Finding a new church, or, "Going Protestant"

Great Debates
61

About the number of books and the kinds of books in the Bible, don’t you think that all peoples who take the Bible seriously should really get together and put the matter to a vote.

Otherwise, how can they continue to act in accordance with the Bible, seeing that there is the very serious risk of missing the genuinely authentic ones or embracing ones which are not really genuinely authentic.

And we are dealing here with the most tremendous question of how to know God’s will for mankind and His plans for each and everyone of mankind.
Remember also to wait for the latest revision and the one coming after the latest, namely, of the Bible; otherwise you won’t have the last word on the most authoritatively reliable edition and translation of the Bible.

Someone here accuses me of casting derision on faithful Christians with my observations and remarks.

Please don’t take any offense from me; I am just expressing my observations on the basis of logic and facts.

If logic and facts and their conclusions are seemingly derisive of Christian beliefs and practices, then it should not be to my blame – I do have the right to practice free inquiry, thought and speech, but to the hazards inherent in the credal commitment of religionists.

Susma Rio Sep

62

Thanks, I guess. Interestingly, I was hoping I was wrong. I have seen your situation before (although it was with the wife of a man who was molested) and it is not the funnest position to be in. That being said, I hope you took the rest of my post to heart.

Actually, the reason, from what I undertand, that happened with the prolonging of the crisis was that the laity was simply unaware. Aside from a few seemingly isolated big cases, there was nothing to indicate that it was the problem it really was. The church heirarchy, for reasons I still do not fully understand, kept a veil of secrecy on the whole thing to protect the reputation of the church, an approach which backfired. Combine this with the unwillingness of victims to speak out, and you have a problem. Not to mention this idiocy with homosexual priests being to blame.

Now, I personally am of a somewhat different mindset. Though I love the church dearly, I am not particularly active within it. Despite this, Every priest in my parish for the last 10 years I have known and respected. They have all been great. This causes in me a sort of mental, block, where I can’t really comprehend the problem. Its like a distant death in the family. It affects me, but not in a direct way.

Part of the explanation for this goes to my ability to sperate the faith from the religion. I am not going to church to see the priest, I am going to be with God. When I confess, when i reciev Holy Communion, I am not really in contact with the priest, rather, I am in contact with God. The priest himself may be a scumbag, but in his offices of a priest, that doesn’t matter. Now, if he is a molester, than obviously he should be punished. But his being a molester does not make the Eucharist plain bread.

If what I wrote above sounded callous, it was not my intention. I am sleepy, and will make a better post later.

63

No. This is not a matter of contention. Protestants have their canon, Catholics have theirs, Orthodox have theirs. They all have different beliefs. Why should we “put it to a vote”? And why should religion be democratic anyway?

One can only function as one’s reason best dictates. If one finds Catholic Christianity to be the most reasonable religion by their measure, then they naturally disregard any other Biblical canons. The same for those drawn to Protestantism. I see no reason why this is a bad situation.

That our understanding of Greek, Hebrew, Latin and the idiomatic expressions of the Biblical period is increasing, and thus our understanding of the text is increasing, is a good thing. We can only function based upon the best information we have to date. If you wait for the final word to come down you will eb waiting forever. I see nothing wrong with going with what we know now, and keeping ready to adapt your worldview should new information arise. But you seem to be denigrating and mocking such a posture.

Because you belittle the beliefs of others and, basically, keep telling people to grow up and “graduate” out of their religious beliefs.

I hate – truly loathe – missionaries who try to get people to change their religions. And that sort of worthless activity is exactly what you are doing here. Leave people alone.

Oh, so you get to decide what is logical and factual? You’re even more arrogant than I thought.

Play in traffic. It’s fun.

64

Susma, I completely agree with the spirit of logical inquiry. But often he who claims to be applying logic is simply declaring “that which cannot be proven must therefore be false” in despite of the obvious valid proposition that many things are not susceptible to proof with our present state of knowledge but may very well be true. Examples within science abound; I see no reason why matters metaphysical should be any different.

In support of what Spectrum says, may I observe that there are a wide variety of writings, some of them extremely moving or logically constructed, that are not and have never been claimed as Scripture – there being a clear distinction between what is “inspired” (a word susceptible to a variety of shades of meaning) and what is not. The sole surviving letter of my namesake, St. Polycarp of Smyrna, makes numerous allusions to Scripture in some very helpful teachings – perhaps a third of his letter is direct quotes or close paraphrases of Scriptural passages – but has never been deemed canonical by anybody. The Fioretti of St. Francis have probably touched more people than Ezra or Obadiah ever did, but they are not “inspired.”

And IMHO, the focus of most Christians is not on the deuterocanonicals or, indeed, much of the O.T., but on preeminently the Gospels and Paul’s letters, with the “catholic” epistles, Acts, and Revelations, Genesis, Exodus, the books of Samuel and Kings, Psalms, Isaiah, and Micah as probably the major other elements of their Scriptural interest. Beautiful as is the third chapter of Habakkuk, I’d venture to guess that not 5% of the practicing Christians on this board, where serious interest in the bases of one’s faith is way above normal level, have ever paid any attention to it.

65

Many sub-topics.

Note that there is more than one work calling itself “Enoch”. The book in the Ethiopian canon is sometimes called “1 Enoch” and in many ways looks like “additional details” on angelology, mystical Jewish astronomy, etc. It’s fairly innocuous. There is also an “Apocalypse of Enoch” (2 Enoch) that is not part of the Ethiopian Canon.

Among the Orthodox in general (in addition to most other Christians), far less attention is paid to the “Apocrypha” than to the “standard” works.
The oldest “Canon” I’ve come across is from a letter from St. Athanasius (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2806.htm)

This is a very long page, and it’s in the 39th letter, so I hope the following quote will be acceptable:

By “the Shepherd”, he means “The Shepherd of Hermas”.

66

As long as there are worthies of Christianity, like the ones we have here, explaining and defending Christian faith, the Church of Christ will last till the Master comes back.

Your testimony of steadfastness and patience, though at times giving in to some moderate anger, as with Spectrum, is truly most exemplary and edifying.

Congratulations to you all.

Praise the Lord!

To you all, allow me to say: “Behold true Israelites, in whom there is no guile”.

I just wished that Bush and his War Party had the same patience and self-moderation as you people demonstrate here; then we would not be witnessing all this bloodshed and calamities in Iraq and also the trusting young men and women in the U.S. military who have given up their lives for still questionable objectives of Bush and his War Party – withal Bush claiming to be a born-again Christian.

Susma Rio Sep

67

Cite?[sup]1[/sup]

1 This is, of course, totally rhetorical – I did it solely for the irony of Polycarp asking Athanasius for a cite! :wink:

68

Nonsense!

Apparently you on the east coast have lived very deprived lives!!!

http://www.in-n-out.com/

:smiley:

P.S. Please pardon my silly hijack. Carry on.

69

Or if you wish to explore your roots, Gnosticism may be what you are looking for. The Coptic church is another option along the same lines. Rastafareanism conveniently ties the two together, and they have some really chronic sermons :smiley:

70

Personally I prefer my sermons to be acute! :wink:

Or at least not obtuse

71

Wow, that’s a real burger joint? I always thought it was just something the Coen brothers made up for Big Lebowski.

Still, I seriously doubt that their burgers are better than Wendy’s, and I can say with near certainty that their fries cannot possibly be better. And does In-n-out burger have spicy chicken sandwiches? Or an excellent 99 cent menu?

As a big Wendy’s fan (I actually was willing to stop for lunch 90 minutes later than planned when driving through Oklahoma, just because I was waiting to reach an exit with a Wendy’s, and apparently the only Wendy’s in the whole bloody state is in Muskogee) I will have to set my friend Tars Tarkas on a quest to the San Francisco In-n-out Burger to discover which reigns supreme.

72

Regarding Copts: They’re part of a larger Communion known as the Oriental Orthodox in the West. This includes the Copts, the Ethiopians, the Armenians, one of the Syrian groups (the others being either Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic), one of the Jerusalem Patriarchates (the others being again either Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic), the Indian Orthodox (aka “Malankara Orthodox”–but be aware that many native Indian Christians were converted to Rome by the Portugese or to Protestantism by the English), and a few others, if I remember aright.

However, the Assyrian Church (sometimes called “The Church of the East”) is another group entirely, as it is a Nestorian group.

73

Dogface, not meaning to argue with you about your own communion but to pick a necessary nit, the Copts of Egypt and Ethiopia are officially monophysites in opposition to the official definition of Orthodoxy based on the teachings of St. Athanasius – though they strongly downplay the distinction and claim Orthodoxy, it does still remain present.

To turn to a more refreshing aspect, what can you tell us about the beliefs of the Mar Thoma Christians? I’ve always been fascinated by them, and think that they have a lot to teach the West, being as they are a completely separate foundation of the church by St. Thomas out of communication with the variegated doctrinal disputes and political rivalries that have plagued the rest of us. (The Pizza Parlor, where I mod. at, has a moderator who is OCA and an ex-mod. [forced to step down by personal time pressures] who posts regularly who is Armenian Orthodox.)

74

Actually, the Copts with which I am personally acquainted reject the monophysitisms that were denounced by Ecumenical Council. They adhere to what they call “miaphysitism” (joined-nature) rather than “monophysitism” (one nature). Both Communions accept the formulation of St. Cyril. Part of the problem is that, to this day, they use “essence” or “nature” to mean what we say when we say “hypostasis”. However, they don’t get much voice when people write about them.

If you want some idea of what the matter might actually be, many of them look at conventional Eastern Orthodox and Western formulations and decide that we are all Nestorians who claim that there were two Christs who only happened to occupy the same space.

Regarding the Malankara Christians, I’m only aware of their existence.

75

This response is a little late, but here goes.

My reason for disagreeing with you simply that I believe in the existence of objective reality, that the beliefs of said religions are either true or they are false, and that since one’s beliefs determine one’s actions it is folly to base one’s actions on that which to the best of your ability you know to be likely false.

One could of course participate in a religion one knows to be false without actually believing it or letting it direct your life. But I also believe it would be wrong to encourage others to believe what you yourself do not.

It is with a heavy heart I say this, because I do indeed enjoy the mass, if only for the nostalgia.

76

Dear TGWATY:

We seem to have a similar background, being previous Catholics of faithful credal commitment and loyal observance.

But I got tired and left the faith as it should be attached to and put to practice of.

Am I happier now?

Well, I am much more free now, than before.

And if the Constitution of the U.S. is right, then I am happy for being free, as in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happines. (Or is that in some other source documents of the U.S. nation?)

And I still consider myself a Catholic, but a postgraduate one.

I have explained earlier and elswhere what a postgraduate Catholic is in my own understanding – to the annoyance of Spectrum.

You should live with the highly learned and very authoritative Catholic churchment working in the Vatican, you might find a good number of them being exactly my definition of postgraduate Catholics, withal their riich churchly vestments and ‘awe/shock’ titles.

How are you getting along?

Objective reality is not otherwise than subjectively appreciated.

And many a profession and practice of religion is due to inheritance and social convenience.

Will I get to heaven when I die, with my kind of religion?

I said somewhere here that I believe so, as God is also fond of sound reasoning.

I do give to God his due.

Namely, I recognize His existence and I acknowledge He is possessed of all the powers in the nth degree that His more deeply thoughtful proponents describe Him to be an exclusive holder of.

As regards doing my duty to fellow creatures He has created, I might not be perfect; but certainly I do not indulge in the kind of homicidal, catastropic, and predatory campaign of Bush and his colleagues upon other people.

Susma Rio Sep