are catholics as bad as protestants?

[Jennifer123]

bengal_fan:

my point is, yes protestants do all the things you listed, but so do catholics. i’m having trouble seeing the difference in the believers. i understand the differences in history and doctrinally and if one teaches the truth and the other doesn’t, then i want to be where the truth is. my point with this is that on the outside, catholics don’t look any different than protestants and if you teach the truth, you should.

That may be true, but the key to Catholic unity isn’t necessarily that we all agree about things outside of faith (or about the faith for that matter). Priests can teach error, Catholics can be ignorant about the faith, but that doesn’t change the Truth of the magisterium or the fact that Jesus established a Church on earth.

I think that even in spite of all that and more, the Catholic Church as a whole still looks different than all the other Protestant denominations. When anyone of faith outside the Church thinks about who among God’s people takes a stand against homosexuality, contraception, abortion, death penalty, isn’t the Catholic Church most prominent? That’s because it’s what we’ve always preached for 2000 years.

There have been times in recent (Jesus’ time) history when most of the world was paganistic in one way or another, but the gates of hell never prevailed against the Church. We may still see times like that, but the Church will always be, regardless of what its believers do or not do.

 

[dredgtone]

Most say the Bible does not conflict in it’s message, it only must be interpreted correctly. If the Bible is up for interpretation why would anybody argue with anybody about specifics if it’s all a matter of different interpretations of the same material?

You can only “believe” in the specifics when it comes to religion, you cannot “know” them. Then why the big fuss when it all comes down to the same thing in the grand scheme of things?

 

[theMutant]

Katholikos:

If you’re going to make claims about the RCC (2000 year old church) you need to back those claims up with historical evidence.

This is to the anonymous person who left this message on my profile. Thank you for asking.

I don’t have the space here to document Catholic history through the centuries, but there is a recent book that covers it: TRIUMPH, The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church–A 2,000-Year History, by H.W. Crocker III, Forum, Prima Publishing, Roseville, California, 2001. Crocker is a recent convert to Catholicism from the Anglican Church (www.primaforum.com).

I also recommend A History of Christendom, in several volumes, especially Vol. 1, The Founding of Christendom, by Warren H. Carroll, Ph.D. Dr. Carroll is a Columbia University-trained historian, who became a Catholic through his study of history. His work covers Christianity from its beginning through the modern era. Dr. Carroll also is the founder of Christendom College, rated one of the ten best liberal arts colleges in the U.S.

AMEN! Just study the writings of the early Church where you will find what they believed and practiced is the same as Catholics. It was this type of study that has led many to find the truth of the Church’s claim to be 2000 years old and the one Church founded by Christ.

 

[Panis_Angelicas]

bengal_fan:

i’m having trouble seeing the difference in the believers.

There isn’t a big difference in believers, as human beings. The difference is in the beliefs, not the believers!

i understand the differences in history and doctrinally and if one teaches the truth and the other doesn’t, then i want to be where the truth is.

That’s great! And where do you think you will find the fullness of Truth? Many denominations have bits of truth.

my point with this is that on the outside, catholics don’t look any different than protestants and if you teach the truth, you should.

How so? Should we look like robots, should we have halos over our heads? We are sinners, all of us. You shouldn’t judge the Church by the personalities found within it, but by it’s teachings. People are flawed. The Bride of Christ is flawless in Her teachings.

Pax Christi. <><

 

[Trish]

bengal_fan:

then tell me why not excommunicate these “renegade” bishops? my point is, just look at these threads. so many catholics (i know there are protestants here too and i am not taking them into account) are arguing with other catholics. one group says their right and the other says they are. on issues that haven’t exactly been defined. all the things done “in the spirit of vatican II”. the catholic church does look disunified. the only way to combat it is to aknowledge it and go from there.

Personally, I agree with you. I think that the more the Pope seems to be tolerant and ‘pastoral’ the more encouraged dissident priests and Bishops become. They are like small children that parents allow to have their own way and push the envelope with their behavior.

So, I suppose the issue is one of appearance of disunity. These Bishops are, indeed, out of communion with the Holy Father on certain issues. In those areas, they are Protestant.

 

[theMutant]

Trish:

Personally, I agree with you. I think that the more the Pope seems to be tolerant and ‘pastoral’ the more encouraged dissident priests and Bishops become. They are like small children that parents allow to have their own way and push the envelope with their behavior.

Amen! While I don’t understand the Pope’s reasoning for his tolerance on some things, I am reminded of the parable of the wheat and the tares. It is all too easy for us to sit back and pass judgment and assign blame.

 

[ralphinal]

Bengal_fan,
I always enjoy your posts. Anyway, the problem as I see it is that for some reason, Jesus lets humans belong to his Church. These humans tend to abandon the rules as quickly as possible. Do you think that if it had been a bunch of Catholics or Protestants, or anything else, at the base of the mountain while Moses was talking to God the story would be any different? Not at all.

Why not excommunicate? A couple of reasons, imo. First, could an excomunication of a bishop or cardinal cause a scizim, thus causing more division? Second, if you excomunicate too often, it loses its effect. I say simple remove the bishop from power. Place him into a non-leadership role. It seems like those who defy the CHurch and her teachings the most are the most arrogent and egotistical. That is how you get to them.

I’ve talked to you before about similar things on other posts. We all share responsibility for it, not just the pope.

As to the lack of unity, I think we need a good, old fashioned persicution. Yep, then watch the goofballs fall in line.

 

[Katholikos]

dredgtone:

Most say the Bible does not conflict in it’s message, it only must be interpreted correctly. If the Bible is up for interpretation why would anybody argue with anybody about specifics if it’s all a matter of different interpretations of the same material?

You can only “believe” in the specifics when it comes to religion, you cannot “know” them. Then why the big fuss when it all comes down to the same thing in the grand scheme of things?

The Catholic Church is not based on the Bible; rather, the New Testament is based on the dynamic, living, believing, teaching Church that wrote it. The Catholic Church does not have a mere interpretation of the NT, she knows what it means.

Every Protestant denomination is man-made and is based on an interpretation of the same 66-book cut version of the Bible.

The Catholic Church is God-made. She wrote the New Testament and canonized it and the Old Testament that she inherited from Jesus and the Apostles and formed the Bible in 382, 393, and 397 A.D.

I would say that’s soooooome difference!

JMJ Jay

 

[Catholic_Eagle]

Sorry if I sound divisive or anything like that but the Pope does have the power to excommunicate. Look at Pope St.Pius X he excommunicated the whole Sillon movement. Anyway the Pope is not the holiest man on earth. The man in the Papal Office changes every couple of years so its not the same Pope. Let me take a historical example for you guys. Pope Alexander VI ruled from 1492-1503. During his reign he did the following:Was elected by bribing the cardinals,had concubines in the Vatican,was more focused on wars and making his sons rich. He did much more that even Girolamo Savaonarola said is a sermon about him"He goes beyond the limits of infidelity and impiety". [Girolamo Savaonarola’s canonization is now pending] Now if this Pope is the most holiest man during his reign on Earth and according to some “Don’t try to be holier then the Pope”. Well it’s pretty easy to be holier than the Pope if the Pope is like this.

P.S. I do not believe Pope John Paul II is the worst Pope in history nor the best in history. But the way the Pope is idolized here by some, sometimes scares me. Even John Paul II in his latest book blamed himself for not being strict enough. Who cares if a schism happens when renegade bishops are excommunicated. Just shows how faithful some faithful are. If they want salvation they will stay but if they don’t want salvation they’ll leave. What type of Church do you want a million unfaithful or a thousand faithful? Well God will always choose the ones that truelly love Him over the ones who disobey Him. So… who will be the winner if a couple of renegade bishops leave the Church and form schismatic churches?

 

[bengal_fan]

ralphinal:

As to the lack of unity, I think we need a good, old fashioned persecution. Yep, then watch the goofballs fall in line.

i agree…brother lawrence said, “the persecuted church is the growing church.”

 

[Catholic_Eagle]

The SSPX and Indult societies are persecuted for not being able to say Mass everywhere and their seminaries are full and overflowing. The FSSP actually has to throw out candidates. the only problems for all of these groups is that their is not enough space for them

 

[Jennifer123]

Catholic Eagle:

The SSPX and Indult societies are persecuted for not being able to say Mass everywhere and their seminaries are full and overflowing. The FSSP actually has to throw out candidates. the only problems for all of these groups is that their is not enough space for them

They are still labled as schismatic, though right because they refute Vatican II? Just wondering and I don’t necessarily want to get into that debate just curious. Thanks