dating across denomination?

[J3thekingofking]

How can a Protestant Christian date when the church is divided, with each group having its own leader and doing its own thing? Sure, they are part of the universal church, but in practice, they don't organize events that involve all churches across all denominations due to disagreements and disputes.

Dating itself is already hard. Now, you'll find very few options—or possibly no options at all—or you might get turned down by someone simply because you aren't in their denomination or social circle. Aren't we all confessing the Nicene Creed? I've seen many Christians eventually give up and marry non-Christians.

 

[jas3]

How can a Protestant Christian date when the church is divided, with each group having its own leader and doing its own thing?

One of the couple, usually the woman, joins the other's denomination. In my experience, most people aren't familiar enough with denominational disagreements to have strong opinions about why one or the other is correct.

Aren't we all confessing the Nicene Creed?

The Nicene Creed is sadly very neglected within Protestantism, which is why you'll see some people denigrating the Creed or its terminology on this forum, particularly when they come from newer, "no creed but the Bible" strands of Protestantism.

 

[The Liturgist]

How can a Protestant Christian date when the church is divided, with each group having its own leader and doing its own thing? Sure, they are part of the universal church, but in practice, they don't organize events that involve all churches across all denominations due to disagreements and disputes.

Dating itself is already hard. Now, you'll find very few options—or possibly no options at all—or you might get turned down by someone simply because you aren't in their denomination or social circle. Aren't we all confessing the Nicene Creed? I've seen many Christians eventually give up and marry non-Christians.

Most Christian churches are similiar enough in doctrine so that this is simply not the problem you think it is.

Even the Eastern Orthodox have established protocols for intermarriage with the Oriental Orthodox in Egypt and Syria. Indeed the ecumenical agreement between the Antiochian Orthodox and the Syriac Orthodox is sufficiently sweeping to the point where it could no longer be said that the two churches are in any sort of schism, since in Syria, the two churches no longer convert each others’ members.

This is appropriate, since Chalcedonian saints are venerated by the Syriac Orthodox, such as St. John of Damascus, St. Romanos the Melodist and others, and everyone venerates St. Isaac the Syrian, who we now know was not even Orthodox but a member of the Assyrian Church of the East (who in common with most members of the Church of the East in the late First Millenium, believed in apokatastasis, following in the footsteps of Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa).

 

[The Liturgist]

The Nicene Creed is sadly very neglected within Protestantism, which is why you'll see some people denigrating the Creed or its terminology on this forum, particularly when they come from newer, "no creed but the Bible" strands of Protestantism.

That said, the Nicene Creed is part of the official Christian Forums Statement of Faith, so if you do see someone criticizing it, they are violating the rules of the theology forums. Non-Nicene churches furthermore are not regarded as Christian for purposes of participation in General Theology and the other theology forums.

Now, regarding “non-creedal” churches like the Churches of Christ and the Stone/Campbell movement, these groups are accepted on Christian Forums since despite not having a formal creed, they nonetheless agree in doctrine with the Nicene Creed and the rest of the Statement of Faith. Additionally, these groups are of some interest to the Orthodox, since they were among the first Protestants to implement a weekly celebration of the Eucharist and to define their local church ecclesiology in Eucharistic terms. Thus, they belong in the same category as John Wesley and the early Methodists, and the Anglo Catholics, and the early Moravians (the Utraquists) and the Orthodox Lutherans, in that they represent a movement of Protestantism in an Orthodox direction.

It is interesting, by the way, to consider that John Wesley was a contemporary of the Kollyvades Brothers (who were supported by the likes of St. Nicodemus the Hagiorite and St. Macarius of Corinth, the compilers of the Philokalia) who worked to promote a return to weekly reception of the Eucharist for the Orthodox laity, a cause that would later be taken up at the turn of the 20th century by St. John of Kronstadt.

Thus the movement for a return to high frequency reception of the Eucharist actually occurred almost concurrently within Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism.

The difference was that most Protestant churches aside from cathedrals had ceased celebrating the Eucharist weekly, which made things particularly difficult for Protestants wanting to move in this direction.

Conversely, the Orthodox did celebrate the Eucharist weekly - the problem was laity who had grown accustomed to infrequent confession and infrequent communion. A similar situation existed in Roman Catholicism, where most people outside of clergy and the religious orders did not partake weekly.

 

[jas3]

That said, the Nicene Creed is part of the official Christian Forums Statement of Faith, so if you do see someone criticizing it, they are violating the rules of the theology forums.

Indeed, but in practice the only requirement seems to be nominal acceptance of Trinitarianism. I've even seen someone say Satan wrote it and that comment was allowed to stand. Other parts of the Creed people ignore: that the Son is "of one essence with the Father"; that the Son, not just His human nature, "was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man"; that the Church is "one, holy, catholic, and apostolic"; and that there is "one baptism for the remission of sins."

This is not specific to CF; it's a widespread sentiment, especially in ecumenical dialogue, that we all agree on the Creed, but the fact of the matter is that most people in all traditions are never catechized on the meaning of the Creed, so they don't even know that they've strayed from what it says on these subjects. It robs Christian children of something that should be a part of their upbringing and preparation for facing the world's challenges to their faith.

Now, regarding “non-creedal” churches like the Churches of Christ and the Stone/Campbell movement, these groups are accepted on Christian Forums since despite not having a formal creed, they nonetheless agree in doctrine with the Nicene Creed and the rest of the Statement of Faith.

While it is a good thing that this movement recognized the salvific value of baptism and the need for the Church to be one, I don't see how any restorationist denomination can be said to believe in the holiness or apostolicity of the Church.

 

[DragonFox91]

The historical lines that separated the denominations have been blurred w/ time. That should actually make it a little easier.

I know what denomination I am & have compared & contrasted the other denominations. I know which ones I'd be willing to marry & which ones I wouldn't. Some denominations may claim to confess to the Creeds but the Creed's kept in a closet & no one reads it, they really couldn't tell you what they believe & nor what you should believe. You do the same. Know your denomination, research the others, which ones are 'close enough' to what you beliveve. If you are a believer under no circumstance date a non-believer no matter how she makes you feel

 

[bèlla]

Examine your beliefs and the principles echoed in those teachings as a middle ground. What virtues are foremost? What practices are encouraged and maintained? What behaviors are denounced most frequently and what is their position for correction? How is marriage addressed through instruction, counseling and support? Is there a network in place for couples and families? And the same holds true for men and women. What opportunities exist for fellowship within the church and outside of it and what percent participate and so on?

If you have a deep affinity for your denomination that’s an obvious starting point are as suitors who lack the same, openminded to other settings or willing to heed your direction. As you mature spiritually you’re able to find common denominators and chew the fat and spit out the bones. You don’t have to agree on everything and it’s unlikely you will. Many people come to a different perspective later on and that’s okay. We have to leave room for growth and change.

~bella

 

[linux.poet]

Too hard.

My church has specific training that all children are encouraged to follow; trying to make that happen without my husband’s support will not work. My understanding is that the RCC is the same way. Eventually you will need to be united about which church you go to and what your children are to believe.

Indeed, but in practice the only requirement seems to be nominal acceptance of Trinitarianism. I've even seen someone say Satan wrote it and that comment was allowed to stand. Other parts of the Creed people ignore: that the Son is "of one essence with the Father"; that the Son, not just His human nature, "was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man"; that the Church is "one, holy, catholic, and apostolic"; and that there is "one baptism for the remission of sins."

We’re not going to have an Orthodox meaning of the creed if we’re not Orthodox. If you look at the actual CF Statement of Faith, including the Scripture references at the end of each line and the notes at the end, the point is to include all Christians on the site. The Nicene Creed is there to make the Orthodox feel welcome, but it’s clear the Scripture references are there to make Protestants feel welcome, since most doctrinal statements and statements of faith I’ve ever seen have Scripture references everywhere. Someone from my faith background would look at the statements and Scriptures and be like “yup, agreed, that’s a good summary of what I believe” with no knowledge of Arians and Nestorians. I’m reminded of my own fundamentals of the faith class, everything lines up.

My church has taught classes on the ancient creeds though, as my pastor seems interested in exploring these kinds of subjects. I ended up reading the Westminister shorter catechism the other day as part of studying a systematic theology. So maybe judging creedal knowledge by denomination isn’t really as important as I think it is and Protestants just place it on a scholarly level beyond reach of the average churchgoer.

 

[Bob Crowley]

While I think most trinitarian Protestant Christians would not have too much trouble dating someone from another church, I could see issues when dating crosses Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox borders.

Of course if someone is hardline Reformed for example they're going to find they have a much smaller playing field.

I'm Catholic and my wife is Baptist, but when we met we were both Protestant. I became Catholic later. There was a bit of resistance at first, but she is an associate member of the St Vincent de Paul society and we often do visits together. She rarely attends mass but she attends her own church regularly and I do the same with mine.

When it comes to love the heart often rules the head. I remember one politically active young Christian way back who was going to marry a Moslem girl (Iranian I think). My pastor's wife said "I wish them luck". What happened in the end I don't know as that was a long time ago.

One young bloke who attended the same Presbyerian church I did was going to marry a Catholic woman in a Catholic Church. The person who told me seemed to disapprove, but again I've lost touch so I don't know what the final result was.

I don't suppose we should be surprised. I'm reading "Defending Constantine" and he really had his work cut out trying to stop the bishops from cutting each other's throats over Arianism, formulations of the trinity and un-Christian brawling in general. Athanaseus, who staunchly defended the Trinity as dogma, was exiled five times for his trouble.

Christian bunfights including dating issues? Well, what's new?

 

[jas3]

We’re not going to have an Orthodox meaning of the creed if we’re not Orthodox. If you look at the actual CF Statement of Faith, including the Scripture references at the end of each line and the notes at the end, the point is to include all Christians on the site.

Sure, but all that would be specific to an Orthodox meaning of the Creed would be the particular Church identified with the "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church." There's not debate on what the statements about the Son mean, people just either believe them or they don't. There really isn't debate on what the Nicene Fathers meant by "one baptism for the remission of sins," either, or whether "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church" as they wrote it refers to the particular institution they were a part of, although the widest latitude in ecumenical discussions seems to be given on those two points.

My main point, though, was not about differences in interpretation, but that there are many who claim the title "Protestant" but do explicitly reject the Creed as something that "Satan wrote," or as a "creation of men," often because they reject the clause about baptism or think Constantine corrupted the Church with pagan influences and that the Creed is a product of that corruption, or even just because the Creed isn't part of the Bible.

 

[seeking.IAM]

In the United States about 43% of first marriages end in divorce. Second marriages have even slimmer changes of success, with a 60% divorce rate. Finding the right person is very important, and a little tolerance may be necessary for individual differences that exist along the way. As for me, I would rather marry the right person with religious differences than the wrong person just because we have religious compatibility.

 

[linux.poet]

In the United States about 43% of first marriages end in divorce. Second marriages have even slimmer changes of success, with a 60% divorce rate. Finding the right person is very important, and a little tolerance may be necessary for individual differences that exist along the way.

Among practicing Christians that actually go to church (not just among those who claim to be Christian and are not) the divorce rate is 10%. If you spiritually vet your future spouse for church attendance and knowledge of what their church teaches about marriage, you’re not going to have a problem with divorce.

At every church I go to, we have a large number of older couples congratulated on 30, 40, and 50 years of marriage. At one church I’ve swung through, their marriage counseling department was overbooked and the church was hosting marriage classes trying to reduce the demand, and those classes were well attended. (The hosting pastor encouraged me and my boyfriend to attend, and we went.) People inside the church aren’t trying to end their marriages. They are trying to save them.

 

[The Liturgist]

Too hard.

My church has specific training that all children are encouraged to follow; trying to make that happen without my husband’s support will not work. My understanding is that the RCC is the same way. Eventually you will need to be united about which church you go to and what your children are to believe.


We’re not going to have an Orthodox meaning of the creed if we’re not Orthodox. If you look at the actual CF Statement of Faith, including the Scripture references at the end of each line and the notes at the end, the point is to include all Christians on the site. The Nicene Creed is there to make the Orthodox feel welcome, but it’s clear the Scripture references are there to make Protestants feel welcome, since most doctrinal statements and statements of faith I’ve ever seen have Scripture references everywhere. Someone from my faith background would look at the statements and Scriptures and be like “yup, agreed, that’s a good summary of what I believe” with no knowledge of Arians and Nestorians. I’m reminded of my own fundamentals of the faith class, everything lines up.

My church has taught classes on the ancient creeds though, as my pastor seems interested in exploring these kinds of subjects. I ended up reading the Westminister shorter catechism the other day as part of studying a systematic theology. So maybe judging creedal knowledge by denomination isn’t really as important as I think it is and Protestants just place it on a scholarly level beyond reach of the average churchgoer.

Interestingly the largest Protestant denominational groupings worldwide, the Anglican Communion and the Lutheran churches, tend to use the creed, especially the Anglicans and confessional Lutherans, in all services.

 

[bèlla]

I'm Catholic and my wife is Baptist, but when we met we were both Protestant. I became Catholic later. There was a bit of resistance at first, but she is an associate member of the St Vincent de Paul society and we often do visits together. She rarely attends mass but she attends her own church regularly and I do the same with mine.

I would not do the same and this would definitely cause a rift. Which isn’t a criticism of your decision but a confirmation of the challenges about dating across the lines and why it’s incumbent to acknowledge your position upfront and unwillingness to bend if that’s the case.

When it comes to love the heart often rules the head.

Everyone in my family has been married for forty years or more and only one couple parted ways from the whole and that’s several generations in that number. You don’t last that long consistently with statements like that. The bible says the heart is deceitful for a reason. Oftentimes we must go against our feelings to keep the peace, find solutions, make agreements and so on. I’ve had the opportunity to question several within the fold and the resounding answer for their longevity was belief in God, mutual respect and commitment to the union.

~bella