Other Issues which cannot be ignored

I have given my two reasons (plus a little icing) for joining the Catholic Church. Now I must address a few issues which cannot be ignored.

This page is very long, but organized by topics, so feel free to skim and skip until you find an issue that concerns you.

The Church and the Bible

All the apostles went about spreading the gospel and establishing churches, appointing local church leaders and passing on all the necessary instructions to get the churches started right, and yet most of the apostles did not write anything that has been preserved in the Bible. What we have in the New Testament came from a few of the apostles (and their fellow workers) and even those writings are but a small portion of what they taught. Writing took time away from preaching, and letters could be easily intercepted and destroyed during times of persecution (and some probably were). The apostles preferred speaking to writing, as John said at the end of his second and third letters:

I have much to write to you,
but I do not want to use paper and ink.
Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face,
so that our joy may be complete.

2 John 1:12 (NIV)

I have much to write you,
but I do not want to do so with pen and ink.
I hope to see you soon, and we will talk face to face.

3 John 1:13 (NIV)

The apostle Paul also made it clear that the writings were only part of the teaching, and that the spoken messages were also very important and not to be forgotten:

So then, brothers,
stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you,
whether by word of mouth or by letter.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 (NIV)

(By the way, I can't let this verse go by without pointing out the fact that the Greek word for "teachings" is "paradosis" which is translated as "tradition" in English in other places in the NIV, but the translators made the decision in this one instance to bend the rules and use "teaching" apparently because they did not want to promote the idea that tradition can be a good thing.)

Paul also instructed his disciple Timothy to pass on his oral teachings to other men who would also pass them on to others.

You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.
And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses
entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others.

2 Timothy 2:1-2 (NIV)

We have no writings of Timothy in the Bible. So what became of the teachings of Paul which Timothy heard and was told to pass on? Are they lost forever?

For that matter, considering how many hours of teaching and preaching must have been done by all the apostles during their lives compared to the relatively small number of books we have in the New Testament, it would appear that the vast majority of apostolic teaching has been lost, both written and oral!

The apostle Paul wrote at least four letters to the Church in Corinth, but we only have two of them in our Bible (see I Corinthians 5:9 and 2 Corinthians 2:3), and he also wrote a letter from Laodicea which is not in our Bible (see Colossians 4:16).

We know that the majority of the deeds of Jesus are not even recorded in Bible, as the apostle John has affirmed.

It would seem that John was still a youth during the time he was with Jesus, which would explain why could stay near the cross without fear of being arrested when the others had to stay away. And as far as we know, John outlived the other apostles. As the last surviving member of the Twelve, he understood that Christ would not return in his own lifetime, contrary to rumors that he would not die until Christ came. In the final years of his life, John apparently saw the need to write a final eye-witness account of Jesus' life with details which were not recorded in the other three written accounts. But his time was limited, and he made it very clear to the reader that much would have to go unwritten.

Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples,
which are not recorded in this book.
But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God,
and that by believing you may have life in his name.

John 20:30-31 (NIV)

This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down.
We know that his testimony is true.
Jesus did many other things as well.
If every one of them were written down,
I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

John 21:24-25 (NIV)

As far as we know, Jesus did not write anything down (except for some unrecorded writing with his finger on the ground) and the majority of what Jesus did during His time on earth -- plus what he must have said in connection with those deeds -- went unrecorded.

Jesus spent some three years with the twelve apostles, living with them and talking with them day and night. Then there was that period of 40 days after Jesus' resurrection before he ascended to heaven. Jesus must have used that crucial period with his disciples as a time of intense instruction to fully reveal their mission on earth and prepare them for their roles as preachers and leaders in the Church.

All that information no doubt exceeded what we have in the few writings of the apostles in the Bible. They were probably more interested in using their time to proclaim the gospel and plant new churches than to sit down and write detailed instructions!

So what happened to all of that unrecorded teaching that the apostles received from Jesus? Was it completely lost? Not necessarily; much can be gleaned from the writings of the early Church Fathers who recognized the need to preserve in writing what they had received from the original apostles. Some of these documents such as the Didache were written while the apostles were still alive, before some parts of the New Testament were written.

There is actually a huge body of written work by the early Church Fathers from the early years of the Church, including writings of men who were directly taught by twelve apostles. These men are known as the Apostolic Fathers.

There are the letters by Clement of Rome who was ordained bishop of Rome by the apostle Peter. We also have the letters of Ignatius of Antioch who was a disciple of John and possibly ordained bishop of Antioch by Peter. We also have the letters of Polycarp, another disciple of John.

Although not inspired like the Bible, the writings of the Apostolic Fathers and the Early Church Fathers are reliable as historical documents and include descriptions of how the early church worshipped and conducted itself, and how the early hierarchy was structured. In these writings you will find a clear description of the early Church, and you can't help but notice that it is a description of the Catholic Church and not any Protestant church.

We even have a book on early Church history which was written by Eusebius of Caesarea in the early 300s A.D. This man had access to documents which have long since perished, plus he had access to accounts and histories which were handed down orally and still fresh. Although definitely not inspired scripture, it is generally reliable as any history book, and has some amazing accounts of what the Christians recognized as historical fact back then.

What's the best way to interpret the Bible? Come up with your own interpretation 2000 years after the fact, or find out how the first Christians interpreted it while the apostles or their disciples were still around to correct them?

Catholics accept the ancient teachings and practices handed down in the Church, which are called Sacred Tradition. These teachings fill in a lot of the gaps. Protestants claim to accept only the teachings of the Bible (although the very concept of relying only on the Bible comes from outside the Bible since it is not taught anywhere in the Bible).

With Catholics the God-inspired Scriptures have priority over Tradition, but both are considered important.

Even as a Protestant I knew that we also filled in gaps with our own Protestant "traditions" which were not nearly as old as the Catholic ones. I remember thinking that a person could not even get "saved" by reading just the Bible without some kind of supplement such as the "Four Spiritual Laws" to show him the way.

As a Protestant who was active in evangelism, the "sinner's prayer" was a crucial tool in my ministry. I couldn't "close the sale" without it. There are many versions of the sinner's prayer out there, the most famous version probably being the one found in the back of the Four Spiritual Laws:

Lord Jesus, I need You.
Thank You for dying on the cross for my sins.
I open the door of my life and receive You as my Savior and Lord.
Thank You for forgiving my sins and giving me eternal life.
Take control of the throne of my life.
Make me the kind of person You want me to be.

Again, my point is not that tradition is a bad thing, and both Protestants and Catholics rely on them. But we ought to recognize the value of Tradition (capitalized) which comes from the early Church, especially from those who were taught by the apostles.

It is no wonder we have so much difficulty communicating and debating certain issues; Protestants and Catholics don't go by the same ground rules. We are not on the same page. Protestants claim to look to the Bible only while Catholics look to the Church that gave us the Bible.

For the first few centuries, the Church spread all over Europe, Africa and Asia and suffered great persecution so that Christians had to meet in secret for fear of their lives. Hand-copied manuscripts of gospel accounts and letters of the apostles were circulated among the churches along with lots of other similar writings such as the Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistle of Barnabas. These were read when the early Christians were gathered together.

There had been no general agreement among the Christians concerning which writings should be considered the inspired written Word of God.

Then, after Christianity was declared legal during the fourth century and Christians came out of hiding, the pope and bishops gathered and determined which of these writings were to be included in the New Testament canon.

Both Protestants and Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit guided them in the selection process. It is clear that the Church gave us the New Testament.

The apostle Paul used the term "pillar and foundation of the truth" in his letter to Timothy. What do you suppose he was referring to? The Bible? No, he was referring to the Church:

Although I hope to come to you soon,
I am writing you these instructions so that, if I am delayed,
you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household,
which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

2 Timothy 3:14-15(NIV)

And back then there was only one church he could be referring to, the church that Jesus built, the Catholic Church. "Catholic" simply means "universal," and the term "Catholic Church" (ekklesia katolika in Greek) was used way back around 110 A.D. in the writings of Ignatius of Antioch (mentioned above). Ignatius did not have to explain what he meant by it; the Church was apparently already called the Catholic Church by that time.

