To live by faith

[Craig_Kennedy]

Please do .

And by the way, you can come to the Catholic Mass any time you like if you’re willing to skip the Eucharist. What I did while Protestant, waiting for the RCIA process to be completed, is go to Mass and when it came time for Eucharist, I prayed that the Lord would give me His Eucharist spiritually.

This may well provide a spiritual blessing. It isn’t the same as receiving the Eucharist itself, but it’s still great . And the Masses are wonderful. You’re welcome to join us at them any time.

Certainly you’re a Christian.

There will be Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews and Atheists who go to Heaven- and to Hell. I’m certainly in no position to include or exclude anyone from the company of God’s saints.

Even if you don’t become a Catholic on Earth, you will nevertheless be perfectly one with God’s Church in Heaven. People are purged of all kinds of faults in Purgatory, and I believe division from doctrines of God to be amongst them.

I also believe that one day doctrinal error amongst Christians all over the world will melt away due to the power of God’s Spirit. I believe that one day we will all be reunited and one single Church again here on Earth, as we were a thousand years ago, prior to the Orthodox Schism. I think this will take place prior to the establishment of the New Heaven and New Earth, and I look forward to and pray for coming of that day .

You read that? I’m surprised you remembered or were able to dig that up. That was at least four months ago! I was confirmed Catholic on Pentecost.

You must be doing a lot of reading, here. I’m impressed.

I’d be glad to relate this . . . it just was so involved, complicated and radically life-changing that it’s somewhat hard to know what elements of it to focus on and how to make myself brief enough. In a different thread, I wrote two full length posts about just the experiential Marian side of it . Posts 13-15 of this thread (15 is just a handful of final thoughts), in case you’re interested.

That’s a very incomplete testimony I linked there, though, because it only focuses on the Marian part and none of the rest, of which there’s a large amount. I can’t make it complete without taking a LONG time. I’ll just try to be concise and give some important elements that I didn’t mention in the other thread.

Hi Lief,

Thank you for this excellent post which I have found spiritually uplifting.

I am pleased and grateful that you do regard me as a Christian because - and I say it with the utmost reverence - God truly knows that I am one of his.

Obviously, as I think you already well know, I regard you as a true Christian; as I also regard all genuine Catholics who practise their faith as true Christians.

You are so right; God’s Church will be one in heaven!

Thank you, too, for making me feel welcome to attend a Catholic MASS at any time. I feel I can do this without any hypocrisy. It’s just that I cannot partake of the Eucharist!

I have read your journey in faith in the thread you pointed me to, and I must say your Marian experience seems genuine and authentic. I need to reflect more on this.

I am a genuine Christian who loves the Lord and by God’s grace I practise the faith. I am happily married with three children and God has blessed me with a clean and pure heart. Praise be to God for his gifts!

Your experience of the virgin Mary beckons me to find out more about her. I have always had a high love for the Virgin Mary, the Mother of our Lord but have never delved further.

I want to discuss this further with you. How do you respond to the assertion made by some, that Catholics worship the Virgin Mary?

I am encouraged by your devout spirituality and your resolve to live a life of FAITH and GOOD WORKS in God’s sight.

God bless you, Craig

 

[Craig_Kennedy]

It’s very unlikely that someone will be unable to attend a Mass for their HDoO. I can almost guarantee that any day in which a HDoO (Including Sundays) happens, there are many Masses to accomodate varied schedules. For example, every Sunday my Parish offers a 7:00AM, 8:30AM, 10:00AM, 11:30AM, 1:00PM (Spanish), and 7:00PM Mass. Holy Days of Obligation usually have an 8:30AM, 12:15AM, and 6:00PM Mass.

Now you mention Vigil Masses. A Vigil Mass is a Mass said the day before an Obligation day, and does count for the Obligation. For example, every Saturday my parish also has a 4:00Pm and 5:30PM Mass that, if attended, satisfies your Sunday Obligation. Every HDoO also has one or two Vigil Masses.

So you see, The Church makes every accomodation. If you honestly cannot make it to any of these Masses because of work that you must do, then your obligation is dispensed.

Out of curiosity, why do you spell Mass with all caps? Also, to expand on Lief’s post, The Church considers you a Christian if you have been baptized with water in the Trinitarian Formula, barring Mormon baptisms. It’s rare that a Protestant is not a Christian, by strict definition of the Church (I didn’t want you to think you’re in the same category as Hindu’s and Muslims to a Catholic!)

Thank you Rawb,

Again, you have answered my questions thoroughly.

You asked me:

“Out of curiosity, why do you spell Mass with all caps?”

Actually, I’ll be perfectly honest with you; I thought by doing this I was showing respect to the liturgical service of the Word and Eucharist. I now realise that this is not necessary.

Thank you, too, that you - along with Lief - do see me as a genuine Christian. That means a lot to me. Yes, I have been baptized with water in the Trinitarian formula in a Protestant Church.

I am grateful that I am welcome to attend Mass in any Catholic parish, anywhere in the world; it’s just that I cannot partake of the Eucharist!

May God bless you, Craig

 

[Rawb]

I am grateful that I am welcome to attend Mass in any Catholic parish, anywhere in the world; it’s just that I cannot partake of the Eucharist!

Completely welcome! There is a strange stigma about going into Catholic churches though, isn’t there? When I first converted I remember a friend asking me if just anybody was allowed to walk into a Catholic Church, and for a second, I wondered about it!

