In the comments to my post, “When Protestants Attack,” Ed Jacoutot, who is Catholic, asks some questions that are worth bringing center-stage. For example, he wonders,
If worship in the Protestant Tradition is “proclaiming and re-enacting the saving acts of God”¬ù – per Robert Webber, and your paraphrase – “celebrating what God has done through both the Word and the Table.”¬ù Then – where do we differ? I see nothing in these descriptions that Catholics can find a quarrel – and if there is hardly a quarrel – why are we not one?
I suggested in a previous comment that many Protestants are, frankly, clueless about worship. This is a sad fact to confess, if indeed the chief end of humankind, in the words of the Westminster Catechism, is “to worship God and enjoy him forever.” Worship would seem to be an area where Protestants and Catholics could find common cause‚Äîassuming we both believe what we are saying about the importance of worship.
Instead, as Ed notes, we (or at least some of us) prefer to hurl insults at each other. He observes‚Äîand I concur‚Äîthat many Protestants’ understanding of Catholic theology and practice comes straight out of the Reformers’ sixteenth-century critique of some of Catholicism’s darkest days (papal corruption, the Inquisition, etc.).
I would add that many Protestants read the New Testament, especially Paul’s letters, by imposing these same failings on the Judaism of the first century. Thus, the legalistic Pharisees held to the same (heretical) doctrine of salvation by works that the “papists” held in Luther’s day‚Äîand continue to hold in ours. (The joint Lutheran-Catholic statement on the doctrine of justification by faith notwithstanding!)
Ed continues,
I note that a previous entry recalled that Catholics too know very little about Protestant beliefs and practices. But one thing I am willing to admit is that whatever they are – I believe they arise from a sincere desire to make their relationship with God as perfect as possible – and wish it for others too.
That is very gracious of you, Ed. I also seek to understand Catholics and Catholicism by assuming the best of intentions on their (your) part.
Then, he concludes with a question worth addressing:
Maybe it will help (me at least) if some of your Protestant readers can tell us what it is that we Catholics or our Church [do that] makes them cringe so? And, maybe I am wrong – maybe the animosity I think I detect is much milder than I imagine and instead – we are in reality “Brothers in Christ¬ù.” Wonderful would that be so. I’m listening.
What do you think, Protestant readers? I assume you’re in the majority in these parts, so what would you say to my Catholic brother? Where does the cringe factor come from? I’m sure Ed would appreciate your honesty‚Äîand I definitely appreciate your attempts to address the question in a manner that befits Christians who speak the truth in love.
As a Lutheran, I’ve heard some of the same type of thing, but the RCs get it more, I think, because they are such a large group. But, I’ll write about practices that we both share that other Protestants don’t “get.”
First, one is sort of born a Catholic or Lutheran. Because of infant baptism, in a sense you officially join a church without doing anything. Others see this as “fire insurance” and not as an active faith life. They have a point.
The RCs, as I understand it, have insisted that they are the True Church. Is this so? I was taught, as a Lutheran, that WE corrected the wrongs, so we now have it RIGHT. Some Lutherans still officially feel this way, if the official websites are an indication.
The RC and Lutheran worship service is very similar, usually has liturgy. With liturgy, there is repetition from week to week. RCs and Ls view this as participating in worship. I think others look at us and see people going through the motions. When the RCs used Latin in church, the outside impression of this was even stronger. But outsiders can’t judge the heart. [I have problems with the whole Sunday-service-as-entertainment-thing protrayed in the media of some other groups. But again, I'm not there, I shouldn't judge.]
I have no clue why some Protestants do express such strong negative emotions about the whore of Babylon thing. I think that is an unchristian way to speak of the brothers and sisters of Christ.
I think I’ll write a whole post on this one, but it’s not going to be til at least next week b/c of my schedule. I’ll comment again here when I’ve got a post up.
Also from a Lutheran perspective – I see so many more similarities than differences with the Roman Catholic Church.
Worship styles – similar, whether formal liturgical or folk or other
Membership participation, small percentage of on-fire and sold out, majority are lackluster pewsitters
Bible use and devotion – similar to above
Sacraments -similar in understanding of Baptism and Holy Communion, but RC have 5 others – which Lutherans would call – sacramental but not sacraments
still some doctrinal differences – papal authority is one, and another is the understanding of justification by faith (despite the JDDJ-Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification – which stated this what RC, and we Lutheran agree thats what you believe and Lutherans said, this is what we believe, and the RC said we agree that is what you believe.
Also, still there is the use of penance and indulgences by the catholic church.
on the whole, many similarities -a few differences – I still refer to Roman Catholics members as my brothers and sisters in Christ.
I am looking forward to Anne’s future Post – She hints at a comprehensive reply. The other two posts were interesting in that they reflect Luthern prespectives. Lutherns often remind us of their Catholic similarities – after all Luther for most of his life and especially his theological training was Cahtolic. But I think most Protestants (of all persuasions) dwell too much on the “Sale of Indulgencies” to complain about the Catholic Church especially as it was practiced by the Church in Luthers time without understanding what it was really all about. It is easy to level the charge of “Buying your way into Heaven” at the feet of medieval practioners of religion when at that time (and throughout history) many things were done that we would not feel right about today. Burning someone at the stake is one example which both Catholics and Protestants did. The French for political reasons in the 1700′s (long after the Reformation) cut people’s heads off with a huge thunderous blade dropped upon them – we wouldn’t do these things today. To understnad “Indulgencies” you have first to understand the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory. But since most Protestants don’t believe in that they also do not understand “The Sale of Indulgencies”. During Luthers time – the basilica of St. Peter’s in Rome – the largest church in all of Christiandom – then or now – was being renovated. It took 120 years to complete this work – Michaelangelo did a portion of the work. It cost of course a great deal of money and Christians all over the world were asked to contribute funds for this purpose. Anyone wishing to find fault with another system than their own could be expected to cry – “Ahhh Ha! You give money to the church – they will promise you in turn a seat in Heaven!” This is simplistic I know – but do non-Catholics really understand the dynamic here? You give money to your church’s building fund – don’t you? It’s far more difficult, I kinow – but please – come up with a better more serious charge to substantiate the claim that the Catholic Church, while it may have had it right at one time, made a serious turn somewhere in the past and went all wrong. And then came Martin Luther – and eventually many others – who were now going to get everything right. Believe me – I don’t really want to sound derisive here – I think my real motive is just to stir up the pot a little. Perhaps get us (all) to think a little deeper about many of these issues. I’m willilng. And – thank Dr. P for making this possible. I belive he is a Baptist – who have had their historical differances with Luthernism. I would like to see all these “differances” minimized. Surely God would prefer it. Thanks for listening my friends.
I’ve only jotted down my notes for my reply at this point, so this comment is not the official notice that my reply is posted, but merely another comment.
re: Ed’s comments on minimizing our differences — I’m not entirely sure that I want to minimize our differences. What I am sure I want is to explore our differences, and see which differences are necessarily cause for division. That may have been what you (Ed) meant anyway, I just wanted to make myself clear. Beyond that, I want to see not merely what those differences are, but what our frameworks are for deciding which differences are within the bounds and which are outside. I think the only real groundbreaking work at this point can come not on the level of “we believe this, you believe that” — sure, we can clarify, but after we clarify we often still differ. I think any groundbreaking work will come from exploring a different level of question: one doctrinal conclusion follows necessarily from this set of assumptions, another doctrinal conclusion follows necessarily from another set of assumptions, so it is moot to try to resolve at the level of the conclusions when they are not the source of the differences. We have to keep moving backwards in the chain of reasoning until we get to the root assumptions, and then try to see how to evaluate.
Take care & God bless
Anne (yet another Lutheran) / WF
I feel I’ve helped start a minor thread that I hope will prove useful. I must first admit I didn’t expect to solicit comment from (three no less) Lutherns. I’m delighted. Frankly I have never personally known a Luthern – at least to discuss Religion with. Lutherns are, I bellieve, notable in that they among all Protestants represent that branch of Christianity in it’s “purest form”. And I mean that in a positive and friendly way. Anne posted a succinct challange – to not address “our differances” by trying to minimize them as I suggested but instead traverse the “…chain of reasoning until we get to the root assumptions” in order to clarify our differances. But Anne – please explain what yu mean by pointing out there are differances that “… are within the bounds and which are outside”. I am unclear what these “bounds are. I believe that since most all differances between Catholicism and Protestantism have been reviewed by more learned men – better minds than mine at least – for centuries now it may only be useful to identify some of those fairly common issues that we two groups use to sow suspicion upon one another. I already mentioned Indulgencies but others are Mariology, Confession (to a Priest), the presence of statues in our churches etc. On the Protestant side Catholics often point out the prolifiation of denominations – and the total reliance upon ones reading and own intertretion of the Bible etc. It seems funny to me but those “trappngs” of Catholicism seem so “natural” to us as I’m sure you find those things mentioned above as natural to you. And yet we are the same people – human beings with identical emotions – nerve endings – all the physical attribtes that make us members of the same species. Yet in matters of religion we see and feel many of these things so completely differant. I hope I have not trivialized the matter too much but as a Catholic I really want to know why non-Catholics have what seems to be an acute revulsion of things that make us Catholics comfortable about our relationship with God. When Crrist (as God) came down upon Earth and became Man he prepared the Way for us to eventually “See” Him. He told us that He would be “…with us” for all time. But we have mucked it up pretty bad havn’t we? Do you think He is pleased? It must be then, our job to clear all this mess up. Or maybe, like Republicans versus Democrats, we think that it is natural for one side to be (completly) right and the other to be (completely) wrong! I for one don’t like that arrangement we have made for ourselves. I am pretty sure I can live next door to a Luthern – and I KNOW he/she would find me a congenial neighbor – so why can’t we share the same pew? And when we look front of the nave – all we see is God. Tell me again where I am wrong. I’m listening.
Your fellow (human being) – in Christ
The discussion has been so good I’ve been hesitant to chime in. I will simply observe that beyond the big doctrinal areas like justification, prayers to the saints, etc. (which were, sadly, always boiled down to inaccurate stereotypes), all of the “cringes” associated with Catholicism in my Baptist upbringing apply almost equally well to Lutherans and other Protestants of a more liturgical and/or hierarchial slant.
The very idea of a liturgy, with everybody mouthing words (without ever considering their meaning, of course!) was foreign to me. The office of bishop, infant baptism, and the use of formal creeds were all dismissed as “Catholic”–despite the fact that many Protestants had all three! As my faith has matured, my “cringes” have shifted dramatically. Maybe I’ll talk about them later, but for now, let the conversation continue!
Well, what Dr. P. just said applied equally to me as well. We saw Catholics as “religious” people who went through the motions without any pretense of genuine faith–rather like the folks in The Godfather.
I remember being appalled that my Catholic playmates next door had a large Bible on the table–usually dusty–that they were ADAMANT should not be touched, told me it was “a sin” to put something on top of it. I once watched them kiss the Bible when they had inadvertantly put something on it. I found this rather shocking and idolatrous. And the few occasions they came to church with me they told me that if their priest knew he would be upset, and that it was “a sin” to go to another church. I saw them as completely alien, so to speak, and I felt sad that they seemed to have absolutely no understanding of the Bible or spiritual things even though they faithfully attended Sunday mass and treated “the book” with reverence.
Now I understand things differently, and I love many Catholic writings, prayers, etc. I can even enjoy liturgy once in a while, though it would never be my preference.
Now, speaking for what I see in my area, there seem to be a great many Catholics who go to church as a matter of habit, and when asked what they believe about something can’t really say. Or many people who live lives of blatant sinfulness but who think it is okay because they go to church or to confession, etc. This is German country, so folks are Lutheran or Catholic by upbringing.
Some of the very same things I’ve just said, however, could apply to different folks from different denominations and different parts of the country.
One other thing–the Catholics in our area still do seem to believe that they are the only ones who have it right. And many, many people are angry or dissatisfied or disillusioned with Catholicism, but would absolutely never even consider anything else. Instead, they stay home. That is sad to me. I believe a more liturgical worship form has great meaning for some, but not all. And the same is true for the “free church” traditions.
Welcome SingingOwl. (Did I make a mistake using my real name? I am brand new to blogging – this is my first.) And, please D.P. – Do “chime” in. (It’s your blogg – we’re your guests). Now maybe I should feel “outnumbered”. 1 Catholic, 1 Baptist, and four (?) Lutherns! I attended one summer Troy University in the deep remote “bible belt” heart of southern Alabama. One class was Religion and Religious History. The Prof was Episcapol (Anglican), I was the only Catholic (progably for miles around) and the other 20 or more students were all Baptist. When the professor found out I was Catholic he called on me far more than anyone else hoping I could explain (for all the others) many of the items we were studying. A fair and fun course but boy was I on the “hot seat”. I probably seemed like an “invader” from Mars to some. D.P. says that now that his faith has matured many of the “odd” facts (or impressions) about other Christains have mellowed with more comprehensive understanding. Ditto for me too. But I notice that both D.P. and SingingOwl expressed a common impression about Catholic “literguy” and our worhip. To you We seem to “mouth words”, not pay attention, look bored etc, and just “go thru the motions”. Welllllll – in a way I think you were not exactly deceived – and were a little correct in your observations. Consider for a moment that for Catholics going to Mass at least once a week (usually on Sundays) is a “Commandant of the Church”. Something quite foriegn to Protestants who, as you know, look upon “The Church” in a far differant way. That therefore makes it a spiritual requirement to “be there – and do that.” Week in and week out – and on some other days of the year as well. And, without question – the Mass does not differ each time – except the sermon and the passages of the Gospel read. The words we “mouth” are responses (participation) in the liturgy – and prayers like the “Our Father” and the “Apostles Creed”. We realize that in this environment our minds – our thoughts often wander. I remmeber in the large gothic church I attended as a child in Indiana (it had the second largest stained-glass windows in the U.S. then) I (always) sat in a pew with my brother and sisters in the far rear of the church while the Mass was being celebrated way up front. As children we could barely see or even hear what was happening. My eyes instead would settle on the large window towering over us which depicted Mary, the boy Jesus, and Joseph as a carpenter in a domestic scene from their life in Nazareth. I have always been “aware” and actively interested in the life of Jesus as a result. Sunday services of cource are differant for everybody else – but you can be reassured that most of us had The Savior somehow on our mind. I hope this answers too why SingingOwl noticed that “…there seemed to be a great many Catholics who go to church as a matter of habit,…” I’m sure that it’s not a secret that when we observe folks of other faiths going about their practice of it tells us almost nothing “about” their faith. But that doesn’t stop us from gathering “impressions” – which leads us to conclusions – does it? I for one encourage Dr. P to tell us soon how some of his “cringes” about Catholicism “… have shifted dramatically. I will find that especially interesting. Singingowl says he lives “…in German country”. I would guess Wisconsin or nearby but once while I was in Germany and walking along the banks of the Rhine I came upon two little boys fishing and tried out my German on them. One was wearing a cross on a chain around his nect and I pointed to myself and said, “Catolische” – and he answered, “Ich Evangelische”. (sp?) We smiled and knew we understood each other. I then went on my way. I was wondering – is there anything, a question, or point of interest about Catholicism you may have that I perhaps could address from a “personal” standpoint – not that you couldn’t get it from a book. Be glad to try. And – I’m sure there are issues about your faith that I am unclear about. Let me think…..
Hi Ed! I’m sorry, I wasn’t thinking very clearly..heh hee. I’m a woman, and a former Baptist who is now a Pentecostal (Assemblies of God) who lives in Wisconsin and pastors a rural church. Whew. After a night’s sleep I will attempt to think about questions I might like to ask.
I forgot to say that I’d love to share a pew with you. And I was touched thinking of a little boy looking at the stained glass. One thing you Catholics (and many mainline Protestants as well) have over us is stained glass windows! One only sees stained glass in Pentecostal churches (and usually Baptist too for that matter) if the church was purchased from some other denomination. I love stained glass and candlelight and the scent of incense….so…what does that say? (grin)
We’ve got cool stained glass windows in our (born Baptist) sanctuary, depicting events in the life of Christ from his birth at one end of the chancel and the resurrection at the other.
Oooh! Dr. P. that is wonderful! I have NEVER seen a “born Baptist” (lol) or AG for that matter with stained glass windows. I’m glad to know it can happen! My daughter once attended a small and very beautiful AG church in Minneapolis that had been a Scandinavian Anglican or some such odd church variation! Then Lutherans bought it, and then something else and then the AG folks. Talk about a lovely old building and windows! I was saddened to learn that that little gem of beauty has since been torn down to make room for some big development of condos or some such.
Interesting thread of conversation. As Ed mentioned in one reply – the German’s who are “Lutheran” – go by the name “Evangelische”. In fact, Martin Luther never wanted a denomination named after him – instead he preferred “The Gospel” – or “Good News” – which is a rough translation of the German word, Evangelische.
But the english spelling is “Lutheran” — and that is important.
Liturgy — has cropped up as one of the “cringing” points.
Do most protestants understand that “liturgy” – means the “Work of the people” – and refers to the participation of the congregation in worship.
The ancient Christians — of the 1st Century and beyond emerged from the Jewish tradition — and worship for Jews includes the Psalter (all 150 psalms). Just as Jews used the psalms – spoken and sung – so early Christian worship also used the psalms and then began to add other pieces of scripture as they were commonly used by many congregations of believers. For example, The Christ Hymn – -in Philippians chapter 2 – probably was once set to music and a tune.
So liturgical worship – although never a requirement among Lutherans – who are free to worship in whatever manners suits each congregation as long as the basics are kept: the Gospel is proclaimed and the Sacraments of Baptism and Holy Communion are shared.
Liturgical worship is quotation of scripture – either spoken or sung — with certain scripture given a great priority because it tells the story of human brokenness and the overwhelming grace of God that saves us through Jesus Christ.
Some of our orders of worship – in hymn books – list the particular Bible verses in the margins – so that people can look them up, so that they are reminded that these words are not common – but extraordinarily important Words of God.
Our congregation uses 5 different liturgical orders of worship – as well as some weeks we have a less formal style – still within a framework of:
Gathering (hymns and songs of praise to God)
Word (the Bible is read and sermons are preached)
Meal (Holy Communion – only 2 weekends per month in my cong.)
Sending (Prayers and Benediction and Words to send the cong into mission in the world)
This note – has turned into a mini-lecture — sorry for the length. I hope the information is useful.
Sorry I addressed you – SingingOwl as a male. See! This communication mode CAN misslead! Unwittingly, on your part I’m sure, but you brought up a “question” that confuses a typical Catholic – like me. You say you are a former Baptist – but now an Assembly of God adherent. (And – a pastor in a rural church – that’s wonderful!). But – what is the “essential” differance being a Baptist or instead a Pentecostal? Most Cahtolics – proobably don’t understand – apart from certain doctrinal differance which I think I do understand. We think of you (all) as “Protestants” – and don’t understand how you differ among yourselves – and WHY. Can I be a little – annoying? here? When Martin Luther and later John Calvin did what they did to launch the Reformation didn’t they announce they were doing it to “reform” the current Christian church – which I guess no one can deny was the Catholic Church. (The appleation “Roman” was attahced later mostly by the Anglicans in England – though I today don’t feel “Roman”). (I was there once though and after seeing it don’t mind being associatied with them). And is it true that they did a good job reforming the Church? Or maybe they meant they reformed Christianity? Once they did that did they do it right? They had no prior blueprint? If they did it right why are not all Protestants Lutherns – or (to impart more variety) eithr/or Calvanists? With all due respect – who and why are Pentecostals? Please try to understand our confusion? I know – this question has been asked many many times. And there have been probably many good answers. But we Catholics – when we think of “Unity” (if there is or ever will be such a thing) think of ONENESS. Now – my question: How can we Catholics and Protestants ever have a unity that will please God if you don’t have any among yourselves? My next question is: Was this a fair question? And by the way – I’m honored to be among “pastors” – leading practioners in your faiths – since I’m merely a layman in mine. (I did attend 8 years in a parocial elementary School – St. Patrick’s by name). I just re-read this entire thread and realize it contains many things you have all brought up that bears more attention. Stailned glass windows for one comes to mind.
That should never have ever been a Catholic monoply. But – when you start out to reform something you want to begin by throwing out all the bathwater! We don’t mind now – you can use all the stailned glass you want. I even have some in my kitchen window – surely you can have some in your life on Sunday. Like a nun at St. Patrick’s you can rap my knuckles with a ruler if you want (though no one ever did) for saying that. I can’t help it if I feel mischevious – after all I’m a Paptist. (There I go again).
Believe me – I remain, a friend to you in His Name.
That is a BIG subject. Way too big for a blog comment.
Ed, there is nothing offensive about any of those quiestions. We Protestants can’t even figure it out, so I can’t fault a Catholic brother who is honestly confused. Who wouldn’t be?
I recall seeing, in a small town, an intersection where a church stood on all four corners. All were old, brick buildings. All four buildings had tall steeples topped with a cross. One was Catholic and the otheer three were various brands of Protestant. It looked pathetic, to tell you the truth. I looked at the steeples, looked at my husband, and he said, “It must be something when they all dismiss at noon and try to beat each other to the only restaurant in town.” I thought of Muslims, and of Jews, and of how ludicrous this would look to them…and now to you a well.
It is sad. I wish it were not so. The differences between Protestants may be relatively large, or may be rather miniscule. (There are so many kinds of Baptists in the USA that it is nigh impossible to keep track.) Dr. P. has a “family tree”
of the various Christian groups.
As for Baptists and Pentecostals, we are pretty similar as to doctrine. Where we differ is in how we interpret scriptures regarding the Holy Spirit and the “gifts” of the Spirit. Specifically, Pentecostals generally believe that there is an experience that is seperate from one’s salvation that usually is called “the baptism in the Holy Spirit” which includes speaking in tongues as well as other spiritual gifts. Pentecostal is the name for denominations that hold this view. (We could combine as far as I’m concerned…miniscule differences.) They include the Church of God, the Church of the Foursquare Gospel, the Church of God in Christ (largely African American) and the Assemblies of God. Charismatic is the word used (generally) for Christians in other denominations, Catholic or Lutheran for example, who have similar views about the operation and gifts of the Holy Spirit.
Roman Catholic charismatics in the “renewal” movement of the 70s and following sometimes left the Catholic church for a Pentecostal church, but many stayed. Stuebenville University was at one time quite known for their emphasis on the Spirit baptism and gifts of healing. I do not know if this is still so or not. But in the 70s and 80s there was a lot of sharing between Catholic charismatics and Pentecostals. I recall our Wednesday night church service at Evangel Assembly of God near Washington D.C. It was called “Charismatic Adventures” (makes me kind of smile and kind of cringe to recall) and a local charismatic Catholic priest was a frequent guest. He was great–but sadly I have forgotten his name. This was 30 years ago though, so I may be excused.
In most cases, Baptists and Pentecostals wouldl agree on the divine inspiration of the Bible, on Jesus as our means of salvation and forgivness from sin, on baptism (by immersion), on the importance of individual relationship with God through Christ, and many many other things.
I’ll include a link to something I was pondering a while back about the Church and how we view salvation. I’m still pondering it. I, like you, mean no disrespect by anything I say about Catholics or others. I also remain a friend to you in His name.
http://pastoretteponderings.blogspot.com/2005_08_01_pastoretteponderings_archive.html
Aaaarrrrgggghhhh! I just wrote a long post about this–and cyberspace ate it.
I will try to write it again soon.
It won’t be the same though. I HATE it when that happens!
Thank you SingingOwl for a comprehensive lesson on the Pentacostal and Chrismatic movement. I found it very informative – and have some friends – a Catholic couple who, though we don’t discuss religion (I probably would annoy them) belong to a large and faily new parish in Indianaoplis – which ironically was started about 15 years ago by a priest who I discovered (through research in “family history”) just last year is a relatilve of mine – (great uncle). He recently became deseaced before I could meet him – but I understand this partilcular parish is heavily Chrarismatic. Knowing little about the movement I have “wondered” a lot. Loved your observation of 4 churches on one corner – each with a cross on top of its steeple. Indiana (perhaps the whole midwest) seems full of intersections like that. I wonder – when Christ looks down at that spot on Sunday morning – and say’s to Himself (if we are permitted to speculate on THAT) – “Well, of course I’m everywhere (being God), but which one shall I point my finger to this morning and make someone in that congreation feel My “Presence” especially. (I like to think He has a sense of humor). It is true that we have brought up a great many “subjects” that are probably too big for this Blog but may I say I have always had a little “problem” with one issue in the Baptist view of things. You have such a great and gentle way of addressing controversal subjects ‘tween factions that I’m sure you can help me on this one. It is about Baptism – and the original Anabaptist and how many Protestant denominations insist on immersion – and complete rejection of “Infant Babptism – or “sprinkling”. I find it hard to believe that immersion vs sprinkling, as long as it involvs water, makes enough diffeance to cause a whole movement to evolve around the method of accomplishing this “act”. When I (we) consider that two thirds of Christiandom (all Orthodox – and many Protestants) accept sprinkling – and it’s companion practice “Infant Baptism – is it that important and if it is just how upset is Christ with the way the vast majority preforms this Sacrament? A clarification will be welcome. The other issue I think a lot about – mostly becasue I’ve always had a special “devotion” to Mary since I was about 15 is the Protestant problem with our interest in Her and their almost total neglect – avoidance of almost anything to do with Her. It seems you pay far more attention to Mary Magdelan (and many women in the OT) who was only a “friend” os Jesus – albiet important – rather than His Mother who who was not only “there” at the begining and at the end but during His entire life – especially the first 30 years of it. I sometimes feel that it is too bad that you folks are missing so much. I realize a valid reply to this could be, “…well, we have Jesus – why would we want anything – or anybody else?” That in itself is true – but does not Her “role” in the way God “arranged” Salvation thru His Son’s sojourn on earth justify a little more “respect” for Her? Well, if not respect – at least justify interest. Oh – it’s true that over the centuries and down to the present many people (all Catholics mostly) learned in their daily lives to pay Her perhaps more attention than should be due – but isn’t it also true that when we concentrate our gaze on Heaven and things that are Heavenly He will be pleased? Yes – He is a jealous God – but since They shared flesh – and no other human being had that Gift bestowed upon them does not that make Her speical? Really Special? Seems to me – but I’m not everybody. Hey! You guys – (and girls), I can’t believe you are willing to devote so much of your valuable time listening to me – speculate. I didn’t suspect so many non-catholics could be so good to have around. Please come back.
Okay, call me a fool and you’ll be right, but I’ve replied as best I know how.
http://weekendfisher.blogspot.com/2007/02/one-holy-catholic-and-apostolic-church.html
Sorry Anne – I don’t recall calling you a “fool” – nor would I ever do so. I believe I have mised your reply. Perhaps – there may be little doubt – I am the fool.
Ed, I believe you’ve misunderstood Anne’s figure of speech. She was suggesting that her reply (linked in her comment) might seem foolish because she is unsure it is adequate.
I think Ed makes a good point about protestants overlooking the role of Mary. It is probably an over reaction against the idea of praying to her.
Regarding the liturgy, as someone posted, it is the “work of the people” As a Lutheran, I’m used to it, of course. A pastor described it as a way to connect with past memories, past moments. It is meaningful if you want it to be so. It does involve the people in worship; it is not worship as entertainment, and it is not passive. Old people have the repeated prayers engrained in the deepest part of their brains. That often sustains them in difficult times.
I, unfortunately, attended two dual funerals in one weekend, due to a car accident. They were both held in the same large public space. The first funeral was Baptist, the second Lutheran. At the Baptist funeral, the pastor did all the talking, plus there was music. At the Lutheran funeral, there was some liturgy, so there was participation. My friend, who grew up Baptist, but has been Lutheran for awhile, said, “now I know that I am really Lutheran. I appreciated taking part in the service.” Of course, you could substitute two other denominations for Baptist and Lutheran.
Regarding the “cringe” factor. From my point of view, I have some “cringe” toward groups that seem to suggest that there was no true church before their founder came along about 50 years ago and founded their group. And I cringe when I hear a pastor, perhaps on a Christian radio station, who talks as though he completely knows the mind of God and even says what God can and can’t do. I haven’t decided yet if the problem is that the guy sounds so “not humble” or that I harden my mind to what truths he might be preaching.
Ohhhhhhhh – is my face Red! And thank you D.P. for straightening it out for me. Anne – my profound apology! Not only am I a “new Kid” on the block (bloggilng) but you guys have treated me so well I plunged in and hoped nobody would detect that I have little idea how to navigate here. So I took the hint and visited Anne’s link – and presto! Can’t wait to devour – andd wade in to her comments. But my time’s up and am forced to wait. Will I sleep tonight? Prob-ley not.
Hi Ed
Just to confirm, Dr. P. interpreted my comment correctly, “call me a fool” as in “fools wade in where angels fear to tread”. As a blogger, I find it helps if I don’t take myself too seriously, and especially when I deal with comments that are dear to everyone’s hearts. It is so incredibly difficult to comment on such a sensitive divide without just stirring hostilities.
Take care & God bless
Anne/WF
Thank you Anne for your patience. Oh and thank you too for reminding me that I should not take myself too seriously. You are right: These can be sensitive issues when they are so dear to our hearts. Perhaps blogging is not the best venue to do this – I would prefer sitting on a sunny verandah over a cup of tea (I’m sitting here in Arizona where that is possible) but short of that pecking away faceless on this keyboard is the best we can do ….. and I promise, – promise NOT to be in anyway upset by statements I hear here. Made by anyone. When I was growing up my family was the only Catholics in the neighborhood (like many neighborhoods) and you know how kids are – we engaged in silly little barbs hurled at each other across the street. The only thing some could think of against me was …..”Cat Licker!” (Ever heard THAT one?). No – me neither – before or since – but even then – as a thin- skinned kid – it didn’t bother me. But now it’s “ROMAN” Catholic! Now – THAT bothers me! No – ahhhhh, just kidding. Now that that’s all cleared up – oh I hope so – I’m going to go over and study again your “Comments”. A first glance is all I’ve managed so far. Oh – modern life! It is so overscheduled! Time – Time, please Lord, give us more! I just bought a new house so my mind has been EVERYWHERE. Votre Ami – Edmund
Having spent considerable time (for me) studying Anne’s Blog, “Heart, Mind, Soul, and Strength” accessed by her link seven comments ago dated Feb. 24 I am anxious to offer my response and will do so there. Her well-thought-out effort – notable for its clear and comprehensive rebute to the claims of Roman Catholicism deserve a careful reply which I believe she will welcome. I’m beset by the fear, however, that my qualifications are so limited that I may fail to fairly represent “the other side”. I recognize this is not a “debate” per say, and I am not a recognized RC apologist – so I hope my humble “opinion” tempered by a life-long love of Roman Catholicism will fare me well – and I will strive for breverity and when all is done – we shall part comfortable knowing our goal all along is akin to Emily Dickinson’s when she said, “I never … visited in Heaven; Yet certain am I of the spot as if (a) chart were given.”