Catholic to Protestant

[CopticChristian]

I guess the Protestant would understand or believe that just because something was first, doesn’t mean it’s the best or the most right or the truest. Many things improve as they evolve in time, as we work on them and think about them and have exerience with them. Many errors in legal laws, for example, are updated and corrected as we learn more. Same as in medicine. We used to use leeches to suck blood out of us when we were sick! (or something like that).
Many great thinkers of our time have improved upon psychology and math and science and made it better than it was originally.
If a grandmother has a recipe for chicken soup, maybe her daughter improves upon it…and so on, and so on, adding new ingredients that make it even better. Grandma’s soup was first, but her granddaughter’s revised version is better.
Not to compare religion to soup but I assume a Protestant might have a thought process happening along those lines.

I am amused at the vast number of Protestant that are against evolution and when it comes to Protestant thought it is a constant evolution of new and improved doctrines ever evolving. Protestant thought is a testament to evolution of thought.

 

[Trebor135]

I am amused at the vast number of Protestant that are against evolution and when it comes to Protestant thought it is a constant evolution of new and improved doctrines ever evolving. Protestant thought is a testament to evolution of thought.

Excellent point! One day it’s salvation by grace through faith and works (Lutherans). Next it’s infant baptism (Baptists(?!)). Then it’s the perpetual virginity of Mary (modern-day Protestants). And lastly it’s the trinity (Jehovah’s Witnesses, coming out of a Protestant mindset of “my decisions on doctrine are the be-all and end-all of following Christ”).

 

[1voice]

I have come to the conclusion that God looks at our hearts and the love it holds rather than at our doctrines or our church affiliation. See Micah 6:8, Matt. 25 and I Cor. 13.

I have come to the same conclusion.

 

[CopticChristian]

I have come to the same conclusion.

For this to be a truth is must always be true, true for all and true for all time. Do you believe that this applies to Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Athiests, Agnostics and Nihilists?

 

[CMatt25]

For this to be a truth is must always be true, true for all and true for all time. Do you believe that this applies to Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Athiests, Agnostics and Nihilists?

What Roy and 1voice said is they have concluded God looks at hearts rather than doctrine/affiliation. It isn’t true that God looks at hearts? So you know for sure you aren’t going to see in heaven anyone of those you mentioned?

 

[CopticChristian]

What Roy and 1voice said is they have concluded God looks at hearts rather than doctrine/affiliation. It isn’t true that God looks at hearts? So you know for sure you aren’t going to see in heaven anyone of those you mentioned?

In the vernacular of functional and dysfunctional this would be called a rescue of Roy and 1voice. You cannot read their minds or their intentions. Only 1 voice and Roy can speak for themselves.

The heart. A muscle that pumps blood. This is commonly referred to as the center of our being, our essence, what we are. Let’s use that.

Our totality of thought and understanding, our essence, determine how we think and believe and in turn how we act. Doctrine is right thinking. Affiliation is membership in the body of Christ. Not knowing is innocence. Knowing and denying is another thing.

What does God look at? I have no idea who I will see in heaven? You ask what you believe are simple answers to dismiss your denial of right thinking/doctrine and knowledge that Paul says that the Church, affiliation is how Gentiles would be made fellow heirs. You redefine your terms and get back to me.

 

[CMatt25]

Many well-educated people want a religion that permits the right of its members to question, differ amiably among thmselves, even feel free to publicly admit doubts.

I have come to the conclusion that God looks at our hearts and the love it holds rather than at our doctrines or our church affiliation. See Micah 6:8, Matt. 25 and I Cor. 13.

Maybe it’s because they understand even the most faithfully devout Catholic has to take leaps of faith to first believe in God, then in the NT, then in Catholic Church interpretation of Herself and of Scripture. They then place faith in Her writings and in that of the ECFs, and in how the Church interprets it all. And that’s a lot of faith steps before one gets to the point of believing they “know”.

 

[mwok]

I guess the Protestant would understand or believe that just because something was first, doesn’t mean it’s the best or the most right or the truest. Many things improve as they evolve in time, as we work on them and think about them and have exerience with them. Many errors in legal laws, for example, are updated and corrected as we learn more. Same as in medicine. We used to use leeches to suck blood out of us when we were sick! (or something like that).
Many great thinkers of our time have improved upon psychology and math and science and made it better than it was originally.
If a grandmother has a recipe for chicken soup, maybe her daughter improves upon it…and so on, and so on, adding new ingredients that make it even better. Grandma’s soup was first, but her granddaughter’s revised version is better.
Not to compare religion to soup but I assume a Protestant might have a thought process happening along those lines.

Except in the chicken soup analogy, it doesn’t matter what the granddaughter does to Grandma’s recipe, it’s still chicken soup. The original recipe is always in the “new” recipe and there is always Grandma’s original recipe scrawled in her handwriting on an index card somewhere in a cookbook. What Protestantism does to Grandma’s recipe is to put just whatever feels should go into the pot and call it “chicken soup”.

 

[CMatt25]

In the vernacular of functional and dysfunctional this would be called a rescue of Roy and 1voice. You cannot read their minds or their intentions. Only 1 voice and Roy can speak for themselves.

The heart. A muscle that pumps blood. This is commonly referred to as the center of our being, our essence, what we are. Let’s use that.

Our totality of thought and understanding, our essence, determine how we think and believe and in turn how we act. Doctrine is right thinking. Affiliation is membership in the body of Christ. Not knowing is innocence. Knowing and denying is another thing.

What does God look at? I have no idea who I will see in heaven? You ask what you believe are simple answers to dismiss your denial of right thinking/doctrine and knowledge that Paul says that the Church, affiliation is how Gentiles would be made fellow heirs. You redefine your terms and get back to me.

I don’t need to speak for Roy and 1Voice. Because what they said was clear. I was merely reiterating it for you because you were questioning how it could be true.

Neither do I need to get back to you about anything. I am not God. So I shall leave it to God to know one’s heart, essence, including that of those you mentioned in your earlier post. And leave it to Him and Him alone to judge.

In the meantime may He bless with peace you and all His children who walk on earth along their journeys of faith.

 

[bevsue]

In my experience, I would agree with mark a’s posting that most people I know leave the church over a moral issue/church teaching of same, and that seems to trigger all the other issues they’ve never resolved. You reach a point in your spiritual life when you must embrace your faith for yourself, agree in your own mind and heart with the gospel, and the Church’s teachings, and if you DON’T do that, what you really believe or even question about the faith and the Church are never fully settled for you in your own mind.

When a life changing situation comes up -falling in love (living together), pregnancy (abortion, birth control issues), difficult marriage (divorce) etc. you are influenced by the world rather than your own solid belief system based on Jesus and the truth. (See parable of the sower and the seed - Luke 8:11-15, Matt. 13:3-9 & 18-23, Mark 4: 3-20) Then it is easier to go elsewhere, and often the elsewhere doesn’t like Catholicism so you get a fairly steady diet of what’s wrong with the CC, thus feeling reinforced in the correctness of your decision to leave Catholicism.

Because of your background I’m sure you sat through some negative teachings or at least negative mentionings of the Catholic church. I know I did. (I am a revert after 20 years away from the church.) The BIGGEST problem is most Catholics, Lord love 'em, don’t know their own faith. They don’t KNOW the history of the Church, the origins of the sacraments, the Biblical basis for what the Church does. So they don’t recognise misinformation when they hear it. I was in that boat after years of Catholic education.
There needs to be more of an emphasis on adult spiritual education in the Church, and I’m happy to see there is much more of that now than there used to be.

To sum up - I think often people leave over lack of personal moral conviction in the Church’s teachings. They then stay away over unresolved issues they are uneducated about or don’t really have the authentic Church teaching on. After years of sitting with ex-Catholics in evangelical/fundamentalist/Pentecostal churches and then coming home again to the Catholic church, I am convinced if they knew what they had as Catholics - really KNEW the Catholic faith - they’d be back in droves. We have such treasures, but they need to be reminded and to be honest, many need to be taught for the first time. That’s why we need Catholic evangelists and why we need to know and love our faith so we can share it ourselves with joy.

 

[1voice]

For this to be a truth is must always be true, true for all and true for all time. Do you believe that this applies to Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Athiests, Agnostics and Nihilists?

biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=+wisdom+fear+of+the+lord&qs_version=DRA

 

[CopticChristian]

Maybe it’s because they understand even the most faithfully devout Catholic has to take leaps of faith to first believe in God, then in the NT, then in Catholic Church interpretation of Herself and of Scripture. They then place faith in Her writings and in that of the ECFs, and in how the Church interprets it all. And that’s a lot of faith steps before one gets to the point of believing they “know”.

I do not know what you are talking about. I recollect in my learning about the truths of Faith is wasn’t done the way Protestants do it. Protestants use oral tradition. This oral tradition is implemented by the Bible, bible studies, church services, potlucks, wednesday service, friday service, tracts, books and the like. Learning is based on what others believe is wrong to justify what is taught to be correct. It is handed out piecemeal to build on the theology of saved, Faith, bible alone, me and Jesus, in my experience.

My recollection of my learning was to learn about God as a child trusting my parents guidance using many sources including the Church, School, Catechisms, having the Bible read to me each Sunday over the years so that I had hear the Bible read to me in its entirety in a sequence that included Old Testament, Psalms, Epistles Gospels in that order. It was a logical sequence Old to New, Revalation showing how the New was revealed in the Old. I never got piecemeal verses strung together, memorized, was never taught to do mental gymnastics with bible verses to prove a point or was ever taught about what anyone else believed.

I do not recall any leaps of Faith. It was a natural progression that felt as comfortable as learning how to walk. Unfortunately you speak of what you do not know. This is what I routinely find in Protestants looking from the outside in and those that have been on the inside and never learned.

 

[CopticChristian]

Maybe it’s because they understand even the most faithfully devout Catholic has to take leaps of faith to first believe in God, then in the NT, then in Catholic Church interpretation of Herself and of Scripture. They then place faith in Her writings and in that of the ECFs, and in how the Church interprets it all. And that’s a lot of faith steps before one gets to the point of believing they “know”.

If you truly believe in your saying, walking together to glorify his name, then we walk together with the Eucharist. This is how the Orthodox and Rome will walk together to glorify his name.

You may have to start by crawling with humility, learning to take a few steps, and then walk with us.

 

[1voice]

For this to be a truth is must always be true, true for all and true for all time. Do you believe that this applies to Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Athiests, Agnostics and Nihilists?

biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=+wisdom+fear+of+the+lord&qs_version=DRA

What does “fear of the Lord” include?
Peter was sent to the Roman officer’s home … against the fiber of everything that Peter stood for … Because God knew the man’s heart. The man had a heart after God.

“Man looks on the outside … God looks on the heart.”

---

Whatever you do to the least of these … you do to me.

---

… Beloved, love one another. For love is of God… and everyone that loves is born of God … and knoweth God … he who loveth not … knows not God … For God is love …
1John 2

---

God seeks his own … Jesus said of the Roman officer " I have not found faith like yours … in all of Israel". Jesus was seeking for those that had the insight to see truth … no matter what the world perceived them to be.

He who has ears ( the insight / wisdom given by the Holy Spirit ) to hear … let him hear

 

[dzheremi]

I do not know what you are talking about. I recollect in my learning about the truths of Faith is wasn’t done the way Protestants do it. Protestants use oral tradition. This oral tradition is implemented by the Bible, bible studies, church services, potlucks, wednesday service, friday service, tracts, books and the like. Learning is based on what others believe is wrong to justify what is taught to be correct. It is handed out piecemeal to build on the theology of saved, Faith, bible alone, me and Jesus, in my experience.

My recollection of my learning was to learn about God as a child trusting my parents guidance using many sources including the Church, School, Catechisms, having the Bible read to me each Sunday over the years so that I had hear the Bible read to me in its entirety in a sequence that included Old Testament, Psalms, Epistles Gospels in that order. It was a logical sequence Old to New, Revalation showing how the New was revealed in the Old. I never got piecemeal verses strung together, memorized, was never taught to do mental gymnastics with bible verses to prove a point or was ever taught about what anyone else believed.

I do not recall any leaps of Faith. It was a natural progression that felt as comfortable as learning how to walk. Unfortunately you speak of what you do not know. This is what I routinely find in Protestants looking from the outside in and those that have been on the inside and never learned.

