You know, you guys have yet to explain exactly what constitutes becoming a different denomination. Thus far, two ideas have been raised…
- Final authority. The Roman Catholic Church claims the Pope (as the voice of Christ, basically). Protestants either claim scripture (for the sola scriptura folks) or Christ/God as their final authority. That’s 3 different groups I see so far…not even close to 135.
No, because we aren’t talking about some kind of general principle (and yes, when people say “Christ is my final authority,” they are citing a general principle, since Jesus is not wandering around under His proper species to be consulted–they may be talking about private revelation, but then we would have as many “denominations” as there are Protestants, which would really make the Catholics happy!). We are talking about a decision-making person or body who can hold the members of the “denomination” to some kind of accountability, however indirect (i.e., if you disagree, you are no longer part of the group). At least I think that would be a reasonable way to talk about it–I should not assume that this is what the Catholics mean.
- Slight differences in doctrine leading to splintering of denominations. The problem with this, of course, is that various groups do and have splintered from or schism’d with the Roman Catholic Church over the centuries, and I’d dare to point out that current Roman Catholics do differ in belief on some points of theology.
Again, it’s not just about differences of theology, but as you note about differences that result in division.
You raise a very good question which the Catholics have not adequately addressed in this thread. Here is my attempt, for what it’s worth.
As I understand it, the Catholic claim is this:
Catholicism is a definable, visible group of people with a rationale for how to determine theological truth and maintain unity. I.e., as long as you remain part of a local community led by a bishop in communion with the Bishop of Rome, you are clearly part of the Church (I think the Catholics on this board often confuse the issue by calling Catholics they disagree with “false Catholics,” but that’s a separate question!). The point is not that there is no theological disagreement, but that this disagreement does not lead either to an inability to say what the Church teaches (obviously there are points on which one can’t say for sure what the Church teaches, but the Church can clarify its teaching when and if it wishes) or to a schism that makes it impossible to say which of the resulting bodies is the true Church.
Protestantism, on the other hand, replaces the episcopacy/Magisterium with an appeal to Scripture as the final authority. Catholics therefore argue that if Protestantism is true, it ought to lead to a similar degree of unity. I.e., just as there is one body that unquestionably represents the legitimate application of the bishops-in-communion-with-Rome principle of authority, so there ought to be one body that clearly represents the legitimate application of the Scripture-as-only-infallible-authority principle. I think Catholics often pursue this argument in unconvincing ways. But they can surely argue reasonably that even if there were small groups of stubborn, eccentric people who went in their own direction (just as there are tiny groups of people today who follow antipopes or say that the See of Rome is vacant), one should be able to point to one central Protestant body with the same characteristics I ascribed to the Catholic Church above–i.e., the ability to clarify its teaching when desired, and the ability to avoid schisms that result in serious doubt as to which of the resulting bodies is the legitimate “successor.” It’s pretty clear to me from studying the Reformation that the Reformers expected such a body to emerge. If you want to argue that it did, you’re pretty much stuck with either the Lutherans or the Reformed.
The Lutherans have less diversity than the Reformed, but one can point to a family of mainstream Reformed churches (Presbyterians and Continental Reformed, and in modern times also Congregationalists, who have pretty much agreed to differ amicably with the Presbyterians on church government. However, the problem is that both Lutherans and Reformed have divided in modern times into more conservative and more liberal varieties–and not just two of each either. For Lutherans you have the “mainline” variety (ELCA in the U.S.), which is generally to be found in full communion or even union with the mainline Reformed (certainly this is true both in Germany–the Evangelische Kirche–and in the U.S.–the mainline Reformed denominations in the U.S. being the Reformed Church in America, the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., and the United Church of Christ).
