Protestants: The 1500 yrs

[CMatt25]

So, as you struggle to come to an understanding of the Church’s teachings, Matt, as do I, I wonder why you default to your own position as being the correct one?

PRMerger I have acknowledged I am human numerous times and have said I am not infallible.

 

[araiceil]

:In Christian communion, though imperfectly, let us strive to walk together to glorify His name.
.

I like that!

 

[Lovesa]

This is such a fascinating thing to me! I went to Catholic School my entire life, and never once can I remember even 5 minutes of time devoted to what other religions practice or believe.
(and Lovesa, yours is not the first time I have heard accounts such as this)

We were tought what WE believe. We were tought, at times (though in my opinion not often enough) how to defend what WE believe. never was I once taught what other denominations believe (other than the general definitions ie. Jews are still waiting for the Messiah, Buddhists follow the teachings of Buddha, etc).

Can anyone explain this to me? If you feel that your beliefs have the fullness of Truth, why the need to attack and (at some times) invent falsehoods against the beliefs of others? It seems a paranoid way to live.

I’m not so sure that the teachers were inventing falsehoods, as that they believed they were telling us the truth. Someone who does not understand praying to Mary and the saints might mistake it for worship, for instance. Anything that isn’t grace alone is mistakenly taken to mean that works get you into Heaven. And so on. Besides that, some of our teachers were still very Reformation-happy, and believed that the abuses had never been corrected, only that Luther and others had made the Catholics act secretive about it.

And yes, we did learn quite a bit about other religions. Even now, I don’t see why it would be a bad thing necessarily, if one learns only truths. After all, if one defends one’s own faith only, how can they explain their religion to others unless they know where the other person is coming from? Understanding other people’s religion was seen as a way of promoting understanding and providing for more informed debate, if we ever found ourselves in a debate.

For instance, if talking about Christianity with a Buddhist, we’d know what Buddhism is about. That way there wouldn’t be tedious explanations going back and forth, just dialogue.

& yes, it is a paranoid thing to make up things about other religions. However, no matter how misguided and untruthful our teacher could occasionally be when talking about other religions, in the end the point was to foster understanding. The warnings against other religions were his effort to show that, while he was willing to tell us about other religions, he did not want us thinking that they had it right, so he’d pause to explain why the religion was wrong at the same time as he was telling about it. Good intentions gone wrong, in other words.

 

[araiceil]

I’m not so sure that the teachers were inventing falsehoods, as that they believed they were telling us the truth. Someone who does not understand praying to Mary and the saints might mistake it for worship, for instance. Anything that isn’t grace alone is mistakenly taken to mean that works get you into Heaven. And so on. Besides that, some of our teachers were still very Reformation-happy, and believed that the abuses had never been corrected, only that Luther and others had made the Catholics act secretive about it.

And yes, we did learn quite a bit about other religions. Even now, I don’t see why it would be a bad thing necessarily, if one learns only truths. After all, if one defends one’s own faith only, how can they explain their religion to others unless they know where the other person is coming from? Understanding other people’s religion was seen as a way of promoting understanding and providing for more informed debate, if we ever found ourselves in a debate.

For instance, if talking about Christianity with a Buddhist, we’d know what Buddhism is about. That way there wouldn’t be tedious explanations going back and forth, just dialogue.

& yes, it is a paranoid thing to make up things about other religions. However, no matter how misguided and untruthful our teacher could occasionally be when talking about other religions, in the end the point was to foster understanding. The warnings against other religions were his effort to show that, while he was willing to tell us about other religions, he did not want us thinking that they had it right, so he’d pause to explain why the religion was wrong at the same time as he was telling about it. Good intentions gone wrong, in other words.

I cannot speak for what was said about the other religions, but as for what you learned about Catholicism is easily disproved by consulting our Catechism. It is very clear regarding the veneration of Mary and the Communion of Saints. Therefore, it is difficult to come to any conclusion other than that somewhere along the line someone made up a lie to make Catholics look crazy and Lutherans look sane. Again, this is contrary to anything Christ would have wanted his children to do to each other.

 

[CMatt25]

Why? I mean, Scripture not only speaks of binding and loosing for the apostles, it also speaks of taking one’s sins to the church and confessing to others.

So. . .what would you rather do? Confess to a priest, or stand there and tell everybody in your parish? I mean, it’s going to be the priest who ‘does something about it’ anyway. . .even in the ‘early christian’ times, going to the church meant you were going to a gathering with people AND priest, not just ‘people’. And since the people were led by the priest, HE was in charge of what to do.

Therein lies a problem some might have Tantum. The Catholic Church take lets say Jn 20:23 and then seemingly to some proceed to add to Scripture by turning it into the ONLY manner in which to confess mortal sins.

Yet remember the words from the Lord’s Prayer I asked PRMerger about in which we pray, “Forgive us our trespasses”?

And Matt 6:14 For if you will forgive men their offences, your heavenly Father will forgive you also your offences.

And James 5:16 Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The fervent prayer of a righteous person is very powerful.

I have no problem with someone confessing to a priest as an option.

But what I rather currently do is this. Matt 6:6, But thou when thou shalt pray, enter into thy chamber, and having shut the door, pray to thy Father in secret: and thy Father who seeth in secret will repay thee. And then I recite The Lord’s Prayer and ask God for forgiveness.

 

[CMatt25]

I like that!

Thanks. I confess though I may sometimes fail myself at it. But I hope I’m striving! God bless.

 

[araiceil]

Thanks. I confess though I may sometimes fail myself at it. But I hope I’m striving! God bless.

God doesn’t expect us to always succeed, but he does expect us to always try! I fail too, miserably and often many times daily to be who God has made me to be. Thankfully, he forgives and lets me try again the next day!

 

[Lovesa]

I cannot speak for what was said about the other religions, but as for what you learned about Catholicism is easily disproved by consulting our Catechism. It is very clear regarding the veneration of Mary and the Communion of Saints. Therefore, it is difficult to come to any conclusion other than that somewhere along the line someone made up a lie to make Catholics look crazy and Lutherans look sane. Again, this is contrary to anything Christ would have wanted his children to do to each other.

Someone, somewhere along the line may have very well made up a lie. However, I don’t think that was the case so much as that somebody looked at Catholic practices, didn’t research further, and told somebody else their mistaken belief. This belief was then carried on. They would say “Catholics don’t think they’re committing idolatry, but they are, because xyz.”

Also, many times the teachers I’m talking about wouldn’t care what the Catechism says. They would point out that praying to anyone other than God is worship, since prayer is a form of worship, and leave it at that. Or, they would say that in theory they don’t worship statues, but superstition was rampant and so a pious belief was corrupted beyond repair and best abandoned. And so on.

At any rate, the intent never was to make other people look crazy. Flat-out wrong? Yes. But that was simply the teacher’s belief, which he thought best to impart. After all, our teachers were only human, and could only do their best. There are inaccuracies about religion on both sides, Catholic and Protestant, and if the teachers made mistakes it was just that, a mistake, not malicious intent. After all, when people called him out on being incorrect, he would come up with defenses for his belief. When he couldn’t defend his belief (as when somebody called him out on calling the rosary vain repetition) he admitted his wrong.

As for other religions, they got much fairer treatment than other Christian denominations. We learned a good many things in that area, and I only found a blatant error once, so they were being as fair as they could.

 

[Bluegoat]

This being the case, why are you still here?

Sometimes it seems that one’s actions may speak louder than one’s words.

There are lots of different reasons to post on CAF. I like to discuss theology, and this is a large active site. Most of the other large sites are dominated by evangelicals, with whom it is very difficult to discuss theology in any way that is meaningful to me. I do post on some other Christian sites, and I like top read at Monachos - though I’m not quite up to posting there.

Hi, Bluegoat,

I have really done the best I can do. Your expressed desire to ‘move on’ while remaining on CAF is noteworthy. /QUOTE]

As above.

Have you ever noticed that there is no specific biblical reference giving Paul the authority to ordain bishops. We find that Paul appoints Titus the first bishop of Crete, and Timothy as the first bishop of Ephesus. And, these are not the only two! (Titus 1:5 and 2Tim 4)
These are men with the ‘fullness of the priesthood’ in that they can ordain other men to be priests and bishops. I have yet to hear anyone criticize Paul for the actions he took during his Missionary Journeys in establishing the Chruch throughout the world.

 

[Bluegoat]

Your “stuff” and “non-sequiturs” happen to be our Sacred Sacriments and Traditions. The fact that they are unimportant to you does not excuse your dismissal of them. They (especially the Eucharist) are of the utmost importance to us and therefore (I feel) deserve a little more reverence from you then the glib dismissal you give them here.

I didn’t say they were unimportant, I said they were non sequiters. That is, they disn’t seem to have anything to do with what was being discussed. As if I said “What time is it” and the other poster answered “Green tea”.

And therein lies the crux of the issue. We as Catholics have really no idea what one Protestant to the next believes. Your lack of a central authority makes this impossible, as does the belief of many Protestants that Scripture and God’s Law are theirs to interpret as they see fit.

So many times have I had Protestants insist that I explain to them what I believe and why. Considering that the Canon of my belief has been unchanging for so long, shouldn’t it be for you (collective, not singular) to explain to me why you DON’T believe what I do and why? shrug:

I wasn’t expecting anyone to know anything about my religious beliefs, and would have described them if it was part of the conversation or if asked. I was objecting to having assumptions made about them, and in fact having what I did say pretty much ignored. More broadly I was pointing out that trying to argue apologetics without actually listening to the other person is usually ineffectual on many levels, and that it was a bit ironic to accuse me of being unwilling to budge when the poster in question wasn’t really interested in listening himself.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Therein lies a problem some might have Tantum. The Catholic Church take lets say Jn 20:23 and then seemingly to some proceed to add to Scripture by turning it into the ONLY manner in which to confess mortal sins.

Yet remember the words from the Lord’s Prayer I asked PRMerger about in which we pray, “Forgive us our trespasses”?

And Matt 6:14 For if you will forgive men their offences, your heavenly Father will forgive you also your offences.

And James 5:16 Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The fervent prayer of a righteous person is very powerful.

I have no problem with someone confessing to a priest as an option.

But what I rather currently do is this. Matt 6:6, But thou when thou shalt pray, enter into thy chamber, and having shut the door, pray to thy Father in secret: and thy Father who seeth in secret will repay thee. And then I recite The Lord’s Prayer and ask God for forgiveness.

 

[CMatt25]

Tantum_ergo:
Tantum, I know you don’t just like re-quoting me. Is my screen missing your response or something?

 

[araiceil]

Someone, somewhere along the line may have very well made up a lie. However, I don’t think that was the case so much as that somebody looked at Catholic practices, didn’t research further, and told somebody else their mistaken belief. This belief was then carried on. They would say “Catholics don’t think they’re committing idolatry, but they are, because xyz.”

Also, many times the teachers I’m talking about wouldn’t care what the Catechism says. They would point out that praying to anyone other than God is worship, since prayer is a form of worship, and leave it at that. Or, they would say that in theory they don’t worship statues, but superstition was rampant and so a pious belief was corrupted beyond repair and best abandoned. And so on.

At any rate, the intent never was to make other people look crazy. Flat-out wrong? Yes. But that was simply the teacher’s belief, which he thought best to impart. After all, our teachers were only human, and could only do their best. There are inaccuracies about religion on both sides, Catholic and Protestant, and if the teachers made mistakes it was just that, a mistake, not malicious intent. After all, when people called him out on being incorrect, he would come up with defenses for his belief. When he couldn’t defend his belief (as when somebody called him out on calling the rosary vain repetition) he admitted his wrong.

As for other religions, they got much fairer treatment than other Christian denominations. We learned a good many things in that area, and I only found a blatant error once, so they were being as fair as they could.

I understand now. I will have to beg your forgiveness for my assumptions. I have encountered in my personal life quite a bit of persecutions and lies thrown at me by Protestant relatives, so I tend to jump on that side when I perceive it.

I really appreciate your point of view and honesty. Thank you for sharing it!

 

[araiceil]

I didn’t say they were unimportant, I said they were non sequiters. That is, they disn’t seem to have anything to do with what was being discussed. As if I said “What time is it” and the other poster answered “Green tea”.

I took your tone in reference to them to mean that you feel these arguments are unimportant in the Catholic/Protestant debate. To any Catholic, these particular things are the MOST important. If they were not it would be much easier to declare onesself Protestant and live life as we choose and not as our Church calls us to.

If I misinterpreted your tone, I apologize.

I wasn’t expecting anyone to know anything about my religious beliefs, and would have described them if it was part of the conversation or if asked. I was objecting to having assumptions made about them, and in fact having what I did say pretty much ignored. More broadly I was pointing out that trying to argue apologetics without actually listening to the other person is usually ineffectual on many levels, and that it was a bit ironic to accuse me of being unwilling to budge when the poster in question wasn’t really interested in listening himself.

In all fairness to Tom, I have read most (if not all, though I could not say for sure) of your posts in this thread, and it is difficult to know WHAT you believe or feel, other than a disdain for Catholicism. So, while you may think you are being clear, I don’t think it is coming across that way.

 

[Lovesa]

I understand now. I will have to beg your forgiveness for my assumptions. I have encountered in my personal life quite a bit of persecutions and lies thrown at me by Protestant relatives, so I tend to jump on that side when I perceive it.

I really appreciate your point of view and honesty. Thank you for sharing it!

Nah, that’s all right. I get a lot of presumptions about Protestantism from Catholic friends at school, so I know how that can feel.

For instance, I find it a little annoying when people say things like “All Protestants don’t believe in the real presence” or “Lutherans don’t believe in the common cup”. It usually turns out that the same place they got those ideas is where I got my own misinformation–at school or from relatives, so it’s not meant badly. It just gets weird sometimes how people are told this stuff.

 

[Bluegoat]

I took your tone in reference to them to mean that you feel these arguments are unimportant in the Catholic/Protestant debate. To any Catholic, these particular things are the MOST important. If they were not it would be much easier to declare onesself Protestant and live life as we choose and not as our Church calls us to.

If I misinterpreted your tone, I apologize.

In all fairness to Tom, I have read most (if not all, though I could not say for sure) of your posts in this thread, and it is difficult to know WHAT you believe or feel, other than a disdain for Catholicism. So, while you may think you are being clear, I don’t think it is coming across that way.

No, I haven’t really said anything about them, because that hasn’t been the topic of the discussion.

Which is why I can’t figure out on why I keep getting lectured about what are my presumed Protestant deficiencies. It makes me very testy. Why not just talk about the topic, rather than trying to prove that people are stupid for not being Catholic? I am pretty sure that never wins people over.

I really don’t have disdain for Catholicism, though there are a few things in it I think are quite wrong. As I am sure Catholics think of other Christians. Not, for the most part, things that have been discussed here.

But I do get very frustrated with the implication that anyone who isn’t Catholic doesn’t know anything about history, or the history of the Church, or the Fathers. I spent four years at university dedicated to studying the writings of the early Church, and when people dismiss the possibility that I could actually have reasons not to be Catholic, and try to make points playing language games, it really gets my back up. (And in my experience, Catholics and pretty much any educated Christians understand that the case for Catholicism, or another Christian position, is not simple and clear-cut and obvious.)

Anyway, this whole discussion seems to have made me angry, which is why I stopped posting at CAF for a while. That may have been the better decision.

 

[PRmerger]

Me personally? No. I hardly think that is possible, nor have I heard a Catholic claim that.

I would be very judicious about accepting a Catholic’s claim about what the Church teaches. More often than not this Catholic will be wrong. :sad_yes: (And I use the word “judicious” quite pointedly here. It may indeed be a correct profession, or it may not be. )

So whether you heard a Catholic claim we know who’s in hell, or not is irrelevant. Go to the source and see for yourself what the Church teaches.

It is, however, what a lot of protestants are told, whether in school or just growing up. It took me researching on my own to learn otherwise, but that is what a lot of protestants believe.

What? A lot of Protestants believe that the Catholic Church states she knows who’s in hell?

ALSO: I’ve seen that attitude in Catholic friends, unfortunately, when I can’t quite tell if they’re joking or not. One girl at lunch at school, for instance, said she’d better confess sleeping with her bf the night before “lest [she] get hit by a meteor”.

Can I take it she has it all wrong?

She most certainly does! In so many ways…

 

[Lovesa]

I would be very judicious about accepting a Catholic’s claim about what the Church teaches. More often than not this Catholic will be wrong. :sad_yes: (And I use the word “judicious” quite pointedly here. It may indeed be a correct profession, or it may not be. )

So whether you heard a Catholic claim we know who’s in hell, or not is irrelevant. Go to the source and see for yourself what the Church teaches.

:yup: That’s what I try to do.

What? A lot of Protestants believe that the Catholic Church states she knows who’s in hell?

Unfortunately, yes. A lot of Protestants I know think that the Catholic Church believes it can decide who goes to Heaven. For instance, I know a girl who thinks that if the pope were to tell somebody to go to hell they would. Weird, huh?

She most certainly does! In so many ways…

I’m glad to hear that. I was pretty sure she didn’t know her faith as well as she thought she did, but that felt like a presumptuous thing to say. Maybe it would help to ask what she meant by that? But she says things like that all the time. It’s odd.

 

[PRmerger]

:yup: That’s what I try to do.

Unfortunately, yes. A lot of Protestants I know think that the Catholic Church believes it can decide who goes to Heaven. For instance, I know a girl who thinks that if the pope were to tell somebody to go to hell they would. Weird, huh?

I’m glad to hear that. I was pretty sure she didn’t know her faith as well as she thought she did, but that felt like a presumptuous thing to say. Maybe it would help to ask what she meant by that? But she says things like that all the time. It’s odd.

Oh my gosh, Lovesa. You certainly came to the right place. I hope you stay here on the CAFs a lonnng time and read and learn and dialogue!

Many Catholics here are very, very good at expressing and explaining the faith correctly. Accept what you read here with a greater credence than what you hear at the lunch table from a teenage girl, but, again, be judicious about what you believe.

 

[araiceil]

I’m glad to hear that. I was pretty sure she didn’t know her faith as well as she thought she did, but that felt like a presumptuous thing to say. Maybe it would help to ask what she meant by that? But she says things like that all the time. It’s odd.

While I cannot speak on her behalf, I will say that in my experience Catholics tend to jovially mock the aspects of our faith that are secularly most controversial. I have heard many people joke about confession. I assume we do it in order to either avoid confrontation about things with those that would give it, or to seem more secular.Of course, there is also the possibility of the person simply being ignorant.