Catholic vs. Presbyterian

Could you tell me the difference between the Presbyterian church and the Catholic Church.

Answer:

I'll try to focus briefly on some basics, beginning with the foundational matter of authority.

The Roman Catholic Church understands the Bible to be the inspired Word of God, as do we, but alongside the Bible, stands the authority of the tradition of the church, the decrees of its councils, and the ex cathedra pronouncements of its popes. Tradition, councils, and popes tell the faithful what the Scriptures teach and can add dogma to what the Scriptures teach (for example, the immaculate conception of Mary). We regard this as man exercising authority over the Word of God rather than sitting in humble submission before it.

In contrast, this is what we confess to the world in our Confession of Faith (a statement which we believe faithfully summarizes what the Bible teaches, but which is wholly derived from the Bible, subordinate to it, and may be corrected by it):

4. The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof; and therefore it is to be received because it is the Word of God....

6. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture, unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit or traditions of men....

7. All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other that not only the learned but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them....

9. The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.

10. The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.

With particular reference to the Church, we hold that Christ alone is the Head of His Church, and that there are no princely rulers in the church, but elders and preachers gifted by the Spirit and called to rule and teach in local churches in subordination to the Word of God. Again, our Confession:

6. There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof." (WCF, Chapter 25, "Of the Church"; see Colossians 1:18, Ephesians 1:22, 1 Peter 5:2-4)

Christ is the King and only Lord of the church. He rules us by His Word, the Holy Spirit who first inspired it continuing to work now by enabling us to understand, believe, and obey the Scriptures. Elders and preachers are gifts He gives to the church to guide and help us understand and obey the Word, but they are not infallible.

1. The Lord Jesus, as King and Head of His church, hath therein appointed a government, in the hand of church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate. (WCF, Chapter 30, "Of Church Censures"; see Acts 14:23, 20:17,28, Heb.13:7,17, Eph.4:11,12, 1 Timothy 3:1-13, 5:17-21, etc.)

2. To these officers the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed, by virtue whereof, they have power, respectively, to retain and remit sins, to shut the kingdom against the impenitent, both by the Word and censures, and to open it unto penitent sinners, by the ministry of the gospel; and by absolution from censures as occasion shall require. (WCF, 30.2)

1. For the better government, and further edification of the church, there ought to be such assemblies as a commonly called synods or councils, and it belongeth to the overseers and other rulers of the particular churches, by virtue of their office and the power which Christ hath given them for edification and not for destruction, to appoint such assemblies and to convene together in them, as often as they shall judge it expedient for the good of the church. (WCF, Chapter 31, "Of Synods and Councils")

2. It belongeth to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience, to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God and government of his church, to receive complaints in cases of maladministratiion, and authoritatively to determine the same; which decrees and determinations, if consonant to the Word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission. (WCF, 31.2)

3. All synods or councils, since the Apostles' times, whether general or particular, may err; and many have erred. Therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith or practice, but to be used as a help in both. (WCF, 31.3)

4. Synods and councils are to handle or conclude nothing but that which is ecclesiastical, and are not to intermeddle with civil affairs ... [exceptions stated]" (WCF, 31.4)

A key point here is our understanding that church authorities are to act "ministerially" and based always on the Word of God. They cannot make laws in addition to God's revealed Word, but must labor to understand that Word properly and then declare it to the church and base their governing and disciplining actions upon it. We do not claim for any merely human governors of the church a magisterial authority.

From this fundamental difference in regard to authority and to the relative roles of the Bible, tradition, decrees of councils, and edicts of popes, flow the other differences. Why do Presbyterians not pray to Mary and the saints? Because the Bible nowhere tells us to do so; it is an invention by gradual accretion in the tradition of the church. And because, on the other hand, the Bible tells us that "there is one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus," who is our Great High Priest, through whom we have boldness to come to God's throne of grace (1 Tim.2:5, Hebrews 4:14-16). Christ is all the intercessor we need (Heb.7:23-28).

There are fundamentally different approaches to worship, which might be summed up this way:

Whatever the tradition and councils have given us is what we do in public worship.

We give to God in worship only what is revealed in His Word as pleasing to Him (see Lev.10:1-3, Exodus 20:4-6, Mark 7:1-8).

While we are looking at worship, we observe that Presbyterians differ fundamentally with Roman Catholics in regard to the Lord's Supper. We both agree that Christ Himself ordained the observance of communion by His church and that this involves bread and wine. From that point on we agree on almost nothing. But let me try to summarize:

By the grace received in his ordination the priest has power to utter the words of consecration by which mere bread and wine become the actual body and blood of Christ for sacrifice on the altar, and by receiving this mystical body (and blood) of Christ the faithful receive Christ Himself bodily and His grace to wash them clean of all their sins.

(a). The minister is not a priest; Christ alone is our priest in the sense of interceding for us before God by sacrifice. The minister is a servant, who declares the Word so that the faithful may understand what is taking place.

(b). The power of the minister is to declare what the Scriptures teach, not to say words that change bread into Christ's body.

(c). The bread and wine symbolically represent the body and blood of Christ. When Jesus at the Last Supper said to His disciples (of the bread), "This is My body which is broken for you", He was standing before them in His body, whole and intact. He meant this bread symbolizes My body. (When He said, "I am the door to the sheepfold," He was similarly speaking symbolically, or "I am the light of the world").

(d). There is no sacrifice of Christ on any altar, for He offered Himself once for all (Hebrews 7:27, 9:12, 9:26-28, 10:10). So perfect and acceptable was the sacrifice of the God-Man of Himself for sinners that no other sacrifice is required. When on the cross He said, "It is finished," He meant not only his suffering of death, but also His making atonement by His suffering. By that "one sacrifice for sins for all time," that "one offering." "He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified" (Heb.10:12,14). We hold it to be a great dishonor to Christ's once-for-all atoning work on Calvary to claim that His body and blood continue to be offered as sacrifice for sin. This is why we speak of the communion "table", not altar.

(e). The faithful receive Christ by faith, not physically. The elements are signs. They point to Christ and what He has done to atone for our sins. They point to Him also as our risen and living Savior and Lord who is present in His Church by the Holy Spirit, continuously offering Himself to believers. The bread and wine call us to draw near to Christ by faith, to receive forgiving and sanctifying grace from Him, to grow in our union with Him. But it is all spiritual and by faith.

I could go on listing differences, but two very important ones remain. I will deal with the most important last.

Presbyterians believe that God's Word is a sufficient revelation of His will for our lives (see above, Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 1, especilly Sections 6 and 7, and read 2 Timothy 3:15-17).

We think it is an arrogant usurpation of Christ's authority for church rulers to presume to have authority to add to His word rules and commands. Where does the Bible require ministers in Christ's church to be celibate? It doesn't, but rather teaches the opposite (1 Tim.3:2-5,12, see 1 Cor.9:5). But Catholic authority requires Catholic priests to take vows of celibacy, which are contrary to human nature and create terrible stumbling blocks leading to sin (which is now being plastered shamefully all over the public media). For centuries the Catholic Church told its people they must refrain from eating meat on Fridays; to do otherwise was sin. Now it's okay. It was a sin. Now it's not. The church says so. But the Bible does not say one word, except Colossians 2:20-23 (and 1 Timothy 4:1-5).

Appeal may be made to Matthew 16:19 (and 18:18), which read this way: "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" (and vice versa). There! The church officers make a binding decision on earth, and heaven will ratify it. But the passage actually says exactly the opposite. The second verbs in each case ("shall be bound" / "loosed"), are future perfect tenses, properly translated: "shall have been bound / loosed". So that the correct reading is: "Whatever you bind / loose on earth shall have been bound / loosed in heaven". That is, officers of the church on earth must base their decisions on what heaven has already determined. And what would that be? That would be what "Heaven," that is, God, has revealed by the Spirit in His Word, the Scriptures.

But the most important issue concerns salvation. We believe the Bible teaches that the all-sufficient atoning sacrifice of Christ and the perfect obedience of Christ, offered to His Father in our behalf and given to us as God's gift in the declaration of justification is all the basis for salvation that a sinner needs. See Romans 3:19-30, Philippians 3:2-9, Galatians 3:10-13, Romans 8:1-3. We believe that we receive this gift only by faith, Ephesians 2:8,9. Good works enter in as the fruit of saving faith, as its outworking in our lives. But the moment I throw myself on the mercy of God trusting in Christ's saving work for me, I am then and there and once and for all justified in God's sight and nothing I do after that in the way of good works can add to what Christ has done or to God's justification.

This has gone on quite long. As I noted at the beginning, your question is very short. Maybe you were looking for something other than what I have given you. But I do want to close with a few clarifications.

"Presbyterian": This is from the Greek word in the NT, presbyter, meaning elder. Presbyterian churches are churches which believe that Christ governs his church through the work of elders, a plurality of elders in each local church, and councils of the elders of the churches in a region or a nation.

Historically the "Presbyterian" churches were churches of the Protestant Reformation in Scotland and England that shared with other Protestant churches on the Continent a common understanding of Bible doctrine that is often referred to as "Reformed" (and historically associated with John Calvin in Geneva, Switzerland). In the 1640s the pastors and teachers of the Church of England met to officially reform the English church in the light of Scripture. Among other things they spent several years writing the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms. These have since been the defining documents of Presbyterian churches.

Unfortunately, in the last 100 years or so, many Presbyterian churches have wandered away from their Confession because, at bottom, they were accepting man-made philosophies and ideas as being more true than the Bible. So not all "Presbyterians" believe what I have given you above. But those who believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God and who still believe - as the Orthodox Presbyterian Church does, by God's grace - the summary of its doctrines in the Westminster Confession, would agree with what I have told you.

I hope this is helpful to you. I have not meant in any way to offend, though sometimes stating things starkly can have that effect. I have tried to be clear about the differences, which is what you asked, and I cannot pretend that I do not think truth is on one side and not on the other. You, of course, may speak with equal frankness and I welcome a reply or further questions.

About Q&A

verdadjusticia WROTE: The dogmas of the Catholic Church are the Holy Spirit speaking through the magisterium.

Dr. Eckleburg ANSWERED:
lol. That lie has no basis in Scripture and actually permits the magisterium to usurp the role of the Holy Spirit in men’s lives and faith.

verdadjusticia RESPONDS:

The magisterium sure could usurp the role of the Holy Ghost, if it was a human fabrication. The Catholic magisterium, in it’s infallible decrees is the Holy Ghost speaking through it’s Church. If it was human it would have changed it’s doctrines or been inconsistent, or invented doctrines out of thin air that contradicted prior doctrines. THERE IS NOT ONE DOCTRINE to which that has happened.

Protestants teachings on the other hand change with the winds, proof that they are of man.

You have a choice, either follow your ever changing man made haughty self interpretations of scripture or trust what “has been believed in the Church everywhere, always”, and by all, till present unchanged, universal in time and space. In all time and all countries the same doctrines

ST. VINCENT OF LERINS [ A. D. 434 ]
[Author - Vincent shows himself also as a man of such remarkable perception that there is a certain timelessness to his writing. What he has to say of preserving the faith and of keeping to the rule of faith fits any period and all times, and might have been written yesterday.
Vincent develops the notion that our faith is based on the authority of divine Law, which must be understood and interpreted in the light of the Tradition of the Church. And this Tradition, if it need be discovered, is quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus crediturn est: what has been believed in the Church everywhere, always, and by all. Vincent’s doctrinal principle does not exclude progress and development; but it does exclude change. For Vincent, progress is a developmental growth of doctrine in its own sphere; change, however, implies a transformation into something different.

ST. VINCENT OF LERINS says:
With great zeal and closest attention, therefore, I frequently inquired of many men, eminent for their holiness and doctrine, how I might, in a concise and, so to speak, general and ordinary way, distinguish the truth of the Catholic faith from the falsehood of heretical depravity. I received almost always the same answer from all of them, that if I or anyone else wanted to expose the frauds and escape the snares of the heretics who rise up, and to remain intact and sound in a sound faith, it would be necessary, with the help of the Lord, to fortify that faith in a twofold manner: first, of course, by the authority of the divine law; and then, by the Tradition of the Catholic Church. [Here, perhaps, someone may ask: “If the canon of the Scriptures be perfect, and in itself more than suffices for everything, why is it necessary that the authority of ecclesiastical interpretation be joined to it?” Because, quite plainly, Sacred Scripture, by reason of its own depth, is not accepted by everyone as having one and the same meaning. The same passage is interpreted in one way by some, in another by others, so that it can almost appear as if there are as many opinions as there are men. Novatian explains a passage in one way, Sabellius in another, Donatus in another; Anus, Eunomius, Macedonius in another; Photinus, Apollinaris, Priscillian in another; Jovinian, Pelagius, Caelestius in another; and afterwards in still another, Nestorius. And thus, because of so many distortions of such various errors, it is highly necessary that the line of prophetic and apostolic interpretation be directed in accord with the norm of the ecclesiastical and Catholic meaning. In the Catholic Church herself every care must be taken that we may hold fast to that which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all. For this is then truly and properly Catholic. That is what the force and meaning of the name itself declares, a name that embraces all almost universally. This general rule will be correctly applied if we pursue universality, antiquity, and agreement. And we follow universality in this way, if we confess this one faith to be true, which is confessed by the whole Church throughout the whole world; antiquity, however, if we in no way depart from those interpretations which, it is clear our holy predecessors and fathers solemnized; and likewise agreement, if, in this very antiquity, we adopt the definitions and theses of all or certainly of almost all priests and teachers.
To announce, therefore, to Catholic Christians something other than that which they have received has never been permitted, is nowhere permitted, and never will be permitted. And to anathematize those who announce anything other than that which has been received once and for all has never been unnecessary, is nowhere unnecessary and never will be unnecessary.
He is a true and genuine Catholic who loves the truth of God, the Church, and the Body of Christ; who puts nothing else before divine religion and the Catholic Faith, neither the authority nor the love nor the genius nor the eloquence nor the philosophy of any man whatsoever, but, despising all that and being fixed, stable, and persevering in his faith, is determined in himself to hold and believe that only which he knows the Catholic Church has held universally and from ancient times.

“Guard” he says, “what has been committed.” What does it mean, “what has been committed”? It is what has been faithfully entrusted to you, not what has been discovered by you; what you have received, not what you have thought up; a matter not of ingenuity, but of doctrine; not of private acquisition, but of public Tradition; a matter brought to you, not put forth by you, in which you must be not the author but the guardian, not the founder but the sharer, not the leader, but the follower. “Guard,” he says, “what has been committed.”Keep the talent of the Catholic Faith inviolate and unimpaired. What has been faithfully entrusted, let it remain in your possession, let it be handed on by you. You have received gold, so give gold. For my part I do not want you to substitute one thing for mother; I do not want you impudently to put lead in place of gold, or, fraudulently brass. I do not want the appearance of gold, but the real thing. O Timothy, O priest. O interpreter, O teacher, if a divine gift has made you suitable in genius, in experience, in doctrine to be the Beseleel of the spiritual tabernacle, cut out the precious gems of divine dogma, shape them faithfully, ornament them wisely, add splendor, grace and beauty to them! By your expounding it, may that now be understood more clearly which formerly was believed even in its obscurity. May posterity, by means of you, rejoice in understanding what in times past was venerated without understanding, Nevertheless, teach the same that you have learned, so that if you say something anew, it is not something new that you say.

But perhaps someone is saying: “Will there, then, be no progress of religion in the Church of Christ?” Certainly there is, and the greatest. For who is there so envious toward men and so exceedingly hateful toward God, that he would try to prohibit progress? But it is truly progress and not a change of faith. What is meant by progress is that something is brought to an advancement within itself, by change, something is transformed from one thing into another. It is necessary, therefore, that understanding, knowledge, and wisdom grow and advance strongly and mightily as much in individuals as in the group, as much in one man as in the whole Church, and this gradually according to age and the times; and this must take place precisely within its own kind, that is, in the same teaching, in the same meaning, and in the same opinion. The progress of religion in souls is like the growth of bodies, which, in the course of years, evolve and develop, but still remain what they were. . . . For example: Our fathers of old sowed the seeds of the wheat of faith in this field which is the Church. Certainly it would be unjust and incongruous if we, their descendents, were to gather, instead of the genuine truth of wheat, the noxious error of weeds. On the contrary, it is right and logically proper that there be no discrepancy between what is first and what is last and that we reap, in the increment of wheat from the wheat of instruction, the fruit also of dogma. And thus, although in the course of time something evolved from those first seeds and has now expanded under careful cultivation, nothing of the characteristics of the seeds is changed. Granted that appearance, beauty, and distinction has been added, still, the same nature of each kind remains. May it never happen that the rose garden of the Catholic sense be turned into thistles and thorns. May it never happen, I say, that darnel and monk’s hood suddenly spring up in the spiritual paradise of shoots of cinnamon and balsam.

