Posted on 04/04/2008 11:01:22 AM PDT by Gamecock
Last week I received the following e-mail, and I felt it would be best to share my response here on the blog.
Dear Mr. White, For someone considering converting to Catholicism, what questions would you put to them in order to discern whether or not they have examined their situation sufficiently? Say, a Top 10 list. Thanks.
When I posted this question in our chat channel a number of folks commented that it was in fact a great question, and we started to throw out some possible answers. Here is my "Top Ten List" in response to this fine inquiry.
10) Have you listened to both sides? That is, have you done more than read Rome Sweet Home and listen to a few emotion-tugging conversion stories? Have you actually taken the time to find sound, serious responses to Rome's claims, those offered by writers ever since the Reformation, such as Goode, Whitaker, Salmon, and modern writers? I specifically exclude from this list anything by Jack Chick and Dave Hunt.
9) Have you read an objective history of the early church? I refer to one that would explain the great diversity of viewpoints to be found in the writings of the first centuries, and that accurately explains the controversies, struggles, successes and failures of those early believers?
8) Have you looked carefully at the claims of Rome in a historical light, specifically, have you examined her claims regarding the "unanimous consent" of the Fathers, and all the evidence that exists that stands contrary not only to the universal claims of the Papacy but especially to the concept of Papal Infallibility? How do you explain, consistently, the history of the early church in light of modern claims made by Rome? How do you explain such things as the Pornocracy and the Babylonian Captivity of the Church without assuming the truthfulness of the very system you are embracing?
7) Have you applied the same standards to the testing of Rome's ultimate claims of authority that Roman Catholic apologists use to attack sola scriptura? How do you explain the fact that Rome's answers to her own objections are circular? For example, if she claims you need the Church to establish an infallible canon, how does that actually answer the question, since you now have to ask how Rome comes to have this infallible knowledge. Or if it is argued that sola scriptura produces anarchy, why doesn't Rome's magisterium produce unanimity and harmony? And if someone claims there are 33,000 denominations due to sola scriptura, since that outrageous number has been debunked repeatedly (see Eric Svendsen's Upon This Slippery Rock for full documentation), have you asked them why they are so dishonest and sloppy with their research?
6) Have you read the Papal Syllabus of Errors and Indulgentiarum Doctrina? Can anyone read the description of grace found in the latter document and pretend for even a moment that is the doctrine of grace Paul taught to the Romans?
5) Have you seriously considered the ramifications of Rome's doctrine of sin, forgiveness, eternal and temporal punishments, purgatory, the treasury of merit, transubstantiation, sacramental priesthood, and indulgences? Have you seriously worked through compelling and relevant biblical texts like Ephesians 2, Romans 3-5, Galatians 1-2, Hebrews 7-10 and all of John 6, in light of Roman teaching?
4) Have you pondered what it means to embrace a system that teaches you approach the sacrifice of Christ thousands of times in your life and yet you can die impure, and, in fact, even die an enemy of God, though you came to the cross over and over again? And have you pondered what it means that though the historical teachings of Rome on these issues are easily identifiable, the vast majority of Roman Catholics today, including priests, bishops, and scholars, don't believe these things anymore?
3) Have you considered what it means to proclaim a human being the Holy Father (that's a divine name, used by Jesus only of His Father) and the Vicar of Christ (that's the Holy Spirit)? Do you really find anything in Scripture whatsoever that would lead you to believe it was Christ's will that a bishop in a city hundreds of miles away in Rome would not only be the head of His church but would be treated as a king upon earth, bowed down to and treated the way the Roman Pontiff is treated?
2) Have you considered how completely unbiblical and a-historical is the entire complex of doctrines and dogmas related to Mary? Do you seriously believe the Apostles taught that Mary was immaculately conceived, and that she was a perpetual virgin (so that she traveled about Palestine with a group of young men who were not her sons, but were Jesus' cousins, or half-brothers (children of a previous marriage of Joseph), or the like? Do you really believe that dogmas defined nearly 2,000 years after the birth of Christ represent the actual teachings of the Apostles? Are you aware that such doctrines as perpetual virginity and bodily assumption have their origin in gnosticism, not Christianity, and have no foundation in apostolic doctrine or practice? How do you explain how it is you must believe these things de fide, by faith, when generations of Christians lived and died without ever even having heard of such things?
And the number 1 question I would ask of such a person is: if you claim to have once embraced the gospel of grace, whereby you confessed that your sole standing before a thrice-holy God was the seamless garment of the imputed righteousness of Christ, so that you claimed no merit of your own, no mixture of other merit with the perfect righteousness of Christ, but that you stood full and complete in Him and in Him alone, at true peace with God because there is no place in the universe safer from the wrath of God than in Christ, upon what possible grounds could you come to embrace a system that at its very heart denies you the peace that is found in a perfect Savior who accomplishes the Father's will and a Spirit who cannot fail but to bring that work to fruition in the life of God's elect? Do you really believe that the endless cycle of sacramental forgiveness to which you will now commit yourself can provide you the peace that the perfect righteousness of Christ can not?
You claim that site says "that she, "by her obedience" undid sin." I don't see that.
It’s on this page http://www.maryundoerofknots.com/history.htm
It describes sin as “the knot of disgrace for the human race”, and claims that “Mary, by her obedience, undid it”.
I’ve seen the page.
I have not seen there she undid the knot of sin, which is your claim.
What I find distressing on these threads is the lack of love. All we have as Christians, as human beings even, we have because God loved us. The day we were created, Christ was there, the Word forming our being, writing His own death sentence- but we were worth it to Him. We have caused Him more grief than any son born has caused his own Mother and yet he loves us still. Do I know for absolute certain that I am saved? No I don’t- I don’t know what kind of person I’ll be tomorrow, or ten years from now- I know God thought free will worth the price and so I work out my salvation in fear and trembling.
I do know I love my Lord. I know he loves me. I do my best with the gifts he gave me to serve him as well as my imperfections allow and everyday of my life I fall short of what His love demands, for I am the greatest of sinners. Maybe not if you quantify it down to the tiniest jot- a red ant is twice the size of a black ant, you know- but when we look down at them they are all ant-sized. My smallest sin is so great, so repelling to the majesty of God, that it required the blood of He who loved me most to wash it away. What a gift! What a mercy!
And so He loves us all. Once we see that, how could we help but love Him in return. To love Him is to serve Him. I;m not saying that this love excuses us from proselytizing those who do not have the fullness of the faith, whether you believe that fullness is Catholic or Calvinist, but for pity’s sake, for the sake of our Lord bleeding on that cross and suffering the anguish of a billion human hells, let us do what we do in love!
Let love, His love, form every word that pours forth from us in His defense, and the defense of what He has given us. Love demands love- without love there will be no conversions, no charity, no unity. So my brothers and sisters posting here, remember our Lord, and love one another.
What else could be the phrase “knot of disgrace for the human race” mean, in a proclaiming Christian context? Especially since the site claims it was “based on the parallel made by Saint Paul between Adam and Christ. Saint Irenaeus, in turn, made a comparison between Eve and Mary” ?
It is difficult to be charitable with the uncharitable, or to show love to those who come to these threads with malicious black hearts intent to pitch all manner of insults, slanders, slurs and sneering derision at your faith.
It means what it says, not what you want it to say. It does not say she undoes the sin (or have I missed that quote?), it says she undoes the knot of disgrace.
What on Earth is a “knot of disgrace”, if not sin? If not sin, is it a mere short coming on our Earthly plans? If so, is Mary then the RCC version of Tony Robbins?
How exasperating it must be that you cannot rearrange the words of this website to fit the criticism you want to fling—you know, the criticism of what it does not say.
So help me out. What can meant by the phrase, “knot of disgrace for the human race” - in the context of “the parallel made by Saint Paul between Adam and Christ”?
But it is nevertheless what we are called to do. Was not our very own Lord spat upon, beaten, ridiculed, sentence to the most ignominious death devised at that time? Yet out of love He turned the other cheek, allowed Himself to be led to the slaughter, a willing sacrifice. And how do we repay that love? By turning on our lost bretheren like wolves. He asks of us nothing more than what he has already shown can be done.
All who profess themselves Christians are slaves of Christ. No matter how mistaken or misguided, they are the property of their Master, as are we. A little charity is very cheap compared to the Price that was paid for whomever you are arguing with.
Of course we are.
And how do we repay that love? By turning on our lost bretheren like wolves.
Speak for yourself.
I’m sorry if this has come across personally. I find so much to sorrow over in all these threads lately, Catholic flamebait, protestant flamebait, you’re post about feeling driven away struck me, so I responded in a general way to an individual post. Please forgive me any offense I have caused you.
Please, also, pray with me for an increase in charity in these threads.
I will do so.
Meanwhile, may we who are Catholic find better work in the Lord’s vinyard. Certainly, by staying away, we won’t be bait for more vitriol.
*****************
I can't disagree, ROE, that it is often seems best to step away. It's clear that there are some who appear to be filled with hatred, and seem to believe they are entitled to unleash that hatred upon others. Still, one might also argue that we are instructed to be "soldiers of Christ". Call me conflicted. :)
Good points.
He was certainly playing The Game.
And what is your understanding of the Immaculate Conception?
Demonstrate that you are not playing “the Game” by answering the question:
What can meant by the phrase, “knot of disgrace for the human race” - in the context of “the parallel made by Saint Paul between Adam and Christ”?
I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that the reason so many RC's fall such sad prey to such hideous blasphemy and idolatry . . . is because . . .
instead of a steady vision of CHRIST LIFTED UP . . .
AND THEN CHRIST AND HIS TRAIN FILLING THE TEMPLE . . .
All they see is the RC edifice and all the idols and similar distractions.
ANYONE WHO HAS EVER HAD AN EMPHATIC, IMPACTFUL, BURNING-TO-THE-BONE-MARROW VISION OF THE RISEN CHRIST
won't settle for cheap UNBiblical also rans . . . of any sort or name . . . ever again.
Maybe that should be more our prayer focus . . . less against, per se, satan's tool with the Magnificent Magical Earth-Mother Mary caricature . . . and more that they see CHRIST LIFTED UP . . . to the point that they realize . . . woe is me, a man of unclean lips and fingers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.