I think I want to 'convert' but will anybody here help?

[zz912]

I’ve been in at least 5 bible based churches in my life and none of them seemed as hard to join as the catholic church.

Joining a family shouldn’t be something done easily, nor done on a whim. THAT is what is happening when you join the Church. You are becoming a part of the family of God, you are becoming part of the Body of Christ.

Along with that comes not just rights, but responsibilities. Note that Jesus told us that we must pick up our cross daily, and that His burden would be light (not that there wouldn’t be any burden).

When you are baptized, and when you are confirmed, you become a full member of the Church, with a full outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon you. This is something EXTREMELY SERIOUS, and should be treated as such, and not be something done on the spur of the moment.

Remember as well how the Old Covenant was enacted. By circumcision! It was so serious that it was completed by cutting off the foreskin. In the New Covenant, the entry to the covenant is completed by baptism. It should be taken seriously.

Welcome to the forums!

 

[zz912]

The holy sacrifice of the mass seems to be taking me back in time to the time of the martyrs. The mass is the way of the cross!

In a manner. I would suggest reading Scott Hahn’s book The Lamb’s Supper. It outlines how the Mass relates and unlocks the Book of Revelations, and how the Mass is part of the unending and eternal sacrificial offering of Jesus in Heaven offering Himself to the Father that is seen in Revelation.

 

[AmosTown]

In a manner. I would suggest reading Scott Hahn’s book The Lamb’s Supper. It outlines how the Mass relates and unlocks the Book of Revelations, and how the Mass is part of the unending and eternal sacrificial offering of Jesus in Heaven offering Himself to the Father that is seen in Revelation.

Sounds very interesting. Thanks for the tip.

 

[po18guy]

Oh my gosh! I’m studying more about ‘persona Christi’. The catholic priest is as described in John 15 (I am the vine, you are the branch) ! The Mass sacrifice has to be the same as Jesus because Jesus is the source, the way, the truth, the life.

Let’s look at some scriptures:2 Corinthians 2:10 in the King James Bible. Paul forgave sins in the person of Christ, in 2 Corinthians 5:20, we see that Paul is an ambassador for Christ, and in 2 Corinthians 5:18, we see that he had a ministry of reconciliation for those who were already Christian - this is the Sacrament of Confession. Paul had the ministerial priesthood, while you and I are members of the royal priesthood. There is a difference, as we see in the scriptures.

The holy sacrifice of the mass seems to be taking me back in time to the time of the martyrs. The mass is the way of the cross! You had to be willing to be a martyr to be a christian in the early church. To give everything for Jesus just like he gave to us. You have to be pure and blameless to put your heart with Jesus as an offering to the father. You have to be ready to be a martyr for Jesus. You go and confess because so you can be a clean offering, because God can take us at any second.

The mass, when properly understood, is essentially time travel. We are in the upper room at the consecration, we are at the foot of the cross, and we are at the empty tomb. In the mass, the priest washes his hands with water, both as a connection with the Jewish purification rites as the roots of Christianity, but he also prays, “Wash away my sins and cleanse me from all in iniquity” so that God will make him worthy to consecrate the bread and wine, to touch it and to consume it. The entire host of heaven is present when we sing or recite the Sanctus (“Holy, Holy, Holy”), and the power of the Holy Spirit is called down (epiclesis) when the priest consecrates the bread and wine. Truly amazing stuff, once you realize what is happening. It took me years to realize all of this.

I think my grandfather’s catholic missal I have is now finally making sense.

That may be the 1962 Missal. The rubrics of the mass have changed since then - but the meaning and content of the mass is exactly the same. In other words, what we celebrate is exactly the same sacrifice (which can never change), but we celebrate it in a different manner, and in the common language rather than Latin. However, some parishes do offer the exact Latin mass that you see in your grandfather’s Missal, while most offer what is called the Ordinary Form.

As to the note at the bottom of your grandfather’s Missal page, we see from 2 Peter 1:4 that we do indeed become partakers of the Divine nature. This occurs in a spiritual sense of course, but also, via the Holy Eucharist, in a very real and physical sense.

 

[po18guy]

Amos, I am struck by how the Holy Sprit has opened your eyes to revealed truths that it took some of us years - decades even - to realize.

