No doubts about converting from LCMS

[House_Harkonnen]

Lutheranism is just another heresy. You did good joining the RCIA.

That’s an unfortunate and uncharitable thing to say, and not to mention the pope Emeritus disagrees with the assessment that Lutheranism “is just another heresy”.

 

[steido01]

Lutheranism is just another heresy. You did good joining the RCIA.

Huh. Another CAF poster was adamant that Lutherans aren’t material or formal heretics. Now CAF has me thoroughly confused regarding Roman doctrine.

 

[Neofight]

I’ve never been Lutheran, but I think I need to object to this statement … Just like I would object if someone claimed that the anti-Lutheran posters on this forum were representative of the official position of the Catholic Church.

Yeah, there seems to be as many Catholics claiming to be experts on Protestantism as there are Protestants claiming to be experts on Catholicism! Makes me wonder if any of them even know anything about their own faith traditions!

 

[pablope]

Huh. Another CAF poster was adamant that Lutherans aren’t material or formal heretics. Now CAF has me thoroughly confused regarding Roman doctrine.

What about Roman doctrine? It is full of holes, errors, infected with heresy…it is the doctrine of the Anti-Christ pope…that a Luther was needed to cause a split in the Church…and it was necessary for luther to start his own and his own theology/doctrine…

 

[House_Harkonnen]

Huh. Another CAF poster was adamant that Lutherans aren’t material or formal heretics. Now CAF has me thoroughly confused regarding Roman doctrine.

Plus the pope emeritus had a pretty positive assessment of Luther and Lutherans that was way better and more positive than “just another heresy.”

 

[Peter_J]

Huh. Another CAF poster was adamant that Lutherans aren’t material or formal heretics. Now CAF has me thoroughly confused regarding Roman doctrine.

Dude, my experience on the web in general and CAF in particular leaves me completely unsurprised to hear a fellow Catholic say that “Lutheranism is just another heresy.” (Maybe I’ve been on the web too long?)

 

[mikecnorthwest]

Just to sum up how I feel and perhaps get back on track I’d say that I am finding a much fuller faith in Catholicism than I did in the LCMS. But earthly differences aside, we are all brothers and sisters in Christ. Whether he (Pastor Fisk) knows it or not!

 

[benjohnson]

Plus the pope emeritus had a pretty positive assessment of Luther and Lutherans that was way better and more positive than “just another heresy.”

The wort part of that attack is that if I’m going to be in heresy, I would rather do so in spectacular form, and not just “another” heresy.

Sounds so mundane.

 

[benjohnson]

I am finding a much fuller faith in Catholicism than I did in the LCMS.

May you grow in that faith and be blessed by it.

 

[JohnR77]

Peter… The official LCMS teaching is that the papacy is the antichrist. I always hid behind the caveat that LCMS teaches that the office, not the man, is the antichrist but Pastor Fisk seems to lay that bare. Most lay persons in the LCMS have a hard time with this but I would say that most LCMS pastors teach this.

Welcome home. My Great-grandfather, living in Germany and coming from a devout Lutheran family, had a complete set of Luther’s works. His father disowned him when he became Catholic.

In 1520 Luther wrote a tract against the German Franciscan Alveld where he identified the Pope with the Anti-Christ and described Papal Rome as the “whore of Bablyon.”

I suppose that is what Pastor Fisk meant by his statement calling Rome “the ONE who rides the beast that comes from the nations.”

I suppose he means Revelation 17:1-7
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Whore-babylon-luther-bible-1534-saturated.jpg

Of course, being a Catholic myself, I don’t agree with that interpretation, but that he said that doesn’t bother me so much as I am glad to hear what his mistakes are so that I can perhaps help him, rather what offended me was his numerous misrepresentations about what Catholics believe, i.e. worshiping Mary, and so many others I lost count.



Colored version of the Whore of Babylon illustration from Martin Luther’s 1534 translation of the Bible.

John

 

[House_Harkonnen]

The wort part of that attack is that if I’m going to be in heresy, I would rather do so in spectacular form, and not just “another” heresy.

Sounds so mundane.

Totally true. I don’t want to be “just another heretic”, how boring is that.

That being so, call me anything, except “separated brethren”.

 

[Robyn_p]

Welcome Home. You compare the Lutheran and the Catholic Church as some what similar. Well if I wore the same dress as my friend I suppose that would be considered somewhat the same except the hair colour /shoes/tights/jewellery etc would be different.
Luther brought with him the teachings of the Catholic Church that he liked, then those he felt different about he changed to his own likings and taste.

Personally and I say personally I feel the reason why Luther left the monks was because of a sex problem he was not able for celibacy anymore in spite of taking the vow of celibacy. He left no not by himself, or with his vow of celibacy intact , or carrying his big heavy Bible, but with an ex nun not exactly the thing to do for a man with vows, he had a gripe with the Catholic Church but thought it was OK to run off with an ex nun,

I don’t agree with Martin Luther’s actions or theology either, but what you wrote here is bordering slander. Luther really did start out wanting to fix abuses he saw and had legitimate concerns, and I believe his motives in the beginning were motivated out of love for the Church, not lust.

Yes, he got too carried away and went about things the wrong way, but saying he rebelled so he could have sex is uncharitable. He joined the monastery and took a vow of celibacy freely, and didn’t marry until years after he broke from the Church, so I find it hard to believe that sex was his main motivation to split.

No, he shouldn’t have broken his vows, but let’s try and exercise charity and not slander the dead, even if we disagree with what they did.

instead of putting some of the problems he thought to his Superior, said nothing and legged it, but not before committing the sin of scandal/calumny/and making all sorts of accusations which he pinned up on a sheet of paper for all the neighbours to see, thank God he was no relation of mine, I have plenty of dirt on my relations that does not mean I would write them down for the whole Parish to read about them.

Actually, what Luther did with the 95 theses was not uncommon to do in those days. That was how people expressed their concerns back then, it was basically an invite to debate and discuss.

Again, not saying I approve or agree with what he did, but we should limit our critique to the real issues that divide us instead of phantom ones. I think our Lutheran brothers and sisters would appreciate that. I know I don’t like it when non-Catholic’s do this about Catholic history, and I’m sure they feel the same way.

 

[Stilldreamn]

Ah Pastor Fisk. His youthful zeal can be appealing and he does a good job explaining different scriptures to a younger crowd. But when I want to understand what Catholics believe and teach, I would go to a Catholic source (and not just a youtube video either!)

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Just to sum up how I feel and perhaps get back on track I’d say that I am finding a much fuller faith in Catholicism than I did in the LCMS. But earthly differences aside, we are all brothers and sisters in Christ. Whether he (Pastor Fisk) knows it or not!

May you be richly blessed in your journey!

That was a pretty eye opening video though. I imagine this sort of diatribe really gets his message across to the younger crowd, the very crowd Catholics are losing. Thanks for the link. I was only able to last until minute 4.

 

[Cathoholic]

Welcome home mikecnorthwest.

God bless.

Cathoholic

The Jonathan Fisk vitriolic YouTube video was filled with partial truths and errors. You evidently know that, but I don’t think he did this video for you (even though it was in response to your question).

 

[JonNC]

I posted back in December about my conversion from the LCMS and asked for help with book recommendations. Thanks to everyone who responded, it was very helpful. Earlier in December I had emailed a question to Pastor Jonathan Fisk about my planned conversion. He is a more orthodox LCMS pastor that I used to enjoy listening to on Youtube.

So here’s an update. I’m two months into a fantastic RCIA program and on track to enter into full membership in June. I have zero doubts about my conversion and feel very at home with the Church. I did not really expect to get an answer to my question from Pastor Fisk but much to my surprise he recently answered it on Youtube. The link will be below if you want to view it. With the benefit of my studies, and my RCIA class, I’m now able to have a much clearer perspective on the LCMS teachings regarding the RCC. Pastor Fisk also left no doubt as to the LCMS view on the RCC, unfortunately.

youtu.be/KxTglbyabk0

May you be blessed in word and sacrament in the CC.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

I’m a bit grumpy about Fisk’s behavior there - it’s one thing to proclaim the Gospel with vigor and quite another thing to dwell in an ad-hominum against brother Christians as Pastor Fisk did in this particular video.

There is still a sharp dividing line between official Catholic theology and Lutheran theology that is very important - but for Lutherans that trust and believe in their own confessions, they should strive to be convincing and not so acerbic that it drives others away.

The image of Pastors as sheepherders is fitting - gather the flock is a gentle process, not done with strum and drag. Once the flock is gathered, a sheepherder will use the rod of the crosier from time to time - but only after the flock trusts him.

In this case, Pastor Fisk’s delivery has failed in it’s purpose.

…

That said, I can understand the dismay at the ‘church grown movement’.

What’s unfortunate is he is usually pretty solid and positive, even though is jumpy videos grow annoying enough that I’ll listen without watching.
Jon

 

[JonNC]

Peter… The official LCMS teaching is that the papacy is the antichrist. I always hid behind the caveat that LCMS teaches that the office, not the man, is the antichrist but Pastor Fisk seems to lay that bare. Most lay persons in the LCMS have a hard time with this but I would say that most LCMS pastors teach this.

Pastor Fisk is a servant of the confessions, not an interpreter of it. The synod, and by the way, pan-Lutheranism confesses this not to apply to individual popes but to the office. Along with the condemnations of Trent at about the same time, these words leave our communions living with the taint of those old and tired polemics. All the more reason to expand the dialogue between confessional Lutherans in the LCMS and ILC and the Vatican.

Jon

 

[JohnR77]

Pastor Fisk is a servant of the confessions, not an interpreter of it. The synod, and by the way, pan-Lutheranism confesses this
-[that LCMS teaches that the office, not the man, is the antichrist

but Pastor Fisk seems to lay that bare] -
not to apply to individual popes but to the office. …

If it only applied to a particular Pope and he died, that would be the end of it.
But with it applying to the “office” seems like a convenient way of making ongoing till the end of time.

My understanding is that Luther DID APPLY the accusation of ANTICHRIST to the specific Pope of his day. Was the “office” explanation added after that Pope died?
John

 

[mikecnorthwest]

Was the “office” explanation added after that Pope died?
John

Luther deems the Pope the antichrist because of the claims he makes about Papal authority so by that logic (for the LCMS) it would seem the term antichrist would follow the office not the man.