Intrigued by Catholicism, but just can't convert for many reasons

[joe370]

3. Isn’t the stubbornness on abortion and gay rights holding the Catholic Church back from its primary mission–to preach the Gospel? Holding back its ability to connect with modern people?

In your opinion, should the CC permit abortions and defy the biblical teachings regarding homosexuality, in order to prevent others from holding them back from preaching the gospel, i.e. conform to the modern will?

1. What is the necessity of these liturgal traditions and devotion to saints, when Protestants can get spiritually fed by Jesus Christ without any of that?

Liturgical traditions???

We too are fed, spiritually by Jesus the Christ in ways that mere human saints in heaven, perfectly conformed to God’s will, simply cannot provide. As a catholic you can take it right to Jesus and no one else, if that is your prerogative. However, the saints, who have lived heroic lives, in terms of virtues,in this life, inspire us in different ways. Can you imagine what those ways might be? Are you familar with people like Saint Teresa of Avila, Padre Pio, Bernadette Soubirous, Margaret Mary or Faustina, just to name a few?

 

[joe370]

CaliLobo
6. Even though Catholics disagree, isn’t there some merit to the argument that not everyone gets good worship out of the liturgy

Sure.

and that purgatory, prayers to the dead, devotion to saints, Marian devotion, the papacy, and sticking to Holy Tradition are UNBIBLICAL and therefore unnecessary, even wrong?

All those things are biblical, which is why the same folks that gave you your bible, embraced those beliefs. Do you believe that the practice of sola scriptura is biblical? If so then why? Those same folks who gave you your bible never embraced sola scriptura.

If this argument was so weak, Protestants wouldn’t persist in it. We’re not that misinformed.

Oh yes they would, and will. I am speaking as a former protestant.

1. Even though Catholics disagree, isn’t there some merit to the argument that it’s NOT the church Jesus founded?

Jesus said, as per scripture, And I tell you that you are Peter,**(“http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+16&version=NIV#fen-NIV-23691b”)] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hadesc] will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will bed] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will bee] loosed in heaven

Shouldn’t we strive to locate this church?

Isn’t there some lack of clarity with the church history?

In my experience many protestants like to cherry-pick and view certain ECFs in isolation; there is a reason for that, don’t you think? They do the same thing with scripture, e.g. James vs Paul, regarding works.

Someone said my position is stubborn. But I’ve already conceded that the CC has the fullness of the truth. You won’t get that from other Protestant posters.

Do you really believe that??? Why?

 

[joe370]

CaliLobo

What am I intrigued by? Its successful challenge against Sola Scriptura, and its claim to be the original church that Jesus founded. Which is why I even considered being Catholic in the first place.

That was my starting point as a former protestant.

Others said I’m just spewing political rhetoric. But #1-#8 (which I have covered in my several previous posts) show that my questions are broad-based.

Once again, I am not a troll. I am struggling spiritually.

I was once right where you are now brother. It can be tough. For me 3 questions, once answered, was all it took.

My Protestant friends would frown on me for even being in this forum, or for even considering Catholicism! Including my dad, and I’ll spare you what he thinks to avoid being a troll. If it’s this hard for me to convert to Catholicism, how much more difficult is it for people of other faiths, and total atheists??

My sister hates the CC, so I get it COMPLETELY.

BILLIONS of people are asking the same questions. These questions deserve thoughtful answers. Please think about this before deciding I am a hatemonger and banning me from this forum.

Agreed. No one is going to ban you, as long as we all follow forum rules.

Thank you to those who have answered some of my questions so far. If anyone has any other insight I will appreciate it.

I know your struggles first hand and you will be in my prayers brother.

 

[tqualey]

Welcome back, Calilobo!

In looking at the Weather Channel, it looks like the lower half of NM is going to get snow, while Alb’q may not have any - I think there may be a lot of icy roads out there - so, do be careful. While you may think you are being bullied by me … that is not my intent. Rather, it is to show you where your logic is basically faulty and your keep getting invalid conclusions.

Joe370 provided some excellent responses - so let me invite you to seriously consider his multiple posts.

I just will respond to one comment you made and then see where you go with it…

If my arguments, especially #1 and #6, have some merit, then isn’t it possible that the Catholic Church, even though I will concede it’s the church Jesus founded, and I will concede it theoretically has the fullness of the Truth, is not doing its job?.

Now, if someone told me I had a chance to join the Church founded by Christ - or one founded by a sinful man - I would honestly chose the one founded by Christ. This would be all the more obvious when we look at all the ones founded by sinful men, condemn the Church founded by Christ - the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Yet, even after saying that the Catholic Church was founded by Christ, you have these criticisms which honestly are highly opinionated and not backed up with any statistics.

If you are conceding that the Catholic Church has the fullness of all Truth - then all of the others that dispute doctrine with the Catholic Church must have less then the fullness. My concern is why would I even consider risking my immortal soul on a bunch of guys (and a couple of gals) who simply dreamed up their doctrine. For all the significant short comings of those in the 16th Century that revolted from the Catholic Church - none of them claimed to have had a vision from Christ where He revoked the promises he make to Peter and established Luther or Knox or Calvin or Henry VIII or anyone else as the new Prince of the Apostles!

Now, just imagine this: after Peter finished denying Christ 3x, he goes out and weeps bitterly. He then dries his eyes and finally finds his way back to where the other Apostle - he confesses his sins - and the 10 remaining Apostles kick him out of the group! Yep, Christ may have founded His Church on Peter - but, we know better!!! The guy in charge may not be perfect - but, denying Christ 3x is what we 10 consider disqualifying! So, Peter - hit the road because we are forming our own Church! Ah, but as you know, it did not happen that way.

By the time the 16th Century rolls around - we find the pope and others engage in public sin - a scandal to all of the world - and we have decided that we will not support the Vicar of Christ on earth - we will leave the Church founded by Christ for one founded by a man. Now, this is what happened - and we are at a loss for trying to explain why anyone would think that the pope’s public life was going to directly impact on their immortal soul! We are all expected to lead chaste and humble lives as we follow Christ. Seriously, if Pope Benedict were to run off with a nun - the world would be shocked - but, it would not change the fact that Christ still founded the Catholic Church and gave it the fullness of all Truth. Are you going to throgh this out the window because of the public sinis of others?

