Roman Catholics who are true Christians

[thbslawson]

Anyone here have a RC friend that you believe truly knows Christ? If so, I'm curious by what means he or she came to know the true gospel and the reasons he or she gives for not leaving the RCC. How do you typically interact with such a person, (i.e. patience, encouragement to read the Bible more, giving him or her sermons, etc.)

 

[Scott1]

It happens every day. One heard Billy Graham on television. It took a time, but he left and joined an evangelical communion.
God saves and redeems despite, not because of wrong doctrine and there is a legacy of Christianity and some common grace.

I might add, it is difficult to reconcile someone becoming a Christian while in that communion and remaining there a long time.

 

[christiana]

I've known some RC that appear to be christians but then I also know some who left the RC and proclaimed Christianity and those I believe are very real! Many who claim and appear to be christians would never ever sever their ties with 'the church'! They cling in fear to the RC church as their security. I have a dear friend who grew up catholic and saw in scripture the Truth and totally left the RC church and became a strong reformed christian! That is real! ! Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,

 

[Fogetaboutit]

I grew up as a Roman Catholic, after I believed and truly understood the gospel I kept going to the Roman Catholic Church for a few months (2-3 approx). Until my understanding grew enough I could no longer bear the gross Idolatry and blasphemies uttered from the pulpit and had to leave. This is why I say that a true believer will never be able to stay too long in the RC. If they do either they do not read scriptures or they do not truly believe in its authority, either way would not be a good indication that they are true believers. There is just too much obvious blasphemies in the RC that even immature christian should be able to discern them.

 

[jambo]

I have found that some RCs give up the church right away after conversion whilst some others think they have no need to leave the church. However after a few months they usually do leave and only then do they start to grow. I have also found that taking a hard line approach to such people is counter productive.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Anyone here have a RC friend that you believe truly knows Christ?

I'm not sure I do.

My response is somewhat tainted because I grew up Roman Catholic. It's not a matter of bitterness of my experience while a Roman Catholic. I loved being Roman Catholic. My problem is that the system is so idolatrous that it's hard for me to divorce that fact from speculating about who may or may not be saved within a system.

When you read Hebrews, for instance, you don't get the impression that Paul ever would have said: "Well, I know lots of guys who are still Jews and don't attend Church with us who love Jesus and they're saved by Jesus in spite of the system they're in."

I think part of the reason we say that is that we're comfortable with divorcing salvation from God's appointed means and speculating about people being saved apart from a visible communion that nurtures that salvation in a way that our forebears were not. We're also comfortable speculating about things where the Scriptures tell us not to be comfortable speculating about such things. Thus, I won't speculate about the so-call Christian who is never encouraged daily in the way that Hebrews calls him/her to by a Body that is striving together to enter that rest. I won't speculate about a theoretical Christian who is not striving daily to consider the finished work of Christ when they're thinking about shrinking back and returning to types and shadows (or even idols) instead of the perfected work of Christ.

I think some will read my words as arrogant but what I'm confessing, humbly, is that the Scriptures present us as feeble and need of God's ordained means to sustain and grow faith. The idea that faith is birthed and flowers in an environment completely hostile to it is theoretically possible but is speculative. God gives us the Word, the Sacraments, and others to birth and sustain that faith and so I'm not comfortable separating Christ's appointed means from Christ Himself because He's the One Who ordained them and works through the Spirit. It may seem pious to say: "Well God is sovereign and can accomplish anything...." This is true but the moment we add to the "..." and say: "...and I believe He's saving people in the RCC apart from His appointed means" is claiming hidden knowledge.

Every time I run into people who say they know a person who's in the RCC that's saved it's always a pietistic notion of Christianity and not Christianity as revealed in the Scriptures that they're speaking about. Most who claim this are semi-Pelagian evangelicals who, themselves, need to understand the finished work of Christ. Many don't understand the link between the salvation of God and how He works through Word and Sacrament and prayer graciously to encourage and sustain us. Again, I'm not saying this out of arrogance but realizing how desperate we all are for the work of Christ to keep us from being sifted like wheat.

Thus, I hope I answered the last part: of course we should handle this humbly. I haven't always done so but the more we learn of our own desperation for grace the more we'll want it for others and won't be content to speculate about whether they possess Christ.

