Seek and You Shall Find

  This is a pretty full disclosure.  I am first a child of God, and then a follower of God's begotten Son, Jesus Christ.

   Have I always been this?

   I have never struggled with the question, ''Is there a God.''

   To me it was evident, where else do we come from? What else explains a sudden creation of man, let alone the Earth and the Universe.

   Why aren't there more talking species in the world? How can it be that we even talk and build art and architecture?

   If all are natural, why aren't we thinking as the animals think, and living as the animals live? Why aren't we always hunting for food, resting after hunting, and all other primal behaviors of the animal kingdom?

  As I said, all was easy to see for me.

  I grew up in a Christian home, a Catholic home. I went to mass, went to Catholic school, and served as an altar boy.

  In my high school days, I was more influenced by American and Southern things than God things. Although, I was still a practicing Catholic, I would read more about America and history than my Bible or about my faith.

  I even had a remarkable occurrence in a dream, or rather, not in a dream, but while I was sleeping.

  Sleeping in the waiting room in a Vet hospital which happened to be adjacent to my sick grandfather's room, I heard a clear voice speak to me.

  And unfortunately, I recently forgot the exact wording. Was it, ''Matthew, He's gone,'' or was it ''Matthew, He's dead.''

  I think it likely to be ''gone.''

  This of course was amazing to hear, and it instantly woke me up, and I walked in the next room unconscious to the time or anything of what was around as I was still wiping away the sleep.

  As I entered, I saw my mother looking over my grandfather, I heard a funny sound repeat itself in the oxygen tube.

 When my mom looked towards me, I said, ''He's dead, isn't he?''

 She said, ''Yes,'' And confirmed to me that I walked in only seconds after he passed on.

  This was real to me, and I was very spiritual for a while.  I was intensely aware of my spirituality for at least a year, and even quit the wrestling team as those boyhood ambitions to be a champion and seek glory seemed trivial.

  It took a year or so before I was back to being completely distracted by sports, girls, parties, and teenage dreams.

  Off to college, and I was still partially faithful to my Catholicism, but more out of love of my Louisiana culture than out of the love of God.

  I didn't live like a believer, and you can really say I was agnostic, maybe a prayerful agnostic as I was somewhat practicing but it was not for any foundational belief in anything other than, ''Well I am not sure, but I believe in God, so might as well pray and keep my culture as that is the best I have anyway.''

  And agnostic to Jesus Christ more than God, or a god, a creator.

  And this agnosticism allowed me to live unsure and therefore inconsistent to any value I would say I had.

  Later in my college days, I was attracted to my spirituality again, I sort of convinced myself that I had a natural spiritual gift. I sort of impressed upon myself a notion that when I drowned as an infant, I was brought back to life and this happening gave me stronger feelings to the spiritual world, a stronger connection. I attributed the voice in my sleep and other mediation experiences I had to this.  That one of my talents is that I just might have a connection with the spirit world from my 'death' as an infant.

  Of course, I have no memory of drowning, but my parents tell me that I was basically dead and then came to.

  After a nice retreat with an uncle and my grandfather, I considered living this out, and becoming a priest.  It came from my uncle, he said, and I never knew what made him say it, but he said to me, ''Why don't you become a priest.''

  I was in college and although the thought was contemplated before in my life, it was never seriously contemplated until my uncle said those words.  It suddenly really struck me as a very interesting proposal.

  I told myself, I have this spirituality, maybe I am suppose to use it in that way.

  So I spoke to a priest actually, and I told him that I didn't want to be a priest, I wanted a family, but felt that I could be called to become a priest. He said that everything I was saying was a good sign that I was being called, because it usually is not in our will.

  But then, I was left only to experience something oppressive after that conversation.  I suddenly had a crux of faith, and I went back and told the priest that I didn't want to be a priest, the good Lord willing, maybe I would be a deacon.

  This oppressive feeling was one of emptiness and confusion, and felt that I was not even certain about the Catholic faith anymore.  I felt a bit ridiculous to feel this was for me and moments later be stricken with all kinds of doubt and confusion.

  It was not only confusion, however, it was also rationale, I was not going to sign my life away to something I wasn't sure I knew and understood.  And the pope was a huge sticking point for me, why the pope? And why would I join the pope?

  This left a lot off the table, and I continued my life as a regular student in college, and spiritually was in an insecure place, but still at peace with where things were.  I was happy to say as Socrates, ''I know nothing.''

