Lutheran critique of Eastern Orthodoxy and Authority

[UnworthyApostle]

I as a former Lutheran has foudn the fullness of my faith within the Catholic Church and I will say it was the bible which brought me to it.

Matthew 18:17

And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.

1 Timothy 3:15

…the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Acts 15:2
'It is the decision of the holy Spirit and of us not to place on you any burden beyond these necessities

Seems to me that the “Apostolic Witness” deems it necessary to have a church that teaches with guidance from the Holy Spirit and it is the church which is the pillar of Orthodoxy.

 

[mark_a]

Don’t you have a thread to fix? If you get that finished there’s always Very confused on “No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church.” as well. Until then, your comments about “teachings all over the place” apply just as well to Catholicism as any Protestant denomination.

Not on the non-negotiables.

 

[mark_a]

My complaint is that it is opposed to apostolic witness.

In your opinion.

And your solution is?

 

[Non_Serviam]

Not on the non-negotiables.

We touched on those before:

Scanning church documents, is there a list of these non-negotiable teachings that all Catholics would agree with? Or even just a list that has official approval? If not, your authority has missed another opportunity to unify the faithful.

So where is your non-negotiable list of non-negotiables? Are you suggesting that the two topics in the threads I referenced:

1. Whether a Catholic who leaves the Catholic church goes to hell
2. What “Outside the church there is no salvation” actually means in Catholic belief

that neither of these form part of your non-negotiables?

If they do you have work to do clearing up those threads…if they don’t show me the non-negotiable list that proves it.

Either way you have something to do besides repost points that have already been addressed.

 

[TriuneUnity]

In your opinion.

And your solution is?

In my opinion? What does that even mean?

My solution to what? To strife, disunity, disagreement and division within the Church? The return of Christ.

 

[mark_a]

In my opinion? What does that even mean?

I presumed you were talking about

the doctrines behind the concepts of authority in West and East

Did I misunderstand?

My solution to what? To strife, disunity, disagreement and division within the Church? The return of Christ. That’s His solution. Meanwhile, does the Church militant not have work to do?

 

[TriuneUnity]

I presumed you were talking about Did I misunderstand?

I know what you were referring to. However, stating “in your opinion” doesn’t really have a point to it, does it?

My solution to what? To strife, disunity, disagreement and division within the Church? The return of Christ.

That’s His solution. Meanwhile, does the Church militant not have work to do?

Yes, of course. There is no permanent solution, however, as long as there is sin. It also doesn’t have anything to do with either the infallibility of the Pope or ecumenical councils. Pointing to divisions within Protestantism and saying, see, not having an infallible authority to correct erroneous viewpoints is to blame is a self-refuting position. For infallibility has not eased disunity among Catholicism or Orthodoxy, either.

 

[Non_Serviam]

Yes, of course. There is no permanent solution, however, as long as there is sin. It also doesn’t have anything to do with either the infallibility of the Pope or ecumenical councils. Pointing to divisions within Protestantism and saying, see, not having an infallible authority to correct erroneous viewpoints is to blame is a self-refuting position. For infallibility has not eased disunity among Catholicism or Orthodoxy, either.

You Lutherans say things so much purtier than little ole me!

 

[UnworthyApostle]

“For infallibility has not eased disunity among Catholicism or Orthodoxy, either.”

This is an incorect staement if yu understand the nature of auhtority within Orthodoxy and Catholicsm.

In Orthodoxy, Ecuinemical Councils are what teach the doctrine infallibly. If any memeber of the Orthodox church is to disagree with these teachings, they are no longer Orthdodox and are heretics in belief.

In the Catholic Church, the rule of faith is even more stringent to preserve unity. We have the magisterium of the church and the ecuinemical councils. If any Catholic were to dissagree with even one dogmatic teaching, they are then heretics in belief as well.

Thus, both of the afromentioned situations shows a person can be a visible memeber of a church, but are far from it within spirit.

So, infallibility gives the church a way of seperating the chaff from the wheat. One can only be a faithful Orthodox or Catholic, that is truly, if one abides by the teachings of the respected communion.

All the cafeteria Catholics who use contraception, support abortion, and do the such are living in grave/mortal sin according to Catholic teaching. Therefore, they are excommunicated in way of partaking in the church, most specifically the eucharist, unless they repent. One annot partake of Christ’s body unoworthily or they eat and drink condemnation uno themselves and they sperate themselves from the church through sin.

 

[mark_a]

Pointing to divisions within Protestantism and saying, see, not having an infallible authority to correct erroneous viewpoints is to blame is a self-refuting position. For infallibility has not eased disunity among Catholicism or Orthodoxy, either.

Shouldn’t non-Catholics, who fancy themselves as having saved the Church or righted the ship, be showing us the way?

 

[SteveVH]

Shouldn’t non-Catholics, who fancy themselves as having saved the Church or righted the ship, be showing us the way?

And therein lies the problem. Which way? The arrows point in all directions. I wonder if Luther ever dreamed of the consequences the “Reformation” would bring. In the same vein, the behavior of many in the Church prior to the Reformation. Its all pretty sad. Maybe we could start an Eastern Orthodox and Catholic critique of Lutheranism.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Shouldn’t non-Catholics, who fancy themselves as having saved the Church or righted the ship, be showing us the way?

Only if you interpret the critique as being a moral one, which it is not.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

All of Catholic Answers Forum has been a critique of Lutheranism for years now. As long as I can remember we’ve seen sola scriptura and Martin Luther trashed to death in here. We’ve heard “Martin Loser” and “the Deformation” and everything else used to death. Lutheranism is decried as illegitimate and not a true church daily in CAF. I’ve seen more energy and effort put into defacing Luther than any one man in here. Luther’s had a critique in here, trust me! And most folks who maul Luther forget that it was Melancthon and Chemnitz and many other Lutheran divines who hammered out a ton of Lutheran doctrine, not just Brother Martin himself.

Interestingly also, why do you caucus with the Orthodox and ask them to join you in a critique of Lutheranism when they could and would just as easily critique your catholicism on a daily basis in here? Orthodox don’t pull any punches in reminding Catholics that they a) don’t believe in infallibility b) don’t believe in papal supremacy c) don’t accept purgatory d) don’t accept the Catholic/Augustinian view of Original Sin, e) reject penances and indulgences f) reject most if not all of the Marian apparitions to Catholics on and on. Orthodox might not jump on that bandwagon as quickly as you think!

And therein lies the problem. Which way? The arrows point in all directions. I wonder if Luther ever dreamed of the consequences the “Reformation” would bring. In the same vein, the behavior of many in the Church prior to the Reformation. Its all pretty sad. Maybe we could start an Eastern Orthodox and Catholic critique of Lutheranism.

 

[Non_Serviam]

All of Catholic Answers Forum has been a critique of Lutheranism for years now. As long as I can remember we’ve seen sola scriptura and Martin Luther trashed to death in here. We’ve heard “Martin Loser” and “the Deformation” and everything else used to death. Lutheranism is decried as illegitimate and not a true church daily in CAF. I’ve seen more energy and effort put into defacing Luther than any one man in here. Luther’s had a critique in here, trust me! And most folks who maul Luther forget that it was Melancthon and Chemnitz and many other Lutheran divines who hammered out a ton of Lutheran doctrine, not just Brother Martin himself.

Interestingly also, why do you caucus with the Orthodox and ask them to join you in a critique of Lutheranism when they could and would just as easily critique your catholicism on a daily basis in here? Orthodox don’t pull any punches in reminding Catholics that they a) don’t believe in infallibility b) don’t believe in papal supremacy c) don’t accept purgatory d) don’t accept the Catholic/Augustinian view of Original Sin, e) reject penances and indulgences f) reject most if not all of the Marian apparitions to Catholics on and on. Orthodox might not jump on that bandwagon as quickly as you think!

You left out my favourite Orthodox comment-that Catholics created the conditions for the Reformation when they began their schism from the true church.

Of course that would mean that Catholicism is shattered into 30-40,000 pieces, wouldn’t it? (I think we’d see Catholics working harder at proving a lower rather than higher number in that scenario)

 

[mark_a]

Only if you interpret the critique as being a moral one, which it is not.

I’m not sure I understand. Why would theological teachings not be included?

 

[mark_a]

And most folks who maul Luther forget that it was Melancthon and Chemnitz and many other Lutheran divines who hammered out a ton of Lutheran doctrine, not just Brother Martin himself.

All true. I really have wondered why Luthernans stick with the name when they disavow so many of Luther’s teachings. It seems like a PR gaff.

 

[mark_a]

Of course that would mean that Catholicism is shattered into 30-40,000 pieces, wouldn’t it? (I think we’d see Catholics working harder at proving a lower rather than higher number in that scenario)

I really dislike the 30-40k number Catholics tend to throw around. I wonder how many denoms include 90% of Protestantism. Maybe 50?

 

[simspt]

I really dislike the 30-40k number Catholic tend to throw around. I wonder how many denoms include 90% of Protestantism. Maybe 50?

you lost me what do you mean

 

[mark_a]

Orthodox might not jump on that bandwagon as quickly as you think!

Who thinks that?

I don’t know if you remember the Eastern Religions sub-forum here, but that’s where the real action was. The non-Catholic is forum is mild by comparison.

 

[TriuneUnity]

I’m not sure I understand. Why would theological teachings not be included?

Because your question was a moral one; i.e., if Protestantism is true, then why aren’t Protestant churches unified, in a leadership position, etc. We’ve never claimed that we are as unified as Catholics or that we are morally superior to Catholicism or Orthodoxy.