S
SemperReformada
Guest
Thanks. Why then the strong reaction to my first post?
- Status
N
Nicea325
Guest
Because I guess I was being a big pain…my apologies.
S
SemperReformada
Guest
No problem. If you would have read my posts you would have learned that I am converting next year.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
That’s great Semper! God bless!
S
SemperReformada
Guest
Thanks. My cousin converted a few years ago and now I am soon to follow.
S
SemperReformada
Guest
BTW, I too can be a big pain. Sorry about egging you on…can we have a group hug now?:hug1:
N
Nicea325
Guest
And semper,by all means I am not trying to be disrespectful towards you or your current faith. I know you love Jesus and have a strong faith. I know it seems that I am rude,but trust me, I am not a hostile person. I guess at times I’ve grown tired of the pointing fingers at Catholics and how we are wrong on this and that and so and so on. Whew!
Nonetheless,when are you converting and why the change of heart to become Catholic? What caused the change?
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
My wife and I converted in 1985.
J
Juliebug108
Guest
Hi Prodigal!
Hmm…that’s an interesting point. I’m new to exploring the understandings and beliefs of the Catholic faith, so please don’t think I’m trying to be argumentative.
I was simply trying to emphasize that our true Leader is Christ our King. When I look at it that way, the rest seems a lot less important. I don’t really understand the “keys to Heaven” debate. Didn’t Jesus teach that we are ALL one in Christ? Rom. 12:5, Rom. 15:7, Rom. 16:16 1 Peter 5:14, Colossians 3:15, and I can list many more as well. Why debate over the “true church” or who has the keys to the kingdom? Again, I’m not trying to annoy anyone…just trying to learn. Peace and blessings!
Julie
S
SemperReformada
Guest
I don’t really care for internet forums because I believe they bring out the worst in people…including me. I think sites like Called To Communion, Steve Ray’s, Sungenis’ and many others are great but discussion forums seem to be very hostile and I am usually not mature enough (despite my age) to respond with charity. In short, at least for me, these forums are probably more an occasion of sin than anything else. I start having to “win” the argument and if someone is rude I get more rude…you know the drill and am sure you have seen it too.
Anyway, my cousin converted several years ago and he was always my idol growing up. He played football in college, did a few years in the Marines… and has a great family but was always a staunch Calvinist. When he was thinking about converting it caused a stir, a minor one fortunately, but a stir in the family just the same. I ended up moving in with him and his family and after many discussions and arguments I started thinking about it more and more. Really the thing that got me was the issue of the canon which of course really is an issue of authority. I soon found quite a few others from the Reformed view who had converted; Hahn, Matatics (I know there are some issues with him), and the whole Called to Communion group and soon found myself wanting to become Catholic. However, I wanted to make sure it wasn’t an emotional response. I am human and wanted this decision to be based as little on emotion as possible so I waited a little while and then finally when I couldn’t stand it any more I decided that this was it for me…I was going to become Catholic.
S
Sufjon
Guest
Hello Nicea: I am simply following the context of the dialog between Jesus and Peter. What is it about that sentence when taken in the context of the narrative that makes Peter himself the rock on which Jesus builds His church? I am not interested in taking one place and time in scripture and mixing it with another. I have pointed out that 5 verses later in the same chapter, Jesus tells Peter to “get behind me Satan.” If I were to draw parallels between one piece of scripture and another, what I could say is that the only other time Jesus used that same phrase was when He was talking to Satan himself in the wilderness. Does that mean that Peter is Satan? Probably not. I am also wondering what is going to be proven by this thread? That one church is the real one and the others aren’t? That one of you is the “elect” and the others are not? That one will obtain heaven and the other will not? If not, is this conversation not like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic? There is a certain level of spirituality where one frets over the letter of the law and there is a level where one gets the meaning of it. Where are we in this conversation?
By the way, I have asked this question before and no on has answered me. What do you think the keys to heaven are? I am hoping someone can tell me.
Your friend,
Sufjon
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Read Isaiah 22.Hi Prodigal!
Hmm…that’s an interesting point. I’m new to exploring the understandings and beliefs of the Catholic faith, so please don’t think I’m trying to be argumentative.
Peace and blessings!
Julie
Christ is the head of the body of Christ, which is His Church. Peter acted accordingly.
After reading Isaiah 22, please read 1 Chronicles 9. It details the specifics of the keys. The 12 knew the reference as soon as Christ spoke of His keys.
Even though we are all one in Christ, that doesn’t take away from the authority established by Christ. He chose and appointed the 12, and reading on through scriptures we see they chose and appointed others. There was an apostolic succession.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Hello Sufjon,
Peter was speaking through His love of Christ and Christ recognized it was a temptation of Satan.
We cannot read one verse, one passage, one chapter, one letter/epistle, or even one Testament. Scriptures must be read in light of scriptures to receive the fullest understanding. As we read on, in the Gospel of John, we see Christ approach and single out Peter again, commanding him three times to ‘feed His sheep/lambs’. Peter was to act in Christ’s earthly absence.
The keys to the kingdom of heaven, along with the authority to bind and loose, is an authority to make decisions in the King’s earthly absence. The 12 were chosen and appointed by Christ, over His Church.
N
Nicea325
Guest
Oh yes,I have read Scott Hanh,Tim Staples,Stephen K Ray and others conversion stories-great stories. Read the book Surprised by the Truth about 5 converts,one is Marcus Godri. Your story is Interesting,but this caught my eye:
Really the thing that got me was the issue of the canon which of course really is an issue of authority
Indeed,authority is probably the biggest factor which separates Catholics/Orthodoxs and Protestants. Yes,if one brings up the canon,it may cause one to think about it. Good for you and may God Bless you in your RCIA journey. If you have any questions about anything,let me know or anyone here I am sure will kindly assist you.
N
Nicea325
Guest
Yes Jesus did call Peter Satan,but he also later asks him to take care and feed his sheep-did he not? Remember my friend,it is dangerous to isolate certain passages apart from the rest of the Bible. My advice be very careful.
Sorry my friend,but Jesus only founded His church,not thousands of man-made churches.He only promised **His church ** to guide it into the fullness of truth,not the other thousands out there. Not to say those others are bad,but Jesus nor the Apostles did not found them.
J
Juliebug108
Guest
So, let’s say I agree that it makes sense that Jesus gave the actual keys of Heaven to Peter (which I’m not totally sold on, just yet), why would that mean that only the Catholic church has the fullness of truth? If the various denominations are founded in Biblical truth and in Christ’s very own teachings, are they somehow less than the Catholic church? If we are all one in the body of Christ, it makes no sense that the Catholic church would be the only “true” church. I would, however, say that any church refusing to accept the Apostles Creed is seriously in error…but, if the basic tenants of our faith are rooted in the same place, then are we not all equal in the eyes of Christ?
Peace and Blessings,
Julie
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
When you say ‘Biblical truth’, I assume this is based on an interpretation. Now we have to ask who has the authority to give a correct interpretation if there are numerous interpretations?
There are many ‘Bible’ Churches and almost as many doctrines/teachings, based on someone’s interpretation.
Christ gave authority to one Church. All the Churches in scriptures are one Church, in many locations. The scriptures show us they all received the same teachings. Paul wrote to hold to the traditions, whether by word or epistle, to avoid those creating dissension, and to be of one mind and judgment. Scriptures do not tell us of ‘essentials’.
Scriptures themselves do not make scriptures the final authority. If that were so, why is it scriptures tell us the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth, instead of scriptures? Why do scriptures tell us that the manifold wisdom of God maybe made known through the Church, instead of scriptures? Why does scriptures tell us that Christ said to take disputes to the Church, instead of scriptures?
Because Christ established an authoritative Church.
J
Juliebug108
Guest
That still doesn’t really justify the mentality that the Catholic Church is the only true path to salvation. The Apostles Creed that I learned during my Lutheran Catechism/confirmation is identical to the Apostles Creed used within the Catholic church. My Lutheran understanding of baptism is identical, as well. The Lutheran understanding of the Eucharist, while not identical, is only very slightly different. Luther didn’t see his changes as a matter of interpretation, but rather, as a means of eliminating corruption within the Church. He didn’t even want to leave the church! Now obviously, I am totally and admittedly biased because of my religious education, but how do you preserve the idea of Apostolic succession being the true path to God given the undeniable historic abuses and corruption that existed prior to/during the reformation?
Please don’t take offense to this question - I really don’t want to offend anyone here. I’m just confused about Apostolic succession and the whole past corruption thing…
Peace and Blessings,
Julie
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
Christ built His Church on Peter’s answer to His Matthew 16:15 question.
That is the Rock of which Jesus referred.
That is the Rock to which the Keys are issued.
Peter was the first member of the Church.
Peter was the first member of the Body.
All who partake of Matthew 16:16 are members of that Rock.
Peter was one of many who led, not the only one who led, the early Church.
History shows that avowing Jesus as Lord [Peter’s answer in Matthew 16:16] is upon which His Church flourished.
History shows the Church branched into the Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant denominations.
The Church continues to weed out the false and to strengthen the truth and to be a work in progress.
Not all who say Matthew 16:16 will enter the Kingdom, but those under Matthew 16:17, in saying it, will.
It is all about Jesus. Not Peter, Paul, or Mary.
It is all about our answer to Matthew 16:15.
For those who believe Peter is the first Vicar, I say fine. Peace to you and your thoughts. Though I think you are wrong in your view, I know we are all pilgrims of the Faith.
After all, we can always take refreshment in Matthew 10:14 with each other !
S
Sufjon
Guest
I think all of them to some degree resemble the church at the time of Peter and all of them in many ways do not. I can’t think of a particular church that looks exactly like the church at the time of Peter. All have gone through evolutionary changes. Some of the changes are pretty significant. To me, Christianity looks like one tree with a lot of branches. No one branch looks much more like the original seedling than the other.
I think Peter foresaw all of this when He said: “I truly understand that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.”
So if Peter is the true father of the Church, I take it that this is what He had to say on the matter.
Your friend
Sufjon
- Status