Can't we give Protestants SOME credit???

[Publisher]

I know this thread might start World War III in here, but, here goes…

I am NOT a Protestant and do not wish to be. But I notice a constant venom spewed at Protestantism and a real burying our heads in the sand as Catholics. We don’t want to acknowledge that there MUST BE SOMETHING GOOD about Protestantism in a Christ-like way that makes Catholics leave and join up with them.

Think about growing up Catholic…I have a HORRRRRIBLE CCD Catechism class every year!! I learned nothing! I didn’t even know about the real presence until I was in college!! I know my church wasn’t the only lousy CCD bunch!!

Most Catholics you talk to on the street have no catechetical knowledge of the Church Fathers, basic theology, sacramental awareness, or real understanding of what makes a Catholic different from any other Christian faith.

Protestants are very adept at:

Making their followers Biblically-literate
Creating fellowship and a warm, inviting place
Visiting the sick or infirm in their flocks
Creating interesting vacation bible studies
preaching
getting people fired-up

Let’s look at one thing: MOST Catholics I know who are excited, fired-up, theologically-bright, knowledgable folks are FORMER PROTESTANTS!!! Yikes!

Scott Hahn and the other hordes of folks on EWTN are former Protestants!! It seems like to be a really gifted author, teacher, and celebrity in the Catholic media you need to first have been either Jewish or Evangelical?? This is not a compliment to our Catholic faith? We don’t produce Thomas Aquinases or Padre Pios these days but rather borrow them from the Protestants after they’re Biblically literate and then throw in tradition and theology to make them OUR new representatives. Scott Hahn, Roselyn Moss, Marcus Grodi, etc. etc. are all former Protestants and are quite brilliant in many respects. Converts seem to be the thing!? Why doesn’t Catholic education produce such genius?

The folks at Mass around me who SING all the hymns are always former Lutherans, former Anglicans, former Presbyterians, the key word is FORMER PROTESTANT! The cradle Catholics stand there stoically looking like zombies?

Let’s give some credit to Protestants for creating a passion for the scriptures and for Christ. These many converts received that spark of passion for God first from the Protestants.

I always notice that Catholics might slam Martin Luther, calling him Martin Loser and trashing his “sola scriptura,” etc. etc. but, in the end, there is a sneaking admiration and appreciation as well as respect for him from many Catholics. I am one of them. While I don’t agree with several of his philosophies, his passion for what he perceived to be truth, his love of the Eucharist and the Scriptures, his unwillingness to fold to a very then-corrupt Church, his disgust at the indulgence abuses (and they WERE abused!), and conviction in his views made him a heroic anti-hero/villain. He’s a confusing guy. He’s a lightning rod. But there is a respect there. I know I respect him.

I am not into Protestantism or anything. I just like to be intellectually honest and give them the credit they are due. They lack the 5 sacraments, often are QUITE WRONG on many things from women’s ordination to grape juice communions with crackers to silly songs or nutty evangelical healings on TV with weird hairdos. They have an informal style that drives me nuts, man of them at least. But they do have some admirable qualities.

“This Friend speaks my mind.”

 

[SolaFide]

I know this thread might start World War III in here, but, here goes…

…Protestants are very adept at:

Making their followers Biblically-literate
Creating fellowship and a warm, inviting place
Visiting the sick or infirm in their flocks
Creating interesting vacation bible studies
preaching
getting people fired-up

Let’s look at one thing: MOST Catholics I know who are excited, fired-up, theologically-bright, knowledgable folks are FORMER PROTESTANTS!!! Yikes!

…Converts seem to be the thing!? Why doesn’t Catholic education produce such genius?

…Let’s give some credit to Protestants for creating a passion for the scriptures and for Christ. These many converts received that spark of passion for God first from the Protestants.

I always notice that Catholics might slam Martin Luther, calling him Martin Loser and trashing his “sola scriptura,” etc. etc. but, in the end, there is a sneaking admiration and appreciation as well as respect for him from many Catholics. I am one of them. While I don’t agree with several of his philosophies, his passion for what he perceived to be truth, his love of the Eucharist and the Scriptures, his unwillingness to fold to a very then-corrupt Church, his disgust at the indulgence abuses (and they WERE abused!), and conviction in his views made him a heroic anti-hero/villain. He’s a confusing guy. He’s a lightning rod. But there is a respect there. I know I respect him.

I am not into Protestantism or anything. I just like to be intellectually honest and give them the credit they are due. They lack the 5 sacraments, often are QUITE WRONG on many things from women’s ordination to grape juice communions with crackers to silly songs or nutty evangelical healings on TV with weird hairdos. They have an informal style that drives me nuts, man of them at least. But they do have some admirable qualities.

Thank you for this. It was warmly appreciated. I have noticed that all the Catholic converts from protestantism such as Scott Hahn and others, became Catholic after spending inordinate amounts of time studying the church fathers instead of the Scriptures.

When you consider the following:

1. That Paul himself warned the Ephesian elders that false teachers would arive even amongst their own number. Thus being an elder did not automatically exclude you from teaching heresy and error. Thus, not all the church fathers, nor all their writings are to be heeded.

Act 20:28 Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
Act 20:29 For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock.
Act 20:30 Also** from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves.**
Act 20:31 Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.
Act 20:32 "So now, brethren, I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified.
(The Word is able to build us up and give us the inheritance, not Tradition)

1. Paul and John both had to write several churches to refute heresies and problems (1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Colossians, 1 John,) Also the letters to the 7 churches in Revelation had 5 churches that needed rebuking already. If there was already problems in the churches before all the apostles even died…then who is to say that anything other than what the apostles wrote should be heeded with as much authority of the Scriptures?
2. If Paul, himself an apostle chosen by Christ, was not offended or threatened by people double-checking his message to see if what he said was true but rather encouraged such examination, then why should the Church not encourage examination of their doctrines by the Word of God?

Acts 17:10 The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews.
Acts 17:11 Now these were **more noble-minded **than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so

These are only three of many reasons why Protestants don’t hold to Scripture plus tradition but rather Scripture only and why Protestants are much more knowledgable about the Scriptures.

1. About Martin Luther…no one in Prostestantism holds him up as sinless. Martin’s “frustration” with evangelizing the Jews when they wouldn’t listen to him caused Martin to regress into his anti-semitism toward the end of his life. This is a black spot on Martin’s character. However, these views did not “characterize” his life.

.

 

[Bamm]

Really? Name one doctrinal difference between any two “Catholic Churches”.

Petergee,

Biblical or tribunal doctrine?

Bamm

 

[Petergee]

Petergee,

Biblical or tribunal doctrine?

Bamm

Not sure of what you mean by those distinctions but ANY doctrinal difference will do. Just one. Or else let’s all agree that the allegation of “different denominations with the Catholic Church” is a silly fantasy.

 

[Petergee]

Thank you for this. It was warmly appreciated. I have noticed that all the Catholic converts from protestantism such as Scott Hahn and others, became Catholic after spending inordinate amounts of time studying the church fathers instead of the Scriptures.

If I wanted to understand say,some passage from Dante whose meaning was obsucure/disputed, I would look at what he and his contemporaries said to understand his mindset and the cultural milieu of 13th century Italy. Not just try and work it out from a 21st century Western perspective. Similarly if I wanted to understand the Bible better, especially the NT, I would look at what its own authors, editors and publishers and their close associates at the time had to say, and their cultural environment. That’s just what Hahn and co did. And I’ll wager they know the Bible better than anyone who professes “sola scriptura”.

If there was already problems in the churches before all the apostles even died…then who is to say that anything other than what the apostles wrote should be heeded with as much authority of the Scriptures?

So why do you try to defend your viewpoint by quoting Acts, which was written by St Luke, who was NOT an Apostle, and whose work had probably not even been written when Sts Paul and John wrote their letters, and most certainly was not regarded as “scripture”?

About Martin Luther…no one in Prostestantism holds him up as sinless. Martin’s “frustration” with evangelizing the Jews when they wouldn’t listen to him caused Martin to regress into his anti-semitism toward the end of his life. This is a black spot on Martin’s character. However, these views did not “characterize” his life.

No-one mentioned his anti-semitism or any other of his sins (apart from his pride). His sins are not the point. The point is that he was not a hero, and the evil caused by his actions, which admittedly he probably did not foresee and which he soon had little control over, far outweighs any negligible good effects which may have resulted from his actions.

 

[homewardbound]

Thank you for this. It was warmly appreciated. I have noticed that all the Catholic converts from protestantism such as Scott Hahn and others, became Catholic after spending inordinate amounts of time studying the church fathers instead of the Scriptures.

When you consider the following:

1. That Paul himself warned the Ephesian elders that false teachers would arive even amongst their own number. Thus being an elder did not automatically exclude you from teaching heresy and error. Thus, not all the church fathers, nor all their writings are to be heeded.

Act 20:28 Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
Act 20:29 For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock.
Act 20:30 Also** from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves.**
Act 20:31 Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.
Act 20:32 "So now, brethren, I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified.
(The Word is able to build us up and give us the inheritance, not Tradition)

1. Paul and John both had to write several churches to refute heresies and problems (1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Colossians, 1 John,) Also the letters to the 7 churches in Revelation had 5 churches that needed rebuking already. If there was already problems in the churches before all the apostles even died…then who is to say that anything other than what the apostles wrote should be heeded with as much authority of the Scriptures?
2. If Paul, himself an apostle chosen by Christ, was not offended or threatened by people double-checking his message to see if what he said was true but rather encouraged such examination, then why should the Church not encourage examination of their doctrines by the Word of God?

Acts 17:10 The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews.
Acts 17:11 Now these were **more noble-minded **than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so

These are only three of many reasons why Protestants don’t hold to Scripture plus tradition but rather Scripture only and why Protestants are much more knowledgable about the Scriptures.

1. About Martin Luther…no one in Prostestantism holds him up as sinless. Martin’s “frustration” with evangelizing the Jews when they wouldn’t listen to him caused Martin to regress into his anti-semitism toward the end of his life. This is a black spot on Martin’s character. However, these views did not “characterize” his life.

.

Why can’t Protestants take a compliment and leave it at that?

BTW, as a Catholic convert I studied more Scripture during my conversion than I ever did as a Protestant. As a Protestant my knowledge of Scripture was all memorization and blindly believing one man’s personal interpretation of each word…which got confusing with each church move. In Catholicism, my knowledge of Scripture is in actual study and understanding. In converting, I can honestly say I have not studied any church fathers. Only Scripture and relating that to what my last faith taught, and what Catholicism teaches. For me, Catholicism made perfect sense. It goes perfectly with Scripture and anyone who actually studies the faith and seeks God’s Truth instead of only seeking to see whats convenient for them would easily see the same.