Wouldn't of been great if all christians united under one church? Is it possible?

[Timi_Celcer]

We already have a christian flag that is for all christedom(catholics,protestants,orthodox,all…): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Flag

But do you think it will ever be possible for all christedom to be united under one church? Does papal infallibity stand in the way?

 

[ThinkingSapien]

We already have a christian flag that is for all christedom(catholics,protestants,orthodox,all…): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Flag

But do you think it will ever be possible for all christedom to be united under one church? Does papal infallibity stand in the way?

People have a habit of clustering together and forming new in-groups and out-groups. My personal opinion is that it is something that is not likely to happen unless there is something that is recognized as a big enough threat such that people feel like they need to unite together and view the differences or attributes by which they had been clustering before as trivial.

 

[livingwordunity]

All Christians did belong to one Church before the Great Schism and then later the Protestant revolt which spawned never ending divisions called “denominations”. Protestantism is what divided Christianity more than anything else. Uniting under the Pope is the only way possible for all Christians to be united. But pride is what stands in the way of people doing this.

 

[BellsMom]

All Christians did belong to one Church before the Great Schism and then later the Protestant revolt which spawned never ending divisions called “denominations”.

Did they really all belong to “one” church or were there just no other choices?

I’m sure there were just as many people then who disregarded the churches teachings on important issues as there are today. The only difference is that today they choose a different church, back then they just stayed catholic because there was nothing else to be.

If it were socially acceptable for those people to pick another faith or leave Christianity all together then I’m sure they would have. I think the “Protestant revolt” as you put it was more about people feeling empowered to openly acknowledge that they disagreed with what the church taught.

When the church was just as much a political power as it was a religious institute, when there were real life altering repercussions to openly disagreeing with teachings or leaving the church altogether, then I think that saying “all Christians belonged to one church” is misleading.

You can’t really leave if there is no other place to go.

 

[JRKH]

All will be untied in one Church soon… At Christ’s second coming.

Peace
James

 

[Zachary]

IcAt

Did they really all belong to “one” church or were there just no other choices?
…

You’re just making a big assumption that is essentially unprovable. It’s possibly true from some, however, the Reformation prompted much of the schismatic disorder we have today.
Also you’re applying 20/21st century things (socially unacceptable) to a time that didnt view things as we do now. No alternative in 500AD wasn’t even a thing. It wasn’t until a few folks decided to create their own church to fit their own wants did such thinking emerge as a sociological thing.

Finally, regardless if there wasn’t a “choice” of 2 or 40,000 denominations, it’s still true that it started with one. We all know which.

 

[bzkoss236]

Did they really all belong to “one” church or were there just no other choices?

I’m sure there were just as many people then who disregarded the churches teachings on important issues as there are today. The only difference is that today they choose a different church, back then they just stayed catholic because there was nothing else to be.

If it were socially acceptable for those people to pick another faith or leave Christianity all together then I’m sure they would have. I think the “Protestant revolt” as you put it was more about people feeling empowered to openly acknowledge that they disagreed with what the church taught.

When the church was just as much a political power as it was a religious institute, when there were real life altering repercussions to openly disagreeing with teachings or leaving the church altogether, then I think that saying “all Christians belonged to one church” is misleading.

You can’t really leave if there is no other place to go.

There was always one true Church. There have been small sects of heretical and schismatic groups that have popped up throughout history, which quickly died out. So, there were always choices, but only one true Church. The fact that these sects show up at all shows that people always have the option to disobey and do their own thing. Their own thing just isn’t the right thing.

 

[JimG]

Jesus established only One Church, and as has been mentioned here, it did comprise all Christians until the great schism between east and west, and later the Protestant reformation. As stated in the creed, there is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. There should not be division.

 

[ChristianBahai]

The church should come together as one. Unfortunately due to a variety of factors it won’t be through a purely Christian faith. As my username says I am a “Christian-Baha’i”. I would encourage everyone not to judge before doing a little reading on the Baha’i faith and Baha’u’lluh’s messages he delivered from God. One central message is that of a unified humanity - one flock and one shephard. Many bible readers will know that many prophets of the old and new testament spoke of the coming “one shepard”. I am not tied to one church as I was raised Catholic, a practicing Methodist & Baha’i. Overall I am a seeker of truth, and in that search I found Baha’u’lluh and the Baha’i faith. I am so happy I did. A great book that any Christian could benefit from reading is “The Wine of Astonishment” by WIlliam Sears as it speaks to the truths about Baptism, the Trinity, the Eucharist and other things that have confused the leaders of the Christian faith for thousands of years. It’s an amazing read so far. I’m almost done. Remember that Christ’s strength is in his message! Not in or from his miracles, resurrection, etc.

With love and respect…ChristianBahai

 

[The_GreyPilgrim]

We already have a christian flag that is for all christedom(catholics,protestants,orthodox,all…): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Flag

But do you think it will ever be possible for all christedom to be united under one church? Does papal infallibity stand in the way?

No, to be honest the lack of humility of believers stands in the way. Papal infallibility is only an issue to those who would rather themselves be Pope.

The issue of unity would be solved in an instant if we all possessed the love and humility of the saints. But that requires that we “trust God, and lean not on our own understanding.”

 

[livingwordunity]

There was always one true Church. There have been small sects of heretical and schismatic groups that have popped up throughout history, which quickly died out. So, there were always choices, but only one true Church. The fact that these sects show up at all shows that people always have the option to disobey and do their own thing. Their own thing just isn’t the right thing.

 

[livingwordunity]

No, to be honest the lack of humility of believers stands in the way. Papal infallibility is only an issue to those who would rather themselves be Pope.

The issue of unity would be solved in an instant if we all possessed the love and humility of the saints. But that requires that we “trust God, and lean not on our own understanding.”

 

[Zachary]

Remember that Christ’s strength is in his message! Not in or from his miracles, resurrection, etc.

His miracles and resurrection ARE part of His message. We don’t only communicate in word, but in action. To dismiss thousands of years of Church teachings for the “word” of one book is dangerous. Hopefully, you’ll ask the same tough questions of this new “prophet” and not be taken by sugary thinking.

 

[Genesis315]

Some have mentioned the Great Schism as the first split, but that is not true. Groups split after the Council of Ephesus and the Council of Chalcedon, for example, and they still exist. Even before that, there were heresies and schisms even in Apostolic times, as they are mentioned in the letters of St. Paul and others. There always has been and probably always will be schisms and heresies as long as sin still exists in the world.

 

[Honorius]

I would not go so far as to say 1, but perhaps three. You take the liberal churches and put them in one group, the rest of the protestants in another, and then the catholic church. This is extremely idealistic of course, but if you just grouped by characteristics, I think it would come out to something like this.

 

[Zachary]

There was one Church. And when Jesus very literally said that unless you eat His flesh and drink His blood etc, there we see some run away.

Jesus instituted and intended one. Man decided Jesus was wrong.

 

[ChristianBahai]

His miracles and resurrection ARE part of His message. We don’t only communicate in word, but in action. To dismiss thousands of years of Church teachings for the “word” of one book is dangerous. Hopefully, you’ll ask the same tough questions of this new “prophet” and not be taken by sugary thinking.

Know that the thoughts I present are gathered from hundreds of hours of reading and study. Not just one book. Many books a few of which explain the old and new testament in the ways Christ & God intended them not as CHurch leaders have interpreted them. I have not dismissed thousands of years of Church teachings either. I have read the latest word of God as sent down through Baha’u’llah, which has clarified the scriptures so men of our age can understand better what Christ & God intended humanity to know and understand. The Baha’i teachings state that God’s messengers have always come “…to educate the souls of men, and refine the character of every living man…The most vital duty, in this day, is to purify your characters, to correct your manners, and improve your conduct”. I have asked many tough questions about my religion, and that is what brought me to explore the Baha’i faith.

“Sugary thinking” you say? How wrong you are to call the “spoken word of God to humanity - to you as well” in such a lackadaisical, human tone. Ignore the blinders of taught doctrine! Read and understand better what you think you already know. If anyone commenting actually set aside for a minute what they have been taught is “true and fact” to hear from God what is “true and fact” we would have a lot more people who would grow to know God better through a recognition of his message for humanity in our age. The message from Baha’u’'lah and the Baha’i faith.

With love and respect, ChristianBahai

 

[djames99]

We already have a christian flag that is for all christedom(catholics,protestants,orthodox,all…): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Flag

But do you think it will ever be possible for all christedom to be united under one church? Does papal infallibity stand in the way?

2000 years ago, everyone who didn’t have a religion were to accept the new one, and everyone who already had one was to leave it and accept the new one. So what we have before our eyes is the generations of man forming a new one so that it can conform to the desires of man.

At everyone’s judgment, they will be judged on that singular standard established 2000 years ago. All the new changes that the defense can muster in order to mitigate his case will become in admissible. All the permissions that their bogus church allowed them will be inadmissible.

2000 years ago Christ gave us a means to protect us from just such future tampering. He showed us that his Church would be recognized by a uninterrupted succession of Popes going back to Peter, the first Pope. To this Church he gave the guidance and assurance of salvation.

People can be reunited. An acceptance of other churches under doctrine lines would insult Christ who sacrificed to ensure only one could have sanction. A person needs to return to the only Church that was their inheritance, and to do so would imply a desire to become Catholic as Christ was.

 

[eyesopening]

2000 years ago, everyone who didn’t have a religion were to accept the new one, and everyone who already had one was to leave it and accept the new one. So what we have before our eyes is the generations of man forming a new one so that it can conform to the desires of man.

At everyone’s judgment, they will be judged on that singular standard established 2000 years ago. All the new changes that the defense can muster in order to mitigate his case will become in admissible. All the permissions that their bogus church allowed them will be inadmissible.

2000 years ago Christ gave us a means to protect us from just such future tampering. He showed us that his Church would be recognized by a uninterrupted succession of Popes going back to Peter, the first Pope. To this Church he gave the guidance and assurance of salvation.

People can be reunited. An acceptance of other churches under doctrine lines would insult Christ who sacrificed to ensure only one could have sanction. A person needs to return to the only Church that was their inheritance, and to do so would imply a desire to become Catholic as Christ was.

:thumbsup:

 

[andrewstx]

Timi, I am confused. Which church would you have all to join? There are enormous differences between THE church and the Protestant sects…, so which church are you talking about?