Strategies for Returning to the [Catholic] Church

Our world is a fallen world. The effects of sin seem to be suffocating us. The diabolical is running rampant, unleashed, playing with immortal souls as if puppets on a string. Pride continues to dominate; repentance for anything is deemed archaic, of little use to today’s enlightened thinking.

Certainly this is not the positive language one wants to hear at the outset of a new year, when expectations and resolutions are running high. But all is not really so dire: the diabolical and pervasive sin has not crushed the divine light. “My Immaculate Heart will triumph,” promises the Lady of Fatima. There is a reason the Church opens a new year honoring the Mother of God: obedience to accepting one’s mission in life is the most daunting — and exciting — prospect we face on this earth. We have a guidebook in how to do it through Mary’s fiat.

Perhaps over holiday festivities and the euphoria — and stress — of families coming together, some readers might have encountered resistance from relatives regarding the graces offered in entering the mystery of faith during this holy season. Whether it was avoidance from some in either attending Christmas Mass or praying before a Christmas dinner, such discomforts surely existed. While certainly everyone is different, with their own freedom and right to privacy, perhaps there are some of you readers whose own children—raised in the Catholic faith you so diligently sought to instill in them — want nothing to do with it anymore. It is to this element I wish to address.

In my own experience, generally speaking, I have found degrees of toleration from lapsed or non-Catholics regarding matters of the faith — they know the Catholic Church continues to play an enormous part in global affairs while recalling their own experiences either through schooling or parish life. I have found that while the pervading motif of the millennial generation is a general shunning towards organized religion and regular church attendance, there yet remains a desire for an experience of the transcendent. And that desire is the silver lining.

Unfortunately, committed Catholics are not always quite the fearless galvanized evangelizers that each one is called to be. Marveling that St. Francis de Sales converted 40,000 is usually met with a shrug: “Well, that’s why he’s a saint.” But that’s the precisely the mentality that needs to change.

A Jesuit once posed in a homily, “Listen to conversations. How long does it take before God is ever mentioned?” Out of not wanting to create controversy, God is never mentioned. When he is, or when the Church is mentioned, Catholics are immediately put on the defensive. We can stay silent, letting the Uber driver, for example, have his say about the occultish practice of Catholics (as I experienced recently), or we can defend Holy Mother Church, as we would defend our own mother, and begin a conversation. The faith is not part of the pie of life. It is the pie.

I have come to believe that, in this era, accommodation will not work. Appeasing the culture may seem like a conciliatory gesture, but those on the opposite side most probably will not respect such compromise—even if they do not agree with the position in question. In reading Paul Kengor’s new book, A Pope and a President, on President Reagan and Pope St. John Paul II’s battles against communism, the consistency in the Church’s long running condemnation of communism as far back as Pius IX is impressive. The Church may have apologized for grievous actions throughout its long history, but it has never apologized for being magnificent.

So, how to engage your lapsed love one on returning to the Church? After all, that is our sole duty—to grow into our authentic selves, made in the image of God, and safeguard our immortal souls and those of others towards eternal life. Remembering we can only extend an invitation, a proposal, respecting the freedom of others, here are some strategies:

I: Know Thyself

Be yourself a model of virtue.

Live the Gospel, avoiding hypocrisy, condemnation of others, descent into pettiness. If you consider yourself a Catholic first and desire others to feel that same zeal, your example is the best model. Just like Mary.

Avoid “preaching.”

Respectfully engage in conversation in whatever topic arises. Listen to the other person. Avoid shouting or screaming. Do not let a discussion become an argument or a fight. But know the teachings rather than relying on your own emotions in the heat of the moment.

Pray constantly (1 Thessalonians 5:16).

Read Scripture daily, particularly the Gospels, alone or with family. Have the Catechism handy. Always be reading a spiritual work. Your own edification will inevitably seep into your own worldview. Petition the Trinity for guidance. Ask saints for intercession. Call on the Blessed Mother multiple times a day.

Know your own spiritual story.

What were the integral moments for you in your faith formation? Where did God reveal Himself? Write your own spiritual autobiography in a way that you find creative and inspiring. “Know thyself” is not just an ancient Greek saying. It’s vital to one’s own development.

“Pray the Mass,” as St. Pius X instructs.

Throw your fears and pains onto the altar. Bow your head at the Consecration; respect the Real Presence of Jesus Christ.

II: Extend an Invitation

Know the story of your lapsed child or loved one.

“Communication is simply mutual understanding,” says Stephen R. Covey. You have to care about who they are, where they’ve been, and where they want to go — while you are called to evangelize, you cannot treat them as an agenda, a project. In this way, study Ignatian spirituality for insight on the discernment of spirits. You are always an unofficial spiritual director to someone!

Find common ground.

There are many launching points one can meet due to the richness of the Catholic faith. Unfortunately, many lapsed Catholics have a distorted or misinformed view of the faith, just as many in the Protestant and evangelical world have a Reformation-era concept of the papacy. Much time may be spent on clearing the cobwebs on the reality of the Catholic Church today. Yes, corruption and scandal and atrocities have weakened the moral authority of the Church. But there is a difference between human failings and the Church as founded by Christ handed to Saint Peter (Matthew 16:18). That needs to be made clear. (See Joseph Ratzinger, “Why I Am Still in the Church.”)

Nurture their interests.

“For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Luke 12:34). Getting to know your loved one authentically and establishing common ground will offer new avenues of appreciation. Are they artists, musicians, poets, writers? Michelangelo, Gaudi, chant, or the great classics of literature offer beautiful immersive experiences in the Catholic worldview.

Pope Francis has been an inspiration for those of any background, through his environment work, Laudato Si, or his call for activism towards migrants, refugees, the disenfranchised.

Connect them with possibly like minded individuals who might continue the conversation, depending on their interests: educators, bioethicists, Father Spitzer’s Magis Institute on science, faith, and reason. Historical subjects on the veracity of Jesus: the Shroud of Turin, for example (see Ian Wilson’s The Shroud, among others).

Give your lapsed child or loved one Matthew Kelly’s Rediscover Catholicism or a similar book that perhaps impacted you. Rediscover appeals to the mainstream, ringing distant bells they would have remembered growing up Catholic. In many ways, that book is an appetizer to what awaits.

Bottom line: communicate the resources provided by so many apostolates—there is something for everyone. Many of those actively engaged in the mission of salvation, the mission of the Church, were once lapsed themselves. Just ask St. Augustine, Dorothy Day, or many great evangelizers in our day and age.

Invite your lapsed child or loved one to Confession.

It’s a challenging invitation. But you’ve at least put it out there. At the same time, do not let the graces of Confession become distorted. While one receives absolution, authentic penance comes when one’s life is turned around. So often the thought is that a few “Hail Marys” and “Our Fathers” is all the Church demands for conciliation. Actually, one must authentically set out determined to begin anew, a new person, transformed. Vinny Flynn’s 7 Secrets of Confession is a powerful little book for guidance.

Extend an invitation to Mass.

Bring an extra copy of Magnificat or a book with daily readings and give your loved one a copy. Sit up close. And then pray the Mass. Together.

**Give your loved one Benedict XVI’s Jesus of Nazareth.**

Along with the timelessness of the Scriptures themselves, this trilogy is written for people of our time to rediscover Christ. It is some of the most staggering spiritual reading you will encounter.

III: Going Forward

Three very simple, practical steps:

1.) Offer help in introducing your loved one to parish resources in their diocese, again contingent on their own discernment of spirits, perhaps even establishing a regular meeting with a spiritual director.
2.) In a quiet moment, offer to pray with them, calling specifically on the Holy Family for guidance.
3.) Finally, ask them to pray for you.

Happy New Year!

Protestant groups display a wide variety of different doctrines.

Catholicism ~~Protestant groups~~ display a wide variety of different doctrines. Yet claim that all Catholics are in communion with the Roman church.

And these differences are greater than those which separate most non-Catholic churches, save the cults.

The Holy Spirit (the filioque)

In EO - The third person of the Trinity, proceeding from the Father alone as in the original Nicene Creed. The Father sends the Spirit at the intercession of the Son. The Son is therefore an agent only in the procession of the Spirit.

In RC - 'When the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, He is not separated from the Father, He is not separated from the Son'.

Mary - Assumption and Immaculate conception of

EO - The Assumption is accepted and it is agreed that Mary experienced physical death, but the Immaculate conception is rejected. Orthodox belief is that the guilt of original sin is not transmitted from one generation to the next, thus obviating the need for Mary to be sinless.

RC - Both are dogmas of the church. The church has not as yet decided whether Mary actually experienced Physical death. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception states that Mary, was at conception 'preserved immaculate from all stain of original sin' and should not be confused with the virgin birth.

Pope - Authority of

EO - As the Bishop of Rome, he has a primacy of honour when Orthodox, not of jurisdiction. At present, his primacy is not effective as the papacy needs to be reformed in accordance with Orthodoxy. His authority is thus no greater or lesser than any of his fellow Bishops in the church.

RC - The Pope is the 'Vicar of Christ' i.e. the visible head of the church on earth and spiritual successor of St. Peter. He has supreme authority (including that over church councils) within Christendom (The Power of the keys).

Pope - Infallibility of

EO - Papal Infallibility is rejected. The Holy Spirit acts to guide the church into truth through (for example) ecumenical councils. This Orthodoxy recognises the first seven ecumenical councils (325-787) as being infallible.

RC - The Pope is infallible when, through the Holy Spirit, he defines a doctrine on faith and morals that is to be held by the whole church. This is a dogma and is therefore a required belief within Catholicism.

Purgatory

EO - An intermediate state between earth and heaven is recognised, but cleansing and purification occur in this life, not the next.

RC - A place of cleansing and preparation for heaven. Also a place where the punishment due to unremitted venial sins may be expiated.

Peter – rock

Matthew 16:18 - http://bible.cc/matthew/16-18.htm

Jesus said that Peter was *petros*(masculine) and that on this *petra*(feminine) He would build His church.

Greek: 4074 Pétros (a masculine noun) – properly, a stone (pebble), such as a small rock found along a pathway. 4074 /Pétros (”small stone”) then stands in contrast to 4073 /pétra (”cliff, boulder,” Abbott-Smith).

“4074 (Pétros) is an isolated rock and 4073 (pétra) is a cliff” (TDNT, 3, 100). “4074 (Pétros) always means a stone . . . such as a man may throw, . . . versus 4073 (pétra), a projecting rock, cliff” (S. Zodhiates, Dict).

4073 pétra (a feminine noun) – “a mass of connected rock,” which is distinct from 4074 (Pétros) which is “a detached stone or boulder” (A-S). 4073 (pétra) is a “solid or native rock, rising up through the earth” (Souter) – a huge mass of rock (a boulder), such as a projecting cliff.

4073 (petra) is “a projecting rock, cliff (feminine noun) . . . 4074 (petros, the masculine form) however is a stone . . . such as a man might throw” (S. Zodhiates, Dict).

It’s also a strange way to word the sentence that He would call Peter a rock and say that on this I will build my church instead of *on you* as would be grammatically correct in talking to a person.

There is no support from the original Greek that Peter was to be the rock on which Jesus said he would build His church. The nouns are not the same, one being masculine and the other being feminine. They denote different objects.

Also, here, Paul identifies who petra is, and that is Christ. This link takes you to the Greek.

http://biblehub.com/text/1_corinthians/10-4.htm

1 Corinthians 10:1-4 For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock (petra) that followed them, and the Rock (petra) was Christ.

http://biblehub.com/text/romans/9-33.htm

Romans 9:30-33 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, as it is written,“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock (petra) of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

http://biblehub.com/text/1_peter/2-8.htm

1 Peter 2:1-8 So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander. Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up into salvation— if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good.

As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe,

“The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone,”

and

“A stone of stumbling, and a rock (petra) of offense.”

They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.

All occurrences of *petra* in the Greek.

http://biblehub.com/greek/strongs_4073.htm

You are correct that Cephas appears in Strong's Greek Dictionary appendix to His Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, that contains an etymology of each word, followed by the English words used in the translation of the Authorized Version only, ordered in decreasing frequency of use. I have this book.

In using it, one must always remember that the KJV/AV defines Strong's Concordance, not vice versa. In his lexicon, Strong does list the word "rock" in the etymology of Πέτρος, as well as an occurrence in the Bible text, but in that entry he is wrong and abandons his own rules for forming the dictionary. According to the concordance section, the number 4074 for Πέτρος never ever appears associated with the English "rock" or "rocks" anywhere in the KJV/AV. Repeat: not ever, anywhere. Apparently the Romanist/Anglican myth had gotten to him, and prejudiced that entry.

And the negation of any connection between "Peter" and "rock" is also seen in the Bible software e-Sword, where a search for the words "rock" or "rocks" finds no association with G4074 Πέτρος whatsoever; and neither does another fine resource, Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.

On the other hand, under "stone" Vine does not list "petros" as a literal object, but he does have this entry:

Note: In John 1:42 petros stands for the proper name, Peter, as the R.^evised V.^ersion (A.V,, "a stone" ; marg., "Peter"); petros denotes a piece of a rock, a detached stone or boulder, in contrast to petra, a mass of rock, See ROCK.

But there, under ROCK, Vine has only one entry for the KJV/AV, as follows:

1. PETRA (πέτρα) denotes a mass of rock, as distinct from petros, a detached stone or boulder, or a stone that might be thrown or easily moved. For the narure of petra, see Matt. 7:24,25; 27:51,60; Mark 15:46; Luke 6:48 (twice), a type of a sure foundation (here the true reading as in the R.V., "because it had been well builded"); Rev. 6:15,16 (cp. Is. 2:19,ff.; Hos. 10:8); Luke 8:6,13 used illustratively; 1 Cor. 10:4 (twice), figuratively, of Christ; in Rom. 9:33 and 1 Pet. 2:8, metaphorically, of Christ; in Matt. 16:18, metaphorically, of Christ and the testimony concerning Him; here the distinction between petra. concerning the Lord Himself, and Petros, the Apostle, is clear (see above).

What is abundantly clear is that in the Greek and in the KJV/AV, there is absolutely no connection between Simon ("Peter") the person and the concept of "rock" in any way. Furthermore, the Scripture translation of the Aramaic "Cephas" as defining "Petros" as (a) "rock" was not the interpreted meaning. This panel of scholars, experts in the Biblical languages and their cognates, assigned the verbal meaning of "stone" to both "Petros" and "Cephas," and I am good with that, quite solid, actually.

Moreover, while in John 1:42 Jesus told Simon that he would be called "Cephas," as well as assigming that label to him, nowhere in the Greek or the KJV/AV does it ever appear that He personally or familiarly addressed Simon bar Jona as "Cephas" or as "Petros." Nowhere at all does He ever intimate that Simon had the reliability or quality of the geological bedding (symbolically) that He would build His organization of totally committed, regenerated, inducted, and integrated believer-disciple-priests.

The very idea of Simon being the bedrock and papal aristocrat of a two-level clergy/laity exclusive club is not only an ill-conceived fiction; it is just plain silly.

But, discussing the figurative-literal language in using "stones" in building local church organizations from town to town--yes, it is a very fitting concept that Jesus would start with a solid foundation of the apostles and prophets, seen as components of a great and glorious culture of local churches, and be their foundational Head.

And such ashlars literally used for building the Temple and its walls are hewn from the solid rock outcropping, which in Greek can be referred to as η πετρα (the Rock)(Christ in you, the hope of Glory). Of course (no pun), symbolic stones make up the foundation of the spiritual House of God (as I know you are aware):

Ephesians 2:20-23 AV:

²⁰ And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself
being the chief corner stone*;
²¹ In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
²² In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

=====
* = added interpretively by the translators

And Peter himself used the same figurative example:

1 Peter 2:4-8 AV

⁴ To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, ⁵ Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. ⁶ Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. ⁷ Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, ⁸ And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.

=====

Let us not be stumbling blocks but rather stepping stones for those seekers who want and need to approach the foot of the Cross for a faith-based (not a Peter-based nor Church-based) salvation. It's time to drop the Peter-as-a-foundation controversy as being quite puerile.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Strategies for Returning to the Church