Forgiven Former Seminarian

[M.SIGGA]

I'm curious to know why you left the Church, and more importantly, what you have found in Protestantism that you couldn't find in Catholicism. -Dust

Siverbug, so not to treat Protestants as a universal umbrella group, if you don't mind me asking, to which church or community did you leave the Catholic Church?-m.sigga

I left the Church some years ago, simply from rebellion--not against the Catholic Church at that time, but just plain old rebellion of youth. I began to gravitate back in my mid 20's; and with a renewed sense of purpose and belonging i began to investigate the faith with fresh eyes. Not as an obedient boy doing what he is told, but as a man seeking God. As i searched the scriptures, and applied the Catholic faith to the bible, i did not see how they were the same(YES--ill get into what specifically in a sec). I began to go to different Churches, and to explore their beliefs. I never felt quite as "at home" unless I was at a real Mass though. Then I met She who was to become my wife. And she was seeking like I was, although her background was Mormon (NO- I did not become a Mormon). We began to seek together, until we found our church. It was called New Life Center-a Foursquare Gospel Church.

Just the feeling i got when I walked inside--It was like walking into a HUG. There is a foursquare website--i dont know if i can provide links here. Suffice it to say I found my spiritual home and have never left or looked back.

OK-now on to the main course. lets do one thing at a time.

Well start with the Bible. I found 2 Timothy 3:16, and Acts 17:11

These told me to use the Bible to guide me and my life--AND to use it as a way of checking on what i was being taught-to be sure that what i was being taught by priests/pastors/ministers was indeed according to God.

Any problems so far?

Thanks for the reply. So I'm guess Four Square Gospel is sort of like a Non-Denom. church? I left the Catholic Church for a NonDenom and then a Baptist one in my teens and they really showed me an appreciation for Christ that I hadn't seen before, not because I wasn't catechised or reared properly in the faith or because the Catholic Church was lacking in anyway.

When I prayed for God to show me a way out of the lifestyle I was living, it just so happens that two friends, who are Protestants, were there to show me a way out. They never maliciously tried to convert me away with lies or anything like that; I sort of just drifted once I started worshiping/participating with them and their activities. I was going through some major drama and trials at that time and I see it as Jesus calling me at that specific moment in my life so I wouldn't continue on my personal road of depression and maybe destruction. Without that intervention I don't know where I might be today from a Christian perspective.

So as a Catholic that left once, I sort of think I can see where you might be comming from based on what you posted so far. The only difference with my story is that it turned out to be the opposite of yours. I saw the Christian faith from a historical perspective after traveling to Europe, and I discovered the Bible was indeed Catholic after studying it from a totally unbiased point-of-view, and that not meant to say anything about your faith journey.

Since finding faith in Jesus at your new church how has the Lord made an impact on your life? If this question isn't too bold, how has your Christian faith transformed you? What are your feeling towards the (Catholic?) faith of your family? your childhood? Thanks again.

[jmjtina]

Silverbug,

Greetings and welcome to Phatmass.

When I said he was "way off, very way off" I was reading his testimony and reading that indeed he did not understand the faith at all. His main problem was forgiveness, and said it had never been spoken of in the Catholic Church. Now, if you know anything about the Catholic Faith, confession is a biggie.

As for Sola Scriptura, the Catholic Church believes that Scripture and Tradition go hand and hand. Without totally hijacking this thread, we could start another one discussing sola scriptura. The main thing that bugged me about the "testimony" was the apparent lack of knowledge of forgiveness (a seminarian who didn't know about confession is pretty hard to believe) of the Catholic Church. He was stating something that wasn't true: "The catholic church doesn't teach about forgiveness".

John Henry Newman explained 2 Timothy 3:16-17. He wrote: "It is quite evident that this passage furnishes no argument whatever that the sacred Scripture, without Tradition, is the sole rule of faith; for, although sacred Scripture is profitable for these four ends, still it is not said to be sufficient. The Apostle [Paul] requires the aid of Tradition (2 Thess. 2:15). Moreover, the Apostle here refers to the scriptures which Timothy was taught in his infancy.

The two verses immediately before it state: "But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it, and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 3:14–15).

Timothy is told by Paul to continue in what he has learned for two reasons: because Paul himself taught him and two, because he has been educated in the scriputures. Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2). He instructs us to "stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:15). What this tells me is that it is not only by scripture alone is to guide us but through tradition and oral teaching. And then whose "oral teaching?" Now that's another thread too.

More than anything else, conversing with other brothers and sisters of other faiths helps us not only learn more about our faith and yours, but to grow in charity and community. Hope ya stick around!

Peace and God Bless. :dance:

[Silverbug]

M.Sigga-

Since finding faith in Jesus at your new church how has the Lord made an impact on your life?

Oh my--quite a bit. The Lord has revealed himself to me in many ways--when I was injured at work, and was unable to work, my wife and I decided for her to go to work. The next sunday my wife and I had just placed our lives in the hands of the Savior. We had asked Christ "Lord, we submit to your will--whatever you want us to do--we will follow, please we need your help." An hour after we got home, our neighbor came over(whom we had never met), and offered my wife an interview at her place of employment. The place she was working (call it Store x) was interviewing mon-wed all day. My wife was a high school dropout with no experience in the last 3years(she had been a housewife). My wife was the first interview on monday. The interviewing manager told her there was "just something about you" and canceled all the interviews for the rest of the week and hired her on the spot.

We have had quite a few problems since then, and every time, Christ was there for us. By adhering to the tenets of our Church, we have experienced a renewal in our marriage, our family, and our whole lives.

how has your Christian faith transformed you? It has , simply put--given me JOY in worshipping the Lord. I LOVE going to church services, i enjoy donating my time, and being involved. There is a big emphasis on small group interaction in our church. Like the early christians, who worshipped together in each others' homes in small groups; most of the ministries in out church is structured around small groups. Small groups foster more fellowship, and a deep connection with other christians.

What are your feeling towards the (Catholic?) faith of your family? your childhood?

My childhood was more rote and repitition. Do this do that, etc.. I had attended many different Catholic churches, in a few different states, with little variation. I had not received any instruction as to the mysteries behind the rituals. As i got older, the only way i found more of the REASON for the dogma was my own investigation. As far as my family goes, they are still catholic. We simply agree to disagree.

jmjtina-

Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2).

Agreed-until the bible was finally completed (there is a scrip that goes with this--ill find it)

He instructs us to "stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:15).

right--then read acts 17:11-And the people of Berea were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, and they listened eagerly to Paul's message. They searched the Scriptures day after day to check up on Paul and Silas, to see if they were really teaching the truth.

Which tells me to take that which is taught by tradition and apply it to the scriptures--if they disagree with the scrips then it is a false teaching.

[Dave]

M.Sigga-

Since finding faith in Jesus at your new church how has the Lord made an impact on your life?

Oh my--quite a bit. The Lord has revealed himself to me in many ways--when I was injured at work, and was unable to work, my wife and I decided for her to go to work. The next sunday my wife and I had just placed our lives in the hands of the Savior. We had asked Christ "Lord, we submit to your will--whatever you want us to do--we will follow, please we need your help." An hour after we got home, our neighbor came over(whom we had never met), and offered my wife an interview at her place of employment. The place she was working (call it Store x) was interviewing mon-wed all day. My wife was a high school dropout with no experience in the last 3years(she had been a housewife). My wife was the first interview on monday. The interviewing manager told her there was "just something about you" and canceled all the interviews for the rest of the week and hired her on the spot.

We have had quite a few problems since then, and every time, Christ was there for us. By adhering to the tenets of our Church, we have experienced a renewal in our marriage, our family, and our whole lives.

That's great that the Lord is making an impact on your life! But you didn't need to leave the Catholic Church in order for that to happen.

how has your Christian faith transformed you? It has , simply put--given me JOY in worshipping the Lord. I LOVE going to church services, i enjoy donating my time, and being involved. There is a big emphasis on small group interaction in our church. Like the early christians, who worshipped together in each others' homes in small groups; most of the ministries in out church is structured around small groups. Small groups foster more fellowship, and a deep connection with other christians.

You love going to church services, interacting, and being involved. Well again, that's great, but I get the impression your basing things on feelings. Sometimes in worshipping the Lord we may not exactly FEEL joy. There are times when most of us go through dry spells. Yet that doesn't mean that if we don't feel joy there's something wrong with us.

What are your feeling towards the (Catholic?) faith of your family? your childhood?

My childhood was more rote and repitition. Do this do that, etc.. I had attended many different Catholic churches, in a few different states, with little variation. I had not received any instruction as to the mysteries behind the rituals. As i got older, the only way i found more of the REASON for the dogma was my own investigation. As far as my family goes, they are still catholic. We simply agree to disagree.

I'm sorry you felt your childhood was like that. You said you hadn't received any instruction as to the mysteries behind the rituals. And you said you investigated. But did you really look in the right places? In other words, did you read orthodox Catholic apologetics materials, or did you read what non-Catholics say about the Church? Non-Catholic publications are often biased about the Church, and the info they print is often mistakes, misunderstandings, or outright lies.

Also, what's wrong with ritual? I get the impression you're saying something is wrong with it.

jmjtina-

Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2).

Agreed-until the bible was finally completed (there is a scrip that goes with this--ill find it)

But you don't realize that the early Christians -- long before the Bible was compiled -- were thoroughly Catholic in belief and practice. Their writings reflect that. A lot of them even knew the 12 Apostles personally and were taught by them. In addition, for many centuries the vast majority of the faithful were illiterate. How could the Bible be the sole rule of faith if most people couldn't read it?

He instructs us to "stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:15).

right--then read acts 17:11-And the people of Berea were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, and they listened eagerly to Paul's message. They searched the Scriptures day after day to check up on Paul and Silas, to see if they were really teaching the truth.

Which tells me to take that which is taught by tradition and apply it to the scriptures--if they disagree with the scrips then it is a false teaching.

Sorry, but you're taking that verse out of context. The Bereans had first been taught Christianity and were checking to make sure its claims matched Old Testament prophecies. It doesn't mean that the Bible has to be used as a checklist for all Christian doctrines. If it did, then since only the Old Testament existed at the time, it would mean that only the Old Testament should be used for that purpose and that the New Testament would be totally out-of-place.

[phatcatholic]

woh, woh, woh.....i'm going to have to interject here for a moment.

this thread is attempting to handle three topics at the same time....

1. ex-catholics who are ignorant of the faith

2. sola scriptura

3. silverbug's faith journey

....which is quite laborious and difficult to manage.

since he has requested already that we remain on one subject only, and b/c i think we would all agree that this is the most effective way to dialogue, i say we make this thread about one subject and make new threads for the remaining subjects.

so, what is this going to be about? since they all involve silverbug, i am ok w/ him deciding. what do u all think?

if this little intervention of mine is annoying, i apologize. i just felt like this topic was getting off track, and i wanted to bring it back somehow.

pax christi,

phatcatholic

Edited February 18, 2004 by phatcatholic

[foundsheep]

I am watching this thread. I believe what should be stuck to is the Sola scriptura subject. Because it interjects with the other two. So lets start with that. Then if you want to discuss the others start new threads.

Your Mediator of Meh

Foundsheep da ecclectic Laker fan.

[Silverbug]

Phatcatholic--THANK YOU for the interjection and keeping this on one topic at a time.

HOWEVER-you didnt fully read my post did you?

The part where i talked about my WIFE?

That would make me a "he"

Sorry for the jibe but i couldnt resist.

Now--yes lets keep this on one topic--well start with my faith journey--(all others lets wait for a bit until we get this one out of the way.) I dont mind talking about any of it, but one at a time please.

Dave-

That's great that the Lord is making an impact on your life! But you didn't need to leave the Catholic Church in order for that to happen.

You love going to church services, interacting, and being involved. Well again, that's great, but I get the impression your basing things on feelings. Sometimes in worshipping the Lord we may not exactly FEEL joy. There are times when most of us go through dry spells. Yet that doesn't mean that if we don't feel joy there's something wrong with us.

I'm sorry you felt your childhood was like that. You said you hadn't received any instruction as to the mysteries behind the rituals. And you said you investigated. But did you really look in the right places? In other words, did you read orthodox Catholic apologetics materials, or did you read what non-Catholics say about the Church? Non-Catholic publications are often biased about the Church, and the info they print is often mistakes, misunderstandings, or outright lies.

=====================================================

Now when i began to get back into the Catholic Church, I did it with my whole heart and mind--i wasnt holding back, I jumped in with both feet--but found it lacking. I realize there may be dry spells , but i wasnt being spiritually fed. the more i learned the more i questioned. I sought the advice of clergy, my parents, and Catholic apologetic material. I was led by the Spirit to keep searching.

When I went to my current church, i FELT joy. My heart jumps when i sing, some of the songs move me to tears. There have been certain sermons by our pastor that hit home so well, my wife and I talk about them for hours after services. In all my years at mass, i had never had such a moving of the Spirit as i do now.

I dont believe in looking at one side of an issue, i have studied the catholic faith at length from Catholic sources, as well as my own from other sources. Why are you assuming i didnt look in the right places?

There is nothing wrong with ritual if it has meaning. Early in my Catholic life, i was saying that it was all ritual because the mysteries that give them meaning were never fullyexplained to me. Later in life as i learned more about them THEn they meant more.

<example> Giving up something for lent. When i was young it was something to endure thru, and sneak around just to shut my parents up. Later I understood that the sacrifice was to be a daily reminder of the REASON Christ gave his life for us, so that every time you went for that thing that you gave up you would say"Thank you Lord for your selfless sacrifice"

[Silverbug]

Ok Foundsheep--we posted at about the same time--on to Sola Scriptura

[foundsheep]

2 tim 3:16

14 But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and believed, because you know from whom you learned it,

15 and that from infancy you have known (the) sacred scriptures, which are capable of giving you wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

17

so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Heres my question, Did Pual know that his letter to Timothy was scripture or was he talking about Old Testament? In order to prove sola scriptura you would need to ask where the Bible came from. Who put these letters together? I know your answer will probably be God, but whom did he work through to make sure this book was put together?

[foundsheep]

PS. or do you believe the bible appeared from thin air?

[Laudate_Dominum]

2 tim 3:16

14 But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and believed, because you know from whom you learned it,

15 and that from infancy you have known (the) sacred scriptures, which are capable of giving you wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

17

so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Heres my question, Did Pual know that his letter to Timothy was scripture or was he talking about Old Testament? In order to prove sola scriptura you would need to ask where the Bible came from. Who put these letters together? I know your answer will probably be God, but whom did he work through to make sure this book was put together?

16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

Yeah, I've never understood why protestants often think this says anything about sola scriptura. It says that Scripture is inspired and is useful for various things. The Catholic Church has always taught this. This does not in any way assert the doctrine of sola scriptura which was taught by certain men 1,500 years later and is utterly foreign to the Bible and historical Christianity.

[Silverbug]

By golly you are right! Thin air it is!

ok seriously. Many times in the Bible, Christ referred to scripture-shouldnt we use His example, and NOW since we have a complete Bible, use it?

I mean, if you are to take this argument to its logical extreme, as it does elsewhere on this site, then, using that logic, who could use the Bible at all?

This Book, the one book inspired by God himself, was put here for a reason. To teach us. Using 2 tim, in context still points to using the Bible as a benchmark-and as i said earlier in conjunctin with acts 17:11, use it to measure tradition for truth.

[Laudate_Dominum]

By golly you are right! Thin air it is!

ok seriously. Many times in the Bible, Christ referred to scripture-shouldnt we use His example, and NOW since we have a complete Bible, use it?

I mean, if you are to take this argument to its logical extreme, as it does elsewhere on this site, then, using that logic, who could use the Bible at all?

This Book, the one book inspired by God himself, was put here for a reason. To teach us. Using 2 tim, in context still points to using the Bible as a benchmark-and as i said earlier in conjunctin with acts 17:11, use it to measure tradition for truth.

Certainly Scripture is the infallible Word of God. It is truly amesome and is Divine Revelation, inerrant, Divinely inspired and sufficient. But this does not necessarily imply the protestant doctrine of sola scriptura. That's my point. You can have a very high understanding of Scripture (as the Fathers and the Catholic Church to this day have) and not necessarily hold that Scripture is all you need. The Bible doesn't interpret itself (consider the Ethiopian in acts, "how can I understand unless someone explains it to me", or Peter's statement about how people misinterpret Paul). Christ established a Church with men appointed to authoritatively interpret the Scriptures and teach in His name. You cannot divorce the Scriptures from the Church that Christ established.

Christ and the Apostles could authoritatively use the Bible. And we can use the Bible and know we have correct doctrine (orthodoxy) because the Church has a Sacred Tradition and a teaching authority (Magisterium) which guides us and safeguards the Truths of God. For example all of the heretics throughout history based their doctrines on misinterpreting Scripture. We know they were wrong because the Church that Christ established on the Apostles, and promised that He would guide in all Truth, has authoritatively taught what is the correct doctrine.

If this was not so the we would not have assurance of things like the Trinity, the Unity of Christ, Christ's true Divinity, the Canon of Scripture, etc..

[Dave]

By golly you are right! Thin air it is!

ok seriously. Many times in the Bible, Christ referred to scripture-shouldnt we use His example, and NOW since we have a complete Bible, use it?

I mean, if you are to take this argument to its logical extreme, as it does elsewhere on this site, then, using that logic, who could use the Bible at all?

Christ never said that Scripture ALONE sufficed. Just because he quoted Scripture, why would that mean that nothing else was necessary? If you're implying that Scripture and Sacred Tradition are contradictory or compete with another, then you're wrong on both counts. They actually complement each other.

This Book, the one book inspired by God himself, was put here for a reason. To teach us. Using 2 tim, in context still points to using the Bible as a benchmark-and as i said earlier in conjunctin with acts 17:11, use it to measure tradition for truth.

Of course it was put here for a reason -- it's a wonderful and necessary tool for teaching. But didn't you read what I said earlier in this thread that you're taking that passage from Acts out of context? Let me quote that again:

Sorry, but you're taking that verse out of context. The Bereans had first been taught Christianity and were checking to make sure its claims matched Old Testament prophecies. It doesn't mean that the Bible has to be used as a checklist for all Christian doctrines. If it did, then since only the Old Testament existed at the time, it would mean that only the Old Testament should be used for that purpose and that the New Testament would be totally out-of-place.

Edited February 18, 2004 by Dave

[Silverbug]

Laudate--

Certainly Scripture is the infallible Word of God. It is truly amesome and is Divine Revelation, inerrant, Divinely inspired and sufficient.

Ok-so we are in agreement here that the Bible as we know it today is a Divinely inspired written Word of God.

You can have a very high understanding of Scripture (as the Fathers and the Catholic Church to this day have) and not necessarily hold that Scripture is all you need. The Bible doesn't interpret itself (consider the Ethiopian in acts, "how can I understand unless someone explains it to me"

And we can use the Bible and know we have correct doctrine (orthodoxy) because the Church has a Sacred Tradition and a teaching authority (Magisterium) which guides us and safeguards the Truths of God

So are you saying that the Catholic church alone holds the keys to understanding scripture?