Protestantism Today

[Ahimsa]

So, one can hope, it will be as the clock ticks down to October 31, 2017, the quincentennial of the beginning of the Protestant Reformation. On that day 500 years ago a little-known German monk, Martin Luther, posted 95 theses (in Latin) on the door of the Castle Church in Saxon Wittenberg in order to prompt a debate on the Catholic church’s promotion of indulgences. The dispute on indulgences (certificates purchased to reduce time in purgatory for relatives or oneself) soon got out of hand. Within four years, this once obscure monk stood before the most exalted ruler of the western world and told the Holy Roman Emperor, the Habsburg Charles V, that he was “bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not retract anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience.”
…
And today? Nearly 500 years after Luther’s initial provocation in Wittenberg, Protestants and Protestant-like movements are all over the map, both literally and figuratively.
…
An answer could not even be attempted without acknowledging the extraordinary diversity of world-wide Protestantism. That diversity is structural since it describes a broad religious tradition that began as church-establishments in Europe (challenging Catholic doctrine but preserving the Christendom instincts of Catholicism); that then added a voluntary form exemplified best by the constitutional separation of church and state in American experience; and that over the last century and a half added yet another form as Christian groups throughout the world exploit American-style voluntarism in settings far from Europe or America. Moreover, a multitude of doctrinal differences, differing musical forms, different political attitudes and huge differences in wealth and social power overlays this structural diversity.

The result is that in form Protestantism more closely resembles Judaism or Islam than Catholicism. Yet if Protestantism lacks structural or organizational coherence, it is nonetheless still possible to perceive the effects of a common inheritance and to note a number of widely shared characteristics.

 

[Roy5]

There is so much to comment on when it comes to Protestantism. I will tackle just one aspect.

** Coming from a mixed Catholic-Protestant heritage myself, I always have been interested in ecumenism, getting the two traditions together**, not necessarily as one church but one in spirit, advocating the same Christ and Christian faith. It has never troubled me all that much that there are differences, since I’m inclined to think that all humans ‘see through a glass darkly…’ I would suggest that none of us understand this mammoth, miraculous, magnificent and mysterious universe. With maybe a thousand or a million solar systems, how could we? I am content to go along with an old gospel hymn which begins: “Farther along we’ll know all about it, farther along we’ll understand why…”

 **Sadly - well, in my view - the form of Protestantism that is most attractive is losing ground**. That is mainline Protestantism: Methodism, Episcopalianism, the UCC, Presbyterianism, etc. I admire the freedom these groups allow to think and let think, considerable freedom to believe or not believe, yet with a strong faith in God and a desire to imitate Christ in daily life. Apparently, millions either reject religion altogether or they are attracted to evangelical groups that have plenty of charisma but are inclined to be fundamentalist, not open to varying points of view.

** I worry, too, that Catholicism may be more and more authoritative since the time of John XXIII, my favorite Pope.** John Paul II and Benedict XVI certainly are capable and devout men, but I wonder if they are throw-backs to earlier times. This is being cheered by some, but in the long haul will injure the church, certainly in Europe and North America, where reasonable religion is important to millions of the faithful. I have read the Church Fathers and find them brilliant for their era but full of assumptions based on a time when telescopes were primitive and microscopes were yet to be invented. So, they often taught the three-tier view of the universe with no knowledge of the vastness of space and such false concepts as demons or God’s punishment being the main causes of disease.

** One particular event troubled me**: when Hans Kung was no longer permitted by the Church to teach in Catholic universities. He was one of my favorite theologians. he wanted to make Catholicism broader and less restrictive when it came to matters of doctrine. He elevated respect for the individual and his/her mental ability to think, to weigh, to investigate, to ponder. I personally need the right to do this.

  **So, time will tell. If Catholicism can 'loosen up' **and if church members are permitted to have serious conversations about such matters as marriage of priests, ordaining women as deacons, allowing 'artifical' birth control, etc., it may thrive. Otherwise, I think it will continue to lose ground. The young people want to go forward, not backward. Even the little changes we will have at Mass soon strike me as a move backwards, More like the Latin, the priest here assured the faithful? When will the hierarchy wake up?

  **But God bless all people of faith**, whatever their creed, color, culture or country. May religion become a bridge rather than a barrier.

 

[Scoobyshme]

There is so much to comment on when it comes to Protestantism. I will tackle just one aspect.

** Coming from a mixed Catholic-Protestant heritage myself, I always have been interested in ecumenism, getting the two traditions together**, not necessarily as one church but one in spirit, advocating the same Christ and Christian faith. It has never troubled me all that much that there are differences, since I’m inclined to think that all humans ‘see through a glass darkly…’ I would suggest that none of us understand this mammoth, miraculous, magnificent and mysterious universe. With maybe a thousand or a million solar systems, how could we? I am content to go along with an old gospel hymn which begins: “Farther along we’ll know all about it, farther along we’ll understand why…”

 **Sadly - well, in my view - the form of Protestantism that is most attractive is losing ground**. That is mainline Protestantism: Methodism, Episcopalianism, the UCC, Presbyterianism, etc. I admire the freedom these groups allow to think and let think, considerable freedom to believe or not believe, yet with a strong faith in God and a desire to imitate Christ in daily life. Apparently, millions either reject religion altogether or they are attracted to evangelical groups that have plenty of charisma but are inclined to be fundamentalist, not open to varying points of view.

** I worry, too, that Catholicism may be more and more authoritative since the time of John XXIII, my favorite Pope.** John Paul II and Benedict XVI certainly are capable and devout men, but I wonder if they are throw-backs to earlier times. This is being cheered by some, but in the long haul will injure the church, certainly in Europe and North America, where reasonable religion is important to millions of the faithful. I have read the Church Fathers and find them brilliant for their era but full of assumptions based on a time when telescopes were primitive and microscopes were yet to be invented. So, they often taught the three-tier view of the universe with no knowledge of the vastness of space and such false concepts as demons or God’s punishment being the main causes of disease.

** One particular event troubled me**: when Hans Kung was no longer permitted by the Church to teach in Catholic universities. He was one of my favorite theologians. he wanted to make Catholicism broader and less restrictive when it came to matters of doctrine. He elevated respect for the individual and his/her mental ability to think, to weigh, to investigate, to ponder. I personally need the right to do this.

  **So, time will tell. If Catholicism can 'loosen up' **and if church members are permitted to have serious conversations about such matters as marriage of priests, ordaining women as deacons, allowing 'artifical' birth control, etc., it may thrive. Otherwise, I think it will continue to lose ground. The young people want to go forward, not backward. Even the little changes we will have at Mass soon strike me as a move backwards, More like the Latin, the priest here assured the faithful? When will the hierarchy wake up?

  **But God bless all people of faith**, whatever their creed, color, culture or country. May religion become a bridge rather than a barrier.

There is but one Church, the Catholic Church, which is the Body of Christ. Christ has but one Body. Historically, for the first 1000 years of Christianity, if one was Christian, one was Catholic. That was the only choice.

When Saul (Paul) was persecuting the Church, and Jesus knocked him from his horse, Jesus said to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me?” Note that Jesus didn’t say, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute My Church?” But, “…why do you persecute Me?” Christ and His Church are one.

Everyone who is (validly) baptized, is baptized into this one Church, the Catholic Church. Some, unfortunately, are separated from His Body into man-made institutions. The Orthodox split off in 1054 A.D., but retained Apostolic Succession, and, therefore, all seven Sacraments. Protestantism began about 1500 years after Christ, and by design, has been splintering every since. It will continue to splinter because it is based on man-made interpretation of Scripture, with no “final authority” so that no one can know for sure what anything really means. It is a sadness and a disgrace to Christianity.

The Church operates with Christ’s authority. Especially the Pope, who is the successor of Peter. First century Jews understood Matt. 16:18-19 much better than 21st century Americans, however. In those days, the king always had a second-in-command, a royal steward, who ruled the kingdom when the king was otherwise not available (off fighting wars, visiting other kingdoms, sick, etc.). Whatever this royal steward held bound was held bound by the king upon his return. Whatever he loosed, was held loosed by the king upon his return. This royal steward was identified by a large key (or two) about 2-3 ft. in length that he carried over his shoulder as a symbol of his office. THIS is the office that Jesus, our King, established to rule His earthly kingdom until His return. The person in this office rules with His authority. “Whatsoever you hold bound…”, etc.

We Americans have a harder time being good Catholics and good Christians because we value personal independence. We want to invent the wheel for ourselves all the time. It is a window into which pride can creep, which keeps us from growing in wisdom and holiness.

Hans Kung, as well as other heretical theologians, do not have the right to teach anything contrary to what the Church teaches. Why? Because the Church hands on (teaches) only what has been handed it by Christ through the Apostles and their successors, the bishops.

 

[babylonsfalling]

He was one of my favorite theologians. he wanted to make Catholicism broader and less restrictive when it came to matters of doctrine. He elevated respect for the individual and his/her mental ability to think, to weigh, to investigate, to ponder. I personally need the right to do this.

As if the Catholic Church DOESN’T respect the right to “investigate, to ponder.” and as if you ever were ever denied that right by the Church?!

 

[philial]

What the Church will, and must, prevent is the teaching of error, as in the Hans Kung matter. Now, the Church could not have stopped him from teaching, per se, but only in those areas it has influence.

Do people really believe the Church can ignore the propogation of heresy, etc, especially in its own backyard? We would quickly degenerate to 30 000 congragations, where the whim of the individ ual is greater than the Gospel! Is there any single piece of Scripture or Tradition that clearly states the subjectivism of the one is greater than God Himself? No, of course not.

Arrogance & pride is the root of divided Christianity. The prophecy of the baptist is what should guide us - " I must diminish so that He might increase"!

 

[Barb3]

I’m not sure whether or not this “rates” as response to the previous comments, but thought it might be a good place to place a question. In the past couple of months I have attended 2 Protestant Churches – a Presbyterian Church for a Memorial service for a husband of a good friend – the other, a Lutheran Church for a musical program. The Lutheran church was more like a Catholic Church – an altar, Stations of the Cross, etc. BUT the one thing that was missing in both were kneelers-- I can’t help wondering when and why the Protestant Churches removed the kneelers – it was all I could do NOT to genuflect, particularly when I attended the Memorial service – anyone have an answer to this one???

 

[Jim_Dandy]

Roy5’s comments are a testament to relativism, which is the inevitable legacy of Protestantism. It can’t claim to be “true” in any objective sense.

Jim Dandy
Former Protestant

 

[Jim_Dandy]

I’m not sure whether or not this “rates” as response to the previous comments, but thought it might be a good place to place a question. In the past couple of months I have attended 2 Protestant Churches – a Presbyterian Church for a Memorial service for a husband of a good friend – the other, a Lutheran Church for a musical program. The Lutheran church was more like a Catholic Church – an altar, Stations of the Cross, etc. BUT the one thing that was missing in both were kneelers-- I can’t help wondering when and why the Protestant Churches removed the kneelers – it was all I could do NOT to genuflect, particularly when I attended the Memorial service – anyone have an answer to this one???

Since Catholics genuflect to Christ present in the Eucharist, why would you have the urge to genuflect in a Protestant church where He is not present???

 

[babylonsfalling]

What the Church will, and must, prevent is the teaching of error, as in the Hans Kung matter. Now, the Church could not have stopped him from teaching, per se, but only in those areas it has influence.

Yes but the Church can and does accomplish that without denying respect to "investigate or ponder, and the Church certainly doesn’t deny that right to anyone.
The insinuation that the Church disrespects or denies these rights was completely ridiculous.

 

[philial]

Yes but the Church can and does accomplish that without denying respect to "investigate or ponder, and the Church certainly doesn’t deny that right to anyone.
The insinuation that the Church disrespects or denies these rights was completely ridiculous.

There’s no suggestion of that. The Church allows an individual to fall into error as a result of genuine research - speculative theology is an area this may happen, while the study itself can be very fruitful. However, if error should occur then the Church has the obligstion to correct, and, if the error is persistently taught, then the Church has to react in defense of revealed truth and for the soul of whoever.

 

[babylonsfalling]

There’s no suggestion of that. The Church allows an individual to fall into error as a result of genuine research - speculative theology is an area this may happen, while the study itself can be very fruitful. However, if error should occur then the Church has the obligstion to correct, and, if the error is persistently taught, then the Church has to react in defense of revealed truth and for the soul of whoever.

Well in my opinion, this…

He elevated respect for the individual and his/her mental ability to think, to weigh, to investigate, to ponder. I personally need the right to do this.

was a strong indication that the poster presumed a lack of respect for the individual’s ability to think & ponder, as well as a denial of the poster need to do so. My only point here was that the lack of respect AND the denial just don’t exist. Catholics are all free to pursue these things.

