Protestants: What ONE Protestant alternative to Catholicism is essential?

[MichaelP3]

Objectively speaking, there is no such thing as faithful Christian but not Catholic. None of the Protestant groups are objectively “faithful.”

This is a very concerning post.

I have come to realise the “concept” of understanding Catholicism but still disagreeing is very foreign to Catholics "mainly " on CAF. I even started a thread on it which I believe proved my point! (One could say I was subjective in that conclusion… see what I did there?).

Point is. You are pretty subjective in your assertion to even start of with. And the fact that you even got to that (as you stated) is concerning and even uncharitable if we need to go there.

 

[feed_me]

I will have to put my disagreement in, i have been in protastan churches where the real gifts of the Holy Spirit were active.

 

[StAugustine]

Actually, I would say the Hussites, for Luther first followed the writings of Hus in his journey to Protestantism, and Catholics recognize him as a protoprotestant, and even the Orthodox respect him, probably because his chief follower, Jerome of Prague, became an Orthodox Monk.

A former Protestant perspective.

 

[LisaB]

This is not about any particular person’s faith; when I say “objectively” I mean theologically true (as God sees it). For example, a Lutheran may believe that Lutheran and Catholic Churches are equally pleasing to God, and it’s just a matter of what helps an individual grow in faith more or what an individual likes. While this would be his subjective opinion, the reality (absolute truth) is that the Catholic Church is more pleasing to God because it’s His Church, not just as an institution, but He is the bridegroom of the Church. For this reason, the Catholic Church is the only one fully faithful to God - it contains the full truth of God’s revelation. Other Christian denominations contain partial truth and therefore are not fully faithful.

The definition of faith I’m using here is from New Advent encyclopedia:
Objectively, it stands for the sum of truths revealed by God in Scripture and tradition and which the Church presents to us in a brief form in her creeds.

The sum of truths revealed by God is found in its entirety in the Catholic Church.

This doesn’t mean that individuals in other churches are not pleasing to God, or that Catholics live out their Christianity better - it’s not about that. It’s an assertion that there is a qualitative difference between the Catholic Church and all other churches at a theological level.

 

[ATraveller]

So essentially, there could be ONE Protestant alternative, so long as it maintained the five solas?

I would say yes.

In other words, do most Protestants think that the large variety of Protestantism is quite unnecessary?

The reasons behind all of the different denominations and synods and conventions are numerous. Some are due to Eucharistic theology, baptism and soteriology and these tend to split the major branches (Lutheran, Methodist, etc.). Then you have the issue of how close one should adhere to confessions of faith, women’s ordination, abortion, tongues and marriage and these tend to be the basis for different denominations, synods and conventions within a branch. So the large variety is inevitable.

 

[ATraveller]

Some Methodists might but others won’t. There are many varieties of Methodism too like much of Protestantism.

 

[ATraveller]

Is there a protestant church that believes, abortion, euthanasia, divorce + remarriage etc. are sins?

Plenty. Confessional Protestants would. Many Evangelical churches would to. There are even a number of parishes or congregations in Mainline denominations that still do, though they’re feeling the heat from their denominational governing bodies.
Though on divorce and remarriage, it’s different from Catholicism. These churches would permit divorce only in the cases of adultery, abandonment and abuse and would permit remarriage for those widowed or due to divorces within the 3 conditions mentioned earlier.

 

[joeybaggz]

So we must follow the Old Testament laws?

I’m confused.

Love is the summation of the Law.

And love is the foundation of the Ten Commandments.

 

[LoyalViews]

I’m sorry, but I don’t think Anglicanism is Protestant.

 

[StAugustine]

What version of Anglicanism?

 

[LoyalViews]

Anglo-Catholic. All of the high Church.

 

[StAugustine]

And what of the broad and low Anglicans? Seems pretty Protestant if you read the 39 articles.

 

[StAugustine]

Especially reformed episcopal.

 

[CTBcin]

A very interesting question.

As a Catholic convert who grew up Lutheran, I would have to say Lutheranism or Reformed Christianity.

In my opinion, Anglicanism is too all-over-the-place and varied in its theological stances.

Baptists, Evangelicals, and Non-Denominationalists, with all due respect, simply don’t have a rich and nuanced theology to counter Catholicism and Orthodoxy

Only Lutherans and Reformed Christians seem to have the theology, uniformity, and tradition to country Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

 

[GKMotley]

Find an Anglican who affirms the Articles (which are a mixed bag, reflecting the Elizabethan Settlement) and you likely have a more or less reformed side of Anglicanism Anglican. Might be fair to think of them as protestant, at that.

 

[catholic1seeks]

But is that the historical sense, or in the essential sense of what it means to be Protestant?

I’m rather asking about what Protestant group is most essential as the alternative to the Catholic worldview (so the latter).

Or, from a Protestant perspective, what Protestant tradition best captures what “authentic Christianity” is — after all, most would say it’s not Catholicism.

 

[catholic1seeks]

So in other words, could Baptists, Evangelicals, and Non-Ds, as fellow Protestants, just as much respect Lutheranism or Reformed Christianity to say that their own particular sects are non-essential?

Or do Baptists, Evangelicals, (name whatever particular denomination) think that their own denomination is most essential, and most true?

 

[CTBcin]

I think some Baptists and Evangelicals see their particular denomination as most true, but most seem focused more with religion on a personal level (me and Jesus, conversion experience, etc.) than theological nuances.

I think most Baptists, etc. respect Lutheranism and Reformed Christianity as valid expressions of Christianity. I think Lutherans and Reformed would have more theological hang-ups about Baptists and Evangelicals than Baptists and a Evangelicals have about Lutherans and Reformed.

It’s complicated. But this is a hypothetical scenario.

 

[JonNC]

So my question is this: What Protestant alternative is essential in order for Christians to be faithfully Christian, and yet not Catholic?

Is PNCC Catholic or “Protestant”?

Most Protestants on here will think that the Protestant Reformation was necessary. That is, they would be Catholic if they didn’t think Protestantism was essential to Christianity. But they aren’t: They remain Protestant.

I don’t view “Protestant “ in this way. I’ve often said that it is doctrine that matters, there are almost no so-called Protestant communions I could be a part of. I believe the faith revolves around both word and sacrament. By that very statement I’ve eliminated a significant number of western communions.
A belief on baptismal regeneration, the real presence, Confession and holy Absolution are essentials.

So here’s the exercise. If there were only ONE Protestant group that existed, what would it be? What alternative to Catholicism (and Orthodoxy) must there be in order for authentic Christianity to flourish?

The authority of Christianity is in word and sacrament, so it flourishes in the Catholic and Orthodox churches, Lutheranism that remains true to the Augsburg Confession, Apology, and Small Catechism, and Anglicanism that remains orthodox and Catholic.
That’s not to say other communions aren’t sincere. They are. It just answers the question

 

[StAugustine]

Well that’s just the problem with BEING Protestant isn’t it?

I would think that could be a clue.