I'm Catholic but thinking of attending a protestant church. I feel like this is wrong...

[Penelope]

 

Third, the Lutheran Church -- founded on the teachings of the original Protester -- teachings on the Eucharist seem to be in line with what you believe.

 

Finally, as a Protestant, I celebrate the concept that my faith, my identity, my unity, my relationship is with Christ Himself. I do not need a particular building, or man who has a certain education or training, or a set of ceremonies, or just the right words, for me to experience that truly life-giving, affirming relationship with Him. Even if I were somehow separated from any formal church, I would not be separated from Him. I find it incredibly sad that you would have that sense of loss.

The teachings of Luther about the Eucharist are closer to Catholicism than other Protestant churches, but there are still subtle differences.

 

I think a little grace and respect for both sides is due as clearly Catholics and Protestants see things very differently here.

[Jann in TX]

Wow-- so much hatred (also ignorance)... such a sad thread.

 

I am a Christian.  I am not a Protestant-- I did not protest anything!  I am not a Catholic.  I am human.

 

I rely on the Bible, and not tradition or leagalism, for my personal truth and faith in Jesus and I currently attend a non-denominational church.

 

FOR ME-- I partake of communion and believe what the BIBLE teaches-- that it is symbolic of what Jesus was going to do--what He DID do for us.  The first communion was an extension of Passover.  One has to understand Passover to understand what was going on that night.  Each 'element' of the Passover meal had a special symbolism.  As Jesus led the passover dinner he explained the meaning/history behind each element.  It is a beautiful example of God's love for His people-- how He provided a way for (all of us) to be released from our bondage (sin).  The bread and wine (the new elements of Passover introduced that night) symbolize the completion of the absolute sacrifice-- Jesus dying and redeeming His people with his ressurection.

 

If a person wants to believe that they are actually partaking in Jesus's body-- then that is between them and God.  If a woman feels obligated to wear dresses and cover her hair, then that is not for me to judge-- it is between her and God.  What church I attend (if I attend) is between me and God-- the Bible does not have a verse that says 'Your membership and attendance MUST be at XYZ church or you are doomed'-- still, if you personally believe that then it is between you and God.

 

I've attended many different types of churches in my life. I have friends of different faiths and different 'flavors of Christianity'.  I am not one to judge if they are a true 'Christian' or not-- that is between them and God. 

 

It is sad that some attach so much "guilt' to being the perfect Christian... isn't that why Jesus died in the first place...

 

 

(please forgive any typos as it is difficult to type passionately with one hand!)

 

[Parrothead]

First off, in my church, crackers and grape juice are not simply "passed around". We do not take communion lightly. It is a very solemn part of our services. The pastor reminds us of its meaning, Scripture is read -- Jesus' own words --, each element is prayed over, and then we partake together. I have been in Protestant churches of many (and non) denominations, and while the details may vary, I have never seen it taken as lightly as you seem to think.

 

Jesus often spoke in parables and used analogies and all kinds of word imagery. He was not physically a gate, or a shepherd or a vine. I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that His statements at the Last Supper were similarly symbolic.

 

Second, if the OP believes that the bread and wine literally become the Body and Blood, why couldn't she believe that in another setting other than the Catholic church?

 

Third, the Lutheran Church -- founded on the teachings of the original Protester -- teachings on the Eucharist seem to be in line with what you believe.

 

Finally, as a Protestant, I celebrate the concept that my faith, my identity, my unity, my relationship is with Christ Himself. I do not need a particular building, or man who has a certain education or training, or a set of ceremonies, or just the right words, for me to experience that truly life-giving, affirming relationship with Him. Even if I were somehow separated from any formal church, I would not be separated from Him. I find it incredibly sad that you would have that sense of loss.

We do know that non-Catholic Christian churches don't pass around grape juice and crackers. But some are more reverent than others. I know Ellie didn't mean any offense.

 

As justamouse pointed out upthread, Jesus did not indicate in any way that his commandment to eat His flesh and drink His blood was a parable or meant to be symbolic.

 

Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. . . . Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. (Jn 6:53-57)

He lost a number of followers who just couldn't get behind the idea of actually eating and drinking Jesus. Jesus reiterated again and then again that one must eat the flesh of his body. So, no. He wasn't being symbolic.

 

For further reading consider this post http://everythingcatholic.wordpress.com/2012/06/07/eat-my-body-john-6-why-jesus-was-being-literal/

 

The reason one can't get the Eucharist elsewhere (except an EO church some episcopal churches) is because Jesus gave the ability to change bread into the Eucharist to the apostles who in turn pass the knowledge and ability to priests through an unbroken line of succession.

 

Non-catholic Christian ministers cannot confect the Eucharist because they broke their succession by downgrading Ordination from being a sacrament. Basically Ordination consecrates someone to act in place of Christ.

 

We live in an imperfect world. Many many Catholic world-wide do not have a priest or a church available to them. Like you and other Christians (Catholic or not) they have a relationship with Jesus. In circumstances where going to Church or confessing to a Priest are difficult or impossible we have means available to remain on a state of grace.

 

If one cannot get to a priest one may attain justice extra-sacramentally with perfect contrition http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage_print.asp?number=370862

 

One may also make a spiritual Communion if one is ill, in dire circumstances or simply wanting a closer Communion. http://www.fisheaters.com/TLMmissingmass.html

 

But ideally, Catholic follow what Jesus taught us to do in the Gospels. Every Catholic sacrament was given to us by Jesus. He didn't tell us to do these thing lightly. He said they are necessary for salvation. Not something we should do if we feel like or when we get around to it. He didn't say don't worry about it if you aren't satisfied with your local parish.

 

Jesus loves us and wants us to do that which is said do.

[Jann in TX]

The reason one can't get the Eucharist elsewhere (except an EO church some episcopal churches) is because Jesus gave the ability to change bread into the Eucharist to the apostles who in turn pass the knowledge and ability to priests through an unbroken line of succession.

 

Non-catholic Christian ministers cannot confect the Eucharist because they broke their succession by downgrading Ordination from being a sacrament. Basically Ordination consecrates someone to act in place of Christ.

