How can RCs and Protestants reconcile

[Hentenza]

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

No, but the first thing you would do is fire the general.

 

[archierieus]

So who has the authority to decide who is right?

Jn. 16: Jesus said He would send the Spirit of truth to guide His people into 'all truth.' And the Bible says in Isaiah, 'You will hear a voice behind you saying, this is the way, walk ye in it.'

As ideas are presented, and students have the opportunity to prayerfully consider them and compare them with the witness of Scripture, the Holy Spirit is promised to guide each believer to the truth. It is by comparing notes and sharing ideas that people can develop a fuller understanding of what is truth. Trust God to lead His people.

 

[Albion]

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

That would depend on whether a new army were being started at all. Sometimes we see things other than they actually are. Anyway, let's not retreat into re-fighting the Thirty Years War when we are discussing how to overcome or minimize the divisions that exist.

 

[Thekla]

I would imagine that within the parameters of the forum rules, a person may refer to whatever standards are chosen. However, those who believe in Scripture as final authority may not find such other standards persuasive. Depends on the intent in sharing and discussing . . . is it to share ideas or is it to persuade? Personally, I am interested in developing a clearer understanding of truth. The Bible is the final authority for me, and anything presented will be evaluated by this student on the basis of the Bible. (which doesn't include the Apocrypha, for this believer)

Can you respect that your "standards" are yours, and this is in part a matter of historicity ?

Is it permissible to defend EO belief based on standards received by the EO, just as you defend your belief based on your standards but not EO received standards ?

If this is not respected, then it is not dialogue, it is polemic.

 

[Albion]

Jn. 16: Jesus said He would send the Spirit of truth to guide His people into 'all truth.' And the Bible says in Isaiah, 'You will hear a voice behind you saying, this is the way, walk ye in it.'

As ideas are presented, and students have the opportunity to prayerfully consider them and compare them with the witness of Scripture, the Holy Spirit is promised to guide each believer to the truth. It is by comparing notes and sharing ideas that people can develop a fuller understanding of what is truth. Trust God to lead His people.

Yes but, once again, this is not about each individual's study and seeking for the truth. It begins by observing that the whole of Christianity is divided, that billions have already made their individual choices. We wonder if those divisions can be moderated and just how to go about it.

 

[katholikos]

Fact is, the ol' boy tried to reform 'the army,' but the army kicked him out....

Thats because he (Luther I assume) went beyond reform. He tried to introduce heresy. That is unacceptable

 

[Albion]

Can you respect that your "standards" are yours, and this is in part a matter of historicity ?

Is it permissible to defend EO belief based on standards received by the EO, just as you defend your belief based on your standards but not EO received standards ?

It is not necessary for either to be defended. We begin in the KNOWLEDGE that this disagreement exists. The question is on what to do now.

 

[archierieus]

Here is a proposal for helping move things in a positive direction in these kinds of discussions--to promote peaceful co-existence and harmony. This is a grass-roots idea. I'm a little fish, just a trainee, and only speaking for myself here:

I submit we can promote a positive and harmonious spirit here by doing a couple of things. First of all, making an effort ourselves to put it into practice; but secondly, and I don't think it will work without this second part, if we see the other kind of stuff going on, the undermining, the attempt at subversion, the finger-pointing, the proselytizing at others' expense, then call them on it--in a courteous way! Speak up, take responsiiblity for helping make this a safe neighborhood.

Hentenza, I hope I'm not out of line in suggesting this. It is just an idea, and I'm still new on the block.

Dave

 

[Albion]

Thats because he (Luther I assume) went beyond reform. He tried to introduce heresy. That is unacceptable

We know that that is your POV. Could you possibly stick to discussing reconciliation?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Thats because he (Luther I assume) went beyond reform. He tried to introduce heresy. That is unacceptable

So? I don't follow Luther

 

[Thekla]

It is not necessary for either to be defended. We begin by KNOWING that this disagreement exists. The question is on what to do now.

I'm sorry I'm so unclear -- I don't desire polemics. I desire respect, and as a part of this respect a recognition that the standards vary as a matter of historicity. Respect for and from both sides.

If the scripture (and a particular interpretation of scripture) is the sole standard here, then there is no need for me to participate. I desire to know if this thread is only for those Christians in post-reformation gathered Churches.

 

[archierieus]

Thats because he (Luther I assume) went beyond reform. He tried to introduce heresy. That is unacceptable

That kind of language tends to incite. And it can go both ways. Rather than accuse someone of heresy, why not seek to build up and build bridges--find common ground, and let the Holy Spirit lead?

 

[Albion]

Here is a proposal for helping move things in a positive direction in these kinds of discussions--to promote peaceful co-existence and harmony. This is a grass-roots idea. I'm a little fish, just a trainee, and only speaking for myself here:

I submit we can promote a positive and harmonious spirit here by doing a couple of things. First of all, making an effort ourselves to put it into practice; but secondly, and I don't think it will work without this second part, if we see the other kind of stuff going on, the undermining, the attempt at subversion, the finger-pointing, the proselytizing at others' expense, then call them on it--in a courteous way! Speak up, take responsiiblity for helping make this a safe neighborhood.

Hentenza, I hope I'm not out of line in suggesting this. It is just an idea, and I'm still new on the block.

Dave

That's not exactly about reconciliation but more about how any discussion can hope to keep from devolving into name-calling and pointless posturing. But I like what you said!

The single most destructive turn of events around here is not--as might be assumed--the postings of a bull headed propagandist intent upon forcing hiw views upon someone else by reciting over and over again his own biases--but rather it's RESPONDING TO THEM. If all those incendiary posts were left unanswered, the problem would go away. It's that the taunt is seen as so unjust that the recipient thinks he just has to reply. If we could get over that....

 

[archierieus]

Sure sounds like an awkward situation, though. Gotta be some way to deal with the bull-headed propagandists! One way or the other. How about a propaganda forum?

 

[Albion]

I'm sorry I'm so unclear -- I don't desire polemics. I desire respect, and as a part of this respect a recognition that the standards vary as a matter of historicity. Respect for and from both sides.

If the scripture (and a particular interpretation of scripture) is the sole standard here, then there is no need for me to participate. I desire to know if this thread is only for those Christians in post-reformation gathered Churches.

As I recall, he merely said that Scripture is all that would persuade him.

And my reply was to the effect that it doesn't matter that you disagree with each other about this, because we already know that. The problem is how to deal with it, not how to make one side go away.

 

[Albion]

Sure sounds like an awkward situation, though. Gotta be some way to deal with the bull-headed propagandists!

you mean, I take it, dealing with them other than not replying to their provocative posts? That would work, although I admit that it doesn't take but a couple of people willing to mix it up with the provocateur for the rest of the posters to be thwarted.

 

[Albion]

Fact is, the ol' boy tried to reform 'the army,' but the army kicked him out....

Thats because he (Luther I assume) went beyond reform. He tried to introduce heresy. That is unacceptable

So, we have a conflict of needs. On the one hand, we want purity of teaching and belief. But yet we also say we want unity.

Here we are discussing the unity end of it. That can't be done if we want to address the other objective instead.

 

[archierieus]

you mean, I take it, dealing with them other than not replying to their provocative posts? That would work, although I admit that it doesn't take but a couple of people willing to mix it up with the provocateur for the rest of the posters to be thwarted.

And THAT is the tragedy of the whole thing. Pleasant and fruitful discussions derailed! But that shouldn't be. It is not fair to the rest, and can make things less than pleasant.

 

[chestertonrules]

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?

We must break down the wall by examining each brick that divides us.

This takes study, prayer, and debate.

 

[Hentenza]

Here is a proposal for helping move things in a positive direction in these kinds of discussions--to promote peaceful co-existence and harmony. This is a grass-roots idea. I'm a little fish, just a trainee, and only speaking for myself here:

I submit we can promote a positive and harmonious spirit here by doing a couple of things. First of all, making an effort ourselves to put it into practice; but secondly, and I don't think it will work without this second part, if we see the other kind of stuff going on, the undermining, the attempt at subversion, the finger-pointing, the proselytizing at others' expense, then call them on it--in a courteous way! Speak up, take responsiiblity for helping make this a safe neighborhood.

Hentenza, I hope I'm not out of line in suggesting this. It is just an idea, and I'm still new on the block.

Dave

Dave, you are right on point. We have several levels of debaters here.

From both sides we have:
1. Those that do not consider RC or Protestants to be fully Christian. These folks are a big stumbling block in any kind of debate or discussion.
2. Those that do not bother to educate themselves in what the RC or a protestant denomination believes and merely go by what they have heard. These folks only perpetuate the division.
3. Those that know what the RC and a Protestant denomination believe and debate form the finger pointing stance. I believe that these only let their pride get in the way and only want to win. There is no "winning".
4. Those that know what the RC or a protestant denomination teach (or honestly seek to know) and are truly seeking an understanding. Typically these type of conversations are not confrontational or polemic but merely a sharing of ideas and honest defense of belief. We need a ton of these folks.

In RL my experience has been that the majority land within the 4th group. That might be because, when gathered together face to face, civility of discussion is implied. I often think of what would happen if all of us that debate here where to gather together in one place, face to face.