Many times when converts speak of their journeys to the Holy Catholic Church, myself included, they speak in terms of "joining" the Church. This seems only natural, since the convert must sever himself from a group with which he has had close relations and approach a group with which he is unfamiliar. The convert must take a number of actions in the process, and the illusion is created of actually joining the Church. Such a notion is, however, only an illusion. Nobody joins the Church. There is nothing that any man who is not a member of the Church can do to make himself a member of the Church. It is the Lord who, upon a man's baptism, adds him to the Church, a truth that is expressed in the Sacred Scriptures in the Pentecost account of Acts 2. All who are baptized are members of the Catholic Church, having been added to it by God himself. When a baptized man who is not Catholic converts, he is embracing and acknowledging and glorying in a membership which is already his. For many, this is a great sojourn.
Over the course of the last several years, I have been on such an exciting and often frightening journey. The Lord our God has touched my heart and opened my eyes to truths which are, to many, unimaginable. The Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life who proceeds from the Father and the Son, has called me and by his grace. I have attempted to answer that call. Often I am reminded of Abraham who left his home in Ur of the Chaldeans for an unknown land, trusting only in God. Surely if not for the Providence of God, Abraham would have perished alone and childless in the desert. Yet, relying on his Lord, Abraham was led to the Promised Land and made privy to the Covenant of God. I too, though far lacking in comparison to the great Abraham, would have perished in the desert of uncertainty if not for the guidance of our mighty Savior.
I was raised in the Margaret Street Church of Christ, a sincere, loving, conservative, and committed congregation in Joliet, IL. This congregation teaches the doctrines inherited from the 19th century Restoration Movement. Outsiders to the movement often refer to them as "Campbellites" after Alexander Campbell, the movement's most influential thinker and, arguably, its founder. Members of the Church of Christ do not consider themselves Campbellites, but urge that they are simply Christians. While the term "Campbellite" is insulting when applied to individuals, it is an accurate way to describe the doctrine of the Church.
My aspirations were to serve as a minister in the Church of Christ. God, it seems, had other plans for me. The background in faith and morals, which I received from my dear friends and family at Margaret Street, is priceless, and I would not trade it for anything in the world. Influenced most strongly by my grandfather, I took an interest in the Bible and in the Christian faith at an early age and, when I was 9 years old, was baptized by immersion into Christ. By the age of 11, I had preached my first sermon, and I continued to preach for six years. For two years, I was blessed with the opportunity to work under David Banning, a very holy man and an outstanding evangelist. During his time with the congregation, our church grew like never before, and I learned quite a bit from him.
Were it not for his guidance and his influence, I might never have heard God's call to the Catholic Church. He inspired me to examine the Scriptures closely, and introduced me to the Fathers of the Church. Though he would most certainly object to the direction in which my studies have led me, he has been to me what Rabbi Gamaliel was to St. Paul.
Like most preachers in the Church of Christ, I was very anti-Catholic. It was, in fact, the prospect of converting Catholics that led me to examine the Catholic Faith. However, by the grace of God I was called to recognize the imperishable truths of the Catholic Church and, in July of 1997, I left the Church of Christ to prepare for reception into the Catholic Church.
Pope Pius XII in 1950 wrote, "Disagreement and error among men on moral and religious matters have always been a cause of profound sorrow to all good men, but above all to the true and loyal sons of the Church, especially today, when we see the principles of Christian culture being attacked on all sides." My decision to convert to Catholicism was surprising and troubling to many that are dear to me. Several people have attempted to guess why I made such an unheard of move. Mr. Jerry Crolius, minister of the Margaret Street Church of Christ, has declared publicly and on tape that "our brother Jeff's problem is accepting that we can not trust that God has preserved for us his inspired word. That really gets down to an issue of faith." He added that there is "nobody to blame but Satan" for my conversion.
The confusion over my choice is understandable. In the Church of Christ, we teach that the Catholic Church is a false Church with false doctrines and that Catholics should be converted lest they lose their immortal souls. To go from that position to a full and unconditional embracing of Catholic teaching as truth is quite a leap. Some, unable to envision how I could accept such things as Mariology, the papacy, Purgatory, infant baptism, confession, and so on, have suspected that I may have ulterior motives. It has been suggested that I want a Church with less control over the morality of its members, or a Church where I may dissent from the normal doctrines and teach what I want. At other times, the finger has been pointed at the full room and board and tuition scholarship offered to seminarians of the Joliet Diocese, even though I didn't hear about that until November of 1997, four months after I left the Church of Christ.
I hope in this essay to explain my five main reasons for embracing the one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church. When I walked into St. Mary's Church for the first time after leaving Margaret Street, there was no cash prize waiting for me. Ed McMahon was not there with balloons and a big check. I didn't know anybody, and I would have given anything to leave and return to my comfort zone in the Church of Christ, where I had just given up a full time position as an interim preacher. But I could not do that. I had left Margaret Street for Rome not for petty reasons or ulterior motives, but because God called me from the Ur of the Church of Christ to the strange unknown land of the Catholic Church. I didn't know if it would be the Promised Land or if I would perish in the desert, but I followed Christ's lead. When I first walked into the Catholic Church, I endured her as a truth I knew in my head. Now, having been blessed with the life of community and sacrament, I love Christ's Holy Catholic Church from the very depths of my soul.
The Catholic Church has existed for nearly twenty centuries. History shows that the earliest Christians held to doctrines which are peculiarly Catholic, were ruled by the bishops of the Catholic Church, and even used the Greek word Katholikos to describe the Church. All of this was in an age when there was only one Church. This is affirmed by St. Paul in Ephesians 4:3ff, where he exhorts the Ephesian Christians to strive "to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace: one body and one Spirit, as you were also called to the hope of your call; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all." This Church, built by Jesus Christ through his apostles, has continued to function in an unbroken line of succession since the first century. It was the Catholic Church that was founded by Jesus. All other Churches are of far more recent origin, and founded without divine authority. If there is one Body of Christ and one faith, any others that are established, though done so with good intentions and a sincere desire to please God, are established without authority to exist. St. Paul states that "the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the Church." (Eph. 3:10) What need is there, then, to create other Churches? Christians understood this for a long time. Disagreements and heretics arose from time to time, but they were cast out of the Church and either repented or died excommunicated.
It was not until 1054, over a thousand years after the establishment of the Catholic Church, that a second Church arose. Many of the congregations of the East sided with the Patriarch of Constantinople in a disagreement with the Pope, and so did what was up until that time unthinkable: they separated themselves from the Catholic Church and created their own, the Eastern Orthodox Church. It would be almost another five hundred years before a third and then a fourth Church were created by the Augustinian Father Martin Luther and John Calvin. This, beginning in 1517, was the origin of Protestantism. Separated from the Catholic Church, Protestants could not find any source of unity. Rather than "striving to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace," the Protestants continued to split and form new Churches and religious communities. This is the phenomenon that we in the Church of Christ called denominationalism.
Before the sixteenth century, there were no denominations. There was one Church, the Catholic Church, and since 1054 the relatively few schismatic Christians of the East. Following the Protestant Reformation, non-Catholic Christianity has split into 20,000 different denominations and independent churches. In the Church of Christ, we recognized that denominationalism was not pleasing to God, and called for unity. Alexander Campbell, the founder of the Church of Christ, had this to say about his new Church: "I have no idea of adding to the catalogue of new sects. This game has been played too long. I labor to see sectarianism abolished, and all Christians of every name united upon the one foundation on which the apostolic Church was founded." What we never realized in the Church of Christ was that, with all our talk of ending denominationalism and creating unity, we were simply adding to the problem. In order to end denominationalism, Campbell started his own denomination. Like all the other 20,000 Churches, the Church of Christ claims to be right. Adding one more shouting voice to the confusion of Protestantism surely does not solve anything. The Church of Christ claims to be the Church Christ founded in Jerusalem in 33 AD. Yet the record clearly shows that the Church of Christ did not in any way, shape, or form exist prior to 1831, when two smaller denominations, Barton Warren Stone's Presbyterian splinter group the New Light Christians and Campbell's Reformed Baptists, merged on April 24, 1831 in Millersburg, Kentucky.
This always troubled me. How can the Church of Christ be the one true Church when it came onto the scene a solid one thousand eight hundred years late? To answer this dilemma, the Church of Christ teaches the Theory of the Restoration. According to this theory, Jesus founded the Church of Christ. At first, the Church held fast to his teachings, but eventually corruption set in. The Church of Christ adopted false doctrines and practices, and fell away. In its place stood the Catholic Church, a diabolical impostor. When Alexander Campbell began his movement, he was not founding a new Church, but restoring the true, ancient Church of Christ. This all makes perfect sense. It is very logical. However, we are not looking for what could have happened, we are looking for what did in fact happen.
Did the Church fall away? The answer to this question is of vital importance. If the Church did fall away, then Catholicism is the product of this apostasy and should be shunned. If the Church did not fall away, then all Christians should return to the Catholic Church, the only Church founded by Jesus Christ. I am convinced that not only did the Church never fall away, but it can not ever fall away. If we put any trust at all in the promises of God given to us through his inspired prophets, apostles, and Christ himself, we will come to see that the first Church is the only Church. Christ meant to establish a faith community and he got it right on the very first try. Consider, my friends, these words from the Sacred Scriptures. First, consider the words of Jacob on his deathbed to his son Judah, Patriarch of the Tribe of Judah. "The scepter shall never depart from Judah, or the mace from between his legs, while tribute is brought to him and he receives the peoples' homage." (Genesis 48:10) The tribe of Judah will rule all of Israel, says this prophecy. This came true in the house of David, who was of the tribe of Judah. From the house of David came the Messiah, who established an everlasting kingdom, visible on the earth as his Church. According to this prophecy he will always rule, and people of all nations will always recognize his rule. If the Church fell away, this cannot be true! We are left with a choice: Accept that the Church never fell away, thus accepting the truth of the Catholic Church or assert that the Holy Scripture is in error. Next, consider the words of God to King David. "And when your time comes and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your heir after you, sprung from your loins, and I will make his kingdom firm. It is he who shall build a house to my name. And I will make his royal throne firm forever. I will be a Father to him, and he will be a Son to me." (2 Sam. 7:12-14) David's son was Solomon, who built the Temple. David's descendant who would rule forever was Jesus Christ, who built the true House of God, the Church. (1 Tim. 3:15) This House, this Kingdom, this Church built by Jesus the Son of David is called by God "firm." In verse 16, the Lord says " your house and your kingdom shall endure forever before me; your throne shall stand firm forever." Christ will rule forever and his Kingdom will remain firm! Only the Catholic Church out of all the Churches has any claim on fulfilling this prophecy. The other Churches were not founded by Christ, but by misguided Christians no less than a thousand years after Jesus. The one Church founded by Christ "shall stand firm forever." While I would never pass judgment sincere people in other Churches, this leaves no room for another house or another kingdom to take the place of the Catholic Church. The prophet Isaiah further clarifies this idea. "The Lord himself will give you a sign: The Virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel... To us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be upon his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the Lord Almighty will accomplish this." (7,8) The Messiah Immanuel, the Mighty God, will rule over the house of David and the Kingdom of God, his Church. Isaiah promises that the Church will increase steadily throughout time. This does not allow for it to fall away, only to be restored centuries upon centuries later. Nor does God's promise to uphold the Church "with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever" allow for such to happen. If we can trust God's Word, we can be confident that his original Catholic Church, the only Church for a thousand years, is still being upheld and increasing, by "the zeal of the Lord Almighty."
Those who consider the Catholic Church to be a false Church usually accuse her of bringing pagan Roman doctrines and practices into the Christian faith. It could be said, then, that the Church was delivered up to the Romans for corruption. This, however, is grossly inconsistent with the message of the prophet Daniel. Daniel was called in by King Nebuchadnezzar to interpret a dream. In the dream, various creatures represent four kingdoms: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. Speaking of the last kingdom, the Roman Empire, Daniel prophesies. "In the lifetime of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed or delivered up to another people; rather it shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and put an end to them, and it shall stand forever." (Daniel 2:44) Here, Daniel assures us that the Kingdom of God, established in the days of the Roman Empire by Christ through his apostles, will last forever. It will not be delivered up to the Romans or any other nations, but the people of the nations will be delivered up to the Kingdom of God.
Lastly, consider the words of our Lord Jesus to St. Peter in Matthew 16:18. "And so I say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it." Here Christ confirms what the prophets' spoke. The Church will not fall away. No power can topple it. How is it possible that a Church made up of mere human beings with all of our human weaknesses can stand firm as the household of God for 2,000 years? It is not by our own power at all. Rather, it is Christ. "And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age." (Matthew 28:20) It is a clear and scriptural truth that the Church founded by Jesus, the only Church in existence for over a thousand years, will never fall away. How can it if Christ be with it? Therefore, my friends and brethren, the first main reason I embraced the Catholic Church is that I trust in God's promises to preserve his Church.
Many do not understand why I would embrace a Church that teaches and practices things that are not taught in the Bible. In the Church of Christ, we held very strictly to the Protestant battle cry sola scriptura, which teaches that all matters of faith and religion must be found explicitly stated in the Sacred Scriptures. According to the Church of Christ, the Bible and the Bible alone is the sole authoritative Word of God. To go beyond this rule of faith in any way is to introduce into religion doctrines of men. As author Roy E. Cogdill states, "the sum total of what the scriptures teach is the pattern of the Lord's will in any matter. When we go beyond what the scriptures teach in worship or in our efforts to serve God's purpose, we depart from the pattern, disrespect God's silence, and become guilty of the sin of presumption." To put it simply, in the Church of Christ we speak where the Bible speaks and are silent where the Bible is silent.
In the Catholic Church, we look at things differently. We believe that the Word of God, first partially revealed to Moses and the prophets, was revealed in its entirety to the apostles on Pentecost. Jesus confirms this in John 16:13. "But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth." The Holy Spirit did come upon the apostles, revealing to them the Word of God. We Catholics call this the depositum fidei, or the deposit of faith. St. Jude describes this deposit of faith as having been "once for all handed down to the holy ones." (v.3) Catholics believe that after the death of the last apostle, there is no more public revelation. The apostles, under the leadership of St. Peter, taught this faith to the world. By the protection of the Spirit of God, the apostles were infallible. This was necessary so that their teaching could be reliable. We believe that Christ himself ordained the apostles to be his first priests and bishops. They chose from among their first male converts worthy men to ordain bishops, priests, and deacons. The Church teaches that these bishops and priests are successors to the apostles. At first, the apostles were responsible for teaching and preserving the depositum fidei. This responsibility to teach and preserve the faith is known as the Magisterium or teaching office of the Church. As the Church grew and the apostles died, their successors inherited from them the responsibility to teach and preserve the faith "once for all handed down to the holy ones." Catholics believe that the second, third, fourth, and ten thousandth generation of Christians is every bit as important as the first. Since he gave his first Magisterium, the apostles, the charism of infallibility, we believe that he gave it also to their successors. Whereas some of the faith was recorded by the apostles and their first successors into Scripture, some was not. The New Testament Scriptures are, primarily, answers to specific problems which arose in the early Church. They were not meant to be a complete handbook for the faith. Nor are they the sole Word of God. The Word of God is the entire deposit of faith, regardless of whether it was written down in scripture or not. That complete deposit is taught and preserved infallibly by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, which has continued in an unbroken succession since the time of the apostles. It's fairly obvious that to move from sola scriptura to the Magisterium is no small jump. In my study, I found that there were many inconsistencies involved in accepting sola scriptura. First of all, it is never explicitly taught in the scriptures. The doctrine teaches that everything a Christian can believe or practice must be stated in the pages of Sacred Scripture, but the doctrine fails its own test. No book, chapter, and verse can be given to support a need for book, chapter, and verse.
Secondly, the Bible fails to identify what scripture is. The New Testament consists of 27 separate pieces of writing. They were written by different men at different times covering a variety of topics. Those 27 separate letters were not the only such letters from apostolic times. There are 50 or 60 different letters which were considered inspired by different Christians. The adherent of sola scriptura insists that, along with the Old Testament, the 27 books of the New Testament contain the entire revelation of God. However, with 50 or 60 such letters floating around, it is necessary to have an authoritative list. This list is called the canon. No such canon can be found in scripture. That is a fundamental weakness with the Church of Christ's position. None of the 27 books of the New Testament specify what books are to be included in the canon. So how was the decision made? The Councils of Rome, Carthage, and Hippo established the New Testament canon in the late 300's. Members of the Church of Christ and all other Christians accept their New Testament solely on the authority of the Catholic Church.
Thirdly, no Christian before 1517 ever went on record as believing in sola scriptura. The closest was John Wycliffe, who in the 1300's believed that the popes could err but scripture could not. For fifteen centuries the notion of the Bible alone was foreign to Christianity. It was invented by Fr. Martin Luther, and accepted as fact by the other Reformers. Campbell and Stone accepted it as the basis for their new Church in the 1800's. Yet, it is not supported by scripture, tradition, or history. Sola scriptura is a flawed invention. It's fruit can be seen in the 20,000 conflicting denominations, all claiming to abide by the Bible alone. Are they all lying? No, they are simply accepting a false standard of authority. I support the authority of the Catholic Church because it is consistent with both Sacred Scripture and history. First of all, scripture supports the claim that the apostles were priests.
Historically, the Catholic priesthood has had two main duties; one, to offer the sacrifice of the Eucharist and, two, to grant absolution for sins. It was with the apostles that Christ shared the first Eucharist, and it was them he commanded to "do this in memory of me." (Luke 22:19) Christ granted his apostles the priestly power of forgiving sins in John 20:23. "Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained." So, St. Paul could rightfully say in Romans 15:16 that "grace was given me from God to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, ministering as a priest the gospel of God."
Not only were the apostles priests, they were also bishops. This is evidenced when St. Matthias succeeded Judas as an apostle. Of Judas, St. Peter says, "Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and, his bishopric let another take." (Acts 1:20) The apostles ordained faithful men among their first converts to be their successors. St. Clement I, the fourth pope and a reliable source, since he is called by St. Paul a "coworker, whose name [is] in the Book of Life" (Philippians 4:3), verifies this in his 97 AD Epistle to the Corinthians. "And thus preaching through countries and cities, [the apostles] appointed the first fruits of their conversion to be bishops and ministers over such as would afterwards believe, having first proved them by the Spirit... So likewise our apostles knew by our Lord Jesus Christ that there should contentions arise, upon account of the bishop's office. And therefore having a perfect foreknowledge of this, they appointed persons, as we have before said, and then gave direction, how, when they should die, other chosen and approved men should succeed in their ministry."
