LCUM teaches the Pope is the Antichrist?

[ac_claire]

I just read on wiki that the LCMS considers the pope to be the Antichrist as a matter of doctine. This is suprising, as I always figured the LCMS was one of the more reasonable Protestant sects.

Here’s the quote from Wikipedia:

Confessional Lutheran church bodies, such as the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, the Evangelical Lutheran Synod and the Church of the Lutheran Confession teach that the Roman papacy or office of the pope is the Antichrist, including this article of faith as part of a quiarather than quatenus subscription to the Book of Concord. In 1932 the LCMS adopted A Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod.

Now we all know that Wiki isn’t infallible, so…Lutherans, can anyone tell me if this is really true?

Thanks and God bless

 

[Dauphin]

It had better be true, or else Lutherans would be rebelling not only against the true Church, but against their own prophet. What an utterly rootless faith that would be, if it rebels even against the teaching of the original rebel!

 

[workingman]

I just read on wiki that the LCMS considers the pope to be the Antichrist as a matter of doctine. This is suprising, as I always figured the LCMS was one of the more reasonable Protestant sects.

Here’s the quote from Wikipedia:

Now we all know that Wiki isn’t infallible, so…Lutherans, can anyone tell me if this is really true?

Thanks and God bless

From the book of Concordia the Lutheran confessions. section power and primacy of the Pope.

1. The Roman pontiff claims for him self that he is supreme above all bishops and pastors by divine right.
2. Second, he adds that by divine right he has both swords, that is, the authority also to enthrone and depose kings, regulate dominions, and such.
3. Third, he says that to believe this is necessary for salvation. For these reasons, the Roman bishop calls himself the vicar of Christ on earth.
4. These three articles we hold to be false, godless, tyrannical, and destructive to the Church.

This is off the first page of this section. There are also wood cuts that defer to the Pope as the anti-Christ. For a more complete reading you can google the triglota book of concord and down load a pdf of the whole book.

here is the link concordialutheranconf.com/doctrine/trig.pdf

 

[ac_claire]

It had better be true, or else Lutherans would be rebelling not only against the true Church, but against their own prophet. What an utterly rootless faith that would be, if it rebels even against the teaching of the original rebel!

I suppose you’re right.
I’ve been listening to The Lutheran Hour- it comes on our local station on Sunday mornings, and I guess I just thought they were a more relatively orthodox denomination. But obviously I never gave it much thought.

Workingman, thanks for the info. I read your other thread btw and wanted you to know I’ll be praying for you today at Mass. Preservere; keep praying and searching for the Truth and God will lead you there.

 

[workingman]

I suppose you’re right.
I’ve been listening to The Lutheran Hour- it comes on our local station on Sunday mornings, and I guess I just thought they were a more relatively orthodox denomination. But obviously I never gave it much thought.

Workingman, thanks for the info. I read your other thread btw and wanted you to know I’ll be praying for you today at Mass. Preservere; keep praying and searching for the Truth and God will lead you there.

The linked websight can answer a lot of questtions.
Thank you for the prayers for myself and family .

 

[JonNC]

I just read on wiki that the LCMS considers the pope to be the Antichrist as a matter of doctine. This is suprising, as I always figured the LCMS was one of the more reasonable Protestant sects.

Here’s the quote from Wikipedia:

Now we all know that Wiki isn’t infallible, so…Lutherans, can anyone tell me if this is really true?

Thanks and God bless

First, let’s be clear on a few of items:

1. We are not talking here about an end-times beast.
2. I don’t know any lutherans who believe that JP II or Benedict XVI are the anti-christ.
3. I was raised in a Lutheran pastor’s home, and never did I hear the idea spoken about in Catechetical Class, Sunday School, or worship. And as an adult, I frankly have never heard it talked about at any length in Bible Study, only in passing in study of the confessions, and never in worship.

2nd, my personal view as an LCMS Lutheran:

1. It is 500 year old polemics, and I don’t like the language because to the modern ear it is offensive, my ear included. There were things Catholics said about the reformers that were equally offensive, and if we are to pursue Christ’s wish for unity, we must stop using the old polemics.
2. The relationship between Lutherans and Catholics has changed, I dare say, dramatically in the last 50 years. Our leaders sit and talk to each other, and demonstrate Christian love and charity. Obviously, Lutherans see something other than anti-christ in Rome, and Rome sees something other than heretics in Lutheranism.
3. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=250002&highlight=proposal+to+fellow+lutherans

Jon

 

[JonNC]

It had better be true, or else Lutherans would be rebelling not only against the true Church, but against their own prophet. What an utterly rootless faith that would be, if it rebels even against the teaching of the original rebel!

Dauphin,
Luther was not a prophet, never claimed to be, and Lutherans have never seen him as one.
Where Luther was wrong, we do not agree with him (example: some of his later writings that were anti-jewish).
Lutherans, true Lutherans, do not consider themselves protesters or rebels, but instead reformationists. With praise to God, and thanks for John XXIII and those popes since who have opened ecumenical communication and dialogue as a result of Vatican 2,
you can see the great desire amongst Lutheran and Catholic leaders to work out our differences, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, return to unity. One only needs to look at the following for evidence of this great desire.
usccb.org/seia/lutheran.shtml

Jon

 

[Peter_J]

… and I guess I just thought they were a more relatively orthodox denomination.

