Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Radio Replies Second Volume - The Idealization of Protestantism
Celledoor.com ^ | 1940 | Fathers Rumble & Carty

Posted on 05/08/2010 9:30:27 PM PDT by GonzoII

The Idealization of Protestantism



246. Protestants claim to belong to the Apostolic Church.

The claim cannot be sustained. That Church alone can be truly Apostolic which reaches back to the Apostles by the historical, spiritual, and social bond of uninterrupted succession. Jesus chose and commissioned the Apostles, and they formed the authoritative body in the Church. And in the same Church today there must still be an authoritative body derived from them. This derivation must be historically and socially evident in a visible Church. The whole chain depends on the first link, for that links the Church to Christ.

247. The Reformation was to restore the Apostolic Church.

So it is said. But Protestants do not claim an Apostolic character for their Churches in the right sense of the word. As a rule, they seek to attach themselves to Christ directly, without any intermediary society possessing historical continuity. They rather claim to have a religion "like" that of the Apostles, than one given them "by" the Apostles and their lawful successors. The true Christian and Catholic doctrine is that the Eternal Son of God became man in the Incarnation, thus commencing a life at once divine and human. And this life of Christ continues its activity by the Church, which is a kind of permanent social incarnation. As there is one continuous life of humanity by heredity, so the life of the Church is continuous by succession and tradition.

248. We cling to the traditions of the Apostles.

You mean that you have the same doctrines as the Apostles. That is not really true. But even were it true, it would not be enough. To profess someone's doctrine on the grounds of one's own approval of them does not mean social continuity with him. The Church is a society, and its life is collective and organized under one authority. Protestantism has no central authority, and no priesthood properly so-called. It has not an apostolicity such as the true Christian Church requires.

249. The Reformed Church has always acknowledged the Roman Catholic Church as an important branch of the Church Catholic; but that Christian judgment is not reciprocated.

Do all the Protestant Churches constitute the one "Reformed Church"? If so, would Methodists or Presbyterians admit that they are one with Judge Rutherford's Witnesses of Jehovah? After all, Judge Rutherford has as much, or as little right to set up his new Protestant sect as John Knox had to set up Presbyterianism. And it is not true, of course, that the Protestant Churches have always acknowledged the Roman Church as an important branch of the Church Catholic. The first Reformers rejected the Catholic Church as antichrist, and spoke of it with the utmost horror. Preaching in Edinburgh, in 1565, John Knox, the founder of Presbyterianism, declared that the Church is limited to those who profess the Lord Jesus, and have rejected papistry." The Catholic Church must be forgiven for refusing to admit relationship with Protestant Churches which originated with men who denounced her, and left her, and never returned to her. Is it reasonable to suppose that the new Churches set up by the Reformers are really in union with the Church they left? History and logic leave no room for the modern claim of Protestants to belong also to the Catholic Church.

250. Whom do members of Protestant Churches acknowledge as head of their Church on earth?

They have various systems of government. In some, as the Congregationalists, the members of each congregation are a law to themselves. In others, as the Presbyterians, authority is vested by the members in elected office-bearers, different assemblies prevailing in various localities. In these cases there is no universal bond of unity in the strict sense of the word. In Churches which have bishops, as the Catholic, Orthodox Greek, and Episcopal or Anglican, power is vested in those bishops. In the Greek Church the power is ultimately traced back to one or other of almost a dozen different Patriarchs. There is no such thing as one united Greek Church. In the Anglican Church the final authority is traced back to the Crown of England. In the Catholic Church all authority on earth centers in one supreme bishop independent of any national rulers — the Bishop of Rome. Thus we have a genuine ecclesiastical unity side by side with the required universality of one and the same Church throughout the world.

251. Do the Anglican, Presbyterian, and Methodist Churches exist in such foreign countries as Germany, Russia, France, Spain, Norway, etc.?

They may have what may be termed "agencies" in some of those countries to cater for English-speaking tourists of the different denominations. But, insofar as any nationals of these countries profess Protestantism, they usually profess a type of Protestantism peculiar to themselves. Where the Catholic Church unites men of different nationalities in one and the same Christian doctrine, Protestantism permits variations in doctrine to suit the national differences of outlook amongst men.

252. You habitually speak of your own Church as the Catholic Church. What right have you to drop the prefix "Roman"?

Either ours is the Catholic Church, or there is no Catholic Church. The expression "Roman Catholic," though frequently used, is really meaningless. Grammatically it involves a contradiction in terms. For the word Catholic means universal or "not limited." To use the word "Roman" as a qualifying adjective of limitation or restriction is like speaking of the "limited unlimited." Again, geographically, the Catholic Church is that Church which exists in all the different countries of the world for members of those different countries. And our Church is alone truly Catholic in that sense of the word. The Church subject to the Bishop of Rome exists in every country precisely for the people of each different country. No other Church is universal in this sense of the word.

253. I cannot accept your verdict of Protestantism. You seem quite blind to all the positive good it has accomplished.

I am not blind to the good to be found in Protestantism side by side with its errors. But I am concerned with the Reformation movement as such; and I say that it was not justified.

254. When the Romish Church rose to power she abandoned the teachings of the Gospel until the people were fed up with the deal given by Rome.

The Catholic Church never abandoned the teachings of the Gospel. The laxity of many of her members in practice was made one of the excuses for the Protestant Reformation. But the Protestant defection from the Church was a great mistake.

255. The people gladly accepted the teaching in which the Apostles gloried.

You would find it very difficult to set out clearly the teachings of the Protestant Reformers which you believe to harmonize with those of the Apostles. For the Reformers themselves were anything but agreed as to what should be believed. They fought against each other's teachings bitterly, indulging in violent mutual recriminations.

256. Protestantism is a witness to the great truths that have stood the test of time.

It used to witness to some of them. But unfortunately it is allowing most of them nowadays to be denied without protest, and even by its official teachers and ministers.

257. Protestants believe the Bible to be the standard of Christian truth, and the very Word of God.

Many of their leading exponents dispute that today. But even amongst those who still accept the Bible, there is little agreement as to what the Bible means. The Catholic Church defends the Bible as the very Word of God, and is alone capable of giving the authentic interpretation of the sense intended by God.

258. The Bible gives spiritual freedom such as all Protestants enjoy.

The Bible nowhere gives freedom to believe as one pleases, or to worship as one pleases. It demands our submission to the truth that we may be free from error, and obedience to the Church that we may be free from false forms of religion.

259. The Reformation limited the power of priests, and liberated the people from an autocratic hierarchy.

It abolished the priestly office, limiting the ministry to the preaching of the Word of God and the administration of some of the Sacraments.

260. It meant a purifying of the ministerial office to an extent that makes it difficult to realise now the evils to which it was subject.

It is true that there were many evils amongst the clergy at the time of the Reformation. I will go so far as to say that, had the Catholic clergy of the time been all they should have been, the disaster would not have occurred. At the same time, if many were not true to their obligations, many also were strictly faithful, and some were saints fit for canonization. Nor did any really holy priest dream of leaving the Church. I deny, of course, that the ministry was purified by abandoning the priesthood, abolishing its obligations, and adopting definitely lower standards. However, as I have admitted, if the Reformation did not itself purify the ministry, it did occasion a vast movement of reform strictly so-called within the Catholic Church; and the Council of Trent made the most stringent legislation for the better formation of future candidates for the priesthood, and the elimination of abuses. While the Reformation, then, did not purify the ministerial office, it did challenge the Catholic Church to do so.

261. Protestant Churches are founded on personal trust, and freedom as to how and where we shall meet our Lord in prayer.

The Catholic Church does not exclude personal trust in our Lord. She insists upon it. And Catholics are perfectly free to seek union with Him in prayer whenever they wish. But the Catholic Church rightly forbids Catholics to seek union with the assemblies of others who profess doctrines other than hers. Whatever charity we have for the persons of others, we cannot extend approval to their erroneous teachings and forms of religious worship. You may be my friend; but your religion is not my religion; and you should not expect me to behave as if it were.

262. Protestantism at least has meant liberty.

It liberated people from the Catholic Church. But that was a liberation from the restraints of the truth revealed by Christ, and from His moral laws. In his excellent book on "Luther and His Work," Mr. Joseph Clayton, F.R.H.S. writes, "Whither has Luther led his followers? Into what promised land, after the years of wandering outside the Catholic unity, are now brought the Protestants who date their emancipation from Martin Luther? Four centuries of journeying since Luther started the exodus, and yet the promised land of the Lutheran evangel, so often emergent, fades from sight even as the mirage vanishes in the desert. It is the wasteland of doubt that Protestants have reached — a wasteland littered with abandoned hopes and discarded creeds."

263. The Reformation meant the restoration of public prayer to its right place as the duty and privilege of every servant of God, and not the monopoly of a select class of monks and nuns called ironically the Religious.

Such a sneer at those who consecrated their lives to God in the Religious Orders is unworthy of a Christian. Meantime, while the suppression of the monasteries meant the suppression of the worship offered to God within them in the name of the whole Church, what have people made of the duty and privilege of public prayer? Protestant clergymen complain regularly of lost congregations, empty Churches, and the neglect of public worship. That scarcely sounds like the restoration of public prayer to its proper place as the right and duty of all the faithful. On the other hand, Catholic Churches are filled to overflowing.

264. The Reformation meant a purifying of family life.

In what way? The Catholic Church certainly cannot be blamed for the growth of loose ideas of marriage, easy divorce, the widespread plague of contraceptive birth control, and other acknowledged evils tending to break down family life.

265. How can you escape the evident success of Protestantism?

I deny that its success is evident, at least from the genuinely Christian point of view. Genuine Christianity leads to supernatural rather than to merely natural ideals. Christ said that His kingdom was not of this world, and definitely bade us "love not the world." A spiritual and unworldly outlook is therefore the outstanding characteristic of the Catholic religion. I do not say that it is the outlook of all individual Catholics. But insofar as he has not a spiritual and unworldly outlook, a Catholic has drifted from Catholic ideals. On the other hand, Protestantism does not, of its very nature, lead to a spiritual and unworldly outlook. If some good Protestants are truly spiritual, it is in spite of their religion, not because of it. The contrast is evident in the fact that Catholicism will propose as one of her heroes a St. Francis of Assisi who utterly rejected worldly goods, sought poverty and holiness of life, and ended up as a canonized Saint. But the heroes of the Protestant tradition grow from penniless boys into millionaires, or travel from log cabin to White House.

Encoding copyright 2009 by Frederick Manligas Nacino. Some rights reserved.
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0
http://www.celledoor.com/cpdv-ebe/


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History
KEYWORDS: catholicism; christianity; protestantbash; protestantism; radiorepliesvoltwo; religion; theology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360361-375 next last
To: Judith Anne

You accuse many FR Protestants of bigotry and say that they are deserving of attacks from FR Catholics — thus making their beliefs and percieved biases the subject of your posts and attacks. One cannot level such attacks and expect to not be questioned about their own beliefs and biases.

The question is straighforward — do you consider Protestant doctrine inherently bigoted in its objections to Catholic doctrines? The question can be better phrased ... does my intentional disbelief in many Catholic doctrines (almost universally mirrored throughout Protestant Christianity) make me a bigot?

SnakeDoc


341 posted on 05/10/2010 8:11:47 AM PDT by SnakeDoctor ("The world will know that free men stood against a tyrant [...] that even a god-king can bleed.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies]

To: SnakeDoctor
What I am trying to figure out is whether you see Protestantism inherently bigoted or not ... are non-Catholic Christians necessarily bigoted anti-Catholics and thus necessarily deserving of the scathing attacks and rebukes you regularly dish out?"

Protestantism is, by the stated reasons for its foundation, anti-Catholic. Protestantism to justify its continuing existence must declare Catholicism wrong, heretical, and not Christian.

To rationalize this Protestants constantly make bold proclamations about what the Catholic Church teaches and what Catholics believe without ever having read or studied the Church history and Catechism beyond the self-serving lectures and sermons of Protestant preachers whose livelihood is dependant upon fomenting anti-Catholic bigotry. Recognizing this and citing examples is not the sin.

342 posted on 05/10/2010 8:25:29 AM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: Irisshlass

“Catholics don’t worship dead people either”

Sure they do. Idols as well.

“Maybe it would help you if would invoke the Holy Spirit who is God for discernment of the Scriptures.”

I thought I had to have a priest?


343 posted on 05/10/2010 8:25:59 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 340 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
"Sure they do. Idols as well."

YOur understanding of the English language is as poor as your understanding of Scripture and the Catechism. You would be well served if you gained an understanding of the difference between the words worship and venerate and between the words icon and idol.

You may be able to explain what you believe and why, but you are completely ignorant of Catholicism. Further, you should try to explain how you can profess any intimate or in depth knowledge or understanding of what the Catholic Church does or does not teach and what Catholics do or do not believe without ever having read the Catechism.

344 posted on 05/10/2010 8:34:01 AM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver; SnakeDoctor; Natural Law

Thank you for a FINE example of telling Catholics what they believe, even though you don’t know the subject well.

That bigoted behavior is much appreciated, for the edification of Snake Doctor.

FYI, Catholics are encouraged to read the Bible on their own. They can even receive one of those infamous indulgences for it, no money involved.


345 posted on 05/10/2010 8:34:25 AM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: SnakeDoctor
"The question is straighforward — do you consider Protestant doctrine inherently bigoted in its objections to Catholic doctrines?"

I cannot answer for Judith Anne, but I certainly do consider it bigoted for the reasons explained in post #342.

346 posted on 05/10/2010 8:35:50 AM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law; Religion Moderator

I thought personal attacks were not permitted?


347 posted on 05/10/2010 8:37:18 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law; SnakeDoctor
Protestantism is, by the stated reasons for its foundation, anti-Catholic. Protestantism to justify its continuing existence must declare Catholicism wrong, heretical, and not Christian.

A classic, backseat Catholic apologetic. I encourage you to take a History Lesson: Positively Protestant. Here's a quick summary:

What do the major historians of Protestantism say? Like almost all their colleagues, John Dillenberger and Claude Welch link the origin of the word Protestant to the ‘Protestation’ of the German evangelical estates in the second Diet of Speyer. But they see in that term “the duality of protest and affirmative witness.” That protest, they write, was
from the standpoint of affirmed faith. Few churches ever adopted the name “Protestant.” The most commonly adopted designations were rather “evangelical” and “reformed.” ... [W]hen the word Protestant came into currency in England (in Elizabethan times), its accepted significance was not “objection” but “avowal” or “witness” or “confession” (as the Latin protestari meant also “to profess”).
That meaning lasted for another century, say Dillenberger and Welch, and it referred to the Church of England’s
making its profession of the faith in the Thirty-nine Articles and the Book of Common Prayer. Only later did the word “protest” come to have a primarily negative significance, and the term “Protestant” come to refer to non-Roman churches in general.
....When Edward VI was crowned, the word still had a positive connotation. On the CultureVulture blog for the Guardian, Sean Clarke notes that it was 60 years from the introduction of Protestant in English until its first use in the extended sense of "object, dissent, or disapprove.” That (according to the Collins Etymological Dictionary) was first recorded in English in 1608. The Online Etymological Dictionary places the first use of protest to mean “statement of disapproval” in the year 1751—another century and a half. Through much of that history and well after, protest continued to mean “avow,” “affirm,” “witness,” or “solemnly proclaim.”

Poor, misunderstood protest has had a history something like that of another word—apology. That word has gone from its positive, head-held-high sense of “a formal justification or defense” (as in “the essay was an apology for capitalism”) to something tinged with shame and remorse (“a statement of regret or request for pardon”).


348 posted on 05/10/2010 8:37:22 AM PDT by Alex Murphy (Pretentiousness is so beneath me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
"A classic, backseat Catholic apologetic."

Much of Protestantism and most of the anti-Catholic bigots who frequent the Catholic topic threads on the Religion Forum draw their identity more from their opposition to all things Catholic than from their relationship with God.

349 posted on 05/10/2010 8:43:49 AM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
YOur understanding

Reading the mind of another Freeper is a form of "making it personal."

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

350 posted on 05/10/2010 8:43:55 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne; SnakeDoctor

“Thank you for a FINE example of telling Catholics what they believe, even though you don’t know the subject well.”

I know what Catholics have told me they believe. I know what Catholics do.

“That bigoted behavior is much appreciated, for the edification of Snake Doctor.”

So anyone who disagrees is a bigot?


351 posted on 05/10/2010 8:44:28 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

Comment #352 Removed by Moderator

To: driftdiver

Are you playing a game? Do you need attention? Are you trying to bait someone into an argument?


353 posted on 05/10/2010 8:46:48 AM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

I have heard Catholics say Protestants are not Christian, just as I have heard Protestants say Catholics are not Christian.

However, Protestant Christianity has never doctrinally claimed exclusivity in its relationship to Christ and the Almighty (though some denominations thereof certainly have). The very nature of Protestantism is that Salvation is achieved through grace and a personal relationship with Christ. Salvation is therefore individual, not through a specific denomination. A Baptist can be just as saved as a Calvinist, Methodist or Catholic — some denominations may be more conduscive than others, but doctrinal errors are one of many sins covered by Grace.

Catholic doctrine does claim exclusivity. So, it would seem to me that Catholicism is more invested in the failure of Protestantism than vice versa. If Protestantism succeeds, Catholicism is wrong in its claim of being the one true church of Christ. To Protestants, the success of Catholicism makes Catholicism but one of many branches of Christ’s chuch, as Protestants have claimed.

As far as I am aware, most mainstream Protestant denominations regard Catholics, though wrong in several respects, as brothers in Christ. Catholics very often seem to regard Protestants as heretics. However, I will acknowledge that Protestantism has fundamental objections to Catholicism which define it, and that Protestant denominations do not hesitate to make those objections known.

I think the characterization of Protestantism as anti-Catholic is a bit too heavy. There are doctrines which are specifically contrary to Catholicism, but mainstream Protestants do not typically regard Catholics as non-Christian. I certainly don’t.

SnakeDoc


354 posted on 05/10/2010 8:47:45 AM PDT by SnakeDoctor ("The world will know that free men stood against a tyrant [...] that even a god-king can bleed.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

What can I say...when you have 24,000 sects pressing down on you, who would know the truth. God appointed 24,000 sects to put his word out? Where is that in scripture, Christ appointed 24,000 sects?. God always appointed one person to represent Him, like Moses, like Peter. And I’m sure many are dead that started all those 24,000 sects, so continuing to listen to dead men who are not appointed by God is worshipping them and not God.


355 posted on 05/10/2010 8:48:56 AM PDT by Irisshlass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

Comment #356 Removed by Moderator

To: Judith Anne

‘Are you playing a game? “

Yep with peoples souls as the chips. I’d hate to see people lose their salvation because they think they just need to be a good person and do good things to be saved.

“Do you need attention? Are you trying to bait someone into an argument?”

Here I thought this thread was for discussion. Yet anyone that disagrees with Catholicism is told they are going to hell, bigoted, evil incarnate.


357 posted on 05/10/2010 8:51:38 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

If you regard my faith as inherently bigoted, then only a complete surrender of that faith will you find acceptably non-bigoted. I find such a surrender unacceptable. We seem to be at an impasse.

I will state outright that I would rather be labeled a “bigot” than to betray my faith in Christ. However, I find the label disingenuous when I regard you as a fellow Christian, and you appear to regard me as a heretic.

SnakeDoc


358 posted on 05/10/2010 8:55:11 AM PDT by SnakeDoctor ("The world will know that free men stood against a tyrant [...] that even a god-king can bleed.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 346 | View Replies]

To: SnakeDoctor; driftdiver

I just encourage you to read driftdiver’s comments. As regards Catholicism, they are unreliable, of course.


359 posted on 05/10/2010 8:58:11 AM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 354 | View Replies]

To: Irisshlass

Not sure I understand your 24,000 sects comment. I assume you are referring to some some number of non-catholic ‘churches’. I’ve never used them as I use the Bible.

“God always appointed one person to represent Him, like Moses, like Peter. “

Well he did appoint Moses in the OT. Later he had multiple people he used.

“so continuing to listen to dead men who are not appointed by God is worshipping them and not God.”

Are you saying the Bible shouldn’t be used?


360 posted on 05/10/2010 8:59:23 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360361-375 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson