Before you convert to Roman Catholicism... (Top Ten List)

http://www.reformationtheology.com/2007/08/before_you_convert_to_roman_ca.php ^ | 7 Aug 2007 | James White

[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?

[Quix]

OH DEAR!

LOL.

[narses]

Rest. Depending on which heretical or schismatic belief system you have, either yesterday or today ought to be a day of rest for you. You need rest. Trust me, you do.

[OLD REGGIE]

can’t begin to count the amount of non-Catholic FReepers who are so wonderfully kind to the Catholic FReepers that, it has in the past, brought tears to my eyes. And I am not kidding about that. I’ve tried to point out every time a non-Catholic poster is Christlike and say thank you. It truly warms my heart, especially after a long hatefilled thread.

Then there are baiters and those that enable them...

Though my comment was facetiously aimed at a single individual yours is an example of a pure heart and soul. God bless you.

[netmilsmom]

>>Perhaps some of the new memory pills would be helpful.

IIRC, I’ve noted that there are many RC believers/bros/sis hereon.

I haven’t named a list because I don’t know hearts that intimately.<<

Let’s read the quote from Netmilsmom (me) again.
“I have NEVER been called this by one of the “Ususal Suspects”.”

Not the “I”. Your sarcasm is misplaced.

[steve86]

I went to a Catholic Church once, long ago. Everything was in some foreign language

God understands Latin, not a problem.

The priest isn't speaking to you most of that time.

when the Priest finally got around to the sermon in was long, dry and monotone.

Some priests give animated sermons, others don't. You know, priests aren't chosen based on auditions to carnival barker school like some protestant ministers are.

[netmilsmom]

Oh thank you so much!

Coming from a family that was half Protestant and marrying a Protestant (now Catholic) I was amazed at the vile thrown at Catholics here. I swear, I had never experienced it my entire life.

Then I realized it was a small group when I saw people starting posts that said, “I’m not a Catholic, but....”
There are good, Christlike Protestants here who know that honey gets more than vinegar.

Then there are those that are positively pickled!

God Bless, my FRiend!

[Alex Murphy]

I have been the first one to get on a Catholic who has made baiting statements. Want to know how many times? Twice.

Only twice? I'm about to fill your dance card for the next year.

If you find a Catholic who baits, call me.

If I can find one? netmilsmon, check out this collection of quotes, which all oame from just ONE "baiting" Catholic FReeper. I could cough up a similar list for at least three or four more Catholic FReepers, if you still have nothing to do....

-- Brace thyself for the attacks of snake handlers, calvinists, "non-denoms" and others...
-- If you're upset that I called out the cults for what they are...sorry...but it's still an accurate depiction of the non-denoms, mormons, calvinists and other wacky cults.
-- Mormons...the cult that's become commonplace...so hard-up for membership that they have to resort to attempted spiritual kidnapping of the dead...
-- Fact is, John Calvin was an unintelligent, perverse fraud who founded a cult known as "calvinism."
-- The Episcopal "Church" was started by an English king who could not get the Pope to accept the king's immoral ways.
-- Luther was a disaffected, likely egomaniacal priest.
-- Protestantism is a breakoff of mainstream Christianity that seeks to glorify the pastor more than the Lord.
-- Presby's are some of the laziest "Christians" out there...as are all of their predestination cousins.
-- Would the calvinist cult members like some damnation with their heresy?
-- As for your post, you're also off base and reciting a continual lie of the snake handlers, calvinists and "pastor" worship folks at the Church of the Almighty Dollar.
-- Hey...I'm not surprised by anything the snake-handling crowd does. Their "churches" are simply shrines to the "pastors" - no theological foundation...
-- Why is this listed as a Catholic interest article? Why not Calvinists? They're the ones who practice the witchcraft.
-- You'll note that it's "Calvin" College. Again, I ask why are the activities at a cult center in the midwest relevant to Catholics?
-- I tell ya, this "reverend" ... is nothing more than an uneducated bumpkin. Wonder how much money he's skimming from the ship of fools attending his "church..."
-- You'd be stunned by how quickly these snake handlers degrade into profanity, anger and threats.
-- Again, a demonstration of a protestant being ignorant...
-- Let's have a little fun with that wackiest of prot sects, the Baptists
-- Being a protestant is in itself a demonstration of ignorance...
-- The pentacostals, "church of God" and others are simply inventions of men...designed to pump the ego and line the pockets of the "pastors." But continue donating...I'm sure your pastor is happy in his new Benz...
-- Martin Luther, being a relatively lazy type, deleted a good chunk of the Bible?
-- A British king, attempting to justify his own heresy and immorality, heavily edited a version to suit his own twisted lifestyle?
-- Yes, if you're a born again, declared protty, then you're clear to do whatever you wish..."date" male hookers, cheat on your spouse, defraud donors of money intended for religious purposes...not that any protestant "ministers" did that or anything...
-- Perhaps things are different at your church - one of the, what, million protestant sects? However, the snake handling pentacostal calvinist wannabeatelevangelist "churches" here typically only use snippets.
-- Hell, most "Protestant" "churches" in my area are simply shrines to the ego (and pocketbook) of the "pastor."
-- Luther was a self-absorbed idiot...and his followers are fools...a complete bunch of utter fools.
-- Perhaps I'll just convert to that calvinist cult I've heard so much about.
-- That's the real origin of the Anglican church - born of sin and a king's ego.

[Alex Murphy]

More than I can say for the liar Ottofire ...

You really ought to ping somone when you talk trash about them.

[Polybius]

Not a single RC has remotely even addressed my point shooting the assertions about the Gospel read at every mass out of the water in terms of this and similar cases. That the Gospel is read is largely a moot point. Has little to do with the problem.

And your point was?

I, myself, am an agnostic. I am pefectly willing to be convinced by either side as long as it makes sense.

The original claim was that an 80+ year old Catholic woman can go an entire lifetime "without hearing the Gospel" until somebody from your own particular denomination, a cousin to be exact, graces her with the words from his mouth.

The Watchtower people that knock on my door ever four weekends probably say the same thing. "If it ain't my interpretation or Cousin Wilbur's interpetation, it just ain't THE GOSPEL!"

So, the question remains:

Is your definition of "the Gospel" the verbatim text of the New Testament or is your definition of "the Gospel" the words of your cousin?

[netmilsmom]

>>You know, priests aren’t chosen based on auditions to carnival barker school like some protestant ministers are.<<

Come on Steve, that wasn’t nice either. We’re bigger than that.

We have a Deacon that gave a sermon for Lent with a Big plastic purple Crayon talking about “Coloring our hearts...” as he wiggled the thing in front of the 1st pew. People politely laughed.

I thought the seniors in the parish were going to need smelling salts!!!!

[Quix]

I wasn’t aware I’d written any sarcasm.

I’m thinking of getting a bottle of memory pills myself.

[OLD REGGIE]

You’re going to lose your “Immaculate Metal” decoder ring if you let the secret out that we read the Gospel at EVERY mass...XD

It's just possible that when the only obligation of the congregation is to say "Amen" at the appropriate time they are not really aware they are "learning" Scripture. The fact is, they are not.

I applaud the "recent" emphasis on Scripture study among many Catholics.

[netmilsmom]

Taking things out of context doesn’t befit you, AM.

How about if you quote me completely...
“If you find a Catholic who baits, call me. If it’s not a defensive statement in response to a post, I’ll get on them too.”

When you pull statements out of a thread, I can’t read what came before, now can I? How can I tell if it’s defensive?

[pgkdan]

You’re right. I intended to and thought I had. Thank you for informing Ottofire that I call him a liar.:

[netmilsmom]

I LOVE a good Bible study! Best part of VII.

[narses]

Rest, you need rest. Really.

[Quix]

I’m headed for a nap. The RC’s have ordered it and I’m trying to be a cooperative as I can be, with a good consciece . . . LOL.

Briefly . . .

Of course the Gospel from Scripture is read in the mass.

And all manner of things are SAID by all manner of RC authorities.

HOWEVER, THE OVERALL GESTALT of the RC edifice experience for a host of individuals I’ve known . . . including my step-mother . . .

IS

that . . .

The text of Scripture isn’t that important vis a vis in terms of what it means to BE ROMAN CATHOLIC, IN RIGHT STANDING ETC.

What THEY PERCEIVE AND TAKE INTO THEIR CONSCIOUSNESS AS REALITY, REQUIRED, EXPECTED, IMPORTANT

IS

THE RITUALS . . . jumping through all the Roman edifice hoops at least once a week and perhaps a few daily.

That’s their TAKE on it at the end of the day; the bottom line. That’s what governs their behaviors.

[Quix]

So . . . this adament assertion . . .

is it a result of mind reading? Would something mindless afford sufficient rest?

Or is the reading being managed over the ethers of some other part of my body?

Or is something else being said between the words?