‘Revolution’: Rome Lutheran pastor says Pope Francis ‘opened door’ to intercommunion

  • Thread starter Thread starter CopyBoy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jon_Mallory said:
At least Cardinal Sarah opposes this. Ecumenism as dialogue and cooperation on some moral issues is good but when it comes to diluting if not completely contradicting Catholic teaching, then it becomes nothing more than blindfolding ourselves to our fundamental disagreements and singing koombaya.
Click to expand...
I hear Cardinal Sarah’s name come up a lot when discussing this and several other potentially controversial issues. Who is Cardinal Sarah and why is his opinion held in such high esteem?
 
Padres1969 said:
I hear Cardinal Sarah’s name come up a lot when discussing this and several other potentially controversial issues. Who is Cardinal Sarah and why is his opinion held in such high esteem?
Click to expand...
Read the article.
 
FollowChrist34 said:
Where did I say I supported sharing the Eucharist?

I said I wanted prayer in common and that I was glad the door was open *to work towards *inter-communion.

And I have a right to state my opinion. When the Pope references stony hearts is he out of line? All I am saying is that I have seen many working in the name of defending faith, be it Catholic, Lutheran, or something else - with very little mercy and much coldness.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Forgive me, I misunderstood what you mean by communion and I am still not clear what you mean by it (better relation?). Those who delight in calling others heretics are engaging in nothing but slander and delight in excluding others. Hence, the Pope is right to call out the so called “traditionalist” who renounce ecumenism altogether. Also beware about taking for granted everything the Pope says. A great example comes from Church history. When Pope Leo the Great sent his tome on the two natures of Christ to Chalcedon, the Fathers did not simply say “The Pope sent it. It must be true”. They read it and analyzed it first to see if it conformed to orthodox teaching. The Catholic tradition is larger than any one Pope, bishop, or council.
 
Jon_Mallory said:
Read the article.
Click to expand...
That doesn’t answer my question. I’ve read the article and I know he’s a liturgy chief. But why does his name come up continually with this AND other controversial issues? Is Cardinal Sarah a staunch orthodox traditionalist? I mean I’ve seen it suggested he’d be a good choice for the next pope and I’m curious as to why as I’d not even heard of him until recently in the context of “Francis backlash”.
 
Jon_Mallory said:
Agreed. Forgive me, I misunderstood what you mean by communion and I am still not clear what you mean by it (better relation?). Those who delight in calling others heretics are engaging in nothing but slander and delight in excluding others. Hence, the Pope is right to call out the so called “traditionalist” who renounce ecumenism altogether. Also beware about taking for granted everything the Pope says. A great example comes from Church history. When Pope Leo the Great sent his tome on the two natures of Christ to Chalcedon, the Fathers did not simply say “The Pope sent it. It must be true”. They read it and analyzed it first to see if it conformed to orthodox teaching. The Catholic tradition is larger than any one Pope, bishop, or council.
Click to expand...
Yes, you and I agree much more than we disagree. (sorry I wasn’t clearer on that; I knew it)

Though you’ll probably disagree with me when I say that I think the Lutherans deserve a fair hearing at some form of inter-communion talks. To oversimplify in the interests of time (and since I have said all of this on multiple other threads), I think we did them wrong in the initial split but that of course they share the blame. Due to the shared blame, we have a responsibility to work to achieve some form of mutual recognition and inter-communion. I am being vague because I don’t know what form it would take; I am not saying it should be a shared Eucharist; maybe something like our relationship with the Anglican Church and clergy for starters. And of course we should pray for closer union; that is our (L & Cs) Christian duty.
 
FollowChrist34 said:
Yes, you and I agree much more than we disagree. (sorry I wasn’t clearer on that; I knew it)

Though you’ll probably disagree with me when I say that I think the Lutherans deserve a fair hearing at some form of inter-communion talks. To oversimplify in the interests of time (and since I have said all of this on multiple other threads), I think we did them wrong in the initial split but that of course they share the blame. Due to the shared blame, we have a responsibility to work to achieve some form of mutual recognition and inter-communion. I am being vague because I don’t know what form it would take; I am not saying it should be a shared Eucharist; maybe something like our relationship with the Anglican Church and clergy for starters. And of course we should pray for closer union; that is our (L & Cs) Christian duty.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Let not the oil of the sinner anoint my head. I will not eat with the choicest of them (from the liturgy of St. John Chrysostom). But what if I am the sinner? Wrong was done on both sides and no can claim to be “more holy” than the other. We pray to the same God. Hence, we can pray with one another. I don’t disagree with you. It was right for Rome to listen to this Lutheran Pastor. Otherwise, how could there be ecumenical dialogue?
 
Jon_Mallory said:
Absolutely. Let not the oil of the sinner anoint my head. I will not eat with the choicest of them (from the liturgy of St. John Chrysostom). But what if I am the sinner? Wrong was done on both sides and no can claim to be “more holy” than the other. We pray to the same God. Hence, we can pray with one another. I don’t disagree with you. It was right for Rome to listen to this Lutheran Pastor. Otherwise, how could there be ecumenical dialogue?
Click to expand...
👍
 
Jon_Mallory said:
Also beware about taking for granted everything the Pope says. A great example comes from Church history. When Pope Leo the Great sent his tome on the two natures of Christ to Chalcedon, the Fathers did not simply say “The Pope sent it. It must be true”. They read it and analyzed it first to see if it conformed to orthodox teaching. The Catholic tradition is larger than any one Pope, bishop, or council.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it would be hard to imagine them (or the Council of Ephesus, or Constantinople, or Nicea, etc. … or, if we want to talk about the early times, the Council of Jerusalem in the Book of Acts) approving the Pope’s words without even reading them, but still calling themselves a council. :cool:
 
The Lutheran church I attended with a client had the same norms as the Catholics, that you have to be in full communion with their beliefs to receive their communion.
 
JonNC said:
I think God would like to see a mutual recognition of orders. We recognize yours

Jon
Click to expand...
What do you mean by recognize? Do you believe in Transubstantiation?? If so, why not consider becoming a Catholic and receiving the TRUE Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ in Holy Communion?? God Bless, Memaw
 
I am now waking up.

I read two days ago the affirmation of the Eucharist by St. Ignatius of Antioch who studied under St. John the Evangelist.

The Church has it right.

We all pray to be restored to the one table of the Lord.

I will do a search on it and bring it forth. St.Ignatius is the one who named the Church, Katolika…107 AD
 
cjforJesus said:
Once again we have the media twisting Pope Francis words. They eliminated the part where he said he has no authority to allow her to receive Holy Communion. Her conscience would tell her that too.
Click to expand...
👍
 
KathleenGee said:
I am now waking up.

I read two days ago the affirmation of the Eucharist by St. Ignatius of Antioch who studied under St. John the Evangelist.

The Church has it right.

We all pray to be restored to the one table of the Lord.

I will do a search on it and bring it forth. St.Ignatius is the one who named the Church, Katolika…107 AD
Click to expand...
cool. thanks.
 
Peter_J said:
That’s a good question. I’ve gotten it a number of times from the Orthodox, but unfortunately I don’t know if I have a good answer for it.
Click to expand...
For me, it’s when I recognize Christ’s one holy, catholic, and apostolic church in another church tradition, and especially when the grace of that tradition overflows.

Hence, why I hardly ever suggest to a Catholic that they become Lutheran.
 
benjohnson said:
For me, it’s when I recognize Christ’s one holy, catholic, and apostolic church in another church tradition, and especially when the grace of that tradition overflows.

Hence, why I hardly ever suggest to a Catholic that they become Lutheran.
Click to expand...
Yep

Jon
 
Peter_J said:
That’s a good question. I’ve gotten it a number of times from the Orthodox, but unfortunately I don’t know if I have a good answer for it.
Click to expand...
Your priests have received God’s call to serve His people in His Church. This call is confirmed in the Church’s sending through ordination.
As a result, we believe that you do receive the true and substantial body and blood of Christ, just as we do.

Jon
 
Memaw said:
Don’t you think it matters to God??? God Bless, Memaw
Click to expand...
Sure, we think it matters to God. That’s why we celebrate Holy Communion as often as we do and look forward to tangibly experiencing the Real Presence of our Lord in the Bread and the Wine.

Blessed Christmas!

Rita
 
I realize that I am entering this discussion quite late, but here are my 2 cents worth.
  1. It seems to me that the pope was making a comment about one specific person and not the entire Lutheran church. In his response he points to the conscience of that individual person. For me this is not a question of ecumenism or some attempt at a union between the Church and Lutheranism.
Framed in such a way, the matter rests with that one soul, making a very important decision. Whatever decision she will make at this point, it will be dictated by her conscience.

To me there is a big difference between one individual soul grappling with the choice of receiving or not receiving. Presumably, she is fully aware of the implications of her decisions, and if she is a believer, she is prepared to face the consequences.

Having said that, there is nothing more to be said. This is a matter of a Christian person and her response to Christ’s call.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top