A
allischalmers
Guest
Psalms 33 — i can not find a liturgy in the BibleYou’ll have to show me where. But you ignored the second point.
- Status
E
Evan
Guest
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
I guess pretty recognizable, since my tradition and local community embraces all of those things.
J
jmcrae
Guest
What about the moral teachings? Would you say that your church teaches all that is taught in the Didache? (Including the ban on medical interventions to prevent or destroy pregnancy?)
N
Nine_Two
Guest
We know the Bible is correct because it says it is correct, and we know it is correct on this because it says it is correct, and we know it is correct on this because it says it is correct…
Circle logic just doesn’t do it for me.
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
You’re obviously going to keep asking questions and add on to the list until you can say, “Ah hah!”
I suspect the apostles and martyrs would have problems with practices on both sides of the Tiber. I knew this thread would become a set up and strawman before it was over.
Why do Protestants at CAF answer any thread that begins “Protestants…” One of these days, I will learn not to take the bait.
J
jmcrae
Guest
It’s not that I want to say “Aha” - it’s that I want you to say “Aha.”
I do doubt, though, that the theology and moral teachings of the Methodist Church around issues of human life would be recognizable to the Apostles as something they would have expected their successors to have come up with.
J
jpaul1953
Guest
Harpazo,Glory to Jesus Christ!
I have a genuine question for the Protestants on CAF. Do you believe that the Apostles and martyrs who shed their blood would recognize your church or denomination? Would they see their same faith in your church? Does it even matter if they did? Why or why not?
While this thread is geared toward Protestants, I would appreciate (name removed by moderator)ut from former Protestants as to what they believed in regards to this when they were in that particular church/denomination. But please no Protestant bashing!
In Christ,
Andrew
Your last remark let’s us Catholics know what you think about us. The Eight Commandement has been abused in this foray of comments
M
MDK
Guest
O.S.,
I believe your tradition didn’t exist until the 1960’s. Did God wait that long to start His Church, or did He start His Church in 33 AD… the same Church that authored the New Covenant Scriptures?
Sadly, your tradition has no apostolic succession, and so only two valid sacraments. You don’t have a valid Confession, Holy Orders, Confirmation, Extreme Unction, nor Eucharist. How is that a good thing?
It’s really common sense to see that you’re “tradition” is nothing more than a man-made collection of ideas separated from authentic Christianity. If you guys didn’t distort ideas from authentic Christianity, then there would be no reason for United Methodist separatists.
The Holy Spirit unites in God’s one Church, the Catholic Church.
Satan is able to divide in Protestantism. Satan therefore has won a victory in Protestantism. It may not be a complete victory for Satan (yet), but he’s much happier with you believing the falsehoods of United Methodist than the truths taught for the last 2,000 years in the Catholic Church with a valid and licit Eucharist!
N
Nine_Two
Guest
While I don’t know his intentions, I will comment that Orthodox often use the term “Catholic” (both with a capital c and a small c) self-referentially. It may well have just been an attempt at a blanket statement for those who practice apostolic-succession verses those who do not.
H
Harpazo
Guest
Heh?
What are you implying here?I only placed that last marker so that Catholics would not jump on this thread as a way to condemn Protestants (which has already failed given some of the comments). Let’s face it, this particular forum has become a place for some Catholics to preach to other religions about why their religion is bad and why they must become Catholic or burn in Hell forever. The goal of this thread was to open discussion, and not preach to Protestants why they’re wrong.
But I guess I just can’t do it right.
In Christ,
Andrew
H
Harpazo
Guest
I apologize if that’s what you that the thread was forYou’re obviously going to keep asking questions and add on to the list until you can say, “Ah hah!”
I suspect the apostles and martyrs would have problems with practices on both sides of the Tiber. I knew this thread would become a set up and strawman before it was over.
Why do Protestants at CAF answer any thread that begins “Protestants…” One of these days, I will learn not to take the bait.
As in my previous post, I explained that I wanted to help facilitate discussion and get opinions, not preaching to one another. I, personally, wanted to see various perspectives on the matter from a large array of Protestants.But as is custom here, some people will unavoidably use it as an opportunity to condemn instead of learn.
In Christ,
Andrew
B
BrianH
Guest
In posts like this, it is hard to know whether the proper response is. In general though, I think the topic is way too broad. What specific traditions? Well MDK mentions several. They state that “Holy Orders” only occurs through a bishop. A contradiction of the historical evidence that bishop/presbyter were synonymous
newadvent.org/cathen/02581b.htm
I think you will find the vast majority of what constitutes our traditions are shared with most other elements of Christianity. Perhaps you will find some that started in the 1960’s. I am sure they exist.
I needed this thread and it comes at a good time for me. I am not egotistical enough to think it happened for a reason…but it was good timing. Thank the Lord.
J
jmcrae
Guest
At one time, yes, we only had Bishops.
Later, when the Church became larger, Bishops began to appoint “assistant presbyters” who had less authority than themselves and were under obedience to them - thus, the priesthood as we know it today. But yes, there were only Bishops and Deacons (all ordained by the Apostles), in the beginning.
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
You are obviously mistaken and quite the smart-a**. But congratulations.
They are very valid to a lot of folks, including me. I believe God certainly honors it. Several U.S. presidents have been Methodists, I believe. Not to mention millions of others who are now among the communion of the saints. I think God needs our humility a lot more than our triumphalism.
Spoken with true arrogance. Bravo.
Bravo again. Wonderful. And thank you.
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
You’re not the problem, Andrew. And, as always, you are wise beyond your years.I apologize if that’s what you that the thread was for
But as is custom here, some people will unavoidably use it as an opportunity to condemn instead of learn.
In Christ,
Andrew
Some folks can’t resist a Protestant jab and bash - even when the initial invitation is to share. I won’t answer these threads anymore - I’m not going to share my opinion and get bashed for it, especially when it’s my faith. Living the faith is hard enough without fellow Christians bashing and jabbing it.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Methodism began with John and Charles Wesley in the mid 1700s at Oxford University, originally (as so many Protestant denominations) as a student Bible club. They became separated from Anglicanism during their missionary journeys to North America, when North American converts began to ordain their own clergy (yes, you read that right - lay converts - not Bishops - were “ordaining” men to be ministers of the Methodist Church), outside of the hierarchy of the Anglican Church. Since these ordinations obviously could not be recognized by the Anglican hierarchy, they formed their own system of organization.Really??? The Methodist tradition did not exist before the 1960’s???
You can’t be serious.
However, it is not wrong to say that the United Methodists got their start in the 1960s, since the United Methodist Church, specifically, as an offshoot of Methodism, came into existence on April 23rd, 1968, when, according to their official website, “Bishop Reuben H. Mueller, representing The Evangelical United Brethren Church, and Bishop Lloyd C. Wicke of The Methodist Church joined hands at the constituting General Conference in Dallas, Texas. With the words, “Lord of the Church, we are united in Thee, in Thy Church and now in The United Methodist Church,” the new denomination was given birth by two churches that had distinguished histories and influential ministries in various parts of the world.”
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
If you’re going to bash Methodism, at least do it with the proper history, not revisionist.
No, it started as the “Oxford Club” devoted to piety, holiness, biblical exegesis, frequent celebration of the Eucharist (at that time, weekly Eucharists were rare in the Church of England), prayer offices, visitation of the poor, and accountable discipleship. The Wesley’s were already ordained priests in the Church of England, and teaching at Oxford (they were not students at the time). I’ve never heard any historian refer to it as a “Bible Club.” The term “Methodist” came about at that time, and it was a term used in derision by those who ridiculed the Oxford Club. They were also called Bible Bigots, Sacramentarians, and “Holy Club.”
No - John and Charles Wesley died Anglican priests. They came over, actually, to convert Indians/Native Americans and served parishes at Fort Oglethorpe. No one was ordained until Francis Asbury and Thomas Coke were ordained bishops, simply because no Anglican bishops were available to ordain. Wesley ordained Asbury and Coke by the Alexandrian Precedent, from Roman Catholic history. There were some breakaway lay preachers who ordained each other… and were promptly admonished by Asbury and ordained later.
John Wesley was in his 80’s when the Christmas Conference was held and organized in 1784 - and in England. The Methodists in the U.S. had no intention of wanting to be Anglican (given the lack of love for the Church of England). On the other hand, both Wesleys died Anglican priests in good standing. In many ways, Methodism was a ‘fill in’ for a Church that wasn’t present, and it started at best, by accident.
Y
yankee_doodle
Guest
I’m protestant in the protester sense
But let’s think about the OP question, would an apostle recognize a protestant church (and view it as a proper “church”)?
In my experience most protestant churches tend to be simple dwellings, with not much decoration, probably much more like the simple dwellings first century Christians worshiped in compared to the grandeur of a Catholic Church. I’m sure protestant services are also probably more similar to apostolic era services since the Catholic mass is a very orderly, ritualistic worship ceremony. The first century church, according to the bible, wasn’t nearly as organized as the CC. Sometimes services were held in peoples homes.
Fast forward a few centuries and you see a different picture begin to emerge. But it took many centuries for the Catholic Church we see today to develop.
So I’m not sure how you guys imagine this bolsters Catholicism versus protestantism … but anyways?
But let’s think about the OP question, would an apostle recognize a protestant church (and view it as a proper “church”)?
In my experience most protestant churches tend to be simple dwellings, with not much decoration, probably much more like the simple dwellings first century Christians worshiped in compared to the grandeur of a Catholic Church. I’m sure protestant services are also probably more similar to apostolic era services since the Catholic mass is a very orderly, ritualistic worship ceremony. The first century church, according to the bible, wasn’t nearly as organized as the CC. Sometimes services were held in peoples homes.
Fast forward a few centuries and you see a different picture begin to emerge. But it took many centuries for the Catholic Church we see today to develop.
So I’m not sure how you guys imagine this bolsters Catholicism versus protestantism … but anyways?
- Status