Why be Catholic?

[Ben_Bet_Beh]

I am a middle aged man and have been born and raised in a faithful Catholic family. I also have been faithful to what the Catholic Church believes and teaches to the best of my ability over the years. I have also studied what the Catholic Church believes and teaches and in theory I agree with everything that it teaches.

However, there is also an element of the Catholic Church that is quite troubling to me. Although the teachings appear sound to me, how the Catholic Church applies those teachings have been suspect. It is causing a sort of crisis of faith for me. Normally the best advice to be given would be to consult a parish priest or something to that effect. However, as a layperson, I am looking for a layperson’s perspective on how to reconcile the Church with it’s faulty members.

The Bible mentions something to the effect of ‘by their fruits you shall know them’. In my own life, having interacted with persons at my local parish and other parishes I have been associated with, there is an element of superiority by some, whiners by others, and downright deceptiveness by a few as well. Don’t get me wrong, there are also plenty of very loving Christian souls in the Catholic circles I am associated with as well. Then let’s throw in the bishops who do not conform to the Magisterium…and then a Magisterium that does little or acts too slowly to act on whatever issue is at hand.

This has gotten me questioning how throughly I have investigated my own faith. Perhaps being a cradle Catholic has been a bit of a disadvantage for me. Perhaps I have instinctively given my own church’s teachings the ‘benefit of the doubt’ and haven’t seriously considered that my personal biases haven’t allowed me to consider that the Catholic Church could be wrong about doctrine {fill in the blank}.

I know many people who are good honest people. Many of them are Catholic. Yet many are also non-practicing Catholics, Protestants, and in some cases atheists. I have to admit I know more practicing Catholics who aren’t very good Christians than non-Catholics. Admittedly however, this is possibly the result of being a regular church-goer and therefore by default will know more “bad” Catholics. When I say “bad” Catholics, I don’t mean those who do not follow the Church’s teachings from a legalistic standpoint. I mean bad in the sense of not looking out for their fellow man like you would expect to see from a Christian person.

With all this in mind, it has gotten me thinking as to how important it is for me to be a Catholic when the Catholic Church itself says that one does not need to be Catholic to be saved? Yes, the Church teaches that it is through the Church that non-Catholics can be saved. However, I wish the fruits of practicing Catholics would be clearer for me to discern if I am indeed in the true Church.

Could you all help me with some evidence that supports that the Catholic Church is far and away not only the best option for my salvation, but THE option for my salvation?

 

[davidv]

I am a middle aged man and have been born and raised in a faithful Catholic family. I also have been faithful to what the Catholic Church believes and teaches to the best of my ability over the years. I have also studied what the Catholic Church believes and teaches and in theory I agree with everything that it teaches.

However, there is also an element of the Catholic Church that is quite troubling to me. Although the teachings appear sound to me, how the Catholic Church applies those teachings have been suspect. It is causing a sort of crisis of faith for me. Normally the best advice to be given would be to consult a parish priest or something to that effect. However, as a layperson, I am looking for a layperson’s perspective on how to reconcile the Church with it’s faulty members.

The Bible mentions something to the effect of ‘by their fruits you shall know them’. In my own life, having interacted with persons at my local parish and other parishes I have been associated with, there is an element of superiority by some, whiners by others, and downright deceptiveness by a few as well. Don’t get me wrong, there are also plenty of very loving Christian souls in the Catholic circles I am associated with as well. Then let’s throw in the bishops who do not conform to the Magisterium…and then a Magisterium that does little or acts too slowly to act on whatever issue is at hand.

This has gotten me questioning how throughly I have investigated my own faith. Perhaps being a cradle Catholic has been a bit of a disadvantage for me. Perhaps I have instinctively given my own church’s teachings the ‘benefit of the doubt’ and haven’t seriously considered that my personal biases haven’t allowed me to consider that the Catholic Church could be wrong about doctrine {fill in the blank}.

I know many people who are good honest people. Many of them are Catholic. Yet many are also non-practicing Catholics, Protestants, and in some cases atheists. I have to admit I know more practicing Catholics who aren’t very good Christians than non-Catholics. Admittedly however, this is possibly the result of being a regular church-goer and therefore by default will know more “bad” Catholics. When I say “bad” Catholics, I don’t mean those who do not follow the Church’s teachings from a legalistic standpoint. I mean bad in the sense of not looking out for their fellow man like you would expect to see from a Christian person.

With all this in mind, it has gotten me thinking as to how important it is for me to be a Catholic when the Catholic Church itself says that one does not need to be Catholic to be saved? Yes, the Church teaches that it is through the Church that non-Catholics can be saved. However, I wish the fruits of practicing Catholics would be clearer for me to discern if I am indeed in the true Church.

Could you all help me with some evidence that supports that the Catholic Church is far and away not only the best option for my salvation, but THE option for my salvation?

How many churches did Jesus start?
Which church today is still teaching the things that were in the church that Jesus started?

 

[DavidFilmer]

I doubt the problems you observe are limited to the Catholic Church - I think you could find this anywhere.

Jesus anticipated this. He told us the wheat and the tares would grow together in the Kingdom of Heaven until harvest time, when the tares would be thrown into the fire and the wheat will be gathered into the master’s barn (Mt 13 24-30). If a church has no bad members then it is not the Church that Jesus was describing (so, ironically, having sinners in the Church is kinda a Good Thing - it’s what Jesus said would happen. If we had no sinners, we would have a problem.)

Please judge the Church by Her Saints, not her sinners. Among the Saints we find heroic virtue, and no cause for shame. These are the people who most fully lived the life of the Church. They are the ones who show us what the Grace of God can do through the Church.

With all this in mind, it has gotten me thinking as to how important it is for me to be a Catholic when the Catholic Church itself says that one does not need to be Catholic to be saved?

That works only for people who don’t know better, and have never had reasonable opportunity to find out. That doesn’t sound like you.

 

[Ben_Bet_Beh]

How many churches did Jesus start?

Jesus only started one Church. Some Protestants would concur. The argument is whether or not that Church needs to be a physical entity or not. Do you have evidence that supports that the Church Christ founded needs to be a physical entity?

davidv:

Which church today is still teaching the things that were in the church that Jesus started?

I’ve studied the early Church and I find evidence that the same things that the Catholic Church teaches today were also taught by the early Church. Yet there are also things taught be the Church today that were not taught by the early Church. The Catholic argument is that doctrine develops over time. One could argue that Protestants claim the same thing when it comes to some of their own doctrines.

 

[Ben_Bet_Beh]

I doubt the problems you observe are limited to the Catholic Church - I think you could find this anywhere.

This is partly what I struggle with. There doesn’t seem to be anything that truly differentiates the Catholic Church from others.

DavidFilmer:

Jesus anticipated this. He told us the wheat and the tares would grow together in the Kingdom of Heaven until harvest time, when the tares would be thrown into the fire and the wheat will be gathered into the master’s barn (Mt 13 24-30). If a church has no bad members then it is not the Church that Jesus was describing (so, ironically, having sinners in the Church is kinda a Good Thing - it’s what Jesus said would happen. If we had no sinners, we would have a problem.)

I could be a member of another Christian denomination and say the same thing. There are good and bad members in other Christian denominations. This helps me retain a Christian faith (and even allows invincible ignorance to well-meaning atheists), but doesn’t say “hey, that’s the lightbulb that says Catholicism is the clear choice” either.

DavidFilmer:

Please judge the Church by Her Saints, not her sinners. Among the Saints we find heroic virtue, and no cause for shame. These are the people who most fully lived the life of the Church. They are the ones who show us what the Grace of God can do through the Church.

I really don’t like this analogy. I don’t believe I should be Catholic based on the heroism of Catholic saints as great as that may appear. Using that logic,I may as well become Hindu because of the heroic virtue that Ghandi displayed.

DavidFilmer:

That works only for people who don’t know better, and have never had reasonable opportunity to find out. That doesn’t sound like you.

I find beauty in the teachings of the Church. I do not deny this. Yet, this is part of my struggle. How do I know that there isn’t beauty in other religions teachings? How can I reasonably judge this based on my ingrained Catholic teachings all these years?

 

[Heuchler]

First, Welcome to the forums
I think the best way to answer this is to refer to something in Monsignor Ronald Knox’s book the Creed in Slow Motion. The question is not why are there bad people in the Church. It is how much worse would this person be without their belief. Another point is that the Church has produced more Saints than any other institution that I know of. Saints are the fruit that the Church is made to produce. If we work with the Church and actually forllow its teachings, we become Saints. Besides, sinners are meant to flock to the Church. It was made to transform sinners. Christ’s own disciples were sinners and tax collectors. However, Judas still betrayed Christ. Does that mean Christ was a bad teacher? No, this just means that Judas didn’t listen to Christ and didn’t follow him well. Likewise, there are sinners in the Church which resist its teachings. However, don’t let that stop you from transforming into a saint yourself

 

[Cyclophile]

I doubt the problems you observe are limited to the Catholic Church - I think you could find this anywhere.

Jesus anticipated this. He told us the wheat and the tares would grow together in the Kingdom of Heaven until harvest time, when the tares would be thrown into the fire and the wheat will be gathered into the master’s barn (Mt 13 24-30). If a church has no bad members then it is not the Church that Jesus was describing (so, ironically, having sinners in the Church is kinda a Good Thing - it’s what Jesus said would happen. If we had no sinners, we would have a problem.)

Please judge the Church by Her Saints, not her sinners. Among the Saints we find heroic virtue, and no cause for shame. These are the people who most fully lived the life of the Church. They are the ones who show us what the Grace of God can do through the Church.

 

[catholic1seeks]

You’re in the right place.
See the tracts here at Catholic Answers; you’ll be able to read on the topics that you’re interested in.

Here’s a link to the ones dealing with the Church:
catholic.com/library/church_papacy.asp

Also, as to the visible Church,
see this: catholic.com/thisrock/1993/9301fea2.asp

 

[DavidFilmer]

I could be a member of another Christian denomination and say the same thing.

Yes, exactly. So if you leave the Church because of these problems, you have no problem-free place to go. So, why leave in the first place?

I don’t believe I should be Catholic based on the heroism of Catholic saints as great as that may appear. Using that logic,I may as well become Hindu because of the heroic virtue that Ghandi displayed.

That wasn’t my point. You said you were thinking about leaving the Church because of the conduct of some “bad” Catholics. I was suggesting that you should consider staying because of the conduct of some very good Catholics (a goodness which astonishes me). The good Catholics have goodness to a MUCH greater degree than bad Catholics have badness - the good Catholics are a much better indicator of what is possible when a person fully lives the life of the Church.

It goes something like this:

SAINT average Catholic bad Catholic

I find beauty in the teachings of the Church. I do not deny this. Yet, this is part of my struggle. How do I know that there isn’t beauty in other religions teachings?

There will be. All religions are an attempt to understand and relate to God. To the extent that they do so, there will be beauty. But there is only one Church which dares to even claim to be the One True Church Established by Jesus Christ. No other church (except maybe for some kook cults) would dare make that claim. Because of what the Church is, nothing can equal or exceed it.

How can I reasonably judge this based on my ingrained Catholic teachings all these years?

As a convert, this is a question I have never had to ask myself - so I really don’t have an answer. But, let me ask you this - if you decided to leave the Church tomorrow, where do you think you might go next Sunday?

 

[Little_One0307]

The fullness of Truth and the means of salvation subsists in the Catholic Church. Need I say more?

Not to say that there is not truth and some salvation in other beliefs, but why oh why would I want to go anywhere else than where the fullness of Truth and the means of salvation can be found?

God bless.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

…sinners are meant to flock to the Church. It was made to transform sinners…

I agree that the Church has the ability to transform sinners, and it does. However, in practice, the Church is not getting it done to get those sinners to flock to the Church.

Heuchler:

…Judas didn’t listen to Christ and didn’t follow him well. Likewise, there are sinners in the Church which resist its teachings. However, don’t let that stop you from transforming into a saint yourself

Why does it have to be so difficult, moreso some than others?

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

You’re in the right place.
See the tracts here at Catholic Answers; you’ll be able to read on the topics that you’re interested in.

Here’s a link to the ones dealing with the Church:
catholic.com/library/church_papacy.asp

Also, as to the visible Church,
see this: catholic.com/thisrock/1993/9301fea2.asp

I am familiar with the tracts. However, I will review them again as it would be good to re-evaluate the information. Thanks!

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Yes, exactly. So if you leave the Church because of these problems, you have no problem-free place to go. So, why leave in the first place?

Fair enough point.

DavidFilmer:

That wasn’t my point. You said you were thinking about leaving the Church because of the conduct of some “bad” Catholics. I was suggesting that you should consider staying because of the conduct of some very good Catholics (a goodness which astonishes me). The good Catholics have goodness to a MUCH greater degree than bad Catholics have badness - the good Catholics are a much better indicator of what is possible when a person fully lives the life of the Church.

It goes something like this:

SAINT average Catholic bad Catholic

Hitler was a pretty bad Catholic, but I get your point.

DavidFilmer:

There will be. All religions are an attempt to understand and relate to God. To the extent that they do so, there will be beauty. But there is only one Church which dares to even claim to be the One True Church Established by Jesus Christ. No other church (except maybe for some kook cults) would dare make that claim. Because of what the Church is, nothing can equal or exceed it.

I will admit that Christianity seems lesser if it isn’t Catholic due in part to the claims it makes about being the church established by Christ.

DavidFilmer:

As a convert, this is a question I have never had to ask myself - so I really don’t have an answer. But, let me ask you this - if you decided to leave the Church tomorrow, where do you think you might go next Sunday?

I’ve done plenty of study of the early Church and am convinced that the Protestants are wrong. I admit that Orthodoxy is a possibility, due in part to the continuity of their teachings. Nonetheless, I think Catholicism makes a good case for the papacy. Other than that, if I find Catholicism to be false and Orthodoxy to be a poor replacement, it seems that another religion would be sought after - if it exists. Atheism seems a poor option since it ironically takes too much faith not to believe this existence wasn’t created by at the very least a someone.

 

[FCEGM]

I am a middle aged man and have been born and raised in a faithful Catholic family. I also have been faithful to what the Catholic Church believes and teaches to the best of my ability over the years. I have also studied what the Catholic Church believes and teaches and in theory I agree with everything that it teaches.

However, there is also an element of the Catholic Church that is quite troubling to me. Although the teachings appear sound to me, how the Catholic Church applies those teachings have been suspect. It is causing a sort of crisis of faith for me. Normally the best advice to be given would be to consult a parish priest or something to that effect. However, as a layperson, I am looking for a layperson’s perspective on how to reconcile the Church with it’s faulty members.

The Bible mentions something to the effect of ‘by their fruits you shall know them’. In my own life, having interacted with persons at my local parish and other parishes I have been associated with, there is an element of superiority by some, whiners by others, and downright deceptiveness by a few as well. Don’t get me wrong, there are also plenty of very loving Christian souls in the Catholic circles I am associated with as well. Then let’s throw in the bishops who do not conform to the Magisterium…and then a Magisterium that does little or acts too slowly to act on whatever issue is at hand.

This has gotten me questioning how throughly I have investigated my own faith. Perhaps being a cradle Catholic has been a bit of a disadvantage for me. Perhaps I have instinctively given my own church’s teachings the ‘benefit of the doubt’ and haven’t seriously considered that my personal biases haven’t allowed me to consider that the Catholic Church could be wrong about doctrine {fill in the blank}.

I know many people who are good honest people. Many of them are Catholic. Yet many are also non-practicing Catholics, Protestants, and in some cases atheists. I have to admit I know more practicing Catholics who aren’t very good Christians than non-Catholics. Admittedly however, this is possibly the result of being a regular church-goer and therefore by default will know more “bad” Catholics. When I say “bad” Catholics, I don’t mean those who do not follow the Church’s teachings from a legalistic standpoint. I mean bad in the sense of not looking out for their fellow man like you would expect to see from a Christian person.

With all this in mind, it has gotten me thinking as to how important it is for me to be a Catholic when the Catholic Church itself says that one does not need to be Catholic to be saved? Yes, the Church teaches that it is through the Church that non-Catholics can be saved. However, I wish the fruits of practicing Catholics would be clearer for me to discern if I am indeed in the true Church.

Could you all help me with some evidence that supports that the Catholic Church is far and away not only the best option for my salvation, but THE option for my salvation?

As has already been said, one looks to the best and that is the evidence of the Saints whose lives of Faith went far beyond the good in the denominations; one then looks to the sacramental life and their many-varied lives of prayer and work for the Kingdom which formed them into true images of their Savior.

Frank Sheed in his Theology for Beginners has an excellent passage that pertains to your difficulty:

“It is the especial meaning of the Church that in it Our Lord unites men to Himself through humanity - not through some ideal humanity, but through the humanity, good, bad, and indifferent, that actually exists. As Matthew Arnold notes, where other religions suggest a special type of man, Catholics suggest ‘all the pell mell of the men and women of Shakespeare’s plays. There is a certain kind of spiritual man who finds all this intolerable. His every instinct is revolted at the thought of Christ’s working in and through, and of himself being sanctified in and through, this mixed crowd of human beings. The hot smell of humanity is too strong for him. He would have his own direct relation with God, excluding the turbulence of humanity; or he would make his own choice of the men he feels God would choose. But this is preciousness and folly. It is as though the man Christ healed by the touch of His spittle had asked to be healed some other way - he was a refined man, perhaps, brought up to regard spittle as vulgar, or even unhygienic. One cannot be thus delicate about the Gifts of God.’”

 

[Bookcat]

Q: Why be Catholic?

A: Jesus of Nazareth…the Christ and Son of God

Q:Why be Catholic?

A: Fullness of revealed Truth and of course the Sacraments etc…

I came into full communion with the Catholic Church so many years ago due (among other things) to it being the Church *he *founded …in him is true life and in the Catholic Church is the full means to such…what he gives us (more of course could be said etc…for there is a rich mystery here…but being short here)

Now among the billions of Catholics are there many who do not live as they should? Yes of course…and so too there are those who do and those who do so with heroic virtue…(Bl. Mother Theresa etc)

 

[Bookcat]

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

II THE CHURCH IS HOLY

823 "The Church . . . is held, as a matter of faith, to be unfailingly holy. This is because Christ, the Son of God, who with the Father and the Spirit is hailed as ‘alone holy,’ loved the Church as his Bride, giving himself up for her so as to sanctify her; he joined her to himself as his body and endowed her with the gift of the Holy Spirit for the glory of God."289 The Church, then, is "the holy People of God,"290 and her members are called "saints."291

824 United with Christ, the Church is sanctified by him; through him and with him she becomes sanctifying. "All the activities of the Church are directed, as toward their end, to the sanctification of men in Christ and the glorification of God."292 It is in the Church that "the fullness of the means of salvation"293 has been deposited. It is in her that "by the grace of God we acquire holiness."294

825 "The Church on earth is endowed already with a sanctity that is real though imperfect."295 In her members perfect holiness is something yet to be acquired: "Strengthened by so many and such great means of salvation, all the faithful, whatever their condition or state - though each in his own way - are called by the Lord to that perfection of sanctity by which the Father himself is perfect."296

826 Charity is the soul of the holiness to which all are called: it "governs, shapes, and perfects all the means of sanctification."297

