L
LutheranScholar
Guest
bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php#VII. The Lord’s Supper Irritating when a link doesn’t work.
- Status
C
ComplineSanFran
Guest
Thank you for these good words. I agree with you wholeheartedly.
I saw something yesterday on the PBS show ‘Religion and Ethics’ that might make your point. There is a Lutheran church (ELCA) in Denver called The House for All Sinners and Saints and it seems to be a very inviting community of all people that most churches turn away. Perhaps similar to the people that Jesus ate with and travelled with. The sinners that most of us pass by. Anyway, if someone here from Denver knows it, I’d certainly like to hear more.
pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/video/#32411
Their pastor has two books that are speaking to a whole lot of people.
Here is their website:
houseforall.org
I know it’s not a church for everyone, but I am very, very glad it is there for the people who find God in that sacramental circle of care.
E
Eric_Hyom
Guest
It is beyond my understanding that Jesus would die for me a sinner,I am not worthy that Jesus should die for me. So who in this world is worthy enough to judge the worthiness of others.
Jesus offered his body and blood to Judas, he forgave the adulterous woman,he came into the world for sinners, he prayed on the cross, Forgive them Father.
W
Wannano
Guest
You are right, no one is worthy, however it seems mankind likes to justify himself by condemning others.
L
LutheranScholar
Guest
I’m pretty sure it’s in one of my links to the pertinent topic in the Confessions, but according to the Lutheran take, the one who is considered " unworthy" is simply one who lacks that faith necessary to believe Jesus Christ is in the Bread and Wine, His Body and Blood being truly present. That would be the person who would eat and drink the Body and the Blood to his/ her own damnation. Whether you believe it or not, the True Presence of Christ is there, but one’s faith is the determinant of whether one eats and drinks to the forgiveness of sins and unity with Christ or one eats and drinks to judgment and damnation.
J
johnnyc176
Guest
A key mission given to the Catholic Church by Jesus Christ is the salvation of souls. The identification and condemnation of sin is necessary in carrying out that mission.
E
Eric_Hyom
Guest
It may be a key mission, but as individuals, we should look to the greatest commandments first, we can do nothing greater.
We are best placed to identify and condemn our own sins, I am not sure that we can compare other people’s sins with our own. Adam and Eve only ate from the tree of knowledge, in our eyes that seems like no big deal, but in the eyes of God this single small act caused our downfall.
W
Wannano
Guest
I get a warm sense of affirmation from you that you have a vibrant personal relationship with the risen Saviour. I wish I could meet you in real life.
W
Wannano
Guest
Ouch, I must admit I have never heard that explanation before. I have been taught that to eat and drink unworthily is to approach the table with unconfessed sin in our life and if we have aught with our brother.
L
LutheranScholar
Guest
" Ouch??"
I happen to think of it as a source of great comfort that the Lord calls us to His table… of course, the corporate Confession and Absolution at the beginning of the Divine Service is every bit as valid as private Confession and Absolution ( which people are starting to use more or less regularly in the Lutheran Church again). It’s not ***our ***work that makes us worthy, but what Our Blessed Lord did for us and what the Holy Spirit continues to do for us that enables us to declare our common faith with those we share the Table with.
C
commenter
Guest
prior poster: salvation a key mission (end)
True, we cannot and should not judge other people in terms of their personal goodness or evil. But as an act of love, the Church in general and we as individuals must point out what actions are objectively evil. I cannot judge whether my neighbor is overall unhealthier than me. I am not his doctor. But I can judge that smoking would harm him. If I can, I can encourage him not to smoke, and try to discourage young people from taking up the habit, even if those young people are, overall, healthier than me.
So, the Church does identify and condemn sins. It is part of providing needed information. It would be wrong to say “I couldn’t care less about my neighbor’s health”. Likewise, every abortion or intentional homosexual act hurts people. We can’t judge the person, but we need to judge - that is, inform - the action. This is part of love. Apathy about my neighbor is not part of love.
That is why 90% of all anti-Christian attacks today are attacks on the Catholic Church. The Magisterium still affirms absolutes of truth and goodness, when most other churches, perhaps including ELCA, are not doing that anymore.
Eric is missing a truth from prior poster. We don’t choose between encouraging salvation - or - “love”. Rather we encourage others and ourselves toward salvation as part of our love for them and God.
True, we cannot and should not judge other people in terms of their personal goodness or evil. But as an act of love, the Church in general and we as individuals must point out what actions are objectively evil. I cannot judge whether my neighbor is overall unhealthier than me. I am not his doctor. But I can judge that smoking would harm him. If I can, I can encourage him not to smoke, and try to discourage young people from taking up the habit, even if those young people are, overall, healthier than me.
So, the Church does identify and condemn sins. It is part of providing needed information. It would be wrong to say “I couldn’t care less about my neighbor’s health”. Likewise, every abortion or intentional homosexual act hurts people. We can’t judge the person, but we need to judge - that is, inform - the action. This is part of love. Apathy about my neighbor is not part of love.
That is why 90% of all anti-Christian attacks today are attacks on the Catholic Church. The Magisterium still affirms absolutes of truth and goodness, when most other churches, perhaps including ELCA, are not doing that anymore.
E
Eric_Hyom
Guest
Amen
There has been enough graphic images and messages on cigarette packets for decades, millions of smokers just ignore these messages. It might make you feel better if you tell them not to smoke, but I am truthfully not convinced this acts as a prevention.
It is probably easier to pick out the sins of homosexuality, if I am not that way inclined, it is easier to single out abortion, if that is something I am not tempted to do. The sins that cause me to speak out are against poverty. We allow twenty thousand children to die every day as a result of grinding poverty, preventable disease and starvation. We don’t have to lecture these children, we have to help them in practical ways. Love is about doing something.
C
commenter
Guest
G. K. Chesterton: “The difficulty of explaining “why I am a Catholic” is that there are ten thousand reasons all amounting to one reason: that Catholicism is true. I could fill all my space with separate sentences each beginning with the words, “It is the only thing that…” As, for instance, (1) It is the only thing that really prevents a sin from being a secret. (2) It is the only thing in which the superior cannot be superior; in the sense of supercilious. (3) It is the only thing that frees a man from the degrading slavery of being a child of his age. (4) It is the only thing that talks as if it were the truth; as if it were a real messenger refusing to tamper with a real message. (5) It is the only type of Christianity that really contains every type of man; even the respectable man. (6) It is the only large attempt to change the world from the inside; working through wills and not laws; and so on”.
Chesterton said that he became a Catholic so that his sins could be forgiven. He didn’t say, so that he could have the feeling of forgiveness, or that he could feel united with his fellow man, etc. He definitely was altered specifically by Catholicism. I am sure there are many dedicated Christians in ELCA. I am not sure if any were altered specifically as a result of ELCA. Even though the Holy Spirit can work through any human means, or no human means, I think Chesterton p(name removed by moderator)oints the distinction.
#4 above is crucial.
Chesterton said that he became a Catholic so that his sins could be forgiven. He didn’t say, so that he could have the feeling of forgiveness, or that he could feel united with his fellow man, etc. He definitely was altered specifically by Catholicism. I am sure there are many dedicated Christians in ELCA. I am not sure if any were altered specifically as a result of ELCA. Even though the Holy Spirit can work through any human means, or no human means, I think Chesterton p(name removed by moderator)oints the distinction.
#4 above is crucial.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
What is meant by saying that Catholicism is true? Was it a true position to support the Inquisition and the burning of heretics at the stake?
C
commenter
Guest
Read the book “Orthodoxy” by G. K. Chesterton. That will help clarify what Catholics, and many others including LCMS, mean by “true”. Chesterton was Anglican at the time he wrote it.
Consider this a challenge. Even if your wish is to refute Catholicism, you will never find a more important book for refuters, except perhaps “The Everlasting Man”. “Orthodoxy” makes explicit the foundation underlying half the arguments you do read in other books and the internet by Catholics, the EO, many Anglicans and Protestants. He makes explicit what is implicit everywhere else.
G
GKC
Guest
Twelve Modern Apostles and Their Creeds (1926); reprinted in The Collected Works of G.K. Chesterton, Vol. 3 Ignatius Press, 1990, p.127.
G
GKC
Guest
Anglo-Catholic, in fact, but about at the point of deciding to make a journey. Took another 14 years.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Recommending a book to read does not answer the question. For example, someone questioning this can say: Read the books on the Inquisition by Henry Charles Lea.
G
GKC
Guest
It suggests a venue to achieve some understanding in depth, though. Lea is the father of the modern study of the Inquisitions, and not as bad as sometimes painted. But one needs to add Kamen and Peters and Netanyahu (and so forth). One certainly needs more than the internet and opinions found there on boards such as these.
Reading is recommended. In depth and broadly.
C
commenter
Guest
Originally Posted by commenter View Post
Read the book “Orthodoxy” by G. K. Chesterton.
You have written an awful lot of posts challenging various aspects of Catholic doctrine. Your challenges aren’t that challenging because you usually aren’t asking the sharpest possible questions, and you likely don’t know the assumptions the other posters are implicitly responding to. Well, the book “Orthodoxy” will help you better understand William F. Buckley, Martin Luther King, Winston Churchill, and lots of others; and, also, most of what Catholics and Protestants on CAF rightly or wrongly take for granted in their posts here.
I am not saying you have to agree with those arguments that became our assumptions, but wouldn’t you be curious to know what they are? Even for the purpose of refutation?
Read the book “Orthodoxy” by G. K. Chesterton.
I am sure only a tiny percentage of people today have been shaped by Lea’s books. But a huge percentage have been shaped directly by Chesterton, or their teachers and mentors were shaped by his books. This is especially true of Catholics, Anglicans, LCMS, evangelicals, and many others, who usually don’t know who Chesterton was, but his arguments are half of all their assumptions. I was influenced by Chesterton before I recall reading his name, because in hindsight I see that my textbooks, teachers, and favorite authors were. Chesterton didn’t invent these arguments, but expressed in readable form what writers before and after him usually hint at, or take for granted.
You have written an awful lot of posts challenging various aspects of Catholic doctrine. Your challenges aren’t that challenging because you usually aren’t asking the sharpest possible questions, and you likely don’t know the assumptions the other posters are implicitly responding to. Well, the book “Orthodoxy” will help you better understand William F. Buckley, Martin Luther King, Winston Churchill, and lots of others; and, also, most of what Catholics and Protestants on CAF rightly or wrongly take for granted in their posts here.
I am not saying you have to agree with those arguments that became our assumptions, but wouldn’t you be curious to know what they are? Even for the purpose of refutation?
- Status