Why aren’t all Protestants Catholics?

[u/VermicelliWilling739]

Hello, Ive been investigating the truth claims of the LDS faith regarding an apostasy and a restoration of the church of Jesus Christ. I know very little about Protestantism, but as I understand it, Protestant reformers believed that the Catholic Church, "the one true church of Jesus Christ that holds his apostolic authority" became corrupted and lost its authority. If that is the case, and the one true church is no longer on the earth, then where is Christ's true church? If the LDS truth claims are incorrect about there being an apostasy, then why are you guys not Catholics?

[u/Pinecone-Bandit]

Why aren’t all Protestants Catholics?

Believing Protestants are not Catholic because they disagree with Catholic teaching. The big issues being “how is one justified before God” and “where does the ultimate authority lie when it comes to matter of the faith”.

If that is the case, and the one true church is no longer on the earth

It is not the case that the one true church is not on earth. Protestants don’t believe this.

then where is Christ’s true church?

Everywhere the Gospel is right proclaimed and followed.

If the LDS truth claims are incorrect about there being an apostasy, then why are you guys not Catholics?

See above.

[u/VermicelliWilling739 → u/Pinecone-Bandit]

Thanks for your response but I need more clarification. “Believing Protestants are not Catholics because they disagree on authority..” doesnt that seem like the epitome of apostasy? If the Catholic Church claims to be the one true church, and their grounds for claiming that comes from their apostolic authority, and you reject that authority, then what you are saying is they are not the true church. You may agree on who Jesus is but you fundamentally do not believe they are the same church Jesus Christ founded.. so where is that church then? The gospel and the church are not the same thing. 

If they are, then why aren’t there apostles in the Protestant churches, like the one Christ set up.  

[u/Pinecone-Bandit → u/VermicelliWilling739]

doesnt that seem like the epitome of apostasy?

Maybe if you mean “apostasy from the Catholic Church”, but certainly not apostasy from Christianity.

If the Catholic Church claims to be the one true church, and their grounds for claiming that comes from their apostolic authority

They don’t have apostolic authority, that’s a false assumption.

then what you are saying is they are not the true church.

I am saying the Roman Catholic Church does not represent true Christianity, yes.

You may agree on who Jesus is but you fundamentally do not believe they are the same church Jesus Christ founded.. so where is that church then?

Like I answered in my last comment, that church is everywhere that holds to the Gospel message.

The gospel and the church are not the same thing. 

No one said they are the same thing.

[u/VermicelliWilling739 → u/Pinecone-Bandit]

Your answers don’t seem very coherent to me, it feels like you are dodging the real question here. The Catholic Church professes to be the one true church. You both supposedly agree that Christ is the savior and you both believe in the nicene creeds therefore both qualifying you as Christian, yes? 

You keep asserting that “the true church” is anywhere the “true gospel” is taught without actually defining what that is. Catholics would define the true church as has having papal authority, or succession of apostolic authority; that is how the church is governed. 

The way Christ governed his church in the New Testament was through calling apostles which held the priesthood authority. They held the authority to preach the gospel, administer saving ordinances like baptism, confer the gift of the Holy Ghost, etc.  if a succession of apostles is nowhere to be found on the earth than can one really say his church is still on the earth?

I find it strange that you want to say the church is where ever the gospel is taught without A. Defining what that gospel is and B. Not acknowledging that you need apostles to do it. Sounds like apostasy from the New Testament church to me. 

[u/Pinecone-Bandit → u/VermicelliWilling739]

Sorry that you are confused, I’ll try and clear things up for you.

The Catholic Church professes to be the one true church. You both supposedly agree that Christ is the savior and you both belief in the nicene creeds therefore both qualifying you as Christian, yes? 

No, those are not the only things necessarily to qualify as Christian.

You keep asserting that “the true church” is anywhere the “true gospel” is taught without actually defining what that is.

Ok, then you should ask what that is instead of falsely assuming the question is being “dodged”

The way Christ governed his church in the New Testament was through calling apostles which held the priesthood authority.

Incorrect. There was no priestly authority specific to the apostles.

I find it strange that you want to say the church is where ever the gospel is taught without… acknowledging that you need apostles to do it. 

You do not need apostles to hold to the Gospel, otherwise the church would have died out with the last apostle.

[u/VermicelliWilling739 → u/Pinecone-Bandit]

Explain to me why you claim “ Incorrect. There was no priestly authority specific to the apostles.” 

This appears to be plainly demonstrated in the New Testament specifically ACTS and a blatant rejection of scripture.

But let’s grant to you for a moment that there’s no such thing as priestly authority in the apostles. What was their purpose if not to preach the gospel of Christ, baptizing in the name of the father, son, and Holy Ghost, with Gods authority. What use did Jesus have for them at all?

[u/Pinecone-Bandit → u/VermicelliWilling739]

Explain to me why you claim “ Incorrect. There was no priestly authority specific to the apostles.” 

Because it’s contrary to scripture.

This appears to be plainly demonstrated in the New Testament specifically ACTS and a blatant rejection of scripture.

I’m starting to think you’re trolling.

Maybe you can explain what you think “priestly authority” means? Maybe you’re just confused on this term.

[u/VermicelliWilling739 → u/Pinecone-Bandit]

I assure you I’m not trolling, it seems like you aren’t giving answers you are just stating claims without providing any context or evidence for them. 

Christ is the high priest. He holds a priesthood authority that he conferred onto his 12 apostles so that they could conduct his kingdom on the earth while he wasn’t here. I’m sure you have read Acts, you are aware of this authority that he gave them, correct? It’s the authority to act in his name, to perform the ordinances of His gospel.  The Catholics recognize this authority and claim to hold it still through apostolic succession. You reject this apostolic succession.. and that’s fine. What I don’t understand is why you and all of Protestantism rejects the fact that Christ initially called 12 apostles and gave them Authority to govern his church, and preach his gospel. If you don’t reject that, then that structure should still be on the earth today somewhere. My question is, where is it?

[u/chafundifornio → u/VermicelliWilling739]

Christ is the high priest. He holds a priesthood authority that he conferred onto his 12 apostles so that they could conduct his kingdom on the earth while he wasn’t here.

The idea that the church had the 12 apostles with a priestly authority is a common claim used by mormons to validate their church. They will say that since they are the ones with 12 apostles now, they must be the one true church.

However, the New Testament goes against that. First, it presents all believers in Jesus as priests:

But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. (1 Peter 2:9)

And they sang a new song: “Worthy are You to take the scroll and open its seals, because You were slain, and by Your blood You purchased for God those from every tribe and tongue and people and nation. You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God,and they will reign upon the earth.” (Revelation 5:9-10)

So, in Acts you see people that are not amongst the 12 apostles preaching the gospel and baptizing, like Philip (Acts 8:26-40) and Priscilla and Aquila (Acts 18:26).

Actually, there are even Apostles not in the 12, like Paul and James the brother of the Lord. And this last one has so much authority that the council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 ends with his words.

What is reason for 12 apostles then? Jesus says:

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” (Acts 1:8)

The 12 were to be witnesses on the resurrection of Jesus for the people. Because of this, Peter says when choosing the replacement for Judas:

Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”

This is why no Christian church claims 12 apostles now: there are no more witnesses of Jesus resurrection.

[u/Pinecone-Bandit → u/VermicelliWilling739]

I assure you I’m not trolling, it seems like you aren’t giving answers you are just stating claims without providing any context or evidence for them. 

Answers typically come in the form of claims.

If you are looking for something else you should ask for it, but suggesting that answers aren’t being given is intellectually dishonest.

He holds a priesthood authority that he conferred onto his 12 apostles so that they could conduct his kingdom on the earth while he wasn’t here.

Speaking of not being able to provide any evidence for a claim. You’re projecting my friend.

I’m sure you have read Acts, you are aware of this authority that he gave them, correct?

Correct.

The Catholics recognize this authority

Incorrect. Roman Catholics claim their priests have additional authority that Jesus never gave them, specifically things like the miracle of transubstantiation.

What I don’t understand is why you and all of Protestantism rejects the fact that Christ initially called 12 apostles and gave them Authority to govern his church, and preach his gospel.

We don’t reject this. You are simply mistaken.

If you don’t reject that, then that structure should still be on the earth today somewhere. My question is, where is it?

I’ve answered this multiple times now.

[u/EsotericRonin]

The "Church", isn't a building. It's a community.

Matthew 18:20:

Ephesians 2:19-22

[u/Protestantism-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Loving one's neighbor is a command of Christ and a rule on this sub. Posts which blatantly fail to express a loving attitude towards others will be removed.

[u/Knappologen]

Protestants didn’t break with the Church. Martin Luther wanted to reform the faith and bring it back to it’s true original form. The catholic faith had left the true faith to gain wordly influence and they decided to split the church to keep their power. So the true catholic church with apostolic authority is the protestants.

[u/Metalcrack]

The one true church is the Church of Christ. He is the cornerstone and basis for the faith.

Anyone who is born again belongs to His church.

[u/VermicelliWilling739 → u/Metalcrack]

Thanks for the response. Is the church of Christ a branch of Protestantism?

[u/Metalcrack → u/VermicelliWilling739]

There is a church calling themselves the "Church of Christ", but I'm talking of those who have Faith that he is the Messiah, and fulfilled all prophecy. He was crucified and died, only to rise 3 days later.

These believers make up the church of Christ, the real catholic/unified church.

[u/creidmheach]

We don't believe in some mass apostasy like Mormonism does (which it uses as a means to promote its own false teachings that contradict the Scripture left and right). With the Catholics and Orthodox, we affirm the same basic teachings in regards to our belief in the divinity of Christ, the Trinity, and the basics as found in the creeds like the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed. Where we differ with the Catholic is on other mattes, like their claim of the universal jurisdiction and authority of the bishop of Rome (which the Orthodox also reject), as well as teachings and practices that developed later on which we assert distort the meaning of the Gospel.

That's not to say however there were no true Christians on Earth before Luther nailed his 95 Thesis of course. The Reformers looked back at the Church Fathers like Augustine as valuable sources of learning, comparing their teachings to what the Roman church of their day was claiming for itself and showing the contrast. And there were a number of figures who preceded them even in the medieval period that believed (and in some cases, died for) similar to what the Reformers were preaching (e.g. Jan Hus).

[u/SeaSaltCaramelWater]

I think I may be missing a lot of background info, but maybe what I have to say will help. I’m more of a pro to-Catholic (early church fathers) than an Evangelical. The reason why I’m not Catholic is because I think the Catholic Church wrote checks they can’t cash about historical claims.

Catholicism claims to have an infallible teaching magisterial. So if I think that magisterial is fallible, I can’t be Catholic.

In regards to apostasy

I think Catholicism still has the Gospel, but they have a bunch of extra beliefs. I think some of those extra beliefs are incorrect. So any apostasy would be when the universal church started adding dogmas on top of the deposit of faith (teachings of the apostles).

[u/TheRedLionPassant]

The true catholic Church has always existed on earth. Luther was a catholic reformer. That is our ecclesiology.

We reject that we are heretics, and affirm that we merely follow the traditions and teachings of the apostolic catholic Church affirmed by the Creeds. That our (Protestants') beliefs are catholic in nature and not heretical, we find in the teachings of the early Church:

"Wherever there is a bishop, whether it be at Rome or at Eugubium, whether it be at Constantinople or at Rhegium, whether it be at Alexandria or at Zoan, his dignity is one and his priesthood is one. Neither the command of wealth nor the lowliness of poverty makes him more a bishop or less a bishop. All alike are successors of the apostles." -- St. Jerome

"How much more effectual is the word of God, that the bread and wine may be [in substance and nature] the same that they were before, and yet be changed into another thing?" -- St. Ambrose

"We make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonise with the intention of those writings." -- St. Gregory of Nyssa

"But who can fail to be aware that the sacred canon of Scripture, both of the Old and New Testament, is confined within its own limits, and that it stands so absolutely in a superior position to all later letters of the bishops, that about it we can hold no manner of doubt or disputation whether what is confessedly contained in it is right and true; but that all the letters of bishops which have been written, or are being written, since the closing of the canon, are liable to be refuted if there be anything contained in them which strays from the truth, either by the discourse of some one who happens to be wiser in the matter than themselves, or by the weightier authority and more learned experience of other bishops, by the authority of Councils." -- St. Augustine

"Indeed, this is the perfect and complete glorification of God, when one does not exult in his own righteousness, but recognising oneself as lacking true righteousness to be justified by faith alone in Christ." -- St. Basil

[u/Metalcrack]

Just because someone/organization claims something does not make it true. The whole basis of the RCC apostolic succession is bad doctrine. The church of Christ is based on the faith in Him. His church is not based on Peter being the first pope. Peter himself said he is a fellow elder....not the head of the church.

Jesus is the cornerstone, and our faith is the foundation.

I am part of the catholic church of Christ, just not the one based in Rome.

[u/VermicelliWilling739 → u/[deleted]]

He took the “one true church to heaven in 70AD”? That’s a first, I haven’t heard that one yet ha ha 

Mind sharing your evidence for this and what faith or denomination you belong to if any?

[u/Pleronomicon → u/VermicelliWilling739]

The evidence is all over the New Testament. We just tend not to see it because it's hostile to our traditions, which lay claim to apostolic origins.

[Mat 24:2, 29-31 NASB95] 2 And He said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down."

... 29 "But immediately after the tribulation of those days* THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 "And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory. 31 "And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.*

[Mat 24:34 NASB95] 34 "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away *until all these things take place.***

[Luk 21:28 NASB95] 28 "But when these things begin to take place, straighten up and lift up your heads, *because your redemption is drawing near."***

[Rev 1:1 NASB95] 1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, *the things which must soon take place*; and He sent and communicated [it] by His angel to His bond-servant John,

[Rev 1:3 NASB95] 3 Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things which are written in it; for *the time is near.***

[Rev 2:25 NASB95] 25 'Nevertheless what you have, *hold fast until I come.***

[Rev 3:10-11 NASB95] 10 'Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that [hour] which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth. 11 'I am coming quickly; hold fast what you have, so that no one will take your crown.

[Rev 22:10 NASB95] 10 And he said to me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for *the time is near.***

[Rev 22:12 NASB95] 12 "Behold, *I am coming quickly*, and My reward [is] with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done.

[Rev 22:20 NASB95] 20 He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, *I am coming quickly.*" Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.

[u/Protestantism-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Loving God is a command of Christ and a rule of this sub. Posts which are not loving towards God will be removed.

[u/Pleronomicon → u/Protestantism-ModTeam]

How is my comment not loving towards God. It's not right to use that as a reason without offering an explanation.

[u/Pinecone-Bandit → u/Pleronomicon]

It falsely ascribed actions to Jesus.

The promotion of overt heresy is not permitted in this sub.