Will I go to Hell?

[carinapir]

Be realistic. The church has declared these men to be saints (which some say is an infallible declaration), and has raised St. Alphonsus Liguori to the status of doctor. The writings of Liguori are carefully reviewed for heresy. Is it really reasonable to conclude that he went “overboard” and the intellectuals of the church missed it when he said things like:

If my Redeemer rejects me on account of my sins, and drives me from his sacred feet, I will cast myself at those of his beloved Mother Mary, and there I will remain prostrate until she has obtained my forgiveness; for this Mother of Mercy knows not, and has never known, how to do otherwise than compassionate the miserable, and comply with the desires of the most destitute who fly to her for succor; and therefore, if not by duty, at least by compassion, she will engage her Son to pardon me"

*(Note, he is actually quoting from St. Bonaventure, another doctor of the church).

Would one REALLY be trusting the church to claim that two of her greatest teachers went “overboard.”

Perhaps if you explained why this quote bothers you, we could be of more help. To me he is being rather dramatic but is only saying that Mary can interceed for you if you ask her. He is assuming a lot about the reality of the afterlife when he says that he would do this after the Lord rejects him so in my mind this is figurative rather than literal.

I honestly don’t see the problem with this quote.

 

[Kawaii957]

Perhaps if you explained why this quote bothers you, we could be of more help. To me he is being rather dramatic but is only saying that Mary can interceed for you if you ask her. He is assuming a lot about the reality of the afterlife when he says that he would do this after the Lord rejects him so in my mind this is figurative rather than literal.

I honestly don’t see the problem with this quote.

Essentially he is saying that we should put our hope in Mary rather than Christ. If we put our hope in Christ, we might still be rejected for our sins. But if we put our hope in Mary, then we can be assured that she will convince Christ to spare us.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

Addressing Marian theology generally, via the Bible…

Probably because Jesus placed Mary in his care from the cross, the Apostle John has the most to say about Mary and Marian theology.

Let’s carefully review the story of the Wedding at Cana in the Gospel of John. It is not what most think it is…

1 On the third day there was a wedding in Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there.
2 Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the wedding.
3 When the wine ran short, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.”
4 (And) Jesus said to her, “Woman, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come.”
5 His mother said to the servers, “Do whatever he tells you.”
6 Now there were six stone water jars there for Jewish ceremonial washings, each holding twenty to thirty gallons.
7 Jesus told them, “Fill the jars with water.” So they filled them to the brim.
8 Then he told them, “Draw some out now and take it to the headwaiter.” So they took it.
9 And when the headwaiter tasted the water that had become wine, without knowing where it came from (although the servers who had drawn the water knew), the headwaiter called the bridegroom
10 and said to him, “Everyone serves good wine first, and then when people have drunk freely, an inferior one; but you have kept the good wine until now.”
11 Jesus did this as the beginning of his signs in Cana in Galilee and so revealed his glory, and his disciples began to believe in him. John 2:1-11.

The story is what is called a “typological word picture” – a picture of God’s theology, built out of types, or symbols, particular to the Bible. But, it is a picture of what? Let’s work on that…

(to be continued)

 

[Peter_Dawson]

First, here is the story again, with types delineated in red…

**1 On the third day there was a wedding in Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there.
2 Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the wedding. **

“third day” = a combination of the Three Type and the word “day.” The Three Type = “will of God.” However, when it is combined with “day” into “the third day,” it’s probably intended to refer to the ultimate “will of God day” – the day of Christ’s resurrection, after His murder.

“wedding” = the Wedding Feast Type. This is a picture, again and again in Scripture, of the “wedding” of God’s Son to God’s people in His Church.

3 When the wine ran short, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.”

“wine” = the Wine Type = the sacrificial blood of Christ, of course!

4 (And) Jesus said to her, “Woman, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come.”
5 His mother said to the servers, “Do whatever he tells you.”

“Woman” = the Woman Type = “mankind in need of salvation.” We all know what nasty literalist Catholics will object: “MARY WAS IMMACULATELY CONCEIVED.” Of course, that is true. She had to be, because Jesus was made out of one of her ova which, if Mary had not been immaculately conceived, would have been tainted with the stain of Original Sin, making Jesus’ conception impossible, because Original-Sin-tainted flesh is inconsistent with a special Presence of God.

