In your Revelation 12 thread you said that you don’t like to be called Protestant because you didn’t like being lumped in with groups that denied that Christ is Lord. What groups do you have in mind?
I have in the past been very scornful of the habit of some non-denominational and other low-church Protestants of denying that they are actually Protestants. However, I’ve been thinking through the matter recently, and given that I generally insist that people should be called whatever they choose to be called, I think I’m being inconsistent here. My main concern is with the denial of history and with the false pretense that people such as yourself are “just Christian,” simply reading the Bible as it stands with no tradition influencing them. But as a matter of identity, if you see your tradition as radically different from historic Protestantism, that is your choice. In one sense it should make the job of “real” Protestants easier. . . . The problem is that there are lots of folks on the other side–many Anglicans, some Lutherans, even a few Methodists–who deny being Protestants because they are *more *Catholic and traditional than the average Protestants. So I worry that in the end only the Reformed will admit to being Protestant!
I like the term “Protestant” because it’s historically precise–it identifies our common roots in the events of the 16th century, however far we may have gone from those roots in one direction or another. I accept that I don’t have the right to try to make you accept this label, but I would be interested in knowing more precisely why you are uncomfortable with it.
I *really *dislike using “non-Catholic” as a label, both because it’s negative and because it lumps the Orthodox in with historically Protestant traditions, which frankly seems ridiculous (unless the Catholics here are simply willing to admit that the Orthodox are really Catholic. . . . )