 

[AmosTown]

Let’s look at some scriptures:2 Corinthians 2:10 in the King James Bible. Paul forgave sins in the person of Christ, in 2 Corinthians 5:20, we see that Paul is an ambassador for Christ, and in 2 Corinthians 5:18, we see that he had a ministry of reconciliation for those who were already Christian - this is the Sacrament of Confession. Paul had the ministerial priesthood, while you and I are members of the royal priesthood. There is a difference, as we see in the scriptures.
The mass, when properly understood, is essentially time travel. We are in the upper room at the consecration, we are at the foot of the cross, and we are at the empty tomb. In the mass, the priest washes his hands with water, both as a connection with the Jewish purification rites as the roots of Christianity, but he also prays, “Wash away my sins and cleanse me from all in iniquity” so that God will make him worthy to consecrate the bread and wine, to touch it and to consume it. The entire host of heaven is present when we sing or recite the Sanctus (“Holy, Holy, Holy”), and the power of the Holy Spirit is called down (epiclesis) when the priest consecrates the bread and wine. Truly amazing stuff, once you realize what is happening. It took me years to realize all of this.
That may be the 1962 Missal. The rubrics of the mass have changed since then - but the meaning and content of the mass is exactly the same. In other words, what we celebrate is exactly the same sacrifice (which can never change), but we celebrate it in a different manner, and in the common language rather than Latin. However, some parishes do offer the exact Latin mass that you see in your grandfather’s Missal, while most offer what is called the Ordinary Form.

As to the note at the bottom of your grandfather’s Missal page, we see from 2 Peter 1:4 that we do indeed become partakers of the Divine nature. This occurs in a spiritual sense of course, but also, via the Holy Eucharist, in a very real and physical sense.

The missal is dated 1954.
Thanks for writing that! It made my eyes well up with tears!

 

[po18guy]

The missal is dated 1954.
Thanks for writing that! It made my eyes well up with tears!

You might want to obtain the latest Missal. They are available at Catholic bookstores and all parishes have them for use during mass. Many parishes sell a Saint Joseph’s Missal (or similar) this time of year, as the Advent season (anticipatory of the birth of Christ) begins a new liturgical year in the Church. They run about $5. I note that I mis-typed what the priest prays as he washes his hands. I got it backward. It should be “Lord wash away my iniquity and cleanse me of my sins.” This comes directly from Psalm 51:2

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Oh wow! Thank you! I hope so. Being a sinner is about all I can lay claim to

We all share in that.

In the Church you’ll find exciting, divinely-originated doctrines such as you’re exploring, and that is wonderful. I’m still learning new and exciting things. But you’ll also find many people who are apathetic and unappreciative of the gift of the Church. Try to remember that the Church is a hospital for sinners, and not a museum of Saints.

 

[AmosTown]

We all share in that.

In the Church you’ll find exciting, divinely-originated doctrines such as you’re exploring, and that is wonderful. I’m still learning new and exciting things. But you’ll also find many people who are apathetic and unappreciative of the gift of the Church. Try to remember that the Church is a hospital for sinners, and not a museum of Saints.

Ahh yes. The human condition of any church. We had a situation in our church where a member confessed to the pastor and the pastor somehow leaked the sin to his wife. After that, the whole church went into gossip column chaos. Not good.

Maybe I’m romanticizing but maybe the catholic church is like a hospital for sinners being cared for by the saints?

 

[po18guy]

Ahh yes. The human condition of any church. We had a situation in our church where a member confessed to the pastor and the pastor somehow leaked the sin to his wife. After that, the whole church went into gossip column chaos. Not good.

Consider the case of Saint John Nepomuk. He reportedly gave his life rather than reveal a secret of confession.

Maybe I’m romanticizing but maybe the catholic church is like a hospital for sinners being cared for by the saints?

We are all called to be Saints, because the alternative is pure hell. Yet, each and every priest, bishop and the pope go to regular confession.

 

[zz912]

Ahh yes. The human condition of any church. We had a situation in our church where a member confessed to the pastor and the pastor somehow leaked the sin to his wife. After that, the whole church went into gossip column chaos. Not good.

That is why the Catholic Church imposes the absolute seal of secrecy on the sacrament of Confession. Priests and bishops are absolutely forbidden to disclose things said in confession. Any priest who does is automatically excommunicated, and ONLY the Pope can lift this excommunication. That is how serious it is taken.

Maybe I’m romanticizing but maybe the catholic church is like a hospital for sinners being cared for by the saints?

Be careful here. SOME of our priests and bishops are saints in the making, and some are not. Some are weak and fallen, and a small amount are just bad and/or evil. But here is the great thing, the grace bestowed through the sacraments is NOT dependent upon the personal holiness of the priest. He can be the more reprobate sinner, but if he performs the sacrament validly and licitly, the effects of the sacrament are unstained and perfect. The Eucharist is still present, the confession and absolution are completely effective, the baptisms are perfect, etc, etc.

 

[AmosTown]

That is why the Catholic Church imposes the absolute seal of secrecy on the sacrament of Confession. Priests and bishops are absolutely forbidden to disclose things said in confession. Any priest who does is automatically excommunicated, and ONLY the Pope can lift this excommunication. That is how serious it is taken.

That’s good you mention this but are you afraid of the government interfering with the sacrament. I read that in China you confessed to a priest with a government agent present.

What about big brother? Could they bug confessionals under the laws of home land security? Wouldn’t that sort of interference be a work of Satan?

Be careful here. SOME of our priests and bishops are saints in the making, and some are not. Some are weak and fallen, and a small amount are just bad and/or evil. But here is the great thing, the grace bestowed through the sacraments is NOT dependent upon the personal holiness of the priest. He can be the more reprobate sinner, but if he performs the sacrament validly and licitly, the effects of the sacrament are unstained and perfect. The Eucharist is still present, the confession and absolution are completely effective, the baptisms are perfect, etc, etc.

This is pretty hard for me to accept. That can’t be right at all.
The priest’s vow to be real and sincere. How can anyone ever accept that? All the apostles were holy and show signs. So this has to be a law put in by a fake cleric to scam the believers and get away with cheating. No. I can’t see how I could accept this teaching.

The bible says that even believers were accountable for their vows.

*Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.

Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”

When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.

About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?” “Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”
Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.” At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.* — Acts 5:1-11

 

[benjamindt]

This is pretty hard for me to accept. That can’t be right at all.
The priest’s vow to be real and sincere. How can anyone ever accept that? All the apostles were holy and show signs. So this has to be a law put in by a fake cleric to scam the believers and get away with cheating. No. I can’t see how I could accept this teaching.

Well let’s not forget that even Peter denied the Lord three times. None of the apostles were perfect. Paul talks about struggling with what most acknowledge was probably lust.

The reason why it’s easy for me to accept this is that the priests are not the source of the grace of the sacraments.

The grace of the sacraments, why they work, is directly from God. Even the priests who are “saints in the making” still falter and have problems.

Mother Teresa (yes I know not a priest) remarked about how unsure she was and how she constantly questioned what she was doing (or something like that)

The main point is this, the sacraments are a gift from God, and the power of that sacrament is derived not from men, but from God Himself, and therefore as long as it is performed correctly, it is valid and “works”

 

[zz912]

That’s good you mention this but are you afraid of the government interfering with the sacrament. I read that in China you confessed to a priest with a government agent present.

What about big brother? Could they bug confessionals under the laws of home land security? Wouldn’t that sort of interference be a work of Satan?.

Of course it would be wrong and sinful for anyone to snoop. Thank goodness that the sacrament is able to be done anywhere, so you can always walk somehere private.

Make sure that you don’t confuse the chinese-state run “catholic” church with the actual Catholic Church in China. The Church has a long history of fighting the communists there who want to control the Church.

We must always be vigilant against govt. It is a dangerous thing that has caused much suffering.

 

[zz912]

This is pretty hard for me to accept. That can’t be right at all.
The priest’s vow to be real and sincere. How can anyone ever accept that? All the apostles were holy and show signs. So this has to be a law put in by a fake cleric to scam the believers and get away with cheating. No. I can’t see how I could accept this teaching.

The bible says that even believers were accountable for their vows.

Priests and bishops WILL be held accountable by God, but God also won’t leave the people without His grace because of a bad priest or bishop. As another said, God is the one who makes the sacrament work. It is not the power of the priest, he is only the conduit.

And no, it wasn’t a fake cleric. It was a century-long argument with a sect called Donatists who believed only pure priests could administer the sacraments validly. This question was settled at a synod of Carthage in 411AD.

oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Donatists
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Carthage

 

[po18guy]

This is pretty hard for me to accept. That can’t be right at all. No. I can’t see how I could accept this teaching. The bible says that even believers were accountable for their vows.

Slow down a bit. The Sacraments are vias of God’s grace. Each and every prophet, Levite, High Priest, and scripture writer from Abraham to Moses to David to Solomon and beyond were sinners - yet God used them to achieve his purpose. Remember that the grace comes from God and flows via the Sacrament at the hands of sinners.

Example: Was Moses a sinner? Of course. Did God’s grace part the Red Sea via Moses’ authority - even as a sinner? Yes!

If you do not believe in papal infallibility, how can you believe in priestly impeccability?

 

[AmosTown]

Well let’s not forget that even Peter denied the Lord three times. None of the apostles were perfect. Paul talks about struggling with what most acknowledge was probably lust.

The reason why it’s easy for me to accept this is that the priests are not the source of the grace of the sacraments.

The grace of the sacraments, why they work, is directly from God. Even the priests who are “saints in the making” still falter and have problems.

Mother Teresa (yes I know not a priest) remarked about how unsure she was and how she constantly questioned what she was doing (or something like that)

The main point is this, the sacraments are a gift from God, and the power of that sacrament is derived not from men, but from God Himself, and therefore as long as it is performed correctly, it is valid and “works”

I appreciate what you are saying.

But Jesus does not say to the apostles, *“friends, I want you to go and spread the good news, but you know and I know you are going to fall short. I’m going to be crucified for establishing the New Covenant, but you weak apostles don’t stick your neck out. Preach the gospel but if you see the Romans coming for you, run for the hills and hide for a while.” *

No Jesus doesn’t say that. He says “do as I do” and commands the apostles to pick up their cross and follow him!

The Church teaches what Jesus teaches and does not compromise, even if we know we all fall short.

The church does not change word of God, “the standard” set by Jesus and the Apostles. It does not ‘lower the bar’ because humans are weak.

Therefore, Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a ‘rite of holy martrydom’, the sacrament of love as I’ve now come to know its been called. It is the rite of passage from the slavery of sin, to the freedom of Jesus’ unconditional, eternal love and vow to save us even unto death on the cross.

And the only way to truly enter the mystery of Christ’s cross is to die with Him daily.

I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily. - 1 Corinthians 15:31

In the most holy sacrament of the New Covenant the early Christians gathered in the catacombs confronted with the possibility of a brutal martyrdom while at the same time being confronted face to face the martyrdom of Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

I can see it so clearly. Mother Mary, John the Apostle, they went to the cross ready to die with Jesus. I’ve not a single shred of doubt about it.

 

[QNDNNDQDCE]

There is a distinction you are failing to make. A priest can be a wicked sinner and he will be punished for it according to his sins. In fact he will be punished more on account of his office. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more (Luke 12:48).

On the other hand, as you have noted, the priest does not administer the sacraments in his own person, but in the person of Christ and the efficacy of the sacraments depends not on the priest’s merits, but on Christ’s merits. Think about it. How could a sacrament be any sign of assurance if we tied its efficacy to the personal righteousness of the priest? The priest could do all manner of wicked things privately and we would never know. How could we be ever of a sacrament’s validity?

John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us. (Luke 9:49-50)

 

[benjamindt]

I appreciate what you are saying.

But Jesus does not say to the apostles, *“friends, I want you to go and spread the good news, but you know and I know you are going to fall short. I’m going to be crucified for establishing the New Covenant, but you weak apostles don’t stick your neck out. Preach the gospel but if you see the Romans coming for you, run for the hills and hide for a while.” *

That is very true, but it has nothing to do with what i was pointing out. That is that we are not perfect and it is illustrated even when Peter denied the Lord 3 times. The point I and others were making is that the “effectiveness” of the sacraments is tied not to the priest but to Christ Himself. Like QN said, how could you possibly know the heart of anyone? We neither have the ability or the authority to judge the heart of another and therefore would have no way of knowing whether the priest was “righteous enough” to perform the sacrament.

You are right, Christ said we may have to die for our faith, but what does that have to do with the validity of sacraments?