Radio Replies Second Volume - The Idealization of Protestantism

Celledoor.com ^ | 1940 | Fathers Rumble & Carty

[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/

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“The Gemera, Josephus, Seneca, Tacticus, Pliny the Elder, Suetonius, and many others... All are not credible? Their silence on the matter of the highly structured Papist faith speaks volumes.”

No, it doesn’t. If you look, you’ll see more than you might think. Pliny, for instance, makes reference to deaconesses and apparently to the sacrament of the altar (without realizing it). Many people today forget that Acts itself speaks of bishops (Apostles), presbyters (priests) and deacons. That in itself implies a highly structured church on the episcopal level. Also, Pliny makes clear that even after more than 70 years the Romans still did not understand what Christianity was about, who was involved or how it worked on the ground (maybe “underground” should be the word used there). Christians were often secretive. The Romans couldn’t write about what they didn’t know.

[TexasCajun]

Thanks,,, It is always a good feeling to have backup.

I'm with you guys. Do catholics really want to go 'there'?

[grey_whiskers]

Can't we all just Romans 14 ??

[OneVike]

I am not offended so much as I am curious as to the motive.

Every time I have seen a dispute it has been started by an individual of the Catholic persuasion that has ignited the fire by;

A.) claiming superiority over others

B,) Claiming their deceased loved ones who died in sin have a second chance after death

C.) Claiming that James, Peter, Paul, and other men the Catholics have promoted, for various reasons to Sainthood, now have equal same power of intercession with God as Christ does.

D.) Claiming that somehow a mere mortal woman is now elevated to the status of God with Christ.

I would offer other reasons, but the list of violations by the Catholic Church that go directly against Christ’s completed works on the cross and resurrection are actually longer then what I refer to as the Constitution of Christianity He offered in the sermon on the mount. Your adherence to traditions invalidate the word of God. You offer the word of men who wrote great works of theological discourse no doubt, yet they are but men, not God.

The Cannon is closed, to add to it is a sin. So anything outside of the word of God cannot replace nor refute His Son’s teachings. The Catholic Church is like the elders of Judaism whom Jesus ran against while He walked amongst us. You would rather believe that the traditions of your Church are what saves the souls of men. Rather it is the sacrificial death on the cross and His resurrection from death of our almighty God, Christ Himself who saves the souls of men. Not a membership in a quasi political gathering of men stuck on traditions made by mere mortals, many of which are probably languishing in hell as we speak because of their self importance over God.

I guess it would be only expected then that some Protestants will begin posting works of theological writings that have destroyed the Catholic faith so resoundingly that the Catholic Church needed to create a whole department just to defend their heretical practices.

The Catholic Church depends upon signs, wonders, and traditions of the Church along with the supposed infallible wisdom from the Pope for the salvation of their members.

I count on the blood of Christ for mine. No more, no less. Foolish yes, but to men the wisdom of God is foolish. In that I put my faith.

[vladimir998]

I’m sorry, but I don’t believe you.

You wrote:

“A.) claiming superiority over others”

What is true and sent by God is superior to what is false or partly false and sent by man alone.

“B,) Claiming their deceased loved ones who died in sin have a second chance after death”

Catholics don’t teach that. Can you please post evidence for that claim?

“C.) Claiming that James, Peter, Paul, and other men the Catholics have promoted, for various reasons to Sainthood, now have equal same power of intercession with God as Christ does.”

Again, Catholics don’t teach that. Can you please post evidence for that claim?

“D.) Claiming that somehow a mere mortal woman is now elevated to the status of God with Christ.”

Again, Catholics don’t teach that. Can you please post evidence for that claim?

One of your points is a misunderstanding - perhaps based upon hurt feelings? - on your part. The other three are just outrageous untruths that Catholics do not teach and have never taught.

Attack us all you like, but at least attack us for what we actually teach and believe and not for untruths that you have made up.

[Natural Law]

"Your whole post reeks with an attitude of superiority over Protestants."

