Christian Denominations

>1 NothingOutThereForMe:

Didn't you already just start a thread with the same title a week ago, here?

There’s a lot of history to how we got all our denominations. The 16th and 17th centuries were crucial for the rise of many of the major denominations. But the process is still ongoing, as churches divide and come together. There’s a book that covers the denominations that I haven’t read. In it are hundreds of denominations and churches. I’ll see if I can locate that title for you.

The thing with denominations is that we tend to think our own is the best. Sometimes this can result in what I call ‘denominational pride’. People with denominational pride not only value their own denomination but actually look down on the others. Sometimes this can be destructive.

For instance, evangelicals often look down on Catholics. They say that Catholics all believe that you are saved only by your works. But when you read the history, or talk to Catholics, you find that many of them are quite aware that they need grace to be saved, they just believe that works also plays a role somehow in salvation. It’s good to believe in grace, but what these evangelicals are doing is holding up this straw man to wall themselves off from Catholics. This contributes to division and probably hurts real people.

My goal in some of my reading these days (see the Reformation Era: History and Literature discussion group on LT) is to learn the history of some of how we got our denominations. I think learning about it helps to take off the edge, contributes to the conversation, and helps us see others more for who they really are.

That book, and again, I haven’t read it, is -

Handbook of Denominations in the United States, by Roger E. Olson, et al. It appears on Amazon to be in its 14th edition. It’s a reference book. You’re not expected to read it cover to cover.

Jesus, at the last supper, prayed, "that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you." John 17:21.

We have not done a good job of living up to that.

Worth remembering that the first Great Schism in the Church was not the protestant reformation but the split between the eastern (Orthodox) and western (Roman Catholic) Churches in 1054, several hundred years earlier.

>7 NothingOutThereForMe:

What do you think of Calvinism?

>7 NothingOutThereForMe:

The word on the street is that Calvin was more cerebral than some of the other reformers. Also, he may have overemphasized predestination.

But I’ve never talked to a Calvinist or read any books on it, so the honest answer is, I don’t know.

Someday, I intend to read his Institutes of the Christian Religion (it’s a Christian classic) and a book about the Five Points of Calvinism. The Institutes in its final version is about 1,000 pages, though, so it may be a while before I tackle that one.

>9 geoffreymeadows: I also found that 10 pages of the Institutes was certain to put me to sleep.

Orthodox Christians celebrate Christmas (BBC)

More than 200 million Christians around the world are associated with Orthodox Churches and most celebrate Christmas on 7 January as they follow the Julian calendar, unlike those Christian denominations which follow the Gregorian calendar. Ceremonies and processions marking the event have been taking place around the world from Cairo to Moscow...

Someday I’d like to visit Cairo, Egypt, not only to see the pyramids, but also to visit a great Muslim city. There is also a great museum in Cairo called the Coptic Museum. The Copts were Egyptian Christians. In fact, the Coptic language was once the ancient Egyptian language. It’s hard to understand that, but once you get it, it’s tells the story of Cairo and Egypt. The Copts are now a small Christian community in Egypt and sometimes are persecuted for their faith by the Muslim majority. They use the Coptic language mostly for ceremonial purposes, though they use mainly Arabic in their daily lives mixing in completely with the Muslims.

I don’t know if it is still true, but the Coptic Church, part of the Eastern Churches, holds a high view of Mary, whom they call the Theotokos, the “Mother of God.” Mary, the mother of Jesus used to be revered like this in the Catholic Western Church, too, I think, but not in the Protestant tradition. I’m not sure if this is still the case because I believe Vatican II may have changed all that. There’s so much to learn about the ancient Christian churches, especially those that still exist largely in their ancient form. There’s so much to learn about the contemporary churches, for that matter.

Anyhow, the Coptic Church is part of the Eastern Churches, and I wish I could visit Cairo to learn more about the Copts.

>14 NothingOutThereForMe:

Is this copied from somewhere? If so, it would be helpful if you could give us the link, so that we can see the original text in context. Thanks.

This long paper (I’ve read only most of it), sets out the basics of what the Bible says about Apostles and Prophets. I know this thread is now referencing only Apostles, but there are reasons to look at them both.

It’s from the Assemblies of God, a denomination I used to frequent, and this paper reminds me of how careful the leadership was about their Bible interpretation and how they responded to possible issues within the Church.

https://ag.org/Beliefs/Position-Papers/Apostles-and-Prophets

Maybe just read the applicable sections.

>16 geoffreymeadows: Thanks. That's very helpful.

>18 NothingOutThereForMe:

Thanks. It's a deep and complex subject which one can hardly touch in brief posts like this. But basically there are many denominations, and while all of us have basic tenets of faith in common, there are different opinions and practices. Each of us finds the path which is fruitful for us. The document you have posted sets out the position of certain modern evangelical protestant churches, while the older mainstream global churches (Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, etc) take a different position. Thank God for diversity! I think our challenge today is not to argue which one is right but to try to work together for the glory of God, "that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you" (John 17:21), seeking unity in diversity rather than uniformity. Much of my work over the last thirty years has been ecumenical, and I have seen the fruits of this project, as well as its challenges.

Incidentally, "assuming you all are catholic" is not the case. I am, and so are one or two others who post here, and of course our Catholic faith influences how we view things, but this is a Christianity group not a Catholic group, and many of those who post and read it are not Catholics. Again, thanks be to God that we can all enrich each other's faith, and be constructively challenged by those who are different.

>22 brone:

We all speak from our own experience, and mine is as a missionary in Sudan and South Sudan. As far back as the 1960s, with the churches facing Islamist oppression, military dictatorship and violent conflict, far-sighted Italian Catholic and British Anglican missionary bishops in Khartoum discerned that if Christianity were to survive in Sudan the churches would need to cooperate and work together, supporting each other in solidarity. Gradually other churches joined them - Orthodox, Presbyterian, evangelicals, pentecostals - and they all began to work together for justice and peace in the country. That cooperation has had its ups and downs, but sixty years later it is still going strong. It showed itself most recently in last year's Ecumenical Pilgrimage for Peace to South Sudan by the Holy Father, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Scottish Moderator. The voice of the churches standing together in solidarity is far more powerful than that of any single church.

Or I suppose they could have just sat back and argued with each other about who is right, concentrating on the deficiencies which they see in each other, trying without success to convert each other, and refusing to work together because they were not blessed with perfect unity. Ecumenical solidarity does not mean that each church agrees with all the others on everything. It's not about doctrine or dogma, but rather pastoral pragmatism. In practice it means agreeing on what we can agree on, and agreeing to disagree on what we can't, while working and praying together to advance God's Kingdom in our concrete situation.

But I would ask you what do you actually propose as a practical alternative to ecumenism? What is your advice to Christians of different churches all over the world who are struggling to cope with the realities of religious oppression, violent conflict, authoritarian governments, extreme political ideologies, unsympathetic or even hostile secular societies, humanitarian disasters, poverty, illiteracy, etc, etc? Go it alone in the belief that only you have the truth, or stand together for the things you have in common while recognising that it is not perfect unity as long as you still have issues which divide you? I know which I prefer.

Incidentally I'm currently writing the history of a particular South Sudanese Catholic diocese and in the archives I've found amongst the reports from the Catholic missionary superior in 1947, "All the different {protestant} Missionaries - American, Aussie and New Zealanders - are very fine types. We all get on excellently”. An early example of practical ecumenism.

One of my memories of the 1960s is of my father, then a protestant missionary, showing a filmstrip of Indian Christian art at the Roman Catholic school we attended during our first few months in India.

A few years later, I was attending a boarding school that was an ecumenical effort for the children of various missions. Some of our Sunday 'vesper' services were Roman Catholic masses showing different liturgical traditions within the Roman Catholic church celebrated for us by priests from a nearby ashram.

In an environment of so many different religious traditions, the differences between Catholic and Protestant were still there, but seemed much less important than all being in Christ.

I suppose you can look at it this way - we may not have a lot of unity any more, but we do now have choice.

Does that sound a little depressing after the beautiful thoughts from the thread above?

I’m sorry this thread has turned out the way it has.

>27 geoffreymeadows:

I often know that feeling, here and in other threads in this group. My apologies if any of my posts have contributed to that. Mea culpa, as we confess in my denomination.

>28 John5918:

I don’t think so, John. From my experience you seem to be right on the money. Keep up the good work.

Me? I’m new. I feel like I’ve got a lot to learn.

>29 geoffreymeadows: Seconded

Again, I’m sorry the way the thread turned out. I’m sorry also that NothingOutThereForMe was removed. I didn’t agree with her (was she a her or a him?) on everything, and I think she had kind of an aggressively anti-church viewpoint, but she put her questions and opinions out there despite what all others thought about her and those opinions. It takes some courage to do that. Actually, there would have been no thread on denominations without her and I appreciated her for that. I don’t know what she did or said on other threads, but I’m sorry now that she’s gone.

In the end, I agreed with her about there not being a specific official line of authority between Peter and the leadership of the Catholic Church, specifically from the Apostles to the bishops. (I still have much more to learn about the popes and the history of the papacy). There certainly was a lineage in general in that the Apostles appointed some of the bishops and that the “Apostolic teaching” was preserved through the bishops that came after the Apostles, no matter how they were chosen.

Does that mean I hate or don’t love Catholics or Orthodox believers? I don’t think so. I don’t have much experience of Orthodox believers, but the Catholics I have known have been much less contentious than some of the evangelical people I have known. (And I think that’s a good thing.) They also seem to have a quieter faith and sometimes more reasonable judgments about the modern world.

To me it seems that claiming the Bible has only one absolute inerrant interpretation has led to many problems, including dividing us when we disagree on anything at all in the Bible. It’s this position of absolutes and inerrancy that has bred so many denominations in the first place. I got this idea - inerrancy leading to the proliferation of denominations - from a little book called, The Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism Is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture by Christian Smith. This book is not a major theological work, but I thought it was helpful.

Maybe one thing I can learn from this thread is not to have a negative attitude towards people I think have a negative attitude. I might actually end up agreeing with them.

>31 geoffreymeadows:

Thanks for this interesting post. Like you I was rather surprised to see that NothingOutThereForMe was removed. I assumed them to be a youngish person who was seeking answers about their faith, and I tried to encourage them in their journey. I found nothing offensive or inappropriate about their posts in this Christianity group, but like you I don't know what they might have posted elsewhere.

Does that mean I hate or don’t love Catholics or Orthodox believers?

Thanks for raising this question. I think it links to a far wider problem in our current societies, that there's a modern tendency to demonise, denigrate, disparage, ridicule, hate and/or dehumanise those with whom we disagree in any sphere of life. There's a good article in the Guardian this morning, Social media lies can unleash a dangerous contempt for others. We can stop it. It's particularly sad when it crops up within the Christian family. We disagree on many issues between different denominations and, as some of these conversations demonstrate, there is also disagreement within each denomination, but I wish we could do so with civility, courtesy and, above all, charity. Once again for the times I have fallen short of that ideal, mea culpa.

As for being "less contentious" and having "a quieter faith and sometimes more reasonable judgments", that makes me think back to a recent post by Foxhunter which I think has now been deleted. This is precisely one of the things I always admired about Anglicans - many of my Anglican friends and colleagues were what could be described as "middle of the road", avoiding contentious extremes. God bless them.

>32 John5918: "a modern tendency to demonise..."

This is hardly new, but rather, very old, even within Christianity. It did seem to be getting better towards the end of the last century, but with the rise of social media, it has gotten worse again. I remember reading Arius, Rowan Williams shortly after he was chosen to be Archbishop of Canterbury, and thinking that at least no amount of controversy would surprise him.

BTW, it constantly surprises me that others think of Anglicans as being so much less difficult than other Christians. Maybe we argue so much in the family that we find it easier to accept other opinions from others. Believe me, in the family the fighting can be fierce.

A bit of an apology - I realize my words have been kind of strong. Talking about “absolutes” and “inerrancy.” Probably most people who believe in inerrancy do so simply because they believe the Bible is inspired. And how do you get the most out of the Bible without believing that? I’ve spent some years reading the Bible as history, but after all that time I still need something more from it. I suppose I still believe some things in the Bible are cultural not spiritual. But I’m trying myself now to seek God in the Bible more earnestly. I’m sorry if I’ve overstepped any lines.

I have a cheat sheet on Christian Churches that helps remind me of top-level differences between the various Churches that some may find useful.

First, the two great non-European Churches that some may be unaware of:
Nestorian = 'Assyrian Church of the East' (This is the Non-Ephesian Church, 431 AD, that could not agree with the Christological formulation at the Council Ephesus.)
Jacobite = 'Oriental Orthodoxy', (Monophysite - today we typically say "Miaphysite") (These are the Non-Chalcedonian Churches, 451 AD, that could not agree with the Christological formulation at the Council of Chalcedon) - Syrian Orthodox, Copts, Armenians, and Ethiopians.

The Assyrian Church of the East, from its ancient base in the pre-Islamic Persian Empire, was, according to most scholars, probably the first to reach India and China. It still exists in the Middle East and India. (If memory serves, and it might not, it has never ruled or been the majority religion in any nation or empire.)
One finds the Oriental Orthodox Church at the eastern / southern fringes of the classical Mediterranean world, from Syria and Egypt to Armenia and Ethiopia.

So these are the four (or five) great distinct Christian traditions, as dated (and judged) by the Ecumenical councils:
0. Gothic (German) Church - The so-called 'Arian' Church - did not accept the Nicene Creed. First Council of Nicaea, 325 AD. It does not have a continuous extant tradition. Basically dies when the German / Gothic Empires fell in Late Antiquity. Not considered truly Christian by the Churches below.
---- All Churches below are Nicene Churches.
1. 'East Syrian' - (Assyrian Church of the East) Its Schism is dated from AD 431 at the First Council of Epheseus. Older books / sources refer to them as 'Nestorians'.
2. 'West Syrian' - (Oriental Orthodox: Syrian Orthodox, Copts, Armenians, and Ethiopians.) Its Schism is dated from AD 451 at the Council of Chaldedon. Older books sometimes refer to them as Jacobites or Monophysites / Miaphysites. (When I was in Catholic grammar school in the sixties, no one said 'Miaphysite'.)
NOTE that 1 and 2 above have theological / liturgical traditions that begin in Aramaic, not Greek or Latin. Some scholars even believe that an Aramaic Ur-Bible predates the Koine Greek Bible that is the basis of the Bibles of the European Christian traditions below.
----All Churches below are Chalcedonian Churches.
3. Greek - Eastern Orthodox Church. Several Eastern Churches are in full Communion with each other. 1054 AD - Schism between the Eastern Orthodox Churches and the Roman Catholic Church.
3.5. 'Russian' Greek - Russian Orthodox Church. Largest Eastern Orthodox Church.
4. Latin - Roman Catholic. 1054 AD - Schism between Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Church.
4.1 Uniate Catholic Churches - (Several) Eastern Catholic Churches in full Communion with Rome.
4.5 / -or, in some reckonings, 5. 'Germanic' Latin - Protestant Revolution. 16th Century.

Obviously, 3 and 4 are the heirs of the Roman Empire and thus the beginning of European Christianity.

And, at the fringes of these four core (East Syriac, West Syriac, Latin, Greek) Christian traditions one has:
A. The 'Jewish Christians' of the first century of the Christian Era who disappeared loooong before any Council could judge their orthodoxy.
B. Gnostics. Their influence on Christianity / the influence of Christianity on them is still the subject of scholarly debate.
C. Islam, which rose in the 7th century (600's). It combined elements of 1., 2., A., and B., and, perhaps, other traditions - to, as some have argued, create the most successful Christian heresy to date.

Thank you, pomonomo2003. You’ve done us a service. Thank you so much for your cheat-sheet.

Yes, thanks indeed. Good to see some of the eastern strands of Christianity getting some visibility.

#36 and #37. You're welcome.

Now, there were other sizable religious movements during the rise of Christianity that I didn't mention in my note, for instance:
Manichaeism - Persian Dualist religion that was quite popular in its time. In fact Saint Augustine was once a Manichean! Lasted in the Far East into the late medieval period. In the west, it was stamped out by both Christianity and Islam. It was never considered remotely Christian.
Marcionism - A much more 'Christian' - gnostic dualism that was also quite anti-Jewish. Taught that the God of Jesus and the God of the 'Old Testament' were different! (The OT God was Evil.) The Church Fathers wrote against them. It was (and is) often considered a Christian heresy. Others think of it as a gnostic religion. By the time of the ecumenical councils I guess they were no longer a threat because (I believe) they were never mentioned.

>38 pomonomo2003: Saint Augustine was once a Manichean

And he brought some Manichean influences into Christianity!

Yes. Some would add 'unfortunately'.

>40 pomonomo2003: Indeed! We're still dealing with the consequences.

These might be relevant to the conversation on eastern Christian denominations:

Orthodox Patriarch Anticipates Pope Francis Visit to Turkey for Council of Nicaea Anniversary (ACI Africa)

Pope Francis reinstates papal title ‘Patriarch of the West’ in Pontifical Yearbook (CNA)

Here’s a little YouTube video by an Orthodox Christian:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=12gQwcFHbjs&si=rrXH5WCZoJCqiBf2

Thanks. Very interesting and informative. It highlights many of the similarities with Catholicism, as well as some differences.

Vatican to Publish New Document with Proposals “for renewed exercise of bishop of Rome’s ministry of unity” (ACI Africa)

The Vatican will publish a study document on papal primacy and ecumenism on Thursday that will contain proposals “for a renewed exercise of the bishop of Rome’s ministry of unity” recognized by all Christians... The Vatican’s Dicastery for the Promotion of Christian Unity put together the study document to summarize the ecumenical dialogue that has occurred on the question of papal primacy and synodality in the past 30 years. In particular, the document includes responses by different Christian communities to Pope John Paul II’s 1995 encyclical on Christian unity, Ut Unum Sint (“That They All May Be One”). According to the Holy See Press Office, the document “concludes with a proposal from the dicastery identifying the most significant suggestions put forward for a renewed exercise of the bishop of Rome’s ministry of unity ‘recognized by one and all.’” Ut Unum Sint says that the bishop of Rome as the successor of the Apostle Peter has a “specific duty” to work for the cause of Christian unity. The encyclical acknowledges that “the Catholic Church’s conviction that in the ministry of the bishop of Rome she has preserved, in fidelity to the apostolic tradition and the faith of the Fathers, the visible sign and guarantor of unity, constitutes a difficulty for most other Christians, whose memory is marked by certain painful recollections.” It notes that the “primacy of the bishop of Rome has now become a subject of study” in the Church’s dialogue with other Christian communities...

"Bishop of Rome" Vatican Document: A Theologically Fruitful Clarification of the Church as a Communion of Believers (ACI Africa)

The Dicastery for Promoting Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch, recently published a lengthy new text on the question of the papacy and ecumenical relations. The document, “The Bishop of Rome: Primacy and Synodality in the Ecumenical Dialogues and in the Responses to the Encyclical Ut Unum Sint,” is not a magisterial text like an encyclical or apostolic exhortation, but is rather a “study document” intended to reopen ecumenical conversations that have been stalled...

>45 John5918:
I’m glad they’re studying it, John5918, but I don’t have much interest having over me one specific person who regulates all of Christendom. To me, much more important is the movement of the spirit, and the functioning of all the different “members” at the local level. All churches, of whatever denomination, seem to have hierarchies, but to me they exist for the local church communities, not vice-versa. I don’t know why the church got into bishops and hierarchy so early in its history. Up until these hierarchies were created, it seemed the emphasis was more local and governed more according to the actions of the “body.”

Though, I’d still like to see a church more united, I don’t think putting it all under one individual is the way forward.

Don’t get me wrong, even a local church can go off the rails. This is when you do need a hierarchy or some set of leaders to discipline, correct, and restore the local body. But even then, there is a point at which the local body must take up the responsibility of representing Christ once again. This is what a hierarchy is for. Not for one individual person to lead, guide, and nurture the entire world church.

On the other hand, I do realize Catholics derive a great deal of joy from their pope. He’s a symbol of global Catholicism. Especially since the last few popes have been such good ones (my point of view), there seems no reason to be antagonistic towards the popes. It’s just that in this report it sounds like the Pope still thinks he has authority over all Christendom. That seems to be a bit odd to me, and it ignores a fair amount of history and trouble.

>47 geoffreymeadows: and >48 geoffreymeadows:

Thanks for those two posts. I understand your concerns, particularly as the model of papacy which has been dominant for many centuries has been one of papal power and authority. But I would say that this has not always been the case, and that in earlier times the Bishop of Rome was seen as the first amongst equals rather than someone with authority over all Christendom. I suspect that this is more like the model which Pope Francis is thinking of. His decision to restore the honorific title "Patriarch of the West" seems to me to put himself alongside rather than above the other patriarchs. "Pope Francis' decision to reinstate the title of 'Patriarch of the West' can be linked to his insistence on the importance of synodality and ecumenical concern, which urges us to keep looking back to the first centuries of Christianity, when there were still no dogmatic disagreements between the churches" (link). There are many Catholics, and I believe not a few Anglicans and Orthodox, who would be prepared to explore recognising the primacy of the Bishop of Rome as a symbol of unity in a synodal and ecumenical sense rather than one of power and authority.

>49 John5918: But the first things that the Roman Catholic Church would need to do to get any consensus on the pope as 'the' leader of Christianity would be to stop using titles that claim that leadership, and to repudiate any claims of papal infallibility.

To this Anglican 'Patriarch of the West' sounds very much like he is claiming authority over me and my church. It may not be his intention, but that is how it comes across.

And after that, any claim to primacy that does not include admitting women to equal power in the church won't get very far in the 21st century in the West that he wants to be patriarch of.

>50 MarthaJeanne:

Thanks, yes, I think that's what I'm getting at, a different model of papacy.

>52 brone:
Actually, brone, you make some good arguments. But I take you most seriously when you seem to say that I meant to say, there is no body of Christ in the Catholic Church; I did not mean to say that.

Each Church seems to me to have its own kind of expression of Christ, and the Catholics I have known have always been very peaceable, sober, and gentle Christians. Sometimes, and this is not an insult, (and this is not to limit Catholics, either) I see in them the death of Christ - “for as” often as you do this “you proclaim the Lord’s death till he comes.” I was raised in the Catholic Church, so I realize I may have some inner allegiance to such expression. It certainly seems so in my life.

As for “the Pope” and “Protestant individualism”, we could probably talk a lot more about those. Maybe it’s time to give the Catholic Church some due, even if in the 16th century they were more or less off the mark. The Protestant Churches certainly weren’t perfect themselves at the time.

>52 brone: Catholics have always believed that the Church in a real sense (not symbolic) is the Body of Christ and that in that Church He lives, speaks and acts really as if He still is with us

True.

progressive Catholics don't believe this

False. Beware of tilting at straw persons.

Christians have always believed that the church is the body of Christ.

1 Corinthians 12:27

No single denomination is of itself 'the church' in that sense, and we all get things wrong, but we are all part of Christ's body. And, as Paul reminds us, the body needs all its parts.

>5 MarthaJeanne: Explains why it’s expressed as a prayer. Like “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” Aspirational, but not realisable.

>57 brone: Overwhelming number of converts to Catholicism in the US are people who are marrying a Catholic. Meanwhile stats on those leaving compared to those arriving are about 5-1. I say this as someone who perceives that as sad—a reflection on poor catechesis and average parish size of 4000+ members which allows for little personal connection between clergy and congregants.

>57 brone:

Thanks for your unusually positive description of the Catholic Church which you and I are both old and active members of. I have been a missionary in Africa for all of my adult life, the best part of half a century, so my experience is different to yours and probably that of many other posters here. In many of the areas I have worked, a single Catholic parish will baptise and confirm several hundred new Christians every Easter. Very few of these are former protestants or Muslims; the majority are people who have never come into contact with either the Holy Bible or the Holy Qur'an. We don't tend to use the archaic word "pagan", but they come from traditional African religions, many of which worship one God and don't find it too difficult a transition to embrace Christianity, in the same way that Christianity was a natural progression from Judaism for many of Jesus' contemporaries. Christianity in Africa is vibrant and growing.

You refer to western individualism. While Africa is changing with urbanisation and social media, nevertheless there is still a strong sense of community here, epitomised by the ubuntu concept, and this helps to build a strong sense of being part of the Body of Christ rather than just a collection of individuals. As far back as the 1970s the Catholic Church in East Africa formally adopted the Small Christian Community model to supplement the parish model which is mentioned in >58 booksaplenty1949:.

I agree with you that the Church is not run like a business. Businesses tend to compete with each other. In many parts of Africa the Church has discovered that in order to survive, we need to cooperate with each other rather than compete, which is why Catholic and Anglican missionary bishops founded a council of churches in Sudan in 1965. I've just completed a short history of a Catholic diocese which I have been associated with for many years, a diocese the size of UK but until very recently with not a single paved road. When Catholic missionaries first sailed up the Nile and settled there in 1901, there were no Christians amongst the scattered pastoralist communities. By 1964, when an Islamist regime expelled all the Christian missionaries, there were around 8,000 Catholics and just three local diocesan priests. In the 1970s Palestinian, Jordanian, Italian, Irish, British, Dutch and US Catholic missionaries were allowed to return to provide support to the local Church. Now there are reportedly 1.5 million Catholics as well as a couple of dozen local priests, and a dozen or so missionaries from South America, Asia, Africa and both western and eastern Europe. That's a huge growth in just fifty years, and it's still expanding, having just this month been divided into two separate dioceses.

>60 brone: I agree with everything you say here, except your implied identification of “the Church” with “those in communion with the Bishop of Rome.” This strikes me as arbitrary. In any event, anyone who left a previous Christian denomination for Roman Catholicism to escape bitter internal disagreement and infighting must feel quite disappointed. I note that you have many of Evelyn Waugh’s books. He was a man who, whatever his personal and family failures, was a faithful and grateful Catholic, and the liturgical etc impact of Vatican II was terribly painful for him. Probably just as well that he died in 1966. Not that I share his views, but I can understand the mindset. I heard a very interesting lecture on this subject once, where the lecturer quoted the hymn “In heavenly love abiding/No change my heart shall fear/And safe is such confiding/For nothing changes here.” as expressing this POV. But Our Lord ,for some reason, has entrusted His Church to fallen human beings, and we’re a contentious lot.

>61 booksaplenty1949: the liturgical etc impact of Vatican II was terribly painful for him

While there were some Catholics who found change painful, I wouldn't overestimate it. Quite a few bishops were suspicious of reform when they first arrived in Rome for the Second Vatican Council, but they soon saw the value of aggiornamento and all the documents which emerged from the Council were agreed almost unanimously - the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, for example, was approved by the assembled bishops by a vote of 2,147 to four. The liturgical impact only began to be felt from the late 1960s onwards, by which time Waugh had died so he didn't see it.

While there is a small hard core of vocal, visible, well-organised and media-savvy opposition to post-Vatican II teaching in a handful of countries such as USA, UK and France, this internal disagreement passes most ordinary Catholics by, particularly in the Global South where the majority of Catholics are to be found. I'm old enough to remember the changes taking place - I was an altar server, Master of Ceremonies at mass, and chapel prefect at a Catholic grammar school - and in general I don't remember either great enthusiasm or great disappointment, although the changes to the mass were very well received, and by the time I got to university this was a great draw for students and youth, as well as for young families in ordinary parishes. Catholics just accepted it all as the teaching of the Church and got on with it. In my experience that's still how most Catholics view it.

>62 John5918: I quite agree that the average person in the pew ultimately welcomed the chance to participate more fully in the Mass. The TLM crowd is quite niche and unrepresentative. But many of those switching denominations, as opposed to former non-Christians or those becoming Catholic to marry a Catholic, are drawn to the idea that this is The One True Church, the Rock, the “Life-Bark” of Peter that is rescuing them from the sinking Titanic they perceive their former denomination to be. They want to be transported to some cross between Going My Way and Brideshead Revisited. A big overlap with politically conservative homeschoolers and such. The (Anglican) Ordinariate has a core of such people, although most parishioners are in fact life-long Catholics, presumably looking for TLM Lite.

>64 brone: Yes, I think that your point is well made. Vatican II tried, if (inevitably) not 100% successfully, to provide a framework in which the Catholic Church could move into the post-WW II world. The statements on the Church’s relationship with Jews, for example, were transformative. One could multiply examples. People who actually remember “the good old days” aren’t particularly nostalgic for them, I notice.

>65 booksaplenty1949: People who actually remember “the good old days” aren’t particularly nostalgic for them, I notice

Indeed. As one who does actually remember them, I agree with you. Of course there have been ups and downs and missteps in the ongoing reform, as there have been in all the many reforms that the Catholic Church and other churches have gone through over two millennia, but without a doubt the Church is in a far healthier place now than it was sixty years ago. One of the reasons Vatican II took place was to deal with the problems which had emerged over many decades, problems which were very evident to those of us who lived with them at the time. If we have not yet "100% successfully" resolved all those issues (will we ever?) we need to move forwards, not back.

I think one's viewpoint is shaped by one's experience and the view from where one stands. Most of the Christian churches in the Global North are experiencing shrinkage. I suppose that is depressing for those who are viewing and experiencing the Church from that place, and it must be very tempting to want to blame dynamics within the Church rather than larger social and historical reasons. If one stands where I stand, experiencing and watching a Catholic diocese which in just fifty years grew from 8,000 to over a million Catholics, from three Catholic priests to more than twenty, and in the meantime survived Islamist oppression and two civil wars, one definitely sees the Church, and the reforms which brought it to this situation, in a very positive light. In much of the Global South all the Christian churches have experienced similar growth and vibrancy; the word "vibrancy" is important, as it's not only about numbers. Older readers may remember the 1977 book The Coming of the Third Church: An Analysis of the Present and Future of the Church by Walbert Bühlmann. One 1978 reviewer highlights hope and optimism as the outstanding thread throughout the book (link), and this hope and optimism still runs through the Global South, in contrast to some of the detractors within the Church's own membership in parts of the Global North.

>66 John5918: 20+ priests for 1,000,000 Catholics? That’s not good. I gather that many African priests/seminarians are poached by the “Global North.”

Austria has several African priests. They tend to be very popular.

>68 MarthaJeanne: How’s their German?

>69 booksaplenty1949: They learn it. Not so difficult when you can't use your own language with anyone. Also, the congregation wants a priest, both for the Eucharist and for pastoral duties. Anyone used to liturgy can learn a new one sound by sound if they have to. Also, the congregation KNOWS what the priest is saying.

Pastoral care is harder. In the beginning there may be a lot of communication with English on both sides. Unlike you would expect, someone with poor English can often communicate with someone else for whom English is a poor second language better than either can with a fluent speaker. But is a German speaking environment, passible German comes quickly, and we are all used to communicating with immigrants such as the delivery driver, the guy at the sausage stand, the cleaning lady. The GP near us probably speaks better Arabic than German, but we had no problem, he picked up subtle issues better than most. Many of his patients probably use Arabic.

In the end communication is often more a matter of wanting to understand.

>70 MarthaJeanne: No doubt. And as you say, apart from the sermon, never a big deal in most Catholic churches anyway, the liturgy is a known quantity. But I think that when it came to spiritual direction and pastoral care I would want a greater degree of communication than I can have with the cleaner or the taxi driver. If the African priests were surplus to requirements back home that would make me feel better about the situation, but they have been lured away to affluent countries whose own vocations to the priesthood have dried up, while their home countries are grossly undersupplied with clergy.

I don't say that this is a fully satisfactory situation. Obviously it's not, but most of the churches with third world priests, or even southern European priests are happy to have a priest at all, with many parishes sharing, the priest driving each Sunday from service to service, and most of the parish work being done by trained lay people, many of them female.

"Spiritual direction and pastoral care" are hard for these parishes, too.

My opinion as an outsider is that the RC church in Austria was beginning to recover from WWII, when the church lost many of its best clergy. It's hard to bring up the next generation when the enthusiastic clergy were all killed.

Then sexual scandals broke out including clergy right up to and including the Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna. One friend of mine pulled her son from his planned confirmation rather than let him be touched even momentarily by the Cardinal. The seminary in St Pölten was found to have mostly foreign students, and all the computers full of mm porn. Apparently the number of people leaving the church is down to a trickle now.

One advantage the third world priests have is they didn't grow up in this environment. They are seen to actually believe something.

>67 booksaplenty1949:

In many parts of Africa a parish may cover the same area as a small European country, and have numerous outstation chapels, often up to 100km from the main parish. There may be no roads and the priests may only be able to reach each outstation once or twice a year (if they are lucky), often travelling for days on foot, by canoe, by motorbike, car or lorry. I have photos from both the 1940s and the 2010s of priests wading chest deep through swamps to reach the outstations.

In much of Africa lay catechists form the backbone of the Catholic Church. Normally each outstation will have a catechist who leads Sunday prayers, gives catechesis, and generally acts as a pastoral focus for the outstation. In many cases the catechist will have been given authority to do baptisms and funerals, more rarely to solemnise marriages and to give communion to the sick and at Sunday prayers from hosts consecrated by the priest and kept in the tabernacle. I believe this model is similar in many parts of the Global South, and explains why there is some interest in ordaining mature married men, viri probati, "respected people", people of proven faith, although this has not yet been approved by the Catholic Church (unless you happen to be an Eastern Rite Catholic or a former Anglican priest!)

The other important element of the Catholic Church in many parts of Africa since the 1960s is the Small Christian Community model, similar to (but developed independently of) the Basic Ecclesial Communities of Latin America and parts of Asia. SCCs are the basic and manageable social groups whose members can experience real interpersonal relationships and feel a sense of communal belonging as the Body of Christ, both in living and working, rooted in the theology that SCCs are not optional, but are the basic unit, basic cell, basic building block, basic foundation, most local expression of the Catholic Church (link). By the 1970s the SCC model had been formally adopted by many African bishops' conference, and is still going strong.

>73 John5918: Celibacy has never had the cachet in Africa that it acquired in Europe. My understanding is that many African priests have a common law wife. I saw a quotation recently to the effect that if he only had one, he was made a bishop.
As you point out, in many parts of the world functions other than consecration and absolution are undertaken by married permanent deacons and/or female religious.

>74 booksaplenty1949: if he only had one, he was made a bishop.

cf 1 Timothy 3:2!

>75 John5918: Tee-hee.

Since both Synodality and Small Christian Communities have been mentioned in the last thirty or so posts, this article from the (Catholic) Association of Member Episcopal Conferences in Eastern Africa (AMECEA) which mentions them both might be of interest. It refers to the 45 SCCs from one particular parish which has four outstations.

MALAWI: Forty-five Small Christian Communities Epitomise Jubilee in Synodality

“We really thank God that for the first time in over a decade now we managed to bring together all our 45 Small Christian Communities to pray at the Parish Centre. They came in numbers and by counting of prepared seats we can confirm that over 3,000 people attended the Mass. In addition to that, we also had representatives from all our four outstations participating in all the departments starting from the organising committee to Mass acolytes”...

>77 John5918: Nice.

>4 geoffreymeadows: Quite.

It is indeed the straw man.

Catholics fully understand that only by the Grace of God can one be saved, but yet good works are of paramount importance in finding the narrow way to Heaven.

We lament the irresponsibility of Calvin, Luther etc. in implanting notions of salvation that lead Christians into dangerous waters of thinking that good works drop not influence your particular judgement.

One would have to be completely blind to not see good works as a cornerstone of the Christian.

>79 LesMiserables: As far as I know, both Luther and Calvin, while insisting that good works do not save you, also insist ed that good works are the result of being saved, and if you do not do them, it is proof that you are not saved. "By their fruits you shall know them." Matthew 7:16

I have heard it claimed that Catholics don't think they have to he good, because they can just go to confession and get all their sins forgiven, and the next Saturday night go out and get drunk again, and succumb to all the old temptations again. So, back to the confessional.

You are promoting a picture of Protestant teaching that is equally inaccurate.

>80 MarthaJeanne:
Para1 - Well that is faulty theology. For one can be saved by the Grace of God without good works: re St Dismas the thief on the cross. One can also do good works without merit, being in a state of mortal sin, and so cannot be saved.

Para2 - That's a nonsense claim. Catholics know by their catechesis that absolution comes only with true contrition and reparation. God will not be mocked.

Para3- well not really as protestants wholeheartedly are in such divers and confusion amongst their tens of thousands of sects, that there is no protestant 'teaching'.

>81 LesMiserables: So according to you, Catholic teaching is that good works don't really matter when it comes to being saved. You can be saved without good works, and doing lots of good works doesn't help.

How is that different from what you claim Luther and Calvin taught?

>82 MarthaJeanne: How you read that from my answer to you, is perplexing.

I most certainly didn't say that.

Care to reread #79?

>81 LesMiserables:
“Para3- well not really as protestants wholeheartedly are in such divers and confusion amongst their tens of thousands of sects, that there is no protestant 'teaching'.”

I suppose it’s my own fault for having written about the number of denominations myself earlier in this thread. Still, I think, LesMiserables, that the fact that there are a great number of denominations now, does not need to be exaggerated. You could have made the same point without the exaggeration and the faulty conclusion. There are plenty of teachings Protestants agree on, and there are even a lot of teachings that Protestants and Catholics agree on.

I think it’s dangerous for Christians on both sides to continue arguing with one another over these same old issues. I realize we can’t always agree, but we should let go of trying to punish or slander the other side. Instead, we should be sharing information, seeking common ground, seeking neutral ground, asking questions, and doing a whole lot of listening.

Erasmus, who was also a Catholic, emphasized all those sorts of things. I wish we could proceed more like Erasmus claimed we should.

Also, I’m very much enjoying John5918’s posts about the African Catholic Church. Proverbs 25:25. It’s encouraging to hear what good things are happening in the global church in our current atmosphere (in the West) of partisanship and division, both politically and spiritually.

>85 geoffreymeadows: Earlier in life I thought that other World Religions were monoliths and only Christianity had sadly splintered into innumerable denominations and cults. Then I learned more about Judaism and Islam and realised that they too had experienced endless divisions and subdivisions. Hinduism is not really a coherent theological entity at all. Why is this? Because human beings are involved. Our search for “the Truth” is our strength and our folly. Yet it seems clear that a common desire to love God and our neighbour unites all people of faith, and produces wonderful results when we focus on those things.

>85 geoffreymeadows:

Talking about the Church in Africa, this may be of interest.

“An Adult Church”: Symposium of Africa’s Catholic Bishops Laud Growth of the Church in Africa (ACI Africa)

Following decades of evangelization, the Catholic Church in Africa “has taken root and is now an adult”, the leadership of the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM) has said. In a message marking 55 years since SECAM was established, the President of SECAM highlights the various ways in which the Church in Africa has grown, ranging from growth in vocations, and in championing for human development on the continent. According to Fridolin Cardinal Ambongo Besungu, most of the hierarchy in Africa now comes from indigenous Clergy, both secular and Religious... “An increasing number of African diocesan priests are beginning to make themselves available for limited periods as fidei Donum” {that is as missionaries to other countries}... each Diocese has created regular Diocesan structures including church buildings, educational establishments and health centres, religious institutes, seminaries and religious formation centres. “Today, the Catholic Church in Africa represents about 18 percent of the African population, with around 256 million believers and it is in Africa where the Catholic Church is experiencing record growth,” the SECAM President says... He says that in many places in Africa, it is the Church that makes up for State deficiencies, “without which there would be no life, no hope and no future.” “In the absence of State provision, the Church is concerned with the education and health of its people, providing training centres, hospitals and health centres”... He continues, “The Church has been involved in the work of being the voice of the voiceless and advocating for the reduction or cancellation of the unjust debt burden of the African people.” “The Church in Africa is vibrantly building herself up as the Family of God and enriching herself with the experience of Small Christian Communities, which are the hallmark of the Church of Jesus Christ in Africa and its islands”...

>87 John5918: Heartening. Very.

>87 John5918: Wonderful to hear that, John. Thank you.

>85 geoffreymeadows:

There's no exaggeration my friend.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_by_number_of_mem....

the fragmentation in Protestantism has been extreme, with tens of thousands of denominations.

>90 LesMiserables:
You’re right LesMiserables. There are more than I thought. They’re certainly not limited to Protestant churches, though, as even the Catholic Church has some. The early schisms of the Church in the first few centuries of the Christian era and medieval times are responsible for some of those. Some are just local or national entities which differ only in national identification with others of the same denomination.

But let’s go a little deeper. Take a look at these two sites. The first says that what counts for a “denomination” can be just a local, independent church. This is responsible for most of the high total you see in this 30,000 number. I think that’s worth remembering.

https://www.gotquestions.org/denominations-of-Christianity.html .

Here’s the Wikipedia list which starts with the earliest divisions. That’s informative, in a way, because these are some of the divisions which broke off from the Catholic Church. It’s true, though, the predominance of denominations are derived from the Protestant tradition.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Christian_denominations&amp... .

I still say we agree upon more than we disagree on. It’s just that we are so intolerant of other opinions that we withdraw fellowship when we disagree on only one or a few things. It doesn’t have to be that way.

>91 geoffreymeadows:
Thanks Geoffrey. I would say that the Catholic Church doesn't have any denominations. There are certainly different types of Catholic Churches like Roman Catholic, Coptic Catholic etc. but they all believe in the same thing, are in unity, and are all in communion with the Holy See.

I believe the key distinction with the protestants is that they all have their own dogmas and essentially have no unity.

It is quite sad and I pray that all Christians are unified one day.

>92 LesMiserables: Some people are of the mindset that everyone with whom they worship must agree with them about every theological point. Others are of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” school. Surveys often reveal that significant numbers of Catholics don’t accept the Church’s position on birth control, divorce, what have you, but Catholics by and large seem to be of the latter way of thinking—-let a hundred flowers bloom, as it were. I have often been startled by casual comments that arise in a parish discussion group—-a favourite was “Everything in the Old Testament is just a metaphor.” Yet these people are in the pews happily warbling the Creed every Sunday. What a world.

>93 booksaplenty1949: sigh.

Don't I know it, but...

No matter what the person in the pew may think, they must hold to and give intellectual assent to ALL dogmas of the Catholic Church, including those of life/death, the Eucharist etc.

And despite the current incumbent of the Holy See, the reason the Catholic Church has weathered every storm from within and without is because, apart from Christ's guarantee that it won't fail, it holds fast to tradition and is unified by the Chair of Peter.

>93 booksaplenty1949: just a metaphor

I don't want to get into mystical apophatic theology, but virtually all of our language about and description of God is image or metaphor, as God is greater than and not confined by human thought, language, imagination or understanding. "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known" (1 Corinthians 13:12). The only things that we know concretely about God are revealed through Jesus: "If you really know me, you will know my Father as well", and "He who has seen Me has seen the Father" (John 14:7, 9). God is mystery, and as the old Catholic "penny catechism" used to say, mystery is "a truth which is above {human} reason, but revealed by God" (#28).

>94 LesMiserables: despite the current incumbent of the Holy See

Not sure why you use the word "despite", except that I suppose it means you are not happy with some of the current pope's teaching. I was not happy with some elements of the teaching of previous popes including Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI, but wouldn't disparage them in that way, and I recognise and respect the value of their contribution to the life of the Church. There is a continuum in papal teaching, while each one is different (thank God) and emphasises different aspects of the rich treasury of Church teaching. The current pope emphasises pastoral mercy. Again, thank God. The Church is healthy and growing in both numbers and vibrancy, and will continue to do so as long as Catholics remain in unity with the Chair of Peter and do not stray towards schism. But schism is not new to the Catholic Church, going back to the earliest times, and seen more recently in the 19th century Old Catholic Church, and from the 1960s groups such as Legio Maria, Sedevacantists and the Society of St Pius X. But as you say, we trust in Christ's guarantee that the Church won't fail, and from where I stand there is no sign of it doing so.

>94 LesMiserables: "No matter what the person in the pew may think, they must hold to and give intellectual assent to ALL dogmas of the Catholic Church, including those of life/death, the Eucharist etc. "

But they don't. Most of the Roman Catholic women I know are (or were) on birth control. They want female priests. And many of them have very little respect for their clergy. And these are the ones who still bother to go to mass on Sundays.

>97 MarthaJeanne:
But they don't.

Ah, that's heresy then.

The Church of England is part of the Anglican Communion, and although the churches of the Communion disagree on many topics, we are all in Communion with Canterbury.The Church of England is also in full communion with the Old Catholics and with many Lutheran Churches.

We also work and pray together with many other churches, in the World Council of Churches, as well as in local, regional, and worldwide discussions and agreements. Part of what helps make all of this work is being willing to accept that none of us have the whole truth. But we all know Jesus, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. We try to be His Church, and know that that is the church that really matters.

I would not want to call anyone a heretic who assents to the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed. Nor would I ever join a church that demanded denominational loyalty above loyalty to Christ.

>99 MarthaJeanne: I get what you are saying, but perhaps let me put it another way.

The Catholic Church is essentially a unified body due to the three legged stool of tradition, scripture, and doctrine: ie the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium.

The Church approaches the above objectively.

Hence when I say heretic, or schismatic, or Pelagian, or Eucharist, I'm referring objectively to clearly defined Church teaching,

On the other hand, Protestantism, by its very nature is founded upon subjective opinion.

This subjectivism crosses a huge spectrum from the least subjective, in the High Church Anglican protestants, to the most subjective Evangelical Protestants who one can clearly see is a purely emotional experience for the participants.

So, I'm not stone throwing here just stating facts about what heresy means.

>100 LesMiserables: Please stop saying 'the Church' or even 'the Catholic Church' when you are referring to your specific denomination.

By the very fact that you are setting the lines so narrowly, you are showing that what you think of as acceptable belief is anything but καθολικός - ie universal.

>101 MarthaJeanne:
Why? It is the Church that Christ founded in Peter. That's straight from the Gospel.
When you are separated from it, your priority should be to join with it.

My priority is to follow Christ, not Peter, and not people who think they can speak for either of them.

How you understand Matthew 16:18 is your business. Whatever it means, I doubt that Jesus was referring to the whole Vatican apparatus. But recall 16:23 as well. Peter was certainly not infallible. Nor has there ever been a time in church history when the whole church was united, certainly not behind Peter or the bishops of Rome.

There will be no unity in the church on earth as long os any single denomination tries to claim to be the only real church.

>103 MarthaJeanne:

Ah! I wish you well.

I suppose this is where the “Christian Denominations,” thread on the “Christianity” discussion bites the dust. Notice that the division derives from the dissentions of the early 16th century. I’m not siding with either the Catholic or Protestant points of view on this thread, but I wish we could say a few more things with respect to reconciliation and hope. Like we were doing earlier in the thread.

Like what is “ecumenism” really, and how much hope can we realistically derive from it? I’ve never been in a church that had a major interest in it.

>95 John5918: Didn’t see this before. I agree that it is difficult to speak of God other than in metaphorical terms—-like “Father,” for example. I think the person in question was referring to the *events* in the Old Testament, however, like the Exodus or the Babylonian Exile. The implication was that they didn’t really happen.

Has anyone here read The Small Sects in America? Makes the situation with mainstream Christian denominations seem more torlerable, by comparison.

Sounds like, from the description on LT, a great little book. I don’t know why I’m interested in these topics. Maybe I’m just missing something in myself. But somehow it completes me to learn about different groups (within the church), and to talk about those differences reasonably.

Thanks for the book suggestion, >107 booksaplenty1949: !

Also, I’m going back and re-reading this whole thread. There’s a lot there that I didn’t remember.

>105 geoffreymeadows:

No, I don't think this thread "bites the dust". I think there are a number of regular posters who are interested in discussing the topic of Christian denominations and ecumenism, exploring the prayer of Jesus in John 17:21, "May they all be one. Father, may they be one in us, as you are in me and I am in you, so that the world may believe it was you who sent me".

I follow, with detachment, what goes on in the Ordinariates set up to incorporate elements of the Anglican tradition compatible with Roman Catholic belief into that church. Some of the new communities have taken the name of a saint who started life as an Anglican—St John Henry Newman, for example—which seems an appropriate choice. But others are named after various English martyrs who died rather than become Anglican. This strikes me as very odd. I think the whole era of “conversion or execution” is a sad chapter in Christian history, and world history in general.

>110 brone:

But this thread is about Christian denominations, not about interfaith dialogue, so "confessing Christ's unique mediatorship" does not become an issue in this context.

>112 John5918: Good point.

>109 John5918:
I didn’t mean to disparage the posters, as they are heroes in many ways to me. What I was trying to disparage was that the thread had seemingly come to an end. (It had paused for over a month.) The discussion seemed to come to an end where two posters took positions between the Catholic and Protestant positions, positions dating from the rift of the church from 500 years ago, and that seemed discouraging for me. We have to find other ways to communicate. I realize there are real disagreements, but there must be some way to communicate our disagreements without just digging in and saying goodbye. Not sure exactly how we do that, but we should.

I too am interested in John 17:21. There could be nothing better.

>109 John5918:
Yes, I think John 17:21 makes a good measuring stick for this thread. I just want this thread to take another step (and not get stuck on a supposed Catholic-Protestant divide).

Thanks. So let's try "to take another step" and avoid the "supposed Catholic-Protestant divide" (although I would add that it is not only Catholic-Protestant but there can also be what one might call an Evangelical Protestant-Mainstream Global Protestant divide with some "saved" evangelicals being as resistant to cooperation with mainstream protestantism as some Catholics apparently are, as I have witnessed in some conversations in this group over the last couple of decades).

I would suggest that there are two aspects to ecumenical cooperation between Christian denominations, namely theological and practical.

There is a clear theological imperative in John 17:21 as already mentioned, but ecumenism is also part of the teaching of most mainstream global denominations, including Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, Roman Catholic, Presbyterian and many others. The Anglican–Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) and the Lutheran–Roman Catholic dialogue have both been ongoing since 1967, and have led to a greater understanding of what we share in common.

The practical imperative has been obvious to many denominations in situations of oppression, persecution, conflict, human rights abuses, poverty, etc for many decades. I've mentioned often before how the Sudan Council of Churches came into being in 1965, in the face of Islamist oppression which threatened the very existence of the Christian Church in Sudan. But this dynamic holds true not only for the Global South. The Taize community in France, for example, is a fruit of World War II, as is Pax Christi International. The World Council of Churches was founded in 1948. As religion wanes in many parts of the Global North, it would seem that the practical advantages of working together are becoming increasingly obvious there too. As congregations shrink and the cost of maintaining churches increases, forcing many churches to close, many denominations in many places are sharing worship spaces.

I'm a Catholic missionary, but I have worked ecumenically for the last thirty years or so, with the full backing of my Catholic bishops. In my experience, nobody has to compromise their beliefs, but the simple act of working together for peace, justice and human rights brings us closer, helps us to understand and appreciate one another, leads us towards seeing each other as both fellow human beings and fellow Christians rather than as "other", and takes us at least a few steps down the path of unity without uniformity.

Is all or any of the above a useful beginning towards "taking another step" based on John 17:21 in this LT conversation on Christian denominations?

Might I also suggest that in this thread we avoid the topic of interfaith dialogue and concentrate on Christian denominations? We can open a new thread on interfaith dialogue if there is any interest, and I would certainly be happy to post on that thread as well.

>116 John5918: St Paul was already complaining of disunity among Christians in his first letter to the Corinthians. I don’t think that, in this fallen world, Christians are any more capable of being one as Christ and His Father are one than they are capable of achieving any other form of moral perfection. Doesn’t mean they shouldn’t try—-I’m also trying to love my neighbour as myself. But to reduce this challenge to trying to get everyone to join a particular denomination which has identified itself as The One True Church strikes me as quite reductive. I recall in high school, before we said the Lord’s Prayer in the morning, any Catholics in the class left the room to avoid “participating in heretical and schismatic worship.” I’m sure this impressed the non-Christians in the room. Those days are done, even if the Lord’s Prayer is ever said, but insofar as the mindset persists it is a major obstacle to progress.

It's rather scary to think that I have been involved in ecumenical activities for over 60 years now. In most cases these activities have been very enjoyable and fruitful. It can be very exciting and inspiring to learn other ways that people follow Christ.

Right up to the point where instead of 'Jesus Christ is the Way.' someone has tried to insist that 'My (church's) interpretation of Christ is the way.' That just doesn't work. Learning from each other requires that all sides are open to learning and to changing.

>116 John5918:, >117 booksaplenty1949:, >118 MarthaJeanne:
I’m very happy with all of this. I guess part of the problem is that I’ve only been in evangelical churches in my adult Christian life (and have witnessed some of their “skepticism” towards other denominations). So, I would agree with the following statement -

“although I would add that it is not only Catholic-Protestant but there can also be what one might call an Evangelical Protestant-Mainstream Global Protestant divide with some "saved" evangelicals being as resistant to cooperation with mainstream protestantism as some Catholics apparently are,…”

Thank you all for responding!

I’m also wondering what I can do myself to move things forward in the way we’ve been speaking. Are there suggestions?

>119 geoffreymeadows: Believing that “we’ve got it right and everyone else has got it wrong” is a strong human temptation. Look at the history of Marxism, or psychoanalysis, to choose two examples of atheistical movements with competing “orthodoxies.” It’s great to feel in with the in-crowd. It just doesn’t have anything to do with Christ. When you approach another Christian, or another human being for that matter, with this in mind you may have some possibility of furthering the cause of Christian unity.

I remember several decades ago shopping in Cambridge MA. I finally came up out of the bookstore for air, and found that most of the shops were selling esoterica. I was pregnant, and thought my blood pressure was low. I saw a bus offering blood pressure measurements, but wasn't sure I wanted to get into theological arguments with 7th Day Adventists.

In the end I decided to risk it. The woman doing the measurements did ask about my faith. Once it was clear that we were both convinced Christians, the subject was dropped and we talked as sisters in that difficult environment for a long time about all sorts of things. Finally another customer came in, and I left. But refreshed both physically and spiritually.

>121 MarthaJeanne: Because I’m feeling contrarian, I will point out that 7th Day Adventists accept the writings of Ellen G White as divine revelation subsequent to canonical Scripture, and their Trinitarianism is debatable. That takes them off the list of Christian denominations, in my view, and lines them up with Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons as a post-Christian sect. Doesn’t mean they aren’t good people.

>122 booksaplenty1949: Like I said, I did not want to argue with her. She presented herself to me as a Christian believer, and did not insist on anything else. (Some Mormons and JWs nay be able to do that, but I've never met them in a situation where I knew that.)

I think in most ecumenical meetings you have to take people at their word. The borders are somewhat fuzzy, and if they insist that they belong inside, I would be inclined to accept that until they prove otherwise.

>123 MarthaJeanne: A Mormon colleague once told me that she had recently tried to join a neighbourhood Bible study group and been turned down because it was only open to Christians—-a group she obviously considered herself a member of. I didn’t tell her I didn’t think she was a Christian either—-that didn’t seem a helpful discussion to get into. Instead I opined that a Bible study should be open to anyone who was prepared to respect others’ opinions.

Off-topic, so I’m prepared to be disciplined, but has anyone else here read When Prophecy Fails? Some university sociologists see a notice about a group meeting to discuss “revelations” about the end of the world supposedly received by a local woman. Thinking this would be of professional interest they join the group and are soon inside members of the cult. A fascinating opportunity to see how a belief system starts and evolves. A classic study of cognitive dissonance, when the world fails to end.

>124 booksaplenty1949:

When I lived in Atlanta, a couple of members of my Mormon congregation told me they were welcomed at Bible study at Charles Stanley's church. I thought that was nice.

>127 cpg: I would view welcoming non-Christians as an evangelical opportunity.

>128 booksaplenty1949:

Indeed, particularly if one views evangelisation as spreading the message and praxis of the Gospel in the broadest sense rather than simply converting people to one's own particular brand.

I'm reminded of how Gandhi, a devout Hindu, explicitly acknowledged the influence that the nonviolent message and example of Jesus had on his own understanding of nonviolence. Fr John Dear's recent book The Gospel of Peace: A Commentary on Matthew, Mark and Luke from the Perspective of Nonviolence emphasises this dynamic.

>129 John5918: I am currently reading Out of the Night which describes the career of a Communist organiser in Germany between the wars. The success and growth of the Party is the goal which transcends any objective beyond itself, such as workers’ rights or social justice. The Party’s refusal to co-operate with any other group in opposing Hitler was a major factor in his rise to power. By the same token, the Communist Party of India did not support Gandhi. Not a model we want to imitate, IMHO.

In case anyone is interested I have started a thread on Inter-religious dialogue here.

I think Pope Francis' words which I cite in that thread, "May we cultivate friendship as pilgrims on our way to God", are equally relevant in a conversation on ecumenism. We are indeed all pilgrims on the way to God. None of us can claim exclusively to have reached our goal, and all of us can humbly help each other on the journey.

I have not read all of these posts. If you cannot define God, would Wittgenstein say this whole thread is straw? (Would the late Aquinas agree?)

>132 mmarty164: Can you define “love”? Or “freedom”? Still worth discussing.

God is the creator of heaven and earth, of all things.

Love is charity towards others, it is an act not a feeling.

Freedom is free will to do and choose by our rational, a gift from God, distinguishing us from animals.

>135 brone:

Perhaps Marx felt threatened by the potential of Christian social justice to undermine his own movement, although Catholics did not begin to express it as a distinct body of doctrine until Pope Leo XIII's Rerum novarum, "On the rights and duties of capital and labour", published in 1891. Catholic social doctrine addresses many of the same issues as Marx's communism, but in a healthier, more holistic, Christ-centred way.

>135 brone: I wasn’t suggesting that Marxism and Christianity were compatible. I was pointing out that refusal to co-operate with anyone who is not a Catholic, even in pursuit of a common goal, is not an approach I can support.

>138 brone: My point had nothing to do with Catholics and Communists working together. I was referring to the Communist policy, specifically in the run-up to WW II, of not working with any other group. Had they banded together with the other groups opposing Hitler, specifically the non-Communist left, he could probably not have come to power, but Communist ideology did not allow this.

>139 booksaplenty1949:

Much the same could be said of the Spanish Civil War. If the various socialist, communist, anarchist and other anti-fascist parties had been able to work together effectively, they might have prevented fascist dictator Franco and his Falangist, conservative and traditionalist military junta from taking control of Spain. Sadly the Catholic Church largely supported the fascists.

>140 John5918: Franco was a champion of the Catholic Church, and despite the left wing mantra since then, and the gullible who believe it, the International Butchers would have annihilated the Catholic clergy and religious in Spain if it were not for Franco. Anti+Clericalism not seen since the horrors of the French Revolution, cannot in any sense be condoned or sympathised with by Catholics.
I would have thought the horrors of Africa in recent times would educate our brothers and sisters, but seemingly not.

>141 LesMiserables:

And neither can fascist coups d'etat, and the horrific human rights abuses carried out by the fascist regime of Franco, be condoned nor sympathised with by Catholics.

Not sure what your comparison with Africa is, but as far as I am aware the Catholic Church in Africa is not in general condoning nor sympathising with autocratic fascist regimes, although Catholic clergy were implicated in the Rwanda genocide, and did in places collaborate with colonial regimes.

>142 John5918: And who protected the priests and nuns in Spain? Who massacred them? Ah, but of course some would condone this, because they were not on the side of the Republicans anti-Monarchist communists.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyrs_of_the_Spanish_Civil_War

I find it incredible that as a Catholic you are bemoaning the fact that the anarcho-commumist rabble couldn't organise themselves better so that they could be more effective.
Are 7000 Catholics murdered in cold blood not enough.
What would an organised cohesive blood thirsty atheistic pact of socialists and anarchists do?
70,000? 700000?

God help us all.

>143 LesMiserables:

Well, I'm concerned about every human life, not only Catholic priests and nuns. It's estimated that up to half a million people died in the Spanish Civil War which followed the right wing military coup d'etat, many of them killed by German Nazi troops practising for their next war, and that between two and four hundred thousand died under Franco's right wing military dictatorship.

But as >139 booksaplenty1949: says, the reference to communism here was simply an example of how much more effective any movement can be if it cooperates with others. If history is anything to go by, right wingers have nothing to fear from communism and its potential allies as they seem unable to put aside their differences and work together!

>143 LesMiserables: The Spanish Civil War is certainly an example of how the Russian Communist Party let a country become a fascist dictatorship rather than ally itself with other groups fighting that battle. The savage anti-clericalism unleashed by the war is another matter. Gerald Brenan’s great book The Spanish Labyrinth does an excellent job of describing the feudal situation of the Catholic Church in Spain which produced this terrible backlash. It is far more complicated than a merely Marxist response. I also recommend Bernard Bergonzi’s The Roman Persuasion, one of the rare English novels on the Spanish Civil War written from a Catholic perspective.

>145 booksaplenty1949: Appreciate the recommendations.

South Africa's 'high priest' Ray McCauley dies aged 75 (BBC)

Tributes are pouring in for the widely admired but controversial founder of the Rhema Bible Church South Africa, Ray McCauley, who has died aged 75... The Rhema Bible Church has more than 45,000 members and is considered one of the most influential churches in South Africa. The South African National Christian Forum (SANCF) paid tribute to Mr McCauley, calling him a "an outstanding ecumenical leader"... he "stood resolute on matters of integrity in state affairs". “I will always remember him as a person who pioneered inclusive worship long before others did"... Mr McCauley played a key role in the late years of apartheid and spoke out against the racist apartheid regime. Ramaphosa described Rhema as one of the "largest multiracial churches during apartheid". During the Truth and Reconciliation talks, he confessed the shortcomings of white South Africans who "hid behind their so-called spirituality while closing their eyes to the dark events of the apartheid years"... But he was criticised for living like a millionaire and preaching the prosperity gospel...

Following a tragic fall, Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais fell asleep in the Lord on October 8, 2024 at the age of 79.

Bernard Tissier de Mallerais was born in Sallanches, Haute-Savoie, France, on September 14, 1945. After acquiring a master’s degree in biology, he was among the first to enter the International Seminary of Saint Pius X in Fribourg, Switzerland in October 1969. Under the mentorship of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the future Bishop Tissier was ordained a priest by the Archbishop in Écône, Switzerland on June 29, 1975.

Following his ordination, Bishop Tissier served the Society of Saint Pius X’s (SSPX) seminary at Écône in multiple roles, first as a professor then rector from 1979 until 1983. In 1984, he was appointed the SSPX’s Secretary General. On June 30, 1988, he was one of four bishops consecrated for the Society by Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop Antônio de Castro Mayer. From that time, Bishop Tissier traveled the world administering the sacraments of confirmation and ordination, along with preaching retreats and visiting the SSPX’s chapels to provide pastoral care for the faithful.

https://fsspx.news/en/news/death-bishop-bernard-tissier-mallerais-47993

Supplementary

https://onepeterfive.com/respect-the-dead-bishop-tissier-goes-to-his-eternal-rew...

Kenya’s President Appeals to Newly Chartered Catholic University to Consider Training Clergy for Other Denominations (ACI Africa)

Kenya’s President, William Samoei Ruto, has appealed to the leadership of Tangaza University (TU), the Nairobi-based Catholic institution that is jointly owned by 22 Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life (ICLSAL) to help in the training of clergy for other denominations in the East African nation, where the university is based. In his address at the at the Friday, November 15 inaugural graduation ceremony that was held at TU in Karen, Nairobi, President Ruto acknowledged the dearth of properly trained clergy in some Christian denominations in the country, noting that the Catholic Church, on the other hand, has many well-prepared and “qualified” Pastors... “Today, our nation and the continent increasingly need professionals and leaders who are not only academically accomplished, but also deeply grounded in the values that enable our societies to remain resilient and dynamic, economically sufficient and competitive,” he said. The Kenyan President added, “It is inspiring to see Tangaza University’s commitment to nurturing students who are not only well prepared academically, but also equipped to be good citizens, dedicated servants, and visionary leaders. This is an important accomplishment, and I commend you for it, because values matter as much as knowledge”...

While many mainstream denominations other than Catholics obviously also have "qualified" pastors, Kenya has hundreds of small independent Christian churches, and many of these have dubious and/or controversial leadership.

>150 John5918: I’m sure that many cities worldwide have something like this https://www.tst.edu a consortium of institutions preparing students for ministry in a variety of denominations, including the Catholic church.

A Path Towards Unity: Pope Francis Proposes Joint Catholic-Orthodox Celebration of Nicaea Anniversary (ACI Africa)

Pope Francis has proposed celebrating the 1,700th anniversary of the First Council of Nicaea together with Orthodox leaders, in a personal letter to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople... “The now imminent 1700th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea will be another opportunity to bear witness to the growing communion that already exists among all who are baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” Francis wrote in his message dated Nov. 30. Reflecting on six decades of Catholic-Orthodox dialogue while looking ahead to future possibilities for unity, the pope acknowledged the progress made since Vatican II’s Unitatis Redintegratio decree marked the Catholic Church’s official entry into the ecumenical movement 60 years ago... Cardinal Koch emphasized that unity efforts must focus on “the innermost center of self-revelation in Jesus Christ.” The Swiss cardinal also highlighted what he called an “ecumenism of blood,” noting that “Christians are not persecuted because they are Catholic, Lutheran or Anglican, but because they are Christians.” While celebrating the “renewed fraternity” achieved since Vatican II, Pope Francis noted in his message that full communion, particularly sharing “the one Eucharistic chalice,” remains an unfulfilled goal. In a pointed observation about contemporary global tensions, the pontiff connected ecumenical efforts to peace-building. “The fraternity lived and the witness given by Christians will also be a message for our world plagued by war and violence,” he wrote, specifically mentioning Ukraine, Palestine, Israel, and Lebanon...

Recently finished Is the Reformation Over?: An Evangelical Assessment of Contemporary Roman Catholicism, Mark A. Noll and Carolyn Nystrom. All about areas where Catholics and Protestants agree and disagree. Actually, relations between the 2 sides of the Reformation debate have gotten a lot better since the 1960’s. Vatican II had a lot to do with it. I didn’t know enough about Catholicism or the efforts to partly reconcile the churches. Despite honest efforts there are still several issues that divide Catholics and Protestants, as well as their basic outlooks. I suppose that’s inevitable.

I have a lot of respect for Mark Noll. I’ve read one of his books now, and I’ve seen some of his YouTube discussions. He’s a historian I wouldn’t mind reading or listening to again.

>153 geoffreymeadows: Interesting. Currently reading Eamon Duffy's 'Stripping the Altars' and he says that VatIican II is essentially repeating the iconoclastic vandalism of Catholicism that Henry VIII, Edward VI, Elizabeth I did.
I agree with his thesis from personal experience.

>154 LesMiserables:

Interesting. I haven't read Duffy's book, but my own personal experience would suggest the opposite.

>155 John5918:

Appreciate your perspective. I do think the Vatican II aggiornamento project has more or less died a death, and the youth are coming through in new generations and once again are embracing not only the message of life through Christ, but the traditions of Catholicism that were iconoclastically assaulted by modernists.
The fast growing part of the Church is the Traditional Latin mass. Who would have thought? Smells and bell matter, because not only for we crave ritual, but we offer only the best for the glory of God in our worship.
God bless you all, and have a beautiful Easter.

>156 LesMiserables: I would say that the TLM of today is generally a far cry from what was on offer before Vatican II in most parishes. Those who seek it out these days are generally liturgically literate and expect high standards of music and ritual. They are not saying the rosary while Father rips through low mass in 17 minutes.

>156 LesMiserables:

Thanks. I think the terms "your perspective" and "personal experience" are key here. We each validly see different sides of the Church from our own perspective and experience. But objectively, "The fast growing part of the Church is the Traditional Latin mass" is not true. Statistically the fastest growing part of the Church is in Africa, where any Latin mass, let alone the antecedent rite, is not even on the horizon. So while in the USA (and maybe on a much smaller scale in one or two European countries) you may experience the "traditional Latin mass" to be growing, globally that is not the case, and is certainly not what I experience.

As for "smells and bells" and all the rest of the ritual, I agree with you that it matters greatly. I love the smell of incense in church, and the symbolism that goes with it. But the idea that it can only be found in the antecedent rite of the mass celebrated in Latin is simply not the case. High masses acccording to the normative rite are regularly celebrated in Rome in Latin and in many cathedrals and churches throughout the world in vernacular languages, complete with all the ritual pomp and ceremony that one could desire to offer "only the best for the glory of God in our worship". Most of the singing will be either traditional hymns or plainchant-inspired modern compositions. Might also be worth remembering that the average Latin mass celebrated in a cold and empty parish church on a weekday morning back in the good old days pre-Vatican II had no smells and bells and in my personal experience was offering far from "the best for the glory of God".

Edited to add: Our posts crossed, but I think >157 booksaplenty1949: presents a good summary of the antecedent rite as I experienced it most of the time: "saying the rosary while Father rips through low mass in 17 minutes".

>157 booksaplenty1949: generally liturgically literate and expect high standards of music and ritual

That may or may not be true, but "high standards of music and ritual" can be found throughout the Church in masses celebrated according to the normative rite, in whatever language including Latin. If there is poor and sloppy liturgy, which there is and which there always has been regardless of the era and the rite used, then the solution is for those who are "liturgically literate" to work to improve the liturgy and to educate others as to how to celebrate the mass to high standards using the Church's normative rite. Trying to revert to an antecedent rite which was superseded for good reasons and is at odds with most of the Church is not a viable solution.

>159 John5918: I certainly agree that the EF has no monopoly on HSofMandR. Those who are looking for these things but also want lay participation in the mass can definitely find them in a parish which uses the OF, although perhaps not the first one they come upon. In pre-Vatican II days there were plenty of parishes with cheap ugly vestments, artificial flowers, mass-produced statues, and incompetent musicians. To imagine it was all to some higher standard of popular taste than is the case in 2025 is to miss the point about popular taste.

'Normative' 'EF' are highly loaded terms.

I'd also challenge anyone to raise pejorative anecdotes like 'the 17 minute mass' to a standard of evidence of beyond ere heresay.

Furthermore, from the Medieval ages, devotional application of the laity during mass has been a regular feature whether telling the paternoster or rosary or reading the hours, whilst the most important sacrifice of the mass occurred at the altar.

I suppose nowadays where the new mass is more like a protestant commemoration, there would be a demand for 'participation ' whatever that means. My own experience in recent years is that almost every new mass I have experienced has been demoted by chatting, waving, particularly unsuitable attire, blasé approach to the Eucharist etc. Whilst at the TLM there is a quietness and reverence despite the larger numbers attending.

>161 LesMiserables: In mediaeval times, it’s true, participation wasn’t highly valued; indeed, laypeople generally received Communion only once or twice a year. I don’t regard those as the Good Old Days, frankly. As for “evidence,” you cite your experience and others cite theirs. I say “tomahto” and you say “tomayto.” Attending any Mass is an inestimable privilege. If you can regularly attend one that meets your devotional needs you are blessed. Why complain about someone else’s choice?

Thanks for these responses.

>160 booksaplenty1949: I'm afraid I have no idea what EF, OF and HSofMandR are.

>161 LesMiserables: Well, I cited my own personal experience of mass in the old pre-Vatican II days in >158 John5918:. It wasn't very edifying, although I admit it was fun for a young altar server as we performed a range of incomprehensible actions which kept us awake in the cold and empty church and proudly reeled off a series of incomprehensible foreign responses which we had been forced to learn by rote.

nowadays where the new mass is more like a protestant commemoration

First and foremost, it is not a "new" mass. The mass has developed organically for two thousand years (what do you think a first century house mass in Aramaic was like?) and the current mass is simply the latest development of the same old mass. But what I find more protestant is the move by a small number of Catholics to reject the mass as defined by the Church and make a personal individual choice to implement their own version of it.

almost every new mass I have experienced has been demoted by chatting, waving, particularly unsuitable attire, blasé approach to the Eucharist etc

Unfortunately this can often be the case. So why don't we concentrate on improving the way the liturgy of our Church is celebrated instead of rejecting the liturgy and trying to impose a different one? And you do say "almost", so it appears you have at least experienced some good liturgy. Why not build on that?

at the TLM there is a quietness and reverence

I'm sorry that you can't find legitimate liturgies where there is a quietness and reverence, but I have experienced many of them in many countries, not only in ordinary parishes but also in monasteries, pastoral centres, retreat houses, at conferences and traning workshops, in small groups and house masses, etc. As I get older I find myself more and more attracted to quietness and reverence in the liturgy, and I seek (and find) it wherever I can, but without complaining (as >162 booksaplenty1949: says) about the fact that many people, especially youth and families, find the noisier and more informal masses to be beneficial. Once again I would say that the Catholic way is to find, encourage and multiply the more contemplative liturgies rather than turning to an outdated and separatist one.

>163 John5918:

Foreign language? It's the language of the Roman Catholic Church!!!

Novus Ordo an organic development? It was a clear rupture. Bugnini wrote it with the assistance of a protestant committee invited to Vatican II.

>163 John5918: EF=Extraordinary Form (official name of the “TLM”) OF=Ordinary Form (official name of the “NO”) HSofMandR was my abbreviation of “high standards of music and ritual” as quoted previously.

>164 LesMiserables:

It's an incomprehensible foreign language to virtually all the 1.3 billion Catholics in the world.

The current normative (or ordinary - thanks >165 booksaplenty1949:) form of the mass is not a rupture, regardless of who drafted it and what liturgical committees were involved in researching it. The basic structure of the mass remains unchanged - entrance, penitential rite, liturgy of the word, preparation of the gifts, liturgy of the eucharist, blessing and closing. Major prayers such as the confiteor, kyrie, gloria, credo, pater noster, agnus dei and domine non sum dignus are only slightly modified from earlier versions. The eucharistic prayers contain the same elements that they always have - praise, thanksgiving, epiclesis, anamnesis, intercession and closing doxology. Eucharistic Prayer I is barely changed from the earlier one, and Eucharistic Prayers II and II are influenced by pre-Roman prayers. The vast majority of bishops, priests and ordinary lay Catholics in the world accept it. The rupture, surely, is on the part of those few who reject it?

I have been to so many different eucharists, ranging from med-week services that were only the priest and me, to a papal mass in St. Peter's, from no music to guitar folk masses, to classical music with professional choir and orchestra. Various languages, and multi-lingual services. At some the children got loud. I remember fondly a little boy getting in line to take communion with a loud "I'm going to get me someJesus!" Outside services, services in a friend's living room - and in ours when our new home was blessed. Some were fairly short and simple, others were part of services that included baptism, confirmation, marriage or ordination. In churches ranging from small village chapels to some of the largest cathedrals, from modern to baroque to Gothic or even older. Some have been very inspiring, and of course some not really. But I have (almost) always felt the presence of God with us, and felt as one with the others there, and with the Communion of saints, past and present. I am grateful for every eucharist I have been privileged to have been able to attend. Each one, even those I haven't really liked, has enlarged my spirituality.

And I feel very sorry for anyone who can only feel they have properly worshiped in a single style of service. And I don't see how that can be 'catholic' - "adjective - including a wide variety of things; all-embracing."

>166 John5918: The rupture, surely, is on the part of those few who reject it?

I'd say that's pretty much gaslighting.

Ripping up the Roman Rite and replacing it with an impoverished replacement is a rupture. Completely at odds with Catholic Tradition.

Part 2 here of Mass of Ages.

Enjoy https://youtu.be/8y1cABhLc2o?si=CvxCSnU76H7nNEc_

All the best.

>168 LesMiserables:

Ah well, we're clearly not going to agree. But as I say in >166 John5918:, the Roman rite has not been "ripped up", it has been modified, and the modified version is neither "impoverished" nor a "rupture". It's certainly not "at odds with Catholic Tradition" as this is not the first time that existing rites have been modified (I've already mentioned, for example, that the earliest liturgies were not in Latin - that was a later modification) nor replaced completely (where are the Celtic, Sarum, Gallic, Dunelm and other such rites today?) I've also pointed out that the basic structure of the mass, and many of the key liturgical texts, remain virtually unchanged. It might be worth rereading Sacrosanctum Concilium, but I won't quote it at any length here. If you want to have a conversation about that authoritative teaching document I'm happy to do so. But you're yet to convince me that the modifications to the liturgical rite constitute a rupture, an impoverishment, or an overthrow of the basic structure and essential elements of the liturgy. Could you give some examples of what immutable elements divinely instituted (SC21) have been lost, bearing in mind that "The rites should be distinguished by a noble simplicity; they should be short, clear, and unencumbered by useless repetitions; they should be within the people's powers of comprehension, and normally should not require much explanation" (SC34).

I've looked at the YouTube opinion piece which you link to, and the question it poses right at the beginning sets it in context: "What went so awry after Vatican II?" Well, the answer is nothing went awry. All the bishops of the world gathered and agreed almost unanimously on the need for aggiornamento, reform, and that has been ongoing since then. Not that everything has gone perfectly; there have been some unwise experiments which were unsustainable, and there have been attempts to resist reform, but both the bishops and the sensus fidei of the universal Church have largely accepted reform. I've asked a number of cardinals, archbishops and bishops in various African countries about the Latin mass, and they just look at me blankly and ask what on earth am I talking about! It's not even on their radar, just as it's not on the radar of the majority of Catholics in the world. Lex orandi, lex credendi, and I think the current prayer and praxis of the universal Church is more in keeping with the diversity of its 1.3 billion adherents than praying in a language none of them understand as passive listeners rather than active participants.

>169 John5918: I'm glad you noted
SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM, as you will be aware that Latin remains the Language of the Church.

Yes we disagree. Rupture indeed has happened, and there is no denying that the new mass deviated against the sacred norm of upholding tradition in the Church.

All the best.

>170 LesMiserables:

Thanks, yes, but you still give no actual examples of how "the new mass deviated against the sacred norm of upholding tradition in the Church". What immutable elements divinely instituted have been deviated from?

And yes, Latin is still the official language for normative texts of the Church, including the mass itself, which are then translated into languages which people can understand. Latin mass according to the Ordinary Rite can be celebrated anywhere anytime (provided one can find a priest competent to do so) without any restrictions, which is why I find it disingenuous for people who like Latin masses to claim that the only way they can get it is by using the antecedent rite. I was at a mass a few months ago for the golden jubilee of the priestly ordination of an elderly archbishop where the formal congratulatory message from the Holy Father was read out in Latin by a Ugandan priest who clearly didn't understand what he was reading, and the congregation certainly didn't. Fortunately the English and Acholi translations were also read out.

>167 MarthaJeanne: My sentiments exactly. Thank you for elaborating so helpfully.

>167 MarthaJeanne: Thank you for your personal anecdotes.

Thank you all in the above thread for agreeing to disagree. It’s so much better than just parting ways.

You all post because you care. I’m very grateful for that.

My condolences to you all, too. With the passing of Pope Francis, this is a time of mourning for many of you. Just remember it’s also a time of celebration, since Francis lived his life so close to God.

Pope invites Anabaptists and Catholics to have ‘courage to love’ (Vatican News)

Mennonites have gathered in Zurich, Switzerland, to commemorate 500 years since the foundation of the Anabaptist movement, a Protestant Christian denomination that originated in Friesland in the 16th century. Pope Leo XIV sent a message to participants in the commemoration on Thursday, recalling the Risen Jesus’ first words: “Peace be with you!”... “The motto chosen for your celebration, ‘The Courage to Love,’ reminds us, above all, of the need for Catholics and Mennonites to make every effort to live out the commandment of love, the call to Christian unity, and the mandate to serve others,” he said. Pope Leo invited both Mennonites and Catholics to be both honest and kind when reflecting on our common history, which “includes painful wounds and narratives that affect Catholic-Mennonite relationships and perceptions up to the present day.” He also called for theological and pastoral discussions, so that the fruits of dialogue will endure...

>175 John5918: Amazing. When I was young, if a prayer, even the Lord’s Prayer, was offered before class began or at some other non-Catholic event any Catholics present were supposed to temporarily leave the room, lest they appear to be participating in “heretical and schismatic worship.” That’s along way from the Pope sending a message of goodwill to an Anabaptist gathering.

>176 booksaplenty1949:

That reminds me of an occasion a good sixty years ago when we went on a field trip from our Catholic primary school to Waltham Abbey, a historic Norman church on the eastern outskirts of London where King Harold of 1066 fame is reputed to be buried. One of my mates and I felt we should say a prayer in this beautiful church, moved perhaps by the atmosphere of sacred space where people had been praying for the best part of eight hundred hundred years (and in earlier churches on the same site for five hundred more), but so indoctrinated were we about “heretical and schismatic worship” that we decided we'd better ask the headmaster if we were allowed to say a prayer in a protestant church. Fortunately our good Catholic headmaster was very open-minded and he said it was OK, so Andrew and I knelt in the back pew and said the Lord's Prayer together. That was probably my first spark of ecumenism long before I ever heard the word.

In the sixties I attended a boarding school in India that had been founded to give the children of missionaries a good, American education. The various missions provided staff, so we were multidenominational, even if not all the missions were agreed theologically. All students were required to attend Sunday morning and evening services in the school chapel. When I was in 9th grade we had a few Catholic students in our dorm. They had to get up early on Sunday to walk to a Catholic church for mass. I understand that the sisters there gave them a better breakfast than the one they missed at school. They were back in time for chapel.

Now, a class hike (that I was not involved in) got into trouble. They got lost, ended up at the top of a cliff, somebody got bitten by a snake, the group got separated into several smaller groups, some without adults. Somehow everyone got back to school, partly due to the help of a few Roman Catholic priests who we staying at a nearby ashram. A Catholic one, of course. In the process, one of the priests became friends with a teacher, with the result that it was decided that we ought to be exposed to other worship traditions. That priest celebrated at least three masses from RC rites as our vespers. Those weeks our Catholic schoolmates were able to sleep in, and were able to feel very special as they went forward for communion. This was my introduction to liturgical worship. It was very beautiful, and really impressed me.

I guess the surprising thing is both that he was willing to celebrate in the Protestant chapel, and that our chaplain agreed to allow it (and did not get into trouble for it.) This was probably 1967.

I consider this an important event in my Christian development.

Two interesting stories; both, however, involving Catholic worship in a Protestant space. This has always been okay, in certain circumstances, with the local Diocesan’s permission, (apparently to the surprise of some Catholic laypersons). My point concerned participating in worship *with* non-Catholics.

Interesting comment which prompts me to search my memory for my first interaction with interdenominational worship. It was probably Taize, way back in my twenties, and soon after that an experience of "pulpit exchanges" between Catholic, Presbyterian and Anglican priests in Sudan. Also in my twenties I was introduced to interfaith dialogue and collaboration, particularly with Sikhs, in the area of west London where I was living and working at the time, and in my thirties interfaith prayer with Muslims in Sudan. And I was twice in ecumenical mixed choirs for BBC TV's popular long-running "Songs of Praise" programme, if that counts.

I have experienced some truly moving ecumenical examples of worship over the years. I have seen Lutheran and Anglican priests concelebrating mass at Catholic weddings, in one case with a Catholic bishop; Catholic priests inviting non-Catholics to receive communion; an Anglican archbishop anointing and blessing a Catholic archbishop; a Catholic archbishop giving general absolution to a group which included protestant bishops and moderators; Catholic bishops giving holy communion to Anglican bishops; and many small informal ecumenical house masses. But I won't go into detail about identity, time, location or circumstances of any of the above as I have also experienced "Catholic vigilantes" who latch onto such things and try to stir up controversy.

>180 John5918: Yes indeed. All a long way from having to leave the room because the class was going to say the Lord’s Prayer.

Evangelicalism in France continues to grow, driven by conversions (Le Monde)

Members of evangelical churches, a branch of Protestantism, are increasing. These believers say they are drawn by a more informal liturgy and the emphasis on community...

>183 brone:

Indeed. And we now have a US pope. It's good to see him calling for peace, social justice, nonviolence, care of creation, respect for migrants and the poor, and for synodality within the Church, and we pray that this will give greater unity, strength and purpose to the US Catholic Church. In the current "new reality" in the USA it's particularly encouraging to see the US Catholic bishops speaking out so strongly in support of migrants.

>185 brone:

Isn't Pope Leo one one of those "boomer" American bishops that you often refer to? He was born in 1955, smack in the middle of the "boomer" generation.

Eastern Catholics in the United States: A Look at the Numbers (Catholic World Report)

Ten of the Eastern Catholic Churches have a combined 18 eparchies that are headquartered in the United States; these 18 jurisdictions have a combined 575,218 Catholics, 793 priests (both diocesan and religious), and 641 parishes... 39% of these 575,218 Eastern Catholics are Chaldean Catholics, 14% are Maronite Catholics, 11% are Ukrainian Greek Catholics, 10% are Syro-Malabar Catholics, and 9% are Armenian Catholics. The rest are Melkite Greek Catholics, Romanian Greek Catholics, Ruthenian Greek Catholics, and Syro-Malankara Catholics. The 18 eparchies range in size from the Ruthenian Eparchy of Phoenix (2,637 Catholics) to the Chaldean Eparchy of St. Thomas the Apostle (180,000 Catholics). Four of the eparchies are smaller than the nation’s smallest Latin-rite diocese, the Diocese of Fairbanks, which has 10,218 Catholics...

‘Yes’ to God, but ‘no’ to church – what religious change looks like for many Latin Americans (The Conversation)

Once a missionary outpost, Latin America is now the heart of the Catholic Church. It is home to over 575 million adherents – over 40% of all Catholics worldwide... Yet beneath this Catholic dominance, the region’s religious landscape is changing. First, Protestant and Pentecostal groups have experienced dramatic growth. In 1970, only 4% of Latin Americans identified as Protestant; by 2014, the share had climbed to almost 20%. But even as Protestant ranks swelled, another trend was quietly gaining ground: a growing share of Latin Americans abandoning institutional faith altogether. And, as my research shows, the region’s religious decline shows a surprising difference from patterns elsewhere. While fewer Latin Americans are identifying with a religion or attending services, personal faith remains strong... Overall, the number of Latin Americans reporting no religious affiliation surged from 7% in 2004 to over 18% in 2023. The share of people who say they are religiously unaffiliated grew in 15 of the 17 countries, and more than doubled in seven... From 2008 to 2023, the share of Latin Americans attending church at least once a month decreased from 67% to 60%. The percentage who never attend, meanwhile, grew from 18% to 25%... However, in my study, I also examined a lesser-used measure of religiosity – one that tells a different story. That measure is “religious importance”: how important people say that religion is in their daily lives. We might think of this as “personal” religiosity, as opposed to the “institutional” religiosity tied to formal congregations and denominations. Like church attendance, overall religious importance is high in Latin America. In 2010, roughly 85% of Latin Americans in the 17 countries whose data I analyzed said religion was important in their daily lives. Sixty percent said “very,” and 25% said “somewhat.” By 2023, the “somewhat important” group declined to 19%, while the “very important” group grew to 64%. Personal religious importance was growing, even as affiliation and church attendance were falling... What we are seeing in Latin America, I’d argue, is a fragmented pattern of religious decline. The authority of religious institutions is waning – fewer people claim a faith; fewer attend services. But personal belief isn’t eroding. Religious importance is holding steady, even growing. This pattern is quite different from Europe and the United States, where institutional decline and personal belief tend to move together. Eighty-six percent of unaffiliated people in Latin America say they believe in God or a higher power... In other words, for many Latin Americans, leaving behind a religious label or skipping church does not mean leaving faith behind... Because priests were often scarce in rural areas, Catholicism developed in many communities with little direct oversight from the church. Home rituals, local saints’ festivals and lay leaders helped shape religious life in more independent ways... In short, Latin America reminds us that faith can thrive even as institutions fade.

Being a Christian is not about going to heaven:

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTr98bNaa/

>189 brone: today is a Holy Day of Obligation to most Catholics around the World

The Immaculate Conception in the hearts and words of the Popes (Vatican News)

On the occasion of the solemnity of December 8, we look back at several reflections from Popes throughout the years—a Marian path that connects to the dogma proclaimed by Pope Pius IX... Pope Pius X... Pope Pius XII... Pope John XXIII... Pope Paul VI... Pope John Paul II... Pope Benedict XVI... Pope Francis... Pope Leo XIV...

Edited to add: On Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception, Pope Leo XIV Encourages Renewing Our "yes" to God (ACI Africa)

Addressing the faithful and pilgrims in attendance in St. Peter’s Square, the pontiff commented that on Dec. 8 we express our joy because the Father of heaven wanted her to be “preserved immune from all stain of original sin.” “The Lord has granted to Mary the extraordinary grace of a completely pure heart, in view of an even greater miracle: the coming of Christ the Savior,” he added. The pope also noted that the gift of the fullness of grace in the young woman of Nazareth “was able to bear fruit because she in her freedom welcomed it, embracing the plan of God.” He emphasized that “the Lord always acts in this way: He gives us great gifts, but he leaves us free to accept them or not.” For the Holy Father, this feast also invites us to “believe as she believed, giving our generous assent to the mission to which the Lord calls us”...

Pope at Angelus: Believe as Mary believed, say ‘yes’ to God (Vatican News)

On the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception, Pope Leo XIV prays the Angelus and invites the faithful to believe as Mary did, and to welcome Christ into their lives...

Vatican conference: Our Lady of Guadalupe in light of doctrinal note on titles of Mary (CNA)

“Do not let your heart be troubled. Am I not here, I who am your mother?” With this consolation — with which Our Lady of Guadalupe of Mexico addressed St. Juan Diego in December 1531 — a devotion was kindled that, almost five centuries later, continues to shape the spiritual identity of Mexico and all of the Americas. That same message, simple and profoundly consoling, still has a singular power today, especially “in the context of war and difficulties in the world we live in today,” said Father Stefano Cecchin, OFM, president of the Pontifical International Marian Academy, in an interview with ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish-language news partner. Cecchin will participate on Dec. 12 in an unprecedented gathering organized by the Pontifical Commission for Latin America at the Vatican, a day that will bring together Latin American priests, women religious, and seminarians and will place the figure of Mary — particularly under her title of Our Lady of Guadalupe — at the center of evangelizing reflection...

New book affirms 'remarkable convergence’ of Methodists and Catholics (Vatican News)

The Methodist-Roman Catholic International Commission releases an updated synthesis of the fruits of 60 years of theological dialogue, affirming that the two Churches converge much more than they diverge... Printed by the Vatican Publishing House (LEV), the document examines the theological progress made over the past six decades between the Catholic and Methodist Churches. MERCIC enjoys the support of the Vatican’s Dicastery for Promoting Christian Unity... Presented as “both a record of hope and a call to deeper communion,” the volume serves as “a gift to all the Churches, as they affirm their faith in the Triune God and reflect on the next stages of the quest for Christian unity”... the book shows the need for a “healing of memories, acknowledgment of past wrongs, and the retelling of histories to honour victims and foster mutual respect and trust”... “Our Commission has confirmed that the consensus between Methodists and Catholics about the foundation of faith and the source of our salvation far outweighs our remaining differences on matters relating to the means of saving grace in the life and practice of our respective communions—although here, too, we have made great advances toward mutual understanding and agreement”...

Some Protestant scholars welcome Vatican document clarifying Marian titles (CNA)

Some Protestant scholars who spoke with CNA welcomed a Vatican document that clarified titles for the Blessed Virgin Mary that discouraged the use of Co-Redemptrix/Co-Redeemer and put limits on the use of Mediatrix/Mediator... The document affirms Mary plays a role in both redemption and mediation because she freely cooperates with Jesus Christ. That role, it explains, is always “subordinate” to Christ, and it warned against using titles in a way that could be misconstrued to mitigate Christ as the sole Redeemer and sole Mediator... The document did not alter any doctrines in dispute but instead focused on titles the dicastery felt may cause confusion about what the Church actually teaches about Mary.

I would highly recommend the title, Is the Reformation Over?: An Evangelical Assessment of Contemporary Roman Catholicism, Mark A. Noll, to any evangelical interested in the work that has been done to try to reconcile the many Protestant “churches” to the Catholic Church since the 1960’s when attitudes began to change between Protestants and Catholics. It’s not a straightforward history, but an analysis of what has been tried and how far it has been able to go. It explains the major issues, the history of changes in attitudes, and the differences and commonalities between Protestants and Catholics. Mark A. Noll is a respected evangelical historian.

One such effort to reconcile the churches was called “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” (ECT I-IV) which progressed in several stages.
Some evangelical authors that supported the project were, J.I. Packer and Timothy George. Some that were critical of it included R.C. Sproul and John MacArthur, Jr.

Noll recommends that Protestants wishing to understand what the Catholic Church officially believes should read the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994).

>193 John5918:
Noll’s book talks about the differences between Protestants and Catholics on the issue of Mary. It seems that with some care taken it might not be an insurmountable problem. It’s good that the Catholic Church is moving a little bit, though I wouldn’t presume to tell anyone how or to whom they should pray. My own mother prayed to Mary, and she was as godly a woman as I can imagine.

I think there are a lot of things that the Roman Catholic "Church" proclaims as dogma that most Protestants have real problems with. In fact, in my experience, so do a lot of Roman Catholics.

>195 MarthaJeanne:

I would say yes and no! Key phrases in >193 John5918: and >194 geoffreymeadows: are "may cause confusion about what the Church actually teaches" and "wishing to understand what the Catholic Church officially believes". A lot of what is attributed to the Catholic Church by both Catholics and Protestants is actually not official dogma, which often allows more wriggle room than one might think. On the other hand obviously there is real disagreement with some dogma, again by both Catholics and Protestants, and in a spirit of lex orandi, lex credendi one could argue whether the lived praxis of the Catholic Church or the official dogma better represent the reality.

I don't see a lot of wiggle room when it comes to equality between men and women. The wiggle room on the issue of contraception, even when doctors warn that a pregnancy would probably result in the mother's death is that large numbers of women deliberately go against the Roman Catholic "Church"'s official teaching.

>197 MarthaJeanne:

Fair comment about equality between men and women, although also to be fair it's only 31 years ago that the Church of England ordained its first woman priest, and there are still significant parts of the Anglican communion which refuse to ordain women as priests or bishops. Lutherans were a bit earlier, in 1948, Presbyterians in 1956, and Methodists granted full clergy rights to women the same year. Orthodox, Latter Day Saints, and Southern Baptist Convention still do not ordain women, so it's a very mixed bag. Most Christian denominations are still grappling with this issue, and there is ever-increasing internal pressure within the Catholic Church.

As for contraception, Pope Paul VI's encyclical Humanae Vitae is a controversial document which went against the conclusions of the expert theological commission which he set up to examine the issue. While it is currently official Church teaching, there is widespread disagreement by theologians, pastors and laity and you might be surprised what can be allowed in the "internal forum", ie between an individual and their confessor. Also traditional Catholic moral theology can and does allow exceptions if the mother's life is in danger, under the principle of "double effect".

I didn't join the Church of England until they had female priests. There may not have been a lot of them around, but I have known female clergy my whole life (I grew up UCC, which first ordained a woman in 1853.) But, as you say, it is very hard to give a picture of the the differences between Protestants and Catholics, for the simple reason that there are many different Protestants. In fact, many of the dates you give above depend on which part of a family of churches you are talking about. Lutherans? https://www.livinglutheran.org/faith-in-action/lutheran-church-in-australia-and-... First ordinations this year in Australia and New Zealand. On the other hand, I was present at the first ordination of a female priest in the Old Catholic Church in Austria (1998), and they now have a female bishop.

>195 MarthaJeanne:
I think when Mark Noll recommended reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church he was saying it was a good place for evangelicals to start not the end of the issue.

Before I started reading the history of the church, I didn’t know that Luther believed in the trans substantiation of the bread and wine. I had simply assumed that all Protestant churches (and to the extent that Luther could be said to be “Lutheran”) believed the bread and wine were symbolic. Any time we learn about history or from other denominations or churches, I think it’s a positive thing.

Also, I do not like it when Protestant clergy create animosity between their congregations and the Catholic Church. Sure, we disagree on many things; but if we were smart, we would not be so surprised about them. Some of the differences that we rely so much on, to prove our own church’s superiority I guess, may not be the large chasms we think they are.

>200 geoffreymeadows: Some of the differences that we rely so much on... may not be the large chasms we think they are

That's certainly been the fruit of formal theological conversations between Anglicans, Catholics, Lutherans and to some extent Methodists over the last few decades. When we get beyond superficial language on issues such as baptism, eucharist and ministry we find we're much closer than many people had thought. And many Christians on all sides are still unaware of this convergence.

>202 brone:
It seems to me that inclusivity and unifying the Church are things that the Lord and the Apostle Paul would be very much in favor of. Why do you think that they are not? that they are somehow irreligious?

>201 John5918:
Thank you, John5918, for your comments.

>202 brone:

Thanks for reminding us that humanitarianism is one of the areas where churches demonstrate ecumenism in action; respect for human dignity is a basic element of Christianity. Catholic and protestant networks such as Caritas Internationalis and ACT International have excelled in cooperating in humanitarian aid and development as well as peacebuilding, from large scale international initiatives to local soup kitchens and food banks, as well as welcoming migrants. This is also a field in which inter-faith cooperation can be found.

Like >203 geoffreymeadows: I would question your suggestion that ecumenism is somehow irreligious, or connected with any secular ideologies. In recent posts we have mentioned baptism, eucharist, ministry and the role of women as part of ecumenical dialogue, and other ecumenical conversation issues include Mary, the Nicene Creed and the role of the papacy. I would argue that "the real task of ecumenism", as you put it, is to fulfil Jesus' desire for unity, "May they all be one, just as, Father, you are in me and I am in you" (John 17:21).

50 years on, Paul VI’s gesture of reconciliation with the Orthodox Church (Vatican News)

On 14 December 1975, on the eve of the conclusion of the Holy Year and ten years after the lifting of the mutual excommunications, Pope Paul VI unexpectedly bent to the ground to pay homage to the representative of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople... Metropolitan Meliton would later describe the kiss he received from the Pontiff in these words: “Only a saint could do such a thing.” Patriarch Dimitrios, for his part, commented: “With this gesture, the venerable and dearly beloved brother to us, the Pope of Rome Paul VI, surpassed himself and showed the Church and the world what a Christian bishop is and can be—and above all what the first bishop of Christianity is called to be: a force for reconciliation and for the unity of the Churches and of the world”...

'A den of bandits': Rwanda closes thousands of evangelical churches (AFP)

Grace Room Ministries once filled giant stadiums in Rwanda three times a week before the evangelical organisation was shut down in May. It is one of the 10,000 churches reportedly closed by the government for failing to comply with a 2018 law designed to regulate places of worship. The law introduced new rules on health, safety, and financial disclosures, and requires all preachers to have theological training. President Paul Kagame has been vocal in his criticisms of the evangelical churches that have sprouted across the small country in Africa’s Great Lakes region. “If it were up to me I wouldn’t even reopen a single church,” Kagame told a news briefing last month. “In all the development challenges we are dealing with, the wars... our country’s survival -- what is the role of these churches? Are they also providing jobs? Many are just thieving... some churches are just a den of bandits,” he said... the rules mostly affected new evangelical churches that have “mushroomed” in recent years. But Kagame has described the church as a relic of the colonial period, a chapter of its history with which the country is still grappling. “You have been deceived by the colonisers and you let yourself be deceived,” he said in November...

Taizé gathers 15,000 people to reflect on purpose at Paris meeting (Tablet)

Up to 15,000 people from 72 countries met in Paris for the forty-eighth European youth meeting of the ecumenical Taizé Community... The Taizé Community, an ecumenical monastic community known for its commitment to peace and justice through prayer and meditation, organises a youth gathering in a European city at the end of each year... Brother Matthew expanded on the theme of this year’s gathering in his letter: “So many people are looking for meaning in their lives. They are searching for something greater than the easy promises that fill our screens so much of the time. Are humans not created for a real purpose? What can enable us to discover this? “Our world has so much beauty, but so much injustice too. What is my place in all of that? What am I being asked to do? How can I use the freedom that has been given to me to express solidarity with those who suffer? They are seeking ways in which their desire to love and care can become real, making their lives meaningful by helping and serving. After a week at Taizé, when asked what has been most important for them, many young people speak about the experience of silence. In a world which is hyperconnected and constantly on the move, this may seem surprising. When we take time and disconnect from input that never ends, it is sometimes in silence that we truly encounter ourselves and also glimpse a greater reality”...

It reminds me of my first encounter with the Taizé community when they held their annual European meeting in London forty five years ago. The following year I led a group of young people on a pilgrimage to Taizé. I've never had the opportunity to go back to Taizé, but both encounters were very meaningful for me. The candlelit silence and the simple Latin chants have remained with me.