What in theology prevent Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox from being simply "Christians"?

[BobRyan]

If you want to discuss why Catholics and Orthodox do not keep the Sabbath as the Jews do, there are a lot of resources out there that can explain it a lot better than I can, so I'm not going to try. However, here is what our Catechism says about why we worship on Sundays instead of Saturdays as the Jews do:

I would note the objection that the concept of the "eighth day" is indeed extra-Biblical, but we hold that this simply does not matter. This is one of the traditions handed down to us. I predict that we could argue until we're blue in the face about this, but the simple fact that you do not accept Holy Tradition as valid authority means that we are never going to agree on this.

No doubt that we have some differences on that subject - but there is a specific reason why I include the Catholic Church in my signature line.

This line:
=========================
I am glad these Sunday sources all affirm all Ten of the Ten Commandments for Christians.

The Baptist Confession of Faith,
the Westminster Confession of Faith ,
D.L. Moody,
R.C Sproul,
Matthew Henry,
Thomas Watson
Eastern Orthodox Catechism
The Catholic Catechism.
=========================

The Catholic Church Catechism affirms the point that all ten of the Commandments are included in the moral law of God written on the heart under the New Covenant, as did Pope John Paul II in Dies Domini.

How that gets altered in some way over time through tradition is a point of discussion where we probably differ - but the underlying point of all ten still being applicable and included in the moral law of God - is a point of agreement.

 

[SeraphimSarov]

How that gets altered in some way over time through tradition is a point of discussion where we probably differ - but the underlying point of all ten still being applicable and included in the moral law of God - is a point of agreement.

I'm honestly not familiar with why there are different "versions" of the Ten Commandments. I'll have to check my Douay-Rheims and see how the Decalogue appears in it. I would say that's the version that's closest to the Latin Vulgate, so I'd be curious. I'll have to do some research, though -- I was Orthodox for many years, and I don't think this "issue" exists in the East. ETA: don't quote me on that though. I'm very much a "lay" theologian and can't come close to even calling myself knowledgable.

 

[SeraphimSarov]

Oh duh. We use the Decalogue from Deuteronomy. Protestants in general use that from Exodus. Hmmm. Never knew that.

 

[hedrick]

I'm honestly not familiar with why there are different "versions" of the Ten Commandments. I'll have to check my Douay-Rheims and see how the Decalog appears in it. I would say that's the version that's closest to the Latin Vulgate, so I'd be curious. I'll have to do some research, though -- I was Orthodox for many years, and I don't think this "issue" exists in the East. ETA: don't quote me on that though. I'm very much a "lay" theologian and can't come close to even calling myself knowledgable.

This Wikipedia gives 8 different numbering schemes. Ten Commandments - Wikipedia

 

[BobRyan]

I'm honestly not familiar with why there are different "versions" of the Ten Commandments. I'll have to check my Douay-Rheims and see how the Decalogue appears in it.

I think it will read the same.

The question where differences come in is whether to suppose that no matter what the text says - there is a command that is modified/edited/downsized/altered via tradition - not a change to the text itself.

 

[hedrick]

I think it will read the same.

The question where differences come in is whether to suppose that no matter what the text says - there is a command that is modified/edited/downsized/altered via tradition - not a change to the text itself.

The difference is just in numbering. It’s the same commandments.

 

[BobRyan]

Oh duh. We use the Decalogue from Deuteronomy. Protestants in general use that from Exodus. Hmmm. Never knew that.

No Protestants use both. Exodus 20 is at Sinai and is written on stone at that point... Deut 5 is 40 years later and is recap. There is nothing in Protestant doctrine that says only one of them is valid or that one of them should be ignored.

 

[BobRyan]

The difference is just in numbering. It’s the same commandments.

The numbering of the commandments is not in the text. I am claiming that the text for the commandments in both Protestant Bibles and in Catholic ones is pretty much the same.

 

[The Liturgist]

The Liturgist,
re: "I follow His commandments when I ... baptize infants..."

I'm not familiar with that command. What do you have in mind?

