It Is Finished

Thank you all for your time in helping me understand Catholic dogma.

I have decided to stay Lutheran. Your time was not wasted, because I now understand what you believe. I can not reconcile with Catholicism. Sorry if some do feel their time was wasted.

God bless you all.

Hey, you have to do what makes the most sense to you - as do we all.

Best wishes to you in your journey! :slight_smile:

I do wish you the best. Time spent here is never wasted. But please consider, now that you do know and understand what the Catholic Church teaches, how will you explain to God on your last day that you turned away from the Truth when it was presented to you?

I’m not starting up a whole new debate for you - I’m just offering something for you to consider as you travel the road you have chosen.

God bless.

~Liza

May God bless you on your journey. It is commendable that you took the time for discernment in regards to Catholicism. You “tested everything” and believe you are holding on to what is true. What more can we ask of you? Other than stick around of course :thumbsup:

I was not able to reconcile Catholicism to myself either. In fact I was not able to reconcile Christianity with myself at all. I realized (or rather the Spirit awoken in me) that it was I who had to change. :wink: I had to reconcile to Catholicism (and to our Lord), not it to me. Now if you believe that Catholicism does not reconcile with Biblical Christianity, that is a total different matter. You and I would disagree, but it is quite different than why I was originally unable to reconcile with Catholicism.

By the way thank you for the birthday wish the other day.

God bless you

Hey Tristan - Well, thank you for posing some thought provoking questions that made for some great conversation. Just because you have decided to stay Lutheran does not mean you aren’t still welcomed on this board.
God bless you.

Thank you all for being understanding and kind :smiley:

I won’t say Catholicism isn’t Biblical Christianity. I will not say it isn’t the True Church. But, what I will say is that I do not know if it is Biblical Christianity or the True Church, and that it is not for me.

My calling is in the Lutheran Church. Though, at the end of the day, we are all still Christians. :smiley:

In the past I ran an RCIA program for those coming into the Church. I always emphasized to enquirers that you don’t seek to become Catholic. You seek truth. If one is sincere in that quest, he will eventually end up where God wants him.

Years ago in Maine a Baptist minister ran a missionary boat. He once told us that God gave each of us a ;map and a compass. We do best if we follow the map He gave us using the compass He gave us. If we try using another’s compass we are going to get lost.

I can relate. I choose to stay in catholicism , even though I have certain issues with it. Other christian churches do not fit me, while I can understand alot of why they are the way they are.

We are all seeking Perfect truth but we seek it with imperfect humanity.

See you in Heaven.

Tristan:

Have you discussed Martin Luther with anyone on these threads? If you are to remain a Lutheran I’m assuming that you’ve looked into the history of Martin Luther and have reconciled the history that he brings into the Lutheran Church. I was wondering, since it may be appropriate in this thread, if you wanted to discuss this a little further? If for no other reason than for both of us to expand our knowledge of the history of your Church?

Doxiemom:

Since this thread seems to be open to different discussions may I ask what kind of issues you are having with the Catholic Church?

Joe:

I can understand that logic, but it seems to me that all compasses point north. Therefore, if this is a compass of truth, all compasses will eventually lead you to one truth. I applaud your first comment about seeking the truth. I tell people the same thing. As a matter of fact, I take it one step further. I tell people that if the truth is anywhere else but the Catholic Church, that’s where you’ll find me. I always tell them that if you can prove that the Catholic Church is not the ligitimate Church started by God Himself almost 2000 years ago, I’ll leave today. Many have tried but none succeeded. Why? Because the truth is on the side of the Catholic Church, as you well know. It is not skilled debating or shrewd tactics, it is the obvious presence of truth. Keep on brother Joe.

Please understand I love my church.

I have issues with birth control use, especially after one has had children and does not /should not have anymore.(note: agreed that all abortion is murder).

I have an issue with how sin is considered venial or mortal. There is only one unforgivable sin and that is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. I have come to terms with purgatory, but not with the 'sins" that will send you to hell if you have not gone to confession. I understand confession of sin, but cannot reconcile penence. Repentence comes from the heart, before confession. And why should prayer, or even good works, be a punishment. The work of the cross was the penence taken upon Himself for us, if we confess our sin.

I have a real problem with how much devotion, some goes well into worship, is given Mary. It can make Jesus secondary in their prayer life. I honor Mary, love Mary, even say the Hail Mary, but too much is too much.

But the biggest problem is the way the Church has put forth its teaching on the end times. Amillennialism is just wrong. It makes no sense and the church is not forthcoming with its preparedness of its people. So many here are so interested in the secrests of fatima and such, when, all that is to come has been told by the prophets and by John in Revalation, as told to him by Jesus Himself.

That’s all,

Have you looked into NFP?

Both venial and mortal sins are forgivable, unlike blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. I Can’t think of one sin that will send you to hell if you don’t go to confession. I think that when you die, you either die in His friendship or you don’t. It won’t be one sin that puts you over the top, it’ll be a whole lifetime of them. Going to confession certainly wipes those sins away but a person performs sins out of a lack of love and a lack of faith. Ultimately God will make His judgement based on not just the sins you failed to confess (because you didn’t have an opportunity to make it to confession) but based on your entire life’s work.

I know it can seem that way, but if you think about it, the Hail Mary, and really the Rosary, is a prayer right out of the Bible. We are asking Mary to pray for us to God the Father Almighty as we are all sinners. The Hail Mary is directly quoted out of Luke’s Gospel and certainly doesn’t take away from our love for God the Father or the Son or the Holy Spirit. If reading the Bible can be considered a way of showing love and devotion to God, then certainly quoting it over and over again is that much more devotional.

I had to come to terms with this one as well. My problem was I became overwhelmed with the different doctrines of end times from non-Catholics and my head started to spin (literally). I then sat down and earnestly downloaded the information into my brain and tried to analyze it. My analysis (just mine) is that the Catholic Church takes its understanding of the end times right out of Scripture without adding anything else into it. This is unlike any other non-Catholic belief of the end times, all of which appear to throw something man-made into the mix. Have you read the Catholic Answers faith tracts regarding the end times? There are several tracts here, all of which are very informative.
catholic.com/library/last_things.asp

Consider what makes a sin mortal:

  1. It’s grave matter
  2. It’s committed by a free act of the will
  3. It’s committed with full knowledge of the consequences

We have to meet all three of those qualifications for our sin to separate us from God and damn us. Not just one or two. And even then we can be forgiven of that sin if we go to confession with repentance in our heart. And even then if we die before confessing a mortal sin it will be forgiven if we had the intent to go to confession and it was not a willful act on our part to not go (such as being killed in a car wreck on Tuesday when we intended to confess on Saturday). And EVEN THEN we can STILL be forgiven of that sin REGARDLESS of intent to go to confession if we are truly repentant out of love and sorrow for having offended God by our action rather than fear of the consequences of hell.

The last one is a bit difficult because only God knows for sure whether our contrition is born of love rather than fear. Much better to take advantage of the certainty of the sacrament God gave us specifically for the purpose of forgiveness.

But however you look at it, that’s a heck of a lot of mercy on the part of God. He doesn’t let anyone go to hell unless that’s what they truly want. King David was an adulterer and murderer, and he’s a saint. The mercy of God is infinite when we have true repentance.

Penance should be done out of thanks for the love God shows us with his mercy. It’s not punishment. It’s a blessing. Jesus suffered and died for our sake. The least we can do in return is give him glory by fulfilling his will. How can we view penance as a punishment or inconvenience compared to the pain and suffering Jesus has gone through on our behalf?

Even purgatory is a blessing and act of mercy. Without purgatory we’d have to be absolutely perfect at the time we die, since nothing impure can come before God. Purgatory lets us die imperfect and still be fully purified after the fact.

When Jesus walked the earth 2000 years ago, the vast majority of the Jews expected him to establish a physical Kingdom of God with himself as a temporal monarch. In light of how that turned out, a belief in amillenialism would seem to be perfectly reasonable even if it doesn’t make any sense to us. God is notorious for doing things in a way he deems reasonable rather than how we might want them to be :stuck_out_tongue:

God Bless you, my brother in Jesus Christ, but it is never “finished” or accomplished until we are in our final seconds of life on our Cross!

"And he said to all, “If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.” (Lk 9:23)

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

erikd,
Not speaking for Tristan, but I think you will find that most Lutherans know enough about Luther to know of his virtues and of his flaws. Luther was a sinful human being, who at times was intemperate, rude, and sometimes crude.
But it is not Luther that determines why one is Lutheran. Those of us who are Lutheran are so because we believe, teach and confess the Augsburg Confession as a true statement of the catholic faith. We believe that in terms of faith, the Lutheran Confessions rightly reflect scripture and the teachings of the early Church.
Luther holds a special place of honor in our tradition, but it is not a blind honor, or an honor ignorant of the whole truth about the man.
In the end, we do not preach Luther, we preach Christ, and Him crucified.

Jon

Jon:

Thank you for that. The reason for the question is simple: The Catholic Church has always taught one way without ever changing that one way. Doctrines may have developed over time but they never contradicted doctrines that were present before. The Bible always remained 73 Books and that has never changed. Martin Luther, however, proposed to take away the Books of James, Revelations, and Hebrews, in addition to the 7 that were removed by the original reformation. So I guess my question is simple. If one holds themselves to a Lutheran belief system, how does one justify the elimination of 7 Books from the Canon (which was Luther’s doing), the proposal of the elimination of three other Books (which was also Luther’s doing) as well as the insertion of one word that transformed the views of non-Catholics to believe in a dogma noone had preached prior to Luther (I’m referring to the insertion of the word “only” into Romans 3:28 which Luther also did).

=erikd;5511503]

Thank you for that. The reason for the question is simple: The Catholic Church has always taught one way without ever changing that one way. Doctrines may have developed over time but they never contradicted doctrines that were present before.

Hi erikd,
The Catholic Church says this, and I know you believe it, and that’s fine. Orthodox, Lutherans, and others do disagree with the contention, however. We would point to Transubstantiation, and papal primacy as examples of what we would term innovations.

The Bible always remained 73 Books and that has never changed. Martin Luther, however, proposed to take away the Books of James, Revelations, and Hebrews, in addition to the 7 that were removed by the original reformation. So I guess my question is simple. If one holds themselves to a Lutheran belief system, how does one justify the elimination of 7 Books from the Canon (which was Luther’s doing), the proposal of the elimination of three other Books (which was also Luther’s doing)…

First, Luther’s Bible contained all the books traditionally contained in the western Bible. His challenge of the deuterocanonical books and the NT books you mentioned was no different than challenges to the canon from St. Jerome on, including Cardinal Cajetan. This was permitted by Rome until Trent, which did not apply to Luther.
The fact that Lutherans consider the d-c books as not canonical reflects a point of view held by many thoughout the history of the Church. It is interesting to point out that Luther, even near the end of his life, preached from Revelations and James and Hebrews, and more importantly, are regularly used in Lutheran liturgy.
Remember what I said, Lutherans are Lutheran because we believe, teach, and confess the Augsburg Confession asa right reflection of scripture and early church teachings, not because of Martin Luther necessarily. So, Luther’s speculations about Hebrews, for example, are interesting, but not necessarily relevant to a Lutheran, especially since he changed his thinking about those NT books as he got older.

…as well as the insertion of one word that transformed the views of non-Catholics to believe in a dogma no one had preached prior to Luther (I’m referring to the insertion of the word “only” into Romans 3:28 which Luther also did).

As for the inclusion of “alone” in Romans, Luther was translating into German. In the German it was necessary to properly show the meaning. It is not in any English translation since the word is not necessary for the meaning to be conveyed. The contention that “Faith Alone” as Luther taught it was not known before him is also debatable.

I’m sure you won’t agree with me, but I hope you understand this explanation of our POV.
Jon

I feel so stupid. For some reason, my mind is telling me I’m making a mistake. I’m lost. I’m confused.

:banghead:

Ready for a strange suggestion from a fellow Lutheran?

Sign up for RCIA. In a figurative sense, lay our confessions side by side with the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I suspect the Holy Spirit will guide you. And if you let Him guide you, where ever you end up is the right place.
My prayers and best wishes are with you.
Jon

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.