Catholics: Do you want Protestants on the Mission Field?

[Gottle_of_Geer]

ComradeAndrei:

Protestant missionaries ruin the fairly good unity that the Catholic Church has established in Central and South America. They go down there and introduce their fractional sects into Catholic territory and end up infecting these lands with the same mess that goes on in America.

Plus, protestantism (namely the more Americanized brands) don’t work with local cultures the way Catholicism does. They introduce American protestantism lock, stock, and barrel to these people.

If it’s the US Fundamentalist variety, that’s no wonder - US Fundamentalism is far from the whole of US Protestantism: which is itself a very small part of Protestantism world-wide. IMO, it’s just a pity that the US has inflicted Fundamentalism on the world. (Though it is not wholly or purely to blame. The finished product is of US vintage, such as it now is.)​

All cultures are local. And some cultures have been Protestant for centuries. The Italian Waldensians have been separate from Rome for almost 800 years, and Protestant for 470, despite frequent and bloody persecution. If longevity is any test, Italian Waldensian Protestantism has done pretty well for a Protestant Chuch in an overwhelmingly Catholic envirionment. ##

Plus, how is protestantism supposed to work with sola scriptura when quite a few of these folks can’t read? You can’t hardly have the Bible as your sole authority when you can read it, but I suppose that the Pastor’s opinion is just as good…

Since that is a straw man, no further comment is necessary. Except to say that to judge all Protestantism in the world by treating US Fundamentalism as typical, is no way to understand Sola Scriptura. Any more than treating Voodoo Catholicism as typical is a good way to understand the Catholic doctrine of the Church.​

 

[amanda_nicole82]

I haven’t visited the boards for awhile and I see that I have several responses to my post. Frankly, I stopped reading them after the first few, as you all have the same negative reaction. It is extremelly arrogant of you all to say that God should only work through Catholics. Please give HIm more credit than that. I believe He can work through anyone who is willing to let Him - no matter what their denomination. It’s not about “just tell them about Jesus and leave the rest up to them”, it’s about “just tell them about Jesus and leave the rest up to Him(God).” (Protestant missionaries don’t just hand them a Bible by the way, they inform them of the plan of salvation (you know, about how to have eternal life)). I confess I don’t understand everything, but the one thing I am certain of is that it is all about Christ. He came to tear down a complex system of laws and regulations, and His message was one of faith. He came to save the world, so that whoever believes in Him will live forever (not whoever believes in the Catholic Church). Just my opinion, I think that it is time that some of you started to give God more credit. Let Him work in all of us throughout the world, not just who YOU think is worthy. Because I think that God has a different idea of who is worthy than most of you do, and I believe that we will see that in Heaven. I pray that we all learn to have more faith in Him (including myself), and to not concern ourselves with worldly ideas. Go ahead and argue this post, as I know most of you will. However, I will not come back to read your responses. I have better things to do than to debate with all of you who is worthy and who is not. I have work to do for the Lord (because I am His child and in His eyes I am worthy of His love because He laid down His life for me). That’s right, He laid down His life for ME, a (gasp) Protestant, just as He laid down His life for you! I’m sorry if this has offended you, but it is the truth. Pick up a Bible (God’s Word) and see for yourself. BTW, I believe that all who accept the Truth are children of God (not just people from my Baptist Church, but people from the Catholic church, and other denominations who accept the Truth as well).
In Christ,
Amanda

 

[b_justb]

amanda_nicole82:

… It is extremelly arrogant of you all to say that God should only work through Catholics. Please give HIm more credit than that. I believe He can work through anyone who is willing to let Him - no matter what their denomination.

I agree God can, does, has and will continue to work through whom He wishes. One of most favorite expressions, albeit tongue in cheek is: “If God can use Bala’ams donkey to get His message across, I guess he can use any other *** He chooses to do the same.”

amanda_nicole82:

It’s not about “just tell them about Jesus and leave the rest up to them”, it’s about “just tell them about Jesus and leave the rest up to Him(God).”

Do you think that people are guided along a certain path to know of God, or know more about Him? I think we are. And I think that being true then a person who is introduced to God, God’s grace and mercy in an incorrect or incomplete way walk down a spiritual path that is also incorrect or incomplete. This is my objection to Protestant Evangelism, it is incorrect and incomplete. I find the vast majority of American Protestant Evangelism is rooted in Gnostic ideology and “me-ism.” The idea that only if one knows he is saved is the only way is purely Gnostic and most un-Christian. The idea that worship is all about what one gets out of it rather than what one puts into it is wholly un-Christian, yet this is what I see in the American Protestant Evangelic movement. Why would anyone want to see heretical ideas spread to people as Christianity? Sounds hash I know, yet the truth often sounds harsh.

amanda_nicole82:

(Protestant missionaries don’t just hand them a Bible by the way, they inform them of the plan of salvation (you know, about how to have eternal life)).

Perfect! Then why isn’t God’s plan of salvation taught by Protestants? Where is the instrument of that salvation, His Church, in the Protestant “teachings”? It is left out and by doing so it is therefore incorrect and incomplete.

amanda_nicole82:

I confess I don’t understand everything, but the one thing I am certain of is that it is all about Christ. He came to tear down a complex system of laws and regulations, and His message was one of faith. He came to save the world, so that whoever believes in Him will live forever (not whoever believes in the Catholic Church).

Check your Scripture here – Christ came to FULFILL the law and the prophets not to tear anything down. He came to build, not destroy. We all live forever, where we live is another question. Do not the demons believe and shutter?

amanda_nicole82:

Just my opinion, I think that it is time that some of you started to give God more credit. Let Him work in all of us throughout the world, not just who YOU think is worthy. Because I think that God has a different idea of who is worthy than most of you do, and I believe that we will see that in Heaven. I pray that we all learn to have more faith in Him (including myself), and to not concern ourselves with worldly ideas. Go ahead and argue this post, as I know most of you will. However, I will not come back to read your responses. I have better things to do than to debate with all of you who is worthy and who is not. I have work to do for the Lord (because I am His child and in His eyes I am worthy of His love because He laid down His life for me). That’s right, He laid down His life for ME, a (gasp) Protestant, just as He laid down His life for you! I’m sorry if this has offended you, but it is the truth. Pick up a Bible (God’s Word) and see for yourself. BTW, I believe that all who accept the Truth are children of God (not just people from my Baptist Church, but people from the Catholic church, and other denominations who accept the Truth as well).
In Christ,
Amanda

Well if you don’t return to read so be it. Peace all the same.

-B.

 

[scylla]

If by some chance you do read this, please read my earlier posts. I have seen many of your posts previously which assert that Catholics somehow discriminate or think that Protestants are damned. If you look carefully then you will see that the majority of Catholics see Protestants as their separated bretheren. Just look at the Billy Graham thread.
What Catholics really oppose is division. It is a horrible thing, like divorce. Fundamentalism is a minority here in the United States, but there is a very active missionary effort pushing the ideas of fundamentalist Christianity, with of course varying degrees of it from evangelical and other non-denominational churches.
Now if this produced a unified stronger faith in some places like Latin America this would be a good thing. Unfortunately you see division, sects and independant churches coming out of this. I would research the new denominations being founded in Latin America and see what you come up with, it is shameful sometimes.
The good thing is this, there is a common tendancy for people to be renewed in the faith, they start studying getting closer to God and often after study they come back to the Catholic Church. Some of the most active people in Parishes are the converts back to the Catholic Church.
Look at people like Tim Staples, Scott Hahn, Jesse Romero, Marcus Grodi and others who have studied their way back in. So I am a little torn in opinion. Sometimes it is very good as some people would never have a real relationship with Jesus without evangelization, some come back renewed.
I wont mention all the negatives as others have and this post is getting too long, but I just want to give you a better perspective on how Catholics see this. We don’t think that Protestants are not worthy, I believe they are again my brothers and sisters in Christ.

God Bless
Scylla

(this is close to my heart as my wife’s uncle left his wife and family behind to be a pastor for 'Iglesia universal del reino de Dios", just look up IURD Bishop Macedo )

 

[ComradeAndrei]

If it’s the US Fundamentalist variety, that’s no wonder - US Fundamentalism is far from the whole of US Protestantism: which is itself a very small part of Protestantism world-wide. IMO, it’s just a pity that the US has inflicted Fundamentalism on the world. (Though it is not wholly or purely to blame. The finished product is of US vintage, such as it now is.)

I do tend to be a bit over generalizing when it comes to protestantism, but it is sort of hard not to when there are so many different flavors and persuasions.

When Martin Luther really got the ball rolling for protestantism, there was really nothing stopping it from turning into everything from High Church Anglicanism to backwoods U.S. fundamentalists. That is the problem. Put that on the dominantly Catholic Central and South America and we have problems. Catholicism has already won these people to Christ, we don’t need anyone trying to convert them to one of the multitudes of protestant sects.

