What do you think is the biggest obstacle to unity between Catholic Christians and non–Catholic Christians?

[Bob_McKissick]

Do you think the teachings of Saint Thomas Aquinas form an obstacle to unity between Catholic Christians and non–Catholic Christians?

Curiously,
Mick

St. Thomas in effect baptized Aristotle. Aristotilian philosophy is forbidden in secular philosophical circles because it puts an end to the subjective in favor to the objective. This shouldn’t be an obstacle to unity but a factor in favor of it. The trouble is that so few non-Catholics and sadly Catholics have knowledge of Aristotilian-Thomistic philosophy to get the thoughts of Catholic philosophy. bob

 

[Cinette]

I have just come on this thread and read a few postings in the beginning but intend to continue reading.

However, I have a question for everyone. It is a fact that there have been scores if not hundreds of anti-Catholic books written. I was convent educated and drifted away from the Church for 27 years and when I returned I realised that had I known more about my Catholic faith I would never have left.

There was a period of rebellion against the status quo and it was cool to be a revolutionary - it was progressive! I experienced a marxist/Leninist revolution (not in South Africa which was very different) and this was also an eye opener in many ways.

As I got to know more about my Catholic faith I became acquainted with the anti-Catholic “movement” and it hurt and surprised me. I find the Catholic Church so non-threatening, so good, so beautiful and so true. It has sustance and offers such hope and great love.

I had bought into some of those lies. Recently I purchased a book written by a Rabbi called “The Myth of Hitler’s Pope”. I have since ordered “The Icon of Evil” by the same author which reveals who Hitler’s “clergy” really was. I have also seen documentaries where certain people and newspapers were quoted in support of Pius XII (NewYork Times, Times of London, Einstein, Golda Meir among others). They alll acknowledge Pius’s role in saving hundreds of thousands of Jews. Much is explained.

If I could have bought into some of the lies then I can only imagine that Protestants and Fundamentalists have for generations bought into lies propagated by all the anti-Catholics.

I firmly believe that it is the lies that are at the core of anti-Catholicism. For anyone to break the anti Mould requires bold effort and courage in many cases.

Christian unity is so essential to combat evil and it my daily prayer that this will happen. Jesus prayed that we may be one and his prayers are powerful. However, although we have been given free will Jesus will not intervene - he wants us to make the choice! If we raise thinking children who learn to discern and who are encouraged to pursue truth energetically then we can expect that they will encounter truth. Much prayer is required.

Do you agree? Or is there much more to it than that? Have I missed something?

Cinette

 

[NCSue]

Do you agree? Or is there much more to it than that? Have I missed something?

Cinette

I agree with your message. I also think you’ll find evidence that there are Catholics who are anti-Protestant. I think our divisiveness must hurt Jesus very badly.

See acts17verse28.blogspot.com/2009/05/if-he-hadnt-risen-from-dead-hed-be.html.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

St. Thomas in effect baptized Aristotle. Aristotilian philosophy is forbidden in secular philosophical circles because it puts an end to the subjective in favor to the objective. This shouldn’t be an obstacle to unity but a factor in favor of it. The trouble is that so few non-Catholics and sadly Catholics have knowledge of Aristotilian-Thomistic philosophy to get the thoughts of Catholic philosophy. bob

Come on you don’t seriously believe what you’re saying here do you? I’m not religious and I find some value in Aristotle (in fact I’ve even read quite a bit of Aquinas, Summa Theologica).

However, have you ever studied Aristotle’s metaphysics (and Aquinas’ for that matter)? First it’s all wrong (particularly his theories on causation), and second if you think Aristotle is always objective and clear than oh my. He might be better than his predecessors … but I’d take German philosophy over his sophistic musings any day (and better yet English philosophy).

 

[Cinette]

I agree with your message. I also think you’ll find evidence that there are Catholics who are anti-Protestant. I think our divisiveness must hurt Jesus very badly.

See acts17verse28.blogspot.com/2009/05/if-he-hadnt-risen-from-dead-hed-be.html.

