|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Just who DOES identify as Protestant?
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
I pretty much agree with one of TheAlethiophile's main points, in that 'Protestant' was inherently defined as being not something, rather than being something. It meant 'not Catholic' in an environment where 'Catholic' had previously been the default position. It's an umbrella term for various groups that were defined by not being Roman Catholic, not necessarily by their own shared common doctrines.
They did probably start with a lot of shared ideas, but there's nothing inherent in the label to keep the 'brand' together. If you departed from Catholic views, you were no longer a Catholic. If you departed from Orthodox views, you were no longer Orthodox. If you departed from existing Protestant views, you were... another interesting new variety of Protestant to add to the list.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rosa Winkel
Saint Anger round my neck
# 11424
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Trouble is, a great many people we speak with aren't up on their history OR the differences between denominations, and immediately classify Lutherans among the Reformed or even among those popularly called Evangelicals.
Of course the Lutheran Church in Germany is called "Evangelische." ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
An Evangelische church I used to work for in Germany translated itself as "Protestant"; you are right, of course, it is Lutheran. The word "evangelical" in German is evangelikal, though I believe that Freikirche (Free-church) is more commonly used. I've hardly heard evangelikal used.
I raise this, as I would myself translate evangelisch with Protestant, as I'm not sure that many of those I would be speaking with (I did tours for international groups) would understand Lutheran, at least, British groups. They would read Evangelisch and presume that it is evangelical.
This is another example of confusion. Here in Poland people don't tend to have heard of the Anglican church, and I get called protestant; I've even used the word myself, a word I wouldn't ordinarily use.
--------------------
The Disability and Jesus "Locked out for Lent" project
Posts: 3271 | From: Wrocław | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
I see Euty got here first. Don’t forget that in some places, Catholic is still the default position.
In my locality, ‘Protestant’ is a widely used, uncontroversial and useful term. Self-described Protestants are members of Reformed Calvinist churches (their buildings are known here as ‘temples’ to distinguish them from Catholic places of worship).
The term is usually separate from ‘evangelical’, which covers a wide variety of Baptist, Pentecostal and other free or nonconformist churches.
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Except that if they think they are in danger of being labelled a cult, evos will quickly lay claim to the "protestant" moniker. These churches are increasingly Eglise Protestante Evangélique, indeed our trust deed says that's what our church is ![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
quote:
What about the vestigial forms of groups that split off from the Catholic Church before Luther? And where do we put people like the Doukhobors, whose roots are in Eastern Europe?
I think that both the Waldensians (generally) and the Hussites (by and large) self-identify as protestant or reformed.
Eastern groups tend not to.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
Churches of the Reformation, perhaps? That's ambiguous too, of course, but might be more useful as a general catch-all than "Protestant".
I am reminded of a sermon I heard preached at Westminster Abbey many years ago, in which the homilist concluded, "And that is why whenever I am asked by visitors 'Is this a Protestant or a Catholic Church?' my answer is always 'Yes'."
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jon in the Nati
Shipmate
# 15849
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel
I raise this, as I would myself translate evangelisch with Protestant, as I'm not sure that many of those I would be speaking with (I did tours for international groups) would understand Lutheran, at least, British groups. They would read Evangelisch and presume that it is evangelical.
You would be correct to do so. The German word "evangelische" means simply Protestant. It was (part of) the name the German Protestants took for themselves, and lives on in the names of some of the major Lutheran bodies in North America (e.g., the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, almost totally German by extraction).
"Evangelische" carries almost none of the connotations of the English word evangelical; in that sense it is a false cognate.
--------------------
Homer: Aww, this isn't about Jesus, is it?
Lovejoy: All things are about Jesus, Homer. Except this.
Posts: 773 | From: Region formerly known as the Biretta Belt | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
The idea that Anglicans aren't Protestants has always puzzled me, and I've only encountered it here on the Ship. Looked at historically, of course we are Protestant; that doesn't stop us from being Catholic and Orthodox also (and therefore The One True Church ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif) ).
