Why are Protestants so Anti-Catholic?

[SORROWS]

The Protestants would say that they are not Anti-Catholic, but against some Catholic teachings that go against the Bible. I agree.

Give an example! Don’t throw comments out unless you can back it up.

 

[mercygate]

Catholic dogma
“Outside the Church there is no salvation, thus membership in the Church is necessary.” (Adam S. Miller, The Final Word, Tower of David Publications:Gaithersburg (1997), p. 16)

Douay-Rheims Bible
Romans10
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved. 14 How then shall they call on him, in whom they have not believed? Or how shall they believe him, of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear, without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach unless they be sent, as it is written: How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, of them that bring glad tidings of good things!

Douay-Rheims Bible
John14
6 Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.

Latin Vulgate Bible CONTENTSINDEXSEARCH
John 14:
6 dicit ei Iesus ego sum via et veritas et vita nemo venit ad Patrem nisi per me

Douay-Rheims Bible
1Tim2
5 For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus:

1Tim3:1 A faithful saying: if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 It behoveth therefore a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, of good behaviour, chaste, given to hospitality, a teacher, 3 Not given to wine, no striker, but modest, not quarrelsome, not covetous, but 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all chastity. 5 But if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?

The Jesuit Oath​

“Go ye, then, into all the world and take possession of all lands in the name of the Pope. He who will not accept him as the Vicar of Jesus and his Vice-Regent on earth, let him be accursed and exterminated.”

Gag. The “Jesuit Oath” is a forgery/mocked up pile of poop. And if you are flying by the username “truthnlight” you should take better care of your resources. This is just plain irresponsible.

As for salvation outside the Church, check out this paragraph from the *Catechism of the Catholic Church. *Clearly, for someone who knows the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ and who rejects it, the chances of salvation are problematic because that person is rejecting the Truth and the Truth, aside from being a matter of right conscience, is a Person, and that Person is Jesus Christ. “He who rejects you (the apostles, ie, the Church) rejects me.”

 

[one4niner]

The only friends I’ve gotten into fights with over religion were ex-Catholics. Unfortunately, all I was able to do was change the subject to something other than religion, and then later pray for them.

I feel all religion has some truth to it. Yes, we can debate which I enjoy doing, but we must definately pray for them.

 

[Greg27]

I honestly think deep down it is jealousy because we are apostolic. Because history is so against them. They know deep down that their church was created by Martin Luther and not Jesus Christ, but out of their arrogance and pride they cannot submit to the Catholic Church. They want a “christianity” that works for them, allows abortion, allows women priests, and allows them to do more of what they want. So they join the church ‘they feel’ is right from them, and then justify it by attacking the Catholic Church in order to make them feel better and justify their own beliefs. But in reality they are only doing harm to thierselves and their own salvation.

One man popping up out of nowhere 1500 years after Christ out of pride and ego to seperate the church and have his own followers. Much like Mohammed wanted. That is the epitamy of protestantism…and its very sad that all of the theological beliefs protestants base their views on is ONE man.

By attacking the Catholic Church, you claim that God did it wrong for 1500 years before Luther came. And thus they make Luther the real Savior and not Jesus. So they contradict themselves unknowingly out of their zeal and hatred for the church… And when they read the ECF, some of which who were friends and diciples of the apostles, which makes it even worse for them because they know Martin Luther did not talk to or even converse with one apostle like St. Igantius, or Clement, or Polycarp did. And thus because of this, the result to the only thing they can do, attack the church…

But i think the most important thing. Is to look at the fruits of protestantism. 30,000 divisions, false prophets like Ellen White and Joseph Smith, the SDAs, the Mormons/Book of Mormon, the denial of the Trinity(oneness groups), creation of the Rapture, dispensationilism, annihilationism, etc, etc… All these heresys have sprouted up from protestantism, the worst being the division since the bible says Christ and his Church are ONE. This here prooves that protestantism is nothing but another heresy like the gnostics or arianism…In fact protestantism is much like Gnosticism(the invisible church)… But it is here that the fruits proove they are false… How the Catholic Church has stayed together in unity for over 2000 years is proof that it is the true church… As they say, Satan is the author of confusion, and what spells out confusion more than 30,000 protestant denominations…

Not to be uncharitable, but with the CC we have the Crusades against the Jews and Muslims, anti-Jewish pogroms in medieval Europe, the Inquisition, extermination of ‘heretics’, ‘witches’ and ‘schismatics’, Popes who were corrupt and decadent in their conduct, and many other dark evils and stains.

Both branches of Christianity have dubious things which can be laid at their feet, and I think serious improvements in relations will require each to seriously and soberly look at their often dismal records of violence, intolerance and persecutions towards people of other religions and also towards other Christians who did not belong to their denomination. I don’t think either side can fairly claim, if we examine history, moral supremacy in conduct.

 

[mercygate]

Not to be uncharitable, but with the CC we have the Crusades against the Jews and Muslims, anti-Jewish pogroms in medieval Europe, the Inquisition, extermination of ‘heretics’, ‘witches’ and ‘schismatics’, Popes who were corrupt and decadent in their conduct, and many other dark evils and stains.

Both branches of Christianity have dubious things which can be laid at their feet, and I think serious improvements in relations will require each to seriously and soberly look at their often dismal records of violence, intolerance and persecutions towards people of other religions and also towards other Christians who did not belong to their denomination. I don’t think either side can fairly claim, if we examine history, moral supremacy in conduct.

Part of the honesty is to look at those things in terms of what actually happened, and not through such ridiculous distortions as the Black Legend. As for extermination of heretics – that means the extermination of heresy. Heresy is more dangerous to the human soul than mass murder. Only persistent, unrepentant heretics were ever executed.

Pope John Paul kicked off the campain for reconciliaion by apologizing for hurt done by Catholics against Jews and others.

I would be interested in knowing if anybody has returned the favor.

 

[Singinbeauty]

Only persistent, unrepentant heretics were ever executed.

Wait, I forgot… who did Jesus kill because of opposition? Who did Peter or Paul kill because they spoke out against Christ?

 

[mercygate]

Wait, I forgot… who did Jesus kill because of opposition? Who did Peter or Paul kill because they spoke out against Christ?

That’s begging the question; Protestants did their share of slaughtering, so nobody has clean hands here.

I am not defending the killing of anybody. Period. But the mores of the time condoned capital punishment for stealing a sheep or shooting a grouse in the king’s forest.

Death penalty in perspective: In our own time, the death penalty for treason is not considered cruel and unusual. Context, context, context.

I am stating that the allegations of the “horrors” perpetrated by the Church are always exaggerated in attacks on the Church.

Heresy was considered by both Protestants and Catholics to be a more grievous sin than murder.

 

[Singinbeauty]

I agree that it has happened on both sides. But while I don’t make excuses for my protestant brothers and sisters as to their wrong doings I am getting wary of the amount of catholics who try to rationalize and defend what the catholic church did back then rather than do what their own Pope had done and just apologize or agree it was horrible. It is still happening to day but not on as large of a scale. We have countries torn in half and it breaks my heart. If we just follow Christ’s example of turning the other cheek even when faced with opposition our world would know more about the love of Christ. Right now all they see is HIS people arguing and killing eachother.

SOME protestants are anti-catholic but not ALL as the title of this thread would suggest. SOME catholics are anti-protestant to the same degree but not ALL.

 

[BelFarfalla]

I agree that it has happened on both sides. But while I don’t make excuses for my protestant brothers and sisters as to their wrong doings I am getting wary of the amount of catholics who try to rationalize and defend what the catholic church did back then rather than do what their own Pope had done and just apologize or agree it was horrible.

We have apologized. Our Pope apologized. Not one Catholic today was involved in any of it. Mostly Catholic try to discuss it to learn and understand so as to not make the same mistakes. But apparently this is considered ‘rationalization’ and ‘defense’. If we don’t seek to understand what was wrong and its source it will more likely repeat itself.
On the other hand I’ve never heard one protestant apologize for the deaths and slaughters carried out by their religious ancestors. What I have heard is that they were not responsible.

It is still happening to day but not on as large of a scale. We have countries torn in half and it breaks my heart.

Really? The Catholic Church is slaughtering people today? Is this what you are saying? If it is, where is the CC doing this today?

 

[Singinbeauty]

We have apologized. Our Pope apologized. Not one Catholic today was involved in any of it. Mostly Catholic try to discuss it to learn and understand so as to not make the same mistakes. But apparently this is considered ‘rationalization’ and ‘defense’. If we don’t seek to understand what was wrong and its source it will more likely repeat itself.

Actually there is a thread or two on this very board that actually has catholics DEFENDING these heinous acts. Rationalizing it because that was what the times were like.

On the other hand I’ve never heard one protestant apologize for the deaths and slaughters carried out by their religious ancestors. What I have heard is that they were not responsible.

I make no excuse for what other protestants have done when it comes to slaughtering catholics. It’s wrong.

Really? The Catholic Church is slaughtering people today? Is this what you are saying? If it is, where is the CC doing this today?

What about Ireland? Protestants and catholics alike are killing eachother there and neither side is doing anything about it. It’s really sad. Why does the CC condone this? Wouldn’t that be something that the CC would be actively trying to stop? Apparently not since there actually has to be a dividing line with a wall built between North and South.

 

[SyCarl]

Actually there is a thread or two on this very board that actually has catholics DEFENDING these heinous acts. Rationalizing it because that was what the times were like.

I make no excuse for what other protestants have done when it comes to slaughtering catholics. It’s wrong.

What about Ireland? Protestants and catholics alike are killing eachother there and neither side is doing anything about it. It’s really sad. Why does the CC condone this? Wouldn’t that be something that the CC would be actively trying to stop? Apparently not since there actually has to be a dividing line with a wall built between North and South.

I really think that Northern Ireland is more a political situation now than a religious one. It just happens that the Unionists are Protestant and the Republicans are Catholic. It may have started on a religious basis but I don’t think that is the case today, although some leaders may make it sound that way.

 

[St_Violet]

I am not a defender of the acts of killing or murder. but It is important that when we research History we must take into consideration of what was considered the ‘norm’ of that peroid. it is really simple for someone who doesn’t understand history to say how evil the Indians were when they practiced cannibalism , or how evil it was when God told Moses to stone a man for gathering sticks on a sabbath day, but for someone who understands History, understands the norms of the times. when I look at the History of the Catholic Church, I understood that ever since the beginning, the Church was always concerned about the unity of christianity. and to have unity there has to be an agreement.

Gosh I even wonder if Martin Luther was to come back, I wonder what he’d say about the division among christianity.

 

[anamchara]

if Martin Luther was to come back, I wonder what he’d say about the division among christianity.

Doh! :doh2::ehh:

 

[Mannyfit75]

What about Ireland? Protestants and catholics alike are killing eachother there and neither side is doing anything about it. It’s really sad. Why does the CC condone this? Wouldn’t that be something that the CC would be actively trying to stop? Apparently not since there actually has to be a dividing line with a wall built between North and South.

The Catholic Church has never condone this. The division between Protestant and Catholic in Ireland is purely done by the actions of lay Protestants and Catholics. Not the Catholic Church authority.

Show me a Vatican document that condone any form of killing?

 

[Singinbeauty]

I am not a defender of the acts of killing or murder. but It is important that when we research History we must take into consideration of what was considered the ‘norm’ of that peroid. it is really simple for someone who doesn’t understand history to say how evil the Indians were when they practiced cannibalism , or how evil it was when God told Moses to stone a man for gathering sticks on a sabbath day, but for someone who understands History, understands the norms of the times. when I look at the History of the Catholic Church, I understood that ever since the beginning, the Church was always concerned about the unity of christianity. and to have unity there has to be an agreement.

Gosh I even wonder if Martin Luther was to come back, I wonder what he’d say about the division among christianity.

The ‘norm’ of the time called for killing woman found committing adultry… Tell me, did Jesus throw the first stone?

 

[Singinbeauty]

The Catholic Church has never condone this. The division between Protestant and Catholic in Ireland is purely done by the actions of lay Protestants and Catholics. Not the Catholic Church authority.

Show me a Vatican document that condone any form of killing?

They condone it by not doing anything about it…

 

[LDNCatholic]

The divide is there because the six counties collectively called ‘‘Northern Ireland’’ are under British control- It was not the fault of the Catholic Church. The protestants, often with the full backing of the British government slaughtered hundreds, it was a response to incredibly oppressive actions that most of us are lucky enough not to have any experience of. Incidentally, you say that the Church condones this violence by not doing anything, what actions did you take? If you didn’t then are you condoning the protestant violence (or non denominational Christian violence whatever the prods are calling themselves these days)?

 

[Singinbeauty]

The divide is there because the six counties collectively called ‘‘Northern Ireland’’ are under British control- It was not the fault of the Catholic Church. The protestants, often with the full backing of the British government slaughtered hundreds, it was a response to incredibly oppressive actions that most of us are lucky enough not to have any experience of. Incidentally, you say that the Church condones this violence by not doing anything, what actions did you take? If you didn’t then are you condoning the protestant violence (or non denominational Christian violence whatever the prods are calling themselves these days)?

If I had authority over the protestants you are DARN-TOOTIN’ right that I would be doing something! But I don’t. So I can’t stop it. I do not stand next to the men and women killing catholics in the name of God. To me, they are not christian and not my brothers or sisters…

But it seems to me that if you have such a hierarchy in the CC then the leaders should be able to do something on their side… The bible says ‘Thou shalt NOT kill’… why aren’t people being removed from the church by disobeying such a blatent law?

I wouldn’t be surprised if God has some issues with letting those who are killing their brothers and sisters in Christ get through the Pearly Gates…

 

[mmortal03]

To go against Catholic teaching is, by definition, to be anti-Catholic. A Catholic is the living embodiment of the theology, doctrine and dogma of the kata holos church that Christ established.

That you maintain that Catholic teachings go against the Bible shows you have far yet to go in your understanding of the Catholic views of Scripture, Apostolic Tradition and Magisterium.

I would maintain it is you who “go against the Bible,” not Catholics.

To go against Catholic teaching is NOT by definition to be anti-Catholic. You can be non-Catholic, and not be hostile to Catholicism, which anti- implies. This is a similar issue to those who call themselves non-theists instead of atheists, because of what the a- is taken to mean.

For the second point you made, I would argue that it is only in an ideal world that a person that is Catholic is actually the living embodiment of the theology. However, I don’t think that is what you were trying to say. I think the structure of some of our sentences is introducing ambiguity into a very intrinsically specific issue.

 

[mmortal03]

That’s begging the question; Protestants did their share of slaughtering, so nobody has clean hands here.

I am not defending the killing of anybody. Period. But the mores of the time condoned capital punishment for stealing a sheep or shooting a grouse in the king’s forest.

Death penalty in perspective: In our own time, the death penalty for treason is not considered cruel and unusual. Context, context, context.

I am stating that the allegations of the “horrors” perpetrated by the Church are always exaggerated in attacks on the Church.

Heresy was considered by both Protestants and Catholics to be a more grievous sin than murder.

We have apologized. Our Pope apologized. Not one Catholic today was involved in any of it. Mostly Catholic try to discuss it to learn and understand so as to not make the same mistakes. But apparently this is considered ‘rationalization’ and ‘defense’. If we don’t seek to understand what was wrong and its source it will more likely repeat itself.
On the other hand I’ve never heard one protestant apologize for the deaths and slaughters carried out by their religious ancestors. What I have heard is that they were not responsible.

Really? The Catholic Church is slaughtering people today? Is this what you are saying? If it is, where is the CC doing this today?

I am not a defender of the acts of killing or murder. but It is important that when we research History we must take into consideration of what was considered the ‘norm’ of that peroid. it is really simple for someone who doesn’t understand history to say how evil the Indians were when they practiced cannibalism , or how evil it was when God told Moses to stone a man for gathering sticks on a sabbath day, but for someone who understands History, understands the norms of the times. when I look at the History of the Catholic Church, I understood that ever since the beginning, the Church was always concerned about the unity of christianity. and to have unity there has to be an agreement.

Gosh I even wonder if Martin Luther was to come back, I wonder what he’d say about the division among christianity.

Wait, so the three of you are saying that the Catholic Church didn’t have the ultimate answers then, and they had to learn about their morality right along side the rest of society?