However, Jesus seems, by His “Woman” title for Mary, used here and at the cross, to appoint Mary “special leader of mankind.” Don’t be ashamed of this; be proud of this.

6 Now there were six stone water jars there for Jewish ceremonial washings, each holding twenty to thirty gallons.

“six” = the Six Type = “evil.” “Evil”? Why “evil”? Because “stone water jars” is probably intended to be an analog of the Clay Vessel Type," referring to “mankind.” We’re evil, and so in need of salvation.

7 Jesus told them, “Fill the jars with water.” So they filled them to the brim.
8 Then he told them, “Draw some out now and take it to the headwaiter.” So they took it.
9 And when the headwaiter tasted the water that had become wine, without knowing where it came from (although the servers who had drawn the water knew), the headwaiter called the bridegroom
10 and said to him, “Everyone serves good wine first, and then when people have drunk freely, an inferior one; but you have kept the good wine until now.”
11 Jesus did this as the beginning of his signs in Cana in Galilee and so revealed his glory, and his disciples began to believe in him.

“Water” = the River Type (because it is potable, not saline, water) = “salvation.”

Now, let’s analyze the typological word picture, substituting-in the meanings for the types, to get a rough idea of what is being portrayed…

1 On Resurrection Day, there was a wedding of God’s Son to the people of God’s Church in Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there.
2 Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the wedding.
3 When the saving blood of Christ ran short, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no saving blood.”
4 (And) Jesus said to her, “Special leader of mankind, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come.”
5 His mother said to the servers, “Do whatever he tells you.”
6 Now there were evil humans there for Jewish ceremonial washings, each representing the will of God for His Church.
7 Jesus told them, “Fill the people with salvation.” So they filled them to the brim.
8 Then he told them, “Draw some out now and take it to the headwaiter.” So they took it.
9 And when the headwaiter tasted the salvation that had become Christ’s saving blood, without knowing where it came from (although the servers who had drawn the water knew), the headwaiter called the bridegroom
10 and said to him, “Everyone serves good wine first, and then when people have drunk freely, an inferior one; but you have kept the saving blood of Christ until now.”
11 Jesus did this as the beginning of his signs in Cana in Galilee and so revealed his glory, and his disciples began to believe in him.

All of a sudden, we have something extremely special, in the story of the wedding at Cana.

First, we have the people of God needing the benefit of Christ’s sacrificial blood.

Then, we see Mary interceding for them with Christ.

Christ at first gives them the answer demanded by our Protestant brothers and sisters. “IT’S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS, AND YOUR TIMING IS BAD!”

But then, observe: Mary, despite the fact that it’s none of her business, and despite the fact that her timing is bad, *assumes * that He will answer her intercession.

Astonishingly, He does!

And so, in response, He uses His saving blood to give the people salvation.

The “Woman” title seems to be associated with this process.

Lo and behold, Jesus, while His scourged body is attached by nails to the cross, appoints Mary “Special Intercessor for Mankind” by conferring on her the title of “Woman”…

26 When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son.”
27 Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother.” And from that hour the disciple took her into his home. John 19:26-27.

 

[Doxiemom]

Back to the Op

you will not go to hell because you do not want to remain in the catholic church. You will go to hell only if you do some serious sin and do not desire to turn away from that sin and do not repent. The holy Spirit will urge you to acknowledge your sin and turn away. If you fail again, you get yourself up and try again and again. How many times did Jesus tell Peter that forgiveness must be given? What will send you to hell is spurning the Holy Spirit, denying Jesus.

But i suspect that you really do not want to leave. There is so much about Mass, the Eucharist, about many other very ‘catholic’ ways that are so right.

Forget the radical Maryism. Do not take part in it. You could even lovingly , if the right moment happens, talk to that person who is too deep into her, about how much more closer you have become with Jesus as you have prayed to Him alone, or listen more closely to the Holy Spirit Who is within you, or speak to Abba, The Father, just as you would any living father.

I would not fear. You are on a journey like the rest of us. And God will never ever lead you astray from the path He chose for you. Ask the Holy Spirit to defend you if Satan tries for your soul.

