Roman Catholicism vs Protestantism.

[B-A-C]

It has been asked are Roman Catholics "true Christians"? I believe that is a difficult question to answer.
I have also seen similar questions on Catholic forums "Are protestants "true Christians"?

I think the answer is the same for both sides in many respects. There are some who call themselves either a protestant or a catholic
who likely aren't Christians at all.

Roman Catholics have varied beliefs, but as a denominational whole, these are a few that protestants are "protesting".

1. The pope - Roman Catholic believe St. Peter was the first pope and that there have been successive popes (infallible leaders of the church) down through the ages.
2. Priests - Roman Catholics believe that earthly priests are still required for confession and mass.
3. Mass - This is different from the protestant 'communion' in the respect that it has to be performed by a priest and the bread actually becomes the body of Christ and the wine (juice) actually becomes the blood of Christ, this is called transubstantiation. They are actually crucifying Christ with every mass.
In protestant 'communion' is is simply a chance to "commune" with Christ, examine yourself, and do this in "remembrance" of Christ.
4. Mary - Roman Catholics believe Mary was the sinless mother of God. She is also called the medatrix (she is another mediator between God and man, besides Jesus) Also Roman Catholics believe Mary had no other children besides Jesus. Roman Catholics also believe Mary's parents were Anna and Joakim.
There is much debate around the veneration of Mary (praying to her, statues of her, praising her, etc..)
5. Salvation by works - Roman Catholics believe that good works are required for salvation.
6. Indulgences - Roman Catholics believe that most sins can be forgiven by the church (as opposed to forgiven by God) by paying money to the church.
7. Purgatory - Roman Catholics believe this is a place where the dead wait in a conscious state until the judgement day.

There is more, but this is a start. So rather than answer the question are Roman Catholics christians, we should see what they are teaching, then decide if it is Biblically close enough.

Some Lutheran and Anglican churches fall halfway between these beliefs and those of mainstream protestantism.
Also the word "catholic" simply means the body of the church as opposed to Roman Catholic which is a specific denomination.

 

[james1523]

The 8th point that protestants are protesting, is gender equality (female priests) and married clergy (Catholic believe in celibate, unmarried).
A 9th point of protest is the right to divorce. This is a big one since it was the reason for the largest Protestant denomination in the world (Anglican).

The formal name of the Episcopal church is the "protestant episcopal church in the USA".

At first it was simply the Roman Catholic church without the Pope as head (replaced by the Crown of England), driven by King Henry's lust for women.
Then this political opportunity was taken up by the reformers - the protestant theological agenda came into the church (salvation by faith alone etc).

The church was still too Roman Catholic for the liking of the puritans, so under persecution from the church and the crown, they fled to the USA. The USA became a place for religious freedom amidst the persecution in Europe. In Europe, Catholics persecuted Protestants and vice versa, because there was a prevailing view that there should be only one state religion and this should be enforced by the secular authorities, and anyone not part of this religion could be treated as heretics (or criminals).Today in the Anglican church, there is still a split (theologically) between the protestant evangelical Anglicans, and the more Catholic, or Anglo-Catholic Anglicans.

Just as the Roman Catholic church is the religious arm of the (former) Roman Empire, the Anglican church is the religious arm of the (former) British Empire.

 

[B-A-C]

The 8th point that protestants are protesting, is gender equality (female priests) and married clergy (Catholic believe in celibate, unmarried).
A 9th point of protest is the right to divorce. This is a big one since it was the reason for the largest Protestant denomination in the world (Anglican).

I think the female clergy issue is equal in both the Protestant and Roman Catholic community. (1 Tim 2:12; 1 Cor 14:34-35; etc..)
Most of the protestant churches I am familiar with allow divorce for one of two reasons. ( Matt 5:32; Matt 19:9; and 1 Cor 7:15; )
as far as unmarried priests ( monks, etc..) the first commandment given to humans from God was to go forth and multiply. ( Gen 1:22; Gen 1:28; )
Peter himself was married. ( Matt 8:14-15; Luke 4:38-39; Mark 1:30; )

 

[NoHype]

Christ's Church is defined in His Word, and not by man. That's what's most important.

The first nation as a whole that accepted Christ Jesus was Great Britain, even when Rome was still pagan under the emperors (see history about the Culdee Church in Britain, and about Claudia and Linus which Apostle Paul mentioned in his Epistles).

The doctrine of the Nicolaitions which our Lord Jesus said He hated in Rev.2:15 I believe pertains to a major organizational religious structure over the Churches. Because of that kind of structure today many pastors won't stick to just preaching The Bible as written, but are swayed to preach the main organizational line, otherwise they can be fired or lose their retirement pensions. That shows a political structure over the Churches more than keeping to Christ as The True Head over the Churches as written.

 

[james1523]

Christ's Church is defined in His Word, and not by man. That's what's most important.

The first nation as a whole that accepted Christ Jesus was Great Britain, even when Rome was still pagan under the emperors (see history about the Culdee Church in Britain, and about Claudia and Linus which Apostle Paul mentioned in his Epistles).

The doctrine of the Nicolaitions which our Lord Jesus said He hated in Rev.2:15 I believe pertains to a major organizational religious structure over the Churches. Because of that kind of structure today many pastors won't stick to just preaching The Bible as written, but are swayed to preach the main organizational line, otherwise they can be fired or lose their retirement pensions. That shows a political structure over the Churches more than keeping to Christ as The True Head over the Churches as written.

I agree with all of the above and wanted to expand on this matter.
The main problem of Nicolaitanism is that it stops or hinders God's work.
Instead of many people, everyone, in church ministering to one another, it becomes one or two people, ministering to everyone. If church is the body of Christ, this is like your head moving but your arms and legs paralysed. Sometime in the middle ages, leading a church became a paid role and position in society, like lawyers and doctors to provide a spiritual service. Hence the term "church service" is not in the Bible - the idea of going to a place to receive a spiritual service from someone qualified (and paid) to provide that service. Even today, the vocation of a priest or pastor has remained a high societal position. This is why in societies today, a priest can witness legal documents and get away with much crime (eg rape, abuse), but the honest word of a Spirit-filled Christ following believer means little.

Nicolaitanism arises by certain capable individuals or groups of people wishing to rule over others. A person thinks they are gifted, they think they are capable, they see that everyone else is doing a poor job, so they want to take a leading role in the church and pretty much be responsible for everything. On the other hand, everyone else sits back and lets them, because they don't want to do anything.

So we have some individuals wanting to do everything, and others, the majority, wanting to do nothing, but just attend church then go home.

Jesus has a problem with this for at least two reasons. Firstly He is the Head and everyone else is just brethren, or members of His Body. No one rules over others. Yes, churches must have leaders, but these leaders are not ones who rule over others, but ones who take the lead and oversee (but not rule) the ministry of others. Secondly, He doesn't like seeing people sitting in church pews doing nothing - He gifted every believer with a ministry, and intended everyone to participate (1 Corinthians).

Now the religious heirarchies in Roman Catholicism etc, are the result of centenaries of Nicolaitanism. Nicolaitanism has become so prevalent that they built an organized religion around it. But we should be mindful of how it starts.
Nicolaitanism is not just confined to the religious heirarchies such as the RC church. But can also exhibit in a local house church or non-denominational church, where there is complacency, apathy, and a few strong-willed believers who want to take responsibility for everything and be some body important. To combat Nicolaitanism, church leaders should encourage others to minister in church freely as the Spirit leads them, and we should encourage one another to participate in ministry.

A clear sign of Nicolaitanism is a church which waits for the pastor or priest to start the service. And if the pastor or priest is not there, they cannot have church without a pastor or priest present. This happens in almost all protestant and catholic services. And it is mainly because people attend expecting to receive a spiritual service, rather than meeting together to minister and encourage one another. Instead, the ones who are there first, should take the lead to pray and worship God, and the pastor or priest can join when they arrive or are willing, and oversee the worship and ministry that is being done by the church. Even though Christ was the greatest, He became the least by becoming the servant of all. In the same way, the leaders of a church are those who serve the most, and are not afraid to get their hands dirty and perform the most menial and lowly tasks.

 

[farout]

Some of the issues Martin Luther posted on the Wickedburg door are still within the Roman Catholic church today. But it's so much deeper than that.

The Bible is the main issue today for Protestant and Roman Catholics's today and always. The Bible is without error, it the very Word God directly spoke to those to whom the Holy Spirit spoke, allowing the writters personality to show. How you see the begining and how you see the end of the Bible is how you understand the rest of Scripture. God created the world exactaly in 6 literal days. Jonah was real, so was Job. Everything in the 66 books is factual., accurate. completely trustworthy.
That's where problems come from when others add to it with a Pope, and purgatory, not allowing clergy to marry. Allowing any sexual sin to exist in the church with the clergy. I could go on for a long time, but time does not permit me to say much more. I hope this gives everyone much to think about.

 

[Last Things]

Just thought I would clarify a few things...

1. The pope - Roman Catholic believe St. Peter was the first pope and that there have been successive popes (infallible leaders of the church) down through the ages.

The Pope is only considered infallible on a few rare occasions on matters of faith. In much the way the apostles were sinners, but could speak infallibly about the faith.

3. Mass - This is different from the protestant 'communion' in the respect that it has to be performed by a priest and the bread actually becomes the body of Christ and the wine (juice) actually becomes the blood of Christ, this is called transubstantiation. They are actually crucifying Christ with every mass.
In protestant 'communion' is is simply a chance to "commune" with Christ, examine yourself, and do this in "remembrance" of Christ.

Catholics believe the sacrifice was once, all Masses tap into the sacrifice, not redo it.

4. Mary - Roman Catholics believe Mary was the sinless mother of God. She is also called the medatrix (she is another mediator between God and man, besides Jesus) Also Roman Catholics believe Mary had no other children besides Jesus. Roman Catholics also believe Mary's parents were Anna and Joakim.

Mary is a mediatrix as anyone in Heaven is a mediator. Christ is the mediator, Mary offers prayers on behalf of people, along with the angels and saints.

There is much debate around the veneration of Mary (praying to her, statues of her, praising her, etc..)
5. Salvation by works - Roman Catholics believe that good works are required for salvation.

Salvation by works is not what Catholics believe, but this is often said. That implies that one earns salvation. Catholics believe that salvation comes from Christ, through grace. In order to remain with Christ, good works keep up the faith and our relationship. The relationship needs to be fed, but it is not the good works.

6. Indulgences - Roman Catholics believe that most sins can be forgiven by the church (as opposed to forgiven by God) by paying money to the church.

You seem to be confusing two issues. Regarding sin, Catholics believe that God forgives sins through the Church.
Indulgences are something different, they are done to repair the damage caused by sin, sin which is already forgiven. Indulgences could not be sold and are not sold. Around the time of the Reformation some unfortunate individuals said that giving money was a 'sacrifice' and therefore could count as an indulgence.

7. Purgatory - Roman Catholics believe this is a place where the dead wait in a conscious state until the judgement day.

That's not purgatory, or anything in Catholic theology. People go to either heaven or hell. Catholics believe that some will need to be purged of their sinful nature before entering heaven. This could be a place, a process, it is not specified.

 

[Last Things]

The 8th point that protestants are protesting, is gender equality (female priests) and married clergy (Catholic believe in celibate, unmarried).

There are married Catholic priests. Celibate Catholic priests are the norm in the west, but married priests are common in the east.

A 9th point of protest is the right to divorce. This is a big one since it was the reason for the largest Protestant denomination in the world (Anglican).

To clarify, Catholics have a right to divorce. A Catholic can be divorced and in good standing. The only time it becomes an issue is when they try to remarry.

Just as the Roman Catholic church is the religious arm of the (former) Roman Empire, the Anglican church is the religious arm of the (former) British Empire.

Actually the Roman Empire ended with the Orthodox Church. The Roman Empire ended in the 15th Century. In the west, we tend to think of the western part of the empire as the empire, but that is not the case. The east last another thousand years.

 

[Last Things]

I agree with all of the above and wanted to expand on this matter.
The main problem of Nicolaitanism is that it stops or hinders God's work.
Instead of many people, everyone, in church ministering to one another, it becomes one or two people, ministering to everyone. If church is the body of Christ, this is like your head moving but your arms and legs paralysed. Sometime in the middle ages, leading a church became a paid role and position in society, like lawyers and doctors to provide a spiritual service. Hence the term "church service" is not in the Bible - the idea of going to a place to receive a spiritual service from someone qualified (and paid) to provide that service. Even today, the vocation of a priest or pastor has remained a high societal position. This is why in societies today, a priest can witness legal documents and get away with much crime (eg rape, abuse), but the honest word of a Spirit-filled Christ following believer means little.

Nicolaitanism arises by certain capable individuals or groups of people wishing to rule over others. A person thinks they are gifted, they think they are capable, they see that everyone else is doing a poor job, so they want to take a leading role in the church and pretty much be responsible for everything. On the other hand, everyone else sits back and lets them, because they don't want to do anything.

So we have some individuals wanting to do everything, and others, the majority, wanting to do nothing, but just attend church then go home.

Jesus has a problem with this for at least two reasons. Firstly He is the Head and everyone else is just brethren, or members of His Body. No one rules over others. Yes, churches must have leaders, but these leaders are not ones who rule over others, but ones who take the lead and oversee (but not rule) the ministry of others. Secondly, He doesn't like seeing people sitting in church pews doing nothing - He gifted every believer with a ministry, and intended everyone to participate (1 Corinthians).

Now the religious heirarchies in Roman Catholicism etc, are the result of centenaries of Nicolaitanism. Nicolaitanism has become so prevalent that they built an organized religion around it. But we should be mindful of how it starts.
Nicolaitanism is not just confined to the religious heirarchies such as the RC church. But can also exhibit in a local house church or non-denominational church, where there is complacency, apathy, and a few strong-willed believers who want to take responsibility for everything and be some body important. To combat Nicolaitanism, church leaders should encourage others to minister in church freely as the Spirit leads them, and we should encourage one another to participate in ministry.

A clear sign of Nicolaitanism is a church which waits for the pastor or priest to start the service. And if the pastor or priest is not there, they cannot have church without a pastor or priest present. This happens in almost all protestant and catholic services. And it is mainly because people attend expecting to receive a spiritual service, rather than meeting together to minister and encourage one another. Instead, the ones who are there first, should take the lead to pray and worship God, and the pastor or priest can join when they arrive or are willing, and oversee the worship and ministry that is being done by the church. Even though Christ was the greatest, He became the least by becoming the servant of all. In the same way, the leaders of a church are those who serve the most, and are not afraid to get their hands dirty and perform the most menial and lowly tasks.

I am not sure how Nicolaism has anything to do with any organized religion or church. Your use of the word does not seem to fit what is commonly known about the heresy. Can you please explain how you are defining it?

 

[Last Things]

The doctrine of the Nicolaitions which our Lord Jesus said He hated in Rev.2:15 I believe pertains to a major organizational religious structure over the Churches.

What are you basing that on?

How do you reconcile your view with the NT Church having apostles guiding it, elders(bishop/obispo/overseer) watching over individual regions, and presbyters and deacons serving the elders?

 

[NoHype]

A tradition exists that supposes Nicolas was a heretic who allowed Baalim, fornication and idol worship among the brethren. It is unfounded.

The following Scripture by our Lord Jesus reveals the doctrine of the Nicolaitans was not the same thing as the doctrine of Balaam, idol worship, and fornication...

Rev 2:14-15
14 But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.
15 So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.
(KJV)

Jesus said, "So hast thou also..." when speaking of the doctrine of the Nicolaitans. That's a direct contrast between the things in the previous verse.

The definition the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance gives for Nicolaitans is 'victorious over the people' (Strong's no. 3532 & 3531).

That idea exactly fits the reason why many Christians in Europe's past history fled to the Americas, because of persecution of Protestants by the Roman Church's politico-ecclesiastic structure, because of Martin Luther's revealing exactly that kind of structure that had gone outside the New Testament bounds of authority.

I don't hate Catholic believers on Christ, for I know the majority of Catholics aren't part of that man-made structure that goes beyond the doctrines that Paul taught for Christ's Church. Even in my era while in Spain, I recall seeing a Bible on a shelf in a Spanish friend's house, and asked if she read it. She said no, that it was only the parish priest who was supposed tell her what it says. Those same type of politico-ecclesiastic authorities burned some of the saints at the stake because of their trying to get a translation of God's Word to His people. Obviously, the supposed authority of those didn't work even with persecuting those saints, because King James of England over-road those supposed authorities in Rome in getting an English translation to the English speaking peoples, and since The Bible is now in just about every known language of the world.

 

[B-A-C]

Catholics believe the sacrifice was once, all Masses tap into the sacrifice, not redo it.

Thanks for clarifying these things. I will let your answers speak for themselves. As fate (or God) would have it, I had lunch with a Catholic priest friend of mine.
(Actually there were 3 priests and myself). I showed him your response (I hope you don't mind) he agreed with most of it. However in the case of mass, he did mention the reason a priest is required to do it, and the reason the transubstantiation was required was because it is indeed a sacrifice. However, like you he did not consider this to be a "new" sacrifice each time, but rather an "on-going" sacrifice.

 

[Last Things]

Thanks for clarifying these things. I will let your answers speak for themselves. As fate (or God) would have it, I had lunch with a Catholic priest friend of mine.
(Actually there were 3 priests and myself). I showed him your response (I hope you don't mind) he agreed with most of it. However in the case of mass, he did mention the reason a priest is required to do it, and the reason the transubstantiation was required was because it is indeed a sacrifice. However, like you he did not consider this to be a "new" sacrifice each time, but rather an "on-going" sacrifice.

I'd agree with him, it is a sacrifice, but it is all one accomplished by Christ.

 

[B-A-C]

Mary is a mediatrix as anyone in Heaven is a mediator. Christ is the mediator, Mary offers prayers on behalf of people, along with the angels and saints.

The immediate thought here is to point out 1 Tim 2:5; Heb 9:15; Heb 12:24; and 1 Jn 2:1;
Also praying to anyone besides Jesus is seen as heresy in the sense they would be considered a medium. ( 1 Sam 28:8-9; )

After thinking about this a bit, I think Protestant and Catholics may view "intercessory" prayer a little differently.
For example, you may be so sick or incapacitated that you can't pray for yourself. So someone else, likely myself and some of your other friends and family from the church will have to pray for you. If you aren't totally incapacitated, we can pray together with you. So far I think we would agree on this part.
However God is really far away (on vacation in Australia) so the only way we can talk to him is by telephone. Jesus is that telephone. He is the only
telephone. ( John 14:6; 1 Tim 2:5; ) Now your friends can talk to God for/with you, but they can only do it through Jesus. Not Mary or other dead people.

 

[james1523]

Every Catholic tradition has its origins in some truth, but unfortunately the time of the middle ages was a time of great superstition in a time when the Word of God was not available to the common people and education was generally poor. People fail when there is lack of knowledge. So people believed weird stuff and superstitions, like witches would float and people who weren't witches would sink. The superstitions are evident in the Catholic cathedrals of Europe - little animals and things you can pat or stroke for good luck or like a lucky charm. It is not as if someone said "let's make a new doctrine today about praying to the dead". Over hundreds of years, what started as prayer for the dead, became prayer to the dead. In the early church people prayed for the dead, but this became prayer to the dead.

Jesus taught that the communion bread and wine is His body and blood, so Protestants are wrong when they say it is only a symbol. But then the Catholic idea that the bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Christ, is also wrong. It is His body and blood, it doesn't become His body and blood, and it is more than just a symbol for His body and blood (that is why God killed some people when they treated it lightly).

 

[B-A-C]

There seems to be a number of verses about this.
Lev 19:31; Isa 8:19; Deut 18:9-12; Lev 20:6; Lev 20:27; 1 Chron 10:13-14; etc...

Some these people are alive (spiritually in heaven) but that isn't the issue. The issue is how you communicate with them, and should you even try?

 

[Christ4Ever]

Last Things, Since the other thread closed out, I figured my other brothers in Christ who are posting here won't mind me posting this here.

Why the non-acceptance? Didn’t and still doesn’t make sense to me either. The curiosity is would a baptism from say the Pentecostal, SDA, Baptist, Episcopalian, Anglican, or any other number churches that fall under the heading of Protestant have been accepted? If not why not?

To reply to the last part first, yes to certificate and I was a baby and as a baby what conditions that you speak of would have been placed upon me that would have negated the baptism? Care here or you'll be adding another condition unto Salvation Last Things besides the ones already set down by the Catholic Church!!!!!

No malice intended here Last Things. That you agree with Catholicism is not the point. That is already assumed and confirmed when you added 1258, 1259, 1260, and 1261. This just confirms the position which is in disagreement we have which is that “Baptism is necessary for Salvation”

BAPTISM: The first of the seven sacraments, and the "door" which gives access to the other sacraments. Baptism is the first and chief sacrament of forgiveness of sins because it unites us with Christ, who died for our sins and rose for our justification. Baptism, Confirmation, and Eucharist constitute the "sacraments of initiation" by which a believer receives the remission of original and personal sin, begins a new life in Christ and the Holy Spirit, and is incorporated into the Church, the Body of Christ. The rite of Baptism consists in immersing the candidate in water, or pouring water on the head, while pronouncing the invocation of the Most Holy Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (977, 1213 ff.; 1275, 1278). Extracted from "Catholic Terminology from Glossary of Catechism"

The Lord told us to do many things that were not tied into Salvation, which we attempt to make part of our lives, and with the help of the Holy Spirit are able to do so. Yet failing to do so, does not take away the saving grace received through the Holy Spirit from the Father through the belief in the Sacrificial death and resurrection of His Son Jesus Christ.

Mat 3:11 11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and [with] fire:

Now let's look at Matthew 3:11 meaning that the water-burial was an outward sign of an inward work of God. Submission to baptism testified to the world around that a spiritual and moral change had taken place. The ordinance of baptism, which from its institution has only acted as a sign or symbol of a spiritual grace. The problem has become, that it has been treated not only as the symbol of that grace but the grace itself. As evidenced by the baptism of babies by the church.

Paul writes in Romans 10:9-10 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. (10) For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

So what are we to make of the above in relation to 1261 " All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism. " How can a baby be an active partaker as outlined by Paul? This is not possible unless the baptism itself can save them! Nice of the church to add this, though scripture does not support this action.

Matthew 28:19-20 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: (20) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

<tbody>
</tbody>

Well, sadly Matthew does not provide for that. Maybe Mark, Luke or John does! Sadly no. However, Mark does identify the very thing Catholicism does state concerning baptism.

Mark 16:15-16 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. (16) He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

There it is in 16 Last Things! If baptism can save an individual, they must also believe. A baby cannot do this. So baptism for children is a man made ordinance and not directed by our Lord.
Another point we can take from this verse is that the non-believers, not those who have not been baptized but believe, are damned. The only way to accommodate baptism as a saving grace in this verse would be to assume that those who have not been baptized and say they believe really don't believe. Using scripture to support this position, I've yet to find. Maybe you can help me out. I've found other verses where the Lord speaks of being saved by believing alone, with no mention of baptism, but no place where baptism by itself provides saving grace.

Now, we know that it is the Holy Spirit by which we are regenerated who also seals us as believers (Titus 3:5, Ephesians 1:13). If Baptism is to have saving grace, then either upon the act or afterwards the believer must receive Him and not prior to the baptism which must be done to be saved. This however, presents us with a problem.

The issue is Acts 10 and the story of Cornelius. Cornelius and his household received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. We also know that one can born again and certain of eternal life without baptism, as evidenced by the dying thief, and I'm sure many other dying sinner.

Too often we seek signs when grace is all that is needed. The error has arisen from the substitution of the grace for the sign, for mistaking the sacrament for that which it is supposed to symbolize.
Although the sacraments are only symbolical, they are yet the instruments of divine appointment whereby spiritual influence and power are communicated to us as we engage in them, their benefit and worth being not in themselves but in the sovereign, ever-present personal agency of the Holy Spirit, who uses the sacraments as His instruments and medium of operation.

For instance, the public confession of one's regeneration by the act of baptism is a means of spiritual motivation to the believer, and at the same time a means of effective witness to the non-believer who witness' the ordinance. This can be a witness more forcible among them at times than our own testimonies.

I'm sure you have not changed your thought on this subject. The reply was not supposed to do that. Yet the posting is not without purpose. One purpose was to show you that saying that others who are not now Catholics (or ever were), somehow do not know the correct belief as it pertains to Catholicism. This is simply not true in every case. If not completely understood by one, it's actually no different than many who do practice the Catholic Faith. I also understand that God is not bound by what the Catholic Church says is a necessity, because I keep in mind that He is faithful even when we are not.

The other purpose was to show the differences between Catholicism and certain Denominations within the Protestant Faith when dealing with the subject of baptism. I'm sure you already knew, but the Protestant perspective you can use as a refresher.

I wonder what He will say when I get to heaven and ask, which of the three Baptisms I received was the valid one? LOL I'm sure that will not be a question worth asking, for it really won't matter! Alleluia!

Stay faithful to God and His Word Last Things and Overcomer you will be!

Love you Last Things.
C4E

 

[B-A-C]

Another big difference is the way Protestants and Roman Catholics view Mary.

We know Mary had a sister.
John 19:25; Therefore the soldiers did these things. But standing by the cross of Jesus were His mother, and His mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.

We know that Jesus had brothers and sisters. The Roman Catholic view is that these were Joseph's children from a previous marriage.
Matt 12:46; While He was still speaking to the crowds, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him.
Matt 12:47; Someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.
Matt 13:55; "Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
Matt 13:56; "And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?"
( Mark 3:31-32; Luke 8:19-20; John 2:12; )

John 7:1; After these things Jesus was walking in Galilee, for He was unwilling to walk in Judea because the Jews were seeking to kill Him.
John 7:2; Now the feast of the Jews, the Feast of Booths, was near.
John 7:3; Therefore His brothers said to Him, "Leave here and go into Judea, so that Your disciples also may see Your works which You are doing.
John 7:4; "For no one does anything in secret when he himself seeks to be known publicly. If You do these things, show Yourself to the world."
John 7:5; For not even His brothers were believing in Him.
John 7:6; So Jesus *said to them, "My time is not yet here, but your time is always opportune.
John 7:7; "The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me because I testify of it, that its deeds are evil.
John 7:8; "Go up to the feast yourselves; I do not go up to this feast because My time has not yet fully come."
John 7:9; Having said these things to them, He stayed in Galilee.
John 7:10; But when His brothers had gone up to the feast, then He Himself also went up, not publicly, but as if, in secret.

We see in John 7:3; that his disciples were different people from his brothers. ( Also John 2:12; )

Some of Jesus' brothers were married.
1 Cor 9:5; Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?

Again we see in the verse above, that most of the apostles weren't considered the Lord's brothers.

Gal 1:19; But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lord's brother.

This verse and Matt 13:35; say Jesus had a brother named James. Luke 24:10; says Mary had a son named James.

The book of Jude starts off with this verse.
Jude 1:1; Jude, a bond-servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, To those who are the called, beloved in God the Father, and kept for Jesus Christ:
Again in Matt 13:55; we see Jesus had a brother named Jude (Judas, not Judas Iscariot the traitor).

In Matt 10:3; and Luke 6:15; We see that James was not the son of Joseph, but rather the son of Alphaeus.

Mark 6:3; "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?" And they took offense at Him.

It appears Jesus had a sister named Salome.
Mark 15:40; There were also some women looking on from a distance, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the Less and Joses, and Salome.
Mark 16:1; When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might come and anoint Him.

Roman Catholics consider Mary to be the mother of God. Protestants view her as simply the mother of Jesus in His flesh form ( the son of man ).
Of course if Mary had other children, it would be possible she was the mother of many gods. That's why she is still considered to be the "virgin mother".

As mentioned earlier Roman Catholics consider Mary's parents to be Joachim and Anne. These people aren't mentioned in the Bible, but rather by tradition.
Protestants consider Joseph's and Mary's fathers to be in Luke 3:23; and Matt 1:16;
Roman Catholics consider the discrepancy between those two verses to be a mistake. However it was Jewish custom of the time to list the family lineage through
the father on both sides.

Roman Catholics consider Mary to be sinless.
Some verses that might be questionable about this.

Jesus rebuked Mary for asking Him to do a miracle that wasn't a part of His ministry.
John 2:3; When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus *said to Him, "They have no wine."
John 2:4; And Jesus *said to her, "Woman, what does that have to do with us? My hour has not yet come."

Also we know that Mary and Joseph accidentally left Jesus behind for three days. Luke 2:41-46;
Also Mary herself said she needed a savior. Luke 1:47;

Also we know performed a sacrifice offering for cleansing. Luke 2:22-24; Which was the same as the in offering in Lev 12:8;
(Why would she need cleansing if she never sinned?)

It's also interesting that even though Jesus had the Holy Spirit, Mary did not receive it until Acts 2. ( Acts 1:14; Acts 2:4; )

A common Roman Catholic prayer starts off with "Hail Mary". Which is the same as Praise Mary. Protestants believe that all Spiritual praise
belongs to God/Jesus alone.

 

[B-A-C]

Other cultural differences between Mary.

Protestants consider the immaculate conception to be the birth of Jesus.
Roman Catholics consider the immaculate conception to be the birth of Mary.
This raises the question of why a baby born of two human parents would be considered more immaculate than a child born of the Holy Spirit/God.

A quick survey of the 15 Roman Catholic churches in my part of town show 11 of them to be named after Mary.
Our Lady of Lourdes, Our Lady of Guadalupe, Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception, etc...
A few are named after Saints the Roman Catholic church considers canonized. St, Anne, St. Francis, etc.. and one is named after an Apostle ( St. Paul).

A quick drive through some of the Roman Catholic neighborhoods shows 5 statues of Mary, 0 statues of Jesus.

Protestant churches are typically named something like...
Church of Christ the King, Church of God, Assembly of God, Church of Christ the Redeemer, Eastside Baptist
Pentecostal Church of the Holy Spirit, Church of Christ, Non-denominational church of God, First Assembly.

The perception is that Roman Catholics consider Mary above or at the very least equal to Jesus.

Frequently you will see churches of the first reformation (Anglican, Lutheran, etc..) name churches after the apostles.
Typically second generation Protestant churches (Baptist, Pentecostal, Wesleyan, Methodist, etc..) do not. Although there are exceptions in all cases.

 

[B-A-C]

A tongue in cheek nursery rhyme goes like this.

Mary had a little lamb, his fleece was white a snow.
Everywhere that Mary went, the lamb was sure to go.

The perception is that Jesus was a follower of Mary, rather than Mary being a follower of Jesus.