What does Traditional Catholicism say about active participation in Protestant service?

[Brian777]

may i ask why do you want to go to this university? if you are traditional Catholic, i would think you would want to go to a more Traditional teachings of the Church. i dont think Stuebenville is very Traditional. i believe charismatic movements came from there. i may be wrong but there is what i heard.

Yes the Charismatic movement did begin there, but they are solidly orthodox and regularly offer the Traditional Mass, not every sunday, yet, but enough for a good start.

 

[Brian777]

I am sure that Arius, Pelagius, Nestorius etc, would have been offended by being called ‘heretics’, but it certainly did not mean that they were not one.

Interestingly enough Pelagius himself was not a heretic, I believe a pope pardoned him and he lived out his remaining days in an eastern monastery…i think. It was his folowers who took his teachings too far and created the badly named “Pelagian heresy”

 

[wisdomseeker]

Yes the Charismatic movement did begin there, but they are solidly orthodox and regularly offer the Traditional Mass, not every sunday, yet, but enough for a good start.

sure. but if you are traditional Catholic you might find yourself in conflict on what they teach and what you believe though… i dont know why they call themselves Orthodoxy. do you know? because for i hear from them is that they very against Traditional Catholics. i went to father groeschel seminar one time and he made the remark," i am not a Tradional Catholic, i am orthodox Catholic. whatever that means.

 

[The_Prodigal]

When in doubt about a spiritual matter, consult your pastor. There is nothing more traditional than that.

 

[Aramis]

Church teaching has always been “Do not participate in Protestant Services.”

Current church teaching is that you may go and observe for educational reasons, and may participate in joint extra-liturgical prayer services for good cause.

An eagle scout project would not be sufficient reason in my mind, and singing in the band would be participation.

 

[Brian777]

sure. but if you are traditional Catholic you might find yourself in conflict on what they teach and what you believe though… i dont know why they call themselves Orthodoxy. do you know? because for i hear from them is that they very against Traditional Catholics. i went to father groeschel seminar one time and he made the remark," i am not a Tradional Catholic, i am orthodox Catholic. whatever that means.

He meant that he believes and professes eveything that Holy Mother Church teaches, but practices his faith in a more contemporary way. There are plenty of traditional catholics who are not orthodox, I know one person who claims we should allow same sex marriage in civil law but refuses to attend NO Mass if he can find a TLM.

 

[SemperFidelis]

These documents use the term “separated bretheran”.

Yes, but note that UR does mandate the use of such language.

 

[pipper]

Who says we must do this?

The Catholic Church, In I beleive the Documents of Vatican II, and I beleive in the Canon law of 1983, and the more recent Catechism of the Catholic Church.

You may reject both of these sources as being too “modern” or “liberal” but they are out there and they are church teaching, It boggles my mind to think you have never heard the phrase “seperated brethren” (hope I spelt that correctly).

IMHO, those who ignore more recent church teachings are as guilty as those protestants and schismatics we all (including myself) love to deride, on occasion.

In case you may not be familiar “seperated brethren” is used out of courtesy, it does not mean the heretics (formerly called) are or peers or equals, but that we do acknowledge them as Christians,tho in a incomplete union.

To the original topic. At least since the 60s the Popes have met with, and prayed with our seperated brethren on occasions. Surely you are not saying those Holy Fathers were wrong in doing this? Our Lord taught charity for all, not just those we agree with…ALL.

 

[Cat]

I have read the CCC and I do not recall anywhere where it mandates that we can no longer use the term heretic and that we must use “seperated brethren.”

And speaking as an ex-“seperated brethren,” I have no problem acknowledging that my former beliefs and the beliefs espoused by my former “church,” were/are heretical.

You better pray for the souls of all those canonized Saints and Popes who used the word heretic then.

I don’t know if you noticed, but this is the Traditional Catholicism Forum. I don’t have to do any such thing thank you very much.

“Indeed, the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators: they are traditionalists.” - Pope St. Pius X

P818

I apologize, the CCC does not mandate that they must be called “separated brethren” rather than heretics. I interpret the paragraph that way, but I could be wrong, and you could be wrong. There is no way for us to tell which of us is wrong about which term to use, so I guess the answer is that we both continue doing things the way we feel is right.

 

[corsair]

When in doubt; follow tradition. Its far safer.