Now, the Chruch founded by Christ, having the fullness of Truth is not running a democracy, or taking polls or throwing darts at a dart board to decide what they will do when it comes to preaching the truth of the Gospel. In fact, the Catholic Chruch has some serious demands it makes of its members (e.g., do not procure an abortion to murder your unborn child is an item taken quite seriously by practicing Catholics.)

So, you decide on what you are going to do - follow Christ’s Church with the fullness of Truth or flip a coin to see which Protestant group you want to listen to next. It really is up to you.

God bless

. If my arguments, especially #1 and #6, have some merit, then isn’t it possible that the Catholic Church, even though I will concede it’s the church Jesus founded, and I will concede it theoretically has the fullness of the Truth, is not doing its job? … .

 

[empantarhei]

Welcome back, Calilobo!

Nice post…helped me, too…
thank you

 

[CopticChristian]

Hello… I’m a Protestant from New Mexico.

Sorry this is long and unfocused, but my mind is in such conflict about all areas of Catholicism.

• But then again, if the Catholic church were to liberalize politically or tolerate political dissent, what would it then offer that I can’t find in a Protestant church?? Protestant churches are okay with political diversity because they know it’s secondary to the main mission of preaching the Gospel. Politics doesn’t save us after all, right?
• For every worship-related reason why the Catholic Church is so great I can always find a reason to counter that. For example, some love the liturgy, but others cannot get anything out of the old liturgical style of worship, because it’s just empty rituals to them. And why should communion be reserved to only Catholics, isn’t that offensive? And if confession is so important why do most people not do it, and live a life of “Catholic guilt”?
• In general, why are Catholic churches so dead and boring? Isn’t the faith “more alive” in a Protestant church? I appreciate that Protestant churches have more entertaining music, are more welcoming, will say hi to you if you’re new, and will ask you to fill out a welcome card so they can get back to you! Even if it’s annoying and in your face, it at least shows they care! Where are the people that care in a Catholic church, besides the nuns (many which give me platitudes of advice when I talk to them)? I just get the sense that the Catholic faith is so personal, but why can’t Catholics get involved with the lives of others, form small groups, and talk about faith with each other? I get the sense that there’s a disconnect between priests and nuns and laypeople, because they live a life of cloistered study. Where are the laypeople that care and I can talk about faith with?
• In general I just don’t see Catholics practicing their faith, the way Protestants do. The Catholic Church does have the edge intellectually, but why doesn’t that translate into a growing, vibrant church? All I see is a moribund, boring church with inconsistency in the beliefs among members. In fact, Catholics who convert to Protestantism complain that the Catholic Church is just a bunch of rote rituals with no meaning. Maybe they need to stop sticking to tradition just to stick to it, adopt more contemporary worship, be more welcoming, and not be so politically involved, so they can convert the younger generation??

Sorry this is long and unfocused, but my mind is in such conflict about all areas of Catholicism. The Catholic Church has such potential, but right now Protestant churches have the edge in how “alive” their faith is. I just don’t see Catholics stepping up. Why don’t the bishops just excommunicate people left and right anymore? I do need to figure out where my faith is gonna turn next, so I appreciate your help.

Lobo,

My first response to Protestants from New Mexico looking into the Faith is to direct them to the USA Catechism for Adults…and ask them to think a bit to organize their thoughts.based on the organization of the Catechism as follows…

Profession of Faith**
Sacramental Life****
Moral life, modeling Christ****
Prayer Asking for help…**

For starters, as we think and believe so we act and we need help so we pray…however in light of what you say and my usual experience with Protestants from New Mexico usually the questions originate with the Profession of Faith and everything else flows from there…

So first, may I ask, were you baptized in the trinitaritan formula and do you accept some or most of the following… I higlighted in red what I assume you may accept…

We believe (I believe ) in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begottenSon of God, and born of the Father before all ages. (God of God ) light of light, true God of true God. Begotten not made, consubstantial to the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for usmen and for our salvation came down from heaven. And was incarnate of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary and was made man ; was crucified also for us underPontius Pilate, suffered and wasburied ; and the third day rose again according to the Scriptures. And ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, and shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, of whose Kingdom there shall be no end. And (I believe ) in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father (and the Son ), who together with the Father and the Son is to be adored and glorified, who spoke by theProphets. And one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We confess (I confess) one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for (I look for) theresurrection of the dead and thelife of the world to come. Amen."

 

[jmcrae]

Dear joe370, tqualey, guanophore, Kal2012, eddie, and others:

You were wrong! You won’t believe me but I am in between internet providers, so I have come all the way to the only Apple store in Albuquerque just to reply to you.

Honestly, I was debating whether to reply though. It seems like you guys are inciting me to reply, much like how a school bully keeps bullying because he enjoys the reaction. What conclusion can I draw from a post like this?

You’ve read my first post, and my subsequent posts. My questions are the same as billions of non-Catholics around the world. But now you dismiss my questions as null. Why, when I’ve come in peace?

Here are my arguments again, paraphrasing my previous posts, posed in the form of questions:

1. If the Catholic Church is so true, why does it bear such little good fruit?

What does this even mean? The Catholic Church provides twice as many schools, hospitals, and emergency response teams as every other charitable organization in the world, combined, when you include the U N.

1. Where is the fire for evangelism, missions, preaching, and Bible study?

Just because you’re not yelliing “Aiiiy-min” every 30 seconds doesn’t mean you aren’t preaching the Word of God with zeal. I’ve never seen a priest who didn’t.

1. Isn’t the stubbornness on abortion and gay rights holding the Catholic Church back from its primary mission–to preach the Gospel? Holding back its ability to connect with modern people?

That is the Gospel - the good news is that Jesus came to bring life to the world. Not death.

1. Isn’t there room for change from within on those issues?

Certainly not.

1. What is the necessity of these liturgal traditions and devotion to saints, when Protestants can get spiritually fed by Jesus Christ without any of that?

A child can eat sugar and think he is being fed - just because it “tastes” good doesn’t mean it is, necessarily. Meat and vegetables might not be as attractive, but the child who eats them will grow to become a strong, healthy adult.

1. Even though Catholics disagree, isn’t there some merit to the argument that not everyone gets good worship out of the liturgy, and that purgatory, prayers to the dead, devotion to saints, Marian devotion, the papacy, and sticking to Holy Tradition are UNBIBLICAL and therefore unnecessary, even wrong? If this argument was so weak, Protestants wouldn’t persist in it. We’re not that misinformed.

You are, however, lacking a third of your Old Testament - which is why you “can’t find” these things. You’ll never find what you’ve already ripped out and buried. What you do have in your Old Testament, though, is the fact that it is God who tells us how to worship Him; I’m sure there were plenty of ancient Hebrew teenagers who thought the whole lamb-sacrificing ritual was boring and repetitive, but it is what God had commanded them to do - and even today, you don’t see the Jews replacing the Passover meal with a hip-hop concert.

1. Even though Catholics disagree, isn’t there some merit to the argument that it’s NOT the church Jesus founded?

None whatsoever.

Isn’t there some lack of clarity with the church history?

You wish. Read the Fathers. There’s no lack of clarity - they were Catholic, through and through.

After all, that’s why it’s debated in the first place, right?

Actually, no one has ever actually debated it. They either don’t know about it, or they just ignore it, or they say things like “the real church was hidden away, and didn’t appear until the time of Martin Luther” - which is clearly not historical - if such a “hidden church” ever existed, Martin Luther certainly was never aware of them - he freely admits to establishing the Lutheran Church on his own personal theological conclusions.

Despite the Real Presence in the Eucharist, isn’t God really present in the Protestant churches, and isn’t God’s presence evidenced in the fruit that Protestant churches produce?

What - less than one fifth of the world’s good works, as contrasted with the Catholic Church’s 68%+?

 

[CopticChristian]

Hello… I’m a Protestant from New Mexico.

Sorry this is long and unfocused, but my mind is in such conflict about all areas of Catholicism.

For the past few years I’ve been more and more intrigued by the Catholic Church. I like the intellectual edge it has, and its claim to be the original that Jesus founded. But the more I look into it and ask around, the more I get confused. And because of this confusion, it just makes it impossible to pull the trigger and convert. Here’s some reasons why:

• The Vatican says we should vote against gay marriage and abortion rights. The Vatican says one cannot be pro-choice and Catholic. But I can always find another liberal parish that disagrees.
• Why should the Church continue to hold such positions, then? Even when so many Catholics disagree with the Vatican? Even when social conservatism is dead now with the reelection of Obama, and gay marriage winning by popular vote in three US states? Isn’t the Church least effective when it meddles with politics the most? Doesn’t the fact that Jesus said “I did not come to bring peace, but a sword,” while also being called Prince of Peace, mean that Jesus never came for social and political peace, that he was never a political reformer?
• Since so many Catholics disagree with the Vatican, doesn’t that make the Church less effective? Shouldn’t the Catholic Church just tolerate political dissent like the Protestant churches, and not advocate any political position in particular? Why are abortion, gay marriage, cloning, euthanasia, and (I forgot the other) such immutable issues for Catholics? Yes I’ve heard natural law and moral issues. But aren’t civil rights important?
• But then again, if the Catholic church were to liberalize politically or tolerate political dissent, what would it then offer that I can’t find in a Protestant church?? Protestant churches are okay with political diversity because they know it’s secondary to the main mission of preaching the Gospel. Politics doesn’t save us after all, right?

Sorry this is long and unfocused, but my mind is in such conflict about all areas of Catholicism. The Catholic Church has such potential, but right now Protestant churches have the edge in how “alive” their faith is. I just don’t see Catholics stepping up. Why don’t the bishops just excommunicate people left and right anymore? I do need to figure out where my faith is gonna turn next, so I appreciate your help.

Lobo,

Previously I pointed out that, as we think, so we believe and as we think and believe so we act. I outlined for you a way of thinking to order thoughts. As I go through your postings and in particular your initial posting here is what I see…however first, I asked you to look at the Profession of Faith…I suggested that what you believe may be coincident with all portions of the Creed except this one…

And one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We confess (I confess) one baptism for the remission of sins.]

If you can understand that within the Church there is wheat and Chaff, recall the parable…there are those that know what the Church teaches however choose to oppose and follow reason. There are those that know what the Church teaches and follow. Polls do not determine doctrine. No the magesterium will not change.

Understand that those that follow Church teachings take this portion of the Creed seriously, ie Holy-Catholic-Apostolic-Church…many of the questions you ask and suggestions you make for change are related to the fact that the discrepancies you see are based on those that for some reason do not accept, do not take serious or just down right refuse to follow this dictum. This is part of the deposit of Faith, that those that are faithful accept as divine revelation. Many Catholics are poorly Catechised. This is the problem you are seeing and why you ask questions.

I believe if you consider all your questions about change, and the magesterium is not changing, then you will then boil down your question to this…

Do you accept that the Church Christ founded is Apostolic and that that Church Is Holy, it is Universal/Catholilc and that it was founded by the Apostles? Whatever your answer is to this question will dictate the questions you ask…

A better question for you to ask is not about those that are Chaff, rather those that are Wheat…and question the reasons we believe this, how it is we believe it, and how you can consider that if Christ is Lord and God created the universe and holds it in order, how in the world did He say He would build a Church and not hold the teachings in order…has Christ abandoned His people…by no means…for to us was given the Utterance of Scripture and the pillar and foundation of truth…

Think about this and then consider what it is you want to know in light of this formulation…Ok…

 

[eddie_too]

calilobo,

as for sola scriptura, the gospels say that all that Jesus did and said is not contained in the bible.

the gospels also say that Jesus taught the apostles information that He did not preach to the masses.

also, the Church’s existence precedes the existence of the New Testament.

finally, the very doctrine of sola scriptura contains an inherent error. that error is that by its very nature the doctrine of sola scriptura can only divide the followers of Christ. that is clearly demonstrated by the more than 30,000 protestant belief systems that currently exist. without Sacred Tradition to guide and restrict the interpretation of the Bible, then the Bible means whatever ANYONE wants it to mean. sinful human beings will interpret the Bible for whatever reason and in whatever manner the individual finds most beneficial or favorable to themselves.

it is not as though the Church does not know what Jesus meant when He did and said the things He did. the apostles spent three years being educated by Jesus about the meaning of His Life, Death and Resurrection. the decisions the apostles made after Pentecost Sunday were guided not only by the events they recorded in the New Testament but also by the teachings of Jesus that Jesus explained and helped them to understand. humans’ understanding of the meaning of Jesus to the world is still being expanded through research and scholarship.

according to sola scriptura, those three years of targeted education from Jesus to the Apostles is insignificant and contributes nothing to the Gospel.

bottom line, the doctrine of sola scriptura necessarily results in division among the followers of Christ. it is difficult to understand why a person would believe that Jesus would establish a mechanism that would necessarily divide His flock.

Sacred Tradition on the other hand necessarily unites the followers of Christ because it provides a constant and unchanging source of understanding of Jesus that is not available anywhere else.

if Jesus had not created an institution and mechanisms within that institution that guaranteed future generations of His followers access to the the truths contained in His Life, Death and Resurrection, then that truth can never be affirmed because no one knows what it is.

 

[eddie_too]

regarding your questioning of the fruit produced by the Catholic Church, the saints are the fruit of the Catholic Church. there are canonized saints, but also every soul in heaven and purgatory are saints.

the concepts of the both quality and quanity in regards the fruit produced by the Catholic Church are also relative and subjective. Your idea of the quanity and quality of the fruit produced by the Church may be quite different from others ideas of the quanity and quality of the fruit.

it is Jesus who says that the road to hell is wide, easily traveled and many there are who find it while the road to heaven is narrow and difficult and few there are who find it.

no one knows how many souls have been saved by faith in the Roman Catholic Church. that number is the real fruit of the Roman Catholic Church.

since neither you nor i nor anyone else can know the number of souls saved by the various teachings of protestant churchs and compare them to the number of souls saved by the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, it seems to me, aside from the worldly accomplishments such as hospitals, schools, missionaries, canonized saints and millions of baptisms every year that are produced and maintained in far greater numbers by the Roman Catholic Church than any other institution or organization that operates purely on free will, that the very idea of hanging one’s salvation on a tallying up of a concept that is more complex than any human can fully understand and thus can never be accurately tallied by finite man is an exercise in futility.

 

[irishpatrick]

CaliLobo,

1. If the Catholic Church is so true, why does it bear such little good fruit?

==> There are 1.2 billion baptized Catholics, and many thousands of people from Protestant Churches and from other faiths come into the Church every year. Protestant Churches and the Bible would not exist if it were not for the Catholic Church. Many billions of Christians through history have received the saving Grace of Christ through the Catholic Church. That is an awful lot of fruit.

1. Where is the fire for evangelism, missions, preaching, and Bible study?

==> Most parishes have Bible studies. No institution on earth does more work for the poor, than does the Catholic Church. Millions would starve without the Church’s help. Further, despite false claims to the contrary, the RCC has been a staunch defender of peace and of Christian values since its founding.

1. Isn’t the stubbornness on abortion and gay rights holding the Catholic Church back from its primary mission–to preach the Gospel? Holding back its ability to connect with modern people?

==> Abortion takes the life of innocents. It is not something that can just be dropped. The Bible is clear on many things, do you expect the Church to ignore public Revelation, or to somehow modify it to fit current times?

1. Isn’t there room for change from within on those issues?

==> NO!

1. What is the necessity of these liturgal traditions and devotion to saints, when Protestants can get spiritually fed by Jesus Christ without any of that?

==> Protestants do receive spiritual gifts and Graces, yet nowhere near the level that is avaliable in the Catholic Church.

1. Even though Catholics disagree, isn’t there some merit to the argument that not everyone gets good worship out of the liturgy, and that purgatory, prayers to the dead, devotion to saints, Marian devotion, the papacy, and sticking to Holy Tradition are UNBIBLICAL and therefore unnecessary, even wrong? If this argument was so weak, Protestants wouldn’t persist in it. We’re not that misinformed.
   **
   ==> All of those are Biblical. Protestants are smart, it is just attachment to one’s faith is hard to overcome. Each item on your list takes careful study, and cannot be properly addressed with a sound-bite sized response. I suggest you search for these topics on CA, you will find they are all quite thoroughly covered here. Your arguments and objections are nothing new at all, we Catholics are used to addressing them, over-and-over-and-over. If you are truly interested in learning the truth, then study the reasons for those teachings and you will see. **
2. Even though Catholics disagree, isn’t there some merit to the argument that it’s NOT the church Jesus founded? Isn’t there some lack of clarity with the church history?

==> NO. Do not forget that one would not expect the true Church to change its teachingsd based on what the current culture says. Many thousands of non-Catholic churches change their teachings all the time in order to accomodate the culture. The Roman Catholic Church (RCC) never changes its teachings because truth does NOT change. For example, please read the Gospel of John, chapter six…the entire chapter. You will see that Jesus taught His Bread of Life discourse and that many of His followers left Him because they could not handle His teachings. Jesus did not change His teachings to suit the crowd, instead Jesus let the majority go. Likewise, Jesus’ Church (the RCC) will not change teachings that Christ gave in order to pull in more people. Truth is truth and cannot be changed to fit people’s whims.

1. If my arguments, especially #1 and #6, have some merit, then isn’t it possible that the Catholic Church, even though I will concede it’s the church Jesus founded, and I will concede it theoretically has the fullness of the Truth, is not doing its job? And if it’s not doing its job, then isn’t the Trinity doing its work in the Protestant churches, which are bearing good fruit when the Catholic Church is stumbling (and there are stats to prove this)? Despite the Real Presence in the Eucharist, isn’t God really present in the Protestant churches, and isn’t God’s presence evidenced in the fruit that Protestant churches produce?

==> You concede that the RCC is the Church Jesus founded, though in point-7 you did not. You also concede that the RCC holds the fullness of truth. You also seem to acknowledge that the Eucharist is the Real Presence of Jesus (His actual Body, Blood, Soul, and Dvinity), then a question must be asked of you: WHY IN THE WORLD ARE YOU NOT CATHOLIC?
**
==> Point eight has really answered all other points. The RCC is the Church Jesus founded. The RCC holds the fullness of truth. Jesus comes to us during every Mass in the Eucharist, which no Protestant Church has. Using only your points (and ignoring hundreds of other great points that can be made), every Christian should be in the Catholic Church!**

 

[joe370]

calilobo,

as for sola scriptura, the gospels say that all that Jesus did and said is not contained in the bible.

the gospels also say that Jesus taught the apostles information that He did not preach to the masses.

also, the Church’s existence precedes the existence of the New Testament.

finally, the very doctrine of sola scriptura contains an inherent error. that error is that by its very nature the doctrine of sola scriptura can only divide the followers of Christ. that is clearly demonstrated by the more than 30,000 protestant belief systems that currently exist. without Sacred Tradition to guide and restrict the interpretation of the Bible, then the Bible means whatever ANYONE wants it to mean. sinful human beings will interpret the Bible for whatever reason and in whatever manner the individual finds most beneficial or favorable to themselves.

it is not as though the Church does not know what Jesus meant when He did and said the things He did. the apostles spent three years being educated by Jesus about the meaning of His Life, Death and Resurrection. the decisions the apostles made after Pentecost Sunday were guided not only by the events they recorded in the New Testament but also by the teachings of Jesus that Jesus explained and helped them to understand. humans’ understanding of the meaning of Jesus to the world is still being expanded through research and scholarship.

according to sola scriptura, those three years of targeted education from Jesus to the Apostles is insignificant and contributes nothing to the Gospel.

bottom line, the doctrine of sola scriptura necessarily results in division among the followers of Christ. it is difficult to understand why a person would believe that Jesus would establish a mechanism that would necessarily divide His flock.

Sacred Tradition on the other hand necessarily unites the followers of Christ because it provides a constant and unchanging source of understanding of Jesus that is not available anywhere else.

if Jesus had not created an institution and mechanisms within that institution that guaranteed future generations of His followers access to the the truths contained in His Life, Death and Resurrection, then that truth can never be affirmed because no one knows what it is.

Nice post. If protestants such as Radical are correct in their claims then truth, in terms of doctrine, is unknowable at least on this side of eternity.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Calilobo,

My guess is that you are stuck in some snowbank in NM any your keyboard is frozen so that responding is not possible - but - you can receive our CAF posts …

Now, while waiting for the snowplows to free up the roads - think about this: conceding that your selection of online sources is sub-par is one thing, rationalizing that you lack the time to put in a credible presentation is another. But, what is most distressing is that you are going into these posts so unprepared. Google is great for as far as it goes - the snag comes in with it not going far enough when you immortal soul is involved.

You have been given some truly superior sites to look at. You have also been given some excellent responses to ponder. As I see it you really only have two choices:

1.) continue with this sub-par presentation only made worse by truly deplorable sources or

2.) show some signs of genuine growth and development - you are on this site risking the displeasure of fellow Protestants - to say nothing about an unhappy family. Well, here’s a chance to either make them proud (by showing off the true wisdom Protestantism) by presenting excellent arguments - or - start to show that after you have examined these arguments - they simply fall short of the mark.

Here’s hoping that the cold does not freeze up the receiving end of your computer … and that you are able to get to a warm and safe area and take the time to formulate your response(s).

God bless

One more thing. I concede my online sources aren’t the best. I don’t have time to thoroughly parse through all of my sources since I spend most of my days at work. I got them all from quick Google searches (which shows how common my arguments are), and if you want better-written sources, there are Protestant bookstores in every town. I apologize I can’t give you more solid sources, but it doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

 

[Kal2012]

What am I intrigued by? Its successful challenge against Sola Scriptura, and its claim to be the original church that Jesus founded. Which is why I even considered being Catholic in the first place.

Others said I’m just spewing political rhetoric. But #1-#8 (which I have covered in my several previous posts) show that my questions are broad-based.

Once again, I am not a troll. I am struggling spiritually. My Protestant friends would frown on me for even being in this forum, or for even considering Catholicism! Including my dad, and I’ll spare you what he thinks to avoid being a troll. If it’s this hard for me to convert to Catholicism, how much more difficult is it for people of other faiths, and total atheists??

As someone going through the conversion process, I understand what you are going through. We may not share the exact same perspectives on a lot of issues, but I understand what struggling/fighting with faith is all about and the struggle to figure out what is true.

I’ve been actually considering conversion for 2-3 years. When I got married to my Catholic husband, I had no interest in converting whatsoever. None. Zero. We’ve been together 12 years and married for nearly 10. We weren’t married in the CC. sums up his reaction to my announcement that I was going to start RCIA.

My own journey took me from Protestantism to Judaism back to Protestantism then Catholicism. (I never converted to Judaism because I just couldn’t give up Jesus being the Messiah and just being a ‘great spiritual leader in history’).

Please remember that while the internet is a good medium for sharing ideas, it can often be a challenge to get the whole picture because, we as readers, simply don’t have the body language/tone of voice cues that we’d get from a person to person conversation.

I’m not trying to bully you, so if that’s the impression I left you with, I’m sorry.

I’m really just trying to understand. I’m wondering why it’s so important to you that the church change her values on the social issues. It’s one thing to change the liturgy into the common language of the population and do the V2 reforms, but it’s another to completely transform the dogma of the church.

Having modern values and promoting them in society would cause a lot more problems in the church than it would solve. If you think there’s a problem with the church being on fire now, let’s just say the Pope comes out tomorrow and says abortion and gay marriage are okay. The church would certainly be ‘on fire’, but I’m pretty sure that’s not what you are talking about when you say you want to see the CC be ‘on fire’ for Jesus.

The American/Western CC isn’t the only part of the church and not everyone shares modern western values or wants to see them promoted in their societies. I get that as Americans we tend to think that everyone wants American/Western/modern (what we’d consider modern) values, but in a lot of cases, that’s simply not true. (As an American, that’s hard to admit!) A lot of times, these societies want the prosperity of the West w/o giving up their social/cultural values.

 

[Kal2012]

1. If the Catholic Church is so true, why does it bear such little good fruit?
2. Where is the fire for evangelism, missions, preaching, and Bible study?

---

The thing that I’ve noticed about Catholicism is that you aren’t going to see fruit unless you look for it. Catholics, especially if they have kids, are at church - a lot. Between mass/activities/religious ed classes/school (if the church has a parish school - or they are homeschooling) - you just won’t see a lot of the fruit because they are busy living the life to show outsiders fruit. For the Catholic moms I know, their fruit is their family and kids, their lives and the example they set for everyone around them. Their home life is their ministry. For the Catholic dads, their ministry is what they do to support the family structure and helping support his wife w/her (their) ministry at home.

Outsiders get a glimpse, but the CC is also a community - and if you aren’t involved with the church and its community, then you aren’t going to see a lot of what it has to offer. Churches vary in the programs they offer and support. Some things are left to the vicar/bishops/national organizations.

How many channels is Joyce Meyer on? Joel Osteen? John Hagee? In my area, I can think of 3 protestant radio stations w/o even trying. There’s only one Catholic radio station.

Protestants know how to sell the message to the masses and they do that very well. I don’t even know how many protestant church stations there are in my cable package because I hid them all a long time ago. ATT U-Verse even has the BYU (mormon) channel. Still, only one Catholic station.

Individual Catholics priests don’t promote themselves or their ministries as readily as individual Protestant ministers. It’s a cultural difference. It’s just not the way they do business. Priests tend to be more interested in building the church than they are about building their brand.

 

[Kal2012]

1. Isn’t the stubbornness on abortion and gay rights holding the Catholic Church back from its primary mission–to preach the Gospel? Holding back its ability to connect with modern people?
2. Isn’t there room for change from within on those issues?

---

I’m not sure that there’s much room for change, as others have said. I really don’t need to rehash. I’m okay w/agreeing to disagree.

In every generation, the church has had problems connecting to ‘modern’ people. I don’t think that’s unique to this generation. What is unique to this generation is the mass marketing and acceptance/tolerance/promotion of sin. Most people really aren’t impressed with what passes for socially acceptable behavior and morality these days, despite what the media tries to feed us. I don’t live in NYC or LA. I don’t relate to the values the media machine promotes on a daily basis. Church values still matter to a lot of people, whether they want to be honest about it or not. It’s one thing to be Liberal when it comes to another person’s behavior, but it’s another when you are talking about your behavior and what you will and won’t tolerate.

You should check out Charles Murray’s Coming Apart
amazon.com/Coming-Apart-State-America-1960-2010/dp/0307453421

It’s not Catholic, but it has some really interesting data about behavior and how it defines class. In fact, it shows what we already know. That uber-rich people follow traditional values and patterns - meaning that they wait to get married. Women don’t get pregnant out of wedlock and wait for stable marriages in which to bring children into. In uber-poor areas, women don’t follow traditional patterns (for a variety of reasons) and then they wonder why they are struggling. So, why wouldn’t society encourage lower income people to follow traditional values and patterns, if the data shows better outcomes? That just doesn’t make sense to me.

I recommend checking the book out of the library or ordering it because there’s just a ton of information/data/charts/graphs to look at and digest.

In the end, the CC shouldn’t condone sin because the sin happens to be accepted by popular culture. Cultural acceptance of an idea doesn’t mean that an action or a policy is actually good for anyone.

 

[Kal2012]

1. What is the necessity of these liturgal traditions and devotion to saints, when Protestants can get spiritually fed by Jesus Christ without any of that?
2. Even though Catholics disagree, isn’t there some merit to the argument that not everyone gets good worship out of the liturgy, and that purgatory, prayers to the dead, devotion to saints, Marian devotion, the papacy, and sticking to Holy Tradition are UNBIBLICAL and therefore unnecessary, even wrong? If this argument was so weak, Protestants wouldn’t persist in it. We’re not that misinformed.

---

One of the biggest things I had to overcome was the idea of Marian Devotion and devotion to the Saints.

For me, as a woman, Mary is direct link to the feminine aspects of our Lord. Being able to pray to the Mother is quite comforting because I’ve always felt a little out of place in the protestant world as a woman. Conservative Protestantism is very masculine and can be very harsh towards women. Through Catholicism, I find femininity reflected in the tenderness and devotion of Mary. There isn’t that kind of respect for the feminine in the Protestant world or worship. Either things are masculine or gender-neutral, but rarely does anyone talk about how God is both male and female and God isn’t all masculine → all the time.

Once I got into Mary, it really wasn’t that hard to move into the Saints.

I find it comforting that Mary and the Saints can intervene for us and be advocates for us in heaven. It really isn’t much of a stretch if you believe that souls don’t die after their human bodies die. If they are communing in heaven, then why not take advantage and ask for some advice/prayers? I just see it as practical. Why not get everyone who can pray for you on Earth and in Heaven listening to your needs/wants and taking them to the Father?

I really like the story in Tobit about how two fathers were praying to Raphael because they wanted their kids to marry and Raphael took those prayers to the Father. Then, the Lord sent Raphael to the young man as an assistant and led him to the woman he’d eventually marry. If it works in the Bible, then why can’t it work for us in the here and now? We don’t know until we try.

I take the view that we’ll find out who’s right/wrong when we get to heaven. Until then, I can only make the best decisions with the information that I’ve been given.

I don’t think that Protestantism has everything right when it comes to death. I come out the 'fire and damnation version of Hell" school of Protestantism and I find it lacking.

Personal story: My mom was anorexic. She decided to refuse medical treatment after a car accident and died a couple of days later. I was 7 and totally devastated - since I found the body. She chose to die - even though with treatment, she could have been fine and healthy. I was taught that suicides go to hell. Period. There is no middle ground. Either you are in heaven or you are in hell. As a kid, it’s just painful to think about your mom suffering in the pit of Hell.

Now, I get that she was mentally ill and not thinking clearly. She couldn’t make a rational decision. As a result, I tend to think that there is room for God to forgive souls and work with them to see the error of their ways. They may not qualify to get into heaven right away, but the soul can work through its issues and become qualified. I don’t think that it’s wrong for people to pray for these souls because it’s something comforting that the living can do to remember someone they loved, even if the loved one wasn’t 100% rational in their actions. It’s a lot better than telling someone that their loved one is in Hell and there’s absolutely nothing they can do about it. It is what it is.

 

[Kal2012]

1. Isn’t there some merit to the argument that it’s NOT the church Jesus founded? Isn’t there some lack of clarity with the church history? After all, that’s why it’s debated in the first place, right? bibliotecapleyades.net/va…_vatican43.htm
2. And if it’s not doing its job, then isn’t the Trinity doing its work in the Protestant churches, which are bearing good fruit when the Catholic Church is stumbling (and there are stats to prove this)? Despite the Real Presence in the Eucharist, isn’t God really present in the Protestant churches, and isn’t God’s presence evidenced in the fruit that Protestant churches produce?

---

People can argue about anything/everything. I tried bring up the page that you linked to, but it said that it was disabled. Given the current paradigm of how church is set up, you’ll either end up going Catholic or going Jewish if tradition, getting to the historical roots of the church is important to you. (I know, I’m a broken record!)

God is present in Protestant Churches and in Catholic Churches. Protestant churches produce a lot of fruit. However, what’s the quality of the fruit they are producing?

For all this talk of how Protestants are producing fruit, I have to wonder how much of it is real and how much of it is show. How much of it is people saying they are Christians, but not living the life after church on Sunday?

I think, again, it comes down to culture. Catholics, historically, have been persecuted, so they aren’t going to be showy when it comes to how they worship or live in the community. They aren’t going to bring unnecessary attention to themselves. For a lot of Catholics, ethnicity matters. Polish/Irish/Italians can tell you stories about being persecuted when they came to the US from the old country. Or how they were persecuted in the old country, so they came to the US. They developed their own communities around the church and their ethnic groups. It’s no accident that a lot of towns have the Irish CC/the Italian CC/the Polish CC/the Slovak CC…etc.

Protestants, on the other hand, have a culture where revivals and crusades have always been a part of the scene (at least on the charismatic side). They don’t think twice about their actions because they’ve always been in the cultural majority.

Also, protestantism isn’t based on ethnic communities in the same way that Catholicism is here in the US. Catholicism isn’t just a religion, but a cultural community. That’s key to keep in mind and is so different than the way that Protestant churches have organized themselves in the US. In more recent times, you can argue about the development of Korean/Chinese language protestant churches (at least in my area), but that hasn’t always been the case. Largely, the White-Anglo has floated between different brands of Protestantism based on doctrine and what’s available in the community for doing church.

Most people don’t find it odd that on nearly every station you can find Joyce Meyer and other Protestant ministers selling their product/ministry/good word for the day. Most people would find it odd if they saw a priest or a rabbi or an imam doing the same thing in the same way that protestants do it. It’s just not how they approach people and doing ministry work. So, if you are looking to see fruit and make a comparison in that one area of TV ministry, then you are going to be hard-pressed to find it because Catholic priests don’t behave the same way as Protestant ministers. That doesn’t mean there isn’t any fruit being produced. It means the type of fruit they are producing is different because they are focusing their efforts elsewhere.

 

[eddie_too]

calilobo,

i understand your questions concerning the social issues. there is a tremendous pressure in 21st century america to abandon traditional morality. most of the media, most of the political leadership and most of higher education focus their efforts on tearing down traditional morality. in almost every effort, there is a common thread that links the effort to a misunderstanding of the constitution of the usa and its purpose of promoting liberty.

at some point in life, an individual needs to accept that it is not possible to know and understand everything. the Church recognizes this reality. it teaches catholics at a very young age that life and faith have many mysteries. faith itself is a very profound mystery. we sinful humans are born with the stain of sin on our souls. that sin affects our souls and how well our souls operate.

the mind is one function of the soul. free will is another function of the soul. since we are born sinners and as a consequence our souls are damaged from birth, one of the damages is a clouded intellect. the intellect is a function of the mind by which the mind can remember, reason and understand.

our clouded intellect makes it difficult, really impossible, to know and understand all of reality. in addition, being the minds of creatures, our intellects are necessarily limited by their finite nature. by their very nature, our minds are incapable of understanding the infinite.

by the grace of God, the human mind of Jesus was not clouded by sin. also, because Jesus’ human mind was perfectly united with His Divine Person, it is capable of knowing and understanding reality in a manner and to a degree that is not and will never be possible for any other human being.

the Lord’s apostles recognized that Jesus had knowledge and understanding that surpassed any thing else they had ever encountered to a degree that was beyond expression. even though they had the same clouded intellects as every other human being ever born into sin, the grace of God as represented by the Person of Jesus and their encounter with Him was able to pierce their clouded intellects and the ignorance and confusion that is the fruit of our clouded intellects. they recognized they did not have the intellectual capacity to have reaced the truths given them by Jesus through their own efforts. in this recognition and through humility, they were able to believe that Jesus is the One.

so, after all of that, it really comes down to the fact that being a follower of Christ means accepting many things on faith in Him.

it may seem unreasonable and confusing to believe in One God Who is comprised of Three Persons. it may seem impossible that the finite and the infinite can be united in One Human Being. it may not make sense that our Creator created everything from nothing. yet, in humility we recognize our own limitations in knowledge and understanding and through faith we substitute for our flawed intellects the knowledge and understanding given to us through salvation history and culminating in the totality of revelation being given to us in the Incarnation of Christ Our Lord.

just as through faith we give assent to theological teachings of the Church that would be total mysteries (so total that we would not even know of their existence) so through faith we give assent to the moral teachings of the Church.

