C
Contarini
Guest
Most Pentecostals don’t believe this. What they added was the idea that speaking in tongues is a gift that modern Christians should expect to receive. This has been taken up by the Charismatic Movement in the Catholic Church (and in many other churches), so it does appear to be a positive doctrinal contribution made by Protestants.I could be wrong, but I think that that’s another restriction. It takes away the salvation of those that have not spoken in tongues. It doesn’t seem to add.
I think the problem with your OP is that you define Protestant doctrines purely in negative terms, which automatically gives you the result you desire.
For instance, I would argue that the key element in the Protestant doctrine of justification is not the denial that good works make any contribution to one’s final salvation (a denial that would not be upheld by Wesleyans, Anabaptists, or Restorationists, just for starters), but the doctrine that saving faith is unique and indivisible–a positive, living thing that cannot simply be reduced to a composite of “dead faith” and love, as in the Catholic doctrine. Such a faith is by definition incompatible with willful persistence in mortal sin or (which amounts to the same thing) with the deliberate refusal to pursue holiness and to love God and one’s neighbor.
This is a positive doctrine not found in pre-Reformation Catholicism. As far as I’m concerned, it’s the only part of “sola fide” worth keeping. (I know that not all Protestants would agree with the definition I’ve given, but I can show evidence that Luther and the original Reformers more broadly would agree with it. And it is certainly the teaching of my own Wesleyan tradition.)
Edwin