Where Have All the Protestants Gone?

NOR ^ | January 2006 | Thomas Storck

[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!

[Sidebar Moderator]

A poster's request not to be pinged must be honored. It also means you cannot reply to his posts and should not use his name in your posts. And he must do the same.

But either can address issues raised by the other, indirectly, in replies to others.

[Cronos]

I corrected my statement so that even you could understand it.

don't you mean to say that you retracted your false statement posing as the truth (which is a fancy way of saying a person LIED) and then try to cover your false statement (i.e. lie) with bluster?

[Cronos]

The RCC is one part of the overall Catholic Church, which in turn is but a part of the Apostolic Church of God -- the Churchs that were set up by Christ himself through his Apostles, not by any man. Those groups that are not part of the Apostolic Church are not Christian period. Individuals in those groups may be, but the overall bunch of non-catholic/orthodox cannot be labelled Christian.

[Cronos]

Since you posted your snippet to show how women are owned by men.... try the ENTIRE Pararaph

Exactly my point Jaded -- FC, like so many of those who are led astray away from The Church see only one line -- they are quote based Christians, not seeing the forest for the trees. They take one line of the Bible and not the meaning and then cry sola scriptura. Fie on that. They lose the meaning, the majesty and the reason. A little knowledge is very dangerous and that's exceptionally true for the protesting groups.

To refute your statement, the protester will pull up random quotes from various books of the Bible with no string of meaning bar what the person has pieced together, thereby corrupting The Word.

[Cronos]

Holy Scripture is clear that Jesus had siblings, brothers and sisters.

Really? Where? And when you post the little bit about His brothers and sister, I'll repost my statement (which I think I've brought out about 20 times so far) that brothers and sisters in Eastern cultures are synonyms for cousins as well as siblings......

[Cronos]

Holy Scripture is clear that Jesus had siblings, brothers and sisters.

Really? Where? And when you post the little bit about His brothers and sister, I'll repost my statement (which I think I've brought out about 20 times so far) that brothers and sisters in Eastern cultures are synonyms for cousins as well as siblings......

This shows where your sola scriptura falls apart -- like a 3 year old trying to understand e=mc2

It's a classic case of where quote-based groups err -- they don't understand what they speak, they just spout their nonsense....

[Cronos]

What comparisons?

Read yer own illogical post

I'll just reprint what SD said:
In one instance we are talking about needing miracles in order to believe in God, to have faith in Jesus, etc. In the other we are talking about proof that someone is in heaven. Two totally different things.

[Cronos]

So you'd rather follow the men that brought you the homosexual/pedophile scandal than the Bible?

hmmm... let's see -- so you're saying that St. Augustine, St. Ignatius etc., ALL the Church Fathers and the Apostles since the time of Christ brought the homo/paedo scandal? Because THOSE people are the ones who help us lean the Word of God -- and yes, I'd rather have THEM teach me then some silly 20th century "pastor" who probably got his certificate off the net (a la Joey from friends). I'd rather have their serious, devote study than the singing-and-dancing hallelujah shouting gibberish that goes in non-Christian groups.

[Cronos]

Full Court's postings are a clear example of how Sola Scriptura leads to solo scriptura. Each individual becomes their own pope and magisterium. With little or no knowledge of the language in which the Bible was written and ignoring the audience of the Gospel writers, each person 'interprets' Scripture anyway they wish. Two thousand years of theologians is totally disregarded.

Perfectly put NYer.

[Cronos]

Typical of a member of a quote based grouping: you completely ignore the entire statement and consider only one quote. The entire statement was "The Vatican is both the place where the Bishop of Rome resides and a separate state(read up on the events of 1870). "

[Cronos]

Paul says - Jesus says --- big difference.

hmmm... so Paul's letters aren't inspired? They are not to be considered?

[Cronos]

Thank you for explaining that so well I.Q.

[Cronos]

As you see FC -- THIS is why were Belong to The Church, the Apostolic Church founded by Christ through His Apostles. This entire community of believers -- dating back 20 centuries helps us learn more about our faith. Do you think no one asked these questions in the 20 centuries before the Pentecostals and Evamngelicals came along? No, these questions were asked and answered by the Holy Spirit and by people who actually KNEW The Christ. We cannot be presumptive to refute THOSE proofs.

[restornu]

FAMILY OF JESUS CHRIST (recap)

Matt. 12: 46
46 ¶ While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.

Mark 3: 31
31 ¶ There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him.

Luke 8: 19
19 ¶ Then came to him his mother and his brethren, and could not come at him for the press.

Matt. 13: 55
55 Is not this the carpenter’s son?

is not his mother called Mary?

and his brethren, James, and Joses,
and Simon, and Judas?

Mark 6: 3
3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary,

the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon?

and are not his sisters here with us?

And they were offended at him.

John 2: 12
12 ¶ After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they continued there not many days.

John 19: 27
27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.

Acts 1: 14
14 These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.

Gal. 1: 19
19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother.

[Cronos]

I think the Hare Krishnas have stopped recruiting lately...

[Cronos]

oh, the Word of God is perfect -- however, MAN's interpretation of it is fault (as we ARE faulty, unlike God) -- so we as INDIVIDUALS err when trying to understand scripture on our lonesome. You read scripture in a community, don't you FC? You go home and ponder on your own as well, but you learn it with a group of people? Well, we do the same, only our community of people extends back 2000 years and includes the Apostles. That's what so many Protestant miss out on -- the depth. They are like seeds planted on shallow dirt, lacking the richness and the depth. We as individuals make mistakes -- and the Church Fathers as individuals make mistakes. But when united by the Spirit in the ONE Church, the CHURCH does not err...

[Cronos]

oh, the Word of God is perfect -- however, MAN's interpretation of it is fault (as we ARE faulty, unlike God) -- so we as INDIVIDUALS err when trying to understand scripture on our lonesome. You read scripture in a community, don't you FC? You go home and ponder on your own as well, but you learn it with a group of people? Well, we do the same, only our community of people extends back 2000 years and includes the Apostles. That's what so many Protestant miss out on -- the depth. They are like seeds planted on shallow dirt, lacking the richness and the depth. We as individuals make mistakes -- and the Church Fathers as individuals make mistakes. But when united by the Spirit in the ONE Church, the CHURCH does not err...

And before you go further, the Church is the entire community, the continuity of Christian believers in the Apostolic Church founded through Christ through His Apostles.

[Cronos]

The Bible says Mary had sex with Joseph

Ok, give me the Verse which says so in plane language like the OT does when it says when someone KNEW someone....

and the Bible says that Mary and Jesus brothers came to see him.

Brothers as in brethern, as in cousins or kinsmen. In the M-E you will still find people referring to their cousins as brothers in a normal way. You can't understand that as you can't understand that kind of culture, so you make up your own concepts -- don't worry, we ALL as individual make mistakes, make errors, we as INDIVIDUALS are fallible, extremely so (you and me included in the same boat) -- when you come to The Church, you find THE Church, the community of believers past and present IS, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, IS INFALLIBLE.

[Cronos]

You place oral tradition as equal to SCRIPTURE, even though oral tradition is suspect at best for its veracity.

As Jaded said in post #1683: "Paul did not learn at the feet of Jesus Christ. Paul himself said "what I have taught you by word of mouth or by letter." Word is tradition. Letter became Scripture"

Do you agree with that, or do you think the letters of St. Paul are not scripture and thereby agree with OLD Reggie in post # 1611 "It is refreshing that you recognize Paul frequently speaks for himself and himself only. Please advise some of your compatriots that I am not a bitter "ex" or anything like that when I say that not all of Paul's writings are "Commandments of God"."

[restornu]

Amen!!