I've noticed a LOT of threads on switching to traditional churches, and I have ???s.

[KarenNC]

On LITURGY: EVERY church is liturgical. Some have 14 praise songs, a scripture reading, a sermon, the collection, and another song; others have preparation, praise, confession, assurance of pardon, old testament, new testament, prayer, anthem, sermon, collection, hymn, benediction. Every church has an "order" in which it worships or conducts its services.

 

I've been trying to convince our Unitarian Universalist church for years that, yes, we really *do* have a liturgy :). So many of them consider "liturgy" a bad word or that it has to mean one specific type of order.

[iwka]

The difference in definition between "heresy" and "sect" is extremely relative to one's point of view.;)

 

 

Yep. We need absolutes, logic, Socrates and all that jazz to untangle it all. God's grace being number one help, that is.

[Rhonda in TX]

I attend a non-denominational church and have all my life. I'm very satisfied with it. However, we attend a Lutheran Christmas Eve service (DH is usually playing in the orchestra) and I just love the ceremony of it. I feel that I have truly worshipped while I am there. All that to say, while I have no intention of changing churches, I can definitely understand the appeal. (My DD loves it as well and I can see her changing when she is older, which is fine with me.)

[milovany]

You say "we," but did one of you feel this way first, and then convince or talk the other one into it, or did you both spontaneously feel this way simultaneously? I am in sort of a similar situation, but my wife isn't on board...

 

I'm not BBB, but I can speak of our family's situation. Part of our conversion story (we are Eastern Orthodox now, after 23 -me- and 45 -dh- years as "born again Christians", Protestants). I'm the one that started reading and emailing with others about Orthodoxy first. Because we had switched churches numerous times since we'd been married, and because this was usually at my instigation, I was wary this time of talking too much with my dh about changing again. He knew I was reading/emailing but we didn't talk very much about what I was learning. I just kind of turned it over the Lord. I didn't want it to be another case of me being antsy and him following along with a change partly in an attempt to meet my [perceived] needs. Anyway, within a few days of me turning it over the Lord, dh asked me for something to read. Over the next couple of months, it was still me reading more and being more enthusiastic, but by the end of those months, HE was the one all gung-ho and I was the one trying to pull back on the reigns a little. (Part of the reason for this, which might not be true in your case, is that we were considering such a drastic change. At times it felt like we were nuts to be considering what we were considering). In the end, we're both at the same place -- thrilled with where we are.

[TeacherZee]

I am finding all of these threads about returning/finding the more traditional churches very fascinating.

 

I would probably best be described as a seeking agnostic :D. The only churches that even remotely interest me are the EO and Catholic Church and that is because of their traditions. They seem comforting in a world that seems to be spinning faster and faster each day.

 

I think that is part of why many are looking into them. The liturgical year has a predictability that feels comforting and secure.

 

just my 2 cents

[milovany]

I am finding all of these threads about returning/finding the more traditional churches very fascinating.

 

I would probably best be described as a seeking agnostic :D. The only churches that even remotely interest me are the EO and Catholic Church and that is because of their traditions. They seem comforting in a world that seems to be spinning faster and faster each day.

 

I think that is part of why many are looking into them. The liturgical year has a predictability that feels comforting and secure.

 

just my 2 cents

 

I was pondering something along these lines recently. In a church that follows a liturgical/seasonal year, there's always next year if you didn't "get it" or fully understand it or do all that you wanted to do this year. If that makes sense. My recent thoughts centered on Lent, in which we find ourselves. There was an activity I'd wanted to do with our children over the course of these weeks, but I didn't get it going in time. But I know it will come around again. And just the fact that it will come around again (with the same services/prayers/focus/practices in the life of the church) teaches my kids more than I could with my little activity at home. The Church will be training my children, even when I falter.

[justamouse]

Colleen, you and I in our walks are almost exactly the same.

 

I have to admit that it was the wonderful answers of the OC women on this board that opened my heart to a more traditional liturgical worship, but in the end, my family chose Catholicism. I agree with Chuckie, that both have reasons as to why they believe that they are historically accurate, and I don't disagree with either, to my family, we just felt led to our local parish.

 

And Simka's quote, that in studying the church fathers you come to the knowledge that if you want a historical church, you have either the EO or the RC to chose from.

 

For us, it all came down to the celebration of the Eucharist. As I started reading that these martyrs died not only for being Christians, but because they would not deny that the Eucharist was (by faith) the body and blood--I wanted a church that celebrated it *every* service, with all of the respect it deserved. I read Clement's letters, Ignatius (who as he was traveling to be martyred, wrote passionate letters to the churches) , Polycarp, these men died for the body of the Church, that it remain one, and for the Eucharist, in all it's holiness.

 

For years and years I went to churches where the Eucharist was almost an afterthought-services got so big that they couldn't celebrate it every week, so it went down to once a month, and then if you missed it, you were out.

 

Celebrating the Eucharist is our *reason* for meeting on Sunday. Mass has nothing to do with how good the praise and worship is, nothing to do with the sermon touching us-that's not why I'm there. I'm there to partake in the Eucharist with my brothers and sisters. Worship is all up to ME. Those prayers that are said? They have been said since the beginning. They may be repetitious, but they are not vain. With them I join in wioth the ancient brothers and sisters that went before me, I join with the ancient celebration of the cross of Christ. I am so excited to follow the steps of the seasonal liturgical year-to celebrate not only fresh and new, each year, but with an eye to the brothers and sisters that have passed before me. I"m deeply happy that when I have passed, my children will still have the same church.

 

iwka says it best, I'm disjointed because of all that I've been reading lately, I'm still so full with it I can't really talk about it coherently. I'm so sorry.

Edited March 19, 2011 by justamouse

[Dolphin]

The bread into the body of Christ is called Transubstabtiation, I linked wiki to it for a bit of an explanation.

 

I don't know EXACTLY what is happening during communion, but it is very spiritual and fills me in a way that I can not explain. When I am having a particularly difficult week, I try and go to communion, it strengthens me.

 

A lot of people refer to Anglican as Catholic light. We don't do individual confession, but there are a lot of simulations. Our services follow a pattern according to the seasons of the church year. We chant and pray together during the service. We also have 2 readings from the bible and one from the gospel at every service. Full passages. That is one thing I had a problem with in the more modern churches was a sentence or 2 from here, and then another from a totally different book. Very bitty.

 

For me, it is also not just the bible, but prayer. Framing your day each and every day with prayer. Morning, noon, eveningsong, and night prayer. This is besides the breath prayers and personal prayers that you might have during the day. For me there is a comfort in starting everyday with the same words, it reminds me (and the kids) why we are here. The 51st Psalm "Open my lips, O Lord, and my mouth shall proclaim your praise."

 

It really is a manual on how to live.

[missesd]

Although there were SOME sects, the unity was visible from the very beginning. It is documented in the Scriptures (the order of authority and functionality of the early Church) and in the works of the pre-Nicean church fathers. Although the Scriptures were canonized (officially decided upon) in the fourth century, the majority of Christian local churches have already used mostly the same writings that later formed NT. The OT that was used was Septuagint, as this is what Jesus quoted while on earth.

 

It wasn't, as some would like to have, hundreds of views and opinions about what Christianity was, and then by a democratic vote or mysterious process decided upon who was right. The church was one from the very beginning. If you read the early church fathers you will see at least this: it's unity. Facing heresies? Yes, but unity was visible.

 

Why did they need to be canonized? Why did man get to decide what scriptures made it in and which did not? Aren't ALL of Christ's teachings/scriptures important and relevant??

[iwka]

Why did they need to be canonized? Why did man get to decide what scriptures made it in and which did not? Aren't ALL of Christ's teachings/scriptures important and relevant??

 

The simplest answer: Because the Bible (OT or NT) itself does not say which books should be included. It is the question of final authority (and somewhat of inspiration and interpretations of the Scriptures).

[Wayfaring Stranger]

This occurred as various leaders and movements gained power or influence over each other, more followers, political backing, etc until one took ascendancy.

 

Do you have any examples of this?

[missesd]

Ok, so I have been following this thread and discussing it with hubby... we've had some very "spirited" debates... LOL One of his biggest complaints is that he has read/heard that we are not to worship "graven images". Until last night I had never heard that or that term. He used the golden calf as na example... again I am not very familiar with the stories, so I was :confused: But he has taken this story from Exodus and applied it to the images within the Catholic church... the cross, statues, etc... So does anyone have an answer that may appease him on this?? Cause I am clueless... LOL

 

Thanks :)

[Dolphin]

Ok, so I have been following this thread and discussing it with hubby... we've had some very "spirited" debates... LOL One of his biggest complaints is that he has read/heard that we are not to worship "graven images". Until last night I had never heard that or that term. He used the golden calf as na example... again I am not very familiar with the stories, so I was :confused: But he has taken this story from Exodus and applied it to the images within the Catholic church... the cross, statues, etc... So does anyone have an answer that may appease him on this?? Cause I am clueless... LOL

 

Thanks :)

 

I am not sure about the Catholic response to this, but I would say that I do not worship the cross. I respect it as a symbol of Jesus's sacrifice.

[lionfamily1999]

Ok, so I have been following this thread and discussing it with hubby... we've had some very "spirited" debates... LOL One of his biggest complaints is that he has read/heard that we are not to worship "graven images". Until last night I had never heard that or that term. He used the golden calf as na example... again I am not very familiar with the stories, so I was :confused: But he has taken this story from Exodus and applied it to the images within the Catholic church... the cross, statues, etc... So does anyone have an answer that may appease him on this?? Cause I am clueless... LOL

 

Thanks :)

They are not worshipping the images. They are using the images to get themselves into the frame of mind to worship God, they are using the arts to worship God.

 

I know how your dh feels, a lot of the Catholic icon-type things dh's grandmother left around the house scared me for the same reason. I know, now, that it's not the idol worship I thought it was.

 

ETA, he's talking about the 2nd Commandment: Ex. 20- 4You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,

6 but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.

Edited March 19, 2011 by lionfamily1999

[SEP]

i was raised in the Catholic church, but I did not have a personal relationship with Christ until I was 22.

 

I would like to see what responses you get to the 'graven images' because I have to say that I agree with your husband.

 

yikes!

[mcconnellboys]

I am not (yet at least, LOL) changing my church affiliation, but I am continuing to become more involved in study of both the Bible and church history. To that end, I have been talking to some Catholic friends and doing some studies on my own using books of theirs. I have been invited to attend Catholic study groups, too, but have not done that at this time.

 

I am currently in a very small church group that has affiliation with the Methodist church, but it is run more as a non-denominational church. I was raised in the Methodist church and have attended that church most of my life. While Methodists are not quite as ritualistic as Catholics, Episcopalians, etc., there was ritual involved in our weekly services as well as for the various periods of the church year. I find that now that I am in a church that does not incorporate much of that, I am missing it.

 

I'm not a singer (tone deaf) and while I love music, I can't really participate in it. For me, the words of liturgy, reciting psalms together, responsive readings, reciting creeds and prayers together, is simply beautiful and makes me feel much closer to God. And it is something I can really participate in, unlike the music. I'm not saying empty words, I'm concentrating on the intent of those words as I say them. I'm thinking about their meaning. I'm rejoicing in words of praise to God. I want more of that in my life.

 

To that end, I began praying the hours at the beginning of this year. I've just looked around and pulled together some psalms and prayers (also some song responses) that I've pasted into a little blank book, along with other things I want to incorporate into my prayers. I'm using it as a working model right now. After I've decided what I want to keep, change, add, etc., I'll make myself a better prayer book.

 

I have found that I really, really enjoy incorporating this formality into my prayer time!

[OLG]

Catholics do not 'worship' the statues of the saints or the cross but pray to Christ and the saints. The statues are simply images not like in the OT when people actually believed that the golden calf was responsible for answering their prayers. Does that make sense? It isn't like the ancient Greeks who worshipped their god images. In the Catholic faith prayer is directed to saints only as intercessors. God still is 'in charge' of answering the prayers! I am lousy at explaining these things but your dh's concern is a very common one that is simply a misunderstanding. Maybe others will be more articulate!

[SEP]

okay, so i agree that the statues, crosses, necklaces, might not be 'idol' worship as per the old testament examples. however, if you bow before anything that isn't Christ or pray to anyone who isn't Christ, isn't that idol worship?

[lionfamily1999]

okay, so i agree that the statues, crosses, necklaces, might not be 'idol' worship as per the old testament examples. however, if you bow before anything that isn't Christ or pray to anyone who isn't Christ, isn't that idol worship?

The world being finite, it is physically impossible to NOT kneel infront of something.

[simka2]

okay, so i agree that the statues, crosses, necklaces, might not be 'idol' worship as per the old testament examples. however, if you bow before anything that isn't Christ or pray to anyone who isn't Christ, isn't that idol worship?

 

Hmmmm...is it ever appropriate to bow before a dignitary? am I worshiping the dignitary because I show him honor?

 

In EO, we use the terms honor and venerate. I don't "pray" to the saints as in asking them to do something for me, other than asking them to "pray" for me. No different than if you were sitting next to me and I asked you to pray for a situation I am going thru.

 

I ask those that are alive for prayer and I ask those that "are so great a cloud of witnesses" for their prayers.;)

[missesd]

They are not worshipping the images. They are using the images to get themselves into the frame of mind to worship God, they are using the arts to worship God.

 

Ex. 20- 4You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,

6 but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.

 

I agree with the bolded, that was my take too.

 

As for the scripture, are you sure that's the right one?? It says nothing about "graven images". It talks about worshiping other idols (I take that to mean persons) or Gods.

[simka2]

Ok, so I have been following this thread and discussing it with hubby... we've had some very "spirited" debates... LOL One of his biggest complaints is that he has read/heard that we are not to worship "graven images". Until last night I had never heard that or that term. He used the golden calf as na example... again I am not very familiar with the stories, so I was :confused: But he has taken this story from Exodus and applied it to the images within the Catholic church... the cross, statues, etc... So does anyone have an answer that may appease him on this?? Cause I am clueless... LOL

 

Thanks :)

 

Yes, they were not to WORSHIP idols as if they were God, but God did have them make images of things...

 

Num 21:8-9 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.Num 21:9And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

[missesd]

but pray to Christ and the saints. In the Catholic faith prayer is directed to saints only as intercessors. God still is 'in charge' of answering the prayers!

 

I know your trying your best to answer questions, so please don't take this an I am attacking you per se. But again, to the underlined *why*?? Why would we pray to Saints :confused: That makes no sense to me. And why would we need an "intercessor"?? Isn't prayer a direct line of communication to God??

 

okay, so i agree that the statues, crosses, necklaces, might not be 'idol' worship as per the old testament examples. however, if you bow before anything that isn't Christ or pray to anyone who isn't Christ, isn't that idol worship?

 

I have to agree... good question.

[SEP]

it doesn't say 'graven' images b/c of your version of the Bible.

[missesd]

Hmmmm...is it ever appropriate to bow before a dignitary? am I worshiping the dignitary because I show him honor?

 

In EO, we use the terms honor and venerate. I don't "pray" to the saints as in asking them to do something for me, other than asking them to "pray" for me. No different than if you were sitting next to me and I asked you to pray for a situation I am going thru.

 

I ask those that are alive for prayer and I ask those that "are so great a cloud of witnesses" for their prayers.;)

 

I get the first part. It makes sense to me, and I can understand it. But you lost me at the rest, sorry... LOL

[SEP]

Hmmmm...is it ever appropriate to bow before a dignitary? am I worshiping the dignitary because I show him honor?

 

In EO, we use the terms honor and venerate. I don't "pray" to the saints as in asking them to do something for me, other than asking them to "pray" for me. No different than if you were sitting next to me and I asked you to pray for a situation I am going thru.

 

I ask those that are alive for prayer and I ask those that "are so great a cloud of witnesses" for their prayers.;)

interesting... and well written.

 

my mother is Catholic and goes to church weekly. Maybe it is her perception, maybe she has been incorrectly taught the correct Catholic way (her father was a deacon in the Catholic church), but she prays to the saints and pray to Mary, believing that they can do something.

 

I can see why people have misconceptions.

[lionfamily1999]

I know your trying your best to answer questions, so please don't take this an I am attacking you per se. But again, to the underlined *why*?? Why would we pray to Saints :confused: That makes no sense to me. And why would we need an "intercessor"?? Isn't prayer a direct line of communication to God??

 

 

 

I have to agree... good question.

It's the equivalent of asking for others to pray for you. We (Baptists) ask fellow Christians to pray for us, Catholics make the same requests and direct them to Saints. We, Baptists, believe Christ intercedes for us, Catholics believe that the Saints can as well.

 

Try to find a place to kneel where you aren't facing anything. Unless you've found a door to infinite nothingness you're out of luck. You can kneel infront of your bed, kneel in your closet, kneel next to your couch, you're still facing something.

it doesn't say 'graven' images b/c of your version of the Bible.

Right.

[SEP]

I know your trying your best to answer questions, so please don't take this an I am attacking you per se. But again, to the underlined *why*?? Why would we pray to Saints :confused: That makes no sense to me. And why would we need an "intercessor"?? Isn't prayer a direct line of communication to God??

 

I cannot find anywhere in the Bible that it says anything about having an intercessor except for the Holy Spirit. Jesus gave us the Holy Spirit when we trust Him as our Savior for that very reason.

 

We do not need anyone to interpret for us or be an intercessor for us.

 

I love a good debate where people have to challenge what we know. :) So refreshing!

[lionfamily1999]

Exodus 20:4 (King James Version)

 

 

4Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

 

Exodus 20:4 (New International Version, ©2011)

 

 

4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.

 

Exodus 20:4 (American Standard Version)

 

 

4 Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, nor any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

 

It depends on the translation used :)

[simka2]

interesting... and well written.

 

my mother is Catholic and goes to church weekly. Maybe it is her perception, maybe she has been incorrectly taught the correct Catholic way (her father was a deacon in the Catholic church), but she prays to the saints and pray to Mary, believing that they can do something.

 

I can see why people have misconceptions.

 

I can't speak to the Catholic side of things ;). I think there may be a bit of difference. And I'm sure the Anglican side has it's own take as well.

[SEP]

I know your trying your best to answer questions, so please don't take this an I am attacking you per se. But again, to the underlined *why*?? Why would we pray to Saints :confused: That makes no sense to me. And why would we need an "intercessor"?? Isn't prayer a direct line of communication to God??

 

 

 

I have to agree... good question.

 

It's the equivalent of asking for others to pray for you. We (Baptists) ask fellow Christians to pray for us, Catholics make the same requests and direct them to Saints. We, Baptists, believe Christ intercedes for us, Catholics believe that the Saints can as well.

 

Try to find a place to kneel where you aren't facing anything. Unless you've found a door to infinite nothingness you're out of luck. You can kneel infront of your bed, kneel in your closet, kneel next to your couch, you're still facing something.

 

Right.

 

That is quite the literal interpretation. I believe the verse means more of what some said about 'honoring or worshiping'. I am not giving my couch honor. :)

[Britomart]

One thing that I would like to underline, and it would be totally appropriate for the classical forum (since logic is part of classical education), is that people who are honest, really, really honest, and are searching for the deep things of God, sooner or later will come to the crossroad in where they have to answer a question: how do I determine that what I believe is an objective truth. Faith will follow or will lead to this point. Reason will agree with faith, bc there is no other way (St. Augustine said: I believe, so I can understand.)

 

 

This rings true to me. I came to traditional Anglicanism in college, while I was attending a great books program, and the two events were very linked for me. I came into this church, and there they were, praying in the words of St. John Chrysostom, St. Augustine, John Donne, George Herbert - the very authors I was studying in school . . . and every week they said the creed - the same creed I was finally learning the significance of, as I read the Apostolic fathers, the church councils, etc. I couldn't help but stay. Finally, my heart and my head (and my body) were in concord when I worshipped.

 

I still am abundantly, terribly, overwhelmingly grateful for the Book of Common Prayer.

[lionfamily1999]

okay, so i agree that the statues, crosses, necklaces, might not be 'idol' worship as per the old testament examples. however, if you bow before anything that isn't Christ or pray to anyone who isn't Christ, isn't that idol worship?

That is quite the literal interpretation. I believe the verse means more of what some said about 'honoring or worshiping'. I am not giving my couch honor. :)

 

I was specifically answering the "bow before" part. Now, I do not pray to anyone besides Christ ;) but for a different reason. I don't see it as idol worship, so much as trying to contact the death. In the case of where you kneel or what's infront of you, Catholics do not pray to the icons. They are kneeling infront of them (imu) much the same as we, Baptists, may kneel at the alter in church, or before the cross, or before our Bibles. It's not the alter or cross or Bible we're worshipping, we're worshipping God, these things help us to focus.

[missesd]

Exodus 20:4 (King James Version)

 

 

4Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

 

I am not sure where you fit in all of this... if you are RC or EO, or just someone with information. But it would seem to me from the quote above, and the last, that my husband was correct. *Likeness of anything that is in Heaven above* Wouldn't that be pictures/sculptures of Jesus??

[missesd]

Although there were SOME sects, the unity was visible from the very beginning. It is documented in the Scriptures (the order of authority and functionality of the early Church) and in the works of the pre-Nicean church fathers. Although the Scriptures were canonized (officially decided upon) in the fourth century, the majority of Christian local churches have already used mostly the same writings that later formed NT. The OT that was used was Septuagint, as this is what Jesus quoted while on earth.

 

It wasn't, as some would like to have, hundreds of views and opinions about what Christianity was, and then by a democratic vote or mysterious process decided upon who was right. The church was one from the very beginning. If you read the early church fathers you will see at least this: it's unity. Facing heresies? Yes, but unity was visible.

 

Why did they need to be canonized? Why did man get to decide what scriptures made it in and which did not? Aren't ALL of Christ's teachings/scriptures important and relevant??

 

Still trying to get an answer to this too...

[simka2]

Yes, they were not to WORSHIP idols as if they were God, but God did have them make images of things...

 

Num 21:8-9 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.Num 21:9And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

 

I am not sure where you fit in all of this... if you are RC or EO, or just someone with information. But it would seem to me from the quote above, and the last, that my husband was correct. *Likeness of anything that is in Heaven above* Wouldn't that be pictures/sculptures of Jesus??

 

How would you explain the above scriptures? ;)

[lionfamily1999]

I am not sure where you fit in all of this... if you are RC or EO, or just someone with information. But it would seem to me from the quote above, and the last, that my husband was correct. *Likeness of anything that is in Heaven above* Wouldn't that be pictures/sculptures of Jesus??

I'm Baptist, but some of the Catholics in the hive answered many of these questions for me already. I only posted the first half (vs 4) to show the difference in terminology. They all follow with "5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me," although the wording can be different depending on the translation.

 

It's not the creation of art, remember the Arc of the Covenant, made per God's instruction, as well as the inner room, were full of art that depicts all those things. It's the worshipping of those things that is wrong. God is jealous over us. He doesn't want us worshipping dumb idols, because it hurts us. We can create and decorate, we just can't create and then worship.

[ScoutTN]

OK, I'm responding to the OP's question without getting into the protestant vs. RC/EO stuff.

 

We are members of a PCA church with a formal worship service and a neo-gothic cathedral sanctuary. Many people find the traditional liturgy, hymns (played on a huge pipe organ!), pastors in robes, weekly communion and the large, formal, beautiful building to help them focus on the transcendence of God, on his holiness, on his infinitude and immutability and on his omnipotence. We have people of all ages and from many church background finding our church a home.

 

I think many people find the Jesus-is-your-friend, casual, utilitarian buildings

rock-band approach wears thin after a while. Worship and church can seem just like a regular part of the world. But people are seeking rest, quiet for their souls and eternal truths which do not change with culture or time. Worship which is not all about us, but is clearly about and for God, is a refreshing change in our current culture!

 

Ritual and formal worship, if accompanied by true preaching and teaching of the gospel, can be balm for our weary, busy, self-oriented souls!

Edited March 19, 2011 by ScoutTN

[lionfamily1999]

Why did they need to be canonized? Why did man get to decide what scriptures made it in and which did not? Aren't ALL of Christ's teachings/scriptures important and relevant??

 

Still trying to get an answer to this too...

Many Christians do not believe it was a man that decided. Many believe that God had a hand in it.

 

Many of the gospels were redundant. Some "gospels" were written much later.

[missesd]

It's not the creation of art, remember the Arc of the Covenant, made per God's instruction, as well as the inner room, were full of art that depicts all those things. It's the worshipping of those things that is wrong. God is jealous over us. He doesn't want us worshipping dumb idols, because it hurts us. We can create and decorate, we just can't create and then worship.

 

Ahhh, that makes sense.... thank you.

[lionfamily1999]

Ahhh, that makes sense.... thank you.

Sure thing :D Have to run!!!! I'll check in later ;)

[missesd]

Many Christians do not believe it was a man that decided. Many believe that God had a hand in it.

 

Many of the gospels were redundant. Some "gospels" were written much later.

 

Is there anywhere where this belief is evidenced?

[Caitilin]

Is there anywhere where this belief is evidenced?

 

I am confused. What kind of evidence are you seeking? You want evidence that Christians believe this, or you want evidence to support their beliefs?

[missesd]

I have a separate question, or rather 2. As I am reading over some of the sites given, and thinking about the thread, 2 things have come to mind:

 

1. Someone said that Christ started this church before his death and it has continued on, albeit it splintered and then splintered again. If this is so, do the EO or RC have Apostles and such as they did in Jesus' times?

 

2. Isn't there a scripture stating that baptism is to be by immersion? Am I right in remembering, in what I have seen on TV, that RC baptism is done by sprinkling?

[missesd]

I am confused. What kind of evidence are you seeking? You want evidence that Christians believe this, or you want evidence to support their beliefs?

 

I guess I want to know if there is anyway for us to *truly* know this? When I watched The DaVinci code, I think one of the parts that bothered me the most was the scene with the canonization. I know a lot of Catholics did not like that movie, though I don't know why.

[Caitilin]

I guess I want to know if there is anyway for us to *truly* know this? When I watched The DaVinci code, I think one of the parts that bothered me the most was the scene with the canonization. I know a lot of Catholics did not like that movie, though I don't know why.

 

I don't think that you can really KNOW this, if by that you mean knowing through proof. I guess you either believe that God worked through man in the compilation of the Scriptural canon or you don't. I don't know how it could be proved.

 

I have never seen the da Vinci Code, but Catholics dislike the false representation it gives both of the Church and of Christ himself, as I understand the objections. What is the "canonization" scene to which you refer?:001_smile:

[Caitilin]

I have a separate question, or rather 2. As I am reading over some of the sites given, and thinking about the thread, 2 things have come to mind:

 

1. Someone said that Christ started this church before his death and it has continued on, albeit it splintered and then splintered again. If this is so, do the EO or RC have Apostles and such as they did in Jesus' times?

 

This is going to be one of those places where it's very hard for someone from the one faith background to understand where the other is coming from. I realize that this is very much a part of the LDS teaching on the organization of the church, but the RC church and the EO church just don't see it like that. They understand apostles to be those specific individuals whom Christ commissioned; the Catholic organizational hierarchy is much more involved than that of the Orthodox Church, but they both have deacons, priests, and bishops, all of which are ordained ministries, and are vocations, not something which every man may or should undertake. And they don't believe in a continuing "apostleship" in a literal, "specific job in the church" kind of way.

Edited March 19, 2011 by Caitilin

[missesd]

This is going to be one of those places where it's very hard for someone from the one faith background to understand where the other is coming from. I realize that this is very much a part of the LDS teaching on the organization of the church, but the RC church and the EO church just don't see it like that. They understand apostles to be those specific individuals whom Christ commissioned; the Catholic organizational hierarchy is much more involved than that of the Orthodox Church, but they both have deacons, priests, and bishops, all of which are ordained ministries, and are vocations, not something which every man may or should undertake. And they don't believe in a continuing "apostleship" in a literal, "specific job in the church" kind of way.

 

I guess I understand that. But when we talk a bout Christ setting up his church before his death, and we knew he had Apostles, I guess I just figured that would continue on with his church :confused:

[Colleen in NS]

Once again, I'm just having a quick skim of the replies, and I don't have time to reply right now - argghhhh!! I can't believe how involved this thread got - I really appreciate all your input!!

 

Because I probably won't have time later tonight now, or tomorrow (birthday celebrations all day!), and might have to wait til Monday to dig into this thread; I just want to ask if you all could keep trying to keep the thread mostly on track with my OP. Please? So many people have had VERY helpful things to say to me, and I see that missesd has some great questions going on and I'm fine with that. I'm just asking that the thread doesn't derail into debates about which denomination is right about which particular beliefs, etc.. I'm seeing places where the line is fine between just short answers, and what could be interpreted as short, snappy answers. Cuz I just don't have time today or tomorrow to reply to what I want to reply to, and I don't want the thread to get locked before I get a chance! :D

 

Thank you all again, and please carry on with helping me out with my OP!

[missesd]

I don't think that you can really KNOW this, if by that you mean knowing through proof. I guess you either believe that God worked through man in the compilation of the Scriptural canon or you don't. I don't know how it could be proved.

 

I have never seen the da Vinci Code, but Catholics dislike the false representation it gives both of the Church and of Christ himself, as I understand the objections. What is the "canonization" scene to which you refer?:001_smile:

 

Just a group of church heads sitting around a big table in a HUGE room, arguing about what should and should not be included. It just came off as presumptuous, and one has to ask *why* they get the right to decide for generations of man what should and shouldn't be in the Bible. Especially when he seemed no one could agree... that certainly doesn't portray God's hand in it :confused: