I have a question: How are protestants doing without the Pope?

[guanophore]

No John, the CC stil One Church. She is not divided. I am talking about the protestant system.

I think you are missing Jon’s point, wisdom. Our Protestant brethren are members of the OHCAC, though improperly joined. The lack of unity with the successor of Peter constitutes a major element of that improper joining. This causes division in the Body.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I think you are missing Jon’s point, wisdom. Our Protestant brethren are members of the OHCAC, though improperly joined. The lack of unity with the successor of Peter constitutes a major element of that improper joining. This causes division in the Body.

I think that they are not members of the CC. if that is so than they are Catholics which they are not.

 

[Tony888]

Wisdomseeker
Please explain the real world discrepency between your vision of a united CC church and the reality.

Stop painting everyone with just **black and white, **it’s not polite.

The teachings of Christ in the bible are self evident - love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself

‘They’ don’t claim Catholics don’t understand the bible

Catholics don’t even agree on what the bible says completely SHOCK

This is so NOT TRUE!
Pew Research shows the majority of US Catholics disagree with ‘the mind of Church’ on key issues of doctrine.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Wisdomseeker
Please explain the real world discrepency between your vision of a united CC church and the reality.

Explain what you mean by that.

 

[guanophore]

It did not split. the CC is stil One Holy Church. No matter how much protestants try this it does not work. the Teachings of the CC still the same. those who left did nothing with the teachings of the Holy Church of God. So, those who left could not and did nothing that could split the Church. all you did was creating a sect among yourselves.
if you think that the Church is split because of protestants, we could say that the Church was split right in the beginning since so many did as you all did. instead we had our Fathers and Saints arguing with them and affirming the Holy Church.

I think Brian is referring to the Great Schism, which is most certainly a split between East and West. This happened 600 years before the Protestant reformation. He is incorrect to say, though, that the East did not have patriarchs, because they do, or that there is not disunity, as there is. The difference is that it is not so much doctrinal as it is linguistic, cultural, and political. From the Eastern perspective, the Western Church has continued to “create dogmas” (heresies) making it impossible to reunify unless these dogmas are abandoned. They view the Latin Church as “protestant”, and it is no surprise to them that we have created thousands of errant Protestant fruits as a result.

 

[Tony888]

Explain what you mean by that.

I want you to explain yourself

You indicated Protestants can’t understand the teachings of Christ?

But do they know the Teachings of Christ. How are they to teach what they do not know?

Where do Protestants claim Catholics can’t understand the bible?

they claim to understand the Bible and Catholic Church does not

How do you claim the below and reconcile research showings Catholics do not “think with a mind of the Church” since significant qty of Catholics disagree on key articles like Transubstantiation, homosexuality, women priests.

We think with the mind of Church, we read the Bible with the mind of the Church. Our conscience is formed by the Church. this is not an insulting but a joy to all Catholics.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I want you to explain yourself

You indicated Protestants can’t understand the teachings of Christ?

Where do Protestants claim Catholics can’t understand the bible?

How do you claim the below and reconcile research showings Catholics do not “think with a mind of the Church” since significant qty of Catholics disagree on key articles like Transubstantiation, homosexuality, women priests.

I must say this, the greatest miscommunication between protestants and Catholics is that Catholics speaks of Teachings and protetants speaks i believe.

If protestants underestands the Teachings of Christ than the CC doesnt because the CC says one Thing and protestant says a different thing about the same God.

which is it?

 

[fhansen]

How do you claim the below and reconcile research showings Catholics do not “think with a mind of the Church” since significant qty of Catholics disagree on key articles like Transubstantiation, homosexuality, women priests.

In the end it doesn’t matter what Catholics think or believe-although it’d be best, of course if we all agreed, if we were all one with the sensus fidelium. What is important is that Catholic doctrine presents a unified whole. What we do with that gift is up to us.

 

[Conor7]

I must say this, the greatest miscommunication between protestants and Catholics is that Catholics speaks of Teachings and protetants speaks i believe.

If protestants underestands the Teachings of Christ than the CC doesnt because the CC says one Thing and protestant says a different thing about the same God.

which is it?

This thread should be closed. Wisdomseeker, I may be wrong, but I suspect that you started this thread in an effort to denigrate Protestants because you thought we would all fall on our knees with our faces in our palms and confess (in your mind) the error of our ways.

You ask, ad nauseam, how we are doing with out the Pope, but continue to be unsatisfied when we reply that we’re doing just fine. The Pope does not hold the same authority to us as he does to you, and at best he is irrelevant.

 

[wisdomseeker]

This thread should be closed. Wisdomseeker, I may be wrong, but I suspect that you started this thread in an effort to denigrate Protestants because you thought we would all fall on our knees with our faces in our palms and confess (in your mind) the error of our ways.

You ask, ad nauseam, how we are doing with out the Pope, but continue to be unsatisfied when we reply that we’re doing just fine. The Pope does not hold the same authority to us as he does to you, and at best he is irrelevant.

Yeah. I suspect when called into questions your beliefs, the only thing you can do is run.

the Pope is irrelevant to you but is he irrelevant to Christ? this is a question that you all should be asking each other.

 

[Conor7]

Yeah. I suspect when called into questions your beliefs, the only thing you can do is run.

the Pope is irrelevant to you but is he irrelevant to Christ? this is a question that you all should be asking each other.

I wished I had ran, instead I am ashamed of the part I’ve played in contributing to this nonsense.

In an effort to redeem myself and this thread I will list for you why I do not afford the Pope the same respect as you.

I don’t believe in Papal infallibility. If you want to argue that the true authority derives from the Magesterium, then I may be able to get on aboard with that. But as the Papacy stands currently, I can’t in good conscience subscribe to that.

Don’t misunderstand, I’m not some anti-Papal zealot. I respect the Pope, well, I respect the position of the Pope. The current Pope, I could take or leave-- but that’s for personal reasons and are based neither in my current understanding of scripture nor tradition.

Additionally, I don’t afford the Pope the same respect as you simply because I was not born into the Catholic faith. Yes, I have made leaps in that direction. My current Episcopal church is far more “catholic” than the Pentecostal church of my upbringing.

I tend to think of the Pope, as another poster on this thread has mentioned previously, in much the same way as the ancient church.

 

[JonNC]

=ThereWasADream;8645859]…Yes, and so we can believe whatever we like as long as it’s irrelevant to salvation. Everything else has, more or less, some teaching about it. I really don’t know enough about Lutherans to say more, but from what I heard from a few, they felt that their Church said they could interpret the Bible personally like most other protestant denominations. Now, I know enough about poorly catechized Catholics to know that I may have just met a bunch of “crummy” Lutherans, so I’ll give you benefit of the doubt. It has little relevance to the point I was making - that most protestant denominations allow for a mostly free interpretation of the Bible, except for a few basic tenets that all christians believe, and then a few more besides that set them apart from the other denominations. For example, the Church of the Brethren = Apostle’s Creed + nonviolence and simple living. That’s it.

I wouldn’t say “cummy”, but certainly poorly catechized. I will admit, to the point, that Lutherans are rather doctrinal, when compared to non-denom evangelical types.

So you believe the Pope is the successor of Peter?

In a manner of speaking, a general sense, yes. But I would place the kind of claims regarding that that Cathoicism does. I don’t think it is necessary to be in communion with the Bishop of Rome to be Christian. I don’t believe not being in communion with him is detrimental to my chances of everlasting life.

Jon

 

[wisdomseeker]

I wished I had ran, instead I am ashamed of the part I’ve played in contributing to this nonsense.

In an effort to redeem myself and this thread I will list for you why I do not afford the Pope the same respect as you.

I don’t believe in Papal infallibility. If you want to argue that the true authority derives from the Magesterium, then I may be able to get on aboard with that. But as the Papacy stands currently, I can’t in good conscience subscribe to that.

Don’t misunderstand, I’m not some anti-Papal zealot. I respect the Pope, well, I respect the position of the Pope. The current Pope, I could take or leave-- but that’s for personal reasons and are based neither in my current understanding of scripture nor tradition.

Additionally, I don’t afford the Pope the same respect as you simply because I was not born into the Catholic faith. Yes, I have made leaps in that direction. My current Episcopal church is far more “catholic” than the Pentecostal church of my upbringing.

I tend to think of the Pope, as another poster on this thread has mentioned previously, in much the same way as the ancient church.

You mean this ancient Church?

Council of Sardica

“*f any bishop loses the judgment in some case [decided by his fellow bishops] and still believes that he has not a bad but a good case, in order that the case may be judged anew . . . let us honor the memory of the apostle Peter by having those who have given the judgment write to Julius, Bishop of Rome, so that if it seem proper he may himself send arbiters and the judgment may be made again by the bishops of a neighboring province” (canon 3 [A.D. 342]).

"f some bishop be deposed by the judgment of the bishops sitting in the neighborhood, and if he declare that he will seek further redress, another should not be appointed to his see until the bishop of Rome can be acquainted with the case and render a judgment" (canon 4).*

 

[Tony888]

Wisdomseeker,
You need to do better than this strawman argument (the OP)

Yeah. I suspect when called into questions your beliefs, the only thing you can do is run.

the Pope is irrelevant to you but is he irrelevant to Christ? this is a question that you all should be asking each other.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I wished I had ran, instead I am ashamed of the part I’ve played in contributing to this nonsense.

In an effort to redeem myself and this thread I will list for you why I do not afford the Pope the same respect as you.

I don’t believe in Papal infallibility. If you want to argue that the true authority derives from the Magesterium, then I may be able to get on aboard with that. But as the Papacy stands currently, I can’t in good conscience subscribe to that.

Don’t misunderstand, I’m not some anti-Papal zealot. I respect the Pope, well, I respect the position of the Pope. The current Pope, I could take or leave-- but that’s for personal reasons and are based neither in my current understanding of scripture nor tradition.

Additionally, I don’t afford the Pope the same respect as you simply because I was not born into the Catholic faith. Yes, I have made leaps in that direction. My current Episcopal church is far more “catholic” than the Pentecostal church of my upbringing.

I tend to think of the Pope, as another poster on this thread has mentioned previously, in much the same way as the ancient church.

This one?

Synod of Ambrose

“We recognize in the letter of your holiness [Pope Siricius] the vigilance of the good shepherd. You faithfully watch over the gate entrusted to you, and with pious care you guard Christ’s sheepfold [John 10:7ff], you that are worthy to have the Lord’s sheep hear and follow you” (Synodal Letter to Pope Siricius [A.D. 389]).

 

[wisdomseeker]

I wished I had ran, instead I am ashamed of the part I’ve played in contributing to this nonsense.

In an effort to redeem myself and this thread I will list for you why I do not afford the Pope the same respect as you.

I don’t believe in Papal infallibility. If you want to argue that the true authority derives from the Magesterium, then I may be able to get on aboard with that. But as the Papacy stands currently, I can’t in good conscience subscribe to that.

Don’t misunderstand, I’m not some anti-Papal zealot. I respect the Pope, well, I respect the position of the Pope. The current Pope, I could take or leave-- but that’s for personal reasons and are based neither in my current understanding of scripture nor tradition.

Additionally, I don’t afford the Pope the same respect as you simply because I was not born into the Catholic faith. Yes, I have made leaps in that direction. My current Episcopal church is far more “catholic” than the Pentecostal church of my upbringing.

I tend to think of the Pope, as another poster on this thread has mentioned previously, in much the same way as the ancient church.

Or this one?

Jerome

“I follow no leader but Christ and join in communion with none but your blessedness [Pope Damasus I], that is, with the chair of Peter. I know that this is the rock on which the Church has been built. Whoever eats the Lamb outside this house is profane. Anyone who is not in the ark of Noah will perish when the flood prevails” (Letters 15:2 [A.D. 396]).

“The church here is split into three parts, each eager to seize me for its own. . . . Meanwhile I keep crying, ‘He that is joined to the chair of Peter is accepted by me!’ . . . Therefore, I implore your blessedness [Pope Damasus I] . . . tell me by letter with whom it is that I should communicate in Syria” (ibid., 16:2).

 

[wisdomseeker]

I wished I had ran, instead I am ashamed of the part I’ve played in contributing to this nonsense.

In an effort to redeem myself and this thread I will list for you why I do not afford the Pope the same respect as you.

I don’t believe in Papal infallibility. If you want to argue that the true authority derives from the Magesterium, then I may be able to get on aboard with that. But as the Papacy stands currently, I can’t in good conscience subscribe to that.

Don’t misunderstand, I’m not some anti-Papal zealot. I respect the Pope, well, I respect the position of the Pope. The current Pope, I could take or leave-- but that’s for personal reasons and are based neither in my current understanding of scripture nor tradition.

Additionally, I don’t afford the Pope the same respect as you simply because I was not born into the Catholic faith. Yes, I have made leaps in that direction. My current Episcopal church is far more “catholic” than the Pentecostal church of my upbringing.

I tend to think of the Pope, as another poster on this thread has mentioned previously, in much the same way as the ancient church.

Maybe this one?

Peter Chrysologus

“We exhort you in every respect, honorable brother, to heed obediently what has been written by the most blessed pope of the city of Rome, for blessed Peter, who lives and presides in his own see, provides the truth of faith to those who seek it. For we, by reason of our pursuit of peace and faith, cannot try cases on the faith without the consent of the bishop of Rome” (Letters 25:2 [A.D. 449]).

 

[JonNC]

And my question is: how are they doing without the Pope?

I think that, in the best of all possible situations, being in communion with the Bishop of Rome would be a good thing. There are issues of doctrine, however, that need to be resolved for this to happen. Pan-Lutheranism, has struggled in recent years with the influences on the one hand, and protestantism on the other. I’ve often complained to my pastor about the problems with the rather congregationalist polity of my synod, so I can see the value of a hierarchy, though it, obviously, has had its problems too.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

I think that they are not members of the CC. if that is so than they are Catholics which they are not.

Actually, in a way, the CC says we are, via our baptism. Additionally, it says the “ecclesial groups” are used by the Spirit, that we have elements of truth that come through the CC. Am I a member of the CC, in communion with the Bishop of Rome? No. Am I part of the OHCAC via my baptism? Absolutely.

Jon

 

[Conor7]

I think that, in the best of all possible situations, being in communion with the Bishop of Rome would be a good thing. There are issues of doctrine, however, that need to be resolved for this to happen. Pan-Lutheranism, has struggled in recent years with the influences on the one hand, and protestantism on the other. I’ve often complained to my pastor about the problems with the rather congregationalist polity of my synod, so I can see the value of a hierarchy, though it, obviously, has had its problems too.

Jon

I would like to elaborate on your point, Jon, for the sake of the original poster.

There seems to be a prevalent thought that Protestants should be seeking reunification with Rome. Work is being done are Protestants’ part for the sake of reunification and these organizations are doing the best they can while their opposition to certain Catholic doctrines are being investigated.

Protestant groups are seeking reunification with one another until these doctrinal disagreements with Rome can be reconciled.

It appears that you are a Missouri Synod Lutheran, Jon, but the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America and the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America celebrated 10 years of being in full communion with each other this year.

So it appears that these churches one might consider (for lack of a better term) close cousins to the Catholic Church are reconciling and seeking reunification with each other, and perhaps even preparing for a reunification with Rome. Although, I think it unlikely in my lifetime.