Why do Protestants presume to know Catholic doctrine and dogmas when they don't really know it?

[eliasaph99]

Cheap grace is actually blasphemy against the Holy Spirit because it denies the need for us to respond to the life giving grace of Jesus Christ… Costly grace on the other hand recognizes our need to “pick up your cross and follow after.” Costly grace recognizes the need to die to self and to die to sin in order to live in Christ.

Seems like “Faith+Works” to me.

 

[patrick457]

Lets not just limit ourselves to just the catechism but the entire fullness of the truth found only in the catholic church. Certianly the Brown Scapular is part of this fullness. You claim that the Brown Scapular is a private revelation that you don’t have to believe. Have you read the promise given to those who wear it?

This promise is also endorsed by the pope. Here it is:
"Another important aspect of wearing the Scapular is the Sabbatine Privilege. This concerns a promise made by Our Lady to Pope John XXII. In a papal letter he issued, he recounted a vision that he had had. He stated that the Blessed Virgin had said to him in this vision, concerning those who wear the Brown Scapular: **“I, the Mother of Grace, shall descend on the Saturday after their death and whomsoever I shall find in Purgatory, I shall free, **so that I may lead them to the holy mountain of life everlasting.”

This is no trivial claim here nor just a mere “private revelation” but a major claim.
If you are a catholic and believe in purgatory and believe also your church cannot err in matters of faith you should wear this scapular. I can’t think of any good reason for a catholic not to wear this. If they don’t, why not?

Because:

-The Carmelites do not generally promulgate the Sabbatine Privilege

-Many Catholics actually do not know or are ignorant of the Scapular and its promises

-The Sabbatine Privilege’s authenticity was contested by many even during past centuries, which led some Popes who ratified the supposed Bull to not comment whether the text or the promises is genuine or not

Of course, there are promises on the Scapular but at least, Mary did not say “You should proclaim that ALL Catholics are to wear this and make it binding unto them” nor did the Pope say “This belief is to hereby a dogma of the Church.” Nor is a Scapular a free ticket to Heaven; wear it and pop! You’ll instantly go straight past the Pearly Gates when you die. You still must have faith on God AND good works (We Catholics are not “works alone”; we are not Zen monks).

Even if a Private Revelation contains a major claim (like the “*The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the *world” statement at Fatima) it is still Private. Private Revelations do not become Public Revelations even if word of it spreads to many people or contains a major claim.

To claim that Public Revelations are still possible is contrary to what the Church teaches, that Public Revelations are complete and was ended at the time of the death of the last Apostle, and that there will be no further Public Revelations until the time the Lord Jesus Christ comes back in glory to judge the living and the dead.

Plus, just because the Pope promulgated it does not necessarily follow that it is a dogma of the Church and thus is binding. Say the Pope’s favorite baseball team is the Red Sox or his favorite color of socks is blue; are all Catholics obligated to have the Red Sox as their favorite baseball team or wear blue socks?

For example, Pope John Paul II supposedly commented at Mel Gibson’s ‘The Passion of the Christ’, ‘It was as it was.’ But does that mean that Catholics are not free whether to like or dislike Mel Gibson’s film or believe there are some historical inaccuracies in it?

 

[justasking4]

Mostly read about it from Scott Hahn and his wife’s conversion story.

Is he an authority in the catholic church that defines what words mean?

 

[adrift]

I looked up the word “veneration” in the dictionary and this what it means honor something or somebody: to honor something or somebody as sacred or special

In the thesaurus it came up with these words:
revere, worship, adore, idolize, esteem, honor, respect, look up to, admire
antonym: disrespect

Worship means-religion treat somebody or something as deity: to treat somebody or something as divine and **show respect by engaging in acts of prayer and devotion **

In the thesaurus it uses these words–adoration, love, reverence, respect, devotion, adulation, veneration
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2004. © 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

So no matter how catholics would like to get around this issue of worshipping Mary and saints, there is no getting around it. Worship is going on.

I looked it up too. What I found was that when the thesaurus used it as worship, worship was not defined as limited to God. The Merriam-Webster thesaurus had no listing for veneration.

Main Entry: worship
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: honoring

Thesaurus.com I would disagree with this difinition but it explains things

 

[justasking4]

Because:

-The Carmelites do not generally promulgate the Sabbatine Privilege

-Many Catholics actually do not know or are ignorant of the Scapular and its promises

-The Sabbatine Privilege’s authenticity was contested by many even during past centuries, which led some Popes who ratified the supposed Bull to not comment whether the text or the promises is genuine or not

Of course, there are promises on the Scapular but at least, Mary did not say “You should proclaim that ALL Catholics are to wear this and make it binding unto them” nor did the Pope say “This belief is to hereby a dogma of the Church.” Nor is a Scapular a free ticket to Heaven; wear it and pop! You’ll instantly go straight past the Pearly Gates when you die. You still must have faith on God AND good works (We Catholics are not “works alone”; we are not Zen monks).

Even if a Private Revelation contains a major claim (like the “*The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the *world” statement at Fatima) it is still Private. Private Revelations do not become Public Revelations even if word of it spreads to many people or contains a major claim.

To claim that Public Revelations are still possible is contrary to what the Church teaches, that Public Revelations are complete and was ended at the time of the death of the last Apostle, and that there will be no further Public Revelations until the time the Lord Jesus Christ comes back in glory to judge the living and the dead.

Plus, just because the Pope promulgated it does not necessarily follow that it is a dogma of the Church and thus is binding. Say the Pope’s favorite baseball team is the Red Sox or his favorite color of socks is blue; are all Catholics obligated to have the Red Sox as their favorite baseball team or wear blue socks?

For example, Pope John Paul II supposedly commented at Mel Gibson’s ‘The Passion of the Christ’, ‘It was as it was.’ But does that mean that Catholics are not free whether to like or dislike Mel Gibson’s film or believe there are some historical inaccuracies in it?

Even though something may not be binding does that mean its not true?
Is not the claim that a person who wears this will be out of purgatory on the first Saturday after their death true for all who wear this scapular?

 

[estesbob]

Even though something may not be binding does that mean its not true?
Is not the claim that a person who wears this will be out of purgatory on the first Saturday after their death true for all who wear this scapular?

I dont know-Why dont you get one and tell us how it works out. You seem to be the only one here who cares in the least about Brown Scapulars.

 

[Teflon93]

I dont know-Why dont you get one and tell us how it works out. You seem to be the only one here who cares in the least about Brown Scapulars.

I’ve got to cop to not even knowing what a Brown Scapular IS.

It’s apparently so essential to the Catholic teaching that there was no reference to it in RCIA.

 

[Teflon93]

Sounds like there is a lot of Druid influence on Protestants.

THAT’s why they celebrate Christmas on December 25th, a known PAGAN holiday!

(Arguing the way Protestants argue regarding icons, praying to saints, and Marian devotion sure is liberating, isn’t it?)

 

[Teflon93]

Well, this makes me fundamentally rethink EVERYTHING about Catholicism—er, not quite:

History
A scapular is a garment worn by religious over the shoulders (scapula), and hanging down in front and back, usually to about the bottom of the habit. It developed as a practical garment, protecting the habit during work, and was in time invested with spiritual significance, consecration or dedication to God.

By analogy to the scapulars of religious, there are small scapulars that are derived from them which represent a particular devotion or spirituality, usually associated with a particular community. Such a scapular is two pieces of cloth (generally about an inch square), connected by cords and worn over the head. It often has a picture or a particular color, depending on the spirituality it stands for.

The best known and most highly esteemed scapular, and the one most favored by the Church, and by the Blessed Virgin in many of her apparitions, is the Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel. It is adapted from the scapular of the Carmelite Order and represents a special Consecration to Our Lady under the title of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel. Those who wear it practice it a special devotion to Mary. In the past this was the Little Office of Our Lady, but today this can be commuted by any priest to the rosary. In addition, the person has a special entrustment of themselves to Mary for their salvation. This, in fact, has been promised to those who faithfully wear the scapular: “Those who die wearing this scapular shall not suffer eternal fire.” This must not be understood superstitiously or magically, but in light of Catholic teaching that perseverance in faith, hope and love are required for salvation. The scapular is a powerful reminder of this Christian obligation and of Mary’s promise to help those consecrated to her obtain the grace of final perseverance.

How precisely does one consult the Brown Scapular to intuit the teachings of the Catholic Church?

The Catechism surely seems a more user-friendly way to figure out what the Church teaches…

 

[estesbob]

I’ve got to cop to not even knowing what a Brown Scapular IS.

It’s apparently so essential to the Catholic teaching that there was no reference to it in RCIA.

Which is exactly the point we have been and trying to make to justasking4 all along. He has such a poor understanding of Catholic teachings and doctrines that he latches onto totally trivial things and try to reach profound conclusions based on them. Scapulars have nothing to do with faith or morals .The Church in neither endorses or condemns them.

However justasking4 is under the mistaken assumption that every word the pope utters is infallible and the fact the a pope said something nice about the Brown scapular puts it on, in his mind, the same level as the doctrines of transubstantiation and the resurrection of Jesus. Like I said you can not have an intelligent conversation with with him until he learns a little bit more about our faith.

 

[DB_AND_ALI]

I never understand this. Why do Protestants especially Ex-Catholics persume to know Catholic Church doctrines and dogma, but they don’t really know it.

1. They think we worship Mary, we don’t.
2. They think think our doctrines are invented doctrines but they aren’t.
3. They think the whatever the Popes says is infallible, when in fact it that infallibility is that the Holy Spirit preserves the Pope from teaching error when speaking moral and faith teaching
4. That the sacrifice of the Mass is re-sacrifice when it isn’t. It is to make presence the sacrifice at the cross which transcends time itself.

These are some false presumption of Protestants of what the Catholic Church supposedly believe. There of course countless others, which they think we believe and professed.

It’s called tradition…for 500 years there has been negligible dialogue between the denominations hence a child born into a protestant family will be indoctrinated. I was one of the lucky ones in that half my family is Presbyterian and the other half Catholic…hence appreciation for both sides. I do however think that our church heirarchy was far , far too inflexible prior to vatican 2 and was also too conservative in their approach to our protestant brotherhood. It’s time to change and reach out…you need to start in your neighborhood and invite a protestant to church OR at the very least don’t shy away from a respectful discussion with your protestant friend.

 

[estesbob]

It’s called tradition…for 500 years there has been negligible dialogue between the denominations hence a child born into a protestant family will be indoctrinated. I was one of the lucky ones in that half my family is Presbyterian and the other half Catholic…hence appreciation for both sides. I do however think that our church heirarchy was far , far too inflexible prior to vatican 2 and was also too conservative in their approach to our protestant brotherhood. It’s time to change and reach out…you need to start in your neighborhood and invite a protestant to church OR at the very least don’t shy away from a respectful discussion with your protestant friend.

Good advice.

 

[ChadS]

One thing I’ve noticed also is that many Protestants, no matter how often their mischaracterizations of Catholicism and Catholic teachings are corrected they typically refuse to admit they were misinformed. Even if they would admit that the actual belief isn’t what they originally thought it to be the tactic is then to say that “regardless Catholics are wrong anyhow.”

Actually, just a couple.

I wish that Catholics would stop saying that God did not ordain the Reformation to correct the errors in Catholicism. None of our churches teach that.

Do you see the problem here?

…

My question for you Atemi is what was the point of the Reformation then if it wasn’t to “correct the errors in Catholicism.” If God didn’t ordain the Reformation then who or what ordained it? Also, if the Reformation wasn’t ordained by God then why belong or better yet why not join one that was ordained by God?

ChadS

 

[justasking4]

Well, this makes me fundamentally rethink EVERYTHING about Catholicism—er, not quite:

How precisely does one consult the Brown Scapular to intuit the teachings of the Catholic Church?

The Catechism surely seems a more user-friendly way to figure out what the Church teaches…

Isn’t the Brown Scapular part of the fullness of the truth that is found in the catholic church?

 

[justasking4]

I dont know-Why dont you get one and tell us how it works out. You seem to be the only one here who cares in the least about Brown Scapulars.

YAWN

 

[estesbob]

Isn’t the Brown Scapular part of the fullness of the truth that is found in the catholic church?

No.

 

[Teflon93]

Isn’t the Brown Scapular part of the fullness of the truth that is found in the catholic church?

Umm, no—it’s a garment.

 

[justasking4]

Umm, no—it’s a garment.

That is true but the claim that a person who wears it will be out of purgatory on the 1st Saturday after their death. That claim is either true or false. It must be part of the fullness of the truth found in the catholic church otherwise they would have renounced this and said it was false.

 

[Teflon93]

That is true but the claim that a person who wears it will be out of purgatory on the 1st Saturday after their death. That claim is either true or false. It must be part of the fullness of the truth found in the catholic church otherwise they would have renounced this and said it was false.

And how do you intend to prove or disprove this claim, even presuming is a perfectly accurate paraphrasing of true Catholic teaching?

You could start I suppose with the Catechism on Purgatory:

1030 All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.

1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.606 The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:607

As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.608

1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."609 From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.610 The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:

Let us help and commemorate them. If Job’s sons were purified by their father’s sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them.611

and

1472 To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the “eternal punishment” of sin. On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the “temporal punishment” of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin. A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain.84

1473 The forgiveness of sin and restoration of communion with God entail the remission of the eternal punishment of sin, but temporal punishment of sin remains. While patiently bearing sufferings and trials of all kinds and, when the day comes, serenely facing death, the Christian must strive to accept this temporal punishment of sin as a grace. He should strive by works of mercy and charity, as well as by prayer and the various practices of penance, to put off completely the “old man” and to put on the "new man."85

Now, the brown scapular is nowhere referenced herein. Absent context (was the Pope granting an indulgence related to an order which wore this garment, perhaps?), one may hardly address the rightness or wrongness of whatever claim you’re making.

Of course, you also need to understand the difference between temporal and eternal punishment, the true nature of indulgences vs Luther’s profane propaganda regarding the same, and what truly constitutes infallible statements on the part of the Pope.

In order to aid in your quest, I’m including a link to the online version of the Catechism here.

 

[Atemi]

My question for you Atemi is what was the point of the Reformation then if it wasn’t to “correct the errors in Catholicism.” If God didn’t ordain the Reformation then who or what ordained it? Also, if the Reformation wasn’t ordained by God then why belong or better yet why not join one that was ordained by God?

The Reformation was ordained by God. That is what we believe.

But Catholics insist on saying that it was not ordained by God when we don’t even teach that. Even after corrected they contiinue to say it is not ordained by God.

Why do Catholics presume to know Protestant doctrine when they don’t really know it?

(If you read the OP through non-Catholic eyes, you would see how it sounds the same)