Offended at being called Protestant

[Dave_Noonan]

I am not sure what errors you are having a beef with. Converts like Tim Stables and others will speak to the ideas and beliefs that they knew and grew up with while in Protestant Churches but that doesn’t mean that they are speaking for all Protestants because even they say they aren’t. The background of Tim Stables is going to be much more common than lets say someone from a liberal Protestant background like myself. I had in the Methodist Church the religious ed director who didn’t’ believe in the virgin birth. Denominational liberal Protestantism is much more in the decline and smaller numbers than evangelical/charismatic groups that Tim Stable came from. Plus there is movement from and between Protestant groups as they split and reform etc and so. When I attended non-denominational Charismatic churches, everyone there was an ex-something 99% being Protestant. That is the dilemma of Protestantism. Now may you don’t want to think of yourself as “Protestant” but, if you are not Catholic which as one poster pointed out is monolithic, or Orthodox which has more divisions, then you come out of the reformation in some manner, even if you don’t think so. Usually when the Catholic apologists are addressing things taught in the wide river that never ends of Protestantism, they address things that are most commonly taught and thought of which is going to be in the evangelical/fundamentalist stream of things. Likewise those are the groups that are or can be most anti-Catholics and our Catholic apologist are usually trying to answer some of those charges. Likewise even for the uninformed, unchurched person, their view of even Protestantism is going to shaped by what they see on TV in the roles of Joel Osteen and Joyce Meyers who represent even a small fraction of Protestantism.

I think Tim Staples could clean up probably 75% of his errors by substituting the word “Evangelical” for “Protestant”. Ideally, CA and other Catholic apologists would simply ban the word “Protestant” from their shows and writing because it would force them to be more truthful and accurate.

Unfortunately though, when apologists like Tim Staples present what they call the “Protestant” position, it’s usually some mishmash of American Evangelicalism often followed by some inaccurate historical information about Martin Luther—who theologically wouldn’t have had that much in common with Evangelical thought—the latter stemming from the Calvinist and/or radical branches of the Reformation.

Because Evangelical/Fundamentalist theology is easiest to critique, the tactic that the Catholic apologists use is to paint all non-Catholics/non-Orthodox with the same Evangelical/fundamentalist broad-brush. That’s just wrong and that’s what I “have a beef” with to answer your question. The tactic is dishonest and contrary to claims that apolgists are people dedicated to finding out and disseminating the truth.

 

[St_Francis]

To me, it’s really just a matter of mutual respect. Perhaps there are some people (maybe living in Northern Ireland for example) who wish to be referred to as “Protestants” but I would say almost no one in the U.S. prefers that designation over something else. So if someone wishes to refer to him or herself as a “Baptist” that would (logically) be a good name to use.

If someone introduced himself as “Stephen,” I would be loath to then call him “Steve” or “Stevie”; much less “Joey” or “Jack.” So part of this is showing mutual respect and part of this is just the simple need to be accurate and prudentially avoid perpetuating error.

I think you could say that all non-Catholics are united in their rejection of papal authority as the Catholic Church has laid it out. Beyond something pretty simple like that, all over-generalizations are just that.

So, in discussing an issue like baptism, I would refer to Baptist, Prebyterian, Anglican, or etc., but if I wanted to speak of the wider non-Catholic, non-Orthodox group of Christians, would it be OK to speak of Protestants?

 

[Peter_J]

Quick question, Peter. I’m curious what criteria you use to define Anglicans and Lutherans as catholic vs. Presbyterians, Methodists, etc?

I won’t – in fact I don’t think I could – give a complete answer to that; but I’ll just say that I see it largely as a matter of convention. Plus it just seems to make sense to me to consider Anglicans and Lutherans to be both catholic and protestant. (Of course, I realize that’s somewhat shaky reasoning since I’m going against another popular convention – namely, that “Protestant” should be written with a capital P.)

 

[Dave_Noonan]

So, in discussing an issue like baptism, I would refer to Baptist, Prebyterian, Anglican, or etc., but if I wanted to speak of the wider non-Catholic, non-Orthodox group of Christians, would it be OK to speak of Protestants?

What exactly do you wish to say about them? I think if you avoid concepts such as “Protestant beliefs” or “Protestant practices” and/or inaccuracies and generalizations about the Reformation, you might be OK.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

I normally do not chime in, but I will make an exception in this case.
Generalizations are a problem that should be addressed. I have often seen a thead with a title like “Why do Protestants Hate Catholics?” Or “Why do Protestants think the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon?” Which I change to “some Protestants” , “some Non-Catholic Christians”, or “Fundamentalists” for the sake of clarification and charitableness as not all non-Catholic Christians teach those doctrines.
“Protestant” should not be used as a label for all non-Catholic Chrisitans. Many do not like the term because they do not consider themselves to be “protesting” anything.
So, let charity rule the conversation.
Carry on.

 

[Dave_Noonan]

I normally do not chime in, but I will make an exception in this case.
Generalizations are a problem that should be addressed. I have often seen a thead with a title like “Why do Protestants Hate Catholics?” Or “Why do Protestants think the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon?” Which I change to “some Protestants” , “some Non-Catholic Christians”, or “Fundamentalists” for the sake of clarification and charitableness as not all non-Catholic Christians teach those doctrines.
“Protestant” should not be used as a label for all non-Catholic Chrisitans. Many do not like the term because they do not consider themselves to be “protesting” anything.
So, let charity rule the conversation.
Carry on.

I am grateful for your work at trying to keep discussions both more civil and more accurate.

Perhaps CA will consider changing the title of their book/banner ad to “Some Protestants’ Dilemma”? Or maybe (following Karl Keating’s influential work) “The Fundamentalist’s Dilemma”?

 

[St_Francis]

What exactly do you wish to say about them? I think if you avoid concepts such as “Protestant beliefs” or “Protestant practices” and/or inaccuracies and generalizations about the Reformation, you might be OK.

While traveling in the Bible Belt, I might easily say, there are a lot of Protestant churches in this town but no Catholic church. Or, there are a lot of Christians here but almost all of them are Protestant; there are few Catholics.

Or, more seriously,

I have learned over the years that there is a lot of variation in belief among the various Protestant churches, but i also see that when they “church-shop,” only other Protestant churches are among their chosen options; they don’t consider Catholic or Orthodox churches.

it seems to me that these would be ok?

 

[Dave_Noonan]

While traveling in the Bible Belt, I might easily say, there are a lot of Protestant churches in this town but no Catholic church. Or, there are a lot of Christians here but almost all of them are Protestant; there are few Catholics.

Or, more seriously,

I have learned over the years that there is a lot of variation in belief among the various Protestant churches, but i also see that when they “church-shop,” only other Protestant churches are among their chosen options; they don’t consider Catholic or Orthodox churches.

it seems to me that these would be ok?

They seem ok to me because they are addressing broad classifications. Not sure what your evidence is on the church shopping, but there’s probably a Pew study on that.

 

[St_Francis]

They seem ok to me because they are addressing broad classifications. Not sure what your evidence is on the church shopping, but there’s probably a Pew study on that.

Maybe I should tone down that statement until Pew does the study It is drawn from my own obsefvations which are limited.

 

[Peter_J]

I have learned over the years that there is a lot of variation in belief among the various Protestant churches, but i also see that when they “church-shop,” only other Protestant churches are among their chosen options; they don’t consider Catholic or Orthodox churches.

I think the way it is stated makes it difficult to agree or disagree with this idea. I mean, if/when a protestant does join Orthodoxy or Catholicism (or, for that matter, Oriental Orthodoxy, the ACoE, or the Polish National Catholic Church) then he/she is no longer protestant by definition.

Perhaps (?) a better statement would be: when a protestant joins Orthodoxy or Catholicism, he/she thereby leaves protestantism.

 

[robwar]

I think Tim Staples could clean up probably 75% of his errors by substituting the word “Evangelical” for “Protestant”. Ideally, CA and other Catholic apologists would simply ban the word “Protestant” from their shows and writing because it would force them to be more truthful and accurate.

Unfortunately though, when apologists like Tim Staples present what they call the “Protestant” position, it’s usually some mishmash of American Evangelicalism often followed by some inaccurate historical information about Martin Luther—who theologically wouldn’t have had that much in common with Evangelical thought—the latter stemming from the Calvinist and/or radical branches of the Reformation.

