WHY are you NOT a Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PJM

Guest
Dear friend in Christ,

The multiplicity of Protestant faiths indicate a high degree of searing; so WHY then are YOU not a Catholic?

God Bless and please friends LET US discuss this with charity

Patrick [PJM]
 
Last edited:
Many reasons. First, let me say that I believe that Catholicism gets a lot of things right, like the inspiration of the Bible and the Trinity. I don’t think it’s got the full package, though. It rejects Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide; I have a problem with that. Another thing I don’t agree with is iconography and statues. It takes the mind away from focusing of God. Lastly, the devotion towards Mary I find to be blasphemous. It’s nothing but idolatry. Nothing could be more obvious than that.
 
Thank you for your charitable response… I post this to help with our teaching so people may have a better understanding of Catholicism and many read the forum but don’t post. God bless.

"People who oppose religious statuary forget about the many passages where the Lord commands the making of statues… (part of article deleted due to character limit on the forum)

David gave Solomon the plan “for the altar of incense made of refined gold, and its weight; also his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all, all the work to be done according to the plan” (1 Chr. 28:18–19). David’s plan for the temple, which the biblical author tells us was “by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all,” included statues of angels.

Similarly Ezekiel 41:17–18 describes graven (carved) images in the idealized temple he was shown in a vision, for he writes, “On the walls round about in the inner room and [on] the nave were carved likenesses of cherubim.”

The Religious Uses of Images
During a plague of serpents sent to punish the Israelites during the exodus, God told Moses to “make [a statue of] a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live” (Num. 21:8–9).
One had to look at the bronze statue of the serpent to be healed, which shows that statues could be used ritually, not merely as religious decorations. 🙂

https://www.catholic.com/tract/do-catholics-worship-statues

[
“drac16 said:
Many reasons. First, let me say that I believe that Catholicism gets a lot of things right, like the inspiration of the Bible and the Trinity. I don’t think it’s got the full package, though. It rejects Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide; I have a problem with that. Another thing I don’t agree with is iconography and statues. It takes the mind away from focusing of God. Lastly, the devotion towards Mary I find to be blasphemous. It’s nothing but idolatry. Nothing could be more obvious than that.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
PJM said:
Dear friend in Christ,

The multiplicity of Protestant faiths indicate a high degree of searing; so WHY then are YOU not a Catholic?

God Bless and please friends LET US discuss this with charity

Patrick [PJM]
Click to expand...
What is a high degree of searing supposed to mean? Searing is something I do to our steaks on the BBQ.
 
It rejects Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide
Click to expand...
Please don’t take it the wrong way when I say this but, sola scriptura is one of the most baseless and nonsensical doctrines of the Lutheran and Reformed tradition, I just can’t see the logic in it. The Bible didn’t just fall from the sky, it was written over the course of about 1,000 years, and it took centuries more for a canon to be compiled. Furthermore, Christians can’t even seem to agree what should be Biblical canon. Orthodox follow the Septuagint exactly for the Old Testament, including chapters like Psalms 151 and all the deuterocanonicals (including the ones that even Catholics consider apocryphal), whereas Catholics follow the canon put forth by the fourth Council of Carthage (397 A.D) which includes several deuterocanonical books that are in the Septuagint, and Protestants follow the same canon as the Jews do for the Old Testament which omits all the deuterocanonicals. As for the New Testament, it is often thought all Christians agree on at least this, and for the most part that is true, there is indeed no difference between the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant New Testament, however, Ethiopian Orthodox do actually include 8 additional books in their New Testament canon. So how do we decided what is scripture and what is not? Easy. We listen to the Magisterium. That is the authority we have. The Magisterium also has the authority to interpret scripture. You wouldn’t have your Bible today if it wasn’t for the Tradition of the Magisterium. You do know that the idea of a Biblical canon is Tradition within itself right? You do know that before any of the books in the Bible were written, all their stories and teachings began as Tradition right? Scripture itself really is Tradition, it’s an extension of it, it’s Tradition that has been written down onto pieces of paper and made into a book. This is why Scripture and Tradition (with a capital ‘T’) are equal, because they’re essentially the same thing. This is why Scripture itself urges us to follow Tradition (1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15). You can’t just rely on scripture alone, that reasoning makes no sense!

As for the whole faith alone issue, this is one of the most misinterpreted issues of the Catholic vs Protestant debate. Faith alone centers around the Lutheran and Reformed ideas of monergism, whereas Catholics and Orthodox, as well as Wesleyan Protestants and some Anglicans, reject sola fide because we are synergistic. We put a great importance on the idea of free will in salvation, while Lutherans and Reformed Christians reject the idea of there being free will in salvation, teaching that God is doing all the work, and their is no cooperation. Synergist do not teach “work based salvation”, like monergist we agree that justifying grace is freely given and not based on works, but we believe in cooperation with God’s grace is necessary so that we may continue to grow in it and achieve full divinization, this is what we mean when speak about “merit” and works being necessary for salvation. Do you not know that God will judge each of us according to our works (Job 34:11, Matthew 16:27, Romans 2:6)?
 
Last edited:
Another thing I don’t agree with is iconography and statues. It takes the mind away from focusing of God.
Click to expand...
On the contrary, it directs the mind towards God, releasing a person from worldly distractions, and filling it with the thoughts of spiritual things. Images of all kinds have been important in the role of Christian history and defended zealously by the early Church. Did you not know that Christ himself is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15)? Did you not know that images were a central part of temple worship for the Israelite’s (Exodus 25:18, 1 Kings 6:23-29)? God does not forbid the use of images and icons and statues, what he forbids is the worship of images and icons and statues fashioned by the hands of men.
Lastly, the devotion towards Mary I find to be blasphemous. It’s nothing but idolatry. Nothing could be more obvious than that.
Click to expand...
If it were really idolatry, then we’d be offering the bread and wine up to God and Mary, we’d be asking God and Mary for forgiveness, and we’d be speaking about the grace that God and Mary gave to us. But this is not the case, Mary is infinitely lesser than God, just as you and I are, yet she is the greatest creature in God’s creation, greater than all the angels even. Think about it, if you were God, about to become man, wouldn’t you want to make your own mother in perfection? That’s exactly what God did when he created Mary. She, having contained the very God in her womb, is like the Temple of Jerusalem, as it was believed to host God’s own presence. If it wasn’t for Mary’s cooperation with God, then Christ would not have come into the world. For this reason, from the earliest days of the Church, Mary has been met with great veneration and devotion. How could we not honor the Blessed Virgin in such a way? It would be a dishonor to God himself to neglect this. As St. Epiphanius remarks:
“True it is . . . the whole race of man upon earth was born of Eve; but in reality it is from Mary that Life was truly born to the world, so that by giving birth to the Living One, Mary might also become the Mother of all the living.” - St. Epiphanius, (Against Eighty Heresies, 78,9, [374 A.D])
Click to expand...
 
One of the reasons why I AM a Catholic is that we can have conversations like these on our own forums with a respectful, open-minded exchange of viewpoints and perspectives.
 
My husbands answer to this is because he finds most Catholic parishes lacklustre and his worry would be without the support of a group of fellow believers and religious activities outside of the Sunday service his faith would weaken.
 
While I have great respect for Catholicism, there are a few differences that are reasons why I’m not Catholic. The nature of the Eucharist/Mass/Lord’s Supper, the intercession of saints, baptismal regeneration and of course how works and faith relate are the main reasons that come to mind. There may be a few more that I haven’t come across yet or haven’t given much thought about.
 
I hear this a lot on the forums. I almost left the Church Catholic after my divorce because of my frustration with the annulment process. (my marriage was annulled but I was frustrated by the process) and found the fellowship of a Lutheran Church very comforting. I felt like your husband. However after a time away going to both the Catholic and Lutheran Church every Sunday (never communing) I realized what was missing. The true body and blood, soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ at every Mass. I could never give that up so back I went full force to the Catholic Church.

I understand your husband’s point of view. I was in Bible study and had fellowship I never had during that time, but something for ME was always missing.

God bless you both.
 
My husband claims to have some difficulty with believing in the Real Presence in the host, which he says keeps him from joining. In the past he also cited indulgences as an issue. I explained to him the Church has not sold them for hundreds of years and we get them now by saying prayers, so that issue went away.
 
There are a number of things that I am investigating. However, the number one thing is that I don’t believe Catholicism affirms salvation as a free gift of God. I’ve had numerous folks on this forum try to explain it to me but I can’t get past the difference between meriting grace and earning grace. It seems that no matter how you slice it, if I have to merit something then I"m at least partially saying salvation is “of our own doing”.

I’m also investigating what we evangelicals would call “non-Biblical” doctrines and practices of the RCC. Basically, the normal list of things we like to say are “weird”. Purgatory, Mariology, veneration of saints, iconography and so forth. The question I’m trying to answer is, “Did the Apostles teach those practices and doctrines to the early church orally, but not include them in scripture?”. If so, then they are acceptable practices. If not, then they are the inventions of men and should be rejected.

For instance, I’m inclined to believe that the doctrine of Purgatory comes from Platonic and Greek philosophical influences on the church. Most of the church fathers were huge fans of Plato and used Platonic methods when reasoning out theology. It is no secret that Plato describes a place very similar to purgatory in the Republic. Also, Virgil’s description of a purgatory like place in the Aeneid is compelling evidence, although circumstantial, that the concept of purgatory was borrowed from Platonic thought and Greek influence.

I also believe that the 2 Macabees 12 quote that Catholics use to justify the doctrine of purgatory is weak at best. First of all, it is descriptive not prescriptive. No where in the Old Testament is anyone ever directed by God to pray for the dead. Second, just because Pre-Christian era Jews believed something and practiced something doesn’t mean it was directed by God. It is very possible, and even likely, that religious syncretism had started to occur between pagan religions and Judaism by the time of the events of 2 Macabees. I believe, at least in part, this syncretism was one of the thing Christ called “doctrines of Men” when dealing with the Pharisees.
 
PJM said:
Dear friend in Christ,

The multiplicity of Protestant faiths indicate a high degree of searing; so WHY then are YOU not a Catholic?

God Bless and please friends LET US discuss this with charity

Patrick [PJM]
Click to expand...
Universal ordinary and immediate jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome. I am sufficiently “catholic” to reconcile all other issues.
 
PJM said:
Dear friend in Christ,

The multiplicity of Protestant faiths indicate a high degree of searing; so WHY then are YOU not a Catholic?

God Bless and please friends LET US discuss this with charity

Patrick [PJM]
Click to expand...
I can also list the reasons why I am not Catholic, however, I do not understand the op question. I am supposed to obviously change to Catholic because of the “high degree of searing” but I do not understand what that means. Can anyone enlighten me?
 
Brittany said:
think you might be misunderstanding what the Church teaches about salvation.
Click to expand...
Oh, I’ve read the Catechism. I just don’t think it teaches Biblical Salvation.

2010 Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life. Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God’s wisdom. These graces and goods are the object of Christian prayer. Prayer attends to the grace we need for meritorious actions.

Catholicism splits salvation into two parts. Initial salvation and ongoing justification. In the Catholic Church initial justification is free but ongoing justification is merited, primarily by the sacraments and good works.

I don’t think the Bible splits the two. I believe the Bible teaches that eternal life is a free gift that is received by faith. What Catholicism teaches is that salvation is not a gift, it is a possibility, if you do your best and go to church and give to the poor you may merit enough grace to obtain eternal life.

I’ve went round and round about this on other thread so there is no need to do that again. I’ll just stand by my statement that if eternal life is a free gift then to say we in anyway contribute to our salvation makes it something we earn and not a free gift. It is making salvation “of ourselves” when the bible says we are saved by grace through faith, not of yourselves.

You could argue that faith is “of yourselves” as well. You could also argue that faith is a God Given response to Grace (and not of ourselves) or that Faith itself is a gift of God that He choose to give to us (and not of ourselves).
 
I thought he meant since Protestants and Catholics have a lot in common ("sharing "), then why don’t the Prods become Catholic.
That was just my take
 
Ditto, I’m kind of in the same boat.

I’ve also been treated fairly poorly, almost like a pariah or a tag along (with my Catholic family) at two different Parishes. I’ve decided I don’t want to be a part of a church or Parish that looks down upon other NC’s and don’t see them as “part of the family”. I actually thought it was a foregone conclusion that I’d convert, but after the way I was looked at and treated I decided that’s not the right direction or decision for me.
 
Brittany said:
I recommend reading the following tract from Catholic Answers, and I’ll also include some other interesting articles that you might want to read.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I’ve read those and many more Catholic Apologist. The Evangelical View of Salvation, in my opinion, is more in line with Scripture. Which, btw, is fairly different that what I see the Evangelical view of salvation portrayed as on this board.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top