MegaChurch or Catholic Church?

taylormarshall.com ^ | August 26, 2013 | Dr. Taylor Marshall

[NYer]

Megachurch. Two young ladies. Both had left the Catholic Church. Both were now attending “megachurches.” We had a good chat together. I wanted to understand their reasons for why they left the Catholic Church for a megachurch.

Joel Osteen’s Lakewood Megachurch
43,500 weekly attendance

I was at the bank and somehow I got into a spiritual conversation with two Hispanic executives that worked there.

Why the Megachurch?

When I asked why they exchanged the Catholic Church for the megachurch, they gave me a number of reasons:

1. “My new church has an iPhone app. I can go on my iPhone and get Bible studies, sermons (video and audio). When I travel I can still watch the sermon, either live or later. I feel apart of the community.”
2. “The preaching is dynamic and speaks to my life. I find practical encouragement.”
3. “I felt judged at the Catholic Church.”
4. “People were not friendly or welcoming at the Catholic Church. The first time I went to my new church, I was welcomed by so many people.”
5. “My new church has classes and courses that are interesting and helpful.”
6. “The music is better.”
7. “In the Catholic Church, they use a lot of words that I did not understand.”
8. “People pray for each other and know each other (in the megachurch).”

Although these two ladies didn’t articulate it explicitly to me, I could tell that they were very proud of their new churches. I could also discern in them a surprise that I am so “spiritual” and yet I am very excited about being Catholic. They assumed the “with it” people were leaving Catholicism for the bigger and better and deal.

I asked them what they miss about being Catholic. They replied with two answers:

1. “There are not any crosses in my new church. I know it makes some people feel uncomfortable, but I wish we had crosses.”
2. “What will I do when I die?” They were both unclear about whether they could get anything like Last Rites at the megachurch.

What About the Eucharist?

I asked both about the Eucharist: “Don’t you miss the Eucharist?”

This question didn’t phase them one bit. “Oh we still have communion. They pass out little crackers and cups of juice. I like this better because I thought drinking from one big cup is icky. Spreads germs.”

“But in the Catholic Church,” I replied, “we believe that the Eucharist is the real Body and Blood of Jesus?”

I may as well have said, “Don’t you know that there are Martians in my back pocket.” She was unaware that the Catholic Church taught this. No idea.

The Problem

This, my brothers and sisters, is the crux of the problem. These girls were raised as Catholics, but did not know about the Eucharist. They did not know that the Eucharist is God. They did not understand the Holy Eucharist is the center of the Catholic tradition.

So when they compare our ho-hum Catholic music and pedestrian sermons to snazzy well produced musical productions and highly polished bulleted sermons from handsome professional speakers…where are they going to go?

If they had believed that the Holy Eucharist is truly the Lord Jesus Christ, then they would have stayed. This is the task of the New Evangelization if there is going to be one. Can we communicate the mystery of Eucharist. If we fail in that, everyone is leaving the building.

Godspeed,
Taylor

PS: I don’t mean to suggest that having the Holy Eucharist is an excuse for bad music, bad vestments, bad architecture, and bad sermons. The Eucharist is like a precious diamond. It deserves a platinum setting…not a plastic setting. We can’t say, “Well, we have the Eucharist – so you’re forced to stay and have a miserable experience every Sunday.” We can’t keep the sacraments hostage to mediocracy.

PPS: With 1 billion strong, the Catholic Church is the real megachurch!

Pope Francis at Rio de Janeiro
3 million people

[count-your-change]

How does “parthenogenesis” sound? quite a different thing.

[metmom]

How does “parthenogenesis” sound? quite a different thing.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3059418/posts?page=1347#1347

verga: Post 1347: The scientific term is Pathogenesis;

Now, about that public school education and apology demanded......

FOTFLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

[count-your-change]

Now who needs “reinforcements”, Mr. verga? Noah Webster is on his way!

[metmom]

So Christ's work on the cross wasn't sufficient?

There are things suffering does. Paying for sins is not one of them. Only the shedding of blood can obtain forgiveness and forgiveness is the only way sin can be taken care of. It CANNOT be paid off because the wages of sin is death and we cannot pay that penalty.

Suffering produces character qualities in us.

Romans 5:1-5 Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.

Suffering teaches us compassion for each other and gives us the ability to comfort others who are suffering.

2 Corinthians 1:5-7 For as we share abundantly in Christ's sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too. If we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation; and if we are comforted, it is for your comfort, which you experience when you patiently endure the same sufferings that we suffer. Our hope for you is unshaken, for we know that as you share in our sufferings, you will also share in our comfort.

There is NOWHERE in Scripture, however, that teaches that suffering cleanses or purifies us from sin.

[metmom]

No argument there.

All those who have faith in Christ feel an obligation to share Christ with others.

[metmom]

Yes, our Bible is better. It has not been defaced by mere men. It was compiled under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and has not been “edited” like other religions’ bibles.

Nonsense.

Nobody edited the Bible. It was at the Council of Trent where the Apocryoha was ADDED to Scripture. For the first 1500 years of Catholicism, the only canon that was recognized is the one that Catholics call the Protestant Bible.

When Martin Luther translated the Bible, he did it in keeping with the prevailing thought and teaching of the day and while he did translate the Apocrypha, he, as the Catholic at the time, did not consider it canon.

Boatbums has posted the history with cited documentation to support it before in this thread.

Perhaps she can do it again as it is clear that somehow the message is not getting across because Catholics keep repeating the same error over and over again.

[metmom]

I am sure that there are some Catholics who read the Bible. I know some, but precious few who admit to it.

I do not doubt that your parish encourages the laity to read the Bible. I told you before that I’d take your word for it; that you didn’t need to email me a copy of the bulletin (which BTW, only encourages people to read it but is no proof that they do.)

[metmom]

Here is Young’s Literal Translation of the Bible and a link for more research in the even that any Catholics are willing to take an honest, thinking outside the box, look at the Greek.

It’s clear that you are correct that Peter was affirming heaven’s decisions.

http://biblehub.com/matthew/16-19.htm

and I will give to thee the keys of the reign of the heavens, and whatever thou mayest bind upon the earth shall be having been bound in the heavens, and whatever thou mayest loose upon the earth shall be having been loosed in the heavens.’

[CynicalBear]

>>Sorry if I touched a nerve.<<

A nerve? You had me laughing. The snide remark about “Obviously, the KJV of the Bible would downplay that” was so incredibly wrong.

>>As I said, we also believe the Holy Spirit comes to all of us, but to the Apostles and their successors in a special way.<<

Well, you can disagree with the Holy Spirit speaking through Peter all you want.

Acts 15:8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them All the rest of those verses you listed do NOTHING to change what Peter said in Acts 15:8.

>>We follow Scripture very closely<<

Now there is a statement that has been proven false innumerable times in these threads.

>>Are you denying that parts were deleted from the original Scripture text to form the King James bible?<<

Oh here we go with the apocrypha again. Let’s just let Paul explain what was in the Old Testament as scripture.

"Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2 Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God," (Rom. 3:1-2).

Guess what. NO apocrypha included. Not to mention even the many of the RCC church fathers didn’t recognize it as scripture. Jerome didn’t even translate it into Latin believed that the Jews recognized and established the proper canon of the Old Testament.

>>Peter said that sentence in reference to the Gentiles.<<

Um dude. We are all Gentiles. You surely aren’t suggesting the so called “magesterium” are the only Gentiles are you?

>>As I stated before: the Spirit comes to all of us in different ways.<<

Ok, you’re going to have to furnish scripture to prove that one.

>>The gifts of the Spirit are unique to each of us, as we know.<<

Now that’s a different subject. The gifts are different to each but not the Holy Spirit given to each. Again:

Acts 15:8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them >> In Acts 1:20 we see the office of leadership passed on.<<

No way does Acts 1:20 establish Apostolic succession other than replacing a lost episcope. An overseer or it could be the office of bishop or elder. No apostolic succession.

>> If you choose to read a version that some earthly King or disgruntled Priest or Billy Bob slashed parts out of, that’s your choice.<<

Nice try but the “original” as Paul explained in Romans was set by the Jews and proclaimed by Jesus and the apostles and had no apocrypha.

>>I would assert we love it most because we believe it as the Spirit inspired it to be written and we don’t presume to alter it in any way.<<

The RCC alread “altered” it by adding the apocrypha to what the Jews had already established as the Old Testament canon. Don’t deny what Paul said.

[CynicalBear]

Now where on earth did you get the idea that the “Protestant” organization were ever declared 100% correct? I have seen no one on these threads declare that. How could they be? They are all daughters of the RCC and as such have retained many errors of her. It’s scripture that is 100% correct and is the only source to be relied on for doctrine.

[count-your-change]

Since Peter was affirming heaven’s decision then it follows that the whole basis for the notion of papal infallibility is, in fact, false.

[CynicalBear]

Well said and done!

[CynicalBear]

>> Romans 2:2-8 tells us we gain eternal life by perseverance in good works.<<

“Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.” John 6:28-29

>>Salvation is not that simple.<<

Acts 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Matthew 11:30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

"For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. ..." Galatians 5:1-26

"For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery." Galatians 5:1

"This matter arose because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves." Galatians 2:4

[verga]

Parthenogenesis- gee I am sorry I misspelled the word and you didn't go back to see that I spelled it correctly the first time. And you wonder why I don't ever take you seriously.

[verga]

Go back and read the original I don’t have time to deal with you.

[Religion Moderator]

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal!

[Melian]

I can cite as many texts and more saying works are needed. Also, don’t forget the story of the unprepared virgins. Obviously their hearts were in the right place but they didn’t follow through with action. We know what happened to them.

Not sure what the slavery passages have to do with it. I don’t think they proved your point. Living in the Church Christ started, in the way He wanted us to, is not slavery. It’s joy.