Are Protestant Theologians really qualified?

[childofmary1143]

In another thread here somebody thought they heard that the Pope was going to declare Our Lady as Divine. It’s ridiculous I know but some people brought up that perhaps it was mixed up with the effort of some good people to have the Pope declare Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces and Co-Redemptorix.

Back in 1996 there was convened a Panel of theologians to study that (Mediatrix and Co-Redemptorix). On the panel was 3 Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican.

I remember Karl Keating saying a few years back that “Schism, unfortunately leads to heresy”.

So I guess the questions begs is: Why would you even consider having a Protestant study a very deep Catholic theological consideration. No offense to Protestants, but they are hardly qualified to give a CATHOLIC study of it.

Can anybody offer me any insightful reason to this?

 

[Truthstalker]

In another thread here somebody thought they heard that the Pope was going to declare Our Lady as Divine. It’s ridiculous I know but some people brought up that perhaps it was mixed up with the effort of some good people to have the Pope declare Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces and Co-Redemptorix.

Back in 1996 there was convened a Panel of theologians to study that (Mediatrix and Co-Redemptorix). On the panel was 3 Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican.

I remember Karl Keating saying a few years back that “Schism, unfortunately leads to heresy”.

So I guess the questions begs is: Why would you even consider having a Protestant study a very deep Catholic theological consideration. No offense to Protestants, but they are hardly qualified to give a CATHOLIC study of it.

Can anybody offer me any insightful reason to this?

Perhaps to challenge some assumptions?

 

[Liberian]

Child of Mary,

Truthstalker has raised a good point, I think. Quite possibly the presence of Protestants on the board of inquiry served the same purpose as the Devil’s Advocate on a saint’s canonization review board.

• Liberian

 

[JOE_OBERR]

Child of Mary,

Truthstalker has raised a good point, I think. Quite possibly the presence of Protestants on the board of inquiry served the same purpose as the Devil’s Advocate on a saint’s canonization review board.

• Liberian

They’ve rejected the Church Jesus founded, saying in effect that Jesus was wrong & we’re right (to go with sola fide & scriptura). They’ve also rejected the leadership Jesus himself established for his Church when he gave Peter the keys to the kingdom. So Jesus was wrong again.

Then they have the pride to make up their own “gospel” based on their personal guesswork of bible verses. They do this because they’ve also rejected the gospel the apostles taught & preached (Mt 16:15-16), that part of the Word of God which can’t be found in Scripture. So what possible good can come from their (name removed by moderator)ut?

Joe

 

[Truthstalker]

They’ve rejected the Church Jesus founded, saying in effect that Jesus was wrong & we’re right (to go with sola fide & scriptura). They’ve also rejected the leadership Jesus himself established for his Church when he gave Peter the keys to the kingdom. So Jesus was wrong again.

Then they have the pride to make up their own “gospel” based on their personal guesswork of bible verses. They do this because they’ve also rejected the gospel the apostles taught & preached (Mt 16:15-16), that part of the Word of God which can’t be found in Scripture. So what possible good can come from their (name removed by moderator)ut?

Joe

Actually most Protestant and Orthodox theologians were never Catholic and have not studied Catholic theology - thus, they haven’t rejected it, because they were never Catholic. Perhaps their ancestors were, but that was generations ago. Please review your catechism. Nor do they say that Jesus was wrong. Concerning they verses regarding Peter and the keys, they follow another interpretation, as you may see on numerous threads here.

The Orthodox would be very surprised at your view that they adhere to Sola Fide or Sola Scriptura. The Anglicans would as well. All would say that they are careful in observing what the Scriptures say, and to dismiss their theology as “personal guesswork” betrays a lack of appreciation or knowledge of their faith.

I’m not convinced they operate out of pride, or that you have the ability to judge their hearts. Much Protestant and Orthodox theology is careful and reverent and the fruit of the Spirit is evident - including humility. I don’t think you can really make the sweeping statements that they have rejected the Gospel or that there is no good that can come from their (name removed by moderator)ut. It is often good to seek the wisdom of brothers, and the Catholic church looks on them as separated brothers - not as the scoundrels you apparently view them as.

 

[tdgesq]

Imho it would be foolhardy to outright dismiss the worth of the views of Protestants (or Orthodox or Anglicans) on Catholic doctrine. They have an intellect just like the rest of us, and are motivated to point out errors in our thinking that we may not have ever discovered otherwise. Some of my favorite theologians are not Roman Catholic at all.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

They’ve rejected the Church Jesus founded, saying in effect that Jesus was wrong & we’re right (to go with sola fide & scriptura). They’ve also rejected the leadership Jesus himself established for his Church when he gave Peter the keys to the kingdom. So Jesus was wrong again.

Then they have the pride to make up their own “gospel” based on their personal guesswork of bible verses. They do this because they’ve also rejected the gospel the apostles taught & preached (Mt 16:15-16), that part of the Word of God which can’t be found in Scripture. So what possible good can come from their (name removed by moderator)ut?

Joe

If insults are wanted - it’s equally possible that the “rejection” was by Catholics. That is what the Orthodox think. It’s understandable we should think otherwise, and we can make a case for our position, as can they for theirs - but it certainly isn’t water-tight. That’s the trouble with arguments which use history: historical evidence can always be give more than one interpretation. We cannot prove we are not heretics & apostates; any more than any one else can.​

In answer to the question: there has been Protestant influence on Catholic thinking, just as there has been Catholic & other Christian influence on Protestant thinking, for a very long time - for 400 years at least. It’s not new - but anyone who doesn’t take an interest in editions of the Fathers, in the Liturgy, the Bible, Mariology & such things, is likely to miss it; so a news item about one instance of this will seem extraordinary if one does not know that it is one instance only out of many that could be given. Catholic theology owes a good deal to the learning of non-Catholics; Protestant theology owes much to Catholics & others.

So it is not at all newsworthy for Protestants to be involved in this - particularly as such a definition would be a serious obstacle to reunion between Catholics & Protestants. The Churches are far less inclined to forge ahead, each with its own schemes, than in the past; which is why the decision to accept the ordination of women was such a mistake - so radical a decision can’t rightly be taken unilaterally, because what affects one Church, affects all. The same consideration makes what Rome does doctrinally of urgent & close interest to non-Romans; so it is only right they should be consulted. Apart from anything else, it is gracious & courteous to seek their opinion of possible doctrines that might cause trouble if defined.

Not all Protestant writers are semi-educated folk who paid for their degrees; even if a lot of those who make the most noise in the US might fit that description. Catholic theologians have no monopoly on intelligence, learning, or piety. ##

 

[childofmary1143]

If insults are wanted - it’s equally possible that the “rejection” was by Catholics. That is what the Orthodox think. It’s understandable we should think otherwise, and we can make a case for our position, as can they for theirs - but it certainly isn’t water-tight. That’s the trouble with arguments which use history: historical evidence can always be give more than one interpretation. We cannot prove we are not heretics & apostates; any more than any one else can.​

In answer to the question: there has been Protestant influence on Catholic thinking, just as there has been Catholic & other Christian influence on Protestant thinking, for a very long time - for 400 years at least. It’s not new - but anyone who doesn’t take an interest in editions of the Fathers, in the Liturgy, the Bible, Mariology & such things, is likely to miss it; so a news item about one instance of this will seem extraordinary if one does not know that it is one instance only out of many that could be given. Catholic theology owes a good deal to the learning of non-Catholics; Protestant theology owes much to Catholics & others.

So it is not at all newsworthy for Protestants to be involved in this - particularly as such a definition would be a serious obstacle to reunion between Catholics & Protestants. The Churches are far less inclined to forge ahead, each with its own schemes, than in the past; which is why the decision to accept the ordination of women was such a mistake - so radical a decision can’t rightly be taken unilaterally, because what affects one Church, affects all. The same consideration makes what Rome does doctrinally of urgent & close interest to non-Romans; so it is only right they should be consulted. Apart from anything else, it is gracious & courteous to seek their opinion of possible doctrines that might cause trouble if defined.

Not all Protestant writers are semi-educated folk who paid for their degrees; even if a lot of those who make the most noise in the US might fit that description. Catholic theologians have no monopoly on intelligence, learning, or piety. ##

Shouldn’t we as Catholics, who possess the FULLNESS of the Faith seek wisdom and inspiration from GOD as he alone is the one who should tell us and not on our separated brethren?

 

[JOE_OBERR]

If insults are wanted - it’s equally possible that the “rejection” was by Catholics. That is what the Orthodox think. It’s understandable we should think otherwise, and we can make a case for our position, as can they for theirs - but it certainly isn’t water-tight. That’s the trouble with arguments which use history: historical evidence can always be give more than one interpretation. We cannot prove we are not heretics & apostates; any more than any one else can…​

. ##

No insult was given, just a simple summary of Martin Luther’s ideology which has resulted in mass confusion for his spiritual descendants. Of course one can use history for evidence and proof of which Church Jesus founded.

Cardinal Newman knew history was quite practical to determine the truth as he sought to defend the Anglican or neo-Anglican position but the more he researched history the more he realized there was only one Church which existed from the first century forward, the Catholic Church.

The strong and constant tradition of history as well as written documents all pointed to only one Church, not the 25,000 plus denominations we have today. There is no documented evidence or any witness of history indicating Jesus founded an Eastern Church. That body of Catholics decided to reject Petrine Primacy in the 1400’s as history reflects.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Child of Mary,
Your name has forced me to pray for you…
I prefer child of God myself.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

In another thread here somebody thought they heard that the Pope was going to declare Our Lady as Divine. It’s ridiculous I know but some people brought up that perhaps it was mixed up with the effort of some good people to have the Pope declare Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces and Co-Redemptorix.

Back in 1996 there was convened a Panel of theologians to study that (Mediatrix and Co-Redemptorix). On the panel was 3 Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican.

I remember Karl Keating saying a few years back that “Schism, unfortunately leads to heresy”.

So I guess the questions begs is: Why would you even consider having a Protestant study a very deep Catholic theological consideration. No offense to Protestants, but they are hardly qualified to give a CATHOLIC study of it.

Can anybody offer me any insightful reason to this?

From the interpretations i’ve seen and read Protestant theologians are much more qualified than your average priest, heck I believe I am for that matter.

 

[SORROWS]

From the interpretations i’ve seen and read Protestant theologians are much more qualified than your average priest, heck I believe I am for that matter.

I’m baffled! Give an example.

 

[THutch04]

For whatever it’s worth, there was a conference at Fransican University on this topic that took place in 2005, and an Anglican spoke on it. I actually know the Anglican who spoke, and she is very well-educated on the subject. She actually taught a Master’s course in Mariology. It’s too bad she wasn’t a full time professor, because students would really learn a lot from her. I think a lot of non-Catholic theologians are very qualified to discuss the details of Catholic theology. That being said, there are just as many very educated CATHOLIC theologians as well, and I don’t understand why the Vatican would even want non-Catholics discussing the subject at an official VATICAN conference.

 

[childofmary1143]

Child of Mary,
Your name has forced me to pray for you…
I prefer child of God myself.

You know its bad enough that Fundamentalist Protestants ride me about my id in the Catholic chat rooms but to get this in a Catholic forum is terrible.

Perhaps you should read a little of our Queen of Saints and Heaven and Earth.

 

[4given]

Actually most Protestant and Orthodox theologians were never Catholic and have not studied Catholic theology - thus, they haven’t rejected it, because they were never Catholic. Perhaps their ancestors were, but that was generations ago. Please review your catechism. Nor do they say that Jesus was wrong. Concerning they verses regarding Peter and the keys, they follow another interpretation, as you may see on numerous threads here.

The Orthodox would be very surprised at your view that they adhere to Sola Fide or Sola Scriptura. The Anglicans would as well. All would say that they are careful in observing what the Scriptures say, and to dismiss their theology as “personal guesswork” betrays a lack of appreciation or knowledge of their faith.

I’m not convinced they operate out of pride, or that you have the ability to judge their hearts. Much Protestant and Orthodox theology is careful and reverent and the fruit of the Spirit is evident - including humility. I don’t think you can really make the sweeping statements that they have rejected the Gospel or that there is no good that can come from their (name removed by moderator)ut. It is often good to seek the wisdom of brothers, and the Catholic church looks on them as separated brothers - not as the scoundrels you apparently view them as.

I’m a Protestant, Truthstalker, and I find your post to be very gracious.