Interactions with Evangelicals?

[Cat]

Really? I would think that the opposite would be true… it certainly is for me. I think of “sacred” as being set apart. I hear electric guitars and drums in rock and pop music, so I don’t think of it as sacred and never did when I went to evangelical churches in college where this kind of music was supposed to be more “relevant” for us. Whereas organs (church organs, not jazz organs) and the accompanying hyms are much more solemn and send a chill down my spine and fill me with a sense of reverence.

If indeed, “sacred” is “set apart”, then for me, the pipe organ would not be a sacred instrument.

The pipe organ and its electronic counterpart are used in secular concerts including baroque, classical, and contemporary music. I receive a magazine from the AGO that advertises the many concert organists who are available for hire to do concerts and workshops.

Yes, most pipe organs are located in church buildings. But the concerts are definitely NOT “sacred” concerts.

Also, keep in mind that as Baptists, we didn’t listen to much “pop” music. Although my Baptist church didn’t burn rock music albums, many churches did, including the church my husband grew up in. (Just last week, he was bemoaning that he burned up his Three Dog Night albums!)

So we couldn’t say, “This music sounds like rock and or roll” because most of us didn’t have the experience of rock and roll or pop in a secular realm. We used these styles in CHURCH, in worship settings.

We considered ourselves to be using the style of music for its TRUE PURPOSE, which was to worship God, and we considered the popular musicians to be the ones who were corrupting perfectly good and acceptable music.

Well, this may be true in a way, but I think there is a definite mainstream “evangelical” brand of Christianity that carries with it certain stereotypes and can be pretty easily identified.

I would be careful with that viewpoint. Evangelical Protestantism is always seeking to widen their big umbrella and include more and more denominations and faith communities. With the recent “alternative” church movement, which reaches back into the roots of Christianity and uses “confession,” “incense,”“lectio divina,” “chant, including Gregorian chant,” “Latin” “silence” “candles,” etc. it’s really difficult to define how Evangelical Protestantism looks, sounds, and smells.

For those who are interested, Christianity Today is a really good source of information about Evangelical Protestantism. You can read it online.

 

[CompSciGuy]

I notice that a lot of the evangelicals you mention are either Reformed or Baptist (or both).Driscoll and MacArthur are Reformed, non-denominational. Piper and Chandler are Reformed and Baptist. And Warren is Southern Baptist but whether he’s a Calvinist or Arminian I’m not sure (though I suspect Arminian). It sort of evokes the age old rivalry between Reformed and Wesleyan-Arminian evangelicals, as discussed by historian Grant Wacker in this article from Modern Reformation, “Are Charismatic-Inclined Pietists the True Evangelicals? And Have the Reformed Tried to Highjack Their Movement?”

MacArthur is certainly not reformed… he is a dispensationalist.

 

[CompSciGuy]

Again, see the list of member churches at the National Association of Evangelicals website. Evangelical Congregational is most definitely on the list!

I don’t care about lists… I’m talking about majority. Like you said Evangelicalism has a lot of differing beliefs, and perhaps even a Lutheran church could be considered Evangelical, but it is not fair to say that Lutheranism is representative of “mainstream” american evangelicalism because it differs so greatly from the norm. Same with pentecostalism. The brand of evangelicalism I described before is so vast and broad in the US that it makes up probably about 90 percent of the Evangelical movement. So when someone says that Evangelicals believe in symbolic sacraments and AbideWithMe says “No we don’t!” I have to say, sir, your congregationalist church does not represent the majority of evangelical Christianity in the US.

 

[andrewstx]

Right.

Jon, Andrewstx, and CompSciGuy–If you gentlemen are willing to download a very short PDF for a couple of minutes’ reading, the following link should help you understand why I have to insist that the generalizations in Andrewstx’s previous post are untrue when speaking of Evangelicals as a whole. (Andrewstx, I truly don’t mean to seem like I’m picking on you. I regard all of you with respect and friendliness, which would probably come across much better if we were talking in person.) The link offers a PDF which explains the Evangelical Congregational Church’s teaching on sacraments. While it differs from Catholic teaching in some ways, it makes it unmistakable that we accept the sacraments as a “sure and certain means of grace,” not as symbolic only.

eccenter.com/ecc./media/EC-Brochures/Sacraments.pdf

If you don’t want to go to the PDF, here’s an excerpt regarding the sacraments from the Evangelical Church in North America, which is historically very closely related to the Evangelical Congregation Church:

“The Holy Scriptures declare that the sacraments ordained by Christ, are not only pledges and symbols of the Christian’s profession, but they are also signs of God’s love and grace toward us, by which He works invisibly in us, quickening, strengthening and confirming our faith in Him.”

Regarding whether my church was unique, CompSciGuy—no, not at all. It was originally known as the Evangelical Association, or Albright’s Brethren, and it was in essence a Wesleyan Methodist church for the Pennsylvania German speakers in PA’s early days. For that reason it’s mostly stayed on the east coast, but thanks to mergers, splits, reunions, mergers, splits, and reunions again, the ECC has kissing cousins all over the US and the world. Although the ECC stayed out of two important mergers, the larger body of the Evangelical Association’s direct descendents eventually joined with The Methodist Church (US) to form the United Methodist Church. Some smaller branches of the Evangelical Association (like the ECC, ECNA, and the old constitution United Brethren in Christ) stayed out of the mergers and ultimately remained more conservative.(That’s probably more truncated Evangelical history than you wanted to read, sorry )

Anyway, far from being unique, uncommon, or outside the norm, the ECC’s teaching on sacraments is a long-standing and widespread feature of that large amount of American Evangelicalism that’s descended from Anglicanism via Methodism.

I am sure you are correct AWM. And I’m sure that a lot of it is regional. Around here the big, popular Protestant denominations are Southern Baptist, churches of Christ, Assembly of God and so called ‘non denominational’. The small denominations are LCMS Lutheran, Nazarene, Pentecostal and Holiness church of God, Episcopal and Presbyterian. The churches that don’t exist in this part of Texas are your church and the United Church of Christ. The United Methodists are kind of medium in size. The German Methodists exist in the far South part of the state.

Perhaps the sacramental part of your churches teaching comes from the Lutheran heritage? What I am familiar with around here is Baptist ‘ordinances’ and gettin’ saved. The Baptist church is pretty much the norm for Texas and the deep South.

 

[Cat]

I don’t care about lists… I’m talking about majority. Like you said Evangelicalism has a lot of differing beliefs, and perhaps even a Lutheran church could be considered Evangelical, but it is not fair to say that Lutheranism is representative of “mainstream” american evangelicalism because it differs so greatly from the norm. Same with pentecostalism. The brand of evangelicalism I described before is so vast and broad in the US that it makes up probably about 90 percent of the Evangelical movement. So when someone says that Evangelicals believe in symbolic sacraments and AbideWithMe says “No we don’t!” I have to say, sir, your congregationalist church does not represent the majority of evangelical Christianity in the US.

The list exists because the churches on the list made a decision that they are “evangelical” and therefore want to be identified with the Evangelical Protestants. They have examined the Statement of Faith of the National Association of Evangelicals, and decided that they agree with everything on that statement.

So they are actually part of the “mainstream” of Evangelicals, which is what the NAE is–mainstream Evangelical Protestants. Yes, there are plenty of “evangelical” churches that aren’t members of NAE, and often, this is because they don’t want to give their money to an outside organization.

But it’s safe to say that the churches who join NAE have made a decision that they want to be identified on paper as “Evangelical Protestant.”

I was Evangelical Protestant for 47 years, and a member of a church that has produced some of the most prominent and respected Evangelical leaders in the world today. (I’m not one of them, obviously. ) Definitely mainstream Evangelical!

I would say that it is virtually impossible to assume anything about “evangelical” churches. The Statement of Faith of the NAE is what the ones on the list have in common, but that’s very likely it. The actual practices in their churches vary immensely.

E.g., as I mentioned earlier, the Assemblies of God does NOT teach “once saved always saved”–just the opposite! That’s very different than a lot of the other denoms on that list.

Th

 

[ltwin]

MacArthur is certainly not reformed… he is a dispensationalist.

He’s a Calvinist still, despite any dispensationalist belief. At this point, he’s more Reformed theologically than most members of the Reformed churches are!

 

[ltwin]

My husband grew up in the Assemblies of God, which is also “on the list” of NAE. I’m not sure if they have changed any of their teachings (I don’t think so), but he grew up NOT believing in “once saved always saved.” The A of God teaches (or at least, used to teach) that a person CAN lose their salvation if they reject Jesus as their Savior and renounce Him.

They haven’t changed.

 

[ltwin]

I don’t care about lists… I’m talking about majority. Like you said Evangelicalism has a lot of differing beliefs, and perhaps even a Lutheran church could be considered Evangelical, but it is not fair to say that Lutheranism is representative of “mainstream” american evangelicalism because it differs so greatly from the norm. Same with pentecostalism. The brand of evangelicalism I described before is so vast and broad in the US that it makes up probably about 90 percent of the Evangelical movement. So when someone says that Evangelicals believe in symbolic sacraments and AbideWithMe says “No we don’t!” I have to say, sir, your congregationalist church does not represent the majority of evangelical Christianity in the US.

If you’re leaving out Pentecostal churches and denominations (which at this point are really the only Protestant churches showing consistent growth and vitality) I would like to know where exactly is “90% of the Evangelical movement” because if you eliminate the hundreds of thousands of Pentecostal and Pentecostal-derived churches out there, you won’t find “mainstream Evangelicalism” at all.

 

[AbideWithMe]

I am sure you are correct AWM. And I’m sure that a lot of it is regional. Around here the big, popular Protestant denominations are Southern Baptist, churches of Christ, Assembly of God and so called ‘non denominational’. The small denominations are LCMS Lutheran, Nazarene, Pentecostal and Holiness church of God, Episcopal and Presbyterian. The churches that don’t exist in this part of Texas are your church and the United Church of Christ. The United Methodists are kind of medium in size. The German Methodists exist in the far South part of the state.

Perhaps the sacramental part of your churches teaching comes from the Lutheran heritage? What I am familiar with around here is Baptist ‘ordinances’ and gettin’ saved. The Baptist church is pretty much the norm for Texas and the deep South.

Thanks for the reply, Andrewstx. Yeah, my Pennsylvania-raised sister lives down in Texas, and she’s talked about some of the regional differences. Her family is in an Assemblies of God church, but a long time ago, before their marriage, her Texan husband was flirting with some KJV-only weirdness. She brought him around, though. I was a bit disappointed I confess; I have a sarcastic streak which I really, really, try to curb, and some of things he’d say during that KJV-only phase were a source of uncharitable amusement for me. That said, I really admire all the Texas Christians I’ve met through my sister’s family.

Up here in southeast PA, according to maps of religious affiliation I’ve seen as well as personal experience living here and traveling around, there’s a very strong Lutheran presence. Even the smallest hamlets have an often beautiful, old stone Lutheran church. A slightly bigger town may have a Reformed church; the next-likely-to-be-encountered churches will be Methodist, Mennonite, Catholic, Evangelical and Pentecostal, with Orthodox churches in the bigger cities. My particular county is pretty sparse on the Baptist churches.

In the Evangelical Congregational Church, the belief in sacraments as means of actual grace come directly from Methodism. The Evangelical Free Church, where it’s retained a sacramental theology, gets it from Lutheranism.

 

[AbideWithMe]

“Evangelical Congregationalism” is such a small sect within protestant christianity, I hardly think that it can be used as a general example for mainstream evangelical protestantism.

I don’t care about lists… I’m talking about majority. Like you said Evangelicalism has a lot of differing beliefs, and perhaps even a Lutheran church could be considered Evangelical, but it is not fair to say that Lutheranism is representative of “mainstream” american evangelicalism because it differs so greatly from the norm. Same with pentecostalism. The brand of evangelicalism I described before is so vast and broad in the US that it makes up probably about 90 percent of the Evangelical movement. So when someone says that Evangelicals believe in symbolic sacraments and AbideWithMe says “No we don’t!” I have to say, sir your congregationalist church does not represent the majority of evangelical Christianity in the US.

CSG–That’s madam to you, sir . I thought I was pretty clear that I wasn’t holding up the ECC as the majority model of American Evangelicalism. I did state that it was organized to be, originally, a German-speaking Methodist-based church, and that it has a goodly number of twin churches under different denominational names outside the PA German counties. They cross the country. Additionally, numerous Wesleyan Methodist/Holiness and Pentecostal churches of various names around North America come from the same source in the Evangelical Association, either directly or by influence. All these related churches form one of the main tributaries feeding into the mainstream of American Evangelicalism, though I never indicated they were the only one or currently dominate one.

I agree to a certain limited extent that Evangelicalism has a mainstream, but if you look at it closely and historically the influences come down from different directions based on their mainline sources. At the end of the day, though we Evangelicals do influence each other, the distinct mainline origins can be found to one degree or another.

I think also, what you’re calling mainstream Evangelicalism I might call Evangelical pop culture.

In the second part I quoted from you, I didn’t say to Andrewstx, “No we don’t!” I said that the two churches I have spent the most time in do have a sacramental theology. I followed that up with evidence for what I said, and I further said, as above, that these types of Evangelical churches were not unique or uncommon. You brought up the “mainstream Evangelicalism” idea, not me.

 

[AbideWithMe]

I notice that a lot of the evangelicals you mention are either Reformed or Baptist (or both).Driscoll and MacArthur are Reformed, non-denominational. Piper and Chandler are Reformed and Baptist. And Warren is Southern Baptist but whether he’s a Calvinist or Arminian I’m not sure (though I suspect Arminian). It sort of evokes the age old rivalry between Reformed and Wesleyan-Arminian evangelicals, as discussed by historian Grant Wacker in this article from Modern Reformation, “Are Charismatic-Inclined Pietists the True Evangelicals? And Have the Reformed Tried to Highjack Their Movement?”

That’s a really interesting article to me. I think he brings up some good points. Thanks for posting it.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Great discussion!

Does the Savoy Declaration have influence with Evangelicals? How does the Savoy Declaration differ from the Westminster Confession of Faith?

I think a Lutheran would feel comfortable in a Congregational church.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Great discussion!

Does the Savoy Declaration have influence with Evangelicals? How does the Savoy Declaration differ from the Westminster Confession of Faith?

I think a Lutheran would feel comfortable in a Congregational church.

I don’t think Evangelicals think much about either the Westminster Confession nor the Savoy declaration. At least not at the level of laity. I would think if any evangelical pastors were aware of these things and knowledgeable on them would would be merely as an academic and not as a subscriber to these. Generally speaking of course .

One document that although controversial amongst some fundamentalist leaning evangelicals like John Mac Arthur, that a lot of Evangelicsls are aware of is * Evangelicals and Catholics Together*. Chuck Colson was a big contributor as well as other big names. It is probably IMO the greatest document in establishing a foundation for Catholic and Evangelical relations which have grown immensely in the last 20 years.

You can read it here: ewtn.com/library/issues/evancath.txt

 

[ltwin]

I don’t think Evangelicals think much about either the Westminster Confession nor the Savoy declaration. At least not at the level of laity. I would think if any evangelical pastors were aware of these things and knowledgeable on them would would be merely as an academic and not as a subscriber to these. Generally speaking of course .

One document that although controversial amongst some fundamentalist leaning evangelicals like John Mac Arthur, that a lot of Evangelicsls are aware of is * Evangelicals and Catholics Together*. Chuck Colson was a big contributor as well as other big names. It is probably IMO the greatest document in establishing a foundation for Catholic and Evangelical relations which have grown immensely in the last 20 years.

You can read it here: ewtn.com/library/issues/evancath.txt

I think you’re underestimating the extent that evangelical pastors may be influenced by the Westminster Confession of Faith. Of course, this would apply more to those in the Calvinist tradition than the Arminian tradition. For example, R. C. Sproul wrote Truths We Confess: A Layman’s Guide to the Westminster Confession of Faith. His website has a done of other resources you can buy about the Westminster Confession. Obviously, there are evangelicals who are interested in confessionalism.

Also, we have to distinguish between explicit subscription and influence. A minister (and even laity) can be influenced by a confession without ever explicitly subscribing. This is the case with the Nicene Creed. Many evangelicals would never actually say I subscribe to the Nicene Creed, but they do because they are Trinitarians.

I think as a minister’s educational level increases, he has more awareness of the different confessions, creeds, and other documents that have shaped his tradition.

As I read through Foundations of Pentecostal Theology by Duffield and Van Cleave, I find the Westminster Confession mentioned twice and the Westminster Catechism mentioned 3 times. And Pentecostals aren’t even Calvinists!

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

Hi everyone…

I wonder if any Catholics here have had any significant interactions with evangelical christians?

If so, what do they think of us? It seems in recent years, that many do in fact consider us “christians” and are willing to overlook our differences. Many believe we are saved… as if they knew…

I could be wrong, but the whole notion of Catholics as “Idol worshipin’, pagan idolaters” seems to be one from the past ( albeit still exiting among groups such as Westboro baptist Church"

I live in Minnesota. The only biggest faith group here are the Lutherans, a pretty tame and tolerant bunch, despite their doctrinal errors

Any thouhgts?

I’m confused. You talk about evangelical Christians and use words like “us” and “we” yet your profile says “agnostic/searching”? Just curious.

To your question, I’ve never had issues with evangelical Christians. They don’t agree with some of my beliefs and I theirs but for the most part they’ve been civil conversations. I consider their faith genuine and them to be God fearing. I see them as brothers and or sisters in Christ. My run ins with fundamentalists however (who, right or wrong, I consider different from evangelicals) is an entirely different story.

God bless

 

[EvangelCatholic]

I think you’re underestimating the extent that evangelical pastors may be influenced by the Westminster Confession of Faith. Of course, this would apply more to those in the Calvinist tradition than the Arminian tradition. For example, R. C. Sproul wrote Truths We Confess: A Layman’s Guide to the Westminster Confession of Faith. His website has a done of other resources you can buy about the Westminster Confession. Obviously, there are evangelicals who are interested in confessionalism.

Also, we have to distinguish between explicit subscription and influence. A minister (and even laity) can be influenced by a confession without ever explicitly subscribing. **This is the case with the Nicene Creed. Many evangelicals would never actually say I subscribe to the Nicene Creed, but they do because they are Trinitarians. **

Is there anything in the ecumenical creeds that an Evangelical would disagree with?

 

[ltwin]

Is there anything in the ecumenical creeds that an Evangelical would disagree with?

Not in the Nicene or Apostles’ Creeds. Those are pretty much “mere Christianity.” I’m not sure about creeds like the Chalcedonian or Athanasian. I think those were mainly clarifying christology though??

 

[TK421]

I’m not sure how hot they would be over saying “I believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church”

Confessing one baptism for the forgiveness of sins is increasingly an issue too. Protestantism is undergoing a transformation, as the traditional so-called mainline denominations are waning in relevancy and being replaced with pentecostal / charismatic / restoration / non-denominational groups. The entire concept of a ‘sacrament’ is fading out; I know growing up, the idea of it was foreign to me. It’s starting to now just hinge entirely on the idea of repenting and accepting Jesus as your savior, and the other stuff is basically an ordinance that you go through with. Communion is commemorative, baptism is a symbolic act of your acceptance, etc. With this view in mind, there isn’t too much qualm over the idea of baptizing a person again when they want to recommit themselves to Jesus. It truly is starting to morph to the point of being two separate religions, although the CC does consider itself in partial communion with these newer groups (excluding Mormons/JW/a few other sects).

The prospect of this is mixed. On one hand, much of the inspiration for these new churches is a response to the watered down moral theology and spirituality of the mainline denominations. People are starving for mysticism, and so are flocking away from mainline protestantism into churches where there is passion and charismatics, and where they continue to be stalwart against secular liberal morality. Many of them, I believe, are hungry for the Catholic Church, though they know not. These groups make natural allies to orthodox Catholics as far as the political landscape is concerned. On the other hand, the concept of organized religion (liturgy) and sacraments is more distant to these groups than ever before. This makes these groups sporadic and unpredictable, with no visible anchor to hold them in place.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

I’m not sure how hot they would be over saying “I believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church”

Confessing one baptism for the forgiveness of sins is increasingly an issue too. Protestantism is undergoing a transformation, as the traditional so-called mainline denominations are waning in relevancy and being replaced with pentecostal / charismatic / restoration / non-denominational groups. The entire concept of a ‘sacrament’ is fading out; I know growing up, the idea of it was foreign to me. It’s starting to now just hinge entirely on the idea of repenting and accepting Jesus as your savior, and the other stuff is basically an ordinance that you go through with. Communion is commemorative, baptism is a symbolic act of your acceptance, etc. With this view in mind, there isn’t too much qualm over the idea of baptizing a person again when they want to recommit themselves to Jesus. It truly is starting to morph to the point of being two separate religions, although the CC does consider itself in partial communion with these newer groups (excluding Mormons/JW/a few other sects).

I can’t speak for all Protestants but want you to know that Lutherans and Anglicans celebrate the Mass more now than 50 years ago. Every Sunday is the norm and more often in larger parishes.

 

[Jon_S_1]

I’m not sure how hot they would be over saying “I believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church”

Funny story.

At my old evangelical free church the worship pastor started introducing this song called “the creed”.

It is the Apostle’s Creed put to praise music.

The first Sunday we sang it.

That week the murmurs about professing one Catholic Church circulated.

The next Sunday he gave an explanation of how catholic just means universal and not the Roman Catholic Church. Talked about the creed history a bit.

Now apparently the emails and letters started flooding the in box of the pastors and elders.

The next week the creed was changed to “One Holy Christian Church”

That went on for a couple months and it was abandoned.