Why Should I be a Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JordanWoods
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JordanWoods

Guest
I’m not asking you to convince me to be a Catholic, although I’m thoroughly interested in investigating and possibly joining the Church. I’m definitely interested in learning as much as I can, that’s for sure. Is the Church really as historically documented as some say? I mean if there are documents that go all the way back to before 100 AD then why aren’t more people apart of this Church? I don’t know… just some thoughts racing through my head right now.
 
I’m not asking you to convince me to be a Catholic, although I’m thoroughly interested in investigating and possibly joining the Church. I’m definitely interested in learning as much as I can, that’s for sure. Is the Church really as historically documented as some say?
I would say it’s at least as well documented, and probably moreso than any institution during this period.
I mean if there are documents that go all the way back to before 100 AD then why aren’t more people apart of this Church?
For those you want to go their own way, no amount of documentation will sway them from their course.
I don’t know… just some thoughts racing through my head right now.
If you want to get to heaven, you should want the greatest aids to help you get there. The Church teaches the Truth (Jesus) and has the sacraments which supply the grace needed to follow Jesus on the Way to heaven.
 
I think that one should be convinced that something is true without any emotional persuasion whatsoever. Sure, if one is a Christian or a Catholic if they are saved they will feel conviction for their sins and they will feel in tune with God when they pray and such, but if someone is not a believer these things don’t quite make sense and in no way does it aid them in becoming a Christian. Personally I’ve never looked into the Catholic Church until now, but if it is as well documented as some say, and if Peter was really the first Pope and if Christ was the one that established it and it can be proven from history then it definitely seems like it would prove itself that way in the very least.
 
I think that one should be convinced that something is true without any emotional persuasion whatsoever. Sure, if one is a Christian or a Catholic if they are saved they will feel conviction for their sins and they will feel in tune with God when they pray and such, but if someone is not a believer these things don’t quite make sense and in no way does it aid them in becoming a Christian. Personally I’ve never looked into the Catholic Church until now, but if it is as well documented as some say, and if Peter was really the first Pope and if Christ was the one that established it and it can be proven from history then it definitely seems like it would prove itself that way in the very least.
Before you get too far, there is no “proof” in the mathematical sense of the word. There is only evidence. The Church proposes to each of us a set of truths that are summed up in the Apostle’s Creed.
I believe in God,
the Father Almighty,
Creator of Heaven and earth;
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son Our Lord,
Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended into Hell;
the third day He rose again from the dead;
He ascended into Heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy Catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body and life everlasting.
We can accept these things or reject them. No one should attempt to force you to accept these beliefs.

At the core of Catholism is a personal God, who in the person of Jesus became one of us, saved us from the slavery of sin and reopened the gates of heaven that were closed due to original sin.
 
I don’t mean to say “proof” in the sense that you can prove to me it is true, because if you could, I’m sure most everybody would be a Catholic, lol. I guess evidence is the word that would fit this the best. If there is evidence that points to Peter being the 1st Pope and that the Churches roots are found before 100 AD, then it wouldn’t be hard for me to believe.
 
I don’t mean to say “proof” in the sense that you can prove to me it is true, because if you could, I’m sure most everybody would be a Catholic, lol. I guess evidence is the word that would fit this the best. If there is evidence that points to Peter being the 1st Pope and that the Churches roots are found before 100 AD, then it wouldn’t be hard for me to believe.
Do you believe that the Bible is a valid historical document?

The Old Testament records the office of Prime Minister. The person assigned to this role, acted on a kings behalf while the king was away from his kingdom.

Jesus is the King of the Kingdom of Heaven. He appointed Peter to the role of Prime Minister. Peter, and his successors are Jesus’ Prime Ministers until His return at the end of the world.
 
I think that one should be convinced that something is true without any emotional persuasion whatsoever. Sure, if one is a Christian or a Catholic if they are saved they will feel conviction for their sins and they will feel in tune with God when they pray and such, but if someone is not a believer these things don’t quite make sense and in no way does it aid them in becoming a Christian. Personally I’ve never looked into the Catholic Church until now, but if it is as well documented as some say, and if Peter was really the first Pope and if Christ was the one that established it and it can be proven from history then it definitely seems like it would prove itself that way in the very least.
When people don’t want to believe in something, no amount of evidence can change their mind unless they want to open their minds first. That goes not only for religion but also for things such as global warming, Evolution…
 
I don’t mean to say “proof” in the sense that you can prove to me it is true, because if you could, I’m sure most everybody would be a Catholic, lol. I guess evidence is the word that would fit this the best. If there is evidence that points to Peter being the 1st Pope and that the Churches roots are found before 100 AD, then it wouldn’t be hard for me to believe.
Most if not say all Church Father refers Peter as the succession of Jesus, and the head of the Church as Jesus stated in Matthew that Peter is the Rock, and upon that Rock Christ’s Church shall be built.
 
When people don’t want to believe in something, no amount of evidence can change their mind unless they want to open their minds first. That goes not only for religion but also for things such as global warming, Evolution…
Well my mind is definitely open to the reality of it being true.
 
it took me four years to convert.

take your time reading and educating yourself…

God will handle the rest!

saying a prayer for you…

Dana
 
More than a billion people are part of the Catholic Church. It accounts for more than half of the two billion Christians in the world. If numbers prove anything, we’re already there. Just saying. 🤷

Why are people in other churches? Because their parents made the choice for them when they are very young; because in some unfortunate cases, there are some individuals and churches who promulgate urban legends and stereotypes about the Catholic Church, due to either longstanding historical disputes, or simply popular rumors that never go away, much like the alligators in the dra(name removed by moderator)ipes stories; because of lack of opportunity to get to a church in one’s home area; lack of opportunity to have Catholic neighbors, Catholic books around them, etc., and just not getting to know anyone who was Catholic; because of the choices made by the leaders of their regions or countries during the Reformation era; well, so many factors determine what happens in people’s lives, we can’t account for them all.

Read about the origins of the many, many different churches that are out there today. Up until the Protestant Reformation in the 1500s, by far the supermajority of Christians in the world were either Catholic or Orthodox. Very simple. And before the tragic events of 1054, there were even fewer churches than that: 1.

Then, a lot of governments took the decision out of people’s hands. Look at the rise of the Protestant governments and societies in Europe, for example. From the Anglican Church, which violently oppressed Catholics in Great Britain and Ireland, to the Dutch Reformed Church and their influence on colonialism in the Americas and Asia… the list goes on and on. People talk about Catholic colonies under Spain and Portugal, but they forget that the Dutch and the English, among others, did the same thing. The King James Bible was the Bible of the British Empire. Not every place invited them in. They did that for themselves, at the point of the cannon.

Fortunately, in our current day, with the growth of the Internet and rapid publishing, and the fact the social impetus against looking into different beliefs has in may places died out, people are starting to get to know one another. The historical record is what it is.

The Christian faith did not begin with tacky television shows or polemic books. It began with Our Lord and His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Search all you want, but the facts don’t change.
 
Read “The Early Church Fathers, Expanded Edition” by Mike Aquilina (sp?). I don’t have it by my side at the moment.:confused:

It reads like a novel. You can’t put it down. What you will find is that ALL the early Fathers were Catholic in thought and action.

Peace:thumbsup:
 
I’m not asking you to convince me to be a Catholic, although I’m thoroughly interested in investigating and possibly joining the Church. I’m definitely interested in learning as much as I can, that’s for sure. Is the Church really as historically documented as some say? I mean if there are documents that go all the way back to before 100 AD then why aren’t more people apart of this Church? I don’t know… just some thoughts racing through my head right now.
You a reader? You can benefit greatly from Catholicism for Dummies, a book which will answer nearly every question that you might have about the Church. For those which might not be answered, there’s always CAF.
 
Well my mind is definitely open to the reality of it being true.
Ever spent time with Jesus? No, really. You can in the Catholic Church. Call a nearby parish and ask when they offer ‘Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament’. Take one hour out of your life and just go and sit there with Him in silence. Ask Him to reveal to you that He is there.
 
I don’t mean to say “proof” in the sense that you can prove to me it is true, because if you could, I’m sure most everybody would be a Catholic, lol. I guess evidence is the word that would fit this the best. If there is evidence that points to Peter being the 1st Pope and that the Churches roots are found before 100 AD, then it wouldn’t be hard for me to believe.
Here is some evidence from way back in ancient times.

You would do well to research St. Ignatius of Antioch born in Syria, around the year 50; died at Rome between 98 and 117 AD.

He published letters that we have in the records, that were already calling the church the “Catholic Church”. Yes that’s right the “Catholic Church” already being named by 110 AD. He didn’t invent the name he was using as if it was already well known.

Here are some quotes from Catholic Encyclopedia:
It is scarcely possible to exaggerate the importance of the testimony which the Ignatian letters offer to the dogmatic character of Apostolic Christianity. The martyred Bishop of Antioch constitutes a most important link between the Apostles and the Fathers of the early Church. Receiving from the Apostles themselves, whose auditor he was, not only the substance of revelation, but also their own inspired interpretation of it; dwelling, as it were, at the very fountain-head of Gospel truth, his testimony must necessarily carry with it the greatest weight and demand the most serious consideration. Cardinal Newman did not exaggerate the matter when he said (“The Theology of the Seven Epistles of St. Ignatius”, in “Historical Sketches”, I, London, 1890) that “the whole system of Catholic doctrine may be discovered, at least in outline, not to say in parts filled up, in the course of his seven epistles”. Among the many Catholic doctrines to be found in the letters are the following:
Code:
* the Church was Divinely established as a visible society, the salvation of souls is its end, and those who separate themselves from it cut themselves off from God (Philadelphians 3)
* the hierarchy of the Church was instituted by Christ (Introduction to Philadelphians; Ephesians 6)
* the threefold character of the hierarchy (Magnesians 6)
* the order of the episcopacy superior by Divine authority to that of the priesthood (Magnesians 6 and 13; Smyrnæans 8; Trallians 3)
* the unity of the Church (Trallians 6; Philadelphians 3; Magnesians 13)
* the holiness of the Church (Smyrnæans, Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians and Romans)
* the catholicity of the Church (Smyrnæans 8); the infallibility of the Church (Philadelphians 3; Ephesians 16-17)
* the doctrine of the Eucharist (Smyrnæans 8), which word we find for the first time applied to the Blessed Sacrament, just as in Smyrnæans 8, we meet for the first time the phrase "Catholic Church", used to designate all Christians
* the Incarnation (Ephesians 18); the supernatural virtue of virginity, already much esteemed and made the subject of a vow (Polycarp 5)
* the religious character of matrimony (Polycarp 5)
* the value of united prayer (Ephesians 13)
* the primacy of the See of Rome (Introduction to Romans 13)
 
I’m not asking you to convince me to be a Catholic, although I’m thoroughly interested in investigating and possibly joining the Church. I’m definitely interested in learning as much as I can, that’s for sure. Is the Church really as historically documented as some say? I mean if there are documents that go all the way back to before 100 AD then why aren’t more people apart of this Church? I don’t know… just some thoughts racing through my head right now.
As to ancient documents, yes, I understand that there are a good number of them, and that’s fine, but, it’s not even close to why I’m Catholic. I’m a convert from just shy of a 1/2 century of Buddhist/Pagan/Pantheist/Pop religion. I finally ended up here because when I started really thinking, and really praying, and really opening up my heart and soul to the Holy Spirit, I was given faith in the Church as a grace. The Church kind of made itself known to me by supernatural means as the truth. Having said that, there was much catechesis and learning to be done after my, …calling forth? I will say conversion, because that’s the word sort of understood by all. But I consder myself still in a “process” of conversion, which I don’t expect will ever end, whereas this calling forth was rather singular and distinct.

Once I felt this kind of…tug?..I picked up an audio book at a truck stop while driving from Kansas to Nevada, just because it looked kind of interesting. It was “The Lambs Supper” by Scott Hahn. I had been trying to read and make sense of Revelation, so this looked like it might have a little bit on insight about it according to the back of the box. It helped me to follow the events closer in a novel I was reading called “In His Image”. Isn’t that a kick? I was interested in reading and understanding the book of Revelation in order to undertand a novel? That cracks me up in retrospect. It’s so perfect to how I see God actually work in people, now that I’m actually watching such things. In my defense, I was a Buddhist on the cusp of a new age understanding of Jesus at the time, and considering looking back into my family’s religion of Lutheran Christianity, (though actually the last church goer in the family was my grandmother who had already been gone for a while by now). Long story short, I found a mass when I got to Kansas, and found myself, along with my “atheist” wife sitting in an RCIA session, which led to another, and another. Discernment was happening, though I didn’t know what to call it. RCIA was so awesome that after being confirmed at the Easter Vigil and watching my wife baptised, her and I both stayed in RCIA for 3 more cycles just to take care of refreshments, help with setting up the rooms and such, and learning more and more about the faith God brought us to. I’m thiking about going back now as a sponsor. I love watching others have the RCIA experience.

Anyway, good luck. I understand that the way God works with some people is intellectually first, and then the conversion. Others fall off a horse and are struck blind.

I am finding great joy on the intellectual side of things now. But I don’t know what the things I study look like without a Catholic lens, because I was already Catholic by the time I began reading all this great stuff. I don’t know what non-Catholics might get from the stuff I study, since I wasn’t exposed to it before conversion. I’m sure some may read the things I read with skepticism, which would dull the nature of the material. I believe Catholicism to be the truth as my axiom. So everything I read pretty much bears that out. The anti or even Catholic neutral material I read, just doesn’t resonate with me.

The two things I read before becoming Catholic that really did, I think, help though, were the afore mentioned Scott Hahn book, which was indispensable as both an understanding of Revelation and the Catholic Mass. It helped me see you can’t understand one without the other. The other is the Gospel according to St. John which I read over and over again, along with the lectionary readings, and the other books of the bible. Something about John really really speaks to me. It led me to an understanding and view of Jesus I had never had before. I read it prayerfully, and slowly, and let each passage sink in. It’s like some would sip brandy, or eat an exotic dark chocolate. It is a joy, and a privelege.
 
Catholicism is not an easy religion.

You can seek an easy religion that fits your mood - Catholicism isn’t that. But personally, I’d rather do badly at a hard religion than do well at an easy religion. If something is easy, it’s probably not worth it…:rolleyes:

Catholicism is the ultimate combination of the rational and the mystical, working in concert.

And anyone who says the Devil has the best music has never heard Palestrina 😉
 
Others fall off a horse and are struck blind.
.
That’s exactly how I used to tell people how I came back to the Catholic Church. I felt like I had been knocked off my horse.

I was raised a Catholic, but went the way of the protestants, until I was a lot older, some pastors even called me a truthseeker. Then one day - Whammo the Holy Spirit hit me one day, and suddenly everything I had been studying became clear as a bell.

I then headed right back home.
👍
 
Catholicism is not an easy religion.

You can seek an easy religion that fits your mood - Catholicism isn’t that.
I don’t know what you are talking about. I never think about it in terms of easy. I think of it in terms of Love, Beauty, Wisdom and salvation.

I still have to fight back the tears everytime I go to Mass.

Perhaps you are talking about the attacks that we encounter all the time?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top