“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity. . . . That the Roman Church is more honored by God than all others is not to be doubted. St, Peter and St. Paul, forty-six Popes, some hundreds of thousands of martyrs, have laid down their lives in its communion, having overcome Hell and the world; so that the eyes of God rest on the Roman church with special favor. Though nowadays everything is in a wretched state, it is no ground for separating from the Church. On the contrary, the worse things are going, the more should we hold close to her, for it is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better. We must not separate from God on account of any work of the devil, nor cease to have fellowship with the children of God who are still abiding in the pale of Rome on account of the multitude of the ungodly. There is no sin, no amount of evil, which should be permitted to dissolve the bond of charity or break the bond of unity of the body. For love can do all things, and nothing is difficult to those who are united.”

Martin Luther to Pope Leo X, January 6, 1519 more than a year after the Ninety-Five Theses quoted in The Facts about Luther, 356

[Natural Law]

"Protestantism has our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus as the Chief Cornerstone of the Church, not the Pope. Those who call their denomination the Church, fail to exercise faith through Christ, when they place the Pope between any believer and God."

Repeated hogwash is still hogwash. Protestants declare that the objective standard for any discussion is an unconditional acceptance of Sola Scripture which the Catholic Church rejects. The Bible, as wonderful as it is, does not contain 100% of the revealed Word. Declaring so is to obsolete the presence ans role of the Holy Spirit in our lives and elevates those 16th century heretics who corrupted the Scripture to the status of Apostles.

The comment about the role of the Pope is just plain ignorant. The whole purpose of the Church is to educate, serve and facilitate ones personal salvation.

[SnakeDoctor]

Protestant do not deny the Catholic church as a historical entity — so evidence of the historical basis of the sacraments, heirarchy, etc. does not seem to be germane. We are aware they existed for a while ... we think they are wrong.

Protestants typically deny that the Catholic church — particularly since the Protestant reformation — is endowed with any specific exclusivity as the church of Christ. We also deny that any person or entity is endowed with infallibility of any kind. Historical evidence cannot address these objections, so is unlikely to be even remotely persuasive to a Protestant.

SnakeDoc

[vladimir998]

Denial of reality is not a good basis for religious truths. We suggest you don’t do it. We don’t.

[GonzoII]

"Protestant do not deny the Catholic church as a historical entity — so evidence of the historical basis of the sacraments, heirarchy, etc. does not seem to be germane."

It is germane if you make the link back to the apostles and therefore Christ himself, because Christ said he would be with his Church forever and it would be free from teaching error.

If you find the historical Church you find the security of God's protection over it.

[grey_whiskers]

Do you ever ask anyone to pray for you?

If so, why not ask the saints, too?

"He is not the God of the dead but of the living..."

Cheers!

[Persevero]

“If so, why not ask the saints, too?”

Because although they are alive in Christ, they are dead, and the Bible says so, and we are expressly forbidden to contact the dead.

I was just reading the account of Saul praying to the dead Samuel last night as a matter of fact. Sin.

[Persevero]

I pretty much agree with Pius about the public schools! Other than that, great summary list.

[Natural Law]

Protestants declare that the objective standard for any discussion is an unconditional acceptance of Sola Scripture which the Catholic Church rejects. The Bible, as wonderful as it is, does not contain 100% of the revealed Word. Declaring so is to obsolete the presence ans role of the Holy Spirit in our lives and elevates those 16th century heretics who corrupted the Scripture to the status of Apostles.

[Judith Anne]

It’s clear you can’t answer the Catholic arguments. Spamming the thread with unsourced material, instead of rational arguments, is a clear indication of ineptitude. Maybe if you take the original post one paragraph at a time, it would help you.

[GonzoII]

"OF ALL THE HUMAN TRADITIONS taught and practiced by the Roman Catholic Church, which are contrary to the Bible, the most ancient are the prayers for the dead and the sign of the Cross. Both began 300 years after Christ."

I'll refute the first one for you someone else may go for the others later.

About one hundred years before Christ the Jews were already praying for the dead. You will probably reply that this is not Scripture, fine, it's still history four hundred years before this absurd claim:

2 Machabees 12:44 " (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,)"

2 Machabees 12:46 " It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins." BTW, the first KJB Bible had 2 Machabees in it.

