Protestants, why are you not Catholic?

[JonNC]

Yes, their canon is slightly bigger, but again, we have never contested (don’t know of any councils) nor have we had the opportunity to question the veracity of said books after we schismed, i.e., if a union between Orthodox and Catholics were to happen then it is possible that the canon could include these books (Trent only established that the books within our Bible were canonical). To deny however that there is no Tradition is erroneous, we know that the deuterocanonical books were accepted by both Churches. It was only until Luther and the Reformation that these books were considered apocrypha.

I posted what Cajetan said about them, that they were not canon, except in the sense of edification of the faithful, not unlike the position that Luther held. Cajetan sources Jerome. If they are not canon, then they are something else. I personally actually like the term deuterocanon (second canon) better than Apocrypha, but that said, Luther’s position was not new, not novel, not untraditional, and not prohibited. It also was not the majority view.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

It was accepted, moreover, you can accept it based on Tradition because the deuterocanonical books were never held to be non-scriptural by the Church until Luther and the Reformation.

Luther and Lutherans do not hold them as non-scriptural. The Lutheran confessions refer, for example to 2 Macc as scripture.

Although concerning the saints we concede that, just as, when alive, they pray for the Church universal in general, so in heaven they pray for the Church in general, albeit no testimony concerning the praying of the dead is extant in the Scriptures, except the dream taken from the Second Book of Maccabees, 15:14.

Obviously, however, there were Catholics who did consider them as less than the attested books, as examples of the names have been posted. They were allowed to believe the DC’s not to be equal to the attested books, and so was Luther.

The issue here isn’t whether or not Luther was right. We can argue that point. I tend to think he could have been even more deferential than he was (and he was very deferential considering he included them in his translation with no obligation to do so since his translation was long after his excommunication). It cannot be argued historically that Luther did something novel, or held a novel opinion regarding the books. To argue that position is to hold Luther to a different standard than others of his time and prior.

Jon

 

[josie_L]

This conversation can bring up more questions. Josie you keep bring us that Protestant do not have all the books of the Bible…66 I believe you state. Although my Bible has every book that your Catholic bible has, you then draw the line in the sand between DC and apocrypha.

You yourself admitted that the deuterocanonical books in your Bible are considered apocrypha, which means that they are not viewed as sacred scripture. That is why your Bible is smaller than mine, i.e., it has less divinely inspired books.

So you the Orthodox have even more books in their bible as stated and they are considered a valid Church with valid Sacraments…they your argument could then be turned around back on you right? Why does the RCC not accept the FULL version of the Scriptures?

We never rejected the books because there isn’t any councils referencing these books as apocrypha that I’m aware of. I’ll have to check it up (as many factors can be involved) and gather more information, either way, the deuterocanonical books were accepted by both Churches, so it is a forsaking of Tradition to actually relegate the deuterocanonical books as non-scriptural as Luther did, i.e., the CC has not relegated the books found in the OO or EO as non-scriptural, i.e., Trent only dealt with the books that were in our Bible.

Tradition also keep being thrown around and although I am not against Tradition, it can differ from Church to Church. I was just in the EC section of the forum and they were talking about how a Byzantine Catholic has different Sacred Traditions that the Latin Rite. Orthodoxy and Catholic differ a bit on Orginial Sin. Does that make their Tradition wrong?

more questions than answers I believe

The Byzantine Catholic church has a different way of interpreting certain doctrines (Sacred Tradition), but in a way that does not contradict and even compliments the RC.

 

[josie_L]

I posted what Cajetan said about them, that they were not canon, except in the sense of edification of the faithful, not unlike the position that Luther held. Cajetan sources Jerome. If they are not canon, then they are something else. I personally actually like the term deuterocanon (second canon) better than Apocrypha, but that said, Luther’s position was not new, not novel, not untraditional, and not prohibited. It also was not the majority view.

Jon

Luther’s position was new and non-traditional for all the reasons I cited earlier. And it was not the majority view as Trent (and history) proved that it wasn’t. I have yet to see you cite a council or anyone other than Cajetan and poor St. Jerome (who would be spinning in his grave). I’ll leave you with the words of St. Jerome:

. . . “I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul. I appealed for spiritual food to the church whence I have received the garb of Christ. The wide space of sea and land that lies between us cannot deter me from searching for “the pearl of great price.” Wheresoever the body is, there will the eagles be gathered together. . . My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross. As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this I know is the rock on which the church is built!”

God bless Jon!

 

[JonNC]

Luther’s position was new and non-traditional for all the reasons I cited earlier. And it was not the majority view as Trent (and history) proved that it wasn’t. I have yet to see you cite a council or anyone other than Cajetan and poor St. Jerome (who would be spinning in his grave). I’ll leave you with the words of St. Jerome:

. . . “I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul. I appealed for spiritual food to the church whence I have received the garb of Christ. The wide space of sea and land that lies between us cannot deter me from searching for “the pearl of great price.” Wheresoever the body is, there will the eagles be gathered together. . . My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross. As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this I know is the rock on which the church is built!”

God bless Jon!

His blessing also with you, Josie.

I indeed said Luther’s was not the majority view. We have no disagreement there. The fact that others through history, including St. Jerome, the quote you provided notwithstanding, proves that Luther’s was neither new, nor novel, nor non-traditional.

Jon

 

[aidanbradypop]

You yourself admitted that the deuterocanonical books in your Bible are considered apocrypha, which means that they are not viewed as sacred scripture. That is why your Bible is smaller than mine, i.e., it has less divinely inspired books.

Josie we read Scripture from those books on Sunday often. “My Bible” is my smaller than the Catholic Bible.

We never rejected the books because there isn’t any councils referencing these books as apocrypha that I’m aware of. I’ll have to check it up (as many factors can be involved) and gather more information, either way, the deuterocanonical books were accepted by both Churches, so it is a forsaking of Tradition to actually relegate the deuterocanonical books as non-scriptural as Luther did, i.e., the CC has not relegated the books found in the OO or EO as non-scriptural, i.e., Trent only dealt with the books that were in our Bible.

I wouldn’t say they are not Scripture. As I stated above, we often read from those books during Mass on Sunday.

The Byzantine Catholic church has a different way of interpreting certain doctrines (Sacred Tradition), but in a way that does not contradict and even compliments the RC.

I would research more on that. From the EC I have spoken with in the past, there is much that does not compliment the RCC. Now that may be the opinion of the individual but many individuals agree.

 

[Eternalwonder]

There are lots of things but one of the biggest for me is the praying to the saints! I mean its in one of the comandments to not do so. How can Catholics just completly disregard such an order. With that said I promise I sometimes wish I was Catholic it would make my life so much easier in so many ways, and I have tried to believe I have but I just can’t! The bible is very clear on certain things that I feel the catholic church just does not follow.

 

[Croc]

I am not a Roman Catholic. I’ll try to give my reasons in a very simple manner.
When I was 10 yrs old, our family joined the Catholic Church. We followed all the teachings faithfully until we had a chance of knowing what what the Bible teaches as opposed to what the Catholic church teaches.
One of the simple examples is the 10 commandments as they are written in the bible versus how they are taught in the Roman Catholic Church. I did not get an explanation of it.
I had been baptized, and confirmed but my life and my fellow brothers was not focused on Christ, actually it was Christless.
I and my fellow brothers in the church never used to read the bible. We liked singing, praying the rosary and going for mass but not reading the Word of God.

When I did alot of research, both in the bible and in other books, I realized I needed Jesus more than anything else.
One verse in the bible that challenged me was, John:4:21 "Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor at Jerusalem, worship the Father.
Verse 23, “But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him”

In John:4:14, Jesus said to the woman, “But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life”.
When I accepted Jesus as my Saviour, and the Word of God my guide, I had the assurance of eternal life through Christ Jesus.

I am not proselytizing, but giving my reasons “why am not a catholic”.

 

[JonNC]

Hi Croc. Welcome to CAF. I have just a couple of comments, from the perspective of a Lutheran.

=Croc;11513277]I am not a Roman Catholic. I’ll try to give my reasons in a very simple manner.
When I was 10 yrs old, our family joined the Catholic Church. We followed all the teachings faithfully until we had a chance of knowing what what the Bible teaches as opposed to what the Catholic church teaches.
One of the simple examples is the 10 commandments as they are written in the bible versus how they are taught in the Roman Catholic Church. I did not get an explanation of it.

I don’t see any difference in the way the CC teaches the 10 Commandments and how they are written in scripture. The numbering (Catholics and Lutherans number them the same way) isn’t relevant since scripture doesn’t specifically number them. So, I’m not sure what you are driving at.

I had been baptized, and confirmed but my life and my fellow brothers was not focused on Christ, actually it was Christless.
I and my fellow brothers in the church never used to read the bible. We liked singing, praying the rosary and going for mass but not reading the Word of God.

If you went to Catholic Mass, you did almost nothing but read scriptures, as the liturgy is based in scripture. I’ve been to Catholic Mass often enough to recognize this fact. The same is true in Lutheran Divine Worship (Mass) since it is very similar to and has its roots in the Catholic Mass.

Jon

 

[SoMissCatholic]

There are lots of things but one of the biggest for me is the praying to the saints! I mean its in one of the comandments to not do so. How can Catholics just completly disregard such an order. With that said I promise I sometimes wish I was Catholic it would make my life so much easier in so many ways, and I have tried to believe I have but I just can’t! The bible is very clear on certain things that I feel the catholic church just does not follow.

Which commandment says not to pray to saints? You are confused about the Church’s teaching on this. Catholics do not pray to saints because we believe that they have any power in and of themselves. Rather, we pray to saints, asking for their intercession (prayer to God) on our behalf, because they are in the very presence of God, experiencing Him face to face in the glory of the beatific vision, and therefore, their prayers on our behalf can be very efficacious for us. We do not pray to them instead of God; we pray to them in addition to it. BTW, “pray” in this context simply means “request.” We do not give prayers of adoration to saints, nor do we worship saints. Worship is for God and God alone. We simply honor the saints and ask them to pray for us.

 

[ajecphotos]

Which commandment says not to pray to saints? You are confused about the Church’s teaching on this. Catholics do not pray to saints because we believe that they have any power in and of themselves. Rather, we pray to saints, asking for their intercession (prayer to God) on our behalf, because they are in the very presence of God, experiencing Him face to face in the glory of the beatific vision, and therefore, their prayers on our behalf can be very efficacious for us. We do not pray to them instead of God; we pray to them in addition to it. BTW, “pray” in this context simply means “request.” We do not give prayers of adoration to saints, nor do we worship saints. Worship is for God and God alone. We simply honor the saints and ask them to pray for us.

This is right. If i ‘pray’ to St Padre Pio I am not worshipping him, I am asking him to ‘intercede’ for me. Simples!

 

[aidanbradypop]

This is right. If i ‘pray’ to St Padre Pio I am not worshipping him, I am asking him to ‘intercede’ for me. Simples!

I can see both sides.

In the prayer section of the forum, people ask us to pray for____________.

90% of the time people respond with a Hail Mary.

To many non catholics, this is where many take issue with. They have been taught their entire life that one should only pray to God through Christ’s name…not St. Stephen or St. Patrick.

Being Episcopalian, we believe in the communion of saints and ask for their prayers all the time. Many do not ask directly but rather for all of them to pray for us.

 

[SoMissCatholic]

I am not a Roman Catholic. I’ll try to give my reasons in a very simple manner.
When I was 10 yrs old, our family joined the Catholic Church. We followed all the teachings faithfully until we had a chance of knowing what what the Bible teaches as opposed to what the Catholic church teaches.
One of the simple examples is the 10 commandments as they are written in the bible versus how they are taught in the Roman Catholic Church. I did not get an explanation of it.

As JonNC said, the Catholic Church follows all of the commandments. We may number them differently than some protestants (who we would argue split the first commandment into two and combine the ninth and tenth commandments into one), but the substance is the same.

I had been baptized, and confirmed but my life and my fellow brothers was not focused on Christ, actually it was Christless.

If you attended mass regularly and received the Eucharist, your life was anything but “Christless” as you physically received him, body, blood, soul and divinity, every time you received communion.

I and my fellow brothers in the church never used to read the bible. We liked singing, praying the rosary and going for mass but not reading the Word of God.

You read the word of God (“word” is deliberately left uncapitalized here, as the Word of God is Jesus Christ himself) every time you went to mass. Indeed, more than 1/4 of the mass is devoted to reading scripture during the liturgy of the word, not to mention, as JonNC pointed out, the liturgy of the mass is saturated with scripture. I would contend that each Sunday more scripture is read at a Catholic mass than the vast majority of protestant worship services.

Also, the rosary, properly prayed, is very much Christ centered and includes several scripture readings. The mysteries we meditate on while praying the rosary center on Christ’s life, His birth, His miracles, His passion, and His resurrection and ascention.

When I did alot of research, both in the bible and in other books, I realized I needed Jesus more than anything else.

I agree we need Jesus more than anything else, and the best way to achieve that is by being a member of the Church He established, where you can receive him body, blood, soul and divinity every day in the Eucharist.

One verse in the bible that challenged me was, John:4:21 "Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor at Jerusalem, worship the Father.
Verse 23, “But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him”

Not sure what your point is here because Jesus is talking about cessation of Jewish sacrificial temple worship.

In John:4:14, Jesus said to the woman, “But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life”.
When I accepted Jesus as my Saviour, and the Word of God my guide, I had the assurance of eternal life through Christ Jesus.

Jesus did not teach, nor does the Bible teach, once save always saved. Jesus does indeed give us assurance of eternal life if we follow His commands and respond to the graces imparted to us, but no where does He teach that salvation is a simple act of saying a prayer accepting him as our personal Lord and Savior.

I am not proselytizing, but giving my reasons “why am not a catholic”.

Fair enough. I would encourage you, however, to study up on what the Church actually teaches instead of what you erroneously believe those teachings to be. There are many great resources here at CA, or you can read the Catechism of the Catholic Church online here

 

[Kliska]

I can see both sides.

In the prayer section of the forum, people ask us to pray for____________.

90% of the time people respond with a Hail Mary.

To many non catholics, this is where many take issue with. They have been taught their entire life that one should only pray to God through Christ’s name…not St. Stephen or St. Patrick.

Being Episcopalian, we believe in the communion of saints and ask for their prayers all the time. Many do not ask directly but rather for all of them to pray for us.

It all depends on how the person defines worth and showing it forth. Worship, to me is akin to worth-ship. And God alone is worthy, God alone is worthy of praise, respect, service. Most protestants like me believe in the “community” of saints as well, but don’t speak directly to the saints, preferring to go to God directly.

Also, I don’t know if certain prayers are “approved” by the RCC or not, but some of them aren’t just asking for intercession, but asking for something from the Saint themselves. St. Michael is a good example. “St. Michael defend us.” That’s calling upon the angel personally to defend, it’s not asking Michael to go to God and have God send Michael to defend. If a protestant of my ilk wanted angelic protection we’d pray to the Father, as Jesus said He would have done;

Matthew 26:53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?

 

[aidanbradypop]

It all depends on how the person defines worth and showing it forth. Worship, to me is akin to worth-ship. And God alone is worthy, God alone is worthy of praise, respect, service. Most protestants like me believe in the “community” of saints as well, but don’t speak directly to the saints, preferring to go to God directly.

Also, I don’t know if certain prayers are “approved” by the RCC or not, but some of them aren’t just asking for intercession, but asking for something from the Saint themselves. St. Michael is a good example. “St. Michael defend us.” That’s calling upon the angel personally to defend, it’s not asking Michael to go to God and have God send Michael to defend. If a protestant of my ilk wanted angelic protection we’d pray to the Father, as Jesus said He would have done;

Matthew 26:53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?

Yeah I would never pray the Hail Holy Queen prayer when I did the Rosary.

 

[aidanbradypop]

So I asked a Protestant friend (Lutheran LCMC) why he is not Catholic and this is what I got back.

*The following list give a summation of what I believe to the the error of the Catholic faith and why I am not Catholic. If the Bible is a Catholic book,

1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).
2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).
3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).
4. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).
5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2).
6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5).
7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12).
8. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as “father”? (Matt. 23:9).
9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).
10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).
11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).
12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).
13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).
14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?

These “doctrines” were all made by man. The Catholic Church is made by man.*

Any comments on the reasons he gave?

 

[Randy_Carson]

So I asked a Protestant friend (Lutheran LCMC) why he is not Catholic and this is what I got back.

*The following list give a summation of what I believe to the the error of the Catholic faith and why I am not Catholic. If the Bible is a Catholic book,

1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).
2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).
3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).
4. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).
5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2).
6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5).
7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12).
8. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as “father”? (Matt. 23:9).
9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).
10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).
11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).
12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).
13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).
14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?

These “doctrines” were all made by man. The Catholic Church is made by man.*

Any comments on the reasons he gave?

Dustin-

The Bible does NOT teach all those things; it is your friend’s misinterpretation of scripture that creates his misunderstanding. Others will have a blast knocking these softballs over the fence.

I want to focus on the bigger question, “Does the Church established by Jesus have real authority or not?”

If not, then we’re all wasting our time with Christianity, because there is no reason we should believe a word of it. OTOH, if Jesus really did give the Church HIS authority (as scripture clearly shows He did), then the Church can do “whatever” (cf. Mt 16:18-19) because it is prevented by God from everyteaching doctrinal error.

So, an infallible, authoritative Church founded by Jesus and led by the Holy Spirit has determined that all of the things listed above are perfectly acceptable. But until your friend acknowledges that authority, he’s putting the cart before the horse arguing all these little issues, and you’ll be playing “Whack-A-Mole” forever trying to answer these and a million more objections.

http://www.jeffcubos.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/whack-a-mole2.jpg

 

[aidanbradypop]

Aidan-

The Bible does NOT teach all those things; it is your friend’s misinterpretation of scripture that creates his misunderstanding. Others will have a blast knocking these softballs over the fence.

I want to focus on the bigger question, “Does the Church established by Jesus have real authority or not?”

If not, then we’re all wasting our time with Christianity, because there is no reason we should believe a word of it. OTOH, if Jesus really did give the Church HIS authority (as scripture clearly shows He did), then the Church can do “whatever” (cf. Mt 16:18-19) because it is prevented by God from every teaching doctrinal error.

So, an infallible, authoritative Church founded by Jesus and led by the Holy Spirit has determined that all of the things listed above are perfectly acceptable. But until your friend acknowledges that authority, he’s putting the cart before the horse arguing all these little issues, and you’ll be playing “Whack-A-Mole” forever trying to answer these and a million more objections.

jeffcubos.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/whack-a-mole2.jpg

Aidan is my son. I am Dustin. Nice to meet ya

I believe the OHCAC is the Church founded by Christ to spread the Gospel to all as I am sure my friend does and as do you.

I do not believe in a Pope being infallible no any doctrines being infallible. I believe many of the verses he cited were a bit reaching.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Aidan is my son. I am Dustin. Nice to meet ya

I believe the OHCAC is the Church founded by Christ to spread the Gospel to all as I am sure my friend does and as do you.

I do not believe in a Pope being infallible no any doctrines being infallible. I believe many of the verses he cited were a bit reaching.

So, I should address infallibility for you instead of your friend?

 

[aidanbradypop]

So, I should address infallibility for you instead of your friend?

No I stand firmly on my theology as do you.