 

[babylonsfalling]

I’m not sure whether or not this “rates” as response to the previous comments, but thought it might be a good place to place a question. In the past couple of months I have attended 2 Protestant Churches – a Presbyterian Church for a Memorial service for a husband of a good friend – the other, a Lutheran Church for a musical program. The Lutheran church was more like a Catholic Church – an altar, Stations of the Cross, etc. BUT the one thing that was missing in both were kneelers-- I can’t help wondering when and why the Protestant Churches removed the kneelers – it was all I could do NOT to genuflect, particularly when I attended the Memorial service – anyone have an answer to this one???

I have no idea WHEN the were removed, my question would be why.
I was out of the Church for decades, and into other churches at that time and none of them had kneelers either.
One of the things that impressed me when I finally attended a Catholic Church after all my time out WAS the kneelers, which serve to create a MUCH greater, collective sense of humility before God in the congregation as a whole. And the greater sense of humility then goes onto to create a greater connection during prayer.

 

[Roy5]

A few responses

It's been interesting to read the various postings. I respect them all, even if we may disagree.

**
1. Catholicism limits free investigation and expression**. As I recall, Pope John Paul II ruled out even the discussion of married priests. Is my memory correct? As for individual Catholics, if we question even one of the keystone doctrines, whether, say, the Assumption or transubstantiation, we are no longer good Catholics. Little variation is permitted. The belief, of course, is that the Papacy, the magisterium and traditions they endorse are infallible. I’m old enough to recall the Index. When I wrote my undergraduate thesis on Thomas Aquinas I had to get permission of a priest to have access to ‘caged books’ in college libraries. Freedom? By the way, Aquinas advocated turning heretics over to the state to be executed. Running across that in the Summa was very disappointing.

** 2. I think that non-Catholic scholars would disagree that the entire Church was united under Rome at the outset.** Take the Coptic Christians of Egypt, members of a Church of the East which was independent from the beginning. It claims that its founder was St. Mark and today they still have a Pope and are not under the authority of the Vatican. Other churches of the Near East fit into that same category. There were mumerous major heresies from the Church’s earliest days. There is a body of scholarly opinion which even doubts that Peter ever was in Rome. They may also contend that the Papacy gained power because, in effect, Rome had been the key city and the Pope gradually replaced the Emperor. Both were treated as special representatives of God.

** 3. I have no authoritative answer for why there are no kneelers in most Protestant churches.** Episcopalians certainly are an exception. There are communion rails in many of these churches were many people (e. g., Methodists) usually kneel for communion. As I recall such communion rails were removed from most Catholic Churches after Vatican II. Why was that done?

** 4. It comes as no surprise that when one challenges the Church's policy on this or that, one is called relativistic, egotistic, etc.** I hope I don't fit either category. Yes, perhaps I am influenced by the democratic climate in the USA which can endow us with a spirit of individual freedom. I treasure that freedom.For those who accept whatever the Church teaches, fine. I was reading a study recently that one of the major reasons young people have left the Church in large numbers is because they feel that their natural curiosity is stifled and they are hesitant to automatically rubber-stamp whatever the church teaches.

** God bless everybody!.**

 

[manualman]

…**So, time will tell. If Catholicism can ‘loosen up’ **and if church members are permitted to have serious conversations about such matters as marriage of priests, ordaining women as deacons, allowing ‘artifical’ birth control, etc., it may thrive. Otherwise, I think it will continue to lose ground. The young people want to go forward, not backward. Even the little changes we will have at Mass soon strike me as a move backwards, More like the Latin, the priest here assured the faithful? When will the hierarchy wake up?

Since you spent rather a lot of time waxing about your ability to ponder and reason, ponder why it is that every faith community (whether protestant or, ahem, liberty-taking catholic) that has taken your advice in the last 80 years has been bleeding membership at rapidly fatal levels. Your recipe for curing catholicism is the medicine that has poisoned all the mainline protestants? Thats the result of ponder and reason? That vision preached to young people turns them stone cold by the time they are 12. It only works (for some reason) on people who had a decent formation early in life, but have struggled hard with some aspect of it and grown tired. Those people are dying of old age left and right and their ranks are not being replenished in those communities.

What people WANT is to have a relationship with God. They already know there is more to existence than greed, power and/or ego. They are unimpressed with religious communities that tell them that God is inside themselves. They’ve been told that all their lives and found it to be a lie. God isn’t inside me, that’s just a clever way of telling myself that I’m divine without sounding arrogant. God is both close and intimate and “as high as the heavens are above the earth.” That’s the real God, and people are starting to realize it. He can be known, but not by navel gazing. The real opportunity for growth is in staying true to the Church that reveres the revelation God has given mankind. People want that. It’s built in. They rebel against it from time to time, but they always exhaust themselves in faulty alternatives and come looking again for the real thing.

 

[ProdigalAnglicn]

Hans Kung, as well as other heretical theologians, do not have the right to teach anything contrary to what the Church teaches.

Well, what happens if a Pope becomes a heretic?

 

[Scoobyshme]

Well, what happens if a Pope becomes a heretic?

The Pope can go to hell just like anyone else if he dies without being in the state of Sanctifying Grace. There’s no personal guarantee for him to get to heaven. The only guarantee we have is that he will not declare erroneous doctrine. that is by the power of the Holy Spirit and is for OUR protection.

 

[ProdigalAnglicn]

The Pope can go to hell just like anyone else if he dies without being in the state of Sanctifying Grace. There’s no personal guarantee for him to get to heaven.

Of course. I would never suspect a good Roman Catholic of believing any differently. However…

The only guarantee we have is that he will not declare erroneous doctrine.

What about Honorius I, who taught the heresy of Monothelitism? Or, for that matter, what about St. Peter teaching the heresy of the Judaizers before being corrected by St. Paul (“But when Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong”, Galatians 2:11, NIV). These are just two examples of a Bishop of Rome teaching erroneous doctrine.

 

[Scoobyshme]

Of course. I would never suspect a good Roman Catholic of believing any differently. However…

What about Honorius I, who taught the heresy of Monothelitism? Or, for that matter, what about St. Peter teaching the heresy of the Judaizers before being corrected by St. Paul (“But when Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong”, Galatians 2:11, NIV). These are just two examples of a Bishop of Rome teaching erroneous doctrine.

But that’s not at all what Honorius did. Even a quick review of the records shows he simply decided not to make a decision at all. As Ronald Knox explained, “To the best of his human wisdom, he thought the controversy ought to be left unsettled, for the greater peace of the Church. In fact, he was an inopportunist. We, wise after the event, say that he was wrong. But nobody, I think, has ever claimed that the pope is infallible in not defining a doctrine.” Papal infallibility does not include a guarantee that any particular pope won’t “neglect” to teach the truth, or that he will be sinless, or that mere disciplinary decisions will be intelligently made. It just means that IF they do declare a doctrine on faith and morals, to the Church universal, with the intent of it being binding upon the faithful, that it will not be in error.

 

[manualman]

And Peter did not PREACH the principles of the Judaizers. He just behaved around them as if he agreed with them until Paul called him on it. Infallibility does not protect behavior and popes must not be considered infallible teachers by example.

History is actually rather remarkable for showing popes with seemingly wicked intentions inexplicably being too “busy” to formally TEACH on subject matters or dying off rather quickly.

 

[JonNC]

Since Catholics genuflect to Christ present in the Eucharist, why would you have the urge to genuflect in a Protestant church where He is not present???

So, Jim, are you saying that the only time Catholics kneel is in the presence of His body and blood? You mean you don’t kneel to pray at home? You wouldn’t find it appropriate to kneel in the confessional? (I honestly don’t know if Catholics kneel for confession or not, though I do.) Is it your belief that Christ is only present in the Eucharist?

Jim, I have on occasion posted Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger’s expressed opinion that the salvation granting presence of Christ is in a Lutheran Eucharist. Perhaps your view is different.

Originally Posted by Barb3
I’m not sure whether or not this “rates” as response to the previous comments, but thought it might be a good place to place a question. In the past couple of months I have attended 2 Protestant Churches – a Presbyterian Church for a Memorial service for a husband of a good friend – the other, a Lutheran Church for a musical program. The Lutheran church was more like a Catholic Church – an altar, Stations of the Cross, etc. BUT the one thing that was missing in both were kneelers-- I can’t help wondering when and why the Protestant Churches removed the kneelers – it was all I could do NOT to genuflect, particularly when I attended the Memorial service – anyone have an answer to this one???

As a Lutheran, Barb, it is distressing to me, at times that there are not kneelers. I was raised with the idea - stand to praise, kneel to pray, sit to listen. But I have a question regarding the Lutheran parish you were in; was there a kneeling rail at the altar? Most Lutherans do kneel to receive the Eucharist.

In closing, Barb, I have indeed witnessed Catholics genuflect in our parish, recognizing Christ’s presence within our midst, their view of our sacrament nowithstanding. It is an act of piety, respect and love for our Lord, and you are welcome to genuflect in our parish anytime.

Jon