Do modern Protestants know what they are protesting?

[LDemontfort]

As a Catholic in an area with many non-Catholic’s I often hear that Martin Luther was a great man that saved the church through reformation. However, when the question is posed about the “need” for Martin Luther’s protest I hear explanations like… “Because the Catholic Church was corrupt” or “the church lost its authority”, et. Al. What I don’t understand, and my question is if the issue was corruption why change the dogma? If the issue was loss of authority, whether through corruption or some other reason, how do they explain Matthew 16:18. Would that not mean the church fell due to evil (“the gates of hell”)? If it did not fall then the teachings of the church were still sound, so why did Martin Luther (with no authority if his own) decide it truthful and appropriate to change teaching? If it did fall, how could that be, as it runs contrary to Jesus’s own words, which is “truth”?

 

[House_Harkonnen]

What I don’t understand, and my question is if the issue was corruption why change the dogma? If the issue was loss of authority, whether through corruption or some other reason, how do they explain Matthew 16:18. Would that not mean the church fell due to evil (“the gates of hell”)? If it did not fall then the teachings of the church were still sound, so why did Martin Luther (with no authority if his own) decide it truthful and appropriate to change teaching? If it did fall, how could that be, as it runs contrary to Jesus’s own words, which is “truth”?

We don’t believe that the church as whole fell, there was just rampant corruption in parts of it. We believe the church is the body of all believers existing where the sacraments are administered and the word is preached, that church can never fall per Jesus words. We believe we are a part of this church. What unfortunately happened was that many false teachings were brought in and had to be removed.

 

[NextElement]

My Protestant friend’s main protest with the Catholic Church is us “bowing before statues” and “confessing to a priest”. He doesn’t even know what the Nicene Creed is…

But the bottom line for most Protestants today is: 1) They were raised Protestant 2) Our mass just feels foreign to them. It’s our job as Catholics to try our best to explain why and how we do what we do.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Agree with House Harkonnen that these issues no longer apply. Protestants, particularly Anglican and Lutheran, are seeking closer ties with the Catholic Church.

 

[NextElement]

Agree with House Harkonnen that these issues no longer apply. Protestants, particularly Anglican and Lutheran, are seeking closer ties with the Catholic Church.

But yet the Anglicans allow women to be ordained priests and same-sex marriage in their Church.

 

[mjwise]

But yet the Anglicans allow women to be ordained priests and same-sex marriage in their Church. (EDITED)

Sorry, this is rude. It says right on the forum rules that it is out of bounds to question the sincerity of someone’s religious belief, no matter how wrong-headed you think it is.

EDIT: Thank you.

 

[NextElement]

Sorry, this is rude. It says right on the forum rules that it is out of bounds to question the sincerity of someone’s religious belief, no matter how wrong-headed you think it is, and to call Anglicans secret agnostics is way over that line.

You’re right. Edited.

 

[johnnyc176]

c

Sorry, this is rude. It says right on the forum rules that it is out of bounds to question the sincerity of someone’s religious belief, no matter how wrong-headed you think it is.

EDIT: Thank you.

Baloney…there is only one Truth. We as Catholics are called to proclaim the Truth of Jesus Christ and the Church that He founded, the Catholic Church. Jesus Christ and His Church are One and the Same. Many protestants profess to love Jesus but they do not follow Him. They separate Jesus from His Church. That is the hard Truth. This is a Catholic forum and we are called to give a defense of the One True Church.

 

[robwar]

As a Catholic in an area with many non-Catholic’s I often hear that Martin Luther was a great man that saved the church through reformation. However, when the question is posed about the “need” for Martin Luther’s protest I hear explanations like… “Because the Catholic Church was corrupt” or “the church lost its authority”, et. Al. What I don’t understand, and my question is if the issue was corruption why change the dogma? If the issue was loss of authority, whether through corruption or some other reason, how do they explain Matthew 16:18. Would that not mean the church fell due to evil (“the gates of hell”)? If it did not fall then the teachings of the church were still sound, so why did Martin Luther (with no authority if his own) decide it truthful and appropriate to change teaching? If it did fall, how could that be, as it runs contrary to Jesus’s own words, which is “truth”?

