Protestants are not a different "religion" from Catholics

[guanophore]

Protestantism is not a religion but a heresy within Christianity. Protestants are hereitcs because they have fallen away from the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church due to the invention of new, and contradictory doctrines. While Protestants came from the Catholic Church they will not be part of it until they return to it.

Welcome to CAF, qOcOp.

You are correct that Protestant denominations represent various heresies within Christianity, however, you are wrong that Protestants are heretics. Most Protestants have been raised to believe that their faith is the Truth, and many are taught that the Catholic Church has “added” to the gospel. They don’t know that their spritual ancestors subtracted from it. Since they are in ignorance in these matters, they do not qualify for the position of “heretic”, which requires a willful and deliberate departure from the known truth.

Also, you are wrong about Protestants being part of the Church. When they are validly baptized, they become members of the One Body of Christ, though improperly joined. These matters are discussed specifically in the Catechism of the Church.

Then why are they called Protestants and not Catholic’s then?

Protestantism began by people of good faith standing up against the corruption running rampant throughout the Roman clergy in Europe.

Church Catholic =/= Catholic Church. Church Catholic means universal. The Catholic Church is a denomination.

No, the Catholic Church is not a “denomination”. The Catholic Church is the One Church founded by Christ, from which all others “denominated”. All the denominations are defined by what, and how much doctrine of the Apostles they reject that is within the Catholic Church. The CC did not “denominate” from anyone.

 

[LDNCatholic]

One word: Orthodoxy.

You certainly live up to the smug part of your username mate.

For all intents and purposes in this discussion Orthodoxy is Catholic. Our disagreement with them pales in comparison to the chasm that separates the Holy Catholic Church and Protestant ecclesial communities.

The Orthodox have valid Apostolic Succession and all seven of their Sacraments are fully valid and recognised as such by the Catholic Church.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

You certainly live up to the smug part of your username mate.

For all intents and purposes in this discussion Orthodoxy is Catholic. Our disagreement with them pales in comparison to the chasm that separates the Holy Catholic Church and Protestant ecclesial communities.

The Orthodox have valid Apostolic Succession and all seven of their Sacraments are fully valid and recognised as such by the Catholic Church.

It appears some Protestants use the ‘Orthodoxy’ card to somehow invalidate the Catholic Church. I fail to see how it validates Protestantism?

 

[GaryTaylor]

It appears some Protestants use the ‘Orthodoxy’ card to somehow invalidate the Catholic Church. I fail to see how it validates Protestantism?

I have also seen this as of late also. And your right. Truth is what it does is make the conversation more time consuming and difficult. I find myself respectful of the the EO and thus another diversion becomes apparent.

The schemes of this world are never ending my brother.

God Bless, Gary

 

[StTommyMore]

It appears some Protestants use the ‘Orthodoxy’ card to somehow invalidate the Catholic Church. I fail to see how it validates Protestantism?

Fact of the matter is that Protestants woould have the same beefs against Orthodoxy as they do against catholicism

 

[PLeeD]

Fact of the matter is that Protestants woould have the same beefs against Orthodoxy as they do against catholicism

Not true. There are differences that make EO more appealing to me.

 

[rinnie]

The ball for that was and is in the Catholic court. IMO, Luther’s 95 Theses were mostly correct, much needed reforms… and evidently the Catholic Church agrees since it eventually adopted most of them. If it had worked with Luther (yeah, I know… he was a stubborn and difficult man, but he wanted to reform the CC, not to leave it) instead of kicking him out and taking several hundred years to adopt most of his reforms, Protestantism might not exist at all today. Of course, we all know that was impossible: the CC is not institutionally capable of reacting that quickly.

As to the label… I don’t especially like being called Protestant. I just call myself a Christian, or ever better, a Christ-follower (better because it means exactly the same thing but carries less baggage and is a better conversation starter). But Protestant is the accepted term today for all Christians who aren’t Catholic or Orthodox, and I happen to fall into that category.

Oh so then it is the fault of the Catholic Church because it refused to go against the word of God and go Luther’s way.

Why can’t we be called Christ followers also? But if you don’t like to be called Protestant then you have to follow all of the teachings of the Catholic Church not protest them teachings.

To be Protestant is to not accept and protest against them. While I understand you are not carrying protest signs and things like that, you still reject the teachings which is really the same thing.

But anyway what Doctrine of the Catholic Church did the Church take from Luther?

 

[rinnie]

Welcome to CAF, qOcOp.

You are correct that Protestant denominations represent various heresies within Christianity, however, you are wrong that Protestants are heretics. Most Protestants have been raised to believe that their faith is the Truth, and many are taught that the Catholic Church has “added” to the gospel. They don’t know that their spritual ancestors subtracted from it. Since they are in ignorance in these matters, they do not qualify for the position of “heretic”, which requires a willful and deliberate departure from the known truth.

Also, you are wrong about Protestants being part of the Church. When they are validly baptized, they become members of the One Body of Christ, though improperly joined. These matters are discussed specifically in the Catechism of the Church.

Protestantism began by people of good faith standing up against the corruption running rampant throughout the Roman clergy in Europe.

No, the Catholic Church is not a “denomination”. The Catholic Church is the One Church founded by Christ, from which all others “denominated”. All the denominations are defined by what, and how much doctrine of the Apostles they reject that is within the Catholic Church. The CC did not “denominate” from anyone.

Hi Guan, I still do not undertand how the corruption of some of the Roman Clergy had to do with rejecting the Catholic faith. They still left the Catholic faith. I am at a loss at how the actions of some leaders of the Church would be a excuse to reject the Church.

I mean you have had bad leaders even in the times of Jesus. But just because you could call Judas’s actions corrupt and actually as much as it hurts to admit it Peter was not exactly the perfect example of a follower of Christ at all times. It still had nothing to do with the Church.

Jesus never promised us the leaders would not sin and be perfect. He promised us the Church would be because it was guided by the Holy Spirit.

Luther questioned more then the leaders. He questioned much of the teachings.

 

[Izdaari]

Oh so then it is the fault of the Catholic Church because it refused to go against the word of God and go Luther’s way.

Evidently the CC didn’t believe most of Luther’s way was against the word of God, since it did eventually adopt the majority of his reforms.

Why can’t we be called Christ followers also? But if you don’t like to be called Protestant then you have to follow all of the teachings of the Catholic Church not protest them teachings.

To be Protestant is to not accept and protest against them. While I understand you are not carrying protest signs and things like that, you still reject the teachings which is really the same thing.

Certainly you can be called a Christ follower too. All Christians can. And there certainly are some teachings of the CC that I would protest, inside of it or out, and the majority of Catholics agree with me on some of them. I do accept Catholics as Christian brethren and if the CC were the only Christian church available, I’d do my protesting from within, but I think our way is better.

But anyway what Doctrine of the Catholic Church did the Church take from Luther?

I don’t know that they got any doctrine from him. I was speaking of reforms.

 

[rinnie]

Evidently the CC didn’t believe most of Luther’s way was against the word of God, since it did eventually adopt the majority of his reforms.

Certainly you can be called a Christ follower too. All Christians can. And there certainly are some teachings of the CC that I would protest, inside of it or out, and the majority of Catholics agree with me on some of them. I do accept Catholics as Christian brethren and if the CC were the only Christian church available, I’d do my protesting from within, but I think our way is better.

I don’t know that they got any doctrine from him. I was speaking of reforms.

You are right and that was my err. But when you speak of reform what exactly do you feel that he reformed? Could you give me some examples.

I agree that he did bring attention to the wrong doing of the Church leaders, I do not disagree with that. BUt what of the Church itself do you feel he reformed. Thanks.

 

[Izdaari]

You are right and that was my err. But when you speak of reform what exactly do you feel that he reformed? Could you give me some examples.

I agree that he did bring attention to the wrong doing of the Church leaders, I do not disagree with that. BUt what of the Church itself do you feel he reformed. Thanks.

I understand. I’ll have to research that and get back to you – kinda pressed for time right now.

Btw, if I were within the CC, I’d probably wind up like Hans Küng, still a priest, but stripped of his authority to teach Catholic theology. Catholic or not, he remains one of my favorite Christian writers.

 

[StTommyMore]

Not true. There are differences that make EO more appealing to me.

Doctr4inally they are very similar: Marian veneration, real presence in the Eucharist, seven sacraments, etc. At any rate we should not base our worship on “what we like” but on “what has been revealed”

 

[vsedriver]

I am disappointed at the title of this forum. Protestants are not a different “religion” from Catholics. That’s a misuse of the term “religion.” Islam is a different religion from Christianity, but Protestants are part of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. This is acknowledged by most RC scholars.
Tom

But the title of this forum is “non-CATHOLIC” religions. Protestants are a non-CATHOLIC religion.

Now you could object if the title of the forum was ‘non-CHRISTIAN’ religions and Protestants were put in that forum.

 

[PJM]

=ETEXAS;7762375]Not so. Augustine, “found” Christian Communities that after the end of the Roman Empire and Pax Romana , he investigated (in and around his Area in Africa, and found the doctrines to be overall solid) he was torn, his reports upon arrival to Rome, wanted him to bring under Rome, Augustine, wanted them to be gifted with tools, and learning…and while not wanting “them free floating” he wanted a 'satellite" status, with more autonomy, remember, these guys…fell though the cracks here, Augustine never had to go against his feeling here thankfully, before push came to shove, God called him home.

I’ve not heard this before; but even so; how does this make them anyting but 'Catholics" at that time?

God Bless,
Pat

 

[JRRTFAN]

“Your religious affiliation isn’t going to save you, but your lack of one, if you know the truth and deny it, might damn you”

Religious affiliation, according to St. Paul, does not save anyone, but only trust in our Lord Jesus Christ, who died to save us all. Ephesians 2:8-9.
Shalom, Tom.

Tom, you’re kidding, right? After what Paul wrote to the Church in every locale trying bring them into true faith and practice, and there was only one valid faith and practice in Paul’s day. Are you telling us his letters don’t mean anything? I agree that religious affiliation saves no one, but failure to affiliate with the Church Christ founded, when one realizes that is what one is doing, is a denial of Christ and one can not be saved.

 

[Izdaari]

Religious affiliation, according to St. Paul, does not save anyone, but only trust in our Lord Jesus Christ, who died to save us all. Ephesians 2:8-9.
Shalom, Tom.

Sure, but which is the one that Christ founded? Given that it was hundreds of years before the Bishop of Rome was anything more than “first among equals”, (it was Leo I who first successfully asserted the claim to papal authority, and that worked because the barbarians were literally at the gates) it looks like a human evolution rather than something divinely instituted. If apostolic succession is necessary, it looks to me like the Eastern Orthodox claim is at least as valid as the Roman one, and I think their doctrine is better. From a Protestant perspective, being in the Church Christ founded is not being in any particular organization, but simply being one of his followers. If you follow Him, you are in His Church, which is universal and invisible to human eyes (though highly visible and powerful in the spiritual realm).

 

[PJM]

=PLeeD;7764332]Not true. There are differences that make EO more appealing to me.

And what my friend might that be?

God Bless,
Pat

 

[qOcOp]

Welcome to CAF, qOcOp.

Thank you

You are correct that Protestant denominations represent various heresies within Christianity, however, you are wrong that Protestants are heretics. Most Protestants have been raised to believe that their faith is the Truth, and many are taught that the Catholic Church has “added” to the gospel. They don’t know that their spritual ancestors subtracted from it. Since they are in ignorance in these matters, they do not qualify for the position of “heretic”, which requires a willful and deliberate departure from the known truth.

I understand what you’re saying, however, the only requirement that is needed to be labeled a heretic is if you follow a heresy. Sure maybe most of the Protestants are ignorant that Protestantism (in all its forms) is a heresy within Christianity, this ignorance sadly does not change the fact that they are heretics nonetheless.

Also, you are wrong about Protestants being part of the Church. When they are validly baptized, they become members of the One Body of Christ, though improperly joined. These matters are discussed specifically in the Catechism of the Church.

Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t the Church the Mystical Body of Christ? If so how can you be part of the One Body of Christ but not part of the Church? Baptism was is a sacrament of the Church and so anyone baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, become a member of Christ’s Church by way of this sacrament. Now whether these people are active or dead members in Christ’s Church (His Mystical Body) depends on if they adhere and follow the teachings, and doctrines of said Church. In short Protestants are part of the Catholic Church because they have received the sacrament of Baptism; however, because they do not follow the doctrines and teachings of the Church they are considered dead members within Christ’s body.

To illustrate what I mean, imagine if you will a human body, and on this body a foreign object has been placed on the left arm. Once this foreign object is placed on the arm it immediately cuts off circulation to the rest of the body thus rendering the left arm dead. Now while this dead arm is still part of the Body, the foreign object is not. The foreign object neither originated from the body nor does it contribute to the body. Likewise is the case with Protestantism. It is the foreign object and Protestants are the dead, and they will not be able to contribute to the body until they rid themselves of the foreign object.

Protestantism began by people of good faith standing up against the corruption running rampant throughout the Roman clergy in Europe.

Whether this was their real intention of whether it was something malicious is neither here nor there. I’m not God so I can neither presume to know their real intentions or pass judgment on their actions. All I do know is when you create new doctrines that contradict the already existing ones you’re not reforming a Church but starting a new one.

 

[PJM]

=rinnie;7764714]Hi Guan, I still do not undertand how the corruption of some of the Roman Clergy had to do with rejecting the Catholic faith. They still left the Catholic faith. I am at a loss at how the actions of some leaders of the Church would be a excuse to reject the Church.

I mean you have had bad leaders even in the times of Jesus. But just because you could call Judas’s actions corrupt and actually as much as it hurts to admit it Peter was not exactly the perfect example of a follower of Christ at all times. It still had nothing to do with the Church.

Jesus never promised us the leaders would not sin and be perfect. He promised us the Church would be because it was guided by the Holy Spirit.

Luther questioned more then the leaders. He questioned much of the teachings.

In a sad way it quite humerous:

“The Church Get’s ALL OF THE BLAME” and little if any credit.

Yet the “Catholic Church” is an enity by herself…

It is the CC that has no possibility of error EVER when teaching officially on matters of Faith-Beleifs and or Morals amd Morality. [Jn.14:16-17; Jn. 17:15-19; Mt. 16:19] all confirm this as FACT.

It is THEE Church [Roman Catholic] that is::

One
Holy
Catholic
Apolostolic

These terms apply directly to and speak about THEE CHURCH NOT the people [popes included] in Her.

And ONLY when the Pope or Magisterium teach in the Official capacity of there Offices; and then ONLY on matters of Faith and or Morals; MUST they be held [not infallibly] but nevertheless are required for salvation and MUST be accepted and lived.

**canons 747-754 **

Thee Church can’t sin! Only the people in Her can [and do]

God Bless,
Pat

 

[StTommyMore]

Thank you

I understand what you’re saying, however, the only requirement that is needed to be labeled a heretic is if you follow a heresy. Sure maybe most of the Protestants are ignorant that Protestantism (in all its forms) is a heresy within Christianity, this ignorance sadly does not change the fact that they are heretics nonetheless.

Not exactly, You cannot be a heretic if you are ignorant of the heresy:

"Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same

It is not enough to simply hold to a heretical belief. You have to know the teaching of the Church and obstinately refuse to submit to her.