Why does virtually every non-Catholic religion target Catholics for conversion?
- Status
C
CWBetts
Guest
No. More than half of all Christians are Catholic. It is a fact.In other parts of the world, however - not so. E.g.Nepal. And even tbe UK
T
traillius
Guest
I wonder why baptists don’t target methodists, or lutherans go after anglicans. Hmmm…
4
4Squarebaby
Guest
But they do Mormons, JWs, INC and the like. Perhaps because those also claim to be “the one true” and are led by a proclaimed living prophets or other forms of infailable leadership?
Some do target other ofcourse. Every ministry has someone running a counter ministry to it. They may believe all others to be wrong but a specific other is seen as particularly dangerous and attracts most the counter ministers attention.
F
fbl9
Guest
in my area we have the catholic church which has been in town for 100yrs and the pentacostal church which was started around the same time but has since shut down due to lack of attendence,when the pentacostal church closed its members went to the church that was started by one of the their ex-ministers…who left the pentacostal church because some of the people there disagreed with his teachings,yet none came to the Catholic church
…why go to a church that was started by the one who you claimed to be in error,yet ingore the other church which you also claim to be in error.is there such a thing as going to where one thinks there is “less” error?
I
IowaJay
Guest
Because Lutherans and Anglicans are already in full communion with each other in the United States, Canada, and in Northern Europe.
Even in the reformation era, some of Luther’s harshest criticisms are of the anabaptists, and those who followed Zwingli.
Jon
C
CWBetts
Guest
A little off topic, but what keeps the Lutherans and Episopelians from reunion with the Holy See?
I can’t speak for the Episcopal Church, but for Lutherans generally:
- Complete reconciliation on Justification: The JDDJ is a great start.
- The primacy of the papacy, and infallibility.
- Reconciliation of beliefs regarding Purgatory and saintly Intercession.
- Consensus on the nature of the real presence, and the number of sacraments.
Jon
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
I probably wouldn’t and that probably isn’t fair. I think of baptists as belonging to dozens of smaller groups, but belonging I guess to the Greater Baptist Federation. (my appelation). I would agree that some in these groups may unfairly castigate Roman Catholics. I believe that the very few instances where I was admonished was by groups such as this. I generally think of Methodists, Presbyterians, Anglicans, Episcopals, Lutherans, as mainline. Again that may be unfair.
Btw, St.Thomas More is one of my more favorite saints. Largely because I was a lawyer. I have a very very detailed biography of him. He fell a bit inmy estimation after reading his rather vicious attacks on Luther and others. To disagree is one thing, but his vileness was really over the top. Still I deeply admire his sacrifice for his beliefs.
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
But you are not differing from me. You simply referred to pastors in “your pulpits” and teaching in “your faith gatherings”. As you rightly point out here, those are not mine at all, since I am Episcopalian. I cannot speak for the religious right, which is where I would place many of the groups you listed. I have as much difficulty with them, albeit for different reasons as you do probably. And I would probably agree that I wouldn’t want children indoctrinated in fundamentalist teaching which I find incorrect. However, much of this can be corrected at home, and I don’t think children in general are going to suffer from attending a particular function or other. That is being a bit paranoid in my opinion.
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
How incredibly ironic. You object, rightly so, when nonRC’s don’t consider you to be a Christian, and yet, you have your own list of those YOU don’t consider Christian. So you do consider Christian the people who claim you aren’t, but not the people who don’t?
I may have to sit still and let that one filter for a while. You do realize what you have said don’t you?
C
CWBetts
Guest
Its very difficult to castigate More for his attacks on Lutherans because the 17th century was a very differnt time. You are Anglican, I am Catholic. Neither of us runs the risk of being burned at the stake, beheaded, or whatever for our choice of faith tradition. In More’s time, that obviously was not the case. It is one of the reasons I feel blessed for being born where and when I was. The historical and cultural context must be taken into consideration when evaluating people’s actions. I seriouly doubt More would have been as harsh in modern America.
D
dzheremi
Guest
If being “Christian” is to mean anything, we should all have such ‘lists’, in accordance with Church teaching. Mormons are not Christian, Jehovah’s Witnesses are not Christians, and certainly Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, New Agers, etc. are all not Christian.
“Christian” means something! In the Western Church, it has been argued that we are rapidly losing our sense of just what that is, but it can still be there at least in the individual. And now you want to take that away because…? It hurts your feelings? You don’t think it’s “fair”? What a world it would be if there were never any excommunications or anathemas pronounced. Maybe the Ebionites, Arians, and others would have increased in number. Maybe we too would be Gnostics.
Several months ago in confession, Father reminded me of the sin of indifference towards the faith. It can take two main forms:
- Nothing is God
- Everything is God
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
You might be right, Still, I found the language unseemly for anyone professing to be Christian. If as you say, everyone talked that way, well then he must be granted some slack. I never saw evidence of that in other historical readings, but I’m certainly not claiming you are wrong.
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
You have come in a bit late here I think. The thread is about “virtually” all Protestants trying to steal Roman Catholics from their church. Of course the fallacy of such a broad statement has been proven rather handily. Then RC’s went on to talk about some denominations which claim they are not real Christians. The irony of then turning around and making the same claim against others is hysterically funny beyond being so intellectually dishonest as to be absurd.
In reality, one is claiming that another group falsely claims them not to be Christian based on incorrect information about them. One then turns around and claims that others are not Christian based on one’s apparent superior knowledge of some other group. It is unbelievable.
I have not asked anyone to to take away anything or talked about hurt feelings or fairness. . I have no clue where you come by this. You have introduced it on your own, apparently not understanding much of what has transpired on this thread.
Your church has the right to do as it wishes regarding it’s declarations of excommunication and such. But you are simply the pot calling the kettle black when your definitions are true and everyone else’s is false because you say so. It’s laughable.
I defend the RCC against charges of not being Christian. To say so is ludicrous in my opinion. But, on the other hand, a faith that requires defense has some serious problems to start with. Apologetics has gotten a bad name here. People here do not just point out obvious wrong statements and so forth, but now go to the extreme of twisting anything to make the church come out on top. It had resulted in ludicrous results wherein even other Catholics say…whoa. Rome is not the reason that civilization exists, however much She may have contributed to its success.
The ultra orthodox may well end up with the Church, but it will be a small shell of its former self. The short answer, is no one should be telling another they are not Christian. I have no truck with JW’s or many you named, but I surely don’t take it upon myself to claim they are not Christian. It is a shame to hear a Christian say such a thing.
M
Marsha_Adams
Guest
Spirit:
Can a denomination be called Christian if it does not believe that Jesus Christ died for one’s sins? My response is no.
Therefore, at a minimum, in order to be a Christian one must believe Jesus Christ is God (only God can save) and in sin. If one does not believe in sin then one cannot believe that Jesus God saved him/her from sin. If an entire denomination does not believe in both Jesus and sin, it cannot be Christian.
Can a denomination be called Christian if it does not believe that Jesus Christ died for one’s sins? My response is no.
Therefore, at a minimum, in order to be a Christian one must believe Jesus Christ is God (only God can save) and in sin. If one does not believe in sin then one cannot believe that Jesus God saved him/her from sin. If an entire denomination does not believe in both Jesus and sin, it cannot be Christian.
D
dzheremi
Guest
The post you are responding to was not my first in this thread. I have read every page.
I thought this was about all non-Catholic religion? Maybe I’ve misunderstood this thread, then. In an earlier reply, I talked about both Protestants and non-Christians. If this thread seems unfairly focused on Protestants, maybe that’s because Protestants are more likely than others to target Catholics specifically. I don’t think that this is an unfair generalization.
It’s neither dishonest nor absurd. Are you seriously suggesting that because we disagree with others who claim that we are not Christian we can’t then claim that others are not Christian? Do you even know why Catholics claim that certain Protestant groups are not Christian, or do you think that we just like passing judgment on others?
I don’t think it takes any sort of “superior knowledge” to find what is wrong with the groups that the Catholic Church deems to be non-Christian. Usually it is right there in their own literature, whether it is an incorrect and highly unorthodox view of the Trinity (Mormons), denial of Christ’s divinity (certain non-Trinitarians), or some other point.
No it isn’t. It’s monotheism. What are you doing in defending your statements against my post but saying that I am wrong and you are right? Am I going to say that you’re the pot calling the kettle black? No. In fact, I’d much rather you disagree with me when you feel I am in error. A brother cannot stand by ineffectually as his sibling heads into danger, can he?
Hmmm…I wonder what all those councils in the early Church were about, then…
That’s all that we do. The Catholics point out obviously wrong statements to the Protestants, the Orthodox point out obviously wrong statements to the Catholics (or, rather that in their view Catholics are just Protestants with a bit more history behind them), and we all point out obviously wrong statements to the Mormons, Muslims, Hindus, etc (who in turn point out obviously wrong statements to us). Everyone has their own idea of what is or should be seen as “obviously wrong” that is inherited from their faith tradition. That you apparently do not says more about you than it does about any of us.
You can’t be serious…what on Earth makes you think that the truth of the Church is in any way determined by bickering on the internet? No, the Church that Christ founded comes out on top because it is the Church that Christ founded.
This makes absolutely no sense. The “ultra orthodox” are those who make the Church what it is. Those who are willing to stand up and say that some things are right and some things are not and that’s just that.
I think you are wrong here. We absolutely must be willing and ready to do this for the sake of defending the faith. We ought not to delight in it, we ought not to take pride in it, we ought not to feel that we are better than anyone else because of it, and we ought not to make a sport of it, but by the same token we absolutely should not ever shy away from it. When Mormons or Muslims or JW or whoever else come knocking at my door wanting to share a common word with me, you better believe I want to be ready for them. In the spirit of truth and love, not the sort of triumphalism that is often (sadly justifiably) attributed to Catholics.
This is your stance, and I accept it in that context. I just think that it is wrong.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Not to nit-pick, but the ‘Evangelical Lutheran Church in America’ is in full communion with the Episcopal Church. The ‘Luther Church Missouri Synod’ isn’t.
P
Peter_J
Guest
This wasn’t addressed to me, but what the hey …
P.S. On the other hand, I have known Christians – Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant alike – who will basically start jumping up and down and yelling, and other such childish behavior, if anyone suggests that they aren’t Christian. That’s a whole other matter.
I object when people say that I’m not a Christian; and, conversely, I would expect any self-proclaimed Christian to object if I say that he/she is not a Christian. So what’s wrong with that?
P.S. On the other hand, I have known Christians – Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant alike – who will basically start jumping up and down and yelling, and other such childish behavior, if anyone suggests that they aren’t Christian. That’s a whole other matter.
- Status