Polycarp Ministries

I loved seminary. Our time in Louisville afforded me so many chances to grow, learn and serve. Now I was amongst the “big dogs” so to speak, and I could once and for all put away those tinges of doubt concerning the Catholic Church. But every class I attended, being taught by the brightest and best protestant scholars in the nation, I was more and more drawn to Rome. Why?

The more I studied Church history, Scripture, and theology, the more I saw an ecclesiological structure found only in the Catholic Church. The Church Fathers constantly spoke of fidelity to bishops and to THE Church (not local congregations or cliques or anything else). It didn’t take long for me to see that a structure was logically demanded of the Church, and therefore was provided by Christ when he appointed Peter as its first pastor. Now there was one who could speak for God, being led by the spirit along with the Apostles, in order to settle disputes and declare what is and what is not truth. Why didn’t everyone else see this? Because they were blinded by their presuppositions that congregational democratic government is correct, that the Church fell away from the truth, and that the Reformation was a legitimate cause for schism. But I could find no evidence to support these assumptions in history or sacred Scripture.

What I found as I read, was a Bible that explained God’s covenant love for us, and a promise that is fulfilled in Christ. I saw a sanctification that is continuous and real and that was not merely a legal declaration. I saw in the writings of the Scriptures, the Fathers, and even the secular historians, that the Church believed in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and that for this and many other beliefs protestants consider invalid or optional the early Christians were willing to die. The Church I saw in history was the same Church I was reading about in my Catechism, both doctrinally and structurally.

I should explain that I did a lot of reading and study outside of class, and that may partially explain why my classmates were not having the same revelations as myself. But I still think that if somebody is honestly seeking truth, and is willing to conform themself to it and not the other way around, will eventually find the fulness of salvation in Jesus Christ as taught by His Church. Even reading anti-Catholic writers during this period could not sway me. Their arguments were mostly ad hominem, laced with circular reasoning and poor source documentation (including a glaring lack of source documentation itself). To have truly studied the Scriptures and History and to remain protestant would be essentially saying, “I know that the early Church believed the things that the Catholic Church today teaches, and that the Church has been consistant in its teaching for 2000 years, BUT I, with my 4-8 years of study, am willing to fly in the face of 2000 years of succession and disagree because my presuppositions do not match those of the Church.” In a word, pride, seems to be one of the largest vices that threaten to keep protestants from discovering the Church.

I don’t mean to paint such a negative picture. Most all protestants I know are godly people who love and serve Jesus Christ the best they know how. They want nothing more than to please Christ with their lives, but Catholicism is something truly foreign to them. They have only vague knowledge and assumptions on Church teaching and practice based on what they see in the media (and we all know how accurately the media portrays the Church). Catholicism makes them uncomfortable because of the unfamiliarity. I encourage you to take advantage of the Easter season and invite a protestant friend to a Holy Week service. They will be surprised by what they see and their faulty assumptions will begin to fall.