Lutheranism is the "pure" Church?

[rcwitness]

I think the real issues between Lutheranism and Catholicism are few and specific, with some smaller related issues. For example, Purgatory: the general disagreement is the existence of an intermediate state/place, with indulgence, etc. involved.
Jon

“According to Luther justification consists essentially in the mere covering of man’s sins, which remain in the soul, and in the external imputation of Christ’s justice; hence his assertion that even “the just sin in every good work” (see Denzinger, n. 771), as also that “every work of the just is worthy of damnation [damnabile] and a mortal sin [peccatum mortale], if it be considered as it really is in the judgment of God” (see Möhler, “Symbolik”, 22)”

…Catholic Encyplopedia, on Merit

  If you ask me, this belief demands a purging before heaven! Though, I admit I don't know what Lutherans believe in regards to the removal of sin from our soul. I understand there are aspects of Purgatory that many protestants accept. Generally, isn't it the "temporal punishments" that would be rejected?
  And yes, indulgences. I admitt I am not a big fan of indulgences as a tool for evangelizing, or I should say motivating. I think it had its purpose and affect in a different time. Not to criticize Pope Francis :o but I felt the indulgences offered for following the WYD were not very inspiring. That's just me. I don't say they are false.

…maybe its just a silly way that the Church says,“if you do this for the building up of the Church, you will have specific rewards.” …?

Thanks Jon,
Michael

 

[MaryT777]

everyone is entitled to their opinion. Lutherans are partially connected to the OHCAC through baptism and profession of some truths revealed by Christ. In fact, during my short time here on CAF, I have come to learn that the similarities are great…but close only counts in horse shoes and grenades. We should try to bring all Lutherans to the fullness of the faith.

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android

I agree.
I believe all non Catholic religions believe their faith was founded by Jesus for the most part. However, Luther does play a large part in what Lutherans believe That is simply the fact of the matter and the reformer that starts a new Church is oft quoted as an expert in interpreting and understanding Scripture.
Mary.

 

[Peter_J]

That’s strange. I thought the Orthodox claimed that they were the One, True Church, so someone must be lying.

Yikes. That’s even worse than last year when Mitt Romney and Barack Obama each said that he was the best candidate for president of the USA!

 

[aidanbradypop]

Yikes. That’s even worse than last year when Mitt Romney and Barack Obama each said that he was the best candidate for president of the USA!

 

[pablope]

From my standpoint the problems stemmed from when the Papacy seemingly turned into a political office - Leo X being a prime example. He wasen’t even an ordained minister before becoming Pope.

That said, those times were hard for the Church. Perhaps an argument can be made that the political nature needed to be stressed just to survive.

N.B. : I’m under the influance of several bitters.

That is why…Ben…one does not reform the Church outside of it…one does it with the Church…within it. Catherine of Sienna…Francis of Assisi…hope they ring bells to you.

 

[AveChriste11]

That’s strange. I thought the Orthodox claimed that they were the One, True Church, so someone must be lying.

Ask them who founded their church. Lutheranism was started in the 1500s, while Catholicism started in 33 AD. Orthodoxy started in the 1000s. Ask them if they have any Eucharistic miracles. Lutherans don’t, Catholics do. The Catholic Church has preserved the original Priesthood established by Jesus himself 2,000 years ago.

If they aren’t yet convinced, ask them just exactly when the Catholic Church ventured away from its “original beliefs.” That one should be tough.

God bless you.

If you’ve taken the time to read many of the numerous threads in reference to Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy, their similarities and differences with Roman Catholicism and the history behind those differences. You would realize that it’s not as simple as stating “Such and such Church begin in this year ____ A.D.” The Protestant churches are a little different, but as far as to the Churches which are attributed with having been founded by actual Apostles or the disciples of those Apostles (i.e. St. Andrew, St. James, St. Mark, St. Peter, St. Paul) then it becomes a little more complicated.

 

[benjohnson]

That is why…Ben…one does not reform the Church outside of it…one does it with the Church…within it. Catherine of Sienna…Francis of Assisi…hope they ring bells to you.

From the Lutheran standpoint, we did reform the church from the inside!

Of course, from your perspective, we broke away… that we don’t have too much to argue over (in my opinion) nowadays is speaks to the power of the Holy Spirit and God’s love for His children.

 

[benjohnson]

"According to Luther justification consists essentially in the mere covering of man’s sins, which remain in the soul, and in the external imputation of Christ’s justice;

Remember, this is supposed to be comforting - as it’s easy to accept that we put on the mantle of Christ and are justified immediately. If we were to requite that a complete change of the individual’s soul to be Christ-like, we would tend to have doubts as to if we’ve crossed the threshold. Lutherans tent to put the process of becoming like Christ into the idea of Sanctification.

Yes! Lutherans have no problem with being purged of sin before coming face to face with God - we have a problem with Purgatory and Indulgences… in our little minds it’s something like Dante’s Inferno crossed with You Bet Your Life.

To be fair, I’m beginning the think that the Lutheran idea about Catholic concept of Purgatory may be a bit wrong.

[/QUOTE]

 

[SteveVH]

From the Lutheran standpoint, we did reform the church from the inside!

Of course, from your perspective, we broke away… that we don’t have too much to argue over (in my opinion) nowadays is speaks to the power of the Holy Spirit and God’s love for His children.

But Ben, Catherine of Sienna and Francis of Assisi remained in the Catholic Church. Luther did not. While he was excommunicated, he certainly had the opportunity make amends but chose to remain outside of the Church. There is a big difference. How does one reform the Church from the inside when they are outside?

 

[concretecamper]

But Ben, Catherine of Sienna and Francis of Assisi remained in the Catholic Church. Luther did not. While he was excommunicated, he certainly had the opportunity make amends but chose to remain outside of the Church. There is a big difference. How does one reform the Church from the inside when they are outside?

You are dead on. The more I learn about Luther and the reformation I am left with a nagging question. After all the dust settles, he couldn’t bring himself to push the reforms within the structure of the Church. OK…so it’s a human thing I get it. But to walk away from Christ in the Eucharist. To be driven by whatever he was driven by to do that…I cannot imagine.

 

[andrewstx]

That’s strange. I thought the Orthodox claimed that they were the One, True Church, so someone must be lying.

Ask them who founded their church. Lutheranism was started in the 1500s, while Catholicism started in 33 AD. Orthodoxy started in the 1000s. Ask them if they have any Eucharistic miracles. Lutherans don’t, Catholics do. The Catholic Church has preserved the original Priesthood established by Jesus himself 2,000 years ago.

If they aren’t yet convinced, ask them just exactly when the Catholic Church ventured away from its “original beliefs.” That one should be tough.

God bless you.

That is not exactly true. Before the great schism there was one Catholic church east and west one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic church. In fact the creeds were written in the East and the original Ecumenical councils were held in the East.

At the splitting of the ways the Eastern church changed nothing at all. They did not go Protestant, and the sacraments and ordinations of the East are still recognized as valid.

 

[Peter_J]

That is not exactly true. Before the great schism there was one Catholic church east and west one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic church. In fact the creeds were written in the East and the original Ecumenical councils were held in the East.

Certainly.

 

[Peter_J]

Btw, not meaning any offense to any of you fine people; but I think I’m going to try to get out of the habit of reading threads like this one, and see if I can’t find a better use of my time. (That last part is somewhat ironic: it’s not like I have an abundance of free time.) I think others should consider the same.

 

[mark_a]

I have been told by Lutherans where I live (Lutheran heavy upper Midwest) that the Lutheran Church is the pure form of Catholicism that has not been perverted. They claim that the Lutheran Church is the church of the Gospel and the way Christ intended the Church to be. Many have gone on to say that the Lutheran faith is THE One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church rather than the Catholic Church. They believe that the Lutheran faith preaches the Gospel and the Catholic Church has ventured away from doing so. Basically, they are stating that they are the true Church established by Christ.

Are they wrong or spot on according to Lutheran teachings? The Lutherans here are very anti Catholic Church so it may just be a geographical thing and no Lutheranism as a whole. Please enlighten me because this is a tad disturbing.

Why wouldn’t a serious Lutheran, LCMS or otherwise, believe this?

 

[Peter_J]

Good question, mark a.

 

[Cavaradossi]

Why wouldn’t a serious Lutheran, LCMS or otherwise, believe this?

I too wonder the same thing. I think people confuse the exclusivity of their own Church’s claim to truth with the exclusivity of believing that their Church exclusively teaches the truth. The latter is found in almost any Church which claims to teach exclusively the truth, but the former can only be found in one of them.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Why wouldn’t a serious Lutheran, LCMS or otherwise, believe this?

I too wonder the same thing. I think people confuse the exclusivity of their own Church’s claim to truth with the exclusivity of believing that their Church exclusively teaches the truth. The latter is found in almost any Church which claims to teach exclusively the truth, but the former can only be found in one of them.

Great question Mark.

Cavaradossi…I believe that if someone is a member of a certain religious belief, they should believe their faith to be the true faith. A Catholic should believe in Catholicism, a Lutheran in Lutheranism, Anglican in Anglicanism…etc.

I think would caught me off guard is that the majority if Lutherans in my area are very much anti Catholic Church, yet they claim to be the true Catholic Church. Baptist claim to preach the whole true and nothing but the truth, yet they do not claim to be the Catholic Church.

You are Orthodox. That would be like someone of the Methodist faith claiming to be the pure Orthodox faith. If they are the “pure” Orthodox Church then that would make your faith the? See what I mean?

I would hope everyone views their faith as the true faith. Why else believe in such if you do not believe it to be true right? However, claiming to be something you are against is kind of awkward. This could be simply a regional thing and not Lutheranism as a whole.

 

[JonNC]

So, what changed between 787 and 1517? At what point did the Catholic Church (from a Lutheran perspective) “run off the rails”? Certainly not before 787.

While the concept of original sin goes way back to the early church, it is St. Thomas Aquinas (who lived from 1225 or 1227 to 1274) who is credited with the theological explanation of the nature of original sin. From this link:

Also, from this link, the word filioque was added to the symbol of Constantinople in 1274 (at the Second Council of Lyons).

So, since Lutherans accept that people are saddled with original sin, and since Lutherans also accept the Filioque, it can be presumed that the Catholic Church (from a Lutheran perspective) could not have “run off the rails” until sometime after 1274.

In this and the post about Transubstantiation, you use the term “run off the rails” as if you think we believe in the foolish Great Apostasy. Nothing could be further from the truth. The CC in communion with the Bishop of Rome, from our perspective, could, and frankly, is in error about some things, things that have sprung up since the Great Schism, among them Transubstantiation. But even here, the error regarding Transub. is more an error of dogma, meaning binding the conscience of the believer to something not extant in scripture, nor is it obviously taught in the early Church. The doctrine of the real presence is obvious in scripture, regardless of the opinions of some that reject it, and it is obvious in the early Church.

The Catholic Church claims for itself infallibility in doctrine. Our perspective is that, while Christ’s Church has infallible teaching, individual humans, even popes and Magisterium, can be in error. That doesn’t mean the CC has “run off the rails”. The CC in communion with the Bishop of Rome is a Christian communion, which has the word and sacraments.

Jon

Jon

 

[Peter_J]

You are Orthodox. That would be like someone of the Methodist faith claiming to be the pure Orthodox faith. If they are the “pure” Orthodox Church then that would make your faith the? See what I mean?

So I believe what you’re driving at is the whole capital vs lower-case issue: i.e. I would call us “orthodox” but not “Orthodox”, “evangelical” but not “Evangelical”, “episcopal” but not “Episcopal”, “apostolic” but not “Apostolic”, etc. (For anyone not already familiar with it, that last one was in reference to the Armenian Apostolic Church.)

Baptist claim to preach the whole true and nothing but the truth, yet they do not claim to be the Catholic Church.

I’m not very easily surprised by anything that Baptists say or do. (No offense to you Baptists out there, of course. )

 

[aidanbradypop]

So I believe what you’re driving at is the whole capital vs lower-case issue: i.e. I would call us “orthodox” but not “Orthodox”, “evangelical” but not “Evangelical”, “episcopal” but not “Episcopal”, “apostolic” but not “Apostolic”, etc. (For anyone not already familiar with it, that last one was in reference to the Armenian Apostolic Church.)

In some cases yes, but many Lutherans in my area believe they are the Catholic Church and not catholic Church. I was just surprised to learn such