What is a Protestant?

[Anastasia13]

So, Old Catholics and SSPX are sacrimentally valid Protestants and the rest (Anglican, Non-denominational grous, Methodists, etc.) are sacrimentally invalid Protestants?

[p0lar_bear]

[quote name='Light and Truth' date='Dec 19 2005, 07:38 PM']So, Old Catholics and SSPX are sacrimentally valid Protestants and the rest (Anglican, Non-denominational grous, Methodists, etc.) are sacrimentally invalid Protestants?
[right][snapback]831014[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Simplified, but yes


eta: most people would not call the SSPX Protestant and would not tend to think of them when they heard the word "protestant." I think it is a fitting description, but there are many who would disagree.

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='p0lar_bear' date='Dec 19 2005, 06:39 PM']Simplified, but yes
[right][snapback]831015[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Then where do the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox fit in?

[p0lar_bear]

[quote name='Light and Truth' date='Dec 19 2005, 07:42 PM']Then where do the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox fit in?
[right][snapback]831017[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Well, in some sense they could be considered protestant, but a distinction must be made to give proper respect to the fact that they hold to ancient apostolic traditions and have valid sacraments, which (according to my earlier definition) one would not associate with "Protestants".

While I don't think "Protestant" is a wholy inappropriate description for the Old Catholics and SSPX, it would not be a very useful description for discussion.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

but the EO and espescially the oriental orthodox are heretics

[p0lar_bear]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Dec 19 2005, 07:52 PM']but the EO and espescially the oriental orthodox are heretics
[right][snapback]831025[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Well yes, but that is not the question.

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='p0lar_bear' date='Dec 19 2005, 06:50 PM']Well, in some sense they could be considered protestant, but a distinction must be made to give proper respect to the fact that they hold to ancient apostolic traditions and have valid sacraments, which (according to my earlier definition) one would not associate with "Protestants".

While I don't think "Protestant" is a wholy inappropriate description for the Old Catholics and SSPX, it would not be a very useful description for discussion.
[right][snapback]831024[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
So it would be relatively accurate to see the Orthodox the way one would see SSPX and Old Catholics?

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

no.

the orthodox's schism was much less their fault then the other 2 groups.

[p0lar_bear]

[quote name='Light and Truth' date='Dec 19 2005, 07:58 PM']So it would be relatively accurate to see the Orthodox the way one would see SSPX and Old Catholics?
[right][snapback]831031[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


In some ways, but they would strongly object to being called Protestant...I would never use that term in relation to them, especially since their break came centuries before the Protestant break. If I used it in relation to the SSPX or Old Catholics, it would be more to make a point than as a regular discription.



Generally speaking I would group the SSPX and Old Catholics with the Orthodox as opposed to Protestants resulting from the Reformation.

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='p0lar_bear' date='Dec 19 2005, 07:01 PM']In some ways, but they would strongly object to being called Protestant...I would never use that term in relation to them, especially since their break came centuries before the Protestant break. If I used it in relation to the SSPX or Old Catholics, it would be more to make a point than as a regular discription.
[right][snapback]831033[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I mean to use it to help me understand the distinctions as I was largely unfamiliar with the term schismatic and not quite grasping what it really means. How else should I understand this without using terms like schismatic?

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

schism is refusal to sumbit to the Roman Pontiff.

[p0lar_bear]

In general usage, minor distinctions aside, I would classify like this:


Protestants: all Christian ecclesial communities without valid sacraments, including those resulting from the Protestant Reformation and evangelicals

Orthodox: Churches of ecclesial traditions beginning with the Apostles which were separated from the Church as a result of the Great Schism in the 11th century. Valid sacraments, valid bishops, ancient liturgies aside from the Latin rite

SSPX, Old Catholics, SSPV, other such groups: kind of an in-between; protestant-like tendencies in regard to Church authority, but valid sacraments, Latin rite.

Eastern Rite Catholics: Churches in union with Rome, but following liturgical and cultural traditions other than the Latin rite. With a few exceptions these are traditions that have counterparts in the Orthodox churches.

Roman Catholic, Latin Rite: what you would generally think of when you hear "Catholic." Latin rite, western tradition



Does that help?

[Anastasia13]

Anglican would fit where and why?

[rkwright]

[quote name='Light and Truth' date='Dec 19 2005, 09:42 PM']Anglican would fit where and why?
[right][snapback]831278[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

according to what polar bear wrote it would fit under Protestant.

They don't have valid sacraments and it resulted from the Protestant Reformation.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

anglicans would have fallen in with the old catholics, sspx etc. but they changed their rite of ordination making their sacraments invaid.

[Anastasia13]

I thought they came out of a king's desire to get a new wife.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

they did. but later kings "protestantized" the anglican church.

[rkwright]

the term protestant is more than just a designation, or 'stage' in which groups pass through. Its NOT just someone who is 'protesting' the Roman Church. (why do we call Nestorians, Nestorians and not protestants??)

It refers to all the churches that split off from the Roman Catholic church during the middle to late Renaissance. This includes the Anglican, Lutheran, and their offsprings.

The SSPX or Old Catholics will never really be 'protestant' (unless they join up or take on the philosophy's of the Protestants)

[Anastasia13]

Why are recent churches grouped with other Protestant churches from the reformation?

[Alden]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Dec 19 2005, 06:52 PM']but the EO and espescially the oriental orthodox are heretics
[right][snapback]831025[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Wow. How do you figure that we (EO) are heretics? My Church, of Antioch, is the same church referenced in the "they were first called Christians at Antioch. We still hold to the Nicene Creed, sans filioque, which was added at a later date without the consent of the Church as a whole. We hold to the seven ecumenical councils. We have apostolic succession. The shape of our liturgy is the same as that described by St. Justin the Martyr in 150 A.D.. We are essentiallly the same as we were before the schism, and before serious claims of papal supremacy. I'm not sorry to say that I find the charge of being a heretic both ridiculous and insulting.