Denominations

I loathe the doctrines taught by the Catholic church and will gladly attack them (the doctrines), but would refrain from attacking Catholics.

Frankly, I think that's a wrong point of view. In an effort not to start something, I'll make one comment and be done with it. Being a Catholic doesn't mean you're not a Christian—therefore, to "loathe" their doctrine (an unnecessarily strong and harsh word to use on the teachings of Christian brothers in Iesu Crist) is no different than to "loathe" (again, your word) the teachings of the Lutherans, the Methodists, the Baptists, and anyone you disagree with. Utterly false doctrines should be loathed. The faith of Islam should be fought against because everything it teaches is contrary to the truth. However, Catholicism is not—therefore I find it offensive and unChristian-like to do so.

As far as the letter goes, I completely agree. This whole issue of "tolerance" just means that every religion but the Christian faith is a-okay and should be praised, uplifted, etc. The tolerance people and groups "love" everyone but the Christians. I think it's high time we had more people doing this. Frankly, a Buddhist religion would be far better to have in our country—it's teachings are peaceful and promote peaceful attitudes, a good thing to have. Even though it's false, it's easier to deal with as Buddhists don't kill the converts to Christianity. I heard on the news recently of Buddhist priests getting killed somewhere in Asia by Islamic fanatics. They get persecuted nearly as much as the Christians.

Wylff,
You are apparently speaking out of ignorance of Catholic doctrine. I do not think you could be a born again christian if you truly believe everything the Roman Catholic church officially teaches. The only born again Roman Catholics are those who do not hold to all the church doctrine. So although I would not use the word loathe, I disagree with the Roman Catholic church doctrine. I believe it is full of dreadful heresies. (I don't want to get into them all right now) I would however be cordial and loving toward Roman Catholic church members. Although the Roman Catholic doctrine is not totally against the truth (like Islam, etc.) it is full of heresies and we should be aware of that. However if we want to talk about this we further we should start a new thread.

You are apparently speaking out of ignorance of Catholic doctrine. I do not think you could be a born again christian if you truly believe everything the Roman Catholic church officially teaches. The only born again Roman Catholics are those who do not hold to all the church doctrine. So although I would not use the word loathe, I disagree with the Roman Catholic church doctrine.

I am, actually, not speaking out of ignorance at all. The fact is, I find Presbyterians in the US quite arrogant often, and they seem to think that they are right and everyone else, Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, Catholics, etc is wrong. This is an ungodly and unbiblical, besides being uncharitable, way of thinking and I think it is something that needs to be addressed. Just because we disagree doesn't mean that they are the ones who are wrong. They don't just make up views out of thin air—if we both go to the Bible and get different conclusions four things can happen: a is right, b is wrong. B is right, a is wrong. B and a are both wrong. A and b and both right. People need to be more open-minded and not so critical of someone else's view ESPECIALLY if it's not something that is essential to being a regenerate believer in Iesu Crist.

TheWylff wrote:

You are apparently speaking out of ignorance of Catholic doctrine. I do not think you could be a born again christian if you truly believe everything the Roman Catholic church officially teaches. The only born again Roman Catholics are those who do not hold to all the church doctrine. So although I would not use the word loathe, I disagree with the Roman Catholic church doctrine.

I am, actually, not speaking out of ignorance at all. The fact is, I find Presbyterians in the US quite arrogant often, and they seem to think that they are right and everyone else, Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, Catholics, etc is wrong. This is an ungodly and unbiblical, besides being uncharitable, way of thinking and I think it is something that needs to be addressed. Just because we disagree doesn't mean that they are the ones who are wrong. They don't just make up views out of thin air—if we both go to the Bible and get different conclusions four things can happen: a is right, b is wrong. B is right, a is wrong. B and a are both wrong. A and b and both right. People need to be more open-minded and not so critical of someone else's view ESPECIALLY if it's not something that is essential to being a regenerate believer in Iesu Crist.

Wylff, I am really astonished by this post. It is impossible for two contradictory views to be correct. The Catholic church beliefs are nothing short of heresy and those who fully subscribe to those heretical beliefs cannot be considered our brothers and sisters in Christ.

I completely understand what you are saying about the dangerous and sad tendency that Presbyterians have towards arrogancy in their interactions with those of other denominations, and I consider that a great shame which should be remedied - arrogance has no place in a Christian life. However, there is a difference between 1) being willing to be a friend with someone from another religion or denomination or set of beliefs (this option of friendship being godly, Biblical, and charitable) and 2) throwing our hands up and saying that we can all hold our different beliefs without a recognition of what the Bible teaches without a proper Scriptural view of what is truth and what is error. We MUST be discerning.

I agree with you that we should not be OVERLY critical when it comes to issues that are not essential to salvation... that is absolutely true as it applies to our relationships with others and making sure that we are treating issues with grace and love, but we each have responsibility before God to live according to His Word and thus we should not compromise our Scriptural beliefs or our consciences. I don't think God is very open-minded. Do you?

Let me put it this way. It is possible that two contradictory views can be right. Let's say someone thinks it's right to have the pulpit in the centre of the "stage" and anything else is wrong. Another church says, no, the table of sacrament should be in the centre, the pulpit should be to another side. Obviously, it doesn't matter how you do it. Either way is right and perfectly acceptable. It is not impossible for two contradictory views to be correct. There are other things like that as well—choices have to be made about worship, and either way you do them can be perfectly acceptable. No, God is not necessarily open-minded, but that's because He KNOWS the truth—we, on the other hand, don't know everything and don't know for a certainty that we are right and others are wrong. If we knew everything without a doubt, then we could be judgmental. Something, of course, are more obvious than others. I'll just put it this way: I have a good number of Catholic friends—all of whom are just as saved as I am. Even before I knew they were Catholic, things they wrote, said, the way they acted fully portrayed the working of Iesu Crist in their hearts. Learning they were Catholic didn't make me think: "Oh, because they go to a Catholic church, they must not be Christians!!" Of course not. As Christians we need to be more open-minded than we are, mainly because there has been so many times when Christians disagree, they are completely focused on one thing, and the church or denomination splits. We need to be willing to compromise. If it's not a vital piece of doctrine, for the sake of unity in the church and among the brethren, COMPROMISE! It's completely Biblical.

I do not, and will not, believe that the Catholic Church is no longer a Christian Church. The simple fact is, 90% of Presbyterians in America are not born again. The largest Presbyterian denomination teaches many heretical things—despite the fact that they "hold" to the Westminster Standards. I just get extremely irritated at the strong bias against Catholics and the assumption that if they are Catholic, they are probably not Christians. The fact is, most people who attend Church in America, aren't either. Are we going to do the same with Presbies? Baptists? The "Bible Belt" in the South, as it's called, most people go to church. Most of them aren't Christians, despite what they say.

Well, it looks like we got into it anyways.

If I heard someone went to a Presbyterian Church in the USA (PCUSA) I would doubt their salvation just as much as if I heard they were Catholic so its not just a bias against Catholics...

Wow! I never thought one passing comment would start such an interesting debate. I think perhaps Wylff misunderstood what I was saying. I was by no means condemning everyone in the Catholic Church. I do believe that there are Christians in the Catholic Church. Therefore I do not see you as attacking the position I was putting forth but a misrepresentation of my position.

The point I was trying to make is that I think a distinction can be (and needs to be) made between what the official doctrine of an organization, and what some within it may believe. In that line I would not automatically doubt the salvation of a member of the PCUSA or any other denomination for that matter. I am not talking about individuals within an organization in my condemnation but organizations and their stated doctrines. There are members in those churches that do not know what the official doctrines of the denomination are, or do not personally hold to those doctrines, but do in fact hold to the correct position.

The fact remains though that you can not call the Catholic Church a "denomination" or a different brand of Christianity because of their official doctrine of justification. Their position was clearly laid out in the Council of Trent and was NEVER repudiated. Hence they still hold to a justification by works . . . a position clearly condemned in Scripture not only in Jesus' refutation of the Pharisees teaching (see the parable of the Pharisee and Publican in Luke 18 ), but also in the book of Galatians. In Galatians you can clearly see Paul calling "anathema" (condemned to hell) anyone who teaches a gospel contrary to the one that the Word of God teaches. Not only that but he opposed personally someone who had perverted the Gospel, the apostle Peter. Was that harsh, "arrogant" and judgmental? The Gospel must be defended.

That being said, I think your point is well taken. We as Christians (not necessarily just Presbyterians) need to be open to being corrected and not create a standard that God Himself has not instituted. Else we would be just as the Pharisees who thought to be more righteous than God Himself. We all would be wise to heed your caution.

I apologize for misunderstanding. I spoke hastily—but in some ways more against the whole idea, not necessarily against you. I meant only to state what I find to be a problem among many people I meet and speak with.