We must most studiously investigate and follow this ancient agreement of the holy fathers, not in all the lesser questions of the divine Law, but certainly and especially in the rule of faith. . . . But only those opinions of the fathers are to he brought forward which were expressed by those who lived, taught, and persevered wisely and constantly in the holy Catholic faith and communion, and who merited either to die faithfully in Christ or to be killed gloriously for Christ. Those men, moreover, are to be believed, in accord with the rule that only that is to be held as undoubted, certain, and valid, which either all or most of them have confirmed by receiving, holding, and handing on in one and the same sense, manifestly, frequently, and persistently, as if by a council of teachers in mutual agreement. But whatever was thought outside of or even against the opinion of all, although it be by a holy and learned man, or although by a confessor and martyr, must be removed from the authority of the common and public and general opinion, as being among his personal and peculiar and private views. In this way we shall not, as is the sacrilegious custom of heretics and schismatics, reject the ancient truth of universal dogma, to pursue, with great danger to our eternal salvation, the novel error of one man.

Call Protestants whatever you want, I can’t call them something that they are not. They are not “one”, and they do not definitelly espouse one single doctrine (absolute truth), and they are not a Church. Those are the facts.

Those who know and love Jesus as Lord are one, in Him--even if in different human organizations.

It is also a fact that all kinds of people--including important theologians--with all kinds of contradictory beliefs call themselves Roman Catholic--and have not been formally, publicly removed from the Roman Church (and yes, I know about the cop-out called latae sententiae). If you take officially stated doctrines, plus all the varied opinions of baptized Roman Catholics (Nancy Pelosi and Ted Kennedy come to mind....)(not to mention, variations in Tradition), you have as many or more variations of belief and practice as you find amidst Protestants. Not only that, but in the USA alone, there are dozens of different groups which claim to be "Roman Catholic" who have competing claims of doctrine, and leadership, to the official Roman denomination. Mel Gibson, for example, is associated with one of these.

The Roman Church itself--since it originally consisted of only one of the 5 original principalities of the Church--broke away from the Eastern Church in AD 1054. Thereafter it only maintained its internal unity through force of law...routinely persecuting or executing those who disagreed. From the Eastern point of view it is the Latin church which was schismatic...

verdadjusticia had WRITTEN:It has not decided on an definitive answer to ONE SINGLE QUESTION! In almost 500 years it still has not even decided if Jesus Christ is God, or if you must be baptized to be saved.

I don't know of a single orthodox Protestant denomination that has not consistently maintained Jesus as God since they were begun.... All agree too, that Christians should be baptized--even as we find the precise meaning of baptism holy and mysterious. Yes, recently liberal groups have denied the essentials (just like certain individuals and professors within Roman Catholicism)...and this is why new, conservative Churches have formed--and are growing, even as mainline apostate denominations are dying. The core doctrines amidst the conservatives are the same as 100...or 500 years ago. Do we have the same teachings on say....slavery as 200 years ago? No. Does Rome? I know I for one recite (and sincerely believe) the Nicene Creed every week. Every conservative Protestant denomination I know of also subscribes to the doctrines found in the Nicene creed.

AnalogReigns ASKED: Your argument is nonsensical, as, every group claiming to be Christian also claims to have the best (or only) understanding of truth. (actually that is a statement, not a question)

verdadjusticia ANSWERS: That is not accurate, for not one Protestant organization has maintained FOREVER the same doctrines. Truth is unchangeable. Protestants do not claim absolute truth. ONLY the Catholic Church has unchanged doctrines that are absolute truth and are unalterable. There is no other religion that has servived the test of time on their so-called “truths’. they have abandoned them all.

Recognizing God's Word be absolute truth alone, is hardly abandoing "so called "truths"" Since you lump traditional Protestants in with Mormons or anyone else who claims the name "Christian" I have no idea what specific group you are criticizing. It's about as helpful as criticizing "white peoples religion..."

Truth is unchangeable, however, human beings are fallible--even humans who are popes, or who have belonged to Church councils. Therefore, except that which we KNOW is revealed from God--connected directly to the Apostles who were eye-witnesses of Jesus, that is the holy Scriptures, we cannot make (fallible, human opinions) "unchangeable" or else we become like the ancient Persian emperors--having bad laws that can never be undone--and that places fallible humans over and above God's holy Word.

AnalogReigns ASKED: to say Protestant groups haven’t agreed on everything, therefore that makes them all false, is like an atheist saying, “All religions for thousands of years have not decided on an definitive answer to ONE SINGLE QUESTION! Therefore they must ALL be false!” That’s a statement which I know you’ll agree, is ridiculous (even though that’s what your typical agnostic/atheist will say...).Once more, a statement. Discussion is impossible without the distinction between questions and statements

verdadjusticia ANSWERED: I don’t agree, there is only one religion that has decided the definitive answer to those questions which it has defined dogmatically. So, your analogy is wrong misapplied to Catholicism.

That's ridiculous. Many religions have defined dogmas. My point stands....To say that Protestant (which you seem to define as any and all groups not Roman Catholic) differ on points of doctrine, or have changed points of (minor) doctrine over time it proves they are false is the same as saying since religions in general differ, or have changed over time, they are therefore all false. That's a logical fallacy as ALL religious change to some degree over time.

AnalogReigns ASKED: Historically the only proven alternative to divided Christian groups—is a state enforced official religion (which until the 1500s was Roman Catholicism in western Europe) something which no true American lover of liberty will endorse.Once again, a STATEMENT, NOT a question...

verdadjusticia ANSWERED: the unity of doctrine of the Catholic Church has nothing to do with the populace. The Catholic Church today numbers about 1 billion people. If it was only 50,000, the unity of doctrine would still prevail. Protestants have no unity of doctrine. They actually have no defined doctrines which they have not changed.

Unity of doctrine? LIke how your average (baptized, Roman catholic) Italian believes, verses your average RC Philipino vs. your average RC American? How about what popes taught as 100 years ago...or 500 years ago, verses now? Unchanged? What dream world do you live in?

One example will suffice: Capitol punishment was not protested in principle by Rome until the last 30 years or so (correspondingly when secular Europe--home of the Vatican--also rejected capitol punishment). So somehow, the position of the Roman Church, the same institution and leaders which rejoiced in the murder of literally tens of thousands of Calvinist Protestant civilains in the 1570s, compared to today--when it protests the just execution of the worst murderers imaginable, is unchanged? Silly on its face.

How does the American Presbyterian Denominations differ from the 318 orders of the Roman Catholic Church? According to the Catholic Church they all have various rules, regulations and traditions. Seems to me the American Presbyterian Denominations is far less complicated.

