Do modern Protestants know what they are protesting?

[clem456]

You know I’m not making light of it, but how do you know you are in the right church? I suspect our answers would be similar.

I go to God, and He definitely has the power and capability to convict, lead, and guide. Again, it is what the Catholic faithful believe about the pope and the magisterium I believe, and converts to Christianity understand conviction and guidance of the Spirit?

But no one sees God face to face. And that doesn’t detract from his power to convict, lead, and guide. We simply aren’t on the same plane as him.

Because we:

1. can’t see and hear God perfectly, and we:
2. can’t fathom scripture in a full and complete way (and that doesn’t mean Scripture is un-reasonable),
   I hear you suggesting that we rely on other persons as the “missing link” that gives our beliefs context, so that we might have confidence that our faith is true.

If your interpretation of Scripture ran afoul of your community, would you go through some self-examination with your community to discover where the contradictions lie?
What I am getting at is that God reveals himself through a community of human persons (thank you JP2) as well as through Scripture.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

The RCC is composed of individuals, such as the individual popes. At this point, it is the individual in the office of Pope; Francis that is considered to be convicted and guided by the Spirit in certain instances. Again, my belief is just one step removed.

A rather important step.

No, He corrected them, and that’s my point.

He corrected them through the Church Magisterium. That’s my point.

In fact, many didn’t take that correction. St. Paul still had to battle the Judaisers over and over again.

God is the Shepherd who herds His sheep, He’s also the Father who corrects His kids.

We’re not discussing that. We’re discussing just HOW He does this.
Scripture shows that He does this through His Church, and only on extremely rare occasions through an individual (think St. Catherine of Siena or St. Francis).

Please reread; God uses people to communicate truth,

Yes; and He has promised that St. Peter had the power to bind and loose, and through that power, the gates of Hell wouldn’t prevail against the Church.

but that truth cannot contradict other revelations from God.

In short, in today’s world, someone’s teaching cannot contradict scripture and be truth.

And, likewise, someone’s interpretation of scripture can’t contradict the teaching of the Magisterium and be true.

Someone tells me it’s OK to murder, and I can confidently tell them it isn’t. Murder directly contradicts scripture.

True. If the Church ever teaches that, then we can dispense with the Church.

 

[Kliska]

That’s fine and dandy when you are walking with the Word of God. But there are many passages in Scriptures that are not explicit and some are downright obscure.

The problem is that we cannot be our sole judge and jury. Our mind, sentiments, prejudices, desires will get in the way.

And that is why I don’t trust myself, I trust God. I know it is frustrating reading some of my replies because they seem… vague. I apologize for that, they aren’t meant to. When a sheep goes wandering and the Shepherd brings it home, it is the Shepherd that has done well, and has done what He loves. I’m a sheep, I’ve not claimed to be anything other than that. We know that feeling of conviction, and the knowledge that comes with it. Again you believe the Lord guides the RCC through the men He puts in positions, and if He has to, He will use His power to make sure the do not teach error. It is my belief that God is shaping each believer into the image of His Son. Part of that is something that no OT Saint had; the indwelling of the Spirit. Our relationship, those of us in His church, is more intimate and life changing than in times past. We have the Spirit, we have His word, we have relationship put right by the Son, and we have His promise that His sheep hear His voice. I believe in His capability to guide His church by guiding each believer. Part of our job is to get out of the way and listen to Him instead of our biases.

1. “teaching by others”.

This is exactly what we see in Scriptures. Only Prophets walked alone (mostly) and directly received instructions from God. The rest of us (unless you have been gifted with prophecy) learn from others. Yes, we learn on our own from the Spirit, but the moment we disagree in matters of Faith and Morals - contradictions are not an option. And either one of us is wrong or both of us are wrong.

I agree with this; but would point out, as above, the age of grace is different than what came before. He talked to humankind in diverse manners prior to the Son. After the Son, it has changed. We disagree on how it has changed, but we agree that it has.

1. “You were guided to the truth by the Spirit despite everyone else around you disagreeing with you”.

I understand what you are saying here. Not succumbing to peer pressure and having a very intimate relationship with the Holy Spirit.

But what happens when you find yourself against the Church of the Living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth? What’s your next step?

