Roman Catholic teachings denounced by Orthodox groups?

[zippy2006]

In some respects, there is more congruity between a Calvinist or Lutheran and a Roman Catholic than there is between these and E. Orthodoxy.

That appears to be a matter of "preference"...

The fact of the matter is that Catholics and Orthodox hold one another in higher esteem than they do Protestants, for they recognize that they have more in common with one another than they do with Protestants.

Catholic-Orthodox polemics can be bitter and intense, but one should not draw from this the false inference with respect to Protestantism.

 

[concretecamper]

Please give a list of these denominations

you forgot to list Northway Christian Community Church led by Billy Bob. You also didn't lust the 10s of thousands of others.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

I don't understand your first point. The E. Orthodox have addressed Lutheranism and Calvinism. Luther is also mentioned by name in some churches on Orthodox Sunday.

As to your second point, there is no such thing as the Protestant Church, so it would be erroneous to address all Protestants in toto, even if you could.

There are two reasons for this:

1. Protestants are not considered important enough to be worthy of sanction.
2. Protestant errors are so variegated that it would be difficult to address them in toto.

For example, if you want to be part of the Magic Johnson fan club you have to renounce Larry Bird. You don't have to say a word about Sylvester Williams. This doesn't mean that Magic fans think Williams was better than Bird. It just means they don't really care about Sylvester Williams. He is not worthy of mention.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

No. I asked you to do that, since it is your assertion that there are 10s of thousands of different theologically-communion dividing positions.

you forgot to list Northway Christian Community Church led by Billy Bob. You also didn't lust the 10s of thousands of others.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

It has always amazed me how Catholics will stand their ground.

As if the truth of Catholicism depends on the multiplicity of nonCatholic Churches. The more the better.

you forgot to list Northway Christian Community Church led by Billy Bob. You also didn't lust the 10s of thousands of others.

 

[concretecamper]

It has always amazed me how Catholics will stand their ground

we are know for that. That is why people Schism from His Church.

As if the truth of Catholicism depends on the multiplicity of nonCatholic Churches.

I'm just stating fact, and the obvious.

You also forgot Sprigcreek Church in TX USA. I dont have the space to list the 10s of thousands of others.

 

[zippy2006]

I don't understand your first point. The E. Orthodox have addressed Lutheranism and Calvinism. Luther is also mentioned by name in some churches on Orthodox Sunday.

It was just a general claim. There may be some churches here and there that renounce Lutheranism or Calvinism, but the priority would be apostolic Churches. For example, if tomorrow Catholicism and the ILC denounced aerial toll houses, Orthodoxy would give most of its attention to the Catholic denunciation.

(Of course geography matters, too. But what I say holds, ceteris paribus.)

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

At least give me a link to the article where you have attained your stats.

The two churches you mention sound non-denominational, so Anabaptist.

we are know for that. That is why people Schism from His Church.
I'm just stating fact, and the obvious.

You also forgot Sprigcreek Church in TX USA. I dont have the space to list the 10s of thousands of others.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Probably.

I was referring to the Council of Jerusalem (Calvinism) and Patriarch Jeremias' dispute with Jacob Andreae (Lutherans).

QUOTE="zippy2006, post: 76265653, member: 342410"]It was just a general claim. There may be some churches here and there that renounce Lutheranism or Calvinism, but the priority would be apostolic Churches. For example, if tomorrow Catholicism and the ILC denounced aerial toll houses, Orthodoxy would give most of its attention to the Catholic denunciation.

(Of course geography matters, too. But what I say holds, ceteris paribus.)[/QUOTE]

 

[concretecamper]

The two churches you mention sound non-denominational, so Anabaptist.

they are not Anabaptist.

You also forgot to list Heartland Community Church in Kansas USA.

I dont think a single thread on this forum can handle 10s of thousands of replies.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

they are not Anabaptist.

You also forgot to list Heartland Community Church in Kansas USA.

I dont think a single thread on this forum can handle 10s of thousands of replies.

I asked for one link.

The question you need to ask yourself is, 'What do these churches believe', and have enough understanding of Church history to know their history.

 

[concretecamper]

'What do these churches believe', and have enough understanding of Church history to know their history.

these Church's have the right to claim what any other protestant church you listed claims.

You forgot to mention Radiant Church KC in Kansas USA.

 

[dzheremi]

Anyone that joins a particular denomination from another one as in the example of the Catholic priest joining the Orthodox church or any other example one might note - has at least one doctrinal difference that is now changed. Yet most churches don't have a list of "I renounce" as part of the liturgy used to join by profession of faith or by baptism.

Alright. Again, I don't remember a listing of specific heresies coming from the Chalcedonians that I had to renounce, but there was a more general statement on renouncing past heresies. Seems fitting to me. I think it is only outsiders who view these renunciations as something so incredibly scandalous, which frankly doesn't matter since you're not members of any of the churches involved.

In any case - I simply note that the "feature" that "differences do exist" extends well beyond evangelical and Protestant into Orthodox and Roman Catholic as we see in that video.

Who gave you the impression that they didn't, though? I know the Eastern Orthodox are very open about this fact, anyway. And even though the video didn't deal with us in particular, we are also not shy about that fact. Only some more modern-leaning RCs play the "we're all really saying the same thing" game, and even that's hardly a (RC) communion-wide belief on the ground. (The more ecclesiologically conservative types who tend to think of VII as a victory for Satan or whatever generally don't think like that.)

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

these Church's have the right to claim what any other protestant church you listed claims.

Of course they do, but then they would be in communion with one of the churches I listed (Lutheranism, Presbyterian, Roman Catholic). I looked up the churches you listed. They are all nondenominational, which means that they practice open communion. That you are trying to divide them into separate communions is therefore disingenuous. They are Anabaptist, meaning they all practice believer's baptism, deny a real Eucharist presence and following the Stone-Cambell Restoration movement eschewing Confessions and Creeds.

You forgot to mention Radiant Church KC in Kansas USA.

You seem to be getting these out of the phone book with no real understanding of what these churches believe Scripture to teach or how they relate to each other.

Sola Scriptura pertains to doctrine. If you don't understand what churches teach, you can't cite them as demonstrable of Sola Scriptura's fallacy.

1. Protestants are a single entity.
2. Protestants are doctrinally divided.
3. Therefore, that single entity is divided.

But 1. is incorrect, therefore 3. does not follow

 

[zippy2006]

1. Protestants are a single entity.
2. Protestants are doctrinally divided.
3. Therefore, that single entity is divided.

But 1. is incorrect, therefore 3. does not follow

If they are not a single entity then how can you use a single word to refer to them? Surely at least in some sense they must be a single entity, or have a common (and substantial) property.

...Sola Scriptura's fallacy...

If the argument says that Sola Scriptura leads to disunity, then it is not a fallacy. This was elaborated in post #14.

 

[Albion]

So, Sola Scriptura has not divided the Church.

Absolutely correct. Almost all Protestant churches adhere to the principle of Sola Scriptura.

Meanwhile, the various Catholic churches follow Sacred Tradition instead, and each of them has its own idea of what that supposed tradition has said. As a result, each has its own, different, list of doctrines. And in every case, the church in question says they're all based on the same "Sacred Tradition."

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

If they are not a single entity then how can you use a single word to refer to them? Surely at least in some sense they must be a single entity, or have a common (and substantial) property.

They are a single entity in that they are outside of the Roman Catholic communion. But, they are not a single entity doctrine-wise. They each interpret Scripture by different rubrics. Confessional Lutheranism (my tradition), interprets Scripture according to the apostolic tradition of the Fathers. Nondenominational churches do not.

If the argument says that Sola Scriptura leads to disunity, then it is not a fallacy. This was elaborated in post #14.

Sola Scriptura doesn't lead to disunity because it is not Biblicalism. It is Scripture interpreted by the Fathers (as witnesses). Roman Catholics misunderstand the 'Sola'. It simply means that we don't adhere to doctrines which have no foundation in Scripture. It doesn't mean ignore Ignatius, Augustine, Jerome, ect.[/QUOTE]

 

[zippy2006]

Presbyterians, Lutherans and Anglicans are Confessional Churches. Which means that Scripture is interpreted according to a Creedal standard. For Lutherans, that Creedal standard includes the Church Fathers (As witnesses). Meaning, that a Lutheran can no more depart from their Tradition than a Roman Catholic can.
All Confessional Protestants are unified on Christology. Although there may be somewhat of a difference between Calvinists and Lutherans. Soteriologically speaking, they are divided into three camps, Arminianism, Calvinism and Lutheranism. These Soteriological positions can each be traced back to the undivided Church, in that they are logical developments of the same.

I cannot speak for the Anabaptists or Methodists.

So, Sola Scriptura has not divided the Church.

Lutherans can depart from their Tradition more than a Roman Catholic can, for Lutheranism was founded on a departure from tradition (Luther was a Roman Catholic who abandoned his tradition). Now there is a reason why Lutherans can depart from tradition more than Catholics; or why Calvinists and Lutherans differ in Christology; or why there are three soteriological camps in Protestantism. The reason is (essentially) Sola Scriptura. And it has clearly divided the Church. Even all of the divisions you note in this post are the result of Sola Scriptura.

The reason that Protestants are no longer doctrinally homogenous is because divisions occurred. Divisions occurred over and over, and they continue today. New divisions almost always occurred because someone or some group decided that their inherited tradition had misinterpreted Scripture, and that their new interpretation was the correct one.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Yes. One just has to listen to Church Militant's rant and condemnation of Francis, their Pastor.

Absolutely correct. Almost all Protestant churches adhere to the principle of Sola Scriptura.

Meanwhile, the various Catholic churches follow Sacred Tradition instead, and each of them has its own idea of what that supposed tradition has said. As a result, each has its own, different, list of doctrines. And in every case, the church in question says they're all based on the same "Sacred Tradition."

 

[zippy2006]

They are a single entity in that they are outside of the Roman Catholic communion. But, they are not a single entity doctrine-wise. They each interpret Scripture by different rubrics. Confessional Lutheranism (my tradition), interprets Scripture according to the apostolic tradition of the Fathers. Nondenominational churches do not.

Protestants were a single entity until divisions occurred, and those divisions occurred on the justification and basis of Sola Scriptura. Confessional Lutherans and non-Confessional Lutherans diverge on the basis of whether Scripture should be read through the Book of Concord.

Sola Scriptura doesn't lead to disunity because it is not Biblicalism. It is Scripture interpreted by the Fathers (as witnesses). Roman Catholics misunderstand the 'Sola'. It simply means that we don't adhere to doctrines which have no foundation in Scripture. It doesn't mean ignore Ignatius, Augustine, Jerome, ect.

Biblicism results in more disunity than Sola Scriptura, but Sola Scriptura also results in a great deal of disunity. Just because some Catholics misunderstand it doesn't mean it doesn't result in disunity.