Poll: Do ppl here consider Roman Catholics as Christian?

[Reformed Catholic]

I saw a similar poll on an Anglican forum where the results were
Yes: 100%
No: 0%

Was curious what the attitudes are of the kind of Puritanism the members of this board represents with all the changes Roman Catholicism has had since Vatican II.

 

[Ploutos]

I saw a similar poll on an Anglican forum where the results were
Yes: 100%
No: 0%

Was curious what the attitudes are of the kind of Puritanism the members of this board represents with all the changes Roman Catholicism has had since Vatican II.

A better poll would be whether the people on that forum are Christians. Is "maybe, but they need some help" an option?

Roman doctrine is a wet blanket over the flame of the gospel. It kills faith by a thousand tiny cuts and leads people astray by a thousand subtle shifts. To be saved in the Roman church is to be saved in spite of Rome's evil obfuscation of the gospel, not because of anything Rome does positively.

Many Reformed believe that Catholics can be saved if they have true faith, but that this generally entails a degree of ignorance about what their false church reaches. For people who are knowledgeably Catholic, and even more so for those who have swum the Tiber from Protestantism to Rome, I think it's safe to state a general Reformed view that this weighs heavily against the likelihood of actual saving faith. I would personally allow some room for context in individual cases but in general am inclined to agree. Rome is a false church preaching another gospel, with all that implies for its followers. But yes, Romanists can be saved.

 

[MyCrows]

all the changes Roman Catholicism has had since Vatican II.

What changes exactly?

 

[davejonescue]

I marked yes. Because I think it arrogant of me to believe that both the RCC and the Orthodox Church are all going to Hell, and my little clan of Protestants are the True Church. I am not ready to take that position yet. I often struggle already with what seems the cannibalistic ways even Protestants are kicking each other out of the kingdom with all these discernment ministries. From my readings of the Puritans, they seem gracious and patient towards lay Roman adherents, but most aggressive to Roman teachers. The truth is, there are devout Catholics that love the Lord, and many that dedicate their entire lives to his service. And I just dont know how strict God is in holding us accountable to off theology in comparison to judging hearts who genuinely desire to love him, serve him, and do his will? The only part of the confession that I struggle with, is the claim that Rome is the Antichrist Church, and much of the reason for it is because there was so much tension between Protestants and Catholics at the time of the Reformation, and shortly after when the confessions were written; I am not quite sure yet if it was not related to "battle-hatred." I may be totally off. But in no way have I thought I have arrived to begin with. I still need to do a lot of studying in Church History before I claim any semblance to an elementary understanding of this controversy. But do I think Protestants have the best grip on what God intends? Yes. Do I think all who are not Protestants are reprobates? No.

I believe I listed this questioning (about that part of the confession) during the questionnaire to becoming a member of this board, so it is known at least to admin. I am not promoting my view as the proper one, just where I am at, and in the spirit of honest discussion.

 

[EvanF]

Only the regenerate elect are Christians. No doubt some catholics are in that category, but why would we say that all of them are, or that none are?

Christians are mercifully not saved by knowledge or understanding or doctrinal rectitude. If we were, who could be saved?

 

[SeanPatrickCornell]

The purest churches under heaven are subject to mixture and error; and some have so degenerated as to
become no churches of Christ, but synagogues of Satan; nevertheless Christ always hath had, and ever shall have a
kingdom in this world, to the end thereof, of such as believe in him, and make profession of his name.

The Savoy Declaration and Westminster Confession both say substantially the same thing. The part I have in bold text is referring to the Roman Catholic Church.

Therefore the confessional Presbyterian, Congregationalist, and Baptist view is that the RCC is not a Christian church, ergo, her members cannot be rightly said to be Christians.

 

[Theoretical]

A better poll would be whether the people on that forum are Christians. Is "maybe, but they need some help" an option?

This. I most fear for the souls of those who've converted to Rome/EO out of a learned and informed Protestant position and of course for the clergy (especially upper echelons). For lay Catholics (insert EO here as well, I think there's huge variations that probably align fairly well with those of Arminian or Welseyan type churches. Some, perhaps even many, are in fact saved, but despite their church and not because of it.

Also, I view the Reformation solas as 1ab issues with the Nicene Creed as 1aa level. You badly need both, but Rome and EO fundamentally do share Nicea with us and are in a fundamentally different category from cults, non-Christian religions, woo-woo spirituality, and the like. With Rome, I'd also say that it's a very different Beast (pun partially intended) depending on the region and even the parish. For example, one of my Reformed friends is Mexican-American with lots of family ties back in Mexico and another is a missionary to one of the mountain regions and both have described the deep and overt paganism such that it's not even a debate among evangelical converts over whether to get (re)baptized, whether going to a paedo or credo church.

 

[Recipient of Grace]

Laymen, perhaps some of them. Clergymen, on the other hand… James. 3:1.

 

[Charles Johnson]

Most aren't. Once in a while one surprises me.

 

[Guido's Brother]

Maybe change the question to "consistent Roman Catholics" or "devoutly committed to Rome Roman Catholics." Because then the answer is clearly 'no.'

 

[Reformed Catholic]

What changes exactly?

Mass done in the language of the people and not Latin. Eucharist taken standing up and by hand, lessening (though not entirely erasing) the idolatrous aspect of it. Protestants being seen as "separated brethren" and not entire god-hating heretics as in the past. Both bread and wine was allowed again for the laity. Religious liberty being allowed and praised, reversing past papist teaching. And much much more (some for the worse too, such as elevating Muslims and Jews to a level of being able to be saved without submitting to Christ).

 

[Sam Jer]

Mass done in the language of the people and not Latin. Eucharist taken standing up and by hand, lessening (though not entirely erasing) the idolatrous aspect of it. Protestants being seen as "separated brethren" and not entire god-hating heretics as in the past. Both bread and wine was allowed again for the laity. Religious liberty being allowed and praised, reversing past papist teaching. And much much more (some for the worse too, such as elevating Muslims and Jews to a level of being able to be saved without submitting to Christ).

The pope disguises himself as an angel of light? I wonder who he learned that trick from.

"And his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain, and blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds."

 

[Ploutos]

The Savoy Declaration and Westminster Confession both say substantially the same thing. The part I have in bold text is referring to the Roman Catholic Church.

Therefore the confessional Presbyterian, Congregationalist, and Baptist view is that the RCC is not a Christian church, ergo, her members cannot be rightly said to be Christians.

I can't speak for the Baptists, but it is not true that this is the confessional Presbyterian view, as it is generally maintained that Roman Catholics can be saved despite the church itself being a synagogue of Satan. How often it happens is another thing, but most Reformed have maintained, at least on paper, the possibility of a believing Romanist.

 

[Deleted member 12759]

why do you have a graven image in your pfp?

 

[Ploutos]

Who are you referring to? Me, or the OP? If the OP, it's what looks like some Byzantine-era image of King Josiah - click on it to see.

 

[EvanF]

why do you have a graven image in your pfp?

What makes you call that a graven image? Do people worship israelite kings?

 

[Ed Walsh]

Was curious what the attitudes are of the kind of Puritanism the members of this board represents with all the changes Roman Catholicism has had since Vatican II.

A Yes/No vote was too polar for me to cast a vote.

My best answer is the same as I have said about professed Arminians, which is that if a man firmly believes in his heart of hearts that they–not God is sovereign in his salvation and continues in this "faith" to the end, I don't see how they can be saved. But I don't think I know a person from the Arminian camp who truly believes this. These same people pray to God for their loved ones and that He will save them. They thank God for His salvation and mercy towards them and theirs. I end up with a simple two-word sentence, which must be my best answer.

Blessed inconsistency.

EDIT:
Though I speak charitably of the man in the pew, I would like to add from my morning devotions the passage from Galatians that gives you an idea of how I feel about those who promote these false Gospels.

Galatians 1:6-9​

[6] I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: [7] which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. [8] But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. [9] As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.​

 

[MyCrows]

Would peoples response be the same if it was about the JWs, or Mormons?

Look, there may be just enough of the gospel hidden in their false system of religion, for someone to be saved in spite of the system they are in. But that's what Roman Catholicism is, a false system. They proclaim a false gospel, which is no gospel at all.

I have not cast a vote. If it were worded, "Is Roman Catholicism a legitimate Christian body", I would vote no in a heartbeat. As it stands it is a satanic institution. But thankfully, there may be souls the Lord is pleased to get bring out of her.

 

[Ed Walsh]

Would peoples response be the same if it was about the JWs, or Mormons?

No.

 

[MyCrows]

No.

I agree. We all see that the RC church has maintained some orthodoxy in contrast to these other groups. That is a good thing. There is still a glimmer of truth in there, although greatly darkened and held back.

However the RC church falls short on the marks of a true church, and cannot be called such.

We cannot judge her favorably just because she has retained some orthodoxy.

 

[MarrowMan]

Mass done in the language of the people and not Latin. Eucharist taken standing up and by hand, lessening (though not entirely erasing) the idolatrous aspect of it. Protestants being seen as "separated brethren" and not entire god-hating heretics as in the past. Both bread and wine was allowed again for the laity. Religious liberty being allowed and praised, reversing past papist teaching. And much much more (some for the worse too, such as elevating Muslims and Jews to a level of being able to be saved without submitting to Christ).

Without changing their anathematizing of the Gospel, nothing else matters.

 

[RamistThomist]

Would peoples response be the same if it was about the JWs, or Mormons?

Without defending RCC in any way, there are some substantial differences. The Trinity, for one.

 

[MyCrows]

Without defending RCC in any way, there are some substantial differences. The Trinity, for one.

That was actually exactly what I had in mind when I mentioned them retaining some orthodoxy. I would say this is one of the important few things that distinguishes them from the myriad of smaller heretical sects. Almost all of them strip Christ of his deity.

 

[alexanderjames]

It depends on how one interprets the question,
but I marked yes on the basis that
if someone professes faith in Christ the Lord as their Saviour I will treat them as a sincere Christian, unless of course they demonstrate clearly they will not submit to the Scriptures as the word of God with ultimate authority over us.

 

[cthorn14]

WCF 24.3:

Yet is it the duty of Christians to marry only in the Lord: and therefore such as profess the true reformed religion should not marry with infidels, papists, or other idolaters:

 

[earl40]

Are those in a reformed church Christian?

 

[lynnie]

We read the Magazine "First Things", among many many other theological writings, and we don't look to it for sound doctrine. ( I have no problem with the strict confessional view that the Pope is anti Christ, although I am open to other views as well.) Nevertheless many of the Roman Catholic contributors are certainly devout Christians, and I have no doubt they have a great reward in heaven waiting for them, and I am edified by many of their writings.

 

[Sam Jer]

We read the Magazine "First Things", among many many other theological writings, and we don't look to it for sound doctrine. ( I have no problem with the strict confessional view that the Pope is anti Christ, although I am open to other views as well.) Nevertheless many of the Roman Catholic contributors are certainly devout Christians, and I have no doubt they have a great reward in heaven waiting for them, and I am edified by many of their writings.

These two views seem to be blatantly contradictory

Revelation 14:6-13:
And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.

 

[MyCrows]

Perhaps before we go any further, it would be prudent to ask the OP to clarify what he is actually asking.

@Reformed Catholic , can you clarify what exactly you are seeking to find out here?

Are you asking about the possibility of sincere Christians existing within an anti-christian system, or whether the system can be considered Christian?

 

[Reformed Catholic]

Are you asking about the possibility of sincere Christians existing within an anti-christian system, or whether the system can be considered Christian?

Neither, but more leaning towards the latter. Can Roman Catholics, as a whole, be considered Christian in the same way that Baptists or Presbyterians, as a whole, may be considered Christians regardless of the exceptional members within those denominations that do not profess true faith?

For example, when a person tells me they are a Baptist, my first thought is that they are Christian. It is only if I receive evidence to the contrary that I doubt that thought.