Replies

“The Roman rite and the Eastern Orthodox disagree over some basics of the faith as well.”

Yes, but members of the Roman Rite do not claim to be Eastern Orthodox and the Eastern Orthodox do not claim to be members of the Roman Rite. Protestants are Protestants. And those Protestants almost universally claim to be sola scriptura followers yet they sometimes disagree on very basic things. If you’re honest, you’ll admit that what usually happens on FR is that there will be one of two results: 1) Protestants will clash with one another, 2) if there is a Catholic involved the Protestants will claim the glaring difference between Protestants is actually not an important matter of the faith after all. How is that logically consistent?

“And both claim to be Catholicism in it’s original form with the other group being schismatic.”

Well, most Catholics and even many Eastern Orthodox will not say that the other is “schismatic” today. After all they are following their designated bishops. I understand what you’re saying, however, I don’t think your analogy works. Any logical person could see how Churches separated since 1054 - who had issues between them dating back centuries before that - could develop different views. But why is it so quick to happen among Protestants - especially when they claim to be sola scriptura people (in other words, they’re using the same source for final authority)?

A town I lived in some years ago had two Presbyterian churches. One of them was large and traditional and the other was a different denomination and liberal. The larger traditional one ended up in some sort of theological spat with in itself. A group broke off and they named their new church after the main issue of the theological spat (although they also still call themselves Presbyterians). All of this happened almost over night when you speak in terms of the long history of the Church. That’s the Protestant way. It’s not “Reformed and Still Reforming”, it’s “Fragmenting and Still Fragmenting”.

“So which one is right and why?”

I don’t believe for a single second that you believe either one is right or that either one could be right. The logical problem with that belief on your part is that Protestantism can’t possibly be right since Christ didn’t found it and a German monk did only 500 years ago.

“Your criticism of Prots disagreeing as making anything they believe invalid falls flat in light of Catholicism and its many flavors.”

No, my “criticism” of Protestants “disagreeing” stands and always will - precisely because their disagreeing shows the utter logical hopelessness of sola scriptura.

“For that matter, we can’t even get all the Catholics within the Roman rite to agree on whether Francis is a legitimate pope.”

He is a legitimate pope. You don’t have to get people to agree to it. He is one whether they agree or not. And I don’t even agree with Pope Francis on many of the things he says or does - but he is the legitimate pope. Truth cannot be merely subjective.

“And according to previous popes and Unum Sanctum, that’s pretty basic.”

It sure is. And that’s the point. But the vast majority of Catholics - and ALL of the Catholic hierarchy recognize the pope as legitimate. Case closed. But popes die. There will be a new one in a few years. A much more grave situation is when you can’t get Protestant denominations to agree on what happens in Baptism. 1) Baptism is a PERENNIAL thing. It’s been practiced for 2,000 years. No pope will hold the office for more than 30 or so years EVER. Popes come and go. Baptism stays. It matters much more what people think about Baptism then whether or not they like or dislike a particular pope! 2) If something happens in Baptism it has eternal significance. No particular pope’s popularity does. If something happens in Baptism it could effect or affect me forever and if I don’t receive it, it could affect or effect me forever. The popularity of a particular pope - or even the legitimacy of one - effects and affects me not in the least in terms of my eternal destiny. This was shown rather clearly in the Great Schism of the West 600 years ago. That’s the difference.