How can RCs and Protestants reconcile

[chestertonrules]

Friends, Romans, countrymen, hear me for my cause!

Is this not an appropriate time to decide what direction things should go with these types of discussions? Which way do we want to head? To focus on proselytizing, or to focus on sharing, discussion and fellowship? To recognize each participant as a fellow believer, respectful of his or her beliefs and validating them, or intending to subvert and undermine them?

Which way?

Here's the problem.

Some of us are dead wrong, well intentioned as we may be.

Errors in these matters are serious. Eternity is at stake.

We can be civil, but we should not be validating beliefs that we find to be in error.

 

[Albion]

Reconciliation is a step toward unity, in my opinion.

OK

I think unity should the goal of all Christians.

I feel that there is widespread sympathy for that idea.

There is only one Truth, and this truth should be our goal.

If I am wrong, I want to know it. Don't you?

We all seek the truth. The topic here is about steps that could lead to some degree of reconciliation between the churches which is not enjoyed at present.

Do you have some ideas for how the churches could pull more closely together in advance of any formal union?

 

[Rick Otto]

Then Chez, can you imagine another form of reconciliation? A less purist notion of unity?

 

[chestertonrules]

OK



I feel that there is widespread sympathy for that idea.


We all seek the truth. The topic here is about steps that could lead to some degree of reconciliation between the churches which is not enjoyed at present.

We should not be interested in reconciling truth with lies, or even with distortions.

Reconciliation is about Truth.

We should openly pursue truth through vigorous study, prayer, and debate.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Here's the problem.

Some of us are dead wrong, well intentioned as we may be.

Errors in these matters are serious. Eternity is at stake.

We can be civil, but we should not be validating beliefs that we find to be in error.

There are threads you can discuss that on

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=6870602
Roman church errors and inventions

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=6983026&page=48&highlight=errors
Errors of Protestism

 

[chestertonrules]

Then Chez, can you imagine another form of reconciliation? A less purist notion of unity?

I think that's what we are doing now. (impure notions and all!)

 

[Hentenza]

Friends, Romans, countrymen, hear me for my cause!

Is this not an appropriate time to decide what direction things should go with these types of discussions? Which way do we want to head? To focus on proselytizing, or to focus on sharing, discussion and fellowship? To recognize each participant as a fellow believer, respectful of his or her beliefs and validating them, or intending to subvert and undermine them?

Which way?

Great point and one that would require both sides to "forgive" and "forget" the events that occurred before, during, and after the reformation. As long as the RC continues to make claims of superiority or the "only" true church, that will not happen. We are all united in Christ in our hearts but not in body.

 

[Albion]

Here's the problem.

Some of us are dead wrong, well intentioned as we may be.

Errors in these matters are serious. Eternity is at stake.

We can be civil, but we should not be validating beliefs that we find to be in error.

No one is asking for that. We all know that we hold differing beliefs and ( I hope this is understood) that no one is going to be changing his religious beliefs merely because someone belonging to another church shouts at him that he's wrong.

 

[archierieus]

Here's the problem.

Some of us are dead wrong, well intentioned as we may be.

What if you--you, generally, addressing this to any and all--are one of those who is dead wrong?

Errors in these matters are serious. Eternity is at stake.

Yes it is, and our safety is found in following the Bible as it reads. As I have said in the past to the Mormon missionaries, if a later witness is indeed from God (substitute 'magisterium,' restoration, you name it) it will be in harmony with the earlier witness, the Bible. The later purported witness is tested by the earlier witness, it is not on the same level. The Bible is trump.

We can be civil, but we should not be validating beliefs that we find to be in error.

Then, if a person knows that someone believes strongly in the Bible, show that person from the Bible where he or she is in error. If what someone believes is true, then it will be supported by Scripture.

 

[Hentenza]

Here's the problem.

Some of us are dead wrong, well intentioned as we may be.

Errors in these matters are serious. Eternity is at stake.

We can be civil, but we should not be validating beliefs that we find to be in error.

That is the crux. We find your church to have teachings that are in error and your church believes that we have teachings that are in error. Now what?

 

[Hentenza]

That's why we call it the Reformation, not The Protestation.

 

[katholikos]

That is the crux. We find your church to have teachings that are in error and your church believes that we have teachings that are in error. Now what?

So who has the authority to decide who is right?

 

[Albion]

We should not be interested in reconciling truth with lies, or even with distortions.

Reconciliation is about Truth.

We should openly pursue truth through vigorous study, prayer, and debate.

Our personal quests for the truth are not what this thread is about, however. Here we begin by acknowledging that the Christian world already has big divisions, and we then deal with the question of possibly overcoming that fact...even in a small way. Whatever is possible. Do you have any suggestions for breaching the divide that exists?

 

[katholikos]

That's why we call it the Reformation, not The Protestation.

If you wanted to reform the army, would you start a new army? Thats illogical

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Our personal quests for the truth are not what this thread is about, however. Here we begin by acknowledging that the Christian world already has big divisions, and we then deal with the question of possibly overcoming that fact...even in a small way. Whatever is possible. Do you have any suggestions for breaching the divide that exists?

Wanna guess what his answer will be

 

[visionary]

Big fish eat little fish for lunch.

 

[archierieus]

If you wanted to reform the army, would you start a new army? Thats illogical

Fact is, the ol' boy tried to reform 'the army,' but the army kicked him out and tried to kill him. Didn't leave him much choice.

 

[Albion]

So who has the authority to decide who is right?

That's another discussion. Here we are beginning by acknowledging that differences exist and we are interested in practical methods for softening them. Immediately going to the "Who gets to say?" doesn't do that.

 

[Hentenza]

So who has the authority to decide who is right?

The only authority is Jesus and only Jesus. I do not consider your church to be "the" authority. The issue here is not one of who the best church is but how we can at least achieve partially unity without the 'lesser" church judgment from the RC.

Katholicos, there are many teachings that we have in common but there are some that we simply do not agree. Put away the supremacy and sola ecclessia claims and we just might have a chance. I know it works because it has worked in my area. Several churches in our area, including the RC, collaborate in charitable events and also fellowship with each other. There is very little friction.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

If you wanted to reform the army, would you start a new army? Thats illogical

Ya can't stop progress