Scotland More Roman Catholic Than Protestant
From Scotland on Sunday:
"Scotland has become more Roman Catholic than Protestant, with its congregations now outnumbering the Kirk for the first time since records began.
Figures compiled by the independent group Christian Research reveal that in 2005 the number of Catholics who went to Mass surpassed those who attended Church of Scotland services.
A total of 215,000 Catholics went to church, compared with only 208,400 attending the Church of Scotland."
If you recall, sometime this past year the English newspapers reported that Catholics had achieved parity with Anglicans in church attendance in England.
Source: Catholic church moves into Pole position
"Scotland has become more Roman Catholic than Protestant, with its congregations now outnumbering the Kirk for the first time since records began.
Figures compiled by the independent group Christian Research reveal that in 2005 the number of Catholics who went to Mass surpassed those who attended Church of Scotland services.
A total of 215,000 Catholics went to church, compared with only 208,400 attending the Church of Scotland."
If you recall, sometime this past year the English newspapers reported that Catholics had achieved parity with Anglicans in church attendance in England.
Source: Catholic church moves into Pole position
Labels: Catholic, Catholicism, Presbyterian, Reformation, Statistics
6 Comments:
YAY!!! Some GOOD NEWS. I'm always happy to find and read good, uplifting news. Thanks, Timothy.
Interesting blog. I couldn't help but wonder why you have invested so much in the debate of what many Christians consider secondary doctrines, on a site reported to be all about apologetics. Isn't the root purpose of apologetics to equip believers with the word to prepare them for evangalism and dicernment? Anyway sorry for the criticism. Chalk it up to iron sharpens iron.
By the way while I am at it, check out my blog at www.bloodmessage.com, criticisms welcome.
>SOTMH wrote: "I couldn't help but wonder why you have invested so much in the debate of what many Christians consider secondary doctrines"
Where in scripture do we find "secondary doctrines" or "non-essential doctrines"? We don't. The idea that there are secondary, or non-essential, doctrines is a tradition of man and we know well what the Bible says about traditions of man.
First, there is no such thing as a secondary doctrine. All truth is from and of God and leads us closer to God. There are no doctrines which are not truth and which do not bring us closer to God.
Second, Christ in the Great Commission did not say to teach only the primary or essential doctrines. Christ said to teach everything that He taught the apostles. Everything includes so-called secondary doctrines.
Thus, since most Christians agree on doctrines like the Trinity and that salvation is by grace alone, I focus on those ancient Christian doctrines that various Christian sects have rejected, distorted, or misunderstand. As a member of Christ's visible Church, it is my charge to help teach everything that Christ taught the apostles.
God bless...
+Timothy
Check out my response on www.bloodmessage.com,
Thanks
You're being a classic arrogant Catholic though, and I don't think Christ would be too happy about your criticism of the seperated brethren. I also certainly don't think Christ would rejoice over any of his churches being destroyed.
Pope Jean Paul II called the Anglican church "our beloved sister", you are acting much different than the former vicar of Christ, and as well, I would say that you can't say Church of Scotland = All Protestants, it is one of probably 15 denominations. I've done protestant ministry in the UK and the Church of Scotland is barely the biggest denomination in the country, so I wouldn't put much stock in those statistics, as well look at Anglicanism globally, you won't find it decreasing. It's just the UK.
>Andrew said... "You're being a classic arrogant Catholic though..."
How so? Did I not repost a snippet of a legitimate news story and a reminder of a previous news story sans personal comments?
I believe you may be reading some emotions into the post which just aren't there. I post on the demographics of all Christian sects.
>"I don't think Christ would be too happy about your criticism of the seperated brethren"
Since my only criticism would be my comments on the so called "secondary doctrines" or "non-essential doctrines", I don't think Christ would have a problem with that. My sinfullness, yes. My comments against "non-essential doctrine", probably not.
>"I also certainly don't think Christ would rejoice over any of his churches being destroyed."
I agree that Christ would not rejoice over his Church being destroyed. Christ has promised us that the gates of hell would not prevail over the Church He built on Peter. So, we know that's not going to happen. Also, I believe Christ uses the singular Church versus the plural churches, does He not?
Also. I don't see churches being destroyed, but the Church being unified. Some churches are decreasing so that the Church may increase. I believe Christ is the architect behind the current reunification of Christianity.
>"you are acting much different than the former vicar of Christ"
Yep, that's quite probable. I am much more sinful than the former vicar of Christ. Saint John Paul the Great, pray for me.
>"look at Anglicanism globally, you won't find it decreasing. It's just the UK."
No, I have to disagree. While Anglicanism is growing worldwide and in Africa, Anglicanism is steadily declining in the US and Canada, both former English colonies. Anglicanism is also decreasing in Australia and New Zealand.
As the Anglican church is now 55% African, that bodes well for the reunification of Anglicans and Catholics.
God bless...
+Timothy
<< Home