When I discuss my faith with others, I refer to myself as a Christian as I have always done. For the first thousand years, all Christians were members of one church and it was the Catholic Church. The original Christians were Catholics.

When Christians today recite the Apostles' Creed (which may have been around since the second century) they profess their belief in the "holy catholic Church."And when they recite the Nicene Creed (also known as the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed which was formed in 381 A.D.) they profess their belief in "one holy catholic and apostolic Church." Today some Protestants may explain these terms away so that they take on a new and different meaning, but when these creeds were originally written there was no ambiguity as to what Church it referred to.

But can I trust them?

When I first took a serious look at the Catholic Church I had the major obstacles that all Protestants have, such as the pope, Mary and the saints, and I began my investigation like any Protestant would, by looking for evidence in the Bible.

Then I turned to the early Church Fathers, church history, and also a big fat book called The Catechism of the Catholic Church to see what the Catholic Church actually taught about these issues.

Even as I came up with enough evidence to overcome some difficulties, other issues popped up that I needed to confront. I suspected that even more issues might surface later on, and the quest could go on forever if my goal was to pursue every difficult teaching to a satisfactory conclusion.

My problem was I was going about it the wrong way because I had missed the main issue which was whether or not the teaching authority of the Catholic Church is trustworthy. I wouldn't have to prove every doctrine that I came across if I could just trust the Church and accept that it has been guided all along by the Holy Spirit as Jesus promised to the first church leaders, the apostles:

I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear.
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth.

He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears,
and he will tell you what is yet to come.

He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you.
All that belongs to the Father is mine.

That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he will make known to you.

John 16:12-15 (NIV)

It seems reasonable that the Holy Spirit would guide the church into all the truth especially since Paul declared the church to be the pillar and foundation of the truth.

When Jesus made this promise, he was talking to the men who would be the leaders of the church which was to be founded at that time and which would continue to the present day. He was not addressing leaders of Protestant churches which would not come into existence for another 1,500 years.

Protestants already accept that the Holy Spirit has guided the Catholic Church into all the truth, because we all accept many teachings which are not spelled out in the Bible but were taught in the early church, and we all use Catholic words not found in the Bible such as Trinity and incarnation. These biblical concepts are not as self evident as we would like to think.

The Catholic Church, guided by the Spirit of truth had to clarify and define doctrine when people started to teach contrary opinions.

As mentioned above, we accept the list of 27 books of the New Testament that the Catholic Church gave us.

Many Protestants also accept as reliable the early historical accounts of the deaths of the apostles such as reports of Paul being beheaded and Peter crucified upside down in Rome. We accept as historical fact the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. which is described in ancient documents although it is not mentioned in the Bible.

If we accept some of what the Catholic Church has taught us, on what grounds do we reject the rest? Where can we draw the line? The same people who gave us the 27 books of the New Testament also tell us that we must not ignore the other teachings of the apostles as handed down in the Church.

The big issue is what I have mentioned so many times already: authority. Can I recognize the authority of the one universal Church that Jesus built and which the Holy Spirit has guided and preserved? Can I submit to that authority?

If you are like most people today, you probably don't have the time or energy to hunt down all the relevant Bible passages or writings of the Church Fathers or all the official declarations of the Church from its over two thousand year history.

Fortunately those teachings can be found in one place, which is that big book called The Catechism of the Catholic Church which I have mentioned a few times already. You can read it online for free, or you can get the actual book. If you find such a big book to be a bit daunting, there is a concise edition in question-and-answer form called the Compendium of Catechism of the Catholic Church, and if that is still too much, there is also an easier-to-read edition for young readers called YOUCAT (Youth Catechism of the Catholic Church).

Church growth and development

The Church (specifically its leaders, the bishops with the pope) as the pillar and foundation of the truth has the authority to defend and define teachings as official Church doctrine. But it has been reluctant to do so until it reaches a point of crisis when a teaching is challenged and there is danger of people abandoning it. Some such doctrines such as the incarnation and the Trinity had to be defended early, while others such as long-held teachings about Mary had to be defended much later.

Jesus used the image of a mustard seed to describe the kingdom:

He told them another parable:
"The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed,
which a man took and planted in his field.
Though it is the smallest of all your seeds,
yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree,
so that the birds of the air come and perch in its branches."

Matthew 13:31-32 (NIV)

The Church has been growing and developing for 2000 years under the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit who has continued to shed light on the truth and treasures of the Kingdom of God. A mustard seed does not simply increase in size and become a giant mustard seed unchanged in every other way; it develops and grows in complexity with branches, leaves, and flowers over time. It doesn't look like the mustard seed any more than we look like our old baby pictures.

A lot of Christians would like to see the Church return to its simple and pure existence as it was in the early years, but that would be like wishing that adults would once again become tiny and cute and wear diapers. But if we all became babies again, the human race would perish.

I can now recognize that the Catholic Church today is what Jesus had envisioned from the beginning, and that the Holy Spirit guided its formation and growth.

The Church has grown from its simple beginnings and has developed like a huge and complex tree. And like the birds of the air who came to perch in its branches, people from all countries, languages and cultures have come to live in it and call it home. Over 1.2 billion people in the world are in the Catholic Church. It is by far the biggest single Church in the world; nobody else even comes close.

As I have already pointed out, for the first thousand years, there was no other church but the Catholic Church. Jesus said he would build His church, and that the Holy Spirit would guide it. Anyone who claims that the Catholic Church has gone astray is in danger of calling Jesus a liar and declaring that the Holy Spirit was not able to guide the Church these two thousand years.

I used to think that the Catholic Church was just another Christian denomination, and I was proud of my own generosity since a lot of people will not even admit that much. Now I realize that calling the Catholic Church another Christian denomination is like saying that you are ready to admit that your mother is one of the family. It might sound OK to your ears, but it is very rude to mom. The Catholic Church is the mother Church and she calls her estranged children to come home and rejoin the family.

As mentioned above, the word "catholic" simply means "universal," and I usually don't refer to the Church as the Roman Catholic Church which is a strange combination of adjectives. The "Roman" part was added by Anglicans many years ago who wanted to continue calling themselves "catholic" even after they split from the Catholic Church. The term did not have a positive image at first, but the years have taken the sting out of it, and today many Catholics call themselves Roman Catholics.

Actually, what we have come to know as the Roman Catholic Church is only a part of the Catholic Church; right now there are 23 autonomous churches in the Catholic Church, most of them are Eastern Rite churches such as the Coptic, Marionite, Armenian, and Byzantine Rites, to name a few. They are self governing, and a visitor could easily mistake many of these for Eastern Orthodox Churches, but they but all are in communion with the pope, whose authority they accept as the successor of Peter.

If Jesus built only one universal church on the rock called Peter, then one could make the argument that all Christians in the world are already part of the Catholic Church whether they like it or not, like estranged children. They just need to find their way home like the prodigal son.

If you wanted to be simplistic, based on the numbers of Christians in the world (I have read it is approximately 2.1 billion), you could say that most Christians in the world are already members of the Catholic Church with its 1.2 billion members.

To keep things in perspective, the Eastern Orthodox churches are recognized by the Catholic Church as being part of the one true church.

Although they split from each other during the 11th century mainly over political and cultural differences -- and leaders on both sides were at fault -- the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox churches together are considered the "two lungs" of the Church, and both sides earnestly desire to reunite officially, but it will require working out differences from the last thousand years (still, representatives from both sides are meeting regularly and working on it).

During my few years of research I also considered the Orthodox churches, and visited a Russian Orthodox church several times in Tokyo (there are no other Orthodox churches around here). It was beautiful, but the cultural barriers were huge. Perhaps not enough to prevent me from pursuing it if I thought this was the best path for me, but in the end I chose the part of the Church which submits to the authority of the successor of Peter -- the first of my two reasons mentioned on page 2. For more information on my experience with the Orthodox Church, see my separate and long-winded article, Why did I choose the Catholic Church and not the Orthodox Churches?

The Catholic Church currently has 1,200,000,000 members (1.2 billion) while the Eastern Orthodox churches have 210,000,000 members (one big "lung" and one that is much smaller). Together they can claim over 1.4 billion members world wide. That's two thirds of all the Christians in the world.

A movement in both directions

One area where Protestants outshine Catholics is Bible study. Although the Catholic Mass has much more public Bible reading than a typical Protestant worship service, many cradle-Catholics who were raised in the Church rarely read the Bible on their own, while Protestants are typically well versed in the Bible and study it on their own, even memorizing large portions. I myself had memorized over 500 verses plus the entire first letter of John from the New American Standard Bible.

Many Catholics leave their church without understanding what they left, and then talk about how bad the Catholic Church was. There are several books which describe the errors and evils of the Catholic Church written by people who left the Church -- or were never part of the Church -- who couldn't discern the myths from the facts. For many years my own opinion of the Catholic Church was based on some of these inaccurate writings.

On the other hand, some Protestants, once they expand their study to include church history and the writings of the early Church Fathers, are drawn to the Catholic Church and bring all their evangelistic zeal and Bible knowledge with them. And they still have an appreciation for the Protestant tradition they left behind. You would be amazed at how many Protestant clergy have become Catholics in recent years.

A lot of former Catholics finally study the Bible at Protestant churches, recognize the great treasure they left behind, and return to the Catholic Church.

A speed bump: bad Catholics

I have referred to the issue of authority many times already in my explanation. Again, what I am referring to is the specific teaching authority which has been entrusted to the pope and all the bishops who are in union with him. This group is also called the Magisterium of the Church.

It is an unfortunate reality that the Catholic Church often looks better on paper than it does in person.

The Church has been entrusted to human beings, who can be self-centered and sinful, and even deaf to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit may not allow them to influence the official doctrines of the Church, but these people can still cause lots of damage in other ways.

Many of us have known Catholics who did not live up to the name, and a lot of people will tell you that the most notorious sinners among their friends were Catholics. Sure, there are a lot of bad Protestants out there as well, but they tend to not identify as Christians anymore and stop going to church, while even bad Catholics tend to hold on to their Catholic identity, perhaps due to family or cultural reasons.

Some Catholic theologians write heretical stuff and some bishops and priests unfortunately teach crazy stuff which contradicts the teachings of the Church. And as you know, a lot of really bad priests and bishops have made the headlines for their inexcusable sinful acts.

There are bad priests out there even now. My first step towards the Catholic Church was an appointment with a grumpy priest at a parish in Tokyo which caters to the English-speaking community. The things he told me were so discouraging that it temporarily derailed my train (which might have been his goal since he apparently disliked Bible-literate evangelical Christians). According to my journal entry from that day, this priest told me that my reading of the Catechism was "really stupid" because that book was only intended for bishops, and that some of the things I considered reasons to leave the Anglican Church such as the consecration of practicing homosexual bishops would eventually be permitted in the Catholic Church under a different pope. He also suggested I try a different parish. Later I learned that he was wrong on just about everything he said during our meeting, and that he had a bad reputation among my Catholic friends who knew him. Thank God, I eventually resumed my inquiries and found a great parish with great priests who submit to the teachings of the Church and encouraged the study of the Bible -- and also the Catechism.

The lesson to be learned from this is that you might encounter a bad priest as you investigate the Catholic Church. Don't be shocked or discouraged but just keep looking until you find a good one. And pray for the bad priest.