 

[rookie]

I agreed with Etienne on this one. Someone that is truly saved, and spends time in the scripture will not be able to endure the RC (or any other sect/cult/religion system). They only thing I can add, is that if someone was only in the faith system for a short while, might not take as long to leave as someone that might have been born in it, and are in their 60's - 70's and see salvation.

 

[Jack K]

I know several who have been converted and have stopped attending Catholic services or participating in any of the rites... but are still on the rolls. Officially leaving is a step many people find hard to take.

 

[A5pointer]

We have those that go to Rome as well. I have a dear friend who went. Hard to understand. When he describes his reasons I hear what I think is unbalanced emotion looking for an experience in the mass and perceived authority structure in the Roman Church. This man is seminary educated and makes a living as a very capable litigation attorney specializing in banking and lending. I have spent much time with him and been greatly blessed by his teaching and even preaching. As perplexed as I am about his going to Rome, I can not imagine that he is not a believing brother.

 

[py3ak]

Bruce, while I can sympathize with your feelings as I think about the encouragement I've gotten from Francis de Sales and Karl Rahner, the fact that you've received a blessing through this man is strictly irrelevant to the question. Judas was among the disciples sent out to preach and teach. From the fact that the other disciples don't have any suspicion of him, it would seem that things with him went the way they did with others: even demons were subject to him in Jesus' name. Carl Trueman has mentioned learning a lot of the basic principles of discipleship from a man who later made shipwreck of the faith: that didn't invalidate what he'd been taught, it just meant that the other man should have practiced it. A man may explain the truth of Scripture clearly and beautifully, and may do so with great feeling, and in a way that is very helpful to others, without saving faith.

 

[Scott1]

I know several who have been converted and have stopped attending Catholic services or participating in any of the rites... but are still on the rolls. Officially leaving is a step many people find hard to take.

Yes.
Imagine someone giving something up in order to follow or obey Christ!
Imagine a God who demands it, in fact.
Then again, maybe it is all about our own convenience and we ought all be understanding of that.



Biblically, do we have any indication that such might be part of proving out one's salvation?

Or, isn't it really all about imagining all the reasons we are willing to justify disobedience and lack of love for a Savior who endured everything, ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING,
for us.

 

[earl40]

As a "rabid" protestant former RC I can attest that the reason I left was because of my wife, who attended a baptist church. We would alternate between RC mass and baptist service for a few years before I came into relativity good teaching from Walter Martin at the CRI. Because of Walter I learned a ton about the difference in the world's religions and in doing so I came to realize that there is a difference in the RC "church" and true protestant churches (5 Solas). Now in the meantime I am attending a SBC, that was far from reformed, and the bible study before service was eye opening in that I was known as making the study rather "lively" because I asked questions that were contrary to what the typical arminian believes. Now these question arose because of what I learned in the RC "church" and my parents....that God is sovereign and what He wants or desires He gets. Another thing I discovered is that I believed essentially the same Jesus now as I did when I was very young and only have grown in faith because of studying His Word under good reformed teachers, to which I am eternally grateful to RC Sproul and many here.

So to sum it up I can a person can stay in the RC "church" for a long time. Also I would like to add that I was there for a while and was exposed to protestants much more so than my parents, who I believe are with The Lord in heaven in spite of them being lifelong RC's.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Just to clarify, I am not saying that there aren't people that the Lord has chosen within the Roman Catholic Church. It would obvious be impossible for me to be a Christian today if I believed it impossible for someone who once begins in RCC to be saved. Since I was once a Roman Catholic, by ruthless logic, it would be impossible that I should be saved if no Roman Catholic can be saved.

But, again, I have to get back to the point I'm making. Christianity is not a theoretical religion. Word and Sacrament and the other means of grace are not revealed in the Scriptures to be theoretically necessary in the Scriptures. As I said before, so I will repeat myself, where does this notion that we have that a person can be converted and sustained in the Christian religion apart from the means that the Scriptures testify to? This conviction doesn't arise from the Scriptures themselves. This conviction comes from speculation and, no matter how pious sounding speculation is, it is not Biblical. Calvin has an excellent quote about how trying to penetrate into the mind of God apart from the Scriptures is like rushing headlong into an impossible maze. You get lost. He notes that it's better to limp along by the thread of God's revelation than it is to speculate about things God has not revealed.

The Roman Catholic view of salvation is a soul-killing dogma. All the Sacraments are designed to take a person's focus away from Christ as He's revealed and to give a Christ whose merit (along with the Saints) is infused into the believer and must be cooperated with in order to make a person savable.

