Why Protestantism?

[Tannhauser]

So, having only just(!) realised that Christianity, Jesus Christ, is Catholicism - is the Holy Catholic Church… my question is this:

How can Protestant movements not acknowledge the Church? How can they take Scripture - given to them by the Church(!) - and then go off and set up their own churches?
That’s like… me, taking everything that my family has given me, and then leaving and entirely disowning them, all the while paying for everything that I have with their money…

I mean, surely Protestant Churches only know what they do because the Catholic Aposteles were gracious and inspired enough to give it to them…

Sorry… sudden surge of questions!

 

[ConstantineTG]

Their point of view is completely different from ours. Some of them are convinced that the Church is not needed, or that the Church exists not materialy, but spiritually among all believers, regardless of which religion or denomination they subscribe to. Others believe that a personal relationship with Christ is all that is needed. Others such as the Reformers believe that the Church was the true Church, but something went wrong along the way and they had to break off to preserve what is right and true of the Church. Then there are the Restorationists who believe the true Church disappeared after the Apostles died and that through some divine intervention, their founder has been given a mandate from heaven to restore the true Church and they are that restoration.

So many of the things we see and believe in, many of the truths that we have has been distorted in some way to support their current way of believing. In their hearts and in their minds, they believe that they are right.

 

[Tannhauser]

Their point of view is completely different from ours. Some of them are convinced that the Church is not needed, or that the Church exists not materialy, but spiritually among all believers, regardless of which religion or denomination they subscribe to. Others believe that a personal relationship with Christ is all that is needed. Others such as the Reformers believe that the Church was the true Church, but something went wrong along the way and they had to break off to preserve what is right and true of the Church. Then there are the Restorationists who believe the true Church disappeared after the Apostles died and that through some divine intervention, their founder has been given a mandate from heaven to restore the true Church and they are that restoration.

So many of the things we see and believe in, many of the truths that we have has been distorted in some way to support their current way of believing. In their hearts and in their minds, they believe that they are right.

St.Matthew 16:18 !

One quick question: I was reading Jeremiah 1:5 - such a beautiful verse! I realise it is directed at Jeremiah… but surely this sort of thing applies to all of us??/ Can we interpret some things in Scripture as indeed concerning *us implicitly *?

 

[Roy5]

Constantine TG gives a good summary.

** I am of mixed Catholic/Protestant heritage**. Why do I find Protestantism attrac- tive? Because mainline Protestants I know, and their churches, seem more flexible, less legalistic when it comes to doctrine and liturgy.

** For example, most of my Protestant friends aren’t ‘hidebound’ when it comes to beliefs.** I have attended a Bible study group where different opinions are not only allowed but welcomed. “Oh, that’s an interesting interpretation of that verse” the minister might say. To be a Catholic suggests that you march in step with the Magisterium. Over the years I have found that increasingly difficult to accept. I think many Catholics feel similarly, millions leaving the church, millions more remaining for spiritual, family or other reasons but ignoring much that the church teaches.

** To begin with, I don’t believe the original church was of any denomination.** Jesus taught us that we must love one another. St. Paul well summed up the main theme of Christianity when he wrote: “faith, hope, love, these three; and the greatest of these is love.” Gradually the early Christians formed congregations and then denominations. There were many different points-of-view among those early Christians, and most were declared heresies. Nestorianism. Arianism. Adoptianism. Monophysitism. Monarchianism. Etc. Many heretics were slaughtered, such as the Albigensians. Not the way I would have dealt with heretics, frankly.

So much of this was politics - a power struggle between different factions within the church, a tribalism that still is strong and makes so many people loyal to one church or another because of that tribalism, even when they may know little about other faiths or even their own. “Hooray for our team!”

**Anyway, if Jesus came back today I rather doubt if he would approve of all the pomp and ceremony in many churches**. He would be shocked, I think, by the huge gilded cathedrals and the ornate vestments. He would say, as in scripture: "Why do you call me Lord, Lord, and do not the things that I say." Then, of course, he would approve of many priests and nuns who live dedicated, simple lives humbly serving the poor and the sick.

** Now, I am no longer all that attracted by either traditional Catholicism or by sola scriptura Protestantism.** They both seem dogmatic, when I am very open to different theological opinions. This universe is so mammoth, marvelous, miraculous and mysterious that I don’t think many of us know all that much. I do have enormous trouble with some aspects of traditional Catholic and evangelical Protestant teaching. For example, do I believe that St. Padre Pio, a modern saint, actually lavitated and bilocated? Sorry, I don’t. This is one of many instances where I feel that superstition and gullibility won out over science and common sense. I need a religion that I can intelligently accept. I know this is dismissed as egotism, but so be it. I deem it humbler than to claim to belong to the one and only religion which has the fullness of truth.

** But God bless everybody, of every creed, color, culture and country. Let’s make religion a bridge instead of a barrier! **

 

[UnityofTrinity]

Constantine TG gives a good summary.

** I am of mixed Catholic/Protestant heritage**. Why do I find Protestantism attrac- tive? Because mainline Protestants I know, and their churches, seem more flexible, less legalistic when it comes to doctrine and liturgy. People often say I don’t like “organized religion”, but without a religion that is organized, can you have a religion at all? God is not the Gd of confusion, that must mean there’s only one true way to interpret Scriptures. But base on what authority? It is based on the authority of the Church which Jesus had built

** For example, most of my Protestant friends aren’t ‘hidebound’ when it comes to beliefs.** Tell me, how can your minister tell ifthat scipture interpreted is right or wrong? Without a certain authority, the concept of right and wrong does not and will not exist
** To begin with, I don’t believe the original church was of any denomination.** Something as denomination only exist because some people wanted to seperate themselves from the True Church. But that does not mean the Catholic Church isn’t the one true Church, in fact, read the Church Father, they always seem to support the notion that there’s a centralized Church that will tend all the Christians.

So much of this was politics -Although politics could be involved, that does not mean we should all withdraw ourselves from all form of governance and descend into anarchy.
Anyway, if Jesus came back today I rather doubt if he would approve of all the pomp and ceremony in many churches. -That exactly the thing that Judas asked Jesus when Mary poured expensive oil on the Lord’s feet? The Lord didn’t say: “I disapprove this”, why? Because He knew that this is used to glorify God. Likewise, the ceremonies, the cathedrals all for the Christian people to rejoice in the joy of the Lord, it is built base on the people, and always for the people. Frankly, I would prefer the Church to build cathedrals, then from those cathedrals come the center for the sicks and poor both physically and spiritually than having the ministers using the same money buying cars and mansions

 

[Thoughtfulone]

Anyway, if Jesus came back today I rather doubt if he would approve of all the pomp and ceremony in many churches. -That exactly the thing that Judas asked Jesus when Mary poured expensive oil on the Lord’s feet? The Lord didn’t say: “I disapprove this”, why? Because He knew that this is used to glorify God. Likewise, the ceremonies, the cathedrals all for the Christian people to rejoice in the joy of the Lord, it is built base on the people, and always for the people. Frankly, I would prefer the Church to build cathedrals, then from those cathedrals come the center for the sicks and poor both physically and spiritually than having the ministers using the same money buying cars and mansions

Actually, Jesus was predicting His own death and saying that it was good that she anoint Him for His burial because he would not always be there:

“Leave her alone,” Jesus replied. “[It was intended] that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial. You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me.”

This is not to say that I wholly disapprove of the pomp of the Church…it is part of humanity trying to reach toward the Heavens and trying to please God through art and architecture here on Earth…it also inspires us, as anyone who has ever been to the Vatican can attest. I do think that the Church could do a little “housecleaning” and possibly sell some of the art and such that is no doubt cluttering up basements all over Vatican City and use the money for something worthwhile, but part of the power of the Church lies in Her massive wealth as she no doubt knows.

 

[bnbkaine]

** To begin with, I don’t believe the original church was of any denomination.** Something as denomination only exist because some people wanted to seperate themselves from the True Church. But that does not mean the Catholic Church isn’t the one true Church, in fact, read the Church Father, they always seem to support the notion that there’s a centralized Church that will tend all the Christians.

If you read the Church fathers, they state very clearly that it is the Catholic Church.
staycatholic.com/about_the_early_fathers.htm
“Shortly after the death of the apostle John, his disciple, Ignatius of Antioch, referred to the Church as the Catholic Church. In his Letter to the Smyrnaeans he wrote: “Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church” (8:2 [A.D. 107]).”
I don’t know how much earlier you want to get, but within 100 years after the Crucifiction, the Church had its name.

 

[Steadfast_love]

So, having only just(!) realised that Christianity, Jesus Christ, is Catholicism - is the Holy Catholic Church… my question is this:

How can Protestant movements not acknowledge the Church?

Lots of Protestants do, but by doing so they enter into full communion with the Catholic Church. It’s actualy a very difficult process. My family was deadset against it, and although I’m able to beat them in a war of bible verse quoting, my wife has been having a heck of a time with it. They sneak up on her whenever I’m out of the room and give her a hard time. I don’t let them babysit my toddlers now because of it.

How about Protestant pastors? It takes real commitment to leave not only a job, but also a profession and education. (Since, how does a Catholic ex-Protestant pastor make a buck?)

And even if you have the courage it’s not easy to switch your thinking from Protestant to Catholic. Speaking from experience here as a former Protestant, some Catholic theology was completely incomprehensible to me. I wanted to but I was stuck on some essential points of doctrine and it took serious effort to wrap my head around them.

How can they take Scripture - given to them by the Church(!) - and then go off and set up their own churches?

In my experience, it was by taking all the verses where Jesus was taking about the 12 Apostles and imagining that Jesus was talking about everyone who ever read the bible. And that’s not totaly wrong either. The great commission where Jesus sends his apostles to the ends of the earth to spread the good word also applies to all Catholics, even though only the Bishops are apostolic successors. But once you start imagining that Jesus gave Peter’s authority to bind and loose to EVERYONE, or that when Jesus is in a closed room and tells his Apostles that he is with them “whenever two or more of you are gathered in my name” you get tens of thousands of opinions, and each opinion is it’s own non-Catholic church.

That’s like… me, taking everything that my family has given me, and then leaving and entirely disowning them, all the while paying for everything that I have with their money…

Not to burst your bubble, but that too is a very biblical notion. God cast the wicked out of the promised land and gave it to his chosen people. All you have to do is imagine that the Catholics are the Cananites and you are Joshua for the new chosen people… Or you can imagine that the Catholics are the new Sodom, and you’re Abraham on a mission to prostlatize Lot and his daughters… Which is why bible is very clear that when someone asks “Who should we follow, God or Moses?” you must pick Moses. You must pick the person that God sent to lead you. Lean not on your own understanding and all that.

I mean, surely Protestant Churches only know what they do because the Catholic Aposteles were gracious and inspired enough to give it to them…

The party line is that the Catholics are to blame for losing fidelity to the original manuscripts. And it’s not an entirely spurious charge since the bible apart from the guidence of the Holy Spirit is a stumbling block. Historicaly, Protestant churches have had difficulty maintaining their identity for more than a few centuries, not even to mention the two millenia that the Catholic and Orthodox churches have been rolling along.

What I’m saying is, when I was growing up Protestant we could all tell that the stuff the Bible promised about God’s Church was not exactly coming true in our church, at least not yet. The Catholic church was an easy scapegoat for our failure to achieve Magisterium.

Sorry… sudden surge of questions!

Good questions, hope my answers are helpful.

 

[Church_Militant]

I think you would benefit from reading this document.
RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING non-Catholic “Churches”

 

[thistle]

So, having only just(!) realised that Christianity, Jesus Christ, is Catholicism - is the Holy Catholic Church… my question is this:

How can Protestant movements not acknowledge the Church? How can they take Scripture - given to them by the Church(!) - and then go off and set up their own churches?
That’s like… me, taking everything that my family has given me, and then leaving and entirely disowning them, all the while paying for everything that I have with their money…

I mean, surely Protestant Churches only know what they do because the Catholic Aposteles were gracious and inspired enough to give it to them…

Sorry… sudden surge of questions!

Ignorance and/or pride.

 

[ConstantineTG]

St.Matthew 16:18 !

I know. But they would quote other verses to justify their false doctrine. Here’s an example, there is a LDS/SDA wannabe in the Philippines called Iglesia ni Cristo (literally Church of Christ). Its founder claimed to be an angel made flesh sent by God to restore the apostatized Church. He uses this passage:

[BIBLEDRB]Isaiah 46:11[/BIBLEDRB]

Okay, this is his claim. He is the ravenous bird. The east points to the Philippines which is in the Far East where he founded his church. There’s 5 million people buying that today.

Many of these diversions of faith or all-together false faith is well thought of. Many of what they claim are supported by their own interpretations of scripture. Don’t underestimate what they have. They may be obvious fakes to well catechized people, but not to those who are poorly taught.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Constantine TG gives a good summary.

** I am of mixed Catholic/Protestant heritage**. Why do I find Protestantism attrac- tive? Because mainline Protestants I know, and their churches, seem more flexible, less legalistic when it comes to doctrine and liturgy.

The Eastern Churches are less legalistic. The Western thought just developed into a more legalistic system by the philosophy they adopted.

** For example, most of my Protestant friends aren’t ‘hidebound’ when it comes to beliefs.** I have attended a Bible study group where different opinions are not only allowed but welcomed. “Oh, that’s an interesting interpretation of that verse” the minister might say. To be a Catholic suggests that you march in step with the Magisterium. Over the years I have found that increasingly difficult to accept. I think many Catholics feel similarly, millions leaving the church, millions more remaining for spiritual, family or other reasons but ignoring much that the church teaches.

The problem here is there is deviation of true teaching. St. Paul himself warned in his epistles about false teachers. And the false teachers don’t necessarily bring obviously opposing doctrine, some even teach Jesus Christ. But he said be wary of people who teach a Jesus other than the Jesus they are teaching. This means that you may think you’re professing Christ, but what you have is nothing more than a name. What he did and what he said is entirely different to what Christ actually did and taught.

** To begin with, I don’t believe the original church was of any denomination.** Jesus taught us that we must love one another. St. Paul well summed up the main theme of Christianity when he wrote: “faith, hope, love, these three; and the greatest of these is love.” Gradually the early Christians formed congregations and then denominations. There were many different points-of-view among those early Christians, and most were declared heresies. Nestorianism. Arianism. Adoptianism. Monophysitism. Monarchianism. Etc. Many heretics were slaughtered, such as the Albigensians. Not the way I would have dealt with heretics, frankly.

Heretics have been coming out even before Christ died. As historical evidence would show, there are a number who claimed they are the Messiah. So why did Christ win out? Because His message was true, simply because He is God, the true Messiah. Everyone else were fakes and their following died out as soon as the supposed-to-be Messiah died.

Then in the following centuries, it was other heretics who would misinterpret the teachings of the Church.

So much of this was politics - a power struggle between different factions within the church, a tribalism that still is strong and makes so many people loyal to one church or another because of that tribalism, even when they may know little about other faiths or even their own. “Hooray for our team!”

I can’t deny the politics. Most of what brought the Great Schism is politics. But its part of life. Sometimes politics has to be played not because one has a political agenda, but because the other side has and you have to counter it.

**Anyway, if Jesus came back today I rather doubt if he would approve of all the pomp and ceremony in many churches**. He would be shocked, I think, by the huge gilded cathedrals and the ornate vestments. He would say, as in scripture: "Why do you call me Lord, Lord, and do not the things that I say." Then, of course, he would approve of many priests and nuns who live dedicated, simple lives humbly serving the poor and the sick.

The problem here is that you claim to know the mind of Christ. Clearly as seen in Scripture that the Apostles established Churches across the Mediterranean. This is reflected today by the 23 different sui juris Catholic Churches. Scripture has shown this as record, even showed the First Council of Jerusalem. Why will Christ disapprove of that?

** Now, I am no longer all that attracted by either traditional Catholicism or by sola scriptura Protestantism.** They both seem dogmatic, when I am very open to different theological opinions. This universe is so mammoth, marvelous, miraculous and mysterious that I don’t think many of us know all that much. I do have enormous trouble with some aspects of traditional Catholic and evangelical Protestant teaching. For example, do I believe that St. Padre Pio, a modern saint, actually lavitated and bilocated? Sorry, I don’t. This is one of many instances where I feel that superstition and gullibility won out over science and common sense. I need a religion that I can intelligently accept. I know this is dismissed as egotism, but so be it. I deem it humbler than to claim to belong to the one and only religion which has the fullness of truth.

So you believe that God became man, turned water into wine, walked on water, fed 5000 with 5 loaves of bread and two fish, healed the sick, gave sight to the blind, raised the dead, died himself and resurrected on the third day, then ascended into heaven on a cloud, yet you cannot believe a holy man levitate himself?

** But God bless everybody, of every creed, color, culture and country. Let’s make religion a bridge instead of a barrier! **

 

[Roy5]

No, I don’t believe that Padre Pio levitated and bilocated. He was not Jesus. And when I hear the Lords on EWTN tell of miracles performed by various saints over the centuries I can only think to myself - please, give me a break! We’re living in the 21st century!

**We don’t live any longer in a world full of ghosts, demons, and such. **We have telescopes that tell us we are on a tiny speck in a huge space containing maybe even a billion solar systems! And we have microscopes that help us understand that diseases result from germs and not from evil spirits or punishment from God.

**Personally, I need a reasonable religion, and not one crammed full of unverifiable miracles.** My criteria rules out traditional Catholicism and much of Protestantism. Most Catholics and Protestants I know tend to agree on these points. "When I was a child I thought as a child....but now that I am a man I have put away childish things." St. Paul goes on to say that the core of Christianity is love, and I concur enthusiastically. Emphasis on pure doctrine and similar causes of division promotes bigotry, misunderstanding, and tribalism instead.

** If others can believe all the extra baggage that has grafted itself on to Christianity over the centuries, fine.** I focus mainly on the Sermon on the Mount and try my best to live by it. That means I seek to live in harmony with others, whatever their creed, color, culture or country. I am committed to doing what little I can do to make Christianity a bridge and not a barrier to a better and more peaceful world.
**God bless everybody.** I'm sure when we enter the 'world to come' (many call it heaven) we'll realize that our pet doctrines and prejudices have been petty, and we will recognize that God alone understands the miraculous mysteries that surround us. "Now we see through a glass darkly...."

 

[ConstantineTG]

No, I don’t believe that Padre Pio levitated and bilocated. He was not Jesus. And when I hear the Lords on EWTN tell of miracles performed by various saints over the centuries I can only think to myself - please, give me a break! We’re living in the 21st century!

Do you forget that St. Peter himself walked on water? That handkerchiefs and other pieces of cloths were placed on St. Paul and were taken to other people and it healed them of their sickness? They were not Jesus, but they achieved holiness that Christ’s power flows through them like a mighty river. What they did they did not do on their own.

**We don’t live any longer in a world full of ghosts, demons, and such. **We have telescopes that tell us we are on a tiny speck in a huge space containing maybe even a billion solar systems! And we have microscopes that help us understand that diseases result from germs and not from evil spirits or punishment from God.

How do you not that these germs are not created as a punishment? There are more diseases today than there ever was in the history of man, even though we have advanced so much in medicine and cleanliness in our homes and surroundings. And yet we get sick more.

Ultimately, I too don’t believe they are God’s punishment, rather we men have been so insistent with our sinful ways that we have conjured our own punishment through our sins.

**Personally, I need a reasonable religion, and not one crammed full of unverifiable miracles.** My criteria rules out traditional Catholicism and much of Protestantism. Most Catholics and Protestants I know tend to agree on these points. "When I was a child I thought as a child....but now that I am a man I have put away childish things." St. Paul goes on to say that the core of Christianity is love, and I concur enthusiastically. Emphasis on pure doctrine and similar causes of division promotes bigotry, misunderstanding, and tribalism instead.

Still I wonder how can you adhere to Christianity when Christianity and even the Old Testament is full of unbelievable and unverifiable miracles. Perhaps you’d rather be atheist and believe in science? Because if you cannot believe that God can bend the laws of physics which He himself created, then what is God? I personally cannot accept a God that is limited by the world He created.

Pure doctrine is what the Apostles handed down to us. The problem here is you are adhering to the pick-and-choose crowd. Even the Bible itself must be presented as a whole and not only concentrate on parts one would prefer. Sure, there’s emphasis on love, God is love. But don’t forget everything else mentioned in the Bible.

** If others can believe all the extra baggage that has grafted itself on to Christianity over the centuries, fine.** I focus mainly on the Sermon on the Mount and try my best to live by it. That means I seek to live in harmony with others, whatever their creed, color, culture or country. I am committed to doing what little I can do to make Christianity a bridge and not a barrier to a better and more peaceful world.

In the sermon on the mount, Christ fed 5000 with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish. I thought you do not believe in this stuff?

**God bless everybody.** I'm sure when we enter the 'world to come' (many call it heaven) we'll realize that our pet doctrines and prejudices have been petty, and we will recognize that God alone understands the miraculous mysteries that surround us. "Now we see through a glass darkly...."

Actually, it may be you who may be surprised that there doctrines do carry the fullness of teachings as handed down by the Apostles.

 

[melchesidechpio]

So, having only just(!) realised that Christianity, Jesus Christ, is Catholicism - is the Holy Catholic Church… my question is this:

How can Protestant movements not acknowledge the Church? How can they take Scripture - given to them by the Church(!) - and then go off and set up their own churches?
That’s like… me, taking everything that my family has given me, and then leaving and entirely disowning them, all the while paying for everything that I have with their money…

I mean, surely Protestant Churches only know what they do because the Catholic Aposteles were gracious and inspired enough to give it to them…

Sorry… sudden surge of questions!

you got to remember that Protestantism was a pure accident. The reformers weren’t trying to start a new Church, but had issues in some sort. Over time the beilefs of the reformers were twisted over and overa again

 

[Dave_B]

you got to remember that Protestantism was a pure accident. The reformers weren’t trying to start a new Church, but had issues in some sort. Over time the beilefs of the reformers were twisted over and overa again

I personally wouldnt say it was a total accident. The reformation followed the invention of the printing press. When Bibles became more readily available people started questioning accepted church teaching. Private interpretation resulted in the split in my opinion.