If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic? - 2

[Ronald_E]

Dear Ronald,

thanks for your response. But this raises a few questions in me: first of all, these offenses were commited against me by franciscan priests, at least 2 of them. They, who ere the ones responsible for teachin me the catechism! If they aren’t true Catholics, then who are?

Also, I was chrismated at 17. The Catholic church must, of course have a good reason for putting the sacrament of chrismation at such an age, even before people start thinking in a mature way. No?

Dear csmatyi, Please forgive me I don’t know how to address folks on the inet. I hate appearing formal.
Just by your response to me I sense a great deal of warmth and humility. These Franciscan priests are an example of how satan will use sinners, no matter what their title or vocation, to hurt those who are most vulnerable and open to God’s Love. You and your brother could only be hurt as deeply as you were because of your sensitivity. In my awakening in our faith, I have learned that the highly sensitive person is like the canary in the coal mine in that they are the ones who are hurt most intensely by the toxins or sins in the environment. I believe that these highly sensitive people have the sensitivity of saints and that they will then be targeted by evil to prevent them from becoming aware of their special purpose in our faith.
True Catholics are the meek and humble of spirit. They are the introverts whose real passion is God, but they are not understood in the proper way that God has made them, and, as a consequence they go into hiding because they do not fit in the same way as the extroverts do.
Introverts are internally driven and do not compete like extroverts do. They cannot use people and obtain power through manipulation like extroverts. Introverts have the untapped passion for the spiritual life with God. It is difficult for the introvert to confront others unless their rage is triggered. However, the introvert or highly sensitive person has been given at birth the knowledge of how we are to treat one another in our relationships.
Please forgive me for going on and seemingly fragmented.
As I look back, confirmation gave me the second step in my relationship with the Holy Spirit. I committed a lot of sins in the 40 years I was away, but it was the Holy Spirit who influenced me not to go too far away. I had a conscience that would not quit until I had been softened up enough to know God and Catholicism in its true form which wasn’t tainted by the sins of my teachers.
I hope this makes sense. I am multi-tasking and it is impossible for me to do this.
God Bless You.

 

[awantz]

awantz -**

Yes, but Catholicism fell away from what Christ intended for the church to be through Peter.**

At exactly what time in history did this earth shattering event take place? Surely it must be recorded in the annals of Christianity or other!

I was told this by some Catholics I know and the guy that teaches RCIA.

**So, you just take his word for it, without investigating the matter for yourself. Where does He teach, certainly no where in the catholic sphere. If I remember correctly, your husband is catholic, what does he have to say about all this! **

He teaches in the Catholic church. He is the one who teaches RCIA. He has be teaching it for many years. He believes that yes they fell away, but they are trying to get back on track and that is what I believe, too.

I have to have something to work with…

I will have to talk to them. I’ll get back to you on that.

 

[Memaw]

I’ve read John 6 and I don’t see why you think it would make a difference to me. I know that the truth is the truth and I do believe the truth.

The Blind leading the Blind.

 

[awantz]

The Blind leading the Blind.

What? No one’s blind here. Are you?

 

[Memaw]

What? No one’s blind here. Are you?

You know the Bible so well, find it and read for yourself.

 

[joe370]

awantz:
He teaches in the Catholic church. He is the one who teaches RCIA. He has be teaching it for many years. He believes that yes they fell away, but they are trying to get back on track and that is what I believe, too.

I certainly respect your right to believe that.

If you don’t mind me asking, does the catholic parish your husband teaches at, support his belief that the C.C. fell away from what Jesus taught to His apostles?

Also, when you say “fell away” what exactly do you mean? If the church fell away from what was originally taught to Jesus’ apostles --when exactly did this take place? —And— isn’t that tantamount to admitting that Jesus misspoke (left them orphans, at least until they “get back on track” at some point in the future) --when he said:

*"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever— the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you." John 14:15-18

“All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” John 14:25-26

“When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me…” John 15:26

"But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. John 16:7

"Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter (kepha), and on this rock (kepha) I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” Matthew 16:16-19*

How can you reconcile your belief that the C.C. “fell away” with what sacred scripture says about Jesus’ promise of perpetuity via the Holy Spirit, teaching His church “all things” and reminding the church of everything He taught the apostolic church during his earthly ministry?

Did the gates of hades in fact, temporally overcome the church, Jesus built on His chosen apostle Peter, the apostles and prophets?

Wouldn’t the Holy Spirit (Parakletos) be the ultimate “helper” --indefectible, infallible and impervious to error, and if so, how could it be possible that the C.C. could ever fall away from what Jesus created?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to challenge your beliefs, just trying to understand them!

 

[csmatyi]

Dear csmatyi, Please forgive me I don’t know how to address folks on the inet. I hate appearing formal.
Just by your response to me I sense a great deal of warmth and humility. These Franciscan priests are an example of how satan will use sinners, no matter what their title or vocation, to hurt those who are most vulnerable and open to God’s Love. You and your brother could only be hurt as deeply as you were because of your sensitivity. In my awakening in our faith, I have learned that the highly sensitive person is like the canary in the coal mine in that they are the ones who are hurt most intensely by the toxins or sins in the environment. I believe that these highly sensitive people have the sensitivity of saints and that they will then be targeted by evil to prevent them from becoming aware of their special purpose in our faith.
True Catholics are the meek and humble of spirit. They are the introverts whose real passion is God, but they are not understood in the proper way that God has made them, and, as a consequence they go into hiding because they do not fit in the same way as the extroverts do.
Introverts are internally driven and do not compete like extroverts do. They cannot use people and obtain power through manipulation like extroverts. Introverts have the untapped passion for the spiritual life with God. It is difficult for the introvert to confront others unless their rage is triggered. However, the introvert or highly sensitive person has been given at birth the knowledge of how we are to treat one another in our relationships.
Please forgive me for going on and seemingly fragmented.
As I look back, confirmation gave me the second step in my relationship with the Holy Spirit. I committed a lot of sins in the 40 years I was away, but it was the Holy Spirit who influenced me not to go too far away. I had a conscience that would not quit until I had been softened up enough to know God and Catholicism in its true form which wasn’t tainted by the sins of my teachers.
I hope this makes sense. I am multi-tasking and it is impossible for me to do this.
God Bless You.

Dear Ron,

Thanks for your post,

Okay, so you are an elderly person (maybe around 60?), and it seems that you speak from life experience. Thanks for your kindness. Yes, I have met a number of kind Catholics in my journey through life (you are another of them ), and I am always greatful for them.

If you strive to do the good your religion tells you to do, then this is commendable.

However, after high school, I became Protestant (Calvinist), and you see, Protestant teachings made very much sense to me after I came to Christ (I can offer to send you my story if you are interested, just give me your email adress if you are open to it).

for example in high school Solus Christus made very much sense to me. I thought that if God is omnipotent, then all prayer must be adressed to Him. The sacrifice of Christ is perfect and doesn’t need any add-ons. We prayed to Mary, but, in all earnesty it didn’t make sense to me. Also, Sola Scriptura was simply too logical for me. The Bible is the handbook to life written by God as a gift to humans, so why not accept it as the ultimate source of truth? It’s a clear cut.

But still, the Protestant teaching about salvation through Christ’s sacrifice and faith alone is still at odds with salvation by acts, as I tried to do all throughout my Catholic years.

What I found out is this:

We have nothing good within ourselves. We have nothing to show to God at final judgement. Our deeds count as nothing.

The Bible says in Luke 17:7-10:

But which of you, having a servant plowing or feeding cattle, will say unto him by and by, when he is come from the field, Go and sit down to meat? And will not rather say unto him, Make ready wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself, and serve me, till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward thou shalt eat and drink? Doth he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I trow not. So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do.

This means that all the good we do is exected of us by God. We are expected to be perfect as He is perfect, Jesus says this several times, and it is also found in the Old Testament. God’s standard is perfection, so we all fall short of this standard. Paul proclaims that

And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace. (Romans 11:6)

You see, this is what I found out after I became Protestant, because as a Catholic, I found out that our works are all too fragile and are not worth anything when it comes to final reckoning before God.

Cheers.

 

[awantz]

You know the Bible so well, find it and read for yourself.

I have. I’ve read the entire Protestant bible and almost all but one or two books in the Catholic bible.

 

[joe370]

To those who say the Catholic Church perished, which brought about the need for a reformation:

To say that the Church perished or went apostate is blasphemous against the Passion of Our Lord. Didn’t Jesus undergo His passion and death for us that He could establish His Church for all of us? Of what sense does it make that Our Lord should let go of His Church which cost Him so dear right after He established it? Of what sense would it make that He would take it back from us after giving it to us? How could He have abandoned the Church, which cost Him all of His blood? Do you think that Jesus is weaker than His adversary, the devil, and was overcome by him?
bullet In Scripture Jesus clearly made promises on promises pertaining to the perpetuity of His Church. To say the Church perished is to call Jesus a liar. “and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matt 16:18)
Who gave Luther and Calvin a commission to revoke so many holy and solemn promises which Our Lord made of His Church? Did Our Lord not say of His Church, “and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”? (Matt 16:18) And didn’t He say, “behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world” Matthew 28:20? And didn’t Our Lord say “And I will ask the Father, and he shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever” John 14:16? And don’t we see repeated mention in the New Testament that Our Lord will be with us? How can all of these promises stand if the Church perished or went apostate? And if the true Church is to last forever as Christ told us, how can it have failed or went apostate for a thousand years as the Protestant reformers claim?

He who thinks himself to be the reformer or resuscitator of the Catholic Church attributes to himself the honor due to Jesus alone, and makes himself greater than the Apostles. The Apostles preserved the Church by their ministry after Our Lord instituted it. He who says that he has found the Church dead and raised it to life himself is the most audacious human alive.

If the Church did perish and the Protestant reformers were the ones to truly resuscitate the Church back to a true state, that would make them greater than the Apostles. But never have they shown any signs or wonders of such greatness in their lives as the Apostles did!

To say that the Church perished sometime after the first five or six centuries as the Protestant reformers say is to imply nothing else than our predecessors for nearly 1000 years before the reformation are damned, for outside of the true Church there is no salvation.
bullet And lastly, there is no doubt there were problems in the Church before the Reformation. The Church has always had problems in every century and has always been persecuted, as Our Lord told us would be the case. We also see in Scripture that Our Lord said He would be with His Church forever and that it would never fail. Looking at the history of the Church, whenever problems had arisen, the Church, guided by the Holy Ghost, always called together General Councils and corrected the problems. If there were problems in the Church before the Reformation, it was not up to unknown men like Luther and Calvin to try and correct them on their own without any authority when it was well known that the Church had always used General Councils to correct problems for the 1500 years prior.

 

[joe370]

To those who claim they can interpret and understand the Scriptures themselves:

The Protestant reformers claim that we simply need to refer to Scripture for our salvation. We agree, but when two people disagree on the interpretation of Scripture, who shall be the judge as to the correct interpretation? Disagreements arise in nearly every verse of Scripture of which could easily lead one of the parties to damnation. It is illogical to think that Our Lord would expect us all to interpret Scripture on our own with no judge to turn to since this will always lead to endless disagreements. There can be countless wrong answers to a question, but only one right answer. All of those interpreting Scripture incorrectly will be lead down the wrong road. It is illogical for us to think God left us in anarchy with respect to interpretation of Scripture, at the mercy of the winds and the tide, with no pilot to help steer the way, as this would mean he wishes our destruction. As with a ship at sea, if everyone attempts to steer in the direction they think is right, we will inevitably wind up lost.

Consider the Constitution of the United States if there were no U.S. Government to rule over it and make decisions over conflicts and offenses that arise with it. The result would be anarchy. Where have you ever seen any great province or organization which has governed itself? Consider any governed country, state, or any organized group throughout the history of the world. All were governed by an earthly leader of some sort or else they would wind up in chaos and confusion. If there were not a king in a kingdom, a foreman in a shop, or a captain of a ship, there would be no order. Why then do the Protestant reformers claim that all of their members do not need an earthly ruler to help guide them? What has this gotten them but thousands of opposing denominations (and growing) which is nothing better than anarchy? Never can a province be well governed by itself, especially when it is large.

If it is true that the Scriptures are so easy to understand, what is the use of the commentaries made by countless Protestant ministers, and what good are so many schools of Theology?

Also consider the verse, “As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:16). How else can we interpret this than to say Scripture is difficult to understand, and to interpret it incorrectly can lead to our destruction?
And to those who say they must read and understand Scripture themselves, consider the large number of poor ignorant people who cannot read the Scriptures. What is to happen of them? Obviously they can find and seek their salvation through the mouth of a pastor. “How shall they believe him, of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear, without a preacher?” Romans 10:14.

Consider the verse, “And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest? Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.” Acts 8:30-31. Obviously interpretation of Scripture is needed!

 

[O.S.Luke]

. That being said, how can Methodists have a valid Eucharist?

Easy - Christ is present, and is the host. As far as apostolic succession, the Alexandria Precedent, and a host of other stuff that historians still debate - I’ll leave that to the debaters and critics. To be honest, time is precious. Some arguments will always be arguments - and so I choose to go on instead of endless-loop arguing.

I am obviously in disagreement with you, consider my ordination valid, and the Eucharists I have received in my life have been valid too. I am blessed to have Christ in my life in every way. And so I give thanks.

O+

 

[joe370]

Dear Ron,

Quote from csmatyi, "You see, this is what I found out after I became Protestant, because as a Catholic, I found out that our works are all too fragile and are not worth anything when it comes to final reckoning before God."

Works are very important to Jesus…

To those who believe that faith alone (Sola Fide) justifies our salvation:

Nowhere in the bible does it state faith “alone” justifies, and this new doctrine was not heard of before the 16th century. Why did the Protestant reformers propose it and what authority gave it to them?
Consider the verse, “Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in. Naked, and you covered me: sick, and you visited me: I was in prison, and you came to me.” Matthew 25:34-36. Are these not examples of good works? Why would Our Lord give them so much emphasis if only faith was of importance?

Consider the verses, “And behold one came and said to him: Good master, what good shall I do that I may have life everlasting? Who said to him: Why asketh thou me concerning good? One is good, God. But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He said to him: Which? And Jesus said: Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness. Honor thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. The young man saith to him: All these I have kept from my youth, what is yet wanting to me?** Jesus saith to him: If thou wilt be perfect, go sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come follow me.” **Matt 19:16-21. Are the above verses not filled with good works? How much more proof from Scripture do we need to show that Our Lord commanded us to do good works for our salvation?

Consider the verse, “For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels: and then will he render to every man according to his works.” Matthew 16:27. Again here we have more proof that good works are required of us.

Consider the verse, “And every man shall receive his own reward, according to his own labor.” 1 Corinthians 3:8. Again this clearly does NOT refer to faith alone, but to labor, which is works.

Consider the verse, “And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.” 1 Corinthians 13:2 (St Paul). What is charity other than helping the needy? Charity is clearly considered among good works. And in the same Chapter we also see the verse, “And now there remain faith, hope, and charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity.” (1 Corinthians 13:13). This clearly puts charity BEFORE faith, so to say “faith alone” is all that is required of us is clearly contrary to Scripture.
bullet Consider the verse, “Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?” James 2:24. How much more plain can it be said that faith alone is not enough for our salvation?
bullet Consider the verse, “What shall it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but hath not works? Shall faith be able to save him?” James 2:14. And we see several verses later that the answer to this question is NO.
bullet Consider the verse, “So faith also, if it have not works, is dead in itself.” James 2:17. No explanation is needed for this verse!
bullet Consider the verse, “But some man will say: Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without works; and I will shew thee, by works, my faith.” James 2:18. Another extremely obvious verse that proves our point on the subject.
bullet Consider the verses, "But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? James 2:20-21. No explanation is needed for these verses.
bullet Consider the verse, “For even as the body without the spirit is dead; so also faith without works is dead.” James 2:26. How can the Protestant reformers claim faith is sufficient when we read a verse like this with such obvious meaning?
bullet And finally consider the verse, “Wherefore, brethren, labor the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election.” 2 Peter 1:10
bullet In summary, justification by faith alone has overwhelming opposition in Scripture. Some Protestants have been known to reference other verses from Scripture in an attempt to show that works are NOT required for our salvation. However if one looks at verses that appear to speak negatively about works, they are clearly referring to works that glorify men and not God. Here we agree; works done to please men do not help with attaining our salvation.
in the book What Is Christianity? Protestant pastor Walter Lowrie argued that justification is by faith, but that it is not by faith alone.5 One of his principle arguments is this:

St. Paul never said “faith alone,” and the contention that he meant this is not plausible in view of the fact that, having many opportunities of saying it, he didn’t. In the book What Is Christianity? Protestant pastor Walter Lowrie argued that **justification is by faith, but that it is not by faith alone. ** One of his principle arguments is this:

 

[Harpazo]

Easy - Christ is present, and is the host. As far as apostolic succession, the Alexandria Precedent, and a host of other stuff that historians still debate - I’ll leave that to the debaters and critics. To be honest, time is precious. Some arguments will always be arguments - and so I choose to go on instead of endless-loop arguing.

I am obviously in disagreement with you, consider my ordination valid, and the Eucharists I have received in my life have been valid too. I am blessed to have Christ in my life in every way. And so I give thanks.

O+

Shlomo Luke!

I don’t know. These are pretty serious questions that you should be asking yourself. They are not too hard to figure out, and I do not consider them looping because they will lead to a conclusion, albeit probably one you would not like.

I did not ask if you considered your ordination valid, or your Eucharists. I asked if you would please be able to answer the question. I’m curious to see how you can claim Apostolic Succession. If you don’t claim it, why should we with a 2000 year history accept the validity of your denomination that is about 200 years old which cut itself off from that original Church?

Does truth change as the times do? If it was true for one to be under submission of a local bishop and for one to have a valid ordination by a valid bishop, why is that no longer true, and why does it not apply to Methodists or other Protestants that claim valid sacraments?

These are very honest and serious questions that you should be asking yourself. Perhaps God put me here to help bring them up.

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew

 

[O.S.Luke]

Shlomo Luke!

I don’t know. These are pretty serious questions that you should be asking yourself. They are not too hard to figure out, and I do not consider them looping because they will lead to a conclusion, albeit probably one you would not like.

I didn’t order my ordination certificate in the mail. I spent 4 years in college, 3 in seminary, and more in post-graduate work and spiritual direction thinking about these (and many other) questions. I consider them looping because I have had these conversations with others ad infinitum before you were born. There are no satisfactory conclusions, save agreeing to disagree. I am content to do so.

I asked if you would please be able to answer the question. I’m curious to see how you can claim Apostolic Succession. If you don’t claim it, why should we with a 2000 year history accept the validity of your denomination that is about 200 years old which cut itself off from that original Church?

I did answer your question. You just didn’t like the answer. And I’m not asking you to accept the validity of my denomination. Nor will anyone saying it’s not valid sway me from otherwise practicing my faith in it. My faith is a lot stronger than that, and I worked and prayed thru these things a long time ago.

Having said that, I consider Catholicism a valid faith.

O+

 

[joe370]

If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic? - 2

The true Church of Christ must be one in unity and doctrine and that can only be obtained in the C.C.:

First, it cannot be that the true Church is divided of belief in opinion, as God would no longer be its author. God, a God of Truth, could not possibly have revealed a plurality of religions, or a multitude of varying Christianities. Our Lord taught one religion and founded one Church, not multiple ones. The Protestant denominations clearly fall into this category with their thousands of denominations, all with beliefs opposing the other. How can we call thousands of opposing denominations a reformation of the Church? Our Lord’s threat of damnation for not believing clearly condemns the opposing Protestant denominations that have formed since the Protestant reformation.
bullet Consider the verse, “And Jesus knowing their thoughts, said to them: Every kingdom divided against itself shall be made desolate: and every city or house
against itself shall not stand.” Matthew 12:25. Are not Protestant denominations divided among themselves with little hope to reunite?

Consider the verse, “And let the peace of Christ rejoice in your hearts, wherein also you are called in one body: and be ye thankful.” Colossians 3:15. One body is one Church, and cannot possibly be thousands of opposing denominations.

When the Protestant reformers brought forward the belief that each was to interpret Scripture on his own, that made each person on earth equivalent to the next. Under this belief a lay person is equivalent to a priest or minister, therefore it is optional for a lay person to consult them. This situation inevitably leads to conflicts between all of these “equal” people claiming their interpretation is correct, which inevitably leads to different denominations which inevitably leads to multiple doctrines. As already mentioned above, nowhere is it found in Scripture that we are to interpret Scripture on our own, rather Scripture does clearly indicate Our Lord instructed His Apostles to, “Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned.” Matthew 16:15. Clearly we must believe in one religion as taught by the Apostolic successors to be saved, not to believe two unknowns like Luther or Calvin, or any other number of reformers claiming different doctrines.

Looking at all the Catholic Church has been through with respect to heresies and persecution, the same faith remains in Catholics century to century. Looking at any random point in the history of the Catholic Church, if there was ever a difference in opinion relating to faith or morals, a General Council or the Roman See, guided by the Holy Ghost, has always determined what the correct belief should be, and you will see every Catholic has always submitted to their decisions and argued no more. The Protestant denominations do not have this structure, and therefore they will forever be in disagreement and will forever have multiple doctrines. Can one really call this introduction of contradicting doctrines a reformation of the Church? This is not the teaching of Our Lord.

The Protestant reformers such as Luther and Calvin did not even agree on the same canon of Scriptures from the start of the Reformation. They also differ in opinion on things such as number of Sacraments and other beliefs. For example, Protestant denominations are as much divided among themselves regarding Justification than they are divided with the Catholic Church, with no hope of ever coming to an agreement. Scripture cannot be their judge because it is concerning Scripture that they are in disagreement. From the start of the Reformation this was clearly a red flag that this so-called reformation of the Church was not sent from God, as why would God suddenly decide to spin off multiple denominations with opposing doctrines? Why didn’t Jesus teach, approve or ever hint of such a thing?
Those who have a diversity of canon, that are divided into thousands of opposing denominations with different beliefs, cannot “add up” to one true Church, and neither can they be called by the name of “Church” like the Catholic Church can who has one same head, the same canon of the Scriptures, and one like rule for interpreting them. “He that is not with me, is against me” Matthew 12:30.

It is very common these days to get a variety of answers when asking Protestants if their denomination holds the truth over other Protestant denominations. We’ve heard some Protestants claim “Our denomination is not 100% correct”. If not, then we ask why are you a part of that denomination? If your denomination is not the true Church as Christ gave to us, which denomination IS the true Church, the pillar of truth? We know it must exist somewhere because Christ promised us it would always exist.

We have also heard some Protestants claim that it is not for them to place judgment on the correctness of any denomination. We ask, why not? Our Lord clearly laid out what the truth is and how we are to be saved, why are you now unsure about it, and most of all why are you indifferent about it? Here we present two points against these illogical claims:

 

[joe370]

1. For one to claim they are a Lutheran or Presbyterian or some other Protestant, but yet be indifferent and not claim their religion is the true or correct religion is absurdity. How can one be indifferent in what they believe? This is the same as believing truth and error are both acceptable. Are mathematicians indifferent in the outcome of their equations? Are scientists indifferent in their studies? If they were, they would not have the respect of their peers and would not be mathematicians or scientists. Where would we be if every scientist or mathematician or doctor were to be indifferent in their work and always produce uncertain results generation to generation? What you believe in must be the truth from your perspective or you cannot claim you believe in it. The fact of the matter is, if no one is an authority and if everyone is open to their own interpretation of Scripture, this inevitably leads to indifferentism, for who knows who is right! Nowhere else in the world will you see the concept of indifferentism accepted as we see with Protestant denominations. It is just as wrong to deny the faith than it is to be indifferent about searching for it!
2. If one Protestant denomination believes in the real presence in the Holy Eucharist, and another believes it to be a symbol only, these are directly opposing views and only one can be the truth. If the Symbolic point of view were true, then the believers in the real presence would be guilty of idolatry among other things and if the real presence is true, the symbolic believer would be following a false religion. How can Protestants be indifferent about denominations when critical beliefs such as this separate them? How could Protestants be neutral on a belief that would decide whether we are saved or damned? Only one belief is true according to Our Lord. To say one religion is as good as another when such massive differences exist between each of them is to say truth and error are acceptable to Our Lord, which is simply absurd. Our Lord never taught multiple doctrines!

 

[Harpazo]

I didn’t order my ordination certificate in the mail. I spent 4 years in college, 3 in seminary, and more in post-graduate work and spiritual direction thinking about these (and many other) questions. I consider them looping because I have had these conversations with others ad infinitum before you were born. There are no satisfactory conclusions, save agreeing to disagree. I am content to do so.

I did answer your question. You just didn’t like the answer. And I’m not asking you to accept the validity of my denomination. Nor will anyone saying it’s not valid sway me from otherwise practicing my faith in it. My faith is a lot stronger than that, and I worked and prayed thru these things a long time ago.

Having said that, I consider Catholicism a valid faith.

O+

I did not ask if you considered the Holy Catholic Church valid, although I certainly appreciate your kind words nonetheless.

No, I’m afraid you did not answer my question at all, much to my dismay. You approached it in a round about way, and then replied with answers to questions I did not ask, nor had the intention of doing so.

I do not know of any other way to phrase this than saying I will repeat my question one more time in hopes that you can give me an answer, as opposed to an excuse for not giving one: How can Methodists claim Apostolic Succession in light of Wesley (being an Anglican priest) ordaining ministers to his new movement. Since all Methodist ministers can do is trace themselves back to Wesley, who was NOT a Bishop and could NOT confer the Mystery of the Holy Priesthood, how can the ordinations and Sacraments be valid.

Assume I or someone else is a skeptic, just saying “because I say so” is not going to cut it. Please show why we should see plainly and logically that we should accept your sacraments, ordinations, etc. as valid even though no possible means of Apostolic Succession was passed on. Again, if it was true 1700 years or so prior to the Wesleys confering of his own ordinations that it was necessary to have a valid Bishop (tracing himself back to the Holy Apostles) why is it no longer true?

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew

 

[O.S.Luke]

I did not ask if you considered the Holy Catholic Church valid, although I certainly appreciate your kind words nonetheless.

No, I’m afraid you did not answer my question at all, much to my dismay. You approached it in a round about way, and then replied with answers to questions I did not ask, nor had the intention of doing so.

