How do protestants explain the 1500 year gap.

[JonNC]

I’ll give you one small example: Luther changed the creed:

From your link above:
The Third Article.

Of Sanctification.

I believe in the Holy Ghost; one holy Christian Church, the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen.

And from the same source, in all three creeds, the term “catholic” is used.
I prefer the use of the term “catholic”, but I don’t believe the use of the term Christian changes anything.

Jon

 

[Lek]

I appreciate the discussion guys. You made some strong points. Maybe I’ll open another thread about sola scriptura, but I’ve got to go for a few days. Thanks.

 

[Novocastrian]

Yes, until the Church was taken over by the Monarchy of England. At which point it became invalid. We don’t believe in caesaropapism.

Just papal-caesarism? Papal States, long-term use of the Donation of Constantine, etc. Don’t get me wrong, you can criticise the Church of England for a lot of things, but caesaropapism seems like a stone thrown within a glasshouse…

 

[EvangelCatholic]

What is false about what the Augsburg Confession says here?

**Article XXI: Of the Worship of the Saints.

1] Of the Worship of Saints they teach that the memory of saints may be set before us, that we may follow their faith and good works, according to our calling, as the Emperor may follow the example of David in making war to drive away the Turk from his country. 2] For both are kings. But the Scripture teaches not the invocation of saints or to ask help of saints, since it sets before us the one Christ as the Mediator, Propitiation, High Priest, and Intercessor. 3] He is to be prayed to, and has promised that He will hear our prayer; and this worship He approves above all, to wit, that in all afflictions He be called upon, 1 John 2:1: 4] If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, etc.
We believe that Christ has ONE Body; not one on earth and one in Heaven.
The saints in Heaven are not dead, and not devoid of love and concern for us here on earth.
We CAN ask them to pray with us, and since they are cleansed of sin and all propensity to sin (which we are not, fully), their prayers are efficacious.

You see, this is what the Church has always meant by the line in the Apostles’ Creed:
I believe in the holy catholic church: the communion of saints:
(notice how close the belief in the “holy catholic church” is tied into the belief in the “communion of saints”)

If you re-define the terms then you can try to lay claim to the creed. But you deny the beliefs espoused therein. **

Jon

Jon, I think for Catholics the Augsburg Confession is a little confusing and even for Lutherans when it states we can ask the saints to pray for us but that the Bible states that Christ is the one Mediator.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

And from the same source, in all three creeds, the term “catholic” is used.
I prefer the use of the term “catholic”, but I don’t believe the use of the term Christian changes anything.

Jon

Words mean things.

I cut and pasted directly from the document.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Just papal-caesarism? Papal States, long-term use of the Donation of Constantine, etc. Don’t get me wrong, you can criticise the Church of England for a lot of things, but caesaropapism seems like a stone thrown within a glasshouse…

That’s funny. The Papal States were initiated as a reaction to caesaropapism, as a way to make the Holy See less subject to force from secular rulers.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Yet the Apostles’ Creed is part of these confessions, and it uses the word ‘catholic.’.

So, in SOME places it alters the ancient creed; in others it doesn’t.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Originally Posted by joe371 View Post
Just curious: I know why the east-west schism occurred. Why did the Church of Norway, founded in 995, break away from the Catholic Church?

Do you think it’s acceptable to break away from the Church that was begun by Christ for political reasons?

 

[EvangelCatholic]

So, in SOME places it alters the ancient creed; in others it doesn’t.

Lutherans adhere to the 3 ecumenical creeds that use the term 'Catholic" in all of them. When using the word “Christian” Luther and others were merely attempting to designate universal in order to avoid confusion with Roman Catholic. Yes, there have been some Lutherans who seized on this to eliminate the word ‘Catholic’ in the liturgy and catechism but they readily admit to accepting ‘Catholic’ as the norm for universal Church.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

I’m addressing this to both Joe and Isaiah. We all agree that the early church possessed all the knowledge and understanding that God required of them to be saved. I think we can also agree that numerous doctrines such as the trinity, although true at that time as they always were throughout eternity, had not been formulated by the church at the time. Obviously, a knowledge of and belief in these doctrines was not necessary for an individual christian to obtain salvation. Do you believe that Catholic person today who studies the scripture and prays for the guidance of the Holy Spirit and believes differently can be saved? What if that person believes that rather than “three divine persons in one God”, that it is “one God manifesting himself in three different ways?” How would this fit in with the following verses from scripture?

Romans 10:9-10English Standard Version (ESV)

9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.

As far as the doctrine of sola scriptura not being embraced officially by the reformers until the 1500s - the doctrine of the immaculate conception was formally embraced by the catholic church in 1854.

Those doctrines were not known definitively at the time of the Apostles.
Now they are.

Joh 15:22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin.

We’re not responsible for what we do not and can not know. We are responsible for what we should and do know.

We know them because they were decided by the Church.

1Ti 3:15 if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Lutherans adhere to the 3 ecumenical creeds that use the term 'Catholic" in all of them. When using the word “Christian” Luther and others were merely attempting to designate universal in order to avoid confusion with Roman Catholic. Yes, there have been some Lutherans who seized on this to eliminate the word ‘Catholic’ in the liturgy and catechism but they readily admit to accepting ‘Catholic’ as the norm for universal Church.

And, as I said above, we can agree on the language while disagreeing on the meaning of the language. If you re-define words, we are still in disagreement even if we use the very same words.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Yet the Apostles’ Creed is part of these confessions, and it uses the word ‘catholic.’

It is perfectly true that Scripture doesn’t teach invocation directly, and no exegete – neither Catholic nor ‘Protestant’ – would disagree. But I can assure you that Lutherans believe the saints are praying for us.

Is this belief supported by those documents, or is it held despite those documents?

 

[Novocastrian]

That’s funny. The Papal States were initiated as a reaction to caesaropapism, as a way to make the Holy See less subject to force from secular rulers.

And the result was that the Pope became a secular ruler, as much an Italian prince as Bishop of Rome.

 

[KjetilK]

It’s great that Lutherans believe in something true, as opposed to their catechism.
But there’s still the problem of what the small catechism teaches, which we apparently agree is false.

It is only false if you can prove that he meant ‘non-catholic’ by ‘Christian.’ It should be noted that he put the Apostles’ Creed above almost anything else.

 

[KjetilK]

Yes, until the Church was taken over by the Monarchy of England. At which point it became invalid. We don’t believe in caesaropapism.

Rome approved the appointment of Thomas Cranmer as Archbishop of Canterbury.

 

[KjetilK]

Do you think it’s acceptable to break away from the Church that was begun by Christ for political reasons?

I guess you should ask that to the Orthodox. It seems that you do not distinguish between something being valid and something being licit. You cannot say that separating from Rome for political reasons is invalid while still claiming that the Eastern Orthodox Churches remain valid, yet illicit.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

I guess you should ask that to the Orthodox.

I asked you.

Why do you keep insisting on introducing the same red herring?

It seems that you do not distinguish between something being valid and something being licit.

I’m asking whether or not it is against’ Christ’s will.

You cannot say that separating from Rome for political reasons is invalid while still claiming that the Eastern Orthodox Churches remain valid, yet illicit.

Where have I said it is valid?
Their sacraments might be valid but illicit, but that says nothing about the act of separation.

 

[KjetilK]

Is this belief supported by those documents, or is it held despite those documents?

In the Apology or Defense of Confessio Augustana (Apol.), Philip Melanchthon points out that both the Saints and the Angels pray for us, yet that doesn’t mean that they are to be invoked (see XXI:8ffApol.). Note that they do not here, nor in XXIConfessio Augustana, state that you cannot invoke saints, but that this cannot be certain and thus cannot be laid upon the conscience of the faithful ( XXI:10-13Apol.).

It is also important to note that these things aren’t certain. They are constantly arguing on the basis of Scripture, and they are holding up Scripture as the ultimate norm, ‘the norm that norms (but which cannot itself be normed)’ (norma normans or norma normans non normata). Tradition, especially the creeds, are defined as ‘the norms which can be normed by (nothing more than) Scripture’ (norma normata). See here.

That means that if a case can be made, from Scripture, that we can, or should, invoke the saints for prayer, then that trumps the testimony of both Confessio Augustana and its Apology. I happen to believe that such a case can be made. The best examples, in my opinion, are found in the Revelation of John: “And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.” (5:8) “And another angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God.” (8:3-4)

The point is anyway that the confessions do not say that invocation is idolatry or wrong per se, but only that it shouldn’t be forced. And their argument is furthermore based on Scripture and would be changed should they be convinced otherwise, from Scripture.

 

[KjetilK]

Where have I said it is valid?
Their sacraments might be valid but illicit, but that says nothing about the act of separation.

Does Rome say that they are invalid? Does Rome call them ‘ecclesial communities’?

 

[JonNC]

Words mean things.

I cut and pasted directly from the document.

So can I.

The Three Ecumenical or Universal Creeds

The Apostles’ Creed

I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.

And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy catholic* Church, the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen.

The Nicene Creed

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified; who spake by the Prophets. And I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

The Athanasian Creed

Written against the Arians.

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.

And the catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three Eternals, but one Eternal. As there are not three Uncreated nor three Incomprehensibles, but one Uncreated and one Incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords, but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords.

The Father is made of none: neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before or after other; none is greater or less than another; But the whole three Persons are coeternal together, and coequal: so that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshiped. He, therefore, that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe faithfully the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right faith is, that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man of the substance of His mother, born in the world; Perfect God and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood; Who, although He be God and Man, yet He is not two, but one Christ: One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking the manhood into God; One altogether; not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation; descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead; He ascended into heaven; He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty; from whence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give an account of their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire.

This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.

In all cases, the word “catholic” is used. Words mean things, and “catholic”, whether capitalized or not, does not mean only and exclusively those in communion with the Bishop of Rome.

Jon