Protestants ask, Catholics answer.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jul 17, 2009
353
0
0
#41
For those interested...


A concerned Roman Catholic wrote to me, "...we cannot only look at the Bible without looking at the tradition of the Church. It says in scripture (1 Thess 2:15) "Stand firm in the teachings passed on to you by WORD and in letters."
1 Corinthians 11:2
Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.

2 Thessalonians 3:6
Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us.


There are plenty of NT references to Tradition. The above are just the easiest to see clear reference to. Jesus even fulfilled prophecy that existed only in Holy Tradition and was never found in Holy Scripture. Tradition and Scripture have always been authoritative, in Judaism and also Christianity. It wasn't until 1600s to the present that people began to ignore and eventually entirely reject Holy Tradition as having any authority.

Jesus spoke against bad tradition or traditions of men and never rejected Holy Tradition. The following is pre-resurrection of course but still, continuity is key to understanding that Christianity sees itself as the purest expression of Judaism. Catholics also believe that Christianity is the end of all religion. Sacramental theology is sorely misunderstood by protestants and they reduce their understanding of it to ritual and religion. Judaism and Christianity has been Sacramental (though differently) and liturgical since the beginning. Continuity is key:

Matthew 23:1-3 (New International Version)

1Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. 3So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.



The traditions (small t - or in other words the way things are done) have changed and can continue to change (married priesthood, the language the Holy Mass is celebrated in, etc.)."
To get a general but actual understanding of Holy Tradition vs tradition vs custom click on the following article titles:

On Holy Tradition

Paradosis and its Noetic Base: Towards a Spiritual Statement of Tradition in Orthodox Thought

Let This Mind Be In You

The Sources of Christian Doctrine


Following the Holy Fathers

Introduction to Humility

The Monastic Life

Some Remarks to a Priest Concerning Holy Tradition and Modernism

Commonly Misunderstood Terms

Dogmas and Opinions

General Rules for Distinguishing Truth From Error and Preserving the Faith

The Roman Catholic church does not claim to be merely one valid expression of the Church which Christ founded. It claims to be the church which Christ founded. It claims that it has faithfully preserved the Traditions given to us by Christ and the apostles....
For those who are interested, clickeroo on the following article

Does Orthodoxy Really Think It Is the "True Church"?


Allow Scripture to interpret Scripture

An important principle in evangelical thinking is to allow Scripture to interpret Scripture. Since "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." it folows that every interpretation of Scripture should be in harmony with the rest of Scripture.
The following CChat thread covers this topic:

A Refutation of Sola Scriptura



Apart from this, I'm sure there were many Christian churches, such as the Celtic churches in the British Isles and many nameless faceless Christian groups with no political power who enjoyed the life of Christ without seeing the pope as their spiritual Father. (Incidentally Jesus himself taught against the use of the word "father" as a spiritual title for men (Matthew 23:9). I have never heard any reasonable Roman Catholic explanation on why this verse has been apparently abrogated in the favor of popes and priests!). In the middle ages various groups such as the Waldeneses, the followers of John Huss, Wycliffe and others were faithful believers in Christ and suffered cruel persecution for their stand against the roman catholic tyrants of the day.
Paul calls himself Father in the bible. The Father issue is easy enough to find explanations for. Research. It's out there for those who verily verily want to look past the rhetoric and get a solid understanding on these issues.

On the Waldeneses...

Here too, this is easily enough understood. Research. Any person looking into these issues ought to go in objectively:

WIKI (just a general source but look into the issue if anyone wants to have an opinion with integrity)

Some researchers argue that the group has existed since the time of the apostles, a claim that is disputed by modern scholarship.[1] The supporters of the ancient origin claim the Waldenses' name does not in fact come from Peter Waldo, as modern scholars contend, but from the area in which they lived. [8] They claim Peter Waldo in fact got his name by association with the Waldenses. This thought was current in the early 19th century:
"Some Protestants, on this occasion, have fallen into the snare that was set for them...It is absolutely false, that these churches were ever found by Peter Waldo...it is a pure forgery."[9] "It is not true, that Waldo gave this name to the inhabitants of the valleys: they were called Waldenses, or Vaudes, before his time, from the valleys in which they dwelt." [9] "On the other hand, he "was called Valdus, or Waldo, because he received his religious notions from the inhabitants of the valleys." [10] The claim of an ancient origin was for a long time accepted as valid by Protestant historians.[7] The Alexandrine Nobles Lessons, written in Provençal, was thought at one time to have been composed in 1100, but all scholars now date it between 1190 and 1240.[11] Other scholars claimed Claudius, Bishop of Turin (died 840), Berengarius of Tours (died 1088), or other such men who had preceded Peter Waldo, as the founder of the group.[7] In the nineteenth century, however, critics came to the conclusion that the poem and other Waldensian documents offered as proof had been altered.[7] For example, the respected Waldensian scholar Dr. Emilio Comba dismissed the theories related to the ancient origin of the Waldensians in the middle of the 19th century.


Michael Fackerell /christian-faith.com
I've never heard of this fellow and thought I'd look into him. He's a pastor at an Assemblies of God church. Here's a snippit of his testimony. To read the entire thing, click HERE

On the second appointment, this pastor asked me, "Do you believe you will speak in tongues when I pray for you?" I said I wasn't sure, but he assured me it would happen. I was scared that nothing would happen.



After further discussion, I prayed to the Lord something like this: "Dear Lord Jesus, I want you, and only you. Fill me with the Holy Spirit and give me the power of God." I prayed this prayer based on Luke 11:13. God will give his children the Holy Spirit if they ask, not a serpent (a demon).



I believed that I should open my mouth and speak what came out - so I did. At that very instant something very surprising happened to me. I felt like 240 Volts of power was going through my body - it was also a bit like pins and needles. I thought, "Something real is happening". I had never experienced anything like that before. At the same time, I continued to utter syllables that I did not comprehend at all. It was something that was right outside my experience. I had never felt anything like that when I prayed before! I knew it was God's power that I had asked for.



I went home and kept praying in tongues. Then I went to a Christian conference organised by Campus Crusade. I noticed in my life a greater desire to serve God, a desire after holiness and purity which I had never known before. Up until that time, holiness had a very negative connotation for me. It was something I didn't want. But now things were different. The first unbeliever I talked with prayed to receive Christ.



When I returned to University, I knew that what I had experienced was not going to be accepted by most of my Christian friends. And I was right. I had already made the commitment though, that I was after truth no matter what it would cost me in terms of social relationships. I have never regretted that decision.



I started attending an AOG church. It wasn't long before the matter of water baptism was brought up. Having now experienced the Holy Spirit in a new way, I was eager for everything God had for me. I had long suspected that baptism was for believers, not babies. I remember wishing I could be baptised before as a believer when I was in the Anglican church. I was glad to learn that it was still part of God's plan.




I offer this only as an alternative response to these all too common allegations.


God bless
 
Jul 17, 2009
353
0
0
#42
Why?? is this biblical? I think not. Its a shame that Christians attending a Catholic funeral are unable to partake in the LORDS supper. its not the CAtholic supper, its the Lords supper. The requirement should be stated if you have received and accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and savior. I also felt quite sad that the priest so caught up in his "religion" didnt know the LORD! When you speak to a Holy Spirit filled person you know and he, unfortunately was going through the motions. Now I pray for HIM to truly experience the Lord and not just the religion... I've been to many many many Church's in my search for a church family and NEVER have I felt as shunned and unaccepted and unwelcome as I have the 3 times I've attended Catholic services. All different churches by the way. Its hard to feel the Love of God and the Holy spirit when you are feeling offended. The buildings are beautiful though. Dont get me wrong, I love the Catholics who's funeral I attended and in no way question their love of the Lord it was that the entire service disturbed me and did come off as idol worship to someone who is unfamiliar with this church's rituals. I too question why was he bowing to the statue? And why did he get mad when i did my Bible reading from the Bible?
Open vs closed communion was a huge issue for me when I was a protestant looking at Catholicism. I won't go into it here but basically, rejecting the Presence of Christ in the Eucharist is pretty much going to result in eating judgment upon yourself. The Eucharist also has to do with communion with God and with other believers. One faith, one mind, one belief, etc.

No Christian rejected the Real Presence in the Eucharist until Huldrych Zwingli came into the world. When I discovered the writings of St. Ignatius I was a little taken back. St. Ignatius was the third Bishop of Antioch. The second Bishop was St. Evodius. The first bishop was St. Peter (who later went to Rome). But more importantly, St. Ignatius knew personally and studied UNDER St. John, the beloved disciple. I'm sure that St. John instructed him on what the Eucharist was and wasn't....

So if you had to vote on who you thought was more qualified to give their "opinion?" on the Eucharist, would you vote for Zwingli or admit that St. Ignatius (who died a martyr and lives a Saint) is more "authoritative". Catholics and protestants have the same New Testament. The only thing that varies in regards to the verses about the Eucharist are the teachings.

It should also be noted that Orthodox do not believe in Transubstantiation. So there's a bit of a "debate" between what we Catholics mean by "Real Presence".

St. Ignatius:

"Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead."
"Letter to the Smyrnaeans", paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.


"Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ."
-"Letter to the Ephesians", paragraph 20, c. 80-110 A.D.


"I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed."
-"Letter to the Romans", paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D.


"Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons."
-Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.​


Zwingli who?

Click Here





God bless. I hope you revisit the issue. It's not a small one....
 

BLC

Banned
Feb 28, 2009
711
4
0
#43
Merryheart and Imoss are right on and have communicated their convictions with loving hearts that are really concerned for the truth and that God's way be known through His word.

Consider this in light of all that has been said. Without being critical of the RCC, let's say that from day one that they have been wrong about everything they teach and practice from the top down. We still have to preach Christ and Him crucified to them as it was to us and to any other. They must believe the gospel of Christ for salvation by grace and through faith as we have done, because that is what the scriptures teach. We still must honor and esteem God's word in everything because it is eternal, it will never pass away and every person will be judged by it.

When we walk in the light as He is in the light, everything that is not of the light will be reproved and revealed by the light. We don't have to always expose darkness, the light we walk in will do that. Let's say you walk into a dark room, you don't start explaining why the room is dark and why you shouldn't be there and how it can cause you to stumble, you turn the switch and light up the room and the darkness flees. You might need a little wisdom to show you where the switch is but that's all that is needed.

I know that many think that we have to reprove the unfruitful works of darkness and we do at times, but that is not our calling, we are called to be light and the children of light. Light is what opens the ears to hear and the eyes to see of those in unbelief who grope in darkness and have been blinded by the god of this world. We don't put our candle under a bushel but we put it on top of the house and let it shine for all to see so that they will come to the light. It is like the lighthouse on the hillside that when the ships have lost their way they look for the light of that lighthouse to safely bring them to shore.
 
Feb 27, 2007
3,179
19
0
#44
after some time away from Church & just spending time in the Lords word & prayer & doing "tv church" I was telling the Lord how much I missed communion. The answer, Why are you missing it? I sat down at my kitchen table, just me, The Lord and his word, & I proceeded to have the most HOLY SPIRIT FILLED communion of my christian life. just little ole me & the Lord. I must tell you it was amazing and possibly one of my best spiritual experiences yet. Praise the Lord! now I dont know what the word says about this... perhaps i was out of line because i'm a woman, not a priest or ordained... The Lord, however, knows me and my heart and I was really missing him & he blessed me in return.
 
Feb 27, 2007
3,179
19
0
#45
as posted in the other discussion forum, the is a CHRISTIAN chat room, kindly take your ANTI-Christian links elsewhere. If you are here to discuss or rediscover Christ, welcome... If you are here to separate Christians from their Lord then its best that you be identified for who you are & asked to discontinue your links.
 
Feb 27, 2007
3,179
19
0
#46
Oh I must have misread, so Jesus is your RISEN LORD and SAVIOUR?
 
K

Knightjester

Guest
#47
Knightjester Has Spoken:
I have no problem with the Catholics’ way, it’s all between you and the Lord. I have no intention whatsoever in forcing you to change your doctrines,
or to tell God to open HIS eyes and punish you because you are wrong according to “my interpretation of the Bible.” Nope, instead,
I thank you, the Catholic [parents] for shedding your tears (if there’s one) and letting us; Protestantism, Anabaptism, Restorationism, Anglicanism,
..ism, ..ism, ..ism, etc-ism [kids], go our own directions, and have our own way of praising the Lord.
Look Cathy, can I call you Cathy? Anyway, Catholic, what I mean is, just do what you’ve been doing, there is no “certain way” or “certain style”
in worshiping our Lord, that’s why we have so many denominations! And for more, there is no such way that we can do to impress the Lord!
Yours are yours, my faith is between me and God, our Father in the Lord Jesus Christ. And with all my existence, I will show the world
the light in my heart that I am a humble follower of Jesus, I trust in Him only. I just hope it shines bright enough. :)

As a Non-Catholic, I do have one thing, just one:
Can you tell your Pope to please for once a while wear a pair of blue jeans?
Ok, that would be all. Thank you.
With Love,
~Ren
 
C

carpetmanswife

Guest
#48
:cool: Knight ol buddy ol pal, good to hear from ya :)
 
Feb 27, 2007
3,179
19
0
#49
as posted in the other discussion forum, the is a CHRISTIAN chat room, kindly take your ANTI-Christian links elsewhere. If you are here to discuss or rediscover Christ, welcome... If you are here to separate Christians from their Lord then its best that you be identified for who you are & asked to discontinue your links.
Just so there is no confusion... there were other posts on here that I was refering to. They have since been removed. Thank you to the Mods!!
 
J

Jordan9

Guest
#50
Has anyone, who is not a Catholic, ever been to a Catholic Mass? Ever actually experienced it?
Yes. I fell in love with the Mass almost instantaneously. I am currently seriously considering conversion, all because I went to one single Mass with a Catholic friend.

So yeah, I'd recommend it to anyone reading this thread.
 
J

Jordan9

Guest
#51
Todd, i think you flipped flopped that . John20:21 is Jesus 's words not sure where you got that other snippet. The verse that can remotely fit here for your purposes might be 'confess your faults to one another and be healed' (James 5:16) but even that is not to say a man (priest) can forgive sins after you say 10 hail marys and 1 our father.
The "10 Hail Mary's" don't forgive you. The priest doesn't forgive you. Jesus does. The priest is acting "in persona Christi."
 
S

suaso

Guest
#52
I would feel awkward around the Pope if he were in jeans...not that I am frequently around the Pope though...but um, yeah, the first time I ever saw on of the monks at my college in jeans and a t-shirt, I was like "Whooa...whoa...is, hey, is that the Abbot?!!" You just can't go from 8th-Century poor-man robes to Levi-Strauss like that. It boggles my fragile mind. Haha.

Well, at any rate, I believe the late John Paul II used to dress fairly casually when he went on his hikes...ah, gotta miss that guy:



He was quite a jokester...
 
I

iamnotashamed

Guest
#53
Why should only catholics receive Holy Communion? Jesus died once for all. The only requirement for communion should be acceptance of Christ as one's personal Savior, and a desire to follow His commands.

iamnotashamedthelist.com
 
I

iamnotashamed

Guest
#54
I am still not clear about many issues. Where is the biblical basis for Mary's assumption without death? Where is the biblical basis for sainthood? I mean, the bible refers to all believers of the gospel as saints. I see no biblical basis for some being elevated over another. What about God's command to not create and bow down to idols? How does baptism as an infant provide salvation, and where is the biblical basis for infant baptism? Where is the biblical basis for the infallability of the pope?

I would also like to add that I believe all scripture is God-breathed. Paul was simply an instrument God used to give us His word. Jesus and the Father are one, so there really is no difference between the gospels and the rest of the New Testament

iamnotashamedthelist.com
 
J

Jordan9

Guest
#55
I am still not clear about many issues. Where is the biblical basis for Mary's assumption without death? Where is the biblical basis for sainthood? I mean, the bible refers to all believers of the gospel as saints. I see no biblical basis for some being elevated over another. What about God's command to not create and bow down to idols? How does baptism as an infant provide salvation, and where is the biblical basis for infant baptism? Where is the biblical basis for the infallability of the pope?

I would also like to add that I believe all scripture is God-breathed. Paul was simply an instrument God used to give us His word. Jesus and the Father are one, so there really is no difference between the gospels and the rest of the New Testament

iamnotashamedthelist.com
Hey, I can't answer all of these, because I'm still seeking myself. However, regarding saints; Catholicisim agrees with you; all believers are saints. The saints that are formally canonized by the Catholic Church are folks who we can be sure, beyond a reasonable doubt, are in Heaven with Our Lord. Your grandparents and my grandparents could very well be saints, too, just not formally canonized.

I've not yet seen a Catholic bow down to an idol. Also, God actually commands Moses to build a serpent statue in Numbers 21:8-9. This same statue is later destroyed in Second Kings, because the Israelites started worshiping it as a god, rather than a Holy manifestation of God's power, which is what it truly was.

Baptism isn't the only thing necessary for Salvation, but it is one pre-requisite. See Mark 16:16, John 3:5, etc. Paul tells us in Colossians 2:11-12 that Baptism is the rite of initiation into the family of God, just as Circumcision was in the Old Covenant (Gen. 17:11). Boys were circumcised at 8 days old by God's command (Gen. 17:12). If Baptism is the "replacement" of circumcision, then why would we wait til adulthood?

Personally, I see the Catholic sacrament of Confirmation analogous to most Protestant baptisms. Baptists, for example, believe that Baptism is an adult, public confession of faith, which is what Confirmation is.

As for papal infallibility, that's one I'm still working on :)
 
K

kujo313

Guest
#56
Hey, I can't answer all of these, because I'm still seeking myself. However, regarding saints; Catholicisim agrees with you; all believers are saints. The saints that are formally canonized by the Catholic Church are folks who we can be sure, beyond a reasonable doubt, are in Heaven with Our Lord. Your grandparents and my grandparents could very well be saints, too, just not formally canonized.


As for papal infallibility, that's one I'm still working on :)

"Catholic saints" arent saints until the catholic denomination says so. Protestant "saints" are saints because the Bible says so. Whatever yoke catholics put upon themselves is totally unnecessary.

Papal infallibility, again, is because a pope once said so.



All that is as totally redicilous as a Hindu saying that their god IS God only because they say so.


The catholic AND protestant Bible each say that there is ONE MEDIATOR between God and man. He is THE ONLY Way, THE ONLY Truth and THE ONLY Life. Because of Him, all that believe can go directly to the Throne by themselves.

Such restrictions some "leaders" put upon people! Then they expect everybody else to do the same!
 
J

Jordan9

Guest
#57
"Catholic saints" arent saints until the catholic denomination says so. Protestant "saints" are saints because the Bible says so. Whatever yoke catholics put upon themselves is totally unnecessary.

Papal infallibility, again, is because a pope once said so.



All that is as totally redicilous as a Hindu saying that their god IS God only because they say so.


The catholic AND protestant Bible each say that there is ONE MEDIATOR between God and man. He is THE ONLY Way, THE ONLY Truth and THE ONLY Life. Because of Him, all that believe can go directly to the Throne by themselves.

Such restrictions some "leaders" put upon people! Then they expect everybody else to do the same!
You clearly don't understand canonization and what it entails.

Also, re: infallibility. I can assure you that I'm not trying to decide between Catholicism's take and Protestant's take on the papacy. I am conflicted between Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, insofar as papal infallibility is concerned. Therein is where my confusion lies, but I'm working on it.

"there is ONE MEDIATOR between God and man. He is THE ONLY Way, THE ONLY Truth and THE ONLY Life. Because of Him, all that believe can go directly to the Throne by themselves."

Catholicism does not disagree with you on this.
 
K

kujo313

Guest
#58
"there is ONE MEDIATOR between God and man. He is THE ONLY Way, THE ONLY Truth and THE ONLY Life. Because of Him, all that believe can go directly to the Throne by themselves."

Catholicism does not disagree with you on this.
You don't know what you're missing!

Here, read this.

THE IMMEDIATE EFFECTS OF JESUS' DEATH. 27:51-56.​
A.​
The Tearing of the Curtain. 27:51.
1. The place. This curtain is either the one which hung in front of the
Holy Place (Ex 26:36-37), or the one which divided the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place (Ex 26:31-35). As that passage shows, both were made of the same material. Matthew does not clearly specify which curtain is meant. Good arguments can be advanced for each choice Given the NT's theological reflection on the event (notably Heb 6:19-20; 9:11-28; 10:19-22), I conclude that the
inner curtain is meant. For some interesting parallel accounts in Jewish literature.
2. The meaning. Matthew's word order is that the curtain "was torn
from top to bottom in two" (contrast the order in NIV). He thus emphasizes both that the curtain was completely severed, and that this was God's action. What is God declaring?
a. Covenant fellowship. The essence of the covenant, as God
declares e.g. in Jer 31:33 (the promise of the New Covenant), is: "I will be their God, and they will be my people." Now, by virtue of the atoning death of Jesus, his people's sins are forgiven (1:21; Jer 31:34b) and they are granted direct access into God's holy presence. The coming of
Immanuel has already testified to God's intention to bring that fellowship to full realization (1:23; 28:20). Now, by the rending of the veil, God demonstrates that through Christ's coming and death, the people of God are ushered into the most intimate imaginable fellowship with him. Thus did Jer 31:31-34 prophesy, and thus has Jesus' work now made possible.

b. The end of Mosaic ceremonial. Jesus has taught that his coming
makes OT ceremonial obsolete - without abrogating the underlying moral law. Furthermore, Jesus has prophesied the destruction of the temple. This is to come about, not only in judgment upon Israel but also as a visible demonstration that the temple ritual is no longer needed. The death of
Jesus makes it obsolete. The
tearing of the curtain symbolizes the destroying of the whole temple of which the curtain is a part.

 

daddycat

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2007
170
2
18
60
#59
I think my biggest reservation about Roman Catholicism has been solidified by reading this thread. I truly appreciate all the explanations, parsings and fleshing out that has been undertaken to enlighten non-Catholics as to the meaning of what Catholics believe and practice. I guess, at the end of the day, why is so much explanation necessary? Is not the gospel simple, accessible to all? It just seems unfortunate that one practically needs a degree in RC theology and a course in Latin in order to even follow what Catholics are doing. It's just plain not intuitive, because it has taken centuries of haggling among holy men, scholars and politicians to come up with it all. No wonder non-Catholics who attend a mass or attempt in some other way to approach the RCC often feel put off or even unwelcome. It reminds me of my attempts at understanding the U.S. federal tax code. It is so complicated, and has taken so many years and so many people to develop it, it takes an expert to get any kind of grasp. So of course I end up hiring one.

As to why strange, superstitious practices arise which the RCC does not officially sanction... Well, the uneducated masses just can't wrap their minds around the whole thing, so they come up with their own stuff. I admit that is conjecture on my part, but I think it's quite possibly the case.

I mean no disrespect to adherents of Roman Catholicism in my observations. If any of my readers feel affronted then I apologize. You have missed my point.

Blessings from the Father...
 
Last edited:
Jul 17, 2009
353
0
0
#60
You don't know what you're missing!
Perhaps this is a case of a protestant not understanding Catholicism and so projecting their misunderstanding onto Catholicism instead of understanding Catholicism's view of herself. Yes, Catholics believe that Christianity is the end of all religion (in the way we understand what you understand religion to be).

Isaiah 61:6
And you will be called priests of the LORD, you will be named ministers of our God. You will feed on the wealth of nations, and in their riches you will boast.

Yes, we're all saints/priests. Yes, there is 1 mediator between man and God. Yes, we also have a personal relationship with Jesus. Yes, idolatry is bad. Yes, we shouldn't pray to the dead. Yes, sacramental theology totally changed from the OT to the NT.

For Catholics, it's so hard to explain stuff, especially when we're informed because first we have to deconstruct your theological language (and we first have to understand what your language is - good luck) and then we have to construct a basic understanding of our language and then put that language into the context of the topic being discussed, then give you a history lesson to show you where it comes from and for what reasons it exists in the form it does today so you can see that the structural integrity is there and there's continuity in regards to Holy Scripture, and then if the person is still conscious, go from there and repeat the process nearly every inch of the way.

(insert tower of babel)

When I realized that I could no longer be protestant I had the task of letting my beloved protestant fellows know. I remember explaining that I was going to go to another church and when they realized that it was 'catholic' all the rhetoric slogans were let loose, not unlike hand grenades. The pitchforks came out and they used scripture as if it were tar and feathers. Many recoiled as if I had just run over their grandmother and then backed up over her again.

"So instead of going straight to the source you believe that you have to go to a Priest? Bible says call no man Father!!! What about the second commandment? Catholics are idolaters! Don't you know that it's faith, not works? You realize that Catholic re-sacrifice Christ over and over? You realize that they think the wafer and grape-juice turns into flesh and blood? You realize that Catholics don't read their bibles. They aren't biblical at all!!! What you need is a biblical church. You're going to pray to dead people? We're ALL Saints!!! We only have one mediator between God and man and that man is Jesus! You realize they actually think that they are the one True Church? The believers are The Church! Catholics live by the Old Testament. They live by the law. You can't live by the law or you will perish! Jesus put an end to all that tradition stuff. Don't you realize that you need to have a personal relationship with Christ? It's not about religion! I was a Catholic and it was so spiritually dead. You really going to stand and sit and sit and then stand? Your kids are going to fall away. How boring! You gotta get spirit filled and when I was a Catholic I wasn't spirit filled. No one told me I had to have a personal relationship with Christ."

The sad thing is, they have the rhetoric memorized and wholly believe it but had no actual understanding of Catholicism. And those who used to be Catholics were just, without saying it, saying that they were just really bad uninformed catholic Christians. And when I began to question our protestant beliefs they didn't have much actual understanding there either. Only more rhetoric that they had picked up from their own traditions. They could only offer what they heard verse X,Y,Z meant. They had no clue where the teachings/traditions came from.

The pastor himself who came out of retirement and who had started Pastoring in his early twenties, had never even heard of Sola Scriptura. Some had concluded that Satan had deluded me, was leading me away from the true one true Church - Protestantism, the faithful remnant - though they rarely say what they are saying. Now, they, being good Christians, would pray for me, that the scales would be lifted from my eyes, that I might plunder Catholicism for the good bits and like a pirate bring the bounty back to the faithful protestants.

They, even though no two denominations can agree on anything across the board other than Jesus is Lord, knew that their way was The Way. Despite the 50,000 denominations disagreeing on elementary teachings like baptism and having widely varying views of the other elementary teachings of Christ as found in Hebrews 5-6, they somehow still insisted that their doctrines weren't jacked up as a whole. 50,000 flavors and within each church good luck finding two individuals that agree across the board, yet each with full confidence saying that their views are "biblical", each member saying that they are being led by the Holy Spirit, and each saying that the Spirit within them has confirmed their personal view on what such and such scriptural teaching truly is, despite being in conflict with the other and vice versa...

Despite no Christians for nearly 1700 years were running around believing or saying half the things I was running across in protestantism, it just didn't matter. They were right in their own mind because they had a bunch of bible verses that when put next to each other painted a picture that 'looked' right. Yet, how many protestants disagree with other protestants on teachings and also have their own arsenal of hand picked self-affirming bible verses? 50,000 on the denominational level and even if half of the individual protestant members agreed with each other across the board, the other 4-500 million others don't. That's 500 million teachings that can't agree across the board. And it's a shock that Atheism rises? Have we taken an honest look at the image of God that we are projecting to the world?

If we were actually forced to deconstruct our own faith and see it for what it has become, where would we go? We can't become Catholics. We can't become theists. This is why more and more people are just saying, "well, who is to say who is right? I consider myself non-denominational even though I have my own opinions that divide me from others who disagree (which is pretty much what a denomination is). So long as they aren't Catholic, they're on the right path, walking according to The Way." Just read yer bible more is often the cure to this dilemma. Have you prayed about it?

Someone wants to become Catholic and suddenly all the protestant confusion and division seems to vanish (they persist they're not divided but all the Kings men couldn't put Humpty back together again - and the pieces are breaking into even smaller and more unmanageable pieces the more they attempt to insist they're not divided).

They plea with the person as if protestantism doesn't have any popes (sola scriptura pretty much dubs every literate person a pope and it's up to the individual if whatever dogmas they "biblically" construct are supreme or infallible), as if their doctrines are right, as if their traditions are Holy (many of them will say, "what traditions?, we don't have traditions!"), as if those traditions haven't become corrupted, as if they aren't influenced by demonic forces like they accuse the Catholics in regards to pagans, as if all their mutations and varying church governments, abuse scandals, and idolatry doesn't count because they aren't Catholic....








God bless
 
Status
Not open for further replies.