Since it's been asked of Protestants...

[SSTeacher]

So my question, if you belong to one branch, what are your feelings towards the other? Not of the religion, but of those who practice it. Do you feel they are your kindred spirits? Or lost souls in danger of damnation?

SSTeacher;6606702:

I don’t view Catholics as kindred spirits. Knowing what I know now, if there were suddenly to be no Orthodoxy, I’d give the Catholic Church a very wide berth and either return to Evangelicalism or Methodism or become a Lutheran.

Do you mind expounding on this statement?

Dancelittleewok;6614552:

Do you mind expounding on this statement?

Yes, SSTeach, that remark got me curious too.
Especially since one cannot physically receive the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord outside the CC and the EO why would anyone go anywhere else?

SSTeacher;6606702:

I don’t view Catholics as kindred spirits. Knowing what I know now, if there were suddenly to be no Orthodoxy, I’d give the Catholic Church a very wide berth and either return to Evangelicalism or Methodism or become a Lutheran.

Why would you say that?

I can expound only within the framework of hypothesis, of course.

The reason I’d return to Evangelicalism or Methodism would be because they are familiar to me. That I am where I am today is in some part owing to the prayers, the friendship, and the support of Evangelicals and Methodists. Certain individuals inside those two faith communities constitute an intrinsic part of my spiritual development. Had I not been able to stand on their shoulders I would never have seen Orthodoxy. If Orthodoxy were no more I’d be distraught and I’d naturally be drawn back to the love and the warmth and the solidarity that I know I could experience amongst those people who helped me along and taught me a lot. My hypothetical attraction to Lutheranism is based solely upon the attitude of the (albeit few) Lutherans who’ve posted their thoughts on threads in this forum and that stance has made me wonder about what Lutheranism might be like.

The reason I’d give the Catholic Church a wide berth is because since I came to this forum to check out Catholicism I’ve come to realize that the Catholic Church is in a state of great unrest. Inside it are several different factions fighting each other. I’m saddened to see that it’s so. In addition, there are several Catholic doctrines that I simply cannot accept as being from God and which I identify as legalism. So the perception of Catholicism I’ve developed is that it is a very legalistic religion and that many of its adherents are not at peace with themselves or with each other. I’d be unable to function in such an environment. I’ve little doubt that I’d grow cold. I would suppose that I’d become full of fear and guilt and simply go through the motions of “church” in a very mechanical way. Eventually, I’d likely grow to see such a routine as pointless whereupon my natural rebelliousness would kick in following which I might even drop out of Christianity altogether and drift back into the vague and aimless agnosticism from which the LORD beckoned me a decade ago.

Hypothetically,
Mick

 

[steve_b]

well, there’s no mention of mass in hebrews and i point that out simply to remind you that i am a non–catholic and that all non–catholics miss mass every sunday as a matter of routine.

following that passage, (my comments in blue)

heb 10**:**

23let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful.

iow what is being professed here must be held. It’s not an option.

24and let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. 25let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the day approaching.

iow, meeting on sunday must be held unswervingly, .

26 if we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth,

iow deliberately not meeting is already considered a sin. There’s no excuse for a habit of not meeting by some. As we will see this habit of missing is defined as a deadly sin. And as you will see, this is taught so there is no mistake or excuses.

no sacrifice for sins is left, 27but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of god

wow!!! Deliberately not meeting on sunday is that serious?

• what does it mean no sacrifice for sin is left for that person who deliberately fails to meet on sunday?
• what is the sacrifice for sin that one is missing when they don’t meet?
• why does deliberately failing to meet on Sunday, draw judgement by God on that person and the consequences for them are a raging fire that consumes the enemies of god if they die in this sin?

I’ll be interested in your answer

 

[steve_b]

If the term “mortal sin” is employed I think there is a danger that we will talk past each other.

look up mortal in the dictionary.
sst:

Embracing the Ancient Faith hasn’t turned me into a biblical scholar and even if it had done the passage would still read the same as it always did, would engender as much discussion as it always had, and would remain as obscure as it always was.

this passage makes sense only to the ancient faith.
sst:

I have two comments.

Firstly, although most of the Evangelicals I encountered did not accept that there are degrees of sin I did meet some who did accept that idea. That isn’t surprising. It’s generally acknowledged that Evangelicals agree to disagree with each other about any number of issues. So, although it’s probably tempting to try to add weight to the argument by representing Evangelicals as being united in their view, it’s not really helpful to do so.

Scripture is clear. There is deadly and non deadly sin. John says non deadly sin can be prayed about and God will forgive those sins. But John says not so for the deadly ones.

How do those deadly sins get taken care of?
sst:

Secondly, I’d like to draw attention to the term “skipped over” that you’ve used. Again, it’s probably tempting from a Catholic perspective to suppose that this is what is happening i.e. Evangelicals are carefully ensuing that certain verses in the Bible “get skipped over” because they know deep down in their hearts that these particular verses reveal that the Catholic Church is indeed righter than rain – but I respectfully submit that common sense and refined sense strongly suggest that this is a very unlikely scenario.

Not only do these passages prove Evangelicals wrong but it also leaves them in a pickle. How do they get rid of mortal sin when they can’t pray about them as John says.
sst:

I’ll assume, then,
a) That we’re going to drop the term “mortal sin” and
b) That you regard my objection as valid.

the RSV-CE (Catholic edition) uses mortal sin.

1 Jn 5:
16 If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God * will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.

Read any translation along side this translation. You’ll see there is no difficulty

 

[steve_b]

No, that’s not what I meant. Ah, well.

:
Originally Posted by steve b forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
here are some sins that keep you out of heaven. By definition, that makes them deadly

Ephesians 5: 3-5 fornication, covetousness…… 5 Be sure of this, that no fornicator or impure man, or one who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

Hebrews 10:25-26 missing mass deliberately, no sacrifice for sin for THEM but fearful judgement and fire .

Hebrews 12: 16 - 17 immoraliy, is selling your inheritance

*Galatians 5: 19 - 21 sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21and envy; drunkenness, orgies, will not inherit heaven *

Colossians 3: 5-6 immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry, …rath of God is coming

1 Corinthians 6: 9 - 10 sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

Just to name a few.

sst:

Indeed. The wages of sin is death.

1 Jn 5:
17 All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.

Those sins mentioned above are deadly. and as John says not all sin is mortal

 

[Reuben_J]

I can expound only within the framework of hypothesis, of course.

The reason I’d return to Evangelicalism or Methodism would be because they are familiar to me. That I am where I am today is in some part owing to the prayers, the friendship, and the support of Evangelicals and Methodists. Certain individuals inside those two faith communities constitute an intrinsic part of my spiritual development. Had I not been able to stand on their shoulders I would never have seen Orthodoxy. If Orthodoxy were no more I’d be distraught and I’d naturally be drawn back to the love and the warmth and the solidarity that I know I could experience amongst those people who helped me along and taught me a lot. My hypothetical attraction to Lutheranism is based solely upon the attitude of the (albeit few) Lutherans who’ve posted their thoughts on threads in this forum and that stance has made me wonder about what Lutheranism might be like.

The reason I’d give the Catholic Church a wide berth is because since I came to this forum to check out Catholicism I’ve come to realize that the Catholic Church is in a state of great unrest. Inside it are several different factions fighting each other. I’m saddened to see that it’s so. In addition, there are several Catholic doctrines that I simply cannot accept as being from God and which I identify as legalism. So the perception of Catholicism I’ve developed is that it is a very legalistic religion and that many of its adherents are not at peace with themselves or with each other. I’d be unable to function in such an environment. I’ve little doubt that I’d grow cold. I would suppose that I’d become full of fear and guilt and simply go through the motions of “church” in a very mechanical way. Eventually, I’d likely grow to see such a routine as pointless whereupon my natural rebelliousness would kick in following which I might even drop out of Christianity altogether and drift back into the vague and aimless agnosticism from which the LORD beckoned me a decade ago.

Hypothetically,
Mick

Perhaps without realizing it but your statement seems to be rather insincere and borders on hypocrisy.

A person who came with the nick SSTeacher should know better rather than based your opinion on a religion from an internet forum. Posters come in various forms and we can never know whom we are talking to in an internet. There are definitely some posters who have dishonestly put their denominational affiliation as something else that may not be their real religion and then there are anti-Catholic posters who no doubt want to put the religion in a negative light. In any case the last thing I would do would be to use the internet as my yardstick to gauge what the religion would be, less of all to convert based on my impression on what I find in the internet. The internet is good if you want to get some fast information to answer some questions such as doctrine. Even then that would still be helpful to talk to a person in real life.

About different factions in the Catholic Church. Which church would you find where there is no infighting and different factions? At least Catholics are open and honest enough to voice their differences here. And are you really sad to see that? You should be sadder still to see the factions that are fighting within Evangelicals and Protestantism in general because there are truly many infighting and differences there.

You cannot accept Catholic doctrines but you can easily accept Orthodox. While the Orthodox here deny that they are the same with Catholicism and which I do agree with them, you will see that basically those doctrines are the same in principles. If you have to make that leap from Evangelical, the difference to you would be minimal as both are completely new territory to you.

I can understand that you find legalism in Catholicism. I think it is considering you are from a Protestant background.

I understand too if you choose the other denominations because you know the people there. Many a time, people’s reason to convert to the particular denomination is because of friendship and knowing people there.

Otherwise on the whole, your reason smacks of untruth that springs out of an original perception that you already have on the Church.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Both Western and Eastern Orthodox Catholic Churches who are in full communion with the Pope reveal the unbroken succession to Apostolic Catholic Church.

Now the few Orthodox Churches who refuse communion with the Pope and their other Eastern Orthodox brethren, remain isolated in their communities with valid holy orders and apostolic succession. These are more close to the Church Jesus built upon Peter and his successors in the Popes, than Protestantism which left the Pope and the Catholic church teachings and communion.

If you see or hear of any tension in debates between Catholics and Orthodox who refuse communion to the Pope, comes from rejecting or refusing to recognize the Authority Jesus placed upon Peter whom he built his Catholic Church and gave the Keys to the Kingdom of God singularly and then to the rest of the apostles.

Most of these arguments come from those Orthodox members refusing communion to the Pope, who are actively evangelizing the West opposing the authority of the Pope. Exercising their freedoms as do Protestants which compete and protest against authority God has placed upon Peter and the college of Bishops united with the Peter and his successors in the unbroken line of Popes from Peter.

The Western Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox in full communion with the Pope remain steadfast in what God has joined together let no man put asunder.

Orthodoxy who refuse communion with the Pope side with western Protestantism which Protests the authority of the Pope given by Jesus Christ himself, and rejects clarification of Apostolic Doctrine from the Pope and the College of Bishops world wide including Eastern Orthodox united (in communon) with the Pope.

Although those Orthodox who refuse communion with the Pope are alot closer in faith than western Protestantism as far as Apostolic succession and Apostolic Tradition is concerned.

I can never phantom the idea of refusing communion with any Apostolic successor to an apostle of Jesus Christ. Jesus never taught refusal of communion among his disciples even though two disciples bucked for authority to sit at Jesus right hand. Jesus told them that this seat at his right hand was already chosen for by the Father in heaven. Could Jesus had meant Peter, when God revealed to Simon who Jesus is?

Peace be with you

 

[SSTeacher]

I’ll be interested in your answer

You are ignoring my questions and prooftexting with eisegesis so can we agree that there is little point in continuing?

Cordially,
Mick

 

[steve_b]

You are ignoring my questions and prooftexting with eisegesis so can we agree that there is little point in continuing?

Cordially,
Mick

I gave you a detailed answer showing there is no chance the Church will reduce that offense from a mortal sin to a misdemeanor for one who purposefully misses mass on Sunday.

regarding the mass, that passage is crystal clear. Accusing me of eisegesis and prooftexting won’t work. I suspect you’re having trouble coming up with an answer to the questions asked

 

[SSTeacher]

I suspect you’re having trouble coming up with an answer to the questions asked

I’ll settle for that. I’ll let you have the last word.

Contentedly,
Mick