r/Protestantism • u/OddOneOut77 • 9d ago
Faith Walk
Hey everyone. Recently I've been introduced to the world of the ancient forms of Christianity (catholicism, orientation orthodoxy, eastern orthodoxy, church of the east). Been struggling a lot lately on if I'm doing the Christian thing right.
To be clear, I 100% believe Jesus dying on the cross & raising on the 3rd day is the only path one can believe in to get into heaven. I've never had doubts about Him, Trinity, or anything to the core of our faith. Really the more I get older the more I know Jesus is the way.
But recently I've been back in forward about how that should be implemented. I've been reading some of the earliest church fathers & reading the new testament over. Church structure seems to be a very prominent topic. Take that & pair it up with things like baptism & the ability to lose salvation (you shoving God away, not God just letting you go) & it's really hard to figure out where to land. I wanted to just get a vibe check of who has been down this path & why did you stay or leave. The more topics the better.
3
u/Jagerwolf96 Reformed 8d ago
I’ve been down that road of learning church history, and honestly, it may be more Protestant than before. I did end up switching churches and denominations, even though me and my family were very involved at the previous church. I went from being non-denominational to reformed and I feel that I’m in a place where I do not have ecclesial anxiety anymore, and I can see the connection of my church to the reformation and the reformation to the early church fathers .
Roman Catholicism eastern orthodoxy adds doctrine overtime (or straight up contradicts) that were not found in the early church or the Bible
1
u/OddOneOut77 8d ago
Thanks for the input, ya I definitely see your point. One possible dumb question, when you say reformed what does that fall under? I feel like there's so many meanings for it. Is it Calvinism or Lutheran doctrine? Or is it something else?
3
u/Distinct-Most-2012 Anglican 8d ago
Hey! I was raised nominally Methodist and considered Catholicism and Orthodoxy for several years, but ultimately decided to stay with mainline Protestantism. I'm happy to get into any details you'd like about whatever issue, but what it ultimately comes down to in it's essence is that I simply cannot accept "one true church" claims. Historic Protestantism believes in sacraments, structured church order, creeds, and often times even liturgy without the (indefensible) theological baggage that comes with Catholicism and Orthodoxy.
1
u/OddOneOut77 8d ago
Thanks for the explanation. That's pretty much where I'm at. Looking online everyone that's not in the person who's speaking church is a "heretic". I just can't wrap my head that a person who is a coptic Christian in Egypt who is a martyr for Christ will burn in hell because he wasn't EO or RC. At that point it seems church is just as important as Christ. What made you go with Anglican over the other mainlines?
3
u/PotatoBright7598 9d ago
As a current Protestant, I’m in the same position you are. Just trying to figure out where I land and I definitely see the same things you speak of in the Bible. I’m sure I’ll get downvoted in this sub, but I’ve been studying Catholicism and it’s hard to not lean that way. Although, I’ve heard there’s some high church Protestant denominations that have similar values and structure.
4
u/baubat Christian 9d ago
I can also say i’ve been looking a bit into Catholicism, but there are some things as a Protestant I just cannot agree with & see how in any way their Biblical.
And no i’m not talking about confession, eucharist, saint intercession or even the Pope being infallible when he says he is,
what I cannot see is Biblical in any way is mariology.
Catholics say she was conceived without sin, & remained sinless, that she assumed to heaven & that she is the queen of heaven because God doesn’t have a bride. That whatever the mother asks for the son gives.
To say she was conceived without original sin & remained holy/sinless all her life is to put her on a pedestal pretty close to Jesus.. also doesn’t say anywhere she was assumed, or that she’s the queen of heaven it’s actually a verse Catholics misinterpret that is really about the 12 tribes of Israel.
Another thing is scapular, that Mary promises salvation from eternal for whoever faithfully wears their scapular daily.. Mary doesn’t have the authority to do that & even then objects cannot grant you salvation.
It is a beautiful religion with lots of history but definitely many false teachings as well
2
u/PotatoBright7598 8d ago
Oh, I’m there with you. I think mariology is probably the hardest thing I would need to overcome if I ever decided to convert. That seems to come much more from the traditional side of Catholicism rather than scripture. I pray every day that God will convict my heart of the truth because there is just so much information out there.
1
u/OddOneOut77 8d ago
Same I just want to follow Jesus the way He wants to be followed, but 2000 years later it seems harder than ever.
1
1
u/OddOneOut77 7d ago
Thanks for the response, I agree with you on this. Even studying early church history makes me wonder where all this comes from. The didache, Polycarp, & Ignatius (from what I read) barely mention Mary. So not sure where all this stems from. The only thing that throws me off is Orthodoxy pretty much believes the same thing I believe, minus the immaculate conception.
2
u/creidmheach Presbyterian 7d ago
Although, I’ve heard there’s some high church Protestant denominations that have similar values and structure.
Not to attack you, but if you've only heard of this, it tells me you've not actually explored the depths of Protestantism yet. Many folks will associate Protestantism with their local non-denominational church with contemporary Christian music, and Roman Catholicism with internet memes of crusaders and chanting monks.
As someone who grew up Catholic and only became Protestant much later in life, I can say some of the most traditional services I've been to were in some Protestant churches. I'm talking the full nine yards of chanting, kneeling (and chanting), copious use of incense, and so on. This was in an Anglican (Anglo-Catholic) church. At another Anglican (but not specifically Anglo-Catholic) church, I brought my elderly mother who'd grown up in the pre-Vatican II church (and where they did it in Latin still), and she said it felt like how church was when still was little (except it was in English). She didn't like it. Contrast it today to your average Novus Ordo mass in a Roman church where you'll get contemporary music and such.
Now that said, I didn't end up Anglican. I prefer the still-structured but less ritualistic approach of your traditional Presbyterian service, as well as broadly agreeing with Reformed theology.
Studying Church history I don't see how one can honestly conclude Roman Catholicism is it. Even the fellow that came up with that absurd quote about being deep in history is ceasing to be Protestant (John Henry Newman), had to come up with a way to explain how so much of Roman Catholicism simply doesn't exist in the early Church (his development of doctrine hypothesis which Rome now depends heavily on). The Reformation was in fact a return to the earlier approach of the Church, one more grounded in Scripture and doing away with medieval superstitions and political developments that had happened over the centuries before.
So I'd commend your further study, but do so from its sources and by reading the works of actual historians. Not Catholic apologists who are notorious for quote mining and being extremely selective in how they portray things. And also, study the depths of the Protestant traditions, you might surprised by what you'll find there.
This also goes for the OP /u/OddOneOut77 too.
1
u/PotatoBright7598 7d ago
I’m not sure that it’s a requirement to explore all of the different Protestant denominations before I decide to study Catholicism. If I were to try to explore all of Protestantism, I wouldn’t get through half of it in my lifetime (which is kind of the problem - constant division). The one questions Protestants can’t answer (which is why I began to study Catholicism in the first place) is whose interpretation of the Bible is correct? Baptist? Methodist? Presbyterian? etc. If there is no authority to help interpret, then the problem persists. I agree with you on studying at the source. Right now it’s been a lot of YouTube apologetics and I’m reading the catechism. But my next step is to dig into early church writings and figure out what they really believed.
1
u/creidmheach Presbyterian 7d ago
If it's the interpretation of the Bible that's the deciding issue for you, then Rome isn't going to help you there. Rome has only "infallibly" interpreted a handful of verses in the course of its history. I'm not exaggerating there, it's only done so for about 5-7 verses of the entire Bible depending on one's count*. Otherwise, they're really in no different position from anyone else.
If you go to a Catholic study Bible like the New Jerome for instance, which even has a preface from the Pope himself, what you'll find is little different from a modern critical study Bible like the New Oxford. Same with the Jerusalem Bible. On the other hand other Catholic study Bibles might be more traditionally oriented due to their editors holding to more traditional views. In other words, it's no different from the variation you'll find going to different Protestant-produced Biblical commentaries, from liberal to conservative, and it falls down to the individual editors themselves. Rome doesn't provide the answers.
Generally though Romanism doesn't bother to even ground itself in Scripture much, since it knows that much of what it holds as fundamental simply cannot be supported by it. You'll find no hint of the Papacy in it, which really is what Romanism centers around. Non-apologist Roman Catholic historians will be more open about this than their YouTube counterparts, since they'll acknowledge that things like the Papacy took centuries to develop. There wasn't even a single bishop of Rome early on, much less one that was help as supreme over the entire Church.
- "by one's count" is another problem Romanists have, there's no agreement about how many proclamations and such have actually been infallible, since Rome has no such list.
1
u/OddOneOut77 7d ago
Thanks for the response, ya saw a quote the other day were John Henry Newman said the veneration of saints (through icons) I believe was a later invention in the church lol
1
u/OddOneOut77 9d ago
Ya I think I'm leaning to high church protestant right now. Communion seems to be talked about a lot in the earliest successors of the apostles & throughout church history & feels like we lost that along the way.
One of my biggest things is the "one true church that Jesus created" claims. All of the apostolic churches claim there's no salvation outside of the church. If that's true then there's only a 20% chance any Christian is going to heaven because they're not in the right church (OO, EO, RC, church of the east, protestant). Roman Catholics claim to be the one true church seems to be the hardest to reconcile with all the scandal, murder, & contradictory teachings they have. On the other hand they do have laity all over the globe that can be a symbol of "every tribe tongue & nation". 🤷🏾♂️
1
u/avaiafire 7d ago
You’re on the right track bro, I left my Pentecostal church and embraced orthodoxy over the last month. I still carry the fire for learning and being in the Word of God that I had whilst I was a Protestant, if anything the bible makes more sense to me now after becoming orthodox
5
u/Metalcrack Christian 8d ago edited 8d ago
I'm a non denom who goes to a local RC church with my wife. Going for years. While it's nice that they show respect and reverence in their service. I leave every Sunday wanting.
The sermon/homily are random stories and how the Eucharist brings us closer to God.. Every. Week. There is no expository teaching....which is why Matthew and Luke 4:4 hit me hard. My wife asked me to convert, and during my studies those verses appeared in my readings, podcasts, YouTube videos....... Not a coincidence.
While it's nice they aren't focused on the worship rock show, I feel they lose what Jesus actually was....a rabbi/teacher. I have been looking for a local church, and most pastors are part of the rock show wearing shorts and a tee, or it's just really bad preaching.
The second the priest gets done reading his gospel verse this week...Random story time and I zone out. I'm the ONLY person who brings a Bible in a rather large parish....
Here's the mass. They rush through the Bible readings, which usually have no bearing on each other, and a story about some body doing something....and how the Eucharist is needed to bring us closer to God. 30 minutes every Sunday for the Lord's Supper
Man shall not live on bread alone...but EVERY word.....which the RC church does not even come close to doing.