You can say the responses, you can bless yourself with the Holy Water as you enter and exit, you can sing the hymns, everything, just no, you cannot recieve Communion.

Do you know about Missals? Catholics have a book called a “Missal” that is usually in the pews. It will tell you the readings for the day, as well as have the entire Mass written out for you to follow, including the responses of the laity so you’ll be able to know what you’re supposed to say, when!

 

[Craig_Kennedy]

Completely welcome! There is a strange stigma about going into Catholic churches though, isn’t there? When I first converted I remember a friend asking me if just anybody was allowed to walk into a Catholic Church, and for a second, I wondered about it!

You can say the responses, you can bless yourself with the Holy Water as you enter and exit, you can sing the hymns, everything, just no, you cannot recieve Communion.

Do you know about Missals? Catholics have a book called a “Missal” that is usually in the pews. It will tell you the readings for the day, as well as have the entire Mass written out for you to follow, including the responses of the laity so you’ll be able to know what you’re supposed to say, when!

Hi Rawb,

You are very insightful and sensitive when you write:

"There is a strange stigma about going into Catholic churches though, isn’t there? When I first converted I remember a friend asking me if just anybody was allowed to walk into a Catholic Church, and for a second, I wondered about it! "

That’s exactly how I feel sometimes when I go into Catholic Churches. I love the heightened sense of spirituality that ensues but sometimes I feel that I do not know all the “correct” things to do.

For example, are there any “correct” things that I am supposed to do? Do I have to bow before the altar, genuflect, kneel when praying and so on.

I have full confidence you will set me right on all this.

God bless you, Craig

 

[Craig_Kennedy]

Do you know about Missals? Catholics have a book called a “Missal” that is usually in the pews. It will tell you the readings for the day, as well as have the entire Mass written out for you to follow, including the responses of the laity so you’ll be able to know what you’re supposed to say, when!

Hi Rawb,

From what you have said, I take that the Missal is a Catholic book of the divine liturgy, rather like the Anglican Prayer Book is a book of the divine liturgy designed for the Anglican Communion.
Is this a valid observation?

If this is so, is there ONE common liturgy for the Catholic Church worldwide, or are there different liturgies in different parts of the world?

Where would one buy a “Missal” and what particular version is recommended?

God bless, Craig

 

[Lief_Erikson]

I’m afraid describing my conversion is going to take a while . I can’t be concise. I’ve written it up for you and it’s very long, but I still haven’t described it at all fully. I’m going to leave the rest out, though.

My conversion was a gradual process that transpired in the last three years. It started in my 21st year.

I described in the other thread how it started and ended, starting a long period of spiritual hunger and emptiness in my life (which, I now believe, was caused by the prayers of the Virgin, drawing me toward the Church). I prayed throughout that period for deeper intimacy with the Lord, and toward the end of that period, for greater knowledge about His Kingdom. I felt that that was what I was lacking.

The first spark that set me off on a journey that would end up in Catholicism was when one day as I was lying on my bed reading my Bible, reading from Revelation 20 where it was talking about the Millennium, I realized suddenly that the Thousand Years of Christ reigning over the Earth corresponded to the amount of time Christianity dominated virtually the entire known world during the Medieval Ages. That was 1000 years of Christianity. Reading the history books, we can see easily that after that period, people turned their gaze from salvation to the things of this world. That was also when Christianity was shattered into thousands of pieces (the Reformation), and the Enlightenment created waves of unbelief, truly a Great Deception to me as a Protestant. I wasn’t at that time ready to accept the logical implications about the Reformation, though my Dad noticed them immediately and jumped on them with criticism, but the way this framed history and put it into a spiritual perspective impressed me.

I had previously been taught that the saints would rule physically on the Earth, but I realized at that time that the verses actually said the souls of the saints would reign over the Earth, and the kinds of stories from that era of saints in Heaven through their prayers directly dominating events on Earth appeared very directly, literally and logically connected to this.

Then, I started realizing other prophecies in the Bible went the same way, most important amongst them Daniel 7. He predicted the time the Millennium would occur. He predicted four beasts, the last of which, Christian scholars across the board agree, is the Roman Empire. Then, he said that after the fall of this Fourth Beast, the kingdoms of men would be handed over to God and the saints to rule (Daniel 7:21-22, and 24-27). So that gives the timeline for when the Millennium would occur, and that is when, historically, a Millennium of Christianity dominating all the known world did occur (and the known world is all the Scripture is talking about- see Daniel 7:23).

The Millennium was not described in Scripture as a time of perfect peace where sin is abolished completely (though, interestingly, in the Early and Middle Medieval Ages there were no major rebellions and throughout the Medieval Ages there were no genocides, which is radically different from the modern era), but instead it is written that when Christ mounted His throne, he would rule the world with an iron scepter (Revelation 12:5). However, it was an era of Christianity, and that is what Christ’s reign means. His kingdom is a spiritual kingdom, and he reigned in the hearts of men all over the known world, His the only acknowledged way, whether people chose to follow it faithfully or not.

That was the beginning, for me. But just a beginning- it took a lot more months and more development of thought to get to Catholicism. I also found it a neat confirmation from God (though one could argue it’s coincidence) that I received this message about the Medieval Ages that started leading me toward Catholicism on this date: 3/3/07. Three and seven are very Christian numbers signifying God and his perfection, and receiving it on the seventh year of the new millennium, when the message was about Christ’s millennium, was neat. Also that happened to be my 21st year, my coming of age, and the Lord had prophesied to me on the first day I met Him, as a Protestant, that I would be a repairer of the breach, a restorer of the old foundations (which I think refers to the Medieval Ages and the breach of the Enlightenment- God means me to be an ideological builder, just helping people to realize how that part of our history works, spiritually).

This is not proof of anything on its own, but it was neat to me and a natural part of my relationship with God. It hearkened back to experiences I’d been having with God, dreams or other messages, for years before, and explained a lot.

After this experience though, I did not immediately think “Catholicism has got to be right.” It took quite a long time for me to get there.

Here are some of the factors that made a big difference in leading me toward Catholicism:

 

[Lief_Erikson]

1# Discovering that the Early Church was Catholic made a big difference. Perusing the writings of the Early Church Fathers and finding references to Purgatory, the intercession of saints in Heaven, the Marian dogmas, the authority of the Church, Apostolic Succession, that they believed the Eucharist to be the real flesh and blood of Jesus, the authority of the Pope over all the Church, the transforming power of Baptism (they did not see it as only symbolic and an outward sign, as I had believed), etc. Also, it was amazing to me to learn that many of these men were the disciples of the original apostles! So a number of Protestant sources actually try to argue that the Church went wrong from the very first generation! Or the second. But that viewpoint, to me, was clearly ludicrous, and whenever I’ve examined attempts to show that the Early Church Fathers were Protestant in their beliefs, I’ve found a lot of seriously tangled reasoning.

Usually, their efforts will attempt to set one Church Father’s statement up in opposition to another. For instance, Origen says, I think, that the Confession of Peter is the Rock on which the Church is built, and we all can make that confession and be the rock on which the Church is built. So Protestants have tried to use that to undermine the Catholic statements about Petrine authority. On the other hand, Origen has also called Peter specifically the Rock in terms that very clearly showed massive respect and reverence for him being the leader of the Church. So Catholics will usually use that reference. The thing to understand is that the Church Fathers of that time believed in the Scripture having multiple meanings, just as many of us believe now. They thought on one level, it meant Peter’s Confession, which we all participate in, is the Rock. On another level, Peter’s faith is the Rock. On another level, Peter himself is the Rock, and his successors too.

So these supposed contradictions weren’t seen as contradictions by Church Fathers who saw vast layers of meanings in these writings. That is why we find over and over again multiple interpretations amongst them, but not any serious clashes between them over these interpretations. Because they all were orthodox and all believed to be right. If some were believed to be wrong, there would have been a serious contention- and there were several of these in the Early Church. Many groups, and you can see this even in the New Testament Epistles and Acts, were considered heretics and banned from the Church swiftly for unorthodox beliefs. Apostolic Succession, the passing on of the beliefs of the original apostles to their chosen successors (bishops) was crucial to the preservation of Church teaching, of which Scripture was one part.

Finding out that the Early Church was Catholic was very important to me. The original apostles would have heard more from Jesus and known His beliefs and interpretations of His own teachings better than anyone else, so it appeared logical to me that the people who knew those apostles best, were their disciples and their chosen successors, would be the most reliable interpreters of what Jesus meant. For they had additional knowledge of Jesus’ teachings to what is contained in the Scripture. And they held firmly and died for Catholic doctrines.

2# I realized that my old Protestant way of coming to beliefs about doctrine was subjective and thus invalid. In the past, I relied solely on this method of coming to conclusions about doctrine:

I listened and prayed for the Holy Spirit’s guidance, examined Scripture carefully (taking it literally, as I realized that failure to do that can lead to relativism), and I used reason to come to conclusions. Here’s the problem with this system:

a) Reason is subjective. Others might reason differently.

b) The Scripture, when interpreted by our own minds, is also subjective. People come to different conclusions about it- hence, Protestantism contains tens of thousands of denominations. My reading of Scripture, even if me and my brethren all take it literally (Though on what authority can we require that it be taken literally? That too comes from Catholic Tradition), can be very different from that of another Protestant. So Sola Scriptura leads to immense shattering of doctrinal belief, even though everyone’s reading and trying to correctly understand the same Bible.

c) Since my reason and my reading of the Scripture are very fallible, surely I can rely on the Holy Spirit to guide me to the correct interpretations of Scripture?

Here’s the problem. We know, in Protestantism, that whatever spirit we are hearing must correspond in its teachings to God’s Word. If it teaches us things that contradict God’s Word, it is teaching a lie. The spirit is always supposed to be compared against God’s Word (Galatians 1:8).

BUT, this test is impossible to practice if our own personal readings and interpretations of Scripture are subjective anyway, so we, as Protestants, have to rely on the Spirit completely. We can’t test the spirit against the Scripture when we can’t be sure of what the Scripture says without the spirit!

That’s the log jam. The Protestant testing methods of how to know what’s true are circular. With one subjective authority tested against another subjective one over and over again, it’s no wonder that Protestants come to radically different conclusions about all kinds of matters, and hence the existence of tens of thousands of denominations- not to mention the vast non-denominational movement, which is even more doctrinally diverse.

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Subjectivism creates an inability to clearly distinguish between right and wrong. Thus it has no place in the “pillar and foundation of truth.”

This is why we need an infallible teaching authority that interprets the Bible. Jesus said that His Church was the foundation of truth. It is not subjected to subjective methods of determining true doctrine- in it, the infallible has been unleashed, and that is why it has had one teaching and one dogma for 2,000 years, from its very beginning with the first apostles and their successors.

Glory be to God, the Most High.

