Is Protestantism Really All That Different Than Catholicism??......

The original Protestants weren't trying to be un-Catholic. Luther never stopped considering himself Catholic.

The desire was reform, not schism.

-CryptoLutheran

.


1. Depends on the Protestant (and probably the Catholic)!


2. IMO (as a former Catholic), the two BIGGEST differences with the most consequences are:

A. Is the church US or the RCC? MUCH of our difference boils down to two conflicting views of the church. Ironcially, the RCC actually agrees with Protestantism on this but it has a SECOND theology of the church that entirely overwhelms and overshadows that; and it is fundamental, foundational, central to everything in Catholicism: Christianity, the Body of Christ, the communion of saints, the assembly of all believers is above all else an individual, institutional denomination - ITself. MUCH "flows" from that in Catholicism...

B. Really just one of these things flowing from the above difference, Protestants embrace accountability whereas the RCC fundamentally, foundationally denies it for itself (it insists upon it for every OTHER teacher - very passionately). Because self was founded by Jesus, because it itself exclusively was authorized and promised all sorts of remarkable things, self has the power (it calls this "authority") to be exempt from accountability and the question of truth; when it speaks- God is speaking. Everyone is to just quietly, docilicly SUBMIT to it. Everything in cast in terms of power and submission. This is actually the key to understanding the Reformation.


There are many other things that Protestants and the RCC view or practice differently, but I doubt any of them are "deal breakers" in any fundamental sense. When I left the RCC, I had a very good purposeful meeting with my priest. A good (and mutually respectful) talk. I told him that I agreed with probably 95% of what I had been taught (which is probably still true). He laughed and said (this is verbatim), "Josiah - that's a whole lot better than most Catholics!" He was correct. Our agreement is VAST. But our two fundamental disagreements are divisive and seem irreconcilable - the RCC rises or falls on these two points and it will defend such at any cost, no matter what. Cease to accept that Christianity essentially IS the RCC and thus the RCC has all this divine POWER over all and thus all are to wave the issue of truth and just submit to it alone - and you cease to be Catholic. To me, leaving was a matter of honestly and integrity.



That's my perspective.


Pax


- Josiah




.

You're right, the services are very similar.
I went to an RC mass with a friend last year and knew the entire service as our liturgies are almost exactly the same.

One of the differences in service style probably comes with some Protestants. Like the RCC, Anglicans, Methodists, many Reformed churches etc. follow the Revised Common Lectionary and are read the appointed readings from which the sermon is then based. There are some churches though that now attack the sermon in a different way and choose the subject of the sermon and from that choose the readings.

abysmul said:

Protestant covers so much and that wish is so varied I think it makes the answer difficult.

Some Protestant church services are very similar to a RCC service, but you could walk into another Protestant church and the person giving the service could be a Lesbian.

Click to expand...

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori disagrees with your dichotomy.


It isn't that one church has a sunday service very similar to an RCC service, and the other one has a lesbian in leadership.

It's that one church has a sunday service very similar to an RCC service, and the other one has some hopped-up little man in a suit giving short shrift to the sacraments because he imagines his 45 minute sermon to be such an indispensable piece of rhetorical elegance.

The problem with the question regarding "protestantism" is that for many of us the term is redundant in that it has no bearing on what we believe or practice; other than us not being Roman Catholic.
In many Pentecostal and Evangelical circles the term is simply rarely ever heard or used.

For those of us who are either Pentecostal or Evangelical we could probably ask where do we have any real areas of common belief and certainly practice?

Tim (#9),

".....other than us not being Roman Catholic."

As far as I am concerned, that IS the definition of Protestantism.....

You may very well be correct but it does seem that those who associate themselves as being Protestant that they tend to belong to the more liturgical church systems; for most Pentecostals and Evangelicals this type of ecclesiastical system is way outside of their frame of reference. The term may have been useful prior to Wesley but when we simply try and define the Church as being merely either Roman Catholic or Protestant this does tend to isolate what may be around 75% of the born again believers.

If you were to ask is there any real difference between the Anglican church and more importantly with its "High" church component then I would say it would only be by small degrees; even then many of its rank and file members may be more than content to accept Roman Catholic beliefs even if they differ from that of the Anglican communion.

As for the other liturgical church systems each one would have to be assessed on their own merits and this is certainly beyond my pay grade.

Tim (# 11),

I agree, Biblicist....yet, when I see some "protestant" sevices, such as Episcopalian, I do not see a lot of difference between those services and the Catholic Mass.

Have you ever watched Robert Schuller or D. James Kennedy on television?? I used to think I was watching a R.C.C. service when I was younger.....

Click to expand...

I would agree with you in that when we compare the Anglican (Episcopalian) denominations especially with the “High Church” component that the differences can be so minute that it can be easy to simply say that High Church Anglicanism and Roman Catholicism are essentially one and the same creature.

When I used the term ‘liturgical’ I was actually thinking about Schuller along with a handful of others but as I have little if any experience with them I thought it prudent to leave them alone.

One could legitimately ask is the Evangelical and Pentecostal role of the pastor often any different from that of the Roman Catholic priest.
We only have to take a look at many of those who are in ministry who seem to think that they are ‘God’s gift to mankind’ and have much the same if not more power over their assemblies than does the RC priest. When it comes to the Anglican ministers here in Australia they are to a large degree under the control of the local church vestry or at least their powers are certainly curtailed by them; the Anglican constitution in Australia also places tight restraints on their power though of course historically the Anglican church (Aust) has not placed too much importance on immorality within the ministry and have been more than prepared to cover up serious abuses by their ministers – unless of course the media and police become involved.
From my experience within the AoG here in Australia it does seem that their pastors wield much the same if not more power over their members than does the average RC priest.

Even though I struggle with the Roman Catholic – Protestant position as both of their ecclesiastical and doctrinal positions are as foreign as they can be to most Evangelicals and Pentecostals, there are of course some parallels as with the one that I have just mentioned. If you were to ask are there any similarities between Evangelicals and Pentecostals with Roman Catholicism then I could agree though we would have to carefully define what we mean by this and of course most Pentecostals and Evangelicals would be horrified to think that any parallels actually did exist – but of course they do.

There are plenty of differences between the two, really. One would be that Protestants deny purgatory. That is, if you see a ghost, it is likely not human.
Another would be that Protestants believe we are practically unworthy and miniscule beings not capable of any good unless it is willed and empowered by Christ. However, Protestants do not believe you must be part of a church or confess to anyone but Christ.

There's some swaying concepts between the two. I am not of any denomination. I sort of sync between both.

If religion would be a plane , Eastern Orthodox plane would be the initial plane , a full functioning one.

A full functioning plane.

Protestantism plane would be a plane from which were thrown out nuts and bolts in some denominations, a wing in another, a wheel in another denominations and more determined denominations took out the engine.

This may portray Protestantism:
Hey Luther.
Yes Calvin.
Do you understand what this capsule is for?
Nope.
Smash it...
It's a gonner!!!
Hi 5.
How about this bigamous thing that is labeled engine?
Nope. Don't get it.
Smash it...
Well actually am tired and will require a lot of effort.
Ok . Next one. What is this big thing names parachute.
Don't know but I can make a tent out of it.
Take it. It's yours.
Men we did a work today.
Yes we did.
Tomorrow we put foam on the places where we threw things out and put a better paint than original plane so lots of people will come to us.
Sounds like a plan.
.....

When death will come they will try flying with what is left.

Search "abc to eternal life" on google to see how Protestantism threw out food for eternal life. That artcile show that for 2000 years . most important moments in Bible are mentioned by YEARLY MIRACLES that happen today in Eastern Orthodox Church. Holy light miracle on Easter, Jordan River miracle on Baptism, Cloud on Mount Tabor opn Transfiguration day.

So for miracles, look for APPENDIX C on the search mentioned above.

Dumping silly and unbiblical Catholic doctrines is a significant difference. Unfortunately, getting rid of the bad also opened the door to a lot of new bad doctrines. Some churches are so far gone away from traditional Protestantism that I wouldn't call them Protestant churches.

Unfortunatelly they dumped too much of teachings of Jesus.

Why would you dump food for eternal life?
Why would you dump confession for sin forgiveness since many miracles showed angels appearing and erasing sins?

I don't think that there is good Protestantism. Actually I don't believe it was good Protestantism at any time.

CryptoLutheran said:

The original Protestants weren't trying to be un-Catholic. Luther never stopped considering himself Catholic.

The desire was reform, not schism.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

And you know what they say, "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions".

Unfortunatelly they dumped too much of teachings of Jesus.

Why would you dump food for eternal life?
Why would you dump confession for sin forgiveness since many miracles showed angels appearing and erasing sins?

I don't think that there is good Protestantism. Actually I don't believe it was good Protestantism at any time.

I love what Dr. Carl Trueman says and I'm inclined to agree with him. The two subjects that separate all of historical protestantism and catholicism:
1) The issue of authority (who or what has the final authority)
2) The issue of justification (by faith alone)

In my mind these two summarize all that distinguishes the two, yet these two subjects go to the core of the Gospel and what it means to follow Christ. These two doctrines naturally effect and are the reasons for the other differences and why ecumenical conversation will always be limited.

Why would everyone keep silence to the genormeous problem in Protestantism, renouncing food for eternal life and for these people not suspecting this?