Why do non-Catholics send missionaries to Hispanic Catholics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Beno
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I asked my roommate a similar question. He is a baptist and his church sends missionaries every year to Bulgaria, which is predominantly Eastern Orthodox.

His response was, “Most of them are only nominally Orthodox”.



I somehow doubt that our Orthodox brothers and sisters are amused.

-Penitant
 
Well, I disagree. In my opinion he ought not to have received you unless he was convinced either that your former church had cast you out unjustly against your will or that it was utterly and irredeemably apostate.

OK, in practice I recognize that would be hard to enforce. If people have irrevocably left their former church and turning them away would embitter them, probably receiving them is the right thing to do. But the pastor was certainly correct to be cautious and to demand a good deal of convincing.

Why, theologically speaking, do you think this was a mistake on his part? Of course it was bad marketing. . . .

In Christ,

Edwin
Edwin,
Why do you think that it wasn’t a mistake? If a Church believes in what it preaches, shouldn’t it welcome those who are seeking to worship there? Why should it turn away those who wish to join its flock? Why should it demand an accounting of the seeker’s former Church or engage in a determination as to whether that Church is apostate or not?

Now, to this Church’s credit, it will not accept as members those who will not confess that they believe in its teachings. I think that the Church acts properly in that regard. In fact, I was told by the other pastor at this Church that I shouldn’t join a church, including his, unless I believe in the Church’s teachings. I don’t disagree with that admonition and, among other easons, it is why I have not joined this Church although I am attending worship there.

I think that, broadly speaking, you believe that we should stay in the Church we find ourselves unless it is completely apostate and I suppose that I could articulate a Scriptural argument from some of Paul’s preachings in support of that concept. But I think that I could also articulate a Scriptural argument, and a more convincing one I believe, that we should not remain associated with erroneous teaching and erroneous behavior. Are you sure that you are not responding this way just because of the identity of the Church that I left?

RR1213
 
Edwin,
Why do you think that it wasn’t a mistake? If a Church believes in what it preaches, shouldn’t it welcome those who are seeking to worship there? Why should it turn away those who wish to join its flock? Why should it demand an accounting of the seeker’s former Church or engage in a determination as to whether that Church is apostate or not?

Now, to this Church’s credit, it will not accept as members those who will not confess that they believe in its teachings. I think that the Church acts properly in that regard. In fact, I was told by the other pastor at this Church that I shouldn’t join a church, including his, unless I believe in the Church’s teachings. I don’t disagree with that admonition and, among other easons, it is why I have not joined this Church although I am attending worship there.

I think that, broadly speaking, you believe that we should stay in the Church we find ourselves unless it is completely apostate and I suppose that I could articulate a Scriptural argument from some of Paul’s preachings in support of that concept. But I think that I could also articulate a Scriptural argument, and a more convincing one I believe, that we should not remain associated with erroneous teaching and erroneous behavior. Are you sure that you are not responding this way just because of the identity of the Church that I left?

RR1213
Absolutely not. I’m a lot more sympathetic to people leaving ECUSA (particularly if they leave it in a more Catholic direction) than to people leaving other churches. I groan every time I hear of another evangelical becoming Episcopalian. This has nothing to do with sticking up for ECUSA. I really mean what I am saying.

Either the erroneous teaching and behavior constitutes apostasy–i.e., destroys the community’s character as a true church–or it does not. If it does not, then leaving it (I’m speaking of local congregations here, not denominations–another reason your closing surmise is incorrect) is an act of schism. No church on this earth is free from error of some sort (even if the Catholic Church is what it claims to be, there are still errors at the local level and the level of practice, which is what I’m concerned with).

No church has any business trying to augment its own little share of the Body of Christ. The only concern of any Christian church should be the welfare of the Universal Church, the Body of Christ. If a given Christian communion does not consider itself to be the true Church, then it is very wicked for it to try to aggrandize itself at the expense of other true Christian churches.

I shake my head every time I hear people condemn Catholicism or Orthodoxy (or for that matter the relatively few Protestant churches that make analogous claims, unbelievable as I find those claims) as “arrogant” because they claim to be the true Church. My anger is reserved solely for those churches that modestly and ecumenically claim to be only one flavor of Christianity, but then act as if their own particular institutional existence is a matter of importance. My wife’s denomination, the UMC, is one of the worst offenders in this regard. Few denominations raise so elaborate a superstructure on such slender and modest ecclesiological claims. But most American denominations fall into this trap to a significant degree. It is one of the greatest heresies of our times.

In Christ,

Edwin
 
But of course they are sheep stealers as far I’m concerned.
I tend to think the above is true when non-Catholic missionaries try to separate Catholics from their religious faith if Catholicism is the fold that Jesus speaks of when he says: “I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and mine know me…And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd.”

I know of a local Presbyterian church that sends a medical mission to the Dominican Republic every year. Upon returning from their last trip, a report was given not only of the medical care given but also how many souls were saved by coming to know Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. I would consider that to be an admirable effort on their part only as long as the native peoples had no exposure to Christianity at all. But my research shows that 95% of the Dominican Republic’s population is Catholic. This irks the heck out of me. :mad:
 
I have had the impression that most evangelizing and church-starting in Latin America by my Baptists is in areas where there isn’t a local Catholic Church or priest in residence and locals report many people don’t really have a religious life. The Protestant worry that a child baptism isn’t giving that child a personal saving relationship with Jesus Christ has to figure into this. Certainly, the medical teams going there (or to anywhere in the Third World) find lots of physical needs to fill, and of course there are the water projects. I could be wrong.

By the way, a Gideons International team once got way up in the hills somewhere (Columbia?) once, found a Catholic priest, and left him a couple boxes of bibles. He told them there were no other printed materials of any kind in the entire valley. (I’m sure they weren’t official RCC scriptures.)
 
It’s an invitation. One that I wished someone had extended to me a bit earlier in my life.
Can’t you see that there is incredible hypocrisy on this Board about “sheep steeling”.

If Protestants send missionaries and convert (mostly nominal) Roman Catholics, that is “sheep steeling” and is wrong. However, if Catholic Answers assists Protestants to become Roman Catholics, that is “an invitation” to the one true Church and therefore, wonderful.

Why not just say that you wish all people were Roman Catholics and understand, concomitantly, that Evangelicals have the same wish for people to be Evangelicals.

I am at least honest about it: I want everyone in the whole world, every single one, to become independent charismatic evangelicals.

If not:
  1. I want them all to become Assembly of God; if not
  2. I want them all to become Southern Baptists; if not
  3. I want them all to become Presbyterians; if not
  4. I want them all to become Methodists; if not
  5. I want them all to become Congregationalists; if not
  6. I want them all to become Anglicans; if not
  7. I want them all to become Eastern Orthodox; if not
  8. I want them all to become Roman Catholics (yea!!); if not
  9. I want them all to become Orthodox Jews; if not
  10. I want them all to become Muslims; if not
  11. I want Jesus to return as quickly as possible
Since Assembly of God and Southern Baptists are the fastest growing denominations (along with independent Evangelical), I am of course delighted. J4M:)
 
Can’t you see that there is incredible hypocrisy on this Board about “sheep steeling”.

If Protestants send missionaries and convert (mostly nominal) Roman Catholics, that is “sheep steeling” and is wrong. However, if Catholic Answers assists Protestants to become Roman Catholics, that is “an invitation” to the one true Church and therefore, wonderful.
It just depends on whose sheep…er…ox…is being gored.
 
As far as I can tell, this site is not forced on anyone. All come here voluntarily. So who are the sheep here?
It was a joke.

The sheep belong to Christ. We belong to Christ. We are the sheep and we probably should stop goring each other.
 
It was a joke.

The sheep belong to Christ. We belong to Christ. We are the sheep and we probably should stop goring each other.
Well next time use a smiley at the end of your statement. This is required for all jokes. Did you not read all of the posting rules for this forum??? 😃
 
Well next time use a smiley at the end of your statement. This is required for all jokes. Did you not read all of the posting rules for this forum??? 😃
Point well taken, although using simileys all the time does take away from the ability to use dry humor a bit.
 
Can’t you see that there is incredible hypocrisy on this Board about “sheep steeling”.

If Protestants send missionaries and convert (mostly nominal) Roman Catholics, that is “sheep steeling” and is wrong. However, if Catholic Answers assists Protestants to become Roman Catholics, that is “an invitation” to the one true Church and therefore, wonderful.
The big difference is that evangelicals consider Catholics to be non-Christian cultists and damned to hell, whereas Catholics consider evangelicals to be sincere fellow Christians who just do not have all of the gospel. We don’t go out and knock on doors telling lies about evangelicals, but I often get local evangelicals knocking on my door telling terrible lies about the Catholic faith. We just provide answers for those who are interested in coming home to the Church established by Jesus, with all its authority, priesthood and sacraments.

Paul
 
I tend to think the above is true when non-Catholic missionaries try to separate Catholics from their religious faith if Catholicism is the fold that Jesus speaks of when he says: “I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and mine know me…And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd.”

I know of a local Presbyterian church that sends a medical mission to the Dominican Republic every year. Upon returning from their last trip, a report was given not only of the medical care given but also how many souls were saved by coming to know Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. I would consider that to be an admirable effort on their part only as long as the native peoples had no exposure to Christianity at all. But my research shows that 95% of the Dominican Republic’s population is Catholic. This irks the heck out of me. :mad:
I guess Catholics need to make sure there is no need for a Protestant medical mission in the Dominican Republic or any other predominantly Catholic country.
 
The big difference is that evangelicals consider Catholics to be non-Christian cultists and damned to hell, whereas Catholics consider evangelicals to be sincere fellow Christians who just do not have all of the gospel. We don’t go out and knock on doors telling lies about evangelicals, but I often get local evangelicals knocking on my door telling terrible lies about the Catholic faith. We just provide answers for those who are interested in coming home to the Church established by Jesus, with all its authority, priesthood and sacraments.
Paul
This sounds so innocuous but is in fact demonstrably false, as evidenced by many posts on Catholic Answers.

Evangelicals, in general, consider the Roman Catholic Church to be in error, but do not deny that there may be Christians within the Roman Catholic Church. Many Evangelicals who post here say so, and even the most virulent Anti-Catholics will often say this.

Many on Catholic Answers cite the Roman Church as the “one true faith” and claim that great Evangelical leaders such as Charles Wesley or Billy Graham will burn in hell. Fair enough, but hardly the attitude that you espouse whereby Roman Catholics consider Evangelicals “sincere fellow Christians”.

By the way, we Evangelicals just provide answers also, only we do so door to door, at our workplaces, in bars, in buses, in football stadiums, in fact anywhere where we are called “to make a defense” of the faith.
 
This sounds so innocuous but is in fact demonstrably false, as evidenced by many posts on Catholic Answers.

Evangelicals, in general, consider the Roman Catholic Church to be in error, but do not deny that there may be Christians within the Roman Catholic Church. Many Evangelicals who post here say so, and even the most virulent Anti-Catholics will often say this.

Many on Catholic Answers cite the Roman Church as the “one true faith” and claim that great Evangelical leaders such as Charles Wesley or Billy Graham will burn in hell. Fair enough, but hardly the attitude that you espouse whereby Roman Catholics consider Evangelicals “sincere fellow Christians”.

By the way, we Evangelicals just provide answers also, only we do so door to door, at our workplaces, in bars, in buses, in football stadiums, in fact anywhere where we are called “to make a defense” of the faith.
Well said. Anyone, Catholic or Protestant, who believes that misconceptions are a one way street is fooling himself.
 
This sounds so innocuous but is in fact demonstrably false, as evidenced by many posts on Catholic Answers.

Evangelicals, in general, consider the Roman Catholic Church to be in error, but do not deny that there may be Christians within the Roman Catholic Church. Many Evangelicals who post here say so, and even the most virulent Anti-Catholics will often say this.

Many on Catholic Answers cite the Roman Church as the “one true faith” and claim that great Evangelical leaders such as Charles Wesley or Billy Graham will burn in hell. Fair enough, but hardly the attitude that you espouse whereby Roman Catholics consider Evangelicals “sincere fellow Christians”.

By the way, we Evangelicals just provide answers also, only we do so door to door, at our workplaces, in bars, in buses, in football stadiums, in fact anywhere where we are called “to make a defense” of the faith.
Really? I’ve never heard anyone say that any particular person will burn in hell. The Catechism of the Catholic Church specifically states the Catholic Church has no idea who will be in hell and it even prays that all souls will come into the presence of God. We can believe the Catholic Church is the One True Faith without at the same time making a judgment on who or who is not in hell. The Catholic catechism in fact states that it expects many non-Catholics have the possibility of attaining heaven. Go read the Catechism and find out what it says before claiming that the Catholic Church believes thus and so.
 
**
Evangelicals, in general, consider the Roman Catholic Church to be in error, but do not deny that ***there may be Christians ***within the Roman Catholic Church. Many Evangelicals who post here say so, and even the most virulent Anti-Catholics will often say this.
.
“There MAY be Christians within the Roman Church”,… and there you have it folks. That pretty much sums it up. My personal, and there are many, experience with evangelicals is this. Almost all, and we have many large ‘congregations’ in our area and growing, are strongly anti-Catholic, they do not think the Roman Church is a Christan Church and spend endless hours discussing just that with their members. In fact, it is a MAJOR part of their platform, used exclusively in our very heavily Catholic region to bring Catholics in. They study Catholic teaching and choose subjects to, I’ll use the word ‘attack’ a weak Catholics beliefs. Things may be different in your area, but that’s the way it is here. But I suspect not. Everything you said about Evangelisms growing is true. Everything you said about the RCC loosing ground is true. But what you said about their ‘attitude towards Catholics’ is not. It is evident on their websites, official websites, not a post, it’s evident on their broadcasts. You said Evangelicals “provide answers’…which are? You said in 'defense of the faith”…which one? You speak of Evangelical as if it’s one coordinated answer to the Roman Church, shoulder to shoulder in defense of ‘the faith’. ‘My’ experience is that Evangelicals each have their own version of ‘the faith’. But it’s seems as long as it’s ‘anything but Catholic’, then that works. The Pentecostal Movement and Evangelical Movement is growing, because it relates better to the individual, it provides more engagement, more feeling, more emotion, but more truth, hardly. The Church’s approach is old and stogy, unless you count the part about following Christs commands like “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.” People are so desperate for an “experience” with God, and hence the Evangelical phenomenon. Look at the mega-church’s, big screens, lights, music, nice seating. It’s an experience, and that’s fine. But you say ‘defense of the truth of the faith’ but I say, what ‘truth’. And from whom do you defend it? Your statement above answers that question. The reason so many people leave the Catholic Church is because they ‘feel’ they can’t get an experience from the Church, it’s boring, not because of some divine ‘truth’ you seem to think lives on in the Evangelical movement. If you really start to study the history and Scripture and Tradition IN IT"S ENTIRETY, you will conclude the Roman Church is the true Church. Don’t kid yourself, people leave the Church looking for ‘a feeling’, the fellowship, the fun, the experience of God, and consequently forget God was always with them, in the Tabernacle, in the Word, in the Eucharist, in the faith of the Saints. Catholic arrogance, that’s funny. Read your posts, your bristling with pride.
 
The big difference is that evangelicals consider Catholics to be non-Christian cultists and damned to hell, whereas Catholics consider evangelicals to be sincere fellow Christians who just do not have all of the gospel. We don’t go out and knock on doors telling lies about evangelicals
No, but you do post lies about evangelicals on the forum, such as the first statement in your post quoted above. Evangelicals as a whole do not think that Catholics as a whole are damned to hell. (BTW, I don’t think you were deliberately lying. But neither are the evangelicals who say false things about Catholicism deliberately lying, on the whole.)

artist3189 apparently can’t see the difference between saying “there may be Christians in the RCC” and saying “there are no Christians in the RCC,” even though on the face of it those are obviously different statements. JesusforMadrid’s phrasing is a relatively polemical version–more common is “some Catholics are Christians” or “Catholics can be Christians.”

These statements sound offensive because you misunderstand what evangelicals mean by “Christians.” A “Christian” in normal evangelical usage is a person in a state of grace. Translate the above into “some Catholics are in a state of grace” and it is a perfectly accurate, orthodox statement. The Catholic Church does not teach that all Catholics are automatically in a state of grace or that all Catholics will go to heaven. So you have no reason to be offended when evangelicals say that not all Catholics are going to heaven. Even when folks like JesusforMadrid express doubts as to how many Catholics are in a state of grace and put Catholicism at the bottom of the list of churches they’d like to see people join, they are doing no more than conservative Catholics do with regard to Baptists, say.

I repeat what I said earlier–for most evangelicals, the Church is simply an instrument for saving souls (and I completely agree that this is a horribly inadequate concept of the Church). If the Catholic Church is doing a bad job, then evangelicals have no reservations about pitching in.

And there’s no reasonable dispute that Catholicism does on the whole do a rather bad job of “internal evangelism.” Not as bad as evangelicals think (because they judge by their own narrow and culturally limited standards), but bad enough in all conscience. I don’t think the methods evangelical Protestants use to deal with that situation are the right ones, but the plain fact is that many of the people evangelicals convert in Catholic countries are not people who are leading a good Christian life by any standard.

Edwin
 
This sounds so innocuous but is in fact demonstrably false, as evidenced by many posts on Catholic Answers.

Evangelicals, in general, consider the Roman Catholic Church to be in error, but do not deny that there may be Christians within the Roman Catholic Church. Many Evangelicals who post here say so, and even the most virulent Anti-Catholics will often say this.

Many on Catholic Answers cite the Roman Church as the “one true faith” and claim that great Evangelical leaders such as Charles Wesley or Billy Graham will burn in hell. Fair enough, but hardly the attitude that you espouse whereby Roman Catholics consider Evangelicals “sincere fellow Christians”.
Please support this statement with citations of specific posts and/or posters. I do not recall ever seeing a single post on this board that claimed that Charles Wesley was in hell or that Billy Graham was on his way there. If you have read such posts, then tell me where to find them (and bear in mind that you said many, so you need to find more than just one or two, though I’m not sure you can even find that). If you haven’t, then you are lying and you need to apologize humbly to the Catholics on this board whom you have slandered.

In Christ,

Edwin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top