PDA

View Full Version : Denominational Nuances



jeffreys
Dec 1st 2007, 04:04 PM
Howdy Partners...

My very brief conversation with The Parson led me to think it might be kinda fun to tell everyone what denomination/brotherhood your church is part of, and what churches are very similar, but perhaps not exactly the same.

For instance, if you're Lutheran, could you elaborate on what you see as the differences between ELCA and Missouri Synod?

Let's not argue, or point out where others are wrong, but just have this thread be informational.


I'll start...

I pastor a Christian Church - whose heritage is the Restoration Movement that essentially began with the Cane Ridge Revivals, in Kentucky, around 1800. The desire of the leaders was to be "Christians Only" and follow the New Testament. Their desire wasn't even to start new churches (initially) but to be Biblical Christians wherever they were.

Within the Restoration Movement, there are 3 main branches, none of which - to be honest - really has much to do with the others.

The Christian Church/Disciples of Christ are very liberal, both theologically, doctrinally and socially. They're now very similar to the United Church of Christ and/or some liberal Methodist Churches.

The Christian Church/Church of Christ (where I am) is the "centrist" branch. We're actually very conservative, in the big picture, but considered liberals by the non-instrumentalists. This branch is very similar to Evangelical Free Churches and/or some Baptist Churches.

The Acceppella churches of Christ have an extremely conservative approach to Scripture. Their most remarkable feature is the belief that the use of instruments in worship is wrong. The doctrinal approach is, basically, that if the New Testament does not command something, that means it's forbidden. They're similar to some Primitive Baptist churches.


I'll stop for now.

Anyone else want to join in the discussion?

GothicAngel
Dec 3rd 2007, 02:55 AM
Im a Catholic in the old Latin rite. We use the Latin version of the Mass that was finalized at I think the Council of Trent in the 1500s. The calnder is different from the new Latin rite- there are more feast days for one. IT is a very conservative and stable rite. It doesnt use all the penances of the pre-Vatican II era though.

Theres also the new Latin rite. Although the origianl Mass put forth by Vatican II in the 60s was meant to be mostly in Latin with the preist facing away from the people, somehow it ended up kind of wierd. The lack of strict rules that the old Mass had made it easy for nuts to get in, and there were/are alot of abuses, although some were conservative.

Thats all I know of them. According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Liturgical_Rites), there are about 24 other rites, which I know nothing of. Some of the Eastern ones do not have celibacy as a rule, and theres other differences in practice.

KingFisher
Dec 3rd 2007, 07:39 PM
Hey good idea. This could be a good read.

I'm a member of a Missionary Baptist Church associated with the
BMA of Texas (Baptist Missionary Association)

We have also just recently affiliated in joint projects with the SBC of Texas.
(long story but the BMA of Texas and SBC of Texas have joined in the
efforts with a college and teen home)

In the link I pasted below it gives the origin of the BMA.(the association)
Although like The Parson I feel that there have been "Baptist like"
churches since the beginning. I find the roots of the church there.
(I'm not an Old Landmarker nor is my church)

The Missionary Baptist and Southern Baptist are very similar. I have
visited Many southern Baptist churches and see no differences. I am
told that Missionary Baptist alot a higher percentage per church towards
missions. I don't know if this is true because I have not looked into it.

We have nearly identical doctrinal statements.

A little history...
"The Baptist Missionary Association of America (BMAA) is a fellowship of
autonomous Baptist churches for the purpose of benevolence, Christian
education, and missions. Formed at Little Rock, Arkansas in 1950 as the
North American Baptist Association, the Baptist Missionary Association of
America adopted its current name in 1969. This association owes its origin
to a split in the American Baptist Association, and many of its policies and
programs are similar to the parent body. Its deepest roots may be found in
the controversy within the Baptist General Convention of Texas that
resulted in the formation of the Baptist Missionary Association of Texas in
1900. The BMA of America has been viewed as part of the Landmark
movement, yet many BMA churches no longer hold Landmark views. Its
concentration is in the south, with the primary membership in Texas
(about 43 percent), but as a result of its mission work, the association
has churches across the United States and throughout the world.
According to the BMAA Missions Department, "the sun never sets on
BMA Missions." The BMAA supports missionaries, a publishing house, a
seminary (several state groups own junior colleges), a youth camp, and
a radio ministry. Most churches participate in local and state associations
as well as this national/general body. In 2003, there were about
234,511 members in 1,275 churches (in the United States). Foreign
countries with churches that associate closely with BMAA churches
generally also have a national association in their respective country.
This includes the rapidly-growing BMA of Africa, and the BMA of the
Philippines, which has begun sending out its own foreign missions
personnel to neighboring East Asian nations.""
Copied from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist_Missionary_Association_of_America

HisLeast
Dec 4th 2007, 05:06 AM
I consider myself "simply" Christian.

I attend Moody Church here in Chicago who's doctrinal statements can be found here: http://www.moodychurch.org/information/doctrine.html

jeffreys
Dec 4th 2007, 12:45 PM
I consider myself "simply" Christian.

I attend Moody Church here in Chicago who's doctrinal statements can be found here: http://www.moodychurch.org/information/doctrine.html
DL Moody was pretty much a "down-the-line" Baptist, wasn't he?

HisLeast
Dec 4th 2007, 03:23 PM
DL Moody was pretty much a "down-the-line" Baptist, wasn't he?

I'm not sure. I know he grew up in a unitarian Church, but as an adult I believe he spent more time witnessing to soldiers, sailors, thieves, and street urchins than worrying about what denomination he was.

The Moody Church today is best described as non-denominational but basically protestant. There is a substantial former RCC membership, and according to my RCC wife "the worship service feels very much the same, but I learn more during the speaking". There's also a large Southern Baptist crowd in attendance. Moody seems to just transcend racial, cultural, and denominational boundries while still focussing on the Word and what it means to be the Church.

jeffreys
Dec 4th 2007, 03:33 PM
I'm not sure. I know he grew up in a unitarian Church, but as an adult I believe he spent more time witnessing to soldiers, sailors, thieves, and street urchins than worrying about what denomination he was.

The Moody Church today is best described as non-denominational but basically protestant. There is a substantial former RCC membership, and according to my RCC wife "the worship service feels very much the same, but I learn more during the speaking". There's also a large Southern Baptist crowd in attendance. Moody seems to just transcend racial, cultural, and denominational boundries while still focussing on the Word and what it means to be the Church.
Very cool. I'll PM you - since I don't want to derail this thread.

Ayala
Dec 4th 2007, 03:59 PM
I go to a small Calvary Chapel church.

Wikipedia on Calvary Chapel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvary_Chapel

jeffreys
Dec 4th 2007, 05:34 PM
I go to a small Calvary Chapel church.

Wikipedia on Calvary Chapel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvary_Chapel

Cool. Does your particular congregation lead toward or away from the tongues & other manifestations of the Spirit (I read that they're considered valid, but aren't really pushed)?

Ayala
Dec 4th 2007, 05:39 PM
If the Lord touches you in such a way...awesome. It's not a focal point of our church though.

jeffreys
Dec 4th 2007, 05:48 PM
If the Lord touches you in such a way...awesome. It's not a focal point of our church though.
Makes sense. Thanks!

Steve M
Dec 4th 2007, 05:49 PM
The Christian Church/Disciples of Christ are very liberal, both theologically, doctrinally and socially. They're now very similar to the United Church of Christ and/or some liberal Methodist Churches.

The Christian Church/Church of Christ (where I am) is the "centrist" branch. We're actually very conservative, in the big picture, but considered liberals by the non-instrumentalists. This branch is very similar to Evangelical Free Churches and/or some Baptist Churches.

The Acceppella churches of Christ have an extremely conservative approach to Scripture. Their most remarkable feature is the belief that the use of instruments in worship is wrong. The doctrinal approach is, basically, that if the New Testament does not command something, that means it's forbidden. They're similar to some Primitive Baptist churches.


Within each of these different subsets you'll find the smaller pacifist subsets, going back to the Libscomb branch and others within the offshoots. That's where I live.

Teke
Dec 4th 2007, 06:39 PM
I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian. The branch I am part of presently is associated with the Russian patriarchate. We use the old calendar of feasts for Christ and His Church. Our branch agrees with the first seven ecumenical councils, there are some EO (Coptic) who only agree with the first three. The EO follow the tradition of Christ and His Apostles. Clergy (priests, deacons ) are not required to be celibate, it was later decided that bishops would be called from the monastic order as they have no worldly attachment other than Christ. Orthodox monks do not strive to be bishops, their only obedience is to Christ and His Bride the Church.


http://www.archangelsbooks.com/prodimages/Large/Misc/FCR223.jpg

sunney4
Dec 4th 2007, 07:23 PM
i attend a non-denominational church. pretty conservative. so i guess technically its not a denomination, non-denominational can be a deonmination? maybe? if not, ill remove my piece. but anyway, we follow a lot along the lines of John MacArthur's church and Masters Seminary...http://www.gracechurch.org/home/doclib.asp?ministry_id=1&dlcat=Doctrinal+Statement....

Soj
Dec 4th 2007, 09:05 PM
I am an Independent Baptist. I am conservative, King James only, dispensational, rightly dividing, non-charismatic, and evangelical.

I follow the model of those faithful Christians down through the centuries written about in "The Trail of Blood" by J.M Carroll http://users.aol.com/libcfl/trail.htm who circumnavigated the Catholic Church and subsequent Protestant Churches. We have always been labelled sectarian by our contemporaries, amen.

I am a New Zealand Christian yet the majority of my mentors/teachers over the years have been American.

My church maintains contact with a network of churches of like faith and practise throughout New Zealand and the world, including the support of missionaries on the far field.

matthew94
Dec 6th 2007, 05:26 AM
I am a pastor in the Wesleyan Church which is a holiness denomation branched off of the Methodist Church. We are extremely similar to the Nazarene Church and identical in theology to the Salvation Army.

ServantofTruth
Dec 6th 2007, 08:40 AM
I grew up Church of England/ Anglican, left at 13. Since being an adult and returning to Christ i have been happy to attend any denomination - Baptist, United Reform, my old Anglican etc. If any of you invited me and i could get there i'd attend any denomination, same goes for your bibles if you wanted me to read your translation - i'd be happy too. One church of Jesus Christ.:hug:

KATA_LOUKAN
Dec 6th 2007, 12:02 PM
I'm EFCA (Evangelical Free Church of America) myself.

We are theoligical newcomers, only formed in 1950 in a bookstore in Iowa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelical_Free_Church