Why Would A Priest Say Don't Convert To The Church And Stay Protestant

[christcnection1]

Did the definition of what the Church is change in recent years? The modern definition that you quote is also inconsistent with St. Pope Pius X’s syllabus of errors.

So, I guess I need to decide if I’m going to go with the definition of the Church before the 20th century or the definition of Church in the late 20th century. I’m not convinced that going with the modern definition of the Church is correct. I’ve been teaching the kids from the Baltimore Catechism and I think we’ll stick with that.

I find it hard to believe that the definition of what the Church is can be changed either based upon the binding and loosening authority or by the development of doctrine, but I must admit I don’t have a good understanding of the development of doctrine. This would be a good subject for a new thread. Thanks I think I’ll start one.

Steve

Yep, go for it.

And to answer your original question, I have no idea why a priest in good conscience would not want someone to become Catholic. Encouraging them to do so, particularly when they want to, is the righteous and loving thing to do.

JB

 

[Steve40]

It doesn’t contradict at all. The Council of Florence defined that Baptism is teh door by which we enter the Church and that even heretics have valid baptisms. The Council fo Trent also anathemitizes those who say heretics do not have valid baptisms.

The Baltimore Catechism says the same thing. There’s that picture of the Church as Noah’s ark and there are those who are connected to the ark by ropes. Remember that picture?

That imperfect communion is union with the Church, but not the full visible unity. This was often called union with the soul of the Church:

Here is what the Catechism of St. Pius X says:

29 Q. But if a man through no fault of his own is outside the Church, can he be saved?

A. If he is outside the Church through no fault of his, that is, if he is in good faith, and if he has received Baptism, or at least has the implicit desire of Baptism; and if, moreover, he sincerely seeks the truth and does God’s will as best he can such a man is indeed separated from the body of the Church, but is united to the soul of the Church and consequently is on the way of salvation

And here is a Catechism from the reign of Bl. Pius IX whixh was published after the Syllabus:

Q. Do Catholics charge all that are apparently out of their communion with the crimes of heresy and schism, and consequently exclude them from salvation

A. No; all baptized children who die before they sin mortally, and before they embrace and believe error, are members of the true Church. Again, all those sincere people belong to the soul of the Church, who, being baptized, and believing the great fundamental truths of Christianity, and who are prevented from believing it in all its details, not by carelessness, nor temporal interest, nor human respect, nor the spirit of obstinacy, nor by malice, but simply because they never doubted, and never had sufficient means of knowing the truth, which they would embrace at once, and with gladness, could they only discover it,*—*all these, we say, belong to the soul of the Church, and will be saved, if they lead good lives and do not violate God’s law.

I agree with what you are saying about Baptism. But, we don’t have a once saved always saved doctrine either, so just because they or we for that mater are Baptised it does not mean we can’t be separated from the Church and on the road to hell.

I have seen the picture with the people hanging off the boat but this is not an indication of being in the Church to me or Salvation. There is a connection but if they are hanging out there by their own fault then by any definition they are headed for hell. If they are outside the Church by their own fault the Church says they are heading for hell. I think it is wise and safer to assume that most if not all are out side the Church by their own fault.

If we try to decide who is hanging onto the rope because they like the rope better than the boat, or just because they don’t know any better we will make some very costly mistakes. It is safer to assume that all out side the Church are going to hell if we don’t help them in.

I definately see a contradiction between “…one faith, one Sacrifice, with the same Sacrements under the Pope…” and the idea of our separated Protestant bretheren being part of the Church, out side which there is no salvation.

 

[jmcrae]

I think it is wise and safer to assume that most if not all are out side the Church by their own fault.

Actually, there are a great many Protestants in modern times who have never so much as heard of the Catholic Church, never mind made a conscious choice to be separated from it.

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
T! It’s ALWAYS best for any human being to show interest in and study t become Catholic.

I think I agree here. I can see where in individual situations some person may be converting for some “wrong” purpose such as to please a spouse or something.

As Chesterton said, as some point, I think,… “Pick a room! Don’t hang out in the entryway…! Any room is better than NO room at all,… as they all tend to lead you into the room with the most ‘beauty’.”

That last part I may have made up,… but I don’t think so,… at least in spirit.

But, it seems God meets people where they are at, yet never leaves them there. He would always draw them home to His Church which has all the sacraments and means of salvation.

…the most “beautiful” room…!

I could see a situation where the priest says you are not ready yet because of this or that, but you should continue to pray and study so that you will come to accept everyone was intended to be in the Church.

This is where we disagree.

The “doorkeeper” should never consider the “guest” to not be worthy to enter into the most beautiful room, even if the guest can’t yet treat the room as “theirs”, due to insufficient knowledge of it.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Steve40]

Actually, there are a great many Protestants in modern times who have never so much as heard of the Catholic Church, never mind made a conscious choice to be separated from it.

And many of them may not be Baptised and many of them may not have the means of forgiveness for mortal sin. If ignorance is a means of salvation then why send missionaries at all?

We should still assume they are lost for the sake of their salvation and perhaps for the sake of ours. To hypothesize that some are saved in their ignorance is an enemy of the salvation of souls.

 

[jmcrae]

And many of them may not be Baptised and many of them may not have the means of forgiveness for mortal sin. If ignorance is a means of salvation then why send missionaries at all?

We should still assume they are lost for the sake of their salvation and perhaps for the sake of ours. To hypothesize that some are saved in their ignorance is an enemy of the salvation of souls.

Absolutely - they should be evangelized in exactly the same way that we evangelize the pagans - through invitations and through information campaigns.

But we should never begin by assuming that Protestants know anything about history, or anything about the Catholic Church, because the majority have absolutely no idea even that Jesus founded a Church (and yes, I know that that’s in the Bible, but Protestants wish it away by explaining that Jesus is talking about a local gathering of his disciples; not about a world-wide organization) let alone that it’s still here, or that it would be a good idea to join it, if you really want to be Christ’s faithful follower.

 

[Atemi]

But this is the classic case of someone who knows that the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation, but does not enter.

And how did you come to that conclusion?

 

[Church_Militant]

And how did you come to that conclusion?

When it’s been presented and explained to you as often as it has here and you assert that you know the Catholic faith (supposedly better than we do ) and still reject it. Invincible ignorance does not apply to you.

It is the very same premise that applies when someone is presented with the Gospel and rejects it, persevering in that rejection even unto death.

I’m sure you understand…that anyway.

 

[love4mary]

There is a beautiful old couple in our parish that I went through RCIA with. HE was the one who wanted to convert (this made the 6th different kind of faith conversation for him ),his wife simply followed him to what ever church he chose.

The conversion was his, but his wife followed to “keep peace” in the home.

There ARE times when its the right thing to do to tell someone NOT to convert.

 

[fix]

This is where we disagree.

The “doorkeeper” should never consider the “guest” to not be worthy to enter into the most beautiful room, even if the guest can’t yet treat the room as “theirs”, due to insufficient knowledge of it.

Well, that is a good point. I would ask what benefit there is to telling another they are not ready to come into the Church?

 

[Contarini]

Well, that is a good point. I would ask what benefit there is to telling another they are not ready to come into the Church?

Preventing them from committing apostasy later on? The priest I mentioned above was afraid that if I became Catholic because it was new and different, I might later on find Orthodoxy more appealing (I don’t know if he had had experience with people who went that route, but I’ve certainly known quite a few people who did, so he wasn’t just being paranoid–or rather, he was paranoid, but we all know that being paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t really out to become Orthodox!).

Edwin

 

[Teflon93]

Well, that is a good point. I would ask what benefit there is to telling another they are not ready to come into the Church?

Take the very worst case—someone who wishes to join the Church in order to profane the Eucharist. The benefits of preventing one so oriented from so doing ought to be clear.

 

[fix]

Preventing them from committing apostasy later on? The priest I mentioned above was afraid that if I became Catholic because it was new and different, I might later on find Orthodoxy more appealing (I don’t know if he had had experience with people who went that route, but I’ve certainly known quite a few people who did, so he wasn’t just being paranoid–or rather, he was paranoid, but we all know that being paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t really out to become Orthodox!).

Edwin

Ok, but there is never any guarantee and I would wonder if the proximate cause of apostasy was due to being Catholic.

I mean even if one waits to become a Catholic one may still fall away. I am not arguing here just trying to understand both sides of this issue.

 

[fix]

Take the very worst case—someone who wishes to join the Church in order to profane the Eucharist. The benefits of preventing one so oriented from so doing ought to be clear.

Yes, that seems a good reason.

 

[Contarini]

Ok, but there is never any guarantee and I would wonder if the proximate cause of apostasy was due to being Catholic.

I mean even if one waits to become a Catholic one may still fall away.

Certainly. The point is that priests are justified in trying to make sure that people know what they are doing and are rightly motivated. Particularly given the current emphasis on corporate reunion, I think the priests who downplay or even (mildly) discourage individual conversion may be more in tune with the wishes of the Pope and bishops than the zealous laypeople on this board who want to bludgeon or coax everyone into Catholicism.

People should not convert (to anything) unless they are really, really sure they can’t possibly stay where they are.

One of the things I really respect about the Catholic priests I’ve known is that they were not pushy. Self-proclaimed lay apologists are another matter!

Edwin

 

[fix]

Certainly. The point is that priests are justified in trying to make sure that people know what they are doing and are rightly motivated. Particularly given the current emphasis on corporate reunion, I think the priests who downplay or even (mildly) discourage individual conversion may be more in tune with the wishes of the Pope and bishops than the zealous laypeople on this board who want to bludgeon or coax everyone into Catholicism.

People should not convert (to anything) unless they are really, really sure they can’t possibly stay where they are.

One of the things I really respect about the Catholic priests I’ve known is that they were not pushy. Self-proclaimed lay apologists are another matter!

Edwin

This is from the USCCB website:

***53. Goal II: To invite all people in the United States, whatever their social or cultural background, to hear the message of salvation in Jesus Christ so they may come to join us in the fullness of the Catholic faith

***54. Catholics should continually share the Gospel with those who have no church community and with those who have given up active participation in the Catholic Church, as well as welcoming those seeking full communion with the Catholic Church. People can know they are invited to experience Jesus Christ in our Church only if they are really and effectively asked and if adequate provisions are made for their full participation. We want our Catholic brothers and sisters to effectively ask and to really invite.

Go and Make Disciples

 

[DB_AND_ALI]

Yes, you are referring to 845, but the surrounding parts are also important to keep in mind. It’s good to read all of Article 9 on the topic.

usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt3art9p3.htm

The priest is wrong. You will not have any argument from me.

The tone of your thread could be misconstrued by our separated brethren. They deeply love Christ and would glady convert if they knew the truth, but “through no fault of their own,” they reject our Lord’s very design.

We can be very hopeful in the Lord’s tender love and mercy that we’ll see many “Protestants” in heaven one day. Of course there will be no divisions then.

Could not agree with you more…to arrogantly say that there will be no protestants in heaven defies belief. We must never forget that He will judge and that his love is well beyond human comprehension ! I am truly disappointed with some of the comments by the devout folk on this forum…in our country it would be considered a serious insult to call anybody a ’ cafeteria catholic ’ ; but more than that it is a statement devoid of LOVE !
Now what did Jesus tell us to do first…a protestant reading some of the rabid comments on these forums will probably not be too interested in catholicism and i would not blame them !

 

[Atemi]

When it’s been presented and explained to you as often as it has here and you assert that you know the Catholic faith (supposedly better than we do ) and still reject it. Invincible ignorance does not apply to you.

It is the very same premise that applies when someone is presented with the Gospel and rejects it, persevering in that rejection even unto death.

I’m sure you understand…that anyway.

In case you didn’t know, this thread is not about me. This thread is about those specifically mentioned in the OP.

…

 

[Church_Militant]

But this is the classic case of someone who knows that the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation, but does not enter.

And how did you come to that conclusion?

In case you didn’t know, this thread is not about me. This thread is about those specifically mentioned in the OP.

You asked… I gave you an answer in simplest terms that you should be able to understand.

 

[jmcrae]

Could not agree with you more…to arrogantly say that there will be no protestants in heaven defies belief.

They will not be Protestants anymore, when they get to Heaven - they will have converted to the Catholic faith in Purgatory.