Which protestant denomination is most close in doctrine to the catholic church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RosslynV
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Contrary to what some have suggested, The SSPX is not a church, and it is in communion with the Catholic Church, irregularities notwithstanding.
Indifferently said:
Lutherans believe in sola fide. That is an entirely different from the doctrine of synergy/semipelagianism codified at Trent.
Click to expand...
Catholics do not believe in semipelagianism. Semipelagianism is a word fixed with a specific historical meaning, not a word that changes its meaning to suit the fancy of Calvinist apologists like R.C. Sproul.

newadvent.org/cathen/13703a.htm

If you read Trent’s decree on justification, you will see that it explicitly condemns semipelagianism, which again means something different from “whatever Rome teaches.”
 
QNDNNDQDCE said:
Contrary to what some have suggested, The SSPX is not a church, and it is in communion with the Catholic Church, irregularities notwithstanding.
Click to expand...
They have rejected the ordinary magisterial authority of the Pope.
 
I think you need to define what constitutes “close enough” in terms of doctrine – which doctrines are more important than others. Papal supremacy? Papal infallibility? Sola fide/scriptura/gratia? Filioque? Married clergy? Women clergy? Divorce and remarriage? Gay marriage? Gay divorced re-married women clergy? Hypostasis vs monophysitism vs miaphysitism vs Nestorianism? Universalism vs EENS? Rangers vs Celtics? 🤷
 
Indifferently said:
They have rejected the ordinary magisterial authority of the Pope.
Click to expand...
Well not exactly. They do believe in the Pope’s supreme authority as outlined by the Vatican I Council. They also believe, in accordance with Sacred Tradition, that one is permitted to disobey their lawful superior if the superior decrees or commands sin.

What sets the SSPX apart is that they believe that everything the Holy See has done in the past 50 years has been tainted with the heresy of Modernism, and therefore they are not obliged to follow any of the Curia’s orders. But they still believe that the Bishop of Rome is the Supreme Pontiff.
 
Chiefsinner said:
Could be Lutherans or Anglicans not to sure about the others
Click to expand...
Possibly Missouri Synod Lutherans as opposed to, say, ELA.

I studied with some close friends from a Missouri Synod church; he made the statement, at first in jest but with a note of seriousness, that they were far closer in theology to Catholics than to ELA.
 
JamesTheJust said:
Some High-Church Anglicans and Lutherans (especially LCMS). They’re practically Catholics, just without the Pope. 😃

I think what you’ll find is that, the younger the denomination is, the further it’ll be from Catholicism.
Click to expand...
EXCELLENT point. Very true, as far as generalizations go.
 
I guess LCMS is pretty close, but it’s not exactly just a matter of accepting papal authority. There’s everything that goes along with that. As far as I’m aware, they don’t believe in purgatory, have no problem with contraception or divorce and remarriage (well, divorce depends on who you talk to- most pastors I’ve met say that getting a civil divorce is only permissible due to infidelity. Many even say that abuse isn’t a valid reason for a civil divorce without remarriage, which always blew my mind), and see the Catholic practice of praying to saints as idolatry. They technically have a concept of mortal and venial sins, but they speak as though all sins are equally grave. In two years of Lutheran confirmation classes, I was never told anything about different degrees of sin. There are other differences, I suppose, including a slightly different understanding of the eucharist (as well as the inclusion of the other sacraments- Lutherans only believe in two, baptism and communion). They do believe in the real presence, whereas most Protestants think communion is only meant to be symbolic.

The main thing standing in the way of their conversion is usually sola scriptura/fide/gratia. Once you blow sola scriptura out of the water, the rest will often follow, but it doesn’t always come easily. I suppose they’re closer than most other denominations, but there’s still a fair bit of adjusting to do.

My second guess would be Anglicans, but I don’t know that much about them.
 
Indifferently said:
They have rejected the ordinary magisterial authority of the Pope.
Click to expand...
Perhaps some members of the Society, or those who attend mass at their chapels, are in error in their stance towards the pope, but this does not define the identity of the SSPX. If we excommunicated groups of people solely on account of individuals erring in specific matters, we had have to excommunicate the entire faithful. The members of the SSPX (which is a “priestly society,” not a Church) are, in general, in communion with the Church, only the SSPX priests do not have faculties to celebrate the sacraments, which is something different. Regardless of the genuine problems with the SSPX, I do not want to go further than Rome has in this matter.
 
EphelDuath said:
Well not exactly. They do believe in the Pope’s supreme authority as outlined by the Vatican I Council. They also believe, in accordance with Sacred Tradition, that one is permitted to disobey their lawful superior if the superior decrees or commands sin.

What sets the SSPX apart is that they believe that everything the Holy See has done in the past 50 years has been tainted with the heresy of Modernism, and therefore they are not obliged to follow any of the Curia’s orders. But they still believe that the Bishop of Rome is the Supreme Pontiff.
Click to expand...
Wasn’t there a provision that B16 included, when he lifted the excommunications of the I validly consecrated bishops, which stated that the SSPX has no canonical status whatsoever?
 
JamesTheJust said:
Wasn’t there a provision that B16 included, when he lifted the excommunications of the invalidly consecrated bishops, which stated that the SSPX has no canonical status whatsoever?
Click to expand...
Corrected a few typos.
 
I would bet on the Lutherans, they’re the first ones to break off, then as time past on,
splinters became more and more different, much like evolution, so it is natural to as-
sume that Lutheranism is closest. Also, I don’t think that Martin Luther himself was
a full fledged Protestant really, but was more like a really bad Catholic with good in-
tentions, good motives here and there, just used bad methods.
 
Judas_Thaddeus said:
I would bet on the Lutherans, they’re the first ones to break off, then as time past on,
splinters became more and more different, much like evolution, so it is natural to as-
sume that Lutheranism is closest. Also, I don’t think that Martin Luther himself was
a full fledged Protestant really, but was more like a really bad Catholic with good in-
tentions, good motives here and there, just used bad methods.
Click to expand...
I hear this view a lot, that Luther was a genuine Catholic that just had some problems with authority and a few doctrinal misunderstandings. I wonder if the people who say this have actually read a good part of Luther’s corpus. Aside from the fact that he thought the Catholic Church was the Whore of Babylon and the Antichrist, he also said… well, these things.
Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tell’s us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died.
Click to expand...
It does not matter how Christ behaved – what He taught is all that matters
Click to expand...
There is no scandal greater, more dangerous, more venomous, than a good outward life, manifested by good works and a pious mode of life. That is the grand portal, the highway that leads to damnation.
Click to expand...
The word and work of God is quite clear, viz., that women are made to be either wives or prostitutes.
Click to expand...
🤷
 
EphelDuath said:
I hear this view a lot, that Luther was a genuine Catholic that just had some problems with authority and a few doctrinal misunderstandings. I wonder if the people who say this have actually read a good part of Luther’s corpus. Aside from the fact that he thought the Catholic Church was the Whore of Babylon and the Antichrist, he also said… well, these things.

🤷
Click to expand...
Oh, sheesh, not again… that blog post full of quotes twisted out of context has already been gone over here ad nauseum. It’s like a Hydra. :rolleyes:
 
EphelDuath said:
I hear this view a lot, that Luther was a genuine Catholic that just had some problems with authority and a few doctrinal misunderstandings. I wonder if the people who say this have actually read a good part of Luther’s corpus. Aside from the fact that he thought the Catholic Church was the Whore of Babylon and the Antichrist, he also said… well, these things.
🤷
Click to expand...
I tend to view Luther as a overly stubborn man, similar to how Judas Thaddeus described him. His stubbornness led him to refuse to surrender to the Church, and after his excommunication, he became so stubborn and frustrated that he said some pretty heretical things… If that makes any sense. The way I see it, he meant well, but had poor character.
 
Come now, why all the effort to make it seem like Luther wasn’t so bad a guy after all? This is the man that swayed hundreds of thousands to abandon the Catholic Church because he taught that the Pope was the Antichrist and the Church the Whore of Babylon – on top of that, it is not disputed by any serious person that Luther commanded that truly horrific levels of violence be perpetrated against Jews and other peoples.
 
EphelDuath said:
Come now, why all the effort to make it seem like Luther wasn’t so bad a guy after all? This is the man that swayed hundreds of thousands to abandon the Catholic Church because he taught that the Pope was the Antichrist and the Church the Whore of Babylon – on top of that, it is not disputed by any serious person that Luther commanded that truly horrific levels of violence be perpetrated against Jews and other peoples.
Click to expand...
Maybe because slander is a sin in itself?

Hate the sin, love the sinner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top