Giving money to a protestant church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DavidFilmer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DavidFilmer

Guest
If I visited a protestant church, I would never give money to a general collection. The way I see it, giving money would be promoting that flawed faith. (I might feel differently if it was a targeted collection for hunger relief, etc - but I’m talking about a general collection.)

I was wondering if the Church actually has any rules in this regard. Does the Church have anything to say about Catholics giving money to non-Catholic churches?
 
DavidFilmer said:
If I visited a protestant church, I would never give money to a general collection. The way I see it, giving money would be promoting that flawed faith. (I might feel differently if it was a targeted collection for hunger relief, etc - but I’m talking about a general collection.)

I was wondering if the Church actually has any rules in this regard. Does the Church have anything to say about Catholics giving money to non-Catholic churches?
Click to expand...
I have that same feeling when I go with friends to fund raisers of dinners when the purpose is for evangelization in foreign countries. But I rationalize that it is God’s work somehow and I have to work even harder for the truth.
mdcpensive1
 
I would never donate money to a flawed faith.

But some other examples arise, a protestant church my family attends has this “Baptist Children Collection”… It’s a baptist collection for children who cannot afford school or something.

Is it OK to donate then? I’m not sure.
 
For starters, I commend you on your generosity. It is so important that we give - it is giving back to God what He already owns and by giving, we open ourselves to receiving further graces - maybe not in temporal finances, but sometimes in eternal virtues.

I don’t know that the Church teaches explicitely on the matter, but I do believe that we are first responsible to tithe to our local parish - after all, that is where we are fed. In my personal opinion, anything over and above your tithe is up to you. For example, our family commits a small monthly amount to our local Pregnancy Care Centre (which has both Catholic & Protestant staff & volunteers).

Protestant ministries teach doctrine that is sometimes contrary to our Catholic teaching and some are even anti-Catholic (implicitely if not openly). Rather than support even the well intentioned Protestant ministries, I recommend finding a Catholic equivalent. I would check with your local parish if you do not know of any. God Bless you as you give!

CSJ
 
Nothing wrong with it, if you feel compelled to be charitable unto them. They’re people, too. I donated to an Orthodox church, for the book I got from them. And, it’s a good book. If I could, I’d fork more dough, for it.
 
mdcpensive1 said:
I have that same feeling when I go with friends to fund raisers of dinners when the purpose is for evangelization in foreign countries. But I rationalize that it is God’s work somehow and I have to work even harder for the truth.
mdcpensive1
Click to expand...
All too often, such evangelization efforts focus on the Catholics already in those countries because the pagans are too much work. :mad:
 
I will give donations to almost any charity that is helping the poor. In fact, our parish routinely collects donations for faith based (Non-Catholic) organizations in our community.
Heck, it’s not a contest 🙂
 
Some of the best people I know are non denominational Christians who do great work for the poor and are fantastic examples of what living Christianity is all about. Who cares if we disagree about Mary’s status, or the authority of the Pope? If I can help them out, I do.
 
My thinking is this. There are no lack of Catholic charities that always need our help, so I no longer give to any but Catholic organizations. One reason is that I have seen firsthand the way many of these n-C groups seek to evangelize Catholics away from our most holy faith. (See My Testimony) It’s just simply built into their evangelism regardless of the work they do. Most Catholic charities however, help regardless of religious affiliation, so it only makes sense to support them instead of the n-Cs.

Just for instance. I maintain a small Catholic correspondence ministry to prison inmates. My Catholic guys routinely report that they are targeted by n-C chaplains and inmates alike for evangelism simply because they are Catholic since they do not consider them Christians. :mad: This includes telling Catholics that they have to accept n-C Bibles because “they are all the same” and even trying to get Catholics to “trade in” their Catholic Bible for a new n-C one!

These a-Cs supply their materials free of charge and in abundance to prisoners, while every diocese I know of has to scramble to supply Bibles, Rosaries, and good Catholic materials to our guys. Worse still is the situation among Hispanic Catholic prisoners who cannot get Spanish language Catholic materials and are intensively targeted for proselytizing. I am getting letters from Spanish speaking inmates begging for Bibles and Catechisms. It’s unreal…

I actually have a deeply converted and very devout Catholic inmate doing life who sends me donations to provide Catholic tracts and other materials out of his meager prison job pay. (Most have no paying job, so he’s fortunate even though is only a few cents an hour.) I make sure that every cent he sends me is spent on things that go back into the prisons. Catholicism has the absolute best answer to these guys lives that can change them into men of God before they exit prison, but we do a poor job of reaching them. Every diocese needs help there, just as Caritas and Catholic Charities always need financial help to meet needs.

No…my giving goes to Catholic sources.
 
I would not give money to a Protestant church under any circumstances whatsoever, even if it was for hunger relief. The reason is because many Protestant denominations are notorious for mixing evangelism with hunger relief and such. Now, don’t get me wrong, evangelism is not a bad thing. However, Protestantism is a flawed sect of Christianity. Also, many Protestant denominations make it a point to evangelize Catholics. They try to steel sheep from the Catholic Church so that they can be “true” Christians. Some Protestants do not believe that Catholics are really Christian.
 
DavidFilmer said:
If I visited a protestant church, I would never give money to a general collection. The way I see it, giving money would be promoting that flawed faith. (I might feel differently if it was a targeted collection for hunger relief, etc - but I’m talking about a general collection.)

I was wondering if the Church actually has any rules in this regard. Does the Church have anything to say about Catholics giving money to non-Catholic churches?
Click to expand...
If Protestants are wrong about salvation and their teaching is misleading people with the result of them going to Hell, then I think it would have to be a very serious sin to donate to Protestant organizations.

I’m a Bible Christian and I think most Protestants would never donate to Catholic Churches for the same reason.
 
I’ve given to the Salvation Army ‘red kittle’ drives several times, but you have a choice there. 🙂
 
XianThinker said:
I’m a Bible Christian…
Click to expand...
Please refrain from such phrases here. It won’t get you far. The Catholics here know we are “Bible Christians” and many in the Apologetics forum regularly demonstrate Catholicism to be more Biblical than non-Catholic forms of Christianity.
 
SonCatcher said:
Please refrain from such phrases here. It won’t get you far. The Catholics here know we are “Bible Christians” and many in the Apologetics forum regularly demonstrate Catholicism to be more Biblical than non-Catholic forms of Christianity.
Click to expand...
How should I refer to myself? When I say I’m a Bible Christian, I mean I rely primarily on the Bible instead of a particular church or a bunch of traditions. I’m not Protestant because I don’t believe in faith alone. I also didn’t believe in the Trinity because it’s based on tradition and instead believed that God is one (modalism).
 
XianThinker said:
How should I refer to myself? When I say I’m a Bible Christian, I mean I rely primarily on the Bible instead of a particular church or a bunch of traditions. I’m not Protestant because I don’t believe in faith alone. I also didn’t believe in the Trinity because it’s based on tradition and instead believed that God is one (modalism).
Click to expand...
Matthew 28:19 Go therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,

I trust you have read THAT in your Bible… If that is not the Trinity, what was Jesus talking about? Want to re-think your statement, Mr. Bible Christian? Or, just because the WORD ‘trinity’ isn’t in the Bible, it mustn’t exist?

There is ‘God, the Father’, ‘God, the Son’, and ‘God, the holy Spirit’. I would say that the VAST majority of Christians acknowledge this truth. You may do as you like, but I don’t make a habit of denying Jesus’s Word.

Also… how did Christians know how to worship during the 300+ years between the Crucifiction and the compilation of the Holy Bible?
Code: 
Getting back to the ACTUAL TOPIC... Having read some of the posts here... I don't think I would ever give money to a protestant church, since they treat many Catholics so shabilly.  I found this thread quite informitive.
 
rfournier103 said:
Matthew 28:19 Go therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,

I trust you have read THAT in your Bible… If that is not the Trinity, what was Jesus talking about? Want to re-think your statement, Mr. Bible Christian?
Click to expand...
Actually, no.

“Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus. (The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Baptism)”

“Critical scholarship, on the whole, rejects the traditional attribution of the tripartite baptismal formula to Jesus and regards it as of later origin. (The Philosophy of the Church Fathers, Vol. 1, Harry Austryn Wolfson, 1964, pg 143)”

“It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but…a later liturgical addition. (The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275)”

“The testimony for the wide distribution of the simple baptismal formula [in the Name of Jesus] down into the second century is so overwhelming that even in Matthew 28:19, the Trinitarian formula was later inserted. (Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christianity, page 295)”

“In place of the words “baptizing… Spirit” we should probably read simply "into my name," (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 1929, page 723).”

1John 5:7 is another verse used to support the Trinity. The evidence is so overwhelming that it was added to the Bible, that it has been removed from all modern non-Catholic Bibles.

You can read more in my recent post on the topic in this form:

Documentation that the Church changed the way we baptize?
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=702284
 
XianThinker said:
Actually, no.

“Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus. (The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Baptism)”

“Critical scholarship, on the whole, rejects the traditional attribution of the tripartite baptismal formula to Jesus and regards it as of later origin. (The Philosophy of the Church Fathers, Vol. 1, Harry Austryn Wolfson, 1964, pg 143)”

“It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but…a later liturgical addition. (The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275)”

“The testimony for the wide distribution of the simple baptismal formula [in the Name of Jesus] down into the second century is so overwhelming that even in Matthew 28:19, the Trinitarian formula was later inserted. (Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christianity, page 295)”

“In place of the words “baptizing… Spirit” we should probably read simply "into my name," (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 1929, page 723).”

1John 5:7 is another verse used to support the Trinity. The evidence is so overwhelming that it was added to the Bible, that it has been removed from all modern non-Catholic Bibles.

You can read more in my recent post on the topic in this form:

Documentation that the Church changed the way we baptize?
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=702284
Click to expand...
Interesting that it is almost the beginning of the year of faith. Part of faith is believing in the one who presents information to you. Their character and abilities make them more believable then other people or things.
You have used terms like “It is often affirmed…” and “the testamony for the wide distribution…” that do not give confidence that they are true but maybe someone’s opinion. Anyway, I would tend to bet on the Church Fathers vs commentaries and encyclopedias.
Please don’t be offended because this is just my personal opinion also. Bible scholarship has been done extremely well by both Catholics and Protestants when done properly and scholarly.
mdcpensive1
 
XianThinker said:
Actually, no.

…(The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Baptism)”

… (The Philosophy of the Church Fathers, Vol. 1, Harry Austryn Wolfson, 1964, pg 143)”

… (The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275)"

… (Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christianity, page 295)"

… (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 1929, page 723).”

…
Click to expand...
I thought you said your source was the Bible only. This current list of citations detracts from your credibility. The other thread you link also is dependent on non-Biblical sources.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top