Luther's Theology of the Cross

[QNDNNDQDCE]

Gotta respect “Second Martin’s” work, whether agreed or disagreed.

So, do you see the current Roman definition of ‘Church’ as entirely dependent on Apostolic Succession, or is it pliable enough to support a change – er, I mean – development that would be more inclusive of other Christian bodies? Something more akin to the Lutheran understanding of “wherever the Word is preached and Sacraments rightly administered”? Sometimes I wonder if the groundwork is already laid with the familiar ecumenical phrases (I’m thinking specifically of CCC 818-819, Nostre Aetate, etc.). It’s easy to meet in the middle from the Lutheran side, since we’d already acknowledge that Rome has the sacraments and the Word (however obscured Wittenburg understands them to be under the Bishop of Rome). Is there reason to be hopeful here, or is this just my wishful thinking? Maybe I’m not thinking about this in the right direction; I’m not sure I’ve clearly articulated my thoughts in this jumble of a paragraph.

The Lutheran view may be that the Church is simply “the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered” (Conf. Aug. VII). This is not the Catholic view. In the apt words of St. Augustine,

Outside the Catholic Church, everything can be removed from salvation. It is possible to have honor, it is possible to have sacraments, it is possible to sing Alleluia, it is possible to respond Amen, it is possible to have the Gospel, it is possible to have faith in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and to confess the same, but never except in the Catholic Church has it been possible to find salvation.
6)Sermon to the People of the Caesarean Church

Merely having the true Gospel and valid sacraments is not enough. Outside the unity of the Church, it cannot save. The Church is one and undivided, visible and objective. If one says that the Church is not doing a good enough job, erects a separate hierarchy, even if the faith is preserved, he has separated himself from the Church. This is further complicated in the case of Lutherans since, in addition to separating themselves from the Catholic Church, they do not have the same faith or the same sacraments.

The problem regarding unity and objectivity of composition is not something that can be ignored.

To get back on point - I don’t find Catholic claims to be the immutable church especially persuasive, as even some Catholics (SSPX et al) find the claim to be suspect.

I think you misunderstand the position of the SSPX “et al.” The SSPX do not deny that the Catholic Church is exclusively the one Church, they just argue that they do not have to obey their lawfully apointed superiors (the rightful bishops), which of course is wrong since it is necessary to obey lawful authorities in everything except to sin, or they have false beliefs about what is sin, such as that the new mass is intrinsically sinful and so on. Sedevacantists (who I assume you refer to by “et al.”) also do not deny that the Catholic Church is the true Church either. They merely believe that the pope and the Catholic hierarchy apostatized, which, in their view, removes the hierarchy from the Church, and therefore are not obliged to be obeyed. This view is perhaps similar to the Lutheran position, but it is also different because sedevecantists at least, for the most part, believe the same faith as Catholics whereas Lutherans reject central tenets of the Catholic faith.

Understandable, especially from an obedient [almost] Roman Catholic. But Rome has the ability to develop doctrine. Lutherans are bound to their Confessions as an unchanging reflection of Scripture that does not err. It seems to me that Rome is the more pliable partner.

“Rome” can develop doctrine, but it cannot change or contradict what it believes. Are you so certain of the inerrancy of the Lutheran Confessions that they could not be in error or any point? They were written by fallible men who did not even claim they were operating under any charism of infallibility. Do you think it is more likely that the whole Church erred up until the Lutheran Reformers wrote the various documents of the Book of Concord and got everything right or that maybe the Lutherans made some mistakes?

 

[Duane1966]

I would add to the above statement that I have never met a SSPX or sedevacantist who believes that any one outside the Catholic Church can have a hope of salvation.

 

[guanophore]

I would add to the above statement that I have never met a SSPX or sedevacantist who believes that any one outside the Catholic Church can have a hope of salvation.

This is the teaching of the Apostles.