Church schisms

[Gustav Kuriga]

That must be why there are thousands of catholic churches splitting off every year to be their own independent protestant church.

Oh wait...

Really? You really want to make that statement? Well let's just turn the clock back to the Protestant Reformation... not exactly middle-ages, but definitely closer to it than you talking about the modern church. Oh what's this? Hey, many churches splitting off of the Catholic church and forming their own independent protestant church! How about that.

Chenier, please, think about what you say before you say it... I beg of you.

[Chenier]

Really? You really want to make that statement? Well let's just turn the clock back to the Protestant Reformation... not exactly middle-ages, but definitely closer to it than you talking about the modern church. Oh what's this? Hey, many churches splitting off of the Catholic church and forming their own independent protestant church! How about that.

Chenier, please, think about what you say before you say it... I beg of you.

Even then. The protestant reforms wasn't about all individual pastor changing their church's vocation like they would change what kind of bread they feel like eating that morning.

Religions aren't just a sum of local congregations. And pastors aren't people with absolute moral authority. If all change from the top down was supposed to be 100% accepted by the followers, then there wouldn't have been so much violence between the anglicans and the catholics. Even during the protestant reforms, temples didn't just opt out on a whim, just because.

When anyone tells their followers, whether they be kings, priests, or anything else, that their old practices were wrong and that new practices are justified, they will not be considered to be legitimate by 100% of the following and as such will not have automatic 100% adhesion.

The notion that was being proposed is essentially the opposite of how things are, yet both extremes are poor choices for religion on the long term. Either 1) with the status quo, religions are at the mercy of whoever holds the top rank and thus this scares people away from investing themselves in religion or 2) religions are at the mercy of each unit that makes it up, too easy to dismember and thus scaring people away from investing in things that could too easily be taken away by a seditious unit (be that unit a priest,  a lord, or anything else).

Religions need mechanics that are more akin to realms than guilds, with built-in mechanics for governance (like elections), an option to protest out top positions (albeit it being extremely hard to protest out someone who has been leading it for a long time or the founder as opposed to someone who just took power and isn't even a priest), more complex religion definitions (drop-down menu for a variety of traits that categorize religions), heavier realm-religion interactions (national sponsored religions, prohibited religions, tithes, etc.), and so on, priest activities having more bite, and so on.

[vonGenf]

That must be why there are thousands of catholic churches splitting off every year to be their own independant protestant church.

Oh wait...

The catholic church has not allowed gays to become priests yet. (Some?) anglican churches have, and they have seen local branches split off.

[De-Legro]

That must be why there are thousands of catholic churches splitting off every year to be their own independant protestant church.

Oh wait...

While not the Catholic church, several congregations of the Uniting Church did leave the church a few years ago when the greater church voted to allow gay and lesbian ministers, most notably the Church led by Fred Nile who for various reasons as a media profile in Australia. Some of these congregation joined other existing denomination they felt were closer to their own theology, others formed independent congregations or the oh so trendy community church path. Under Uniting Church policy these congregations were entitled to take with them all land and property that was managed by the congregation.

These sorts of things are always happening on a small scale through out most Christian denominations. It just not so news worthy that it is often know about outside of the groups themselves. It is not unheard of for Catholic congregations to leave the church in modern times over debates like Women Priest, Gay Priest and even that old chestnut of contraception. I'm not entirely sure but I think in most cases the Church itself however is legally the property of the Catholic Church, so what you see is simply a mass exodus from the congregation. Where we not in modern times with modern property laws perhaps that would be different.

I can't comment on if it is true for other faiths.

[OFaolain]

That must be why there are thousands of catholic churches splitting off every year to be their own independant protestant church.

Oh wait...

More appropriate than you realize, Chenier.  The American Episcopal church was excommunicated by the Church of England (and is now split off) for officially allowing rites of gay marriage; individual pastors that wanted to remain with the Church of England are now being sued out of the buildings they worship in, which are owned by the American Episcopal church.

[Chenier]

About the only thing united in that church is the name.

[De-Legro]

About the only thing united in that church is the name.

You are a expert about my Church now?

[De-Legro]

I didn't mean to derail the thread into a Christianity thread . I just meant that people are followed even if a group of old rich men don't like it. Religion is full of unlikely circumstances that led to crazy outcomes. Everyone seems intent on applying logic to the situation....but is that appropriate with religion? SA seemed more rational than a lot of real and BM religions, but it is still a faith-framework built on belief.

That is part of why I RP'd the peasants following the church regardless of 50 or 60 nobles. How many worshippers does SA have? If you imagine a percentage of total worshippers (character and peasant), how much do you think would give a fig about the charter? Is there one mention of the peasantry in there? Why would they care? The church treated them as cattle....do the cattle really notice shift-change at the slaughter house?

Probably because even in RL history there is scant evidence of 90% of the "lower" faithful going against the hierarchy. If the charter is a significant part of the faith, you better believe they would give a fig about it, since there would be rites/sermons whatever that enshrine its importance to the faithful.

The upheaval of the founding of the Church of England is the closest thing I can think of to what should probably be occurring within SA right now. The difference being so far as I can work out Jonsu has none of the power or support that the King of England needed to force that down the faithful's throats.

[Chenier]

You are a expert about my Church now?

Presbyterianism was a lot about focusing the moral authority into the local pastors, and it's now a part of the United Church. No, I'm not an expert on the United Church, but from what I gather, it rallies a number of protestant denominations and is characterized by decentralized moral authority.

[De-Legro]

Presbyterianism was a lot about focusing the moral authority into the local pastors, and it's now a part of the United Church. No, I'm not an expert on the United Church, but from what I gather, it rallies a number of protestant denominations and is characterized by decentralized moral authority.

Which is why only part of the Presbyterian church joined the united movement. United does not need to infer a single moral authority. Part of the entire point of the Uniting Church was to demonstrate that groups which had previously felt the need to identify as separate denominations could indeed function as a single church while still maintaining the separate articles of faith and interpretations important to them. The National Assembly is the centralised moral Authority, however unlike some other denominations it does not seek to make rulings on every facet of the faith. There are central articles that are deemed important, outside of that there is considerable leeway and discussion and debate is a central part of the church.

When article 52 was approved, allowing for gay and lesbian ministers it had an important restriction. It was left to each congregation to decide if they consent to allowing a gay minister to be assigned to their church. In this case the Assembly has the power and moral authority to declare that the larger church and the colleges that train ministers are allowed to ordain gay and lesbian ministers, but since the community is not of "one mind" in this matter it did not have the authority to decree their acceptance throughout the church. This should come as no surprise, decision making within the Church requires a unanimous consensus among those gathered.

[Chenier]

Which is why only part of the Presbyterian church joined the united movement. United does not need to infer a single moral authority. Part of the entire point of the Uniting Church was to demonstrate that groups which had previously felt the need to identify as separate denominations could indeed function as a single church while still maintaining the separate articles of faith and interpretations important to them. The National Assembly is the centralised moral Authority, however unlike some other denominations it does not seek to make rulings on every facet of the faith. There are central articles that are deemed important, outside of that there is considerable leeway and discussion and debate is a central part of the church.

When article 52 was approved, allowing for gay and lesbian ministers it had an important restriction. It was left to each congregation to decide if they consent to allowing a gay minister to be assigned to their church. In this case the Assembly has the power and moral authority to declare that the larger church and the colleges that train ministers are allowed to ordain gay and lesbian ministers, but since the community is not of "one mind" in this matter it did not have the authority to decree their acceptance throughout the church. This should come as no surprise, decision making within the Church requires a unanimous consensus among those gathered.

Yea, well, in my eyes, there's little "United" about a Church were member denominations come and go as they please.

[De-Legro]

Yea, well, in my eyes, there's little "United" about a Church were member denominations come and go as they please.

Um they don't tend to come and go when they please. Where the hell did you get that idea. Congregations fall out of communion with their greater denomination all the time. That is very different from an entire denomination leaving, especially since there is no concept of "member" denominations within the church. Those that joined are of the one United Denomination, those that choose to remain separate, did so.

Nearly every denomination has a process for deciding and declaring when a congregation is no longer considered to be upholding which ever tenets they hold to be important. There also have processes and requirements to bring said congregation, or indeed congregations of other denominations, back into the "fold". I think you will simply find that as someone no heavily involved in RL religion, you just don't realise how common this sort of thing can be. Take for example my local Presbyterian church, they currently risk being removed from the register on a simple matter of finance and maintenance of the manse. Should they not perform the maintenance that the State Assembly has deemed is required, they will be officially and independent church and their current minister removed from their service.

When the Churches first united not every congregation wished to be part of the Uniting Church. Thus the Presbyterian split, some joining the Uniting Church, others continuing the Presbyterian Church. It wasn't even the first occurrence of this, The Presbyterian Reformed Church split off from the greater Presbyterian Church several years earlier.

We are talking about the 2nd largest Christian denomination in Australia with some two thousand congregations and a organisation that operates the largest non-government provider of community and social services.

[Daycryn]

This is getting way off topic. SA, remember?

[Qyasogk]

That must be why there are thousands of catholic churches splitting off every year to be their own independant protestant church.

Oh wait...

Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, Protestant, Baptists.... EVERY major denomination out there exists because it broke away from Catholicism (or broke away from a denomination that broke away from Catholicism.)