Yes you are right. To be anti-Protestant demonstrates ignorance. I think Protestants have been good for us also because they challenge us and keep us on our toes. They also make the most awsome Catholics.

However, I have never heard any Priests or Nuns talk against Protestants - ever! I don’t know of any anti-Protestant books written by Catholics.

 

[Bob_McKissick]

I have just come on this thread and read a few postings in the beginning but intend to continue reading.

However, I have a question for everyone. It is a fact that there have been scores if not hundreds of anti-Catholic books written. I was convent educated and drifted away from the Church for 27 years and when I returned I realised that had I known more about my Catholic faith I would never have left.

There was a period of rebellion against the status quo and it was cool to be a revolutionary - it was progressive! I experienced a marxist/Leninist revolution (not in South Africa which was very different) and this was also an eye opener in many ways.

As I got to know more about my Catholic faith I became acquainted with the anti-Catholic “movement” and it hurt and surprised me. I find the Catholic Church so non-threatening, so good, so beautiful and so true. It has sustance and offers such hope and great love.

I had bought into some of those lies. Recently I purchased a book written by a Rabbi called “The Myth of Hitler’s Pope”. I have since ordered “The Icon of Evil” by the same author which reveals who Hitler’s “clergy” really was. I have also seen documentaries where certain people and newspapers were quoted in support of Pius XII (NewYork Times, Times of London, Einstein, Golda Meir among others). They alll acknowledge Pius’s role in saving hundreds of thousands of Jews. Much is explained.

If I could have bought into some of the lies then I can only imagine that Protestants and Fundamentalists have for generations bought into lies propagated by all the anti-Catholics.

I firmly believe that it is the lies that are at the core of anti-Catholicism. For anyone to break the anti Mould requires bold effort and courage in many cases.

Christian unity is so essential to combat evil and it my daily prayer that this will happen. Jesus prayed that we may be one and his prayers are powerful. However, although we have been given free will Jesus will not intervene - he wants us to make the choice! If we raise thinking children who learn to discern and who are encouraged to pursue truth energetically then we can expect that they will encounter truth. Much prayer is required.

Do you agree? Or is there much more to it than that? Have I missed something?

Cinette

You’ve hit a bulls eye!!! Satan works night and day to mislead and pervert those he would destroy. St. Peter tells us that the Devil goes about like a roaring lion seeking whom he can devour! You are on the right track. Keep up the good work. Jesus prayers are not only very powerful they are the most powerful. Archbishop Sheen said that there were probably 2 to 5 hundred people in the U.S. who hated the Catholic Church for what She is and millions who hate Her for what they think She is! Welcome home. bob

 

[twohumble]

Is it,

a) Disagreement as to whether salvation is an event or a process?
**Curiously, what is the Catholic position here? Are you using Salvation as a catch all term for both Justification and Sanctification? If not, how are you using the term, and what do you say the official Church position is here?**Curiously,
Mick

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Is it,

a) Disagreement as to whether salvation is an event or a process?
b) Disagreement about the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception?
c) Disagreement about praying for the dead?
d) Disagreement about the existence of purgatory?
e) Disagreement about how to understand baptism?
f) Disagreement about the doctrine of Transubstantiation?
g) Disagreement about confession of one’s sins being heard by a priest?
h) Disagreement about the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God?
i) Disagreement about the papacy and papal infallibility?
j) Some other doctrine or factor?

Curiously,
Mick

People​

 

[jmcrae]

If you googled Priest who questioned his faith, i think you will find a very interesting story. It has to do with a priest of long, long ago. He was questioning his faith, so just before Mass he asked for Christ to make himself real to him. At the time of Eucurist, the wine physically changed to blood and the host to flesh. it was scientifically tested years later and the “flesh” was that of heart muscle and the blood I believe was type “O”. Does anyone recall reading of this occurance?

This is called the Miracle of Lanciano - a dear friend of mine went to Lanciano a couple of years ago, and found that even until now, the Host continues to bleed, and the heart-flesh is even now as fresh as it was on the day of the miracle.

The blood-type, by the way, is Type AB, and identical to the blood on the Shroud of Turin.

These kinds of miracles are a source of division between Protestants and Catholics, because Protestants are taught that the age of miracles is over - that there are no miracles taking place today. They would attribute these events to the Devil, I think.

 

[Bob_McKissick]

Come on you don’t seriously believe what you’re saying here do you? I’m not religious and I find some value in Aristotle (in fact I’ve even read quite a bit of Aquinas, Summa Theologica).

However, have you ever studied Aristotle’s metaphysics (and Aquinas’ for that matter)? First it’s all wrong (particularly his theories on causation), and second if you think Aristotle is always objective and clear than oh my. He might be better than his predecessors … but I’d take German philosophy over his sophistic musings any day (and better yet English philosophy).

You’ve made statements of what you think but no proofs. bob

 

[SSTeacher]

Hi twohumble,

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forum.

Your first post, which is #255 on this thread, appeared to contain a question addressed to me. I’m assuming you meant your post to look something like this (if you didn’t, ignore everything after my first sentence above):

SSTeacher;5150912:

Is it,

a) Disagreement as to whether salvation is an event or a process?

Curiously,
Mick

Curiously, what is the Catholic position here? Are you using Salvation as a catch all term for both Justification and Sanctification? If not, how are you using the term, and what do you say the official Church position is here?

If the above is what you intended, this is my reply.

I wasn’t using the word salvation in any particular way. I was taking into account the fact that that Catholic Christians and non–Catholic Christians have different understandings of salvation. I wasn’t necessarily advocating any particular position, official or unofficial.

Respectfully,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;5150912:

Is it,

a) Disagreement as to whether salvation is an event or a process?
b) Disagreement about the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception?
c) Disagreement about praying for the dead?
d) Disagreement about the existence of purgatory?
e) Disagreement about how to understand baptism?
f) Disagreement about the doctrine of Transubstantiation?
g) Disagreement about confession of one’s sins being heard by a priest?
h) Disagreement about the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God?
i) Disagreement about the papacy and papal infallibility?
j) Some other doctrine or factor?

Curiously,
Mick

People​

What – all of ‘em?

Ecumenically,
Mick

 

[Eric_Hyom]

I believe in one God the creator of all that is seen and unseen, and when I walk through town, I see a part of God’s wonderful creation. I see people who could be atheists, Hindu, Catholic, Muslim, protestant all created by the same wonderful God.

It seems we should have a duty of care to look after God’s creation, and that comes down to caring for and loving each other, despite all our differences.

A few hundred years ago where I live Catholics and Anglicans were killing each other. Since those times of war, we have been kind of just hating each other without so much of the killing. Now we are able to pray in each others churches on occasions, and we are starting to pray for each other, and that should be a feeling of joy.

Has God been updating the Bible over the centuries, has he changed the rules in how we should treat each other despite all our differences. Sadly we still seem to play by childish rules, and we can’t quiet bring ourselves to love people of other faiths as we love ourselves.

Sadly this thread highlights for me all the doctrines that get in the way of loving each other as we love ourselves.

In the spirit of praying to ONE God.

Eric

 

[SSTeacher]

I believe in one God the creator of all that is seen and unseen, and when I walk through town, I see a part of God’s wonderful creation. I see people who could be atheists, Hindu, Catholic, Muslim, protestant all created by the same wonderful God.

Agreed. People are indeed created in the image of God.

It seems we should have a duty of care to look after God’s creation, and that comes down to caring for and loving each other, despite all our differences.

Agreed.

A few hundred years ago where I live Catholics and Anglicans were killing each other. Since those times of war, we have been kind of just hating each other without so much of the killing. Now we are able to pray in each others churches on occasions, and we are starting to pray for each other, and that should be a feeling of joy.

I think it ought to be emphasized that it was mostly the Anglicans killing and subjugating the Catholics, which went on for several centuries. It wasn’t until the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829 that the Catholics got any kind of a break. The situation today is largely owing to the fact that the English as a nation are no longer interested in any kind of religion. And the Anglicans still haven’t returned the churches they stole, have they? Let the case be stated as it really is, not as some might like it to appear.

Has God been updating the Bible over the centuries, has he changed the rules in how we should treat each other despite all our differences. Sadly we still seem to play by childish rules, and we can’t quiet bring ourselves to love people of other faiths as we love ourselves.

Are you able to enlarge upon the “rules” you have in mind?

Sadly this thread highlights for me all the doctrines that get in the way of loving each other as we love ourselves.

In the spirit of praying to ONE God.

Eric

The idea that doctrines “get in the way” is one I sometimes encountered during my sojourn inside the Evangelical world. I’ve never heard an informed Catholic declare it or endorse it. It seems to me that if we throw out our doctrines we have no reason for our beliefs and certainly no reason to love anybody other than ourselves. All we’ll have left is emotionalism and sentimentality. I urge you to rethink your stance. Not only does it make little sense it’s extremely dangerous.

Respectfully,
Mick

 

[Peter_J]

I like your post, Eric; but I wouldn’t say “we are starting to pray for each other”. I think we have been praying for each other for centuries – just not necessarily with a lot of charity.

 

[Shaken]

j) some other factor

I think it’s sin.

 

[Peter_J]

Sadly this thread highlights for me all the doctrines that get in the way of loving each other as we love ourselves.

Eric, I think you ought to clarify what you’re saying here. E.g. are you saying “Doctrines get in the way” or more like “Some doctrines (or dogmas) get in the way”?

 

[austine50]

Is it,

a) Disagreement as to whether salvation is an event or a process?
b) Disagreement about the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception?
c) Disagreement about praying for the dead?
d) Disagreement about the existence of purgatory?
e) Disagreement about how to understand baptism?
f) Disagreement about the doctrine of Transubstantiation?
g) Disagreement about confession of one’s sins being heard by a priest?
h) Disagreement about the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God?
i) Disagreement about the papacy and papal infallibility?
j) Some other doctrine or factor?

Curiously,
Mick

Brother,
I would pick “f”. It seems that the issue of real-presence is a mile-high mountain for non-catholics to climb. This mental block might explain why non-catholics may feel uncomfortable with John 6 (of which significant part deals with the Eucharist). However the antagonism to the “eating of flesh” predates Protestanism. I have read that the Romans, during the era of martyrdom, were horrified by the fact that Christians believed they were eating the body of Christ. They were therefore viewed as being cannibalistic. Shows you that the Eucharist is an ancient believe and not a “papist” dogma. The believe was therefore a “given” for the early Christians.
Kind regards
Austine

 

[Oneheartway]

a) Disagreement as to whether salvation is an event or a process?
b) Disagreement about the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception?
c) Disagreement about praying for the dead?
d) Disagreement about the existence of purgatory?
e) Disagreement about how to understand baptism?
f) Disagreement about the doctrine of Transubstantiation?
g) Disagreement about confession of one’s sins being heard by a priest?
h) Disagreement about the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God?
i) Disagreement about the papacy and papal infallibility?
j) Some other doctrine or factor?

I believe the problem is I. In particular, Infallibility.

in·fal·li·ble (ĭn-fāl’ə-bəl) adj.

1. Incapable of erring: an infallible guide; an infallible source of information.
2. Incapable of failing; certain: an infallible antidote; an infallible rule.
3. Roman Catholic Church Incapable of error in expounding doctrine on faith or morals.

I grew up amongst many christian religions, and the infallibility of the pope was most often brought up - they never declared the pope was not a good man, but they questioned that he would be infallible. In fact, the statement was often made that only christ was perfect when discussing this topic. I would also add that most protestants do not understand that infallible is currently interpreted as only in interpretation of doctrine and not that the pope is actually infallible. Communicating that point is necessary if you are trying to discuss this with a protestant as they can quote many historical references where a particular pope was not infallible outside from a pure sense (ie, Incapable of erring)

The other issue was the saints. Many protestant groups saw this as a form of idolatry.

 

[Peter_J]

Oneheartway,

I would also suggest asking your Protestant friends whether they believe that St. Paul was infallible at times (e.g. when he wrote Romans), and if so why can’t they also believe that the Pope is infallible at times (when he makes an ex cathedra statement).