1
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
C
Contarini
Guest
Insufficient argument. Remember that the Church extends throughout time as well as space. By your logic, the facts that the Catholic Church added the Filioque to the Creed (and for that matter that Eastern Catholics are still not required to use it), and that the Nicene Creed was not adopted till 325 and was then significantly modified in 381, constitute an “insoluble dilemma” for Catholics.
In other words, you have to show that these statements of faith are clearly contradictory, not just that they are verbally different. But that would be a bit of work, wouldn’t it?
Furthermore, once you have shown that some evangelical Protestants statements of faith contradict each other, you will have to show that they do so on matters necessary to the Faith. Note again the Filioque. This clearly reflects a theological difference between East and West. Yet your own Church has decided that Eastern Catholics do not need to use it. (There is a difference, I admit, since Rome allows this on the grounds that the same faith can be expressed in somewhat different words. Protestants, lacking central authority, have a lot more problems with this.)
Edwin
C
Cat
Guest
Many of them are, or are so very close that there is no conflict.
My husband and I were evangelical Protestant until we were 47 years old and converted to Catholicism.
During that time, we were members of Assemblies of God, Conference Baptists, Christian church, Southern Baptist, Christian and MIssionary Alliance, and Evangelical Free Church in America.
We were also members for two years of a Reformed Church in America, but this denomination is not considered “evangelical,” it is considered “mainline.”
All of these denoms, including the Reformed Church, had Statements of Faith, and in the essentials, they were identical. The essentials are as follows:
- The inerrancy of the Bible
- The Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ
- Christ’s Substitutionary atonement (death on the cross)
- Bodily resurrection of Jesus
- either a) Second coming of Jesus or b) Authenticity of Miracles of Jesus
By “essential”, we meant (and still mean) those things that are necessary for authentic Christianity. Christianity without the Virgin Birth is not Christianity. Same for the other essentials above.
The various Statements of Faith all contained these essentials. Where they differed was the Non-Essentials.
E.g., the Assemblies of God adds the aspect of the “Sign Gifts,” mainly that the evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is speaking in tongues. That statement, BTW, is still part of the Assemblies of God Statement of Faith (unless they’ve changed it in the last year or two), even though it’s not emphasized as much as it was when my husband was growing up there. They want to attract new members, not scare them away!
The Conference Baptist church adds a few non-essentials but to be honest, I can’t even remember what they are. I think they have to do with the freedom of each individual believer to interpret Scripture, without relying on a pastor or church organization. But I may be wrong.
However, when I was growing up, the Conference Baptist churches had a Church Constitution that forbade the drinking of alcoholic beverages, or indeed, having any assocation with alcoholic beverages (e.g., owning a restaurant that served liquor) for its members. If you were willing to sit in the church as a non-member (which meant you couldn’t teach or serve on any boards), you could drink. But most people were very happy to go along with this “rule” in order to become a member of the Church.
I don’t know if the teetotaller pledge is still in the Church Constitution. In fact, I don’t know if they still have a Church Constitution. So many evangelical churches have dropped things like that so as not to discourage people from joining. And after all, alcohol consumption is a non-essential.
The Christian church added the idea of “Restoration Movement” (the church is trying to be as much like the New Testament Church of Acts as possible). In our opinion, the Christian church is the closest to Catholicism of all the evangelical churches. Communion is offered at every church worship service, and baptism is required to consider yourself a Christian. It was in the Christian church that my husband and I developed a deep love for Holy Communion and sensed that there was much more to this practice than a gulp of grape juice and piece of matzoh. We believe that it was this church that probably lit in us a desire for the True Eucharist, not just a symbol of Christ’s Body and Blood.
I don’t remember anything about the Southern Baptist Statement of Faith, except that it was similiar to the Conference Baptist Statement of Faith. We didn’t stay in the SBC very long.
The Christian and Missionary Alliance adds the aspect of church MISSIONS to the Statement of Faith. The C and MA was founded originally as a Missionary Sending Organization, for the purpose of helping ALL churches of ALL denominations send missionaries overseas. But eventually it morphed into a true denominations. However, the original purpose of sending missionaries to the foreign field is still very strong in C and MA churches (many allot 50% of their church budget to Foreign Missions, while in many other evangelical churches, the figure is around 5% or less.)
Also, the C and MA adds the concept of the Four Fold Gospe: Christ the Savior, Christ the King, Christ the Sanctifier, and Christ the Healer. In the C and MA, the belief in the possibility of literal physical or mental healing from the Lord (miraculous) is very real.
Finally the E Free churches. Same Statement of Faith when it comes to the essentials. Again, I can’t remember the differences, but they were negligible.
Always keep in mind that the Statement of Faith is different than a Church Constitution (or whatever they call it). A Statement of Faith tells you what the church believes. The Church Constitution tells you what is required for admittance into church membership. I think a lot of evangelical churches have relaxed these requirements in order to attract and retain members. But in many evangelical churches, you still have to be a member to teach or serve on a board. If this is important to you, you will want to be a member.
In case you’re wondering, the Reformed Church Statement of Faith has the same five essentials, but since the Reformed Church is a “sacramental” church, they add all the sacramental things. But in the Reformed Church, these sacramentals are considered essentials, too, just as they are in the Catholic Church. (i.e., in the Catholic Church and the Reformed Church, water baptism is an essential, whereas in most evangelical churches, it is NOT an essential.)
1
1holycatholic
Guest
Red herring. There is only one Church, and it’s not some invisible amalgam of believers.Insufficient argument. Remember that the Church extends throughout time as well as space.
Source:
The Second Vatican Council, in n. 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution * Lumen Gentium*, stated that “this Church, constituted and organized as a society in this present, world, subsists in (subsistit in) the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him, although (licet) many elements of sanctification and truth can be found outside her structure; such elements, as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, impel towards Catholic unity”.
If you want contradiction look at Baptism. They are all over the map. Some don’t even mention it. They don’t even agree as to what the “essentials” are.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.