Catholic vs. Protestant - why is there so much animosity?

Got Questions? ^

[Between the Lines]

Question: "Catholic vs. Protestant - why is there so much animosity?"

Answer: This is a simple question with a complicated answer, because there are varying degrees of, and reasons for, animosity between any two religious groups. This particular battle is rooted in history. Degrees of reaction have ranged from friendly disagreement (as reflected in the numerous ecumenical dialogues produced between the two groups), to outright persecution and murder of Protestants at the hands of Rome. Reformation teachings that identify the Pope as the Beast of Revelation and / or Roman Catholicism as Mystery Babylon are still common among Protestants. Clearly, anyone with this view is not going to “warm up” to Rome any time soon.

For the most part, today at least, most of the animosity comes from basic human nature when dealing with fundamental disagreement over eternal truths. Passions are sure to ignite in the more weighty matters of life, and one's faith is (or at least should be) at the top of the heap. Many Protestants think Roman Catholics teach a works-gospel that cannot save, while Roman Catholics think Protestants teach easy-believism that requires nothing more than an emotional outburst brought on by manipulative preaching. Protestants blame Catholics for worshipping Mary and Catholics think Protestants are apparently too dull to understand the distinctions Rome has made in this regard. These caricatures are often difficult to overcome.

Behind the particular disagreements over the role of faith and works, the sacraments, the canon of Scripture, the role of the priesthood, prayers to saints, and all the issues surrounding Mary and the Pope, etc., lies the biggest rift between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism: the issue of authority. How one answers the authority question will generally solve all the others. When it comes down to deciding a theological issue about defined Catholic dogma, there isn’t really much to discuss on the Catholic's side because once Rome speaks, it is settled. This is a problem when trying to debate a Roman Catholic - reason and Scripture are not the Catholic’s final authority, they can always retreat into the “safe zone” of Roman Catholic authority.

Thus, many of the arguments between a Protestant and a Catholic will revolve around one's “private interpretation” of Scripture as against the "official teachings of the Roman Catholic Church." Catholics claim to successfully avoid the legitimate problems of private interpretation by their reliance on their tradition. But this merely pushes the question back a step. The truth is that both Roman Catholics and Protestants must, in the end, rely upon their reasoning abilities (to choose their authority) and their interpretive skills (to understand what that authority teaches) in order to determine what they will believe. Protestants are simply more willing to admit that this is the case.

Both sides can also be fiercely loyal to their family's faith or the church they grew up in without much thought to doctrinal arguments. Obviously there are a lot of possible reasons, and while we should not divide over secondary issues, both sides agree that we must divide when it comes to primary issues. Beyond that, we can agree to disagree and worship where we find ourselves most in agreement. When it comes to Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, the differences are just too great to ignore. However, that does not give license for caricatures or ignorant judgments - both sides need to be honest in their assessments and try not go beyond what God has revealed.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thanx Quix! ..:o)

[Mad Dawg]

OW!

;-)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Then why are you sticking around?

[Persevero]

Well, I disagree with you, obviously. For example, such doctrines as Mary’s immaculate conception; or the perfection of the saints whose good works outweigh their sins and so they have extra grace to dispense; purgatory; these don’t have a biblical basis. They are based on church tradition and so forth.

I also should add the what Roman Catholics and what Protestants believe constitute the Bible differs. Roman Catholics accept the Apogrypha as part of the canon; we don’t. However, I have not seen much doctrinal differences based on that in my time, so I don’t know how much of a factor that is.

[Marysecretary]

I AGREE. I DON’T SEE MUCH ANIMOSITY OR DISAGREEMENT OTHERWISE. BUT HERE WE CAN BE HONEST ABOUT HOW WE FEEL.

[Marysecretary]

MY PASTOR WAS A CATHOLIC MUCH OF HIS LIFE AND WHEN GOD CALLED HIM INTO THE MINISTRY, HIS DEAR MOM ALWAYS HAD A TOUGH TIME ACCEPTING THAT.

[Belteshazzar]

Why d’ya think they call themselves ‘Protesters’?

Who first called Protestants Protestants? (clue: it wasn’t the Protestants) Do your homework.

