Reformation

Originally posted by humblejoe
Ok then... why are we all split up like this? I can't stand there being so many different churches. Which one is right? This is really depressing. Who can I trust? Which denomination is true?

Did Luther and the other reformers intend for there to be so many groups? This is really annoying. I will never have enough time to examine every single denomination out there to see who's right and who's wrong. I'm feeling pretty flabbergasted about this. This is really hurting my heart. I just wish it would all go away, that there wouldn't be so much confusion and uncertainty. Again, why is it like this? Why would God let his church be split so many different ways?

Click to expand...

It's definitely difficult to deal with at times.  I would offer that His church is not split.  It is united in Christ.  Though many people have different levels of discernment of God's Word I would say that the important thing is to continue to study His Word and trust that He will sovereignly bring about His plan.

God bless

Before I converted to Catholicism I basically floated around without an "official" church home. I was raised Methodist, tried Southern Baptist, went back to Methodist and then I married a Catholic.

What I discovered before I converted that I had to come to on my own was - why am I church hopping? Why am I unsatisfied with the churchs I had been a part of?

And I also wanted to get back to the original church Christ established. I've seen all the different churches and their different beliefs and I wanted one source that was accurate, that taught the same thing at a church in Chicago, San Diego, Italy, France, etc. You can go to any parish in any part of the world on Sunday and hear the same Mass, the same biblical readings and in some cases the same homily! That is huge in my eyes. Consistency is important to me.

That's just one aspect, but I had to come to that point on my own.  That is what I meant. You have to come to that conclusion on your own, us posting here is not going to encourage anyone, their going to get defensive.

Click to expand...

That is wonderful that you have finally found a church that meets your needs.  My story would run the opposite though.  I was raised Catholic and attended Catholic schools most of my life and even gave serious consideration to becoming a Priest.  Something always kept me back though.  The more I learned about the RCC the more I found things to be wrong within it.  As Martin Luther may have felt, I felt that the RCC had lost its way.  I would go on to attend a non-denominational church and finally find my home.

Originally posted by Reformationist
Right.  And in that sense I do believe the Catholic (not your church) church is God's church.  I just don't think your denomination accurately implements, or interprets, God's Word.  Then again, that makes sense that I feel that way.  I'm not Catholic.

God bless

Click to expand...

My concern is that we have numerous denominations all claiming that they "implement, or interpret, God's Word" properly or they know who does interpret the bible correctly ~ yet none of them agree. I don't believe Jesus wants us to be confused about his message.

The world and universe God created has an order to it, our bodies have an order to them - our hands do no think on their own. So why would Jesus' very important messages and teachings be confused, dis-ordered or divisive? Somewhere there is an organized, concise, orderly process that is governed and protected from messing up the message. Why would he leave something as important our salvation up to chance that someone may or may not get it right?

Addditionally, how can the Catholic Chuch be separated from the Roman Catholic rite, as you allude to in your statement above?

I'm very curious as to what the standard of reformed thought is. Is there a single Confession or similar source that contains the "most true" reformed theology? If so, then which church holds it?

Originally posted by humblejoe
I'm very curious as to what the standard of reformed thought is. Is there a single Confession or similar source that contains the "most true" reformed theology? If so, then which church holds it?

Click to expand...

Not sure I follow your qurstion.

My question was more directed toward Reformationist, I think. I was just wondering if there was a supreme "authority" on Reformed thought, other than the Bible, like the Catholic Church has her Catechism. Which one holds the most truth? Is it the Westminster Confession, or another text?

Dear humblejoe,

While I am not Reformationist, I believe I can answer your question.

For Continental (i.e., Europe minus the British Isles) Reformed, the standard has been the Heidelburg Catechism. This document is highly respected in all Reformed circles, but is particularly the standard for Reformers of Continental roots.

For British and American Reformers, of whom Presbyterians are predominant, the Westminster Confession of Faith is THE standard.

Throw into this the highly respected Canons of Dordt, the Second Helvetic Confession, the Scots Confession, and the Westminster Smaller and Larger Catechisms and you should have a firm foundation for understanding Reformed theology.

Another must, but not one that is openly held as a standard, is John Calvins Institutes of the Christian Religion. This tome is held in similar high regard as a Catholic might view the writings of Augustine or Aquinas, Fathers of the Faith, but also individuals who can err.

Now if you are speaking of the Reformation in general then we must include Lutheran standards as well, and that will lead us to the Book of Concord. This is actually a collection of documents bound together to form a standard for Lutheran doctrine. Some more conservative German Lutherans (or is it Swedish, I can't recall) only hold to Augsburg Confession, a document found within the Book of Concord.

Aside from the documents mentioned above, both Reformed and Lutheran also hold to the Apostles Creed, the Nicene-Constantinoplian Creed, and the Athanasian Creed, albeit their may be some dissent on what the mean when they say it, particularly on clauses touching upon the subject of the Church, and to the definitions of faith of the first six ecumenical councils and the Council of Orange, if memory serves correct. (I may be wrong on the Council of Orange comment) 

I hope this has sufficiently answered your question

I should also add that none of these documents is of the same authority as the Catholic Catechism. Even Teaching Elders (Presbyeterian jargon for pastors) can at their ordination dissent from the Westminster Confession of Faith and still be ordained, although they should have very good reason and the dissention should not concern a doctrine which is considered critical and/or the dissention should be only a minor deviation or a qualification and not a complete rejection of the doctrine under consideration.

I'm not certain, and here you would need to consult with our Catholic friends, but I believe that this kind of dissention would not be acceptable for a would-be priest under ordination consideration.

Ok, I'm not sure how this question will go over, lol ... but, what would Reformed Baptists use as their standard?

Dear humblejoe,

By their very definition, Baptists shouldn't have a standard, at least not a standard such as the Catholic Catechism or even the Westminster Confession of Faith, since each baptist church is theoretically independent, hence the SBC stands for the Southern Baptist Convention and not Church.

However, despite this, there is a document which could be considered to be a standard for Reformed Baptists, the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith.

a lot of catholics leave the church because of the same reasons
but did u know that some of my friends who are much more older than me (adults)left and came back because,there wasn't any meaning in other churches(no offence) same old thing.
no benefits.

i have attented ceratin churches(i dun know what u call it)they just sing for god knows when and they have an alter call,and people will rest in the spirit

but in the catholic church context,it is call the LSS seminar(Life in the Spirit)
where the seminar can go on for days,first is praise and worship then ,it is the "baptism of the H.S."
same thing i see
practically the same like the LSS,no difference
but the mass ,i can say is the only thing that sets the catholic church from the other churches,she offers no other churches would dare to offer,i seen it.

people leave rome but a lot of them came back because they reflected and found out what is important

THE WORD OF GOD IS IMPORTANT but THE BODY AND THE BLOOD OF JESUS IS EQUALLY IMPORTANT

Originally posted by Nilhil Obstat
Why would he leave something as important our salvation up to chance that someone may or may not get it right?

Click to expand...

You see, Nilhil, there is kinda where the reformed thought comes in, at least the position that I enjoy.  You salvation is not granted because you "got it right."  Your salvation is not granted because you were baptized.  Your salvation isn't granted because you did certain things and were accepted into a particular church.  Your salvation is not granted because you said some words or professed some faith in Christ.  Your salvation wasn't granted because God has some crystal ball He can look into and look into the future and see who would accept Him of their own "free will."  Your salvation is given to you solely because it pleased God to do so.  I know, I know.  That kinda takes the focus off what we do to merit our salvation and therefore most Christians don't like to acknowledge that there's a possibility that they were saved before they did anything to earn it.

I'm not saying what you read or watch isn't important.  What goes in definitely affects your faith and how you apply it to your life.  For example, there are plenty of people out there who follow these crackpot "name it and claim it" crew and they go without proper medical care, don't manage their money wisely, live outside their means, etc all because they listen to the tripe spewed out by some of these ridiculous "evangelical ministers."  But, with the exception of Catholics, as far as I know, other Christians all use relatively the same Bible.  As far as what each individual church teaches with regard to salvation I can only believe that God will bring about His Will regardless of mankind's feeble attempts to thwart it.

You see, Nilhil, I don't have to "get it right" because Christ already did.  That's called faith.

Addditionally, how can the Catholic Chuch be separated from the Roman Catholic rite, as you allude to in your statement above?

Click to expand...

Which "Roman Catholic rite" would that be?

God bless

Originally posted by humblejoe
My question was more directed toward Reformationist, I think. I was just wondering if there was a supreme "authority" on Reformed thought, other than the Bible, like the Catholic Church has her Catechism. Which one holds the most truth? Is it the Westminster Confession, or another text?

Click to expand...

I would have to second the opinion of Squalid, at least as far as the standard for the American reformers.  I have not read the entire Westminster Confession but it is, as far as I can tell, the supreme declaration of our faith in God's Word.

God bless

Originally posted by Reformationist
You see, Nilhil, there is kinda where the reformed thought comes in, at least the position that I enjoy. 

Click to expand...

But you've avoided what I am trying to point out....none of the "Reformation" churches share the same beliefs, doctorines, etc. The Reformation missed the goal of reforming the church - it instead introduced the concept of "Sola Scriptora" and removed many, many things that were not supposed to be removed.

The only time "Reformation" churches agree is when they disagree with the Catholic Church.

You salvation is not granted because you "got it right."  (edited)

Click to expand...

I am not saying that, I have never said you had to 'earn' your salvation. My point is there is an order, a structure, a continuity to God's creations, what would make us think that God's church would be without order, without structure, without continuity?

Why would one set of people do the same things for 1500 years and then on the whim on a small minority we suddenly decided to do it 1,000 different ways and yet in the same breath call it a "Unified Body"? How can we be unifed if we are not all on the same page theologically?

there are plenty of people out there who follow these crackpot "name it and claim it" crew and they go without proper medical care, don't manage their money wisely, live outside their means, etc all because they listen to the tripe spewed out by some of these ridiculous "evangelical ministers." 

Click to expand...

But, to me..."Sola Scriptora", "Symbolic Eucharist", "Predestination", etc., are NO different than the "Name it, Claim it" folks? Why? Because all of those items lean NOT on God's abilities, but on Man's abilities.

But, with the exception of Catholics, as far as I know, other Christians all use relatively the same Bible. 

Click to expand...

Reformed Churches use a bible that has been mutilated by Luther. The Catholic Church cannonized the bible, they assembled it, printed it, interpreted it, etc. Yes, God inspired the writers, and the councils that cannonized, assembled, printed and distributed the bible. Would God use HIS church to do that? The one HE established?

You cannot deny the origin and role the Catholic Church played in bringing the bible to you.

 As far as what each individual church teaches with regard to salvation I can only believe that God will bring about His Will regardless of mankind's feeble attempts to thwart it.

Click to expand...

You've checked out every denomination to ensure they meet your criteria? I think you may have skipped over the Catholic Church.

You see, Nilhil, I don't have to "get it right" because Christ already did.  That's called faith.

Click to expand...

I never said Jesus didn't "get it right" - but the tools in which YOU got it right had to come from an organized, concise mechanism that has divine guidance and protection from error. The bible didn't fall out of the sky, the disciples did not encourage self-interpretation of scripture nor the idea that you can do it on your own.

Which "Roman Catholic rite" would that be?

God bless [/B]

Click to expand...

You made the statement that 

"And in that sense I do believe the Catholic (not your church) church is God's church.  I just don't think your denomination accurately implements, or interprets, God's Word."

Click to expand...

The Roman Catholic church IS the Catholic Church, period. It is the "universal" church established by Christ. It didn't not receive its unfortunate distiction of a "denomination" until the "Reformation".

 

 

 

Originally posted by Nilhil Obstat
But you've avoided what I am trying to point out....none of the "Reformation" churches share the same beliefs, doctorines, etc.

Click to expand...

Well, I couldn't honestly tell you with any sense of accuracy which churches are reformatory in their theological position.  Unless, of course, you're just referring to churches that don't share the RCC's views on doctrine.  Though there might be differences in the interpretations of Scripture amongst the Protestant churches I believe that they are far closer to the truth of God's Word than the RCC.

The Reformation missed the goal of reforming the church - it instead introduced the concept of "Sola Scriptora" and removed many, many things that were not supposed to be removed.

Click to expand...

As I do not subscribe to the majority of teachings of your church I would say that the reformation most definitely did happen.  As to "sola scriptora" and the removal of many of the doctrines of your church, I believe that God's Will was done and those things were supposed to be removed. 

The only time "Reformation" churches agree is when they disagree with the Catholic Church.

Click to expand...

I don't see how that should make any difference with regard to whether I should believe that the doctrine preached by your church is unbiblical.  I know that my church does not place any importance on the fact that we disagree with any particular church, to include yours.  Disagreeing with your church is not the basis for any of the beliefs of my church.  We believe what we believe because we believe it to be the true interpretation of God's Word, not because it goes against the teachings of the RCC.

I am not saying that, I have never said you had to 'earn' your salvation.

Click to expand...

Really?  I was under the impression that the method for procuring your salvation, according to the belief of the Catholic doctrine was through baptism.  Am I wrong about that?

My point is there is an order, a structure, a continuity to God's creations, what would make us think that God's church would be without order, without structure, without continuity?

Click to expand...

Nilhil, there is a continuity.  There is structure.  It just isn't dictated by the name of your faith.  Our continuity comes about due to being united in Christ, not because we're Baptist or Catholic or Presbyterian. 

Why would one set of people do the same things for 1500 years and then on the whim on a small minority we suddenly decided to do it 1,000 different ways and yet in the same breath call it a "Unified Body"? How can we be unifed if we are not all on the same page theologically?

Click to expand...

So, what happened was that everybody felt the Catholic church did everything right for 1500 years and then Martin Luther got a wild hair in the wrong place and said, "Hey, I'll start my own church."  I don't think it was quite so simple as you like to paint the picture.  Nor do I agree that it is our being on the same page theologically that unites God's children.  It's not our understanding of His Word that unites us.  It's Him. 

But, to me..."Sola Scriptora", "Symbolic Eucharist", "Predestination", etc., are NO different than the "Name it, Claim it" folks? Why? Because all of those items lean NOT on God's abilities, but on Man's abilities.

Click to expand...

So, relying soley on God's Word, and acknowledging that our salvation had nothing to do with our actions, i.e., predestination, are relying on man's ability?  And the opposite is the Catholic teaching of the traditions of man and our salvation being dependant on our actions is relying on God?  I think you've got that backwards.  Not sure what the difference in symbolic vs. "real presence" eucharist have to do with the other two because, as far as I understand it, not even your church believes that to be a salvitic issue.

Reformed Churches use a bible that has been mutilated by Luther.

Click to expand...

Nice.  Don't hold back.  What are your real feelings about the Protestant reformation?

The Catholic Church cannonized the bible, they assembled it, printed it, interpreted it, etc. Yes, God inspired the writers, and the councils that cannonized, assembled, printed and distributed the bible.

Click to expand...

Riiiiggght.  All God did was inspire.  Your church should be credited with everything else.  Very sovereign view of God you have there.

Would God use HIS church to do that? The one HE established?

Click to expand...

Yes.  I've never said any differently.  Let me say it again, for the cheap seats.  YOUR CHURCH, THE DENOMINATION OF YOUR FAITH, IS NOT THE CHURCH CHRIST ESTABLISHED.

You cannot deny the origin and role the Catholic Church played in bringing the bible to you.

Click to expand...

Oh man.  You guys never cease to amaze me.  The origin of my faith is not the Catholic church, it's God.  Yes, the Catholic church played a very significant part in bringing the Bible into the printed word.  Of course, just for your priests and learned scholars.  The part the Catholic (universal) church played in bringing the Bible to me was exactly the part that God decreed.  It wasn't because the forefathers of the Catholic church were so religious or learned.  It was God who brought that about, not man.  And you say I'm the one who puts so much emphasis man's abilities.  As I said, I think you've got that backwards. 

You've checked out every denomination to ensure they meet your criteria? I think you may have skipped over the Catholic Church.

Click to expand...

No, and no. 

The bible didn't fall out of the sky, the disciples did not encourage self-interpretation of scripture nor the idea that you can do it on your own.

Click to expand...

Oh my. What should I do?  I know.  I'll just credit man with bringing God's Word to me.  I don't think so. 

The Roman Catholic church IS the Catholic Church, period. It is the "universal" church established by Christ.

Click to expand...

Well, that's one opinion.  Oddly enough, it's the opinion of only the Catholic denomination.  I don't know to many non-Catholics who go around saying, "Yup.  The RCC is the church Christ established."

It didn't not receive its unfortunate distiction of a "denomination" until the "Reformation".

Click to expand...

That's because you think the name of your church means something.  As if God's Will is confined to some man made title. 

God bless

Originally posted by s0uljah
Of course, if people were open minded enough to study history objectively, they would agree and would then become Catholic.

Click to expand...

Objective.  Yeah.  That's what Catholics are.  I agree that studying history is one of the most important things that all Christians can do to strengthen their faith.  However, I don't think it would have the same effect on me as it has on you.  You see, I would see the reformation as God's realigning His church to His Word and you'd probably see it as some sin against God.  I don't think there's ever going to be a point where I feel like the answer is to become part of the Catholic denomination.

Please Note: While each member has his own viewpoints on the topic, this discussion has deteriorated into disharmony (Rule 2). Therefore, the thread has been locked until further notice.