Not all Innovations are Protestant!

[EasterJoy]

I think it is time that we quit blaming the Protestants for every innovation, knuckle-headed or otherwise, that one of our own thinks up. Children who are fully within Holy Mother Church are fully capable of rebelling all on their own, without reference to those who have already left.

Is it too much to ask that we call a wrong-headed innovation a wrong-headed innovation, and leave the Protestants out of it?

I’m not saying every innovation is bad. I’m saying that it isn’t right to immediately assume that because an innovation is inappropriate that it came from the Protestants.

 

[Cat]

I think it is time that we quit blaming the Protestants for every innovation, knuckle-headed or otherwise, that one of our own thinks up. Children who are fully within Holy Mother Church are fully capable of rebelling all on their own, without reference to those who have already left.

Is it too much to ask that we call a wrong-headed innovation a wrong-headed innovation, and leave the Protestants out of it?

I’m not saying every innovation is bad. I’m saying that it isn’t right to immediately assume that because an innovation is inappropriate that it came from the Protestants.

Thank you!

To me, using the word “Protestant” as a derisive adjective is almost as offensive as saying, “That’s so gay!” or “That’s so ghetto.” Shudder.

 

[franklinf]

How so? [Edited]. If there are innovations and such that are Protestant in origin or influenced by Protestantism why is so wrong to denounce it as such? Such innovations should be derided.

 

[jmcrae]

How so? [Edited] If there are innovations and such that are Protestant in origin or influenced by Protestantism why is so wrong to denounce it as such? Such innovations should be derided.

Actually there are a lot of knuckle-headed innovations that aren’t even physically possible for Protestants to do - for example, sand in the holy water fonts during Lent.

Protestants don’t even have holy water, let alone any fonts to put either the holy water, or any sand, into. So, you can’t blame that one on the Protestants.

And hand-holding during the Our Father. Most Protestant churches that even have the Our Father during their services, to start with, don’t stand up to pray it - they pray it sitting down - and they don’t hold hands while praying sitting down.

 

[Shike]

How so? Protestants are heretics and have committed great crimes against Catholics and the Church. If there are innovations and such that are Protestant in origin or influenced by Protestantism why is so wrong to denounce it as such? Such innovations should be derided.

Being heretical and being a heretic is not the same! Protestants in the general sense would be herectical. Be careful.
You’re also assuming the protestant inovation is bad/wrong. But I agree, such bad innovations should be corrected.

peace,
Michael

 

[franklinf]

Actually there are a lot of knuckle-headed innovations that aren’t even physically possible for Protestants to do - for example, sand in the holy water fonts during Lent.

Protestants don’t even have holy water, let alone any fonts to put either the holy water, or any sand, into. So, you can’t blame that one on the Protestants.

And hand-holding during the Our Father. Most Protestant churches that even have the Our Father during their services, to start with, don’t stand up to pray it - they pray it sitting down - and they don’t hold hands while praying sitting down.

Yes, I’m aware of that. Sadly there are abuses that occur from within HMC. I was saying IF the innovations are Protestant in origin, it isn’t wrong to denounce them as such.

 

[franklinf]

[Edited]

Protestant innovation is bad / wrong. The Catholic Church is not a protestant religion. Protestantism is at odds with Catholicism - it is a deviation and distortion of its teachings. I don’t see how a Protestant innovation could be a good thing or right.

 

[jmcrae]

Yes, I’m aware of that. Sadly there are abuses that occur from within HMC. I was saying IF the innovations are Protestant in origin, it isn’t wrong to denounce them as such.

Sure. I just don’t think there are very many of them. And there seems to be a knee-jerk tendency to blame any and all idiocy on some kind of Protestant influence, even when the said idiocy has no connection whatsoever to any form of Protestantism.

 

[jmcrae]

I’m not quite sure I understand the difference. What do you mean being heretical and being a heretic is not the same?

A heretic has to start out Catholic. Someone born into Protestantism can never be a “heretic” because he can’t reject what he never had, to begin with. (A heretic is a person who has rejected his Catholic faith.)

Heresy, on the other hand, is pretty much what Protestantism is made of - heresy is a form of Christianity that rejects at least one essential doctrine of the Catholic faith.

 

[EasterJoy]

[Edited]

And it is not an assumption. Protestant innovation is bad / wrong. The Catholic Church is not a protestant religion. Protestantism is at odds with Catholicism - it is a deviation and distortion of its teachings. I don’t see how a Protestant innovation could be a good thing or right.

