Not practicing SS in Lutheran churches

[Annie39]

You don’t have enough time to examine the evidence, but you have enough time to reflexively dismiss it with provision that you don’t have enough time.

I have to admit, tis a curious debating strategy.

I guess I missed this post addressed to me until I saw that Topper had referenced it. I think that I asked if the person would post just one or two of those references and I’d try to find time to look those up. I didn’t get them but Topper is right. It is up to the poster to research the quotes not the researchee

 

[Topper17]

Hi Edwin,

Thanks for your post.

This doesn’t make sense. As you say, referring it to the office doesn’t make it better–in fact, it’s a much more serious ecumenical problem.

I agree that it is a very serious ecumenical problem. Personally, I don’t see how supposedly most Lutherans can believe in the ‘primacy’ of the Bishop of Rome while still claiming that he is the antichrist, or as you state, even worse, that his office is the antichrist. To me it’s a distinction without a difference. No matter how you spin it, it’s extremely offensive and amazingly, Lutherans SEEM not to understand that, or maybe they just can’t admit it. If they did, maybe they would have to ‘do something’ about it, like eradicate that offensive language from their Confessions. Now THAT would be a ‘signal’ that they are serious about unity with Catholics. But my prediction is that Lutheranism will turn to dust before they alter their confessions.

But there’s no doubt that the Confessions are talking about the office and not an individual Pope. Why on earth would you read them otherwise? What individual Pope do you think they are talking about?

I disagree that the Confessions are only talking about the ‘office’.

The Formula of Concord - A Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, Treatise Compiled by the Theologians Assembled at Smalcald – 1537

INTRODUCTION TO THE TREATISE ON THE POWER AND PRIMACY OF THE POPE

“39] Now, it is manifest that **the Roman pontiffs, with their adherents, defend [and practice] godless doctrines and godless services. And the marks [all the vices] of Antichrist plainly agree with the kingdom of the Pope and his adherents.**57] Therefore, even though the bishop of Rome had the primacy by divine right, yet since he **defends godless services and doctrine conflicting with the Gospel, obedience is not due him; yea, it is necessary to resist him as Antichrist. **59]

But those who agree with the Pope, and defend his doctrine and [false] services, **defile themselves with idolatry and blasphemous opinions, become guilty of the blood of the godly, whom the Pope [and his adherents[/COLOR]] persecutes, detract from the glory of God, and hinder the welfare of the Church, because they strengthen errors and crimes to all posterity…”

**#39 makes it very clear that ‘all the marks of antichrist’ are on ‘Roman pontiffs, with their adherents’. #57 makes it very clear that the Pope – ‘him’ is antichrist. The ‘him’ is personal and does not refer to an office. #59 again mentions the Pope AND his ‘adherents’.

There is absolutely NO mention of the ‘office’ of the papacy in this document.**

**It would seem that the ‘adherents’ are people who, like me, are loyal to the Church and to the Bishop of Rome. Apparently according to the Lutheran Confessions, I, personally, bear the mark of the antichrist. I have asked Lutherans, repeatedly, specifically and exactly who the ‘adherents’ are that bear the mark of the antichrist and have NEVER gotten an answer. **

As we both know, there are plenty of Lutherans here who would prefer that we NOT read their confessions literally, claiming that the antichrist is ONLY the office of the Bishop of Rome (as if that is not offensive enough). I have been told repeatedly that they personally don’t consider the pope, to be the antichrist and consider Catholics to be true Christians, etc, etc. But that is not the issue. What is important is NOT what individual LCMS members believe, but what their church officially teaches.

This is a very difficult distinction to make with Protestants. It seems that with Protestants, their personal opinions are MUCH more important to them than ours as loyal Catholics are to us. As Protestants, they have the ‘right’, and in fact, sometimes a duty, to disagree with their church. As a loyal Catholic, our ‘job’ is to accept Catholic dogma. To them, what is important is what THEY believe, and to a loyal Catholic, what is important is what the Church teaches. In my experience, this difference ‘does not compute’ when the mindset revolves around the individual, what the self believes and perceives. Of course, with that ‘my opinion’ being supreme mindset, there was no way that the Reformation could remain united in doctrine or anything else, and history shows that it was only a matter of months before the schisms within Protestantism began to emerge.

It seems that many of the Lutherans here claim to adhere to their Confessional documents, but when push comes to shove, they really don’t. Of course they can always resort to tortured ‘interpretations’ of those documents and attempt to make us believe that they don’t say what they clearly do say.

All that being said, I do agree that the reference to the “office” of the papacy as being the antichrist creates a huge roadblock to any kind of meaningful unity between Catholics and Lutherans. With that in mind, I have a question for you Edwin:

Do you think it is even possible that Lutherans could ever retract or rewrite those offensive statements in their Confessions?

God Bless You Edwin, Topper**

 

[Annie39]

Hi Topper

I am very grateful for all the time that you have taken on this topic. Can you imagine that I was told by more than one person that since I didn’t read the Confessions I was not properly catechized in the Lutheran Church? I’m completely amazed.

You ask Edwin “Do you think it is even possible that Lutherans could ever retract or rewrite those offensive statements in their Confessions?" I am not a Professor of Church History but I would like to comment as an ex-Lutheran. It is my wish; my prayer that that the Lutherans disavow and jettison this horrible book. I don’t see any hope of their return home to Rome unless they do. I said it before and I’ll say it again I now know why I was not asked to read the Confessions by the Lutheran Pastors I have known. Almost all of those men were kind and worked hard at their occupation. One of those men I sincerely believe was on his way to the Catholic Church I have lost contact with him so I don’t know if he made it home. On my way into the Lutheran Church the Pastor gave a bible study concentrating on the Lutheran interpretation of same.

I was thinking about ordering the Confessions today to see what may have kept me in the Lutheran Church if I were just catechized properly. I must thank you once again this time for saving me money.

Annie

 

[House_Harkonnen]

Hi Edwin,

Thanks for your post.

I agree that it is a very serious ecumenical problem. Personally, I don’t see how supposedly most Lutherans can believe in the ‘primacy’ of the Bishop of Rome while still claiming that he is the antichrist, or as you state, even worse, that his office is the antichrist. To me it’s a distinction without a difference. No matter how you spin it, it’s extremely offensive and amazingly, Lutherans SEEM not to understand that, or maybe they just can’t admit it. If they did, maybe they would have to ‘do something’ about it, like eradicate that offensive language from their Confessions. Now THAT would be a ‘signal’ that they are serious about unity with Catholics. But my prediction is that Lutheranism will turn to dust before they alter their confessions.

I disagree that the Confessions are only talking about the ‘office’.

The Formula of Concord - A Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, Treatise Compiled by the Theologians Assembled at Smalcald – 1537

INTRODUCTION TO THE TREATISE ON THE POWER AND PRIMACY OF THE POPE

“39] Now, it is manifest that the Roman pontiffs, with their adherents, defend [and practice] godless doctrines and godless services. And the marks [all the vices] of Antichrist plainly agree with the kingdom of the Pope and his adherents.57] Therefore, even though the bishop of Rome had the primacy by divine right, yet since he defends godless services and doctrine conflicting with the Gospel, obedience is not due him; yea, it is necessary to resist him as Antichrist. 59]

But those who agree with the Pope, and defend his doctrine and [false] services, defile themselves with idolatry and blasphemous opinions, become guilty of the blood of the godly, whom the Pope [and his adherents[/COLOR]] persecutes, detract from the glory of God, and hinder the welfare of the Church, because they strengthen errors and crimes to all posterity…”

**#39 makes it very clear that ‘all the marks of antichrist’ are on ‘Roman pontiffs, with their adherents’. #57 makes it very clear that the Pope – ‘him’ is antichrist. The ‘him’ is personal and does not refer to an office. #59 again mentions the Pope AND his ‘adherents’.

There is absolutely NO mention of the ‘office’ of the papacy in this document.**

**It would seem that the ‘adherents’ are people who, like me, are loyal to the Church and to the Bishop of Rome. Apparently according to the Lutheran Confessions, I, personally, bear the mark of the antichrist. I have asked Lutherans, repeatedly, specifically and exactly who the ‘adherents’ are that bear the mark of the antichrist and have NEVER gotten an answer. **

As we both know, there are plenty of Lutherans here who would prefer that we NOT read their confessions literally, claiming that the antichrist is ONLY the office of the Bishop of Rome (as if that is not offensive enough). I have been told repeatedly that they personally don’t consider the pope, to be the antichrist and consider Catholics to be true Christians, etc, etc. But that is not the issue. What is important is NOT what individual LCMS members believe, but what their church officially teaches.

This is a very difficult distinction to make with Protestants. It seems that with Protestants, their personal opinions are MUCH more important to them than ours as loyal Catholics are to us. As Protestants, they have the ‘right’, and in fact, sometimes a duty, to disagree with their church. As a loyal Catholic, our ‘job’ is to accept Catholic dogma. To them, what is important is what THEY believe, and to a loyal Catholic, what is important is what the Church teaches. In my experience, this difference ‘does not compute’ when the mindset revolves around the individual, what the self believes and perceives. Of course, with that ‘my opinion’ being supreme mindset, there was no way that the Reformation could remain united in doctrine or anything else, and history shows that it was only a matter of months before the schisms within Protestantism began to emerge.

It seems that many of the Lutherans here claim to adhere to their Confessional documents, but when push comes to shove, they really don’t. Of course they can always resort to tortured ‘interpretations’ of those documents and attempt to make us believe that they don’t say what they clearly do say.

All that being said, I do agree that the reference to the “office” of the papacy as being the antichrist creates a huge roadblock to any kind of meaningful unity between Catholics and Lutherans. With that in mind, I have a question for you Edwin:

Do you think it is even possible that Lutherans could ever retract or rewrite those offensive statements in their Confessions?

God Bless You Edwin, Topper

The confession that the pope is the antichrist is contingent on the pope continuing to teach false doctrine and persecute Christians.

Since the pope has stopped persecuting Christians, but still teachings false doctrine (IMO) confessional Lutherans continue to see him as the antichrist.

If he stopped and returned to correct doctrine, we would presumably cease believing that he is the antichrist.

 

[steido01]

The confession that the pope is the antichrist is contingent on the pope continuing to teach false doctrine and persecute Christians.

Since the pope has stopped persecuting Christians, but still teachings false doctrine (IMO) confessional Lutherans continue to see him as the antichrist.

If he stopped and returned to correct doctrine, we would presumably cease believing that he is the antichrist.

It isn’t worth the effort, House. Topper has some vendetta against Lutherans; it’s been his focus ever since post one. No matter how many times you explain what the Confessions mean, he’ll give his own (wrong) interpretation. He doesn’t seem to understand that the Confessions are for the church to interpret, not for Topper to try to misinterpret for us. Last I checked, it was our Lutheran Ministerium that held the keys in our synod but, alas, Topper has crowned himself our new pope. Topper locuta est; causa finita est!

 

[Novocastrian]

“39] Now, it is manifest that the Roman pontiffs, with their adherents, defend [and practice] godless doctrines and godless services. And the marks [all the vices] of Antichrist plainly agree with the kingdom of the Pope and his adherents. Therefore, even though the bishop of Rome had the primacy by divine right, yet since he defends godless services and doctrine conflicting with the Gospel, obedience is not due him; yea, it is necessary to resist him as Antichrist.

I’ll preface my two points by saying that I’m not a Lutheran, so I have no horse in this race.

(1) In your enthusiasm for highlighting, you appear to have missed the one phrase which permits an interpretation of the rest of the passage as referring to the office of the Papacy.

(2) You seem to believe that Lutherans should remove something because it is “offensive”. Since most non-RC Christians are presumably somewhat offended by the claim that, “Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” Ought Rome to abrogate that for being offensive? It would seem a little inconsistent it not.

Problem is, of course, that it’s ‘infallible’…

 

[Novocastrian]

Given that you also ‘use’ the word “Catholic” to refer to your communion, it appears that you have a ‘dog in this hunt’.

Why the scare quotes around ‘use’?

Are we to believe that anybody who holds to the Creeds should be called “Catholic”? That seems like a pretty ‘watered down’ version of the term in my book. In addition, that would mean that any sect or heretical group can refer to themselves as members of the Only, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, which pretty much eliminates the importance of excommunication.

Nope, of course we’re not to believe that. But that’s not what was being discussed. You were asking how long Lutherans had been referring to themselves as ‘Evangelical Catholics’, and I said that I didn’t know, but that they had been referring to themselves as Catholics in using the Creeds.

According to the Catholic Church, a person who is excommunicated is no longer allowed the authority of the Catholic Church to teach and to administer the Sacraments. Of course, as we have seen here on this thread though, those people who were excommunicated can CLAIM that they still have teaching authority, and that they have the right to administer the Sacraments, and that they can legitimately claim the title “Catholic”.

