Contraception

I received the following question, in italics, in an email from a reader and recent convert to the Catholic Faith. I offer the following article in an attempt to answer the question. Please, if I have missed something, or misspoke in any way, let me know.

At 46 going on 47 years old with the last pregnancy in my late 30s ending in a painful and emotional miscarriage. My husband and I decided it was time not to have any more. I am at a loss on the church’s teaching on no contraceptives. So what is the church’s teaching on this and is there scripture to back it up?


I should also state that my husband and I are on different prescribed mediations for our health that affect unborn babies for the last several years.
I believe that God has taken this issue from me and my husband. My heart is at peace and with my recent conversion I feel that God is strongly leading me to do more for the Catholic church than just sit in mass.

The issue of contraception must be understood in context of the covenant marriage ordained by God. Scripture teaches us that marriage is both unitive and procreative. These are both essential elements contained in God’s divine plan.

In Genesis chapter two, verse 23 Adam said of Eve, “This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; This one shall be called ‘woman,’ for out of ‘her man’ this one has been taken.” Verse 24 explains, That is why a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body.” In Genesis chapter one, verse 28 God blesses Adam and Eve and tells them, “Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.”

Christ echoed this in Matthew chapter 19, verses four through six, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’ 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’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that in marriage a man and a woman, “establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life” (CCC 1601).

Scripture reveals to us that it is God’s plan “from the beginning” (Mt. 19: 4) that man and woman should through marriage, “become one flesh” (Mt. 19: 5), for “it is not good for the man to be alone” (Gen. 2: 18). “The consent by which the spouses mutually give and receive one another is sealed by God himself” (CCC 1639).

Over and over again we are presented with this idea of union and oneness: “become one body”, “become one flesh”, “partnership of the whole of life”, “give and receive one anther”. Man and woman are called to give themselves totally to the other in marriage. The pinnacle manifestation of this giving and receiving, or consummation, is the conjugal act.

Conjugal love involves a totality, in which all the elements of the person enter – appeal of the body and instinct, power of feeling and affectivity, aspiration of the spirit and of will. It aims at a deeply personal unity, a unity that, beyond union in one flesh, leads to forming one heart and soul; it demands indissolubility and faithfulness in definitive mutual giving; and it is open to fertility. In a word it is a question of the normal characteristics of all natural conjugal love, but with a new significance which not only purifies and strengthens them, but raises them to the extent of making them the expression of specifically Christian values.

This conjugal love has as its natural end the gift of a child. “Fecundity is a gift, an end of marriage, for conjugal love naturally tends to be fruitful. A child does not come from outside as something added on to the mutual love of the spouses, but springs from the very heart of that mutual giving, as its fruit and fulfillment” (CCC 2366).

Here I will follow momentarily a tangent concerning infertility. The Church recognizes that the inability to have children causes many couples to suffer greatly. (CCC 2374). The Catechism later says, “a child is not something owed to one, but it is a gift” (CCC 2378). “The Gospel shows that physical sterility is not an absolute evil. Spouses who still suffer from infertility after exhausting legitimate medical procedures should unite themselves with the Lord’s Cross, the source of all spiritual fecundity” (CCC 2379). It should be noted here that the use of techniques such as surrogates and artificial insemination are not morally permissible. For more information please see CCC 2376 – 2377.

God established marriage as the means by which man and woman would give and receive of themselves to enter into this “partnership of the whole of life.” Through our sexuality, properly ordered for the bond of marriage, God gives us the awesome ability to share in His act of creation. This is a gift that we should embrace and cherish.

The use of contraception closes this ability to share in God’s act of creation. What more, it removes the full unity found in marriage. The use of contraceptives does not allow the spouses to give themselves fully to the other. Sin is the rejection of God’s will and divine plan. Therefore the Church rightly teaches that the use of contraceptives is morally illicit.

Pope Paul VI says in Humanae Vitae, “to be excluded . . . is direct sterilization, whether perpetual or temporary, whether of the man or the woman. Similarly excluded is every action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible.” Scripture provides support for this in Genesis chapter 38. Verses 6 – 10 tell us that Judah instructed his son Onan to take the widow of his brother Er as his wife and to father children in order to preserve Er’s line. Verse 9 states, “Onan, however, knew that the descendants would not be counted as his; so whenever he had relations with his brothers widow, he wasted his seed on the ground, to avoid contributing offspring for his brother. What he did greatly offended the Lord, and the Lord took his life also.”

In some circumstances it may be desirable for couples to regulate the birth of children.

“It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood. Moreover, they should conform their behavior to the objective criteria of morality:

When it is a question of harmonizing married love with the responsible transmission of life, the morality of the behavior does not depend on sincere intention and evaluation of motives alone; but it must be determined by objective criteria, criteria drawn from the nature of the person and his acts, criteria that respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love; this is possible only if the virtue of married chastity is practiced with sincerity of heart.

“By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its orientation toward man’s exalted vocation to parenthood.”

Periodic continence, this is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom.

Pope Paul VI summed this up nicely in Humanae Vitae saying that couples who refrain from sexual relations during periods of fertility, “make legitimate use of a natural disposition.”

In summary, the Church’s teachings on contraception must be understood in context of the marriage covenant established by God the Creator. In marriage man and woman are called to give of themselves totally to the other, becoming one flesh. This giving to each other naturally is conductive to the creation of new life. The conjugal act is the supreme manifestation of the marriage bond. Marriage is both unitive and procreative. As this is the natural design of God it is unacceptable to reject either aspect as they are both necessary and equal in accordance with God’s will. Contraception acts to block the procreative aspect of the conjugal act and is therefore illicit. Abstaining from sexual relations during periods of fertility is acceptable because it remains open to the possibility of the creation of new life is seen fit by God.

Perpetual Virginity of Mary

Joes at The Breastplate of St. Patrick was kind enough to write this post concerning the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. I would also suggest that you check out Joel's post Protestantism Is A Lifeboat On Stormy Seas. Even though that post isn't directly related to this post, I think it is a good read.

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary was always a hard sell for me too. It wasn't until the last 6 months or so I started to get a handle on it. There are a few reasons why I feel that Mary needed to be a Perpetual Virgin and I will share them to the best of my knowledge and ability, however if I am off track or I contradict the Magisterium, please let me know and I will conform my opinions to those of the Church. Without further ado, the reasons are as follows.

1) Mary was the Ark of the New Covenant.

If you remember the Ark of the Old Covenant, it contained the 10 commandments (Word of God), the manna from the desert (Bread of Life) and Aaron's budding staff (Pastoral Symbolism). We also know that the foreshadowing of the Old Testament always takes a new form: the Word become flesh (John 1), the Passover Lamb becoming human, circumcision becoming baptism (Col 2:9-12). Following this vein, we can see that Mary was foreshadowed by the Ark of the Old Covenant having in her womb the Word of God, the Bread of Life and the Good Shepherd. What other reason for the Old Ark was there? It went before the Israelites through the wilderness and was the first into the waters of the Jordan, thereby allowing the Jews of the second generation to go through the waters as if in Baptism into the Promised Land. Please note the allegory of the Christian life found in the Exodus story. First in slavery to sin (Egypt), set free by the blood of the Lamb (passover), through the waters of Baptism (Red Sea) into the wilderness of the world where we are aliens on our pilgrimage to Heaven (wandering), fed with the Bread of Life and quenched with water from the Rock, given spiritual formation and training in holiness (Sinai and the 10 commandments), fighting against evil forces (defending against tribes in the area), and finally coming to the Promised Land, again through Baptism. The Ark led the way the whole time. So how does Perpetual Virginity work into this? Well, if you touched the Old Ark, you died. It was holy and set apart for God and God alone. It was a beacon, an object of adoration and a declaration of God's favour and provision. Mary likewise then was holy, set apart for God and God alone and is a beacon, object of adoration and a declaration of God's favour and provision. There is a strict "look but don't touch" rule in effect.

2)This was explained to me by my RCIA leader when I was but on my way to becoming a Catechumen because the Perpetual Virginity was high on my list of grievances with the Church.
The Jewish concept of marriage was a little different than what we have today. Anyone who has seen "The Nativity Story" has seen that when a couple became engaged, they were actually married at that point, but until the ceremony they were to refrain from what led to family so the marriage would be pure and there would be no doubt about the bride's virginity. We can see this in the Church today as the Church is the Bride of Christ, but the Marriage feast of the Lamb is spoken of as a future event. However, if the woman became pregnant, the Groom would marry her anyhow (if he knew the baby was his of course).
When it was announced to Mary that she was to conceive God's Son, she was under no illusions as to what that meant. To have someone's child was to be married to them. In her 'yes' Mary agreed to become God's 'spouse'. This makes sense also if Mary is to be the foreshadowing of the Church itself who is to be Christ's Spouse. Joseph therefore was told to take her into his house anyhow so that the baby would have a father and so God's Spouse would not be put to shame. Having said this, Joseph was a devout man the Gospels say and as a devout man, how could he in good consience have sexual relations with someone else's spouse? Mary had no other Children and remained a Virgin Perpetually because she became God's Spouse, prefiguring the marriage of Christ to the Church.

The question of Matt 1:25 came up to me also. It says:
"but had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son; and he named him Jesus."
What about the word "until"? I asked my Priest this question and he answered me thusly: In modern English the word until is used conditionally, that is to imply that whatever condition existed before no longer existed after. The original use of the word did not have this connotation of condition to it. Simply understood, when the author says 'until she bore a Son', he is trying to emphasize that she did not have relations with anyone, not even her own (earthly) husband so there would be no disputing that the child was of divine origin, not to imply this situation changed afterwards. I am quite satisfied with that explaination.

3) In the Garden of Eden, the Man was given the job of heading up the human family (which is more of a curse than a blessing if you are reading this as a feminist). If you will read Gen 3, you will find that Eve cursed herself and the relationships she will have as a result of being tricked, but since Adam chose sin over God, the whole of creation was damned. Sin entered into the world through the man only. This is one of the reasons that the Jewish faith is passed through the Mother only, because Original Sin is passed through the man. This is also the reason why Christ did not have an earthly father in a biological sense. He could not be scarred by sin in order to be our spotless sacrifice. Having said all this, Mary was the new Eve. In Gen 3 Adam named the woman Eve because she was the mother of all living. Likewise as the mother of all living in Christ, she is the new Eve. Therefore she is subject to Christ alone as he is the new Adam (1 Cor 15:35-50). To have sexual relations with anyone else would be to submit to or to put herself into subjection to the body of sin.
I was reading D.G.D. Davidson's conversion story at www.scificatholic.com yesterday, and I noted specifically his ponderings on birth control. My wife asked why we don't allow barrier methods as they do not abort or cause medical complications. I referred to Gen 38 and the story of Tamar, the wife of Judah's son. Judah's son Er was struck down by God for being evil, so his brother Onan was told to go and 'raise up offspring for his brother' by making Tamar his wife. It is said then that Onan practiced the 'withdrawal method' and spilled his seed on the ground (every time it says). God struck him dead for this also. Why? because he refused to give of himself to the woman, he only took. It was the ultimate way to use and mistreat the woman in his day and age. Likewise, barrier methods of birth control have in fact perfected this feat of using, abusing and demeaning by now allowing the man to 'complete the act' without in fact giving of himself at all. Barrier methods allow men to steal more effectively from women. What does this have to do with the Perpetual Virginity of Mary? Well, if denying the gift of himself is evil, then a man does good by giving of himself, by giving of his flesh to his wife if you will for the purpose of creating a new life within her. Since the sacrament of marriage is a foreshadowing of our marriage (in the Church) to Christ, and Christ always does what is good, he gives of his flesh to his bride, the Church, for the purpose of creating a new life within her, both collectively and individually speaking. Finally, as previously mentioned, as the foreshadow of the Church, Mary accepts "the Flesh of God" as the creation of a new life within her. To accept another flesh less than that of God after this is unthinkable and unnacceptable.

4)Like Divine Revelation, the doctrines about Mary are trinitarian to a certain degree. They are Immaculate Conception, Perpetual Virginity and Assumption into Heaven. Mary was Immaculately conceived as I understand as a singular grace given in advance for what Christ was about to do (and had in fact accomplished as he is Divine, outside of the bounds of time and therefore everything is now to Him) so redeeming her also. If she did not receive this grace, Perpetual Virginity and Assumption would be impossible. To be without stain of Original Sin meant that she committed no actual or personal sins. This meant that she was without concupicence or tendency towards sin, and therefore capable of remaining pure in every sense. This also means, since the wages of sin is death (Rom 3:23), then she was free to be assumed into Heaven because she had no sin to be paid for.
What this all means is that if you attack or deny Perpetual Virginity, you then also deny the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. By saying she did not remain a Virgin is to say that she was capable of sinning, and that means she was not born free of concupicence, and therefore not born free of Original Sin. What this also implies is that she had sinned and therefore was capable of dying. Even farther, if Mary sinned, Christ was also marked by sin and could not be our sacrifice for sin, and this would make his death useless and deny also the resurrection due to the fact the resurrection relies on the assertion that Christ was in fact sinless.
There is a good reason that the Church declares these things Dogmas of the Church; because if you deny one of them the whole of the faith unravels and is left a sham.

1 Cor 15:17-19
17 If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have died in Christ have perished. 19 If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.

I hope this has helped you out! I had a lot of fun writing it, and putting it all together on 'paper' helps me solidify my own view.

In Christ Jesus the Risen Lord
Joel

A Call for Submissions

A couple of months ago I posted this poll asking readers which issues they struggled with most in their conversion to the Catholic Faith. The results of that poll led to the writing of posts about Mary: Mother of God and Papal Infallibility.

The plan was and still is to eventually have posts addressing all of the issues from the poll. However, I have found myself stuck on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. I've tried several times to gather information and write a post about this but keep getting stuck. So I'm turning to you, dear readers.

If anyone has any interest in writing a post about this subject or any other please let me know by sending an email to the one listed near the top of the sidebar.

The intention of this blog was never to be a place where I alone shared my thoughts. That is what Calling Rome Home is for. I am very open to having guest posts on this blog. I'm also open to having additional authors join the blog with direct posting privileges. Of course, I am aware that everyone has busy lives and their own blogs so I'm not expecting anyone to be posting everyday. Obviously, I don't do that myself. But if you think you may be interested in helping add to this blog from time to time please let me know. If you ever write something that you think would be of value to this blog's readers on your own blog and would like a link to it here, let me know. Or, if you are so moved, writings can be posted here in their entirety with credit back to you.

This blog is not about me. It is meant to be a location where people looking for conversion stories similar to their own and more importantly people who are discerning a call to conversion to come and find information and links to all of your wonderful blogs.

Of course I will always reserve the right to delete any posts, comments, or links from this blog containing heretical material or linking to any site containing such material with the intention of promoting said heretical material.

If you are interested please let me know. At any rate, I hope to have some new stuff up (either written by myself or by others) soon for you all to enjoy.

Welcome Joel

Joel has started a new blog called, The Breastplate of St. Patrick. His first post gives his conversion story.

Joel has also left a comment on this blog asking for help with a question. Here is his comment:

Anyhow, I'm commenting because I wrote a blog entry on salvation and the Church and I would love the input of as many people as possible as I am wrestling with it at the moment.

The post in question is Salvation Ave.

Please offer your insights to help Joel with this issue.

D. G. D. Davidson's Conversion Story

Dear Catholic Converts,

The first part of my conversion story is now up at The Sci Fi Catholic. It is entitled "How I Became a Sci Fi Catholic" and the link is http://www.scificatholic.com/2007/04/how-i-became-
sci-fi-catholic-part-1.html.

**Note** D. G. D. Davidson's conversion story is in three parts. All three parts are now posted. Links to each part or provided on his blog.

Welcome Home!

Please join in welcoming the following members of the Catholic Converts blogroll home to the Catholic Church.

Jennifer at "Et tu, Jen?"

Mark at Rise and Pray

Matt at Absolutely No Spin

Runningmom at One Foot in Front of the Other

Shellie at Profound Gratitude

Gloria in Excelsis Deo

Surrexit Christus hodie, Alleluia

Just some Catholic Converts updates

My thanks to all of you who have read, commented on, and linked to this blog over the last couple of months.

We now have 12 conversion stories linked here and have 32 blogs in the Catholic Converts blogroll.
I was surprised today to see that the blog had received well over 200 pageloads, the second most in one day since the mad rush in mid February.

I then discovered that the CC blog had received a mention by Amy Welborn on open book. Amy is one of the most popular Catholic bloggers out there and I am honored and humbled that she felt this project worthy of a mention on her site.

Please do continue to check back from time to time. I have some ideas for the blog that I hope to put into place over the next few weeks.

Welcome Martha

Martha has a very new blog titled: One Foot In Front of the Other.

Martha and her children will be received into the Catholic Church at this weekend's Easter Vigil. Please stop by her blog and join in welcoming her family home!

Martha's conversion story can by found here: Surprised by God

A couple of items about confession from this weeks Catholic Carnival

This week's Catholic Carnival is up. Check it out here: Holy Week Catholic Carnival

I don't normally link to the Carnival on this blog but I wanted to highlight a couple of items from this weeks edition. Both of these are posts from members of the Catholic Converts blog roll.

The Kid Sister of Blessed Imelda offers this wonderful post titled The First Time . . .. This is a great reflection on her own first confession and the ones after. Whether you've yet to make your first confession or received the Sacrament of Reconciliation hundreds of times, this is a very good read.

Profound Gratitude describes her first confession with a bit of humor in the post First Confession. Again, whether you've yet to make your first confession or received the Sacrament of Reconciliation hundreds of times, I think this post does a lot to remind us that we all struggle with this aspect of our Catholic Faith at times. However, I think the struggles just make it that much more of a blessing.

Sober Catholic

I am a revert to the Catholicism, not a convert, but I would like to be considered a friend of Catholic Converts.

My blog, "Sober Catholic", is directed at people who may be interested in how the Catholic faith and its spirituality can assist them in maintaining their sobriety. Most would be reverts, or lukewarm Catholics who seek a deeper spirituality than that offered by AA or any alternative recovery program.

Some may be non-Catholics on the same spiritual path. They are not satisfied by the recovery spiritualities or the religious expressions found in non-Catholic religions. Regardless, I think that your blog offers invaluable tools for those who read Sober Catholic, and you would be providing a tremendous service to them. -Paul

Check out Paul's ministry for recovering alchoholics: Sober Catholic

Three more convert blogs

The God Fearin' Forum

Leave Your Head At The Door

My Franciscan Diary

Catholic Converts Poll #3

I recently saw a comment somewhere about it being uncommon to see young people being received into the Catholic Church. In the context of this comment "young" seemed to refer to 20 - 30 years old. My perception could be skewed because I went through RCIA at a Catholic campus center in college. Anyway, I thought this might give an interesting view of things.

At what age where you received into the Catholic Church.
0 - 14
15 - 20
21 - 25
26 - 30
31 - 35
36 - 40
41 - 45
46 - 50
51 - 55
56 - 60
61 - 65
66 - 70
71 - 75
76+
See Results

Welcome Eric and Mark

I joined the Church in 2000. My story can be found here.

Give Eric a visit at Ales Rarus

Also be sure to pay Mark a visit at Rafting the Tiber

Also, here's a discussion forum that has linked to the Catholic Converts blog: café theology

Welcome Peter

I am an ex-Lutheran minister who was recieved into the Church in 2001. I am currently Manager of Studies at the Catholic Adult Education Centre Cardinal Pell's Archdiocese). I am married with 5 children.

I have started my own blog recently. I intend it to be a general look at the Church and the world from the eyes of a convert. I have enjoyed reading many of the blogs linked to your site and I hope others will find something worth
reading on mine from time to time.

Give Peter a visit at cum grano salis

This one is for the guys

Well I guess ladies can be affected by this also, but this post is mainly pointed toward the guys.

I'm going to be frank here. This issue is one that we must learn to face regardless of how embarressing it can be.

It seems that before I came into the Catholic Church that I didn't give much thought to our call to live chaste lives. I pretty much thought that we were in good shape as long as we refrained from having sex before marriage and didn't commit adultery once we were married. And no one every really taught me differently.

It wasn't until I found the fullness of the Catholic Faith that I begin to see things in a much broader since. I guess on some level I had always knew that pornography and masturbation were wrong but never fully understood the implications of these things.

Now, that I have the Church's teachings to guide me I see much more clearly how pornography, impure thoughts at the sight of an attractive woman, maturbation, etc. act to degrade, dehumanize even, others and ourselves.

A reader has suggested this website True Knights as a helpful resource for men struggling with issues of purity and chasity. I haven't had a chance to fully explore the site yet but it does seem like it would offer some help in this area.

This was one of the things that really made me want to avoid going to confession when I first came into the Church. I was too embarressed to talk about it, even through the screen. I got by with saying, "I have been impure" or "I have failed to be chaste". This worked until I recently moved and the priest called me out on it. In a way he forced me to swallow my pride and really tackle the issue before God.

We may be embarressed by our sins against chasity, but we can't hide behind veiled words to save our pride. Because that is where our weakness lies. We have to face the issues head on.

Who's swimming the Tiber

We are getting very close to Easter Vigil. So, who is planning to be received into the Catholic Church this Easter? I know that there are at least two CC blogroll members anticipating thier confirmation in a couple of weeks. Please offer your prayers for Mark at Rise and Pray and Matt at Absolutely No Spin as they near their Confirmations.

Please leave a comment if you are planning to be received into the Catholic Church soon so that we can all join in the joy of welcoming you home.

Welcome D. G. D.

For the science fiction buffs out there here is a blog for you.

The Sci Fi Catholic

Welcome William

Just found the blog and I look forward to spending some time looking through the blogs on it. Please add mine. My blog is Full Circle. I am a convert and my topics include often include conversion related items. The main site http://www.earlychurchfathers.org/ was put together during my conversion process ... Consider it an unexpected fruit of my conversion.

Blog URL: a href="http://earlychurchfathers.org/fullcircle/


Be sure to check out the Early Church Fathers site. It offers a very easy to use index of writings about a wide range of topics.

Infant Baptism

Infant baptism is another issue that must be dealt with by many individuals considering a call to conversion to the Catholic Faith. Most Protestant traditions reject infant baptism even though their Reformation founders made use of the practice.

Aimee at Historical Christian addresses infant baptism from both a scriptural and a historical view in Infant Baptism in Scripture and Early Christian History.

Guide to Confession and Examination of Conscience

The CC blog has gotten a few hits from Google searches looking for information on the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

I've added this Guide to Confession and Examination of Conscience to the Conversion Resources section in the sidebar.

Welcome Aimee

Be sure to pay Aimee a visit at Historical Christian

Conversation starter #2

Are you able to identify anything that acted as a tipping point during your conversion? When was the moment that you moved from unbelief to belief? Was there something that caused the wall of your objections to crumble? Please join in the discussion in the comments section.

I have mentioned before that I had several objections to the Catholic Faith including but not limited the communion of saints, the Virgin Mary, and the Real Presence in the Eucharist. One night I was watching EWTN when a priest who was a guest on one of the shows mentioned the story of the Road to Emmaus in Luke chapter 24. I took out my Bible and read the passage. I had read it before but that time it really struck me and was suddenly sure of the Real Presence of the Eucharist. From there all of my other objections were easily dealt with. This was definately a big tipping point in my conversion.

13 And behold, two of them went, the same day, to a town which was sixty furlongs from Jerusalem, named Emmaus. 14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened. 15 And it came to pass, that while they talked and reasoned with themselves, Jesus himself also drawing near, went with them.

16 But their eyes were held, that they should not know him. 17 And he said to them: What are these discourses that you hold one with another as you walk, and are sad? 18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleophas, answering, said to him: Art thou only a stranger to Jerusalem, and hast not known the things that have been done there in these days? 19 To whom he said: What things? And they said: Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, who was a prophet, mighty in work and word before God and all the people; 20 And how our chief priests and princes delivered him to be condemned to death, and crucified him.

21 But we hoped, that it was he that should have redeemed Israel: and now besides all this, today is the third day since these things were done. 22 Yea and certain women also of our company affrighted us, who before it was light, were at the sepulchre, 23 And not finding his body, came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, who say that he is alive. 24 And some of our people went to the sepulchre, and found it so as the women had said, but him they found not. 25 Then he said to them: O foolish, and slow of heart to believe in all things which the prophets have spoken.

26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and so to enter into his glory? 27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded to them in all the scriptures, the things that were concerning him. 28 And they drew night to the town, whither they were going: and he made as though he would go farther. 29 But they constrained him; saying: Stay with us, because it is towards evening, and the day is now far spent. And he went in with them. 30 And it came to pass, whilst he was at table with them, he took bread, and blessed, and brake, and gave to them.

31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him: and he vanished out of their sight. 32 And they said one to the other: Was not our heart burning within us, whilst he spoke in this way, and opened to us the scriptures? 33 And rising up, the same hour, they went back to Jerusalem: and they found the eleven gathered together, and those that were staying with them, 34 Saying: The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. 35 And they told what things were done in the way; and how they knew him in the breaking of the bread.

The Gargoyle Code

Father Longenecker at Standing On My Head , a member of the CC blogroll, has an excellent series of posts titled The Gargoyle Code.

Writing in the style of C.S. Lewis' The Screwtape Letters, Fr. Longenecker gives us a look at how satan and his demons try to influence our lives especially during the season of Lent. This is a good read for everyone.

Conversion story of John C. Wright, compliments of Jen

Jen at "Et tu, Jen?" has alerted me to the conversion story of John C. Wright, a former athiest, that she has received premission to reprint on her blog.

Like Feeling A Heartbeat: Conversion of John C. Wright

Michelle Therese's Conversion Story

I received this conversion story in an email today from Michelle Therese at Things Go Moo in the Night.

Michelle's story is very interesting in that it highlights the importance of sacred art and church architecture. Unfortunately, we see far too many churches today that look like assembly halls and supposedly Christian art that is one the verge of being scandalous.

Hello! My name is Michelle Therese and I am an American who is married to an Orcadian farmer. We raise beef cattle and sheep - and barn cats!

On December 8th I celebrated my 9th year as a Catholic! I was baptised December 8th, 1998 at Our Lady of Czestochowa church in Turners Falls, Massachusetts, U.S.A.. After nearly six months of intense study I was Confirmed May 3, 1999. I was chosen by Saint Therese and she is my beloved Patron Saint! (The "Therese" part of my name is acctually my confirmation name - I've taken it as part of my everyday name now!) My husband and I hope to make a retreat at Pluscarden Abby as I hope to become a Benedictine Oblate. And we will also try to make a pilgrimage to Lisieux in October!

I grew up in a very anti-God anti-religion and especially anti-Catholic church family. Yet somehow I always believed in God and "The Lady." I had no idea who The Lady was but I knew she was not a God. Later, as I grew older, I understood that she was the Virgin Mary.

I felt drawn to the Catholic Church since I was a very small child. I obviously could not explain my feelings - I just felt the intense desire to run into any Catholic church I happened to come across!! But my mother's intense prejudices against christians and the Church caused her to forbid me to have anything to do with the Bible or the Church. So I knew absolutely nothing about the Catholic faith - or even basic Christianity for that matter!

I'll admit, as I grew older I adopted a lot of my mom's suspicion and impatience with all Christians and basically waved them, and their religion, off as "Brainwashed Bible Thumpers." But I never lost that hunger for the Catholic Church - even if I did not understand it!

I joined the U.S. Navy at age 17 and found myself stationed in Sicily, Italy. I lived within sight of the magnificent volcano Mount Etna and worked as a helicopter mechanic. While off-duty I would often go on local day tours around Sicily. In this way I was exposed to the early early EARLY Christians - I'm talking waaaay back in the 100's - 400's.

We visited churches, shrines, holy places where miracles had taken place and cathedrals so ancient and so full of history that through the paintings, stained-glass windows, stories, statues and other works of art I was exposed to the story of the early martyrs and christians. The tour guides would often tell us the story of each work of art or Saint and then we'd be left to ourselves to wander about and think things over.

I was struck by the fact that a huge number of these brain-washed christians had been willing to endure horrific tourtures and death before they would renounce their faith! I started to think to myself, "There must be something very serious about this Christianity business!"

As I was exposed over and over again to these most ancient places and their amazing art I learned about the bread and wine being changed into the body and blood of Christ. I learned the names of the 12 Apostles and how they were the leaders of the Church and that they passed on their leadership to new people - and this was passed on and on and on down the ages.

I learned that Saint Peter was appointed as THE head of the Church by Jesus.

I learned that God loved me and that He wanted me to be with Him in heaven - and that in order to be with God in heaven I had to get off my duff and acctually get to know God.

And I learned all of this without ever going to Mass or talking to a Catholic - or even a Priest! I was learning all of this through the artwork and the stories of the ancient Christians themselves! I never really thought of them as Catholic. I saw them as "Christian" and so I didn't really grasp the fact that THIS was the Catholic Church!

I was often deployed into the Middle East where I was exposed to Islam and a very serious organized religion that permeated every aspect of public and private life. This opened my eyes to what life would have been like before the separation of Church and State - how God would have been always at the center of everything!

By the time my four year tour of duty was finished and I returned to America I was a self-professed christian. Now I had to find the church that connected with the ancient Church I had been exposed to in Sicily!

I sorted through several different denominations but each one could be traced back to usually one man in the Reformation era - or post-Reformation era. These churches never seemed to go past the 1500's or the 1400's.

Many churches had been around only fifty years - or even two years!

I was beginning to despair when I came across the Catholic Church offering Adult religious education classes. So I signed up!

The first class was filled with a lot of 1960's psycobabble nonsense about things like, "Draw a picture of God and tell us how it makes you feel" and "All that stuff about sin and hell is so old fashioned and out of date!"

I had seen or heard none of THIS stuff in those ancient holy places in Sicily!

I tried the RCIA program at another Catholic church but ran into the same exact stuff. I left after a few classes and was walking down the road feeling pretty bad. I prayed to God and asked Him, "Is the Catholic Church not the right place after all?" A few moments later I heard the most beautiful singing coming through the green leafy trees!! I continued down the sidewalk towards the sound and came upon Our Lady of Czestochowa Catholic church. The singing continued as I went inside and then... I found no one. Not a soul! Not a sound! Hmmmmm.

I talked with the Priest of this church and was set up with one-on-one instruction with this strict Polish lady. Thank God too because I was sick of all that weird "feel good warm fuzzy" stuff!

After several weeks of asking all of the hard questions, reading books and the Bible - and the book, "Story of a Soul" I began to realize that the Catholic Church connected perfectly with everything that I had learned in Sicily from the earliest Christians.

So!! I continued in my study of the Faith, became a bone fide Catholic on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception and I haven't looke back since!!

Congratulations Brittany

Good news! Brittany, a member of the CC blogroll, at Casting out into the deep, in a JPII sort of way… has raised enough money to pay off her student loans. She plans to enter the convent with the Saelesian Sisters in August.

Welcome James

James has shared his conversion story on his blog fides et ardor

Jame's conversion story is in seven parts. Scroll down to the bottom of the page to find part one.

Welcome Kat plus Brittany and David's conversion stories

Kat at The Crescat has joined the CC Blogroll. Please pay her a visit.


Brittany has shared her conversion story at Into the Deep

David has also shared his conversion story at The Fullness of Faith

Welcome Brittany

Hi,
I converted from "nothing-ism" at 14. My blog is at
Casint out into the deep, in a JPII sort of way . . .

I am entering the convent in August.... so maybe I will put my
conversion story together soon!

As Brittany mentioned she is planning to enter the convent in August and is seeking help in paying off her student loans before that time.

Catholic Converts Poll #2

The CC blog has been getting a lot of Google hits from people searching for information about converting to Catholicism from one faith tradition (or lack there of) or another. So I thought this might be interesting.

Before you were Catholic you were . . .
Adventist
Agnostic
Anglican/Episcopal
Atheist
Baptist
Jehovah's Witness
Lutheran
Methodist
Mormon
Pentecostal
Presbyterian
Unitarian
Other (leave comment)
See Results

Lord, Have Mercy

At the end of February I read Scott Hahn's^(?) book Lord Have Mercy. Subtitled "The Healing Power of Confession", I hoped the book clear up any lingering doubts before I made my first Confession.

As a biblical scholar and theologian, and a convert from hardcore Protestantism, himself, Scott is a thorough author, who I find personally compelling. The book is laid out in 13 Chapters, starting at the origin and causes of lies, untruth and sin, discussing contrition and penance before talking about Confession as something with a truly sacramental character.

Scott further discusses differing views on sin and forgiveness exhibited by Catholics and Protestants, and explains in detail--as with his other books--the covenantal nature of the Old Testament, of the whole Bible and of Christianity. Demonstrating Confession as not a new invention, Scott then discusses why and how Confession is required to fulfil the Law, to make whole that Covenant.

The book also discusses, clearly, mortal sin and its effects on the soul, feelings of resentment that come without repentance, and the dangers of make excuses which will never make up for our transgressions.

The style of book is easy and approachable, yet it is sufficiently informative and robust, replete with references to primary and secondary sources. As well as clear instructions regarding Confession, the book also includes helpful appendices at the back laying out the actual Rite of Reconciliation, some prayers including an Act of Contrition, and most importantly, a thorough Examination of Conscience.

I would recommend this book to anyone making their first Confession this Lent/Easter. Whilst you will of course have been properly Catechised, the book is helpful in reinforcing orthodox doctrine in a gentle yet persuasive way, striking a correct balance in being non-offensive whilst assertive of the Truth of the matter. I found it helpful!

pbk., 214 pages,
Darton Longman & Todd,
£10.95

Dave's entry into the Church

Reposted with Dave's permission:

My name is David and I was born and raised Episcopalian. However, my grandmother who is more on the non-denominational evangelical side, had me "dedicated" at her church. Apparently my grandparents founded a non-denominational Protestant Church back in the day. My father was raised in it and became hostile to established religion preferring to spend Sunday mornings at "his church" the Raquet Club playing tennis. My mother was Episcopal and I went to Church with her. Around 8th grade when my other grandfather (my mother's father) died I pondered actually being baptized. All this time I thought I'd been baptized as an infant when was merely dedicated. And so I was summarily baptized. Gradually I drifted away during High School and stopped going to Church as my mother had stopped going as well. I still believed in God and everything and had a reverence for Jesus, in short I became a lapsed- Episcopalian or what passes for many a Episopalian nowadays. However even at this period there were signs of the Holy Spirit drawing me to the Church I traveled to Europe and still remember my encounter with the Cathedral in Seville, Spain. I even worship at the shrines and prayed to the saints. Then I went to Italy and saw the Vatican. Then Paris. Funny thing is the only Paris I saw was that of Saint Louis and the Medieval University. It's not that I saw it so much as I perceived it as the kernel whence all the grandeur had sprung.
Then in college as is usually the case I was reintroduced to Christianity by a Jewish friend who started out an agnostic and then became Catholic. Now I had had many Jewish acquaintances over the years so more sensitive to him that I would have been to anyone else. The inner unity of the Jewish tradition and Christianity made sense.
I remained nominally Episcopal but began attending non-denominational Protestant congregations. I even attended some sects that would be considered out of the main stream. However all the while I secretly knew that the Catholic Church was the one true Church that Christ founded. And like many I recognized and admired the holiness of Mother Theresa and John Paul II. I was waiting to become a Catholic as an on the fence Anglo-Catholic type when I finally went through RCIA and was received into the Church on Easter 2004. And I have to say I'm glad to be home!

Welcome Dave and Contemplating Christian

Check out Dave's blog Love and do what you will.

I'm a former Episcopalian. Tidbits about my turn toward Catholicism and the Church can be found in my comments on confirmation names under the name Antonio449. I do not say "conversion", for though we may use this term to appeal to non-Catholic sensibilities we all know we are in a constant state and need of conversion. Am I 100 converted yet? To be honest: not really. We too often depend on emotional security in this regard. This comes from William of Occam empiricist approach I think, accentuated by Luther and others later on. The Evangelical turn comes in the 19th century from what I gather from Newman's description in Apologia pro vita sua. Such a position assumes that if only we experience pleasant feelings then we have it all together. As for me "I am still working out my salvation with fear and trembling" along with the entire Church whose head is Christ.

Dave brings up a very good point here. We must not allow ourselves to fall into this trap of, "well I've converted and now I'm finished." Quite the contrary. On my other blog Calling Rome Home my header reads, "Conversion is but the start of the journey." Maybe that should read, "Conversion to the Catholic Faith is but the next step in the journey." We are all called to life-long conversion. Being fallen creatures in an imperfect world we can never obtain full conversion while here on Earth. We are called to a continual process of conversion and an always just out of reach goal of perfection. It is God who is our guide in the process. And as the stories that have been shared here recently show, that process didn't start when we entered the Catholic Church. For many this process has taken years before we even got to that point.

Let us be reminded that even though perfection is always just out of our reach it must always be our goal.

We have also been joined by Contemplating Christian.

Conversation Starter #1

Which saint's name did you take as your confirmation name and why?

I thought this might be an interesting topic of conversation that might help us all learn a little bit more about various saints. If you would like please share in the comments section.

I chose St. Augustine of Hippo. While I was in RCIA I was reading St. Augustine's Confessions. I will admit that I still haven't finished reading it. I think it's so deep that I have to take time off from it for lighter reading. I'll eventually get through it.

St. Augustine's mother was a very devote Catholic. In his own life he fell into heresy and spent much of his young adulthood searching for the truth. I felt like I identified with St. Augstine's struggle in accepting the Catholic Church's teachings. I've written more about this in an earlier post.

I'll also point out that this blog has been dedicated to the patronage of St. Augustine. See the side bar for a wonderful prayer from St. Augustine.

Mark is fired up. . .

. . . about the book he is currently reading. He is reading Scott Hahn's Lord Have Mercy: The Healing Power of Confession.

I am a big fan of Scott Hahn, though I must say I haven't read this book. It sounds like it would be a good read for anyone struggling with the idea of going to confession.

Maybe after he finishes the book we can have the rest of his thoughts on it here also.

Papal Infallibility

Today is the Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter. Therefore, when I noticed that papal infallibility had caught up to Marian doctrines in the poll I thought that it would be appropriate to explore the topic of papal infallibility today. Today’s Gospel reading is from Matthew 16: 13 - 19¹. It reads,

And Jesus came into the quarters of Cesarea Philippi: and he asked his disciples, saying: Whom do men say that the Son of man is? But they said: Some John the Baptist, and other some Elias, and others Jeremias, or one of the prophets. Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am?

Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

Here we find the scriptural basis for the Church’s dogma of Papal Infallibility. When Jesus asks the disciples who men say that He is there is a multitude of answers, none of which are correct. It is Peter who proclaims, “Thou are Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus tells Peter that he is blessed because this truth has not been revealed to him by flesh and blood but by the Father in heaven. Jesus goes on to say “upon this rock I will build my church.” I have heard it preached in a Protestant church that Christ was not referring to Peter because he would never build His church upon a mere man. What I believe is misunderstood is that Christ was revealing his plan to build His church on Peter’s statement of faith which he received from the Father, “Thou are Christ, the Son of the living God.” Christ goes on to promise the keys to the kingdom of heaven to Peter and tells him that whatever he binds and loosens on Earth shall be bound and loose in heaven.

We are given an example of Peter exercising his primacy in Acts 15: 7 – 10² concerning the question of circumcision of the Gentiles.

And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them: Men, brethren, you know, that in former days God made choice among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, who knoweth the hearts, gave testimony, giving unto them the Holy Ghost, as well as to us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore, why tempt you God to put a yoke upon the necks of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?

There had been much discussion and argument about whether or not Gentiles who where received into the Christian Faith must follow the law of Moses and be circumcised. When Peter declared circumcision for the Gentiles unnecessary it was considered by all present to be the final word on the matter. Peter’s primacy and infallibility was not questioned.

In 1870 the First Vatican Council³ decreed the dogma of Papal Infallibility saying, “That apostolic primacy which the Roman pontiff possesses as successor of Peter, the prince of the apostles, includes also the supreme power of teaching. This holy see has always maintained this, the constant custom of the church demonstrates it, and the ecumenical councils, particularly those in which East and West met in the union of faith and charity, have declared it.” The First Vatican Council cited the Fourth Council of Constantinople, the Second Council of Lyons, and the Council of Florence in its declaration.

The Council said,

We teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, irreformable.

So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.

It is important to understand that Papal Infallibility refers to the pope’s ability to speak without error when doing so on matters of faith and morals in the exercise of his office. It must not be confused with impeccability which would imply that the pope is exempt from committing sin or saying things that are in error. For example the pope could say that the Earth is flat, however that statement would obviously be in error and we would not be bound to accept it as truth. In fact infallible statements made by the pope are quite the exception rather than the norm. It is also important to note that infallible teachings may not be later contradicted. For example, since the doctrine of the Holy Trinity has been infallibly declared, no future pope or council of the Church may contradict it.

The First Vatican Council also spoke about the permanency of Peter’s primacy. Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church. This means that the Church is destined to remain until the end of time. It is helpful here to quote the First Vatican Council’s entire statement on permanence of Peter’s primacy³.

That which our lord Jesus Christ, the prince of shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed apostle Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the church, must of necessity remain for ever, by Christ's authority, in the church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time.

For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the catholic church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the saviour and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the holy Roman see, which he founded and consecrated with his blood.

Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the church which he once received.

For this reason it has always been necessary for every church--that is to say the faithful throughout the world--to be in agreement with the Roman church because of its more effective leadership. In consequence of being joined, as members to head, with that see, from which the rights of sacred communion flow to all, they will grow together into the structure of a single body.

Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole church; or that the Roman pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema.

Peter’s infallible statement that Christ was the son of God was revealed to him by God. Christ said that it was upon this that He would build the Church and gave Peter primacy in teaching. In order that the Church may remain throughout the ages, free from error in Her teachings, Peter’s primacy and infallibility have passed down through the ages through the apostolic succession of the Bishops of Rome.

References:

1. Matthew 16: 13 - 19
2. Acts 15: 7 – 10
2. First Vatican Council

Related Article: Apostolic Succession

Mary: Mother of God

So far Marian doctrines are taking 57% of the vote in the poll. I've done some research into the doctrine of Mary as Mother of God. I hope that this will be helpful in helping anyone thinking about converting to Catholicism that stumbles across this blog seeking answers. My hope is that this series will be continued by myself or anyone else that wants to jump in and offer an article.

I know that there are much more informed people than myself reading this blog. If you think that anything I post is in error, PLEASE let me know. Also, I hope that you will add your thoughts and comments.

Mary: Mother of God

In the Nicene Creed we profess:

“We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he was born of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.”

In this statement we acknowledge that Jesus Christ was both fully God and fully human. He is, “God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God.” We do not say that he “became like man” but rather say the he “became man.”

Jesus Christ as fully God and fully human is demonstrated by St. John in John 1: 1-21 when he says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.” John goes on to say, “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John beareth witness of him, and crieth out, saying: This was he of whom I spoke: He that shall come after me, is preferred before me: because he was before me” John 1: 14-15. In John 1: 29 – 30 he says, “The next day, John saw Jesus coming to him, and he saith: Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who taketh away the sin of the world. This is he, of whom I said: After me there cometh a man, who is preferred before me: because he was before me.”

