pull down to refresh
82 sats \ 13 replies \ @freetx 7 Oct \ parent \ on: What is the Acts 17 Collective? Why is Peter THiel Speaking About the Antichrist spirituality
I'm a Catholic and frankly the "you follow a pope who claims infallibility" is the worst of all the Protestant arguments.
I say that not triggered, just honestly assessing the argument on its merits. A much better argument (maybe the best Protestant argument) is that the Catholic Church has just re-created the Jewish legalism that Jesus ended via his ministry. There is some level of truth to that argument. I honestly say its hard to square things like the Church's requirements that "new catholics" jump thru the legalistic hoops it does (OCIA classes, etc) with how Jesus's ministry was actually portrayed in the Bible.
The problem with the "pope argument" is that it begs the question of "what is the alternative?"
ChatGPT tells me:
Is 1 Pope better or worse than 8000-9000 Popes (each possibly conflicting with the other)? What worse is there is literally no upper limit on the possible number of "Protestant Popes"....it becomes every single mans interpretation is as valid as the next -- a create your own religion scenario.
I think arguing about who's right based on the outcomes is going in reverse. For example, Protestants can point to all the bad popes who have led the church astray in the past.
Instead, I think the debate would be more well grounded if the arguments were made based on theology. To me, the key things to argue about are 1) sola scriptura and 2) the role of the church and the sacraments in determining a person's salvation.
reply
If I didn't disagree with the Roman church I would be a part of it. Personally, I know far too many Christians that smear the Catholic church is ways that turn my stomach. For one, they are just wrong on many things and it shows me they haven't even spent a few hours to learn for themselves. They have instead listened to things other preachers have said, likely also in ignorance.
Most Christians I know(including myself) know even less about the Eastern churches. I'm not Orthodox either so obviously I have points of disagreement or further learning there.
What I really find distasteful is the ignorance of our own churches failures. The bloodshed and divisions. The scandals. None of us are perfect. I find it appalling that we protestants (myself included) are so ignorant of our own history and division. I truly believe this attitude is the work of our real enemy Satan. I don't want to smooth over the differences but I do want us all to love our brothers and sisters more than our own rightness.
reply
Its hard for me to judge if things are getting worse or getting better.
I actually tend to feel that the internet has made things better since you can see so many online debates now... and many times you realize the differences, while real, are not the massive gulfs that you might assumed existed.
Most of the time its semantics -- specific definitions involving isolated phrases.
reply
I think arguing about who's right based on the outcomes is going in reverse.
Yes, in many areas of thought this is a risky way of thinking. Think, the ends justify the means. We should look at the ends but that doesn't mean the means were correct.
debate would be more well grounded if the arguments were made based on theology
Yes, this ^^
I have very little interest in the typical bravado filled "debates" I see on all sides of Christianity. Its not helpful and turns people outside of our faith away. What doesn't turn them away is the truth, honestly, and good faith discussions.
To your specific sola scriptura I have heard many Catholics as well as Orthodox say that for the first 1500 years or so the vast majority of people were either illiterate or had no access to the full canon of Scripture. The church and her liturgy and art were what they had. I think many Catholics will falsely say that Protestants ONLY follow their interpretation of Scripture but this is a straw man as well. All of the protestant church traditions had hierarchy and traditions.
Like I've said, I think we (all) need to seek to better understand one another, church history (the good and bad), and remember Jesus command that we love one another. Doesn't mean we don't disagree but we should do so in good faith and love.
reply
Most protestants do not understand the Roman Catholic Church. I've been trying to better understand it myself from people in the church who are very good at explaining the nuance of many of the teachings.
I have found that most non-Catholics think you all believe the Pope is infallible and not that the Pope can speak ex cathedra. This infallibility is limited. I like to focus on first understanding the points of agreement and points of disagreement. It very easy to straw man others and this is done to Roman Catholicism most of the time.
I'm not equipped to argue on my points of disagreement with the Roman Church but the more I have learned the more straw men have been blown down. I will say this. I think we are all better served by understanding each other vs. making bad faith arguments to win a debate.
The counter to your point about the 8000-9000 popes is that many Catholics act as their own Pope as well by cherry-picking the teachings of the church for cultural and personal reasons. This isn't an argument against a head of the church but it is something to consider as we can all be selfish and rebellious to authority. Picking your church is more or less being your own Pope in some ways.
Clearly, we live in a very self-centered time and lack clear foundations as everything seems to be up for debate. Even the most fundamental things. I see this as a reason many are returning to Christianity and I think they will be more attracted to strong churches like the Roman and Eastern churches over the non-denomination churches in the Protestant movement.
reply
I have found that most non-Catholics think you all believe the Pope is infallible and not that the Pope can speak ex cathedra.
Correct, the easiest way to understand the reality of the Popes "infallibility" is "the buck stops here" - that is he exist as the final decision maker on formal questions of doctrine and morals. It does not mean he is inerrant. If the Pope says "the sky is green" it doesn't magically make it so, only that he is the final decision maker on dogmatic issues.
I will say this. I think we are all better served by understanding each other vs. making bad faith arguments to win a debate.
Agree 100%. I think that >95% of all Protestants and Catholics agree on almost everything. It really all comes down to how the argument is framed. I think the classic case is the "Sola Fide" question. I think in actual practice Prots and Caths believe the same from a day to day living perspective (you need to accept Christ and accepting Christ means being a good person). However, the framing of the argument can ignite needless disagreement over semantic issues.
that many Catholics act as their own Pope as well by cherry-picking the teachings of the church for cultural and personal reasons.
Its a nuanced issue. A local priest, bishop, or even the Pope can opine on any subject. For instance, they may say "We have a duty to welcome all illegal aliens".
Its fine that they say that, it can be a call for reflection. It can even be true that it exhorts Christian virtue. However, a Catholic is not bound to follow every utterance of clergy / popes / etc.
Catholics are only bound by the Catechism (whats officially defined via the Church's Magisterium). Regular public statements, calls to action, etc don't apply.
So in your example if a person is choosing not to follow the Catechism, then he is by definition not Catholic. If he is choosing not to agree with his local Bishop who made a statement against the death penalty, well because thats not a doctrinal statement, he is free to disagree.
NOTE: To clarify something in case its not clear, the Catechism is an actual written document you can reference, kinda like a "constitution". (https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM)
reply
Catholics are only bound by the Catechism (whats officially defined via the Church's Magisterium). Regular public statements, calls to action, etc don't apply.
Yep, this is what I'm referring to. Most non-Romans I have met over my life including pastors don't get this really.
if a person is choosing not to follow the Catechism, then he is by definition not Catholic. If he is choosing not to agree with his local Bishop who made a statement against the death penalty, well because thats not a doctrinal statement, he is free to disagree.
I was thinking more of people that profess to be Catholic and yet support abortion. Or have violated the churches teaching on marriage for example. Or speak openly against teachings in the Catechism.
The problem I have with this line of argument is that all of us non-Romans know people that say they are Christians or members of our church who do the same things. Or will poorly represent the teachings of our church.
It really does come down to theology and perspective and I have been more encouraged by the common ground we share, protestants, Romans, and Eastern Christians. I can see that none of our traditions are without mistakes in our histories but if we believe the words of Jesus we will all be one again. It is the enemy that seeks to divide us that is our true enemy. Not one another. Not saying we should just go along to get along. But I pray for more charity in myself when I disagree with others about our faith.
reply
I was thinking more of people that profess to be Catholic and yet support abortion. Or have violated the churches teaching on marriage for example. Or speak openly against teachings in the Catechism.
That is very true. A far far more common example is the Catechism mandates that to receive the Eucharist, you must be in "a state of Grace and anyone aware of having sinned mortally must not receive communion without having received absolution"
The number of Catholics who line up every Sunday to receive Communion while not in a state of grace....well lets just say the lines would be half as long if that was actually followed.
To be clear, this is something I've been guilty of many times in my life. But as I've gotten older I try to be much more honest with myself before I stand up to get in line.
reply
The more I learn the more I see the same human failings in all Christian traditions. We need Jesus. We fail. We need community. We are not intended to be islands.
reply
You are Catholic?
I thought everyone in Texas had to be Baptist lol
reply
Remember when there was a second pope in Avignon France?
Good times!
reply
Yep, I drink his wine all the time....
reply
Thanks for the recommendation
I have been drinking Meiomi Pinot noir
Good wine for 20 bucks
reply