Any institution that has grown as big and as old as this is bound to have its share of personnel problems. That's a hard thing to swallow for someone like me who was raised with the idea that you don't put up with any nonsense but simply leave and find another church -- or start a new one. Staying put and trying to fix the problem from the inside was not part of my mindset. Unfortunately for the world, neither was it part of Martin Luther's. Many -- if not all -- of the complaints Luther raised about the Church were corrected after he left -- by those who chose to remain and reform it from the inside.

There have always been bad Catholics in history among the laity and at all levels of the hierarchy. There have been dark times in the history of the Church where many leaders were corrupt, even a few popes. One of the original twelve apostles, Judas Iscariot, was a real bad apple. But what thinking person would leave Peter and the other apostles because of Judas? We shouldn't be surprised at the rotten apples in the Church since Jesus already said this very thing would happen:

Jesus told them another parable:
"The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field.
But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away.
When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.

"The owner's servants came to him and said,
'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field?
Where then did the weeds come from?'

"'An enemy did this,' he replied.

"The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?'

"'No,' he answered,
'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may uproot the wheat with them.
Let both grow together until the harvest.
At that time I will tell the harvesters:
First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned;
then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.'"

Then he left the crowd and went into the house.
His disciples came to him and said, "Explain to us the parable of the weeds in the field."

He answered, "The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man.
The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the people of the kingdom.
The weeds are the people of the evil one,
and the enemy who sows them is the devil.
The harvest is the end of the age,
and the harvesters are angels.

As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire,
so it will be at the end of the age.
The Son of Man will send out his angels,
and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil.
They will throw them into the blazing furnace,
where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father.
Whoever has ears, let them hear.

Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43 (NIV)

The Catholic Church has always had its share of "weeds" sowed by the enemy who wants to destroy it, but it is still Jesus' church and he will deal with the weeds in his own time.

If the Holy Spirit were not personally active in the history of the Church, it would have destroyed itself and vanished a long time ago!

The fact that the Catholic Church still exists is proof that it is the "real deal."

Culture shock!

While I'm on the subject of speed bumps, another obvious hurdle which many Protestant evangelicals encounter when examining the Catholic Church is the culture. You might experience severe culture shock when you visit a Catholic Mass, and it might turn you off the first few times you visit.

Of course, there is quite a bit of diversity within the Catholic Church.

James Joyce described the Catholic Church with the phrase, "Here comes everybody!"

Some parishes will have a rather casual atmosphere complete with guitars and song lyrics projected on a screen, while other parishes fully embrace the culture of "smells and bells" and Latin prayers which are as familiar to the average Protestant as life on another planet. Some parishes have large ethnic congregations with even more unfamiliar cultural elements.

Sometimes you will find several types in the same Church where different groups have Mass in their own languages at different times on a Sunday.

Remember that the Church is an amazingly wonderful gift from Jesus, and don't fret too much over the wrapping. You might even learn to like it.

The Catholic Church is far from perfect, but if it is the original church that Jesus built, then my options are limited; I had to choose the Catholic Church, warts and all -- where else could I go?

Protestants and Catholics

Hopefully this explanation will satisfy your curiosity as to why I did what I did. You may not agree with me; I would not have agreed with this article during most of my adult life, and nobody could have convinced me that my position as a Protestant was wrong.

There are some Protestant scholars who have far more knowledge about these things than I do, who are still not convinced that they must join the Catholic Church, and there are other Protestant scholars who did in fact eventually convert to the Catholic Church. As I examined the issues for myself and expanded my studies to include Catholic resources and early church history, I personally became convinced by the overwhelming evidence that I must join the Catholic Church.

As I wrote at the beginning of this long article, I joined the Catholic Church after being an evangelical Protestant all my life. Now I'm an evangelical Catholic. I still pray and study the Bible daily as I have always done. I still read my Bible from cover to cover at least once a year. I also pray the Rosary every day.

Of course, I believe I could have gone to heaven as a Protestant. Who can deny that the Holy Spirit is active in Protestant Churches? They have the gifts of the Spirit, an amazing zeal and love for Christ and the Kingdom of God. Many Protestant martyrs have shed their blood for their faith.

