Being Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox, is not essential to being Christian.

[gurneyhalleck1]

Again, you’re acting like a Christian cannot walk and chew gum or that these things are mutually exclusive. Catholics believe both that His blood purchases our salvation AND that He also established a Church through which we may know His truths properly, receive valid sacraments to actively participate in the very salvific act you mention, as well as be guided by the shepherd Peter whom Christ Himself chose to led the flock. One is not exclusive to the other.

And if you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church, it is made clear that those who are baptized in the trinitarian formula are indeed in a relationship with Jesus. There is no doubt of that. But it is an impaired and imperfect relationship when it is free of sacraments, especially the Eucharist (!!) and the sublime act of Confession. Outside the Church one is left to drift from opinion to opinion hitting and missing and often walking deep into outright heresy and evil. The Church is the Body of Christ, it is His vehicle for salvation. It is an extension of Jesus Himself. That’s the problem here that you’re not seeing. Your vision is impaired in that you’re seeing Jesus and His Church as two separate entities and that any Tom, Dick, or Harry who grabs a Bible and gets some folks together in a building is somehow in that proper balance that a Catholic is in with the True Church Christ founded? Your thesis is out of line with 2,000 years of Christian history…and you still didn’t name your denomination? That still eludes me…God bless…

So, I respect your distinctively Catholic belief, I]but somehow the truth of being purchased by His blood seems more weighty than Christ establishing a visible church.

For those whom Christ purchased are united into His eternal body (eternal church).

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

Again, you’re acting like a Christian cannot walk and chew gum or that these things are mutually exclusive. Catholics believe both that His blood purchases our salvation AND that He also established a Church through which we may know His truths properly, receive valid sacraments to actively participate in the very salvific act you mention, as well as be guided by the shepherd Peter whom Christ Himself chose to led the flock. One is not exclusive to the other.

And if you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church, it is made clear that those who are baptized in the trinitarian formula are indeed in a relationship with Jesus. There is no doubt of that. But it is an impaired and imperfect relationship when it is free of sacraments, especially the Eucharist (!!) and the sublime act of Confession. Outside the Church one is left to drift from opinion to opinion hitting and missing and often walking deep into outright heresy and evil. The Church is the Body of Christ, it is His vehicle for salvation. It is an extension of Jesus Himself. That’s the problem here that you’re not seeing. Your vision is impaired in that you’re seeing Jesus and His Church as two separate entities and that any Tom, Dick, or Harry who grabs a Bible and gets some folks together in a building is somehow in that proper balance that a Catholic is in with the True Church Christ founded? Your thesis is out of line with 2,000 years of Christian history…and you still didn’t name your denomination? That still eludes me…God bless…

I do agree with you that any Tom, Dick or Harry who grabs a Bible, building, and starts a church with the attitude of the Holy Spirit, the Bible, and I is a dangerous mix for disaster. Much of modern day Protestantism have generally left historic Christianity with very little regards for church history is a major problem. Historic traditions which are true are essential for any visible church. Therefore, I believe in Christian unity within the historic ecumenical creeds in which Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox Christians are united in. Redemptive history goes beyond the Catholic Church and is way older than 2,000 years. The first redeemed sinners were probably Adam and Eve, or maybe Able.

By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks. - Hebrews 11

BTW… why would I want to name my denomination and give you a reason to divide. My goal is to unite us through the reality of us being one in Christ. Is Christ divided?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I fail to see the reason in which you won’t tell us your denomination. Why would it give me a reason to divide? You should be proud of your denomination, right? If you believe it’s divisive, you should leave it. I’m glad we agree about the Bible-grab/church building silliness that Protestantism tends to give us often times.

There were no redeemed sinners before the advent of Christ so Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel and the gang had to wait.

