Why do so many non-Catholic Christian “Protestants” - Reject the term “Protestant”?

[LutheranDK]

Hello LutheranDK,

**

Saint Peter the Apostle, was first the Bishop of Antioch and the first Catholic Pope. Saint Ignatius was also the Bishop of Antioch, after Peter. In fact, Saint Ignatius was appointed Bishop of Antioch, by Saint Peter the Apostle. Saint Ignatius lived during the time of Saint Clement I (Philippians 4:3), the forth Pope and Saint Peter, the first Pope (Matthew 16:18), they were both, obviously, mentioned in the Bible. List of Popes here.

Saint Ignatius of Antioch

Saint Clement I

Below, is a map of ancient Rome. Rome is located in the center/left portion of the map and Antioch is located in center/right portion of the map.

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/Articles/Images/PaulsTravelsMap.gif

I hope this helps.

Peace

Hi Jimmy.

I’m wondering if you even read the post you quoted.
Because in your supposed rebuttal, you assume the very thing I draw into doubt: That the word “Catholic” has never referred to anything else than what I call the Roman-Catholic church.
You assume, in other words, the very thing you intend to prove, which of course is not valid reasoning.

Oh, and btw: The map was not a map of Rome (the city), but of a large part of the geographical area that comprised the Roman Empire.

 

[happilycatholic]

Hello Non Serviam,

“…chose to create their own assemblies.”

I think I would characterize this more as “re-inventing” Christianity, to have God on their own terms.

Your thoughts?

Merry Christmas!

If I may interject here…

I agree. I think that becoming catholic (maybe more so if you are converting) is a HUGE comittment and a difficult one to keep. For instance, if I am Baptist and want to be Methodist, I go to a Methodist church. If I don’t like that and want to be Baptist again I just go back.

I think it’s about comittment. Only this one is with the Big Kahuna so there’s no turning back. It’s intimidating to say the least and if you take it seriously, a life-long journey.

It’s been said on this forum that there are folks sueing the Church because they can’t “rescend” their Baptism.

Rediculous! If folks are that flippant about their own Baptism, how can they commit to catholicism as a whole?

HC

 

[LutheranDK]

It’s been said on this forum that there are folks sueing the Church because they can’t “rescend” their Baptism.

Rediculous! If folks are that flippant about their own Baptism, how can they commit to catholicism as a whole?

HC

Are you serious?? LOL!! People are actually sueing over that?!What do these people want? An official statement which says:

“No, we did not baptize you, even though your parents brought you to us, and water was poured over your head while the Trinitarian formula was said”?

 

[happilycatholic]

Are you serious?? LOL!! People are actually sueing over that?!What do these people want? An official statement which says:

“No, we did not baptize you, even though your parents brought you to us, and water was poured over your head while the Trinitarian formula was said”?

Maybe they are pleading “temporary sanity” (at the time of Baptism). Ha! I crack me up. Not so funny when you have to explain. Oh well.

I’m just kidding. I don’t know, I find it strange that people would stand before God and try to take back their Baptism. But hey, if they want to take that chance so be it.

 

[Jimmy_B]

Hi Jimmy.

I’m wondering if you even read the post you quoted.
Because in your supposed rebuttal, you assume the very thing I draw into doubt: That the word “Catholic” has never referred to anything else than what I call the Roman-Catholic church.
You assume, in other words, the very thing you intend to prove, which of course is not valid reasoning.

Oh, and btw: The map was not a map of Rome (the city), but of a large part of the geographical area that comprised the Roman Empire.

Hello LutheranDK,

You’re right…I noticed that, after I posted it.
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_20_1.gif
I went and re-read your posts, after-the-fact and was too lazy to go back and make any corrections.
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_12_11.gif
Then again, maybe I didn’t want to go back and make any corrections…
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_5_3.gif

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_12_6.gif

Pretty cool map though, don’t you think? It came from an ancient coin site, here.

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/3/3_2_124.gif

• At what point in time, do you believe that there was actually, a Church “Catholic”? - Upper case “C”, not “universal”.
• In your opinion was there a Catholic Church prior to the forth century?
  BTW, nice, last few post…
  . smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_2_68.gif

Until the next thread…

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_5_7.gif smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb096&pp=ZNxmk788MSUS

 

[LutheranDK]

*]At what point in time, do you believe that there was actually, a Church “Catholic”? - Upper case “C”, not “universal”.
*]In your opinion was there a Catholic Church prior to the forth century?

Until the next thread…

We all make mistakes, and if misreading a post on an internet forum is the worst mistake you make today, more power to you

To answer your questions:

1: I do not believe that there ever was this single, unified structure which I assume is what you mean when you say Catholic Church using upper case. The most “unified” time was during the time of the Apostles, and even then it is, IMHO, wishful thinking to think of ONE unified Church Catholic. I believe that the NT gives us a pretty good picture of the situation: Many “churches” (as in “congregations”), who, however, were “unified” because they shared the same basic orthodoxy.
So to the degree that there WAS “unity”, it was a doctrinal one, not an organizational one.

2: As follows from #1, I would not say that there was a Catholic Church (in your sense of that word) before the fourth century, no. Neither do I hold to that absurd belief that what is now called the Catholic Church suddenly and instantaniously sprung up after Nicea. It was a gradual process, which didn’t really finish until the late 5th century. Although there had been bishops of Rome since about 130 AD, it wasn’t until then that the claim of primacy of the bishop of Rome was generally accepted in the West (and, interestingly enough, it never was in the East, until the Byzantines, desperate for aid against the Turks, half-heartedly agreed during the Council of Florence).

Mark

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Why do so many non-Catholic Christian “Protestants” - Reject the term “Protestant”?

Any non-Catholic Christian belonging to a sect or denomination descending from those that seceded from the Roman Catholic Church and rejected aspects of Catholicism at the time of the Reformation (and today)…is by definition – “Protestant”.

If you are a Christian and not a Catholic, it is because you are, or your denomination is - “protesting” aspects of Catholicism; you are a “Protestant”.

Whats wrong with being called a “Protestant” if your are a “Protestant”? I don’t get it…

Peace

Because Protestant Churches are - they say - “daughters of the Whore” (no prizes for guessing her identity )​

---

**This has the result - in the illogic favoured by these loonies - that if one leaves the Ho’ of Babble On [John Loughnan, thanks for that joke ], one is its daughter: IOW, the sin of being Catholic is indelible: one cannot be saved from it; one is eternally polluted with the polluting pollution thereof. IOW - we are going to be slung into the lake burning for ever with fire & brimstone [God is clearly no Green] by one of those Chicky angels. **

---

**IOW, these people believe in the seal of baptism & its indelibility every bit as firmly as we do. What the logic of their position shows they don’t believe in is, that Christ is any use as a Saviour: for to be Catholic or ex-Catholic seems to amount to being a sign of predestination to the BBQ down below. That is not Christianity - it may be a kind of “Christian Islam” **

---

**These people are jerks - that’s all one need know about them. **

 

[LutheranDK]

Because Protestant Churches are - they say - “daughters of the Whore” (no prizes for guessing her identity )​

---

**This has the result - in the illogic favoured by these loonies - that if one leaves the Ho’ of Babble On [John Loughnan, thanks for that joke ], one is its daughter: IOW, the sin of being Catholic is indelible: one cannot be saved from it; one is eternally polluted with the polluting pollution thereof. IOW - we are going to be slung into the lake burning for ever with fire & brimstone [God is clearly no Green] by one of those Chicky angels. **

---

**IOW, these people believe in the seal of baptism & its indelibility every bit as firmly as we do. What the logic of their position shows they don’t believe in is, that Christ is any use as a Saviour: for to be Catholic or ex-Catholic seems to amount to being a sign of predestination to the BBQ down below. That is not Christianity - it may be a kind of “Christian Islam” **

---

**These people are jerks - that’s all one need know about them. **

I seriously hope that you’re referring to psychos a la Jack Chick, etc, and not “protestants” in general?
Because if not, you have just exposed yourself as completely ignorant.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I seriously hope that you’re referring to psychos a la Jack Chick, etc, and not “protestants” in general?
Because if not, you have just exposed yourself as completely ignorant.

Can’t you read ? ​

**Just for you, a little quotation, & then a little explanation: **

• Because Protestant Churches are - they say - "daughters of the Whore"
  I trust the words in red are both visible and **legible. **Now for the explanation:
• **the words “they say” are used to indicate (among other things) an opinion held by those quoted. **
  If you can’t r****ead, then for God’s sake get some glasses, or change your fount, or do something else equally useful. But don’t blame others if you can’t read a simple sentence in English

 

[Phillipos]

The term “protestant” sounds very negative. Protestants don’t see themselves protesting against the Catholic Church. Back during the 70’s and 80’s the popular term was “Fundamentalist” because they held to the fundamentals of the faith. During the 90’s it was popular to be an “evangelical” because of their evangelizing nature.

Nowadays it seems people of my generation (18 - 25 ) think all those terms, including Christian, are overused and lack their meaning. A Pastor around here has convinced his congregation to refer to themselves as “disciples of Christ” or “followers of Christ.”.

On the flip side I can’t say I’ve heard of anyone referring to themselves as “the way” as the church was first called.

thebereanlife.com

 

[LutheranDK]

Can’t you read ? ​

I can most definately read. In the opposite can, I would not be able to respond to your message. So by asking, and expecting a response, you have answered your own question.
Can **you **express yourself politely?

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I can most definately read. In the opposite can, I would not be able to respond to your message. So by asking, and expecting a response, you have answered your own question.
Can **you **express yourself politely?

**Can you **express yourself with something vaguely approaching intelligence ? **You’re in no position to tell off others. **​

**Congratulations on joining my ignore list. **

 

[Jimmy_B]

**Can you **express yourself with something vaguely approaching intelligence ? You’re in no position to tell off others. …​

**Congratulations on joining my ignore list. **

Hello Gottle of Geer,
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_12_20.gif

How can I join your ignore list?
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_12_7.gif
Kidding, just kidding, I don’t want to be on your list….Please, no hate mail.
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_2_21.gif

Now, I have to leave and go to my happy place…nice thoughts…nice thoughts…

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_1_69.gif . smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb095&pp=ZNxmk788MSUS

 

[SIA]

Why do so many non-Catholic Christian “Protestants” - Reject the term “Protestant”?

Any non-Catholic Christian belonging to a sect or denomination descending from those that seceded from the Roman Catholic Church and rejected aspects of Catholicism at the time of the Reformation (and today)…is by definition – “Protestant”.

If you are a Christian and not a Catholic, it is because you are, or your denomination is - “protesting” aspects of Catholicism; you are a “Protestant”.

Whats wrong with being called a “Protestant” if your are a “Protestant”? I don’t get it…

Peace

No, you just mean that you Won’t get it.

 

[Jimmy_B]

No, you just mean that you Won’t get it.

I hope not… because, I don’t want it… (my attempt at humor).

SIA, I hope that you have a safe and blessed new year! Thank you for your post.

God Bless!

 

[LutheranDK]

**Can you **express yourself with something vaguely approaching intelligence ? You’re in no position to tell off others. ​

**Congratulations on joining my ignore list. **

English is not my native language, and it was late at night.
What’s your excuse for being rude?

 

[Jimmy_B]

Now, I think it’s time for some others here, to go to their happy place…nice thoughts…nice thoughts…

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_1_69.gif . smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb095&pp=ZNxmk788MSUS

 

[mystified]

A friend once requested that his Catholic neighbors try to be “a little quiet” on Sunday morning leaving for an early Mass. He explained, “I’m a PROTEST-ant, and if you wake me up, I’m going to PROTEST1”
Personally, since most of our separated brethren are not protesting anything, and often don’t know why their churches are called protestant, I prefer to refer to them as non-Catholics, or non-Catholic Christians. I’ve never been sure which religious bodies are protestant, which are splinters from the generally recognized protestants of the 1500s, and which are Christians of some other stripe.
I do respond when someone says that Catholics are not Christians by pointing out that Catholics were the first people to be called thus, long before the speaker’s denomination was developed.
Frankly, I deeply dislike labels.

 

[EvangelistRay]

It’s a good question, as a non-catholic Christian myself there are some things we don’t agree with, but do I believe Catholics aren’t going to heaven? Absolutely not. This about a true genuine relationship with Christ and I know many Catholics with real relationships with God. Catholic, protestant, evangelical or whatever you are, God desires a real relationship with all of us.