Sorry. Divisions are mutual But don’t worry, we love our separated siblings in Christ who are in communion with the pope
Well, you seem to want to group all Anglicans together by name. What’s good for the goose and all that.
Last edited:
What percentage of Protestant theology is based on the Bible?
- Status
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Rebellions are not. Otherwise, do you think Lucifer perhaps had some merit in his spat with God?
Yeah. I do this weird thing where I associate the word “Anglican” with the communion that contains roughly 90% of them. And I associate the word “Catholic” with the communion that contains roughly 99% of them.
Per your standards, this may be irrational of me.
Last edited:
M
Maximilian75
Guest
The established Anglican leadership allows for women priests.
John Paul the Second dedicated a whole ecclesiastical letter to this called Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, with the express purpose of ending such foolishness.
John Paul the Second dedicated a whole ecclesiastical letter to this called Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, with the express purpose of ending such foolishness.
Sure. You know all of us Protestants are Comparable to Lucifer.Rebellions are not. Otherwise, do you think Lucifer perhaps had some merit in his spat with God?
Well, The polemical purposes are probably part of the equation, too. But that’s okay. If I wanted to convince someone not to be Catholic, this style of "dialogue " would probably work.
Last edited:
P
phil19034
Guest
I’m sorry, but there are not 240 some Catholic Churches. There is only one Catholic Church.MonteRCMS:
And 240 some-odd Catholic Churches
That 240 number comes from people who don’t understand what it means to be Catholic.
- they count the each Eastern Catholic Church as a separate denomination, instead of counting everyone in Communion with the Pope as one.
- the rest of them are the denominations of the “Old Catholic Church” and/or other post Vatican I and post Vatican II schismatic Churches. Almost all of them are in communion with the Old Catholic Church and/or the Anglicans.
And some of them even have different 7 sacraments.
Honestly, these groups are more “high Church” Protestant than they are Catholic.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Last edited:
Yes, I know this.
The same flawed approach that brought us the "33,000 Protestant denominations " brought us the 240 Catholic ones.
So, every time someone mentions thousands of Protestant denominations it seems appropriate to mention hundreds of Catholic ones.
Cool. Just so everyone knowsFrom above, @JonNC :
Vonsalza:
Last edited:
V
Vonsalza
Guest
No, you missed the point. Unsurprisingly.Vonsalza:
Cool. Just so everyone knowsFrom above, @JonNC :
Vonsalza:
That post from earlier was a perfect preemptive reply to your "If I wanted to convince someone not to be Catholic, this style of “dialogue " would probably work” gripe that you recently levied.
Further clarified, the primary attachment most folks have to their faith is emotional, so logical arguments aren’t likely to sway them because they don’t break the specific “glue” that binds them to that faith anyway.
So apologetics and polemics probably aren’t going to convince you of anything, even if I’m as over-compromising and hyper-ecumenical as you seem to think I should be. The only thing they’re going to do is blunt attacks and point out the systemic weaknesses of the other - which I think has been sufficiently done here.
I do t think I’ve missed the intention of you apologia at all.
Though not by you.
No one has been asked to over-compromise. No one has been asked to be “hyper-ecumenical”. These are simply excuses to be hyper-polemical.
That’s allowed now at CAF, and I’m a firm believer in free speech.
P
phil19034
Guest
But the thousands of protestant denominations pretty accurate (even if it isn’t 30,000).phil19034:
Yes, I know this.
The same flawed approach that brought us the "33,000 Protestant denominations " brought us the 240 Catholic ones.
So, every time someone mentions thousands of Protestant denominations it seems appropriate to mention hundreds of Catholic ones.
A denomination isn’t just about what the group believes, but also the ultimate human authority.
Therefore, every single “non-denominational” Church is a denomination onto itself. Also, in Protestantism, there typically isn’t an international umbrella that keeps all groups believing the same thing.
Even if you look at the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury cannot force other groups to accept doctrine and discipline. They may be in communion with one another, but they are not truly one religion that all believe (on paper) the exact same thing.
However, even if you do consider every group of the Anglican Communion as one denomination, every Lutheran as one denomination, every Presbyterian as one denomination, every Methodist as one denomination, and every Baptist as one denomination (which you really can’t - but lets assume you could); there are still thousands of independent, non-denominational churches that teach and believe whatever the pastor believes.
The reason there are tens of thousands of Protestant denominations isn’t because of the mainline groups, it’s because of the non-denominationals.
God bless
Last edited:
Depends on how you view things. For example, there are many independent Lutheran synods around the world. These are viewed in this approach as "different " denominations. But in fact they generally are members of one of two different international organizations: the LWF or the ILC.
