Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
What have Protestants thought of the Coptic Orthodox Church
I think it is useful to be aware of how our Coptic Orthodox Church has been viewed by Protestants over the years. I will provide a few early quotes in this post. To be honest I have read much of the correspondence of the Church Missionary Society and they plainly and explicitly planned to undermine the Coptic Orthodox Church by the provision of schools and a theological college in which Protestant doctrines would be taught to the young.
i. 1752, Moravian Brethren. "..in all their conversation to endeavour to direct attention to the essence of Christianity ... and teach them how, by means of Jesus' merits, they might obtain rest for their souls, true holiness of life, and evangelical liberty, which leave the conscience unfettered by human traditions".
ii. 1850, Church Mission Society. "The missionaries seem to follow almost too strictly the plan on which the mission was begun, to seek the friendship of the clergy, especially the higher clergy of the Eastern Churches, with a view of influencing them gently, in the hope that by slow degrees they would become convinced of their errors and themselves reform their respective Churches. But the system has failed... Individual conversions [of Copts] must be the aim, as the only means of prosecuting reformation".
iii. 1850, Church Mission Society. "Through the Church Mussuin Society missionaries throughout the Nile Valley, hundreds of persons had their knowledge of the way of salvation corrected, their faith directed away from their own works, to the death and suffering and obedience of the Son of God as the reason and ground of salvation from sin and its consequences".
iv. 1852. "Rev Mr. Leider has done good among the Copts, and the young men whom he has instructed refuse on conscientious grounds to enter the priesthood of this corrupt Church.... The American Missionary Association has resolved to establish a Mission among the Copts".
v. 1896. "[The Copts] must have had some glimpse of the light that illumines the soul and leads up to the throne of God. To help such a people [the Copts] to loosen themselves from the chains of superstition, and to come out of the dungeon of darkness into which their surroundings had imprisoned them, and lead them forth into the light and liberty of the Christian faith, is surely a duty and a Christian privilege".
THIS is what the Protestants thought of our Coptic Orthodox Church while they were busy undermining and corrupting it. They may well have meant well, but their actions made them the enemy of the truth and of the Orthodox Faith. Read all of these short passages carefully. The Protestantism which produces such a view of the Coptic Orthodox Church is not Orthodox, nor truthful. It is a deception and it works, however well meant, to deceive those it persuades.
Is the Coptic Orthodox Church bound by chains of superstition? Are we in a dungeon of darkness? Do we need to find the Christian Faith? Are these attitudes we should embrace? Are the practices of those who hold such views ones which we should easily and readily adopt? Do you see that they had a clear plan to befriend the higher clergy and to persuade them that the Orthodox Faith was error and must be reformed? And when that did not work they changed their plan and began to deceive individuals. All of these plans are published in black and white, the Protestants were proud of all their efforts to win the superstitious Copts to the Christian Faith.
Father Peter
i. 1752, Moravian Brethren. "..in all their conversation to endeavour to direct attention to the essence of Christianity ... and teach them how, by means of Jesus' merits, they might obtain rest for their souls, true holiness of life, and evangelical liberty, which leave the conscience unfettered by human traditions".
ii. 1850, Church Mission Society. "The missionaries seem to follow almost too strictly the plan on which the mission was begun, to seek the friendship of the clergy, especially the higher clergy of the Eastern Churches, with a view of influencing them gently, in the hope that by slow degrees they would become convinced of their errors and themselves reform their respective Churches. But the system has failed... Individual conversions [of Copts] must be the aim, as the only means of prosecuting reformation".
iii. 1850, Church Mission Society. "Through the Church Mussuin Society missionaries throughout the Nile Valley, hundreds of persons had their knowledge of the way of salvation corrected, their faith directed away from their own works, to the death and suffering and obedience of the Son of God as the reason and ground of salvation from sin and its consequences".
iv. 1852. "Rev Mr. Leider has done good among the Copts, and the young men whom he has instructed refuse on conscientious grounds to enter the priesthood of this corrupt Church.... The American Missionary Association has resolved to establish a Mission among the Copts".
v. 1896. "[The Copts] must have had some glimpse of the light that illumines the soul and leads up to the throne of God. To help such a people [the Copts] to loosen themselves from the chains of superstition, and to come out of the dungeon of darkness into which their surroundings had imprisoned them, and lead them forth into the light and liberty of the Christian faith, is surely a duty and a Christian privilege".
