Episcopal and Anglican, are protestant?

[The Barbarian]

The quote starts out with those that are baptized, which many communities don't care about: "who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety" When I wrote 'Christians' I was referring to the fact that they are only such as they relate to the Church, as I wrote "who are partially in communion with the Church based on what they share in common with her."

In high school, I took CCD from a very bright priest who was the pastor of the church in my little town. He told me that all christians were catholics, even those outside the Roman Catholic church. Being in error does not mean one is not a Christian. Most of us are in error in some manner or another. The evolution controversy among Christians, even within the Roman Catholic Church demonstrates this fact.

Father Greener once spoke before a group of Protestants and told them "If you're not a Catholic, you won't go to heaven." And then he told them "But by 'Catholic', I don't mean only those in the Roman Catholic Church."

There is no Christianity outside of the Catholic Church in that what exists in those communities is only Christian as it relates to the Church. They don't have their own co-existent contradicting truths.

Yes, but it is Christianity.

Protestants were originally quite defined in what is truth. They had principles and very defined theologies that slowly devolved in endless comprise. For that reason, I understand that discussion between Catholics and protestants is seen as hurtful because Catholics haven't accepted the protestant notion of endless compromise and that led to personal truth. Protestants have agreed to disagree.

For example, the Roman Catholic Church has decreed that the question of a literal history in Genesis is an open question as far as faith is concerned. If you want to take it as a literal history, you are perfectly free to do so; if you want to accept evolution and an allegorical Genesis, that's fine, too. Although various popes have made differing comments on the issue, none of it is doctrine. We, as Roman Catholics, have agreed to disagree.

For most, whatever they believe is based on what the Holy Spirit personally told them.

Hence, Lumen Gentium; the acknowledgement that the Holy Spirit is at work in Protestants as it is in Catholicism.

Everyone has their own truth. For Catholics, there is objective truth that is not hidden.

God is not the author of confusion. Truth is not parcelled out.

Religions, however, that are bound up with an advanced culture have struggled to answer the same questions by means of more refined concepts and a more developed language. Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek freedom from the anguish of our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound meditation or a flight to God with love and trust. Again, Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination. Likewise, other religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing "ways," comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites. The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself.
DECLARATION ON
THE RELATION OF THE CHURCH TO NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS
NOSTRA AETATE
PROCLAIMED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON OCTOBER 28, 1965

(my emphasis)

We are seen as offensive, perhaps even as arrogant for not accepting their mentality.

And perhaps some of us see them as offensive, perhaps even as arrogant, for the same reason. But there are people of good will on both sides of this divide.

I accept that Christ created a Church based on objective truth that was available to everyone. This Church produced the bible, which is objective truth.

This is an important point. The Bible is the product of the Church, since it was compiled by men of the Church, using tradition, prayer, and scholarship to determine the canon of the Bible.

The Church maintains objective truth. It has imperfect people that led others to believe you could find a more perfect truth outside the Church. For the last five centuries, this movement has given up any and all hope of understanding any universal truth.

Such as the literal/figurative nature of Genesis? Or the age of the Earth. St. Augustine thought the world was only a few thousand years old (to be fair, he was debating pagans and others who argued that it was eternal) and St. Basil thought that the days of Genesis were literal 24-hour days.

Loads of Anglicans claim they are both "Catholic" and "Protestant."

In the sense that "catholic" (as in "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church") means "Christian", I suppose they are right. But the word has different meanings for different people.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Actually, what you said is "unique Protestant theology," not "unique Protestant doctrines." I think there is a difference. I submit that our theology summary may be found in the Nicene Creed, which is hardly unique to Anglicans.

CF rules aside, it's not very easy to find Protestants who wholeheartedly endorse every single word of the creed. Thus, the Nicene Creed isn't unique to Anglicans, as you say, but it's not like the Nicene Creed is inclusive of the rest of the Protestant world either.

 

[Paidiske]

CF rules aside, it's not very easy to find Protestants who wholeheartedly endorse every single word of the creed.

I find this an astonishing claim. I must have been much more fortunate than you in my Protestant acquaintances...

 

[thecolorsblend]

I find this an astonishing claim. I must have been much more fortunate than you in my Protestant acquaintances...

Oh? In that case, why not take a minute to cruise one of the evangelical forums here on CF and ask "Without equivocation or elaboration, do you believe in and wholeheartedly endorse 'I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins'? Just say 'yes' or 'no'."

Let me know how it goes.

 

[Paidiske]

But that's American evangelicals. Hardly representative (in fact, in global terms a bit of a strange outlier) even of Protestants.

 

[Knee V]

I find this an astonishing claim. I must have been much more fortunate than you in my Protestant acquaintances...

In my own experience, there are two parts of the Creed that very few Protestants affirm according to the original meaning. 1) "And in one, holy, catholic and apostolic church," and 2) "I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins."

Nearly every Protestant that I have ever encountered rejects at least one of those clauses. And by "reject" I mean that they understand it in a way other than the original meaning, thus rejecting the original meaning, and thus rejecting it.

 

[Knee V]

Although to be sure, I cannot claim to know the people that you know.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Apart from that...

But that's American evangelicals. Hardly representative (in fact, in global terms a bit of a strange outlier) even of Protestants.

You're suggesting that all evangelicals in CF's evangelical forums are Americans? There are no exceptions?

And only American evangelicals reject that part of the creed? Again, no exceptions?

Frankly, I find both of those implicit claims to be not believable.

 

[The Barbarian]

But that's American evangelicals. Hardly representative (in fact, in global terms a bit of a strange outlier) even of Protestants.

It's true. But they are a significant proportion of Protestants in America. And they have proselytized their particular beliefs to some other nations. Still, they are hardly typical of the world's Protestants.

 

[Paidiske]

You're suggesting that all evangelicals in CF's evangelical forums are Americans? There are no exceptions?

And only American evangelicals reject that part of the creed? Again, no exceptions?

Frankly, I find both of those implicit claims to be not believable.

I'm suggesting that CF is dominated by American evangelicals, but that this is not representative of global Christianity (or global Protestantism).

I'm also suggesting that - in terms of global Christianity, or indeed global Protestantism - American evangelicals have a unique and at times rather idiosyncratic take on things.

I would not look to this forum to establish Protestant norms.

 

[thecolorsblend]

I'm suggesting that CF is dominated by American evangelicals, but that this is not representative of global Christianity (or global Protestantism).

Even if that's true (which I doubt, btw), it doesn't somehow change my point.

A good number of Protestants will object to at least the line about baptism in the Nicene Creed.

I'm also suggesting that - in terms of global Christianity, or indeed global Protestantism - American evangelicals have a unique and at times rather idiosyncratic take on things.

As above, that is beside the point.

The point is that no small number of evangelicals will dispute the line about baptism in the Nicene Creed. Period.

I would not look to this forum to establish Protestant norms.

This Appeal To Majority you're attempting is obviously not flying with me.

The point remains that a lot of Protestants will disagree with the Nicene understanding of the efficacy of baptism.

 

[Paidiske]

I didn't say that no Protestants will disagree with any point of the Creed. I expressed astonishment at the apparent difficulty of finding any Protestants who don't.

In my experience, Christians (Protestants and not) largely fall into two camps on this stuff. People who are more educated, who have taken the time to learn about their faith in some depth, done some reading, and who have wrestled with these ideas, and found that when understood correctly, they can affirm the Creed. And people who are perhaps less educated, who when you talk about some of this stuff are thinking about it for the first time, who reject what looks untenable to them at first blush, and who mumble their way through the Creed or wish the liturgy didn't require them to say it.

That the second group are as large as they are is largely a problem with the teaching office of our churches, where there is often gross failure to adequately catechise.

 

[thecolorsblend]

I didn't say that no Protestants will disagree with any point of the Creed. I expressed astonishment at the apparent difficulty of finding any Protestants who don't.

In my experience, Christians (Protestants and not) largely fall into two camps on this stuff. People who are more educated, who have taken the time to learn about their faith in some depth, done some reading, and who have wrestled with these ideas, and found that when understood correctly, they can affirm the Creed. And people who are perhaps less educated, who when you talk about some of this stuff are thinking about it for the first time, who reject what looks untenable to them at first blush, and who mumble their way through the Creed or wish the liturgy didn't require them to say it.

That the second group are as large as they are is largely a problem with the teaching office of our churches, where there is often gross failure to adequately catechise.

Let's go back to the beginning here, shall we? Because the point is getting lost.

Oh? In that case, why not take a minute to cruise one of the evangelical forums here on CF and ask "Without equivocation or elaboration, do you believe in and wholeheartedly endorse 'I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins'? Just say 'yes' or 'no'."

Let me know how it goes.

What I wrote there is objectively true. So rather than getting lost in unnecessary tangents about Americans or numbers of evangelicals or whatever, let's stick with the point.

It would be a pain in the neck to find, for example, significant numbers of evangelical Christians (or any nationality) who will agree with every single word of the Nicene Creed, without hesitation, elaboration or equivocation. This is also objectively true.

That is my point. And it is undeniable.

 

[Paidiske]

It would be a pain in the neck to find, for example, significant numbers of evangelical Christians (or any nationality) who will agree with every single word of the Nicene Creed, without hesitation, elaboration or equivocation. This is also objectively true.

That is my point. And it is undeniable.

I'm still astonished at the claim. I do not think I would find it a pain in the neck to find such Protestants (which is what you originally said, rather than evangelicals) in my context.

 

[thecolorsblend]

in my context

Yes, I suppose if we change the subject enough, frame the issue enough and gloss over the question enough, we can certainly prove “your context” is correct.

 

[Albion]

And then when we note that the Old Catholics - the Union of Utrecht - are in full communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury, can we really say that Anglicans are less catholic than Old Catholics?

Yes, it's true. And, for those who think there is something singularly Roman Catholic about this succession business, Rome also recognizes the validity of the Apostolic Succession of the churches of the Union of Utrecht which, as you noted, are in full communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury.

 

[charsan]

It would be a pain in the neck to find, for example, significant numbers of evangelical Christians (or any nationality) who will agree with every single word of the Nicene Creed, without hesitation, elaboration or equivocation. This is also objectively true.

I remember when I was an evangelical that no one agreed totally with the Nicene Creed, most thought it was to Catholic

 

[Chris V++]

We say the Creed in the traditional Methodist service I attend. My understanding is the Methodists are both protestant,evangelical at the same time sacramental. The liturgy resembles Roman Catholic. In the printed Creed the hymnal has a little asterisk next to the word Catholic with a footnote denoting 'Universal.'

 

[lambofgod43985889]

The Temple was full of images. What God opposes is false images and the worship of such as gods.

all kind of images

 

[lambofgod43985889]

God never said not to create, that you added. There is absolutely nothing wrong with icons, pictures, an statues

i say the truth that i am taught, god dislikes images and idol statues