Posted on 01/27/2014 1:46:12 PM PST by Gamecock
The election of Pope Francis has the world’s attention. It is fascinating to read the array of perspectives. Political pundits and cultural exegetes, with more or less knowledge of Catholicism, have expressed their opinions concerning the meaning and future prospects of this pope. But what about former Catholics, those of us who were raised Catholic and now identify with evangelical Protestantism? What are we saying? I can’t speak for others, but I’ll tell you what is on my mind.
My Upbringing in Catholicism
Hardly a week goes by in which I don’t receive an email from a Catholic reader of my blog expressing that he or she is praying for me to “come home” to the Catholic Church. On the whole, I find them to be incredibly genuine and therefore it is easy for me to give a sincere “thank you.” Over the last week, as I have participated in several interviews about the conclave and papal selection, my inbox has seen many such appeals. In what follows I would like to share with my Catholic friends the fundamental reason why I am an evangelical Protestant.
To start with, I should say that my experience growing up Catholic was exceedingly positive. Owing largely to the ministry of our parish priest, Monsignor Tom, I grew to love the Catholic tradition. I loved the grandeur of the sanctuary with its carved wood, arched windows, and stained glass. I loved the deep, resonate amalgam of voices confessing the Nicene Creed and the honesty and humility expressed in the kyrie: “Lord, have mercy; Christ, have mercy; Lord, have mercy.” I loved simple things, like braiding cruciform-shaped palm leaves for Easter.
Oh, what I wouldn’t give for one more Knights of Columbus dinner, with trays of pasta fra diavolo, risotto parmigiano, and pignoli nut cookies prepared by my uncles. These were the occasions in which boys became men, learning how to eat for God’s glory.
I vividly recall our confirmation retreat at the nearby Cenacle. In the tranquil surrounding of a Marian grotto we learned stories of heroic saints like Perpetua and Felicity, martyrs who stared down lions in the name of Christ. Dominick, my best friend, suggested that I choose Saint Jude as my personal saint since Jude was the Saint of “lost causes.” Despite our juvenile banter, we were challenged to be courageous for God.
I enjoyed watching reruns of Archbishop Fulton Sheen with his long flowing cape and clever quips, marveled during Lent at the seemingly endless number of recipes we had for preparing tuna fish, and took great pleasure in walking to the altar with my family during Mass to present the gifts of wine and bread. This was my identity—a member of the Catholic Church—and I loved it.
But I had to leave.
Why an Evangelical Protestant?
Having written an entire volume on the reasons why I (and other Catholics) have decided to leave the Catholic Church for Protestant pastures—my book Holy Ground: Walking with Jesus as a Former Catholic—I will not retell my story here. Instead, I would like to put my finger on the fundamental reason why Rome is not my religious home. The leading edge of this reason is perhaps best expressed by John Bunyan in chapter three of his Pilgrim’s Progress. It is the climactic point when the faithful protagonist of his story, “Christian,” comes to the cross of Jesus and has his burden of guilt removed once and for all.
Christian ran till he came to a hill; upon it stood a cross, and a little below was a tomb. So I saw in my dream, that just as Christian came up to the cross, his burden loosed from off his shoulders, and fell from off his back, and began to tumble, and so continued to do till it came to the mouth of the tomb, where it fell in, and I saw it no more. Then said Christian with a happy heart, “He hath given me rest by His sorrow, and life by His death.” Then he stood still awhile to look and wonder; for it was very surprising to him that the sight of the cross should thus ease him of his burden. He looked, therefore, and looked again, even till the springs that were in his head sent the water down his cheeks.
In my humble opinion, the above vision is the centerpiece of evangelical Protestantism. Through the preaching of the gospel, God removes the burden of guilt and shame from our shoulders and sends it into the grave, where it disappears, never to be seen again. As far as the east is from the west, so far has God removed our sins from us. And moving toward the Celestial City from one’s initial encounter of the cross, Christian and all who share his name do so as children of God whose identities are permanently marked by this salvation. Precisely because we have died to self and now live anew in our resurrected Lord, there is nothing that can separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus. Such assurance is God’s gift to his children and serves as the driving force of our lives.
This lesson came into focus for me last month. A buddy invited me to his home to talk with his Catholic colleague who is struggling with religious guilt, feeling that he is never quite acceptable to the Father. This colleague described his experience in his Catholic parish as “salvation on probation,” a relationship with God that depended upon his ability to observe the precepts of the church (i.e., abstaining from meat on Lenten Fridays, holy days of obligation, auricular confession). Therefore, despite his best efforts, our friend bemoaned the fact that it was only a matter of time before he fell short of the church’s expectations and thus lost his eternal hope.
In response to our friend, I asked whether he had children. With great enthusiasm he proceeded to explain how much he enjoys his kids, attending all of their basketball games, going on vacations, and delighting in conversation about their future hopes and dreams. “Do they ever disappoint you,” I asked. “Of course; they are sinners like their mother,” he said with a smile. I then asked, “And when that happens, does it potentially terminate your relationship? Are they in jeopardy of losing their status as your children and being rejected from your family?” “You mean like a ‘mortal’ sin,” he responded? I could see he was starting to get my point. A long pause followed and finally our friend looked up with eyes full of tears and confessed, “I guess I’m secure as a child of God.”
