Are catholics and protestants really so different?

Question

I was brought up catholic and told that protestants were similar to us, just went about things a little differently but that we were all Christians. As I got older and attended services in the Lutheran, Anglican and United churches I agreed with what I was taught. (Even a couple of Lutheran ministers I spoke to acknowledged they were similar).

Now, however, in reading lots of the comments in this area, I see what I can only call torrential amounts of hatred aimed at Catholics (and others), I'm not so sure things are as cozy as I originally thought. I haven't been Christian in a few years and I think it's partly due to some of the negative attitudes I have encountered in recent years.

I feel I should add that when I was catholic, we read from the bible, didn't worship Mary, statues, or the pope, and despite my baptism as an infant, I didn't grow horns. Hopefully that will keep the catholic bashers out of this question.

Answer 1

Being a Catholic you get the same tired old one liner that Catholics are not Christians,(Chris is a constant abuser of this one) the reality is that we are all the same under the skin but Protestants are simply Catholics in schism.

Answer 2

Catholics, Lutherans, Anglican Catholics, and Moravian are quite similar. However it would seem that most of the reformed protestants hold us Lutherans, Catholics, and ACs in equal disdain because of our similarities. Likewise, Catholics generally dis like us Lutherans because we were the first to successfully challenge Papal authority in the light of Scripture, and generally lump all of the rest of protestantism in with us.



Human nature, and insecurity make us all want to think that we are better than the other guy, while faith in Christ constitutes membership in the true catholic (universal) Church.



Wish I could fix it, but the only time the Church will be unified is in Paradise!



Mark

Answer 3

I am concerned by the number of exclusionary answers in response to this question--it doesn't bode well for Christianity as a religion to hear so much judgement and condemnation. It certainly doesn't ring true with the way Jesus behaved during his ministry, when he reached across barriers and showed inclusion and acceptance to be his way. Regardless, the question regarding differences between Roman Catholic and Protestant denominations is a large one. There are all kinds of differences doctrinally and within the governing structure amongst all Christian denominations. As to whether or not these differences matter to us is subjective. An an Anglican priest, I have noted that people long to be respected in their personal beliefs and that even in one congregation, we can find many thoughts and beliefs and perspectives; to sit in judgement of any of these is not the Christian way. My hope is that we learn to embrace difference as a sign of the diversity of God's creation, realizing that human beings all need to express themselves in a unique way when approaching the Divine.

Answer 4

I was raised Catholic too but I now disagree with Catholicism. That doesn't mean I hate Catholics -- after all, my family is still Catholic. It just means that I disagree.



The biggest area of disagreement is how one gets into heaven. The Bible, which the Catholics claim to follow, clearly states that salvation is a free gift from God and that no one can earn his/her way to heaven. Dozens of verses support this, notably Ephesians 2:8-10.



Catholics believe that people get to heaven based on how good they are. No where does the Bible state this. In fact, as I said, the Bible clearly says this is not the case.



We will all face Jesus when we die and He will judge the status of our life. If we were less than perfect (i.e. if we sinned) which will be true of all of us, then if, and only if, our sins have been paid for by Christ's blood by our belief in Him while on earth (John 3:16 and dozens of other verses), then we will get into heaven. Else, we will be eternally separated from him. The Bible calls that place hell.

Answer 5

One of the first major differences between Catholicism and Protestantism is the issue of the sufficiency and authority of Scripture. Protestants believe that the Bible alone is the sole source of God’s special revelation to mankind, and as such it teaches us all that is necessary for our salvation from sin. Protestants view the Bible as the standard by which all Christian behavior must be measured. This belief is commonly referred to as “Sola Scriptura” and is one of the “Five Solas” (sola being Latin for “alone”) that came out of the Protestant Reformation as summaries of some of the important differences between Catholics and Protestants.



While there are many verses in the Bible that establish it’s authority and it’s sufficiency for all matters of faith and practice, one of the clearest is 2 Timothy 3:16 where we see that “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” Catholics on the other hand reject the doctrine of “Sola Scriptura” and do not believe that the Bible alone is sufficient. They believe that both the Bible and sacred Roman Catholic tradition are equally binding upon the Christian. Many Roman Catholics doctrines, such as purgatory, praying to the saints, worship or veneration of Mary, etc. have little or no basis at all in Scripture, but are based solely on Roman Catholic traditions. Essentially the Roman Catholic Church’s denial of “Sola Scriptura” and their insistence that both the Bible and their “Sacred Tradition” are equal in authority undermines the sufficiency, authority and completeness of the Bible. The view of Scripture is at the root of many of, if not all, the differences between Catholics and Protestants.

Answer 6

Yes, European Catholics and Christians (aka Protestants) are quite different.



European Catholics have tossed out the Bible and Christians (aka Protestants) regularly have Bible studies and use quotes from the Bible as motivational slogans.



Christians (aka Protestants) place a higher value on human marriage than the Medieval Pope who views women and human marriage as evil.

Answer 7

Some Catholic doctrines are not based on biblical principles. For instance: Purgatory. There is not any biblical basis of Purgatory. Yet, rather than admit they are wrong, Catholic leadership attempts to defend the dogma.



Purgatory was invented to extract money from the surviving members of a loved ones family.



Praying to saints and having statues of them in your home. This too is not biblical. Only Jesus can intercede for the saints (not Mary, or any of the other idols that are prayed to).



To be a Christian is not to join some church and give them money, but to accept Jesus into your heart as Lord and Savior. You do not need a priest to forgive you of your sins. Only Jesus can do that.



If you tell me that this is what the Catholic Church believes, then we are in agreement. Having not been a Catholic, I can not say-only to look at the actions of some of the devout Catholics I have met and known in my life.



There are many that do pray to a statue of Mary. That in and of itself is a violation of one of the 10 commandments that states you should not have any graven images before you. It may not be a golden cow, but a marble Mary is a false god if you are praying to her to intervene with God on your behalf.

Answer 8

When Fundamentalists study the writings of the "Reformers" (or founders of their particular sect) on Mary, the Mother of Jesus, they will find that the "Reformers" accepted almost every major Marian doctrine and considered these doctrines to be both scriptural and fundamental to the historic Christian Faith.

Martin Luther:

Mary the Mother of God

Throughout his life Luther maintained without change the historic Christian affirmation that Mary was the Mother of God:

"She is rightly called not only the mother of the man, but also the Mother of God ... It is certain that Mary is the Mother of the real and true God."

Perpetual Virginity

Again throughout his life Luther held that Mary's perpetual virginity was an article of faith for all Christians - and interpreted Galatians 4:4 to mean that Christ was "born of a woman" alone.

"It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of the Lord and still a Virgin."

The Immaculate Conception

Yet again the Immaculate Conception was a doctrine Luther defended to his death (as confirmed by Lutheran scholars like Arthur Piepkorn). Like Augustine, Luther saw an unbreakable link between Mary's divine maternity, perpetual virginity and Immaculate Conception. Although his formulation of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was not clear-cut, he held that her soul was devoid of sin from the beginning:

"But the other conception, namely the infusion of the soul, it is piously and suitably believed, was without any sin, so that while the soul was being infused, she would at the same time be cleansed from original sin and adorned with the gifts of God to receive the holy soul thus infused. And thus, in the very moment in which she began to live, she was without all sin..."

Assumption

Although he did not make it an article of faith, Luther said of the doctrine of the Assumption:

"There can be no doubt that the Virgin Mary is in heaven. How it happened we do not know."

Honor to Mary

Despite his unremitting criticism of the traditional doctrines of Marian mediation and intercession, to the end Luther continued to proclaim that Mary should be honored. He made it a point to preach on her feast days.

"The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart."

"Is Christ only to be adored? Or is the holy Mother of God rather not to be honoured? This is the woman who crushed the Serpent's head. Hear us. For your Son denies you nothing." Luther made this statement in his last sermon at Wittenberg in January 1546.



John Calvin: It has been said that John Calvin belonged to the second generation of the Reformers and certainly his theology of double predestination governed his views on Marian and all other Christian doctrine . Although Calvin was not as profuse in his praise of Mary as Martin Luther he did not deny her perpetual virginity. The term he used most commonly in referring to Mary was "Holy Virgin".

"Elizabeth called Mary Mother of the Lord, because the unity of the person in the two natures of Christ was such that she could have said that the mortal man engendered in the womb of Mary was at the same time the eternal God."

"Helvidius has shown himself too ignorant, in saying that Mary had several sons, because mention is made in some passages of the brothers of Christ." Calvin translated "brothers" in this context to mean cousins or relatives.

"It cannot be denied that God in choosing and destining Mary to be the Mother of his Son, granted her the highest honor."

"To this day we cannot enjoy the blessing brought to us in Christ without thinking at the same time of that which God gave as adornment and honour to Mary, in willing her to be the mother of his only-begotten Son."



Ulrich Zwingli:

"It was given to her what belongs to no creature, that in the flesh she should bring forth the Son of God."

"I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin." Zwingli used Exodus 4:22 to defend the doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity.

"I esteem immensely the Mother of God, the ever chaste, immaculate Virgin Mary."

"Christ ... was born of a most undefiled Virgin."

"It was fitting that such a holy Son should have a holy Mother."

"The more the honor and love of Christ increases among men, so much the esteem and honor given to Mary should grow."

We might wonder why the Marian affirmations of the Reformers did not survive in the teaching of their heirs - particularly the Fundamentalists. This break with the past did not come through any new discovery or revelation. The Reformers themselves (see above) took a benign even positive view of Marian doctrine - although they did reject Marian mediation because of their rejection of all human mediation. Moreover, while there were some excesses in popular Marian piety, Marian doctrine as taught in the pre-Reformation era drew its inspiration from the witness of Scripture and was rooted in Christology. The real reason for the break with the past must be attributed to the iconoclastic passion of the followers of the Reformation and the consequences of some Reformation principles. Even more influential in the break with Mary was the influence of the Enlightenment Era which essentially questioned or denied the mysteries of faith.

Unfortunately the Marian teachings and preachings of the Reformers have been "covered up" by their most zealous followers - with damaging theological and practical consequences. This "cover-up" can be detected even in Chosen by God: Mary in Evangelical Perspective, an Evangelical critique of Mariology. One of the contributors admits that "Most remarkable to modern Protestants is the Reformers' almost universal acceptance of Mary's continuing virginity, and their widespread reluctance to declare Mary a sinner". He then asks if it is "a favourable providence" that kept these Marian teachings of the Reformers from being "transmitted to the Protestant churches"!

What is interpreted as "Providence" by a Marian critic may legitimately be interpreted as a force of a very different kind by a Christian who has recognized the role of Mary in God’s plan.

Answer 9

Catholcism teaches a false gospel of works that leads to the eternal lake of fire (Galatians 1:6-9). So the truth of God vs. catholicism is about as far as heaven from hell.



Nobody hates people. But we are required by Jesus to hate false gospels that cause people to be sent to the eternal lake of fire.

Answer 10

Catholics are not saved Christians Because

The only way to be a Christian and be saved, and go to heaven and not eternal hell, is by believing that Jesus, who is God, died for our sins on the cross and rose again (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). It is impossible to lose salvation (1 John 5:13). Posted By Chris

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Catholic’s Do believe In your Post Chris , It would be ignorant to think they didn’t So Chris are you Lying a little bit here.



The Apostle's Creed

The Nicene Creed

The Trentine Creed

The Athanasian Creed



Then Chris you say Catholics teach works for salvation. All false gospels of works lead to eternal hell (Galatians 1:6-9).



But you neglect to say that the Catholic Church also teaches you need Grace and Faith as well not just works. And never taught works alone.

Catholics Teach we are saved by "faith, hope, and charity.

"faith alone" formula is unbiblical language. The phrase "faith alone" (pisteus monon) appears in the New Testament only once-in James 2:24-where it is rejected.

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9911fea1.asp



Which false Gospels do you speak of you never say.



Another Lie Chris

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------



Chris Then you Say Constantine Made the Catholic Church and is a Pagan religion and Instituted Sunday worship.



Constantine's Sunday Blue Law

"Let all judges and all city people and all tradesmen rest upon the venerable day of the sun. But let those dwelling in the country freely and with full liberty attend to the culture of their fields; since it frequently happens that no other day is so fit for the sowing of grain, or the planting of vines; hence, the favorable time should not be allowed to pass, lest the provisions of heaven be lost." -- Given the seventh of March, Crispus and Constantine being consuls, each for the second time. 321 A.D.



Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight" (Acts 20:7). "On the first day of the week let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collections when I come" (I Corinthians 16:2)



Constantine reigned from 306 to 337 AD



Evodius was the first Bishop of Antioch, and he is credited with being the first person to call the followers of Christ, "Christians", as shown in Acts 11:26. See Eusebius, book 3, chapter 22.



Saint Ignatius (35-107), the second Bishop of Antioch wrote a letter to the Smyrneans in 107 A.D..

In this letter is recorded the first known use of the words "Catholic Church"...



The List of Popes All before Constantine

.

St. Peter (32-67) St. Linus (67-76) St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)

St. Clement I (88-97) St. Evaristus (97-105) St. Alexander I (105-115)

St. Sixtus I (115-125) St. Telesphorus (125-136) St. Hyginus (136-140)

St. Pius I (140-155) St. Anicetus (155-166) St. Soter (166-175)

St. Eleutherius (175-189) St. Victor I (189-199) St. Zephyrinus (199-217)

St. Callistus I (217-22) St. Urban I (222-30) St. Pontain (230-35)

St. Anterus (235-36) St. Fabian (236-50) St. Cornelius (251-53)

St. Lucius I (253-54) St. Stephen I (254-257) St. Sixtus II (257-258)

St. Dionysius (260-268) St. Felix I (269-274) St. Eutychian (275-283)

St. Caius (283-296) St. Marcellinus (296-304) St. Marcellus I (308-309)



And all the other Saints and Martyrs Of the Church Of Christ. (Catholic Church) Before Constantine.



Can you add and subtract Chris or is it Another little lie Chris

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Chris you say They also added books to God's Word, books that don't belong there.

Catholics didn't write the Bible (Canonize).



Humm I guess you never herd of St. Augustine or St. Jerome.

Which books did they add, the ones removed by Luther in the 1500’s That were canonized By the council of Nicea the same council you say formed the Catholic Church from where your Bible came from [Constantine] .Which using your logic would make your King James Version Pagan.



Are you ignorant of Bible History Chris or still another little lie



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

They also believe false things like "priest forgiving sins". That is nowhere in the Bible.

The Bible says only Jesus can forgive sins. You should avoid catholicism at all costs.



Chris Are you Calling Jesus a Liar, you might want to rethink that one.



Did you remove the following scripture from your Bible or did the Catholics do it.

Are these scriptures in the Bible or not.





I. Jesus Christ Granted the Apostles His Authority to Forgive Sins

John 20:21 - before He grants them the authority to forgive sins, Jesus says to the apostles, "as the Father sent me, so I send you." As Christ was sent by the Father to forgive sins, so Christ sends the apostles and their successors forgive sins.



John 20:22 - the Lord "breathes" on the apostles, and then gives them the power to forgive and retain sins. The only other moment in Scripture where God breathes on man is in Gen. 2:7, when the Lord "breathes" divine life into man. When this happens, a significant transformation takes place.



John 20:23 - Jesus says, "If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven. If you retain the sins of any, they are retained." In order for the apostles to exercise this gift of forgiving sins, the penitents must orally confess their sins to them because the apostles are not mind readers. The text makes this very clear.



Matt. 9:8 - this verse shows that God has given the authority to forgive sins to "men." Hence, those Protestants who acknowledge that the apostles had the authority to forgive sins (which this verse demonstrates) must prove that this gift ended with the apostles. Otherwise, the apostles' successors still possess this gift. Where in Scripture is the gift of authority to forgive sins taken away from the apostles or their successors?



Matt. 9:6; Mark 2:10 - Christ forgave sins as a man (not God) to convince us that the "Son of man" has authority to forgive sins on earth.



Luke 5:24 - Luke also points out that Jesus' authority to forgive sins is as a man, not God. The Gospel writers record this to convince us that God has given this authority to men. This authority has been transferred from Christ to the apostles and their successors.



Matt. 18:18 - the apostles are given authority to bind and loose. The authority to bind and loose includes administering and removing the temporal penalties due to sin. The Jews understood this since the birth of the Church.



John 20:22-23; Matt. 18:18 - the power to remit/retain sin is also the power to remit/retain punishment due to sin. If Christ's ministers can forgive the eternal penalty of sin, they can certainly remit the temporal penalty of sin (which is called an "indulgence").



2 Cor. 2:10 - Paul forgives in the presence of Christ (some translations refer to the presences of Christ as "in persona Christi"). Some say that this may also be a reference to sins.



2 Cor. 5:18 - the ministry of reconciliation was given to the ambassadors of the Church. This ministry of reconciliation refers to the sacrament of reconciliation, also called the sacrament of confession or penance.



James 5:15-16 - in verse 15 we see that sins are forgiven by the priests in the sacrament of the sick. This is another example of man's authority to forgive sins on earth. Then in verse 16, James says “Therefore, confess our sins to one another,” in reference to the men referred to in verse 15, the priests of the Church.



1 Tim. 2:5 - Christ is the only mediator, but He was free to decide how His mediation would be applied to us. The Lord chose to use priests of God to carry out His work of forgiveness.



Lev. 5:4-6; 19:21-22 - even under the Old Covenant, God used priests to forgive and atone for the sins of others.



II. The Necessity and Practice of Orally Confessing Sins

James 5:16 - James clearly teaches us that we must “confess our sins to one another,” not just privately to God. James 5:16 must be read in the context of James 5:14-15, which is referring to the healing power (both physical and spiritual) of the priests of the Church. Hence, when James says “therefore” in verse 16, he must be referring to the men he was writing about in verses 14 and 15 – these men are the ordained priests of the Church, to whom we must confess our sins.



Acts 19:18 - many came to orally confess sins and divulge their sinful practices. Oral confession was the practice of the early Church just as it is today.



Matt. 3:6; Mark 1:5 - again, this shows people confessing their sins before others as an historical practice (here to John the Baptist).



1 Tim. 6:12 - this verse also refers to the historical practice of confessing both faith and sins in the presence of many witnesses.



1 John 1:9 - if we confess are sins, God is faithful to us and forgives us and cleanse us. But we must confess our sins to one another.



Num. 5:7 - this shows the historical practice of publicly confessing sins, and making



public restitution.



2 Sam. 12:14 - even though the sin is forgiven, there is punishment due for the forgiven sin. David is forgiven but his child was still taken (the consequence of his sin).



Neh. 9:2-3 - the Israelites stood before the assembly and confessed sins publicly and interceded for each other.



Sir. 4:26 - God tells us not to be ashamed to confess our sins, and not to try to stop the current of a river. Anyone who has experienced the sacrament of reconciliation understands the import of this verse.



Baruch 1:14 - again, this shows that the people made confession in the house of the Lord, before the assembly.



1 John 5:16-17; Luke 12:47-48 - there is a distinction between mortal and venial sins. This has been the teaching of the Catholic Church for 2,000 years, but, today, most Protestants no longer agree that there is such a distinction. Mortal sins lead to death and must be absolved in the sacrament of reconciliation. Venial sins do not have to be confessed to a priest, but the pious Catholic practice is to do so in order to advance in our journey to holiness.



Matt. 5:19 - Jesus teaches that breaking the least of commandments is venial sin (the person is still saved but is least in the kingdom), versus mortal sin (the person is not



Are these scriptures in your Bible Chris

Some Scripture verses for Purgatory:



Sir 7:33, Isa 6:5-7, Isa 61:1, *2Macc 12:38-46, Mal 3:2-3, Mt 5:25-26,48, Mt 17:1-8, Mt 25:31-46, Lk 6:19-31,

Lk 12:58-59, *1Cor 3:12-15, 2Cor 5:10, Eph 6:18, Phil 2:10, 2Tim 1:16-18, Jam 1:12,5:19-20, Heb 9:27, Heb 12:23, 1Pet *1:3-7, 1Pet *3:13-20, *1Pet 4:6, Rev 6:9-10, Rev 21:27,22:14-15,

CCC 1030-1032.





The fact that catholics worship Mary is evidence

Chris Please show me where in Catholic teaching Catholics worship Mary I cant find it.

Do I hear the sound of Taps playing Chris.



Thomas Aquinas once noted that no matter how flawless one's logic was, if it began with a faulty premise, then the end result would be a conclusion founded upon error.



Fear Not! Chris The Lord loves even nitwits! I shall pray for you



A Little song for Chris



http://www.lovetobecatholic.com/video_362_Divine_Mercy.html





What every Protestant should Know

http://home.inreach.com/~bstanley/how.htm