just for the record

[percival]

According to my definition of Christianity, all denominations and all followers of non-denominational churches are Christians in the sense that they try to follow Christ's teachings.

Seeing people contrast Christians with Catholics, even if they don't wish to imply that Catholics disregard Christ's teachings, makes me angry. Please compare evangelical Christians with Catholics, or Baptists with Catholics, or Christians who believe in salvation through faith alone with Catholics who also emphasise salvation through works.

I for one don't like to perpetuate the myth that one denomination or one non-denominational tradition has The Truth, and that only one of the many approaches to Jesus Christ is The Right and Only Correct One. Many of you will feel differently, in particular some of you who have found a path to God through Christ that works for them, and that's fine with me.

However, what I will fight for is the right to approach Christ from many different angles and spiritual traditions, and the right to call oneself a Christian even if one is NOT an evangelical or believes in salvation through faith alone.

Comments

[perceval.livejournal.com]

So would you consider Mormons and Quakers part of the body of Christ?

[angelofthenorth.livejournal.com]

Not because they are mormons, but because of who they are. Same as I don't see Evangelicals or Catholics or Anglicans or Methodists as being necessarily part of the body of Christ. Or even those that take the label 'Christian'. Because being a Christian is a relationship between God and the individual, and who am I to define that relationship.

I consider Ecclesiology to be a different matter, and tend to split hairs about it.

[perceval.livejournal.com]

Yes, it makes perfect sense to separate the theological from the ecclesiological - mixing the two was just what I was getting upset about, in fact!