Santorum says the 45,000,000 Protestants in America are not Christians

[ajb]

Again, this is yet another example of gross distortion.

The short answer is, "Yes, Rick Santorum believes 45,000,000 mainline Protestants in America are in fact Christians."

The long answer involves a careful study of the "Re-imagining 1993" conference held in Minnesota with the support and participation of the National Council of Churches [mostly mlp], and a series of other theological debates within those churches. The upshoot is that many are experiencing schisms, bleeding membership and otherwise showing themselves to be a in a state of "shambles."  That is a fact.

Much of the internal debates within those churches is whether, or not, some of the theological stances the church leadership have taken are heretical. Apparently, Santorum agrees with many of the dissidents within those churches. Is this such a big deal?

He does say that mainline Protestants are "gone from the world of Christianity as he sees it." To split hairs, that's not quite saying that they're not Christian. But it's certainly pointing heavily in that direction.

[ajb]

Again, this is yet another example of gross distortion.

The short answer is, "Yes, Rick Santorum believes 45,000,000 mainline Protestants in America are in fact Christians."

The long answer involves a careful study of the "Re-imagining 1993" conference held in Minnesota with the support and participation of the National Council of Churches [mostly mlp], and a series of other theological debates within those churches. The upshoot is that many are experiencing schisms, bleeding membership and otherwise showing themselves to be a in a state of "shambles."  That is a fact.

Much of the internal debates within those churches is whether, or not, some of the theological stances the church leadership have taken are heretical. Apparently, Santorum agrees with many of the dissidents within those churches. Is this such a big deal?

He does say that mainline Protestants are "gone from the world of Christianity as he sees it." To split hairs, that's not quite saying that they're not Christian. But it's certainly pointing heavily in that direction.

Many of the parishioners of those churches have come to the conclusion that their leadership has left the world of Christianity as they understand it, thus, the schisms, and, defections. Are they questioning their own faith? No, they are questioning the leadership of their churches.

Sure. But many others remain in those churches. And consider themselves to be Christian, even though they're Lutheran, or Methodist, or Presbyterian, or even Episcopalian!

You may not agree with them, and that's your right. It's also Rick Santorum's right to stand up for his convictions. I just don't see how anyone expects to win 270 electoral votes by establishing so many preconditions for accepting anyone's support.

And you know, maybe Santorum doesn't care about winning 270 electoral votes.

[ajb]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Obama is as tone deaf as it comes to what certain Christians believe and how they practice their faith.

Fixed.

[ajb]

Random conference, indeed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re-Imagining:_Christian_feminist_conference

Note that the conference led to the firing of the highest-ranking Presbyterian woman of the time.

Not a single mainline Protestant denomination withdrew the Nicene Creed from regular liturgical use as a consequence of the Re-Imagining conference. All still use it today.

[ajb]

To be fair to Bob, a lot of what went on at Re-Imagining was theological woo of the sort that's incredibly damaging to the reputation of feminist theology.

Fair enough. But it's pretty amusing to characterize the event as having led to the overturning of centuries' worth of doctrine for several major denominations.
Or it would be amusing, if it weren't pernicious.

[ajb]

To be fair to Bob, a lot of what went on at Re-Imagining was theological woo of the sort that's incredibly damaging to the reputation of feminist theology.

Fair enough. But it's pretty amusing to characterize the event as having led to the overturning of centuries' worth of doctrine for several major denominations.
Or it would be amusing, if it weren't pernicious.

Oh, I completely agree. It went over like a lead balloon. It was probably the most pointless theological exercise of its kind in decades, up there with the career of Mary Daly.

Thinking of Mary Daly, at least one of the participants at the Re-Imagining conference was a Catholic nun. I wonder if that means that the Catholic Church abandoned the Nicene Creed as well?

[ajb]

Random conference, indeed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re-Imagining:_Christian_feminist_conference

Note that the conference led to the firing of the highest-ranking Presbyterian woman of the time.

Not a single mainline Protestant denomination withdrew the Nicene Creed from regular liturgical use as a consequence of the Re-Imagining conference. All still use it today.

Here's another link for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Shelby_Spong

John Shelby Spong was a bishop.  You can't simply dissociate his church from him as you attempted with the re-imaging conference. [Nor, is pointing out the fact that someone was fired an answer to the question why in the heck did the Presbyterian Church sponsor the conference in the first place?] Spong clearly was advocating the rejection of Nicene Christianity. The schisms are occurring for a reason.

OK, I think I now understand the argument that you're trying to make, which hasn't been fully clear. You're arguing that the presence of prominent individuals within mainline Protestant churches, who openly doubt aspects of the Nicene Creed, and are not expelled from their churches as a result, somehow impugns the commitment to the Nicene Creed of the church as a whole, and that this is responsible for defections from those churches?
I'll certainly give you the latter point. As for the former, I have to remind you that the Nicene Creed remains an active part of the liturgy of every major mainline Protestant denomination. And schisms or no, millions of honest Americans continue to attend these churches, and to recite and believe in the Nicene Creed. As long as you can accept that those people are fully Christian, and that any denomination that follows the Nicene Creed is Christian, then we don't have anything to disagree about.

[ajb]

To be fair to Bob, a lot of what went on at Re-Imagining was theological woo of the sort that's incredibly damaging to the reputation of feminist theology.

Fair enough. But it's pretty amusing to characterize the event as having led to the overturning of centuries' worth of doctrine for several major denominations.
Or it would be amusing, if it weren't pernicious.

Since I originally said, "The long answer involves a careful study of the "Re-imagining 1993" conference held in Minnesota with the support and participation of the National Council of Churches [mostly mlp], and a series of other theological debates within those churches,"I think I am safe in noting that you are arguing against a strawman and not me.

Presumably, though, the "long answer" also involves looking at the fact that each and every one of those mainline Protestant denominations remains within the fold of Nicene Christianity, in doctrine and in liturgical practice.

I'm quite willing to admit that there are individuals within some of these churches who are not supporters of the whole of the Nicene Creed. Are you willing to agree that those churches, as institutions, remain adherent to the Nicene Creed?