Is Protestantism a good thing? (Or “Why I Kissed Ecumenism Goodbye”)

[gohjedrek]

How about you or I create a specific thread, if you’d like to debate about this ? It could be interesting.

I would prefer not to debate further, lest it put a stumbling block on the other party.

(Romans 14.13-14) Therefore, let us not pass judgement on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother. I know I am persuaded in the Lord Jesus Christ that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who think it is unclean.

I have said my piece on transubstantiation, but if I add any further, it serve to do no justice. It will thus, be appropriate for me to stop here regarding transubstantiation. If you are keen on a debate, it would be best to go to a priest in your local diocese. (no sarcasm intended)

 

[steve-b]

I am not sure if this thread is till on track; …

Is Protestantism a good thing? The question may be, “good in compared to what?”

The OP has posted 7 times. Peter’s last post he expresses agreement …

otjm:

does Ecumenism need to be kissed goodbye?

no one YET, has said yes or no.

otjm:

Ecumenism is another word most fail to give any definition to. I define ecumenism in tow different aspects, The first is the work done by various Christian communities working together for peace and justice; that is done oin a local level and whether or not it leads any individuals to convert to the Catholic Church, it is doing together what Christ commands of us to do for others. And combined we can do more than we can individually.

We know we are to love the Creator FIRST over EVERYTHING, THEN comes our love for the created. We know That should NOT be reversed in order.

consider the following
Lk 14:26

The English translation "Hate" in Greek is μισέω = hate, detest, love less, esteem less

Since we aren’t to hate anyONE, it’s probably fair to say in that case, it means "love less, esteem less" etc people, AFTER loving God first and foremost.

But it DOES put particular emphasis on love God first over everybody and everything, and don’t mix up the order of that.

otjm:

The second definition of ecumenism is the work done on a much higher pay grade level, and that is the meetings we have with other Christian communities; …

And there might be a third level of ecumenism, as represented by one-on-one and information provided which leads to Protestants joining the Church, largely but not exclusively through RCIA.

the 3rd level is the primary reason for ecumenism.

otjm:

And to add to this … we have many Catholics who “have been sacramentalized but not evangelized”. And … that is a critical issue within the Catholic Church, particularly for the young. CARA recently estimated about 18% of Catholic in the ages of 18 to 29 attend Mass on a weekly basis.

Just some food for thought.

To your last point, I completely agree. As Our first Pope Peter taught, 7 attributes we are to attain without stopping 2 Pet 1:5-11

Note: Education is 2nd so it is at the top of the list to do…for EVERYONE

 

[Dovekin]

there might be a third level of ecumenism, as represented by one-on-one and information provided which leads to Protestants joining the Church, largely but not exclusively through RCIA.

This not part of ecumenism, though it should enhance ecumenism. At Vatican II, the Fathers were clear on this:

it is evident that, when individuals wish for full Catholic communion, their preparation and reconciliation is an undertaking which of its nature is distinct from ecumenical action. But there is no opposition between the two, since both proceed from the marvelous ways of God.

Your final paragraph is an excellent comment on Ecumenism. It is much more about evangelizing those who have not been fully evangelized in their own Church. It is about discovering Christ in other communities as well as bringing others to recognize Christ as we know him.

 

[steve-b]

otjm:

there might be a third level of ecumenism, as represented by one-on-one and information provided which leads to Protestants joining the Church, largely but not exclusively through RCIA.

This not part of ecumenism, though it should enhance ecumenism. At Vatican II, the Fathers were clear on this:

it is evident that, when individuals wish for full Catholic communion, their preparation and reconciliation is an undertaking which of its nature is distinct from ecumenical action. But there is no opposition between the two, since both proceed from the marvelous ways of God.

IOW the two go together,

AND

Re: your point, Vat II
As the popes have taught since Vat II, the Church never imposes the Faith but always proposes it. Pope Paul VI makes this clear in Evangelii Nuntiandi

Emphasis mine:

It would certainly be an error to impose something on the consciences of our brethren. But to propose to their consciences the truth of the Gospel and salvation in Jesus Christ, with complete clarity and with a total respect for the free options which it presents—“without coercion, or dishonorable or unworthy pressure”—far from being an attack on religious liberty is fully to respect that liberty, which is offered the choice of a way that even non-believers consider noble and uplifting (From: EN 80).

IOW, for purposes of our culpability, it’s always about choice freely made, once one is given the truth. THAT then is what makes us all culpable for what we freely choose NOT forced, to do AFTER we have the truth

If one is NOT given the whole truth, because of one’s own errors, giving them their views, rather than the truth, then that’s just an example of one spreading their own errors example: HERE

AND THAT

isn’t evangelizing OR ecumenism.

Dovekin:

Your final paragraph is an excellent comment on Ecumenism. It is much more about evangelizing those who have not been fully evangelized in their own Church. It is about discovering Christ in other communities as well as bringing others to recognize Christ as we know him.

What if they are in all sorts of heresy themselves? They pass on their own errors to others. What is the consequence to THAT action for the one doing THAT?

 

[otjm]

What if they are in all sorts of heresy themselves? They pass on their own errors to others. What is the consequence to THAT action for the one doing THAT?

We could go round and round about that until the cows come home. They certainly have part of the kerygma down correctly, and call each other to lead a moral life. They are baptized and do their best to follow Christ as they know it; is that better or worse than Secularism?

And not to make too fine a point of it, but given the large number of Catholics who are sacramentalized but not evangelized - and to an extent may have some heretical ideas themselves picked up a long the way from minimal catechesis - does not your question apply also to them? If so, then what is the answer to your question.

People are held to what they know and the choices they make based on that. If they do not know they are in heresy, I sincerely have my doubts God will hold them responsible. And it would appear the bishops of the world hold the same.

I am not suggesting that heresy has no need to be addressed, but rather your questions at the end. And I strongly suspect that any Protestant who is approached with “That’s a heresy!” will immediately turn a deaf ear.

 

[TULIPed]

People are held to what they know and the choices they make based on that. If they do not know they are in heresy, I sincerely have my doubts God will hold them responsible. And it would appear the bishops of the world hold the same.

Well said. This made me think about choices I make. As a Christian, here’s how I rank them in terms of Easy and Hard choices:

EASY:
Debate theology and heresy on CAF
Go to church
Read your Bible
Memorize scripture
Read your Catechism/Confession
Call yourself a Catholic or Protestant
Show up and take communion, Eucharist (regardless of what you think of it theologically)
Confess your sins - corporately or otherwise
Profess your faith (unless you’re in Iran)
Recite the Lord’s Prayer, Rosary, Apostles or Nicene Creeds, sing hymns, kneel, light candles, etc. etc.

HARD:
Love the Lord with all your heart and strength
Love your neighbor as yourself
Be kind to people you disagree with - especially politically or in terms of religion (or anyone in your immediate family after you’re tired and/or hungry)
Tithe - at least (truly tithe - 10% of gross income/first fruits)
Be unselfish
Honor the sabbath
Pick up trash instead of walking by it thinking somebody else will do it
Talk and listen to homeless people
Listen to your spouse - like really listen
Honor your mom and dad, even when they’re annoying
Be a good Samaritan
Forgive that guy that drives you crazy (and who will keep driving you crazy)
Show mercy to somebody when you have every right not to
Share my faith, even when I’m uncomfortable doing it
Take risk
Don’t be lazy
Don’t gossip
Don’t lust
Don’t watch stupid shows on Netflix that seem really good, but aren’t good for you
Don’t be a glutton (even on Thanksgiving or Easter or Christmas)

Interestingly, for me - I think I could do a fair amount of the easy ones on my own. I have no chance at the hard ones without the Holy Spirit doing the heavy lifting - really all the lifting (especially the stupid show on Netflix one).

 

[EricPH]

if Protestantism did not exist, there would be more people who would opt for Catholicism.

If all Protestant Churches closed tomorrow, I think a lot of them would also looses their faith.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

What if they are in all sorts of heresy themselves? They pass on their own errors to others. What is the consequence to THAT action for the one doing THAT?

We could go round and round about that until the cows come home. They certainly have part of the kerygma down correctly, and call each other to lead a moral life. They are baptized and do their best to follow Christ as they know it; is that better or worse than Secularism?

And not to make too fine a point of it, but given the large number of Catholics who are sacramentalized but not evangelized - and to an extent may have some heretical ideas themselves picked up a long the way from minimal catechesis - If so, then what is the answer to your question. does not your question apply also to them?

Of course it applies. Did I not already address that in reference to Peter’s instruction in post 103? YES
ojtm:

People are held to what they know and the choices they make based on that. If they do not know they are in heresy, I sincerely have my doubts God will hold them responsible. And it would appear the bishops of the world hold the same.

Your opinions are duly noted. I however am NOT expressing MY opinions. Just look at the links I provide. My links point to Scripture, Church teaching, and Tradition. I’m NOT the author of any of it.

Re: one’s ignorance,
here is what the Church teaches RE: culpability on THAT point of ignorance.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.” In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

THAT is why we evangelize.

HOWEVER

Given how easy it is to receive information today, and if one shows no interest in voluntarily educating themselves, in the areas God is already giving THEM graces to be interested in such education, with all that information available, THEN, they are culpable for the wrongs they commit.

otjm:

I am not suggesting that heresy has no need to be addressed, but rather your questions at the end. And I strongly suspect that any Protestant who is approached with “That’s a heresy!” will immediately turn a deaf ear.

Re: terms one uses
The Church defines heresy as

2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. " Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

So:

What point is it you want to make on this?

 

[steve-b]

otjm:

People are held to what they know and the choices they make based on that. If they do not know they are in heresy, I sincerely have my doubts God will hold them responsible. And it would appear the bishops of the world hold the same.

Well said. This made me think about choices I make. As a Christian, here’s how I rank them in terms of Easy and Hard choices:

EASY:
Debate theology and heresy on CAF
✓Go to church
Read your Bible
Memorize scripture
Read your Catechism/Confession
✓Call yourself a Catholic or Protestant
✓Show up and take communion, Eucharist (regardless of what you think of it theologically)
✓Confess your sins - corporately or otherwise
Profess your faith (unless you’re in Iran)
Recite the Lord’s Prayer, Rosary, Apostles or Nicene Creeds, sing hymns, kneel, light candles, etc. etc.

[snip for space]

Interestingly, for me - I think I could do a fair amount of the easy ones on my own…

I picked 4 points off your list to address .

As an observation, it matches points made by
From Pius IX 1864

THE SYLLABUS OF ERRORS CONDEMNED BY PIUS IX
III. INDIFFERENTISM, LATITUDINARIANISM

1. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true. – Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862; Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.
2. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation. – Encyclical “Qui pluribus,” Nov. 9, 1846.
3. Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ. – Encyclical “Quanto conficiamur,” Aug. 10, 1863, etc.
4. Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church. –
   Encyclical “Noscitis,” Dec. 8, 1849.

Those errors can all be shown using Scripture, Sacred Tradition, & 2000 yrs of Catholic Church teaching. If interested, just ask

 

[TULIPed]

Steve - this has nothing to do with my point. But - as always - thanks for the information.

 

[steve-b]

Steve - this has nothing to do with my point. But - as always - thanks for the information.

And that’s all it is…INFORMATION

I’ll just say,

When you said

This made me think about choices I make. As a Christian, here’s how I rank them in terms of Easy and Hard choices:

&

I think I could do a fair amount of the easy ones on my own.

So

While Your point was about choices one makes on their own…right?

All I was doing, in my response given the topic of the thread , was to point out, different errors in thinking that have showed up in history, and do show up in people’s thinking.

Just some information

 

[TULIPed]

While Your point was about choices one makes on their own…right?

No. My point was that certain choices me make as Christians - those that Christ has asked us to make - are harder than others. Further - the harder they are, the less of a chance I have of making them on my own, and the more likely the Holy Spirit is at work in my life.

For example - which would the average person find more difficult to do as a Christian - give at least 10% of their gross income to God; or make it to church on Sunday. Given that 80% of Americans give no more than 2% of their income to the church (2018 Charitable Giving Statistics, Trends & Data: The Ultimate List of Charity Giving Stats | Nonprofits Source) - my guess is it’s harder for folks to tithe than to make it to church on Sunday.

Maybe all Catholics tithe, and we Protestants skew the curve. I doubt it. I think making the hard choices that Jesus asks of us is hard for everyone - Protestant and Catholic.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

While Your point was about choices one makes on their own…right?

I think making the hard choices that Jesus asks of us is hard for everyone - Protestant and Catholic.

True.

And I gave an example of, how people can and do disobey or ignore, what Jesus not only asks of us to do, but commands of us to do.

 

[TULIPed]

but commands of us to do.

Like giving till it hurts. How many people in Catholic pews do this Steve? I’ll speak for Protestants and say - not very many. Like almost none. Maybe you guys are better at it - but my guess is not by much.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

but commands of us to do.

Like giving till it hurts. How many people in Catholic pews do this Steve? I’ll speak for Protestants and say - not very many. Like almost none. Maybe you guys are better at it - but my guess is not by much.

I wasn’t talking about tithing. Besides, We can’t buy our way into heaven anyway… agreed?

I was giving information on errors of thinking.

 

[TULIPed]

I was giving information on errors of thinking.

Exactly. Which is why I said you missed my point entirely.

Besides, We can’t buy our way into heaven anyway… agreed?

No - you can’t buy you way to heaven. You write a lot about what Jesus commands Steve. And maybe you’re right - maybe Jesus commands us all to be Roman Catholic. I think being Roman Catholic, or Presbyterian, or Methodist, or whatever stripe you want to call yourself is easy. Giving - really sacrificing - till it hurts? That’s hard. Without the Holy Spirit - I think it’s all but impossible.

Said another way - if you call yourself a Christian - Protestant or Catholic - and you really love Jesus, and the Holy Spirit is really, no kidding in your heart - you better find yourself doing the hard stuff Steve. And it’s not hard to show up on Sunday and hit the rail. At least it’s not for me.

What is hard is to give like this:

"And he called his disciples to him and said to them, “Truly, I say to you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the offering box. For they all contributed out of their abundance, but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, all she had to live on.”

Is that easy for you Steve? If it is, you’re a better man than I. (Even if it isn’t you’re probably a better man than I - but that’s a very low bar )

 

[steve-b]

I was giving information on errors of thinking.

TULIPed:

Exactly. Which is why I said you missed my point entirely.

You write a lot about what Jesus commands Steve. And maybe you’re right - maybe Jesus commands us all to be Roman Catholic. I think being Roman Catholic, or Presbyterian, or Methodist, or whatever stripe you want to call yourself is easy. Giving - really sacrificing - till it hurts? That’s hard. Without the Holy Spirit - I think it’s all but impossible.

As I’ve said many many times, “Roman” is a rite within the Catholic Church. It happens to be ~98% of the total Catholics in the world, but all rites within the Catholic Church are 100% Catholic. ALL are Catholic because all are completely united with the chair of Peter, the pope of Rome, AND they are in complete union with all those in union with him…

AND

I just pass on the information from references properly referenced.

I impose NOTHING. I respect everyone’s free will. After all, THAT in the end is how God judges us. By the choices one makes freely . NO coercion, NO pressure

TULIPed:

***I think being Roman Catholic, or Presbyterian, or Methodist, or whatever stripe you want to call yourself is easy. …

Said another way - if you call yourself a Christian - Protestant or Catholic - and you really love Jesus, and the Holy Spirit is really, no kidding in your heart - you better find yourself doing the hard stuff Steve.

All I was showing, by quoting from Pius IX, is how those 80 errors he describes, show up in people’s thinking. AND, i selected from those 80 errors, 4 errors, [errors 15-18] as an example to address indifferent points of view, in people’s thinking.

TULIPed:

What is hard is to give like this:

"And he called his disciples to him and said to them, “Truly, I say to you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the offering box. For they all contributed out of their abundance, but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, all she had to live on.”

[snip for space]

All I’m saying here is,

I have said with links, many times before, the HS isn’t behind all the divisions we see FROM Our Lord’s Church, the only one HE established on Peter and those in perfect union with Peter. THAT defines what Jesus established, the Catholic Church, and those in obedience to HIM in this command, defines who a person loves most..

Again, I’m just passing on information to consider…

 

[TULIPed]

I just pass on the information from references properly referenced .

Sorry. The story about the widows mite is Mark 12:41-44.

After all, THAT in the end is how God judges us. By the choices one makes freely . NO coercion, NO pressure

Agreed. Those who choose to make the hard choices (with the help of the HS of course), get a “well done good and faithful servant.” (Matt 25:23)

and those in obedience to HIM in this command, defines who a person loves most. .

Yep. And the Man said where your treasure goes, there you’ll find your heart, no? (Matt 6:21) You can preach unity and heresy all you want brother - but the rubber meets the road with personal sacrifice.

Showing up on Sunday costs you and me NOTHING, except maybe some coffee and bagel time. Show me somebody making hard choices for Christ, and I’ll show you somebody who really loves Him.

(Surely you find it a bit ironic that a Protestant is preaching good works, no?)

 

[TULIPed]

As I’ve said many many times, “Roman” is a rite within the Catholic Church. It happens to be ~98% of the total Catholics in the world, but all rites within the Catholic Church are 100% Catholic. ALL are Catholic because all are completely united with the chair of Peter, the pope of Rome, AND they are in complete union with all those in union with him…

Ok geez. I can never remember who on this site gets mad when I just say “Catholic” and not “Roman Catholic”, and vice versa. With you, it’ll always be “Catholic”. Apologies.

 

[Candlefish66]

concerning “Protestants turning the Catholic Church into a cartoon of itself“, you asked for an example. Chic Tracks is a good start.

Concerning the Reformation and beyond, I cited conduct of the Religious, and not any specific teaching.

Are they validly baptized into Christ? The answer is yes. Again, they are brothers and sisters in Christ.