Do we really want another 500 years of division between Catholics and Protestants?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Christian_Unity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Christian_Unity said:
Yep, Protestants see the church to not be an exclusive denomination or branch of Christianity. We see the church universal to be those in Christ from all the different denominations and branches of Christianity. I think you see this concept in the Sacred Scriptures… because there are verses in Scripture which speak of multiple churches.
Click to expand...
Indeed. And why I think the schism is also part of His plan in a way. It has definitely brought the word to more people than would otherwise have happened. But then, I’m in the USA and have a different view than many in the rest of the world. Being from the Eastern half, it is the protestant denominations which were more prevalent even at our revolution. Of the signers of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the US combined, only one was Catholic. I may point out that two were more Gnostic than Christian, but were still members of protestant denomination churches.
 
CopticChristian said:
777,

Imagine Christian Unity,
Click to expand...
That would be so awesome!! I really think the division of Christian (Catholicism and Protostentism) really hurts Christianity in terms of people being able to say "How can Christianity be the correct religion if there are two forms of it (not to mention many forms of Prototentisim)
 
Christian_Unity said:
Yep, Protestants see the church to not be an exclusive denomination or branch of Christianity. We see the church universal to be those in Christ from all the different denominations and branches of Christianity. I think you see this concept in the Sacred Scriptures… because there are verses in Scripture which speak of multiple churches.
Click to expand...
Apples and Oranges. The early churches were Apostolic, not Protestant.

Jewish Christians and Gnostics were preaching doctrinal errors in the early churches and the Apostles had to deal with them, but the Apostles were of one mind. Even Paul went to the twelve at Jerusalem to ensure what he was preaching was in accordance with them.

I do not see evidence in Scripture of the discord that is prevalent in Christianity now. Furthermore, the problem with Christianity now is that unlike the early Christians who listened to their Bishops, these new “reformed” Christians (of the Reformation movement) rejected Apostolic authority and elevated themselves instead.

This doesn’t change the fact that we’re all Christian, regardless of Catholic or Protestant, but one simply cannot chalk up most our differences to stubbornness or pride. They are largely theological and that carries a lot of weight.
 
CatherineOH said:
Indeed. And why I think the schism is also part of His plan in a way. It has definitely brought the word to more people than would otherwise have happened. But then, I’m in the USA and have a different view than many in the rest of the world. Being from the Eastern half, it is the protestant denominations which were more prevalent even at our revolution. Of the signers of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the US combined, only one was Catholic. I may point out that two were more Gnostic than Christian, but were still members of protestant denomination churches.
Click to expand...
Division is not part of God’s plan. God took a bad situation and brought some good out of it. But when 800 Million people claim to be “guided” by the Holy Spirit and then call everything they can’t agree on “non-essential”, it’s evident this is not Providence.

We have to be very careful lending weight to the reformation because the ideas of it, once taking root, can lead to a watered-down theology that continuously spreads seeds of division and can cost more souls than it will save. An example is one church I went to where they preached Baptism as “non-essential”.

And we must also be careful assuming that had the Protestant Reformation not happened, less people would know Christ. That’s simply something we can’t quantify. Who says that over the 400 years the Bible might not have been available in every language. Instead of a handful of groups fighting over dollars to fund missionaries to translate scripture for languages, you’d have One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church doing it ? Who is to say the Reformation didn’t actually cause more people to reject the message or that it caused Christianity to grow at a slower rate because of the conflict ?
 
Chris_Etzel said:
Division is not part of God’s plan. God took a bad situation and brought some good out of it. …Who is to say the Reformation didn’t actually cause more people to reject the message or that it caused Christianity to grow at a slower rate because of the conflict ?
Click to expand...
We don’t know if it actually didn’t grow slower, but wow did it sure take off after the split 75 years after Christ’s death, then again 1500 (or so) years after…

But how do we know that this schism (I prefer Separation over Division) is not part of his plan?
 
Christian_Unity said:
Christendom will never agree on the same final authority for the next 500 years. Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants understand that final authority comes from our same God. However, we disagree on how our God reveals His authority and will to His adopted children. Do you believe Christendom should be divided for the next 500 years in the same way that has been for the last 500 years?
Click to expand...
So what is YOUR point? That we just pretend we are all the same?

If your brother or sister is in error, you must correct them. If your brother or sister is hellbent on holding on to that error and engages in leading others to error, then serious measures must be taken (like refusing communion).

So should there be a division? YES, if Protestants continue to cling to error. The division will exist for as long as it takes. If and when the Protestants will let go of their errors and come back in to communion, we will have true unity.

You are making it sound like division exists for no reason. That is not the case. Division exists because there are different views on important matters. To say that God exists, Christ is son of God and then say that we have differing views on how God reveals himself is a BIG DIFFERENCE. Since we have contradictory “revelations” of God’s authority, only one can be right. Since this would mean that others are forgeries, it is imperative that we do not pretend that all of them are also right/or we do not know what is right.

The brotherly thing to do is correct those in error. If they do not accept these corrections, they have to kept outside full communion with the church till they can see the error. It is how it has always been done and will happen.
 
Eufrosnia said:
So what is YOUR point? That we just pretend we are all the same?

If your brother or sister is in error, you must correct them. If your brother or sister is hellbent on holding on to that error and engages in leading others to error, then serious measures must be taken (like refusing communion).

So should there be a division? YES, if Protestants continue to cling to error. The division will exist for as long as it takes. If and when the Protestants will let go of their errors and come back in to communion, we will have true unity.

You are making it sound like division exists for no reason. That is not the case. Division exists because there are different views on important matters. To say that God exists, Christ is son of God and then say that we have differing views on how God reveals himself is a BIG DIFFERENCE. Since we have contradictory “revelations” of God’s authority, only one can be right. Since this would mean that others are forgeries, it is imperative that we do not pretend that all of them are also right/or we do not know what is right.

The brotherly thing to do is correct those in error. If they do not accept these corrections, they have to kept outside full communion with the church till they can see the error. It is how it has always been done and will happen.
Click to expand...
Don’t Protestants make the same point that you are making in reverse? I could go on staunch Protestant sites which wouldn’t even acknowledge the Catholic Church to be a true church. I think the thread topic is significant because I personally do not want the church to be divided for the next 500 years. The frst step to unity is what we are doing: discussing such things in a Christ-like manner.
 
CatherineOH said:
We don’t know if it actually didn’t grow slower, but wow did it sure take off after the split 75 years after Christ’s death, then again 1500 (or so) years after…

But how do we know that this schism (I prefer Separation over Division) is not part of his plan?
Click to expand...
Very interesting point and valid comment, considering the Great Schism occurred way before the Protestant Reformation.
 
Good point.
I had forgotten about the Great Schism. (rather outside my experience and knowledge) But that created the Eastern and Western Catholic churches now known in English as Orthodox and Roman. Do they not still have recognition of mass in that a Roman Catholic can attend mass at an Orthodox Catholic church and it counts towards the Mass obligation? (same with a very few Anglican churches who have come back.)
 
CatherineOH said:
But how do we know that this schism (I prefer Separation over Division) is not part of his plan?
Click to expand...
Christ said “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, every city or household divided against itself will not stand.” And again “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”

So in my humble opinion for it to be part of the Plan, it has to provide Growth and Unity. We constantly fish from each others’ ponds so the growth isn’t there and we can’t even agree on what Christ meant about the Eucharist or how many books are even in our bibles so the unity is out the window.

The difference between the Great Schism and the Protestant Reformation is that the Great Schism didn’t leave 33,000 “denominations” in its wake.

It may take another 500 years to sort this all out.
 
Chris_Etzel said:
Christ said “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, every city or household divided against itself will not stand.” And again “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”…
Click to expand...
Yes, that was Jesus reply to the Pharisee when they accused him of being a demon because he drove demons out of the blind mute man. He replied with logic and asked why would a demon remove other demons as that would cause a house divided. (Demons are Satan)
By the use of logic he showed the absurdity of their statements. And all the groups of Christians who believe in the triune nature of God would concur with your second quote.

I think a better argument for you and against the schism would be “He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters”
 
Chris_Etzel said:
Christ said “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, every city or household divided against itself will not stand.” And again “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”

So in my humble opinion for it to be part of the Plan, it has to provide Growth and Unity. We constantly fish from each others’ ponds so the growth isn’t there and we can’t even agree on what Christ meant about the Eucharist or how many books are even in our bibles so the unity is out the window.

The difference between the Great Schism and the Protestant Reformation is that the Great Schism didn’t leave 33,000 “denominations” in its wake.

It may take another 500 years to sort this all out.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church is part of the 34,000 denominaton count:

How many Christian denominations are there?

About 34,000.

There are about 34,000 different Christian groups in the world since AD 30. This is according to the World Christian Encyclopedia published in 2001. 1,200 different Christian denominations exist in the United States alone. Some groups classify Christianity into 8 meta-groups, namely Roman Catholicism (the largest), Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy and Assyrian Churches, Protestantism, Restorationism, Anglican Communicants, Pentecostal, and others.

numberof.net/number-of-christian-denominations/
 
Christian_Unity said:
The Catholic Church is part of the 34,000 demominaton count:

How many Christian denominations are there?

About 34,000.

There are about 34,000 different Christian groups in the world since AD 30. This is according to the World Christian Encyclopedia published in 2001. 1,200 different Christian denominations exist in the United States alone. Some groups classify Christianity into 8 meta-groups, namely Roman Catholicism (the largest), Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy and Assyrian Churches, Protestantism, Restorationism, Anglican Communicants, Pentecostal, and others.

numberof.net/number-of-christian-denominations/
Click to expand...
Denominations are a feature specific to Protestantism. Prior to Protestantism there weren’t any.
 
Christian_Unity said:
The Catholic Church is part of the 34,000 denominaton count:

How many Christian denominations are there?

About 34,000.

There are about 34,000 different Christian groups in the world since AD 30. This is according to the World Christian Encyclopedia published in 2001. 1,200 different Christian denominations exist in the United States alone. Some groups classify Christianity into 8 meta-groups, namely Roman Catholicism (the largest), Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy and Assyrian Churches, Protestantism, Restorationism, Anglican Communicants, Pentecostal, and others.

numberof.net/number-of-christian-denominations/
Click to expand...
A good read which refutes the 33,000 denominations myth

aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2218
 
Chris_Etzel said:
Denominations are a feature specific to Protestantism. Prior to Protestantism there weren’t any.
Click to expand...
The source that I quoted is secular which are always the best sources to quote when discussing theological issues like these. I don’t think you can find a secular source that does not link the Catholic Church or Orthodox Church as being part of the overall 34,000 denominational mix. Remember the thread topic… one Christian Faith that is divided. The Geat Schism was a bad divide too which still applies today.
 
Christian_Unity said:
Very interesting point and valid comment, considering the Great Schism occurred way before the Protestant Reformation.
Click to expand...
Yet no change in doctrines to speak of and each had valid apostolic succession, something the Protestant “reformers” could not claim. The schism was the result of questions concerning authority, not doctrine. The Protestants rejected both the authority and most of the doctrines held by both the Catholic and the Orthodox Church’s, retaining only the Catholic document known as the “Bible” as their source of faith, for the most part.
 
CatherineOH said:
Yes, that was Jesus reply to the Pharisee when they accused him of being a demon because he drove demons out of the blind mute man. He replied with logic and asked why would a demon remove other demons as that would cause a house divided. (Demons are Satan)
By the use of logic he showed the absurdity of their statements. And all the groups of Christians who believe in the triune nature of God would concur with your second quote.

I think a better argument for you and against the schism would be “He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters”
Click to expand...
The logic is still valid to my original point: The splits were not of Divine origin because logically Christ wouldn’t divide his church.

I apologize for injecting the side-topic of Schism differentiation in my last post. Ugh! I got side-tracked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top