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
The idea that Anglicans aren't Protestants has always puzzled me, and I've only encountered it here on the Ship.
It's what I was taught in Sunday School: we are neither Catholic nor Protestant, but our own category in between.
I think the reasoning is that the Church of England split from the Pope for different reasons than the reasons in Europe, and not directly or indirectly because of Luther. Although I suppose that if one looked closer one might find a great overlap of reasons all the way around, indebtedness to earlier reformers, etc.
I was mighty puzzled several years later when I started reading the fine print of the (US) BCP and discovered we were the Protestant Episcopal Church.
Thinking back all these years, I don't know what particular definition of "Protestant" my Sunday school teacher was using. Hearing from Lamb Chopped that at least some Lutherans, who I think of as being the original and prototypical Protestants, might hesitate to use the word Protestant because of how the meaning has drifted in various areas, really has me wondering if I understood why my Sunday school teacher said what she did, or not.
Despite hesitating mightily when confronted with a form that offers me a Catholic/Protestant choice, and looking for "Other Christian" (and then feeling that I'm perhaps being too precious), if the form offered me "Mainline Protestant" I would check it off immediately. I don't know if there's a word for that, where "adjectiveA adjectiveB" is not perceived (by me at least) as a subset of "adjectiveB".
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
As an Anglican, I loathe the word protestant.
leo, why is this? I'm genuinely interested in why the term arouses such strong feelings in you.
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
Does the Supreme Governor of the Church of England not have to promise to support the Protestant religion ?
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
An interesting side note to the strangely legalistic name Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America is that in 1861 when the bishops, clergy and laity of the secessionist Southern states met to form a separate ecclesiastical province, the name Reformed Catholic Church in the Confederate States of America came close to being adopted, and was defeated only by virtue of the strong opposition of the Bishop of Virginia. There was another attempt made by the re-united church after the Civil War to change the name to Reformed Catholic Church in the United States of America, but again this did not pass, and thereafter it was apparently felt that the name Protestant Episcopal was too much of a trademark to change at that point. What has happened instead is that in general use, the formal, legal name has been abandoned, and the Church now simply calls itself The Episcopal Church in all but formal documents with legal import.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
Lietuvos, do you know why the word "Protestant" was adopted to start with (that is, when the Anglican church in the newly formed USA split from the mother Church of England)? My sister told me once, but I've forgotten, or at least the reasons that I can half-manufacture from my half-memory don't seem to make sense.
[ 23. June 2014, 16:40: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
I would imagine TEC called itself Protestant in its official name to emphasize that even though it had bishops (which many people in the newly-created US thought of as inherently bad Popish things), it had nothing to do with the Pope. Before the American Revolution, even Anglicans in the US were highly resistant to any bishops residing in the Colonies. Being thousands of miles from the nearest bishop gave parishes huge amounts of autonomy, and the legacy of that continues today when you compare the autonomy of parishes and the power of lay Vestry members in TEC with that in the CofE.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
As an Anglican, I loathe the word protestant.
leo, why is this? I'm genuinely interested in why the term arouses such strong feelings in you.
Because, unlike protestants, we continued the historic episcopate, so we have catholic orders.
We are the catholic church of this realm - we are not a new church founded by the whim of a king.
We believe in baptismal regeneration.
We have sacramental confession.
We accept the first 4 ecumenical councils.
We accept the catholic creeds.
says why we are not protestant
as does this.
and this
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
Does the Supreme Governor of the Church of England not have to promise to support the Protestant religion ?
I hate this bit of the coronation oath but have to remember that it comes from a time when everyone was terrified of the Spainish Armada.
The coronation service is not a piece of official anglican liturgy and does not appear in our official formularies.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The5thMary
Shipmate
# 12953
|
Posted
HCH: Southern Baptists don't handle snakes, as a general rule. The late Jerry Falwell notwithstanding (Ha!). There are some mighty weird strains of backwoods Christians who do the snake handling thing but to my knowledge, Southern Baptists aren't into that.
