Non-Catholic denominations

  • Thread starter Thread starter Colin_Robens
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You honestly believe that if someone calls a church Catholic it is Catholic.

I .
Yes of course. If the theology is similiar, the liturgy etc…sure, why wouldn’t I? Its not specfic to Catholic though…if a church calls itself Baptist…and looks Baptist…why wouldn’t I? I am sure there are some groups that beliefs and practices and MIGHT be so radically different I could do something different…but I have not thought of one yet…
 
I can give an example kalt. I have a person I know that goes to a Liberal Catholic International Church. When talking about their faith, I have stated “they are liberal Catholic, not Roman Catholic”, the person understood what I meant.
While some on this forum do not like the term RC, people understand what that means in terms of categorizing people.
 
Yes of course. If the theology is similiar, the liturgy etc…sure, why wouldn’t I? Its not specfic to Catholic though…if a church calls itself Baptist…and looks Baptist…why wouldn’t I? I am sure there are some groups that beliefs and practices and MIGHT be so radically different I could do something different…but I have not thought of one yet…
How different does a theology need to be before it’s a different denomination?
 
Whats the number of Catholic denominations? I see that there are already representitives of two who have posted in this thread. 😃
Mick isn’t Catholic - he’s studying to join one of the Eastern Orthodox denominations (I think there are seven of those.) 😃

Personally, I find that identifying denominations according to “who’s in charge” is the best way to avoid confusion. If two Presbyterians answer to different General Councils, then they are of different denominations (even though both of them follow Presbyterian teaching and discipline); if they both answer to the same General Council, then they are of the same denomination.

Everyone who answers to the Pope is Catholic, including the non-Roman members of the other 22 Rites of the Catholic Church.

But if they answer to the Patriarch of Constantinople, or the Patriarch of Moscow, then even though they have a great deal in common with our Eastern Catholics, they are not to be considered Catholic - they are Eastern Orthodox.
 
How different does a theology need to be before it’s a different denomination?
I don’t know. Like I said, I cannot even think of a group that is applicable. For example, denominational families tend to have certain characteristics. I cannot think of a reason a group would use a name that seems so dramatically different from how people perceive them when they walked into the church. In other words, if your group is called Quaker, and you walk in and see a formal liturgy, statues or icons, and a copy of the Book of Mormon on an altar…it just would not make much sense. So no, I cannot think of a group to use as an example. It is a fair question to be sure.

Now certainly there is a slightly applicable example. Many groups call themselves Christians and the Christian community as a whole has rejected them…and that is certainly subjective. For every person who says that LDS are not Christians, many would disagree and say they are.
 
I don’t know. Like I said, I cannot even think of a group that is applicable. For example, denominational families tend to have certain characteristics. I cannot think of a reason a group would use a name that seems so dramatically different from how people perceive them when they walked into the church.
Based on the name, what would you expect to see happen in a Reformed Baptist church? (Let’s pretend that the name of it is the Moody-Calvin Reformed Baptist Church.)
In other words, if your group is called Quaker, and you walk in and see a formal liturgy, statues or icons, and a copy of the Book of Mormon on an altar…it just would not make much sense. So no, I cannot think of a group to use as an example. It is a fair question to be sure.
What if it was a Quaker-Mormon church (Anglican-use)?
Now certainly there is a slightly applicable example. Many groups call themselves Christians and the Christian community as a whole has rejected them…and that is certainly subjective. For every person who says that LDS are not Christians, many would disagree and say they are.
In that they worship a god named Christ, it could be argued that they are, and in that their god has almost nothing in common with Christ as understood by the majority of other Christians, it could be argued that they are not. 🤷
 
QUOTE=jmcrae;5558456]Based on the name, what would you expect to see happen in a Reformed Baptist church? (Let’s pretend that the name of it is the Moody-Calvin Reformed Baptist Church.)
Calvinists. Sola Scriptura. Noncharismatic. Symbolic Lord’s supper. Not overly liturgical.
What if it was a Quaker-Mormon church (Anglican-use)?
I would say I never heard of such a thing…possible of course. I am not saying it cannot happen, it just is unusual. I would call them what they call themselves
 
Yes of course. If the theology is similiar, the liturgy etc…sure, why wouldn’t I? Its not specfic to Catholic though…if a church calls itself Baptist…and looks Baptist…why wouldn’t I? I am sure there are some groups that beliefs and practices and MIGHT be so radically different I could do something different…but I have not thought of one yet…
You really don’t understand Catholicism. It’s not sufficient to be similar. All Christian denominations are “similar” to the Catholic faith.

Lots of churches have communion, but do they have the real pressence in the Eucharist.

Being similar in belief and appearance is not enough to be called Catholic.
 
I can give an example kalt. I have a person I know that goes to a Liberal Catholic International Church. When talking about their faith, I have stated “they are liberal Catholic, not Roman Catholic”, the person understood what I meant.
While some on this forum do not like the term RC, people understand what that means in terms of categorizing people.
Roman Catholic is one rite. There are other rites within the Catholic Church. Belief is the same throughout, not merely similar.
 
You really don’t understand Catholicism. It’s not sufficient to be similar. All Christian denominations are “similar” to the Catholic faith.

Lots of churches have communion, but do they have the real pressence in the Eucharist.

Being similar in belief and appearance is not enough to be called Catholic.
You do not have a monopoly on the name…you might think you SHOULD…but you do not. Now, you might not think they are REAL Catholics but that is not the point. I understand your view. I, not being Roman Catholic (and I use that term intentionally in this case) do not agree with you.

