Replies

You wrote:

“I’m not a Protestant, so I’m just asking for them.”

You’re Catholic? A Jew? Eastern Orthodox?

“Does this mean that, in the view of Catholics, Protestant Christians do not have the Holy Spirit in them, Whose job it is to guide them into all truth? (John 16:13)”

They have the Holy Spirit, but overrule the Holy Spirit with their own prejudices. This is why Protestants can’t even agree among themselves. Want to see something funny and sad at the same time? Get ten Protestants from different denominations and ask them about infant baptism! Then stand back and watch them rip each other apart. They start accusing each other of not understanding the scriptures, not having the Holy Spirit, etc.

“Does this mean that Catholics are more proficient readers than Protestants,...”

Here at FR? Yes. I know that sounds arrogant, but I have seen it hundreds of times. We’re not smarter. We’re just more experienced it seems.

“... and Catholics are always better historical researchers than non-Catholics?”

Beyond any question. Stick around and you’ll see Protestants admit again and again (or show with their comments if they’re too embarrased to admit it) that they didn’t know something that knowledgeable Catholic generally know. Protestants here are often eyeball deep in caricatures about history and don’t even realize it: the “Dark Ages”, Inquisition, crusades, popes, annullments, papal elections, indulgences, etc. One of my favorite questions on these topics is to simply ask, “How many books have you read on this subject?” The answer is almost always ZERO. Seriously, ZERO. So when I bring up books and authors’ findings the usual response I get is “That’s revisionism!”, or “That’s what Catholics would say!” even when the authors are not revisionists and not Catholic. I have even had guys here at FR argue with me and admit that what I was saying went against what they learned in their high school history classes! Yeah, I hope so! And high school seems to have been the last time that they read anything even claiming to be a history book.

Ask yourself, “How many book on the Eucharist have you read?” Any at all? I’m willing to bet the answer is ZERO. It is ZERO is it not?

“Your statements just seem to indicate that non-Catholics are all totally without God and fairly daft, too.”

No. I think there are many fine Protestants, but God’s guidance often comes in the form of moral guidance and not in the form of historical or even Biblical accuracy. God is there first for your soul! The problem is that Protestants ignore what they have a Protestant prejudice against. Secondly, yeah, I admit, and I am sure this is often just me, that Protestants seem rather “daft” about many Christian things - especially historical things in Christianity. Let me give you an example. A friend of mine went to a Protestant non-denominational church in Kansas City a number of years ago. He was shocked to see a mural in the basement that showed their view of Bible preaching throughout the ages since Christ. The mural showed the Apostles preaching out of a codex, then there was a gap, until a painting of John Wycliffe showed up preaching out of a Bible. That’s right. There were NO CHRISTIANS from the time of St. John until the late 14th century. Now, if that isn’t emblematic of poor Protestant understanding of history, then nothing is.

“What about non-Catholics who are regenerated, have the indwelling Holy Spirit, and know it?”

They claim they have it and say they know it. They also claim they understand the Bible correctly, but then again the Protestant next door also says he is regenerated and has the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but he disagrees with you on a hundred issues. And the Protestant next door to him claims the same, and disagrees with you on a hundred issues. How can you all be regenerated, all have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and all not only disagree with one another, but also disagree with the Church?

You might want to think about that. This is something I have thought about often: How can Protestants claim sola scriptura and the Holy Spirit as their guide and yet not agree on things? Either that means they are untrustworthy as a group for guidance or the Holy Spirit is somehow falling down on the job. Clearly the Holy Spirit always is what He is, so the problem lies with Protestants and Protestantism. There’s simply no way around it.

Any one who relies solely on individual interpretation of Biblical text is more likely to fall prey to heresy. Which is one reason St. Peter warns against it. Now many Protestants do not rely only on their personal reading of the text. They have the writings of the reformers, the articles of faith of their denomination, the creeds, the teachings of their pastors. So though there is not a teaching magesterium, there is a tradition of what certain passages of scripture mean. Protestant seminaries and governing bodies of various denominations also have procedures for dealing with heresy. But the danger of heresy is that heretics can always find Biblical "proofs" for their teachings. Fortunately historical Christianity both Catholic and Protestant can counter these heresies with the creeds of the church and with access to the writings of early Christians. I often refer non Catholics to Christian Research Institute for apologetics for the Trinity and other core beliefs of Christianity. But Joe Shmoe reading is Bible at home without any grounding in church teachings ( Protestant or Catholic) is much more vulnerable to being seduced by heresy. He reads a passage about Jesus and decides based on that one passage Jesus must not be God. Oh sure there are other verses that indicate Jesus is God, but this guy knows the Holy Spirit would not steer him wrong. So 2000 years of Christian teaching go PBFFT out the window in favor of his own interpretation of the text. And lay Catholics are usually more proficient readers than your average non churched Protestant. Your average Calvinist is extremely well read and does not shy away from reading the fathers and other extra Biblical texts. They don't try to deny what these texts say. But when the texts do not support Reformed teaching they are viewed as historical anecdotes and not as having any binding authority. Which is consistent with the teaching of Sola Scriptura. I may not agree with this view but it is an honest one based on the teaching of their church. The Catholic Church also does not view all the writings of the Church Fathers as part of Church teaching. But doctrines such as Baptismal Regeneration, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, Apostolic Succession are clearly taught by the fathers and are not to be jettisoned without a dang good defense for doing so. I don't believe Protestants have given such a defense. But in a way they have no need to do this. All they have to do is say "my denomination believes the Scriptural passages on these issues means this." So Baptism does not cleanse us of our sins, the bread and wine are only a memorial of Christ's actions at the Last Supper, Mary had other children and the office of Apostle is no more. What was believed before does not matter because our church says the plain meaning of Scripture contradicts these beliefs. And yeah a lot of non churched Protestants are daft if reading the typical anti Catholic posts on Free Republic are a true indication of their ability to understand doctrines taught and believed by Catholics and even other Protestants. And no one should rely solely on some personal feeling to determine if they have the in dwelling of the Holy Spirit. They should rely on the promises of God and His grace. Christianity is meant to be practiced in a community. This community of believers whether Catholic or Protestant help bolster and enliven the grace of individual believers. It also helps the believer defend against false doctrine and to discern whether one's reading of Scripture is correct. There is no basis in either Catholicism or historical Protestant ism for the idea of just reading the Scripture on your own and attending the Church of the Holy Living Room. Without a diligent prayer life, the support of spiritual mentors, the coming together to worship and study Scripture with other Christians it becomes too easy for a person to become isolated and turn only to their own understanding. This is when heresy is most likely to find a foothold. It is the place of the churches, Protestant and Catholics to protect the believer against heresy. To help them grow spiritually and to equip them for preaching the Gospel to all nations. And Truth can never be relative so I have to ask how do Protestants reconcile the Holy Spirit telling them so many different things about the same Biblical passages? And I am not speaking about disagreements with Catholic doctrine but amongst various Protestant denominations. Is the Holy Spirit that flexible? My take is that it is not the individual believer who is given the Charism of being guided in all Truth but the community of believers. Catholicism is given this Charism in full. Protestant denominations have it in a very wide extent. But anyone who relies solely on their own understanding is easy pickings for the wolves out there.

Gosh I just came across a new fangled contraption called the paragraph. Sorry about the mess above.

But the danger of heresy is that heretics can always find Biblical "proofs" for their teachings. Fortunately historical Christianity both Catholic and Protestant can counter these heresies with the creeds of the church and with access to the writings of early Christians. I often refer non Catholics to Christian Research Institute for apologetics for the Trinity and other core beliefs of Christianity.

But Joe Shmoe reading is Bible at home without any grounding in church teachings ( Protestant or Catholic) is much more vulnerable to being seduced by heresy. He reads a passage about Jesus and decides based on that one passage Jesus must not be God. Oh sure there are other verses that indicate Jesus is God, but this guy knows the Holy Spirit would not steer him wrong. So 2000 years of Christian teaching go PBFFT out the window in favor of his own interpretation of the text.

And lay Catholics are usually more proficient readers than your average non churched Protestant. Your average Calvinist is extremely well read and does not shy away from reading the fathers and other extra Biblical texts. They don't try to deny what these texts say. But when the texts do not support Reformed teaching they are viewed as historical anecdotes and not as having any binding authority. Which is consistent with the teaching of Sola Scriptura. I may not agree with this view but it is an honest one based on the teaching of their church.

The Catholic Church also does not view all the writings of the Church Fathers as part of Church teaching. But doctrines such as Baptismal Regeneration, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, Apostolic Succession are clearly taught by the fathers and are not to be jettisoned without a dang good defense for doing so. I don't believe Protestants have given such a defense.

But in a way they have no need to do this. All they have to do is say "my denomination believes the Scriptural passages on these issues means this." So Baptism does not cleanse us of our sins, the bread and wine are only a memorial of Christ's actions at the Last Supper, Mary had other children and the office of Apostle is no more. What was believed before does not matter because our church says the plain meaning of Scripture contradicts these beliefs.

And yeah a lot of non churched Protestants are daft if reading the typical anti Catholic posts on Free Republic are a true indication of their ability to understand doctrines taught and believed by Catholics and even other Protestants.

And no one should rely solely on some personal feeling to determine if they have the in dwelling of the Holy Spirit. They should rely on the promises of God and His grace.

Christianity is meant to be practiced in a community. This community of believers whether Catholic or Protestant help bolster and enliven the grace of individual believers. It also helps the believer defend against false doctrine and to discern whether one's reading of Scripture is correct. There is no basis in either Catholicism or historical Protestant ism for the idea of just reading the Scripture on your own and attending the Church of the Holy Living Room.

Without a diligent prayer life, the support of spiritual mentors, the coming together to worship and study Scripture with other Christians it becomes too easy for a person to become isolated and turn only to their own understanding. This is when heresy is most likely to find a foothold.

It is the place of the churches, Protestant and Catholic to protect the believer against heresy. To help them grow spiritually and to equip them for preaching the Gospel to all nations.

And Truth can never be relative so I have to ask how do Protestants reconcile the Holy Spirit telling them so many different things about the same Biblical passages? And I am not speaking about disagreements with Catholic doctrine but amongst various Protestant denominations. Is the Holy Spirit that flexible?

My take is that it is not the individual believer who is given the Charism of being guided in all Truth but the community of believers. Catholicism is given this Charism in full. Protestant denominations have it in a very wide extent. But anyone who relies solely on their own understanding is easy pickings for the wolves out there.