What is Protestantism?

[With_Questions]

This is the consequence of the Protestant dogma of private judgement.

This is exactly what I am talking about.

First of all there is no such thing as Protestant dogma.

Second of all this belief as you stated is just a title and lacks definition.

Third, once you define it, you have to show that all Protestants believe this. And that you must believe this to be Protestant. And that it is unique to Protestants.

Then you might have a case for saying that this is a tenet of Protestantism and is Protestant dogma.

Otherwise you are overstating your case.

 

[With_Questions]

I think you are putting too much ideological weight on a suffix!

We speak of “Hinduism,” even though “Hinduism” is really defined historically and culturally rather than ideologically (I’ve met a Hindu who said that reincarnation was not an important belief for her, for instance). In both Hinduism and Protestantism we can make generalizations that hold good for the most part, but in both cases these generalizations are risky.

And I wouldn’t describe Catholicism as primarily a belief system either. I would describe it as a historical tradition/community. Generally the trend in contemporary scholarship is toward recognizing the diversity of all human movements and the difficulty of speaking about abstract “belief systems” rather than specific ideas and practices. And I think this is generally a halthy trend.

Edwin

Objection noted.

I conceded in another post that perhaps I am being nitpicky.

However, this nitpickyness is a response to Catholics using the word as a belief system, then placing certain beliefs (like sola scriptura), and then attributing these beliefs to all Protestants via the word Protestantism.

 

[With_Questions]

I see where you’re coming from distinguishing the difference between the word Protestant and Protestantism. From what you’ve gathered and read so far, what kind of stab would you give if any to the definition of it?

I honestly don’t know that I can come up with any tenets of Protestantism.

I can come up with some that it would not make any sense for a Protestant to hold. For example it would not make any sense for a Protestant to believe the Bishop of Rome is incapable of being incorrect when speaking on faith and morals.

If one were to hold this belief, the logical next move would be to convert to Catholicism. Why would one remain Protestant knowing that God gives special favours to the Catholics that He apparantly doesn’t give one’s own church. But it is theoretically possible I suppose.

One problem is that there is no ecclesiastical organization called “Protestant” to define what a Protestant must believe. So maybe I can start the 33,001 (since you claim there are 33,000 of them) Protestant denomination that believes the Bishop of Rome is incapable of being incorrect when speaking on faith and morals. Nothing is stopping me from doing so.

Nah…bad idea. That is totally ridiculous.

All that you can do is examine the tenets of faith of all the 33,000 denominations that you all claim exist and see what is common in these denominations that is not found elsewhere.

I can’t think of any. Not to say that none exist. But I am not smart enough to figure out what they are.

 

[Peter_J]

Hi WithQuestions,

As you probably already realize, with a question like that you’re going to get a lot of hearsay. And I mean a lot.

The word Protestant I understand.

Protestant is a classification word. Branches of Christianity that are not Catholic or Orthodox and at the same time retain certain essentials such as the trinity are classified as Protestant. I got it.

The word that I do not understand is Protestantism.

Since that word is bandied about here, I need to know what it means.

When you add the suffix ism to a word, you are changing that word from either an adjective or a noun referring to a person to a belief system.

In principle, yes, but not always in practice. For example, “Protestantism” can be used to mean “the state or condition of being Protestant” or “the Protestant phenomenon”.

But to answer your question, I would say there are 3 conditions for “Protestantism”:

• being Christian
• accepting a certain canon of Scripture
• accepting Sola Scriptura

Of course, for each of those conditions there will be “borderline” cases. For example, Anglicans believe in the Sufficiency of Scripture. But do Anglicans believe in Sola Scriptura? Well, some do and some don’t. Does that mean that some Anglicans are Protestants, and some aren’t? Well, I guess so …

 

[1edyson]

I honestly don’t know that I can come up with any tenets of Protestantism.

I can come up with some that it would not make any sense for a Protestant to hold. For example it would not make any sense for a Protestant to believe the Bishop of Rome is incapable of being incorrect when speaking on faith and morals.

If one were to hold this belief, the logical next move would be to convert to Catholicism. Why would one remain Protestant knowing that God gives special favours to the Catholics that He apparantly doesn’t give one’s own church. But it is theoretically possible I suppose.

One problem is that there is no ecclesiastical organization called “Protestant” to define what a Protestant must believe. So maybe I can start the 33,001 (since you claim there are 33,000 of them) Protestant denomination that believes the Bishop of Rome is incapable of being incorrect when speaking on faith and morals. Nothing is stopping me from doing so.

Nah…bad idea. That is totally ridiculous.

All that you can do is examine the tenets of faith of all the 33,000 denominations that you all claim exist and see what is common in these denominations that is not found elsewhere.

I can’t think of any. Not to say that none exist. But I am not smart enough to figure out what they are.

I think a start of those tennats might be found in the 5 Sola’s that most Protestants Hold.

1 Sola scriptura (“by Scripture alone”)​

2 Sola fide (“by faith alone”)​

3 Sola gratia (“by grace alone”)​

4 Solus Christus (“Christ alone”)​

5 Soli Deo gloria (“glory to God alone”)​

Or even do a wiki search, they have a quasi-definition of protestantism, though I think its more along the lines of defining a Protestant, like you’ve noted.

So then do we conclude that Protestantism doesn’t exist? Then the Jesuits can check that off the list! No seriously, but I think Protestantism is just a word used to generalize non-Catholic Christian beliefs.

 

[Drilling4Truth]

Perhaps most of would agree that the one unifying factor that all protestants have is they are not unified. Even within certain denominations there is no unity outside the fact that you attend the same building once a week. A relatively new phenomenon is the appearance of “non-denominational” churches. These independent groups operate on the local level and are completely autonomous. Thus, their perceived authority is derived from the head pastor and his ability to interpret scripture. But, as is the case with most non-Catholic denominations, one is still free to interpret sacred scripture however they like. It’s these mini-denominations that raise the number of overall protestant denominations, and there are tens of thousands of them. Each operating on their own and answering to no authority.

Now, I can sort of understand why you dislike being referred to as a part of protestantism. I myself was a protestant for 24 years and I had no trouble calling myself one. And even then I was never susceptible to the notion that, “We’re all just Christians.” Because with that comes the inevitable justifiers. “I’m Christian, but Catholics are not. Or Mormons. Or Jehovah’s Witnesses. Or Branch Davidians.”

Understand that when we use the word protestantism we aren’t using it as a negative. It’s merely a way to distinguish those Christians that are not part of the Universal Church as we know it. If the term upsets you because you don’t feel we can define it to your liking, by all means, suggest a definition and we can move. on.

 

[With_Questions]

I think a start of those tennats might be found in the 5 Sola’s that most Protestants Hold.

1 Sola scriptura (“by Scripture alone”)​

First of all this is just a phrase that has no meaning without a verb. I sort of like sentences myself.

Second of all I have encountered several nuances on this.

From my reading on the topic I am more comfortable with Prima Scriptura than Sola Scriptura anway. On this one I look to one of my Protestant heros, John Wesley who believed in Prima Scriptura (at least according to Wiki).

I have been accused by other Protestants in my life of not adhering to Sola Scriptura because I do not believe the gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased on whatever magical day the Bible became the Bible. Whatever.

Finally there are liberal Protestants that do not believe Scripture has any authority.

2 Sola fide (“by faith alone”)​

I am fairly sure that the Church of Christ is one Protestant denomination that specifically denies Sola fide. I might be wrong but I seem to have recalled reading that somewhere.

And of course there are liberal Protestants that lean more towards universalism anyway. How can they believe in Sola Fide when they believe in the end God gives everyone a pass?

But even with us conservative fundy types there are nuances here. Us who like John Wesley have a much different understanding of this than those who like John Calvin.

Again I have been accused of not believing in Sola fide because I do not buy into the notion that a true Christian is eternally secure.

So I can’t please anyone I guess.

But anyway these different nuances are a problem when you take a phrase like Sola Scriptura and then ascribe these phrases to a phantom belief system called Protestantism. You totally miss the idea that us former Methodist types have a totally different understanding (if we use them at all) than your Presbyterian or Baptist church around the block.

3 Sola gratia (“by grace alone”)​

4 Solus Christus (“Christ alone”)​

5 Soli Deo gloria (“glory to God alone”)​

I have been told that Catholics have no problem with these. So they do not uniquely identify Protestants.

Again, since these phrases lack verbs, I have no idea what they mean.

I sort of like sentences to communicate thoughts instead of two word slogans. But that’s me I suppose.

 

[With_Questions]

Perhaps most of would agree that the one unifying factor that all protestants have is they are not unified.

But is that unique to Protestants.

Aren’t there about 18 Orthodox Strains or so?

Aren’t there even Sedevacantist Catholics?

And even within standard Catholics aren’t there different beliefs. Some believe in 24 hour creation; some do not. Some are Catholic Charismatics. Some are not. And so forth.

I will concede that Catholics are more unified than Protestants. But to hold this one trait up as black-and-white seems to be an oversimplification.

 

[Drilling4Truth]

But is that unique to Protestants.

Aren’t there about 18 Orthodox Strains or so?

Aren’t there even Sedevacantist Catholics?

And even within standard Catholics aren’t there different beliefs. Some believe in 24 hour creation; some do not. Some are Catholic Charismatics. Some are not. And so forth.

I will concede that Catholics are more unified than Protestants. But to hold this one trait up as black-and-white seems to be an oversimplification.

I wouldn’t call them “strains”. Although some protestants disagree, Catholicism is not a virus. Many Eastern Rite Churches are in Communion with Rome. Some are not due to their not accepting the primacy of the Chair of St. Peter

But, back to the point. To be Catholic means to accept the Commandments of God and the precepts of the Church. Can Catholics disagree on certain issues. Yes, of course. We’re not robots programmed my the Vatican. There are some Catholics that believe things that are in error, and yet they still consider themselves Catholic, even if those beliefs set them apart from the Universal Church.

I know all you’re trying to do is defend protestantism and that’s your right. But, perhaps you should spend more time discussing the issues that unite us and less time on issues that divide us

 

[With_Questions]

I know all you’re trying to do is defend protestantism and that’s your right. But, perhaps you should spend more time discussing the issues that unite us and less time on issues that divide us

This may come as a surprise, but I have absolutely no interest in defending something as ill-defined as “protestantism”.

So far the only definition that has been provided that makes any sense is some variant of “those denominations that flow from the Reformation”.

For many / most of these denomination I sort of view them in the same way as I view you all.

And that would be as branches of Christianity that I agree with on some things and disagree with on other things.

To me, you all are logically just another denomination (or branch of Christianity if denomination offends you) that is not mine, Under this view, you all are better and no worse than the other churches in my city that are not mine and that I may disagree on some things.

So I have no interest really in defending the Anglicans from you as I have in defending you from the Anglicans.

 

[Drilling4Truth]

This may come as a surprise, but I have absolutely no interest in defending something as ill-defined as “protestantism”.

So far the only definition that has been provided that makes any sense is some variant of “those denominations that flow from the Reformation”.

For many / most of these denomination I sort of view them in the same way as I view you all.

And that would be as branches of Christianity that I agree with on some things and disagree with on other things.

To me, you all are logically just another denomination (or branch of Christianity if denomination offends you) that is not mine, Under this view, you all are better and no worse than the other churches in my city that are not mine and that I may disagree on some things.

So I have no interest really in defending the Anglicans from you as I have in defending you from the Anglicans.

Don’t worry, I’ve spent too much time in the oil field to be offended. I think your original question has been answered ad nauseum. You may not like the answers people took the time to give. You’ve been rather short with the way some people provide those answers. And, you’ve demonstrated that you can come up with endless reasons (real or imagined) why no answer will satisfy you. Either way, I’m not really interested anymore.

 

[mark_a]

So far the only definition that has been provided that makes any sense is some variant of “those denominations that flow from the Reformation”.

For many / most of these denomination I sort of view them in the same way as I view you all.

This is refreshing considering the view most Protestants who post here have of us.

And that would be as branches of Christianity that I agree with on some things and disagree with on other things.

Are there any Catholic moral theology teachings you’d take issue with?

To me, you all are logically just another denomination (or branch of Christianity if denomination offends you) that is not mine, Under this view,

you all are better and no worse

than the other churches in my city that are not mine and that I may disagree on some things.

More refreshment!!! Or is the inset a typo?

 

[Syele]

I found it curious that these were tenets of “Protestantism” that I for one have never heard of. But yet these were tenets of “Protestantism”.

Well after letting that one float around in my mind for a while, I have concluded that I apparantly really do not know what Protestantism is. Hence I am asking the question.

There is really no such thing as “Protestantism” only lots of people who make up definitions for it.

So far I cant even get from Catholics a consensus that non-Christians cannot be Protestants. If you don’t even need to be a Christian to be a Protestant then there is no possible tenet of “Protestantism” that all Protestants hold except perhaps “I am not Catholic”

I never even knew what a protestant WAS till a Catholic informed me one day that I was one! If you want some tenets of some belief system why not ask people about the belief system they actually hold instead of taking a word with almost no meaning and then complaining it hasn’t got a lot of meaning?

 

[With_Questions]

Are there any Catholic moral theology teachings you’d take issue with?

Possibly the artificial contraception one although to be honest I haven’t yet eliminated the possibility you might be right on that.

Other than that, I can’t think of any.

I am quite sure that God is not going to send Christians to hell for the mortal sin of using condoms.

More refreshment!!! Or is the inset a typo?

Don’t get too excited. I meant to say “no better and no worse”.

Although that is not totally accurate because I do prefer Catcholicism to liberal Protestant. At the same time I probably prefer evangelical Protestant to Catholic as long as the evangelical Protestant is not weird. But that’s just me and not something I will spend bandwidth arguing.

The Catholic church in my community is logically the same to me as the Episcopalean, Presbyterian, Baptist…

At my age I get communication challenged sometimes.

 

[Peter_J]

So far I cant even get from Catholics a consensus that non-Christians cannot be Protestants.

I remember a line from the movie “Shattered Glass”, something like “We’re not in the business of Gotcha-journalism”.

I would question whether what you’re doing here (and, for that matter, what I’ve seen a lot of others do online as well) isn’t a form a “Gotcha-journalism” (except it isn’t exactly “journalism”, so I don’t know what the precise term would be).

In other words, “Aha! I’ve found a Catholic who believes that you can be a Protestant without being a Christian. So that proves that there isn’t a consensus among Catholics that non-Christians can’t be Protestants.”

Eh?

 

[Syele]

I remember a line from the movie “Shattered Glass”, something like “We’re not in the business of Gotcha-journalism”.

I would question whether what you’re doing here (and, for that matter, what I’ve seen a lot of others do online as well) isn’t a form a “Gotcha-journalism” (except it isn’t exactly “journalism”, so I don’t know what the precise term would be).

In other words, “Aha! I’ve found a Catholic who believes that you can be a Protestant without being a Christian. So that proves that there isn’t a consensus among Catholics that non-Christians can’t be Protestants.”

Eh?

nah its just one reason I don’t hang out here as much as I used to. there are actually quite a few people who have told me this over the years Ive been here at CAF… that not all Protestants are Christians, one doesn’t have to believe in the Trinity etc to becalled a Protestant.

Its much less “gotcha” than it is pure frustration on my part. I find it difficult to have any conversaiton if people can’t agree on what they are conversing about.

 

[Peter_J]

nah its just one reason I don’t hang out here as much as I used to. there are actually quite a few people who have told me this over the years Ive been here at CAF… that not all Protestants are Christians, one doesn’t have to believe in the Trinity etc to becalled a Protestant.

Its much less “gotcha” than it is pure frustration on my part. I find it difficult to have any conversaiton if people can’t agree on what they are conversing about.

Fair enough, but you should also realize that some of us Catholics are down-right embarrassed when one of our fellow Catholics makes a statement like that. (Good thing “banging my head against the wall” is only an expression. )

 

[hays1122]

Exactly.

And I am not even sure that is a tenet of Protestantism. I could believe that I suppose and still be a Protestant. After all there is no Protestant ecclesiastical organization that would enforce my heretical Protestant belief.

It just doesn’t make any sense to do so.

But it sure seems to me on these forums that a lot of Catholics use the word Protestantism as a belief system that contains a set of tenets. I guess what I am asking is for those Catholics who use the word in this way is to tell me what these tenets are that are common to all Protestants yet uniquely identify Protestants.

If they can not come up with these tenets, then I have a modest proposal that the word Protestantism is being abused and this abuse should stop.

Why not accept the idea that Protestantism is describing any non-catholic but yet christian believers.

 

[mark_a]

Possibly the artificial contraception one although to be honest I haven’t yet eliminated the possibility you might be right on that.

We’re the only major church that hasn’t changed her tune on that one. Or ignored it completely.

I am quite sure that God is not going to send Christians to hell for the mortal sin of using condoms.

Then it must not be a mortal sin. Maybe “Christians who don’t believe that sex with a condom is a mortal sin” could be the definition of Protestantism you asked about?!?!?!?!?

Don’t get too excited. I meant to say “no better and no worse”.

I know, I’m not a complete idiot, I’m an incomplete idiot.

The Catholic church in my community is logically the same to me as the Episcopalean, Presbyterian, Baptist…

I would say that concerning moral teachings you are probably correct, except for that pesky contraception teaching. But Catholics use contraception at about the same rate as Protestants, which is about the same as the general population.

At my age I get communication challenged sometimes.

Welcome to the club!!

 

[Syele]

Fair enough, but you should also realize that some of us Catholics are down-right embarrassed when one of our fellow Catholics makes a statement like that. (Good thing “banging my head against the wall” is only an expression. )

LOL no worries, about me taking a few to represent the whole, IF I did I’d have to claim a few very bad representations of my own faith too!

As for banging heads on wall, I do that for real sometimes. it helps so long as I dont bang it too hard! :banghead: