Receiving the eucharist in non-Anglican contexts

[Paidiske]

Churches of Christ as I have encountered them here, I would describe as being basically Baptists who have communion every week.

Would you call groups who don't do infant baptism "mainline"? (I know I've said it before, but "mainline" really doesn't mean anything in Australia, so I get confused about how Americans understand it).

 

[Albion]

I thought that you were referring to different factions within the Churches of Christ, Shane. That was unexpected since the CsofC congregations hardly differ an inch, one to another.

But if it is the separate church bodies that came out of the non-denominational or restorationist movement...well, yes, that would easily explain the diff. It wouldn't be the Disciples that would take a sterner approach towards visitors communing, but one of the others might.

 

[Arcangl86]

Churches of Christ as I have encountered them here, I would describe as being basically Baptists who have communion every week.

Would you call groups who don't do infant baptism "mainline"? (I know I've said it before, but "mainline" really doesn't mean anything in Australia, so I get confused about how Americans understand it).

Yes. This is a very rough definition, but mainline is used more or less to mean "non-evangelical" theologically they are more moderate or liberal, and usually egalitarian.

 

[Shane R]

I thought that you were referring to different factions within the Churches of Christ, Shane. That was unexpected since the CsofC congregations hardly differ an inch, one to another.

But if it is the separate church bodies that came out of the non-denominational or restorationist movement...well, yes, that would easily explain the diff. It wouldn't be the Disciples that would take a sterner approach towards visitors communing, but one of the others might.

I was speaking of all of the miscellaneous groups to emerge from the Stone-Campbell Restoration movement. At least the main ones. There are outliers like the no Sunday school faction.

 

[Arcangl86]

I was speaking of all of the miscellaneous groups to emerge from the Stone-Campbell Restoration movement.

It actually fascinates me how much diversity is in that movement, then again I have one foot in Lutheranism and the Lutheran tradition in America is probably just as diverse.

 

[Albion]

I was speaking of all of the miscellaneous groups to emerge from the Stone-Campbell Restoration movement.

My apologies, Shane. I had the posts and comments given by everbecoming2007 in my mind, not yours, when I wrote what I did. Now that I've checked back through the posts, I can see where I went wrong.

 

[Shane R]

This is what ol' Shane looked like in those days:


That was a long time ago.

 

[archer75]

It breaks down something like this: Disciples of Christ (basically mainline these days); Christian Churches (instrumental); Churches of Christ (non-instrumental); Churches of Christ non-institutional (the sect I was raised in). Then there is the cultish outlier "International Churches of Christ" sometimes known as the "Boston Movement."

Do all these groups go back to Alexander Campbell in some way?

 

[Shane R]

Do all these groups go back to Alexander Campbell in some way?

Yes. Campbell and Stone were the driving forces of the early movement. Later it was Smith and Scott. Some will claim they date to a Methodist named O'Kelley (1790s) but that is questionable.

 

[Arcangl86]

Do all these groups go back to Alexander Campbell in some way?

Yes. They are all part of the Stone-Campbell movement.