 

[DrumminFool91]

I think we may be splitting hairs here and arguing mere semantics… traditional vs orthodox, separated brethern vs heretics… This whole time I’ve been under the impression that in order to properly refer to someone as a “heretic” they must first come from the Church, as in they must be Catholics that adopt unorthodox beliefs that are in some way counter to the teachings of the Church. If you were born outside of the Church, and have never purported to be a member, and have beliefs that don’t line up with Catholic teaching then you’re more along the lines of simply being a non-Catholic. To call someone who was born Protestant and has never claimed to be a Catholic a “heretic”, I think might simply be mislabeling someone. I’m not one for PC-isms or trying to make folks “feel good” about being in error, but I think we should only make people wear a shoe when it fits, ya know?

Orthodox vs. Traditional - I think Fr. Groschel wanted to use the term Orthodox simply because it means one that is conformed to the faith and is completely loyal to the Church. “Traditional” it could be argued, suggests an attachment to a particular way of doing things, regardless of Church teaching. I’m not saying that’s what it means, but it may just be one way that he could have meant it. I dunno for sure though.

 

[shuzo1189]

I think we may be splitting hairs here and arguing mere semantics… traditional vs orthodox, separated brethern vs heretics… This whole time I’ve been under the impression that in order to properly refer to someone as a “heretic” they must first come from the Church, as in they must be Catholics that adopt unorthodox beliefs that are in some way counter to the teachings of the Church. If you were born outside of the Church, and have never purported to be a member, and have beliefs that don’t line up with Catholic teaching then you’re more along the lines of simply being a non-Catholic. To call someone who was born Protestant and has never claimed to be a Catholic a “heretic”, I think might simply be mislabeling someone. I’m not one for PC-isms or trying to make folks “feel good” about being in error, but I think we should only make people wear a shoe when it fits, ya know?

Orthodox vs. Traditional - I think Fr. Groschel wanted to use the term Orthodox simply because it means one that is conformed to the faith and is completely loyal to the Church. “Traditional” it could be argued, suggests an attachment to a particular way of doing things, regardless of Church teaching. I’m not saying that’s what it means, but it may just be one way that he could have meant it. I dunno for sure though.

Heresy:"In Christianity, heresy is a “theological or religious opinion or doctrine maintained in opposition, or held to be contrary, to the Roman Catholic or Orthodox doctrine of the Christian Church, or, by extension, to that of any church, creed, or religious system, considered as orthodox. By extension, heresy is an opinion or doctrine in philosophy, politics, science, art, etc., at variance with those generally accepted as authoritative”

I think Protestantism by default (I could be wrong) is considered a Heresy.

And to the OP:Ask if you can go dressed as John Ogilve S.J.

 

[rfpapcun]

The question was what **Traditional Catholicism **says about participation in Protestant services. The question was not what the current teaching is on the subject.

Traditional Catholicism rejects all ecumenism because (1) Scripture clearly condemns ecumenical activity, and (2) the Magisterium up through Pius XI’s Mortalium Animus did the same.

 

[Markstorm]

There is no way for us to tell which of us is wrong about which term to use, so I guess the answer is that we both continue doing things the way we feel is right.

Or perhaps both can be used, in appropriate situations, as prudence dictates. That, I think, is what Semper Fidelis and others are saying. They argue that even if some recent documents use the term “separated brethren”, they are in no way forbidden to use the word “heretic”.

I note, with some amusement, that pipper has not delayed in setting up the appropriate straw man:

It boggles my mind to think you have never heard the phrase “seperated brethren” (hope I spelt that correctly).

Semper Fidelis et alii are saying that they have the right to use the term “heretic”, not that they have never heard of the term “separated brethren”. And no, you did not spell that correctly.

 

[pipper]

Or perhaps both can be used, in appropriate situations, as prudence dictates. That, I think, is what Semper Fidelis and others are saying. They argue that even if some recent documents use the term “separated brethren”, they are in no way forbidden to use the word “heretic”.

I note, with some amusement, that pipper has not delayed in setting up the appropriate straw man:

Semper Fidelis et alii are saying that they have the right to use the term “heretic”, not that they have never heard of the term “separated brethren”. And no, you did not spell that correctly.

Perhaps that is because I am disabled and can barely type or spell, You see not only am I a stroke patient, and have Parkinson’s disease.

But I am trying my dead-level best.

And of course they have the right to call people whatever they wish. I guess a little charity is too much to hope for.

 

[Toribus]

The current Holy Father has taken pains to make the distinction between true ecumenism and false ecumenism.

My understanding of the distinction is that true ecumenism is where we earnestly seek to restore our fallen brothers to full communion, after having been misled by falsehood. This means we do not shy away from proclaiming and defending that which we hold to be true. False ecumenism is what most traditionalists (as well as the Holy Father) reject as mere syncretism, where we “celebrate what we hold in common” (while turning a blind eye to the glaring differences).

An act of true ecumenism would be to explain to your friend that while you can help him with a concert that is not directly involved with Protestant worship, you can’t participate in the services of his ecclesial communion because they are a violation of canon law, to which you as a Catholic are bound.

And act of false ecumenism would be to say “well we both worship Jesus as Lord and God, so it’s alright yeah?” This statement focuses on the lowest common denominator while feigning ignorance of the pivotal distinctions.

 

[Toribus]

Perhaps that is because I am disabled and can barely type or spell, You see not only am I a stroke patient, and have Parkinson’s disease.

But I am trying my dead-level best.

And of course they have the right to call people whatever they wish. I guess a little charity is too much to hope for.

I’m sorry to see that people have attacked you for something clearly irrelevant (spelling). The fact that you are willing to argue your position here despite the difficulties is marvelous, even though I can’t completely agree with them.

I too am fond of throwing out barbs against “heretics, schismatics, apostates and infidels”. Most of the time, I am ashamed to admit, it is more for the sake of appearance than out of prudence.

I do sincerely believe that it is important for people to see the gravity of protestant errors. While they are truly our brothers separated by error, it is just as true that the error which separates them is heresy. The distinction is that for the most part, protestants did not have the grace to start with truth and then choose error: rather they were born into error and have not yet come to the fulness of truth.

Therefore, while it is true that protestant communities espouse heresy (for the most part in good faith - they sincerely believe that the falsehoods are truth), it is far more prudent to remind ourselves that they are our brothers, and that the Lord calls us to bring them back. We are our brothers’ keepers.

 

[I_Believe]

If you want to call people heretics and condemn their churches as heretical, you go right ahead. But be prepared to explain to the Lord Jesus at your judgement day why you personally turned people away from the Church.

Hold on there Cat. Whoa.

Christ’s followers were, in his time, called disciples and brethren. After His Death and resurrection, they were called Christians. And before too long, all Christians were called Catholics.

Schisms and men who start their own church turn people away from the Church Cat. Luther, Calvin, and all the rest who are heretics. Heretics in their denial of Catholic Doctrine.

No Catholic owes any of these Protestants anything. And no Catholic who rejects false ecumenism need fear God for it. We needn’t shun them, but we should never give them comfort in their heretical beliefs. To do so Keeps them from the Church.

Here’s how Roman Catholics pray

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Cat]

Hold on there Cat. Whoa.

Christ’s followers were, in his time, called disciples and brethren. After His Death and resurrection, they were called Christians. And before too long, all Christians were called Catholics.

Schisms and men who start their own church turn people away from the Church Cat. Luther, Calvin, and all the rest who are heretics. Heretics in their denial of Catholic Doctrine.

No Catholic owes any of these Protestants anything. And no Catholic who rejects false ecumenism need fear God for it. We needn’t shun them, but we should never give them comfort in their heretical beliefs. To do so Keeps them from the Church.

Here’s how Roman Catholics pray

http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z256/hwjennings1/pius/foundy002.jpg

Boldface mine–Romans 13:8 says, “Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another.”

We owe love to everyone, including Protestants.

Calling someone a heretic is hateful. Perhaps in Pope Pius X’s time, the word “heretic” did not have the horrible, nasty connotations that it currently has–I wouldn’t know, since I didn’t live in Pope Pius X’s time. But in TODAY’S time, where I live, it is a hate-filled word that will cause hurt and will probably result in a breaking-off of friendship and communication.

Traditionalists often tout the superiority of Latin because it is a “dead language” and therefore, the meanings of the words do not change. Well, English is NOT a dead language, and the meaning of the word “heretic” has changed immensely even in the last 50 years. It’s a terrible word, a horrible word, one that causes pain. IMO, it should be banned from CAF, just as certain other nasty names are banned.

It does NOT help people to understand that their beliefs are not what Jesus taught. It only estranges people and drives them away from the Church.

Calling someone a “heretic” is not love. It will not fulfill the debt of love that we as CHRISTIANS owe to everyone.

You can correct people without calling them filthy, hateful, insulting names. If a teenaged girl was sleeping with a boy, I could gently and lovingly try to lead her back to righteousness, or I could call her a whore–which is truly what she is, right? Which method do you think is more likely to RESTORE this young woman?

And by the way, I_Believe, you may not owe the Protestants anything, BUT I DO!!! It was through the Protestants that I first heard of Jesus and came to know Him as Savior and Lord. It was through Protestants that I read and studied the Bible backwards and forwards. It was through Protestants that I learned right and wrong, what the commandments of the Lord are, and how I can act like a Christian and love my fellow man, including those who are not like me.

I owe MUCH to Protestants–it was the Protestant evangelical churches that prepared me to become Catholic, because I was taught that Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and that there is no other Name by which I can be saved. **This is how I was able to recognize the truth of the Catholic Church when I finally walked through the door–I had learned to recognize Jesus from the Protestants, those “heretics.” **

Here’s my challenge–seek out a Protestant friend and tell him/her that he/she is a heretic. Then come back to this forum and tell us whether that was a good idea or not.

I_Believe, do you realize that nowadays, you will be using an insulting word to call Protestants “Protestants?” There are many non-Catholic Christians who take serious issue with this name, which they reject utterly. You can go right ahead and cling to the definition of “Protestant” that you grew up with, or you can accept that this word, like many in the English language, is changing in its meaning and is now hurtful to many Christians. It does no good to insist upon keeping the past meaning of the word if it’s going to antagonize people.

It’s kind of like the words that we use to describe people who are not white. For a long time, everyone used the “n” word and people meant no harm or insult. In fact, it is used today among the people themselves. But then we said “colored people” or “Negroes,” then “Afro-American,” “black,” and “people of color.” Currently the correct term is “African American.” Again, if you want to insist on using the original name, and claiming that it still means what it meant a hundred and fifty years ago and carries no harmful or demeaning connotations, go ahead. Good luck with that! But I’ll use the name that tells people that I am eager to communicate and make friends and keep peace. "Blessed are the peacemakers."

How many Protestants have you personally led back into the Catholic Church by calling them heretics? I’ll tell you what’s going on in MY family–a few years ago, my very Protestant, Pentecostal mother-in-law told us to our face that she rejects Catholism. But on Sunday, she told us that she visited a church full of statues (Catholic) and took great comfort in the company of the saints, and even asked St. Anthony to help her find something that she had lost, and it WORKED and she was praising God for it! My husband and I are still in shock! He grew up hearing her condemn Catholicism, and now she is accepting what for many Catholics is a major stumbling block–the communion of the saints. I think it’s a matter of time before she and our entire family will be home. And we’ll continue our gentle, non-condemning, non-name calling, loving evangelism.

As for the prayer that you posted, of course this is admirable to whisper to God in the privacy of your prayer closet, and with your close Catholic friends who have full understanding of what you mean when you say “heretic.” But I repeat, to use this degrading and horrible word around real people, real Protestants who love the Lord, is nasty and will lead to no good.

 

[Toribus]

Cat, if anything, the connotations of “heretic” have diminished since earlier times. This is people have become syncretists, intentionally or otherwise believing that any “truth” is as good as another, all “religions” are more or less equal, and that it doesn’t matter if you’re a Catholic or an atheist as long as you’re a “good person” and “live a good life”.

These are all heresies, and throughout the entire span of history since God appeared to Moses, heresy has been regarded with abject horror. Like schism, the apostles (and shortly after, the fathers) considered it abhorrent that people could claim to be Christian but teach contrary to Christ and his Church.

The fact is, heresy should be a horrible accusation, and people should be horrified by the thought of being heretics (or schismatics, or apostates). Heresy divides Christ’s Church. Heresy denies Christ’s Truth. Heresy comes from one place only, and that is hell. It has one author only, and that is satan. Calling someone a heretic is not even remotely like calling them a “******” (as you imply). The latter denigrates someone unjustly for something over which they have no control. The former, however, justly charges someone with a willful rejection of divinely mandated authority.

This is why I said earlier that it is important to make the distinction between true heretics (who began within the Church and freely left it), and those born into heresy (who did not receive the grace of a proper Catholic upbringing).