Lutherans, Is This True?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randy_Carson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
GKC said:
To be the Pope, yes, a bishop. To be elected the Pope, no.

Subject to correction, of course.

GKC
Click to expand...
Possibly Ben is referring to Adrian V:
Wikipedia:
Under the influence of Charles of Anjou, he was elected Pope to succeed Innocent V on 12 July 1276 but died at Viterbo on 18 August 1276 from illness without ever having been ordained to the priesthood.
Click to expand...
Don’t ask me why he wasn’t immediately ordained upon election, I just don’t know.
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
That’s what Steve said, but you jumped to Bishop.
Click to expand...
The Pope is, by definition, Bishop of Rome!

Look, obviously you can elect a priest and then consecrate him immediately, but are you suggesting that you can be Pope and not a bishop for any protracted length of time?
 
Novocastrian said:
Look, obviously you can elect a priest and then consecrate him immediately, but are you suggesting that you can be Pope and not a bishop for any protracted length of time?
Click to expand...
Good question.

Prior to learning about Adrian V, my understanding was that if a non-bishop was elected pope, he would not actually be pope until he was ordained as a bishop. If that’s the case, then it follows that Adrian V was never pope but only “pope elect”.
 
Peter_J said:
Good question.

Prior to learning about Adrian V, my understanding was that if a non-bishop was elected pope, he would not actually be pope until he was ordained as a bishop. If that’s the case, then it follows that Adrian V was never pope but only “pope elect”.
Click to expand...
I assumed the same.
 
SteveVH said:
The anti-Christ is not your run of the mill sinner. He is the one who will lead many away from Christ and our Pope has been identified by your faith tradition as that one.
Click to expand...
Ok…lets assume I’m deficient for reading our Confessions with a bit less bombast that you. Let’s accept that so we can move on from the mudslinging.

I have one question:

How you do account for Pope Benedict XVI musing that the Lutheran Confessions may have some merit as a Catholic confession?
 
Novocastrian said:
The Pope is, by definition, Bishop of Rome!

Look, obviously you can elect a priest and then consecrate him immediately, but are you suggesting that you can be Pope and not a bishop for any protracted length of time?
Click to expand...
In theory any baptized catholic male can be elected as Pope. But before taking Office they must be consecrated.

I think Leo X was the last non-priest to be elected as Pope.
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
In theory any baptized catholic male can be elected as Pope. But before taking Office they must be consecrated.

I think Leo X was the last non-priest to be elected as Pope.
Click to expand...
Ok, good, that’s what I meant in the first place.
 
tdgesq said:
The Reformed Presbyterians in the United States figured out a long time ago that Pope = anti-Christ didn’t make any sense. Here is the original version of the Westminster Confession of Faith on the issue:

“VI. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ.[13] Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God.” WCF 1646

Now the 1788 version used by the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America.

“6. There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof.” WCF 1788.

I don’t know any individual Lutheran in the United States who actually believes that the Pope or the office of the Papacy is the anti-Christ referred to in Scripture. Get rid of it already. The Calvinists did.
Click to expand...
Wow. I’ve read some of this before and it never ceases to amaze me how ignorant some people really are!

Would any pope say he is the head of the Church, and not Christ? No. Would any pope “exault himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God”? No.

Sometimes it feels to me that this inter-denominational mud-slinging is more suited for politics than the salvation of souls. There are many today who hold this point of view, but thankfully MOST of it has been stricken from “official” confessions of faith (I think).

There is ALOT of Biblical support for the papacy, and many just choose to interpet the Bible in such a way as to discredit the Universal Church’s teaching. 🤷 It is what it is. As I have said MANY times on these forums, it all comes down to authority: Who has it? What are the limits of that authority? Who GRANTED that authority?

The notion that the pope is the antichrist is absolutely absurd. I think ANY Christian who cares to do his homework will clearly see just how worshipful to God and Christ the current pope is and almost all the former popes really were. What do you think, people? Some of the writings of the Supreme Pontiffs for your reading pleasure…

vatican.va/holy_father/index.htm
 
MaryT777 said:
It’s simply another man made docrine with no basis in Scripture.
Mary.
Click to expand...
The CCC doesnt say this is a manmade doctrine and some Church fathers have also spoken of Antichrist as a man. I don’t know where you get the idea this is not in Scripture.
 
Hockeygurl said:
As far as the stumbling blocks for me… Mary,
Click to expand...
Really!!! :rolleyes:
H:
oral contraception,
Click to expand...
Scripture is absolutely against murder and infanticide. Oral contraception i.e. the pill, is a known abortifacient, even in lower doses. OC is also known to increase by 4 x the risk for breast cancer and cervical cancer. Therefore, how could avoiding its use, possibly be a stumbling block?
H:
confession etc…
Click to expand...
Jesus instituted the sacrament of confession when He gave His apostles the power to forgive and retain sins. That’s a serious power to give anyone. Obviously Jesus did that for a reason. He doesn’t institute a sacrament needlessly. The only way for the apostles to know what sins to forgive or retain, since they aren’t mind readers, is for a person to confess their sins to one who is ordained to forgive and retain sins. It goes without saying, that eliminates joe six pak who has no business parading as somebody bonafide to administer that sacrament.
H:
I don’t know any protestant churches that REQUIRE the belief in these doctrines for salvation.
Click to expand...
Did you ever wonder why? Who says any of them are saved?
H:
The catholic church still affirms that it is necessary for salvation to believe what the church teaches on these practices. In that case I know MANY catholics who are in trouble because of practices in the church that they don’t agree with.
Click to expand...
True. And think of all those outside the Church.
H:
Now for the “:bible” question. I have read many times on this site that the “bible” wasn’t put together for 100’s of years so why should we use it to guide us?
Click to expand...
I don’t think you got that last part from a Catholic.

The Church teaches our 3 sources of authority are (in order)
    • Scripture
    • Tradition
    • the teaching magesterium of the Church
    So what’s fair to say,H:
    Much of the NT is comprised of letters from the apostles, John, Peter and then Paul who wrote many letters to the churches that were forming. These letters guided the churches as far as core beliefs and practices. These letters were available in the 1st century and the use of scribes was very common so there may have been a limited number of copies made. The point is the guidance of these letters WAS given to the churches back then. At this point I agree with a moderate amount of “tradition”. It was common for jews to memorize the scriptures so they could teach it to others and I believe this is what may have happened.
    Click to expand...
    There were 100’s of writings. The Catholic Church considered only 27 to be inspired. That was done officially in 381 at the council of Rome. That canon listed there is the same canon we have today.
    H:
    Another thing I just wanted to add is that I find most liturgical church services not helpful.
    1. Who wants to sit in church for someone else to tell you 10 things that you aren’t doing good enough on. I don’t need to be reminded of my sins, I know they are plentiful.
    2. I don’t find it easy to have a good connection with GOD in these services that have you sitting, then standing then kneeling. Tiring. AND sometimes they have very stupid hymns. I understand fellowship is a good thing, however I find that alone time is the time where I can have a good “conversation” with GOD. “wherever 2 or more gather in my name, I will be there also” I prefer to study and worship with my family or a small group.
    Click to expand...
    You read the scriptures yet miss HUGE points

    forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11098219&postcount=51 scroll down to Heb 10 and the Mass.

    Protestants don’t have the Eucharist because no Protestant group regardless of stripe has valid orders.
 
benjohnson said:
How you do account for Pope Benedict XVI musing that the Lutheran Confessions may have some merit as a Catholic confession?
Click to expand...
I account for it by understanding that Benedict XVI was certainly not talking about that portion of the Confessions and that he was doing all he could to be charitable to his separated brethren. I am sure this is not the only part of the Confessions with which he would disagree if pressed, which is why his words were in the form of a musing rather than some definitive statement. But much of it is very Catholic, understandably, which allowed our Pope to give credit where credit was due.

Ben, please understand that my feelings are not personal here and I have probably blown this somewhat out of proportion, but I think it is obvious to anyone alive that our Pope is not the anti-Christ. It just really shocked me that this is basically Lutheran doctrine. People can try to explain it away but it says what it says. It does not belong in your doctrine as it has nothing to do with revealed truth, but rather human frustrations and anger.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top