The successors of the apostles inherited the duty to teach and preserve the depositum fidei. St. Timothy was one of those first successors. St. Paul describes to him the process of apostolic succession: "And what you heard from me through many witnesses entrust to faithful people who will have the ability to teach others as well." (2 Timothy 2:2) The Apostle gives a similar charge to St. Titus, whom he had ordained Bishop of Crete. "For this reason I left you in Crete so that you might set right what remains to be done and appoint presbyters in every town, as I directed you." (Titus 1:5)
It is the duty of the Magisterium of the Church to teach and preserve the Word of God in its entirety. The Word of God is not limited to what is written in the inspired letters which were later known to be scripture, but also includes truths passed down from the apostles through oral tradition. St. Paul says in 2 Thessalonians 2:15, "Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours." It is the Church that is given the commission to teach the world. The Apostle writes in Ephesians 3:8-10, "To me, the very least of the holy ones, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the inscrutable riches of Christ, and to bring to light for all what is the plan of the mystery hidden from ages past in God who created all things, so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the Church to the principalities and authorities in the heavens." Since the only Church in existence at the time was the Catholic Church, it is the duty of the Catholic Church to make the wisdom of God known to mankind.
We are given the guarantee that we can trust in the teaching of the Catholic Church. "[T]he household of God, which is the Church of the living God, (is) the pillar and foundation of truth." (1 Timothy 3:15) Jesus promised his apostles and disciples, the primitive Church, "lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." (Matthew 28:20) The world has not ended yet, and so the promise remains. Christ has always been with his Church and always will. If Christ is guiding the Church, the Church, as "the pillar and foundation of truth," can not err. Only if we believe that the Church is infallible in proclaiming God's Word are these words of Jesus understandable: "If he refuses to listen to them, tell the Church. If he refuses to listen even to the Church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector. Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matthew 18:17,18)
This is how God promised to preserve his Word. He did not promise a book to be the sole authority, but rather a living passing down of his truth, guided by the Holy Spirit. "This is my covenant which I myself have made, says the Lord: My Spirit which is upon you and my Words that I have put into your mouth shall never leave your mouth, nor the mouths of your children, nor the mouths of your children's children from now on and forever, says the Lord." (Isaiah 59:21)
Because I trust in God's promises, I accept the authority he has placed over me in his Church. The Church preserves and teaches the deposit of the faith "once and for all delivered to the holy ones." This truth is found in both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. All Christians accepted this until the 1500's. I accept wholeheartedly every teaching of the Catholic Church as, if you'll excuse the pun, gospel truth. This is the second major reason that I embraced the Catholic Church.
My dear brothers and sisters, the third reason that I embraced the Catholic Church is one which will most likely be puzzling to Christians outside of the Catholic faith. We in the Catholic Church, along with the Orthodox and some Anglicans, hold to a doctrine that is, to the non-Catholic, very peculiar. A wide variety of terms are used by non-Catholics to describe this doctrine: false, heretical, foolish, nonsensical, repulsive, superstitious, blasphemous, cannibalistic, idolatrous, etc. This is the doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist. We believe that the Eucharist is the greatest gift left for us by the Lord. When the priest consecrates the bread and wine that we offer to God, we believe that they miraculously change into the actual Body and Blood of Christ. The Church teaches that Jesus is truly present under the sacramental veils: body, blood, soul, and divinity. In other words, though it looks and tastes like bread and wine, there is not a single particle of bread and wine left. It is Jesus--fully present in the smallest fragment. It is the greatest mystery of our faith: we receive in our mouths the eternal and almighty God. In the Sacrifice of the Mass, Jesus, "the Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world," reaches down from eternity where he is being perpetually sacrificed to the Father and becomes present in time. We offer him to the Father for the forgiveness of our sins. In the Blessed Sacrament, the one sacrifice of Calvary is extended into our own time and place. What looks like bread and wine on our altars is really the Ancient of Days, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Non-Catholics find the Eucharist difficult to swallow. (Bad pun.) In the Church of Christ, as in virtually every Protestant Church, we observed the Lord's Supper, unleavened bread and grape juice, in commemoration of Christ's death. The nature of the Supper was purely symbolic. We felt that the Bible taught clearly that the bread represented Christ's body and the juice represented his blood. In commemorating his death, we performed a solemn and honorable act of worship. But we objected profoundly to the "hocus pocus" idea of an actual transformation of the bread and wine into flesh and blood. It was our claim that the idea of the Real Presence was an invention of the Middle Ages.
I found it very surprising to learn that the doctrine of the Real Presence was consistently taught and defended by all Christians prior to the Reformation. The Didache, Pope Clement I, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Polycarp, St. Justin Martyr, St. Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, St. Clement of Alexandria, St. Athenagoras, the Liturgy of Addai and Mari, St. Hippolytus, Eusebius of Caesarea, St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius, the Council of Nicaea, St. Basil the Great, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Hilary of Poitiers, St. Ambrose, St. John Chrysostom, and St. Augustine taught in the first four centuries of Christianity the same Eucharistic doctrines taught by Pope John Paul II and the Second Vatican Council. Having all ready come to understand the historical continuity and authority of the Church, this was practically enough to convince me of the truth of the Real Presence. Still, I did feel obligated to see what the Sacred Scriptures had to say about the Eucharist. Friends, I was surprised. I wondered how I could have missed the clear teaching of the Bible all those years. We know from the Book of Hebrews and Psalm 110 that Jesus Christ, our High Priest, is "a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." Melchizedek was a priest of God and king of Salem in the days of Abraham. The Psalmist and the Apostle Paul both see Melchizedek as a forerunner of the Messiah. When Melchizedek the Proto-Christ met Abraham, he offered a sacrifice to God. "And Melchizedek, King of Salem, brought out bread and wine; he was a priest of God Most High." (Genesis 14:18-20) The prophet Malachi further foretold this sacrifice which Melchizedek prefigured and Christ fulfilled: "For from the rising of the sun, even to its setting, my name is great among the nations; and everywhere they bring sacrifice to my name and a pure offering; for great is my name among the nations, says the Lord of hosts." (Malachi 1:11) Catholics believe that this is speaking of the Eucharist, a sacrifice which, because it is Christ himself, is wholly acceptable to the Father, and is offered in every nation under the sun.
Jesus spoke to the multitudes about the Eucharist. A close examination and open-minded reading of his words leave little room for symbolism. "I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I give is my flesh for the life of the world... Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink." (John 6:47ff) Following these words, many abandoned Jesus. He did not correct them. Nor did he correct his disciples. They understood what he was commanding, and simply replied, "This saying is hard; who can accept it?"
At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted the Eucharist by changing bread and wine into his body and blood. Many ask how he did it. He did it the same way he created the world: by speaking. When he said, "Let there be light," there was light. When he said, "This is my body," it became his body. When he gave the apostles the power to "do this in memory of me," they received that power. Though we cannot see it, we trust in his word. He said it was so; therefore, it is so. Yes, the saying is hard. Who can accept it? Not many. A tragically large number of Catholics don't even truly believe that their God is present on the altar. But those who do accept it have great rewards awaiting them.
St. Paul recognized that there would be difficulties with people accepting the Eucharist, but he also realized how sacred and holy the Sacrament is. In 1 Corinthians 10, St. Paul writes, "The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" (10:16) "For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying." (11:29,30) What powerful language! Can there be any doubt that St. Paul accepted the Real Presence as part of the deposit of faith?
The Apostle also explains that the Eucharist is an act of unity. This is why Holy Communion is not offered to people, even Christians, who are as of yet separated from Holy Mother Church. "Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though, many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf." (10:17) In verses 18-22, St. Paul confirms that the Eucharist is a true sacrifice by comparing it to the sacrifices of Jews and pagans. Following the comparison, the saint makes another strong statement: "No, I mean that what they sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to become participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and also the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and of the table of demons. Or are we provoking the Lord to jealous anger? Are we stronger than he?" (10:20-22) Elsewhere, the Apostle compares the Sacrifice of Christian altars to the sacrifices of the Jews: "We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat." (Hebrews 13:10)
I can't explain to you how the Transubstantiation takes place. I can't make anyone fully comprehend how what looks and tastes like bread is really flesh. But, I trust in Christ's word. I know that it was the same voice that spoke my soul into existence. By receiving the Lord in Holy Communion, the Christian comes in the most intimate contact with the Lord possible. The grace of God is poured upon the believer, and the sacrifice of Jesus wipes away his sin. The first converts on Pentecost believed that the Eucharist was a great gift, and so "devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers." (Acts 2:41-42) Like the disciples who met the risen Lord on the road of Emmaus, I desire for Christ to be made known to me in the breaking of the bread. (See Luke 24:13ff, especially v. 35) The hunger for Christ's body, true food, and his blood, true drink, is the third reason I embraced the Catholic Church.
In the Church of Christ, as in most every other Protestant Church, we were very uncomfortable with the way the Catholic Church treats St. Mary. Like the Eucharist and other doctrines, Mariology is almost strictly limited to Catholics, Orthodox, some Lutherans, and some Anglicans. I can understand, then, that to many of you my listing Mariology as a fourth reason I embraced the Catholic Church is quite perplexing. Many of you probably feel that Catholics step grossly out of line in our honor of St. Mary. The worship of Mary has often been called Maryolatry by non-Catholics. It is important, then, to make clear one fact: Catholics do not worship Mary. We worship God and God alone. To Mary we give the greatest honor of any created being, but not worship. One can argue such honor is inappropriate, but it is still not worship.
