Protestant errors and inventions (3)

[Albion]

Here are clarifications and more errors:

1) Eucharist Adoration (the worship of the created bread via the priest, rather than the Creator)
2) Accepting bad theology from children who have visions (devotions to "sacred" hearts)
3) Believing visions as truth that contradict scripture (Fatima)
4) Accepting "regenerative" baptisms of heretical groups as on par with Christian baptism
5) Baptizing babies as salvific (contradicts scripture)
6) Maintaining the clergy/laity split, rather than promoting the biblical priesthood of believers

Just as I questioned taboflamb's list of Protestant errors--which was mainly a list of errors held by the fringes of Christianity, not the Protestant norm--what I see here is the beginning of similar list but from the opposite end of things. IOW, it's a list of beliefs considered to be erroneous by only the fringes of Protestant Christianity and certainly not by Protestants in general.

 

[tadoflamb]

You're thinking EO is a Protestant group then.

As for me, like the icon says, Christian.

No, the Catholic Church's relationship with Eastern Orthodoxy is clearly defined. They are not some sort of proto-protestants.

As to your icon, thanks to reforms of the protestant revolt, 'Christian' has become just about as meaningless as 'protestant'. So, being a Christian doesn't really tell me much. What I do know, from your activity on this board is that you believe in the Eucharist as a symbol only, adult only baptisms and you've rejected the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Mother. In my mind, that's three solid steps towards the fringes of protestantism.

I could be wrong, the fullness of the protestant faith could subsist in what you confess. If so, that would make you the central deposit of faith and it's the rest of us who have wandered out to the fringes. If not, then you are, as I maintain, the fringe element.

I apologize in advance for making this so personal, but once someone is possessed of a belief system that is so novel, so unique and so of themselves, how could it be anything but personal?

 

[Albion]

No, the Catholic Church's relationship with Eastern Orthodoxy is clearly defined. They are not some sort of proto-protestants.

As to your icon, thanks to reforms of the protestant revolt, 'Christian' has become just about as meaningless as 'protestant'. So, being a Christian doesn't really tell me much. What I do know, from your activity on this board is that you believe in the Eucharist as a symbol only, adult only baptisms and you've rejected the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Mother. In my mind, that's three solid steps towards the fringes of protestantism.

I could be wrong, the fullness of the protestant faith could subsist in what you confess. If so, that would make you the central deposit of faith and it's the rest of us who have wandered out to the fringes. If not, then you are, as I maintain, the fringe element.

I apologize in advance for making this so personal, but once someone is possessed of a belief system that is so novel, so unique and so of themselves, how could it be anything but personal?

Actually, there is no reason to think that BOTH of you can't have adopted the beliefs of different fringes.

 

[tadoflamb]

The big difference between Catholicism 'fringe' beliefs and protestant 'fringe' beliefs is that if something is deemed to far out there, we always have the recourse to 'tell the Church' (ie: bishops). Private revelations don't have to be believed and if something is outside the deposit of faith, then it doesn't have to be believed either. Nothing like it exists in protestantism. You have no authentic authority to teach and thus, fringe elements get unfairly qualified as protestant. If we only know where the fullness of the protestant faith subsisted, then it would be easy to see where the fringes begin.

I suppose in the absence of a protestant definition of what a fringe protestant is we could use the Catholic one. For instance, if we don't recognize your baptisms, you wouldn't be a protestant. Hence, the recent rejection of Oneness Pentecostalism.

At any rate, it seems to me, the Catholic Church is still the standard by which one could judge whether a protestant group was on the fringes or not.

 

[tadoflamb]

OK, folks, below is a list of all the non-Catholic ecclesial assemblies within a short distance of where I sit. Please help me out by telling me if these are fringe or non-fringe protestant denominations.

Northminster Presbyterian
Church of God of Prophecy
God's House
Generations Church (they're the ones who like motorcycles)
Peniel
St James Methodist
Chinese Baptist
Silverbell Baptist
Lighthouse Church
Cool Church
Vineyard Community Church
Anglican Church (it's in a house)
Church of Tamara; Spiritual Oasis in the Desert


Thanks in advance

 

[MoreCoffee]

OK, folks, below is a list of all the non-Catholic ecclesial assemblies within a short distance of where I sit. Please help me out by telling me if these are fringe or non-fringe protestant denominations.

Northminster Presbyterian
Church of God of Prophecy
God's House
Generations Church (they're the ones who like motorcycles)
Peniel
St James Methodist
Chinese Baptist
Silverbell Baptist
Lighthouse Church
Cool Church
Vineyard Community Church
Anglican Church (it's in a house)
Church of Tamara; Spiritual Oasis in the Desert


Thanks in advance

I have:

• The potter's house
• Uniting Church
• Westminster Presbyterian
• Congregational church
• Cary Baptist
• Free Reformed church
• Baptist union church
• Salvation Army
• Church of Christ
• Sheltering Tree church
• Assemblies of God (recently renamed to "christian church")

 

[Rev Randy]

OK, folks, below is a list of all the non-Catholic ecclesial assemblies within a short distance of where I sit. Please help me out by telling me if these are fringe or non-fringe protestant denominations.

Northminster Presbyterian
Church of God of Prophecy
God's House
Generations Church (they're the ones who like motorcycles)
Peniel
St James Methodist
Chinese Baptist
Silverbell Baptist
Lighthouse Church
Cool Church
Vineyard Community Church
Anglican Church (it's in a house)
Church of Tamara; Spiritual Oasis in the Desert


Thanks in advance

Nope. I'm not biting that hook. If I did, folks would begin singing this show tune:
a song from Annie Get Your Gun (with lyrics) - YouTube

 

[sonshine234]

MoreCoffee, could you highlight the new items that you add to your list in a different color please. Thank you in advance

 

[Albion]

The big difference between Catholicism 'fringe' beliefs and protestant 'fringe' beliefs is that if something is deemed to far out there, we always have the recourse to 'tell the Church' (ie: bishops).

Trust me. Protestants tell their church leaders, too.

Private revelations don't have to be believed and if something is outside the deposit of faith, then it doesn't have to be believed either.

But as you've seen in the posts here, anything that's claimed is almost automatically accepted by the rest of the faithful as a matter of solidarity and because the less believable it is, the more you seem devout by buying into it.

Nothing like it exists in protestantism. You have no authentic authority to teach

Boy, are you out of touch.

At any rate, it seems to me, the Catholic Church is still the standard by which one could judge whether a protestant group was on the fringes or not.

Hmmm. No, it would still be the Bible.

 

[Tzaousios]

NM - wrong thread.

 

[Standing Up]

Just as I questioned taboflamb's list of Protestant errors--which was mainly a list of errors held by the fringes of Christianity, not the Protestant norm--what I see here is the beginning of similar list but from the opposite end of things. IOW, it's a list of beliefs considered to be erroneous by only the fringes of Protestant Christianity and certainly not by Protestants in general.

My list of errors is held by Anglicans and Lutherans, hardly fringe groups.

 

[Albion]

My list of errors is held by Anglicans and Lutherans, hardly fringe groups.

You'd better give that one a little more thought. Lutherans and Anglicans absolutely do NOT oppose infant baptism and ordained clergy!

 

[Standing Up]

No, the Catholic Church's relationship with Eastern Orthodoxy is clearly defined. They are not some sort of proto-protestants.

As to your icon, thanks to reforms of the protestant revolt, 'Christian' has become just about as meaningless as 'protestant'. So, being a Christian doesn't really tell me much. What I do know, from your activity on this board is that you believe in the Eucharist as a symbol only, adult only baptisms and you've rejected the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Mother. In my mind, that's three solid steps towards the fringes of protestantism.

I could be wrong, the fullness of the protestant faith could subsist in what you confess. If so, that would make you the central deposit of faith and it's the rest of us who have wandered out to the fringes. If not, then you are, as I maintain, the fringe element.

I apologize in advance for making this so personal, but once someone is possessed of a belief system that is so novel, so unique and so of themselves, how could it be anything but personal?

You're right there is no well defined Protestant belief structure. Likewise RC has its fringe groups as well. So what?

OTOH, we all (P, RC, EO, OO) agree on the original Nicene creed, as a definition of Christian. Using that definition, we know LDS, JW fall outside Christianity. But, we also would know that RC falls outside too (the later rendition includes the filioque, making RC unique, novel, and of themselves).

So, now what?

 

[Standing Up]

You'd better give that one a little more thought. Lutherans and Anglicans absolutely do NOT oppose infant baptism and ordained clergy!

Right. Errors. The list is about errors. Like thinking only 66 books are the inspired words of God, rather than 100 or whatever that OO, EO, RC might have.

 

[Albion]

Right. Errors. The list is about errors. Like thinking only 66 books are the inspired words of God, rather than 100 or whatever that OO, EO, RC might have.

Excuse me if I'm misunderstood your intention. These are supposed to be considered errors BY most Protestants, then?

1) Eucharist Adoration (the worship of the created bread via the priest, rather than the Creator)
2) Accepting bad theology from children who have visions (devotions to "sacred" hearts)
3) Believing visions as truth that contradict scripture (Fatima)
4) Accepting "regenerative" baptisms of heretical groups as on par with Christian baptism
5) Baptizing babies as salvific (contradicts scripture)
6) Maintaining the clergy/laity split, rather than promoting the biblical priesthood of believers

That may make it clearer to me, but item 6 is certainly not considered an error by most Protestants and certainly not by Lutherans or Anglicans which you seemed to hold up as agreeing with you. And item 4 does not seem to belong on this list, either. Both are pet peeves of yours, I know. Finally, 66 Bible books is not considered to an error by any Protestant church I know of, so what your list is intended to identify, I am having a hard time figuring out.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

My list of errors is held by Anglicans and Lutherans, hardly fringe groups.

Ahem! Lutherans do not accept the visions of Fatima and would never let a vision contradict the sovereign, authoritative scriptures!

And no one worships the bread. That's just silly.

Oh, and we do believe in the priesthood of all believers!

 

[Rev Randy]

Excuse me if I'm misunderstood your intention. These are supposed to be considered errors BY most Protestants, then?

1) Eucharist Adoration (the worship of the created bread via the priest, rather than the Creator)
2) Accepting bad theology from children who have visions (devotions to "sacred" hearts)
3) Believing visions as truth that contradict scripture (Fatima)
4) Accepting "regenerative" baptisms of heretical groups as on par with Christian baptism
5) Baptizing babies as salvific (contradicts scripture)
6) Maintaining the clergy/laity split, rather than promoting the biblical priesthood of believers

That may make it clearer to me, but item 6 is certainly not considered an error by most Protestants and certainly not by Lutherans or Anglicans which you seemed to hold up as agreeing with you. And item 4 does not seem to belong on this list, either. Both are pet peeves of yours, I know. Finally, 66 Bible books is not considered to an error by any Protestant church I know of, so what your list is intended to identify, I am having a hard time figuring out.

Could it be, "Things SU disagrees with"? It's a fair list if he sees them as errors. We all have out pet peeves.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

My list of errors is held by Anglicans and Lutherans, hardly fringe groups.

Some, yes, but you should know from past and reading the responses of historic traditional Anglicans, and Confessional Lutherans (those who actually hold "Lutheran Theology" that there is much that we hold that you have posted that you consider error; conversly, there is much that you hold that we would consider not only error, but heterodox.

You'd better give that one a little more thought. Lutherans and Anglicans absolutely do NOT oppose infant baptism and ordained clergy!

Thanks Albion, there's a couple right up front!

Right. Errors. The list is about errors. Like thinking only 66 books are the inspired words of God, rather than 100 or whatever that OO, EO, RC might have.

Yup Luther was a heritic for including the Apocrypha, as were the translators of the original KJV!

Excuse me if I'm misunderstood your intention. These are supposed to be considered errors BY most Protestants, then?

1) Eucharist Adoration (the worship of the created bread via the priest, rather than the Creator)
2) Accepting bad theology from children who have visions (devotions to "sacred" hearts)
3) Believing visions as truth that contradict scripture (Fatima)
4) Accepting "regenerative" baptisms of heretical groups as on par with Christian baptism
5) Baptizing babies as salvific (contradicts scripture)
6) Maintaining the clergy/laity split, rather than promoting the biblical priesthood of believers

That may make it clearer to me, but item 6 is certainly not considered an error by most Protestants and certainly not by Lutherans or Anglicans which you seemed to hold up as agreeing with you. And item 4 does not seem to belong on this list, either. Both are pet peeves of yours, I know. Finally, 66 Bible books is not considered to an error by any Protestant church I know of, so what your list is intended to identify, I am having a hard time figuring out.

Well, Lutherans are considered "protestant" by the RCC. That being said, Lutherans are the single largest group of protestants in the world, which makes them (by your own definition) "most protestants".

We "DO" adore the Eucharist as Christ's very body and blood within the context of the Mass.

Items 2, 3, and 4 are out.

We do teach that baptism saves both infant and adult.

Item 5 is correct, but the duties of the ordained clergy is quite different that that of the laity.

 

[Albion]

Oh, and we do believe in the priesthood of all believers!

Yes, but on several of these issues, the exact meaning held by SU and by you are not the same, I'm sure. For instance, everyone says he believes in the 'priesthood of all believers,' but you (and I) don't think of that as our friend does. He takes it super literally and feels that every congregant is an ordained priest with all the authority that any pastor exercises.

 

[Standing Up]

Could it be, "Things SU disagrees with"? It's a fair list if he sees them as errors. We all have out pet peeves.

Does EO worship the eucharist?

Does EO accept the theology of children and visions?

Does EO believe in necessity of baptizing babies for salvation?