To put it in perspective, you might consider the opinions that SSPX people have about Lutheranism. (Not that they would use the term “Antichrist” specifically.)

 

[JonNC]

To put it in perspective, you might consider the opinions that SSPX people have about Lutheranism. (Not that they would use the term “Antichrist” specifically.)

In that way, think about what the SSPX folks say about the recent popes.

Jon

 

[Peter_J]

In that way, think about what the SSPX folks say about the recent popes.

Jon

Hmm … the comparison doesn’t really do it for me.

To my mind, the SSPX have just gotten some popes mixed up – they think Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI are questionable; whereas the idealize some truly questionable Popes like Pius IX and Pius XI.

 

[Peter_J]

To my mind, the SSPX have just gotten some popes mixed up

No doubt, they would say the same about me.

 

[JonNC]

Hmm … the comparison doesn’t really do it for me.

To my mind, the SSPX have just gotten some popes mixed up – they think Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI are questionable; whereas the idealize some truly questionable Popes like Pius IX and Pius XI.

Perhaps not, but I’ve read some pretty ugly things about JP II that would have made Luther squirm. And btw, while the LCMS has its hardliners, they’re teddy bears compared the WELS.

Jon

 

[Peter_J]

Perhaps not, but I’ve read some pretty ugly things about JP II that would have made Luther squirm.

Touché, some individual SSPX supporters might go beyond the SSPX’s “official positions”.

And btw, while the LCMS has its hardliners, they’re teddy bears compared the WELS.

Jon

Indeed. When I read the OP and ac claire’s complaints about the LCMS, I thought to myself “That sounds more like a description of the WELS.”

 

[Dauphin]

Dauphin,
Luther was not a prophet, never claimed to be, and Lutherans have never seen him as one.

Only a prophet of God could have done legitimately what Luther did, in essentially presenting entirely novel doctrines as part of the faith and supposing to speak in place of the authority of the Church.

 

[JonNC]

Only a prophet of God could have done legitimately what Luther did, in essentially presenting entirely novel doctrines as part of the faith and supposing to speak in place of the authority of the Church.

FWIW, the reformers, including Luther, made no claim of new doctrine.
Augsburg Confession

Only those things have been recounted whereof we thought that it was necessary to speak, in order that it might be understood that in doctrine and ceremonies nothing has been received on our part against Scripture or the Church Catholic. For it is manifest that we have taken most diligent care that no new and ungodly doctrine should creep into our churches.

Jon

 

[mark_a]

1. I don’t know any lutherans who believe that JP II or Benedict XVI are the anti-christ.

I fail to see what difference it makes if the Lutherans you know don’t believe Lutheran doctrine. By comparison, the vast majority of Catholics don’t believe the Church teachings about contraception. That doesn’t mean the Church doen’t reall teach this.

1. I frankly have never heard it talked about

at any length

in Bible Study,

only in passing in study of the confessions

, and never in worship.

By comparison, I’ve only heard double predestination called “the most cruel doctrine” once in a Catholic Church. But it was still said.

2nd, my personal view as an LCMS Lutheran:

1. It is 500 year old polemics, and I don’t like the language because to the modern ear it is offensive, my ear included. There were things Catholics said about the reformers that were equally offensive, and if we are to pursue Christ’s wish for unity, we must stop using the old polemics.

Good, we Catholics are looking for a Lutheran to head up the rewriting of Lutheran doctrine. The Catholic Church has been bending over backwards, perhaps because we see the real antichrist on the horizon. Maybe we could meet half way once in a while.

 

[Dauphin]

FWIW, the reformers, including Luther, made no claim of new doctrine.
Augsburg Confession

Jon

The doctrine of sola scriptura itself is perfectly novel and totally incoherent. To deny the reality of the oral transmission of faith and the unique role given to the Church to safeguard it is to break with the universal consensus of the Church fathers and to rebel against the assumptions which underlie scripture itself.

Again, no one but a prophet could have legitimately introduced such novelties or claimed the authority the define the faith which Luther undeniably did.

 

[JonNC]

The doctrine of sola scriptura itself is perfectly novel and totally incoherent. To deny the reality of the oral transmission of faith and the unique role given to the Church to safeguard it is to break with the universal consensus of the Church fathers and to rebel against the assumptions which underlie scripture itself.

Again, no one but a prophet could have legitimately introduced such novelties or claimed the authority the define the faith which Luther undeniably did.

modernreformation.org/default.php?page=printfriendly&var1=Print&var2=19

Jon

 

[Peter_J]

FWIW, the reformers, including Luther, made no claim of new doctrine.

Yes I know.

Similarly, we Catholic don’t consider the dogmas that were defined at Trent and Vatican I to be new doctrine, but we sometimes have trouble convincing our separated brethren of that.

 

[JonNC]

Good, we Catholics are looking for a Lutheran to head up the rewriting of Lutheran doctrine. The Catholic Church has been bending over backwards, perhaps because we see the real antichrist on the horizon. Maybe we could meet half way once in a while.

Working on it, Mark, the meeting half way part, that is.
Jon

usccb.org/seia/lutheran.shtml