What is your opinion on anti-Catholics that are also Trinitarians?

[apexviper13]

I'm proud to be a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and know it is Jesus Christ's church. We have suffered persecution. Due to the church having this persecution I can't help but feel sorry for the persecution also given to the Catholic Church. I thought about this some today so I would like other people's opinions on this matter. According to history, the "trinity" was established as official doctrine by the Catholic Church in 325 AD at the council of Nicea. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints teaches the trinity is not a teaching supported by scripture but that is not the point. There are people that are Protestants, Baptists, etc that are anti-Catholic yet they believe in the trinity. I find this odd. Anti-Catholics that are trinitarians believe in the trinity yet they heavily put down what made claimed this doctrine to be official. What are your opinions on this?

[Dravin]

Do you also find it odd that they accept the Bible (or at least the books they agree on)? I suppose you'd ultimately have to ask someone who is anti-catholic, I rather hope there isn't any on to respond in all honesty.

Edited April 6, 2011 by Dravin

[FunkyTown]

Do you also find it odd that they accept the Bible (or at least the books they agree on)? I suppose you'd ultimately have to ask someone who is anti-catholic, I rather hope there isn't any on to respond in all honesty.

Dravin's right. If you want to know why some people dislike the Catholics, you'll have to ask the people who dislike the Catholics. Hopefully, there's nobody on here who can answer your question.

[Blackmarch]

I'm proud to be a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and know it is Jesus Christ's church. We have suffered persecution. Due to the church having this persecution I can't help but feel sorry for the persecution also given to the Catholic Church. I thought about this some today so I would like other people's opinions on this matter. According to history, the "trinity" was established as official doctrine by the Catholic Church in 325 AD at the council of Nicea. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints teaches the trinity is not a teaching supported by scripture but that is not the point. There are people that are Protestants, Baptists, etc that are anti-Catholic yet they believe in the trinity. I find this odd. Anti-Catholics that are trinitarians believe in the trinity yet they heavily put down what made claimed this doctrine to be official. What are your opinions on this?

those who find fault with others allow the devil to lead their hearts.

[Guest]

I'm not sure if you would consider Protestants Anti-Catholics...

But, if that's what you're talking about - then the issue is not with the Trinitarian doctrine but with the church traditions and practices... like all the rites and ceremonies that are practiced in the Catholic church that the Protestants do not indulge in.

But... using the term anti-Catholics for... say, Baptists or Lutherans, invokes a negative connotation that is not truly indicative of their position. So, I'm not sure if this post addresses the OP.

[jlf9999]

I think you will find that historic anti-Catholic sentiment is based on politics. In former times, the Roman Catholic church was the dominant religious and political authority and dealt with others with a heavy hand. They were often cruel and demanding. That began to change in the 19th century but not entirely and so there exists some genuine fear of what a resurgent Catholic power structure would do to people with independent ideas.

[rameumptom]

Not all protestants are anti-Catholic. Some broke away because they disagreed with certain teachings of the Catholic church, such as indulgences or priesthood authority.

There are some who are anti-Catholic today, because they believe the Catholic Church and the Pope are leading people away from true worship of Christ. The Catholic Church, for example, believes that works must go with faith to be saved. For the cheap grace Protestants, this is false doctrine, and so they would consider Catholicism as counter-Christ. some also think that the use of the Virgin and saints is idolatry, and so also think the Catholics are apostate in this manner.

BTW, the Catholic church was not fully formed in 325 AD. Many Biblical scholars today would call it the "proto-orthodox" church. Or if you were to call it catholic, it would be with a little 'c' to denote the word "universal", rather than a specific religion. As it is, the christians were arguing over the Trinity well into the 4th century AD, even after the Nicaea Council.

[prisonchaplain]

I'm going to take the OP's "Anti-Catholic" label at it's broadest and interpret the question as, "Why do non-Catholics insist on the Trinity when the authority behind that doctrine's development is one they do not believe in?" With that in mind, others have already answered it broadly. Protestants, for example, generally do not believe there was a Great Apostasy. Instead, we saw the Catholic church go astray on some of its practices and doctrines. Most Protestants still agree with Catholics on major doctrines, such as the nature of God, the authority of the Bible, the existence of heaven and hell and a Day of Judgment. Where we disagree is:

Ram correctly pointed to the issue of "faith alone" vs. salvation through the sacraments. (BTW, the adjective "cheap" before grace was a bit broad-bush).

Adventists believe the Church went badly wrong in changing the church day of worship to Sunday. In my experience, many of them would be Anti-Catholic, because they believe this issue to be so serious.

Purgatory and Apostalic succession are a couple other doctrines few other Protestants agree with. Ironically, LDS accept the latter.

I could go on, but the point is that non-Catholic Trinitarians do not dismiss everything that developed during the period when the Catholic church was the dominant expression of Christianity. We do not say the church was completely false and apostate. They certainly, from our perspective, got the Trinity right.

[rameumptom]

Let me clarify. Not all those who believe in grace go with the "cheap" version. However, that is the term used for those who think that just saying "I believe" saves a person, regardless of any works at all, to the greatest glory God would give us.

I believe prisonchaplain and many other Protestants/evangelicals believe that salvation is free, however the glory we receive depends on our faithfulness and obedience. This is not a "cheap grace" belief, because it does explain the importance of works in our overall salvation. "Cheap grace" means I can give lip service to Christ and be fully saved in all his glory, regardless of whether I've been Mother Teresa or Hitler.

Oh, and the Catholics are not entirely sure about Purgatory anymore, either. In the last few years they've stated that Purgatory may not be doctrinal/Biblical, and so they are going to have to review it along with Limbo, which is not doctrinal/Biblical.

[prisonchaplain]

Thanks, Ram. "Cheap Grace" is a phrase we sola fide types (faith alone) use for our foolish members who wrongly believe it means they can live for the Devil, and go to heaven because they said they believe. I've even seen books with with the title, intended to shame wayward members back towards the straight and narrow path. Discipleship (following the Christian disciplines) and spiritual maturity ought to be REACTIONS to grace. I'd even suggest that the absolute gratitude that we feel for the reprieve we receive ought to drive us towards Christian service and works far more intensely than would any effort I might make to barter my goodness with God in exchange for salvation.

BTW, I just checked "Catholic Answers" (a Catholic apologetics site, similar to FAIRLDS), and they have an article defending the doctrine of purgatory against typical evangelical criticisms. I do not link the page because Catholic Answers has some material that some would consider anti-LDS.

Edited April 6, 2011 by prisonchaplain

[Jason_J]

Oh, and the Catholics are not entirely sure about Purgatory anymore, either. In the last few years they've stated that Purgatory may not be doctrinal/Biblical, and so they are going to have to review it along with Limbo, which is not doctrinal/Biblical.

While I am familiar with the status of Limbo as far as not being a doctrinal teaching of the Catholic Church (it is understood to be speculative teaching based on what they believe has been revealed on related issues, such as original sin, mortal sin, and qualifications for Heaven and Hell, and the Catholic Church teaches that there is more cause for belief that God may save unbaptized infants in His mercy, instead of them going to Limbo, as can be read in this Vatican document), I have never seen anything put forth stating that Purgatory may not be doctrinal/Biblical. What are your sources for that? Purgatory and its related concepts of temporal punishment for forgiven sins, prayer and Masses for the dead, as well as indulgences, are quite important in Catholic theology. I'm very curious to see where "they" have said this.

[rameumptom]

And that is how I see grace work, as well.