A
- Status
J
jmcrae
Guest
The Campbellites (Campbellite Restoration movement) refer to themselves as “the Christian church.” This is what she is referring to. They are also known as “The Disciples of Christ, Christian.”
They sincerely believe themselves to be the restoration of Christ’s original Church, which they believe to have been lost at some point after the Ascension into Heaven, which is why they reject the label of “denomination” and why they refer to themselves as “the Christian church.”
T
toaslan
Guest
Hi, Nondenom–I thought it was funny, and just assumed it meant that first there is singing, then there is a sermon, then there is singing again? Isn’t that what it meant? And here, have a little
Atemi, I refuse to define that.
B
Br.Rich_SFO
Guest
“Do you mean to tell me that every non-denominational church is likely to have its own unique description of what it is to be Christian? And to disagree on that with the non-denom church down the street? Is this what I am learning?”Yes, isn’t that how it functions for any individual protestant or group of Protestants? I mean, the first assumption is that you are your own pope (you have his ability to infallibly discern scripture). What follows from that is that everybody who doesn’t have the same discernment as you is not only wrong, but also abandoned by the Holy Spirit, (which means they are led by the devil). You must, in conscience, have your own church which will be the true church?
But in the practical realm, surely there is some connection linking all the non-denoms? I guess I was thinking that all the non-denominational churches were really all ascribing to the same set of beliefs, and all rejecting the same set, and that therefore one day they would pick a nameto describe the entire set of non-denominationals.
Do you mean to tell me that every non-denominational church is likely to have its own unique description of what it is to be Christian? And to disagree on that with the non-denom church down the street? Is this what I am learning? If so, would a non-denominational church say that their body was right about being Christian and say, the Baptists, were wrong? Or is it their position to be silent on all the disagreements (except the disagreement with the Catholic Church)? (since from ALLFORHIM I see they do disagree with the Catholic belief)…
Yes
In my experience even members of the same “church” may hold very different beliefs.
Many are not even Baptized and so technically are not even Christians.
C
Cat
Guest
My husband and I attended the Christian church for five years, during our college days. My husband was deacon in the church in his last year of college.
The pastor of that church insisted that the Christian churches were NOT a denomination, because they were all autonomous. They do not capitalize “church.” They are just “Christians.”
But each of the Christian churches does have a Statement of Faith. And they have colleges and conferences that bring other Christian church people together. They publish a couple of magazines (“The Christian Standard” and “Lookout”) that are handed out in Christian churches.
Until this year, I was involved with a Protestant forum, and apparently the same practices are still followed. The Christian churches claim that they are not a denomination, and they don’t capitalize “church” in their name.
There are also churches called “Church of Christ” and “Disciples of Christ” that share a lot of the same beliefs, go to the same colleges, and hand out the same magazines.
And to make it even more confusing, there are the “instrumentalists” and “non-instrumentalists” in the Christian churches. (Names are self-explanatory.) Both believe that they are practicing Christianity the way the New Testament church did it.
Gosh, I’m glad to be Catholic!
The pastor of that church insisted that the Christian churches were NOT a denomination, because they were all autonomous. They do not capitalize “church.” They are just “Christians.”
But each of the Christian churches does have a Statement of Faith. And they have colleges and conferences that bring other Christian church people together. They publish a couple of magazines (“The Christian Standard” and “Lookout”) that are handed out in Christian churches.
Until this year, I was involved with a Protestant forum, and apparently the same practices are still followed. The Christian churches claim that they are not a denomination, and they don’t capitalize “church” in their name.
There are also churches called “Church of Christ” and “Disciples of Christ” that share a lot of the same beliefs, go to the same colleges, and hand out the same magazines.
And to make it even more confusing, there are the “instrumentalists” and “non-instrumentalists” in the Christian churches. (Names are self-explanatory.) Both believe that they are practicing Christianity the way the New Testament church did it.
Gosh, I’m glad to be Catholic!
T
toaslan
Guest
Digitonomy, I know this was an illustration and not your point, but I don’t know how I missed this the first time through!
What the hey are you thinkin’??
Your example derailed me, as an example of, hmmmmm, heterodoxy?I’m OK with non-denoms each having individual unique beliefs, because I guess that’s them (although not free to reject Sola Scriptura?), but not with Catholics having such
T
toaslan
Guest
You guys are kidding me.
So what in your opinion unites them in their church? With respect to the content of faith, are they united in their rejection of some content, if it comes down to reality? Basically a negative unity…?
With respect to the act of faith, are their wills just set one way? They love something (what?) as good so much, that they are willing to embrace that without examining the content of that faith. Or is it more likely to be a hatred, in the will, of something which is the motivating factor? Maybe this latter gets too subjective as well as judgmental…
D
Digitonomy
Guest
"Digitonomy:
Since there seem to be many different beliefs on these issues, it would appear that heterodoxy is running rampant on this message board!
Well, just looking under the Apologetics forums today, I see that there is disagreement on whether it is right to apply the death penalty to child molesters, whether the Douay-Rheims or the RSV is the better Bible translation, whether it is sinful to call a girl “hot”, and what St. Ignatius meant in his letter to the Smyrneans.What the hey are you thinkin’??
I’m OK with non-denoms each having individual unique beliefs, because I guess that’s them (although not free to reject Sola Scriptura?), but not with Catholics having such
Since there seem to be many different beliefs on these issues, it would appear that heterodoxy is running rampant on this message board!
J
jmcrae
Guest
One becomes a member of one of these churches by signing a statement of faith, or even simply by showing up to Sunday/Wednesday services on a regular basis.You guys are kidding me.
So what in your opinion unites them in their church? With respect to the content of faith, are they united in their rejection of some content, if it comes down to reality? Basically a negative unity…?
They consider one’s relationship with Christ to be so personal that they won’t even ask you about that. They don’t consider baptism to be an “essential” and, at least in my experience, the “Altar Call” is also optional, though strongly encouraged.
N
NonDenom
Guest
G
guanophore
Guest
I had a very good friend who was like that, attended a non-denom church, knew the scriptures very well, prayed fervently and walked the evangelical walk. After 7 years of thinking she was an evangelical protestant I was shocked when she announced to the world that God incarnate had returned to earth, and she quit her job 1 1/2 years before retirement, sold all she had to go join a comune in California run by a man who calls himself Jesus Christ Lightening Amen. She later told me he was the only Jesus she had ever known, and that she had always believed this!!
T
toaslan
Guest
Well, Jesus’ new name is pretty funny. Man, I shouldn’t be laughin’…she had to go join a comune in California run by a man who calls himself Jesus Christ Lightening Amen. She later told me he was the only Jesus she had ever known, and that she had always believed this!!
Who said, “If you believe in nothing, you’ll fall for anything?” Sure seems like she fell for anything; so I expect what she did believe in, was so akin to nothing that this is the result…
G
guanophore
Guest
What amazed me was that I was taken in for seven years. That is how much subtance her faith had, and how consistently she lived. Even though she believed that all the Bible was really about this fella she met 30 years ago, she lived it better than most people who call themselves “Catholic”.
She was so convincing to me that I never asked her how she met Jesus. A mistake I can assure you I will never make again!
T
toaslan
Guest
Dear Friend Non-Denom, will you allow me to make the following distinction?
There is what a badly educated Catholic believes.
There is what the Catholic Church actually teaches her members to believe.
If a Catholic believes in reincarnation, then that Catholic is not Catholic in that respect.
Every single Catholic is required to accept as true all the things proposed for his belief by the Church. If a man refuses to accept an official teaching, he is rejecting his own Church in that regard.
It is not Catholic to believe in reincarnation. You can’t be a fully faithful Catholic and believe that. You can’t be a faithful Catholic and also believe that there are, for example, Four Persons in God.
One easy thing about the Catholic religion–you can look up an idea in our Catechism and see if it is taught or not. We have one objective standard of what to believe.
May I make another distinction, please?
When we say Joe Smith is a man of faith, we mean two things:
He has the Content of the Faith
and
He makes the Act of Faith.
The first means, that with his intellect he accepts as true all that the Catholic Church proposes for his belief.
The second means that with his will he loves, like we love what is good to us, what his mind accepts as true.
(If he doesn’t know all the content, then his attitude is that he accepts it all in advance, and if he were to learn better on some particular point, he will promptly drop any error as soon as it is shown him, and accept what he then learns to be true.)
This is my attempt to remove what I see as a confusion on your part: just because some Catholics have beliefs which may contradict the beliefs of other Catholics, does not mean that the Catholic Church allows/admits contrary beliefs. It means that they are wrong to hold those beliefs. It cast no reflection on what the Church teaches.
The Catholic Church has a official statement of belief, open for all the world to read, called the Catechism of the Catholic Church, available free online from the official vatican website.
Non-denominational churches, on the other hand, seem to have no one set of beliefs which they all share. What I am learning from our thread is that it is possible for each separate non-denom group to disagree with the next non-denom group on what to believe, except for some staple points like Sola Scriptura. Do you confirm this?
T
toaslan
Guest
yes, scary, kind of unbelievable, enough to make one question one’s ability to asses another at all!
I can see how she wouldn’t have been able to satisfactorily answer the question, “How I met Jesus?”
, but shall this be your threshhold or special question to test the authenticity of any self-proclaimed believer in Jesus?
T
toaslan
Guest
Now we’re getting somewhere, Digitonomy. Thanks for the examples. You and I are operating with different definitions for the word “belief.” That’s my brilliant analysis.
I think you mean opinions!
There is lots of room for contrary opinions as well as the high-flown controversies of the professional theologians, as long as it is on a matter which the Church has not defined. After the Church has defined something, there can be all sorts of debate on how to understand that definition, and how to apply it; but not on whether that definition must be accepted as true.
I expect you and I agree that the Catholic Church, as articulated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, lays out a set of statements that must each and every one be accepted as true by every Catholic?
Those are the Catholic “beliefs!”
The conversations, dialogues, debates surrounding those beliefs are not the beliefs themselves, right? For example, a Catholic must believe that the Eucharist is the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, offered in an unbloody manner, under the appearances of bread and wine. We must believe the Eucharist is Jesus in the most literal sense.
That’s a belief. Now how to understand that belief: Well, on that we can enjoy a considerable conversation, along with the biggie saints in their writings down through the centuries.
So figuring out whether and if so, how, to apply the teachings on adultery and coveting and right use of language and Theology of the Body to the proposition “That girl is hot!”-- that would entail opinionating and extrapolating. We would be leaving the realm of defined belief and entering the realm of practical judgement where shifting variables reign. I am willing to bet the Catholic Church will never issue an infallibly-binding answer as to the morality of the phrase, “That girl is hot!”
As for a priest having a belief contrary to the belief of the Catholic Church, God preserve us from such priests. The vast majority of priests I have known have believed what the Church taught and taught it themselves.
I realize we are expanding on what was meant initially to be nothing but an example. We were speaking of whether or not non-denominational churches ascribe to a set of beliefs, and it would seem each individual church does, but they do not do so as a whole group of churches calling themselves Non-Denominational.
That part about one’s relationship with Christ being so personal that no one will ask anyone about that, that is interesting. I would have thought that, since that is what a non-denom would say it is all about, that that would be the hot topic within that faith group.
D
Digitonomy
Guest
Your definition of belief requires that the Church endorse it. If I feel that murder is wrong, and my atheist neighbor feels exactly the same, is my view a belief, and his just an opinion? Does the status of that view change upon converting to a different religion? No. We all determine our own beliefs, and whether to subscribe to the beliefs put forth by our faiths.
An opinion is one where we don’t know for sure whether it is right or wrong. I may feel that my team is the best in its league, but it’s reasonable that you may disagree, and I’ll grant that maybe your opinion has merit.
A belief is much more deeply held. I firmly believe that it is wrong and even evil to shift pedophile priests to new parishes, trying to sweep the whole thing under the rug. There is no way you’ll convince me otherwise, and if you disagree, quite frankly you’re wrong.
However, the Church allows prudential judgement on this matter, so there may be, and have been, those who feel otherwise.
Going back to my statement in post #10,
The Church has made doctrine a lot of things which I consider insignificant. I’ll go along with them, trusting in her judgement, but they’re not that important to me. On the other hand, I have some very firm beliefs on which the Church allows for other opinions. I’m quite certain they’re wrong, but these different beliefs are allowed within the Church.
If you go to some of these threads where people are disagreeing, they may tell you that their views are much more than mere opinions. The people posting may consider some of their statements to be unshakable truths. And these beliefs are fine, so long as they don’t go against what the Church defines as doctrine.
Or in my original statement, a diversity of beliefs is fine within the non-denominational church, so long as they don’t violate the core statement of beliefs that church has defined.
T
toaslan
Guest
Still not on the same page. Let me try it this way:
The Believer is such because of two things:
He, with his mind, holds to be true certain propositions
AND
He, with his will, loves as good what his mind holds as true.
In other words, the man of faith:
accepts as true a certain content of the faith
AND
loves as good that content (and then lives according to that acceptance).
Thus an ACT of FAITH includes TWO things–a movement of the mind and a movement of the will.
The Catechism presents all the propositions which we are required to accept as true (believe) as members of the Catholic Church.
We are helped to live and love these truths through the Sacraments and the Mass and the Church herself.
We must accept the Catechism fully. We may disagree how some teaching applies in some particular situation.
No, we do not determine our own beliefs. Catholics believe what the Catholic Church believes.
Yes, the individual Catholic may believe a defined doctrine more deeply and more correctly than another individual Catholic. So we pray, “Lord, I believe; help my unbelief.” Thomas Aquinas believed better, more deeply and more correctly, the same content that I believe–that, for example, Jesus Christ is a Divine Person with a human nature. He understood that Catholic belief better than I do.
Believe is used loosely when I say, I believe some practical thing should be done another way! What I mean, rather, is I think this way is better than that way."
Practical matters are judgment calls, with error margins, shifting variables, unknowns, and the impossibility of certainty. This is not an area of proof OR belief; it is an area of probability, more or less, “for the most part”, in my experience the answer is, most people agree that, etc.
Speculative matters are subject to absolute proof. All A is B; All B is C; Therefore all A is C. Absolutely. The ancients call this the realm of science–pure knowing, where one can have proved absolute certainty.
In belief, we can have certainty, but not provable certainty. Rather our certainty is that of faith.
Agreed?
D
Digitonomy
Guest
No. Suppose you have a particularly learned person who believes all that Aquinas stated. This person believes that the three levels of Holy Orders are priest, deacon, and subdeacon. His wife, also quite learned, holds equally firmly that bishop is a level of Holy Orders, not merely an office of a priest. The husband and wife each believe these things firmly, having determined after much study which position is in union with what the Church has taught. Although they call their views beliefs, and hold to them as they do to the Trinity and the real presence, their neighbor toaslan tells them to get it straight, they’re merely opinions.
While the couple is going about their business, perhaps in service of the scholars at a university, the Council of Trent is underway. Unbeknownst to the couple, the Church defines more clearly the doctrine of Holy Orders. According to the theory you have suggested, the opinion of the wife on Holy Orders suddenly becomes her belief, while the husband suddenly ceases to be Catholic.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Digitonomy;
I think you are conflating the beliefs of a denominational body with the individual beliefs (which Toaslan is calling “opinions” for the purpose of differentiating them from the beliefs of the denomination) of the adherents thereof.
The beliefs (official teachings) of the Catholic Church are found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Where does one find the beliefs (official teachings) of non-denominational Christian communities? (Do they even exist?) Again, we are not speaking about the beliefs of particular individuals, but of the community with which they are affiliated.
It is perfectly possible for individuals to disagree completely with the teachings of the Church they attend each Sunday, while being completely oblivious of that fact, especially if they can’t find an official body of teachings that would clearly contradict them.
I think you are conflating the beliefs of a denominational body with the individual beliefs (which Toaslan is calling “opinions” for the purpose of differentiating them from the beliefs of the denomination) of the adherents thereof.
The beliefs (official teachings) of the Catholic Church are found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Where does one find the beliefs (official teachings) of non-denominational Christian communities? (Do they even exist?) Again, we are not speaking about the beliefs of particular individuals, but of the community with which they are affiliated.
It is perfectly possible for individuals to disagree completely with the teachings of the Church they attend each Sunday, while being completely oblivious of that fact, especially if they can’t find an official body of teachings that would clearly contradict them.
- Status