Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I Hated the Idea of Becoming Catholic
Aleteia ^ | JUNE 20, 2014 | ANTHONY BARATTA

Posted on 11/28/2014 2:33:31 PM PST by NYer

It was the day after Ash Wednesday in 2012 when I called my mom from my dorm room at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and told her I thought I was going to become Catholic.

“You’re not going to become Catholic, you just know you’re not Southern Baptist,” she said.

“No, I don’t think so.”

A pause. “Oh boy,” she sighed.

I started crying.

I cannot stress enough how much I hated the idea of becoming Catholic. I was bargaining to the last moment. I submitted a sermon for a competition days before withdrawing from school. I was memorizing Psalm 119 to convince myself of sola scriptura. I set up meetings with professors to hear the best arguments. I purposefully read Protestant books about Catholicism, rather than books by Catholic authors.

Further, I knew I would lose my housing money and have to pay a scholarship back if I withdrew from school, not to mention disappointing family, friends, and a dedicated church community.

But when I attempted to do my homework, I collapsed on my bed. All I wanted to do was scream at the textbook, “Who says?!”

I had experienced a huge paradigm shift in my thinking about the faith, and the question of apostolic authority loomed larger than ever.

But let’s rewind back a few years.

I grew up in an evangelical Protestant home. My father was a worship and preaching pastor from when I was in fourth grade onwards. Midway through college, I really fell in love with Jesus Christ and His precious Gospel and decided to become a pastor.

It was during that time that I was hardened in my assumption that the Roman Catholic Church didn’t adhere to the Bible. When I asked one pastor friend of mine during my junior year why Catholics thought Mary remained a virgin after Jesus’ birth when the Bible clearly said Jesus had “brothers,” he simply grimaced: “They don’t read the Bible.”

Though I had been in talks with Seattle’s Mars Hill Church about doing an internship with them, John Piper’s book Don’t Waste Your Life clarified my call to missionary work specifically, and I spent the next summer evangelizing Catholics in Poland.

So I was surprised when I visited my parents and found a silly looking book titled Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic on my father’s desk. What was my dad doing reading something like this? I was curious and hadn’t brought anything home to read, so I gave it a look.

David Currie’s memoir of leaving behind his evangelical education and ministries was bothersome. His unapologetic defense of controversial doctrines regarding Mary and the papacy were most shocking, as I had never seriously considered that Catholics would have sensible, scriptural defenses to these beliefs.

The book’s presence on my father’s desk was explained more fully a few months later when he called me and said he was returning to the Catholicism of his youth. My response? “But, can’t you just be Lutheran or something?” I felt angry, betrayed, and indignant. For the next four months I served as a youth pastor at my local church and, in my free time, read up on why Catholicism was wrong.

During that time, I stumbled across a Christianity Today article that depicted an “evangelical identity crisis.” The author painted a picture of young evangelicals, growing up in a post-modern world, yearning to be firmly rooted in history and encouraged that others had stood strong for Christ in changing and troubled times. Yet, in my experience, most evangelical churches did not observe the liturgical calendar, the Apostles’ Creed was never mentioned, many of the songs were written after 1997, and if any anecdotal story was told about a hero from church history, it was certainly from after the Reformation. Most of Christian history was nowhere to be found.

For the first time, I panicked. I found a copy of the Catechism and started leafing through it, finding the most controversial doctrines and laughing at the silliness of the Catholic Church. Indulgences? Papal infallibility? These things, so obviously wrong, reassured me in my Protestantism. The Mass sounded beautiful and the idea of a visible, unified Church was appealing - but at the expense of the Gospel? It seemed obvious that Satan would build a large organization that would lead so many just short of heaven.

I shook off most of the doubts and enjoyed the remainder of my time at college, having fun with the youth group and sharing my faith with the students. Any lingering doubts, I assumed, would be dealt with in seminary.

I started my classes in January with the excitement of a die-hard football fan going to the Super Bowl. The classes were fantastic and I thought I had finally rid myself of any Catholic problems.


But just a few weeks later, I ran into more doubts. We were learning about spiritual disciplines like prayer and fasting and I was struck by how often the professor would skip from St. Paul to Martin Luther or Jonathan Edwards when describing admirable lives of piety. Did nothing worthwhile happen in the first 1500 years? The skipping of history would continue in many other classes and assigned reading. The majority of pre-Reformation church history was ignored.

I soon discovered I had less in common with the early Church fathers than I thought. Unlike most Christians in history, communion had always been for me an occasional eating of bread and grape juice, and baptism was only important after someone had gotten “saved.” Not only did these views contradict much of Church history but, increasingly, they did not match with uncomfortable Bible passages I had always shrugged off (John 6, Romans 6, etc).

Other questions that I had buried began to reappear, no longer docile but ferocious, demanding an answer. Where did the Bible come from? Why didn’t the Bible claim to be “sufficient”? The Protestant answers that had held me over in the last year were no longer satisfying.

Jefferson Bethke’s viral YouTube video, “Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus,” was released during this time. The young man meant well, but to me he only validated what the Wall Street Journal called “the dangerous theological anarchy of young evangelicals,” attempting to remove Jesus from the confines of religion but losing so much in the process.

Ash Wednesday was the tipping point. A hip Southern Baptist church in Louisville held a morning Ash Wednesday service and many students showed up to classes with ashes on their forehead. At chapel that afternoon, a professor renowned for his apologetic efforts against Catholicism expounded upon the beauty of this thousand year old tradition.

Afterwards, I asked a seminary friend why most evangelicals had rejected this beautiful thing. He responded with something about Pharisees and “man-made traditions.”

I shook my head. “I can’t do this anymore.”

My resistance to Catholicism started to fade. I was feeling drawn to the sacraments, sacramentals, physical manifestations of God’s grace, the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. No more borrowing, no more denying.

It was the next day that I called my mom and told her I thought I was going to become Catholic.

I didn’t go to classes on Friday. I went to the seminary library and checked out books I had previously forbidden myself to look at too closely, like the Catechism and Pope Benedict’s latest. I felt like I was checking out porn. Later, I drove to a 5pm Saturday Mass. The gorgeous crucifix at the front of the church reminded me of when I had mused that crucifixes demonstrated that Catholics didn’t really understand the resurrection.

But I saw the crucifix differently this time and began crying. “Jesus, my suffering savior, you’re here.”

A peace came over me until Tuesday, when it yielded to face-to-windshield reality. Should I stay or leave? I had several panicked phone calls: “I literally have no idea what I am going to do tomorrow morning.”

On Wednesday morning I woke up, opened my laptop, and typed out “77 Reasons I Am Leaving Evangelicalism.” The list included things like sola scriptura, justification, authority, the Eucharist, history, beauty, and continuity between the Old and New Testament. The headlines and the ensuing paragraphs flowed from my fingers like water bursting from a centuries-old dam. 

A few hours later on February 29, 2012 I slipped out of Louisville, Kentucky, eager to not confuse anyone else and hoping I wasn’t making a mistake.  

The next few months were painful. More than anything else I felt ashamed and defensive, uncertain of how so much of my identity and career path could be upended so quickly. Nonetheless, I joined the Church on Pentecost with the support of my family and started looking for work.

So much has changed since then. I met Jackie on CatholicMatch.com that June, got married a year later, and celebrated the birth of our daughter, Evelyn, on March 3rd, 2014. We’re now in Indiana and I’m happy at my job.

I’m still very new on this Catholic journey. To all inquirers out there, I can tell you that my relationship with God has deepened and strengthened. As I get involved in our parish, I’m so thankful for the love of evangelism and the Bible that I learned in Protestantism.

I have not so much left my former faith as I have filled in the gaps. I thank God for the fullness of the Catholic faith.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Evangelical Christian; Theology
KEYWORDS: anthonybaratta; baptist; catholic; evangelical; protestant; seminary; southernbaptist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 1,081-1,100 next last
To: boatbums
Do you believe the Roman Catholic church is the "Authentic New Testament Church"? Are you aware that there are numerous doctrines, dogmas and practices of the RCC that were UNHEARD of in the beginning centuries of the Christian faith? Instead of presuming "your" church is THE church and anyone who wants to BE a Christian must be a member of it, why shouldn't we strive to actually be the people Jesus wants us to be and follow HIS guidelines for being His followers without having to attach labels and designations to our places of assembly? At the Judgment Seat of Christ, do you seriously think He will care what appellation we put on a questionnaire?
  1. Yes, the Roman Catholic Church is an authentic New Testament church.
  2. Yes, I'm aware of all the arguments and counter arguments concerning the almost two thousand years have elapsed.
  3. It is His church that He built. He gave Peter his authority. He gave all the Apostles his authority and set Peter as the chief servant of them. We should believe John 17. He chose Paul as the Apostle to the Gentiles and gave Paul his authority.

