For Protesters (aka: Protestants)

[tGette]

Thank you O.S. Luke for that tidbit of information.
The only problem is…that is what the word now means in English…actually that is partially true. English is funny like this. Of the many definitions “protest” has, one still retains the idea of “witnessing”. The actually definition is to promise or to affirm. The same is true of the word apology. Though I doubt you really ever hear people use these words in their alternate definitions. Maybe we should start doing it to confuse people.

Anywho…

I understand your point Swan about the people in the Bible belt, but my question in the thread was meant specifically for those who do refer to themselves as Protestant, even if there are only a few of them.

This is my apology to my protest!

 

[Harpazo]

The Latin protestari literally means “witness,” and in Elizabethan times to protest meant “to witness” or “make a confession or witness.” Indeed, most non-Catholics after the Reformation called themselves Reformed or Evangelical. The word Protestant was not even used to refer to the Anglican Church until long after the Reformation had taken place.

It really had a dual meaning when the word was coined; it wasn’t just used as a negative; it was also used in the positive. Over time, it - like many words - drifted from it’s original. Even Luther’s own “protest” was a witness: “Here I stand; I can do no other.”

One author has suggested that the same thing has happened to the word apology/apologia. It was coined to mean “formal defense” but has been replaced to mean “to repent or ask pardon.”

Since CAF has much to do about apologetics, I wonder if we would want people to define “apology” by what most people think it means. It may be the same for “protestant” - a seemingly bad word might in fact be a good word.

Shlom lokh!

It can be a good word, such as the events in the 50s, 60s and 70s with Civil Rights. But it can also be a bad one, as I’m sure you are aware of, leading to splintering, doctrinal in-fighting, schism, innovative beliefs, heterodoxy, et al.

If we’re going to go on this subject of verbial shift, might I add another? The word “to pray” has changed it’s meaning in English, at least in many Protestant circles. Most Protestants without much liturgical tradition equate it with worshipping and speaking to God alone. We know this not to be the case from Middle English and beyond. It simply means “to ask.” It’s just another word for it.

In fact, in Italian the word “pregare” means “to pray, ask, implore, beg.” To my knowledge, it has been used with that meaning for many centuries prior to the Reformations of Luther, Henry, et al.

Alloho minokhoun,
Andrew

 

[embertx3]

I was raised Baptist and was RC for close to 20 years. I don’t know a single Protestant (and I come from the Bible Belt where there are very few Catholics relative to population) who id themsevles as “Protestants” at any time other than to differentiate themselves from Catholics - in other words, they only use the term to in the place of “non-Catholic Christians” - it’s shorter and folks know that they mean. IOW, if you asked them what faith they were they would answer “Baptist”, “Methodist” or whatever. They wouldn’t say “Protestant”.

I too live in the Bible belt and used to work with the public doing admissions to the hospital and majority of them would say “Protestant” then I would ask which one/denomination. I often wondered why they would say “Protestant” and not Baptist…etc.

 

[Robbinson]

In summation:
Why this attitude of “anything but Catholic”? And why are people content with any form of Protestantism (as long as it is not Catholic)? **

The criticism I hear most (I’m Protestant, though in the interest of full disclosure, very much drawn to Catholicism) from other Protestants is the view that Catholics don’t accept Jesus’ sacrifice as sufficient for our salvation, but rather requires works in addition to acceptance of Christ’s sacrifice for salvation. On that basis, there is a rejection by many Protestants of the Catholic faith and they believe this failure to rely on Christ as the sole means of salvation disqualifies Catholics from truly being Chrisitan.

I have come to believe this is an errant view as I now understand the Catholic doctrine that salvation does come thorugh Christ alone and God’s grace, and that the sacraments are a form of God’s grace - consistent with scripture and tradition.

Protestants also, generally speaking, have terrible difficulty with the concept of an infallible Pope and Marian veneration (often mischaracterized as worship and idolotry). I’ve learned that there is oh so much more in common among us as Christians than differences and I"m troubled by the viseral reaction of many Protestants to Catholics.

I’m sincerely thankful that such treatment has not, generally, been repaid in kind and I can enjoy fellowship here with my brothers and sisters in Christ notwithstanding the issues of doctrine which divide us (though the divide is not as wide as I had thought).

Blessings,

Brian

 

[SIA]

Warning! Many questions within one thread:

I want to know why for those who protest the Catholic Church that a lot seem to adopt this mentality that it is OK to be any kind of Christian as long as it is not Catholic?

?? Where did you get that from? I have never seen such a notion here.

 

[ChristianKnight]

I have said this before and I’ll say it again.

We do not preach anything about the Catholic Church in our church. We do not have some major beef with you, we have never covered anything to do with Catholic Church, scripture is what we base on.

I do not know of any major conspiracy to destroy the Catholic Church.

 

[SIA]

I have said this before and I’ll say it again.

We do not preach anything about the Catholic Church in our church. We do not have some major beef with you, we have never covered anything to do with Catholic Church, scripture is what we base on.

I do not know of any major conspiracy to destroy the Catholic Church.

That’s because there is no conspiracy against the Catholic church. There is an ancient thought process that says that you can gain much attention if you put a target on yourself and make others believe that you are a victim.

 

[tGette]

Again, the thread is meant specifically for those who do fit the profile I describe. By now we should realize that there is variation no matter where you search for something. The truth of the matter is that there are Protestants who do this.

My thread was not about Protestants secretly trying to overrun or do away with the Church or even bash the Church during their worship services. You have to admit, by choosing to not be Catholic is an external sign that you would prefer the Catholic Church to be done away with. (Please tell me if I am wrong.)

I was simply saying that in attitude a lot seem to adopt the idea that it is good to be anything, but Catholic (or as someone pointed out, it is OK to be any kind of Trinitarian Christian).

