E
Esdra
Guest
Well, because I am feeling comfortable in that Church… Although in some points they are a bit to fanatical for me. Those points I simply (inofficially of course!) substitute through my own thoughts.
Esdra
- Status
Esdra
E
Esdra
Guest
I agree. I know A LOT such Catholics. In fact, nearly all Catholics in the Tyrol, Austria, Europe, are like that. Those who stick firmly to the whole doctrine are normally called fundamentalists or fanatics (which isn’t regarded as positive!)
Esdra
M
mark_a
Guest
I see. Thanks.Well, because I am feeling comfortable in that Church… Although in some points they are a bit to fanatical for me. Those points I simply (inofficially of course!) substitute through my own thoughts.
Esdra
By the way, most Catholic Churches have padded pews AND kneelers, and we keep the thermostat set to 72f.
O
oneGODoneCHURCH
Guest
I do not understand that. I could not remain in a church that taught something that I did not agree with. There are things in the Catholic church that I may not understand, but in those case I pray for understanding. I do not substitute my own beliefs( offically or unoffically) If I am asked about them I state this is what I know of the Church teaching on the matter and I accept the churches teaching. I also say if pressed that I do not understand that completely and direct them to people that may be better able to answer their questions.Well, because I am feeling comfortable in that Church… Although in some points they are a bit to fanatical for me. Those points I simply (inofficially of course!) substitute through my own thoughts.
Esdra
I
Izdaari
Guest
If I held out for a church I completely agreed with, I’d have to start my own. I guess it would be called the Izdaarian Charismissional Anglicostal church.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Or I could just go Anglican/Episcopalian, since their range of beliefs is wide enough to encompass mine.
B
benidict
Guest
and why does your heart ache?:tanning:
O
oneGODoneCHURCH
Guest
Not to be argumentative, but is that not the driving force behind protestanism? If the church says something that I do not personnally like then I join another, or go start my own.If I held out for a church I completely agreed with, I’d have to start my own. I guess it would be called the Izdaarian Charismissional Anglicostal church.
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a141/Izdaari/churchsign.jpg
Or I could just go Anglican/Episcopalian, since their range of beliefs is wide enough to encompass mine.
C
crazzeto
Guest
I grew up in a prodominantly Catholic area of the US, so for me they’re pretty interchangeable… Now that I live in the protestant bible belt I usually wait for some doctrinal statement on the part of those speaking before I decide what faith tradition will probably fit their beliefs the best.
I
Izdaari
Guest
Hmmm, maybe. I never really thought of myself as a Protestant, just a Christian. Other people call me Protestant because I’m not Catholic or Orthodox.
The point of what I posted wasn’t that I was going to start my own church. That was but a jest. I’m quite tolerant of doctrinal differences on less important matters, and can happily worship in a church I don’t agree with on everything… so long as we agree on the essentials.
Luther wasn’t trying to split off from the Catholic Church, but to reform it. But it was too resistant to change, and decided to kick him out instead.
O
oneGODoneCHURCH
Guest
I do realize that you were making a joke in your statemnt of starting your own Church.Hmmm, maybe. I never really thought of myself as a Protestant, just a Christian. Other people call me Protestant because I’m not Catholic or Orthodox.
The point of what I posted wasn’t that I was going to start my own church. That was but a jest. I’m quite tolerant of doctrinal differences on less important matters, and can happily worship in a church I don’t agree with on everything… so long as we agree on the essentials.
Luther wasn’t trying to split off from the Catholic Church, but to reform it. But it was too resistant to change, and decided to kick him out instead.
However, Lutherns original proplem were not on points of Dogma, but abuses of those Teachings that had arisen. What lead to his excummonication was IMHO really bad advise from people that he surrounded himself, and what some within the Church took as a attack upon their authority. If you look at it almost all of Luthers concerns wer address at Trent and saddly it was to late to stop what had already started in the protestant revolt.
I see things a little different and I guess it is because I look through a Catholic lens. There are no little docturines. All Dogma and docturinal teachings are more or less equal and I as Catholic are bond by them, wether or not I like them I must accept them and pray for understanding. There are small t traditons that i am not bond by. Those I can choice to accept or reject. They are not binding upon the faithful. Example it is a tradition upon entering and leaving a church to dip your finger in the Holy Water Font and cross yourself saying in the name of the Father and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. I am free to do or not do this. It is a docutural/dogmatic teaching that God is a Trinity. I may not understand that, I may not even like that but to be catholic I must accept that.
I
Izdaari
Guest
Right, egos got involved and things spun out of control. It’s especially sad since all sides eventually agreed that Luther had mostly been right. So, if Trent could’ve happened during Luther’s time, likely the split could’ve been averted. But the Church has a lot of bureaucratic momentum, and can’t be turned that quickly, so given the personalities and the institutions involved, I don’t see how it could’ve been avoided.I do realize that you were making a joke in your statemnt of starting your own Church.
However, Lutherns original proplem were not on points of Dogma, but abuses of those Teachings that had arisen. What lead to his excummonication was IMHO really bad advise from people that he surrounded himself, and what some within the Church took as a attack upon their authority. If you look at it almost all of Luthers concerns wer address at Trent and saddly it was to late to stop what had already started in the protestant revolt.
It’s not that different with us. Big things, like the Trinity, are essential doctrine, dogma if you will. I would not attend a church I differed with on such. There aren’t many things I put in that category, mainly just what C.S. Lewis called “Mere Christianity”, the things that pretty much all Christians at all times have agreed on.
But the differences between most Protestant denominations are smaller, things I’d put more on the level of traditions, and they’re no big deal to me. I belong to an Assemblies of God church, but if the best church in my neighborhood happened to be Baptist, Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist or Presbyterian, I could work with that. There are, of course, exceptions: i.e., some Presbyterian churches are hardcore Calvinist, and I’d be too different from them on doctrine. But mostly they’d be in my range.
E
Esdra
Guest
I agree with you!Right, egos got involved and things spun out of control. It’s especially sad since all sides eventually agreed that Luther had mostly been right. So, if Trent could’ve happened during Luther’s time, likely the split could’ve been averted. But the Church has a lot of bureaucratic momentum, and can’t be turned that quickly, so given the personalities and the institutions involved, I don’t see how it could’ve been avoided.
It’s not that different with us. Big things, like the Trinity, are essential doctrine, dogma if you will. I would not attend a church I differed with on such. There aren’t many things I put in that category, mainly just what C.S. Lewis called “Mere Christianity”, the things that pretty much all Christians at all times have agreed on.
But the differences between most Protestant denominations are smaller, things I’d put more on the level of traditions, and they’re no big deal to me. I belong to an Assemblies of God church, but if the best church in my neighborhood happened to be Baptist, Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist or Presbyterian, I could work with that. There are, of course, exceptions: i.e., some Presbyterian churches are hardcore Calvinist, and I’d be too different from them on doctrine. But mostly they’d be in my range.
Happy to know someone that has similar believes than I have in this board. It is getting hard in here sometimes…Most Protestant Churches are very similar according their Teachings. I am a Baptist (or let’s say some sort of
) but I also feel at home in Pentecostal Churches.Esdra
O
oneGODoneCHURCH
Guest
Yes it is true that the wheels of the Church turn really slow. That in almost all cases is a blessing as it keeps the Church from getting turned by fads and also gives it time to look at any “New” thought and way it against what docturnies and teaching are to make sure there is not a conflict. We can see that what happens when change happen fast in all the up heaval that just now is starting to settle in reaction to the Second Vatican Councel.
But some of those big things would be the Eucharist. Communion of the Saints. The Authority of the Church. There are even parts of the Nicene Creed the some protestant denomination reject.
I just could not say I am a ( insert name here) and yet believe things that that organization did not, or reject beliefs that that organization said is part of faith. I mean even as Close to each other as Cathoic and Orthodox are I do not feel comfortable at the Divine Liturgy of the Orthodox because we do not agree on the role of the Pope in th world wide Church. I aslo wonder just how really comfortable you would be at the Liturgical services of the Lutherns or Episcopals as they in most case are so close to the Catholic Mass
E
eucharisteo
Guest
We were there May 2006 trying out a non-denominational after getting our heart broken in our previous faith. We considered ourselves not having a denomination as opposed to non-denomination. We knew that after 19 congregations, mostly moving around, it was time to rethink what we were doing. Proselytizing became overwhelming offensive to us and we began to understand how people felt, since no one ever really talked to us like we were members of the Lord’s church in spite the fact that we were baptized into that faith and toated the belief line. I was never truly accepted because I was only interested in what was true and rejected that which was obviously inconsistent with scritpure, which ultimately led me to Catholicm shortly after. And that was because of our exposure to that non-denomination’s open forum, more of an interdenominational church than a non-denomination we realized. We rejected way to much of what they believed and discussed where we should go with much anxiety. I felt more comfortable with the doctrine taught by the church of Christ but without the worries over instruments. I also had issues with a lack of ability to tackle the really difficult passages that were skimmed over and dismissed, but really revealed to me Catholic doctrine. It disturbed me and none of the explanations ever relieved my anxiety. I remember saying to myself several times: “the catholic Church teaching that I read about is beautiful if it was true but it’s ashamed that none of the Catholics even accept or practice it, including its preachers/leaders all the way up to Rome.” I meant that with all sincerity. I could not see how the Lord could use an organization so full of corruption, both current and historical. It was very humiliating for me to return with my tail tucked between my legs trying not to show my anger towards Catholics. It was strange. I actually loathed Catholics, but loved the faith and that is why I converted, not because the people inspired me but because the Church that Christ founded contained the fullness of the truth. More on this another time.
I
Izdaari
Guest
Yes, that does have advantages.
I differ a little on the Real Presence – I see it as true on a spiritual/mystical level, not physical. But I do believe it’s much more than just symbolic.
I accept all of the Nicene Creed, though of course I don’t capitalize “catholic” in it. I don’t see a need to ask the dead to pray for me, but I don’t have a problem with it so long as you don’t worship them, and I know you don’t. The one thing I just can’t swallow is the Authority of the Church.
I have been a regular at a Lutheran church, though I didn’t join, and I do sometimes visit the local Episcopal cathedral, which is the seat of the Seattle archdiocese. I enjoy a liturgical service once in a while as a change of pace. I don’t mind visiting a Catholic or Orthodox church either, but since neither will let nonmembers take the Eucharist, it’s not a complete experience.
But then again, I’m not your typical Pentecostal. By doctrine, I’m probably about 1/3 Pentecostal, 1/3 Lutheran and 1/3 Anglican. The Lutheran part comes from reading Martin Luther himself, and the Anglican part comes mainly from C.S. Lewis and N.T. Wright, two of my favorite Christian writers. Indeed, I owe Lewis the lion’s share of the (human) credit for my being a Christian at all. It was he who convinced me it was a reasonable thing to believe.
O
oneGODoneCHURCH
Guest
Thank you for sharing. Praise the Lord that you have found your way home. You are correct in that within the Church there are many that have not lived up to the faith they profess. I could be one of those at various times in my life.
Gods grace continue to mode us if we allow it and keeping working on it.
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
Interestingly enough, this is the most biblical of those things that you mentioned. Christ clearly instituted a Church and He clearly gave His authority to that Church.
“And I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.” Matt 16:19
The passing of the keys is a clear sign of authority, (έξουσία in Greek if you prefer), which was foreshadowed plenty in the Old Testament as well, (e.g., Isaias 22:22).
A
AdamC
Guest
I hear Christian, I think American-style Protestantism. I hear Catholic, I think “intense Christian”.
E
Esdra
Guest
Hi
I can’t agree with you.
When I think of Christian I normally don’t think of American-style Protestantism. For the American didn’t found the evangelical movement, but the Europeans: Calvin, Zwingli, Hutter (btw. a Tyrolian, this means of the same county I am actually from
), also Luther if you want so and some others. The problem was that the RCC often prosecuted those movements and later denominations as heresies and so most of them moved to the US, the land of (religious) freedom and there they grew - and since the RCC isn’t that powerful than she used to be, those denominations came back evangalizing Europe and the rest of the world as “american sects” in the last few decades.Esdra
- Status