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!

[tenn2005]

Please explain what MKJV stands for and you also need to read Paul's statement.

[Pyro7480]

I wasn't mocking. I was stating a fact. You and many of your fellow-travelers are quite presumptuous to say that Catholics don't have a relationship with the Lord. He's in our tabernacles 24/7.

[Diego1618]

God chose Paul.

Good point.....very profound!

[Jaded]

Try reading this. Try studing the Bible instead of excerpting it particularly all of the Gospels.

[tenn2005]

Tabernacles are tents. Please explain where your tents are.

[TradicalRC]

He isn't explicit here at all. He never mentions Scripture. He didn't exactly have a new testament to hand to Timothy. Study means observe, does it not? He is exhorting him to be a good teacher, so study virtue, study prophecy, study other teachers and apostles.

[Pyro7480]

A tabernacle is also the place in our churches where the Blessed Sacrament - Our Lord Himself present Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity - is reserved.

[kerryusama04]

You insults are not relevant. Read the texts.

Act 23:6 But when Paul saw that the one part were Sadducees and the other part Pharisees, he cried out in the sanhedrin, Men! Brothers! I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee! I am being judged because of the hope and resurrection of the dead.

The "hope of the resurrection of the dead" speaks to:

Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. The second death has no authority over these, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with Him a thousand years. Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be loosed out of his prison. Rev 20:8 And he will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle. The number of them is as the sand of the sea. Rev 20:9 And they went up over the breadth of the earth and circled around the camp of the saints, and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of Heaven and devoured them.

None of this makes sense if you die and go straight to heaven or hell. None of it. Insult me all you want to, it does not change the facts.

[kerryusama04]

Hey Brother D! I was wondering when you would show up. :)

[tenn2005]

Babies are saved without baptism because baptism is for sinners who have come to a belief in Christ. Babies do not fit either of these descriptions. When they die they are with the Lord.

[TradicalRC]

We didn't surrender our ability to think, learn and grow in our relationship with the LORD to an institution of man.

It is an institution of God's, not man's. You sound like those atheists who insist that Scripture is man-made as well.

[kerryusama04]

Modern King James Version. You are not a happy man, are you?

[tenn2005]

He had Pauls letters to him. Are those not scripture?

[Full Court]

"People were also bringing babies to Jesus to have him touch them . When the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. But Jesus called the children to him and said, 'Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.'" Luke 18:15-17

Sorry, the bible your friend used is incorrect.

Matthew 19:13  

¶Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them.

14  But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

15  And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence.

Notice there is no mention of baptism, and infants are not mentioned, but little children.

Joseph was called a little child when he was 16, Solomon called him self a liitle child when he took the throne.

So little children does not mean infants.

[tenn2005]

So says the Pope, but not the bible.

[Jaded]

Obviously you didn't read. I'm finished. Have a good evening.

[magisterium]

How on earth can you say that? What of the 24 elders first mentioned in Revelation 4:4, and the multitude of saints praying before God's throne in Revelation 5:8. These people are clearly already in Heaven. The saints mentioned are emblematic of all people who will have died and attained Heaven before the Last Day.

[TradicalRC]

Well yeah, now.

[Jaded]

She OBVIOUSLY didn't use Your Preferred Version.

[Pyro7480]

You don't even know what you're saying. The Pope didn't make the decree. Christians have believed that since at least the late 1st century, and probably from the time of the Apostles. Our Lord didn't say "This is a symbol of My Body." He said, "This is My Body," and, "This is My Blood."

I'm calling it a night. I have to get up for work tomorrow. As the Book of Numbers says, "The Lord bless thee, and keep thee. The Lord shew his face to thee, and have mercy on thee. The Lord turn his countenance to thee, and give thee peace."