All your experiences aside, EC, do you not see how this comes off as, at best, arrogant?
Do you really think so? I can’t imagine that being the case. Pope John Paul II was quite clear that no pope has the authority to do so.
Sorry Jon; now that you point it out, I am appearing “arrogant”All your experiences aside, EC, do you not see how this comes off as, at best, arrogant?
Do you really think so? I can’t imagine that being the case. Pope John Paul II was quite clear that no pope has the authority to do so.
I for one honestly hope you are wrong on this, mainly because** if **(yeah, big if) the LCMS ever goes down that road, I’ll need a place to land.
Jon
Tell them that the Tiber is still quite warm this time of year, c’mon over!
No big deal, as we all get carried by our thoughts and emotions. As you know yourself, we spend a good bit of time as Lutheran guests at CAF trying to provide correct information about Lutheranism, and I know I at times get irritated when someone tries to tell us what you and I believe.=EvangelCatholic;11351475]Sorry Jon; now that you point it out, I am appearing “arrogant”
I don’t believe it is an issue of being anti-ecumenism. Some of the very people who have spoken out against what you are saying are probably the most ardent of supporters of ecumenism, myself included. But we also believe that when you are a guest in someone’s house, be it their home of the house of worship, you comply with the rules they set down. The Catholic Church, outside of extraordinary circumstances, and approval of the bishop, ask us not to receive when attending mass. That is all I need to know, even if the local priest says its ok. According to their teaching, it isn’t ok. As for LCMS parishes, the hierarchical rules are less imposing. We practice close (not closed) communion because it gives the local parish and priest/pastor greater flexibility to respond to the needs of the community. For example, our parish is the only Lutheran parish in our county. We are, without doubt, far more open to ELCA members, and Anglicans who want to receive.
Baloney.
Agreed. In my opinion, we don’t really honor Mary in our Church. We just make ourselves believe that we are through token prayers and feast days. She was a woman and an apostle of Christ. She, out of all the followers of Christ knew him the best, loved him the most and was the most loyal. We dishonor her by pronouncing through our MAN made doctrines, our laws, our thoughts and our deeds that people like her, women, are unworthy of priesthood. If she graced our church today, we would not offer her the honor of being a priest or bishop or pope because we are shackled by our own perceptions of worthiness… and women like Mary, the Mother of God, lack our seal of approval.
Christ didn’t make Mary a priest. That’s all we need to know.
Perhaps instinctively, I accepted this unity in the Body of Christ many decades ago. University chapels and churches who minister to college students have been practicing inner-communion between Lutherans, Anglicans and Catholics for a long time.
I also struggle with the place of Mary as an symbol of the priesthood. The mystery of the Mother of God would seem to suggest that the Virgin Mary is inexplicably united in the salvation of Christ.
The Mary PeopleB4Things spoke about was Mary Magdalene not Mary Jesus’s mother.
Oops! The wrong Mary
I am a Catholic in the Lutheran tradition. As a member of the Western Church, I believe the Pope is the primary head of the holy Church.
Most definitely I respect the teachings on faith and morals as articulated by the Pope. I also understand that teachings are informed by revelation from the holy Spirit.
OK, well a Pope (who is about to Canonized) stated definitively, as a Magisterial teaching, that it was impossible for the Church to ever ordain a woman to the priesthood. Not just prohibited, but beyond the power of the Church.