And the fact is that some traditions split far more often than others, but they lump all Protestants together.
I was wondering why there were so many Anglican denominations, and this sort-of makes sense. However, there are clearly over 200-some dioceses for each Roman Catholics, Anglicans, and Orthodox. Was he only counting at the Archbishop level, or what?
Never trust RCC statistics. After all, they are the same ones who claim that only a handful (less than 100) people were killed during the various Inquisitions.
Daily or weekly?
A lot of the misunderstanding here comes from Catholics expecting Protestant churches to be trying, and failing, to replicate Catholicism, rather than not trying to replicate it at all (except for Anglicanism in some of its sillier moments).
For example, Catholics assume that Jesus wanted to create a single, unified, worldwide, hierarchical and infallible church with unbroken succession of its bishops from the Apostles. (All of these assumptions are highly debatable!) It is therefore manifestly absurd if a Baptist were to claim that there has existed some 2000-year-old unbroken hierarchy of Baptist pastors ordaining other Baptist pastors and espousing the 1688 London Confession. And Protestants and Catholics alike would laugh if anyone tried to claim that "The Moderator of the Presbyterian Church, by virtue of his infallible authority when speaking on matters of faith and morals in communion with the rest of the National Assembly, hereby defines the Tradition of the Presbyterian Church as follows ..."
Since Catholics expect that a true church will look like that and do these things, it seems obvious that Protestants either don't even try to do these things (Baptists) or try them but fail hilariously (High Anglicans pretending Augustine of Canterbury and St Patrick wanted no connection with Rome, etc).
By contrast, Protestants don't regard these things as necessary signs of the, or , true church. Because we believe that God himself can take stones and make descendants of Abraham, we focus more on whether the doctrines taught by a particular congregation, or denomination formed by federating congregations, is consistent with the doctrines taught by Jesus, St Paul and the other Apostles, as recorded in the most reliable form available to us -- ie, those written Scriptures that were accepted by the early Christians as accurate.
But even if there's only 8196, is that 8195 too many? IOW, should denominational reunification be more of a priority among Protestants -- or is that a diversion of our time and energy? (Looking at the World Council of Churches, for example).
To me, the difference between "unity" in Catholicism and Protestantism is like the difference between People's Republic of China on one hand, and Australia (where I live) and New Zealand on the other.
PR China is a single, unitary nation with enormous population -- it's not even a federation. Legally, the national People's Congress is supreme. But in practice, it is extremely disunified. Local Communist Party bosses in particular cities (eg, Shanghai) run their own show, sometimes even to the extent of refusing to hand over the taxes they collect to the central govt (something that'd be unthinkable in federations like USA, Aust or even Canada).
By contrast, Aust and NZ are two separate countries and likely to remain so (NZ rejeced an invitation to federate with us in 1901). Yet our govts cooperate together extremely closely, to the extent that NZ and Aust citizens can visit each others' country without needing a visa. Similar with Canada and the US and UK/ Ireland (the UK, I think, even lets citizens of the Republic of Ireland vote in its elections if they reside in Britain!).
IOW, would we Prots be wasting our time and energy putting together an enormous "World Protestant Church" whose existence then papers over the deep divisions among its nominal members (I can share communion in a Baptist, Presbyterian or Anglican church much more easily than traditionalist Catholics can with modernist Jesuits, for instance)? Would we be better off focusing on improving cooperation between denominations and local congregations?
Also, many Catholics are inconsistent in their use of this “Protestant splits and schisms” argument. On the one hand, they’ll criticise us for being disunited, for not having a single institutional hierarchy. But on the other hand, they still criticise us as if we were a single united church anyway. So you often hear Catholics blaming Baptists or Congregationalists for the Bible-chopping of Martin Luther or the dirty deeds of Henry VIII. Peter Akinola in Nigeria or Peter Jensen in Sydney are guilty by association with heretics like Gene Robinson or John Shelby Spong, because they’re all Anglicans. We’re condemned if we do split, and we’re also condemned if we don’t split.
The Catholic view seems to be: you should use your private interpretation of Scripture to judge your denomination’s leaders, and should secede if they fall into apostasy and abandons the Bible – but only if your denomination is Protestant. If and once you convert to Catholicism, any further judging of denominational leaders and talk of secession or schism becomes a dead letter (– bad pun!). It’s the private judgment to end all private judgment.
As I said above, Catholics often try to fit Protestantism into their mental categories and look for evangelical/ Reformed counterparts to Catholic institutions where really there are none. Look how often Catholics assume the Archbishop of Canterbury is a kind of Anglican Pope, or that the Patriarch of Constantinople is the Eastern Orthodox pontiff!. Protestants, of course, can’t point to an “unbroken succession of Reformers” from Luther back to St Peter – and we aren’t interested in trying. We'd consider that as futile as trying to convert a Jew by showing that Christians have a Temple with priests who are all unblemished descendants of the tribe of Levi.
A second example is that, when Protestants say “I believe I am correct and Pope John Paul II is incorrect about the meaning of this passage of Scripture”, Catholics often hear this as “I am not only correct, as the Pope claims to be, but infallible too, as the Pope claims to be” – a very big claim, and much more obviously ridiculous when stated by someone in jeans and a T-shirt sitting in a cafeteria than by someone in robes and vestments enthroned in a cathedral. (Briefly, “correct” and “infallible” are two different things. If my calculator says 2 + 2 = 4, I accept that as correct. But if my calculator says that 3 + 3 = 5, then I’ll only believe that if I have a prior belief that my calculator is infallible. In other words, an answer is right or wrong: a source of answers is either fallible or infallible. David, there might be a blog-sermon in there for you somewhere).
Thirdly, I’ve lost count how many times Catholic writers view the Lambeth Conference of 1930 as the turning point when suddenly Protestants
CONTD
Thirdly, I’ve lost count how many times Catholic writers view the Lambeth Conference of 1930 as the turning point when suddenly Protestants switched from opposing contraception to allowing it. The implication that, say, Southern Baptists in Kentucky would suddenly modify their strongly-held interpretation of Genesis 38: 9-10 simply because Anglican bishops in England voted to allow it is … unlikely. The nearest Catholic equivalent would be to say that “Catholics in New York changed to vernacular Masses in the 1960s because the synod of the Armenian Orthodox Church in Yerevan decided that Latin was not compulsory”. Instead, what happened was that a number of different Protestant groups, ranging from High Anglicans and Lutherans to snake-handling Fundamentalists, decided independently of each other, within the space of a few decades, that their opposition to contraception had been misguided – and this while still maintaining their unflinching opposition to other cultural trends, in the face of constant mockery from the non-Christian world. This does not of course prove they were right on the merits, but it does mean they were thinking independently rather than following the bishops at Lambeth as a sort of Protestant Vatican II.
I wonder if that guy mentioned that before the Protestant revolution, it was also a common belief that if you gave a small sum of money to Rome, you'd get a free ticket out of Purgatory?
Josh S, go over there and tell them. You'll see my cyber-corpse lying there -- they're a pugnacious lot.
Wow...A lot of misconceptions here about the Catholic Church.
First I would say that my partner at Deo Omnis Gloria just wrote an excellent article on Sola Scriptura that I would advise all here to read. It's a foundation shaker...
Second, I would like to respond to a couple of the comments made here:
1) The fact that Christ wished to establish one Church and the necessity of that Church being unified is clearly stated in Sacred Scripture. "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me" -John 17:20-23 I really don't think our Lord Jesus could have been any clearer on the importance of unity than this. He makes it His prayer to the Father. Do any of you believe that there is the slightest bit of disunity between the Father and the Son? Yet Christ asks the Father that we might be one as He and the Father are one. This is a significant matter.
2) I had entered the number of Protestant denominations incorrectly on our blog and have made the corrections there. I am committed to the truth, even when it comes to stats (contrary to some bloggers beliefs). The actual number is closer to 20,000, but this is a number that is continually fluctuating due to the variances among the different larger denominations and the increasing number of non-denominational groups. The number of non-denominational churches is also hard to track because they come and go so often. Regardless of the number, this is not the image of unity desired by Christ. How can it be anything but a sign of disunity? The Church is necessary. Christ stated that He would found a Church (Matt 16:1
, St. Paul proclaims the Church to be the pillar and bulwark of truth (1 Timothy 3:15), and there are constant references to the Church throughout the New Testament epistles. So how can the Church be insignificant? The early Church was united in faith, and therefore I can't understand how anyone can believe it is not necessary now.
Please, take time today to visit deoomnisgloria.com and read Jay's post on Sola Scriptura. It is detailed. What is important is that we are all seeking to know God more fully and we must continually go to Jesus asking to be led into the fullness of truth.
Russell - sorry for the theological beating at deomnisgloria.com. You just stated some very inaccurate things and Jay and I both wanted to call your game. As I stated there we have thoroughly enjoyed your involvement on our blog. You remain in our prayers.
May the peace, love, and unity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit be with y
Joe, no offence taken at all, my last comment there was a bit tongue in cheek. I meant "pugnacious" in the good sense -- as in, "Don't think that just because a Lutheran waltzes over there and says 'Hey, the Popes used to allow selling of indulgences!', these guys are going to reply 'My goodness, you're right, I'm going to become a Baptist right away because of that..."
Russell,
I'm glad to hear that. We miss your involvement at DeoOmnisGloria. Did you get a chance to read Jay's article on Sola Scriptura? We would love your input.
In Christ,
Joe
There may exist Catholics who abandon the Barque of Peter whenever someone says "Indulgences!" (or "Albigensians!", if they've been drinking too much ...) but I've never met any.
By the same standard, I've also met very few Anglicans for whom the revelation that Henry VIII was a very wicked man has shaken the foundations of their faith.
And I wonder if under "Catholic" Jenkins places the Philippine Independent Church, the German Old Catholics, the Polish National Catholic Church of America, etc.
Commenting by HaloScan
