are independent Christian Churches,protestants?

[flewen]

I had a debate with a member of an Independent Christian Church, known as the church of Christ…he told me that they are not protestants because they reject the creeds, confession of faith and etc that the protestants practice.

my questions:

1. is it true that they did not practice what the mainline protestants do?
2. are Independent Christian Churches believed in the 5 solas of Protestantism?
3. did those Independent Christian Churches part of Steve Ray’s claim that they are protestants?

hope you will help me answer my fellow Catholics.

 

[RobHom]

A wise man one said: You can put a dress, a wig, and lipstick on a pig and in the end…all you still have is a pig.

They can call themselves whatever they want. The 1st Amendment of the US Constitution gives Americans the right to “free speech”, however,…just because they say it does not make it a fact.

That person is either confused or is the victim of what is known as being taught “historical revisionism”. If you read this page of Steve Ray’s blog… you will see that they are in fact “Protestants”. Read here: blog.catholic-convert.com/?p=1522

The problem is that people who belong to the independent “christian” churches…are wholly unawares of, or completely ignore both history and reality. They are “protestant” by definition and actions. That’s simply reality as it is.

 

[Chirpa]

Of course they are Protestant! Even though they want to distingquish themselves as seperate from them…I have had contact with some of the members of the Church of Christ and they state that the reason they place themselves apart from any of the other Protestants is because they say their church is founded on the teaching of Christ ONLY… and go only by what it states in the Bible and take it very literally. They do not believe that tradition plays any significance at all in Christianity. They go as far as to say if you aren’t baptised in the way the Bible says to do it (immersion only) then you really aren’t baptised and you won’t go to heaven. they completely ignore or don’t have any idea about tradition/ or that maybe even the translation of the Bible into the English lang. might affect the wording…etc… They don’t take in to account what the readings in the Bible meant for the people of the time…and so forth. All in all, they can say what they want, but they are still Protestant!

 

[Sean_Boyle]

Of course they are Protestant! Even though they want to distingquish themselves as seperate from them…I have had contact with some of the members of the Church of Christ and they state that the reason they place themselves apart from any of the other Protestants is because they say their church is founded on the teaching of Christ ONLY… and go only by what it states in the Bible and take it very literally…

They do not believe that tradition plays any significance at all in Christianity. All in all, they can say what they want, but they are still Protestant!

I agree they are protestant.
I’d like to point out that the bible that they use is the result of Tradition. How funny is that, the sole source of their faith was only a tradition for the first 400 years and was maintain by big “T” tradition until they came up with their ideals on faith. Tell your friend that the bible didn’t just fall out of the sky to their pastor.

 

[Hisalone]

If they are protesting the Catholic Church they are Protestant.
If they are affirming the gospel of Jesus Christ they are not. Very simple actually.
There was a time when men believed the universe revolved around the earth. That proved to be false.
Men today believe the universe revolves around the Catholic Church that position is likewise false.

 

[Tomster]

If they are protesting the Catholic Church they are Protestant.
If they are affirming the gospel of Jesus Christ they are not. Very simple actually.
There was a time when men believed the universe revolved around the earth. That proved to be false.
Men today believe the universe revolves around the Catholic Church that position is likewise false.

And tell us all, please, what is the result of one group of Protestants “protesting” another group of Protestants? (Hint: doctrinal chaos)

Protestantism is an elusive concept of which we can find as many definitions as writers on the subject. About the only thing the many differring sects within Protestantism have in common with each other is their rejection of Catholicism. Everything else is and has been up for grabs due to Protestantism’s claim of private interpretation. With no real authoritative structure within Protestantism, that having been rejected by its founders, Protestants are free to come and go as they please, agreeing to disagree.

If we would define Protestantism by a short formula, we might call it subjective Christianity, whose positive contents are derived from Catholicism and whose radical error is a denial that faith belongs essentially to the intellect.

 

[Contarini]

I had a debate with a member of an Independent Christian Church, known as the church of Christ…he told me that they are not protestants because they reject the creeds, confession of faith and etc that the protestants practice.

my questions:

1. is it true that they did not practice what the mainline protestants do?

It depends on how you define “mainline Protestants.” They break in very significant ways from classical Protestant teaching as found in the Lutheran and Reformed traditions. In my vocabulary, this does not mean that they are not Protestants, because I define the term “Protestant” historically, and because calling only Lutherans and Reformed (even defining the latter broadly to include low-church Anglicans and many Baptists) “Protestants” leaves us with no convenient word to describe the multifarious, fissiparous reality of non-Catholic, historically Reformation-derived, Western Christianity.

1. are Independent Christian Churches believed in the 5 solas of Protestantism?

They have a particularly radical doctrine of sola scriptura, but reject sola fide. Arguably they have a more works-based doctrine of salvation than the Catholic Church does (certainly they reject Augustine’s concepts of original sin and grace), though they might argue with this.

Of course, I would challenge the very concept of the “Five Solas,” which as far as I know is a rather pompous modern Reformed formulation (it may be older than I think, but this Reformed website admits that two of them don’t seem to go back beyond the 19th century).

1. did those Independent Christian Churches part of Steve Ray’s claim that they are protestants?

I have trouble understanding this sentence. It is common for them to claim not to be Protestants, and if you define “Protestant” in a traditional theological sense–the five solas, etc.–they have a point. But they exemplify central principles of radical American Protestantism in a particularly dramatic way–the idea that the Scriptures are clear and plain and anyone can understand them if they just throw off the shackles of tradition; an insistence on an adult commitment to Christ (expressed through baptism by immersion) as the basis for one’s identity as a Christian; suspicion of any form of clericalism–their churches are run by lay elders and the “ministers” are seen as servants of the church who are called to do certain specific things but have very little authority, at least in principle, and anyone can preach or lead the celebration of Communion; and so on.

Edwin

 

[kage_ar]

The ICC comes from the Stone Campbell movement - so, they are a direct line from Presbyterianism. Sort of the Presby’s grandchildren

They will not claim the term Protestant, because they rejected Presbyterianism -

 

[Rightlydivide]

The distinction seems so subjective.