Why Should I Become A Catholic.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mberg3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mberg3 said:
  • So if Salvation is a Process is an individual “more saved” at one point of their life than another, or is this an incorrect understanding of the message
Click to expand...
No one is saved until they are saved, that is until they die and face their judgment and God tells them they are saved.

One can be in a state of justification and then turn away from God and lose that justification and then one can return to God and be restored to the justified state again, but as far as salvation nothing is decided until God decides after we die.

God of course knows what will happen but we cannot know and should never presume.

“…but he who has persevered to the end will be saved.” Matt 10:22, 24:13
 
Mberg3 said:
  • So if Salvation is a Process is an individual “more saved” at one point of their life than another, or is this an incorrect understanding of the message
Click to expand...
I think Protestants and Catholics sometimes are simply using the word differently. From the standpoint of Catholic theology, salvation (or damnation) is something that happens to you when you die and go to your judgment. Nobody walking around on Earth “is saved.” At most, one could offer a prediction about the future: “If so-and-so died right now, he would be saved.”

So I think it is less correct to say that salvation is a “process” – since it is a one-time act of God for those who receive it – than to say, with St. Paul, that while on Earth we “work out [o]ur salvation with fear and trembling.” That, not the fact of the salvation itself, is the process we undergo.
 
Brendan_McCabe said:
No one is saved until they are saved, that is until they die and face their judgment and God tells them they are saved.
Click to expand...
Then shall we say that at any point in a persons life - which is technically infinite like a line - if you take any point and suppose they had died at that point would there be a difference in the security of their salvation. Example. If someone died before first communion or directly after first communion is there a difference since, as stated above, salvation is growing in Grace which is most importantly given in Baptism and Communion(Eucharist) so if we presuppose one of the events ever happened would it change the Salvation Status.
 
Mberg3 said:
Hello all, I am a younger man who is in a Denominational Crisis in the Christian Faith. I was raised in a fundamentalist Christian household who was very anti-Catholic and preached against the Church consistently. Now, however, I am at a point in my life where I am engaged to a Catholic girl and would love to share a single faith as we now look toward the future.

I am currently attending a more traditional and Liturgical protestant Church and have fallen in love with the beautiful and ancient Church ritual that was lacking in my youth. I am much more informed about the Church than I once was, but my protestant roots are pulling hard against any ideas about converting over. There are a lot of points of differences between me and the Roman Church and I feel like it would be to big of a gulf to fill so I am trying to interact with those people who can better explain the differences and explain to my why they are the correct choices. I will ask questions based on any statements I receive.

I know that many people on here are convinced and on fire to support the validity of the Catholic Church, and I have no problem with that. However, I have noticed that this forum has sometimes refered to other Christians as outsiders or not truely in the Faith. While I understand that this is an easy assumption to make I hope that I may be treated with the respect and dignity of someone who feels as thought they are truely a part of the fullness of Christ. Christian civility is all I ask.

Further more I ask that in stating your points and premises that you do not state the reality as stated as the Church. I understand most of the Church’s positions on theological issues, but do not understand the reasoning behind them. Whenever possible then it would be nice to provide as many quotes and supporting evidence as possible that I may understand more fully.

Finally if I refute anyone, or state that I believe them to be in error, I will try to state as best as I can the reasons why I differ. I do not mean to attack anyone’s beliefs, but instead want to clarify my own and think about things more fully.

I thank you for you time and appreciate your position as to why the Catholic Church should be the right Church for any Christian.

Thanks
Click to expand...
Here are some of my reason for being Catholic.
  1. While is was descerning Christianity I could not deny the historical fact that the Catholic Church is the oldest Christian Church around. While other Churches told me there was a great apostasy after the apostles died which is why their Church was “underground” for 1500 years they could not provide me with secular or in house evidence of their Churches history. The Catholic Church on the other hand could.
  2. The writtings of the Early Church Fathers to me were Catholic in their teachings and instruction.
  3. I could not deny that the Bible is the product of the Catholic Churches authority. The Canon of the Bible was formulated by the Catholic Church and it is because of this Church’s decree the NT for examle has the Apocalypse of John and not the Apocalypse of Peter (which was a scripture being circulated during the same time.) This means every Christian that opens the Bible and reads the Apocalypse of John does so because the Catholic Church declared that John was inspired! The same goes for all of the other books too! It would be hypocritical of me to use the Bible while not acknowleging their authority especially since it is because of this very authority that i even have a Bible in the first place.
  4. The first Protestant Bibles had the same Canon as the Catholic Church which made me realize that the accusation that Catholics added to the Bible was wrong. The sad truth is protestants removed books! They removed Gods word!
5.) If I believe the Bible is the written Word of God then what I’m professing is that man wrote the Scriptures under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and that this same Holy Spirit kept them from all error. This means the Sacred Scriptures are cut and dry evidence of infallibility being exercised in the Church! Imagine my surprise when I found out that the only Church that claims to have infallibility is also the same Church that was responcible for giving us the Bible Canon.

There are plenty more reasons but for now I will leave it at these.
 
Mberg3 said:
What the Anglican Church claims is Apostolic Succession because the Bishops of the Church of England were ordained through the laying of hand and their predecessors trance their linage to the beginning of the Church. They also claim to have been established before the Pope’s Jurisdiction was established in England and so say they did not technically “break away”. The fact that Anglicans ARE returning - as you say - I believe has much more to do with Politics within the Church than over Theological differences.
Click to expand...
But then if the Anglican church was the true Church than why aren’t the Catholics the one returning to the Anglican faith? 🤷
 
MarkThompson said:
I "

So I think it is less correct to say that salvation is a “process” – since it is a one-time act of God for those who receive it – than to say, with St. Paul, that while on Earth we “work out [o]ur salvation with fear and trembling.” That, not the fact of the salvation itself, is the process we undergo.
Click to expand...
An Earlier post said “The CC views salvation as a process, not a one time event.” Which seems to contradict what you have said… could you please clarify
 
Mberg3 said:
Then shall we say that at any point in a persons life - which is technically infinite like a line - if you take any point and suppose they had died at that point would there be a difference in the security of their salvation. Example. If someone died before first communion or directly after first communion is there a difference since, as stated above, salvation is growing in Grace which is most importantly given in Baptism and Communion(Eucharist) so if we presuppose one of the events ever happened would it change the Salvation Status.
Click to expand...
Right. So we can say (or at least surmise) that it might have been better for someone to have died just after baptism than to have lived and gone on a murder spree and died unrepentant. After baptism he was in a state of grace, which he later lost by committing terrible sins.

Similarly, we ought to be saddened when – to continue with the example – a murderer is killed in a shootout with the police, because if he had lived then he would have had the opportunity to repent, confess his sins, and return to the state of grace.
 
srferdave said:
But then if the Anglican church was the true Church than why aren’t the Catholics the one returning to the Anglican faith? 🤷
Click to expand...
Im not saying you are necessarily wrong, but I just refuse to be convinced by a popularity contest. Like I said I just want to be convinced on its own merit not assuming that others are right… its just me, God, and the Truth… Know what I am saying
 
Mberg3;I’m going to say something that may offend many Catholics and is sort of a mystery at tthe same time.The CC has done some deimplorable things in the past and are just as guilty if not more so than Luther in causing the split called the Protestant Reformation.They were so offensive that even to this day they are felt and may never be reconciled.When Luther condemned the Church he more or less proved the notion of the infalliability of the Pope was not believeable.To state infallibility and make such gross error seems inconceivable.I’m still Catholic and believe in the infallibility.Infallibility to me has taken on a little different meaning than that which I believe the average Catholic to believe.When the Pope expounds a document which is taken as infallible it means that according to Him it is what the Holy Spirit has inspired Him to do and that is leading Christ’s church in a right direction.However as we can see the Church has made some serious errors which the Pope sanctioned.In those particular areas we have to admit that the Pope wasn’t following the leadings of the HS.Although the Pope wasn’t aware of the severity of the crimes which were committed he did no to a smaller degree they were takeing place.So,Popes are human’s and can make mistakes.That being said it didn’t destroy the Church and shouldn’t make one’s faith in Christ any less.I pray and trust such an occurance never happens again.This is really going out on a limb but I believe God wanted it to Happen(for some reason which I can’t explain)because He allowed it and God would never do anything that wasn’t positive for His Church.I write all this because I feel that all christian denominations that disagree with the CC stem from this fundamental error.Some denominations thought(or maybe still do think)that the CC orthe Pope was the Anti-Christ because of this error.In the end I feel the Pope just didn/t give Luther enough consideration aand he acted in haste when he dismissed him.Their was a war going on and perhaps he paid more attention to it than he should have.
 
MarkThompson said:
Right. So we can say (or at least surmise) that it might have been better for someone to have died just after baptism than to have lived and gone on a murder spree and died unrepentant. After baptism he was in a state of grace, which he later lost by committing terrible sins.

Similarly, we ought to be saddened when – to continue with the example – a murderer is killed in a shootout with the police, because if he had lived then he would have had the opportunity to repent, confess his sins, and return to the state of grace.
Click to expand...
So you seem to say that there are times “in” and times “out” of the state of Grace which determine Salvation. If you are “in” then saved if “out” then not… is this a fair representation?
 
valentino said:
Mberg3;I’m going to say something that may offend many Catholics and is sort of a mystery at tthe same time.The CC has done some deimplorable things in the past and are just as guilty if not more so than Luther in causing the split called the Protestant Reformation.They were so offensive that even to this day they are felt and may never be reconciled.When Luther condemned the Church he more or less proved the notion of the infalliability of the Pope was not believeable.To state infallibility and make such gross error seems inconceivable.I’m still Catholic and believe in the infallibility.Infallibility to me has taken on a little different meaning than that which I believe the average Catholic to believe.When the Pope expounds a document which is taken as infallible it means that according to Him it is what the Holy Spirit has inspired Him to do and that is leading Christ’s church in a right direction.However as we can see the Church has made some serious errors which the Pope sanctioned.In those particular areas we have to admit that the Pope wasn’t following the leadings of the HS.Although the Pope wasn’t aware of the severity of the crimes which were committed he did no to a smaller degree they were takeing place.So,Popes are human’s and can make mistakes.That being said it didn’t destroy the Church and shouldn’t make one’s faith in Christ any less.I pray and trust such an occurance never happens again.This is really going out on a limb but I believe God wanted it to Happen(for some reason which I can’t explain)because He allowed it and God would never do anything that wasn’t positive for His Church.I write all this because I feel that all christian denominations that disagree with the CC stem from this fundamental error.Some denominations thought(or maybe still do think)that the CC orthe Pope was the Anti-Christ because of this error.In the end I feel the Pope just didn/t give Luther enough consideration aand he acted in haste when he dismissed him.Their was a war going on and perhaps he paid more attention to it than he should have.
Click to expand...
I thank you for your frank statements. Luther has been a source of Greatest Theological inspiration to me, and also an example of the worst ideas to be introduced into the Christian Church. He was hard headed and German, what can I say. I truly believe that he wanted the Church to remain united in the beginning and I want to look past the differences and start rebuilding ties with all Christian denomination and find common ground. For that I think the Catholic Church as a leader is necessary, and it has lead me here
 
Mberg3 said:
An Earlier post said “The CC views salvation as a process, not a one time event.” Which seems to contradict what you have said… could you please clarify
Click to expand...
I would characterize the previous post as using a typical shorthand, but ultimately a less-than-accurate was of describing what goes on. While on Earth we do not undergo a long process of salvation; what we undergo is the long process of working out salvation. Salvation (or not) is the end result of that process at the end of our lives.

This is why it is nonsensical to speak of a living person as “being saved,” still less as being “more saved.” If a person says, “Hallelujah, I am saved!”, what does that mean? That if he were stricken dead right now he would go to Heaven? Well, maybe so. But if tomorrow he commits a murder and then dies unrepentant, I expect he will find out that he was not, after all, quite as “saved” as he was bragging about.
 
MarkThompson said:
I would characterize the previous post as using a typical shorthand, but ultimately a less-than-accurate was of describing what goes on. While on Earth we do not undergo a long process of salvation; what we undergo is the long process of working out salvation. Salvation (or not) is the end result of that process at the end of our lives.

This is why it is nonsensical to speak of a living person as “being saved,” still less as being “more saved.” If a person says, “Hallelujah, I am saved!”, what does that mean? That if he were stricken dead right now he would go to Heaven? Well, maybe so. But if tomorrow he commits a murder and then dies unrepentant, I expect he will find out that he was not, after all, quite as “saved” as he was bragging about.
Click to expand...
I understand how the idea of being saved is a hard thing to say when there are so many different circumstances that may occur, but there does seem to be the sense of a “secure salvation” in Christianity… I mean I think that many of the Martyrs were very sure of their salvation, while you seem to be more straddling the fence. I do not mean that you are not sure you are going to heaven and perhaps you were referring. to other people, but if you are not sure you are going to Heaven I am curious on how that impacts your Christianity
 
Mberg3 said:
So you seem to say that there are times “in” and times “out” of the state of Grace which determine Salvation. If you are “in” then saved if “out” then not… is this a fair representation?
Click to expand...
Yes. This is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church is talking about when it says, for instance:
1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.
This is also referred to as sanctifying grace. This concept is why we have expressions in the English language like “to fall from grace.”
 
MarkThompson said:
Yes. This is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church is talking about when it says, for instance:
1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.
This is also referred to as sanctifying grace. This concept is why we have expressions in the English language like “to fall from grace.”
Click to expand...
Is it possible for a strict Catholic to be saved “out of a state of Grace” ie that they have just committed a mortal sin and die on the way to Confession. Of course this is a little far fetched but I just want to clarify underlying themes
 
Mberg3 said:
I understand how the idea of being saved is a hard thing to say when there are so many different circumstances that may occur, but there does seem to be the sense of a “secure salvation” in Christianity… I mean I think that many of the Martyrs were very sure of their salvation, while you seem to be more straddling the fence.
Click to expand...
Well, what one can be (reasonably) sure of is whether one is in a state of grace at the present. If you’re embezzling from your boss and having an affair with his wife, then most likely not. If you just walked out of the confessional after repenting all your sins and receiving absolution, then yes.

What you cannot be as sure about – and so much the worse, because this is the part that is up to you – is what you are going to do tomorrow, next week, next month. The way a Catholic might think about it is, “I have a ‘secure salvation’ right now, because I am in a state of grace. So I need to really pray that I don’t backslide into my old sinful ways.” You see, the only part that can’t be made “secure” is the part that we are responsible for.
I do not mean that you are not sure you are going to heaven and perhaps you were referring. to other people, but if you are not sure you are going to Heaven I am curious on how that impacts your Christianity
Click to expand...
The previous discussion ought to show that, as should be clear from the message Christ taught throughout the Gospels, living a Christian life is never a matter of resting on your laurels. You can’t say, “Whew, I’m saved! Glad I got that pesky issue taken care of. From here on out I can just coast along, I guess!”
 
MarkThompson said:
The previous discussion ought to show that, as should be clear from the message Christ taught throughout the Gospels, living a Christian life is never a matter of resting on your laurels. You can’t say, “Whew, I’m saved! Glad I got that pesky issue taken care of. From here on out I can just coast along, I guess!”
Click to expand...
This is interesting because I personally have felt that I am assured of salvation, and the assurance grows through interacting with God through the Eucharist. There has never been one time that I have doubted, but sitting on my laurels was never something I had considered. I had always wanted to share my gift of Gods love and salvation in many ways which was why I feel joyfully-compulsion to help others in need or offer forgiveness to others. In my experience salvation doesn’t but things on cruise control, it puts things in overdrive.
 
Mberg3 said:
Is it possible for a strict Catholic to be saved “out of a state of Grace” ie that they have just committed a mortal sin and die on the way to Confession. Of course this is a little far fetched but I just want to clarify underlying themes
Click to expand...
The Council of Trent explained: “though contrition may sometimes be made perfect by charity and may reconcile men to God before the actual reception of this sacrament, still the reconciliation is not to be ascribed to the contrition apart from the desire for the sacrament which it includes.” Thus, as the Catholic Encyclopedia describes the doctrine, “Perfect contrition, with the desire of receiving the Sacrament of Penance, restores the sinner to grace at once.” So a person in such circumstances would not, in fact, die outside of the state of grace at all.

Of course, it would be extremely risky to continue along in a sinful life, trusting your salvation to the hope that you get a few moments before dying to experience a change of heart and perfect contrition. (After all, if you’ve got such a great “desire of receiving the Sacrament of Penance,” then how come you didn’t go last week, or the week before, or the week before that?)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top