|
0 members (),
1,639
guests, and
98
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,508
Posts417,509
Members6,159
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 78
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 78 |
Please help me.
I have a friend who is a United Methodist doctorate student at Asbury Seminary in Kentucky. He's been a Methodist pastor for around 15 years and is currently working on his dissertation. He used to be my pastor and then I moved on and became Catholic, which was the best thing I've ever done.
Anyway, we go rounds disagreeing on the teachings of the Church. He is set in believing the Holy Spirit used Martin Luther to bring about the Reformation and that the Protestant "churches" are a part or the continuation of the Apostolic Early Church. He says the Catholic Church is not the "only way" and we need to realize Martin Luther was right.
He also claims the Methodist tradition has preserved the teachings and practice of the Early Fathers and that he's a "catholic christian".
I tried talking to him about the "one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all" passage that Scripture mentions. His analysis is that whoever believes in Christ is part of the "one faith" because it is simply talking about faith in Christ. I told him that faith in Christ is the foundation for the faith, but it's more complicated then that. So I used the Mormons who appear to have some sort of faith in Christ, to see what he would say. He said they would not be included as part of the "one faith" because they have distorted views of Christ and they do not trust in him for salvation.
It sounds like a double standard to me. Whenever we talk I get frustrated with him and his views. I think he's fooling himself and not looking at the bigger picture.
What can I say to him or what proof is there I can show him stating that Protestants have not stayed with the faith of the Early Church and there are indeed many "faiths" in Protestantism, not the "one faith" Scripture speaks that we have in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,405
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,405 |
Personally, I have more or less given up discussing this kind of question with protestants, because they have such a different idea of what Christian unity actually means. Still, that doesn't mean that I want to discourage you from having these discussions with your friend! Your friend is right in a way. All the baptized belong to Christ and are part of his mystical body. That is why we talk about "separated brethren." The Mormons are an exception because their baptism is invalid [ vatican.va], so they are not in fact Christians. The late Father Richard John Neuhaus [ economist.com] has written an excellent and quite nuanced article where he discusses the question: "Is Mormonism Christian?" [ firstthings.com] Perhaps it would help you to re-read the part of the [i]Catechism of the Catholic Church[/i] [ vatican.va] dealing with the Church, especially this part [ vatican.va]: I. THE CHURCH IS ONE
"The sacred mystery of the Church's unity" (UR 2)
813 The Church is one because of her source: "the highest exemplar and source of this mystery is the unity, in the Trinity of Persons, of one God, the Father and the Son in the Holy Spirit."259 The Church is one because of her founder: for "the Word made flesh, the prince of peace, reconciled all men to God by the cross, . . . restoring the unity of all in one people and one body."260 The Church is one because of her "soul": "It is the Holy Spirit, dwelling in those who believe and pervading and ruling over the entire Church, who brings about that wonderful communion of the faithful and joins them together so intimately in Christ that he is the principle of the Church's unity."261 Unity is of the essence of the Church:
What an astonishing mystery! There is one Father of the universe, one Logos of the universe, and also one Holy Spirit, everywhere one and the same; there is also one virgin become mother, and I should like to call her "Church."262
814 From the beginning, this one Church has been marked by a great diversity which comes from both the variety of God's gifts and the diversity of those who receive them. Within the unity of the People of God, a multiplicity of peoples and cultures is gathered together. Among the Church's members, there are different gifts, offices, conditions, and ways of life. "Holding a rightful place in the communion of the Church there are also particular Churches that retain their own traditions."263 The great richness of such diversity is not opposed to the Church's unity. Yet sin and the burden of its consequences constantly threaten the gift of unity. And so the Apostle has to exhort Christians to "maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."264
815 What are these bonds of unity? Above all, charity "binds everything together in perfect harmony."265 But the unity of the pilgrim Church is also assured by visible bonds of communion:
- profession of one faith received from the Apostles;
-common celebration of divine worship, especially of the sacraments;
- apostolic succession through the sacrament of Holy Orders, maintaining the fraternal concord of God's family.266
816 "The sole Church of Christ [is that] which our Savior, after his Resurrection, entrusted to Peter's pastoral care, commissioning him and the other apostles to extend and rule it. . . . This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in (subsistit in) the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him."267
The Second Vatican Council's Decree on Ecumenism explains: "For it is through Christ's Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained. It was to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, that we believe that our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant, in order to establish on earth the one Body of Christ into which all those should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the People of God."268
Wounds to unity
817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:
Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271
818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272
819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276
Toward unity
820 "Christ bestowed unity on his Church from the beginning. This unity, we believe, subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time."277 Christ always gives his Church the gift of unity, but the Church must always pray and work to maintain, reinforce, and perfect the unity that Christ wills for her. This is why Jesus himself prayed at the hour of his Passion, and does not cease praying to his Father, for the unity of his disciples: "That they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be one in us, . . . so that the world may know that you have sent me."278 The desire to recover the unity of all Christians is a gift of Christ and a call of the Holy Spirit.279
821 Certain things are required in order to respond adequately to this call:
- a permanent renewal of the Church in greater fidelity to her vocation; such renewal is the driving-force of the movement toward unity;280
- conversion of heart as the faithful "try to live holier lives according to the Gospel";281 for it is the unfaithfulness of the members to Christ's gift which causes divisions;
- prayer in common, because "change of heart and holiness of life, along with public and private prayer for the unity of Christians, should be regarded as the soul of the whole ecumenical movement, and merits the name 'spiritual ecumenism;"'282
- fraternal knowledge of each other;283
- ecumenical formation of the faithful and especially of priests;284
- dialogue among theologians and meetings among Christians of the different churches and communities;285
- collaboration among Christians in various areas of service to mankind.286 "Human service" is the idiomatic phrase.
822 Concern for achieving unity "involves the whole Church, faithful and clergy alike."287 But we must realize "that this holy objective - the reconciliation of all Christians in the unity of the one and only Church of Christ - transcends human powers and gifts." That is why we place all our hope "in the prayer of Christ for the Church, in the love of the Father for us, and in the power of the Holy Spirit."288 [ vatican.va]
Last edited by Latin Catholic; 03/31/09 05:09 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 78
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 78 |
Latin Catholic,
I agree and understand the teaching on our separated brethren. With my friend, I'm talking about One Faith in doctrines, structure, practice, etc. I know the Church is diverse and that's great, but the deposit of faith remains the same in Orthodox and Catholic Churches. My claim is that Protestants threw away or severely altered the faith when they broke away from the true Church. So if that's the case, how can they be part of the "one faith" that Scripture speaks of when they changed that "one faith" regardless if we consider them as Christians?
I know they're part of Christ's body, but they are severely off the track he set the Church on. I know, I used to be Methodist.
The problem with my friend is that he has read the Church Father's, he's familiar with most of Catholic teaching, and he thinks what he has in Methodism is the faith of the Fathers! It's like the Scripture verse in Peter that talks about distorting the truth of Scripture, only he's distorting the Father's.
How do you reach someone like him to show them that the Lord doesn't want all these different "faiths" in Protestantism (I know the Spirit works through them and they can have salvation), but that God's will is for us to all be One on a deeper level than just having faith in Christ as that's all he thinks is required to have unity. That seems to be the trend among Methodists at least. My wife's Methodist pastor has said to me that "we have unity in Christ". I think the Lord wants us to have unity in practice, doctrine, morals, structure, etc.
Last edited by IgnatiusBenedict; 03/31/09 06:53 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
"What can I say to him or what proof is there I can show him stating that Protestants have not stayed with the faith of the Early Church and there are indeed many 'faiths' in Protestantism, not the 'one faith' Scripture speaks that we have in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches?"
The proof you say could be dismissed by qualification, especially if he is steeped in modern critical studies. He can find intellectual paths around the claim. But it could be ignored altogether from how deep he is emotionally vested in what he sees as his pastoral duties and his education.
I would like to know how he justifies his claim that "the Methodist tradition has preserved the teachings and practice of the Early Fathers." Luther pointed to Augustine when trying to give weight to his understanding of justification, but I am not sure how else the Fathers are read. I would imagine that the works of the Fathers are used more than they are approached with an open heart.
Terry
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,334 Likes: 96
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,334 Likes: 96 |
IB:
Christ is in our midst!! He is and always will be!!
You're NOT going to reach him unless the Holy Spirit finds him open to what you have to say. I've been down this road and don't argue with anyone any more. We have an obligation to speak the truth as we have received it, but you have to understand that quite often the best you will achieve is the point where you agree to disagree.
The one argument that I use and that usually stops the conversation is that for Protestant claims to be true--that the Church was far off--Christ has to be a liar. Our Lord promised to be with His Church to the end of the age. And if the Church was so far off that men had to start their own versions, then Christ has to be a liar.
Now we can admit that the medieval Church did need reforming and there were plenty of abuses. But the abuses were not doctrinal; they were in the area of putting doctrine into practice. We can reform practice--orthopraxy; we cannot reform doctrine--orthodoxy.
As for arguments that Protestants have unity in Christ, they are fine when they come off the lips, but when you ask a typical group you find as many opinions about what the Bible teaches as you have people answering. So much for Luther's idea that the Scripture is so self-evident that everyone will plainly come to the same conclusions. I recently had to share a laugh with a Baptist friend who said that when you get three Baptists together you get four versions of the same Scripture.
As for Luther, there are some good books that are well-researched that get to the real Luther: he isn't the hero that many Protestants believe him to be. It might be well to find some of those. But even then, don't expect Protestants to swim the Tiber. Part of their foundation is anti-Catholicism and it usually runs deep as you well know.
In Christ,
BOB
Last edited by theophan; 03/31/09 08:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
"But even then, don't expect Protestants to swim the Tiber. Part of their foundation is anti-Catholicism and it usually runs deep as you well know."
Especially Protestants of the reformed tradition.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,405
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,405 |
I love this verse from the Gospel of Saint John (1:46): "And Nathanael said unto him, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? Philip saith unto him, Come and see." (Just imagine the protestant saying: "Can any good thing come out of Rome?"  ) I have a friend who used to be a Lutheran, but I invited him to Pontifical High Mass for All Saints' Day. He turned up and was quite sceptical about the whole thing, but now, many years later, he is a Catholic and happily married to a Catholic girl  Sometimes it is not the intellectual argument which convices people, but the actual experience of the liturgical life of the Church... Perhaps you could ask your friend to come and see for himself?
Last edited by Latin Catholic; 03/31/09 07:49 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 78
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 78 |
We've talked about the Father's writings. Say for instance on the Eucharist changing into Jesus' Body and Blood, I have given him a whole laundry list of Father's and their quotes speaking of the Eucharist in this way. For example, St. Ignatius of Antioch's (my patron) comments on the Eucharist and my friend says it can be interpreted many different ways. He once believed in Transubstantiation, but from his experiences at seminary for his doctorate, now he's gone back to his original belief that it's just a "memorial meal" like the Passover. He knows what the Father's teach on it, he's read their quotes on the Eucharist, and he still draws from it all that it's a memorial meal and it doesn't not turn in to Christ's Flesh and Blood! How can that be! And then he has the audacity to claim Protestantism, Methodism particularly, follows the Fathers! He's bending my mind into a pretzel. When I was converting it was perfect alignment with what the Father's said and the Catholic Church teaches on it, but my friend finds any excuse to hold on to his beliefs.
He has said that God used John Wesley to start his movement and it doesn't bother him that Wesley was more "catholic" than today's Methodists.
Another problem: he is seeing in the Catholic Church what are to him "changes". Say on Confirmation. He's doing his dissertation on it and he's using a lot of quotes from the Father's and the Catechism as well as from his own denomination. So he has said to me that the Church in the Middle Ages didn't do Confirmation and it wasn't completely defined until Trent or Florence and Confirmation wasn't first mentioned until the third century. So, he views these as changes instead of DEVELOPMENTS and I'm going to say he's probably thinking that if the Church that claims to be the only right Church can make changes, why would his denomination be wrong then? I'm sure that's his justification for it. And he thinks the Catholic Church has changed all kinds of things. I've told him the core deposit of faith has always been there, but the Holy Father can change practices to fit the needs of the Church at that particular time in history.
He's tiring to talk to sometimes. It's not like he doesn't know that Catholic Faith or what the Father's say. He does, probably better than most protestants. He just has found a way to justify his denomination and claim he's a "catholic" christian and his denomination has kept the teachings of old. He's fooling himself!
Latin Catholic: He's been to Masses. He took his son to my Confirmation Mass on Corpus Christi last year. He took his family to a Mass when they were on vacation last year. He's also tasted and saw the Lord is good because when he was a Chaplain in the Army Guard, a Roman Priest Chaplain gave him the Eucharist! He just sticks to that there's unity in believing in Christ regardless of doctrines, practice, leadership, etc. is all that's required and he's said the Pope needs to recognize they were wrong with the Protestants and need to welcome them as legitimate Christians. Then I share with him that we do view them that way if they're properly baptized, but they've thrown away the teachings, practice, etc. of the historic ancient Church. He of course disagrees and claims Protestantism has kept it. Oye, the headaches with him.
Last edited by IgnatiusBenedict; 03/31/09 08:14 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,036 Likes: 4
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,036 Likes: 4 |
I recently had to share a laugh with a Baptist friend who said that when you get three Baptists together you get four versions of the same Scripture. I had a baptist theology professor at my Catholic college. A methodist covered class one day, and told us that when three Baptists are gathered in his name, there are four denominations present . . . I think the next day was the first time I heard the definition that a methodist was willing to turn anything into a religious doctrine . . . And I remember my secretary's relief in the early '90s when the methodists rejected "creator, redeemer, and sustainer," but that doesn't seem to have stuck . . . hawk
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,334 Likes: 96
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,334 Likes: 96 |
IB:
Christ is in our midst!! He is and always will be!!
You've run into one of the problems of the recent convert. What appears to be the truth for you--something new and bright and clear and so apparent that everyone should realize it as you have--is the exact opposite to the person who used to be your fellow believer, as it was to you when he knew you a short time ago. He sees you as somehow off the track. He is confident of who he is and what he believes. He is not moved one iota by your new-found faith or the insights you have derived from it. You believe that you are on a mission and that you can reach this person.
Been there. Done that. Experienced a big yawn or complete indifference or hostility--sometimes a mixture.
You may simply need to put distance between you. Or at least distance between discussions about these matters if your relationship continues.
What you have experienced in these discussions about the Eucharist is precisely why the Catholic Church--and the Orthodox Church, too--does not admit Protestants to Holy Communion except in very rare cases and why we are forbidden to participate in Protestant Communion Services. Doctrine is intimately involved in Communion participation as well as discipline and Church order. We simply don't believe that Protestants have preserved the Eucharist at all because of a lack of Apostolic Orders and, even more basic, the correct understanding of the Apostolic Faith Deposit as rightly interpreted by the Fathers. Like the Bible, anyone can take the Fathers and read into their writings whatever they wish if they come to the tomes with preconceived notions of what they are to to find.
There's something else. A man who is about to be granted a doctorate in Protestant theology is not about to suddenly become a Catholic. Chances are if he did his committee wouldn't grant his degree; they'd toss him out of his program.
In Christ,
BOB
Last edited by theophan; 04/01/09 07:01 PM. Reason: spelling
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,405
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,405 |
He's bending my mind into a pretzel. This is wonderful! It's exactly what it feels like when I speak to protestants Latin Catholic: He's been to Masses. He took his son to my Confirmation Mass on Corpus Christi last year. He took his family to a Mass when they were on vacation last year. He's also tasted and saw the Lord is good because when he was a Chaplain in the Army Guard, a Roman Priest Chaplain gave him the Eucharist! He just sticks to that there's unity in believing in Christ regardless of doctrines, practice, leadership, etc. is all that's required and he's said the Pope needs to recognize they were wrong with the Protestants and need to welcome them as legitimate Christians. Then I share with him that we do view them that way if they're properly baptized, but they've thrown away the teachings, practice, etc. of the historic ancient Church. He of course disagrees and claims Protestantism has kept it. Oye, the headaches with him. Don't worry. Some people just need more time. They take a lifetime to realize where to find Christ's true Church. In this case a doctorate is no help, on the contrary! Don't be intimidated by the fact that he is a learned man! I'm really quite tired of protestants who want to receive Holy Communion in the Catholic Church, but who don't bother to learn what Holy Communion really means according to Catholic teaching. Dear Ignatius Benedict, I think perhaps God has sent your friend to test your patience. You can still be friends, even if you don't agree
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 299
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 299 |
The reformed are the toughest since they think they know the Fathers. I should know I used to be Orthodox Presbyterian. They are one of the toughest!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1 |
I suggest the novels of Msgr. Robert Hugh Benson, God rest him. You'll find some delightful lines that one might hesitate to quote on the Forum!
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 78
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 78 |
My friend also likes to say that the Father's themselves disagreed with one another on different issues/doctrines/practices.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
My friend also likes to say that the Father's themselves disagreed with one another on different issues/doctrines/practices. Your friend is right. Sometimes, there were substantial disagreements among the fathers on a variety of issues. I believe Peter Abelard brought much of this together in his work, Sic et Non, which unfortunately is not translated into English. As someone who was raised an Evangelial Southern Baptist, converted to the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, studied patristics and scholastic philosophy & theology; eventually converted to Orthodoxy; almost became a victim of "Internet Orthodoxy," and is now trying to pull all of this together; let me share a few thoughts. A priest-friend of mine once said that to read Church history is to cease being a Protestant. The assumption, of course, was that Church history self-evidently points to the truth of Catholicism. There was a time (before Graduate Studies) when I would have agreed. A first read of Church history might lead to that conclusion. But it becomes more complicated on a second or third or fourth read. Indeed, I've come to the point where I do believe that the most plausible view of things is that Orthodoxy (the Orthodox Church) has preserved the faith and tradition of the ancient Church to a degree that no other Church has. However, I can't say that I'm certain of this. I can see how one can make arguments for Roman Catholicism and for some versions of Protestantism. I also want to say that there is a substantial difference between the teachings of contemporary confessional protestant churches and between the ancient heresies. Most of the ancient heresies involved a deficient view of the Trinity and the nature of Christ. Modern protestant denominations (at least officially) hold to the ancient Trinitarian faith and hold a correct doctrine of the nature of Christ. Granted, many individual protestants do not have a correct doctrine of Christ; but many Catholics and Orthodox don't either. So we have to look at the official confessional statements and not the private beliefs of individuals. Now, I think that this distinction between Trinitarian/Christological heresy and the "heretical" teachings of modern protestants is important and it shows that our protestant brothers and sisters (for the most part) worship the same God and the same Christ as we do. In fact, I'm reluctant to use the word "heretic" to describe a traditional, confessional protestant. For my own purposes I distinguish between heresy and heterodoxy (I understand that I'm stipulating this distinction) and I see the "heterodox" as still being fundamentally Christian. And I have to say that I think that all arguments rely on a certain amount of question-begging and that very sincere and holy people can disagree over a number of these issues. Also, I'm really not interested in converting people to Orthodoxy. I am interested in being a good Christian brother to my neighbors and enemies (love thy neighbor; love thy enemy), and my hope for people is that they grow closer to God and to Christ within their own religious traditions. And I think that it is not for me to say where grace does not exist in the churches of our protestant brothers and sisters. I don't have a problem with the notion that Christ can make himself fully present in the Eucharist of our brothers and sisters if He wills to do so. Joe
|
|
|
|
|
