Posted on 03/02/2015 3:10:55 PM PST by Legatus
Almost always, it begins with a warm invitation, from nice people. You work with them. They live on either side of you. They are the parents of your children's friends. Most of the millions of Catholics who have defected to one form of Protestantism or other in the last thirty years did not intend to apostatize, when they agreed to "Come go to church with us!"
The individual Catholic frequently does not recognize the profound implications of the invitation. What is being proposed is a grave sin against faith, apostasy, exceeding in moral weight adultery, because faith is a gift received directly from God Himself. Nor does he realize what he is being asked: Does he take his faith seriously? Is he willing to give it up? Does he think the Catholic Church and the holy religion established by the Son of God no better than one founded sixteen centuries later by a man?
The process cannot be set in motion without the Catholic's cooperation. He must see a positive response to the friendly overture as the decisive step on the road that leads to loss of the Faith. Even one who senses danger may, all the same, fear giving offense, should he refer to the defects of false religions: "Exchange Christ, for Luther? The Church of the martyrs for some sect of the Protestant Reformation?" So most of us try something like the following: "I am a Catholic. I know what I have, I treasure the Faith, and I would never leave the Church."
Experience has shown that this will not end the matter; often, it will not even end the conversation. Why? Because the response is going to be, "But the Church is all believers in every church!" The Catholic has just collided with an invisible force: Protestant oral tradition.
This provisional answer-which the Protestant does not even believe himself, although, while he is saying it, he thinks he does-is a dogmatic decree from this infallible Protestant magisterium, which furnishes whatever is needed at any given moment to attack Catholic teaching. It will be followed by a conversation which, if put in graphic form, would resemble a bramble bush.
This oral tradition is a manufactured, unbiblical body of teaching, and it is passed on from one generation to the next. Its basic content; however kaleidoscopic and contradictory, is identifiable because it is unvarying. The essentials consist of what the Reformers denied, what they invented, and what they said the Bible says, mingled with the slanders and calumnies of the Church and of Catholics used by the Reformers to justify the establishment of a religion opposed to the one Christ founded. This body of inconsistencies and non sequiturs is the only thing each and every Protestant believes, whatever "denomination," a euphemism for "sect;" claims him at the moment
While Protestantism officially denies any obligation to accept Revelation, it guarantees Protestant adherence to the negatives of Protestantism by means of this unacknowledged magisterium. But because the very existence of an oral tradition in Protestantism is unsuspected, its deficiencies as a body of false, man-made dogmas which replaces the biblical teaching and Apostolic Tradition preserved by the Church escape notice.
What is actually written in Holy Scripture is never permitted to supplant dogmas decreed by the oral tradition. But this fact is similarly hidden behind the phrases, taken from the oral tradition, in which the Protestant continually proclaims his unshakable attachment to "the Word of God."
The control over the Protestant exercised by that tradition is a secret, even to him. Its operation is protective and wholly negative. It protects Protestant dogma by preventing the Protestant from believing anything the Reformers denied. It is wholly negative in that while the Protestant Bible reader is indoctrinated and remains immersed in error, he is systematically trained to reject only one thing: the truth. He is free to accept only those few doctrines left after the ravages of the Reformation, e.g., the divinity of Christ, the Resurrection, the Virgin Birth of Christ.' But it is not the things he believes which define his identity as a Protestant, but rather those revealed truths he rejects.
A Hidden Program
The oral tradition dictates the terms and direction in which any discourse between its adherents and Catholics will unfold. Thus, in his contacts with Catholics, the Protestant speaks only of what he does not believe, and why. He does not believe what all Christendom believed for fifteen centuries: the divine institution of a visible Church founded on Peter and his successors, who, acting in his official capacity as head of the Church, is guaranteed not to mislead us, with a separate, sacrificing priesthood and seven sacraments, through which flows the sanctifying grace which enables us to share in the life of God, and eventually, enter heaven. The repudiation of these truths is what makes him a Protestant, and this, his list of denials, is what he wishes to share with the Catholic. His hope is that the Catholic may be brought not to believe what he does not believe.
Because of the barely-concealed but broad and enduring Gnostic streak in Protestantism, the Protestant recoils from the flesh, imagining that he receives his doctrines from what he calls "the Spirit," all the while obeying Luther, and seeking support for Protestant denials of Revelation by quoting other revolutionaries who repudiated truths revealed by God.
The inventions of the Reformers are further safeguarded from exposure because of the Protestant's inability to distinguish what the Bible says from what these 16th-century revolutionaries, whose qualifications as religious leaders consisted largely of hatred of the Catholic Church, said it says. Luther claimed that his dogmas came from Holy Scripture, and since he is falsely portrayed in Protestant¬ism as the very one who "restored the Bible to the people," no one bothers to look and see whether the claim is true.
The Protestant Reformation had its birth and inspiration in Holy Scripture.
Protestantism rests its case upon the Bible.
It has a Bible Christianity.
Its final court of appeal is the Holy Scriptures . . .
No man or institution, no matter how great, can supersede the Word. For Protestants it is the Living Word.'
The first four statements above will be seen in their true light as we move through the following pages. To the first of the italicized assertions, Catholics answer: "Oh, yes, it can." Protestants consistently, habitually, and, wherever and whenever Protestant dogma is threatened, invariably allow their oral tradition to "supersede the Word." And to the second, we say, "Oh, no, it is not." It is Luther's, and/or occasionally some other Reformer's, word which is living; where Protestant dogma is concerned, it is the Bible which is a dead letter. This unexamined myth, that Protestantism is based on the Bible, so thoroughly deceives the Protestant that when he is reciting the dogmas of his oral tradition, he thinks he is quoting Holy Scripture, which he has infallibly interpreted through the guidance of the Holy Ghost
Therefore Protestants, wholly unaware of the oral tradition to which they are in thrall, regularly denounce Tradition in favor of the written Word. Moreover, they oppose, they tell us, any and all authority in matters of religion. They do not suspect that it is they themselves, and not, as they have been taught, Catholics, who scorn Holy Scripture.
Dressed-Up Rebellion
The true role of the Bible in Protestantism remains a well kept secret It is a slave to the oral tradition. Those beliefs peculiar to Protestantism cannot be found in Holy Scripture. They are imparted solely by means of their oral tradition. The Bible is forced, whenever possible, to furnish support. It is never permitted to contradict the Reformers. The Catholic who accepts Protestant myths at face value, and believes that "Protestants know the Bible," is as much deceived as the Protestant is. An exposition of Protestant oral tradition will reveal the extent of the Protestant's knowledge of Holy Scripture, and the use he makes of it.
The presentation of Protestant tenets in the following pages will unveil the source of Protestant beliefs. The l6th-century roots, the contradictions, the lack of biblical foundation, and the negative terms in which Protestant dogmas are framed betray the hidden presence of the oral tradition. The negative premise is sometimes disguised: "Faith alone" is a repudiation of everything else. The "all sufficiency of Scripture for faith and life" is a repudiation of Christ's right to found a teaching Church and His right to delegate His own authority, plus a rejection of any authority but the hidden authority in Protestantism, perceived as the speaker's own. It is a dismissal of the sacraments, a dismissal of sanctifying grace. It is a denial of man's need for sanctification. It is a rejection of all, in short, which the Reformers rejected. It is rebellion dressed up and made to sound pious.
First, the Belief, Then the Written Reminder
As I set forth in the following pages texts from Holy Scripture in support of Catholic doctrine and practices, the question might well arise: How do we know that those in the Primitive Church read the Bible text the way the Catholic Church interprets it? The answer is that there was no text to read. First there was the belief, taught orally. And even as the Primitive Church grew, the writing came in only gradually. The Church, whose human representatives spoke for her, had the authority; they instructed and directed the faithful. The first statement below is Our Lord's:
And if he will not hear them, tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican (Mt 18:17); Wherefore, my dearly beloved, (as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but much more now in my absence) (Phil 2:12); Obey your prelates, and be subject to them (Heb 13:17, falsified in the KJV).
What do Catholics mean when they say, "the Church"? According to St Robert Bellarmine, the Church is the visible society of the validly baptized faithful, united together in one organic body by the profession of the same Christian faith, by the participation of the same Sacrifice, and the same seven sacraments, under the authority of the Sovereign Pontiff and the bishops in communion with him. Another definition says that the Church is comprised of the living faithful, united under an earthly head, who is the Vicar of Christ, who Himself remains the cornerstone (Ps 86:5). It is the Body of Christ, who is the head of the Church (Eph 5:23), which completes and continues Christ's mission (Col 1:24).
During the very time her bishops were committing to paper the writing which we call the New Testament, as confirmed by that handy history of the apostolic age, the New Testament itself, the Church was a functioning organism. Surviving documents of historians and the Church Fathers testify to the one Church with one set of unchanging doctrines, identical to those which have continued up to our time in the Catholic Church, despite the fact that the truth is constantly under attack.
No, No! This Answer Will Not Do!
How shall we respond to the well-meaning Protestant's declaration that "the Church is all believers in every church"? It demands, as an answer, a question: "Why, then, should I go to a Protestant sect of your choosing? I am a believer, and therefore, according to the Protestant definition, I am a member of the Church."
On the hidden prompting from the Protestant tradition, this response will be rejected at once. The rejoinder that the Church is all believers was only temporarily useful, to be discarded and forgotten as he proceeds to his next point. The Protestant will now solemnly assure you that one church is as good as another. The logical answer here would be: "That being true, you surely will have no objection if I continue to attend my own?"
Of course, he has an objection. He only says this, that one church is as good as another, but he wishes the Catholic to join him in Protestant error precisely because of his conviction that the Church is invisible, is made up of all believers in every Protestant church, and that it is actually one Protestant church which, in his estimation, is-more or less-as good as another, although his enthusiasm centers on the one he attends at the moment And if you point out to him that no church founded by a creature can possibly be equal to one founded by the Son of God, he will not be listening, or he will not be impressed with this simple statement of truth. The Catholic will feel himself falling through a series of trap doors, as solid ground gives way time after time. There is always another step, another hidden contradiction, another unspoken qualification: "One church is as good as another ... except the Catholic Church."
Protestants, that feeling you may be having right now is what it feels like to be on the receiving end of thread after thread of anti-Catholicism.
To my fellow Catholics, this is an excerpt from a book that led me into the Catholic Church almost 20 years ago. THIS is what polemics looks like. This is not Scott Hahn/Tim Staples/Karl Keating/Patrick Madrid apologetics. This is EENS/you're all going to burn in hell material. I have shelves of this stuff, if necessary I'll post all of it. Certain posters seem to want to get down in the mud and splatter Catholicism with Protestant feculence, to which I respond http://youtu.be/nTY836hhY7o
Apparently one man’s Apostasy is another man’s Salvation.
I feel this practically everytime you guys post an article.
It is a joke that you believe only Catholics here are piled upon. Everytime you guys post an article - sometimes even in the headline - is a slam against other denominations. The condescending tones and backhanded insults are all over the place in your article posts.
That is the equivalent of saying what a Christian feels when a Muslim yells "Allahu Akbar"...absolutely nothing. We are simply trying to alert the victims of Rome that they are following another cult, a self-made, self-aggrandizing religion...not Jesus, alone, and your article does not dissuade that ambition one bit.
I asked a Catholic friend of mine what a mass was and he couldn’t answer. He said he thought it was the last supper, the crucifixion and the resurrection all rolled up together. Or something like that. Ha!
Interesting.
You oppose anti-Catholic threads and your solution is to post an anti-Protestant thread.
Upon which of Jesus Christ’s teachings is this behavior based?
27 “All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.
28 “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” (-Love, Jesus!)
... After we accept the free gift of grace given to us through Jesus paying the price of our salvation we then begin a new life in Christ. When we accept Jesus into our heart He sends the Holy Spirit into us to begin our spiritual life in Christ. (2 Corinthians 1:21-22 NIV) Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, {22} set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come. The Holy Spirit is given to us to be with us forever, the Holy Spirit is God in us. (John 14:16-17 NKJV) "And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever; {17} "the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.
The Holy Spirit teaches us truth from God, and directs us toward obeying God. Obedience to God is summed up by being in Love, Loving God and Loving people through the Spirit of Love. (1 Peter 1:22 NKJV) Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit in sincere love of the brethren, love one another fervently with a pure heart. It is the work of the Holy Spirit that is transforming us and changing our will and our desires to walk in love and obedience to God. (Philippians 2:13 NLT) For God is working in you, giving you the desire to obey him and the power to do what pleases him. We can not walk in obedience by our own efforts, it is the work of the Holy Spirit in us that gives us the ability and the desire to love and obey. ...-seekgod.org
Example please
That is actually what they think it is.. The priest is another christ.. and he offers a bloodless sacrifice
Yep
You mean this is TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC theology.
I wouldn't post it as a reaction to the Protestant threads though. I would post it because it is the Truth.
From the very next line: “The presentation of Protestant tenets in the following pages will unveil the source of Protestant beliefs.”
Thank you for inviting me to post the rest of the book.
Sorry. He sounded so unsure I had to laugh. But you're saying he got it right? Wow.
My church has dozens and dozens of former Catholics. I am a former Catholic myself. I was the most serious Catholic in my entire family, but I didn't know Jesus.
The testimonies of our church's former Catholics are powerful. They were saved by the love and grace of Christ Himself. The Bible is very, very, very clear about what saves us, and it isn't ritual or the sacraments.
Someone who calls being save by Jesus Christ "grave sin" and "apostasy" puts you squarely in the camp of Lucifer, and against God Himself.
Good luck with that.
That's fine - bring it on.
Excellent.
No such thing as a priest or sacrifices in the New Testament church other than the priesthood of all believers and the sacrifice of praise to God. What Catholics call priests don't even qualify for any leadership position in the New Testament ekkelesia of Christ.
“Protestants, that feeling you may be having right now is what it feels like to be on the receiving end of thread after thread of anti-Catholicism.”
I want to say thank you for another opportunity for bible-believing Christians to share gospel truths with Roman Catholics. There is absolutely nothing that can be said here to shake my faith or upset me. I know what I believe and I know Whom I believe. I have that God-given peace that surpasses all understanding.
actually, usually it starts with a “church of nice” where the mass is meaningless, the “kiss of peace” greeting is chaotic and considered more important than the Eucharist, all the statues are gone and the church resembles the waiting room at the local airport, your children learn socialism in catechism or catholic school, and you start missing mass because you are not being fed spiritually.
Then you find a spirit filled church that feeds your soul, so you start going there.
Here in the Philippines, it’s even more complicated: Pope Francis got crowds, but still he didn’t see the real problem: That the clergy are from upper class families... and the “emphasis on the poor” that he spouts essentially means the poor are there for the rich to “help”, which locally translates to “you can take bribes, skim the top of the profits or from gov’t funds, seduce your employees and take drugs, but hey, if you give to the church and/or help the poor, you go to heaven”.
In contrast, the Protestant churches teach morality, honesty, and emphasize that the personal relationship to Jesus in a charismatic way is not enough: You need to also “walk the walk”...which is why many in the middle class are becoming protestant, and many of the poor, especially in cities, are finding that following Christ in the biblical way is not only the way to heaven, but will help you be successful in your daily life, i.e. in a job and in family life.
If I remain a Catholic, it is because of the Eucharist, and because the traditional Catholic approach to God sees his glory in everything (the heavens proclaim the glory of God) and that I am old enough to remember when they taught the “little way” of doing every small deed for love of God.
not to mention that my protestant relatives are honest, but if a poor person comes to the door with a request for emergency funds, they are skin flints, with the idea that if the poor just got out and got a job, they wouldn’t have to ask for help.
I guess God need both types.
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.