Evangelicals Becoming Catholic, why?

by Steve Ray on May 24, 2012

Below is an interesting YouTube video (really audio) of an Evangelical Radio show in which two Evangelicals discuss why so many Evangelical Protestants are leaving to join the Catholic Church.

The host and guest are trying to be honest in the show entitled  “Why Evangelicals are Returning to Rome.” Although towards the end of the video they are making some statements that are historically inaccurate (about Luther and the Popes); nevertheless, their questioning tries to be honest. It is interesting that they are taking note of a large exodus. I am one of those who Crossed the Tiber to Rome.

Furthermore, this was coming from a Protestant network that is decidedly anti-Catholic.  They are willing to discuss openly what has been happening for years now (the exodus of Evangelical ordained ministers to Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches).  They also mention briefly EWTN, the program Journey Home and the moderator Marcus Grodi, a convert from Evangelical Christianity. It is obvious this is all new to them since they didn’t even know how to pronounce Marcus Grodi’s name.

The moderator Ingrid Slater asked Pastor Bob DeWay; “Let’s talk about the problem; what do you think is the seed bed (this is sort of a rhetorical question; everybody knows what a mess Evangelicalism is as a whole today doctrinally speaking).  What is setting people up for this disenchantment and the willingness to look to Roman Catholicism?”

Here are some of the Problems that Bob Deway lists, though they really have no explanation since they are blind to the real problems within Protestantism, which are things that cannot be fixed. If they were fixed they would be Catholics.
(1) The Seeker Movement took the Bible out of churches.
(2) People are not steeped in solid Bible teaching (yeah, but according to whose interpretation?).
(3) Big churches that don’t preach the Bible (who decides what should be taught??).
(4) The influx of mystical practices, contemplative prayer, the labyrinths.
(5) Seminaries that are training therapeutic practitioners rather than theologians.
(6) The idea that we have to have to justify our practices and beliefs from Scripture – according to what Luther and the other reformers – which has now been overlooked.

The moderator then mentioned a book saying, “Coming Home by Fr Peter [Eastern Rite] (I am not even going to use the term father). . . He used to head up Campus Crusade here in the Midwest” Evidently he is now heading up an organization helping Evangelical ministers come into the Eastern rite Churches.  If you want to know why he made his move from Evangelical Protestantism you can listen to the video.

For years you’d hear Evangelicals boast of the fact that their churches were filled ex-Catholics.  But in too many cases the Evangelical churches are just the exit ramp that eventually leaves them disillusioned and abandoning the faith altogether. Now the tide is changing.  Some Evangelicals seem to be oblivious to the fact of this large exodus of Evangelical ministers and lay people.

A year ago, Karl Keating of Catholic Answers Live said he believed there were now more Evangelicals or Fundamentalists leaving Protestantism to become Catholic than the other way around. Even Evangelicals admit that there are notable Protestants becoming Catholics but no notable Catholics becoming Protestants.

I could take exception to several of Pastor Bob’s statements and argue decisively against them, but that is not the point of my posting this video.

{ 25 comments… read them below or add one }

Pete May 10, 2011 at 5:56 PM

If Pastor Bob is so sure that Sola Scriptura is correct then why doesn’t he simply debate these former Evangelicals who want to debate him on the subject? Who is fearing what?

Armando Borja May 11, 2011 at 12:43 AM

In the last days many will leave the faith. Prostestans’ transfering to Roman Catholicism, though something to be considered, does not prove that the Roman Catholic Church is the church founded by Christ.

Tom N May 11, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Armando,
Ah, but if it’s not the One Church founded by Christ, which one is? Which one, other than the Catholic Church, was around at the time of Christ (around as in just getting started, as was the Catholic Church)??? The short answer is “none”. Only the Catholic Church was alive and well in the year 34. Only the Catholic Church was alive and well in the years 134, 234, 334, 434, 534, etc etc. And, coincidentally, the name “Catholic” was first written (althought it may have been spoken earlier) in the year 110 by Ignatius of Antioch. Therefore, only the Catholic Church could be the Church spoken of by Christ (I will build MY Church) emphasis mine, and “The gates of Hell will not prevail against it”…meaning there will never be a time when the Catholic Church is not alive and well, otherwise Christ would be a liar, which He is not. Read Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History (written in 325) where he very precisely describes the history of the Church from the time of Christ until then (325). In that book you will find the faith articles believed, the succession of the Bishops of the Catholic Church from each of the Apostles right down through the ages, the discussion of the Canon (who held which book as inspired, those that were not, etc). Much can be learned from the early Christians (who again were nothing but Catholic in name and belief).
Peace,
Tom

Pete May 11, 2011 at 3:26 PM

Or, maybe Armando, in the last days many will leave the one true Church for some form of Protestant (50,000 Man-made and constantly splintering) ideology. Ever consider that?

Barbara May 27, 2011 at 10:12 PM

I have not viewed the video yet, but I am one of 22 converts from Protestantism to Catholicism in 4 years, in a tiny parish in Central California. 18 of the 22 came from the same Protestant church, but honestly we didn’t communicate with one another very much until someone was actually out. This was not a case of “stealing the sheep.” I can only describe it as the Holy Spirit drawing us to the truth and beauty of the Catholic Church, in all different ways–the intellectuals got their fill, the ones who received experientially got that. We have a wonderful, wonderful priest who loves RCIA, which he teaches himself since the church is so small. Each person must speak for him/herself, but I can tell you that the very first time I went to Mass, I knew I was home. I have written a pretty long conversion story which I may send you in due time. I was received into the Church on June 13, 2010, and that ranks as one of the very best days of my life, right up there with my wedding day. It took me a year and a half to become a Catholic since I needed a Pauline Privilege ruling. It was infinitely worth the wait. My dear husband of 27 years followed me into the Truth five weeks ago at the Easter Vigil. Though we are not young, we love Jesus more and more and feel that the best is yet to be.

Armando Borja January 5, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Tom: Ah, but if it’s not the One Church founded by Christ, which one is? Which one, other than the Catholic Church, was around at the time of Christ (around as in just getting started, as was the Catholic Church)??? The short answer is “none”.

Armando: You are right, Tom. None off the churches today was obviously around in 34 AD, not even the Roman Catholic Church of today. But there is a church during that time and that is the church mentioned in the Bible.

Tom: Only the Catholic Church was alive and well in the year 34. Only the Catholic Church was alive and well in the years 134, 234, 334, 434, 534, etc etc. And, coincidentally, the name “Catholic” was first written (althought it may have been spoken earlier) in the year 110 by Ignatius of Antioch. Therefore, only the Catholic Church could be the Church spoken of by Christ (I will build MY Church) emphasis mine, and “The gates of Hell will not prevail against it”…meaning there will never be a time when the Catholic Church is not alive and well, otherwise Christ would be a liar, which He is not.

Armando: But, if we compare the teachings and practices of Roman Catholics today to the teachings of the first church in the Bible, it is clear that Roman Catholics today is not the same with the church mentioned in the Bible. For example, Christians in the Bible don’t pray to any saint, they don’t bow down and talk to images when they talk to a saint in heaven. They don’t believe the sacrifice of Christ on the cross is repeated in an unbloody manner during the mass (Heb 10:18). They don’t believe that Mary is Mediatrix of all grace (2Tm 2:5).

Even if Roman Catholic Church can trace their history back to the apostles, if the their teachings is different from what the apostles preached, they are disconnected to the apostles and the first church. Read this:

“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!” — Gal 1:8

Even the apostle Paul included himself to the “we” who may preach another gospel. If he do that — and he did not — he, together with others who preach another gospel, is accursed. Paul can trace his authority back to Christ just as Roman Catholic Church can , according to them, trace their history to the apostle. But even so, if they preach that which is different from what the apostles preached originally, they are accursed. Their historic traceability is irrelevant now. What they teach determines if they are a the true church.

You asked where is the true church today? Any church who continues to believe and preach the gospel preached by the opostles is the church of Christ. There were no time in history where nobody believe and preached what the apostles preach. And what the apostle preached is not what the Roman Catholic Church of today is preaching.

Peace,
Tom

marty May 5, 2012 at 4:34 PM

STEVE RAY HERE: I LEFT MARTY’S COMMENT HERE FOR IT’S COMEDY VALUE. HIS COMMENT IS NUTS AND SHOWS A DEEP SENSE OF IGNORANCE.

MARTY SAYS, The few cases of “Evangelical” preachers/ministers converting to RCism are most convincingly (IMO)
explained by the “pull” of “something earthy”, something material, something “I can do” beyond just believing the gospel of grace. I would add that it also is the “pull” to walk by sight rather than by faith.

Jared Z May 14, 2012 at 11:45 AM

“What the apostle preached is not what the Roman Catholic Church of today is preaching. ” -Tom.

Well until you can show show me another denomination that acknowledges the primacy of St. Peter’s role in the Church (Matt. 16:18,) the cleansing fires of Purgatory (1 Cor. 3:15-16,) the authority of the Church to forgive and retain sin (John 20:23,) the Virgin Mary as Queen of Heaven (Revelations 12:1,) or the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist (1 Cor. 11:27-29,) then I’m going to go ahead and say yeah, they are the True Church, and they ARE preaching the gospel that the Apostles preached. Converted last year. ;)

Blessings & Peace, Jared Z.

Catherine Ina May 24, 2012 at 12:19 PM

I am also converted to Catholic Christianity from evangelical Lutheranism. Why? I always loved the Bible, and I found and still find that Evangelicals have a very selective reading of Scripture. Even the Bible itself does not teach sola scriptura. Bible-alone doctrine is a late invention. For the first few hundred years the Church was guiding the believers. The Bible came out of the Church. Evangelicals seem to be against Church history. The New Testament was written, preserved and interpreted by the Catholic Church over time.. If you believe the Catholic Church was lead back then, why do you believe that God has left this Church today? He promised Himself He would not let it fall into error. It would go against the promises of Christ if he had abandoned the Church. I love Evangelicals, but they really are cast into confusion. They need to come back to the Church Christ instituted, under the true shepherd to which he gave His shepherd’s staff when he chose the 12 and said to Peter “you are Peter… and feed my sheep”. I hardly ever met an Evangelical who knows what the Catholic Church actually teaches. As I said, I love my Evangelical brethren, love to pray, talk and sing with them, but some of them seem scared of the stories they created by their own imagination about the Catholic Church.

De Maria May 24, 2012 at 11:10 PM

Armando, the Church of Scripture is the Catholic Church:

First, Jesus Christ appointed a Pastor as head of the entire Church: John 21:17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

I see only a few Churches with such a Pastor. Further, Jesus Christ said that the Pastor over His Church would be infallible:

Matthew 16:17-19 (King James Version) 17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

The list of Churches accept this teaching gets smaller. Certainly, all Protestant denominations can now be eliminated.

Jesus Christ not only said that the Pastor was infallible but Scripture describes the Church as infallible: Ephesians 3:10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

The list remains the same, but now I can certainly eliminate all Protestant denominations.
Back to Matt 16:18, Scripture says that Jesus Christ established one Church. History shows that all the Churches sprang from the Church which is frequently described as the Mother Church. The Catholic Church.

By simple logic of elimination, that leaves only the Catholic Church. Further, the Catholic Church can produce records tracing back to Apostolic times.

Therefore, I conclude that it is the Catholic Church which is described in Scripture.

Scripture says that the Church teaches the Wisdom of God:

Ephesians 3:10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

Is God’s Wisdom infallible? I say yes.

Is there really any need to say more? I don’t think so. But there is more.
Scripture says that the Church is the pillar and ground of the truth: 1 Timothy 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
God is here saying that the Church always upholds the truth. I believe God. Therefore, I conclude that the Church is infallible.

Scripture says: Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Here the Church is depicted as keeping hell in a state of seige. And further it is said that hell will never prevail against the Church. If the Church committed errors in the mission given her by God, then the gates of hell would have prevailed.

