There are more things to be concerned about in life than one's brand or one's religious club is better than another brand.
Agreed, but don't expect silence from me when faced with a made-in-America cults obsessed with Catholic bashing lies, falsehoods and twisted "histories". Seventh Day Adventism is notorious for that, their mask needs to come off. Do we do to them what they do to us???
I would be more concerned that what and who I worshipped is the true God of Abraham and that the spirit of Christ lived within me and is changing me from within me, and outwards. We are to serve Christ and in turn do the Father's will and not any flavor of a world recognized religion and its human leadership.
You profess an earthly body with no earthly head. Gotcha.
BREAKING NEWS! GOD GAVE MERE HUMANS HIS OWN AUTHORITY TO TEACH. How much "proof text" would suffice?
Do you consider yourself a Christian first and a (Roman) Catholic second? They are not really the same thing, right?
Wrong.
Is Catholicism Christian?
to: James White of Alpha & Omega Ministries
Dear Mr. White,
I am a cult researcher (#248 in 1993 Directory of Cult Research Organizations, Tolbert & Pement) and Christian apologist, who converted to Catholicism in 1990 after ten years of committed evangelicalism (including five as a campus missionary). I am disturbed by the tendency among cult researchers and other leaders in Protestantism to regard the Catholic Church as "apostate" and/or non-Christian, since it supposedly denies the gospel of Jesus Christ. This is not worthy of men of your stature and theological training, and is also
uncharitable, since it is slanderous and schismatic.
I'd be interested in dialoguing with you or anyone you might know (with perhaps more time on their hands) who would be willing to do so, about this matter and any or all of the theological issues which sadly divide us (enclosed is a list of my tracts and a few samples). I have been published in The Catholic Answer and This Rock, two of the leading Catholic apologetic journals, and will soon have a book out, The Credibility of Catholicism (possibly published by Ignatius Press), which is a defense of Catholicism from Scripture, the early Church, and reason, as well as a very extensive critique and examination of the so-called "Reformation" (I prefer the objective term "Revolt").
Catholicism is not only Christian -- it is far superior to Protestantism on biblical, historical, and rational grounds. Secondly, I would say that a position maintaining that Protestantism is Christian while Catholicism is not, is self-defeating, incoherent, and intellectually dishonest, if thought through properly (which is rarely the case). I never had this outlook as a Protestant for these very reasons.
Among the many insuperable difficulties of anti-Catholicism:
1) The Canon of the Bible was determined by the Catholic Church. Thus, "sola Scriptura" necessarily requires a Tradition and Catholic (conciliar and papal) Authority. Not to mention the preservation of Bible manuscripts by monks.
2) At what moment did Catholicism become apostate? At John's death? In 313? With Gregory the Great and the ascendancy of papal power? In the "Dark Ages" of c.800-1100? With the Inquisition or Crusades? Or at the Council of Trent? And how can anyone know for sure when?
3)
23,000+ denominations and the scandalous organizational anarchy, schism, and theological relativism inherent therein virtually disproves Protestantism in and of itself.
4) Protestantism has only been around for some 500 years!
5) If the Inquisition disproves Catholicism, then the Witch Hunts and killings of Anabaptists, the suppression of the Peasants' Revolt, and early Protestantism's horrendous record of intolerance (at least as bad as Catholicism's by any criterion)
disproves Protestantism as well.
6) Protestantism inconsistently and dishonestly appeals to indisputably Catholic Church Fathers such as St. Auqustine (above all) St. John Chrysostom, St. Jerome, St. Ignatius, St. Irenaeus, St. Justin Martyr (also, later Catholics such as St. Francis, St. Thomas Aquinas, and Thomas a Kempis).
7) Likewise, it inconsistently appeals to Church Councils which it likes (generally the first four)
and ignores the rest, on questionable theological and ecclesiological grounds. Development of doctrine is accepted to an extent, and then incoherently rejected. This is largely what made me a Catholic, after reading Newman's Development of Doctrine.
8) Funny how an "apostate" Church has uniquely preserved traditional Christian morality such as the indissolubility of marriage, gender roles, the prohibition of contraception, euthanasia, infanticide, abortion, etc.,
while Protestantism is compromising these with frightening rapidity.
"Sola fide" is not the gospel. If so, then there wasn't a gospel to speak of for 1500-odd years, since "sola fide" was a radically novel and unbiblical interpretation of justification and sanctification. The God I serve is greater than that-- His hands weren't tied until Dr. Luther figured everything out! Related to this is the slanderous assertion that Catholics are Pelagian or semi-Pelagian and believe in salvation by works. Nothing could be further from the truth. We merely refuse to separate works from faith in a dichotomous relationship as Luther did (which is why he wanted to throw out James-- so clear was its Catholic teaching). Catholicism condemned Pelagianism at the 2nd Council of Orange in 529 A.D., almost 1000 years before Luther. The very first Canon on Justification in the Council of Trent states:
"If anyone saith that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema."
This would seem to be sufficient to put the matter to rest.
But blind prejudice and anti-Catholicism stubbornly persist.
Many other biblical proofs for Catholicism are in my apologetic works, if you're interested. Thanks for your time.
Sincerely, your brother and co-laborer in Christ,
Dave Armstrong
READ THE FULL DEBATE HERE
Does that answer your question? :
Do you consider yourself a Christian first and a (Roman) Catholic second? They are not really the same thing, right?
Again: Secondly, I would say that a position maintaining that SDA is Christian while Catholicism is not, is self-defeating, incoherent, and intellectually dishonest, if thought through properly (which is rarely the case).
"Christian" and "Catholic" are interchangeable terms. Catholics are Christians, but there are stupid Catholics just as there are stupid anti-Catholics.
Your question presupposes a false dichotomy. That's why my reply is so long.
Give us the right to explain ourselves, the same right you give to yourself. And try not to be so insulting.
