Protestant ways

[NotWorthy]

smelton:

I admit that the protestant churches are not perfect. I admit that we screw up scripture with errant teachings at times. I would say that God dictates the truth and that we were given his word to try and understand the truth.

Yea and Amen!!!

smelton:

The Council of Nicea did not make the truth did they? They simpley tried to understand what the scripture teaches, correct?

If you had read about the Council, you would have trouble believing the Holy Spirit was present. Some of those bishops were willing to pull any stunt in order to get their way. But if you saw how well the resulting Creed teaches us Christians what God told us in the Old and the New Testaments, you would have to marvel at just how much an effect the Holy Spirit had on the Council.

smelton:

But I think you would admit that its not God’s word that is wrong but the churches whom make the errors.

Again, Yea and Amen!!! God’s truth hasn’t changed one Iota (A little Council of Constantinople humor, there!)

smelton:

I’m just curious that if you can see that in protestant churches why that is not visible in the Roman Catholic Church? I really apprecitate your point of view it is helping me understand your position better.

Because our teaching on faith and morals hasn’t changed. What was sinful 1900 years ago is still sinful today. I used the example of contraception. Every major protestant denomination has changed its teaching on the sinfulness of contraception. What changed? Did God’s truth change? Of course not!

Now, its easy to confuse our disciplines and traditions (with a little “t”) with this, because they are subject to change. They don’t affect our salvation in the way sinning does. Whether a priest can marry or not is a good example, as well as fasting on Fridays. These are traditions and disciplines. Another example is the Latin Mass. The Mass said in the vernacular has brought many people back to the Church (although many will argue against that, but that’s another thread).

Thank you, for your patience with us, as well my friend. Your questions are encouraged.

Notworthy

 

[SolaChristo]

jim1130:

I’ve only been visiting this forum recently, but am already discouraged by the amount of hostile anti-Catholic rhetoric permeating the threads disqualifying reason, logic, history, science, tradition, intellect, etc. to substantiate and promote their individualistic stances, positions, and theologies. The pious tones of these anti-Catholics do little to make me sympathetic to their standpoints and, in fact, make me less tolerant of their theology and more devout as a Catholic. How, after 2,000 years, people continue to misinterpret Catholicism, endorsed by non-Catholic pastors, theologians, etc. who should be educated and informed, is an absolute mystery to me. The rise of the super-star pastor (see Joel Osteen, Jim Bakker, and Benny Himm) and superstar prophets (see Joseph Smith and Mohammad) are violations of the “thou shalt not have false god before me” Commandment, but the non-Catholic obsesses on Catholic “icons” and Mary. These anti-Catholics do not want to know our position or even care to hear our position because explanations offered by the well-informed Catholics on this site are dismissed, belittled, and/or insulted. From my perspective, their goals are to defame, defraud, etc. Catholicism as a way to elevate their own theologies, ideologies, and prophets. It is a shame that their basis of faith relies on insulting the true faith. In a simplistic comparison, such antagonism reminds me of the turbulence in the Middle East where the Palestinians, and Arabs in general, are fed hate (hated toward Israel, hatred toward the US) because that is easier than peace and understanding. On the other and more positive hand, I have learned a significant amount in defense of the Catholic Church that reinforces my faith. I am not well versed enough to tackle the contrarian views head on, but appreciate those Catholics significantly more knowledgeable who present doctrine in a reasonable, intelligent, and articulate way, and I enjoy reading and learning from them. To those I say “thank you.”

Have you not just done what you claim others do?

 

[smelton]

mercygate:

The first step in answering this extremely central question is to ask you what you mean by “error” in Catholic teaching. Not putting you off here: this is a foundational point of the discssion.

I mean any thing that is taught that doesn’t agree with scripture. I’m not talking about specifics just that possibility that man ,by that I mean every man, preacher, bishop, teacher, elder, priest, deacon, has a propencity to sin and therefore is liable to teach something contrary to scripture. Maybe not maliciously but still is contrary to scripture. That is what I mean

 

[NotWorthy]

Mickey:

I’m not sure you’ll be able to convince SolaChristo otherwise.

If SolaChristo was the only Non Christian reading this thread, this would be pertinent. You have to understand that there are others that read this thread, and some of them would like to gain some inspiration from this.

I’m just wondering how many people have been converted to or from our faith by being insulted or ridiculed (Yes, I’m guilty of this, too!)

Notworthy

 

[jim1130]

mercygate:

That is not important. All we need to do is state the Catholic position clearly, in the power of the Holy Spirit, and in a way people can understand. “Convincing” – as you know – is the Holy Spirit’s prerogative, and when it comes to the Catholic Church, “convincing” can take decades. Superficial Christianity may be acquired overnight, but the depths and reaches of the faith, the full glory of Christ in his Body and Bride – that can take a while if you’ve been taught to believe the Church is something other than she is.

I would rather be an oak than a mushroom. A mushroom sprouts quickly and appears bright among the green blades of grass whereas an oak tree takes years and years, but then an oak tree’s roots are deep and its longevity without question.

 

[mercygate]

smelton:

I mean any thing that is taught that doesn’t agree with scripture. I’m not talking about specifics just that possibility that man ,by that I mean every man, preacher, bishop, teacher, elder, priest, deacon, has a propencity to sin and therefore is liable to teach something contrary to scripture. Maybe not maliciously but still is contrary to scripture. That is what I mean

In that case, you are correct: people, Catholics, Catholics in authoritative positions, can, may, and do err. Even Thomas Aquinas had a few ideas that are inconsistent with Catholic teaching today. But when the Church teaches out of her Magisterium on matters of faith and morals, that is an entirely different thing from Joe Catholic – or even Father Joe Catholic – mouthing off on his own about some point of theology.

Very quickly any allegation that the Church teaches anything not in agreement with Scripture will take you to the specifics. The Church teaches nothing that disagrees with Scripture. If you believe she does, put up a thread on the subject (chances are there are already a dozen threads on whatever question you may have) and see what responses you get.

Your approach on this thread has been respectful. You should receive equally respectful replies.

 

[smelton]

NotWorthy:

Yea and Amen!!!

If you had read about the Council, you would have trouble believing the Holy Spirit was present. Some of those bishops were willing to pull any stunt in order to get their way. But if you saw how well the resulting Creed teaches us Christians what God told us in the Old and the New Testaments, you would have to marvel at just how much an effect the Holy Spirit had on the Council.

Again, Yea and Amen!!! God’s truth hasn’t changed one Iota (A little Council of Constantinople humor, there!)

Because our teaching on faith and morals hasn’t changed. What was sinful 1900 years ago is still sinful today. I used the example of contraception. Every major protestant denomination has changed its teaching on the sinfulness of contraception. What changed? Did God’s truth change? Of course not!

Now, its easy to confuse our disciplines and traditions (with a little “t”) with this, because they are subject to change. They don’t affect our salvation in the way sinning does. Whether a priest can marry or not is a good example, as well as fasting on Fridays. These are traditions and disciplines. Another example is the Latin Mass. The Mass said in the vernacular has brought many people back to the Church (although many will argue against that, but that’s another thread).

Thank you, for your patience with us, as well my friend. Your questions are encouraged.

Notworthy

I think we both agree that their are essentials to salvation and that those essentials must never be compromised. There are also non-essentials of faith that we should allow for freedom in Christ. I agree that sin 1900 years ago is still sin. I don’t believe its the church who makes it a sin but its a sin because contrary to God’s will. I believe I have enough education and faith, plus the Holy Spirit, to determine what God teaches through his word. Maybe I’m just arrogant. I appreciate the fact that your faith stands by what you believe is truth.

 

[Mickey]

NotWorthy:

If SolaChristo was the only Non Christian reading this thread, this would be pertinent. You have to understand that there are others that read this thread, and some of them would like to gain some inspiration from this.

I’m just wondering how many people have been converted to or from our faith by being insulted or ridiculed (Yes, I’m guilty of this, too!)

Notworthy

My statement was not meant as an insult to SC. If it has been construed in that way, I apologize. Unfortunately, I am somewhat jaded. So many times I have read beautifully worded responses that depict what the Catholic Church actually teaches and has always taught. Yet certain non-Catholics will retort with the same prejudice that has been thoroughly instilled in their hearts’. I do understand that it is the Holy Spirit that converts minds and hearts, but it is still sad and frustrating to hear the same biased comments being recycled and regurgitated. :banghead:

Blessings to you Notworthy and mercygate,
Mickey

 

[mercygate]

smelton:

I think we both agree that their are essentials to salvation and that those essentials must never be compromised. There are also non-essentials of faith that we should allow for freedom in Christ. I agree that sin 1900 years ago is still sin. I don’t believe its the church who makes it a sin but its a sin because contrary to God’s will. I believe I have enough education and faith, plus the Holy Spirit, to determine what God teaches through his word. Maybe I’m just arrogant. I appreciate the fact that your faith stands by what you believe is truth.

Ah. Those non-essentials? What are they? Infant versus believers’ baptism? Baptism by immersion or infusion? Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist? Sacraments or ordinances? Who gets to decide what is essential? See the problem?

My Holy Spirit can beat up your Holy Spirit!

Oh yeah?

Yeah!

Your mother wears combat boots!

Messy, messy, messy.

A Catholic would say that education, faith and the Holy Spirit are all important – essential – but in one single believer they would be considered insufficient.

We would heed Jesus’ advice in Mt. 18:17, and the model exhibited in Acts 15, and “take it to the church.” “The Church,” for this kind of discernment, being the Apostles (or their successors: the bishops in union with the See of Peter), acting under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and in their Christ-given authority to “bind and loose.” (Mt. 18:18)

 

[Mickey]

mercygate:

My Holy Spirit can beat up your Holy Spirit!

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/10/10_3_7.gif

 

[jim1130]

SolaChristo:

Have you not just done what you claim others do?

Not at all. I do not go out of my way to participate in theatrics like yourself. As a Catholic, I am constantly bombarded and confronted by anti-Catholics. When I attempt to educate them about Catholicism, they are not interested because they prefer to remain hostile and prejudiced. I do not deliberately go around to non-Catholic Web sites and attack non-Catholic points-of-view or play the contrarian for the fun of it. I do not walk around my neighborhood or office telling others that their non-Catholic beliefs are wrong. I have never attended one Mass where the priest or deacon made negative comments about any other religion (cannot say the same when I accompanied friends to their non-denominational or non-Catholic churches). I do not know you from Adam, but from the brief threads you have written and your misinterpretation of what I wrote, I feel that you wish to perpetuate this victim status so that you can profess you are being persecuted for the sake of God. Sadly, you do not have to look far to see which religion, in addition to Judaism, is most persecuted and is really the lone religion that does not fall under the protection of political correctness. For example, this country, from the time of the colonies until now, exhibits a strong anti-Catholic thread that has been promoted and endorsed by the non-Catholics. Charles Carroll, the only Catholic signer of the Declaration of Independence (and whose grandfather came to the colonies from England to escape Catholic persecution) and the last surviving signer, had to study in France because Catholics schools were not allowed in the colonies. Of course, the southern colonies had a quaint parlor game called “Break the Pope’s Neck” What about the Know-Nothing Party (which was originally called the Order of United Americans, but was called “Know Nothing” because members feigned ignorance when asked of their party affiliation, and was confined to native-born Protestants), which was sold as “nativism,” in the nineteenth century that was anti-Catholic (the party eventually split over the slavery issue) and opposed election of Catholics to political office? Samuel Morse concocted some “conspiracy” theory and encouraged Protestants to put aside their religious difference and unite against Catholics. The KKK added anti-Catholicism to the creed of their prejudices. Most are aware of the hostility Catholic John F. Kennedy received when he announced his run for the Presidency (John Kerry did not receive such negative treatment because he went out of his way to show he was more non-Catholic than Catholic). Do you see a non-Catholic Supreme Court nominee challenged about religious views when brought before a Senate Committee? Already having 4 Catholics on the Supreme Court has become an issue. Knock yourself out.

 

[smelton]

mercygate:

Ah. Those non-essentials? What are they? Infant versus believers’ baptism? Baptism by immersion or infusion? Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist? Sacraments or ordinances? Who gets to decide what is essential? See the problem?

My Holy Spirit can beat up your Holy Spirit!

Oh yeah?

Yeah!

Your mother wears combat boots!

Messy, messy, messy.

A Catholic would say that education, faith and the Holy Spirit are all important – essential – but in one single believer they would be considered insufficient.

We would heed Jesus’ advice in Mt. 18:17, and the model exhibited in Acts 15, and “take it to the church.” “The Church,” for this kind of discernment, being the Apostles (or their successors: the bishops in union with the See of Peter), acting under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and in their Christ-given authority to “bind and loose.” (Mt. 18:18)

No doubt deciding the essintials of salvation verses the non-essentials can be difficult or as you called it messy. That doesn’t mean it’s the wrong way just very difficult. All you have to do is look at all the denominations out there and that would indicate how difficult it is. I do understand submitting yourself to the church’s authority. I believe that is biblical. I really feel though that just because you submit yourself to their authority doesn’t mean you blindly accept any doctorine they may say. I know this is not how you probably see it but it appears from the outside looking in that is how it is. Thanks for the honesty

 

[MariaG]

SolaChristo:

So you thik we ought to worship as David did?
Singing and dancing with all sorts of musical instruments?
Sounds like a lot of nonDem churches Ive been to.

But are the statues etal necessary?

Wait a minute.

What exactly is your position.

Your first postition is that statues and stuff are idol worship. One of the reasons stated was kneeling in front of them makes it worship. On further examination, you don’t have a problem with protestants who kneel in front of their bible, so it is not kneeling in front of something that makes it idol worship.

Now you are asking if they are necessary.

No. They are not necessary. But the Bible is not necessary in order to worship God, but it sure enhances the experience.

But since when does not necessary translate into idol worship? When the person kneeling in front of something is Catholic?

I do not mean to be offensive. You said you were just explaining your position, and I am just trying to understand it. To me it seems as if you have a problem with appearances. **Since you seem to understand the intent of a person kneeling with a Bible, that is okay. But since you don’t give the same motivation to a person kneeling with candles and statues, it makes it idol worship. **

I could understand your beliefs better if you were consistent in your position. Kneeling in front of anything is wrong, no pictures of anybody, no posters etc. Right now, I just see a unreasoning attitude towards Catholic worship and what it “appears” to be to you.

I will tell you, I do have a Nazarene friend who has no pictures anywhere, including posters or even pictures of her children on the walls because she feels that violates the command of no idols. I don’t agree with her postion, but I understand it and respect it because she is consistent in her application.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[mercygate]

smelton:

No doubt deciding the essintials of salvation verses the non-essentials can be difficult or as you called it messy. That doesn’t mean it’s the wrong way just very difficult. All you have to do is look at all the denominations out there and that would indicate how difficult it is. I do understand submitting yourself to the church’s authority. I believe that is biblical. I really feel though that just because you submit yourself to their authority doesn’t mean you blindly accept any doctorine they may say. I know this is not how you probably see it but it appears from the outside looking in that is how it is. Thanks for the honesty

OK smelton! You’re already sounding like a good Catholic here! Blindly accepting doctrine is no Catholic’s idea of a good game!

But as a convert, I can honestly say that after about 100 of my dearly-held Protestant positions crumbled on “essential” points (well, maybe eight), I found myself leaping the Tiber even before I was thoroughly satisfied about my remaining “issues” because one of the “essentials” that I had come to accept was the legitimacy of Church authority. I realized that holding a personal standoff on the remaining issues would be dishonest. So far, I have not been disappointed.

Where I waver, I pray: “Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!” “Lord, increase my faith!” It works.

 

[Orionthehunter]

SolaChristo:

There are those that accuse some protestants of bible worship. Im not one of those.
So some have “prayer closets” a room set aside for prayer, If God is spirit why is it neccesary to have pictures of anything in this prayer closet or sanctuary or tabernacle? Ive heard it said that these items help make one think this or that-- is not the object of our prayer, God? Statues and pictures cna be distracting if one is praying to God alone.

What is the essence of worship?

God is spirit and much more. We are also not just spirit but also spirit and body. To understand and celebrate our completeness as spirit and body by invoking physical senses such as sight, sounds, and smell into our worship glorifies our God and the gifts He has given us.

Necessary for worship? Of course not. However, using our full God-given gifts in worship is enhancing. I guess it is the difference between a person who chooses a bicycle and anther chooses a car. Both might serve the same purpose but one seems to do it more efficaciously and effectively. Personally, since the spiritual journey is the “long and narrow road”, I’ll choose a car with a full tank of gas and not just rely on my own meager pedal power.

 

[NotWorthy]

smelton:

No doubt deciding the essintials of salvation verses the non-essentials can be difficult or as you called it messy. That doesn’t mean it’s the wrong way just very difficult. All you have to do is look at all the denominations out there and that would indicate how difficult it is. I do understand submitting yourself to the church’s authority. I believe that is biblical. I really feel though that just because you submit yourself to their authority doesn’t mean you blindly accept any doctorine they may say. I know this is not how you probably see it but it appears from the outside looking in that is how it is. Thanks for the honesty

But, Smelton, I don’t blindly accept everything the church teaches. I have had some BIG problems with what the church teaches - why can’t women be priests, why can’t priests get married (which may be one of the only reasons I’m not a priest today), etc.

In every case, though, I can do some research and find what the church teaches, why the church teaches it, and why the church may or may not ever change her position on it.

Guys, I truly love my Church! And the more I know her, the more I love Her, for she has brought me so much closer to Jesus.

I think I saw a post that claimed what our Church teaches are unbiblical, although I’m having trouble finding it. Whoever made that claim, can they site what those are, or start it up in another thread.

God Bless all of you, especially Smelton and SolaChristo for your interest.

Notworthy

 

[SolaChristo]

MariaG:

Wait a minute.

What exactly is your position.

Your first postition is that statues and stuff are idol worship. One of the reasons stated was kneeling in front of them makes it worship. On further examination, you don’t have a problem with protestants who kneel in front of their bible, so it is not kneeling in front of something that makes it idol worship.

Now you are asking if they are necessary.

No. They are not necessary. But the Bible is not necessary in order to worship God, but it sure enhances the experience.

But since when does not necessary translate into idol worship? When the person kneeling in front of something is Catholic?

I do not mean to be offensive. You said you were just explaining your position, and I am just trying to understand it. To me it seems as if you have a problem with appearances. **Since you seem to understand the intent of a person kneeling with a Bible, that is okay. But since you don’t give the same motivation to a person kneeling with candles and statues, it makes it idol worship. **

I could understand your beliefs better if you were consistent in your position. Kneeling in front of anything is wrong, no pictures of anybody, no posters etc. Right now, I just see a unreasoning attitude towards Catholic worship and what it “appears” to be to you.

I will tell you, I do have a Nazarene friend who has no pictures anywhere, including posters or even pictures of her children on the walls because she feels that violates the command of no idols. I don’t agree with her postion, but I understand it and respect it because she is consistent in her application.

God Bless,
Maria

Maria,
Ive told you my position.
One block from my house there is a Catholic Church which has statues in it. One of the statutes is of St Jude. There is several rows of candles in front of the statue with a coin box, to help cover expenses?
If you spend any time at the church, which is open during the day people will come in to pray, to look to meditate etc. Some of the folks will knell in front of the statue of St Jude or ST Joseph or Mary and I assume pray. Some I know are praying because you can hear them.
My question to you is why of all the spots on earth did they chose that one?
In contrast I dont know of any (there may be someone somewhere) who will go to a Protestant Church and look for the bible to knell in front of it to pray.

 

[Orionthehunter]

SolaChristo:

Maria,
Ive told you my position.
One block from my house there is a Catholic Church which has statues in it. One of the statutes is of St Jude. There is several rows of candles in front of the statue with a coin box, to help cover expenses?
If you spend any time at the church, which is open during the day people will come in to pray, to look to meditate etc. Some of the folks will knell in front of the statue of St Jude or ST Joseph or Mary and I assume pray. Some I know are praying because you can hear them.
My question to you is why of all the spots on earth did they chose that one?
In contrast I dont know of any (there may be someone somewhere) who will go to a Protestant Church and look for the bible to knell in front of it to pray.

Solo, do you have any concept of the Catholic’s teaching on the Communion of Saints as well as the teaching on the intercession of Saints?

P.S. FYI, when I go to a Church named after the Patron Saint of the America’s (Mary), I do kneel down and pray. Do you think I’m worshipping her?

By the way, did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. It might explain alot.

 

[NotWorthy]

SolaChristo:

One block from my house there is a Catholic Church which has statues in it. One of the statutes is of St Jude. There is several rows of candles in front of the statue with a coin box, to help cover expenses?
If you spend any time at the church, which is open during the day people will come in to pray, to look to meditate etc. Some of the folks will knell in front of the statue of St Jude or ST Joseph or Mary and I assume pray.

What you have described is a beautiful scene, my friend. I often find solace going to our Cathedral and spending some time alone with God. I feel so close to Him when I’m surrounded so many reminders of His goodness.

If you had listened in on the person praying (and shame on you if you had), you would have probably heard, first an Our Father, then a prayer asking St. Jude (He’s the patron saint of lost causes, you know) to pray for “my friend, Joe, who is suffering from terminal cancer, and has been given 6 months to live. St. Jude, help Joe to reconcile himself with God, and not to suffer too much in his pain. Please pray that Joe’s family will have the strength to support each other in their sorrow.”
This is repeated in many ways all over the world. Again, it’s a beautiful thing to be able to pray to God and to his family.

Notworthy

 

[MariaG]

SolaChristo:

Maria,
Ive told you my position.

But your position is not consistent. You have a problem with Catholics who kneel in front of statues but not Protestants who kneel in front of a Bible. You think it is idol worship to gaze a icons, but have posters on your wall. One moment you are judging Catholics guilty of idol worship even though their actions, kneeling in front of something are the same as a protestant kneeling in front of a bible. Then you backtrack and say maybe it isn’t idol worship but it isn’t necessary.

Your postition has changed multiple times that I no longer know what your position is.

Is it idol worship to kneel in front of statues and worship and pray to God in your heart?

One block from my house there is a Catholic Church which has statues in it. One of the statutes is of St Jude. There is several rows of candles in front of the statue with a coin box, to help cover expenses?
If you spend any time at the church, which is open during the day people will come in to pray, to look to meditate etc. Some of the folks will knell in front of the statue of St Jude or ST Joseph or Mary and I assume pray. Some I know are praying because you can hear them.
My question to you is why of all the spots on earth did they chose that one?

Maybe because it helps them concentrate on Christ and draw closer to God. What does it matter to you why they choose that place? Once again, you are judging appearances. You can’t imagine going there to pray so no one can pray to God there?

In contrast I dont know of any (there may be someone somewhere) who will go to a Protestant Church and look for the bible to knell in front of it to pray.

I know of many who have prayer rooms with only a bible, a table and a kneeler.

The point is, people go to places where they can concentrate and draw near to God. Some go to a private room, others go outside, others go to a chapel.

Why does it matter where a person goes? Shouldn’t it matter what is in there heart when they are there?