Will there ever again be a new variant of Christianity?

Sure. Wiccans I have known have all felt that the Goddess is basically a force for good, and interact with Her and / or other gods as if those gods actually care about them as individuals. That’s a pretty stark contrast with what I understand of pre-Christian Europe, where you might build a relationship with the gods, but the default position is that they DON’T care about you. Prayer among Wiccans seems to be about asking nicely for reasonable things, paying attention to the balance of the universe, where in the ancient world you could ask for anything provided you were willing to pay for it; much more quid pro quo. I’m left with the impression that the Goddess is basically a combination of the Catholic views of Mary and of Jesus, cut loose from the Bible and from God the Father.

I should stress that this is based on my observation of Wiccans I know (I’m a Neopagan myself, but an independent practitioner), and I really don’t want to denigrate the religion. I’m rather fond of it, and I hope this doesn’t come across as offensive. I view Wicca as a post-Christian improvement, but I know it’s an article of faith for many that it’s a survival and revival of an older, woman-centred tradition. I don’t happen to believe that, but I respect it.

I do wonder what Pope Francis (Argentinian) has to say about all of that?

Kinda had the same thought. I’m pretty much convinced that the ecumenical charismatic movement will be (and actually has been since the '60s) a form of spiritual glue that will connect otherwise doctrinally disparate if not contradictory subdivisions of Christendom as one. The inevitable result is that “signs and wonders” will trump all else, meaning the essentials of the Faith, however its members may define them, will be downplayed or ignored wherever there is doctrinal friction. Again, this is already happening so it’s not news, but it has not yet reached fruition. When it does, the result will not be good.

Why not good? Seems to be a way of lessening hostility between Christian denominations. Are you thinking it will ultimately form an excuse for them to put aside differences, team up, and beat on the atheists/agnostics/Jews/Muslims/non-Christians in general?

From a Christian perspective, it leads to basically lowest common denominator religion which would especially be a problem for those Christians who place a strong emphasis on the historical creeds and confessions such as Catholics, Lutherans, and Calvinists. Then again there are some who think this will lead to the formation of the End Times One World Church-ie the “Whore of Babylon” (although I’d say Clifford and Emily Elizabeth fits the description better)…

Correct, although it should be pointed out that Catholics, Lutherans and Calvinists (Presbyterians) all have some liberal strains among them which are very involved with ecumenism, charismatic or not. Both the liberal and the charismatic camps of ecumenists make no secret of their dislike for those who hold to historic creeds, much less those who hold to the Bible alone. The liberal types consider themselves intellectually advanced; the charismatics, spiritually advanced. Both view their benighted, backward brethren with pity if not open disdain.

As an interesting BTW that not many are aware of…the charismatic movement *as an ecumenical movement *had its beginnings in the 1960s mostly among charismatic Roman Catholics.

BTW, how did the word “charismatic” get into it? Whatever distinguishes such Christians, it is not “charisma” in the lay sense of the word.

“Charismatic” in this context is not the usual meaning of personally magnetic or attractive, or any such modern connotation. Going from memory here, it goes back to the Greek *charisma *or *charismata *which refers to the miraculous New Testament gifts of the Holy Spirit, seen most notably during the early-mid Acts period starting with chapter 2 (tongues, healing, raising the dead, etc), all of which the modern Charismatic movement lays claim to.

Seconding this question. Please answer it.

Cite?

I’d rather not, thanks. I suspect most here would understand the words but would still find them meaningless. That is not an insult so please don’t take it as one.

As one example of liberalism’s effect on the Christian faith, take a look below at the Episcopal church (pardon the C&P but it came into my mailbox this week…be forewarned it is from an unapologetically fundamentalist perspective):

As for Charismatics, many in recent years have gone from the older, semi-cautious TBN style downplaying of Bible doctrine in favor of unity “in the Spirit,” to now openly claiming the Church needs to replace “the old wineskin” [the Bible] with “new wineskins” [purported modern-day prophets] in order to receive the “new wine” of purported new revelations from God.

I would also refer you to very recent video, easily found on YT, of charismatic giant Kenneth Copeland having a video chat with the current pope. Whatever your beliefs are or aren’t, it is a fascinating video.

apologies for the double post

Whatever one’s view on the validity of Kenneth Copeland’s doctrine it is highly unlikely that he would call the bible the old wineskin. Charismatics of his doctrine
believe the bible is the revealed Word of God, unchangeable just as God is unchangeable.

I did not say Copeland said it. I was citing him to make a separate point on anti-doctrinal ecumenism. For all his false doctrine, I too doubt he would make THAT bold of a pronouncement. But “young lions” who claim to be modern day prophets have done so. They’re the ones I referred to.

Since the thread’s now bumped, another factor in the mutation of Christendom into unrecognizable forms is the contemplative spirituality movement. Even though those who teach it are usually aware it stems largely from medieval and pre-medieval Catholic monasticism, it has been repackaged for modern protestant consumption so as to appear “new.” In the past 10 or so years it has built ecumenical roads even more effectively than the charismatic movement has done (which itself is considerable), in part because it has used CCM (Contemporary Christian Music) as a platform and vehicle.