P
Peter_J
Guest
I guess we can no longer speak of “the Christian religion”. Maybe we could say “The Family of Religions Formerly Known as Christianity”, or T-FORF-KAC.
- Status
C
CWBetts
Guest
I think the OP was referring to Protestants. Orthodox is defintely NOT Protestant.
G
grandfather
Guest
Family is a good analogy, actually. In a family there are brothers and sisters, first cousins and distant cousins and some in between. So within the phenomenon of denominationalism we have those who would affirm many of the same tenets of faith. They might accept the entire Apostle’s Creed, for example. Then there are some who insist they are Christians, the true Christians, who deny the Trinity, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Unitarians, etc., that broke off from one Protestant denomonation or another, or were former Protestants at some point. So you would have the Catholics and mainline Protestants, or most of them say, if you deny the Trinity, you are not a Christian. Yet these groups insist they are and in the case of Mormons, everyone else is not. So maybe Catholics and Orthodox are brothers and sisters, very close in doctrine, seven sacraments, priesthood, apostolic succession. Then Lutherans are cousins, and maybe Methodists, or Baptists, even though many would despise the great whore of Babylon, vis Seventh Day Adventists who say the pope is the anti-Christ, as other Protestants have done from time to time in the past. As you get further out on the fringe you have the stranger sects. There is some relationship. They all can be traced backward to some common origin. There is some familial relationship. Maybe they are like the ancient clans in Ireland. They were all Irish, but certainly very separated.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Yes. That’s why we say that we are all the same religion, namely Christian.
C
Contarini
Guest
You’re using the word “religion” in what I consider a highly irresponsible way.
Obviously it’s a semantic issue, but it’s also a matter of self-definition. I consider all Trinitarian Christians to be unequivocally part of the same religion to which I belong. And most Protestants I know would agree with me.
Edwin
N
Newbie2
Guest
Yes, I was.
G
grandfather
Guest
So a Mormon says he is a Christian. A discussion was held in a local Protestant Reformed church on the question of whether Mormons are Christians. A credentialled theologian of the Reformed persuasion was there, along with Mormon representatives to discuss this question which has been getting some attention in certain circles lately. The conclusion of the Reformed expert was that Mormons are indeed Christians and those in attendance should agree with this position. The purpose of the meeting was to come to this conclusion and persuade others to agree. It made most everyone there happy. Many if not most believers in the Holy Trinity would say belief in the Trinity is essential at a minimum to a Christian. It is essential to the Christian faith. One could not be called a Christian who rejects belief in the Trinity. Clearly to the latter group, simply calling yourself a Christian does not make you a Christian, or an adherent to the Christian religion. Catholics think the same thing of Anglicans. Rome says who or what is Catholic. Mormons would say they are followers of Christ, accept the Bible, but believe Joseph Smith was God’s prophet who corrected the flaws of traditional Christianity. Most Christians would say to Mormons that their beliefs put them outside of the Christian religion. From this controversy we can conclude that there is some element of agreement on theological belief that is necessary for one to be a Christian. What that is is another matter. There has to be some level of agreement.
Another defining aspect of religion is morality. Certain human behaviors are considered moral, good, and others are immoral, evil. If you are a Catholic you might disagree with some moral precept of the Catholic faith, but it would be clear what the moral position of Cathlicism is. There is a moral code that is defined and knowable. It seems that as there has to be some minumum common beleif, an element of theological agreement that would define a person as a Christian or not, or a Hindu, Muslim, or Buddhist for that matter, it would also be true that there must be some alignment on moral precepts for a person to belong to a religion.
Assume there are two people. One believes abortion is a grave evil. The other believes it is morally acceptable. One believes men and women get married. The other believes men can marry men. One believes homosexual behavior is gravely evil. The other believes it is good. One believes taking body parts from aborted fetuses to cure diseases is gravely evil and the other says it is a moral necessity. One forbids cloning while the other thinks it is good. One says extramarital sex is sinful. The other says it is not a problem. As we go down the list both parties take opposing views on each and every item, or moral question. Both of these individuals say they are Christians. Can these two people belong to the same religion?
7
7_Sorrows
Guest
i haven’t read all of the posts, so maybe someone already mentioned this, but the anglicans/episcopalians do use a Bible with the apocrypha or the deuterocanonical books
and there is an anglican use rite approved by the Pope for those anglicans converting to Catholicism which is in use in several parishes here in the u.s.
why does it matter to the OP which denomination is closest to Catholics?
the Pope is concerned about the relationship between both the anglicans and the lutherans with the Holy See.
i still believe that the anglican church is the closest to Catholics.
and there is an anglican use rite approved by the Pope for those anglicans converting to Catholicism which is in use in several parishes here in the u.s.
why does it matter to the OP which denomination is closest to Catholics?
the Pope is concerned about the relationship between both the anglicans and the lutherans with the Holy See.
i still believe that the anglican church is the closest to Catholics.
N
Newbie2
Guest
Yep. We have Catholics that believe one way or the other.
C
Contarini
Guest
I’m not sure why you would read my post and then write the above, as if you expected to disagree with me. And if you didn’t read my post, why respond to it?
I explicitly said that I believed there was such a litmus test for belonging to the same religion I profess, and that this litmus test was belief in the Trinity. (Although I admit that I’m tempted to stretch a point for Oneness Pentecostals, on the grounds that their opposition to the Trinity seems more a matter of disliking metaphysics than of radically rejecting the basic framework of the Faith. At any rate, Mormons are a different matter entirely and clearly I do not recognize them as belonging to the same religion I do.) The word “Christian” obviously has a broad historical sense, like other similar terms, and of course Mormons are in some sense Christians. But their version of “Christianity” is effectively a different religion.
You misunderstood me if you thought I was objecting a priori to the claim that “people can claim to be Christians while in fact belonging to a religion other than orthodox Christianity.” I am disagreeing with your claim that the disagreements between Catholics and other Trinitarian Christians are such as to constitute several different “religions.” I argue that your Church agrees with me and not with you, on the grounds that they recognize our baptism as valid. Baptism is perhaps the clearest boundary marker for who is or is not a member of the historic Christian religion.
Why not? As I said, it’s a matter of definition. And your Church seems to make the dividing point baptism in the name of the Trinity. Those who are so baptized are recognized as Christians and thus “separated brethren,” however grave our errors may be.
I agree with this, although as I said I have a bit of a soft spot for Oneness Pentecostals, largely because I had a good friend of that persuasion in grad school (admittedly not a rational reason, but we aren’t beings of pure reason).
Edwin
G
grandfather
Guest
Right! There are Catholics who are completely polarized on what they believe. Do they really share the same religion? If they do, then it seems what people believe is irrelevant to their religion. If there is no common set of beliefs that unite people in a religion, if the beliefs of a religion are not the criteria for being a member of a religion, then what is?Yep. We have Catholics that believe one way or the other.
Recently we saw in Anglicanism their leadership try to accomodate anything and everything in terms of what they believe. Many of their leaders refused to attend the conference. As an outsider who followed the news there, the conclusion I came to is Anglicans are internally confused at the moment, in disarray, facing schism around the world and serious decline in their home country. Their leadership said England is mission territory. The same issues, moral and otherwise face Protestantism in general and Catholics. So there are people who call themselves Catholic who do not believe much of anything that the Church teaches. I know a priest who publicly states he does not believe much of Catholic dogma. He is Catholic in name, but is he really Catholic? What defines being Catholic? What defines being Christian?
P
Peter_J
Guest
Um … I don’t know. Why don’t you ask him yourself?
E
Ernie
Guest
I think that Orthodox, Old Catholics etc. are considered more as schismatics rather than outright Protestant. Lutherans and Anglicans have at least two sub-divisions and when comparing their theology, it is the group that has shed the least of their Catholic heritage that may appear closer to the Church. It is interesting that when you compare two Protestant denominations it is usually the Catholic theology that they haven’t thrown out that leaves them with something in common.
7
7_Sorrows
Guest
i know their are issues in the anglican church, but the episcopal church in the U.S.A. is in a far worst state. i agree that the same issues, moral and otherwise face protestantism in general and Catholics. those forming anglican churches here in the U.S.A. are considered more conservative than those remaining in the episcopal churches. a priest once told me that there is no perfect church. so, in 25 years, i cannot predict what the definition of a Christian will be. i think we could be in the middle of another reformation of some type and i am not sure what will come out of all this.
N
Newbie2
Guest
It doesn’t. I think it makes for interesting discussion.
Good questions. Much of this discussion begs the question, “What constitutes a core Christian belief?”. And the answer, methinks, is belief in the risen Christ as one’s Lord and savior. Beyond that, we get into Baptist Christian, Lutheran Christian, Catholic Christian, etc.
Now Catholic theology teaches that it is the complete deposit of the Christian faith. Other separated churches do not hold to this complete deposit of faith…and while that may make them less complete Christians, in Catholic theology, they are no less Christians.
Even heritical believers can, IMHO in some instances be called Christians, if they do not reject the core Gospel message. We must be careful not to equate all Christians in the depth and correctness of their beliefs, but at the same time they are not Pagans, nor Muslims, nor Jews.
Even Paul referred to misinformed believers as brothers and sisters in Christ…shouldn’t we?
P
Peter_J
Guest
Well said.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Now that I think about, I suppose “but at the same time they are not Pagans, nor Muslims, nor Jews” could be seen as a bit of a back-handed compliment.Gee, Newbie, thanks… I think.
Ah, shucks. I knew what he meant.Now that I think about, I suppose “but at the same time they are not Pagans, nor Muslims, nor Jews” could be seen as a bit of a back-handed compliment.
- Status