R
raster
Guest
Why we Christian are seperate? Is there no possibility that we Christians can be united again? when do we christians will be united when the judgement day comes, in the 2nd comming of Jesus?
- Status
B
Br.Rich_SFO
Guest
Why we Christian are seperate?
Because we are human and will always insist on our views no matter how wrong we might be, many times we refuse to even consider another point of view different from ours. Even when presented with the facts of history.
What is the difference between Catholic (Roman), Orthodox, Protestant?
First Catholic is the universal Church founded by Christ. Western Catholic (Roman) and Eastern Catholic (Byzantine and others) accept the same doctrines. But differ in Liturgy, traditions, language, etc.
Orthodox Christians are Eastern Christians separated from Catholic unity primarily by matters of Church governance. The role of the Pope in the Church. Many Orthodox refuse to return to union with Rome because they fear loosing their Eastern identity, liturgy, traditions. Which is not so.
Protestant Christians are Western Christians who separated from the Western Catholic Church over matters of Doctrine and Practice primarily. Most hesitate to return to union with Rome because it would mean having to give up long held differences of Doctrine. Doctrines established by their founders who separated from the Catholic Church.
Then there is Non-Denominational or Evangelical Christians. Who either separated from mainline Protestant churches or sprouted on their own. They define their own beliefs, Doctrines and practices. Many hold beliefs that historically are heresies found in early Christianity and refuse to recognize any organized Church structure outside of their local Christian community. Many do not require even Baptism for membership!
M
Magicsilence
Guest
Pride.
F
Franze
Guest
Pride, I think too, but the Holy Spirit is with the Catholic Church, it´s our protection.
B
BayCityRickL
Guest
This question is really too big. You ought to visit a few websites about each of these churches and start to piece this together yourself.
Or, consult a few books on the history of Christianity.
To focus on doctrinal issues alone is a mistake, a total mistake. I believe that personalities and emotions are deeply involved.
For example, the Roman church sacked the eastern city of Constantinople on the way to the crusades, if I recall correctly. The Orthodox are still really mad about that. Don’t kid yourself, it’s all personal.
The Orthodox Church split over what appears to be a doctrinal dispute about the “filioque” == this refers to the Nicene Creed which has that line about the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father “and the Son” (" filioque"). The issue is not the line so much, although it is a deep theological problem, but the problem is that the Roman church added that one Latin word to the Nicene Creed without consulting the Easter Church.
And, you see, the problem goes way back to the Nicene Creed itself. As I understand (Read Garry Wills “Why I am a Catholic”), the Nicene Creed was developed at the council of Nicea, to which the Roman representatives were not even invited. Perhaps the Nicene Creed was not known in Rome until maybe 25 years after the Council, and they had to beg the Greeks for the manuscripts of what was decided there. (Wills is a historian and Pulitzer Prize winning author “Lincoln at Gettysburg” .)
So, that was a feud that was brewing for many hundreds of years.
The Protestant reformation is much like that. The PBS series on Luther (or maybe it was the History Channel) shows how Luther was a very docile priest in Germany. He wanted to discuss some matters and so went to Rome and was totally scandalized about what he saw there. He saw oppulence and decadence in the Church compared to the austerity of his own circumstances as a priest in a disciplined religious order. He started simply to take matters into his own hands, as undoubtedly he thought he should. The problems in the Church were real, and they had been known for a couple hundred years. Luther was just the wrong guy to cross. The Protestant reformation was a revolt against the doctrinal, political, financial, social, and spiritual control of Rome.
As you may notice, Luther separated the Bible and the Church, which Catholics believe is fundamentally wrong == they are inseparable. So, Luther sits down and translates the bible from the original languages (as opposed to the Roman Vulgate) and away we go. We’ve got “the bible alone” (sola scriptura) and the whole nine yards. The whole thing launches off more on the declaration of political independence from Rome. It is no accident that the French Revolution was so anti-clerical, based on the ideas that were set into action by Luther. Notice people who supposedly know say how irreligious Europe is today. The Reformation is still doing its damage today.
Or, consult a few books on the history of Christianity.
To focus on doctrinal issues alone is a mistake, a total mistake. I believe that personalities and emotions are deeply involved.
For example, the Roman church sacked the eastern city of Constantinople on the way to the crusades, if I recall correctly. The Orthodox are still really mad about that. Don’t kid yourself, it’s all personal.
The Orthodox Church split over what appears to be a doctrinal dispute about the “filioque” == this refers to the Nicene Creed which has that line about the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father “and the Son” (" filioque"). The issue is not the line so much, although it is a deep theological problem, but the problem is that the Roman church added that one Latin word to the Nicene Creed without consulting the Easter Church.
And, you see, the problem goes way back to the Nicene Creed itself. As I understand (Read Garry Wills “Why I am a Catholic”), the Nicene Creed was developed at the council of Nicea, to which the Roman representatives were not even invited. Perhaps the Nicene Creed was not known in Rome until maybe 25 years after the Council, and they had to beg the Greeks for the manuscripts of what was decided there. (Wills is a historian and Pulitzer Prize winning author “Lincoln at Gettysburg” .)
So, that was a feud that was brewing for many hundreds of years.
The Protestant reformation is much like that. The PBS series on Luther (or maybe it was the History Channel) shows how Luther was a very docile priest in Germany. He wanted to discuss some matters and so went to Rome and was totally scandalized about what he saw there. He saw oppulence and decadence in the Church compared to the austerity of his own circumstances as a priest in a disciplined religious order. He started simply to take matters into his own hands, as undoubtedly he thought he should. The problems in the Church were real, and they had been known for a couple hundred years. Luther was just the wrong guy to cross. The Protestant reformation was a revolt against the doctrinal, political, financial, social, and spiritual control of Rome.
As you may notice, Luther separated the Bible and the Church, which Catholics believe is fundamentally wrong == they are inseparable. So, Luther sits down and translates the bible from the original languages (as opposed to the Roman Vulgate) and away we go. We’ve got “the bible alone” (sola scriptura) and the whole nine yards. The whole thing launches off more on the declaration of political independence from Rome. It is no accident that the French Revolution was so anti-clerical, based on the ideas that were set into action by Luther. Notice people who supposedly know say how irreligious Europe is today. The Reformation is still doing its damage today.
- Status