    I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

  4. No, He will care about our works.

    When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

    And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie. I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.


521 posted on 12/01/2014 7:55:07 PM PST by af_vet_1981 (The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 492 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
Jesus didn't use "palon and Nicodemas didn't use palon because neither speaker is thinking , at that time, in Greek. Nicodemus was a member of the Sanhedrin speaking with the Holy One of Israel. While I do not doubt Messiah could speak in tongues, it is dissonant to imagine these two Jewish rabbis in the land of Israel discussing God in Greek. There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
522 posted on 12/01/2014 8:18:56 PM PST by af_vet_1981 (The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 510 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981; verga

And if you read my at length response above to verga, you see that I speculate on the real possibility of an Aramaic conversation. The problem being that it is speculative. The Holy Spirit saw fit to give this to us in Greek, and for purposes of discussing what was said to the point of discovering meaning, that’s what we have to work with. In this particular case, the question comes down to whether “born again” could be a legitimate translation, and appears to be answered in the affirmative both in the Greek, and even more so if hypothetical Aramaic values are used. I’m not saying your point is wrong. Just it doesn’t address the problem being solved using Scripture as God gave it to us.


523 posted on 12/01/2014 8:35:31 PM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
And if you read my at length response above to verga, you see that I speculate on the real possibility of an Aramaic conversation. The problem being that it is speculative. The Holy Spirit saw fit to give this to us in Greek, and for purposes of discussing what was said to the point of discovering meaning, that’s what we have to work with. In this particular case, the question comes down to whether “born again” could be a legitimate translation, and appears to be answered in the affirmative both in the Greek, and even more so if hypothetical Aramaic values are used. I’m not saying your point is wrong. Just it doesn’t address the problem being solved using Scripture as God gave it to us.

Or, as in “V’zot haTorah asher sar Moshe lifnei b’nei Yisrael al pi Adonai b’yad Moshe” – This is the Torah that Moses placed before the Israelites—the mouth of the LORD at the hand of Moses. God gave the Scripture to us by the hand of John and through the scribes of the Catholic Church.

It is fairly obvious that from the first centuries we have the New Testament books in Greek, the Catholic and Orthodox churches and not some other version, and that the Greek word ἄνωθεν (anōthen) normally is translated "from above" but in the KJV in this one conversation is rendered "again." I use the KJV here so it all works for me.

524 posted on 12/01/2014 8:57:49 PM PST by af_vet_1981 (The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 523 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
and even more so if hypothetical Aramaic values are used.

If indeed they said "men dris" in Aramaic or "m bereshit" in Hebrew, it would mean "from the beginning," "anew," or "again." "Born again" seems to leave something from the Hebrew/Aramaic on the table though.

525 posted on 12/01/2014 9:20:51 PM PST by af_vet_1981 (The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 524 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
No, I did not write that the descendants of the Protestants are Catholics.

I acknowledge you did not say the above explicitly,  but I find it to be an inference of your logic if said logic is applied equally to both Protestants and Catholics.  

Formulaicly,

1.  If all descendants of A are still A, and

2. All descendants of B are still B,  and

3. A is a descendant of B, THEN

4. All descendants of B are still A.

Now just go back and insert Catholic for A and Protestant for B.  This logic shows that David Koresh, Fred Phelps, the Oneness Pentecostals, the Jehovah's Witnesses, Joel Olsteen, Mormonism, and anything else that has even the tiniest connection to Christianity, no matter how attenuated, is still Catholic.  

Which of course is absurd, is it not?  It is a "reduction to absurdity" argument, reductio ad absurdum, and I am using it to highlight the genetic fallacy in the premises 1 and 2, which are really saying the same thing, that any descendant of a given group is still classifiable as that same group.  That premise is defective.  Sufficient change is introduced in the descendancy to disqualify the children as belonging in any meaningful way to the parent group.  Thus, by means of this fallacy, i.e., by counting as Protestant every non-Catholic Tom Dick and Harry group that claims to be sort of Christian, you are able to run up the count as high as you like, with no reference point in reality, such as substantial doctrinal consistency with historic Protestantism.  

So I am reclaiming Catholicism for all of us.  If you get to count all of our "children" as Protestant, we get to count them all as Catholic.  So it isn't Protestantism with 30,000 divisions.  It's Catholicism. Because all descendants are Catholic, and all descendants of all descendants are Catholic, ad infinitum. But if you get to disown them, we get to disown them too. No double standards.  That's all I'm really saying.  

BTW, has anyone even attempted a true count based on a purely doctrinal metric?  Now that would be instructive.

Peace,

SR
526 posted on 12/01/2014 9:33:44 PM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 517 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981

Messed up my logic statement, #3 should be:

Formulaicly,

1. If all descendants of A are still A, and

2. All descendants of B are still B, and

3. B is a descendant of A, THEN

4. All descendants of B are still A.


527 posted on 12/01/2014 9:45:16 PM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 517 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981

As is your usual MO, you give NO references for your copy and pastes and take verses out of their context. If someone has to snippet hunt - an accusation often made against “Protestants” - to try and prove their beliefs, they aren’t being honest. It isn’t really that much more effort to do that is it?


528 posted on 12/01/2014 10:55:39 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 521 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

Liberals always seek to silence the truth by silencing their opposition. You might consider sticking to Caucus threads if the truth bothers you this much.


529 posted on 12/02/2014 2:03:06 AM PST by verga (You anger Catholics by telling them a lie, you anger protestants by telling them the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 508 | View Replies]

To: boatbums; metmom; Elsie; BipolarBob; Resettozero; CynicalBear; WVKayaker; imardmd1; laplata; ...

Hey folks. I think we can banter back and forth, play silly word games, or watch others play silly word games. We can try to figure out what the word “is” means. When we get down to brass tacks, however, and when the rubber meets the road, when we come face to face with the gut issues of life and our own demise, there is only one thing in all of creation that matters. What is the plan of salvation? All else is a mole hill, compared to the mountain of that one single question? Are we saved by baptism, good works and church membership, or are we saved by grace through a living, working, dynamic faith that naturally produces good works. Do good works get us to Heaven, or simply show where our hearts are? When we talk about eternity, Heaven and Hell are the only two words I am concerned with. How to go to the first and avoid the second. It doesn’t matter a hill of beans what other less important concepts people may be right or wrong about, if they do not get this one issue right. What matters is, what is their plan of salvation? I am sure you know what the plan of salvation is. God bless.


530 posted on 12/02/2014 2:39:39 AM PST by Mark17 (So gracious and tender was He. I claimed Him that day as my saviour, this stranger of Galilee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 528 | View Replies]

To: verga
Hahaha.

Is that the best you can come up with?

Truth?

You mean the truth that FRomans here frequently seek information as to the religious affiliation of others (so they can attack it) instead of sticking with speaking of issues, as those arise?

Do you have any idea how transparent you guys are to many of the rest of us here?

Look -- it's not my fault that many or most Roman Catholics take most any and all criticism of Roman Catholicism personally, then seem to always be making things personal in return -- and when they cannot do so easily -- fish around for information which they can possibly exploit in order to go on the offensive and attack other forum participants, personally, as much as can be gotten away with, even if they have to make things up, in order to do so.

Like -- you having just compared me to "liberals", though there are better, more prime examples on this thread of you having done so (made things up, cast dispersions upon persons here, directly, or by innuendo).

I do tire of witnessing such blatant disregard (as you quite often display) for forum rules, and individuals here both.

What I AM seeking to silence from yourself, is your own long practice of making things personal with others here on this forum, when your comments are not otherwise sweepingly insulting towards entire classes of individuals, in general --- with the seeming aim then (when the insults are broadly generalized) is for those who you may perceive as being "the opposition", to be insulted, etc., all of which is a form of making it personal, which results in much degraded quality of conversation.

Deal with THAT truth, or else stick with caucus threads, yourself.

Few here are interested in the typical (Roman) Catholic bigotries which you express.

Try to keep those to yourself. Edit them out.

And if you do care for truth, then pray, and honestly, diligently ask even God Himself if what you say about others is in actual fact true -- and most particularly entirely true as that may be perceived by readers here to have been intended yourself to apply.

In other words;

Do that, and stick with it for a while, and you may garner some respect around here, although there is a deficit in that area which must be first overcome.

531 posted on 12/02/2014 2:50:43 AM PST by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 529 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

Interesting that you chose to raise your voice instead of reinforcing your argument.


532 posted on 12/02/2014 4:17:55 AM PST by Hope for the Republic (My favorite book is the Bible, and favorite song is "The Star Spangled Banner")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 454 | View Replies]

To: do the dhue

As I have gotten older, what people think of me becomes less and less important to me.

What they know of God’s Word has become EXTREMELY important to me!

I don’t like the rebuke part, I’d much rather do the encourage part.

If I get despised for it; there’s a reason for me to look into how I present the material.


533 posted on 12/02/2014 4:30:05 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 487 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Sorry; but Rome is the biggest 'judge' of all time!




Judge NOT???
 
Sigh............
 

 
Jesus has commanded us to judge!
 

“Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world?... And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters?... Do you not know that we shall judge angels?... How much more, things that pertain to this life?.. If then you have judgments concerning things pertaining to this life, do you appoint those who are least esteemed by the church to judge ? (1 Corinthians 6:1-5).


Many commands of God require the exercise of righteous judgment.


“But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us” (2 Thessalonians 3:6).

“And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother” (2 Thessalonians 3:14,15).

“Teach and exhort these things. If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions, useless wrangling of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself” (2 Timothy 6:2b-5).

“Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them. For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple” (Romans 16:17,18).


All these commands require the careful exercise of righteousness judgment. Do not be deceived by smooth words and flattering speech. Beware of wolves who come to you with a sheep’s skin.

We must be careful not to make unqualified judgments. But we must judge appropriately when commanded to do so.


 “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.  (John 7:24).

534 posted on 12/02/2014 4:34:32 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 496 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church;

I just LOVE having a really good straightman!


Matthew 16:13-18
 
 
When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?"  
They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."  
"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"  
Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ,  the Son of the living God."  
Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven.   And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades  will not overcome it.    I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be  bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

 

 


535 posted on 12/02/2014 4:36:16 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981

And the Catholic Church says...



As regards the oft-quoted Mt. 16:18, note the bishops promise in the profession of faith of Vatican 1,

 

Likewise I accept Sacred Scripture according to that sense which Holy mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy scriptures; nor will I ever receive and interpret them except according to the unanimous consent of the fathers.http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/firstvc.htm

Yet as the Dominican cardinal and Catholic theologian Yves Congar O.P. states,

Unanimous patristic consent as a reliable locus theologicus is classical in Catholic theology; it has often been declared such by the magisterium and its value in scriptural interpretation has been especially stressed. Application of the principle is difficult, at least at a certain level. In regard to individual texts of Scripture total patristic consensus is rare...One example: the interpretation of Peter’s confession in Matthew 16:16-18. Except at Rome, this passage was not applied by the Fathers to the papal primacy; they worked out an exegesis at the level of their own ecclesiological thought, more anthropological and spiritual than juridical. — Yves M.-J. Congar, O.P., p. 71

And Catholic archbishop Peter Richard Kenrick (1806-1896), while yet seeking to support Peter as the rock, stated that,

“If we are bound to follow the majority of the fathers in this thing, then we are bound to hold for certain that by the rock should be understood the faith professed by Peter, not Peter professing the faith.” — Speech of archbishop Kenkick, p. 109; An inside view of the vatican council, edited by Leonard Woolsey Bacon.

Your own CCC allows the interpretation that, “On the rock of this faith confessed by St Peter, Christ build his Church,” (pt. 1, sec. 2, cp. 2, para. 424), for some of the ancients (for what their opinion is worth) provided for this or other interpretations.

• Ambrosiaster [who elsewhere upholds Peter as being the chief apostle to whom the Lord had entrusted the care of the Church, but not superior to Paul as an apostle except in time], Eph. 2:20:

Wherefore the Lord says to Peter: 'Upon this rock I shall build my Church,' that is, upon this confession of the catholic faith I shall establish the faithful in life. — Ambrosiaster, Commentaries on Galatians—Philemon, Eph. 2:20; Gerald L. Bray, p. 42

• Augustine, sermon:

"Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter's confession. What is Peter's confession? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' There's the rock for you, there's the foundation, there's where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer.John Rotelle, O.S.A., Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine , © 1993 New City Press, Sermons, Vol III/6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327

Upon this rock, said the Lord, I will build my Church. Upon this confession, upon this that you said, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,' I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not conquer her (Mt. 16:18). John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 236A.3, p. 48.

Augustine, sermon:

For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but Peter from petra; just as Christ is not called so from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. For on this very account the Lord said, 'On this rock will I build my Church,' because Peter had said, 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.' On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ; and on this foundation was Peter himself built. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus. The Church, therefore, which is founded in Christ received from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the person of Peter, that is to say, the power of binding and loosing sins. For what the Church is essentially in Christ, such representatively is Peter in the rock (petra); and in this representation Christ is to be understood as the Rock, Peter as the Church. — Augustine Tractate CXXIV; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: First Series, Volume VII Tractate CXXIV (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf107.iii.cxxv.html)

Augustine, sermon:

And Peter, one speaking for the rest of them, one for all, said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Mt 16:15-16)...And I tell you: you are Peter; because I am the rock, you are Rocky, Peter-I mean, rock doesn't come from Rocky, but Rocky from rock, just as Christ doesn't come from Christian, but Christian from Christ; and upon this rock I will build my Church (Mt 16:17-18); not upon Peter, or Rocky, which is what you are, but upon the rock which you have confessed. I will build my Church though; I will build you, because in this answer of yours you represent the Church. — John Rotelle, O.S.A. Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 270.2, p. 289

Augustine, sermon:

Peter had already said to him, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' He had already heard, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not conquer her' (Mt 16:16-18)...Christ himself was the rock, while Peter, Rocky, was only named from the rock. That's why the rock rose again, to make Peter solid and strong; because Peter would have perished, if the rock hadn't lived. — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 244.1, p. 95

Augustine, sermon:

...because on this rock, he said, I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not overcome it (Mt. 16:18). Now the rock was Christ (1 Cor. 10:4). Was it Paul that was crucified for you? Hold on to these texts, love these texts, repeat them in a fraternal and peaceful manner. — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1995), Sermons, Volume III/10, Sermon 358.5, p. 193

Augustine, Psalm LXI:

Let us call to mind the Gospel: 'Upon this Rock I will build My Church.' Therefore She crieth from the ends of the earth, whom He hath willed to build upon a Rock. But in order that the Church might be builded upon the Rock, who was made the Rock? Hear Paul saying: 'But the Rock was Christ.' On Him therefore builded we have been. — Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume VIII, Saint Augustin, Exposition on the Book of Psalms, Psalm LXI.3, p. 249. (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf108.ii.LXI.html)

• Augustine, in “Retractions,”

In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,' that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven.' For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ,' in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable. — The Fathers of the Church (Washington D.C., Catholic University, 1968), Saint Augustine, The Retractations Chapter 20.1:.

Basil of Seleucia, Oratio 25:

'You are Christ, Son of the living God.'...Now Christ called this confession a rock, and he named the one who confessed it 'Peter,' perceiving the appellation which was suitable to the author of this confession. For this is the solemn rock of religion, this the basis of salvation, this the wall of faith and the foundation of truth: 'For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.' To whom be glory and power forever. — Oratio XXV.4, M.P.G., Vol. 85, Col. 296-297.

Bede, Matthaei Evangelium Expositio, 3:

You are Peter and on this rock from which you have taken your name, that is, on myself, I will build my Church, upon that perfection of faith which you confessed I will build my Church by whose society of confession should anyone deviate although in himself he seems to do great things he does not belong to the building of my Church...Metaphorically it is said to him on this rock, that is, the Saviour which you confessed, the Church is to be built, who granted participation to the faithful confessor of his name. — 80Homily 23, M.P.L., Vol. 94, Col. 260. Cited by Karlfried Froehlich, Formen, Footnote #204, p. 156 [unable to verify by me].

• Cassiodorus, Psalm 45.5:

'It will not be moved' is said about the Church to which alone that promise has been given: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I shall build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.' For the Church cannot be moved because it is known to have been founded on that most solid rock, namely, Christ the Lord. — Expositions in the Psalms, Volume 1; Volume 51, Psalm 45.5, p. 455

Chrysostom (John) [who affirmed Peter was a rock, but here not the rock in Mt. 16:18]:

Therefore He added this, 'And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; that is, on the faith of his confession. — Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew, Homily LIIl; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf110.iii.LII.html)

Cyril of Alexandria:

When [Peter] wisely and blamelessly confessed his faith to Jesus saying, 'You are Christ, Son of the living God,' Jesus said to divine Peter: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church.' Now by the word 'rock', Jesus indicated, I think, the immoveable faith of the disciple.”. — Cyril Commentary on Isaiah 4.2.

Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII):

“For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, 1 Corinthians 10:4 and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, and the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.'

“For all bear the surname ‘rock’ who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters.” — Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII), sect. 10,11 ( http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/101612.htm)

Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II): Thus our one immovable foundation, our one blissful rock of faith, is the confession from Peter's mouth, Thou art the Son of the living God. On it we can base an answer to every objection with which perverted ingenuity or embittered treachery may assail the truth."-- (Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II), para 23; Philip Schaff, editor, The Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers Series 2, Vol 9.

536 posted on 12/02/2014 4:37:10 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
 
Is Peter the 'rock'?
 


NIV Matthew 4:18-19
 18.  As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon called Peter and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen.
 19.  "Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will make you fishers of men."
 
NIV Matthew 8:14
  When Jesus came into Peter's house, he saw Peter's mother-in-law lying in bed with a fever.
 
NIV Matthew 10:1-2
 1.  He called his twelve disciples to him and gave them authority to drive out evil  spirits and to heal every disease and sickness.
 2.  These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John;
 
NIV Matthew 14:28-31
 28.  "Lord, if it's you," Peter replied, "tell me to come to you on the water."
 29.  "Come," he said.   Then Peter got down out of the boat, walked on the water and came toward Jesus.
 30.  But when he saw the wind, he was afraid and, beginning to sink, cried out, "Lord, save me!"
 31.  Immediately Jesus reached out his hand and caught him. "You of little faith," he said, "why did you doubt?"
 
NIV Matthew 15:13-16
 13.  He replied, "Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots.
 14.  Leave them; they are blind guides.  If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit."
 15.  Peter said, "Explain the parable to us."
 16.  "Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them.
 

As you can see, Simon was already known as 'Peter'
BEFORE the following verses came along.....


NIV Matthew 16:13-18
 13.  When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?"
 14.  They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
 15.  "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
 16.  Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ,  the Son of the living God."
 17.  Jesus replied, "
Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven.
 18.  And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades  will not overcome it.
 19.  I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be  bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

NIV 1 Corinthians 10:4
   and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.
 
NIV Luke 6:48
   He is like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundation on rock. When a flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it, because it was well built.
 
NIV Romans 9:33
  As it is written: "See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame."
 
 
 
NIV 1 Peter 2:4-8
 4.  As you come to him, the living Stone--rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him--
 5.  you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
 6.  For in Scripture it says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame."
 7.  Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, "The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone, "
 8.  and, "A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall." They stumble because they disobey the message--which is also what they were destined for.


But, since there WAS no NT at the time Christ spoke to Peter, just what DID Peter and the rest of the Disciples know about ROCKS???

 

NIV Genesis 49:24-25
 24.  But his bow remained steady, his strong arms stayed limber, because of the hand of the Mighty One of Jacob, because of the Shepherd, the Rock of Israel,
 25.  because of your father's God, who helps you, because of the Almighty,  who blesses you with blessings of the heavens above, blessings of the deep that lies below, blessings of the breast and womb.
 
NIV Numbers 20:8
   "Take the staff, and you and your brother Aaron gather the assembly together. Speak to that rock before their eyes and it will pour out its water. You will bring water out of the rock for the community so they and their livestock can drink."
 
NIV Deuteronomy 32:4
  He is the Rock, his works are perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is he.
 
NIV Deuteronomy 32:15
   Jeshurun  grew fat and kicked; filled with food, he became heavy and sleek. He abandoned the God who made him and rejected the Rock his Savior.
 
NIV Deuteronomy 32:18
  You deserted the Rock, who fathered you; you forgot the God who gave you birth.
 
NIV Deuteronomy 32:30-31
 30.  How could one man chase a thousand, or two put ten thousand to flight, unless their Rock had sold them, unless the LORD had given them up?
 31.  For their rock is not like our Rock, as even our enemies concede.
 
NIV 1 Samuel 2:2
  "There is no one holy  like the LORD; there is no one besides you; there is no Rock like our God.
 
NIV 2 Samuel 22:2-3
 2.  He said: "The LORD is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer;
 3.  my God is my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield and the horn  of my salvation. He is my stronghold, my refuge and my savior-- from violent men you save me.
 
NIV 2 Samuel 22:32
  For who is God besides the LORD? And who is the Rock except our God?
 
NIV 2 Samuel 22:47
  "The LORD lives! Praise be to my Rock! Exalted be God, the Rock, my Savior!
 
NIV 2 Samuel 23:3-4
 3.  The God of Israel spoke, the Rock of Israel said to me: `When one rules over men in righteousness, when he rules in the fear of God,
 4.  he is like the light of morning at sunrise on a cloudless morning, like the brightness after rain that brings the grass from the earth.'
 
NIV Psalms 18:2
  The LORD is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer; my God is my rock, in whom I take refuge. He is my shield and the horn  of my salvation, my stronghold.
 
NIV Psalms 18:31
   For who is God besides the LORD? And who is the Rock except our God?
 
NIV Psalms 18:46
  The LORD lives! Praise be to my Rock! Exalted be God my Savior!
 
NIV Psalms 19:14
   May the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be pleasing in your sight, O LORD, my Rock and my Redeemer.
 
NIV Psalms 28:1
   To you I call, O LORD my Rock; do not turn a deaf ear to me. For if you remain silent, I will be like those who have gone down to the pit.
 
NIV Psalms 31:2-3
 2.  Turn your ear to me, come quickly to my rescue; be my rock of refuge, a strong fortress to save me.
 3.  Since you are my rock and my fortress, for the sake of your name lead and guide me.
 
NIV Psalms 42:9
   I say to God my Rock, "Why have you forgotten me? Why must I go about mourning, oppressed by the enemy?"
 
NIV Psalms 62:2
   He alone is my rock and my salvation; he is my fortress, I will never be shaken.
 
NIV Psalms 62:6
   He alone is my rock and my salvation; he is my fortress, I will not be shaken.
 
NIV Psalms 62:7
   My salvation and my honor depend on God ; he is my mighty rock, my refuge.
 
NIV Psalms 71:3
   Be my rock of refuge, to which I can always go; give the command to save me, for you are my rock and my fortress.
 
NIV Psalms 78:35
   They remembered that God was their Rock, that God Most High was their Redeemer.
 
NIV Psalms 89:26
   He will call out to me, `You are my Father, my God, the Rock my Savior.'
 
NIV Psalms 92:14-15
 14.  They will still bear fruit in old age, they will stay fresh and green,
 15.  proclaiming, "The LORD is upright; he is my Rock, and there is no wickedness in him."
 
NIV Psalms 95:1
   Come, let us sing for joy to the LORD; let us shout aloud to the Rock of our salvation.
 
NIV Psalms 144:1
   Praise be to the LORD my Rock, who trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle.
 
NIV Isaiah 17:10
   You have forgotten God your Savior; you have not remembered the Rock, your fortress.
 
NIV Isaiah 26:4
   Trust in the LORD forever, for the LORD, the LORD, is the Rock eternal.
 
NIV Isaiah 30:29
 And you will sing as on the night you celebrate a holy festival; your hearts will rejoice as when people go up with flutes to the mountain of the LORD, to the Rock of Israel.
 
NIV Isaiah 44:8
   Do not tremble, do not be afraid. Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago? You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me? No, there is no other Rock; I know not one." 
 
NIV Habakkuk 1:12
   O LORD, are you not from everlasting? My God, my Holy One, we will not die. O LORD, you have appointed them to execute judgment; O Rock, you have ordained them to punish.

.....No other rock.............
 
And now you know the Biblical position!


537 posted on 12/02/2014 4:37:38 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

No one can tell if I use a HOMONYM when I am speaking...


538 posted on 12/02/2014 4:39:36 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 503 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
I re-read this several; time to make sure I understood your point completely, that is why I did not respond last night. Doesn't the fact that Jesus chose Anthon not just reinforce but stipulate that it is not a "generic" birth, but rather a supernatural occurrence that can only happen once?

As I pointed out Nicodemus used the word Dueteron. He asked how can a fully grown person re-enter the womb. If we move forward in the same chapter to verse 3:31 The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all.

Every single translation uses the word "above" for "anthon."

This is one of those time that I wish we had the Aramaic/ Hebrew text, then there would be zero confusion.

539 posted on 12/02/2014 4:39:57 AM PST by verga (You anger Catholics by telling them a lie, you anger protestants by telling them the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 510 | View Replies]

To: verga
If Jesus truly meant to say "again", why didn't he use the word "Palon"?


540 posted on 12/02/2014 4:42:17 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 506 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 1,081-1,100 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson