the perfect song for our fight for rights of conscience and religious freedom

This is a great song, "Uprising" by Muse. I was listening to it one day and thought, gee, this sounds a lot like the stand we are currently taking against the government, who is actively pushing pills on our society like birth control and the abortion pill (all under the guise of "freeeeeedom for women"). Don't fall for the P.R. machine. Rise up!

The paranoia is in bloom
The P.R. transmissions will resume
They'll try to push drugs to keep us all dumbed down
And hope that we will never see the truth around

So come on

Another promise, another seed, another
Packaged lie to keep us trapped in greed with all the
Green belts wrapped around our minds and endless
Red tape to keep the truth confined

So come on

They will not force us
And they will stop degrading us
And they will not control us
We will be victorious

So come on

Interchanging mind control
Come let the revolution take its toll
If you could flick a switch and open your third eye
You'd see that we should never be afraid to die

So come on

Rise up and take the power back
It's time the fat cat's had a heart attack
You know that their time is coming to an end
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend

So come on

They will not force us
They will stop degrading us
They will not control us
We will be victorious, so come on

Hey, hey, hey, hey
Hey, hey, hey, hey
Hey, hey, hey, hey

They will not force us
They will stop degrading us
They will not control us
We will be victorious, so come on

Hey, hey, hey, hey

unity! pleeeeeeeeease, unity!

Martin Luther has always been a fascination to me. His heart for God caused a revolution. I used to admire him with the utmost respect. But once I saw the fruit of the first division - which is division upon division upon division upon division upon division...and now we have 30,000 denominations, or divisions, I realized that the fruit of the Reformation doesn't necessarily tie to the will of God as seen in the Gospel.

About 8 years ago I met an on-fire Catholic named Sharon. I was married with one child at the time and working with her. I had never met a Catholic who was so excited about her faith or who knew so much of the "why" regarding the Catholic faith, and I had never met a Catholic who was able to explain things to me like she did. She marked me. One statement she said in particular really stayed with me,

"Imagine what Christians could do against Satan if we were in unity."

I couldn't argue with her. I had never thought about unity in the body of Christ before. I had never even noticed the passage in John 17 when Jesus prays in the garden before his death. He prays for unity of believers (Christians) and the unity of the apostles. 

That's when I began to question what Martin Luther did. 

Martin Luther didn't intend to start a new church when he posted his 95 theses on October 31, 1517. The Catholic Church had some very corrupt practices going on. The Church needed to be reformed. When Martin Luther stood up and demanded reform, the Church leaders made sure he wouldn't be successful by excommunicating him and later condemning him as an outlaw. I believe Martin Luther wanted to change the Church, not start his own thing. He later went off course when he started changing the Bible and becoming his own pope.

www.catholicmemes.com

The Catholic Church wasn't an innocent victim in the Reformation. The abuses in the Church were the root of the problem. But others who also disagreed with the abuses that were going in the Catholic Church instead helped to reform it from within. Great men and women of God  - Ignatius of Loyola, Teresa of Ávila, John of the Cross, and Francis de Sales - risked their lives to make the Church what God wanted her to be. This is known as the Counter-Reformation. I had never heard of the Counter-Reformation before. I assumed the abuses that Martin Luther stood up against were still commonplace in the Catholic Church today.

But they're not!

I'm not saying that the leaders of Catholic Church is always perfect. They're human, they can't be perfect. But no other church is as in line with the will of God in the area of unity as well as numerous other areas as the Catholic Church. Jesus gave us the Church and promised that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. 2,000 years later, this promise still stands true.

Jesus prayed for us all to be one - you could say it was his dying wish/prayer. He prayed this so that "the world will know that you sent me and have loved them..." Time after time the world recognizes the relevancy of the Catholic Church. It has been reported recently that the NSA may have been spying on the Vatican. When the anti-christ comes, who do you think will be his first target? The Church who is the most relevant and strongest against him. Join us in our fight against evil.

If you love Jesus and hate the devil, please consider learning more about what the Church teaches and join us. I promise you that you will find that the Catholic Church is not what you thought it was.

Imagine what Christians could do against Satan if we were in unity.

on unity

Seeing that unity was the will of Jesus is one of the main reasons that I came home to the Catholic Church. 

One thing that always bothered me once I got serious about Christianity and started attending a Southern Baptist was the denominations within Christianity. The wonderful people I met in my new church were very helpful in teaching me the importance of the Bible. We had a wonderful youth group, and I learned more about the Bible than I had ever known before. It became part of my life. A part that I couldn't live without.

There was one Holy Bible - the inspired Word of God. Yet there are an estimated 8,000...or 30,000 denominations. I get dizzy at some of the figures I see, but the latest Wikipedia reports 41,000 denominations, so I'll go with 41,000. To be correct - it's actually 41,000 and counting. Churches aren't finished splitting. I could not reconcile how one Holy Word of God could translate into 41,000 denominations. Every single one of those 41,000 use the same Bible, and every single one of them would say they were the most accurate in their interpretation of Scripture. 

Does anyone else think that maybe someone might be wrong here? How on earth could 41,000 people be right using one Bible?! The Bible is THE WORD OF GOD!! And God isn't schizophrenic. There is only one Truth. And 41,000 denominations. It just doesn't add up.

One day I read some passages in John 17. I am sure I had read them before, but for the first time I really saw them for what they were (emphasis mine). 

“I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me." ~John 17:20-23 (NKJ)

This is Jesus' prayer after the last supper, right before He was betrayed by Judas. Luke's account of this time of prayer says that Jesus' sweat was like drops of blood. This was a very difficult time for Him as He prepared for His sacrifice. And he prayed for us. For us to be one. He cared that much about the unity of His believers - Christians. Not only that, but He also prayed in the following passage of John 17 for the Apostles - the leaders of His church - to be one.

Jesus' will is for us to be one. Disunity is against His will. I believe it grieves Him to see the state of disunity within His bride, the church. I don't want to be out of Jesus' will. I don't want to grieve Jesus.

3,000,000 Catholics participate in Mass in Brazil.
What a statement of hope to the world!

I've heard the response that we all somehow share in an invisible unity by being believers in Christ. Yet Protestants can't join worship services for a month before they start arguing about interpretations or who our leader will be. And then they split over disagreements. I think this "invisible unity" is a way to justify the status quo. I wonder what the world thinks about the unity of Christians? As the author of the blog Carpe Veritatem writes, "[divisions] causes people to look at us and say, 'How can Christianity be true, they can't even agree amongst themselves!'"

Human pride has caused the body of Christ to divide. I don't blame one side or the other - the pride and resulting problems started before 1517. Please read on at Carpe Veritatem posts about unity between denominations. There are 7 parts to the topic, and the author describes in more detail the unity that Christ desires and why we have the divisions that we currently have.

This is a huge topic to my heart, and I wonder if there are people "out there" who have given division within the body of Christ any thought? How do you think we can achieve unity within the body of believers?

kristy

we all need baptism, including infants

Infant baptism was not one of the big doctrines that lead me to the Catholic Church. I focused on studying theology on things like apostolic succession, visible unity of the church, sacred Tradition, the papacy, and the Eucharist. Once I had these things settled in my mind and my heart - once I saw that Catholicism lined up with Scripture more than any Protestant denomination I had ever been a part of, I looked into things like baptism, prayer of the saints, and contraception (just to name a few). But no Protestant ever asks me about apostolic succession or visible unity of the church or even the Eucharist. I can understand why - as a Protestant I never even heard of these things much less considered them very important. When I'd be in a group talking about the anti-Bibleness of the Catholic Church, people always brought up infant baptism and prayers to the saints. Oh, and Mary worship (which is feels odd to even write this because Catholics don't worship Mary). Now as a convert, infant baptism is often the thing I get questioned about the most.

Baptism was not a big deal to me before. I believed that the Catholic Church relied on this man-made tradition of baptizing infants because they were backwards and never thought it fully out - that Catholics were just mindless sheep doing what they were told to do and never reading the Bible to find out what it actually said about needing to be of an accountable age before you can be baptized. (What I didn't realize is that there was no verse about being at an accountable age before deciding to be baptized.)

When I was learning to evangelize, one of the arguments we prepared for non-believers went something like this, "If I'm wrong about my belief in God, what's the worst that will happen to me? I will have lived a life of love and charity the best I could and then I die and get buried and that's the end of that. But what if you're wrong?" The implication was that if the non-believer was wrong about the good news of the Gospel not being true, well then he was going to have hell to pay for being wrong. This argument was not used to scare people into believing in Jesus, but rather as a way to spur them to some deep thinking on the solidity of their beliefs about truth. The same question rang through my mind when I didn't believe in baptizing infants. What if I'm wrong? As any other parent, my children are precious, priceless gifts to me. The answer to "What if I'm wrong about not baptizing infants?" scared me enough that I wanted to know the other side of the argument to see if truth was there.

This isn't my baby, but it looks just like my Zoë

Catholics aren't the only ones who believe infants should be baptized. There are many Protestant faith traditions that believe in infant baptism - Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopal/Anglican, Eastern Orthodox and Reformed Christian churches all believe in infant baptism. Of the 800 million Protestant Christians in the world, at least 540 million believe in infant baptism, or 68% of Protestants. Take the entire world of Christianity into consideration - Catholic and non-Catholic - at least 87% of Christians believe in infants baptism. (I came up with these calculations using Wikipedia's number of Christians by faith tradition.) This of course doesn't mean that majority rules. But it is at least worth mentioning. If you are in the 13% minority who do not believe infants should be baptized, do you feel you have some sound evidence to take this position?

Baptism is not optional for salvation. The Bible stresses in verse after verse the necessity of baptism for salvation. In John 3:5 Jesus says, "Verily verily I say to you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit." Mark 16:16 says "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved, but he that does not believe will be condemned." 1 Peter 3:21 says baptism saves a person "this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also - not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus." Peter insists baptism is integral in salvation in Acts 2:38, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins." Acts 22:16 "Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord." In fact, in every instance in the Bible where people learn about Jesus, they are immediately baptized. It wasn't optional.

We are all born with original sin. We can't help it. We inherited our sinful nature from our parents, Adam and Eve. Psalm 51:5 says, "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me." Ephesians 2:3 says that we're "by nature all children of wrath". Jesus says in John 3:6 that "Flesh gives birth to flesh." We were stained with sin from the beginning. 1 Corinthians 15:21-22 says "death came through a man (Adam)...For as in Adam all die..." Without salvation, our sinful nature inherited from our first parents is a death sentence. It's a death sentence as soon as we enter the earth. Babies need forgiveness. They need it at birth.

The Bible does not exclude infants from the promise of baptism. The objection that is often brought up against infant baptism is that there is no reference to an infant being baptized in the Bible. However, there is no objection to infant baptism in the Bible, either. So if we are to discuss infant baptism, we have to agree that the Bible does not spell out the words "thou shalt not baptize thy infants". Actually the Bible has several verses that show that baptism was not restricted to adults. In Acts 2:38 Peter commands, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Then in 39 he says (emphasis mine) "This promise is for you and your children..." Jesus himself did not turn away infants when they were brought to Him. In Luke 18:15-16 people brought their infants to Jesus and when the disciples saw this they rebuked the people for bringing their infants (after all, the infants cannot themselves make the decision for Jesus). Jesus corrects them instead welcomes the infants of believers into the kingdom of God, "Let the little children come to me, and do not forbid them, for of such in the kingdom of God." In 1 Corinthians 1:16 Paul says that he baptized the household of Stephanas. 

Jesus instructs the disciples in Matthew 28:19, "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." The term "all nations" has always been understood by Church fathers to exclude infants mean everyone. The promise does not leave infants out.

Baptism is to the New Covenant what circumcision was in the Old Covenant. In Colossians 2:11-12 Paul equates baptism with the old circumcision, saying, "you yourself were circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands, by putting of the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ, buried with him in baptism..." Christians have no need for physical circumcision.  They have already received that inward circumcision, that spiritual cleansing of the heart, that is effected by the Holy Spirit, given to us in baptism.

Circumcision under the Abrahamic covenant was applied to infants on the basis of parental faith. Galatians 3:29 says "if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise." We've already seen how Paul explains that baptism is the fulfillment of circumcision. 

Now, imagine a father who was Jewish and newly converted to Christianity in 70 A.D. He brings his baby to be included in the kingdom of Jesus Christ, the fulfillment of the covenant of his father Abraham. Do you think the Apostles would have turned away his baby because his baby could not choose Christ for himself? Of course not! If it were so, then the man would have been turned off by the new covenant, which was preached as a fulfillment of - as better than - the old. Infants were included in the old covenant. They are not to be turned away in the new covenant, which is a better covenant than the old.

Please don't get me wrong. I am not claiming that baptism alone will save someone. But it is necessary.

Baptism is a sacrament, which means it is  given to us by Jesus to give us a powerful grace in our lives. Remember, it is only by God's grace that any of us have faith, adult or child or infant. And for an adult or an infant, faith should grow after baptism. The faith required for baptism is not a perfect and mature faith. 

I hope I've at least spurred an interest in some to investigate further into the theology behind infant baptism. If I'm wrong that infant baptism is right and true (I don't believe I'm wrong, but let's just ask for argument's sake), what's the worst that would happen? But if you believe it's wrong to baptize infants, what if you're wrong?

And here's a little completely interesting fact. Do you know how Catholics dip their finger in holy water when they enter and leave church? There's meaning behind it! It's to remind us of our baptism! I get sooooo excited about this. I love the opportunity to relive, in a way, my baptism each and every time I go to church and to remind myself that I am His.

Some additional resources: 

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/baptism.html

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/infant-baptism

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm

And, of course the CCC (with Bible references) - start in the section called "The Sacraments of Christian Initiation."

Kyrie, eleison
Christe, eleison
Kyrie, eleison

For Such a Time as This

Have I mentioned that I love being Catholic?  It's exactly where I know I'm supposed to be.

I grew up with a nominal Catholic foundation (one day I'll go into that more), so I became a Protestant at the age of 15 after meeting someone who showed me how much Jesus loved me.  For 18 years I was passionately in love with Christ as a Protestant.  Then I was called home by the lover of my soul.  Now I am passionately in love with Christ in the Church that Jesus gave us to guide us.  That's not to say the Church has been perfect, but it has been guided by the Holy Spirit amid any attacks from the gates of Hell.

I like to get the background out of the way so that you know where I'm coming from.

Being Catholic has been very difficult in so many ways.  I've had the chance to take a deeper look at myself (and while that's good, it certainly is ugly), and I've had to stand strong to people who oppose my move.  I haven't known very many passionately Catholic people in my life.  Honestly, most Catholics I know don't even seem to know what they believe or why they believe it.  And most Protestants I know have had the same experience with Catholics. They are baffled when they see someone who is a Bible-believing Jesus freak moves back to the Catholic Church.  They are speechless.  I can feel the speechlessness.

I constantly feel like I am fighting from the inside and from the outside.

But I didn't expect anything about my conversion (reversion) to be easy, so I'm OK with it.  I was prepared for it.  I have been silently letting the Holy Spirit build things in me that should have been built in me in the first 15 years of my life.  I've held these things close to my heart.

During the end of 2011, I felt God telling me it's time to speak up.  Time to stand up.  Time to be a light for His Church.  All for His glory, not mine.  All for His people, not for me.

This is the thing about me - I don't like to go against the crowd.  I don't like to stand out.  I don't like to speak up.  I don't like to be the odd one.  I've always stood firm in my convictions, but I've resisted being outspoken about them.  I like to stand in the corner and watch life from a safe place.  So I pondered what I kept hearing and tried to explain it away.  Surely that's not what God is telling me.

The Time Square ball dropped and 2012 was here.  I still wrestled with the message I felt like I was getting from God.  The message I felt like I was getting from Him to go and stand out for Him, which is an absolute paradox to my personality.

January 20, 2012.  Obama announces that he is not giving any religious exemption to his HHS mandate.  Catholic institutions will have to violate their consciences and pay for birth control and abortion-causing pills or suffer large fines.  The Bishops speak up.  They stand firm.  They stand for the teachings of the Church regarding contraception.  A teaching that many - including Catholic and Protestant Christians - feel is antiquated.  Religious liberty is threatened and the Bishops are not caving.  The drama begins.  Suddenly the Church and her 2,000 years of teaching on contraception is shoved into the limelight.  People start asking the question - why does the Catholic Church teach against contraception?  A teaching that was long considered old-fashioned and irrelevant is suddenly being discussed everywhere.

Something in me has changed.  Now I'm ready.  Time to stand up.  Time to speak up.

Am I the only one who feels like there's something happening?  I can't put my finger on it, but there is something in the air.  Israel and Iran (and China and Russia) are getting ready to go to war.  Religious liberty is being attacked by our government.  The Bishops are finally standing firm for something.  People are flocking back to the Catholic Church, spurred by a deep desire to get to firmer ground, beyond themselves and their own opinions about the Bible.  Deep, thoughtful Christians are making the move more and more.  Why?

I think a major reason is because God needs unity in His people.  Something is happening in the world, and Christians would be stronger against evil if  they were united.  Unity is also necessary to reach the lost in the world.  On the night before He died, Jesus prayed for all Christians to be in unity.

“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one — I in them and you in me — so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me." John 17:20-23


This passage never meant anything to me before I started taking a closer look at the Catholic Church.  Now my heart echoes Jesus's heart when he prayed this.  He knows he's about to die, and he is praying for us to be united.  I feel like screaming, "Doesn't this mean anything to anyone?!"


It's time to reach the lost, and we cannot reach the masses without unity.  

the why-i-hate-religion debate

No, no - I don't hate religion.  But this guy does.  And he gave a lot of people who had thought about getting back into church a good reason to keep sleeping in.

The Bad Catholic has a wonderful post on why the message in this video is very unbiblical (despite the guy in the video claiming he loves the Bible), and very contradictory to say the least.