Aren't protestants following tradition too?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chiefsinner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
benjohnson said:
šŸ™‚ (Donā€™t let the Catholics tell you otherwiseā€¦ we have better coffee and tastier potlucks.)
Click to expand...
Waiting for Ben to invite me to the Church for coffee and a tasty potluck! Iā€™ll rent a bus and bring 50 Catholic friends. Lol!

I need to stay on topic. Sorry. I assume that is a Protesant (Specifically LCMS)
traditionā€¦coffee and tasty potlucks.
 
JonNC said:
And so it goes, my friend. Tomster has mentioned that an Orthodox priest friend of his believes that unity is but 2 to 3 years away. That would solve it, as far as Iā€™m concerned.

Jon
Click to expand...
Yes my friend and I would be shocked if it is in 2-3 years time frame. Let us prayā€¦šŸ‘
 
JonNC said:
No, but we do believe that the claim of universal jurisdiction,
the claim of being the vicar of Christ is opposed to the historic
Teaching of the church, and that is the primary source of the charge
against the office.

Jon
Click to expand...
Hmmā€¦which is opposed ot the historic teaching? And according to whom and whose perspective?

Pardon me friendā€¦and correct meā€¦but I get the impression you are leaning favorably to the Orthodox viewā€¦you just have not tipped over yetā€¦šŸ˜‰

Anywayā€¦to explore your thoughts furtherā€¦do you think there should only be one vicar on earht who could speak for the Church? For Christ?

Or do you think there should be several vicars who all can speak on their own?

And if there should only be one spokesmanā€¦who do you think it should be?

If it is not the bishop of Rome? Who do you think it should be?
 
JonNC said:
The one I stated, which seems to be the historic understanding
of the early Church. Fix the disagreement so I and others donā€™t
have to choose.

Non
Click to expand...
But life is made up of choices, is it not?

You have chosen not to make a choiceā€¦that is your choice so far. But sooner or later, you are going to have to make a choiceā€¦whether to choose or not to chooseā€¦šŸ˜‰
 
MaryT777 said:
Waiting for Ben to invite me to the Church for coffee and a tasty potluck! Iā€™ll rent a bus and bring 50 Catholic friends. Lol!

I need to stay on topic. Sorry. I assume that is a Protesant (Specifically LCMS)
traditionā€¦coffee and tasty potlucks.
Click to expand...
Coffee is the 3rd or 4th sacrament in Lutheranism. Just donā€™t listen to what the ones in MN tell you about the lutefisk.
 
I was wondering why did Luther and Calvin have different views on Baptism? Calvin preached perseverance of saints or once saved always saved but Luther didnā€™t agree to that. Other reformers had different opinionsā€¦
 
Chiefsinner said:
I was wondering why did Luther and Calvin have different views on Baptism? Calvin preached perseverance of saints or once saved always saved but Luther didnā€™t agree to that. Other reformers had different opinionsā€¦
Click to expand...
On baptism? Their views did not differ that much. Calvin thought the Lutheran view was too ex opere operato. That is, that it always regenerated just by performing the rite. However, he did still see it as entrance into the New Covenant.

Calvinā€™s view of perseverance is tied closely to his understanding of election. In this, he went farther than Augustine. Luther insisted on maintaining the truth of the falling away passages.
 
Reuben_J said:
This to me is a great escapist line. The question would be what faith? Faith has to be supported by belief. When we examine the various beliefs, well, they are not quite the same as what you would like them to. Except for some commonalities, the faith mentioned are so different apart that they are enough to be basis for a church on its own. So save us from trying to make that look so good because in reality if you are from different churches, there is actually no real unity. So which church is it?
Click to expand...
šŸæ
 
Gaelic_Bard said:
On baptism? Their views did not differ that much. Calvin thought the Lutheran view was too ex opere operato. That is, that it always regenerated just by performing the rite. However, he did still see it as entrance into the New Covenant.

Calvinā€™s view of perseverance is tied closely to his understanding of election. In this, he went farther than Augustine. Luther insisted on maintaining the truth of the falling away passages.
Click to expand...
Well, maybe these two different views can be fixed. (If youā€™re reading this Jon, sorry, I couldnā€™t help it. :heaven:) Hopefully, in the next two or three years - seriously!
 
Gaelic_Bard said:
Coffee is the 3rd or 4th sacrament in Lutheranismā€¦
Click to expand...
:rotfl:

Iā€™m hesitant about telling that joke at our church because everybody will love it so much that I know the coffee would henceforth always be called the ā€œ3rd sacrament.ā€
 
Gaelic_Bard said:
I can see the headline now, ā€œPope announces great relief during this weekā€™s Wednesday press media, states he is happy he is no longer the anti-Christ.ā€
Click to expand...
šŸ˜ƒ I can only imagine what the press would do with that!

In all seriousness, I entirely understand how the Lutheran explanation of calling the office of the papacy anti-Christ seems hyperbolic and, frankly, harsh. But this should be looked at in context: The Lutheran definition of ā€œanti-christā€ has to do with the claim of being a ā€œlordā€ over church or state. That means it can apply to anyone; pope and Lutheran bishop alike, so long as they bear the marks. In all fairness, Lutheran leaders (Confessional ones, anyway) also hold themselves accountable to the marks of antichrist. All that said, times certainly have changed. It would be reasonable to concede that most of the marks of antichrist no longer apply to the office, since the good men who have held it in recent times have not acted in the same ā€¦

This topic is one of the most (understandably) misunderstood stumbling blocks for Catholics trying to understand Lutheranism. Calling Mary ā€œco-redemptrixā€ causes a similar impedance for most Lutherans when trying to find common ground with Rome. While the term doesnā€™t mean that Mary literally died for our sins, it makes many Lutherans uncomfortable. Not a perfect comparison, but maybe that helps?

On a much more important topic, stay far, far, FAR away from lutefisk! :eek:
 
steido01 said:
šŸ˜ƒ I can only imagine what the press would do with that!

In all seriousness, I entirely understand how the Lutheran explanation of calling the office of the papacy anti-Christ seems hyperbolic and, frankly, harsh. But this should be looked at in context: The Lutheran definition of ā€œanti-christā€ has to do with the claim of being a ā€œlordā€ over church or state. That means it can apply to anyone; pope and Lutheran bishop alike, so long as they bear the marks. In all fairness, Lutheran leaders (Confessional ones, anyway) also hold themselves accountable to the marks of antichrist. All that said, times certainly have changed. It would be reasonable to concede that most of the marks of antichrist no longer apply to the office, since the good men who have held it in recent times have not acted in the same ā€¦

This topic is one of the most (understandably) misunderstood stumbling blocks for Catholics trying to understand Lutheranism. Calling Mary ā€œco-redemptrixā€ causes a similar impedance for most Lutherans when trying to find common ground with Rome. While the term doesnā€™t mean that Mary literally died for our sins, it makes many Lutherans uncomfortable. Not a perfect comparison, but maybe that helps?

On a much more important topic, stay far, far, FAR away from lutefisk! :eek:
Click to expand...
I believe we share a lot of similar beliefs regarding the Blessed Mother and the Communion of Saints. Martin Luther had a lot of beautiful things to say about her.
 
pablope said:
You have chosen not to make a choiceā€¦that is your choice so far. But sooner or later, you are going to have to make a choiceā€¦whether to choose or not to chooseā€¦šŸ˜‰
Click to expand...
Perhaps some of us are working on a different question thoughā€¦ I would never try to ā€˜convertā€™ Gaelic Bard to being an LCMS Lutheran unless I knew it would strengthen his faith AND that it would strengthen the faith of his family.

I think his church is dreadfully wrong on certain aspects, and Iā€™ll continue to try to convince him of that. But a also have to acknowledge that his church brings itā€™s members to the cross so that they can chose to love Jesus on the Cross, receive salvation, and live vigorous lives of faith.

So for me, the question isnā€™t centered around absolute ā€˜correctnessā€™, but is centered around ā€˜validity.ā€™ And thatā€™s how I have to judge my church as well if Iā€™m to remain in it - for weā€™ve been kicked around by history so much that weā€™ve lost some of our traditions, our discipline, our bishops, our cathedrals.

Jesus commands us to tend to the sick, and for me, I look upon my church as needing help and Iā€™m happy to do my part and have no desire to abandon her and her people even though I know that the Catholic church and the EO church have more wisdom, more people, and have maintained a fuller tradition.

God has placed my in this church, and given me a sharp and clear path to salvation and for the salvation of my family. I would consider myself a fool to chase after ā€˜perfectionā€™ if I have ā€˜everythingā€™ in front of me - for in front of me, as best as my eyes are able to see, is the Cross.
 
Tomster said:
I believe we share a lot of similar beliefs regarding the Blessed Mother and the Communion of Saints. Martin Luther had a lot of beautiful things to say about her.
Click to expand...
Indeed he did! šŸ™‚ The angel was speaking for God when he declared her blessed among women. I donā€™t understand how anyone who professes Sola Scriptura can ignore those wonderful words.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top