The fact remains with this line of reasoning, only one group is the true Lutherans, Methodists etc
 
DD2007;5553893:
What’s the number of Catholic denominations? I see that there are already representatives of two who have posted in this thread. 😃
Mick isn’t Catholic – he’s studying to join one of the Eastern Orthodox denominations (I think there are seven of those.) 😃
Three thought I was too annoying, two thought I was too argumentative and one thought I was still too Evangelical but the OCA apparently accept anybody who can walk and talk at the same time. My mission, if I decide to accept it, is to learn how to pronounce the word, “autocephalous,” by next Pascha. 😉

Ecumenically,
Mick
👍
 
You do not have a monopoly on the name…you might think you SHOULD…but you do not. Now, you might not think they are REAL Catholics but that is not the point. I understand your view. I, not being Roman Catholic (and I use that term intentionally in this case) do not agree with you.

The fact remains with this line of reasoning, only one group is the true Lutherans, Methodists etc
The Catholic Church in communion with the Bishop of Rome may not have a monopoly on the word “catholic”, but churches called “Catholic” who are not in communion with Rome cannot be considered “Catholic denominations” because communion with Rome is a defining characteristic of the members of the Catholic Church.

Appearances are simply not enough. Many High-Church Anglican services look, smell, and sound very much like a Catholic Mass celebrated in a Catholic church by a Catholic priest.
 
You do not have a monopoly on the name…you might think you SHOULD…but you do not. Now, you might not think they are REAL Catholics but that is not the point. I understand your view. I, not being Roman Catholic (and I use that term intentionally in this case) do not agree with you.

The fact remains with this line of reasoning, only one group is the true Lutherans, Methodists etc
Only one group are United Methodists. The others are other kinds of Methodists. I know Methodists who have no problem with this.

Any can use the word “Catholic”, but it doesn’t make them part of the Catholic Church.

Again, you don’t understand what Catholicism is.
 
The Catholic Church in communion with the Bishop of Rome may not have a monopoly on the word “catholic”, but churches called “Catholic” who are not in communion with Rome cannot be considered “Catholic denominations” because communion with Rome is a defining characteristic of the members of the Catholic Church.

Appearances are simply not enough. Many High-Church Anglican services look, smell, and sound very much like a Catholic Mass celebrated in a Catholic church by a Catholic priest.
But they are Catholic denominations. They are naturally not part of your church, that is not what I am saying. But They were part of the Roman Catholic Church at one time, certainly that is the case with the larger ones, and now they are not. It is a defining characteristic of your church but not all Catholic denominations. You have a theological objection to this, I understand but it is not a historical one. If there had been one Baptist denomination for 1000 years and now there are several, there would be several Baptist denominations. The Roman Catholic Church does not get an exception just because they do not want anyone else using the name.
 
Only one group are United Methodists. The others are other kinds of Methodists. I know Methodists who have no problem with this.

Any can use the word “Catholic”, but it doesn’t make them part of the Catholic Church.

Again, you don’t understand what Catholicism is.
There you have made the crucial distinction to support what I have been saying all along! There is only one United Methodist Church. There is only one Roman Catholic Church or you could even say there is only one Catholic Church in communion with the Bishop of Rome.
There ARE several Methodist churches and there are several Catholic churches as well.
 
But they are Catholic denominations. They are naturally not part of your church, that is not what I am saying. But They were part of the Roman Catholic Church at one time, certainly that is the case with the larger ones, and now they are not. It is a defining characteristic of your church but not all Catholic denominations. You have a theological objection to this, I understand but it is not a historical one. If there had been one Baptist denomination for 1000 years and now there are several, there would be several Baptist denominations. The Roman Catholic Church does not get an exception just because they do not want anyone else using the name.
You just don’t get it. :rolleyes:
 
There you have made the crucial distinction to support what I have been saying all along! There is only one United Methodist Church. There is only one Roman Catholic Church or you could even say there is only one Catholic Church in communion with the Bishop of Rome.
There ARE several Methodist churches and there are several Catholic churches as well.
You just refuse to learn about Catholicism. There are several rites in the Catholic Church, the Latin (Roman) Rite (Roman Catholic) being one of them. All Catholics are in full communion with the Catholic Church. Rite doesn’t refer to different beliefs. All are part of the Catholic Church.

You seem to think that these different rites are like Protestant denominations that break off from one another over doctrinal differences of opinion. Not true of Catholic rites. All Catholics are in full communion. We all share one set of beliefs.

Any church which is not in full communion, no matter what they call themselves, no matter where they come from, is not a Catholic denomination, because there is no such thing as a Catholic denomination. Again, Catholic rites are not the same as denominations, since all Catholic churches share the same set of beliefs and are in full communion with each other and the whole Catholic Church.

Your church is either a Catholic church - in full communion with the Catholic Church - or it isn’t. Calling it Catholic doesn’t make it Catholic. There are no denominations (off-shoots with differing beliefs) within Catholicism. I can call myself a Smith. Doesn’t make me a Smith.

All Christians are in some kind of communion with the Catholic Church, but it’s not full communion. For a church to be Catholic, it must be in full communion with the Catholic Church.

If you refuse to learn this very simple fact, you will continue to mistakenly believe that anyone calling their church “Catholic” is a denomination of the true Catholic Church.

There are no denominations within the Catholic Church, only without.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top