Anti-Catholicism, Anti-Protestantism

[Josiah]

.


"That's CATHOLIC so it's bad, wrong, false, heresy, blasphemy!" Say (variously) some very modern American (and Australian) "Evangelicals" If it's CATHOLIC, it's bad. Wrong.

"That's PROTESTANT so it's bad, wrong, false, heresy, blasphemy!" Say (variously) a few fundamentalist Roman Catholics. If it's PROTESTANT (and not RCC), it's ergo bad. Wrong.


We see it a lot. Including at this website. Sometimes it's nicely worded, but it's easy to see it. It's divisive. It's most unhelpful. And it's usually wrong.


I think this "ANTI" approach is not very constructive (or thoughtful). And it's often not even right. For example, some "Evangelicals" may claim that if you hold Mary in esteem, or do the sign of the Cross or have a liturgical worship service or confess the Nicene Creed during a service - that's CATHOLIC and ergo, therefore, bad, evil, false, blasphemy, unbiblical, horrible and maybe satanic. But actually, most NON-Catholics do all those things! NONE of those things are AT ALL distinctively Roman Catholic. The half billion or so Orthodox Christians do all those things. The 90 million or so Anglicans do all those things. The 70 million or so Lutherans do those things. Some Reformed/Calvinists do those things. Some Methodist do those things. YOUR American or Australian "Evangelical" church may not, I realize - but THAT doesn't mean it's a distinctively CATHOLIC thing.

And of course, Catholics believe and do a LOT of things that these modern American and Australian "Evangelicals" ALSO believe and do. The Trinity. The New Testament. Typically worshiping on Sunday. Singing hymns. Having a sermon. IF it's wrong to beleive or do something that Catholics do, then it's wrong to have a Bible, it's wrong to worship God, it's wrong to sing hymns, it's wrong to believe God is Triune.

It works the other way, too. But I admit, Catholics are FAR less likely to do this ("If it's Protestant, it's BAD and WRONG!"), but it exists. It's usually framed as, "If it's not CATHOLIC, it's ergo bad, wrong" but since these fundamentalist Catholics define all non-Catholics as "Protestant" it amounts to the same thing.

Sometimes this just gets SILLY. Today is an example: My Lutheran church will have an Ash Wednesday service, and we'll receive ashes in the form of a Cross on our foreheads. Yup, some select "Evangelicals" will shout, "THAT'S CATHOLIC!!!!!!! Horrors of horrors!!!!!!! It's THEREFORE bad, wrong, blaspheming, satanic, unbiblical!!!!!!!" Once, when at lunch with friends, without meaning offense, I crossed myself while silently saying grace. An "Evangelical" LANDED (verbally, right in the restaurant, our friends with us very embarrassed and uncomfortable) landed into me about how satanic I was, how that's CATHOLIC (horrors of horrors). I tried, politely, to ignore this (this was in a Carls' Junior restaurant.... people were looking at him.....). He said, "I thought you left that demonic church!!!" Of course, crossing is not just Catholic. Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans and beyond also do this - but this "Evangelical" didn't know that (and probably considers all who do the Sign to be Catholic anyway since they do this!!! How SILLY this gets).


And the emptiness of this SOON becomes apparent. Could this guy tell me WHY it is wrong to do the Sign of the Cross? Well.... I kept getting "That's CATHOLIC!!!" Perhaps in time he might have said, "The BIBLE STATES that's bad, wrong!" To which I'd ask, "Where? Help me by quoting the verse." Well, the holy, written WORD OF GOD states that's forbidden, that's blasphemy!" To which I'd say, "Wow! Please quote that verse for me!" Well.... that's CATHOLIC!" It's how it goes. I'm so sick of it. It's so silly. And of course, yes - it happens the other way around, too. "That's WRONG!" "Why?" Because it's PROTESTANT, my church says that's wrong!" "Well, my church says its right." "Well, my church says it's wrong so it's wrong! - we are required to obey our church!" "I am.... my church says this is correct!" "But your church is PROTESTANT - horrors or horrors - so YOUR church is wrong. We have to obey the authority of our church!!!" And so it goes.

I was Catholic for some time and got it from Protestants. I'm Protestant now and get it from Catholics. But worse - I'm Lutheran and so get it from both. As do the hundreds and hundreds of MILLIONS of Christians who are not RCC or American/Australian "Evangelicals."

Seems to ME that if someone is going to ATTACK a brother or sister in Christ, going to shout that a Christian is blaspheming or is a heretic or satanic - they should have something SOLID that STATES that, not "It's CATHOLIC so it's WRONG" or "That's NOT Catholic so it's WRONG." Something more than "the Holy Spirit told ME" or "The Holy Spirit told MY denomination." Something more than, "The Bible STATES - well, no, actually it doesn't, but if you twist it like I do, if you ADD a whole bunch of words to it that aren't there, if I appoint just me to creatively interpret it - THEN the Bible says so! Well, sort of."


I have nothing against "This we believe." I DO have something against the baseless slams, the accusations that are little more than just anti-Catholicism or anti-Protestantism. If one is going to wag their accusational finger at someone.... if you are going to divide Christians..... at least have something to SUPPORT it, something you yourself would support in reverse, not just "anti".



Sorry. Yeah, it's a rant.



- Josiah




.

 

[Lamb]

It's ALWAYS better to state what is wrong instead of spewing hate for a group outright. For example, saying Catholics are not Christian is not preferred. State instead some of the things that Catholics believe that are not biblical and provide scriptural proof. That's the way to properly converse instead of aiming to insult and be unloving toward your neighbor.

 

[Josiah]

Thanks, Lamm


An example. I was mostly homeschooled, but this was done through a big "Evangelical" (Baptist, actually) K-12 private school. We used their curriculum, I had my tests all there at that campus, etc. And monthly, I met with my "school group" on the campus, with the teachers of that school.

Anyway, probably 95% of the students in my group were Christians of the "Evangelical" type. And one of their fave sports was "Catholic Bashing." This never sat well with me since it often was ME they were bashing - and rarely, VERY rarely, did they have a clue what they were talking about. This whole framework of Evangelicalism of "we have no idea what we are BUT we know this - we ain't CATHOLIC!" rather amazed me.

Anyway, one day the bashing turned to the Rosary. And it became OBVIOUS none of them had a CLUE what it even was. So, I volunteered to bring mine and show them. Kinda show and tell, lol. The jaws of the guys in the group dropped (such a satanic thing brought onto the holy ground of a Baptist school?) BUT the teacher actually seemed curious. So next month, I brought my Rosary (in truth, I was never a big Rosary person, but yup, I had and still have one and I knew how to use it). Anyway, I went through the thing, explained the various options. They were SHOCKED that Scripture is stated - verbatim! And good Scriptures at that! That the BIBLE is the focus! That the LORD'S PRAYER is actually said - wow! And the Creed (yes, some Evangelicals believe that all confessions of faith are evil but of course they insist we must confess our faith - another of the WEIRD things of Evangelicalism) but the teacher noted that the Creed actually is all okay and biblical. The students were AMAZED. Now, yes - they had some understandable problems about MARY praying for us..... and I noted that I did too. But that that aspect was ADDED after the Reformation and that I had problems with it too. The teacher (a Baptist) lead the group into a discussion of how the Rosary might be edited to be Evangelical.... turned out, they edited it hardly at all. Guys THANKED me for bringing my Rosary and for sharing all this.

I share that example because it's the only one I have with a positive outcome. But I think of that now and then, especially at websites where the "ANTI" attitude sticks up its ugly head now and then. Sometimes if we would just LISTEN..... if we lay aside our irrational, empty emotions, we'll find that things aren't as evil and satanic as we might think. Of course, we need to SAY what we mean and MEAN what we say (sloppy, emotionally charged anti-ism often leads to statements badly worded). We may not agree (I doubt ANY of those fellow students went out a bought a Rosary!) - and that's fine! But maybe we'll go away understanding something we didn't understand before.... Well, maybe. I've been posting on discussion forums like this since I was 10 years old (WAY too much!) and I've seen it happen! Once or twice anyway.



A blessed Lent to you and yours!



- Josiah



.

