Why do Protestants presume to know Catholic doctrine and dogmas when they don't really know it?

I never understand this. Why do Protestants especially Ex-Catholics persume to know Catholic Church doctrines and dogma, but they don’t really know it.

  1. They think we worship Mary, we don’t.

  2. They think think our doctrines are invented doctrines but they aren’t.

  3. They think the whatever the Popes says is infallible, when in fact it that infallibility is that the Holy Spirit preserves the Pope from teaching error when speaking moral and faith teaching

  4. That the sacrifice of the Mass is re-sacrifice when it isn’t. It is to make presence the sacrifice at the cross which transcends time itself.

These are some false presumption of Protestants of what the Catholic Church supposedly believe. There of course countless others, which they think we believe and professed.

They believe those because that is what they have been taught that we believe. They did not learn thi sby themselves, they did not read it in their Bibles.
They were taught it.

But that doesn’t explain Ex-Catholics. They’ve been taught otherwise. Do they just cleanse their minds of Catholic teachings, or do they just follow the new crowd?


Because w are smarty pants:p :wink: :smiley: Sorry couldnt resist;)

But seriously, I believe what you say and then another catholic will come along and say something opposite to what I have learned here:shrug: I just cant keep up:( It is way too complicated for me so I try to steer away from explaining any catholic doctrine to anyone. Even though I have to say I now know more about catholocism then my catholic friends and family.

I think what happens too is semantics. We all know that if you use one word that could be construed differently then meant–welllll it all goes down hill from there.:shrug:

Just my:twocents:

I suppose the reason they’re “ex”-Catholics is that they don’t have a proper understanding of Catholic teaching to begin with.

I think that they have “bet the house” so to speak, on the fact that their way is THE WAY. I went to non-denominational bible schools for a couple of years in elementary and through jr high, even though my family was catholic. From my experience, most protestants have very little understanding of the Catholic Faith and thanks to inept catechism, most cradle catholics know little more.

In a nut shell, they believe that once saved, always saved. That Jesus’ dying on the cross was enough, we don’t need confession, communion, baptism, works of mercy, etc. Now, for the average every day human being in today’s western culture that theos is much “easier”, if you will, than being a good Catholic in our modern secular culture.

Having stated that on these forums before, I have been repremanded by some catholics. Their argument was that actually being catholic makes it easier for one to obtain heaven because the church offers us the tools, (ie, the sacraments) to do so. That is true, and believing it (which I do) is one thing, but practicing it in the world is another. For some, in particular fallen away catholics) it’s easier to take the “I am saved, no matter what” road.

A protestant friend asked me once if I was going to heaven. I said “I don’t know, but I pray that I am”. This was shocking to her, she on the other hand, knows she’s going to heaven. When, I asked her how she can be so sure? “I am saved”. So then I said, “well what if you commit a serious sin, such as theft, murder, etc?” Her reply, “Once you ask Jesus into your heart and are saved you are always saved. Jesus already died for your sins”.

How can I argue with that? I think that this way of thinking excuses us from really taking responsibility for our souls. It doesn’t force us to have to recognize our sinful nature and realize that we are in constant struggle to live a holy life. I think this is why protestant thinking is so attractive to most people today, there is a perceived lessoning of suffering for a relationship with Christ. It’s just plain easier.

Because it is what they have been taught; it is what they have heard; it is what has been handed down to them. It is their tradition.

Protestants learn from their own tradition,

Sometimes I think part of the problem is lack of clarity by the Catholic Church. For example, even though the English word “worship” has changed in meaning over the years, you’ll still find people even on this forum who insist on using the word “worship” in relation to Mary on the grounds that the word had a broader meaning in the past. The meaning is not the same in today’s world and Catholics who insist on continuing to say that they give “worship” to Mary (in the old sense of the word) have no one to blame but themselves when they are misunderstood by Protestants today.

In some cases you are right. But most Ex-Catholics tend to tell their new faith in Protestantism the false misconception they have about the Catholic Church. This only fuels the many misconception of the Catholic Church teaching.

I agree that there are many misconceptions in the Protestant world about Catholic doctrine, some of this can be laid at the doorstep of the Catholic Church but much cannot.

Does this answer the question?

Few people in America hate the Catholic religion,
but there are many who hate what they mistakenly believe is the Catholic religion
–and if what they hate really were the Catholic religion,
Catholics would hate it too.
Bishop Fulton Sheen

Currently I am reading Dietrich Boenhoeffer’s Cost of Discipleship. Boenhoeffer was a Luthern minister who died at the hands of the Nazis. “Once saved, always saved” is the fallacy of cheap grace. It is a distortion of what Luther actually taught. It is true that we are saved by grace and not by works. But as St. James writes “Show me faith without works and I will show you the faith that underlies my works.” Cheap grace is actually blasphemy against the Holy Spirit because it denies the need for us to respond to the life giving grace of Jesus Christ. Cheap grace denies the reality of the cross. Cheap grace says I can continue in my sins without the need for contrition, repentence, or conversion. Costly grace on the other hand recognizes our need to “pick up your cross and follow after.” Costly grace recognizes the need to die to self and to die to sin in order to live in Christ.

Sometimes they have been taught otherwise as you say. But there are times when they are not taught at all, or the teaching of the Church is flawed in the extreme. Some know better, but find it much easier to live as they please thus they live outside the teachings of the Church. Perhaps I am old-fashioned, but I believe much of this began when we lost the majority of our Catholic schools.

I believe that it also applies to Ex-Catholics also, they didn’t understand what they were taught and then allowed themselves to be re-taught. IT also is with Ex-Catholics that Catholic teaching just didn’t fit into their idea of life, so went looking for something that did.

We understand the claim that you dont worship Mary and Saints and Dulia/Latria hair splitting. But the practice certainly does not look like asking one saint to pray for you as you would a living, breathing friend.

When we see candles lit with kneelers before statues of saints, parades with Mary atop a flowered float it certainly appears you worship saints. The Apostle Paul rebuked those who bowed to him. Angels rebuked John for falling down and worshiping angels in Rev. Some of the prayers offered to Mary are obvious worship.

They should stop spreading false misconception and try to find out for themselves what the Church teaches. They can disagree but they cannot claim we worship Mary above God or make up false doctrines.

Well in my case, I left the RCC because of a proper understanding of the Catechism versus a biblical understanding. History also shows many claims of the RCC to be incorrect as well.

Read Shakespeare and you’ll find lots of people “praying” to one another as they speak - do you think they were confused about what type of prayer was being used? We still have “lords” in English government - do you think that anyone, even here in America, thinks that the House of Lords means that English types worship many gods? Go back to the old form of marriage vows and you’ll find husband and wife swearing before God that “with my body I thee worship” Do you think that anybody back then was confused about the kind of worship being given?

Think about what you posted here…“they cannot claim that we WORSHIP Mary ABOVE God…” This is saying that you do worship Mary, albeit in a manner different from and subordinate to the worship you give to God. As I said in my previous post before, my using this anarchic English terminology you are helping to to perpetuate the claim that Catholics worship Mary in the manner that the word “worship” is commonly used today.

Do you merely judge by appearance? How do you know that Catholic is praying to a statue. He could be using it as a mediation to focus his prayer on God. The problem with you Protestants. You merely judge by what you see as if you can read the mind and hearts of Catholic.

You don’t. Only God does.

When we see candles lit with kneelers before statues of saints, parades with Mary atop a flowered float it certainly appears you worship saints. The Apostle Paul rebuked those who bowed to him. Angels rebuked John for falling down and worshiping angels in Rev. Some of the prayers offered to Mary are obvious worship.

These are veneration. You need to understand what Catholic veneration to the saints. These aren’t worship that put saints and Mary above God.

You may see some Catholic bow? Does it make him guilty? Bowing doesn’t necessary mean worship in the same sense as God.

If that were so King Solomon would be guilty of idolatry by worshipping His Mother Bathsheba.

Read 1 King Chapter 2 verse 19:21

19 So Bathsheba went to King Solomon, to speak to him on behalf of Adonijah. And the king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne, and had a seat brought for the king’s mother; and she sat on his right. 20 Then she said, “I have one small request to make of you; do not refuse me.” And the king said to her, “Make your request, my mother; for I will not refuse you.” 21 She said, “Let Abishag the Shunammite be given to Adonijah your brother as his wife.”

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.