I think I'm in the process of converting to Catholicism

[WisdomTree]

While we wait for a proper question from the OP, I would like to add that the reason the recent trend of the Catholic Church deciding to justify all of her dogmas and doctrines through scripture is not because it wants to proselytize individual Protestants back into its folds, but rather to have understanding between them so that we can have a proper dialogue. The Catholic Church has always cared about non-Catholics Christians and for that reason wanted them back into their fold though the means were questionable at times...

 

[Albion]

While we wait for a proper question from the OP, I would like to add that the reason the recent trend of the Catholic Church deciding to justify all of her dogmas and doctrines through scripture is not because it wants to proselytize individual Protestants back into its folds, but rather to have understanding between them so that we can have a proper dialogue. The Catholic Church has always cared about non-Catholics Christians and for that reason wanted them back into their fold though the means were questionable at times...

The fact is that there are several different levels of looking at this phenomenon.

One concerns the motivation on the RCC's part for engaging in such dialogue. The idea that this was done as an act of collegiality with reformed Christians may be what you'd like to believe, but that's not what religious professionals have said about it.

Then too, there is that other matter that is related to the first. I refer to the Roman Catholic Church adopting a slew of Protestant practices that it had condemned since the Reformation. The experts have reported that this was done in order to keep down the drift of Catholics over to Protestant churches. That's not to say that it was done in order to attract Protestants to convert to the Roman church, you understand, but to stem its own losses.

In any case, I'd rather that she did all of this for any reason rather than remain the church she was prior to Vatican II.

 

[MoreCoffee]

The fact is that there are several different levels of looking at this phenomenon.

One concerns the motivation on the RCC's part for engaging in such dialogue. The idea that this was done as an act of collegiality with reformed Christians may be what you'd like to believe, but that's not what religious professionals have said about it.

Which religious professionals?

Then too, there is that other matter that is related to the first. I refer to the Roman Catholic Church adopting a slew of Protestant practices that it had condemned since the Reformation. The experts have reported that this was done in order to keep down the drift of Catholics over to Protestant churches. That's not to say that it was done in order to attract Protestants to convert to the Roman church, you understand, but to stem its own losses.

Which experts?

In any case, I'd rather that she did all of this for any reason rather than remain the church she was prior to Vatican II.

 

[shturt678]

The fact is that there are several different levels of looking at this phenomenon.

One concerns the motivation on the RCC's part for engaging in such dialogue. The idea that this was done as an act of collegiality with reformed Christians may be what you'd like to believe, but that's not what religious professionals have said about it.

Then too, there is that other matter that is related to the first. I refer to the Roman Catholic Church adopting a slew of Protestant practices that it had condemned since the Reformation. The experts have reported that this was done in order to keep down the drift of Catholics over to Protestant churches. That's not to say that it was done in order to attract Protestants to convert to the Roman church, you understand, but to stem its own losses.

In any case, I'd rather that she did all of this for any reason rather than remain the church she was prior to Vatican II.

The RCCs do have a "another faith" than what I consider valid, ie, based upon a core base that even you and I as Protestants have a "another faith" obviously, scrutinizing your words, and your being non-refutable nor correctable. The framework should be based upon what is a valid definition of a justifying faith, building the framework up from there.

Just ol' old refutable and correctable Jack

 

[shturt678]

Which religious professionals?


Which experts?

Drink more coffee or Chai tea? Good to see your alert, ie, antenna's up

Just ol' old Jack have to depart for a little

 

[MoreCoffee]

Drink more coffee or Chai tea? Good to see your alert, ie, antenna's up

Just ol' old Jack have to depart for a little

Well "religious professionals say" is about the same as a TV interviewer saying "I has been said that you beat your wife, when did you stop?"

And "experts observe" has about the same weight.

It's like opinions, everybody's got some and most are not worth much, right?

 

[shturt678]

Well "religious professionals say" is about the same as a TV interviewer saying "I has been said that you beat your wife, when did you stop?"

And "experts observe" has about the same weight.

It's like opinions, everybody's got some and most are not worth much, right?

Collectively worth a temporary high, ie, my opinion is valid' and the rest are in error. btw the high doesn't last long thus "let us all be in error and our Lord Christ Jesus be true."

Just ol' old "left" Jack, your ol' friend that doesn't want to be 'left' behind.

 

[steve_bakr]

I currently identify as either a Methodist or an Anglican. Someone convinced me that there is a lot to be said for Catholic doctrine. I'm still not sure, though.

Although there are a lot of doctrinal considerations, I believe that being a devoted Catholic is a matter of the heart. It was the Eucharist and the Mass that spoke to my heart. In the beginning, I had doctrinal issues too, but doctrine is not the core element of Christianity; the core element of Christianity is that God self-communicates to us in grace through Jesus Christ. And he does that at every Mass.

If you are a lay theologian, the two greatest Catholic theologians in recent times are Karl Rahner and Hans Urs von Balthasar. Don't try to read Rahner without help; he's extremely difficult to read. If you searchword: Rahner on your Kindle, buy, The Theology of Karl Rahner, by Steven Buller. Former Pope Benedict XVI, Karl Ratzinger, was also a good theologian in his day. There is also Marechal, Blondel, and many others.

If you are really finding yourself drawn to Catholicism, GT is perhaps the worst place to start a thread of this type. There are many people here who are only too happy to dissuade you from becoming a Catholic and would consider it a victory to succeed.

GT is too polarized into a Protestant vs Catholic conflict. Don't let your spiritual life become mired by that kind of thinking. You might consider starting a similar thread in OBOB where you will receive a lot of support.

 

[Cappadocious]

Hey.

So you know, there's us, too.

Tidbit of interesting stuff:

jbburnett.com | the human person

 

[steve_bakr]

The fact is that there are several different levels of looking at this phenomenon.

One concerns the motivation on the RCC's part for engaging in such dialogue. The idea that this was done as an act of collegiality with reformed Christians may be what you'd like to believe, but that's not what religious professionals have said about it.

Then too, there is that other matter that is related to the first. I refer to the Roman Catholic Church adopting a slew of Protestant practices that it had condemned since the Reformation. The experts have reported that this was done in order to keep down the drift of Catholics over to Protestant churches. That's not to say that it was done in order to attract Protestants to convert to the Roman church, you understand, but to stem its own losses.

In any case, I'd rather that she did all of this for any reason rather than remain the church she was prior to Vatican II.

This is a good example of a Protestant vs Catholic mindset. When I became a Catholic, it became less of a competition between two traditions and more of a spiritual decision about how I can best live out my faith in Jesus Christ. For me it is the Catholic Church and for my wife it is the evangelical church. For you it is the Anglican Church.

 

[shturt678]

Hey.

So you know, there's us, too.

Tidbit of interesting stuff:

jbburnett.com | the human person

Just have to bring Sola Scriptua aboard, and we're rolling together.

Just ol' old 'rolling' Jack

 

[Cappadocious]

Scriptures aren't the problem, but the interpretation thereof!

 

[shturt678]

Scriptures aren't the problem, but the interpretation thereof!

Does one core-base one's interpretation upon "Holy Tradition," or "Scriptures" or "Holy Tradition" + "Scriptures" or ?

My point: it's the factual objective core-base one needs to base any interpretation upon, correct, eg, "faith" is sujective.

Just ol' old Jack

 

[Cappadocious]

Does one core-base one's interpretation upon "Holy Tradition," or "Scriptures" or "Holy Tradition" + "Scriptures" or ?

The Holy Tradition v. Scriptures thing is silly IMO.

factual objective core-base

If such an absurdity existed, it would only be accessible via the subjective, rendering it functionally subjective.

 

[shturt678]

The Holy Tradition v. Scriptures thing is silly IMO.


If such an absurdity existed, it would only be accessible via the subjective, rendering it functionally subjective.

Thank you again.

Just ol' old leveretbrain 'Jack'

 

[Bill McEnaney]

I'm just wondering if anyone here has any thoughts or arguments for or against.

I'm too tired to argue for Catholicism and too new here to post the link I hope to post. For now, I'm going to suggest a source that astounded a Greek Orthodox acquaintance of mine when I quoted it. In Calvin College's online Christian Classics Etherial Library, you'll find Protestant historian Philip Schaff's 38-volume set of writings from the Early Church. Hendrickson Publishing Company, a Protestant firm, sells a printed edition of it, too, thank God.

What part of it surprised the monk? In the volume about the first seven ecumenical councils, you'll find the documents from the Council of Ephesus that met in 431 to condemn the Nestorian heresy. The Historical Introduction to that council tells me that the council's Fathers believed that their council infallibly and that Pope Celestine taught with St. Peter's authority.

 

[bitznbitez]

I think much of that which has gone on recently (last couple centuries or so, especially post-Vatican II) has been an effort to make the Catholic church more palatable for Protestants/Evangelicals.

I used to think that way. Its application in the US and Europe has certainly taken it that way. But many of the changes, diversity of liturgies and so on and so forth, are perhaps more focused on the hope of unity with the east. In the end its not "either or" its "and".

To the OP "come on in the waters fine". I converted to the Catholicism a couple years ago.

 

[Knee V]

I used to think that way. Its application in the US and Europe has certainly taken it that way. But many of the changes, diversity of liturgies and so on and so forth, are perhaps more focused on the hope of unity with the east. In the end its not "either or" its "and".

To the OP "come on in the waters fine". I converted to the Catholicism a couple years ago.

I find it interesting that you would feel that way. I haven't seen much that would convince me that the Vatican is all that interested in ties with the eastern churches. Perhaps you have more details?

 

[Knee V]

I find it interesting that you would feel that way. I haven't seen much that would convince me that the Vatican is all that interested in ties with the eastern churches. Perhaps you have more details?

Other than Pope Francis meeting with Patriarch Bartholomew recently.

 

[bitznbitez]

Apparently I inadvertently resurrected an old thread. I'll let it return to the bone pile.