Why Is Catholicism So Unattractive to Evangelicals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JustaServant
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Semi-ditto, my experience was IRL. I had absolutely zero opinion on Catholics or Catholicism until my family joined our first Parrish as a family. That is where I was turned off to, what I see as, exclusionary portion of Catholicism.

It was putting off, and quite confusing, to see my name in the Church directory, on our Church mailbox, Collection envelops, mailers, etc…with an asterisk to denote that I, in fact wasn’t Catholic. When talking with the Father when joining, when he found out I wasn’t Catholic he wanted zero to do with me. At festival time, all the teen and adult members of the Church were assigned duties for the weekend…except myself and the other one or two non-Catholics.

Now, that was my first real experience with Catholicism. Is it getting better…ya it is. We have a new Father now. Is he keen on me, not 100% sure yet but he seems to be much more open. Do I feel comfortable at Mass yet. Not really, but it’s getting better. Has asking questions to the Father helped, yes…it has (once we got passed the I don’t want to convert part). Has this website helped. Ya, a whole lot. Have I been a touch offended a couple of times…sure. But for every post like that, here have been 5 more like FC34’s that are civil in nature and have been part of a healthy discussion.

Coming from my non-denominational background this is all quite different. My first experience with Catholicism was one of exclusion where growing up all that I learned was inclusion. That has been something that I struggle with, and maybe I’m missing something.

If there’s anything I’ve noticed, we’re probably all (myself included) guilty of throwing too large of blanket over too many people.

Not 100% sure how much sense I made there, but I’ll stick with it.
Two thoughts …

First, thank you for talking about Catholicism IRL – it’s amazing how tired I can get of people saying "Well, somebody called CatholicPerson1234 said such and such on such and such webpage, so what that tells us about Catholicism is … " :rolleyes:

Second, fwiw, there’s a parish where I live that I now make a point not to go to, because of judgmental/triumphalistic/whatever comments that I have heard the priest (yes, the priest) make when I have been there in the past. I’ll grant you that’s rather troubling (imagine if there were, oh say, a kindergarten class where the worst behaved person in the class was the teacher :hmmm:) but the thing is, that’s one parish out of about a dozen in the area, so we can hardly conclude that it is representative.

Hope this helps. 🙂 :cool:
 
Regarding the bolded: Ever consider people have their own lives, families, jobs, real life friends, a need for recreation and rest, a lack of obsession with internet discussions?
Yes to all of the above. My original comment, however, was simply a joke in the context of a series of previous postings.
Sometimes your posts seem to me like they’re coming from two different people, FollowChrist34.
Given the rather predictable, sad “us vs. them” tone of a vast majority of the posts on the thread (from either “side”), I will take this one as a compliment - a high one indeed - casting pearls territory even.
 
“Catholicism isn’t a website”
“American Evangelicals–So much more than TV shows and mega churches”.

You both made me giggle this morning. Thanks.
 
Point two is off , we don’t believe in anything goes , but we do believe that there are differences in belief within the Catholic Church . we do believe in churches within the Catholic Church to keep pure doctrine though .
Point one is correct .
As far not believing in ‘anything goes,’ I suppose it depends on what Evangelical church you belong to. Or what Lutheran church or branch you belong to (are the various Lutheran churches called confessions? I don’t know the proper term to use). Don’t the various Lutheran churches believe different things?

It’s not much different in Catholicism, though, where Catholics have various beliefs, the difference being that Catholics belong to the same church. In Catholicism, it’s okay now to dissent - there aren’t all that many of us die-hards left who absolutely believe in everything that the Catholic Church teaches.
 
Point two is off , we don’t believe in anything goes , but we do believe that there are differences in belief within the Catholic Church . we do believe in churches within the Catholic Church to keep pure doctrine though .
Point one is correct .
Re point two - does the ELCA for example, have “pure” or “impure” doctrine? If a Christian belongs to a denomination of “impure” doctrine (my word, not yours, by which I mean doctrine that violates the Word of God) is he still in the “Catholic Church” (your definition)?

(Is this what Luther meant when he said reason was a whore? I don’t think so but my guess is that we are supposed to allow for multiplicity of interpretations here.)
 
As far not believing in ‘anything goes,’ I suppose it depends on what Evangelical church you belong to. Or what Lutheran church or branch you belong to (are the various Lutheran churches called confessions? I don’t know the proper term to use). Don’t the various Lutheran churches believe different things?

It’s not much different in Catholicism, though, where Catholics have various beliefs, the difference being that Catholics belong to the same church. In Catholicism, it’s okay now to dissent - there aren’t all that many of us die-hards left who absolutely believe in everything that the Catholic Church teaches.
It isn’t “all right” to dissent with the teachings of the Catholic Church. The fact that a lot do it, does not make it right. One of the unattractive elements of the Church are those that pick and choose what doctrines that believe.
 
And it was reported to Him, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wishing to see You.” But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the Word of God and do it.” Luke 8:21
 
It isn’t “all right” to dissent with the teachings of the Catholic Church. The fact that a lot do it, does not make it right. One of the unattractive elements of the Church are those that pick and choose what doctrines that believe.
And who is going to tell them that they can’t dissent?
 
And who is going to tell them that they can’t dissent?
First of all, their conscience. Each person will be judged individually, by God. But bishops have a responsibility to affirm the Truth, to point out that it sins against integrity for someone to claim to teach for the Church, then teach something different.

But what distinguishes Catholicism from Evangelicalism is the Magisterium. Individual Catholics may fail to affirm the Truth, either laity, priests, bishops. But the Magisterium offers the Truth. The reliability of the Magisterium is not affected by how many Catholics (and non-Catholics) follow it. For any one Christian, it is always a reliable guide.

Some evangelicals are taking a closer look at the Magisterium. They have seen some formerly reliable denominations, some still claiming “evangelical”, adopt positions on theology and morality that most evangelicals know to be totally wrong. A few decades ago evangelicals would say “those liberals over there are the Mainline Protestants. We are totally different from them because we are guided by Scripture.” Now so many seemingly biblical individuals and denominations that once opposed the “Mainline” have now joined them more or less.

If you are using what seemed a reliable steering wheel - call it Sola Scriptura - it is disconcerting to see so many others using the same steering wheel go astray; still quoting the Bible. The Magisterium is like a lighthouse on the edge of the land. It sheds light, and it doesn’t move, so you can chart your position. Evangelicalism is like a floating lighthouse, or floating lighthouses. Yes, it sheds some lights, but…
 
First of all, their conscience. Each person will be judged individually, by God. But bishops have a responsibility to affirm the Truth, to point out that it sins against integrity for someone to claim to teach for the Church, then teach something different.

But what distinguishes Catholicism from Evangelicalism is the Magisterium. Individual Catholics may fail to affirm the Truth, either laity, priests, bishops. But the Magisterium offers the Truth. The reliability of the Magisterium is not affected by how many Catholics (and non-Catholics) follow it. For any one Christian, it is always a reliable guide.

Some evangelicals are taking a closer look at the Magisterium. They have seen some formerly reliable denominations, some still claiming “evangelical”, adopt positions on theology and morality that most evangelicals know to be totally wrong. A few decades ago evangelicals would say “those liberals over there are the Mainline Protestants. We are totally different from them because we are guided by Scripture.” Now so many seemingly biblical individuals and denominations that once opposed the “Mainline” have now joined them more or less.

If you are using what seemed a reliable steering wheel - call it Sola Scriptura - it is disconcerting to see so many others using the same steering wheel go astray; still quoting the Bible. The Magisterium is like a lighthouse on the edge of the land. It sheds light, and it doesn’t move, so you can chart your position. Evangelicalism is like a floating lighthouse, or floating lighthouses. Yes, it sheds some lights, but…
You’ve provided information about the magisterium, but it doesn’t really address my question about who is going to tell the dissenters that they can’t (or should not) dissent.
 
You’ve provided information about the magisterium, but it doesn’t really address my question about who is going to tell the dissenters that they can’t (or should not) dissent.
That task is assigned to the person who has proper ecclesiastic jurisdiction.
That may be the pastor, bishop, superior of the religious order, etc. In some cases it is tricky; a school or hospital may have one person who is administrator, but a priest is designated as chaplain on behalf of the bishop, to assure its Catholicity.

What should you do if you are aware of dissent, but you aren’t in the chain of command? If you know the “dissenter”, show them why they are wrong. If they are simply misinformed, show them the Catechism, etc. If that is not possible, notify their superior. There is a grievance procedure through Canon Law, if you have a little help. The problem is most “dissenters” are careful not to exactly deny a dogma, but do enormous damage. All you can do is discourage their books, or inviting them to speak, at any church or institution in your area.

It always helps to write a letter to your bishop, documenting when some major dissent happens locally. He may not know about it. If he knows about it, your letter gives him some ammunition, or a caveat, he may be able to later use. The problem is that there are other things going on in your diocese, maybe involving religious orders, lawsuits, or stuff you don’t know about. The bishop can’t address all the problems this year.

It helps if you can show some specific effects: not “this person is a dissenter” but: “our prolife group has been emphasizing the urgency of A, B, and C; our efforts are undermined by this person speaking at this parish, publicized by the diocese, when on September 1 she said “abortion is above my pay grade”. I request speakers be screened for prolife fidelity.” (this example is not made up, I am addressing it with my diocese). In my example, you might think of that speaker as dissenting, but more accurate to say her actions are imprudent. And imprudent for any Catholic agent to publicize her in any way.

Your letters and emails have more effect than you realize, even though you don’t see immediate improvement. But if you were to go outside, and criticize the bishop to the media, as many are doing now, that does more harm than good. Non Catholics would see your action, not as addressing the problem of dissent, but as addressing the “problem” of bishops. If you convince them that bishops are a “problem” they would jump to the conclusion the Magisterium is a “problem”. You know, and I know, there are 2 different things here, but evangelicals won’t know that. “If bishops are a problem, then I will stay away from churches that have bishops.”
 
That task is assigned to the person who has proper ecclesiastic jurisdiction.
That may be the pastor, bishop, superior of the religious order, etc. In some cases it is tricky; a school or hospital may have one person who is administrator, but a priest is designated as chaplain on behalf of the bishop, to assure its Catholicity.

What should you do if you are aware of dissent, but you aren’t in the chain of command? If you know the “dissenter”, show them why they are wrong. If they are simply misinformed, show them the Catechism, etc. If that is not possible, notify their superior. There is a grievance procedure through Canon Law, if you have a little help. The problem is most “dissenters” are careful not to exactly deny a dogma, but do enormous damage. All you can do is discourage their books, or inviting them to speak, at any church or institution in your area.

It always helps to write a letter to your bishop, documenting when some major dissent happens locally. He may not know about it. If he knows about it, your letter gives him some ammunition, or a caveat, he may be able to later use. The problem is that there are other things going on in your diocese, maybe involving religious orders, lawsuits, or stuff you don’t know about. The bishop can’t address all the problems this year.

It helps if you can show some specific effects: not “this person is a dissenter” but: “our prolife group has been emphasizing the urgency of A, B, and C; our efforts are undermined by this person speaking at this parish, publicized by the diocese, when on September 1 she said “abortion is above my pay grade”. I request speakers be screened for prolife fidelity.” (this example is not made up, I am addressing it with my diocese). In my example, you might think of that speaker as dissenting, but more accurate to say her actions are imprudent. And imprudent for any Catholic agent to publicize her in any way.

Your letters and emails have more effect than you realize, even though you don’t see immediate improvement. But if you were to go outside, and criticize the bishop to the media, as many are doing now, that does more harm than good. Non Catholics would see your action, not as addressing the problem of dissent, but as addressing the “problem” of bishops. If you convince them that bishops are a “problem” they would jump to the conclusion the Magisterium is a “problem”. You know, and I know, there are 2 different things here, but evangelicals won’t know that. “If bishops are a problem, then I will stay away from churches that have bishops.”
Dealing with dissent is not the job or responsibility of laypersons. If the hierarchy, for whatever reason, don’t want to deal with dissent, that’s their choice. It isn’t an easy thing to deal with. They’ll also have to deal with the ramifications, too. I’ll think we’ll see that in the upcoming synod. But that’s another subject.

I’ve begun to realize that there are probably quite a few Evangelicals who are better at living up to God’s laws than Catholics are. So much for evangelization. I think that Catholics need to be evangelized first, so that they have clear understanding of Church teachings, minus the relativism.
 
Dealing with dissent is not the job or responsibility of laypersons. If the hierarchy, for whatever reason, don’t want to deal with dissent, that’s their choice. It isn’t an easy thing to deal with. They’ll also have to deal with the ramifications, too. I’ll think we’ll see that in the upcoming synod. But that’s another subject.

I’ve begun to realize that there are probably quite a few Evangelicals who are better at living up to God’s laws than Catholics are. So much for evangelization. I think that Catholics need to be evangelized first, so that they have clear understanding of Church teachings, minus the relativism.
Well I would suggest we slow down a bit here - the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence - it is only after you’ve been over there for a while that you start to notice the weeds and pooch droppings here and there.

I share your apprehension about the Synod, make no mistake. Maybe we should start a support group.

I don’t want to promise anything here - not that confident - but I am very encouraged by Pope Francis’ visit to the US so far. Much better than I had expected. Hope I am not eating these words tomorrow or the next day - but again I am cautiously optimistic. Besides, we really are off topic now, for real.

The Evangelicals have just as many “sinners” as we do. It’s the law of the land. 🙂 Hang in there.
 
Well I would suggest we slow down a bit here - the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence - it is only after you’ve been over there for a while that you start to notice the weeds and pooch droppings here and there.
Don’t worry - there’s no way I’d ever leave the Catholic Church. I can differentiate between the behavior of Catholics and the perennial teachings of the Church for nearly 2000 years.
Thank heavens for the internet - so that we can have access to what the Church has historically taught.

Okay…way off-topic now…I’ll take a break from the thread for a few days. God bless! 🙂
 
Don’t worry - there’s no way I’d ever leave the Catholic Church. I can differentiate between the behavior of Catholics and the perennial teachings of the Church for nearly 2000 years.
Thank heavens for the internet - so that we can have access to what the Church has historically taught.

Okay…way off-topic now…I’ll take a break from the thread for a few days. God bless! 🙂
Have fun - I’ll carry the torch. 😃
 
Why does anyone have to be “wrong?”
Because of the Law of Non-Contradictions, Lamb.

So…either the Pope is the vicar of Christ, or he is not. One of the 2 paradigms has to be wrong.

Either God is a Trinity of God is a Unity. One of these 2 paradigms has to be wrong.

Either Jesus is the 2nd person of the Trinity, or he is not. One of these 2 paradigms has to be wrong.

Either the Bible Alone is the Word of God, or God has other channels of revelation. One of these 2 paradigms has to be wrong.
 
The simple way to answer the question is to say that Protestants already are part of the Catholic Church , so why should We be part of the Roman part , that and major doctrinal differences .
So that you can receive All of Him.

Imagine if Apollos has refused to be taken aside by Priscilla and Aquila, saying, “I’m already part of the Church. Why do I need to be corrected doctrinally?”
 
You are right about nothing being wrong with beautiful ornate things, as long as the heart is not corrupted. But hearts can be corrupt when wearing simple things, too.

There’s a lot of symbolism in what a priest wears, and what bishops and even popes wear. I’ve forgotten what many of those symbols are, exactly, but it doesn’t have anything to do with lording it over others, as some here may believe.
Indeed.

The Scriptures limn some very specific instructions about how priests were to be dressed:

For your brother Aaron you will make sacred vestments to give dignity and magnificence. You will instruct all the skilled men, whom I have endowed with skill, to make Aaron’s vestments for his consecration to my priesthood. These are the vestments which they must make: a pectoral, an ephod, a robe, an embroidered tunic, a turban, and a belt. They must make sacred vestments for your brother Aaron and his sons, for them to be priests in my service. They will use gold and violet material, red-purple and crimson, and finely woven linen.–Exodus 28:2

And nothing in the NT contradicts this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top