Matthew 16:18 - Empowers ministers to remit sin, which baptism accomplishes (when one is first baptized, one is born again and all prior sin is washed away).
Matthew 19:14 - Demands ministers allow children to come to the Lord.
Matthew 28:19 - The Great Commission, to baptize all nations in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

A careful reading of scripture will confirm the positions of the traditional liturgical churches concerning baptism. And indeed, a knowledge of church history will show that the chronology presented by the Landmark Baptists is in error, and Believers’ Baptism started in Germany during the Radical Reformation in the mid to late 16th century.

That said, while I disagree with Baptists on the subject of the baptism of infants, I do agree with their approach of triple immersion, which is the way the ancient church performed the sacrament, and which still prevails in the East. And the SBC is an excellent denomination; at times I feel like the SBC and the Roman Catholics are like two pillars propping up the Pro-Life Movement; the SBC’s work in this area has been absolutely vital.

I myself am a Congregationalist who used to be part of a congregational denomination which is sickeningly pro-choice, under the delusion I could change it from within (as we did have a group of 75 traditional parishes which was trying to do that).

 

[The Liturgist]

And I should point out that "tradition" is more properly called "apostolic tradition." We keep the traditions handed down to us from the Apostles themselves. In fact, the Liturgy of St. James is still served to this day, so we know how ancient Christians worshiped.

The Greek Orthodox Church of Alexandria and the Coptic Orthodox Church use recensions of an ancient liturgy, called the Divine Liturgy of St. Mark by the former and the Divine Liturgy of St. Cyril by the latter. This liturgy is probably older than that of St. James based on the documentary evidence of the Strasbourg Papyrus. Interestingly there is also a theory that the Divine Liturgy of St. James is a derivative of the Divine Liturgy of St. Basil (the statement attributed to Evagrius that the liturgy of St. Basil is a shortened version of St. James and that of St. John Chrysostom is a shortened version of St. Basil has been proven to be a forgery, and also it is incompatible with the facts, for example, the Anaphora of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is clearly based on the much older Anaphora of the Divine Liturgy of the Twelve Apostles, which is believed to have been the ancient liturgy of Antioch, just as St. James was the ancient liturgy of Jerusalem, St. Basil and later, St. John Chrysostom, of Constantinople, St. Mark, the liturgy of Alexandria, and of course, the Roman Rite mass the ancient liturgy of Rome, and the Ambrosian mass the ancient liturgy of Milan, named for St. Ambrose, and the Divine Liturgy of Sts. Addai and Mari, the ancient liturgy of Seleucia-Cstesiphon (this liturgy, along with that of St. Mark, and the Liturgy of the Apostolic Tradition of St. Hippolytus*, is one of the three oldest liturgies attested to.

*Many Roman Catholics, Episcopalians and other Protestants legitimately complain about how the Liturgy of Hippolytus has been thrust upon them since 1969, displacing the Roman Canon, the traditional Anglican communion prayer, and variations thereof, primarily because it is shorter. This liturgy, though recorded in Latin, also exists in Ge’ez, and is of Antiochene form; it is known the liturgists who organized the services of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church after that country became the fourth** to convert to Christianity were Syrians, and the only place where the Anaphora of Hippolytus has been in continual use is Ethiopia, where it is known as the Anaphora of the Apostles.

** You doubtless know this, but for the benefit of other readers, the first five governments to embrace Christianity as their state religion were Edessa in 304 AD, Armenia in 306-310 AD, the Roman Empire in 314 AD, and Ethiopia and Georgia in the following decades. Georgia was evangelized by an Armenian noblewoman, St. Nino.

 

[The Liturgist]

First, I'd like to apologize for the tone I've taken with you in this thread. Sometimes I let charity take a back seat to the zealousness I have for my Faith. I will try to be less harsh. That said...