Adorers (Adorers of the Blood of Christ) - A.S.C. (1834)
Adornos (Clerics Regular Minor) - C.R.M. (1563)
Adrian Dominican Sisters (1233/1853)
Albertines (1888)
Alexians - C.F.A. (1469)
Angelic Sisters of St. Paul - A.S.S.P. (1535)
Apostles of the Sacred Heart of Jesus - A.S.C.J. (1894)
Assumptionists - A.A. (1845)
Little Sisters of the Assumption (1865)
Religious of the Assumption (1839)
Atonement, Society of the (Atonement Friars/Graymoor Friars/Sisters) - S.A. (1909)
Augustinian Recollects - (Order of the Augustinians Recollects) - O.A.R. (1912)
Augustinian Sisters, Servants of Jesus and Mary - A.S.J.M. (1827)
Augustinians (Order of Saint Augustine) - O.S.A. (1244)
Augustinians of Kansas: Society of Saint Augustine - S.S.A. (1981)
Baladites (Order of Lebanese Maronite) - O.L.M. (1694)
Barnabites (Clerics Regular of Saint Paul) - B., C.R.S.P. (1530)
Benedictines (Order of St. Benedict) - O.S.B. (529)
Benedictine Oblates of St Scholastica
Benedictine Sisters of Perpetual Adoration (1874)
Bernardine Cistercian Sisters of Esquiermes
Bernardines (also see Cistercians) (1098)
Bon Secours Sisters - C.B.S. (1824)
Brigidine Sisters (1807)
Bridgettines (Order of Our Savior) - O.Ss.S. (1350)
Brotherhood of Hope - B.H. (1980)
Brothers Hospitallers of St. John of God (Order of Hospitallers) - O.H. (1572)
Brothers of Christian Instruction of St Gabriel - F.S.G. (1711)
Brothers of Mercy of Our Lady of Perpetual Help - f.m.m. (1839)
Brothers of the Christian Schools (Lasallian Brothers or Christian Brothers) - F.S.C. (1680)
Brothers of the Poor of St. Francis of Assisi (Brothers CFP located in the United States, Belgium, The Netherlands, and Brazil, Regular Third Order) (1861)
Brothers of the Sacred Heart - S.C. (1821)
FIC Brothers-FIC
Camaldolese (Camaldolese Benedictines) - O.S.B. Cam. (1200s)
Camaldolese Hermits of the Congregation of Monte Corona - Er.Cam.
Camillians (Ordo Clericorum Regolarium Ministrantium Infirmis)- M.I. (1591)
Canonesses of St. Augustine - C.R.O.S.A.
Canons Regular of Saint John Cantius - S.J.C. (2006)
Canons Regular of the Holy Cross OSC (1311)
Canons Regular Canons Regular of St. Augustine CRSA (1100)
Canons Regular of the Immaculate Conception (1871)
Canons Regular of the New Jerusalem - C.R.N.J. (2002)
Canons Regular of the Order of the Holy Cross (Crosiers) (1210)
Canons Regular of Premontre (Norbertines) (1121)
Canossians (Canossian Daughters and Sons of Charity) - F.D.D.C. (1808)
Capuchins (Order of Friars Minor Capuchin) - O.F.M. Cap. (1520)
Capuchin Poor Clares (1538)
Carmelites (Order of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel) - O.Carm., O.C.D., O.C.D.S. (1209)
Carmelites of Mary Immaculate - C.M.I. (1831)
Carmelite Daughters of the Divine Heart of Jesus - D.C.J. (1891)
Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and Infirm (1929)
Carmelite Sisters of the Most Sacred Heart of Los Angeles (1904)
Carthusians - O.Cart. (1084)
Celestines (defunct) (1244)
Cistercians (Cistercians of the Ancient Observance)- O.Cist./S.O.Cist (1098)
Claretians (Claretian Missionaries) - C.M.F. (1849)
Claretian Sisters (1876)
Comboni Missionaries (1867)
Community of Betania
Companions of the Cross - C.C. (1988)
Company of Mary Our Lady - O.D.N. (1607)
Congregatio Immaculati Cordis Mariae - C.I.C.M. (1862)
Congregation of the Blessed Sacrament - S.S.S. (1659)
Congregation of Christian Brothers (Christian Brothers of Ireland) - C.F.C. (1802)
Congregation of the Disciples of the Lord - C.D.D. (1931)
Congregation of Divine Providence - C.D.P. (1827)
Congregation of Holy Cross - C.S.C. (1837)
Congregation of Maronite Lebanese Missionaries - M.L.[kreimists.org] (1865)
Congregation of the Mission - C.M. (1624)
Congregation of the Mother Co-Redemptrix - C.M.C. (1909)
Congregation of Notre Dame - C.N.D. (1653)
Congregation of Our Lady of the Missions (1861)
Congregation of the Sisters of the Resurrection (1891)
Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary - SS.CC. (1800)
Congregation of St. Basil - C.S.B. (1822)
Congregation of St. Joseph - C.S.J. (1873)
Congregation of St. Therese of Lisieux, Cstbrothers, Kerala, India (1931)
Congregation of the Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy (Divine Mercy Sisters) - O.L.M. (1862)
Conventual Franciscans (Conventuals or Order of Friars Minor Conventual) - O.F.M. Conv. (1209)
Daughters of Charity - D.C. (1633)
Daughters of Divine Charity - F.D.C. (1868)
Daughters of Divine Love (1969)
Daughters of the Holy Spirit - D.H.S. (1706)
Daughters of Mary of the Immaculate Conception (1904)
Daughters of Our Lady of Compassion - D.O.L.C (1892)
Daughters of St. Francis of Assisi - Lacon, Illinois (1894)
Daughters of St. Paul - F.S.P. (1915)
Daughters of Wisdom (1707)
Dehonians (Priests of the Sacred Heart of Jesus) - S.C.J. (1878)
Discalced Augustinians - O.A.D. (1592)
Discalced Carmelites - O.C.D. (1593)
Disciples of the Lord - C.D.D. (1931)
Divine Word Missionaries - S.V.D. (1875)
Dominican Nuns of the Perpetual Rosary (1880)
Dominicans (Order of Friars Preachers) - O.P. (1216)
Dominican Sisters of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin (1856)
Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne (1900)
Dominican Sisters of the Immaculate Conception - O.P. (1861)
Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia - O.P. (1860)
Dottrinari (Congregazione dei Preti della Dottrina Cristiana) - D.C. (1592)
Eudists (Congregation of Jesus and Mary) - C.I.M. (1643)
English Benedictine Congregation - O.S.B. (1216)
Fathers of Mercy - (Congregatio Presbyterorum a Misericordia) - C.P.M. (1808)
Felician Sisters (Congregation of the Sisters of St. Felix of Cantalice) - C.S.S.F. (1855)
Franciscan Apostolic Sisters - F.A.S. (1954)
Franciscan Brothers of Brooklyn - O.S.F. (1858)
Franciscan Brothers of the Eucharist - F.B.E. (2004)
Franciscan Brothers of Peace - F.B.P. (1982)
Franciscan Clarist Congregation
Franciscan Friars (Order of Friars Minor) - O.F.M. (1209)
Franciscan Friars of the Renewal - C.F.R. (1987)
Franciscan Friars of the Third Order Regular - T.O.R. (1447)Franciscan Sisters of the Family of Mary
Franciscan Handmaids of Mary (1915)
Franciscan Hospitaller Sisters of the Immaculate Conception - F.H.I.C. (1876)
Franciscan Minims of the Perpetual Help of Mary - f.m. (1942)
Franciscans of the Immaculate - F.I.
Franciscan Missionaries of the Divine Motherhood - F.M.D.M. (1887)
Franciscan Missionaries of the Eternal Word - M.F.V.A. (1987)
Franciscan Missionaries of Mary - F.M.M. (1877)
Franciscan Missionary Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary (1859)
Franciscan Missionary Sisters of the Infant Jesus (1879)
Franciscan Servants of Jesus (1997)
Franciscan Sisters of Christian Charity - O.S.F. (1869)
Franciscan Sisters of the Eucharist - F.S.E. (1973)
Franciscan Sisters of the Family of Mary
Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate Conception - F.S.I.C.
Franciscan Sisters of Mary Immaculate (1893)
Franciscan Sisters of Penance of the Sorrowful Mother - T.O.R. (1988)
Franciscan Sisters of Perpetual Adoration - O.S.F. (1849)
Fransalians (Missionaries of St. Francis de Sales) - M.S.F.S. (1838)
Good Shepherd Sisters - R.G.S. (1641)
Grey Nuns - G.N.S.H. (1738)
Handmaids of the Blessed Sacrament and of Charity - A.A.S.C. (1950)
Handmaids of the Precious Blood - H.P.B. (1947)
Handmaids of the Sacred Heart of Jesus - A.A.S.C. (1877)
Handmaids of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Mary and Joseph (1978)
Hermits of Saint Bruno - H.S.B.
Holy Cross Fathers (Congregation of Holy Cross) - C.S.C. (1837)
Holy Spirit Adoration Sisters (Pink Sisters) - S.Sp.S.A.P. (1896)
Hospital Sisters of the Mercy of Jesus (1200s)
Infant Jesus Sisters (Nicolas Barre) - I.J. (1666)
Institut du Clergé Patriarcal de Bzommar - I.C.P.B. (1749)
Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest - I.C.R.S.S. (1990)
Institute of the Incarnate Word - I.V.E. (1984)
Jesuits (Society of Jesus) - S.J. (1540)
Josephite Fathers (St. Joseph’s Society of the Sacred Heart) - S.S.J. (1893)
Legion of Christ - L.C. (founded 1941, approved 1983)
Little Brothers of the Gospel - (1956)
Little Brothers of Jesus - (1933)
Little Brothers of St Francis - (1970) (l.b.s.f)
Little Flower Congregation (CST Fathers) (1931)
Little Sisters of the Assumption (1865)
Little Sisters of the Gospel - (1963)
Little Sisters of Jesus - (1933)
Little Sisters of Jesus and Mary (1974)
Little Sisters of the Poor - L.S.P. (ca. 1700s)
Lovers of the Holy Cross (1670)
Loreto Sisters (Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary) - I.B.V.M. (1609)
Marian Fathers - M.I.C. (1673)
Marian Sisters (Marian Sisters of the Diocese of Lincoln) - M.S. (1952)
Marianists (Society of Mary) - S.M. (1817)
Marianist Sisters (Daughters of Mary Immaculate) - F.M.I. (1817)
Marianites of Holy Cross - M.S.C. (1841)
Marist Brothers - F.M.S. (1817)
Marists (Society of Mary) - S. M.(1816)
Maryknoll (Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America) - M.M. (1911)
Mercedarians (Order of Our Lady of Mercy) - O. de M. (1218)
Miles Christi - M.C. (1984)
Mission Helpers of The Sacred Heart - M.H.S.H. (1890)
Missionaries of Charity - M.C. (1950)
Missionaries of La Salette - M.S. (1852)
Missionaries of Mary - (2007)
Missionaries of St. Charles Borromeo) - C.S. (1887)
Missionaries of the Gospel of Life (2005)
Missionaries of the Poor - M.O.P. (1981)
Missionaries of the Precious Blood (Precious Blood Fathers) - C.PP.S. (1815)
Missionaries of the Sacred Heart - M.S.C. (1854)
Missionaries of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary (1836)
Missionary Congregation for the Blessed Sacrament
Missionary Society of St. Columban Columbans - S.S.C. (1916)
Monastic Fraternities of Jerusalem (1975)
Montfort Missionaries (Company of Mary) - S.M.M. (1705)
Norbertines or Premonstratensians (Canons Regular of Prémontré) - C.R.P., O.Praem. (1120)
Oblate Apostles of the Two Hearts - O.A.T.H. (1995)
Oblate Sisters of Providence - O.S.P. (1829)
Oblates Of Mary Immaculate - O.M.I. (1816)
Oblates of St. Joseph - O.S.J. (1878)
Oblates Of The Virgin Mary - O.M.V. (1827)
Olivetans (Order of Our Lady of Mount Olivet) (1313)
Oratorians (Oratory of St. Philip Neri) - C.O., Cong. Orat. (1500s)
Order of the Imitation of Christ - O.I.C. (1930)
Order of Sempringham (Gilbertines) - (1148-1538)
Order of St. Elisabeth O.S.E. (1622)
Pallottines (Society of the Catholic Apostolate) - S.A.C. (1835)
Paris Foreign Missions Society (Missions Etrangères de Paris) - M.E.P. (1658)
Passionists (Congregation of the Passion) - C.P. (1720)
Passionist Sisters (1850s)
Patrician Brothers - F.S.P. (1808)
Pauline Fathers (Order of Saint Paul the First Hermit) - O.S.P.P.E. (1250)
Paulist Fathers (Missionary Society of Saint Paul the Apostle) - C.S.P. (1858)
Piarists (Clerics Regulars Poors of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools) - Sch.P. (1617)
Pious Disciples of the Divine Master - P.D.D.M. (1924)
Pontifical Congregation of the Benedictine Sisters of the Reparation of the Holy Face (1950)
Poor Clares (Nuns of the Order of St. Clare/(Order of Poor Ladies) - O.S.C. (1212)
Poor Clare Nuns - Joliet, Ill.
Poor Clares of Santa Barbara - Santa Barbara, Calif.
Poor Clare Nuns of Perpetual Adoration (1854)
Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon - Pauperes commilitones Christi Templique Solomonici (1129-1312)
Sisters of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary - P.B.V.M. (1775)
Presentation Brothers - F.P.M. (1802)
Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter - F.S.S.P. (1988)
Putra Puteri Carmel
Racine Dominican Sisters (1862)
Redemptorists (Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer) - C.Ss.R. (1732)
Les Religieuses de Notre-Dame-du-Sacre-Coeur (Dieppe, New Brunswick, Canada) (1924)
Religious of the Assumption - R.A. (1839)
Religious of the Sacred Heart of Mary - R.S.H.M. (1849)
Religious Sisters of Mercy of Alma, Michigan - R.S.M.
Religious Sisters of Charity (1815)
Resurrectionists - C.R. (1836)
Rogationists of the Heart of Jesus - R.C.J. (1897)
Rosminians (Institute of Charity) - I.C. (1828)
Salesians of St. John Bosco - S.D.B. (1857)
Salesian Sisters (Daughters of Mary Help of Christian) - F.M.A. (1872)
Salvatorians (Society of the Divine Savior) - S.D.S. (1881)
Salvatorians (Basilian Salvatorian Order - A Melkite Community) - bso (1724) (Always Lower-Cased)
School Sisters of Christ the King (1976)
School Sisters of Notre Dame - S.S.N.D. (1833)
School Sisters of the Third Order of St Francis (1873)
Servites (Order of Friars, Servants of Mary) - O.S.M. (1233)
Sinsinawa Dominican Sisters (1847)
Sister Adorers of the Precious Blood - R.P.G. (1861)
Sisters Adorers of the Royal Heart of Jesus Christ Sovereign Priest (2004)
Sisters of Adoration, Slaves of the Blessed Sacrament and of Charity (1850)
Sisters of the Apostolic Carmel (1870)
Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament (1891)
Sisters of the Cenacle - r.c. (1826)
Sisters of Charity - S.C. (1633)
Sisters of Charity of Saints Bartolomaea Capitanio & Vincenza Gerosa, Milan, Itlay - SCCG (1832)
Sisters of Charity of Cincinnati (1829)
Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth (1858)
Sisters of Charity of New York (1846)
Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary - B.V.M. (1831)
Sisters of Charity of the Immaculate Conception (St. John, New Brunswick, Canada) (1854)
Sisters of Charity of the Incarnate Word (1866)
Sisters of Charity of Jesus and Mary (1803)
Sisters of Charity of Our Lady of Mercy (South Carolina) (1829)
Sisters of Charity of Providence - SP (1844)
Sisters of Charity of Saint Elizabeth (1859)
Sisters of Charity Federation in the Vincentian-Setonian Tradition
Sisters of Charity of Saint Vincent de Paul - Halifax (Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada) (1849)
Vincentian Sisters of Charity (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) (1902)
Sisters of the Destitute (Kerala, India) (1927)
Sisters of the Divine Compassion (1886)
Sisters of Charity of Seton Hill (Pennsylvania) (1870)
Sisters of the Holy Cross - C.S.C. (1837)
Sisters of the Holy Family (1837)
Sisters of the Holy Family of Nazareth (1875)
Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary - S.N.J.M. (1844)
Sisters of the Immaculate Conception of Castres
Sisters of Jesus, Our Hope
Sisters of Life - S.V. (1991)
Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist - O.P. (1997)
Sisters of Mercy - R.S.M. (1831)
Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur - S.N.D., S.N.D. de N. (1803)
Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy (1862)
Sisters of Providence of St. Vincent de Paul (Kingston) - SP
Sisters of La Retraite
Sisters of Saint Agnes (1858)
Sisters of Saint Dorothy
Sisters of Saint Elizabeth (1842)
Sisters of St. Francis of Assisi (1849)
Sisters of St Francis of the Martyr St George - F.S.G.M. (1869)
Sisters of St. Francis of Penance and Christian Charity (1835)
Sisters of Saint Francis of Rochester, Minnesota (1877)
Sisters of St Joseph (AKA Sisters of Saint Joseph of Medaille) - C.S.J. (1650)
Sisters of Saint Joseph of Bourg or S.S.J. (1650)
Sisters of St. Joseph of Chambéry (1812)
Sisters of St. Joseph of Peace (1884)
Sisters of St. Joseph of the Sacred Heart - S.S.J. (1866)
Sisters of St. Joseph of the Third Order of St. Francis (1901)
Sisters of Saint Martha (Antigonish, Nova Scotia, Canada) (1900)
Sisters of St Rita (1911)
Sisters of St Therese of the Child Jesus (St Therese Sisters - Tanzania) - S.S.Th.
Sisters of Social Service - S.S.S. (1926)
Sisters of the Visitation - Sisters of the Visitation, Toledo, Ohio (1610)
Sisters, Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary – I.H.M. (1845)
Sisters, Servants of the Lord and the Virgin of Matará - S.S.V.M. (1988)
Sisters, Servants of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus (Cresson, PA; Poland; Vatican City) - S.S.C.J. (1894)
Society of African Missions (Societas Missionum ad Afros) - S.M.A. (1850)
Society of the Helpers of the Holy Souls (1856)
Society of the Holy Child Jesus - S.H.C.J. (1846)
Society of Jesus - S.J.or S.I. (1534)
Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity - S.O.L.T. (1958)
Society of St. Edmund S.S.E. (1843)
Society of Saint Paul - S.S.P. (1914)
Society of the Sacred Heart - R.S.C.J. (1800)
Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of Saint John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta (Order of Malta) - S.M.O.M. (1099)
Spiritans or Holy Ghost Fathers (Congregation of the Holy Ghost) - C.S.Sp. (1703)
Stigmatines (Congregation of the Sacred Stigmata) - C.S.S. (1816)
Sulpician Fathers (Society of Saint Sulpice) - S.S., P.S.S. (1642)
Tertiary Sisters of St. Francis - Cameroon (1700)
Teutonic Order (1190)
Theatines (Congregation of Clerics Regular) - C.R. (1524)
Theatines Nuns (Congregation of Theatines of Immaculate Conception) - T.I.C. (1633)
Trappists (Order of Cistercians of the Strict Observance) - O.C.R., O.C.S.O. (1662)
Trinitarians (Order of the Most Holy Trinity) - O.SS.T. (1194)
Ursulines (Ursuline Nuns of the Roman Union) - O.S.U. (1535)
Verbum Dei Missionary Fraternity - M.V.D.F. (1963)
Viatorians (Clerics of Saint Viator) - C.S.V. (1831)
Heralds of the Gospel ( Virgo Flos Carmeli and Regina Virginum) - E.P. (February 22, 2001)
Vincentian Congregation (VC) (1904)
Visitation Nuns - Sisters of the Visitation, Toledo, Ohio (1610)
(Visitation Nuns - Second Federation of the Visitation Order) (1610)
Vocationists (The Society of Divine Vocations) - S.D.V. (1927)
White Fathers - M.Afr. (1868)
Xaverian Brothers - C.F.X. (1839)
Xaverian Missionaries (Missionary Society of St. Francis Xavier) - S.X. (1895)

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.

Catholic vs. Presbyterian

Question:

Answer:

About Q&A