Baptists and Catholic Sacred Tradition?

[Esdra]

Hi all,

in another thread (pages 4 and 5) the thought came up that Baptists do believe some parts of what Catholics call Sacred Tradition.

We were talking about the Apostle’s and Nicene Creed which are Sacred Tradition.

Now I’d like to ask you (Catholics and Protestants) to think about it and tell me what other parts of the Sacred Tradition are in the Baptist faith.

That’s what I understand under building bridges and tearing walls down instead of building them up, like I’ve quite often in the one or other thread written: To search for similarities also and not only for the differneces (which are many, I do agree).

What also comes to mind is i.e. The Holy Trinity, this is also S.T.

Hoping for a charitable and good discussion!

in Christ,

 

[Nicea325]

Hi all,

in another thread (pages 4 and 5) the thought came up that Baptists do believe some parts of what Catholics call Sacred Tradition.

We were talking about the Apostle’s and Nicene Creed which are Sacred Tradition.

Now I’d like to ask you (Catholics and Protestants) to think about it and tell me what other parts of the Sacred Tradition are in the Baptist faith.

That’s what I understand under building bridges and tearing walls down instead of building them up, like I’ve quite often in the one or other thread written: To search for similarities also and not only for the differneces (which are many, I do agree).

What also comes to mind is i.e. The Holy Trinity, this is also S.T.

Hoping for a charitable and good discussion!

in Christ,

1. Congregating on Sunday
2. Hearing the Word of God
3. Preaching the Word of God
4. Having a canonized Bible (well at least the NT canon,which all agree on).
5. Missionary work
6. Ministry to others
7. Easter Sunday
   8.Christmas
8. Helping the less fortunate
9. Feeding the poor

Peace

 

[Esdra]

1. Congregating on Sunday
2. Hearing the Word of God
3. Preaching the Word of God
4. Having a canonized Bible (well at least the NT canon,which all agree on).
5. Missionary work
6. Ministry to others
7. Easter Sunday
   8.Christmas
8. Helping the less fortunate
9. Feeding the poor

Peace

Are the religious feasts also ST?

Then I will continue with Pentecoast and Christ’s ascension to heaven.

 

[Inishfree]

I think the core belief is the same. I view all christians, as brothers and sisters in Christ.

There may be different custom, tradition, names for what we call sacraments. But, the Baptist believe in what is most important. Same for all christians.

 

[jmcrae]

Are the religious feasts also ST?

Yes, since we find nothing in the Bible mentioning that we should celebrate the Nativity of Christ, or Easter - and the dates of both of these were set by different Popes at different times. (Easter actually was celebrated at different times in different Dioceses, at one time - some Bishops required that it be celebrated on the Sunday nearest to Passover, while others fixed a calendar date, and still others used the current method, which is to fix it on the Sunday after the first full moon after the vernal equinox (March 20th or 21st).

Then I will continue with Pentecoast and Christ’s ascension to heaven.

Yes, both of these dates are also set by the Church - and there is nothing in the Bible itself suggesting that we should continue to celebrate them today.

Another tradition is the ordering of the Ten Commandments, and even saying that there are ten commandments, because when you look at the Scriptures themselves, there are actually about fourteen or fifteen “thou shalts” in the list - and they are certainly not numbered. When I was a kid, I always used to wonder how people came up with the idea that there were ten of them (because if you count them, there are more than ten), and who it was who divided them up and put the numbers on them.

 

[Esdra]

I think the core belief is the same. I view all christians, as brothers and sisters in Christ.

There may be different custom, tradition, names for what we call sacraments. But, the Baptist believe in what is most important. Same for all christians.

Oh brother, you said the same I’ve often said here in CAF: They belief the core things which are the same things the Catholic Church also believes.
But the question that always follows if I say is, “Who determines what is a core belief and what not?”
Maybe you can help me out with that question?

in Christ,

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Oh brother, you said the same I’ve often said here in CAF: They belief the core things which are the same things the Catholic Church also believes.
But the question that always follows if I say is, “Who determines what is a core belief and what not?”
Maybe you can help me out with that question?

in Christ,

Christ commissioned the men He chose and appointed, 'Teaching them ALL things whatsoever I have commanded you. ALL things, which indicates much more than just believing in Him.

These were authoritative men of the early Church. Paul wrote the Thessalonians, that were called by Him, by ‘their’ Gospel. Then he distinguishes ‘their’ Gospel by telling the people to hold to the traditions, whether by word or epistle. This indicates that not all things were written. All things were not written is confirmed by the Gospel of John, and that there were ‘many other signs Jesus also did in the sight of His disciples’.

2Th 2:14 (2:13) Whereunto also he hath called you by our gospel, unto the purchasing of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2Th 2:15 (2:14) Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.

Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

Joh 20:30 Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book.

Joh 21:25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did which, if they were written every one, the world itself. I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written

The ‘core beliefs’ are taught through His authoritative Church, by the authoritative men He chose and appointed, and the men they chose and appointed with the authority He bestowed upon them. ‘Core beliefs’ come under the authority to ‘bind and loose’.

You, and other Protestants, have made the argument of ‘basics’, or ‘essentials’, are agreed upon, yet no one can produce a ‘list’, or even that it was taught that not everything had to be agreed upon. To dispute the authority you would have to produce the scriptures listing ‘basics’ or ‘essentials’ and that some things were not important, or ‘core’.

 

[FabiusMaximus]

Hi all,

in another thread (pages 4 and 5) the thought came up that Baptists do believe some parts of what Catholics call Sacred Tradition.

We were talking about the Apostle’s and Nicene Creed which are Sacred Tradition.

Now I’d like to ask you (Catholics and Protestants) to think about it and tell me what other parts of the Sacred Tradition are in the Baptist faith.

That’s what I understand under building bridges and tearing walls down instead of building them up, like I’ve quite often in the one or other thread written: To search for similarities also and not only for the differneces (which are many, I do agree).

What also comes to mind is i.e. The Holy Trinity, this is also S.T.

Hoping for a charitable and good discussion!

in Christ,

The thing is though that most Baptists would say that the Tradition isn’t necessary. There might be good things that come from Tradition, like the creeds, but most wouldn’t accept Tradition because of it. In fact, I come from an Evangelical background myself and the first time I’ve even heard of the Nicene Creed was in a Lutheran church. Evangelicals never recite creeds.

And if you ask most Evangelicals what they think about the writings of the early Church Fathers (the ones that even know about them), they’ll tell you that they were misguided ancient men and that in interpreting the Bible your own way, you can find truth. Which is absurd, frankly.

 

[jmcrae]

And if you ask most Evangelicals what they think about the writings of the early Church Fathers (the ones that even know about them), they’ll tell you that they were misguided ancient men and that in interpreting the Bible your own way, you can find truth. Which is absurd, frankly.

Exactly - it’s absurd because it assumes that these ancient men, many of whom were personally acquainted with the Apostles, and heard their preaching every Sunday, were more ignorant of the Gospel than men today who (having rejected the Holy Tradition) have nothing to go on except the translation of a translation of a few letters and books - those same letters and books that happened to be the ones picked out by those same ancient men as being worthy to be read out in the Christian assembly, as part of the liturgy, because they conformed to the teaching that they had heard (either by means of the Holy Tradition, or even with their own ears) from the Apostles.

 

[FabiusMaximus]

Exactly - it’s absurd because it assumes that these ancient men, many of whom were personally acquainted with the Apostles, and heard their preaching every Sunday, were more ignorant of the Gospel than men today who (having rejected the Holy Tradition) have nothing to go on except the translation of a translation of a few letters and books - those same letters and books that happened to be the ones picked out by those same ancient men as being worthy to be read out in the Christian assembly, as part of the liturgy, because they conformed to the teaching that they had heard (either by means of the Holy Tradition, or even with their own ears) from the Apostles.

Yeah it’s kind of a convenient dismissal of what the early Church believed. When I got to studying Church history I started asking myself serious questions, and I never found any plausible answers for these questions by anyone. Why did so many ECFs embrace the Real Presence? Why does everyone talk about a ‘Tradition’ and an ‘Apostolic Succession’? What really shocked me especially is when Irenaeus was talking about the Gnostics and upheld Tradition, and closed off saying that ‘…and the heretics reject the Traditions of the Church, seeing themselves as wiser…’

I’ve never received a satisfactory explanation. It was all dismissed with a ‘we read the Bible’ (because apparently the ECFs didn’t believe in the Bible?), or ‘they can be wrong’ (and we’re better…why?) or that there was some kind of apostasy or corruption of some sort. But for that long? And so quickly? My father is a pastor in the Assemblies of God. Not even he has been able to give me the answers I desire. And believe me, if I could cling to anything that would make Evangelicalism seem correct again to me, I’d grab it and run with it in a heartbeat. Sounds awful? Maybe. But I want it to be true.

Even Lutheranism, the earliest of the Protestant groups heavily clings to Tradition (whether Martin Luther was correct or not is a different discussion). I like that about them.

 

[Good_Fella]

What Baptists and all Protestants of the other denominations are coming to realize is that the apostolic tradition of the Church served as a measuring stick with which to distinguish the canonical sacred texts from the apochryphal texts.

PAX :heaven:

 

[Esdra]

Yeah it’s kind of a convenient dismissal of what the early Church believed. When I got to studying Church history I started asking myself serious questions, and I never found any plausible answers for these questions by anyone. Why did so many ECFs embrace the Real Presence? Why does everyone talk about a ‘Tradition’ and an ‘Apostolic Succession’? What really shocked me especially is when Irenaeus was talking about the Gnostics and upheld Tradition, and closed off saying that ‘…and the heretics reject the Traditions of the Church, seeing themselves as wiser…’

I’ve never received a satisfactory explanation. It was all dismissed with a ‘we read the Bible’ (because apparently the ECFs didn’t believe in the Bible?), or ‘they can be wrong’ (and we’re better…why?) or that there was some kind of apostasy or corruption of some sort. But for that long? And so quickly? My father is a pastor in the Assemblies of God. Not even he has been able to give me the answers I desire. And believe me, if I could cling to anything that would make Evangelicalism seem correct again to me, I’d grab it and run with it in a heartbeat. Sounds awful? Maybe. But I want it to be true.

Even Lutheranism, the earliest of the Protestant groups heavily clings to Tradition (whether Martin Luther was correct or not is a different discussion). I like that about them.

The “problem” (seen from the Catholic side) with the Lutheran Church is that it was forced to ally with the Reformed Evangelical Churches (like in Germany, actually rather early when these Churches were founded!), but also voluntarly they allied with them later on (like it is the case in Austria).
So the only “real Lutheran Church” is the LCMS (in the US) and the the SELK in Germany. (The SELK doesn’t even exist in Austria i.e.)
And it’s the Reformed “fault”, better said the “fault” of Calvin and Zwingli (and companions) who first rejected the Real Presence, that all the other evangelical Churches came into being.
So you are a member of the Assemblies of God, Fabius?

in Christ,

 

[Esdra]

The “problem” (seen from the Catholic side) with the Lutheran Church is that it was forced to ally with the Reformed Evangelical Churches (like in Germany, actually rather early when these Churches were founded!), but also voluntarly they allied with them later on (like it is the case in Austria).
So the only “real Lutheran Church” is the LCMS (in the US) and the the SELK in Germany. (The SELK doesn’t even exist in Austria i.e.)
And it’s the Reformed “fault”, better said the “fault” of Calvin and Zwingli (and companions) who first rejected the Real Presence, that all the other evangelical Churches came into being.
So you are a member of the Assemblies of God, Fabius?

in Christ,

I wanted to add: I’ve even read here in CAF that the ELCA also often allies with other Protestant Churches (like United Methodist, Presbyterians or Reformed Churches etc) who also don’t all believe in the RP.
In which Lutheran Church were you, Fabius?