Catholic/Protestant Reunification...

[Contarini]

:Reformed, Lutheran, Wesleyan/Holiness. In reality, that is about it.:

Anglicans? Baptists (who distinctly differ from mainstream Reformed)? Restorationists? Pentecostals? Anabaptists? And all of these have lots of subdivisions that have significant differences (try telling a fundamentalist independent Baptist and an American Baptist that they have the same basic view!). The truth is in between what you are saying and the claim of “thousands of denominations.”

As to reunification, of course that is a denomination by denomination affair–and in practice any denomination that united with Rome would undergo a split–there would always be some who would choose not to go along with it. Some small groups of Anglicans have reunited, but that’s as far as it’s gone. The problem is that frequently the more ecumenical Protestants are also the more liberal ones, who would love to have reunion but not on terms Rome would find acceptable. There is a solid central core of orthodox ecumenical Protestants, but I don’t think they are strong enough in any denomination to bring about reunion.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[Makerteacher]

I believe reunification is possible, but only through the grace and intervention of The Holy Spirit. It’s going to require a lot of open discussion between denominations. An astonishing number of people, many of them Catholics , are uninformed about what Catholics believe, and will swallow the most ridiculous claims about what Our Faith teachers.

Locally, a group of lay Catholics active in the Faith have begun to meet monthly for an extended lunch and prayer time with leaders from other denominations. We have evangelicals, Messianic Jews, Presbyterians, and often visitors from other churches. Our goal is simple: to understand one another’s denominations in order to further the reunification of the Church.

This is something that could be done anywhere by anyone. I encourage you all to take a leap out on a limb, make some phone calls, and get something started. JP2 has a real heart for ecunemism. He’s my role model!

 

[hlgomez]

Reformed, Lutheran, Wesleyan/Holiness. In reality, that is about it. You’ve got Franciscan, Dominican, Augustinian, Benedictine, VOF, Matthew Fox, Hans Kung, Scheelebex, Reiki, holististic therapy, buddhism, yoga, and oh, so many more

hmmm… do you know what you are talking about?

Those highlighted in blue are NOT OPPOSED to Catholic beliefs, in fact, they belong to the Catholic Church, unlike the others that you have mentioned which are all Protestants.

 

[MattG]

Makerteacher:

I believe reunification is possible, but only through the grace and intervention of The Holy Spirit. It’s going to require a lot of open discussion between denominations. An astonishing number of people, many of them Catholics , are uninformed about what Catholics believe, and will swallow the most ridiculous claims about what Our Faith teachers.

Locally, a group of lay Catholics active in the Faith have begun to meet monthly for an extended lunch and prayer time with leaders from other denominations. We have evangelicals, Messianic Jews, Presbyterians, and often visitors from other churches. Our goal is simple: to understand one another’s denominations in order to further the reunification of the Church.

None of the posts seem to be the perfect hinge to hang mine on. Since this is the last one, I will add it here.
Shortly after the beginning of year of 1973, many disparate Christians from equally disparate churches began to meet in what became quickly known as Right to Life Groups. The group of Pro-life individuals in my area have been led by Catholics, Mormons, Baptists, and Evangelicals. We’ve met in various churches but mostly in my RCC.
This is not history, but wasn’t the Protestant Revolt as much of a politcal land grab by princes of state yearning after Church Lands as it was the rashness of Martin Luther and his new theology to reform the church in need of it? [uninformed opinion:]The former purpose certainly destroyed the latter, which from the beginning was suspect. Now, another politcal event, Roe vs Wade, has thrust the United States into its own Culture of Death already witnessed by much of the rest of the world. It seems that an event, call it a Reform in reverse, will be necessary to return to all life the legal protections to which they are due. In the process, a reunification will take place in another example of God bringing good from evil.
My signature block contains a mathematical inequality that attempts to express a non-mathematical idea. A phrase I have borrowed from another expresses it differently:
Anyone whose choice would deny the possiblity that another human being from ever making his or her own choices is not pro-choice; s/he is pro-abortion. To be truly pro-choice one must be pro-life and vote pro-life, too.

 

[chemcatholic]

When I visit my parents at home, I attend the worship service at their Baptist church with them (in addition to Mass, of course). I do this not because I am unsure of my conversion to Catholicism, but to continue to worship and praise God with them on terms that are comfortable to them. The only major discussion about Catholic doctrine that I had with them was this past Thanksgiving when I told them of my decision to join the Church. They recieved answers to their questions and objections then, and so I feel no need to continually bring the topic up. All I can do for them at this point is pray for them, worship with them, and be prepared to answer questions they may have in the future, when the Holy Spirit convinces them to re-examine the Church.

Peace

 

[Calvin]

Obviously it is a shame that there are thousands of different protestant denominations.

Reading this thread, though, there are at least two things Catholic apologists need to keep in mind:

1) Protestants distinguish between “essentials” and "non-essentials"

It isn’t fair, from a Protestant prospective, to charge Protestants with having multiple disagreements over what different verses in the Bible mean since Protestants, ourselves, make a distinction between “essential” doctrines and “non-essential” doctrines. “Essential” doctrines are things you have to believe to have eternal life. “Non-essential” doctrines are everything else.

Take, for example, the rapture. Some Protestants believe in such an event and some do not. I don’t know of any Protestant sect, however, that would say that a person’s salvation depended on believing in the rapture. (That is why in the Left Behind books the authors noted that Catholics were raptured too.) The “essential” doctrine is “do you believe in Christ?” The “non-essential” doctrine is “what happens at the end of the world?”

Even the Catholic Church, as I understand it, allows for “essential” and “non-essential” doctrines. Predestination, for example, (as I understand it) is a doctrine that Catholics are allowed to have a variety of opinions on whereas the Immaculate Conception is not open for differing views. We wouldn’t accuse Catholics of being “disunited” because Catholic thinkers had different opinions on predestination so Catholic apologists should be careful with accusing Protestants of being disunited because they think some doctrines are “non-essentials.” Many Protestants would be quick to say, despite the number of denominations, that they “essentialy” have unity (“on the important things”) with other Protestants. This is why you see lots of cross-denominational things in the Protestant world like Promise Keepers or Billy Grahm Crusades where “different” Protestant groups can come together. It is because they agree on “essentials.”

2) Most Protestants fall into one of four broad categories

As one of the other posters pointed out you can basically classify Protestants as different species. (I compared the Protestant denominations to “breeding dogs” in another post.)

The four categories are: Anglo-Catholic, Reformed, Anabaptist and Charismatic. Some groups are all of one of these categories, some groups are a mixture but these four “themes” would account for 95% of Protestant theology.

I think it behooves Catholic apologists to “know thine enemy.” I was disinclined to read one of the books recommended on this site because the title was “Catholicism and Fundamentalism” (or something like that) and I thought to myself, “well I’m not a fundamentalist.” I’m Reformed. Fundies are Anabaptist – so if I was feeling my oats I could argue with BOTH Catholics and Fundamentalists. Why should I read a book from one to the other since I am neither?

Now, with that said, I think that the book might have some good things for me in it. I’m assuming that the author, perhaps, has confused some aspects of Protestant theology and is writing to Protestants more broadly than the title would indicate. I assume that he probably addresses issues common to both Anabaptist and Reformed theology although the title does not indicate that.

Anyway, keep those two points in mind and I think it will help you when you talk to Protestants.

-C

 

[gnoa]

How important do you feel a unity between the two sides is? Do you think it will be reached any time soon? Why or why not? Is important to Catholics to bring Protestants “home”?

~mango~

I do not think that it is a matter of unity that we must seek between Catholicism and the various Protestant denominations. I believe that what is needed is the revelation of truth about Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church to Protestants. This being said, I do not forsee this happening very soon. However, what keeps this from happening is a variety of factors: more evangelization and apologetics work by Catholics, a better educated Catholic laity, more dialogue with Protestant ministers, and, amongst many other factors not listed, open hearts to receive God’s grace to look at the objective truth instead of one’s subjective nature. We are all called, in one way or another, to spread the Good News and bring people home to Christ and His Truth.

 

[Nominefili]

The possibility of a reunion is first of all dependent upon the particular Protestant group. For orthodox, Confessional Lutherans, the Unaltered Augsburg Confession and the other documents of the Book of Concord are the *norma normata *of our doctrine (scripture being the norma normans.)

If the papal office were evacuated, and the Catholic Church could accept the Confessional Lutheran position (i.e. not the ELCA position) on issues such as justification, transubstantiation, Church Tradition, saintly intercessory prayer, among others, the Lutheran Church would be obligated to rejoin the Roman Communion. The remainder of the Church’s structure could remain intact (cardinals, bishops, diocese, archdiocese, etc.) but without a Pope at the top.

Of course, the central doctrine upon which the Church stands or falls is justification. If the Roman Communion could unequivocally accept the Unaltered Augsburg Confession as an accurate exposition of Scripture and the ancient faith, the Lutheran Church would seek communion with Rome, eventually leading up to the integration of the church bodies.

