Protestants are "enemies of Christ" and we should "shun them"

[Zenkai]

This is a continuation from the off-topic discussion in this thread: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=636931&page=4

Someone posted this quote by pope Pius IX in an attempt to give me a reason as to why Catholics shouldn’t go to Protestant services:

“We think it is Our duty to repeat this public declaration now and to request you to preserve the unity of faith among your faithful by every possible means in accordance with your eminent zeal and your renowned virtue. For you have given notable examples of this virtue in bearing tribulations for the cause of God. You should remind them to beware of these treacherous enemies of the flock of Christ and their poisoned foods. They should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings, and their chairs of pestilence which they have with impunity established to transmit the sacred teachings. They should shun their writings and all contact with them. They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any jurisdiction. They should avoid them as strangers and thieves who come only to steal, slay, and destroy. For the Church’s children should consider the proper action to preserve the most precious treasure of faith, without which it is impossible to please God, as well as action calculated to achieve the goal of faith, that is the salvation of their souls, by following the straight road of justice.”
ewtn.com/library/encyc/p9graves.htm

I think that is absurd. Discuss.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I’ll start off where I left off the other thread:

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 18:17[/BIBLEDRB]

Also you asked if Protestants deny that the Catholic Church is the true Church. If they do believe it, why are they outside of it?

 

[Zenkai]

I’ll start off where I left off the other thread:

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 18:17[/BIBLEDRB]

Also you asked if Protestants deny that the Catholic Church is the true Church. If they do believe it, why are they outside of it?

And I’ll post that verse in context, again:

“If another believer sins against you, go privately and point out the offense. If the other person listens and confesses it, you have won that person back. But if you are unsuccessful, take one or two others with you and go back again, so that everything you say may be confirmed by two or three witnesses. If the person still refuses to listen, take your case to the church. Then if he or she won’t accept the church’s decision, treat that person as a pagan or a corrupt tax collector.” Matthew 18:15-17

Also, they don’t believe that the Roman Catholic Church is the true Church. If they did, they would join it.

 

[RyanBlack]

If we believe that the Catholic Church is truly the Church, and that it was established by Christ for the purpose of bringing God’s gift of salvation to the world, we should hope for Protestants (and all other non-Catholics) to become Catholics. As a former Protestant, I assure you that had I been shunned by Catholics and labeled by them as an “enemy of Christ,” I never would have given any thought whatsoever to becoming Catholic. Furthermore, I don’t see how you can read what the CCC says concerning wounds to the Church’s unity and see shunning as an appropriate reaction to Protestants. Here it is.

Wounds to unity

817 In fact, “in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame.” The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ’s Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.

818 “However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers … All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.”

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: “the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements.” Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to “Catholic unity.”

 

[LegoGE1947]

Yikes.
This pope reigned approx 250 years ago, yes?
I can’t imagine a pope saying these words today–using such harsh words like “treacherous enemies”. Talk about spreading hate. I wonder if anyone back then questioned these words or just followed them without hesitation.

It is not such a fearful “war” of sides today as it was then, right?
Or is it?
I see these sentiments in many religions…not wanting their “flock” to interact with any other flock, for fear they will be badly influenced and leave their own flock.
So even if the words are not as harsh today in this politically correct society, I think the underlying warnings are the same for many: Do not fraternize with outsiders! They are bad! They will destroy you!
It’s not a very love-thy-neighbor kind of feeling, is it?

It is also not following the example of Christ. He associated with all kinds of people, those who followed him and those who hated him.

 

[Tridentinum]

For goodness sake. The Church wasn’t born at Vatican II.

 

[TrueLight]

I honestly believe that if one wants to evangelize to others, one should really understand where they’re coming from.

I’m not saying that everyone is spiritually strong enough to visit a Protestant church, because I as an ex-Protestant, can tell you that some of the services can be alluring.

But that’s not a danger to me obviously, because that is where I come from.

And I’m not saying I would visit the Church of Satan to understand where Satanists are coming from, but come on… an Episcopalian service?

 

[LegoGE1947]

For goodness sake. The Church wasn’t born at Vatican II.

The Church was born with the events surrounding the crucifixion and resurrection of our Lord. Sad to say there are protestant groups that don’t mention or even believe that. According to some the true church was some underground group that came to the foreground when Martin Luther showed up on the world scene. But God can use anything (practically) to bring people to a knowledge of himself. He used the Assemblies of God to get me into the fold, but after more than 30 years as a Protestant, and I don’t even know how, God led me to the Catholic Church.

 

[Anthony_V]

I think the message that Pius XI was trying to get across is this:
Protestantism is a heresy. This doesn’t necessarily make protestants heretical (unless they’ve defected from the Church, such as Luther, Calvin, etc.)
For instance (I’ll use a real life example), there are many devout Lutherans, Methodists, Anglicans, Episcopalians, etc here on this forum. I wouldn’t consider any of them heretics (even if I were allowed to say so in good conscience on this forum), because they seek the Church that Christ founded. The semantics of what and where the Church is drives a wedge between us. I assure you, Satan does not want the Christian universal church to be unified in any form or fashion. It’s indeed very difficult to preserve Truth while promoting it.

 

[kjm1967]

I was shocked to read the words “Protestants are enemies of Christ”. It is true that Protestants do not accept all of the Catholic Church’s teachings. However, I think we need to get back to the basics. We should start with what we do believe in common. Next we can strengthen our own beliefs and practices in those things which Protestants openly admit that they do not accept. When our lives and practices as Catholics give witness to our faith, then that will show Protestants what they are missing. How can we blame Protestants for not believing ,when we as Catholics don’t show them the truth. There are many in our own church who deny our Church’s teachings. I found that out when I went on Catholic Match in search of a potential future husband. Even those saying they are members of the Knights of Columbus, and men considering priesthood admit on that sight that they do not accept the church’s teachings about such things as contraception, premarital sex, etc…Soo disheartening.

 

[LegoGE1947]

I think the message that Pius XI was trying to get across is this:
Protestantism is a heresy. This doesn’t necessarily make protestants heretical (unless they’ve defected from the Church, such as Luther, Calvin, etc.)
For instance (I’ll use a real life example), there are many devout Lutherans, Methodists, Anglicans, Episcopalians, etc here on this forum. I wouldn’t consider any of them heretics (even if I were allowed to say so in good conscience on this forum), because they seek the Church that Christ founded. The semantics of what and where the Church is drives a wedge between us. I assure you, Satan does not want the Christian universal church to be unified in any form or fashion. It’s indeed very difficult to preserve Truth while promoting it.

It seems one of the greatest phenomena that is bringing Christians to be unified is the battle against the scourge of abortion. A good example of this just occurred in Rockford, Illinois, where after nearly 40 years of having an abortion clinic, it finally was closed down by the state of Illinois due to several violations of Illinois law regarding medical facilities. During that 40 years there were countless prayers sent to God not only by Catholics but by people of good will of all religious stripes, in addition to demonstrations where Christians stood shoulder to shoulder in protest to this evil place. (Ironically the clinic was housed in a building that was formerly a grade school intended to educate rather than kill children)

 

[WoundedIcon]

This is a continuation from the off-topic discussion in this thread: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=636931&page=4

Someone posted this quote by pope Pius IX in an attempt to give me a reason as to why Catholics shouldn’t go to Protestant services:

“We think it is Our duty to repeat this public declaration now and to request you to preserve the unity of faith among your faithful by every possible means in accordance with your eminent zeal and your renowned virtue. For you have given notable examples of this virtue in bearing tribulations for the cause of God. You should remind them to beware of these treacherous enemies of the flock of Christ and their poisoned foods. They should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings, and their chairs of pestilence which they have with impunity established to transmit the sacred teachings. They should shun their writings and all contact with them. They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any jurisdiction. They should avoid them as strangers and thieves who come only to steal, slay, and destroy. For the Church’s children should consider the proper action to preserve the most precious treasure of faith, without which it is impossible to please God, as well as action calculated to achieve the goal of faith, that is the salvation of their souls, by following the straight road of justice.”
ewtn.com/library/encyc/p9graves.htm

I think that is absurd. Discuss.

Hold on a hot minute! This excerpt is from an encyclical written to address a situation where a new heresy was breeding within the Church; it’s not discussing the old errors of Protestantism, it’s discussing the Old Catholics, right at the time they were beginning to dissent and form. They were hijacking parishes and claiming to be the only true Catholics. Step back and reread that excerpt and you’ll see that he’s telling primarily clergymen to educate their flock about the dangers of this new heresy and also tell them to avoid those who push it like the plague lest they get sucked in by their false authority.

Context, context, context. Modern Protestants are a different case because they aren’t directly responsible for heresy and schism, and most of them don’t know any better. Words like this may have applied to ex-Catholic Lutherans right at the time of the Reformation, but not modern Lutherans, etc.

 

[Edmundus1581]

[Edit: WoundedIcon posted with the a similar point, just ahead of me. I’ll keep my post, as I think we have slightly different emphasis and info]

This encyclical of 1875 was directed to Swiss Catholics in their dealings with the Old Catholics in Switzerland who rejected Vatican I (1870). It is not about Protestants.

To Our Venerable Brothers the Bishops, to the Clergy, and to the Swiss People who enjoy Grace and Communion with the Apostolic See.

Venerable Brothers, Greetings and Apostolic Blessing.

The serious and long-lasting plots and efforts which the new heretics who call themselves Old Catholics use daily in your country to deceive the faithful and to tear them away from their ancient faith, urge Us, as a duty of Our supreme apostolate, to zealously devote Our paternal care and attention to protecting the spiritual welfare of our children. We are aware, and We sorrowfully deplore the fact, that these schismatics and heretics who enjoy the favor of the civil authority exercise the ministry of their wicked sect in the region of the diocese of Basel as in other regions of your country while the religious freedom of Catholics remains publicly oppressed by schismatic laws.

 

[Jesus_123]

+In all charity and peace . . .

The subject quote in the original post is from an article that has nothing whatsoever to do with “protestants” per se . . . rather it deals with a particular heretical CATHOLIC group who separated themselves from the Catholic church . . . who are entitled “Old Catholics” and who embraced heretical doctrines . . . they are schismatic/divisive disenting Catholics **not in union with Rome **. . . they are **“pretend” **Catholics . . . not protestants . . . for more information re this heretical “Catholic” sect I posted the link below the following Wikipedia quote . . .

:compcoff: ewtn.com/library/encyc/p9graves.htm

OLD CATHOLIC CHURCH

The term **Old Catholic Church **is commonly used to describe a number of Ultrajectine Christian churches that originated with groups that split from the Roman Catholic Church over certain doctrines, most importantly that of Papal Infallibility.

These churches are not in communion with the Holy See of Rome, but their Union of Utrecht of Old Catholic Churches is in full communion with the Anglican Communion[1] and a member of the World Council of Churches.[2] The formation of the Old Catholic communion of Germans, Austrians and Swiss began in 1870 at a public meeting held in Nuremberg under the leadership of A. Döllinger. Four years later episcopal succession was established with the ordination of an Old Catholic German bishop by a prelate of the Church of Utrecht. In line with the “Declaration of Utrecht” of 1889, they accept the first seven ecumenical councils and doctrine formulated before 1054, but reject communion with the pope and a number of other Roman Catholic doctrines and practices. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church notes that since 1925 they have recognized Anglican ordinations, that they have full communion with the Church of England since 1932 and have taken part in the ordination of Anglican bishops.[3]

The term “Old Catholic” was first used in 1853 to describe the members of the See of Utrecht who did not recognise any claimed “infallible” papal authority. Later Catholics who disagreed with the doctrine of Papal Infallibility as made official by the First Vatican Council (1870) had no bishop and so joined with Utrecht to form the Union of Utrecht.

Contents
1 Beliefs
2 History
2.1 Independent bishopric
2.2 Three periods of development
2.2.1 Post Reformation Netherlands: first period
2.2.2 Impact of the First Vatican Council: second period
2.2.3 United States: third period
2.3 Polish National Catholic Church
2.3.1 Conference of North American Old Catholic Bishops
3 Ecumenism
4 Apostolic succession
5 Liturgy
6 Roman Catholic views
7 See also
7.1 Churches
7.2 Movements
7.3 Persons
8 References
9 External links
9.1 Union of Utrecht
9.2 Union of Utrecht dependent churches
9.3 Other links
10 Bibliography

- Wikipedia

:compcoff: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Catholics​

. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of Truth+​

 

[The_Scott]

Hold on a hot minute! This excerpt is from an encyclical written to address a situation where a new heresy was breeding within the Church; it’s not discussing the old errors of Protestantism, it’s discussing the Old Catholics, right at the time they were beginning to dissent and form. They were hijacking parishes and claiming to be the only true Catholics. Step back and reread that excerpt and you’ll see that he’s telling primarily clergymen to educate their flock about the dangers of this new heresy and also tell them to avoid those who push it like the plague lest they get sucked in by their false authority.

Context, context, context. Modern Protestants are a different case because they aren’t directly responsible for heresy and schism, and most of them don’t know any better. Words like this may have applied to ex-Catholic Lutherans right at the time of the Reformation, but not modern Lutherans, etc.

Well, that answers that.

Bravo!

 

[mdgspencer]

I am very surprised that the Pope’s statement about a Catholic group is being said to be about Protestants. How can someone be doing this?

 

[theidler]

Hold on a hot minute! This excerpt is from an encyclical written to address a situation where a new heresy was breeding within the Church; it’s not discussing the old errors of Protestantism, it’s discussing the Old Catholics, right at the time they were beginning to dissent and form. They were hijacking parishes and claiming to be the only true Catholics. Step back and reread that excerpt and you’ll see that he’s telling primarily clergymen to educate their flock about the dangers of this new heresy and also tell them to avoid those who push it like the plague lest they get sucked in by their false authority.

Context, context, context. Modern Protestants are a different case because they aren’t directly responsible for heresy and schism, and most of them don’t know any better. Words like this may have applied to ex-Catholic Lutherans right at the time of the Reformation, but not modern Lutherans, etc.

Phew…I was actually getting a little worried there.:coolinoff:

 

[Zenkai]

Well, it’s good to know that the quote is not about Protestants. It confuses me as to why it was used against Protestantism in that other thread.

 

[mark_a]

This is a continuation from the off-topic discussion in this thread: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=636931&page=4

Someone posted this quote by pope Pius IX in an attempt to give me a reason as to why Catholics shouldn’t go to Protestant services:

“We think it is Our duty to repeat this public declaration now and to request you to preserve the unity of faith among your faithful by every possible means in accordance with your eminent zeal and your renowned virtue. For you have given notable examples of this virtue in bearing tribulations for the cause of God. You should remind them to beware of these treacherous enemies of the flock of Christ and their poisoned foods. They should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings, and their chairs of pestilence which they have with impunity established to transmit the sacred teachings. They should shun their writings and all contact with them. They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any jurisdiction. They should avoid them as strangers and thieves who come only to steal, slay, and destroy. For the Church’s children should consider the proper action to preserve the most precious treasure of faith, without which it is impossible to please God, as well as action calculated to achieve the goal of faith, that is the salvation of their souls, by following the straight road of justice.”
ewtn.com/library/encyc/p9graves.htm

I think that is absurd. Discuss.

Because most non-Catholics believe the word protestant is used to describe folks who once protested corruption in the Catholic Church, the quote above can be seen in an entirely new light when one learns the the word “protestant” was used by Catholics to describe folks who protested the right of Catholics to hold mass.

 

[Edmundus1581]

Well, it’s good to know that the quote is not about Protestants. It confuses me as to why it was used against Protestantism in that other thread.

I assume that you are still learning about Catholicism and this episode could be confusing to you, so I’ll try to give an explanation which goes beneath the surface. What you have encountered with that post is actually the result of changes in the Catholic Church since the 1960’s, and the way these changes are sometimes argued, particularly on the internet. Please be patient while I explain it.

First of all, you should be aware of the Catholic Church’s overall response to non-Catholic Christians. In summary:

• We affirm that the Catholic Church, under Peter (ie. the Pope), is the one true Church of Christ
• We believe that the historical separations should not have happened, but that there was often fault on both sides
• We regard all who are baptised in Christ as fellow Christians, and we value all that we have in common, and we respect the Truth and elements of salvation found outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church.
• We do not hold those Christians who are not in full communion as responsible for historic differences.
• We believe that it is the responsibility of all Christians, Catholic and others, to seek unity.

These points largely arose out of the Second Vatican Council of the 1960’s, and are accepted by most Catholics.

See the Decree on Ecumenism.

1. Whenever the Sacrament of Baptism is duly administered as Our Lord instituted it, and is received with the right dispositions, a person is truly incorporated into the crucified and glorified Christ, and reborn to a sharing of the divine life, as the Apostle says: “You were buried together with Him in Baptism, and in Him also rose again-through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead”.(40)

On the other hand, Catholics must gladly acknowledge and esteem the truly Christian endowments from our common heritage which are to be found among our separated brethren. It is right and salutary to recognize the riches of Christ and virtuous works in the lives of others who are bearing witness to Christ, sometimes even to the shedding of their blood. For God is always wonderful in His works and worthy of all praise.

The teachings of the council were not different from what had previously been taught, but there was certainly a new emphasis, ie. an emphasis on respect and what we have in common.

However, there are a number of extreme “Traditionalists” (who must be distinguished from other traditionalists) who believed that these statements of ecumenism were new, and are a departure from the historic faith. Some of these left the Church, and others remained in the Church, but disgruntled. They published their arguments, citing previous Church documents to support their point of view. These arguments are now all over the web.

So, you will occassionally meet Catholics who are strongly anti-ecumenical. You will encounter them in real life and in forums. Some of them belong to schismatic communions who reject Vatican II, but most don’t. They have their “proof texts” from historic documents, just as some anti-Catholics have their “proof texts” from the bible. They treat the ecumenism of Vatican II and in the Church since then as suspicious, or even heretical.

That is how an obscure letter from the Pope to Swiss Catholics in 1875 can appear as an argument against worshipping with Protestants in a CAF thread in 2012. It is very unlikely that the poster found the document himself, or even read it. He would have just found the useful extract (“proof text”) in an extreme Traditionalist web site. (eg. this one).