Since we discuss religion so much on this forum, and I often see the term used in different ways to mean different things, I’m wondering what people here think is the definition of “Protestant?”
Is a Protestant a Christian who is not Catholic? That’s the sense I often hear and see it used. Even though this seems to be the major way the term is used, it does have holes. By this definition the Orthodox Church(es) is Protestant.
Or is a Protestant a member of a branch of Christianity that traces its roots back to the Protestant Reformation? I’ve heard this line of thought before, but it also has holes because many groups who consider themselves Protestant don’t trace their origns to the Reformation or to Luther.
The term properly refers back to the protesters (protestants) from the Reformation. It gets thrown around a bit. I hear it used for the Presbyterians, but they were actually the remains of the early RC church in Scotland (still swear by the apostles’ creed, etc.) so I can see how it can get very confusing. Like so many things, I would guess its better to let individual sects label themselves and let them define it, rather than apply it from the outside and find out that some object.
I agree about the label things…but when there are large organisations and stuff, many groups feel left out if they’re not included in the Protestant category. I have a friend who is Mormon, and some kind of conference that she attended included representatives from a lot of the Protestant groups, but they left Mormons completely out. She could attend but only as a visitor because they did not consider her “Protestant.”
Protestant, n. - A Christian who substitutes Biblical misinterpretation for papal pronouncements and who prefers his intolerance be dispensed at the local rather than the corporate level.
heck - I can’t tell you what a Catholic is, and I’ve supposedly been one since I was 6 weeks old!
And, of course, I’ve had other Christian groups tell me I wasn’t a Christian because I was a Catholic.
Although I’m not a Catholic, I have had people tell me that too.
The word “Catholic,” at least in theory, is easier to pinpoint than “Protestant,” I think. When you say “Catholic” everybody usually knows what you’re talking about. When you say “Protestant,” people have all different ideas.
And regardless, the Apostles’ creed predates the Roman Catholic Church. Strictly speaking, a Protestant, with no further qualification, refers to someone who traces their religious beliefs to the Reformation. The Mormons aren’t technically Protestant, because they don’t believe most of the important tenets of the Reformation, while the Presbyterians are. Knox, Hus, Wycliffe, and others were all Presbyterian and were killed by the Roman church for heresy. Of course, the very nature of the Reformation, as a kind of rebellion, made the splitting party rather prone to fracture itself, as with all rebellions. That’s why we have so many different types of Protestants today.
The reason the Orthodox aren’t Protestant is that the Roman Catholic Church split from them about 500 years before the Reformation. They never dealt with the issues raised by the Reformation, and so have a very different perspective from the Romans or the Protestants.
gonzo914, excellent quote from Bierce. I’m going to have to reread that now.
I’ve looked it up. Do you have an authoritive source with a clear simple accepted answer? The dictionaries I’ve found (online and in book form) usually have at least 2 or 3 definitions, which roughly conform to the way people use it 1) Non-Roman Catholic or 2) Tracing roots back to Luther.
Besides, I didn’t ask for a standard looked-up definition. I asked what people here felt. How can I look that up other than asking?
Authoritative? Clear, simple, and accepted? You ask too much.
But for you, I’ll oblige: Catholic means “universal.” An antonym would be parochial. “Roman Catholic” is really an oxymoron.
Protestant: A belief tracing back to those who protested. Specifically, several (German) cities and rulers (kings, princes, dukes and such) signed a formal “protestation” at the Imperial Diet of 1529. (Imperial Diet meant the formal assembly of all the states and cities that were part of the Holy Roman Empire of Germanic Nations). The protestation was against the Imperial Edict of Worms (1521), in which Martin Luther, after having been given a chance to defend his views, was outlawed by the Emperor and his teachings suppressed.
Not every group that traces its root back to the reformation is “protestant” although they are usually all called “evangelical.” There were “protestant” and “reformed” movements in Europe. There were other groups, such as the Anabaptists (or Radical Reformation). England (which finally split from the Roman Catholic Church in 1536) was slightly different again.
I grew up Church of Christ and had never even heard the term “Apostles’ Creed” until visiting other churches.
By the way, for whatever it’s worth, I don’t think “Protestant” really does much to describe a given religion or member anymore. I divide the Christians up this way:
–Right-wing (Catholic, Fundamentalist-Evangelical, Holiness);
–Centrist or “Mainstream” Churches (I would put Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, along with others);
–Liberal or Left-wing (Universalist/Unitarianism, some Episcopalean)
–Separatist / Isolationist (broad category, includes Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, other religions who see themselves as either completely apart from society, or wanting to be)
A “Protestant” is a Christian who’s religion somehow stems (whether directly or indirectly from the Reformation where those that broke away were “protesting” the hierarchical structure of the Catholic Church. The reason why the Orthodox does not fall into this category is because their split came well before the Reformation in 1517 (they split off in 1054). Also, I would tend to think that because they retain an Apostolic succession (their priestly orders are traced back to the Apostles) as well, that could have something to do with it. The Catholic Church recognizes their Holy Orders as valid.
Mormons are not considered Christian based on their belief system, therefore are not considered Protestants. I believe this is also true for Jehovah’s Witnesses.
John Hus was indeed burned at the stake for heresy, but John Wycliffe (who died soon after a stroke) and John Knox (who died of old age) were not. Also, Hus and Wycliffe were condemned in the 14th century before there was even a such thing as Presbyterianism.
It lies in both faith’s rejection of the Trinity. Mormon’s believe that Christ was a human and then became a god after his death. They do not believe in the unity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (ie: the Trinity). Jehovah’s Witnesses are in essence Arian in their beliefs…the Arian heresy was condemned in 325 at the Council of Nicea. They believed that Jesus was not truly God. The Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus was not God, but rather the Archangel Michael. It is because of these belief systems that the two religions hold that they are not considered Christian by the majority of Protestant denominations as well as the Catholic Church.
The Eastern Orthodox Church says that the Catholic Church is the one that split off in 1054. It’s a rather convincing argument, I think. It has nothing to do with the definition of “Protestant,” though.
Mormons are not considered Christian based on their belief system, therefore are not considered Protestants. I believe this is also true for Jehovah’s Witnesses.
They both call themselves Protestant (and Christian), though, and I feel it’s a matter of respect, giving them the benefit of the doubt. All my friends who are Mormon (and strangely, I have A LOT of them) call themselves Christian and believe themselves to be Christian (and Protestant) so I don’t see any point in saying, “No, you are not a true Christian.”
Cranberry, I agree about the Mormons / Jehovah’s Witnesses. Well spoken. Thank you.
As for the question about the Society of Friends, I am no expert, and should not attempt to categorize them without more specific knowledge. From what I have read I think they would be somewhere in the Centrist or possibly Liberal category.
