Mary Meg

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 11, 2019
562
700
23
Alabama
✟31,384.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Hmm. I would say that the Great Schism of 1054 was at least as significant as the Protestant Reformation. No?
Significant, sure. But both the Catholic and Orthodox churches still agree in a lot of things, in the attributes of the Church, in church hierarchy, in the idea of the sacraments. They are really close -- just a few sticking points.

What I mean by "the scale of what has happened in the Protestant world" is that churches split off and keep splitting. There were how many different Protestant traditions by the time Luther died? There are how many distinct traditions today? And most of these can't even sit down to agree on anything but the very basics.
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,243
✟48,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Isn't "Romish" a pretty bad word? Pretty pejorative? :confused2:

If they wanted to purge the church of corruptions, okay. Why didn't they try to do that in communion with the Catholic Church?

Many tried and failed. Rome refused to properly reform herself. Schism became the only faithful option, sadly.

Knowing even just a little about the Early Church and about Calvin -- I find that pretty laughable. Didn't Calvin deny the authority of bishops, and propose a whole different form of church governance? I'm unclear who exactly did what, but obviously Presbyterian and Refomed churches don't have bishops. And yet the one, single attribute that Ignatius of Antioch defined for being the "Catholic Church," at the very beginning of the second century, is being in communion with your local bishop (who is in communion with all the other bishops).

If Calvin believes he can deny that and still "match the early church much better" -- then I think he's smoking something.

This might be true if the only relevant issue were presbyterian polity versus episcopal polity. Many Calvinists (including Calvin) are not totally opposed to an episcopal system. They just believe that presbyterianism is what is taught in the NT and works out better in a fallen world. Bishops are great when you have godly bishops. But they are terrible when they are ungodly.

Sure, the Church always needs to be reforming. But one major thing the Reformation accomplished is expressly at odds with the will of Jesus, and that's the disintegration of all Christian unity.

This is only true if you come in with an assumption of what Christian unity must look like. I seriously doubt that Christian unity must look like what Rome thinks it must look like. I don't believe that denominationalism is opposed to Christian unity. Denominationalism is a good way to express diversity and freedom of worship while at the same time being broadly unified with other Christians.
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
I do know the difference, and I think sanctification is at least part of the point (cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:23, Ephesians 5:26, 1 Corinthians 6:11, etc.).



It's not really a scale. Some people are just outstanding examples of His grace.



Yes, it's God who is at work in them.



Yes I do realize that, and I don't use it. Usually when I talk about the "Catholic" Church, I'm talking about the whole, universal, undivided Church of Jesus Christ... especially the one before the Orthodox split off in 1054, but sometimes the Church in the West too.



Yes... though the Church was called Catholic ("the Universal Church") from a very early time... "universal" as attribute, not to distinguish it from some other Church.



Regardless of what they said they wanted, they actually started another church. And not just one of them.



Yes, it's true that there was a lot of arrogance and rigidity all around. And it's true that where there's arrogance and rigidity, people are bound to do the sinful thing. But I don't think that's necessarily inevitable.



Yes, absolutely.



Yeah, it's not clear to me who it said and when, but it seems to me that must have been the justification for starting a new church, in the end. I don't see how anyone can justify burning bridges and moving on unless they believe that what's behind them is really lost. Unless it's all really cold and calculating and frankly, atheistic.


You should really check out David Wagschall's blog, Under the Sun. Because the line of logic you are taking with Resha needs a completely different perspective.

Three Pillars of the Old Order: Part One - Scripture as Divine Revelation

Both Dr. Wagschall and I have been in the Orthodox world, we've seen what it's about. Dr. Wagschall in particular was a professor at St. Vladimir's Seminary. He's very familiar with patristics. But in the end, he doesn't agree with the approach, and he returned to his childhood Lutheran faith.
 
Upvote 0

Mary Meg

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 11, 2019
562
700
23
Alabama
✟31,384.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
My profile in each of my posts says I am non denominational. This means I don’t go by popular denominational names and not a ould I be categorized with them.

I believe in:

1. The Trinity.
2. Sola Scriptura (Bible alone as our only spiritual authority).
3. Faith in God’s grace + Works of Faith = Salvation.

I don’t agree with Catholicism, Orthodox churches, and or Charismatic churches.

I was asking you to consider a more narrow way of Christianity where you just follow Jesus and the Bible alone with out a specific church organization. For not many can be seen today (like the early church) who did follow Jesus. It is because we are living in the last days (please read 2 Timothy 3:1-9).

I thank you for your kind messages. There is a lot I think we don't agree on, but you are very polite and respectful and helpful and I appreciate that a lot. I think it is wrong for the other person to throw around accusations like "heresy." You definitely follow the same Lord we do.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Significant, sure. But both the Catholic and Orthodox churches still agree in a lot of things, in the attributes of the Church, in church hierarchy, in the idea of the sacraments. They are really close -- just a few sticking points.
I disagree, but no matter. It is still a schism--the biggest single one in all church history--so if schism is the issue....

What I mean by "the scale of what has happened in the Protestant world" is that churches split off and keep splitting.

All of a sudden, it looks like schism is NOT the tell-tale issue here after all.

What you say about continued splits has also been a development in both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox history in the years following the schism that split the two of them in 1054.
 
Upvote 0

Mary Meg

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 11, 2019
562
700
23
Alabama
✟31,384.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
All of a sudden, it looks like schism is NOT the tell-tale issue here after all.

"Splitting and continuing to split" isn't schism?

What you say about continued splits has also been a development in both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox history in the years following the schism that split the two of them in 1054.

I only know of a few other churches that have split from the Catholic or Orthodox communions since 1054. "Old Catholic," for example. If there's something I'm missing, please let me know.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
"Splitting and continuing to split" isn't schism?[/quote
Lets say that it is. My point was that the churches you exempt from your criticisms have nearly the exact same history of splitting as the Protestant churches and should, therefore, not be immune from your standards.

[quote
I only know of a few other churches that have split from the Catholic or Orthodox communions since 1054. "Old Catholic," for example. If there's something I'm missing, please let me know.
Then that is probably the problem.
I could name about a dozen just off the top of my head. Lets see. There were the Cathars, Waldensians, the followers of all the Medieval anti-popes, a variety of Protestant churches, the Old Catholics, Liberal Catholics, Polish National Catholic Church, Philippine Independent Church, Society of Pius X, Society of Pius V, and the Patriotic Catholic Church in China.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Athanasius377
Upvote 0

Mary Meg

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 11, 2019
562
700
23
Alabama
✟31,384.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Then that is probably the problem.
I could name about a dozen just off the top of my head. Lets see. There were the Cathars, Waldensians, the followers of all the Medieval anti-popes, a variety of Protestant churches, the Old Catholics, Liberal Catholics, Polish National Catholic Church, Philippine Independent Church, Society of Pius X, Society of Pius V, and the Patriotic Catholic Church in China.
I'll have to research these. But it doesn't look on the surface that these are all the same sorts of things.

Anyway -- a schismatic group splitting from a larger group is bad. But when the larger group remains largely coherent, that's something different. This applies to Catholic and Orthodox and Anglican at least to a certain extent. I don't know about Lutheran. How do Lutherans view all the national churches, and all the denominations? Many of them are crazy-out-the-ears liberal, aren't they? Do conservative Lutherans still consider themselves "in communion" with them?
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,341
26,785
Pacific Northwest
✟728,115.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
He is not talking in the past tense but the present tense. He telling to do something. He is telling you to sin. Not just to sin but to do it boldly. The Bible does not teach this.

"Let your sins be strong" is not "Continue to sin", it is, "Own up to your sins, don't pretend like they aren't there". It's about being honest with oneself. I am a sinner. You know what St. Paul said? He said he was the foremost sinner. Not past tense, but present tense.

1 Timothy 1:15
Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς ἦλθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἁμαρτωλοὺς σῶσαι ὧν πρῶτός εἰμι ἐγώ
"Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of which I am foremost."

That phrase eimi ego, "I am", not "I was", but "I am". Paul is arguing that he is, in his eyes, in his present tense, the foremost sinner.

We are sinners.

Therefore boldly confess that you are a sinner, but be even bolder in your faith in Christ who saves you from your sin and the condemnation of your sin.

The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews writes, "Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need."

St. John says if we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us, and we call God a liar; but if we are faithful to confess our sin, God is faithful to forgive us all our sin.

So pray hard.
Confess boldly.
Know that you are a sinner.
Don't pretend you aren't, don't pretend you're something else.

You are a sinner, and you need Jesus Christ. His Gospel is the power of God to save all who believe, "for by it the justice of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, 'The just shall walk by faith.'"

Don't hide behind that "which has the appearance of religion, but lacks the power thereof", cling to Jesus Christ and to His cross, for there and there alone is salvation. There and no where else. Cleave to Jesus Christ, the Author and Finisher of your faith.

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Athanasius377
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Hi. I grew up in a small Southern Baptist church that my something-great-great-grandparents helped found. It's not really a great place for dynamic preaching or worship -- it's just my family and a few other families, sharing the love and Gospel of Christ. I love it for that, and in some way, it will always be home...

But as I've gotten older and learned things (maybe too much for my own good), I've started to have doubts and questions about a lot of things. I studied a lot of Christian history in school and Bible and theology and classical languages, and through all of that I've grown to feel a lot closer to the Early Church...... and honestly I've started to feel like it doesn't look all that much like my church today. :confused2:

I know the Protestant narrative very well... that the Catholic Church was corrupt, had fallen away from the truth of the Gospel of Christ, and needed Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation to come and bring us back to the true Gospel. And I've mostly been happy with my church and my upbringing and everything, just now I am wondering...

So I'm not sure I even know how to ask the questions I'm asking... How do I approach these things? Are there answers, and how can I find them? Where do I go from here? Or do I stay put?

Good and great Christians -- So I've come to admire a lot of great people from the history of Christianity -- saints. That means they were holy people who are surely now enjoying God's glory in eternity. But my Protestant background tells me that no one is holy... But surely people go to heaven, right? Surely people can grow in sanctity and become more Christlike... I've seen that with my own eyes, and isn't that the point?

But if I admire Christians from the first dozen Christian centuries -- it turns out I'm admiring people who believed very differently than me, who believed in things like baptismal regeneration, the perpetual virginity of Mary, that the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus... Does that mean they were less than Christian, for believing something beyond what's revealed in the Bible? Should I even admire them? As much as I admire them, I'm afraid these people would have told me I'm not a Christian since I don't believe those things. :anguished:

My Protestant background tells me that the Catholic Church went off the rails at some point in history. When? If I accept that these great saints -- it is what I want to call them -- were true believers, despite believing different things than me, then don't I also have to accept that the faith they had was true? And that the Church that was teaching them was teaching the true faith? At the very least, that it wasn't as wholly corrupt at that time as the Protestant Reformation would have me believe it became -- to the point that breaking from it and starting over was warranted? That it must have gone off the rails sometime later? The problem is, the more people I admire, and the closer they get to 1517, the more I start to wonder if anything really could have gone off the rails very far...

(Don't even mention that I might admire Catholic saints after 1517... :fearscream:)

This is getting long and I haven't even gotten to half the things in my head... but I'll have to put a period here and maybe post again sometime.
Subscribing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mary Meg
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,341
26,785
Pacific Northwest
✟728,115.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Many of them are crazy-out-the-ears liberal, aren't they?

Not so much. Lutherans, like all other Christians, can be found across the political spectrum with various political beliefs and opinions on social issues. While it is popular to say things like the ELCA is "liberal" whereas the LCMS and WELS are "conservative", such broad generalizations ignore the fact that worshiping people are here in the trenches of the world. You can find plenty of conservative members of the ELCA, just as you'll find liberal members of the LCMS.

At least in the ELCA the attempt is to avoid forcing particular social views upon constituent congregations and their members, there isn't anyone at the top telling us what to think about politics and social issues, and as such individual Lutherans in the ELCA have to think for ourselves and live with our own conscience. When it comes to certain issues, discretion is left up to congregations to make their own determinations.

Here's why: Being Lutheran isn't about following cultural and political trends, it's about confessing what we've always confessed. Lutheranism isn't American Evangelicalism, and it shouldn't be. Lutheranism is Lutheranism. When conscience is violated to serve a political agenda, we have a problem. That goes both ways, both for liberalism and conservatism.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
@Mary Meg:

While I am not discounting gifted teachers, in fact I have read what felt like a hundred Christian articles on certain topics involving the Bible and watched many sermons online (and they can be very helpful), but the apostle John said to those believers in his 1st epistle:

“But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.” (1 John 2:27).

Notice, John says to certain believers that they did not need any man to teach them because they had the anointing of the Spirit.

Paul said,

“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15).

We are also to study to show ourselves approved unto God, and it is not a teacher alone who is to spoon feed us the Word.

The Bereans were more noble because when they heard the spoken Word of God, they confirmed it was true with the written Word of God (Note: For them it would have been the OT Scriptures).

“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts of the Apostles 17:11).

In other words, they were not relying blindly on what another said but they searched the Scriptures to see if it was so or not.
 
Upvote 0

Concord1968

LCMS Lutheran
Sep 29, 2018
790
437
Pacific Northwest
✟23,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Not so much. Lutherans, like all other Christians, can be found across the political spectrum with various political beliefs and opinions on social issues. While it is popular to say things like the ELCA is "liberal" whereas the LCMS and WELS are "conservative", such broad generalizations ignore the fact that worshiping people are here in the trenches of the world. You can find plenty of conservative members of the ELCA, just as you'll find liberal members of the LCMS.

At least in the ELCA the attempt is to avoid forcing particular social views upon constituent congregations and their members, there isn't anyone at the top telling us what to think about politics and social issues, and as such individual Lutherans in the ELCA have to think for ourselves and live with our own conscience. When it comes to certain issues, discretion is left up to congregations to make their own determinations.

Here's why: Being Lutheran isn't about following cultural and political trends, it's about confessing what we've always confessed. Lutheranism isn't American Evangelicalism, and it shouldn't be. Lutheranism is Lutheranism. When conscience is violated to serve a political agenda, we have a problem. That goes both ways, both for liberalism and conservatism.

-CryptoLutheran
In fairness, I don't think she's using the term "liberal" in it's political sense, but rather in it's theological sense Liberal Christianity - Wikipedia
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Mary Meg
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,341
26,785
Pacific Northwest
✟728,115.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
In fairness, I don't think she's using the term "liberal" in it's political sense, but rather in it's theological sense Liberal Christianity - Wikipedia

In which case, at least in my experience, I've yet to meet many--if any--Liberals in the sense of the old German Liberal school of thought from any Lutheran synod. I'd largely argue that oldschool German Liberalism is effectively dead, it's been dead in the water for a while now. It, like much of the Enlightenment, died in the shadows of the horrors of Auschwitz and Dachau.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Concord1968

LCMS Lutheran
Sep 29, 2018
790
437
Pacific Northwest
✟23,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
In which case, at least in my experience, I've yet to meet many--if any--Liberals in the sense of the old German Liberal school of thought from any Lutheran synod. I'd largely argue that oldschool German Liberalism is effectively dead, it's been dead in the water for a while now. It, like much of the Enlightenment, died in the shadows of the horrors of Auschwitz and Dachau.

-CryptoLutheran
Theological liberalism is a bit broader than that......
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Mary Meg
Upvote 0

Not David

I'm back!
Apr 6, 2018
7,356
5,235
25
USA
✟231,310.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
It's not the gates of hell assailing the church - it's actually the other way around.

And the verse in 1 Timothy 3:15 makes no sense if you consider God to be an eternal entity. The church is not an eternal entity. So in order for something to be the pillar and foundation of truth - that has to be a reference to God Himself.
That's not what the verse says
 
Upvote 0

Athanasius377

Out of the deep I called unto thee O Lord
Supporter
Apr 22, 2017
1,370
1,515
Cincinnati
✟702,387.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I'll have to research these. But it doesn't look on the surface that these are all the same sorts of things.

Anyway -- a schismatic group splitting from a larger group is bad. But when the larger group remains largely coherent, that's something different. This applies to Catholic and Orthodox and Anglican at least to a certain extent. I don't know about Lutheran. How do Lutherans view all the national churches, and all the denominations? Many of them are crazy-out-the-ears liberal, aren't they? Do conservative Lutherans still consider themselves "in communion" with them?
I can't speak for all Lutherans but I am Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. We are not in communion with these national church bodies. We believe these church bodies are in error and have strayed from the teachings of Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions. So when you hear about the Lutheran World Federation know that group does not represent more conservative Lutheran church bodies.

As far as the issue of schism I think it comes down to being honest. When I was in the Roman church I often heard homilies from priests that attacked both scripture and RCC teaching. And I was in what was thought to be a "conservative" diocese. It was obvious there were those that opposed church teaching and were looking for ways to subvert said teaching from within. My thought is these folks need to be honest and realize they have already committed schism in their hearts by trying to subvert church teaching. It is a lie to say that you are a member of a communion when you do not believe what your communion teaches. To be clear I am talking about the essentials of the faith like Resurrection, the Virgin Birth, the Deity of Christ, the sufficiency and inerrancy of Scriptures and the forbidding of praise bands and so on. (ok, I made up the last one). I am not talking about adiaphora. As bad as schism is in my opinion it is better to be honest and separated due to theological reasons than united in institutional unity and ignore the theological differences.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TuxAme

Quis ut Deus?
Supporter
Dec 16, 2017
2,422
3,264
Ohio
✟169,197.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
It seems to me that God is calling you into more perfect communion with Him. Keep up with your study- the first Christians are our example to follow, not a hurdle that we must make every effort to avoid. Don't let anyone try to convince you otherwise.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: zippy2006
Upvote 0