Is Ron Paul a Protestant or a Baptist?

[goRPaul]

These sites say Protestant, which I had believed for some time now:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400311
http://votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=296
http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/special/forums/candidates/paul.html

Someone recently told me he's a Baptist, and these sites say that about him:
http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2007/apr/25/ron-paul-bio/
http://pewforum.org/religion08/profile.php?CandidateID=15

Doesn't matter to me either way, but I think Protestant is more fitting. *snicker*

[erowe1]

Baptists are Protestants.

[ItsTime]

All I have to say is this. If more Christians were more like Ron Paul I would become one.

[Spirit of '76]

Baptists are Protestants.

True.

[Joey Wahoo]

I'm pretty sure he is a Lutheran. He was raised Lutheran and two of his brothers are Lutheran ministers.

As someone pointed out, Baptists (like Lutherans and most other non-Catholic Christians) are Protestants.

[SwooshOU]

Is an iPod an MP3 Player or an Apple?

;)

[Nash]

I'm pretty sure he is a Lutheran. He was raised Lutheran and two of his brothers are Lutheran ministers.

As someone pointed out, Baptists (like Lutherans and most other non-Catholic Christians) are Protestants.

He's Episcopalian.

[erowe1]

I know for sure that you're right about at least one of his brothers being a Lutheran pastor. I know someone in his church and he was written about in the Grand Rapids newspaper (forget the paper's exact name, sorry).

But I have heard multiple times that Ron Paul himself is now a Baptist. It's just hearsay. But I've definitely come across that claim a lot. I suspect it's true, but don't know for sure.

[Joey Wahoo]

I stand corrected. Here is the answer: http://pewforum.org/religion08/profile.php?CandidateID=15


In His Own Words

"I have never been one who is comfortable talking about my faith in the political arena. In fact, the pandering that typically occurs in the election season I find to be distasteful. But for those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do."
(The Covenant News, July 2007)


Ron Paul was raised on a dairy farm outside of Pittsburgh. His parents were "pretty devout" Lutherans, according to campaign spokesman Jesse Benton, and as a child, Paul regularly attended St. John's Lutheran Church in Carnegie, Pa. One of five sons, Paul briefly considered becoming a Lutheran minister like two of his brothers but chose to pursue medicine instead. In 1957, during his senior year at Gettysburg College in Gettysburg, Pa., Paul married Carol Wells at her neighborhood Episcopal church.

All five of the couple's children were baptized as Episcopalians, but Paul told a reporter at the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review that he and his wife "became less comfortable with the Episcopal Church as time went on." They now attend services "several times each year" at the First Baptist Church of Lake Jackson, Texas, according to a pastor at the church, where Paul's eldest daughter and her family are members.

According to Benton, Paul feels the "greatest affinity right now" with the Baptist denomination and identifies himself as a Baptist, though he is not a formal member of a local church. In the past, Paul has identified himself simply as "Protestant" but is now saying "as a matter of clarification" that he is a Baptist, according to Benton.

If elected president, Paul would be the fifth Baptist to hold the office.

[spiteface]

As someone who was brought up Baptist I can vouch for the claim that some Baptists do not, in fact, consider themselves Protestant. They believe their church goes back to the time of Jesus and existed outside of, and alongside, the Catholic Church. Weird and not exactly what the original poster was getting at but whatever...

[fj45lvr]

Paul attends a southern Baptist church...

Here he talks about it: http://theamericanview.com/dictator/media/898/aview_20070825.mp3

Good interview BTW.

[Joey Wahoo]

Very good interview. Thanks.

[Cowlesy]

Being Lutheran is great. Martin Luther would have been my type of rebel back in the 16th century or whenever he got into it with Pope Leo X. ;)

[fj45lvr]

Yeah I love it when Paul says, "we've been conditioned for 100 years to be zombie-like"!!!!

that is the truth...preach it brother.

[Taralee]

I thought he was a Presbetarian?

[Benaiah]

I'm a Baptist, not a Protestant.

Like an above poster stated, I can trace them back to Christ. Luther came around in the 1500's I believe. The Catholic church started the inquisition by killing Baptist in France in the 1200's. Although, they weren't called Baptist back then.

Anyways, I wish the the Christians would get their heads out of the gutter and get on board with Ron Paul. He really is the best candidate for all of us. You all do what you want, and I'll do what I want. Which is better than the government telling all of us what to do.

[hells_unicorn]

The term Protestant in the "Protestant Reformation" sense only applies to the original reformers (Luther, Calvin, Henry VIII). They are referred to by some as the Magisterial Reformers because there weren't any really large differences between Catholic and the original 3's theology, save who was in charge. Calvinism is essentially Augustinian Catholicism without recognition of Papal authority.

By contrast, the Baptists, along with the Methodists, Quakers and all of the younger churches (although they'll deny this) are part of what is known as the "Radical Reformers", or those who decided to make some extremely large changes in the theology of Christianity. These were the break-off churches who essentially protested the original 3 Protestant Churches.

I would agree with the general sentiment that Baptists and Protestants are not necessarily synonymous, and that's 3 years of Catholic school talking. ;)

[inibo]

Very good interview. Thanks.

I think Ron Paul did very well. I think the interviewer was a bit of extreme. He strikes me as bordering on Christian Reconstructionism. He doesn't understand the difference between legality and morality. No matter how much he might say it abortion is currently legal. That's not to say that something that is legal is necessarily moral any more than something that is illegal is necessarily immoral.

His take on the military is very hypocritical. Standing armies are antithetical to liberty. His remarks about barring people of bad character in the military is ridiculous. All I can think about is the Group W Bench in Alice's Restaurant:


I went over to the sergeant, said, "Sergeant, you got a lot a damn gall to
ask me if I've rehabilitated myself, I mean, I mean, I mean that just, I'm
sittin' here on the bench, I mean I'm sittin here on the Group W bench
'cause you want to know if I'm moral enough join the army, burn women,
kids, houses and villages after bein' a litterbug."

[brandon]

I heard he was wiccan

[mdh]

I heard he was wiccan

Only 14 year old girls can be wiccans.

[jaumen]

As someone who was brought up Baptist I can vouch for the claim that some Baptists do not, in fact, consider themselves Protestant. They believe their church goes back to the time of Jesus and existed outside of, and alongside, the Catholic Church. Weird and not exactly what the original poster was getting at but whatever...

Yes, but the Catholic church makes that claim too, and both are equally ludicrous, since you can point to specific times when both denominations started, as well as pretty much every denomination. The fact is, the first Christians didn't identify by denomination.

[brandon]

Only 14 year old girls can be wiccans.

Oh then maybe I heard he is a scientologist

[hells_unicorn]

Yes, but the Catholic church makes that claim too, and both are equally ludicrous, since you can point to specific times when both denominations started, as well as pretty much every denomination. The fact is, the first Christians didn't identify by denomination.

The original 12 Apostles didn't even use the word Christians, Christianity, or Christendom. Essentially all the early Christians were Jews who believed that the savior prophesied by Moses had come. When the Council of Nicene was convened, we had the equivalent of what is the modern day collage of schismatic thoughts between various groups within Christendom.

The Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church are the first "established" churches in the sense that they rose out of the Roman Empire and had governing powers beyond the catacombs that Christians used to hide in to avoid the wrath of the Jewish Establishment and the Roman Emperor.

You could argue that essentially every Church that follows the basic dogma set down by the Council of Nicene (this excludes many of the Radical Reformers, but not the original ones) are the original Christians and be correct, because it is the teachings, not the church establishment itself, that determines this.

[Skeeterbug73]

Only 14 year old girls can be wiccans.

I am Wiccan and voting for Ron Paul. I'm certainly not 14. I guess I will go back to lurking now. Blessed be! :)

[brandon]

I am Wiccan and voting for Ron Paul. I'm certainly not 14. I guess I will go back to lurking now. Blessed be! :)

Hey! That's great! I love the huge variety of backgrounds and lifestyles this campaign draws. Stick around and post!

[jaumen]

The original 12 Apostles didn't even use the word Christians, Christianity, or Christendom. Essentially all the early Christians were Jews who believed that the savior prophesied by Moses had come. When the Council of Nicene was convened, we had the equivalent of what is the modern day collage of schismatic thoughts between various groups within Christendom.

The Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church are the first "established" churches in the sense that they rose out of the Roman Empire and had governing powers beyond the catacombs that Christians used to hide in to avoid the wrath of the Jewish Establishment and the Roman Emperor.

You could argue that essentially every Church that follows the basic dogma set down by the Council of Nicene (this excludes many of the Radical Reformers, but not the original ones) are the original Christians and be correct, because it is the teachings, not the church establishment itself, that determines this.

Where in my post did I say they identified themselves by the word "Christians"? That was my word to define them, because it is the word we use today.

I suppose one could argue that and be technically correct in the sense of people who identified themselves as the word "Christian", but they were not REALLY the originators of the ideas they professed, which, as you pointed out, is more important then what they called themselves.

At any rate, the Catholic church claims that the Apostle Peter was the first Pope, which is clearly a ridiculous claim, since the Catholic church was not established until much later. I have nothing against Catholics, but this simply is not historically possible.

The Baptist claim I am not as familiar with, but I understand it has to do with tracing a succession of churches (some of which perhaps did not go by the name baptist) all the way back to John the Baptist. It has the ring of falsehood, and seems to just be an assertion made in order to qualify their doctrine as "more correct" than other denominations (which I would also say is the case with the Catholic claim). Sure they could trace back through church's that may have had varying teachings all the way back to Christ or John the Baptist, I think any denomination could do that, every denomination at some point split off from the same tree.

Anyway, I guess this doesn't have a whole lot to do with the purpose of this forum, but... I just wanted to respond I guess. No offense intended to anyone. I like both Catholics and Baptists, as well as all my brothers/sisters in every other denomination.

[hells_unicorn]

Where in my post did I say they identified themselves by the word "Christians"? That was my word to define them, because it is the word we use today.

It was used by many of the converts in the early church as well, my point was to preface the fallacy of using such terms to refer to the early followers of Christ, who genetically were very different from modern day Christians.


I suppose one could argue that and be technically correct in the sense of people who identified themselves as the word "Christian", but they were not REALLY the originators of the ideas they professed, which, as you pointed out, is more important then what they called themselves.

Christ was the originator to be precise, the assertions put forth by the various churches is not that they were the first church in the "already established" sense, but in that they are the ones following the original message the most exactly. The Baptists follow an early form of Christianity that co-existed with the early Church fathers known as Pelagianism, which renounces the existence of original sin. Since this doctrine was based off of scriptural interpretation, both viewpoints hold a specific place in the early Christian teachings, which one is the correct model is where the rub is.


At any rate, the Catholic church claims that the Apostle Peter was the first Pope, which is clearly a ridiculous claim, since the Catholic church was not established until much later. I have nothing against Catholics, but this simply is not historically possible.

As a former student of the Dominican Order, I think you are misunderstanding the Catholic Church's view here. The office of the Pope is modeled after the leadership role that was delegated to Peter just before Jesus ascended. There is extensive literature discussing the rite of succession that followed Peter's crucification and how, although the current Papacy has strayed very far from the office's intended purpose, this line led to the hierarchy that resulted in the Byzantine Church and the Roman Catholic Church.

The Vatican and the Roman Church was not established when Peter was given the task of leading the remaining apostles, but was instead a direct consequence of his charge and those who followed.


The Baptist claim I am not as familiar with, but I understand it has to do with tracing a succession of churches (some of which perhaps did not go by the name baptist) all the way back to John the Baptist. It has the ring of falsehood, and seems to just be an assertion made in order to qualify their doctrine as "more correct" than other denominations (which I would also say is the case with the Catholic claim). Sure they could trace back through church's that may have had varying teachings all the way back to Christ or John the Baptist, I think any denomination could do that, every denomination at some point split off from the same tree.

The Baptist claim really has to do with the disagreement between Pelagius and Saint Augustine over Original Sin. Both churches, along with many others, came out of the original theology and share the common dogmas so both are technically correct in tracing themselves back to the originators of the faith. The differences between the churches are not much different to what they were 1700 or so years ago, only the fact that one governing authority isn't enforcing it's will against what it considers heresy.


Anyway, I guess this doesn't have a whole lot to do with the purpose of this forum, but... I just wanted to respond I guess. No offense intended to anyone. I like both Catholics and Baptists, as well as all my brothers/sisters in every other denomination.

No offense taken, the question of religion is one that will likely come up again in this campaign, I think these discussions are quite healthy.

[inibo]

I am Wiccan and voting for Ron Paul. I'm certainly not 14. I guess I will go back to lurking now. Blessed be! :)

You are not alone here. There are other Pagans, they just don't talk about it much. I was initiated in the Alexandrian tradition though I left my coven several years ago. Too much drama.

[Brinck Slattery]

I'm sure there are some other discordians who support Ron Paul...

[Bradley in DC]

The Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church are the first "established" churches in the sense that they rose out of the Roman Empire and had governing powers beyond the catacombs that Christians used to hide in to avoid the wrath of the Jewish Establishment and the Roman Emperor.

You could argue that essentially every Church that follows the basic dogma set down by the Council of Nicene (this excludes many of the Radical Reformers, but not the original ones) are the original Christians and be correct, because it is the teachings, not the church establishment itself, that determines this.

You're neglecting the Alexandria and some Antioch churches, and the rest of the "Oriental" early Christian churches (Coptics, Malabar, Chaldean, Melkites, etc.) who are not Eastern Orthodox or Roman. And no offense, the Baptist claim of an original parallel church does not seem to be accurate. Yes, there were Waldeneses and Anabaptists and others before Luther, but nothing like an broken chain of the Roman, Orthodox and Oriental churches.

[wgadget]

Now that there is one funny thread. LOL.

[Bradley in DC]

Being Lutheran is great. Martin Luther would have been my type of rebel back in the 16th century or whenever he got into it with Pope Leo X. ;)

Oh please, we're already fighting off charges of anti-Semetism!

[Bradley in DC]

At any rate, the Catholic church claims that the Apostle Peter was the first Pope, which is clearly a ridiculous claim, since the Catholic church was not established until much later. I have nothing against Catholics, but this simply is not historically possible.

Yes, Peter was the first Pope, though the term (and that of the church) wasn't used at the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church

[Corydoras]

You're neglecting the Alexandria and some Antioch churches, and the rest of the "Oriental" early Christian churches (Coptics, Malabar, Chaldean, Melkites, etc.) who are not Eastern Orthodox or Roman.

::small throat clearing::
All Melkites are Catholic. The Churches of Antioch and Alexandria are both Orthodox.
:)

[BuddyRey]

All I have to say is this. If more Christians were more like Ron Paul I would become one.

Ditto!

I've actually been thinking about dropping in on a couple of Quaker services. The Quakers have a long and storied tradition of Pacifism, Abolitionism, and shunning doctrinal groupthink, which, sadly, is probably the reason there aren't very many of them around anymore. Like Dr. Paul, they're usually painted as anachronistic kooks by the outside world for espousing such beliefs. :(

[TurtleBurger]

Quakers have a really beautiful role in U.S. history. I can't imagine how bad things would have gone without them. The only black spot is the election of QINO Richard Nixon.