There is a lot to unpack here, and I admit I am not an expert in the questions you've raised. I'll do the best I can. The main thing I'll point out is that, again, we do not hold Scripture to be the only source of authority. I understand this is difficult for many Protestants who hold to Sola Scriptura doctrine, but the traditional Churches and more modern churches are always going to talk right past each other because of this point. We simply do not hold that something has to be in the Bible for it to be true. Take, for example, dogmas about the Trinity -- if I'm not mistaken, the word "Trinity" does not show up in ecclesial writings until the second or third century after Christ's ascension. Does that make it any less true? Well, some Protestants have taken Sola Scriptura far enough that they indeed deny that God is three in one and one in three! (I honestly do not know what SDAs believe, so you'll have to enlighten me.)

If you want to discuss why Catholics and Orthodox do not keep the Sabbath as the Jews do, there are a lot of resources out there that can explain it a lot better than I can, so I'm not going to try. However, here is what our Catechism says about why we worship on Sundays instead of Saturdays as the Jews do:



I would note the objection that the concept of the "eighth day" is indeed extra-Biblical, but we hold that this simply does not matter. This is one of the traditions handed down to us. I predict that we could argue until we're blue in the face about this, but the simple fact that you do not accept Holy Tradition as valid authority means that we are never going to agree on this. A more fruitful discussion would be why Holy Tradition is indeed authoritative. I'm sure this topic has been discussed to death, but why not do it again? That's what this forum is here for, after all.

Also on this point, I think a case could be made that the Orthodox and other liturgical churches do observe the Sabbath in the manner most fitting Christians, because we commemorate the Great Sabbath in which Jesus Christ our Lord and God rested in a tomb. This event was prophesied in Genesis, and the observance of Holy Saturday or Easter Even as the traditional day for the baptism of catechumens and the solemn reading of the Old Testament prophecies of the Passion and Resurrection of our Lord, and on Mount Athos and in the Coptic Church, the reading of the Apocalypse, in my opinion is the correct way for Christians to keep Saturday holy.

 

[dzheremi]

This liturgy, though recorded in Latin, also exists in Ge’ez, and is of Antiochene form; it is known the liturgists who organized the services of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church after that country became the fourth** to convert to Christianity were Syrians, and the only place where the Anaphora of Hippolytus has been in continual use is Ethiopia, where it is known as the Anaphora of the Apostles.

Wait...does this mean that the Syriac Orthodox Anaphora of the Twelve Apostles is the same as the Latin liturgy of St. Hippolytus? Because I had assumed that the Ethiopians got their Anaphora of the Apostles from the Syrians (I'd have to double check to be sure, but I'm fairly certain it says something like that in Fr. Marcus Daoud's book on the Ethiopian liturgies from c. 1950s), but this is the first that I'm hearing that it's the same as the Latin liturgy. That's very interesting, if so.

 

[The Liturgist]

The pope is currently working on a National Sunday law of rest, why not Saturday since that is God's true Holy day?

This is actually not true; I’ve wasted many an hour looking for evidence of Pope Francis drafting the Blue Law to End All Blue Laws, and can’t find it.

Rather, the people plotting to change the days of worships are the political Islamists. In every Muslim land, Friday is the holy day. In Israel, the weekend consists of Friday and Saturday, which is unfortunate for non-Sabbatarian Christians who reside there permanently. As demographics shift in Europe, if a European country becomes a Muslim-majority land (like much of Spain used to be), it seems probable that a change in the weekend from Saturday and Sunday to Thursday and Friday will likely follow.

 

[The Liturgist]

Wait...does this mean that the Syriac Orthodox Anaphora of the Twelve Apostles is the same as the Latin liturgy of St. Hippolytus?.

No, the two just have similiar names. The Anaphora of the Apostles is based on Hippolytus, whereas the (much longer) Anaphora of the Twelve Apostles is the obvious source text on which St. Chrysostom based his Anaphora.

There are several cases of anaphoras in the Syriac Orthodox Church having the same name, however. Among the 86 extant anaphoras, I believe there are at least three Anaphoras of St. John, but only one exists in English.

Likewise the Maronites, who inherited many Anaphoras from the Syriac Orthodox, have an Anaphora of St. Peter, and an Anaphora of St. Peter (Sharar), the latter being exceptionally interesting as it follows the East Syriac format (like the Liturgy of Sts. Addai and Mari)*.

*Fun fact: some Church of the East documents refer to the Liturgy of Sts. Addai and Mari as “The Liturgy of the Holy Apostles”, sometimes adding “Addai and Mari” and sometimes not.

 

[dzheremi]

No, the two just have similiar names.

Ah, I see.

The Anaphora of the Apostles is based on Hippolytus, whereas the (much longer) Anaphora of the Twelve Apostles is the obvious source text on which St. Chrysostom based his Anaphora.

Makes sense. Didn't St. John serve as priest in Antioch before becoming archbishop of Constantinople?

Likewise the Maronites, who inherited many Anaphoras from the Syriac Orthodox, have an Anaphora of St. Peter, and an Anaphora of St. Peter (Sharar), the latter being exceptionally interesting as it follows the East Syriac format (like the Liturgy of Sts. Addai and Mari)*.

It's been a long time since I corresponded with any Maronites, but I used to have an older Maronite friend with whom I sometimes corresponded about Church history and liturgical topics, and he once said (probably in response to my incessant needling him about why he wouldn't just become Syriac Orthodox, since he often lamented the state of the Maronite Church, and particularly in ways that made him seem 'envious' of how the Syriac Orthodox had preserved their liturgical patrimony better, i.e., "our liturgies USED to be intoned like Mor Behnam Jajjawi's, but not since ____" -- the Jesuits, or the civil war, or whatever) that one of the things that in his estimation separated the Maronites from the Syriac Orthodox is that the Maronites have a considerably stronger Edessan influence in some of their liturgy, by which he meant East Syrian. I can only assume that he had things like this in mind, though he didn't explain it further. Hmm.

Fun fact: some Church of the East documents refer to the Liturgy of Sts. Addai and Mari as “The Liturgy of the Holy Apostles”, sometimes adding “Addai and Mari” and sometimes not.

Well this only makes sense, right? They were the apostles to the East Syrians. We don't do the same with the liturgy of St. Cyril/Coptic Mark, but it is common to call him "our apostle" in various contexts, since he is. Apparently, Fr. Shenouda Maher (a man who is greatly respected in matters of liturgy and Coptic history, as well as being an amazing priest) while still a deacon wrote a new Psali to St. Mark for the 1900th anniversary of his martyrdom that refers to him as "our apostle", though I don't know how widespread it is. I kinda hope it is, since the one example I've heard of his new Coptic hymns ("Rashi ensaw niwen") is really cool. A new Coptic hymn ~700 years after the 'death' of the language outside of the Church!

 

[SabbathBlessings]

The numbering of the commandments is not in the text. I am claiming that the text for the commandments in both Protestant Bibles and in Catholic ones is pretty much the same.

Actually the Catholic commandments removed completely the 2nd commandment, which is why the 4th commandment is the 3rd in the Catholic version. They tinkered with the 4th commandment wording and to make up with the missing second commandment they broke up the 10th commandant into two commandments.

There is scripture warning us of these type of changes:
Daniel 7:25 25He will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. The holy people will be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-10 3Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God. 5Don't you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? 6And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. 8And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the LORD Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming. 9The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, 10and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

 

[BobRyan]

Actually the Catholic commandments removed completely the 2nd commandment, which is why the 4th commandment is the 3rd in the Catholic version. They tinkered with the 4th commandment wording and to make up with the missing second commandment they broke up the 10th commandant into two commandments.

Sometimes you hear that - but they did not actually change the text - so in their DUAY Bible translation it reads pretty much the same as ours. But in the Catechism they provide a shortened summarized statement for each commandment and they group them differently and since it is not a verbatim quote of scripture in the Catechism - the combination of regroup and then summary-paraphrase is as you say -- but only in the Catechism. Not in their actual Bible.

This is their Bible translation --
===================================

3 Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.
4 Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth.
5 Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me:
6 And shewing mercy unto thousands to them that love me, and keep my commandments.
7 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that shall take the name of the Lord his God in vain.
8 Remember that thou keep holy the sabbath day.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and shalt do all thy works.
10 But on the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: thou shalt do no work on it, thou nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy beast, nor the stranger that is within thy gates.
11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them, and rested on the seventh day: therefore the Lord blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it.
12 Honour thy father and thy mother, that thou mayest be longlived upon the land which the Lord thy God will give thee.
13 Thou shalt not kill.
14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.
15 Thou shalt not steal.
16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house: neither shalt thou desire his wife, nor his servant, nor his handmaid, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is his.

Bible Gateway passage: Exodus 20 - Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Sometimes you hear that - but they did not actually change the text - so in their DUAY Bible translation it reads pretty much the same as ours. But in the Catechism they provide a shortened summarized statement for each commandment and they group them differently and since it is not a verbatim quote of scripture in the Catechism - the combination of regroup and then summary-paraphrase is as you say -- but only in the Catechism. Not in their actual Bible.

This is their Bible translation --
===================================

3 Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.
4 Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth.
5 Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me:
6 And shewing mercy unto thousands to them that love me, and keep my commandments.
7 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that shall take the name of the Lord his God in vain.
8 Remember that thou keep holy the sabbath day.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and shalt do all thy works.
10 But on the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: thou shalt do no work on it, thou nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy beast, nor the stranger that is within thy gates.
11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them, and rested on the seventh day: therefore the Lord blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it.
12 Honour thy father and thy mother, that thou mayest be longlived upon the land which the Lord thy God will give thee.
13 Thou shalt not kill.
14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.
15 Thou shalt not steal.
16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house: neither shalt thou desire his wife, nor his servant, nor his handmaid, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is his.

Bible Gateway passage: Exodus 20 - Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition

Interesting. Thats good information, thank you.

 

[JohnDB]

As the SDA among us argue for their particular single theologies....

The overriding thing keeping the rest of the Protestant/Evangelicals and the Catholics from joining together is the principle of symbiosis.

In 1Corinthians Paul talks about how woman was made for man and man was made for God...
But the relationship between is kinda glossed over today because of the term glory and the concept of symbiosis is lost on us today.

Man is to live symbiotically with woman.
Mankind is to live symbiotically with the Earth.
Mankind is not supposed to live without God...but does in a sinful state.

So when you have those who focus on celibacy for priests and nuns ministering to families and children it causes problems.
They don't have the requisite experience or lifestyle to minister to a large portion of the constituency. They really don't understand the symbiotic relationship.

And it's a core issue of fundamentals of God and man in relationship with each other "Tabernacling" with each other.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I've been growing up in Northern Europe, so as I was faced with conversion from Buddhism into Christianity I eventually met other Christians that told me of Christianity in a distinct Protestant flavor, but I didn't ever feel I was met with a God that first demanded of me to choose between one of 3 different Jesus. And I honestly think it is the same Jesus we all believe in. However tradition and theological disagreement have isolated us all into different pockets of belief, even if this is clearly against Christian tradition itself. I think we are unable to let go of a history where our forefathers have killed other people and themselves been killed for holding onto the distinct theological ideas we've inherited

I've found myself very drawn to "original" Christianity, and I think this is what everyone long for. A source of unpolluted truth. So I've seen Orthodox Christianity as a natural choice, but when I've tried to explore what it mean to be Orthodox I find myself confused because one does not simply say "I am Orthodox" and that's it, but there's various things that is needed to do to be part of this tradition, just like there seem to be ideas that I should for example re-baptize myself to be a uncontroversial Protestant and to be totally safe I should pray to get the gift of talking in tongues, and have seen that among Catholic and Orthodox is a very simple thing that caused a schism and these two are much more open in their longing to become one again.

But before I blunder into something that might break some kind of rules here, are there any single point in history we can track down where Protestantism was inevitable? And likewise in the east-west schism? And please, try to think carefully before writing answers here.

Try to explain in a way a child could understand, if that's possible.

Did you get a satisfactory answer to your question?