  I would leave for Ireland, and I had a few religious talks in my first few months, however,  I really wasn't comfortable talking about my faith as I was unsure what to say in a world I heard more voices against what I was than voices that substantiated what I was.

  Then I met this lovely Danish girl on her own spiritual journey.  We would talk about things, and I was in my ''I know nothing'' stage, but she showed me how wonderful it was to be on a spiritual journey.

  She was also very intriguing as no one in her environment influenced her, she found this road on her own.

  She grew up with Lutheran sensibilities as a Dane, but was very persuaded by the Catholic Faith, and she taught me about a few saints and really opened my eyes to a beautiful spiritual journey.

  Even more, she would ask questions, and she inspired me to do what I really never actually did. Despite attending fine Catholic schools in my young life, I never really examined all the why's of my Catholic Faith.  Those questions weren't in my peripheral, only was there a God, and was Jesus him?  I suppose it was because I already saw myself as a Christian by name, and I had no reason to think what is all this stuff in Catholicism really about to its core. It was the way I learned to be a Christian, and that was that.

  I would marry this girl in a Lutheran Church.  I was not one bit concerned with marrying her in any certain Church.  I had developed my own rationales, that marriage existed before Jesus so any marriage is the same with the intent on it being with God.

  I had no inclination in me that a marriage in a Christian Church was not Godly.  It was the promise of the two people to God themselves which made it Godly.

  This is where I was, I was an American, everything could be answered this way.  I was a Catholic, but I was not a papist. I was a Matthew, and my Catholicism was that of my conscious not of the law or of the pope and Church teachings to the inscription.

  I also allowed my son to be baptized in a Lutheran Church, but this was more so because I knew the Catholic Church recognized all Christian baptisms and being in Denmark as we were this was convenient, and I also made an agreement to allow my wife's brother be the first sponsor which he could not do in a Catholic Church, and my brother as another, but I am still not sure what position this is in Lutheranism, but seemed fair enough so my own twin could claim the title of 'parain' in some way.

  But I was still on a quest which my wife help inspire, although after these early years, our spiritual lives took us on different courses. I was actually intrigued by Lutheranism as I still hadn't answered the question for myself why they pope? I also understood the arguments which would question any need to pray to the saints or Mary.

  So the essentials of Lutheranism actually made sense to me for a while, and I examined them.

  My examinations ever so slowly, however, led me back to the Catholic faith.

  The story of Fatima really got my energies going in understanding that in Catholicism the Word of God is alive.  Catholicism is a living tradition and is not one where we are only to look in a book centuries old.

  With Protestantism, of course people have experiences of God in their own lives, but the foundation of the religion is back in time.  Prophets and miracles are what are read of in the Bible.  A greater sense of God's mystic body is lost in the textual based faith.  Catholicism moves with the world, as God is not stagnant but also involved.  For many Protestants, if something happens that is not in the Book, it is rejected.  The Catholic Church is very open to God's mysticism at work even today, and there are some wonderful stories which seem to reflect this view as a true one.

  And this lead to much more, and then I discovered the vast and amazing resources to me in understanding the existence of God and the existence and Truth which lies in Jesus Christ on the world wide web, specifically youtube.

  This blog is all from these moments where I began to get answers I didn't realize they were there all along, and my twin told me to stop sending emails, and start a blog where people could go to if they wanted.

  I still send emails :), but they are shorter because I have links to share with what it is I have to say ;)

  I should like to speak more to Luther, LINK
 

People of God

  All are people of God, whether they know it or not, because all people are from God, and we are His.

  Lumen Gentium is the Vatican II document which reinforces this idea, that all are God's people, not just believers.

  With this, I want to focus on my Protestant friends. They must be on the verge of cursing my existence by now with all the links I send their way and seemingly to attack them as people.  That is what I can imagine lying in their hearts, a cringe when they see my name attached to something.

  I don't blame them, I actually would like a response every once in a while, but of course, disregard is the greatest insult. So I suppose they can claim that for themselves.

  And for the record, a couple have replied.

  There are several reasons this is the case. One lies in convenience, one lies in distaste, and one reason lies in a loss of the sense of what is Good and True.

  Sharing one's heart is the greatest thing to do, there is very little anything else anyone should want of another than the sharing of their heart.
  But when a sharing of the heart is ingested as a sharing of one's mind, people object more substantially.

  It is not in my interest to make people uneasy.  It is not my interest to make people think ill of my intentions.  I have no greater value mentally then they do, I just am in the instrument of sharing knowledge. Sharing truth.  Do we know what truth is today?