 

 

The above statements are based in tradition.  Support for them is not found in the Bible. 

The history of the Catholic church has so much 'leagalism' and control...  it can be 'freeing' for some-- to have a priest or pope who does the spiritual thinking for them-- but the foundation for this is NOT in the Bible.

 

I rather have a personal relationship with my God myself.

 

 

 

 

[QueenCat]

The Protestant church doesn't have the Eucharist.

 

 

 

We most certainly do, at least in the Lutheran and United Methodist denominations. And yes, they are sacraments. We may not have the same "rules" on who can partake, but we do partake in Holy Communion, which we also call the Eucharist.

[GSOchristie]

So, I don't know that much about Catholiscm, but I do know several Catholics who only go to church about twice a year. So, if their souls are okay, I think you could try out a Protestant church or two without losing your salvation. We have been in several different Protestant denominations, some were a sound and light show, but most are earnestly seeking to provide a worshipful experience, with or without traditional music, readings, etc. We are getting ready to join a Presbyterian church and they are much more subdued than our former formerly Southern Baptist, currently non-denominational church. So maybe start by researching churches that are similar to what you are used to in the Catholic church and go from there. I do know that as a Protestant, I go through dry spells, too, that have nothing to do with my pastor and are in spite of "lively" worship experiences. BSF (Bible Study Fellowsip) really has done more to enrich my spiritual life and understanding of Jesus than my church. It is interdenominational, and we have quite a few Catholics in our group here.

[milovany]

Wow-- so much hatred (also ignorance)... such a sad thread.

 

I really don't see any hatred, just a passionate sharing of one's Catholic faith to one (Catholic) who has asked for input. I do see a teeny bit of irritation on the "other" side back toward those Catholics who are addressing their sister, but nothing near "hatred."  I wonder why stated disagreement is seen as "hatred."  ??? That's always confusing to me.  You write the rest of your post from a perspective very different from the Catholic perspective -- and they would disagree that yours is the more Biblically based one.  It's good to realize that when communicating about these things. 

 

Upthread, Chucki mentioned that a Catholic could attend an EO church without committing mortal sin.  IF the OP doesn't have another Catholic parish nearby, and has an Eastern Orthodox church within doable distance -- maybe especially one that's made up mostly of English-speaking converts -- that might be a good option for the vibrancy and fellowship she's looking for.  We have attended numerous convert-heavy EO parishes (which exist because the number of non-ethnic* Orthodox parishes in Americas has exploded in the last 20-30 years), and in all the enthusiasm for the faith and the love/commitment to fellow worshipers is high.

 

Again, OP, I say this IF Orthodoxy is as an option for you; as a Catholic, I realize it may not be. 

 

*There's nothing wrong with ethnic parishes (Greek, Russian, Serbian) either!  Many, many English-speaking Americans have found their true home in a highly ethnic Orthodox parish. 

[Parrothead]

Can you be more specific? John has many verses. The only reference to Trogain that I am finding online is one site that basically says what you're saying. I'd like to be able to use my Strong's Concordance to dig further.Please know that I am truly not trying to be simply argumentative. I want to understand. I am not among those Protestants who believe that Catholics are so wrong as to be beyond salvation. (Before you get offended at that thought, please realize that you are saying that Protestants are beyond salvation.) I do believe, however, that Martin Luther was (mostly) spot-on with his disagreements with what the church was (and still is) requiring of its members.

The Catholic Church does not require anything that Jesus did not say for us to do. The only things Catholics must do to be Catholic are be baptized, receive communion, confess our sins. If one is married, sacramental marriage is available for us. If one is a catholic priest, obviously sacramental ordination is available. If one is severely ill or near death one may be sacramentally prepared. Confirmation is "the icing on the initiation" as it were.

 

Each one of those sacraments is Biblical and given to us by Jesus.

 

 

  

Wow-- so much hatred (also ignorance)... such a sad thread.

 

I am a Christian.  I am not a Protestant-- I did not protest anything!  I am not a Catholic.  I am human.

 

I rely on the Bible, and not tradition or leagalism, for my personal truth and faith in Jesus and I currently attend a non-denominational church.

 

FOR ME-- I partake of communion and believe what the BIBLE teaches-- that it is symbolic of what Jesus was going to do--what He DID do for us.  The first communion was an extension of Passover.  One has to understand Passover to understand what was going on that night.  Each 'element' of the Passover meal had a special symbolism.  As Jesus led the passover dinner he explained the meaning/history behind each element.  It is a beautiful example of God's love for His people-- how He provided a way for (all of us) to be released from our bondage (sin).  The bread and wine (the new elements of Passover introduced that night) symbolize the completion of the absolute sacrifice-- Jesus dying and redeeming His people with his ressurection.

 

If a person wants to believe that they are actually partaking in Jesus's body-- then that is between them and God.  If a woman feels obligated to wear dresses and cover her hair, then that is not for me to judge-- it is between her and God.  What church I attend (if I attend) is between me and God-- the Bible does not have a verse that says 'Your membership and attendance MUST be at XYZ church or you are doomed'-- still, if you personally believe that then it is between you and God.

 

I've attended many different types of churches in my life. I have friends of different faiths and different 'flavors of Christianity'.  I am not one to judge if they are a true 'Christian' or not-- that is between them and God. 

 

It is sad that some attach so much "guilt' to being the perfect Christian... isn't that why Jesus died in the first place...

 

 

(please forgive any typos as it is difficult to type passionately with one hand!)

The Catholic Church is a Biblical church. We do believe what the BIBLE teaches.

[Parrothead]

The above statements are based in tradition. Support for them is not found in the Bible.

The history of the Catholic church has so much 'leagalism' and control... it can be 'freeing' for some-- to have a priest or pope who does the spiritual thinking for them-- but the foundation for this is NOT in the Bible.

 

I rather have a personal relationship with my God myself.

Actually the evidence for Jesus giving us Eucharist can be found in John 6 as has been repeatedly demonstrated in this thread already.

 

Please show examples of catholic legalism to show support for your claim.

 

We do not have someone to "do our spiritual thinking" for us anymore than a non-Catholic Christian allows a minister or preacher to do their thinking or tell them what to think.

