The Problem of Protestant Anti-Catholicism

[Michie]

I think it was Fulton Sheen who said something like “There are not a hundred Americans who hate Catholics, but there are thousands of Americans who hate what they think the Catholic Church is.” It expresses in a nutshell the problem of anti-Catholicism not only among the general population, but also amongst our non Catholic, Protestant brothers and sisters.

On social media this week I posted, “I have never met a Catholic who is as instinctively and profoundly anti-Protestant as almost every Protestant is anti-Catholic”. The post prompted some robust replies–which is ok, but this blog post will help to elucidate the problem.

When I say that Protestants are instinctively and profoundly anti-Catholic the anti-Catholicism comes in many forms. At one end of the spectrum is the old fashioned anti-Catholic rhetoric about the Church of Rome being the “great harlot of Babylon” the pope being an anti-Christ and catholics being blatant idolaters. Historically this has been combined with white hot gossip and rumors about a papist conspiracy to control the world, tales of rampant sexual abuse and corruption like the story of Maria Monk.

For a history of anti-Catholicism in America check out this article

However, these extremes are dying out and the anti Catholicism now is more of a political/cultural thing– Catholicism is seen to be repressive, ultra conservative and out of date. Among Protestants the anti-Catholicism is still sometimes mocking and aggressive, but more often it is masked by tight, polite smiles of a kind of forced toleration. Evangelicals grin and bear it when they encounter Catholics, but beneath the polite smiles the deeply seated anti-Catholicism still rules. Finally, at the other end of the spectrum are the Protestants who share a Catholic sensibility. The Anglo Catholics and high church Lutherans and Methodists claim affiliation with Catholics and even claim to be “catholic” themselves, but scratch the surface and you’ll soon find how fiercely they dislike the Catholic Church.


Continued below.

The Problem of Protestant Anti-Catholicism | Fr. Dwight Longenecker

I think it was Fulton Sheen who said something like "There are not a hundred Americans who hate Catholics, but there are thousands of Americans who hate what they think the Catholic Church is." It expresses in a nutshell the problem of anti-Catholicism not only among the general population, but...

dwightlongenecker.com

 

[chevyontheriver]

I think it was Fulton Sheen who said something like “There are not a hundred Americans who hate Catholics, but there are thousands of Americans who hate what they think the Catholic Church is.” It expresses in a nutshell the problem of anti-Catholicism not only among the general population, but also amongst our non Catholic, Protestant brothers and sisters.

On social media this week I posted, “I have never met a Catholic who is as instinctively and profoundly anti-Protestant as almost every Protestant is anti-Catholic”. The post prompted some robust replies–which is ok, but this blog post will help to elucidate the problem.

When I say that Protestants are instinctively and profoundly anti-Catholic the anti-Catholicism comes in many forms. At one end of the spectrum is the old fashioned anti-Catholic rhetoric about the Church of Rome being the “great harlot of Babylon” the pope being an anti-Christ and catholics being blatant idolaters. Historically this has been combined with white hot gossip and rumors about a papist conspiracy to control the world, tales of rampant sexual abuse and corruption like the story of Maria Monk.

For a history of anti-Catholicism in America check out this article

However, these extremes are dying out and the anti Catholicism now is more of a political/cultural thing– Catholicism is seen to be repressive, ultra conservative and out of date. Among Protestants the anti-Catholicism is still sometimes mocking and aggressive, but more often it is masked by tight, polite smiles of a kind of forced toleration. Evangelicals grin and bear it when they encounter Catholics, but beneath the polite smiles the deeply seated anti-Catholicism still rules. Finally, at the other end of the spectrum are the Protestants who share a Catholic sensibility. The Anglo Catholics and high church Lutherans and Methodists claim affiliation with Catholics and even claim to be “catholic” themselves, but scratch the surface and you’ll soon find how fiercely they dislike the Catholic Church.


Continued below.

The Problem of Protestant Anti-Catholicism | Fr. Dwight Longenecker

I think it was Fulton Sheen who said something like "There are not a hundred Americans who hate Catholics, but there are thousands of Americans who hate what they think the Catholic Church is." It expresses in a nutshell the problem of anti-Catholicism not only among the general population, but...

dwightlongenecker.com

One of my most blatant experiences of it was at the ever so woke Luther Northwestern Seminary bookstore in Minneapolis where some Lutheran seminarians were going on and on about the Catholic seminarians not being sufficiently woke. In those days the bookstore for the St. Paul Seminary WAS the Luther Northwestern Seminary bookstore. The contempt for these Catholic seminarians was so thick you could cut it with a knife.

 

[Bob Crowley]

As my old PROTESTANT pastor used to say "Protestants tell a lot of lies about Catholics and the Catholic Church" and "Protestants can be quite arrogant when it comes to Catholicism".

 

[mourningdove~]

I think it was Fulton Sheen who said something like “There are not a hundred Americans who hate Catholics, but there are thousands of Americans who hate what they think the Catholic Church is.” It expresses in a nutshell the problem of anti-Catholicism not only among the general population, but also amongst our non Catholic, Protestant brothers and sisters.

( Fulton Sheen)

When I was growing up pre-Vatican II, the Church didn't teach us that Protestants were our brothers and sisters. We were, however, taught that only Catholics were going to heaven. We heard that message often, back then. (It got drilled into us!) And so that did make for some thick (invisible) relational 'walls' to be put up between the two of us groups.

Imo, one of the positive changes since Vatican II is that the Church has softened the message about only Catholics going to heaven, and does now consider other baptized Christians to be (separated) brothers and sisters in Christ. I think it was a step in the right direction, towards at least some kind of unity in Christ.

When I look at it, Catholicism is a much more mystical religion than most all the Protestant denominations that I've been exposed to. I think maybe it is this mystical aspect that many Protestants do not understand. So what people do not understand, they are sometimes very quick to reject. But it is this mystical aspect that I see many Protestants as missing; it is like a 'hole' in their theology. Our relationship with God is mystical ... supernatural ... though it seems many aren't comfortable seeing it as such.

 

[RileyG]

One of my most blatant experiences of it was at the ever so woke Luther Northwestern Seminary bookstore in Minneapolis where some Lutheran seminarians were going on and on about the Catholic seminarians not being sufficiently woke. In those days the bookstore for the St. Paul Seminary WAS the Luther Northwestern Seminary bookstore. The contempt for these Catholic seminarians was so thick you could cut it with a knife.

Let me guess, WELS, or maybe LCMS?

If by woke you mean ELCA?

 

[RileyG]

As my old PROTESTANT pastor used to say "Protestants tell a lot of lies about Catholics and the Catholic Church" and "Protestants can be quite arrogant when it comes to Catholicism".

They listen to whatever their pastor tells them without learning about it for themselves

He was very wise.

 

[Bob Crowley]

I think it was a gradual realisation on his part. By the time I met him he would have been 58 and that conversation probably took place seven or eight years later.

He knew his stuff though. Towards the end of his life he was getting disillusioned with the Protestant position.

He even said to me once during one of ouir discussions "I sometimes wonder if Protestants get to heaven." There was a bit more but he went on "I don't think God is as easy going about the continued division of HIS church as we are."

In another conversation on the Protestant position following on from a comment he made about the earliest popes. I said to him "If you believe that, why are you still Protestant?"

He replied "They (the Catholic Church) have done a lot of damage at times".

Anyway he predicted I'd become Catholic amongst other things. At the time he said it I wasn't even interested but his prediction was accurate as usual.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Let me guess, WELS, or maybe LCMS?

If by woke you mean ELCA?

I have actually had great personal experiences with LCMS and WELS. Luther Northwestern Seminary is ELCA.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

Let me guess, WELS, or maybe LCMS?

If by woke you mean ELCA?

LCMS and WELS are far more conservative than the Catholic Church is today (former LCMS here). Their problem was that the Catholic Church was too conservative and not woke. This means they were likely ELCA, which Chevy actually clarified. ELCA is essentially Episcopalian. The worst you'll hear from LCMS and WELS is that the pope is the anti Christ. And that's pretty bad, but in a different way. It's a formal belief that's written in the catechism. From my experience in the LCMS, it's not something they commonly actually believe these days, but it's there.

 

[chevyontheriver]

LCMS and WELS are far more conservative than the Catholic Church is today (former LCMS here). Their problem was that the Catholic Church was too conservative and not woke. This means they were likely ELCA, which Chevy actually clarified. ELCA is essentially Episcopalian. The worst you'll hear from LCMS and WELS is that the pope is the anti Christ. And that's pretty bad, but in a different way. It's a formal belief that's written in the catechism. From my experience in the LCMS, it's not something they commonly actually believe these days, but it's there.

If I HAD TO BE a Lutheran it would be LCMS. I'd prefer martyrdom if they would just kill me quick, but LCMS is not beyond the pale.

To be fair I would prefer martyrdom under the same conditions to being stuck at some Catholic parishes.

 

[RileyG]

If I HAD TO BE a Lutheran it would be LCMS. I'd prefer martyrdom if they would just kill me quick, but LCMS is not beyond the pale.

To be fair I would prefer martyrdom under the same conditions to being stuck at some Catholic parishes.

I could never be Protestant. It just makes no sense to me.

 

[RileyG]

LCMS and WELS are far more conservative than the Catholic Church is today (former LCMS here). Their problem was that the Catholic Church was too conservative and not woke. This means they were likely ELCA, which Chevy actually clarified. ELCA is essentially Episcopalian. The worst you'll hear from LCMS and WELS is that the pope is the anti Christ. And that's pretty bad, but in a different way. It's a formal belief that's written in the catechism. From my experience in the LCMS, it's not something they commonly actually believe these days, but it's there.

I think WELS is very similar to fundamentalist or evangelicals. LCMS is conservative, but a little more moderate than WELS. Correct me if I’m wrong.

ELCA has trans and homosexual ministers and is ok with abortion and same sex “marriage.” I know they are in full communion with the episcopal church.

 

[narnia59]

( Fulton Sheen)

When I was growing up pre-Vatican II, the Church didn't teach us that Protestants were our brothers and sisters. We were, however, taught that only Catholics were going to heaven. We heard that message often, back then. (It got drilled into us!) And so that did make for some thick (invisible) relational 'walls' to be put up between the two of us groups.

I was born in the 50s and grew up in the 60s. I was never taught that only Catholics were going to heaven. In high school, my Baptist English teacher made a comment one time about all the pagans in Africa going to hell and I was shocked. I didn't see how anyone could believe that.

And it clearly has never been the teaching of the Catholic church that only Catholics would go to heaven. So I am always puzzled when I hear people were taught that and wonder why. Over zealous clergy? More than one Fr. Feeney around? I guess I am curious what others experiences are in this regard.

 

[mourningdove~]

I was born in the 50s and grew up in the 60s. I was never taught that only Catholics were going to heaven.

That's very interesting.

And it clearly has never been the teaching of the Catholic church that only Catholics would go to heaven.

Really?

I do hear some Traditional Catholic podcasters these days saying "there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church".

I couldn't readily find this subject in the Catechism of The Council of Trent, but Bishop Athansius Schneider also writes "there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church" in his book "Credo".

So I wonder what are they meaning when they say that?


And were Protestants always considered (separated) brothers and sisters in Christ?
(Or was that a Vatican II change?)

And if Protestants are considered separated brethren, does that mean that they are actually members of the Catholic Church because they are baptized? (Is that it?)

I went Grades 1-8 in Catholic grade school; daily religion classes. We were tald that 'only Catholics go to heaven'.
(There was never any mention of 'our separated brethren', or that they could go to heaven also.)

Of course, there were Protestants back then calling us 'cannibals', and telling us that we were the ones headed for he*l.
So, go figure? Maybe over zealous clergy? Maybe just meant to be a scare tactic? Dunno.

("Is there a Catholic historian\theologian in the house?")

 

[mourningdove~]

I was born in the 50s and grew up in the 60s. I was never taught that only Catholics were going to heaven.

p.s.
It is interesting now, at my age, to look back at my childhood experiences in the faith.
They were all mostly exclusively good.
I grew up finding comfort and safety within the four walls of the Church.

Back then, there was no talk about things like the priest scandals (least, I didn't hear them.)
Everything seemed good.

But lately I've been researching some of that history.
Seems the priest scandal was a problem in my diocese.
One of the (guilty) priests served 3 years in my church, but apparently committed his many crimes in his previous church.
But we didn't know.

So it seems things weren't so perfect back in 'the good old days', afterall.
And maybe we were taught wrong about some things, too.

 

[narnia59]

That's very interesting.


Really?

I do hear some Traditional Catholic podcasters these days saying "there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church".

I couldn't readily find this subject in the Catechism of The Council of Trent, but Bishop Athansius Schneider also writes "there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church" in his book "Credo".

So I wonder what are they meaning when they say that?


And were Protestants always considered (separated) brothers and sisters in Christ?
(Or was that a Vatican II change?)

And if Protestants are considered separated brethren, does that mean that they are actually members of the Catholic Church because they are baptized? (Is that it?)

I went Grades 1-8 in Catholic grade school; daily religion classes. We were tald that 'only Catholics go to heaven'.
(There was never any mention of 'our separated brethren', or that they could go to heaven also.)

Of course, there were Protestants back then calling us 'cannibals', and telling us that we were the ones headed for he*l.
So, go figure? Maybe over zealous clergy? Maybe just meant to be a scare tactic? Dunno.

("Is there a Catholic historian\theologian in the house?")

What I know historically is that the catechism from the Council of Trent cites the same benefits of Baptism we have always recognized — remission of sin, remission of all punishment due to sin, grace of regeneration, infused virtues of faith, hope and love and incorporation into Christ, and it opens the gates of heaven to us — in other words, SAVED provided that with the help of God’s grace we persevere in faith and charity.

And Canon 4 on Baptism from the Council recognized the validity of Baptisms performed outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church. "CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the baptism which is even given by heretics in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, with the intention of doing what the Church doth, is not true baptism; let him be anathema."

So if Trent says that Protestants can be validly baptized, and that baptism does all of what the catechism from Trent said it does, how can anyone say that council did not profess that Protestants can be save?

Fr. Feeney that I referenced was a Jesuit priest in the 1950s who taught that only Catholics could be saved and the Vatican ruled his views were heretical. That's before Vatican II.

As far as what "no salvation outside the Church means," I think it's important to remember that dates back to Cyprian of Carthage in the third century when there was only one Church, no schisms at that point. Applying it post schisms as written would not be to put it in its appropriate context. It has to be adapted to be understood in a world that Cyprian did not know.

What we should mean when we say that in today's context is that all who are validly baptized into Christ are part of his mystical body, the Church. Even though they may not sit within the visible confines of the Catholic Church, they are still part of the Church, just not in perfect communion.

 

[chevyontheriver]

That's very interesting.


Really?

I do hear some Traditional Catholic podcasters these days saying "there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church".

I couldn't readily find this subject in the Catechism of The Council of Trent, but Bishop Athansius Schneider also writes "there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church" in his book "Credo".

So I wonder what are they meaning when they say that?


And were Protestants always considered (separated) brothers and sisters in Christ?
(Or was that a Vatican II change?)

And if Protestants are considered separated brethren, does that mean that they are actually members of the Catholic Church because they are baptized? (Is that it?)

I went Grades 1-8 in Catholic grade school; daily religion classes. We were tald that 'only Catholics go to heaven'.
(There was never any mention of 'our separated brethren', or that they could go to heaven also.)

Of course, there were Protestants back then calling us 'cannibals', and telling us that we were the ones headed for he*l.
So, go figure? Maybe over zealous clergy? Maybe just meant to be a scare tactic? Dunno.

("Is there a Catholic historian\theologian in the house?")

Concentrate on the issue of Fr. Feeney.

 

[mourningdove~]

What I know historically is that the catechism from the Council of Trent cites the same benefits of Baptism we have always recognized — remission of sin, remission of all punishment due to sin, grace of regeneration, infused virtues of faith, hope and love and incorporation into Christ, and it opens the gates of heaven to us — in other words, SAVED provided that with the help of God’s grace we persevere in faith and charity.

And Canon 4 on Baptism from the Council recognized the validity of Baptisms performed outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church. "CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the baptism which is even given by heretics in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, with the intention of doing what the Church doth, is not true baptism; let him be anathema."

So if Trent says that Protestants can be validly baptized, and that baptism does all of what the catechism from Trent said it does, how can anyone say that council did not profess that Protestants can be save?

Fr. Feeney that I referenced was a Jesuit priest in the 1950s who taught that only Catholics could be saved and the Vatican ruled his views were heretical. That's before Vatican II.

As far as what "no salvation outside the Church means," I think it's important to remember that dates back to Cyprian of Carthage in the third century when there was only one Church, no schisms at that point. Applying it post schisms as written would not be to put it in its appropriate context. It has to be adapted to be understood in a world that Cyprian did not know.

What we should mean when we say that in today's context is that all who are validly baptized into Christ are part of his mystical body, the Church. Even though they may not sit within the visible confines of the Catholic Church, they are still part of the Church, just not in perfect communion.

Thank you very much!

 

[mourningdove~]

Concentrate on the issue of Fr. Feeney.

I'm gonna do that ... I'm going to check it out.

 

[zippy2006]

I didn't see how anyone could believe that.

Here is the Baltimore Catechism:

167. What do we mean when we say, “Outside the Church there is no salvation?”​

When we say, “Outside the Church there is no salvation,” we mean that Christ made the Catholic Church a necessary means of salvation and commanded all to enter it, so that a person must be connected with the Church in some way to be saved.​

And it clearly has never been the teaching of the Catholic church that only Catholics would go to heaven.

See, for example, Cantate Domino of the Council of Florence.