What are some of the main reasons that people are attracted to the Protestant faith?

[PRmerger]

AbideWithMe, who am I to say but nothing is wrong with it that I can see.

Nothing is wrong, except that it’s not the correct expression of the verse.

And it certainly is not an indictment of purgatory.

We would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord.
“8 We are of good courage, and we would** rather be **away from the body and at home with the Lord.”

But that certainly doesn’t mean that if we are away from the body that we must be at home with the Lord.

The RATHER is a quite important word.

And the KJV uses the word WILLING.

Very important not to exclude that.

Anyway if people back up 2 verses to verse 6 in Douay Rheims assuming it’s not in error, I know it says 'Therefore having always confidence, knowing that, while we are in the body, we are absent from the Lord." So verse 6 says we can with confidence know that while we are in the body, we are absent from Him.,

Very Catholic, this!

It doesn’t seem all that off then to me if you then want to say to be absent from the body is to present with Him.

Unless one is in hell or purgatory (on his way to heaven, of course).

If one uses 2 Cor 5:8 to say there is no purgatory, then one must use it to say there is no hell, either.

Of course, some people don’t like the idea that there is a hell, so because it’s unpalatable, have decided that there is no such thing because it doesn’t agree with their own personal tastes.

I dunno if that’s another thing that has been removed from the teachings of Christ in order to create a religion more palatable…

 

[SoMissCatholic]

But, I want to ask you about something since it’s come up again. You keep saying, “Not our words. But His.” Okay, well, His words in regard to divorce (in Matthew 19, Matthew 5, Mark and Luke, and then through Paul in 1 Corinthians 7) say, to men, that they may not divorce their wives, except for marital infidelity*. The context of the discussion in Matthew 19 is about the debate between the school of Hillel and the school of Shammai on the interpretation of Deuteronomy 24:1-4. Jesus affirms the stricter understanding of the school of Shammai, as I wrote earlier.

. . .

• porneia= Greek root refers to selling something (sex, in this case); so the closest Latin and then English translations would be fornication, from “fornix”, an archway, specifically here an archway where prostitutes sold themselves. Also, the LXX translates the Hebrew for prostitution as “porneia” when moving to Greek. And, among the ECF’s, Origen understood porneia in Matthew 19 to mean fornication, as have all translations, Catholic or Protestant, that I’ve read up until the recent change in some Catholic Bibles. I’ve yet to find any evidence that “unlawful marriage” is an accurate translation for porneia in Matthew 19. If someone has any such evidence, I’d be interested in seeing it.

I am quoting below two passages from The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, which address the two points bolded above. The first is a commentary on Matthew 19:3 and addresses your point on the Hillel/Shammai debate. The second is an essay on Matthew 19 entitled “Jesus on Marriage and Divorce.” I do not claim to be an expert in such matters, but am simply offering a response from a source more learned than me. All emphasis is mine.

19:3 tested: The Greek verb can also mean “tempted” and often implies a hostile intent (as in 4:1 and 22:18). The Pharisees, resolved to destroy Jesus (12:14), hope to ensnare him with an incriminating question (cf. 22:15; Jn 8:6). for any cause: Many read this as a question about the legitimate grounds for divorce. It is said that Jesus is pressed to take sides in a debate between the Pharisaic schools of Hillel (liberal) and Shammai (conservative). This is doubtful; giving an opinion on an intramural dispute among the Pharisees would hardly constitute a trap. More likely, the question concerns the legality of divorce itself (as in Mk 10:2). Presumably it was becoming known that Jesus forbids divorce and remarriage (5:32; Lk 16:18), even though Moses had long ago permitted it (Deut 24:1-4). The Pharisees thus see an opportunity to discredit Jesus by pitting him against Moses. Jesus evades the trap by quoting the words of Moses from Genesis (19:4-5) and then turns the tables by showing that the Pharisees are the ones out of touch with God’s true intention for married life as revealed in the Torah.

Since the dawn of creation, God designed marriage to be permanent, exclusive, and fruitful (Gen 1:28, 2:24; Mt 19:5). However, since man’s rebellion against God, the institution of marriage has suffered many distortions that tarnished its God-given beauty. Moses permitted divorce and remarriage as a concession to the sinfulness of Israel under the Old Covenant (Deut 24:1-4). Even so, it was ultimately clear that divorce falls short of God’s will and plan for married couples (cf. Mal 2:16).

This leads to an important question: Does Jesus reaffirm the permission of divorce stipulated in Deut 24:1-4, or, rather, does he revoke this concession and announce the indissolubility of marriage for the New Covenant? The Catholic Church has consistently maintained that Jesus forbids divorce and remarriage. The bond that unites a couple in the sacrament of matrimony is created by God (Mt 19:6) and can be dissolved only by the death of one of the spouses (cf. Rom 7:1-3). For men or women to remarry while their spouse is living is to commit adultery (Mt 19:9; Rom 7:3).

Jesus’ teaching on mariage, divorce, and remarriage is unfortunately a source of controversy among Christians. Much confusion swirls around his statement in Mt 19:9: “[W]hoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another, commits adultery” (cf. Mt 5:32). Does Jesus really make an “exception” to allow for divorce and remarriage? Since the rise of Protestantism in the sixteenth century, many non-Catholic groups have answered “yes”. They began to appeal to this “exception clause” to justify divorce and remarriage in extreme circumstances. However, this view fails to interpret Jesus’ statement in light of its immediate, biblical context. The disciples’ response to Jesus’ statement on divorce (“it is not expedient to mary” [19:10]) demonstrates that, in their understanding, Jesus was leaving no room at all for divorce and remarriage. In fact, they viewed celibacy as a preferable alternative to marriage precisely because Jesus’ teaching on this matter is so strict–far more so than that of any of his Jewish contemporaries. The disciples’ incredulous response to jesus thus confirms the Catholic Church’s constant teaching on the indissolubility of sacramental marriage.

continued below

 

[SoMissCatholic]

continued from previous post

Still, the question remains: What did Jesus mean when he said “except for unchastity” in Mt 5:32 and 19:9? Over the centuries, Catholic exegesis has put forward three main interpretations of this exception clause. None is endorsed by the Church as her official understanding of the passage. However, all are premissible interpretations inasmuch as they harmonize the exception clause with the revolutionary teaching of Jesus (and the Catholic Church) on the indissolubility of sacramental marriage.

1. Patristic View

Several Church Fathers suggest Jesus allowed for divorce in cases of serious sexual sin such as adultery, but he never permitted remarriage after divorce. The spouses may separate in these circumstances by a legal arrangement of living apart, but they cannot break the marriage bond, and they are not free to remarry. This view finds support by a consideration of the Greek word porneia, translated “unchastity”, in Mt 19:9. While the word has a broad range of meaning, it can mean “adultery”, as in the Greek OT (also translated “harlotry”; Sir 23:23; Ezek 16:33; Hos 2:2). Thus, an adulterous situation may give cause for separation so long as the spouses do not embark upon a second marriage. This squares with St. Paul’s teaching that a separated couple has only two options: be reconciled to one another, or remain single (1 Cor 7:10-11).

1. Levitical Law View

This position interprets “unchastity” in Mt 19:9 as invalid marriages where the spouses are too closely related. Thus, “except for unchastity” (Mt 19:9) means “except where unlawful unions exist”. Such unions ought to be severed because of the impediment posed by near blood-relations. A divorce under these conditions does not sunder a true marriage bond because a valid marriage never existed. It is equivalent to an annulment. This view is supported by two NT instances where porneia refers to incest. In Acts 15:20, 29, the apostles charge Gentile Christians to abstain from blood and unchastity. The OT background for this decision in Lev 18:6-18 suggests that unchastity refers to prohibited marriages between closely related kinsfolk. ** In 1 Cor 5:1-2 (translated “immorality”), porneia** clearly refers to an illicit union of a man and his father’s wife.

1. “No Comment” View

According to this position, Jesus sets aside Jewish debates over the grounds for divorce in the Old Covenant (Deut 24). Because Jesus is revoking the OT concession on divorce, he brackets the whole issue and sets it off to the side as irrelevant. Thus, “except for unchastity” (Mt 19:9) means “regardless of the OT grounds for divorce”. Jesus refuses even to comment on Deut 24:1. To do so would blunt the force of his own teaching, since he is not clarifying or reaffirming Moses’ permission, he is abolishing it.

Each of these views faithfully upholds Jesus’ prohibition against divorce and remarriage (cf. Mk 10:11, 12; Lk 16:18). He restores marriage to its original purity as a lifelong uion of love and fidelity. Greather still, Jesus elevates marriage, transforming it into a New Covenant sacrament. married couples are not called to be an image of Christ and his enduring love for the Church (Eph 5:21-33; cf. Rev 19:6-8). Through the sound principles of biblical interpretation and the guidance of tradition, the revolutionary standard of Jesus’ teaching on marriage and divorce is preserved intact in his Church.

 

[SoMissCatholic]

Just FYI in reference to my above posts, The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible (RSV 2CE) translates Matthew 19:3 as follows:

And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?”

 

[sailor28]

I am late to reply to this but it is such an important question. I have not read all the responses but I am hoping this is a thread where people can reply honestly without being chastised, admonished, belittled, have their character judged or called any names.

Main reasons people leave:

They did not discover their relationship with Jesus Christ in the Catholic Church. They found it elsewhere in a community that fostered that faith. One that they could serve and grow in. The fact the the music is deplorable in most parishes adds to that. People wants to sing and worship God when they go to church. (My kids sometimes ask to go the church where people have joy and talk to each other rather than the Catholic church)

I was raised Catholic but had a profound conversion experience through an evangelical group at college. I continued to attend Mass and an evangelical church when I was in college. Mass for the Eucharist. The evangelical church for everything else. For 20 years I belonged to a very faithful parish and participated in programs that studied the catechism in its entirety. Conferences with speaker like the Hahn’s were common and well attended. Humanae Vitae was preached often. I read Karl Keating’s “Catholicism and fundamentalism” a million times. I just wanted to reference that because I have been taught everything. However, I could not accept certain doctrine or dogmas of the church including: celibate male only priesthood (allowing women and married individuals to be ordained is vital), the church’s legalistic stance on birth control (I’ve seen too many marriages damaged by it), infallibility (I just do not accept that any institution or individual is infallible)

I remain Catholic but do not believe in obedience to the Magisterium at all costs. I don’t accept many doctrines. Unity in the Body of Christ does not come in my opinion through doctrinal agreement. Even though the church claims to be the one true church: I see little unity in it. There is a small remnant of the church that considers itself to be the only obedient faithful ones telling everyone else they are not Catholic. I see a lot of self righteousness.

I will remain Catholic for now. I am not sure if I can stay Catholic and remain in good conscience. Currently 80% of our youth are leaving before the age of 30. We need to listen and understand why and it needs to go beyond “they are sinners and don’t want to live a moral life” No. I believe the church is failing to engage people in the faith in a relevant way.

I don’t answer this because I want to engage in a theological discussion in doctrine/dogma. I just want to give you some (name removed by moderator)ut as to why people leave. I hope it was helpful for you.

 

[Sy_Noe]

I am late to reply to this but it is such an important question. I have not read all the responses but I am hoping this is a thread where people can reply honestly without being chastised, admonished, belittled, have their character judged or called any names.

Main reasons people leave:

They did not discover their relationship with Jesus Christ in the Catholic Church. They found it elsewhere in a community that fostered that faith. One that they could serve and grow in. The fact the the music is deplorable in most parishes adds to that. People wants to sing and worship God when they go to church. (My kids sometimes ask to go the church where people have joy and talk to each other rather than the Catholic church)

I was raised Catholic but had a profound conversion experience through an evangelical group at college. I continued to attend Mass and an evangelical church when I was in college. Mass for the Eucharist. The evangelical church for everything else. For 20 years I belonged to a very faithful parish and participated in programs that studied the catechism in its entirety. Conferences with speaker like the Hahn’s were common and well attended. Humanae Vitae was preached often. I read Karl Keating’s “Catholicism and fundamentalism” a million times. I just wanted to reference that because I have been taught everything. However, I could not accept certain doctrine or dogmas of the church including: celibate male only priesthood (allowing women and married individuals to be ordained is vital), the church’s legalistic stance on birth control (I’ve seen too many marriages damaged by it), infallibility (I just do not accept that any institution or individual is infallible)

I remain Catholic but do not believe in obedience to the Magisterium at all costs. I don’t accept many doctrines. Unity in the Body of Christ does not come in my opinion through doctrinal agreement. Even though the church claims to be the one true church: I see little unity in it. There is a small remnant of the church that considers itself to be the only obedient faithful ones telling everyone else they are not Catholic. I see a lot of self righteousness.

I will remain Catholic for now. I am not sure if I can stay Catholic and remain in good conscience. Currently 80% of our youth are leaving before the age of 30. We need to listen and understand why and it needs to go beyond “they are sinners and don’t want to live a moral life” No. I believe the church is failing to engage people in the faith in a relevant way.

I don’t answer this because I want to engage in a theological discussion in doctrine/dogma. I just want to give you some (name removed by moderator)ut as to why people leave. I hope it was helpful for you.

Very helpful. I do agree with a lot of it. And with all of your studies, conferences and reading it even appears you were properly catechized along the way.

 

[George45]

Catholics and Protestants have differing views. But here are some reasons I agree with Protestants while differing with Catholics though I am not Christian. Most Protestants (including Born Again Christians) support In Vitro Fertilization for creating families- I support I.V.F. while Catholicism forbids IVF.

Protestants do not believe that there is Purgatory-that after a person dies, the decision is made by God. Catholics believe that you can pray for dead. I would think that after a person is dead, it is too late.

Now Catholics do many good things to help the poor. The work Catholics do to help those harmed by disasters such as the Haiti earthquake, poor children in India are commendable. Catholic charities deserve credit for work they do helping the poor. Both Catholics and Protestants if they are faithful are against the destruction caused by homosexual agenda. Catholics and Protestants share many things in common though they have theological differences and differences on some topics.

 

[PRmerger]

Protestants do not believe that there is Purgatory-that after a person dies, the decision is made by God. Catholics believe that you can pray for dead. I would think that after a person is dead, it is too late.

I do not think you are correctly understanding Catholic teaching on purgatory.

Firstly, the decision of one’s final destination is always made by God (in accordance with our choices and our will, based on our acceptance or rejection of Him).

Secondly, when we pray for the dead it is to ease their suffering in purgatory.

But the decision has already been made (by God) as to their salvation.

If they are in purgatory, they are on their way to salvation. They just need some “purgation” or “cleaning up” first.

 

[PRmerger]

I am late to reply to this but it is such an important question. I have not read all the responses but I am hoping this is a thread where people can reply honestly without being chastised, admonished, belittled, have their character judged or called any names.

Main reasons people leave:

They did not discover their relationship with Jesus Christ in the Catholic Church. They found it elsewhere in a community that fostered that faith. One that they could serve and grow in. The fact the the music is deplorable in most parishes adds to that. People wants to sing and worship God when they go to church. (My kids sometimes ask to go the church where people have joy and talk to each other rather than the Catholic church)

This demonstrates an impoverished understanding of the Mass. :sad_yes:

I was raised Catholic but had a profound conversion experience through an evangelical group at college. I continued to attend Mass and an evangelical church when I was in college. Mass for the Eucharist. The evangelical church for everything else. For 20 years I belonged to a very faithful parish and participated in programs that studied the catechism in its entirety. Conferences with speaker like the Hahn’s were common and well attended. Humanae Vitae was preached often. I read Karl Keating’s “Catholicism and fundamentalism” a million times. I just wanted to reference that because I have been taught everything. However, I could not accept certain doctrine or dogmas of the church including: celibate male only priesthood (allowing women and married individuals to be ordained is vital), the church’s legalistic stance on birth control (I’ve seen too many marriages damaged by it), infallibility (I just do not accept that any institution or individual is infallible)

If you don’t believe that any institution is infallible, then how is it that you can know that the NT books are correct?

Or are you of the opinion that some of them may not actually be the Word of God?

Or are you of the opinion that some of the ancient Christian texts that the Church rejected are actually theopneustos and the Church erred in rejecting them (since no one, according to you, is capable of making pronouncements about our faith infallibly).

I remain Catholic but do not believe in obedience to the Magisterium at all costs. I don’t accept many doctrines. Unity in the Body of Christ does not come in my opinion through doctrinal agreement. Even though the church claims to be the one true church: I see little unity in it. There is a small remnant of the church that considers itself to be the only obedient faithful ones telling everyone else they are not Catholic. I see a lot of self righteousness.

This sounds, sadly, a bit self righteous.

I will remain Catholic for now. I am not sure if I can stay Catholic and remain in good conscience. Currently 80% of our youth are leaving before the age of 30. We need to listen and understand why and it needs to go beyond “they are sinners and don’t want to live a moral life” No. I believe the church is failing to engage people in the faith in a relevant way

I think it’s because you haven’t been looking.

Check this out.

http://www.franciscan.edu/uploadedImages/Top_Level/About/News/2013_News/Crowd shot.jpeg

My daughters have been attending these conferences for years. As has our Youth Group, which is very alive and on fire.

 

[Sy_Noe]

I actually just wrote to my local Catholic diocese earlier today before I read your post. I don’t expect to hear back now before next wk. But unless I’ve misread, I seem to gather from some on CAF that priests and parishes can not require a set minimum amount to pay before the Sacrament of Baptism will be performed and can not require parents to use offertory envelopes. But I’ve also seen on CAF where envelopes can be required to prove parents practice the faith. So since the priest and parish around the corner from me requires a MINIMUM $50 “donation” for Baptism and the use of envelopes for 6 mos and since I’m not clear from what I’ve read on CAF if this is allowed or not, I wrote the diocese.

Does anyone know how long I should wait before giving up that they are going to answer? I also asked about geographical parishes for a couple of locations. I did receive an auto response that my email had been received but that was it. It’s been a week tomorrow and now the long Independence Day holiday weekend is approaching.

 

[Sy_Noe]

This demonstrates an impoverished understanding of the Mass. :sad_yes:

If you don’t believe that any institution is infallible, then how is it that you can know that the NT books are correct?

Or are you of the opinion that some of them may not actually be the Word of God?

Or are you of the opinion that some of the ancient Christian texts that the Church rejected are actually theopneustos and the Church erred in rejecting them (since no one, according to you, is capable of making pronouncements about our faith infallibly).

This sounds, sadly, a bit self righteous.

I think it’s because you haven’t been looking.

Check this out.

http://www.franciscan.edu/uploadedImages/Top_Level/About/News/2013_News/Crowd shot.jpeg

My daughters have been attending these conferences for years. As has our Youth Group, which is very alive and on fire.

http://blog.stlouisreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/mass-pic_0.jpeg

How many Baptized Roman Catholics attend Mass weekly? I’ve seen numbers suggesting maybe only 25%? If that’s the case, it doesn’t suggest to me there are all that many on fire for the faith.

 

[PRmerger]

How many Baptized Roman Catholics attend Mass weekly? I’ve seen numbers suggesting maybe only 25%? If that’s the case, it doesn’t suggest to me there are all that many on fire for the faith.

And that’s because they are…

wait for it…

wait for it…

here it is…

poorly catechized.

The Church in the past has done an abysmal job catechizing her flock.

Thankfully, thanks to the human need to be nourished with food that satisfies deeply, and the CC’s response to this, we are getting youth on fire for God.

http://www.wydenglishsite.org/wyd/images/topspot/opening_mass.jpg

 

[Sy_Noe]

we are getting youth on fire for God.

Maybe and for your children. And I don’t have kids but I know that’s not the case for most of the youth in my extended family.

 

[Sy_Noe]

This demonstrates an impoverished understanding of the Mass. :sad_yes:

I think this was very unfair and quite unnecessary. I read Sailor28 to even say he/she attended Mass for the Eucharist. Maybe you missed that part.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Maybe and for your children. And I don’t have kids but I know that’s not the case for most of the youth in my extended family.

Our youth groups are doing well (Understand HS and MS).

Our College and Young Adult programs have much room to improve.

 

[PRmerger]

[BIBLEDRB][/BIBLEDRB]

Maybe and for your children. And I don’t have kids but I know that’s not the case for most of the youth in my extended family.

Because they are…

poorly catechized.

 

[PRmerger]

I think this was very unfair and quite unnecessary. I read Sailor28 to even say he/she attended Mass for the Eucharist. Maybe you missed that part.

Anyone who states that he is not going to go to Mass because he likes the music at the next door Protestant church is demonstrating a grievously impoverished understanding of the Mass, his desire for the Eucharist notwithstanding.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Our youth groups are doing well (Understand HS and MS).

Our College and Young Adult programs have much room to improve.

I will say, Jose, at one parish I’ve attended there seems to be more youth involvement than at others I’ve been to. They have a youth Mass once a month. They don’t call it Lifeteen though. I’ve often thought of attending myself if the music was contemporary. It will be interesting I suppose to see what happens when the MS and HS kids become college and young adult age and their parents perhaps have less control over their involvement.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Anyone who states that he is not going to go to Mass because he likes the music at the next door Protestant church is demonstrating a grievously impoverished understanding of the Mass, his desire for the Eucharist notwithstanding.

You’re entitled to your opinion.

 

[Sy_Noe]

[BIBLEDRB][/BIBLEDRB]

Because they are…

poorly catechized.

Yes I was expecting that. I didn’t even have to wait. As I know that’s the Catholic response to anyone who doesn’t agree with you or doesn’t share your faith, or who might not be where you are along your faith journey. It’s really quite the turn off.