How do protestants explain history

[Isaiah45_9]

Hello Jose,

At least know this, I am not your enemy.

We can disagree without being enemies .

 

[JonNC]

Hi Don,

I think that the problem we are having is one that is very fundamental. I am questioning what Lutheranism officially teaches and the answers I am getting revolve around personal opinions.

For the record, I don’t have one even slight problem with Jon. However, he did NOT answer my question. If you think he did, could you please locate it for me and repost it? The question was – “Who are the ‘adherents’?”

Here you have an opportunity to tell me specifically and exactly how and why I am wrong. Again, my question has absolutely nothing to do with what your personal opinions might be regarding the pope and the antichrist, but with what your church officially teaches in it’s Confessions.

For the record, I watched this hateful and disgusting video. One has to wonder whether this LCMS pastor was ‘disciplined’ for his outrageous rant against the Catholic Church. Actually I don’t wonder at all. I would bet pretty big money that he was never disciplined for his rant, BECAUSE all he was doing was expounding the official teachings of the Lutheran church.

God Bless You Don, Topper

No personal opinion here, as this is what the LCMS states about Catholic Christians:

Q: A non-Lutheran Christian friend of mine recently stated that he believes that Catholics are not saved and should not be considered Christians. What is the Synod’s belief regarding the salvation of Catholics who adhere to Roman dogma?

A: The LCMS recognizes all Trinitarian church bodies as Christian churches (in contrast to “cults,” which typically reject the doctrine of the Trinity and thus cannot be recognized as Christian). In fact, a primary “objective” listed in the Synod’s Constitution (Article III) is to “work through its official structure toward fellowship with other Christian church bodies”—which explicitly assumes that these “other church bodies” are “Christian” in nature. That does not lessen the Synod’s concern for the false doctrine taught and confessed by these churches, but it does highlight the Synod’s recognition that wherever the “marks of the church” (the Gospel and Sacraments) are present—even where “mixed” with error—there the Christian church is present. Such a church is a heterodox church, that is, a church that teaches false doctrine.

Of course, personal salvation is not merely a matter of external membership in or association with any church organization or denomination (including the LCMS), but comes through faith in Jesus Christ alone. All those who confess Jesus Christ as Savior are recognized as “Christians” by the Synod—only God can look into a person’s heart and see whether that person really believes. It is possible to have true and sincere faith in Jesus Christ even while having wrong or incomplete beliefs about other doctrinal issues.

This explains why former Synod President A.L. Barry called members of the Roman Catholic Church “our fellow Christians” in his statement Toward True Reconciliation, which at the same time identifies and laments the false teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.

The great danger is that believing things contrary to God’s Word can obscure and perhaps even completely destroy belief in Jesus Christ as one’s Savior. We pray that this will not happen to those who confess Jesus Christ as Savior and yet belong to heterodox church bodies, including fellow Christians in the Roman Catholic Church.

Herein your question is definitively answered regarding the view of Lutherans, at least regarding those in our synod, as to whether or not Catholics, including Pope Francis, are Christian. They, you, and he are! If, in fact, this is the interpretation of the confessions of our synod, and it is, and you have come to a different interpretation, then yours is wrong. If, further, you continue to proffer your view as that of Lutherans, you are then intentionally misrepresenting our belief and our confessions.

Jon

 

[Buddyroe]

We can disagree without being enemies .

Hopefully we can build each others faith, I pray that happens.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Dispensation reception certainly took a toe hold in Lutheranism at least in the U.S. In-fact, the Dialogues address it in practice if not in doctrine. I’m sure any Lutheran can find congregations that still mix the consecrated with unconsecrated. That is why parishes should reserve the Sacrament near the altar.

The tabernacle in the photo is actually positioned in the stain glass window behind the altar but also visible on the outside of the church. I attended an installation of the pastor of Grace/ Teaneck years ago

 

[JonNC]

=Isaiah45_9;11753183]I know bro’, Darby being the earliest proponent I believe.

But that’s not what I claimed, Was it?

What I said was that I found it hard to be a Protestant without believing that a dispensation was granted.

A dispensation from what?

From separating from the Catholic Church.

I mean, How can we reconcile a separation from the Church without some sort of dispensation?

No dispensation = heresy. Plain and simple.

From a Lutheran perspective, however, we do not consider ourselves outside the OHCAC, and the separation between us and the Bishop of Rome is two-way. So, we both need to seek forgiveness for our sad separation.

T

here is another dilemma: I would need to redefine terms, if I am not under a dispensation.

Or I would need to stop believing in the physical Church and believe solely in an invisible one.

For example, the LCMS sees herself as part of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church. And yet, it severed ties with the Catholic Church. In her theology, the LCMS must now look at what:

One means - In the general sense, the LCMS must believe in a Spiritual one. Since we are not in communion with each other.

Holy means - In the general sense, Holy is to be set apart - to be called out by Christ. The problem lies in the “apart” sense .

Catholic means - In the general sense, we can be "c"atholic, whereas to be "C"atholic you would need to be in communion with the Bishop of Rome.

Apostolic means - This is where it gets even trickier, just reading the New Testament doesn’t mean that we are apostolic. There needs to be a consistency and a delegation of authority from the Apostles. While the Lutheranism claims succession - if we study “form” and “intent” - as expressed in Apostolicae Curae:

First, from a Lutheran perspective, simply because there is a division between us does not mean we can believe in only an invisible Church. The Church is quite visible, in that it is found where the word is preached and the sacraments administered among the regenerate. So, the visible Church is found in your parish, and mine, and in others.

As for Apostolicae Curae, which was directed at the Anglicans, that is a Vatican statement. The fact that we disagree as to what is “apostolic” (disagree in terms of ours, not yours since we accept yours)long before AC.

So, even if the form is kept but the intent in its external expression dissents from the Catholic Church, then it is not apostolic until it returns to the Catholic Church.

From a Catholic POV, yes. We disagree.

So a dispensation is needed. Probably not in the same sense as Darby or Ryrie, but it is needed nonetheless.

If you mean it in the sense that division and schism is sin, yes, and it applies to both sides of the Tiber.

On a minor point, the Catholic Catechism says, from a Catholic POV, “But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame.”
and
“However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities…”

If we cannot be charged with the sin of separation, why do we need a dispensation?

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=Buddyroe;11754507]Well you know electricity wasn’t discovered until the 19th century either but then all of a sudden the lights came on. The truth is out there all you have to do is let it in.

I see no reason to believe the light wasn’t already on.

A serious dispensationalist will maintain a sola scriptura presupposition (definitely not Catholic). They will claim the details have always (from 1st century on at least) been there for all to examine. They will not read personal understanding into scripture (eisegesis), claim legitimate reading out of scripture (exegesis). Alas, some dispensationalists can at times be, let us say, impressionable.

Except their own.

You are probably right though, the reformers were not dispensationalists.

Indeed.

Jon

 

[Memaw]

Hi Don,

I think that the problem we are having is one that is very fundamental. I am questioning what Lutheranism officially teaches and the answers I am getting revolve around personal opinions.

For the record, I don’t have one even slight problem with Jon. However, he did NOT answer my question. If you think he did, could you please locate it for me and repost it? The question was – “Who are the ‘adherents’?”

Here you have an opportunity to tell me specifically and exactly how and why I am wrong. Again, my question has absolutely nothing to do with what your personal opinions might be regarding the pope and the antichrist, but with what your church officially teaches in it’s Confessions.

I did read it. NOWHERE does it mention the ‘office’ of the pope. And yet, the answers I get back are all about the office of the pope. There is clearly a huge difference between what YOUR confession is saying and what Lutherans here on the threads are saying.

In addition, I was trying to get an answer from Jon as to who the ‘adherents’ are:

The Formula of Concord - A Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, Treatise Compiled by the Theologians Assembled at Smalcald – 1537

INTRODUCTION TO THE TREATISE ON THE POWER AND PRIMACY OF THE POPE

“39] Now, it is manifest that the Roman pontiffs, with their adherents, defend [and practice] godless doctrines and godless services. And the marks [all the vices] of Antichrist plainly agree with the kingdom of the Pope and his adherents.

57] Therefore, even though the bishop of Rome had the primacy by divine right, yet since he defends godless services and doctrine conflicting with the Gospel, obedience is not due him; yea, it is necessary to resist him as Antichrist.

59] But those who agree with the Pope, and defend his doctrine and [false] services, defile themselves with idolatry and blasphemous opinions, become guilty of the blood of the godly, whom the Pope [and his adherents] persecutes, detract from the glory of God, and hinder the welfare of the Church, because they strengthen errors and crimes to all posterity…”

#39 makes it very clear that ‘all the marks of antichrist’ are on ‘Roman pontiffs, with their adherents’. #57 makes it very clear that the Pope – ‘him’ is antichrist. The ‘him’ is personal. There is absolutely NO mention of the ‘office’ in this document. #59 again mentions the Pope AND his ‘adherents’.

So Don – what I really want to know if this: Who, specifically and exactly are these ‘adherents’ who ‘bear the marks of the antichrist along with the pope? Please don’t tell me what you personally think about whether Catholics are Christians or anything other than what I actually asked.

If you don’t believe what your Lutheran Confession says about this matter then just say so. If you want to claim that it doesn’t say what it so clearly says, then you are going to be in opposition to the following people who signed the above statement:

Bugenhagen, Pomeranus, Rhegius, Amsdorf, Spalatin, Osiander, Veit Dieterich, Agricola, Draconites, Figenbotz, Bucer, Schnepf, Rhodius, Oeniken, Northanus, Schneweis, Pomeranus, Brentz, Melanchthon, Corvinus, Adam a Fulda, Schlainhauffen, Helt, Coelius, Geltner, Melander, Fagius, Faber, Oettinger, Wolfart, Aepinus, Amsterdam, Fontanus, Myconius, Menius, Blaurer.

Don, I recognize about a dozen of these names. Of course, Luther’s name should be included as agreeing with the whole pope as the antichrist, and the Church as the church of Satan (references upon request if you insist). He would have attended this conference but he was ill. He was however, the ‘inspiration’ for all of the antichrist accusations. If you don’t like what this treatise says, take it up with the founders of your religion, don’t take it out on me.

BTW, there is one more name, jonathan fisk, LCMS pastor

youtu.be/KxTglbyabk0

Exerpts:

“The Lutheran church exists because the teachings of the RCC is so abhorrent and so connected to the description of the abomination mentioned in the Book of Daniel and by Jesus in Matthew……The Jesuits are basically not even Trinitarian….(the RCC) is Mary worshiping, saint idolizing, money grubbing, pedophile protecting”. When quoting the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, fisk states: “Indeed they ought to curse the Pope and his minions” as the very realm of the antichrist.”

Which of course begs the question – Who, specifically and exactly are the ‘minions’ if not loyal Catholics?

For the record, I watched this hateful and disgusting video. One has to wonder whether this LCMS pastor was ‘disciplined’ for his outrageous rant against the Catholic Church. Actually I don’t wonder at all. I would bet pretty big money that he was never disciplined for his rant, BECAUSE all he was doing was expounding the official teachings of the Lutheran church.

God Bless You Don, Topper

Don’t they believe in the 8th Commandment. “Thou shalt NOT bear false witness against they neighbor”??? To accuse someone of something without ever seeking the TRUTH, is just that. God Bless. Memaw

 

[JonNC]

Don’t they believe in the 8th Commandment. “Thou shalt NOT bear false witness against they neighbor”??? To accuse someone of something without ever seeking the TRUTH, is just that. God Bless. Memaw

Of course we do, and so do Catholics, and violations of the 8th Commandment have happened back and forth since 1530. It isn’t an excuse. It isn’t right. It requires confession. But it is a fact.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Of course we do, and so do Catholics, and violations of the 8th Commandment have happened back and forth since 1530. It isn’t an excuse. It isn’t right. It requires confession. But it is a fact.

Jon

From The Small Catechism:

The Eighth Commandment.

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

What does this mean?–Answer.

We should fear and love God that we may not deceitfully belie, betray, slander, or defame our neighbor, but defend him, [think and] speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything.

To the extent that we Lutherans do not always act in accordance to God’s commandments, we ask forgiveness of our Catholic Christian siblings, and God Himself.
We look forward to the day that the condemnations between us are finally lifted in reconciliation and unity.

Jon

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Dispensation reception certainly took a toe hold in Lutheranism at least in the U.S. In-fact, the Dialogues address it in practice if not in doctrine. I’m sure any Lutheran can find congregations that still mix the consecrated with unconsecrated. That is why parishes should reserve the Sacrament near the altar.

The tabernacle in the photo is actually positioned in the stain glass window behind the altar but also visible on the outside of the church. I attended an installation of the pastor of Grace/ Teaneck years ago

Found a better photo of the tabernacle in the window

 

[Isaiah45_9]

From a Lutheran perspective, however, we do not consider ourselves outside the OHCAC, and the separation between us and the Bishop of Rome is two-way. So, we both need to seek forgiveness for our sad separation.

I have never denied fault on both sides.

However, you have to redefine things to be part of the OHCAC if you are not in communion with the Bishop of Rome.

First, from a Lutheran perspective, simply because there is a division between us does not mean we can believe in only an invisible Church. The Church is quite visible, in that it is found where the word is preached and the sacraments administered among the regenerate. So, the visible Church is found in your parish, and mine, and in others.

The visible Church needs to be one in order to have consistency of teaching. Women ordination, Homosexual marriage, Abortion, Infant Baptism, Real Presence Communion, and others.

If I have a problem and I have to take it to the Church, I should not be able to go to the one that is more convenient for my personal preferences. This Church needs to be one in regards to these things.

You are well informed and studied in the visible Church. This is not the norm.

As for Apostolicae Curae, which was directed at the Anglicans, that is a Vatican statement. The fact that we disagree as to what is “apostolic” (disagree in terms of ours, not yours since we accept yours)long before AC.

From a Catholic POV, yes. We disagree.

Even when it was directed to the Anglican communion. Form and Intent are applicable across the board.

If you mean it in the sense that division and schism is sin, yes, and it applies to both sides of the Tiber.

I already addressed this above.

On a minor point, the Catholic Catechism says, from a Catholic POV, “But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame.”
and
“However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities…”

If we cannot be charged with the sin of separation, why do we need a dispensation?

Jon

Are you in communion with the Bishop of Rome? No. Regardless of being charged with the divisional sin, you must have a dispensation from God in order to remain outside the Church.

Call it Sola Scriptura, for example - that is a prime example to a claim to dispensation. Because Scripture Alone gives you all you need outside the Church. Biggest claim of Sola Scriptura? Scriptures are the final rule and norm for the faithful - Not the Church - therefore, you have a dispensation to remain outside the Church.

So whatever you call it - that justifies a separation from the Church is a form of dispensation.

And if you don’t claim a dispensation, the you have to redefine what OHCAC is, like I previously said.

I know you have probably read, but for the benefit of read-only people, Dominus Iesus goes into what constitutes the Church and what constitutes the Salvific Mystery of Christ much better than I can ever do.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Hopefully we can build each others faith, I pray that happens.

I have some very dead Calvinist friend in RL. Most walked away when I became Catholic thou…

I pray our Faith is One, in echo of Christ’s prayer.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Recommendations for close personal relations summarized in the Lutheran-Catholic Dialogues:

The Church as Koinonia of Salvation: Its Structures and Ministries

1. We recommend that our churches recognize the real but imperfect communion among our ministers and encourage appropriate forms of pastoral collaboration between our ministries. Specifically, we propose:

that common activities among Lutheran and Roman Catholic bishops be promoted in order to signify the level of communion that exists between them, such as regular joint retreats, co-authored pastoral letters on topics of mutual concern, and joint efforts on matters of public good;

that mutual activities be intensified among ordained ministers, such as regular retreats, homily or sermon preparation study, participation in non-eucharistic prayer services and weddings, and common sponsorship of events or services in the life of the church, including as appropriate other leadership ministries;

that the faithful, in light of their common baptism into the people of God, engage together in catechesis, evangelization, peace and justice ventures, social ministry, and attendance at each other’s diocesan and synodical assemblies; and

that social ministry organizations, educational institutions, chaplaincies, and other church agencies engage together in activities that further the gospel and the common good.
usccb.org/beliefs-and-tea…-salvation.cfm

 

[JonNC]

=Isaiah45_9;11756895]I have never denied fault on both sides.

However, you have to redefine things to be part of the OHCAC if you are not in communion with the Bishop of Rome.

And of course, Jose, that would be the definition of those who are in communion with the Bishop of Rome, which is to be expected. Also to be expected is the belief by all of those not in communion with the Bishop of Rome, that said communion is not the exclusive way to be part of the OHCAC.

The visible Church needs to be one in order to have consistency of teaching. Women ordination, Homosexual marriage, Abortion, Infant Baptism, Real Presence Communion, and others.

If I have a problem and I have to take it to the Church, I should not be able to go to the one that is more convenient for my personal preferences. This Church needs to be one in regards to these things.

This, of course, would be the optimal way, the way Christ intended. Curiously, the ones you mentioned are ones we agree on.

Even when it was directed to the Anglican communion. Form and Intent are applicable across the board.

Again, the view of this is dependent on what communion one is in. OTOH, validity of orders seems easily reconciled between our communions

Are you in communion with the Bishop of Rome? No. Regardless of being charged with the divisional sin, you must have a dispensation from God in order to remain outside the Church.

While all of us being in communion is, again, optimal, being in communion with the Bishop of Rome is not the only way one is in the Church. Primarily, Baptism is how we are in the Church.

Call it Sola Scriptura, for example - that is a prime example to a claim to dispensation. Because Scripture Alone gives you all you need outside the Church. Biggest claim of Sola Scriptura? Scriptures are the final rule and norm for the faithful - Not the Church - therefore, you have a dispensation to remain outside the Church.

The notion that SS replaces the Church is inconsistent with Lutheran understanding, since it is the Church that practices sola scriptura, the practice of holding teachings, doctrines, etc. accountable. SS doesn’t happen without the Church.

So whatever you call it - that justifies a separation from the Church is a form of dispensation.

And if you don’t claim a dispensation, the you have to redefine what OHCAC is, like I previously said.

And I responded to this previously.

I know you have probably read, but for the benefit of read-only people, Dominus Iesus goes into what constitutes the Church and what constitutes the Salvific Mystery of Christ much better than I can ever do.

Thanks, and always a pleasure to dialogue with you, Jose.

Jon

 

[Isaiah45_9]

I have some very dead Calvinist friend in RL. Most walked away when I became Catholic thou…

I pray our Faith is One, in echo of Christ’s prayer.

A partial freudian slip , I meant to say “dear” Calvinist friends. Friendship with most, died. Sadly.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

And of course, Jose, that would be the definition of those who are in communion with the Bishop of Rome, which is to be expected. Also to be expected is the belief by all of those not in communion with the Bishop of Rome, that said communion is not the exclusive way to be part of the OHCAC.

It is for all the CAPS to be applied

This, of course, would be the optimal way, the way Christ intended. Curiously, the ones you mentioned are ones we agree on.

I know we do , but there are others that share your denomination that don’t. I know you are LCMS but they are still part of the LWF.

Again, the view of this is dependent on what communion one is in. OTOH, validity of orders seems easily reconciled between our communions

I know some Lutheran Pastors (Fr. Gregory Lockwood) have successfully entered into the Priesthood through the Pastoral Provision given by Blessed John Paul II, just like Episcopalian and Anglican Pastors have. But such validity is effected once in communion with the Holy See.

While all of us being in communion is, again, optimal, being in communion with the Bishop of Rome is not the only way one is in the Church. Primarily, Baptism is how we are in the Church.

And that is because it is what the Church was commanded to do under our Lord’s command in Matthew 28. As long as the Baptism has the form (Father, Son and Holy Spirit), matter (Water) and intent (Life in Christ) needed - it is valid.

The notion that SS replaces the Church is inconsistent with Lutheran understanding, since it is the Church that practices sola scriptura, the practice of holding teachings, doctrines, etc. accountable. SS doesn’t happen without the Church.

Jon, I hate to say this but…, even within Lutheranism you guys can’t agree on how to hold Scriptures accountable. You have many different “authorities”… ELCA does their own thing, LCMS does their own thing, WELS, ELdoNA (Just learned this one…) and neither can hold the other accountable. Where is the one Lutheran Church?

Thanks, and always a pleasure to dialogue with you, Jose.

Jon

Likewise, my friend.

 

[JonNC]

Jon, I hate to say this but…, even within Lutheranism you guys can’t agree on how to hold Scriptures accountable. You have many different “authorities”… ELCA does their own thing, LCMS does their own thing, WELS, ELdoNA (Just learned this one…) and neither can hold the other accountable. Where is the one Lutheran Church?

It isn’t that we practice SS differently, it usually has to do with the level of authority one puts into the confessions and scripture. Sadly, there are some who have decided that scripture and the confessions ought to be re-interpreted to meet current, modern cultural “norms”. The LCMS/ILC synods tend to believe the confessions because they agree with scripture (quia), as opposed to believing the confessions “in so far as” they agree with scripture (quatenus), ut the overall approach is the same, as set out in the Epitome of the Formula of Concord.
weedon.blogspot.com/2011/01/quia-quatenus.html

Jon

 

[EvangelCatholic]

It isn’t that we practice SS differently, it usually has to do with the level of authority one puts into the confessions and scripture. Sadly, there are some who have decided that scripture and the confessions ought to be re-interpreted to meet current, modern cultural “norms”. The LCMS/ILC synods tend to believe the confessions because they agree with scripture (quia), as opposed to believing the confessions “in so far as” they agree with scripture (quatenus), ut the overall approach is the same, as set out in the Epitome of the Formula of Concord.
weedon.blogspot.com/2011/01/quia-quatenus.html

Jon

Like Fr Weedon’s icon on Mary as the Burning Bush :angel1:

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Like Fr Weedon’s icon on Mary as the Burning Bush :angel1:

 

[Topper17]

Hi Isaiah,

Jon, I hate to say this but…, even within Lutheranism you guys can’t agree on how to hold Scriptures accountable. You have many different “authorities”… ELCA does their own thing, LCMS does their own thing, WELS, ELdoNA (Just learned this one…) and neither can hold the other accountable. Where is the one Lutheran Church?

Hi Jose,

I don’t think anyone really knows how many Lutheran denominations there are today. By ‘denominations’ I am referring to organizations which determine their doctrines independent of any other organization. You listed a few, but the actual number is surprisingly large, although it is hard to determine in any listing what is ‘independent’ and what is not. That being said, it is clear though that the divides within Lutheranism are deep and probably irreparable, which of course makes the task of dialogue very difficult for the Catholic Church. It also makes it difficult for Catholic Apologists. Sometimes I feel like I need some sort of ‘doctrinal scorecard’ with a summary of what the various denominations believe.

The mistake that we can make is to approach Lutheranism as if it were even somewhat unified. As I have learned, it is impossible to ask a question about what Lutheranism teaches, because nobody speaks for Lutheranism as a whole. If you ask about what the Formula of Concord says, the answer you will get will be from the perspective of the individual answering the question or from the perspective of some particular Lutheran denomination.

As an example, the LCMS seems to be pretty well represented here. Yet they only represent 2% of Lutheranism worldwide, 10% of American Lutherans, and only 0.1% of Christendom as a whole. While they can answer questions directed towards Lutheranism as a whole, they can only do so from their particular perspective. This is not to say that their opinions are not important. They are 2% of Lutheranism as a whole and so their opinions should be considered as such.

With this in mind, it is important to understand that, in reality, nobody speaks for Lutheranism. When you are looking for something other than a personal opinion or a denominational position, it can get rather frustrating. When you ask a question about what the Formula of Concord meant when it was written in the 16th century, it seems that that question ‘does not compute’. All you can do is take the documents literally and then compare that literal interpretation with the opinions offered. Only then will you be able to determine if those various denominations are really following their Confessions.

On a related note – Do you believe that Lutherans actually believe in Sola Scriptura?

God Bless You Isaiah, Topper