Error Begets Error

[PRmerger]

I think Tim Staples is an unstanding guy who stands up for his fath in an admirable way and truly loves Christ. t’s a well-articulated piece. I disagree with a lot of what Mr. Staples believes but I respect him. He was a catalyst behind me looking into the catholic church more, and I simply didnt find the evidence he uses t support his conversion convincing enough to support such a move for me. Nothing wrong with him as a person though.

Which argument of his did you find the most compelling? (I understand it wasn’t compelling enough to induce you to convert, but I am still interested in which one you found most convincing.)

 

[BA11]

Which argument of his did you find the most compelling? (I understand it wasn’t compelling enough to induce you to convert, but I am still interested in which one you found most convincing.)

His arguments on once saved always saved and how it contradicts the bible. I believe, differently from many “protestants”, that you can exercise your free will to abandon your faith and salvation and he articulates that point well I think.

I also appreciate his strong moral stances on homosexuality, abortion and other assorted topics.

 

[Cavaradossi]

Ben,

Historically speaking, what is now know as the Orthodox Church, divided as it may be, once was strongly united to the Chair of Peter.

We still are, as the Chair of Peter belongs to the Episcopacy. But if you wish to assert that the East historically was “strongly united” to the See of Rome, then I would suggest that you brush up on your history, as there is little indication that communion with the bishop of Rome bore the same significance historically as it does now.

 

[PRmerger]

His arguments on once saved always saved and how it contradicts the bible. I believe, differently from many “protestants”, that you can exercise your free will to abandon your faith and salvation and he articulates that point well I think.

Ah, very good, then.

So you were of the OSAS ilk before reading Mr. Staples’ arguments?

I also appreciate his strong moral stances on homosexuality, abortion and other assorted topics.

Such as?

 

[guanophore]

It is very difficult to know what the reformers of the 16th century understood by the faith that justifies, for we find among them no precise definitions, and especially no uniform notions of it.

I have to disagree with this. I think it is quite clear what they meant. Each of the Reformers created their own definitions of this concept, each representing a departure from the Apsotolic faith. However, if by “uniform” you mean that none of them agreed with each other, I will have to concede that point. Once of the reasons there is such a splintering in Christendom is that the various redefinitions of the doctrines each had their own following. Today, when there is disagreement, those who think otherwise simply move down the street, open a new “church” and publish their own ideas.

Their texts, when compared, leave a strong impression of obscurity and incoherence.

Well, this is not suprising, since none of them were trying to be coherent with the others. Scripture has a good statment about what happened:

Judg 17:5-6
6 In those days there was no king in Israel; all the people did what was right in their own eyes.

When the authority appointed by Christ was jettisoned, it then fell to each man to do what he thought was right in his own eyes. Each one interpreted the Scripture according to his own frame of reference, and thus, there are widely divergent views. I don’t think any of them are “obscure”, though. Each one has clarity about his own opinion, and writes quite plainly about it. Perhaps the obscurity lies in the fact that they are so divergent from one another?

If they said with Calvin that faith is “an unshaken and certain knowledge of divine good will towards us,” they had to make long commentaries in order to explain that such an act proceeds from the heart and not from the mind, and they did not know where to locate the reality of this faith, the object of which, at the moment when it was perceived as existing, did not yet exist. If they preferred Luther’s definition: “a certain and profound confidence in the divine goodness and in the grace manifested and known by the Word of God,” it was impossible to say how this confidence can be certain, unless it be admitted that it is itself preceded by an act of intellectual faith. We have no right to expect any greater clearness and precision from modern Protestants.

Thanks for these examples. They helped me to understand the point you are making.

 

[guanophore]

I understand what you are saying. For Catholics, the One, Catholic, Holy and Apostolic Church is the Catholic Church. I believe** a few Protestant denominations are a member of the OCHA Church but just not in full Communion.** A friend and I had this talk once before (the retired ELCA pastor) and we agreed to agree part way as I will with you.

I don’t think this is the case. It is not possible for a “denomination” to be a member of the OHCAC. The very fact that they are denominations means that they have departed to some extent from the Apsotolic faith.

But there are many members of those denominations who are members, though through imperfect communion. The Holy Spirit works through those denominations to unite people to HImself. He calls all of the faithful to unity.

 

[aidanbradypop]

I don’t think this is the case. It is not possible for a “denomination” to be a member of the OHCAC. The very fact that they are denominations means that they have departed to some extent from the Apsotolic faith.

But there are many members of those denominations who are members, though through imperfect communion. The Holy Spirit works through those denominations to unite people to HImself. He calls all of the faithful to unity.

I probably should have worded it better. My fault

I believe many “people” within those faiths are. Thanks for pointing that out lol

 

[Daniel_Stinson]

Egads, I knew Luther’s Sola Fide was nutty, but I didn’t know he was as wacky as Calvin in the matter of “double predestination!” He really wrote that? That man is merely a beast ridden either by God or by the devil and has no freedom in the matter? Seriously?

No, Lutheranism believes God’s intent is for all to go to heaven, but our free-will must accept Christ Jesus’ free gift of grace and exercise faith in such grace.

We don’t believe anyone is predestined for hell, as you would encounter with the Calvinists.

 

[Daniel_Stinson]

As I stated above, I believe reform brings reform…and reform…and reform…and more reform. I believe that once someone decides they know better than The Church, then many more will draw that same conclusion later on. Example with in Lutheranism is ELCA, LCMS, WELS, LCMC…etc.

Example: East-West Schism, Papal Schism, Western Catholic Church (1054-1545)…
Old Catholics…
Lutheran Church (Protestants) of 1530…
Roman Catholic Church of 1545…
Reform Church of 1559…
Remonstrants of late 1600’s…

The LCMS and WELS are in close relations.

The ELCA was excommunicated during the 1970’s Seminex walkout and switched theologies to Remonstrants (Arminianism, Charismatic, Liberal). Since ordaining women and non-celibate gays; that church has splintered off into LCMC and several others.

 

[Daniel_Stinson]

Did Tim falsely quote Luther on the matter of man being like a “beast ridden by either God or the devil?” I’ll grant you that nobody used the term “double predestination” but the logic appears to clearly be there. If God chooses you to be saved, then that’s what happens and your will has no relevance (God rise those like horses?) If God doesn’t choose you to be saved, then the devil is free to have his way. That’s how I read the LUTHER quote, not Staples opinion of it.

Is this something that today’s Lutherans repudiate?

I admit to being no theologian, but the way I understand sin and Grace is that we humans have dug ourselves into a hopelessly deep pit of sin and cannot escape from it via our own efforts. In Christ, God offers us a rescue rope which we must cling to as He pulls us out of our pit. As I understand it, many protestants reject this analogy because they worry that the clinging to the rope is a “work” about which the person may brag and be proud of.

Personally, I’ve never met anybody that bragged about his achievement of clinging to the rope that rescued him from the fatal pit he had dug himself into…

It’s just a metaphor for the ups and downs we have in our daily faith and it’s designed to wake the congregation up and become the Church militant, ridden by God’s will, and not that of Satan. There’s no waling atop the fence, your loyalties lie on one side of the yard or the other, so focus on what side of the fence you belong on where God and Satan are concerned. This isn’t a predestination comment, but one of free-will.

 

[joe370]

That’s a fair problem, and hence our desire for stronger unity with the holy, catholic and apostolic church we profess. As far as dogma, I would say the LCMS has been very consistent and hasn’t introduced anything novel - a concern our Orthodox friends would also share with us about the Catholic church.

Is it safe to say that you do not believe the Holy Spirit continues to guide the Catholic Church into all truth, just as the HS did during the early councils i.e. God parted ways for whatever reason, leaving the CC alone, as an orphan, to discern doctrinal truth on their own (zero charism) until Jesus’ glorious return? If you are right, trust me, I would not belong to the CC…any church for that matter.

 

[Daniel_Stinson]

My gut reaction is that don’t know if Lutherans share this theory - in fact, if you look carefully, my synod claims to be the holy, catholic, and apostolic church. Before you start gathering the firewood - we have to be a bit careful in this - our claim is exclusive without speaking on if we deny others the same possibility. It’s an acknowledgement that God have given us His church.

If I remember correctly, we would say what you’re describing as the ‘invisible church.’ But this is not the same as the church.

Yes, Lutherans share the same Holy Spirit as all others who have sufficient faith in their grace from God to enter into heaven with us. We’re one Church and one Body in Christ Jesus regardless of borders, barriers, or whose pew you’re sitting in. This is the Body of the Church faithful and not a physical structure per say.

Like any other religion, Lutherans believe we have a more efficient approach to obtaining salvation, otherwise we’d just convert to something else. We cast judgement within the Church along Scripture; when voting in our pastors, elders, and council members to hold the hierarchy in accountability. The congregation is viewed as a priesthood on par with the pastor, but not answering the call into ordination to administer the Sacraments. Our congregations do vote out members who try to bring in outside influence that’s not Scriptural or God breathed.

 

[Daniel_Stinson]

That’s interesting. All the LCMC folks I know believe the “Church” is the people of Christ. They do not prescribe to the “church” being what Christ instituted on earth. They actually are kind of against that belief.

It’s both under Lutheranism, “the people of Christ” “instituted on earth”. We acknowledge different levels of institution based on God’s unique calling of the faithful. Many serve, but not all are “called”.

Some of us directly serve God within the Church; while others serve God through the Civil authority. Both realms are of equal importance and must remain balanced by the faithful serving both. We acknowledge that all those who are Baptized and renew their baptism at Communion; are sharing the same Holy Spirit in community with one another.

 

[Daniel_Stinson]

That’s interesting. All the LCMC folks I know believe the “Church” is the people of Christ. They do not prescribe to the “church” being what Christ instituted on earth. They actually are kind of against that belief.

When one provides a prerequisite that there must be word and sacrament present, preached and administered (and Augsburg also requires the presence of an ordained pastor for these to be done properly), then we are talking about more than just an invisible Church. There is a tangible, visible aspect to this, where word and sacrament are present.

Perhaps baptists define things differently.

Jon

One Church of many congregations within the same Church, Lutherans would explain that for some doctrines the means of grace is difficult to obtain, because the doctrine won’t promote a growing faith. We generally don’t go so far as to definitively say non-Lutherans can’t go to heaven, and we don’t believe Lutheranism is the only path. We do believe that the average Roman Catholic congregational member has a better chance of going to heaven than the papacy for instance.

The Law is death, brings death, and lawful traditions and hefty doctrines are the product of Satan bogging down the Church; so that it’ll be ineffective at administering the Gospel. The Hebrews and Jews have tried for centuries to figure out salvation through the Law alone and it took the Christ to break them of their bondage; yet their hearts are so hardened by the Law that it’s difficult to accept the love and mercy of the Gospel. Christ Jesus was ridiculed for not obeying the priests’ laws and ordinances, but Jesus didn’t have to comply because it was his Church and he was their priest and Lord. Yet he complied with the civil authority in unity by giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s or catching a fish with money in its mouth to pay the tax; as seen with the Civil realm of God.

Romans 2:12
For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law.

 

[Daniel_Stinson]

Is it safe to say that you do not believe the Holy Spirit continues to guide the Catholic Church into all truth, just as the HS did during the early councils i.e. God parted ways for whatever reason, leaving the CC alone, as an orphan, to discern doctrinal truth on their own (zero charism) until Jesus’ glorious return? If you are right, trust me, I would not belong to the CC…any church for that matter.

The Church has ups and downs just as people do. It’s best to hold out and help the Church through the lulls and hardships. Conversion is a last option and should only be done if where you’re going still holds you accountable to Scripture and a strong faith in God.

 

[guanophore]

We generally don’t go so far as to definitively say non-Lutherans can’t go to heaven, and we don’t believe Lutheranism is the only path. We do believe that the average Roman Catholic congregational member has a better chance of going to heaven than the papacy for instance.

LOL. this gave me a chuckle.

Given the fact that people go to heaven (or not) without regard to offices (such as “the papacy”), of couse the office of the “papacy” is not eligible to go to heaven.

That being said, I am curious to know why you think a person in that office would not have as equal a chance to go to heaven than anyone else?

What do you think the person in the position of pope does or doesnt do to disqualify themselves that an “average Roman Catholic congregational member” does that gives that person a “better chance of going to heaven”?

The Law is death, brings death, and lawful traditions and hefty doctrines are the product of Satan bogging down the Church; so that it’ll be ineffective at administering the Gospel.

Actually, this is not a Scriptural position.

Rom 7:16-17
16 Now if I do what I do not want,** I agree that the law is good. **

1 Tim 1:8-9
"Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it legitimately. "

Rom 3:20
through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

Rom 3:30-31
31 Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, **we uphold the law. **

Rom 7:12
the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good.

Rom 7:22
22 For I delight in the law of God in my inmost self,

The Law is not “death”, but was given for our instruction. We are not saved by it, but it was our tutor until Christ.

Gal 3:23-25
we were imprisoned and guarded under the law until faith would be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came, so that we might be justified by faith.

The law itself is not evil.

The Sacred Tradition is the Word of God that was given once for all to the Church. Rules and laws need not “bog down” the Church. YOu seem to be suggesting a form of anomianism. The fact that we are under grace does not mean there are no rules or expectations.

 The Hebrews and Jews have tried for centuries to figure out salvation through the Law alone and it took the Christ to break them of their bondage; yet their hearts are so hardened by the Law that it's difficult to accept the love and mercy of the Gospel.

For some, yes but the nature of salvation by grace through faith has never changed. There are those who were saved by it who lived under the law.

The Church has ups and downs just as people do. It’s best to hold out and help the Church through the lulls and hardships. Conversion is a last option and should only be done if where you’re going still holds you accountable to Scripture and a strong faith in God.

This is an interesting piece of non-biblical advice.

Jesus only founded One Church. Conversion of the human heart should always be the FIRST OPTION.

The modern innovation that one “should” join or create a congregation that meets these criteria would be foreign to the Apsotles.

 

[joe370]

The Church has ups and downs just as people do. It’s best to hold out and help the Church through the lulls and hardships. Conversion is a last option and should only be done if where you’re going still holds you accountable to Scripture and a strong faith in God.

Perhaps not the only reason to convert to the Catholic Church. Two more good reasons in my humble opinion: the Holy Eucharist and of course the realization that the Catholic Church is the church founded by God, with God continuing to guide the Catholic Church into all truth until Jesus’ return.

 

[joe370]

We do believe that the average Roman Catholic congregational member has a better chance of going to heaven than the papacy for instance.

What are you talking about?

 

[joe370]

Yes, Lutherans share the same Holy Spirit as all others who have sufficient faith in their grace from God to enter into heaven with us. We’re one Church and one Body in Christ Jesus regardless of borders, barriers, or whose pew you’re sitting in. This is the Body of the Church faithful and not a physical structure per say.

Like any other religion, Lutherans believe we have a more efficient approach to obtaining salvation, otherwise we’d just convert to something else. We cast judgement within the Church along Scripture; when voting in our pastors, elders, and council members to hold the hierarchy in accountability. The congregation is viewed as a priesthood on par with the pastor, but not answering the call into ordination to administer the Sacraments. Our congregations do vote out members who try to bring in outside influence that’s not Scriptural or God breathed.

In your opinion, did Jesus see the need for a reformation and subsequent departure from His Catholic church, and therefore establish the Lutheran church in the 16th century?

 

[benjohnson]

Is it safe to say that you do not believe the Holy Spirit continues to guide the Catholic Church into all truth, just as the HS did during the early councils i.e. God parted ways for whatever reason, leaving the CC alone, as an orphan, to discern doctrinal truth on their own (zero charism) until Jesus’ glorious return? If you are right, trust me, I would not belong to the CC…any church for that matter.

Sorry to have missed this:

I certainly do believe the Holy Spirit continues to guide the Catholic Church, in addition to my church. It’s evident the Holy Sprit has touched the leadership of your Church, and for that I give thanks, and I pray that guidance you have received becomes evident in the next conclave to select your next Pope.

We pray for the church in our intentions - that of course includes our church as well yours and our other separated brothers in Christ.