The proper Lutheran position is that we do not like Christ’s Church divided, but for the sake of consciences and souls, we had to forcibly remove ourselves from beneath the Pope’s tyranny until the Reformation-era concerns are fully and adequately addressed.

Will that ever happen? Of course not. Because the Pope would have to decide that the Church doesn’t need a Pope. Or at least that said Pope isn’t infallible. That’s like asking the President of the US to give up his power. It just doesn’t happen. Do I think the Pope is a de facto tyrant? No. It is not the individual but the office of Pope, the office that claims to be the norm for all Christian doctrine, which is unnecessary and prone to corruption.

In short, we would love to ‘come home.’ But something has to give. Back in the old days (Nicea, Chalcedon, etc.) we were able to make concessions to keep Christ’s church together. But the Reformation didn’t see that kind of dialogue, and as a result everyone has taken their corner and is just itching for a fight.

 

[Lutheranteach]

Interesting questions.Let us take a look at the Lutheran/Catholic split— perhaps the closest of all Protestant-Catholic relationships. While the differences are narrow they are in many cases pretty deep. Even if some common ground was found on all those separations, I doubt there would be a total reunification. Why, each side likes their identity, traditions etc. The most I would ever hope for, and I doubt that even this would happen, is that there would be an open communion between the two like there is between the Lutherans and some other mainstream protestant denominations.

 

[Nominefili]

The most I would ever hope for, and I doubt that even this would happen, is that there would be an open communion between the two like there is between the Lutherans and some other mainstream protestant denominations.

Hold on a second. The ‘Lutherans’ don’t commune with other ‘mainstream denominations’, the ELCA does. WELS and LCMS won’t. I don’t see how the ELCA can commune with church bodies like the Presbyterians who don’t even believe that Christ is present in the sacrament. Boggles my mind.

 

[manualman]

…

I think it behooves Catholic apologists to “know thine enemy.” I was disinclined to read one of the books recommended on this site because the title was “Catholicism and Fundamentalism” (or something like that) and I thought to myself, “well I’m not a fundamentalist.” I’m Reformed. Fundies are Anabaptist – so if I was feeling my oats I could argue with BOTH Catholics and Fundamentalists. Why should I read a book from one to the other since I am neither?

Good post. Calvinists are my favorite brand of protestant. I just gotta love the high Christology and the emphasis on the sovereignty of God - even if it does go a bit off the rails in the end. (Hey, I’m catholic - what did you expect?) As a note, the author of that book explains in detail why he chose the title and practically apologizes for applying an arguably over-broad definition. But what did you want him to call it, Catholicism and Pre-Millenial, Dispensational Arminians? (I couldn’t even tell you if such a thing makes any sense!)

On an overall note to the OP, I don’t think there will be reunification until there is intense persecution. And I think that is still a few generations off at the rate things have been going for the last 500 years. When that time comes, the necessity of the sacraments will become clearly manifest.

Does it matter? Absolutely! Christendom has failed convert any new continent or culture wholesale since the Reformation EXCEPT when that conversion took place before the people learned about the divisions. Expect that pattern to continue until we all repent of our sinful roles in perpetuating the schism. Until then, we will fail to convert Islamic nations, fail to make more than minor progress in India, China, and Japan. And we will continue to make a mockery of Christ in our own cultures and fail to pass the faith onto the bulk of our children - until that persecution I mentioned above…

 

[Lutheranteach]

Good post. Calvinists are my favorite brand of protestant. I just gotta love the high Christology and the emphasis on the sovereignty of God - even if it does go a bit off the rails in the end. (Hey, I’m catholic - what did you expect?) As a note, the author of that book explains in detail why he chose the title and practically apologizes for applying an arguably over-broad definition. But what did you want him to call it, Catholicism and Pre-Millenial, Dispensational Arminians? (I couldn’t even tell you if such a thing makes any sense!)

On an overall note to the OP, I don’t think there will be reunification until there is intense persecution. And I think that is still a few generations off at the rate things have been going for the last 500 years. When that time comes, the necessity of the sacraments will become clearly manifest.

Does it matter? Absolutely! Christendom has failed convert any new continent or culture wholesale since the Reformation EXCEPT when that conversion took place before the people learned about the divisions. Expect that pattern to continue until we all repent of our sinful roles in perpetuating the schism. Until then, we will fail to convert Islamic nations, fail to make more than minor progress in India, China, and Japan. And we will continue to make a mockery of Christ in our own cultures and fail to pass the faith onto the bulk of our children - until that persecution I mentioned above…

Let’s not forget that many of those conversions came at the point of a sword.