Above all else, find joy in Jesus Christ, Himself. Enjoy what the catholic church offers you. Dump the people who interfer with that joy. You are not obligated to listen to them.

And pleasse know that you are not alone in this sort of journey.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

Pride – a sure path to The Liar. It causes the created to exalt themselves above The Creator. The Liar knows how to use it very well and has enslaved many in its vice.

Faith - “Faith is the theological virtue by which we believe in God and believe all that He has said and revealed to us, and that Holy Church proposes for our belief, because He is truth itself.” – Catechism 1814

Marian devotion and Mary’s role in Truth is an infallible part of Faith.

By Faith we form ourselves to God who is Truth. That formation may “bother” us. The question is: What is bothering us? What is bothering us to the extent that would cause us to reject Christ’s Church and Christ’s Real Presence?

Look no further than The Liar, The Deceiver, Murderer From The Beginning. The Deceiver desires us to be so bothered by something, anything, that we reject Christ and His Church. Those who recognize and understand this deception accept the trial and let it work to further form themselves to Christ.

Discussion by the laity can only go so far. The teaching of the Catechism Of The Catholic Church concerning Mary:

vatican.va/archive/catechism/p122a3p2.htm

Do not be swayed by strange teachings that stray from what the Catechism teaches. All authentic Marian devotions are Christocentric. Period.

 

[Kawaii957]

I’ll buy that, but when you chose to enter the Church, you didn’t do so soley because of the “externals” did you?

OK - But please be careful in how you read these things and compare what is basically personal devotions, even widespread ones, with what is actually dogmatically taught by the Church.
As I have said to any number of non-catholics here, there is absolutely nothing in Catholic teaching that requires one to have a personal devotion to Mary or any other saint. If such things make you uncomfortable, just know that you are perfectly free, within the Church, to pray only to Jesus and the Father.
So you see there is really no need for you to leave the Church over this. Simply accept those those dogmatic teachings of the Church, honor Mary as teh Mother of Our Lord, and worship in the way that is most comfortable for you.

I hope this helps a bit.

Peace
James

“There is absolutely nothing in Catholic teaching that requires one to have a personal devotion to Mary”

But Catholic teaching (CCC 971) says, “The Church’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship.”

Besides, would it really make sense for me to stay in the Catholic Church and ignore the writings of countless popes, saints, and doctors who advocate a theology and a devotion that I feel is contrary to Scripture? If this were a discussion in another thread, I’m sure I’d get called proud for thinking I know more about Mariology than them. Wait, it looks like I DID get accused of that in this thread, here and here

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

Do you think you know more than Christ’s Church established by Jesus Christ?

That is the real question.

 

[Kawaii957]

Do you think you know more than Christ’s Church established by Jesus Christ?

That is the real question.

If Christ established the Catholic Church, then either he did a poor job at keeping it in check, or else he is an illogical self-contradicting deity who is not worthy of worship. The Bible teaches us that Christ obtains pardon for our sins. Catholics affirm this, but they also say that Mary obtains pardon for our sins. Do you not see how absurd that is? They couldn’t both have done it. One or the other. Which is it? Either denounce the esteemed Doctors of the Church, effectively saying that you know more than they, or accept them and continue in your illogical madness.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Mary is joined in the work of Christ, as are all saints. And if you speak so strongly of “contradiction,” explain the 33,000 plus contradictions in your own sect of Christianity. Your views don’t even coincide with other Protestant denominations about Marian beliefs. This is a poor argument and is easily turned back on yourself. The unity of the Roman Catholic Church and the unity of the Protestant variants is not even a contest. And you’re right, Chirst IS indivisible.

 

[Kawaii957]

Mary is joined in the work of Christ, as are all saints. And if you speak so strongly of “contradiction,” explain the 33,000 plus contradictions in your own sect of Christianity. Your views don’t even coincide with other Protestant denominations about Marian beliefs. This is a poor argument and is easily turned back on yourself. The unity of the Roman Catholic Church and the unity of the Protestant variants is not even a contest. And you’re right, Chirst IS indivisible.

The alleged “33,000” denominations don’t claim to be infallible, either. Catholicism stands or falls on the consistency of teaching over the years. If there is even ONE that contradicts another, it cannot be the Church which Christ established. Such is not the case with Protestantism.

Catholicism isn’t as united as people claim. Just start a thread on “no salvation outside the church”, or head over to the traditional form, or go to some liberal and conservative blogs and look at how treat different clergy and religious across the spectrum. Some Catholic bishops and priests are as liberal as Unitarian Universalists, and some are as conservative as Baptists. Does the fact that they all fly under the banner as “Catholic” make them united?

Protestantism isn’t as divided as people claim. They all atleast agree on the 5 essential solas. The rest is filler. But what do Catholics agree on (and here I speak chiefly of clergy, religious, and theologians, not individual Catholics)? The authority of Scripture? No. The authority of the Church? No. The Eucharist? No. The priesthood? No. Ecclesiology? No. Soteriology? No. The infallibility of the pope? No. Sanctity of human life? No. Dignity of marriage? No. Where is this unity again? Is it in the Mass? Maybe, but you have plenty of priests who don’t believe in the real presence and say that it’s only a symbol. So I wouldn’t call that unity.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

The fact remains that the Church teaching does not conflict, and is one. People may dissent from it, but the teachings are true.

As for your statement on “the rest is filler” regarding the solas, I would think that you are vastly oversimplifying your case. Many believe in eternal security, many do not. Many believe in baptism as necessary for salvation, many do not. These are critical issues, not filler. Your statement and entire premise are false.

 

[Kawaii957]

The fact remains that the Church teaching does not conflict, and is one. People may dissent from it, but the teachings are true.

And no evidence to the contrary will convince you otherwise. I’m sure if the Pope tomorrow said “Birth control is A-OK!” you’d rationalize that away by saying Humanae Vitae wasn’t infallible. Isn’t that what you do when faced with the conflicts over “No salvation outside the Church”? Unam Sanctam teaches one thing, while Vatican 2 teaches another. Likewise, when faced with the problems between the writings of Pope Pius IX (as in Quanta Cura) and Vatican 2, especially regarding liberty, you just rationalize those away. But there is no contradiction in teaching! Right? Statement X wasn’t infallible. Well, what makes a statement infallible? Rest assured, someone will produce a fallible statement regarding infallibility (I saw this in another thread where people were debating which statements were fallible and which ones infallible). What good is an infallible magisterium when only some statements regarding faith and morals are infallible, and there is no clear way to determine which ones are and which ones aren’t? It seems to me that if Christ were to create an infallible church with an infallible pope, he would have gone all the way and made all statements with regard to faith and morals infallible. But he didn’t do that, obviously.

As for your statement on “the rest is filler” regarding the solas, I would think that you are vastly oversimplifying your case. Many believe in eternal security, many do not. Many believe in baptism as necessary for salvation, many do not. These are critical issues, not filler. Your statement and entire premise are false.

You clearly haven’t studied Protestant doctrine that much. I don’t want to get in a debate with you over that.

 

[Soler]

Catholicism stands or falls on the consistency of teaching over the years. If there is even ONE that contradicts another, it cannot be the Church which Christ established.

Not true.

If the Pope were to attempt to define Nestorianism as a Church dogma, such a definition would be null. It would be a catastrophe for the Church, but the teaching of the Church would remain the same, for Nestorianism has been infallibly defined as heresy already.

 

[JRKH]

“There is absolutely nothing in Catholic teaching that requires one to have a personal devotion to Mary”

But Catholic teaching (CCC 971) says, “The Church’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship.”

Yes, Mary’s intercession is invoked in the mass and devotion to her is promoted within the Church, but this is still not “Private Devotion” of the type or level that seems to give you problems.

