Christians: Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant

Onesimus

I know most Christians here don't like the tag ''protestant'' but lets face it, How could I have said anything else?

But I want to invite discussion on how all Christians feel how various elements of Catholicism, Orthodoxy and Protestantism could help them.

For me it has to be the great reverence of the East in Liturgy that could really cure Catholicism and the Protestants great reverence and study of scripture that could help. I also love many protestant hymns and Orthodox hymns too.

What about you?

Doc Farrell

Very open minded of you, I've always admired the peaceful views of the Quakers. What is it that Catholicism needs to be cured of?

lmaopml

Onesimus wrote: »

I know most Christians here don't like the tag ''protestant'' but lets face it, How could I have said anything else?

But I want to invite discussion on how all Christians feel how various elements of Catholicism, Orthodoxy and Protestantism could help them.

For me it has to be the great reverence of the East in Liturgy that could really cure Catholicism and the Protestants great reverence and study of scripture that could help. I also love many protestant hymns and Orthodox hymns too.

What about you?

Pml, Onesimus, you have a 'love' of Christ as manifest in the Liturgy of the East ( which I might add is rather beautiful ) but you have to speak the same language sometimes? Not everybody 'gets' Liturgy, or relates it to Christ as Present. One has to...join the dots....sometimes.

I really had to learn a lot - I still am!! I think 'faith' preceded that though, and a vague notion that things are not the way they 'could' be.

I think various 'elements' and not to mention 'people' have been a part of my journey. They have 'cemented' me, the good, the bad, and the ugly..lol... - I think we are united in more ways than not, except when we contravene the Gospel - you can't do that!

We just choose to explain ourselves differently sometimes, and words get in the way, and even what those words mean sometimes. I think we need to talk more. If you know that somebody truly loves Christ, than be happy for them and trust and pray for them..they're a friend. I think that is what we need most to recognise.

Onesimus

Doc Farrell wrote: »

Very open minded of you, I've always admired the peaceful views of the Quakers. What is it that Catholicism needs to be cured of?

Good one Doc. The Quakers have a deep impact upon me too. I think Roman Catholicism in Ireland has a lot to be cured of. A return to a Holy Liturgy for one, homilies that challenge us rather than play to our reasoning which has been infected by secularism. I find Roman homilies in my area to be incredibly stripped of any holiness and it almost sometimes feels like I am at a comedy club in which all we get is jokes which are usually followed up by a homily that has no relevance what so ever towards the joke and it goes on and on and on.

I think that the Eastern Liturgy can really help Roman Catholics restore their true Liturgical worship in holiness. I also think that protestants great love for the scripture in the home can really help Catholics universal to break free from the ''Oh I have to be educated to read that'' silliness.

I dunno. Feel free to object.

Doc Farrell

I agree with your last point that education is a good thing but reason isn't secular or the opposite to faith. Thomas Aquinas or yesterday's saint, John Duns Scotus are testament to that.
Fides et Ratio!

If you are disappointed with your local church you can always attend a different church. You can attend Mass with the monks in Collon, if you are a very early riser!

Onesimus

Doc Farrell wrote: »

I agree with your last point that education is a good thing but reason isn't secular or the opposite to faith. Thomas Aquinas or yesterday's saint, John Duns Scotus are testament to that.
Fides et Ratio!

If you are disappointed with your local church you can always attend a different church. You can attend Mass with the monks in Collon, if you are a very early riser!

I never said it wasn't. What I am saying is that priests play to the human reasoning of people which is contrary to the faith.

Sorry but all my Roman parishes in Dundalk are infected with this happy clappy watered down version of the Catholic faith. So much so that no matter where I go its there and there seems to be no escape from it.

Maybe I should just bring along my St.John Vianney book of sermons and have fun reading that while having a nice set of ear plugs in place. Because the way things are going, thats what I will be reduced to. :pac:

Collon is a great Monastery by the way. I am close to the Monks there.

lmaopml

Onesimus wrote: »

Good one Doc. The Quakers have a deep impact upon me too. I think Roman Catholicism in Ireland has a lot to be cured of. A return to a Holy Liturgy for one, homilies that challenge us rather than play to our reasoning which has been infected by secularism. I find Roman homilies in my area to be incredibly stripped of any holiness and it almost sometimes feels like I am at a comedy club in which all we get is jokes which are usually followed up by a homily that has no relevance what so ever towards the joke and it goes on and on and on.

