Are Protestants Excommunicate, Pagans, or Something Else?

[Tis_Bearself]

OK, it sounds like you mean well. I wish you and your future wife all the best. I was very happy with my husband and would still be if the Lord didn’t decide it was his time to go. I do think a priest is in the best position to address your quesitons without confusion though.

 

[Presbyterian]

I think so too, and we have already set up an appointment. I’m just impatient and like hearing from people with first-hand experience and knowledge.

I’m also sorry for the loss of your husband, but from everything I have read so far, he’s still waiting for you in Heaven. My wife-to-be, as I previously mentioned, still had fears that I would be damned unless I converted, and remembering that, it occurs to me that I haven’t been totally honest.

I don’t just want to convert for our children, or for reunification with the Church, I also want to do it for her. I already have Faith, tried and tested, proven in battle and life, to the point where I know my Faith can withstand anything. It can easily survive conversion, but that’s also the problem. I want it to be sincere, so I need to know exactly what I need to change, and I guess the answers, or even the questions, are not easy.

That’s fine. God never gives us any challenges we can’t overcome, and the hardest ones make us better.

 

[Wannano]

I don’t know if I will get into trouble for saying this but I am not sure you can genuinely convert if you do it solely to appease your partner. Perhaps your discussion with the priest could possibly inform your fiancee that you will not be damned for not converting. For me, conversion could only come when I genuinely became convinced personally of the claims of Catholicism.

 

[po18guy]

The best answer I can think of. When the lockdown is over, get yourself before Christ in the Blessed Sacrament. You need not believe that the Eucharist is Christ. For that matter, you do not have to believe in God for Him to hear your prayer.

Spend time - as long as it takes - before Christ in the Blessed Sacrament. He knows your heart already, but lay it all out. Your doubts, your fears, your hesitance, your comfort zone.

Then, be as patient with Christ as he has been with you.

When the Holy Spirit convicts you, and when you become aware that Christ is there, you will be changed.

Why do this? Man’s words fail, but the Holy Spirit will not.

 

[joecaro]

The Catholic church was formed by Jesus Christ. ALL other Christian churches were formed by man. You are certainly not a pagan as you state, just not a Catholic. You would be warmly welcomed back into the fold and both you and your wife will be blessed and happy.

 

[1ke]

Apparently, according to her, only Martin Luther is excommunicate because he knew the teachings of the Church and rejected them.

That’s not accurate. There were a number of leaders of reformation movements, clergy and otherwise, who were excommunicated.

You can’t be excommunicated from the Church if you were never part of it,

That is true. Excommunication is a canonical penalty. members of reformation churches born into them are not charged with the sin of separation, heresy, etc. nor can they be excommunicated from a communion they are not part of.

which in turn would mean that the Catholic Church never saw Protestants as part of the Church at all, which would make us pagans.

No. This is not accurate.

While not in full communion, a partial communion exists by virtue of our baptism.

I suggest you read the entire section of the Catechism on the four marks of the Church and the document Ut Unum Sint.

I’m like, 95% sure that the Catholic Church excommunicates us, by every meaningful definition of the word, but she says it isn’t so,

I don’t think you are understanding what the word excommunicate means.

It’s a penalty in canon law. And canon law only applies to Catholics.

 

[Genesis315]

Protestants are public heretics, in the broader sense of the term, which means those baptized persons who believe in Jesus, but are not members of the Church by virtue of not being united in her faith (whether they do so culpably or not). The Church today tends to use the term “heretic” in the narrower sense, meaning those actually culpable of the sin of heresy, which includes a spirit of obstinacy. Generally nowadays you’re more likely to hear baptized Protestants simply called non-Catholic Christians. Both phrases have the same meaning.

Here’s how Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma sums up the relationship (using the broader “public heretic” nomenclature):

Although public apostates and heretics, schismatics and excommunicati vitandi are outside the legal organisation of the Church, still their relationship to the Church is essentially different from that of the unbaptised. As the baptismal character which effects incorporation in the Church is indestructible, the baptised person, in spite of his ceasing to be a member of the Church, cannot cut himself off so completely from the Church, that every bond with the Church is dissolved.

This bond with the Catholic Church, which is the one body of Christ, can even be salvific for those non-Catholics who are in good faith and persevere to the end in faith in Christ and in charity. Those actually culpable of heresy cannot be saved if they persevere to the end in it.

 

[tafan2]

Protestants are Christians who are not in communion with the Catholic Church. To be an “excommunicate” would imply you were once in communion with us,. For the vast majority of Protestants, that us not the case.

 

[OddBird]

Not gonna lie, that sounds like Islam with extra steps. Essentially it’s just guaranteeing that any children will be born Catholic and adhere to the tenets of the Catholic Church, which is just an indirect way of forcing Catholicism. I don’t like that, and as Protestant, I will probably not obey. Indeed, I think this is exactly how you get so many rebellious Catholics.

Hi, @Presbyterian !

I’m a Reformed pastor waiting for the right moment to cross the Tiber (long story). I also have spent some time involved in the ecumenical movement.

I think what you say here is, indeed, one of the biggest struggle we encounter in the walk towards unity : we do not start from the same vantage point, and I even think there is a fundamental inequality some Protestant friends struggle to recognize and to accept.

For most ecumenically-minded Protestants I know, unity seems natural and no big deal – after all, we all believe in Jesus, right ? We all baptize, we all celebrate the Eucharist, and most of us recognize that something significant for our faith happens there, so it shouldn’t be complicated ?

Except this is, in fact, a very Protestant approach to unity. For most Protestant traditions, as long as Christians are “biblically grounded” (however we interpret that), and try their best to be faithful to the teaching of Christ and the apostles (be it through a form of, sometimes adaptative, tradition or through what is seen as the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit), they’re good to go. This gives us a way of defining borders which is extremely fluid.

From a Catholic point of view, actual – physical – apostolic succession is not one way among others that faithfulness to Christ and his apostles may be actualized. It is the only way, and a huge and fundamental way of the Catholic faith’s DNA. That means that people who are outside that bond always lack something essential, even though other admirable fruits of the Spirit may be present in them.

Most non-Catholics I know, indeed, do not like being told that. It can often come across as arrogant and dismissive, when, from a Catholic point of view, it is the simple statement of a fact.

(Continued)

 

[OddBird]

This is why we, non-Catholics and Catholics, go from a very unequal starting point when talking about unity. Protestants tend to have a fluid vision of it which could easily accommodate what they perceive of the Catholic Church; Catholics do not want to compromise on something which is an intrinsic part of their faith and identity, and for them, unity without physical apostolic succession (and its consequences) would not be unity at all, but probably, at best, a dangerous travesty of the truth.

This is why the Church insists that children from mixed marriages be baptized and raised in the Catholic Church ; because, however inconvenient – and even insulting – it might appear to the non-Catholic party, it would be compromising with what it recognizes as the truth.

This is also why, in Protestant-Catholic ecumenical talks, the biggest stumbling block right now is not what happens in the Eucharist – we could actually agree on that. It is rather who can licitly celebrate it – in other words, who can be legitimately recognized as a minister. And on that point, realistically, we’re nowhere close to an agreement.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

This is also why, in Protestant-Catholic ecumenical talks, the biggest stumbling block right now is not what happens in the Eucharist – we could actually agree on that. It is rather who can licitly celebrate it – in other words, who can be legitimately recognized as a minister. And on that point, realistically, we’re nowhere close to an agreement.

I think this might be the case for some Protestant groups, but I know one of the issues I had with my Presbyterian husband is that he did not believe in the Real Presence in the Catholic Eucharist. He believed God/ Jesus was spiritually present in the church when we all gathered there to pray, but did not regard Holy Eucharist aka Communion as receiving the actual physical body of Christ; it was symbolic or whatever to him. I would presume that he was telling me the beliefs of his Presbyterian church in which he was catechized. If the Presbyterian and Catholic Church were to merge, Presbyterians would have to believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the consecrated Eucharist that have the appearance of bread and wine. It’s not negotiable.

Aside from Anglican and possibly Lutheran churches, I would guess that this issue would be a major source of division for ecumenically merging most Protestant churches with the Catholic Church.

 

[OddBird]

If the Presbyterian and Catholic Church were to merge, Presbyterians would have to believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the consecrated Eucharist that have the appearance of bread and wine. It’s not negotiable.

Yes. But Reformed theology – of which the Presbyterian tradition is an heir – allows for a quite a bit of leeway for interpreting it in terms of Real Presence (and, if going from Calvin’s writings, even in terms of transsubstantiation), independently of whether or not individuals believe in it.

What I meant is that having theologians agree formally on that would not be a completely improbable scenario. In fact, I have witnessed such agreement happen between Catholic and Reformed theologians, even if it was during informal talks which did not (as yet) give birth to any official document.

For now, however, agreeing on what constitutes apostolic succession and licit ordination is not a realistic scenario. The reason why there is not yet, with at least part of the European Reformed Churches, such an agreement on the Eucharist is because until now, Catholics and Reformed have been unable to agree on who may lawfully celebrate it.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

I don’t just want to convert for our children, or for reunification with the Church, I also want to do it for her.

You can’t convert just to “do it for her” or for the sake of the children because that is not being fair to them, God and yourself. Do it because God is calling you.

If you feel called to come home to the Catholic Church, pray and learn more about the Catholic Faith. The priest you are working with can help answer your questions.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

Great quote. Thank you.

 

[TC3033]

Most of the posters have this covered.

and we can intermarry so long as we’re baptized

^^^ This isn’t true, as you have it written or seem to understand. One does not have to be a baptized Christian to marry a Catholic in the Church. With the proper permission a Catholic can marry an un-baptized athiest.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

^^^ This isn’t true, as you have it written or seem to understand. One does not have to be a baptized Christian to marry a Catholic in the Church. With the proper permission a Catholic can marry an un-baptized athiest.

I presume the situation is that the Catholic wife-to-be wants a sacramental marriage, in which case her husband-to-be would have to have had a Trinitarian baptism, which the Presbyterians do have.

A Catholic can have a non-sacramental marriage to a person who lacks Trinitarian baptism, which might mean they are not baptized at all, or that they were baptized but it wasn’t a Trinitarian baptism. Although a non-sacramental natural marriage may be recognized by the Catholic Church, some Catholics might feel strongly that they only want a sacramental marriage.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Catholics who want to marry a non-Christian need to get a dispensation in order to do so, and although nowadays the dispensation will often be granted, that wasn’t always the case in the past. It’s my understanding that prior to Vatican II the church really frowned on a Catholic marrying even a Protestant with a Trinitarian Baptism and even if the priest would agree to marry you, there would often be restrictions on it such as the marriage taking place in the rectory or in the vestibule of the church and it not being like a normal wedding. If the Catholic had shown up wanting to marry a Jewish person or a Buddhist or a Muslim then a lot of priests would have just said no. The families of the non-Christian person probably would have objected equally strenuously.

 

[phil19034]

Are Protestants Excommunicate, Pagans, or Something Else?​

I’m responding to your header. Protestants are not excommunicated and they are not pagans.

While it is not PC to say so now a days, protestants are technically considered to be heretical schismatics, unlike the Eastern Orthodox who are simply just schismatics.

While heretical, Protestants who are born into Protestantism are typically considered to be “material heretics” and NOT “Formal Heretics.” The Formal Heretic is much worse and always a mortal sin. While the material heretics is typically at worse a venial sin and sometimes not even sinful.

Finally, the reason why Protestants cannot receive communion, but the Orthodox can is because Protestants do not share the same share the belief in the 7 sacraments as the Catholics. The Orthodox do.

I hope this helps.

Formal Heresy and Material Heresy Spirituality

Please could you explain the difference using a Catholic that falls into both and a Protestant that falls into both to help me see clearer? A summary of each would be great. Thanks.

 

[TC3033]

TC3033:

^^^ This isn’t true, as you have it written or seem to understand. One does not have to be a baptized Christian to marry a Catholic in the Church. With the proper permission a Catholic can marry an un-baptized athiest.

I presume the situation is that the Catholic wife-to-be wants a sacramental marriage, in which case her husband-to-be would have to have had a Trinitarian baptism, which the Presbyterians do have.

A Catholic can have a non-sacramental marriage to a person who lacks Trinitarian baptism, which might mean they are not baptized at all, or that they were baptized but it wasn’t a Trinitarian baptism. Although a non-sacramental natural marriage may be recognized by the Catholic Church, some Catholics might feel strongly that they only want a sacramental marriage.

Fair enough. I read the OP that they didn’t really understand the rules of the Church and thought it was a Church requirement that a Catholic must marry a baptized Christian…which isn’t the case.

If I misunderstood the OP, my apologies.

 

[mdbaumert]

Thanks for clarifying to the thread your intentions and more of a clear picture of where you are and where perhaps you’d like to be. Feel free to reach out with any specific questions you may have relative to crossing from reformed theology/practice to catholic theology/practice as my wife and I are coming from the same reformed background for the majority of our adult lives - me, a Catholic revert who grew up with a mix of Catholicism/non-denominationalism and eventually landed in the reformed camp for the last 12 years. My wife, a non-denominational/baptist to reformed christian who is awaiting her confirmation into the Church at Pentecost, hopefully.

We just had out marriage convalidated on Easter Sunday, so believe me, we had a lot to work through to get to that point. Happy to be a resource if you’re interested.

Coming into the Church is one of the best decisions we’ve made together and, by God’s grace, we’ve been able to truly do it together. Praying for you and all those who are struggling not being on the same page with your beloved at the present time; may he bring true unity to the both of you.