If I believed that, I’d be Roman Catholic. I’m not against the church, I am one of the ekklesia, a part of the church, a member of the body of Christ. As a member of the church, I hold up Jesus Christ as we are called to do; He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. I hold that up as on a pillar and shall go on defending and protecting truth, and that truth is Christ and Him crucified. The church is made up of all my brothers and sisters, whom I love and can’t wait to get to know on a very deep and fundamental level, God willing, in the ages to come.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

And that is why I don’t trust myself, I trust God. I know it is frustrating reading some of my replies because they seem… vague. I apologize for that, they aren’t meant to. When a sheep goes wandering and the Shepherd brings it home, it is the Shepherd that has done well, and has done what He loves. I’m a sheep, I’ve not claimed to be anything other than that. We know that feeling of conviction, and the knowledge that comes with it. Again you believe the Lord guides the RCC through the men He puts in positions, and if He has to, He will use His power to make sure the do not teach error. It is my belief that God is shaping each believer into the image of His Son. Part of that is something that no OT Saint had; the indwelling of the Spirit. Our relationship, those of us in His church, is more intimate and life changing than in times past. We have the Spirit, we have His word, we have relationship put right by the Son, and we have His promise that His sheep hear His voice. I believe in His capability to guide His church by guiding each believer. Part of our job is to get out of the way and listen to Him instead of our biases.

It’s not a matter of what Christ and do or not. He can do it all!!! But it’s more of what did He ordained? What did He actually do?

Let’s look at your favorite NT writer; Paul. What was the first thing that Paul did after an encounter with Christ?

If I believed that, I’d be Roman Catholic. I’m not against the church, I am one of the ekklesia, a part of the church, a member of the body of Christ.

I know you didn’t get [itchy] ears on your own accord

You could also be Eastern Catholic, Orthodox, or dare I say it? Anglican or Lutheran

As a member of the church, I hold up Jesus Christ as we are called to do; He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. I hold that up as on a pillar and shall go on defending and protecting truth, and that truth is Christ and Him crucified. The church is made up of all my brothers and sisters, whom I love and can’t wait to get to know on a very deep and fundamental level, God willing, in the ages to come.

Let’s start now! Let’s go to Mass, why wait?

 

[pablope]

But *why *

do you go to the RCC? Why *did *you go to the RCC? I would assume at some point you would say you were convicted and convinced?

I’ve answered it; God convicts and guides. He does so through scripture and also internal conviction.

But we know, from Scripture, through the example of St. Paul, He does not do so through Scripture.

Galatians 2:2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.

Even the Scriptures which you say is your rule or standard…contradicts using Scripture to use as a standard…from 1John 4… .6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

Scriptures does not say to read the Scriptures…but listen…to “us”…so the question is…who is the “us” that John is talking about?

 

[Kliska]

It’s not a matter of what Christ and do or not. He can do it all!!! But it’s more of what did He ordained? What did He actually do?

We agree on that bit. We do disagree on what He ordained.

Let’s look at your favorite NT writer; Paul. What was the first thing that Paul did after an encounter with Christ?

Let’s talk about the encounter first; he was doing wrong and killing Christians, who Jesus counted as Himself (meaning Paul was persecuting Jesus by persecuting Christians). So, Paul was clearly wrong and headed down the wrong path… until Jesus knocked him on his rear in the dirt and directly corrected him. So, the first thing he did was have to get up out of the dirt! Then Ananias came to find him… whom God sent directly.

I’m definitely not making light of the role of others in the life of the church, and spreading the gospel by proclaiming it, but I also truly believe, because of scripture and experience that God does play a direct and intimate role when it comes to His sheep and keeping them moving and on the right path. We both believe that, in fact, but we disagree on the “how.”

I know you didn’t get [itchy] ears on your own accord

You could also be Eastern Catholic, Orthodox, or dare I say it? Anglican or Lutheran

Ha! Itching ears indeed! If I go that far, it will surely be over the Tiber for me.

Let’s start now! Let’s go to Mass, why wait?

I’ve been to one, and only one, but if you lived around here, I’d go with you and thank you for the invite!

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Originally posted by Isaiah45_9
But what happens when you find yourself against the Church of the Living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth? What’s your next step?

Why wouldn’t you believe it? St. Paul said it, and it was written in scripture!

 

[Kliska]

Why wouldn’t you believe it? St. Paul said it, and it was written in scripture!

The part I don’t believe is that I’m against the Church; of course I’m not, I’m a part of the Church. I help act a pillar and bulwark of the Truth along with all of my brothers and sisters in Christ that make up the ekklesia or out-called ones that is the church; Who is Truth? Jesus Christ; His life, death, and resurrection. For He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

The part I don’t believe is that I’m against the Church; of course I’m not, I’m a part of the Church. I help act a pillar and bulwark of the Truth along with all of my brothers and sisters in Christ that make up the ekklesia or out-called ones that is the church; Who is Truth? Jesus Christ; His life, death, and resurrection. For He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

OK, but if scripture is to be followed, “the Church” in the scriptural context must be approachable and must be able to give a single, coherent answer.

Can I get a single, coherent answer on, say, infant baptism?

Yes, you can from the Catholic Church.

How about if I poll all the individual “brothers and sisters in Christ that make up the ekklesia”? Will I get a single, coherent answer?

Doesn’t the lack of a single, coherent answer make void the teachings of God?

 

[PRmerger]

But the question still remains, sister.

Where do you go to make sure you have a correct understanding of certain passages?
How does this work?

This is a question which ought to trouble anyone who has divorced himself from the Tradition which gave us these Scriptures.

Saying that God’s interpretation always happens to agree with my own personal interpretation (or vice verse) is the epitome of creating a god in one’s own image.

That is: I read Matthew 3. I pray. I decide it means “A”.
Someone else reads Matthew 3. She prays. She decides it means “Not-A”.

This ought to be very troubling indeed to anyone who says that prayer and the Holy Spirit are all one needs to come to a correct interpretation of Scripture.

Very troubling, indeed.

 

[steve_b]

Yes, of course, no one is disputing these facts.

a Catholic who knowing, that the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation and leaves the Church, there are grave consequences

g:

Yes, but it is wrong to ascribe to Lutherans the sin of Luther:

818 “However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers. . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.”

steve:

The statement "Who at present are born … " isn’t meant as a [for all time] permanent excuse for “them”. Nor does it cover those in those organizations who left the Catholic Church, or those unaffiliated individuals who are just shopping around. Once one knows the truth, **then **they need to respond to the truth as the CCC states.[846 (Catechism of the Catholic Church - Paragraph # 846) . And how are they to know the truth unless someone shows them?

g:

The ecclesial communities did, in the beginning, but the members of them today are not to be considered as such. We are not to charge them with the sin of separation. And frankly, one has to wonder why it seems so important for you to do so.

s:

It’s important because of the following

As I said above how are they to know the truth and in extension their error unless someone shows them?

Is it okay to leave them in error? In effect saying to them just go about your business, be good protestants and I will be a good Catholic and kumbaya?

Is that loving one’s neighbor? One’s brother or sister in Christ?

I obviously think it’s important for Catholics to step up to the plate and make a difference here.

Protestants ARE in schism. They ARE one of [The Great Heresies (http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-great-heresies) . That’s NOT okay. If one innocently is ignorant of their own situation, then they are not guilty of those serious sins that is **until **such time they **DO **know , or should have known but didn’t take the effort or take the subject seriously. At that point they are no longer innocent but guilty CCC [1791 (Catechism of the Catholic Church - Paragraph # 1791)

We’re here because we take this seriously and because we take Jesus commands seriously

which is to

• love God with your whole heart soul mind and strength
• love your neighbor as yourself

That means we want for THEM what we have ourselves

 

[steve_b]

Lumen Gentium 16

Show me where this section answers my question?

“16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God.(18*) In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh.(125) On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues.(126) But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.(128) Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.(19*) Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel.(20*) She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life. But often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator.(129) Or some there are who, living and dying in this world without God, are exposed to final despair. Wherefore to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all of these, and mindful of the command of the Lord, “Preach the Gospel to every creature”,(130) the Church fosters the missions with care and attention.”
I:

(Bold mine)

You cannot force people to betray their conscience in seeking with an honest intention to please God and to serve Christ. You would be denying the God given gift of free will.

Dominus Iesus also explains the salvific mystery of Christ in other denominations and individuals.

Like I have been saying. What is easy and obvious to you - is not easy and obvious to others.

Who is advocating forcing anyone? Free will is what makes us culpable for what we do. No free will no culpability.

 

[Kliska]

OK, but if scripture is to be followed, “the Church” in the scriptural context must be approachable and must be able to give a single, coherent answer.

In some respects, yes, mainly in the area of Jesus. They already had the OT scriptures and Judaism. The key was Jesus; His life, death and resurrection. The witness to that truth made the rest fall in line. There are certain areas that the church is not seen to be the end all and be all of answers, in the area of particle physics for example.

One of the differences that you and I see (or don’t see) in scripture is this idea that the church is monolithic, and that is has a myriad teachings that it is responsible for and that it shall never ever err on those teachings, that there is no room for disagreement (Paul shows that is not true). It is the Spirit that is infallible, and is the guide, and comforter.

Jesus asked if He shall find faith on the earth when He returns, further, we are warned and warned and warned that the church and those in it are actually capable of erring (even Paul); those warnings would not be needed if we were assured of always having an infallible leader. In short, from my pov, scripture does not indicate the characteristics of the church in the way the RCC teaches. So, the differences in opinion that we see today, such as about infant baptism, doesn’t negate sola scriptura… it underscores it. If a game of telephone has the word written down at the beginning, when in doubt about what the word was, we look at what was written. John obviously saw the need to write things down for the church to read and know what was true, he certainly was not reliant on just verbal transmission.

Doesn’t the lack of a single, coherent answer make void the teachings of God?

No, there’s been wolves in the church from the beginning, the gospel is contained… in the gospel as recorded in scripture.

As I said, I don’t want to rip into the same ol’ debates. I do appreciate the opportunity to explain my position though and the civil dialogue. I understand why we disagree, even from scripture, and human nature.

Grace and Peace,
K

 

[Isaiah45_9]

…

Please forgive me if I have offended you.

 

[steve_b]

I am curious, how you make this leap from the Church’s proclamation of truth, to damnation, that disposition of a person’s soul
which belongs to God alone.

817 In fact, “in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church -…”

If you’d like I’ll give all the scripture passages that condemn heresy, schism, division from the Catholic Church as it condemns the one who does it. And there is no expiration date to those warnings and consequences. Since it is in scripture it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. And the HS gets all He teaches from Jesus John 16:12-15 which means Jesus, the judge of all, is telling us in advance, how He will judge those sins if one dies in them.

 

[PRmerger]

The part I don’t believe is that I’m against the Church; of course I’m not, I’m a part of the Church.

Of course. Just imperfectly joined to it.

I help act a pillar and bulwark of the Truth along with all of my brothers and sisters in Christ that make up the ekklesia or out-called ones that is the church;

This is a problem, though, when all the brothers and sisters are professing different, and often contrary beliefs.

The Truth cannot contradict itself.

So either the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, or it is the most monstrous claim in the world.

Either the pope is the vicar of Christ, or he has assumed an office which no man can claim–another monstrous assertion.

Either God hates homosexuals, or he loves them. Both cannot be true. Yet there are putative members of His ecclesia who claim the former.

Both black and red assertions cannot be true.

Both cannot claim to represent the teachings of Christ.

There is no way to reconcile this in your paradigm, Kliska.

 

[guanophore]

You didn’t answer my question. Let me say it this way. Quote the Church document that says I as a Catholic can change allegiance and become Lutheran with no consequence to my soul?

I can’t imagine why you would make such a demand of JonNC, or any other Lutheran on CAF,for that matter. Has any Lutheran here implied that any Catholic should leave the Roman communion? Or that if they did, there would be no consequences?

It sounds like a strawman to me.

 Those books you list are NOT canonical to Luther.

Fortunately Luther is not authorized to edit the canon.

And fortunately the Lutheran Confessions do not do so, which leaves Lutherans in a position to be able to easily return to the historical canon (Septugint) used by the Apostles.

That means “canon”. He had the Vulgate. That’s the canon that has been in place since the council of Rome in 382. It’s the same canon we have today. 20 versions of that bible were printed "in German " before Luther printed his bibel.

I would say that the canon goes even further back from that time, since Jesus and the Apsotles quoted from the Septuagint, the early councils had identified the NT a century and more before the Council of Rome.

All this makes it more incredible that Luther would consider taking out any NT books, as well as OT.

Excuse me? “These books” of the Apocrypha, wrote Luther, “are not held equal to the Scriptures.

That sure did seem to be his opinion. I hope you are not painting modern Lutherans into a corner to defend it!

He affected all of protestantism.

And still does, sadly. Sola Scriptura being one of the most damaging.

 

[guanophore]

I’ve seen many threads here that show that Catholics believe converts are guided to their church via the Holy Spirit, if you can understand that, y’all can understand what I’m saying; Christians believe in the power of the Spirit to guide, I’m not alone in that belief.

Yes. But we also believe that the HS does not contradict Himself, so that, even though we all believe we are being led by the Spirit, some of us are getting that Truth interfered with by our own fallen human perceptions. Since denominations espouse opposing beliefs, we can only conclude that someone is not “hearing” the HS sufficiently.

I believe 100% in the power of the Spirit to lead and guide, and I believe 100% in His faithfulness not to abandon even one of His sheep. I’m in fantastic hands, so are you.

Yes, God has mercy on all who call out to Him in faith, even if they are surrounded by many errors, also very sincere.

 

[Per_Crucem]

And fortunately the Lutheran Confessions do not do so, which leaves Lutherans in a position to be able to easily return to the historical canon (Septugint) used by the Apostles.

Interestingly, any time our Confessions refer to the deuterocanonical books, they are referred to as Scripture.

 

[steve_b]

You’re misrepresenting Luther here by imposing the Catholic understanding of ‘canon.’ I don’t think you did it on purpose (you’re a logical guy), so I’ll clarify for you. The original Luther quote you’re referencing is from one of his sermons on John 16 (a beautiful starting block for eventual reunion, if you ever get the chance to read the entire thing). It reads,

okay, Luther is no longer Catholic. And given his disposition he clearly shows to all, an “eventual reunion” even in his day has probably zero chance.
s:

Note that Luther does **not **say Scripture, but Word of God.

So then does he deny that scripture is the word of God?
s:

Luther (and Lutherans) do not understand Scripture to be, as Josh Strodbeck eloquently puts it, “just some final Table of Contents on which to draw up a dogma and so that we can excommunicate everyone who refuses to stop asking the historical questions, it’s to have a rule of faith for settling doctrinal disputes and the like.”

One then could ask, after Luther makes scriptural deductions and additions, who then is it, you’re basing your rule of faith on ?
s:

The Word of God to which Luther refers here is the Rule of Faith. Please don’t transpose the “Protestant” or post-Trent Catholic understandings of ‘canon’ and ‘Scripture’ onto the Lutheran understanding.

Just to be clear, are you contrasting protestant or post-Trent Catholic understanding of canon and scripture as opposed to Lutheran understanding of same]… as if Lutherans aren’t protestants or united with other protestants on this?

btw

• if we’re talking here about how Luther defind word of God, who’s authority is he operating under? He’s an excommunicated defrocked priest from the Catholic Church. He speaks for no one but himself
• Re: Trent and the canon, I forgot to give you one more piece of information. In 1442, 100+ years prior to Trent, the council of Florence Session 11 (1442) also canonized the same 73 books.
• Councils of Rome, Hippo, Carthage, Florence (ecumenical), Trent, that’s alot of councils canonizing the same books of scripture.

s:

We won’t defend either of those positions. Instead, please read Strodbeck’s link - I’ve yet to read a logical objection to the actual Lutheran understanding.

To be clear, are you denying Luther put 7 OT books into his apocrypha?
s:

I think you’re taking it to mean something negative. The LCMS link you quoted is one that I originally posted. So I’ll repost them here for your response and contemplation:

Post by steido01:
Used in the liturgy, used in the hymnody. Occasionally spoken during readings in some Lutheran churches. What more does it need? **So Lutherans don’t afford those books the same level [of authority] as the four Gospels, or other holy books. **

I think in a disguised way, that response answers my previous question. You’re following Luther’s lead on those books aren’t scripture, therefore because they don’t equal scripture, they are not valuable for doctrine.
s:

Catholics don’t either, really.

Not true.

They are Canonical books, and they are used for the explanation of doctrine.

For example

• praying for the dead, and purgatory, Maccabees
• the coming of Jesus described in Wisdom
• “Therefore let us lie in wait for the righteous; because he is not for our turn, and he is clean contrary to our doings: he upbraided us with our offending the law, and objecteth to our infamy the transgressions of our education. He professeth to have the knowledge of GOD: and he calleth himself the child of the Lord. He was made to reprove our thoughts. He is grevious unto us even to behold: for his life is not like other men’s, his ways are of another fashion. We are esteemed of him as counterfeits: he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness: he pronounceth the end of the just to be blessed, and maketh his boast that GOD is his Father. Let us see if his words be true; and let us prove what shall happen in the end of him. For if the just man be the Son of GOD, he will help him, and deliver him from the hand of his enemies. Let us examine him with despitefulness and torture, that we may know his meekness and prove his patience. Let us condemn him with a shameful death: for by his own saying he shall be respected.” Wisdom 2:12-20 ,