Protestantism stemmed from Catholicism in the same way which Christianity (both Protestantism and Catholicism) stemmed from Judaism.
"Christianity" as a terminology is not found in the bible. the disciples were called christians first at antioch (acts 11:26). however prior to that, early Christians did not call themselves Christians, but Jews who acknowledge and received the messiah. in fact, the pioneer believers in Christ such as the apostles who were Jewish continued to meet at the synagogue as a display of their Jewish identity. (acts 2:46)
therefore to settle the raging disputes between the protestant and catholic identity, i propose that we debunk all this labeling and pigeon-holing and call ourselves Jews/gentiles for Christ.
however, in my research for an essay, i came across an article that evoked in me a revelation why in our present cocoon, we rather stay that way.
"Christianity" as a terminology is not found in the bible. the disciples were called christians first at antioch (acts 11:26). however prior to that, early Christians did not call themselves Christians, but Jews who acknowledge and received the messiah. in fact, the pioneer believers in Christ such as the apostles who were Jewish continued to meet at the synagogue as a display of their Jewish identity. (acts 2:46)
therefore to settle the raging disputes between the protestant and catholic identity, i propose that we debunk all this labeling and pigeon-holing and call ourselves Jews/gentiles for Christ.
however, in my research for an essay, i came across an article that evoked in me a revelation why in our present cocoon, we rather stay that way.
In 1925 Pope Pius XI organized a missionary exhibition to applaud missionary work in the non-western world. About 100 000 items were sent to the exhibition and only half were returned. The remaining items were subsequently placed in the new Vatican museum, which opened in Rome in 1927. The museum according to the Pope, demonstrated that the 'dawn of faith...illuminated pagan Rome' (Greenfield 1989:10). Included among the 1925 exhibits were cultural property from Papua New Guinea and over 200 Aboriginal materials that were sent by missionaries in Australia. The Vatican's portrayal of indigenous cultures as heathens was a justification for imposing Christianity on indigenous populations.Smallcomb, Sonia, On display for its Aesthetic Beauty: How Western Institutions Fabricate Knowledge about Aboriginal Cultural Heritage, Political Theory and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, ed. Duncan Ivison, et al, Cambridge University press, 2000, pp. 153
in our present political and cultural sensitivities, we recognise that the certain ways, certain persons representing the Church made some wrong calls, from the above example, to the selling of indulgences to build the St Peter's Basilica to the complex and dubious hullabaloo of the crusades.
admist all the spewing of words and verbosity, sorry seems to be the hardest word for some. the alternative is to distance yourself from the mistakes and say that you were never a part of it.
it dawned on me that as a protestant, this is a reason why i rather remain a protestant. because in this way, i can claim that by ascribing to the exposure of the list of abuses of the catholic church that martin luther made plain, i can say that i and all the other protestants have no share in those areas where the church fell from grace. i found myself thinking along those lines when i read the above excerpt. as a protestant, "the pope" does not connote the most positive image in any case.
it is always easier to point fingers then suffer and learn painful lessons together. of course this is in no way summing up the reformation, neither am i weighing the pros and the cons of the protestant break away.
going back to the original point, and to the original point in time, i believe the believers in Christ had more clarity about their belief because it was a matter of life and death. in fact, the nicece creed as we know it was formulated only 300 years after Christ, what doctrine did those Christians hold on to over 3 centuries of persecution?
at gun point, a believer is not going to expound on theological discrepancies or denominational preferences. when your life is at stake under persecution like the first believers in Christ, stripped of all theological baggage, who will you say you are?
admist all the spewing of words and verbosity, sorry seems to be the hardest word for some. the alternative is to distance yourself from the mistakes and say that you were never a part of it.
it dawned on me that as a protestant, this is a reason why i rather remain a protestant. because in this way, i can claim that by ascribing to the exposure of the list of abuses of the catholic church that martin luther made plain, i can say that i and all the other protestants have no share in those areas where the church fell from grace. i found myself thinking along those lines when i read the above excerpt. as a protestant, "the pope" does not connote the most positive image in any case.
it is always easier to point fingers then suffer and learn painful lessons together. of course this is in no way summing up the reformation, neither am i weighing the pros and the cons of the protestant break away.
going back to the original point, and to the original point in time, i believe the believers in Christ had more clarity about their belief because it was a matter of life and death. in fact, the nicece creed as we know it was formulated only 300 years after Christ, what doctrine did those Christians hold on to over 3 centuries of persecution?
at gun point, a believer is not going to expound on theological discrepancies or denominational preferences. when your life is at stake under persecution like the first believers in Christ, stripped of all theological baggage, who will you say you are?
No comments:
Post a Comment