Lutherans and the Papacy

  • Thread starter Thread starter EvangelCatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jotto said:
we , including the Missouri Synod, see nothing wrong with sending our young men and women off to slaughter their fellow human beings and even provide them with military chaplains to bless them while they are doing that.
Click to expand...
Please speak for yourself in these matters. I see plenty of sin in almost all war.
 
benjohnson said:
Please speak for yourself in these matters. I see plenty of sin in almost all war.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am speaking for myself, Ben. But though you as a good Lutheran see much sin in war, as we Lutherans pretty much see sin in most, if not all, of what we do, the question is whether Luther and his contemporary fellow Catholics thought war is inherently sinful or whether they thought there were some wars which could properly from a Christian point of view be called “just.”

In blessing our young men and now women who have chosen to go to war, are we, as most of us perceive it, telling them to go sin? Because of how I read the New Testament and take seriously how the first Christian communities understood those texts, I think in blessing the military efforts of our various countries we are guilty of idolatry. And I think the popes who blessed this crusade and that were guilty of idolatry - their supposed infallibility being of no help here.

And to return to our original topic, the norm of “just following Scripture,” Sola Scriptura does not in many cases seem to be an adequate norm for Christian life.
 
Jotto said:
And to return to our original topic, the norm of “just following Scripture,” Sola Scriptura does not in many cases seem to be an adequate norm for Christian life.
Click to expand...
No argument from me, we need the church.

…

Back to your desire to change the LCMS: You may very well prove that the church has changed doctrine. However, such proof doesn’t logically conclude in the idea that we much continue to change.
 
hn160 said:
At my church, the pastor does all the teaching of adults and the catechism group, he allows women to teach a woman’s group and children but never men.
Click to expand...
This thread wasn’t meant to pit Lutherans against fellow Lutherans but as an ex-Missouri Synod Lutheran, I left the Church for precisely the reason you identify, as well as other reasons.

Insistence on rigid cultural norms that, like almost any issue can be proclaimed to be the will of God, creates a barrier between those Christians and those seeking Christ.
 
hn160 said:
At my church, the pastor does all the teaching of adults and the catechism group, he allows women to teach a woman’s group and children but never men.
Click to expand...
The Pastor’s wife could have been teaching a woman’s group on Wednesday night.
I never attended that; in fact I believe that makes most sense.
 
Wonder what Roman Catholics think of Pope Benedicts words about Martin Luther?
“The question: what is God’s position towards me, where do I stand before God? – Luther’s burning question must once more, doubtless in a new form, become our question too, not an academic question, but a real one. In my view, this is the first summons we should attend to in our encounter with Martin Luther…
Click to expand...
Another important point: God, the one God, creator of heaven and earth, is no mere philosophical hypothesis regarding the origins of the universe. This God has a face, and he has spoken to us. He became one of us in the man Jesus Christ – who is both true God and true man. Luther’s thinking, his whole spirituality, was thoroughly Christocentric: ‘What promotes Christ’s cause’ was for Luther the decisive hermeneutical criterion for the exegesis of sacred Scripture. This presupposes, however, that Christ is at the heart of our spirituality and that love for him, living in communion with him, is what guides our life.”
Click to expand...
-Pope Benedict XVI, September 23, 2011
Click to expand...
 
Any thoughts on Pope Benedict’s comments at a Mass in 2011?
Pope Benedict XVI celebrated Mass Sunday morning at Castel Gandolfo with members of the “Ratzinger Schülerkreis” – a study group of former students of the Pontiff who have been meeting together for the past thirty years.
Click to expand...
This year the group discussed the theme of ecumenical dialogue, and especially the dialogues of the Catholic Church with the Anglican and Lutheran communities.
In his homily at the Mass, Pope Benedict said that “Today, the concepts of truth and intolerance have almost fused together, so that to say that one has the truth becomes synonymous with intolerance. And we Christians do not dare to believe or to speak about the truth.” The Pope said that in a certain sense, it is true that no one can say that he “possesses” the truth, precisely because “we belong to the truth which is a living thing.” And so, he said, we must learn anew “to allow ourselves to be lead by the truth. Then the truth will be able to shine through us anew, for the salvation of the world.”
Click to expand...
news.va/en/news/pope-let-the-truth-shine-through-us-anew
Click to expand...
 
aidanbradypop said:
Blessed John Paul II had much respect for Billy Graham. Benedict can have respect for Luther. I respect everyone on this forum, however, I may not fully agree with them. 😉 I respect you BUT…lol;)
Click to expand...
If you read what Benedict says in these statements as well as others, it is not just respect that he is communicating about Martin Luther but theological agreement.
 
EvangelCatholic said:
If you read what Benedict says in these statements as well as others, it is not just respect that he is communicating about Martin Luther but theological agreement.
Click to expand...
He agrees that Luther loved God and we faithful, but shall we keep it in context? I have read many articles about it. Benedict praised Luther’s deep faith, focus on Christ, and love of the Sacred Scriptures. I doubt any Catholic would argue against that.
 
JonNC said:
Well, in some areas.

Jon
Click to expand...
Exactly. Benedict did not claim Luther was 100% correct in everything. He praised Luther for being a faithful man of God. As much as I dislike what Luther did, I do not deny him his faith nor should any Pope or Catholic.
 
Why Can’t Lutherans Take Catholic Communion?
Why Can’t Lutherans Take Catholic Communion?
Click to expand...
October 25, 2012
Click to expand...
Russell E. Saltzman
Click to expand...
No, I have never snuck into a Catholic mass for Holy Communion. Not the first time anyway. I politely asked, and when I communed I had the permission of the archbishop of Washington, D.C.
Click to expand...
That was 1978 when I was one of the chaplains at a Scout summer camp in Virginia and still a Lutheran seminarian. There was a Catholic priest on staff, and I approached him for communion. He thought it would be okay but he first had to check. The archbishop didn’t blink, the priest told me, and up I went during the distribution.
Click to expand...
I don’t remember any time restriction attached to the archbishop’s permission (probably best not to ask) so I have comfortably communed with Roman Catholics a number of times, usually on vacation visiting Catholic relatives. I’m discreet; I don’t have the archbishop’s permission in writing so I can’t exactly flaunt it.
Click to expand...
It works the other way too. Roman Catholics have received from my hand at funerals, at weddings, at Christmas, and on ordinary Sundays.
Click to expand...
Intercommunion for us is no big deal, though it used to be. Beginning in 1875 and for about a century thereafter, we had the Akron-Galesburg Rule: Lutheran pulpits for Lutheran pastors only; Lutheran altars for Lutheran communicants only. It was directed against Protestants who did not accept the doctrine of the Real Presence, but it probably discouraged a Catholic or two as well.
Click to expand...
Those Lutheran church bodies that still have a “closed” altar nonetheless offer many exceptions, although on a case-by-case, congregation-by-congregation basis. Yet even Lutherans with “open” altars mostly couch their invitations in Real Presence terms. The point is: on most Sundays, in most places, Catholics may commune with Lutherans.
Click to expand...
firstthings.com/onthesquare/2012/10/why-canrsquot-lutherans-take-catholic-communion
Click to expand...
 
EvangelCatholic said:
Why Can’t Lutherans Take Catholic Communion?
from the article:
Those Lutheran church bodies that still have a “closed” altar nonetheless offer many exceptions, although on a case-by-case, congregation-by-congregation basis. Yet even Lutherans with “open” altars mostly couch their invitations in Real Presence terms**. The point is: on most Sundays, in most places, Catholics may commune with Lutherans.**
Click to expand...
Not if those Catholics are true to their faith.

Nothing would please me more, no greater shout of Alleluia would pass my lips than in response to an agreement of eucharistic hospitality between Catholics and Lutherans. But as Pope Benedict said at the Lutheran Church in Rome about 3 years ago, we are not able to do that yet, and this, to me, is the greatest reason to continue ecumenical dialogue.

I have a similar story from my youth, isolated from a Lutheran communion as a summer camp counselor, and the choices being Presbyterian or Catholic worship, I approached the Catholic priest who would visit the camp on Sundays to hold mass, and explained my circumstance. He and I had had numerous conversations each summer, so he knew me and my beliefs. Long story short, he gave me permission to receive. I am forever grateful to Father D.
I pray for the day when sharing the altar is not under unique circumstances anymore, but instead the norm.

Jon
Click to expand...
 
EvangelCatholic said:
Wonder what Roman Catholics think of Pope Benedicts words about Martin Luther?
Click to expand...
Interesting. Perhaps the Emeritus Pope doesn’t believe the old adage that the only good Lutheran is an ordinariate Lutheran. (Well, okay it’s not such an old adage.)
 
JonNC said:
Not if those Catholics are true to their faith.

Nothing would please me more, no greater shout of Alleluia would pass my lips than in response to an agreement of eucharistic hospitality between Catholics and Lutherans. But as Pope Benedict said at the Lutheran Church in Rome about 3 years ago, we are not able to do that yet, and this, to me, is the greatest reason to continue ecumenical dialogue.

I have a similar story from my youth, isolated from a Lutheran communion as a summer camp counselor, and the choices being Presbyterian or Catholic worship, I approached the Catholic priest who would visit the camp on Sundays to hold mass, and explained my circumstance. He and I had had numerous conversations each summer, so he knew me and my beliefs. Long story short, he gave me permission to receive. I am forever grateful to Father D.
I pray for the day when sharing the altar is not under unique circumstances anymore, but instead the norm.

Jon
Click to expand...
Jon

Another point as stated in the article, is that Lutherans began “closed communion” to emphasize the Real Presence to other Protestants. It was never meant to exclude other Lutherans. How can the LCMS justify such today when ELCA Lutherans fully believe in our Lord’s actual Presence in the Eucharist?
 
EvangelCatholic said:
Why Can’t Lutherans Take Catholic Communion?
I don’t remember any time restriction attached to the archbishop’s permission (probably best not to ask) so I have comfortably communed with Roman Catholics a number of times, usually on vacation visiting Catholic relatives. I’m discreet; I don’t have the archbishop’s permission in writing so I can’t exactly flaunt it.
Click to expand...
Two thoughts:

First, I don’t object to his assumption that there wasn’t “any time restriction attached to the archbishop’s permission”; but if he was “on vacation visiting Catholic relatives”, then wouldn’t that usually be away from Washington, D.C.? If so, then Rev. Saltzman is the only Lutheran I know of who believes in one bishop having universal jurisdiction.

Second – and more importanlty – reading that articles (I won’t re-quote the whole thing) it appears that Rev. Saltzman doesn’t realize that the permission question is a two-part question, i.e. Does the minister have permission from his/her church? and Does the Christian receiving communion have permission from his/her church?
Click to expand...
 
EvangelCatholic said:
Jon

Another point as stated in the article, is that Lutherans began “closed communion” to emphasize the Real Presence to other Protestants. It was never meant to exclude other Lutherans. How can the LCMS justify such today when ELCA Lutherans fully believe in our Lord’s actual Presence in the Eucharist?
Click to expand...
Not to jump in for Jon, but it would seem that ‘emphasizing the RP to other protestants’ is still the purpose.

The ELCA has full pulpit/altar fellowship with church bodies who do not believe in the RP. I do not understand why a church that claims to profess the RP would do such a thing - either the ELCA does not actually believe the doctrine of RP is important, or it doesn’t know what it believes. Why would the LCMS officially share communion with a body that, in practice, does not share the Lutheran view of the Lord’s Supper?
 
EvangelCatholic said:
Jon

Another point as stated in the article, is that Lutherans began “closed communion” to emphasize the Real Presence to other Protestants. It was never meant to exclude other Lutherans. How can the LCMS justify such today when ELCA Lutherans fully believe in our Lord’s actual Presence in the Eucharist?
Click to expand...
The practice of close communion has flexibility, EC. When I first moved to the area, the only Lutheran parish in the county was LCMS. We were still ELCA in those days, but at our first visit, we had a brief conversation with the pastor. We explained our belief and circumstance, and he allowed us to commune. Close communion is not closed communion.

OTOH, how can you justify, based on the same article, communing with protestants who reject the doctrine of the real presence. The Anglican/Episcopal approach I understand, but I am perplexed by joint communion with UCC, and Reformed churches, who as I understand it reject that we not only receive His body and blood spiritually by faith, but also orally by the mouth.

We can leave aside for now the broader concept of communion meaning more than just agreement on the doctrine of the real presence, but much broader doctrinal agreement.

Jon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top