Posted on 04/04/2008 11:01:22 AM PDT by Gamecock
Last week I received the following e-mail, and I felt it would be best to share my response here on the blog.
Dear Mr. White, For someone considering converting to Catholicism, what questions would you put to them in order to discern whether or not they have examined their situation sufficiently? Say, a Top 10 list. Thanks.
When I posted this question in our chat channel a number of folks commented that it was in fact a great question, and we started to throw out some possible answers. Here is my "Top Ten List" in response to this fine inquiry.
10) Have you listened to both sides? That is, have you done more than read Rome Sweet Home and listen to a few emotion-tugging conversion stories? Have you actually taken the time to find sound, serious responses to Rome's claims, those offered by writers ever since the Reformation, such as Goode, Whitaker, Salmon, and modern writers? I specifically exclude from this list anything by Jack Chick and Dave Hunt.
9) Have you read an objective history of the early church? I refer to one that would explain the great diversity of viewpoints to be found in the writings of the first centuries, and that accurately explains the controversies, struggles, successes and failures of those early believers?
8) Have you looked carefully at the claims of Rome in a historical light, specifically, have you examined her claims regarding the "unanimous consent" of the Fathers, and all the evidence that exists that stands contrary not only to the universal claims of the Papacy but especially to the concept of Papal Infallibility? How do you explain, consistently, the history of the early church in light of modern claims made by Rome? How do you explain such things as the Pornocracy and the Babylonian Captivity of the Church without assuming the truthfulness of the very system you are embracing?
7) Have you applied the same standards to the testing of Rome's ultimate claims of authority that Roman Catholic apologists use to attack sola scriptura? How do you explain the fact that Rome's answers to her own objections are circular? For example, if she claims you need the Church to establish an infallible canon, how does that actually answer the question, since you now have to ask how Rome comes to have this infallible knowledge. Or if it is argued that sola scriptura produces anarchy, why doesn't Rome's magisterium produce unanimity and harmony? And if someone claims there are 33,000 denominations due to sola scriptura, since that outrageous number has been debunked repeatedly (see Eric Svendsen's Upon This Slippery Rock for full documentation), have you asked them why they are so dishonest and sloppy with their research?
6) Have you read the Papal Syllabus of Errors and Indulgentiarum Doctrina? Can anyone read the description of grace found in the latter document and pretend for even a moment that is the doctrine of grace Paul taught to the Romans?
5) Have you seriously considered the ramifications of Rome's doctrine of sin, forgiveness, eternal and temporal punishments, purgatory, the treasury of merit, transubstantiation, sacramental priesthood, and indulgences? Have you seriously worked through compelling and relevant biblical texts like Ephesians 2, Romans 3-5, Galatians 1-2, Hebrews 7-10 and all of John 6, in light of Roman teaching?
4) Have you pondered what it means to embrace a system that teaches you approach the sacrifice of Christ thousands of times in your life and yet you can die impure, and, in fact, even die an enemy of God, though you came to the cross over and over again? And have you pondered what it means that though the historical teachings of Rome on these issues are easily identifiable, the vast majority of Roman Catholics today, including priests, bishops, and scholars, don't believe these things anymore?
3) Have you considered what it means to proclaim a human being the Holy Father (that's a divine name, used by Jesus only of His Father) and the Vicar of Christ (that's the Holy Spirit)? Do you really find anything in Scripture whatsoever that would lead you to believe it was Christ's will that a bishop in a city hundreds of miles away in Rome would not only be the head of His church but would be treated as a king upon earth, bowed down to and treated the way the Roman Pontiff is treated?
2) Have you considered how completely unbiblical and a-historical is the entire complex of doctrines and dogmas related to Mary? Do you seriously believe the Apostles taught that Mary was immaculately conceived, and that she was a perpetual virgin (so that she traveled about Palestine with a group of young men who were not her sons, but were Jesus' cousins, or half-brothers (children of a previous marriage of Joseph), or the like? Do you really believe that dogmas defined nearly 2,000 years after the birth of Christ represent the actual teachings of the Apostles? Are you aware that such doctrines as perpetual virginity and bodily assumption have their origin in gnosticism, not Christianity, and have no foundation in apostolic doctrine or practice? How do you explain how it is you must believe these things de fide, by faith, when generations of Christians lived and died without ever even having heard of such things?
And the number 1 question I would ask of such a person is: if you claim to have once embraced the gospel of grace, whereby you confessed that your sole standing before a thrice-holy God was the seamless garment of the imputed righteousness of Christ, so that you claimed no merit of your own, no mixture of other merit with the perfect righteousness of Christ, but that you stood full and complete in Him and in Him alone, at true peace with God because there is no place in the universe safer from the wrath of God than in Christ, upon what possible grounds could you come to embrace a system that at its very heart denies you the peace that is found in a perfect Savior who accomplishes the Father's will and a Spirit who cannot fail but to bring that work to fruition in the life of God's elect? Do you really believe that the endless cycle of sacramental forgiveness to which you will now commit yourself can provide you the peace that the perfect righteousness of Christ can not?
Have you seen the pictures on this page?
http://www.maryundoerofknots.com/sanctuary.htm
VERY relevant, seems to me.
Doubt is not of God—it is from the Devil! “Surely hath God said...?” From the beginning, Satan has been the father of lies, of casting doubt in the hearts of men about the nature of God. Doubting is not a sign of faith. Faith means not doubting! “For without faith it is impossible to please Him.” So, when we waver in our faith, let us never celebrate and say, “Ah, God has thus gifted me.” God is not, never has been, and never will be in the business of casting seeds of doubt into the hearts and minds of people.
You said,
“What need has certainty for faith.”
To this I would say, it is faith itself which brings certainty. It is not my believing in the thing that I believe which is the certainty, but rather the certainty of the thing which I believe which strengthens my faith. My faith is strong (if/when it is such) because of Who I place my faith in—The Lord Jesus Christ. I draw no strength from my faith in Him. I draw my strength (which I use to believe) from His faithfulness.
You alluded to the parable of the 10 virgins in Matt. 25:1-12. Here are those verses:
1Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.
2And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.
3They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them:
4But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.
5While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.
6And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.
7Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.
8And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out.
9But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.
10And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.
11Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.
12But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.
Those without oil (a symbol for the Holy Spirit), were shut out and told by the Lord, “I know you not.” It echoes the passage earlier in Matthew where the Lord speaks to those who claim to have done all manner of miracles and prayers, etc. in His name. “Depart from me, ye workers of iniquity. I never knew you,” was His reply. Here, again, there are those who seem to have some anticipation of a joyous union with the Lord (The Bridegroom). But upon His return, they are found to be not ready (not filled with the Holy Spirit—none of His—Rom. 8:9 “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.”) Once more, the reply to such is the same, “I know you not.”
Which is that Jesus is the Son of the living God who died for our sins and was resurrected. And the two greatest commandments Jesus gave to us was to LOVE THE LORD THY GOD with all thy heart and to love thy neighbor as thyself. I don't see how believers fighting over other doctrine trumps violating what Jesus calls the greatest commandments. Having discussions which furthers ones faith and improves one another's knowledge of God is good, bitterly fighting is not so good.
I agree, doubt is of Satan, or depression, on occasion, or a mixture of both. God evidently thinks I ought to be strong enough to withstand these attacks on my faith, and I do find my faith stronger when I come out the other side. I am very glad I do not equate doubt to an actual losing of faith, else I might have given in to the despair I was sorely tempted to. Doubt is no sin, just a temptation; despair- despairing of the mercy of God, now there’s an “unforgivable sin”, a sin that refuses to believe forgiveness exists, an insult to the sacrifice of our Lord, a blasphemy against the Comforter He sent to follow.
Satan attacks our faith fiercely, tempts us to little sins to deaden our souls to God’s word, to bigger sins to fill the emptiness. Sometimes this silence hits for no reason- there’s no shortage of Jobs out there, you know- people struck by misfortune, as the man blind from birth, not for any sin of their own, but so that God’s mercy and love may shine even brighter in the aftermath.
There’s no touch of the Holy Spirit as sweet as the one that arrives when you’ve stopped expecting it.
As for the Virgins, I have been invited to the Great Wedding in Heaven. I have been given a clean garment, and the promise that Christ will wash it with His own pierced hands so often as I bring it penitent to Him, sorrowing at my sins. But I still must needs ask, before it will be given. And I still must go to the door and knock. And if I have no oil on that day, I know it will be only because I have forgotten Him, and I will recieve nothing more than I deserve.
I pray God to keep me faithfull.
I agree completely. I am a Catholic. I prayed, studied, meditated, prayed some more, before becoming Catholic. I can defend 99% of my faith with scripture, history and logic. But for that last percent I had to make a leap of faith.
That’s why with apologetics it is more true than of most things that “you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink. Only God can provide that last push. If anyone on this thread is sincerely posting in the hopes of saving another poster’s misguided soul this might be the point at which to withdraw from the computer into a quiet room for some serious prayer. I think all the “undecideds” left 600 posts ago, thoroughly scandalized.
That is, assuming everyone is here “Ad maiorem Dei gloriam” as opposed to simply seeking the intellectual satisfaction of getting the last word in.
You are wrong.
Now you in your own sights, resting on your opinion. Would that I knew how to post images on FR. No sane person can see what’s on that site and think it’s anything but idolatry.
Anyone who disagrees with you is insane?
Wow. Amazing.
[backs away slowly...no sudden movement]
My grandmother, raised a Catholic all her eighty some odd years, first heard the Gospel on her deathbed, thank the Good Lord.
pgkdan said:That is a blatant lie.
pgkdan sad to say that isn’t a lie.
I met 2 ladies that had been Roman Catholic’s all their lives...they went to Catholic schools...faithfully attended Mass...went through all the motions the church offered, but didn’t know Jesus as their Personel Lord and Savior.
They spent hundred of hours listening to sermons, but neither of them understood them, or had a personel relationship with Jesus.
When I first met the ladies they wanted to know why I had so much Joy and Peace. I’m a born-again Christian who found Jesus just by reading my Bible.
When I started sharing with them what the Bible said they started reading their Bibles, (they said they were always discouraged against reading the Bible themselves?)
They both accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior, became filled with the Holy Spirit and started telling all their friends about Jesus.
They had always pictured Jesus as a dead Jesus hanging on the cross. Once He became alive to them it changed their lives.
They had no idea that they were going to have eternal lives in either Heaven or Hell. Heaven and Hell weren’t real places to them. They only knew about purgatory and that they were to pray for those folks that were there.
They didn’t know they’d someday have a perfect ressurected body just like Jesus has now. To them the idea of Heaven would be just floating around on a cloud somewhere.
They didn’t know “to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord”. They thought they’d be laying in a grave somewhere until the end of time.
They didn’t know they could just ask God themselves for the forgiveness of their sins.
They had no idea about Jewish customs in Jesus time.
They knew nothing about The Rapture and how it compares to The Jewish Wedding.
http://www.godonthe.net/evidence/marriage.htm
http://www.waitingforjesus.com/therapture.html
They didn’t know anything about Bible Prophecy. And how God told us in the last days there would be a one world religion.
In fact that’s how I was able to talk with them about the Bible.
They had been deceived into going to “A Course in Miracles” (The garbage that Oprah’s teaching right now) and this was many, many years ago when they went.
They were empty and searching for something to fill the void. I was able to show them that this was a New Age teaching and not from God.
So I’m just saying these two ladies didn’t get anything out of going to school, or church for all those years. It wasn’t until they read the Bible for themselves that they finally found Peace & Joy...after they found Jesus.
Please know I’m not bashing anyone’s religion or faith...I just understand how someone could go through their entire life, and not have a personel relationship with Jesus.
Correction: Those are the words of Irenaeaus, not Ignatius.
Yes, there are some Catholics like that.
And there are no doubt many more who do have a “personal relationship with Jesus” and do know about heaven and hell and do know how to pray and most especially, they know how to love one another in this world as God has loved them for all eternity.
My large family and me are Catholics like that and we know of many, many like us.
THANKS for the wonderful testimony.
The HOW it could happen has been repeatedly explained to them.
They are fixated at the idol images stage and can see nor hear nothing save what the RC magicsterical tells them to see and hear.
A most sad condition.
Prayer is best. Sometimes jarring prods pry loose an opening to a stray true thought or two.
But Holy Spirit truly has to be the one to open such eyes and ears.
I’m a Catholic, well catechised because I chose to be, and I will not defend the sorry state of catechism in most American dioceses. As a Catholic, I believe pretty much everything you told those ladies, with a quibble here about the need of sacramental confession (it’s still God who forgives, though), and there about the Rapture (although God is God and can end the world as He pleases, I won’t hang my theological hat on it).
Still, it is not uncommon for a person born to any type of Christianity to spend their whole life not thinking about. Heaven forbid they start thinking about it and find themselves compelled to change their life. It’s so much easier to go on auto-pilot, attend mass, go to prayer meeting, make all the motions while your brain gets on with that cool plot twist on TV last night and what on earth did that woman two rows up do to her hair. That’s more a function of the human capacity for self-deception than whichever religion they’re coasting through.
There’s no one like a human for the ability to keep two conflicting thoughts in their head without questioning the paradox. Why do you think there are so many liberals around?
Then one day (hopefully) they get confronted by the fact that all this “God stuff” is real, and impacts their lives, and will effect the eternity of which this life on earth is not even a second- and it’s gobsmacking, like a punch in the gut while someone pulls the rug out from under you. It’s like falling in love. The trick is to keep it up when the novelty and fervor wear off.
I wish it had been a well educated Catholic who had struck up that conversation with your two ladies (although it might not have had the same effect, it’s the everyday that gets disdained, the new that catches the eye), but ANY sort of Christianity is better than that secular, new age, dumber-than-pagan, demonic psudeo-religion.
Thank you, Manfred, for bringing this devotion to my attention. I had been unfamiliar with it. It is a source of constant wonder how God manages to use people.
LOL
mind-reading.
Mind reading is the “coup” de jour on this type of thread.
And it makes far easier missiles than substantive ones.
Actually, it was hypothesis stating.
But I can make that clearer next time.
I do appreciate the RC edifice’s decreasing the need for a Protty barrel of monkeys.
The RC edifice is much cheaper.
And often twice as humorous.
In any case the thrust of the poster's question remains on point: the Apostles did not teach that Mary was "immaculately conceived", nor did they teach that she was "conceived immaculate." If I am wrong, please point out where the immaculate conception appears in Apostolic teaching.
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.