Catholics believe Jesus is God. Catholics believe that God can neither deceive or be deceived. Catholics believe that God became man so that God’s creatures might have eternal life. Catholics believe that eternal life is knowing the Father and He whom the Father has sent.

Jesus knew He was the fullness of God’s revelation to mankind. Jesus knew that He would ascend in to heaven and this world would continue without His human existence being present to subsequent generations of His followers. Jesus knew that it was possible for His teachings and Person to be present to future generations of His followers even though His human body was in heaven and not on earth.

how was it possible for Jesus to perpetuate His salvation for all generations to come? by using the Holy Spirit that Jesus brings to His flock through His Suffering, Death and Resurrection to be present in a human organization.

the questions you should ponder are, could the organization set up by Jesus fail to accomplish its and His purpose? and, if it could fail, how could the salvation brought us by Jesus remain available to all future generations? if Jesus could not ensure He be available for his human followers for all time, who could ensure that? if Jesus did not guarantee an earthly Shepherd for His flock through all time, how are we saved?

for it is in knowing the Father and He whom the Father has sent, Jesus Christ, that we receive eternal life.

to me, it makes perfect sense that the path to salvation should be clear, simple and easily found for any soul that seeks the truth and the good in a humble manner.

it is nonsense to me to think that a Creator who so loved His creatures that He deigned to lower Himself to become one with them would make it difficult for them to know how to receive the gift of salvation.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Eddie too and Kal2012,

These are excellet posts!

I a wondering what has happened (again) to Calilobo. I am wondering if the rescue St. Bernard dogs are working the New Mexico area?

God bless

calilobo,

i understand your questions concerning the social issues. there is a tremendous pressure in 21st century america to abandon traditional morality. most of the media, most of the political leadership and most of higher education focus their efforts on tearing down traditional morality. in almost every effort, there is a common thread that links the effort to a misunderstanding of the constitution of the usa and its purpose of promoting liberty.

at some point in life, an individual needs to accept that it is not possible to know and understand everything. the Church recognizes this reality. it teaches catholics at a very young age that life and faith have many mysteries. faith itself is a very profound mystery. we sinful humans are born with the stain of sin on our souls. that sin affects our souls and how well our souls operate.

the mind is one function of the soul. free will is another function of the soul. since we are born sinners and as a consequence our souls are damaged from birth, one of the damages is a clouded intellect. the intellect is a function of the mind by which the mind can remember, reason and understand.

our clouded intellect makes it difficult, really impossible, to know and understand all of reality. in addition, being the minds of creatures, our intellects are necessarily limited by their finite nature. by their very nature, our minds are incapable of understanding the infinite.

by the grace of God, the human mind of Jesus was not clouded by sin. also, because Jesus’ human mind was perfectly united with His Divine Person, it is capable of knowing and understanding reality in a manner and to a degree that is not and will never be possible for any other human being.

the Lord’s apostles recognized that Jesus had knowledge and understanding that surpassed any thing else they had ever encountered to a degree that was beyond expression. even though they had the same clouded intellects as every other human being ever born into sin, the grace of God as represented by the Person of Jesus and their encounter with Him was able to pierce their clouded intellects and the ignorance and confusion that is the fruit of our clouded intellects. they recognized they did not have the intellectual capacity to have reaced the truths given them by Jesus through their own efforts. in this recognition and through humility, they were able to believe that Jesus is the One.

so, after all of that, it really comes down to the fact that being a follower of Christ means accepting many things on faith in Him.

it may seem unreasonable and confusing to believe in One God Who is comprised of Three Persons. it may seem impossible that the finite and the infinite can be united in One Human Being. it may not make sense that our Creator created everything from nothing. yet, in humility we recognize our own limitations in knowledge and understanding and through faith we substitute for our flawed intellects the knowledge and understanding given to us through salvation history and culminating in the totality of revelation being given to us in the Incarnation of Christ Our Lord.

just as through faith we give assent to theological teachings of the Church that would be total mysteries (so total that we would not even know of their existence) so through faith we give assent to the moral teachings of the Church.

Catholics believe Jesus is God. Catholics believe that God can neither deceive or be deceived. Catholics believe that God became man so that God’s creatures might have eternal life. Catholics believe that eternal life is knowing the Father and He whom the Father has sent.

Jesus knew He was the fullness of God’s revelation to mankind. Jesus knew that He would ascend in to heaven and this world would continue without His human existence being present to subsequent generations of His followers. Jesus knew that it was possible for His teachings and Person to be present to future generations of His followers even though His human body was in heaven and not on earth.

how was it possible for Jesus to perpetuate His salvation for all generations to come? by using the Holy Spirit that Jesus brings to His flock through His Suffering, Death and Resurrection to be present in a human organization.

the questions you should ponder are, could the organization set up by Jesus fail to accomplish its and His purpose? and, if it could fail, how could the salvation brought us by Jesus remain available to all future generations? if Jesus could not ensure He be available for his human followers for all time, who could ensure that? if Jesus did not guarantee an earthly Shepherd for His flock through all time, how are we saved?

for it is in knowing the Father and He whom the Father has sent, Jesus Christ, that we receive eternal life.

to me, it makes perfect sense that the path to salvation should be clear, simple and easily found for any soul that seeks the truth and the good in a humble manner.

it is nonsense to me to think that a Creator who so loved His creatures that He deigned to lower Himself to become one with them would make it difficult for them to know how to receive the gift of salvation.