God says that won’t happen. I believe God.

Therefore, I conclude that the Church of Scripture is infallible.

There is only one Church today which claims to be infallible. The Catholic Church.

Sincerely,

De Maria

kent May 25, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Mostly Luther and Calvin somewhat were both disgruntled Catholic priests. Luther was declared a heretic and nearly burned at the stake. I don’t think God appointed them heads of any church. They pretty much started their own following by reprinting the bible from latin to their native languages of German and French and in Luther’s case actually changed the wording of the new German bible to include saved by faith “alone.” We have had many sects from the first beginnings of the Catholic Church at Pentacost when the Holy spirit descended on the apostles, Gnostocim, Islam and arianunism to name a few. We have many home grown sects: mormons. protestantism is a sect that seems to hang on by fleecing of the flock. All of these little churches with no Godly head but some pastor who knows nothing about the spirit, salvation and rightousness will eventually come crumbling down.

Rick June 1, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Aren’t you guys analyzing this way too literal? I mean. Isn’t a Christian someone who has Christ living inside(Holy Spirit)? Anyone who has HIM and has been born anew by confessing Him as one’s saviour is saved. This metanoia will provoke graceful deeds and you will be part of Christ’s church. His church is one and made from his children everywhere, which by definition, is Catholic. That IS the meaning of the name, no?

Shouldn’t we be doing God’s Will as one? Shouldn’t we let HIM judge? If you do not agree with something, can’t you simply disagree without judging others?

God bless you all.

STEVE RAY HERE: RICK, ACCORDING TO JESUS, BEING BORN AGAIN IN BY WATER AND SPIRIT – BAPTISM (SEE TOO 1 PETER 3:21), NOT SIMPLY BY CONFESSING HIM AS SAVIOR. AND ONE CANNOT BAPTIZE THEMSELVES. IT TAKES A CHURCH. JESUS FOUNDED A CHURCH AND IT IS ENCUMBENT ON US — IF WE LOVE OUR SAVIOR — TO FIND OUT WHAT HE ACTUALLY STARTED AND HOW WE CAN BE A MEMBER OF IT, SINCE IT IS OF COURSE HIS BODY.

SO NO, WE ARE NOT BEING TOO LITERAL, WE ARE BEING OBEDIENT.

Ed June 3, 2012 at 2:16 PM

I converted to the Catholic Church, Latin Rite — not Roman, from my Baptist upbringing. I value the love of the Bible I learned from in the Baptist church, but when I saw pastors give entirely different, and many times contradictory interpretations of Bible passages, yet both interpretations were supposed to be “the TRUTH”, I decided something was wrong. This started me on a long search for consistency of belief and consistency of biblical interpretation. After finding the same inconsistencies in ALL of the Protestant churches in my local, the only thing left was the dreaded “Whore of Babylon”, the Catholic Church. The first time I attended Mass, I was overwhelmed with emotion because of the solemn beauty of the Mass where I was exposed to a mega dose of the Bible. Besides the three readings (only three in those days, but after Vatican II there were four) from the Bible, I found Scriptures all through the Mass. I later learned that the readings were the same all over the world. AND I found CONSISTENCY in the interpretation of the Scriptures. I fell in love with the Mass, but it was a long time before I actually joined the Church. I still needed to search for the Truth about the Catholic Church because I was taught many horrible things about the Church. Catholics claimed a continuous, unbroken lineage back to the Apostles, and Jesus himself. One of the first books I read was the history of the Church by Eusebius Pamphili, Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, the “Father of Church History”; b. about 260; d. before 341. It was actually several books, but I saw by reading the first book that the Catholic Church was indeed the Church of the Bible, the one established by Jesus upon Simon Peter as described in Matthew 16:13-19. Then I read writings by Justin Martyr and discovered that the Mass today is almost identical in make-up to that of the early Church – before the end of the 2nd century. And from the Didache I learned the Church’s teachings have not changed in 2000 years.