point out this, Martin Luther was excommunicated because he refused to recant from the errors he was beginning to teach. Also point out that there have been many a saint that faced morally corrupt Church leadership and didn’t break with the Church but cause the church leadership to reform. Among these are St. Francis of Assisi, St. Catherine of Sienna, St. Bridget of Sweden. These saints and many others didn’t break with the Catholic Church but brought reform and revival. Against point out to people that bring up Martin Luther needed to brake away that in fact he was ex-communicated. Also bring up that Martin Luther wrote violent things especially concerning the Jews and if he was so great, why at the end of his life would he describe a six step plan to eliminate them which was used by Hitler. This should shut them up.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

point out this, Martin Luther was excommunicated because he refused to recant from the errors he was beginning to teach. Also point out that there have been many a saint that faced morally corrupt Church leadership and didn’t break with the Church but cause the church leadership to reform. Among these are St. Francis of Assisi, St. Catherine of Sienna, St. Bridget of Sweden. These saints and many others didn’t break with the Catholic Church but brought reform and revival. Against point out to people that bring up Martin Luther needed to brake away that in fact he was ex-communicated. Also bring up that Martin Luther wrote violent things especially concerning the Jews and if he was so great, why at the end of his life would he describe a six step plan to eliminate them which was used by Hitler. This should shut them up.

Speaking of Brigitta:

Modern abbey[edit]

A new monastery of Bridgettine nuns was founded on the grounds of the ancient abbey in 1963, named Mary’s Peace (Latin: Pax Mariae). It was established from a Bridgettine abbey in the Netherlands, one of the four abbeys of the original branch of the Order, and currently numbers 13 nuns. In 1991 it was raised to the status of an autonomous abbey. Thus the Order founded by Saint Bridget has returned to its birthplace.

This devotional site, known as Blue Church, is visited by both Lutheran and Roman Catholic pilgrims.[3] The Brigittine nuns have a habit with the Crown of the Five Holy Wounds.[3] The monastery also holds Taizé prayer services."[3] Blue Church contains relics of Saint Bridget, and her body lies in a red-coloured casket and is tended to by devout Lutheran Christians.[4][3]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vadstena_Abbey

 

[House_Harkonnen]

point out this, Martin Luther was excommunicated because he refused to recant from the errors he was beginning to teach. Also point out that there have been many a saint that faced morally corrupt Church leadership and didn’t break with the Church but cause the church leadership to reform. Among these are St. Francis of Assisi, St. Catherine of Sienna, St. Bridget of Sweden. These saints and many others didn’t break with the Catholic Church but brought reform and revival. Against point out to people that bring up Martin Luther needed to brake away that in fact he was ex-communicated. Also bring up that Martin Luther wrote violent things especially concerning the Jews and if he was so great, why at the end of his life would he describe a six step plan to eliminate them which was used by Hitler. This should shut them up.

Also bring up that Martin Luther wrote violent things especially concerning the Jews and if he was so great, why at the end of his life would he describe a six step plan to eliminate them which was used by Hitler. This should shut them up.

It wouldn’t shut me up at all. I enjoy discussing my hero Martin Luther, especially his errant beliefs about Jews later in life. They were wrong of course, however early in his reforming career he was criticized by Eck as being TOO friendly towards Jews, either way, it’s not like the 16th century was a great time of tolerance towards Jewish folks from either Protestants or Catholics. Anyway, can you give us a source for this six point plan that was implemented by Hitler?

 

[MaryT777]

Sorry, this is rude. It says right on the forum rules that it is out of bounds to question the sincerity of someone’s religious belief, no matter how wrong-headed you think it is.

EDIT: Thank you.

This is not out of line. This does not question the sincerity of a religious belief but questions the validity of same sex marriage and women ordination which is within forum rules at least on non Catholic forum.

Mary.

 

[South_Bound]

As a Catholic in an area with many non-Catholic’s I often hear that Martin Luther was a great man that saved the church through reformation. However, when the question is posed about the “need” for Martin Luther’s protest I hear explanations like… “Because the Catholic Church was corrupt” or “the church lost its authority”, et. Al. What I don’t understand, and my question is if the issue was corruption why change the dogma? If the issue was loss of authority, whether through corruption or some other reason, how do they explain Matthew 16:18. Would that not mean the church fell due to evil (“the gates of hell”)? If it did not fall then the teachings of the church were still sound, so why did Martin Luther (with no authority if his own) decide it truthful and appropriate to change teaching? If it did fall, how could that be, as it runs contrary to Jesus’s own words, which is “truth”?

I prefer not to think of it as protesting, but as defending the Biblical doctrines of grace.

 

[South_Bound]

It wouldn’t shut me up at all. I enjoy discussing my hero Martin Luther, especially his errant beliefs about Jews later in life.

Do you mean about Jews in general? Or about the specific group of Jews to whom he was in discussions with? Because the idea that he was an anti-Semite has been debunked.

it’s not like the 16th century was a great time of tolerance towards Jewish folks from either Protestants or Catholics.

Tread lightly here. It’s my understanding from folks who have posted here, with whom I post on another board, that Protestants who discuss the Inquisition tend “disappear” pretty quickly.

 

[Publisher]

The designation of “Protestant” is used more now these days to deasignate those who are not Catholc or Orthodx or Mormon or ??? It has little to do with protesting the abuses of Catholicism. I don’t know one Protestant who even gives the meaning “protest against the Catholic church” , that’s more of a Catholic use of a word that never meant your definition in the first place

Most of us don’t give your church a second thought concerning its claims to authority nor of its unique beliefs .for lost of us the Catholic church is just one more claimant that they are the true church organization…for most of us it IS just another church organization,denomination…which I realize Catholics don’t see themselves as such, but you are in our eyes. Some are Roman, some are “Old” some are "
Eastern" … Some are “Orthodox” or “Copt” or a host of other denominations that distances themselves from one another fairly early in church history…each claiming it’s own leadership and tenets…“walks like a suck, quacks like a duck”.

I’ve never protested against the Catholc church…don’t know anyone who has:shrug:

 

[Richard_Feynman]

We don’t believe that the church as whole fell, there was just rampant corruption in parts of it. We believe the church is the body of all believers existing where the sacraments are administered and the word is preached, that church can never fall per Jesus words. We believe we are a part of this church. What unfortunately happened was that many false teachings were brought in and had to be removed.

Can you name a couple false teachings that needed to be taken out of the Catholic Church? I’m just curious what they are.

 

[benjohnson]

Can you name a couple false teachings that needed to be taken out of the Catholic Church? I’m just curious what they are.

From a Lutheran standpoint, our confessions indicate that the expanded (what we say) papal authority is a barrier to reunification.

Among minor things, Lutherans are uncomfortable with the practice of donating money to have a Mass, and the (what we feel) new revelations of events like Fatima strikes us as a bit odd.

Franky, even though we are separated,I would say that it’s much more in God’s will that we build each other up in Christ.

 

[faithfulwannabe]

The designation of “Protestant” is used more now these days to deasignate those who are not Catholc or Orthodx or Mormon or ??? It has little to do with protesting the abuses of Catholicism. I don’t know one Protestant who even gives the meaning “protest against the Catholic church” , that’s more of a Catholic use of a word that never meant your definition in the first place

Most of us don’t give your church a second thought concerning its claims to authority nor of its unique beliefs .for lost of us the Catholic church is just one more claimant that they are the true church organization…for most of us it IS just another church organization,denomination…which I realize Catholics don’t see themselves as such, but you are in our eyes. Some are Roman, some are “Old” some are "
Eastern" … Some are “Orthodox” or “Copt” or a host of other denominations that distances themselves from one another fairly early in church history…each claiming it’s own leadership and tenets…“walks like a suck, quacks like a duck”.

I’ve never protested against the Catholc church…don’t know anyone who has:shrug:

But you would agree that there’s authority in your house/family. Your father maybe the one hold authority, and then your mother, and then your eldest sibling. Perhaps.

As for Roman Catholic church, since he’s probably the eldest church around, we can’t just ignore it. Maybe your older brother did wrong in the past, or maybe he’s still doing wrong here and there, but like it or not, he’s still your brother. The same with Roman Catholic church I think. Unless you grew really dislike him & decided to disown him. But he’s still someone in your life.

Just my 2 cents, if I make any sense.

 

[pablope]

As a Catholic in an area with many non-Catholic’s I often hear that Martin Luther was a great man that saved the church through reformation. However, when the question is posed about the “need” for Martin Luther’s protest I hear explanations like… “Because the Catholic Church was corrupt” or “the church lost its authority”, et. Al. What I don’t understand, and my question is if the issue was corruption why change the dogma? If the issue was loss of authority, whether through corruption or some other reason, how do they explain Matthew 16:18. Would that not mean the church fell due to evil (“the gates of hell”)? If it did not fall then the teachings of the church were still sound, so why did Martin Luther (with no authority if his own) decide it truthful and appropriate to change teaching? If it did fall, how could that be, as it runs contrary to Jesus’s own words, which is “truth”?

Show them this article and recommend the book at the same time:

catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0097.html

Ask them why is it that a reformer, like Catherine of Siena, can counsel the pope and exhort him to reform without the need for being excommunicated?

 

[pablope]

From a Lutheran standpoint, our confessions indicate that the expanded (what we say) papal authority is a barrier to reunification.

It is a barrier if only you make it a barrier, isn’t it?

And can you suggest an alternative to papal authority? If not the pope, who is the alternative?

The reformers splintered among themselves already. Can you say the Reformation will succeed just by itself?

Among minor things, Lutherans are uncomfortable with the practice of donating money to have a Mass, and the (what we feel) new revelations of events like Fatima strikes us as a bit odd.