anabaptist – Kanisa la Christadelphian huko Anderlecht

Waarom mochten katholieken niet ter communie gaan tijdens de doopdienst

Mai 9, 2024 par Marcus Ampe, publié dans Christadelphian, Geloof, Jezus Christus - zoon van God, Vragen & Antwoorden

Church community - ecclesia - church service - communion - sharing of the bread — Photo by Pavel Danilyuk on Pexels.com

Het delen van brood en wijn enkel voor gedoopte broeders en zusters

Na de doopdienst kreeg ik een vraag van een jonge dame die bedroefd was omdat zij en anderen toch gedoopten niet mochten delen in het brood en de wijn.

Met die andere gedoopten bedoelde zij Katholieken. Ik trachtte haar duidelijk te maken dat er twee belangrijke redenen waren.

Kinderdoop

In het katholieke geloof worden de meesten als baby gedoopt. Die kinderdoop wordt meestal in de eerste dagen of weken van het leven van een kind toegediend waarbij men er van uit gaat dat die begieting met wat water volgens de kerkvader Augustinus de erfzonde zou afwassen. Hierbij gaat men er vanuit dat volgens de leer van de Rooms-Katholieke kerk zo de babies kunnen beveiligd worden, wanneer ze vroegtijdig zouden overlijden, dat ze niet gedoemd zouden zijn om voor eeuwig in de hel te moeten branden. De (kinder)doop betekent zo (volgens de Katholieke leer) dat men het heil ontvangt en wordt ingelijfd bij de kerk.

In het verleden ging die Paapse Kerk zo ver dat in de tijd van de vervolging en inquisitie men moest kieze voor ofwel de dood ofwel de doop.

Bij de kinderdoop heeft het kind echter nooit zelf de keuze gemaakt voor God, maar hebben de ouders of anderen die keuze voor het kind gemaakt.

Het komt er echter op aan dat eenieder wanneer deze op een leeftijd van bewustzijn is gekomen een bewuste keuze maakt om in Jezus naam een kind van God te willen zijn en hiervoor die richting van het geloof in te gaan.

Volwassenendoop

Op latere leeftijd kan een mens zelf beslissen welke kant deze wil uit gaan.

Bij de eerste christenen ging het altijd om een daad van overgave aan God, welke men pas kon verrichten op een leeftijd van verstand. Katholieken en Reformanten zaten met de doemgedachte van de hel in hun hoofd en wensten het kind hiervoor te behoeden. Als grond voor de kinderdoop wordt door hen gewezen op het verbond en Gods belofte.

In onze contreien kwamen in de tijd van de Reformatie ook meer anabaptisten en baptisten naar voor, die een Enige God predikten en een volwassen doop. De Doperse stroming verwierp de kinderdoop en pleitte voor de doop nadat men een geloofsbelijdenis had afgelegd. In Nederland werd dit gedachtegoed onder meer aangehangen door Menno Simons, een Friese ex-priester, die doopsgezind werd.

De Baptisten noemen hun doopceremonie liever geloofsdoop omdat ook jongeren die nog geen volwassene zijn, maar wel al voldoende inzicht hebben in de Bijbelse Waarheid, op grond van hun geloof gedoopt kunnen worden. Ook bij de Broeders in Christus of Christadelphians gaat men er van uit dat eens een persoon zelf een bewuste keuze kan maken en kan bewijzen voldoende inzicht te hebben in Gods Woord en Leer, deze zich kan over geven aan God, door zich te laten onderdompelen in water, als symbolische daad van purificatie of zuivering van vroegere zonden.

Deelname aan de herinnering van het avondmaal

In de meeste kerken van het christelijk geloof kan men slechts ter communie gaan als men de geloofsbelijdenis van die gemeenschap erkend en ondertekend heeft.

In de oosters-orthodoxe kerken en de rooms-katholieke kerk wordt het Laatste Avondmaal herdacht in de eucharistie, waarvan de Heilige Communie een onderdeel is.

In de Latijnse ritus van de katholieke Kerk wordt bij de communie slechts de geconsacreerde hostie uitgereikt, het drinken uit de miskelk is meestal voorbehouden aan de priester. Bij speciale gelegenheden kan het voorkomen dat de gelovigen ook onder twee gedaanten (hostie en wijn uit de kelk) te communie gaan. De gedachte hierbij is dat men één met Christus wordt.

Ook bij de Christadelphians is er een herinnering met een « offermaaltijd » waarbij er brood wordt gebroken en dit als symbool van Jezus lichaam uitgedeeld wordt aan al de gelovigen die volgens de Bijbelse voorwaarden gedoopt zijn, namelijk een volledige onderdompelingen met een getuigenis van het geloof in slechts één God (Jehovah) en in Zijn gezonden heiland, Jezus Christus. De wijn staat dan als symbool voor het vergoten bloed van Christus, dat door de gedoopte gelovigen mag genuttigd worden, als teken van vergeving van zonden door Jezus’ bloed.

Waarom slechts beperkte deelname

Voor christenen uit de Trinitarische geloofsgemeenschappen mag het vreemd zijn dat zij niet mee mogen aanschuiven aan de offerande tafel in de diensten van Christadelphians.

Dit komt omdat de Christus waarin de Christadelphians geloven een andere Christus is dan diegene waarin de Trinitarische Christenen, zoals Katholieken, Anglicanen, Hervormden, e.a. in geloven. Voor diegenen die in de Drie-eenheid geloven is Jezus Christus God die naar de aarde gekomen is om ons te verlossen.

Voor Christadelphians en andere Ware Christenen, zoals Jeshuaisten en leden van Het Abrahamitische geloof, de Kerk van God, Nazareense Vrienden, Getuigen van Jehovah, kan men alleen maar deelgenoot aan de tafel zijn als men behoort onder hen die deel uitmaken van de goedgekeurden door God, of hen die slechts Jehovah als de Enige Ware God aanbidden.

Voor God is er geen tussenweg. Hij aanvaard enkel ware aanbidding.

Indien men toch graag mee aan tafel aansluit

Tijdens de doop ceremonie viel het op dat er verscheidene aanwezigen wel overtuigd waren dat Jezus de zoon van God is. Maar erg genoeg waren ze ervan overtuigd dat hun Katholieke Kerk er daar ook zo over dacht en Jezus niet als God aanschouwden. Ik heb hun aangemoedigd om hun pastoor of enkele priesters van die kerk daar toch vragen over te stellen, zodat ze een beter inzicht zouden krijgen in de leer van de Katholieke Kerk.

Indien zij er werkelijk van overtuigd zijn dat Jezus de zoon van God is en niet een god de zoon, zouden ze zich er best van gewissen of dat ze wel in een juiste geloofsgemeenschap zitten en of het niet beter is om dan ook naar buiten toe en naar God toe, het niet beter zou zijn om zich aan te sluiten bij een kerkgemeenschap die zich houdt aan de Bijbelse leerstellingen?

Voorgaande

Aanvullende lectuur

Why were Catholics not allowed to take communion during baptismal service

Mai 9, 2024 par Marcus Ampe, publié dans ??? Questions asked, Christadelphian, Faith, Jesus Christ - son of God, Questions & Answers

Sharing bread and wine only for baptized brothers and sisters

After the baptismal service I received a question from a young lady who was sad because she and others who were baptised were not allowed to share in the bread and wine.

By those other baptised people she meant Catholics. I tried to make it clear to her that there were two main reasons.

Infant baptism

In the Catholic faith, most are baptised as babies. This infant baptism is usually administered in the first days or weeks of a child’s life and it is assumed that this pouring with some water would wash off original sin, according to the church father Augustine. It is assumed that, according to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, babies can be secured in such a way that they would die prematurely that they would not be doomed to have to burn in hell forever. (Children’s) baptism means (according to Catholic teaching) that one receives salvation and is incorporated into the church.

In the past, the Papal Church went so far that in the time of persecution and inquisition one had to choose either death or baptism.

However, during infant baptism, the child has never made the choice for God himself, but the parents or others have made that choice for the child.

However, it is important that everyone, when they have reached an age of consciousness, makes a conscious choice to want to be a child of God in Jesus’ name and to move in that direction of faith for this.

Adult baptism

Later in life, a person can decide for himself which way he wants to go.

The first Christians were always about an act of surrender to God, which could only be performed at an age of reason. Catholics and Reformants had the doom idea of hell in their heads and wanted to save the child from this. As a basis for infant baptism, they point out the covenant and God’s promise.

In our region, more Anabaptists and Baptists also emerged during the time of the Reformation, preaching an Only God and an adult baptism. The Baptist movement rejected infant baptism and advocated baptism after making a confession of faith. In the Netherlands, this idea was adhered to, among others, by Menno Simons, a Frisian ex-priest who became a Mennonite.

The Baptists prefer to call their baptism ceremony baptism of faith because young people who are not yet adults, but already have sufficient insight into the Biblical Truth, can also be baptised on the basis of their faith. The Brothers in Christ or Christadelphians also assume that once a person can make a conscious choice and prove that he has sufficient insight into God’s Word and Teaching, he can surrender to God by allowing himself to be immersed in water, as a symbolic act of purification of past sins.

Participation in the memory of the Lord’s Supper

In most churches of the Christian faith one can only take communion if one has recognized and signed the confession of faith of that community.

In the Eastern Orthodox Churches and the Roman Catholic Church, the Last Supper is commemorated in the Eucharist, of which Holy Communion is a part.

In the Latin rite of the Catholic Church, only the consecrated host or Sacramental bread is awarded at communion, drinking from the chalice is usually reserved for the priest. On special occasions, believers may also take communion under two guises (host and wine from the chalice). The idea here is that one becomes one with Christ.

Also among the Christadelphians there is a memory with a « sacrificial meal » in which bread is broken and this is distributed as a symbol of Jesus’ body to all believers who have been baptized according to the Biblical conditions, namely complete immersions with a testimony of faith in only one God (Jehovah) and in His sent Saviour, Jesus Christ. The wine then symbolizes the shed blood of Christ, which may be consumed by the baptized believers, as a sign of forgiveness of sins through Jesus’ blood.

Why only limited participation

It may be strange for Christians from the Trinitarian faith communities that they are not allowed to sit down at the sacrificial table in the services of Christadelphians.

This is because the Christ the Christadelphians believe in is a different Christ from the one the Trinitarian Christians, such as Catholics, Anglicans, Reformed, et al, believe in. For those who believe in the Trinity, Jesus Christ is God who came to earth to redeem us.

For Christadelphians and other True Christians, such as Yeshuaists (or Jeshuaists) and members of The Abrahamic faith, the Church of God, Nazarene Friends, Witnesses of Jehovah, one can only be a participant at the table if one belongs among those who are part of the approved by God, or those who worship only Jehovah as the Only True God.

There is no middle ground for God. He only accepts true worship.

If you still like to join the table

During the baptism ceremony it was noticed that several attendees were convinced that Jesus is the son of God. But bad enough, they were convinced that their Catholic Church thought the same way and did not see Jesus as God. I encouraged them to ask their pastor or some priests from that church questions about this, so that they would gain a better understanding of the teachings of the Catholic Church.

If they are really convinced that Jesus is the son of God and not a god the son, they would be happy to erase whether they are in the right community of faith and whether it is not better to go outside and to God, wouldn’t it be better to join a church community that adheres to Biblical teachings?

Preceding

Additional reading

+++

Infant baptism versus baptism as an adult #2 The Teenage Baptism

mars 3, 2024février 28, 2024 par Marcus Ampe, publié dans Christadelphian, Faith, Questions & Answers, Reflection - Meditation

communion - baptism renewal — Photo by Wilson Pinto on Pexels.com

In certain Protestant churches, as with us, it is assumed that one must have acquired sufficient knowledge about God and His People, as well as about Scripture and faith, so that one must be at least in the teenage years to make a choice.

In the previous chapter, we saw that baptising a small child does nothing to help that child develops his or her faith. Even though infant baptism may have an „on joyfully long tradition”, we must realise that certain traditions have rendered the word of God powerless for the sake of their tradition. (Matthew 15:6)

When children grow up, they have many questions about God and commandments. During their search for God and faith, they may want to dedicate themselves to God. To this end, they sometimes make the choice to be baptized in the church community in which they grew up.

When they later get to know another church community and feel better at home there, they often wonder why they should be baptised again. They often forget what was asked of them at their first baptism, or what they had to comply with.

According to some churches, in the baptism of an infant, based on the living faith of the parents, is an advance, as it were, taken on the faith that the child will be handed over from father and mother. It is for this reason that when the Christian faith is completely absent from one of the parents or from both parents, or when the parents do not want to guarantee the development of their child’s faith, the Church, therefore, postpones baptism. If those children come to an age where they can make their own decisions, those churches are open to baptising them.

Reformed churchgoers regularly want to switch to a Baptist community and would like to become a full member there, but they do have difficulty ‘re-baptising’ or ‘overbaptising’. When people enter secondary school, they are even more confronted with all kinds of questions about their attitude to life and faith.

Over the centuries, infant baptism had become by far the most popular, but since the end of the last century there have been more questions about the value of such baptism and whether it would not be better to switch to baptism of faith. Opinions about this baptism of faith also vary widely. It is said that it is not only a personal choice, but that God would have chosen the baptismal candidate himself. The latter may give the baptismal candidate such an intense feeling that years later he or she is convinced that because God has chosen him or her and no new baptism should take place.

I admit that certain young people are truly convinced that they made the right choice in their teenage baptism, and that they did understand everything they were talking about. It may therefore be safe that a baptised person actually believed in a Only God during teenage baptism, but did not think further about whether his or her church community also thought that way about an Only True God. Often their thoughts were so intertwined with the doctrines of the church where they belonged. They therefore did not consider the existence or otherwise of three different entities of their deity that also spoke of « we », so according to them it was also about Christ Jesus.

Adherents of infant baptism see in that act a resemblance to the former circumcision. In the Old Testament, on the eighth day after his birth, each Jewish boy was made a sign of the covenant between God and Israel, in accordance with Gen. 17:10-12 and Lev. 12:3 a circumcision was performed on babies, in which a small circle of flesh is then cut away from the foreskin (the loose sliding covering) of the penis. In many Christian communities, they see baptism as the sign of the new covenant. According to those churches, the promises of the new covenant are greater than those of the old covenant, and that is why they say so

it would be strange to think that the promises in the Old Testament relate to the children, but not those of the New Testament.

Mennonites or Baptists, such as the Brethren and Brothers in Christ of Brethren in Christ (or Christadelphians) like to talk about baptism as a testimony of personal faith, and point out to child baptisms that the Bible never cites the idea of baptising newborns.

While non-Trinitarians view baptism as an active event in which the baptismal candidate indicates that he is entering into a personal relationship with God and that he is becoming a participant in the community of followers of Christ, the followers of infant baptism believe that one is not active in baptism, but passive. According to them, baptism is received and baptism is administered by the church in the name of God. Therefore, Anabaptists see baptism as an act of God in which He gives His promises to the person being baptised.

Of course, God can give his promises to both children and adults, but the institution of baptism is an act that was already performed for Jesus’ public life among adult people, as a sign of their surrender to God. Likewise, Jesus allowed himself to be completely immersed in the Jordan River by John the Baptist, as a sign of surrender to his Heavenly Father.

Among the Christadelphians, the baptismal candidate is also expected to perform a sign of complete surrender to God in the community. The baptismal ritual then becomes a confirmation of that covenant with God, but also of a union of the community of Brothers and sisters in Christ.

We can understand that if someone was baptised in a Pentecostal community and was only asked the following questions

Do you believe in God the Father, our Creator and Saviour?
Will you follow Jesus Christ, His Son, our crucified and resurrected Lord?
Do you entrust yourself to the Holy Spirit, who renews our lives?
Do you desire and promise to serve the Lord faithfully with the church, united around Scripture and Table, in the building of His church and the coming of His Kingdom?

that one could safely answer « Yes » if one really believed in the Only True God, the Heavenly Father of Jesus Christ. In this way, that baptismal ritual could be a real surrender to God.

For such baptised people, baptism will really have been a surrender and union with God. Their action is then actually a union with That Only True God who is only one.

But because their baptism was performed in a Trinitarian Church, it may be unclear to others whether they actually surrendered to the True Faith. Especially if they stayed in that community for a long time after that baptism and sang songs with it that glorify Jesus as God.

In several Pentecostal churches, after baptism, people sing a song in which they say they kneel before Jesus, whom they see as their Lord (God). Such a worship of Jesus is not possible at all and if an earlier member of a Trinitarian church wants to become a member of our Christadelphian movement, that person will have to conclude that old life and enter the new life through complete immersion in the water and confession of keeping only one True God, the God of Abraham, God of Isaac and Jacob, who is also the God of Jesus Christ.

The teenage years are a period of religious research and development that should not be underestimated. It is an important phase in life: a time of intense emotions and creativity, a phase in which social contacts are very important.
It is also a time of ‘weigh up’ and where the child wants to make a personal choice, free from the will of the parents. This means that in terms of faith, children during adolescence can take a completely different path than their parents.

We are convinced that children of teenage age want to deepen their friendship with Jehovah. To this end, it will certainly happen that they want to make it clear to their heavenly father what they stand with a baptism. We must respect that choice.

However, when transferring to another church community, it also comes down to whether the thoughts of the baptismal ritual correspond with the thoughts of the newly elected church community.

The biggest question is whether, during their teenage baptism, they really went for the God of the Bible, which we as Brothers in Christ want to carry high in our hearts.

It can be difficult if one feels that the baptism that has been entered has not been recognised. But one must rather see that when re-doping, one now also indicates that one wants to go through life as a Brother or Sister in Christ, at the service of Jehovah, the only True God.

To indulge in a re-doping is modest, and it is that humble surrender to God that can be admired. By now switching to an adult baptism, it is made clear that people want to dedicate their lives to God.

The preparation time for that baptism can then be a beautiful time in which they grow spiritually, just as it was for Jesus. (Read Luke 2:52.)

Additional reading

Een wereld waar men zich duidelijk kenbaar moet maken #2 Onrust onder het werkende volk

février 16, 2024février 8, 2024 par obligingworldviewer, publié dans Geloof, Geschiedenis + Nieuwsvoering, Wereldgebeuren & omgeving

Photo by Porapak Apichodilok on Pexels.com

In de « Far West » waren er al conflicten onder de inheemse bevolking ontstaan toen er een groeiende welvaart had plaats gegrepen tussen de verschillende volkeren. Een verbond was de enige manier om deze conflicten op te lossen en daarom werd de Iroquois confederatie opgericht.

De Haudenosaunee beschouwden zichzelf als een trotse krijgersnatie en noemden zichzelf van oorsprong Ongwe Hongwe, « mannen die alle anderen overtreffen »; toch konden ze in hun hoogtijdagen hoogstens duizend krijgers op de been brengen.

Het overtreffen van anderen was niets nieuws, maar hier ging het om de strijdbijl wegens anderen die er materieel beter voor stonden.

Op 17 maart 1768 sluit de Britse hoofdinspecteur van Indiase zaken, Sir William Johnson, een vredesakkoord met de leiders van de Six Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy (de stamnaties Mohawk, Onondaga, Oneida, Cayuga, Seneca en Tuscarora) van de Noord-Amerikaanse landen, en met Chiefs Oconostota en Attakullakulla van de Cherokee-natie in de Zuid-Amerikaanse landen.

Tien dagen later stuurt Catharina de Grote van Rusland troepen onder leiding van generaal Pjotr Krechetnikov om in te grijpen in een burgeroorlog in Polen, op verzoek van de Poolse koning Stanisław II Augustus, een stap die uiteindelijk zal leiden tot de partities van Polen.

Langs één kant is er dus een samensmelten van volkeren terwijl aan de andere kant er een verdeling optreedt.

Op 5 april 1768 wordt in de Nieuwe Wereld de Kamer van Koophandel van New York opgericht, de eerste in zijn soort in de Amerikaanse koloniën. Duidelijk is het dat men er aan denkt het verhandelen van goederen te vergemakkelijken en als een mogelijke bron van verrijking te zien. Hierbij kan dan wel de vraag gesteld worden « wiens verrijking »?

Zij die de scheepsverbinding tussen de oude en nieuwe wereld voorzien en zij die levensmiddelen en koopwaar in Groot-Brittannië aan land brengen zijn hun hongerloon beu. Dat jaar worden in Sunderland de zeilen gestreken door de zeelui, om hun grieven en aanspraken op betere werkvoorwaarden kracht bij te zetten. Het was een van de eerste grote werkonderbrekingen en ze werd toen beschouwd als een ‘muiterij’. Sinds die muiterij, waarbij de zeevaarders de zeilen streken (‘striking the sails’), geraakte het woord ‘strike’ ingeburgerd in de Engelse taal als aanduiding voor een werkonderbreking of staking.

De muiterij aan land voor betere werkvoorwaarden en werkomstandigheden, de staking, zou in het prille industriële Engeland snel uitbreiding nemen.

Honderd jaar later waren die werkvoorwaarden niet echt verbeterd en was het ongenoegen zo groot dat velen het niet meer zagen zitten om daar in het natte Engeland of koude Schotland te blijven.

In de eeuw die zich kenmerkt door weergaloze vorderingen van de wetenschappen en een levenshouding die zich alsmaar meer gaat richten op een materialistische levensbeschouwing op, komt er onder de mensen een wrok, doordat men de rijken alsmaar rijker ziet worden terwijl het gewone arbeiders volk alsmaar harder moet gaan werken om rond te komen.

In meerdere streken komt er ook een gevoelen nar boven dat men zijn eigen streek moet redden en zelf kunnen beheren, het nationalisme komt de kop op steken. Ook gaan bepaalde groepen van anderen eisen dat als ze er bij willen horen ze aan hun normen en waarden zullen moeten aanpassen. Het nationalisme baant de weg open om raciale, etnische en religieuze verdeeldheid te legitimeren, om minderheden aan te vallen of te onderdrukken en om de mensenrechten en de democratie te ondermijnen.

Bepaalde geloofsgroepen worden geviseerd of beschuldigd van de moeilijkheden die er zijn. In Centraal- en Oost-Europa kwam een etnisch nationalisme op waarbij de taal die men sprak of de godsdienst die men beoefende doorslaggevend zou worden om of geliefd of gehaat te worden. Regeringsleiders maakten hier bijzonder handig gebruik van om anderen de schuld te wijzen en hen zo te stigmatiseren, waardoor Joden bijvoorbeeld het zeer moeilijk begonnen te krijgen, vooral omdat hun werkijver en geldelijke bezigheden een doorn in het oog waren voor hen die weinig bezaten. De Rooms Katholieke Kerk wakkerde het vuur aan door hen nog eens te beschuldigen dat zij Jezus hadden vermoord. Verder ging die Kerk alsook de Anglicaanse kerk ook fel tekeer tegen anders gelovigen, in het bijzonder tegen hen die de Drie-eenheid niet wensten te aanvaarden, zoals ondermeer bepaalde anabaptisten en baptisten, also de Bretheren of Broeders, die ervan overtuigd waren dat enkel de Bijbel de autoriteit had om de waarheid te vertellen en zich zo hielden aan de sola scriptura.

Voorgaande

A world where one must make oneself clearly known #2 Unrest among the working people

février 16, 2024février 8, 2024 par obligingworldviewer, publié dans Faith, History & news feed, World events & environment

In the « Far West« , conflicts had already arisen among the indigenous population when growing prosperity had taken place between the different peoples, an alliance was the only way to resolve these conflicts and so the Iroquois Confederacy was founded.

The Haudenosaunee considered themselves a proud warrior nation and originally called themselves Ongwe Hongwe, « men who surpass all others »; yet in their heyday they could raise at most a thousand warriors.

Outdoing others was nothing new, but this was about the hatchet because of others who were materially better off.

On 17 March 1768, the British Superintendent of Indian Affairs, Sir William Johnson, concludes a peace agreement with the leaders of the Six Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy (the tribal nations of Mohawk, Onondaga, Oneida, Cayuga, Seneca and Tuscarora) of the North American lands, and with Chiefs Oconostota and Attakullakulla of the Cherokee nation in the South American lands.

Ten days later, Catherine the Great of Russia sends troops under General Pyotr Krechetnikov to intervene in a civil war in Poland, at the request of Polish King Stanisław II Augustus, a move that will eventually lead to the Partitions of Poland.

On one side there is a merger of peoples while on the other side there is a division.

On April 5, 1768, the New York Chamber of Commerce, the first of its kind in the American colonies, is established in the New World, it is clear that one is thinking of facilitating the trading of goods and seeing them as a possible source of enrichment, and this may well ask the question « whose enrichment »?

Those who provide the ship link between the old and new world and those who land food and merchandise in Great Britain are tired of their starvation wages That year in Sunderland the sails are lowered by the sailors, to reinforce their grievances and claims for better working conditions. It was one of the first major work stoppages and she was then considered a ‘muitery’. Since that mutiny, in which the seafarers lowered their sails (‘striking the sails’), the word ‘strike‘ became established in the English language as an indication of a work stoppage or strike.

The onshore mutiny for better working conditions and working conditions, the strike, would rapidly expand in early industrial England.

A hundred years later, those working conditions had not really improved and the dissatisfaction was so great that many were no longer interested in staying there in wet England or cold Scotland.

In the century, which is characterized by unparalleled advances in the sciences and an attitude to life that increasingly focuses on a materialistic philosophy of life, there is a resentment among people because the rich are seen becoming increasingly richer while the ordinary working people have to work harder and harder to make ends meet.

In several regions, a feeling jester is also emerging that one must save one’s own region and be able to manage it oneself, nationalism is emerging, and certain groups are also going to demand from others that if they want to belong they will have to adapt to their nationalism is opening the way to legitimize racial, ethnic and religious divisions, to attack or suppress minorities and to undermine human rights and democracy.

Certain faith groups are either targeted or accused of the difficulties that exist In Central and Eastern Europe, an ethnic nationalism emerged in which the language one spoke or the religion one practised would become decisive to either be loved or hated Heads of Government took particularly convenient advantage of this to blame others and thus stigmatize them, as a result, Jews, for example, began to have a very difficult time, especially because their work and financial activities were a thorn in the side for those who owned little.
The Roman Catholic Church stoked the fire by accusing them again of murdering Jesus. Furthermore, that Church as well as the Anglican Church also railed fiercely against other believers, especially those who did not wish to accept the Trinity, such as certain Anabaptists and Baptists, including the Brethren or Brothers, who were convinced that only the Bible had the authority to tell the truth and thus adhered to the sola scriptura.