Why Is Catholicism So Unattractive to Evangelicals?

[z_0101]

1 Timothy 3, New International Version. I have bolded the qualifications that indicate marriage is normative:

Titus 1:5-9

It seems to me that Paul is laying out criteria, even though he remained single. It is a both-and. I think you have to have a pretty good reason to think you are to be celibate and a minister.

You touch on something else, and that is the idea that ministers (my deliberate word choice) are priests (Catholic/Lutheran/Orthodox term). A discussion as to why Evangelicals find the term unattractive might be profitable. But I gotta go.

Yet we have 1 Corinthians 1:
1Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.”.

Read down to 1C7:
7I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that

yet further down - 1C27:
27Are you pledged to a woman? Do not seek to be released. Are you free from such a commitment? Do not look for a wife

SO while marriage may have been a norm for the average person, there was a call for the celebrate/chaste priest starting very early in the church.

We can pull scriptures all day to “prove” each side of this coin - indeed, I’ve had this argument many times with my late-step-father… hundreds of different quotes from the bible.
However, how does this aspect actually pertain to the original post and thread topic?

 

[Tomyris]

Yet we have 1 Corinthians 1:
1Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.”.

Read down to 1C7:
7I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that

yet further down - 1C27:
27Are you pledged to a woman? Do not seek to be released. Are you free from such a commitment? Do not look for a wife

SO while marriage may have been a norm for the average person, there was a call for the celebrate/chaste priest starting very early in the church.

That does not follow from those verses at all. They don’t even mention elders or overseers.

We can pull scriptures all day to “prove” each side of this coin - indeed, I’ve had this argument many times with my late-step-father… hundreds of different quotes from the bible.
However, how does this aspect actually pertain to the original post and thread topic?

As I said above, Evangelicals consider the whole idea of “priestly celibacy” something that is un-Scriptural and therefore wholly unattractive, which is why it is relevant. It seems to Evangelicals that the Roman Catholic Church is in direct defiance of an apostolic mandate.

 

[Sarcelle]

He is going to be married, and He is eternally a priest. Clearly ALL the apostles except Paul were married and took their wives with them in ministry. The idea that Peter was single when an apostle is pure fiction.

Hmmm.

I would rather have someone to confide in who struggles with passion and has overcome it than someone who has no idea what a struggle it is to fight temptation.

A single minister who does nothing but ministry lives a life where he cannot understand the struggles other people go through - I would find it very difficult to respect such a man as anyone worth listening to. A married man understands marriage and the struggles the rest of us go through: he can sympathize with us in our weakness instead of being other-worldly and so heavenly minded he is no earthly good. But that is not to say someone CAN be celibate and have their feet on the ground and an understanding of what life is like for most of us. But it would be a barrier he would have to overcome.

Is there a place for single people in your church? If ministers or pastors are supposed to be married how can they understand the struggles singles go through?

This post makes me glad I am Catholic. From what I have read of the experiences of single people in Protestant churches, mainly of the Baptist variety, single people are treated like pariahs at best and abominations at worst.

At least Catholicism recognizes the dignity of each individual no matter their state in life.

 

[feed_me]

Is there a place for single people in your church? If ministers or pastors are supposed to be married how can they understand the struggles singles go through?

Because they were single before they got married so they do understand the struggles from both perspectives.

 

[Sarcelle]

feed_me:
No they don’t. I know this from experience.

Why? Because there was an end to their singleness. For singles over a certain age, there likely will never be an end to being single. How can a married minister understand this?

Anyway, this is not the point of the thread, so I will not derail it.

Back to the topic, Evangelical churches offer a more vibrant social life than Catholic Churches. This is speaking in general. However there is a big caveat. From personal experience and from the experience of friends, you must belong to a certain demographic, white, young, married and with small children. Outside of this you are on the outside looking in.

 

[Tomyris]

No they don’t. I know this from experience.

Why? Because there was an end to their singleness. For singles over a certain age, there likely will never be an end to being single. How can a married minister understand this?

Anyway, this is not the point of the thread, so I will not derail it.

Back to the topic, Evangelical churches offer a more vibrant social life than Catholic Churches. This is speaking in general. However there is a big caveat. From personal experience and from the experience of friends, you must belong to a certain demographic, white, young, married and with small children. Outside of this you are on the outside looking in.

Not true in my experience. But some evangelical churches overdo the friendliness to the point of phoniness or feeling like you will be roped into something if you show up.

Many evangelical churches have singles groups for social functions and ministry, both inward and outward.

The coldness and unfriendliness of Catholic churches is a turn-off to many Evangelicals. For myself, I kind of liked being able to go to Mass without anyone noticing I existed, except for the “passing of the peace” which sometimes seemed artificial. We do that, too, and I don’t really see it as all that wonderful. Some people like it.

 

[Sarcelle]

Not true in my experience. But some evangelical churches overdo the friendliness to the point of phoniness or feeling like you will be roped into something if you show up.

Many evangelical churches have singles groups for social functions and ministry, both inward and outward.

The coldness and unfriendliness of Catholic churches is a turn-off to many Evangelicals. For myself, I kind of liked being able to go to Mass without anyone noticing I existed, except for the “passing of the peace” which sometimes seemed artificial. We do that, too, and I don’t really see it as all that wonderful. Some people like it.

I also like going to mass and greeting a few friends in the pews. I am not a big social butterfly but I am involved in various ministries and I also personally know the priest. I like the low key laid back atmosphere in the Catholic parish I am in.

 

[Sarcelle]

Not true in my experience. But some evangelical churches overdo the friendliness to the point of phoniness or feeling like you will be roped into something if you show up.

Many evangelical churches have singles groups for social functions and ministry, both inward and outward.

The coldness and unfriendliness of Catholic churches is a turn-off to many Evangelicals. For myself, I kind of liked being able to go to Mass without anyone noticing I existed, except for the “passing of the peace” which sometimes seemed artificial. We do that, too, and I don’t really see it as all that wonderful. Some people like it.

The best evangelical church for me was one that did not have a singles group. The congregation felt like one big extended family where everyone was a member no matter their state in life. I felt that this congregation reflected what it was like to be part of God’s family in Heaven.

Most churches were divided into cliques. This goes for both Catholic and Protestant churches. Human nature I guess.

 

[randomuser]

Many Evangelicals also believe Constantine (not Jesus) founded the Catholic church. Yes, we talk til we’re blue in the face about ‘upon this rock,’ and somehow, there are many, many evangelicals who still believe Constantine founded the Catholic church. Every time I have mentioned this, it falls on deaf ears. It has inexplicably become a non-starter in Catholic apologetics.

Catholics don’t want to talk about Constantine. I have e-mailed CA staff like Tim Staples, etc., asking them to write books about the guy. I have e-mailed EWTN asking them to talk about him. They won’t. I wish I knew why. It’s a “freebie,” a slam-dunk way for Catholics to evangelize to evangelicals.

Constantine is all evangelicals want to talk about. You can sum up in one word why Catholicism is unattractive to evangelicals: Constantine. That’s why.

 

[Michael68]

Not true in my experience. But some evangelical churches overdo the friendliness to the point of phoniness or feeling like you will be roped into something if you show up.

Many evangelical churches have singles groups for social functions and ministry, both inward and outward.

The coldness and unfriendliness of Catholic churches is a turn-off to many Evangelicals. For myself, I kind of liked being able to go to Mass without anyone noticing I existed, except for the “passing of the peace” which sometimes seemed artificial. We do that, too, and I don’t really see it as all that wonderful. Some people like it.

I think many confuse coldness and reverence. We don’t talk in the sanctuary and maybe this is perceived as being cold. I don’t think they understand that.

 

[randomuser]

Back to the topic, Evangelical churches offer a more vibrant social life than Catholic Churches.

Very true. Catholic singles are second-class citizens. Being “single” has become a “vocation.” Divorcees and gays get preferential treatment, in particular with current pontifical activity, over singles.

Oh, and the Constantine thing. Many Evangelicals still believe Constantine founded the Catholic, yet there is inexplicably very little interest in countering those allegations and evangelizing to evangelicals who believe Constantine founded the Catholic church. It has, sadly, become a “non-starter”/taboo topic in apologetics.

 

[Tomyris]

I think many confuse coldness and reverence. We don’t talk in the sanctuary and maybe this is perceived as being cold. I don’t think they understand that.

I was referring to time in the foyar/narthex rather than in the sanctuary.

Non-denominational churches are typically founded and staffed by extroverts who think everyone should be one, or act like one, and that that appeals to everyone. It’s a different issue. That idea gets copied over to denominational churches who see it as something that explains part of the growth of non-denominational churches.

 

[Tomyris]

Oh, and the Constantine thing. Many Evangelicals still believe Constantine founded the Catholic, yet there is inexplicably very little interest in countering those allegations and evangelizing to evangelicals who believe Constantine founded the Catholic church. It has, sadly, become a “non-starter”/taboo topic in apologetics.

Ok, let’s talk about him. I think Roman Catholic apologists don’t like to talk about him because the subject is a good argument against the papacy. You will recall at Nicea Constantine (not the pope) called the council. The bishop of Rome didn’t even bother going. He sent two priests, but that was it. There is also a recognition at that council that the bishop of Rome was not the head of the entire church. See Canon 6.

This was the first council of the Catholic-Orthodox church. It is highly embarrassing to Catholic apologetics that the bishop of Rome had no significant part to play, let alone any leadership. So it is no wonder that Catholic apologists avoid the subject.

I don’t believe Constantine founded the Catholic church, for that matter.

 

[Michael68]

Ok, let’s talk about him. I think Roman Catholic apologists don’t like to talk about him because the subject is a good argument against the papacy. You will recall at Nicea Constantine (not the pope) called the council. The bishop of Rome didn’t even bother going. He sent two priests, but that was it. There is also a recognition at that council that the bishop of Rome was not the head of the entire church. See Canon 6.

This was the first council of the Catholic-Orthodox church. It is highly embarrassing to Catholic apologetics that the bishop of Rome had no significant part to play, let alone any leadership. So it is no wonder that Catholic apologists avoid the subject.

I don’t believe Constantine founded the Catholic church, for that matter.

For the record, Constatine didn’t, Jesus did

 

[randomuser]

For the record, Constatine didn’t, Jesus did

Yes, of course, I know that. You know that. However, Evangelicals don’t know that because there’s very little (if any) Catholic apologetics material to counter that allegation. I can’t remember the last time I heard Constantine talked about on CAL - callers simply don’t ask about it because they just assume it’s true. I did a CAL radio search key word “Constantine,” and it yielded just a handful of shows. OMG, as the kids today say. There should be pages of search results and tons of threads of CAF about Constantine to “give a reason for” this aspect of the Catholic church.

 

[PRmerger]

Ok, let’s talk about him. I think Roman Catholic apologists don’t like to talk about him because the subject is a good argument against the papacy.

Constantine has been beaten to death.

catholic.com/blog/jon-sorensen/constantine-has-been-beaten-to-death

 

[Michael68]

Yes, of course, I know that. You know that. However, Evangelicals don’t know that because there’s very little (if any) Catholic apologetics material to counter that allegation. I can’t remember the last time I heard Constantine talked about on CAL - callers simply don’t ask about it because they just assume it’s true. I did a CAL radio search key word “Constantine,” and it yielded just a handful of shows. OMG, as the kids today say. There should be pages of search results and tons of threads of CAF about Constantine to “give a reason for” this aspect of the Catholic church.

I understand your frustration and I share it. I don’t know why there isn’t more info on the subject. My experience has shown that some Protestants refuse the truth and rather believe the lie. I think how we’re raised has part to do with it. For example, my father told me it was a sin to step foot in a Protestant church. I believed that for a very long time because my father told me.

 

[randomuser]

Constantine has been beaten to death.

catholic.com/blog/jon-sorensen/constantine-has-been-beaten-to-death

Really? From 2013, and only has one comment? “Constantine has been beaten to death” makes for a nice headline, but it doesn’t seem to be very accurate or a particularly realistic point of view, for that matter.

Quoting directly from that 2013 blog entry, “It would be nice if this falsity were confined to Fundamentalist circles, but sadly it is not.”

For how much longer will Catholic apologists (whether here on CAF or on CAL) refuse to talk about Constantine in outreach to evangelicals? I just don’t see how it has been ‘beaten to death.’ Far from it.

 

[PRmerger]

Really? From 2013, and only has one comment?

What a peculiar criterion you are using to determine how much there has been said about Constantine.

Personally, I don’t view the number of comments on 1 article to be a very good measure.

Perhaps you should widen your parameters a bit.

I just did a search here on the CAFs, and came up with 931 hits.

And if one googles some of the prominent Catholic apologists, this is what happens:

Jimmy Akin: 4510 hits
google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=constantine+%22jimmy+Akin%22

Dave Armstrong: 13, 700
google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=constantine+%22dave+armstrong%22

Steve Ray: 17,700

google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=constantine+%22steve+ray%22

So I suggest you look a bit better.

 

[Della]

Yes, of course, I know that. You know that. However, Evangelicals don’t know that because there’s very little (if any) Catholic apologetics material to counter that allegation. I can’t remember the last time I heard Constantine talked about on CAL - callers simply don’t ask about it because they just assume it’s true. I did a CAL radio search key word “Constantine,” and it yielded just a handful of shows. OMG, as the kids today say. There should be pages of search results and tons of threads of CAF about Constantine to “give a reason for” this aspect of the Catholic church.

Apologetics doesn’t work that way. The Church is not obligated to answer every screwy objection any group makes. History, real history, from many sources, is readily available for those who want to know the truth, but those to put forward this kind of idea don’t want to know the truth–they aren’t interested in pursuing unbiased sources–they simply want use something, almost anything, in their efforts to discredit the Church.

It takes time for Catholic apologists to respond since the kind of Protestant who does this will grab anything he thinks is a “gotcha” argument even if it’s totally bogus. It’s meant to keep their own people on board and to sway clueless Catholics away from the Church. I saw it again and again when I was one of them. It didn’t matter what it was as long as it cast doubt on the Church’s validity.

And when they see that something is no longer doing the job, they grab something else. Trying to get such people to admit they’re wrong is like trying to sweep up jello with comb–it simply can’t be done since they have no desire to learn the truth. They wouldn’t put it like that, but that’s what it amounts to.