Liberal and Conservative

[dreadnought]

There is an obvious, I think, rift in the Protestant Church. There are conservatives, who apparently believe the entire Bible is the inerrant Word of God. And there are liberals, who seem to believe we are bound to nothing the Bible says. Has anyone ever wondered if there is some middle ground?

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

I'm not protestant, but I think you forgot the nuances. Most people lean one way or the other, but few subscribe to the whole package of either liberalism or conservatism.

 

[dreadnought]

I'm not protestant, but I think you forgot the nuances. Most people lean one way or the other, but few subscribe to the whole package of either liberalism or conservatism.

You are describing a group of people who have have found a middle ground, aren't you?

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

You are describing a group of people who have have found a middle ground, aren't you?

No, I think you have orthodox Christianity and you have heterodox Christianity.
There's are different levels of heterodoxy and few subscribe to all of the heresies, but some do adorse more of them than others.

We (all Christians) should stop using political terms such as conservatism and liberalism and return to the religious terms heterodox and orthodox.

 

[dreadnought]

No, I think you have orthodox Christianity and you have heterodox Christianity.
There's are different levels of heterodoxy and few subscribe to all of the heresies, but some do adorse more of them than others.

We (all Christians) should stop using political terms such as conservatism and liberalism and return to the religious terms heterodox and orthodox.

But what is heterodox to one person might be orthodox to another, don't you think?

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

But what is heterodox to one person might be orthodox to another, don't you think?

Within low churches perhaps, but not in say Lutheranism or in Anglicanism.
The book of common prayer is the foundation of the English church as is the case with Luther's big catechism and the creeds within lutheranism.

This is some of the frame work for those kind of believers. You cannot chose what you like and reject the rest AND still be faithful to your church.

Heterodoxy is decided upon the confession of your church and the dogmatic content within it which is to say it may very well vary among the different churches.
Still most churches recognise and commit to the 7 ecumenical councils and the creeds which in fact is quite a commitment.

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

Before anyone gets offended, remember that I don't have a "dog in this fight"...

 

[dreadnought]

Within low churches perhaps, but not in say Lutheranism or in Anglicanism.
The book of common prayer is the foundation of the English church as is the case with Luther's big catechism and the creeds within lutheranism.

This is some of the frame work for those kind of believers. You cannot chose what you like and reject the rest AND still be faithful to your church.

Heterodoxy is decided upon the confession of your church and the dogmatic content within it which is to say it may very well vary among the different churches.
Still most churches recognise and commit to the 7 ecumenical councils and the creeds which in fact is quite a commitment.

A group of high-ranking church officials can get together and create an edict, or some such thing. Is the church then obliged to obey?

 

[dreadnought]

Before anyone gets offended, remember that I don't have a "dog in this fight"...

I've argued the conservative side of some issues and liberal side of others, during my stay here.

 

[Albion]

There is an obvious, I think, rift in the Protestant Church.

WHICH Protestant church?

There are conservatives, who apparently believe the entire Bible is the inerrant Word of God. And there are liberals, who seem to believe we are bound to nothing the Bible says. Has anyone ever wondered if there is some middle ground?

Many Protestants believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God, but that there are some places in it which have mistranslations or are additions to the original manuscript, making parts--and parts only--of the Bible open to question.

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

A group of high-ranking church officials can get together and create an edict, or some such thing. Is the church then obliged to obey?

You touch upon some of the appearing randomness of lots of protestant theology, at least today.
This so called randomness wasn't as big of a theological problem back when all Christians shared the basic ideas of how to live a moral christian life, but now it's different.

The problem with liberals theology is that is argue from a position of emotions and it make use of people's lives as an argument to undermine Christian ethics and moral.

By emotions I refer to this kind of argument : how can you be so coldhearted as not to accept these two mens love for one another. Why do you hate love?!

The above is an example of arguing from the point of a given persons life. Often times liberals add a tad of absurdum and a tiny bit of personal characteristics and voila you've lost out, but on the wrong premises.

To answer you're question, in Protestantism it's easier to mislead the faithful gravely than its to mislead us Catholic due to our weight on the magesterium, the catechism and counciliar theology. Even in Protestantism one should weight the new doctrines to those of earlier times.

If Luther left no room for homosexual weddings then Lutherans should feel obligated to follow his line of reasoning.

 

[dreadnought]

WHICH Protestant church?

I should have said "Protestantism."

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

It's the moral theology which is under attack in all of Christianity today.

 

[dreadnought]

WHICH Protestant church?



Many Protestants believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God, but that there are some places in it which have mistranslations or are additions to the original manuscript, making parts--and parts only--of the Bible open to question.

That complicates things when you take the position that parts of the Bible are mistranslated or added later. Suddenly, the entire Bible is thrown into question.

 

[Albion]

That complicates things when you take the position that parts of the Bible are mistranslated or added later. Suddenly, the entire Bible is thrown into question.

I know. However, there are plenty of people who do look at it the way I described or something close to that.

 

[dreadnought]

You touch upon some of the appearing randomness of lots of protestant theology, at least today.
This so called randomness wasn't as big of a theological problem back when all Christians shared the basic ideas of how to live a moral christian life, but now it's different.

The problem with liberals theology is that is argue from a position of emotions and it make use of people's lives as an argument to undermine Christian ethics and moral.

By emotions I refer to this kind of argument : how can you be so coldhearted as not to accept these two mens love for one another. Why do you hate love?!

The above is an example of arguing from the point of a given persons life. Often times liberals add a tad of absurdum and a tiny bit of personal characteristics and voila you've lost out, but on the wrong premises.

To answer you're question, in Protestantism it's easier to mislead the faithful gravely than its to mislead us Catholic due to our weight on the magesterium, the catechism and counciliar theology. Even in Protestantism one should weight the new doctrines to those of earlier times.

If Luther left no room for homosexual weddings then Lutherans should feel obligated to follow his line of reasoning.

I think one of the stumbling blocks in Christianity is sexual morality. The Lord taught us to be sexually chaste, and he explains what he means by that. A lot of Christians refuse to conform to these teachings.

 

[dreadnought]

It's the moral theology which is under attack in all of Christianity today.

Yes.

 

[hedrick]

The problem with liberals theology is that is argue from a position of emotions and it make use of people's lives as an argument to undermine Christian ethics and moral.

By emotions I refer to this kind of argument : how can you be so coldhearted as not to accept these two mens love for one another. Why do you hate love?!

That's not actually the argument.

It is true, however, that as people come to know gay couples they tend to be more willing to reconsider traditional ethics. But in the end, real exegesis is needed.

 

[Albion]

To answer you're question, in Protestantism it's easier to mislead the faithful gravely than its to mislead us Catholic due to our weight on the magesterium, the catechism and counciliar theology.

I doubt that. Catholics have been trained to follow unquestioningly.

If the Pope and the bishops are fighting to maintain the historic faith, then things are moving along relatively smoothly. However, all it takes is a decree changing the faith/dogmas...and that willingness to think that the church cannot be wrong brings acceptance of the change by most members. There are many examples of this happening.

That would not happen in most Protestant denominations where a full scale debate would most likely break out.

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

I doubt that. Catholics have been trained to follow unquestioningly.

If the Pope and the bishops are fighting to maintain the historic faith, then things are moving along relatively smoothly. However, all it takes is a decree changing the faith/dogmas...and that willingness to think that the church cannot be wrong brings acceptance of the change by most members. There are many examples of this happening.

That would not happen in most Protestant denominations where a full scale debate would most likely break out.

You may be right. I have written quite alot about the kind of believers that you refer to.
They're refered to as ultra-montanists and they do have an unhealthy "admiration" of the pope. Francis seems to attract these more than anyone before him, but that's due to his heterodoxy more than anything.

I believe it's the ultra-montanists which has triggered the creation of the term papists. Sadly it's applied to all of us.