What is your opinion of this article about Evangelicals vs. Roman Catholics? Please read before responding. God bless!🙏

Yes, the Sacrament of Reconciliation is a treasure. Baptism, of course. The others too.

My point was that God used Protestants to spread the Gospel far and wide. He didn’t prevent the spread of “partial” truth. WHY??

Like I said, if the conscience compels us to leave, we must leave. But I would stress a long silent retreat and assistance in discerning this path.

It doesn’t make sense that the Holy Spirit would lead us away from heaven, of which the Catholic Church is the narrow gate.

But what do I know? Judas was allowed to betray our Lord with a kiss. Had to be done. But woe to that man.

Maybe Martin Luther’s dissent was the lesser evil, how am I to know? But I fear for his soul when the final day of judgment comes.

Same reason he tolerated Moses’ allowance of divorce. He is moved by compassion for our weakness.

Understand, if a person wrestles with God until the day they die, they may very well be saved. But if that person leads another astray… woe to him.

The holy Spirit will act in ways to lead people to Jesus, but the holy Spirit would not cause Martin Luther to sin by becoming a schismatic and cause him to start a man-made church which, in turn would cause others to start their man-made churches. Those, in turn would dazzle confused Catholics with their sparkly disco balls, lack of contrition for sin, and in the end, effectively cause some Catholics to leave the only church Jesus created. It doesn’t make sense.

The Prodigal Son had to choose to come back. The holy Spirit didn’t make a religion out of women, wine, and money to suit the son.

Exactly. We are called to follow Christ. Though He was in the form of God, did not find equality with God something to be grasped at. He humbled himself taking the form of a slave.

Like He humbled himself & submitted himself to the Virgin’s womb, we must submit ourselves to Mother Church.


Man has free will. God also has not prevented genocide.

1 Like

Flannery O’Connor once said that Southern Fundamentalists would be surprised to learn that they hold more in common with Catholicism than they do with classic Protestantism.

Now, Evangelicalism is not the same thing as Fundamentalism, though there is an overlap. I would strongly disagree with the quoted writer who said this:

" The Church never bothered to build institutions to really build that identity based on the principals of the Church outside of Catholic schools…"

As an older Catholic, I will say that’s far from true. At one time, the Church was the center of peoples’ lives, and there were many institutions around which peoples’ lives revolved. It wasn’t just Catholic schools.

What did happen, though, is that a lot of Catholics, including many churchmen and women, threw out those institutional underpinnings; arguing that, basically social work is the true calling and purpose of the Church. That degenerated into the notion that if you just vote for politicians who want to spend more on social programs, you’re meeting your religious obligation.

But Evangelicals have a serious problem all their own with such things. They’re each a church unto itself. Every congregation tries to build its own culture, and people quite often move from one to another because they find it more enjoyable or novel.

And some people with a partial measure of the truth live out lives of holiness, ministry and evangelism far beyond some who had the (humanly speaking) fullest possible measure.

1 Like

Not really.

Didn’t God do a reboot, known as the flood, at about the time of Noah?

There is geological evidence of floods (plural) in multiple areas of the world, but no evidence of a single world-wide flood.

The evidence of floods - and they were massive - dates them back to the last great ice age, somewhere around 11,000 to 15,000 years ago.

Evidence of writing dates back about 3,000 years ago.

There are flood stories in various parts of the world; and interestingly, the Gilgamesh epic parallels the Noah story in a number of details, and is from the same general area.

In another thread, someone stated that they knew therre was a Noah because Christ referred to him. I don’t question there was a Noah; but Christ was making a theological point, not a historical point.

The Church allows us to believe that there was a world wide flood; it also allows us to believe that the flood referred to in the Noah story was not world-wide; the Church refers to Noah as one of the patriarchs and I accept that.

We need to be cautious when we read Scripture, as it is easy to presume that what is reported in an apparently literal fashion as we understand literal (as in, your favorite television reporter was “on the scene” type of literal) is in fact a literal rendition of what happened.

And then there is the story of the serpent speaking to Eve. Literally? Serpents I have met don’t speak. Was it Satan in the form of a serpent?

Does it matter? The Church (Pius XII) has said we must believe there was on first couple - and we use the names Adam and Eve. Beyond that , the Church does not say what specifics, if any, we must believe. Scripture is not presented to teach history, although much is historically accurate. It is the means which God has used to self reveal to us, culminating if the revelation of Christ: “he who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:8-10).

Arguing about the literal historicity of the Noah story, or the tower of Babel, or the Garden of Eden is to side track from why we have these stories; the OT also tells us there was a dome over the earth. The literal truth is not the point - the theological truth is the point.

1 Like

I can’t speak to whether or not South Americans are leaving by the millions, or the tens of thousands, but it should come as no surprise.

I am inclined to believe that the French Revolution and the Enlightenment have done more damage to Christian faith and truth than the Protestant Revolution. Why?

Because the Catholic Church is by no means at all the only Christian religious group losing members; the “nones” are growing rapidly. Christianity is passe for more and more people.

And we could get into all sorts of discussions as to what is causing this; it is not one single thing, but a multiple of issues contributing. Go onto any secular campus and see what percentage of the student body attends a religious service on the weekend, and my point will be made.

Secularism, relativism, hedonism, materialism and a host of other subsets are devastating the faith of those of ages 18 to 29. Europe has had a weekend Mass attendace rate hovering around, to below 5%. as in, 95% of the population that was baptized are somewhere between “occasional”, “C/E” and not at all. Vast areas of the world have people who have never heard the Gospel, and while pockets here and there are growing (the Catholic Church in Africa is thriving, for example) those where Christianity (not just Catholicism) have had a major influence are retreating.

And whether it is Catholics or other Christians, all too many of the youth going into college or out of the family home do not know their faith well, and have often bailed out during their teen years. and even those who know their faith fairly well are challenged by those around them who reject faith.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

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.