/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6813022]

How did Protestants and Catholics end up with such divergent worldviews? Does it all stem from theology? or were their other factors involved?

[Anonymous No.6813040]

Protestantism is literally anticatholicism so it's only to be expected.

[Anonymous No.6813055]

Protestantism is a collection of godless man-made religions that is not guided by the grace of Our Lord.

[Anonymous No.6813057]

Billy Graham is a bad example of the ideals of Protestantism
FUCK-MY-SHIT Francis is bad example of the ideals of Catholicism

[Anonymous No.6813061]

Protestants are heretics.

[Anonymous No.6813064]

Whose is this
>shit of Satan
>the smell of Hell
>the brown of Beelzebub
>the droppings of the diablo
>the loo of Lucifer

[Anonymous No.6813066]

Catholics are pagan.

[Anonymous No.6813068]

>>6813057
>Billy Graham is a bad example of the ideals of Protestantism
Really?

>Graham has repeatedly been on Gallup's list of most admired men and women. He has appeared on the list 55 times since 1955 (including 49 consecutive years), more than any other individual in the world.[7]

>FUCK-MY-SHIT Francis is bad example of the ideals of Catholicism
Have Catholics EVER been pro-capitalist?

[Anonymous No.6813070]

>>6813057
'bad example of the ideals of the Catholicism'
like someone who forgot about papal infallibility??

[Anonymous No.6813078]

>>6813057
Billy Graham is a perfect example of the ideals of Protestantism

An apostate ignormaus

[Anonymous No.6813087]

>>6813066
Catholics are the only ones who are part of a divinely-mandated Church.

[Anonymous No.6813093]

>>6813061
Absolutely correct.

[Anonymous No.6813133]

>>6813066
Well meme'd

[Anonymous No.6813156]

>>6813066
This, tbh.

Also, to answer op, dissenting Protestants are more likely to form a new denomination rather than conform their beliefs to that of whatever senile Italian says that he ought to believe

[Anonymous No.6813161]

>>6813066
Protestants are Muslim.

[Anonymous No.6813165]

>>6813087
heresy

[Anonymous No.6813172]

>>6813156
Francis is Argentinian.

[Anonymous No.6813175]

>>6813165
Catholic bishops have a line of ordination, they can lay hands on people to fill them with the holy spirit. Protestants don't have that, they're like Simon Magus.

[Anonymous No.6813184]

>>6813175
Yeah but there are other Apostolic Churches.

[Anonymous No.6813198]

>>6813172
And? What is it, like three quarters of the popes have been Italian? Hell, if I understand Catholic history correctly, the last three popes have been kind of an aberration. A Pole succeeded by a German succeeded by an Argentine. Weird as fuck, considering that popes tend to be Italian

[Anonymous No.6813214]

>>6813175
>he isn't a Cessationist
Have fun in hell, you Charismatic heretic

[Anonymous No.6813221]

>>6813184
But they aren't the original one.

[Anonymous No.6813233]

>>6813221
>he honestly thinks that the Roman church was the first one
Read a book and don't learn your church history from a catholic priest

[Anonymous No.6813234]

>>6813175
>they can lay hands on people to fill them with the holy spirit.

heresy

[Anonymous No.6813235]

>>6813214
I am as far as all those things go. But not with ordination and giving people the power to lay hands, since the Apostles did ordain people like Paul and had the power to with Magus, but they didn't.

[Anonymous No.6813238]

>>6813022

B A S E D P R O T E S T A N T I S M

seriously though; you should look up protestantism and it's begginings, how some dudes basically just seceded since they were tired of the sale of indulgences etc.

[Anonymous No.6813246]

>>6813221
They're all pretty much equally original, St. Peter just received particular authority from Christ.

[Anonymous No.6813257]

>>6813234
Nope. The Apostles did it and could pass gift on to others, which they did. That's what ordination is all about, passing on that gift

[Anonymous No.6813261]

>>6813235
But that isn't unique to Roman Catholicism. There are other apostolic churches, tbh. Also, what's so special about apostolic succession anyway? It's not really Biblical, tbh. Sure, you have verses proof texted by Catholics that out of context seem like they support it, but the whole idea goes contrary to Christ's message. Paul surely didn't go for apostolic succession
>>6813246
>he takes one of Jesus' funniest jokes as the basis for his concept of church hierarchy
Toppest of keks

[Anonymous No.6813266]

>>6813238
Pretty sure it was about a King who wanted a divorce and German barons who wanted to be without oversight, and Scandinavian Kings who wanted their own state Churches they could be personal popes of. As for rest of the Protestants, they mostly came from the English Dissenters.

[Anonymous No.6813276]

>>6813266
Pretty sure you swallowed some bait, tbh. And, your church was founded by an upstart bishop who didn't want to work under the Byzantine emperor. So don't act like you're any better

[Anonymous No.6813289]

>>6813276
The primacy of the Bishop of Rome dates back far before the schism, and it signified a lot more than being first among equals.

Are there similar records of theologians supporting the primacy of the Emperor of Byzantium?

[Anonymous No.6813292]

>>6813261
>funniest jokes
OK, heretic

[Anonymous No.6813298]

>>6813266
That's the Church of England, not all of Protestantism.
Protestantism is just 'lol I want to be a religious capitalist and not have to worry about the content of my actions'

[Anonymous No.6813311]

>>6813266
The Church of England, *as revived under Elizabeth*, is, or at least was, the most legitimate of Protestant denominations.

[Anonymous No.6813327]

>>6813266
Pretty sure you need to brush up on your history.

[Thomas No.6813338]

http://theotherjournal.com/2005/04/04/theology-and-capitalism-an-interview-with-john-milbank/

Gives a decent overview.

[Anonymous No.6813370]

>>6813292
Stay mad, crypto pagan.

>>6813289
The primacy of Rome was an idea started by (gasp) the bishops of Rome. And while I personally disagree with caesaropapism, support for it as a counter to Rome's claims of special snowflake status goes just as far back. Plus, why Rome? Why not Jerusalem? Why not Antioch? Why not Damascus? Why not Alexandria? All of these places have as good a claim as Rome (if not better, tbh) on being home to a first among equals style bishop. And yet none of them claimed it. The Popoe only claimed that because he wanted more political power, allowing the RCC to try and fill in the vacuum of the empire left in the West. Like the separation of most denominations, the founding of the Roman Catholic Church was more about politics than straight up theological differences.

[Anonymous No.6813388]

>>6813370
Because Peter was the first bishop of Rome, and the leader of the Apostles after Christ ascended to heaven. Rome therefore became the default See for the bishop in charge.

[Anonymous No.6813407]

>>6813388
>implying the apostles had leadership after Christ died and rose

[Anonymous No.6813416]

>>6813407
They kind of did.

[Anonymous No.6813442]

>>6813066

All Christians are pagan

[Anonymous No.6813447]

>>6813442
Not Protestants, broski

>Martin Luther also took note of the similarities between Islam and Protestantism in the rejection of idols, although he noted Islam was much more drastic in its complete rejection of images. In On War against the Turk, Luther is actually less critical of the Turks than he is of the Pope, whom he calls an anti-Christ, or the Jews, whom he describes as "the Devil incarnate".[16] He urges his contemporaries to also see the good aspects in the Turks, and refers to some who were favourable to the Ottoman Empire, and "who actually want the Turk to come and rule, because they think that our German people are wild and uncivilized - indeed that they are half-devil and half-man".[17]

>The Ottomans also felt closer to the Protestants than to the Catholics. At one point, a letter was sent from Suleiman the Magnificent to the "Lutherans" in Flanders, claiming that he felt close to them, "since they did not worship idols, believed in one God and fought against the Pope and Emperor".[18][19]

[Anonymous No.6813474]

The Papacy is gearing up for China to come tumbling down so it can relocate to Beijing.

All of this pro-Commie tripe is attempting to ease the transition by showing that the church has a "history" of supporting the Communist Party and the "ideals" it stands for.

[Anonymous No.6813600]

>>6813022
http://www.ideasinactiontv.com/tcs_daily/2003/12/does-islam-need-a-luther-or-a-pope.html

[Anonymous No.6813615]

>>6813388
>Peter admitting gentiles into the Church

im sure there are other examples

also, look at St Stephen I

[Anonymous No.6813618]

>>6813474
China's a hyper-capitalist state.

[Anonymous No.6813627]

>>6813057
And a good one is... ?

[Anonymous No.6813645]

>>6813068
No. Capitalism is post-Catholic, and the Church hates everything post-Catholic.

[Anonymous No.6814353]

>>6813068
What does pro-capitalist even mean? Seems like a dubious commie-under-the-bed sort of term. Most Catholics don't support a command economy.

[Thomas No.6814362]

>>6814353
It means supporting an economy based on wage labor and the credit system.

There are plenty of anti-capitalist models that don't involve a command economy.

[Anonymous No.6814391]

No, this is simply a natural consequence of Christianity, which can never have unity, since it's a bunch of idiots bickering over who is 100% right and must be followed by everyone else

[Anonymous No.6814397]

>>6814391
euphoric

[Anonymous No.6814403]

catholics are a big organisation like google or any other, and need to save face in the public eye. protestants are just chill niggas trying to grind out a peaceful existence on earth.
>>6813040
also this

[Anonymous No.6814415]

>>6814397
I am ecstatic with the blood of psychic surgeons.

[Anonymous No.6814535]

Pope francis was considered conservative in argentina. It's funny to see americans calling him communist.

[Thomas No.6814543]

>>6814535
Well, he was a lot more conservative, against liberation theology even, but after communist Jesuits started getting executed, it affected his outlook.

[Anonymous No.6814554]

>>6814543
I think it has more to do with where the political spectrum stands. Being pro unions isn't leftist in some countries where there's basically no one against their existence for example.

[Anonymous No.6814565]

>>6814535
He's talked about undergoing a "profound interior crisis" that changed him fundamentally. He was very sympathetic to the poor as Archbishop of Buenos Aires.

[Thomas No.6814586]

>>6814554
He's a lot more than pro union. He wore a hammer and sickle medal in Bolivia and accepted a hammer and sickle crucifix as a gift (and according to a Vatican spokesman, he didn't say, "this is not good," he said, "I didn't know that" in response to Evo telling him it was based on a design by a Jesuit whose grave Francis would go on to visit. He's said several times that there has to be a radical restructuring of the global economic system, and that labor, land and lodging are human rights and should be legally recognized as such.

[Anonymous No.6814595]

>>6814586
I don't think him accepting the gift means anything in particular. I'll admit that him speaking against private property as a right is more radical than i expected from him though.

[Anonymous No.6814612]

Popes have condemned both Capitalism and Socialism. The first for its treating economics as a mechanical science with no ethical dimension, the second for its godlessness and tyranny.

[Thomas No.6814617]

>>6814595
The medal is actually more of a thing than the gift, in my opinion. The gift, which the Pope looked very hesitant about (it's a bit iffy outright substituting the hammer and sickle for the Christian cross) until he received the explanation--is in commemoration of Jesuit who was put to death by the government. The medal, on the other hand, not only has no such significance, but the Pope actually wears it. It would have not be insulting for him to politely say, "I can't wear that acting in official capacity as the head and representative of the Church, but appreciate the sentiment". So it's abundantly clear to me that the Pope, regardless of whether or not he's actually a communist, feels very sympathetic toward communists and wants an open dialogue between them and the Church. Considering Raul Castro says he's very interested in being reconciled with the Church and attending Mass again, that's a decent conclusion.

[Thomas No.6814645]

>>6814612
I think that after the Cold War, with communists in South America no longer beholden to Russia, there is a lot of political possibility for communism to actually become friendly toward the Catholic Church. I also thing moving beyond the tyranny is going to be a big thing. Pope Francis, unlike John Paul II, was not influenced by seeing tyranny in communist countries, he was influenced by seeing tyranny against communists. So he's going to have a very different perspective than the Cold War Popes did, and it's a relevant perspective since the collapse of the USSR. The USSR set communism on a trajectory that really wasn't healthy, it defined it for the 20th Century; on the other hand, it also helped make it more mainstream among the working class, and when it collapsed, there ceased to be any cohesiveness to the working class movement in that direction. Now that it's gone, communism can be rebuilt anew without the oppression and paranoia, is all that is needed is a new hub, which Francis might provide without actually being overtly communist. It's communism for a new generation, and it is very different from communism under USSR hegemony. What's really great is that the Pope is helping to foster it at the flashpoints of exploitation, in the Third World, while at the same time pulling in the First World, which allows it to be a far more global movement than it being led by First World workers or academics, and also more than "Third-Worldism", which tends to shun First World workers.

[Anonymous No.6814716]

>>6813087
Nice meme, papists continue to deceive the westerners as always

[Anonymous No.6814730]

>>6813447
What a cuck tbh

This is also laughably oedipal.

[Thomas No.6814737]

>>6814730
Luther was a super cuck

>Suppose I should counsel the wife of an impotent man, with his consent, to giver herself to another, say her husband’s brother, but to keep this marriage secret and to ascribe the children to the so-called putative father. The question is: Is such a women in a saved state? I answer, certainly.

>Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tell’s us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died

>Know that Marriage is an outward material thing like any other secular business.

[Anonymous No.6814772]

>>6813070
looks likes someone only has a vague idea of a papel infallibility is talking out his ass and a place of ignorance

[Anonymous No.6815962]

>>6814716
Reunification when

[Anonymous No.6816340]

>>6813022
>pope francis
>catholic
blz

[Anonymous No.6816343]

>>6813447
Pretty sure that Islam considers worship of Jesus Christ, images of Jesus Christ, and trinitarianism pagan.

[Anonymous No.6816358]

>>6814737
Pig disgusting