Because Evangelical/Fundamentalist theology is easiest to critique, the tactic that the Catholic apologists use is to paint all non-Catholics/non-Orthodox with the same Evangelical/fundamentalist broad-brush. That’s just wrong and that’s what I “have a beef” with to answer your question. The tactic is dishonest and contrary to claims that apolgists are people dedicated to finding out and disseminating the truth.

Catholic Apologists dishonest? that seems to be quite the generalization that you are arguing against. You don’t want Catholic apologists to broadly paint Protestantism into a corner but you are claiming that they are dishonest so I guess that means all Catholic apologists? With all due respect, that seems like a double standard. You can’t have it both ways. I am assuming you have more of a liberal theological background however, that is more of a minority in Protestantism now and dwindling in numbers. I think you can cut these Catholic apologists that you feel are not being truthful some slack in that the majority are going to be addressing those with an evangelical or fundamentalist type background. Look at Protestant Christian media. Most of it is dominated by those with a charismatic background but that is not a majority of Protestant Christianity. That is likewise true of Christian books which is even influenced more by dispensationists like Tim Lehaye. If your beef again that Catholic apologists speak to a majority of Protestant Christians that doesn’t seem to include where you are coming from or at, what do you want them to say or do?

 

[jmcrae]

I thought the discussion was about “the label” not what someone might do with the label. Sure we all commit error when we say “Protestants, Catholics, or Orthodox believe X” when in fact they do not. The difference is that there can be instances where one Protestant does believe something that another Protestant does not, making the statement seem in error to those Protestants who believe otherwise but still being a true belief not necessarily in error.

It’s multiplied many-fold, though.

You get a Lutheran, an Anglican, a Mennonite, and a Calvinist together in one room - all of whom belong to Protestant organizations that originated with the Lutheran Rebellion dating back to the early 1500s, and a Catholic comes into the room and says, 'Protestants believe ‘x’" the chances are high that only one of those four ground-floor original Protestants (if any at all) actually hold that belief, or go to Church on Sunday with someone who holds that belief.

Fast forward to today, with possibly hundreds of different iterations of Protestantism, and you’re looking at one chance in, if you’re lucky, a hundred that the actual Protestant you’re speaking with, believes this ‘x’ that “Protestants believe.”

The problem is that of the three, “Catholic” is the only true monolith. You can talk about the Catholic faith, defend it, offend it, or do whatever you want and in the end you are discussing “one” thing. If an individual Catholic believes something outside the faith they are simply a bad Catholic. If they profess something nor orthodox to the teaching they are simply wrong. Their belief does not, in any way, define the Catholic faith. Sure, their belief could also be “a true belief” but this belief is in error as a Catholic and can be definitively proven as such.

True.

I cringe every time I feel the need to use the words “Protestant” or “Orthodox” and even more so now after reading this thread and apologize if I have ever, in the past, used it offensively. But now I wonder, more than ever, what do we call the “other guys” who…

…do/do not believe in infant baptism.

Do - Reformed. Do not - Anabaptist.

…do/do not believe in the OHCA church.

This one’s fairly safe - they all do, but each puts a different spin on it and interprets it differently.

…do/do not believe in the real presence.

Do- High Church Do not - Low Church.

…believe in sola scriptura unlike what the great minds have taught us here it should be like.
…chose to accept all, some, no councils as authoritative.
…believe praying to saints is/is not idolatrous.
…and the list goes on.

This one is tricky - I think it means whatever it means to the person who is saying it. There doesn’t seem to be a standard definition, in practice.

 

[St_Francis]

I think the way it is stated makes it difficult to agree or disagree with this idea. I mean, if/when a protestant does join Orthodoxy or Catholicism (or, for that matter, Oriental Orthodoxy, the ACoE, or the Polish National Catholic Church) then he/she is no longer protestant by definition.

Perhaps (?) a better statement would be: when a protestant joins Orthodoxy or Catholicism, he/she thereby leaves protestantism.

Well, I see what you are saying but what I have seen is a great difference between “church shopping” and converting to Catholicism (by which I do not mean Anglicanism or Lutheranism; Orthodoxy seems to engender a reaction somewhat closer to Catholicism). It’s kind of like the difference between buying a pair of jeans and buying a new car.

From what they tell me, it seems they become discontent over a personal or theological issue, and then look for a church in which they “feel more comfortable” or which agrees with them.

 

[adf417]

Do - Reformed. Do not - Anabaptist.

This one’s fairly safe - they all do, but each puts a different spin on it and interprets it differently.

Do- High Church Do not - Low Church.

This one is tricky - I think it means whatever it means to the person who is saying it. There doesn’t seem to be a standard definition, in practice.

Would you be willing to build a chart matrix filling in all the blanks please?

 

[jmcrae]

Would you be willing to build a chart matrix filling in all the blanks please?

I have often thought of doing so, and some day when I have the kind of time I would need for such a project, I may very well undertake it. I’m surprised no one else has beaten me to it, quite honestly.

 

[McCartney]

I won’t – in fact I don’t think I could – give a complete answer to that; but I’ll just say that I see it largely as a matter of convention. Plus it just seems to make sense to me to consider Anglicans and Lutherans to be both catholic and protestant. (Of course, I realize that’s somewhat shaky reasoning since I’m going against another popular convention – namely, that “Protestant” should be written with a capital P.)

…and so should Catholic be written with a capital C.

 

[adf417]

I have often thought of doing so, and some day when I have the kind of time I would need for such a project, I may very well undertake it. I’m surprised no one else has beaten me to it, quite honestly.

I would pay good money for one…here take all I have…:twocents::twocents::twocents:

Seriously though, I really don’t see how this is possible when you get into the non-denominationals. Wouldn’t that be a never-ending task and isn’t that the reason this thread makes sense?

Peace!!!

 

[LaughingBoy1503]

If calling a protestant a protestant offends them, I will not call them a protestant. But I will not sugar coat that if they believe in Sola Scriptura that they are following at least one protestant tradition. My mother does not consider herself a protestant and does not like being called one and she is a “Bible only” Calvary Chapel Christian. One of the biggest non-denominational denominations in the world

Although I might not care about offending them so much if they insist on speaking of Catholicism and Christianity as if they are two separate things. For example “We both follow the same God. It does not matter that I am a Christian and you are a Catholic” I WILL be quick to point out that Catholics were the first Christians and I get offended when people try to separate the two words as if they were not one in the same thing. I will often refer to protestants as “Non-Catholic Christians” to get this point across. Too many Catholics still ask “Are you a Christian or a Catholic?”

 

[McCartney]

If calling a protestant a protestant offends them, I will not call them a protestant. But I will not sugar coat that if they believe in Sola Scriptura that they are following at least one protestant tradition. My mother does not consider herself a protestant and does not like being called one and she is a “Bible only” Calvary Chapel Christian. One of the biggest non-denominational denominations in the world

Although I might not care about offending them so much if they insist on speaking of Catholicism and Christianity as if they are two separate things. For example “We both follow the same God. It does not matter that I am a Christian and you are a Catholic” I WILL be quick to point out that Catholics were the first Christians and I get offended when people try to separate the two words as if they were not one in the same thing. I will often refer to protestants as “Non-Catholic Christians” to get this point across. Too many Catholics still ask “Are you a Christian or a Catholic?”

A Christian is a follower of Christ - Catholic or not.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

If calling a protestant a protestant offends them, I will not call them a protestant. But I will not sugar coat that if they believe in Sola Scriptura that they are following at least one protestant tradition. My mother does not consider herself a protestant and does not like being called one and she is a “Bible only” Calvary Chapel Christian. One of the biggest non-denominational denominations in the world

Although I might not care about offending them so much if they insist on speaking of Catholicism and Christianity as if they are two separate things. For example “We both follow the same God. It does not matter that I am a Christian and you are a Catholic” I WILL be quick to point out that Catholics were the first Christians and I get offended when people try to separate the two words as if they were not one in the same thing. I will often refer to protestants as “Non-Catholic Christians” to get this point across. Too many Catholics still ask “Are you a Christian or a Catholic?”

Yes, I agree that it is even more egregious to separate Christian and Catholic and still hear that on occasion when a Protestant asks that question. I see the Christian faith as being either the Eastern Church [Orthodox] or Western Church [Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Reformed, etc]. Certainly the Western Church has much variety and some so-called Protestant groups express Christianity in ways that are quite different.