What Do Protestants Believe About the Early Church?

[JonNC]

I boggles the mind, actually. It seems to me that the office is antichrist, or not. How can someone occupy an antichrist office who is not antichrist?

Is it easy to explain why I, as a member of a heretical tradition, am not a heretic?

Jon

 

[guanophore]

There are 960 -965 million" Protestants " plus 85 million oriental Orthodox, so by the numbers the majority say that the papacy has usurped power, I agree that numbers don’t really solve the matter, but it should make you think a bit .

I don’t think so. Most Protestants don’t even think about the Papacy, and don’t know why or how the authority exists.

I think the problems began when the Bishop of Rome accepted the title of “Pontiff” and added secular authority to the spiritual. It seems to me that the authority given to the Successor of Peter in Rome on the material plane was a distraction that resulted in centuries of involvement in secular and governmental affairs. The contaminated the spiritual role he was given by Christ.

What does primacy of honor look like to you? Practically speaking.

To me this is all semantics. If all bishops are equal but one holds a special honor, that makes him supreme in some way to the others. Sounds like Catholicism to me.

I think the term “supreme” is problematic. The Early fathers believed that all Churches needed to be in agreement with Rome because of her primacy in doctrine. She had the benefit of instruction by both Peter and Paul, and thus was a bastion of orthodoxy.

 

[guanophore]

And Cyprian declared that all apostles and bishops were ordained with the same authority as Peter. Why should I go with Optatus over Cyprian?

Why would you need to choose?

Did you know there is a line of Bishops from Antioch that also goes back to Peter?

The line that is in Rome was charged with the Petrine responsibilities/gifts.

Yet the EO and the RC and the OO are hardly unified.

We have more unity with one another than any of us have with our Protestant brethren.

  Is the EO doctrine that all bishops are equal and invested with the same power and authority apostolic doctrine?

I believe it is. They also recognize the Petrine gifts.

How should I decide who I should belong to without relying at least in part on my private interpretation of scripture and history’s?

I don’t think you can. Reading your posts, it seems that trust is difficult for you. You will have to rely on yourself as the only basis you can trust?

Is Jesus the source of Eastern Orthodoxy too?

Do you see any reason they are not? They have valid apostolic succession…

That’s good news. I defer to the church on a great many things.

One must wonder how you define “Church”.

 

[RodH]

To respond to the original post, “Protestants” view the Early Church in various ways.

I was raised in a long line of Methodists including ministers. I obtained a Masters degree in Theology from Asbury Theological Seminary, a Wesleyan School. I wound up leaving that Wesleyan seminary a Calvinist of sorts, and attended a Christian Reformed Church where I was an elder, then moved and due to some geographic issues worshiped with the Nazarenes and Lutheran. It was a long process but I am a convert to the Catholic faith and glad to be here! I’m home!!

Each tradition has its own views, naturally, and there is of course no Magesterium within Protestantism {or better put “non-Catholicism” as using a singular term such as “Protestantism” implies unity that doesn’t actually exist} so personal views about Early Church history and doctrine tend to hold sway.

Mostly, tho, I’d say there is very little real concern about the Early Church in most of the non-Catholic traditions, especially among evangelicals who may be so bold as to say “Who cares what they believed”. Early Church doctrines seem to be seen as personal opinions for example, associated with the theologians that affirmed them and the gist seems to be “Well, that’s what they believed” just as “This is what we believe”. In other words, it really doesn’t matter to most Protestants what St Ignatius of Antioch said about the Body and Blood of our Lord, etc. Unless some doctrine can be grabbed to support some denominational doctrine. Like I have seen Calvinists and Lutherans attempt to use Augustine against the Catholic Church as if they forget that Saint Augustine was a Catholic Bishop and is a Saint of the Catholic Church!

So for sure there are those who desperately want to see some of their own in the various Early Church Fathers, but many see the teachings and the traditions of the Early Church as NOT definitively necessary to what they do or believe today. There is, among many evangelicals, a tendency to project their own doctrines and traditions on the “Early Church” as if their traditions somehow reflect that which was common in the first several hundred years of the faith. This is pop theology but it holds sway among many evangelicals and charismatic groups where many think lots of singing and swaying to the music are traditions representative of early Church worship.

For myself, this topic was an important issue in my initial study of the Catholic Church, as I really did care what the first post-Apostolic Christians believed and how they worshiped. Ultimately it was second only to the reading of the Bible in leading me to the Catholic Church.

 

[KathleenGee]

God bless you, Rodh and your observation of our relations and understandings coincide with my observations…over many years.

Thankful you are now in full communion in the Church; we pray for our reunion all the time.

 

[steido01]

To respond to the original post, “Protestants” view the Early Church in various ways.

I was raised in a long line of Methodists including ministers. I obtained a Masters degree in Theology from Asbury Theological Seminary, a Wesleyan School. I wound up leaving that Wesleyan seminary a Calvinist of sorts, and attended a Christian Reformed Church where I was an elder, then moved and due to some geographic issues worshiped with the Nazarenes and Lutheran. It was a long process but I am a convert to the Catholic faith and glad to be here! I’m home!!

Each tradition has its own views, naturally, and there is of course no Magesterium within Protestantism {or better put “non-Catholicism” as using a singular term such as “Protestantism” implies unity that doesn’t actually exist} so personal views about Early Church history and doctrine tend to hold sway.

Mostly, tho, I’d say there is very little real concern about the Early Church in most of the non-Catholic traditions, especially among evangelicals who may be so bold as to say “Who cares what they believed”. Early Church doctrines seem to be seen as personal opinions for example, associated with the theologians that affirmed them and the gist seems to be “Well, that’s what they believed” just as “This is what we believe”. In other words, it really doesn’t matter to most Protestants what St Ignatius of Antioch said about the Body and Blood of our Lord, etc. Unless some doctrine can be grabbed to support some denominational doctrine. Like I have seen Calvinists and Lutherans attempt to use Augustine against the Catholic Church as if they forget that Saint Augustine was a Catholic Bishop and is a Saint of the Catholic Church!

So for sure there are those who desperately want to see some of their own in the various Early Church Fathers, but many see the teachings and the traditions of the Early Church as NOT definitively necessary to what they do or believe today. There is, among many evangelicals, a tendency to project their own doctrines and traditions on the “Early Church” as if their traditions somehow reflect that which was common in the first several hundred years of the faith. This is pop theology but it holds sway among many evangelicals and charismatic groups where many think lots of singing and swaying to the music are traditions representative of early Church worship.

For myself, this topic was an important issue in my initial study of the Catholic Church, as I really did care what the first post-Apostolic Christians believed and how they worshiped. Ultimately it was second only to the reading of the Bible in leading me to the Catholic Church.

Firstly, welcome to CAF! Please stick around - it’ll be good to have someone here with such varied experiences.

If I can ask, which of those communions nudged you to make the last swim across the Tiber?

Like I have seen Calvinists and Lutherans attempt to use Augustine against the Catholic Church as if they forget that Saint Augustine was a Catholic Bishop and is a Saint of the Catholic Church!

Are they ‘using’ him against the Catholic Church, or rather for their understanding of truth? And if we’re being objective historians, Augustine belongs to post-Tridentine Roman Catholicism just as much as he belongs to Lutheranism (remember that Lutherans consider themselves to be the truest continuation of the church, even if Rome kept the house in the divorce).

 

[Rasoleil]

“St. Augustine would have been a Lutheran” is what I’ve heard many times from Lutherans and Lutheran pastors.

 

[steido01]

“St. Augustine would have been a Lutheran” is what I’ve heard many times from Lutherans and Lutheran pastors.

Thank you for sharing the anecdote. One could make a convincing case for this based on much of his writings. Especially when he elaborates on his life before becoming a Christian. His distinct descriptions of Law and Gospel are almost Proto-Lutheran.

But I prefer to think of him as a Christian who lived 300 years after Christ, and mercifully did not know how deep division would be in the future. Asking which side he would’ve been on is like asking which side Washington would have fought in the American Civil War.

 

[Rasoleil]

Thank you for sharing the anecdote. One could make a convincing case for this based on much of his writings. Especially when he elaborates on his life before becoming a Christian. His distinct descriptions of Law and Gospel are almost Proto-Lutheran.

But I prefer to think of him as a Christian who lived 300 years after Christ, and mercifully did not know how deep division would be in the future. Asking which side he would’ve been on is like asking which side Washington would have fought in the American Civil War.

I’m trying to stay neutral on the issue, as my wife is a Lutheran! Seriously. And I know a few Lutheran pastors. Oh, as my wife says: “Lutheran, LCMS Missouri Synod”, as it’s important to make that distinction from other Lutheran denominations.

 

[Jon_S_1]

“St. Augustine would have been a Lutheran” is what I’ve heard many times from Lutherans and Lutheran pastors.

That is the type of framing I see a lot that projects personal opinions on Augustine.

He would have been a Calvinist
He would have been a baptist, a Pentecostal, a whatever I am.

No he was Catholic, faithful and trying to say anything other does him injustice.

He had plenty of dissenting opinions he could have followed but his faithfulness to the one holy Catholic and apostolic church would not allow him to pursue Protestantism any more than one of the heresies of his time.

As an evangelical I heard his name thrown around quite a bit. Always in serving the pastors own world view and never ever indicating that Augustine had any view different or was Catholic or anything else.

 

[steido01]

I’m trying to stay neutral on the issue, as my wife is a Lutheran! Seriously. And I know a few Lutheran pastors. Oh, as my wife says: “Lutheran, LCMS Missouri Synod”, as it’s important to make that distinction from other Lutheran denominations.

You married well. She’s my sort of Lutheran. We make for reasonably good matches with Catholics. Just ask my Romish wife.

If a Lutheran doesn’t know what sort of Lutheran they are, chances are they aren’t very Lutheran.

 

[Rasoleil]

You married well. She’s my sort of Lutheran. We make for reasonably good matches with Catholics. Just ask my Romish wife.

If a Lutheran doesn’t know what sort of Lutheran they are, chances are they aren’t very Lutheran.

I actually attend divine services with her on Sundays, and, of course, shared in fellowship and potlucks ( . I am Catholic and attend Mass on Saturday vigils and Holy Days of Obligation. However, the rule is, according to her: she never attends Catholic Mass. In fact, starting in January, I’m going to start as a Lector at my church… My wife never bothered to congratulate me. Oh, I did forget to add, that she’s pretty bitterly anti-Catholic ( seriously), despite us being a great match. She converted about 10 years ago from Catholicism. I try not to engage in any religious discussions, as she can get fired up, really fired up. She could read this and agree. I’m always wrong, even if I’m right. But that’s the way it’s with most marriages, on any subject.. Thought you and most people would find what I wrote somewhat funny.

 

[steido01]

I actually attend divine services with her on Sundays, and, of course, shared in fellowship and potlucks ( . I am Catholic and attend Mass on Saturday vigils and Holy Days of Obligation. However, the rule is, according to her: she never attends Catholic Mass. In fact, starting in January, I’m going to start as a Lector at my church… My wife never bothered to congratulate me. Oh, I did forget to add, that she’s pretty bitterly anti-Catholic ( seriously), despite us being a great match. She converted about 10 years ago from Catholicism. I try not to engage in any religious discussions, as she can get fired up, really fired up. She could read this and agree. I’m always wrong, even if I’m right. But that’s the way it’s with most marriages, on any subject.. Thought you and most people would find what I wrote somewhat funny.

I’m sorry to hear that. I pray that she learns to discuss religion openly with you. Feel free to PM me anytime if you’d like.

 

[KathleenGee]

I think if Protestants would study early church history and then see how Islam expanded, they would have a different view of some aspects of American foreign policy and come to understand our policies so many time are unpopular with the rest of the world who knows its history.

 

[Padres1969]

I think if Protestants would study early church history and then see how Islam expanded, they would have a different view of some aspects of American foreign policy and come to understand our policies so many time are unpopular with the rest of the world who knows its history.

Oh which policies would those be? Also Islam’s rise would have happened a fair bit after the “early” Church seeing as it happened 7 centuries after Christ and long after the Church took a form not unfamiliar to those today.

 

[KathleenGee]

Have you read the letter by St. Justin the Martyr on the description of the Mass to the Emperor of Rome in 154 AD? The basic parts, tone and spirit of the liturgy then is the same today, and it also expresses the sense of rhythm of daily life the Mass provides us today.

The books of Scripture, the liturgy, the episcopacy as form of church governance, and the foundation of the Creed was all in place by 100 AD. And the Church was named by Ignatius of Antioch on his way to martyrdom, Greek, ‘He Ekklesia Katholika’…simple the Universal Church.

 

[Valdemar]

Firstly, welcome to CAF! Please stick around - it’ll be good to have someone here with such varied experiences.

If I can ask, which of those communions nudged you to make the last swim across the Tiber?

****None of them. Most every Protestant group in some form centers around the notion that the Bible is at the center of their faith and morals. But in fact, if one investigates their claims, one sees they, to use the technical theological term, cherry pick from the Bible, form their own “traditions” and ignore lots of history. The Anglicans do not of course, but have their own breach of Apostolic succession to deal with. If it wasn’t for that, who knows, they just might be in line for unity with the Church, but at this point their doctrinal novelties have pretty much put paid to any notion of unity with the CC.

ALL OF THEM possess truths. ALL OF THEM can teach Catholics a thing or two about something. Piety, general popularity of Bible reading, joy in the Gospel and courage in speaking out for their doctrines are all aspects of various expressions of Protestantism that I see curiously lacking in the general population of Catholics. ****

Are they ‘using’ him against the Catholic Church, or rather for their understanding of truth? And if we’re being objective historians, Augustine belongs to post-Tridentine Roman Catholicism just as much as he belongs to Lutheranism (remember that Lutherans consider themselves to be the truest continuation of the church, even if Rome kept the house in the divorce).

**Well, yeah, they of course are using him against the Catholic Church, or trying to. I say trying to because their hermeneutic is one of hand selection out of context from the writings of a Catholic Bishop. It would be something like as if a modern Anglican went back to Cardinal John Henry Newman and hand-selected something from his writings and claimed defense of their schism on that basis and tried to call him an Episcopalian.

And your statement about post-Tridentine Catholicism is meaningless. The Catholic faith is continuous and unbroken from the establishment of the Church and indeed, from eternity. St Augustine belongs to an earlier history certainly. An early history of the same organic being, the Mystical Body of Christ.

Lutheranism does not. It is in schism historically and doctrinally from the Church of which St Augustine was a Bishop.

Catholics often get beat-up in debates because of a historical reality common to other Christian groups as well. The problem with the Catholic Church today is that we are currently largely in the hands of a generation of effeminates who kowtow to what appears to be popular theology among secularized culture. That will change as the current cultural fad wears out, and we will see orthodoxy rise again. Witness the fantastic leadership and doctrinal purity of Cardinal Robert Sarah and Archbishop Athanasius Schneider, etc.**

 

[Valdemar]

That is the type of framing I see a lot that projects personal opinions on Augustine.

He would have been a Calvinist
He would have been a baptist, a Pentecostal, a whatever I am.

No he was Catholic, faithful and trying to say anything other does him injustice.

He had plenty of dissenting opinions he could have followed but his faithfulness to the one holy Catholic and apostolic church would not allow him to pursue Protestantism any more than one of the heresies of his time.

As an evangelical I heard his name thrown around quite a bit. Always in serving the pastors own world view and never ever indicating that Augustine had any view different or was Catholic or anything else.

PRECISELY.

Well said.

Just like St Jerome is manhandled by some Protestants because he has some concern about the deuterocanonicals. I’ve heard an evangelical say “I believe in the Canon of Jerome” because St Jerome suggested doubt in the deuteros. But “the Canon of Jerome” is none other than the Canon of the Catholic Church, because he obeyed his instructions given by the Pope and translated the WHOLE Bible, not just the parts he was most comfortable with.

St Jerome and the Bible is yet another example of how the Catholic Church rightly claims both continuity and authority in teaching.

 

[In_His_Grace]

I actually attend divine services with her on Sundays, and, of course, shared in fellowship and potlucks ( . I am Catholic and attend Mass on Saturday vigils and Holy Days of Obligation. However, the rule is, according to her: she never attends Catholic Mass. In fact, starting in January, I’m going to start as a Lector at my church… My wife never bothered to congratulate me. Oh, I did forget to add, that she’s pretty bitterly anti-Catholic ( seriously), despite us being a great match. She converted about 10 years ago from Catholicism. I try not to engage in any religious discussions, as she can get fired up, really fired up. She could read this and agree. I’m always wrong, even if I’m right. But that’s the way it’s with most marriages, on any subject.. Thought you and most people would find what I wrote somewhat funny.

You and your wife are in my prayers. My wife is Catholic and I’m Lutheran. I go to Mass with her out of a desire to worship God with the wife I love. It is possible for there to be harmony between the two of you.

 

[steido01]

**Well, yeah, they of course are using him against the Catholic Church, or trying to.**It’s unfortunate you think that way. When I study what the early church teaches, I don’t do it simply to spite the Roman Catholic Church and disagree with her; I do it to learn what the early Christians believed so that I can practice as close to that as possible. Lutheranism would not be the home of so many intellectual giants for 500 years if it could not stand on its own.
Valdemar;13485699:

I say trying to because their hermeneutic is one of hand selection out of context from the writings of a Catholic Bishop. It would be something like as if a modern Anglican went back to Cardinal John Henry Newman and hand-selected something from his writings and claimed defense of their schism on that basis and tried to call him an Episcopalian

.

And your statement about post-Tridentine Catholicism is meaningless. The Catholic faith is continuous and unbroken from the establishment of the Church and indeed, from eternity. St Augustine belongs to an earlier history certainly. An early history of the same organic being, the Mystical Body of Christ.You do acknowledge that your communion’s doctrines -]change/-] “develop” over time, don’t you? Augustine was not bound to believe that his salvation was dependent upon whether or not Mary was Assumed or whether the Pope was Infallible. Until those beliefs were made doctrines (relatively recently), it was perfectly acceptable for Catholic to hold different views. The same is true for Lutheranism. No Lutheran teaching is novel or invented; it has its basis in what was, in its time, perfectly acceptable Catholic opinion.

Lutheranism does not. It is in schism historically and doctrinally from the Church of which St Augustine was a Bishop.

From your point of view. But they don’t think so. Again, they see their church as the church to which St. Augustine belongs. To them, it’s your church, and the Orthodox, and the Reformed who have gone wayward to varying degrees.

‘Effeminates, eh?’ Which Catholics, exactly, does that encompass? Care to name names?