The Catholic Church recognizes all baptized Christians as brothers even if they are in communities which have separated from the Catholic Church. Here is how the Catechism puts it:

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth" are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements." Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."

Catechism of the Catholic Church, 818 & 819

So I need to clarify that I am not attacking the Protestant Churches or my Protestant friends. I thank God for all the people I led to Christ during my Protestant days, and I don't doubt the validity of their salvation. When I hear of people getting "saved" at a Protestan church, I rejoice! But I also hope and pray that they don't stop there, but go on to discover the Catholic Church where they will find even more blessings.

As a Protestant coming into the Catholic Church, you will discover that there is so much to gain and absolutely nothing to give up. You can bring all the treasures of your Bible study and evangelistic zeal with you and enrich the local Church as it enriches you.

When I take communion in the Catholic Church, the sense of Jesus' presence is so overwhelming that I am often moved to tears. But it's more than just an emotional high at church; I can recognize the effects of grace. I find my thoughts turning to God more often than before. I am able to resist sin more successfully than before.

I'm finally able to succeed in the "practice of the presence of God" which I had been attempting for 30 years since I read the words of Brother Lawrence. By the way, in case you forgot, Brother Lawrence was a Catholic who received all the grace that comes from Jesus' presence in the Eucharist. In addition, he was a lay brother in a Carmelite monastery and wore the brown scapular day and night, a powerful sacramental which undoubtedly was a secret weapon in his success in practicing the presence of God.

For the sake of the world

Of all the reasons for joining the Catholic Church, I saved this one for last, which should speak to the heart of everyone who calls himself an evangelical or an evangelist.

In the prayer of Jesus in the seventeenth chapter of the Gospel of John, he said to his Father in Heaven:

I have given them the glory that you gave me,
that they may be one as we are one -- in them and you in me -- so that they may be brought to complete unity.
Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

John 17:22, 23 (NIV)

There is a relatively new concept (new in the history of the Church) which was born out of necessity after the Protestants left the Catholic Church that teaches that there is an invisible universal Church which contains all believers of all denominations; a Church which agrees in the major issues and agrees to disagree in the minor issues.

Of course the reality is, many Protestant groups disagree on the major issues as well, and there is no agreement as to who actually belongs to this invisible Church. And the concept of an invisible Church is not found anywhere in the Bible, which teaches clearly about the importance of one unified Church that the world can actually see and recognize.

Every time a new Christian group or denomination has splintered from the Catholic Church (or from another splintered group outside of the Catholic Church), the confusion and scandal in the eyes of the world has increased, and evangelism efforts have been further damaged.

The world must wonder how the message of Jesus Christ can be true when there are tens of thousands of Christian groups who disagree with each other and even attack each other. It seems that some Christians have turned their guns on each other and have forgotten who their real enemy is.

If you follow the example of Jesus and pray for the unity of all Christians in the world, you ought to make sure that you yourself are united with the one Church that Jesus built.

Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church;
and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.

Matthew 16:18 (KJV)

The world needs zealous Bible-literate Protestant evangelists to join the Catholic Church so we can stand shoulder-to-shoulder as one unified army and storm the gates of Hell.

If this article makes you want to investigate further, go ahead and follow the links I've provided in Part 4: Resources for Further Investigation.

The moment men cease to pull against it they feel a tug towards it. The moment they cease to shout it down they begin to listen to it with pleasure. The moment they try to be fair to it they begin to be fond of it. But when that affection has passed a certain point it begins to take on the tragic and menacing grandeur of a great love affair. G.K. Chesterton, The Catholic Church and Conversion

Part 1: My Story
Part 2: My Reasons for joining the Catholic Church
Part 3: Other Issues which cannot be ignored
Part 4: Resources for Further Investigation

Scripture taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION. Copyright 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Bible Publishers.

The New International Version (NIV) is the most popular version of the Bible among Evangelical Protestants. My personal favorites have always been the New American Standard Bible (NASB) and the King James Version (KVJ) which I also quoted in this article.