To Protestants: Why aren't you Catholic?

[JSmitty2005]

believers:

Also, why do we have “Catechism of the Catholic Church” when the Bible is supposedly all we need.

Can anyone please shed some light on this?

The first Christians had a “catechism” called the Didache. It was written before St. John’s biblical writings were, so obviously the first Christians didn’t have a problem with this, so I don’t see why you do. And, no, the Bible is not all we need. As a Catholic, I don’t know where you got that idea, but if you’d like some light shed on this issue, go here. I hope that helps.

 

[DARichards]

Believers,

Hopefully I can help you with the concern over the graven images part of your question. First of all I understand your concern with images being in churches. As a Protestant, I did not understand either. I have just finished an excellent book that addresses this subject with many others and it was a great help. It seems by your questions you might benefit from Karl Keating’s book, “Catholicsim and Fundamentalism”

Keating does a masterful job of explaining this to us. First of all it is important that the Catholic Church does not worship statues. People bow to the statues out of a respect for the people they represent, not the stones themselves. It would be similar to the way that one would bow with respect to the Queen of England, or a foreign dignitary.

Secondly, we must consider what God meant in the second commandment. God didn’t want the Israelites to attribute Him an earthly form and box him in to that likeness. When the Son of God appeared on the scene, God physically revealed Himself to us as a Human, one of his creatures. Does this mean that we are not to have pictures or statues of our Savior, of course not. Again, we don’t worship the statue of Christ, but what that represents. And by the way, we bow to Him because He IS PRESENT WITH US THERE, EVEN THOUGH WE DO NOT SEE HIM.

But if God meant NO GRAVEN IMAGES of any sort, then He broke His own commandment by having Moses place Cheribum ontop of the Ark of the Covenant and by having Moses raise the serpent on the staff in the wilderness. Notice in this item, God did address the issue when the people started to worship the serpent.

I hope that this does a little help for you. It helped me immensely

 

[Contarini]

DARichards:

the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura to me now holds no water. It is (with all due respect) illogical. The main argument I get is that Scripture interprets Scripture. In other words A interprets B. In order for A to interpret B, then we must have a firm foundation for A.

Why? What grounds do you have for this assertion? You’re presuming a “foundationalist” epistemology–that the only way to know something is to start with some unquestionable premise. Why do you accept this epistemology? Does it really match the way you function in the world from day to day? For me it certainly doesn’t. I come to conclusions about the world around me through putting together all sorts of bits of evidence, and processing them in both logical and intuitive ways. I don’t demand some kind of unshakeable foundation for my beliefs.

In the modern world (Descartes is one of the chief offenders, I think) we have come to demand this kind of “foundational” starting point, largely I believe because of the breakup of Western Christianity and the consequent uncertainty. Ironically, this “foundationalist” epistemology that is driving you back to Catholicism arose because of the chaos caused by the Reformation. So I suppose that it’s only fair. . . .

That is the only way that A can interpret B.

That’s just not true. I interpret texts every day in a matrix of references and interpretive paradigms, none of which necessarily have some kind of clear, final authority. Why do you think you need this kind of absolute certainty? What if it isn’t something God intended us to have in this world?

In the Protestant Churches that I have been affiliated with, either small or large denominations, they are simply relying on their interpretation of Scripture and they have no guarantee that what they are saying or not saying is true. Not so in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has been given the gift of the Holy Father of the Church who is led by the Holy Spirit to protect the Church from error.

But you have to accept that premise by faith. You can’t prove it. You can’t prove any of it.

You are looking for a kind of certainty that does not exist in this life. Catholicism does give a much better basis for that kind of certainty than Reformed Protestantism does. But I think the whole quest is misguided.

As John Cardinal Henry Newman says: “To go deep into Church history is to cease to be a Protestant”.

Newman said many wise things, but this was not one of them. There are plenty of excellent church historians who are Protestants.

There are good reasons to become Catholic. But don’t become Catholic or anything else based on facile bigotry of the kind represented by Newman’s silly claim.

Edwin

 

[DARichards]

What is Truth? Truth is a foundation of our spiritural life that remains unchangeable throughout time. Truth is not based on where we were yesterday, where we are today, or where we will be tomorrow. The same applies to our faith. Our faith in Christ is unchangeable. The question is: How do we apply that faith? How do we interpret a book that has been written over thousands of years (if you include the Old Testament) by a tens of different people. This is not just a book. This is the Inspired, Inerrant, Infallible Word of God. There are only two options.

The first option is to take the route that the Reformers took. That means that we all know enough to take the Bible by itself and with the help of the Holy Spirt to know what the Bible means in its original intent. No need for Church Fathers (if the disagree with our interpretation of Scripture). And nobody has an infallible message of Scripture. Even R.C. Sproul says that at best the Protestants have a “fallible collection of infallible books”.

The second option to take is to believe that when Christ instituted the Church, He also gave the leaders of that Church the gift of the Holy Spirit to protect the members of the Body of Christ from being led into error.

You’re right, all of this is on faith. But I choose to interpret Scripture in the light of the Saints who have gone before and what they have consistantly said for thousands of years.

If I don’t choose this, then we are relying strictly on our own intellect and understanding, which is something I am not willing to do.

The quote of Newman is not bigoted, just true.

 

[Mickey]

DARichards:

The quote of Newman is not bigoted, just true.

Yes. I don’t see how this could be interpreted as a bigoted statement. The early Church was Catholic. Protestantism didn’t exist. There were heretical sects, but the Church was Catholic.

 

[Doreen]

Why Protestants (in general) are not Catholic (in no particular order):

1. As such, any Catholic Doctrines which do not have explicit Scriptural support are thought to be the inventions of men…
2. The Immaculate Conception, the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, Papal Infallibility, Prayer to the Saints, Purgatory, Confession to a Priest, Priestly Celibacy, Relics and Sacramentals, and certain other Catholic Doctrines and Disciplines do not have, or do not appear to have explicit Scriptural support (see rule 1), and as such are signs of a false belief system…
3. The Catholic belief in losing one’s “saved” state through certain sins seems to go against the idea that God will never let His children be “snatched out of His hands.” …
4. The Catholic emphasis on ceremony and rituals is unattractive to the Protestant who believes in a very simple relationship with Christ as being all he or she needs for salvation…
5. Protestants see the veil of the temple being torn in two at Christ’s death as a symbol that man no longer needs a mediator between him and God…
6. Protestants are not likely to study other churches until they see something wrong with their own…
7. Most Protestants see the Church as an “invisible body of believers,” and, as such, do not believe any particular church is the “true” church…
8. If Protestants think about the Catholic Church at all, they think of it as the church that was, but which has since been replaced. Many Protestants believe the Catholic Church became corrupt and started introducing false doctrines…
9. Many Protestants believe the Catholic Church teaches that people must earn their way into Heaven by their works…
10. Some Protestants believe the Catholic Church is so false as to be dangerous, leading millions of people to Hell…

There are more, of course, but I think those are a few general rules that apply to most Protestants (except for maybe number 10…).

Why I am not Catholic:

1. I have been a Protestant my whole life, and my family has been for generations. If I cross over, so to speak, I will be severing that spiritual connection. I will be saying, in effect, that all of those great, righteous people were wrong, and that I, generations down the road, have discovered some truth that all these men and women of faith somehow missed. If Catholicism is true, I wonder, why has this knowledge been given to me, but not to them?
2. All the evidence I have seen suggests that Catholicism is true, but I can’t deny that there are many brilliant men and women who remain Protestants. Obviously, they have seen something I have not, and so I hesitate to make a decision until I have done more research of the other side’s viewpoint.
3. It’s too close to Easter to get into an RCIA program…

In closing, there was a time not too long ago when I feared Catholicism was true and hoped it wasn’t. Now I hope it’s true and fear that it isn’t. I guess maybe that’s progress…

God bless!

Wow, I know I am finding this thread late in the game, but IAMBIC PEN, you have done a really good job of laying it all out there plainly!

If this post doesn’t answer the OP’s question…nothing will.

One comment for you directly, Iambic…
Pray fervently that you be shown the truth, and the Lord will reveal things to you that cannot be questioned. I can relate to your conclusions at the end here, but only when I disregard some major facts. One…Christ did TEAR THE VEIL! There is NO debate about this…so that alone, should be enough to keep you in the truth.

Be careful…pray ceaselessly that every thought would be held captive to the obedience of Christ. He will not steer us wrong…but the devil surely will.

This said, remember to hold onto the “essentials” and not compromise those…the non-essentials are open for discussion, but do not lose the hope and assurance you have in the Gospel. Do not grieve the Spirit of God, but daily make yourself a living sacrifice, that He would keep you from stumbling.

God bless you!

 

[JSmitty2005]

Why I am not Catholic:

1. I have been a Protestant my whole life, and my family has been for generations. If I cross over, so to speak, I will be severing that spiritual connection. I will be saying, in effect, that all of those great, righteous people were wrong, and that I, generations down the road, have discovered some truth that all these men and women of faith somehow missed. If Catholicism is true, I wonder, why has this knowledge been given to me, but not to them?

You must remember what Christ said about abandoning all (even family) to follow Him. Regardless of whether your first Protestant ancestors were really right ( :nope: ) or wrong ( :yup: ) in converting from Catholicism, they (hopefully) did it because they felt that that’s what they needed to do to truly follow Christ. You must also remember that when they made that decision, they were severing a spiritual connection as well. I’m sure that there were probably ancestors of yours way back when that were praying that their relatives that converted to Protestantism would come back to the Church. God might be calling you with His grace to do that now…and maybe that’s why you’ve been given this knowledge (plus back then, they were probably illiterate and may have converted for less than pure motives like political or social reasons.) I never had to make the decision myself, but my mom did. Her father’s side of the family is solidly Lutheran. I’m sure you’ll make the right decision. It already seems like you know what that is.

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

Doreen:

Wow, I know I am finding this thread late in the game, but IAMBIC PEN, you have done a really good job of laying it all out there plainly!

If this post doesn’t answer the OP’s question…nothing will.

Well, I should reclarify that not everything in my first list applies to me personally, but rather to Protestants in general. The second list, as I say, is my list, and to it I should probably add reason number four:

1. The Eastern Orthodox have an equal claim to age and apostolic succession, and as such, I am also conducting a study of their theology. I really can’t make a final decision on Catholicism until I resolve this issue. There are a number of Catholic teachings that the Catholics claim have always been taught in the Church since the beginning, and yet they are not found in Orthodoxy, a Church which traces itself to the same beginning. Ah, life is not always as simple as I would like.

Pray fervently that you be shown the truth, and the Lord will reveal things to you that cannot be questioned.

And so I do.

I can relate to your conclusions at the end here, but only when I disregard some major facts. One…Christ did TEAR THE VEIL! There is NO debate about this…so that alone, should be enough to keep you in the truth.

Well, my understanding is that there is some debate on the meaning of the tearing of the veil, though I have often about it in the terms you mention. The major fact I cannot ignore is that modern day Protestantism is very different from the early Church in its theology and practices.

God bless you!

And you!

 

[JSmitty2005]

Doreen:

This said, remember to hold onto the “essentials” and not compromise those…the non-essentials are open for discussion, but do not lose the hope and assurance you have in the Gospel.

What exactly are the “essentials”? Protestants vary greatly in their ideas of what is essential…which is probably because there is no index in the Bible that lists essential things as opposed to nonessential ones. The entire Gospel in its fullness is essential. It cannot be slimmed down to one’s own liking or opinion of what it should be.

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

JSmitty2005:

You must remember what Christ said about abandoning all (even family) to follow Him. Regardless of whether your first Protestant ancestors were really right ( :nope: ) or wrong ( :yup: ) in converting from Catholicism, they (hopefully) did it because they felt that that’s what they needed to do to truly follow Christ.

Ah yes, very true. Obviously, if I come to the conclusion that I should become Catholic, I will do so, in spite of what my ancestors believed. So, while the family reason isn’t holding me back from converting, it is making me act less rashly, as I am more careful about my decision.

I’m sure you’ll make the right decision. It already seems like you know what that is.

Well, I’m sure I will too, in time. As far as knowing what it is, I’m closer!

 

[Doreen]

You’re right, all of this is on faith. But I choose to interpret Scripture in the light of the Saints who have gone before and what they have consistantly said for thousands of years.

If I don’t choose this, then we are relying strictly on our own intellect and understanding, which is something I am not willing to do.

You say, all of this is on faith…then you say that you choose to “interpret Scripture in the light of the Saints who have gone before” …

which means you have FAITH in the “Saints who have gone before” …

the Protestant would say, “I have faith in the Holy Spirit.” …which the Lord promised would “guide us into all truth”…

We stand on the promises of God, and we believe these promises were not just for an elect few…and this is a serious difference in doctrine.

I am not Catholic because I did not experience the Holy Spirit in the Catholic Church. That was simply my experience…I am not saying it wasn’t there…but it certainly wasn’t expressed as a gift I might hold. It was only for the priests…and that, to me, is the source of great sadness.

I might have forever been “luke warm” if I had not come to know Christ and to have the indwelling of His Spirit. You say it’s taught. Well, I stand as evidence that the teaching lacked and many of my generation didn’t get it.

The teaching of the church is complicated and overwhelming and so many of your average Joe Catholics are just that, average Joe Christians…That’s a serious enough offense to cause many to miss out completely on any kind of real faith at all…and that surely is not the will of God. … it is a serious enough offense to keep me out of the church, because I feel that the church is not feeding the sheep.

They’re starving, they’re running astray, and so, so, many are lost.

Don’t get irate about these words…I’m speaking truth as I see it in my own life and in the lives of the Catholics around me…and the sad truth is that many, many Catholics trust the CHURCH to get them to heaven.

It’s like living in an institution…where they make your bed, bring you meals, and care for your every need…Who wants to get well? They don’t see their need for a personal trust in a real and living God. They do not look for a Savior, since they figure they are covered by the blood of the church as long as they show up. That’s the danger I see in the doctrine that is based on much tradition and ritual…the ritual acts replace the heart condition.

Paul spoke many words against such teachings that would “be a stumbling block” — we take the focus off the work of God through Christ and put it on the work we do as patrons of a system. That’s scary to me…that’s not pleasing to God.

I believe that there’s a balance somewhere … to be reverent is important, to worship and pray and remember His work…but where is the joy in the RCC? The joy of the Lord is my strength!
Someone on here said that protestants don’t believe in confession. That’s a HUGE lie! It is essential in the walk of a protestant to humbly come before the Lord, confessing their sins…it’s just that they don’t feel that it has to be to the priest to be effectual. It is good to do so with an elder, so that we have support and prayer. But I can go directly to Christ with my sins anytime, anywhere. To me, that’s an amazing gift, and I am sad for my friends who don’t have it because they believe the only way it “counts” is before a priest.

How can THAT teaching not grieve our Lord? That His beloved children would feel they could not come to Him? **“Let the children come unto me!” **
Oh, I could go on and on, you all know that by now.

**To love the Lord with all thy heart, soul, mind and strength, and to love thy neighbor as thyself. ** If we are to do these things, His Spirit will alight on our hearts and we will walk like Christ.

So simple, so lovely, so amazing, so transforming, so true.
D.

 

[DARichards]

Doreen,

I grew up in a Non-Denominational/Charismatic background, so I am very familiar with what you are saying. How can I as an individual know for certain that I am being led by the Holy Spirit, or what he has shown me is orthodox and true.

My decicion to join the Catholic Church was not based on the “experience” or what I felt or did not feel. I do believe that the Holy Spirit will guide us into all truth, but how do you decide which person is correct when both people are fully convinced that their opinions (which are conflicting) are guided by the Holy Spirit? Personally, I had a hard time differentiating that in my personal life. What was me and what was the Holy Spirit. The refuge was the Scriptures. Then when I went to the Scriptures, how could I be assured that I wasn’t interpreting Scripture just to meet my own desires and needs?

I will agree that there have been many Catholics in the past 2 generations or so that have been under-catechised and truly do not understand what they have in the Catholic Church. * Every thing* in the Catholic Church that you do is an outward expression of your inward faith. The incense, the candles, the water, the bells, it is not just rote rituals, but it allows all of our senses as humans to be included in our worship of our Lord.

The same things that you have said are many of the questions that I had for Monsignor when we began our converstions. My understanding of the Catholic Church was that as long as you showed up and did your role, your salvation was assured. That is not the point at all. The heart attitude what Christ desires to change in all of us in the Eucharist. The end point is that Christ is the final judge of all and as Christians we are to desire more and more to be conformed into the image of Christ. That is the joy! The joy is in knowing that in becoming a part of the Body of Christ that we have refuge, a way out of our sins, a way to know we are forgiven, a way for us to obtain the grace of our Father. A way every time the Eucharist is recieved to renew our covenant “oath” with the One who has sealed our Salvation.

I’m not in the least irate, however I know that there are just as many people in the denominational/Charismatic circles who are just as lost but they may not know it either their “rituals” are just different. They effect your emotions in a way that you “feel” saved. But how does it effect your life? Does it transform your heart more to Christ? I’m not in the least saying that theses people don’t hold some of the truths of Christianity, or that they aren’t saved because I know many, many wonderful people that are committed and love our Lord. I just am coming to the belief that the fullness of Christianity is held in the Catholic Church.

In regard to the confession issue, again I found much relief in the teaching of the Church. This may bring up another issue for you, but the venial sins of our lives can and should be directly confessed to our Lord. The Church does not say that we have to go through our priests to confess these. The sins that are taken to confession are what the Church would consider mortal sins. 1Peter refers to sins that do not kill. This would mean that there are sins which are of mortal consequence to your spiritual walk. Such would be the case of adultery, for example, or addictions.
Also read in James when he instructs the sick to be brought before the elders that they might be annointed with oil and they would be healed and their sins forgiven. Also, what did Jesus mean when He told the disciples that what sins they forgive would be forgiven, and what sins they held would be held? How is this taught in Protestant Circles. My experience is that this is glossed over and not taught much if at all.

If you haven’t done so, I would suggest reading Swear to God by Scott Hahn. It is a wonderful book on the Sacraments of the Catholic Church.

Peace and Love to all In Christ

 

[Mickey]

Doreen:

I am not Catholic because I did not experience the Holy Spirit in the Catholic Church.

Believe me, the Holy Soirit is there.

Doreen:

That was simply my experience…I am not saying it wasn’t there…but it certainly wasn’t expressed as a gift I might hold.

Perhaps you were not listening?

Doreen:

It was only for the priests…and that, to me, is the source of great sadness.

I beg your pardon!

Doreen:

Well, I stand as evidence that the teaching lacked and many of my generation didn’t get it.

I am your generation and speaking for myself and countless others of our generation, the teaching lacks nothing and continues to speak to our hearts.

Doreen:

The teaching of the church is complicated and overwhelming

It’s rich and deep and beautiful–but surely not complicated and overwhelming.

Doreen:

I feel that the church is not feeding the sheep.

Is this your opinion?

Doreen:

but where is the joy in the RCC?

Oh, if only you knew!
img145.imageshack.us/img145/293/3barcross0xn.gif
%between%

 

[JSmitty2005]

But I can go directly to Christ with my sins anytime, anywhere. To me, that’s an amazing gift, and I am sad for my friends who don’t have it because they believe the only way it “counts” is before a priest.

Then why, in 1 John 5:16, do the Scriptures say that “There is such a thing as deadly sin, about which I do not say that you should pray.” If there are sins that are so grievous that prayer alone will not suffice, do you really think that Our Lord would leave us hanging? I think not! You’re having the same problem that the Jews had (Mark 2:7). They looked at Jesus and thought, “He’s only a man. He cannot forgive sins. Only God can do that!” When in fact, He is God and can (obviously) forgive sins as well as relegate that office to His apostles for them to fill in His stead when He ascends into Heaven. And that’s exactly what He did! Yes, priests appear to be mere men, and of course they are not divine, but they do have the authority to forgive sins in the Name of Christ the Lord because He gave it to them! We can see this in John 20:22-23. “And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, ‘Receive the holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.’” If Jesus wanted us to pray to Him to forgive all our sins, then why would He give such a power to His apostles in the first place? It would only make sense that if He gave those men the power to forgive sins back then, then He would want us to have that same opportunity today. Furthermore, the fact that Jesus breathed on them is extremely significant. There is only 1 other place in the Bible where God breathes on man - when He breathed souls into Adam and Eve. This shows how magnificent this sacrament is. The souls breathed into Adam and Eve were good, pure, and united with God. Then, after the Fall, we all became stained with Original Sin as well as the consequent tendency to sin (concupiscence). When Our Lord breathed on His apostles, He gave them a means to restore our souls again to being in a state of grace - good, pure, and united with God. What a wonderful sacrament this is! Jesus told His apostles that when He left, that they would do greater things than Him. That’s because during His life, if you wanted to experience Jesus Christ’s healing power, you had to go find Him. Now, however, to experience the healing power of Jesus the Christ, all you need to do is go to your local Catholic Church.

 

[Doreen]

I’ll comment on the previous three threads:

Also, what did Jesus mean when He told the disciples that what sins they forgive would be forgiven, and what sins they held would be held? How is this taught in Protestant Circles.

I understand this to be in line with “forgive and ye shall be forgiven” --and “with the measure you use, it shall be measured unto you.” and with “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us”

That we who have the Holy Spirit are given the power to forgive our brothers and sisters of their sins, and we are all held bound when we hold others bound by their sins.

Mickey:
Yes, I am speaking from my experience, and perhaps I wasn’t listening…but I can tell you I spent 10 years (age 18-28) trying my darnedest to make sense of the Catholic teachings. I am a teacher! I count myself as having been blessed with a pretty good intellect. Not to seem prideful or vain; I am saying that I am not dense or thick-headed in general…and so if I couldn’t ascertain all the beauty of the pageantry expressed in the Mass, and I could not find the way out of the darkness of sin, then there was a problem in the delivery.

Now granted, I moved a lot as a child…so my foundation was sketchy…and that may have seriously impacted the continuity of learning I might have had in one diocese…but that does not explain these years of adulthood that were lost in sin and despair.

And you can say, well maybe you weren’t ready to hear …you had to get to a point where the Lord could get your attention, and I will say, maybe…maybe…

Now you seem to say that the Holy Spirit is NOT just for the priests, since I said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doreen
It was only for the priests…and that, to me, is the source of great sadness.

And you said:

I beg your pardon!

But your counterpart, who posts following you, makes it pretty clear that God only breathed on a few elect folks:

When Our Lord breathed on His apostles, He gave them a means to restore our souls again to being in a state of grace - good, pure, and united with God. What a wonderful sacrament this is! Jesus told His apostles that when He left, that they would do greater things than Him. That’s because during His life, if you wanted to experience Jesus Christ’s healing power, you had to go find Him. Now, however, to experience the healing power of Jesus the Christ, all you need to do is go to your local Catholic Church.

JSmitty has made my point…that (according to the Catholic) the Church has authority, not the individual believer.

continued…

 

[Doreen]

*This is the teaching that troubles me greatly. It is the teaching that left me empty and powerless for all those years. I did not manage to avoid serious sin because I had NOT the Holy Spirit, and I had NO IDEA it was mine to have! *

The church did not tell me that I could be granted power over sin when I invite Christ to lead my life.

Folks, this is a great undoing of the Gospel! And it is a stumbling block! How can we see it as anything else?

I am glad, Mickey, that you have found beauty and joy in the presentation of the Gospel through the traditions (I mean no disrespect) and the rituals of the Mass. I believe you have come to know the Lord in a real way. But too few of your counterparts share your experience, would you agree?

I believe that – at the first – The Mass was ordained as a beautiful ceremony, and a celebration. But somewhere the truth is getting messy and murky and lost, and folks are missing out on the promises.

If Jesus wanted us to pray to Him to forgive all our sins, then why would He give such a power to His apostles in the first place?

He was teaching them to teach the truth of the forgiveness of sins…not giving them the POWER to do so. Look closely, “As the Father has sent Me, so I send you.” “Recieve the Holy Spirit” … “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

–The POWER given them WAS the SPIRIT –

And John finishes the chapter with:
“truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.”

One of you is surprised (“beg your pardon”) by my saying that, according to what I was taught in the RCC, the priests are the only ones given the power to forgive sins…the other of you says that only the elect were “breathed on” and thus empowered…

Now—tell me if there is any contradiction in the Church?

Friends, I so want that all of us would know the truth.
That is forever my quest and my prayer…
It is not my desire to cause division, but to grow together in the knowledge of Our Lord.

In Him!
D.

 

[DARichards]

Doreen,

I have learned a phrase that has helped me alot during my travels, and that is this: “Context is your friend.” If you look at the verse where Christ commissions the Disciples, He is speaking strictly to the Apostles, He is not speaking to the public at large, as for example at the Sermon on the Mount. He commissions the Apostles to teach, to preach, to baptize, and then to forgive sins. This logistically can’t be read as you are reading it. Yes we are also to forgive each other, but in this setting, the command almost demands an auricular confession. The question then refers to whom shall we confess? There are certain people I will not confess my sins to due to several reasons but mainly trust. The second thing to remember is that only God has the power to forgive men of their sins. In this case the priest ( a mere man) is acting on behalf of Christ. In the pronouncement of forgiveness, God is the one because of the Sacrifice of His Son who has forgiven your sins.

God is a God of order and His authority travels through the channels which He has set. It was this way in the Old Testament and it continues throughout the New Testament. St. Augustine (somebody correct me if I am wrong) said: "In the Old Testament the New Testament is concealed; In the New Testament the Old is revealed. The problem with the Old Testament system was that it was powerless to do what God intended because it lacked the power of the Sacrifice of Christ. Just as God placed the twelve tribes of Israel as heads of the nation, So has he placed the Apostles over our New Testament nation: The Church. The difference is that the authority that was given to them has been passed down through them to our generation. Now this does not mean that the priests are the only one with the access to the Holy Spirit. (Somebody again correct me if I am wrong here, being that I am not fully Catholicized yet) We as Christians, Catholic in this case receive the Holy Spirit during our Baptism and also during our confirmation. The Holy Spirit is with us continually to keep us from evil.

For me, the privilege of going to Confession does not turn me, nor does it appear to ball and chain of legalism. It is freeing to know that if I have committed a sin that is of a mortal nature I can go to someone who has the authority by Apostolic Succession to pronounce the forgiveness of the Almighty and I can leave KNOWING that I have been forgiven. The other side of this is that by going to confession, it gives a certain amount of accountability in my life. It is much easier as an individual to continue sinning if I know all I have to do is privately ask for forgiveness. To me this situation is trampling underfoot the Grace given to us by the allpowerful Sacrifice of Christ.

 

[Brian_C]

That’s funny. My intellect is what DREW me to Catholicism. It just made more sense. It’s like protestantism has a bunch of puzzle pieces that don’t quite go together. But when I started to read church history from the Catholic standpoint, I was an epiphany…a big “Ah Ha!” moment.

 

[proclaim]

ARE CATHOLIC PRIEST OR SAINTS NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE WIFES, BECAUSE IF NOT CATHOLIC ST. PETER WAS MARRIED…hmmmmmmmm, somethin fishy is goin on here…and ur a CATHOLIC CUZ Y…hmmmmmmmmm

 

[JSmitty2005]

Brian_C:

That’s funny. My intellect is what DREW me to Catholicism. It just made more sense. It’s like protestantism has a bunch of puzzle pieces that don’t quite go together. But when I started to read church history from the Catholic standpoint, I was an epiphany…a big “Ah Ha!” moment.

That’s because there’s a coherence to the Church. Protestantism is not intellectually defensible.