From a Catholic perspective, this is a novelty, but an egregious error.
If they’re really spiritual gifts, they’re not attributable to Protestantism.
This sounds like name-it-claim-it hokum, which is no contribution.
All of these existed before and/or independently of Protestantism.
…that a number of us have just decided to pass on another variant of “We are better than you”.
It is a statement about your own narrow-minded sectarianism more than anything else. If you start with theological premises that exclude any openness to Protestant theology, obviously you will not be able to think of any contributions Protestants have made.
.Why should it be “universally accepted amongst protestants”? That’s a pretty weird condition, given that “Protestant” is just a convenient historical label for what has always been a diverse group of religious movements.I find it very interesting that the majority of protestant responces do not address the question at all, instead they attack the questioner or the question. It seems quite defensive and hostile to me.
Those who did contribute seemed to point to contributions that are challenged within protestantism. The post from the person from Assemblies of God and the charismatic contributions would be hottly contested amongst protestants. It seems as though the contribution is only valid if you are of the theological persuasion espousing it.
I would be interested to know what protestants feel they have contributed that is lacking, or missing, in Catholicism and that is universally accepted amongst protestants.
I think there’s a problem intrinsic to the question, which isn’t your fault. The things I can think of that are truly novel, Catholics don’t accept as contributions.
Catholics already believed in this.
This is 100% Catholic. In fact, the Counter-Reformers denounced Protestant doctrine precisely because Protestants were denying this.
This only appears to work because it sets boundaries.
Protestants “contributed” the penal substitution model of atonement. Catholics consider that model incompatible with the nature of God.
Does “revival and strengthening” really count as a contribution, especially when we consider that most of the “revival and strengthening” was necessary because Protestantism introduced the weakness? I mean to say, Catholics could regard this as a partial return to Catholic roots. (Indeed, N.T. Wright has created a number of Catholic converts, however unintentionally.)
Both of these existed before Protestantism, and it would be somewhat disingenuous to say “but look how Protestants expanded it!” since the printing press was not a Protestant invention.
Like I said: “I think there’s a problem intrinsic to the question, which isn’t your fault. The things I can think of that are truly novel, Catholics don’t accept as contributions.”
I like Bouyer’s book. I think it should be mandatory reading for Catholics and Protestants. Catholics need to read it because, as you say, it confirms the Protestants were on to something good - sola gratia, sola fide, and sola scriptura are grounded in Catholic thought. Protestants need to read the book because Bouyer proceeds to make a challenging case for why Protestant implementations of these Catholic ideas have gone astray, and that the Catholic Church is necessary for these principles to develop correctly. Peter Kreeft basically says the same thing in his article about how sola fide, when boiled down to its essence, is a Catholic teachingAs they are now formulated by most Protestants. Not in their origins.
The Catholic Church teaches that faith informed by love justifies, and that faith is necessary for justification. Pope Benedict reiterated what Catholics have always believed when he said “Luther’s phrase: ‘faith alone’ is true, if it is not opposed to faith in charity, in love.” What the Catholic Church rejects are later understandings of sola fide that claim faith does not need to be informed by charity, that faith without love can justify.
If you really want to dig deeper into this, I would heartily recommend the articles and blog posts by Bryan Cross on Called to Communion (e.g. here and here), and the lovely book The Spirit & Forms of Protestantism by Louis Bouyer.
We do not accept formulations of sola scriptura which overtly deny sacred tradition and the authority of the magisterium, but we do believe that scripture is divinely inspired in a way that the magisterium is not. Many Catholics accept a kind of prima scriptura position, and it is acceptable within Catholicism to believe in the material sufficiency of scripture. This is the original root of the Reformers’ sola scriptura, as Louis Bouyer aptly points out: “Luther’s insistence on the Bible and its supreme authority did not… signify to him or to [contemporary] Protestants in general a denial of tradition or of the authority of the Church.” It is later formulations that become increasingly problematic, not the root.
From a Catholic perspective, this is a false dichotomy: the saints are living members of Jesus’ own Body. Even Protestants do not interpret this doctrine to mean that they cannot pray for one another.
The Catholic Church also teaches that we have a responsibility to receive and live according to God’s grace inasmuch as we are able. A Catholic adult cannot say “Well, I was baptized as an infant, so I do not have to be faithful now.” Every moment is a moment in which we are called to conversion, every moment is an opportunity to say “yes” to God.
It is, actually, we just believe differently about it than do Calvinists. We believe that all humans are created in, by, and for life in Jesus Christ, that all human beings are unconditionally chosen by God for participation by grace in the life of the holy Trinity. Calvinists believe only a few are so chosen and that it is impossible for the elect not to be saved; that’s where we differ with them.
I wish!
Yes, I agree. Their goal was not to create a new religion full of theological novelties.
Since I suspect you and I are the only ones here who may have read it, here’s a couple of links that might help others get up to speed -
By definition, Protestantism can’t actually “contribute” anything that it didn’t originally receive from the Catholic Church, to begin with.
I know of more Catholics that are divorced than anyone else. Go figure…
Boy…that was a mature response, pretty typical from what I have seen from your posts.I know of more Catholics that are divorced than anyone else. Go figure…