If the Church was a body composed of different members, it couldn’t lack the noblest of all; it must have a Heart, and a Heart BURNING WITH LOVE.
and I realized that this love alone was the true motive force which enabled the other members of the Church to act; if it ceased to function, the Apostles would forget to preach the gospel, the Martyrs would refuse to shed their blood.
LOVE, IN FACT, IS THE VOCATION WHICH INCLUDES ALL OTHERS; IT’S A UNIVERSE OF ITS OWN, COMPRISING ALL TIME AND SPACE - IT’S ETERNAL!298

827 "Christ, ‘holy, innocent, and undefiled,’ knew nothing of sin, but came only to expiate the sins of the people. the Church, however, clasping sinners to her bosom, at once holy and always in need of purification, follows constantly the path of penance and renewal."299 All members of the Church, including her ministers, must acknowledge that they are sinners.300 In everyone, the weeds of sin will still be mixed with the good wheat of the Gospel until the end of time.301 Hence the Church gathers sinners already caught up in Christ’s salvation but still on the way to holiness:

The Church is therefore holy, though having sinners in her midst, because she herself has no other life but the life of grace. If they live her life, her members are sanctified; if they move away from her life, they fall into sins and disorders that prevent the radiation of her sanctity. This is why she suffers and does penance for those offenses, of which she has the power to free her children through the blood of Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit.302

828 By canonizing some of the faithful, i.e., by solemnly pro claiming that they practiced heroic virtue and lived in fidelity to God’s grace, the Church recognizes the power of the Spirit of holiness within her and sustains the hope of believers by proposing the saints to them as models and intercessors.303 "The saints have always been the source and origin of renewal in the most difficult moments in the Church’s history."304 Indeed, "holiness is the hidden source and infallible measure of her apostolic activity and missionary zeal."305

829 “But while in the most Blessed Virgin the Church has already reached that perfection whereby she exists without spot or wrinkle, the faithful still strive to conquer sin and increase in holiness. and so they turn their eyes to Mary”:306 in her, the Church is already the “all-holy.”

( vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM )

 

[Julian0404]

Jesus only started one Church. Some Protestants would concur. The argument is whether or not that Church needs to be a physical entity or not. Do you have evidence that supports that the Church Christ founded needs to be a physical entity?

This “invisible church” vs physical church has been a long established spin by Christians who do not want to enter into the Catholic Faith. The response is basic - was JESUS physical or invisible? - Therefore, would HE want HIS church to represent HIM by being physical or invisible? JESUS did not create an invisible faith, church or apostles, HE created an actual physical church and apostles so teach the faith - not to “imagine” the faith.

I’ve studied the early Church and I find evidence that the same things that the Catholic Church teaches today were also taught by the early Church. Yet there are also things taught be the Church today that were not taught by the early Church. The Catholic argument is that doctrine develops over time. One could argue that Protestants claim the same thing when it comes to some of their own doctrines.

JESUS knew that “over time” HIS church would come under attack as it has even before the apostles had died. HE therefore, established that Peter should have and carry “they keys to the Kingdom, that whatever he loosed in earth would be loosed in heaven and whatever he bound on earth would be bound in heaven”. JESUS prepared for the “over time” arguement by assigning one person who is responsible for the final authority of all dogma and doctrine - not a Christian committee who on one side allows for gay bishops and on the other side opposes gay bishops.

 

[Julian0404]

This is partly what I struggle with. There doesn’t seem to be anything that truly differentiates the Catholic Church from others.

Actually there are some very concrete and huge difference created by GOD HIMSELF. In order to allow HIS people to know HIS church HE gave it four signs, which are ONE - HOLY - CATHOLIC - APOSTOLIC. Get a copy of the Catechism and read about them

I could be a member of another Christian denomination and say the same thing. There are good and bad members in other Christian denominations. This helps me retain a Christian faith (and even allows invincible ignorance to well-meaning atheists), but doesn’t say “hey, that’s the lightbulb that says Catholicism is the clear choice” either.

I really don’t like this analogy. I don’t believe I should be Catholic based on the heroism of Catholic saints as great as that may appear. Using that logic,I may as well become Hindu because of the heroic virtue that Ghandi displayed.

