How I Led Catholics Out Of the Church (And into Apostasy)

Catholic Education ^ | Steve Wood

[rzman21]

How I led Catholics Out of the Church STEVE WOOD I was a Protestant for twenty years before I became a Catholic. I led many people out of the Catholic Church. My formula for getting Catholics to leave the Church usually consisted of three steps.

Step 1: Get Catholics to have a conversion experience in a Protestant setting. Most Fundamentalist, Evangelical, and charismatic Protestant churches have dynamic youth programs, vibrant Wednesday and Sunday evening services, and friendly small-group bible studies. In addition, they host special crusades, seminars and concerts. At the invitation of a Protestant friend, a Catholic may begin attending one or more of these events while still going to Sunday Mass at his local parish. Most Protestant services proclaim a simple gospel: repent from sin and follow Christ in faith. They stress the importance of a personal relationship with Jesus and the reward of eternal life. Most of the Catholics who attend these services are not accustomed to hearing such direct challenges to abandon sin and follow Christ. As a result, many Catholics experience a genuine conversion.

Protestants should be commended for their zeal in promoting conversions. Catholic leaders need to multiply the opportunities for their people to have such conversions in Catholic settings. The reason is simple. About five out of ten people adopt the beliefs of the denomination where they have their conversion. This percentage is even higher for those who had profound conversions or charismatic experiences that were provided by Protestants. (Believe me, I know; I was a graduate of an Assembly of God college and a youth minister in two charismatic churches.)

Protestant pastors, evangelists, youth leaders, and lay ministers are acutely aware that conversion experiences in Protestant settings often lead to a Protestant faith and church membership. Why do so many Catholic leaders fail to see this? Why are they so nonchalant about a process that has pulled hundreds of thousands of Catholics out of the Church?

Step 2: Give their conversion a Protestant interpretation.

A genuine conversion is one of life's most precious experiences, comparable to marriage or the birth of a child. Conversion awakens a deep hunger for God. Effective Protestant ministries train workers to follow up on this spiritual longing.

Before a stadium crusade, I would give follow-up workers a six-week training course. I showed them how to present a Protestant interpretation of the conversion experience with a selective use of bible verses. The scripture of choice was of course John 3:3, the "born-again" verse: "Jesus declared, 'I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.'

I used the "touch and go" scripture technique, similar to that used by pilots training for landings and takeoffs. We would briefly touch down on John 3:3 to show that being born again was necessary for eternal life. Then I would describe conversion in terms of being born again. We would make a hasty takeoff before reading John 3:5 which stresses the necessity of being "born of water and spirit." I never mentioned that for 20 centuries the Orthodox and Catholic Churches, echoing the unanimous teaching of the Church fathers, understood this passage as referring to the Sacrament of Baptism! And I certainly never brought up Titus 3:5 ("He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit") as a parallel reference to John 3:5.

In my experience as a Protestant, all the Catholics who had a conversion in a Protestant setting lacked a firm grasp of their Catholic faith.

In twenty years of Protestant ministry, I never met a Catholic who knew that John 3:3-8 describes the sacrament of Baptism. It wasn't hard to convince them to disregard the sacraments along with the Church that emphasized the sacraments.

Proverbs says: "He who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him" (18:17). Catholics without a scriptural foundation for their Catholic beliefs never hear "the rest of the story." My selective use of scripture made the Protestant perspective seem so absolutely sure. Over time, this one-sided approach to scripture caused Catholics to reject their Catholic faith.

Step 3: Accuse the Catholic church of denying salvation by grace.

Catholics often consider Protestants who proselytize to be bigoted, narrow-minded, or prejudiced. This is unfair and inaccurate; a profound charity energizes their misguided zeal.

There was only one reason I led Catholics out of the Church: I thought they were on their way to hell. I mistakenly thought the Catholic Church denied that salvation was by grace; I knew that anyone who believed this wasn't going to heaven. Out of love for their immortal souls, I worked tirelessly to convert them.

I used Ephesians 2:8-9 to convince Catholics that it was imperative for them to leave the Church:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith — and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God — not by works, so that no one can boast. First I would say, "The Bible says that salvation is by grace and not by works. Right?" Their answer was always yes. Then I would say, "The Catholic Church teaches that salvation is by works. Right?" (I never met a Catholic who did not say yes. Every Catholic I met during my twenty years of ministry confirmed my misconception that Catholicism taught salvation is by works instead of grace.) Finally, I would declare, "The Catholic Church is leading people to hell by denying salvation is by grace. You'd better join a church that teaches the true way to heaven."

Because I would also do a "touch and go" in Ephesians, I rarely quoted verse 10 which says, "For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." Listen carefully to stadium evangelists, televangelists, and radio preachers. Nine times out of ten they will quote Ephesians 2:8-9 with great emphasis and never mention verse 10.

We are not slaves futilely trying to earn salvation by doing "works of the law" (Eph. 2:8-9). Yet as sons of God we are inspired and energized by the Holy Spirit to do "good works" as we cooperate with our heavenly father in extending the Kingdom of God (Eph. 2:10). Catholicism believes and teaches the full message of Ephesians 2:8-10, without equivocating or abbreviating the truth.

For twenty centuries the Catholic Church has faithfully taught that salvation is by grace. Peter the first pope said, "We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved" (Acts 15:11). The Catechism of the Catholic Church, fully endorsed by Pope John Paul II, says, "Our justification comes from the grace of God" (section 1996).

Protestantism started when Martin Luther declared that we are justified (made righteous) by faith alone. At the time I was leading Catholics out of the Church, I wasn't aware that Martin Luther had added the word alone to his translation of Romans 3:28 in order to prove his doctrine. (The word alone is not found in any contemporary Protestant English translation of Romans 3:28.) I didn't realize that the only place the bible mentions "faith alone" in the context of salvation is in James 2:24, where the idea of faith alone is explicitly refuted: "You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone." This verse was troubling, but I either ignored it, or twisted it to mean something other that what the verse and its context clearly taught.

Should Catholics participate in Protestant events?

I have no objection to Catholics participating in Protestant-oriented events and worthwhile ecumenical activities provided that:

they have a firm grasp of their Catholic faith. they know their faith well enough to articulate it to a non-Catholic, using scripture and the Church fathers. they have the maturity to realize that the most profound presence of Christ isn't necessarily found in the midst of loud noise and high emotion, but in quiet moments like Eucharistic adoration (see 1 Kings 19:11-12). Unfortunately, the majority of Catholic men born after WWII don't meet the above conditions. For them, attending Protestant functions may be opening a door that will lead them right out of the Catholic Church.

There are now thousands of Catholic men on the brink of leaving the one Church Christ died to establish. I recently heard of a group of Catholic men who decided not to consult the Catechism of the Catholic Church in their small-group bible study. They believed that all they needed was scripture alone. Three of these men claimed that they no longer believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. I can tell you from experience where this group is headed: straight out of the Catholic Church.

Over the past three decades, thousands of Catholics have left the Church for Protestant pastures. The largest church in America is the Catholic Church; the second largest group of Christians in America is former-Catholics. The Catholic men's movement has a solemn obligation to help men discover the biblical and historical roots of their Catholic faith. Then, rather than leaving, they will become instruments to help others discover the treasures of Catholicism.

Remember that a man who leaves the Church will often take his family with him — for generations. It took my family four hundred years — 10 generations — to come back to the Church after a generation of my ancestors in Norway, England, Germany and Scotland decided to leave the Catholic Church.

As one whose family has made the round-trip back to Catholicism, let me extend a personal plea to Catholic men, especially the leaders of various Catholic men's groups: don't put untrained Catholics in a Protestant setting. They might gain a short-term religious experience, but they take the long-term risk of losing their faith. It would be highly irresponsible to expose them to Protestantism before they are fully exposed to Catholicism.

At my dad's funeral twenty-nine years ago, I tearfully sang his favorite hymn, Faith of Our Fathers. Little did my dad, a minister's son, or I realize that the true faith of our forefathers was Roman Catholicism. Every day I thank God for bringing me back to the ancient Church of my ancestors. Every year God gives me breath on this earth I will keep proclaiming to both my Protestant brethren and to cradle Catholics the glorious faith of our fathers.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Wood, Steve. "How I led Catholics Out of the Church." St. Joseph's Covenant Newsletter 4 no. 2 (March/April 1998).

Reprinted with permission St. Joseph's Covenant Newsletter.

THE AUTHOR

Steve Wood is the founder of St. Joseph's Covenant Keepers (SJCK), a dynamic apostolate for Catholic men, and runs the web site dads.org.

Copyright © 1998 St. Joseph's Covenant Newsletter

[Iscool]

If the scriptures aren’t literal, why did God have them written...Practicing a comedy routine???

>>Begging the question aren’t we.