For centuries some have tried to separate the dual natures of Jesus Christ as man and God. The idea that Jesus Christ exists as two persons, the man Jesus and the divine Son of God is known as the Christological heresy Nestorianism2. The heresy gets its name from Nestorius, Archbishop of Constantinople from 428 – 4313. In speaking of the Nicene Creed Nestorius, in a letter4 to Cyril of Alexandria said,

"I believe", they say, "also in our Lord Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son". See
how they first lay as foundations "Lord" and "Jesus" and "Christ" and "only
begotten" and "Son", the names which belong jointly to the divinity and humanity. Then they build on that foundation the tradition of the incarnation and resurrection and passion. In this way, by prefixing the names which are common to each nature, they intend to avoid separating expressions applicable to sonship and lordship and at the same time escape the danger of destroying the distinctive character of the natures by absorbing them into the one title of "Son".

Nestorius believed that calling Mary he Mother of God diminished Christ’s humanity and taught that Jesus was two persons, one divine and one human, living in one body. He said, “Holy scripture, wherever it recalls the Lord's economy, speaks of the birth and suffering not of the godhead but of the humanity of Christ, so that the holy virgin is more accurately termed mother of Christ than mother of God4.”

In his first letter4 to Nestorius, to which Nestorius’ letter above was in response, Cyril stated:

We too ought to follow these words and these teachings and consider what is meant by saying that the Word from God took flesh and became man. For we do not say that the nature of the Word was changed and became flesh, nor that he was turned into a whole man made of body and soul. Rather do we claim that the Word in an unspeakable, inconceivable manner united to himself hypostatically flesh enlivened by a rational soul, and so became man and was called son of man, not by God's will alone or good pleasure, nor by the assumption of a person alone. Rather did two different natures come together to form a unity, and from both arose one Christ, one Son. It was not as though the distinctness of the natures was destroyed by the union, but divinity and humanity together made perfect for us one Lord and one Christ, together marvellously and mysteriously combining to form a unity. So he who existed and was begotten of the Father before all ages is also said to have been begotten according to the flesh of a woman, without the divine nature either beginning to exist in the holy virgin, or needing of itself a second begetting after that from his Father. (For it is absurd and stupid to speak of the one who existed before every age and is coeternal with the Father, needing a second beginning so as to exist.) The Word is said to have been begotten according to the flesh, because for us and for our salvation he united what was human to himself hypostatically and came forth from a woman. For he was not first begotten of the holy virgin, a man like us, and then the Word descended upon him; but from the very womb of his mother he was so united and then underwent begetting according to the flesh, making his own the begetting of his own flesh.

In response to Nestorius’ letter Cyril said,

• he took flesh from the holy virgin and made it his own, undergoing a birth like ours from her womb and coming forth a man from a woman.
• He did not cast aside what he was, but although he assumed flesh and blood, he remained what he was, God in nature and truth.
• We do not say that his flesh was turned into the nature of the godhead or that the unspeakable Word of God was changed into the nature of the flesh. For he (the Word) is unalterable and absolutely unchangeable and remains always the same as the scriptures say. For although visible as a child and in swaddling cloths, even while he was in the bosom of the virgin that bore him, as God he filled the whole of creation and was fellow ruler with him who begot him. For the divine is without quantity and dimension and cannot be subject to circumscription.

Cyril goes on to say,

Therefore, because the holy virgin bore in the flesh God who was united hypostatically with the flesh, for that reason we call her mother of God, not as though the nature of the Word had the beginning of its existence from the flesh (for "the Word was in the beginning and the Word was God and the Word was with God", and he made the ages and is coeternal with the Father and craftsman of all things), but because, as we have said, he united to himself hypostatically the human and underwent a birth according to the flesh from her womb. This was not as though he needed necessarily or for his own nature a birth in time and in the last times of this age, but in order that he might bless the beginning of our existence, in order that seeing that it was a woman that had given birth to him united to the flesh, the curse against the whole race should thereafter cease which was consigning all our earthy bodies to death, and in order that the removal through him of the curse, "In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children", should demonstrate the truth of the words of the prophet: "Strong death swallowed them Up", and again, "God has wiped every tear away from all face".

The Council of Ephesus4 accepted both of Cyril’s letters and condemned that of Nestorius. The Council also accepted twelve anathemas proposed by Cyril. The first of which read, “If anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is God in truth, and therefore that the holy virgin is the mother of God (for she bore in a fleshly way the Word of God become flesh, let him be anathema.” By action of the Council Nestorius was, “stripped of his episcopal dignity and removed from the college of priests.”

Saint Luke provides us with biblical reference to Mary being referred to as the Mother of God in Luke 1: 41 – 455 by saying,

And it came to pass, that when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the infant leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed art thou that hast believed, because those things shall be accomplished that were spoken to thee by the Lord.

Earlier in Luke’s Gospel we are told how the angel Gabriel came to the virgin Mary bearing a message from God that she was to bear a son and that he would be the called the Son of God. Notice the significance when Elizabeth calls Mary the, “mother of my Lord” and goes on to say, “because those things shall be accomplished that were spoken to thee by the Lord.”

In our Catholic understanding we do not elevate Mary to the role of goddess by our application of the title “Mother of God” to her. The doctrine’s immediate concern is the maintenance of the belief that Jesus Christ was both fully human and fully God. Cyril believed and the Council of Ephesus found that to deny Mary as the “Mother of God” in favor of “Mother of Christ” endangered this understanding of Christ’s dual natures. This opened up the door to distinguish between Christ the man and Christ the divine. Which in turn led to the teaching that the Word did not become flesh but only inhabited within the flesh of the man Christ while keeping a separate nature. John does not tell us that the Word came to live within flesh but tells us that, “the Word was made flesh.”

1. Douay-Rheims Bible Online: Luke 1

2. Wikipedia: Nestorianism

3. Wikipedia: Nestorius

4. Council of Ephesus

5. Douay-Rheims Bible Online: John 1

Welcome Jonathan

I am a convert from evanglical Protestantism to
Catholicism (with a brief time in Anglicanism in
between). My blog is:

http://jonathanbennett.typepad.com/ (Ancient and
Future Catholic Musings)

My conversion story can be found at the website I run
with my brother (also a convert)

http://www.ancient-future.net/mystory.html

Your conversion story

I would like to invite you to provide a link to your conversion story. In addition to the blogroll directing visitors to your blogs I would like to create a link list that links directly to conversion stories.

If you would like this blog to link directly to your conversion story please leave the address in the comments section or email it to catholicconverts@gmail.com.

My conversion story is posted on this blog. Chris' Conversion Story

Vote in the poll!

Please register your vote in the poll. Hopefully this poll represents a few of the common objections that non-Catholics have to the Catholic Faith and some of the things that converts struggle with. Hopefully this will give us some ideas for discussion and the priority applied to each.