 

[Alithis]

Its an incorrect assumption to think i oppose a thing for the sole reason that it come out of a particular denomination.
I simply oppose any teaching that is based on traditions of men imposed over the word of God..
I will just as passionatly oppose mormon teachings for the same reason. Tradition does not ever dictate an imposed truth over the word of God. Every denomination has errant traditions and i openly oppose those when they arise..
.i mean whew.. Sit in church on sunday..sing 3 fast songs a few slow songs..bang back a coffe.listen to a man give a sermon... And go home to catch the sports or sneak a look at some porn in the week ... And call that "worship" !?

See my point.. Tradition becomes dead religious carnality..it is not life in the spirit.
The scriptures do not teach this module of penticostal church tradition...
Im just saying this so you can see my opposition to non scriptural theology that is based more on tradition then Gods word is not confined to one denomination.

When i share the gospel i point people to the lord Jesus via his good news. I never direct them to a denomination .

 

[Lamb]

Sit in church on sunday..sing 3 fast songs a few slow songs..bang back a coffe.listen to a man give a sermon... And go home to catch the sports ...

Wait, what? Go home and catch sports is wrong in your eyes? <_<

 

[MoreCoffee]

If you say what you believe (what your Church teaches) and leave it to others to define their beliefs (what their church denomination or independent group believes) and debate topics rather than alleging that group x teaches doctrine y which is wicked and evil etcetera then you'll do better but you may not do well with everybody.

 

[Lamb]

If you say what you believe (what your Church teaches) and leave it to others to define their beliefs (what their church denomination or independent group believes) and debate topics rather than alleging that group x teaches doctrine y which is wicked and evil etcetera then you'll do better but you may not do well with everybody.

This is an excellent way to discuss instead of destruct. :thumbsup:

 

[Alithis]

Wait, what? Go home and catch sports is wrong in your eyes? <_<

...when it (anything) usurps authority in our lives by being elevated to a place of import.when it becomes "a carnal passion.. .it becomes a form of idolatry.. Colossians 3 deals with that topic.

The tell is...when a thing has no sense of overt importance ..one is not passionate about it.. Its obviously not an issue..but when one leaps to its defense ..it rather plainly shows they have become carnally passionate about whatever it may be. one is more passionate about that which holds greater value to them . we always follow after that which we love the most.God is not fooled by these things.

 

[MoreCoffee]

This is an excellent way to discuss instead of destruct. :thumbsup:

In my experience at the receiving end of "The Catholic Church teaches X or does Y and X & Y are evil and wicked" the suggested approach in my earlier post almost never happens. almost everybody says they are an ex-Catholic or an expert on Catholicism and then proceeds to offer profoundly ignorant opinions about Catholic teaching and spray every sort of invective against Catholicism that their vocabularies allow. Some go out of their way to drag the Catholic Church into a discussion if a Catholic happens to be a participant. In the end all it does is mess up the thread and make Catholics, such as myself, type responses to educate and correct the false and misleading claims made by the anti-Catholicism posters. It is a rather thankless task for the Catholics and totally fruitless as far as correcting the attacks is concerned since the attackers are ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that they know how wicked and Jesuitical Catholics are so in the end the Catholics give up and start posting nothing but Church approved statements and ignore the endless anti-Catholicism posts or just *sigh* and repost something that they wrote weeks, months, or years ago to correct the same (sometimes the exact same) posted claims of somebody claiming expertise on Catholic views. ... {end of whine}

 

[Josiah]

In my experience at the receiving end of "The Catholic Church teaches X or does Y and X & Y are evil and wicked" the suggested approach in my earlier post almost never happens. almost everybody says they are an ex-Catholic or an expert on Catholicism and then proceeds to offer profoundly ignorant opinions about Catholic teaching and spray every sort of invective against Catholicism that their vocabularies allow. Some go out of their way to drag the Catholic Church into a discussion if a Catholic happens to be a participant. In the end all it does is mess up the thread and make Catholics, such as myself, type responses to educate and correct the false and misleading claims made by the anti-Catholicism posters. It is a rather thankless task for the Catholics and totally fruitless as far as correcting the attacks is concerned since the attackers are ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that they know how wicked and Jesuitical Catholics are so in the end the Catholics give up and start posting nothing but Church approved statements and ignore the endless anti-Catholicism posts or just *sigh* and repost something that they wrote weeks, months, or years ago to correct the same (sometimes the exact same) posted claims of somebody claiming expertise on Catholic views. ... {end of whine}

