Who's on First?

[Kliska]

Yes, it’s not to late too accept Luther.

Go ahead and swim the Elbe, the water’s freezing.

Hmmm… my favorite coffee mug is “Lutheran Church Basement Coffee: It’s Heavenly” with “Pray and let God worry - Martin Luther.” Isn’t that enough for you people?

 

[PRmerger]

Again, a viewing Protestantism as a single monolith.

Oh, yes. I have always argued that there is no such thing as “Protestants believe…”.

Rather, it is a behemoth of tens of thousands of differing denominations and differing (and often contrary) doctrines.

Surprise. Different groups have different teachings.

It is curious that this has occurred when using Scripture as the authority.
Why is that?

Because without an final arbiter of what Scripture means, you get “different groups” having “different” (and often contrary ) teachings.

I like Jimmy Akin, and I don’t mean to be snarky, but the same issues apply to communions that are not typically described as protestant. PNCC, Old Catholics, OO, EO, and CC all have different viewpoints, yet claim Sacred Tradition.

The sad nature of division is that different groups have different views and beliefs.

Jon

If you read further on in the article, Akin addresses that very point.

In response, a number of points may be made: First, Catholicism has a functioning magisterium that can decide that these matters are not essential differences. Second, the relevant schools adhere to the teachings of the magisterium and, if their views were reprobated, would accept the results (or cease to be faithful Catholics). Third, the differences between Catholic schools of thought have nowhere near the magnitude of the difference among Protestant schools. Compared to the differences among Protestant groups, differences among orthodox Catholic groups are trivial. Finally, the fact that the Catholic Church has a magisterium means that there can be—and on the most important theological matters there is—an official Catholic position. There is no parallel standard in Protestant circles that can speak for Protestantism.

Other times, advocates of the “unity in essentials” argument will attempt to construct a parallel argument against Catholics by pointing to the existence of ostensible Catholics who refuse to acknowledge the magisterium’s teachings.

In response, it should be pointed out that the difference among Catholic dissidents is frequently far less than among individuals in the sweep of Protestant belief. Furthermore, individuals’ refusal to accept the magisterium’s teachings does not challenge the Christ-given authority of the magisterium any more than the refusal to accept some of Paul’s teachings undermines Paul’s authority as an apostle. Moreover, Protestant churches also have individuals who refuse to honor the teachings of their denominations. The difference is that for Catholicism there is a body—the bishops teaching in union with the pope—who “speak for the Church” and who can articulate what “the Catholic position” is, while in Protestantism there is nothing comparable.

 

[JonNC]

=PRmerger;11476718]Oh, yes. I have always argued that there is no such thing as “Protestants believe…”.

Rather, it is a behemoth of tens of thousands of differing denominations and differing (and often contrary) doctrines.

It isn’t even a behemoth, because that implies a single entity.

It is curious that this has occurred when using Scripture as the authority.
Why is that?

Because people have interpreted it in different ways, just like different groups have intermpreted Tradition in different ways

Because without an final arbiter of what Scripture means, you get “different groups” having “different” (and often contrary ) teachings.

And with the final arbiter (the undivided Church) of Tradition and scripture in schism, you get differing interpretations.

If you read further on in the article, Akin addresses that very point.

In response, a number of points may be made: First, Catholicism has a functioning magisterium that can decide that these matters are not essential differences. Second, the relevant schools adhere to the teachings of the magisterium and, if their views were reprobated, would accept the results (or cease to be faithful Catholics). Third, the differences between Catholic schools of thought have nowhere near the magnitude of the difference among Protestant schools. Compared to the differences among Protestant groups, differences among orthodox Catholic groups are trivial. Finally, the fact that the Catholic Church has a magisterium means that there can be—and on the most important theological matters there is—an official Catholic position. There is no parallel standard in Protestant circles that can speak for Protestantism.

That’s because he starts with the premise that all Protestants are of the same communion.
“Protestant schools of thought”. where would I find one of these?

Other times, advocates of the “unity in essentials” argument will attempt to construct a parallel argument against Catholics by pointing to the existence of ostensible Catholics who refuse to acknowledge the magisterium’s teachings.

Well, I reject that idea as well. I find the essentials in the confessions, the councils and creeds.

In response, it should be pointed out that the difference among Catholic dissidents is frequently far less than among individuals in the sweep of Protestant belief. Furthermore, individuals’ refusal to accept the magisterium’s teachings does not challenge the Christ-given authority of the magisterium any more than the refusal to accept some of Paul’s teachings undermines Paul’s authority as an apostle. Moreover, Protestant churches also have individuals who refuse to honor the teachings of their denominations. The difference is that for Catholicism there is a body—**the bishops teaching in union with the pope—who “speak for the Church” **and who can articulate what “the Catholic position” is, while in Protestantism there is nothing comparable.

They speak only for that part of the Church that is in communion with the Bishop of Rome who, among the patriarchs, is alone.

Jon

 

[batman1973]

Yes, and if you can find a way to use marshmallows in a casserole, that would be the bees knees.

Casserole? What are you, some high falutin’ Episcopalian? We Lutherans use the term “Hot Dish”

 

[batman1973]

My favorite skit ever!!!

@batman - fellow WoW player, if you have not seen this, you will thank me

Who’s the tank?

HA! That’s awesome!

 

[PRmerger]

It isn’t even a behemoth, because that implies a single entity.

Ok.

Because people have interpreted it in different ways, just like different groups have intermpreted Tradition in different ways

But this isn’t the way it should be. There shouldn’t be tens of thousands of denominations, each reading the Bible and each claiming their interpretations are the correct ones.

And with the final arbiter (the undivided Church) of Tradition and scripture in schism, you get differing interpretations.

Not so much, Jon.

That’s because he starts with the premise that all Protestants are of the same communion

His very first sentence professes the OPPOSITE of what you’re asserting:

,the extreme diversity in belief among Protestant denomination

“Protestant schools of thought”. where would I find one of these?

If he had said “Protestant school of thought” I think your question would have supported your argument.

However, as Akin uses the plural, it’s clear that there are a multitude of them. Or, at least, more than one.

And they can be found in any theological seminary, in all religious bookstores, most secular bookstores, on Amazon, Google, and even here on the CAFs.

Well, I reject that idea as well. I find the essentials in the confessions, the councils and creeds

Ok.

They speak only for that part of the Church that is in communion with the Bishop of Rome who, among the patriarchs, is alone.

Jon

Agreed. And so we can know what it is that Catholicism preaches. We cannot know, however, what Protestant preaches, specifically vis a vis their varied definitions of SS.

 

[batman1973]

Hmmm… my favorite coffee mug is “Lutheran Church Basement Coffee: It’s Heavenly” with “Pray and let God worry - Martin Luther.” Isn’t that enough for you people?

Sadly, no it’s not. There’s been too much mis information that the RCCers here have been spoon fed. Even when it is shown that they are wrong, they won’t admit to it, but, they expect us protestants to accept when they dispel our mis information.

 

[Kliska]

Sadly, no it’s not. There’s been too much mis information that the RCCers here have been spoon fed. Even when it is shown that they are wrong, they won’t admit to it, but, they expect us protestants to accept when they dispel our mis information.

There’s enough misinformation flying around about everyone that it would fill volumes. I encounter Catholics who have misinformation about protestants, and protestants who have misinformation about Catholics, and all too busy damning everyone else to stop and clarify. I’ve been taught misinformation about Catholics, Lutherans, Pentecostals, etc… I feel it is up to each of us, on all sides, to make sure the of the beliefs of the people we are engaging in conversation with.

On a side note; I’ve never even been in a Lutheran church… I should probably give one a go. lol

 

[Isaiah45_9]

On a side note; I’ve never even been in a Lutheran church… I should probably give one a go. lol

You really should. And more than one of each as well. I did , almost all the most common denominations (and non-denom, lol) 50 miles around me.

 

[JonNC]

=PRmerger;11476903]Ok.

But this isn’t the way it should be. There shouldn’t be tens of thousands of denominations, each reading the Bible and each claiming their interpretations are the correct ones.

I absolutely agree.

Not so much, Jon.

Where am I wrong?

His very first sentence professes the OPPOSITE of what you’re asserting:

,the extreme diversity in belief among Protestant denomination

Yes, but then he goes on to talk about “Protestant schools of thought”, etc. I often site Akin’s essay on Faith Alone, where he clearly makes distinctions between different communions.

If he had said “Protestant school of thought” I think your question would have supported your argument.

However, as Akin uses the plural, it’s clear that there are a multitude of them. Or, at least, more than one.

In this paragraph,

In response, a number of points may be made: First, Catholicism has a functioning magisterium that can decide that these matters are not essential differences. Second, the relevant schools adhere to the teachings of the magisterium and, if their views were reprobated, would accept the results (or cease to be faithful Catholics). Third, the differences between Catholic schools of thought have nowhere near the magnitude of the difference among Protestant schools. Compared to the differences among Protestant groups, differences among orthodox Catholic groups are trivial. Finally, the fact that the Catholic Church has a magisterium means that there can be—and on the most important theological matters there is—an official Catholic position. There is no parallel standard in Protestant circles that can speak for Protestantism.

he is contrasting schools within Catholicism with the level of agreement with differing schools of Protestantism, as if they should agree like schools within Catholicism do. If one wans to make an argument such as this, one should identify different schools within, say, Lutheranism, or different schools within Anglicanism.

Agreed. And so we can know what it is that Catholicism preaches. We cannot know, however, what Protestant preaches, specifically vis a vis their varied definitions of SS

We can know what Catholicism teaches about Sacred Tradition. We can know what the EO teaches about it. We can know how Lutheranism practices sola scriptura. We can know how the Reformed practice sola scriptura. Our definition is specific. I imagine their’s might be also.

Jon

 

[Kliska]

You really should. And more than one of each as well. I did , almost all the most common denominations (and non-denom, lol) 50 miles around me.

I think that’s a good idea too, and have been to most, but never Lutheran, or Episcopalian, for some reason. My preacher uncle is friends with a Lutheran pastor, perhaps we’ll go visitin’.

 

[PRmerger]

I think that’s a good idea too, and have been to most, but never Lutheran, or Episcopalian, for some reason. My preacher uncle is friends with a Lutheran pastor, perhaps we’ll go visitin’.

Visitin’ is just fine.

Shoppin’, though, I say:
(as in church shoppin’)


I remember my co-worker once telling me, quite proudly, how her mother used to take her and her 3 siblings around to different churches every Sunday, until they found a church that preached the gospel that her mother agreed with.

 

[PRmerger]

Where am I wrong?

The difference among Catholic dissidents is frequently far less than among individuals in the sweep of Protestant belief. Furthermore, individuals’ refusal to accept the magisterium’s teachings does not challenge the Christ-given authority of the magisterium any more than the refusal to accept some of Paul’s teachings undermines Paul’s authority as an apostle. Moreover, Protestant churches also have individuals who refuse to honor the teachings of their denominations. The difference is that for Catholicism there is a body—the bishops teaching in union with the pope—who “speak for the Church” and who can articulate what “the Catholic position” is, while in Protestantism there is nothing comparable.–ibid

 

[PRmerger]

he is contrasting schools within Catholicism with the level of agreement with differing schools of Protestantism, as if they should agree like schools within Catholicism do. If one wans to make an argument such as this, one should identify different schools within, say, Lutheranism, or different schools within Anglicanism.

I am not understanding your objection re: Akin’s use of “Protestant schools of thought.”

We can know what Catholicism teaches about Sacred Tradition. We can know what the EO teaches about it. We can know how Lutheranism practices sola scriptura. We can know how the Reformed practice sola scriptura. Our definition is specific. I imagine their’s might be also.

Jon

But you cannot demand that I use your definition of SS, Jon. Why is your communion’s definition more weighty than

This poster’s def: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5968041&postcount=252
or this poster’s: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4967120&postcount=29
or this poster’s: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4955792&postcount=10??

 

[JonNC]

I am not understanding your objection re: Akin’s use of “Protestant schools of thought.”

But you cannot demand that I use your definition of SS, Jon. Why is your communion’s definition more weighty than

This poster’s def: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5968041&postcount=252
or this poster’s: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4967120&postcount=29
or this poster’s: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4955792&postcount=10??

Because ours is right.

Seriously, though. I can’t command others to our definition anymore than Rome can command other communions accept papal supremacy.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

The difference among Catholic dissidents is frequently far less than among individuals in the sweep of Protestant belief. Furthermore, individuals’ refusal to accept the magisterium’s teachings does not challenge the Christ-given authority of the magisterium any more than the refusal to accept some of Paul’s teachings undermines Paul’s authority as an apostle. Moreover, Protestant churches also have individuals who refuse to honor the teachings of their denominations. The difference is that for Catholicism there is a body—the bishops teaching in union with the pope—who “speak for the Church” and who can articulate what “the Catholic position” is, while in Protestantism there is nothing comparable.–ibid

Individual Lutheran’s refusal to accept the doctrines of the Lutheran Confessions do not change the truth of scripture and its reflection in said confessions. There are even groups of Lutherans that want to ordain women. That doesn’t change the Lutheran teaching that only men can be ordained. There are Lutherans, perhaps even Lutheran synods, that want to perform same sex marriages. That doesn’t change the fact that God established marriage to be one man and one woman, and that Lutheran teaching is the same.

The difference is that for Catholicism there is a body—the bishops teaching in union with the pope—who “speak for the Church” and who can articulate what “the Catholic position” is, while in Protestantism there is nothing comparable.

Within my synod, the LCMS, there is certainly a body that “speaks for the Church”.

And there’s the issue, in short: you want to group all of “protestantism” together and say, “see, there is no one body that speaks for them”. And my point is it makes no sense to expect that to be the case, anymore than to expect one body to speak for EO, OO, PNCC, CC combined.

Jon

 

[Kliska]

Visitin’ is just fine.

Shoppin’, though, I say:

It becomes less of an issue when we believe that all Christians are a part of the body of Christ. I can go to a Lutheran church, a Roman catholic church, a Baptist church, a Methodist church, a Pentecostal church, etc… and be reasonably sure I’m with at least some brothers and sisters.

I may be going to Midnight mass this Christmas eve to visit one of the parishes with friends, I would imagine if I went there and believed they taught the gospel I agree with and believed what they said to be true, you’d have no problem with that.

 

[concretecamper]

they taught the gospel I agree with:

This is the problem.

 

[PRmerger]

This is the problem.

Indeed.

That is the epitome of creating a god in one’s own image.

Rather, shouldn’t the paradigm be: find the Church Jesus established and then conform your views to that gospel?

 

[PRmerger]

It becomes less of an issue when we believe that all Christians are a part of the body of Christ. I can go to a Lutheran church, a Roman catholic church, a Baptist church, a Methodist church, a Pentecostal church, etc… and be reasonably sure I’m with at least some brothers and sisters.

It is an issue when these churches teach differing doctrines.

For example, I am guessing that you would never attend services at the Westboro Baptist Church. Why not? Because you disagree with their hateful, vile doctrines.

And what about a church that states that Paul’s writings are demonic? Would you worship there?

Where do you draw the line?

I may be going to Midnight mass this Christmas eve to visit one of the parishes with friends, I would imagine if I went there and believed they taught the gospel I agree with and believed what they said to be true, you’d have no problem with that.

That would make me very happy! (Just don’t receive communion though, until you are “in communion” with us truly).