Posted on 07/24/2012 3:07:03 PM PDT by Teófilo
Brethren: Peace and Good to all of you.
This blog post presents a broader commentary to this MSNBC headline: Is liberal Christianity signing its own death warrant? I invite you to read that news piece.
I have said many times before that the decline among the US mainline Protestant churches (Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist, etc.) is due to their embrace of secular values and pseudomorality.
In my opinion, their faithful departed are seeking a more vigorous or emotive faith and for that reason are leaving the so-called Mainline Churches and are joining Pentecostal or Evangelical communities. Or, they might become more interested in historical Christianity and therefore leave for the Roman Catholic, Orthodox, or independent Anglican churches. Or maybe they become agnostic or “spiritual” without belonging to any “organized religion” and the trappings that come with it.
|
Tenet
|
Explanation
|
Consequence
|
||||
| ; | ||||||
|
Sola Scriptura
|
That the written Scripture only is the sole rule of belief, morals, and practice for believing Christians.
|
The absence of a proven, credentialed and authoritative hermeneutics that is external to the individual believer leads to interpretative anarchy – for a single believer or group of believers will always find a purportedly compelling reason to reinterpret the Bible to suit their own agenda
|
||||
| ; | ||||||
|
Sola Fide
|
That faith alone is necessary for the salvation of individual Christian and that good works lack intrinsic salvific value.
|
The experience of faith was emptied of any objective contents and was made subjective, enabling the individual to determine his status as “saved” by the emotive contents of his or her salvation experience – the individual believer is now empower to approach Scripture individually, purportedly under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
|
||||
| ; | ||||||
|
Free Examen
|
That the individual alone exercises “priestly” power to approach Holy Scripture and to interpret it on the basis of his or her salvific experience alone, as permitted by sola scriptura and illuminated by sola fide.
|
Faith and belief having been emptied of objective contents and free from external hermeneutical authority. now depends on the subjective contents the individual believer deems fit to find. Dissent is built into this tenet for if the individual believer objects to what his pastor teaches and his community believes, he can leave to search for another community or found his own.
|
||||
| ; | ||||||
|
Sola Gratia
|
That salvation is due to “grace alone” apart from individual efforts of sanctification and cooperation with grace.
|
The consequence is that there’s no Christian morality or orthopraxis that is ultimately binding. The “Grace vs. Works” conundrum being resolved in the favor of grace “through faith”, and faith having been subjectivized itself, they further built their morality on subjective principles such as “compassion, acceptance, understanding” defined apart from any objective grounds such as saving works.
|
||||
| ; |
That’s predictable - the survey I believe was done by the baptists.
We agree. I said that those who just say "lord, lord' without the sincerity are not in the plus side
We Christians hold the Bible to be the Word of God. Now whatever you want to hold to outside the Bible, is your choice.
The Romans 10:13 statement is very simple: “Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”
It does not mention sincerity. Honestly, though, one should realize it is assuming sincerity. The value of Romans 10:9-10 is that it brings sincerity into play...”believe in your heart” can be seen as nothing other than true sincerity.
The encroachment of liberal theology into conservative churches of all kinds has been a long, complex process, in which there were many players over a very long period of time, not the least of whom was one Thomas Aquinas and his unfortunate elevation of reason in relation to faith. No, I am not blaming him. No one person or group provides that single point of inflection on which the whole matter turned. To get an idea of the full scope of the problem, I highly recommend a book by Francis Schaeffer called Escape from Reason. Schaeffer was a Presbyterian, but his explanation of the history of western thought in relation to Christian theology is a powerful antidote to the temptation to make incendiary oversimplifications.
TEA does have a point though. When a church, as a congregation or as a body, embraces social action to the exclusion of the Gospel, you will have trouble.
And it doesn't matter if that action is to the political left or right. Once the church becomes a PAC, you are in trouble.
(joke)
That's the propaganda, anyway...
There was a story out yesterday where for the first time, a Catholic leader was convicted and sentenced to 6 years in prison for covering up the sex crimes of numerous priests...
No one knows how many priests are out there molesting and raping children...The one percent you are referring to are the ones who have been caught...
That's the propaganda, anyway...
Actually, no. That's what we know by studying the available data. If you have an alternate set of data contradicting those findings, now is the time for you to share it.
No one knows how many priests are out there molesting and raping children...The one percent you are referring to are the ones who have been caught...
This argument from silence is a logical fallacy. In fact, it proves too much, for we don't know either how many ministers, elders, deacons, and members of your congregation, of your family even, are "out there molesting and raping children..."
If you living in fear makes you happy, go right ahead and live like that. But I suggest you keep the fearmongering to yourself.
~Theo
Thank you kindly,
~Theo
Sola Scriptura
That the written Scripture only is the sole rule FINAL AUTHORITY of belief, morals, and practice for believing Christians.
The meaning of the word "rule" has changed in 450 years. Classical, CONSERVATIVE magisterial Protestants (that is, Lutherans, Anglicans, and the Reformed) have always taught that Scripture alone, as God's Word, had FINAL authority, not that it was the "sole authority," so you toss all tradition and knowledge gained since the 1st Century out the window...
This is why the earliest Protestant Reformers were all devout students of the both the early Church Fathers and the best scholars of the middle ages--as these were and are valid authorities (while not being FINAL authorities) on how best to interpret scripture.
Conservative magisterial Protestants abide by the 1st 4 Ecumenical Councils also, for example--showing they are not the hyper-individualists that you portray here.
Are some Protestants hyper-individualistic? Yes--coming out of the "radical Reformation", that is, the non-Lutheran/Anglican/Reformed branches--which survived primarily because of the RELIGIOUS FREEDOM we have here in America.
With the absence of a body fully obedient to the final authority of God's Word, the Bible, as is the case with Rome (and the Eastern Orthodox)--Tradition is given an independent, competing, dueling authority to the Bible...and the Magisterium of the Church picks and chooses which scriptures, and which traditions to follow--with no standard, no "constitution" of the Bible to keep it accountable.
One has the possibility of endless changes of "interpretation" since--as with our Supreme Court using a "living constitution" method of constitutional interpretation (instead of textual, or original intent), God's authority is given to the current curia and Pope--functionally, over and above the holy Scriptures--written by the 1st Century Apostles.
I for one, am not surprised that Chief Justice Roberts--if he believes a human institution (Rome) has the right under God to rewrite the Bible using hand-chosen Tradition--that he too, has the right to rewrite a "living constitution" according to the expediency of politics today.
Sola Fide
That faith alone is necessary for the salvation JUSTIFICATION of individual Christian and that good works lack intrinsic salvific value.
Real justification comes ONLY through the good works of Jesus--as He alone is the author of our salvation. Jesus' justification of a Christian though, if their faith is real, must be followed by a growth in holiness--marked inevitably by works of charity, this is called SANCTIFICATION. Justification and Sanctification MUST go hand in hand, or to use an old Puritan phrase: "Justification is by faith alone, but not by faith that is alone."
The house of a Christian life has a FOUNDATION of faith alone, by grace alone, through Christ alone--but a house is not a house if only a foundation exists...the building is built up by sanctification, that is good works of love--all though, utterly dependent on the foundation of grace, through faith, in Christ Jesus, who gets ALL the glory!
The ONLY proper motivation of doing good works is LOVE, gratefulness for Jesus’ good works for me…NOT a fear—that if I don’t do this, and this, and this…why I might have to spend more time or endure more fire, in Purgatory…(another fully unbiblical/unapostolic superstitious teaching…)
Free Examen
That the individual alone exercises “priestly” power to approach Holy Scripture and to interpret it on the basis of his or her salvific experience alone, as permitted by sola scriptura and illuminated by sola fide.
This is just bogus, I know of NO majesterial Protestant group which understands any individual's interpretation as just as valid as anyone elses--this is mere post-modern Roman-Catholic-propaganda spin. Can laymen read, understand, and apply the bible? Sure! But always, everywhere, everyone is called to be a part of a Church body--and the churches are called to be a part of a larger body, the Church--whose doctrines are interpreted--AS A BODY--from the bible.
Sola fide, and sola scriptura, do NOT imply me-and-my-bible-alone-ism. Otherwise the various creeds and catechisms (which agree on at least 95% of topics) of each of the magisterial Protestant groups from all over Europe would never of been written--as they were, 450 years ago.... Set catechisms and creeds make NO SENSE at all if individualistic interpretation was considered the standard method of bible interpretation.
Faith and belief having been emptied of objective contents and free from external hermeneutical authority.
NO. Just as in astronomy, there is great consensus amidst well qualified astronomers--employed by various communities of scholars...that is universities. However, you or I can own individual telescopes, and study the stars on our own, so too, in classical Protestant theology individuals may study the bible--and contribute--but, the theology is approved and led by serious experts in the community of scholars, the Church. Occasionally, in astronomy an amateur will discover a new comet or some other phenomena, using a back-yard telescope--and this is confirmed and added to the knowledge of the universities of professional astronomers.
Classical conservative Protestant belief & practice does NOT now depends on the subjective contents the individual believer deems fit to find.
Dissent is built into this tenet for if the individual believer objects to what his pastor teaches and his community believes, he can leave to search for another community or found his own.
Hmmmm, what exactly, historically has been the Roman Catholic solution to dissenters and objectors? Using the power of the state to persecute or BAN Churches other than the Roman Catholic church, religious suppression of individuals, and the Inquisition--that's what.
In the era of the Protestant Reformation TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PROTESTANTS WERE KILLED--AT THE DIRECT APPROVAL OF THE ROMAN CHURCH--ONLY FOR THEIR RELIGION.
Even today 400 years later, if you go to a Latin American country, or Poland or Austria—countries with 90%+ Roman Catholics—it is LEGALLY VERY DIFFICULT to start or maintain a Protestant church…as these places lack all the protections of religious freedom we have in the USA. Where they dominate….freedom of religion has NEVER been a priority of Roman Catholicism.
Sola Gratia
That salvation is due to “grace alone” apart from individual efforts of sanctification and cooperation with grace.
"For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God; Not of works, that no man may glory. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them."
(Ephesians 2:8-10, in the Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (official Roman Catholic Bible))
Hmmm, I think your beef is with St. Paul, NOT Protestants.
The consequence is that there’s no Christian morality or orthopraxis that is ultimately binding.
This is ridiculous. Let's look at the social ethics of historically Protestant places, compared to historically Roman Catholic places. Does the USA--which is and has been overwhelmingly Protestant--have a history of "no Christian morality or othopraxis?" Do Spain, Italy, or any of the Latin American countries have less corruption than the USA, the UK or Scandanavia? Are Lousianna, Maryland or Massachusetts (overwhelmingly Roman Catholic states) well known for corruption-free politics? (NO. QUITE the opposite...).
The “Grace vs. Works” conundrum being resolved in the favor of grace “through faith”, and faith having been subjectivized itself, they further built their morality on subjective principles such as “compassion, acceptance, understanding” defined apart from any objective grounds such as saving works.
Biblical ethics--compared to human-institutionally-defined(and redefined) ethics offer a FAR MORE OBJECTIVE standard, than just doing what your priest tells you because of what the Church tells him—just because they say so…..without bothering to understand or think why. This is why bible-believing Christians--even with no institutionally mandated unity—ARE VERY UNIFIED on Christian ethics. Opposition to abortion, homosexuality, sex-before-marriage among other social issues--HAVE MORE unanimity among conservative evangelical PROTESTANT Christians than among Roman Catholics, by far.
As a matter of fact, show me the MOST LIBERAL, MOST DEMOCRAT controlled areas of the Red States--and I will show you the places with the highest percentage of Roman Catholics (in Florida, Texas and Louisiana). For some reason the teachings of social conservatism of the Roman church--don't translate into serious social conservatism of parishioners exercised in the voting booth.
well, what I said was Catholic belief. We differ on things that are a lot more subtle.
Right and that's what I do...mindlessly. (Irony)
As a matter of fact, show me the MOST LIBERAL, MOST DEMOCRAT controlled areas of the Red States--and I will show you the places with the highest percentage of Roman Catholics (in Florida, Texas and Louisiana). For some reason the teachings of social conservatism of the Roman church--don't translate into serious social conservatism of parishioners exercised in the voting booth.
Obviously, unlike me, they don't listen mindlessly to what the Church teaches!
Conservative magisterial Protestants abide by the 1st 4 Ecumenical Councils also, for example--showing they are not the hyper-individualists that you portray here.
I can think of about 35,000 reasons to suppor my point against yours. But, no matter. Have a great day. God bless!
-Theo
But if a shepherd feeds his sheep thorns, thistles and sand-spurs, they will seek greener pastures. No matter how much the shepherd tells the sheep that the food he now gives them is evolving.
To often we line up on opposite sides of the fence without seeing how alike we are.
it’s human nature. Like arguing over whether one eats boiled eggs bottom endian or top endian.
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.