Give me your best argument AGAINST becoming Catholic.

[House_Harkonnen]

I’d just like to know why you are here at all. You seem to have nothing but disdain for the Catholic Church. What is your purpose in going through so much apparent aggravation?

I am here because I enjoy debate and I feel like I have been sharpened by the arguments presented here.

I also cross swords with evangelicals at another forum, so it’s not like I have a particular animus towards the RC denomination that is driving me to post here any more than I have a particular animus towards evangelicals. I have animus towards neither.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

Pray until you no longer feel the need to defend your choice to be a Protestant.

I only have defended my choice to be protestant when prompted to do so by Catholic apologists.

Perhaps I could pray until Catholic apologists no longer feel the need to prompt me to defend why I am a protestant.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Perhaps I could pray until Catholic apologists no longer feel the need to prompt me to defend why I am a protestant.

Then pray without ceasing, brother, for concern that you have left the Catholic Church and may be lost is very real indeed.

 

[CrossofChrist]

Then pray without ceasing, brother, for concern that you have left the Catholic Church and may be lost is very real indeed.

clarification

HH, we are concerned with your objective situation. Your personally guilt is something between you and God.

Something that’s often lost in discussions and can give the impression of judging other’s souls. Certainly not judging you Randy, just based off my own past experiences…

 

[Peter_J]

If I believe that the RCC denomination is the true one then I join it. If I believe some other denomination is the true one then I join that.

What, are you stealing our ideas now or something?

Kidding (sort of).

 

[guanophore]

Thanks for the reprint. Sounds partly ok, plausible. But death is still death, whether for a second or three days. She still dies. She still either died of illness or old age or both, but both are curses from the fall. So as you tie two together , IC and Assumption, I would tie together all the curses of sin,(old age, disease, death) not just one of them, bodily corruption. Now if she had been translated like Enoch, that would be another story.

And yet, Christ died…

 

[friardchips]

Indeed. The same is true for all denominations.

Then why is that simply joining a denomination that “confirms to their beliefs”?

If I believe that the RCC denomination is the true one then I join it. If I believe some other denomination is the true one then I join that.

We are all in the same boat.

Maybe stop going onto forums and get out there and get involved with the world’s problems. God will lead you if you pray in the direction He wants you to go as long as you are open to it. But as long as you persist, and this goes for everyone, with putting arguments before the acts of doing, then where is this all heading - nowhere. It stays in the head.

 

[friardchips]

right you said she is not inclined to sin and that leaving Him behind in Jerusalem was not sin/mistake cause she was “worried about her son” and finally found Him. So worrying is not a sin ( as is not leaving Him behind) ?

The text does not say that she left Him Behind in a careless way. He was a boy - firstly - and went off to preach about His Father and get involved. He was not sinning because He was on a spiritual errand, but in practical terms although He did not sin, He did in fact seemingly go off without telling his parents. Our Lady found Him. She knows where to look, where to lead us, to find Him. She did no wrong by giving her son room to be a boy and did no wrong by finding Him and even gently rebuking Him. A Mother is meant to correct her Son (in practical terms). Neither sinned. Mary was not expected to know where Jesus was but was expected to do what a Mother does and be concerned for Her son. No sin involved. Mary was not inclined to sin. It is all there if you look.

You have seen it and I am sure explained it accordingly. Just google “they thought Him beside Himself” and find biblehub with all the differing translations. Then read on and Mary comes into the picture.

Instead of looking at Biblehub on the internet go and grab some books by an R.C publisher or a decent Commentary, and do some proper research, as there are all sorts of translations out there and all sorts of dodgy ones at that.

That is an old tactic to label me incorrect without really correcting me, that is, show me what I am am missing of what took place at Calvary with Mary.

I am just saying how it is and Why should I do your research for you? Cardinal Newman did his own which led him to full understanding in the R.C Church. D.I.Y! It is more rewarding that way for you I, on the other hand, I have no desire to go to in-depth, correcting your own insights. They are something between you and God. My only duty is to say the Truth in simple terms and this is the case for all Catholics when they see attacks against the Church, and yes, Our Lady and HOLY Mother. I am not on this forum to give myself a massive ego (or a headache) but to state what I understand to be the Truth against heresy. Then you can go and follow up yourself.

Look, enough cat and mouse. The CC finally made the Assumption a dogma of faith in 1950. To not believe it now is an authoritatively forewarned departure from the one true faith.

And what? The Hebrew Scriptures were not collated, or brought together rather, for centuries, does that make them invalid? The Bible was actually put together as one whole after a fair few centuries went by but we know the faith was there. In fact, the Gospels weren’t written immediately.

If one can’t get their head around a Dogma it is not a reason to jump ship. There was a Saint who couldn’t reconcile in (her?) head the Resurrection but the gift of piety told her it was her faith that was lacking not the belief. There was another Saint who was never shown one moment of consolation from God. One of the reasons Jesus came here was not to teach us how to be typical Pharisees and to help us massage our minds and tell us how great our understanding is but to teach us to have faith and live by it.

Yes, she( Church/Pope) put forth many “proofs” from Tradition and some Scripture foreshadowing, dating back centuries. In 1950 most bishops were for the dogma but not all. So a generation or two ago I would be in some Catholic company, some.

There is nothing that can be argued about Dogma - written in stone. They are the sum of the Churches findings. The Church is a treasure chest of divine insights and reasoning…Go Dig! And enjoy!

Ask me something particular and don’t bring political rambling and politics into religious debate. Not interested. If you want to know something ask in simple and straightforward terms…what about Mary and Calvary? Are you going to argue “sola scriptura” at the end of this? Or are you open in your heart to Reasoned debate…?

 

[Novocastrian]

I hold that it was not an infallible teaching.

Thus, it is not an issue.

I’m sure it’s a defensible statement that the Dictatus Papae oughtn’t to be read as infallible, but could you please explain why you think it isn’t?

N

 

[friardchips]

Not so much evidence as conjecture.

I’m not saying it’s untrue. It may well be. There are plenty of Protestants who will say that the Assumption/Immaculate Conception/whatever are perfectly orthodox pious beliefs which the faithful might hold. I’m saying that the conjecture offered comes with little reason to accept it as compelling, in the sense of a dogma to be held de fide.

This is the problem. Rome often seems not to distinguish between the plausible and the proven. Mariology often seems this way.

The Assumption of our Blessed Lady is a Dogma. And ‘reason’ is the exactly the wrong word to use as argument against Dogmas as is the word ‘faith’.

Really. Other than with trusted sources and faith what can anyone prove with anything in religion? Remember Thomas wanting to see the marks in Jesus’s hands and the response Jesus gave.

 

[friardchips]

Truth is often revealed over time. Fruits are born from Truth often over a period of time. As Faith and Reason underlines.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Then you hold Dictatus Papae to be false teaching?

Whether or not old Greg authored it, did medieval popes for centuries agree with the sentiments contained in it? Or did they know it was false teaching?

This is precisely why there is no “Official Church” source indicating what declarations are infallible or not. You gotta have wiggle room to develop more and/or reconstruct words.

 

[clem456]

This is precisely why there is no “Official Church” source indicating what declarations are infallible or not. You gotta have wiggle room to develop more and/or reconstruct words.

The Catholic faith has never pretended to rest in proof of infallible declarations, it springs forth from the person of Christ.

 

[Sam43232]

Speaking as a quasi-Protestant, based on my experiences as a Protestant meeting Catholics:

1. The Pope (ranging from papal infallibility to his mere existence in the hierarchy)
2. Mary (and all associated Catholic dogmas, the Assumption, Immaculate Conception, perpetual virginity after Jesus’ birth, her intercessory role…)
3. “Worship” of the saints
4. Catholics don’t read the Bible and care more about what the Church says

Of course, #3 is based on a misunderstanding of Catholic belief, #4 is something that runs contrary to official Catholic teaching if and when it happens, #2 has a lot more scriptural support than at least I would have guessed and & 1 remains as perhaps the best argument, but when rightly understood, the limits on Papal infallibility render it unobjectionable and a proper understanding of Early Church history should quickly disabuse any Protestant of the notion that the Church was ever intended for bottom up governance…

 

[guanophore]

I’m really curious what we Lutherans are portraying as dogma!!

I know the Solas have the appearance of dogma, but I would counter that they’re more defining principal of our hermeneutical practices.

Dogma could well be defined as the result of hermeutical practices. Catholics call it doctrinal development, but functionally it is the same thing. They are formal statements of how what has been received from the Apostolic deposit of faith is applied in the present day.

I think the enitre confessions are a form of Dogma - they are professions of faith that organize and undergird the Lutheran faith.

In addition to the Solas, ,naturally Catholics have difficulty with the perception of the successor of Peter.

 

[guanophore]

Thanks. Was she perfectly united ? She was human and made mistakes. She left Jesus behind in Jerusalem once. She tried to bring him back home for “rest” and was with those that thought Jesus was" beside himself" during the early growing part of His ministry. Her presence at the Crucifixion is something most daughters of Eve probably would have probably done for their sons also. I would think there is a reason that past popes rejected or refused to declare the Assumption as inspired revelation for nearly two millennium. I think an “uninspired” even spurious gospel that speak of the Assumption was declared as heretical by one pope (5 or 6 hundreds ?). Please do not be offended as I try not to cast aspersions on Mary, but only on what I believe to be untrue doctrines about her. She is still blessed amongst women in Truth.

The gospel you refer to was not rejected because it mentioned the Assumption. All of the rejected ancient writings contain Truths about the Gospel, but that is not the only requirement for canonicity.

Seriously Ben, the way Catholics are about relics, do you honestly think there would not be a cult of relics around Mary if her body or anything attached to it had been left here? Have you ever looked at how we are about the bones of the saints?

Many of the faithful, saved by grace, through faith, from the Old Covenant were raised from their graves at the time of Jesus’ resurrection. These he took with Him into heaven at the time of his ascension. What makes you think he would not take His own mother?

Making mistakes does not keep people out of heaven, fortunately!

 

[guanophore]

True, but authority is not fully defined by the infallible statements of the Pope.

Excellent post Clem!

 

[rcwitness]

Seriously Ben, the way Catholics are about relics, do you honestly think there would not be a cult of relics around Mary if her body or anything attached to it had been left here? Have you ever looked at how we are about the bones of the saints?

This is definitely good evidence, although circumstancial.

Many of the faithful, saved by grace, through faith, from the Old Covenant were raised from their graves at the time of Jesus’ resurrection.

I agree this supports the concept of Mary’s Assumption as a reasonable probability. Also, they were described as Saints… Wouldn’t these ones be of the NT believers?

These he took with Him into heaven at the time of his ascension.

Im not sure we are able to make this assumption (no pun intended ). We don’t know what happened to these Saints, right?

 

[guanophore]

For the literal linguists it is almost an oxymoron question but very insightful to our differences. It is like asking is there a body in the Body that is over us ??

I think this is only true if one begins from the point of view that Christ did not establish an authorative, structured, visible Church. Yes, our roles in the Church are different, and I notice that Lutherans affirm almost all of those roles taught by the Apostles, but it seems that great care is taken to avoid the authority of the Bishop, and the structure surrounding that authority. You seem to separate this part of the body as “not needed” and reject it, so then it has to be come a “body within a body”. When the Apostles met in council to make decisions, ,or the elders gathered to discuss and to pray, they did not represent a “body within a body”, but were fulfilling the function they had been appointed.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

Maybe stop going onto forums and get out there and get involved with the world’s problems. God will lead you if you pray in the direction He wants you to go as long as you are open to it. But as long as you persist, and this goes for everyone, with putting arguments before the acts of doing, then where is this all heading - nowhere. It stays in the head.

Isnt that a bit presumptuous?

You have no idea what I do outside of the forums.