Which one did/do you struggle with most?
Papal Infallibility
Marian Doctrines
Real Presence in the Eucharist
Communion of Saints
Sacred Tradition
See Results

*UPDATE* Here are some posts in response to this poll.
Marian Doctrines
Papal Infallibility

Welcome David, Shellie, Red Neck Woman, Jennifer, and Radical Catholic Mom

David's blog: The Fullness of Faith

Shellie:
I am a lifetime, generational, all-the-way-back-to-Pilot Point-Texas Nazarene reconciling with my family of six to Rome this Easter. For some reason, our family's journey across the Tiber was sharp and swift. I like it that way. :)

My first reconciling post is: What's a Girl Like You Doin' in a Place Like THIS?

My blog is: Profound Gratitude

Red Neck Woman:
Anne (NachoMama) said that I counted as a convert even though I converted 20 years ago. I won't feel bad though if you don't want to post my blog on the grounds that I've been Catholic too long. [grin]

Postscripts From The Catholic Spitfire Grill


Jennifer's blog: "Et tu, Jen?"

Radical Catholic Mom:
I grew up Lutheran, but my father was a lapsed Catholic and my mom was from a die hard Protestant, anti-Catholic background. My entire family entered the Church because they were tired of the the in-fighting that goes on at Protestant Churches. So we went to the Catholic Church not out of conviction that it was THE Church, but because it was more stable than the rest. Whatever works.

But it was my work in the pro-life movement where I encountered two fabulous Catholic women who actually believed in the Church's teachings and lived them in their daily lives. I wanted what they had, so as a teenager I started to study and read and ask questions, so in a way I had two conversions. The first is when I entered the Church and the second is when I believed what the Church taught!

So, now I am a Radical Catholic Mom trying to convince the rest of the world that the Catholic Church is the best thing that has ever happened to the world.

Radical Catholic Mom

Welcome David

I have just found your blogsite, and have added your badge to my own blog. I would like to be listed as a "Catholic Convert". I am a former Lutheran Pastor from Australia, currently working for the Melbourne Catholic Archdiocese as Executive Officer of the Ecumenical and Interfaith Commission.

In fact, I have three personal blogs, and one blog for work.

My personal blogs are:

Sentire cum Ecclesia (www.cumecclesia.blogspot.com), which is my general daily blog

Year of Grace (www.yearofgrace.blogspot.com) in which I am in the process of publishing my conversion journal from 2000-2001 - a kind of "retro-blog".

Sing Lustily and With Good Courage (www.singlustily.blogspot.com) which is where I post stuff about church music and hymnody - one of my personal passions.

Then I have a work blog which is really a news dissemination site for Catholic ecumenical and interfaith news: Ecumenical and Interfaith Newsblog (www.einews.blogspot.com). You probably won't want to list that one as it isn't very much on the topic.

I very much enjoy reading about other people's faith journey's. We are all unique in many ways, but there is that bond which we all share of coming to the same destination!

David is quite the busy blogger. I will add all Sentire cum Ecclesia and Year of Grace to the blogroll. The other two blogs will be added to the soon to be created resources section in the sidebar. I've suddenly found myself quite busy today. If request to be added to the blogroll continue at this rate I will start doing one post per day to welcome new members.

Welcome Anne

A homeschooling mother of four, I was a Southern Baptist all my life until I converted to Catholicism. My children and I joined my husband in the faith in January of 2006. After many years of marriage, my conversion had nothing to do with the faith of my husband but everything to do with God’s leading in my life and has been an awesome gift.

Visit Anne's blog The Kid Sidter of Blessed Imelda.


On a side note:
This blog has been floating round out there since May 2006. Until today the all time record was 14 page loads. Today, as of 10:47 PM CST, the blog has had 137 page loads from 89 unique visitors. That's doesn't count the numerous times that I've loaded the page in the last few hours. I almost gave up on this project several times and in fact neglected the blog for several months.

My thanks to everyone who has been linking to Catholic Converts today. We were even the subject of a message to a Catholic Yahoo group! My hope is that this will become a great gathering place of converts to the Catholic Faith and a valuable resource for those considering making that journey.

Blogroll Code

I've decided to make the code for the Catholic Converts blogroll available. Feel free to use it on your site.

<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"
src="http://rpc.blogrolling.com/display.php?r=33f0e28d87f01
ae4d394f4b7c0706628"></script>

If you are using WordPress the above option doesn't seem to work very well.

Here is the RSS feed for the blogroll:
http://rpc.blogrolling.com/rss.php?r=33f0e28d87f01ae4d394f4b7c0706628

And the PHP:
http://rpc.blogrolling.com/display_raw.php?r=33f0e28d87f01ae4d394f4b7c0706628

And the OMPL:
http://rpc.blogrolling.com/opml.php?r=33f0e28d87f01ae4d394f4b7c0706628

Welcome Jay

I am a convert to the Catholic Church, having been raised Southern Baptist. I became Catholic because of my belief in and devotion to the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, as well as for the Truth that is found only in the Catholic Church. My wife and I were received into the Church on Corpus Christi Sunday, 2004.

Check out Jay's blog Pro Ecclesia * Pro Familia * Pro Civitate.

Welcome Fr. Longenecker

Fr. Longenecker is a former Anglican priest who converted to Catholicism and is now a Catholic priest.

Drop by and pay him a visit at Standing on My Head

The dilemma of timing

Some people convert, or change faiths, because they find the 'target' faith more appealing, or better suiting to their nature. Others change because, quite simply, they have no choice.

To explain this, let me quote the former Anglican bishop of London, Mgr. Graham Leonard^(?)--here he is speaking about ordaining former Anglican clergy, but this is equally pertinent to many converts:

We are talking about men who ... sincerely believed that they were following God's will as regards their vocation. Only later, and sometimes very painfully, have they come to the realisation that the ecclesial body in which they [were] did not enjoy the fulness of Christianity which subsists within the Catholic Church.

So, that's the problem. You think you've done the right thing, you think you've gone to the right place, and then you realise, as if lightning has struck you, that you've knocked on the wrong door.

It's a very tough place for people to be in. It's okay when they don't realise, but once they have, as Msgr. Leonard notes, it becomes a very painful situation. I found this pain accelerated my own journey "across the Tiber". It took me almost two years to work out that the Anglican Communion was not, for me, the full expression of my faith, but once I had realised that, there was an almost frantic desire in me to "get to the right place". Think of it, if you will, as realising you're not only late for the birthday party, but also at the wrong end of the motorway.

I think the important lesson to be learned here, though, is that timing is essential and crucial. You cannot go at faith like a bull at a gate; you must instead learn to work at God's pace. Even when bogged down in the pain of feeling distant and separate from those you long to be with, you must have faith that time will bring about that which is so desired. If we run too fast, then our faith becomes shallow and only skin-deep. If, on the other hand, time is taken--even painful time--then that faith becomes ingrained, and a part of our everyday life. You cannot run before you can walk.

Welcome Mark

Mark is on the journey to reception into the Catholic Church. He has a great blog, Rise and Pray.

In the comments section Mark has recommended these books:

- The Path to Rome, ed. by Fr Dwight Longenecker;
- What Catholics Really Believe, by Karl Keating;
- The Way, by St Josemaría Escríva; and
- Catholicism for Dummies.

I have a copy of What Catholics Really Believe by Karl Keating. It is a great book that answers 52 common questions about the Catholic Faith. It is good to have around as a quick reference.

Mark has also asked to become a contributor to this blog. I believe it would be great to have him post some of his thoughts as he continues on his journey.

Welcome Dana

My blog is more about everyday life and some about what divorce/annulment is like from a faithful catholic point-of-view.

Check out Dana's blog here.