Do we want to unite?

[waxwing]

If you cannot agree on doctrine such as the Eucharist, the Person of Christ, Original Sin, etc then there can be no true unity. Unity cannot be achieved by agreeing to disagree on doctrine such as JDDJ.

What does JDDJ mean?..Because of above I see that unity within the Protestant Church may be the first order of business - which would in itself would be a huge accomplishment.

 

[KathleenGee]

Not all Christians are bound so much to doctrines…

I wait to see what the Holy Spirit will do…the world is changing…and it has been promised that some day we will have One Shepherd and One Church.

 

[hn160]

What does JDDJ mean?..Because of above I see that unity within the Protestant Church may be the first order of business - which would in itself would be a huge accomplishment.

There probably could never be true unity within the Protestant Churches because most are either Zwinglian or Calvinist which means that their doctrine on the Person of Christ, the Eucharist, Baptism and others are all screwed up. Such as on the Eucharist, Zwingli said that the Body of Christ was confined to Heaven and that the Lord’s Supper was a memorial meal, Calvin said the same thing about the Body of Christ but that Christ was spiritually presence in the Lord’s Supper. On this subject, Lutherans and Catholics are closer.

 

[KathleenGee]

I have faith we will continue to grow in unity…but there will be different charisms…but the fruit will be Our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[TrueLight]

I’m pretty sure a lot of Evangelicals do not want to unite with the Catholic Church by becoming Catholic. If anything they are most likely praying that the Catholic Church repents.

 

[Rahn]

A great quote from Peter Kreeft:

“The bridegroom is coming for His bride, and Jesus Christ is not a bigamist”.

And another:

“Two things we need to realise about ecumenism: we can’t do it, and He can”.

 

[wisdomseeker]

A great quote from Peter Kreeft:

“The bridegroom is coming for His bride, and Jesus Christ is not a bigamist”.

And another:

“Two things we need to realise about ecumenism: we can’t do it, and He can”.

Yes, but God will not force anyone. It is obedience that will dictates for God has already established what is to be done. All we have to do is obey. He also said to obey the Church. the problem is that everyone thinks that they have authority to determine what is True.

 

[Cat]

Sorry if I misstated the Orthodox position - I always thought that the RCC was the only Church that was upfront about stating is is the one and only true Church. Yes I think it will take a miracle for serious reunification. Regarding your last line, never understood why certain Protestant don’t accept the one baptism doctrine. I think a good starting point for at least some Protestant unity would be lets just accept each others baptism. Is it really fruitful to engage in the whole infant vs adult baptism, immersion vs sprinkling debate? Is it worth dividing over?

The baptism issue is huge among Protestant denominations.

I grew up Baptist, and the issue of adult vs. infant baptism is gigantic.

You see, Baptists and other evangelical denominations do not accept sacraments. To them, baptism is an outward manifestation of an INWARD change. They believe that a person choose to be baptized out of obedience to Jesus, as a demonstration that they are CHOOSING to follow Jesus.

An infant cannot choose to follow Jesus. So an infant baptism is not valid to a Baptist. It means nothing.

Baptists and many other evangelical denominations do not accept that baptism has any “saving” power. It’s just a symbol of a decision to follow Christ.

That’s one reason why Baptists can and do accept some Catholics as Christians. To Baptists, being saved has nothing to do with baptism. If a person has made a decision to follow Christ and give their life to Him, then they are saved.

Other Protestant denominations, mainly the mainlines (Lutheran, Reformed, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, etc.) still accept the sacraments, including the sacrament of Baptism. They attach some kind of saving power to baptism.

There are subtle and not-so-subtle shades of difference in baptism doctrines among all the Protestant denominations. Some do not believe that baptism is necessary at all, and some even teach that it is a “work of man” and therefore, an abomination to the Lord Jesus. Others, e.g., the Campbellite churches (Church of Christ, Christian church, DIsciples of Christ) believe that Baptism is necessary for salvation; these “Restoration” churches are closer to Catholicism in their teaching about baptism and communion. The Reformed Churches believe that baptism brings a child (or adult) into the “covenant” and makes them part of the Church, but doesn’t necessarily save them.

I’m only listing a few that I have personal experience with. There are many others. And I haven’t even begun to touch the issue of “baptism by immersion” vs. “sprinkling and pouring.” This issue alone is a source of fierce and bitter conflict between evangelical denominations and many other denominations.

So I think that Baptism is highly unlikely to become a rallying point for unity among Protestants. IF anything, it will continue to be a controversial issue and a point of sorrowful division among Protestants.

 

[wisdomseeker]

The baptism issue is huge among Protestant denominations.

I grew up Baptist, and the issue of adult vs. infant baptism is gigantic.

You see, Baptists and other evangelical denominations do not accept sacraments. To them, baptism is an outward manifestation of an INWARD change. They believe that a person choose to be baptized out of obedience to Jesus, as a demonstration that they are CHOOSING to follow Jesus.

An infant cannot choose to follow Jesus. So an infant baptism is not valid to a Baptist. It means nothing.

Baptists and many other evangelical denominations do not accept that baptism has any “saving” power. It’s just a symbol of a decision to follow Christ.

That’s one reason why Baptists can and do accept some Catholics as Christians. To Baptists, being saved has nothing to do with baptism. If a person has made a decision to follow Christ and give their life to Him, then they are saved.

Other Protestant denominations, mainly the mainlines (Lutheran, Reformed, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, etc.) still accept the sacraments, including the sacrament of Baptism. They attach some kind of saving power to baptism.

There are subtle and not-so-subtle shades of difference in baptism doctrines among all the Protestant denominations. Some do not believe that baptism is necessary at all, and some even teach that it is a “work of man” and therefore, an abomination to the Lord Jesus. Others, e.g., the Campbellite churches (Church of Christ, Christian church, DIsciples of Christ) believe that Baptism is necessary for salvation; these “Restoration” churches are closer to Catholicism in their teaching about baptism and communion. The Reformed Churches believe that baptism brings a child (or adult) into the “covenant” and makes them part of the Church, but doesn’t necessarily save them.

I’m only listing a few that I have personal experience with. There are many others. And I haven’t even begun to touch the issue of “baptism by immersion” vs. “sprinkling and pouring.” This issue alone is a source of fierce and bitter conflict between evangelical denominations and many other denominations.

So I think that Baptism is highly unlikely to become a rallying point for unity among Protestants. IF anything, it will continue to be a controversial issue and a point of sorrowful division among Protestants.

Wow! this alone makes my head spin. Don’t want to know about the others.

 

[Cat]

I’m pretty sure a lot of Evangelicals do not want to unite with the Catholic Church by becoming Catholic. If anything they are most likely praying that the Catholic Church repents.

This is absolutely true.

What evangelicals would like is unity of the basic fundamentals of the Christian faith, and unity regarding the historical morals of the Christian faith.

The Fundamentals are as follows:

1. Inerrancy of the Scriptures.
2. The Virgin Birth and Deity of Jesus Christ
3. Substitutionary atonement by God’s grace through faith.
4. The bodily resurrection of Jesus.
5. The authenticity of the miracles of Jesus OR the 2nd Coming of Jesus Christ

The historical morals of the Christian faith would include (but not be limited to):

1. Marriage between a man and a woman
2. The Sanctity of human life from conception to natural death
3. Homosexual sex is a sin
4. Racism is a sin
   etc.

Charles Colson and Father John Richard Neuhaus (RIP) recognized the importance of unity between the Christian churches and formed Evangelicals and Catholics Together. Over the years, they have written several documents that have been signed by many prominent Protestant pastors and leaders, as well as by many Catholics priests and leaders.

Here’s a link to a July 24, 2011 article in Christianity Today about Evangelicals and Catholics Together post Fr. Neuhaus: christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/januaryweb-only/103-51.0.html?start=3

BTW, I don’t know what the rest of you think, but I don’t see that Catholics should have any problems with the 5 Fundamentals of the Faith. In fact, I think that Catholics are the biggest champions of these 5 Fundamentals. Many Protestant denominations have become “mushy” over the years, especially regarding #2, #4, and #5. I have heard with my own ears Protestant pastors deny the virgin birth, deny the deity of Jesus, deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and deny that Jesus will ever come again. But Catholics continue to teach and preach all of these things.

I also think that the Catholic Church teaches and preaches the historical morality issues. One issue that isn’t on the evangelical Protestant list is the evil of artificial birth control. It USED to be on the list, but in the 50s and 60s, many Protestant churches stopped teaching that contraception is sinful, and began promoting “responsible family planning.” But in the last ten years, many evangelical Protestants have come to see that it is wrong to limit the size of the families artificially. During the last few years that we were part of evangelical Protestantism, we knew many families who had 8 children or more. We knew many families who were totally open to having as many children as God would give them.

I think it’s possible that the issue of artificial contraception could become a rallying point for unity between Catholics and evangelical Protestants.

 

[KathleenGee]

I could be misunderstanding this, but they are not including the idea of subsisting on the Eucharist…I mean that is centrality to both our faith and Divine worship dictated by our Lord, practiced for 2,000 years…I read a book on the Evangelicals with Catholics…know of Colson’s work…

 

[waxwing]

The baptism issue is huge among Protestant denominations.

I grew up Baptist, and the issue of adult vs. infant baptism is gigantic.

You see, Baptists and other evangelical denominations do not accept sacraments. To them, baptism is an outward manifestation of an INWARD change. They believe that a person choose to be baptized out of obedience to Jesus, as a demonstration that they are CHOOSING to follow Jesus.

An infant cannot choose to follow Jesus. So an infant baptism is not valid to a Baptist. It means nothing.

Baptists and many other evangelical denominations do not accept that baptism has any “saving” power. It’s just a symbol of a decision to follow Christ.

That’s one reason why Baptists can and do accept some Catholics as Christians. To Baptists, being saved has nothing to do with baptism. If a person has made a decision to follow Christ and give their life to Him, then they are saved.

Other Protestant denominations, mainly the mainlines (Lutheran, Reformed, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, etc.) still accept the sacraments, including the sacrament of Baptism. They attach some kind of saving power to baptism.

There are subtle and not-so-subtle shades of difference in baptism doctrines among all the Protestant denominations. Some do not believe that baptism is necessary at all, and some even teach that it is a “work of man” and therefore, an abomination to the Lord Jesus. Others, e.g., the Campbellite churches (Church of Christ, Christian church, DIsciples of Christ) believe that Baptism is necessary for salvation; these “Restoration” churches are closer to Catholicism in their teaching about baptism and communion. The Reformed Churches believe that baptism brings a child (or adult) into the “covenant” and makes them part of the Church, but doesn’t necessarily save them.

I’m only listing a few that I have personal experience with. There are many others. And I haven’t even begun to touch the issue of “baptism by immersion” vs. “sprinkling and pouring.” This issue alone is a source of fierce and bitter conflict between evangelical denominations and many other denominations.

So I think that Baptism is highly unlikely to become a rallying point for unity among Protestants. IF anything, it will continue to be a controversial issue and a point of sorrowful division among Protestants.

I never understood this divide within Protestantism…RCC accepts Protestant Baptism, both from the Mainline and Evangelical Churches - from what I am aware at least. So don’t know why within Protestantism they can’t do the same? To me (yeah I may be naive ) there is room from unity here. But your probably right its not going to happen anytime soon.

 

[gcnuss]

I never understood this divide within Protestantism…RCC accepts Protestant Baptism, both from the Mainline and Evangelical Churches - from what I am aware at least. So don’t know why within Protestantism they can’t do the same? To me (yeah I may be naive ) there is room from unity here. But your probably right its not going to happen anytime soon.

We Lutherans certainly accept Catholic baptisms. On the other hand, the Protestants who adhere to a “believer’s baptism” won’t accept ours either.