Ecemunical Council

[Starwarsfan2]

As documented by the CA tract on the Great Heresies, Jon, Protestantism IS a heresy. You don’t seem to object to that label for Protestantism as a whole, but you object to individual modern Protestants as being heretics? Why are you not equally bothered by the CA tract designation of Protestantism as a heresy? Don’t you care about that also?

True. The Catholic Church, has acknowledged, with great humility, its role and share of the blame for our division. It would be ‘nice’ if there were some kind of official corresponding acceptance of blame from Lutheranism – some official declaration exhibiting the same kind of humility. However, there isn’t one. Please correct me if I am wrong here. I would love to be wrong on this point. My respect for Lutheranism would grow significantly if I am in fact wrong. From my perspective Jon, and from this side of the Tiber, with all due respect, it is the absence of this kind of humility and willingness from Lutheranism to accept ANY of the blame that IS a “barrier to ecumenism.”

1. As Jon has already shown by the CCC. " Protestantism " is not heretical.
2. We Lutherans acknowledge the split, it was a good thing in that( from our point of veiw) the the church was reformed and the gospel preached purely , the split however was although necessary was very tragic .(and absence of humility really , low and uncalled for ) .

Keep the faith, Topper , Starwars

 

[benjamindt]

1. As Jon has already shown by the CCC. " Protestantism " is not heretical.
2. We Lutherans acknowledge the split, it was a good thing in that( from our point of veiw) the the church was reformed and the gospel preached purely , the split however was although necessary was very tragic .(and absence of humility really , low and uncalled for ) .

Keep the faith, Topper , Starwars

Protestantism is heretical. This is a matter of definition, sort of like marriage. No matter how much people call gay unions “marriages” they are in fact not marriages. In the same manner, no matter how much a protestant denies the heresy of protestantism, it does not magically lose its heretical foundations.

The schism caused by the heresy of Protestantism IS NOT reform. It is division, it was sinful. Reform occurs within an organization. It did prompt reform, but no one who left the church, and none of the tens of thousands of churches created by men after the split from the church created by God hold onto those reforms.

It says something that there are multiple “reformed” churches of a Lutheran descent as well. You do not reform something by leaving it.

An ecumenical council would only be worthwhile if it leads to people seeking the truth and realizing that the full Truth is found only in the one and only Church created by God, the Catholic Church.

 

[theropod]

Protestantism is heretical. This is a matter of definition, sort of like marriage. No matter how much people call gay unions “marriages” they are in fact not marriages. In the same manner, no matter how much a protestant denies the heresy of protestantism, it does not magically lose its heretical foundations.

The schism caused by the heresy of Protestantism IS NOT reform. It is division, it was sinful. Reform occurs within an organization. It did prompt reform, but no one who left the church, and none of the tens of thousands of churches created by men after the split from the church created by God hold onto those reforms.

It says something that there are multiple “reformed” churches of a Lutheran descent as well. You do not reform something by leaving it.

An ecumenical council would only be worthwhile if it leads to people seeking the truth and realizing that the full Truth is found only in the one and only Church created by God, the Catholic Church.

You seem to be under the impression that Luther left. He was excommunicated. They did invite him back to be the special guest of honor at a big Catholic BBQ though.

 

[benjamindt]

You seem to be under the impression that Luther left. He was excommunicated. They did invite him back to be the special guest of honor at a big Catholic BBQ though.

His actions separated him from the church, just as did anyone who chose to fit the church to themselves instead of themselves to the Church.

 

[theropod]

His actions separated him from the church, just as did anyone who chose to fit the church to themselves instead of themselves to the Church.

Yes, by trying to reform it from the inside, thus invalidating your original point.

 

[pablope]

Yes, by trying to reform it from the inside, thus invalidating your original point.

Maybe initially…but the focus of his reform took a turn for the worse…and he started calling the pope the anti-Christ

Let me introduce to you Cardinal Contarini…he tried to reconcile with the Reformers, but was rebuffed, and he did not have to resort to calling the pope the anti-christ.

newadvent.org/cathen/04323c.htm

At the desire of Charles V, Contarini was sent as papal legate to Germany in 1541, and took part in the conference held at Ratisbon between Catholics and Protestants in hope of conciliating the latter. As it gradually became evident that the differences in doctrine could not be bridged over, the conference was broken off; Contarini remitted the final decision of all articles of faith to the pope, and returned to Rome.

This is true reform from the inside, see how he counsels the the pope to reform and does not get excomminicated for it:

Contarini was created cardinal by Paul III in 1535. He accepted the honour and went to Rome (Oct., 1535). He used his influence with the pope to suppress abuses in the papal government and to secure virtuous men for the Sacred College. Contarini was the president of a commission appointed by the pope in 1536 to submit plans for a reform of evils in the Roman Curia or in other parts of the Church. It was largely due to him that, early in 1537, the commission could present its programme, the “Consilium de emendandâ ecclesiâ”. He advised the pope not to abuse the great jurisdiction placed in his hands; and encouraged his friends among the bishops to take appropriate measures for discipline and good order in their dioceses, setting an example in his own Diocese of Cividale di Belluno, to which he was appointed in October, 1536.

 

[Starwarsfan2]

Yes, by trying to reform it from the inside, thus invalidating your original point.

Yep , but I think we e gotten off topic here.

 

[FollowChrist34]

There’s an old saying that “Nations get the leaders they deserve.” I think that’s an over-generalization … but it gets me to thinking, particularly when I read all the lowest-common-denominator discussions on the internet, that perhaps we as a society *deserve *the internet.

Nailed it. My question is does Catholicism, let alone Protestantism or the Orthodox, get the followers it deserves?

 

[Peter_J]

The internet? Is that thing still around?

It is, if you believe it is.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Never mind that so many of these " varieties" have drifted so far into the ways of the world and from the way of Life that the Reformers, the Early Church Fathers and the Apostles themselves would fail to recognize their movements as Christian.

This drift afflicts the Catholic Church as well (see Synod). As I have stated before I believe in an invisible Church - those worthy in faith (word and deed) in God’s eyes. Nothing else makes any sense to me.

That said, I would support an ecumenical effort as laid out here. There is a fault line developing between Christians who adhere to what I would roughly call Biblical theology and those who advocate a modern, secularized theology in most if not all Christian denominations. These two “groups” often have more in common with each other across denominations than those on the other “side” within their own denomination. I trust the Holy Spirit is at work here. I think we may actually be more in union with some and divided from others in the universal Church in ways that transcend our comprehension.

In addition, I think cross-denominational dialogue can be fruitful - think of it as chatting with the neighbors. The body of Christ is better for it. Like going to a foreign country and realizing how human we all are - develops empathy, though it may highlight differences too.

 

[Peter_J]

That said, I would support an ecumenical effort as laid out here. There is a fault line developing between Christians who adhere to what I would roughly call Biblical theology and those who advocate a modern, secularized theology in most if not all Christian denominations. These two “groups” often have more in common with each other across denominations than those on the other “side” within their own denomination. I trust the Holy Spirit is at work here. I think we may actually be more in union with some and divided from others in the universal Church in ways that transcend our comprehension.

Hmmm … I don’t know, FollowChrist. That seems awfully like something an Anglican would say/said.

It is at her centre, where her truest children dwell, that each communion is really closest to every other in spirit, if not in doctrine. And this suggests that at the centre of each there is something, or a Someone, who against all divergences of belief, all differences of temperament, all memories of mutual persecution, speaks with the same voice.

 

[Topper17]

Hi Stars,

Thanks for your response.

1. As Jon has already shown by the CCC. " Protestantism " is not heretical.

That being the case, you had probably better notify the CA team to let them know that there is an error in their tract “The Great Heresies” and that Protestantism as a whole should be taken off the list of heresies. Please let me know how that works out.

In fact, throughout history, there have been various ‘spin off’ groups who have agreed that the Catholic Church was correct to condemn (as heresy) all of those other groups – right up until but not including theirs.

1. We Lutherans acknowledge the split, it was a good thing in that( from our point of veiw) the the church was reformed and the gospel preached purely , the split however was although necessary was very tragic .(and absence of humility really , low and uncalled for.

By your last comment, I take it that you don’t know of any official statement from Lutheranism admitting ANY kind of fault for the split between us. I think that speaks for itself.

Actually Stars, if the goal of the Reformation had really been ‘Reform’, then it wouldn’t have been necessary to turn the Church upside down and inside out doctrinally. It was not a Reform, it was a doctrinal REVOLT.

If all it were was a ‘Reformation’ then there never would have been a split. Early on, and I mean VERY early, there was a desire for Reform, but when that Reform didn’t happen fast enough, THEN the goal was to destroy the Church. But with church unity in mind, what was destroyed was Protestantism with its tens of thousands of doctrinally conflicting denominations.

As for ‘preaching the Gospel purely’, could you please explain who does that, meaning which particular denominations?

God Bless You Stars, Topper

 

[Starwarsfan2]

Hi Stars,

Thanks for your response.

That being the case, you had probably better notify the CA team to let them know that there is an error in their tract “The Great Heresies” and that Protestantism as a whole should be taken off the list of heresies. Please let me know how that works out.

In fact, throughout history, there have been various ‘spin off’ groups who have agreed that the Catholic Church was correct to condemn (as heresy) all of those other groups – right up until but not including theirs.

By your last comment, I take it that you don’t know of any official statement from Lutheranism admitting ANY kind of fault for the split between us. I think that speaks for itself.

Actually Stars, if the goal of the Reformation had really been ‘Reform’, then it wouldn’t have been necessary to turn the Church upside down and inside out doctrinally. It was not a Reform, it was a doctrinal REVOLT.

If all it were was a ‘Reformation’ then there never would have been a split. Early on, and I mean VERY early, there was a desire for Reform, but when that Reform didn’t happen fast enough, THEN the goal was to destroy the Church. But with church unity in mind, what was destroyed was Protestantism with its tens of thousands of doctrinally conflicting denominations.

As for ‘preaching the Gospel purely’, could you please explain who does that, meaning which particular denominations?

God Bless You Stars, Topper

It’s not a revolt if your kicked out and then killed for your faith , and no the reformation NEVER wanted to destroy the church ( let’s please try to stay on topic )

Anyway , how would one go about keeping modernists from infecting a council .
Keep the faith Topper, Starwars

 

[Starwarsfan2]

Hi Stars,

Thanks for your response.

That being the case, you had probably better notify the CA team to let them know that there is an error in their tract “The Great Heresies” and that Protestantism as a whole should be taken off the list of heresies. Please let me know how that works out.

In fact, throughout history, there have been various ‘spin off’ groups who have agreed that the Catholic Church was correct to condemn (as heresy) all of those other groups – right up until but not including theirs.

By your last comment, I take it that you don’t know of any official statement from Lutheranism admitting ANY kind of fault for the split between us. I think that speaks for itself.

Actually Stars, if the goal of the Reformation had really been ‘Reform’, then it wouldn’t have been necessary to turn the Church upside down and inside out doctrinally. It was not a Reform, it was a doctrinal REVOLT.

If all it were was a ‘Reformation’ then there never would have been a split. Early on, and I mean VERY early, there was a desire for Reform, but when that Reform didn’t happen fast enough, THEN the goal was to destroy the Church. But with church unity in mind, what was destroyed was Protestantism with its tens of thousands of doctrinally conflicting denominations.

As for ‘preaching the Gospel purely’, could you please explain who does that, meaning which particular denominations?

God Bless You Stars, Topper

By the way , notifying the CA team about their mistake

 

[JonNC]

=Topper17;13345111]As documented by the CA tract on the Great Heresies, Jon, Protestantism IS a heresy. You don’t seem to object to that label for Protestantism as a whole, but you object to individual modern Protestants as being heretics? Why are you not equally bothered by the CA tract designation of Protestantism as a heresy? Don’t you care about that also?

That wasn’t the question. I know that the CC labels certain beliefs often labeled as protestant as heresy. My question is, am I, ma baptized christian who has never been in communion with the Bishop of Rome, a heretic?

True. The Catholic Church, has acknowledged, with great humility, its role and share of the blame for our division. It would be ‘nice’ if there were some kind of official corresponding acceptance of blame from Lutheranism – some official declaration exhibiting the same kind of humility. However, there isn’t one. Please correct me if I am wrong here. I would love to be wrong on this point. My respect for Lutheranism would grow significantly if I am in fact wrong. From my perspective Jon, and from this side of the Tiber, with all due respect, it is the absence of this kind of humility and willingness from Lutheranism to accept ANY of the blame that IS a “barrier to ecumenism.”

I’m not convinced, when I see posting such as the two that sparked my response, that there is indeed, truly, any humility from your side of the Tiber. Is our friend correct when he labels us apostate? Was the other poster right in claiming that** protestants**, not protestantism, are heretics?

You seemed to come immediately to their defense. What say you? Am I apostate, or a heretic, or neither?

Jon

 

[Duane1966]

Yep , but I think we e gotten off topic here.

Knew this was coming.

 

[Starwarsfan2]

Knew this was coming.

How d ya know?

 

[Duane1966]

How d ya know?

Because you have a penchant for going off topic, and when someone, like me responds to it, you try to get one more off topic response in, and then you post: “let’s get back on topic.”

 

[Starwarsfan2]

Because you have a penchant for going off topic, and when someone, like me responds to it, you try to get one more off topic response in, and then you post: “let’s get back on topic.”

I was responding to an accusation, the poster of the accusations went off topic , I responded , then tried to get the conversation back on track that’s all , thats all

 

[benjamindt]

I think the fact that this thread has gone off topic for so long is, in itself, a great analogy for how useful an ecumenical council would be in the manner proposed by the thread.

It seems like an ec like the one suggested would be for no other purpose than to try to point out where the Catholics are wrong and see how much she can be moved into the domain of protestantism.