Catholic vs. Protestant – why is there so much animosity?"

[redleghunter]

Yes, they could anchor their claims to Scripture-with accuracy. Others could not necessarily do so, evidenced by the fact that Sola Scriptura adherents disagree with each other regularly.

Doesn't follow. I'm sure you are making some kind of argument but it is misplaced in responding to my comments. My points were to the authority of Holy Scriptures. Of such writings they were attested to in word and power. That is why when quoted the authors of the NT used such terms as "It is written", "The Scriptures say" "Let them hear Moses and the prophets."

You seem to be asserting Sola Scriptura is me and my Bible alone. It is a common error among Catholics to do so and when I was Catholic heard it a few times. Sola Scriptura boils down to the Holy Spirit Inspired Scriptures are what we use to test truth claims. To put it in 21st Century lingo, The Holy Scriptures are the Gold Standard.

Another fault from the Roman Catholic side is that Protestants and Evangelicals refuse the teaching office. This is not true as even the Reformed Westminster Confession of Faith discusses the teaching office (which St Paul confirms) and synods and councils to resolve issues of disagreement (Acts 15 Council of Jerusalem).

Where the difference occurs is your church uses Sacred Scriptures as a servant to your Magisterium. The clear evidence is the extensive use of later doctrinal developments applying eisegesis to shoehorn traditions not found in the NT church nor post apostolic early church (which many Eastern Orthodox will attest to as well).

Doesn't follow-already been done-why should that be required now? I don't expect Protestants to walk on water to prove their interpretations are true-some are, some aren't. We can hold them up for scrutiny against the teachings of the Church that God established for that purpose.

What do the NT epistles say who is the head of the Church? The answer is Christ. Where do we find the direct commands, actions and words of Christ? That's correct in the New Testament.

 

[redleghunter]

The thing is, redleghunter, If someone who witnessed Pope Francis or some other RC bishop performing some miracle (alleged to be by the power of the Holy Spirit) testified of this miracle to you, would you believe their testimony?

Ping me when they do.

Or should you or I be assured the college of Cardinals just so happened to elect four popes from the Medici family?

There's a real problem with self proclaimed authority seen in the ancient churches which was unseen in the NT church.

For the most part the early councils were among peers and deemed ecumenical. Yet when West and East split that was lost. The Eastern Orthodox will make the more ancient claim to the One True Church and point to the Western Church as breaking from tradition. Yet Rome makes the claim the East is in error and out of fellowship of the One True Church.

Off in Protestant land we are now faced with two One True Churches. Your church won't even offer Holy Communion to Roman Catholics. And Protestants and Evangelicals who hold more in common theologically don't refuse the Lord's Supper whether one is Methodist or Reformed.

Please tell me where the greatest divide occurs?

 

[Anguspure]

Haha......15 pages of the same old stuff. Went down the exact path the OP intended. Doesn't everyone ever get tired of the same old stuff?

Its not the same old stuff to the person who is thinking about it for the first time, and surely this is why we cover the same ground over and over again, for the benefit of those people.

 

[Goatee]

17 pages and counting of Catholic Bashing.

These threads prop up continuously!

 

[Blood Bought 1953]

17 pages and counting of Catholic Bashing.

These threads prop up continuously!

Goatee....the phrase below your picture says everything one needs to know in order to be saved.....everything else is window dressing....a sincere,contrite heart is all that God has ever been looking for , He will take it from there

 

[Vicomte13]

In the final analysis , it’s just like Solomon said....”it’s all vanity”......

Maybe. But then again, God has gone to a great deal of trouble to appeal to each of us in our individual courts, and he has succeeded in winning his case in many of our courtrooms. Whether or not our following him is all vanity is a different question. I rather hope it isn't.

 

[monoingles]

I am an Evangelical in the Church of England and my mother-in-law who is from Colombia is a devout Catholic. I have known her for 20 years now but I have only been a Christian for the last 8 years.

The main discussion that we have about the differences of what we each believe always comes back to what we think about Mary and her centrality in each of our individual faith, which of course is just as far as we live from each other

 

[JoeP222w]

Because of this, the arguments between a Protestant and a Catholic will revolve around one's “private interpretation” of Scripture as against the "official teachings of the Roman Catholic Church."

This is not an accurate description of the Protestant view. Sola Scriptura does not deny the role of other authorities in the Christian's life. Sola Scriptura defines scripture to be the sole infallible rule of faith. Sola Scriptura does not deny the teachings of those who have gone before us (i.e. the early church fathers) or the role of the church. But all of those things outside the Bible must come into submission to the Bible. Protestantism does not promote "you and your Bible underneath a tree and that's all you need", so it is not merely your own "private interpretation". It is the revelation of the Holy Spirit through the pages of scripture, and the church (not the Roman Catholic church) when the church submits to the ultimate authority of the Bible.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

Without the Holy Spirit revealing it, the Word cannot be known, so God cannot be known. That is the point that is being made. So, even though God's Word is the highest authority, it is of little consequence if one cannot "hear" it. Hearing is the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Your statement
"What is not in Scripture is the teaching that Scripture is the highest authority."

Care to retract it?

Matt 4:4

 

[JoeP222w]

I think animosity stems from many having an, "I'm right and you're wrong perspective" instead of, "We're all brothers and sisters in Christ" perspective. Until we change our focus to what we hold in common rather than how we are different, animosity will persist.

If someone believes something that is not in scripture and even goes against scripture, they are not my brother or sister in Christ. There are definitions of Christianity and Theology matters.

 

[Vicomte13]

17 pages and counting of Catholic Bashing.

These threads prop up continuously!

They keep propping up because of the fear that the Catholics have it right. Nobody bothers to bash the various other little splinters of Christianity, because they aren't really afraid of them. Everybody already knows that those others are wrong, so why bother.

But Catholicism has power in it, and people feel it. So they either accept it, or they attack it.

Ever notice how few Catholics there are on Christian Forums? Those of us who stay, do it because deep down we enjoy arguing with people. Have you ever learned a thing - one single thing of any spiritual use - from any of the braying anti-Catholic voices?

The only thing I've ever learned is to thank God for infant baptism, to have that seal placed on the soul so young that one grows up within God's protection, so that one does not have to "reason" one's way to faith the way these other folks do.

Of course, we're never going to reason them into changing their minds either. That requires a change of heart, only God can do that, and I'm pretty sure that our coming over here and arguing with them all the time doesn't really prepare their hearts to be changed, but rather, hardens them. The best thing we Catholics could probably do for the folks who bash us endlessly would probably be to cut them off, leave them alone, and walk away. God may reach down and change their hearts - we're certainly never going to be able to do that.

For us Catholics to come here, then, get bashed by the ignorant and then work them up into a froth, is really kind of mean on our part, a guilty pleasure. We're like rich kids born into everything who are taunting the poor kids on the other side of the tracks for being poor. We really should have pity, stop it and walk away. But it IS fun - a guilty pleasure.

When you're attacked, when Catholicism is attacked by the sort of wild, unhinged nonsense you read on this site, have you ever felt so much as a twinge of doubt, a tremor of "He has a point?" I never have. The only criticism of Catholicism that has ever rung true here is that leveled by other Catholics, based on the bad deeds of our history, and how we fell into the trap of doing those bad deeds.

THAT is a legitimate line of discussion. The rest of the endless nonsense? Well, let's get together in a Seance with Ishtar and the Virgin Mary, burn some sacred incense inside of a pentacle, drink some blood, burn some candles bought with indulgence money (TM), and pray to our Lord and Master, Darth Bergoglio, the Pope - he will give us all the answers {through the Illuminati and the world elite bankers, dontcha know.)

 

[Monksailor]

IF you have been on this web site for any length of time you have seen that most of the conversations and debates revolve around the conflict between the Catholic faith and the Protestant faith.

There is constant back and forth banter and in the end the difference is still there.
IT seems that the debates always disintegrate into personal combat and verbal wars with the moderators finally ending the thread and in fact I expect that same thing to happen to this thread.

It seems to me that the conflict comes from our basic human nature in dealing with fundamental disagreements concerning eternal truths. The Protestants understand that the RCC teaches a "work-gospel" that can not save and the Catholic church thinks that Protestants teach a "greasy - grace" gospel that requires nothing more than a simple confession of wrong doing/sin due to the emotional preaching of a man.

However, looking deeper than just that the question must be WHY?
In My Opinion the real rift that ignites the debate is rooted in AUTHORITY!

How anyone answers that question always determines the answers to all the other questions.
I think that every Catholic believer will agree that when it comes down to deciding a theological issue about defined Catholic dogma, there isn’t anything to discuss on the Catholic's side because once Rome speaks, it is settled.

Therefore we have the ROOT of the conflict. Whenever there is a theological discussion when trying to debate a Roman Catholic – reason and Scripture are not the Catholic’s final authority; they can always retreat into the “safe zone” of Roman Catholic Authority.

Because of this, the arguments between a Protestant and a Catholic will revolve around one's “private interpretation” of Scripture as against the "official teachings of the Roman Catholic Church."

Catholics claim to successfully avoid the legitimate problems of private interpretation by their reliance on their TRADITION. But that never satisfies the difference but instead merely pushes the question back a step. The truth is that both Roman Catholics and Protestants must, in the end, rely upon their reasoning abilities to choose their authority and their interpretive skills to understand what that authority teaches in order to determine what they will believe. IMO, Protestants are simply more willing to admit that this is the case.

Hi, Major 1, it has been a while. As I understand one of the MAJOR differences of the two is that Protestants believe in direct, Divine inspiration through the Holy Spirit and/or the fact that God's Word/The Holy Scripture is "God breathed" and "living and active." This is the major reason, I believe, that the Protestant fore fathers, Luther and Calvin and others (who were considered heretics by the RCC), were persecuted, imprisoned, tortured and even killed by the Catholic regime during the Inquisitions (see: What were the Inquisitions?) During one of the four (second:Spanish Inquisition 1478>(over 31,900 killed)) Inquisitions over 2,000 "heretics" were burned at the stake (in less than a decade) These "heretics" were not only being divisive but I think much more importantly they preached a message which threatened the authority (and wealth) of the RCC which had "gotten in bed" with the Emperors of Rome (4th century.) Their influence over the conquered peoples (in effect, the world) of Rome (Roman Empire) enabled the RCC to form a collusion with Rome which was a VERY beneficial symbiotic (and horribly evil in many ways) relationship for both parties: hence, the "separation of church and state" (not: of personal religious convictions and state) in our Constitution. One of the many RCC's benefits was a heretic now became an enemy of the State and the maximum punishment now shifted from excommunication to death and the RCC was given virtually free reigns on how to conduct their Inquisitions. Sorry, for that large bit of info/joy ride.

Anyway, because we "heretics/protestors" believe in direct, Divine inspiration with individual responsibility and accountability and not the Catholic way of always going through what we regard as a worldly religious system based upon the worldly influence and power gained by the collusion described above, like you said, we will rarely (not, never) ever be able to influence a devout Roman Catholic. But we must NEVER< NEVER< NEVER forget that our Protestant forefathers/founders WERE Roman Catholics in high places who, after much study of the Holy Scriptures realized and actualized the Scriptural foundations for direct, Divine individual inspiration. I believe that Roman Catholics, through their fundamental belief in Jesus the Christ and what He did for them, ARE Christian but due to many hurdles thrown in their way they have been crippled (but not totally prevented) from realizing that they are endowed individually with the Holy Spirit and open and free for direct, Divine individual inspiration with individual responsibility and accountability.

Direct, Divine individual inspiration need not always or ever be determined by puny human nature or reason. The Holy Scriptures tells us several times that all Christians are endowed with the Holy Spirit Who can also guide us if we acknowledge and submit to Him.

 

[FireDragon76]

They keep propping up because of the fear that the Catholics have it right. Nobody bothers to bash the various other little splinters of Christianity, because they aren't really afraid of them. Everybody already knows that those others are wrong, so why bother.

But Catholicism has power in it, and people feel it. So they either accept it, or they attack it.

Ever notice how few Catholics there are on Christian Forums? Those of us who stay, do it because deep down we enjoy arguing with people. Have you ever learned a thing - one single thing of any spiritual use - from any of the braying anti-Catholic voices?

The only thing I've ever learned is to thank God for infant baptism, to have that seal placed on the soul so young that one grows up within God's protection, so that one does not have to "reason" one's way to faith the way these other folks do.

Of course, we're never going to reason them into changing their minds either. That requires a change of heart, only God can do that, and I'm pretty sure that our coming over here and arguing with them all the time doesn't really prepare their hearts to be changed, but rather, hardens them. The best thing we Catholics could probably do for the folks who bash us endlessly would probably be to cut them off, leave them alone, and walk away. God may reach down and change their hearts - we're certainly never going to be able to do that.

For us Catholics to come here, then, get bashed by the ignorant and then work them up into a froth, is really kind of mean on our part, a guilty pleasure. We're like rich kids born into everything who are taunting the poor kids on the other side of the tracks for being poor. We really should have pity, stop it and walk away. But it IS fun - a guilty pleasure.

When you're attacked, when Catholicism is attacked by the sort of wild, unhinged nonsense you read on this site, have you ever felt so much as a twinge of doubt, a tremor of "He has a point?" I never have. The only criticism of Catholicism that has ever rung true here is that leveled by other Catholics, based on the bad deeds of our history, and how we fell into the trap of doing those bad deeds.

THAT is a legitimate line of discussion. The rest of the endless nonsense? Well, let's get together in a Seance with Ishtar and the Virgin Mary, burn some sacred incense inside of a pentacle, drink some blood, burn some candles bought with indulgence money (TM), and pray to our Lord and Master, Darth Bergoglio, the Pope - he will give us all the answers {through the Illuminati and the world elite bankers, dontcha know.)

Much as I am not a fan of papal infallibility, I do recognize there is a certain integrity to the way Catholics do things that is not found in other Christian traditions, necessarily.

The Baptists (the largest non-Catholic religion in the US) have nothing to lose, no skin in the big game of history. All they rally around is detesting infant baptism and sacramentalism. Everything else about their faith is up for theological debate. They have no sense of history or identity beyond a book they have no explanation for (I guess Jesus just handed Peter a copy of the KJV and said "Feed my sheep."). They feel no social obligation to shepherd hundreds of millions of souls over thousands of years, across changing times and circumstances. After all, the Baptist view of the Church is just for the "true believer" that has separated themselves from "the world" and chosen to be baptized as a symbol of that separation, so the folks that don't easily fit into the theological fad of the day can simply be discounted.

Evangelicals in the US aren't really much different in that respect, and are basically cut from the same cloth.

 

[FireDragon76]

Anyway, because we "heretics/protestors" believe in direct, Divine inspiration with individual responsibility and accountability and not the Catholic way of always going through what we regard as a worldly religious system

Read some real history, not evangelical propaganda. Calvin had an extremely high view of the Church, seeing it as a magisterial authority with the power to impose penances and church discipline. Luther would reject the notion of "direct divine inspiration" and "individual responsibility", in fact he would call those folks dangerous fanatics who "swallowed the Holy Spirit "feathers and all". He had no use for them and demanded they perform a sign from God or he would run them out of town as false prophets.

The early reformers were not individualists. The individualism came more from the secular developments in the western world, not really from religion.

 

[PeaceByJesus]

Our position relies not on mere words (1 Corinthians 2:4), and there is no poverty of the evidence of the Holy Spirit working powerfully within the Life of the Church throughout all of its history, including right now. There is only a poverty of your willingness and ability to accept it.

No, your boasting is that of mere words which a Mormon could likewise assert within her history, and searching the Scriptures reveals your history is NOT that of the NT church church, but the result of progressive deformation, which you charge your Roman cousins, though searching the Scriptures reveals also you have not gone as far as they have.

Thus yes, there sure is a poverty of my willingness and ability to accept it - as there should be to an org that manifest a progressive accretion of traditions not manifest in the inspired record of the NT church, whether it be PTCBIH, or a separate sacerdotal class of believers for which the distinctive term hiereus is used, uniquely being able to confect and preside over the Eucharistic sacrifice, and regularly confessing sins to such, and more.

 

[redleghunter]

Our position relies not on mere words (1 Corinthians 2:4),

We can now look at said quoted passage:

1 Corinthians 2 New King James Version (NKJV)

2 And I, brethren, when I came to you, did not come with excellence of speech or of wisdom declaring to you the testimony of God. 2 For I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. 3 I was with you in weakness, in fear, and in much trembling. 4 And my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, 5 that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.

Three points.

1. How did you come about to use verse #4 in your argument? Holy Scriptures as presented above or a Patriarch who quoted the Holy Scriptures the Holy Spirit provided through St Paul?

2. Do you not see your own appeal to the Holy Spirit inspired Scriptures to further your argument?

3. The last point is, we have St Paul not merely leaving such truth to pass down orally but he actually penned those words in which you use.

 

[PeaceByJesus]

Yes, they could anchor their claims to Scripture-with accuracy. Others could not necessarily do so, evidenced by the fact that Sola Scriptura adherents disagree with each other regularly.

And adherent of Tradition-based churches in which the One True Church® is the supreme infallible authority (sola ecclesia) disagree with each other regularly, including on what their supreme infallible authority means, and what magisterial level many teachings belong to, and thus what manner of assent is required.

Thus according to the premise that a claim to be the supreme infallible authority cannot be valid if it can result in disagreement or confusion, neither Scripture or "The Church" qualifies to be that authority.

But just what is your basis for your assurance of truth? For it seems that the RC argument is that an assuredly (if conditionally) infallible magisterium is essential for determination and assurance of Truth (including writings and men being of God) and to fulfill promises of Divine presence, providence of Truth, and preservation of faith, and authority. (Jn. 14:16,26; 15:26; 16:13; Mt. 16:18; Lk. 10:16)\

And that being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that Rome is that assuredly infallible magisterium. Thus any who knowingly dissent from the latter must be in rebellion to God.

Does this fairly represent what you hold to or in what way does it differ?

 

[redleghunter]

17 pages and counting of Catholic Bashing.

These threads prop up continuously!

Did you get your Christmas lights up yet?

 

[Vicomte13]

All they rally around is detesting infant baptism and sacramentalism.

Thank God for infant baptism!
To baptize a child is to seal him with a protective ward until he is old enough to reason.

 

[redleghunter]

I am an Evangelical in the Church of England

As was the late John Stott. His "Basic Christianity" is still being handed out today by all walks of churches and denominations. Good book.