Is anyone a revert here?

[ChicanaRose]

Has anyone here left the church once and came back?

What made you homesick?

Were you always conscious of your Catholic identity while attending another church (since you are still technically a Catholic)?

 

[anna ~ grace]

Hey! Well, sort of. Was baptized Catholic as an infant, but raised Lutheran by my mom.

Was taught to ridicule and look down on Catholics growing up.

Since coming to Christ as an adult, I have developed a deep appreciation for Catholic Saints, spirituality, how they view following Christ, art work, traditional architecture, religious orders, and history. But mostly, it's about following Christ as a Catholic Christian. Even as a Baptist, entering a Catholic Church filled me with inexplicable joy and happiness. Like, on some level, "I remember this...".

 

[chevyontheriver]

Has anyone here left the church once and came back?

What made you homesick?

Were you always conscious of your Catholic identity while attending another church (since you are still technically a Catholic)?

Are you back, or wanting to be back?

 

[ChicanaRose]

Are you back, or wanting to be back?

I know I am still technically a Catholic because I have never been ex-communicated or anything like that. I still identify myself as "originally a Catholic" or "from a Catholic background."
I am not back to going to Mass yet, but have started feeling homesick lately.

But I want to make sure that the feeling is not flesh-based, or based on my own spiritual deficiency such as:

-Missing social connection: Missing people I've known for years in the Church.
-Cultural shock: Starting to feel overwhelmed in a Protestant church, as time passes and I find out more about it.
-Superficial liturgical elitism: Being stumbled by people who walk into Protestant services sipping Starbucks cup; missing the beautiful church setting (the altar, the stained glass, the candles, the kneeler, and the music)
-Emotional clutch/ being a creature of habit: The Catholic practices have been part of my spiritual life for years that I easily stumble without them.
-Amazement over the church's stance on social justice and family issues: In comparison to what I am finding elsewhere.

etc.

(edited to comply with SoP)

 

[ChicanaRose]

Even as a Baptist, entering a Catholic Church filled me with inexplicable joy and happiness. Like, on some level, "I remember this...".

Thanks for sharing Gracia. I posted on OBOB forum and not in the general area because I didn't want to be talked out of going back by anyone. I'm wanting to process this in peace, hearing experiences of reversions.

 

[anna ~ grace]

Thanks for sharing Gracia. I posted on OBOB forum and not in the general area because I didn't want to be talked out of going back by anyone. I'm wanting to process this in peace, hearing experiences of reversions.

That's fine! Feel free to share your thoughts and feelings here.

 

[Gnarwhal]

But I want to make sure that the feeling is not flesh-based, or based on my own spiritual deficiency such as:

-Missing social connection: Missing people I've known for years in the Church.
-Cultural shock: Starting to feel overwhelmed in a Protestant church, as time passes and I find out more about it.
-Superficial liturgical elitism: Being stumbled by people who walk into Protestant services sipping Starbucks cup; missing the beautiful church setting (the altar, the stained glass, the candles, the kneeler, and the music)
-Emotional clutch/ being a creature of habit: The Catholic practices have been part of my spiritual life for years that I easily stumble without them.
-Amazement over the church's stance on social justice and family issues: In comparison to what I am finding elsewhere.

Maybe I can offer some perspective on a couple of those points? I'm not a revert, but I grew up and spent my entire life until about four years ago in an evangelical protestant church.

If I were you, I wouldn't worry about culture shock, liturgical elitism or being a creature of habit.

The protestant environment is like a nutritionally deficient meal. It simply does not, nor will it ever, have what you need to live a well-balanced life in Christ. They might offer a couple of food groups but they don't have the whole pyramid. The Catholic Church, however, does.

As far as "liturgical elitism" I think in this age of modernism, secularism, and relativism, that the timeless and ancient liturgies of the Church should be a source of pride, wonderment, awe; an inspiration for devotion to our Lord, and above all: worship. I've never felt so in tune with the God of the universe as when I attended a Latin Mass (and that wasn't even the full Tridentine Latin Mass, it was a Latin Novus Ordo!)

There's a reason these things lasted for 2,000 years though: they work! They're prescribed by the divine physician himself! Who are we to deviate from that?

Finally, there's nothing wrong with being a creature of habit. Some of the holiest Saints had habits and routines that elevated them closer to the heart of Jesus. Entire religious orders are devoted to habits (pardon the pun) like, for example, praying the Divine Office. Instead of allowing a habit to be a source of complacency, let it be an opportunity for self-discipline. There are so many ways in the Catholic way of life to discipline ourselves in our faith, it's just a matter of resolving to tap into that.

 

[ChicanaRose]

Maybe I can offer some perspective on a couple of those points? I'm not a revert, but I grew up and spent my entire life until about four years ago in an evangelical protestant church.

I'm not exactly a cradle Catholic either. I've had exposure to it since childhood through school, but never officially converted until adulthood through RCIA.

I want to make my decision carefully because once I go back (i.e. revert), that would be final.

 

[Gnarwhal]

I'm not exactly a cradle Catholic either. I've had exposure to it since childhood through school, but never officially converted until adulthood through RCIA.

I want to make my decision carefully because once I go back (i.e. revert), that would be final.

That's fair. I was careful about my decision as well. I can trace my conversion all the way back to 2006 when I started having a lot of doubts and questions about the protestant way of doing things. Along the way I explored Orthodoxy, I looked at Anglicanism, and I read a lot of theology and Church history. My ex-wife sidetracked me because she had no interest in liturgical Christianity, let alone Catholicism so there was a 1-2 year period there where I wasn't moving in any direction at all.

I didn't join RCIA until October, 2015 and wasn't Confirmed until Easter, 2017. It was a long ride, but it was worth it. I can say without any doubt that it was carefully considered, I weighed my options, I did my due diligence, and ultimately my desire for a close relationship with Jesus lead me to the Catholic Church.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I know I am still technically a Catholic because I have never been ex-communicated or anything like that. I still identify myself as "originally a Catholic" or "from a Catholic background."

I do not mean this in any nasty way at all, but it's not about being technically Catholic, but living your life as a faithful Catholic. You can come back at any time by simply making a good confession.

I am not back to going to Mass yet, but have started feeling homesick lately.

It does make sense. Take your time and think it through.

-Missing social connection: Missing people I've known for years in the Church.

Friends are good but we should be willing to forsake them in favor of the Lord. That said, it's a natural desire to maintain friends.

-Cultural shock: Starting to feel overwhelmed in a Protestant church, as time passes and I find out more about it.

The grass is always supposedly greener on the other side. But picking the right place is not a function of where the grass is greener. It's where we should go to tend the grass, so maybe we should go to the more barren place. We tend to think that only Catholic churches have scandals, but that isn't exactly true. We should go where we are called, not where the grass is greener.

-Superficial liturgical elitism: Being stumbled by people who walk into Protestant services sipping Starbucks cup; missing the beautiful church setting (the altar, the stained glass, the candles, the kneeler, and the music)

They actually do the Starbucks thing? Today we had the memorial of St. Michael the archangel. It got me thinking of the difference between where I went today and a place where they sip Starbucks coffee. And it came down to who we think is there in the building with us. A Catholic church will have seraphim and cherubim, angels and archangels, and all of these are here because Jesus Christ is here too. Who is present in the Protestant churches you have been to? In other words, is the coffee making up for something that is missing? Or is the coffee in addition to the presence of Jesus and the thousands of angels attending on Him? The beauty of the Catholic Church is to show us a glimpse of heaven. The holy water and the sign of the cross and the kneeling are to help us see the bit of heaven we are entering. I don't think it is wrong to wonder about the Starbucks or to appreciate the beauty of an ordinary Catholic church. It's much more than liturgical elitism.

-Emotional clutch/ being a creature of habit: The Catholic practices have been part of my spiritual life for years that I easily stumble without them.

You can do many spiritual practices on your own. For example, the Rosary can be done in private.

-Amazement over the church's stance on social justice and family issues: In comparison to what I am finding elsewhere.

This is getting to the meat of the matter.

A hundred years ago every denomination of Protestant taught that contraception was absolutely wrong. But they all changed their doctrinal teaching on this and now allow it. Catholics didn't change. So now we are the odd guys out. Catholic moral teaching is pretty darn consistent, consistent over time and internally consistent. It may not always be explained well, but it goes way way back. In fact, it is newly explained very well as part of pope John Paul's Theology of the Body. It's actually profound.

Another matter is the whole LGBT thing. Some Protestants are fanatically against any person with an aberrant sexuality, hating the sinner. Others seem to be eager to approve of any aberrant sexuality, loving the sin. Some manage to hate the sin but love the sinner. That's the Catholic position, not to hate a person who has moral troubles, nor to approve of the sin. It's a tough balance to maintain, We will have that position until the end of time. Sure we have our own turmoils, but I don't have to worry about everything changing in five of fifty years.

 

[Gnarwhal]

They actually do the Starbucks thing?

Oh yeah. It's...horrifying.

A hundred years ago every denomination of Protestant taught that contraception was absolutely wrong. But they all changed their doctrinal teaching on this and now allow it. Catholics didn't change. So now we are the odd guys out. Catholic moral teaching is pretty darn consistent, consistent over time and internally consistent. It may not always be explained well, but it goes way way back. In fact, it is newly explained very well as part of pope John Paul's Theology of the Body. It's actually profound.

Another matter is the whole LGBT thing. Some Protestants are fanatically against any person with an aberrant sexuality, hating the sinner. Others seem to be eager to approve of any aberrant sexuality, loving the sin. Some manage to hate the sin but love the sinner. That's the Catholic position, not to hate a person who has moral troubles, nor to approve of the sin. It's a tough balance to maintain, We will have that position until the end of time. Sure we have our own turmoils, but I don't have to worry about everything changing in five of fifty years.

I've actually been reflecting on this recently, and how so many churches try to "change" to stay alive (like some say, "adapt or die") and yet, I really think change itself is what kills a church. If something is changing, then it inherently has to reach a state of non-existence at some point. But if something is UNchanging, like the Catholic Church, then it will always be. The Church has survived so much longer than any other group would've, from the Lord's divine protection, and I think part of that at least comes from the Church's steadfastness and unwillingness to bend on dogma and doctrine.

Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it, modernists!

I kid but only kinda.

 

[Markie Boy]

Much of Catholicism has embarked on the "Change to stay relevant and part of culture" thing, and it's been a disaster.

We have a group in our area that is trying to turn that back, and it's like pounding nails with a feather duster!

I am sort of a revert - but once I reverted I am deeply second guessing how wise it was, and if either Eastern Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy isn't a much more original path.

 

[Romans 13:3]

I would humbly suggest there is a big difference between the two.

I am sort of a revert - but once I reverted I am deeply second guessing how wise it was, and if either Eastern Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy isn't a much more original path.

 

[Gnarwhal]

I am sort of a revert - but once I reverted I am deeply second guessing how wise it was, and if either Eastern Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy isn't a much more original path.

Someone else mentioned 'the grass is always greener'. Orthodoxy has it's own messes, a lot of it owing to phyletism out the wazoo!

 

[Chrystal-J]

I grew up in a family that basically atheist, but my dad's aunt was a believer. Since my dad wanted to please her (and he was on the fence religiously), we went to church. Not a lot of it sunk in because of family influences, so I quit going to church at around 20. I didn't start going again until 28, then quit going again. But, something kept pulling me to the Church. One day I was walking down the street and I walked in front of Catholic church. I just walked in and attended Mass. I've been going ever since. That was about 15 years ago. My faith has grown tremendously since then.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

I didn’t go join something else, but there were about 20 years where I just forgot about church altogether. Now I’m one of the more active members of the Parish.

 

[Markie Boy]

It's always nice to stay on topic for the OP. So I'll say this. Nothing made me homesick. I was in a great Baptist church.

But certain things they taught I just can't reconcile with Jesus teaching in the Bible - like the strong Faith Alone element. There are so many passages that just don't line up with Faith Alone that I could never be a Baptist or Lutheran, or any other faith that uses that as it's foundation.

My daughter and I had a discussion on "Strive to enter thru the narrow gate". Striving sounds like we are doing something more than Faith Alone.

My old Baptist church is actually less mixed up on many issues and less liberal than the Catholic Church where I am, but they still have a false foundation.

 

[ChicanaRose]

I was also thinking recently about spiritual formation.

In the Catholic church, RCIA is almost a year;
First Communion is 1 - 2 years. ​

But in evangelical churches, you just need to take a 6-week new membership and 2-week baptism classes (or even less in some churches) to be initiated.

We wouldn't go into marriage with just 6-weeks preparation.

Even queen Esther received 6 months beauty treatment before being presented before a human king.

I feel like it cheapens the meaning of Communion when people are ill-prepared to join the table of the divine King.

What do you all think?

 

[chevyontheriver]

I was also thinking recently about spiritual formation.

In the Catholic church, RCIA is almost a year;
First Communion is 1 - 2 years. ​

But in evangelical churches, you just need to take a 6-week new membership and 2-week baptism classes (or even less in some churches) to be initiated.

We wouldn't go into marriage with just 6-weeks preparation.

Even queen Esther received 6 months beauty treatment before being presented before a human king.

I feel like it cheapens the meaning of Communion when people are ill-prepared to join the table of the divine King.

What do you all think?

I think the longer time can be good if the time is well spent on good formation. For some people though a much shorter process would be just fine. RCIA was developed for someone unbaptized with little to no experience in the Christian faith. Many many people in RCIA though are baptized and have already read themselves into being Catholic and it's a waste of time and energy for them. Some, and I've seen this, should be LEADING the RCIA class rather than attending it. Basically, things do need to be tailored to the individual needs of the person who is already a faithful baptized person.

 

[Markie Boy]

I was also thinking recently about spiritual formation.

In the Catholic church, RCIA is almost a year;
First Communion is 1 - 2 years. ​

But in evangelical churches, you just need to take a 6-week new membership and 2-week baptism classes (or even less in some churches) to be initiated.

We wouldn't go into marriage with just 6-weeks preparation.

Even queen Esther received 6 months beauty treatment before being presented before a human king.

I feel like it cheapens the meaning of Communion when people are ill-prepared to join the table of the divine King.

What do you all think?

I'm not so sure. I'm more for quality than quantity. I was in RCIA several times before finishing. It was painfully boring, and really not moving or that educational.

And when the Ethiopian eunuch said what's to keep me from being baptized, they found some water and it was done. Nobody said - wait, you gotta work on this for a year.