Unbiblical teachings from the church.

[Strong in Him]

The church is Universal because it is made up of believers from all over the world.
It is Catholic because Catholic means universal.

 

[Christopher0121]

I think that is the consensus amongst those who are ignorant to the facts of the schism. The bishop of Rome claimed that he held papal supremacy over all the churches and everyone else disagreed and sided against him. In my eyes that’s not a division of the church at all it’s the excommunication of one church from all the others. Surely you wouldn’t say that a congregation was divided just because one member was asked to leave.

It wasn't "everyone else". Most rites have united with the Pope. It was largely the Eastern bodies who broke ranks and only recently have began to fellowship Rome. You'll also note that they fell into obscurity upon rejecting Christ's appointed Bishop over the Church. Today, you can travel throughout the free world and in nearly every major city there are at least two Catholic churches. There are also over 1.3 BILLION Catholics on the planet. That's makes Catholicism the largest unified religious body on the planet. We also run more hospitals, clinics, charities, orphanages, clothing closets, soup kitchens, shelters, and charities than any other organization or government on earth. As Jesus promised, the gates of Hell have yet to prevail against the Church Christ appointed Peter earthly head over...

Matthew 16:18-19
New Catholic Bible
18 And I say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.​

 

[Christopher0121]

Doctrine has nothing to do with philosophy. Doctrines are facts that we can conclude from the scriptures, nothing more.

Some doctrines cannot be established without Sacred Tradition. For example, using the Bible alone... tell me... who wrote the book of Matthew???

 

[Christopher0121]

Christ died so that humans may be reconciled to God and have peace with God, Romans 5:1.
All who are, who believe, have eternal life and receive God's Spirit are his children, John 1:12, Romans 8:16, John 3:36. It is God's children who belong to God and who are called out from the world, John 15:19, Romans 12:2, 1 John 2:15.
All believers are called out, therefore all believers are church - Ecclesia.

The devil believes and trembles. Christ actually established an ecclesia upon the shoulders of Peter...

Matthew 16:18-19
New Catholic Bible
18 And I say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.​

Binding and loosing is a Jewish reference to ecclesiastical authority. The Jewish Encyclopedia defines it as follows...

Binding and loosing (Hebrew, asar ve-hittir) . . . Rabbinical term for ‘forbidding and permitting'. The power of binding and loosing was always claimed by the Pharisees. Under Queen Alexandra, the Pharisees, says Josephus (Wars of the Jews 1:5:2), “became the administrators of all public affairs so as to be empowered to banish and readmit whom they pleased, as well as to loose and to bind.” . . . The various schools had the power “to bind and to loose”; that is, to forbid and to permit (Talmud: Chagigah 3b); and they could also bind any day by declaring it a fast day (Talmud: Ta’anit 12a). . . . This power and authority, vested in the rabbinical body of each age of the Sanhedrin, received its ratification and final sanction from the celestial court of justice (Sifra, Emor, 9; Talmud: Makkot 23b).​

The personal pronouns and emphasis on "this Rock" and the changing of Simon's name to "Peter" meaning "rock" firmly means this authority was given specifically to Peter. So, essentially Jesus is appointing Peter the earthly authority to "bind and loose" to "asar ve-hittir", to establish Scriptural interpretation and Christian doctrine, morals, and practice, to be head of the Church.

In the Second Epistles of Clement to James II it is recorded that Peter transferred this authority prior to his death...

“I communicate to him the power of binding and loosing so that, with respect to everything which he shall ordain in the earth, it shall be decreed in the heavens; for he shall bind what ought to be bound and loose what ought to be loosed as knowing the rule of the Church.” (3:215)​

What all this means is... all Heaven follows the lead of the Bishop or Shepherd of the Church. And this office has been handed down in successive continuity from Peter, all the way down through history, to... Pope Francis. The Office of Peter (aka Seat of Peter) is to be honored and respected for the authority that Christ invested in it. And God raises up whomever He chooses rather it is to advance the Church, challenge the Church, or purify the Church. Each Pope serves Christ's purpose over His Church. And we're promised the, "gates of Hell shall not prevail" against her.

The Church isn't some giant book club anyone can claim membership of. It is an actual body founded by an actual Christ, delegated to an actual Peter, and has actually existed successively throughout the centuries. These garage band start ups are not a part of the Church Jesus founded. Now, I'm not saying that individuals in such churches crying out to God in sincere contrition aren't saved. I'm saying they are not a part of the body that Christ founded and that has endured as promised down throughout the ages. You know the same body, that held the councils of Rome, Nicea, and Carthage that compiled, translated, and set as Canon what became known as the Holy Bible. The version that endured over 1,000 years before it was butchered and cut down from 73 books to 66 by the Reformers because some books were simply "too Catholic". lol

 

[ViaCrucis]

Any Catholic body who doesn't recognize the Pope is schismatic and isn't technically... "Catholic". All "Catholic" means is... "Universal", or, "all encompassing and embracing". By rejecting the Pope, they cease to be universal, and therefore are not Catholic.

And if the institution of the papacy has no grounds to stand on in the Catholic Church, because it is at odds with Scripture and the received tradition of the Church Catholic then it would be Rome which has ceased to be Catholic.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Christopher0121]

And if the institution of the papacy has no grounds to stand on in the Catholic Church, because it is at odds with Scripture and the received tradition of the Church Catholic then it would be Rome which has ceased to be Catholic.

-CryptoLutheran

You might want to review post #124.

Sadly, Luther's legacy is a widely divided Protestantism composed of contradictory denominations, sects, heresies, and cults. Over FORTY THOUSAND different groups. Rebellion breeds rebellion.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It wasn't "everyone else". Most rites have united with the Pope. It was largely the Eastern bodies who broke ranks and only recently have began to fellowship Rome. You'll also note that they fell into obscurity upon rejecting Christ's appointed Bishop over the Church. Today, you can travel throughout the free world and in nearly every major city there are at least two Catholic churches. There are also over 1.3 BILLION Catholics on the planet. That's makes Catholicism the largest unified religious body on the planet. We also run more hospitals, clinics, charities, orphanages, clothing closets, soup kitchens, shelters, and charities than any other organization or government on earth. As Jesus promised, the gates of Hell have yet to prevail against the Church Christ appointed Peter earthly head over...

Matthew 16:18-19
New Catholic Bible
18 And I say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.​

Well we could compare the atrocities that took place in the Orthodox Church after the schism to those that took place in the Roman church if you like but you might not like the results. Or we could list the apostolic churches that sided with Rome as opposed to the ones that opposed Rome and adopted the name Orthodox which would be all of them except for Rome. We could also compare the number of patriarchates who sided with Rome, which would be zero except for the bishop of Rome himself, as opposed to the rest of them who sided against Rome and adopted the name Orthodox.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It wasn't "everyone else". Most rites have united with the Pope. It was largely the Eastern bodies who broke ranks and only recently have began to fellowship Rome. You'll also note that they fell into obscurity upon rejecting Christ's appointed Bishop over the Church. Today, you can travel throughout the free world and in nearly every major city there are at least two Catholic churches. There are also over 1.3 BILLION Catholics on the planet. That's makes Catholicism the largest unified religious body on the planet. We also run more hospitals, clinics, charities, orphanages, clothing closets, soup kitchens, shelters, and charities than any other organization or government on earth. As Jesus promised, the gates of Hell have yet to prevail against the Church Christ appointed Peter earthly head over...

Matthew 16:18-19
New Catholic Bible
18 And I say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.​

Peter left successors at all of the churches he planted including Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria, all of which sided against Rome during the schism and adopted the name Orthodox.

 

[Strong in Him]

The devil believes and trembles.

But is not born again, has the Spirit and eternal life or is a child of God - as I said in my post, and as Scripture says.

Christ actually established an ecclesia upon the shoulders of Peter...

Christ's called out ones - Ecclesia - are his body with him as the head, and also the corner stone.
Peter himself said this.

I wouldn't belong to the church if I thought it's founder was a fallible human who denied his Lord, with curses.
The gates of hell will NEVER come against Christ's church. Christ, himself, called Peter 'Satan'.
Yes I know he was actually addressing Satan and not Peter - but the man who had just received a revelation from God about Christ's identity, in the next breath made a satanic suggestion.

The personal pronouns and emphasis on "this Rock" and the changing of Simon's name to "Peter" meaning "rock" firmly means this authority was given specifically to Peter. So, essentially Jesus is appointing Peter the earthly authority to "bind and loose" to "asar ve-hittir", to establish Scriptural interpretation and Christian doctrine, morals, and practice, to be head of the Church.

Yet James was head of the church in Jerusalem.
Paul founded churches and appointed elders in them. If there was a problem with doctrine and/or false teachers the matter was taken to the Apostles - all of them, not just Peter.
When the NT was compiled, books were chosen that were written by Apostles or had Apostolic authority. Peter did not write most of the books in the NT, and he never once said that he was head of, or the rock for, the church. He pointed to, and proclaimed Christ - always.

What all this means is... all Heaven follows the lead of the Bishop or Shepherd of the Church. And this office has been handed down in successive continuity from Peter, all the way down through history, to... Pope Francis. The Office of Peter (aka Seat of Peter) is to be honored and respected for the authority that Christ invested in it. And God raises up whomever He chooses rather it is to advance the Church, challenge the Church, or purify the Church. Each Pope serves Christ's purpose over His Church. And we're promised the, "gates of Hell shall not prevail" against her.

That's what the Catholic church has interpreted it to mean; it's not what Scripture says.

The Church isn't some giant book club anyone can claim membership of.

No, it's a gathering of believers - called out ones, members of Christ's body, those who are IN Christ.

The NT says this over and over again;
those who believe can become God's children, John 1:12, Romans 8:16.
Those who remain in Christ are part of the Vine and will bear fruit, John 15:4
Those who are IN Christ have every spiritual blessing, Ephesians 1:3
Those who are in Christ are new creations, 2 Corinthians 5:17.
Those who are in Christ will be made alive, 1 Corinthians 15:22.
Those who are baptised into Christ are baptised into his death, Romans 6:3.
We died and our life is hidden, with Christ, in God, Colossians 3:3.
We are heirs together with Christ, Romans 8:17.
Those who believe in Christ - i.e. accept who he was, not just acknowledge that he existed - have eternal life, John 3:16, John 3:36, John 6:29, John 6:40, 1 John 5:12.
We are the body of Christ, 1 Corinthians 12:27.

Nowhere does the NT say; only those who accept Peter as the head of the church can be part of the church. It does not teach a difference between those who belong to "Peter's church" and those who don't. And it certainly doesn't say, as some Catholics have said on these forums, that those who don't belong to Peter's church do not have the whole truth and their church is not valid.

These garage band start ups are not a part of the Church Jesus founded.

All believers are the body of Christ and part of his church.

I'm not sure, if you want to get personal, that the Catholic church today is the church that Jesus founded.
He did not teach that Mary was queen of heaven or a perpetual virgin; he did not tell people to pray to the saints. He prayed that his church - followers - would be one, not that one section of the church would claim superiority and holders of the only truth.

Denominations, it seems to me, came about because people wanted to worship in different ways and/or emphasised different parts of the Bible. For some, adult baptism alone is the only baptism. For some, speaking in tongues is important - to the degree that a few have claimed you are not filled with the Spirit if you cannot do this. Some believe that only a few, elect, people will get to heaven, and that God has already chosen who they will be. Others dispute this and say Christ died for all.
So, we have different denominations.

But the Gospel - Christ was born both man and God, lived among us, taught, died for us, was raised, ascended, sent his Spirit and will return in glory - is the same for all. Baptists do not have a different way of salvation; Methodists do not teach the Holy Spirit is an optional extra; Anglicans do not teach that Jesus was only a man, or was only God and did not come in the flesh.
I've said it before, but if we were facing persecution and someone stood over us with a gun saying "do you believe in Christ/are you a Christian; yes or no?" There'd be no time to argue and give them a definition of "true church". You either have a load of dead Anglicans, Catholics, Methodists etc who had ALL died confessing Christ - or you'd have a load of live Anglicans etc, who had denied him.
We'd better all get used to the fact now that there will be many believers from other denominations in heaven - or we'll be in for a shock.

Now, I'm not saying that individuals crying out to God in sincere contrition aren't saved. I'm saying they are not a part of the body that Christ founded and has endured throughout the ages.

Good. So all believers who cry out to the Lord are saved and part of his church.
Just what Scripture says.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Some doctrines cannot be established without Sacred Tradition. For example, using the Bible alone... tell me... who wrote the book of Matthew???

I’m not a Protestant so I don’t subscribe to Bible alone. As far as I know Levi the tax collector aka Matthew wrote the gospel of Matthew.

 

[ViaCrucis]

You might want to review post #124.

Sadly, Luther's legacy is a widely divided Protestantism composed of contradictory denominations, sects, heresies, and cults. Over FORTY THOUSAND different groups. Rebellion breeds rebellion.

So you're going to pin five hundred years of sectarian division on Luther? You do know that Luther didn't like that anymore than you do. Luther regularly was exhausted by the extremists and the sectarians of his day, and spoke against them.

You may as well blame the violence of the French Revolution on the Magna Carta, after all the Magna Carta helped influence the ideas that Englishmen were freemen, which would eventually become a major talking point of the political philosophies of the early modern period--ultimately influencing men like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison to try this whole democracy thing in a brand new independent nation after it severed ties with the British Crown. And, after all, the French Revolution was at least party inspired by the American Revolution.

Ergo, the Magna Carta is to blame for people losing their heads at the guillotine.

And I've already pointed out the "FORTY THOUSAND" number is being misrepresented. As part of that "FORTY THOUSAND" you speak of INCLUDES at least a couple dozen "Catholic denominations", that is, the Latin Rite and Byzantine Rite are counted as two distinct "denominations" in reports that have these high numbers in them. It is also counting different regional jurisdictions of the same church as distinct "denominations".

So sure, if you agree that your own church is a denomination, and that there are dozens of Catholic denominations, e.g. Roman Catholics, Byzantine Catholics, Maronites, and the rest of the Particular Churches as separate "denominations"--then maybe there could be 40,000 denominations. But in reality, it's not like that.

And if you disagree with the definition of "denomination" being used to include your own church as consisting of like two dozen denominations; then you should probably stop using such misrepresentative numbers.

Yes sectarianism and schismaticism is a problem. Blaming Luther isn't going to get you anywhere though. It just comes across as parroting certain talking points rather than having engaged in much in-depth study.

It it sounds like I'm being hostile toward Catholicism, I'm not. I just dislike having my own faith tradition misrepresented.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[prodromos]

You might want to review post #124.

Sadly, Luther's legacy is a widely divided Protestantism composed of contradictory denominations, sects, heresies, and cults. Over FORTY THOUSAND different groups. Rebellion breeds rebellion.

Protestants are the children of Roman Catholicism, so yes, rebellion breeds rebellion. The Orthodox Church has no such progeny.

 

[Christopher0121]

Christ's called out ones - Ecclesia - are his body with him as the head, and also the corner stone.
Peter himself said this.

An "ecclesia" is a word with a meaning. Merriam-Webster defines it accurately...

ecclesia
noun
ec·cle·sia | \ ə̇ˈklēzēə, eˈ-, -lēzh(ē)ə \
plural ecclesiae\ -lēz(h)ēˌē , -lāzēˌī \
Definition of ecclesia
1: a political assembly of citizens of ancient Greek statesespecially : the periodic meeting of the Athenian citizens for conducting public business and for considering affairs proposed by the council​

It's not just a feelgood group of people singing and banging on banjos. It's a body of deliberation, conducting the public business of Heaven, giving consideration to her councils. It is an actual "ecclesia". Not some wispy, airy, invisible book club.

I wouldn't belong to the church if I thought it's founder was a fallible human who denied his Lord, with curses.

Jesus founded the Church, not Peter. Peter was merely appointed to be the earthly authority to act in Christ's absence. This is actually an ancient Israelite function. I gave you the definition of "binding and loosing" above per the Jewish Encyclopedia...

Binding and loosing (Hebrew, asar ve-hittir) . . . Rabbinical term for ‘forbidding and permitting'. The power of binding and loosing was always claimed by the Pharisees. Under Queen Alexandra, the Pharisees, says Josephus (Wars of the Jews 1:5:2), “became the administrators of all public affairs so as to be empowered to banish and readmit whom they pleased, as well as to loose and to bind.” . . . The various schools had the power “to bind and to loose”; that is, to forbid and to permit (Talmud: Chagigah 3b); and they could also bind any day by declaring it a fast day (Talmud: Ta’anit 12a). . . . This power and authority, vested in the rabbinical body of each age of the Sanhedrin, received its ratification and final sanction from the celestial court of justice (Sifra, Emor, 9; Talmud: Makkot 23b).​

However, in ancient Israel the King would appoint a governor/minister to govern in his absence. This is mentioned in the book of Isaiah...

Isaiah 22:15-25
15 Thus says the Lord God of hosts:​

Go forth and find that official,
Shebna, the master of the palace, and say:
16 What are you doing here,
and who gave you permission
to hew a tomb for yourself here?
By what right have you hewn your grave on a height
and chiseled out your tomb in the rock?
17 The Lord is about to hurl you away violently;
he will grasp you firmly
18 and roll you up and throw you like a ball
into a vast expanse.
There you will die,
and there your splendid chariots will lie;
you are a disgrace to your master’s household.
19 I will remove you from your office,
and you will be pulled down from your post.
20 On that day I will summon
my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah.
21 I will clothe him with your robe
and place your sash around his waist,
and I will bestow upon him your authority.
He will be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem
and to the house of Judah.
22 I will place on his shoulder
the key of the house of David.
When he opens,
no one will close;
when he closes,
no one will open.
23 I will fasten him like a peg in a secure place,
and he will become a throne of honor for his family.
24 Upon him will depend all the glory of his family,
his descendants, and his offspring,
and even the smallest vessels, from cups to pitchers.
25 On that day, says the Lord of hosts,
the peg that was securely fastened
will give way, break loose, and fall,
and whatever had been hanging on it will be lost.
For the Lord has spoken.​

Jesus was setting up an actual governing body that the gates of Hell would not prevail against. A body that would endure until His return. And Peter was the chief minister and authority over that body in Christ's absence. Now, Peter was human. But as with the President of the United States... Peter was the man holding the office and the authority. And the keys being delegated to Peter were delegated by Peter and have been passed down from Peter until Francis today.

The gates of hell will NEVER come against Christ's church. Christ, himself, called Peter 'Satan'.
Yes I know he was actually addressing Satan and not Peter - but the man who had just received a revelation from God about Christ's identity, in the next breath made a satanic suggestion.

Which testifies that God can use anyone, does it not??? Also, note... this was before Pentecost and Peter's full infilling with the Spirit.

Yet James was head of the church in Jerusalem.
Paul founded churches and appointed elders in them. If there was a problem with doctrine and/or false teachers the matter was taken to the Apostles - all of them, not just Peter.
When the NT was compiled, books were chosen that were written by Apostles or had Apostolic authority. Peter did not write most of the books in the NT, and he never once said that he was head of, or the rock for, the church. He pointed to, and proclaimed Christ - always.

Yes, James was appointed Bishop over Jerusalem, not the entire Church. Paul was a missionary evangelist who appointed elders over the churches. However, only Peter was given the keys to the kingdom of Heaven. Notice the specificity that Jesus issues Peter's authority with...

Matthew 16:18-19
New Catholic Bible
18 And I say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.​

Nowhere does Jesus give such authority to any other Apostle. While yes, James was Bishop over the Church in Jerusalem, and Paul was the Evangelizing Apostle... only Peter was appointed to be earthly head over the entire Church. And we know from the writings of the Apostolic Father, Clement, who is mentioned in Scripture and who traveled with St. Paul that St. Peter delegated this authority to his successors in the Second Epistles of Clement to James II...

“I communicate to him the power of binding and loosing so that, with respect to everything which he shall ordain in the earth, it shall be decreed in the heavens; for he shall bind what ought to be bound and loose what ought to be loosed as knowing the rule of the Church.” (3:215)​

Consider also...

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA​

“[T]he blessed Peter, the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute [Matt. 17:27], quickly g.asped and understood their meaning. And what does he say? ‘Behold, we have left all and have followed you’ [Matt. 19:27; Mark 10:28]” (Who Is the Rich Man That Is Saved? 21:3–5 [A.D. 200]).

TERTULLIAN​

“For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]” (Antidote Against the Scorpion 10 [A.D. 211]).

“[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. . . . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church” (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).

THE LETTER OF CLEMENT TO JAMES​

“Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect” (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]).

CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE
“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.’ . . . On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).​

I could go on and on and on... It is a historical fact that the vast majority of Christian theologians have observed the authority of St. Peter and his successors.

That's what the Catholic church has interpreted it to mean; it's not what Scripture says.

Actually, it is what Scripture and history attest to. Read the above.

No, it's a gathering of believers - called out ones, members of Christ's body, those who are IN Christ.

The NT says this over and over again;

All those verses are firmly believed in and embraced by the Catholic Church, without denying the writings of the Church Fathers who affirmed Peter's Primacy and the identity of the Church. Remember, until 1054 AD when the Eastern Churches became schismatic and broke away, we were the only Church.

Nowhere does the NT say; only those who accept Peter as the head of the church can be part of the church. It does not teach a difference between those who belong to "Peter's church" and those who don't. And it certainly doesn't say, as some Catholics have said on these forums, that those who don't belong to Peter's church do not have the whole truth and their church is not valid.

Again, you're not reading the Bible. The Bible firmly records Christ giving Peter the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, with authority to bind and and loose. Even in Acts 15 we see the Church gathered to resolve the issue of circumcision regarding new Gentile converts. The meeting was in heavy debate until Peter speaks and brings it to order. Upon St. Peter speaking, they all become silent and listen to the testimonies of Paul and Barnabas, and Peter's summation of the resolution is then seconded by James...

Acts 15:6-14
New Catholic Bible
6 The apostles and the elders convened to consider this matter. 7 After a long period of debate, Peter stood up to address them. “Brethren,” he said, “you are well aware that in the early days God made his choice among you that it would be through my mouth that the Gentiles would hear the message of the gospel and become believers. 8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness by giving to them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us. 9 He made no distinction between them and us, for he purified their hearts by faith.
10 “Therefore, why are you determined to try God’s patience by laying a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither we nor our ancestors have found easy to bear? 11 On the contrary, we believe that we are saved in the same way as they are, through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” 12 On hearing this, the whole assembly fell silent, and they listened as Barnabas and Paul described all the signs and wonders that God had worked through them among the Gentiles.
13 James on Dietary Law. After they had finished speaking, James responded, “Brethren, listen to me. 14 Simon has related how God first looked favorably upon the Gentiles and took from among them a people for his name.​

We see Peter's authority to call this Council to order and take control. We see the body fall silent and end their debating. This is Peter actually using the keys given him by Jesus. And it is the prototype and model of all subsequent Church Councils.

All believers are the body of Christ and part of his church.
I'm not sure, if you want to get personal, that the Catholic church today is the church that Jesus founded.
He did not teach that Mary was queen of heaven or a perpetual virgin; he did not tell people to pray to the saints. He prayed that his church - followers - would be one, not that one section of the church would claim superiority and holders of the only truth.

Actually... the Bible does teach that Mary is Queen of Heaven. This deserves a post all of its own to break down biblically. I'll follow up with it. You might disagree... but you'll never be able to say this teaching isn't found in Scripture.

Denominations, it seems to me, came about because people wanted to worship in different ways and/or emphasised different parts of the Bible. For some, adult baptism alone is the only baptism. For some, speaking in tongues is important - to the degree that a few have claimed you are not filled with the Spirit if you cannot do this. Some believe that only a few, elect, people will get to heaven, and that God has already chosen who they will be. Others dispute this and say Christ died for all.
So, we have different denominations.

That's buffet bar Christianity. Take what you like and leave what you don't. True and historic Christianity is far far more robust and authoritative than that. In fact, many of these groups are in direct opposition to not only Papal authority but even the Councils. It's called... heresy.

But the Gospel - Christ was born both man and God, lived among us, taught, died for us, was raised, ascended, sent his Spirit and will return in glory - is the same for all. Baptists do not have a different way of salvation; Methodists do not teach the Holy Spirit is an optional extra; Anglicans do not teach that Jesus was only a man, or was only God and did not come in the flesh.
I've said it before, but if we were facing persecution and someone stood over us with a gun saying "do you believe in Christ/are you a Christian; yes or no?" There'd be no time to argue and give them a definition of "true church". You either have a load of dead Anglicans, Catholics, Methodists etc who had ALL died confessing Christ - or you'd have a load of live Anglicans etc, who had denied him.
We'd better all get used to the fact now that there will be many believers from other denominations in heaven - or we'll be in for a shock.

Martyrdom is an entirely different subject.

Good. So all believers who cry out to the Lord are saved and part of his church.
Just what Scripture says.

Some are saved in spite of their broken relationship to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

 

[Christopher0121]

Protestants are the children of Roman Catholicism, so yes, rebellion breeds rebellion. The Orthodox Church has no such progeny.

Amen. This is why I believe the Orthodox are just as Catholic as we are. We're all still hammering out how to bring one another back into fellowship without denying the autonomy you seek and the recognition of the Seat of Peter we hold dear. I pray one day we'll straighten this mess out. Because I love Orthodoxy. Personally, I prefer your icons over many Western icons. lol

 

[Christopher0121]

He did not teach that Mary was queen of heaven or a perpetual virgin; he did not tell people to pray to the saints. He prayed that his church - followers - would be one, not that one section of the church would claim superiority and holders of the only truth.

Ah, but Scripture solidly affirms Mary as the sinless Queen of Heaven.

Many have never heard the Annunciation unpacked. People briefly read it around Christmas time and that’s it. And most non-Catholics barely understand what they’re reading.

I’m going to briefly unpack it here. Here goes…

Luke 1:26-38
New Catholic Bible
26 Announcement of the Birth of Jesus.[g] In the sixth month,[h] the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town in Galilee called Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin’s name was Mary.
28 The angel came to her and said, “Hail, full of grace![j] The Lord is with you.” 29 But she was greatly troubled by his words and wondered in her heart what this salutation could mean.
30 Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will name him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his ancestor David. 33 He will rule over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”
34 Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?”[k] 35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore, the child to be born will be holy, and he will be called the Son of God. 36 [l]And behold, your cousin Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and she who was called barren is now in her sixth month, 37 for nothing will be impossible for God.”
38 Then Mary said, “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord. Let it be done to me according to your word.” After this, the angel departed from her.​

One of the first things we noticed is that Gabriel is mentioned by name. This is big. Most of the time angels go unnamed. But here is the angel Gabriel. To Jews in that time Gabriel was an Archangel, meaning he answered only to YHVH. He served as the official messenger of Heaven, Heaven’s Secretary of State if you will. So imagine the impact upon first century readers…. Heaven’s Secretary of State is visiting a… 14/15 year old girl. Wait! What???

Why???

Well, next we read Gabriel’s greeting…

“Hail,…”​

This was the manner in which one addressed royalty. We see it when the Roman soldiers mock Christ…

Mark 15:18
New Catholic Bible
Then they began to salute him with the words, “Hail, King of the Jews!”​

Now we realize the Heaven’s Secretary of State is honoring Mary as his…Queen.

Next, the angel says something that turns most Evangelical theology on its head…

“…full of grace!”​

The word phrase is in the indicative active aorist tense, meaning she was, is, and always will be, full of grace. Grace is defined here as God's sanctifying power. This means Mary was full of God’s sanctifying power from conception, to that moment of Gabriel's announcement, and forever more.

Why would Mary need “sanctifying power”, or “grace”, at her conception???

Because of what is known as, Original Sin. The curse of original sin was a result of Adam and Eve’s fall from innocence. Since that time every human being was conceived in original sin. This “grace”, or “sanctifying power”, was an act of Grace on God’s part, predicated upon the future work of Christ, to stay or prevent the communication of Original Sin from Mary’s mother (St. Anne) to Mary the Mother of God.

Why?

Jesus is God the Son. Being pure and sinless in holiness, The Word, could NOT dwell in an unclean temple (I Corinthians 3:16-17).

So the opening of Gabriel’s greeting establishes that St. Mary was indeed conceived without sin.

So, we realize Gabriel, the Secretary of State from Heaven, just called Mary his Queen who was conceived without sin.

“Hail, full of grace The Lord is with you.”​

This is why Gabriel’s greeting troubled the poor girl.

Some might ask…Why would Mary be “Queen” when she was Christ’s Mother not His wife???

In ancient Israel, a King’s wife didn’t become Queen, his mother did. The office in Hebrew is called “Gebirah” (גְּבִירָה). This is why we see Solomon appoint his mother Bathsheba a throne on his right hand. A good son and an honorable King appoints his mother as Queen over the nation.

This is why Gabriel addressed Mary as His Heavenly Queen, as he declared her sinless favor before God.

On account of her being troubled Gabriel explains that she was to give birth to He who would sit on the throne of His ancestor, David…

“…you will name him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his ancestor David. 33 He will rule over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”​

Based on the above, Gabriel essentially explains the greeting. She was his Queen because she would give birth to the King of Kings.

This makes her, Queen of Heaven.

And THIS is why she later sings…

Luke 1:48
New Catholic Bible
“For he has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant; henceforth all generations will call me blessed.”​

ALL GENERATIONS.

This story is about so much more than the awesome miracle of the virgin birth. It also unfolds the soteriological identity of the Mother of God. To affirm St. Mary as the Queen of Heaven is to affirm Christ as the King of Kings. To deny St. Mary as being the Gebirah of Heaven is to effectively deny Christ's Lordship.

May is the Month of Mary. Let us continue to honor our Blessed Mother.

Hail, Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.

Revelation 12:1-5
New Catholic Bible
1 A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon beneath her feet, and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2 She was with child and about to give birth, crying aloud in the anguish of her labor.
3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: a huge red dragon with seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems crowning his heads. 4 His tail swept away a third of the stars in the sky and hurled them to the earth.
The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child as soon as it was born. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child who is destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod. And her child was taken up directly to God and to his throne.

 

[Christopher0121]

He did not teach that Mary was queen of heaven or a perpetual virgin; he did not tell people to pray to the saints. He prayed that his church - followers - would be one, not that one section of the church would claim superiority and holders of the only truth.

The doctrine known as the Communion of Saints is immortalized in the Apostle's Creed and is deeply connected to the Catholic understanding of Theosis.

Theosis is union with God the Father, through the work and Person of Christ, by the indwelling Holy Spirit. Peter described it in his epistle,

2 Peter 1:4
New Catholic Bible
By these he has given us his precious promises, great beyond all price, so that through them you may escape from the corruption with which evil desires have infected the world and thereby may come to share in the divine nature.​

We “share in the divine nature” and as Paul put it, we become “one spirit” with God…

1 Corinthians 6:17
New Catholic Bible
But anyone who joins himself to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.​

This in essence makes us living extensions of Jesus, or as Jesus put it, “branches of the true Vine”…

John 15:1-6
New Catholic Bible
1 “I am the true vine,
and my Father is the vinegrower.
2 He removes every branch
that does not bear fruit,
and every branch that does
he prunes to make it bear even more.
3 You have already been cleansed
by the word I have spoken to you.
4 “Abide in me,
as I abide in you.
Just as a branch cannot bear fruit by itself
unless it abides in the vine,
so you cannot bear fruit
unless you abide in me.
5 “I am the vine,
you are the branches.
Whoever abides in me, and I in him,
will bear much fruit.
Apart from me you can do nothing.
6 Whoever does not abide in me
will be thrown away like a withered branch.
Such branches are gathered up,
thrown into the fire, and burned.​

The purpose of this divine union with God, though Christ, by the Spirit, is that Christ Himself be formed in us, as stated by St. Paul…

Galatians 4:19
New Catholic Bible
19 You are my children, and I am experiencing the pain of giving birth to you all over again, until Christ is formed in you.​

This is why Paul wrote…

Galatians 2:20
New Catholic Bible
And now it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. The life I live now in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave himself up for me.​

And so the ultimate purpose of salvation is union with God, becoming one spirit with God, becoming a living extension or branch of Christ, that Christ be formed in us, resulting in our being crucified with Christ as Christ Himself literally and spiritually lives His life through us. We become little “Christs” through His indwelling presence and so it becomes manifest that we are sons and daughters of God…

Galatians 4:6
New Catholic Bible
And because you are sons, God has sent into our hearts the Spirit of his Son, crying out “Abba! Father!”​

1 John 3:2
New Catholic Bible
2 Beloved,
we are God’s children now.
What we shall be
has not yet been revealed.
However, we do know that when he appears
we shall be like him,
for we shall see him as he really is.​

It is by virtue of this glorified state that the Saints literally and actually reign with Christ from Heaven, participating with and guiding the Church and believers right now on earth below…

2 Timothy 2:12
If we endure, we shall also reign with him. If we deny him, he will also deny us.​

St. Athanasius spoke of this “Theosis” when he wrote…

“For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.”​

This doesn’t mean we become “Gods” or little almighty beings as Mormons believe. It means God is formed and made manifest in us, His Saints. Ultimately we will become living extensions of God Himself. This is why Catholics venerate and Saints who appear and perform miracles through their prayers after their Beautification. We do not believe they are dead. They are very much alive, ruling and reigning with Christ presently. We’re venerating those who are now living extensions of God, branches of the True Vine, for Christ is manifest in them. And so our veneration of the Saints is an act that gives God glory, for it is acknowledging and honoring Christ in them.

Imagine being at an art museum and adoring a beautiful masterpiece painting…a Monet or Renoir. Who gets the glory when we adore such a masterpiece? The artist of course! lol. No artist will watch you adore his painting and scream, “No, no, no! Adore me! Forget my masterpiece, I’m the artist!!! Adore me!!!” lol. No, they will beam with joy as you adore their work. The Saints are living masterpieces reigning with Christ in Heaven. And as a result, our veneration and emulation of them glorifies God who calls us all to the same level of relationship and Sainthood.

Paul wrote…

1 Corinthians 11:1
New Catholic Bible
1 Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.​

So we follow and imitate the Saints as they are also followers and imitators of Christ.

We also read how Christ chose to share His glory with His Saints...

John 17:20-26
New Catholic Bible
20 “I pray not only on behalf of these,
but also for those who through their word
will come to believe in me.
21 May they all be one.
As you, Father, are in me
and I in you,
may they also be in us
so that the world may believe
that you have sent me.
22 “The glory that you have given me
I have given to them,
so that they may be one,
as we are one,
23 I in them and you in me,
that they may become completely one,
and thus the world may know
that you have sent me
and that you have loved them
even as you have loved me.
24 “Father, allow those you have given me
to be with me where I am,
so that they may behold my glory,
which you have bestowed on me
because you loved me
before the foundation of the world.
25 “Righteous Father,
the world has not known you;
I have known you,
and they have known that you have sent me.
26 I have made your name known to them,
and I will make it known,
so that the love with which you loved me
may be in them, and I in them.”​

The Saints share in Christ's own glory, as Christ prayed we all would. This is a glory that comes from union of spirit with Christ and the Father through the Holy Spirit. The Father in Christ and Christ in us, the Saints. Like a vine and its branches, Christ and the Saints are a single organism. When you venerate a Saint, you give glory and honor to Christ, for it is the Christ in them that inspires the veneration, and longing to see the very same Theosis in ourselves. It's giving reverence and honor to those who have attained union with God, through Christ, by the Holy Spirit.

The Bible include an allusions to the authority of the Saints in the Gospels and the Epistles when it reads...

Luke 19:16-19
New Catholic Bible
16 The first came forward and said, ‘Sir, your money has increased tenfold in value.’ 17 He said to him, ‘Well done, my good servant. Because you have proved trustworthy in this very small matter, you shall be in charge of ten cities.’ 18 “Next, the second servant came forward and said, ‘Sir, your money has increased fivefold in value.’ 19 He said to him, ‘You shall be in charge of five cities.’

1 Corinthians 9:25
New Catholic Bible
Everyone who seeks a prize submits himself to rigorous self-discipline in every respect. They do so to win a perishable crown, while we seek an imperishable one.

2 Timothy 4:8
New Catholic Bible
Now waiting for me is the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that Day—and not only to me, but to all those who have eagerly longed for his appearance.

Revelation 3:21
New Catholic Bible
To anyone who is victorious, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, as I myself overcame and sat with my Father on his throne.​

Yes, the Saints receive crowns (awarded authority) are appointed authority over entire nations on earth and even aspects of daily life. They are seated with Christ in Heaven in His throne (His court of authority), and they rule and reign with Him.

Please understand, the ancient tongue uses two terms for worship. One is "latria". Latria is the worship and honor given only to God. The other is "dulia". Dulia is the honor or respect given to holy things, places, or people, living or in glory. For example, all of us "dulia" the Bible and would not use it disrespectfully. And so it could be said we all "venerate (dulia) the Bible".

St. Mary, being Christ’s Mother, holds the highest rank among the Saints of Heaven, being Queen of Heaven, and so her veneration is most widely practiced.

We believe the Holy Spirit continues to work through the Saints who are ruling and reigning with Christ just as He did while they walked the earth. And so we give them dulia and offer prayers requesting their prayers and aid just as we would brothers and sisters who are filled with the Holy Spirit and have a history of miraculous faith dwelling among us.

We are all called to be Saints. We experience Theosis through the Sacraments, prayer, fasting, contemplation, reading Scripture, and embracing the various devotions of Sacred Tradition that speak to our souls. Through all these things we strive to experience our own Theosis and become Saints, which we believe is the entire purpose of salvation. It’s not about going to Heaven and strumming harps forever. It’s about manifesting Christ in us that we might be glorified with Jesus in order to rule and reign with Him and aid in guiding and serving the Church from Heaven above with Him.

The Saints ruling and reigning with Christ presently are called the Church Triumphant. We who are alive and enduring in the world below are the Church Militant. Those experiencing purgatory are the Church Suffering. We're all a single body connected by the web of our worship and prayer.

I pray I’ve helped to clarify the Catholic understanding of the Veneration of the Saints/Communion of the Saints.

God bless.

Hebrews 1:1-3
New Catholic Bible
1 Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that weighs us down and the sins that so easily distract us and with perseverance run the race that lies ahead of us, 2 with our eyes fixed on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith. For the sake of the joy that lay before him, he endured the cross, ignoring its shame, and is now seated at the right hand of the throne of God.

 

[Christopher0121]

I'm not sure, if you want to get personal, that the Catholic church today is the church that Jesus founded.
He did not teach that Mary was queen of heaven...

Something else just occurred to me to share for our non-Catholic friends.

The Protoevangelium. Many non-Catholics read the Protoevangelium and fail to realize that it is speaking about St. Mary and Christ from the very beginning immediately after man's fall.

The language is very interesting. Most non-Catholics read this all their lives and fail to see the fullness of what is being said. Let's take a look at Genesis 3...

Genesis 3:15
New Catholic Bible
15 I will establish hostility
between you and the WOMAN,
between your line and HER line.
HER offspring will crush your head
and you will bruise his heel.”​

Notice God promises to put hostility, enmity, between Satan and…”the woman” along with "her offspring". What we have in view here is a Mother and Child.

Satan would be in a battle with a woman? Yes. And it is her “offspring” who would crush Satan, though Satan strikes Him.

God is clearly describing that Satan’s demise would be brought about by the actions of a Mother and her Son, and man's Salvation is promised through this Mother and Son partnership.

Luke 1:48
New Catholic Bible
For he has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant; henceforth all generations will call me blessed.
​

The image below strikes as much fear and terror in the heart of Satan and every demon as the Cross and/or Crucifix. For it recalls God's first declaration of his defeat at the hands of a woman and her offspring...

Genesis 3:15
New Catholic Bible
15 I will establish hostility
between you and the WOMAN,
between your line and her line.
HER OFFSPRING will crush your head
and you will bruise HIS heel.”​

​

 

[prodromos]

Amen. This is why I believe the Orthodox are just as Catholic as we are.

That doesn't make any sense. You've just agreed that Rome is the rebellious one did you not?

We're all still hammering out how to bring one another back into fellowship without denying the autonomy you seek and the recognition of the Seat of Peter we hold dear. I pray one day we'll straighten this mess out.

Rome would have to repent of her errors. We don't seek something we always had, and as St Cyprian explained, every bishop is the successor to Peter and the Apostles. Christ set up Peter as the "type" of the Apostles. Whoever confesses Christ as the Son of the living God and has been established as a bishop through the laying on of hands is "Peter".

Because I love Orthodoxy. Personally, I prefer your icons over many Western icons. lol

Our icons are theology in colour. Western religious art has slowly lost its true purpose after the schism. For example the halo above the head of a saint in Western art has become a seperate object instead of being divine light radiating out from within in Orthodox iconography.

 

[jamiec]

I never understood it when people claim that Christianity is not a religion because it absolutely is. Perhaps your not familiar with the definition of the word.

Religion-

• the belief in and worship of a superhuman power or powers, especially a God or gods: "ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
• ▪a particular system of faith and worship: "the world's great religions"
• ▪a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance:"consumerism is the new religion"

The denial that Christianity is a religion, appears to be an Evangelical shibboleth. And a rather recent one, I think. My guess is that it is a US idea, perhaps no older than the last 200 years; but that may be entirely wrong. A lot of the material in US Evangelicalism came from the UK, after all.

I think the idea that "Christianity is not a religion, but a relationship", owes a lot to Evangelical unease with, distaste for, and dislike of, liturgical prayer. There seems to be an idea that where prayer is offered according to set forms, day after day, in a manner that gives little or no place to spontaneity, prayer cannot possibly be:

(1) sincere
(2) heartfelt
(3) personal
(4) free of dead formalism
(5) anything but insincere
(6) and hypocritical
(7) and empty babbling
(8) acceptable to God

Especially if it is offered in an "unknown tongue".

Something of a favourite passage for making the anti-liturgical argument, is Isaiah 29.13 especially as quoted in the Gospels. First, the passage in Isaiah:

…12Or if the scroll is handed to one unable to read, he will say, “I cannot read.” 13Therefore the Lord said: “These people draw near to Me with their mouths and honor Me with their lips, but their heartsare far from Me. Their worship of Me is but rules taught by men. 14Therefore I will again confound these people with wonder upon wonder. The wisdom of the wise will vanish, and the intelligence of the intelligent will be hidden.”…

Now St Matthew 15.1-8:

1Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2“Why do Your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They do not wash their hands before they eat.”3Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’a and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’b 5But you say that if anyone says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever you would have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’ 6he need not honor his father or mother with it.c Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7You hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied correctly about you:

8‘These people honor Me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from Me.
9They worship Me in vain;
they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.’d”

& St Mark 7.1-11:

1Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2“Why do Your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They do not wash their hands before they eat.”3Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’a and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’b 5But you say that if anyone says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever you would have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’ 6he need not honor his father or mother with it.c Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7You hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied correctly about you:

8‘These people honor Me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from Me.
9They worship Me in vain;
they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.’d”

Christian liturgies draw upon the Bible - but they are not explicitly enjoined or provided by the Bible. And Evangelicalism, especially in its Fundamentalist form, is nothing without the Bible. So it would not be difficult to see such liturgies as ungodly human impositions, invented by men in order to make their "traditions of men" come between the Christian and his Saviour. For that is something else to bear in mind - where there is liturgy or church order designed by others, there is mediation: someone, is doing something, that prevents the believer coming to God using his own words, in his own way. IOW, using a liturgy has something insincere about it, something second-rate, something fake.

Mediation by anything created, of any kind, is apt to be anathema to Evangelicals, because one of the cornerstones of Evangelical piety is immediate access to God through Christ, with no Roman priest or Biblical scholar to shove his oar in & get in the way. Liturgies, prayer-books, creeds and theologies, get in the way - which may play a part in the rejection of them in some quarters of Protestantism.

That is my impression.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The denial that Christianity is a religion, appears to be an Evangelical shibboleth. And a rather recent one, I think. My guess is that it is a US idea, perhaps no older than the last 200 years; but that may be entirely wrong. A lot of the material in US Evangelicalism came from the UK, after all.

I think the idea that "Christianity is not a religion, but a relationship", owes a lot to Evangelical unease with, distaste for, and dislike of, liturgical prayer. There seems to be an idea that where prayer is offered according to set forms, day after day, in a manner that gives little or no place to spontaneity, prayer cannot possibly be:

(1) sincere
(2) heartfelt
(3) personal
(4) free of dead formalism
(5) anything but insincere
(6) and hypocritical
(7) and empty babbling
(8) acceptable to God

Especially if it is offered in an "unknown tongue".

Something of a favourite passage for making the anti-liturgical argument, is Isaiah 29.13 especially as quoted in the Gospels. First, the passage in Isaiah:

…12Or if the scroll is handed to one unable to read, he will say, “I cannot read.” 13Therefore the Lord said: “These people draw near to Me with their mouths and honor Me with their lips, but their heartsare far from Me. Their worship of Me is but rules taught by men. 14Therefore I will again confound these people with wonder upon wonder. The wisdom of the wise will vanish, and the intelligence of the intelligent will be hidden.”…

Now St Matthew 15.1-8:

1Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2“Why do Your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They do not wash their hands before they eat.”3Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’a and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’b 5But you say that if anyone says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever you would have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’ 6he need not honor his father or mother with it.c Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7You hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied correctly about you:

8‘These people honor Me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from Me.
9They worship Me in vain;
they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.’d”

& St Mark 7.1-11:

1Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2“Why do Your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They do not wash their hands before they eat.”3Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’a and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’b 5But you say that if anyone says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever you would have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’ 6he need not honor his father or mother with it.c Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7You hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied correctly about you:

8‘These people honor Me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from Me.
9They worship Me in vain;
they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.’d”

Christian liturgies draw upon the Bible - but they are not explicitly enjoined or provided by the Bible. And Evangelicalism, especially in its Fundamentalist form, is nothing without the Bible. So it would not be difficult to see such liturgies as ungodly human impositions, invented by men in order to make their "traditions of men" come between the Christian and his Saviour. For that is something else to bear in mind - where there is liturgy or church order designed by others, there is mediation: someone, is doing something, that prevents the believer coming to God using his own words, in his own way. IOW, using a liturgy has something insincere about it, something second-rate, something fake.

Mediation by anything created, of any kind, is apt to be anathema to Evangelicals, because one of the cornerstones of Evangelical piety is immediate access to God through Christ, with no Roman priest or Biblical scholar to shove his oar in & get in the way. Liturgies, prayer-books, creeds and theologies, get in the way - which may play a part in the rejection of them in some quarters of Protestantism.

That is my impression.

Outside of American Evangelicalism, there were theologians in the early 20th century who spoke in provocative ways to make a point. For example, that in a sense Christ is the end of religion, that Christ has dethroned all would-be gods, etc. The general sense is not that Christianity is "is a relationship, not a religition", but rather the sense given is that in Christ something better than religion has come, Christ is the telos, the end, the consummation of all religious hope and anticipation and all man-made attempts to worship or respect the divine is shown to be nothing more than idolatry.

Here's how Fr. Herbert McCabe says it,

"In Jesus, says the Christian, we do not understand God but we can watch God understanding himself. God's understanding of God is that he throws himself away in love, that he keeps nothing back for himself. God's understanding of God is that he is a love that unconditionally accepts, that always lets others be, even if what they want to be is his murderers. God's understanding of God is that he is not a special person with a special kind of message, with a special way of living to which he wants people to conform. God's understanding of God could not appear to us as someone who wants to found a new and better religion, or recommend a special new discipline or way of life - a religious code laid upon us for all time because it is from God. God's understanding of God is that he just says: 'Yes, be; be human, but be really human; be human if it kills you - and it will.' The Law of God is a non-law; it has no special regulations. The Word just says: 'I accept you as human beings; what a pity you have such difficulty in doing this yourselves. What a pity you can only like yourselves if you pretend to be super-humans or gods.' God could never understand himself as one of the gods; only as one of the human race." - Fr. Herbert McCabe, God Still Matters, pp. 104-105

-CryptoLutheran