How do protestants explain the 1500 year gap.

[JonNC]

Possible to find Anglicans calling the deuteros correctly, over here.

GKC

While Lutherans typically call them Apocrypha, I prefer deuterocanon as it seems more precise, and frankly, accurate, given that other books not of the group of seven are also referred to as apocrypha.

Jon

 

[GKC]

While Lutherans typically call them Apocrypha, I prefer deuterocanon as it seems more precise, and frankly, accurate, given that other books not of the group of seven are also referred to as apocrypha.

Jon

True.

I grew up on M.R. James’ THE APOCRYPHAL NEW TESTAMENT (as well as on his superb antiquarian ghost stories), and long had the idea in hand that the Deuteros were OT, the Apocrypha, NT.

GKC

 

[rinnie]

You are correct, insofar as Lutherans consider the church catholic to be one (despite the corporate divisions that human sin has caused). But let’s correct some misinformation here.

Firstly, no Lutheran pastor is “self ordained;” we practice ordination and the laying on of hands by surrounding bishops (usually 5-10 surrounding ministers, not just 3 bishops as is common in Roman Catholicism). Secondly, if “validity” is based solely on Apostolic Succession, then we Lutherans would be an odd case for Rome to consider, since some Lutherans never ceased the traditional order and practice of Apostolic Succession. Though we know the likely answer, your communion has never ruled specifically on the validity of our priesthood.

CCC Apostolic Succession through the Sacrament of Holy Orders maintains the Concord of God’s Family.

The CCC next goes on to state it was the Apostolic College alone of which Peter was head that our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant.

So my question is if Lutherans never ceased the traditional order and practice of Apostolic Succession how can you be at odds with Rome?

 

[Publisher]

Protestants don’t explain the 150 year gap…there was none. God’s People have always been around…some of them organized a socio-political organization and began calling it the Church and self identified the human made organization through which the Church works through as the “Church” itself…The Catholic human organization of administration of the Catholic’s churches finances and property with it’s various officers is not “The Church”…the Church is made of those who are reborn through the Spirit to become the Children of God, and are found in any organization whether it be Friends, Methodists, Episcopaliasns or Catholic…

There is only one Church, and as we read back thru history we can see that many of the great saints happened to be Catholic…we have some great saints that served Christ faithfully and are recongnized as having a deeper faith and devotion than many Friends who just sit quietly each First Day.

The Church is made up of those various people who identify with a particular religious body…I am a Friend, most of you are Catholic, some Lutheran, others Pentacostal, but all are in Christ and members of His Church by faith in His finished work and walking in Newness of Life as the People of God…that is the Church…not the organization members of the Church have worked thru.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Protestants don’t explain the 150 year gap…there was none. God’s People have always been around…some of them organized a socio-political organization and began calling it the Church and self identified the human made organization through which the Church works through as the “Church” itself…The Catholic human organization of administration of the Catholic’s churches finances and property with it’s various officers is not “The Church”…the Church is made of those who are reborn through the Spirit to become the Children of God, and are found in any organization whether it be Friends, Methodists, Episcopaliasns or Catholic…

There is only one Church, and as we read back thru history we can see that many of the great saints happened to be Catholic…we have some great saints that served Christ faithfully and are recongnized as having a deeper faith and devotion than many Friends who just sit quietly each First Day.

The Church is made up of those various people who identify with a particular religious body…I am a Friend, most of you are Catholic, some Lutheran, others Pentacostal, but all are in Christ and members of His Church by faith in His finished work and walking in Newness of Life as the People of God…that is the Church…not the organization members of the Church have worked thru.

Nicely put. I like this. Although as I understand it Catholics believe theirs is the one true church. So there may be a different interpretation among parties as to the definition of the Church.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

What evidence do you have that they were ordained in apostolic succession?

Same evidence as any other church. That they were ordained by folks who were ordained by folks who were ordained by folks going all the way back to the apostles.

 

[Annie39]

Same evidence as any other church. That they were ordained by folks who were ordained by folks who were ordained by folks going all the way back to the apostles.

How far back can you trace your leader. I once traced my Bishop to the 1700’s but didn’t continue. I got busy with something else but it was very interesting. Do you deny that Martin Luther was not consecrated Bishop?

