I'm thinking about joining the Catholic Church

[Glaucus]

"To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant." - Cardinal Newman

 

[chevyontheriver]

it all seemed forced to me. but i think different congregations have different styles of RCIA. Just have to find the right one I suppose.

For a baptised believer the RCIA is not technically necessary at all. Because that program is designed for the not yet baptized. But due to its relative success, and because nobody yet cooked up anything better for those already baptized, it still is a decent program to address issues you might still need to think about.

Your discomfort with RCIA is probably a good thing. They only propose it to you because of inertia. But even RCIA is not some sort of magical requirement for the unbaptized. And pastors have discression. You and the pastor can always design your own path.

Do be sure that whatever you do is not hasty but well thought out.

My sister in law belongs to Calvary Chapel. She is a good and faithful Christian. We have much in common.

 

[NDL]

Hey all, I've been attending Calvary Chapel since I was a kid, but I'm thinking about maybe making a change. I've been reading a lot about the Church Fathers and the Jewish roots of the Christian faith, and I think I might want to become Catholic. My girlfriend is Catholic, and we've been going between her Church and Calvary Chapel for a couple months. But she always has to go to mass every week, no matter what. Anyway, I just wanted to get some feedback. What are your thoughts?

Okay...I am glad that you posted this on the forum, and I hope my answer is helpful:

I was born into, and got married by, the Roman Catholic church. I have family who're Catholic. In other words, I am not anti-Catholic, nor do I think bad of Catholics...

As a Christian, you obviously believe that Jesus is God. I would ask you to consider the below verse:

Matthew 19:4-6: "And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who madea]">[a] them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’b]">[b] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?c]">[c] 6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

Notice what Jesus did? He quoted the Old Testament. In fact, all throughout the gospels, we see that Jesus supported His arguments by quoting the Old Testament.

What then, does this say about the Scriptures? If Jesus, who is God, makes His arguments in accordance with His Word...what does that say about the importance of the Bible?

Therefore, as a Christian, I would imagine that you'd want to learn about the Scriptures. After all, Jesus used the Scriptures to support His arguments.

The problem with the Catholic mass is that while it is nice, how much Scripture do you get? Yes, I know that a letter is read out of the Gospels. I know that the homily is Scripturally based. But what about the other letters? What about Paul's letters? What about studying things verse by verse, so you get to truly know the Scriptures? That's the reason why I no longer attend mass; I love the mass service, but nothing beats a verse by verse study of the Scriptures.

Doesn't it make sense to be at a church where you study each letter, verse by verse ?

 

[SkyWriting]

Hey all, I've been attending Calvary Chapel since I was a kid, but I'm thinking about maybe making a change. I've been reading a lot about the Church Fathers and the Jewish roots of the Christian faith, and I think I might want to become Catholic. My girlfriend is Catholic, and we've been going between her Church and Calvary Chapel for a couple months. But she always has to go to mass every week, no matter what. Anyway, I just wanted to get some feedback. What are your thoughts?

Every church location has a unique combination of people inside. My wife and I attended
any church that was wheelchair accessible and this included any denomination. Some
we stays at for a while, others not.

 

[PloverWing]

The problem with the Catholic mass is that while it is nice, how much Scripture do you get? Yes, I know that a letter is read out of the Gospels. I know that the homily is Scripturally based. But what about the other letters? What about Paul's letters? What about studying things verse by verse, so you get to truly know the Scriptures? That's the reason why I no longer attend mass; I love the mass service, but nothing beats a verse by verse study of the Scriptures.

In my Episcopal church's lectionary, we read an Old Testament reading, a Psalm, an Epistle reading, and a Gospel reading. I thought the Catholic church followed the same lectionary. Do Catholics not read Paul's letters in the cycle of Sunday readings?

I acknowledge that in my church the homilies are more likely to be inspirational thoughts for the day, rather than verse-by-verse exposition, and I suspect Catholic homilies are similar. But I thought they included Epistle readings in the list of Sunday readings.

 

[chevyontheriver]

The problem with the Catholic mass is that while it is nice, how much Scripture do you get? Yes, I know that a letter is read out of the Gospels. I know that the homily is Scripturally based. But what about the other letters? What about Paul's letters? What about studying things verse by verse, so you get to truly know the Scriptures? That's the reason why I no longer attend mass; I love the mass service, but nothing beats a verse by verse study of the Scriptures.

It may have been a while since you were in a Catholic church to hear how the readings are done. I know I am a bit out of place here in the Calvary Chapel section and I don't want to be doing anything against your rules by disagreeing with you. There are multiple readings at every Catholic mass, an OT reading, a Psalm, an Epistle, and a Gospel reading. The OT, Psalm, and Gospel readings are thematically coordinated. They are read in a three year cycle that covers more Bible than most denominations will cover. If you go to daily mass you get even more. So, whatever method you use I'm sure is just fine, But Catholics do cover a lot of Bible territory over a three year cycle.

 

[NDL]

In my Episcopal church's lectionary, we read an Old Testament reading, a Psalm, an Epistle reading, and a Gospel reading. I thought the Catholic church followed the same lectionary. Do Catholics not read Paul's letters in the cycle of Sunday readings?

I acknowledge that in my church the homilies are more likely to be inspirational thoughts for the day, rather than verse-by-verse exposition, and I suspect Catholic homilies are similar. But I thought they included Epistle readings in the list of Sunday readings.

It may have been a while since you were in a Catholic church to hear how the readings are done. I know I am a bit out of place here in the Calvary Chapel section and I don't want to be doing anything against your rules by disagreeing with you. There are multiple readings at every Catholic mass, an OT reading, a Psalm, an Epistle, and a Gospel reading. The OT, Psalm, and Gospel readings are thematically coordinated. They are read in a three year cycle that covers more Bible than most denominations will cover. If you go to daily mass you get even more. So, whatever method you use I'm sure is just fine, But Catholics do cover a lot of Bible territory over a three year cycle.

Yes, the Church does cover the Bible, and in the way that you both described.

I don't know how to say all of this gently; perhaps this is just a matter of preference: IMHO, the reader gets a lot more context by sticking with each book, verse by verse, seeing a cause and effect correlation by following the text all the way through, than he/she does by reading isolated verses throughout the Bible.

Now, in saying all of this, please understand that my comments are not Catholic specific, since a lot of Baptist/Protestant churches approach the Bible in the same way (a different passage every sunday) - and I would say the same thing of those churches as well.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Yes, the Church does cover the Bible, and in the way that you both described.

I don't know how to say all of this gently; perhaps this is just a matter of preference: IMHO, the reader gets a lot more context by sticking with each book, verse by verse, seeing a cause and effect correlation by following the text all the way through, than he/she does by reading isolated verses throughout the Bible.

Now, in saying all of this, please understand that my comments are not Catholic specific, since a lot of Baptist/Protestant churches approach the Bible in the same way (a different passage every sunday) - and I would say the same thing of those churches as well.

Having a lectionary does not mean reading isolated verses, but allows for themes to be developed week over week. For example, the Advent season pulls in all of the key texts about the coming of Christ and the second coming of Christ with the idea that you can prepare room in your own heart for Christ. The Christmas season, which is not over on December 25th but continues on through Epiphany, explores what it means for us for the Emanuel to have come. The season of Lent is penitential, with the idea that you can repent of your sins. It's one big long retreat. The Easter season covers all the texts involved in the passion and death and resurrection, and continues on until Pentecost. None of this is random texts, but thematic based on a calendar. The Jews had a liturgical calendar, and we do too, repeating the memorialization of the events of Salvation History. Your approach of picking a book and going line by line may be fine, but a lectionary approach does something good that such an approach does not.

I'm not trying to be contrarian here, as I am a guest. You have your methodology and I am not suggesting that you need to change it. Very humbly though I am suggesting that a lectionary approach is not at all deficient, and has strengths.

 

[Albion]

I don't know how to say all of this gently; perhaps this is just a matter of preference: IMHO, the reader gets a lot more context by sticking with each book, verse by verse, seeing a cause and effect correlation by following the text all the way through, than he/she does by reading isolated verses throughout the Bible.

That's probably true. However, you can't read the whole Bible at each worship service, so the lectionary (as used in a Catholic, Episcopal, Lutheran, or similar churches) is based upon reading the key verses that apply to the theme that's appointed for each Sunday throughout the year...and then the kind of more careful study (for which Calvary Chapel is known) is supposed to occur for those same people in Bible study classes, either on the same day before or after worship or on another day of the week. It varies by denomination and congregation, of course.

 

[NDL]

Having a lectionary does not mean reading isolated verses, but allows for themes to be developed week over week. For example, the Advent season pulls in all of the key texts about the coming of Christ and the second coming of Christ with the idea that you can prepare room in your own heart for Christ. The Christmas season, which is not over on December 25th but continues on through Epiphany, explores what it means for us for the Emanuel to have come. The season of Lent is penitential, with the idea that you can repent of your sins. It's one big long retreat. The Easter season covers all the texts involved in the passion and death and resurrection, and continues on until Pentecost. None of this is random texts, but thematic based on a calendar. The Jews had a liturgical calendar, and we do too, repeating the memorialization of the events of Salvation History. Your approach of picking a book and going line by line may be fine, but a lectionary approach does something good that such an approach does not.

I'm not trying to be contrarian here, as I am a guest. You have your methodology and I am not suggesting that you need to change it. Very humbly though I am suggesting that a lectionary approach is not at all deficient, and has strengths.

You expressed yourself quite well, and your argument has merit; Scripture read in a Mass service is done in a very deliberate, purposeful, and orderly way.

I don't want for you to think that I am being argumentative by answering your point; feel free to ignore this reply, or to disagree if you wish. The only reason why I am replying is to make something more clear (in case I was unclear in my initial post):

I write this not for edification purposes, but so you see that we're on the same page: a typical Mass service consists of many parts, including the reading of Scripture; Worship/Singing; the Homily, the Eucharist, the exchange of greetings, and reciting prayers and creeds. All of this you know, (and I know all of this too ).

There are elements of the Mass service that I cherish; I miss, for example, a time set aside to turn to my fellow parishioner for the purpose of extending a greeting, and wishing him/her well. I likewise think it important to recite the Apostles' creed, as an affirmation of our common faith...all of this is good, and done decently and in order.

The point I was making is simply thus: in a Mass service, a quarter of the Mass service might be dedicated to the reading of Scripture; a quarter might be dedicated to the Homily; a quarter might be dedicated to the serving of the Eucharist and time of reflection; a quarter might be spent in praise and worship (give or take). In an hours' time, you might get 20 minutes of Scripture per Mass service; done purposefully, and in order.

Contrast this to a protestant service, where the service is one hour and twenty minutes long; twenty minutes of that time might be singing, with the remainder of the time spent solely on expositing the Scripture.

All that said, you might disagree with my conclusions, and you're free to do so . I wrote all of this to make sure I communicated my first point clearly (I am further refining my thoughts in this post). Again, you're free to disagree with everything i've written; I simply wanted to be sure that we're on the same page .

 

[NDL]

That's probably true. However, you can't read the whole Bible at each worship service, so the lectionary (as used in a Catholic, Episcopal, Lutheran, or similar churches) is based upon reading the key verses that apply to the theme that's appointed for each Sunday throughout the year...and then the kind of more careful study (for which Calvary Chapel is known) is supposed to occur for those same people in Bible study classes, either on the same day before or after worship or on another day of the week. It varies by denomination and congregation, of course.

That was my point exactly . Be sure that there are parts of the Mass service that I miss. It might seem silly, but I do miss the smell of frankensense, and a personal time of reflection while communion is served.

 

[PloverWing]

NDL: Thank you for your clarification. I had not realized that the sermons (and accompanying Scripture readings) were an hour long in your tradition. That would indeed give opportunity for extensive analysis of a portion of Scripture.

 

[chevyontheriver]

You expressed yourself quite well, and your argument has merit; Scripture read in a Mass service is done in a very deliberate, purposeful, and orderly way.

I don't want for you to think that I am being argumentative by answering your point; feel free to ignore this reply, or to disagree if you wish. The only reason why I am replying is to make something more clear (in case I was unclear in my initial post):

I write this not for edification purposes, but so you see that we're on the same page: a typical Mass service consists of many parts, including the reading of Scripture; Worship/Singing; the Homily, the Eucharist, the exchange of greetings, and reciting prayers and creeds. All of this you know, (and I know all of this too ).

There are elements of the Mass service that I cherish; I miss, for example, a time set aside to turn to my fellow parishioner for the purpose of extending a greeting, and wishing him/her well. I likewise think it important to recite the Apostles' creed, as an affirmation of our common faith...all of this is good, and done decently and in order.

The point I was making is simply thus: in a Mass service, a quarter of the Mass service might be dedicated to the reading of Scripture; a quarter might be dedicated to the Homily; a quarter might be dedicated to the serving of the Eucharist and time of reflection; a quarter might be spent in praise and worship (give or take). In an hours' time, you might get 20 minutes of Scripture per Mass service; done purposefully, and in order.

Contrast this to a protestant service, where the service is one hour and twenty minutes long; twenty minutes of that time might be singing, with the remainder of the time spent solely on expositing the Scripture.

All that said, you might disagree with my conclusions, and you're free to do so . I wrote all of this to make sure I communicated my first point clearly (I am further refining my thoughts in this post). Again, you're free to disagree with everything i've written; I simply wanted to be sure that we're on the same page .

Well, yes. A Catholic mass is not a long exposition of Scripture but a short exposition of Scripture as part of the Eucharistic feast. Different purposes. I think it's great that you have a long exposition of Scripture. I would really miss the Eucharist though, and since historically the breaking of bread is one of the purposes of our meetings together as a community, I would want to keep it. You are content with things differently, and I respect that.

 

[NDL]

NDL: Thank you for your clarification. I had not realized that the sermons (and accompanying Scripture readings) were an hour long in your tradition. That would indeed give opportunity for extensive analysis of a portion of Scripture.

My pleasure .

Well, yes. A Catholic mass is not a long exposition of Scripture but a short exposition of Scripture as part of the Eucharistic feast. Different purposes. I think it's great that you have a long exposition of Scripture. I would really miss the Eucharist though, and since historically the breaking of bread is one of the purposes of our meetings together as a community, I would want to keep it. You are content with things differently, and I respect that.

Actually, the conversation we're having is one that I have had with my Dad several times.

When I was a child I attended Catechism on a weekly basis, and I remember times where Mass would follow.
This approach was great; I learned a great deal, and the question and answer format was helpful too. It made me a well rounded Catholic. I wish the Church offered something like this for adults.

I do miss the traditions of the Mass. Recital of the Apostles Creed is a great way to maintain unity of the church, through affirming a common mission statement, weekly.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

Hey all, I've been attending Calvary Chapel since I was a kid, but I'm thinking about maybe making a change.

Although I do not attend a Calvary Chapel today I have attended several over the last 30-40 years. They started here in Southern California and I believe now there's approximately 1000 located all around the world. My wife was baptized by Mike McIntosh a long time ago.

These are good bible-believing and teaching churches -- I would think twice before leaving.

M-Bob

 

[SolomonVII]

Hey all, I've been attending Calvary Chapel since I was a kid, but I'm thinking about maybe making a change. I've been reading a lot about the Church Fathers and the Jewish roots of the Christian faith, and I think I might want to become Catholic. My girlfriend is Catholic, and we've been going between her Church and Calvary Chapel for a couple months. But she always has to go to mass every week, no matter what. Anyway, I just wanted to get some feedback. What are your thoughts?

Jerome, who translated the official Catholic Bible, the Vulgate, was very interested in the Jewish roots of the faith too. That is why he conferred with Jews over the Hebrew text which is what he translated his Bible from.
The Sacraments play a much larger role in Catholicism than in almost any other Christian tradition, maybe even Eastern Orthodox. Probably sacraments are not so much a salvation issue between Protestants and Catholics these days like they once were, but the Sacraments explicitly lay out where the good life is to be found, in being committed to the faith for the rest of one's life through baptism, in recognizing that we are all sinners, and seeking to purify ourselves through perpetually confessing where we have fallen short, through drinking and eating the Word of Christ and energizing ourselves with the Word, week after week, through the One Flesh conjoing of man and woman in the procreative and unitive bonds of Christian marriage, and through all the other sacraments leading up to our death in Christ.
Ritual and repetition are definitely a part of Catholicism too. It is not as spontaneous an expression of Christianity as many Protestant "born-again" traditions are. There has developed some Charismatic traditions in Catholicism in recent decades, so the emotional spontaneity involved in the miraculous healings is at least not outside of the faith, nor just the province of special shrines and pilgrimages any more either.
Catholicism is definitely as Biblical as you want. The Bible is very much a Catholic book.
There are pluses and minuses of being a two faith family, but of course it all depends on how strong your ties are to your Calvary church too. It may not be easy to 'divorce' people you have built bonds with over the course of your life so far. If you have very close and good relations with people in your Calvary Church, and since your wife seems fine with it, I would think twice about leaving them completely.

 

[concretecamper]

The problem with the Catholic mass is that while it is nice, how much Scripture do you get?

Bible references for the Catholic Mass

 

[chevyontheriver]

Bible references for the Catholic Mass

Since I have yet to see a chart of lectionary coverage of the Bible I might have to make one myself to see what is covered and what is not covered in the three year cycle. I'm betting it's all of the NT and lots of the OT, particularly if it includes the daily readings. Which is why one should follow and read the readings in the lectionary even if it is not possible to go to daily mass. It's a three year Bible reading program that millions partake in. But to satisfy my own curiosity I may have to chart it up to see what's in and what's neglected.

Any update from the OP on what brought him to start this thread?

 

[Trimeresurus]

My little brother joined the catholic church too two month ago. I don't get why but he seems to be happy with his religion so I don't hold him back. Still I would never visit a church not even for him.
Anyway if you want to join that church go ahead an see if it is good for you or not.

 

[chevyontheriver]

My little brother joined the catholic church too two month ago. I don't get why but he seems to be happy with his religion so I don't hold him back. Still I would never visit a church not even for him.
Anyway if you want to join that church go ahead an see if it is good for you or not.

You too could come to Jesus Christ. It is entirely possible. Pray about it.