Do you consider Protestants to be Christians?

Patristic theology, and traditional teachings of Orthodoxy from the Church fathers of apostolic times to the present. All forum Rules apply. No polemics. No heated discussions. No name-calling.


Do you consider Protestants to be Christians?

No they are not Christians

8
31%

Of course they are Christians

11
42%

I have no clue

7
27%
 
Total votes: 26

OrthodoxyOrDeath

Post by OrthodoxyOrDeath »

CGW,

...I have to suspect that someone named "Spencer" who posts as an Orthodox Christian on this board has rejected his former church on the basis of his own faith. For I almost never hear on these sort of boards, "I was lost, but now I am found" but rather, "my old parasynagogue turned away from my faith; therefore I dispised them."

Unless someone has told you this I must ask that you to stop making personal judgements of other people. Why anyone would join a different church is for you to ask, not judge.

Vicki
Jr Member
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue 27 April 2004 4:52 pm

Post by Vicki »

Christ is Risen!
Truly He is Risen!

Dear CGW,

I agree with you on one very important matter that has been a source of sorrow to me since this thread appeared:

Of what concern is it to Orthodox Christians what Protestants do?

I should think that my responsibility as an Orthodox Christian is to BE an Orthodox Christian, which does NOT involve saying to Non-Orthodox that they are or are not Christian. Rather, it would seem to involve conducting myself in such a manner that all my actions are a witness to Christ and His Church. Note: actions, not words. I can use words to state my case, but they are empty, or worse, opposite, without the love of Christ behind them.

Once MY ACTIONS are suffiecient to lead anyone to ask me about theology, I know I can answer them...but it will not be from the standpoint of "You have it all wrong, get it right, you aren't even Christian." This regardless of my personal feelings on the subject of mysteries.

You see, for someone who may have spent all his life believing in Christ, and worshipping Him...you can't open fruitful dialogue saying no, you ARE NOT a Christian. Anyone who thinks that has no knowledge of human nature. You can point out theological errors, innovations, and schisms, you can even say "No one can have God for his Father who does not have the Church for his Mother"...but you cannot strike at the heart of a man who has believed in Christ as he knows him all his life, and tell him he doesn't believe.

Right there, his heart and mind will close to you.

This is not a fruitful discussion, and it saddens me greatly that it was brought up. It has already caused pain to several members here.

Vicki

User avatar
Jakub
Member
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu 29 May 2003 10:39 pm

Post by Jakub »

It is not my place to judge one's chosen path within Christianity.

I do not like it therefore will not do it to my brethern.

james

away
Jr Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue 23 September 2003 1:14 am

Post by away »

Maybe its a bit silly to question what someone "is". We are all subject to change. You wouldnt have called the matyr's executioners Christians, until they themselves confessed Christ after witnessing the matyrs graceful deaths. Christ knew who would ultimately die for Him, but a moment in time lacks the context in which to judge for those of us within time or predict our future actions. Was the Christian ever-present within those spontaneous matyrs? Jesus alone knows.

Etienne
Member
Posts: 168
Joined: Wed 21 April 2004 5:26 am

Post by Etienne »

This 'thread' is very painful and touches on matters of great seriousness. If I have offended any, which was not my original intention, I ask your forgiveness.

Yet, are we to avoid painful things? To attempt to follow the God-man, Jesus Christ, along that narrow path is exceedingly difficult and painful. The raison d'etre for these forums is to explore, debate and learn from each other, no? I certainly have learned and benefited, not least by having to think and because of others contributions.

In these times again and again there are seen diminutions of faith, worship and adherence to anything many of our various forbears may have recognised as Christianity. None can be either comfortable or complacent about this. If symptoms of this are seen in other groups it is tempting, perhaps, to look and say it's not happening here. But for how long? One feature seen frequently today is something that starts in one body and little by little it appears in more and more other bodies. An example being the Charismatic 'phenomena'. First it appeared among protestant sects, then spread to 'episcopal churches, later appeared among some Roman Catholics and latterly appeared in some Orthodox parishes.

The reference to a survey of Anglican clergy was not a 'dig', but an example, albeit one I struggle and struggle to comprehend. It has happened among them today and us tomorrow? Nor is this 'sympton' an insignificant feature. Look at the long list of prominent Anglican heirarchs, theologians, clergy and seminaries articulating beliefs which call into question 'belief' in matters considered central over centuries by any professing Christian. They not only profess these 'unbeliefs' but proudly tell you that this a feature of Anglicanism.

Having had from childhood friends who were Jewish, Moslem and from various Christian 'confessions' (to say nothing of being asked at different times to act as a surrogate parent for Moslem and Jain youngsters) it is evident that people appear increasingly to be losing touch with the 'basics' of a knowledge and understanding of confessional belief. Their yearning for 'something' has not necessarily gone but it is often 'replaced' by a cocktail of 'isms' and so-called 'spirituality'. Even among those in main-stream 'confessions' attempts to make worship accessible has resulted in 'watered down' doctrinal statements. These 'doctrinal' statements were set down over time and as a response to error and false belief. They were given in order to prevent us straying and mixing true belief with that which is false. Which takes us away from the One True God. Orthodox may say, "What has this to do with us". These tendencies to shorten the services, cut out the repetitions, and simplify the language exist within our churches too. How long before there are liturgical commissions seeking to edit the texts for anything that conflicts with today's 'values' or it's 'superior secular mores"?

Some of the responsibility for this lays with us. For Orthodox believers our worship is an act of prayer, an instruction and guide. Remember those French Catholic bishops who were unhappy with the promulgation of the 'Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception', and on asking a Russian Orthodox bishop for a view were referred to words of the services.

Again and again it has been told to me over decades to hold on the 'pearl of great wisdom' given me at baptism/chrismation and to be prepared to pass it on to the next generation 'without adding or taking away anything'.

Once again, to those whom I have offended, I offer my sincere apologies. Forgive...

Last edited by Etienne on Tue 11 May 2004 12:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Vicki
Jr Member
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue 27 April 2004 4:52 pm

Post by Vicki »

How long before there are liturgical commissions seeking to edit the texts for anything that conflicts with today's 'values' or it's 'superior secular mores"?

There, Stephen, I agree with you. The answer is, they already have. Just look at Psalm 50, and see how the word "holocaust" is replaced...

But that had nothing to do with the original poll, which is what I objected to. Knowledge of our OWN faith will prevent any such absurdity from making liturgical headway and doctrinal changes. And I DO mean true knowledge. I have known several priests who are of the opinion that only monks can fast the full fast during Lent, everyone else grab some cheese pizza :o . Until THIS tendancy is rooted out in the Orthodox faith, we need to avoid topics like "Are Protestants Christians" while we work out our own salvation, by ensuring we can have enough knowledge at our command to say that we are being taught improperly.

We MUST look to our OWN house, first. Yes, being aware of the absurdity around us (charismatics) helps our hierarchs prepare defensive pamphlets to pass out on request, but frankly, the answers will be meaningless to those who cannot first comprehend their OWN FAITH.

Vicki

User avatar
CGW
Member
Posts: 389
Joined: Tue 18 November 2003 4:30 pm

Post by CGW »

Vicki wrote:

How long before there are liturgical commissions seeking to edit the texts for anything that conflicts with today's 'values' or it's 'superior secular mores"?

There, Stephen, I agree with you. The answer is, they already have. Just look at Psalm 50, and see how the word "holocaust" is replaced...

Well, in a sense this is connected to the original issue. The reason why recent translations avoid the word "holocaust" is that the word now has malign connotations of devastation, connotations which are inaccurate in the context of the psalm. It's just another example of how the church cannot control what words mean.

I don't see how this has much to do with praxis. I would say, however, that the meaning of praxis is also not entirely within the church's control-- but that's another long exchange.

Otherwise I wouldn't disagree.

Post Reply