I used to be an orthodox Protestant and converted to Roman Catholicism a while ago. I recognize what the writer says: Protestants love Jesus, the Bible and love to share the Gospel. However, as a former Protestant I have to make some remarks about my experiences.

1. Protestants love Jesus, or: Protestants love Jesus as the victorious Saviour.
When talking about Christ, a lot of Protestants stress only one side of Jesus: He is the one who was victorious over death and we share in this victory. The other side is hardly talked about: Christ as the suffering servant. Christ suffered a lot during His life on earth, his Passion was the crown on His work her on earth. There’s hardly any interest in Protestant theology for this side. The fact that they only show a cross without corpus is very telling in this respect. The focus on the suffering Saviour is very Catholic.

2. Protestants love the Bible; or the parts of Scripture they like.
Protestants are proud of their Sola Scriptura and they are very eager to show how they can quote the Bible verbatum. However, close inspection reveals that this is only true for parts of Scripture: most the New Testament and portions of St. Paul’s letters.
They try to prove their points quoting Scripture, but since the Sola Scriptura doesn’t allow Tradition to explain Scripture, quotes are ripped out of their context quite often. It’s like having a great tool, without having a manual. You can use its basic features, but with a manual you can use all its possibilities. It’s no use loving Scripture if it’s not embedded in Tradition and 2000 years worth of wisdom.

3. Protestants love to share the Gospel; or what they perceive to be the Gospel.
This refers back to the criticism I pointed to in point 1. Only the nice stuff is highlighted: we share in Christ’s victory. The suffering that preceded this victory and the identification with Christ as the suffering servant is almost absent when you hear Protestants/Evangelicals talk about the Gospel.

We can learn from Protestantism by offering Catholics decent Bible Study Guides so they can learn to appreciate God’s Word more, but I would focus on BOTH aspects instead of the one-sidedness that sadly is widespread among Evangelicals these days. Catholic Tradition enables us to go more in-dept and it avoids the superficial nature of most popular Evangelical writings which are widely available in our days.

I am the daughter of a Catholic convert (and a cradle-Catholic, my father was baptized the same day I was) and am married to a man who was raised Protestant. One thing I see equally in their experiences that Catholics are starting to do a better job on but need a lot of work with is evangelization and more specifically being more welcoming. My father describes growing up bouncing from mainly Methodist and Baptist churces with a few stops in Presbyterian churches and Assemblies of God because Catholics were, in their behavior toward him, apart from him. No one of his friends ever invited him to mass as did many of his Protestant friends. The local parish didn’t open their Pancake Suppers, Fish Frys or Pot Lucks to the community the way the Protestant churches did. Similarly, my husband was very put off by one church we went to where people were downright cold to him as “an outsider” and gave him strange looks for not receiving communion. No one ever spoke to him to ask him his story.

Don’t get me wrong, Catholics have come a long way, but I’ve seen many discussions on this site about allowing a child to go to a Protestant Bible Study or FCA weekend or Young Life but very few people describing what similar programs their parish or local Catholic community offers to young people other than its own members. People are often times drawn in by the friendliness, the kindness, the generosity toward strangers and can then more clearly see the Truth of the Church. Remember the words of St Francis of Assisi, “Preach the Gospel at all times, when necessary, use words.”

Sheila,
I don’t recognize your experience with Catholics not being welcoming. I experienced it the other way around: over here, Catholics are more welcoming than Protestants are. Protestants always gave me the feeling I wasn’t welcome unless I made sure I was thinking along the same ways they did. If one was different, he or she was excluded from the group.

Catholics over here accept you no matter how you are. They are fine with people being a little different. Which was a huge relief to me when I finally made the leap into Catholicism.

Inge,
I’m so glad your experience has been so different from mine.  Fortunately, my faith was strong well before I decided to convert, and my conversion was based on belief that it was what God would have me do.  Had it been based on any person, it would never have happened.  We have moved several times, and I have experienced this in several parishes.  While I’m certainly not and have never been the ‘popular kid’, I do make tend to make friends most everywhere (from the checker at Wal-Mart to the moms of my kids’ friends to my gym buddies), so I don’t think I’m that difficult to befriend.  Kristen posted while I did, and she may have described what I miss better than I did.  I miss having pot-lucks with my church friends.  It concerns me that my kids don’t have opportunities to invite their friends to either fun church activities or even just to Bible class, because they are open only to church members or those enrolled in religious education.  The parish that we are at now does far, far more for the kids than any parish we’ve ever been to.  We actually were even able to invite a friend for Christmas caroling with us!  But that’s the first time ever!  Don’t get me wrong - it isn’t supposed to be all fun.  But especially when you are kids, the fun things help you develop a relationship and fellowship with others.  To me, this is so critical in developing and keeping relationships that will help your faith.  Yes, faith is between God and you, but the encouragement of a Godly friend can do so much. 

But truly, I’m so glad your experience is different than mine.  I hope that is true for many, and that my experience isn’t.  In talking to former Catholics, I know that I’m not alone, but hope that it’s at least the exception rather than the norm.

I converted from Protestantism to Catholicism in 1998.  Before that my family church hopped.  We went to Nazarene, Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, Episcopalian, Community, and many many others.  We were hopping so much because whatever church we were attending would inevitable charge off on a course we didn’t believe in.  They had no central authority so it was hard to know what to believe in.  And every Protestant church would interpret passages differently and often to contradiction from their fellow Protestants. 

The Catholic church was a blessing and I found truths there that I hadn’t even considered before.  But I miss the positiveness and enthusiasm.  I miss the passion for faith.  Catholics can be very quiet in their passion.  Often suffering silently in the love of their faith.  It falls more under the “do not let your right hand know what your left is doing” passage of scripture.  And that your suffering has a meaning other than that you sinned is beautiful. 

But the author is right.  Protestants have a lot to give us.  They show us a path we little follow.  It might be that we are afraid to go in some of those directions.  Breaking from the norm is hard.  Exposing ourselves is hard.  We are liable to be ridiculed, pointed out, made fun of, doors slammed in our faces, sworn at, and even injured.  We live in a comfortable society where people don’t like to step on others toes or contradict someone’s belief.  We have fallen victim to “live and let live” or “tolerance”.  We should be passionate about our faith.  Excited about it.  Wanting to share with others the good news of the gospels.  We have the whole truth in the Catholic faith.  Why not set out to correct those errors so many of us teach because we haven’t read our Catechism in a while? 

I say, keep the Catholic faith in front.  Know your Catechism (if you’re not sure, look it up).  Explore what the Protestants are doing to evangelize and apply their 80% accuracy to our faith.  They have 80%.  That is a lot.  We’ve got 100% but we’ve gotten rusty in some spots.  Let us use the tools we can find (remembering church teaching) to help us spread our faith and love for God.

I LOVE this topic! My & my husband entered the Church 3 years ago. I MISS going to church & have people to hug after church, to share coffee with, having the kids run around with their Sunday school friends….We go to mass & we don’t even get smiles many times & I wonder…will my kids want to come here when they’re older/teenagers? I probably wouldn’t have wanted to. I grew up in a vibrant baptist church with a LARGE teen support, many who went to high school w/ me… sigh…We converted because we believe the Catholic church was founded by Christ, we believe (and have experienced) the richness & fullness of the Faith. Given that, you would think Catholics would have more of a fire for Christ. When protestants try to give me tracks or try to lead me to “salvation” I take it as a compliment, because I know they genuinely care. They truly have a heart for winning others to Christ & see themselves as ambassadors, not that Catholics don’t, but many Catholics I know would never be able to defend their faith or even make a case for Christ to others… WE should have a fire & zeal to win lost souls to Christ & love others, not just rush out to our cars after Sunday mass…
I do want to say I have met some incredible prayer warriors since converting that have challenged me to have a deeper prayer life and their lives of humility and service have inspired me…

In my large parish we have coffee, tea and drinks for the kids after every Mass. Mass is being visited by people aging 0-99. After Mass a lot of people stay to chat and to socialize.
This hasn’t always been the case. Ten years ago, Mass attendance was low, mostly by elderly people and there was no social life.

This all changed when some people decided to change: they set up a kitchen crew to make coffee and tea and serve it after Mass. Slowly but surely people stayed after Mass. This spawned a host of volunteers doing all kinds of stuff.

Instead of feeling sad about the fact a situation isn’t like you want it to be, you always can try find people with the same ideals and start turning the situation around. When you parish is not like you want it to be, leaving and complaining about it won’t change anything. The pope recently said interesting things that also may apply to this:

http://zenit.org/article-26023?l=english

We changed parishes several times because we moved (as in from one city or state to another), not because we were unhappy with something and left, nor do I go around complaining about this.  It is a concern on my heart, and I thought this was an appropriate time and place to mention it.

But the Protest movement sprang out of good intentions. This doesn’t make the movement right, or the Catholic church any less valid, but the point is that none of us can truthfully say that the Catholic church has not through its history, made errors in practice. I believe the Protestant Reformation sought to remedy some of these mistakes, both perceived, and real, for Christians.

Now, while I believe the Catholic Church is the church established by Christ, and later the apostles, and the best way to God, I think there are many misconceptions Catholics have about Protestants, as well as so many misconceptions they have about us.

I was surprised, upon joining the Church with my husband when we were newlyweds, how similar the beliefs are among the Catholic church and most Protestant denominations. It’s so important to remember our similarities, and our shared focus on Christ, and not to focus and harp on our differences.

My wife and I converted to Catholicism a little less than 2 years ago. I was a Church history major in my Protestant undergrad, so I was destined to convert.

Really, there are many good things about our Protestant brothers and sisters. I think some important distinctions have been made and should be made:

1. What’s good with Protestantism is its people. This has always been true of many schismatic groups. As Catholics, or even simply as humans, we can identify truth and beauty wherever it may be found.

2. However, Protestantism as a theology, and more importantly as a philosophy of theology is dangerous. I believe it was LuBac who said that Protestant principles were destined to destroy their beliefs, and for these reasons he lamented the fact that a reuniting with Rome in a visible way was impossible (unlike say the Greek Orthodox). Self-referential truth, theology (or at the least scriptural interpretation) grounded in one’s psychology is very dangerous. We should not be confused; life as a protestant is very distressing and taxing theologically. You are the arbiter of truth. Your entire theology rests upon your cognitive powers. As a Catholic, I take great joy in the easy yoke of our Lord and can truly understand “you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

3. True ecumenism only flows one way. As Catholics, WE must reach out to our separated brothers and sisters. They cannot invite us into their fold, because there is no “body” proper into which to be invited. We aren’t looking for a club (this notion I think addresses everyone’s social lamenting). While ecumenical attitudes can be possessed on both sides, the act of reaching across the table must be an act by Catholics.

4. Therefore, we must see what is good and beautiful in them. We cannot lead them home or just share in good works if we do not appreciate their human longing for God. Behind every Protestant prayer meeting, goofy fog machine, or rock concert is a longing for the Eucharist: God’s presence given as gift. We have what every human heart craves. Let’s tell the world with humility and sacred awe!

St. Francis De Sales pray for us!

Thank you! I also appreciate the article. Too many times we are focused on what is wrong or what is different rather than what is right, shared and good. The first decade we homeschooled I was very involved with the protestant/inclusive support group and they were kind, welcoming and respectful of the Catholics that came. Their group focused on parent support nights, big events like science fair, field trip organization. Our small RC group focused on First Friday’s, Catholic friendships, a catholic moms Bible study etc.
Within their larger group were smaller groups that were likeminded and weall appreciated having more than one place to support us. Unfortunately as their pastors became very supportive of homeschooling their larger group did less so I see them less.
Its sad—the growing unity was a real vision of the possible future.

