Why Christianity got many sub divisions

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Heresy and pride. And, I truly think, the abandonment of regular Eucharistic worship and the historic episcopate. Holy Communion and our bishops keep the church together. Look at the profound sectarianism within Protesants who reject both (Reformed, Methodists, Baptists, evangelicals, Pentecostals, Anabaptists, restorationists, Messianics)

 

[E.C.]

Heresy and pride. And, I truly think, the abandonment of regular Eucharistic worship and the historic episcopate. Holy Communion and our bishops keep the church together. Look at the profound sectarianism within Protesants who reject both (Reformed, Methodists, Baptists, evangelicals, Pentecostals, Anabaptists, restorationists, Messianics)

Agreed!

This is why a few of the early Protestants/Reformers (I remember how much many Lutherans don't like being called Protestants ) such as Lutherans and Anglicans I find more easy to get along with than, for example, Baptists and Pentecostals. The first Reformers such as Luther were justified in some areas of their dislike. Things like indulgences. However, as time goes on, you have people who leave and start up their own camp just because they want to wear jeans in church and than they change the theology around. It reminds me of a line from the Simpsons when Ned Flanders says "Bart and Homer can't go Catholic; the Romans have been in schism from us since 1517 and that was about our holy right to come to church with wet hair! Which we've since, abolished."

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Agreed!

This is why a few of the early Protestants/Reformers (I remember how much many Lutherans don't like being called Protestants ) such as Lutherans and Anglicans I find more easy to get along with than, for example, Baptists and Pentecostals. The first Reformers such as Luther were justified in some areas of their dislike. Things like indulgences. However, as time goes on, you have people who leave and start up their own camp just because they want to wear jeans in church and than they change the theology around. It reminds me of a line from the Simpsons when Ned Flanders says "Bart and Homer can't go Catholic; the Romans have been in schism from us since 1517 and that was about our holy right to come to church with wet hair! Which we've since, abolished."

Haha! I hadn't heard that quote, but it's so fitting...

 

[dayhiker]

Comments on the divission of Prodestants.
I've attended many differnt Prodestant churches over the years, I"m not saying one service but for months, I found the love of Christ in each and I was accepted and loved as well. I don't see the divission that many see.

Unity.

Some see truth as 1+1 = 2 .. that is true and if truth is only looked as that way, the divisions from that POV will miltiply even more.

I look at the love your neighbor as truth. As the 5 love languages pointed out love isn't a one dimentional thing. Love has many ways of being expressed and not all of them are that meaningful to each of us. That doesn't make them wrong, of if one is honest then not only are the others wrong but my way is wrong as well.

What did Paul say when he talked about the middle wall being broken down between the Jews and the Gentiles. He said they were one. Did he same the gentiles had to be circumcised and obey the Sabbath? No. Did he say the Jews had to stop obeying the Sabbath and stop circumcizing their boys? NO. They were one because of what Jesus did on the cross, not because they forsook their world views and accepted the other's world view. Not because they forsoke their customs and accepted the others customs. Jesus made them one and they were to love Jesus and love each other. And so the Gentiles were to stop going to the idol temple to worship with all that meant. The Jews were to stop being so legalistic about their ritualistic cleanest that they couldn't fellowship with those gentile dogs.

Thes the Christian world view effects our beliefs and culture and actions and who are friends are, but we aren't to be clones of what some one person says this is who Christ is and this is how you'll dress and this is how you'll walk and this is the list of accepted hobbies and and and and ...

God created variety in every area we look. Lets let all that variety worhip God and while we many not be comfortable with how they worship God, we are to love them as brothers and sisters in Christ.

dayhiker

 

[Albion]

Heresy and pride. And, I truly think, the abandonment of regular Eucharistic worship and the historic episcopate. Holy Communion and our bishops keep the church together. Look at the profound sectarianism within Protesants who reject both (Reformed, Methodists, Baptists, evangelicals, Pentecostals, Anabaptists, restorationists, Messianics)

...and look at the profound sectarianism within those catholic bodies who don't, Old Catholics and Anglicans, for example.

But you have to admit that it's at least unusual to have a member of a church that rejected (with "heresy and pride" I suppose you'd say) the historic episcopate telling us about "our" and "bishops."


The omission of the Lutherans from your listing was not missed.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

...and look at the profound sectarianism within those catholic bodies who don't, Old Catholics and Anglicans, for example.

But you have to admit that it's at least unusual to have a member of a church that rejected (with "heresy and pride" I suppose you'd say) the historic episcopate telling us about "our" and "bishops."


The omission of the Lutherans from your listing was not missed.

Many Lutherans have apostolic bishops, despite denials.

 

[Albion]

Many Lutherans have apostolic bishops, despite denials.

To be accurate, it's very few. And not including the church you belong to.

 

[Rick Otto]

He's focused on the love of truth, not the love of conformity.
If we have a problem "getting along" with anybody, it's our problem. Blaming the other guy is unChristian.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

To be accurate, it's very few. And not including the church you belong to.

To be accurate, it includes most of the Lutherans in Europe outside Germany and the larger Lutheran denominations of the US and Canada.

