When you just can't believe a teaching(m)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Modestly_Anne
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Modestly_Anne

Guest
Be kind, this is a sincere question and if you are going to make light of it, please just don’t bother replying.

I’ve been studying Catholicism for many years now. I’ve read the Catechism many times from cover to cover and looked up a great number of the biblical references.

However there are a few things that I struggle with but my question is about what I consider my big one, that no matter how hard I have prayed or tried can not seem to make myself believe.

The “Real Presence”. I’ve read and read, I’ve attended Mass many times, but I just can’t seem to make myself believe in transubstantiation.

I study scripture and I see how many times Christ spoke, using parables analogies or symbols to represent things throughout his earthly ministry and it just doesn’t seem that he was speaking any differently here. He knew His body and blood would be shed for our salvation and instructed the Apostles to remember Him by the breaking of bread and drinking from the cup.

I’ve heard the explanation, that it had to be literal, or it would not have upset the Jews that were listening and caused them to leave, but that’s not necessarily true and would take a longer post to explain why that is and it’s not really my question so I won’t waste your time with that.

I read these threads over and over, and how many feel there is no salvation outside the Church and yet, what is one to do when they seriously can NOT believe something?

I’ve even read some of the Catholic Apologetics books, like Scott Hahn’s writings, but it hasn’t really changed my understanding of what scripture tells us about it. I’m sure part of it is my life long upbringing and understanding in regards to it being a representation and perhaps my questioning of whether the organization of the Church could have been misunderstood way back in the first days after the Apostles death but that’s a whole other issue:-)

It’s not arrogance or whatever else some might say, it’s a total inability to make myself believe something that I don’t understand to be true, no matter how much I study or pray about it.

So I just wondered what a Catholic would suggest one is to do in such a case.
 
If you’ve read all the apologetics, passages, and truly studied, I believe the only thing left is to have faith.

Jesus said, blessed is he who believes without seeing right? I suppose that all you can do is continue to pray. There are Eucharistic miracles out there to mull over as well, but then again, it’s STILL about faith unless a eucharistic miracle would happen to you personally.
 
Luke Chapter 24 Specifically the verse I have bolded. They came to recognize him in the breaking of the bread. If there were no True Presence, would this be possible? If the Eucharist was merely symbolic, there would be NO meaning, no sacrificial love.

BTW, which Scott Hahn books have you read?

Now that very day two of them were going to a village seven miles from Jerusalem called Emmaus, 14 and they were conversing about all the things that had occurred. 15 And it happened that while they were conversing and debating, Jesus himself drew near and walked with them, 16 7 but their eyes were prevented from recognizing him. 17 He asked them, “What are you discussing as you walk along?” They stopped, looking downcast. 18 One of them, named Cleopas, said to him in reply, “Are you the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know of the things that have taken place there in these days?” 19 And he replied to them, “What sort of things?” They said to him, “The things that happened to Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, 20 how our chief priests and rulers both handed him over to a sentence of death and crucified him. 21 But we were hoping that he would be the one to redeem Israel; and besides all this, it is now the third day since this took place. 22 Some women from our group, however, have astounded us: they were at the tomb early in the morning 23 and did not find his body; they came back and reported that they had indeed seen a vision of angels who announced that he was alive. 24 Then some of those with us went to the tomb and found things just as the women had described, but him they did not see.” 25 And he said to them, “Oh, how foolish you are! How slow of heart to believe all that the prophets spoke! 26 Was it not necessary that the Messiah should suffer 8 these things and enter into his glory?” 27 Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them what referred to him in all the scriptures. 28 As they approached the village to which they were going, he gave the impression that he was going on farther. 29 But they urged him, “Stay with us, for it is nearly evening and the day is almost over.” So he went in to stay with them. 30 And it happened that, while he was with them at table, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them. 31 With that their eyes were opened and they recognized him, but he vanished from their sight. 32 Then they said to each other, “Were not our hearts burning (within us) while he spoke to us on the way and opened the scriptures to us?” 33 So they set out at once and returned to Jerusalem where they found gathered together the eleven and those with them 34 who were saying, “The Lord has truly been raised and has appeared to Simon!” 35 Then the two recounted what had taken place on the way and how he was made known to them in the breaking of the bread.** 36 **
 
Modestly_Anne said:
So I just wondered what a Catholic would suggest one is to do in such a case.
Click to expand...
Thank you for asking. A little background on myself, so that you may understand where I am coming from: I was born, raised, and baptized Southern Baptist, but left Christianity to eventual Atheism in High School. I was Confirmed into the Catholic faith in the spring of my Senior year, which was 2010. So, comparatively, I’m still fresh meat.

My experience is that Transubstantiation is the single most difficult teaching of the Church. I will not try to convince you, as I am no apologist. I will, however, hold you accountable and will try to give you some resources.

To begin to accept Transubstantiation there must be a few philosophical premises that you are willing to accept:
  1. reality is objective.
  2. we can know this reality.
  3. reality is independent of us: our wants, hopes, and dreams do not determine reality.
Beyond that, you have already studied the Scriptures and the Catechism. Now, look at the Church Fathers and St. Thomas Aquinas. As for apologists, I prefer Dr. Peter Kreeft to Scott Hahn. Dr. Kreeft does not directly address the Eucharist, from his online resources, but gives much information which may indirectly enlighten you on the subject.

I would advise you, above everything in the previous paragraph, to familiarize yourself, if you have not already done so, with Plato and Aristotle.

Above all, please, do not give up on the Eucharist. Once you get it, you will never want to let it go. Continue searching. There is something, somewhere, which will convince you. If I can help you find it, I’ll be glad to do so. Pax tecum.
 
At the Last Supper, Jesus said as he broke the bread, “This is my body…”; when he offered the cup he said “This is my blood…” Do this is memory of me. This, to me, is the defining moment to believe that the transubstantiation takes place.
The priest is acting in persona Christi. He is both priest celebrant and victim. When the priest repeats the words of Christ, although the accidents remain, we truly believe that the host and the wine are transubstantiated into the body and blood of Jesus.

There was a priest some time ago who also could not grasp this concept. He was on a trip to Rome and went to a chapel to say Mass. The host after consecration started to bleed. This is not a fairy tale, it was corroborated by many.

And, yes, faith does play a huge part in the Catholic religion and faith is beautiful.
 
**
jediliz said:
Luke Chapter 24 Specifically the verse I have bolded. They came to recognize him in the breaking of the bread. If there were no True Presence, would this be possible? If the Eucharist was merely symbolic, there would be NO meaning, no sacrificial love.
Click to expand...
BTW, which Scott Hahn books have you read?
Rome Sweet Home, Reasons to Believe, and The Lamb’s Supper.

Now that very day two of them were going to a village seven miles from Jerusalem called Emmaus, 14 and they were conversing about all the things that had occurred. 15 And it happened that while they were conversing and debating, Jesus himself drew near and walked with them, 16 7 but their eyes were prevented from recognizing him. 17 He asked them, “What are you discussing as you walk along?” They stopped, looking downcast. 18 One of them, named Cleopas, said to him in reply, “Are you the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know of the things that have taken place there in these days?” 19 And he replied to them, “What sort of things?” They said to him, “The things that happened to Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, 20 how our chief priests and rulers both handed him over to a sentence of death and crucified him. 21 But we were hoping that he would be the one to redeem Israel; and besides all this, it is now the third day since this took place. 22 Some women from our group, however, have astounded us: they were at the tomb early in the morning 23 and did not find his body; they came back and reported that they had indeed seen a vision of angels who announced that he was alive. 24 Then some of those with us went to the tomb and found things just as the women had described, but him they did not see.” 25 And he said to them, “Oh, how foolish you are! How slow of heart to believe all that the prophets spoke! 26 Was it not necessary that the Messiah should suffer 8 these things and enter into his glory?” 27 Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them what referred to him in all the scriptures. 28 As they approached the village to which they were going, he gave the impression that he was going on farther. 29 But they urged him, “Stay with us, for it is nearly evening and the day is almost over.” So he went in to stay with them. 30 And it happened that, while he was with them at table, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them. 31 With that their eyes were opened and they recognized him, but he vanished from their sight. 32 Then they said to each other, “Were not our hearts burning (within us) while he spoke to us on the way and opened the scriptures to us?” 33 So they set out at once and returned to Jerusalem where they found gathered together the eleven and those with them 34 who were saying, “The Lord has truly been raised and has appeared to Simon!” 35 Then the two recounted what had taken place on the way and how he was made known to them in the breaking of the bread.** 36 ****

I don’t understand how their could be no sacrificial love if Christ was not truly present each time we break bread.

His dying on the cross was His sacrifice, his love gift to us, and it is sufficient enough to cover all time. The sending of the Holy Spirit as our comforter is another sign of the sacrificial love as Christ had to die and rise before it could be sent.
 
Modestly_Anne said:
The “Real Presence”. I’ve read and read, I’ve attended Mass many times, but I just can’t seem to make myself believe in transubstantiation.

I study scripture and I see how many times Christ spoke, using parables analogies or symbols to represent things throughout his earthly ministry and it just doesn’t seem that he was speaking any differently here. He knew His body and blood would be shed for our salvation and instructed the Apostles to remember Him by the breaking of bread and drinking from the cup.

I’ve heard the explanation, that it had to be literal, or it would not have upset the Jews that were listening and caused them to leave, but that’s not necessarily true and would take a longer post to explain why that is and it’s not really my question so I won’t waste your time with that.

So I just wondered what a Catholic would suggest one is to do in such a case.
Click to expand...
Many Protestants point to one particular verse in the Bread of Life Discourse in John 6 as proof that Jesus was only speaking metaphorically - John 6:63. However, this verse along with the 2 that follow (64 & 65) are my favorite verses for explaining just why he WASN’T speaking metaphorically.

John 6:63-65
*"It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life. *
***But there are some of you who do not believe." Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him. ***
*And he said, "For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father." *
Whose flesh was Jesus talking about? His? Absolutely not. Jesus’ flesh profits us everything. He gave up his Body on the cross for our redemption and salvation. It is OUR flesh and worldly thinking that profits nothing. That’s what he was talking about.

What he was telling those who were mumuring in disbelief was, "Don’t thihk as mere humans think as the Father has allowed you to think - spiritually - as he has granted you the knowledge. Some of you don’t believe because he has not granted you that knowledge."
Anne - the reason you do not believe may be because God has not granted this knowledge to you yet. Faith is a gift from God. How we use that faith - whether we accept or reject his teachings - is up to us. We must cooperate with God’s grace to believe. The Old Testament is filled with examples of the Jews refusing God. The New Testament as well (Matt. 23:37, Luke 13:34, John 6:66). It also speaks of our cooperation with his grace (1 Cor. 3:9, 2 Cor. 6:1).
**Remember that those who walked away from Christ in John 6 were believers - disciples - who had full, experiential knowledge of him. They had see him perform miracles. In fact, earlier in that same chapter, they watched him feed 5000 people with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish. **
However, when he told them that they had to eat (trogo, as an animal gnaws his food) his flesh and drink his blood - they simply could not handle what he was telling them.
**Hope that helps.
**
 
GKCT said:
At the Last Supper, Jesus said as he broke the bread, “This is my body…”; when he offered the cup he said “This is my blood…” Do this is memory of me. This, to me, is the defining moment to believe that the transubstantiation takes place.
The priest is acting in persona Christi. He is both priest celebrant and victim. When the priest repeats the words of Christ, although the accidents remain, we truly believe that the host and the wine are transubstantiated into the body and blood of Jesus.

There was a priest some time ago who also could not grasp this concept. He was on a trip to Rome and went to a chapel to say Mass. The host after consecration started to bleed. This is not a fairy tale, it was corroborated by many.

And, yes, faith does play a huge part in the Catholic religion and faith is beautiful.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your reply, I do understand what transubstantiation is and I agree that Faith is necessary and a beautiful thing.
 
Modestly_Anne said:
**

I don’t understand how their could be no sacrificial love if Christ was not truly present each time we break bread.

His dying on the cross was His sacrifice, his love gift to us, and it is sufficient enough to cover all time. The sending of the Holy Spirit as our comforter is another sign of the sacrificial love as Christ had to die and rise before it could be sent.**
Rev. 13:8**, when it tells us that Christ was crucified “before**** the foundation of the world**.” His is an eternal sacrifice. Rev. 5:6* says, “And I saw between the throne (with the four living creatures) and the elders a Lamb standing, as if slain*, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God, sent out into all the earth.”
In 1 Cor. 11:27-30, Paul speaks to the reality of the Eucharist and the severity of the consequences to those who take this lightly: * “Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord*. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying.”
This is pretty harsh language for something that Protestants claim is only a symbol.
This directly correlates to the Bread of Life discourse in John 6, where Jesus stated in no uncertain terms: “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man** and drink** his blood, you do not have life within you.
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food****, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.”
It is interesting to note that the usual Greek word used for human eating is “phagon**”, however, this is not the word used in these passages. St. John uses the word, “trogon”, which means, to munch or to gnaw - like an animal. Jesus was again using hyperbole as he often did to drive his point across so that the crowd would understand that he was not speaking metaphorically. He** meant** what he said.
Just as the Paschal Lamb was to be eaten, it is also true for the Lamb of God.
**In verse 60, his disciples said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?” ***
Did Jesus explain what he "really" meant? No, he said: “Does this shock you?*” He knew that some would not believe because they didn’t have true faith from the Father.
Click to expand...
 
ZDHayden said:
Thank you for asking. A little background on myself, so that you may understand where I am coming from: I was born, raised, and baptized Southern Baptist, but left Christianity to eventual Atheism in High School. I was Confirmed into the Catholic faith in the spring of my Senior year, which was 2010. So, comparatively, I’m still fresh meat.

My experience is that Transubstantiation is the single most difficult teaching of the Church. I will not try to convince you, as I am no apologist. I will, however, hold you accountable and will try to give you some resources.

To begin to accept Transubstantiation there must be a few philosophical premises that you are willing to accept:
  1. reality is objective.
  2. we can know this reality.
  3. reality is independent of us: our wants, hopes, and dreams do not determine reality.
Beyond that, you have already studied the Scriptures and the Catechism. Now, look at the Church Fathers and St. Thomas Aquinas. As for apologists, I prefer Dr. Peter Kreeft to Scott Hahn. Dr. Kreeft does not directly address the Eucharist, from his online resources, but gives much information which may indirectly enlighten you on the subject.

I would advise you, above everything in the previous paragraph, to familiarize yourself, if you have not already done so, with Plato and Aristotle.

Above all, please, do not give up on the Eucharist. Once you get it, you will never want to let it go. Continue searching. There is something, somewhere, which will convince you. If I can help you find it, I’ll be glad to do so. Pax tecum.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your reply. I will look into Kreeft’s writings and search out more of the Early Church Father’s.BTW I absolutely agree that reality has nothing to do with my feelings, hopes dreams or wants. I’m trying very hard to find the truth.

Thanks again.
 
I think it’s impressive that you recognize the potential effects of the culture and climate you were brought up in. In my experience, very few people truly recognize just how much we are each and all products of our upbringing. Few people today can fathom how easily a whole culture rationalized slavery in this country just a couple hundred years ago. In a couple hundred years from now, school kids will read and wonder how OUR generation could tolerate the abortion industry with such a lacklustre moral response to it. Cultural accomodation is part of human frailty.

With issues like this, of course, it cuts both ways. You may just wonder if catholics just believe it because WE have been conditioned to. So let’s step back from directly examining the Real Presence as discussed in Scripture and discuss instead what Scripture IS and what it isn’t. The bible clearly isn’t organized as a catechism. That very fact itself implies something significant. It implies that the reader is receiving his basic instruction from somewhere ELSE and that the Scriptures are intended to provide the larger context, back story and comprehensive picture of salvation history into which that catechesis fits. So at the time of the apostles, how did new christians receive their instruction? They were taught by the apostles themselves and then the bishops (and later priests) that the apostles ordained to supplement their numbers as the church grew. Contrary to what many seem to believe, the bible is NOT the only surviving set of writings from that period of history. There are a multitude of sources from that era that show that the Real Presence was a firm teaching of the church dating right back to apostolic times.

In fact even the Roman oppression of christianity often made scandalized sneering insults about how christians gathered in secret to practice primitive cannibalistic rituals where they ate the flesh of their god. Even the ENEMIES of the church in that period affirm what the teaching was! A good reading source compendium is Jurgens’ “Faith of the Early Fathers”. Since you seem to be a big reader, consider that next. Even if you still struggle with the idea of the Real Presence, reading the early historical accounts of christianity will show you very clearly how utterly foreign many protestant principles really are.
 
Hi,

I struggled for a long time with the Marian doctrines of the Catholic Church. I did what you did, I read up on everything that I could get my hands on.

Well after talking with my SD, he asked me a question, and so out of all sincerity I ask it of you.

Are you praying for the grace to have faith in the Eucharist? Faith is a gift. Sometimes belief in things take time. The best advice he gave to me was to continue to ask for faith, and yet to humbly acknowledge that even if I did not get faith, I would submit myself to the doctrines. of the Church.

I know this is personal testimony and might not hold credence in your eyes but I was very encouraged to see your last sentence. “I am trying hard to find the truth.”

When one seeks the Truth they will always find it. Sometimes we find it in ways we do not even realize could be possible. I will be praying for you.

In your OP you stated that you were trying to make yourself believe in transubstantiation, it is only God who will grant that certitude, that bone-deep faith about it. Pray for faith.

God Bless.
 
Modestly_Anne said:
Thank you for your reply. I will look into Kreeft’s writings and search out more of the Early Church Father’s.BTW I absolutely agree that reality has nothing to do with my feelings, hopes dreams or wants. I’m trying very hard to find the truth.

Thanks again.
Click to expand...
I would like to suggest Dr. Brandt Pitre’s new book called, “Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist”. He has his doctorate in New Testament and Ancient Judaism. Easy to read and will enlighten you! I know it did for me…

A very simple way I explain transubstantiation to young children (and older ones too) is by helping them understand about angels…they are pure spirits with no body of any kind, “therefore they do not appear to men exactly as they are; rather they manifest themselves in forms which God gives them so that they can be seen by those to whom he send them”(St. John Damascene). In the Eucharist, God uses the bread (physical property) so that we can receive Jesus in the form that he has chosen to give himself to feed us spiritually. The bread is no longer bread but only looks like it. Just as the angel isn’t a man, person with wings, animal etc,…but only looks like it in order for us to see him. Simple but it makes the complex easier to understand.

And lastly, find a perpetual adoration chapel and visit and ask God to show you that he is present in the Eucharist. He will:)
 
Modestly_Anne said:
Be kind, this is a sincere question and if you are going to make light of it, please just don’t bother replying.

I’ve been studying Catholicism for many years now. I’ve read the Catechism many times from cover to cover and looked up a great number of the biblical references.

However there are a few things that I struggle with but my question is about what I consider my big one, that no matter how hard I have prayed or tried can not seem to make myself believe.

The “Real Presence”. I’ve read and read, I’ve attended Mass many times, but I just can’t seem to make myself believe in transubstantiation.

I study scripture and I see how many times Christ spoke, using parables analogies or symbols to represent things throughout his earthly ministry and it just doesn’t seem that he was speaking any differently here. He knew His body and blood would be shed for our salvation and instructed the Apostles to remember Him by the breaking of bread and drinking from the cup.

I’ve heard the explanation, that it had to be literal, or it would not have upset the Jews that were listening and caused them to leave, but that’s not necessarily true and would take a longer post to explain why that is and it’s not really my question so I won’t waste your time with that.

I read these threads over and over, and how many feel there is no salvation outside the Church and yet, what is one to do when they seriously can NOT believe something?

I’ve even read some of the Catholic Apologetics books, like Scott Hahn’s writings, but it hasn’t really changed my understanding of what scripture tells us about it. I’m sure part of it is my life long upbringing and understanding in regards to it being a representation and perhaps my questioning of whether the organization of the Church could have been misunderstood way back in the first days after the Apostles death but that’s a whole other issue:-)

It’s not arrogance or whatever else some might say, it’s a total inability to make myself believe something that I don’t understand to be true, no matter how much I study or pray about it.

So I just wondered what a Catholic would suggest one is to do in such a case.
Click to expand...
Hi Anne, I understand and hear you. And from what I can gather Catholics themselves can strugggle too with certain teachings. I applaud :clapping: those such as Loboto-Me and Little One who have mentioned faith here. Little One also pointed out they can find themselves submiting even if they have difficulty believing. But as you pointed out, you’ve heard the explanations for instance of the literal physical RP belief. Yet you could just as easily give reasons why one would believe it is not necessarily true.

Folks mention ECFs. But even then it takes faith in those ECFs and in the Catholic Church’s interpretations because as you mentioned people of other faiths could well question whether there might have been misunderstanding way back in the first days after the Apostles.

This all reminds me of the Apostle Paul saying we walk by faith. Not by sight. And in the end faith is what it all comes down to. Otherwise it would not be called faith. God bless you on your lifelong faith walk with Him and peace be with you always.
 
CMatt25 said:
Hi Anne, I understand and hear you. And from what I can gather Catholics themselves can strugggle too with certain teachings. I applaud :clapping: those such as Loboto-Me and Little One who have mentioned faith here. Little One also pointed out they can find themselves submiting even if they have difficulty believing. But as you pointed out, you’ve heard the explanations for instance of the literal physical RP belief. Yet you could just as easily give reasons why one would believe it is not necessarily true. This all reminds me of the Apostle Paul saying we walk by faith. Not by sight. And in the end faith is what it all comes down to. Otherwise it would not be called faith. God bless you on your faith walk with Him and peace.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I do think that some people use struggling with certain truths as an excuse to leave the Catholic church or not be a part of it. I did. I will say this. I still struggle with many things the CC teaches, yet I am strongly considering a return to Catholicism. We can church hop all day long hoping to find that one church we agree with 100 precent without ever having doubts. I am going to say that this is probably not a realistic endeavor.

I mean in my lifetime I have been part of Baptist (as a child) Pentecostal (as a teenager, I did not move for doctrinal reasons, my friends went to that church), then converted to Catholicism. I then moved to Anglicanism because I had doubts about some Catholic teachings-but wanted to worship liturgically and sacrementally. Then I considered a move to Orthodoxy. Enough is enough. I have reasons why I can’t go back to being Pentecostal or Baptist, rooted in real disagreements that would cause schism in those churches, which is a sin. Catholicism is Holy and Apostolic. She has a rich spirituality.

Point is: Doctrinal doubts and wrestling with things are a part of our spiritual journey. We grow from these things. Searching for the perfect church where I will never have doubt is an exhausting thing. Faith is required.
 
mskejj said:
I would like to suggest Dr. Brandt Pitre’s new book called, “Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist”. He has his doctorate in New Testament and Ancient Judaism. Easy to read and will enlighten you! I know it did for me…

A very simple way I explain transubstantiation to young children (and older ones too) is by helping them understand about angels…they are pure spirits with no body of any kind, “therefore they do not appear to men exactly as they are; rather they manifest themselves in forms which God gives them so that they can be seen by those to whom he send them”(St. John Damascene). In the Eucharist, God uses the bread (physical property) so that we can receive Jesus in the form that he has chosen to give himself to feed us spiritually. The bread is no longer bread but only looks like it. Just as the angel isn’t a man, person with wings, animal etc,…but only looks like it in order for us to see him. Simple but it makes the complex easier to understand.

And lastly, find a perpetual adoration chapel and visit and ask God to show you that he is present in the Eucharist. He will:)
Click to expand...
Yes that book is on my reading list too! Just glancing through the other day I was impressed. Can’t wait to read it, sounds like a good book on the matter. All the sacraments are rootedor foreshadowed in the Jewish faith and tradition.
 
May I suggest this blogpost? The blogger is a priest, brought up in a fundamentalist church, converted to Anglicanism and eventually found his way to the Catholic church. He understands the protestant mindset and speaks the language. I found this very interesting and enlightening and I hope you will find it helpful.

gkupsidedown.blogspot.com/2010/04/do-this-in-remembrance-of-me.html

I also want to stress faith as crucial here. A friend of mine converted from atheism a couple of years ago. I asked which doctrines she found difficult to accept. She said that believing in God was the big thing for her but once that was sorted all the rest was easy and logical. Real Presence was a very natural thing for her to accept given that God is omnipotent. I remind myself of that whenever I’m tempted to decide what He can and can’t do. If Christ could rise from the dead than surely a piece of bread can become his flesh. 😉
 
JohnnyReb said:
Exactly. I do think that some people use struggling with certain truths as an excuse to leave the Catholic church or not be a part of it. I did. I will say this. I still struggle with many things the CC teaches, yet I am strongly considering a return to Catholicism. We can church hop all day long hoping to find that one church we agree with 100 precent without ever having doubts. I am going to say that this is probably not a realistic endeavor.

I mean in my lifetime I have been part of Baptist (as a child) Pentecostal (as a teenager, I did not move for doctrinal reasons, my friends went to that church), then converted to Catholicism. I then moved to Anglicanism because I had doubts about some Catholic teachings-but wanted to worship liturgically and sacrementally. Then I considered a move to Orthodoxy. Enough is enough. I have reasons why I can’t go back to being Pentecostal or Baptist, rooted in real disagreements that would cause schism in those churches, which is a sin. Catholicism is Holy and Apostolic. She has a rich spirituality.

Point is: Doctrinal doubts and wrestling with things are a part of our spiritual journey. We grow from these things. Searching for the perfect church where I will never have doubt is an exhausting thing. Faith is required.
Click to expand...
Johnny I can see what you are saying. While I haven’t physically travelled around as you have, mentally I doubt anyone would be more exhausted than me 🙂 if I didn’t sometimes just allow Him to carry me. And I believe perfection is hard to attain when humans are involved. There are things I struggle with too about the Catholic Church. A problem I still have though with Catholicism is it does still seem to me to expect you to submit even if you struggle and have not attained the faith to believe in something. In other words there seems less room for folks to use their God given reasoning and to have differences in matters of faith as they journey along their faith walks in search of the truth. And nowadays it even can appear folks are expected not only to adhere in matters of faith but to even submit to a certain brand of politics these days. In any case, I wish you well on your journey and if He leads you back, God bless you and peace be with you.
 
Modestly_Anne said:
Be kind, this is a sincere question and if you are going to make light of it, please just don’t bother replying.

I’ve been studying Catholicism for many years now. I’ve read the Catechism many times from cover to cover and looked up a great number of the biblical references.

However there are a few things that I struggle with but my question is about what I consider my big one, that no matter how hard I have prayed or tried can not seem to make myself believe.

The “Real Presence”. I’ve read and read, I’ve attended Mass many times, but I just can’t seem to make myself believe in transubstantiation.

I study scripture and I see how many times Christ spoke, using parables analogies or symbols to represent things throughout his earthly ministry and it just doesn’t seem that he was speaking any differently here. He knew His body and blood would be shed for our salvation and instructed the Apostles to remember Him by the breaking of bread and drinking from the cup.

I’ve heard the explanation, that it had to be literal, or it would not have upset the Jews that were listening and caused them to leave, but that’s not necessarily true and would take a longer post to explain why that is and it’s not really my question so I won’t waste your time with that.

I read these threads over and over, and how many feel there is no salvation outside the Church and yet, what is one to do when they seriously can NOT believe something?

I’ve even read some of the Catholic Apologetics books, like Scott Hahn’s writings, but it hasn’t really changed my understanding of what scripture tells us about it. I’m sure part of it is my life long upbringing and understanding in regards to it being a representation and perhaps my questioning of whether the organization of the Church could have been misunderstood way back in the first days after the Apostles death but that’s a whole other issue:-)

It’s not arrogance or whatever else some might say, it’s a total inability to make myself believe something that I don’t understand to be true, no matter how much I study or pray about it.

So I just wondered what a Catholic would suggest one is to do in such a case.
Click to expand...
I would suggest reading up on Eucharistic miracles. My brother, who died three years ago now, had the Host turn to bloody flesh in his mouth when he was in Medjugorja seven years ago. There were witnesses, including the Eucharistic minister, who saw it when he opened his mouth. He almost spit it out, but instead swallowed. The experience was beyond words for him. I think you have the problem of trying to understand a divine act. Just as His divinity was hidden in His humanity, so his flesh and blood are hidden in the Eucharist. Believe it. He didn’t look real divine hanging on the cross, but He was.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top