Why aren't you Catholic?


Catholicism traces its roots and its Bible interpretations back to Christ and the Apostles (known as Apostolic teachings). The Seven Sacraments form the circle of Jesus’ teachings and practices while here on earth. Why abandon Catholicism? Why not return to original teachings?

  1. That’s sexist, pronoun shouldn’t matter
  2. By implication, “why” is to “everyone”

The ambiguity as to which version of Catholicism comes from the reference to the “seven sacraments”. Roman Catholics today say there are seven: ordination, confirmation, matrimony, extreme unction, penance, baptism, and the Eucharist or the Lord’s Supper.

But only two meet the three required qualifications to be an “ordinance”: Lord’s supper and Baptism.

The three requirements are 1)commanded by Christ; 2)recorded in Acts as a practice; 3)theological exposition of it in the NT.

So, the version of ROMAN Catholicism that believes in the seven sacraments might be the recommended version, but that skips over all those versions of Catholicism that existed before the inaccurate list.


And exactly where does it say it isn’t possible for God to know people’s future actions? Where in the Bible are the limits expressly laid put?


Laid out* 10 char


If there are limits to God’s power and knowledge that means those limits have always existed and are outside of God himself. Which means those limits are almost God-like. If God didn’t create those limits then ergo, eternal things can exist without a God.

  1. A correction as to fact is not “sexist.” In fact, I am ‘she’.
  2. The ‘why’ is to those who wish to share his/her position.

The is no ambiguity as to the seven sacraments. Jesus’ life and teachings revolved around these seven issues, which the Church calls Sacraments. The Church calls people to practice what Jesus practiced, which is called The Way, and/or discipleship.

Following two ordinances (two laws or rules) is not following The Way. It is not discipleship of Christ, it is discipleship of two rules, a fraction of what Christ taught and lived. That is why I am interested in why people choose not to be Catholic, and all Catholic denominations–not just one–follow the entire discipline (discipleship).

If the best someone can come up with is, “Their prayer says, ‘Mother of God’ in reference to Mary,” then that is just plain tedious because it misses the point and shows a lack of understanding of Christian history.

Why aren’t you Catholic is asking, Why do some give less importance to the Way Jesus lived and taught than Catholics do? The seven sacraments is the Church’s response to Christ. “Mother of God” is the Church’s response to history when people were denying the divinity of Christ. I am not asking why Protestants do not have the same response to history, they let their history slide when they decided to start something new. I am asking about why they trimmed down the Way, the Teachings of Christ himself.


[quote=“Meriweather, post:446, topic:119, full:true”]… I am not asking why Protestants do not have the same response to history, they let their history slide when they decided to start something new. I am asking about why they trimmed down the Way, the Teachings of Christ himself.

They see it reverse:

Protestants see much of Catholicism as novelty, therefore NOT found in the NT.

Accordingly, they trimmed away the additions, the novelties so they can focus on the Teachings of Christ Himself.

Scott Adams would say we look at the same facts, and see two different movies. But he’d be wrong.

Catholics look at a “tripod of data”, scripture tradition Magisterium while most Protestants only scripture.

I’ve studied what the Catholic magisterium has produced over the centuries, and find it usually wrong or consumed with splinters, while swallowing camels.

Mark Shea wrote a book “Making Senses Out of Scripture”. He’s right, they have confused about 42 verses throughout their history, subsuming the plain sense with their own unique (and sometimes very odd) sense.

You don’t clarify something, but making different versions of it. That only confuses…


I think we can safely assume that Protestants and Catholics will never agree on the scripture or any number of things.



Then they pass over (or ignore) most of what is written in the New Testament, perhaps seeing it more as a Smorgasbord where a person can selectively pick and choose.


And if people want to follow scripture in accordance with Mark Shea, that’s fine. Catholics follow scripture in accordance with Apostolic teaching. Granted, the Gospels tell of many incidents where (at first) the Apostles were wrong in their conclusions, but we believe they got it right in the end.


Sure. That’s why apostolic teachings solve the problem for Catholics. Even so, there are a number of Saints who disagreed with each other along the way, and simple disagreements are no big deal–as we know from life in our families. Dismissing most of the Way of Jesus is a big deal.


Too much standing and sitting for me.


Mark Shea is a staunch Catholic, years ago we both argued these and other points on Steve Ray’s board. That was fun.

Both Catholics and Protestants cherry pick, its human nature. Here’s a few verses I apply to Catholics, and draw ire from some of my fellow Prots:

11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.”
12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him.
13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” (Rom. 10:11-13 ESV)

We’ll never agree on much, but I do expect to see you there!


Ordinance? Required qualification?

Required by whom?


Mark Shea is one of the more orthodox Catholic Apologists around. I pay attention to what he says. When you have an anti-Catholic quoting Mark Shea in support of his anti-Catholic argument, you can be sure he’s misquoting Mark Shea.

Just saying.




Koushi – Do you know if that requirement is specified in the Bible?


I’ve never seen it mentioned. I have seen the other 5 sacraments in the bible.


The bible specifically mentions Jesus performing a miracle at a wedding. Seems protestants would want weddings as one of their ordinances since Jesus did so much at one as well as teaching about them a lot.


Didn’t quote him, cited the title of his book and said I agree, Catholics do make senses (plural) of some texts.

Unfortunately, that isn’t the same as making sense (singular) of a text. Its giving you a choice, one or both or all of them, might be wrong.


The Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith , under the 1983 Code of Canon Law deputatus of the Pontifical Big Hat Society of the Pius.