To the non-Catholics and Catholic Converts here

[fif1189]

So I have something I’ve been curious about, to those of you here who are not Catholic (yeah, all 5 of us ) and those who converted for whatever reason, what was your main obstacle(s) to becoming Catholic (As in, disagreements with church teachings, family, etc)?

 

[dje101]

My biggest obstacles were the papacy and Mary, but I think this is normal for almost any convert from a protestant background. Once I read their reasons for these doctrines, my mind agreed but my pride wanted to say otherwise. Once I was willing to actually LISTEN to what Jesus ACTUALLY had to say in the gospel rather than what I had been initially brought up to see, it became obvious that he was pointing me towards the Catholic Church.

 

[lauraabarlow]

My biggest obstacles were the papacy and Mary, but I think this is normal for almost any convert from a protestant background. Once I read their reasons for these doctrines, my mind agreed but my pride wanted to say otherwise. Once I was willing to actually LISTEN to what Jesus ACTUALLY had to say in the gospel rather than what I had been initially brought up to see, it became obvious that he was pointing me towards the Catholic Church.

 

[kch86]

So I have something I’ve been curious about, to those of you here who are not Catholic (yeah, all 5 of us ) and those who converted for whatever reason, what was your main obstacle(s) to becoming Catholic (As in, disagreements with church teachings, family, etc)?

As an atheist, moral teachings and the fact that I was entirely alone among the people I knew in being a Christian.

Although I had initially explored Protestant Christianity, I came from a secular background so I had no specifically Protestant hang-ups about Catholicism.

I had also grown to implicitly see the truth of some Christian moral teachings even before I believed in God, so I just had to get to grips with the Church having the authority to teach the rest. The authority issue is probably a problem for atheist and Protestant alike.

And to an extent, I still am alone in being a practising Catholic, but it’s no longer a problem for me.

 

[stephe1987]

As a former deist from a “Christian” family (my dad used to be JW and mom is pretty much a universalist now)…

existence of hell
deity of Christ
Mary
brothers and sisters of Jesus

I actually believed in the Pope long before the other things… I looked at the succession and thought that if Jesus really did start a Church, then it would have to be the Catholic Church.

Most of my family believes hell does not exist, but the more I read, the more I believe it does. A loving God would not force people to be with Him for eternity, and Hell is being away from God after seeing Him. The souls in Hell want to be there, and only God can read the soul, so it’s not for humans to determine that nobody wants hell, or that people should just be erased. There is no point in being pro-life if the soul just gets erased because eventually they’d be gone anyway.

I was raised to think that Jesus was son of God, but that he couldn’t be God because of the “father, why have you forsaken me” verse. But on closer inspection, that is actually a quote from the Old Testament about the crucifixion, and Jesus is announcing this. It also shows from a human perspective, people sometimes think God has left them, but He is really there all along.

I also used to find the Marian doctrines/dogmas a little strange. Some of them do still seem strange (namely, some of her titles), but I now better understand her role as the Mother of Jesus, Queen of Heaven, etc.

Another used-to-be-confusing thing is that some people think Jesus had brothers and sisters. But the references to brothers and sisters just mean family member (i.e. cousin; some of my friends from other cultures call their cousins brothers and sisters) and they are children of another Mary. The biggest giveaway is when Jesus gives his mother to John the Baptist to be under his care. If Mary had other children, they would obviously have been younger than Jesus, since she was a Virgin when she gave birth to Him. In that culture he would have never given his mother to someone else if she had another son alive. Her husband Joseph was obviously dead by that point or it wouldn’t have been necessary to hand her over to someone else’s care. So giving her over to John, the son of his mother’s cousin Elizabeth, only made sense if he was the closest relative.

 

[Metamorphoo]

The main obstacles are:

(1) The degree to which Mary is exalted in the RCC. I have heard Catholics defend the Marian dogmas as being important from a Christological perspective. If that is the case, then I would think that the dogmas would be explicitly written so that the focus is on Christ Himself rather than upon Mary. As they stand, they focus upon the person of Mary. Since dogmas by their very nature are considered “critical doctrine,” they MUST be believed by those who are Catholic. This is a major stumbling block for me and many other non-Catholic Christians. I simply don’t see how Marian dogmas can be considered critical doctrines of the Christian faith.

(2) **The Catholic focus on winning people to the Catholic Church and coming under papal authority. **Most Protestants–evangelicals, at least–are typically focused upon seeing people won to Christ rather than to their particular church/denomination. It seems to me that the focus is in the wrong place. If a Protestant knows only one Bible verse, it is John 3:16 (For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, so that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life). If a Catholic knows only one Bible verse, it is Matt. 16:18–which is used to defend the Catholic Church as the “true church” and papal authority.

(3) Related to (2), but slightly different: the relationship between the clergy and the laity. It seems to me that the clergy is placed upon a much higher pedestal than the layman. A layman who questions something a priest has taught is often regarded as being “out of line”–a layman doesn’t have the training of the priest and shouldn’t question a priest’s teaching.

 

[kch86]

The main obstacles are:
(1) The degree to which Mary is exalted in the RCC.

She is treated much like a secular queen might be. In very high regard. She is the woman Jesus chose to be His mother, after all.

(2) **The Catholic focus on winning people to the Catholic Church and coming under papal authority. **

Well, from our perspective, winning people over to the Catholic Church and winning them over to Christ is equivalent.

(3) Related to (2), but slightly different: the relationship between the clergy and the laity.

Humility is a very important virtue that the Church seeks to cultivate. And obedience, which comes from humility, is a virtue in itself.

 

[kimbaichan]

Papal infalibility was a biggie for me until I had a full understanding of its limitations. The Immaculate Conception would have been, but the first saint I ever read about was the story of St. Bernadette and it really touched me - actually brought me to tears - so I never doubted that, in fact I took her religious name as my conformation name.

 

[JRKH]

So I have something I’ve been curious about, to those of you here who are not Catholic (yeah, all 5 of us ) and those who converted for whatever reason, what was your main obstacle(s) to becoming Catholic (As in, disagreements with church teachings, family, etc)?

To put it in the most basic terms I had to overcome my own ego.
When it came to actual beliefs and practices, I had the advantage of having been raised in a Catholic home, so I didn’t have some of the “built in” issues that many protestants do, some of which have already been mentioned. But the root and principal problem was exactly the same. Pride and Ego.

This pride and ego manifested itself in the fact that, MY understanding was right and others were wrong. Even beliefs held by the Christian community for more a millennia and a half or more were fodder for my ego to examine and possibly modify or reject.
So what if the Catholic Church could trace it’s roots clearly and directly back to Peter and to Jesus. That didn’t mean they had everything right…
“Pope James the uneducated” had to pass on every teaching before it could be accepted and implemented.

Gradually though, through the work of the Holy Spirit, God drew me back. Mainly through a desire for the Mass and the Eucharist. But even then I had to “work” for it, for in my time away I had created an impediment to my return (a divorce and remarriage). This impediment tested my resolve and my new found humility and I subjected myself to the authority of the Church in ruling on this matter. Thanks be to God that He, through His Church determined that the first marriage was invalid and so this last impediment was removed.

Sorry - got a little off subject…but not much…

It was actually after I formally returned that I really began to put things together. I discovered that the Church was far more biblical in it’s teaching and in it’s structure than many protestants think. In fact, I have had a number of conversations with protestants over what the “Biblical” church structure looks like and in every one, it is the Catholic/Orthodox model that is clearly seen and not the “reformed Protestant” model.
The Idea of “Sola Scriptura” or “Prima Scriptura” likewise fell apart by proper examination and understanding of Scripture.

These discoveries - Along with the greatest gift of all - the Eucharist - the real presence were the final nails in my Egotistic outlook and I was able to truly bury “Pope James” and submit to the Church which Christ established with the authority to “bind And Loose” “Whatever”.

Peace
James

 

[kch86]

“Pope James the uneducated” had to pass on every teaching before it could be accepted and implemented.

Along with the greatest gift of all - the Eucharist - the real presence were the final nails in my Egotistic outlook and I was able to truly bury “Pope James” and submit to the Church which Christ established with the authority to “bind And Loose” “Whatever”.

“Pope James the uneducated”

What a wonderfully humorous and yet accurate way of looking at things.

Glad things have worked out the way they have for you.

 

[AbideWithMe]

To put it in the most basic terms I had to overcome my own ego.
When it came to actual beliefs and practices, I had the advantage of having been raised in a Catholic home, so I didn’t have some of the “built in” issues that many protestants do, some of which have already been mentioned. But the root and principal problem was exactly the same. Pride and Ego.

Hi JRKH—

I’m glad you’ve found a spiritual home for yourself in Catholicism. You’re in good hands.

However, regarding the idea that “the root and principal problem was exactly the same. Pride and ego.”, I have to reject your diagnosis as unfounded when you extend it to others besides yourself----in this case Protestants. Do you really believe you’re qualified to understand all the many reasons non-Catholics may remain non-Catholic, and then reduce it to “Pride and Ego”?

You’re qualified to speak for yourself, and I’m glad you’ve found Catholicism helpful in dealing with the unhealthy aspects of your pride and ego, which is a task we all face.

 

[Slaney]

If Mary had other children, they would obviously have been younger than Jesus, since she was a Virgin when she gave birth to Him. In that culture he would have never given his mother to someone else if she had another son alive. Her husband Joseph was obviously dead by that point or it wouldn’t have been necessary to hand her over to someone else’s care.** So giving her over to John, the son of his mother’s cousin Elizabeth, only made sense if he was the closest relative**.

Good point

 

[kch86]

Do you really believe you’re qualified to understand all the many reasons non-Catholics may remain non-Catholic, and then reduce it to “Pride and Ego”?

I’m sure many Protestants humbly submit themselves to the authority of Scripture as well as they know how to. Pride and ego, however, can indeed be a factor in one persisting in error, even from your perspective as a Protestant.

When two Protestants disagree and one’s understanding of a particular part of Scripture is correct and the other one’s erroneous, there is a chance that the one who is in error may continue to persist in that error for subconscious reasons of pride and ego, even when shown how to interpret that particular part of Scripture correctly.

I agree with you that painting all Protestants with the same brush is unfair, but I would say that pride and ego is very significant in causing both Protestants and Catholics alike to be blinded to the truth and to continue in persisting in error.

 

[Layman_F]

I came at Catholicism with the intent to discredit it. Every argument I had against it was based on false information from Protestant claims. After my personal volley of objections I went looking for more. Every doctrine I’ve looked at has a strong logical and historical basis. Going from atheism to Protestant, lots of stuff didn’t line up with how churches did stuff. I hated that many Protestant services ignored preaching from the Gospels, and only used the other books to teach doctrine. I felt every sermon should use something from the Gospels as a foundation, then build on it from other books. I also didn’t like the way that very few recognized the purpose of baptism. It was like they taught that there was a hidden message about it, and ignored the elephant in the room like Acts 2:38. One of the last straws with me was the communion of saints. I felt like an idiot because I never put two and two together that “life everlasting” meant just that… THEY’RE STILL ALIVE IN CHRIST.

 

[JRKH]

Hi JRKH—

I’m glad you’ve found a spiritual home for yourself in Catholicism. You’re in good hands.

However, regarding the idea that “the root and principal problem was exactly the same. Pride and ego.”, I have to reject your diagnosis as unfounded when you extend it to others besides yourself----in this case Protestants. Do you really believe you’re qualified to understand all the many reasons non-Catholics may remain non-Catholic, and then reduce it to “Pride and Ego”?

You’re qualified to speak for yourself, and I’m glad you’ve found Catholicism helpful in dealing with the unhealthy aspects of your pride and ego, which is a task we all face.

Yes you are right. I can only speak for myself and for my journey.
I suppose my “Pride and Ego” are still a problem, even now.

As to my qualification to understand…Again you are right, I really have none…
It’s just that, from my experience in discussions with “bible only” protestants, when issues of teaching, history, Church structure etc. come up, I am able to present many positive arguments and passages in support of the Authoritative Church, but when I ask for the same from them, I am met with silence.
Yet, even in this inability to demonstrate a sound Scriptural or historical basis for SS and the Protestant model the people that I was discussing this with clung to the idea that Protestantism is more biblical than Catholicism.
I suppose I have surmised from this that, at least in the cases of these individuals, t was pride and ego that prevented their recognition of what I was trying to convey.

But then again - maybe it is just my own ego - and impatience - at work. Naturally I think everyone should see what I see…

Anyway - Enough trying to justify myself.

As I said initially - you are right. I cannot truly speak for others and I apologize for any offense I have caused.

Peace
James

 

[lauralh4]

Hm, interesting question. Well, after about 7 years of being an atheist (I was a non-practicing Catholic as a kid), at 21 I met a wonderful guy, who happened to be the most Catholic person I’d ever met. We fell in love. Our relationship was always very spiritual, and very intense. It was a constant spiritual exchange, especially at the beginning. To sum it up: shortly after we started officially dating, I had a very personal and incredibly strong experience with God while meditating. That pushed me to look more and more into Catholicism…few months later I started going to Mass with my then boyfriend (we broke up about 4 months ago). Shortly after, I went to Confession. A year later, I did my Confirmation. And now here I am

My first big obstacle I think was the idea of Confession. It took me a long while to go to Confession, partly because of fear and insecurity (in GREAT part because of that!), but in great part, too, because I didn’t undestand why I had to do it. My mom had always told me she found it ridiculous to have to tell your deepest “secrets” to another human being you don’t even know. She said that wasn’t needed to have a relationship with God. Naturally, I leaned on this excuse whenever my then boyfriend tried to make me understand why Confession is a good thing. Eventually, I understood. Especially after my first Confession. (This is a time when I became obsessed with Tenth Avenue North’s song ‘Healing Begins’, which talks about Confession. If anyone has doubts about Confession, they should look for the video they did explaining that song. It’s on youtube…and it’s one of my faves )

My other two obstacles - which are still there - are the Church’s stance on homosexuality and the fact that only men can become priests. I was talking to a friend the other day, who’s also a Catholic convert, and he has the exact same issues with the teachings of the Church. I won’t go into the whole thing about homosexuality because that conversation generally takes hours! But yeah. And as for the other thing…I remember when I was very little, I realized that “girls couldn’t be priests”…so I got angry and said I’d be a priest (I had an odd fixation on religion when I was little. I wanted to be a priest, then I wanted to be a nun and go volunteer with Mother Teresa, then I wanted to go to a “school that has nuns in it”, etc etc) It still bugs me - not undermining the importance of nuns…I guess that ‘little Laura’ in me still wishes the option to be a “priest” was there

So yup, those are/have been my biggest obstacles. If I can think of any other, I’ll mention it later on

 

[kch86]

Hm, interesting question. Well, after about 7 years of being an atheist (I was a non-practicing Catholic as a kid), at 21 I met a wonderful guy, who happened to be the most Catholic person I’d ever met. We fell in love. Our relationship was always very spiritual, and very intense. It was a constant spiritual exchange, especially at the beginning. To sum it up: shortly after we started officially dating, I had a very personal and incredibly strong experience with God while meditating. That pushed me to look more and more into Catholicism…few months later I started going to Mass with my then boyfriend (we broke up about 4 months ago). Shortly after, I went to Confession. A year later, I did my Confirmation. And now here I am

My first big obstacle I think was the idea of Confession. It took me a long while to go to Confession, partly because of fear and insecurity (in GREAT part because of that!), but in great part, too, because I didn’t undestand why I had to do it. My mom had always told me she found it ridiculous to have to tell your deepest “secrets” to another human being you don’t even know. She said that wasn’t needed to have a relationship with God. Naturally, I leaned on this excuse whenever my then boyfriend tried to make me understand why Confession is a good thing. Eventually, I understood. Especially after my first Confession. (This is a time when I became obsessed with Tenth Avenue North’s song ‘Healing Begins’, which talks about Confession. If anyone has doubts about Confession, they should look for the video they did explaining that song. It’s on youtube…and it’s one of my faves )

My other two obstacles - which are still there - are the Church’s stance on homosexuality and the fact that only men can become priests. I was talking to a friend the other day, who’s also a Catholic convert, and he has the exact same issues with the teachings of the Church. I won’t go into the whole thing about homosexuality because that conversation generally takes hours! But yeah. And as for the other thing…I remember when I was very little, I realized that “girls couldn’t be priests”…so I got angry and said I’d be a priest (I had an odd fixation on religion when I was little. I wanted to be a priest, then I wanted to be a nun and go volunteer with Mother Teresa, then I wanted to go to a “school that has nuns in it”, etc etc) It still bugs me - not undermining the importance of nuns…I guess that ‘little Laura’ in me still wishes the option to be a “priest” was there

So yup, those are/have been my biggest obstacles. If I can think of any other, I’ll mention it later on

I’m glad you’ve been able to overcome some of your obstacles to Catholicism. A true confession is also an amazing exercise in humility and truly teaches a person to let go of their ego and accept their own shortcomings, as well as helping them recognise their need for a Saviour.

As for homosexuality, I do not wish to derail the thread, so let me just say that I’m 25 with homosexual inclinations, and even though it may be difficult to understand from your perspective, I can with full confidence tell you that the Church has very good reasons for teaching the way it teaches and that its teachings are absolutely and most certainly true, and indeed that following them is certainly far more conducive towards happiness in this world, not even mentioning the next.

 

[vnovak]

On a doctrinal level, I had no obstacles. By the time I entered RCIA I had known for several years that I wanted to join the Church and was well-acquainted with the Church’s positions (through research and coming from a historically Catholic family) and found myself in agreement with all of them. My family, although they had left the Church, still hold it in high regard and were very accepting of my choice. Emotionally, though, it was initially hard to leave the only church (Methodist) I had known all my life and also leaving behind members of my old congregation who helped raise me. I got over that as I started making more Catholic friends. There are little things I miss such as traditional hymns with a piano and organ (I attend the parish based on my university…as such the music choice is very contemporary with guitar accompaniment) Those, however, were just sentimental things. I have had no desire to go back.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Yes you are right. I can only speak for myself and for my journey.
I suppose my “Pride and Ego” are still a problem, even now.

As to my qualification to understand…Again you are right, I really have none…
It’s just that, from my experience in discussions with “bible only” protestants, when issues of teaching, history, Church structure etc. come up, I am able to present many positive arguments and passages in support of the Authoritative Church, but when I ask for the same from them, I am met with silence.
Yet, even in this inability to demonstrate a sound Scriptural or historical basis for SS and the Protestant model the people that I was discussing this with clung to the idea that Protestantism is more biblical than Catholicism.
I suppose I have surmised from this that, at least in the cases of these individuals, t was pride and ego that prevented their recognition of what I was trying to convey.

But then again - maybe it is just my own ego - and impatience - at work. Naturally I think everyone should see what I see…

Anyway - Enough trying to justify myself.

As I said initially - you are right. I cannot truly speak for others and I apologize for any offense I have caused.

Peace
James

No offense taken, James. I meant my post just as a reminder that we’re complex and varied creatures.

I also would hope people would be open to the idea that what seems crystal clear to one person—so clear that they’d have to suppress their conscience to ignore or deny it----may, for various reasons, seem far from clear to another equally soul-searching and honest person despite that second person’s genuine openness to the Holy Spirit, holy life, and honest scholarship.

I know people much more knowledgeable of Christian history, the history of Jewish religious practice, the Early Church Fathers, and the Bible than I am. A number of them have seriously explored Catholicism with an open mind and heart. Every one that I know who has done that has come away with a respect for Catholicism. Yet, they haven’t converted to Catholicism for a variety of reasons. It would be wrong to assume that those reasons are just self-deceptive rationalizations or ignorance on their part.

For me, if I ever were to convert to Catholicism, though I don’t foresee that happening, I would hope I would respect the integrity of those more knowledgeable and righteous than I who have explored Catholicism and stayed non-Catholic. I hope I would remember that they may be right to stay where they are, and that none of us–absolutely none of us —will know till Judgment Day if our spiritual choices and beliefs were correct. The Lord Himself will judge us rightly.

Peace, James. That was a kind post from you.

 

[AbideWithMe]

I’m sure many Protestants humbly submit themselves to the authority of Scripture as well as they know how to. Pride and ego, however, can indeed be a factor in one persisting in error, even from your perspective as a Protestant.

When two Protestants disagree and one’s understanding of a particular part of Scripture is correct and the other one’s erroneous, there is a chance that the one who is in error may continue to persist in that error for subconscious reasons of pride and ego, even when shown how to interpret that particular part of Scripture correctly.

I agree with you that painting all Protestants with the same brush is unfair, but I would say that pride and ego is very significant in causing both Protestants and Catholics alike to be blinded to the truth and to continue in persisting in error.

Agreed, kch86.