What percentage of Protestant theology is based on the Bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bettercallpaul
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Good morning, Jon!
JonNC said:
You bring the topic in, and think I should be embarrassed. I don’t EVER bring these types of topics up because behaviors of members does not necessarily reflect on communions.
Click to expand...
Not so fast;

We’re not talking about the sins of clergy. No no no. We both know we’re all sinners and that “sinner’s gonna sin”.

We’re talking about sinful behavior that has been NORMALIZED and ACCEPTED by Anglican clergy. This brings the legitimacy of much of their clergy into question, which deals precisely with the point we were discussing when you claimed that all Roman and Anglican clergy are valid.

It seems you don’t really believe that… Which is good. Now you just need to stop saying it.
There seem to be women clergy now in the Old Catholic Churches.
Click to expand...
We’ve been over this, Jon. Schismatics are schismatics. Just because they use the word “Catholic” in their faith title doesn’t make them the genuine article. Catholics require that the Petrine seat reciprocates your identification as Catholic because they think the Church is real, visible and actually authoritative.
You are asking me to speak for Anglicans that I’m not in communion with.
Click to expand...
Ah ah ah.

You may not personally hold them in communion with yourself (some protestant residue from your time as a Lutheran, I’m sure), but they’ve only been suspended from voting. They’re still very much your fellow communion mates.
I’ll hold you at the same standard. Clearly there are CATHOLIC clergy who are not validly ordained.
Click to expand...
Are there any you’re aware of that are living in unambiguous sin that are not presently under some sort of discipline from the Church?

Serious question!
 
Last edited:
JonNC said:
40.png
guanophore:
I don’t think so. Catholicism has never made any effort to extract doctrines from Scripture, or to interpret Scriptures to produce any unique doctrines. Certain scriptures may be understood in the light of the Traditions, but the Scripture is not the source of them.
Click to expand...
The method of determining doctrine isn’t really the point, but instead that doctrine’s exclusivity to one Tradition within the Church.
Click to expand...
Catholicism doesn’t claim to do that, Jon.

There’re quite a few additional ways to be Catholic besides “Roman” Catholic.
 
Last edited:
JonNC said:
40.png
Vonsalza:
We’re not talking about the sins of clergy. No no no. We both know we’re all sinners and that “sinner’s gonna sin”.
Click to expand...
Then why bring it up?
Click to expand...
Please read the whole post before replying. That is answered in literally the next line.
 
Last edited:
Vonsalza said:
We’ve been over this, Jon. Schismatics are schismatics. Just because they use the word “Catholic” in their faith title doesn’t make them the genuine article. Catholics require that the Petrine seat reciprocates your identification as Catholic because they think the Church is real, visible and actually authoritative.
Click to expand...
Exactly! The Bishop of Rome is no more responsible for how Old Catholics act than Bishop Grundorf is for how TEC acts.
 
JonNC said:
40.png
Vonsalza:
We’ve been over this, Jon. Schismatics are schismatics. Just because they use the word “Catholic” in their faith title doesn’t make them the genuine article. Catholics require that the Petrine seat reciprocates your identification as Catholic because they think the Church is real, visible and actually authoritative.
Click to expand...
Exactly! The Bishop of Rome is no more responsible for how Old Catholics act than Bishop Grundorf is for how TEC acts.
Click to expand...
Which makes me wonder why on Earth you even bother to mention the Dutch Touch…

🤔🤔🤔
 
JonNC said:
40.png
Vonsalza:
Which makes me wonder why on Earth you even bother to mention the Dutch Touch…
Click to expand...
Read the article I posted.
Click to expand...
I have. More than once.

If valid succession broke when Henry broke from Rome, the same would have occurred when the “Old Catholics” left as well.

This makes it an “infusion” worth nothing… They provide nothing that the Anglicans didn’t already have; a broken succession.
 
Last edited:
JonNC said:
You may not personally hold them in communion with yourself (some protestant residue from your time as a Lutheran, I’m sure), but they’ve only been suspended from voting. They’re still very much your fellow communion mates.
Click to expand...
I’ll forgive you for this misrepresentation, because the new CAF format does a horrible disservice by not making religious affiliation something available.
I am not in communion with TEC, or the CoE.
I am a continuing Anglican. We do not ordain women or practicing homosexuals.
So, again, don’t hold me accountable for others, and I won’t do it to you
 
JonNC said:
40.png
bettercallpaul:
Do all Protestant denominations only study the Bible? I thought some even studied the Church fathers, Augustine and Aquinas.
If it isn’t in the Bible it aint true?
Click to expand...
First, there is no such thing as “Protestant” theology.
But yes, different communions that are loosely categorized as Protestant have differing views of the use of Tradition, the Fathers, etc.
Priests in the Lutheran and Anglican traditions go through extensive studies of the Fathers of the Church. As a child, I learned about the martyrs.

And then there are some that have little use for these things and people. It is another reason why the term Protestant is meaningless
Click to expand...
Why do you say the term Protestant is meaningless?
 
Vonsalza said:
If valid succession broke when Henry broke from Rome, the same would have occurred when the “Old Catholics” left as well.

This makes it an “infusion” worth nothing… They provide nothing that the Anglicans didn’t already have; a broken succession.
Click to expand...
Old Catholic orders were considered illicit, not invalid by Rome.
 
JonNC said:
40.png
JonNC:
You may not personally hold them in communion with yourself (some protestant residue from your time as a Lutheran, I’m sure), but they’ve only been suspended from voting. They’re still very much your fellow communion mates.
Click to expand...
I’ll forgive you for this misrepresentation, because the new CAF format does a horrible disservice by not making religious affiliation something available.
I am not in communion with TEC, or the CoE.
I am a continuing Anglican. We do not ordain women or practicing homosexuals.
So, again, don’t hold me accountable for others, and I won’t do it to you
Click to expand...
Ok, so when you say that “Anglican clergy are valid”, you just mean your very specific subset group of wider Anglicanism.

You should include that information next time! 😀
 
Last edited:
Vonsalza said:
Ok, so when you say that “Anglican clergy are valid”, you just mean your very specific subset group of wider Anglicanism.

You should include that information next time! 😀
Click to expand...
My affiliation is listed in my profile. I won’t speak to the effects of ordination of anyone sexually active outside of marriage other than to say that I would not be a member of a communion that does.
 
JonNC said:
40.png
Vonsalza:
Ok, so when you say that “Anglican clergy are valid”, you just mean your very specific subset group of wider Anglicanism.

You should include that information next time! 😀
Click to expand...
My affiliation is listed in my profile. I won’t speak to the effects of ordination of anyone sexually active outside of marriage other than to say that I would not be a member of a communion that does.
Click to expand...
lol, 👍

(16 Chars)
 
7_Sorrows said:
Why do you say the term Protestant is meaningless?
Click to expand...
I’ve had this go with Jon a bunch of times.

The term brutishly lumps his (former) group in with thousands of others into the big casserole of protestant chaos and noise.

I say former because Jon was Lutheran. He’s now some form of Anglican and it’s debatable as to whether Anglicanism is protestant.
 
bettercallpaul said:
all Protestant
Click to expand...
Impossible to tell…the question paints with too broad a brush…like assuming “all women prefer long hair”, or “all children hate brocolli”…with 10s of thousands of Protestant denominations it impossible to answer with the qualifier of “all”.

It can’t even be claimed “all Catholics” do…ask some Catholic who the Church Fathers are and they will give you the names of their parish priests!
 
Last edited:
Vonsalza said:
The term brutishly lumps his (former) group in with thousands of others into the big casserole of protestant chaos and noise.
Click to expand...
It is done without regard to the historical accuracy of the origin of the term, what it was actually about, and who was actually there.
It’s like saying someone acts or is a particular way because they are from South America, without considering that they are Brazilian or Columbian, etc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top