And that is why I have been a Catholic for 45 years.

Rick June 4, 2012 at 5:28 PM

STEVE RAY HERE. RICK, YOUR TONE IS APPRECIATED. A FEW COMMENTS BELOW IN CAPS.

Steve, thanks for your reply to my previous comment!. I find this topic most interesting and of most importance. Also, your blog is very well thought out.

To get back to your response:
Correct, Baptism is also necessary. And it has to be performed by His church. I agree. But Which is His Church?

There are teachings that the Roman Catholic Church practices today that the Primitive Church, the ONE Jesus established, did not. Practices that can be sinful in nature. Wouldn’t that invalidate the Church as His? Like the Pharisees, where the church used to be the one God left for His people, but they walked astray.

Wouldn’t then, the Church be made of faithful followers? Those who do exactly what Jesus taught? And I refer here, to the Church as the sons and daughters of God, not a building.

For example, where did Jesus teach his disciples to ask (pray) to Moses, Abraham or any other saint for help? Catholics today pray to many Saints depending on their needs.

And on Mary, I’m certain Jesus has a very special place for her on heaven. Being his Earthly mother, she was a truly blessed woman, to be selected as the mother of our saviour. She had to have been full of God’s grace and love. I see the importance, her role had on God’s plan for our salvation. But, why should we pray to her?

Furthermore, God never wanted us to have images of anything above of bellow, yet Catholic churches are full of sculptures and images. Images people sometimes use to pray and even kiss a Baby Jesus Sculpture at christmas time. Isn’t that sinful?

Are we supposed to remain or go back to being a catholic when we see all these things? And what will happen to everyone who follows Jesus’ teachings. Those who confess him and repent and are baptized. Who feel the Holy Spirit in them, who start a very personal relationship with Our Loving Father. Who love him above all. Who do His will and by His Holy Grace, do good deeds to others. Those who pass His teachings to their children. Who do all of this but not on a Catholic building. Are those not, God’s sons and daughters? Are those not His Church? What happens to all those faithful believers?

I believe your description of Church is too narrow. Catholic means universal. And being obedient is following His teachings. Doing what he taught us. Is the Catholic church doing only that?

Thanks for the opportunity to comment. God bless you all.

RICK, YOU MAKE A LOT OF HUGE ASSUMPTIONS IN YOUR NOTE ABOVE. IT IS USUALLY THE RESULT OF BEING STEEPED IN A TRADITION THAT OPPOSES THE CATHOLIC CHURCH — AS I WAS UNTIL 1994. THE CHURCH LOOKS DIFFERENT TODAY THAN 2,000 YEARS AGO — GRANTED. BUT THEN AGAIN YOU LOOK DIFFERENT NOW THAN YOU DID IN YOUR FIRST YEAR. YOU HAVE THINGS THAT YOU DID NOT HAVE THEN, LIKE TEETH AND HAIR AND QUITE A BIT OF SIZE. THE CHURCH DID NOT REMAIN THE SAME IN APPEARANCE ANY MORE THAN YOU DID. HOWEVER, ORGANICALLY IT IS THE SAME, AS YOU ARE ORGANICALLY THE SAME PERSON AS THE BABY.

I DON’T HAVE TIME TO RESPOND TO ALL YOUR OBJECTIONS BUT I WOULD SUGGEST YOU READ MY BOOKS “UPON THE ROCK” AND “CROSSING THE TIBER” WHICH DETAIL THIS CAREFULLY. I CAN’T TELL YOU THE HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS WHO HAVE DISCOVERED THE FULLNESS AND BEAUTY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH THROUGH READING THEM.

GOD BLESS.

Ed June 10, 2012 at 12:28 AM

Rick,

So what you are saying is that the Church apostatized? That would mean that Jesus lied when he made these statements:

John 14:16, “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always, the Spirit of Truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you.”

John 14:26, “The Advocate, the Holy Spirit that the Father will send in my name – he will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you.”

John 15:26, “When the Advocate comes whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of Truth that proceeds from the Father, he will testify to me.”

John 16:12-13, “But when he comes, the Spirit of Truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.”

Luke 10:16, “Whoever listens to you listens to me, and whoever rejects you rejects me, and whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.”

Matthew 16:18-19, “And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you bind on the earth shall be bound in Heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.”

I, for one, say Jesus did NOT lie, and the Church has kept His teachings complete, intact, and incorrupt after these 2000 years.

De Maria June 21, 2012 at 8:28 PM

Rick,

You said,
Thanks for the opportunity to comment. God bless you all.

And you as well.

Steve, thanks for your reply to my previous comment!. I find this topic most interesting and of most importance. Also, your blog is very well thought out.

To get back to your response:
Correct, Baptism is also necessary. And it has to be performed by His church. I agree. But Which is His Church?

This is De Maria. Please see my response to Armando, above, for my methodology.

There are teachings that the Roman Catholic Church practices today that the Primitive Church, the ONE Jesus established, did not. Practices that can be sinful in nature.

Name one such practice.

Wouldn’t that invalidate the Church as His?

If it were true. But it isn’t.

Like the Pharisees, where the church used to be the one God left for His people, but they walked astray.

What did Jesus say?
Matthew 23:1-3
King James Version (KJV)
1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2 Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

Wouldn’t then, the Church be made of faithful followers?

What does Scripture say?
Matthew 13:30
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Those who do exactly what Jesus taught?

You might want to study the lives of the Saints. They are they which have done exactly what Jesus taught, in this life. That is why the Church holds them up as our models:
Hebrews 6:12
That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.

And I refer here, to the Church as the sons and daughters of God, not a building.

Understood.

For example, where did Jesus teach his disciples to ask (pray) to Moses, Abraham or any other saint for help?

Luke 16:24
And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame…..

Catholics today pray to many Saints depending on their needs.

Correct.

And on Mary, I’m certain Jesus has a very special place for her on heaven. Being his Earthly mother, she was a truly blessed woman, to be selected as the mother of our saviour. She had to have been full of God’s grace and love. I see the importance, her role had on God’s plan for our salvation. But, why should we pray to her?

Check out Job 42. Notice how God instructed Job’s friends to turn to Job. And have Job pray for them. And He would listen to Job’s prayers but not to theirs.

Same concept:
James 5:16
King James Version (KJV)
16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

Furthermore, God never wanted us to have images of anything above of bellow,

God commanded the Hebrews to make the Cherubim (Exodus 25:18) and the bronze serpent (Num 21:9).

yet Catholic churches are full of sculptures and images. Images people sometimes use to pray and even kiss a Baby Jesus Sculpture at christmas time. Isn’t that sinful?

No. Do you carry pictures of your family in your wallet or on your phone? Have you ever kissed someone’s picture? I’m certain you weren’t showing your affection to the polaroid, if you did. Same concept. The Saints are our family, our brothers and sisters in Christ. Mary is our Mother (Rev 12:17). And we love our family in Christ.

Are we supposed to remain or go back to being a catholic when we see all these things?

Not if you don’t believe in them.

And what will happen to everyone who follows Jesus’ teachings. Those who confess him and repent and are baptized. Who feel the Holy Spirit in them, who start a very personal relationship with Our Loving Father. Who love him above all. Who do His will and by His Holy Grace, do good deeds to others. Those who pass His teachings to their children. Who do all of this but not on a Catholic building. Are those not, God’s sons and daughters? Are those not His Church? What happens to all those faithful believers?

God knows. God will judge.

The difference between the Catholic Church (and Orthodox) and other religions is that we are Sacramental. In the Sacraments, we are saved and walk upon Mount Sion, with the spirits of men made righteous, in this life.

All others will await the Judgement before they, if they are judged righteous, will enter heaven.

I believe your description of Church is too narrow. Catholic means universal. And being obedient is following His teachings. Doing what he taught us. Is the Catholic church doing only that?

The Catholic Church does it better than anyone else. Because she has the fullness of the Truth (1 Tim 3:15: Eph 3:10).

Sincerely,

De Maria

Amos July 9, 2012 at 1:57 AM

Its fun that people like Armando just like any other ignorant protestant(though am not saying Armando is ignorant) think that they know what Catholics uphold best than what Catholics know on the same .
I would to give any Protestant a challenge if he/she is willing prove to me that the Christian Doctrine as been changed as thought by the Early Christian and thought know by the Bishops…
Remember DOCTRINE and MORALS are different from PRACTICES..
If you do that then you could have set out a very strong basis to destroy the Church`s stand(Catholic Church`s teachings)

Armando Borja July 21, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Tom: Ah, but if it’s not the One Church founded by Christ, which one is? Which one, other than the Catholic Church, was around at the time of Christ (around as in just getting started, as was the Catholic Church)??? The short answer is “none”.

Armando: You are right, Tom. None off the churches today was obviously around in 34 AD, not even the Roman Catholic Church of today. But there is a church during that time and that is the church mentioned in the Bible.

Tom: Only the Catholic Church was alive and well in the year 34. Only the Catholic Church was alive and well in the years 134, 234, 334, 434, 534, etc etc. And, coincidentally, the name “Catholic” was first written (althought it may have been spoken earlier) in the year 110 by Ignatius of Antioch. Therefore, only the Catholic Church could be the Church spoken of by Christ (I will build MY Church) emphasis mine, and “The gates of Hell will not prevail against it”…meaning there will never be a time when the Catholic Church is not alive and well, otherwise Christ would be a liar, which He is not.

Armando: But, if we compare the teachings and practices of Roman Catholics today to the teachings of the first church in the Bible, it is clear that Roman Catholics today is not the same with the church mentioned in the Bible. For example, Christians in the Bible don’t pray to any saint, they don’t bow down and talk to images when they talk to a saint in heaven. They don’t believe the sacrifice of Christ on the cross is repeated in an unbloody manner during the mass (Heb 10:18). They don’t believe that Mary is Mediatrix of all grace (2Tm 2:5).

Even if Roman Catholic Church can trace their history back to the apostles, if the their teachings is different from what the apostles preached, they are disconnected to the apostles and the first church. Read this:

“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!” — Gal 1:8

Even the apostle Paul included himself to the “we” who may preach another gospel. If he do that — and he did not — he, together with others who preach another gospel, is accursed. Paul can trace his authority back to Christ just as Roman Catholic Church can , according to them, trace their history to the apostle. But even so, if they preach that which is different from what the apostles preached originally, they are accursed. Their historic traceability is irrelevant now. What they teach determines if they are a the true church.

You asked where is the true church today? Any church who continues to believe and preach the gospel preached by the opostles is the church of Christ. There were no time in history where nobody believe and preached what the apostles preach. And what the apostle preached is not what the Roman Catholic Church of today is preaching.

James August 2, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Armando, your use of Gal 1:8 is rediculous. Firstly, the Gospel Paul first preached was not from the scripture (not the New testament, anyway, which did not exist). Even the book of Galatians… Was written AFTER he already earlier preached ORALLY to the them (ie. tradition). What Galatians 1:8 is esssentially saying is “Believe what we already preached (verbally told) you! -and if we start telling you something different, question it!”

Secondly, Galatians, as a letter of scripture, arises because of some of the first sola scriptura folks, who claimed from sola scriptura, quite rightly, that the bible clearly taught that every convert must be circumcised. I’m not even goona go through all that; just recall that the entire OT teaches this and there was no real NT at the time of these controversies, and even the four gospels do not repudiate circumcision. In fact, the only places that repudiate circumcision are Galatians (being written in response these sola scriptura “Judiazers”) and Acts Chapter 15, written, very clearly, regarding the some controversy. In fact, Acts Chapter 15 records what is the first “ecumenical council” to decide something that scripture does not address clearly and authoritatively and must be addressed by the Holy Spirit working through the CHURCH. There were to be seven more such councils i nthe next 700 years, addressing everything from The trinity, Jesus’s human and divine natures (and by extension, th