Secondly, categorizing independent nondenominational as different denominations is deceptive. Most share a very similar theology
P
phil19034
Guest
Yeah, but theology isn’t the definition of what a denomination is. If it was, then the Catholic Church would need to be several denominations because each Rite of the Catholic Church has different Theology, while sharing the exact same Dogma & Doctrine.phil19034:
Depends on how you view things. For example, there are many independent Lutheran synods around the world. These are viewed in this approach as "different " denominations. But in fact they generally are members of one of two different international organizations: the LWF or the ILC.
Secondly, categorizing independent nondenominational as different denominations is deceptive. Most share a very similar theology
To me (and I would think most proponents of the tens of thousands of protestant denominations argument), it all comes down to human authority. A denomination is a sect that is under the ultimate authority of one person or group to determine what is acceptable & unacceptable for the members of the denomination to believe and determine the rules/laws/requirements of each clergy member.
Last edited:
It is often a mistake to apply a Catholic paradigm to n-Cs, even though it applies to some. I don’t think there is any inconsistency here regarding what I said. While not institutionally connected, they often share the same essential beliefs, regardless of what one calls them.
That is not what a denomination is. YouR description is more in line with that of a cult. Denominations often have a written confession or statement of faith. Rarely are they governed by one person.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Jon’s obfuscating and playing to the middle as hard as he can.
He does this because he can’t articulate the theological superiority of his small off-shoot of Anglicanism - as we clearly showed above.
Thus he attacks anything resembling a similar claim of any rival Christian groups - Catholicism obviously being chiefest among them.
While he can’t prove his own views “right”, as long as he frustrates others from doing the same, he doesn’t have to be clearly wrong.
I think you’re wasting your keystrokes that this point.
He does this because he can’t articulate the theological superiority of his small off-shoot of Anglicanism - as we clearly showed above.
Thus he attacks anything resembling a similar claim of any rival Christian groups - Catholicism obviously being chiefest among them.
While he can’t prove his own views “right”, as long as he frustrates others from doing the same, he doesn’t have to be clearly wrong.
I think you’re wasting your keystrokes that this point.
P
phil19034
Guest
What you write here is basically what I’m talking about. The group who writes that confession or statement of faith is typically the human authority (at least for Mainline Protestant Churches). I was not implying that all are governed by one person, but non-denominational often are or at least have a “Senior Pastor” who has the right to hire / fire other pastors.
Again, I’m not talking about preachers who hide their denomination name/allegiance either, and still abide by Assemblies of God , Southern Baptist, Liberty Baptist, etc.
I’m referring to true, non-denominational who teach what they feel is true based on what they took away from their individual training and schooling (if they even had formal schooling).
In my view (and the view of everyone who says there are tens of thousands of protestant denominations), each “non-denominational” is their own denomination.
The fact that some “non-denominational” churches start setting up satellite locations is proof of this. They essentially are new denominations that currently only have 1, 2 or 3 Churches. The question becomes how much do they intend on growing in the future, and how do they plan to continue after the retirement/death of the Sr. Pastor?
But again, the argument is that they are each their own denomination.
So again, ignore mainline protestants. The non-denominational Church is what we are referring to. And the confessions or statements of faith that typically use are so generic. They simply state that they are sola scriptura and the bare minimum to be consider a Christian. Those confessions / statements of faith never go into true theology.
God bless
Last edited:
M
M33
Guest
Hi Jon,
If it is not in the Bible, it is not theologically relevant. Doesn’t matter.
Yes there is a Protestant theology. Protestant comes from the word Protest. What the reformers protested was works based salvation of the RCC not the Biblical Faith based salvation. (Sola Fida.) The early teachers of the Protestant movement did not want to leave Roman Catholicism, they wanted to reform it back to literal Bible interpretations. That is what the “Solas” are about.
If it is not in the Bible, it is not theologically relevant. Doesn’t matter.
Yes there is a Protestant theology. Protestant comes from the word Protest. What the reformers protested was works based salvation of the RCC not the Biblical Faith based salvation. (Sola Fida.) The early teachers of the Protestant movement did not want to leave Roman Catholicism, they wanted to reform it back to literal Bible interpretations. That is what the “Solas” are about.
If what is not in the Bible? Are you saying it is impossible for humans to write text that accurately reflects scripture?
The three Creeds, for example? Are they irrelevant because they are not literally found in scripture?
Historically inaccurate. The term Protestant comes specifically from the formal protest issued at the Diet of Speyer against civil authorities, not the Church.
But you are correct that there was a broad agreement among the various Reformation era groups regarding faith and works. It could even be said that, in a very broad sense, those groups had a consensus regarding scripture.
But there was never a consensus on what even these meant. Lutheran and Reformed soteriology are not the same, not to mention what the Anabaptists believed. There were and are dramatic differences regarding the sacraments. Even the exercise of the principle of sola scriptura is not uniform, as your first paragraph indicates.
If there had been a Protestant theology, all the Reformation era movements would have confessed the Augsburg Confession
Last edited:
G
guanophore
Guest
G
guanophore
Guest
That would be a good idea, since this definition is so rampant!
- Status