The Catholicization of the Protestant Church

In just a few days I’m going to be walking in the footsteps of Martin Luther. I’ll explore the halls of the church in Zurich. I’ll be in Geneva when the Protestant world celebrates the 500th anniversary of Calvin’s death. And, I’m afraid the Reformers would hardly recognize the Protestant church they struggled to birth.

In fact, I think Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin might think most Protestant churches are really just inconsistent Catholic churches. Five hundred years after these men and others risked their life to bring reform to the church and the Bible to the people, we’ve not only forgotten the lessons learned, we’ve surrendered the gains gotten.

Consider just a few of the ways in which the modern Protestant church resembles the Catholic Church of the 16th century:

Our pastors act like priests. Oh, it’s not that they’ve usurped the priesthood of all believers. We’ve given it to them wholesale. If we have a biblical question, we don’t struggle to find the answer. We twitter the pastor. He’s the spiritual expert. If we need prayer, we don’t call the deacons. We hold out for the pastor because we think there’s some magic left in his words. Last, and certainly the worst, the public exposure of the raucous sexual sins of so many pastors would surely remind Luther of what he saw in Rome during his infamous visit to the so-called Holy City.

Our people have given up the Bible. Sure, we all have plenty. Some of us have handfuls of Bibles at home in every translation imaginable. We have Luther and others of that generation to thank for that great blessing. Yet, most of us don’t actually read our Bibles. Statistics suggest that only a woefully small segment of the evangelical world reads the Bible with any regularity at all. Instead, we let the experts tell us what it says (see above). And to think, Wycliffe and others were willing to die so we could ignore the Bible in our own language.

Our churches are full of people who are not Christians. In the days of the Reformation, the Catholic Church was full of nominal Catholics, those who rarely darkened the church doors but who assumed their salvation was secure because of that loose association. Protestants today have confused church membership with salvation as well.

Compare your church rolls with active attendance and see how many “members” never come to church. Now go share the Gospel with them and see how many say, “I’m okay. I’m a member of such and such church.” Membership, not active faith, has become the basis of their assurance. That sounds an awful lot like what Luther confronted.

A group of Catholic and evangelical scholars and leaders got together to seek common ground between the two movements in the 1990s. Surprisingly, they found what they believed were points of commonality and issued a lengthy statement detailing their finds. The document, referred to as Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT), was lambasted by evangelicals and Catholics alike. In the end, their desire for rapprochement was met with antipathy and suspicion.

Ironically, ECT failed, I’m afraid, because they looked at the written theology of the church rather than its practiced theology. We say we believe one thing but all too often our actions belie another set of beliefs. If you look closely, you’ll find that many Protestants are far more Catholic than they’re willing to admit.

I'm committed to the one, holy Catholic and apostolic Church which is the Body of Christ.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The First Commandment warns us not to put anything before God. As a Protestant Christian, it would be very unlikely to read or hear a statement, similar to that which you wrote above, coming from one of the members of my church. It appears to me that Catholics ( given your post) revere their church more than they do Christ.

A member of my church would instinctively say that they are “committed” to Christ and accept Him as their Savior. Their next statement would be an expression of profound gratitude for Christ's atonement. If they thought to mention the denomination and their membership in it at all, it would be merely as an after thought.

I am trying to be respectful here. I am merely pointing out that the sentence that you wrote above leaves me ( as a Protestant) utterly befuddled as to why would say what you did.

Yes, I find the near adoration of Mary irritating, as well as asking Saints for their “intercession”. The relics that is going around the world recently ( I forget the man's name) leaves me confused. Ditto for digging up John Newman's body. I could easily let all of this pass. I don't see this as being central to Catholic belief.

But...Your sentence above crystallizes for me what is profoundly different between Catholic belief and my own. Commitment to Christ is fundamental, central, and the first thing that comes to mind when I am asked about my faith. **His salvation and atonement**. I don't immediately talk about the institution of the church.

***Calvin believed that people were predestined to be damned or saved....If Protestants have shrugged off those two incubuses, it only shows their good sense.

Er....so did Augustine***

Can you document this? I am not aware of any double predestination theology advocated by Augustine.

Remember that Augustine’s closest definition of the elect were simply those who persevered until the end of their lives. Augustine was also a great point of contention between East and West; they have never accorded him the distinction of Father of the Church and Augustine’s followers were largely responsible for the lessening of the Patristic Church in the West.

Double predestination was condemned at the Council of Valance (530) and by the Council of Mainz (848). Are there certain individuals predestined to Heaven? There is Scriptural evidence. Are there certain individuals predestined to Hell? No Scriptural proofs exist.

***Now if you want to say that some of the greatest Church leaders didn’t have good sense, well, then you have another problem.***

There were several periods in Augustine’s life in which he showed poor sense such as the more than a decade in which he was a dedicated Manichean.

Can you document this? I am not aware of any double predestination theology advocated by Augustine.

Wow, I don't know how many times I have to post this.

CHAP. 11 [VI.]— THAT SOME MEN ARE ELECTED IS OF GOD'S MERCY.

"Many hear the word of truth; but some believe, while others contradict. Therefore, the former will to believe; the latter do not will." Who does not know this? Who can deny this? But since in some the will is prepared by the Lord, in others it is not prepared, we must assuredly be able to distinguish what comes from God's mercy, and what from His judgment. "What Israel sought for," says the apostle, "he hath not obtained, but the election hath obtained it; and the rest were blinded, as it is written, God gave to them the spirit of compunction,—eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear, even to this day. And David said, Let their table be made a snare, a retribution, and a stumblingblock to them; let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see; and bow down their back always." [Rom. 11.7.] Here is mercy and judgment,—mercy towards the election which has obtained the righteousness of God, but judgment to the rest which have been blinded. And yet the former, because they willed,12 believed; the latter, because they did not will believed not. Therefore mercy and judgment were manifested in the very wills themselves. Certainly such an election is of grace, not at all of merits. For he had before said, "So, therefore, even at this present time, the remnant has been saved by the election of grace. And if by grace, now it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace." [Rom. 11.5.] Therefore the election obtained what it obtained gratuitously; there preceded none of those things which they might first give, and it should be given to them again. He saved them for nothing. But to the rest who were blinded, as is there plainly declared, it was done in recompense. "All the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth." [Psalm 25.10.] But His ways are unsearchable. Therefore the mercy by which He freely delivers, and the truth by which He righteously judges, are equally unsearchable.

CHAP. 16.— WHY THE GIFT OF FAITH IS NOT GIVEN TO ALL.

Faith, then, as well in its beginning as in its completion, is God's gift; and let no one have any doubt whatever, unless he desires to resist the plainest sacred writings, that this gift is given to some, while to some it is not given. But why it is not given to all ought not to disturb the believer, who believes that from one all have gone into a condemnation, which undoubtedly is most righteous; so that even if none were delivered therefrom, there would be no just cause for finding fault with God. Whence it is plain that it is a great grace for many to be delivered, and to acknowledge in those that are not delivered what would be due to themselves; so that he that glorieth may glory not in his own merits, which he sees to be equaled in those that are condemned, but in the Lord. But why He delivers one rather than another,—"His judgments are unsearchable, and His ways past finding out." [Rom. 11.33.] For it is better in this case for us to hear or to say, "O man, who art thou that repliest against God?" [Rom. 9.20.] than to dare to speak as if we could know what He has chosen to be kept secret. Since, moreover, He could not will anything unrighteous.

CHAP. 34 [XVII.]— THE SPECIAL CALLING OF THE ELECT IS NOT BECAUSE THEY HAVE BELIEVED, BUT IN ORDER THAT THEY MAY BELIEVE.

Let us, then, understand the calling whereby they become elected,—not those who are elected because they have believed, but who are elected that they may believe. For the Lord Himself also sufficiently explains this calling when He says, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." [John 15.16.] For if they had been elected because they had believed, they themselves would certainly have first chosen Him by believing in Him, so that they should deserve to be elected. But He takes away this supposition altogether when He says, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." And yet they themselves, beyond a doubt, chose Him when they believed on Him. Whence it is not for any other reason that He says, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you," than because they did not choose Him that He should choose them, but He chose them that they might choose Him; because His mercy preceded them according to grace, not according to debt. Therefore He chose them out of the world while He was wearing flesh, but as those who were already chosen in Himself before the foundation of the world. This is the changeless truth concerning predestination and grace. For what is it that the apostle says, "As He hath chosen us in Himself before the foundation of the world"? [Eph. 1.4.] And assuredly, if this were said because God foreknew that they would believe, not because He Himself would make them believers, the Son is speaking against such a foreknowledge as that when He says, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you;" when God should rather have foreknown this very thing, that they themselves would have chosen Him, so that they might deserve to be chosen by Him. Therefore they were elected before the foundation of the world with that predestination in which God foreknew what He Himself would do; but they were elected out of the world with that calling whereby God fulfilled that which He predestinated. For whom He predestinated, them He also called, with that calling, to wit, which is according to the purpose. Not others, therefore, but those whom He predestinated, them He also called; nor others, but those whom He so called, them He also justified; nor others, but those whom He predestinated, called, and justified, them He also glorified; assuredly to that end which has no end. Therefore God elected believers; but He chose them that they might be so, not because they were already so. The Apostle James says: "Has not God chosen the poor in this world, rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which God hath promised to them that love Him?" [James 2.5.] By choosing them, therefore; He makes them rich in faith, as He makes them heirs of the kingdom; because He is rightly said to choose that in them, in order to make which in them He chose them. I ask, who can hear the Lord saying, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you," and can dare to say that men believe in order to be elected, when they are rather elected to believe; lest against the judgment of truth they be found to have first chosen Christ to whom Christ says, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you"? [John 15.16.]

A Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints

We are elected so that we may believe. We are not elected because we believe. A distinct and important difference.

I would point out that Augustine's Treatise of the Saints was not only at the end of his career, but was inspired by the Blessed Cyprian.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.