Posted on 03/30/2019 8:12:59 AM PDT by Salvation
Question: I had reason to hope my niece was going to convert to the Catholic faith. But there were so many obstacles the Church set up that discouraged her. She was asked to go to classes, and they told her that her marriage was not valid and she would need an annulment. Further, it was necessary to wait until Easter, etc. The nearby evangelical church set up no such obstacles, and she was able to join at once and be considered a member. I hear so much talk of evangelization today, but I share my niece’s frustration. Can we not streamline this process?
— Name withheld
Answer: There is a kind of appealing simplicity that you describe in many Protestant denominations. But there are problems with the approach that should give us pause. Ultimately evangelization is more about conversion than mere membership. We are summoned to embrace the saving teaching of the Lord and to walk according to it.
Because adults make informed decisions, the Church considers it important to teach them the fundamentals of the Faith so that they can know what it is they are agreeing to when they enter the Church. Although some of the Scriptures portray an almost instant, on-the-spot baptism, the consensus in the early Church shifted to a lengthy, three-year period of instruction (called the catechumenate) prior to baptism. This likely was because of the insight that quick conversions often led to quick departures or a falling away when the true demands of discipleship became known.
Instructions are most insisted upon for those who are unbaptized. In the case of those who are baptized and come from different Protestant denominations, the length and content of instructions will depend on their background. It is up to the discretion of the pastor who discerns with each individual what is needed. It is certainly not required for those already baptized to “wait until next Easter.”
The concerns about a person’s marital status are rooted in the very words and teachings of Jesus himself. He teaches without ambiguity that for a person to marry, then divorce and enter another marriage, puts them in an ongoing state of adultery in the “new” marriage (cf. Mt 5:32; Mt 19:1-9; Mk 10:11-12; Lk 16:18, etc). He adds rather firmly, “What God has joined together, let no one divide” (Mt 19:9).
It will be further noted that when the Lord was evangelizing the woman at the well, he brought her to a moment of conversion, and she asked for the gift of faith. But the Lord Jesus saw fit to first raise with her the fact that she had been married five times and was now living with a man outside of marriage. Her conversion would not be complete or adequate until she was willing to live chastely. Then the graces could flow.
For reasons of their own, many Protestant denominations have decided to practically overlook such passages. But the Catholic Church takes the Lord’s teaching on these matters rather seriously, as he clearly intended that we should. In some cases, after an investigation based on evidence, the Church may use its power to bind and loose, to indicate that the previous marriage was not “what God has joined,” and it recognizes the first marriage as null. A person’s current marriage then can be blessed and recognized. But we simply cannot set the Lord’s words aside as if they were of little importance.
Thus some conversions to the Catholic faith will take some time to be faithful to the teachings of the Lord and the nature of true conversion. It is worth the diligence required.
So do you consider Francis to be a false pope? If so, who was the last valid one? We cannot get your more prolific reprover of "Bergolio" to answer the latter question.
1 Corinthians 5:1-13 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father's wife. And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.
For though absent in body, I am present in spirit; and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment on the one who did such a thing. When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.
Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
Well, they do have some "saints" on steroids:
The supreme power of the priestly office is the power of consecrating...Indeed, it is equal to that of Jesus Christ...When the priest pronounces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man...Indeed it is greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary [who is said to be all but almighty herself]...The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows his head in humble obedience to the priest's command .
Of what sublime dignity is the office of the Christian priest who is thus privileged to act as the ambassador and the vice-gerent of Christ on earth! He continues the essential ministry of Christ: he teaches the faithful with the authority of Christ, he pardons the penitent sinner with the power of Christ, he offers up again the same sacrifice of adoration and atonement which Christ offered on Calvary. No wonder that the name which spiritual writers are especially fond of applying to the priest is that of alter Christus. For the priest is and should be another Christ. (John A. O'Brien, Ph.D., LL.D., The Faith of Millions, 255-256, O'Brien. Nihtt obstat: Rev. Lawrence Gollner, Censor Librorum Imprimatur: Leo A. Pursley, Bishop of Fort Wayne,-South Bend, March 16, 1974;
I wonder: If the Vatican wasn’t such an obviously disgusting haven of sodomy and sin, and if Pope Francis wasn’t such a hippie, would the usual suspects among the Roman Catholics on this board be so angry?
Apparently one of the symptoms of unresolved or unresolvable cognitive dissonance is anger and ‘socially inappropriate behavior.’
Well said.
‘Loving the sinner’ has gotten to the bizarre point that almost no one concedes that sins as defined by 2,000 years of Christianity are still actually sins that will bring punishment.
Gag.
And it’s not even phrased as, “God keeps his promises” but “God obeys the priest.”
‘Loving the sinner’ has gotten to the bizarre point that almost no one concedes that sins as defined by 2,000 years of Christianity are still actually sins that will bring punishment.
***
I know, right?
But it’s not an entirely new problem; it just takes different forms depending on the era, usually along the lines of ‘sin X isn’t so bad’ or ‘We’ll just commit this sin so that it’ll stop a bigger one.’
Like in the middle ages how there were church-sanctioned brothels for priests because they were under the impression that it was better than getting married or keeping a secret lover/wife.
Doesn’t seem like those people were so arrogant as to claim that sins weren’t really sins. They knew they were making concessions out of weakness. People now believe they are being pious by condemning their culture and offspring to the lowest kinds of degradation.
Doesn’t seem like those people were so arrogant as to claim that sins weren’t really sins. They knew they were making concessions out of weakness. People now believe they are being pious by condemning their culture and offspring to the lowest kinds of degradation.
***
True, it’s sad.
Israel just before the exile had much the same problem, admittedly. I recently re-read the first couple chapters of Ezekiel and I was surprised at how similar they seemed to today.
Even the homo ones?
Do your realize that in 1968 there were only 338 annulments in the US? Now there are 50,000 plus annually???
Nitice the priest offers up again the same sacrifice. Christ was sacrificed once for all and is now seated at the right hand of God in glory. There is no ongoing sacrifice. Everything about their doctrine whether the ongoing sacrifice of the mass or works righteousness diminishes the one great act of salvation that is sufficient for all for all time.
Christ said it is finished from the cross not it’s sort of finished if you attend mass regularly and try to be really good and avoid mortal sin and don’t get divorced and remarried and..... either His act of salvation was sufficient and given the stamp of approval by the Father at the Resurrectiion or it wasn’t. If you don’t believe the cross and the cross alone was sufficient you are preaching another Christ and are no longer Christian.
It’s worse than that though See my 232
Thankfully, our Lord Jesus never went through a three year period to be baptized. He would never have made it to the cross.
Then you missed the analogy.
The Church attracts trolls because her teachings are made public. I couldn’t even attack your protestant beliefs since there are so many variations, nobody has any idea what you believe!
If anyone here was promoting or defending all that Caths label "Protestant" then you would have a case. However, I see no one doing so, while for a long time conservative evangelicals have testified to being the most unified major religious group in America , far more then those overall whom Rome manifestly considers members.
I have both in my family, a brother who is a Baptist minister and Catholic family members. None of them treat me like you treat Catholics and I don’t attack their beliefs.
I have RC neighbors who are friends of mine, but who do not known as attacking Prots as the traditionalists RCs do here, while comparing personal relationships as this to impersonal forum debates is an invalid comparison.
And if you are against beliefs being attacked then you should also be against Catholics attacking Prot, beliefs which is what is Catholic threads do far more than Prot. threads.
You do hate the Church, or you wouldn’t be getting in the middle of every post that’s remotely Catholic.
Which personal mind reading is against RM rules, but as I hardly ever see you here (and the last time I responded you is was another ad homminem by you whining about the heat in the kitchen) it is not surprising you are ignorant of that. We are not even sppsd to make the issue personal, which you made it.
I see zero Catholics jumping on every protestant post, actually I don’t even see protestants commenting on them, but they sure as hell comment on ours!
That is because Prot. threads (not posts in response) are usually devotional threads, or about basic teachings, and not promoting a particular church, while as with this thread which compares Catholic conversions with Prot ones, RC threads promote their particular church as the one true one, provoking evangelical challenges you whine about. And in fact, Catholics are far more protected from threads that attack here then Prots are.
So go ahead and tell yourself you just want the truth to be known, but don’t tell it to me, I don’t have any interest in anything related to you or anything a troll has to say.
Then stop posting and having your ignorance and double standard exposed.
In other words have a great day, I’m heading out to shoot 200 clay targets, have fun with your hobby, attacking Catholics!
It actually about attacking a elitist serf-proclaimed "one true church" which again, historically damned all without her and presently asserts that Prot churches are not worthy of the proper name "church"
I think some of the Catholics i usually deal with wish i was one of your clay pigeons!
"Hppie" is better than this hope: Palestinian Cleric: “Islam Will Conquer the Entire West Through Jihad – and France Will be First”
Meanwhile, despite the emphasis upon catechesis, the response by RCs to vast multitudes of liberal RCs is often that such are poorly catechized.
Perhaps you should read the Bible and truly understand the meaning.
1 Corinthians 4:15
Philippians 2:22
James 2:21
Romans 4:16-17
Acts 7:2
John 8:56
Luke 16:24
Matthew 15:4
Matthew 19:5
Luke 14:26
Matthew 7:3
Jesus was making the point that God the Father is the ultimate source of all authority. He rebuked the Pharisees and you should be rebuked for trying to use Scriptures as a false premise (like Satan does). Father is used throughout the Scriptures including by Jesus and St Paul.
Why do you feel the need to spread false comments about the Truth and the Catholic Church?
Priests are spiritual fathers that help us to serve God with love of God and neighbor. Yes, priests are sinners like the rest of us and a few have committed grave mortal sins. Yes, the Catholic Church is led by human beings who are sinners and some are more interested in the ways of the world than following Jesus Christ. You should pray for them instead of casting stones and showing anger.
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.