I have a question: How are protestants doing without the Pope?

[Conor7]

I would like to know that, please. Unless there is only one other thing, like the Apostle’s Creed, which I believe all or most Christians also believe.

Well I can only speak for Anglicans, but yes we adhere to the Apostle’s Creed and the Nicene Creed and so on. In addition to our 39 Articles, we adhere to tradition and scripture as passed down through Apostolic Succession. (I won’t debate anyone on the validity of Anglican Orders, so don’t bait me.)

Our doctrine is laid out in the Book of Common Prayer, just as Lutheran’s have the Book of Concord.

The Book of Common Prayer as summed up by Wikipedia: The Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds, the Athanasian Creed, the scriptures (via the lectionary), the sacraments, daily prayer, the catechism, and apostolic succession in the context of the historic threefold ministry.

 

[ThereWasADream]

And Catholics are free to believe things not dogmatically defined by their Church, too. Doctrine is doctrine, adiaphora is adiaphora. Example: Was the Blessed Virgin assumed before her death, or after? Catholics are free to believe either way.

What I’m getting at is that I believe of the pope what the early Church believed of the pope, what Orthodoxy still believes of the pope.

Jon

…Yes, and so we can believe whatever we like as long as it’s irrelevant to salvation. Everything else has, more or less, some teaching about it. I really don’t know enough about Lutherans to say more, but from what I heard from a few, they felt that their Church said they could interpret the Bible personally like most other protestant denominations. Now, I know enough about poorly catechized Catholics to know that I may have just met a bunch of “crummy” Lutherans, so I’ll give you benefit of the doubt. It has little relevance to the point I was making - that most protestant denominations allow for a mostly free interpretation of the Bible, except for a few basic tenets that all christians believe, and then a few more besides that set them apart from the other denominations. For example, the Church of the Brethren = Apostle’s Creed + nonviolence and simple living. That’s it.

So you believe the Pope is the successor of Peter?

 

[fhansen]

The original question should be how did a Christianity with a Pope do?
In the west where it had a Pope, it split.
In the east where it did not, it did not split as much.
I see a disconnect in the premise of the question.
Christianity split. So the split is supposed to indict the groups that sprang from the original groups but not the original groups or the religion itself? If division can be used as an evaluation of Truth on the Protestant end but not on the religion itself, why? Why is the third generation liable?

Because they split from the historic church and then re-split and re-split, continuing the tradition of splitting, proving that their doctrine of sola scriptura, where they thought they’d received the authority to split, was wrong. The CC was liable insofar as it allowed for any wrong practices, but not for wrong doctrine, which is the heart of the controversy.

 

[MartyrForJesus]

The original question should be how did a Christianity with a Pope do?
In the west where it had a Pope, it split.
And without a Pope, 35,000+ splits in a third of the time…
In the east where it did not, it did not split as much.
But, there was one split in the West. There have been numerous splits in the East, with the Russian Orthodox Church, Greek Orthodox, etc etc.

 

[LinuxUser]

I look and I see how the holy father is calling the world to God and also calling the attention of the Bishops to the uphold the teachings of the Christ and His Church. Teaching and calling for unity of the Church.

**Optatus of Milevus
“In the city of Rome the episcopal chair was given first to Peter; the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head—that is why he is also called Cephas ‘Rock’]—of all the apostles, the one chair in which unity is maintained by all. Neither do the apostles proceed individually on their own, and anyone who would [presume to] set up another chair in opposition to that single chair would, by that very fact, be a schismatic and a sinner. . . . Recall, then, the origins of your chair, those of you who wish to claim for yourselves the title of holy Church” (The Schism of the Donatists2:2 [A.D. 367]). **

Just fine, Thank you

 

[wisdomseeker]

I would say they are not doing too well.

 

[Conor7]

I would say they are not doing too well.

So you entire point was to bait people into an argument to proselytize? Is that correct?

 

[LinuxUser]

So you entire point was to bait people into an argument to proselytize? Is that correct?

I figured that

 

[wisdomseeker]

So you entire point was to bait people into an argument to proselytize? Is that correct?

I would say that they are not helping the Catholic Church.

 

[BrianH]

??? Name any protestant denomination?

Exactly what I meant! You have the Lutheran confessions, then…and everything else is up for grabs. Like I said. Twice.

As for that second bit…I really have no idea what you’re trying to get at.

You have to follow the conversation. No denomination that I know of teaches that every other denomination is correct in matters of doctrine or practice. Right? Lets start back there.

 

[BrianH]

I would say they are not doing too well.

Okay. :shrug:

 

[BrianH]

MartyrForJesus:
So lets be clear. The Catholic Church split early on. There were tons of groups that Catholics formed even in the Ante-Nicene period. Paulicians, etc.
Then we had the big split when Catholics became the Oriental Orthodox. Then the big split with the Catholics becoming the Eastern Orthodox. Then several other Catholics split off the Catholic Church. Several Catholics became Lutherans. Several Catholics became Anglicans. Several Catholics became Anabaptists. etc
The splits those Catholics started also split. So then the splitting continued and sped up and continues. Of course other Catholic groups STILL break off like the PNC and the Old Catholics.
And all of this occured while all of these Catholics had the Pope. Correct?

 

[wisdomseeker]

So lets be clear. The Catholic Church split early on. There were tons of groups that Catholics formed even in the Ante-Nicene period. Paulicians, etc.
Then we had the big split when Catholics became the Oriental Orthodox. Then the big split with the Catholics becoming the Eastern Orthodox. Then several other Catholics split off the Catholic Church. Several Catholics became Lutherans. Several Catholics became Anglicans. Several Catholics became Anabaptists. etc
The splits those Catholics started also split. So then the splitting continued and sped up and continues. Of course other Catholic groups STILL break off like the PNC and the Old Catholics.
And all of this occured while all of these Catholics had the Pope. Correct?

That is the question. how are they doing now without the pope? They thought they would be better off without the pope. So, are they?
They are not helping the CC.

 

[fhansen]

So lets be clear. The Catholic Church split early on. There were tons of groups that Catholics formed even in the Ante-Nicene period. Paulicians, etc.
Then we had the big split when Catholics became the Oriental Orthodox. Then the big split with the Catholics becoming the Eastern Orthodox. Then several other Catholics split off the Catholic Church. Several Catholics became Lutherans. Several Catholics became Anglicans. Several Catholics became Anabaptists. etc
The splits those Catholics started also split. So then the splitting continued and sped up and continues. Of course other Catholic groups STILL break off like the PNC and the Old Catholics.
And all of this occured while all of these Catholics had the Pope. Correct?

Yep, and Adam & Eve split with God even though they had Him. Having rightful authority is no guarantee that people will follow it.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I think every Pastor and literal father should be doing the same as the Pope
They should instruct their families (literal and figurative) to uphold the teachings of Christ.

But do they know the Teachings of Christ. How are they to teach what they do not know?

they claim to understand the Bible and Catholic Church does not. Women preaching and they say they understand the Bible and CC does not. Some with the Bible are marrying man with man and so forth. they still say they know the Bible more than the CC.

 

[BrianH]

That is the question. how are they doing now without the pope? They thought they would be better off without the pope. So, are they?
They are not helping the CC.

I do not think they care, most of them about the CC, more than the CC probably cares about them. I mean sure the CC meets with some groups and really not too much practical happens. They craft a few statements here and there. For all the talk about unity nothing really happens.

I can think of one exception of real substance. I believe some Anglicans will return because of recent Vatican overtures and dialogue but that is all I can think of.
Okay back to your statement.
Lets take any denomination. Some shrink. Some grow. They build colleges or some other things to leave their mark and impact society. They help people in need. They convert unbelievers. They steal a few from other churches and vice versa. In general, things seem to go the way they always have.
I think the split has nothing to do with a pope. People form different views because of having access to information. As people get access to information and form different opinions, they split. I can elaborate more but right off the bat I would say that is the cause. Nothing to do with a Pope either way in my view.

 

[BrianH]

But do they know the Teachings of Christ. How are they to teach what they do not know?

they claim to understand the Bible and Catholic Church does not. Women preaching and they say they understand the Bible and CC does not. Some with the Bible are marrying man with man and so forth. they still say they know the Bible more than the CC.

wisdomseeker. I think for the most part they do not care about the Catholic Church. Some fundamentalists and evangelicals perhaps but no one goes around talking about Catholics in any Methodist church I have belonged to for example. When they do it is not bad at all.
For example, it is common during confirmation to go visit an Orthodox or Catholic church in the UMC

 

[wisdomseeker]

Your OP isn’t about how you address individuals. It was asking how others would address your question. But, clearly, you are smart enough to ask, “how are Lutherans doing without a pope”.

And this is the flaw; you are not asking about a belief system. you are trying to group together various belief systems, as if they were one. Lutheranism, for instance, is not the
same belief system as Calvinism. There are some similarities, of course. But then both have similarities to Catholicism.

Jon

And my question is: how are they doing without the Pope?

Pope Damasus I**
“Likewise it is decreed . . . that it ought to be announced that . . . the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it” (Decree of Damasus 3 [A.D. 382]).**

 

[BrianH]

Yep, and Adam & Eve split with God even though they had Him. Having rightful authority is no guarantee that people will follow it.

Absolutely! We agree.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I do not think they care, most of them about the CC, more than the CC probably cares about them. I mean sure the CC meets with some groups and really not too much practical happens. They craft a few statements here and there. For all the talk about unity nothing really happens.

I can think of one exception of real substance. I believe some Anglicans will return because of recent Vatican overtures and dialogue but that is all I can think of.
Okay back to your statement.
Lets take any denomination. Some shrink. Some grow. They build colleges or some other things to leave their mark and impact society. They help people in need. They convert unbelievers. They steal a few from other churches and vice versa. In general, things seem to go the way they always have.
I think the split has nothing to do with a pope. People form different views because of having access to information. As people get access to information and form different opinions, they split. I can elaborate more but right off the bat I would say that is the cause. Nothing to do with a Pope either way in my view.

Hummmm… you dont see a problem there? there is no authority to tell them what to believe. So, all they doing is confusing people who in turn dont know who to believe. they are not helping the CC.

Pope Damasus I
“Likewise it is decreed . . . that it ought to be announced that . . . the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it” (Decree of Damasus 3 [A.D. 382]).