Something seems slightly odd about this to me. I should think that Catholics also learn by oral tradition by virtue of the fact that they understand the entirety of the faith as including both the Bible and extra-Biblical oral and written tradition (as is right; see 2 Thessalonians 2:15). Protestants in general claim to reject any extra-Biblical tradition of either type (though in practice there is certainly something we could call “Presbyterian Tradition”, “Baptist Tradition”, etc., it is just not generally recognized as such).

And I’m not sure how you’d define a leap of faith, but the idea of anyone being a Christian of any kind without at least the occasional reliance on faith over natural or other logic (and comfort!) just strikes me as sad. It seems very alien to Christianity in any way we look at it (practice, history, etc.), and is certainly alien to my personal experience of it. And I am in no way a Protestant.

 

[CopticChristian]

My experience is that Catholics who become Protestants go in two different and almost contradictory directions.

 There are those who become part of 'born again' evangelical congregations. I can't speak at length about them   

Most former Catholics I know well who have become Protestant have gone to mainline churches - Episcopal, Methodist, UCC, Presbyterian, etc. These appear to be quite well-educated, people who have trouble with inflexible doctrine. 

 Many well-educated people want a religion that permits the right of its members to question, differ amiably among thmselves, even feel 

  I have just finished reading the book "Absolute Monarchs", a history of the papacy. The author seems rather objective. When you are reminded of the outrageous behavior of some of the popes it can make you wonder. There seems to be more and more of this kind of literature in circulation. 

 There are many other reasons why Catholics leave the church, often to become essentially 'nothing'. Marrying a Protestant. Divorce and remarriage certainly. The sex scandal, which has severely injured the image of 

  What I find interesting is that so many remain Catholic who apparently don't believe essential doctrines. I believe it was in the "US Catholic" magazine that I read a survey that found - what was it - 53%? - of Catholics do not believe in transubstantiation. 

  But, as another friend always says when religious differences come up, "same God!". He's simply not the least bit interested in magnifiying our differences.

  I come from a mixed Catholic/Protestant heritage myself and have been very interested and often perplexed by all these matters. I have come to the conclusion that God looks at our hearts and the love it holds rather than at our doctrines or our church affiliation. See Micah 6:8, Matt. 25 and I Cor. 13.

 God bless the whole world with love, understanding, and peace. Religion should be a bridge rather than a barrier. Between groups like al Qaeda amd that mass murderer in Norway we can see where religious bigotry can lead us. Too often religion preaches love, humility and peace while promoting bitterness, arrogance, and hostility.

I realize that many find this englightening and warming. I find it confusing. If I write the following.

I would like to point out 2 reasons I do believe in this.

I then say first, develop that idea and when I am finished say so. I say, therefore this is the first reason.

Then I say, now here is the second reason.

I read your work and your opening statement leads me to believe that you are going to clarify two distinct points and I cannot for the life of me see the ideas developed or clarified.

My experience is that Catholics who become Protestants go in two different and almost contradictory directions.

Reframe this notion you wrote with a notation so I can understand the first point and then the contradictory point. I don’t see it.

What I see is

There are those

This is an observation without a reason.

They find that the mainline churches permit wide differences of opinion on major doctrines.

This is a statement that many are either not catechized, lose their faith, sin and rationalize or believe that their education supersedes the will of God.

I have just finished reading the book “Absolute Monarchs”, a history of the papacy. The author seems rather objective. When you are reminded of the outrageous behavior of some of the popes it can make you wonder. There seems to be more and more of this kind of literature in circulation.

Subtle Catholic Bashing

There are many other reasons why

This is not cohesive and actually is part of the notion that you stated earlier, "they find that the mainline churches permit…

What I find interesting is that so many remain Catholic who apparently don’t believe essential doctrines. I believe it was in the “US Catholic” magazine that I read a survey that found - what was it - 53%? - of Catholics do not believe in transubstantiation.

Why do you find the one thing that unites Christians, the Eucharist, in its denial interesting. All Protestant deny the Eucharist and are dividied. Many Catholics are in the Covenant but not of the Covenant. I heard Jack Van Impe say that recent polls show that the vast majority of Protestants do not believe that the bible is the word of God and only 17% believe that they are saved by Faith alone. It would appear that those leaving are leaving to much more uncertainty and may end up agnostic.

I have come to the conclusion that God looks at our hearts

I have come to the conclusion that unlike many Protestants wandering the earth that are not aware of what they do not know are not as culpable as the Protestants that are of mixed heritage and in particular those at Catholic Answers who are exposed to the discrepancy of belief and remain hard of heart. The Jews Paul says were hard of heart and a stiff necked people.

Religion should be a bridge rather than a barrier.

I see this often. Outline and explain this bridge that many can walk over to and back from. Your outline here is a bridge from the Covenant out of the Covenant, to uncertainty and possibly worse.

Too often religion preaches love, humility and peace while promoting bitterness, arrogance, and hostility

Too often. How about just often. Is this not the message. Faith, Hope, Charity. Charity is the greatest and endures forever. Can I preach this too often? Understand that this message is in Charity. I appreciate who you are, as a child of God, where you have been, believe you are sincere and as a brother believe you are sincerely wrong.

 

[CopticChristian]

biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=+wisdom+fear+of+the+lord&qs_version=DRA

What does “fear of the Lord” include?
Peter was sent to the Roman officer’s home … against the fiber of everything that Peter stood for … Because God knew the man’s heart. The man had a heart after God.

“Man looks on the outside … God looks on the heart.”

---

Whatever you do to the least of these … you do to me.

---

… Beloved, love one another. For love is of God… and everyone that loves is born of God … and knoweth God … he who loveth not … knows not God … For God is love …
1John 2

---

God seeks his own … Jesus said of the Roman officer " I have not found faith like yours … in all of Israel". Jesus was seeking for those that had the insight to see truth … no matter what the world perceived them to be.

He who has ears ( the insight / wisdom given by the Holy Spirit ) to hear … let him hear

1voice,

I find you an enigma. I personally do not like that website for bible verses. I prefer this one because in an instant I can get to the Greek, parallel translations and commentaries.

biblos.com/bhs.htm

Amen

 

[CopticChristian]

Something seems slightly odd about this to me. I should think that Catholics also learn by oral tradition by virtue of the fact that they understand the entirety of the faith as including both the Bible and extra-Biblical oral and written tradition (as is right; see 2 Thessalonians 2:15). Protestants in general claim to reject any extra-Biblical tradition of either type (though in practice there is certainly something we could call “Presbyterian Tradition”, “Baptist Tradition”, etc., it is just not generally recognized as such).

And I’m not sure how you’d define a leap of faith, but the idea of anyone being a Christian of any kind without at least the occasional reliance on faith over natural or other logic (and comfort!) just strikes me as sad. It seems very alien to Christianity in any way we look at it (practice, history, etc.), and is certainly alien to my personal experience of it. And I am in no way a Protestant.

What may be odd is Oral Tradition vs oral tradition. Reflect on that and then reread.

What may be odd is that what Protestant reject verbally, in practice, does not hold up:shrug:.

What is a leap of Faith is a good question. Since I did not bring it up it is not for me to define. It is for the writer to define. I found this notion not consistent with my experience so I don’t have to define it. There are times when everyone questions something. Lord help not my belief, help my unbelief. This is part and parcel of our journey.

Since you say you after 5,000 plus posts that you are not Protestant, what do you believe. I see that you choose to be without identity.

 

[dzheremi]

I am a catechumen in the Coptic Orthodox Church, not that this has anything to do with what I posted.

Anyway, you wrote that you don’t recall any leaps of faith, so obviously you have some working definition of what a leap of faith is. I’d be interested to read what that is, because again it seems odd to find a Christian who would argue against such things.

 

[CopticChristian]

I am a catechumen in the Coptic Orthodox Church, not that this has anything to do with what I posted.

Anyway, you wrote that you don’t recall any leaps of faith, so obviously you have some working definition of what a leap of faith is. I’d be interested to read what that is, because again it seems odd to find a Christian who would argue against such things.

One of the common objections I have heard from non-Christians and ex-Christians is that Christianity is essentially a western religion,

I routinely argue against this. Christianity is an Eastern religion. Jesus was an Asian Jew. This is difficult for Protestants to swallow as their understanding is western, primarily as a result of white, europeans that developed their Protestant thought.

I am not arguing against anything. I am not inclined to enter into a discussion about a topic I did not generate. I find the topic “leap of faith” without merit. I mentioned it as a counter to what was written.

Would you prefer that I restate this, " I am not sure how you define a leap of faith, I recall no leaps in my experience"…does that work for you?