The Church is both a covenant family and a covenant kingdom. The Holy Trinity, one God in three persons, is the God and ruler of the Church. In the Church, there are both the living and the dead. To call our departed brothers and sisters dead is inaccurate. They are eternally alive, united with God in heaven. In our Lord's own words, our God is the God of the living, not the dead. We Catholics feel a special closeness to the holy men and women who have gone on before us. At Mount Sinai, the Israelites were afraid to approach God alone. In fear, they begged Moses to intercede for them. For the Christian, says St. Paul, it is not like that at all. We do not face the glory of God alone. The Apostle assures us that when we pray we 'have approached Mount Zion and the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and countless angels in festal gathering, and the assembly of the firstborn enrolled in heaven, and God the judge of all, and the spirits of the just made perfect, and Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and the sprinkled blood which speaks more eloquently than that of Abel." (Hebrews 12:18-24) Instructed by the scriptures and the consistent tradition of ancient Jews and all Christians prior to the Reformation, the Catholic Church teaches the doctrine of the communion of saints. Knowing that "the fervent prayer of a righteous person is very powerful," we believe that the saints in heaven intercede for us. Just as all Christians ask their friends to pray for them, we ask the saints to pray for us. We honor them as the great heroes of our faith. Often, we build them statues and shrines or great works of art. This is no different than the way our country treats its heroes. Catholics feel that a martyr for Jesus Christ is infinitely more deserving of honor than a great President or a war veteran.
Certainly at the top of this list is the Blessed Virgin Mary. The Church honors our Lady as the Immaculate Queen and Mother of the Church. Many say that this honor is inappropriate. I would argue that it is commendable. In fact, it is not the Catholic Church but Jesus himself who honors the Blessed Virgin. The Law of Moses commands, "honor thy father and thy mother." The Hebrew word translated honor literally means to glorify. A rich man could not allow his mother to live in poverty. Rather, all Jews were required to elevate their parents to their own status. It is Jesus, then, who elevates Mary by making her Queen of Heaven. In the Book of Revelation, St. John, the caretaker of our Lady, speaks of a vision. "Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of the covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm. A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth. Then another sign appeared in the sky; it was [Satan]... Then the dragon stood before the woman about to give birth, to devour her child when she gave birth. She gave birth to a Son, a male child, destined to rule all nations with an iron rod... When the dragon saw that it had been thrown down to the earth, it pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child. But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle, so that she could fly to her place in the desert... Then the dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God's commandments and bear witness to Jesus." (Revelation 11:19-12:18)
The vision identifies the Mother of Christ with the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark of the Covenant rested in the Holy of Holies. It was the place on earth where God made himself present. The Law is filled with regulations about purity. Absolutely nothing sinful or impure could touch or see God. That is why Uzzah, a good but imperfect man, was struck dead for touching the Ark of the Covenant. It was the Blessed Virgin who brought God into the world. She is honored by Catholics as the Mother of God, which she truly is. She is the Ark of the New Covenant, since in her very body dwelt the same God whom the Israelites worshipped. To be the bearer of God, Mary had to be Immaculate. The slightest sin or impurity would disallow her to bring God the Son into the world. Catholics believe that, by the grace of God, Mary was preserved from all sin from the very moment of her Immaculate Conception.
St. Gabriel the Archangel recognized that the grace of God fully dwelt in our Lady when he greeted her in Luke 2:28. "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women." The vision of St. John portrays the Mother of Christ as Queen. Long ago, God made a covenant with King David. The Lord swore that the eternal Kingdom of God, the Church, would always be ruled by a King of the house of David. At first this was fulfilled through Davidic kings ruling the Kingdom of Judah. God entered humanity as Jesus, the Son of David, and took his permanent seat on the throne of David, ruling the Church. The Kingdom of God also had queens during ancient times. Those queens were not the wives of the kings: many kings had hundreds of wives. The Queen of God's Kingdom has always been the mother of the King. The Queen Mother received homage second only to that of the King. She also acted as an intercessor, going to the King on behalf of the people. One illustration of this is found in 1 Kings 2:19,20. Bathsheba was the Queen of Israel in the days of King Solomon. Solomon, the wise sage, is a proto-type of Christ. His mother is a proto-type of Mary. "Then Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him for Adonijah, and the king stood up to meet her and paid her homage. Then he sat down upon his throne, and a throne was provided for the king's mother, who sat at his right. 'There is one small favor I would ask of you,' she said. 'Do not refuse me.' 'Ask it, my mother,' the king said to her, 'for I will not refuse you.'" The Mother of the King is the Queen of God's Kingdom. Jesus Christ is the eternal King, and his Mother is our Queen. The Catholic Church rightly venerates her as such. St. Elizabeth, filled with the Holy Spirit, recognized this in Luke 1:42,43. "Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. And how does this happen to me, that the Mother of my Lord should come to me?"
In response to what we felt in the Church of Christ and in many other Protestant Churches was a false elevation of Mary, the Blessed Virgin was more or less ignored. I can't remember any sermons about Mary, other than one that I preached myself. I have a question for any of my brothers and sisters in Christ who disapprove of the honor Catholics paid Mary. Mary was paid the honor of bearing God in her womb. What honor can compare to this? If one could imagine anything greater than this honor, perhaps that would be inappropriate. But what is greater than the honor God himself gave her? Just as being in Christ makes Jesus my brother and God the Father my Father, I recognize the Blessed Virgin Christ's Mother and as my own mother. For too long, we non-Catholic have failed to give her the honor she deserves. In the Catholic Church, the Holy Mother of God is paid her proper honor. This is the fourth reason that I embraced the Catholic Church.
We live in a constantly changing world. The abandonment of morality by today's society is labeled progress. What a false progress, indeed. Today we live in the ruins of Western Civilization. I always respected the words of Ghandi who, when asked what he thought of Western Civilization, said "I think it would be a good idea." No honest man can deny that, as Pope Leo XIII predicted, the 20th century has belonged to Satan. Modernism has infected the vast majority of people with a spirit of relativism, which holds that truth is not absolute.
Christianity has not been unaffected by the modernist crisis. I thank God that I was raised in the Church of Christ, a very conservative denomination. I was taught from the pulpit the Gospel truth about such "controversies" as abortion, homosexuality, and the ordination of women. In many of today's mainline Protestant Churches, women serve as pastors and ministers. The Episcopal Church, which is in communion with the Church of England, has ordained priestesses and female bishops. Nearly every Protestant Church, and certainly all the major ones, allow members to use contraception. Many Protestant Churches support the right to choose to abort an unborn child. A large portion of Protestantism no longer speaks out against sexual immorality in the forms of divorce and remarriage, infidelity, premarital sex, and homosexuality. Too many Christian Churches no longer insist upon the inerrancy and inspiration of Sacred Scripture. The Virgin Birth and the Resurrection are relegated to fable status by a horrific percentage of Protestant Churches. A number of Protestant Churches have slipped into a pseudo-Hindu vision of pluralism: that the truth can be found in many paths, rather than in Christ alone.
I have come to realize that the miserable state of today's fallen Christendom is the result of five hundred years of anarchy. When Father Martin Luther and John Calvin made the first splits with the Catholic Church, they would never have envisioned today's mess. However, they were rejecting divinely appointed authority. In it's place, they had nothing solid to offer. First, they lost the Eucharist and the priesthood. In the next generation, they lost Purgatory and devotion to Our Lady. As discussed earlier, every time a Protestant leader invented a new doctrine, another split took place. There was nobody to stop it, because Protestants recognize no central authority but the Bible, which can not interpret itself nor serve a purpose it was never meant to serve.
I mentioned earlier that I am thankful to have been raised in the Church of Christ. The Church of Christ has stood on solid ground in regards to most of the controversial issues of the day. The near future does not seem to hold much change. But, there can be no certainty. Prior to 1930, every non-Catholic church without exception condemned contraception, or Onanism, as an abomination. In 1930, the Church of England sold out because of the popular cry of the masses. Every non-Catholic Church, including the Church of Christ, has followed suit. If someone in the Church of Christ starts teaching that the Bible never specifically condemns abortion, which it doesn't, or that the Divinity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity can not be proven from scripture, who will stop the modernization even of this most conservative denomination? Only in the Catholic Church is there assurance that the truth will be preserved. The Church has spoken infallibly on all the major controversies. The exclusion of women from the priesthood is not open to question. The forbidding of contraception and abortion is not open to question. The inerrancy of Sacred Scripture and the literal truth of the Virgin Birth, Resurrection, and Trinity are not open to question. Divorce and remarriage is unquestionably forbidden. Although there are some who call themselves Catholic, they do so with full knowledge they are rebelling against the teachings of the very Church they claim to espouse.
Many accuse the Church of changing too much. It is true that in the last forty years, the language of the mass, the wording of prayers, the structure of Church bureaucracy, and the role of laity have changed. But while these changes were being made by Catholics, many Protestants started allowing abortion and stopped believing that Jesus Christ was the Messiah and the Incarnate Son of God, the only path to salvation. So, my brothers and sisters, I ask you: Who has changed? The assurance that the Church will not back down to the whining modernism of today's culture of death is the fifth reason I embraced the Catholic Church.
What I have shared here are the five truths which most profoundly motivated me to answer God's call and embrace his Holy Church. Most of this essay was written at the time of my reception into the Church, the peak of my spiritual journey. My journey to Catholicism did not begin with my recognition of these truths. I claim no merit for this great gift. Rather, my journey began with the Lord Jesus, arms outstretched, beckoning me to answer him--to embrace him. This is what I have done in becoming Catholic--and this is all I have done. I have not rejected the faith of my fathers. I have not invented my own way. I am passive in this endeavor. All I have done is embraced my Lord and Savior, and followed after the heart of Jesus.