I do not know of any other way to phrase this than saying I will repeat my question one more time in hopes that you can give me an answer, as opposed to an excuse for not giving one: How can Methodists claim Apostolic Succession in light of Wesley (being an Anglican priest) ordaining ministers to his new movement. Since all Methodist ministers can do is trace themselves back to Wesley, who was NOT a Bishop and could NOT confer the Mystery of the Holy Priesthood, how can the ordinations and Sacraments be valid.

Assume I or someone else is a skeptic, just saying “because I say so” is not going to cut it. Please show why we should see plainly and logically that we should accept your sacraments, ordinations, etc. as valid even though no possible means of Apostolic Succession was passed on. Again, if it was true 1700 years or so prior to the Wesleys confering of his own ordinations that it was necessary to have a valid Bishop (tracing himself back to the Holy Apostles) why is it no longer true?

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew

I would be happy to talk about ordination, the Alexandrian Precedent, the arguments over who was and wasn’t at the ordinations of Francis Asbury and Thomas Coke, whether Wesley (and others) had been ordained a bishop or not by a Greek Orthodox bishop (which is not as big a deal to Methodists as it currently is for Greek Orthodoxy), etc. See lineage here.

I don’t want to derail the subject, and I do have some parish work to do, but I will talk as I can offline.

O+

 

[Memaw]

Easy - Christ is present, and is the host. As far as apostolic succession, the Alexandria Precedent, and a host of other stuff that historians still debate - I’ll leave that to the debaters and critics. To be honest, time is precious. Some arguments will always be arguments - and so I choose to go on instead of endless-loop arguing.

I am obviously in disagreement with you, consider my ordination valid, and the Eucharists I have received in my life have been valid too. I am blessed to have Christ in my life in every way. And so I give thanks.

O+

I, I, I, look how many times you have set yourself up as the authority! You have No ONE to turn to as the final authority. As a Catholic, we have the Church protected by the Holy Spirit, and no matter what goes on around the teaching authority of the Church, (inside and out) the Church continues on in its mission to teach, govern and santify in the TRUTH. Great proof of that in our own time is the man made confusion caused by unfaithful priests, bishops and lay people, after Vatican II, which is being corrected as we speak in so many ways. The Church will work thru her problems without any help or criticizing from outsiders. And She will continue on in her mission. Of course we can always look back into history to see when the Catholic Church has done the same, during and after the protestant reformation. And She will do so till the end of time. You can throw anything at Her you want but she will continue to carry out her work given by Jesus Christ Himself. If the “Gates of Hell” can’t stop Christ’s Church, what makes you think you can!!! You alone have to decide what side you want to be on and when. Many prayers and God Bless, Memaw.

 

[Ronald_E]

Dear Luke,
When I returned to Catholicism in ‘05 after 40 years away many pieces of information began to fall into place that had previously been a fragmented collection of interesting items to know.
When thinking of the sacraments and apostolic succession it came to me one day during prayer that quantum physics might have an answer.
Now I am not an expert; but I can form loose associations from time to time. After His Resurrection, Jesus “breathed” on His apostles and gave them all power in heaven and on earth. When He “breathed” on them He gave them molecules of Himself and consequently they were changed permanently and they had His power by His Word and Breath to create on earth the Sacraments that we have today in Catholicism.
When the priesthood was created through a certain ritual the apostles then transferred the power they obtained through Christ’s actual breath and word to the newly ordained priests. In quantum mechanics there is the reality that energy is given off in the form of light. When Christ breathed on His apostles His Light which would have a certain frequency different from ours would then change the frequency of the apostles’ light. By succession in the priesthood this would then give them the ability to perform the sacraments independent of their human awareness because the Light of God is the source of all life. It is independent of our dispositiion, yet He is always available to us to reveal a deeper understanding of Him. When we experience that deeper understanding it is said that we have a quickening of the spirit. Does that mean that the frequency of the light within us changes and we get closer to the frequency of the Light of God?
Just some thoughts.