Stosh Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 As a Jew, I don't understand your arguments.... Y'all believe in Jesus as God that makes you Christians IMHO. I hope everyone can take a deep breath and accept everyone else. Thank you! As a Christian I don't understand them either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 I agree. When I was in Israel the religious disputes were much more in the open and then (most folks) would just get along. I had spirited and unsolicited disagreements with both Muslims (You're a Polytheist!) and Jews (Jesus was just a Man!) on the street. Followed afterward by some nice chitchat and coffee or tea (or a Falafel!!!) It seemed healthier in some ways. When you say "unsolicited disagreements... on the street", so people just came up to you on the street and started arguing with you about religion? How did they even know you were a Christian? Were you wearing a cross or something and people just felt it was appropriate to start a religious debate with a complete stranger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David CO Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 (edited) The United Methodist skooch right up to the Transubstantiation line so much that is it almost quasi-catholic. And they believe in the 'Wesley Quadrilateral' which includes reason and tradition as long as guidance in addition to Scripture yet they are (conventionally) designated as Catholics. I am amazed at the diversity of Christianity. How many Protestant denominations are there now ? Hundreds and hundreds. On a recent trip to the Holy Land I was amazed, yes amazed at how many ancient Orthodox and "Catholic" branches still exist. And Orthodox Judaism has a whole constellation of traditions...all with FABULOUS different hats. I am not qualified to figure out the divisions in Islam though I took a course once just on Shiite vs Sunni. Everyone muddling along trying to figure things out.... I think in Scouts we need to encourage the boys to explore their family faith traditions and keep wrestling with the issues. The biggest push back I get is from parents with little tradition or past issues who do not like it being brought up at all. What I do not like is when some on our Committee say we should not let the boys discuss God at all because it will be like this years presidential election..a controversy that will lead to fights. I have told the Chaplain's Aides (who tend to be more of the ernest religious lads) that they can be true their faith, be open and honest about it and not be threatened by others who believe differently. I like the Ghandi quote: “I do not want my house to be walled in on all sides and my windows to be stuffed. I want the culture of all lands to be blown about my house as freely as possible. But I refuse to be blown off my feet by anyâ€. But I do agree that it can be a slippery slope to "all religions are the same". My brother is a professor at Wesleyan, and he tells me the same thing. The school has a large Catholic population who feel right at home among the United Methodists. That's why I said most Protestants. I didn't respond to Stosh's correction because I don't feel it is my place, as a Catholic, to instruct him on such things. I also didn't want to offend any United Methodists who might feel that I was mischaracterizing their religion. Edited August 10, 2016 by David CO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 The United Methodist Church recognizes two sacraments in which Christ himself participated: baptism and the Lord's Supper. Baptism Baptism marks the beginning of our lifelong journey as disciples of Jesus Christ. Through baptism, we are joined with the Triune God, the whole of Christ’s church, and our local congregation. The water and the work of the Holy Spirit in baptism convey God’s saving grace, the forgiveness of our sins, and new life in Jesus Christ. Persons of any age may be baptized—infants, children, youth, and adults. United Methodists baptize in a variety of ways—immersion, pouring, or sprinkling. A person receives the sacrament of baptism only once in his or her life. For further study: By Water and Spirit, the church's official statement on baptism. (Download as PDF) Renewing waters: How United Methodists understand baptism This Is Your Baptismal Liturgy, a guide to the baptism ritual A United Methodist Understanding of Baptism The Lord's Supper (also called Holy Communion, Eucharist) The Lord’s Supper is another name for the Eucharist, the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving the church offers to God for all God has done, is doing, and will do to save us and renew all things in Christ. Through offering ourselves in praise and thanksgiving, and through receiving the bread and cup—which the Spirit makes for us the body and blood of Christ—celebrating the Lord’s Supper together nourishes and sustains us in our journey as disciples of Jesus Christ. As we pray together and receive the body and blood of Christ together, we are united with Christ, with one another, and in ministry to all the world. All who love Christ, earnestly repent of their sin and seek to live in peace with one another are invited to join us in offering our prayer of thanksgiving and receive the body and blood of Christ—regardless of age or church membership. Congregations serve the elements of the Lord’s Supper several ways, but always include both bread and cup. The Lord's Supper is to be celebrated and received regularly—John Wesley said, “as often as [one] can.†Having grown up in the United Methodist Church, I can assure everyone the description put forth by the UMC is CONsubstantiation, not TRANSsubstantiation as practiced by the Roman Church. Through offering ourselves in praise and thanksgiving, and through receiving the Body and Blood bread and cup—which the Spirit makes for us the body and blood of Christ—celebrating the Lord’s Supper together nourishes and sustains us in our journey as disciples of Jesus Christ. (There is no bread and wine for the Roman Church, it is forever changed into the Body and Blood of Christ.) This is why the wine is completely consumed and the Host (wafers) are stored on the altar until the next communion service. Consubstantiation is the basis for all Lutheran synods as well. As I mentioned earlier, I had my theological training in a consortium of Roman Catholic, Lutheran and Protestant seminaries. Sorry UMC, but you guys aren't any different than the standard Lutheran teachings on the Eucharist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David CO Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 I agree. When I was in Israel the religious disputes were much more in the open and then (most folks) would just get along. I had spirited and unsolicited disagreements with both Muslims (You're a Polytheist!) and Jews (Jesus was just a Man!) on the street. Followed afterward by some nice chitchat and coffee or tea (or a Falafel!!!) It seemed healthier in some ways. Apparently, Israel isn't the only place where one can get unsolicited disagreements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tampa Turtle Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 When you say "unsolicited disagreements... on the street", so people just came up to you on the street and started arguing with you about religion? How did they even know you were a Christian? Were you wearing a cross or something and people just felt it was appropriate to start a religious debate with a complete stranger? Yes! My wife had a cross on and everybody profiles everybody. It was pretty obvious, apparently even we hid any apparent signs. And yes people would engage pretty quick. We were not part of a tour and were looking (usually) for Christian sites and often had to ask folks for directions, etc and off we would go. It was mostly pretty fun as it was never personal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred johnson Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 Communion as transubstantiation, consubstantial or sacremental union. These are all philosophical differences whose precise meaning reflects very very small differences. IMHO, the different terms are used mainly to divide the groups than to provide any meaningful difference. Heck, Catholics each and every week use consubstantial in our creed in another view. IMHO, focusing on these differences is best done over a beer and a smile. It has no practical use other than to divide people. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 I have been married to a Catholic woman for 35 years, and have been to church with her a number of times (though not regularly), but I have no idea what any of you are talking about. It's ok though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 This is where the clergy are able to see things in a different light. There theological issues of religion and there are traditional issues. We all have the same Creeds, same Scriptures, same liturgical worship practices, use the same lectionary on Sunday morning. Then there are the traditional issues. This is where 99% of the problems arise between the denominations. None of these kinds of issues are even discussed on a theological level because they aren't theology. All Christian denominations have baptism. That's theological, straight out of Scripture. HOW one does baptism is tradition. So we end up fighting about sprinkling, pouring, dunking, etc. Catholic and Baptist were arguing over baptism. Baptist: Sprinkling on the top of the head is not proper, nor a valid baptism. The person needs to be immersed. Catholic: But if he walks in up to his knees it should be okay? Baptist: No, the person needs to be immersed. Catholic: How about up to his waist? Baptist: No, the person needs to be immersed. Catholic: Up to his neck? Baptist: No, the person needs to be completely immersed! Catholic: So it doesn't work unless the top of the person's head gets wet? Baptist. YES That is correct. Catholic: Well we just cut to the chase and do the important part and sprinkle on the top of the head to begin with. That story was first told to me by a Baptist minister friend of mine. A lot of the conflict comes when people are locked into the traditions without knowing the theology. Infant baptism? Scripture tells us whole households were baptized all at the same time. Yet, there are those who say no to infant baptism. Same holds true for Communion. Infant communion is not forbidden in Scripture, but there's a lot of tradition against it in Christianity today. I would say that pretty much of all the dynamics holding Christians apart today is tradition, not theology. Having a class in a consortium of Roman Catholic, Lutheran and Presbyterian seminaries, we all spent a lot of time understanding the differences were more traditional than theological. There were a ton of lengthy dialog among the students, none of it has harsh as that which resides on the laity level where the distinction between theology and tradition are often quite blurred. Sure we all believe there are other sources of divine revelation, Lutherans have their Book of Concord, Mormons their Book of Mormon, Catholics their papal edicts, etc. But those are the codified traditions of the interpretations of Scripture. i.e. baptism, communion, etc. They are important, but they don't stand equal to the Scriptures. Now if Gabriel showed up on one's doorstep and had a message, one would think that would be pretty important,.... A lot of people seem to have had experiences like these ...whose to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David CO Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 (edited) I have been married to a Catholic woman for 35 years, and have been to church with her a number of times (though not regularly), but I have no idea what any of you are talking about. It's ok though. Catholics believe in transubstantiation. This means we believe the bread and wine physically changes into the Body and Blood of Jesus. We don't believe this is just symbolism. We believe a real change takes place. Stosh is deliberately trying to be provocative by insisting that our most sacred Sacrament, which we believe is real, is merely tradition. Edited August 10, 2016 by David CO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 No, I am pointing out that with all the Christian denominations out there, only the Latin church teaches transubstantiation. How can one be provocative by simply stating a true fact. This is nothing new, the issue has been around for long before either of us was born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David CO Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 Communion as transubstantiation, consubstantial or sacremental union. These are all philosophical differences whose precise meaning reflects very very small differences. IMHO, the different terms are used mainly to divide the groups than to provide any meaningful difference. Heck, Catholics each and every week use consubstantial in our creed in another view. IMHO, focusing on these differences is best done over a beer and a smile. It has no practical use other than to divide people. No Fred, I must disagree with you. These are not very very small differences. It's the difference between our most sacred Sacrament being real or not real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 @@fred johnson - David CO is correct, there are two basic traditions behind Christian communion. One is the bread and wine is the Real Presence of Christ in the sacrament. This is what some Protestants, Lutherans, Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Episcopalian, Anglican, Methodist (break off of the Anglican) all believe. The emphasis from Scripture is "THIS IS MY BODY/BLOOD". Jesus said so, that's what we go with. But he also said, "Do this to remember me." Now some Protestants emphasize that by saying Jesus is not really there, but we remember the sacrament to receive it's blessing. This would tend to be the Baptist, Evangelical, types of Christianity. I had a Jewish friend of mine square me away on that one. The Latin etymology for "Remember" is not the mental game of being reminded. In Latin the prefix re- means to do it again. Re-peat, re-mind (bring back into the mind) and re-member with member being a part that all the parts are put back together to become real again. One's hand is a member of the body, a person is a member of a group kind of thinking. So then the IN REMEMBERANCE means to bring the reality of Jesus back through the Sacrament. This is why the mainline Christian Churches go with the real presence, re-membered (put back together in real form) rather than the symbolic reminded process of some Protestants. Con- (Latin meaning "with") con-substantiation means the real presence of Christ (body and blood) is in and with the bread and wine. All the Churches who believe in the real presence of Christ opt for this. Looks like break and wine, but the act of God has changed it into the real presence of Christ's body and blood. Trans- (Latin meaning "across") trans-substantiation means the bread and wine are TRANS-formed actually changed into the real Body and Blood of Jesus. Once changed it cannot go back to it's bread/wine form. The wine is totally consumed during the mass and the wafers (now the Body of Christ (Host)) is stored on the altar until the next mass. More wine and bread will be trans-formed at the next service and the previous Body and Blood will be used in the service as well. Everyone agrees as an act of God, it is a mystery to humanity on how it actually works, but "traditionally" this is how the different parts of the Christian community have tried to explain it. Theologically it is a mystery but is held real by faith. This is why some denominations won't give Communion to certain other Christians. If they don't believe in the real presence of Christ they are asked not to join in. If it's just a symbol, well then, anyone can join in. If one is ex- (Latin for "out of") ex-communicated, it means they are "kicked out" and cannot participate in the Sacrament until they repent and give up their sin kinda thing. This is why this whole discussion is kinda touchy. The reality of Christ is at stake, those who are in and those who are out are defined, lots of "stuff" going on at this point, all kinda at the heart of the Christians' faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwazse Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 As a Jew, I don't understand your arguments.... Y'all believe in Jesus as God that makes you Christians IMHO. I hope everyone can take a deep breath and accept everyone else.That's what some Jews and Pagans noticed in Antioch,19 centuries ago, and they gave the name "Christians" to people who, up until that point simply described themselves as being "In the way" (of our Lord, of the Messiah, of the Lamb). Seems like some poor moderates think they're still in the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 @@qwazse I think my translation says "OF the Way", which translation do you have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts