Replies

To me, daniel1212’s learned posts demonstrate the limitations of this medium.

I've hinted in this and other threads that the differences between Catholics and some Protestants are VERY deep and extensive. To me this means, functionally, that I cannot give daniel1212’s expositions the respect they deserve. What they require, IMHO, is for us to schedule TWO (at least) three day conferences, a year apart. Papers by the presenters would be sent out a month in advance, so that the presentations would be about clarifications and questions.

THEN, The Protestants and the Catholics would caucus — maybe the evening of the second day, and try to identify that disagreement — you know the kind — which leads members of each side to say to one another, “Did you catch that? There they go again!” The last day would be winnowing these “objections” down to maybe two or three per side.

Then the next years conference would be about those questions.

The fiercest Anti-Catholics to the contrary notwithstanding (and not a few fierce Anti-Protestants too), I seriously believe that most of us were indeed made to drink of the same spirit. So I think I would benefit from listening to and praying with Xtians who disagreed with me so much that many thought I wasn't fit to be called Xtian.

It is said that those who seek will find. It would be awesome to seek together.

Echo your reply and add a very well stated.

I've no doubt that daniel1212 had nothing but the best of intentions in posting his quite lengthy and thorough reply.

I think you hit the nail firmly on the head that these types of discussions are really intended to be more lengthy and detailed, thereby requiring exponentially more time to read, comprehend and process in order to thoughtfully reply in kind.

Let's face it: we live in a world that's driven by sound bites and misleading headlines which we attempt to consume as quickly as possible in order to move onto other things. I'm probably as guilty of having A.D.D. as the next guy too.

I did bookmark daniel1212's post and I do intend to come back and read it as time permits over the next few days. When someone spends that amount of time directly responding in good faith (no pun intended...ha!) to a direct question I do want to take the time to read their response and understand their point of view. My time being what it is I have limited availability to do that on a sustained basis so I can't read 'em all. daniel1212's is one I do want to read however.

It is said that those who seek will find. It would be awesome to seek together.

Agree with that statement.

Matthew 7:13-14 states:
Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14"For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it."

At the end of the day, I wish we could all just agree on a few basic points and move together in community with the Holy Spirit. For me, those points would be:

1. Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior.
2. Anyone who accepts Him into their hearts shall be saved.
3. Because we are saved, and because we love Jesus, we willingly and joyfully work together in community to carry out his command in Matthew 28:16-20, "The Great Commission" to the best of our ability. If that means standing outside the gates of hell to save others, then so be it.

I often read these types of threads however I refrain from commenting much. What I've noticed is that so many get caught up in whatever their religious doctrine and dogma is and spend so much time and effort defending it, I think they lose sight of why we're all here in the first place and what Jesus commands us to do. Then again, when I do engage in these conversations I often find I'm as guilty as the rest. ;-)

To me, daniel1212’s learned posts demonstrate the limitations of this medium. I've hinted in this and other threads that the differences between Catholics and some Protestants are VERY deep and extensive. To me this means, functionally, that I cannot give daniel1212’s expositions the respect they deserve. What they require, IMHO, is for us to schedule TWO (at least) three day conferences, a year apart. Papers by the presenters would be sent out a month in advance, so that the presentations would be about clarifications and questions. THEN, The Protestants and the Catholics would caucus — maybe the evening of the second day, and try to identify that disagreement — you know the kind — which leads members of each side to say to one another, “Did you catch that? There they go again!” The last day would be winnowing these “objections” down to maybe two or three per side.

Well, it sounds appealing if challenging. But didn't Catholics try that among themselves in V2? As one poster wryly

The last time the church imposed its judgment in an authoritative manner on "areas of legitimate disagreement," the conservative Catholics became the Sedevacantists and the Society of St. Pius X, the moderate Catholics became the conservatives, the liberal Catholics became the moderates, and the folks who were excommunicated, silenced, refused Catholic burial, etc. became the liberals. The event that brought this shift was Vatican II; conservatives then couldn't handle having to actually obey the church on matters they were uncomfortable with, so they left. — Nathan, http://www.ratzingerfanclub.com/blog/2005/05/fr-michael-orsi-on-different-levels-of.html

I think I would benefit from listening to and praying with Xtians who disagreed with me so much that many thought I wasn't fit to be called Xtian.

Which humility is very refreshing. However, as noble as your thought is, my experience (as one who was manifestly born again while still a RC and remained active therein for 6 years after) is that there are very very few that we find fellowship in Christ with. (And one prayer to Mary or some saint is going to nuke that.) For while we often enjoy spontaneous rejoicing on meeting a fellow evangelical type, die to a shared life giving conversion with its profound changes in heart and life, and relationship with the Lord, and Scripture-based walked, with Catholics there is no such fellowship. Instead if they say anything then it is about their One True Church®, and exalting the Eucharist and Mary or indifference or antagonism in inquiring about salvation. But there are exceptions, usually among those of simple faith.

Fellowship with mainline Prots is also seldom realized, as they also know nothing experientially of the transformative New Birth. But regards what Prots can realize re Christ-centered ecumenism, I will let the famous "prince of preachers" speak:

Most atrocious things have been spoken about the character and spiritual condition of John Wesley, the modern prince of Arminians. I can only say concerning him that, while I detest many of the doctrines which he preached, yet for the man himself I have a reverence second to no Wesleyan; and if there were wanted two apostles to be added to the number of the twelve, I do not believe that there could be found two men more fit to be so added than George Whitfield and John Wesley. (C. H. Spurgeon’s Autobiography, Vol. 1, p. 173, in “A Defence Of Calvinism,” The Banner Of Truth Trust edition)

Now I hate High Churchism as my soul hates Satan; but I love George Herbert, although George Herbert is a desperately High Churchman. I hate his high Churchism, but I love George Herbert from my very soul, and I have a warm corner in my heart for every man who is like him. Let me find a man who loves my Lord Jesus Christ as George Herbert did, and I do not ask myself whether I shall love him or not; there is no room for question, for I cannot help myself; unless I can leave off loving Jesus Christ, I cannot cease loving those who love him. (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Vol. 12, p. 6; http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols10-12/chs668.pdf)