 

[Robbinson]

That’s because there is no conspiracy against the Catholic church. There is an ancient thought process that says that you can gain much attention if you put a target on yourself and make others believe that you are a victim.

I dont’ know, to be fair, on the Protestant board I participate in, its so bad (the attack on Catholicism) that I find my self fellowshiping here much more than there!

 

[SIA]

Again, the thread is meant specifically for those who do fit the profile I describe. By now we should realize that there is variation no matter where you search for something. The truth of the matter is that there are Protestants who do this.

So? And these forums are chock full of Catholics who under no circumstances whatsoever will truly fellowship with Protestants so I must ask you, what is your point?

 

[tGette]

SIA:
My point is the questions I address in the thread.

I was simply asking why some Protestants consider themselves Protestant and never really care much about which kind of Protestant it is, as long as it is not Catholic.

Even if there was only one person in the world who fit this profile…so be it. That was my question. I was seeking understanding.

 

[SIA]

SIA:
My point is the questions I address in the thread.

I was simply asking why some Protestants consider themselves Protestant and never really care much about which kind of Protestant it is, as long as it is not Catholic.

Even if there was only one person in the world who fit this profile…so be it. That was my question. I was seeking understanding.

And my response was that i would like to see proof of this gross bias you speak of. I’ve never seen someone say that as long as you are Protestant, any kind of Protestant is okay fine just as long as you aren’t Catholic. There’s playing the victim role and then there is lying down on the train tracks and calling every TV station within 100 miles to come and film it.

 

[tGette]

My goodness…ok.

Again, I was not claiming this to be the entire populace of Protestentdom.

For example:
The pastor at the Methodist church I used to go to. She had this mentality.

 

[SIA]

My goodness…ok.

Again, I was not claiming this to be the entire populace of Protestentdom.

For example:
The pastor at the Methodist church I used to go to. She had this mentality.

Why didn’t you simply say what you meant then instead of smearing it onto all Protestants?

 

[Robbinson]

Why didn’t you simply say what you meant then instead of smearing it onto all Protestants?

Hi SIA

I don’t think that was her intent - and a fair reading of the original post I think shows she meant why do “alot” of Protestants hold this view (and it is a common, but certainly not uniform) view. “Protestant” means “other than Catholic” so by definition it refers to a rejection of, and separation from, Rome.

I have personally witnessed some pretty extreme antiCatholic views relatively widely held, particularly among evangelical protestants to the point that they object to any outreach or common efforts, even in the name of Christ. While this is not uniform, by any means, is a significant enough phenominon to warrant the OP, I think.

Blessings,

Brian

 

[tGette]

Thanks for the rebuttal Robbinson.

Though, I must say…I am not a female…but thanks for thinking so. LoL!

SIA:
No matter what, when asking a question there is always going to be an exception and someone out of the ordinary, so to speak. I apologize if I did not understand an earlier question properly when I could have just given you the answer you wanted beforehand.

Aside from my old Pastor, of people I do not know specifically on the Internet, I have seen this mentality been shown before.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Thanks for the rebuttal Robbinson.

Though, I must say…I am not a female…but thanks for thinking so. LoL!

He probably had you confused with an Episcopalian.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Warning! Many questions within one thread:

I want to know why for those who protest the Catholic Church that a lot seem to adopt this mentality that it is OK to be any kind of Christian as long as it is not Catholic?

I can think of plenty of “types” of Christian who would be better of Roman Catholic.

Why are a lot of protesters content with the generic term “Protestant” although a myriad of theological beliefs fall under that blanket? Do you like the fact that your faith is described as protesting against something?

No; partly because the original context of the term Protestant has been lost to the mists of history.

It seems to me that every church (besides the Catholic Church) is based on denying the Catholic Church in some way or another and that their manifesto is more on why they are not a Catholic Christian instead of why they are their specific version of protesting Christian.

In summation:
Why this attitude of “anything but Catholic”? And why are people content with any form of Protestantism (as long as it is not Catholic)? **

I am not Lutheran because I don’t want to be Catholic. I am Lutheran because I believe it is the pure teaching of the Word of God. I do not set myself in the position of holding a negative faith.

The only thing I officially protest is bad Italian restaurants.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

A reformation could have come about without needing to form new churches. And your gripe with the Cathecism being so long, do you have the same problem with the Bible?

I think this is easy to say nowdays with hindsight being 20/20. The way the medievel Church was geared back then, if one person spoke up in opposition to the Church, it was hanging or burned at the stake time. The Church could NOT police itself at all; the Church was completely autocratic and very very very politically corrupt. Popes, infallible theologically or not, were personally extremely corrupt while many bishops were not much better. The Church hierarchy at times behaved like El Cosa Nostra lol…It’s easy to say, “heck, they should have just reformed the church, not gone protestant,” but no one would listen to folks like Luther. Luther’s reforms began very moderately and it was only when he was spurned, chided, threatened, and bullied that he expanded his reforms further and further away from the medievel church. He began just merely wanting to stop the sale of indulgences. Had the Church listened and been open to a modest Augustinian monk, things might have gone more smoothly? Remember, the Church can be theologically infallible, but personally and politically VERY crooked!!

 

[Robbinson]

I am not Lutheran because I don’t want to be Catholic. I am Lutheran because I believe it is the pure teaching of the Word of God. I do not set myself in the position of holding a negative faith.
.

I can certainly respect this statement (though we would disagree, perhaps, on what is the pure teaching of the Word of God - but that’s ok, still brothers in Christ - much better to have positive faith rather than negative faith.

Perhaps I’m slow on the uptake, but I didn’t “get” the meaning of your reply that I must have thought he was Episcopalian, however .

Brian