Protestant Statements of Faith and Catechisms: Luther's Small Catechism

[AugustTherese]

Triumphalist, through and through

The Catholic Church has the fullness of Truth, founded by Truth Himself. Just because baptized individuals have severed themselves from the Catholic Church, whether through apostasy, schism, or heresy, does not make Her “[t]riumphalist” in the way that you mean it to be.

The EO is clearly part of Christ’s Church, as are western non-Catholics.

Through imperfect communion, sure; all baptized Christians are ‘part’ of Christ’s Church, but are not in full communion with Her.

We,as members of His Church, because of our sin, are in schism.

Yes, schism is a sin, a grave one at that. But the Catholic Church that Christ founded is not in schism, otherwise the gates of hell have prevailed.

But we are all members of His One True Church

Through valid baptism, yes. However, those who do not partake in the Eucharist of the Catholic Church are not in full communion with the Catholic Church.

and His Spirit will guide us back to unity, and the gates of Hell will not prevail.

I hope His Spirit does guide those separated from the Catholic Church back to Her; but, the Catholic Church will not compromise apostolic and eternal truths that have been divinely revealed to her, simply for the sake of ‘unity’.

 

[JonNC]

The Catholic Church has the fullness of Truth, founded by Truth Himself. Just because baptized individuals have severed themselves from the Catholic Church, whether through apostasy, schism, or heresy, does not make Her “[t]riumphalist” in the way that you mean it to be.

I didn’t mean the Catholic Church. I was speaking specifically about the words in your post.

Through imperfect communion, sure; all baptized Christians are ‘part’ of Christ’s Church, but are not in full communion with Her.

Placing the word part in quotes seems to imply that you disagree with your communion’s position.
I do, because I reject the the notion that the one true Church is only and exclusively found in communion with the Bishop of Rome

I hope His Spirit does guide those separated from the Catholic Church back to Her;

I pray that He will guide us all out of our mutual separation.

the Catholic Church will not compromise apostolic and eternal truths that have been divinely revealed to her, simply for the sake of ‘unity’.

Compromise is not a formula for anything other than a false unity. It will take God to lead us together, as Pope Benedict told the Lutherans in Rome in 2010

 

[ltwin]

Chapter 25, number 5.

So, the gates of hell will prevail against some “pure” churches? Matthew 16:18.

You have to remember that in Reformed Theology the Universal Church and the Church institutions aren’t the same thing. The universal church is made of the elect. That is the church that the gates of hell will not prevail against. As I once heard it put, “The church is God’s people, doing God’s Will, empowered by God’s Spirit, to the Glory of God”. To say that the gates of hell will not prevail against it doesn’t mean the church is perfect. It means the church (God’s people) will ultimately prevail over Satan and that there will always be the church (God’s people) on earth carrying out His work, until Christ returns. The elect (God’s people) are found in various church organizations and while those organizations may fail, the Church (people of God) will always exist and carry out God’s work and Glorify God.

Just to expand on lanman87, Chapter 25 distinguishes between the invisible and visible church.

I. The catholic or universal Church which is invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ the Head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all.(a)

II. The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion;(b) and of their childrenc) and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ,(d) the house and family of God,(e) out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.(f)

So, the visible church are those who profess Christianity. They are visibly part of the church, but not necessarily spiritually in communion with Christ. Within the visible church, there are “particular churches” in the confession’s terminology. These visible churches vary in there purity. And yes, some visible churches have degenerated to such extremes that they are completely impure.

The Confession here is not teaching that hell prevails over the true church. The true church is invisible and universal. While certain visible churches may fall into error and sin, there will always be a church on earth to worship God according to his will.

 

[AugustTherese]

The catholic or universal Church which is invisible

The very terms ‘catholic’ and ‘universal’ are physical marks that manifest the Church Christ founded and maintains, along with the physical marks of ‘apostolic’ and ‘holy’. To label the Mystical Body of Christ ‘invisible’ seems Gnostic and undermines the Incarnate, Total Christ, Head and Body. The Catholic and Universal Church surely has ‘invisible’ qualities, but to label it invisible seems dangerous.

The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion;(b) and of their children:© and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ,(d) the house and family of God,(e) out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.

This seems like a good definition. However, what is the ‘true religion’? Where can one find this ‘visible Church’?

 

[JonNC]

The very terms ‘catholic’ and ‘universal’ are physical marks that manifest the Church Christ founded and maintains, along with the physical marks of ‘apostolic’ and ‘holy’.​

This seems like a good definition. However, what is the ‘true religion’? Where can one find this ‘visible Church’?

It is visible. One can find it where the word is preached and the sacraments administered.

 

[AugustTherese]

One can find it where the word is preached and the sacraments administered.

And, where exactly is the ‘word preached and the sacraments administered’?

 

[JonNC]

At your parish, and mine, and many others of different traditions around the world.

 

[AugustTherese]

At your parish, and mine, and many others of different traditions around the world.

So, if an atheist was desiring to convert to Christianity and was seeking the fullness of truth, the Church Christ founded, and all the valid and licit Sacraments instituted by Christ…would you give him a list of 30,000+ denominations and tell him to choose one?

 

[GladTidings]

I meant to ask Ianman87 earlier, but I didn’t hit the reply button. When Chapter 25 mentions the invisible church, is that also what some refer to as, “the ekklesia”? Or is that more of an interdenom. or non-denom. term which is meant to parallel the early days when people met secretly. Any idea?

 

[JonNC]

So, if an atheist was desiring to convert to Christianity and was seeking the fullness of truth, the Church Christ founded, and all the valid and licit Sacraments instituted by Christ…would you give him a list of 30,000+ denominations and tell him to choose one?

No. I would invite him to my parish. I would then, offer reasonable alternatives, particularly those who generally agree about Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, confession and absolution.
I would include the Catholics in communion with the pope, Catholics not in communion with the pope, such as the EO, many Lutherans, other Anglicans.

 

[AugustTherese]

No. I would invite him to my parish. I would then, offer reasonable alternatives, particularly those who generally agree about Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, confession and absolution

As a former Protestant to a current Protestant, I highly respect that, especially offering reasonable alternatives.

I would include the Catholics in communion with the pope

Thanks, bro!

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

No. I would invite him to my parish. I would then, offer reasonable alternatives, particularly those who generally agree about Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, confession and absolution

As a former Protestant to a current Protestant, I highly respect that, especially offering reasonable alternatives.

I would include the Catholics in communion with the pope

Thanks, bro!

Of course. To paraphrase Luther, what we know of the sacraments, the word and pulpit, we learn from the great western see. We share our general understanding of the sacraments, and a huge portion of our understanding of His word, more than many care to concede.
Every Catholic who hears the word and receives the sacraments is participating in His grace.
Thank God for that!!

 

[ltwin]

I meant to ask Ianman87 earlier, but I didn’t hit the reply button. When Chapter 25 mentions the invisible church, is that also what some refer to as, “the ekklesia”? Or is that more of an interdenom. or non-denom. term which is meant to parallel the early days when people met secretly. Any idea?

Ekklesia is just the Greek word for “church,” literally an “assembly.” The church is the group of people who belong to Christ. The ekklesia is both invisible (those spiritually joined to Christ) and visible (those who profess the Christian religion).

The Westminster Confession was written by English Puritans at a time when they ran England (and it was temporarily part of English law until the return of Anglicanism), and it was ultimately adopted by the Church of Scotland (the state church) as its confessional document. The Presbyterians were the religious establishment in Scotland, so I doubt there is any idea of meeting secretly.

The Reformed stress unconditional election. The elect and the reprobate co-mingle within the visible church, each enjoying the “ministry, oracles, and ordinances of God” that have been entrusted to the visible church. The invisible church is only the elect.

 

[lanman87]

I meant to ask Ianman87 earlier, but I didn’t hit the reply button. When Chapter 25 mentions the invisible church, is that also what some refer to as, “the ekklesia”? Or is that more of an interdenom. or non-denom. term which is meant to parallel the early days when people met secretly. Any idea?

As Itwin said, ekklesia is the greek word that is translated as “church” in the Bible. However, the word actually means “Gathering of those summoned”. We often say it means Assembly or Gathering but in Ancient Greece it had a much deeper meaning. It was when an official came into a town to make an announcement he would summon the townspeople to assemble at a certain location to hear the announcement. This assembly is what is called an ekklesia.

So the word church in the Bible doesn’t have the same meaning as the word church today. Today when we say church we may mean Building, Denomination, Organization, or institution. However, Biblically speaking, it simply means “gathering of those summoned”.

 

[ATraveller]

I think it’s reasonable to move on. I think we’ll move to the related Shorter Catechism as a conclusion to the Westminster Assembly.

The Westminster Shorter Catechism - Ligonier Ministries

 

[ATraveller]

Luther’s Small Catechism.
http://bookofconcord.org/smallcatechism.php