I think that the Eastern Liturgy can really help Roman Catholics restore their true Liturgical worship in holiness. I also think that protestants great love for the scripture in the home can really help Catholics universal to break free from the ''Oh I have to be educated to read that'' silliness.

I dunno. Feel free to object.

Did it 'cure' you Onesimus? The 'New' Liturgy of the Word?

Without an understanding of Liturgy and where it stems from...and lets be clear every single Mass is the divine liturgy in action on a faithful heart. If one wants to go to a concert, or drama, or a feel good place and not a place to 'worship' than don't go to Mass - because it's all about knowing you are a sinner that is being saved and mainly about 'worship'!

Have you been cured from the 'silliness' and restored to 'holiness'....that Latin rite Catholics could benefit from? Well, why not get involved so?

Can you explain 'why' it's so important convincingly in a 'Biblical' way to Protestants why the Liturgy, why 'Mass', is not only or merely a 'Sermon'?

Mass is not a 'homily' on Scripture but so much more, than just a Pastors description of what the Bible says in a particular passage?..Of course it is; what makes you think it isn't for some?

Hey! Have some faith!

Onesimus

Lmao, your posts are confusing me tonight. Have you been sucking back on grandpas old medecine again?:P:pac:

philologos

What do you expect from this thread Onesimus? What is your intention behind it?

Onesimus

I expected all Christians to come in and talk about what they admire about another Christian group like the examples I give.

philologos

Onesimus wrote: »

I expected all Christians to come in and talk about what they admire about another Christian group like the examples I give.

I admire other Christian groups insofar as they put Jesus and what He said and did first over everything else.

I'm starting to agree with others on this forum that the term "Protestant" is a negative description. Essentially it means those who disagree with the RCC. Rather, I think my faith is about Jesus and pointing to His word. I'd favour calling myself Christian first and foremost.

The position of putting Jesus Christ first in everything that we say and everything that we do will no doubt bring opposition. We'll stumble and we'll fail from time to time but the more that we pick ourselves up and keep going in the midst of difficulty and trial the more and more we will grow in holiness as a result of the immeasurable grace that Jesus showed us on by taking God's wrath on our behalf at the cross.

Unity in Christ should be around the gospel of salvation. Putting Jesus and Him crucified and resurrected so that we could have the assurance of life in His name is what I can unite with. We're all liable to putting man before Jesus, or before His words, but we need to consider what He says first before our traditions and ritual. Which may have significance, but that significance fades in comparison to Scripture from what I can tell.

As long as anyone preaches and teaches that I can get 100% behind them. If things that we do, or say or teach undermine the Biblical truth, then I can't support it entirely.

I stumble after Christ, and I'm learning more and more each day about Him. It's not because of my works, or because of anything else. I don't deserve God's favour, and I can't work my way to salvation. It is only by Jesus that I have a chance at knowing God, and being forgiven in His name.

PDN

I admire the Quakers for their commitment through the years to social justice. I think of prison reformers like Elizabeth Fry, and pioneers of benevolent working conditions like the Quaker chocolate families (Cadbury, Rowntree, Terry, and Fry).

I admire the Salvation Army for their commitment to helping the poor. They campaigned against child prostitution and managed to get the age of consent raised to 16 - not just in the UK but in many other countries.

I admire the Moravians for their commitment to prayer in the 17th Century. They held a non-stop 100 year prayer meeting that launched the modern missionary movement.

I admire the early Jesuits for their innovative missionary outreach in China and Japan. They saw hundreds of thousands of converts.

Onesimus

PDN wrote: »

I admire the Quakers for their commitment through the years to social justice. I think of prison reformers like Elizabeth Fry, and pioneers of benevolent working conditions like the Quaker chocolate families (Cadbury, Rowntree, Terry, and Fry).

I admire the Salvation Army for their commitment to helping the poor. They campaigned against child prostitution and managed to get the age of consent raised to 16 - not just in the UK but in many other countries.

I admire the Moravians for their commitment to prayer in the 17th Century. They held a non-stop 100 year prayer meeting that launched the modern missionary movement.

I admire the early Jesuits for their innovative missionary outreach in China and Japan. They saw hundreds of thousands of converts.

Exactly the kind of thing I was after. Even better than my OP.

Philologos, you've got some issues my son. I think you need to chill a bit and stop getting so hot under the collar all the time. What PDN did here Jesus also did in the Gospel with the parable of the good samaritan. The Samaritans were a sect distant from the Pharisees and the Saducees, and both the Pharisees and Saduccees despised them. they were not the true Church but Jesus used them as an example. As a Catholic I'm forever using other Christians behaviour as a better example of our own. Pity you can't do the same.

I think your posts are full of the bitter attitude that came from the Pharisees towards the Samaritans and it's not advertising Christianity pretty well. Just get on with answering the OP or don't bother at all.

philologos

Onesimus wrote: »

Philologos, you've got some issues my son. I think you need to chill a bit and stop getting so hot under the collar all the time. What PDN did here Jesus also did in the Gospel with the parable of the good samaritan. The Samaritans were a sect distant from the Pharisees and the Saducees, and both the Pharisees and Saduccees despised them. they were not the true Church but Jesus used them as an example. As a Catholic I'm forever using other Christians behaviour as a better example of our own. Pity you can't do the same.

I think your posts are full of the bitter attitude that came from the Pharisees towards the Samaritans and it's not advertising Christianity pretty well. Just get on with answering the OP or don't bother at all.

If that's the conclusion you've reached I think you may have misinterpreted my point somewhat.

I can be united with any Christian in any denomination precisely because the Gospel isn't tied down to any one. I've had the pleasure over many years of studying the Bible with people from a wide array of denominations including Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, non-denominational Christians, Baptists, Methodists and Brethren. In most cases it was the gospel of Jesus. We learn from Him primarily and hopefully we aim to walk after Him first and foremost. We're united around Him and around the Gospel.

Onesimus

philologos wrote: »

If that's the conclusion you've reached I think you may have misinterpreted my point somewhat.

I can be united with any Christian in any denomination precisely because the Gospel isn't tied down to any one. I've had the pleasure over many years of studying the Bible with people from a wide array of denominations including Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, non-denominational Christians, Baptists, Methodists and Brethren. In most cases it was the gospel of Jesus. We learn from Him primarily and hopefully we aim to walk after Him first and foremost. We're united around Him and around the Gospel.

Philo I'm looking for the kind of response PDN gave. But I'm afraid you didn't give it. Perhaps I'm taking you up the wrong way but I was fishing for those kind of responses.

Doc Farrell

Unfortunately I'm fairly sure you are misunderstanding philologos as he is one of the most learned and Christian posters here.

Onesimus

Doc Farrell wrote: »

Unfortunately I'm fairly sure you are misunderstanding philologos as he is one of the most learned and Christian posters here.

More learned than me I'm sure but he keeps talking about doctrinal ''unity'' and sure we all want unity as Christians but I'm not after that kind of discussion or response.

philologos

Onesimus wrote: »

Philo I'm looking for the kind of response PDN gave. But I'm afraid you didn't give it. Perhaps I'm taking you up the wrong way but I was fishing for those kind of responses.

My point in a sense is the main reason why Christians can share anything of value with each other comes down to the reality that they should at least be believing in the same Gospel. If we didn't believe in it, we would be just like the world.

Doc Farrell: Honestly that's very kind, but I'm just a layman fumbling after Jesus

FISMA

Onesimus wrote: »

The Quakers have a deep impact upon me too.

The Quakers had a deep impact on me too, I think of them every time I eat Kellogg's Corn Flakes or my Oatmeal.

At the time, Protestants believed that eating meat in the morning would cause your libido to spike. Increased sexual appetite, first thing in the morning isn't exactly conducive with the Protestant work ethic.

The solution? Rid breakfast of meat, and bring in meal, grains, and the like.

So perhaps, we should thank the Protestants for a heart healthy diet?

N'ah, give me black pudding, eggs, rashers, and sausages!

PDN

FISMA wrote: »

The Quakers had a deep impact on me too, I think of them every time I eat Kellogg's Corn Flakes or my Oatmeal.

At the time, Protestants believed that eating meat in the morning would cause your libido to spike. Increased sexual appetite, first thing in the morning isn't exactly conducive with the Protestant work ethic.

The solution? Rid breakfast of meat, and bring in meal, grains, and the like.

So perhaps, we should thank the Protestants for a heart healthy diet?

N'ah, give me black pudding, eggs, rashers, and sausages!

Actually the Kellogg brothers were Seventh Day Adventists - not Quakers. And the Quaker Oat Company was never owned by Quakers either. The owners picked the name because they thought that Quakers had a reputation for integrity, simplicity and wholesomeness - all qualities they wanted to associate with their product. Sorry to spoil your urban legend.

FISMA

PDN wrote: »

... Sorry to spoil your urban legend.

Spoken like a true Protestant!

PDN,
I think you may wish to study this a bit further before you write this off as an "urban legend."

As one example, consider the Protestant Minister Sylvester Graham who preached that eating meat led to "sinful sexual excess." To combat these urges he made Graham bread the precursor to modern Graham crackers.

If you care to read the books or articles, I would be more than happy to furnish you with the numerous references supporting my original claim.

As for J.H. Kellogg, another prominent Protestant, he too discouraged meat eating and attempted to suppress the libido via dietary control.

Unfortunately, Kellogg took his belief to an extreme level. Even going so far as to mutilate sex organs of subjects in his sanitarium. Have a look over his works entitled "Treatment for Self-Abuse and Its Effects" and "Plain Facts for Old and Young." You should pay close attention to what was on the menu for sexual "deviants."

Let's just say there wasn't much Galtee on the menu!

Onesimus

I can't believe my thread has turned into a discussion on Quakers oats * puts his head in his hands, shakes it and laughs*

PDN

FISMA wrote: »

Spoken like a true Protestant!

Spoken like a true sectarian.

PDN,
I think you may wish to study this a bit further before you write this off as an "urban legend."

As one example, consider the Protestant Minister Sylvester Graham who preached that eating meat led to "sinful sexual excess." To combat these urges he made Graham bread the precursor to modern Graham crackers.

If you care to read the books or articles, I would be more than happy to furnish you with the numerous references supporting my original claim.

As for J.H. Kellogg, another prominent Protestant, he too discouraged meat eating and attempted to suppress the libido via dietary control.

Unfortunately, Kellogg took his belief to an extreme level. Even going so far as to mutilate sex organs of subjects in his sanitarium. Have a look over his works entitled "Treatment for Self-Abuse and Its Effects" and "Plain Facts for Old and Young." You should pay close attention to what was on the menu for sexual "deviants."

Let's just say there wasn't much Galtee on the menu!

No Quakers on the menu either.

Kellogg was a Seventh Day Adventist (which is hardly part of mainstream Protestantism).

So an American food called Graham Crackers (which I'm pretty certain no-one on this forum eats for breakfast) was invented by an eccentric Presbyterian minister. Of course, at the same time most pig farmers and bacon producers in Americas were also Protestants. But, hey, why let a few things like facts get in the way of an urban legend.

Doc Farrell

Onesimus wrote: »

I can't believe my thread has turned into a discussion on Quakers oats * puts his head in his hands, shakes it and laughs*

For once we are in full orthodox agreement!

at least no one nominated voodoo, chicken for breakfast is taking things too far.

martinedwards

Our church spent two years having "Go To" visits on the 1st Sunday evening of the month.

about 20 of us visited a LOAD of other denominations

and in two years you can cover a LOT.

things we admired (and might not agree with....)

a couple of denominations who sing unaccompanied...... BEAUTIFUL, but only for a visit!

Greek Orthodox were amazing. thier liturgy was so powerful.

the Monks at Rostrevor with thier contemplative approace. we have folks who go there on retreats several times a year, and the only thiime that they guys there have ALL come out, and locked the doors to visit somewhere together and left the monastarty unattended for DECADES was to come to a special service we had.....

but each denomination has it's own flavours, and to say "I like how Presbyterians do........." is like saying "I like meat" there are a load of different ways to serve it up, and all our denominations are as varied as eachother!