THIS is what the Protestants thought of our Coptic Orthodox Church while they were busy undermining and corrupting it. They may well have meant well, but their actions made them the enemy of the truth and of the Orthodox Faith. Read all of these short passages carefully. The Protestantism which produces such a view of the Coptic Orthodox Church is not Orthodox, nor truthful. It is a deception and it works, however well meant, to deceive those it persuades.
Is the Coptic Orthodox Church bound by chains of superstition? Are we in a dungeon of darkness? Do we need to find the Christian Faith? Are these attitudes we should embrace? Are the practices of those who hold such views ones which we should easily and readily adopt? Do you see that they had a clear plan to befriend the higher clergy and to persuade them that the Orthodox Faith was error and must be reformed? And when that did not work they changed their plan and began to deceive individuals. All of these plans are published in black and white, the Protestants were proud of all their efforts to win the superstitious Copts to the Christian Faith.
Father Peter
Comments
I am truly sorrowful over having ever been a part of any such church that would believe as they believe(d?) about the Copts. Granted, I didn't have a choice (at least as a Protestant; I did when converting to Catholicism, though I see now that I hadn't given Orthodoxy much thought at all!), but now that I do...for shame, Protestants and 'Protestantizers'! No one who is in Christ is in a "dungeon of darkness" or beholden to any superstition. Far more insidious and real are the chains of "Christiani-ME" which all these other sects are bound by. Perhaps the Copts should evangelize the Protestants in return, as they now live among them in great numbers in the West.
I have written on this forum that I never learned mathematics as well as I have since I began tutoring children in it. I have to believe that the same is probably true of teaching spiritual children (Protestants, Catholics, errant fellow Orthodox, others) the true faith. Yet what some conversations here on Tasbeha have shown me is that the opposite is in fact occurring in some places: The Copts are becoming Protestantized by Western culture. I dream of the day when Western culture should become Orthodoxized by the Copts (or the Ethiopians, or the Eritreans, or the Armenians, etc). I believe this is God's will that it should be so, and that with due time a generation will grow up among the diaspora and converts to the faith like you, dear Father, and others. Were it not for this belief, I might become despairing upon reading those quotes! ;D
I remember the first time that I heard about how protestants view us, I was very surprised. especially since we view them as a sub-christianity...
Sigh, this makes me very sad. Every single Christian group (including us!) says they are the only true denomination of Christianity and everyone else is utterly wrong. And when we fail to focus on the 95% of things that are in common and only look at the 5% of the differences - that's when the divide only deepens. We should be brothers in love, not denominations at war.
I remember reading a thread on some secular site that talked about the appearance of St. Mary in Zeitoun, and someone who was Catholic was explaining how we should consider this apparition Satanic and not St. Mary because the Copts were heretics that believed in miaphysitism.
I don't know how accurate this is because I heard it by word of mouth, but in the (I think) Catholic Church there was another apparition of St. Mary and the person asked her which denomination was the correct one. She told him that the Holy Spirit works in all churches. I bet that apparition was shortly denounced as Satanic as well.
It's no wonder that St. Paul warns us multiple times to keep the church united.
Arius also agreed with the Church on alot. The only thing he didn't agree with was the divinity of Christ (which leads to more disagreements within it of course, but I hope you understand my point). Were we supposed to try to keep the Church together and keep Arius inside the Church. The council of Nicaea had Arius deposed. He was no longer part of the one true Church. Now he obviously went around claiming his church was the one true Church. Were the fathers of Nicaea wrong in cutting him off from the Church? We had to preserve the true faith. If he wanted to come back, he could as long as he repented. As long as there was a substantial difference between the sides there was no reason for the unification.
The same St. Paul that warned us to keep the Church united says: "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed."
Where the verses on unity take effect is in the case of the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox churches where there are no differences in faith, and even then we have to do everything thoroughly so as to be sure.
:)
as a Protestant (kind of), what makes me sad about the Orthodox churches is how many of them seem to be increasingly ok with heretical practices and ideas, just because the Protestants are doing it.
i'm a woman who would personally like to be able to do more in church, but as a Christian i realize that my place as a woman is to be silent and to learn under and from men. it kind of alarms me to hear some Orthodox call for women to have a more prominent place in the worship service, even though this hasn't been a feature of Orthodox praxis for 2,000 years.
"we need to change, everyone else is doing it, times have changed so we have to change too", phrases like this have ruined and gutted so many things in Protestantism. it's sad to hear some Orthodox saying the same.
further more, i am not quite sure why everyone here is so preoccupied with criticising the protestants. one does not have to be a protestant to notice this critical spirit which i believe is not at all helpful. it may be more useful if i reminded you that, according to the Bible, no slanderer will inherit the kingdom of God.
2. i appreciate you admitting being biased.
[quote author=epiphania link=topic=10598.msg129139#msg129139 date=1296515269]
I remember the first time that I heard about how protestants view us, I was very surprised. especially since we view them as a sub-christianity...
Sigh, this makes me very sad. Every single Christian group (including us!) says they are the only true denomination of Christianity and everyone else is utterly wrong. And when we fail to focus on the 95% of things that are in common and only look at the 5% of the differences - that's when the divide only deepens. We should be brothers in love, not denominations at war.
I remember reading a thread on some secular site that talked about the appearance of St. Mary in Zeitoun, and someone who was Catholic was explaining how we should consider this apparition Satanic and not St. Mary because the Copts were heretics that believed in miaphysitism.
I don't know how accurate this is because I heard it by word of mouth, but in the (I think) Catholic Church there was another apparition of St. Mary and the person asked her which denomination was the correct one. She told him that the Holy Spirit works in all churches. I bet that apparition was shortly denounced as Satanic as well.
It's no wonder that St. Paul warns us multiple times to keep the church united.
I agree 100%. My dad is Coptic Catholic and my mom is Coptic Orthodox and they taught me how to accept other denominations and that just because someone interprets the bible differently doesn't mean he or she are wrong. I usually go to the Orthodox church and this is where I feel more comfortable though...
I agree 100%. My dad is Coptic Catholic and my mom is Coptic Orthodox and they taught me how to accept other denominations and that just because someone interprets the bible differently doesn't mean he or she are wrong.
This is fine and all, except when the person/denomination is wrong, and with Protestantism that happens quite a lot.
I always say that we must respect the person and their right to believe in whatever wrong thing they want to, but that doesn't mean that we should respect the content of whatever their wrong belief is. We don't have to respect Protestantism as a belief system. Protestantism certainly does not respect the sacraments, the preisthood, the Fathers, the Tradition, and the other things that form the content of the faith. Those individual Protestants or individual Protestant sects who do respect those things (some "liturgical" Protestants, like Anglicans), and Catholics, form something of a different situation because they don't reject these things outright, but even then they're still wrong due to whatever unorthodox teachings they do embrace. And to force any Christian to say "well, the doctrine of Papal Infallibility is wrong, buttttt...just because you believe in it doesn't mean you're wrong" (for one example) would practically force us to become schizophrenic. Of course believing in wrong things means that you're wrong -- you believe in wrong things! You're wrong about those things, not as any sort of judgment of you as a person, but because those things are wrong. They would be wrong even if you didn't believe in them.
I do not like this "Everyone's opinion is inviolable" way of thinking. Certainly we don't deal with other religions in this way (Islam, Buddhism, whatever), do we? We know Christ is the way and the truth and the life, not Muhammad or Buddha. So why can't we also say to those who proclaim Christ but deny what He has instituted that they are wrong in their denial?
The Protestant church is a whole different story though. They do have some positive things they do (like preaching everywhere with the Bible.) Their name is Protestants and the bible teaches us obedience to our leaders, but at least I learned to respect them
You wrote the following: For all I know, you are right. You see, I am not yet Orthodox, so it is not my place to say who can say the Pope is wrong. But in your parenthetical musing, you have written something that is of great significance: "I respect him and can't deny that he is a holy man, but he still can make mistakes." This is exactly the attitude that the Roman doctrine of Papal Infallibility does not allow Catholics to have (but many of them, primarily Easterners and me, still do/did). The doctrine of Papal Infallibility teaches that it is literally impossible for the Pope to teach error when teaching "ex-cathedra" (from the chair [of Peter]) on matters of faith and morals. It is literally impossible for him to err because it is argued that he is protected from any error by the Holy Spirit, which guides him in the pastoral care of the universal Church (which by the way, includes all churches...so HH Pope Shenouda III of Alexandria would also be under the Roman Pope, if Alexandria were to hypothetically "re-unite" with Rome).