(Sorry, my post went in as a response unintentionally!:o0)

H Devin, It’s been a while…

One good thing about Protestantism is its practice of sola scriptura (when done properly). This practice ensures that we always drink from the pure streams of God’s Word. Since there is so much misinformation about sola scriptura, particularly on CtC’s thread (from which I am again blocked), I hope posting here will be helpful.

Sola scriptura is simply the assertion: 1) that Scripture teaches everything that is necessary for salvation either explicitly or in such a way that it can be “deduced by ordinary means,” and 2) that anything not taught in Scripture should not be required. Further, sola scriptura must be understood in its historical context: the Reformers believed that 1) the Apostles taught everything necessary for our faith; and 2) the Apostles’ teaching on those things was sufficiently and authentically preserved in the Scriptures. Therefore, to require adherence to things not taught in Scripture is to deny one or both of these assumptions. Hence, Scripture alone is able to sufficiently teach what is necessary for faith; and because all Scripture is God-breathed,” it is to be trusted over all other sources which conflict with its teaching.

On the subject of what is necessary for salvation, i.e., the fundamentals of the faith, the Reformers agreed with the Church in their day – that the ancient creeds, e.g., the Apostles’ Creed and the “symbol of Nicea” written in 325 AD summarize the essentials (see CCC 188-193). Hence, the Reformers insisted (as do all who practice sola scriptura) that all interpretations of Scripture must be consistent with these creeds, insofaras they are consistent with Scripture. This alone constitutes a principled difference vs. solo scriptura. That Scripture interprets Scripture is plain from any reading of the gospels wherein Jesus and the NT writers explicitly interpret the OT passages about Christ that are necessary for salvation. To alternatively suggest that God could not and did not preserve clearly what was necessary for our salvation in the Scriptures does not make sense.

The negative aspect of sola scriptura is based on the practice of the bishops at Nicea in 325 AD, who refuted the Arian heresy thus: “And since no passage of the inspired Scripture uses the terms ‘out of the non-existent,’ or that ‘there was a time when He was not,’ nor indeed any of the other phrases of the same class, it did not appear reasonable to assert or to teach such things.” (Theodoret, Ecclesiastical History, 1.11). Following the example of the bishops at Nicea, the Reformers rejected Boniface’s bull Unam sanctam: ”it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” There is no statement or implication of such an “absolutely necessary” condition of salvation anywhere in ~ 400 uses of “save” and “salvation” in Scripture. Moreover, there was no recognized precident for Boniface’s irrevocable proclamation in the church fathers for 1300 years. Rather, Boniface and other popes who followed his dictum stand in opposition to the prophets and apostles who proclaimed publicly: “Whoever calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved” (Joel 2:32; Peter, in Acts 2:21; and Paul, in Rom. 10:13). Therefore, Boniface’s declaration does not represent the gospel taught by the founders of the Church, and it should be renounced.

Moreover, sola scriptura does not conflict with the interpretive authority of church leaders, nor does it prescribe a particular method of interpretation, nor address interpretation of passages of Scripture on things that are not necessary for salvation. Indeed, sola scriptura allows differences of interpretation of Scripture re: matters that are not necessary for salvation, such as forms of liturgy, church government, etc. Yet, as Turretin-fan has well said at CtC: “Thus, while man may judge for himself what the Scriptures mean, he’s not free to do so however he pleases.” All interpretation must be consistent with the source – God’s Word - and in concert with the community of faith, as indeed, the core statements of the ancient creeds have demonstrated for almost two millennia.

That there are many different interpretations of Scripture should not be an issue: the Roman Catholic Magisterium itself has not authoritatively interpreted vast portions of Scripture, and therefore both acknowledges and accepts differences of interpretation. That there are many “branches” – all connected to the True Vine - and many different expressions of the One True Faith should not be an issue either.

Blessings,
Lojahw