Dear Mick,
Whilst it may be true that their is a sort of ostensible agreement among the different groups of non-Catholic Christians, that agreement is more apparent than real.
Well, I’m prepared to concede that it’s apparent to you, anyway.
The very existence of some 30, 000 different Protestant denominations, all appealing to the same bible in support of their conflicting opinions, does seem to suggest that the doctrines that they allegedly hold in common are anything but “quite similar”, otherwise why so many divisions?
I don’t dispute the number you’ve adduced although I think the defenders of Catholicism who like to keep up with such things are now quoting the number as 38,000. This latest number may be more apparent than real, of course, but that’s always a possible scenario in the numbers game. At any rate, your wording leads me to suppose that you may not have grasped the point I was attempting to make. Here is what I actually posted.
If the truth is told, many non–Catholic Western Christian faith communities share common ground both in doctrine and spirituality.
I note that you appear to have passed over the suggestion I made of a common spirituality. I’m not suggesting that there aren’t doctrinal divisions. But I would point out that people have different approaches to doctrine. Some people are unable to see doctrine as anything but pivotal. Doctrine is their
raison d’être. I would suppose that Catholics are probably in this group. But there are other possible approaches and those of a thoughtful disposition will be prepared to acknowledge that this is so. For example, some people might take the view that humans define doctrine and that means it must necessarily fall short since God is higher than our highest human thought. To those who think in this way arguments about doctrine naturally seem somewhat pointless. Such individuals do not dismiss
all doctrine – but their main focus is upon the spiritual life. They concentrate upon living out their Christianity and they strive to grow in holiness. I would suggest that this approach is not uncommon in non–Catholic Western Christendom and it is in this sense that its adherents can claim to be responding to the Sermon on the Mount and Our Lord’s prayer in John 17. They know about these passages because they usually read their Bibles every day. Christians like these can doubtless be found in most non–Catholic denominations and I’m suggesting that they have much in common – the fact that might disagree about doctrines notwithstanding. They would hope, with Saint Paul, to be able “to agree with each other in the Lord.”
At the very least it does seem that Protestantism has a pathological tendency to divide.
Logical idea but phrased using incautious terminology. C+.
No doubt all of the 30, 000 Protestant denominations claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit, and yet they all disagree.
I recommend dissection of detail and for such purposes I posit the Wesleyans and the Methodists and pose the following questions. Are there doctrines that greatly divide them? To what extent are they in constant disagreement with each other? Are they (to employ a somewhat curious term you used in an earlier post)
warring denominations?
Did he lead some of them into the truth but mislead others?
That people, as individuals and as groups, struggle to find the truth is axiomatic. It’s perhaps relevant to note at this point that there were plenty of disagreements about what was true and what wasn’t true
prior to the Reformation.
In fact the Holy Spirit was given within the context of the community of faith.
If you are here referring to Pentecost then I daresay most Christians will agree with you.
It is primarily the Church which is the Spirit-filled body of Christ according to the New Testament, and individuals are filled with the Holy Spirit as the fruit of that.
I think the probable source of any disagreement here is how different faith communities understand the Greek word,
ekklesia.
Thus the Catholic Church teaches that only through the Church can the Holy Spirit work authentically and most fully.
Which, some might suggest, seems to put restrictions upon the Holy Spirit who in reality perhaps just goes wherever He pleases? If He does do that, would it mean that the fruit of the Spirit – love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness and self–control – would manifest itself in non–Catholics as well as in Catholics? What an awful doctrine–free nightmare for Catholic amateur apologists, huh?
Therefore it follows from this that it is only the Church which can most authentically interpret Scripture.
Which is the Eastern Orthodox Church, right? No
Sola Scriptura for Orthodox Christians! Moreover, Holy Orthodoxy offers a
Biblecomplete of 76 books. Catholic Bibles (only 73 books) and Non–Catholic Western Bibles (only 66 books) are very good efforts, though, and deserve an A– and a B+ respectively.
Schismatically,
Mick
