Does Vicar of Christ=Anti-Christ?

[JonNC]

Beating a dead horse. All the flavor has gone out of the chewing gum, all the arguments have been presented on both sides, and it is repetitive.

On this issue, this could have been said about 2 years and 3 or 4 threads ago.

Jon

 

[MaryT777]

Beating a dead horse. All the flavor has gone out of the chewing gum, all the arguments have been presented on both sides, and it is repetitive.

Oh come one, it’s not that bad is it?

Just push the unsubscribe button LOL!~

It does start to sound like
“The Pope is the antichrist per Smalcald Articles”
No he is not, he is in the SEAT of the ANTICHRIST per LCMS issues site

No he’s not,
yes he is,
no he’s not
yes he is and ALWAYS

what about UNAM SANCTUM< HUH?

 

[benjohnson]

From a Lutheran perspective, neither, because it isn’t a charge against a man, but the office regarding a specific teaching. Pope Francis is not THE Antichrist. Pope Emeritus Benedict is not THE Antichrist.

Jon

Oh… now you tell me.

I have been working on the figure of the Pope in my Reformation diorama. I’ve already given him thirteen tentacles and blood-red eyes and a throne composed of of kitten skulls.

I used those tiny marshmallows for the skulls - they were kinda cute. The anchovy tentacles didn’t work out so well.

Back to the drawing board.

 

[MaryT777]

Oh… now you tell me.

I have been working on the figure of the Pope in my Reformation diorama. I’ve already given him thirteen tentacles and blood-red eyes and a throne composed of of kitten skulls.

I used those tiny marshmallows for the skulls - they were kinda cute. The anchovy tentacles didn’t work out so well.

Back to the drawing board.

Ben,
If you sell that on Ebay by chance I will purchase it for my Papal AntiChrist figurine collection. I want a signed one though.

Mary.

 

[commenter]

I am not aware of any Lutheran synod that believes that the pope has universal jurisdiction, or salvation is dependent on being in communion with the pope. If they do, then unity is a foregone conclusion.
Now, if they do not, and they just choose to change the language that expresses that disagreement, something I have said for years that I personally do not oppose, that’s fine. But the charge is the same, that there is no support from scripture or the councils of the **early Church **regarding these teachings regarding the supremacy of the pope. Let me know which Lutheran synod or church accepts these teachings of the papacy.

Jon

The term “universal jurisdiction” has 2 meanings: authoritative administration, and authoritative teaching. No Lutheran group goes along with Francis as administrator, but one might find a trend for those Lutherans who hold “orthodox doctrine” to identify the current expression of “orthodox doctrine” as practically coinciding somewhere within the boundaries of Pope Francis for anything important for 2015. I don’t mean the LCMS would agree with everything Pope Francis believes, but do you think they would actively dispute anything he teaches? They certainly could, and do, dispute some of what other Lutheran and non Lutheran denominations teach. They don’t recognized Francis’ boundaries as “jurisdiction” but don’t they, and other orthodox Protestants, generally stay inside those boundaries on anything new that comes up in life ethics, public policy, etc?

Rightly you referred to “early Church”. Those councils were, and still are, useful because they reflect both the recent memory of the apostles, and the experience of the Church’s own experience, both internally and encountering the then contemporary culture.

Protestants who seek to hold to, spread, and identify the orthodoxy in the Faith in 2015 have additional data unavailable in 1965. They have lived through the past 50 years, when much happened in the secular culture, in the papacy, and in denominations that did not believe in any papacy. Some who, in 1965, denied the need for universal jurisdiction based on their 1965 cultural-political-media situation, never envisioned the universal attack on Christianity that we now see. Others who in 1965 saw Protestant denominations universally secure in doctrinal fidelity (no “universal jurisdiction” besides the Bible is needed)

…well, may have had second thoughts since then.

The early church data is crucial. 2015 data is relevant.

 

[JonNC]

=commenter;13338637]The term “universal jurisdiction” has 2 meanings: authoritative administration, and authoritative teaching. No Lutheran group goes along with Francis as administrator, but one might find a trend for those Lutherans who hold “orthodox doctrine” to identify the current expression of “orthodox doctrine” as practically coinciding somewhere within the boundaries of Pope Francis for anything important for 2015. I don’t mean the LCMS would agree with everything Pope Francis believes, but do you think they would actively dispute anything he teaches? They certainly could, and do, dispute some of what other Lutheran and non Lutheran denominations teach. They don’t recognized Francis’ boundaries as “jurisdiction” but don’t they, and other orthodox Protestants, generally stay inside those boundaries on anything new that comes up in life ethics, public policy, etc?

You make a very good point. We can see what you are saying in the current battle against the HHS Mandate, the current redefinition of marriage, the killing of soon-to-be-born human life, and numerous others. It is also true that on a wide array of theological points, we do agree. And many of us recognize the pope and his leadership as vital in these issues.

Rightly you referred to “early Church”. Those councils were, and still are, useful because they reflect both the recent memory of the apostles, and the experience of the Church’s own experience, both internally and encountering the then contemporary culture.

More than that, but yes.

Protestants who seek to hold to, spread, and identify the orthodoxy in the Faith in 2015 have additional data unavailable in 1965. They have lived through the past 50 years, when much happened in the secular culture, in the papacy, and in denominations that did not believe in any papacy. Some who, in 1965, denied the need for universal jurisdiction based on their 1965 cultural-political-media situation, never envisioned the universal attack on Christianity that we now see. Others who in 1965 saw Protestant denominations universally secure in doctrinal fidelity (no “universal jurisdiction” besides the Bible is needed)

…well, may have had second thoughts since then.

Couldn’t agree more.

The early church data is crucial. 2015 data is relevant.

Indeed.

Jon