I won’t argue that, because that is not my point. To make an analogy: just because something is an organized crime does not mean that the Mafia invented it.

It is possible to teach the Mafia a new trick with regards to organized crime. It is even possible to commit an organized crime that the Mafia wouldn’t touch because it violates their own code of ethics! Likewise, it is also possible to think up an innovation that none of the the Protestants have thought up yet, let alone used.

I don’t mean to call the Protestants liturgical criminals. Simply put, that is outside the discussion. I mean to say that even if you have parted with the Church on issue after issue, even if you have called her Babylon and who knows what else, that does not mean that every parting of the ways thereafter can rightly be blamed on you.

Let’s face it: it is fully possible for an innovation to be introduced from within the Catholic Church that would appall the Protestants. As many Protestant as there are, and as many as there are that grew up Catholic, it would be hard to introduce an innovation that wouldn’t appall some Protestants! If you were to call such an innovation “Protestant”, many a Protestant would take it as an insult, and rightly so!

An innovation can be appalling and opposed to everything the Church stands for without anyone outside the Church having put a fingerprint on it.

So call it appalling and opposed to everything the Church teaches. Call it heretical, if it is heretical. But if you don’t know for a fact that the Protestants invented the idea, don’t call it Protestant!!

 

[franklinf]

I think you are misunderstanding what I said. My point was that IF it is a protestant innovation then it is not wrong to denounce such an innovation. IF an innovation has its origin in protestantism then it should be treated with derision and scorned for being a protestant innovation. Sorry for any confusion.

 

[MDK]

I think it is time that we quit blaming the Protestants for every innovation, knuckle-headed or otherwise, that one of our own thinks up. Children who are fully within Holy Mother Church are fully capable of rebelling all on their own, without reference to those who have already left.

Is it too much to ask that we call a wrong-headed innovation a wrong-headed innovation, and leave the Protestants out of it?

I’m not saying every innovation is bad. I’m saying that it isn’t right to immediately assume that because an innovation is inappropriate that it came from the Protestants.

Where did this come from… what’s the motivation?

Have we never heard of “Cafeteria Catholics”, or “Catholic when convenient”, or “Catholic in name only?” One can call themselves Catholic… doesn’t necessarily make it so unless they really are. Whether formally inside or not, one can misinterpret on their own, and go their own way. If you’re talking only about promoting error in teachings, it’s quite clear that some formally outside the Church know more truth about Christ than some formally inside who arrogantly or ignorantly prefer their own way (normally they are not very involved with the Church, if at all). However, one who is in complete communion with the Pope and Magisterium has no equal in the Protestant side if discussing formal teachings. For one, I am normally more insistent with those who want to call themselves Catholic, and yet will not fully commit. If we desire to call ourselves Catholic, we must be Catholic… otherwise, it really doesn’t mean much.

So, we must ask, what’s your point? Certainly those formally inside and those formally outside can be in error. I think that many on this board, myself included often are not referring to Catholics in error when using the term Catholic… as in what is Catholic (not abuses and distortions). I use it to normally refer to those who are in communion with the Pope and who (at least seek to) buy into the full teachings. This use is contextual, though. For those seeking to honestly understand what another says, the it’s normally obvious from the context.

 

[Shike]

[Edited]

And it is not an assumption. Protestant innovation is bad / wrong. The Catholic Church is not a protestant religion. Protestantism is at odds with Catholicism - it is a deviation and distortion of its teachings. I don’t see how a Protestant innovation could be a good thing or right.

[Edited]

As to the second part, we need to zero in on the definition of “protestant inovation”

• is it specific changes/abuses going against what’s in the missal? as in protestant influences against the Mass’ very being?
• is it specific changes brought about by Vatican II? (for instance, saying the doxology after the our father [someone correct me if I’m wrong]) as in protestant influenced in its very being?
  I interpreted it as the latter, but in hindsight it doesn’t make all that much sense and I’m now pretty sure you meant the former.

peace,
Michael

 

[snhs]

Thank you!

To me, using the word “Protestant” as a derisive adjective is almost as offensive as saying, “That’s so gay!” or “That’s so ghetto.” Shudder.

I don’t think most of us use Protestant as a “derisive adjective”, perhaps some do but I certainly haven’t seen anyone do so. The term is mainly used as an adjective to describe someone/something which originates from Protestant groups as opposed to, in this forum anyway, from within the Catholic Church. Surely you should be able to understand that it is proper that Catholic practices are used in the Catholic Mass rather than imported from other religious groups to suit the convenience of people’s musical preference/enthusiasm for prancing round the Altar/holding hands/eating pizza or whatever else?

Gay is a word which in it’s original, and proper usage, means happy/merry. I don’t see why we should allow the term to be misused by pressure groups for their own purposes. A ghetto is a technical term describing a section of a city which is often, though not exclusively, poor and inhabited by people with a common racial/religious or social background. Again there is nothing offensive attached to it, or it’s use in written or spoken English. Perhaps before you begin assigning illogical and unwarranted emotional reactions to words it’s better to understand their meaning rather than arbitrarily attaching some subtext which is not inherent in their meaning.

 

[bpbasilphx]

If there are innovations and such that are Protestant in origin or influenced by Protestantism why is so wrong to denounce it as such?

**The original poster’s comment is that not all innovations ARE “inspired by protestantism”.

Singing something during the distribution of Communion was an innovation in St. Augustine’s day. It was one he defended and you certainly can’t blame those nasty ole prots for that.

Reception of Communion in the hand is an ancient practice in itself, and is a LIVING practice in certain Eastern liturgies, and was NOT inspired by protestantism. (Please do not interpret this as my defending communion in the hand; I don’t do it, myself. I’m just saying it’s NOT in itself protestant.)**

 

[MusicMan]

Actually there are a lot of knuckle-headed innovations that aren’t even physically possible for Protestants to do - for example, sand in the holy water fonts during Lent.

Protestants don’t even have holy water, let alone any fonts to put either the holy water, or any sand, into. So, you can’t blame that one on the Protestants.

Some parishes in the Anglican Communion have holy water, just like Catholic parishes do, although I doubt they could be blamed for the sand in the holy water font debacle. It might be an abuse that’s crept into their churches, and they probably blame us!

And hand-holding during the Our Father. Most Protestant churches that even have the Our Father during their services, to start with, don’t stand up to pray it - they pray it sitting down - and they don’t hold hands while praying sitting down.

Methodists, American Baptists, Lutherans, and Anglicans all stand for the Our Father, but I don’t see hand holding when I play for worship in those denominations. In fact, I mostly see hands folded properly or, in rarer instances, in the orans position.

 

[EasterJoy]

Some parishes in the Anglican Communion have holy water, just like Catholic parishes do, although I doubt they could be blamed for the sand in the holy water font debacle. It might be an abuse that’s crept into their churches, and they probably blame us!

Exactly. One doesn’t have to be Protestant to be under the impression that there are extra points given for originality.

And if the Anglicans are infested with weird innovations that some Catholics thought up, only to hear other Catholics denounce the innovations as Protestant?..Talk about adding insult to injury! Could you blame them for taking offense at that?

 

[MusicMan]

By our very nature, humans seem to need an “enemy.” For strict GIRM-adherent Catholics, the enemy is often those teh_evulz Protestants. When not, them, it’s those teh_evulz liberalz. Often, it’s the teh_evulz Protestants egging on the liberalz.

Many times, though, what’s actually happening is someone meaning well, someone else thinks it’s a good idea, and suddenly everyone’s liturgy gets sullied by it. We might be wise to stick with liturgically conservative Christians across the denominations, just to keep some of the weird innovations from polluting everyone’s liturgy.

 

[Cat]

I don’t think most of us use Protestant as a “derisive adjective”, perhaps some do but I certainly haven’t seen anyone do so. The term is mainly used as an adjective to describe someone/something which originates from Protestant groups as opposed to, in this forum anyway, from within the Catholic Church. Surely you should be able to understand that it is proper that Catholic practices are used in the Catholic Mass rather than imported from other religious groups to suit the convenience of people’s musical preference/enthusiasm for prancing round the Altar/holding hands/eating pizza or whatever else?

Gay is a word which in it’s original, and proper usage, means happy/merry. I don’t see why we should allow the term to be misused by pressure groups for their own purposes. A ghetto is a technical term describing a section of a city which is often, though not exclusively, poor and inhabited by people with a common racial/religious or social background. Again there is nothing offensive attached to it, or it’s use in written or spoken English. Perhaps before you begin assigning illogical and unwarranted emotional reactions to words it’s better to understand their meaning rather than arbitrarily attaching some subtext which is not inherent in their meaning.

And one again, I will state that since you don’t live in the United States, you have no idea what I am talking about.

Also, please stop using hyperbole. Prancing around the altar eating pizza? Have you honestly heard people on this Board, like me, suggest such things?

 

[MusicMan]

I happen to like the juxtiposition of the Mass and pizza. In fact, I think I’ll go out for pizza Sunday after Mass.