J C

Sorry to burst your bubbles ... but the most important thing is to be a Christian ... after that, all other things pale into insignifigance.:)

maguffin

J C wrote: »

Sorry to burst your bubbles ... but the most important thing is to be a Christian ... after that, all other things pale into insignifigance.:)

This is weird...but for once I actually agree with J C...... stop focusing on the differences and concentrate on what is common between you. Differences divide, common things unite. You are ALL christians..so act accordingly. Dispense with these old petty differences in theology and dogma and 'live' your beliefs.

martinedwards

I heartily agree but in the same way that Randy Rhodes was a great rock guitarist, studying classical really added to his playing in rock.

yes, we're all Christians, but we do things differently, just like a french chef might like chow Mein, its GOOD to see how other folks do something and then cherry pick what we see and maybe add it to our experience.

PDN

maguffin wrote: »

This is weird...but for once I actually agree with J C...... stop focusing on the differences and concentrate on what is common between you. Differences divide, common things unite. You are ALL christians..so act accordingly. Dispense with these old petty differences in theology and dogma and 'live' your beliefs.

To be honest, I think you & JC are simply agreeing on a thread hijack.

The vast majority of the posters in this thread were happily recognising good points in different theological traditions - so I'm really not sure what 'bubbles' JC imagined he was bursting.

As for whether differences in theology are petty or not - that's enough debate entirely, and one I don't intend to go into here as I've no intention of helping the hijackers!

So, getting back on track, anyone else see things they'd like to mention that are praiseworthy in other denominations?

I know that I've always had a soft spot for the Moravians due to their adherence to pacifism over the centuries. It's hard enough sometimes in our own day to take a consistent anti-war position. I can't imagine how they did it at a time when Europe was riven by wars.

J C

PDN wrote: »

To be honest, I think you & JC are simply agreeing on a thread hijack.

The vast majority of the posters in this thread were happily recognising good points in different theological traditions - so I'm really not sure what 'bubbles' JC imagined he was bursting.

As for whether differences in theology are petty or not - that's enough debate entirely, and one I don't intend to go into here as I've no intention of helping the hijackers!

So, getting back on track, anyone else see things they'd like to mention that are praiseworthy in other denominations?

I know that I've always had a soft spot for the Moravians due to their adherence to pacifism over the centuries. It's hard enough sometimes in our own day to take a consistent anti-war position. I can't imagine how they did it at a time when Europe was riven by wars.

I didn't wish to derail the thread.
I just saw the title and thought about what fundamentally unites Christians.

Should the title not be changed to something like 'Good things about other Christian denominations that isn't shared by your own denomination' to be in line with what you suggest the thread should be about?

LordSutch

Getting away from Quakers & kellogs for one moment, Protestants are also known for eating
Jaffa Cakes! nothing wrong with them either, specially if they are consumed before, during,
and after a prayer meeting, or after Sunday morning service, yum yum )

georgieporgy

http://spiritdaily.com/lightside.htm

uck51js9zml2yt

PDN wrote: »

I know that I've always had a soft spot for the Moravians due to their adherence to pacifism over the centuries. It's hard enough sometimes in our own day to take a consistent anti-war position. I can't imagine how they did it at a time when Europe was riven by wars.

Just read Broadbents pilgrim church to see the price they paid for holding the line

PDN

Mae Quiet Granule wrote: »

Just read Broadbents pilgrim church to see the price they paid for holding the line

J.E.Hutton's "History of the Moravian Church" is available free online as an e-book.

lmaopml

Sometimes all it takes for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing. The pacifist who teeters on the shoulders of those who acted -


Believe there is no war, that's it's won, it's a foregone conclusion and that good people don't play their part and you are in denial. There is a war, and everybody plays their part.

The Jammy dodger

lmaopml wrote: »

Sometimes all it takes for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing. The pacifist who teeters on the shoulders of those who acted -


Believe there is no war, that's it's won, it's a foregone conclusion and that good people don't play their part and you are in denial. There is a war, and everybody plays their part.

Wine + Boards.ie = scrambled posts. I'm not very good at math but it looks like I have solved this one.

lmaopml

The Jammy dodger wrote: »

Wine + Boards.ie = scrambled posts. I'm not very good at math but it looks like I have solved this one.

Yay! :P

And you never had to contribute a single thought at all, that could be considered a part of conversation, even an arguement - all it took was a rudimentary evaluation.

You must be proud that you have people judged so well...you can ignore so long as you make little.

PDN

lmaopml wrote: »

Sometimes all it takes for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing. The pacifist who teeters on the shoulders of those who acted -


Believe there is no war, that's it's won, it's a foregone conclusion and that good people don't play their part and you are in denial. There is a war, and everybody plays their part.

This comment is so singularly inappropriate that all I can do is heartily recommend that you do read up on the history of the Moravians. Their pacifism was certainly not a case of doing nothing - it was more a case of having the courage to suffer for their non-violent commitment to the words of Jesus while others waged wars and butchered people in the name of God.

Doc Farrell

Heeheehee! Someone has a stinger of a hangover today! All posts after 9.15pm will be breathalyzed!

Benny_Cake

lmaopml wrote: »

Sometimes all it takes for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing. The pacifist who teeters on the shoulders of those who acted -


Believe there is no war, that's it's won, it's a foregone conclusion and that good people don't play their part and you are in denial. There is a war, and everybody plays their part.

You seem to be arguing that a pacifist can only be a pacifist because of others who are prepared to fight for his/her right to avoid violence. Yet pacifists have suffered persecution and imprisonment for their opposition to war so it is not a position that is without serious consequences. Pacifism is not the same as passivity - in fact many of the "peace churches" such as the Quakers and Mennonites have often been the most active and recognisable Christian presence in resisting evil and healing a wounded world. The Quakers even won a Noble prize for their efforts in the Second World War.There is great courage in taking a stand against the violence of this world and Christian pacifists of all shades have often paid a heavy price for standing up for their beliefs.

I was unaware that the Moravians were pacifists, although it seems that this is no longer the case, at least at a denominational level. I know very little about them so I'm looking forward to reading the book that PDN mentioned.

J C

Benny_Cake wrote: »

You seem to be arguing that a pacifist can only be a pacifist because of others who are prepared to fight for his/her right to avoid violence. Yet pacifists have suffered persecution and imprisonment for their opposition to war so it is not a position that is without serious consequences. Pacifism is not the same as passivity - in fact many of the "peace churches" such as the Quakers and Mennonites have often been the most active and recognisable Christian presence in resisting evil and healing a wounded world. The Quakers even won a Noble prize for their efforts in the Second World War.There is great courage in taking a stand against the violence of this world and Christian pacifists of all shades have often paid a heavy price for standing up for their beliefs.

I was unaware that the Moravians were pacifists, although it seems that this is no longer the case, at least at a denominational level. I know very little about them so I'm looking forward to reading the book that PDN mentioned.

It is true that for evil to prevail, all it takes is for good people to remain silent or refuse to act.
For some Christians their action in the face of evil has been pacifism, often at great personal cost.
For other Christians their action was to directly challenge evil and defend themselves when attacked ... again, often at great personal cost.

I'm not sure who was braver or wiser ... probably both ... in their own ways.

Some Christians did both ... pacifist resistance to injustice ... and active defense of the weak and vulnerable.

hinault

I've an interest in reading about the various Protestant denominations.

Movements like the Salvation Army have my deepest respect and are formed out of Protestantism.

Lucy8080

dunno which sect is for /against meat or pro/anti porridge oats?

but, honestly , i can confirm that diabetics i know would have a much easier life on the meat versus the porridge!Dunno which religion is on their side though!

I also like the way the Christians here try to reign themselves in , as if nobody will notice!

This thread is a Testamony to your differences!

I'm o.k. with differences!

J C

Lucy8080 wrote: »

I also like the way the Christians here try to reign themselves in , as if nobody will notice!

This thread is a Testamony to your differences!

I'm o.k. with differences!

Vive La Difference!!!:)


John 14:2-4

2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
4 And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.


Mark 9:38-40

38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
40 For he that is not against us is on our part.