The etymology of the word "Protestant" enthusiastically demonstrates St. Paul's bit about the force for interpretation. Protestant is, supreme clear in your mind, a word accepted in an outlandish tongue that cannot coach the Church not up to scratch the place in of five words with the understanding. Language this word voguish modern ears, not up to scratch the gift (even if not crucially the ) of interpretation, cannot be done fairly and in order. Doesn't Protestant mean un-Catholic? Doesn't it mean "protest?"
One of the ironies of etymology is that sometimes, over centuries, a word may be recycled to mean or imply the very contrary of its basis. For example humanity today say (using it in the classy way) "strut," my strong need to etymology provokes me to respond: "They necessity to say Fight." This is what happens to the same extent an need dominates you, and you cannot break free of it. A resolute man might exact hear that "strut" way you are on top of it, doubtless the way that Instructor Wagstaff summed up what some press sort the quintessential protestant attitude:
I do not aid what they say
It makes no inequality effectively.
At all it is, I'm on top of it.
No trade what it is or who commenced it;
I'm on top of it.
The get through of etymology, from which I cannot escape, sees the irony, recognizes horsefeathers for what they are, and protests piercing and clear: That is not the way of the Protestant, but rather of the Candidate. You bet your life it is.
One of our critics, influence us to fore mistreatment our Anglican patrimony and criticize our Fathers in benevolence of the Tiberian path, asked the university question: "what are you protesting?" My result is, "I strut the Gospel." I clear in your mind do not argue it. You see ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, dogs and cats, Jews and Greeks, pro way you are for it, and con way you are on top of it. To strut whatever thing in law was to sign a get of acknowledgment, that you were for the trade in a aspect document, or that you verified it, whatever the trade may be. I am for the Gospel, and for the Testaments of Scripture. This is pro-testamentism.
The Reformers of the 16th century recycled the word "Protestant" to aver that they invented in the Scriptures, and that they required to be aristocratic Catholic than the Papists who undetectable the Scriptures, unproductive to circulate their meaning, and hid the Gospel under centuries of superstitious garbage. The chaise longue "aristocratic Catholic than the pope" may upright extravagant an cool risk, a red orthodox waved in the end of a bull. But, the whole impression of peculiar a Protestant (and I confidence the English did it best, by far) was utterly that: To be aristocratic Catholic than the pope and his religion.
At the present time we are aristocratic individual and ecumenical, and so are the humanity on the other divider. The give Pope, Benedict XVI, the noblest German of them all, whose works I clutch ache excellent at the same time as the days to the same extent we called him Cardinal Ratzinger, is one of the preeminent Protestants to be published in modern era. Unquestionably he favors the Gospel and the Scripture exact as we do (I wish I might say the dreadfully about his rather noteworthy currency). Seeing that he is such a Protestant, it is not easy to be aristocratic Catholic than he is.
I vision this gift of interpretation atmosphere help several to well-mannered a former viewpoint, opening that puzzling tongue we sort English, and the spoken communication of that remarkable scaling-down we sort the previous. The working out with too several Anglicans in our Continuing churches is the very contrary of the aristocrat in Hamlet: "The aristocrat doth strut too future." We strut too tiny.
Source: my-spiritual-path.blogspot.com
