"Protestant" not a valid term?

[Harpazo]

This was taken from the thread on Lourdes and the reaction of Protestants to Lourdes. I didn’t want to get further off-topic, so I felt it prudent to start a new thread on the matter.

For starters, while “Protestant” is a valid term that refers to those Christian denominations that have a common source in the historical event commonly known as the reformation, the term “Protestantism” is meaningless.

That term seems to be the creation of a non-existent ecclesiastical entity. There is no denomination, creed, or entity called Protestantism.

The way that the term is is misused on these forums, is that a belief or creed that a subset of Protestants hold is then ascribed to this mythical entity called Protestantism.

This of course is all in your opinion, clearly.

Protestantism refers to those groups that grew out of the “Reformation” movement, abandoning Christ’s Church, and ultimately, abandoning Christ. This does include Anglicans, even though they (and some Catholics) will deny it. Because after all, you cannot be half Protestant and half Catholic for the same reason that you cannot be half human and half lion. Every sect and faction of Protestant denominations can in some form or fashion trace themselves back to the “Reformation.”

Protestants are united by only a minute amount of things. Chiefly, their unfaithfulness and rebellion of the Church. The Orthodox are not called Protestants because they are an Apostolic Church, like the Catholic Church and reunification with them, we pray, should result.

That term seems to be the creation of a non-existent ecclesiastical entity. There is no denomination, creed, or entity called Protestantism.

Yes, because Protestantism can never ever be unified, it is diffident, sectarian break-away and by it’s definition can only further divide. And until some cataclysmic event happens to show them the complete truth, it can only further divide.

According to this link there are almost 40,000 denominations as of late. This is a sad state of affairs, considering Protestants try to tell Catholics they are in error…

Pace e Bene
Andrew

 

[mozart-250]

You are misrepresenting what I said.

Protestant is a valid and meaningful word. It is a classification term we use to classify all of the denominations that have as an origin the Reformation.

There is no such thing as Protestantism. That is because Protestant is a classification of denominations, not a denomination in itself.

When you can locate a creed or a statement of faith that all Christians labelled Protestant agree upon (and which the Orthodox and Catholics disagree with), Then I will consent that this particular creed or statement of faith represents Protestantism.

Oh…and the Protestants have not abandoned Christ as you allege.

I will be silent in this thread (continuing my policy of limiting debate) until you produce the creed and statement of faith to which all Protestants agree and which the Catholics disagree with. When you produce this statement of faith, then I will concede this represents “Protestantism”.

.

 

[O.S.Luke]

Every sect and faction of Protestant denominations can in some form or fashion trace themselves back to the “Reformation.”

While I will agree with a little of what you said, the above statement is just historically and factually inaccurate, Andrew. Sorry.

Quoting a webpage is never helpful. I could quote a Jack Chick tract if I wanted - wouldn’t make it right or correct.

O+

 

[ralphinal]

Mozart,
I do agree about using Protestantism as a blanket term for a faith system, but would you accept it to cover general doctrine issues? For example (not for debate), Can it be said that Protestants feel that Catholics place too much empasis on the Communion of Saints? Or, again not for debate, that Protestantism has as a point of faith that Jesus died for our sins?

 

[Harpazo]

While I will agree with a little of what you said, the above statement is just historically and factually inaccurate, Andrew. Sorry.

Quoting a webpage is never helpful. I could quote a Jack Chick tract if I wanted - wouldn’t make it right or correct.

O+

Show me where every denomination cannot in some way trace themselves back to a “reformer,” whether he be Luther, Calvin, Zwingli or Henry VIII.

Have you not viewed the webpage? The book used is by a Protestant author.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

 

[O.S.Luke]

Show me where every denomination cannot in some way trace themselves back to a “reformer,” whether he be Luther, Calvin, Zwingli or Henry VIII.

Have you not viewed the webpage? The book used is by a Protestant author.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

You said that all of Protestantism could trace itself back to the Reformation movement. And I said that wasn’t true. And it’s still not - the Edict of Worms was when the Catholic Church cited Martin Luther. That was 1521. Luther posted the 95 Theses in 1517. You can list Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli. But the beginnings of the Anglican Church have absolutely nothing to do with the Reformation.

There were no theological/doctrinal disputes - it was purely political among leaders. Most people in the pews could have cared (or even knew) less; in fact, priests and theologians in England disputed Luther’s theological views.

 

[Harpazo]

You said that all of Protestantism could trace itself back to the Reformation movement. And I said that wasn’t true. And it’s still not - the Edict of Worms was when the Catholic Church cited Martin Luther. That was 1521. Luther posted the 95 Theses in 1517. You can list Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli. But the beginnings of the Anglican Church have absolutely nothing to do with the Reformation.

There were no theological/doctrinal disputes - it was purely political among leaders. Most people in the pews could have cared (or even knew) less; in fact, priests and theologians in England disputed Luther’s theological views.

Yet they still protested the Church, and broke away. I don’t think divorce is a purely political thing, at least not according to Our Lord. He forbade divorce, so why do Anglicans and others justify it? So the rebellion of the English Church was not purely political as you so watered it down.

Anglicans didn’t dispute all of Luther’s theological views, considering they have adopted some of them. Chiefly, his example of breaking away from Christ’s Church is a justifiable act, leading to even more splintering.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Note that the English sovereign still bears the title Defender of the Faith which was given by the pope to Henry VIII for his refutation of Luther.

 

[mozart-250]

Mozart,
I do agree about using Protestantism as a blanket term for a faith system, but would you accept it to cover general doctrine issues? For example (not for debate), Can it be said that Protestants feel that Catholics place too much empasis on the Communion of Saints? Or, again not for debate, that Protestantism has as a point of faith that Jesus died for our sins?

I will respond to you since you seem reasonable and do not come out with outrageous distortions that are provokative (there are some Catholics on this board that I would be delighted to have as neighbors in eternity…there are others that I hope God puts on the other end of town from me…but then again there are Protestants that I am embarrassed to be associated with).

I am not sure that every Protestant denomination believes that the Catholics place too much emphasis on Communion of Saints. Even if that is a true statement, there is no requirement that this be so (there theoretically could be such an entity.

Come to think of it, there are Protestants here that agree with Catholics with respect to Communion of Saints and have adopted Catholic practices in this regard. As far as I know the denominations these Protestants belong to are probably neutral as to the practice.

If you neglect liberalism (which is a separate problem) I would say that the belief that Jesus died for our sins is common to all Protestants. The problem here is the Catholic and Orthodox believe this also. Thus the belief does nothing to distinguish Protestants.

The only belief that I can come up with that distinguishes Protestants and that they all hold is that they do not believe that the Bishop of Rome is the head of Christ’s church. But to me that is saying that Protestants are not Catholic; it doesn’t really tell you anything.

…and come to think of it, the Orthodox hold that belief also.

 

[Harpazo]

I will respond to you since you seem reasonable and do not come out with outrageous distortions that are provokative (there are some Catholics on this board that I would be delighted to have as neighbors in eternity…there are others that I hope God puts on the other end of town from me…but then again there are Protestants that I am embarrassed to be associated with).

This makes you sound like such a Christian. Thanks for this…

I am not sure that every Protestant denomination believes that the Catholics place too much emphasis on Communion of Saints. Even if that is a true statement, there is no requirement that this be so (there theoretically could be such an entity.

Come to think of it, there are Protestants here that agree with Catholics with respect to Communion of Saints and have adopted Catholic practices in this regard. As far as I know the denominations these Protestants belong to are probably neutral as to the practice.

If you neglect liberalism (which is a separate problem) I would say that the belief that Jesus died for our sins is common to all Protestants. The problem here is the Catholic and Orthodox believe this also. Thus the belief does nothing to distinguish Protestants.

The only belief that I can come up with that distinguishes Protestants and that they all hold is that they do not believe that the Bishop of Rome is the head of Christ’s church. But to me that is saying that Protestants are not Catholic; it doesn’t really tell you anything.

…and come to think of it, the Orthodox hold that belief also.

The Orthodox and Catholics are trying to help each other define Papal Primacy.

How can you say “Protestantism” does not exist? It clearly does. It is the groupings of communities that broke away from the Church and have since split, and divided countless times. Correct me if I’m wrong, but wouldn’t most Protestants have to believe in an “invisible unity of all believers,” something completely foreign to the Sacred Scriptures and the 2000 year length of the Church. That and only a few other minute things unite Protestantism.

I’m sorry you can’t accept what the Church has always maintained as true, but moreover am I offended highly that you would purposefully avoid refuting my points if you find them to be in error. Yet, instead you tell me I’m wrong and that’s that. Tell me where you think I’m wrong, and that’s where we can discuss. I can learn from you, and you can learn from me. I’m sorry if you think I have a disease.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

 

[mozart-250]

I will not get suckered into this thread…
I will not get suckered into this thread…

(oh whatever…I only got involved in this thread in the first place because I was misrepresented).

Just to clarify a point of grammar and syntax here (I am a sticker that words have meaning and that they should be used correctly)…

When you add “ism” to the end of a faith, you are referring to the belief system that uniquely identifies that faith. That Catholicism is the belief system that Catholics hold. That would be your dogma. Methodism is the belief system that identifies Methodists. Presbyterianism the belief system that identifies Presbyterians (etc).

There is no belief system that uniquely identifies Protestants other than they do not submit to the Bishop of Rome (which is moot and still not unique to Protestants). Thus Protestantism is a meaningless term.

This is opposed to the term Protestant that has meaning (and which I was not objecting too).

And yes I have deliberately chosen to ignore folks that come out with drivel such as “Protestants have abandonded Christ”. People who make such statements I assume are “cafeteria Catholics” because I know that the Catholic church does not believe that.

I will not get suckered into this thread.
I will not get suckered into this thread.

 

[ralphinal]

I will not get suckered into this thread…
I will not get suckered into this thread…

(oh whatever…I only got involved in this thread in the first place because I was misrepresented).

Just to clarify a point of grammar and syntax here (I am a sticker that words have meaning and that they should be used correctly)…

When you add “ism” to the end of a faith, you are referring to the belief system that uniquely identifies that faith. That Catholicism is the belief system that Catholics hold. That would be your dogma. Methodism is the belief system that identifies Methodists. Presbyterianism the belief system that identifies Presbyterians (etc).

There is no belief system that uniquely identifies Protestants other than they do not submit to the Bishop of Rome (which is moot and still not unique to Protestants). Thus Protestantism is a meaningless term.

This is opposed to the term Protestant that has meaning (and which I was not objecting too).

And yes I have deliberately chosen to ignore folks that come out with drivel such as “Protestants have abandonded Christ”. People who make such statements I assume are “cafeteria Catholics” because I know that the Catholic church does not believe that.

I will not get suckered into this thread.
I will not get suckered into this thread.

Acceptable. Would there be a better way to describe non-Catholic Christians who are not members of an Orthodox Church?

 

[Singinbeauty]

I prefer Non-Catholic to protestant because I protest nothing. I may not agree with it but it doesn’t mean that I protest against it.

 

[paarsurrey]

I prefer Non-Catholic to protestant because I protest nothing. I may not agree with it but it doesn’t mean that I protest against it.

Hi

If you are a Protestant, I would like to ask you a question.

Here in this forum I write, Catholics believe such and such thing. They never objected to it.

On a Protestant Forum, if I say them Protestants, they dislike it. They tell me to say them “Christians”. This seems to me injustice to other Christians, who also proclaim to be Christians.

Why should they dislike calling them Protestants, when this is what they are known of?

Just for an understanding.

Thanks

 

[LDNCatholic]

Hi

If you are a Protestant, I would like to ask you a question.

Here in this forum I write, Catholics believe such and such thing. They never objected to it.

On a Protestant Forum, if I say them Protestants, they dislike it. They tell me to say them “Christians”. This seems to me injustice to other Christians, who also proclaim to be Christians.

Why should they dislike calling them Protestants, when this is what they are known of?

Just for an understanding.

Thanks

Some Protestants don’t believe Catholics or Orthodox are Christian, so they don’t see the need for distinction between Catholic and Protestant as some of them believe their particular sect to be the only Christians. As far as I know, singinbeauty is not one of those people though.

God Bless

Peter

 

[paarsurrey]

Some Protestants don’t believe Catholics or Orthodox are Christian, so they don’t see the need for distinction between Catholic and Protestant as some of them believe their particular sect to be the only Christians. As far as I know, singinbeauty is not one of those people though.

God Bless

Peter

Hi

But I don’t want to do any injustice to others; say Catholics, JWs, Mormons who also proclaim to be the only true Christians.

So, what should I say to Protestants, if they don’t like to be called Protestant?

Anybody

Thanks

 

[LDNCatholic]

Hi

But I don’t want to do any injustice to others; say Catholics, JWs, Mormons who also proclaim to be the only true Christians.

So, what should I say to Protestants, if they don’t like to be called Protestant?

Anybody

Thanks

Depending on their particular protestant denomination, they might not mind the term protestant (e.g.Anglicans, Lutherans, Calvinists). Others, such as the evangelicals or so called non-denominational Christians would probably prefer just to be called Christians. If you want your questions answered on their forums it might be easiest to just oblige them.

As for the JWs or the Mormons, call them as they are, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the ‘‘Latter Day Saints’’ respectively.

I hope this helps

God Bless

Peter

 

[Claudius]

Protestants are not Christians that protested against The Church. They are a group of people that sent a Protest Letter to the government of Worms in Germany in order to Protest a Freedom of Religion Law. Under the Freedom of Religion Law, it would become illigal to kill Catholics or anyone else because of their religion. It also assured the people that they could have freedom to move about the country so that they could attend services at the church of their choice. Both of these provisions of the new law were objected to by the leaders of the Reformation. The religious movement of the reformation then became a political movement called Protestantism to change the government and repeal the Freedom of Religion Law. The reason they wanted to repeal the law was because they did not want the population of their area to have the ability to go into a Catholic area and attend Mass. They also did not want Catholic Missionaries in their territory and continues in violation of the new Freedom of Religion Law to enact the Death Penalty on all Catholics that were discovered by them.

Technically then, religiously, they are Reformationist but in reality, the old political movement of Protestantism is what they really belong to and that is why we refer to them as such.

Thank God most countries in the world have political leaders and institutions that prevent Protestantism from enacting the kinds of laws they would like.

 

[mozart-250]

Acceptable. Would there be a better way to describe non-Catholic Christians who are not members of an Orthodox Church?

Protestant is the traditional term I suppose and is fine (although many of us aren’t really protesting anything any more 500 years after the fact).

The difference between the two is that protestant with the “ism” refers to a non-existent protestant belief system. Without the “ism” it simply refers to a classification of denominations.

 

[LDNCatholic]

Protestant is the traditional term I suppose and is fine (although many of us aren’t really protesting anything any more 500 years after the fact).

The difference between the two is that protestant with the “ism” refers to a non-existent protestant belief system. Without the “ism” it simply refers to a classification of denominations.

Never actually thought about separating the terms Protestant and Protestantism. Thanks for that

God Bless

Peter