My Protestant friend says this...

[JonNC]

Yep. I guess you did not see my follow up post.

Nope, I didn’t. I type too slow. My turn to apologize.

Jon

 

[LutheranDK]

Both equally wrong though, and don’t use the word Romanist, it insults your own intelligence.

What word then? Not “catholic”, because that word is not one that the Roman church can monopolize.
Not “papist”, because even I don’t like that term, and have only used it in anger or frustration (no one is perfect)
And “those from the Roman church”, while accurate is rather tiresome reading when used again and again and again in a post.

 

[rpp]

Nope, I didn’t. I type too slow. My turn to apologize.

Jon

Thank you. That was kind.

 

[JonNC]

I do believe, however, that the Lutheran Church no longer believes in the Real Presence in the same way Catholic do, but that change came after Luther’s time, I think. Then again, I might continue to be wrong.

Yea, actually the rejection of transubstantiation did take place during Luther’s time. It was considered an attempt to explain the unexplainable - the mystery.

Jon

 

[Gamera]

It irritates me endlessly to see romanists put Luther and Calvin in the same box, just because they’re both reformers. On many issues, they are diametrically opposite eachother!

I know who Luther was, and I know who Calvin was. But what the heck is a romanist?

 

[ibkc]

What word then? Not “catholic”, because that word is not one that the Roman church can monopolize.

BWAH! Sorry, but that horse left the barn a long time ago.

 

[rpp]

What word then? Not “catholic”, because that word is not one that the Roman church can monopolize.
Not “papist”, because even I don’t like that term, and have only used it in anger or frustration (no one is perfect)
And “those from the Roman church”, while accurate is rather tiresome reading when used again and again and again in a post.

In English, “Catholic” is the accepted term. “Romanish” or “Roman Church” are derogatory slurs and very insulting terms, much like “Papist” you referred to.

 

[JonNC]

What word then? Not “catholic”, because that word is not one that the Roman church can monopolize.
Not “papist”, because even I don’t like that term, and have only used it in anger or frustration (no one is perfect)
And “those from the Roman church”, while accurate is rather tiresome reading when used again and again and again in a post.

LutheranDK,
I use the word Catholic because it is a term they like. To me it just helps the conversation to move along. We all know what the term means in the sense of universal.

Jon

 

[LutheranDK]

Whoops! I made a mistake (yes, I do admit when I make mistakes.) Belief in the Real Presence is one of the issues that separated Luther,who DID believe in the Real Presence, and Zwingli who did not.

My humble apologies for the error.

I do believe, however, that the Lutheran Church no longer believes in the Real Presence in the same way Catholic do, but that change came after Luther’s time, I think. Then again, I might continue to be wrong.

That depends on in what way the Roman church believes in Real Presence. I think I read a reply in the apologetics forum before I took a break from these forums, which said that the Roman church believes that (sorry about the poor language…I’m ESL and it’s 11.55 PM) the Lord is “sacramentally present” in the Eucharist, but not that the elements physically BECOME His flesh and blood. If that is the case (which is a thought that seriously struck me by surprise - I thought that the Roman church taught that the elements BECAME His flesh and blood), then the only thing that seperates the Lutheran and Roman churches is the idea about the Eucharist as a “sacrifice” (although that is a MAJOR hurdle - indeed vital).

This is clearly written in the Lutheran “confessional writings”, but the problem is that in the liberal “churches” (i.e. the Scandinavian State Churches, and from my understanding the ELCA), there is a tendency to throw this to the wind like everything else associated with the truth.

 

[LDNCatholic]

What word then? Not “catholic”, because that word is not one that the Roman church can monopolize.
Not “papist”, because even I don’t like that term, and have only used it in anger or frustration (no one is perfect)
And “those from the Roman church”, while accurate is rather tiresome reading when used again and again and again in a post.

Roman Catholic Church maybe? Roman Catholics (only if you’re talking about Catholics of the Roman rite though). Use a capitalised Catholic to differentiate between the uses of the word, just don’t call us Romanists. It is an insulting term used to make us sound like pseudo Christians.

 

[LDNCatholic]

LutheranDK,
I use the word Catholic because it is a term they like. To me it just helps the conversation to move along. We all know what the term means in the sense of universal.

Jon

Thank you Jon, but we don’t just like it, we use it, it is the name of our Church and I don’t see why it is so painful to use it.

 

[LutheranDK]

Thank you Jon, but we don’t just like it, we use it, it is the name of our Church and I don’t see why it is so painful to use it.

Because the Roman church and the Catholic church is not the same.
The Roman church is a denomination within Christendom.
The Catholic church IS Christendom.

Therefore, I am a Catholic. But I am not Roman.

There is no hatred, no bigotry, no contempt, or whatever else I have been accused of, behind my not using the word “catholic” about the Roman church. It is simply because the word is broader than the confines of the Roman church.

 

[LDNCatholic]

Because the Roman church and the Catholic church is not the same.
The Roman church is a denomination within Christendom.
The Catholic church IS Christendom.

Therefore, I am a Catholic. But I am not Roman.

There is no hatred, no bigotry, no contempt, or whatever else I have been accused of, behind my not using the word “catholic” about the Roman church. It is simply because the word is broader than the confines of the Roman church.

OK, but I am a Catholic, and I AM Roman, so call us the Roman Catholic Church, problem solved and you and your fellow members of the Church of Luther can get on with something else.

You say that you are a Catholic, you say that Catholic=Christendom, that my Church is part of Christendom, but you can’t call me a Catholic simply because my Church identifies itself as what you have indicated it is? Interesting…no contempt you say?

Romanist, Papist, Romish and other such ignorant terms were used for years to oppress Catholics. Find a different word, you have been told that they are offensive now, so find an alternative.

 

[hawkeye]

It irritates me endlessly to see romanists put Luther and Calvin in the same box,

And it irritates me to be called a romanist, can you please with-draw that remark, I was called it on a non-catholic board, that I had to accept, but on here ?

 

[LutheranDK]

You say that you are a Catholic, you say that Catholic=Christendom, that my Church is part of Christendom, but you can’t call me a Catholic simply because my Church identifies itself as what you have indicated it is? Interesting…no contempt you say?

Please take note of what I said, not what you would have liked that I had said!
You claim that the Roman church is = Christendom
I say that it is PART OF Christendom.
There’s a huge difference there, and if you see contempt in this, it is because you WANT to.

 

[LDNCatholic]

Please take note of what I said, not what you would have liked that I had said!
You claim that the Roman church is = Christendom
I say that it is PART OF Christendom.
There’s a huge difference there, and if you see contempt in this, it is because you WANT to.

I read what you wrote, I think you misunderstand my reply.

You are calling yourself a Catholic because you are part of Christendom.

Yet Even though you admit the Roman Catholic Church is part of Christendom, you refuse to call it Catholic.

I don’t want to see contempt, I’d rather everyone was peaceful and civil, you are not being very civil and are using a horribly derogatory term.

 

[Homerun40968]

Oops I forgot this one:

1. The Catholic Church is wrong, because one of its councils abolished the “One strike you’re out” rule when applying to adulterous priests in the US. Now, the rule is to move the priests to dioceses with uglier children.
   That’s pretty ridiculous. It’s so foolish, that I did not even have a rebuttal for it.

 

[Gamera]

Baptists aren’t the only ones who believe in baptism. Does that mean we should refuse to call them Baptists? People can name their own organization whatever they want. I can’t understand why anyone would refuse to call the Catholic Church by the name given it by its own members. That doesn’t mean you’re agreeing with it.

 

[i_have_no_names]

1. The Catholic Church has a quota on the amount of good deeds one performs, and if it is not met, then he/she is told that they are going to hell

I can actually sort of see where your friend might be coming from with this. Obviously, he’s wrong, but he could confusing salvation with canonization.
To be canonized, don’t you have to be reported having performed a certain number of miracles through intercession? And if that is not met, then you aren’t canonized by the Pope, but that doesn’t mean you go to Hell. It just means it won’t be officially declared by the Church that you’re in Heaven.

Maybe that’s not what confused him at all, but hey, it’s possible…

 

[JRKH]

Oops I forgot this one:

1. The Catholic Church is wrong, because one of its councils abolished the “One strike you’re out” rule when applying to adulterous priests in the US. Now, the rule is to move the priests to dioceses with uglier children.
   That’s pretty ridiculous. It’s so foolish, that I did not even have a rebuttal for it.

I hope that you explained to your “friend” that if he has legitimate questions about what happened with the abuse scandal you will be more than willing to discuss it and/or get the correct information.

However you have no intention of listening to such foolish and baseless allegations.

Your friend has a long way to go just to reach being able to call himself Christian based on comments such as these.

Peace
James