What are we expecting between Baptists and Roman Catholics?

[Reformed]

This board allows non-Baptists to participate in certain forums. I will not question the wisdom of that policy. What I will question is how comfortable Baptists are with Roman Catholic doctrine and practice? For the record, I was raised in a Roman Catholic home. I was baptized in a Roman Catholic church and confirmed at age 13. I did not officially abandon Roman Catholicism until I was in my late teens. That is when I came to faith in Christ. As I have matured in my Christian walk I realized how antithetical biblical Christianity is from Roman Catholicism. As far as this board is concerned, I am not really concerned about what Roman Catholics believe. I was one of them, so I have a pretty good grasp on their beliefs. I am more concerned about Baptists who seem open to different spiritual stimuli apart from the bible. Historically, Baptists have confessed that scripture alone is the sole authority for all matters of faith and practice. It seems, to this Baptist, that confession is becoming just window dressing in many circles. I think one reason for that is many Baptists have no idea what they believe. The may have been raised in the church but have never really wrestled with biblical doctrine. Because they are functionally ignorant of biblical truth, how can they be expected to trust or defend it? If they do understand biblical truth, they will also understand that there is no compatibility between biblical Christianity and Roman Catholicism. This is not a bash on Catholics. By God's grace and mercy, I pray that He marvelously saves them. I am more concerned about my fellow Baptists.

 

[Adonia]

That is when I came to faith in Christ

Are you trying to say that one cannot have faith in Christ and be a Catholic?

As I have matured in my Christian walk I realized how antithetical biblical Christianity is from Roman Catholicism.

Oh really? So you now believe all that one man put forth about the Christian faith (John Smyth), than all those who came before him (Including Martin Luther and some of the other "Reformers")?

Because they are functionally ignorant of biblical truth, how can they be expected to trust or defend it?

Whose truth? There are many out there, people who interpret the Scriptures and claim that they now have the real skinny on the whole thing. In fact they are so sure they run off and start another new Christian sect, adding to the thousands already out there.

If they do understand biblical truth, they will also understand that there is no compatibility between biblical Christianity and Roman Catholicism.

Only in your estimation. To your detriment you seem to ignore all that came before the Baptist sect. All the Catholic theologians, all the Eastern Orthodox theologians, all the other Protestant theologians - every one of them except John Smyth and his eureka moment sometime in the 1600's. What makes him so special and ultimately believable?

 

[Reformed]

Are you trying to say that one cannot have faith in Christ and be a Catholic?

No. I was a Roman Catholic when I came to faith in Christ. Eventually, I had to leave the RC church because I no longer could abide its beliefs.

Oh really? So you now believe all that one man put forth about the Christian faith (John Smyth), than all those who came before him (Including Martin Luther and some of the other "Reformers")?

No. I believe that the truth the Bible contains is not dependent on papal interpretation. It is also not dependent on any one man or group of men.

Whose truth? There are many out there, people who interpret the Scriptures and claim that they now have the real skinny on the whole thing. In fact they are so sure they run off and start another new Christian sect, adding to the thousands already out there.

I am speaking mainly to the other Baptists on this board.

Only in your estimation. To your detriment you seem to ignore all that came before the Baptist sect. All the Catholic theologians, all the Eastern Orthodox theologians, all the other Protestant theologians - every one of them except John Smyth and his eureka moment sometime in the 1600's. What makes him so special and ultimately believable?

Not just my estimation. Roman Catholic doctrine and dogma is diametrically opposed to biblical Christianity. Baptists understand this.

 

[Adonia]

No. I was a Roman Catholic when I came to faith in Christ. Eventually, I had to leave the RC church because I no longer could abide its beliefs.

We are all free to do such things.

No. I believe that the truth the Bible contains is not dependent on papal interpretation. It is also not dependent on any one man or group of men.

It is the whole of the Church that interprets the Scriptures based on centuries of study, not just the Pope.

So then each person is able to interpret it for themselves? Such a thing only brings on error and confusion.

Not just my estimation. Roman Catholic doctrine and dogma is diametrically opposed to biblical Christianity. Baptists understand this.

Yes, this is just your belief, your opinion and we could go on forever debating this. But tell me this one thing, when you have your communion do you do as other Baptists do and use grape juice as one of the elements?

 

[Reformed1689]

Actually I think the OP needs a different outlook on the RWP. He seems to by hyper RWP and misses the point altogether.

The Regulative Principle of Worship by Derek Thomas

 

[Reformed]

It is the whole of the Church that interprets the Scriptures based on centuries of study, not just the Pope.

So then each person is able to interpret it for themselves? Such a thing only brings on error and confusion.

Words mean things. What did I write? I wrote, "It is also not dependent on any one man or group of men." The operative word here is "dependent". Most Baptists believe that scripture interprets scripture and that is the Holy Spirit who reveals the truth of the scripture to men. There is a consistency to biblical truth. It does not change from generation to generation and it is not veiled to those who accept it by faith. In the confession I linked to previously, the framers wrote on something theologians call "the perspicuity of scripture". In simpler terms, the term means the clarity of scripture. Here is what they wrote:

1689 LBC 1.7 All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of ordinary means, may attain to a sufficient understanding of them.

Psalm 19:7 speaks to this. "The law of the LORD is perfect, restoring the soul; The testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple."

In Roman Catholicism, the pope has the final say. Other offices of the RCC may play their role, but at any time the pope can weigh-in ex-cathedra.

So then each person is able to interpret it for themselves? Such a thing only brings on error and confusion.

Dealt with above.

Yes, this is just your belief, your opinion and we could go on forever debating this.

We could. If nothing else I want you to understand that most Baptists will not yield on this opinion. There is a reason why the Protestant Reformation occurred. You are participating on a Baptist board. You do not walk into someone's home and lay down your own set of rules.

But tell me this one thing, when you have your communion do you do as other Baptists do and use grape juice as one of the elements?

I have no idea as to the relevance of this question. Reformed/Particular Baptists are more likely to use wine as they consider it the due administration of the ordinance. Much to my consternation this not an agreed upon thing among most Baptists.

 

[Reformed]

Actually I think the OP needs a different outlook on the RWP. He seems to by hyper RWP and misses the point altogether.

The Regulative Principle of Worship by Derek Thomas

You, sir, are woefully ignorant of Protestant history and the Regulative Principle of Worship. Either scripture commands how we are to worship or it does not. Also, this thread is about more than just worship.

 

[Danthemailman]

Are you trying to say that one cannot have faith in Christ and be a Catholic?

I was raised in the Roman Catholic church and eventually came to faith in Christ IN SPITE of what Roman Catholicism teaches about the plan of salvation and NOT BECAUSE of what they taught. There are plenty of churches (including Roman Catholicism) that teach a false gospel, which will lead all of those to their doom, who strictly follow the teachings of those churches, but those who believe the true gospel and not just whatever their church teaches, are saved regardless of the group with which they are associated. Conversely, one's church may preach the true gospel of Christ. If one truly believes the gospel (Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4), then one has eternal life, but if one does not truly believe the gospel, then one is lost, even though the official teaching of one's church is correct.

 

[Adonia]

I have no idea as to the relevance of this question. Reformed/Particular Baptists are more likely to use wine as they consider it the due administration of the ordinance. Much to my consternation this not an agreed upon thing among most Baptists.

It's relevant because it goes to the heart of whether one follows the Scriptures as written or not as you folks claim to do. If you do not use wine in your communion service (as you danced around with your answer), than you cannot say with a straight face as you did earlier that: "Roman Catholic doctrine and dogma is diametrically opposed to biblical Christianity". We most certainly do follow the Scriptures verbatim in this particular instance and in my opinion in other instances concerning our doctrines as well. Our doctrines and dogmas differ because of different interpretations of the Scriptures and that is the core of the matter between us.

 

[Adonia]

In Roman Catholicism, the pope has the final say. Other offices of the RCC may play their role, but at any time the pope can weigh-in ex-cathedra.

Again, you get it wrong how the Church actually works. The Pope never makes any ex-cathedra proclamations by himself, he consults with the other Bishop's within the church. There are things called "Councils" and "Synods" that happen where these things are discussed and then "signed into law" so to speak by the Pope. He simply does not act unilaterally.

 

[Reformed]

Again, you get it wrong how the Church actually works. The Pope never makes any ex-cathedra proclamations by himself, he consults with the other Bishop's within the church. There are things called "Councils" and "Synods" that happen where these things are discussed and then "signed into law" so to speak by the Pope. He simply does not act unilaterally.

Did you even read what I wrote?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[Adonia]

We could. If nothing else I want you to understand that most Baptists will not yield on this opinion. There is a reason why the Protestant Reformation occurred. You are participating on a Baptist board. You do not walk into someone's home and lay down your own set of rules.

Oh I know Baptists will not yield on this question, we Catholics are the number foe of fundamentalist Christians. But however, I am on the "Other Christian Denomination" section of the Baptist Board and I fail to see where I have endeavored to lay down my own set of rules. I state my opinions within the confines of the rules set by the good folks who run BB, and if I didn't I would have been sent packing long before today.

 

[Adonia]

Did you even read what I wrote?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Yes, but I dispute that. If the Pope came out with a proclamation like women priests tomorrow, he would be shot down by the rest of the Bishop's immediately. There would be a schism within the Church like no other that's for sure.

 

[kyredneck]

If one truly believes the gospel (Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4), then one has eternal life

You understand that the gist of 'believing in vain' concerns the hypothetical "if Christ hath not been raised", right?

1 Now I make known unto you brethren, the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye received, wherein also ye stand,
2 by which also ye are saved, if ye hold fast the word which I preached unto you, except ye believed in vain.
14 and if Christ hath not been raised, then is our preaching vain, your faith also is vain.
17 and if Christ hath not been raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 1 Cor 15

 

[Reformed1689]

You, sir, are woefully ignorant of Protestant history and the Regulative Principle of Worship. Either scripture commands how we are to worship or it does not. Also, this thread is about more than just worship.

Yes, but you also said the practice of Lent doesn't fall under the RWP but according to the LBCF2 it definitely would.

 

[Reformed]

Yes, but you also said the practice of Lent doesn't fall under the RWP but according to the LBCF2 it definitely would.

When you get back to me after you have completed your research based on this post, then we can talk. Until then, please do not parade your ignorance. Try and maintain some level of dignity.

 

[37818]

@Adonia

Thank you for your comments.

The Apostle Paul wrote the Ephesians, as I am sure you would know, "ye are saved." (Ephesians 2:5; Ephesians 2:8)

And is one of the few places this expression is used.

If one dies and ends up in the nether world (Sheol/Hades), one would not be in that case saved.

For me as a Christian the idea of being "saved" and then not being "saved" is a non sequitur.

Now either one now knows God through Christ (John 17:3) and has eternal life and knows it (1 John 5:13) or one does not (2 Corinthians 13:5; 1 John 5:12).

Jesus warnd agains those not being in God's will and so never being saved (Matthew 7:21-23).

 

[Reformed]

The chickens truly are coming home to roost. During Spurgeon's time, the great crisis was the Downgrade Controversy. Nothing has really changed in the past 132 years, at least not among Baptists. There are still those Baptists churches that have substituted Sola Scriptura with therapeutic deism, a moralistic view of Christianity. It is no longer vogue to proclaim "thus sayeth the Lord!". So long as your version of Christianity makes you feel good, that is all that really matters. Teach this tripe long enough and in enough churches and the result will be a systemic departure from biblical truth. There is only one question worth asking and it demands an answer. Is the Bible the sole authority for all matters of faith and practice? If you claim to be a Christian, you must answer that question. You cannot give a non-answer. The answer is yes or no. A non-answer is effectively a "no". A yes answer does not mean Christians will not disagree. I have much in common with my Reformed Presbyterian brethren but we disagree sharply on church polity and baptism. However, we both look to the Bible, and only the Bible, for our answers. We depart from Sola Scriptura to our harm.

 

[Reformed]

Yes, but I dispute that. If the Pope came out with a proclamation like women priests tomorrow, he would be shot down by the rest of the Bishop's immediately. There would be a schism within the Church like no other that's for sure.

And if elephants could fly... You are introducing a condition that is so unlikely to occur so as it make it irrelevant. The current pope is incurring the scorn of conservative Roman Catholics but there is not going to be an open revolt.

 

[Reformed]

I am on the "Other Christian Denomination" section of the Baptist Board

Which is where you should be. Having come out of Roman Catholicism I understand its danger and the works righteousness that enslaves its adherents. My concern is more for my fellow Baptists who have an unnatural attraction to Roman practices. I watched a video recently of a duck swimming close to a large whirlpool that formed as a result of a sinkhole. The duck got closer and closer without sensing the danger. By the time it did it was too late. The whirlpool captured the duck and sucked it in. That is the danger Roman Catholicism presents to those who flirt with its teachings and practices. If nothing else, I am calling attention to that danger.