 

Catholics do have a "personal relationship" with Jesus. To say differently is to be misinformed of what Catholics believe. The sticking point in this thinking is that Catholics do not call what we have "a personal relationship". This was determined in a previous Catholic thread on the general board several years ago if you are interested in looking for it.

[[email protected]]

The OP opened herself for responses from both "sides" of the question. That's what she's getting, and we would like to leave the thread open. However, it can only stay open if members refrain from both GIVING and TAKING offense.

 

Got that second part? It's important too.

 

Moderator

[SunnyDays]

No offense, but I'm basically getting the impression from my Catholic sisters that if we aren't attending the one true Catholic Church (church as a whole) we may as well not bother with any of it. Apparently the Lutheran church we've most recently attended is full of doomed people, because somewhere along the line, Apostolic succession was broken.

 

Sorry, I'm angry. People have tried to tell me what Catholics believe about other Christians, but I believed surely that couldn't be true. Now we know.

 

I guess I don't believe God is quite that exclusive.

 

ETA: sorry, posted at the same time as the Mod. I'll bow out.

[Ellie]

The above statements are based in tradition.  Support for them is not found in the Bible. 

The history of the Catholic church has so much 'legalism' and control...  it can be 'freeing' for some-- to have a priest or pope who does the spiritual thinking for them-- but the foundation for this is NOT in the Bible.

 

I rather have a personal relationship with my God myself.

 

But the Catholic Church teaches these things based on Scripture.

 

I began my search into the Catholic Church with a big radar looking for legalism and control. I have not yet seen either one, and it has been surprising to me. I haven't seen priests or the pope thinking for Catholics.

 

I also have a personal relationship with God. :-)

[Parrothead]

So, I don't know that much about Catholiscm, but I do know several Catholics who only go to church about twice a year. So, if their souls are okay, I think you could try out a Protestant church or two without losing your salvation.

This is faulty logic. We cannot know the state of "several Catholics who only go to church twice a year".

 

For all you or I know they have lost their salvation. Or they could very well be in perfect spiritual communion with Christ, the so-called "personal relationship."

 

To advise someone such is dangerous. As Catholics we do not believe in once-saved-always-saved. We work out our salvation daily with faith and grace. We use the sacraments Jesus gave us to help us along the way.

[Ellie]

First off, in my church, crackers and grape juice are not simply "passed around". We do not take communion lightly. It is a very solemn part of our services. The pastor reminds us of its meaning, Scripture is read -- Jesus' own words --, each element is prayed over, and then we partake together. I have been in Protestant churches of many (and non) denominations, and while the details may vary, I have never seen it taken as lightly as you seem to think.

 

Jesus often spoke in parables and used analogies and all kinds of word imagery. He was not physically a gate, or a shepherd or a vine. I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that His statements at the Last Supper were similarly symbolic.

 

Second, if the OP believes that the bread and wine literally become the Body and Blood, why couldn't she believe that in another setting other than the Catholic church?

 

Third, the Lutheran Church -- founded on the teachings of the original Protester -- teachings on the Eucharist seem to be in line with what you believe.

 

Finally, as a Protestant, I celebrate the concept that my faith, my identity, my unity, my relationship is with Christ Himself. I do not need a particular building, or man who has a certain education or training, or a set of ceremonies, or just the right words, for me to experience that truly life-giving, affirming relationship with Him. Even if I were somehow separated from any formal church, I would not be separated from Him. I find it incredibly sad that you would have that sense of loss.

 

I know that crackers are grape juice are not simply "passed around." I have seen my non-Catholic Christian friends weep over the symbolism of the crackers and juice (or big loaves of bread that we shared with each other). I spent almost 40 years as a non-Catholic Christian, and for most of those years I was at peace and knew that I was serving God.

 

But Jesus spoke clearly when He said that the bread was His body, and the wine was His blood. He said it in John 6, and He said it again at the Last Supper. We *know* when Jesus speaks symbolically and when He doesn't. If He had been speaking figuratively in John 6, His followers would not have left Him.

[Jann in TX]

Actually the evidence for Jesus giving us Eucharist can be found in John 6 as has been repeatedly demonstrated in this thread already.

 

Please show examples of catholic legalism to show support for your claim.

 

We do not have someone to "do our spiritual thinking" for us anymore than a non-Catholic Christian allows a minister or preacher to do their thinking or tell them what to think.

 

Catholics do have a "personal relationship" with Jesus. To say differently is to be misinformed of what Catholics believe. The sticking point in this thinking is that Catholics do not call what we have "a personal relationship". This was determined in a previous Catholic thread on the general board several years ago if you are interested in looking for it.

 

John 6 goes along with my statements/beliefs as well--these elements were introduced at the end of a SYMBOLIC meal-- even the salt had special meaning...  The meaning of the Passover meal was well known to those people speaking in the Bible

 

Please do not interpret my comments to mean that I in any way believe that Catholics are not Christian by any definition.

I'm just trying to say (apparently in a very awkward way) that faith is just that-- faith.  I have faith in Jesus as the author of my salvation.  From your comments, you apparently do as well. 

 

I find it sad that Christians can be so judgemental toward other Christians-- "my beliefs are the only true ones-- your's might be fine but they are not as good/true as mine"... this makes Christianity in general not appear favorable to nonbelievers.

 

I apologize if I offended you. 

 

[I.Dup.]

Wow-- so much hatred (also ignorance)... such a sad thread.

 

I am a Christian.  I am not a Protestant-- I did not protest anything!  I am not a Catholic.  I am human.

 

I rely on the Bible, and not tradition or leagalism, for my personal truth and faith in Jesus and I currently attend a non-denominational church.

 

FOR ME-- I partake of communion and believe what the BIBLE teaches-- that it is symbolic of what Jesus was going to do--what He DID do for us.  The first communion was an extension of Passover.  One has to understand Passover to understand what was going on that night.  Each 'element' of the Passover meal had a special symbolism.  As Jesus led the passover dinner he explained the meaning/history behind each element.  It is a beautiful example of God's love for His people-- how He provided a way for (all of us) to be released from our bondage (sin).  The bread and wine (the new elements of Passover introduced that night) symbolize the completion of the absolute sacrifice-- Jesus dying and redeeming His people with his ressurection.