My Current Relationship to Catholicism
I light of such evangelical Protestant commitments, is there any sense in which I appreciate Catholicism today? Let me answer the question like this. Most people who come from a Catholic background will probably identify with my sentiment, while those who weren’t raised Catholic probably won’t. It’s the kind of affection you have for that eccentric cousin whom you see once a year at Christmas. Despite your common upbringing, the two of you are now entirely different. He runs marathons, TiVo’s professional wrestling, enjoys dancing the polka, and somehow always manages to perform his Bob Dylan impersonation when the family is assembled. However, as first cousins, you have a deep, abiding affection for one another. Despite your differences, you share a common history that reaches back to your earliest memories, on the basis of which you possess a relationship that is deeper and richer than words can express. So it is for many of us who were raised Catholic. We disagree with much of Catholic faith, but these differences can’t erase the positive, Christ-honoring memories which we continue to cherish.
This is where my pursuit of Christ has led. I identify with the evangelical Protestant tradition because I believe that its approach to biblical authority and the gospel best reflects the will of God as revealed in Scripture. Insofar as the term “evangelical” describes such a person, despite its negative connotations and flaws, I hope to live accordingly, comporting myself and relating to others—including my Catholic family and friends—with the character of Christ. And I hope that what you read from this blog will serve you toward that end.
Excellent expository.
2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
A little bible study will clear up ALL Catholic distortion of the scriptures...
2Ti 2:7 Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things.
1Jn 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
Easy enough isn't it??? Which sins are not unto death???
Mar 3:28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
ALL sins AND blasphemies shall be forgiven, and are not unto death...Every single one of them, EXCEPT for one...Only one sin will not be forgiven...
Mar 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:
So what is this one sin that will not be forgiven??? It is the sin of UNBELIEF...
Joh_3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
So we know that there are not sins that can not be forgiven...There is only one sin that can not be forgiven...And it has nothing to do with a Christian...
When I tell my spouse that, it is not a little white lie...it is truth, spoken from my heart!
Why is it Roman Catholics claim the Pope fallible, except of course when speaking ex cathedra, and yet howl in protest if they perceive Luther or any Reformer said something in error?
Oh the hypocrisy!
Things like idolatry, which Rome says do die in means there is not hope, which those in 2 Mac. 12 died because of, yet RCs invoke it for support for praying for the dead.
2Ma 12:40 Now under the coats of every one that was slain they found things consecrated to the idols of the Jamnites, which is forbidden the Jews by the law. Then every man saw that this was the cause wherefore they were slain.
Which requires RCA to engage to once again argue from silence when trying to support traditions of men, saying they may have repented at the last.
Luther was in error...period.
So out of that verse you extrapolate the RCC as the supreme authority on Scripture?
Like your Socialist, universalist pope?
Which theory was that?
God through the Holy Spirit and the apostles gave us all of scripture. The writers of the New Testament were Jews not Catholics.
Have you forgotten that it was translated into Latin by St. Jerome?
And what Bible was the first Bible printed by the Guttenberg Press? No one has answered that.
How?
And that was a terrible translation. Most of the Roman Catholic errors come from that horrid work.
Want to claim God used Catholics to give us the Bible? Ok, if it makes you feel better. He also used Balaam’s donkey, Judas, Harod and all kinds of people for His purposes.
It was already in Latin when Jerome got to it...
And just what is the rest of that quote? It certainly is something the Roman Catholics should consider before trotting out a fraction of a quote
Purgatory is simply not taught in Scripture
1. We are forgiven of all sins when we become born again (Col. 2:13), and that for those who die in the faith there is no further punishment, except the loss of rewards. and with that the grievous disapproval of the Lord. Thus Paul labored to gain full approval. Yet such will be saved despite the loss the of works - the manner of material one built the church with - being burned up, not because of them.
I think the material that is burned up is the result of such things as not building the church directly or indirectly, in dependence upon God or not in accordance with His word or led by His Spirit (1Cor. 3:8-15). Think Osteen if he is even saved. But it is his works which are burnt by the fire, not the person being purified. And yet which does not occur until the Lord's return.
2. All the verses which clearly speak of a N.T. believer's postmortem condition (Luke 23:43; Acts 7:59; 1Cor. 15:52; 2 Cor 5:8; Phil. 1:23; 1 Th 4:17; 1Jn. 3:2) show it is with the Lord, in whose presence there is fulness of joy (Ps. 16:11).
3. The Bible states that it is the chastening of the Lord in this life that works to make us holy (Heb. 12), and keep or bring us back to saving faith, that we be not "condemned with the world" (1Cor. 11:34), and thus judgment begins at the house of God (1Pt. 4:17).
And in such texts that deal with the issue of chastening, nothing is even intimated of a postmortem period of such for New Testament believers, though different degrees of authority and glory (Mt. 13:43; 16:27; 19:28; Mk. 10:40; 1Cor. 15:41; Rv. 5:4; 20:4) seems evident, in accordance with every man being rewarded according to his own labor in the Lord (1Cor. 3:8).
4. It is the flesh in which no good thing dwells (Rm. 7:18) and which cannot be made subject to the law of God (Rm. 8:7) that is the problem, but which is not going to be purified, but is to be crucified (Rm. 6). And it is those that long to be freed from this "bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God," that "hunger and thirst after righteousness," rather than to seeking to fufil their lusts, that constitute true believers. And having resisted the world, the flesh and the devil, overcoming enough so that they died in the faith (as the Lord searches the hearts and the rein
I have to admit, I’m amused that the answers basically amount to “that don’t count”.
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.