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

[ProVatican]

Do Protestants attempt to add innovations to Infallibly Defined Catholic Dogmas’ because they believe Catholic Dogmas’ are too strict? Is it really that difficult for people to become Catholic and to choose to believe all Infallibly Defined Dogmas’ of the Catholic Church without any innovations whatsoever? How do we convert some of these people to the Catholic Religion?

 

[friardchips]

Hi. This is a broad topic. Made up of two questions:

Q.1. Do Protestants concur with Dogmas.

A. Depends which ones. They might believe some truths are definitive but don’t believe in the Catholic Church’s authoritative position which enables her as able to define truths as Dogmas.

Q.2. How does one convert a Protestant.

A. Being around them occasionally while remaining strong in one’s belief, and/or praying for any you know.

:twocents:

 

[Padres1969]

Do Protestants attempt to add innovations to Infallibly Defined Catholic Dogmas’ because they believe Catholic Dogmas’ are too strict? Is it really that difficult for people to become Catholic and to choose to believe all Infallibly Defined Dogmas’ of the Catholic Church without any innovations whatsoever? How do we convert some of these people to the Catholic Religion?

Would you be able to provide an example of what you consider an innovation?

 

[joeybaggz]

I might think it depended on which Protestant denomination you are referring to. Episcopalian/Anglican and Lutheran I believe have some investiture in a concept similar to sacrament. Pentecostal/Fundamental on the other hand is a relatively new ‘denomination’ and though in sync with the RCC on many moral issues, is far from cozy with RCC doctrine and dogma.

My :twocents:

 

[ProVatican]

Would you be able to provide an example of what you consider an innovation?

An attempt at an innovation to a Defined Catholic Dogma is a willful act of trying to change the definition of a Defined Catholic Dogma. Do you believe it is wrong to add innovations to Infallibly Defined Dogmas of the Catholic Church?

 

[friardchips]

An attempt at an innovation to a Defined Catholic Dogma is a willful act of trying to change the definition of a Defined Catholic Dogma. Do you believe it is wrong to add innovations to Infallibly Defined Dogmas of the Catholic Church?

Inside the Church, such a person is known as a Modernist.

Outside the Church, such people are in protest to the Catholic Church anyway, so why would they concur with what Catholics believe?

 

[JoeT777]

In my opinion:

Do Protestants attempt to add innovations to Infallibly Defined Catholic Dogmas’ because they believe Catholic Dogmas’ are too strict?

No.

Is it really that difficult for people to become Catholic and to choose to believe all Infallibly Defined Dogmas’ of the Catholic Church without any innovations whatsoever?

Of course not.

How do we convert some of these people to the Catholic Religion?

We don’t. We become living examples of the Truths of Jesus Christ as taught by the Apostles.

In my view the problem isn’t Catholic Traditions, Catholic Scripture or the Catholic Church herself. The problem is a philosophical mode of reasoning known as nominalism, relativism and rationalism. This philosophy allows the believer to make anything of God’s call to be justified or made right with God. Let me suggest that the Protestant’s way is to make God’s will subjugated to their own will.

This is evident in the diversity of Protestant tradition of doctrine, which of course they claim they don’t have. Each of the varying sects have dogma that conforms to their will, not necessarily that of God’s and on some subjects there is complete anarchy of doctrine; they are different from each other. In this way the servant becomes the master (or at least they think so).

Until, the Protestant receives a prevenient grace of faith “preach Jesus, and if necessary use words.” [Attributed to St. Francis]. When confronted give a reasoned response of our Catholic faith.

JoeT

 

[Padres1969]

An attempt at an innovation to a Defined Catholic Dogma is a willful act of trying to change the definition of a Defined Catholic Dogma. Do you believe it is wrong to add innovations to Infallibly Defined Dogmas of the Catholic Church?

Within the Catholic Church, Is say yes that it is pretty clearly wrong to try and innovate Catholic Dogma. But Protestants aren’t within the Catholic Church, so they’re not attempting to innovate Catholic Dogmas if they disagree with them. Never seen a Protestant Church that attempts to get Catholics to modify their dogmas.

 

[JonNC]

I might think it depended on which Protestant denomination you are referring to. Episcopalian/Anglican and Lutheran I believe have some investiture in a concept similar to sacrament. Pentecostal/Fundamental on the other hand is a relatively new ‘denomination’ and though in sync with the RCC on many moral issues, is far from cozy with RCC doctrine and dogma.

My :twocents:

Actually, Lutherans and (most) Anglicans believe in actual sacraments, not some investiture in a concept similar to sacrament.

 

[ProVatican]

Actually, Lutherans and (most) Anglicans believe in actual sacraments, not some investiture in a concept similar to sacrament.

Only the Catholic Church, Jesus founded, administers valid sacraments.

 

[GKC]

Only the Catholic Church, Jesus founded, administers valid sacraments.

Valid and licit sacraments, in the stated judgement of the RCC.

Other Churches are considered to confect valid/illict sacraments (where the confecting of the sacraments require valid orders).

 

[GKC]

Actually, Lutherans and (most) Anglicans believe in actual sacraments, not some investiture in a concept similar to sacrament.

Yeah, but you knew what was coming…

 

[JonNC]

Only the Catholic Church, Jesus founded, administers valid sacraments.

But that wasn’t you statement. You made a statement about our beliefs. If you intend to tell us what we believe, accuracy is vital.

 

[Padres1969]

Only the Catholic Church, Jesus founded, administers valid sacraments.

Even within the Catholic POV on that subject, the Orthodox and Oriential Churches would disagree with you there.

 

[JonNC]

Valid and licit sacraments, in the stated judgement of the RCC.

Other Churches are considered to confect valid/illict sacraments (where the confecting of the sacraments require valid orders).

And AFAIK, the CC accepts our Baptism and marriage as valid ** sacraments **, irrespective of orders.

 

[Padres1969]

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?

Seems to me the only ones who could innovate Catholic Dogma in the way the OP suggests would be those that are within the Catholic Church and are attempting to move Catholic Dogma toward their views, whatever those views may be (I suspect they’re thinking modernist or the like?)

 

[GKC]

And AFAIK, the CC accepts our Baptism and marriage as valid ** sacraments **, irrespective of orders.

I’ve seen matrimony argued both ways. But orders are not required for baptism, as long as form, matter, intent and subject are valid. Indeed, belief is not required, as long as the intent is facere quod facit ecclesia, in the sacramental action.

 

[commenter]

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?
**

That point is debatable.
There are some Protestants or fundamentalists who regard Tradition as having no authority. They would deny they are affected by positions or “innovations” made by Rome, at least not since 325 AD. But other Protestants/Anglican types do more or less recognize the authority of Tradition, though less than Scripture. Since “tradition” is an abstract concept rather than a visible human reality, they in effect chart a course in relation to the actual Catholic Church.

 

[steve_b]

Valid and licit sacraments, in the stated judgement of the RCC.

Other Churches are considered to confect **valid/illict sacraments (where the confecting of the sacraments require valid orders).

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

 

[Padres1969]

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?
**

That point is debatable.
There are some Protestants or fundamentalists who regard Tradition as having no authority. They would deny they are affected by positions or “innovations” made by Rome, at least not since 325 AD. But other Protestants/Anglican types do more or less recognize the authority of Tradition, though less than Scripture. Since “tradition” is an abstract concept rather than a visible human reality, they in effect chart a course in relation to the actual Catholic Church.

For instance, one denomination may say “no more than 60 degrees, but no closer than 30 degrees different from Rome”. Another may use different ranges, but the same template. They won’t specifically say “Rome”, but in effect they use benchmarks of doctrine and practice that are kind of stand-ins for Catholicism, or “the ancient historic Christian faith” - benchmarks made visible guess where?

**If you are in one of those denominations, and you want to promote an innovation in your communion, you might want to indirectly lobby to encourage that innovation in the Catholic Church. That makes it easier to defend promoting it in your church; hey, this is not an “innovation” this is simply an ancient practice being resumed, or something like that.

Even if you don’t get it approved by the actual Magisterium, just getting something introduced in a Catholic institution of some kind gives you a little leverage, a little credibility**

.

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.