Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Where Have All the Protestants Gone?
NOR ^ | January 2006 | Thomas Storck

Posted on 02/15/2006 6:22:47 AM PST by NYer

Has anyone noticed the almost complete disappearance of Protestants from our nation? "What!" I can hear my readers exclaim, "Storck has really gone off his rocker this time. Why, just down the street there's an Assembly of God church and two or three Baptist churches and the Methodists and so on. My cousin just left the Catholic Church to become a Protestant and my niece just married one. Moreover, evangelical Protestants have many media outlets of their own and they have great influence in the Bush Administration. They're everywhere." All this, of course, is true. Except that for some time, they no longer call themselves Protestants, but simply Christians, and increasingly they've gotten Catholics to go along with their terminology.

I recall over 10 years ago when I was a lector at Mass, for the prayer of the faithful I was supposed to read a petition that began, "That Catholics and Christians…." Of course, I inserted the word "other" before "Christians," but I doubt very many in the congregation would even have noticed had I not done so. Just the other day I saw on a Catholic website an article about a Protestant adoption agency that refused to place children with Catholic parents. The headline referred not to a Protestant adoption agency but to a Christian one. And how often do we hear of Christian bookstores or Christian radio stations or Christian schools, when everyone should know they are Protestant ones?

Now, what is wrong with this? Well, it should be obvious to any Catholic -- but probably isn't. Are only Protestants Christians? Are we Catholics not Christians, indeed the true Christians? About 30 years ago, Protestants, especially evangelicals, began to drop the term Protestant and call themselves simply Christians as a not too subtle means of suggesting that they are the true and real Christians, rather than simply the children of the breakaway Protestant revolt of the 16th century. This shift in Protestant self-identification has taken on increasingly dramatic proportions. A recent Newsweek survey (Aug. 29-Sept. 5, 2005) found that, between 1990 and 2001, the number of Americans who consider themselves "Christian" (no denomination) increased by 1,120 percent, while the number of those who self-identify as "Protestant" decreased by 270 percent.

But perhaps I am getting too worked up over a small matter. After all, are not Protestants also Christians? Yes, I do not deny that. But usually we call something by its most specific name.

Protestants are theists too, but it would surely sound odd if we were to refer to their radio stations and bookstores as theistic radio stations and theistic bookstores. Language, in order to be useful, must convey human thought and concepts in as exact a way as it can. And, in turn, our thoughts and concepts should reflect reality. As Josef Pieper noted, "if the word becomes corrupted, human existence will not remain unaffected and untainted."

Moreover, words often convey more than simple concepts. A certain word may seem only to portray reality, but in fact it does more. It adds a certain overtone and connotation. Thus, it is not a small matter whether we speak of "gays" or of homosexuals. The former term was chosen specifically to inculcate acceptance of an unnatural and immoral way of life. When I was an Episcopalian, I was careful never to speak of the Catholic Church, but of the Roman Catholic Church, as a means of limiting the universality of her claims. I always called Episcopal ministers priests, again as a means of affirming that such men really were priests, in opposition to Leo XIII's definitive judgment that Anglican orders are invalid and thus that they are in no sense priests. Perhaps because of these early experiences, I am very aware of the uses of language to prejudge and control arguments, and I am equally careful now never to call Episcopal ministers priests or refer to one as Father So-and-So. And I think we should likewise not go along with the evangelical Protestant attempt to usurp the name Christian for themselves. They are Protestants, and public discourse should not be allowed to obscure that fact.

Apparently, though, it is the case that some Protestants call themselves Christians, not out of a desire to usurp the term, but out of an immense ignorance of history. That is, they ignore history to such an extent that they really don't understand that they are Protestants. Knowing or caring little about what came before them, they act as if their nicely bound Bibles had fallen directly from Heaven and anyone could simply become a Christian with no reference to past history, ecclesiology, or theology. The period of time between the conclusion of the New Testament book of Acts and the moment that they themselves "accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Savior" means nothing. Even Luther or Calvin or John Wesley mean little to them, since they can pick up their Bibles and start Christianity over again any time they want. These souls may call themselves simply Christians in good faith, but they are largely ignorant of everything about Church history. They do not understand that Jesus Christ founded a Church, and that He wishes His followers to join themselves to that Church at the same time as they join themselves to Him. In fact, one implies and involves the other, since in Baptism we are incorporated in Christ and made members of His Church at the same time.

So let us not go along with the widespread practice of calling our separated brethren simply Christians. They are Protestants. Let us begin again to use that term. It is precise. It implies Catholic doctrine in the sense that it suggests that such people are in protest against the Church. Moreover, it forces them to define themselves in terms of, rather than independently of, the One True Church. And if we do resume referring to our separated brethren as Protestants, perhaps a few of them might even be surprised enough to ask us why -- and then, behold, a teachable moment!


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Ecumenism; Evangelical Christian; General Discusssion; History; Mainline Protestant; Ministry/Outreach; Religion & Culture; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: abortion; branson; catholics; christians; churchhistory; contraception; protestants
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,161-1,1801,181-1,2001,201-1,220 ... 2,341-2,348 next last
To: Conservative til I die
You're refuting a statement with another statement. Would you be kind enough to explain how the Catholic Church advances, supports, and especially how it teaches evolution?

I guess he got it from an unrefutable source, like Jack Chick or the website "The secrets of the Catholic Church and how Nasa has secretly created a cockroach army to conquer the moon"
1,181 posted on 02/20/2006 9:07:12 PM PST by Cronos (Never forget 9/11. Restore Hagia Sophia! Ultra-Catholic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1167 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Obviously at typo - I am not Catholic, so I would not presume to be able to bless as only the Lord could.


1,182 posted on 02/20/2006 9:09:44 PM PST by gscc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1176 | View Replies]

To: Conservative til I die
Says the person who got banned within the last month.

If I were "banned" I wouldn't be in here talking to you now would I? I believe "suspended" was the word you were digging for. But I just couldn't stay away. I'd miss you too much. (smooch)

1,183 posted on 02/20/2006 9:09:47 PM PST by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1165 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

Note that he had no union with her until she gave birth - he obviously took Mary as his wife in every sense of the word.

1,184 posted on 02/20/2006 9:13:41 PM PST by gscc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1180 | View Replies]

To: gscc; Cronos
When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

Watch out. You're eventually going to receive a link with an eleven page essay by Jerome telling you that "until" doesn't really mean "until". :-)

1,185 posted on 02/20/2006 9:18:04 PM PST by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1184 | View Replies]

To: gscc; Cronos
You are making an assumption that they had sex in the stable. The point of "But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus." was that Mary was a VIRGIN. He didn't even have sex with her after she was found to be pregnant.

Much the same way that referring to Jesus Christ as the first born assumes there are more. If all she ever had was 1 child He would still be the firstborn son, an important distinction in the Jewish faith.

Have a nice evening, it's late and I hafta work tomorrow. (sigh)

1,186 posted on 02/20/2006 9:25:34 PM PST by Jaded (The truth shall set you free, but lying to yourself turns you French.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1184 | View Replies]

To: Jaded

I am not presuming as to when they had sex or where only that at some point after the birth of Jesus that had a "union".


1,187 posted on 02/20/2006 9:28:16 PM PST by gscc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1186 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant; gscc; Cronos
Watch out. You're eventually going to receive a link with an eleven page essay by Jerome telling you that "until" doesn't really mean "until". :-)

Ask and ye shall receive.

St. Jerome

You almost got it right. Actually Jerome responded to Helvidius in an essay defending the The Perpetual Virginity Of Blessed Mary. Yes, the essay is about 11 pages and within these pages he cites several examples of the adverb “till” used in scripture. For example

“Our reply is briefly this -- the words "knew" and "till" in the language of Holy Scripture are capable of a double meaning.”

"Now we have to prove that just as in the one case he has followed the usage of Scripture, so with regard to the word "till" he is utterly refuted by the authority of the same Scripture, which often denotes by its ["till"'s] use a fixed time (he himself told us so) [and] frequently time without limitation, as when God by the mouth of the prophet says to certain persons, "Even unto old age I am He" [Is. 46:4]. Will He cease to be God when they have grown old?"

"And the Savior in the Gospel tells the Apostles, "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" [Matt. 28:20b]. Will the Lord then after the end of the world has come forsake His disciples, and at the very time when seated on twelve thrones they are to judge the twelve tribes of Israel will they be bereft of the company of their Lord?

There are more but you get the idea.

1,188 posted on 02/21/2006 5:27:45 AM PST by pegleg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1185 | View Replies]

To: pegleg; Invincibly Ignorant; gscc
The problem with many dadaists is that they like quick-slogan religions -- they like and understand only the slogans that can fit on a bumper sticker. If they have faith, well good.

But, I'll point out people I know who have become Buddhists because they think it's a feel good, easy-going religion. But it ISN'T -- it's quite a strenuous religion with a strenuous requirement for it's followers. Many westerners treat it like candy fluff and they want to do the same with Christianity. Sadly, many Protestant groups give in to this and put up large show and tell song and dance numbers. There are many Protestant groups that DON'T do this (and may their numbers increase), but mostly the problem tends to be the dummying down to the lowest level,
1,189 posted on 02/21/2006 5:51:23 AM PST by Cronos (Never forget 9/11. Restore Hagia Sophia! Ultra-Catholic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1188 | View Replies]

To: pegleg

Yo Pegleg. You're not gonna believe this but when I posted that last night I had you in mind. I thought to myself, Pegleg's gonna jump all over this. lol.


1,190 posted on 02/21/2006 6:38:21 AM PST by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1188 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant

Whad up? Yes, I didn’t want to disappoint you :-) BTW, have you ever read the entire link? At one time, you said you were going to.


1,191 posted on 02/21/2006 6:44:21 AM PST by pegleg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1190 | View Replies]

To: pegleg

Yes I read it a couple of years ago already. You still in fla?


1,192 posted on 02/21/2006 6:45:27 AM PST by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1191 | View Replies]

To: Full Court
So tell me Dave, how is someone saved?

Right after you tell me if Baptism is necessary for salvation.

SD

1,193 posted on 02/21/2006 6:46:48 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1158 | View Replies]

To: Full Court
They did claim parts of Scripture are not true.

No, they didn't. They said parts are not to be misunderstood as literal history when they are in fact poetic.

SD

1,194 posted on 02/21/2006 6:48:17 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1161 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant
You still in fla?

Yes I am. It's a tough life. I'm playing golf every weekend, rooting for the Gators and I get upset every time the temperature falls below 50 :-)

1,195 posted on 02/21/2006 6:52:08 AM PST by pegleg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1192 | View Replies]

To: Full Court
Answer the questions then, why did Jesus have to die if you Catholics can save yourselves through the sacraments.

We can't "save ourselves" through the sacraments. This is an ill-constructed question.

Sacraments are how salvation, saving grace that is, is communicated, transmitted to us. Your question is like saying "why do you have switches and wiring, I thought you believed in electricity?"

When you bathe the baby, is it possible because God created water and makes it rain, or because there are pipes and faucets in your house?

SD

1,196 posted on 02/21/2006 7:02:40 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1164 | View Replies]

To: pegleg
I get upset every time the temperature falls below 50 :-)

Come to think of it, this must be what gets to Rickey Williams too. :-)

1,197 posted on 02/21/2006 7:09:03 AM PST by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1195 | View Replies]

To: gscc
I am not presuming as to when they had sex or where only that at some point after the birth of Jesus that had a "union".

But that's not what the Scripture says, if you want to read it in your way. It says they had no relations until Jesus was born. That means right then and right there.

Would a natural English speaker say "I didn't get up till noon" if he in fact woke up at 2PM?

Would someone say "I studied mathematics until I was 18" if he in fact studied math all through college?

Would someone say "I never believed in love at first sight until Susie walked into the room" if he fell in love with Kim?

No. The word, in your interpreted usage means that one state of affairs is true in the first half of the sentence and a different state of affairs is true in the second half. And the moment identified by the "till" is the moment of change.

Can you give one example of the word "till" being used in this manner, to mean "everything I just said changed, but not at the moment I describe, but at some indeterminate point in the future."

I'm sure the folks at Oxford would be interested in this new meaning of the word.

SD

1,198 posted on 02/21/2006 7:19:20 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1187 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
Can you give one example of the word "till" being used in this manner, to mean "everything I just said changed, but not at the moment I describe, but at some indeterminate point in the future."

The Steeler won 4 Superbowls in the 70's but didn't win another til 20006. :-)

1,199 posted on 02/21/2006 7:21:38 AM PST by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1198 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

oops one too many zeros on the 2006


1,200 posted on 02/21/2006 7:26:06 AM PST by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1198 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,161-1,1801,181-1,2001,201-1,220 ... 2,341-2,348 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson