I did not say ST and SS divided the Church. I said that ST and SS failed to maintain unity. Perhaps it would have been more correct to say that the communions that practice ST and SS failed to maintain unity. So, yes, I would agree that it is sinful man that brings division, sinful prideful man on all sides of division.
Doctrine = being something required for salvation is not an established truth, Jon.
Hey Jon. Proper assessment of Lutheran faith/beliefs, I think: The Lutheran Confessions (akin to the Catechism of the CC) are necessary for expounding the truths found in the sole rule of faith, namely sacred scripture. Christians belonging to the Lutheran Church embrace sacred scripture as the sole rule of faith + some traditions, perhaps, which are not binding on the faithful. Finally, the Lutheran Church teaching office (leaders) exercises the final authority in terms of interpreting and proposing truths contained within the pages of sacred scripture.
In other words - a post-apostolic tradition?
Are you not required to accept the doctrines of the Catholic Church?
Well ,that’s what I mean by a practice, a hermeunetic principle, a praxis by which teachers, teachings, dctrines and dogmas are held accountable to scripture. And it isn’t rather new. It has always been held this way.
This would only be true if the principle were required to be explicit in scripture, which it doesn’t. The argument, or objection, to sola scriptura that it isn’t found in scripture, and therefore violates the principle is, effectively, a straw man. It requires one to defend something about the practice that one does not believe in the first place.
Hi Joe. If by this you mean that I as a Lay Lutheran am bound to view scripture through the lens of the confessions, yes.
Yes, with the understanding that Tradition is always viewed as secondary, a reflection and witness of the truth of scripture.
Yes, again, in light and through the lens of the confessions
Yes. But there is no paradigm in Catholicism that “these doctrines are required for salvation and these doctrines are not.”
Could you cite a source from a Lutheran theologian of the past age (preferably during Martin Luther’s time) that states that SS is not a doctrine but rather a “hermeneutic principle”?
I don’t think so, friend.
I was just being silly…
Pretty darn close to the way the CC does things…
Agreed.
I think it can also be stated that the communions that practice Sola Scriptura also failed to maintain unity.
I think it’s a sad state of affairs. I’ll bet all these denominations couldn’t even agree what to get on a pizza. This is NOT what Christ wanted. Maybe that’s the ONLY thing we’ll all ever agree on… 
I see your sense of humor is intact…Jon just admit we are right and you are heretic :yup:
It’s always good to keep things light and breezy…As per Jon (my words to which he agreed) this approach is a good way to discourage division and disunity; very close the the catholic way; it’s not the typical sola-scriptura approach, e.g. the Bible via individual interpretation…Agreed.
I think it can also be stated that the communions that practice Sola Scriptura also failed to maintain unity.
I see your sense of humor is intact…
First, I don’t believe Luther and the Lutheran reformers even used the term sola scriptura. As I recall the term came about later. The confessions don’t use the term, either. But, as I said, I will research it.
