince protestants to accept the Sacraments, so the only thing i can think of is actually experiencing them. now most require you to be a Catholic to begin with, but what you can do is visit Jesus in the Tabernacle in any Catholic Church, or even better during exposition, and decide for yourself. i heard a priest suggest 10 visits, one hour each. is it not worth the try? this is God Himself we are talking about…

i don’t know you or your parents personally so i can’t judge them specifically (apologies), but rather protestants in general. if i am wrong, then no loss for you, as we are condemned while we still live. however if i am right, then you have missed the boat to the most profound truth in all of Christendom. we are more than a billion strong comprising more than half of Christianity and 2000 years old since the beginning. we are the oldest surviving institution in all of human history, and for some odd reason, even though we should have collapsed from self-destruction countless times, we remain. we attribute this not to man, but none other than the promise of the Holy Spirit.

like the Christian to the non-Christian, you can go on as you were, or discover the fullness of truth.

 

[adamoses]

Hello,

I am new to the forum and thought I would post on this topic. The church that allows the Bible to explain itself.

Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.
For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:
(Isaiah 28:9-10)

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation.
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
(1 Peter 1:20-21)

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (2 Timothy 3:16)

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Acts 17:11)

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. (Isaiah 1:18)

 

[AlegreFe]

Didn’t someone say" Where 2 or more gather in my name, I will be there?" There was no stipulation concerning Catholic, Baptist, etc.

I don’t doubt one bit that Jesus is where faithful Christians are. I said nothing about individula Christians who are faithful and know nothing about what the Catholic Church teaches. There are plenty of faithful and loving Christians who are not anti-anything, much less anti-Catholic, who just want Jesus. They search for the truth and with genuine open hearts they find the truth, they find Jesus right here in the Catholic Church. And I don’t just mean spiritually find Jesus, they find Jesus here in a very substantial way, the Eucharist.

As far as different “churches” that teach different “doctrines” that’s a different story. They are just repeating lies that have been told to them and they don’t even know it. One thing is saying something about a “church body” in general that has certain teachings and another thing is to say something about an individual. I am not against individual Christians who are faithful to Jesus and still want to search Him out wherever He could be. I believe there are Christians who are genuinely open to the truth and are the best Christians they can be. More power to them.

I do believe Jesus is everywhere spiritually. But He comes to us in a very substantial way, through the Eucharist. He is here in every tabernacle of every Catholc Church around the world. Emmanuel means God with us. And He is truly and substantially with us. What I would give for everyone to believe that Jesus is truly and substantially here in the Eucharist. I wish everyone was as excited as I was about that. I wish everyone was head over heals in love with Jesus in the Eucharist.

My daughter just made her Confirmation and there was a mother of a boy who also made his Confirmation. That Catholic mother said the Eucharist was just a symbol! I can’t believe she said that! Her boy is an altar boy too! How can this mom say the Eucharist is just a symbol?! I hope her boy doesn’t believe that. It’s pretty sad that a Catholic person would think that the Eucharist is just a symbol.

If you haven’t already watched my video, please click on the link in my siggy “Jesus is the Eucharist.”

 

[AlegreFe]

Wrong, back then when Jesus said those words, there were no Catholics or Christians. Everybody surrounding Jesus was Jewish, later on his followers were known to be Christians, then Catholic.

They were still “Catholic” but just weren’t labeled that way yet, but they were very much Catholic.

Wouldn’t you say that the Early Church Fathers were Catholic? Yes they were. And they were taught directly from the Apostles.

 

[AlegreFe]

It never ceases to amaze me how some of my fellow Catholics think. Do you really think Christ is not present in some form or fashion at a non-Catholic Christian gathering/service? Who is being blind here?

Do you really think thirdn6 believes that Jesus is NOT with these non-Catholic Christians in their “churches?” I don’t think we’re blind at all here.

What are you trying to prove Mike? Why are you, a fellow Catholic, arguing with fellow Catholics? Are you trying to please the non-Catholic Christian? Are you being complacent to save face with non-Catholic Christians?

You really don’t give us enough credit here. Do you really believe that we’re that stupid to think that Jesus is not in every faithful Christian heart? How could you even think that? And how could you even argue with another Catholic unless you don’t believe everything the Church teaches? Do you believe everything the Catholic Church teaches? I hope you do.

I hope you believe in the Eucharist. Do you believe that Jesus is substantially present in the Eucharist? I would think you do.

 

[awantz]

most Catholics are pretty clueless as to what the Sacraments even are, and you get out of them as much as you put into them. the ones that put in nothing, get nothing. the fortunate ones who know, are immensely blessed beyond measure. the thing that people find the most confusing and absurd, is actually the “source and summit” of the Church - the Eucharist.

it would probably be almost impossible to convince protestants to accept the Sacraments, so the only thing i can think of is actually experiencing them. now most require you to be a Catholic to begin with, but what you can do is visit Jesus in the Tabernacle in any Catholic Church, or even better during exposition, and decide for yourself. i heard a priest suggest 10 visits, one hour each. is it not worth the try? this is God Himself we are talking about…

i don’t know you or your parents personally so i can’t judge them specifically (apologies), but rather protestants in general. if i am wrong, then no loss for you, as we are condemned while we still live. however if i am right, then you have missed the boat to the most profound truth in all of Christendom. we are more than a billion strong comprising more than half of Christianity and 2000 years old since the beginning. we are the oldest surviving institution in all of human history, and for some odd reason, even though we should have collapsed from self-destruction countless times, we remain. we attribute this not to man, but none other than the promise of the Holy Spirit.

like the Christian to the non-Christian, you can go on as you were, or discover the fullness of truth.

I’d accept the sacraments if I could without having to leave my church too. I go to a Catholic church every week.

You are wrong.

I have discovered the fullness of truth.

 

[johnnydigit]

I’d accept the sacraments if I could without having to leave my church too. I go to a Catholic church every week.

You are wrong.

I have discovered the fullness of truth.

the knowledgeable man knows that he has very little knowledge and must continue learning and growing until the day he dies.

you have discovered a grain of the truth… a seed. it flourishes in the Church with the Sacraments. we tell you there is much more, but you don’t believe it. we tell you there is so much more, that even we have barely scratched the surface.

it’s of no loss to us if you don’t discover the fullness of the faith, that is your own condemnation. we are not a proselytizing church. we only clarify because the teachings never change. the world will change, and protestants will be ever changing. the deposit of faith in the Catholic Church will never change, it will only grow.

there’s more, and it’s up to you find it. first comes your desire. knock and he’ll open the door for you. guaranteed.

 

[mikew262]

They were still “Catholic” but just weren’t labeled that way yet, but they were very much Catholic.

Wouldn’t you say that the Early Church Fathers were Catholic? Yes they were. And they were taught directly from the Apostles.

Not that it really matters much, but I have to disagree. The very early followers of Christ were just simply called Christians. I believe the first written uses of the term catholic was in 110 A.D.

 

[SD_Catholic]

Not that it really matters much, but I have to disagree. The very early followers of Christ were just simply called Christians. I believe the first written uses of the term catholic was in 110 A.D.

This is true… but if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and sounds like a duck… then I would say it’s a duck:thumbsup:

SD

 

[jmcrae]

Not that it really matters much, but I have to disagree. The very early followers of Christ were just simply called Christians. I believe the first written uses of the term catholic was in 110 A.D.

Yes, but they followed the structure of the Catholic Church, and their direct successors were called “Catholics.”

They were certainly not Protestant - Protestantism didn’t come about until after 1524.

 

[Kay_Cee]

That may be one way to do it, but it is not the only way. Since Jesus died on the cross, the curtain has been torn and we’ve been given the ability to go directly to God and confess our sins directly to Him.

I’m confused. I don’t recall seeing the part I bolded in the Bible. I checked the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and in each place where they mention the curtain being torn, I couldn’t find anything that says this means we’ve been given the ability to go directly to God and confess our sins directly to Him.

Would you please tell me where this is?

 

[awantz]

the knowledgeable man knows that he has very little knowledge and must continue learning and growing until the day he dies.

you have discovered a grain of the truth… a seed. it flourishes in the Church with the Sacraments. we tell you there is much more, but you don’t believe it. we tell you there is so much more, that even we have barely scratched the surface.

it’s of no loss to us if you don’t discover the fullness of the faith, that is your own condemnation. we are not a proselytizing church. we only clarify because the teachings never change. the world will change, and protestants will be ever changing. the deposit of faith in the Catholic Church will never change, it will only grow.

there’s more, and it’s up to you find it. first comes your desire. knock and he’ll open the door for you. guaranteed.

I know that.

In my church, too. I know.

I have. No condemnation here. Some of your churches sure try. No change here. I’m looking, but I don’t see it.

Got it. I have and He has. I have no doubt.

 

[awantz]

I’m confused. I don’t recall seeing the part I bolded in the Bible. I checked the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and in each place where they mention the curtain being torn, I couldn’t find anything that says this means we’ve been given the ability to go directly to God and confess our sins directly to Him.

What do you think it means?

 

[Kay_Cee]

What do you think it means?

It doesn’t matter what **I **think it means. It matters what the gospel writers said, and I’m not finding the idea that the curtain being torn meant that we’re given the ability to go directly to God *and confess our sins directly to Him. *Going by scripture alone, if that’s what the gospel writers meant, why didn’t they say so? Why didn’t they mention a relationship between the two things? They say nothing about confessing sins here.

 

[awantz]

It doesn’t matter what **I **think it means. It matters what the gospel writers said, and I’m not finding the idea that the curtain being torn meant that we’re given the ability to go directly to God *and confess our sins directly to Him. *Going by scripture alone, if that’s what the gospel writers meant, why didn’t they say so? Why didn’t they mention a relationship between the two things? They say nothing about confessing sins here.

The curtain was the barrier between God and man and when the curtain was torn so was the barrier.

 

[emeraldcoast]

It doesn’t matter what **I **think it means. It matters what the gospel writers said, and I’m not finding the idea that the curtain being torn meant that we’re given the ability to go directly to God *and confess our sins directly to Him. *Going by scripture alone, if that’s what the gospel writers meant, why didn’t they say so? Why didn’t they mention a relationship between the two things? They say nothing about confessing sins here.

On this subject, it was helpful for me to study on the set-up of the temple (Holy Place and Holy of Holies) with the curtains and the Day of Atonement with the High Priest. It is very interesting.

God Bless!

 

[Kay_Cee]

The curtain was the barrier between God and man and when the curtain was torn so was the barrier.

But how do you get from that to the ability to confess our sins directly to God? (Especially since the verses in question say absolutely nothing about confessing sins.) I see nothing whatsoever in the passages to support that.

 

[jmcrae]

But how do you get from that to the ability to confess our sins directly to God? (Especially since the verses in question say absolutely nothing about confessing sins.) I see nothing whatsoever in the passages to support that.

Neither did the Early Church - the early Christians confessed their sins to their priests, and then, on his advice, confessed certain of their sins to the entire congregation at the beginning of Sunday Mass.

Penances in those days were also very strict - I read stories of certain Saints who went around in sack cloth and ashes, begging on street corners for their living, for periods of three years, seven years, even 21 years. (Added to the embarrassment of everyone knowing your sins, it would have been difficult for them to hold down regular jobs, or travel, or anything like that, while clad in sack-cloth and ashes, and holding a begging bowl.)

It doesn’t seem like they saw any sort of easy-believin’ “confess directly to God and experience no consequences” idea when they meditated on the curtain being torn in twain - instead, I think they saw a righteous God let loose upon the earth to bring justice to the world via the Church and the Sacraments. (In fact, I’m betting some of those early Christian sinners envied the Jews their ability to just pick out an animal to sacrifice in order to cover their lesser sins, and a reasonably quick death at the hands of the stoners for their mortal sins. )

 

[AlegreFe]

Not that it really matters much, but I have to disagree. The very early followers of Christ were just simply called Christians. I believe the first written uses of the term catholic was in 110 A.D.

They weren’t labeled “Catholic” but they certainly were Catholic because they followed the teachings of the Church which was certainly Catholic. And having been labeled Catholic in 110 A.D. should certainly be proof enough for you that the Church that Jesus Christ established on Peter the Rock was definitely the Catholic Church. But I know you will say that it is not proof at all.

 

[awantz]

But how do you get from that to the ability to confess our sins directly to God? (Especially since the verses in question say absolutely nothing about confessing sins.) I see nothing whatsoever in the passages to support that.

The barrier/ curtain was torn allowing us to go directly to God.
I got it from an online bible scholar program.