Name one or two ways the Roman Catholic Church has been protestantized

[Melchior]

The Charismatic movement - like it or not it is a spin-off of a 20th century Pentacostal/Charismatic Revivalist movement.

The non-traditional music at most masses resembles the music of the Jesus movement in the 1970’s (folk music as sacred/worship music).

 

[Timothysis]

So, having read through this entire thread it is obvious that most have nothing but emotional responses to a very direct question. Does that tell us anything at all…???

 

[Ockham]

Yes. People care passionately about our Church and want to see it returned to its rightful glory.

 

[DavidPalm]

So, having read through this entire thread it is obvious that most have nothing but emotional responses to a very direct question. Does that tell us anything at all…???

But Tim, that doesn’t really address the substance of those responses that haven’t been emotional. For example, Yours Truly gave a whole list of changes introduced into the Catholic Church that came right out the Protestant handbook.

Michael Davies wrote a book, Cranmer’s Godly Order, in which he details the changes to the Catholic liturgy made during the Protestant revolt precisely to water down the Catholic distinctives and wean the people away from the Church. The list of changes finds remarkable parallels in the changes made within the Catholic Church during the liturgical revolution of the twentieth century, on point after point. That could be purely accidental, I suppose.

Is it really your contention that it is not possible for there to have been Protestant influences in the way the liturgical changes were made? What sort of evidence would have to be brought forward for you to find it convincing?

 

[Roy5]

THE TRADITIONAL VERSUS THE CONTEMPORARY

I recall the days of the church before Vatican II. It is difficult to say ‘Protestant ways’ because Protestants are as liturgical as the Anglicans, as non-liturgical as the Quakers, as distant as the Amish, as conservative as the Southern Baptists and as liberal as the Unitarians. (Remember: Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses are not Protestants.)

The main difference is that the spirit of Catholicism today resembles that of Protestantism much more than it did. Catholics attend mass when they want to, respect or disrespect the priest as they choose, pay attention to special days of obligation or ignore them, favor a greater role of the laity in parish administration, accept this doctrine or not depending upon how they feel, no longer believe that the Catholic Church is the one true church and the other Christian ‘sects’ are heretical, opening defy papal declarations as on artifical birth control, etc.

As for actual practices, and remembering that Protestants differ so much among themselves - and even within the same denomination (e. g., some Methodists worship more like Episcopalians and other Methodists worship more like Baptists), these changes since Vatican II come to mind. (1) Singing of hymns by everyone, including many Protestant hymns. (2) Worship in vernacular and rarely in Latin. (3) More people-centered than altar-centered than mass once was. (4) Receiving communion in the hand. (4) More informal masses - e.g., folk masses. (5) Church regarded more as a community of faith rather than as a place which dispenses blessings. (6) Community confession has largely replaced personal confession. (7) Laity can go into the altar area. (8) Girls in many churches can serve as altar girls. (9) Lay readers play a greater role. (10) Less statuary.  11) Many churches permit conversations before mass, rarely before Vatican II. (12) Dress more informal, women heads no longer need covering, while Protestants at worship as a whole dress better than Catholics.

 A couple of others thoughts. Before Vatican II it was considered a sin to attend a Protestant church. Today that happens all the time. Before Vatican II there were severe restrictions on marriages of Catholics to non-Catholics. Today many Catholic priests will participate in mixed marriages, even if held in a bride's Protestant church. Oh, and I recall when Catholics were warned not to join the YMCA or YWCA, regarded as subversive to the Catholic faith. 

  We could go on, but that's it for now..

  Happy St. Patrick's Day. I'm told that Irish Protestants organized the first celebrations of St. Patrick's Day in the USA. True or false?

 

[CatholicChick]

I agree & will add one more thing. I’ve seen too many deacons give erroneous information, especially on the internet, while using their title to lend authority to their statements.