 

If a person wants to believe that they are actually partaking in Jesus's body-- then that is between them and God.  If a woman feels obligated to wear dresses and cover her hair, then that is not for me to judge-- it is between her and God.  What church I attend (if I attend) is between me and God-- the Bible does not have a verse that says 'Your membership and attendance MUST be at XYZ church or you are doomed'-- still, if you personally believe that then it is between you and God.

 

I've attended many different types of churches in my life. I have friends of different faiths and different 'flavors of Christianity'.  I am not one to judge if they are a true 'Christian' or not-- that is between them and God. 

 

It is sad that some attach so much "guilt' to being the perfect Christian... isn't that why Jesus died in the first place...

 

 

(please forgive any typos as it is difficult to type passionately with one hand!)

 

Everything you are saying is based on the religion of Martin Luther. He started all of this. Everyone who claims they are "not protestant, not Catholic, not anything but a follower of Jesus" is a follower of Martin Luther. Anyone who believes the Bible should come before everything else is a follower of Martin Luther. He started that independent, "sola scriptura" belief. If you respect that and are okay with that, then that's one thing. But to believe this is the way it should be or has been since the time of Jesus is not true. How did people throughout the world develop a relationship with Jesus or know the Bible at all before humanity could read? Or before the printing press? Or before the Bible in our hands was widely available? Those are all very modern things.

 

My great grandmother was a German Lutheran who believed no one but German-speaking Lutherans would go to heaven. :) I grew up Protestant- my mom has strong Lutheran roots, my Dad converted later in life and leans more non-denominational. We attended a variety of "Christian" churches- everything from Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, Southern Baptist, Charismatic (Pentacostal), Non-denominational, and home worship.

 

I have studied the Reformation in great depth. I have studied Church History in detail. We converted to the Catholic Church 2 years ago after our entire lives of the modern "Christian" churches being unable to answer our deep questions. Sure they had fun youth programs and great community. I still miss that. :) But they could not answer our basic questions. How do you obtain salvation? When should one be baptized? Is baptism necessary? Why don't I feel forgiven? What must I do to be forgiven? What does the Bible say about XYZ? No one could agree or come up with a straight answer! From one church to another they had different answers! Even asking different people in the same church would produce different answers. Huh?? This greatly bothered me as I got older. Most of the time it was "that's between you and God." I needed actual, physical support and answers. I have found that. I will never leave the Catholic Church. I am not the best, most devout Catholic (I hope to become moreso), but I could never go back to being a Protestant. I do admit the in-depth study I have done has made all the difference. I know it is hard for cradle Catholics who have not been properly catechized. I will pray for you.

 

 

[milovany]

I guess I don't believe God is quite that exclusive.

 

It's not really about exclusivity because all Christians -- including Catholics -- believe "let all who will, come."  It's about whether or not God by the Holy Spirit began a church (a physical/tangible one as well as a spiritual one) and whether or not that church still exists today.  I'm not Catholic, but Eastern Orthodox, believing Orthodoxy predates even the Catholic church, although I fully am aware and respect that my Catholic friends here believe differently.  I say that to say that while I'm not Catholic, we have the same belief in Orthodoxy (that there's a physical as well as spiritual church that existed at the beginning and still exists today), so I feel comfortable defending the belief. 

 

[marbel]

You are Catholic, so I am going to answer as one Catholic to another.  I am going to be blunt with you.

 

You are Catholic.  The Catholic Church teaches that it is a mortal sin to miss Mass.  Protestant services are not Mass.  If you choose to attend another Church and not go to Mass, you will be in a state of mortal sin, according the Church you belong to and the rules you have chosen to follow.  Mortal sin is terrible.

 

 

Is the bolded above correct, or is the post below correct?    Or have I forgotten what a mortal sin is?

 

This is faulty logic. We cannot know the state of "several Catholics who only go to church twice a year".

 

For all you or I know they have lost their salvation. Or they could very well be in perfect spiritual communion with Christ, the so-called "personal relationship."

 

To advise someone such is dangerous. As Catholics we do not believe in once-saved-always-saved. We work out our salvation daily with faith and grace. We use the sacraments Jesus gave us to help us along the way.

 

Which is it?  Sincere question. 

[Parrothead]

Upthread, Chucki mentioned that a Catholic could attend an EO church without committing mortal sin. IF the OP doesn't have another Catholic parish nearby, and has an Eastern Orthodox church within doable distance -- maybe especially one that's made up mostly of English-speaking converts -- that might be a good option for the vibrancy and fellowship she's looking for. We have attended numerous convert-heavy EO parishes (which exist because the number of non-ethnic* Orthodox parishes in Americas has exploded in the last 20-30 years), and in all the enthusiasm for the faith and the love/commitment to fellow worshipers is high.

 

Again, OP, I say this IF Orthodoxy is as an option for you; as a Catholic, I realize it may not be.

 

*There's nothing wrong with ethnic parishes (Greek, Russian, Serbian) either! Many, many English-speaking Americans have found their true home in a highly ethnic Orthodox parish.

Yes, she (or we) could attend Divine Liturgy. And in an extreme emergency such as eminent death if an EO priest consented (which is problematic in and of it self) a catholic could be granted extreme unction by an EO priest. But within the everyday workings the EO church would require conversion to otherwise partake of sacraments within the EO church.

 

On the flip side Catholic Eucharist is open to our EO brothers and sisters if they find themselves within on of our churches during Mass. I think (and please note I'm not positive) other sacraments (except baptism) would require conversion. I think.

 

*EO church gives baptism, confirmation and first Eucharist all at one time.

**anyone can validly baptize another if the correct formula and running water are used or so the RCC church believes.

[PrincessMommy]

First off, in my church, crackers and grape juice are not simply "passed around". We do not take communion lightly. It is a very solemn part of our services. The pastor reminds us of its meaning, Scripture is read -- Jesus' own words --, each element is prayed over, and then we partake together. I have been in Protestant churches of many (and non) denominations, and while the details may vary, I have never seen it taken as lightly as you seem to think.

 

Jesus often spoke in parables and used analogies and all kinds of word imagery. He was not physically a gate, or a shepherd or a vine. I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that His statements at the Last Supper were similarly symbolic.

 

Second, if the OP believes that the bread and wine literally become the Body and Blood, why couldn't she believe that in another setting other than the Catholic church?

 

Third, the Lutheran Church -- founded on the teachings of the original Protester -- teachings on the Eucharist seem to be in line with what you believe.

 

Finally, as a Protestant, I celebrate the concept that my faith, my identity, my unity, my relationship is with Christ Himself. I do not need a particular building, or man who has a certain education or training, or a set of ceremonies, or just the right words, for me to experience that truly life-giving, affirming relationship with Him. Even if I were somehow separated from any formal church, I would not be separated from Him. I find it incredibly sad that you would have that sense of loss.

 

You have to understand how reverently those of us treat the Eucharist to fully understand what we mean.  What do you do with the unconsumed grape juice and crackers?  Do you throw them in the rubbish or down the drain with other sewage?  That is just awful to those of us who believe it is truly His body and blood. Why would we throw Jesus out with the trash??!!  KWIM?   Or, is it thrown back in the package to be used again next week - or used for some other purpose (snacks for the kids).   Again.. .that would be very disrespectful to those of us who believe in the True Presence.  KWIM?

 

 

2ndly,, yes, Jesus did use a lot of symbolism.  But, who decides which is which??  Do we follow the ancient practices are follow the changes that come along later?   Historically the church always believed that Jesus was speaking literally in that instance.  The idea that it is ONLY a symbol is a late addition (1500s??) to the Christian tradition.    As someone who was a Protestant, and believed very similarly to you but has since become EO, I decided I'd rather follow the ancient beliefs and practices of the Church rather than stepping in line with later additions/changes.

[Jann in TX]

Everything you are saying is based on the religion of Martin Luther. He started all of this. Everyone who claims they are "not protestant, not Catholic, not anything but a follower of Jesus" is a follower of Martin Luther. Anyone who believes the Bible should come before everything else is a follower of Martin Luther. He started that independent, "sola scriptura" belief. If you respect that and are okay with that, then that's one thing. But to believe this is the way it should be or has been since the time of Jesus is not true. How did people throughout the world develop a relationship with Jesus or know the Bible at all before humanity could read? Or before the printing press? Or before the Bible in our hands was widely available? Those are all very modern things.

 

 

 

 

Isn't it amazing that people all over the world who have NEVER heard of Martin Luther have read the Bible for themselves and have come up with the same conclusion!

 

I'm happy that you have found rest in your faith as I have in mine.  I appreciate your prayers too!

[Parrothead]

Is the bolded above correct, or is the post below correct? Or have I forgotten what a mortal sin is?

 

 

Which is it? Sincere question.

How can one know the state of another's soul? Only God can know that. It is physically impossible to look at my devout friend and know she has her salvation. It is equally impossible to look at those Catholics who only attend Mass at Easter and know the state of their soul.

 

A mortal sin is any that grevious, serious, willful violation of God's commandments. http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/mortal_versus_venial.htm

 

ETA: to further answer your question, yes, the church teaches it is a mortal sin to miss mass willfully and without a good reason. I am currently in a state of mortal sin for this very reason. I hope to rectify that this evening.

 

As in the link I provided elsewhere in this thread, it is okay to miss mass due to distance, illness, work schedule, new baby, eminent death in the family, etc. there are any number of legitimate reasons to miss mass. Not feeling like going isn't one of them.

[ktgrok]

No offense, but I'm basically getting the impression from my Catholic sisters that if we aren't attending the one true Catholic Church (church as a whole) we may as well not bother with any of it. Apparently the Lutheran church we've most recently attended is full of doomed people, because somewhere along the line, Apostolic succession was broken.

 

Sorry, I'm angry. People have tried to tell me what Catholics believe about other Christians, but I believed surely that couldn't be true. Now we know.

 

I guess I don't believe God is quite that exclusive.

 

ETA: sorry, posted at the same time as the Mod. I'll bow out.

Just to clarify...all that talk of Mortal Sin probably sounded as if we were saying anyone that doesn't attend weekly mass is "doomed". Only a Catholic is required to attend Mass...other Christians are NOT thought to be in a state of mortal sin! We do believe that certain things are required for the Eucharist to occur..including valid ordination. So yes, we feel Jesus is physically (not just spiritually) present in the R.Catholic and E.Orthodox communion services. And in some Episcopal..but that one gets kind of tricky. Personally, I believe it is there, and it is fine, but there is some question in theological circles. That is all we KNOW. Now, yes, God may choose to make himeself present in other places and other ways, but we KNOW this way works. That is all. Catholicism teaches that there may be NO ONE in hell....certainly not all non catholics! WE don't think Protestants or Buddhists, for that matter, are "doomed".

 

Please don't interpret what has been said in that manner, it wasn't meant that way.

[I.Dup.]

Isn't it amazing that people all over the world who have NEVER heard of Martin Luther have read the Bible for themselves and have come up with the same conclusion!

 

I'm happy that you have found rest in your faith as I have in mine.  I appreciate your prayers too!

 

Regarding your first sentence, that is simply not true. There are very few Bible-believing, non-Catholic Christians who can agree on much of anything found inside the Bible itself.

 

Acts 8:30-31 (Douay Rheims)

³⁰ And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest?

³¹ Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

 

2 Peter 1:20

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

²⁰ Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.

 

 

 

Regarding your second sentence, you got it. :) And I always appreciate prayers as well. God bless you! :)

[milovany]

Isn't it amazing that people all over the world who have NEVER heard of Martin Luther have read the Bible for themselves and have come up with the same conclusion!

 

I'm happy that you have found rest in your faith as I have in mine.  I appreciate your prayers too!

