Can Protestants even judge heresy?

[BrianH]

This is an interesting concept. Schism produces purity. I believe and you don’t have to. I see and you may not agree. I see the opposite. I see a dilution and faulty perception as thoughts get generated in time and schism. Examples. Oneness Pentacostals, 7Day Adventists, Dispensationalists, Health and Wealth, and then of course although not claimed as Protestant…it is my belief that from Protestant thought we get Jehovah Witness, Mormons and all manner of deviations from the original Protestant thought. It is kind of like this.

Recall the party game where you tell someone something and then that person tells the next person, etc. By the time the message gets back to the originator the message is nothing like the original message. This experience is consistent with my paradigm. Give me an example of your paradigm where schism produces purity.

“Purer” is in quotations.
Denoting a perception of pureness. The fact is that mainline groups do break off into groups that perceive themselves to have a purer form of their beliefs. Examples abound. Presbyterian, Anglican, and others. They are certainly more conservative than their larger counterparts.

 

[JustaServant]

“Purer” is in quotations.
Denoting a perception of pureness. The fact is that mainline groups do break off into groups that perceive themselves to have a purer form of their beliefs. Examples abound. Presbyterian, Anglican, and others. They are certainly more conservative than their larger counterparts.

Correct.
But the question remains, where is the authority? The compass to keep us from falling off into heresy? If we say “the Bible”, the extreme groups CC mentioned would say the same. If we say a “Confession”, those mainline, liberal, “beleive what you want” denominations have the same Confession. They simply ignore it.
Where then does the buck stop to prevent heresy?

 

[Newsy]

This is an interesting concept. Schism produces purity. I believe and you don’t have to. I see and you may not agree. I see the opposite. I see a dilution and faulty perception as thoughts get generated in time and schism. Examples. Oneness Pentacostals, 7Day Adventists, Dispensationalists, Health and Wealth, and then of course although not claimed as Protestant…it is my belief that from Protestant thought we get Jehovah Witness, Mormons and all manner of deviations from the original Protestant thought. It is kind of like this.

I would like to remind you that JW and Mormons are rejected by most protestants b/c they have non-Christian theologies (i.e non trinitarian, etc.)

This experience is consistent with my paradigm. Give me an example of your paradigm where schism produces purity.

JustaServant makes a great point. I was a member of PCUSA, it has grown more and more liberal. There are some churches leaving the PCUSA b/c the latest changes addressing sin and homosexuality. If they retain their beliefs, pre-ammendment, then I would agree that leaving the PCUSA would make them a purer form. I don’t buy their theology, but it would be far more Biblical than the current PCUSA.

 

[Newsy]

Correct.
But the question remains, where is the authority? The compass to keep us from falling off into heresy? If we say “the Bible”, the extreme groups CC mentioned would say the same. If we say a “Confession”, those mainline, liberal, “beleive what you want” denominations have the same Confession. They simply ignore it.
Where then does the buck stop to prevent heresy?

We’ve just hit the basis of protestantism, the problem with Authority. Luther, after leaving the CC, thought he had Authority and was insulted that people rejected his leadership. I believe it stems from the pride that is inherent in each of us. We want our way, if the Church won’t change, then we change churches. There is nothing new, think Henry VIII.

Unfortunately, there is no guardrail to heresy in many liberal churches. But, let’s remember there are “Cafeteria Catholics” doing essentially the same thing. Before I joined the CC, I saw much difference of opinion (theologically) in my church, all were considered legitimate opinions. This eventually led me on a search for the one Truth!

 

[CopticChristian]

I would like to remind you that **JW and Mormons are rejected by most protestants b/c they have non-Christian theologies **(i.e non trinitarian, etc.)

JustaServant makes a great point. I was a member of PCUSA, it has grown more and more liberal. There are some churches leaving the PCUSA b/c the latest changes addressing sin and homosexuality. If they retain their beliefs, pre-ammendment, then I would agree that leaving the PCUSA would make them a purer form. I don’t buy their theology, but it would be far more Biblical than the current PCUSA.

I understand that. The question is from what thought process did they spring from? Joseph Smith was of a congregationalist family and did attend a Protestant church for a time. J. Tazz Russell was Presbyterian influenced by Millinarism. The point is that absent Protestant thought would they exist? It is my opinion that Protestant thought was the germ for their spawning. Like begets like.

 

[Contarini]

So then you disagree with this statement.

No, I do not. I just finished explaining what I meant by this.

The split-off groups within each tradition are “purer” in the sense that they focus on the traditional doctrinal positions held by that specific tradition (Lutheran, Reformed, etc.). They are purer in the ways they care about. Almost inevitably they lose something of the vigor and depth of the original tradition.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

And as Catholics we share the Church with liberals (heretics) as well.

Well, I question the identification of “liberal” with “heretical”–it depends on what you mean by liberal, of course!

But point taken. Indeed, that’s the point I wish more folks on this forum would recognize. There is a disturbing practice on these forums, and in conservative Catholic circles generally, of claiming that Catholics with whom one disagrees (those evil “liberals”) aren’t real Catholics at all. That to me is a reflection of the “schism for the sake of purity” wing of Protestantism.

I have corrected many a Catholic by simply going the Catechism and showing them what the Church teaches.

I see: “solo catechismo Catholicism,” then?

Now let me ask then, what happens when the heretics take over the church? In leadership as well as rank and file?

Actually in mainline churches the rank and file are typically more conservative than the leadership. I think this is largely because of the role of seminary education in traditional (i.e., mainline or confessional) Protestantism. Protestantism in its “magisterial” forms (Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican, and some of their less radical spinoffs) has always been run by academics, or more realistically by ecclesiastical bureaucrats whose idea of theological authority derives from what they were taught in seminary, even if in an over-simplified form. And Protestant theology has always been built around asking questions and pushing boundaries. For a long while in the 17th century they managed to maintain orthodoxy (orthodoxy with regard to the classic confessional statements, that is), but eventually it fell apart in several directions.

My basic problem with the mainliners is that there’s no separation of the task of the theologian from the task of the bishop. Bishops (or their equivalents) get seduced into thinking that they are supposed to be the ones pushing the boundaries, when they are supposed to maintain the boundaries. (Nothing wrong with an adventurous bishop like St. Gregory of Nyssa, of course, and one can maintain boundaries profoundly and creatively, so I’m not saying that the two functions should be wholly separated, only that in principle there’s a legitimate boundary-maintaining function and a legitimate boundary-pushing function. The present occupants of the Sees of Canterbury and Rome both understand that in their different contexts, and both have been accused of being turncoats for that reason.)

Edwin

 

[BrianH]

Correct.
But the question remains, where is the authority? The compass to keep us from falling off into heresy? If we say “the Bible”, the extreme groups CC mentioned would say the same. If we say a “Confession”, those mainline, liberal, “beleive what you want” denominations have the same Confession. They simply ignore it.
Where then does the buck stop to prevent heresy?

Some people are impressed with the authority argument. It is a convincing rationale for joining an Orthdox, Catholic, or another group that is the same.
I really do not think most people, Catholic or otherwise, believe what they want. I think they are convinced or not convinced by arguments or their understanding of their churches teachings and act accordingly.
I do not believe the views, beliefs, or most importantly the actions of people really differ that much. At least from what I can tell.

 

[Nicea325]

Some people are impressed with the authority argument. It is a convincing rationale for joining an Orthdox, Catholic, or another group that is the same.
I really do not think most people, Catholic or otherwise, believe what they want. I think they are convinced or not convinced by arguments or their understanding of their churches teachings and act accordingly.
I do not believe the views, beliefs, or most importantly the actions of people really differ that much. At least from what I can tell.

And a refusal to obey authority has always eaten at the core of humanity. Adam & Eve? How about Satan and his fellow fallen angels? Pride is one the reasons to disobey authority.

 

[JustaServant]

We’ve just hit the basis of protestantism, the problem with Authority. Luther, after leaving the CC, thought he had Authority and was insulted that people rejected his leadership. I believe it stems from the pride that is inherent in each of us. We want our way, if the Church won’t change, then we change churches. There is nothing new, think Henry VIII.

Unfortunately, there is no guardrail to heresy in many liberal churches. But, let’s remember there are “Cafeteria Catholics” doing essentially the same thing. Before I joined the CC, I saw much difference of opinion (theologically) in my church, all were considered legitimate opinions. This eventually led me on a search for the one Truth!

The pew warming cafeteria Catholics have no authority, neither does the cafeteria Baptist or cafeteria Episcopal. That’s human nature. The real issue is authority.
Which is why I veered the conversation in this direction. The question should not be can Protestants judge heresy, but by *what authority *can Protestants judge heresy…

 

[Nicea325]

The pew warming cafeteria Catholics have no authority, neither does the cafeteria Baptist or cafeteria Episcopal. That’s human nature. The real issue is authority.
Which is why I veered the conversation in this direction. The question should not be can Protestants judge heresy, but by *what authority *can Protestants judge heresy…

I totally agree. The real issue is authority. Authority has not always bode well for humanity.

 

[wisdomseeker]

No, I do not. I just finished explaining what I meant by this.

The split-off groups within each tradition are “purer” in the sense that they focus on the traditional doctrinal positions held by that specific tradition (Lutheran, Reformed, etc.). They are purer in the ways they care about. Almost inevitably they lose something of the vigor and depth of the original tradition.

Edwin

that is what happened with those who left the CC and built churches of their own. they are at loss. No longer have the pure faith and continue to do so as time passes. I wonder what would happen if the Bible was taken from you all.

 

[Nicea325]

that is what happened with those who left the CC and built churches of their own. they are at loss. No longer have the pure faith and continue to do so as time passes. I wonder what would happen if the Bible was taken from you all.

More important, what if there did not exist one nicely compiled Bible like today? One can only imagine how much bigger the mess would be today? :bigyikes:

 

[JonNC]

The pew warming cafeteria Catholics have no authority, neither does the cafeteria Baptist or cafeteria Episcopal. That’s human nature. The real issue is authority.
Which is why I veered the conversation in this direction. The question should not be can Protestants judge heresy, but by *what authority *can Protestants judge heresy…

Since the authority that led the early Church, convened the great councils, and gave us the ancient Creeds of the faith is now divided, and has been for 1000 years, where does one find that authority?

Jon

 

[Nicea325]

Since the authority that led the early Church, convened the great councils, and gave us the ancient Creeds of the faith is now divided, and has been for 1000 years, where does one find that authority?

Jon

Blessings my friend. Is it fair to say: Did authority ever cease to exist despite the divisions?

 

[CopticChristian]

No, I do not. I just finished explaining what I meant by this.

The split-off groups within each tradition are “purer” in the sense that they focus on the traditional doctrinal positions held by that specific tradition (Lutheran, Reformed, etc.). They are purer in the ways they care about. Almost inevitably they lose something of the vigor and depth of the original tradition.

Edwin

Precious metals are found in ore and are mixed with impurities. When they get refined we get the pure substance. This is my understanding of purity. I cannot relate to your definition of purity as it is peculiar to your paradigm and does not equate to mine. I don’t see what you say as being “pure”. You have a different understanding of pure than I do and that is OK.

 

[CopticChristian]

Some people are impressed with the authority argument. It is a convincing rationale for joining an Orthdox, Catholic, or another group that is the same.
I really do not think most people, Catholic or otherwise, believe what they want. I think they are convinced or not convinced by arguments or their understanding of their churches teachings and act accordingly.
I do not believe the views, beliefs, or most importantly the actions of people really differ that much. At least from what I can tell.

Mormons don’t smoke, drink, have great community outreaches and have stron family values. They act great.

 

[CopticChristian]

Since the authority that led the early Church, convened the great councils, and gave us the ancient Creeds of the faith is now divided, and has been for 1000 years, where does one find that authority?

Jon

That depends on where you believe the authority is as it regards the authority form the year 1000 until now.

 

[JustaServant]

Since the authority that led the early Church, convened the great councils, and gave us the ancient Creeds of the faith is now divided, and has been for 1000 years,*** where does one find that authority?***
Jon

Thats the question my friend.

 

[JonNC]

Blessings my friend. Is it fair to say: Did authority ever cease to exist despite the divisions?

No, but it is fair to say that discerning where the authority is is far more difficult. I see the earthly authority of my communion in scripture, the confessions, and the synod. So, I don;t see myself without an authority. I look to the confessions and my synod’s teaching role in this regard. I certainly don’t look to myself.

All that said, I would like to be able, yes pray for it to happen, that the authority the Lord handed to his apostles was once again in unity. I could submit myself, even abondon my current communion, were that to happen. So, without intending to sound harsh, the calls of some to authority, when even that authority is dvided, seems at times hollow.
I know, it sounds confusing. It is.

Jon