Why Evangelical megachurches are embracing (some) Catholic traditions

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In my protestant days a church I attended started doing many “Catholic” things in their services. I objected (I was VERY iconoclastic!) and was convinced that it was actually okay that they were doing these things. I observed it and saw it was indeed good, and then I was like “Okay, if that’s okay then what else is?” and BAM. Before I knew it I was crossing the Tiber. 😉
 
Actually not entirely accurate. Several Gnostic groups have persisted in the Middle East for almost 2000 years.

And again, yes the Nicene view became the dominant one at the direction and behest of the Roman Emperor (eventually). Though not all at once as it took the Roman/Byzantine leadership, once they bought into what we consider orthodox Christianity, more than 4 centuries to convert (by carrot and sword) most to their way of thinking (and even then even the Roman leadership didn’t buy in initially). And by the time they had Christianity had already fractured, or begun fracturing, on other lines.
 
I assume you still believe that there is some form of Christian orthodoxy… Christ is either divine or he isn’t. As an Episcopalian (do I have that right?), you’re much closer to Catholicism or Orthodoxy than Arian or Gnostic Christianity.
 
Indeed. Just pointing out that it’s a fallacy that Christianity has always been one big happy family. Like all families there have been splits and squabbles since the word go.
 
Your limited exposure seems to lead you to a likely correct conclusion. They’re a gaggle of Anglicans.
 
JimG said:
The article describes a move towards more liturgical worship, not necessarily a move toward Catholicism. The author describes some who have indeed moved to other more traditional churches, Orthodoxy, in some cases, but not Catholicism:

“Some former evangelicals used vibrant seeker churches as a stepping stone, eventually leaving for Orthodox, Anglican or Presbyterian communions. For many, leaving evangelicalism for Catholicism would mean losing careers, even family and friends.
Click to expand...
The most common guess I’ve seen for why Eastern Orthodoxy is favoured over Catholicism isn’t what’s mentioned above: adding Sacred Tradition isn’t a big leap for many who have held to Sola Scriptura, which remarkably involves visiting Tradition a lot for interpretation. Adding the Magisterium is a big leap.
 
Well, I have know families or parents who would not be bothered much if their child became an atheist or converted to Hinduism, or joined a hippie commune, but would be apoplectic at the thought of a child of theirs entering the Catholic Church. Anti-Catholicism is deeply ingrained in many families, often for generations, and they do not even consider themselves as anti-Catholic. It’s just part of the fabric of their thought.
 
@Nigel7

Are there even protestant churches who believe in transubstantiation? I thought they viewed communion as a symbol so they really would not be role playing.
 
Some Anglicans do. And even if not transubstantiation, Anglicans and Lutherans both good that the real presence of Christ is in their Eucharist as either undefined or via Sacramental Union (for Lutherans). And I’m pretty sure Methodists as well hold Eucharist to be more than symbolic.
 
I was both Episcopalian and Anglican and never believed it was anything but a symbol.
 
Not uncommon among a subset of low church Anglicans. Most wouldn’t agree.
 
The word catholic meant universal when there was only one Christian Church. However it’s a fact that the ECF’s cared very much about unity of belief and condemning heresy, and so therefore they couldn’t have been meaning “universal” based on Christendom today. The word “Catholic” took on another meaning as soon as the reformation happened. Maybe even when the Orthodox/Catholic split happened, but I’m really not sure.
 
Nigel7 said:
You do understand, LittleLady, that the protestant denominations lack a valid eucharist, don’t you?

So while some protestants may adopt a eucharistic prayer in their services, theirs is only ever plain old bread.
Do you understand this?
Click to expand...
That was quite condescending and rude . . .
 
Last edited:
Nigel7 said:
That’s sure nice for children pretending, isn’t it.
Click to expand...
Yes it sure is. It is also good for their growth development as they become adults. And since we are all “children” of God we all have growth and development issues to overcome.

Peace!!!
 
Just throwing it out there…I don’t think he gets it…or cares TBH.
 
Gingersnaps4 said:
The word catholic meant universal when there was only one Christian Church. However it’s a fact that the ECF’s cared very much about unity of belief and condemning heresy, and so therefore they couldn’t have been meaning “universal” based on Christendom today. The word “Catholic” took on another meaning as soon as the reformation happened. Maybe even when the Orthodox/Catholic split happened, but I’m really not sure.
Click to expand...
I understand this to be the Catholic position. My position is that the catholic (universal) church, the body of Christ, the bride of Christ, is made up of all who have been born again by the Holy Spirit, had their hearts turned from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh, been adopted as Sons and Daughters of God, are new creations in Christ, and are part of the royal priesthood.

1 Peter gives us a couple of nice definitions of the universal church

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, 5 who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. 1 Peter 1 3-5 NASB

and later

But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God; you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. 1 Peter 2:9-10 NASB

The universal church is not an organization it is the people of God. Those people are spread out among many organizations but if you are " born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead," then you are part of the universal church. To say otherwise is to contradict the New Testament teachings.

Now you may argue that the only people who are born again to a living hope are those who adhere to the modern definition of Catholic. But that is another discussion.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top