What some Protestants get Wrong About Catholics

Many of our Protestant brothers and sisters sincerely love Christ but often misunderstand what Catholics actually believe. In this video, we’ll explore some of the biggest misconceptions about Catholicism-like the claim that we worship Mary or that we believe we earn our salvation. Instead of debating, this is an invitation to listen, understand, and build bridges in Christian unity. The Catholic faith is deeply biblical and centered on Christ, and by addressing these misunderstandings, we hope to foster deeper dialogue and mutual respect. Whether you’re Catholic, Protestant, or just curious, join us as we unpack the truth with love and clarity.
#Catholicism #ChristianUnity #MisconceptionsAboutCatholics #CatholicProtestantDialogue #ChristianFaith #BibleTruth #UnderstandingCatholicism

[@jmorra]

Why "Revelation 5.8?" It sounds like the New Testament's latest software program. Is this numbering something new? I am a former Catholic who still loves the church, so I am happy to hear you both attempting to clear the air. However, this is so abbreviated, I have to wonder if it is doing any good. For instance, while I am glad for your explanation of papal infalability, why didn't you mention the last time this was done, which gave us extra biblical Marian dogmas, about which I will be condemned if I don't believe their claims? If you are going to go over points like the ones you address, please go a little harder on yourselves. Otherwise this comes off as shallow and maybe even dishonest.

[@heroiclives1278]

Thanks for your comment! I appreciate you taking the time to engage with the video. Regarding Revelation 5:8, I see what you mean-saying “five point eight” instead of “five eight” was just a slip, not a new numbering system! That’s a fair critique, and I’ll be more mindful of that in future videos. As for the depth of the discussion, I totally understand your concern. This video was meant as a broad overview rather than a deep dive into each issue, and I agree that topics like papal infallibility and Marian dogmas deserve more attention. I’ll consider making a follow-up that explores those areas in greater detail. On Marian dogmas specifically, I’d clarify that Catholics are called to accept them as part of the Church’s teaching, but it’s not a matter of automatic condemnation-God alone judges the heart, and Catholic doctrine is about guiding people toward truth rather than imposing arbitrary tests of salvation. In fact, the Church does not actually give a list of anyone who is definitely in hell even those who opposed these dogmas. What the Church does say as that it is part of the teaching it has received from the apostles. Opposing this publicly could of course thus be a problem or serious sin. But I’m sure many wrestle with it privately while trusting that God preserves the Church from error in these specific areas. I appreciate your challenge to go deeper and be rigorous in presenting these topics. My goal isn’t to be shallow or dishonest, but to foster good dialogue. Thanks again for the feedback!

[@jmorra]

Your irenic reply is almost reason enough for me to pack my bags for Rome. I know that there has been a broadening of the Family of God since Vatican two, but I pay special attention to anathemas and the like, and from what I investigated, I am in deep do-do if I willfully reject a dogma ( why these Marian ideas were made into dogmas is beyond me). I take this very seriously, and " God knowing my heart " does not make me less nervous. I am not offended by the immaculate conception, nor by the bodily assumption, nor by her perpetual virginity, as none of these ideas are unreasonable. However, to place them into the same category as the hypostatic union...and to insist that I MUST believe them or else... huh??

[@heroiclives1278]

I really appreciate your openness and willingness to engage with this topic seriously. Your desire to understand the weight of dogma and anathemas shows that you’re thinking deeply about these things, which is commendable. I completely understand why the Marian dogmas might seem like they’re being placed on the same level as something like the hypostatic union-it’s a common concern. The distinction is that all dogmas, whether about Christ or Mary, are defined as revealed truths by the Church’s authority. However, their theological weight differs in terms of their relationship to the core of the faith. Marian dogmas are not independent doctrines but exist precisely because of Christ. For example, the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption are ultimately about protecting the integrity of Christ’s nature and mission. That said, Catholic teaching doesn’t frame dogma as arbitrary hoops to jump through. Instead, it’s about receiving what has been handed down in faith. Rejecting a defined dogma knowingly and willfully is serious because it means rejecting the Church’s teaching authority itself. It’s less about one individual doctrine and more about the principle of whether Christ gave the Church the authority to teach definitively. It sounds like you already see the reasonableness of these Marian doctrines, which is a great place to be. If you have concerns about how they were defined, that’s worth exploring further. I’d be happy to recommend some resources that discuss this more deeply. Thanks again for the thoughtful discussion-I really appreciate your willingness to engage with this seriously!

[@jmorra]

If you were explaining the gospel to someone, at what level of importance would you place these dogmas? We seemed fine without them for 1900 years. In the end, your final answer is always the same: we believe this Christ's church. Translation: because we say so. Why won't I go back? As Lewis said, what on earth might the pope say next on faith and morals, ex cathedral? Mary as Co- redemptrix? That was actually discussed under John Paul, right. Anyway you are both beautiful and awesome. And I believe in the true manna come down from heaven! God bless you !

[@heroiclives1278]

Great questions-I really appreciate your willingness to discuss this with sincerity 😊 If I were explaining the Gospel to someone for the first time, I’d start with Christ, His death and resurrection, and the necessity of faith and repentance. That’s the core of the Good News. But as you know, the Christian life isn’t JUST about a personal relationship with Jesus (though that is very important!)-it’s also about belonging to His Church, which is both the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim 3:15). So where do dogmas fit in? They’re not arbitrary additions but formal clarifications of truths already present in the faith. The Church didn’t “invent” the Marian dogmas out of thin air in the 19th and 20th centuries-these beliefs had been held in some form since the early Church. What changed was that they were defined in response to growing theological challenges, much like how the doctrine of the Trinity wasn’t dogmatically defined until centuries after Christ. The Church has always functioned this way, discerning and articulating truths over time, not making them up. As for the concern about “what’s next?”-the Church doesn’t just declare new dogmas at random. John Paul II explicitly refrained from defining Mary as Co-Redemptrix because he saw that it could be misunderstood. The Church has safeguards, and papal infallibility doesn’t mean the Pope can define anything he wants; it only applies in specific, limited circumstances regarding faith and morals. I love that you affirm the true manna from heaven-because that’s the heart of Catholicism: Christ fully present, feeding His people. I really appreciate your engagement, and I hope this helps clarify some things. God bless you too!