I reject the terminology.

[Judith Anne]

It would be nice to know what protties would like to be called.

[Belteshazzar]

“protties”?

Howsabout Christians?

[Judith Anne]

I picked up “protties” from Quix.

And I won’t be using “Christian” for protties, until/unless protties acknowledge Catholics as Christians.

[Belteshazzar]

“And I won’t be using “Christian” for protties, until/unless protties acknowledge Catholics as Christians.”

First, to refuse to do what is right until the other party does it strikes me as being at variance with Christian teaching. Christians seek to do right for the simple reason that it is right.

Second, I have never in my life said that Catholics are not Christian. As I recently noted in another of these seemingly endlessly generated threads, in response to another sensible poster, the ecumenical creeds delineate what is and is not the Christian faith, and who therefore is or is not a Christian. If you believe as the creeds speak, you are to be counted in the Christian camp. However, in the end, only the Lord knows who are His, as He said in more than one place in the Scriptures. Thus, I leave the final determination to Him, and will take anyone who confesses the creeds at their word.

Third, where I come from, we explicitly say the above in our confessions, since it is in accord with the Holy Scriptures.

Fair enough?

[Judith Anne]

First, to refuse to do what is right until the other party does it strikes me as being at variance with Christian teaching. Christians seek to do right for the simple reason that it is right.

So, why is there any objection to "protties"? Show me how a Christian behaves when someone calls them names they don't like. You know, like RC, RCC, Romish, Romans, papists, Marble Mary toe-kissers, stuff like that.

Control your own side of the fence before looking over at me.

[Belteshazzar]

sigh ...

[Judith Anne]

Exactly. I get a little annoyed when protties start preaching about how Catholics are supposed to behave, while all the time giving a pass to their own.

I posted with another prottie about this yesterday. That one had the grace to confront another one, but then said it was too much trouble to stay around and keep it up.

So, hey! No problem. But you will get a lot farther confronting the excesses of the folks on your side. And maybe show me up. But I doubt it. After all, it’s too much trouble, right?

[Belteshazzar]

“Exactly. I get a little annoyed when protties start preaching about how Catholics are supposed to behave, while all the time giving a pass to their own.”

I thought we were Christians talking to one another.

“I posted with another prottie about this yesterday. That one had the grace to confront another one, but then said it was too much trouble to stay around and keep it up.”

Well, I haven’t had a “prottie” respond to me like you did. Be assured I will respond similarly if it happens. And, yes, it is often too much trouble to stay around. Real life goes on. Virtual life is very secondary.

“So, hey! No problem. But you will get a lot farther confronting the excesses of the folks on your side. And maybe show me up. But I doubt it. After all, it’s too much trouble, right?”

... er ... I guess ... whatever you say. I guess civility as a first response really is the way of the past.

[Belteshazzar]

I don’t know where to start with what you said. So, I’ll stop.

Perhaps, we’ll try again another time.

[Judith Anne]

... er ... I guess ... whatever you say. I guess civility as a first response really is the way of the past.

I did not get this way overnight.

[Quix]

I acknowledged a good number of Roman Catholics as Christians many years ago hereon.

[Marysecretary]

Some Catholics are Christians and some are not..same as protestants. Belonging to a certain church won’t save you or guarantee a trip to heaven.

[Cronos]

I was addressing your point that Roman Catholics place the Pope’s interpretation of Scripture above all else for matters of faith and practice.

This is NOT the Pope's interpretation -- none of our doctrine is the work of one Man besides Jesus Christ. The Pope's personal opinion does not make our doctrine.

Secondly, you said that When we argue about this sacrament or that doctrine, the Protestant appeals to a verse from the Bible, or a group of verses. The Roman Catholic appeals to the Pope’s or the Holy See’s statements. --> we don't appeal to the Pope's or the Holy See's statements as the reasoning for doctrine.

Church doctrines are formed in council, the Church as a whole is what interprets scripture.

And your examples are also examples of what Protestants are told that the Church believes, but we don't, as you would find in the Catechism of The Catholic Church, you would find correct definitions of what we do -- and it will surprise you, as it surprises even many life-long Catholics!