What motivates protestants

[Semalsia]

[quote name='Sojourner']Without that, I think all the intellectual arguments in the world would not have led me to change.[/quote]

This might be off topic, but I think that also applies to conversion from atheism to theism. That requires some kind of emotional religious experience too, and that intellectual stuff alone is not enough.

[littleflower+JMJ]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Feb 24 2006, 02:56 AM']I'm not sure what a Sunday School answer is, but here's mine: the Eucharist.

No protestant or non-denominational group has this bread of life, and there is a hunger inside of people that gives the Eucharist an undeniable pull. It is also the #1 reason why lapsed Catholics return to the faith.

[i]I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh. The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? So Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever.[/i]
[right][snapback]896432[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The summit of our faith!

For those who find the Truth in the Catholic Church, where else could they be but with Him in the most fullest way?

[ironmonk]

Arguements from logic and reason...

[url="http://catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0002.html"]http://catholiceducation.org/articles/apol...ics/ap0002.html[/url]
[url="http://www.peterkreeft.com/featured-writing.htm"]http://www.peterkreeft.com/featured-writing.htm[/url]
[url="http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio.htm"]http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio.htm[/url]

God Bless,
ironmonk

[photosynthesis]

[quote name='Revprodeji' date='Feb 24 2006, 03:52 AM']ok, im gonna get heat for this and perhaps my precious phisy that im sure is coming.

but why should a protestant abandon their faith and convert? I dont want prejudice comments and belittlements. Within our faith and Her ecumenical efforts what is the reason for return? many read Ut Unum sint as not demanding return, but unity. What advantage is in a protestant returning?

please no sunday school answers. Justify something. I dialogue with many protestants with advanced degrees and great visable faiths. To simply say a sunday school answer not only disrespects them, but perhaps ourselves for taking such a stance.

let the games begin
[right][snapback]896418[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Cardinal Arinze always says in his podcasts that some things are so easy to understand and obvious that you don't need long-winded answers in "scholarese." All you have to do is ask the 2nd grader in CCD.

As other people have said, I think this question can be expanded to apply to anyone, even Catholics. Why be Catholic? Why not be Buddhist or Muslim or an Atheist? Why submit to the Pope? Everyone, even cradle Catholics, eventually makes a choice...to be Catholic, or not Catholic.

To suggest that Vatican II wanted all religions to coexist with one another instead of communing with one another with one shared faith, one baptism, all under the Pope, would deny everything Vatican II was about.

I fell away from the church, then had a conversion experience + dabbled in Protestantism for awhile. I could have stayed there and been Protestant for the rest of my life. The reason why I came back to the Catholic Church, though, was because I longed for tradition. I knew that throughout history the apostles + those who succeeded them gave catechesis to the faithful, and I had a problem with the idea that reading the Bible was the ONLY way to know + experience God. I knew there had to be something more.

That's only one reason I came back to the Church and remain in the Church... I stay because I am in love.

[Quietfire]

This is a longish story with a simple answer.

I was baptised in the Catholic faith, but I was not raised in the faith. If I attended Mass 5 times in my life, that would be pushing it. Never fully understanding what the Church was, I grew up completely Protestant. I had grown up believing that God wouldnt care where you go as long as you showed up, either in body or spirit.

Being part of a Protestant denomination demanded that I had to eventually take a good look at their beliefs. The first key issue that I recognized was 'authority'. Who has this authority and where did it come from? In my own church at the time, no one had a clue. In studying the faith of my church, even I couldnt answer the question. Plus the fact that our church was more of a character church...the pastor was everything, even when he went against his superiors. We accepted his word above all others. If he felt that his superiors were wrong on an issue, then most of the time he did his own thing, often without us even realizing that he was going against his superiors. This all came to light when he decided to retire. I then started to think that once we got a new pastor, one that we had to choose (after all, according to others in the church, we had to like him and get along with him and make sure he wouldnt go against everything we held dear. ???) then what if this pastor decided that he would go against his superiors as well, even if it were over issues that were sensitive to our faith?

That was my first taste. I realized that my pastor was going against his superiors on an issue that was so old, no one even remembered what it was originally. It wasnt Scriptural I was told, it more had to do with the fact that the Presbyterian faith performed a certain way and our pastor found it too rigid, but it was still a protest on the part of my pastor. He then made a statement when he was asked what it meant by the word 'Protestant'. He would, during the course of a sermon use the words Catholic and Protestant to describe faith, but never Presbyterian, which was our denomination. He replied that "everything outside the Catholic Church is Protestant, because we 'protest' against the Mother Church."

But then why do we recite the Apostles Creed? Even the part that states, "We believe in One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church". We were in fact, professing a belief, a creed, that although we refused to be one with the Church, we were part of her. She was our mother, from whom we came from. Yet we would not be subject to her authority.
But why? or rather, why not? Nobody knew, in fact in the end, the Presbyterian faith didnt split from the Church, it split from another Protestant denomination and therefore, to the layman, even that would be confusing.

In the end, I had to take an even harder look. For example, I had no problem believing in the Saints. There was nothing in my denomination, as far as I knew, that demanded that I refuse them. And even if the Presbyterian faith in general does not accept the belief in the Saints, it would still be "ok", according to my pastor, if I chose to believe in the Saints.

Well this was confusing. Someone has to have the authority spoken of in Scripture. It's either there or not. Since it was made clear in Scripture that someone had that authority, then it was important to my eternal soul to find out who. I never questioned that the keys were given to Peter, although quite honestly to most Protestants, I think their view is that Peter has the keys to the kingdom of heaven and keeps the gates locked and you have to get by him first in order to enter the pearly gates so that you can then hang out with God. Ok, so this authority was given to Peter, without trying to read between the lines, add to it what you think it means, try to deny what you know it means, everything openly pointed to Peter as the man, the one whom Christ would build his Church on. So what next? Well, according to Scripture, this Church, the one that Christ would build off of the confession of Peter with Peter now holding the keys, plus the fact that he also had the power to bind and loose...would never end. He also would, along with the others, pass this on first to those who would continue to preach the Gospel and second, and most important, choose one to continue to be their leader, their shepard.

So Peter is the main man in my mind, and this is getting scary for me. Because it seemed to be pointing to the Catholic Church, the one Church I never looked into when considering which church to attend. This was the same church that was always the blunt of the jokes when religion was bought up. This was the same church that we always said 'did one thing but stated the opposite'. This was the same church that we always felt that it was wrong that you had to be a 'member' in order to receive communion. But its getting scary because that would mean that Peter is the first Pope, even if he didnt call himself that. That is what the Church eventually called those who held the keys and sat in the seat of Peter.

To address those issues, I had to look even deeper. Ok, the church is still viewed as the blunt of jokes, but only if your an ignoramous. In learning about her, its easy to understand where all the misconceptions are made and the failures to understand what the real meanings are. Sometimes it easier (read...lazy) to just not bother and instead make jokes.
As far as saying one thing and stating something opposite, that charge can only fall to those within the church, not the Church herself. The Church states a truth, and the faithful fail to listen and learn. For example, how many of us can honestly state that we know someone (maybe ourselves) who is Catholic, says that they're Catholic, and their life shows the exact opposite? such as.. he goes to Church when its convienent for him, yet still complains about going. He complains about giving money to support his Church, even accusing the Church of being "rich" while millions starve, he picks and chooses what doctrines of the Church he wants to believe, maybe going so far as to question some of the Dogmas as well...and doesnt seem to mind every now and then of getting the upper hand on a shady business deal, a mistake at the checkout when the cashier gives him back too much change or forgets to actually charge him for a particular item, or he fails to return a 'borrowed' item from a friend. Allows his eyes to rove or even openly considers adultery, meaning he may discuss it with his friends but would never think of talking about it to a priest. I can go on and on about this...
But....is it only Catholics that do this? I know it is not. 30,000+ denominations outside and away from the Church prove that fact.
Is this the fault of the Church? I know it is not. One cannot blame the Church as a whole in the failure of a laymen to get involved in his faith, to understand what she teaches and what God truly wants for him. She can only do so much, and as a mother, will not force her children to do what they know (in thier heart)is faithfully and morally right. They may deny it now, but in the end, we must all answer that question alone. That is the short answer to that issue. To explain it in full would require a book and this post of mine is already starting to look like that!

So the final issue, participating in communion. This is the key issue. We (my Presbyterian church) called it the breaking of bread in memory of Him,and all were welcome. But if you look at the Gospel of John you will see that it isnt just a breaking of bread, it was more. [url="http://members.aol.com/SocratesMG/index10a.html"]Read this to understand[/url]the Catholic Church's view on the Gospel of John and see the compelling arguement. The Catholic Church teaches that Christ is in the Eucharist. This was something that I had never understood or bothered to understand, How can Christ be in a wafer? This had to be false, and if so...(as an excerpt from that site states) then they speak of the "Real Presence" of Christ in the Eucharist (His body, blood, soul and divinity being present), and therefore encourage their followers to actually worship the work of human hands as if it were God! (although I myself never accused the Church of worshiping any other than God, I admit I was ignorant on the issue of the "Real Presence")On the other hand, should it be true that the Son of God is in fact actually present under the appearance of bread and wine in the Eucharist, then true followers of Christ will quite naturally fall to their knees in homage and worship before their beloved Lord. Those who would choose to ignore Him would do so only at the greatest of perils, for it was Jesus Himself who said: "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you."

So in the end, everything hinged on the Eucharist. After spending a few months mulling that over in my mind and doing some furious studying of the subject, and actually taking longer to admit it as a truth that I can now no longer afford to ignore or deny, it became obvious why one must be a 'member' before receiving communion. It wasnt a communion in memory of Jesus, it wasnt a communion with man and each other, but rather it is a Holy Communion with God. Does it not make sense that if you do not understand what that means, then how can you blindly demand to be a part of it. You come to the alter asking to receive God in the most intimate of ways, yet you do not even understand what you are doing, or what you are asking. Is that not blasphemy? Is that not complete and utter ignorance? Is that not insane?

That was the long answer. The short answer is Authority, History, and the most important...the Eucharist.

This is the same answer again and again on this thread. This will always be the difference between the True Church and all those outside, or Protestors (Protestants).

Pax.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Feb 24 2006, 04:56 AM']No protestant or non-denominational group has this bread of life, and there is a hunger inside of people that gives the Eucharist an undeniable pull. It is also the #1 reason why lapsed Catholics return to the faith.

[i].... The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? So Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; .... [/i]
[right][snapback]896432[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

This isn't entirely true about all non-Catholics. I had the opportunity a few days ago during a Q&A session with a local priest to ask how the Catholic Church can say that Protestants have eternal life if Christ specifically said that those who do not eat his flesh and drink his blood have no life within them. He didn't have an answer for that, except to first point out that all the Orthodox and some Episcopals, Anglicans, and even Lutherans do believe in the substance of bread and wine changing into Body and Blood of Christ. Other than that, he said that God is the ultimate judge, so we can't determine anyone's salvation purely from their theology.

As for my answer to why Protestants should return: to receive God's grace through the sacraments, especially Reconciliation and the Eucharist, to be joined in one common faith with so many great saints, and because you can have your cake and eat it too... you don't have to give up praise and worship music or your charismatic prayer group or good preaching... you can find all that, not in every parish but probably closer than you expected, and still receive Christ in the Eucharist.

Of course, good luck convincing a well educated and convinced Protestant theologian of these things.

[Myles Domini]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' date='Feb 26 2006, 04:51 PM']This isn't entirely true about all non-Catholics. I had the opportunity a few days ago during a Q&A session with a local priest to ask how the Catholic Church can say that Protestants have eternal life if Christ specifically said that those who do not eat his flesh and drink his blood have no life within them. He didn't have an answer for that, except to first point out that all the Orthodox and some Episcopals, Anglicans, and even Lutherans do believe in the substance of bread and wine changing into Body and Blood of Christ. Other than that, he said that God is the ultimate judge, so we can't determine anyone's salvation purely from their theology.

[right][snapback]898086[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Its a shame when one hears of priests giving such unstudied answers. I am a revert of only 3 and a half years and I know how to answer that question better. Its shameful

If you want the actual answer to your question read chapter 23 of Mgsr Ronald Knox's book 'The belief of Catholics':[url="http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=5785#XVIII"]Catholics and those outside[/url].

[Socrates]

[quote name='Revprodeji' date='Feb 24 2006, 01:52 AM']ok, im gonna get heat for this and perhaps my precious phisy that im sure is coming.

but why should a protestant abandon their faith and convert? I dont want prejudice comments and belittlements. Within our faith and Her ecumenical efforts what is the reason for return? many read Ut Unum sint as not demanding return, but unity. What advantage is in a protestant returning?

please no sunday school answers. Justify something. I dialogue with many protestants with advanced degrees and great visable faiths. To simply say a sunday school answer not only disrespects them, but perhaps ourselves for taking such a stance.

let the games begin
[right][snapback]896418[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I myself am a "cradle Catholic," but my parents were both converts from protestantism (Church of Christ, which is rather anti-Catholic).

My dad says his first experience with the Catholic Church was when he was a boy and he "snuck out" to a mass with a Catholic friend. He said he had a sense of the presence of God there that he didn't get in his protestant church.
His actual conversion would come years later, after much debating with Catholic friends. He began reading materials given to him by Catholics, which he at first attempted to refute, but eventually came around to the Catholic side. For him, the thing that convinced him the most intellectually was the history of the Church. Only the Catholics could trace their Church back to St. Peter, and Christ. All protestant denominations could be traced back to a particular founder much later.

My mom converted after she was married. After studying the Catholic Faith, she began to realize that some of the teachings of her own demonination were false and contradictory, and could no longer intellectually accept the truth of her old church. (I forget now what the particular issues were.) The Catholic Faith made more sense, and she figured that had to be the true Christian Church.

Of course, everybody's exact conversion story will be unique, but protestants can and do convert to the Catholic Faith. I think the bottom line is: if you become convinced the Catholic Church is the True Church founded by Christ, why settle for anything less?

[Era Might]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Feb 26 2006, 03:18 PM']My dad says his first experience with the Catholic Church was when he was a boy and he "snuck out" to a mass with a Catholic friend.  He said he had a sense of the presence of God there that he didn't get in his protestant church.
[right][snapback]898230[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

hehe. Now that's rebellion! :

That's true though, about the sense of God's presence. I went to a Baptist Church once, for a Bible study, and I could just feel the difference. Not to say the people there weren't holy or didn't know Jesus; but the Church felt like an ordinary building. It didn't have that sense of God's abiding presence.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Myles' date='Feb 26 2006, 12:58 PM']Its a shame when one hears of priests giving such unstudied answers. I am a revert of only 3 and a half years and I know how to answer that question better. Its shameful

If you want the actual answer to your question read chapter 23 of Mgsr Ronald Knox's book 'The belief of Catholics':[url="http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=5785#XVIII"]Catholics and those outside[/url].
[right][snapback]898093[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I read through most of what Knox said there, but I'm not sure that he didn't say basically what the priest I asked said. What the priest was getting at is as a Catholic, believing Christ was talking about literally eating his flesh and drinking his blood, how can you give an answer to those who claim to follow Christ while saying that Jesus was only talking about spiritually communing with His flesh and blood? The only answer is that God judges everybody according to the light of Truth that was revealed to them and whether they chose to say "yes" or "no" to God. That seems to be what Mgsr Knox is saying, but am I missing something?

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Light and Truth' date='Feb 24 2006, 06:10 PM']I can't speak for those who have converted, but one of the major things that draws me to it is a sense of a more tangible religion in following Christ.  Maybe the idea that you can believe in something more, like saints the way most Protestants don't.
[right][snapback]897009[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

It's not a 'sense' of anything. I mean, the Eucharist tastes like a dry, thin piece of bread. I don't know who, but one of the early church father's exclaimed something to the effect of 'oh, how my senses fail me' when he was talking about the physicality of the Eucharist. Christ IS present in the Eucharist, Body, Blood, Heart and Soul. That's what every Christian believed for 1500 years and what Catholics have believed for two milleneia. The Gospels are chock-full of references on the matter...most of which are from Christ's own mouth... The Eucharist IS a miracle Catholics are graced with at every Mass...it requires total abandonment of what our physical senses tell us is real. THAT is real faith...believing in something when every sensibility tell you its not possible. Like believing in the Resurrection.

If Protestants could just get their heads around the Blessed Sacrament...they wouldn't want to be anything but Catholic.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Veridicus' date='Feb 27 2006, 12:41 AM']If Protestants could just get their heads around the Blessed Sacrament...they wouldn't want to be anything but Catholic.
[right][snapback]898612[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

...Eastern Orthodox

The Holy Eucharist is important, but it's not the ONLY consideration.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Feb 26 2006, 11:45 PM']...Eastern Orthodox

The Holy Eucharist is important, but it's not the ONLY consideration.
[right][snapback]898616[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Touché...but I don't really consider Orthodoxy in the same class as Protestantism...that's just me though.

[N/A Gone]

so, i got orders and I wont be back til next week...I really wanna respond to a few of these things

[photosynthesis]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Feb 27 2006, 12:45 AM']...Eastern Orthodox

The Holy Eucharist is important, but it's not the ONLY consideration.
[right][snapback]898616[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
yeah... i think it's more along the lines of the fact that the Catholic Church has the fullness of truth. the Eucharist is certainly part of that fullness.

[jswranch]

[quote name='Revprodeji' date='Feb 24 2006, 01:52 AM']but why should a protestant abandon their faith and convert?
[right][snapback]896418[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


No faith is 'abandoned' when being reconciled to the Catholic Church. Faith in a particular denomination or doctrine is abandoned. One's faith is more fullfilled in 'coming home' to Rome. Our 'separated breatheren' have the truth of the trinitarian baptism, but not the fullness of truth. If one says, "I could not abandon my faith, stop my relation with Christ, and restart with Catholicism," he is clearly misguided.
The Vatican II documents describe this very well:

[url="http://www.rc.net/rcchurch/vatican2/"]http://www.rc.net/rcchurch/vatican2/[/url]

Nostra Aetate:
The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these
religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct
and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in
many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often
reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she
proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ, "the way the truth, and the
life" (John 14, 6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious
life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself (4).

and

UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO
It follows that the separated Churches[23] and Communities as such,
though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of
salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as
means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of
grace and truth entrusted to the Church.

[N/A Gone]

good replies..im finishing my reply now. Just tryin to keep everyone waiting..

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Revprodeji' date='Mar 7 2006, 10:11 AM']good replies..im finishing my reply now. Just tryin to keep everyone waiting..
[right][snapback]905181[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I love how you keep posting to tell us you're going to post ...

[homeschoolmom]

We have very short attention spans...


... oh, looky! banana pudding!!

[N/A Gone]

Im sorry, I had to go to ft knox for a day, and now our interent doesnnt work in our building.

plus, as a hybrid I want to make sure my statements are proper before posting them on this forum with this sensitive issue