We see the term “Catholic-bashing” bandied about regularly these days whenever someone brings up a point of disagreement with the Roman church. This is about on the same level as calling those who disagree with the homosexual lifestyle “homophobic.” It detracts from the core issues and calls upon sensitivity rather than reason.
We should refrain from such rhetoric and name calling if it is just a civil discussion on points of doctrine or a scriptural examination of practices and traditions. That is not “bashing.”
Saying “All ________________ (fill in your preferred group) are doo-doo heads” is bashing, and I won’t engage in that behavior.
Having defined what is bashing and what isn’t, I do have to say that I take offense at the duplicitous approach that the Roman church takes toward those who adhere to Reformed Protestant theology.
On the surface, there is talk of ecumenism; that we are all Christians and should get along. However, I attended a wedding in a Roman church a few years ago and saw that this doesn’t pass muster in practice. I was excluded from partaking of communion. That spoke volumes of my status in regard to official church policy. I was not considered to be a “true believer.”
Also, consider the anathemas (eternal damnations) of the Council of Trent. These are curses pronounced upon people who believe key points of Protestant theology. For the past 450 years these anathemas have been reaffirmed by the leadership of the Roman church, including the current pope.
As a Protestant, the Roman church has pronounced curses upon me and those who believe as I do. Is this “bashing?” I’ll leave that up to you.
For those unfamiliar with these pronouncements, the following is a Roman source, not the incomparable preaching of someone like Ian Paisley.
www.geocities.com/peterpaulmin/CoucilofTrent.htmlSadly, these days Protestants will admire the Reformers, such as Luther, but have abandoned the principles of the Reformation. If Martin Luther spoke in most churches today he wouldn’t be invited back. He would be labeled “intolerant” and “insensitive.” He would indeed be called politically incorrect. However, as was the case 500 years ago, no one could fault him using Scripture as a reference.
Most Protestants call themselves such as a term meaning “not Catholic”, but true Protestantism is indeed rare.
Bashing? No. What I did above was state some of my personal, factual observations and provide a link to a Roman Catholic affiliated website.