How should Catholics deal with Protestants? The early church said not to associate but the doctrine has changed? (OP reached new poster limit for 7/10

[guanophore]

This theological distinction remains true , though in keeping with the pastoral charity of the Council today we use the term heretic only to describe those who willingly embrace what they know to be contrary to revealed truth.

Thank you.

I notice you are focusing on the accusatory part rather than the pastoral part.

"This theological distinction remains true, though in keeping with the pastoral charity of the Council today we use the term heretic only to describe those who willingly embrace what they know to be contrary to revealed truth. "

The purpose of CAF is evangelistic and apologetic and use of terms generally does does not further productive discussion.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

I was stating a factual distinction. Nothing more. The claim was made that Protestants aren’t heretics. That’s false. I said repeatedly the distinction between formal and material heresy.

 

[brit_2911]

If Catholics never associated with non-Catholics, the Catholic faith would never get spread. It just wouldn’t. My parents, and my grandparents, are split one Baptist and one Catholic. Both were married by a Catholic priest. I am Catholic and I am dating a Methodist, one of the most loving people on this earth. God can do great things through our relationships with others of faith disagreements. You just have to learn how to control your tongue, thoughts, and passion in order to be loving to them in your differences.

 

[brit_2911]

And despite our differences, we have Christ in common. He calls us to community. We start with Him. Take refuge in that.

 

[EdwardJP]

Anytime a Protestant wants to debate it, I don’t. I just ask them to go refamiliarize theirself with the scriptures and find the Rock on which the Church was built. I know for sure that it wasn’t during the Protestant reformation. I certainly can’t find anything in the Bible that supports any Protestant faith. There is only one Church and one Religion.

 

[guanophore]

I was stating a factual distinction. Nothing more. The claim was made that Protestants aren’t heretics. That’s false. I said repeatedly the distinction between formal and material heresy.

I understand your point, and don’t disagree, I just don’t see how it addresses the question of the OP, or does anything to move the discussion around the topic forward.

Whether they are formal or material, the Church takes an evangelistic and pastoral position, per the Catechism.

 

[kainosktisis]

Anytime a Protestant wants to debate it, I don’t. I just ask them to go refamiliarize theirself with the scriptures and find the Rock on which the Church was built. I know for sure that it wasn’t during the Protestant reformation. I certainly can’t find anything in the Bible that supports any Protestant faith. There is only one Church and one Religion.

Most Protestants don’t accept the Catholic understanding of Peter as the Rock & will argue back that it’s Christ being spoken of rather than Peter in that way. Many Protestants see their churches as the old historical church returning to its former simplicity after it got perverted or paganized over time (I’m just saying because of my background & have also observed likewise from other Protestants). Most Protestants would likely say they can’t find anything Scriptural about the Catholic Church, but that’s because they don’t have the history, the writings of the Early Church Fathers, & the Magisterium to corroborate & clarify things in addition to the Scriptures. They would agree that there is only one church & one faith (Some object to the term “religion”), but they might view one another with a discerning eye…

That said, I entered the Catholic Church because someone took the time to explain her beliefs to me. With time I realized that we had much more in common than I had previously believed - or been led to believe - & that knocked down a massive wall for me. It sparked curiousity, which led to research, which led to RCIA & my entering the Church.

Take the time to communicate & listen if they want honest dialogue. You never know whom Christ may lead you to save in time…Plant some seeds…Let your life be a witness to your faith.

 

[EdwardJP]

Great response! Thank you. I love the first paragraph. The second and third would require me to have more patience. This is something I am currently working onray:

 

[SnowRose]

Most Protestants don’t accept the Catholic understanding of Peter as the Rock & will argue back that it’s Christ being spoken of rather than Peter in that way. Many Protestants see their churches as the old historical church returning to its former simplicity after it got perverted or paganized over time (I’m just saying because of my background & have also observed likewise from other Protestants). Most Protestants would likely say they can’t find anything Scriptural about the Catholic Church, but that’s because they don’t have the history, the writings of the Early Church Fathers, & the Magisterium to corroborate & clarify things in addition to the Scriptures.

Ah well … we accept the early church fathers. We accept the early saints. We just don’t hold with the magisterium’s interpretation of anything.
Or their additional dogma.
In a way THE CHURCH is scriptual. The RCC believing it is THE CHURCH is not. Just ask the Orthodox.

 

[BoomerangToo]

Protestants may unknowingly believe in heresy, but they themselves can no longer be called heretics, as too much time has passed to label them as such. This is Pope Benedict’s opinion.

It is obvious that the old category of ‘heresy’ is no longer of any value. Heresy, for Scripture and the early Church, includes the idea of a personal decision against the unity of the Church, and heresy’s characteristic is pertinacia, the obstinacy of him who persists in his own private way. This, however, cannot be regarded as an appropriate description of the spiritual situation of the Protestant Christian.

The vast majority of protestants cannot be labeled as “heretics” simply because they’re beliefs are in error. Pope Benedict goes on to say we need a new label to describe the protestant situation because “heresy” doesn’t fit here. To continue calling them “heretics” doesn’t benefit anyone and will never contribute to unity.

 

[Wannano]

Ambasea:

What do you mean?

You claim…

I’m a recent convert to Catholicism

If this is the case, then you were 1) not honest during your initiation rites 2) very poorly catechized. If it is not the case, then you may be a troll.

How can I be sure that the Church hasn’t been led astray in their teaching?

I say you may be poorly catechized because a convert accepts before the rites of initiation that Jesus founded the Church and He protects her from error by the Holy Spirit.

You also seem to be unconverted in your mind, if you refer to “their teaching” as if it is not the teaching you have embraced (our teaching).

I just don’t want to see my family and friends go to hell.

Then it would be prudent to begin fasting and praying for them immediately.

But wasn’t the Church’s policy during, like, the first 1500 years of Christianity to ‘shun heretics?’

Yes. But since you are talking like a heretic yourself, it seems you have nothing to worry about affiliating with others who are also separated from the One Church founded by Christ.

That hasn’t been the church’s view until recently.

Whenever this view changed, it would have been a decision you embraced when you “converted”. Therefore, you were not honest during the Rites of Initiation, or you are not honest about being a recent convert. Either way, your own soul is in too much jeapardy to be concerned about anyone else.

But for this issue, wouldn’t it be right to look at the example of the early church?

Certainly, go ahead. Reject what the authority appointed by Christ has taught.

I guess I’m just worried that Vatican II is illegitimate. I’ve heard Traditional Catholics say that.

I bet you have! In fact, you may be disingenuously misrepresenting yourself as one right now!

Vatican 11 has done and been a wonderful council. Research it yourself. Read its documents.

I suspect we might be dealing with…
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Protestants are in fact heretics. Not achismatics.

If you espouse this view, then perhaps you are also a sedavacantist?

This is opposed to the teaching of the Church.

Their theology is in and of itself in error.

This does not equate to heresy.

I agree with all you have presented above and wondered this myself from the very first OP post.However, I was reluctant to enter in the discussion for it appears I may be a HERETIC ! Surely I have no right to discussion.

 

[po18guy]

The early Church fathers were neither pope nor council - an important distinction. What you read is historical information which informed the Church, guided (or was guided by) the Church but is generally neither doctrine nor binding. It is historical revelation regarding Church structure, history, beliefs and practices. But, we are not members of the Athanasian Church, but the Catholic.

Now, those who are validly baptized are a part of the visible Church, whether they know it or not. In the early days of the rebellion, there was both heresy and heretics. Today, we normally encounter those who have been taught and practice heresy, but are not actually heretics, since they have never been in full communion with the Church. A distinction and a difference.

For the sake of Christian unity, all of us are called to witness our Catholic faith to all others with great charity - so that they will feel the call.

 

[AugustTherese]

Ah well … we accept the early church fathers. We accept the early saints.

Every ‘early church father’ was a Catholic. Every ‘early saint’ was a Catholic. Do you accept everything they profess, e.g. supremacy or Saint Peter, or do you pick and chose what you ‘accept’?

 

[setarcos]

This is one thing I haven’t understood yet. The foundation on which Jesus’s Church is to be built must of necessity be infallible. Yet Peter demonstrably was a fallible person. I can reasonably conclude therefore that the foundation on which Jesus built his Church is not Peter. Thoughts on this?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

What the Early Church Believed: Peter as Pope | Catholic Answers Tract

 

[setarcos]

That wholly depends on how you define “Church father” and how you force those round pegs into that Catholic square hole. The early church fathers often disagreed with each other over doctrine, some even going so far as to simply ignore the opinion of the Bishop of Rome. No universal agreement was ever reached until secular powers got involved for the sake of keeping the peace and even then the disagreements never completely disappeared.

 

[CelticWarlord]

Is it a sin to associate with a Protestant?

If so, then you’re sinning just by reading this.

 

[setarcos]

I’m familiar with the Roman Church’s arguments and early opinion. Do you agree that the foundation of the Church must be infallible?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Yes, but only as regards essential teachings and faith matters.

The Holy Spirit preserves the Church from error in those areas, as all Popes, even the saintliest ones, are fallible men.

 

[kainosktisis]

The Scriptures were written by fallible men who were moved by the power of the Holy Spirit, & yet we don’t doubt the Scripture’s infallibility…Do we…? I don’t…