R
RyanL
Guest
I don’t know if the joke was intentional, but “pregnant with meaning” on a thread about “Mary with child” is AWESOME!!!
RyanL
- Status
RyanL
T
Tom
Guest
I want an advance copy! Congratulations!
M
MikeB
Guest
The Iambic Pen:
I hope your are serious in your search. You will never be disappointed.
Welcome and may your journey to Rome be filled with enlightenment. All of the posts are great and I do not mean to belittle anyone’s views, but I would highly recomment contacting a local Priest and talking to him. Ask around and see if any one stands out as being the one to see. Also, pick up some books on Catholic teachings - there are hundreds to choice from. Read over the articles from Catholic Answers - again numerous one to gain insight. Go back through the Radio shows. The archives give every kind of subject manner ample air time. Take time to listen and take notes. But the all important thing is listen to your heart. That is where the Holy Spirit will begin to move within you and out of the blue the questions you have asked will begin to form answers that explain the Catholic views. As an example, over the weekend several of us were discussing about when Jesus realized that He was God. Monday I was thinking about this and picturing the child Jesus and thought that more than likely He would have been like a child prodigy. Whatever He heard He could repeat it word for word. Whatever He was shown He could do without being retaught. Then imagine Mary and Joseph seeing all of this. Knowing the back story and knowing without a doubt that this child was unlike any other child ever born. Can we really believe that either of them would have had normal sexual relations after that? Also, believe the unique position that Mary was in. Only time in history that the mother was created by the “son”. That in her veins the blood of Jesus flowed as happens to every mother with each of her children. She accepted Jesus without hesitation and carried Him not only in spirit but physically within her.
I hope your are serious in your search. You will never be disappointed.
N
Newvert
Guest
I agree with everthying MikeB says above, but be cautious choosing a priest. We have been blessed by many holy, dedicated clergymen, loyal to the magisterium. If, however, you get someone whose views don’t seem to match what you already know about Catholicism, or does not seem fully welcoming, LOOK ELSEWHERE.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Hey Iambic Pen! http://bestsmileys.com/welcome/12.gif
There are answers to all your questions & we’ll happily help you any way we can. One very good way to get a grip on real Catholic teaching, is to take the courses form the Catholic Home Study Service they are FREE and well worth it. I completed all of them and begged for more and they are one reason that I am Catholic today. Give 'em a shot!
Pax tecum,
There are answers to all your questions & we’ll happily help you any way we can. One very good way to get a grip on real Catholic teaching, is to take the courses form the Catholic Home Study Service they are FREE and well worth it. I completed all of them and begged for more and they are one reason that I am Catholic today. Give 'em a shot!
Pax tecum,
G
gusano
Guest
The Iambic Pen:
(1) and (3),You fail to understand what ingesting His body and blood does for the human soul ?
He OFFERS these to us FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS.
He also hides these MYSTERIES from the learned and the clever, but reveals them to the merest of children. Matt.11:25
I have never known Jesus to reveal himself to one who does not accept His Word.
(Jn.8:43)
FAITH first, … REVELATION follows.
gusano
(2)…If His physical body is not divine, He can not carry away our sins IN HIS BODY. that means we are all still in our sins.
(1) and (3),You fail to understand what ingesting His body and blood does for the human soul ?
He OFFERS these to us FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS.
He also hides these MYSTERIES from the learned and the clever, but reveals them to the merest of children. Matt.11:25
I have never known Jesus to reveal himself to one who does not accept His Word.
(Jn.8:43)
FAITH first, … REVELATION follows.
gusano
B
bhlincoln
Guest
Have you heard of or read about Eucharistic miracles? These first class miracles have been occurring century after century and are on display all over Europe for anyone to go and see. Aside from the clear wording in Scripture on transsubstationation, Eucharistic miracles provide us with plenty of physical proof of the truth of the real presence.
said:
S
system
Guest
I know you have received very lengthy answers. I wanted to try to sum it up in the way that I understand it. There are very theological discussions for every one of your questions, but I offer a simplified version.
Immaculate Conception: The Holy Spirit shielded Mary from original sin so that she would be sinless. In order to carry God, He would want her to be sinless (don’t you think?).
Joseph and Mary not having relations: In that time, Mary is supposed to have been a consecrated virgin (which means that she promised her virginity to God forever) they would have “guardians” to protect them and to guard their virginity. Ususally it would be an older widower. This would be why Joseph is not spoken of in Jesus’s older years.
Jesus’s brothers and sisters: Has been talked about with others
Transubstantiation: God is not limited by the means that we are. He told us to do this and after the resurrection, the apostles only recognized Him during the “breaking of the bread”. You can also do research on the early church fathers and see that this has been practiced from the Gospels to today.
Papal Infallibility: He in only infallible on matters of faith and morals.
Let me know if you want more information
Immaculate Conception: The Holy Spirit shielded Mary from original sin so that she would be sinless. In order to carry God, He would want her to be sinless (don’t you think?).
Joseph and Mary not having relations: In that time, Mary is supposed to have been a consecrated virgin (which means that she promised her virginity to God forever) they would have “guardians” to protect them and to guard their virginity. Ususally it would be an older widower. This would be why Joseph is not spoken of in Jesus’s older years.
Jesus’s brothers and sisters: Has been talked about with others
Transubstantiation: God is not limited by the means that we are. He told us to do this and after the resurrection, the apostles only recognized Him during the “breaking of the bread”. You can also do research on the early church fathers and see that this has been practiced from the Gospels to today.
Papal Infallibility: He in only infallible on matters of faith and morals.
Let me know if you want more information
T
The_Iambic_Pen
Guest
I thank all of you for your answers. They have been extremely helpful in helping understand these issues I have questions about. Being somewhat of a veteran of internet discussions in the past, I have been exposed to a good deal of hostility from those who disagreed with me (about other issues, this being the first Catholic board I have been to). Everyone on this board has proven to be very respectful and helpful. I thank you all very much.
As far as talking with a priest goes, I agree that that would be a very helpful thing to do. Unfortunately, due to my current situation in the military, there aren’t many priests around I can talk to at this time (most chaplains are Protestant). I think there is one Catholic chaplain on this camp, so maybe I’ll try to talk to him. I must confess I have never even been inside a Catholic church, but I intend to change that when I return to the U.S.
I have made note of those links you gave me, and I’ll read them as soon as I get the chance. Thanks for explaining everything so well! In the future, if I have a specific question, I will start a new topic. Of course, feel free to continue answering in this one, as I will be checking it. God Bless!
As far as talking with a priest goes, I agree that that would be a very helpful thing to do. Unfortunately, due to my current situation in the military, there aren’t many priests around I can talk to at this time (most chaplains are Protestant). I think there is one Catholic chaplain on this camp, so maybe I’ll try to talk to him. I must confess I have never even been inside a Catholic church, but I intend to change that when I return to the U.S.
I have made note of those links you gave me, and I’ll read them as soon as I get the chance. Thanks for explaining everything so well! In the future, if I have a specific question, I will start a new topic. Of course, feel free to continue answering in this one, as I will be checking it. God Bless!
C
Church_Militant
Guest
On transsubstantiation…see this post The Eucharist IS Scriptural
Pax tecum,
Pax tecum,
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
vicia3:
Axiom: the pope is in charge. He sits in the seat of Peter. Therefore, he is the boss when it comes to matters of God’s Church. Until you there is a new pope that’s true so accept it. Now in addition to that, He as the right to say what “The Church” says is moral, above any worldly appeal.
Guidelines:
For some reason, nobody else seemed to like my analogy the first time, so of course I’ll try it again. I will at least paraphrase in an attempt not to insult those who gave me valuable feedback:
Axiom: the pope is in charge. He sits in the seat of Peter. Therefore, he is the boss when it comes to matters of God’s Church. Until you there is a new pope that’s true so accept it. Now in addition to that, He as the right to say what “The Church” says is moral, above any worldly appeal.
Guidelines:
- The boss is right.
- If you think the boss is wrong, move on to step 3.
- Pray for and seek understanding, and ask forgiveness if applicable, and when ready go back to rule #1 and try again.
T
The_Iambic_Pen
Guest
I completely agree with the logic of your three steps. The trouble I have is in determining the truth of step 1. When Jesus speaks of Peter, he says, in Matthew 16, “18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven…” All of this gives Peter a great deal of authority. The question I have is how this authority can be known to have passed on through the ages to each pope.
I guess we Protestants are able to have faith that God has preserved the truth of the Bible throughout the ages, but we are reluctant to put this same faith in an individual. The problem with this, of course, is that we trust the writers of the individual books of the Bible without difficulty. I suppose it’s that whole sola scriptura thing creeping up again. I guess it’s difficult to believe that one person’s interpretation can be so right, while it is obvious that many people’s interpretations have been horribly wrong. It is easy for Catholics to trust the Pope and the post-apostolic Christian writers because that is a part of your tradition. When Protestants severed their connection with the Catholic church, they lost that trust in the past. In severing our connection with tradition, all we have left is the Bible. That is why Protestants, particularly Evangelicals, try to determine all doctrine from the Bible and the Bible alone. All these names of early Christian writers are mostly foreign to me, because they are never discussed in church. It’s only because I study history as a hobby that I’ve heard of any of them at all.
Well, once again, in explaining Protestantism, I am becoming a bit of a Catholic apologist…The thing is, personally I very much regret that lost connection. Questions of papal authority aside, there is much to be learned by reading the writings of the early Christians. After all, it didn’t stop with the book of Acts.
Perhaps to explain things better, I’ll make a simple timeline or chronology if you will:
-Protestants see abuses in Catholic church.
-Protestants split with Catholic church over said abuses.
-Over time, Protestants sever all connections with Catholic tradition, including the post-New Testament writings of the early Christians.
-The post-New Testament, yet still early, Christian writers began to be seen as Catholic writers, and thus their writings were seen to be of no importance.
-As such, only the Bible itself is left from which to formulate doctrine.
-With no supreme authority telling them what the Bible means, each Protestant group develops its own, often wildly different interpretations.
-Over the centuries, Protestants split into a mind-boggling number of denominations, each claiming to be the true one.
-In time, even denominations fail to be sufficient, and there is an explosion of non-denominational churches, each with their own private interpretation.
-Now we come to the present day, where there are really no hard and fast rules that can be said to apply to all Protestants, and the break with the Catholic church has been so complete, many Protestants view Catholicism as a completely different religion.
-Since Catholicism is now so foreign, many Protestants do not even consider that it might be true, as its traditions (with no immediately obvious basis in Scripture alone) and rules of authority are completely outside the Protestant experience.
All right, well, keep in mind that I am by no means an expert on the Protestant Reformation, the early Catholic church, or even European history. However, I hope this little chronology will help explain where Protestants are coming from. Of course, I once again seem to have portrayed Protestants as being completely wrong, but it’s not quite as simple as I have portrayed it. Anyway, I must go for now, but hopefully all of this will fuel future discussion.
The Lord be with you all!
I guess we Protestants are able to have faith that God has preserved the truth of the Bible throughout the ages, but we are reluctant to put this same faith in an individual. The problem with this, of course, is that we trust the writers of the individual books of the Bible without difficulty. I suppose it’s that whole sola scriptura thing creeping up again. I guess it’s difficult to believe that one person’s interpretation can be so right, while it is obvious that many people’s interpretations have been horribly wrong. It is easy for Catholics to trust the Pope and the post-apostolic Christian writers because that is a part of your tradition. When Protestants severed their connection with the Catholic church, they lost that trust in the past. In severing our connection with tradition, all we have left is the Bible. That is why Protestants, particularly Evangelicals, try to determine all doctrine from the Bible and the Bible alone. All these names of early Christian writers are mostly foreign to me, because they are never discussed in church. It’s only because I study history as a hobby that I’ve heard of any of them at all.
Well, once again, in explaining Protestantism, I am becoming a bit of a Catholic apologist…The thing is, personally I very much regret that lost connection. Questions of papal authority aside, there is much to be learned by reading the writings of the early Christians. After all, it didn’t stop with the book of Acts.
Perhaps to explain things better, I’ll make a simple timeline or chronology if you will:
-Protestants see abuses in Catholic church.
-Protestants split with Catholic church over said abuses.
-Over time, Protestants sever all connections with Catholic tradition, including the post-New Testament writings of the early Christians.
-The post-New Testament, yet still early, Christian writers began to be seen as Catholic writers, and thus their writings were seen to be of no importance.
-As such, only the Bible itself is left from which to formulate doctrine.
-With no supreme authority telling them what the Bible means, each Protestant group develops its own, often wildly different interpretations.
-Over the centuries, Protestants split into a mind-boggling number of denominations, each claiming to be the true one.
-In time, even denominations fail to be sufficient, and there is an explosion of non-denominational churches, each with their own private interpretation.
-Now we come to the present day, where there are really no hard and fast rules that can be said to apply to all Protestants, and the break with the Catholic church has been so complete, many Protestants view Catholicism as a completely different religion.
-Since Catholicism is now so foreign, many Protestants do not even consider that it might be true, as its traditions (with no immediately obvious basis in Scripture alone) and rules of authority are completely outside the Protestant experience.
All right, well, keep in mind that I am by no means an expert on the Protestant Reformation, the early Catholic church, or even European history. However, I hope this little chronology will help explain where Protestants are coming from. Of course, I once again seem to have portrayed Protestants as being completely wrong, but it’s not quite as simple as I have portrayed it. Anyway, I must go for now, but hopefully all of this will fuel future discussion.
The Lord be with you all!
R
RyanL
Guest
The Iambic Pen:
Hooah! Your last post does a fairly good job of summing up the Deformation (sometimes spelled with an ‘R’).
As for papal authority: Unfortunately for you, I enjoy talking about this subject as well!
The key to understanding the Bible is to see it not as two distinct parts, but rather two parts of one whole. The New Testament is concealed in the Old, and the Old Testament is revealed in the New! Once you see that the whole of the OT points to NT realities, everything starts to fall into place; from the Eucharist, to Baptism, to Mary, to the Papacy, it all makes sense when you look at it with “Jewish eyes”.
To begin. Matthew takes great pains to trace the lineage of Jesus back to David - and this is for a reason. It is to show Jesus as the true Davidic King, King of Kings!, whose kingdom will have no end. Remember, Jesus did not come to abolish the Davidic kingdom, but to perfect it. God, who writes history the way men write books, gave us the Davidic kingdom to show us the true kingdom which was to come. Among the “earmarks” of a Davidic kingdom was the Prime Minister (kinda’ like in England, although in England the Queen has little real power). If you read Isaiah 22, you will see a Prime Minister instated to speak on behalf of the King, and with full authority of the King, and you will also see that this office has successors. I’ll parallel a couple of texts and you’ll see what I mean:
…cont’d…
Iambic Pen,
Hooah! Your last post does a fairly good job of summing up the Deformation (sometimes spelled with an ‘R’).
As for papal authority: Unfortunately for you, I enjoy talking about this subject as well!
The key to understanding the Bible is to see it not as two distinct parts, but rather two parts of one whole. The New Testament is concealed in the Old, and the Old Testament is revealed in the New! Once you see that the whole of the OT points to NT realities, everything starts to fall into place; from the Eucharist, to Baptism, to Mary, to the Papacy, it all makes sense when you look at it with “Jewish eyes”.
To begin. Matthew takes great pains to trace the lineage of Jesus back to David - and this is for a reason. It is to show Jesus as the true Davidic King, King of Kings!, whose kingdom will have no end. Remember, Jesus did not come to abolish the Davidic kingdom, but to perfect it. God, who writes history the way men write books, gave us the Davidic kingdom to show us the true kingdom which was to come. Among the “earmarks” of a Davidic kingdom was the Prime Minister (kinda’ like in England, although in England the Queen has little real power). If you read Isaiah 22, you will see a Prime Minister instated to speak on behalf of the King, and with full authority of the King, and you will also see that this office has successors. I’ll parallel a couple of texts and you’ll see what I mean:
With Jewish eyes, we can clearly see Christ establishing a Prime Minister in His Kingdom. Once it’s laid out for you, it’s pretty hard to deny that this is what Christ was speaking about. What’s more, there’s only ever one Prime Minister. Some folks argue that Christ gives the “keys” to everyone in Matt 18:18, but that’s simply putting words into the text that aren’t there. The keys are a specific item, reserved for one particular office. This is how it worked in a Davidic kingdom, and this is (in part) how we can recognize the True Kingdom.
…cont’d…
R
RyanL
Guest
…cont’d…
What else? How about the Magisterium of the Church? With Jewish eyes, we can also see that the people of God had an infallible guide in the OT to interpret matters of physical law. In the NT, this authority passes to matters of faith and morals, but remains equally authoritative. Additionally, most of the OT foreshadowings are physical in nature, with the NT fulfillments being spiritual in nature. I’ll explain what I mean through Scripture (bear with me…it’s long, but worth reading):
Let’s look at some more Scripture:
Add to this the account you find in Acts 1:15-26 about choosing a successor for the OFFICE left vacant by Judas, and you can now see that a position of authority, with successors, was appointed by Christ to lead His faithful for all time (John 21:15-17). Christ is the head of the Church, and He has left us a Prime Minister to speak on his behalf so that we might know the will of the King for all times.
Questions?
May God bless you and keep you,
RyanL
What else? How about the Magisterium of the Church? With Jewish eyes, we can also see that the people of God had an infallible guide in the OT to interpret matters of physical law. In the NT, this authority passes to matters of faith and morals, but remains equally authoritative. Additionally, most of the OT foreshadowings are physical in nature, with the NT fulfillments being spiritual in nature. I’ll explain what I mean through Scripture (bear with me…it’s long, but worth reading):
This is what’s known through Rabinic tradition (I’ll provide sources if you’d like) as the powers of “binding and loosing”. You can clearly see that the priests/judges had the authority to determine what was and was not the Law. Notice, also, that the passage says nothing about everyone pulling out a Torah and deciding for themselves what the right answer is; nay! that is for the priests/judges to determine. God takes this so seriously that He puts his official stamp of approval on anything they bind or loose, under punnishment of death! Again, the OT rendered physically what the NT renders spiritually.
Let’s look at some more Scripture:
The NT sentence is spiritual death - being cast out of Christ’s kingdom, the Church! (BTW, don’t be scared yet…we won’t be held accountable for the things we never knew.)
Add to this the account you find in Acts 1:15-26 about choosing a successor for the OFFICE left vacant by Judas, and you can now see that a position of authority, with successors, was appointed by Christ to lead His faithful for all time (John 21:15-17). Christ is the head of the Church, and He has left us a Prime Minister to speak on his behalf so that we might know the will of the King for all times.
Questions?
May God bless you and keep you,
RyanL
T
The_Iambic_Pen
Guest
Now, what could be unfortunate about the quest for truth?
Actually, as I have said before, I greatly appreciate all the information I have been given. Everything you have said here is very informative, and I’ll definitely look at it further. In the very brief time I have been posting and reading on this board, I have discovered a very shocking thing. It seems that all that hard to understand Catholic doctrine might actually be based on the Bible! 
Crazy, eh? In all seriousness, there is a common belief in Protestant circles that all of these doctrines such as The Immaculate Conception, Papal Authority, and such were just sort of invented by some Pope back in the Middle Ages. I am happy to see that is not the case.God Bless!
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
The Iambic Pen:
God bless you brother!
I just wanted to say [to you, The Iambic Pen] that your posts are very reasonable and encouraging - they remind me of myself when I was converting to Catholicism [from Baptist]…it’s always great to see when a person opens their minds to the Truth, and their heart to the Holy Spirit!Now, what could be unfortunate about the quest for truth?
God Bless!
God bless you brother!
R
RyanL
Guest
The Iambic Pen:
May God bless you and your family richly,
RyanL
Well…now and then I tend to run off for a while on a particular diatribe…I’m never sure how much the reader wants to hear from me!
May God bless you and your family richly,
RyanL
M
MonicaC
Guest
Well, I for one love to read your posts, I find them very informative. Thank You, I do look forward to your book.Well…now and then I tend to run off for a while on a particular diatribe…I’m never sure how much the reader wants to hear from me!
May God bless you and your family richly,
RyanL
A
adstrinity
Guest
Well, WELCOME!!! 
I’m glad you have come here for answers, BUT, even if you just came here for almost any other reason, I would still say this: LOVE YOUR NAME!!! How VERY clever!!! Oh my gosh!!! So great a name that is!!!
Welcome, Enjoy, & I’ll pray for you!! ;D
I’m glad you have come here for answers, BUT, even if you just came here for almost any other reason, I would still say this: LOVE YOUR NAME!!! How VERY clever!!! Oh my gosh!!! So great a name that is!!! Welcome, Enjoy, & I’ll pray for you!! ;D
T
The_Iambic_Pen
Guest
Thank you for the welcome! As for the name, I suppose it’s a sort of tribute to my college days as an English major. I am a huge fan of literature and writing.Well, WELCOME!!!
Welcome, Enjoy, & I’ll pray for you!! ;D
To all of you, I thank you for your explanations, which have been extremely informative. Of course, the step from understanding to belief is a significant one. For example, I can look at passages supporting the Immaculate Conception and think to myself, “Yes, I can see how one could come up with that interpretation.” Of course, this is complicated by another thought that says, “Just because an interpretion is possible does not mean in and of itself that it’s true.” While passages about grace and comparisons with the Ark of the Covenant could support the idea of Mary’s sinlessness, they do not seem to imply to me that this must be so. I suppose this goes together with the Church’s infallibility on interpretation. Infallibility is the key here then. Sometimes I wish God could just come to be and say, “The Catholic Church’s teachings are all true.” Then, without hesitation, I would commit myself completely to the Church, believing all it taught. Of course, God rarely works that way, and I know my faith should not require something like that. God has given me the reason and knowledge necessary to find the truth. I am very much opposed to “buffet style” Christianity, and I do not believe I could accept Catholicism until I was able to believe it was all true. I pray that God will guide me to the right conclusions about all things and give me faith to trust Him about that which I do not understand.
Of course, there is also the consideration of my family and my own background in a Protestant church. While my immediate family at least would be understanding, they would still be very concerned. My other relatives would quite possibly believe I was descending into the “darkness of Romish popery” (if you’ll pardon the expression). Also, growing up I have met many people who were very strong in their faith in Christ and very committed to His service. It is difficult for me to accept that they are somehow not true Christians. And, finally, the fact is I have personally met very few Catholics who I saw as being serious about their faith. In all fairness, though, the ones I have known who were serious impressed me with their dedication and love for God.
So, those are a few issues I have. As always, I thank you for your patience and for your answers. May God bless you all!
- Status