Is denominationalism an obviously bad thing according to (most) Protestants?

[steve-b]

steve-b:

That’s like saying your truth and my truth. Truth is truth.

Yes, and we all believe that our truth is the one truth. I believe your truth is, in part at least, wrong and misguided. You believe what I believe to be true is, at least in part, wrong and misguided.

From what I can tell, you think that to be “saved” one must agree with the Catholic church and live in accordance with the Cannon Law inasmuch as they have been taught and shown what the Catholic church teaches.

I disagree with that premise completely. Salvation doesn’t come through intellectual agreement and following church laws. It comes from a Spiritual Union with Christ where the Holy Spirit changes ones heart from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh, makes one a new creation in Christ, adopts one as a Child of God, works in us to sanctify us so that our physical and temporal life will reflect what we already are spiritually and eternally (A Child of the most high God) , and changes our affections from being hostile toward God and His Creation to being loving toward God and His creation (including all Humans).

The reason most in denominations aren’t dogmatic about things like mode and time of baptism, how often and purpose of the Lord’s Supper, OSAS or falling from grace, what type of music to have, how often to meet, speaking in tongues/Charismatic gifts and so forth, is because where you stand on those things isn’t what saves you. Those things are intellectual understandings and personal preferences and personal experiences. We understand it is possible for two men to have differing intellectual understandings/preferences/experiences and yet both still have a Spiritual Union with Christ and therefore those two people are Spiritual Brothers in Christ.

You’re coming at this as a Protestant. Your argument is from self preservation of your system of beliefs. Keep in mind,

1. who started Protestantism,
2. when it was started,
3. and who keeps all that division going

Can you show from scripture where all that division is okay, and has no consequences for those who did it , do it, or keep it going ?

 

[lanman87]

1. who started Protestantism,
2. when it was started,
3. and who keeps all that division going

Can you show from scripture where all that division is okay, and has no consequences for those who did it , do it, or keep it going ?

Question 1: Christ started Christianity. All expressions of Christianity trace its roots back to Him
Question 2: The Protestant movement started in the 1500s when several things happened in the same time period.

1. Scholars started learning Greek and Hebrew and the Greek and Hebrew copies of the scriptures and early church writings became available for study. Many Catholic scholars learned that what the church was teaching from the Latin translations was mistranslated/different in the Greek and Hebrew text.
2. The Bible started being printed in the common language of the people and folks realized that much of what the Catholic church taught was not found in the Scriptures.
3. As a reaction of the Catholic churches spiritual abuse of the people
4. The change in political climate where rulers no longer felt obligated to the Catholic church to help maintain power and control of the people

The question is not when the protestant movement started. The question is , Why did it start? And, Was it’s conclusion wrong?

Question 3 We all keep the divisions going. Including Catholics.

The fact is, intellectual division is part of being Human. We all filter our understandings through the prism that we have acquired in life. The real sin is when we let our intellectual divisions override our Spiritual Unity in Christ.

 

[lanman87]

You’re coming at this as a Protestant. Your argument is from self preservation of your system of beliefs. Keep in mind,

So am I wrong in saying?

Salvation doesn’t come through intellectual agreement and following church laws. It comes from a Spiritual Union with Christ where the Holy Spirit changes ones heart from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh, makes one a new creation in Christ, adopts one as a Child of God, works in us to sanctify us so that our physical and temporal life will reflect what we already are spiritually and eternally (A Child of the most high God) , and changes our affections from being hostile toward God and His Creation to being loving toward God and His creation (including all Humans).

 

[lanman87]

Can you show from scripture where all that division is okay, and has no consequences for those who did it , do it, or keep it going ?

I never said all the division is okay or doesn’t have consequences. But it is not division from the Catholic church that has consequences. It is division and distorting the message of the Gospel that has consequences.

 

[TULIPed]

Can you show from scripture where all that division is okay, and has no consequences for those who did it , do it, or keep it going ?

According to great Pope JP2 (God rest his kind soul), we are all guilty as charged:

"Let us ask pardon for the divisions which have occurred among Christians, for the violence some have used in the service of the truth and for the distrustful and hostile attitudes sometimes taken towards the followers of other religions.

Let us confess, even more, our responsibilities as Christians for the evils of today. We must ask ourselves what our responsibilities are regarding atheism, religious indifference, secularism, ethical relativism, the violations of the right to life, disregard for the poor in many countries.

We humbly ask forgiveness for the part which each of us has had in these evils by our own actions, thus helping to disfigure the face of the Church."

Homily of the Holy Father, “Day of Pardon” March 12, 2000

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

1. who started Protestantism,
2. when it was started,
3. and who keeps all that division going

Can you show from scripture where all that division is okay, and has no consequences for those who did it , do it, or keep it going ?

Question 1: Christ started Christianity. All expressions of Christianity trace its roots back to Him

IOW Ianman87,

you can’t give me the scriptural reference for approval of division ?
Ianman87:

Question 2: The Protestant movement started in the 1500s when several things happened in the same time period.

1. Scholars started learning Greek and Hebrew and the Greek and Hebrew copies of the scriptures and early church writings became available for study. Many Catholic scholars learned that what the church was teaching from the Latin translations was mistranslated/different in the Greek and Hebrew text.
2. The Bible started being printed in the common language of the people and folks realized that much of what the Catholic church taught was not found in the Scriptures.
3. As a reaction of the Catholic churches spiritual abuse of the people
4. The change in political climate where rulers no longer felt obligated to the Catholic church to help maintain power and control of the people

again,

IOW you can’t find the scriptural passage approving division?
Ianman87:

The question is not when the protestant movement started. The question is , Why did it start? And, Was it’s conclusion wrong?

again,

IOW you can’t quote scripture approving division?
Ianman87:

Question 3 We all keep the divisions going. Including Catholics.

Ianman87,

The Catholic Church doesn’t/ didn’t divide from itself. Peter is still over the Catholic Church in an unbroken line of succession…just as Jesus promised. Those who left…left. That’s on THEM
Ianman87:

The fact is, intellectual division is part of being Human. We all filter our understandings through the prism that we have acquired in life. The real sin is when we let our intellectual divisions override our Spiritual Unity in Christ.

IOW you admit division from the Catholic Church happened, but can’t show a scripture reference approving division.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

You’re coming at this as a Protestant. Your argument is from self preservation of your system of beliefs. Keep in mind,

So am I wrong in saying?

_Salvation doesn’t come through intellectual agreement and following church laws.

Division, schism, dissension, heresy, are grave sins. Because the consequences for these if one dies in them is they (the person in that sin) won’t inherit heaven. (not my words but from scriptures that I have posted dozens of times).

AND

These sins are all tied to offenses against the ONLY Church Jesus established on Peter and those in union with Peter. The only Church that scripture calls the pillar and bulwark of truth.

So

To your question, For one to go against this Church, in the ways described, one won’t be going to heaven if they die in that state.

Therefore,

Ones salvation is involved. That’s why the phrase, outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.
Ianman87:

It comes from a Spiritual Union with Christ where the Holy Spirit changes ones heart from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh, makes one a new creation in Christ, adopts one as a Child of God, works in us to sanctify us so that our physical and temporal life will reflect what we already are spiritually and eternally (A Child of the most high God) , and changes our affections from being hostile toward God and His Creation to being loving toward God and His creation (including all Humans)._

Where is division from the Church allowed in scripture?

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Can you show from scripture where all that division is okay, and has no consequences for those who did it , do it, or keep it going ?

I never said all the division is okay or doesn’t have consequences. But it is not division from the Catholic church that has consequences. It is division and distorting the message of the Gospel that has consequences.

Re: division
Jesus instituted one Church. The Catholic Church .

It was here before a single word of scripture was written. All the writers of the NT were already IN the Church they were witing to and for. Therefore, the Catholic Church wrote the NT and canonized the 27 books. To the only Church Jesus established and gave His promises to, AND not even the gates of Hell will prevail against the Church Jesus builds on Peter and those in union with him. Ya wanna avoid Hell? Be in Our Lord’s Church and receive the sacraments faithfully that He instituted for our salvation.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

even Joel Olsteen’s theologically shallow and feel good teaching Lakewood church then who am I to complain about it.

lol love it

 

[Le_Cracquere]

I’m an ex-Protestant, and it seemed natural that different Christians would have good-faith disagreements about some doctrines, as well as differing emphases. That being the case, it seemed perfectly reasonable that there’d be a variety of denominations or churches of no denomination at all, and that a believer would go to the one whose teachings seemed best. I don’t remember feeling that there was anything about that situation that was inherently a problem, and didn’t know any other fellow Protestant who did.

 

[Wannano]

I’m an ex-Protestant, and it seemed natural that different Christians would have good-faith disagreements about some doctrines, as well as differing emphases. That being the case, it seemed perfectly reasonable that there’d be a variety of denominations or churches of no denomination at all, and that a believer would go to the one whose teachings seemed best. I don’t remember feeling that there was anything about that situation that was inherently a problem, and didn’t know any other fellow Protestant who did.

So now as a Catholic, do you agree with the idea that all non-Catholics are going to hell?

 

[mcq72]

is it worth it for all the divisions to stay divided on this side of eternity, only to find out that division is made permanent on the other side?

How about this, and I love your zealous stands. Why don’t we see the church universal, here and now, amongst the Catholics and Orthodox and Protestants, for surely saints from all three will be together on the other side as His Bride, those sectarian names being permanently dropped ?

Oh, and by the way, I have a feeling some souls from the big three churches will also unfortunately inhabit the place permanently separated from the Bride and Groom.

Seems like both places have equal opportunity housing.

 

[lanman87]

Division, schism, dissension, heresy, are grave sins. Because the consequences for these if one dies in them is they (the person in that sin) won’t inherit heaven. (not my words but from scriptures that I have posted dozens of times).

AND

These sins are all tied to offenses against the ONLY Church Jesus established on Peter and those in union with Peter. The only Church that scripture calls the pillar and bulwark of truth.

So

To your question, For one to go against this Church, in the ways described, one won’t be going to heaven if they die in that state.

Therefore,

Ones salvation is involved. That’s why the phrase, outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.

Steve, I started to write a long rebuttal but there is no point in doing so. All I will say is you are free to trust the Catholic church and your adherence to its teachings for your salvation. As for me, I will continue to Trust in Christ alone for my salvation.

 

[adf417]

All I will say is you are free to trust the Catholic church and your adherence to its teachings for your salvation. As for me, I will continue to Trust in Christ alone for my salvation.

Do you not believe the church to be Christ’s body and therefore one in the same with Christ?

Peace!!!

 

[lanman87]

Do you not believe the church to be Christ’s body and therefore one in the same with Christ?

The greek word for church (Ekklisía) simply means those called out/God’s people/Assembly. That is the usage everywhere in the New Testament and was the understanding of the Apostles and early church. The true catholic church/universal church is made up of “God’s People” wherever they may be found.

A fun exercise when reading the Bible is to replace the word Church with God’s people or assembly/gathering (whichever the context dictates). That is what first and second century readers would have been reading. Later on the definition of the word church changed to mean organized or structured religious body.

Our institutional churches/denominations contain people who are also God’s people… as I put it earlier these are people who are in a a Spiritual Union with Christ where the Holy Spirit changes ones heart from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh, makes one a new creation in Christ, adopts one as a Child of God, works in us to sanctify us so that our physical and temporal life will reflect what we already are spiritually and eternally (A Child of the most high God) , and changes our affections from being hostile toward God and His Creation to being loving toward God and His creation (including all Humans).

Our institutional churches also contain people who are in fellowship with the church (attend and participate) who do not yet have a spiritual union with Christ.

In other words, what makes someone a true “catholic” and part of the body of Christ is to be united Spirituality with Christ via the Holy Spirit. There are many people who attend the Catholic Church, Baptist church, Methodist church, and so forth who are members of the local institutional church but are not members of the Body of Christ. Just as there are members of all those institutional churches who are Spiritually United with Christ and are part of the Body of Christ.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

is it worth it for all the divisions to stay divided on this side of eternity, only to find out that division is made permanent on the other side?

How about this, and I love your zealous stands. Why don’t we see the church universal, here and now, amongst the Catholics and Orthodox and Protestants, for surely saints from all three will be together on the other side as His Bride, those sectarian names being permanently dropped ?

Oh, and by the way, I have a feeling some souls from the big three churches will also unfortunately inhabit the place permanently separated from the Bride and Groom.

Seems like both places have equal opportunity housing.

True, the opportunity for both places is there. Free will is there, afterall.

Yet

I’m sensing there is an indifferent thinking going on here. No difference between Catholic, or Protestant, or Orthodox, just be convinced where you are and all is good. . No difference in outcome between the choice one makes.

 

[steve-b]

Steve, I started to write a long rebuttal but there is no point in doing so. All I will say is you are free to trust the Catholic church and your adherence to its teachings for your salvation.

Considering Jesus established the Catholic Church , I have no intention what-so-ever , to go against Jesus.


Ianman87:

As for me, I will continue to Trust in Christ alone for my salvation.

Q:​

How does that work when you are shown His Church and you choose not to enter it?

 

[TULIPed]

I’m curious Steve - who do you consider to be “Separated Brethren” as defined in Unitatis redintegratio?

Second - how do you interpret this passage from the same treatise:

“For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect.”

(if you’ll allow me, I’ll cut to what I think will be your first response) "AND"

“Nevertheless, our separated brethren, whether considered as individuals or as Communities and Churches, are not blessed with that unity which Jesus Christ wished to bestow on all those who through Him were born again into one body, and with Him quickened to newness of life - that unity which the Holy Scriptures and the ancient Tradition of the Church proclaim. For it is only through Christ’s Catholic Church, which is “the all-embracing means of salvation,” that they can benefit fully from the means of salvation.”

I get it. But what do you think about the first part? Why would they put that in there? Why call Protestants “brothers”? Why even suggest that if we believe in Christ and are baptized, that we are in even an “imperfect” communion?

 

[lanman87]

Q:​

How does that work when you are shown His Church and you choose not to enter it?

But Steve, I am in His Church/Ekklesia. As are all in whom the Holy Spirit dwells.

 

[steve-b]

I’m curious Steve - who do you consider to be “Separated Brethren” as defined in Unitatis redintegratio?

Second - how do you interpret this passage from the same treatise:

“For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect.”

(if you’ll allow me, I’ll cut to what I think will be your first response) "AND"

“Nevertheless, our separated brethren, whether considered as individuals or as Communities and Churches, are not blessed with that unity which Jesus Christ wished to bestow on all those who through Him were born again into one body, and with Him quickened to newness of life - that unity which the Holy Scriptures and the ancient Tradition of the Church proclaim. For it is only through Christ’s Catholic Church, which is “the all-embracing means of salvation,” that they can benefit fully from the means of salvation.”

I get it. But what do you think about the first part? Why would they put that in there? Why call Protestants “brothers”? Why even suggest that if we believe in Christ and are baptized, that we are in even an “imperfect” communion?

The answer is simple.

Look at all the examples in scripture. Were those who left Jesus also called (disciples) AND not the 12 in the following example It doesn’t number them, but considering the day before, there were 5000 Jesus fed, and many of THEM followed Jesus, it’s a good possibility there were lots of them to hear Jesus. And following is how brother is used. It’s a broader sense than people want to give it

Re: brother please read