The "In House" Battle!


#1

When it comes to Catholic versus Protestant “dialogue/debate,” do you see these exchanges as “in house battles.”

What I mean by this is, do you recognize one another as fellow brother and sisters in Christ? Do you sense things are basically friendly, or “out of control” serious?

Are there ways in which we can understand and appreciate one another better?


#2

The battle started “in house”, but after just reading about Luther and Calvin it seems clear they left the building.

I don’t sense an “out of control” mentality, but a stubborness on the part of those who followed Luther & Calvin out of the Church. I am sure they think Catholics are stubborn too- which is a fair assessment.

If non-Catholic Christians would evaluate the reasons those founders of new Christian faiths left the Church a century or more ago, I think they might see them differently today. Papal authority and succession was among the biggest reasons.


#3

2 Thess. 2:15 - Paul clearly commands us in this verse to obey oral apostolic tradition. He says stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, either by word of mouth or letter. This verse proves that for apostolic authority, oral and written communications are on par with each other. Protestants must find a verse that voids this commandment to obey oral tradition elsewhere in the Bible, or they are not abiding by the teachings of Scripture.

2 Thess. 2:15 - in fact, it was this apostolic tradition that allowed the Church to select the Bible canon (apostolicity was determined from tradition). Since all the apostles were deceased at the time the canon was decided, the Church had to rely on the apostolic tradition of their successors. Hence, the Bible is an apostolic tradition of the Catholic Church. This also proves that oral tradition did not cease with the death of the last apostle.
scripturecatholic.com/oral_tradition.html

Every Christian tradition is passed down through men. We freely acknowledge this. You and many Protestants want to play the silly game of pretending that you rely on no human authority. You certainly do. I can trace every belief you have back through some theological and/or denominational tradition. It always breaks down at a certain point. The question always reduces to: which Christian tradition has the most plausible claims of authority (because everyone has to choose some humanly-mediated tradition, or their own new tradition-of-one)?

Due to the Protestant experience of effectual calling and belief in the Word of God as sole authority This is a distortion of the classic Protestant understanding of sola Scriptura (and is more accurately described as SOLO Scriptura). In the former conception, Scripture was the sole infallible or ultimate authority, but not the sole authority, period.
A Biblical Defense of Catholicism
More Biblical Evidence for Catholicism
The Catholic Verses: 95 Bible Passages That Confound Protestants
socrates58.blogspot.com/2004/09/importance-of-studying-luther.html

Theodore of Beza wrote: “What crime can be greater or more heinous than heresy, which sets at nought the word of God and all ecclesiastic discipline? Christian magistrates, do your duty to God [speaking in Calvin’s Geneva of 1554], who has put the sword into your hands for the honor of His majesty; strike valiantly these monsters in the guise of men.” He went on to characterize those who demanded freedom of conscience “worse than the tyranny of the pope. It is better to have a tyrant, no matter how cruel he may be, than to let everyone do as he pleases.”

Calvin sought to persecute heretics (particularly Roman Catholics) so as to keep Protestant believers in the lands divided by the Reformation faithful to his new teachings. He viciously persecuted the Spaniard, Michael Servetus, having him burnt alive on October 27, 1553. As early as 1545, Calvin had written, “If he [Servetus] comes to Geneva, I will never allow him to depart alive.” He kept his promise.
Martin Luther also fanned the flames of intolerance, "Whoever teaches otherwise than I teach, condemns God, and must remain a child of hell."
biblia.com/christianity/inquisition.htm

The Lutherans proclaimed in full synod:
“The Zwinglians . . . we do not even grant to them a place in the church, far from recognizing as brethren, a set of people, whom we see agitated by the spirit of lying, and uttering blasphemies against the Son of Man.” (113;v.1:466)
The Zwinglians believed that the Eucharist was wholly symbolic (probably the majority position of Protestants today). Hence, whoever believes the same would have had the foregoing said about them by Dr. Luther, who firmly held to Consubstantiation, i.e., the actual Body and Blood of Christ is present in the communion along with the bread and wine.

  1. Luther on Protestant “Heretics”
    “Heresiarchs . . . remain obdurate in their own conceit. They allow none to find fault with them and brook no opposition. This is the sin against the Holy Ghost for which there is no forgiveness.” (51;v.6:282/24) “Those are heretics and apostates who follow their own ideas rather than the common tradition of Christendom, who . . . out of pure wantonness, invent new ways and methods.” (51;v.6:282-3/25)
    Grisar adds:
    “In his frame of mind it became at last an impossibility for him to realise that his hostility and intolerance towards `heretics’ within his fold could redound on himself.” (51;v.6:283) “We must needs decry the fanatics as damned . . . They actually dare to pick holes in our doctrine; ah, the scoundrelly rabble do a great injury to our Evangel.” (51; v.6:289/26) “I am on the heels of the Sacramentaries (27) and the Anabaptists; . . . I shall challenge them to fight; and I shall trample them all underfoot.” (46:86)
    catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/protin.htm

#4

Well, we can look at it a few ways. I prefer to believe that the majority of folks that enter into doctrinal debates are truly concerned for the salvation of others. However, that being said, I do believe that there are those whose stubbornness and need to be right has blinded them to the truth. Most of my friends are devout people… Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, Episcopalian, and yes, even Jews. I look more for the quality of moral character when making friends, but we really aren’t discussing friendships here. When it comes to evangelization and debating between Christians, it seems that the more outrageous a claim you make against the others’ beliefs the more you are revered by your own people. While it is admirable that we have people who concern themselves with the salvation of all, I think the priorities are off here. I mean really! Why not go after the pagans or atheists first? They are more in need of learning about God than the Catholics or Protestant groups that are targeted by the other… it doesn’t make sense to me at all that we would go after each other first. We are all brothers and sisters in Christ, we are all adopted children of the Father.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.