Besides, would it really make sense for me to stay in the Catholic Church and ignore the writings of countless popes, saints, and doctors who advocate a theology and a devotion that I feel is contrary to Scripture? If this were a discussion in another thread, I’m sure I’d get called proud for thinking I know more about Mariology than them. Wait, it looks like I DID get accused of that in this thread, here and here

I have also been accused on this board of this type of thing. It does nto change the basic facts though of Church teaching.
Also, I would say that, no you should NOT ignore the writings of all of these people, but you should also not assume that you personally know more than they do just because “You Feel” something is contrary to Scripture. (And I don’t mean to belittle your concern here) What I mean is that a pope, one who has spent his whole life studying Scripture and Theology may have some wonderful insights. Saints too may have great comfort to offer based on their personal experience. It is up to you to discern what, if anything, these writings have in the way of help for you in your journey and prayerlife.
So what I am saying is - Do not confuse “Spiritual Advise” for “Dogmatic Orders”.

Also, I don’t think that anyone else has addressed this, but I think you are under attack by the devil. He knows that if he can split you from the Church using Mary that he will also split you from the Eucharist. This would be a great loss indeed.

You have come to us as CAF with your concerns and for that we are greatful and hope to give you good answers and consolation. It is our intent to help you with this battle against satan. The way in which I choose to do this is to help you understand that you don’t have to undetstand everything in the Church to remain in the Church.
Here is how I handle such things. A small “prayer” if you will.

Father, I do not understand this teaching, but I accept it as it is revealed to us by You through the Church to whom You gave the authority to bind and loose. Help me to humbly submit my poor will in obedience to You in Your Church.

Well - a prayer something like that anyway.

Sory if some of this is dijointed, it’s Early (Yaaawwwwnn)

I hope this helps

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

The alleged “33,000” denominations don’t claim to be infallible, either. Catholicism stands or falls on the consistency of teaching over the years. If there is even ONE that contradicts another, it cannot be the Church which Christ established. Such is not the case with Protestantism.

Catholicism isn’t as united as people claim. Just start a thread on “no salvation outside the church”, or head over to the traditional form, or go to some liberal and conservative blogs and look at how treat different clergy and religious across the spectrum. Some Catholic bishops and priests are as liberal as Unitarian Universalists, and some are as conservative as Baptists. Does the fact that they all fly under the banner as “Catholic” make them united?

1. Do not confuse the individual belief of people within the Church with the actual teachings OF the Church. The Teachings of the Church are all well documented and available to anyone wishing to learn what they are. Anything or anyone, even a priest, who teaches contrary to approved teachings will be held accountable to God for misleading the faithful.
2. The fact that there are so many different traditions, rites, and spiriualities within The Church is a fine demonstration of how broad minded the Church actually is.

Protestantism isn’t as divided as people claim. They all atleast agree on the 5 essential solas. The rest is filler.

Is it just me, or does anyone else find “Five Solas” (that is “Five Alones”) to be something of an oxymoron? If there is more thatn one “Essential Sola” then there are no “Solas” at all.

But what do Catholics agree on (and here I speak chiefly of clergy, religious, and theologians, not individual Catholics)? The authority of Scripture? No. The authority of the Church? No. The Eucharist? No. The priesthood? No. Ecclesiology? No. Soteriology? No. The infallibility of the pope? No. Sanctity of human life? No. Dignity of marriage? No. Where is this unity again? Is it in the Mass? Maybe, but you have plenty of priests who don’t believe in the real presence and say that it’s only a symbol. So I wouldn’t call that unity.

As I said above. The teachings of th eCatholic Church are clearly spelled out in the Catechism and other Church documents. Anyone who teaches contrary to these, be ti a catholic in the pew, or a bishop, or a cardinal or a pope, is liable for judgement in etiher this world or in the next.

G.K. Chesterton was asked if there were any good arguments against Chrisitanity. His reponse was, "Yes, one - Christians.

Peace
james

 

[raul0592]

Not anymore.

---

you should be believe Christ’s Church , go and refresh.

 

[Kawaii957]

Not true.

If the Pope were to attempt to define Nestorianism as a Church dogma, such a definition would be null. It would be a catastrophe for the Church, but the teaching of the Church would remain the same, for Nestorianism has been infallibly defined as heresy already.

But you would be obliged to explain how the pope’s latter pronouncement isn’t infallible. If it fit the definition of infallible, you’d have a problem there. An infallible pope cannot contradict an infallible council.

 

[Kawaii957]

Also, I would say that, no you should NOT ignore the writings of all of these people, but you should also not assume that you personally know more than they do just because “You Feel” something is contrary to Scripture. (And I don’t mean to belittle your concern here) What I mean is that a pope, one who has spent his whole life studying Scripture and Theology may have some wonderful insights. Saints too may have great comfort to offer based on their personal experience. It is up to you to discern what, if anything, these writings have in the way of help for you in your journey and prayerlife.
So what I am saying is - Do not confuse “Spiritual Advise” for “Dogmatic Orders”.

What you just said is the reason why Protestants think that the church forbids them to read the Bible, even while paying lip-service or offering indulgences. What you said amounts to saying, “Just trust what the church has to say. Don’t question it. The Pope is much smarter than you, little boy, so kneel down and obey.” But the Bible praises those who check what church leaders say against the Scriptures (Acts 17:11). That’s essentially all I’ve done here.

So when I hear claims by Doctors and Popes that Mary obtain pardon for our sins, I check that against Scripture, and realize it can’t be found. There’s no hint of it. When I hear that we must go through Mary to get to Jesus, I check that too, and it can’t be found. I am simply following what Clement of Alexandria said about “those who are ready to toil in the most excellent pursuits”, namely, that they “will not desist from the search after truth, till they get the demonstration from the Scriptures themselves.”

Also, I don’t think that anyone else has addressed this, but I think you are under attack by the devil. He knows that if he can split you from the Church using Mary that he will also split you from the Eucharist. This would be a great loss indeed.

Maybe I am under attack, maybe not. A Baptist could have warned me of the same thing when I became Catholic.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

I was raised Baptist, converted to Catholicism 6 years ago, and am now on the verge of leaving the church, largely because of the teaching regarding Mary. My question: according to the teaching of the Catholic Church, am I turning towards the path for Hell? (Oh, and please spare me the “Don’t leave!” or “Only God can judge” comments)

Look at the original post then look at to what the topic has become. Readings of the Catechism have been offered. Was the readings read? Has the Catechism been read at all? Does one desire to avoid the Catechism? Feelings can vary from day to day, month to month, year to year. We are not to proceed by feelings. Feelings will lead one running into the consoling arms of The Deceiver. The Love of Christ is an act of the will and that love will be tested. That test is The Cross that so many speak of – to separate the wheat from the chaff. Welcome to The Cross. Will it be accepted?

The discussion has expanded from concerns about Mary into “Mary Worship” and so-called contradictory teachings. That’s quite a leap in a day and are probably long festering obstinate doubts about Catholicism that were never fully resolved. These are old, false arguments. From my own experience I associate these arguments with Protestant fundamentalism that reject all but “The Word”, conveniently forgetting that the The Word was written by man, inspired by The Holy Spirit who is one part of the Holy Trinity that includes Jesus. It is that same infallible Holy Spirit that guides Christ’s Catholic church. Forums such as Catholic Answers Forum and others are a minefield of opinions, prideful grandstanding and (I am convinced) a cesspool heavily populated by the The Liar to Deceive and cause doubt and confusion.

Are there outside influences such as family or friends encouraging a rejection of Catholicism?

The perceived contradictions and real scandals of the Catholic Church are made public quickly for several reasons: the Catholic Church is large and an easy target to hit by whatever forces that desire to hit it, the Catholic Church has lots of money, finally The Liar toils in prideful arrogance to try to cause Christ’s Church to fail.

Protestant denominations are not insulated from these attacks and the list is long including but not limited to: embezzlement, sexual abuse, false teaching – all the sins as described in The Ten Commandments, including murder. But because there are so many denominations that may be loosely associated at best and membership relatively small in any one denomination the target is not so big, less easy to hit, makes the news less often and if problems are so bad it dissolves that church, the flock simply finds another denomination or church that suits the feelings de jour and the wandering in the desert continues.

Use the instruments of instruction as presented by the Catholic Church:

The Catechism: vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

Papal Encyclicals: vatican.va/holy_father/index.htm (search within each Pope)
This non-Vatican site may be helpful as well: papalencyclicals.net/all.htm

The Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition: ewtn.com/devotionals/biblesearch.asp

There is Truth in these documents. Read them and in conjunction with a spiritual director in your diocese (there should be one made available to you).

God bless you in your journey.