When did the PROTESTANT religion go bad?

[christosdavid]

late 1800s is a good date (particularly in Germany), I would say for America it was between 1910 and 1925.

The former being when the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church actually had to define the fundamentals of the Christian religion

These being: The Inerrancy of Scripture, the virgin birth, the atonement, the physical resurrection of Jesus and miracles.

Thus fundamentalism was born

The second date is the scopes “monkey” trial, the end of mainstream dominance of the Scriptures in public life.

 

[Zundrah]

Joseph Smith wasn’t a protestant, though. That’s a whole different belief system.

My own vote would be for a much earlier date (like the late 15th century). But I also agree with the posters who affirmed the good that protestants do; my protestant brothers and sisters helped me a great deal in my journey to God. As the actor Sklar Tesla said concerning his own conversion (paraphrasing here): The Catholic Church is like a huge, brightly-lit, beautiful cruise ship with St. Peter at the wheel. All the different protestant sects are like small row boats out there in the dark, rowing in the same direction. We’re all heading to the same place. I’d just rather be on the cruise ship.

That is a beautiful way of putting it. But some may argue that protestantism is the cruise ship, since Catholicism seems more complicated.

 

[Myqyl]

That is a beautiful way of putting it. But some may argue that protestantism is the cruise ship, since Catholicism seems more complicated.

Ummm… Which is more complex, a cruise ship or a row boat?

Just sayin’…

 

[Dave_Noonan]

Since the Catholic Church is under scrutiny in the thread “When did the Catholic Church go bad?”, I thought it might be appropriate to ask when did the PROTESTANT religion go bad? Don’t take offense.
Many mainline denominations have tossed aside the Bible and embraced liberalism and relativity. What do you believe are the undercurrents of that shift?

There’s really no such thing as the “Protestant religion” or “Protestantism” or “Protestant versus Catholic” even though one often sees this here at CAF as kind of an apologetics strawman. What is referred to as Protestantism is in actuality such a diverse religious phenomenon that it’s almost impossible to generalize about it. As soon as one makes a statement: “Protestants are…” you’ve almost assuredly made a serious error because there are a zillion exceptions and differing points of view.

I wouldn’t say the mainline denominations have “tossed aside the Bible” by any stretch, but they have changed their perspective on which parts of the Bible are deemed relevant and important. I think this as a natural outgrowth of the Enlightenment, the modern study of the Bible (since Spinoza), and Luther’s theology of the Bible: that is, Christianity isn’t really about a book, it’s about Jesus Christ–and that not all parts of the Bible carry the same theological weight.

 

[kch86]

I wouldn’t say the mainline denominations have “tossed aside the Bible” by any stretch, but they have changed their perspective on which parts of the Bible are deemed relevant and important. I think this as a natural outgrowth of the Enlightenment, the modern study of the Bible (since Spinoza), and Luther’s theology of the Bible: that is, Christianity isn’t really about a book, it’s about Jesus Christ–and that not all parts of the Bible carry the same theological weight.

Yes, I think one of the various names for these outgrowths of the Enlightenment is the heresy of modernism.

I think the OP was referring to when major Protestant denominations really began losing their way and when their teachings became utterly wrong from our perspective as Catholics. Whereas in the past, despite theological disagreements, we stood shoulder to shoulder with the vast majority of Protestants in affirming the central dogmas and moral teachings of Christianity, that no longer is the case and many Protestant denominations have to a lesser or greater degree embraced secular values, which we as Catholics see as utterly contrary to the Christian faith.

 

[christosdavid]

late 1800s is a good date (particularly in Germany), I would say for America it was between 1910 and 1925.

The former being when the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church actually had to define the fundamentals of the Christian religion

These being: The Inerrancy of Scripture, the virgin birth, the atonement, the physical resurrection of Jesus and miracles.

Thus fundamentalism was born

The second date is the scopes “monkey” trial, the end of mainstream dominance of the Scriptures in public life.

I would add the ministry of Charles Finney, his semi-pelagian theology has devistated the modern revivalist movement…

 

[Anniejoe]

There’s really no such thing as the “Protestant religion” or “Protestantism” or “Protestant versus Catholic” even though one often sees this here at CAF as kind of an apologetics strawman.

Dave, would you say that the non-Catholic Christian groups all agree on anything, such as sola scriptura, sola fides, or the idea that each believer is fully equipped by the Holy Spirit to accurately interpret Scripture without recourse to any other authority? Is there any set of (non-Catholic) propositions you would agree they all embrace?*

 

[Scoobyshme]

There’s really no such thing as the “Protestant religion” or “Protestantism” or “Protestant versus Catholic” even though one often sees this here at CAF as kind of an apologetics strawman. What is referred to as Protestantism is in actuality such a diverse religious phenomenon that it’s almost impossible to generalize about it. As soon as one makes a statement: “Protestants are…” you’ve almost assuredly made a serious error because there are a zillion exceptions and differing points of view.

I wouldn’t say the mainline denominations have “tossed aside the Bible” by any stretch, but they have changed their perspective on which parts of the Bible are deemed relevant and important. I think this as a natural outgrowth of the Enlightenment, the modern study of the Bible (since Spinoza), and Luther’s theology of the Bible: that is, Christianity isn’t really about a book, it’s about Jesus Christ–and that not all parts of the Bible carry the same theological weight.

I think there is some truth to the fact that it is difficult to speak of all Protestants in one breath. However, I think there are some generalizations that may apply to most Protestants, in my opinion. First, they are based on Sola Scripture (the Bible Alone), along with personal interpretation of Scripture. Second, rejection of Sacred Tradition, which are the oral teachings of Christ, carried forth for these 2000 years. Third, rejection of authority of the Church which Christ founded. Fourth, recognition, to some degree, of Sola Fide (we are saved by faith alone).

But one could make the case that today, Protestantism has become so diffused that one can find almost any belief imaginable within some denomination if one just looks hard enough.

 

[GraceDK]

Since the Catholic Church is under scrutiny in the thread “When did the Catholic Church go bad?”, I thought it might be appropriate to ask when did the PROTESTANT religion go bad? Don’t take offense.
Many mainline denominations have tossed aside the Bible and embraced liberalism and relativity. What do you believe are the undercurrents of that shift?

Protestantism was born out of the Catholic Church gone bad… and Protestantism has started out on shaky foundations and had thus been “bad” from the beginning…
We are all in the same boat… All scisms are sins caused by sins.

 

[Contarini]

When they broke away from the Catholic Church. Sorry couldn’t resist.

Why apologize? This is the most reasonable answer, from a Catholic point of view, surely.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

And many haven’t.

I see Catholics as betraying their own ‘charter,’ layman and clergy alike, in embracing Stateism, and now they must deal with what they have created.

At least, many mainline Protestants are adamantly against Communism, are not afraid to speak against it, and do not think it a shameful thing to love their country.

Which, as you’re using it, is a euphemism for nationalistic idolatry.

I think it’s funny that you condemn “stateism” in one breath and endorse nationalism in another. This is what I find perverse about the kind of political position you represent. You revile the relatively benevolent and less coercive uses of government power as “stateism,” but you applaud the violence of the nation-state under the name of patriotism.

Surely “stateism” is a label that fits those willing to kill for the nation-state more than those willing to let it play some role in providing for the poor.

Edwin

 

[Anniejoe]

Which, as you’re using it, is a euphemism for nationalistic idolatry.

I think it’s funny that you condemn “stateism” in one breath and endorse nationalism in another. This is what I find perverse about the kind of political position you represent. You revile the relatively benevolent and less coercive uses of government power as “stateism,” but you applaud the violence of the nation-state under the name of patriotism.

Surely “stateism” is a label that fits those willing to kill for the nation-state more than those willing to let it play some role in providing for the poor.

Edwin

Technically, patriotism and nationalism aren’t the same thing.

 

[The_Door]

When Luther wrote his 95 theses

The 95 theses were an attempt to stop the purchasing of indulgances. Parishoners at his church came to confession, presented the indulgance, and then proceded to say that they no longer needed to repent their sins because they had already been forgiven.

The indulgances were being used to finance the construction of St. Peters Bassilica in Rome. While a large cathedral might be a good idea, you should not build a church on broken promises. What I mean to say is that a peice of paper given to you by a man does not and should not substitute for the eternal grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. His grace is sufficient for all, and a peice of paper is not. The act of being saved is a long and hard process, filled with many a pit and fall. One does not simply purchase God’s love.

 

[Anniejoe]

The 95 theses were an attempt to stop the purchasing of indulgances. Parishoners at his church came to confession, presented the indulgance, and then proceded to say that they no longer needed to repent their sins because they had already been forgiven.

The indulgances were being used to finance the construction of St. Peters Bassilica in Rome. While a large cathedral might be a good idea, you should not build a church on broken promises. What I mean to say is that a peice of paper given to you by a man does not and should not substitute for the eternal grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. His grace is sufficient for all, and a peice of paper is not. The act of being saved is a long and hard process, filled with many a pit and fall. One does not simply purchase God’s love.

Hi TheDoor,

No one is suggesting that there were no corrupt practices in the Church crying out for reform. Sadly, Luther soon turned from reforming bad practices to creating a new theology altogether. Altering Holy Writ by inserting “alone” after “you are saved by faith”, is just one example.

 

[wondrousgnat]

Just wondering here. I believe I once read that in 1973 no Protestant denomination opposed abortion. Is this true? I believe I read it in the book ABORTING AMERICA

 

[The_Door]

Just wondering here. I believe I once read that in 1973 no Protestant denomination opposed abortion. Is this true? I believe I read it in the book ABORTING AMERICA

About as far back in my family as you can go, they are all Baptists, and they all oppose abortion and always have. By saying that “no Protestant denomination opposed abbortion”, you are stereotyping Protestants. It is true that many Protestant denominations differ, and therefor may hold different beliefs about birth control etc., it does not mean that EVERY Protestant denomination supported abortion. There are indeed many corrupted Protestants who do not follow the truth of Christ. I’ve even been to a couple of Baptist Churches that I am astonished that they even call themselves Christian.

 

[Anniejoe]

Just wondering here. I believe I once read that in 1973 no Protestant denomination opposed abortion. Is this true? I believe I read it in the book ABORTING AMERICA

Not saying you didn’t read it in that book, but the notion sounds preposterous to me. It’s possible there were protestant groups with no official statement on abortion in 1973, but prior to Roe v. Wade, why would they have felt the need to spell it out? Maybe it was just assumed abortion is murder; I think quite a few people were astonished to learn from the Supreme Court that it isn’t (legally). I can’t imagine there was ever a time when the Baptists, for example, ever approved of abortion.

 

[The_Door]

**

Hi TheDoor,

No one is suggesting that there were no corrupt practices in the Church crying out for reform. Sadly, Luther soon turned from reforming bad practices to creating a new theology altogether. Altering Holy Writ by inserting “alone” after “you are saved by faith”, is just one example.

In my KJV, the word alone is not in Romans 3:28. Many Catholics like to say that Protestants took out the Apocrypha, but this did not happen until the 1800’s. The Apocrypha was taken out by some because the Jews did not even hold it to as high a standard as Scripture. Although the Apocrypha was revered by the Jews, it was not considered Scripture. With the new doctrine of Sola Scriptura, a select few considered the Apocrypha not part of the Bible.

 

[christosdavid]

In my KJV, the word alone is not in Romans 3:28. Many Catholics like to say that Protestants took out the Apocrypha, but this did not happen until the 1800’s. The Apocrypha was taken out by some because the Jews did not even hold it to as high a standard as Scripture. Although the Apocrypha was revered by the Jews, it was not considered Scripture. With the new doctrine of Sola Scriptura, a select few considered the Apocrypha not part of the Bible.

Luther added it in his German version but its not in the Anglican KJV. Also the deuterocanonicals/Apocrypha were placed in the middle of the Bible between the testaments.

Interstingly, Jerome didnt want to include them either but was instructed to…

 

[wondrousgnat]

I am not saying that all Protestant denominations approved of abortion but I heard that none opposed. I had once heard that at the 1980 Baptist Convention a Catholic doctrine should not be written into public law. These are statements that I have heard, or read, and I may not be in possession of the facts.

On many occasions I have picketed abortion clinics and am also joined by Protestants. Often there was an Hispanic Jew (never knew of one before). While I am a silent protestor she was quite vocal speaking English to some customers, Spanish to others and Hebrew to the abortionist.
While I am glad the Protestants join us and wish there were more I am somewhat ashamed by the lack of Catholics. Many Protestants are more prolife than many Catholics.