Not all non-Catholics are full blown Protestants

[Wisdom]

Hey, most of us have stopped calling the Pope the anti-christ and the Catholic Church the whore of Babylon. That’s a start…

Seriously now? Speaking only of the USA (I have no experience elsewhere), it seems to me that significant segments of Protestantism are becoming more liturgical and more aware of the history of the Church. Further, there is a growing realization that Catholics are solid regarding political and moral issues that are key to the hearts of evangelicals. I don’t forsee a groundswell of Protestant Churches reunifying with the Catholic Church, but who knows? Nothing is impossible for God.

Well yes that is the trend among mainline protestants and thanks for stopping the whore of Babylon nonsense. But the growing segments of Protestantism are Pentacostals and the non-denom types and they are visage in their anti-catholcism and are beyond low church to the point of theatrics. A bad trend in modern protesant movements. But yes we have moved closer to mainline protestantims and you have moved closer to us in some liturgical aspects.

 

[Wisdom]

That makes no sense at all. What about the recovery of liturgy and the Christian year among Protestants? What about the great Protestant admiration for Catholic spiritual writers, from the medieval mystics to Thomas Merton and Henry Nouwen? What about the Protestants who attach themselves to Catholic monastic orders as oblates? What about the large about of Catholic theology that Protestant seminaries and religion majors have to study (my colleague who teaches systematic theology at the small evangelical college where I also teach assigns Catholic authors all the time in her courses)?

What do you expect Protestants to do, short of converting en masse, to try to heal the rift? I think that in fact you simply don’t know about all the things we have done. That may not be your fault, but it certainly isn’t ours.

Edwin

The growing segment of protestantism are those who are low church and have no church year sorry but your proestant brothers known as the Pentacostals and non-denoms are stealing many of your mainline sheep and of course catholics too. THis is the dominant form of protestantism today not mainline.
I know of some protesants recognition of catholic writers and spirituality however this is not eneough ultimatly as Protestantism has always like the 27 catholic books in the new testament taht doesn’t make us seeing things eye to eye although we both may love the gospels our disagreements tend to get in the way.
Sorry but in our official documents of Vatican 2 and our actions since then have us going far father in ecunemical relations than just likeing the works of CS Lewis and John Bunyan. And our going from the Latin Mass to the Norvus Ordo if going far father litrugically than the small inroads you have made in regards to the litrugy. This is not a subject we are likely to agree upon you want to us to give up our catholic distinctiveness which would make us just anotehr protesant church sorry we alreay have such churchs in protestansim. WIthout Catholcism Christendom looses a unique voice and body in the world if the world lost a protestant denomination there would be one similar enought to pick up the void and the world woudl easily recover.

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
Hear hear…!!

…to what?

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

Reunification. We would be quite satisfied if the Catholic Church admitted the errors of its ways, renounced its various erroneous dogmas and joined its brothers and sisters of the Protestants Churches in full communion. What’s taking you so long?

You’re not in communion with THE Church because you don’t want to be.

You ARE part of the Church (Catholic), but you’re just “being bad” and therefore have to “try a little harder” to get into heaven, but you can still do it with a bit more effort.

Oh well. Too bad for you.

Catholics don’t particularly care where you stand, in or out, other than praying for you that, since it would be better for all of us if you were “in” as Christendom would look better, you’d get real and do what’s right.

But what are the odds…?!

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[JohnOneOne]

First off, you’re not in the same group with Jehovah’s Witnesses because you are a Christian, and they are not.

For what it’s worth (not that I believe saying so will, in all actuality, make any real difference here) Jehovah’s Witnesses certainly are Christian.

Yes, although they do not follow the traditions of men nor man-made doctrines, this does not make them non-Christian.

Agape.
john1one@earthlink.net
Good Companion Books

 

[Vaclav]

We believe this is possible, and your prayers for the reunion of the Church are greatly desired and appreciated.

As a former Lutheran who converted to Catholicism, you and your church will be in my prayers.

Hey, most of us have stopped calling the Pope the anti-christ and the Catholic Church the whore of Babylon. That’s a start…

Not in my part of the country!

Seriously now? Speaking only of the USA (I have no experience elsewhere), it seems to me that significant segments of Protestantism are becoming more liturgical and more aware of the history of the Church. Further, there is a growing realization that Catholics are solid regarding political and moral issues that are key to the hearts of evangelicals. I don’t forsee a groundswell of Protestant Churches reunifying with the Catholic Church, but who knows? Nothing is impossible for God.

To be honest I don’t think it matters beyond the few High Church Protestants anyway.

I think many of my Catholic colleagues here forget that the Church does not concern herself with days, months, or years. She works in lifetimes and centuries.

There have always been other paths. When the Church was very young the Alexandrian pagan temples used all sorts of technology to keep their faithful from leaving (and taking their coins with them). They used loadstone to make metal objects appear to fly, or “magically” close doors.

Christ’s Church prevailed then.

Today we see plasma television video screens and stadium seating instead of loadstone, but the result will be the same. The Church will prevail. Ecumenism is worth it, pray for it and it will succeed. But as they say, Rome wasn’t built in a day.

 

[Keikiolu]

For what it’s worth (not that I believe saying so will, in all actuality, make any real difference here) Jehovah’s Witnesses certainly are Christian.

Yes, although they do not follow the traditions of men nor man-made doctrines, this does not make them non-Christian.

Agape.
john1one@earthlink.net
Good Companion Books

Info on Non-Christian Groups:

“Christ is God’s Son and is inferior to him.”
“Christ was the first of God’s creations.”

It will come as no surprise to learn that the Witnesses do not believe Jesus Christ is divine. He isn’t God in their view. To support this theory, they appeal to their own rendering of John 1:1: “In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” They use the lower-case “g” to show that Christ is merely a creature, even if the most exalted creature.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses deny the Incarnation. According to them, Jesus isn’t God, so there’s no question about God taking flesh.

…etc…

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Contarini]

The growing segment of protestantism are those who are low church and have no church year

They tend to be the growing edge. But you’d be surprised how many free-church non-denom evangelicals are into this stuff. I know I have been, teaching at an evangelical college.

sorry but your proestant brothers known as the Pentacostals and non-denoms are stealing many of your mainline sheep and of course catholics too. THis is the dominant form of protestantism today not mainline.

I was speaking in large part of evangelicals–both those who are in mainline denominations and those who are not. The trend among evangelicals is not toward fundamentalism and anti-Catholicism but toward a pragmatic openness to anything that may promote evangelism and spiritual growth. I teach at an evangelical college, I come from a solidly evangelical background, I write for an evangelical periodical (Christian History and Biography). I know what I am talking about.

The evangelical wings of mainline denominations *are *growing, and even non-denominational Protestants are becoming more interested in traditional spiritual disciplines, monasticism, etc. This is creating a vibrant evangelical religious culture that is often undisciplined and amorphous but is not dogmatic or bigoted. There are far fewer anti-Catholic Protestants how than there were even 20 years ago when I was a kid.

I know of some protesants recognition of catholic writers and spirituality however this is not eneough ultimatly as Protestantism has always like the 27 catholic books in the new testament taht doesn’t make us seeing things eye to eye although we both may love the gospels our disagreements tend to get in the way.

I didn’t say there weren’t disagreements. I said that it’s false to say that Protestants have done nothing.

Sorry but in our official documents of Vatican 2 and our actions since then have us going far father in ecunemical relations than just likeing the works of CS Lewis and John Bunyan.

Give an example? Here’s the hard fact. Catholics are welcome to receive communion in most Protestant churches. Protestants are not welcome to receive communion in the Catholic Church. That makes nonsense of any claim that you have “come farther” than we have ecumenically–except perhaps in the sense that you had a lot farther to go in the first place!

And our going from the Latin Mass to the Norvus Ordo if going far father litrugically than the small inroads you have made in regards to the litrugy.

That depends on which Protestant churches you are talking about, obviously. The basic problem with your original post is that you generalized about *all *Protestants. Now you say you are talking about Pentecostals and non-denominational Protestants. That’s a very different thing. Mainline Protestant churches have changed their worship radically under the influence of the same liturgical scholarship that lay behind Vatican II (one of the fallacies of traditional Catholics is that Catholics changed the liturgy to be more Protestant–actually both Catholics and Protestants changed their liturgies under the influence of the liturgical movement and its portrait of the early Church’s worship). I would argue that such things in evangelical worship as an acceptance of art and a greater openness to the emotions and senses are movements toward Catholicism, but we could argue about that.

This is not a subject we are likely to agree upon you want to us to give up our catholic distinctiveness

Why are you making these false claims about me? Nothing I have said gives you any right to say this. You are lying about me and you need to apologize.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Info on Non-Christian Groups:

“Christ is God’s Son and is inferior to him.”
“Christ was the first of God’s creations.”

It will come as no surprise to learn that the Witnesses do not believe Jesus Christ is divine. He isn’t God in their view. To support this theory, they appeal to their own rendering of John 1:1: “In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” They use the lower-case “g” to show that Christ is merely a creature, even if the most exalted creature.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses deny the Incarnation. According to them, Jesus isn’t God, so there’s no question about God taking flesh.

…etc…

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

Right, but the question is whether this makes them not Christian. By some definitions it does, but I think these definitions are not useful, just as the evangelical definition of a Christian as someone who has a personal relationship with Christ is not useful. You can use it if you like, but it is misleading. It’s much better to say that they are not orthodox Christians. I understand why Catholics would need a stronger term, since Catholics think Protestants are not orthodox Christians!

Edwin

 

[Vaclav]

Right, but the question is whether this makes them not Christian. By some definitions it does, but I think these definitions are not useful, just as the evangelical definition of a Christian as someone who has a personal relationship with Christ is not useful.

It would certainly prevent them from being Trinitarian and many Christians, Protestant and Catholic, might agree that this is a very basic and useful precept for being considered a “Christian faith.”

 

[Traveller1534]

It is so very sad, but also necessary for Roman Catholics to feel that they are the only real church of Chrsit. After all, this is the only way that Catholicism can work. I know, I have been on both sides of the issue. It does however take it down to another level to begin to question the Christianity of other denominations. If refusing to accept the pope as infallible and the supreme authority of the church makes one Protestant, then everyone should be Protestant because the whole premise of it is totally assinine and anti-biblical.

Traveller 1534ad

 

[jmcrae]

It is so very sad, but also necessary for Roman Catholics to feel that they are the only real church of Christ.

It is a historical and Biblical fact that Christ only founded one Church, that He put Peter in charge, and that Peter’s lawful successors are at the Vatican today.

 

[lak611]

If refusing to accept the pope as infallible and the supreme authority of the church makes one Protestant, then everyone should be Protestant because the whole premise of it is totally assinine and anti-biblical.

Traveller 1534ad

I do not quite understand your post. Are you suggesting that Catholics or Protestants are anti-Biblical?

 

[Traveller1534]

The church that Christ founded is not the Roman Catholic church of today, not by a long shot. If the popes are all successors of Peter, then why are they literally surrounded and covered by wealth and jewels and yet Peter was a poor fisherman that wasn’t even very smart and not the least bit interested in being an authoritarian?

 

[Contarini]

It would certainly prevent them from being Trinitarian and many Christians, Protestant and Catholic, might agree that this is a very basic and useful precept for being considered a “Christian faith.”

It is of course a basic principle for determining whether one is in any sense part of the Church. But they clearly are part of the historical tradition called Christianity. Mormons are a bit more dubious, but their religion still centers around Jesus so I’d still tend to class them as Christian heretics.

Edwin

 

[lak611]

The church that Christ founded is not the Roman Catholic church of today, not by a long shot. If the popes are all successors of Peter, then why are they literally surrounded and covered by wealth and jewels and yet Peter was a poor fisherman that wasn’t even very smart and not the least bit interested in being an authoritarian?

What about the televangelists who live in fancy homes? What about pastors who drive expensive cars? What do you say about them?

 

[jmcrae]

The church that Christ founded is not the Roman Catholic church of today, not by a long shot. If the popes are all successors of Peter, then why are they literally surrounded and covered by wealth and jewels and yet Peter was a poor fisherman that wasn’t even very smart and not the least bit interested in being an authoritarian?

What has that got to do with anything? Is my mother a different person today because she has more money and wears better clothes today than when I was born? Did I lose her half of my DNA when she reached a certain level of income and started decorating the house with paintings and other art?

 

[Sabda]

It is so very sad, but also necessary for Roman Catholics to feel that they are the only real church of Chrsit. After all, this is the only way that Catholicism can work. I know, I have been on both sides of the issue. It does however take it down to another level to begin to question the Christianity of other denominations. If refusing to accept the pope as infallible and the supreme authority of the church makes one Protestant, then everyone should be Protestant because the whole premise of it is totally assinine and anti-biblical.

Traveller 1534ad

According to YOUR pov it’s anti-biblical. According to MINE and many other Catholics pov it’s extremely biblical. After all didn’t God work though Moses to lead the Israelites to the promised land. Wasn’t Moses only ONE man? What happened to those people who tried to usurp Moses’ authority? Give you a hint. It wasn’t pretty! THAT was God’s doing. God wasn’t to happy with those who were trying to usurpe Moses’ authority.

Read Numbers 12 and also Num 16:1-35

 

[Efrain]

Thanks for asking, Efrain.

My answer is Council of Trent, Session XIII, canons 1-10. Anglicans who say things like this usually differ slightly on canon 11, but 91% is still 91%.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus

Understood. So why not 100%? Why take out confession or the need to be free from sin prior to recieving communion?

 

[GKC]

Understood. So why not 100%? Why take out confession or the need to be free from sin prior to recieving communion?

Anglicans don’t. While Anglicans often do use personal, individual, auricular confession, they also use corporate confession, as a part of every Mass, and receive absolution, and that for the same reason you suggest above.

Yes, I know the RCC teaches it differently. But that’s the slight difference that makes it 91%, with respect to the 11 canons.

Nope, not all Anglicans will answer as I did, with respect to Trent. But Anglo-Catholics will.

GKC

 

[Efrain]

I am a member of the Evangelical Community Church-Lutheran (ECCL) (ecclnet.org) which is the most “Romanized” of the High Church Lutheran (Evangelical Catholic Lutheran) Churches.

We maintain the creeds, celebrate the Mass and all 7 Sacraments using the Rites of the Roman Catholic Church. We too have sacremental confession, make the sign of the cross, baptize infants (and Adults using the RCIA process and rites) and proclaim the consecrated Eucharistic Elements to be the actual Body and Blood of Jesus Christ (through transubstantiation.)

We have formally accepted the authority of the Ordinary Magisterium and the authority and infalibility of the Sacred Magesterium.

We have formally accepted Papal Primacy and Papal Infallibility, and believe that the Pope is the successor to St. Peter, and the Vicar of Christand he is prayer for in all our Masses and other rites and ceremonies.

We say we accept the Unaltered Augsburg Confession et al, along with the Anglican 39 Articles of Religion but only and I do mean, only “insofar as they are in accordance with authentic Catholic faith and tradition,” which is defined by the Magesterium, the documents of all Ecumenical Councils recognized by the Roman Catholic Church, all Papal documents, and the Catechism fo the Catholic Church, which pretty much excises everything Protestant from those Lutheran and Anglican , and reduces them to historic symbols only.

All of our clergy have been re-ordained in the Rebiban (or Vatican) lineage of the apostolic succession. Our primary succession among several) is from Scipione Cardinal Rebiba through Brazilian Archbishop Carlos Duarte Costa. Though our present clergy are married (and self-supporting) we have no problem transitioning quickly to clerical celibacy for future clergy once we have returned to the Catholic Church.

Some of our Archbishops are Opus Dei Cooperators, and our Judicial vicar is a Benedictine Oblate. Our Metropolitan has a Jesuit advisor.

We are governed by Roman Catholic Canons to the greatest extent practical at this time. Our goal is incorporation into the Roman Catholic Church hopefully as an interim structure of “Lutheran heritage” to facilitate the return of large numbers of High Church (Evangelical Catholic) Lutherans to the Catholic Church (many would return if such an interim structure existed not.) This interim structure could be either a sui juris Church (not likley) a personal prelacy, or a Priestly Society (easier to establish.) Either will work for us. And we do not care who is put in charge of it as long as it is created.

Does this mean that we consider the rest of Lutheranism to be in serious error? You bet we do!

In our situation, calling us “Protestants” seems to be not only inacurate, but very sad. We do not evangelize Catholics - we are into giving Lutherans a way to become Catholics, and lead them home to Rome. Why aren’t we Roman Catholics? We are working on that. We could all return individually any time but that would only accomplish our own return. We want to start, essentially, a* second* Counter-Reformation - one generated this time from within Lutheranism. We believe this is possible, and your prayers for the reunion of the Church are greatly desired and appreciated.

You all are in my prayers for the benifit of the Body of Christ.