Posted on 08/30/2007 10:24:53 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
BUDAPEST, HUNGARY (BosNewsLife)— In a move expected to increase pressure on millions of Christians preaching Christ as "the Way, the Truth and the Life" the World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) wants to join an ecumenical effort, backed by the Vatican, to "guide activities seeking converts to Christianity," BosNewsLife learned.
WEA General Secretary Geoff Tunnicliffe "gave his full approval" to a "code of conduct" for preachers and evangelists developed by the World Council of Churches (WCC) and the Vatican, said Thomas Schirrmacher, the head of WEA’s International Institute for Religious Freedom, in remarks distributed by the WCC.
The WEA is an association of organizations and churches, claiming a membership of some 420 million evangelical Christians worldwide. If confirmed, the WEA would abandon its basic beliefs, signing up to a doctrine developed by at least some religious leaders questioning what evangelicals regard as Biblical truths and backed by leaders of Islam and other religions, BosNewsLife established.
For instance Hermen Shastri, the general secretary of the Council of Churches of (mainly Islamic) Malaysia and co-moderator of WCC’s Faith and Order commission, said that "religious preachers need to be told that no religion has a monopoly on the truth, that there are many ways to find salvation."
"LORD AND SAVIOR"
Within the WEA, Christians have said however that only Jesus Christ is "Lord and Savior," citing Bible verses including the New Testament’s John 14:6 : 'Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me."' It remained unclear Wednesday, August 15, how the WEA planned to reconcile these differences.
WEA’s Schirrmacher announced his organization’s readiness to work with the WCC and Vatican at an 8-12 August consultation held in Toulouse, France, where some 30 Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Pentecostal and Evangelical theologians and church leaders from Europe, Asia, Africa and the United States, outlined the ’code of conduct’, expected to be finalized by 2010.
Yet, Reverend Tony Richie from the Church of God, a Pentecostal US-based denomination, said the ’code of conduct’ is not about "whether" Christians evangelize, but "how" they do it. He advocated "dialogical evangelism" which he claimed should be "ecumenically oriented." Some evangelical scholars have questioned this approach saying Jesus never said He is "a way" but rather "the way" to the Father who is God, according to the Bible they regard as God’s Word.
However the WCC said that the ’code of conduct’ should "on the one hand establish what all the partners agree needs to be banned when it comes to Christian mission, a daunting task given the many different contexts involved." Among those issues was "a US Pentecostal struggling with the fact that Pentecostals are indeed ecumenical but just don’t know it," the WCC explained.
ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY
Launched in May 2006 near Rome, Italy, the ’code of conduct’ is part of an ecumenical project named "An interreligious reflection on conversion : From controversy to a ’shared code of conduct’." WCC and Vatican representatives announced they would open contacts with Islam and other faiths "to study ways to avoid conflicts."
Hans Ucko of WCC. The Head of the Interreligious Relations Office for the WCC, Hans Ucko, has already suggested that Christian evangelists should stay away from places in the Muslim world where conversion from Islam is a punishable offense, BosNewsLife monitored.
Some evangelical groups say there are no limits on spreading the Gospel as Jesus Christ died at the cross for the sins of everyone, before His resurrection on the third day, "so whoever believes in Him has everlasting life," as mentioned for instance in Bible verse John 3:16.
They seem to suggest that the ’code of conduct’ paves the way to the impending temporary rule by the ’Anti-Christ’ as described in the Bible. The move comes nearly four years after leaders at an unprecedented religious congress in the former Soviet republic of Kazakhstan agreed to create what they called a "United Nations of Religions."
NEW BUILDING OFFERED
In September 2003, the President of the mainly Muslim and former Soviet nation, Nursultan Abish-uly Nazarbayev, offered to provide a new building in the capital Astana for the organization where disputes can be discussed in a neutral setting.
Delegates in Astana said they would call the organization "the Congress of World and Traditional Religions", dropping the word "national" because most faiths stretch across national boundaries.
Evangelical commentators, including best-selling author Hal Lindsey, have warned that organizations such as the United Nations, the European Union with apparent support from the Vatican and likely WCC groups, are increasingly trying to create a "universally excepted religion ideology", a far cry from Christianity.
If they are going to use this type of daffynitions in the code, all the more reason to be wary.
Here’s another one, btl.
1. To maintain salvation one must receive the real presence.
2. The real presence is found only in RC churches.
Question 1: Given the above, what is the likelihood that a protestant would maintain his/her salvation.
Question 2: When we’re told “Individual Protestants are Christian.” what is really meant?
Well, sorry Hermen, but I won't be adhering to the guidelines put out by the Council of Churches.
John 14:6 Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father but by Me."
Actually, it seems like a pretty good idea in some cases. It's pretty clear the leadership of the Council of Churches don't know Christ.
However, there are certain “Christian” groups whose “Christianity” is unorthodox, to say the least. Whether people who subscribe to those beliefs are indeed Christian is a question to which I put a lot of thought at one time. I came to the final conclusion that if they are trusting in Christ, who am I to say different. But if they are trusting in their being a member of that group, I have my doubts.
Still, there are numerous members of groups of orthodox theology who attend church weekly, live a good life, etc. who just aren’t going to make it because they haven’t really accepted Christ. I make no judgments as to who is and isn’t. If someone says they are a Christian, I’m willing to accept them at their word. I can still judge if their actions, words, and theology are Christian, as they can mine. God will judge.
If someone says they are NOT Christian, I will accept them at their word here, also, and can unequivocally state that they are lost and headed for a bad place in the Judgment. This is not to say I consider them evil, immoral, unworthy, etc. Just lost sinners, like we all were at one time.
All that being said, if your theology states that anyone not a member of your group is lost and going to Hell, I have no problem with your arguing that, and no concern about whether you ‘offend’ some other group. As long as you don’t go around beheading or blowing up those that disagree with you, or thinking that other people should defer to your opinions rather than their own.
You know who I’m talking about.
>> If they are going to use this type of daffynitions in the code <<
These definitions are the translations into English of Latin usages far more ancient than the English language. Even Martin Luther spoke of reforming “THE church.” The use of “church,” as understood in America is a modern one, invented to embue things with qualities they did not have. (A Baptist inviting an Anglican to his “church” would have much much greater success than if he invited him to his “prayer center.”)
And the Pope was right to make such distinctions, so as to warn Catholics that they couldn’t go to “church” with Baptists, since Baptists don’t have churches. And the discord over translations such as “church” and “defective” are precisely why so many Catholics seek to return to Latin.
But you needn’t worry of such difficult language by this group, since the Catholic Church is merely one participant, and Latin will not be the original language.
>> However, there are certain “Christian” groups whose “Christianity” is unorthodox, to say the least. Whether people who subscribe to those beliefs are indeed Christian is a question to which I put a lot of thought at one time. I came to the final conclusion that if they are trusting in Christ, who am I to say different. But if they are trusting in their being a member of that group, I have my doubts. <<
The Catholic church recognizes as Christian all those ecclesiastic communities (”churches”) which baptize in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and which worship no other gods. This includes Protestants, Anglicans, and Orthodox churches, but not Mormon, Jehovah’s Witnesses, New Age, New Wave, or syncretist churches. “New age” as used here, does not mean mainline Protestant churches populated by many flakes, but churches which are pantheistic or self-deifying, or which seek Nirvana, or teach reincarnation.
>> Still, there are numerous members of groups of orthodox theology who attend church weekly, live a good life, etc. who just aren’t going to make it because they haven’t really accepted Christ. I make no judgments as to who is and isn’t. If someone says they are a Christian, I’m willing to accept them at their word. I can still judge if their actions, words, and theology are Christian, as they can mine. God will judge. <<
I would also suggest that perhaps a Christian is one who practices Christianity as taught by a Christian church, whereas you are perhaps defining here a Christian as one who is saved. The Catholic Church believes there are many Christians who are not necessarily saved.
Xzins, the Vatican document you are referring to, RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH does acknowledge that It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification and truth that are present in them.
Some Protestants won't even acknowledge Roman Catholics as Christians! But the Vatican does humbly acknowledge that Churches and ecclesial Communities not fully in communion with the Catholic Church have elements of sanctification and truth.
God bless...
Yes, those would be the groups that I was talking about, as far as “Christian” groups go. Still, there may be the possibility that some individuals in those groups can transcend them and come to a personal relationship with Christ. I don’t know that they can, though.
I hope so, because my beloved grandmother was a member of one of those groups. Previously, she had been a Methodist.
There we have to disagree. I define a Christian as one who has a persnal relationship with Christ, and thus is saved.
Fortunately, I am not a Catholic, so do not have to accept their teachings. But then many Catholics also do not, it seems. Especially on areas like abortion, contraception, etc.
I guess my main objection to this concept is this: Why should non-Christian groups have any input whatsoever into how Christians spread their message? As long as it is non-violently. There is another religion which needs lessons in restraining their spreading of their message far more than does any Christian group of which I am aware.
Then maybe they should become more proficient in English before attempting any future translations.
FMM, what is acknowledged should be based on reality. Unfortunately, as in both cases above, it is not.
Christians in any of our denominations are Christians. Whether acknowledged by others or not, they are acknowledged by the Lord:
Mt 10:32 - Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
Praised be Jesus Christ!
Now and forever. Amen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.