Ecumenism-why is it misunderstood?

[Goya]

Seriously, though, many of our fellow Catholics really do speak of Martin Luther as if he is infallible in the eyes of Lutherans. (I wonder how the world would be different if we each decided not to speak about things we are completely ignorant of? )

I implied no such thing about Luther–that is, ‘infallibility’.

I simply pointed out that Martin Luther founded Lutheranism, and I juxaposed that, against the founder of Catholicism.

What you and JonC have done, is inferred that which I did not imply.

My comment had nothing to do with what Lutherans claim, or how they see things. I simply pointed out what is.

Not trying to be UN-ecumenical, or uncharitable…just putting things into perspective.

 

[Goya]

Understood.

Nor would I expect you to.

What I’m talking about is apostolic teaching. As for succession, our confessions are clear in their support in it. And since this is about ecumenism, the Ecumenical dialogue between Catholic leaders and Lutheran leaders in America have some strong convergence on the topic.

nccbuscc.org/seia/koinonia.shtml

Jon

So I gathered–as I indicated in my post.

You were the one who sought to substitute teaching for Succession, in order to downplay the significance of the latter.

As important as apostolic teaching is, WE wouldn’t have a clue what they taught, if not for Apostolic Succession.

 

[JonNC]

Why would I need to find a Lutheran to claim such ‘tom-foolery’? It is what it is–Martin Luther founded Lutheranism. That Lutherans would never acknowledge it, is about as persuasive as Scientologists (what ever they call themselves) denynig that they are members of a cult.

No. Luther did not found a Church. That is not the essence of Lutheranism. Luther himself stated that he did not die for anyone on the cross. We preach Christ and Him crucified, not Luther. Christ is the founder of the Church, and we are members of it.
So, again, it is patently absurd, and yes, tomfoolery. That we do not claim ought to be a hint to you that it is not our belief, and you claiming it is our belief is as uncharitable as those protestants who claim you worship the Blessed Virgin.

There is but one Church, the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. We confess our belief in said every week, and acknowledge our membership there.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

I implied no such thing about Luther–that is, ‘infallibility’.

I simply pointed out that Martin Luther founded Lutheranism, and I juxaposed that, against the founder of Catholicism.

What you and JonC have done, is inferred that which I did not imply.

My comment had nothing to do with what Lutherans claim, or how they see things. I simply pointed out what is.

Not trying to be UN-ecumenical, or uncharitable…just putting things into perspective.

The problem is that which you is,** is not**.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Seriously, though, many of our fellow Catholics really do speak of Martin Luther as if he is infallible in the eyes of Lutherans. (I wonder how the world would be different if we each decided not to speak about things we are completely ignorant of? )

Peter,
I think here you hit on the starting point of any ecumenical effort, and that is a willingness to listen to one’s dialogue partner. By letting one’s dialogue partner describe their belief, and resist the temptation to create a caricature of their belief, one receives both deeper understanding of that belief, and a significantly higher level of mutual respect.
This, I think is what has happened since Vatican II between our communions, at least between our leaders, a far higher level of respect. It is evident in dialogue documents, such as the one I posted earlier on this thread. Sadly, it isn’t always evident in apologists, and usually both sides are to blame, myself included. Hopefully, that will change over time.

Jon

 

[Goya]

JonNC;11725407]

***No. Luther did not found a Church. ***

OK, we’ll try to work within this framework. What is clear however, is that Martin Luther started a movement–and followed through with it–that led millions (ultimately, hundreds of millions) to reject the authority and fundamental teachings of the actual Church that Christ actually founded, upon the Apostles he actually hand picked, to whom he delegated the authority to hand pick their own successors, and who in turn passed on that same authority down the line, to the present day–notwithstanding Luther’s apparent misgivings about the flaw of the infrastructure which Christ himself actually bequeathed to us.

…and hundreds of millions of souls have since rejected the authority of the Church Christ established, as a result.

So even if he didn’t ‘found a church’, it still doesn’t mean that he didn’t splinter Christ’s Church, and lead [ultimately] hundreds of millions of souls to reject the proper authority of One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church that Christ actually founded–and lead them to subscribe to fundamental falshoods such as* Sola Scriptura, and Sola Fide*–because he did.

That is not the essence of Lutheranism.

And yet, when Lutherans gather on the Lord’s Day to worship, do they do so under the guidance and authority of those who were properly, duly authorized, according to Apostolic Succession? By folks who can trace their authority to the actual Apostles, hand picked by Christ himself? To whom Christ actually, expressly, delegated His authority?

If not, why not?

Seems to me, the Council of Trent, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, addressed every single concern Martin Luther raised.

…and yet, this non-church assembly of Christ professing Christians continued–nay, continues–to this day–to reject the express holdings–and authority (according to Apostolic Succession)–of the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, that Jesus Christ Himself founded.

Luther himself stated that he did not die for anyone on the cross. We preach Christ and Him crucified, not Luther.

I don’t deny that Lutherans preach Christ, Christ crucified, resurrected, ascended, Pentecost, etc.

But Lutherans do preach false teachings which not only contradict, but lead souls away from the Truth: specifically, Solo Fide, and Sola Scriptura.

Both of these doctrines were expressly rejected by the Council of Trent, and remain expressly rejected by the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church that Christ founded (mainly, because HE HIMSELF never taught nor even profesied any such thing–they are solely, expressly, exclusively, fruits of MARTIN LUTHER’S intellect–respectable as it was, still hardly on par with Christ’s actual teachings, or those of the Apostles, or the Church Fathers, in terms of actual authority).

Christ is the founder of the Church, and we are members of it.

Fair enough–albeit separated members, who have rejected fundamental aspects of the Church Christ left to us–including its authority, and how that authority is transmitted from one generation to the next (let alone SF and SS).

So, again, it is patently absurd, and yes, tomfoolery. That we do not claim ought to be a hint to you that it is not our belief, and you claiming it is our belief is as uncharitable as those protestants who claim you worship the Blessed Virgin.

But it is at least grounded in Truth, and Charity cannot exist, outside of Truth. You would have us compromise Truth, in the name of ‘charity’–yet the former cannot be compromised at all, and the latter could not exist, where Truth is denied.

There is but one Church, the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. *** We confess our belief in said every week***, and acknowledge our membership there.

Jon

…while rejecting its authority, and rejecting its teaching on fundamental aspects of the Faith, and subscribing to teachings on aspects that are fundamental to the Faith—such as SF and SS.

Let me be perfectly blunt, honest and truthful here, in case you are in denial about this fundamental truth of ecumenism:

Unity of the Church–between virtually any protestant sect, and the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church that Christ founded–will occur, after, and only after, the protestants reject the foundational pillars of their movement–Sola Scriptura, and Sola Fide (which were, coincidentally, conceived and authored by, Martin Luther). All the talk in the world about common ground vis a vis ‘justification’, etc., does not change this fundamental Truth.

So, whether or not protestantism, or any of its individual sects, including Lutheranism, constitutes a ‘church’ or not may be subject to debate–but what is not up for debate, is that there was a Church prior to the reformation, that never accepted, preached, or held Sola Scritpura or Sola Fide as foundational pillars–and that Church still does not hold to such, as it was never a part of the Gospel. Ever. At all.

…meanwhile there are a multitude of assemblies of professing Christians who subscribe to these foundational pillars since then–and said pillars were articulated, championed, and proclaimed as Gospel, first and foremost, by One Mr. Martin Luther.

 

[JonNC]

=Goya;11728054]

OK, we’ll try to work within this framework. What is clear however, is that Martin Luther started a movement–and followed through with it–that led millions (ultimately, hundreds of millions) to reject the authority and fundamental teachings of the actual Church that Christ actually founded, upon the Apostles he actually hand picked, to whom he delegated the authority to hand pick their own successors, and who in turn passed on that same authority down the line, to the present day–notwithstanding Luther’s apparent misgivings about the flaw of the infrastructure which Christ himself actually bequeathed to us.

And herein lies the rub. The authority is the issue, not that the pope has authority, but that the papacy claims for itself authority not given to it in God’s words, and not given to it in the early councils and Tradition of the Church. This isn’t simply a Lutheran conclusion, but a conclusion come to 500 years before Luther by all of the patriarchs.
Therefore, no Lutherans have been led to reject the authority of Christ’s Church, of which we remain a part.

…and hundreds of millions of souls have since rejected the authority of the Church Christ established, as a result.

I assume there have been hundreds of millions of Lutherans, but we have not rejected authority, and we remain part of, and confess the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
The goal, then of ecumenism between our communions is to heal this disagreement, and come to reconciliation.

So even if he didn’t ‘found a church’, it still doesn’t mean that he didn’t splinter Christ’s Church, and lead [ultimately] hundreds of millions of souls to reject the proper authority of One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church that Christ actually founded–and lead them to subscribe to fundamental falshoods such as* Sola Scriptura, and Sola Fide*–because he did.

If you wish to say the the Lutheran Reformation splintered the Church, please remember that Luther did not act alone. Even the Catholic Catechism recognizes that there was blame on both sides. While I reject the false notion that hundreds of millions of Lutherans have been led to reject the authority of the OHCAC, at the very least hundreds of millions of Catholics and Lutherans have been denied the opportunity to share together the Eucharist. On this there is truth, and the goal of ecumenism is to heal the division.

And yet, when Lutherans gather on the Lord’s Day to worship, do they do so under the guidance and authority of those who were properly, duly authorized, according to Apostolic Succession? By folks who can trace their authority to the actual Apostles, hand picked by Christ himself? To whom Christ actually, expressly, delegated His authority?

Yes. But even AS is not the only way ordination is valid, as the Catholic Church itself has used presbyter ordination in the past, as the Cistercian abbots of the 1400’s are an example.

Seems to me, the Council of Trent, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, addressed every single concern Martin Luther raised.

The Council of Trent was not ecumenical.

…and yet, this non-church assembly of Christ professing Christians continued–nay, continues–to this day–to reject the express holdings–and authority (according to Apostolic Succession)–of the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, that Jesus Christ Himself founded.

We do not reject the Church that Christ founded, but are indeed a part of it. We are part of and indeed confess the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. The goal of ecumenism is work to heal the division in His Church between us.

I don’t deny that Lutherans preach Christ, Christ crucified, resurrected, ascended, Pentecost, etc.

But Lutherans do preach false teachings which not only contradict, but lead souls away from the Truth: specifically, Solo Fide, and Sola Scriptura.

We don’t preach sola scriptura. We use sola scriptura to hold doctrine accountable. And we don’t preach solo fide. We do believe sola fide, which through ecumenical efforts has been found by the Catholic Church to be reconcilable, according to the JDDJ.

Both of these doctrines were expressly rejected by the Council of Trent, and remain expressly rejected by the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church that Christ founded (mainly, because HE HIMSELF never taught nor even profesied any such thing–they are solely, expressly, exclusively, fruits of MARTIN LUTHER’S intellect–respectable as it was, still hardly on par with Christ’s actual teachings, or those of the Apostles, or the Church Fathers, in terms of actual authority).

Sola scriptura is not a doctrine, but a practice. On sola fide, or more specifically, the Doctrine of Justification, see the JDDJ.
The efforts of ecumenism seems to be brigning us closer together, even over the protests of some in both communions.

Fair enough–albeit separated members, who have rejected fundamental aspects of the Church Christ left to us–including its authority, and how that authority is transmitted from one generation to the next (let alone SF and SS).

Fair enough, and you are in separation, also. From us, from Anglicans, from Orthodoxy. Division and schism is a tow way street.

But it is at least grounded in Truth, and Charity cannot exist, outside of Truth. You would have us compromise Truth, in the name of ‘charity’–yet the former cannot be compromised at all, and the latter could not exist, where Truth is denied.

Neither is grounded in truth, and charity never need be compromised for truth!

continued

 

[JonNC]

Let me be perfectly blunt, honest and truthful here, in case you are in denial about this fundamental truth of ecumenism:

Unity of the Church–between virtually any protestant sect, and the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church that Christ founded–will occur, after, and only after, the protestants reject the foundational pillars of their movement–Sola Scriptura, and Sola Fide (which were, coincidentally, conceived and authored by, Martin Luther). All the talk in the world about common ground vis a vis ‘justification’, etc., does not change this fundamental Truth.

Your opinion here, and your opinion counts as much as mine, frankly and bluntly, when our leaders sit to talk.

…meanwhile there are a multitude of assemblies of professing Christians who subscribe to these foundational pillars since then–and said pillars were articulated, championed, and proclaimed as Gospel, first and foremost, by One Mr. Martin Luther.

You mean Dr. Martin Luther, or Father Martin Luther.
What other communions do is their business. I cannot speak for them, or answer for them. I also refuse to characterize them as lemmings, who chose independently to follow any portion of Luther’s teachings.

Jon

 

[Eric_Hyom]

The body and blood of our Lord is truly broken, with our division and arguing.

 

[JonNC]

The body and blood of our Lord is truly broken, with our division and arguing.

I agree. Forgive us, Lord, for our division.

Jon

 

[TRH1292]

On the subject of division, it seems here appropriate to link to the message Pope Francis sent to the Pentecostal Conference recently. Although the conference was of Pentecostals, this message is relevant to all whom are separated by division.

youtube.com/watch?v=NZ9Ssvs5cgY

 

[Eric_Hyom]

On the subject of division, it seems here appropriate to link to the message Pope Francis sent to the Pentecostal Conference recently. Although the conference was of Pentecostals, this message is relevant to all whom are separated by division.

youtube.com/watch?v=NZ9Ssvs5cgY

Pope Francis seems to hang unity on brotherhood and the greatest commandments, a profound gesture.

 

[DavidFilmer]

The book contains word for word documents spoken by the Holy Fathers (“water” in your words) to the international Catholic Charismatic community, not just some "opinions’ by the author. But I guess if you’re not willing to even glance at the book (even Google it) we have nothing to talk about.

I’m not gonna buy the book. I’m not gonna illegally download it. I’m just asking you to CITE something (anything). If you cite a Pope that was cited in that book, then fine. Out of 200 pages (which I presume you have read), please quote the BEST citation (or ANY citation), and include the Pope and the date.

Just one thing!!! Am I really asking that much??? An actual quote by an actual Pope?

I possess William Jurgen’s excellent collection, Faith of the Early Fathers. When people ask about early Church teaching, I have NEVER told them to go out and buy the books to get the answer. I have ALWAYS (on MANY occasions) typed the relevant citations (even ten or twenty of them). C’mon - I’m asking for just ONE. Can you PLEASE crack open your 200 page book and CITE something? Anything?

 

[Peter_J]

Originally Posted by Peter J
Seriously, though, many of our fellow Catholics really do speak of Martin Luther as if he is infallible in the eyes of Lutherans. (I wonder how the world would be different if we each decided not to speak about things we are completely ignorant of? )

Umm, OK. I guess you missed where the subject of the sentence was “many of our fellow Catholics”, not “you Goya”.

 

[CalCatholic]

Peter,
I think here you hit on the starting point of any ecumenical effort, and that is a willingness to listen to one’s dialogue partner. By letting one’s dialogue partner describe their belief, and resist the temptation to create a caricature of their belief, one receives both deeper understanding of that belief, and a significantly higher level of mutual respect.
This, I think is what has happened since Vatican II between our communions, at least between our leaders, a far higher level of respect. It is evident in dialogue documents, such as the one I posted earlier on this thread. Sadly, it isn’t always evident in apologists, and usually both sides are to blame, myself included. Hopefully, that will change over time.

Jon

I’ll say amen to that!

 

[Goya]

JonNC;11729884]

And herein lies the rub. The authority is the issue, not that the pope has authority, but that the papacy claims for itself authority not given to it in God’s words, and not given to it in the early councils and Tradition of the Church. This isn’t simply a Lutheran conclusion, but a conclusion come to 500 years before Luther by all of the patriarchs.

Therefore, no Lutherans have been led to reject the authority of Christ’s Church, of which we remain a part.

IOW, they reject ***the degree ***of the Pope’s authority (recognizing his claim as Bishop of Rome and successor to St. Peter’s bishopric) but yielding no distinction vis a vis the other bishoprics which succeeded the other Apostles.

Up to this point, you may look to the East, and find company…

…but the Lutherans–along with all Protestants–take it a completely unjustified, significant step further–and that is to reject ALL his authority, along with that of all of the bishoprics which may claim Apostolic Succession–and find they have no company, when they look back in time–as there is no historical basis for Sola Scriptura.

I assume there have been hundreds of millions of Lutherans, but we have not rejected authority, and we remain part of, and confess the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
…

Hundreds of millions of protestants, definitely (which is what I was referring to); not so sure about Lutherans. But I see no reason to isolate the Lutherans, other than to identify them as the first of the protestants. Beyond that, the Lutherans still hold fast to the two fundamentally flawed pillars of error–Sola Scriptura, and Sola Fide.

…

The Council of Trent was not ecumenical.

The Council of Trent came before ‘ecumenism’ was even a concept.

That nonsensical point aside, the Council of Trent was an assembly of all of the Bishops–who had received their authority properly, and could trace their respective authority directly back to the Apostles (Apostolic Succession)–to consider and address the objections raised by Luther and his disciples–(under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, worth noting).

The duly authorized ambassadors of the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church that Christ founded, found Luther’s theories…unwarranted, and unpersuasive, against the measurement of history (and of the Faith conveyed through it).

We do not reject the Church that Christ founded, but are indeed a part of it. We are part of and indeed confess the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. …

OK, the Lutherans do not expressly reject The Church…but they refuse to submit to her authority, having created their own, significantly more malleable alternative to her apparently too stringent authority (ref. 8,000+ protestant sects. built upon the foundation of Marty’s SS and SF doctrines).

The goal of ecumenism is work to heal the division in His Church between us.

Sure it is. But as a body heals its wounds, it does so by replacing damaged tissue with healthy tissue, that the wounds may become part of the body again–not by the body becoming the wound, or converting the healthy tissue, to wounded tissue.

We don’t preach sola scriptura. We use sola scriptura to hold doctrine accountable. And we don’t preach solo fide. We do believe sola fide, which through ecumenical efforts has been found by the Catholic Church to be reconcilable, according to the JDDJ.

Lutherans may restrain themselves in the application of Sola Scriptura; but thousands of protestant sects have developed upon the foundation of SS, and show very little indication of restraint. Predictably. No institution or entity can be bound by a written instrument alone. Many Communist dictatorships have a constitution…that are as malleable as the dictator’s whims…

The US Constitution continues to hold up however, because we have a Supreme Court for final say/authority in its interpretation. That’s essentially the purpose served by the Papacy.

The proliferation of Lutheranism, as manifested through the proliferation of thousands of protestant sects, is analogous to what would have happened to the US, had the Confederacy prevailed in the Civil War (though to a much greater degree–that is, the Confederacy would not have yielded a 1000th of the conflicting interpretations that protestantism has yielded).

Sola scriptura is not a doctrine, but a practice.

It is both. A doctrine…and a doctrine put into practice. But it originated as a doctrine.

More lame attempt on your part, to water down and dilute its impact. Non-sense.

It is a doctrine whose practical implementation is as predictably flawed and impracticable, as all the good intentions underlying communism, as they allays face plant, in their application.

Seems Christ was a little too wise to figure on leaving us a written instrument for our ultimate guidance…

…but Luther (according to the protestants) must have known something Christ did not.

On sola fide, or more specifically, the Doctrine of Justification, see the JDDJ.
The efforts of ecumenism seems to be brigning us closer together, even over the protests of some in both communions.

The Catholic Church has yielded no ground here. I’ll leave it at that–let you draw your own conclusions.

…[cont’d]…

 

[Goya]

Fair enough, and you are in separation, also. From us, from Anglicans, from Orthodoxy. Division and schism is a tow way street.

The Orthodox do not subscribe to SS or SF, or anything close to either, and the Anglicans are splintering apart rather remarkably, with a significant portion of them, coming back home–to the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church that Christ founded…

…which entailed (at least implicitly) their recognition of the fundamental flaw of SS and SF.

JonNC;11729929]

Your opinion here, and your opinion counts as much as mine, frankly and bluntly, when our leaders sit to talk.

Touche’…

…and C’est la vie.

This is after all, a message board, and I do not pretend to speak for anyone else, but myself.

You mean Dr. Martin Luther, or Father Martin Luther.

Father? No. He was defrocked (and ex-communicated).

As for ‘doctor’–I see no need at all yield him any respectful titular. He dropped out of Law School (I graduated from LS). I don’t require people to call me ‘Dr.’; I see no need to afford an ex-communicated, defrocked priest, law school drop out, heretic–any particular degree of respect–especially Luther, who refused respect to the proper authorities of his own time.

What’s more, I never hear anyone from prior to the 19th century as referred to as Dr. X. Not even the 35 officially recognized ‘Doctors of the Church’. Perhaps the titular dies with the holder… Whatever…it takes me enough restraint and effort to refrain from referring to him as something less charitable; that’s more than enough…

…I do not need to (and shall not) yield him any more respect that is due any ordinary man.

What other communions do is their business. I cannot speak for them, or answer for them. I also refuse to characterize them as lemmings, who chose independently to follow any portion of Luther’s teachings.

Jon

But every protestant sect is undeniably, based on Luther’s flawed doctrines of faith–Sola Scriputura, and Sola Fide. YOU certainly needn’t answer for them; but you cannot deny the causation of those other sects, attributable to Mr. Martin Luther, and his manufactured theological doctrines of SS and SF.

 

[Goya]

Umm, OK. I guess you missed where the subject of the sentence was “many of our fellow Catholics”, not “you Goya”.

…oh the irony…it appears then, that it was I who inferred what you did not imply.

My apologies.

 

[Peter_J]

…oh the irony…it appears then, that it was I who inferred what you did not imply.

My apologies.

 

[JonNC]

=Goya;11739139]**]

IOW, they reject ***the degree *****of the Pope’s authority (recognizing his claim as Bishop of Rome and successor to St. Peter’s bishopric) but yielding no distinction vis a vis the other bishoprics which succeeded the other Apostles.

Up to this point, you may look to the East, and find company…

…but the Lutherans–along with all Protestants–take it a completely unjustified, significant step further–and that is to reject ALL his authority, along with that of all of the bishoprics which may claim Apostolic Succession–and find they have no company, when they look back in time–as there is no historical basis for Sola Scriptura.
In Melanchthon’s subscription to the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, this:

Regarding the Pope I hold that, if he would allow the Gospel, his superiority over the bishops which he has otherwise, is conceded to him by human right also by us,

for the sake of the peace and general unity of those Christians who are also under him, and may be under him hereafter.
I agree with Melanchthon on the point.

And on Apostolic Succession, from the Apology of the Augsburg Confession:

The Fourteenth Article, in which we say that in the Church the administration of the Sacraments and Word ought to be allowed no one unless he be rightly called, they receive, but with the proviso that we employ canonical ordination. Concerning this subject we have frequently testified in this assembly that it is our greatest wish to maintain church-polity and the grades in the Church [old church-regulations and the government of bishops], even though they have been made by human authority [provided the bishops allow our doctrine and receive our priests]. For we know that church discipline was instituted by the Fathers, in the manner laid down in the ancient canons, with a good and useful intention

.

Hundreds of millions of protestants, definitely (which is what I was referring to); not so sure about Lutherans. But I see no reason to isolate the Lutherans, other than to identify them as the first of the protestants. Beyond that, the Lutherans still hold fast to the two fundamentally flawed pillars of error–Sola Scriptura, and Sola Fide

.
We as Lutherans take responsibility for ourselves. Others may speak and account for themselves, be they of a Calvinist line, or that of Zwingli, or even Anabaptists.

As for Lutherans being the first protestants, indeed we were the ones there to protest at the 2nd Diet of Speyer in 1529, to protest government restriction of religious exercise. And today, LCMS Lutherans join our Catholic siblings in another protest against government tyranny, this time in the form of the HHS Mandate.

OK, the Lutherans do not expressly reject The Church…but they refuse to submit to her authority, having created their own, significantly more malleable alternative to her apparently too stringent authority (ref. 8,000+ protestant sects. built upon the foundation of Marty’s SS and SF doctrines).

If there were 8,000 sects built on Luther’s teaching, we would see all of them preaching the real presence, infant baptism. Obviously, they are not lemmings, and think for and are responsible for themselves.

We submit to authority, within our synod, for example. What we won’t do is submit to an authority that has overstepped the authority granted to it by the early Church, and indeed Christ Himself.

Lutherans may restrain themselves in the application of Sola Scriptura; but thousands of protestant sects have developed upon the foundation of SS, and show very little indication of restraint. Predictably. No institution or entity can be bound by a written instrument alone. Many Communist dictatorships have a constitution…that are as malleable as the dictator’s whims…

The thing is, Goya, those other protestant communions are not Lutheran, never have been. With some, there ties are more to the Catholic Church than to us. OTOH, I agree with your assessment of how they have changed, even morphed, how SS is supposed to be practiced by the Church leadership.

The proliferation of Lutheranism, as manifested through the proliferation of thousands of protestant sects, is analogous to what would have happened to the US, had the Confederacy prevailed in the Civil War (though to a much greater degree–that is, the Confederacy would not have yielded a 1000th of the conflicting interpretations that protestantism has yielded).

They are separate, always have been. In fact, most of the splintering has been in the Reformed/Calvinist movement.

It is both. A doctrine…and a doctrine put into practice. But it originated as a doctrine.

As Catholics are fond to point out, SS is not explicit in scripture. And while it is implied, it is not a doctrine, and did not start out as one. It is a practice of the Church to hold doctrine accountable. Nothing more. It is not an article of faith one must confess. No one loses salvation for not believing it.

More lame attempt on your part, to water down and dilute its impact. Non-sense.

The Catholic Church has yielded no ground here. I’ll leave it at that–let you draw your own conclusions.

An agreement such as that should have no one yielding ground. That’s not the way it works.

Jon