Why are Protestants so Anti-Catholic?

[catholicmarsh]

A very nice prayer. We tend to think in terms of sins of commission, but not of omission … a rather human thing to do, it lets us mitigate our guilt with self-justification … Huh? Who me? I didn’t do anything … Exactly, we didn’t do anything, even though as Christians we ought to. Seeing no evil, hearing no evil and speaking no evil is not a virtue, it is the basis of self-justification.

Quantum, I probably fail to do more things than I “DO” things if you know what I mean. Commission is as important as Omission but I think omission is sometimes left out or deemphesised

 

[quantumDeus]

Quantum, I probably fail to do more things than I “DO” things if you know what I mean. Commission is as important as Omission but I think omission is sometimes left out or deemphesised

Yep. Helps us feel better about ourselves in our temporal day-to-day lives. I admit to sins of omission, they far outweigh my sins of commission. And as you say, sins of omission are de-emphasized or ignored. Keeps us from the burden of guilt, or at least allows us self-justification, doesn’t it?

 

[catholicmarsh]

Yep. Helps us feel better about ourselves in our temporal day-to-day lives. I admit to sins of omission, they far outweigh my sins of commission. And as you say, sins of omission are de-emphasized or ignored. Keeps us from the burden of guilt, or at least allows us self-justification, doesn’t it?

The priest always tells me that we aren’t called to simply avoid vice, we are called to practice virtue. Virtue doesn’t have to always be acts of piety, even though this is a large part of it. Virtue can be simple things like making good choices. I rode the trolley one day afterwork just to take in the sights and sounds and to simply enjoy myself. This is a way to practice virtue. If I decide to take an Art History class or I call a friend for dinner, this is another way to practice virtue. Making positive, healthy, life-affirming choices. As my Priest says, "The Benedictines make cheese, not just to simply make cheese but that in having a balanced life of work and prayer it allows them to be more fully open to the Holy Spirit. When your hands and mind are busy you have more clarity and more time to focus on the Spirit. As a person who suffers with Depression I know this all too well.

 

[JeannetteCML]

][SIGN][/SIGN]

No. While the Catholic Church was seeking to control the world through religion, Bible Christians were running for their lives from the Catholic holocaust that ran for centuries.

God has always had His people, faithful to Him and His Word. They had no part in the Roman Catholic Church. Through much of history, organized religion has hunted and slaughtered Bible Christians. For an excellent overview of this, read the classic work, “The Trail of Blood,”

users.aol.com/libcfl/trail.htm

I know it’s late in the thread for this, and I hope I can put it in the right words… I am kind of troubled by reactions to comments like this one that only dismiss the content as ridiculous and laugh. Perhaps the content is ridiculous. The poster may be terribly blind. But what should be taken seriously is that this poster is a sincere person who really believes what they have posted. Such error and such a thorn in someone’s heart does not call for laughter or dismissal. Maybe sorrow over the person’s position would be more appropriate, or at least compassion. If you were in error, would you not want to be taken seriously? Wouldn’t you want someone to love you enough to be deeply concerned that you are in error and try to help you? Treat posters with positions like this as you would Jesus.

 

[Mannyfit75]

][SIGN][/SIGN]

No. While the Catholic Church was seeking to control the world through religion, Bible Christians were running for their lives from the Catholic holocaust that ran for centuries.

The belief founded on lies and has no archeological evidence to prove it happened.

God has always had His people, faithful to Him and His Word. They had no part in the Roman Catholic Church. Through much of history, organized religion has hunted and slaughtered Bible Christians. For an excellent overview of this, read the classic work, “The Trail of Blood,”

The Trail of Blood is nothing more than a work of fiction. Steve Ray wrote an article refuting every claim made by the Trail of Blood.

When Baptists attempt to discover the origins of their tradition they are faced with a historical dilemma. The search for Baptists roots hits a dead end in the sixteenth century. Most acknowledge that Baptist tradition is a tributary flowing out of the Protestant Reformation, but others attempt to discover a line of historical continuity, of doctrine and practice, back to Jesus and even John the Baptist. These Baptists are commonly referred to “Baptist Successionists”.

Such a historical continuity is a factual impossibility though the proponents continue aggressively promoting their theories. First, we will summarize the popular theory as espoused in the popular booklet The Trail of Blood and secondly, we will analyze their position historically. It is helpful to remember, according to W. Morgan Patterson, associate professor of church history at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, that the “Baptist historians”-those who are proponents of this view-”have been preachers and pastors first of all, and historians second” (Baptist Successionism, [Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1980), 5.

The Trail of Blood was written by J. M. Carroll in 1931 and is published by Ashland Avenue Baptist Church in Lexington Kentucky. It is a small booklet of fifty-six pages containing a proposed timeline of Baptist churches back to Jesus. By 1994 over 1,955,000 copies had been printed and it has gained great popularity among Fundamentalist groups. The author unabashedly attempts to denigrate the Catholic Church while attempting to establish his own legitimacy as the true church

I won’t post all of it here but I will provide a link.

blog.catholic-convert.com/?p=829

Document is available on Word.doc and PDF file.
[/quote]

 

[quantumDeus]

Manyfit:

It all boils down to self-justification for splitting off. Make the Catholic Church appear evil and then the act of schisming is justified.

That a significant number of Protestants have bought the rubbish of historical distortion troubles me to no end. So what can we do? Pray for them firstly. Correct their historical and theological errancies secondly.

 

[lak611]

Manyfit:

It all boils down to self-justification for splitting off. Make the Catholic Church appear evil and then the act of schisming is justified.

That a significant number of Protestants have bought the rubbish of historical distortion troubles me to no end. So what can we do? Pray for them firstly. Correct their historical and theological errancies secondly.

The average Protestant today did not split off from the Catholic Church. Most people are brought up in whatever faith their parents practiced. Although there are converts to all religions, most people practice the faith they do because that is how they were raised. If one were to ask “Why are you ________?”, most people (whether Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, etc.) would say because that is what my parents were.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Manyfit:

It all boils down to self-justification for splitting off. Make the Catholic Church appear evil and then the act of schisming is justified.

That a significant number of Protestants have bought the rubbish of historical distortion troubles me to no end. So what can we do? Pray for them firstly. Correct their historical and theological errancies secondly.

We can always correct them.

 

[santodomingo]

The average Protestant today did not split off from the Catholic Church. Most people are brought up in whatever faith their parents practiced. Although there are converts to all religions, most people practice the faith they do because that is how they were raised. If one were to ask “Why are you ________?”, most people (whether Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, etc.) would say because that is what my parents were.

This is one of the most lucid comments I´ve read on this thread!! The average christian is not a theologian and has very little interest in theology. Therefore he/she has no way out of a religion which is essentially based on error. Their faith is accepted from their parents. That is surely the prime reason why protestantism has flourished and survived for 4 centuries.

 

[Steve_M]

The Trail of Blood is nothing more than a work of fiction. Steve Ray wrote an article refuting every claim made by the Trail of Blood.

That’s why I didn’t even bother to respond to his comment. When someone reads something that’s obviously propaganda and believes it, they don’t want to know the truth. They’re desparate to accept anything that appears to justify their position. That get’s back to the point I made that the poster was responding to. One of the reasons they’re anti-Catholic, is because, when faced with the facts of history, they have to choose between continuing to have a belief in something that was created in the 16th century, or they have to change the belief system many of them have had for their whole lives. It’s often easier to just not learn the truth, thus there’s no choice to be made. It’s the old addage “Ignorance is bliss.” Rather than learn the truth, attack it, and you’ll feel better about your own belief.

 

[Generic_Man]

][SIGN][/SIGN]

No. While the Catholic Church was seeking to control the world through religion, Bible Christians were running for their lives from the Catholic holocaust that ran for centuries.

God has always had His people, faithful to Him and His Word. They had no part in the Roman Catholic Church. Through much of history, organized religion has hunted and slaughtered Bible Christians. For an excellent overview of this, read the classic work, “The Trail of Blood,”

users.aol.com/libcfl/trail.htm

Who assembled the Bible? Catholics.
Who decided whichs books were inspired? Catholics.
Who first printed the Bible with the printing press? Catholics.
Would there be a Bible if there were no Catholics? No.

And you’re talking about people who have been on the run, opposed the the RCC for centuries and centuries, right? There is a name for these people.

They are called Gnostics. You are saying that Protestantism is modern day Gnosticism.

You might want to eat your words.

 

[quantumDeus]

The average Protestant today did not split off from the Catholic Church. Most people are brought up in whatever faith their parents practiced. Although there are converts to all religions, most people practice the faith they do because that is how they were raised. If one were to ask “Why are you ________?”, most people (whether Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, etc.) would say because that is what my parents were.

You are entirely correct, the majority of [fill in the denomination] laity did not choose it, they learned from their parents. I did not, I went in search of a religion that espoused what was in my heart and mind about God and Christ. I ended up, after exploring many denominations along the way, a Byzantine Catholic (think: Orthodox without the polemics).

What attracted me to Catholicism? Besides the sense of tradition (which since Vatican II is stronger in the Byzantine part of the church than the Roman for the most part), the overaching thing that caught my eye at an intellectual level was that the Church was open, maintaining that truth withstands the light of scrutiny.

While one can point to any number of secular misdeeds by the Church, errancy and inconsistency of doctrine and dogma is not among them. Do views change? Yes, because we gain new-found understanding of Scripture as we, as human beings, mature; we can then look at doctrines and revise them. Just as a 30-year-old revises the world-view they held at 18.

Yet, even in revision, there are principles of the faith that do not fall to the convenience of relativistic morals.

So a person takes up the mantle of their forebear’s faith. Understandable, children learn all manner of things from their parents. Yet, we are taught to question, too. Has everything taught by your parents proved to be true? Of course not.

So the door to examine the implementation of your parents’ faith (that is, as a unified body) is there for all as well. There is no lack of information available for those who seek it out. And, with an open mind (which is singularly the largest obstacle) and prayer, the truth will come.

 

[lak611]

You are entirely correct, the majority of [fill in the denomination] laity did not choose it, they learned from their parents. I did not, I went in search of a religion that espoused what was in my heart and mind about God and Christ. I ended up, after exploring many denominations along the way, a Byzantine Catholic (think: Orthodox without the polemics).

What attracted me to Catholicism? Besides the sense of tradition (which since Vatican II is stronger in the Byzantine part of the church than the Roman for the most part), the overaching thing that caught my eye at an intellectual level was that the Church was open, maintaining that truth withstands the light of scrutiny.

While one can point to any number of secular misdeeds by the Church, errancy and inconsistency of doctrine and dogma is not among them. Do views change? Yes, because we gain new-found understanding of Scripture as we, as human beings, mature; we can then look at doctrines and revise them. Just as a 30-year-old revises the world-view they held at 18.

Yet, even in revision, there are principles of the faith that do not fall to the convenience of relativistic morals.

So a person takes up the mantle of their forebear’s faith. Understandable, children learn all manner of things from their parents. Yet, we are taught to question, too. Has everything taught by your parents proved to be true? Of course not.

So the door to examine the implementation of your parents’ faith (that is, as a unified body) is there for all as well. There is no lack of information available for those who seek it out. And, with an open mind (which is singularly the largest obstacle) and prayer, the truth will come.

I do not know what led you to search for which religion to join. What you said is true. If one does search and study (not to mention pray), he will find the truth. However, unless a person has some type of bad experience or some type of disillusionment with the church that he has been raised in, for the most part, he will just stay in that church all his life. For example, my family is either Catholic or Lutheran. All of them have stayed Catholic or Lutheran. The only person who converted is a man who had no religion and became Catholic. He married my cousin who is Catholic. She never pressured him to convert. They were married for about ten years and when their son was studying to make his First Communion, my cousin’s husband announced out-of-the blue that he wanted to be Catholic. He was baptised, confirmed and received his First Communion at the Easter Vigil Mass and his son received his First Communion a couple weeks later.

 

[quantumDeus]

I do not know what led you to search for which religion to join. What you said is true. If one does search and study (not to mention pray), he will find the truth. However, unless a person has some type of bad experience or some type of disillusionment with the church that he has been raised in, for the most part, he will just stay in that church all his life. For example, my family is either Catholic or Lutheran. All of them have stayed Catholic or Lutheran. The only person who converted is a man who had no religion and became Catholic. He married my cousin who is Catholic. She never pressured him to convert. They were married for about ten years and when their son was studying to make his First Communion, my cousin’s husband announced out-of-the blue that he wanted to be Catholic. He was baptised, confirmed and received his First Communion at the Easter Vigil Mass and his son received his First Communion a couple weeks later.

Wonderful news!

I found many good-hearted and accepting communities along the way. One cannot fault the good Christian-based nature of most congregations. But no denomination that I explored in 14 years (from 18 to age 32) held up to intellectual, theologic and philosophic scrutiny except for the kata holos body of Christ on Earth.

What experience has taught me afterward is that those who rale against the RCC (we Byzantines being far too obscure and mysterious for them to tackle) vent about secular aspects of the Church, more specifically, the fault of humans within the Church.

Secondly, there is a tendency to do two main things that are a disservice in understanding not only history, but the evolution of the faith. All too many attach their world-view and perspectives to historical events, rather than consider the events in the context of existing cultures and their mores, beliefs and traditions. This is then compounded by assigning intentionality to persons without historical evidence of intentionality. We can argue consequences, we can look at different societal views in the context of different cultures of the times, but we can never, ever assign intentionality unless it is specifically recorded by that person.

 

[lak611]

Wonderful news!

I found many good-hearted and accepting communities along the way. One cannot fault the good Christian-based nature of most congregations. But no denomination that I explored in 14 years (from 18 to age 32) held up to intellectual, theologic and philosophic scrutiny except for the kata holos body of Christ on Earth.

What experience has taught me afterward is that those who rale against the RCC (we Byzantines being far too obscure and mysterious for them to tackle) vent about secular aspects of the Church, more specifically, the fault of humans within the Church.

You are correct that not as many people are familiar with the Byzantine Rite as with the Latin Rite. I’ve been to a couple Divine Liturgies, although I am Latin Rite. It is beautiful!

Secondly, there is a tendency to do two main things that are a disservice in understanding not only history, but the evolution of the faith. All too many attach their world-view and perspectives to historical events, rather than consider the events in the context of existing cultures and their mores, beliefs and traditions. This is then compounded by assigning intentionality to persons without historical evidence of intentionality. We can argue consequences, we can look at different societal views in the context of different cultures of the times, but we can never, ever assign intentionality unless it is specifically recorded by that person.

Very true!

 

[VociMike]

The average Protestant today did not split off from the Catholic Church. Most people are brought up in whatever faith their parents practiced. Although there are converts to all religions, most people practice the faith they do because that is how they were raised. If one were to ask “Why are you ________?”, most people (whether Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, etc.) would say because that is what my parents were.

And yet there is no getting around that there is a special anti-Catholic energy running through much of Protestantism. Just compare the number of Protestant-authored books and websites and tracts against the Catholic Church, with the number of such books and websites and tracts and posters against Islam or Judaism or Hinduism. After all, if in the Protestant view Catholics are teaching a false gospel, then so are all those other religions, and yet the Protestants don’t go after them with anything like the same zeal. That much is undeniable.

 

[lak611]

And yet there is no getting around that there is a special anti-Catholic energy running through much of Protestantism. Just compare the number of Protestant-authored books and websites and tracts against the Catholic Church, with the number of such books and websites and tracts and posters against Islam or Judaism or Hinduism. After all, if in the Protestant view Catholics are teaching a false gospel, then so are all those other religions, and yet the Protestants don’t go after them with anything like the same zeal. That much is undeniable.

I would not say that is necessarily the case any more. Since 9/11, I have seen many books about Islam in Christian book stores. All of the authors have been Protestant.

 

[quantumDeus]

And yet there is no getting around that there is a special anti-Catholic energy running through much of Protestantism. Just compare the number of Protestant-authored books and websites and tracts against the Catholic Church, with the number of such books and websites and tracts and posters against Islam or Judaism or Hinduism. After all, if in the Protestant view Catholics are teaching a false gospel, then so are all those other religions, and yet the Protestants don’t go after them with anything like the same zeal. That much is undeniable.

Maybe we can ask them to stand in time-out corner until they are over their tantrums?

 

[031064]

I agree, they are anti-Catholic. 2nd, why the heck are anti-catholic protestants joining this Catholic forum?
God Bless

 

[lak611]

I agree, they are anti-Catholic.

Not all Protestants on this forum are anti-Catholic.

2nd, why the heck are anti-catholic protestants joining this Catholic forum?
God Bless

This forum is open to all religions, and I am in favour of it being so. There are forums that are not open to Catholics, but I believe that it is better for this forum to be open to all, rather than to imitate those other forums by selectively excluding some people.