It all sounds very nice, right? But if you think about it, you'll have to eventually ask yourself: Doesn't the Holy Spirit guide HH Pope Shenouda III? Yes, we do believe so (heck, even Rome believes so! Rome teaches that the Orthodox Church is entirely valid, just "schismatic" due to its refusal to submit to Roman Papal prerogatives). So clearly it is not really necessary that the Pope (any Pope, or any person in any position of leadership) be granted some magical power of "infallibility" whereby anything they teach is correct because they're protected a priori by the Holy Spirit. They can be thought of as humans who are able to make mistakes, and the Church is not somehow conquered as a result. And this is why, when the Roman Pope makes or approves of some questionable statement regarding another religion (e.g., the infamous CCC 841 that details the Catholic Church's relationship to Muslims and Islam), or does some curious and potentially heretical public action (e.g., Pope John Paul II kissing the Qur'an), you will always see the Catholics fight among themselves to determine if it is in violation of the Pope's "infallibility". Some will say it is not infallible, and therefore it is okay to label it as error (magically the Pope becomes a human being again and makes a mistake, and the fact that he was clearly in error is brushed aside precisely because it is NOT an "infallible" case), while others will argue that it is infallible in some way so it establishes a precedent that all Catholics must agree with/adhere to/follow and not speak against (of COURSE Catholics and Muslims worship the same God! It's in the Catechism, and the Catechism has an imprimatur, doesn't it?!). Infallibility is a mess, and moreover a falsehood, and the Orthodox Church (including Alexandria and its Pope) are very wise to avoid it.
No human being is ever infallible. The See of St. Mark, where the title of Pope was first used, has never claimed otherwise, and yet it stands for the Orthodox faith as confidently today as it did in times past. Meanwhile, on the side that has this doctrine of "infallibility", what do we see? All kinds of strange doctrines and causes being presented to the Pope for his approval, whereby they will enter into the realm of something Catholics are supposed to trick themselves into believing that they have always believed, even when their common sense tells them that this isn't the case. You'll have to forgive me if in the light of these two competing scenarios I've decided to choose the one that doesn't drive me absolutely insane. The Roman Communion is broken because its approach to the faith leads away from Orthodoxy. If Rome were to renounce her false doctrines, I would have no problem with the Roman Catholic Church. Until then, I will continue on the road to Orthodoxy, which has perhaps fewer explicit directions but is nonetheless infinitely better lit.
i would like to ask people not to use the term 'sub-Christianity' for protestant belief. it's a bit harsh when many of them are very sincere.
Do not confuse the belief with the individual. Some of the individual may indeed be actively seeking Christ, if that is true then God has willed that (John 6:66) and we cannot prevent that transition to the true church. Make no mistake about it, protestantism is not Christianity by any stretch of the imagination.
1. Some Protestants say that the Antichrist will be asian.
2. My protestant bible teacher scolded me for wearing a necklace of the cross with our Lord nailed to it because she said that I was insulting God.
3. My 8th grade bible teacher once compared good deeds to dirty rags claiming that we don't need them to get into Heaven you only need to believe in our Lord. Even though I told him about the comparison St. James makes in his epistle "Faith without works equals dead".
4. The pastor started bragging in his sermon about how many miracles he did. (he basically gathered up some people he found in the Marketplace and prayed that God would heal all of their stomach problems).
5. The worship leader was found reading the bible while smoking while the radio was on playing "peanut butter jelly time". When confronted about it he said that it helped him relax and loosen up to be able to read the Bible.
6. In chapel service the pastor encouraged people to pray that God would manifest random images in their minds and would then go on a car ride until they found some building that matched the mental image and they would go inside and pray.
7. I was asked to pray during class, so I concluded my short prayer with "Through the intercessions of ..." my prayer was then followed by a half an hour lecture about how asking for the intercession of the saints is idolatry.
Honestly, this isn't even half of my experiences with Protestants and I have many more stories but I believe that my point has been established. For this reason which is one of the many, you better think again about getting upset about calling Protestantism a "sub denomination". This phrase is in reality an extreme understatement.
According to Your mercy O Lord and not according to our sins.
dzheremi; I said that our pope makes mistakes but nobody can say that. Did you ever hear anyone saying that the pope did something wrong? I've always heard that he is guided by the Holy Spirit (which is true) and he has a vision that made him say so and so. The Catholic Church instead, just avoided the possibility that the pope sins... I am Orthodox, but I think that both churches believe in the pope's infallibility but the Orthodox church is just "not official" about it... (Which I think is better)
Okay. So you see them as the same. I do not, though. Whether Coptic Christians say that HH Pope Shenouda III (or Pope Kyrillos VI, or any Pope) made a mistake is one thing. Forcing them to believe that he cannot make an error is something else. In fact, I would go farther and say that if the Pope of Alexandria ever made the kinds of seriously unorthodox and questionable pronouncements or actions that some of the Roman Popes have made, I would hope that his people would rightly remind him that he is accountable to the Orthodox faith and its traditions, and the Apostles and Disciples and Fathers that led the Church to this day. The Catholic Church sidesteps this process by simply finding a way to retroactively declare everything the Pope does and says as either infallible and hence binding on all believers, or not infallible and hence of no consequence regardless of how erroneous and faith destroying it is. It is an untenable and deeply disturbing way to approach the faith. I do not believe that a church that has preserved the apostolic faith would operate in such a manner.
rafikwa, His Holiness Pope Shenouda is very highly respected and loved indeed, and it is his own experience of living as a monk and bishop which enables him to speak with grace. But this does not belong to him, and certainly not to his office as Patriarch. There have been Patriarchs who have been deposed for a variety of reasons, and this could also happen with some future Patriarch, which God forbid.
The Pope and Patriarch of Alexandria is essentially a bishop. There is no charism greater than that of a bishop. All of the rest, Metropolitans, Archbishops, Patriarchs etc is a matter of organising the Church. His Holiness is the senior bishop but he does not have a different charism. He is certainly not infallible, and many have disagreed with things that he has said in the past.
I sense that at the present there is no wish to disagree with him in anything because he is loved dearly as a father, he is respected highly as a deeply spiritual man, and he has proved himself to be correct in many of the difficult decisions that have had to be made in his years of service.
But there is nothing theologically wrong in disagreeing with him, while to disagree with the Pope of Rome in a matter in which he has spoken ex cathedra is to deny the Catholic Faith.
This Catholic teaching is not Orthodox. No Orthodox Christian can accept it.
Father Peter
LETS FOCUS ON LOVING OUR CHURCH NOT HATING OTHER CHURCHES!
LETS ACTUALLY BE CHRISTINA PLEASSSSSSE!
What is the Church supposed to do? Just let the youth think that there is no difference between the Christian Faith and Protestantism?
I don't see any hating here. But a criticism of what is taught by Protestantism. That is entirely proper and Christian.
Father Peter
OH YE OF LITTLE FAITH! Do you have no faith that God will keep our church and its congregants faithful in our teachings... You've completely taken God out of the equation. God has kept this church strong for many years. HAVE A LITTLE FAITH HERE "father." Be a good example to your children and teach them how to love not hate.
It has nothing to do with looking at other churches or personalities within them and calling them "non-Christian". It's about their doctrines that are false and threatening to corrupt the faith of those who don't know any better because they haven't experienced Protestantism like we have.
This has nothing to do with Protestants at all, and is everything to do with the false teachings of Protestantism.
We have all had significant and lengthy experience of Protestant teaching, and many of our family members are still Protestants, We do not hate them, how could we, but we do disagree with what they are taught.
As dzheremi says, it is faith-corrupting. What we believe affects how we live. And if we allow Protestant ideas, practices and teachings into the Church then people's spiritual lives will be affected and diminished.
This says nothing about the sincerity of many Protestants, their desire to serve God, their love of Christ. But what they are taught harms them and will harm all those Orthodox Christians who accept and embrace such teachings.
The differences are UNACCEPTABLE.
For their sake, and because we love then, we must bear witness to the Truth in the way we live our lives and in what we teach in the Church.