 

But that's not the case, Jann.  Same conclusion about what specifically? Because whatever it is, I can guarantee you there are other protestants that believe differently about the same issue.  Were you referring to the symbolism of the bread and wine?  Some protestants believe this gift of the Eucharist is merely symbolic -- but some protestants don't (they do believe it is the actual body and blood of Christ).  Similarly, some protestants believe baptism is for infants and some protestants don't. Some protestants believe the sacraments impart grace and some protestants don't.  Some protestants believe salvation is "once for all" and some protestants believe it's a process that lasts a lifetime. So to say "people all over the world ... have come up with the same conclusion" based solely on reading the Scriptures is not correct. 

 

That's a main reason many of us have converted from protestantism to the ancient faith (some converted to Catholicism and some to Orthodoxy depending on which they believe to have come before the other).  We were weary of trying to figure the Bible out for ourselves, when (if we're honest with ourselves) we can see that a lot of different positions can be defended if one solely uses the Bible to try and figure things out. 

 

[Parrothead]

No offense, but I'm basically getting the impression from my Catholic sisters that if we aren't attending the one true Catholic Church (church as a whole) we may as well not bother with any of it. Apparently the Lutheran church we've most recently attended is full of doomed people, because somewhere along the line, Apostolic succession was broken.

 

Sorry, I'm angry. People have tried to tell me what Catholics believe about other Christians, but I believed surely that couldn't be true. Now we know.

 

I guess I don't believe God is quite that exclusive.

 

ETA: sorry, posted at the same time as the Mod. I'll bow out.

the Catechism restates positively that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the church which is His Body. What this statement does not mean is that you have to be a member of a Catholic Parish to be saved. We are bound by Christ's sacraments and commands but He is not bound by His own rules, laws, and pronouncements. He can extend His mercy to whoever He wishes. This concept was affirmed by the Vatican's Holy Office in 1949. From this article which may or may not be helpful coming at it from a non-catholic Christian perspective. http://www.agapebiblestudy.com/documents/is%20salvation%20possible%20outside%20the%20church%20.htm

[Parrothead]

John 6 goes along with my statements/beliefs as well--these elements were introduced at the end of a SYMBOLIC meal-- even the salt had special meaning... The meaning of the Passover meal was well known to those people speaking in the Bible

 

Please do not interpret my comments to mean that I in any way believe that Catholics are not Christian by any definition.

I'm just trying to say (apparently in a very awkward way) that faith is just that-- faith. I have faith in Jesus as the author of my salvation. From your comments, you apparently do as well.

 

I find it sad that Christians can be so judgemental toward other Christians-- "my beliefs are the only true ones-- your's might be fine but they are not as good/true as mine"... this makes Christianity in general not appear favorable to nonbelievers.

 

I apologize if I offended you.

 

No, you didn't offend me. Like you I've been there done that. We get,time and again, that Catholics aren't biblical. Nothing can be further from the truth. Everything we do has a biblical basis.

 

When you see John 6 as symbolic, we see it as a request .

[Parrothead]

It's not really about exclusivity because all Christians -- including Catholics -- believe "let all who will, come." It's about whether or not God by the Holy Spirit began a church (a physical/tangible one as well as a spiritual one) and whether or not that church still exists today. I'm not Catholic, but Eastern Orthodox, believing Orthodoxy predates even the Catholic church, although I fully am aware and respect that my Catholic friends here believe differently. I say that to say that while I'm not Catholic, we have the same belief in Orthodoxy (that there's a physical as well as spiritual church that existed at the beginning and still exists today), so I feel comfortable defending the belief.

 

Yes, we believe when Jesus handed the keys to Peter(you are Peter and on this rock...) He started His church.

 

Up until the time of the Great (and tragic) Schism there was one Christian Church. The church that Jesus Himself initiated. At the Schism we (Catholics) see the branches of Christianity splitting as a Y, then several hundred years later there were further splits from our branch which became CoE then the Reformation.

 

Did the church run by men need cleaning up and airing out? Yes. It whole heartedly did. And that did happen. While there have been slight changes over the millennia the Mass is still that which the Apostles did after Jesus' resurrection and ascension.

[MyThreeSons]

Really, the whole chapter builds up to John 6:53-59. Jesus spent a long time preparing his listeners for those verses. And if you read to the end of the chapter, you'll see the response of His listeners, who understood clearly that He was not speaking metaphorically. All left Him except the 12.

 

Please note that I didn't say that Protestants are beyond salvation. :-) I said that the Protestant communion is not the Eucharist.

Sorry -- I will have to go back and see which particular poster said that missing Mass to worship in a protestant church would be a Mortal sin.

 

But as to your reference for John Chapter 6, Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible shows that the word "eat" is used 15 times in the book of John. All 15 times, it was translated from the same Greek word (referenced as 5315 (phago) in the concordance.) So the same word was used to describe eating bread and manna, which does not confirm your statement about tearing flesh. It appears that it may be taken to mean devour or consume, but not necessarily.

[Saddlemomma]

I don't go to church for fun or entertainment. I go to worship and fellowship with other believers. While it may be true that you won't find Jesus in some churches with electric bands, motivational speakers, large youth groups, etc., my personal experience is that you may very well experience holy, reverent, solemn worship in such a church.

 

This exactly!

 

Our family moved from VT to northern ME in 2007.  We came from a very small, intimate church with fantastic worship team (just guitars and one keyboard) that was very spirit filled.  When we praised God, I could feel the Holy Spirit move within me.  However, here in ME, they are mostly Baptist churches.  Nothing wrong with them, but just now what we were used to.  We went to a Free Will Baptist church for 3.5 years here. 

 

One day I looked at my husband and just said that I didn't feel filled with the Holy Spirit anymore when we worshiped.  First of all worship time was only about 10 minutes (20-30 in VT) and you were looked upon in not so pleasant a manner if you dared to raise your hands.  I felt stymied.  Then it seemed as if the pastor was screaming at us quite a bit.  He would get red in the face and sometimes spittle would come out of his mouth.

 

My husband expressed the same sentiments and was almost relieved that I came out and addressed the situation.  Then dd chimed in and said she was getting absolutely nothing from Sunday School or Children's Church.

 

That clinched it for us.  We moved to a much larger (not necessarily what we wanted) We love it!  Although we can't get as involved as we would like due to distance, we do get to volunteer in some things.  The worship times is about 25-30 minutes of just praising God, lifting our hands and being reverent (nothing overt).  Yes they do have a much bigger and more extensive worship team, but it just enhances the worship time and they absolutely do revere the Lord. The pastor is fantastic.  I feel like he's speaking directly to me in the midst of 300 other parishioners.  It's hard to explain, but almost feel like he's sitting with us in our living room, gently but firmly teaching us.

 

I don't really consider myself any particular denomination.  IMHO, many Christians get too hung up on doctrinal things.  I believe in the core doctrines of Christianity.  Other than that, I just want to worship Jesus and learn more about Him and the Bible in general.  If I don't agree with some little doctrinal issue within the church I'm attending, I just don't pay attention to it unless it disrupts my ability to learn and worship.

[MyThreeSons]

We ended up registered at a parish that's two towns over from us because that turned out to be the best fit. Nobody gave us a hard time for technically living in another parish's boundaries.

This is a change in the Catholic church from when I was a kid. I knew families who had to drive to a church that was farther from their home simply because that's how the boundaries were drawn. They didn't have a choice as to which church they attended.

[MyThreeSons]

Wow-- so much hatred (also ignorance)... such a sad thread.

Jann -- you said it all so very eloquently, and with one hand, even.

 

I'm sure some of what I've posted has shown my ignorance, such as what are to me subtle differences between what the Lutheran church and Catholic church teach about what I call Communion.

 

But I sincerely hope that I haven't conveyed any hatred. If there is something for which I need to apologize, someone please point it out to me. (Not that I think Jann was directing her comment to me, but I have made several posts.)

[Parrothead]

Sorry -- I will have to go back and see which particular poster said that missing Mass to worship in a protestant church would be a Mortal sin.

 

But as to your reference for John Chapter 6, Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible shows that the word "eat" is used 15 times in the book of John. All 15 times, it was translated from the same Greek word (referenced as 5315 (phago) in the concordance.) So the same word was used to describe eating bread and manna, which does not confirm your statement about tearing flesh. It appears that it may be taken to mean devour or consume, but not necessarily.

It is not a mortal sin to worship in a non-Catholic Christian church as long as one has fulfilled one's Sunday obligation. Thinking of Sunday morning services here.

 

One must intend to sin for one's sin to be mortal. That can't be stressed enough. If Betty-Lou thinks, " I'm going to go have s3x with someone other than my husband today. I don't care what the Bible or the Church say." Then goes and does it, that is a mortal sin. It was a grave matter and she intended to sin.

 

When I went to Mass on Saturday evening to fulfill my Sunday obligation, then on Sunday morning went to see my friend's dd baptized in her Baptist church, I've not sinned.

[Avila]

Is the bolded above correct, or is the post below correct?    Or have I forgotten what a mortal sin is?

 

 

Which is it?  Sincere question. 

 

http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/epub/index.cfm

CCC 2181

2181  The Sunday Eucharist is the foundation and confirmation of all Christian practice. For this reason the faithful are obliged to participate in the Eucharist on days of obligation, unless excused for a serious reason (for example, illness, the care of infants) or dispensed by their own pastor.¹¹⁹ Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a grave sin.

 

This is the rule for Catholics.  This is not the rule for someone who is not Catholics.  Catholics have chosen to be Catholic.  When a Catholic is confirmed, he or she makes promises and assumes obligations.  This is one of them.

 

However, what Parrothead said is also true.  We cannot know the state of the soul of an individual Catholic -- or anyone, for that matter.  There are three conditions for a sin to be a mortal (or grave) sin: grave matter, full knowledge and full consent.  If someone is lacking in the knowledge or is not, for whatever reason, able to give full consent, the sin MAY not be mortal for that person at that time.  Some Catholics don't know their faith.  The obligation is still there, but their moral culpability for it may be lessened. 

 

The Church does NOT teach that non-Catholics will all go to hell.  In the end, we are all at the mercy of Christ when we stand before him at the end of our lives.  God have mercy on us.

 

As far as the rest of the predictable mess this thread has become -- a Catholic said she is thinking about leaving the Church but that she feels like this is wrong probably doesn't want to convert. My answers were as one Catholic to another Catholic, who I will pray for and honestly wish for God's blessing on. 

[Penelope]

I am Protestant, but I do not believe going to church is about our feelings, "experiencing God" with our feelings, or about how good the sermons are or whether the pastor is reaching our hearts most of the time, or any such things.

 

I think that this emphasis on our feelings and our own needs and wants in the church is a huge problem in some modern American Protestant churches.

[MyThreeSons]

I think a little grace and respect for both sides is due as clearly Catholics and Protestants see things very differently here.

Again, I hope that I haven't come across as not respectful.

[Parrothead]

This is a change in the Catholic church from when I was a kid. I knew families who had to drive to a church that was farther from their home simply because that's how the boundaries were drawn. They didn't have a choice as to which church they attended.

Yes, that was done away with a while back. One can attend whichever parish one likes.

[marbel]

How can one know the state of another's soul? Only God can know that. It is physically impossible to look at my devout friend and know she has her salvation. It is equally impossible to look at those Catholics who only attend Mass at Easter and know the state of their soul.

 

A mortal sin is any that grevious, serious, willful violation of God's commandments. http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/mortal_versus_venial.htm

 

ETA: to further answer your question, yes, the church teaches it is a mortal sin to miss mass willfully and without a good reason. I am currently in a state of mortal sin for this very reason. I hope to rectify that this evening.

 

As in the link I provided elsewhere in this thread, it is okay to miss mass due to distance, illness, work schedule, new baby, eminent death in the family, etc. there are any number of legitimate reasons to miss mass. Not feeling like going isn't one of them.

 

OK, thanks, I was confusing "mortal" with "unforgivable" sin.   

 

I agree that a person should not judge another person's heart or soul or salvation; only God can know that.  I think though it would be very hard take a person's profession of faith seriously if that person skipped mass 50 times a year while knowing that it's a mortal sin.  It would be hard to imagine a person skipping church most of the time but making it to confession. 

 

Anyway, probably best not to get into all that; I was just confused by the mortal sin comment.

[Parrothead]

I am Protestant, but I do not believe going to church is about our feelings, "experiencing God" with our feelings, or about how good the sermons are or whether the pastor is reaching our hearts most of the time, or any such things.

 

I think that this emphasis on our feelings and our own needs and wants in the church is a huge problem in some modern American Protestant churches.

Can I like this? We (Catholics) have the same problem on pretty much (it seems) the same level. I personally don't think church should be about what the individual wants. But what the individual can give to God.

 

Church isn't about worshipping ourselves.

[Avila]

I am Protestant, but I do not believe going to church is about our feelings, "experiencing God" with our feelings, or about how good the sermons are or whether the pastor is reaching our hearts most of the time, or any such things.

 

I think that this emphasis on our feelings and our own needs and wants in the church is a huge problem in some modern American Protestant churches.

 

I agree!  Feelings change. Sometimes they are not real.  God is always there.  I don't always FEEL Him there, but that does not change the reality of His presence.  It is so easy to get wrapped up in feelings and not see truth.  I don't think that is a Catholic or non-Catholic issue.  It is a human issue. 

 

And it is a universal problem. 

[Whereneverever]

You have to understand how reverently those of us treat the Eucharist to fully understand what we mean. What do you do with the unconsumed grape juice and crackers? Do you throw them in the rubbish or down the drain with other sewage? That is just awful to those of us who believe it is truly His body and blood. Why would we throw Jesus out with the trash??!! KWIM? Or, is it thrown back in the package to be used again next week - or used for some other purpose (snacks for the kids). Again.. .that would be very disrespectful to those of us who believe in the True Presence .

My liturgical, conservative Lutheran synod believes it is the real body and blood. We take Jesus at His words that this IS His body and blood. We use bread and wine, not juice. Leftovers are consumed not disposed of in the garbage. We don't subscribe at all to it being symbolic. The Protestant umbrella has a huge amount of diversity and I think it bothers people when it's all painted with one stroke as if it is uniform.

 

ETA: We bow when we approach the rail, cross ourselves after we receive, have a chalice not just little plastic cups, ect.

[Parrothead]

For those who don't know what Unforgivable or Eternal sin is:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_sin

[MyThreeSons]

I'm with Monica. I'm a bad catholic but I will never be a Protestant.

I'd really like to know what it means to be a bad Catholic, and why you would never be a Protestant. BTW, I find it interesting the you capitalize the one word and not the other. "Catholic" without the capital letter has a very different meaning than with it.

[Parrothead]

I'd really like to know what it means to be a bad Catholic, and why you would never be a Protestant. BTW, I find it interesting the you capitalize the one word and not the other. "Catholic" without the capital letter has a very different meaning than with it.

Not who you quoted, but I may be able to address the Catholic Protestant capitalization thing. On my iPad if I type out catholic the iPad assumes the "universal" definition and does not auto correct. If I type out Protestant it autocorrects to a capital "P".

[Ellie]

No offense, but I'm basically getting the impression from my Catholic sisters that if we aren't attending the one true Catholic Church (church as a whole) we may as well not bother with any of it. Apparently the Lutheran church we've most recently attended is full of doomed people, because somewhere along the line, Apostolic succession was broken.

 

Sorry, I'm angry. People have tried to tell me what Catholics believe about other Christians, but I believed surely that couldn't be true. Now we know.

 

I guess I don't believe God is quite that exclusive.

 

ETA: sorry, posted at the same time as the Mod. I'll bow out.

 

No one has suggested that non-Catholic Christians are doomed. Not one. We have only said that the Eucharist exists in the Catholic Church, and that Jesus was speaking literally when He said that the bread was His body and the wine was His blood. No one can tell the state of someone's soul except for God.

[Tiramisu]

For the OP, if I simply went to my local parish and many of those around, my faith would be at risk. 

 

I believe Jesus is in the Eucharist at every Catholic church, but I had to work at finding a Catholic church that teaches and does what Catholic churches are supposed to and offers the fellowship and community that I also need. I believe the Catholic Church offers the fullness of truth with the sacraments to assist us on our journey, so I can't imagine leaving, though things certainly happen that anger and distress me and I still go through my own personal dry periods. 

 

That said, I've been very blessed by Protestant brother and sister friends and can't imagine where I'd be without all their spiritual support. 

[Audrey]

The title says it all. I am Catholic and lately I haven't been getting much from Mass. I have been Catholic my entire life and I doubt I would ever convert. That said, there are things that have bothered me about my local church. I have some good friends who go to a non dem. Protestant church that has a wonderful youth group, lots of families and a very intense and motivational preacher. My current church lacks all of the above. I guess I'd like to see how it is to go this church and experience something different.

 

Is this terrible? Is this okay? I am feeling like I'm betraying my current religion? Thoughts?

 

 

In most things, I believe that if I am feeling something is wrong, then I simply don't do it.  I would look for other ways to resolve the issue. 

[Hunter's Moon]

In most things, I believe that if I am feeling something is wrong, then I simply don't do it.  I would look for other ways to resolve the issue. 

 

I think this is fantastic advice for all aspects of life!

[MyThreeSons]

The Catholic Church does not require anything that Jesus did not say for us to do. The only things Catholics must do to be Catholic are be baptized, receive communion, confess our sins.

Each one of those sacraments is Biblical and given to us by Jesus.

... snip ....

 

  

The Catholic Church is a Biblical church. We do believe what the BIBLE teaches.

Ah, but just a simple example: It is my understanding that confession in the Catholic church means confessing to (through?) a priest. And he tells you what penance you must do to gain forgiveness. And part of your confession includes stating how long it has been since your last confession.

 

I don't find any of that in the Scriptures anywhere. I can confess and be forgiven multiple times a day, just between me and God.

[marbel]

In most things, I believe that if I am feeling something is wrong, then I simply don't do it.  I would look for other ways to resolve the issue. 

 

This is good advice, but I would take it a step further. 

 

Why do you think it is wrong? Is someone telling you it's wrong?   Do you have a rational basis for it being wrong?    Or does it just feel wrong?  

 

Explore why you feel the way you do.  Write it down. Pray about it.  Discuss it with someone you trust to be honest and forthright with you.