Annie

 

[EvangelCatholic]

How far back can you trace your leader. I once traced my Bishop to the 1700’s but didn’t continue. I got busy with something else but it was very interesting. Do you deny that Martin Luther was not consecrated Bishop?

Annie

Martin Luther was a priest never a bishop. Lutherans during the Reformation maintained apostolic succession except when a bishop refused to ordain Lutheran priests; this occurred primarily in Germany.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

How far back can you trace your leader. I once traced my Bishop to the 1700’s but didn’t continue. I got busy with something else but it was very interesting. Do you deny that Martin Luther was not consecrated Bishop?

Annie

95 percent of Roman Catholic bishops trace their lineage back to Cardinal Rebiba in the 1570s and no further. Doesn’t mean that it stops it’s just that the records are shoddy and poor from before then. I would be surprised if any Roman Catholic bishop could trace their linage to before that.

Martin Luther was not a bishop. But plenty of other Lutheran ministers were consecrated by bishops. Even so, presbyter ordination is valid ordination. Now, Lutheran bishops and presbyters continue to ordain in apostolic succession.

 

[benhur]

This was the real question I had in a previous thread that got derailed. Personally leaving my non denominational church and coming home to the Catholic Church if both had a solid answer from the bible I had to go with the catholic one because it was rooted in history such as the writings from the first three centuries after Christ.

When ever I show protestants of any kind writings such as the Didiache, polycarp, and ignatius of Antioch. They say “well false teachers were there from the beginning and I have the truth from the bible”. This had come from Lutherans to baptists

I don’t have problems with the earliest writings either. I find them very universal.at least for first hundred years.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

95 percent of Roman Catholic bishops trace their lineage back to Cardinal Rebiba in the 1570s and no further. Doesn’t mean that it stops it’s just that the records are shoddy and poor from before then. I would be surprised if any Roman Catholic bishop could trace their linage to before that.

Martin Luther was not a bishop. But plenty of other Lutheran ministers were consecrated by bishops. Even so, presbyter ordination is valid ordination. Now, Lutheran bishops and presbyters continue to ordain in apostolic succession.

Though presbyter ordinations are allowed, most Lutheran priests are ordained by a bishop in apostolic succession.

 

[Annie39]

95 percent of Roman Catholic bishops trace their lineage back to Cardinal Rebiba in the 1570s and no further. Doesn’t mean that it stops it’s just that the records are shoddy and poor from before then. I would be surprised if any Roman Catholic bishop could trace their linage to before that.

Martin Luther was not a bishop. But plenty of other Lutheran ministers were consecrated by bishops. Even so, presbyter ordination is valid ordination. Now, Lutheran bishops and presbyters continue to ordain in apostolic succession.

Presbyters cannot ordain only Bishops. If bishops who were validly consecrated (not ordained they were ordained as priests) in turn consecrated bishops then there would be valid orders for Lutherans. I have never heard that any Lutheran was validly consecrated. Can you furnish the name of even one Lutheran who was validly consecrated? Has this been investigated by the Holy See. Has it been varified? If so do you have this person’s or those people’s names?

Annie

 

[House_Harkonnen]

Presbyters cannot ordain only Bishops. If bishops who were validly consecrated (not ordained they were ordained as priests) in turn consecrated bishops then there would be valid orders for Lutherans. I have never heard that any Lutheran was validly consecrated. Can you furnish the name of even one Lutheran who was validly consecrated? Has this been investigated by the Holy See. Has it been varified? If so do you have this person’s or those people’s names?

Annie

Presbyters cannot ordain only Bishops.

Not true, even according to Roman Catholic teaching. Plenty of RC priests where presbyter ordained in the Middle Ages, especially those of religious orders.

I have never heard that any Lutheran was validly consecrated. Can you furnish the name of even one Lutheran who was validly consecrated?

The first Lutheran bishop George of Polentz.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_of_Polentz

He was validity consecrated by the Roman Catholic Curia, became Lutheran and continued to be a bishop in Apostolic Succession.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Presbyters cannot ordain only Bishops. If bishops who were validly consecrated (not ordained they were ordained as priests) in turn consecrated bishops then there would be valid orders for Lutherans. I have never heard that any Lutheran was validly consecrated. Can you furnish the name of even one Lutheran who was validly consecrated? Has this been investigated by the Holy See. Has it been varified? If so do you have this person’s or those people’s names?

Annie

You might want to consult the Holy See website for some of your questions regarding Lutheran ordination/ consecration.

The difference in the theological and ecclesiological evaluation of the episcopal office in historic succession loses its sharpness when Lutherans attribute such a value to the episcopate that regaining full communion in this office seems important and desirable, and when Catholics recognize that "the ministry in the Lutheran churches exercises essential functions of the ministry that Jesus Christ instituted in his church"269 and does not contest the point that the Lutheran churches are church.270 The difference in evaluating the historic episcopate is thereby interpreted in such a way that the doctrine of justification is no longer at stake and consequently it is also possible to advocate theologically the regaining of full communion in the episcopal.271

. This is true above all in regard to the specific formation of the ecclesial ministry of leadership (episkop�). The development of the ministry into an episcopate standing in a historic succession, i.e., the continuity of apostolic succession which occurred already very early in history250 was fully affirmed by the Lutheran Reformation and emphatically championed251 just as other church realities were affirmed and conserved which had come into being in the course of history (e.g. the biblical canon, the creeds of the ancient church). For Lutheran thinking too it is entirely possible to acknowledge that the historical development of an episcopate in a historic succession was not something purely within the sphere of history, set in motion only by sociological and political factors, but that it “has taken place with the help of the Holy Spirit” and that it “constitutes something essential for the church”.252
prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/l-rc/doc/e_l-rc_church4.html#4.2

Lutheran perspective:

Furthermore, they report having found
“serious defects in the arguments customarily used against the validity
of the Eucharistic ministry of the Evangelical-Lutheran churches”,
and add that they “see no persuasive reason to deny the possibility of
the Roman Catholic Church recognising the validity of this ministry”.
The Roman Catholic dialogue group then appeals to the authorities
of their church to “recognise the validity of the Evangelical-Lutheran
ministry and, correspondingly, the presence of the body and blood
of Jesus Christ in the Eucharistic celebrations of the Evangelical-Lutheran
churches”.49
koed.hu/vocation/johngeorge.pdf

 

[Annie39]

Not true, even according to Roman Catholic teaching. Plenty of RC priests where presbyter ordained in the Middle Ages, especially those of religious orders.

The first Lutheran bishop George of Polentz.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_of_Polentz

He was validity consecrated by the Roman Catholic Curia, became Lutheran and continued to be a bishop in Apostolic Succession.

His successor was Joachim Mörlin (April 5, 1514 – May 29, 1571) was a Lutheran theologian and an important figure in the controversies following Martin Luther’s death.

I could find no reference to him being referred to as a Bishop. I found a reference that referred to him as Doctor Mörlin. Do you have evidence that he was consecrated bishop?

 

[EvangelCatholic]

His successor was Joachim Mörlin (April 5, 1514 – May 29, 1571) was a Lutheran theologian and an important figure in the controversies following Martin Luther’s death.

I could find no reference to him being referred to as a Bishop. I found a reference that referred to him as Doctor Mörlin. Do you have evidence that he was consecrated bishop?

More food for thought:

1. The Roman Catholic Church has preserved the succession of episcopal consecrations; this succession was broken in continental Lutheranism, maintained in parts of Nordic Lutheranism, and has been reclaimed by the ELCA. What is the significance of either preserving or breaking this succession? That question must not be isolated and made to bear the entire weight of a judgment on a church’s ministry. Whether a particular minister or church serves the church’s apostolic mission does not depend only upon the presence of such a succession of episcopal consecrations, as if its absence would negate the apostolicity of the church’s teaching and mission.135 Recent ecumenical discussions of episcopacy and succession do not remove our former disagreements, but they do place them in a richer and more complex context in which judgments made exclusively on the basis of the presence or absence of a succession of consecrations are less possible.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

His successor was Joachim Mörlin (April 5, 1514 – May 29, 1571) was a Lutheran theologian and an important figure in the controversies following Martin Luther’s death.

I could find no reference to him being referred to as a Bishop. I found a reference that referred to him as Doctor Mörlin. Do you have evidence that he was consecrated bishop?

Though offered the bishopric of Samland, and though urged by clergy and laity alike to remain in Prussia, Mörlin still felt bound to Brunswick. Accordingly, promised by the estates (June 8, 1567) that no Calvinists should be allowed at court, he returned to Brunswick. But his stay there was brief, and he was unexpectedly released. Learning that a patricide had been let go free, both he and Chemmtz sharply upbraided the magistracy in a sermon on July 13, and were cited to appear before the court. Under these circumstances the envoys of Albert succeeded in inducing the council, unwilling though it was even then, to let Mörlin go (Sept. 24, 1567). **He was now declared bishop of Samland, while Chemnitz was made superintendent. **Henceforth until his death, in his new office, he was active in preaching and catechizing, never ceasing to polemize against Philippists, Synergists, and, above all, Calvinists. He died, aged 57, in Königsberg.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joachim_Mörlin
*

 

[Annie39]

Though offered the bishopric of Samland, and though urged by clergy and laity alike to remain in Prussia, Mörlin still felt bound to Brunswick. Accordingly, promised by the estates (June 8, 1567) that no Calvinists should be allowed at court, he returned to Brunswick. But his stay there was brief, and he was unexpectedly released. Learning that a patricide had been let go free, both he and Chemmtz sharply upbraided the magistracy in a sermon on July 13, and were cited to appear before the court. Under these circumstances the envoys of Albert succeeded in inducing the council, unwilling though it was even then, to let Mörlin go (Sept. 24, 1567). **He was now declared bishop of Samland, while Chemnitz was made superintendent. ***Henceforth until his death, in his new office, he was active in preaching and catechizing, never ceasing to polemize against Philippists, Synergists, and, above all, Calvinists. He died, aged 57, in Königsberg.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joachim_Mörlin

It says that he was declared Bishop. It says nothing about his consecration by the Bishop with valid orders. BTW I also found that the Cathoic Church does not recognize Lutheran orders. At one time I saw a man being interviewed on TV who was called “Bishop” something or other. He was a pentacostal preacher. Only a Bishop can consecrate another Bishop. Only a Bishop can ordain a Priest. Bishops have authority over their Priests who serve at the pleasure of the Bishop and that Bishop can laicize a priest.

Annie

 

[EvangelCatholic]

It says that he was declared Bishop. It says nothing about his consecration by the Bishop with valid orders. BTW I also found that the Cathoic Church does not recognize Lutheran orders. At one time I saw a man being interviewed on TV who was called “Bishop” something or other. He was a pentacostal preacher. Only a Bishop can consecrate another Bishop. Only a Bishop can ordain a Priest. Bishops have authority over their Priests who serve at the pleasure of the Bishop and that Bishop can laicize a priest.

Annie

Evidently you are selective in what you read with the result that your understanding of Lutherans is flawed. Your choice but it makes it sort of pointless to debate with you.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

It says that he was declared Bishop. It says nothing about his consecration by the Bishop with valid orders. BTW I also found that the Cathoic Church does not recognize Lutheran orders. At one time I saw a man being interviewed on TV who was called “Bishop” something or other. He was a pentacostal preacher. Only a Bishop can consecrate another Bishop. Only a Bishop can ordain a Priest. Bishops have authority over their Priests who serve at the pleasure of the Bishop and that Bishop can laicize a priest.

Annie

It says that he was declared Bishop. It says nothing about his consecration by the Bishop with valid orders.

Why would they appoint someone who wasn’t ordained?

BTW I also found that the Cathoic Church does not recognize Lutheran orders.

So?

Only a Bishop can consecrate another Bishop.

Not true and ahistorical. Congregational election and appointment of bishops was widely practiced in the early church, and the Didache even advises it. Appointment of bishops by the Curia or Patriarchs took a few centuries to develop and solidify. Certainly bishops and presbyters were elected and appointed by different means throughout church history. In this the Lutheran system is consistent with the practice of the early church.

Only a Bishop can ordain a Priest.

Again not true and ahistorical. Presbyter ordinations were widely practiced in religious orders in the Middle Ages. Lutherans generally allow bishops to ordain, but presbyter ordination is valid as well per the practice in the Middle Ages. Therefore Lutheran practice is consistent with church history and tradition.