Nope...Just being overly sarcastic to someone who can't explain why the scriptures were written if they were not meant to be literal...

[rzman21]

Proverbs 16:5
“Everyone who is arrogant in heart is an abomination to the Lord; be assured, he will not go unpunished. (ESV)

[Iscool]

Proverbs 16:5
“Everyone who is arrogant in heart is an abomination to the Lord; be assured, he will not go unpunished. (ESV)

You surely don't believe that, do you??? It must be a metaphor, for something, right???

[metmom]

Deacon: This is the faith of the apostles! This is the faith of the fathers! This is the Orthodox faith! This faith has established the universe!

This faith has established the universe!???????

What a crock......

[CynicalBear]

>>Proverbs 16:5 “Everyone who is arrogant in heart is an abomination to the Lord; be assured, he will not go unpunished. (ESV)<<

Catholics claim it was the CC who wrote the scriptures. They claim no one can be saved if they don’t belong to that organization. They claim that they are the only true church. And you try to insinuate that others are arrogant? I certainly hope you don’t expect people to take that seriously.

[CynicalBear]

>> For most cults the starting premise is that God favors the group above all other groups.<<

Sounds like the CC to me.

>> Non-sanctioned information is to be regarded as dangerous to spiritual health, so the recruit is taught to refuse it. The only information that is approved is from the cult.<<

Yep, sounds like the CC.

>> Comparison of an idea with the accepted standard of biblical truth should be the first and final measure.<<

Like Sola Scriptura!

[metmom]

You think there’s hope?

[MarkBsnr]

I have seen that argument used with many preachers, pastors, Caliphs and Imams of the past. They were considered very devout because they had no personal property.

I am not claiming the status of his holiness by pointing out the fact that the Pope does not have wealth and that the entire estate of JPII was made public.

My entire point was that the success (to the extent it did, considering the legacy of it) was tied to the personal success of its early founders. Regardless of the contents of the 95 Theses, the results of the Reformation were in that the three normally considered the founders wound up realizing more than their dreams (wealth and/0r power). The German princes who provided the muscle did so for political and financial gain. Henry VIII sacked churches, monasteries and other holy places, as well as jutifying to himself that divorce (or spousal murder) was just A-ok.

We may think of the founders as the first preachers of the prosperity Gospel.

But they had plenty of transportation, as did JPII, they had no shortage of clothing, neither did JPII, they never went hungry, neither did JPII, and they always had a real nice place to live or sleep, just as JPII. Mohammad was especially devout since he eschewed personal property also, but his disciples, just as JPIIs followers, made sure he did not do without anything. And JPII never did without anything either. The richest “poor man” who ever lived, but had access to anything from the Catholic Church his heart desired. Homes, food, clothing, and servants to fill his every need or desire.

You might wish to take in a documentary on one of the recent Popes, with camera footage and schedule. You may at least consider changing your mind about things.

[CynicalBear]

LOL Bet on some double speak coming.

[MarkBsnr]

LOL Bet on some double speak coming.

Agreed. We're winning every bet, too. But please continue.

[patriot preacher]

In your dreams.......

On the contrary, we are set free from the bondage of Rome.

So tell me, who appointed you judge and jury concerning people’s salvation? I thought that was Jesus’ job. At least that’s what Catholics tell us when they think they’re being judged for not having the salvation they’re not even sure they have themselves.

---

You’re asking the WRONG poster dude — I’m with YOU. I was asking the QUESTION, not making the STATEMENT. It IS Jesus’ job. I’m no “judge.” Nor are you — nor are Catholics. And I’m good that it’s in HIS hands. He can handle it.

[metmom]

Actually, I was asking the right poster. It just wasn’t you.

I only courtesy pinged you.

I don’t know of any other way to let someone know I’m making a comment that might be of interest to them but that at the same time tells them that I am not addressing them.

My policy is that the first name in the *To* field is to whom the post is addressed and the rest are merely courtesy pings.

.... just for the record....

[patriot preacher]

In that case, please forgive my error :-)

[wbarmy]

None of the Protestant founders ever realized the kind of wealth you are talking about, Zwingli died in battle against Catholic armies, Luther spent most of his life running from town to town fearing for his life, John Calvin died almost penniless and left very small sums for his family. Henry VII was anything but a Protestant, only making his decision as King of England for his own personal desires. He remained a steadfast believer in Catholic doctrines till his death. (You aren’t really trying to say that he was a founder like Luther or Calvin, are you?)

As for the Popes, it really doesn’t matter what a documentary says; if they wanted to go somewhere, the Church paid for their travel, if they were hungry, the Church paid for their food, none feared for shelter, they always had a place to lay their head provided by followers.

[MarkBsnr]

My policy is that the first name in the *To* field is to whom the post is addressed and the rest are merely courtesy pings.

Shouldn't you be using the royal 'WE' when you pronounce policy?

[metmom]

Not a problem.

[MarkBsnr]

None of the Protestant founders ever realized the kind of wealth you are talking about

Let us take a look at their legacies.

Zwingli died in battle against Catholic armies

And he was the de facto general for Zurich who died while trying starve the faithful Catholic cantons through a blockade to stop all food and supplies. The starving cantons launched the last great attack of the Second Kappel War. He died not for Christ, nor for the Reformation, but for Zurich.

Luther spent most of his life running from town to town fearing for his life

You have passed from debator to embarrassedly unprepared debator.

Martin Luther's house in 2006. His personal estate house, mind you:

He was a full tenured professor at Wittenburg University and wanted for nothing. Running from town to town would have been rather inconvenient for a professor at a great University, would it not? And why the great estate house if he couldn't live there? Along with the field hands and servants. It would be most inconvenient if you could not reap the benefits of a personal estate and farm. As a point of debate, why don't you look up how he died. Running man? You people need to understand that history is not optional.

John Calvin died almost penniless and left very small sums for his family.

What family? His passion was not wealth, it was power. And he became the ultimate dictator of Geneva. After he returned to Geneva, there was no power on earth able to dismiss him from that city.

What he did to the good burghers of Geneva was criminal with his secret police (which was a model used by the Stasi - the East German secret police) spying on and oppressing the people.

Henry VII was anything but a Protestant, only making his decision as King of England for his own personal desires. He remained a steadfast believer in Catholic doctrines till his death. (You aren’t really trying to say that he was a founder like Luther or Calvin, are you?)

Bingo, my friend. You have hit upon the reason for success of the Reformation. One's own personal desires. If we were together, I'd kiss you on both cheeks.

As for the Popes, it really doesn’t matter what a documentary says; if they wanted to go somewhere, the Church paid for their travel, if they were hungry, the Church paid for their food, none feared for shelter, they always had a place to lay their head provided by followers.

I see. Facts are irrelevant and prejudices abound. Something of a triumph, really. Not everything in America is great...

[BipolarBob]

I see. Facts are irrelevant and prejudices abound. Something of a triumph, really. Not everything in America is great...

Apply that to what you wrote two times over. Exactly why was ML excommunicated? - something about he objected to the selling of indulgences? or vandalism of a church door (chuckle). ML never bought the place you showed there, did you know that? And to be an enemy of THE CHURCH at that time wasn't a very safe thing at all. No, his life was in constant danger. Tell us about Galileo and how he fared telling about the earth circling the sun some time.

[MarkBsnr]

I see. Facts are irrelevant and prejudices abound. Something of a triumph, really. Not everything in America is great...

Apply that to what you wrote two times over

You made certain claims such as the one where Martin Luther spent his whole life running and hiding. I brought up the fact that he died wealthy as a fully tenured professor at a great university and had a great estate house, with field hands and servants.

Exactly why was ML excommunicated? - something about he objected to the selling of indulgences? or vandalism of a church door (chuckle).

There were 41 separate teachings of Luther that were asked for him to retract, some but not all of which were drawn from the 95.

ML never bought the place you showed there, did you know that?

I see. A gift of great wealth does not make great wealth for a Reformer. Martin Luther broke his vows before God, including the vow of poverty. Wealth and finery and the accolades of university professorship. Whee. That is why he succeeded.

And to be an enemy of THE CHURCH at that time wasn't a very safe thing at all. No, his life was in constant danger.

Indeed. How many times was he arrested? He lived in his very large estate for over 20 years; he was a fully tenured professor at a prestigious university, he was the principal pastor of a church and he was in danger?

Methinks that that statement reeks of fail.

Tell us about Galileo and how he fared telling about the earth circling the sun some time.

Tell us of the torture of a wealthy life, fame, fortune and a soft comfortable life that Martin Luther commanded. Galileo is an entirely different matter. Did you want to redirect from your misspoken thesis?

[BenKenobi]

There’s a difference between those who are divided, and those who have chosen to leave the Church.

Many of those who have chosen to leave, do so for very different reasons than those who have simply grown up in their faith. Those reasons are the crucial thing here.