Present Day Lutheran-Catholic Relations

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tomyris
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
KjetilK said:
Not one person, but the Church. And the Church is more than those in communion with Rome.
Click to expand...
And now we come to the Protestant problems of just who IS the Church and where the final authority in the Church may be found.
 
Thorolfr said:
Of course not! Shouldn’t the Church of Norway validate and examine the claims of the Roman Catholic Church? That sounds logical to me. 😃
Click to expand...
I thought they did this back in the 16th century…and got it very wrong in the process. 😉
 
Picky_Picky said:
Fr K is a priest of the Church of Norway. Why would he need some other jurisdiction?
Click to expand...
Which goes back to the question of the validity of one’s AS…or holy orders…who would validate the claim to AS?

Which in the Church with authority will do this?
 
KjetilK said:
Which brings us back to the point of disagreement: I do not recognize that the Bishop of Rome has jurisdiction in or over the Church of Norway, or the Norwegian realm.

But you seem to use that position as a premise in the debate, thus constantly begging the question.
Click to expand...
Did the Arians or Nestorians recognize the authority of Rome?
 
KjetilK said:
I’ll make you a deal. The Church of Rome can validate our orders, and we can validate theirs.
Click to expand...
And let us say…Rome said your orders are invalid…would you do the same to Rome and rule Rome as invalid when you cannot find an instance where Rome had lost its connection to Peter?

But then again…you sidestep the question again of your claim of AS…by introducing a side issue…by questioning Rome…when Rome’s orders are not in question but yours…🤷

[SIGN]But the question is not the orders of Rome…but of the Church of Norway…who can validate the claim of AS of Norway?

Would you be willing to let Constantinople examine your claim of valid AS?

You are sidestepping the question…but can you point out an instance where Rome had lost its connection to Peter?[/SIGN]

And can you point out this…but can you point out an instance where Rome had lost its connection to Peter?
 
Picky_Picky said:
I would presume that any Christian recognises the authority of his church. Why should he seek to submit to some other authority?
Click to expand...
Because not all “churches” have true, apostolic succession.

My next door neighbor can start a church and we can both agree that he will be the bishop. Then he can ordain me a priest of our new church.

Does that make me equal to a priest who is ordained by the Bishop of Rome?
 
Randy_Carson said:
Because not all “churches” have true, apostolic succession.

My next door neighbor can start a church and we can both agree that he will be the bishop. Then he can ordain me a priest of our new church.

Does that make me equal to a priest who is ordained by the Bishop of Rome?
Click to expand...
Most Protestants (including most American Lutherans) don’t even care about apostolic succession, so discussions about who has it and who doesn’t are irrelevant to them. 🤷
 
pablope said:
…

But then again…you sidestep the question again of your claim of AS…by introducing a side issue…by questioning Rome…when Rome’s orders are not in question but yours…🤷

…
Click to expand...
The Church of Norway has no doubt that her orders are valid. Why then should she seek validation of them?
 
Thorolfr said:
Most Protestants (including most American Lutherans) don’t even care about apostolic succession, so discussions about who has it and who doesn’t are irrelevant to them. 🤷
Click to expand...
Correct.

This is why education about the basic fundamentals of our faith is so important. If people really knew what the early Church taught and why, there would be no Protestantism.
 
Picky_Picky said:
The Church of Norway has no doubt that her orders are valid. Why then should she seek validation of them?
Click to expand...
Which goes back to the question I have been asking…how do you know? if you have read the previoius posts…the CofN did something in the 1800/1900s…to somehow regain this AS…meaning they lost it somehow in the 1500s…and so the questions raised.

Well…consider this…if the CofN is confident they have AS…so why refuse the validation, so as to settle the question, once and for all…and that is why I asked…Father K…who would do this validation (which he has been sidestepping).
 
Thorolfr said:
Most Protestants (including most American Lutherans) don’t even care about apostolic succession, so discussions about who has it and who doesn’t are irrelevant to them. 🤷
Click to expand...
And you think this is a good thing that American Lutherans and many protestants would not consider it important?

And you can see in this article…some baptists are bringing back “bishops”…hamptonroads.com/node/336411

So can anyone, any protestant congregation, claim to have a bishop, do you think, without the proper consecration and ordination as has been ordered by the Church Fathers for order the Church?
 
Randy_Carson said:
This is why education about the basic fundamentals of our faith is so important. If people really knew what the early Church taught and why, there would be no Protestantism.
Click to expand...
pablope said:
And you think this is a good thing that American Lutherans and many protestants would not consider it important?

And you can see in this article…some baptists are bringing back “bishops”…hamptonroads.com/node/336411

So can anyone, any protestant congregation, claim to have a bishop, do you think, without the proper consecration and ordination as has been ordered by the Church Fathers for order the Church?
Click to expand...
I doubt that there will ever be agreement about early church history in a way that will make Protestants become Catholics. Even many good scholars do not agree with the Catholic version of that history.

As for some Baptists bringing back bishops, we also have bishops in the ELCA. But apostolic succession is the least of the disagreements about what is required for the proper ordination of a bishop since the presiding bishop of the ELCA, Elizabeth Eaton, also happens to be a woman. The presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church is also a woman. So I doubt that there will be any agreement among Christians about this issue any time soon.
 
pablope said:
Which goes back to the question I have been asking…how do you know?
Click to expand...
By examining the evidence. That is basically how you get to know things. How do you know that the orders of your Church is valid? If you simply say that the Roman Pontiff settles it, then you are back to the same thing: You then have to have been examining the evidence for his authority, and been convinced of it.

So it doesn’t merely go back to authority. It goes back to examining the evidence. Unless you want to collapse theology into fideism.
pablope said:
if you have read the previoius posts…the CofN did something in the 1800/1900s…to somehow regain this AS…meaning they lost it somehow in the 1500s…and so the questions raised.
Click to expand...
No, the Church of Norway never claimed to loose the orders. Porvoo was not there to restore orders.
pablope said:
Well…consider this…if the CofN is confident they have AS…so why refuse the validation, so as to settle the question, once and for all…and that is why I asked…Father K…who would do this validation (which he has been sidestepping).
Click to expand...
As I said before, I’ll make you a deal. The Church of Rome can validate our orders, and we can validate theirs. If that is not acceptable, why? Why refuse the validation, so as to settle the question, once and for all?

The reason I am not interested is that your question assumes that the Roman Pontiff has universal supremacy, which I deny.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top