From the article:
...it has led some conservative Baptists to reject the label “Protestant,” since successionists can’t accept the view that Baptists emerged out of the Protestant Reformation in the 17th century.Labeling all who dispute the Primacy of the Pope - whether Reformers, anabaptists, or just wolves and heretics - as "Protestant", and then claiming that all believe in the same other things, seems to be a common practice of Catholic Apologists. Here's a little history lesson that might help, or do you believe that a rejection of papal primacy is all that defines being "Protestant"?
OK, then, would you please define “Protestant” for me?
My friend said she was a Protestant and this was taught in her Sunday school (first her family went to a Methodist church and then to a Dutch Reformed church and eventually to the Episcopal Church). They all considered themselves Protestants, and the first two were very big on the glories of the Albigensians and others, whom they considered “crypto-Protestants.”
Can you define Protestantism for me?
Indeed, that's a ridiculous practice. Some Catholic Apologists are notorious for doing that.
Most of my classmates in college were from different Protestant denominations, and it became apparent very quickly that describing "Protestants" using any generalization isn't fair or accurate. Before that point, I didn't realize how many disputes there are between Protestant denominations. Those four groups that you list on the other thread are much less confusing and far more accurate.