Why do you think God allowed Protestantism?

[guanophore]

God created us to have free will.

Jean

Yes, and we see that Adam and Eve used that free will to rebel against God’s plan for them. ARe you comparing this situation to the Reformation?

 

[sambos671]

My dear friend,

This is a BLASPHEMY! I have proven to you otherwise, even using your KJV bible!

Your ranting and raving are not doing you any spiritual good on any level.

If I were to ask you to describe the meaning of the entire bible in a single word, would not that word be LOVE?

It is difficult to think of you as a Christian with the content of lies, mis-understandings, and mis-represenations you are putting forth.

I have invested much time and prayer in my post to you, and you have yet to respond to a single truth I have sharred.

What are you afraid of?

Come Holy Spirit, fill our minds and hearts with love and understanding! God bless you,

PJM m.c.

First the word I would use to describe the entire bible is salvation.

2nd you haven’t proven anything to me specifically using any bible (BTW I’m not KJO). If you want to refer me to a specific post that you made proving something regarding this topic then place the link so I can read it. The Pharisees also called Jesus a blasphemer but it didn’t change the fact that they missed the point of Torah. I’m basically saying the samething. Many Catholics miss the point of Catholicism and do not demonstrate Jesus. So people leave the Church looking for faith in action. I suspect you’ve done more ranting than I.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

House cleaning? “The gates of hell will come against the Church of Jesus Christ but they will never prevail”.

Protestantism is a proof, why the One Holy Catholic Apostolic church remains unchanged these 2000 years. And Protestantism continues to splinter off into new and different Christian schools of biblical interpretations and theologies.

Just as one Angel fell, The tribe of Dan was lost, Jesus lost one apostle, so it follows The body of Jesus Christ his Catholic church will lose one, when one will be left, another will be taken.

 

[SIA]

House cleaning? “The gates of hell will come against the Church of Jesus Christ but they will never prevail”.

Protestantism is a proof, why the One Holy Catholic Apostolic church remains unchanged these 2000 years. And Protestantism continues to splinter off into new and different Christian schools of biblical interpretations and theologies.

Just as one Angel fell, The tribe of Dan was lost, Jesus lost one apostle, so it follows The body of Jesus Christ his Catholic church will lose one, when one will be left, another will be taken.

What about all of the churches in the Bible? Which one of those is right?

 

[SIA]

When we are done here, let’s do a thread on why God allowed Catholicism.

Christianity is being crucified with Christ. There is nothing easy about it apart from the grace of God whether one is Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant.

distracted, I think you really want to reach Protestants. One thing that stands in the way are posts like this that convey the message that you regard Protestantism as a filthy thing to be regarded, if at all, at arm’s length with repugnance and disgust. Not a way to win friends and influence people, particularly as many Protestant communities actually are a lot closer to the Catholic position than many Catholics are. We are regarded, officially in Church teaching, as fellow-Christians and brothers, but then there are those who regard us as unclean illegitimate rebels and posts like yours do nothing towards reconciliation. I may have erred in taking you off my Ignore list.

Great post. This is exactly what I thought of it and what I think of many other posts of this nature.

 

[jmcrae]

What about all of the churches in the Bible? Which one of those is right?

If you are referring to the ones listed in the Book of Revelation, or the ones to whom St. Paul and the other Apostles were writing, these were all in full communion with the One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, headed by Peter and the Apostles, and their successors, as time went on - as evidenced by the fact that the Apostles had sufficient authority over them to be writing them letters telling them what to do, how to behave, and what they were doing wrong.

But if the Apostles had no authority over any of them - if they had independent jurisdiction - then why bother with all the letters?

 

[NonCatholic]

Reading through these posts…very very sad. There is only a remnant, no matter the “Christian” denomination. Even in this forum, there will only be a remnant who will be saved.

 

[guanophore]

It appears to be much the same kind of love that many Catholics show Protestants here and besides, what the poster said was true. If you wish to speak about the Catholic child abuse sex scandal, I would gladly offer that there have been 107 Catholic clergy members that have been convicted of the such abuse. Can you produce any information of a scandal of that magnitude in any Protestant church?

Sure, but what does either one have to do with the topic?

Thanks for your response. It certainly is funny that I didn’t hear a word about any of these in the news media.

It does not surprise me at all. I am certain that Satan knows where attack will be the most effective. That is why he aims at those who have given their lives to God.

It’s harder to document the abuse cases for Protestants because you guys are so fragmented.

Let’s try to stay on topic, can we? Is someone here suggesting that the Protestant reformation was caused by Catholic sex scandals?

I could make the same case for Catholics worldwide.

You could, but it would be irrelevant. It is the teaching that is unified, not necessarily the collection of people who don’t understand it or follow it.

 

[SIA]

Sure, but what does either one have to do with the topic?

It has to do with being charitable which I think is very attributable to the topic.

 

[guanophore]

He didn’t allow it, He mandated it and brought it about as a necessary reformation of His church.

We hold the truth in earthen vessels, we are human, we are fallen, there will always be sin, wrong-headedness, schism, but there remains only one church, not defined by pedigree or episcopal affiliation and this is the great truth to be sifted from all the mess of the history of the church.

This is an amazing way to refer to the bride of Christ. Such a statement seems to reflect a lack of understanding that the Church is not the collection of fallible men who are attached to her. Yes ,it does include these, who are responsible for the messes, but the Church, the Holy Bride of Christ of which He is the Head, and the Holy Spirit the Soul, cannot be corrupted.

How can protestantism lead people to God? How can disobedience lead people to God? There are no different ways to God. The only way to God is the Catholic Church. God cannot be illogical and cannot give us different ways to be saved: for some people it’s buddism, for others hinduism, protestantism or paganism. It doesn’t work that way. People believe in lies and easy solutions.

It is not disobedience, but the Holy Spirit that leads people to God. God is not deterred by lies and disobedience. He can even speak through the mouth of a donkey! God can lead people to Himself however He desires. He gave us the Church to guide, protect, instruct and shepherd us, however, He is also able to do these things outside the visible boundaries of the Church.

 

[SIA]

You could, but it would be irrelevant. It is the teaching that is unified, not necessarily the collection of people who don’t understand it or follow it.

Isn’t that what Protestants here say as well?

 

[jmcrae]

Isn’t that what Protestants here say as well?

Each Protestant adheres to a set of doctrines and strives to follow them as best he can - the difference is, each group of Protestants has its own unique set of doctrines - the Institutes of Calvin, the Scots’ Confession, the Westminster Confession, the Seven Fundamentals, or what have you - different from every other group of Protestants, whereas Catholics are striving to follow one common set of doctrines - whether Franciscan, or Jesuit, or Carmelite, or just plain secular, we are all following the same Code of Canon Law and the same Catechism, which contains the same doctrines that Christ gave to the Apostles, with no changes for the sake of fashion, etc.

 

[guanophore]

People who have left the Catholic Church have done so because of an absence of Christ.  Many Catholics recieve the Body and Blood and are only eating and drinking their own condemnation.

I agree with you entirely. I think that most people who leave have already separated themselves from Christ through mortal sin,and refusal to obey the teachings of the Church. I also hear people say (including myself, at one time) that they left because they were “hungry” for God’s word. Well, one who hungers in the Catholic Church can only do so because they are not perceiving the Body and the Blood.

How many Catholics are baptized such? How many have recieved 1st Communion? How many have been Confirmed? All of them saved except the ones too young to do so. How many Catholics voted for Obama against the teachng of Parish priest and still recieve communion? How many Catholics are divorsed? How many Catholics have commited adultery? How many priest have abused people? How many Popes sitting in Peter’s Chair have ordered murders? How many Bishops have had illigitamate Children? Jesus surely isn’t in these acts! Humble people in search of Jesus find that too many Catholics have taken their covenant for granted and forgoten Jesus altogether!

I agree with what you are saying here, but what it basically says is that people leave because their neighbor is sinful. This is not an acceptable reason to abandon the Apostolic Faith.

The ones who become they go looking for Jesus and are blessed for it.  I would put up an average protestant's knowledge of Scripture to the average Catholic.  Which is Strange for the CCC states that Sacred Scripture work hand in hand with Tradition.  Many Catholics rely soley on tradition making the so called same error of Protestants who rely soley on Scripture.  Certainly one should not be without the other!  Yet how many Catholics know Scripture?

It is a sad fact that many Catholics do not know their scripture. This is one reason that many leave.

 How many catholics would rather bury ST. Joseph in their yard to sell their house?

This is a red herring, since it is against Church teaching and amounts to a superstition. Leaving the Church because one’s neighbor is superstitious is also not acceptable.

None of these points you raise, however, addresses the topic as much as it does the sad state of American Catholicism.

 

[sambos671]

agree with what you are saying here, but what it basically says is that people leave because their neighbor is sinful. This is not an acceptable reason to abandon the Apostolic Faith.

How can they leave the Apostolic faith if they never knew what it was to begin with? People don’t start Catechized. Largly they are ignorant of true apostolic teaching. People know what they experienced and if the body of Christ that they’ve experienced was secular and not upholding true apostolic teaching in their lives then people will respond negatively to it. But here’s the rub the Liturgy that they hear teaches the truth and Protestants teach the bible so they hear the truth and its familiar but they see the protestants life styles their devotion and love for God and what do they think. Ah here is the Truth so the Catholic church is wrong. Without fully knowing what they are thinking because they’ve never fully learned Catholic teaching. So they listen to Jesus’ word directly from scripture and live according to it as best as they can with the knowledge they have. So since this is how I believe it occures who do you blame the individuals themselves? Their families? The teachers of their Catachisms? The church is a community effort so it falls on the "neighbor. The person in search of Jesus knows what they are looking for because they’ve heard it from the Church but not have seen it in action.

 

[guanophore]

That the Reformation happened is a failure of the Church - not the original Reformers.

Well, it is both! Rebellion is never right. All the Reformers were Catholic,and instead of renewing the Church in holiness, they went out to form their own churches.

He didn’t allow it, He mandated it and brought it about as a necessary reformation of His church.

God never mandates separation and division in HIs body. The Church is purified through suffering, when the saints embrace suffering for Him.

 

[guanophore]

What about all of the churches in the Bible? Which one of those is right?

There is only one church in the Bible. It is Catholic. It was the only one for a millenia when the shortcomings of frail humans caused divisions in the Body.

Isn’t that what Protestants here say as well?

No, I think that by and large, Protestants admit that there is not unity of teaching among themselves.

 

[Steadfast]

But guano, this is the mystery of the incarnation: Christ is God made flesh.

In the same way the church is fallible, made up of fallen men and women, awaiting the return of Jesus to take her to wed.

That image of the bride and the bridegroom is very old. Israel is often depicted as the espoused of Yahweh and yet she is always portrayed as being faithless and falling away. In Christ, Israel now includes believing Gentiles, but she is no less faithless, fallen, etc.

What she has now though, is the Holy Spirit in her, testifying to her so that she is never wholly fallen away.

The idea that the church must be blameless appears to be an historical convenience quickly discarded or modified when examples of actual history come up.

The reality of history is that the church is a collection of sinful men and women who have made just about every mistake that can be made.

Making a distinction between The Church and the sinners in her is a kind of ecclesiological Nestorianism it seems to me; something like distinguishing between the Divine and human Natures in Christ such that the one is real while the other is a kind of remora, just hanging on to it.

 

[ForMary]

We all have free will. We are free to chose where we worship and what we worship and how we worship, and to change what we worship. When we have the truth revealed to us, we have to consent to adhere to that truth.

Every single non catholic christian I know in real life has made it their mission to tell me exactly what they think of me and the Catholic Church. Friendly is NOT a word that readily springs to mind.

Amen and Amen.

 

[Truthstalker]

Well, it is both! Rebellion is never right. All the Reformers were Catholic,and instead of renewing the Church in holiness, they went out to form their own churches.

I find this naive. They did not attempt to form churches. Rather, the secularized and corrupt hierarchy excluded them.

I am pursuing, among other things, the idea that the reformers saved Catholicism. The popes and the hierarchy were so corrupted and compromised by the culture, politically and economically, that Catholicism would have died off from its own weight without the Reformation. Catholics tend to forget what things were like. While Protestants may magnify the abuses, and Catholics minimize them, there were real and substantial problems arising from the lack of any real religious leadership from Rome. Leo X was not exactly ideal leadership. He was not interested in reform. Rather, any interest he might have had was in crushing any reform. Without the stimulus of the reformation the Catholic Church might simply have been absorbed into the culture.

Catholic naivete regarding their own past only eases Protestant dismissal of any relevance of Catholic claims. To say that the Reformation was simply a rebellion is a misleading simplification, a false witness, and a sugar-coating of history. You simply sound ignorant of history when you say these things. Perhaps you have been listening to too much Catholic propaganda.

 

[jmcrae]

I find this naive. They did not attempt to form churches. Rather, the secularized and corrupt hierarchy excluded them.

They were invited many times to discuss their issues with the heirarchy. They refused. They promulgated various heresies, and found themselves excommunicated.

I am pursuing, among other things, the idea that the reformers saved Catholicism. The popes and the hierarchy were so corrupted and compromised by the culture, politically and economically, that Catholicism would have died off from its own weight without the Reformation.

There were a great many things going on at the same time - the Muslims were attacking Spain from the south, and it seemed like a higher priority to save Spain than to cuddle the egos of what seemed to them like a few errant monks to the north - they read over the demands, found them to be heretical, and forthwith excommunicated the lot of them, because there were other pressing matters at hand - guys in turbans with guns and knives trying to break down the front door - so yeah, they were a little rushed, and probably didn’t nuance their responses in the most diplomatic fashion.

Catholics tend to forget what things were like. While Protestants may magnify the abuses, and Catholics minimize them, there were real and substantial problems arising from the lack of any real religious leadership from Rome.

What more would you have had them do? The Inquisitions were in full swing already, and the politically/religiously corrupt were being rooted out and burned at the stake. St. Teresa of Avila was making her women go around in bare feet and take no visitors whatsoever, to avoid being polluted by this world. St. Ignatius of Loyola was sending his men to the Americas and to Japan to convert the heathens, often at the cost of their own lives.

Leo X was not exactly ideal leadership.

And yet, he was responsible for the Sistine Chapel.

He was not interested in reform.

Well, he was not interested in heresy, nor of being falsely accused of things he wasn’t actually doing.

Rather, any interest he might have had was in crushing any reform. Without the stimulus of the reformation the Catholic Church might simply have been absorbed into the culture.

I doubt that - yes, there were the problems that occur when a poor region suddenly becomes rich through industrialization, but the Church was already dealing with them, well before the Protestants came along.