Your position of course is that they can do all of those things.

I rather think that I, and not you, get to decide what my position is. Putting words in someone’s mouth is both rude and a bad debating technique.

My position is that those excommunicated by competent authority for good reason are properly excommunicate. I imagine that your view is the same. We merely differ as to what we count as competent authority or good reason.

The Lutheran answer here would be that a renaissance Pope opposed to the preaching of the Gospel is not competent authority. You and I can take that or leave it, but it’s a coherent answer.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Hi Topper

I am very grateful for all the time that you have taken on this topic. Can you imagine that I was told by more than one person that since I didn’t read the Confessions I was not properly catechized in the Lutheran Church? I’m completely amazed.

You ask Edwin “Do you think it is even possible that Lutherans could ever retract or rewrite those offensive statements in their Confessions?" I am not a Professor of Church History but I would like to comment as an ex-Lutheran. It is my wish; my prayer that that the Lutherans disavow and jettison this horrible book. I don’t see any hope of their return home to Rome unless they do. I said it before and I’ll say it again I now know why I was not asked to read the Confessions by the Lutheran Pastors I have known. Almost all of those men were kind and worked hard at their occupation. One of those men I sincerely believe was on his way to the Catholic Church I have lost contact with him so I don’t know if he made it home. On my way into the Lutheran Church the Pastor gave a bible study concentrating on the Lutheran interpretation of same.

I was thinking about ordering the Confessions today to see what may have kept me in the Lutheran Church if I were just catechized properly. I must thank you once again this time for saving me money.

Annie

I find it odd that you profess interest in the Lutheran Confessions when you dismiss every attempt to educate yourself.

Some posters seem to be happier provoking conflict when there is none and then ignoring honest discussion. Makes one wonder about motive and genuineness.

 

[spina1953]

After reading post #84 I have to agree with Topper in that as a Catholic it is hard not to see the intent of the meaning of the Introduction to the treatise on the Power of the Pope #39 of the Formula of Concord 1537. It seems to me anyone reading that can see readily understand what it is saying and what it means, which is the Pope is the antichrist and that he teaches false doctrine and Gospel and those who follow his teachings are also antichrists.

I agree with Topper as to what it says. it appears to me at least that from what Lutheran posters are saying that Topper or us Catholic’s are misinterpreting it. I rather doubt that Topper has any vendetta against Lutheran’s, and it seems to me it is more going to the root cause of Luther’s starting a revolt against the CC which in turn started the Protestant revolution and has since cause more Protestant denominations than one can count.

No matter how many times Lutheran posters try to explain #39 of the Confessions as to what they say it says and means and what the Lutheran church says and what it means by the Lutheran church interpretation, #39 still says the same thing and its meaning is rather clear, so it appears to me IMO.

While I respect one’s right to believe what they will, I see #39 as a insult and very offensive to Catholic’s. I do understand that most Catholic’s may not even know or have read the Concord or Confessions so do not know of #39 and what it says but if they did I think that they would agree that it is very offensive to Catholic’s and to the Catholic Church. But this is only MHO speaking for myself.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Getting real again. Let’s take a look at what the Catholic Church says about the Lutheran Confessions:

The express purpose of the Augsburg Confession is to bear witness to the faith of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. Its and concern is not with peculiar doctrines nor indeed with the establishment of a new Church (CA 7,1), but with the preservation and renewal of the Christian faith in its purity in harmony with the Ancient Church, and “the Church of Rome,” and in agreement with the witness of Holy Scripture.3 This explicit intention of the Confessio Augustana is also still important for our understanding of the later Lutheran confessional documents.

Joint studies by Catholic and Lutheran theologians4 have shown that the contents of the statements of the Augsburg Confession in large measure fulfill this intention and to this extent can be regarded as an expression of the common faith.

prounione.urbe.it/dia-int…onechrist.html

The Vatican is discussing points of genuine reunion or at least inter-communion with Lutherans when some posters are literally 500 years behind reality.

1. Should not creative efforts be made to discover a form of institutional relationship between the Catholic and the Lutheran churches which would express magisterial mutuality and would correspond to the converging state of their traditions? The present Catholic authorization of some sacramental sharing with the Orthodox, who do not acknowledge papal infallibility, shows more flexibility in Catholic thought and practice than was anticipated a few decades ago. Should the current developments in our two churches lead to analogous authorizations regarding sacramental sharing between Catholics and Lutherans?
   ts.mu.edu/readers/content…0.1/40.1.5.pdf

 

[Annie39]

Getting real again. Let’s take a look at what the Catholic Church says about the Lutheran Confessions:

The Vatican is discussing points of genuine reunion or at least inter-communion with Lutherans when some posters are literally 500 years behind reality.

You insist on posting information from Catholics and Lutherans together which does not reflect official teaching. I find it interesting that you are so anxious to be accepted by the Catholic Church that you will continue to hold on to this thread of some Catholic theologians agreeing with some Lutherans to gloss over what the Confessions really say. They don’t deny it they just say things are not the same move on, nothing to see here. I will for the last time post the official Catholic “take” on things after this I give up. vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_01081998_off-answer-catholic_en.html

 

[Annie39]

I find it odd that you profess interest in the Lutheran Confessions when you dismiss every attempt to educate yourself.

Some posters seem to be happier provoking conflict when there is none and then ignoring honest discussion. Makes one wonder about motive and genuineness.

Which passage from the Confessions did Topper misquote?

Annie

 

[benjohnson]

You insist on posting information from Catholics and Lutherans together which does not reflect official teaching.

Our EvanglicalCahtolic is a bit enthusiastic but he also points to a broader truth between Catholics and Lutherans - they while we both may still have serious points of dispute that are full of pain, we also have much to be thankful for.

Our LCMS church is rather suspicious of Catholics, and yet we were more than happy to stand with you on pro-Life issues and the recent HHS mandate. Our president (Bishop) gave a rousing and vigourous defense of Catholic religious liberty before congress.

On the Catholic side, Pope Benedict XVI (Who is very aware of what the Lutheran Confessions say) gave us LCMS Lutherans his greeting and we received it with gladness.

Franlky - this is the sate of LCMS and Catholic relations:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd....e6e2f8160b3e5d94268db71ca5664cfd&oe=54467A16&gda=1412875621_6c4ea9f8657733ef554de903fbb99f07

 

[spina1953]

You insist on posting information from Catholics and Lutherans together which does not reflect official teaching. I find it interesting that you are so anxious to be accepted by the Catholic Church that you will continue to hold on to this thread of some Catholic theologians agreeing with some Lutherans to gloss over what the Confessions really say. They don’t deny it they just say things are not the same move on, nothing to see here. I will for the last time post the official Catholic “take” on things after this I give up. vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_01081998_off-answer-catholic_en.html

Hi Annie39: I agree with your statement. What gets me is #39 of the Confessions not the whole of the Concord, that was what Topper was referring to at this point in time. it seems that the subject gets changes to the whole of the Confessions and not this #39 that Topper was talking about.
While the CC may agree with some things that is in this Confession I rather doubt that the CC agrees with the whole of it. Also the Confession as I understand it is the authority of the Lutheran church as to what Lutherans are to believe. Catholic’s have the Magisterium as our teaching authority which teaches the same truths since the time of the Apostles and has not changed any of the truths given to the CC from Christ to the Apostles to our present time.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

You insist on posting information from Catholics and Lutherans together which does not reflect official teaching. I find it interesting that you are so anxious to be accepted by the Catholic Church that you will continue to hold on to this thread of some Catholic theologians agreeing with some Lutherans to gloss over what the Confessions really say. They don’t deny it they just say things are not the same move on, nothing to see here. I will for the last time post the official Catholic “take” on things after this I give up. vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_01081998_off-answer-catholic_en.html

What are your objections with the Holy See? And how is that being a good Catholic? Or is that important, Annie?

All one can do is provide insight where there is ignorance.

1. However this discussion may be resolved, we wish to stress here two important points. First, whether the anathemas are lifted or not, the differences between Catholics and Lutherans regarding these dogmas do not of themselves exclude all Eucharistic sharing between the churches.124 Second, the truth-implications of these dogmas must not be overlooked. We aim at mutual communion one day with Lutherans without requiring either side to give up the fundamental evangelical convictions and values of its tradition. Even if there were a mutual recognition of Ministries and limited Eucharistic sharing, we would feel that we owed it to evangelical truth, as we are given by the Spirit to understand it, to continue to pray and study with Lutherans about these questions
   w2.vatican.va/content/vatican/en.html

 

[Annie39]

Our EvanglicalCahtolic is a bit enthusiastic but he also points to a broader truth between Catholics and Lutherans - they while we both may still have serious points of dispute that are full of pain, we also have much to be thankful for.

Our LCMS church is rather suspicious of Catholics, and yet we were more than happy to stand with you on pro-Life issues and the recent HHS mandate. Our president (Bishop) gave a rousing and vigourous defense of Catholic religious liberty before congress.

On the Catholic side, Pope Benedict XVI (Who is very aware of what the Lutheran Confessions say) gave us LCMS Lutherans his greeting and we received it with gladness.

Franlky - this is the sate of LCMS and Catholic relations:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd....e6e2f8160b3e5d94268db71ca5664cfd&oe=54467A16&gda=1412875621_6c4ea9f8657733ef554de903fbb99f07

Hi Ben

Most of our friends are Lutherans a long time friend and her family are Calvary Chapel types. One of my favorite people was a Lutheran minister (now diseased). All of the members of my family are Protestants or merely secular. All but one of my husband’s family members are either protestants or secular. I cannot tell you how much we agree with most of those people on various issues including pro-life issues. I greet them when I see them, we’ll call one another somewhat often (we live in different states now). We share holidays both religious and secular. One of my nieces who attends a Calvary Chapel type church has worked alongside Catholics in the pro-life movement for years and she told me that that one thing she admires about Catholics is their commitment to ending abortion. I personally would work alongside a person no matter what the religious belief against abortion.

A friend of ours is Lutheran and is invited back to his former Lutheran Church each year to perform his stand-up comedy act for charity. We used to always attend but we are now in another state. The only person to whom I refer here that I would agree is Catholic is my husband’s sister who actually is Catholic. We have been to Mass at her Parish when we visited her in central CA.

Annie

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Hi Annie39: I agree with your statement. What gets me is #39 of the Confessions not the whole of the Concord, that was what Topper was referring to at this point in time. it seems that the subject gets changes to the whole of the Confessions and not this #39 that Topper was talking about.
While the CC may agree with some things that is in this Confession I rather doubt that the CC agrees with the whole of it. Also the Confession as I understand it is the authority of the Lutheran church as to what Lutherans are to believe. Catholic’s have the Magisterium as our teaching authority which teaches the same truths since the time of the Apostles and has not changed any of the truths given to the CC from Christ to the Apostles to our present time.

There is good reading on the Holy See site. Here are a few random comments involving the Magisterium. Any thoughts?

1. This, to be sure, is not yet full agreement. Catholics, as well as many Lutherans, regret the absence in Lutheranism of a universal magisterium (i.e., of effective means of speaking to and for the whole Church), while Lutherans, as well as many Catholics, believe that the doctrine and practice of papal teaching authority and infallibility are not yet sufficiently protected against abuses. Catholics look upon the papacy, in view of its high responsibilities and the promises given to Peter, as especially assisted by the Holy Spirit.

It is thus clear that the doctrine of justification certainly does not lead Reformation thinking into a depreciation, far less a rejection, of binding church teaching and of a teaching ministry of the church. The churches of the Lutheran Reformation themselves carry out binding teaching and themselves have organs or ministries for the church’s teaching. They even have displayed the willingness, and indeed the "deep desire"287 to recognize for themselves the church’s teaching ministry in its traditional form.288 What they insist on is solely that this teaching and this teaching ministry be in accordance with the gospel in their self-understanding and exercise, and do not contradict the gospel.289

1. Should not Catholic theology take a new look at the Lutheran Confessions, especially those—such as the Augsburg Confession—whose original purpose was irenic? Reinterpreted in a new context which would highlight their Catholic dimension, could these Confessions be recognized as valid expressions of the Church’s teaching? Could such recognition serve as an instance, of magisterial mutuality?82

 

[Annie39]

What are your objections with the Holy See? And how is that being a good Catholic? Or is that important, Annie?

All one can do is provide insight where there is ignorance.

Yes I’m being a very good Catholic. I won’t lie to you nor give you false hope.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Yes I’m being a very good Catholic. I won’t lie to you nor give you false hope.

Any comments, Annie on the Vatican documents?

 

[Annie39]

Any comments, Annie on the Vatican documents?

I looked and couldn’t find them on the web. Which documents are they from and where can I find them. I could not find the quotes in your urls one just went to the Vatican web site.