In what ways can Protestants accept papal primacy today?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
AugustTherese said:
Great! But do realize there is a time and place to constructively and charitably evangelize to those of differing beliefs. The Catholic Church strongly condemns false irenicism and proselytizing. This does not mean we should indifferently shy away from the opportunity to witness the fullness of Truth when it is appropriate. If you are convicted that your faith is the fullness of Truth, then you should want everyone, especially those whom you love most, to experience that fullness of Truth; not by jamming your beliefs down their throats through coercion and/or cajoling, but through genuine acts of love.
Click to expand...
Jews do not evangelize. I didn’t write anything about Jewish beliefs. I don’t know what makes you think I did.

I realize Catholics do evangelize, but most Protestants are Protestant because they are as positive the faith they follow is the right one as you are. And it probably is the right one for them. I think that should be respected unless, of course, one is following a cult-like faith, e.g., David Koresh, that is detrimental to himself or society.

I don’t think there’s any way Protestants can or would accept papal primacy. And I think that’s fine. It’s not a part of their faith, nor mine. It doesn’t make us wrong, except to Catholics, or bad. Even Eastern Catholics do not accept papal primacy.

To answer the question, I don’t think there’s any way Protestants can accept papal primacy. That’s not a criticism of Roman Catholicism or a statement of Protestant or Jewish faith, it’s a belief of mine, regardless of religious beliefs. Most Protestants are as devoted to their faith and as sure it’s the correct one to follow as you are of yours or I am of mine. I don’t think we should interfere with that.

You do realize that Jesus was a practicing Jew and that he only wanted to communicate with Jews? Peter only wanted to communicate with Jews. It was Paul who included Gentiles in the mix.
 
Last edited:
ConstantLearner said:
You do realize that Jesus was a practicing Jew and that he only wanted to communicate with Jews?
Click to expand...
And, yet He stayed with a Samaritan for two days.
ConstantLearner said:
To answer the question, I don’t think there’s any way Protestants can accept papal primacy
Click to expand...
Not with that attitude. Protestants are baptized into communion with the Catholic Church and the Bishop of Rome. As a former Protestant, I would encourage all Christians that unity is desired and hoped for within the Church that Jesus Christ founded.
ConstantLearner said:
Most Protestants are as devoted to their faith and as sure it’s the correct one to follow as you are of yours or I am of mine. I don’t think we should interfere with that.
Click to expand...
Context and place. You do realize that many Protestants come to CAF to either learn about Catholicism, e.g. Papal Primacy, or to either explicitly protest against such doctrines. For us to defend our Faith in hopes of them coming to the fullness of Truth is not ‘interfer[ing]’ with anything!
ConstantLearner said:
I think that should be respected unless, of course, one is following a cult-like faith, e.g., David Koresh, that is detrimental to himself or society
Click to expand...
We believe that Christian sects that break away from the Catholic Church and adopt and advocate doctrines in aversion to the full deposit of faith, are detrimental to themselves. However, most of today’s Protestants do not fall into that category considering that the vast majority have been born into their communion by no fault of their own.
 
Thus concludes Apostolicae curae (reinforced by Ad tuendam fidem). Which all RCs should affirm, at the appropriate level of theological certainty.

Anglicans have a different view on the matter (and the form and the intent). Thus such statements as you make here lack clout, to such an audience.

No one expects you to agree with the Anglican view of the validity of their orders. Anglicans who differ from me in their concept of valid orders get to thumb their noses at me, too. Life is like that.
 
GKMotley said:
Thus such statements as you make here lack clout, to such an audience.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. And, even though the Anglican audience here is probably quite small, and most of them have heard this broken record, these statements need to still be expressed.
 
Last edited:
I certainly see no harm in it. And if it satisfies you, so be it. As pointing out what I did satisfies me.
 
AugustTherese said:
We believe that Christian sects that break away from the Catholic Church and adopt and advocate doctrines in aversion to the full deposit of faith, are detrimental to themselves. However, most of today’s Protestants do not fall into that category considering that the vast majority have been born into their communion by no fault of their own.
Click to expand...
You really don’t have to explain things to me, AT. I have a Master’s degree in theology from a Catholic college, so have studied the Catholic faith formally for six years. I don’t like to mention it, though because it sounds like I know more than I do, and there are people on this forum with no degree who know more than I, such a @Gorgias. And that’s just one. I am, however, Jewish. (Catholic father, Orthodox Jewish mother.)
 
Last edited:
AugustTherese said:
No validly ordained priest, and no Sacrifice of the Mass, no Real Presence.
Click to expand...
Please show us where in the Bible Jesus said those things were necessary. He said, “Do this in memory of me.” That’s it. The Protestant churches do that. Jesus did not dictate their liturgy. Hence, they, too, have the Real Presence. I mean no disrespect to the Catholic Church, but it did not corner the market on Christianity or G-d. Why do you think Jesus was Jewish and wanted to preach to Jews only? He was not interested in gentiles. Peter was not interested in gentiles, which caused much of the friction between him and Paul.

Now, I might consider changing my opinion if you can show me where Jesus said the mass and an ordained priesthood were necessary. And Protestant ministers DO study formally. I have read the NT in its original language, under the guidance of ordained priest instructors, and I never saw anything that says the Real Presence requires the liturgy you indicate. Of course, nothing forbids it, either. I’m not criticizing the Catholic liturgy; I’m defending the Protestant. (And I have never been Protestant, by the way, but I respect their right to worship G-d as they see best, just as I worship G-d as I see best. One must have respect. I do, however, believe only G-d can tell us if we have the fullness of faith or are lacking in some respect.)
 
Last edited:
AugustTherese said:
Context and place. You do realize that many Protestants come to CAF to either learn about Catholicism, e.g. Papal Primacy, or to either explicitly protest against such doctrines. For us to defend our Faith in hopes of them coming to the fullness of Truth is not ‘interfer[ing]’ with anything!
Click to expand...
I think a lot of them come here to socialize with other religious people. Nothing wrong with that. It’s part of life. I belong to a Jewish message board, too, but it’s not very active because it’s quite new. I don’t know of any Protestant message boards, or I imagine Protestants would be there. Other people just like philosophical debate.
 
Last edited:
JonNC said:
The argument a Catholic should make.
Click to expand...
Do you believe your Anglican priesthood has been validly ordained? (I don’t know how Anglicans feel about this.)
 
Last edited:
One never can tell just what a given Anglican might think, on a given topic. But knowing Jon as I do, I’ll go out on a limb and say that yes, he does. Particularly given the way you asked the question.

A sentiment that I share.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for your answer. I believe they are validly ordained as well.
 
Last edited:
I would not make a universal judgement on that. But those who were ordained using valid form, intent, matter, and minister, and are valid recipients of the sacrament of Orders, yes.
 
ConstantLearner said:
40.png
JonNC:
The argument a Catholic should make.
Click to expand...
Do you believe your Anglican priesthood has been validly ordained? (I don’t know how Anglicans feel about this.)
Click to expand...
Of course, and I know my Lutheran pastors were validly ordained
 
Last edited:
ConstantLearner said:
there are people on this forum with no degree who know more than I, such a @Gorgias.
Click to expand...
Actually, I just don’t advertise my academic background. I’d rather that folks take me on face value, and not on my degree or my role. YMMV. 😉
 
ConstantLearner said:
Please show us where in the Bible Jesus said those things were necessary.
Click to expand...
Please show us in the Bible where we need to prove anything from the Bible in terms of validating proper liturgical elements and dogmatic truths.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top