What is wrong with some Protestants?

Question

Why are they reading articles ABOUT the new Vatican document instead of reading the ACTUAL DOCUMENT? Can one be qualified to comment on a document one has not read?

Answer 1

I don't know...it's scary. I mean, I do not have a denomination(not even non denominational) but I will still go straight to the source for information than a religiously bias question/article....

Calling the Catholic church a snake pit and hell, and then spreading lies about the document? Come on...even I'm not that heartless.

Answer 2

In Yahoo Answers you can get 40 Answers to an in depth question in less then a minute. We live in a fast food society in the USA. From what I have read this is the original position of the Catholic church. I remember when I was very young at mass when a Priest clearly proclaimed. (After explaining the one true church doctrine)"If you are not a Catholic, you are going to Hell." It is also outlined clearly in an old first holy Communion epistle I still have to this day. I have not read the the actual document nor do I need to. I am personally concerned with working out my own salvation with fear and trembling, and sharing the good news with all that will hear it. I do really wish the Pope would do the same.
This is a real bad time for Christian Churches to be divided. I am glad the one true invisible Bride of Christ (All believers in Christ finished work on the cross) should not be affected.

May the Lord richly bless you.

Answer 3

This probably doen't answer much, but looking back on when I was protestant, things were very strange. Somehow, I had several close friends in high school and who were Eastern Orthodox, and let me know it at some point, yet somehow I was unaware that the Eastern Orthodox Church existed until I got into my Junior year of college.

Furthermore, I found it very difficult to truly see any of the Catholic and Orthodox arguments against protestantism even when their viewpoint was laid plainly before me.

It was as if most of this stuff just, honestly, never stuck in my head, for whatever reason. I can't really explain why, for so long, I was unaware of the Eastern Orthodox Church when it was all around me. I seemed to hear about it and not understand at all that my friends were telling me that it is a completely different Church, apart from Roman Catholicism (though they stated it plainly). I can't explain why I didn't understand what was being said by Catholics and Orthodox who challenged my views of Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, Apostolic Succession, The Virgin Mary, while they always gave Scriptures that plainly supported their arguments.

It was as if a cloud of forgetfulness and confusion was in my head, blocking out all understanding and reasoning. I didn't actually come to face these facts and arguments until I was forced to, when several of my friends converted to the Eastern Orthodox Church.

Perhaps it is this same spirit of confusion which causes some Protestants to jump the gun on the Pope when they read a news article about his statements and such without first going to the source.

Answer 4

One should read the document first, of course. It's possible to form an opinion if you read all the opinions about that document. Including the ones that are not appropriate.

Answer 5

Some have... The media will, of course, sensationalize this topic. So what is wrong? Despite the ecumenical overtones from the Vatican in recent years, this document simply restates the Pope's previous document, and what many in the Catholic Church believe as theological doctrine. According to the ACTUAL DOCUMENT... that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church alone (question 2), that all other "separated" churches suffer from "defects" (question 3). Christian "communities" born from the Reformation can not even be called "Churches" (question 5). It says this plainly enough. The professing of Christian "Unity" has once again proved to be a misnomer by the Vatican... unless everyone becomes Catholic.

Answer 6

The news commentaries on the actual document are validating prejudices they have against the catholic Church, so they go look no further.

I read the same news article and immediately knew that what the news commentaries said the document said was completely contrary to Catholic doctrine.

First, I found a news article at catholic.com and their commentary on the document was completely different. Then you gave me a link to the actual document and discovered that the quotes in the secular news commentaries was not even in the document.

The actual document can be found at http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070629_responsa-quaestiones_en.html

Answer 7

No. That's why I only posted the headline and asked for comments! ;-)

But in all fairness, the Pope gave his reasons for making the remark:

"These separated churches and communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation," the document read. "In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church."

He is saying that the fragmented churches still provide a way of salvation and has been used by God.

The headlines are generally what is seen first and thus first impressions are born regardless if anyone read the whole thing or not.

I am guilty of this so shame on me!

Answer 8

> Can one be qualified to
> comment on a document
> one has not read?

If not, there are a lot of hypocrites out regarding a whole lot more than that Pope's latest position paper.

I'll start with opinions of the Big Bang.

Answer 9

Primary sources always should be used and quoted in context. A text out of context is a pretext.

Of course,people do the quoting out of context with the Bible all the time and reading into the text things that arenot there(eisogesis).

The full context of the Bible is in Apostolic Tradition and in the Church,since the Catholic Church is the authorized interpreter and definer of Scripture.

Answer 10

Muslims missed the point of the popes former speech in germany about the need for clerics to stop inciting people to violence and be harbingers of peace.however, even jesus was known to rattle a few cages by stating who he was and what he thought of those hypocrites who thought they were holy.

Christians of all flavors need to understand that before the protestant reformation , church's existed through apostolic succession, those who separated themselves from these institutions, also called themselves christians but their churches were not recognized as such by the catholic and orthodox churches. this is common sense, if you are the Church established by christ, no entity can rightfully claim to be a church unless they be descnded from the apostles appointed by christ.

"You are peter and on this rock I will build my church" why mention peter or any of the apostles when talking about establishing the church unless you meant to say that the foundation of the church (the spirit and ground of the truth) is peter and the apostles.

It certainly seems arrogant to proclaim yourself THE only church established by christ, even though history backs this up, and the bible(which was created by this same church)also supports the notion.

Even protestants will proclaim that the church is the contrary, unseen spiritual body of believers, even though the bible refutes this claim, they still make it to the consternation of Catholics and orthodox.

But the pope doesnt dare declare that you are not christians, but only that you are not members of His church. try to understand what that means!