# How Different Denominations See Each Other



## Marrow Man (Sep 27, 2011)

I thought this was pretty funny (and accurate). I don't get the last item on the first row, however (RC's view of charismatics).


----------



## Tripel (Sep 27, 2011)

I saw the title and didn't think I'd like it.



I like it.


----------



## BobVigneault (Sep 27, 2011)

I like it, that's funny. Some real thought went into that.


----------



## caoclan (Sep 27, 2011)

Good stuff!


----------



## nicnap (Sep 27, 2011)

Marrow Man said:


> I don't get the last item on the first row, however (RC's view of charismatics).



Perhaps as ugly, disordered chaos?


----------



## Rich Koster (Sep 27, 2011)

Thanks Tim, I really needed a laugh today.


----------



## Marrow Man (Sep 27, 2011)

nicnap said:


> Marrow Man said:
> 
> 
> > I don't get the last item on the first row, however (RC's view of charismatics).
> ...



OK, I'll go with that.


----------



## au5t1n (Sep 27, 2011)

Well done.


----------



## Zach (Sep 27, 2011)




----------



## Contra_Mundum (Sep 27, 2011)

Mikey, I liked it.

Needed one more column, in my opinion: Lutheran. And maybe Anglican (those two cultures are different enough).


----------



## Jack K (Sep 27, 2011)

Both amusing and very perceptive.


----------



## JML (Sep 27, 2011)

Who is the guy with the beard in column 2, row 3?


----------



## BobVigneault (Sep 27, 2011)

Karl Marx


----------



## Andres (Sep 27, 2011)

BobVigneault said:


> Karl Marx



Thanks, I didn't know about that one either. I think it's tremendously accurate!!


----------



## DMcFadden (Sep 27, 2011)

It also lacks a column for fundamentalists:

Roman Catholics as seen by Fundamentalists = [the devil]
Mainline Liberals as seen by Fundamentalists = [the devil]
Reformed as seen by Fundamentalists = [the devil]
Evangelical as seen by Fundamentalists = [the devil]
Charismatics as seen by Fundamentalsits = [the devil]


----------



## CharlieJ (Sep 27, 2011)

DMcFadden said:


> It also lacks a column for fundamentalists:
> 
> Roman Catholics as seen by Fundamentalists = [the devil]
> Mainline Liberals as seen by Fundamentalists = [the devil]
> ...



Other Fundamentalists as seen by Fundamentalists = [question mark]


----------



## SRoper (Sep 28, 2011)

nicnap said:


> Marrow Man said:
> 
> 
> > I don't get the last item on the first row, however (RC's view of charismatics).
> ...



It's a Jackson Pollock (I think--is there a reliable way to identify a Jackson Pollock?). So RCs are traditional and well-ordered while Charismatics are modernist and chaotic.

What's with Reformed as seen by Reformed? We see ourselves as nice, white, middle-class folks?


----------



## Pilgrim Standard (Sep 28, 2011)

It was very interesting and carried some truth in regards to perceptions.

The implication laid in calling RC, Charismatics, and Mainline Liberal, "Denominations" though is a rather disappointing oversight.


----------



## raekwon (Sep 28, 2011)

SRoper said:


> What's with Reformed as seen by Reformed? We see ourselves as nice, white, middle-class folks?



Exactly. With our loving, perfectly obedient covenant children in tow.


----------



## Andres (Sep 28, 2011)

SRoper said:


> What's with Reformed as seen by Reformed? We see ourselves as nice, white, middle-class folks?



The white family just happened to be a white family. I'm not reading anything more into their skin color. And yes, I think we reformed view ourselves as nice, happy people. We're content with our lives lived out under God's sovereignty. If you notice all the other groups view themselves as "super spiritual" but reformed know we can't take any credit/glory for anything.


----------



## Jack K (Sep 28, 2011)

SRoper said:


> What's with Reformed as seen by Reformed?



I saw it as we see ourselves living out our faith in covenant communities, the family being an important part of that. That's in contrast to the broadly evangelical view which is a more individualistic, "just me and my Bible" thing.


----------



## DMcFadden (Sep 28, 2011)

I agree with Jack. When you look at the average "evangelical" church, you will not see a single child, certainly not during the sermon. The culture militates towards program-specific nurseries, children's church, early elementary, late elementary, etc. experiences. The evangelical (at least traditionally) self-identifies as a "bibliocentric" conservative Christian. Regardless of the "flavor" or position on doctrinal distinctives, the Bible is what we have in common. The stereotypical Reformed church is known for its confessions, intellectual acuity and academic predilections, and baptism of infants. As Rich used to opine on the PB quite often, the Reformed view sees the baptized child as a disciple. And, disciples belong in worship, don't you know? So, without knowing Rae's self-admitted "snarky" comment, the picture of a nuclear family (typically white) is not far from the mark just as an evangelical stereotype of Roman Catholics looks and dresses pretty Hispanic.

BTW, as a Southern Californian of 58 years running who was raised on the celebration of racial diversity, it grieves me to see how monocultural so many Reformed congregations are reputed to be. If a Reformed vision of the faith is to flourish and be more than a statistical footnote, some of you all are going to have to reach out beyond that happy little nuclear family of pasty white folks and evangelize some of the increasingly "colorful" American demographic.


----------



## raekwon (Sep 28, 2011)

Andres said:


> SRoper said:
> 
> 
> > What's with Reformed as seen by Reformed? We see ourselves as nice, white, middle-class folks?
> ...



All of the ways each group is depicted as seeing itself could easily be interpreted as either "super spiritual" or "content," I'd say.


----------



## Philip (Sep 28, 2011)

DMcFadden said:


> BTW, as a Southern Californian of 58 years running who was raised on the celebration of racial diversity, it grieves me to see how monocultural so many Reformed congregations are reputed to be. If a Reformed vision of the faith is to flourish and be more than a statistical footnote, some of you all are going to have to reach out beyond that happy little nuclear family of pasty white folks and evangelize some of the increasingly "colorful" American demographic.



And I should add that it'll get messy and you'll get strange looks from some quarters of the reformed community. I have to admit that I'm probably overly content in my white reformed church.

Also, the chart is scarily accurate.


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Sep 28, 2011)

We have a few very devout African American families in our church, and they get grief from the "African American" churches in town for going to a "white church." Their response is "Our church is not white, its actually red brick."


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Sep 28, 2011)

We are the only "white" church in our community that supports the "black" community organizations and ministries (literally) on the other side of the tracks. However we do not do so in the hopes of diversifying our lilywhite congregation, but because we should support the ministries existing in our community. If some people who our society recognizes as being of different ethnic groups want to join our congregation we welcome them. However I have no intention of purposefully evangelizing certain sections of our community just so we won't be so white. That kind of guilt-driven evangelism I left behind in the mainlines.


----------



## N. Eshelman (Sep 28, 2011)

> As a Southern Californian of 58 years running who was raised on the celebration of racial diversity, it grieves me to see how monocultural so many Reformed congregations are reputed to be. If a Reformed vision of the faith is to flourish and be more than a statistical footnote, some of you all are going to have to reach out beyond that happy little nuclear family of pasty white folks and evangelize some of the increasingly "colorful" American demographic.



Our demographic has changed quite a bit in the last 3 years. We have a Chilean, a number of Mexican-Americans, a Philipino, an Indian (India) family, an Israeli married to a Mexican, a family from the UK and the husband is Ukranian and the wife is Coptic Egyptian, a family from the Netherlands, people from Singapore, as well Euro-Americans. 

We have two families that are studying at RPTS right now. One is a Latino family and the other is Korean. That add some LA RPC spice to the RP Seminary, for sure. 

This is one thing that I have prayed about quite a bit. If Jesus is building an international church, and the Reformed community is basically white bread with some color thrown in here and there- we are not doing our job. All nations- that's what the Bible says. 

Anyhow.... back to the original comic.... which I find very amusing.


----------



## KMK (Sep 28, 2011)

Most evangelicals and liberals I have met have never heard of 'Reformed'.


----------



## Andres (Sep 28, 2011)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> However I have no intention of purposefully evangelizing certain sections of our community just so we won't be so white. That kind of guilt-driven evangelism I left behind in the mainlines.



And the hispanic guy said,


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Sep 28, 2011)

I'd like to see how Baptists see Presbyterians, and vice versa.


----------



## DMcFadden (Sep 28, 2011)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> . . . I have no intention of purposefully evangelizing certain sections of our community just so we won't be so white. That kind of guilt-driven evangelism I left behind in the mainlines.



Duh.

Misreading of my post, Ben? If you phrase it that way, the answer is too obvious to warrant any response. My 50+ years in the mainlines found me fighting ethnic quotas at the local, regional, and national levels as well. But, does anybody believe that Biblical evangelism of a true Gospel should produce lily white congregations in communities that are radically mixed racially? When I was an American Baptist, our big libs pushing "race" pastored congregations that were 99% white while calling some of us anti-quota people racists even though we were in racially mixed congregations with no single ethnic majority. If the geographic reach of your church is a population that is 99% white, fine. But, if it is nearly 50% Chinese and nearly 40% Hispanic like mine, then a "white" church would strike me as missing the point somewhere.

Nate is an example of what I was thinking. My experience with church people is that we get all too comfortable with our own group of close friends and seldom reach out to people at all -- of any color!

Nate pastors a congregation in one of the "less than gigantic" Reformed groups. If his fairly small congregation can reach and assimilate a "Chilean, a number of Mexican-Americans, a Philipino, an Indian (India) family, an Israeli married to a Mexican, a family from the UK and the husband is Ukranian and the wife is Coptic Egyptian, a family from the Netherlands, people from Singapore," then he would be an exemplar of what I was calling for in my post.

If Calvinism is true, you would think that it would to be represented by more than upper middle class white people.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Sep 28, 2011)

I was not responding to your post Mr. Dennis.


----------



## Pilgrim Standard (Sep 28, 2011)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> I'd like to see how Baptists see Presbyterians, and vice versa.


If speaking of _Reformed _Baptists and _Reformed _Presbyterians would it not look like this?


.....Reformed Baptists​ Reformed Presbyterians​seen by Reformed Baptists ........View attachment 2349 View attachment 2348

seen by Reformed Presbyterians: .......1689..........1646..........


----------



## yoyoceramic (Sep 28, 2011)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> I'd like to see how Baptists see Presbyterians, and vice versa.



I'll take the bait...


----------



## SRoper (Sep 28, 2011)

raekwon said:


> SRoper said:
> 
> 
> > What's with Reformed as seen by Reformed? We see ourselves as nice, white, middle-class folks?
> ...



Covie kids! Of course.

I was trying to figure out Lutherans, and it's difficult to come up with how they'd see other groups. They don't seem to make distinctions between Reformed, Evangelical, and Charismatics--we're all just rolling around in the isles in fits of holy laughter.


----------



## Andres (Sep 28, 2011)

DMcFadden said:


> Nate pastors a congregation in one of the "less than gigantic" Reformed groups. If his fairly small congregation can reach and assimilate a "Chilean, a number of Mexican-Americans, a Philipino, an Indian (India) family, an Israeli married to a Mexican, a family from the UK and the husband is Ukranian and the wife is Coptic Egyptian, a family from the Netherlands, people from Singapore," then he would be an exemplar of what I was calling for in my post.



Dennis, I see your point and it certainly makes sense, but let's not forget that Pastor Eshelman pastors a church in Los Angeles, CA, one of the largest and most diverse cities in the U.S. I think it's a bit more likely that Mexican-Americans, Philipinos, Indians, Israelis and Ukranians would be found in his church than in a church in Ellisville, MS.


----------



## dudley (Sep 28, 2011)

Pilgrim Standard said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > I'd like to see how Baptists see Presbyterians, and vice versa.
> ...



Your additioanal comment Ben and Tims original post are Both comical and very observant!!!


----------



## Philip (Sep 28, 2011)

SRoper said:


> I was trying to figure out Lutherans, and it's difficult to come up with how they'd see other groups. They don't seem to make distinctions between Reformed, Evangelical, and Charismatics--we're all just rolling around in the isles in fits of holy laughter.



They'd lump Anglicans in there too, actually. Funny how each group divides the theological world differently.


----------



## DMcFadden (Sep 28, 2011)

Andres said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> > Nate pastors a congregation in one of the "less than gigantic" Reformed groups. If his fairly small congregation can reach and assimilate a "Chilean, a number of Mexican-Americans, a Philipino, an Indian (India) family, an Israeli married to a Mexican, a family from the UK and the husband is Ukranian and the wife is Coptic Egyptian, a family from the Netherlands, people from Singapore," then he would be an exemplar of what I was calling for in my post.
> ...



I agree. That is why I said that if your outreach area is 99% white (or any group), you can hardly be faulted for sinful exclussion if you do not have hordes of non predominant folks. However, other than Koreans who seem to be genetically engineered to be Presbyterians, many of America's Reformed congregations make it seem as if Providence and predestination prefer pasty white people. My hope is to see the resurgence of Reformed Christianity make significant inroads into every ethnicity. Why cede Hispanics to the RCs or South Americans to the charismatics?