[OneVike]

Mary the subject of preaching and worship

From Vatican Collection Volume 1, Vatican Council II, The Conciliar and Post Conciliar documents.  General Editor Austin Flannery, O.P. New revised edition 1992; Costello publishing company, Northport, New York.  1992 pages 420-421 (par. 65)

65.  But while in the most Blessed Virgin the church has already reached that perfection whereby she exists without spot or wrinkle (cf. Eph. 5:27), the faithful still strive to conquer sin and increase in holiness. And so they turn their eyes to Mary who shines forth to the whole community of the elect as the model of virtues. Devoutly meditating on her and contemplating her in the light of the Word made man, the Church reverently penetrates more deeply into the great mystery of the Incarnation and becomes more and more like her spouse. Having entered deeply into the history of salvation, Mary, in a way, unites in her person and re-echeos the most important doctrines of the Faith: and when she is the subject of preaching and worship she prompts the faithful to come to her son, to his sacrifice and to the love of the Father. Seeking after the glory of Christ, the Church becomes more like her lofty type, and continually progresses in faith, hope and charity, seeking and doing the will of God in all things. The Church, therefore, in her apostolic work too, rightly looks to her who gave birth to Christ, who was thus conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of a virgin, in order that through the church he could be born and increase in the hearts of the faithful. In her life the Virgin has been a model of that motherly love with which all who joined in the church's apostolic mission for the regeneration of mankind should be animated.

IV.  THE CULT OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN IN THE CHURCH1

66.  Mary has by grace been exalted above all angels and men to a place second only to her Son, as the most holy Mother of God who was involved in the mysteries of Christ: she is rightly honored by a special cult in the Church. From the earliest times the Blessed Virgin is honored under the title of Mother of God, whose protection the faithful take refuge together in prayer in all their perils and needs. Accordingly, following the Council of Ephesus, there was a remarkable growth in the cult of the people of God towards Mary, in veneration and love, in invocation and imitation, according to her own prophetic words: "all generations shall call me Blessed, because he that is mighty hath done great things to me," (Luke 1:48).

Comments on this passage

1. No where in Scripture are we told to put our eyes upon anyone other than the Lord himself.  We are told to fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith (Heb. 12:2).  In addition, it is Jesus who is the model of virtue, not Mary.  Though she was greatly blessed, and undoubtedly a godly woman, she still needed a savior.  Mary said, "And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior," (Luke 1:47).  Contrary to the Roman Catholic teaching that Mary was sinless, Mary herself admitted that God was her savior.  A sinless person does not need a savior.  It is in the person of Jesus that grace and truth (and virtue) are best exemplified.  Our eyes should be kept on him.
2. "Spouse"?  Still researching to discover what is meant. The Catholic church doesn't seem to be too clear on this.
3. The only proper object of preaching and worship is God.  Jesus said, "...You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only," (Matt. 4:10).  The incredible danger of making a person other than God, such as Mary, the subject of both preaching and worship is warned about in Exodus 20:4-5, "You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me." God clearly warns against creating any idol before which anyone should bow.  It goes without saying that the countless images of Mary strewn throughout Catholic churches all over the world, are most assuredly shrines of idolatry since thousands of times a day Catholics over the world break the commandment of God by bowing before these images in worship.
4. We should look to Christ alone.  When you take your eyes off of Jesus and put them on anything else, or anyone else, you will be led astray.
5. Where is this taught in Scripture?  Where does it say that Mary was exalted above angels and men second only to her son?  This would mean that Mary is just under Jesus, the creator of the universe, in position.   Vatican II's comments are not biblical.  This teaching can not be found in Scripture and should be abandoned.
6. This is a misleading term.  Mary is not the Mother of God in the sense that God, the creator of the universe, had a mom.  The divine nature has no mother since God is eternal and self sufficient. Rather, Mary is the mother of the human nature of Jesus, not the mother of the divine nature.  The human nature took its biological essence from Mary.  The divine nature is from God.  But we have to be careful here.  Mary is, however, the mother of the person of Christ who has two natures:  divine and human.   So, in that sense she can be said to be the mother of God.

 

This article is also available in: Español

1. 1. "Cult" in this sense means a community of worshippers and not the "non-Christian cult" meaning that is often used of Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.

The above was lifted from CARM apoligetics at Carm.org. He did such a bang up job, why remake the work that he has accomplished so well.

[GonzoII]

"Because although they are alive in Christ, they are dead,"

So they are alive. And we don't "contact the dead" we ask for their prayers; not to get nosy news.

[GonzoII]

"Wax Candles introduced in church. about 320"

LOL..you can't be serious

I'll say this, the Rev. at least believes the Catholic church existed in the 4th century.