I find beauty in the teachings of the Church. I do not deny this. Yet, this is part of my struggle. How do I know that there isn’t beauty in other religions teachings? How can I reasonably judge this based on my ingrained Catholic teachings all these years?

 

[meltzerboy]

I am a middle aged man and have been born and raised in a faithful Catholic family. I also have been faithful to what the Catholic Church believes and teaches to the best of my ability over the years. I have also studied what the Catholic Church believes and teaches and in theory I agree with everything that it teaches.

However, there is also an element of the Catholic Church that is quite troubling to me. Although the teachings appear sound to me, how the Catholic Church applies those teachings have been suspect. It is causing a sort of crisis of faith for me. Normally the best advice to be given would be to consult a parish priest or something to that effect. However, as a layperson, I am looking for a layperson’s perspective on how to reconcile the Church with it’s faulty members.

The Bible mentions something to the effect of ‘by their fruits you shall know them’. In my own life, having interacted with persons at my local parish and other parishes I have been associated with, there is an element of superiority by some, whiners by others, and downright deceptiveness by a few as well. Don’t get me wrong, there are also plenty of very loving Christian souls in the Catholic circles I am associated with as well. Then let’s throw in the bishops who do not conform to the Magisterium…and then a Magisterium that does little or acts too slowly to act on whatever issue is at hand.

This has gotten me questioning how throughly I have investigated my own faith. Perhaps being a cradle Catholic has been a bit of a disadvantage for me. Perhaps I have instinctively given my own church’s teachings the ‘benefit of the doubt’ and haven’t seriously considered that my personal biases haven’t allowed me to consider that the Catholic Church could be wrong about doctrine {fill in the blank}.

I know many people who are good honest people. Many of them are Catholic. Yet many are also non-practicing Catholics, Protestants, and in some cases atheists. I have to admit I know more practicing Catholics who aren’t very good Christians than non-Catholics. Admittedly however, this is possibly the result of being a regular church-goer and therefore by default will know more “bad” Catholics. When I say “bad” Catholics, I don’t mean those who do not follow the Church’s teachings from a legalistic standpoint. I mean bad in the sense of not looking out for their fellow man like you would expect to see from a Christian person.

With all this in mind, it has gotten me thinking as to how important it is for me to be a Catholic when the Catholic Church itself says that one does not need to be Catholic to be saved? Yes, the Church teaches that it is through the Church that non-Catholics can be saved. However, I wish the fruits of practicing Catholics would be clearer for me to discern if I am indeed in the true Church.

Could you all help me with some evidence that supports that the Catholic Church is far and away not only the best option for my salvation, but THE option for my salvation?

Many, even devout Catholics, wrestle with certain teachings of the Church, as I’ve found out on this Forum and among some of my friends who are Catholic. That doesn’t mean, however, they abandon the Church. There are other alternatives: praying in order to better find the wisdom to understand, studying the meaning of those doctrines you may not fully agree with, and privately disagreeing but still accepting on the basis that you may not understand for now the whole truth behind the doctrines but may find the grace to one day understand. The same is true in my own faith. Further, I’m going to say to you what I just said to another poster with a similar dilemma, and that is, although I am aware Christianity is very much focused on personal salvation, realize too that Catholicism offers you a wonderful code of ethics in leading a moral and just life here on Earth, in which you are taught to love G-d and your neighbor, including friend and foe alike. Think of the Saints who concerned themselves with doing G-d’s Will on Earth and behaving in a Christ-like way toward their fellow man. This is the faith-based behavior that Catholicism teaches you to strive for. Pay more attention to this and G-d’s love rather than what you might fear about the truth found in other religions.

 

[lutherlic]

You can’t compare churches like you would compare other organizations.

This is the Church with the fullness of the Christian faith. That is, all of the truth and nothing but the truth. It is protected by the Holy Spirit until the end of time.

Our Church has valid Holy Orders. We have the sacraments, particularly the Eucharist. We have the Mass.

Yes, we are also composed of sinners and we are organizationally frustrating at times. Yet we will always survive against the gates of hell.