Was St.Patrick a Protestant?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mr_bamber
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mr_bamber

Guest
Hello I have witnessed a number of Protestants recently say that Catholic apologists have made St.Patrick into a Catholic, when he didn’t remotely believe in anything like what Catholics believe today. Any ideas for a response?
 
mr_bamber said:
Hello I have witnessed a number of Protestants recently say that Catholic apologists have made St.Patrick into a Catholic, when he didn’t remotely believe in anything like what Catholics believe today. Any ideas for a response?
Click to expand...
Yes, actually St Patrick was a Baptist
 
theoldman said:
Yes, actually St Patrick was a Baptist
Click to expand...
Can you give us a complete list of people who were baptist before the baptist sect was founded in the 16th century?

If my history is correct, I believe St. Patrick died well before the Reformation started.
 
Tomster said:
Can you give us a complete list of people who were baptist before the baptist sect was founded in the 16th century?

If my history is correct, I believe St. Patrick died well before the Reformation started.
Click to expand...
I sense theoldman meant it as a joke.

More seriously, my answer:

St. Patrick was definitely a Catholic, just like everyone who was baptized and confesses the Nicene Creed is a Catholic, then or now.
 
Paul_Rimmer said:
I sense theoldman meant it as a joke.

More seriously, my answer:

St. Patrick was definitely a Catholic, just like everyone who confesses the Nicene Creed is a Catholic, then or now.
Click to expand...
Why don’t we wait and see if theodman meant it as a joke.

Theoldman, joke or no joke? Which is it.
 
Mr. Bamber,

St. Patrick was Roman Catholic. Ask your friends for specifics next time they assert such an absurd proposition.

Tomster,

Some ‘Fundamentalists’ or ‘Baptists’ or ‘Bible Believing’ communities allege that an underground group of true Christians existed from the time of John the Baptist. Further, they claim that the Catholic Church periodically persecuted this purported remnant.

As Karl Keating wrote in Catholicism and Fundamentalism, the truth is far more prosaic.

What communities who losely originate from the Pentacostal movement in 19th century America depict is simply not congruent with basic history. They essentially merge every schismatic group into one persistant community; this is curious because various heretical groups did exist but were completely independent of one another (I suppose except for the fact that they all refused to accept the Church’s teaching authority.)

For example, there are still some Fundamentalists who claim ‘they’ were persecuted by the Church during the Carpathian Crusade. Again, this is a good example of how a little bit of knowledge can cause a lot of trouble.

In fact, this sect was deeply disturbed believing that matter was evil, that marriage was evil but fornication was acceptable because of its ‘temporary nature’, and an assortment of other gnostic confusions.

Furthermore, the violent excesses were performed by civil authorities who acted in direct violated of the Pope’s orders that commanded clemancy.

So, it is no surprise that some Protestants are attempting to claim icons of the Church.

I would say, ask these people if St. Patrick believed as we do in the Eucharist. I think the arguments for a Protestant St. Patrick will suddenly pretzel.
 
KingTheoden said:
Mr. Bamber,

St. Patrick was Roman Catholic. Ask your friends for specifics next time they assert such an absurd proposition.

Tomster,

Some ‘Fundamentalists’ or ‘Baptists’ or ‘Bible Believing’ communities allege that an underground group of true Christians existed from the time of John the Baptist. Further, they claim that the Catholic Church periodically persecuted this purported remnant.

As Karl Keating wrote in Catholicism and Fundamentalism, the truth is far more prosaic.

What communities who losely originate from the Pentacostal movement in 19th century America depict is simply not congruent with basic history. They essentially merge every schismatic group into one persistant community; this is curious because various heretical groups did exist but were completely independent of one another (I suppose except for the fact that they all refused to accept the Church’s teaching authority.)

For example, there are still some Fundamentalists who claim ‘they’ were persecuted by the Church during the Carpathian Crusade. Again, this is a good example of how a little bit of knowledge can cause a lot of trouble.

In fact, this sect was deeply disturbed believing that matter was evil, that marriage was evil but fornication was acceptable because of its ‘temporary nature’, and an assortment of other gnostic confusions.

Furthermore, the violent excesses were performed by civil authorities who acted in direct violated of the Pope’s orders that commanded clemancy.

So, it is no surprise that some Protestants are attempting to claim icons of the Church.

I would say, ask these people if St. Patrick believed as we do in the Eucharist. I think the arguments for a Protestant St. Patrick will suddenly pretzel.
Click to expand...
KT
 
St. Patrick believed in the Real Presence.

However, as transubstantiation was not a doctrine at the time, it would be unrealistic to say that St. Patrick believed about the Eucharist what any particular group of Catholics do now. We’d have to ask him to make sure.
 
KingTheoden said:
Mr. Bamber,

St. Patrick was Roman Catholic. Ask your friends for specifics next time they assert such an absurd proposition.

Tomster,

Some ‘Fundamentalists’ or ‘Baptists’ or ‘Bible Believing’ communities allege that an underground group of true Christians existed from the time of John the Baptist. Further, they claim that the Catholic Church periodically persecuted this purported remnant.

As Karl Keating wrote in Catholicism and Fundamentalism, the truth is far more prosaic.

What communities who losely originate from the Pentacostal movement in 19th century America depict is simply not congruent with basic history. They essentially merge every schismatic group into one persistant community; this is curious because various heretical groups did exist but were completely independent of one another (I suppose except for the fact that they all refused to accept the Church’s teaching authority.)

For example, there are still some Fundamentalists who claim ‘they’ were persecuted by the Church during the Carpathian Crusade. Again, this is a good example of how a little bit of knowledge can cause a lot of trouble.

In fact, this sect was deeply disturbed believing that matter was evil, that marriage was evil but fornication was acceptable because of its ‘temporary nature’, and an assortment of other gnostic confusions.

Furthermore, the violent excesses were performed by civil authorities who acted in direct violated of the Pope’s orders that commanded clemancy.

So, it is no surprise that some Protestants are attempting to claim icons of the Church.

I would say, ask these people if St. Patrick believed as we do in the Eucharist. I think the arguments for a Protestant St. Patrick will suddenly pretzel.
Click to expand...
K.T.,

Thanks for your reply.

I am well aware of the attempts of Baptists to claim Catholic saints as their own in an attempt to bolster their claims as the true church. Funny thing, though, nowhere in all of recorded history is there ever any mention of this “invisible church” co-existing with the See of Peter.

When pressed to show us this “invisible, persecuted church” there is a deafening silence from them.
 
mr_bamber said:
Hello I have witnessed a number of Protestants recently say that Catholic apologists have made St.Patrick into a Catholic, when he didn’t remotely believe in anything like what Catholics believe today. Any ideas for a response?
Click to expand...
St Patrick was around WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY before protestants existed, around the year 400ad, protestants emerged around the 1500s
 
StrawberryJam said:
Did I miss his citations in that article somewhere? I must have missed them all.
Click to expand...
He mentions his two surviving writings “Confession and the Letter to the Soldiers of Coroticus”. Also, he mentions the hymn " a Latin hymn written in praise of him by his assistant bishop, Sechnall,". They’re probably not too long of a read. I’ve never read them myself, though, so I wouldn’t know. You’re right that there don’t seem to be many direct quotations. It seems to be a pretty informal article.

I’ve never known Jimmy Akin to be the type to purposefully mislead or be inept at conveying the truth, so I tend to believe him. Let me know if you decide to read St. Patrick’s writings and find something different.

Edit: Here’s His Confession
ccel.org/ccel/patrick/confession.toc.html

And his Letter to the Soldiers of Coroticus
maryjones.us/ctexts/p02.html

I wont have time to read them tonight, but they are pretty short, as I suspected. They’ll definitely come in handy for this thread.
 
Capta(name removed by moderator)icard said:
He mentions his two surviving writings “Confession and the Letter to the Soldiers of Coroticus”. Also, he mentions the hymn " a Latin hymn written in praise of him by his assistant bishop, Sechnall,". They’re probably not too long of a read. I’ve never read them myself, though, so I wouldn’t know. You’re right that there don’t seem to be many direct quotations. It seems to be a pretty informal article.

I’ve never known Jimmy Akin to be the type to purposefully mislead or be inept at conveying the truth, so I tend to believe him. Let me know if you decide to read St. Patrick’s writings and find something different.
Click to expand...
I agree, it seemed to be an informal rather than instructional article. I wished he had provided citations though. I don’t mind reading an article that is like this, but would not be able to reccomend this article to anyone because of that.
 
St. Patrick was Catholic. He wears the Green like a good Catholic. I see no orange on the man. 😃
 
StrawberryJam said:
You do realize, that a dry sense of humor is not one that most of the posters here will pick up on.
Click to expand...
Oh, I think most would, but having seen some Baptists here who espouse the “Trail of Blood” understanding of Christian history it’s not difficult to think that there was no humor intended, wet or dry. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top