My wife and I purchased a home in Fort Wayne this year. I was back there doing home improvement and getting 9 stitches in my hand where the saw bit me last week. We deliberately chose a home on the South Side for a few reasons:

* Just blocks away from our only grandaughter (the beauty in my avatar) out of 7.5 grandchildren
* 2x bigger than any place we had ever lived in the past (a full 1/4 acre!)
* About 1/8 the cost of a similar home in my Alhambra CA (just 13 minutes from Nate E.) area
* It was racially diverse (34% non-white in my zip code) with the largest population of Burmese outside of Burma, a goodly number of Hispanics, and a pretty large population of African Americans. My neighbor to the South is white, to the north is African American, and next to him is a Vietnamese. This feels almost like So.Cal. to me!

It was VERY disappointing to discover that in both of the churches I have attended during my few fix-up-the-house visits, they look like somebody sprayed whipped cream over the whole congregation! Actually, given the propensity for Fort Wayne people to be "ample" and rotund (it must be all of those Sunrise Samplers at Cracker Barrel?), it looked more like the Pillsbury Dough Boy at prayer. One church was a large "broad" evangelical mega church (at least they had an African American as one of the staff pastors) and the other was a confessional LCMS group just 350' from my back door! Even in that racially mixed neighborhood (34% non white), these Bible-believing, inerrancy upholding, conservative confessional Lutherans looked, well, ah, er, as "Germanic" as ole Martin himself.


----------



## Weston Stoler (Sep 29, 2011)

CharlieJ said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> > It also lacks a column for fundamentalists:
> ...



so true


----------



## JoannaV (Sep 29, 2011)

I'm a reformed Baptist, and I don't understand the pictures either Mark or Benjamin used :-(

The area I live in is very segregated still, it is sad.


----------



## Pilgrim Standard (Sep 29, 2011)

JoannaV said:


> I'm a reformed Baptist, and I don't understand the pictures either Mark or Benjamin used :-(
> 
> The area I live in is very segregated still, it is sad.



The pictures were of C.H. Spurgeon (One of the greatest Reformed Baptists Preachers in History In my humble opinion) and John Knox (The Leader of the Reformation in Scotland and the one who brought Presbyterianism from Geneva to the UK.)

The numbers without pictures were the dates of the London Baptists and Westminster Confessions respectively... they were rather placed without pictures intentionally. 

I certainly hope this did not bring one bit of offence to either my reformed Baptist, or Presbyterian brothers and sisters. It was simply my observation.


----------



## JoannaV (Sep 29, 2011)

Pilgrim Standard said:


> The pictures were of C.H. Spurgeon (One of the greatest Reformed Baptists Preachers in History In my humble opinion) and John Knox (The Leader of the Reformation in Scotland and the one who brought Presbyterianism from Geneva to the UK.)



Thanks. I rarely recognise any pictures haha. I could at least assume they were prominent figures. Now Mark's uniformed man with something in his mouth...that I am completely at a loss about.


----------



## smhbbag (Sep 29, 2011)

> Thanks. I rarely recognise any pictures haha. I could at least assume they were prominent figures. Now Mark's uniformed man with something in his mouth...that I am completely at a loss about.



That would be Gen. Douglas MacArthur.


----------



## J. Dean (Sep 30, 2011)

Very funny picture. Reminds me of the quote in the movie _A River Runs Through It,_ "Methodists are Baptists who know how to read."

As for the racial issue, we need to be careful not to assume racism in a church that is dominantly one color. Growing up, I went to a mostly white Baptist church, but it was mostly white because the area in which I lived was mostly white: nothing more. Same thing with the Presbyterian Church I attend on Wed. night for Bible study; it's simply the location and the racial makeup, not because there's a "No Minorities allowed" sign on the door or racist attitude among the parishoners. 

That people are segregated in and of itself due to incidental cause is not the issue. When people _intentionally_ segregate with ill attitudes toward others of a different ethnicity--regardless of who is doing it to whom--then you have a problem, and a spiritual problem at that.


----------



## yoyoceramic (Sep 30, 2011)

JoannaV said:


> I'm a reformed Baptist, and I don't understand the pictures either Mark or Benjamin used :-(



Ah, that is my fault, not yours. Yes, as Jeremy points out, I chose MacArthur to be the Baptist of Baptists in our modern era. Moving clockwise around the grid, I chose a screen shot of an underwater baby to highlight the sacrilege of infant baptism. I chose the Ark of the covenant for the Presbyterian grid, stressing our covenantal understanding of everything, and of course, we see baptists like good ol' craaaazzy John the baptist wearing camel skin out in the middle of nowhere faithfully preaching the word of God. There are probably better, more offensive images to use, but I hope I still offended everyone equally.


----------



## jwithnell (Sep 30, 2011)

Very funny and much appreciated! My only dig was that the reformed-reformed square seems rather man-centered.


----------