The Body of Christ is the Catholic Church. I believe the Orthodox, in an imperfect and somewhat defective way, are part of Our Church by the way of their sacraments, orders, history, and love of liturgy, apostolic succession, devotion to the BVM, the Eucharist, etc. I also feel a strong kinship to Anglicans having been one for a number of years. I happen to believe many Anglican priests have valid orders and sacraments. But I also believe they are in an impaired, defective relationship with Christ that is illicit. The Body of Christ is the Catholic Church. Would I prefer the Body be enriched by the return of Orthodoxy, our Eastern brothers, to the fold, absolutely!! Am I gratified to see some Anglicans returning to the Catholic faith via the Anglicanorum Coetibus, the ordinariates, etc.? You bet! Do I think Protestants can and do go to heaven despite not being Catholic? Yes, the Catechism tells me so. Do I hope Protestants DO go to heaven! Yes yes yes! I have many Protestant friends and acquantances whom I adore and love. Do I view you as a brother in Christ? yes again. But I will reiterate the Catholic Church is the Church Christ built. To deviate from it impairs, imperils, and muddies the waters of one’s salvation. I have no desire to divide, friend, only to restore us to Christ in His Church. God bless you…

I do agree with you that any Tom, Dick or Harry who grabs a Bible, building, and starts a church with the attitude of the Holy Spirit, the Bible, and I is a dangerous mix for disaster. Much of modern day Protestantism have generally left historic Christianity with very little regards for church history is a major problem. Historic traditions which are true are essential for any visible church. Therefore, I believe in Christian unity within the historic ecumenical creeds in which Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox Christians are united in. Redemptive history goes beyond the Catholic Church and is way older than 2,000 years. The first redeemed sinners were probably Adam and Eve, or maybe Able.

By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks. - Hebrews 11

BTW… why would I want to name my denomination and give you a reason to divide. My goal is to unite us through the reality of us being one in Christ. Is Christ divided?

 

[Nine_Two]

Therefore, I believe in Christian unity within the historic ecumenical creeds in which Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox Christians are united in.

Which Ecumenical Creeds are those? Protestants simply believe that the first seven councils are “good teaching”, if they even go that far, which is a far cry from the Catholic and Orthodox Position.

Almost all protestant denominations are based on some guy picking up a bible and proclaiming his interpretation of it. The few that aren’t are either like the Methodists, founded by priests who had no respect for the orders of their bishops - and so breaking Apostolic Succession, or were state supported movements (though not state started) for the rulers own reasons, such as with the Anglicans.

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

I fail to see the reason in which you won’t tell us your denomination. Why would it give me a reason to divide? You should be proud of your denomination, right? If you believe it’s divisive, you should leave it. I’m glad we agree about the Bible-grab/church building silliness that Protestantism tends to give us often times.

There were no redeemed sinners before the advent of Christ so Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel and the gang had to wait.

The Body of Christ is the Catholic Church. I believe the Orthodox, in an imperfect and somewhat defective way, are part of Our Church by the way of their sacraments, orders, history, and love of liturgy, apostolic succession, devotion to the BVM, the Eucharist, etc. I also feel a strong kinship to Anglicans having been one for a number of years. I happen to believe many Anglican priests have valid orders and sacraments. But I also believe they are in an impaired, defective relationship with Christ that is illicit. The Body of Christ is the Catholic Church. Would I prefer the Body be enriched by the return of Orthodoxy, our Eastern brothers, to the fold, absolutely!! Am I gratified to see some Anglicans returning to the Catholic faith via the Anglicanorum Coetibus, the ordinariates, etc.? You bet! Do I think Protestants can and do go to heaven despite not being Catholic? Yes, the Catechism tells me so. Do I hope Protestants DO go to heaven! Yes yes yes! I have many Protestant friends and acquantances whom I adore and love. Do I view you as a brother in Christ? yes again. But I will reiterate the Catholic Church is the Church Christ built. To deviate from it impairs, imperils, and muddies the waters of one’s salvation. I have no desire to divide, friend, only to restore us to Christ in His Church. God bless you…

Denominations and divisions in the body of Christ are really man-made since those who have been united to Christ by faith are in the body of Christ, regardless of their church membership in a corporate body. It’s interesting that you press me to tell you where I corporately worship on Sundays. Is you motive really about division or unity? Is Christ not enough for me and other non-Catholic Christians?

I worship the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob. And we know through Scripture that the gospel was preached in advance to Abraham. Even the Apostle Paul writes about Abraham in Romans 4 to expound the doctrine of justification through imputation. As I recall, a few OT Saints did not see death and went straight to the presence of God prior to Calvary. Please consider Hebrews 11 too in your understanding of Saints prior to the incarnation. Of course OT Saints were reconciled by the future work of Jesus Christ on their behalf.

You sure seem to proclaim and preach and exalt the Catholic Church as a type of savior. Why do you insist to divide the body of Christ by bringing down Orthodox Christians, Anglicans, and Protestants as if we are inferior Christians? Are you saying faith in Christ is not enough for non-Catholic Christians for reconcilation and adoption into the family of God? Please explain your answers.

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

Which Ecumenical Creeds are those? Protestants simply believe that the first seven councils are “good teaching”, if they even go that far, which is a far cry from the Catholic and Orthodox Position.

Almost all protestant denominations are based on some guy picking up a bible and proclaiming his interpretation of it. The few that aren’t are either like the Methodists, founded by priests who had no respect for the orders of their bishops - and so breaking Apostolic Succession, or were state supported movements (though not state started) for the rulers own reasons, such as with the Anglicans.

I’m not sure you can make a generalization of all Protestant beliefs. Some are actually very confessional and creedal in faith. I agree that the Papacy of the individual in regards to Bible interpretation is extremely dangerous and a big problem. Yet, that is only a distortion of sola scriptura. Church tradition and church history is valuable in rightly dividing the Word… and necessary… and needs to be used a secondary sources of authority.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Until you stop the silly hiding of your own denomination, I’m not explaining anything. And the idea that “imputation” even existed in the Old or New Testaments is absurd. Your understanding of Romans is clearly Protestant and warped. It’s not that I consider the Catholic Church exaulted, it’s merely THE Church. If people choose to leave it for a lesser ecclesiastical body, that’s their problem. The Church is what it is, the Church. I’m done explaining my beliefs. You refuse to divulge your associations and I fear it’s because you know there are many holes in your denomination and you’re not sure of yourself. I think you are here for other reasons than to try and be some ecumenical angel that will unite us all. I think you’re on shaky ground with your own Methodist, Anglican, Lutheran, or other group. So I’m done with my part here. If you’re in the mindset that all denominations are equal and the same and that imputation existed in the Old Testament and New and that Abraham’s prefiguration of a righteous model equates to a Gospel in advance, I have nothing more to say…

Denominations and divisions in the body of Christ are really man-made since those who have been united to Christ by faith are in the body of Christ, regardless of their church membership in a corporate body. It’s interesting that you press me to tell you where I corporately worship on Sundays. Is you motive really about division or unity? Is Christ not enough for me and other non-Catholic Christians?

I worship the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob. And we know through Scripture that the gospel was preached in advance to Abraham. Even the Apostle Paul writes about Abraham in Romans 4 to expound the doctrine of justification through imputation. As I recall, a few OT Saints did not see death and went straight to the presence of God prior to Calvary. Please consider Hebrews 11 too in your understanding of Saints prior to the incarnation. Of course OT Saints were reconciled by the future work of Jesus Christ on their behalf.

You sure seem to proclaim and preach and exalt the Catholic Church as a type of savior. Why do you insist to divide the body of Christ by bringing down Orthodox Christians, Anglicans, and Protestants as if we are inferior Christians? Are you saying faith in Christ is not enough for non-Catholic Christians for reconcilation and adoption into the family of God? Please explain your answers.

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

Until you stop the silly hiding of your own denomination, I’m not explaining anything. And the idea that “imputation” even existed in the Old or New Testaments is absurd. Your understanding of Romans is clearly Protestant and warped. It’s not that I consider the Catholic Church exaulted, it’s merely THE Church. If people choose to leave it for a lesser ecclesiastical body, that’s their problem. The Church is what it is, the Church. I’m done explaining my beliefs. You refuse to divulge your associations and I fear it’s because you know there are many holes in your denomination and you’re not sure of yourself. I think you are here for other reasons than to try and be some ecumenical angel that will unite us all. I think you’re on shaky ground with your own Methodist, Anglican, Lutheran, or other group. So I’m done with my part here. If you’re in the mindset that all denominations are equal and the same and that imputation existed in the Old Testament and New and that Abraham’s prefiguration of a righteous model equates to a Gospel in advance, I have nothing more to say…

Galatians 3:8
And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.”

And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. Col 2

Genesis 15:4-6
And behold, the word of the Lord came to him: “This man shall not be your heir; your very own son shall be your heir.” And he brought him outside and said, “Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.” And he believed the Lord, and he counted it to him as righteousness.

Please see Romans chapter 3 and 4 too. Sometimes listening to a brother from another tradition can be interesting and insightful.

 

[SSTeacher]

gurneyhalleck1;6376574:

Until you stop the silly hiding of your own denomination, I’m not explaining anything. And the idea that “imputation” even existed in the Old or New Testaments is absurd. Your understanding of Romans is clearly Protestant and warped. It’s not that I consider the Catholic Church exaulted, it’s merely THE Church. If people choose to leave it for a lesser ecclesiastical body, that’s their problem. The Church is what it is, the Church. I’m done explaining my beliefs. You refuse to divulge your associations and I fear it’s because you know there are many holes in your denomination and you’re not sure of yourself. I think you are here for other reasons than to try and be some ecumenical angel that will unite us all. I think you’re on shaky ground with your own Methodist, Anglican, Lutheran, or other group. So I’m done with my part here. If you’re in the mindset that all denominations are equal and the same and that imputation existed in the Old Testament and New and that Abraham’s prefiguration of a righteous model equates to a Gospel in advance, I have nothing more to say…

Galatians 3:8
And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.”

And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. Col 2

Genesis 15:4-6
And behold, the word of the Lord came to him: “This man shall not be your heir; your very own son shall be your heir.” And he brought him outside and said, “Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.” And he believed the Lord, and he counted it to him as righteousness.

Please see Romans chapter 3 and 4 too. Sometimes listening to a brother from another tradition can be interesting and insightful.

One in Christ,

I’ve been following this thread from the outset and I find myself somewhat disappointed that gurneyhalleck1 has withdrawn as result of your reluctance to state your denomination. Some of your comments sound like the sort of things I might have said when I was an Evangelical. During my time in the Evangelical world I was a SOLO Scriptura adherent so neither the denomination with which I chose to align myself nor the church I happened to frequent was relevant (although I never concealed my affiliation) as all I needed was a Bible (the truncated one of 66 books, of course).

If you would be kind enough to confirm that you, too, are a SOLO Scriptura advocate, I‘d be most grateful as I could then rest easy.

Appreciatively,
Mick

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

One in Christ,

I’ve been following this thread from the outset and I find myself somewhat disappointed that gurneyhalleck1 has withdrawn as result of your reluctance to state your denomination. Some of your comments sound like the sort of things I might have said when I was an Evangelical. During my time in the Evangelical world I was a SOLO Scriptura adherent so neither the denomination with which I chose to align myself nor the church I happened to frequent was relevant (although I never concealed my affiliation) as all I needed was a Bible (the truncated one of 66 books, of course).

If you would be kind enough to confirm that you, too, are a SOLO Scriptura advocate, I‘d be most grateful as I could then rest easy.

Appreciatively,
Mick

I would consider myself to be a sola scriptura Christian as compared to a solo scriptura Christian (no secondary source of authority in tradition). There is a very important difference; therefore I can appreciate my Catholic brothers and sisters who value church tradition. I attend a church that may not actually line up in what I believe in regards to be a confessional church within Protestantism due to where I live. I prefer a Protestant Church with greater regards to church tradition (creeds and confessions).

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

One in Christ,

I’ve been following this thread from the outset and I find myself somewhat disappointed that gurneyhalleck1 has withdrawn as result of your reluctance to state your denomination. Some of your comments sound like the sort of things I might have said when I was an Evangelical. During my time in the Evangelical world I was a SOLO Scriptura adherent so neither the denomination with which I chose to align myself nor the church I happened to frequent was relevant (although I never concealed my affiliation) as all I needed was a Bible (the truncated one of 66 books, of course).

If you would be kind enough to confirm that you, too, are a SOLO Scriptura advocate, I‘d be most grateful as I could then rest easy.

Appreciatively,
Mick

I would consider myself to be a sola scriptura Christian as compared to a solo scriptura Christian (no secondary source of authority in tradition). There is a very important difference; therefore I can appreciate my Catholic brothers and sisters who value church tradition.

 

[Palaeologos]

I believe in the corporate visible church and have attended quite a few corporate churches for the last 22 years. My point is that we don’t really need to be Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox to be truly Christian.

I see what you’re getting at–labels don’t matter–and on a certain level, I agree with you. But whether you identify as a Catholic/Orthodox/Protestant or not, depending on your theology, you are one of those things. If your theology is Arian (JW), or Gnostic (LDS), or Sabellian (Sacred Name), then I guess you’re not–but then again, you’re not Christian either.

The line of reasoning you’re setting forth here is sort of like that put forth by transsexuals when they claim to be women and not men (despite their possession of male sexual organs). It’s rank nominalism, and not compatible with Christianity, which requires universals (abstract objects) to make sense.

 

[Nine_Two]

I’m not sure you can make a generalization of all Protestant beliefs. Some are actually very confessional and creedal in faith. I agree that the Papacy of the individual in regards to Bible interpretation is extremely dangerous and a big problem. Yet, that is only a distortion of sola scriptura. Church tradition and church history is valuable in rightly dividing the Word… and necessary… and needs to be used a secondary sources of authority.

You’re right it is silly to generalize all protestant beliefs, which is exactly what you were doing. I’m trying to draw a line in the sand.

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

I see what you’re getting at–labels don’t matter–and on a certain level, I agree with you. But whether you identify as a Catholic/Orthodox/Protestant or not, depending on your theology, you are one of those things. If your theology is Arian (JW), or Gnostic (LDS), or Sabellian (Sacred Name), then I guess you’re not–but then again, you’re not Christian either.

The line of reasoning you’re setting forth here is sort of like that put forth by transsexuals when they claim to be women and not men (despite their possession of male sexual organs). It’s rank nominalism, and not compatible with Christianity, which requires universals (abstract objects) to make sense.

Sure, I am a historic confessional Protestant and all that goes with it in regards to theology. However, I do not leave out other Christians who reject a forensic justification, penal substitution, and imputation as being in the family of God through Christ. Is this a compromise? I don’t think salvation is based on our exact theological understanding. Do you think the thief on the cross debated the fine points of imputation and faith alone?

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

You’re right it is silly to generalize all protestant beliefs, which is exactly what you were doing. I’m trying to draw a line in the sand.

The line in the sand is faith in the biblical historic Jesus Christ. What other line really matters?

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;6377551:

One in Christ,

I’ve been following this thread from the outset and I find myself somewhat disappointed that gurneyhalleck1 has withdrawn as result of your reluctance to state your denomination. Some of your comments sound like the sort of things I might have said when I was an Evangelical. During my time in the Evangelical world I was a SOLO Scriptura

adherent so neither the denomination with which I chose to align myself nor the church I happened to frequent was relevant (although I never concealed my affiliation) as all I needed was a Bible (the truncated one of 66 books, of course).

If you would be kind enough to confirm that you, too, are a SOLO Scriptura advocate, I‘d be most grateful as I could then rest easy.

Appreciatively,
Mick
:thumbsup:I would consider myself to be a sola scriptura Christian as compared to a solo scriptura Christian (no secondary source of authority in tradition). There is a very important difference; therefore I can appreciate my Catholic brothers and sisters who value church tradition. I attend a church that may not actually line up in what I believe in regards to be a confessional church within Protestantism due to where I live. I prefer a Protestant Church with greater regards to church tradition (creeds and confessions).

Thanks for responding to my query but now I’m even more confused.

Firstly, you affirm above that there is a very important difference between the SOLO Scriptura approach and the SOLA Scriptura approach. So how is it that you do not view the differences in the beliefs of the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church and the ideas and doctrines that you categorize under the heading of Protestant as very important?

Secondly, you appear to be suggesting that the church you attend embraces teachings with which you don’t agree but if Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant beliefs are all equally acceptable within your thinking what is the basis for your conflict with the teachings of the church you currently attend?

Thirdly, if you consider Catholics to be just as Christian as anybody else what is stopping you from becoming a Catholic?

Curiously,
Mick

 

[Nine_Two]

The line in the sand is faith in the biblical historic Jesus Christ. What other line really matters?

And ask different protestants what the “biblical” “historic” Jesus is, and they’ll all give you different answers.

Do you only count as “protestant” under your definition those who accept the Creeds which the various ecumenical councils came out with? What about the Canon’s of those same councils? How many councils are we talking about? Three? Four? Seven? Twenty-One?

I’m trying to bring us back to the question I originally asked, platitudes are not going to cut it for an answer.

 

[SSTeacher]

Nine_Two;6378235:

You’re right it is silly to generalize all protestant beliefs, which is exactly what you were doing. I’m trying to draw a line in the sand.

The line in the sand is faith in the biblical historic Jesus Christ. What other line really matters?

One in Christ,

I suggest there are many other relevant delineations as evidenced by a multitude of different versions of the Bible that do not necessarily agree with each other thereby adding to the contradiction and cacophony that prevails inside Non–Catholic Western Christendom. In Post #68 you quoted from the English Standard Version. Would you be prepared to endorse without qualification this version of the Bible and affirm that it correctly and infallibly represents to its readers the biblical historic Jesus Christ?

Cordially,
Mick

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

Thanks for responding to my query but now I’m even more confused.

Firstly, you affirm above that there is a very important difference between the SOLO Scriptura approach and the SOLA Scriptura approach. So how is it that you do not view the differences in the beliefs of the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church and the ideas and doctrines that you categorize under the heading of Protestant as very important?

Secondly, you appear to be suggesting that the church you attend embraces teachings with which you don’t agree but if Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant beliefs are all equally acceptable within your thinking what is the basis for your conflict with the teachings of the church you currently attend?

Thirdly, if you consider Catholics to be just as Christian as anybody else what is stopping you from becoming a Catholic?

Curiously,
Mick

As much as we like to think that we attend the right church, or like to think we only believe things that are true… we know that in this life that we will always know partially, and believe things that are false. I am not saying that are theological distinctives are not important because they are. However, because we are still sinners in this life and also know in part… we should work on unity with other Christians that see things differently.

In the church that I attend, I am very like minded with the main pastor who inherited a very non-confessional church 3 years ago. I am patient alongside with my Pastor that God is changing things. What would you have me do, leave that church and start my own church…LOL.

I am not Catholic because I disagree with official Catholic theology in regards to justification and authority. How can I give up penal substitution if I believe it to be the truth? Because I disagree with Catholics in the doctrine of justification and the Magisterium… does that make us enemies in Christ? I don’t think so, because the body of Christ is one in spite of our man made divisions and the lines in the sand that we create.

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

And ask different protestants what the “biblical” “historic” Jesus is, and they’ll all give you different answers.

Do you only count as “protestant” under your definition those who accept the Creeds which the various ecumenical councils came out with? What about the Canon’s of those same councils? How many councils are we talking about? Three? Four? Seven? Twenty-One?

I’m trying to bring us back to the question I originally asked, platitudes are not going to cut it for an answer.

How about starting with the Apostles Creed, uniting with those Christians who can agree on that one? BTW… cults will try to undermine the authority of ecumenical creeds. I see that we have two choices… we can continue to fight and divide with other Christians from other traditions, or we can try to unite as one in Christ. We should have unity within orthodoxy.