Struggling with converting to Catholicism

[TheLittleLady]

I’d suggest you pick up a copy of Scott Hahn’s “Hail, Holy Queen”. I wish it had been available during my conversion time I also wish I’d read Fulton Sheen’s “The World’s First Love” early in the process.

 

[ASC]

Find these answers on catholic.com. look for the official Church teachings if you want to find out. These forums are too open and unreliable.

 

[klmt123]

I converted to Catholic from Protestant and I am glad I did, you could literally learn something new everyday for the rest of your life. If you do go through with it, yes there are some Catholics who aren’t really Catholic that sometimes make it difficult to even say that you’re Catholic. Your faith is your own and it’s really up to you which is the better choice for you and how you choose to practice. There are some things that were hard for me comming from Protestant, there are so many differences!!! Good luck on your spiritual journey !

 

[Reuben_J]

I was raised Protestant and recently discovered the Catholic Church was the one created by the apostles. I want to join and go through the RCIA, but I have some questions/concerns that are preventing me from fully committing. I hope that these can be answered so that I can understand them better.

It would be better if you just ask one question or few questions on one thread. In any case, this is more like a question and answer thread rather than a discussion because there are too many questions.

Was Jesus “yes” not so much greater than Mary’s?

This is an apple and orange question. There is no comparison. Jesus is God and Mary is human.

Why not have these large processions carrying a statue of Jesus instead of Mary?

Like you have said, yes, this is Marian devotion. It is not an either / or question. This is the richness of Catholic traditions that there are many different kinds of devotions / feasts / celebrations / spiritualities.

How is this not considered idol worship since they are putting their faith and belief in the statue itself?

We say this many times – there is no faith and belief in the statue. It is like keeping a photo of a loved one. You frame it, sometimes you kiss or even talk to it but you know it is just a photo to remind you of the real person.

Why is it so important to touch this statue when it is only a material thing that was created by the hands of men here on earth?

It is not important to touch the statue nor it is required nor it is even to have the statue at all. Some people prefer to have it or touch it, that’s all. Those who do certainly know it is just a statue made by human hands.

However, what if she would have said no to the request from God to give birth to Jesus? She would have been given the gift of freedom from original sin for no reason.

She would still be the Chosen One by God. It is just that God has made a mistake of choosing her if she had refused.

 

[Reuben_J]

However, would that not also mean that God chose her because he knew she would say yes? If that were the case would that not downplay the veneration and adoration that she is given for saying yes to God since she would have simply been hand selected by God himself because he knew she would say yes?

Her veneration is mainly because she is the Mother of Jesus, the Mother of God. We are grateful for her saying ‘yes’ (Fiat), but the main reason for venerating her is because she is in the unique position of being the Mother of Jesus. She certainly deserves honor and veneration from us. It is not every era we have a Mother of God.

Does it not seem even more plausible and even a greater feat that she instead was not given the gift of freedom from original sin, but that she lived such a perfect life to God’s standards that she found favor with God and this is why she was approached by Him to give birth to His son?

There are two questions here.
(1) God chose her because of what she is.
(2) She is without original sin in order to bear Jesus as her child.

Some may argue that without her being free from original sin then Jesus wouldn’t have been free from it as well since he was born from her womb.

That is not the correct reason. The reason is Jesus being God should be free from sin. The analogy of the Ark of the Covenant is more apt – the Ark must be pure in order for God to dwell there.

However, why is it not considered just as easy for God to keep Jesus free from original sin through His conception just as it was thought that God did for Mary?

This has never been the doctrine of the Catholic Church. Jesus does not sin in anyway. He just should not be conceived in a womb that has original sin. God is perfect and therefore His dwelling place must be perfect.

If Mary needed to be free from original sin to keep Jesus from it since he was to be born of her womb, would that not also mean that Mary’s mother would have needed to be free of original sin as well to keep Mary from it and then Mary’s Grandmother to keep Mary’s mother from it and so on and so forth?

Mary is kept free from original sin for reason for her to conceive Jesus. Being free of original sin is a grace from God given to her only, thus she is not bound by hereditary (where her mother must also be free from original sin).

Would it not make more sense that Jesus conception was indeed the immaculate one and not Mary’s?

Uhh, what? Jesus is God. He just should be in a perfect womb free of sin.

 

[tgGodsway]

The Mary you speak of is not the Mary of the N.T. bible. She is an invention of people who were far removed from the apostolic circle. Oral tradition has invented and perpetuated this lie all of these years. It is sad. The Mary of the bible knew she was a sinner who sinned. So did everyone else know this about her, … as all men are sinners and need Christ.

 

[stpurl]

Funny, the Mary of the Catholic --and Orthodox–Church was known in the catacombs, the early Church, the so-called Dark Ages, the high Middle Ages and Renaissance. . . continuously. . .East or West. . .

The Mary of the Catholic Church was known and venerated (yes, venerated!) by the first protestants, including Luther and Calvin. They knew and acknowledged Catholic truth.

It is only in the later times, as Protestants themselves splintered further and further away from the Church, that individuals made up a Mary whom they claim (without any proof) is ‘real’–because she conveniently rejects Catholic concepts and supposedly embodies Protestant ones. IOW, this Mary is made in the image of a modern 21st century protestant and passed off as the first century Biblical original.

It would be funny if it weren’t so sad, to see not just Mary but Sacred Scripture, and above all Christ Jesus our Lord, used as propaganda to try to dupe Christians.

 

[tgGodsway]

yes, I’ve heard this argument before on this site. Luther and Calvin supported the view that Mary was sinless. I’ll have to go look that one up. I never did.

But Luther and Calvin are not my measuring stick to truth. If Luther, who was raised to believe Mary was sinless, did not yet turn against this based on scripture, then Luther was blind to the obvious evidence of scripture. I am pretty sure he eventually turned.

But as to the many years of believing Catholic tradition without supporting it in scripture, this is what is sad because the evidence is overwhelming. Bottom line, there is a contradiction between “oral tradition” and the testimony of the apostolic circle.

 

[KnowledgeSeeker]

yes, I’ve heard this argument before on this site. Luther and Calvin supported the view that Mary was sinless. I’ll have to go look that one up. I never did.

But Luther and Calvin are not my measuring stick to truth. If Luther, who was raised to believe Mary was sinless, did not yet turn against this based on scripture, then Luther was blind to the obvious evidence of scripture. I am pretty sure he eventually turned.

But as to the many years of believing Catholic tradition without supporting it in scripture, this is what is sad because the evidence is overwhelming. Bottom line, there is a contradiction between “oral tradition” and the testimony of the apostolic circle.

Hello tgGodsway,

I’m the OP for this article. I want to thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut as I am a man who likes to hear all sides and opinions. I’ve been blessed by all of the people that responded to my inquiries, yourself included. I myself was struggling with the idea that Mary was sinless. The responses that I received here helped open my eyes more to the topic and helped me to think differently. I also came across this article which helped even more. Here is the web address if you wish to read it as well.

Hail Mary, Conceived Without Sin | Catholic Answers Magazine

I also came across an explanation that put it as simple as this. It’s not that Mary didn’t need a savior. She did, it was Jesus. Through Him needing her to be totally clean and free from sin as she carried Him in her womb, God allowed her to be born free of sin and remain that way. Jesus was her savior, as His needs required her to already be cleansed and free of sin. It really speaks more to how powerful and spectacular God is and the salvation power of Jesus.

 

[tgGodsway]

Through Him needing her to be totally clean and free from sin as she carried Him in her womb, God allowed her to be born free of sin and remain that way.

Thank you for your kind words. I do appreciate it. But I have heard this view before and feel it does not hold water for a variety of reasons. Firstly, the idea that Mary needed to be clean and free from sin as she carried Him in her womb, is an idea foreign to the apostolic circle. This view was added many many years later by church fathers far removed from the N.T. Church. When you look for evidence in the writings of Paul, Peter, John and others to this quote, “special case” found in Mary, you cannot find it. Paul was clear when he said that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

Mary herself knew she was born “under the law,” as all Jews were. Her sin offering in Jerusalem was common ground to her as a sinner. Secondly, Oral tradition conflicts with inspired scripture on this. The earliest of Apostles and gospel writers, were all forced to avoid the elephant in the room if there was one. There wasn’t. God did not need Mary to be sinless to produce a sinless Son. This was the theological mistake that created this mess. So, yes, Mary was a sinner and remained one, before, during, and after the birth of her first-born Son.

 

[KnowledgeSeeker]

Thank you for your kind words. I do appreciate it. But I have heard this view before and feel it does not hold water for a variety of reasons. Firstly, the idea that Mary needed to be clean and free from sin as she carried Him in her womb, is an idea foreign to the apostolic circle. This view was added many many years later by church fathers far removed from the N.T. Church. When you look for evidence in the writings of Paul, Peter, John and others to this quote, “special case” found in Mary, you cannot find it. Paul was clear when he said that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

Mary herself knew she was born “under the law,” as all Jews were. Her sin offering in Jerusalem was common ground to her as a sinner. Secondly, Oral tradition conflicts with inspired scripture on this. The earliest of Apostles and gospel writers, were all forced to avoid the elephant in the room if there was one. There wasn’t. God did not need Mary to be sinless to produce a sinless Son. This was the theological mistake that created this mess. So, yes, Mary was a sinner and remained one, before, during, and after the birth of her first-born Son.

I myself am a Protestant and was raised that way. I have spent quite some time listening to a lot of sermons on this topic and that is what was causing me to struggle with it so much. I’m also aware of the scripture throughout the Bible that contradicts Mary’s sinlessness, for example Romans 3:23 and I John 1:8. I don’t know if you have looked at the article that I provided the link to, or if you even desire to read it, however it does have some great arguments and explanations to some of the verses in scripture that could be considered to prove that Mary was not sinless. It’s all in all a great read no matter what side of the “Mary fence” you may stand on.

 

[tgGodsway]

Thank you for the tip.
Blessings to you.

 

[ShowersofRoses]

I’m also a recent convert to Catholicism, and I would recommend Tim Staples book Behold Your Mother, along with Hahn’s Hail, Holy Queen, which was already recommended. Staples’ book was pivotal for me to be able to accept the doctrines of Mary and understand who she is. Keep digging and studying…God will reward this journey of yours!

Behold Your Mother: A Biblical and Historical Defense of the Marian Doctrines https://www.amazon.com/dp/1938983912/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_51pcBbBRDGZZW

 

[lilypadrees]

The Mary you speak of is not the Mary of the N.T. bible. She is an invention of people who were far removed from the apostolic circle. Oral tradition has invented and perpetuated this lie all of these years. It is sad. The Mary of the bible knew she was a sinner who sinned. So did everyone else know this about her, … as all men are sinners and need Christ.

You say that Mary knew she was a sinner who sinned. Can you please point to Scriptures where she admits to being a sinner? And can you please point out where these sins are in the Bible as well as name everyone who knew this about her?

 

[Francis]

@tgGodsway

The Mary of the bible knew she was a sinner who sinned. So did everyone else know this about her, … as all men are sinners and need Christ.

Isaiah 66; 7 before she was in labor she gave birth; Before her pain came upon her she delivered a son.8 who has heard of such a thing? Who has seen such things? Shall a land be born in one day? Shall a nation be delivered in one moment? Yet as soon as Zion was in labor she delivered her children.9 shall I open the womb and not deliver? Says the Lord; shall I, the one who delivers, shut the womb? Says your God.

Romans 3:23 since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; that’s why God create a new creation on earth

Jeremiah 31:22 How long will you waver, O faithless daughter (Eve)? For the Lord has created a new thing on the earth: a woman (Mother Mary) encompasses a man (Jesus).If Enoch and Elijah who were born sinners and led a life of penance, but yet was assumed into Heaven, How much more the Mother of God born without the original sin and lived a holy life, will she not be in the heaven praying for all of us Luke 1:37 For nothing will be impossible with God.”. Luke 1:45 And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her by the Lord.” Psalms 118:23 This is the Lord’s doing, it is marvelous in our eyes. Hope you find the Truth.

Galatians 4:26 But the other woman corresponds to the Jerusalem above; she is free and she is our mother ( MARY). (MOTHER MARY IS SINLESS and Mary retain "perpetual virginity), 27 For it is written, “Rejoice, you childless one, you who bear no children, burst into song and shout, you who endure no birth pangs; for the children of the desolate woman are more numerous than the children of the one who is married.”

 

[Francis]

I was raised Protestant and recently discovered the Catholic Church was the one created by the apostles

JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF started the Catholic Church THROUGH HIS TRUE CHURCH AND THE POPE who stands in the person of Christ. Matthew 16:16-18 7 And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven.18 And I say to thee: **That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.**Psalm 12:6 The promises of the Lord are promises that are pure, silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.

-I see so many videos of Catholics walking around and carrying these massive statues of Mary that are adorned with different clothing and golden fixtures. Almost as if they are worshiping them. I understand that Mary said yes to God, but so did Jesus when he chose to go through with his crucifixion. Was Jesus “yes” not so much greater than Mary’s? Why not have these large processions carrying a statue of Jesus instead of Mary?

Mother Mary was united with Jesus and fully co-operated in sufferings and the will of Father in 1 Corinthians 6:17 But anyone united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.

Revelation 12:1-2 A great portent appeared in heaven: a woman (Mother Mary) clothed with the sun (Glory Wisdom 7:26 For she (Mother Mary) is a reflection of eternal light=Jesus John 8:12 Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness but will have the light of life.”, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness.) when any one appreciates your mother and praise her will you not be happy for her? same way here.

 

[Francis]

@KnowledgeSeeker

-I have read articles of Catholics that flock to the streets to have a chance to touch the Black Nazarene statue as they believe it somehow has the power to work miracles. People fighting one another just to get close to the statue as if it were a real person. I know that this has been referred to as “devotion” by Pope Innocent X. How is this not considered idol worship since they are putting their faith and belief in the statue itself? Why is it so important to touch this statue when it is only a material thing that was created by the hands of men here on earth?

Acts 19:11 God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, 12 so that when the handkerchiefs or aprons that had touched his skin were brought to the sick, their diseases left them, and the evil spirits came out of them. that’s why it imp to touch

2 King 13:20-21 20 So Elisha died, and they buried him. Now bands of Moabites used to invade the land in the spring of the year. 21 As a man was being buried, a marauding band was seen and the man was thrown into the grave of Elisha; as soon as the man touched the bones of Elisha, he came to life and stood on his feet.

Acts 5:15-16 15 so that they even carried out the sick into the streets, and laid them on cots and mats, in order that Peter’s shadow might fall on some of them as he came by. 16 A great number of people would also gather from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing the sick and those tormented by unclean spirits, and they were all cured.

Statues, images and relics
Ex 25:18-22, 26:1,31; Num 21:8-9 … God commands images made.
1 Kings 6:23-29, 35, 7:29 … Solomon’s temple: statues and images.
Acts 19:11,12 … Paul’s handkerchiefs and aprons.
2 Kg 13:20-21 … Elisha’s bones.
Acts 5:15-16 … Peter’s shadow.
Mt 9:20-22 … Jesus’ garment cures woman.

 

[stpurl]

You keep saying ‘an idea foreign to the apostolic circle’ and that it was ‘added in’. Could you please show the authentic, ongoing, teaching from apostolic times that is embedded in official Church documents that state that Mary is not the ‘new Eve’/Ark, that show that throughout Christendom from the apostles on this was NOT ever taught or believed, and then, can you show us the ‘view’ of 'the current teaching that you attribute to the Church ‘adding’, and the exact documents where it was added? Since you claim this is ‘the truth’, it should be easy to show that this was first NEVER Catholic teaching and then that it was ‘imposed/made up’ and by exactly who and exactly when ‘added.’

Thank you.

 

[Francis]

However, would that not also mean that God chose her because he knew she would say yes? If that were the case would that not downplay the veneration and adoration that she is given for saying yes to God since she would have simply been hand selected by God himself because he knew she would say yes? Does it not seem even more plausible and even a greater feat that she instead was not given the gift of freedom from original sin, but that she lived such a perfect life to God’s standards that she found favor with God and this is why she was approached by Him to give birth to His son? Some may argue that without her being free from original sin then Jesus wouldn’t have been free from it as well since he was born from her womb. However, why is it not considered just as easy for God to keep Jesus free from original sin through His conception just as it was thought that God did for Mary? If Mary needed to be free from original sin to keep Jesus from it since he was to be born of her womb, would that not also mean that Mary’s mother would have needed to be free of original sin as well to keep Mary from it and then Mary’s Grandmother to keep Mary’s mother from it and so on and so forth? Would it not make more sense that Jesus conception was indeed the immaculate one and not Mary’s?

well it was God plan for Mary to keep her sinless vessel to contain Jesus the holy of holy,its the will of God his plan Jeremiah 29:11 For surely I know the plans I have for you, says the Lord, plans for your welfare and not for harm, to give you a future with hope.Genesis 3:15 I will put enmities between thee (satan) and the woman (Mother Mary), and thy (satan’s children =wicked people, anti-Christ ) seed and her (Mary) seed (Jesus and Christians): she shall crush thy (satan) head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

Revelation 21:27 But nothing unclean will enter Heaven, nor anyone who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life. But when Jesus is born she had to be without Original Sin a pure vessel to contain Jesus in the womb… Lord Jesus (GOD) had to be born in a women who is sinless.

Isaiah 29:16 You turn things upside down! Shall the potter be regarded as the clay? Shall the thing made say of its maker, “He did not make me”; or the thing formed say of the one who formed it, “He has no understanding”?

Jeremiah 18:6 Can I not do with you, O house of Israel, just as this potter has done? says the Lord. Just like the clay in the potter’s hand, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel.

Isaiah 64:8 Yet, O Lord, you are our Father; we are the clay, and you are our potter; we are all the work of your hand.

Are you going to contend with God’s or keep questioning and doubting his master plans.i wouldn’t dare to.but rather accept it

Luke 1:37For nothing will be impossible with God.”

 

[tgGodsway]

This is a great challenge, however, it is impossible. Here’s why. As I’m sure you know the best records we have to official and historical church documents is the events of the first century church recorded by the gospel writers and Apostles.

They were the foundational eye-witnesses to the events in question. There was no one closer to these events and issues than they were. They recorded by the power of the Holy Spirit, their doctrine and practice very accurately and without apology.

So, if we go looking for a sinless Mary in their writings and doctrine, can we find it? No… can we find teaching on it? No … Can we find even a hint of it? No, not at all.

If there was even a hint that the Apostles and gospel writers knew about and believed Mary was sinless, or through a special miracle became sinless, this would show up somewhere in their writings. The opposite evidence from Mary herself makes the case.

Official Church doctrine did not begin with the quote, “fathers of the Church” in Rome centuries later, it began with the divinely inspired eye-witnesses to the events in question beginning in Jerusalem. James, John, Peter, Paul and others formulated and wrote down their doctrine, not to mention Jesus Himself. These Church fathers made no claim to a sinless Mary, not even a hint. They made no attempt for us to know this so- called “truth.” Only the opposite is true. Jesus himself was and is the only man to walk this earth, sinless. see Heb. 4:15. The gospel writer, John, a foundational piece of the puzzle, said… “If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.” 1st. John 1:10.