I would urge you all to consider the fact that the Scriptures don't teach of the idea of the local Church as a "nice to have" augment to your personal relationship with Jesus. We're so infected by the notion that Chrsitianity is a personal relationship and little more that we miss the vital link that the local communion of the Saints plays in our own conversion and sustainment in the faith. We're so ruggedly individual that we impoverish ourselves within our local communions in how we view the Body and then we don't rightly measure how easily our faith might be knocked down if we were in a situation where we had no contact with the daily sustaining work of encouragement from fellow believers' exhortations and prayers into our lives. We also think that we would somehow do just fine without hearing the Word of God and receiving Christ rightly through the Sacraments.

Consequently, because I trust the Scriptures and not my own speculation about what God may or may not do, I return to the conviction that I have no confidence that a person may be saved apart from hearing the Word of God and, once converted, I have no confidence that a person is a Christian if they are not a member of Christ's Church. If someone can exegete something for me that would convince me otherwise then I'd be happy to read the argument. It's not as if I'm immune to emotional attachments on this issue. I've had dear loved ones die who grew up and died convinced Roman Catholics (prayed the Rosary daily and everything) and I have the closest possible affinities to several whom I have no confidence that they know Christ because they remain in the RCC.

 

[earl40]

The Roman Catholic view of salvation is a soul-killing dogma. All the Sacraments are designed to take a person's focus away from Christ as He's revealed and to give a Christ whose merit (along with the Saints) is infused into the believer and must be cooperated with in order to make a person savable.

I would urge you all to consider the fact that the Scriptures don't teach of the idea of the local Church as a "nice to have" augment to your personal relationship with Jesus. We're so infected by the notion that Chrsitianity is a personal relationship and little more that we miss the vital link that the local communion of the Saints plays in our own conversion and sustainment in the faith. We're so ruggedly individual that we impoverish ourselves within our local communions in how we view the Body and then we don't rightly measure how easily our faith might be knocked down if we were in a situation where we had no contact with the daily sustaining work of encouragement from fellow believers' exhortations and prayers into our lives. We also think that we would somehow do just fine without hearing the Word of God and receiving Christ rightly through the Sacraments..

Of course you realize how poorly the average RC is taught those beliefs (Thank God).

Consequently, because I trust the Scriptures and not my own speculation about what God may or may not do, I return to the conviction that I have no confidence that a person may be saved apart from hearing the Word of God and, once converted, I have no confidence that a person is a Christian if they are not a member of Christ's Church.

How long were you a Christian before you joined a church? Dare we put a time frame on such matters? Though do not get me wrong I believe it is a serious sin to stay in the RC "church" for any amount of time if one is a Christian.

If someone can exegete something for me that would convince me otherwise then I'd be happy to read the argument. It's not as if I'm immune to emotional attachments on this issue. I've had dear loved ones die who grew up and died convinced Roman Catholics (prayed the Rosary daily and everything) and I have the closest possible affinities to several whom I have no confidence that they know Christ because they remain in the RCC.

I totally hear you. I have heard Ferguson say that the RC faith #1 problem is the sucking out of confidance in ones salvation...It also sucks out much of our confidence in our loved ones who die in that "church".

 

[thbslawson]

But, again, I have to get back to the point I'm making. Christianity is not a theoretical religion. Word and Sacrament and the other means of grace are not revealed in the Scriptures to be theoretically necessary in the Scriptures. As I said before, so I will repeat myself, where does this notion that we have that a person can be converted and sustained in the Christian religion apart from the means that the Scriptures testify to? This conviction doesn't arise from the Scriptures themselves. This conviction comes from speculation and, no matter how pious sounding speculation is, it is not Biblical. Calvin has an excellent quote about how trying to penetrate into the mind of God apart from the Scriptures is like rushing headlong into an impossible maze. You get lost. He notes that it's better to limp along by the thread of God's revelation than it is to speculate about things God has not revealed.

I hope my original question was not misunderstood. I was not in any way implying that Rome preaches the true gospel, but as my question indicates I'm wanting to know "by what means" did he or she come to understand the true gospel. This implies that I think there must be an outside source of the message.

But two former RC friends of mine will both attest to the fact that their conversion and ultimate departure from Rome began when they started reading their Bibles. Both were moderately entrenched in Catholicism, but began reading copies of the Bibles they had received. It was through this that the Lord moved in their hearts to seek more sound preaching. I'm sure there are other stories like this.

 

[JoannaV]

I have figured that those who are saved young, like Earl, are those most likely to be in the RCC for a long time. Also others who do not have the option of another church. Catholics have English Bibles. There is a large variety of RC churches: some will proclaim more of the Word of God than others. Some are more odious in their practices than others. A Christian who has spent years, perhaps of their childhood, in the RCC may take longer to find a church when they do start looking because, well, for example, Earl was appalled by arminianism. Whilst God had shielded his heart his whole life from the most egregious of Rome's lies.

Then there may be some who think themselves reformers, not knowing that that time is past.

There are some places where there may just be a few Christians scattered through a Catholic land.


On the opposite side I know Catholics who talk like Christians. I think that is the modern danger of Catholicism: it has become more subtle. It may take a while before you discover someone is actually a Catholic and that their view of salvation is off. It's a weird blend of "the Pope is infallible and I think he should say XYZ".


Thomas, in addition to those things you mentioned, I think another thing that is important is encouraging them to meet with other Christians. So invite them to meet with you and a few of your fellow Christians.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Of course you realize how poorly the average RC is taught those beliefs (Thank God).

That's true (although they are catechized) but I did grow up with a sense of a need to go to Confession or I was in danger of going to Hell.

Let me point out that the absence of being indoctrinated in RCC theology is not the presence of sound preaching and the Sacraments? Do you understand what I'm driving at? It's not a small matter that sound preaching is absent from RC Churches (or the sound practice of the Sacraments or Church discipline). Just because many may be devoid of the regular teaching of dogma. In other words, I don't have to be twice as fit for hell in order to still have the wrath of God abide on me if I sit in a Church where the Gospel is never preached.

How long were you a Christian before you joined a church? Dare we put a time frame on such matters? Though do not get me wrong I believe it is a serious sin to stay in the RC "church" for any amount of time if one is a Christian.

I'm not certain it's helpful to worry about timelines. The fact that I'm in a Protestant Church doesn't mean I'm saved. It just means I'm at least in a place where the Gospel is preached and I'm strengthened in the faith.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

But two former RC friends of mine will both attest to the fact that their conversion and ultimate departure from Rome began when they started reading their Bibles.

Incidentally, this is considered to be a means of salvation but it is especially true that preaching is a means. My point was not to criticize anything you wrote but to zoom out to talk about the nature of what it is to be Christian and how important the means of grace are.

 

[A5pointer]

In context of this discussion. What are we to think of confessing brothers and sisters in evangelical churches whose practices are more similar to Rome than we consider? Churches that are theologically bare at best. Churches who deliver a legalistic "are you Christian enough?" messages week after week...after year after year. Am I the only one who thinks this is common in many churches?

 

[Semper Fidelis]

In context of this discussion. What are we to think of confessing brothers and sisters in evangelical churches whose practices are more similar to Rome than we consider? Churches that are theologically bare at best. Churches who deliver a legalistic "are you Christian enough?" messages week after week...after year after year. Am I the only one who thinks this is common in many churches?

Let me clarify again that it's not being in a good Church that saves you. It's easy to conclude that just because being in a place that doesn't proclaim and nurture the Gospel is a bad place to be as a Christian that being in a Church that proclaims and nurtures the Gospel means that I should think of my brothers and sisters as "safe".

I really think a study of Hebrews will answer the question you're asking. Presumably the Christians that Paul is exhorting are in a decent Church. He doesn't say they're hearing a false Gospel. He is mainly contending with Spiritual sloth and shrinking back in faith. If people today think that was a first century disease then they don't know theire hearts well.

Thus, in a good Church, we ought to heed the command of Scripture to "watch out" lest any of those around us are found to be unbelieving.

Now, where does that leave people who attend Churches who either don't proclaim the Gospel or who attend Churches who take no care to "watch out" for spiritual sloth and shrinking back?

All I can tell you is what we're commanded to do. I just can't escape the sense of sobriety that Hebrews speaks to.

 

[Frosty]

I've been of the persuasion for quite awhile that there is little chance that sold-out, hardcore, dogmatic RC's could possibly be considered Christians. There is clearly so much in RC teachings that stand in direct opposition to a free gospel of grace in Christ.

But thankfully, I guess, a lot of Catholics don't even really know the detailed teachings of the RC and have nothing to do with Works-salvation, Saints, Mary, Confession, or views like the RC Church being the only way to salvation. This seems to be a minority group and might depend on geographic and social factors that are hard to decipher. Anyway it seems like somehow certain groups of RC's pick up almost a general evangelical, yet thoroughly entrenched in RC traditionalism, view of Christianity. I think it is ignorance that keeps a lot of these people in the RC: they don't know exactly what the RC teaches and how it differs from Scripture. Others seem to know how RC is off-base but justify staying in by not being that hardline dogmatic Catholic referenced earlier. Certainly neither are good.

I believe I know a number of people that fall into this category. My approach is patience, bringing up discussion points (sometimes), and literature. I gifted Kevin DeYoung's commentary book on the Heidelberg Catechism to one, for example.

I find it hard to believe that "good", by the book RC's could be considered Christians. The ignorant, broadly evangelical-leaning Catholics, I've always considered it possible. I just hope and pray these folks see the idolatry of the Mass and other RC abominations and have the courage to leave.

 

[dudley]

I am today a Presbyterian however I was a Roman catholic most of my life. I left that church in 2006 because I was very disillusioned with the papacy of Joe Ratzinger. I believed he was turning the church back 50 years to a pre Vatican II mentality. I did not leave to become a protestant but I began exploring other Christian churches. In 2010 I began exploring the Reformed churches and I started to read about Calvin and Knox and I liked the Presbyterian church I am now a member. I started attending services in the summer of 2010 and I joined an inquirers class and I was received into my Presbyterian church by public affirmation of faith on October 24th 2010.
I said I did not leave to become a protestant but I now know the truth of the Gospel as it is taught in the Reformed faith and I would never return to Rome. Today I am Protestant in conviction and Reformed in doctrine.
Sola Scriptura—The Scriptures alone for matters of faith and practice
Sola Fide—justification by faith alone
Sola Gratia—by grace alone
Solo Christo—in Christ alone
Soli Deo Gloria—all to the glory of God alone
My Confessional Subscription Westminster Standards and the Reformed Book of Confessions.

I am very active in my Presbyterian church and I have been attending the bible class for 3 years every Thursday night. My conversion to Protestantism, keeps growing and I will share a letter I wrote to my associate pastor earlier this evening who is also my bible teacher.

David ,

I was caught in my own words last night when I said to you “I know now I will be saved” and you corrected me and said “no, I know I am saved.” I had to think about that. I had thought that my thinking had changed as a result of my Protestant Christian faith and my understanding and belief that the true Gospel is found in the Reformed faith and not in the Gospel as it is preached in the Roman catholic church.

I'm personally convicted by Scripture that true belief must flow from the gospel. ( Romans 1:16 )

I also now believe that the way that I understand the Gospel is that we are saved by faith alone apart from any works. I think that is the way that the Gospel needs to be preached and understood. If it is not, then it is a false Gospel and therefore anyone putting their faith in their own righteousness is believing in a false Gospel; which is what I now think the Roman catholic Gospel is, a false Gospel.

I realize now as an ex Roman catholic that I was brainwashed with teachings which were not biblical and defied the true message of salvation. I realized that today when I thought about my statement ‘I will be saved”! I thought I was free of the RC thinking and false theology that we are saved by faith and works. It is obvious by even this brief glimpse which I made back today in examining why I said that as I looked into the doctrines of mortal and venial sins, confession, penance, and purgatory, which I was taught as a catholic. I realized that the Roman Catholic Church has constructed one of the most unbiblical doctrinal systems that has ever been considered “Christian”. The fear, anguish, and religious bondage that such a system of “reward and punishment” creates, has tormented millions of lives for centuries, and continues to prey on those who are ignorant of the biblical way of salvation. It tormented me and it is one of the reasons I left the RCC in 2006 and began exploring other Christian churches.

I found tonight the following list of verses about being saved by faith. I took note that faith and works are contrasted. In other words, we are saved by faith "not by works" and "apart from works", etc. The point is that there are only two options. We are saved by faith alone or we are not. Since we have faith and works (both conceptually and in practice), then we are either saved by faith alone or by faith and works. There is no other option.
If we see that the scriptures exclude works in any form as a means of our salvation, then logically, we are saved by faith alone. I took a look at what the Bible says about faith and works. Then, afterwards, I looked again at James' statement about "faith alone" which was always used by the RCC a an argument against the Protestant doctrine of Justification by faith alone.
Rom. 3:28-30, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 29Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one."
Rom. 4:5, "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness,"
Rom. 5:1, "therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,"
Rom. 9:30, "What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith."
Rom. 10:4, "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes."
Rom. 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace."
Gal. 2:16, "nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified."
Gal. 2:21, I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.
Gal. 3:5-6, "Does He then, who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? 6Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."
Gal. 3:24, "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith."
Eph. 2:8-9, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. 9Not by works, lest any man should boast."
Phil. 3:9, "and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith."
Again, works/Law is contrasted with faith repeatedly and we are told that we are not justified by works in any way. Therefore, we are made right with God by faith, not by faith and our works; hence, faith alone.
James 2:24, not by faith alone
The scriptures clearly teach that we are saved (justified) by faith in Christ and what He has done on the cross. This faith alone saves us. However, we cannot stop here without addressing what James says in James 2:24, "You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone."
There is no contradiction. All you need to do is look at the context. James chapter 2 has 26 verses: Verses 1-7 instruct us not to show favoritism. Verses 8-13 are comments on the Law. Verses 14-26 are about the relationship between faith and works.

James begins this section by using the example of someone who says he has faith but has no works, "What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him?" (James 2:14). In other words, James is addressing the issue of a dead faith, a faith that is nothing more than a verbal pronouncement, a public confession of the mind, and is not heart-felt. It is empty of life and action. He begins with the negative and demonstrates what an empty faith is (verses 15-17, words without actions). Then he shows that type of faith isn't any different from the faith of demons (verse 19). Finally, he gives examples of living faith that has words followed by actions. Works follow true faith and demonstrate that faith to our fellow man, but not to God. In brief, James is examining two kinds of faith: one that leads to godly works and one that does not. One is true, and the other is false. One is dead, the other alive; hence, "Faith without works is dead," (James 2:20). But, he is not contradicting the verses above that says salvation/justification is by faith alone.

The Roman catholic church so grossly distorts the true message of salvation. I will practice saying now ‘I am saved” I pray that my sons and their families will someday see what I have seen. I bought them, each family, a bible, a catholic bible. (I did not want them to think I was trying to convert them.) I also bring them ‘Our daily Bread“” and I encourage them to read the bible. I told them we are now studying Romans in our bible class and suggested they read Roman’s also.

I can now say David as John says: “I confess that through my faith in Jesus Christ I have full assurance of salvation” (1 John 5:11-13).

I know now “I am saved” not that I will be saved. I think I am beginning to shed some of the last false teachings of Roman Catholicism which had lead me to loosing faith altogether. It was in finding the Reformed faith, reading Calvin and Knox and becoming a Presbyterian and attending your bible class that I have discovered the true Christian faith and the true message of salvation as it is in the scriptures.

I remember you saying one class session ‘it is awesome and great to be Protestant” I am now beginning to understand even better what you meant by that. I am thankful that I am now a Protestant. I am happy I am a member of the First Presbyterian church of Manasquan. I am thankful you are a friend , a teacher and a pastor to me.

Thank you David for helping me find and understand our Christian faith, I never really did before.

Dudley

PS I will stat being an usher at the 11 AM family service this Sunday. Bruce called me the other day. I want to become more actively involved in the church. So I will be an usher now , I hope in the future to be able to serve the FPCOM in other ways also.

 

[earl40]

I am today a Presbyterian however I was a Roman catholic most of my life.

First off Dudley I LOVED your post with all the verses! Is it not interesting how The Lord leads everyone to exactly the place He wills them to be and what time you arrive. What I love about your "protestant conversion" is that you are a protestant because you not only know the what, or The Who (The Lord Jesus), you believe in but why you believe in Him now. God used something other than sola fide to get you out but I suspect you may have never believed in the grace produced justification of the RC "church".

 

[housta]

I would urge you all to consider the fact that the Scriptures don't teach of the idea of the local Church as a "nice to have" augment to your personal relationship with Jesus. We're so infected by the notion that Chrsitianity is a personal relationship and little more that we miss the vital link that the local communion of the Saints plays in our own conversion and sustainment in the faith. We're so ruggedly individual that we impoverish ourselves within our local communions in how we view the Body and then we don't rightly measure how easily our faith might be knocked down if we were in a situation where we had no contact with the daily sustaining work of encouragement from fellow believers' exhortations and prayers into our lives. We also think that we would somehow do just fine without hearing the Word of God and receiving Christ rightly through the Sacraments.

Well said brother!