Expert: Father Dave Bechtel - 1/3/2012

Question
Grew up in a loving, Catholic home.  Recently my 56 year old brother, baptized Catholic, got engaged to a 54 year old divorced Baptist raised woman. Her first marriage was to a Baptist minister. She does not like to interact with us, yet knows my brother is born and raised Catholic.  Since dating her he has withdrawn from the Catholic Church.  They attend a non-denominational maga-church together.  People have told me that she does not want to interact with us (or include us in any part of the matrimonial, civil ceremony)because Baptists "hate" Catholics.  Is this true and if they do "hate" us when and why has this come about?

Answer
I am not sure that we can label all Baptists together and say "All Baptists hate Catholics."  Some Fundamentalist Baptists hate Catholics it is true just like some Fundamentalist Muslims hate America. My point is that the Baptists as a whole cannot be judged by the extreme wing of their denomination anymore then the religion of Islam can be judged the the actions of the extreme wing of their religion. I have many a Baptist friend.  We disagree certainly on matters of theology and religion yet respect each other as fellow Christians.

The "hatred" stems from the Reformation in and around 1500AD. The Reformation is why there is "Protestantism" and "Protestant" denominations like the Baptists. The Reformation was caused because the Catholic Church had become morally bankrupt at the time and corruption was rampant among the hierarchy. The problem was that the reformers did not stop with wanting to reform the corruption but rather demanded doctrine be changed as well.  It is a long story and much ink has been spilled on the Reformation over the years---but it would stem from that. Baptists would believe that Catholics teaching things that are not found in the Bible such as the teachings on Mary, the Papacy, the Priesthood, etc.  

In a sense the Catholic Church brought the Reformation on itself because of the rampant moral corruption among the hierarchy. A monk by the name of Martin Luther is said to have posted a document called "The 95 Thesis" on the door of the Wittenberg Cathedral on October 31.  Whether this event is historical is dubious--but it would have been the common practice of the day.  People would post items for discussion or debate.  In this document Luther takes issue with both doctrinal points of the Church and moral abuses. Luther was an Augustinian Catholic Priest and Scripture Scholar. Luther was right to go after the moral corruption.  His problem was that he would not submit to Church authority on doctrinal matters and he eventually broke with the Catholic Church founding "Lutheranism." To be sure Luther never wanted to break with the Church but he felt there was no other way to reform the Church then to start over. John Calvin is another reformer who believed Luther did not go far enough and from him and John Knox come the Presbyterians. Henry VIII broke with the Catholic Church over the issue of an Annulment and from his break with the Church come the Anglicans or Episcopalians.  From the Anglicans comes the Methodists and the Baptists---as they were reform movements of the Anglican Church.

From all of these churches comes what is known today as the "Mega Church."  Mega Church pastors are very clever at attracting members.  Their model is not based on the Gospel of Christ, but rather what the "market" wants in a Christian Religion.  They basically do research to find out what Christians are looking for in a Church and then they give it to them. Their churches are filled but their starting point is flawed: what people want rather then what God has given us in Christ. Mega Churches like all corporations grow, flourish, then eventually die as people begin to get tired of the same old self help prosperity gospel preached week in and week out.  The Gospel preached by mega churches of of no help when an infant dies, or the person gets uncurable cancer, etc.  There is no room for a theology of suffering in these churches---and suffering is a mystical part of Christianity.

It is difficult if not impossible to find agreement among Protestants on any doctrinal matter though they along with Catholics affirm the full Divinity and Lordship of Jesus Christ and that from him alone comes salvation. Protestants are however agreed on two fundamental principles upon which the Reformation was founded: Scriptura Sola and Fide Sola.

Scriptura Sola is Latin for "Scripture Alone."  Fide Sola is Latin for "Faith Alone."  The doctrine of Scripture Alone states that Scripture is the sole infallible rule of Faith for the Christian (and the Church) there is no authority in the Church equal to or higher then that of Scripture.  Scripture is the supreme court of final appeal on all matters of faith, practice and doctrine.  The doctrine is not a denial of the authority of Tradition, nor the authority of the Church.  According to those who profess to hold to this doctrine the Church has authority and Tradition has authority but they are not on a par with Scripture.  (Heiko Oberman distinguishes between T 2 (Catholic) T 1 (Traditional Reformed Protestant and according to him the historical view) and T 0 (Fundamentalist Protestant distortion of the doctrine.)  Another way Protestants make the distinction is "Scriptura SOLO" for T 0, and "Scriptura SOLA" for T 1.

If you read works by the popular Catholic Apologists on the subject you will find that they tend to confuse "Scripture ONLY" (Scripture SOLO) with "Scripture ALONE" (Scriptura SOLA) and they have also done this in formal debates. It is therefore important to understand the distinction. It is beyond the scope of this answer to provide a critique as it would take too much space for an already lengthy answer. If you want the Catholic view simply write a follow up.

Fide Sola (Faith Alone) has to do with Justification, or how one is justified.  Protestants tend to view our Justification (how we are put in right relationship with God) as a legal imputation.  This is to say that the sinner is made righteous through Faith Alone--and that God looks upon the sinner through the lens of Christ.  This is to say that the sinner is DECLARED righteous like a judge would DECLARE someone "Not guilty."  The person who is declared not guilty is legally not guilty of the crime even though they may have committed a crime in fact.  Protestants seem to view Justification in this manner.  According to Protestants we are saved by Faith Alone, but not by a Faith that IS alone.  This is to say that the role of good works is not salvific or meritorious before God---rather they are a product of a Living Faith.  A Living Faith produces good works, a dead Faith does not.  Thus while good works are a product of Faith---they serve more to VINDICATE Faith---but they play no direct role in our salvation. The Letter of James says "We are not saved by Faith Alone" which the Protestant interprets to mean that James is contrasting a Living Faith with a Dead Faith.  A Living Faith produces good works a dead Faith does not, therefore a Dead Faith cannot save.

Scholars claim that the "Material Cause" of the Reformation was "Faith Alone" while the "Formal Cause" was Scripture Alone.  I suggest that is backwards: The Formal Cause is "Faith Alone" the Material Cause "Scripture Alone" because Justification by Faith Alone gives form to the material of Scripture for the Protestant.  I would suggest that "Justification by Faith Alone" is the ESSENCE of Protestantism for it gives form to Scripture.  In other words Protestants read the whole of Scripture through the principle "Justification by Faith Alone."  Again, the Catholic Position is beyond the scope of this answer but I will in follow up questions give it if you want more information.

I hope this helps somewhat.