Are non-denom "churches" basically protestant?


#21

[quote=mastda]The only problem with this rationale is the moment you choose to not choose sides, you have already made a choice and chosen a side!
[/quote]

I agree. Choosing a side is inevitable.


#22

Kendy, there actually are charismatic movements within the Catholic church. Some are perfectly legit, though there has been some concern with the direction others have taken. I have a very orthodox Catholic friend who goes to a charismatic Catholic church. It’s a matter of taste, really: I personally dislike that style of worship, and dislike the music even more. But hey, that’s me. You might want to check with the archdiocese of Chicago if you’re interested in that sort of thing, and make sure it’s on-track and orthodox.


#23

If you’re neither Catholic nor Protestant, then you’re not Christian.


#24

[quote=forthright]If you’re neither Catholic nor Protestant, then you’re not Christian.
[/quote]

Man stinks to be Orthodox then.
BrianH


#25

Many non-denom churches are actually Baptist. I’m aware of three non-denom churches here in Metro-Detroit that were Baptist then changed names but retained the same pastors and teachings, many of the people that attend services there will tell you that. IMHO non-denom is often a marketing ploy.


#26

[quote=Kendy]Non-denominational churches are an attempted to respond to divisions in the Christian faith by stepping out independently and saying, “I am not going to take sides, I just am going to worship God.” I understand that feeling, but it’s misguided since it doesn’t actually address the problem, but avoids it.

Secondly, you cannot judge non-denominational churches by one church since that church can only represent itself.

As for the harrassing part, since I have been on CAF, I was invited everyday to converted to catholicism and occasionally rebuked for resisting that suggestion; people tend to do that when you are on their territory :).

Now, what are these “charismatic people” that you speak of? That might be of interest to me :stuck_out_tongue:

Kendy
[/quote]

I got my M.A. from Franciscan Univ. of Steubenville and it’s charismatic. I also used to attend a moderately charismatic Catholic Church in Dallas. It was a good start for me. I prefer the more traditional mass now, but I do have an appreciation for charismatics.

BTW, I agree with your assessment on non-denominational churches.


#27

[quote=Chris in Mich]Many non-denom churches are actually Baptist. I’m aware of three non-denom churches here in Metro-Detroit that were Baptist then changed names but retained the same pastors and teachings, many of the people that attend services there will tell you that. IMHO non-denom is often a marketing ploy.
[/quote]

Why did they leave their denomination? Sometimes, churches break up because of doctrinal disputes, like one baptist churches broke from the Southern Baptist convention because the convention supported “worldy music” and Billy Graham.

Kendy


#28

[quote=Kendy]Why did they leave their denomination? Sometimes, churches break up because of doctrinal disputes, like one baptist churches broke from the Southern Baptist convention because the convention supported “worldy music” and Billy Graham.

Kendy
[/quote]

It’s hard to speculate. I’ve seen two non-denominational churches split over whether the pastor should be fired or not (in each case, one side kept the pastor, the other side got a new one - I guess they both got what they wanted.) I’ve also seen a church seriously divided (though not split) over whether a farmer’s lost cow was “miraculously” returned by the power of God or if he had just not looked in the right place in his field for a week or two. “Independant” churches have become so common that it has become easy for people to say, “Well, if they’re not gonna teach my interpretation, then I’ll just leave and start my own church.”


#29

I think it helps to keep in mind what the broad meaning of the word “Protestant” is.

“protest.”

The original Protestants were “protesting” against both
the theology of the CC and the practice of some who
were mis-presenting the theology of the CC…e.g. Tetzel
and the indulgence controversy.

So, to me, the non-denominational Churches participate
in the continuing protest, as it were - and are, therefore,
Protestant.

The other theological aspect to consider, consists in the fact that these are
"non-sacramental" Churches…unlike the CC, Orthodoxy and Lutheranism -
if I understand this correctly.

It’s interesting to note, I think, that the Orthodox Church
does not consider herself to be Protestant…while she
"protested" the doctrine of the* filioque*, she considers
herself to be the sole, orthodox Church, founded by
Christ…hence, she is not protesting against the “true
Church” but rather* is* the true Church. [And the break
with Rome occurred centuries before Luther - when
the term “protestant” appeared.]

[Does anyone know if other Protestant Churches - other
than Lutheranism- hold to the Real Presence or accept
that sacraments are theological realities?]

[And, further, do all Lutherans accept the Real Presence?]

reen12


#30

originally posted by reen12
And, further, do all Lutherans accept the Real Presence?]

I was raised and catachized EUL (evangelical united lutheran).
We were taught that the communion, which only took place on the 1st Sunday of the month, was a symbol only.
I understand that the missouri synod lutherans believe in something called con-substantiation, which, no matter how you interpret that, is still not Transubstantiation.


#31

[quote=justint77]my ex-girlfriend started going to a “non denom church” she had no interest in going to my catholic church but wanted me to attend her non-denom church. so i went once…i felt very uncomfortable with attending and felt that i didnt like the “evangelical” “fanatical” type preachings and worship ways.

so basically we broke up because she became very fanatical with her church and felt that catholics were wrong…blah blah blah.
i feel that non-denom churches are basically protestant churches. also is it wrong to be put off and annoyed with the “evangelic” “high pressure” “fanatical” type of worship? because i very much am annoyed by that.
[/quote]

The Catholic Church is the “gold standard” by which all other self-professed Christian churches are judged relative to. Protestant churches derive their name due to their protests against the Catholic Church. All “non-denoms” are offshoots of offshoots of offshoots of the first Protestant churches. They are actually Protestants protesting Protestantism. Which, actually, is what all Protestant churches are, otherwise they would all be Lutherans. Therefore, non-denoms are Protestants.

Phil


#32

[quote=reen12][Does anyone know if other Protestant Churches - other
than Lutheranism- hold to the Real Presence or accept
that sacraments are theological realities?]

[/quote]

Anglicans, Methodists, Calvin Presbyterians do in a weird way (i.e. not Zwinglian), and I’m sure there’s a few others.

If they’re so-called orthodox Lutherans, then yes. Individual Lutherans is another story.


#33

On a practical level, they are of course not protesting. Very few non-Catholics sit down and say, “Now what should I be? First I will look at the Orthodox and CAtholic. Then let me look at the Lutherans.” People fit into their particular niche usually(not always) because of their presuppositions which usually(again) result more from socialization as opposed to an objective search for truth.
BrianH


#34

quote: catsrus

I was raised and catachized EUL (evangelical united lutheran).
We were taught that the communion, which only took place on the 1st Sunday of the month, was a symbol only.
I understand that the missouri synod lutherans believe in something called con-substantiation, which, no matter how you interpret that, is still not Transubstantiation.

Thanks for the insight, catsrus.
I had forgotten about “consubstantiation.”

Best,

reen12


#35

quote: Philthy

The Catholic Church is the “gold standard” by which all other self-professed Christian churches are judged relative to.

According to the CC. :tiphat:

Best regards, Philthy,

reen


#36

quote: Semper Fi

Anglicans, Methodists, Calvin Presbyterians do in a weird way (i.e. not Zwinglian), and I’m sure there’s a few others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reen12
[And, further, do all Lutherans accept the Real Presence?]

If they’re so-called orthodox Lutherans, then yes. Individual Lutherans is another story

Thanks, Semper Fi,

Best,

reen


#37

quote: BrianH

On a practical level, they are of course not protesting.

In one sense, I think that’s true.

Yet, when I read material - on some Christian sites -
it seems to me that the sense of “protest” is alive
and well. :yup:

Best,

reen12


#38

[quote=reen12]quote: BrianH

In one sense, I think that’s true.

Yet, when I read material - on some Christian sites -
it seems to me that the sense of “protest” is alive
and well. :yup:

Best,

reen12
[/quote]

I find that people that who post sites against Catholicism also post against other people they disagree with though.of course that would make them protestors…unless they protest a group that comes after them…is that really a protest of their protest…like I said awile back on here…semantics…but I do understand your point. :thumbsup:
BrianH


#39

Some protestants still feel it is their duty to convert the non-Christian pagan Catholics. For instance, just Google “Pope Antichrist”.

[quote=BrianH]I find that people that who post sites against Catholicism also post against other people they disagree with though.of course that would make them protestors…unless they protest a group that comes after them…is that really a protest of their protest…like I said awile back on here…semantics…but I do understand your point. :thumbsup:
BrianH
[/quote]


#40

I used to be Protestant. Now I’m Christian.

:bigyikes:


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.