--------------------
God gave me my face but She let me pick my nose.
Posts: 3451 | From: Tacoma, WA USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
I apologize for linking Southern Baptists as a group to snake handling.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gildas:
I think that both the Waldensians (generally) and the Hussites (by and large) self-identify as protestant or reformed.
Eastern groups tend not to.
Depends what you mean by Hussites ...
AIUI most of the original Hussites met with Luther, decided they were pretty much on the same page, and agreed that they were Protestants. (The exceptions being a few rather strange groups that have disappeared from history.) They remained as a sizeable proportion of the Czech population until the end of the Thirty Years' War, when they were all forcibly expelled and mostly ended up in Germany.
Some time in the eighteenth century, a certain Count Zinzendorf decided that the descendants of these exiles ought to remember their Hussite heritage and founded the Moravian Brethren as a continuation of the Hussite church. Brethren churches were not established in the Czech Lands until (IIRC) the late nineteenth century. Today they are called either Bohemian or Moravian Brethren depending on which half of the Czech Republic they happen to be located in, have a worship style that is largely 'Protestant' with lots of congregational hymns, and AFAICT would be happy to identify as Protestant.
There is another Hussite church which was founded round about the same time as Czechoslovakian independence with the aim of being a 'national' church, at a time when Catholicism was associated with the Habsburgs. This church is episcopal, with women bishops, and the one service I have attended resembled a long and moderately high Anglican service. A lot of the liturgy was sung and the words seemed to be drawn, as far as I can tell, from historical Western and Eastern liturgies. I think it would show the same caution as high Anglicans about the word 'Protestant' but I may be wrong.
[ 23. June 2014, 18:08: Message edited by: Ricardus ]
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Lamb Chopped:
You may be illogical, but here I think you're just plain missing the point. AIUI, Lutheran consider baptism to be a sacrament; and a sacrament is an act of faith and a display of faith.
quote:
No, we do not. We ask the candidate and/or sponsors to confess the faith of the one holy Christian church, into which the candidate is about to be baptized. The candidate may or may not already share in that faith (though if adult, that is normally the case). The question is irrelevant. That faith will become theirs through baptism, but it often, even usually (see: infants), does not exist in the person prior to baptism.
Er, you do include words like "Do you renounce the Devil and all his works?" or "Do you promise to raise X in the Christian faith" during a baptism? That's a confession of faith. As is "I/We believe in God the Father...." Note the personal pronoun.
I can proof-text out of Lutheran liturgy sites if you want....
As for "ordinance", the Sacraments were ordained by God to be kept by His people, hence ordinance. There's nothing memorialist in there and it's a very innocuous and academic use of the word, though today it's a bit of an obsolete usage.
Then again, I'm never terribly bothered by Calvinist/Arminian debates, The UCCan just said "whatever" to them in 1925 and we've been happy with that ever since. The Articles of Faith do not, notably, discuss the manner of salvation.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
As an Anglican, I loathe the word protestant.
You will not find the word 'protestant' anywhere in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer.
I'm always amused by the way that a certain type of Anglo-Catholic who wouldn't be seen dead in a field with the theology or liturgy of the Prayer Book regards it as nigh on infallible when it fails to describe the C of E as protestant at any point.
It might be added, of course, that the words 'Incarnation' and 'Trinity' cannot be found in the New Testament.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Lamb Chopped:
You may be illogical, but here I think you're just plain missing the point. AIUI, Lutheran consider baptism to be a sacrament; and a sacrament is an act of faith and a display of faith.
One last effort, and then I'll give up. No more after this, we're probably boring the pants off people.
Yes, Lutherans consider baptism to be a sacrament.
No, a sacrament is NOT an act of faith nor a display of faith. It is something that God does and gives. This is the Lutheran view.*
And if you don't believe me, look up "manducatio indignorum," which is the Lutheran doctrine that even unbelievers who receive the Lord's Supper (another sacrament!) do in fact receive Jesus' real body and blood just as believers do. The sacrament remains a sacrament even in the total absence of faith.* Similarly infant baptism is performed on a person who is born without faith and does not possess it until the sacrament itself happens. In the Lutheran view, FAITH DOES NOT DETERMINE THE NATURE OF A SACRAMENT. Dare I say it? Faith is IRRELEVANT to the question of whether it is a sacrament or not.**
* which you may, of course, disagree with. But believe me when I tell you something about my own denomination which I've studied for nearly forty years.
** certainly this is not recommended!
*** Faith is not of course irrelevant if we are considering what happens AFTER the sacrament, that is, the infant now possesses faith (as an effect, not a pre-existing condition), and the unworthy communicant receives judgement rather than blessing because of his lack of faith.)
No more on this now (at least from me).
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
A distinction without difference.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
And if you don't believe me, look up "manducatio indignorum," which is the Lutheran doctrine that even unbelievers who receive the Lord's Supper (another sacrament!) do in fact receive Jesus' real body and blood just as believers do.
Well, I think that's interesting even if no-one else does. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
It does suggest the average Lutheran has a higher view of the Eucharist than the average Anglican - people like leo, take note.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
A distinction without difference.
I'm not sure I see how. The distinction LC is drawing rings true to my Reformed ears, though in some instances the implications of what that means might lead us to a few different conclusions than it does the Lutherans. But we would firmly agree that sacraments are not a "display of faith."
And at least in Reformed understanding, though the sacraments may sometimes be subsumed under the umbrella of "ordinances," there is a significant distinction between a sacrament and an ordinance.
[ 23. June 2014, 20:58: Message edited by: Nick Tamen ]
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Et tu? I'm Reformed too and I do not agree at all with that point, Nick Tamen.
Again, per the UCCan's Basis of Union, Article 2.16:
quote:
We acknowledge two sacraments, Baptism and the Lord's Supper, which were instituted by Christ, to be of perpetual obligation as signs and seals of the covenant ratified in His precious blood, as a means of grace, by which, working in us, He doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and comfort our faith in Him, and as ordinances through the observance of which His Church is to confess her Lord and be visibly distinguished from the rest of the world.
Relevant clauses italicized. The Basis of Union was drawn up in 1908 so it's not some new-wave thing.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
And if you don't believe me, look up "manducatio indignorum," which is the Lutheran doctrine that even unbelievers who receive the Lord's Supper (another sacrament!) do in fact receive Jesus' real body and blood just as believers do.
Well, I think that's interesting even if no-one else does.
It does suggest the average Lutheran has a higher view of the Eucharist than the average Anglican - people like leo, take note.
Maybe in reference to the CofE with its large evangelical wing. Confession of the objective Real Presence is likely more widespread in TEC, even if many communicants don't have a very clear theology of the Eucharist.
[ 23. June 2014, 21:41: Message edited by: Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras ]
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Et tu? I'm Reformed too and I do not agree at all with that point, Nick Tamen.
Again, per the UCCan's Basis of Union, Article 2.16:
quote:
We acknowledge two sacraments, Baptism and the Lord's Supper, which were instituted by Christ, to be of perpetual obligation as signs and seals of the covenant ratified in His precious blood, as a means of grace, by which, working in us, He doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and comfort our faith in Him, and as ordinances through the observance of which His Church is to confess her Lord and be visibly distinguished from the rest of the world.
Relevant clauses italicized. The Basis of Union was drawn up in 1908 so it's not some new-wave thing.
Perhaps I'm missing the precise point you're not agreeing with, but I don't see how what you've italicized, or most of the rest of what you've quoted, disagrees with what I said.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
That a sacrament is not a display of faith and this is somehow alien to Reformed theology.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
I think the reasoning is that the Church of England split from the Pope for different reasons than the reasons in Europe, and not directly or indirectly because of Luther.
Our reasons are more embarrassing, frankly.
I grew up thinking I was Anglican and therefore Protestant. The emphasis may well be different in different parts of the world.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
That a sacrament is not a display of faith and this is somehow alien to Reformed theology.
I think you need to explain what you mean by "display of faith."
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
By "Display" I mean a sign, a public act, observances by which the Church confesses her Lord and is distinguished from the rest of the world (per my quote).
What did you think I meant?
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
By "Display" I mean a sign, a public act, observances by which the Church confesses her Lord and is distinguished from the rest of the world (per my quote).
What did you think I meant?
Not that, exactly. Based on your disagreement with what LC was saying, I took you more to be saying that a sacrament is a way in which the recipient of the sacrament declares his or her faith—more like the traditional Baptist understanding that baptism is an ordinance by which one, in obligation to Christ's command, testifies to his faith by submitting to baptism.
But I have to say that the sense you mean is somewhat alien to anything I have been taught in my lifetime (50+ years) as a Presbyterian. Yes, I would agree that in the broader context of the celebration of a sacrament as in all worship, and in response to God's grace, the church confesses what it believes. But in the sacrament itself, it is God, not the church and not the recipient, who acts. And I think that's what LC was getting at. It's what I was getting at.
For example, when the church celebrates a baptism, the parents typically join in confessing the faith of the church, though as the recipient is typically an infant, the one actually receiving the baptism does not. But that declaring of the church's faith is not the baptism; it is essentially part of the request for baptism. The sacrament of baptism is the washing with water in the name of the triune God. And in the sacrament of baptism, it is God who cleanses, God who signs and seals, God who claims and God who regenerates. We receive.
And while unlike LC I have never had people in other (Protestant) traditions tell me that Presbyterians are not Protestants for believing this, I have had some of those folks suggest we aren't really Christian because of it.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
This seems like an interesting point in this thread to discuss the growing trend in the Southern Baptist Church and in various nondenominational evangelical churches in the US for ministers to embrace Calvinism/Reformed doctrine. This is such a phenomenon that congregations that aren't crazy about Calvinism are being warned by other congregations to look out for hotshot young ministers interviewing for a post as pastor who answer theological questions diplomatically and then once in position try to reshape the church on Calvinist lines. Since most of these churches practice believers' baptism, I'm not sure whether their definition of Calvinist/Reformed theology extends also to baptism or whether it merely covers soteriology (TULIP). Not sure whether, regarding Holy Communion, they are memorialist or whether they believe in a pneumatic presence for believers only. If some of them are memorialist, I am not sure whether that counts as a Reformed belief or not.
I have heard that "Calvinist Baptists" were quite common in the UK in the 19th century - is this the tradition that these people are drawing from?
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
quote:
But I have to say that the sense you mean is somewhat alien to anything I have been taught in my lifetime (50+ years) as a Presbyterian. Yes, I would agree that in the broader context of the celebration of a sacrament as in all worship, and in response to God's grace, the church confesses what it believes. But in the sacrament itself, it is God, not the church and not the recipient, who acts. And I think that's what LC was getting at. It's what I was getting at.
It's not about our will vs. God's Will in some either/or thing. It is not about salvation but about sanctification and what God calls us to do through faith.
Perhaps we are talking past one another; you and LC are talking about salvation when I am speaking of sanctification.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
It's not about our will vs. God's Will in some either/or thing. It is not about salvation but about sanctification and what God calls us to do through faith.
Perhaps we are talking past one another; you and LC are talking about salvation when I am speaking of sanctification.
I think we are talking past each other, but I'm frankly not sure about what. I'm not talking about salvation or about human will vs God's will. I'm talking about the traditional Reformed understanding of what a sacrament is.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Perhaps we are talking past one another; you and LC are talking about salvation when I am speaking of sanctification.
Aren't they essentially the same thing, that salvation is a process of sanctification, or as we in the East call it, theosis?
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
Considered as a branding exercise, "Protestant" is a bad label. By and in itself it indicates a dependence on another, namely the RCC against which this protest was/is raised. There is a psychological difference between saying "they are wrong" and "I am right", even if that has the same doctrinal content. The latter is the message that you want for a religious sales pitch.
"Lutheran" and "Calvinist" are also less than ideal. They indicate a dependence on a historical person, rather than on eternal truths. Of course, one can have a single name standing for eternal truths, as indeed in the label "Christian". But since that spot is taken in Christianity, there is not really room for putting another person forward. I note furthermore that even if we identify a person with eternal truths, it is often done via an "abstract" title given to that person. So we have "Christianity" not "Jesuism", and "Buddhism" not "Gautamaism". This is correct sales psychology, it points to the role of that person as truth bringer rather than simply to their individuality.
Looking further, "Anglican" is a bad label since it indicates a specific nationality / culture. It perhaps gets saved over time by people forgetting what it meant, but one doesn't really want to start off on the wrong foot in adervtising. "Reformed" suffers from the same borrowed identity problem as "Protestant", because it refers to the RCC as that which had to be reformed.
Ideal labels from a sales point of view are those which rely on themselves, are not limited in their scope and indicate something grand and desirable. So "Catholic" is great ("Roman Catholic" less so, which is why the RCC refers to itself only as "Catholic"), it's the universal Church. Likewise "Orthodox" is an excellent label, it's the rightly believing church.
So "Evangelical" is probably the best general label for the Reformation churches. One really wants to be the good news church, after all. By the same principle labels like "Charismatic" or "Puritan" are excellent. Of course, "Puritan" has acquired bad connotations, but that is a matter of history not of advertisement psychology. Conceptually it is a good label to apply to your sect. I'm less convinced by "Ana/Baptist". From an advertisement point of view that is far too specific and "practical". It doesn't have visionary appeal, or at least it does not do so unless you are already deep into Christian specifics. "Methodist" sort of works, but is too uninspiring. Methodological people get the job done, I guess, but so does double-entry bookkeeping.
Overall, I think the German Lutherans did the right thing in adopting "Evangelical" as their name. It is a good advertisement label, and in fact it expresses something about the movement - namely the idea of putting the "good news" of scripture ahead of everything else. It is much better than "Protestant".
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Looking further, "Anglican" is a bad label since it indicates a specific nationality / culture. It perhaps gets saved over time by people forgetting what it meant, but one doesn't really want to start off on the wrong foot in adervtising.
Au contraire. I think "Anglican" is a good label, precisely because it does reflect a specific nationality and culture. The culture from which Anglican comes reflects intellectualism, tradition, history and tolerance of differences of opinion and theology.
I think the British have been forward thinking in a good way in lots of things ( e.g. Act of Toleration 1689 - and ensuing amendments, Queen Elizabeth's stances of moderation and the Glorious Revolution contra the French) and this comes through in our faith.
Admittedly not always, but it is there IMV.
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
So "Evangelical" is probably the best general label for the Reformation churches. One really wants to be the good news church, after all.
Lord have mercy no. In theory perhaps, but in reality the term has been hijacked by cruci-centric nutcases. Heaven forbid I would call myself an Evangelical.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
[I think the British have been forward thinking in a good way in lots of things ( e.g. Act of Toleration 1689 - and ensuing amendments, Queen Elizabeth's stances of moderation and the Glorious Revolution contra the French) and this comes through in our faith.
I'm actually quite speechless at this. But then being English and given the standard of History teaching in British schools you probably actually believe it.
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
I'm actually quite speechless at this.
Good. Because it's true compared to other histories of a similar calibre.
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
But then being English and given the standard of History teaching in British schools you probably actually believe it.
Yes I do.
But I've never lived in Britain.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
[I think the British have been forward thinking in a good way in lots of things ( e.g. Act of Toleration 1689 - and ensuing amendments, Queen Elizabeth's stances of moderation and the Glorious Revolution contra the French) and this comes through in our faith.
I'm actually quite speechless at this. But then being English and given the standard of History teaching in British schools you probably actually believe it.
You apparently haven't received a good enough education to read that Evensong is located in Australia, not Britain.
I disagree with her totally, but is it really so hard to read a post properly?
[ 24. June 2014, 11:18: Message edited by: Jade Constable ]
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
Hell call for CL. Not very hellish, to be honest, and it's in the TICTH thread as I didn't think it merited a thread of its own.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Well I am British Jade. But I grew up in Indonesia and have lived in Australia for the second half of my life. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
[x-posted with SCK]
[ 24. June 2014, 11:24: Message edited by: Evensong ]
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
This seems like an interesting point in this thread to discuss the growing trend in the Southern Baptist Church and in various nondenominational evangelical churches in the US for ministers to embrace Calvinism/Reformed doctrine. This is such a phenomenon that congregations that aren't crazy about Calvinism are being warned by other congregations to look out for hotshot young ministers interviewing for a post as pastor who answer theological questions diplomatically and then once in position try to reshape the church on Calvinist lines. Since most of these churches practice believers' baptism, I'm not sure whether their definition of Calvinist/Reformed theology extends also to baptism or whether it merely covers soteriology (TULIP). Not sure whether, regarding Holy Communion, they are memorialist or whether they believe in a pneumatic presence for believers only. If some of them are memorialist, I am not sure whether that counts as a Reformed belief or not.
In my experience and from what I've seen, it's primarily a matter of embracing Calvinist soteriology and concepts like the sovereignty of God. I have not heard of any that embrace a Reformed understanding of the sacraments, particularly baptism.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Looking further, "Anglican" is a bad label since it indicates a specific nationality / culture. It perhaps gets saved over time by people forgetting what it meant, but one doesn't really want to start off on the wrong foot in adervtising.
Au contraire. I think "Anglican" is a good label, precisely because it does reflect a specific nationality and culture. The culture from which Anglican comes reflects intellectualism, tradition, history and tolerance of differences of opinion and theology.
I think the British have been forward thinking in a good way in lots of things ( e.g. Act of Toleration 1689 - and ensuing amendments, Queen Elizabeth's stances of moderation and the Glorious Revolution contra the French) and this comes through in our faith.
Admittedly not always, but it is there IMV.
I rather think Ingo's point is that liking the connotation involves liking the English. Which might work fine for you (and indeed for me), but it's inherently limiting on a basis which is not about the church's theology, but its geography. There may well be people from different cultural backgrounds who would be a bit mystified as to why they would join an 'English' church.
It's significant that here in Australia it is quite definitely now the 'Anglican Church of Australia', and not, as it once was, ever described as 'the Church of England', as if it was somehow the spiritual equivalent of a national embassy. To me it signifies a conscious attempt to loosen the national association a little.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
[I think the British have been forward thinking in a good way in lots of things ( e.g. Act of Toleration 1689 - and ensuing amendments, Queen Elizabeth's stances of moderation and the Glorious Revolution contra the French) and this comes through in our faith.
I'm actually quite speechless at this. But then being English and given the standard of History teaching in British schools you probably actually believe it.
It's worth remembering that Voltaire's Treatise on Tolerance, which is generally taken as evidence of what a liberal advocate for freedom he was, in reality takes the pre-Emancipation England of his day as one of its models for a tolerant society. England, as we both know, was not very tolerant but it was more tolerant than most places.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Maybe in reference to the CofE with its large evangelical wing. Confession of the objective Real Presence is likely more widespread in TEC, even if many communicants don't have a very clear theology of the Eucharist.
Actually I was going by my faulty memory of the 39 Articles, which was silly because a. I'd misremembered what they say, b. most Anglicans never think about them, c. most of those who do don't regard them as binding.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
catholic me.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
