The Reformation is over. Catholics 0, Protestants 1

triablogue ^ | April 13, 2015 | Jerry Walls

[RnMomof7]

I'm going to transcribe an article that Jerry Walls wrote when he was a grad student at Notre Dame:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am nearing the end of three very happy (with a brief interlude) years as a graduate student in the philosophy department at Notre Dame. The philosophy department is quite lively and stimulating and I have learned a great deal about my discipline.

Along the way, I have also acquired an education of another sort–namely in the ways of the Roman Catholic Church. My education in this regard has been informal and piecemeal, to be sure. My insights have been gathered from diverse sources: from lectures, from letters to the Observer, from articles in the conservative magazine Fidelity, from interaction with undergraduates I have taught. But most of all, I have learned from numerous conversations with students and faculty in the philosophy and theology departments, many of which have involved a friend who is a former Roman Catholic seminarian. While my informal education in these matters hardly qualifies me to speak as an authority, Roman Catholics may find interesting how one Protestant in their midst has come to perceive them. I can communicate my perceptions most clearly, I think, by briefly describing three types of Catholics I have encountered. 

First, I have met a fair number of conservative Catholics. Those who belong to this group like to characterize themselves as thoroughly Catholic. They stress the teaching authority of the Church and are quick to defend the official Catholic position on all points. For such persons, papal encyclicals are not to be debated; they are to be accepted and obeyed. Many conservative Catholics, I suspect, hold their views out of a sense of loyalty to their upbringing. Others, however, defend their views with learning, intelligence, and at times, intensity.

At the other end of the spectrum of course, are the liberal Catholics. These persons are openly skeptical not only about distinctively Roman doctrines such as papal infallibility, but also about basic Christian doctrine as embodied in the ecumenical creeds. It is not clear in what sense such persons would even be called Christians. Nevertheless, if asked their religious preference, on a college application say, they would identify themselves as Catholics. I have no idea how many Catholics are liberals of this stripe, but I have met only a few here at Notre Dame.

It is the third type of Catholic, I am inclined to think, which represents the majority. Certainly most of the Catholics I have met are of this type. I call this group "functional protestants."

Many Catholics, no doubt, will find this designation offensive, so let me hasten to explain what I mean by it. One of the fundamental lines of difference between Catholics and Protestants, going back to the Reformation, concerns the issue of doctrinal authority. The traditional Roman Catholic view, as I understand it, is that its official teachings are guaranteed to be infallible, particularly when the pope or an ecumenical council exercises "extraordinary magisterium" when making doctrinal or moral pronouncements. Protestants have traditionally rejected this claim in favor of the view that Scripture alone is infallible in matters doctrinal and moral. This was the conviction MartinLuther came to hold after he arrived at the conclusion that both popes and church councils have erred. After this, his excommunication was all but inevitable.

When I say most Catholics are functional Protestants I simply mean that most Catholics do not accept the authority claims of their Church. In actual belief and practice, they are much closer to the Protestant view.

This is apparent from the fact that many Catholics do not accept explicitly defined dogmas of their Church. For example, I have talked with several Catholics who are doubtful, at best, about the Marian dogmas, even though these have the status of infallible doctrine in their church. Such Catholics have often made it clear to me that they believe the basic Christian doctrine as defined in the creeds. But they frankly admit that they think their Church has taken some wrong turns in her recent history. Where this is the case, they do not feel compelled to follow. As one of my functional Protestant friends put it: "I am a Roman Catholic, but I am more concerned about being Catholic than about being Roman."

That many Catholics are functionally Protestant is also evident in their attitude toward the distinctive moral teachings of their Church. The obvious example here is the Roman Catholic teaching that all forms of "artificial" birth control are immoral. The official view was reaffirmed explicitly by Pope Paul VI in his encyclical Humanae Vitae, and has been reiterated again and again by Pope John Paul II. Nevertheless, as the article on Humanae Vitae in the Encyclopedic Dictionary of Religion noted, "the papal ban is simply being ignored," and "a concrete authority crisis has thus emerged."

I attended the recent debate on abortion between Fr. James Burtchaell and Daniel Maguire. It is interesting to me that Fr. Burtchaell who eloquently defended the conservative view on abortion, admitted to a questioner that he rejects his Church's teaching on birth control. I could not help but wonder: is Fr. Burtchaell, Catholic statesman though he is, also among the functional Protestants?

This raises, of course, the deeper issue here: to what extent can a member of the Roman Catholic Church disagree with the official teachings of his Church and still be a faithful Catholic? Can one reject the teaching of a papal encyclical while remaining a faithful Catholic? If so, can he also reject a doctrine which the pope has declared infallible?

I have put these questions to several Catholics. Conservative have assured me that the answer to both the latter questions is no. Others insist the answer is yes.

This brings me to a final point concerning functional Protestants: they do consider themselves faithful Catholics. I have  often pointed out in conversation with such Catholics that their views differ little from mine. Why then remain Catholic I ask. In response, these Catholics make it clear to me that they love their Church and intend to remain loyal to it. More than one has compared the Church to his family. One's family makes mistakes, but one does not therefore choose to join another family.

I am not sure what to make of this response. It is not clear to me that one can line up behind Luther in holding that the Popes and councils have erred in their doctrinal and moral pronouncements, and still be a faithful Catholic.  But on the other hand, things have changed since the 16C. It is no longer the case that a Catholic will be excommunicated for holding what Luther held. Perhaps this is just another sign that the Reformation is–despite the pope's best efforts–finally taking hold within the Roman Church. 

Jerry Walls, "Reformational Theology found in Catholicism," The Observer, Thursday, April 23, 1978, p8.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I didn’t. BTW, say anything about Luther in particular.

[Dick Vomer]

Freepers persist in posting these dumb attack-threads, and they keep on winning the same dumb prizes

I agree. It’s just yawner with these clowns that sit around a circle jerk and see who can go to heaven and who has it “wrong”. I just pity them. I just describe it as an old crazy man that is screaming at the ocean to make the waves stop and pay attention to who he is....”all the lonely people, where do they all come from?”

[metmom]

By Catholic reasoning, then if they are having sex knowing that no procreation is going to happen that is contributing to the moral collapse of our culture and society.

[HossB86]

Non-Presbyterian faction of the Presbyterian Church.

Being Presbyterian doesn't save you; and it's not taught that way as it is in the Catholic Church (no salvation outside of the Catholic Church) --

"An unsaved member of the apostate branch of Presbyterianism" might be the better title.

Hoss

[LurkingSince'98]

Couldn’t have happened to anyone more deserving!

What should the Church have done... Pinned a medal on him???

He knew EXACTLY what he was doing

AMDG

[HossB86]

Clinton’s interpretation of scripture, adultery, and fellatio was provided to the Arkansas State Troopers; it’s Sola scriptura. You know everyman can be his own priest. As for your standard rants about Catholics, if you don’t like the Catholic Church, don’t go into it. All your condemnations mean nothing to anyone.

Huh? Feeling okay? You're not making any sense today.

Hoss

[metmom]

We don’t follow Luther.

It’s y’all Catholics who demand that we do even when we tell you repeatedly that we don’t.

Y’all are the ones who insist that we don’t reject him.

[LurkingSince'98]

Thank you for posting that scripture reference.

There is little in the way of doctrine left in many protestant sects.

AMDG

[CynicalBear]

>>If he does not reflect what you believe then why don’t you reject him?<<

I thought you've been lurking. Had you been paying attention you would know I don't venerate Luther, Calvin or any other man. Luther was a Catholic and had many erroneous and vile traits which he took along from Catholicism. The corrections being made had started years, and years before his time. Zwingli, Hus, Waldo, and Wycliffe just to name a few. Gutenberg and his printing press put fear into the hearts of the Catholic hierarchy in that it would become much easier for the masses to obtain copies of scripture and learn of the errors of Catholic teaching. God was moving and the Catholic Church couldn't stop Him. It was God who was working to "increase knowledge" and take away the monopoly of the Catholic Church and it's error's. No one man or even group of men get the glory for that.

[HossB86]

Thanks for the prayers—but don’t pray for me to give up my Roman Catholic faith, the beauty of its liturgy and its traditions, the priestly tradition, the beauty of Mary and her answer; the papacy. Pray for my arthritic hip; pray that my lung cancer does not return; pray for my son to find a job; pray for the millions of aborted babies. If I am in such a state of sin and apostasy, why should God answer my prayers and the prayers of any Catholic? Jesus died on that cross for me, and you, and all. It’s time for these condemnations to stop.

Well, since it pinged you enough to reply, maybe The Lord will use these discussions to reach your heart. All the matters of this world mean nothing; only that you know Jesus Christ as Lord -- not Mary, not priests, not "beautiful liturgy" that practices the re-sacrifice of Christ and makes it cannibalistic --

And I will certainly be more than happy to pray not only for you, but for your son to find a job and for an easing of your arthritic hip and the continuing remission of your cancer, Lord willing. And better I pray to The Lord directly for you than for others to pray useless prayers to "saints" and Mary who cannot hear you.

I do pray and trust that The Lord will do these things for you.

Hoss

[CynicalBear]

They do work at obfuscation and diversion don’t they.

[smvoice]

Isn’t it funny how the world is divided into either Rome or Luther by some people? ...sigh...

[Salvation]

The Reformation is indeed over and the Catholics are coming out on top with people coming back to the Church.

The article is misappropriated in its title.

Should be Catholics 1 (or more), Protestants 0 (or - numbers.)

I’m criticizing the author and the title, not any individuals.

[roamer_1]

Thank you for posting that scripture reference.

You are truly welcome.

There is little in the way of doctrine left in many protestant sects.

Doesn't matter whose doctrine at all (including yours or mine), unless it is the doctrine of Yeshua... which is the doctrine of His Father.

[CynicalBear]

>>If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax-collector.<<

That's "tell it to the assembly (ekklesia) of the local group he has been meeting with. It is they who would decide not to allow that person to meet with them any longer. The Catholic Church attempts to usurp that right from the local assembly. Thus we have paedophile priests who the Catholic Church forces onto local assemblies of Catholics and Catholics who have been conditioned to submit their "will and intellect" rather than assert their God given duty.

[Salvation]

“Few Americans hate the Catholic Church, but millions hate what they think is the Catholic Church.” —Bishop Fulton Sheen

[RnMomof7]

Guess I hit a nerve ...huh?? ..Rome has an anti semiotic history and there is no denying it..just live with it...

Look at Luther's actions during the Peasant's Revolt of 1525./I>

You need to check your sources..Catholic anti protestant/anti Lutheran sources are not real reliable.. often 3rd or 4th party sources..

The quote itself has some history. These texts from the 1800's demonstrate it's been circulating for quite a number of years. Luther, Exposing the Myth cites "Tischreden; Erlanger Ed., Vol. 59. p. 284." They took the quote from this secondary source. It's possible the quote ultimately came from this popular secondary source.
The Tischreden is Luther's Table Talk, a collection of second hand comments written down by Luther's friends, published after his death. There is no such thing as the Erlanger edition of Luther's works, it's Erlangen, referring to the Erlangen Edition of Luther's works. This out of print German / Latin edition of Luther's works was published in the 1800's (some of these volumes are on-line, but the text visibility is poor ). The Tabletalk was included in the Erlangen edition (volumes 57-62). So volume 59 is indeed The Tischreden.
This Tabletalk quote was collected by Conrad Cordatus. It's quite possible Cordatus didn't hear and record the comment himself. He is said to have taken Luther's comments from other sources. He later revised his Tabletalk notes, making stylistic changes. Because of this, Luther's Works (English edition) includes only a small sampling of those statements compiled by Cordatus.
The quote can be found in WA Tr 3:75, and in LW 54:180.

http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2010/09/luther-i-have-slain-all-peasants.html,P>Rome sure does hate Luther.. one little monk that started a revolution...

Luke 6;26 Blessed are you, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake.

[smvoice]

"...Ican'thearyou,Ican'thearyou,Ican'thearyou..."

Give some statistics, please, Salvation.

[Resettozero]

As always, you live in an anti-Catholic dream world. Dream on.

Don't you see what your "faith" has done to you? I can.

[LurkingSince'98]

“Gutenberg and his printing press put fear into the hearts of the Catholic hierarchy...”

Excuse me, excuse me but

1) Gutenburg was a Roman Catholic
2) his bible was printed in LATIN and
3) was the Vulgate originally translated by St Jerome - a throughly Roman Catholic bible.

How was it that this Latin Catholic Vulgate Gutenburg printed bible struck terror into the hierarchy and brought (Latin??) to the oppressed masses???

Sounds like Protestant revisionism!

AMDG