A question for some Protestants who feel it is necessary to proselytize Catholics

[FidesSpesCarita]

So rather than say really and truly believe, why not make the differential that some people are not believers per se but simply ‘identifiers’ (for various reasons).

believers per accidens is the term I think you are looking for, archaic and anachronistic as it may be.

Sorry, been reading too much Aquinas lately…

FSC

 

[wmscott]

“Conditioned?” Umm, before psychology burst onto the scene, people understood that we aren’t Pavlov’s dogs. Belief is not something that is ‘conditioned’. It has to be a free choice. Otherwise we aren’t talking ‘belief’, we are talking anything from a vague sort of cultural ‘assimilation’ to a lazy unthinking acceptance of the status quo.

To believe something one has to ‘know’ and one has to choose, freely.

I know that some CINOs (and probably PINOs as well) may possibly be those who simply ‘accept’ that they were baptized, or who simply ‘stay’ what their parents faith was because they just don’t really ‘care’, and who do or say as they please. But that is not a ‘believing’ Catholic Christian, or a believing PROTESTANT Christian either.

So rather than say really and truly believe, why not make the differential that some people are not believers per se but simply ‘identifiers’ (for various reasons). If you want to address why somebody believes, why on EARTH would you mix them up with those who do not believe? No wonder you are confused into thinking that belief is ‘conditioning’.

Excellent points, and it is about free will and freely loving God. Otherwise, what is the point of conditioned or mandated love? Christ, displaying the ultimate love, He freely sacrificed His own life.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

Christianty is what Jesus founded, not any one denomnation

False. But a topic for another thread.

Also, this proves the OP’s point.

FSC

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Christianty is what Jesus founded, not any one denomnation

I totally agree that Christ founded Christianity. However, since Catholicism (and Orthodox) are the fullness of Christianity, why would somebody wish to be less than 'full Christians" doctrinally speaking?

Mind you, I’m not saying that devout Protestants are not ‘fully Christian’. I’m not saying that devout Protestants are not even (as individuals) more full in their practice as Christians than an individual Catholic might be.

But I am saying that all else being equal, a person who wished to be fully Christian would find greater fullness in Catholic doctrine than in any Protestant doctrines.

 

[wmscott]

Christianty is what Jesus founded, not any one denomnation

In Peace, Christ founded only One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

 

[KathleenGee]

Theoldman should pray and learn how Christians have lived for 1,500 years…Catholic/Orthodox.

 

[wmscott]

As a cradle Catholic who has only truly understood my faith in the past 4 or 5 years, I believe in the truth of the Catholic Church because of my study. I can understand that there have been serious injustices in the Church in the past and present, but I believe that when Jesus asked us to be one as He and the Father were one, He meant for us to stand together as one Church. When I look at the 20,000+ Protestant denominations, I know that the Catholic Church is still protected by the Holy Spirit. The fullness of the Catholic Church is not any one individual person or even a Pope, it is the Body of Christ on earth. I do not believe that the Catholic Church is Christ’s Church on earth because of anything that we do or have done to deserve it. We are definitely a body of sinners. I believe that it is the one, true church that Jesus founded because He said He would build His Church upon Peter and the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. I cannot believe that Jesus would approve of the new denominations and churches that develop on a daily basis based upon any new school of thought that comes along.

Therefore, I study to determine what the Church teaches, pray about anything I do not agree with, study more, pray more, and strangely enough, it starts to make sense. The more I read the Bible, the more I see the Catholic Church as the descendent of the Jews in the Old Testament. I do believe, however, that God can bring good from all things. I think the Reformation did serve to revitalize the Catholic Church, help us to learn to have a more personal relationship with Christ, how to read and study our Bible, and many other things. That cannot, however, ever make me think that if we disagree with a teaching of the Church we are supposed to just leave and start our own church with our own rules.

Sorry if this came across as harsh. I’ve just been looked down upon for most of my life because of my Catholic faith, and treated as if I wasn’t even a Christian. It has truly been a revelation to me to discover that I’m not just Catholic because I was born into it, but because by the grace of God, He has been teaching me and keeping me here.

Bravo, well said. I appreciate your comments and thoughts. It takes great strength and courage to endure to the end. Peace be with you.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

False. But a topic for another thread.

Also, this proves the OP’s point.

FSC

I need to expand on this. Christ came to found his Church. His Church was the body of all Christs followers. , so in a sense, yes and no. The premise you suppose is false. Christ founded a Church as listed previously, but all bodies must have members, parts if you will. Christs Church, his body, was intended to make all men one

"Holy Father, keep them in Your name which You have given Me:
that they may be one, as we also are.
12 While I was with them I kept them in Your name.
Those whom You gave Me have I kept;
and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition,
that the scripture may be fulfilled.

Yet all bodies require a head and a mind. The mind is that which motivates the body, yet the head is the physical representation of that mind. The Catholic Church, epitomized in the Pope, is that head, with the Mind being the Holy Spirit. Since God the Father, the Son, and The Holy Spirit are one, the logical assumption is that Christ leads the ONE Church founded by Christ upon Peter.

In all the verses in the Bible referencing Church, are there any that tell the people to go to THEIR church? or do they all reference THE Church? Since I havent tried to find all these verses, please let me know if any such verses exist.

But thats just my opinion.

FSC

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

So, following on my last post, with the knowledge that Christ founded a physical, hierarchical, Church (supported biblically, which I will not go through here), does it make sense for the foot (Christian laity) to say to the head (CC) “I dont need you”? Or for the hand to say to the foot “I dont need you”?

All parts require all other parts to function as a unified whole. To lose one part damages the whole. Yet without the head (personified in the Pope) which is lead by the Mind (Christ and the Paraclete/Holy Spirit) the entire body falls apart. The Mind (soul) is eternal and survives all loss. The body can live, albeit lessened, without a foot or a hand, but separated from the body, no part can survive. They succumb to death and decay (personified by Satan).

This is not to say that all Christian churches outside the CC are full of Rot and Decay, but it puts them at drastically greater risk. As the CCC states

“Outside the Church there is no salvation”

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337

848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338

And

Who belongs to the Catholic Church?

836 "All men are called to this catholic unity of the People of God. . . . And to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God’s grace to salvation."320

837 "Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, accept all the means of salvation given to the Church together with her entire organization, and who - by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion - are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. Even though incorporated into the Church, one who does not however persevere in charity is not saved. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but ‘in body’ not ‘in heart.’"321

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord’s Eucharist."324

Again, just one mans opinion (outside of the CCC quotes, which are interpreted by me, a layman without theological training)

FSC

 

[Nicea325]

God is Spirit and God is truth. The Spirit of God is founding many faith communities outside of Catholicsm in truth. Your polemic is invalid. Your presuppositions are false.

My polemic is invalid? My presuppositions are false? The RCC mixed with the profane and paganism,but your presuppositions are correct and accurate? It is a good thing I do not believe you.

 

[wmscott]

So, following on my last post, with the knowledge that Christ founded a physical, hierarchical, Church (supported biblically, which I will not go through here), does it make sense for the foot (Christian laity) to say to the head (CC) “I dont need you”? Or for the hand to say to the foot “I dont need you”?

All parts require all other parts to function as a unified whole. To lose one part damages the whole. Yet without the head (personified in the Pope) which is lead by the Mind (Christ and the Paraclete/Holy Spirit) the entire body falls apart. The Mind (soul) is eternal and survives all loss. The body can live, albeit lessened, without a foot or a hand, but separated from the body, no part can survive. They succumb to death and decay (personified by Satan).

This is not to say that all Christian churches outside the CC are full of Rot and Decay, but it puts them at drastically greater risk. As the CCC states

And

Again, just one mans opinion (outside of the CCC quotes, which are interpreted by me, a layman without theological training)

FSC

Great points, I like this. also the CCC teaches the following:

818 “However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.”

819 “Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth” are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to “Catholic unity.”

 

[Nicea325]

Christianty is what Jesus founded, not any one denomnation

And to be more precise,Jesus founded a visible church here on earth. Correct,he did not find thousands of different denominations.

 

[Rence]

“Conditioned?” Umm, before psychology burst onto the scene, people understood that we aren’t Pavlov’s dogs. Belief is not something that is ‘conditioned’. It has to be a free choice. Otherwise we aren’t talking ‘belief’, we are talking anything from a vague sort of cultural ‘assimilation’ to a lazy unthinking acceptance of the status quo.

To believe something one has to ‘know’ and one has to choose, freely.

I know that some CINOs (and probably PINOs as well) may possibly be those who simply ‘accept’ that they were baptized, or who simply ‘stay’ what their parents faith was because they just don’t really ‘care’, and who do or say as they please. But that is not a ‘believing’ Catholic Christian, or a believing PROTESTANT Christian either.

So rather than say really and truly believe, why not make the differential that some people are not believers per se but simply ‘identifiers’ (for various reasons). If you want to address why somebody believes, why on EARTH would you mix them up with those who do not believe? No wonder you are confused into thinking that belief is ‘conditioning’.

The best way IMOHO to raise your children Catholic is by giving them a solid foundation from the beginning. That means seeing to their Catholic education, by brining to Mass, by teaching them to pray, by praying as a family, by living up to the expectations of a Catholic family, etc. This “conditions”, “grooms”, “trains”, “molds” people to grow and mature as Catholic adults with a solid foundation so that when they go through their rough patches, they fall back on their faith, rather than someone hoping to evangelize by preying on those who have a crack in their foundation.

If one of another faith gives the same solid foundation to their child, they will be “conditioned” to be devout members of that religion, with a solid foundation in that religion.

I have no idea why that is a repugnant thought to some people. It is what it is. It’s the truth.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

The best way IMOHO to raise your children Catholic is by giving them a solid foundation from the beginning. That means seeing to their Catholic education, by brining to Mass, by teaching them to pray, by praying as a family, by living up to the expectations of a Catholic family, etc. This “conditions”, “grooms”, “trains”, “molds” people to grow and mature as Catholic adults with a solid foundation so that when they go through their rough patches, they fall back on their faith, rather than someone hoping to evangelize by preying on those who have a crack in their foundation.

If one of another faith gives the same solid foundation to their child, they will be “conditioned” to be devout members of that religion, with a solid foundation in that religion.

I have no idea why that is a repugnant thought to some people. It is what it is. It’s the truth.

Yet a foundation built upon sand, instead of the Petros, will always crumble.

That statement may add to my time in Purgatory, but I just couldnt resist.

 

[Rence]

Yet a foundation built upon sand, instead of the Petros, will always crumble.

That statement may add to my time in Purgatory, but I just couldnt resist.

But you’re right A foundation built upon sand (not teaching children the true teachings so that they can’t answer questions, or come up with a few difficult questions of their own), not bringing them to Church, not leading by example, not praying…is certainly going to crumble the foundation and destroy all that was built on top of it.

Building your foundation as strong as possible will preserve the integrity of what lays on top of that foundation.

 

[Nicea325]

As a Catholic you were conditioned to believe the above. I never could understand why some people can’t process the fact that as much as Catholics believe they are the one true religion, that’s how non-Catholics feel about their religion.

non-Catholic churches don’t believe they were founded by mere mortals. According to those I have talked to, they believe they had to break away from the Catholic Church because the human element of the Catholic Church fell to corruption and ignored God’s influence, thus tainting the Church.

Insisting that the leaders of the Catholic Church are helped by the Holy Spirit, and therefore, cannot err, is a Catholic Church teaching only. And is impossible to prove beyond child-like faith. So exactly, why should non-Catholics believe in the Catholic Church as the “one true church”? They don’t understand why you question their religion as the one true church as well.

Well I hate to break the reality news to you,non-Catholics may not believe their churches were not founded by mere mortals,but they were and it is called history. Not trying to be rude,but it is true so why deny it?

 

[WatchingMedia]

"I should not believe the Gospel except on the authority of the Catholic Church."– Augustine of Hippo, convert, bishop, theologian, Father and Doctor of the Church, Saint; endorsing the position that the promulgation of Scripture, the preservation of its integrity and identity, and the explanation of its meaning flows from the authority of the Catholic Church.

I just copied this from the front page of the CAF site. Thought it might add to this discussion.

 

[wmscott]

The best way IMOHO to raise your children Catholic is by giving them a solid foundation from the beginning. That means seeing to their Catholic education, by brining to Mass, by teaching them to pray, by praying as a family, by living up to the expectations of a Catholic family, etc. This “conditions”, “grooms”, “trains”, “molds” people to grow and mature as Catholic adults with a solid foundation so that when they go through their rough patches, they fall back on their faith, rather than someone hoping to evangelize by preying on those who have a crack in their foundation.

If one of another faith gives the same solid foundation to their child, they will be “conditioned” to be devout members of that religion, with a solid foundation in that religion.

I have no idea why that is a repugnant thought to some people. It is what it is. It’s the truth.

Maybe it is the word “Conditioning” itself that is problematic. To me and this just may be my perception, the term “Conditioning” lends its self to be brainwash like. Yes, I agree we must build a foundation for or children, educate them in the faith, and hope that they carry on in the faith. As I said it just may be a matter of semantics. Peace.

 

[Rence]

Well I hate to break the reality news to you,non-Catholics may not believe their churches were not founded by mere mortals,but they were and it is called history. Not trying to be rude,but it is true so why deny it?

If they don’t believe it, then it’s not that they are trying to deny what is true – they just don’t believe it. There’s a difference between denying what is true, and believing something to be true.

 

[Rence]

Maybe it is the word “Conditioning” itself that is problematic. To me and this just may be my perception, the term “Conditioning” lends its self to be brainwash like. Yes, I agree we must build a foundation for or children, educate them in the faith, and hope that they carry on in the faith. As I said it just may be a matter of semantics. Peace.

Ok, I’ll concede to that Keep in mind that devout catholics who raise their children as devout catholics are “brainwashing” their children in the eyes of those who are not devout catholics But you MUST give children a solid foundation. I don’t CARE if people call it conditioning or brainwashing. It’s irrelevent. That’s why we don’t “wait until he/she is 18” to choose what religion to be. We give them a solid foundation that is hard to crack. What on earth is so bad about that? Call it what you want and let me know what you wanna call it. I certainly want to be on the same page as others here so we can communicate better without

Anyway, to answer the OP, I guess Protestants feel the need to convert others to their religion for the same reason Catholics try to convert others to their religion: because they believe that doing so will bring that person closer to God.