Why do Protestants Attempt to Add Innovations to Infallibly Defined Dogmas’ of the Catholic Church?

[GKC]

That said

I wonder how many people are indifferent to, or just don’t give the term illicit much thought,

illicit (from thefreedictionary.com/illicit)

adjective**
1.** illegal, criminal, prohibited, unlawful, black-market, illegitimate, off limits, unlicensed, unauthorized, bootleg, contraband, felonious

2. forbidden, improper, immoral, wrong, guilty, clandestine, furtive

I couldn’t say. But it is a subject (sacramentally) that I had to get my head around.

 

[commenter]

commenter;14700108:

Padres1969;14699876:

Back to the OPs original point however,** how would any Protestant attempt to innovate Catholic Dogma, when Protestants by there very nature don’t believe Catholic Dogma?
**

I mean I suppose it’s possible. But I think it’s a stretch to think that if they are encouraging a change in their dogma that it is indirectly lobbying or encouraging the same in the RCC’s dogma. I mean take priestly celibacy or women as priests.

Both have been the norm for some time now in my own church. But in citing the biblical reasons for both at the time they were implemented, the Episcopal Church did not lobby for the RCC to do the same on either matter, indirectly or otherwise. The ECUSA recognizes that the RCC holds a different interpretation on the matters and its left at that. No change in the Catholic Magisterium which we hold as having no authority is needed for the “credibility” of our church’s position.

The Catholic Church is regarded by some Anglican/Protestant types as the “legacy” agency for “tradition”. They may not agree the Magisterium has authority over the whole Western church now, but they seem to accept an awful lot of pre Reformation tradition canonized by the Magisterium prior to around 1500, as not just for Catholics, but generally authoritative.

Do leaders of Anglicans and Lutherans regard Rome as officially authoritative now? No.
But unofficially, do many members committed to Tradition, sort of look in that direction as a good indicator where Tradition should be, right now? Maybe. Do leaders of denominations that have Traditional members try to look credible to them? Yes.

 

[Padres1969]

Padres1969;14700141:

commenter;14700108:

The Catholic Church is regarded by some Anglican/Protestant types as the “legacy” agency for “tradition”. They may not agree the Magisterium has authority over the whole Western church now, but they seem to accept an awful lot of pre Reformation tradition canonized by the Magisterium prior to around 1500, as not just for Catholics, but generally authoritative.

Do leaders of Anglicans and Lutherans regard Rome as officially authoritative now? No.
But unofficially, do many members committed to Tradition, sort of look in that direction as a good indicator where Tradition should be, right now? Maybe. Do leaders of denominations that have Traditional members try to look credible to them? Yes.

Yes and No to the last point. Which is why you’ve seen splits in both Anglicanism and Lutheranism along Traditional/Progressive lines in part.