The Reformation Renounced

[skyblue888]

In the City of Chicago, III., Dec. 5, 1912, an assembly of three hundred and nineteen clerical delegates from thirty-one professedly Protestant denominations intentionally and expressly repudiated the word "Protestant."

That is an occurrence that can never mean less than much every way. It will be found to mean much more, and in more ways, than was thought of by the three hundred and nineteen who did it. And to the people of the United States it means the most of all.

The assembly by which this meaningful thing was done, was the "Second Quadrennial Meeting of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America." It was held in the Hotel La Salle, Chicago, Ill., Dec. 4-9, 1912, and was composed of three hundred and nineteen actually present and participating delegates.

This "Federal Council" was then composed of thirty-one denominations, including all of the most prominent ones, having a total membership of "more than seventeen millions." It was originally organized by five hundred delegates from twenty denominations, who met for the purpose in Carnegie Hall, New York City, Nov. 15-21, 1905.

In its original organization the "Federal Council of Churches" was expressly and distinctly Protestant. In the call under which the convention met in New York City, the object of the proposed meeting was distinctly stated to be "to secure an effective organization of the various Protestant communions of this country", and "to form a bond of union that will enable Protestantism to present a solid front," etc.

And then, in only the second meeting of the Council as such, and without any issue or crisis to demand it, spontaneously and voluntarily this professedly Protestant organization repudiated the word "Protestant" that gave them an existence as a Federal Council, that gave them an existence as denominations, and that gave them existence even as Christians! And this was done in the very first business session of the Council, and in dealing with the very first "Report" that was made to the Council: that is, at the first possible opportunity.

to be continued

[skyblue888]

The occasion for it was this: The "Executive Committee" presented its report. In that report the committee expressed the "earnest hope that the Second Federal Council will make yet more clear certain fundamental facts as to the churches of the country, through their federation." And the first of these was--"The fact of the substantial unity of the Christian and Protestant Churches of the nation."

No sooner was opened the discussion of the report than that word "Protestant" was challenged as if it were a mortal enemy that had invaded the Council.

"Why emphasize a word that is not a uniting but a dividing word? a word that recalls a most unhappy and trying experience," said one.

"By using this word, you make it more difficult for many of your Christian brethren to work with you," said another.

Discussion was soon cut off by a motion to resubmit the report for revision, eliminating the word "Protestant." And this was done thus: –

"To express the fellowship and catholic unity of the Christian Church."

Then the report was promptly adopted, and with applause.

All the circumstances of this action of the Council plainly show that there was a full and waiting readiness to do it. Indeed, preceding facts prove that all that was really new or sudden about it was the actual doing of it at the first possible opportunity.

[Gibs]

Sky,

I wonder if the reason God cannot bless America no more is because there is really no true protestantism of all the errors the movement came out of and the errors then that came in each of them all. All a return to Babylon the Great in one way or another?

If one don't see God isn't blessing and in guidance of America I am sure that opinion will soon be vanquished.

Why? Christian America has failed and fallen back!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[skyblue888]

I agree with you that prostestantism in America is a thing of the past.

We should not speak of America as a "Christian nation". It is not what its founders had in mind. The American Constitution guarantees the separation of church and state and freedom of religion. The moment the Christian religion becomes the official religion of the State, the Constitution is violated.

But I agree with you that the blessings of God have gradually been removed from this country. When the law of God shall be made void in the land by the churches influencing the state to enforce Sunday worship, the sins of Babylon will have reached unto Heaven and there will remain only a very short time before the restraining power of God shall be fully removed. During that short period of time the fourth "angel" will come down to give power to the third "angel" and the message will swell into a loud cry and when the mission of the Gospel is completed, the great final test will separate the wise from the foolish and their destiny will be forever fixed.

sky

[dialoguewithus]

I second the point of view that the state must be separate from religious authorities. As for the falling away of America, a nation founded on genocide and slavery didn't really get off to a great start anyway, did it?

[doug yowell]

I second the point of view that the state must be separate from religious authorities. As for the falling away of America, a nation founded on genocide and slavery didn't really get off to a great start anyway, did it?

Founded on genocide?? Founded on slavery?? That's random.

[dialoguewithus]

I'm not sure what you mean by random, Doug. Definitely not every early European immigrant was involved in either, but they were widespread practices, and just as the White House was built by slaves, so also the national territory was, in large part, built by expropriation.

[doug yowell]

I'm not sure what you mean by random, Doug. Definitely not every early European immigrant was involved in either, but they were widespread practices, and just as the White House was built by slaves, so also the national territory was, in large part, built by expropriation.

1) The genocide aspect is completely over the top. The nation was founded as 13 individual British colonies breaking free from unreasonable governing. It had not nor did it ever engage in any policy of genocide. There were many (to our shame) broken promises, massacres,poachings, ect... but that is not genocide.Many of the early settlers wanted to evangelize the Native Indians. Many just wanted to live on the same lands as the Indians. Few actually wanted to exterminate them as did the real perpetrators of genocides in other places in the world (Turks/Armenians,Hutus/Tutsis,ect...)Perhaps a different description could be more accurately used. 2) While it may be technically true that the country was "founded" by allowing slavery, it was that very founding compromise on slavery that led to slavery's eventual destruction in the country.Had not the antislavery colonies compromised on the slavery issue the southern colonies would never have joined as part of the "United States of America" and we would not be having this discussion today.Nor would there have been a war in which over 600,000 Americans would have died in order to rid itself of the slavery curse once and for all.