• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

christians - idols

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
You seem to me to be duplicitous (in not wanting to admit to the origins of your church)

Just to clarify: The restorationist attitude of the Stone-Campbell Movement was that they sought to restore the ancient order of the Apostolic faith. (In other words, the highly authoritative hierarchical structure of the bishopric and other clergy were not "original" to the Church -- the highly liturgical, "extra-Biblical" elements of worship were not "original" to the Church.)

These people sought not to begin a "new church" but to restore the ancient Church to it's proper perspective. While you and I may not agree with this tack, it does lend a certain amount of creedence to Myk's statement about the origin of his faith-system.

I am also part of the Stone-Campbell Movement. (There are three basic branches of that movement.) The Churches of Christ are to the right end of the spectrum. My branch is to the left. We consider ourselves a denomination who seeks to embrace the ancient order of the Church, while recognizing that the many expressions of Church are not only valid, but probably even necessary to its health. We seek unity through ecumenism and cooperation.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
I should note that with all respect to Campbells, I dare to assert that the founder of the Church of Christ is Jesus Christ
I didn't say "founder of the Church," I said "founder of the Movement."

I don't seem to remember anyone of us calling it sacraments.
I think James would understand the term "sacraments" better.

Should I comment that baptism is needed once only?
Yet, there was the common practice in the nineteenth century of "rebaptizing" infants and those who had been sprinkled or poured...

According to the Bible, again.
We are "made kingdom of priests", the Bible clearly states that.
Yet, both Stone and Campbell did not do away with the ordained ministry. In fact, they prescribed that an ordained minister should always preside over the Lord's Supper.

I think there's a mind set here. Most Campbellites I know are suspicious of anything "Catholic." They don't want anything to do with the way the Catholics do things (the use of statues, icons, etc., the intercession of saints, the vesting of ministers, etc.) Personally, I don't have a problem with praying before icons as idolatry. I think that attitude is little more than a knee-jerk reaction to a) something not well-understood, b) not "Biblical" in nature, and c) a more "Catholic" practice.
 
Top