Protestants DENY Tradition?

[Chong]

Jesus talked to dead saints in heaven while he was on earth in Matt 17.

Sometimes I ask myself who told Peter that the 2 men they saw were actually Moses and Elijah. Jesus never endorsed nor refuted the claim. At their appearance, a voice from heaven declared that Jesus was the beloved Son of God.
However, in the book of Revelation we read of 24 elders that are in heaven… Maybe the 2 men who appeared with Jesus were some of the 24 elders. Reason is we do not see Moses and Elijah in heaven in identifiable personalities, only un-named elders.

In Acts1:10: we read, "And while they looked steadfastly towards heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;…“this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven”

Here, 2 men in white apparel appeared just as they had appeared during the transfiguration, but nobody said who they were.These were men and not angels. Peter, John and James saw the 2 men but never mentioned whom they were.

 

[SteveVH]

Shouldn’t it say, Latin Catholic Church, or Catholic Church - Latin Rite?

How about just “Catholic Church”. The different rites are pretty much geographic so if you point one to the Catholic Church they will have no trouble finding it, regardless of the rite. If one was intent on finding a Mass with a rite not common to the area then one would would have to get specific.

 

[SteveVH]

Hi Steve,
But it bothers some, I think because, IIRC, its usage has its beginning as an attempt to marginalize the CC, much like the invention of the term “Lutheran”. For that reason, I, like Ben try to avoid it, simply out of respect for those who dislike it.

Jon

Hi, Jon.

Well, I think it is kind of the like the word “Protestant”. We all need to get over ourselves. I don’t think most people intend to the use the word “Roman” in a negative sense and when they do, it is usually pretty obvious.

I will never forget my father when asked which religion he practiced. He would stand proudly and announce “I am Roman Catholic”, with a lot of emphasis on “Roman”. lol. So it is common among many Catholics as well.

I any regard, thank you for your respectful consideration, Jon (and you too Ben).

Peace.

Steve

 

[Jubilarian]

Sometimes I ask myself who told Peter that the 2 men they saw were actually Moses and Elijah. Jesus never endorsed nor refuted the claim. At their appearance, a voice from heaven declared that Jesus was the beloved Son of God.
However, in the book of Revelation we read of 24 elders that are in heaven… Maybe the 2 men who appeared with Jesus were some of the 24 elders. Reason is we do not see Moses and Elijah in heaven in identifiable personalities, only un-named elders.

In Acts1:10: we read, "And while they looked steadfastly towards heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;…“this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven”

Here, 2 men in white apparel appeared just as they had appeared during the transfiguration, but nobody said who they were.These were men and not angels. Peter, John and James saw the 2 men but never mentioned whom they were.

The scriptures tell us who the men were. I’m not sure what you are getting at. Jesus communed (as a man) with souls that have departed this earth.

 

[Izdaari]

Lutherans profess the one holy catholic and apostolic church, so we won’t quite give you exclusive use of the word ‘catholic’ in all contexts.

So, sure, if some random guy asked for a Catholic church, I’ll point him to our local Catholic parish - because in the context in such a conversation the word is not ambiguous.

But if a Catholic theologian asks me if we Lutherans are ‘catholic’, I’ll vehemently answer in the affirmative.

It’s the same for me as an Episcopalian.

 

[KjetilK]

It isn’t? If some one asks you where the Catholic Church is where do you point them? If someone inquires of your faith tradition do you tell them you are Catholic?

By ‘confessional’ I mean ‘pertaining to a specific confession or denomination.’ Maybe I should have said this instead: ‘Catholic’ isn’t a denominational term.

 

[KjetilK]

Protestants call themselves “Protestant”.

Yes, and circles are circular.

 

[Jubilarian]

Yes, and circles are circular.

Your answer does not change my point about the usage of the word. I would advise you to enter the world of Protestant web sites and begin the corrective process there.

 

[KjetilK]

Hi Steve,
But it bothers some, I think because, IIRC, its usage has its beginning as an attempt to marginalize the CC, much like the invention of the term “Lutheran”. For that reason, I, like Ben try to avoid it, simply out of respect for those who dislike it.

I use it to point out that I am Catholic, too. And because Pope Pius X used it, explicitly (with reference to all sui juris Churches in communion with Rome).

 

[KjetilK]

Your answer does not change my point about the usage of the word.

Which is what? That some of those who do not call themselves Protestant (such as myself and many, many European Lutherans) should be forced to do so because you want to make some ignorant, rhetorical point?

 

[Jubilarian]

Which is what? That some of those who do not call themselves Protestant (such as myself and many, many European Lutherans) should be forced to do so because you want to make some ignorant, rhetorical point?

Forced? No. Recognise the general usage of the word, that’s all. You seem to be at odds with Wikipedia regarding Lutheranism as well. They are misinformed and should be corrected from your standpoint.

 

[KjetilK]

Forced? No.

Yet, you still insist that I am a Protestant. I am not protesting a governmental ban on my religious practice.

Recognise the general usage of the word, that’s all.

Which is precisely what is at issue. You keep begging the question. I do not agree with your americanised usage of that word, and I do not fit the label. I do not fit the historical label, since there are now governmental edicts for me to protest against at the moment. And I do not fit the overly general label that you use, since it puts me in the company of people who have always been regarded as something other than Lutherans.

Historically, Lutheranism IS Protestant. But Anabaptism and Pentacostalism isn’t. But since this is NOT the way most people use Protestant, I do not use it.

The central point of Lutheranism is that Lutheranism is Catholic, that God saves us through word and sacrament, and that there is NO Church without the administration of the Eucharist. But for most people now, a ‘Protestant’ means a non-Catholic who do not care much about the Eucharist and who, at most, sees is as symbolic. To use the label would be inaccurate and misleading.

I have more in common with Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians than I do with Pentecostals and Baptists.

You seem to be at odds with Wikipedia regarding Lutheranism as well. They are misinformed and should be corrected from your standpoint.

So? Does that make me wrong? Please learn the difference between an argument, a claim, and a non sequitur.

 

[Jubilarian]

Yet, you still insist that I am a Protestant. I am not protesting a governmental ban on my religious practice.

No. The insisting comes from you, that you are not Protestant. All that I have put forth is that the word “Protestant” is more encompassing then you will allow for.

Which is precisely what is at issue. You keep begging the question. I do not agree with your americanised usage of that word, and I do not fit the label. I do not fit the historical label, since there are now governmental edicts for me to protest against at the moment. And I do not fit the overly general label that you use, since it puts me in the company of people who have always been regarded as something other than Lutherans.

Historically, Lutheranism IS Protestant. But Anabaptism and Pentacostalism isn’t. But since this is NOT the way most people use Protestant, I do not use it.

The central point of Lutheranism is that Lutheranism is Catholic, that God saves us through word and sacrament, and that there is NO Church without the administration of the Eucharist. But for most people now, a ‘Protestant’ means a non-Catholic who do not care much about the Eucharist and who, at most, sees is as symbolic. To use the label would be inaccurate and misleading.

I have more in common with Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians than I do with Pentecostals and Baptists.

You don’t agree with the"American" definition.That’s fine an dandy but nevertheless it exists, and it exists for reason. I hope we don’t all start vehemently disagreeing with definitions .

]So? Does that make me wrong? Please learn the difference between an argument, a claim, and a non sequitur.

Its not so much about being wrong, it’s about dealing with the vernacular . If you told me something and said look at the historical information on Wikipedia and I said , " I discount Wikipedia and won’t accept it". Then we start getting into bullheadedness . Is Wikipedia the beginning and end all, no, but it is certainly recognized as a reliable source of information.

This now puts me in the position to say that I don’t agree with your definition of Protestant. To me, and multitudes of others, you are a Protestant. However, you are of course entitled to embrace your own concept of the word.

 

[JonNC]

Yet, you still insist that I am a Protestant. I am not protesting a governmental ban on my religious practice.

We are protesting a governmental ban on my religious practice (part of the new government health care bill) in America, and our Catholic siblings have joined us.

Jon

 

[SteveVH]

By ‘confessional’ I mean ‘pertaining to a specific confession or denomination.’ Maybe I should have said this instead: ‘Catholic’ isn’t a denominational term.

True. The Catholic Church is not a denomination. It is the one from which the others denominated.

 

[SteveVH]

We are protesting a governmental ban on my religious practice (part of the new government health care bill) in America, and our Catholic siblings have joined us.

Jon

Yes. When it comes to the HHS mandate Catholics are definitely “protestants”.

 

[Jubilarian]

True. The Catholic Church is not a denomination. It is the one from which the others denominated.

 

[KjetilK]

No. The insisting comes from you, that you are not Protestant. All that I have put forth is that the word “Protestant” is more encompassing then you will allow for.

You don’t agree with the"American" definition.That’s fine an dandy but nevertheless it exists, and it exists for reason. I hope we don’t all start vehemently disagreeing with definitions .

Its not so much about being wrong, it’s about dealing with the vernacular . If you told me something and said look at the historical information on Wikipedia and I said , " I discount Wikipedia and won’t accept it". Then we start getting into bullheadedness . Is Wikipedia the beginning and end all, no, but it is certainly recognized as a reliable source of information.

This now puts me in the position to say that I don’t agree with your definition of Protestant. To me, and multitudes of others, you are a Protestant. However, you are of course entitled to embrace your own concept of the word.

This is starting to get tiresome. Is this clearer: I AM NOT A PROTESTANT!

I do not protest anyone or any edict banning my religious practice. And I am not a low church evangelical. Ask just about anyone what they think a protestant is, and you will get one of two answers:

1. A ‘Protestant’ is a person who protests a governantal bans on their religious practice.
2. A ‘Protestant’ is a low Church evangelical.

That is the truth. And to avoid confusion, I do not label myself as a protestant. I fit neither definition. I am a High Church Catholic in the historical Church of Norway, which was founded over a period of about 30 years, from 995 (when Olaf Tryggvason started the evangelisation of Norway) to 1030 (when St. Olaf was martyred at the Battle of Stiklestad). The same way some people are, say, High Church Catholics in the historical Church of England, which was founded in 597 (when St. Augustine of Canterbury was elected and consecrated as Archbishop of Canterbury.

 

[Jubilarian]

This is starting to get tiresome. Is this clearer: I AM NOT A PROTESTANT!

I do not protest anyone or any edict banning my religious practice. And I am not a low church evangelical. Ask just about anyone what they think a protestant is, and you will get one of two answers:

1. A ‘Protestant’ is a person who protests a governantal bans on their religious practice.
2. A ‘Protestant’ is a low Church evangelical.

That is the truth. And to avoid confusion, I do not label myself as a protestant. I fit neither definition. I am a High Church Catholic in the historical Church of Norway, which was founded over a period of about 30 years, from 995 (when Olaf Tryggvason started the evangelisation of Norway) to 1030 (when St. Olaf was martyred at the Battle of Stiklestad). The same way some people are, say, High Church Catholics in the historical Church of England, which was founded in 597 (when St. Augustine of Canterbury was elected and consecrated as Archbishop of Canterbury.

Whats getting tiresome is your insistence that the word “Protestant” only meets the definitions you lay out. Just doing a basic google search turns up the following:
Protestant:
a member or follower of any of the Western Christian churches that are separate from the Roman Catholic Church and follow the principles of the Reformation, including the Baptist, Presbyterian, and Lutheran churches.

Wikipedia, encyclopedias, dictionaries all support the above definition. I don’t doubt that you have a more personal definition, but stop acting as if the vernacular is somehow obsolete. It’s 2015, and the definition I posted continually appears as a valid definition on line and elsewhere.

 

[JonNC]

Whats getting tiresome is your insistence that the word “Protestant” only meets the definitions you lay out. Just doing a basic google search turns up the following:
Protestant:
a member or follower of any of the Western Christian churches that are separate from the Roman Catholic Church and follow the principles of the Reformation, including the Baptist, Presbyterian, and Lutheran churches.

Wikipedia, encyclopedias, dictionaries all support the above definition. I don’t doubt that you have a more personal definition, but stop acting as if the vernacular is somehow obsolete. It’s 2015, and the definition I posted continually appears as a valid definition on line and elsewhere.

Not speaking for Father K, but I think you hit on something, in calling it “the vernacular”. Webster’s defines vernacular: *of, relating to, or using the language of ordinary speech rather than formal writing. : of or relating to the common style of a particular time, place, or group. *

The term protestant is a vernacular, not a formal name. The definition you give from Wikipedia fits that definition just fine. The term is, indeed, used to refer to western Christian communions not in communion with the Bishop of Rome.
Formally, however, the term has little meaning, as even the “principles of the Reformation” varies from communion to communion, including how we use Tradition.

Jon