C
Cat_Herder
Guest
They correspond to OT types. E.g. Eucharist corresponds to the Bread of the Presence/Face of God.
See also Jewish Origins of Catholic Devotions
- Status
See also Jewish Origins of Catholic Devotions
J
JaredM
Guest
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
No. I think we should abolish sola scriptura since no one follows it anyway.So your saying that we should abolish church buildings and marriage ceremonies!
W
WFS5801
Guest
These are various devotions, not the seven Sacraments.
W
WFS5801
Guest
Some of the New Testament Sacraments may have been prefigured in the Old Testament, but there’s no such thing as “Judeo-Christian” Catholic Sacraments. The Old Testament Jews had a form of baptism, but it wasn’t a Sacrament, nor did its recipients receive the Holy Spirit. There’s no Sacrament of Penance like we have in the Catholic Church, where the priest can grant absolution or “retain sins.” There was nothing like the Sacrament of Confirmation. Jesus elevated Marriage to a Sacrament, it was not so in Biblical Judaism. And while there were priests in the Old Testament, they definitely did not offer the Eucharist – and no Jew would claim they have anything like the Eucharist. I have no idea what might have foreshadowed Extreme Unction but, again, the Old Testament priests did not have the power to retain or absolve sins.
These Sacraments are unique to Church. They are not “Judeo-Christian.”
These Sacraments are unique to Church. They are not “Judeo-Christian.”
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
I know. If you want more info on the OT types of the sacraments then you could start here.
The problem, Jared, I have with these equations is they are far too incomplete.
The first one implies that the Catholic Church is not of the Gospel (since that is the meaning of the term “evangelical”). I would contend this is entirely untrue.
The second implies that, speaking of our communion - Lutheran, that we are without tradition, also entirely untrue. Lutherans accept the first six councils and essentially the seventh, the three ecumenical creeds, and obviously our own confessions. These are all clearly traditions, and since we have a proper understanding of sola scriptura, we accept all of these because they rightly reflect scripture.
Jon
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
Luther did not teach sola Scriptura although he used it as a sound bite. After all, he changed the Bible.
Running through the above list…
There are no church buildings in the Bible but Lutherans have them.
There are no marriage ceremonies in the Bible but Lutherans have them.
ELCA Lutherans have female pastors when in the Bible, Paul said not to.
Lutherans allow divorce when the Bible forbids it.
ELCA Lutherans allow abortion when the Bible forbids murder and human sacrifice.
And I don’t have to point out all the Evangelicals who hold that all denominational Christianity including Lutheranism rejects sola Scriptura, do I?
Hi Cat,
If one considers translationas editing, ok.
The Jews certainly had houses of worship, but that isn’t the point. To define sola scriptura in this way is erroneous.
Again, how does this relate to sola scriptura?
And they are wrong. They have veered away not only from scripture but also Lutheran teaching.
Jon
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
Removing books isn’t translating.
Why? Acts 2 says to sell your possessions, like that church building to feed the poor and worship at home. Jesus said to go in your room, close the door and pray in private. So where is this notion of having church buildings found in the Bible?
Duly noted and edited as to abortion. However the LCMS does allow divorce as you noted.
He didn’t. There are 74 books in Luther’s translation.
He also established The Church, to preach the gospel and administer the sacraments. these cannot be done within one’s own home in private. The Eucharist is also called Holy Communion, as to partake in it links one to the Communion of Saints. The Epistles, in large measure, are written to local churches.
And the CC has “annulment”.
Jon
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
Some of which are not “scripture” according to him.
The Catholic Church administers sacraments in private in the homes of elderly and shut-ins all the time.
Divorce means breaking a marriage, which presupposes that there is a marriage.
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
Although it’s possible to say the Catholic Church is less united now than it was a hundred years ago, it may still be argued that the Church has an inviolable body of doctrines that have not changed since the early days of the Church, whereas Protestantism with its thousands of sects can claim no such unity of truth. Likewise, as another posted noted, only the Catholic Church can trace its history back administratively and historically to Peter, and Christ’s commission to Peter. In England the Protestants broke with Rome and declared the King the head of the Church. In Germany, Martin Luther, once a Catholic, began the Protestant tradition of breaking away from Mother Church. So far as I know, none of the current Protestant Churches can trace themselves administratively and theologically beyond Martin Luther, although some of them have similar beliefs to the early heresies, such as Arianism.
The canonicity of which were question by lots of Catholics before Trent.
Yes, so do we. Thank God the pastor/priest does not need to visit the home of very parishioner. I suspect most sick and shut-ins would much prefer they were able to celebrate the Eucharist with a congregation of believers.
And Christ Himself spoke of when divorce ought to be permitted, which the LCMS references in its statement. Note also, that the preference even then is for reconciliation.
Jon
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
Carnelian
*lso the Catholic Church is NOT the only Church that can trace it’s history to Peter and nor does the Church itself even contend this. *
Which of the current Protestant Churches can do this? Please document. And which of them does the Church contend can do this?
I am not speaking of Orthodox Churches, but the Protestant Churches since Martin Luther.
*lso the Catholic Church is NOT the only Church that can trace it’s history to Peter and nor does the Church itself even contend this. *
Which of the current Protestant Churches can do this? Please document. And which of them does the Church contend can do this?
I am not speaking of Orthodox Churches, but the Protestant Churches since Martin Luther.
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
And so the Church on her own authority decides how to carry out the Divine mission. These decisions comprise an authority distinct from but never contradicting Scripture. These decisions are Sacred Tradition and, since you are reasonable, I think you’re ready to concede that it exists in Lutheranism.
A
Alix1912
Guest
Cat Herder,
Your understanding of the true meaning of Sola Scriptura as Luther taught and intended it, and as at least the Lutheran Church MS and WELS practice it today is flawed. This is completely understandable as most newer protestant denominations also misinterpret it as well.
Luther never said throw out all traditions, in fact he found many to be very good and valuable. What he said is that traditions, policies and practices of the Church that went against the teachings in the Scripture were to be discarded. Sacred Tradition exists in Lutheranism. Luther preached Sola Scriptura against the polices and abuses that were being practiced by some very unscruplous clergy at the time. He never said throw out all sacred tradition. Sola Scriptura meant that the Scripture was the supreme authority, not that it was the only thing we were to look to. Traditions are good and should be maintained as long as they did not conflict with scripture.
Have you ever attended a Lutheran service? You will find that it is very similar to a Catholic Mass in form and style. You will also find the Lutheran Church (MS and WELS) are actually very closely alligned to the Catholic Church in much of their doctrine and teachings. We do not support abortion, women clergy, homosexuality, divorce is only condoned in the most extreme cases (most of which would qualify for annulment in the Catholic Church). Yes, our pastors marry, but so do those in the Eastern Rite. Yes, we allow ABC, but only those that are non abortificant, and really this is a minor issue in my opinion. Yes, we don’t submit to Rome, but we do have our own hierarchy and structure. It’s really not that different or scary.
As to your charge Luther removed books from the bible…actually he didn’t. He simply seperated those Old Testament books that could not be traced back to the original Aramaic and noted that in his translation. This was something that many Catholic Theologians were also doing at the time.
I know many Catholic love to paint Luther as if he was the devil himself, however even your own modern theologians will admit that really most of his 99 Thesis were valid complaints about the Catholic Church in his day, and only a couple were heretical. My pastor has stated on several occasions that Luther would most likely be very comfortable with the state of the Catholic Church today, and he would be much more distressed with the recent behavior of the ELCA, which trust me most of us MS people are too. (On the flip side many ELCA members have converted to the MS or WELS synods or even to Catholicism).
Rather than hammer to death the things that seperate Lutherans and Catholics why not actually look at and celebrate the things that unify us. Trust me Lutherans and Catholics can live in peace and thrive (except maybe on Reformation Sunday
). I know I’m married to a Catholic.
We have some awesome discussions over the dinner table, and with each other’s respective clergy.
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
ust a point about the above, priests may only marry before ordination and not after in the Eastern Churches.
What is the rationale for this? I know a similar policy applies to deacons in the Roman Church.
What is the rationale for this? I know a similar policy applies to deacons in the Roman Church.
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
That’s Prima Scriptura, not Sola.
Yea. Check my profile. I was an ELCA.
Consubstantiation is different. “In with and under” is not “is.” Sola Fide is not Fide et Caritas. But I certainly don’t think Lutheranism is scary or that Luther was evil. I think he was misguided and a poor leader seeing as he failed to prevent the Peasants’ War.
You mean the original Hebrew. Been to Qumran lately?
The 99 Theses were a challenge to the mistaken assertion that indulgences forgive sins. Doctrinally speaking Luther was rallying against a straw man as the Catholic Church has never taught that. Some quaestores were misrepresenting induglences but not in Wittenburg, which is where he posted the Theses.
Trust me Lutherans and Catholics can live in peace and thrive (except maybe on Reformation Sunday
- Status