3# Researching the origins of our Bibles. This was crucial to me in several ways. I learned that the Early Church Fathers had very conflicting views about what books of the Bible should be considered Scripture. The view of no Early Church Father’s list of scriptures exactly corresponds to the current Protestant Bible, but neither did they correspond to the present Catholic canon.

The Catholic Church, in the early 5th century and late 4th century, determined what the Scripture canon would be in three major councils. These were the councils of Hippo, Rome and Carthage.

The Jews had their own council, in which they rejected the Septuagint translation that was used by most of the Jews in Israel and outside of Israel, and was used by Jesus and his disciples most often, and by all the Early Christians. The Jewish council was called Jamnia. They decided to make authoritative in 90 AD the Massoretic texts written in Hebrew, rather than the Septuagint, the Greek translation.

Before 90 AD, the Old Testament canon had not been firmly established for the Jews. The Holy Spirit, however, had undoubtedly already left these Jews, who in the Council of Jamnia pronounced a curse on all Christians and had recently supported two false Messiahs.

The Christians, including the surviving apostles and their earliest successors, did not accept Jamnia’s decision about which books belong to the Sacred Scripture. Consequently, Christians continued to debate about what the canon should be amongst themselves for centuries, until the councils of Carthage, Hippo and Rome settled the matter. It is from these councils that we get our current New Testament. They also pronounced as canonical the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, a version that includes seven more Biblical books than the Protestant Old Testament does.

Here is why:

Martin Luther, a scripture scholar, dropped all seven Deuterocanonical books out of the Bible. He based this decision on the Council of Jamnia, on the fact that these books were disputed amongst the Early Fathers, and on the fact that they included explicit reference to Catholic beliefs he rejected.

The problems involved in his citing the Council of Jamnia are pretty obvious. None of the Early Christians accepted the Council of Jamnia, and why would they, considering?

The problems involved in his citation of the Early Fathers are also pretty severe, for many of the canonical New Testament books were also heavily disputed.

There are problems with each of the reasons he mentioned for dropping the books, but here were the two parts of this that most severely damaged my faith in Protestantism:

a) Logically, if the councils Hippo, Carthage and Rome were WRONG to include these seven books in the Bible, then they cannot be trusted to have been right about any of the Bible!

I had always trusted, as a Protestant, that the Early Church must have been guided by the Spirit when it put together the canon. That was the only way God’s Word could be reliable. We could simply trust in faith that the Spirit guided those proceedings, and therefore believe we had God’s Word.

However, if Luther was right about these councils having been wrong about these seven books, we’re in serious trouble. For if they were wrong about these seven books, what else might they have been wrong about? The entire canon falls into question if any part of it falls into question.

b) Luther did not only remove those seven books. He put them in an Appendix at the back of the Bible, and along with them he put James, Jude, Hebrews and Revelation!!! He removed four New Testament books from the canon!

Later generations of Protestant reformers would put them back in.

I was shocked to discover that not only must the Bible canon be entirely unreliable if the Protestant reformers were right in removing the Deuterocanonicals, but the most pivotal leader of the Reformation had removed books from the New Testament as well, which I had always treasured.

This shocked me. In view of Revelation 22:19, it particularly shook the underpinnings out from under Protestantism for me. That verse says, “If anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away that person’s share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.”

Luther didn’t only take away some of the words from that particular book of prophecy- he removed the whole book. Along with many others from God’s inerrant Word. Therefore, if the word of Revelation is true, Luther had lost his share in the tree of life, unless he repented at the moment of his death. This was the man usually recognized as the greatest leader of the Reformation .

I learned of many other horrors of the Reformation and discovered deep darkness in its greatest leaders. I could go on for a long time about them. They were truly scary, in many ways evil men. They were capable of some beautiful things, such as hymns, but much of what they did was black. I just hadn’t known enough about them before to realize. I was shocked. It made a difference.

 

[Lief_Erikson]

4# Glad to get to a lighter note . The fact that I felt sure my Lord was experientially, interactively leading me this way.

I love God, and I knew Him as a Protestant long before He led me into Catholicism. He gave me many signs and special experiences to confirm to me that He was guiding me and leading me into the fullness and glory of His Kingdom.

I also came to see so, so much beauty when I looked into Catholic teachings that I had never encountered before. There was just such an overflowing of grace in it. I was dazzled by the beauty of this pinnacle of spiritual splendor. All the doctrines and dogmas made so much logical sense!!! And not only that, but they also offered more power, more glory (such as the Communion of Saints teachings, which are vastly more detailed and glorious in their description of Heaven and its relationship to Christians on Earth than anything I’d ever heard of in Protestantism), more ways of ascending higher. I loved what I encountered.

I love that God showed me what He did about His Medieval kingdom, and His Catholic Kingdom, the Church.

The special signs God gave me as I was moving toward Catholicism were marvelous and wonderfully confirmed what I was going through. I could describe quite a few . . . But I’ve overwhelmed you already.

 

[Rawb]

For example, are there any “correct” things that I am supposed to do? Do I have to bow before the altar, genuflect, kneel when praying and so on.

…it poses an interesting question.

We genuflect (get down on one knee ((the right knee in this case))) to the Tabernacle when we enter a pew, or, if the Tabernacle is reserved in a side chapel, we bow to the altar.

But, and this is why your question is interesting, we genuflect to show respect to Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament (another name for Communion) when He is reserved in the Tabernacle.

If you do not believe in the Real Presence, then it may go against your conscience to genuflect. At the same time, it may offend others if you do not show proper respect to Our Lord in His house…

You know, my bet would be to stay honest to your conscience. If you believe in the Real Presence, then genuflect. If it doesn’t bother you but you don’t believe in the Real Presence, genuflect. If it does bother you, feel free to just take your seat.

I’ll give you a breakdown of gestures in the Church. You’ll look like a cradle Catholic!

As you enter there will be a small bowl near the door of water (A Holy Water font). Dip your right hand fingers in the bowl and make the sign of the cross over your body (Forehead, stomach, left shoulder, righ shoulder. Some people pray/whisper “Lord, purify me of my sins and prepare me for Your Holy Sacrifice” or something similar).

Just before you enter a pew genuflect to the Tabernacle (it will have a red or white candle near it. Usually behind the altar or to one side).

If you cross in front of the altar, bow towards it, out of respect for what takes place upon it and to the relics probably encased within.

When you enter the pew there will be a long, padded bar on hinges attatched to the pew in front of you (A ‘kneeler’). Many people will pull this down, kneel, and pray before Mass.

Look for a book. You may find a hymnal as well as a Missal. In the front of the Missal will be the “Order of the Mass” (as well, usually, as a brief description of who can and cannot recieve Communion and why). In the back of the Missal will be readings, topped by a heading such as “August 15th, 27th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Assumption of the Blessed Virgin”. Note that I do not know if August 15th is, in fact, the 27th Sunday in Ordinary Time . Just look for that day’s date. It will have the Bible readings for the day, as well as the Psalm.

Then enjoy the Mass. The Missal will guide you through it. Genuflect as you leave the pew, bless yourself as you leave the Church, and that’s it.

You may enjoy reading “The Lamb’s Supper” by Scott Hahn. It tells you, using a LOT of Scripture, what is going on in Heaven and Spiritually during the Mass, as well as showing how the Book of Revelations may have been an early Liturgy guide,

 

[Rawb]

From what you have said, I take that the Missal is a Catholic book of the divine liturgy, rather like the Anglican Prayer Book is a book of the divine liturgy designed for the Anglican Communion.
Is this a valid observation?

If this is so, is there ONE common liturgy for the Catholic Church worldwide, or are there different liturgies in different parts of the world?

Where would one buy a “Missal” and what particular version is recommended?

I think your comparison to the Anglican Prayer book is right, but I’ve never seen an APB. , so I don’t know. I think they’re similar though, you describe a Missal very well.

There is the Liturgy of the Roman Rite, which is part of the Catholic Church. Chances are any Mass you go to will be Roman Rite. There are 23 Rites of the Catholic Church, the Roman being the largest and most common in the Western World.

Anyway, there are actually two forms of the Roman Mass; The Ordinary Form, and the Extraordinary Form. You will probably go to an Ordinary Form as they’re more common. The Ordinary Form was first written in Latin, and then translated into all the different vernaculars of the world, so it is commonly said in English in the USA (though you can often find other languages, particularly Spanish, as well). It was first written in the 1960’s by the Second Vatican Council, or “Vatican II”.

The Extraordinary Form was first compiled at the Council of Trent, shortly after the Reformation. It is said in Latin, everywhere. If you see advertised a “Traditional Latin Mass” or a “Latin Mass” or a “Tridentine Rite Mass” that is the Extraordinary Form. They’re very beautiful and very reverent. I favor them, as does almost everybody on the “Traditional Catholicism” forum here at Catholic Answers!

Either way the Missal will probably be provided. They are usually in the pews already, or handed out at the door.

If you really wanted to buy one, well all I know is the St. Joseph’s Sunday Missal is the common Missal for the Extraordinary Form, and you can find them often in secondhand stores. It used to be tradition for a Catholic being Confirmed to be given a St. Joseph’s Missal, but as that generation is dying off and the EF was very rare for a while, their offspring often gave them away. I have several that I got for only a few dollars.

The OF Missal? I don’t know. I would actually hold off because apparently there is a new English Translation that will be promulgated about 2009, so I’d wait for that.

Lief: very interesting! I enjoyed it.

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Hi Lief,

Thank you for this excellent post which I have found spiritually uplifting.

I hope you don’t find the posts that followed too depressing .

I need to make clear that I do find a lot of beauty within Protestantism. It was Protestants that led me to the Lord in the first place. Protestant works of charity and devotion to Jesus Christ, and reverence for the Scripture are frankly glorious. I have seen wonderful things amongst Protestants, and consider many conservative Protestants to be the natural allies of Catholicism, because we share a great deal of common ground. All the things I loved most about Protestantism were fulfilled and completed in Catholicism- Catholicism is to me the completeness of God’s beauty that already is manifest and glowing from so many non-Catholic Christians.

I know from personal experience that many Protestants truly know the Lord and seek His face. I have sensed God’s Spirit filling their actions with holiness.

I do believe that the original leaders of the Reformation tended to be wicked and used by evil forces. The historical evidence makes this pretty much irrefutable, in my view.

However, generations of Protestants who have grown up after them did not commit all the sins of their forefathers. They were not the ones who stripped books from the Bible, tortured and slaughtered Catholics, all fellow Protestants of other denominations who were in range, and Jews, and while fully knowing the sin of shattering the Church into pieces and stripping Sacred Tradition and the sacraments from their places, did it anyway.

The modern generations have grown up not in Catholicism but in Protestantism. They didn’t reject the example of the Early Church’s nonviolence and instead slaughter God’s children, like the Reformers did. They instead have devoted themselves to Christ in the way they have grown up with Him. Particularly in the Great Awakening of the early 20th century, but also before that, God’s grace filled Protestantism and blessed Catholicism greatly through Protestantism! Protestants started the Charismatic movement of intimacy with God that still blesses Catholics and has a strong following amongst us.

God blesses many Protestants for their faith and transforms their souls so that they radiate His glory.

Praise be to God for the glorious souls of his Christian disciples in the Protestant communities! I love the great good God pours out through you and your people .

I am pleased and grateful that you do regard me as a Christian because - and I say it with the utmost reverence - God truly knows that I am one of his.

Obviously, as I think you already well know, I regard you as a true Christian; as I also regard all genuine Catholics who practise their faith as true Christians.

You are so right; God’s Church will be one in heaven!

Thank you, too, for making me feel welcome to attend a Catholic MASS at any time. I feel I can do this without any hypocrisy. It’s just that I cannot partake of the Eucharist!

I have read your journey in faith in the thread you pointed me to, and I must say your Marian experience seems genuine and authentic. I need to reflect more on this.

I am a genuine Christian who loves the Lord and by God’s grace I practise the faith. I am happily married with three children and God has blessed me with a clean and pure heart. Praise be to God for his gifts!

God bless you, your wife and children .

Your experience of the virgin Mary beckons me to find out more about her. I have always had a high love for the Virgin Mary, the Mother of our Lord but have never delved further.

I want to discuss this further with you. How do you respond to the assertion made by some, that Catholics worship the Virgin Mary?

It’s just flat out not true.

Some of the reasons people think that are:

1. We pray to her.
2. We hail her as Queen of Heaven and Mother of God.
3. We believe she was born without sin.
4. We sometimes bow or express reverence toward statues of her.

Explanations for this include:

1. We pray to her, but prayer to saints is present in multiple books of the Bible, including the Gospels, when Jesus talked to saints who were dead (and He is our example for Christian life), two chapters of Revelation, two chapters of Psalms, and one chapter from 2 Maccabbees. There’s also one incident in the Epistles that might include Paul praying to a dead saint, if I recall correctly.
2. Jesus is a King, so it’s only natural that His mother should be a Queen. This also is typologically predicted in the role of the queen mother of Israel, a position portrayed as having great power in the Old Testament. Seeing her as a queen is different from seeing her as a goddess. As for her being called the Mother of God, the first person to say this was Elizabeth, who called her, “Mother of the Lord.”
3. She was born without sin, but so were Adam, Eve and Jesus. Protestants believe Adam and Eve were born without sin, and yet they don’t believe this makes them gods. Why, then, should we believe Mary’s sinlessness elevates her to a goddess? It doesn’t. It was a miracle from God that was predicted typologically in the Old Testament.
4. Everyone puts their hands on their hearts and sings the national anthem when the flag is raised. Does that mean they’re worshipping the flag? No. We do this to show respect for what it represents, the country. That’s what Catholics do for Mary, showing respect and reverence toward images representing her because they represent the Queen.

 

[Craig_Kennedy]

4# Glad to get to a lighter note . The fact that I felt sure my Lord was experientially, interactively leading me this way.

I love God, and I knew Him as a Protestant long before He led me into Catholicism. He gave me many signs and special experiences to confirm to me that He was guiding me and leading me into the fullness and glory of His Kingdom.

I also came to see so, so much beauty when I looked into Catholic teachings that I had never encountered before. There was just such an overflowing of grace in it. I was dazzled by the beauty of this pinnacle of spiritual splendor. All the doctrines and dogmas made so much logical sense!!! And not only that, but they also offered more power, more glory (such as the Communion of Saints teachings, which are vastly more detailed and glorious in their description of Heaven and its relationship to Christians on Earth than anything I’d ever heard of in Protestantism), more ways of ascending higher. I loved what I encountered.

I love that God showed me what He did about His Medieval kingdom, and His Catholic Kingdom, the Church.

The special signs God gave me as I was moving toward Catholicism were marvelous and wonderfully confirmed what I was going through. I could describe quite a few . . . But I’ve overwhelmed you already.

Hi Lief,

I am deeply moved by your testimony and I appreciate deeply the time, great effort and spiritual muscle that you have exerted in sharing this.

You have not overwhelmed me; however, your testimony is so rich, jam packed with theological depth and nuances that I will have to read your wonderful posts quite a few times to do full justice to them. In this regard, then, I will respond at greater length to what you have written later. I will need to reflect and mull over what you so compellingly have written.

What I can say now is this; I do not doubt the inspiring strength and incredible authenticity of your experience for a moment.

You have blessed me richly with what you have shared.However, I do need to go away now and put my thinking cap on!

God’s peace and great love be upon you, Craig

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Craig, what I meant by “I’ve overwhelmed you,” is “I’ve already overwhelmed you with billions of tons of reading in that post series, so I’ll stop pushing you toward the brain-dead” .

Hi Lief,

I am deeply moved by your testimony and I appreciate deeply the time, great effort and spiritual muscle that you have exerted in sharing this.

You have not overwhelmed me; however, your testimony is so rich, jam packed with theological depth and nuances that I will have to read your wonderful posts quite a few times to do full justice to them. In this regard, then, I will respond at greater length to what you have written later. I will need to reflect and mull over what you so compellingly have written.

What I can say now is this; I do not doubt the inspiring strength and incredible authenticity of your experience for a moment.

You have blessed me richly with what you have shared.However, I do need to go away now and put my thinking cap on!

God’s peace and great love be upon you, Craig

Thank-you. I’ll look forward to your response. Don’t feel rushed, though. I’m glad you’re going to think about it.

Rawb:

Lief: very interesting! I enjoyed it.

Thanks . Been quite a journey. I’m just so glad to be with you and so many others at home in the Catholic Church, now .

 

[Craig_Kennedy]

I hope you don’t find the posts that followed too depressing .

I need to make clear that I do find a lot of beauty within Protestantism. It was Protestants that led me to the Lord in the first place. Protestant works of charity and devotion to Jesus Christ, and reverence for the Scripture are frankly glorious. I have seen wonderful things amongst Protestants, and consider many conservative Protestants to be the natural allies of Catholicism, because we share a great deal of common ground. All the things I loved most about Protestantism were fulfilled and completed in Catholicism- Catholicism is to me the completeness of God’s beauty that already is manifest and glowing from so many non-Catholic Christians.

I know from personal experience that many Protestants truly know the Lord and seek His face. I have sensed God’s Spirit filling their actions with holiness.

I do believe that the original leaders of the Reformation tended to be wicked and used by evil forces. The historical evidence makes this pretty much irrefutable, in my view.

However, generations of Protestants who have grown up after them did not commit all the sins of their forefathers. They were not the ones who stripped books from the Bible, tortured and slaughtered Catholics, all fellow Protestants of other denominations who were in range, and Jews, and while fully knowing the sin of shattering the Church into pieces and stripping Sacred Tradition and the sacraments from their places, did it anyway.

The modern generations have grown up not in Catholicism but in Protestantism. They didn’t reject the example of the Early Church’s nonviolence and instead slaughter God’s children, like the Reformers did. They instead have devoted themselves to Christ in the way they have grown up with Him. Particularly in the Great Awakening of the early 20th century, but also before that, God’s grace filled Protestantism and blessed Catholicism greatly through Protestantism! Protestants started the Charismatic movement of intimacy with God that still blesses Catholics and has a strong following amongst us.

God blesses many Protestants for their faith and transforms their souls so that they radiate His glory.

Praise be to God for the glorious souls of his Christian disciples in the Protestant communities! I love the great good God pours out through you and your people .

God bless you, your wife and children .

It’s just flat out not true.

Some of the reasons people think that are:

1. We pray to her.
2. We hail her as Queen of Heaven and Mother of God.
3. We believe she was born without sin.
4. We sometimes bow or express reverence toward statues of her.

Explanations for this include:

1. We pray to her, but prayer to saints is present in multiple books of the Bible, including the Gospels, when Jesus talked to saints who were dead (and He is our example for Christian life), two chapters of Revelation, two chapters of Psalms, and one chapter from 2 Maccabbees. There’s also one incident in the Epistles that might include Paul praying to a dead saint, if I recall correctly.
2. Jesus is a King, so it’s only natural that His mother should be a Queen. This also is typologically predicted in the role of the queen mother of Israel, a position portrayed as having great power in the Old Testament. Seeing her as a queen is different from seeing her as a goddess. As for her being called the Mother of God, the first person to say this was Elizabeth, who called her, “Mother of the Lord.”
3. She was born without sin, but so were Adam, Eve and Jesus. Protestants believe Adam and Eve were born without sin, and yet they don’t believe this makes them gods. Why, then, should we believe Mary’s sinlessness elevates her to a goddess? It doesn’t. It was a miracle from God that was predicted typologically in the Old Testament.
4. Everyone puts their hands on their hearts and sings the national anthem when the flag is raised. Does that mean they’re worshipping the flag? No. We do this to show respect for what it represents, the country. That’s what Catholics do for Mary, showing respect and reverence toward images representing her because they represent the Queen.

Hi Lief,

I am absolutely genuine when I say that I am “gob smacked” by what you write and how you say it.

Thank you for your graciousness in recognising my spirituality and authentic Christian life.

Although I do not know you personally, I must say on the basis of what you have written, I feel a spiritual closeness and oneness with you in the Lord. Praise be to God!

Your thoughts on the Virgin Mary are theologically credible and I want to research this more. I want to keep discussing these things with you. I believe God has granted, in his goodness and mysterious providence, you with many gifts.

I am very grateful to you for your insights.

May God bless you richly, Craig

 

[Craig_Kennedy]

**

Thank-you. I’ll look forward to your response. Don’t feel rushed, though. I’m glad you’re going to think about it.

Thanks Lief,

I will not feel rushed. I’ll take my time; but I will think thoroughly on all aspects of what you have written. That’s my Style!

Thanks again for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

Cheers, God bless you Craig**

 

[Craig_Kennedy]

…it poses an interesting question.

We genuflect (get down on one knee ((the right knee in this case))) to the Tabernacle when we enter a pew, or, if the Tabernacle is reserved in a side chapel, we bow to the altar.

But, and this is why your question is interesting, we genuflect to show respect to Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament (another name for Communion) when He is reserved in the Tabernacle.

If you do not believe in the Real Presence, then it may go against your conscience to genuflect. At the same time, it may offend others if you do not show proper respect to Our Lord in His house…

You know, my bet would be to stay honest to your conscience. If you believe in the Real Presence, then genuflect. If it doesn’t bother you but you don’t believe in the Real Presence, genuflect. If it does bother you, feel free to just take your seat.

I’ll give you a breakdown of gestures in the Church. You’ll look like a cradle Catholic!

As you enter there will be a small bowl near the door of water (A Holy Water font). Dip your right hand fingers in the bowl and make the sign of the cross over your body (Forehead, stomach, left shoulder, righ shoulder. Some people pray/whisper “Lord, purify me of my sins and prepare me for Your Holy Sacrifice” or something similar).

Just before you enter a pew genuflect to the Tabernacle (it will have a red or white candle near it. Usually behind the altar or to one side).

If you cross in front of the altar, bow towards it, out of respect for what takes place upon it and to the relics probably encased within.

When you enter the pew there will be a long, padded bar on hinges attatched to the pew in front of you (A ‘kneeler’). Many people will pull this down, kneel, and pray before Mass.

Look for a book. You may find a hymnal as well as a Missal. In the front of the Missal will be the “Order of the Mass” (as well, usually, as a brief description of who can and cannot recieve Communion and why). In the back of the Missal will be readings, topped by a heading such as “August 15th, 27th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Assumption of the Blessed Virgin”. Note that I do not know if August 15th is, in fact, the 27th Sunday in Ordinary Time . Just look for that day’s date. It will have the Bible readings for the day, as well as the Psalm.

Then enjoy the Mass. The Missal will guide you through it. Genuflect as you leave the pew, bless yourself as you leave the Church, and that’s it.

You may enjoy reading “The Lamb’s Supper” by Scott Hahn. It tells you, using a LOT of Scripture, what is going on in Heaven and Spiritually during the Mass, as well as showing how the Book of Revelations may have been an early Liturgy guide,

Thanks Rawb,

This was enormously helpful as well. You have been a great help to me.

May God bless you, Craig

 

[Craig_Kennedy]

I think your comparison to the Anglican Prayer book is right, but I’ve never seen an APB. , so I don’t know. I think they’re similar though, you describe a Missal very well.

There is the Liturgy of the Roman Rite, which is part of the Catholic Church. Chances are any Mass you go to will be Roman Rite. There are 23 Rites of the Catholic Church, the Roman being the largest and most common in the Western World.

Anyway, there are actually two forms of the Roman Mass; The Ordinary Form, and the Extraordinary Form. You will probably go to an Ordinary Form as they’re more common. The Ordinary Form was first written in Latin, and then translated into all the different vernaculars of the world, so it is commonly said in English in the USA (though you can often find other languages, particularly Spanish, as well). It was first written in the 1960’s by the Second Vatican Council, or “Vatican II”.

The Extraordinary Form was first compiled at the Council of Trent, shortly after the Reformation. It is said in Latin, everywhere. If you see advertised a “Traditional Latin Mass” or a “Latin Mass” or a “Tridentine Rite Mass” that is the Extraordinary Form. They’re very beautiful and very reverent. I favor them, as does almost everybody on the “Traditional Catholicism” forum here at Catholic Answers!

Either way the Missal will probably be provided. They are usually in the pews already, or handed out at the door.

If you really wanted to buy one, well all I know is the St. Joseph’s Sunday Missal is the common Missal for the Extraordinary Form, and you can find them often in secondhand stores. It used to be tradition for a Catholic being Confirmed to be given a St. Joseph’s Missal, but as that generation is dying off and the EF was very rare for a while, their offspring often gave them away. I have several that I got for only a few dollars.

The OF Missal? I don’t know. I would actually hold off because apparently there is a new English Translation that will be promulgated about 2009, so I’d wait for that.

Lief: very interesting! I enjoyed it.

Hi Rawb,

I’m reading and digesting what you are writing with great care and interest.

You have been a blessing to me and I thank you for your gracious, kind and helpful Christian spirit. You have enabled me to make some progress in understanding these things. Thank you.

I am enjoying this discussion. You are helping me powerfully to understand God in broader and fuller ways. Praise God.

Cheers, May God bless you Craig

 

[Dempsey1919]

Even if you don’t become a Catholic on Earth, you will nevertheless be perfectly one with God’s Church in Heaven. People are purged of all kinds of faults in Purgatory, and I believe division from doctrines of God to be amongst them.

I need to expand on this statement.

This is related to the doctrine of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, or “outside the Church there is no salvation.” Here is what the Catechism says on this subject (any bold in the text is mine):

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.

This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

“Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men.”

Source: Catechism of the Catholic Church 846-848

The Church teaches that people who know the truth of the Catholic faith but refuse to accept it, cannot be saved. They cannot be saved because they are guilty of sin. The Holy Spirit has revealed the truth to them and they refused to accept his promptings. A person who is convinced of the truth of Catholicism has an obligation to enter in the Church. In the same way, Catholics who know the truth of the Catholic religion but leave the Church are guilty of rejecting the faith. They cannot be saved because they have sinned against charity and are guilty of wounding the Body of Christ.

However, salvation is possible for those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the truth of the Catholic religion. They can be saved if they seek God with a sincere heart and do their best to follow the goodness of their conscience.

How does this relate to protestants? According to the teachings of the Church, protestants can be saved if they sincerely believe they are practicing the true religion of God in their respective denomination. A person who is born into a specific denomination cannot be blamed for thinking that this is the true religion. Therefore, God will not blame them if they sincerely try to please him and do his will. They cannot be blamed for not practicing a religion they did not know. However, if any protestant has a slight idea that the Catholic religion is true, then he must investigate the faith fully; and if he becomes convinced of its truth, he must convert. This same principal holds true for all non-Catholics.

THIS IS A SIMPLIFIED EXPLANATION of the issue. We could go into depth on this subject but I don’t think its appropriate for this thread.

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Well said.