  It may seem as though I am living in the Reformation Age to them.  It may seem this way certainly, but I am not I would like to assure them.  I believe the Holy Spirit works in each human being, and only in sharing am I opening them to my soul. It is a great honesty I write to them and I share things with them.

  I am not out to show them what is wrong with them as people, I love them as people, and I love them as Christians.  It is this love which I want them to understand what the Word is.  That is in loving their ideals, I want to share with them more completely what their ideals stand for.

  I would love to engage the atheist just the same, but they are a different breed of man. The Protestant is believing, so in theory, they should believe in what Jesus said and did.

 1500 years went by before foundational elements of the Faith were changed. Of course, there were always people practicing the Faith contrary to the Faith, but the Reformation was one where the crisis of Faith grew far and wide.

  How does one explain 1500 years of remarkable accomplishments towards congruency and just accept that it needed to be changed when speaking of what we speak of, God became man and revealed himself to us.

  Of course, there was the East-West schism, but foundationally the teachings are the same, differences would come later.

  And I think it would be greatly proper to disclose several things to my Protestant brothers and sisters about myself, about my spiritual journey.

  
LINK: My Spiritual Journey

 

 

Protests Against Protestantism

  A quick display on why protestantism deserves its name.  It is not only a protest to the Pope and Catholicism, but just as well a protest to the Word it proclaims as the only authority in which man can believe in.

ORIGINAL POST CENTERED ON THESE FIVE, BUT I FOUND ONE WHICH IS OUTSTANDING

Colossians 1:24

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

²⁴ Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I ^[a]do my share on behalf of His body, which is the church, in filling up what is lacking ^[b]in Christ’s afflictions.

''for your sake,'' (Not only God, but a cooperation), DO (action, a work) my share on behalf of HIS Body (THE CHURCH!), in filling what is lacking (NOT FINISHED) in Christ's afflictions.

  5 Articles of Scripture which should make any Protestant stay aback in laying any claim to Sola Scriptura, and thus Truth.

1 - ^{1 Tim 3 : 15} if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth.

2 - ^{Romans 13 1} Every ^[a]person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except ^[b]from God, and those which exist are established by God. ² Therefore ^[c]whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. ³ For rulers are not a cause of fear for ^[d]good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; ⁴ for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. ⁵ Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. ⁶ For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. ⁷ Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.

  Of course, it mainly speaks to civil authority, but the ending of verse one suggests all authority, and does it make sense that one should be subject to only civil authority and not a spiritual authority when the general existence of authority is 'established by God?' And this is vindicated in 1 Corin 1 : 10 -13

3 - ALL OF THE SERMON OF THE MOUNT FROM MATT 5 - 7 : 27
 ^{Matt 5 : 13} “You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how ^[e]can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men.
¹⁴ “You are the light of the world. A city set on a ^[f]hill cannot be hidden; ¹⁵ nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a ^[g]basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. ¹⁶ Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.
¹⁷ “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. ¹⁸ For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not ^[h]the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. ¹⁹ Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches ^[i]others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever ^[j]keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
²⁰ “For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.

4 -  Parable of the Sower Explained
   
^{Luke 8 : 11} “Now the parable is this: the seed is the word of God. ¹² Those beside the road are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their heart, so that they will not believe and be saved. ¹³ Those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root; ^[c]they believe for a while, and in time of temptation fall away. ¹⁴ The seed which fell among the thorns, these are the ones who have heard, and as they go on their way they are choked with worries and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to maturity. ¹⁵ But the seed in the good soil, these are the ones who have heard the word in an honest and good heart, and hold it fast, and bear fruit with ^[d]perseverance.

    As I believe the Catholic Church maintains the true interpretations of the Word, I believe the first is one who as said, begins on the path to righteousness, but follows the wrong course by persuasions of the devil, the second is not protestants as a whole as it says that they lose faith after a while, but this does show that Born-Again Christians are wrong in thinking that one can not lose salvation from their belief.  The third can be light weight to earthly to rich and powerful Catholics or hints towards the protestant theology inspired by the temporal concerns of modern liberty. Forth is self-explanatory, but the existence of 'perseverance' once again fortifies the idea that  we are not saved by faith alone!

5-  St. Paul, not only St. Peter, makes the case that we are justified by deeds,
   ^{Romans 2 : 5} But ^[d]because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, ⁶ who will render to each person according to his deeds: ⁷ to those who by perseverance (Luke 8 : 15) in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; ⁸ but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.

   ^{Romans 2 : 12} For all who have sinned ^[f]without the Law will also perish ^[g]without the Law, and all who have sinned ^[h]under the Law will be judged ^[i]by the Law; ¹³ for it is not the hearers ^[j]of the Law who are ^[k]just before God, but the doers ^[l]of the Law will be justified. ¹⁴ For when Gentiles who do not have ^[m]the Law do ^[n]instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having ^[o]the Law, are a law to themselves, ¹⁵ in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, ¹⁶ on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

  Historical claim against Sola Scriptura 

  The historical claim against Sola Scriptura is that it was the authority that the protestants protest against that claimed the authority to establish the Bible.  

  That is, the authority that the protestants say have no authority are indeed the ones who decided which books should be in the Bible. 

  It was a collection of bishops at the Council of Rome in the year 382, after Constantine.  

  If we are to be a scriptural based religion, ask yourself a very reasonable question: If God's intent was to have scripture, why didn't Jesus write? 
  
  You sort of wish he did, but he did not which is a clear indication that His Will was for man to carry the burden to bring the Good News to the world.  He taught, and told His Apostles to teach as He did. It is scriptural that Jesus told His followers to teach the Word :  

 Matt 28 : 20 teaching them oto observe all that pI have commanded you. And behold, qI am with you always, to rthe end of the age.”

  This is clear that we are to listen to men of the Christian God.  We are to be humble in being guided and taught.

 I made up a quote, and it is relevant to this case : Even the smallest journeys teach us about ourselves.... We can not be answered until we allow ourselves to be guided

  My dear wife, an Evangelical Luthern of the Church of Denmark, made claim to me, ''The Bible is there so everyone can read the Word of God.''

  This is not the case, anyone who reads about what went on at the Council of Rome in 382 when the Bible canon was established would find out.

  It was decided, not only which books are true, but which books are meant to be read in Mass, that is, the feast of the Lord.

 Thorough non-Christian scholarship has indicated that in those days, it was common to have a biographical piece of literature read at meals, at meals!

  What is a Christian meal? The remembrance and true sacrifice of the Eucharist ( Eucharist explained:Christ-in-the-eucharist ).

  The officials, who were granted their positions by ordination straight from the Apostles, kept the canon in Latin.

  Why not the vernacular? It was an attempt to make the mass universal, that is, exactly the same, and to them it was also important people could pray the prayers they learn no matter where they were in the world.

  The Bible simply was not made for individual interpretation.  It was also not only claiming which scriptures are true or not.  The Apocalypse, or revelation, of Peter was not rejected based on Truth, but on that idea that it did not match the intent of the Mass: wiki/Apocalypse_of_Peter

   And the Protestants who rail against the Romanism of the Catholic Church,  seriously overlook the beauty of what happened in 313 through the Edict of Milan. It was extraordinary! So extraordinary, it was supernatural as Constantine's motivations came from a revelation in a dream.

  Think biblically, the Jews expected a conqueror to defeat the Romans.  What happened? Of course it was not the way it was expected, but in the infinite wisdom of God and the power of Christ persevered and this Church He built took down the pagan Roman conquerors.

  How Glorious! And this story of Constantine is exactly the mysticism and mystery that Protestantism lacks, and the Catholic faith is engulfed with.

AGAINST SALVATION APART FROM BAPTISM

 The following is from: Catholic Answers

  

Born of Water and the Spirit

The passage in Romans 6 (backed up by Colossians 2) is not the only evidence from the New Testament that baptism is effective and therefore necessary for salvation. The apostles Peter and John confirm St. Paul’s teaching. In Acts 2, when St. Peter is preaching at Pentecost, his hearers ask what they must do to be saved, and he replies, "Repent and be baptized." In 1 Peter 3, Noah’s ark is referred to as a type of baptism, and Peter writes, "In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet. 3:20-21).
The most famous New Testament evidence for the efficacy and necessity of baptism is in John’s Gospel. When Nicodemus comes to visit Jesus by night, Jesus says that a person cannot enter the kingdom of God without being born again. Nicodemus asks how a man might enter again into his mother’s womb and Jesus corrects him, saying, "No one can enter the kingdom of heaven unless he is born of water and the Spirit" (John 3:3-5). From the earliest days of the Church this passage has been understood to refer to baptism, and this interpretation is virtually unanimous down through history.


 Once again, to the question of authority, well I leave it to the Honorable Archbishop Fulton Sheen to disclose this reality of authority. In short, the authorities of God are not in authority for power, but of service!