As for the ways that the Catholic Church has become Protestantized:

1. Our children now attend the same public schools that Protestant children attend. (Very few of us are willing to make the sacrifices that our parents did… in order to send our children to Catholic schools. After all, we must have that nice home in the suburbs, that second car, the two T.V,'s, etc. )
   This results are more Catholic/Protestant marriages, which often results a watered-
   down sort of faith. (Not always, but often.)
2. With our religious orders for women all but gone, there is no place for ladies within the Church to give their whole being to Christ/the Church exclusively. (Perhaps that’s why we’re seeing woman wanting to be priests??? After all, the Protestant sects have female ministers.)
3. Our devotions (rosaries, devotion to the saints, litanies, Novenas, Benediction, etc). have been seen as “embarrassments” by many Catholics during these years following Vatican II. It has been many, MANY years since Benediction has been offered in my previous parish.
4. Our own Catholic music is all but gone. Tantum Ergo has given way to “Amazing Grace”.
5. The very atmosphere in Church is different. Before Mass, people are visiting…after Mass they bolt for the door. Of course, no one really knows where the Tabernacle is…so reverence isn’t demanded. Since it isn’t demanded, it seems to have gone the way of “Church clothes”. (pre-Vatican II people will understand the reference to “Church clothes”.
6. One of my Catholic Grandchildren asked me what incense “was”. .
7. Confession is just SOOOO Catholic. Get rid of those boxes. Strip from the Church, all of the Altar rails, the kneelers, the Crucifix is to be replaced by the Risen Christ, the statues & for goodness sakes…get rid of those Mass prayers that plead for forgivness, after all…modern man is better than that and why would God need such a Sacrifice as His own Son, He’s like a kindly old Grandfather who says of our sins, as He pats on the head…I “understand”, don’t worry about it.

I could add to this, but I think you get the idea.
Thank God & Pope Benedict for beginning to turn this around. But, it’s going to take time. We have, at least, one generation who knows nothing about their heritage or their culture as Catholics & that isn’t their fault. It’s the fault of my generation.

As far as Catholic school goes I wish I could send my kids but the one closest is 45 min away and I just can’t afford it. As far as sacrifice I really wish I could and have been thinking what I could give up so they could go but I just don’t see how I could do it. Sorry to get off topic but I would love any advice in this area

 

[MGLechner]

1.) The heretics changed the language from Latin to the vernacular.

2.) The heretics began to receive communion under both forms.

7.) And lastly they offered their service on a table, rather than an altar.

Not to nickpick…okay, maybe a little…at the First “Mass” called the “Last Supper” Jesus did not speak in Latin, but used the vernacular (namely Aramaic)…

The Disciples received the Eucharist in both forms…

And they did it reclining at a table…

Were they heretics? Just asking!

 

[stringbeanduck]

Hand holding during the Our Father. It always makes me feel gulity to when somebody reaches out their hand to me and I don’t hold it. Sometimes if they touch mine, then I grab it, because I don’t want to be a jerk. Most of the time I try to put mine behind my back so they don’t grab it. Any one else have this problem.

 

[Chiltepin]

Hand holding during the Our Father. It always makes me feel gulity to when somebody reaches out their hand to me and I don’t hold it. Sometimes if they touch mine, then I grab it, because I don’t want to be a jerk. Most of the time I try to put mine behind my back so they don’t grab it. Any one else have this problem.

Fold or clasp your hands in prayer. Doesn’t that make more sense than holding behind your back? Also, I think it is more of a recognizable symbol in that people are less likely to try to hold your hands. I give in if it is a cute child who looks confused and heartbroken. Anyway I figure that if you shake their hand at the sign of peace, they’d figure out you don’t mean anything against them. If you are my uncle and you neither hold hands nor shake hands, I guess it could get pretty tricky.

 

[Tsuwano]

It’s probably been said, but here goes anyway.
The Roman Catholic Church is not “protestantized” because that is an oxymoron. However, the protestant influences I see are that individuals are too much individual an not community oriented. The Church is not about the individual alone, but how he/she relates to the rest of the Church community and the broader human community. Hence the necessity of Reconciliation before receiving the Eucharist, for example. Many people will choose this or that to believe making themselves the one who defines doctrine and dogma thus bypassing the magisterium altogether.

I think this post hits the nail right on the head. Various practices, such as standing or kneeling in church, holding hands during the Our Father, etc., cannot be described with the labels of “Protestant” or “Catholic,” but we can talk about influences that the Protestant communities have had on the Catholic Church. The influence mentioned above may be one such influence. Also, just to make it clear, from my perspective, not all “Protestant” influences on the Church are negative.

 

[The_Theotokos]

Hand holding during the Our Father. It always makes me feel gulity to when somebody reaches out their hand to me and I don’t hold it. Sometimes if they touch mine, then I grab it, because I don’t want to be a jerk. Most of the time I try to put mine behind my back so they don’t grab it. Any one else have this problem.

I had this problem as well when I would attend a Latin rite Church. It completely turned me off.

 

[The_Theotokos]

I have to say, at no time in my life have I felt closer to my faith as a Catholic than when I was an altar girl. I went to Catholic School for 12 years, and the reverence and respect I felt by being allowed to be serving God so actively was an incredible experience. I guess I don’t really understand the vehemence against altar girls.

The problem people have with altar girls stems from the fact that the position of altar boys was created as a means to encourage boys to develop a vocation to the priesthood. Considering that the Church has no authority to ordain females, the concept of an altar girl seems dubious.

 

[Chiltepin]

It is difficult to say ‘Protestant ways’ because Protestants are as liturgical as the Anglicans, as non-liturgical as the Quakers, as distant as the Amish, as conservative as the Southern Baptists and as liberal as the Unitarians.

Good point.

 

[EasterJoy]

If I were to just read this thread and others just like it I would think that the Catholic Church was going to H–L in a handbasket. I know better because I see so many Priests and parishioners not doing what is being said is happening here, I hear great homilies, hard teachings. I see people in less than ideal environments showing utter respect and reverence to Jesus in the Tabernacle and in what is one day going to be a Parish Hall. No, we don’t have Altar rails, yes we stand to receive and can choose on the tongue or in the hand with a good mix.

I don’t travel as often as I used to so I can not say how much this kind of thing is happening and I do believe that there are those who have Priests and religious and other lay church leaders who are still trying to live by the “Spirit of Vat. 2”, more so on the Coasts and in Canada than in fly-over country (which is where I generally used to travel). I believe that EWTN and Catholic Answers on the radio among other great apostolates have started the turning of the tide. Please folks, let’s keep in mind that we are all human and in the time frame of Holy Mother Church, the time from the promulgation of Vat. 2 until now is a drop in the bucket.

Brenda V.

If I were Protestant and read this thread, I’d be mostly impressed by the fact that everything wrong with the Church is referred to as “Protestant”, which I would find highly offensive, if my own Protestant church had never done any such thing.

I am one of those sticklers for the meaning of words that likes to reserve words for uses that reflect their real meaning. Use “Protestant” when you mean “Protestant.” Otherwise, use a word that better fits, whether it be irreverent, heretical, unconventional, ill-advised, hair-brained, innovative, or whatever.

Please don’t blame every irreverent, heretical, unconventional, ill-advised, hair-brained innovation on the Protestants. It is not their fault and they don’t deserve the blame. If our Catholic brothers and sisters did it to our practice, whatever that is, they deserve the job of defending their choices.

There aren’t many practices that fit all the Protestants, after all. They are an extraordinarily (dare I use the word? Why not, it fits) diverse group.

 

[The_Theotokos]

If I were Protestant and read this thread, I’d be mostly impressed by the fact that everything wrong with the Church is referred to as “Protestant”, which I would find highly offensive, if my own Protestant church had never done any such thing.

I am one of those sticklers for the meaning of words that likes to reserve words for uses that reflect their real meaning. Use “Protestant” when you mean “Protestant.” Otherwise, use a word that better fits, whether it be irreverent, heretical, unconventional, ill-advised, hair-brained, innovative, or whatever.

Please don’t blame every irreverent, heretical, unconventional, ill-advised, hair-brained innovation on the Protestants. It is not their fault and they don’t deserve the blame. If our Catholic brothers and sisters did it to our practice, whatever that is, they deserve the job of defending their choices.

I hate to say it, but the very word ‘Protestant’, is by definition a ‘heretic’ who protests the Catholic Church. It really isn’t a kind word to begin with, but most Protestants I know, hold the term in reverence.

 

[CradleCath]

You do know, do you not, that Protestants were invited to be ‘actively involved’ in Trent, Vatican I and probably other councils in between. This is above all because we can’t simply ignore the existence of non-Catholics, or their criticisms of us, stick our heads in the sand and hope they’ll go away or something.

If we are to have any hope of resolution we do have to actually listen to them, right or wrong. Trent, for example, took on board Luther’s criticism of the sale of indulgences (and the points raised in a good ten or dozen of the other 94 theses as well, while we’re at it) - and was happy to address Protestants and their concerns head-on by actively inviting them to be part of the solution.

 

[Canto]

Protestant leaders were invited to the Council of Trent, which was held approximately 30 yrs. after Martin Luther created a new “religion”, because the Pope & King Charles V still thought it possible that the Protestants would return to the fold. Do you really believe that Protestant leaders were invited to Vatican II because the Pope believed that he could get them to return to the TRUE Catholic Church? You know…the Church that recommended the praying of the rosary, the litany of the Saints…the Church that said it’s Mass in Latin & teaches the Real Presence…?? I don’t think so. I think they were there to tell the Catholic prelates what they needed to do in order to make the Catholic Church acceptable to them.

Protestants were at Vatican II to observe.

Those consulted for the Mass were asked to comment on history not on theology i.e. “would you date this prayer to the 3rd century” as opposed to “is it okay if we call Mary the Mother of God in this bit or might that turn you guys off”

Protestants were given free passage by the Church to attend Trent, not just to observe, but to comment on how us Catholics should receive communion! They were delayed for whatever reason and didn’t make it.

As was noted Mass was originally in the vernacular (Aramaic then Greek). At the last supper Communion was under both kinds and the body assumedly was in the hand and it was at a table. In Revelation we see 'happy are those who are called to the SUPPER of the Lamb." Reading the Eucharistic prayers it is blatantly obvious that the Mass is a sacrifice. On the Cross (which the Eucharistic sacrifice is an unbloody perpetuation of) Christ faced the people.

As for music, long before Vat II we see Chant dying out. Classical polyphony anyone? How about the St Basil or St Gregory hymnals with (though some Latin!!!) filled with English hymns.

 

[rpp]

Neither were the Arians - are you suggesting they weren’t heretics or severely damaging for the Church?

LilyM, this is not like you. We are friends. To compare the SSPX, wo are trying to remain faith to traditional teachings, to the Aryans, who claimed Christ was not God, is not a valid comparisson. Aryanism was, and is, a true heresy. The difficulties the SSPX have can be described, from various points of view, as a difference in perspective.

I will categorically state that the SSPX, who represent less than 1% of the faithful, are considerably less damaging, or perhaps not even really damaging at all, than the 70%+ of the Church that was Aryan ay its height.

 

[LilyM]

LilyM, this is not like you. We are friends. To compare the SSPX, wo are trying to remain faith to traditional teachings, to the Aryans, who claimed Christ was not God, is not a valid comparisson. Aryanism was, and is, a true heresy. The difficulties the SSPX have can be described, from various points of view, as a difference in perspective.

I will categorically state that the SSPX, who represent less than 1% of the faithful, are considerably less damaging, or perhaps not even really damaging at all, than the 70%+ of the Church that was Aryan ay its height.

Does it really matter how big the level of damage? Do you think we should only bother about disobedience when it’s a lot of people are being disobedient? Why? Didn’t Jesus talk about going after the one sheep in a hundred who strayed from the flock? Wouldn’t He go even after the one in a thousand? One in a million? One in six billion (you or me?)

 

[rpp]

One or two? How about five:

John XXIII
Paul VI
JP I
JP II
Benedict XVI

None of these Popes promoted protestantism… To suggest otherwise is to to call God a liar because Christ said “the Gates of Hell shall not prevail” against the Church.