 

[Forest-Pine]

surf(name removed by moderator)ure:

That’s exactly right. I might feel different, perhaps, about Protestant missionaries going into some entirely unevangelized civilization (“deepest, darkest Africa,” and such), but I am strictly opposed to Protestant missionaries traveling to largely Catholic countries simply to convert the “lost” Catholics.

An interesting point which hasn’t been discussed yet that always gets my head spinning is this:

Is it more important to evangelize those who have never heard of Christ, or those who have and have not yet accepted him?

The argument goes that someone who has never heard of Christ is not culpable, whereas someone who has rejected him (and his fullness of truth) is. So, by this argument, deepest, darkest Africa would be the last place to evangelize. From a prot point of view, Catholics probably would rank pretty high on the list.

I was once in a Baptist church during a visit from missionaries to Africa whose sole mission was converting Catholics. I thought to myself how pointless it was to try to convert people who had already accepted Christ when there were so many out there who had never heard his message. Then they told the congregation about their efforts and tactics to many nods and "preach it!"s and such. Did you guys know that we don’t think Jesus rose from the grave? (The alter is really his sealed tomb…) And he never came off the cross. (Since he’s still on the crucifix… I suppose he was bilocating between cross and grave) and the more you pay, the closer you get to sit to the front of church…(wha?) The Holy Spirit was so palpable inside me hearing these lies that I (a normally complacent person when listening to the humor that went on in that church) stood up and decried the blantant lies before leaving. I’ve never stepped foot in a Prot church since. So close, and yet so far away.

So what do you think: Is it more important to evangelize those who have never heard of Christ, or those who have and have not yet accepted him?

 

[Vincent1560]

ComradeAndrei:

I do tend to be a bit over generalizing when it comes to protestantism, but it is sort of hard not to when there are so many different flavors and persuasions.
.

I am an evangelical non-denominational protestant and would like to take a crack at this. First of all I believe that everyone who believes in Jesus Christ and accepts him as Lord is saved regardless of wether or not they properly understand certain truths and scriptures. I also believe that a proper understanding of issues beyond John 3:16-17 is very important in terms of being an effective witness of God’s love and a fulfiller of the great commssion. Thus as far as Catholics and Protestants co-evangelizing I think we need to cooperate and pray for each others’ success in winning converts to Christ and for those converts, once they are grounded enough we can explain our differences while assuring them that we are both part of the same faith but have sincerely come to different conclusions on certain matters and that these are not salvational issues. Two verses I think we should all keep in mind:

**Acts 5 34 Then one in the council stood up, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law held in respect by all the people, and commanded them to put the apostles outside for a little while. 35 And he said to them: “Men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you intend to do regarding these men. 36 For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody. A number of men, about four hundred, joined him. He was slain, and all who obeyed him were scattered and came to nothing. 37 After this man, Judas of Galilee rose up in the days of the census, and drew away many people after him. He also perished, and all who obeyed him were dispersed. 38 And now I say to you, keep away from these men and let them alone; for if this plan or this work is of men, it will come to nothing; 39 but if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it–lest you even be found to fight against God.”
**

Inotherwords by their fruits you shall know them. In this case both Catholics and Protestants have produced fruit for Christ. I don’t think anyone has a monopoly on being the true church, because the true Church is the body of Christ which is all believers. (1 Corinthians 12:27) A caveot, I do believe that doctrinal unity is very desirable as evidenced by the scriptures warnings against divisions. But Catholics cannot claim to have always gotten it right, and neither can protestants. Many Catholic parishes act like break off denominations and have varying degrees of toleration for homosexuality, abortion, liberal scripture interpretation etc. In fact I would say that conservative Catholic parishes have far more agreement with evangelical churches than they do with liberal parishes. Furthermore Luther’s protestant reformation would not have been possible save for the great corruption found in the Catholic Church at the time. Many priests were barely literate and understood about as much of the Latin they were reciting as the parishoners, bishops squeezed the peasants dry and were rarely accomplished theologians and far more often the second sons of nobles looking for power and wealth. Indulgences, inquisitions and other exploitations of the flock all occured. Protestants on the otherhand have behaved just as badly in the past (i.e. wanting to get a divorce is not sufficient reason to break apart a Church). Protestants including fellow evangelicals have demonized Catholics, described them as unsaved and not Christian and suggested the pope may be the anti-Christ. No one is without guilt. Despite all this evil and corruption Christ’s promise has held true. The church, body of believers has not perished, and Godly people Protestants and Catholics alike, by the grace of God, have done remarkable things in the furtherance of the Great Comission. That said it is a tragedy that we are split and divided as we are and I pray that all Christian people will be able to resolve their differences and provide a consistant message on all levels. This is the will of God as revealed by Paul’s frequent exhortations against divisions. But until that day I think we should remember the Scripture when we are before unbelievers or those just coming into a relationship with Christ,

Romans 14:1 Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things.

after all

1 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

 

[surfinpure]

Vincent1560:

…once they are grounded enough we can explain our differences while assuring them that we are both part of the same faith but have sincerely come to different conclusions on certain matters and that these are not salvational issues.

First off, Vincent, thank you for your kind effort. I do believe that while our beliefs are very different on many fronts, we do have the same goals in mind. There is certainly grace in that.

Herein lies the difficulty, as I see it. It is a very big generalization to say that we are part of the same faith, because from the Catholic point of view, we have the entire faith and Protestants only a portion of that. One of the Catholics’ concerns is that the entire faith be spread, not just some of the major pieces. Also, it can be argued that there are in fact salvational issues that separate us from our Protestant brethren. Much of this depends on the scale of knowledge and ignorance, but to say that they are not salvational is, I believe, fallacious, as Catholics do believe that there is a bit more to salvation than what the Protestant faiths purport.

 

[ComradeAndrei]

But Catholics cannot claim to have always gotten it right, and neither can protestants.

Depends on what you mean by “all right”. While I would certainly not say that protestants are incapable of doing good deeds etc., I cannot say that protestantism is equal to Catholicism. The Catholic position is that the Church is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. The fullness of truth is found only in the Catholic Church and anyone that will find themselves amongst the saved will have gotten there through the Catholic Church, despite-not because-of their doctrinical error. The Catholic Church reforms from within, the efforts of the “reformers” brought only schism and strife.

Therefore, in the mission fields, I cannot support the propagation of protestant errors-especially amongst already Catholic populations.

 

[Vincent1560]

surf(name removed by moderator)ure:

First off, Vincent, thank you for your kind effort. I do believe that while our beliefs are very different on many fronts, we do have the same goals in mind. There is certainly grace in that.

Herein lies the difficulty, as I see it. It is a very big generalization to say that we are part of the same faith, because from the Catholic point of view, we have the entire faith and Protestants only a portion of that. One of the Catholics’ concerns is that the entire faith be spread, not just some of the major pieces. Also, it can be argued that there are in fact salvational issues that separate us from our Protestant brethren. Much of this depends on the scale of knowledge and ignorance, but to say that they are not salvational is, I believe, fallacious, as Catholics do believe that there is a bit more to salvation than what the Protestant faiths purport.

Do you believe that people who do not accept the doctrine of the Real Presence are doomed to hell? Or that those who don’t believe in papal infallibility are going to hell? Of course all sin is worthy of death, but once you have accepted Christ’s forgivness and given your life to him, I seriously doubt he would damn you for misunderstanding the metaphyiscs of the Eucharist. A lot of these issues seem to me to be akin to Paul’s discussion of wether or not to eat meat sacrificed to idols/eat meat period. Read Romans 14. I find verses 3, 17 and 22 particularly enlightening.

**1 Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. 2 For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. 3 Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him. 4 Who are you to judge another’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand. 5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. Therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s. 9 For to this end Christ died and rose and lived again, that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living. 10 But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. 11 For it is written: “As I live, says the Lord, Every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall confess to God.” 12 So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. 13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way. 14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil; 17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19 Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another. 20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are pure, but it is evil for the man who eats with offense. 21 It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak. 22 Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. 23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin.
**

 

[Forest-Pine]

Vincent1560:

Do you believe that people who do not accept the doctrine of the Real Presence are doomed to hell? Read Romans 14. I find verses 3, 17 and 22 particularly enlightening.

Interesting that you quote Romans 14! I just used that in another thread about vegetarianism not being required of Christians. I think it is interesting that you chose it because I, too, put a great amount of stock in oikonomia, or common good, as Paul did. There is an interesting discussion on this topic you might like at AllExperts. In this context, however, I think it important to point out two things:

1. We’re talking first generation here. They were still working things out and Paul was saying it was better to have good community spirit between Christians who follow Jewish law and Gentiles who did not. We’re a bit beyond that now. As Sister Laurel pointed out to her questioner (who was entertaining a non-Catholic friend’s dietary restrictions):

"(Remember that at Jesus institution of the Eucharist, a number were scandalized and refused to follow him on precisely this point). In any case, your praxis is guided by the current demands of oikonomia and reflect the compromise of Acts 15 (etc). It also reflects Paul’s observation that he is a “Jew to Jews, and a Roman to Romans”, acting in ways which do not scandalize those whom he calls “weaker” or “less mature” in the faith. (I mean no offense to your friends here!!). However, this is a praxis meant eventually to be transcended for the remainder of Paul’s statement reads, “I became a Jew to Jews, IN ORDER TO WIN THE JEWS.” While you are following the first portion of the statement, you still need to bear in mind the reason in the second portion, and bear the temporary nature of your solution in mind.

1. As stated above, Paul was clear in Romans that the ones who were teaching and living errant doctrine were weaker in faith. They had not yet come to a fullness of knowledge and he was willing to make compromises in order that he win them over to the fullness of truth we have in Jesus Christ.

I agree that we must be sympathetic to our Protestant siblings who are not operating in the fullness of truth but who do so with sincere hearts desiring to please the Lord. However, the weakest in faith are not the ones best inclined to teaching and preaching in His name. While many individual Catholics would not be well-equipped for the ministry as their own faith was still too immature, Protestants as a whole have a major disadvantage in that their doctrine purposefully keeps them from coming to a fullness of faith.

 

[surfinpure]

Forest-Pine:

However, the weakest in faith are not the ones best inclined to teaching and preaching in His name.

Very well put, Forest-Pine.

Vincent, surely you have read what Catholics believe necessary for salvation, as well as exemption from judgment based on ignorance. If not, there are many good threads here on the forum (not to mention articles) that deal with the subject. I don’t go into it so much here because it is off the topic of this particular thread.

I will go so far as to say that I believe a Roman Catholic may be morally culpable for supporting the spreading of an incomplete Gospel. After all, half-truths can be more dangerous than outright lies. I therefore am cautious not to encourage Protestant missionaries.

 

[scylla]

No-one here is saying not believing in the Eucharist or parts of the Catholic faith will doom you to hell. That is not the point of the majority of the posters here. What people do not want is the spread of dis-order. They want unity preached. They don’t want people to go and attack Catholicism in other countries.

One of the easiest things for missionaries to do is go to another country and attack Catholicism. Most of these Catholics in predominantly Catholic countries are not used to defend their faith. So they are easy pickings for people accusing them of being unbiblical for doing things like calling their priests father.
catholic.com/thisrock/1994/9407vbv.asp

I have family in Mexico who love Jesus and live devoutly, but since they only have one small lds church, one tiny evangelical church and the Catholic one. They cannot defend their faith as missionaries haven’t really been visiting this small town. They just turn away the Jehovah’s Witnesses. If I was malicious I could attack and confuse them, is this right?
What most people have a problem with here is the attack on unity. I would much rather them come to my house and say, “lets pray together” than tell me I am a pagan.

I am not condemning you to hell, I never saw Surf(name removed by moderator)ure doing that, but rather promoting that Catholic believe in a little more and believe that truth is not opinion. Things are either right or wrong. Unfortunately the culture of today promotes an idea that, opinion determines what is right or wrong.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Vincent1560]

Forest-Pine:

Interesting that you quote Romans 14! I just used that in another thread about vegetarianism not being required of Christians. I think it is interesting that you chose it because I, too, put a great amount of stock in oikonomia, or common good, as Paul did. There is an interesting discussion on this topic you might like at AllExperts. In this context, however, I think it important to point out two things:

1. We’re talking first generation here. They were still working things out and Paul was saying it was better to have good community spirit between Christians who follow Jewish law and Gentiles who did not. We’re a bit beyond that now. As Sister Laurel pointed out to her questioner (who was entertaining a non-Catholic friend’s dietary restrictions):

"(Remember that at Jesus institution of the Eucharist, a number were scandalized and refused to follow him on precisely this point). In any case, your praxis is guided by the current demands of oikonomia and reflect the compromise of Acts 15 (etc). It also reflects Paul’s observation that he is a “Jew to Jews, and a Roman to Romans”, acting in ways which do not scandalize those whom he calls “weaker” or “less mature” in the faith. (I mean no offense to your friends here!!). However, this is a praxis meant eventually to be transcended for the remainder of Paul’s statement reads, “I became a Jew to Jews, IN ORDER TO WIN THE JEWS.” While you are following the first portion of the statement, you still need to bear in mind the reason in the second portion, and bear the temporary nature of your solution in mind.

