Strict Protestants & Traditional Catholicism Vs Modern Catholics…

ImageOne of our sometime bloggers, Whistleblower, submitted the following short article and link for discussion.

I was astounded when I came across this website.    I wonder if bloggers agree that it’s astounding that staunch Protestants have their finger on the pulse more than modern Catholics?  In some ways, I feel I have more in common with these Wee Frees than the people in my local parish. 

 

Comment

Well? Does Whistleblower have a point? Tell us your thoughts.

35 responses

    • Charles McEwan,

      Nope. Modern Catholics. There’s only one kind of Catholicism, and that is Traditional Catholicism. The headline suggests that perhaps strict Protestants are closer to Traditional Catholicism that many modern Catholics. Clearer now?

  1. Every single word from beginning to end was abso-bloomin-lutely bang on! I never thought I’d hear myself say this, but ‘I never knew Protestants spoke such sense’. It’s absolutely true that the rot set in with Darwin and his theories. Thank God we know the Bible must be interpreted literally and understood to be inerrant. Also, the comments about mealy-mouthed preachers, Priests and ministers is spot on. How are the laity supposed to understand doctrine if they couch it in liberalism. Long story short, every word spot on.

    • Catholic Convert,

      It’s not quite as easy as “we must interpret Scripture literally” – we need an interpreter, and the Church is authorised to interpret; private interpretation is an error. Check out this landmark encyclical on the study of the Scriptures.

      • The Church is authorised to interpret but can we trust Liberal Interpretors? I mean what does this mean…

        64. The sensus fidei fidelis also enables the believer to distinguish in what is preached between what is essential for an authentic Catholic faith and what, without being formally against the faith, is only accidental or even indifferent with regard to the core of the faith. For example, by virtue of their sensus fidei, individual believers may relativise certain particular forms of Marian devotion precisely out of adherence to an authentic cult of the Virgin Mary. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_20140610_sensus-fidei_en.html

        NCR has it…As two examples, the commission members mentioned the possibility that some Catholics may downplay certain forms of Marian piety while still maintaining a devotion to Mary http://ncronline.org/news/theology/vatican-publishes-reflection-discerning-essentials-faith

        Kasper in his latest book Mercy, as I have pointed out, also warns us not to go overboard with Marian devotion.

        So when we trust to our current leaders, we are in danger of making everything relative to modern society. Tradition is wheeched oot the windae.

        • Summa,

          The quotes and links you give are nothing to do with the Church’s authority to interpret Sacred Scripture. The encyclical given in the editor’s link is a famous letter of Pope Leo XIII. There is no chance of that being liberal.

          • Owen
            The encyclical given in the editor’s link is a famous letter of Pope Leo XIII. There is no chance of that being liberal.

            Yes, that’s a given. I wasn’t criticising that. The links that I provided are evidence of an era of reinterpretation.

            • Summa,

              I see. Yes, there are too many neo-Catholics with a fetish for re-interpreting everything and Cardinal Kasper is one of them, as you point out.

      • Editor,

        Are you saying that we can learn from Protestants? I seem to remember you saying before that they have nothing to teach us. Is this a U-turn?

        • I don’t see that in the editor’s comments at all. What I see is an interesting observation that certain Protestants are closer to understanding the problems in the world and the Church than a great many Modern Catholics.

        • Owen,

          You’d need to remind me of the exact context in which I said that we have nothing to learn from Protestants. That is certainly true – for example – in terms of divine revelation since God’s public revelation comes to us through the Catholic Church and while the Protestant ecclesial communities certainly believe some parts of what God has revealed, they reject other parts. Thus, they are not authorised to teach in God’s name. Only the Catholic Church enjoys that privilege.

          For example, I found the section on Funerals on the website link very interesting. The “Wee Frees” there are complaining about the “canonising” of people at funerals, which is something we complain about, too. However, the significant difference is that we expect priests to remind us of the need to pray for the souls of the deceased, always presuming (in true charity) that the soul is in Purgatory since no defiled soul can enter Heaven and few of us are likely to die without at least a venial sin on our soul which requires purging before being admitted to heaven. So, it read a bit, that section, like the Wee Frees wanted to hear their ministers condemning certain souls to Hell. They reject the doctrine on Purgatory so that’s not too surprising. Heaven or Hell. End of. Ergo they have nothing to teach any Catholic about the four last things. For starters, so to speak 😀

          If that’s the context in which I said we have nothing to learn from Protestants, I was right (yet again) but in terms – as Petrus says – of understanding the diabolical nature of the crisis in the world and in Christendom today, then I’d say that Evangelical Protestants, without a doubt, appear to have the edge over modern diocesan Catholics, certainly judging by the Wee Free article above.

          What sayest thou?

          • Editor,

            I believe that was the context, that we have nothing to learn from Protestants about salvation or divine revelation as you say in your post above, which all makes sense. I stand corrected!

      • Editor
        Thank you so much. I have just now read Providentissimus Deus – Pope Leo XIII on seeing your link. What a strengthening work. I particularly was drawn to sections 14-16, 18-20 and 23.

        This is the second encyclical I have read, after your last recommendation Pascendi Dominici Gregis – Pope Pius X which was twice as long but just as enlightening.

        Keep the recommendations coming 🙂

  2. It’s hard to disagree with this. They are pained, it is clear, on the liberalism and the indifference of society, which we all feel as crushing. It is interesting that the blogger mentions entertainment. For me the rise of first the radio, then Television then the internet has brought some good but otherwise a disastrous effect on the lives of society. Does anyone have any quiet time any more? Do people read? I know as a Senior High School Teacher (English/History) that I have struggled to get final year students to read a standard sized novel: rather they would ‘google’ spark-notes or cliff-notes and think they have it. Kids and parents sit and watch the same TV programs that are a broad mix of sexualised-reality-humiliation. ie The moron genre.
    We have not had TV in our house for 7 years (ie no aerial) and with a family of five kids, the oldest now being just short of 18, I can honestly say that it’s not an issue: that’s just the way it is.
    When people talk about ‘The Biggest Loser’ or ‘The X Factor’ or ‘EastEnders’, depending on the situation, I hurriedly tell them I don’t watch TV: it saves time. I normally don’t say ‘I don’t have a TV’ as that is often too much for people and sometimes I have to call for an ambulance.
    Is the earth about to be hit by an asteroid? Someone will tell me or I’ll eventually find out by the increase in Church attendance. Any bad news I wan’t I can hear in the car ‘on the hour’ on route to wherever I’m going, then I can switch it back to Classic FM.
    My oldest son is 15. He has read the Aeneid, Ulysses, the Iliad, Gilgamesh, Les Miserables, Tolkien, Herodotus etc etc. Not because he has outstanding intellect but because he has time to do so. But anyway that’s my clan, but you can feel the disapproving social pressure of being weird like this.
    And yes pluralism. Isn’t it somehow reeking of bitter irony that we exist in a society that demands ‘respect’ for all and sundry yet, is continually at war with each other in some way?
    So overall this is a decent blog-post. Are they more in tune than sleep-walking/modern Catholics? Probably. I think that they feel the same moral collapse that we do and have fingered the culprit. For me and perhaps them it’s a blend of indifference to God and being fettered to the fads of society.
    Consumerism wasn’t mentioned in the post, but it underpins it. I weep to see Easter Eggs in the supermarkets so early in January (That’s what its like in Australia – not sure UK). Ditto, Christmas paraphernalia. I don’t even think people are aware that God is behind those events any more.

    • Summa,

      Surprised to learn that Eastenders is broadcast in Australia – I’ve never watched it but was interested to hear it mentioned during a radio discussion about the increase in violence among young people, some months ago. The speaker said that it was shows like Eastenders which in part, at least, explained why the young presume that shouting, temper tantrums and violence is a normal response in conflict situations. So, you are wise to protect your children from that lot!

  3. Most soaps portray the working class as a bunch of uneducated morons who can’t even pick a decent design in wallpaper and yet it is the same class of people who are addicted to them.

  4. I do agree that the article is very interesting and shows the evangelical protestants have their finger “on the pulse more than modern Catholics” when it comes to seeing what is wrong in the world and Church today but what they don’t have is the solution, Our Lady of Fatima.

    We should pray to her for their conversion.

    • Margaret Mary,

      That’s it in a nutshell. In fact, you’ve touched on a very important point. The tragedy of this is that the Protestants have a better understanding of the crisis than modern Catholics, but all Catholics HAVE the solution, Our Lady of Fatima, but many ignore Her.

      I wonder who will fair better on judgement day…. these Protestants or lukewarm Catholics! How’s that for controversy?

      • I think also that its worth remembering that the target for the blog-post was modernism-liberalism.

        I agree with much of what was said, but we shall not forget that the very materialism of Protestantism itself, breeds the capitalism and liberalism that the post attacks.

        More irony.

    • “what they don’t have is the solution, Our Lady of Fatima.”

      Yes, us dumb Protestants only have Jesus Christ as our Saviour. I guess we’ll just have to soldier on with that small comfort.

      • WILLIAM,

        As the saints have said throughout history: “those who have not Mary for their Mother, have not God for their Father.”

        Or perhaps Protestants think they can have the Son while scorning the Mother He exalts so highly? Would you answer the requests of someone who insulted your mother? And yet you expect the Son of God to hear your prayers while you ignore the one who gave birth to Him and stood with Him at the foot of the Cross; as though she had no intercessory power with the one who said while on that Cross: “…behold thy Mother.”

        Jesus, as you rightly state, is the mediator between men and God. But Mary is mediator between men and Jesus, as is perfectly exemplified in Sacred Scripture in the Gospel story of the Marriage feast of Cana, where Jesus carried out His first public miracle through the intercession of His Mother.

        And then there is the Gospel account of Mary’s visit to her cousin Elizabeth, at which visit Elizabeth declares: “From whence is this to me that THE MOTHER OF MY LORD should come to me. From the moment thy salutation reached my ears THE CHILD IN MY WOMB LEAPT FOR JOY.”

        There are many such Scriptural texts upholding the special intercessory power of the Mother of God, both in the Old and New testaments. I’m surprised that ‘Sola Scriptura’ Protestants have missed those many Biblical proofs

        But perhaps the best explanation of how simple and logical Marian intervention with God is is best portrayed by St. Louis Marie de Montford, who writes allegorically of the poor servant who comes to ask a favour of the king, offering only a bruised apple as a token gift to his majesty. How much more likely is it, asks St. Louis, that this poor servant will have his petition granted if he makes his petition via the queen who is so much loved by the king. She removes the bruised sections of the apple (our imperfections in prayer) and presents the final product to the king on a golden dish surrounded with garnish?

        Are Protestants “dumb” in this, as in other, divine truths? I’ll let you answer your own question!

        • I did not ‘scorn’ Mary. However, I will continue to trust, pray and rely solely on Christ as the Bible actually tells us.

          • William,

            You should reflect that the Catholic Church gave the Bible to the world, every Scriptural passage having been scrutinised for authenticity by great saintly scholars under the authority of “Peter,” that is, the Popes who hold the Keys of the Kingdom of heaven and to whom Christ gave the power to teach, as well as to bind and loose.

            That’s why there is only one Catholic Church of 2000 years consistent teaching and adherence to such moral teachings of Christ as forbidding divorce and adultery, as opposed to some 256 different Protestant Sects of maximum 450 years existence, all generally at odds with each other in their personal interpretations of the Bible.

            It is actually quite incredible to observe today how far Sola Scriptura Protestantism has departed from the teachings of the Bible. The reason for this blindness is that they are cut off from the wisdom and teaching of the Church divinely instituted by Christ for their salvation. In all charity and objectivity, I urge you to think on these truths and weigh them seriously.

            As for role of the Blessed Virgin Mary in salvation history, the Catholic Church through her greatest saints has always taught that since she was the instrument by which God entered the world to save it, then it is by her that men must go to the Saviour. Mary is not a divine being like Christ but she is the Mother of the God-Man and the conduit by which salvation and divine grace came to men. It seems perfectly reasonable, then, that Christ expects us to go to Him through the mediation of she whom he declared from the Cross to be our Mother.

            It is perfectly logical also in the sense that each of us has an earthly father and mother, reflecting the supernatural truth that the saved also have a heavenly Father and Mother.

            It took the co-operation of Adam and Eve to bring sin and corruption into the world. Hence, God deigned in His omnipotent plan to restore grace through the perfect co-operation of the God-Man and His Mother, the new Adam and the new Eve. That’s why Catholics call Mary the “Co-Redemptrix.” Not that she had any power in herself to redeem men, for only Christ could do that. But that she co-operated perfectly in the redemption wrought by her Divine Son on the Cross. It takes a lot of ignorance to dismiss all this evidence on the basis of personal interpretation. I urge you to re-think your position with urgency.

            • I am very interested in what you are saying. I have a friend who is a protestant and is quite interested in looking into the Catholic Church but more as a way of proving us ‘wrong’ I think. I have some questions I wonder if you might answer for me? There are actually rather a lot but the Mass is an obvious one. Was the last supper the first Mass and if so, how could Jesus have changed bread into his body and wine into his blood if he hadn’t died yet? If the Mass is the reenactment of the sacrifice on Calvary, how could it have happened the night before he died?

              • Hi Jean
                Well Our Lord knew he was about to sacrifice his life for our salvation and that he used the words of body and blood specifically. Do this in memory of me.
                See Luke 22

              • Jean D’Arc,

                You raise an interesting question about the Last Supper and the Mass, but if I may say it is a question that only Divine Faith can answer. If your Protestant friend is genuinely seeking the truth of the matter then he/she must first of all admit that all things are possible to God. Our Lord raised the dead, healed the lepers, changed water into wine. Is it inconceivable, then, that He was able to change the bread and wine of the Last Supper into His real body and blood? These are mysteries of Faith that only those with the gift of the faith, or those who genuinely seek that gift with objective use of reason, can accept. Does that make sense to you?

              • Jean D’Arc,

                Thank you for those very interesting questions, which I see others have answered, very well indeed.

                Yes, the Last Supper was the first Mass, and that truth is marked every year on Holy Thursday, when the bishop and priests in every diocese gather for the Chrism Mass, to celebrate the institution of both the Eucharist and the priesthood.

                Your friends needs to understand that this is what Christians have always believed from the beginning. As He promised, Jesus said that the Paraclete would come after His death and resurrection to bring to their minds all that He had taught them, so anything that was not explicit at the time of his death, became clear to them, in Faith, very quickly thereafter. It’s only for the last few hundred years since the Protestant Reformation, inspired by the likes of dissident priest Martin Luther, that anyone has questioned any of the truths of the Faith on such a scale, so to speak. When heresies arose in the early Church they were squashed/corrected, of course, but your friend needs to understand that he is part of one of those aberrant movements which actually broke from the Tradition of Christian Faith established by Christ.

                If your friend only accepts what he understands with his human intelligence, then he is not exercising divine Faith. That is what is required to please God. There is nothing in Catholic teaching which offends human reason of course, but some things go beyond our human reason although they do not contradict it. As others have said, if Jesus could heal the sick etc. then He is God and can do anything He chooses – including instituting the two great sacraments of Eucharist and priesthood.

                Hope the answers have helped your friend – he’s welcome to join us and ask more questions if he wishes to do so.

              • Hi Jean
                I just remembered a nifty wee e-book which is free on the Fisheaters website here http://www.fisheaters.com/freebook.html
                If you want it on pdf to carry on a tablet or phone you can scroll to bottom of page to download it. It also shows you how to convert it to kindle e-book format.

                There are lots of excellent rebuttals against protestant charges against Catholics.

                Cheers

          • William,

            Actually , what you are doing is denying Christ’s perfection and, as a result, His divinity.

            Our Lord, being perfect in every way, perfectly keeps His Commandments, including “Honour thy father and mother.” He displayed His perfection with regards to this Commandment at the Wedding Feast of Cana. Christ continues to fulfill this Commandment even now, by listening to His Blessed Mother’s intercession.

            By the way, your unfailing commitment to Sola Scriptura is actually unbiblical. Remember, Our Lord said “All Scripture is profitable for teaching “, not “only Scripture”. In the letter of St Paul to James, the Church is described as the pillar of salvation. Finally, Our Lord said to His apostles, “He who hears you, hears me.” So, the main pillar of the Reformation, “Sola Scriptura” is actually a farce.

  5. I don`t know if I`m off topic here but I thought I would mention a TV programme which is to be screened in Ireland tonight.

    I was listening to RTE on the car radio and it seems that a priest in Dundalk had a couple from the Big S community on centre stage in his church yesterday lamenting, and even crying, because the Catholic Church considers their actions, acts of love, to be sinful. The priest though pointed out that they wouldn`t hear the word sin mentioned from the pulpit. Instead, they would hear the consoling words quoted by Pope Francis.

    The congregation it seems were so enamoured by them that they were the centre of attraction after the Mass.

    The male member admitted, when being interviewed, that he was a Christian rather than a catholic
    but the poor soul seemed demented because his lifestyle was being considered sinful by the Catholic Church. There was no mention, especially by the priest, that their actions are sinful to God.

    I wonder if Ian Paisley, whose church is certainly not Catholic, would have allowed them centre stage.

    Somehow I don`t think so.

    • MIKIDIKI

      Spot on.

      You got it at the first attempt.

      I am seriously thinking of contacting the priest in Dundalk to see if he will give me centre stage to shed a few tears and complain that the Catholic Church considers it sinful if I don`t believe in God, don`t keep holy the Sabbath day, steal, commit adultery and don`t love my neighbour, to mention only a few.

      In fact, they won`t even allow me to crack my neighbours over the head if I ever fall out with them.

      What a bunch of spoilsports.

      Mind you, that is not to say that the ordained Church reps. wouldn`t allow it.

  6. Yes Whistleblower does have a very good point. To me it is another damning (quite literally) piece of evidence against the Second Council’s disastrous cause.

    Had the traditions remained intact, the One True Church would be shining like the beacon She is meant to be for all those who follow Our Lord.

    Many evangelicals, deeply committed to Him as many, many of them are, should be being drawn to the thing that it is becoming so glaringly obvious what it is they lack.

    Yes despite the zeal and commitment many of them have, (and which should put many of us Catholics to shame) they do not have the fullness of faith, but imagine, if our disgraceful leaders had remained true to their duty, in this day and age where those bewildered by their own false denominations leadership’s confusion about current issues.
    Who would believe all these adherents of what were formerly puritan heresies would end up endorsing and voting to conduct “same sex marriages”.

    How starkly The Church should be exhibiting that it is supernaturally gifted to be the only source of authority to teach the truth in matters of faith, doctrine, and morals.

    Michael Voris made a good point recently, how many Evangelical seminarians had been exposed to the Church Father’s writings became drawn to the Sacraments and became converts, only to be shocked at the lack of faith and respect that is exhibited in Novus Ordo parishes.

    I am convinced had there never been the changes made we would have real unity as millions of converts would be drawn to the true Church.

    That council has done so much to make the devil’s work so easy. Shame on them.

%d bloggers like this: