T
tweetymom
Guest
Join the club I am one too.
- Status
C
Catholicnow
Guest
No the other way aroundYou mean a Protestant that is leaning towards Catholicism?
E
eucharisteo
Guest
Jesus is so good to me.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Hey you, separated from the Church out there with sola scriptura can you hear me?
Hey you, losing five sacraments, dropping out of the Pope can you feel me?
Hey you, donât let them tell you thereâs noooooo authority, donât give in without the magisteriumâŚ
Hey you, losing five sacraments, dropping out of the Pope can you feel me?
Hey you, donât let them tell you thereâs noooooo authority, donât give in without the magisteriumâŚ
All in all, Protestantismâs just another brick in the wall.- Pink Floyd?
C
crazzeto
Guest
Well then I would suggest you change your religion, how about âwanting to return homeâHi crazzeto, And gurney, Iâll include you too: itâs because of my present husband, who doesnât know I want to return to the Church, and also I need an annulment which he probably would freak out about even more. Iâve been praying about this for a few years now, itâs taking a long time but he is watching Chesterton with me now. And he just got a book by Cardinal Newman about how a university should be run (or something; canât remember the title). We also like Dr. J. Budiszewskiâs (sp?) books. I read âImitation of Christâ and âOrthodoxyâ without any problems from him.
BUT, he is the biggest ELO fan ever!!! And Traveling Wilburys!!! (well, I like 'em too)
I really feel for you in your position, this can be very difficult. Youâre doing the right thing with prayer, also I would suggest (in addition to newman) Bishop Sheenâs works (life is worth living) as well as maybe St. Francis De Sales The Catholic Contraversy. In fact, you might like reading some of these your self!One book which had a profound impact on me was âThe Mass: A study of Roman Liturgyâ by Fr. Fortescue.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Warren Carrollâs Christendom series is outstanding but is VERY biased toward the Catholic side of history, extremely biased. If youâre trying to influence the guy, Carrollâs the guy to insert into hubbyâs library 
What church are you guys going to right now? What made you want to return to Catholicism? And regarding the annulment, why would he freak out? Does he not know about your previous marriage or would he just be angry at the high $$$ cost of it or the fact that you have to re-live the past a bit?
What church are you guys going to right now? What made you want to return to Catholicism? And regarding the annulment, why would he freak out? Does he not know about your previous marriage or would he just be angry at the high $$$ cost of it or the fact that you have to re-live the past a bit?
Well then I would suggest you change your religion, how about âwanting to return homeâ
One book which had a profound impact on me was âThe Mass: A study of Roman Liturgyâ by Fr. Fortescue.
S
SecretBeliever
Guest
Crazzeto and Gurney, I will make note of these books and pursue reading them myself so my hubby will get exposed to them, thanks!
Well, the story is that when we met, Iâd been divorced and fallen away from the Church for a while. He was Baptist but backslidden
and I was Buddhist . He convinced me to come back to Christ, but then the issue was what church do we go to? He knew I had been Catholic. But he didnât want any part of that. He knew Iâd started out Lutheran (yeah I know guys, Iâve practically covered it all) and wondered what that was like. Somehow we ended up going to the WELS Lutheran church and now heâs convinced of that doctrine. Me, I got disillusioned with it and during my down times at work Iâve been surfing Catholic web sites practically the whole time, in fact even before we decided on Lutheran. I started wanting to be Catholic when I was little. I guess thatâs weird for a little girl to think like that, but maybe my little Catholic friends influenced me.
Finally I got up the gumption to get confirmed in the Church when I was married before. My first husband never was religious. so naturally we never got our marriage convalidated, and due to bad circumstances from the beginning of our marriage, Iâm sure an annulment wonât be too difficult. The expense isnât an issue either; I wonât even mind pouring my heart out in the petition. (or whatever itâs called?)
My present (and last I assure you) husband knows all about my first husband, has met him, etc. He just wouldnât see a need for the annulment because heâd consider it unnecessary and un-doctrinal legalism. So if I brought it up to him, heâd immediately know Iâd want to return to the Church because if I stayed going to the Lutheran church they donât recognize the need for annulments. So the mentioning of an annulment would be the point at which heâd freak out. I think the only way Iâm gonna do this is to ease him into Catholic thinking if you know what I mean. And pray - a LOT.
If yâall have any other ideas, Iâm all ears (so to speak)! Have a GREAT weekend.
P.S. Gurney - gotta ask (maybe I missed it before) What in the world is âJacurutu, Muadâdibâ ??
Well, the story is that when we met, Iâd been divorced and fallen away from the Church for a while. He was Baptist but backslidden
and I was Buddhist . He convinced me to come back to Christ, but then the issue was what church do we go to? He knew I had been Catholic. But he didnât want any part of that. He knew Iâd started out Lutheran (yeah I know guys, Iâve practically covered it all) and wondered what that was like. Somehow we ended up going to the WELS Lutheran church and now heâs convinced of that doctrine. Me, I got disillusioned with it and during my down times at work Iâve been surfing Catholic web sites practically the whole time, in fact even before we decided on Lutheran. I started wanting to be Catholic when I was little. I guess thatâs weird for a little girl to think like that, but maybe my little Catholic friends influenced me.Finally I got up the gumption to get confirmed in the Church when I was married before. My first husband never was religious. so naturally we never got our marriage convalidated, and due to bad circumstances from the beginning of our marriage, Iâm sure an annulment wonât be too difficult. The expense isnât an issue either; I wonât even mind pouring my heart out in the petition. (or whatever itâs called?)
My present (and last I assure you) husband knows all about my first husband, has met him, etc. He just wouldnât see a need for the annulment because heâd consider it unnecessary and un-doctrinal legalism. So if I brought it up to him, heâd immediately know Iâd want to return to the Church because if I stayed going to the Lutheran church they donât recognize the need for annulments. So the mentioning of an annulment would be the point at which heâd freak out. I think the only way Iâm gonna do this is to ease him into Catholic thinking if you know what I mean. And pray - a LOT.
If yâall have any other ideas, Iâm all ears (so to speak)! Have a GREAT weekend.
P.S. Gurney - gotta ask (maybe I missed it before) What in the world is âJacurutu, Muadâdibâ ??
T
TriuneUnity
Guest
May I ask, what caused you to become disillusioned?
Donât get him started LOL
S
SteveVH
Guest
I would throw in almost anything by Scott Hahn. You might want to begin with âThe Lambâs Supperâ. If he is intellectually honest this book is very powerful and written by a former Protestant.Well then I would suggest you change your religion, how about âwanting to return homeâ
One book which had a profound impact on me was âThe Mass: A study of Roman Liturgyâ by Fr. Fortescue.
S
SecretBeliever
Guest
Triune, I guess a few things made me become disillusioned was (and this isnât necessarily in order).
For one thing, the WELS doctrine that the earth is âliterallyâ about 6,000 years old. Nobody had come up with a good argument as to why there are fossils, and it sort of seemed the same as, in the olden days, the Catholic Church insisting that the Earth was the center of the universe when it was being proven that it isnât. I think only WELS believes like this, but if I were to remain Lutheran, the other synods seem to be more fragmented within themselves, and certainly between synods. I canât reconcile the lack of unity.
Also, I sort of re-acquainted myself with Luther and I know about the hideous drawings that he made Cranach create (in addition to the verbal and written screeds) showing the Pope and everything vulgar. And I couldnât see how someone who had the line on the truth needed to do something like that or cause it to be done â mind you, not that Catholics in charge at various times havenât done equally or worse things!!! But, if Luther was supposed to be the Reformationist, I honestly canât look up to someone who was that vulgar, and, in my opinion, threw out the baby with the bath water when it came to good or indifferent traditions that the church had. (I read the whole recent thread about indulgences this morning and thatâs a whole 'nother story.) But in that thread, the last poster mentioned something in the tale about the young boys, that if they just ran to their mother everytime to get them out of trouble, they wouldnât learn anything about responsibility. That concept is what I understand when I think of just asking forgiveness a thousand times a day even if youâre a murderer, adulterer, etc. as Luther said. You tend not to try to get better. Seems like the Catholic Church completes the range of human salvation plus human morality, something I just couldnât totally find in Lutheranism.
One time, in a bible study, Pastor was talking about divorce and one of the members asserted that you are not allowed to marry more than once. Pastor disagreed, sort of, made the comment about âThereâs always forgivenessâ and that was the end of it. So the lack of unity in belief, within that church, was hard to understand (like my comment about that above).
Another thing is, I wonder how Protestants can say that the Holy Spirit directs people and thatâs why thereâs so many churches and it all seems to be OK. But, if the Holy Spirit directs me to be Catholic, that seems to be the only Christian religion that is not OK in some Protestantsâ eyes. Kind of analogous to the liberals advocating tolerance to all, but the conservatives commenting that the liberals are tolerant to everything but religion or Christianity in particular.
So, thatâs just a few things that I really have a hard time with. But thatâs just me, Iâm not very bright!
SteveVH (Van Halen? haha), Yes Iâve read some of Scott Hahnâs books and found them very helpful, thanks!
Yâall have a nice day!
For one thing, the WELS doctrine that the earth is âliterallyâ about 6,000 years old. Nobody had come up with a good argument as to why there are fossils, and it sort of seemed the same as, in the olden days, the Catholic Church insisting that the Earth was the center of the universe when it was being proven that it isnât. I think only WELS believes like this, but if I were to remain Lutheran, the other synods seem to be more fragmented within themselves, and certainly between synods. I canât reconcile the lack of unity.
Also, I sort of re-acquainted myself with Luther and I know about the hideous drawings that he made Cranach create (in addition to the verbal and written screeds) showing the Pope and everything vulgar. And I couldnât see how someone who had the line on the truth needed to do something like that or cause it to be done â mind you, not that Catholics in charge at various times havenât done equally or worse things!!! But, if Luther was supposed to be the Reformationist, I honestly canât look up to someone who was that vulgar, and, in my opinion, threw out the baby with the bath water when it came to good or indifferent traditions that the church had. (I read the whole recent thread about indulgences this morning and thatâs a whole 'nother story.) But in that thread, the last poster mentioned something in the tale about the young boys, that if they just ran to their mother everytime to get them out of trouble, they wouldnât learn anything about responsibility. That concept is what I understand when I think of just asking forgiveness a thousand times a day even if youâre a murderer, adulterer, etc. as Luther said. You tend not to try to get better. Seems like the Catholic Church completes the range of human salvation plus human morality, something I just couldnât totally find in Lutheranism.
One time, in a bible study, Pastor was talking about divorce and one of the members asserted that you are not allowed to marry more than once. Pastor disagreed, sort of, made the comment about âThereâs always forgivenessâ and that was the end of it. So the lack of unity in belief, within that church, was hard to understand (like my comment about that above).
Another thing is, I wonder how Protestants can say that the Holy Spirit directs people and thatâs why thereâs so many churches and it all seems to be OK. But, if the Holy Spirit directs me to be Catholic, that seems to be the only Christian religion that is not OK in some Protestantsâ eyes. Kind of analogous to the liberals advocating tolerance to all, but the conservatives commenting that the liberals are tolerant to everything but religion or Christianity in particular.
So, thatâs just a few things that I really have a hard time with. But thatâs just me, Iâm not very bright!
SteveVH (Van Halen? haha), Yes Iâve read some of Scott Hahnâs books and found them very helpful, thanks!
Yâall have a nice day!
T
TriuneUnity
Guest
The WELS has no official position on the age of the earth. What the WELS affirms is that God created the world in six consecutive days as recorded in Genesis and denies that evolution is a method by which God created life on earth and man in particular. That God created in six days and evolution is false does not necessitate that the earth is only 6,000 years old. It could be 60,000 years old and the above could still be true.
Yet, besides the assertion that justification by faith alone results in the idea that one can be an adulterer, a murderer, etc and still be saved, the fact of the matter is I fail to see the army of Protestants holding to sola fide who wantonly murder and commit adultery. What I do see, is sola fide resulting in millions and millions of Christians who live to serve the Lord and serve their neighbor. Therefore, the assertion is only that, an assertion without any evidence to verify it.
After giving a lengthy explanation of justification by faith apart from works in Romans 3, 4 and 5, Paul asks the rhetorical question in the opening verses of Romans 6, âWhat shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?â Here, the apostle Paul is debating with an imaginary opponent. That imaginary opponent asks the same question with the same concern that you just asked. That alone lets me know that what Paul teaches is that God saves freely, without human merit, will, or cooperation. If Paul did not teach this, then the question you asked and the question Paulâs imaginary opponent asked would have been the furthest thing from Paulâs mind. Therefore, if we are accused of teaching that justification will result in immorality, I can be comfortable in apostolic company.
Let me ask you, Secret, if salvation is by God plus human morality, how would it be possible for Paulâs imaginary opponent to ask that question?
In this, I would agree with you. Which is why Protestants, outside of extreme fundamentalists, do not teach that Catholics are not Christian. The Holy Spirit regenerates in Holy Baptism and through preaching and leads people to faith in Christ. This happens regardless of what building the person happens to be in. The Catholic Church retains the preaching of the word and Holy Baptism, therefore, the Holy Spirit will work through those means. However, that does not necessitate that every teaching of Rome (or any other church) is not mixed with error.
C
crazzeto
Guest
I guess thereâs the little fact that Lutheranism (any form) isnât more than 500 years old and introduces a bunch of brand new doctrines never held by any Christian group prior to him
How much is a bunch? Oh, and the Orthodox say the same thing about Rome.I guess thereâs the little fact that Lutheranism (any form) isnât more than 500 years old and introduces a bunch of brand new doctrines never held by any Christian group prior to him
Jon
C
crazzeto
Guest
Well they certainly canât quite say exactly the same thing can they? There are at least two major tenants of Protestantism pulmigated by Luther, both of which are errors which have lead to numerous other errors some held by Lutherans others not so much. Of course these are Sola Scriptura & Sola Fide.
According to the JDDJ, and interestingly James Akin, the Lutheran Sola Fide is not necessarily outside Catholic understanding. Of course, with sola scriptura, it was not a new practice by any stretch. In fact,in a way, Catholics practice it when they say that Tradition doesnât contradict scripture. And thatâs all sola scriptura requires: that teachers and teachings are measured by scripture.
I suspect that, when Moses returned with the 10 Commandments, he practiced sola scriptura.
Jon
C
crazzeto
Guest
Actually, the Lutheran notion of Sola Fide is entirly new⌠Weâve always understood Saved by Grace through an Active faith working through love. Weâve never deminished the role of faith, but we also never elevated it to the exclusion of works and weâve certainly not made the mistake some (typically non-Lutheran) denominations have made by reducing salvation to a single work done once in a life time (sinners prayer). With out all works, of all laws, this is the point of contentions.
Sola Scriptura was most certainly a brand new practice, even in the days of moses there was no private interpretation of scripture. The Jews didnât read the 10 commandments and decide what it meant for them selves with out any consultation with Moses you know⌠Even Moses didnât act entirly as a free agent, and nor does the Catholic Church. In both cases, the highest level of religious authority on earth has enjoyed the guidence of the Holy Spirit with out which the authentic interpretation of Gods word (written or otherwise) is not possible. Of course I havenât even mentioned yet how even in Moseâs day there was an extensive oral tradition which Jews did not reject out of hand, in favor of their own copy of those two stone tabs.
C
crazzeto
Guest
And on that point, the eastern lay apologists and western ones still disagree and debate. According to the Greek Eccumenical Patriarch (at the very least) the only thing keeping us apart is further discussion regarding the Chair of Peter, thatâs about it.
The historical (actual) similarities between the two lungs of the faith, is probably why the early reformers when they sought the eastern church in alliance against the west found none.
No argument. While we are justified by Grace through faith in Christ, we must have an actice, saving faith. Quite Lutheran.
neither do we, as it is part of our sanctification
Thank you for recognizing that distinction in Lutheran teaching vis a vis others who do not properly understand sola fide.
Certainly, works and laws are important.
Sola scriptura is not personal interpretation. Sola scriptura, in fact holds all teachers and teaching accountable to scripture. Lutherans do not practice personal interpretation, but are held to scripture and the Lutheran Confessions, which rightly reflect scripture.
Moses could not act as a free agent, because he was bound by scripture - the ten commandments. And you are exactly right that the Spirit guides the churchâs understanding of scripture.
Jon
- Status