This happens AT LEAST as often the other way around. For many years, I've been TRYING to correct the silly, absurd strawman that Catholics are taught about Sola Scriptura - to no avail. For many years, I've been TRYING to correct the silly, absurd Catholic Strawman that Catholics CLAIM is "Sola Fide." Shall I go on? Rarely - very, very rarely - will Catholics even READ what Protestants write on this. Shall I go on? The list is very long of FALSE things Catholics SAY Protestants say or do.

And then there is the whole practice of Catholics of grouping everyone who is not officially registered in a parish owned and operated by the RC Denominantion and in full agreement with all 2,865 points of the latest edition of the RCC Catechism as "Protestant." Protestants do not lump together all non-Protestants as "CATHOLIC" so that a JW or LDS or even Oriental Orthodox is ERGO "Catholic".

And I think fundamentalist Catholics are at least equally guilty of violating their own rubric. The Catholic will state (essentially) "we must swallow whole whatever our denomination says! I hold this because MY individual denomination tells me to!" But then turns around and blasts, ridicules the Baptist for swallowing what their denomination tells them to. Yeah, it happens the other way, too.

And nothing TERMINATES the discussion more than the covering their hears with: "How come everybody's always pic'n on we pur Catholics! That's just ANTI-CATHOLIC!" Or "How come you keep pic'n on we pur Evangelicals! That's just anti-Bible!" So that rather than explaining what one believes and way...... we just get the "I can't hear you, I can't hear you, I can't hear you!" and "it's YOUR problem because YOU hate us!"


To another point, Coffee, yes - fundamentalists of ALL stripes DO tend to confuse what are the official statements of belief with what THEY'VE observed or heard or read. Happens equally on both sides. EQUALLY. Protestants may RIGHTLY states that they've witnessed some creepy things among Catholics concerning Mary...... and YOU may RIGHTLY point out that the OFFICIAL position of the RCC is actually quite reasonable..... to no avail. But then CATHOLICS do exactly the same thing. Worse, because they can't see to make any distinction between various Protestants (we're all lumped together in a way no Protestant lumps together all non-Protetstants).

Yes, starting with the ASSUMPTION that because it's Catholic or Lutheran it ERGO must be wrong is absurd. It's just really really common. And yes, starting with the ASSUMPTION that I PERSONALLY understand Catholicism better than any Catholic is absurd, as is starting with the ASSUMPTION that I PERSONALLY understand all forms of Protestantism better than any Protestant is absurd. It's just really, really common.


One of the interesting (and likely fairly modern) aspect is that there are now a LOT of converts. There are THIRTY MILLION former Catholics just now just in the USA today. People who LEFT. 10% of the US population is folks who have LEFT the RCC, making Ex-Catholics the second largest religious group in the USA. And heaven knows, there are a LOT of "ex-Lutherans" and "ex-Evangelicals" and "ex-Anglicans" in the USA too!!!! And denominational/theological borders have become very porous. Lots of movement. Last year in my tiny Lutheran church, we grew by 10% - ALL of those converts being former Catholics, 100% of them (the number is small, just 6, six went through our equal of RCIA and became Confirmed Lutherans). BUT this 'conversion' thing is very common everywhere now. LOTS of movement. And it means that a LOT of the posters here at CH are converts. Yes, it often means they DO bring some knowledge of their former church.... but it sometimes means they bring some negativity about it too. And both tend to get conveyed. It's just a reality. On ALL sides.




Thank you.


Pax


- Josiah





.

 

[MoreCoffee]

This happens AT LEAST as often the other way around. For many years, I've been TRYING to correct ...

It is better to avoid defining what somebody else believes. If the topic is sola scriptura then let the advocates define it. If it is sola fide let the advocates define it. Those who either do not agree with it or do not understand it can then deal with what's provided as a definition and see how matters turn out.

 

[TurtleHare]

It is better to avoid defining what somebody else believes. If the topic is sola scriptura then let the advocates define it. If it is sola fide let the advocates define it. Those who either do not agree with it or do not understand it can then deal with what's provided as a definition and see how matters turn out.

That is absolutely the worst when someone outside a group tries to define what someone else believes. Now if in a conversation the beliefs have been expressed already it is okay to restate them and even show gaps in where it has gone astray.

 

[MoreCoffee]

That is absolutely the worst when someone outside a group tries to define what someone else believes. Now if in a conversation the beliefs have been expressed already it is okay to restate them and even show gaps in where it has gone astray.

I wish more people saw it that way but I, a Catholic, am constantly told what I believe (as a Catholic) and what my Church teaches though when I read what is claimed I do not recognise it as either that which I believe or that which the Catholic Church teaches.

 

[psalms 91]

I wish more people saw it that way but I, a Catholic, am constantly told what I believe (as a Catholic) and what my Church teaches though when I read what is claimed I do not recognise it as either that which I believe or that which the Catholic Church teaches.

I would say that at least a part of that is the double meanings that seem to pop up, such as Catholic which means universal forsure but that is not always what it means when discussing the Catholic religion. That is the one I can think of right off the top of my head.

 

[Josiah]

I wish more people saw it that way but I, a Catholic, am constantly told what I believe (as a Catholic) and what my Church teaches though when I read what is claimed I do not recognise it as either that which I believe or that which the Catholic Church teaches.

I agree with you. I'd simply point out this is wrong when Catholics do the same thing, as well.

And - to put a bit of counterpoint on this - I have OFTEN quoted (verbatim) the Catholic Catechism and been told by Catholics that I was wrong, that what I quoted (verbatim - being sure to reference the quote in the Catechism) is inaccurate. And - to add to the problem - I have often discussed what I was taught (consistently) as a Catholic and been told (probably correctly!) that what I was taught is NOT what Catholicism teaches, only what CATHOLICS teach. In fact, I've had many discussions over at CF on this very point especially regarding justification. I'm convinced that nearly everything CATHOLICS teach on this - THE most important and central teaching in Christianity - is NOT what the RCC officially teaches, but does that matter? I KNOW what my Catholic teachers taught us.... I KNOW what our pastor said in sermons. It complicates things..... especially (again) lots of theology junkies (lol) are converts. We often DO need to deal with the reality that what we were taught ain't necessarily what that denomination officially proclaims.



I think, too, we often get bogged down in self being the filter. Some Protestants will shout, "the Bible states" then go on to undeniably PROVE the Bible does not: THEY say it, and then find some Scripture that does NOT say it but in their opinion, implies it. The authority is obviously self - not Scripture. Some Catholics will shout, "My Denomination states" (they word that differently, of course) and "We must docilicly obey and submit to our own denomination!" And then they'll look to the Baptist ans shout, "Your denomination states that but so what? We are NOT to just swallow what our indiividual denomination says!!!" I've been posting on the 'net since I was 10. And I've been AMAZED at how often both Catholics and Evangelicals shoot themselves in the foot, condemning THE VERY THING they are saying.

The Evangelical will quote a verse that OBVIOUSLY does NOT state what they do - and say "but what this IMPLIES to ME is..... so I'm right!" Catholics will quote a verse or a snippet from someone the RCC regards as a "father" something that OBVIOUSLY does NOT remotely state what they do, but will shout, "But what this IMPLIES to MY individual, singular denomination is...... so the RCC is right!" The two then condemn each other for EXACTLY what each is doing. Over and over and over and over and over. All day long. All year long. Til it degrades into "You ANTI!" (if not "you ignorant, stupid, idiot"). Individualism...... egoism...... institutionalism......



Sorry.


A blessed Lent to all....


- Josiah

 

[Josiah]

I agree with you. I'd simply point out this is wrong when Catholics do the same thing, as well.

And - to put a bit of counterpoint on this - I have OFTEN quoted (verbatim) the Catholic Catechism and been told by Catholics that I was wrong, that what I quoted (verbatim - being sure to reference the quote in the Catechism) is inaccurate. And - to add to the problem - I have often discussed what I was taught (consistently) as a Catholic and been told (probably correctly!) that what I was taught is NOT what Catholicism teaches, only what CATHOLICS teach. In fact, I've had many discussions over at CF on this very point especially regarding justification. I'm convinced that nearly everything CATHOLICS teach on this - THE most important and central teaching in Christianity - is NOT what the RCC officially teaches, but does that matter? I KNOW what my Catholic teachers taught us.... I KNOW what our pastor said in sermons. It complicates things..... especially (again) lots of theology junkies (lol) are converts. We often DO need to deal with the reality that what we were taught ain't necessarily what that denomination officially proclaims.



I think, too, we often get bogged down in self being the filter. Some Protestants will shout, "the Bible states" then go on to undeniably PROVE the Bible does not: THEY say it, and then find some Scripture that does NOT say it but in their opinion, implies it. The authority is obviously self - not Scripture. Some Catholics will shout, "My Denomination states" (they word that differently, of course) and "We must docilicly obey and submit to our own denomination!" And then they'll look to the Baptist ans shout, "Your denomination states that but so what? We are NOT to just swallow what our indiividual denomination says!!!" I've been posting on the 'net since I was 10. And I've been AMAZED at how often both Catholics and Evangelicals shoot themselves in the foot, condemning THE VERY THING they are saying.

The Evangelical will quote a verse that OBVIOUSLY does NOT state what they do - and say "but what this IMPLIES to ME is..... so I'm right!" Catholics will quote a verse or a snippet from someone the RCC regards as a "father" something that OBVIOUSLY does NOT remotely state what they do, but will shout, "But what this IMPLIES to MY individual, singular denomination is...... so the RCC is right!" The two then condemn each other for EXACTLY what each is doing. Over and over and over and over and over. All day long. All year long. Til it degrades into "You ANTI!" (if not "you ignorant, stupid, idiot"). Individualism...... egoism...... institutionalism......



Sorry.


A blessed Lent to all....


- Josiah

Excellent points there, Josiah.....

I think ADDING to the problem is that what we hear being taught is not always exactly what that denomination officially teaches.... even official ministers (pastors, deacons, even Sunday School teachers) tend to put their own "spin" on things. Not every one of the 70 million Lutherans in the world accurately conveys what Lutheranism officially teaches. The same goes for all faith communities....

And YES, I have quoted the Catholic Catechism VERBATIM and been flat out told by Catholics that that's a lie, Catholics never teach that. Perhaps they just don't know that (hey, the Catechism is like 800 pages long - very few Catholics have read it, much less know it) - it's just not THEIR understanding. I'm not pic'n on pur Catholics - it's equally true in call faith communities. And not just among the laity. I've heard a Catholic priest proclaim that "Protestants are welcome to receive the Eucharist in the Catholic Church" and I've heard a Catholic priest state the exact opposite. I've personally heard that - with my own two (excellent) ears. BTW, I've heard Lutheran pastors say the those two opposite things about Catholics and Communion... It's not always clear or consistent official. And that adds to the problem. And (the sad) truth is: Laity aren't well trained in doctrine these days... anywhere. The ones that ARE probably took this upon themselves; it's not that their church trained them up they just studied things on their own.


Another point: Because Catholics tend to lump all non-Catholics together, this leads to enormous misunderstandings on their part. Conservative/Traditional Lutherans and Anglicans especially get misunderstood. We find ourselves not really in either "camp" - not modern Catholics, not really modern Protestant. I once had a Baptist minister tell me: "The worse place to be in any war is in the no mans land in between the waring parties - both will shoot at you and neither will defend you." Catholics think we're too Protestants.... Protestants think we're too Catholic, LOL. As a conservative - traditional - confessional Lutheran, I often feel a LOT of kinship with Catholics and Catholicism - with a lot of appreciation and affirmation there (and share a lot of their discomfort with "Evangelicalism") but I also feel kinship with conservative - traditional - "mainstream" Protestants, with a lot of appreciation and affirmation there. BUT I'm neither.




.