Yes, I think it is possible to distinguish currents in Protestantism, where some believe in fact in the same salvific role of good works as Catholics do, but somehow combine that with the slogan of “faith alone”. The reason I allow myself a generalization is first, because I simply cannot presume the position of arguing for one Protestant comunity against another Protestant community. To me, as Catholic, they are all to differing degrees heretical. Secondly, the cornerstone of that heresy is Luther’s ideas of the supposed dichotomy between the law and the gospel which then allowed him to formulate “faith alone”. I think that all Protestant communities of faith are infected by that fundamental error. How they reconcile that with the obvious calls for sanctity and repentance thoughout the gospel is a certain art where each Protestant is his own pope, thus generating the ever-splitting Protestant theological movement. But the error is common to all.
Yes, I think it is possible to distinguish currents in Protestantism, where some believe in fact in the same salvific role of good works as Catholics do, but somehow combine that with the slogan of “faith alone”. The reason I allow myself a generalization is first, because I simply cannot presume the position of arguing for one Protestant comunity against another Protestant community. To me, as Catholic, they are all to differing degrees heretical. Secondly, the cornerstone of that heresy is Luther’s ideas of the supposed dichotomy between the law and the gospel which then allowed him to formulate “faith alone”. I think that all Protestant communities of faith are infected by that fundamental error. How they reconcile that with the obvious calls for sanctity and repentance thoughout the gospel is a certain art where each Protestant is his own pope, thus generating the ever-splitting Protestant theological movement. But the error is common to all.
As you must defend a church which loves to have the preeminence, and you must consider all who oppose it as heretical, and must never allow that they may be right, and thus a generalization which is not the majority position among those you contend with is convenient. Believing that saving faith must be of a type that produces fruit is not a mere “current,” but as I have abundantly substantiated (such as in post 5825 to you, to which i much more may be added) historic Protestantism broadly taught that a faith without works is dead, in addition to showing that this is consistent with the fact that justification is most precisely by faith. And while some deny the degree of freedom of will afforded man in choosing to deny the faith, it is Rome who engages in the most “artistry” in having believers merit the gift of eternal life via her sacramental system.
Nor is each Protestant his own pope, as they do not claim papal formulaic assured infallibility, but appeal to the Scriptures as the only objective source which is wholly infallible and are to rely upon its means of persuasion. And Scripture itself affirms men to judging what is taught by the Scriptures (Acts 17:11) and its attestation, as well as to ascertaining their own status as believers by what is written. (1Jn. 5:13)
And despite what it is claimed to do, those in Rome do not even know the infallible status of multitudes of pronouncements, but it is generally concluded that very little of the Bible has been defined, while exhibiting far less in exegetical endeavors than those who hold to the supremacy of Scripture, while Roman Catholics can have varying degrees of dissent among those that are not infallibly defined, and have great liberty to interpret Scripture outside such. In addition, overall her teaching itself requires some interpretation, both of which engage private interpretation (PI), and her members evidence less unity in core truths and moral values than those within evangelicalism.
Meanwhile, the unity Rome has by implicit trust in her AIM is not greater than those in cults which also look to a supreme magisterium over Scripture, and is of less quality than that which is results from faith in the evangelical gospel and supremacy of Scripture, despite different “tribes.” Moreover, the premise that such is needed to preserve the faith and to establish writings as being Scripture, as well as the basis for Rome's claim to be such, has been shown to be manifestly false, while Romes AIM rests upon her own infallible declaration that she is such.
Unity in the Bible did not come from implicit trust in an AIM, but men were persuaded by “manifestation of the truth,” (2Cor. 4:2) by a holiness and teaching which were in conformity with the Scriptures, along with Divine attestation of the faith, including the transformative effects of believing the preaching of what you seem to malign as the “misanthropic self-effacing me, filthy rags” gospel of grace, by which those who thus humble themselves are exalted. (Lk. 18:14)