And yeah, my individual denomination lacks bishops. I'd prefer to have no bishops than heretics like Spong. I wish there were a church that was both doctrinally orthodox (by Concordian standards) and had bishops; but given the choice, I'll go with the congregationalism of the LCMS over the heresies allowed in the ECUSA and ELCA every time.

 

[Rick Otto]

I prefer Sproul.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

I prefer Sproul.

Same. Not my favorite, but same.

There's a female bishop in the ELCA who made a great comment about the man: "There's a problem when the Episcopal Church can't understand the difference between right and Spong."

 

[Steve Petersen]

Judaism had its share of sects in Jesus' day.

Islam today has three branches at least.

It is human nature. God made a complex and diverse world. Why should we expect humans to be any different?

 

[Rick Otto]

"The truth will set you free" & "There is liberty in Christ"... can we have that & unity too?

 

[Albion]

To be accurate, it includes most of the Lutherans in Europe outside Germany

Meaning Scandinavia, the ENTIRE POPULATION of which would represent a minority of Europe's Lutherans, not to mention the rest of the world.

And yeah, my individual denomination lacks bishops.

Which was my point. You can believe whatever you want and it's not my concern, but when a person lecturing the rest of us on these matters doesn't even take his own advice you have to admit it's rather strange.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Meaning Scandinavia, the ENTIRE POPULATION of which would represent a minority of Europe's Lutherans, not to mention the rest of the world.

And the Baltics. And Ukraine.

Which was my point. You can believe whatever you want and it's not my concern, but when a person lecturing the rest of us on these matters doesn't even take his own advice you have to admit it's rather strange.

So because your church ordains bishops that deny the Nicene Creed, does that mean you're not allowed to speak on any area of Christian theology?

How about this- my own advice is that doctrinal orthodoxy is more important than episcopal leadership. If you couldn't get that out of the previous post, reread it.

 

[E.C.]

Meaning Scandinavia, the ENTIRE POPULATION of which would represent a minority of Europe's Lutherans, not to mention the rest of the world.

When I read this, I see "All of Scandinavia is Lutheran. Every last person". I hate to say this, but that is inaccurate.

Most people in Scandinavia are really not religious at all. Even then it is worth pointing out that there are other groups of Christians in said region that are not Lutheran. Roman Catholics are around in some areas and in Finland there is a good sized Orthodox population as well.

 

[Rick Otto]

http://foru.ms/showthread.php?p=35174683#post35174683

 

[Albion]

When I read this, I see "All of Scandinavia is Lutheran. Every last person". I hate to say this, but that is inaccurate.

Well, it's as you said--"When I read this, I see...."

That is what you saw.

What I said, though, is that IF we were to count every last resident of Scandinavia (not all of whom are Lutheran by a long shot), that figure would still be small compared to the number Lutherans in Europe.

 

[Albion]

And the Baltics. And Ukraine.

Those are not part of Scandinavia.

So because your church ordains bishops that deny the Nicene Creed, does that mean you're not allowed to speak on any area of Christian theology?

Nice try, but the bishops of my church certainly DO NOT deny the Nicene Creed.

Anyway, the point concerned your church and Apostolic Succession. When a speaker says "our" bishops, referring to those in Apostolic Succession, but his are not in Apostolic Succession, he's not being accurate, is he?

How about this- my own advice is that doctrinal orthodoxy is more important than episcopal leadership. If you couldn't get that out of the previous post, reread it.

What I said was that it is odd that you don't take your own advice, seeing that this means so much to you, that's all. It would be worthwhile, I'm sure, for all of us to learn how this makes sense to you.

After all, if one of us were constantly posting that the Book of Mormon, for example, is the whole truth--but he prefers to belong not to a Mormon church and instead belongs to a mainline Christian one that does not accept the BOM--that would make everyone scratch his head and wonder why that is, I think you'd agree.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Well, it's as you said--"When I read this, I see...."

That is what you saw.

What I said, though, is that IF we were to count every last resident of Scandinavia (not all of whom are Lutheran by a long shot), that figure would still be small compared to the number Lutherans in Europe.

By the way, for the record:

6.9 million Lutherans in Sweden.
5 million Lutherans in Denmark.
3.9 million Lutherans in Norway.
3.9 million Lutherans in Finland
450,000 Lutherans in Latvia.
250,000 Lutherans in Iceland.
200,000 Lutherans in Estonia.

Total: approx. 20,600,000 Lutherans in Scandanavia and the Baltics.

vs.

25.3 million Lutherans in Germany.

So, you're right. But it's not small. In fact, its a 20/25 ratio.

And when you figure in the ELCA (4.8 million) and ELCC (200,000), compared to the LCMS (2.5 million) the gap closes to just about even.

And lets be honest. The Evangelische Kirke of Germany isn't even really Lutheran. It was forcibly united with the Reformed/Calvinist Church there during the Prussian Union of 1817. In fact, the LCMS was founded specifically by German refugees coming to America appauled by the merger.

So unless you're entirely blind to the facts, tens of millions of Lutherans around the globe do have a legitimate claim to apostolic succession. And even then, the number of episcopal Scandanavian Lutherans compared to congregationalist German 'Evangelische' is not small.