1. As stated above, Paul was clear in Romans that the ones who were teaching and living errant doctrine were weaker in faith. They had not yet come to a fullness of knowledge and he was willing to make compromises in order that he win them over to the fullness of truth we have in Jesus Christ.

I agree that we must be sympathetic to our Protestant siblings who are not operating in the fullness of truth but who do so with sincere hearts desiring to please the Lord. However, the weakest in faith are not the ones best inclined to teaching and preaching in His name. While many individual Catholics would not be well-equipped for the ministry as their own faith was still too immature, Protestants as a whole have a major disadvantage in that their doctrine purposefully keeps them from coming to a fullness of faith.

Speaking as an evangelical Protestant, I can understand your concerns about Protestants’ evangelizing, I have had the same misgivings about Catholics. For instance while not a big deal in the US where monotheism is prevalent, I think the Catholic doctrine of praying to Saints and Mary for intercession and using statues and icons in devotional activities poses serious dangers to potential converts in third world countries with a history of idolatry and polytheistic religion. Combined with other theological doctrinal and theological issues I have with Catholism, I would prefer evangelism to be done by evangelicals and those of similar doctrine. However my overriding concern is that people have Christ. It is far better to have Christ than not have Christ, and the fact is that without working together to some degree it will be impossible or very difficult for Catholics and Protestants to fulfill the Great Commission. Part of my reasoning is that once someone has Christ, Christ will give the person the Spirit who will serve as a guide and mentor in discerning matters of theological truth. I think this is God’s will,

**Philippians 1 "15 Some indeed preach Christ even from envy and strife, and some also from good will: 16 The former preach Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains; 17 but the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel. 18 What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice. **

Thus despite our theological and doctrinal differences which are significant and important we should never be hesitant to rejoice that the message of the cross is being preached regardless of the means,

I Corinthians 1 “18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” Amen

 

[Vincent1560]

scylla:

No-one here is saying not believing in the Eucharist or parts of the Catholic faith will doom you to hell. That is not the point of the majority of the posters here. What people do not want is the spread of dis-order. They want unity preached. They don’t want people to go and attack Catholicism in other countries.

One of the easiest things for missionaries to do is go to another country and attack Catholicism. Most of these Catholics in predominantly Catholic countries are not used to defend their faith. So they are easy pickings for people accusing them of being unbiblical for doing things like calling their priests father.
catholic.com/thisrock/1994/9407vbv.asp

I have family in Mexico who love Jesus and live devoutly, but since they only have one small lds church, one tiny evangelical church and the Catholic one. They cannot defend their faith as missionaries haven’t really been visiting this small town. They just turn away the Jehovah’s Witnesses. If I was malicious I could attack and confuse them, is this right?
What most people have a problem with here is the attack on unity. I would much rather them come to my house and say, “lets pray together” than tell me I am a pagan.

I am not condemning you to hell, I never saw Surf(name removed by moderator)ure doing that, but rather promoting that Catholic believe in a little more and believe that truth is not opinion. Things are either right or wrong. Unfortunately the culture of today promotes an idea that, opinion determines what is right or wrong.

God Bless
Scylla

I do not believe truth is an opinion; it is an objective matter on which we diagree in several instances, but agree in many others. I also don’t condone trying to get people out of other churches. If a mature Catholic Christian came to me and asked my opinion on certain issues of Catholic teaching I would share it with him, but I am completley against trying to seek out Christians of Catholic churches to wrest them away, especially when dealing with new believers, because you are far more likely to do harm then good.

 

[surfinpure]

Vincent1560:

I also don’t condone trying to get people out of other churches. If a mature Catholic Christian came to me and asked my opinion on certain issues of Catholic teaching I would share it with him, but I am completley against trying to seek out Christians of Catholic churches to wrest them away, especially when dealing with new believers, because you are far more likely to do harm then good.

We do agree on this point. Would that all Protestants were as hesitant to proselytize Catholics.

 

[scylla]

Vincent1560, I wish more people of your mindset would contribute to forums on the internet.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Vincent1560]

scylla:

Vincent1560, I wish more people of your mindset would contribute to forums on the internet.

God Bless
Scylla

Thank You. I have been encouraged by recent cooperation amongst Catholics and Protestants for the common good, the pro-life movement especially. I just feel that if we can cooperate in political and moral matters we can also cooperate in sharing the love to be found in Jesus with those who have not yet received it. It is just so depressing thinking of living life without having Christ dwell within you in and having an eternal hope. I would see as many people cured from such an incomplete life as is possible, and if that means they will learn a bit of incorrect theology, so be it. God is faithful.