What can I expect from a Baptist Service

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

yes , a catholic CAN receive communion at a baptist service.

No a Catholic can not receive at a Baptist service, or more properly said may not receive.

 

[lisahiku]

You know one Protestant Church that lives in Fantasy land with communiton consecrated by whom? Does not matter what they believe. :

Just to clarify, this is not MY quote.

 

[JHow]

…and the denomination officially supported slavery in the US when it was legal…

Point of order here. I don’t think Southern Baptists deserve to be singled out on the subject of slavery. Churches and churchmen in the South supported the southern cause. You can easily find examples of this (See the relevant chapter in Paul Johnson’s popular A History of Christianity for some notable examples). This happened across all Christian churches or denominations (and other religions as well). Southern Baptist teaching and ideology was no more responsible for slavery than that of any other Christian church of that time.

 

[jmcrae]

it is not the same.

You’re right. It’s waaaaay better, because instead of just “accepting Jesus as my Lord and Saviour” in a spiritual way, I am uniting His body and blood, soul and divinity with my body and blood, soul, and humanity, and subsuming both my body and my will to His. :getholy:

 

[Cat]

Don’t worry, you will have no urge to genuflect in a Protestant church anymore than there would be in any other non-Catholic venue you might find yourself in. You will immediately notice the absence of the Eucharist by the empty feeling you find in your heart while there.

Again, this is just not true.

Even if Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament is not present, He is present wherever two or three are gathered together in His Name.

I was raised Baptist, and even though I reject many of their teachings now that I am Catholic, I still have a warm feeling in my heart whenever I get a chance to re-visit Protestant friends on their turf. Again, if you were not raised Protestant, it will probably be hard to you to have the same warm feeling, just like it is hard for those of us who weren’t raised Catholic to feel anything “special” about the Latin Mass. But don’t deny that it is there for many of us who grew up in it.

 

[mark_a]

I was recently invited by my Baptist cousin to attend a church service in a couple of weeks time in which he will be giving the sermon. He claims he is not a pastor but his pastor has given him this honor because of his belief in him and his knowledge on the Bible. He is a fallen away Catholic. What can I expect from a Baptist Service as I have only attended his church for a funeral.

My experiences in Baptist Churches is that before Church starts, it sounds like a school cafeteria. I have not seen anyone kneeling and praying.

Other than that it was a positive experience except for the sense of dread that some anti-Catholic rhetoric might come from the pulpit. Which didn’t happen.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

I am a catholic. Believe it or not!

But I also respect other people’s beliefs. I don’t know if others would agree with me, but I don’t think this forum is very respecting of protestants.

I agree, lisa.

Posters on this forum often maintain a very triumphalistic attitude. I have seen hurt feelings in this forum from Protestants before. I agree with you that we Catholics should not be rude or triumphalistic - one must always speak the truth with charity. And despite what Protestantism lacks, there are good things in it as well.

I find that SOME (not ALL) members of this forum are quick to put down other people who are protestant. Don’t mean to offend, but that is how I feel.

I’ve seen that happen too, lisa.

Regarding communion…I errored on here and I apologize. Catholics SHOULD NOT receive communion at other churches. Again, I apologize.

It was an honest mistake. It can be confusing since most Protestant churches allow Catholics to receive. It doesn’t always occur to people that the Catholic Church doesn’t want them receiving.

I’ve seen Catholics make the same mistake in reverse, too: assume that Orthodox receive Holy Communion if they attend a Catholic Mass simply because we allow them to… all the while forgetting that their own Orthodox Church is most often against it.

I really this quote from you offensive! Who are YOU to judge that protestants live in a “fantasy” land with communion consecrated by “who”?

I agree. Most Protestants do not believe in the Real Presence in the first place, so obviously they’re not in “fantasy land” even from a Catholic perspective.

 

[mark_a]

Southern Baptist teaching and ideology was no more responsible for slavery than that of any other Christian church of that time.

But tons their descendants are still pretty emphatic that it ain’ wrong ‘cause it’s in th’ bible!

 

[ltwin]

But tons their descendants are still pretty emphatic that it ain’ wrong ‘cause it’s in th’ bible!

This is wrong. No one in the Southern Baptist Convention is still defending slavery, or segregation for that matter, let alone doing it from the Bible. FYI the SBC recently apologized for their pro-slavery origins.

 

[mark_a]

This is wrong. No one in the Southern Baptist Convention is still defending slavery, or segregation for that matter, let alone doing it from the Bible. FYI the SBC recently apologized for their pro-slavery origins.

I didn’t say the SBC is defending slavery.

By the way, has the SBC apologized for their pro-abortion stand in the early seventies?

 

[ltwin]

I didn’t say the SBC is defending slavery.

Quite right, you didn’t say they defended slavery. You said, “But tons their descendants are still pretty emphatic that it ain’ wrong ‘cause it’s in th’ bible!” Can you cite one Southern Baptist today who agrees with this?

By the way, has the SBC apologized for their pro-abortion stand in the early seventies?

What pro-abortion position are you talking about? The closest thing to that that I can come up with is the 1971 resolution:

Therefore, be it RESOLVED, that this Convention express the belief that society has a responsibility to affirm through the laws of the state a high view of the sanctity of human life, including fetal life, in order to protect those who cannot protect themselves; and

Be it further RESOLVED, That we call upon Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother (Resolution on Abortion June 1971)

If they did ever have such a position, it was almost certainly before the “Conservative Resurgence” (also known as the “Fundamentalist Takeover”) of the Convention. It would be impossible for them to hold such a position now, and they certainly are not pro-abortion today.

The 1982 “Resolution on Abortion and Infanticide” states:

Therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the messengers to the 1982 Southern Baptist Convention affirm that all human life, both born and pre-born, is sacred, bearing the image of God, and is not subject to personal judgments as to “quality of life” based on such subjective criteria as stage of development, abnormality, intelligence level, degree of dependency, cost of medical treatment, or inconvenience to parents.

Be it further RESOLVED, That we abhor the use of federal, state or local tax money; public, tax-supported medical facilities; or Southern Baptist supported medical facilities for the practice of selfish, medically unnecessary abortions and/or the practice of withholding treatment from unwanted or defective newly born infants.

Be it finally RESOLVED, That we support and will work for appropriate legislation and/or constitutional amendment which will prohibit abortions except to save the physical life of the mother, and that we also support and will work for legislation which will prohibit the practice of infanticide.

All SBC resolutions on abortion and other topics can be found here.

The history is interesting. The SBC seems to have gone in the opposite direction than other historical Protestant denominations. The usual pattern is that the conservatives are driven out, but in the SBC it was the liberals who were driven out. Read all about it here: Southern Baptist Convention conservative resurgence."

 

[mark_a]

Can you cite one Southern Baptist today who agrees with this?

Are you kidding me? You must live in a different South Carolina than I do.

What pro-abortion position are you talking about? The closest thing to that that I can come up with is the 1971 resolution:

Yes, the one you posted:

Be it further RESOLVED, That we call upon Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother (Resolution on Abortion June 1971)

It would be impossible for them to hold such a position now, and they certainly are not pro-abortion today.

So truth changed for the SBC?

 

[JHow]

I think trying to single out Southern Baptists with respect to slavery is a-historical at best. As I mentioned in the previous post, most pastors in southern churches at the time supported the southern cause (and in the North, these same denominations supported the Northern case). That includes Roman Catholic bishops (Jean Marie Odin of New Orleans, for example), Episcopalians (most of the leadership of the Confederacy), Methodists, Baptists, as well as Jewish leaders such as Rab. Michelbacher of a Richmond, Va. synagogue, and the well-known Judah Benjamin, Sec. of War for the CSA (admittedly not a religious figure, but rather a politician). While racism didn’t disappear in the South (or the North) after April 1865, slavery did. Even the nuttiest civil-war re-enactor today doesn’t argue for a return to slavery. The fact is that Christians of all stripes made excuses for slavery based on “biblical grounds” at the time. Those arguments were wrong then and now, and we need look at those arguments and say why they are wrong - but I don’t think Southern baptists of today are teaching anything like this.

 

[ltwin]

Are you kidding me? You must live in a different South Carolina than I do.

I know there are racists in South Carolina. What I don’t know of is any Southern Baptist today who says slavery is justified because its in the Bible. Please tell me one Southern Baptist who is saying this today? I imagine it could be possible, but I doubt they would have any credibility whatsoever with anyone else in the denomination. However, you said “tons their descendants are still pretty emphatic” so you shouldn’t have problems giving me some names.

So truth changed for the SBC?

Truth for the SBC is contained in the Word of God. A resolution from the Southern Baptist Convention is just that, a resolution from a group of men and women. It is the responsibility of the messengers to Convention to apply the principles from the Word of God to all that they do. The resolution from the 1970s was too ambiguous and broad in its support for legal exceptions to abortion. It has since been corrected.

 

[JHow]

I…Truth for the SBC is contained in the Word of God. A resolution from the Southern Baptist Convention is just that, a resolution from a group of men and women. It is the responsibility of the messengers to Convention to apply the principles from the Word of God to all that they do. The resolution from the 1970s was too ambiguous and broad in its support for legal exceptions to abortion. It has since been corrected.

To this point, correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t the individual SB congregations have a say in this too? For instance if a congregation strongly disagreed with the convention, can’t they somehow resign, or disassociate themselves?

I think the actual message one hears in the pews will have a lot to do with a particular pastor at a particular church.

 

[mark_a]

However, you said “tons their descendants are still pretty emphatic” so you shouldn’t have problems giving me some names.

Sorry, I just won’t be able to give names on a public internet forum or in person, should we ever stumble across each other. That would be a sin, ya know.

It is the responsibility of the messengers to Convention to apply the principles from the Word of God to all that they do. The resolution from the 1970s was too ambiguous and broad in its support for legal exceptions to abortion. It has since been corrected.

Legal exceptions are a pro-abortion position.

 

[mark_a]

I think trying to single out Southern Baptists with respect to slavery is a-historical at best. As I mentioned in the previous post, most pastors in southern churches at the time supported the southern cause (and in the North, these same denominations supported the Northern case). That includes Roman Catholic bishops (Jean Marie Odin of New Orleans, for example),

Right, I know that the Catholic Diocese of Charleston issued an apology for Bishop Lynch, who inherited slaves from his father.

 

[Jack_Bauer]

There is no reason to genuflect. Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament is not present.

That’s the funniest thing I’ve ever seen or done. Have you ever genuflected at a movie theatre seat or dipped your hands in an ashtray at the same place. Funny. If you attend daily mass it becomes a natural reflex to do such things. We just laugh and shrug it off. It’s particularly embarrassing when you catch yourself genuflecting at a protestant church that does not teach that the Eucharist is Christ’s actual body and blood.

For the earlier poster, lisahiku, about saying that Catholics are allowed to receive baptist’s communion. The baptist church congregation may present an open communion, but Catholics in good conscience are not permitted by the authority of the Church to do so. We obey our leaders just as Christ told his followers to obey the teachers of the law. When I was a member of the Church of Christ, an open communion was not permitted in our congregation. One must be considered a Christian before being allowed. Baptists nor Catholics met the criteria. Just a little information of interest.

 

[ltwin]

Sorry, I just won’t be able to give names on a public internet forum or in person, should we ever stumble across each other. That would be a sin, ya know.

So am I correct that you know of no public figure, such as an SBC pastor, or local SBC church that attempts to justify slavery?

Legal exceptions are a pro-abortion position.

And that position is no longer held.

 

[ltwin]

To this point, correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t the individual SB congregations have a say in this too? For instance if a congregation strongly disagreed with the convention, can’t they somehow resign, or disassociate themselves?

I think the actual message one hears in the pews will have a lot to do with a particular pastor at a particular church.

Yes, the convention’s actions are not binding on local churches. A church can leave anytime or can be kicked out by the appropriate agencies.