the over and incorrect usage of the word "Protestant"

[ndismyhome]

As the thread above states, the word Protestant is over used in this forum, as almost everywhere else. By the colloquial usage of the word, it can apply from very conservative Lutheran and Anglican churches that are almost identical in Theology to the Roman church, all the way to the most radical of fringe cults. Anyways, please be aware that anytime you make a general critique of Protestants or general assumption about their Theology, you are probably wrong, as the sheer diversity of views most likely provides a ready counter example to your point.

 

[Feedmysheep]

As the thread above states, the word Protestant is over used in this forum, as almost everywhere else. By the colloquial usage of the word, it can apply from very conservative Lutheran and Anglican churches that are almost identical in Theology to the Roman church, all the way to the most radical of fringe cults. Anyways, please be aware that anytime you make a general critique of Protestants or general assumption about their Theology, you are probably wrong, as the sheer diversity of views most likely provides a ready counter example to your point.

So then, in your opinion, what is the correct use of the word “Protestant”?

In my experience, those who bristle at it most are the ones who most assuredly fit the bill.

From Wikipedia’s entry on “Protestant”:

Protestantism refers to the forms of Christian faith and practice that originated in the 16th century Protestant Reformation. Protestant doctrine, also known in continental European traditions as Evangelical doctrine, in contradistinction to that of Roman Catholicism, rejects papal authority and many elements of Roman Catholic doctrine.

Seems like a fair enough definition to me. So, to apply it to some of the groups you mention:

conservative Lutheran and Anglican churches that are almost identical in Theology to the Roman church

Let’s see- Lutheranism fits the bill on all counts. Anglicans predate the Protestant Reformation, yet “reject papal authority and many elements of Roman Catholic doctrine”, so that would seem to fit the term. Though there are those who would convincingly argue with me on that point. But sorry, Lutherans are the original Protestants, no way 'round that one.

Anyways, please be aware that anytime you make a general critique of Protestants or general assumption about their Theology, you are probably wrong, as the sheer diversity of views most likely provides a ready counter example to your point

True enough observation on some points like infant baptism. However, the fact that such a “sheer diversity of views” exist makes it exceedingly difficult to p(name removed by moderator)oint which Protestant sect one is referring to- particularly when one throws non-denominational groups into the mix. So, in interest of brevity in language, if the above criteria are met, the group in question is fairly called “Protestant”.

 

[tbuley]

Lutheran and Anglican churches that are almost identical in Theology to the Roman church

,
Seeing as Lutherans hold to Grace alone, Faith alone, Christ alone, Scripture alone, are Theology is hardly the same as the papist. We hold monergism and have a Christ centered Cross focused view of Faith and works. Pirate Christian Radio
Issues Etc.

 

[panoikei]

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/protestant

Wow…I guess you’re Protestant then…I used to be.

 

[Pong]

As the thread above states, the word Protestant is over used in this forum, as almost everywhere else.

Okay then…

By the colloquial usage of the word, it can apply from very conservative Lutheran and Anglican churches that are almost identical in Theology to the Roman church

,

1. What is this “Roman church” you speak of? If you mean to say the Catholic Church, then say so.
2. Lutherans and Anglicans most certainly do not have “theologies” nearly identical to Catholic theology. They are, however, quite different from Presbyterians, who are different from Methodists, who are different from Baptists, who are different from Southern Baptists, etc… Much easier to call them all what they are: Protestants. Differentiations may be made when necessary.

all the way to the most radical of fringe cults.

I don’t think too many here consider “fringe cults,” as you put it, such as… oh… say… maybe Michael Travessor’s group Protestant. They are considered cults.

Anyways, please be aware that anytime you make a general critique of Protestants or general assumption about their Theology, you are probably wrong,

So you’re trying to tell us that our general assumptions are wrong by making another general assumption?!

as the sheer diversity of views most likely provides a ready counter example to your point.

It’s this “sheer diversity of views” that is causing the problem in the first place.

 

[Harpazo]

As the thread above states, the word Protestant is over used in this forum, as almost everywhere else. By the colloquial usage of the word, it can apply from very conservative Lutheran and Anglican churches that are almost identical in Theology to the Roman church, all the way to the most radical of fringe cults. Anyways, please be aware that anytime you make a general critique of Protestants or general assumption about their Theology, you are probably wrong, as the sheer diversity of views most likely provides a ready counter example to your point.

Shlomo brother,

Welcome to CAF. I think you might have opened up a can of worms. Protestant has come to refer to all the ecclesial groups that sprang up around Luther’s Reformation and Henry VIII’s. It’s a shame that Catholics and others have to be specific about a particular sect of Protestantism and cannot make a general point. Because it is so divided, in that sense, that a Catholic cannot say something in general about Protestants. That should be plenty of proof that something went awry, and it’s a terrible shame. Christ did not intend all of this.

Alloho minokhoun,
Andrew

 

[anon52328184]

this is a reply to feedmysheep - how do the anglicans predate protestant reformation?

king henry viii was given the title of Defender of the Faith by the Pope because he sided with the Pope against martin luthers.

of course, that later changed, but martin luther started the ball rolling.

 

[tbuley]

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/protestant

Wow…I guess you’re Protestant then…I used to be.

When restrictions on the Evangelicals ( Lutherans) ability to spread the Gospel they filed a formal protest. But with these terms being later associated with the error of future sects they no longer identify with the Lutherans reformation of the church that returned it to a true orthodox understanding of Faith.

 

[tbuley]

this is a reply to feedmysheep - how do the anglicans predate protestant reformation?

king henry viii was given the title of Defender of the Faith by the Pope because he sided with the Pope against martin luthers.

of course, that later changed, but martin luther started the ball rolling.

Or the gross abuses of the papist church.

 

[Feedmysheep]

I stand corrected on the dating of the revolt of the English against the Church. Doy!

Tbuley, please be aware that the word “papist” is a pejorative one. You have used it twice so far in these discussions.

From the Forum rules:

Non-Catholics are welcome to participate but must be respectful of the faith of the Catholics participating on the board.

Thank you

 

[RobHom]

As the thread above states, the word Protestant is over used in this forum, as almost everywhere else. By the colloquial usage of the word, it can apply from very conservative Lutheran and Anglican churches that are almost identical in Theology to the Roman church, all the way to the most radical of fringe cults. Anyways, please be aware that anytime you make a general critique of Protestants or general assumption about their Theology, you are probably wrong, as the sheer diversity of views most likely provides a ready counter example to your point.

Might I be allowed to suggest that you or one of your brethren undertake the project to list and define each and every non-Catholic/OtherThanCatholicChurches/Denominations, you can skip over the “Catholic Churches” and the Jewish Faith. But if you take “umbrage” at being defined as a “Protestant” it is up to you and yours to define the parameters…and show the differences.

I am not trying to be “combative or argumentative”, however…even you as a Lutheran must admit that you are of the Original Protestant Religion…and while your particular theology may differ from others that are OTCC…

Granted…some make take umbrage or exception to the word Protestant…but face it, its a “generic” word that defines those other Christians who have followed in the path of the Reformers and even those who do not…

While there are points of rebuttal available due to the word, this is not a fault to be lain at our feet…look at some of the profiles of posters here…their religious identity ranges from fully honest to vaguely otherwise…and even none.

Take it for what its worth… Peace!

 

[RobHom]

,
Seeing as Lutherans hold to Grace alone, Faith alone, Christ alone, Scripture alone, are Theology is hardly the same as the papist. We hold monergism and have a Christ centered Cross focused view of Faith and works.

While much of your statement seems to bear truth…its seems that there exists a possibility that modern Lutherans, based on the different Lutheran denominational views that many have departed from the original teachings of Luther. Because he in fact did still embrace many, many, of the teachings of Catholicism. Yes?

monergism=Calvinism, no?

 

[Joe_5859]

I understand where the OP is coming from. There are often many generalizations made that could be further clarified.

Whenever I see such general terms such as “Protestant” being used here, I always try to mentally add the precursor “some” beforehand. Hopefully most of us realize that not all “Protestants” or non-Catholic Christians agree on everything. If all Protestants agreed on everything, there would not be more than one Protestant group. It’s an umbrella term that coveres many different groups with many different ideas. Protestant is simply the easiest and most recognizeable term to use.

We are all of us here from various backgrounds and levels of education. Most of us probably do not have backgrounds in writing, particularly essay writing. Therefore, we often don’t articulate our thoughts as carefully or as clearly as they could be articulated. I don’t think most of the Catholics here intend to use the term pejoratively. We just aren’t as precise with our language as we could be.

 

[Corki]

From the dictionary

broadly : a Christian not of a Catholic or Eastern church

Since this is a Catholic forum, that definition works virtually all the time. In other settings, it might be better to differentiate more but when the discussion is Catholicsm differentiation usually just serves as a way to dodge the question.

 

[ralphinal]

I have issue with the term at times. THere are too mny groups. Perhaps we should start using “Us” “Not Us” and “EO”.

Or, since I am from Alabama, “Us” and “Ya’ll”

 

[panoikei]

I have issue with the term at times. THere are too mny groups. Perhaps we should start using “Us” “Not Us” and “EO”.

Or, since I am from Alabama, “Us” and “Ya’ll”

 

[notsmart]

This thread was good for me to read, since I dont know terms correctly yet. I noticed that in reading this, some of those who are not catholic get upset by the term Protestant, and they dont like it being used. I noticed some of those who are Catholic dont like terms like “papist” and “Roman Church”.

So, why dont you all agree to not bother each other with the terms that offend the other?

 

[RobHom]

This thread was good for me to read, since I dont know terms correctly yet. I noticed that in reading this, some of those who are not catholic get upset by the term Protestant, and they dont like it being used. I noticed some of those who are Catholic dont like terms like “papist” and “Roman Church”.

So, why dont you all agree to not bother each other with the terms that offend the other?

Monica… Its not that easy. And the reason why is because if you could get everyone to agree…you would have Congress declaring a new national holiday… What bothers one will not bother the other, and that works conversely.

The “honorific” Papist, while I understand the speaker of the word is attempting to slur or insult Catholics…doesn’t bother me in the least. Nor does it bother me when someone refers to me as a “mackerel snapper” or any of the other “childish slurs”. Why? 3 reasons… 1. My skin is thicker than that, 2. It tells me exactly where the speaker is “coming from” and 3. The old child’s ditty still applies: Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me. And it seems some people have little respect for forum rules which conversely that have little respect for themselves…and belie any truths they claim regarding their faith in Christ.

Now, on the other hand…other Catholics may not be too keen on some words being used, and that is OK, just as its OK for some Protestants to object to certain words. Its a matter of personal tolerance which makes it a human issue…one that has no simple solution.

Plus you have to remember that there are reasons some people come to these forums… and the reasons are all over the map, and some of them are not nice or “Christian”…though some will wear the “wolfs” clothes to try to fool others…

But to me, “It ain’t nuttin’ but a thing”…

 

[Joe_5859]

This thread was good for me to read, since I dont know terms correctly yet. I noticed that in reading this, some of those who are not catholic get upset by the term Protestant, and they dont like it being used. I noticed some of those who are Catholic dont like terms like “papist” and “Roman Church”.

So, why dont you all agree to not bother each other with the terms that offend the other?

I have no problem avoiding any term that is offensive to whomever I’m speaking with, but it should be said that the term “Protestant” is not universally offensive. I actually started a poll thread on the subject a while back (Does the term “Protestant” offend you?) and there werre more who were not offended than those who were.

From my experience, those who have been most offended by the term are those who would be described as fundamentalists. The reason being, they did not feel any connection whatsoever with the Reformation, and they resented being defined in relation to the Catholic Church (as “protesters”). I can appreciate that.

I think the problem, more often than not, is not that the term is necessarily offensive but that it is used inaccurately. When someone says things like “All of you Protestants don’t believe Mary is the Mother of God”, that is not the most accurate (nor the most charitable) way to state one’s point. And anyone who is not Catholic will feel that the originator of such a statement is including them in such a sentiment, even though it may not apply to them personally. That’s why it’s usually a good idea to avoid extreme language like “all” or “none”, especially when talking about groups of people.

 

[tbuley]

I
Tbuley, please be aware that the word “papist” is a pejorative one. You have used it twice so far in these discussions.

Sorry,
I use the word “papist” because I understand not all who subject themselves to the pope and his teaching fit in the category of “Roman” (i.e… the different rites) and “C” “c” catholic might be over looked and misinterpreted.