The end of Protestantism

  • Thread starter Thread starter smead2942
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
PRmerger said:
Actually, I don’t think we were.
Click to expand...
Then either he wasn’t explaining the LCMS view well, or you weren’t understanding it well. Or both. It’s the Internet and things get foggy. 🙂 But considering post #333, I think I understand what he was trying to say.
PRmerger said:
I think he was reserving for himself and his church what he objects to in Catholicism: namely, the right to exclude others.
Click to expand...
Now for this to be correct, the LCMS would need to exclude. But it does not. The LCMS does not claim to exclude anyone from salvation. In fact, we’re pretty big sticklers about saying that Christ died for all. And by “all,” I mean literally all human beings. Now, whether a human has chosen to reject that gift (and this may often appear obvious to us!), it is not for the church to declare. Here’s a real-life example that demonstrates the Lutheran position: the Catholic Church once widely considered all victims of suicide to be damned, and refused them Christian burial. Luther, however, considered the mental illness which caused suicide to effectively be a murder by the devil. So he commended the victims of suicide to God’s Mercy and gave them proper Christian burial. Similarly today, Lutherans of all stripes do not condemn anyone to hell, because only God knows what is in a person’s heart. As Pope Francis said (and this time in a proper context), “Who am I to judge?”

Again, I do not think the LCMS and Catholic definitions of ‘Church/church,’ meaning those who may be saved, is significantly different here, despite the exclusionary or triumphalist language that a particular side may tend to use.
 
LutheranScholar said:
My apologies. I’ll restate my views when I get back from work.
Click to expand...
Very well, it seems I still have a little time. I see Catholics and Protestants as part of the same Christian paradigm. What I have seen here,* never *in real life, though) are Catholics bemoaning the vast numbers of Protestant Churches, the many and various ways of interpreting Scripture, etc., etc… Okay. I say that only Christ can judge Christians. I say that we are saved by God’s grace through faith via the Holy Scripture. I say that the Holy Spirit is unbounded in His power to save. I am questioned about the condition of a Muslim’s soul without Christ. I say that anyone apart from Christ is most likely not going to heaven. I exclude non- Christians. I’m told that I’m allowing for my own Church what I’d refuse for a Catholic Church ( huh?) and that is greatly objectionable! I’m not calling Catholics heretics. I’m not saying every single Christian needs to be part of the Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod. Yes, I support my church’s positions. No, I’m not culpable for the decisions of Christians either in or outside of my own Synod. Biblical infallibility is older than I am, so I’m not responsible for that either. None of us Protestants answer to Rome. As a part of the Body of Christ who takes literally the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, those who share not our faith are rightly excluded, for the protection of their own souls, from participation in said sacrament. I can’t answer for other Christians, protestant or not, because I’m not responsible for their choices.
 
Sorry for coming to the this thread late and for not having read all the posts.

In my view there will never be an end to anything whilst people want to continue believing in it.

I do not profess to be an expert on psychology, but I believe there is something called dissonance? Which is, no matter what evidence you present they will just reject it?

I have noticed two phenomena in my part of the world. First, protestant fundamentalism is under serious scrutiny. I watched a really interesting tv documentary about the Bible last night and advancements in archaeology, biblical scholarship and revisionist history have cast serious doubt on many traditional teachings. If anyone is sufficiently interested I could go into it, but suffice to say it has cast considerable doubt on relying on black and white interpretations of the written word.

As Catholic, such things don’t matter to me. To be Catholic is belief in the Incarnation, Baptism, Holy Communion, the forgiveness of sins, Mary and the Saints and the Resurrection. These cannot be proven by scientific means. They are beliefs and I accept that. But so what? If I derive spiritual enlightenment from such things, I believe it brings me closer to God and I subsequently lead a better life what is bad about the fact they cannot be proven?

There is a lot of pain in the Church in Ireland at the moment and lots of Catholics have lost faith in the hierarchy of the Church. That said, a lot of them have not lost faith in their beliefs. They have drifted away from Mass and don’t regularly take their children because they have valid objections to persons who distribute the Eucharist. Yet, they still profess the faith and admit their children to the Sacraments. To me, that is faith.

In my view, the mistake Protestant religions made was to place too great an emphasis on the written word, portraying it as ‘evidence’ to the detriment of faith. Christians who were persecuted in the first century did not give their lives because they could prove their belief by written word supported by scientific evidence. It was faith.

As Catholic, I cannot prove Real Presence the Incarnation nor anything else. I believe these things. If someone has an objection to that, fair enough. Object because I cannot prove it. It is true we live in a society were if one cannot ‘prove’ a belief one is scorned, but if one needs irrevocable proof to believe one is missing what it is to be human. That is not to say we are compelled to believe whatever no matter what. What I am saying is complete absence of faith is detrimental to society as the absence of belief means an absence of trust. There is no doubt trust today is very thin on the ground because we are no longer prepared to believe. Not just in God but in others.
 
LutheranScholar said:
People are approached by the Holy Spirit according to their own understanding? The only interpretation of Scripture I can really account for is my own.
Click to expand...
Then why do you need a Church, since you have the Bible the Catholic Church gave you? God Bless, Memaw
 
“Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that in us you might learn not to exceed what is written, in order that no one of you might become arrogant in behalf of one against the other,” (1 Cor. 4:6).
 
minkymurph said:
Sorry for coming to the this thread late and for not having read all the posts.

In my view there will never be an end to anything whilst people want to continue believing in it.

I do not profess to be an expert on psychology, but I believe there is something called dissonance? Which is, no matter what evidence you present they will just reject it?

I have noticed two phenomena in my part of the world. First, protestant fundamentalism is under serious scrutiny. I watched a really interesting tv documentary about the Bible last night and advancements in archaeology, biblical scholarship and revisionist history have cast serious doubt on many traditional teachings. If anyone is sufficiently interested I could go into it, but suffice to say it has cast considerable doubt on relying on black and white interpretations of the written word.

As Catholic, such things don’t matter to me. To be Catholic is belief in the Incarnation, Baptism, Holy Communion, the forgiveness of sins, Mary and the Saints and the Resurrection. These cannot be proven by scientific means. They are beliefs and I accept that. But so what? If I derive spiritual enlightenment from such things, I believe it brings me closer to God and I subsequently lead a better life what is bad about the fact they cannot be proven?

There is a lot of pain in the Church in Ireland at the moment and lots of Catholics have lost faith in the hierarchy of the Church. That said, a lot of them have not lost faith in their beliefs. They have drifted away from Mass and don’t regularly take their children because they have valid objections to persons who distribute the Eucharist. Yet, they still profess the faith and admit their children to the Sacraments. To me, that is faith.

In my view, the mistake Protestant religions made was to place too great an emphasis on the written word, portraying it as ‘evidence’ to the detriment of faith. Christians who were persecuted in the first century did not give their lives because they could prove their belief by written word supported by scientific evidence. It was faith.

As Catholic, I cannot prove Real Presence the Incarnation nor anything else. I believe these things. If someone has an objection to that, fair enough. Object because I cannot prove it. It is true we live in a society were if one cannot ‘prove’ a belief one is scorned, but if one needs irrevocable proof to believe one is missing what it is to be human. That is not to say we are compelled to believe whatever no matter what. What I am saying is complete absence of faith is detrimental to society as the absence of belief means an absence of trust. There is no doubt trust today is very thin on the ground because we are no longer prepared to believe. Not just in God but in others.
Click to expand...
👍
 
aidanbradypop said:
“Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that in us you might learn not to exceed what is written, in order that no one of you might become arrogant in behalf of one against the other,” (1 Cor. 4:6).
Click to expand...
If only he would have said what it is that is written 😃
 
Colossians 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, as you teach and admonish one another in all wisdom, and as you sing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs with thankfulness in your hearts to God.
 
steido01 said:
The Catholic considers the Lutheran, by virtue of Baptism, to be Catholic, though suffering from improper church. CCC-838
Click to expand...
That’s NOT what it says (emphasis mine)

**838 **“The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter.” Those “who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church.” With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound “that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord’s Eucharist.”

“imperfect communion” with the Catholic Church ≠ they are Catholic.

I numbered the points of CCC 837 (all emphasis mine)

It makes 5 salient points

*"*Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, (i.e. baptised)

  1. *]accept all the means of salvation given to the Church
    *]together with her entire organization,
    *]who—by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith,
    *]the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion—are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ,
    *]who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops.

    taking that same list and applying that to validly baptised Protestants, they don’t meet the requirements for being “in” the Church.

    "Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, (i.e. baptised)

    1. *]-]accept all the means of salvation given to the Church /-]
      *]-]together with her entire organization, /-]
      *]-]who—by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, i.e. the Catholic profession of faith /-]
      *]-]the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion—are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ,/-]
      *]-]who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops./-]

      Protestants are NO on all 5 points. Ergo they are **NOT **“in” the Church.
 
LutheranScholar said:
Exactly. It’s a foolish thought anyway. Protestantism isn’t going anywhere. Why should it? We’re pretty zealous in disseminating the Christian Message to the world.
Click to expand...
Well, Protestantism stands in the tradition of Apollos: full of vigor and fervent love for the Lord, but in need of some gentle counseling as to the actual kerygma.
 
steve_b said:
“imperfect communion” with the Catholic Church ≠ they are Catholic.
Click to expand...
You’re very correct Steve. I was simplifying for the ease of argument. Sorry if I was unclear. It would have been better had I clarified and said;

The Lutheran considers the Catholic, by virtue of Baptism, to be [essentially] Christian, though suffering from impure doctrine. LCMS
The Catholic considers the Lutheran, by virtue of Baptism, to be [in regards to salvation-issues, a certain sort of deficient] Catholic, suffering from improper , imperfect, and deficient] church. CCC-838

My point is that, like Lutherans, Catholics also acknowledge a special, albeit imperfect, communion with their fellow Saints Militant of other denominations. This communion, however imperfect on earth, is made by the Holy Spirit through the Sacrament of Baptism.
 
steve_b said:
:confused:

The following are ALL Christians The Great Heresies … And all of them should be around because they disseminate their message zealously?
Click to expand...
What a Catholic considers heresy is exactly that: what a* Catholic *considers heresy. The average Protestant isn’t overly concerned about what a Christian from another communion thinks of his or her church… again, a Protestant body might have its own ideas on what actually constitutes heresy. Remember, Luther was excommunicated by somebody who probably had less than pure motives for the excommunication. Luther and his people requested an open council and they never got one. Yeah, Protestantism has as much right to exist as Catholicism or any other Christian body. Again, showing a Protestant a Catholic document showing movements the Catholic Church officially disapproves of means very little to the Protestant. Zealotry ( as I’ve seen here) sometimes relates very strongly to the Truth, sometimes relates hardly at all. The message of Jesus Christ coming to Earth to redeem mankind and establish His Church, which is proclaimed by every Christian body, is indeed a worthy message and those who disseminate it have every right to do so. Rights established, I might add, first by our victory in the Thirty Years War and later by our Protestant forebears who put their ideals of religious freedom into the very Constitution that our country is supposed to go by in the first place.
 
steve_b said:
That’s NOT what it says (emphasis mine)

**838 **“The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter.” Those “who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church.” With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound “that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord’s Eucharist.”

“imperfect communion” with the Catholic Church ≠ they are Catholic.

I numbered the points of CCC 837 (all emphasis mine)

It makes 5 salient points

*"*Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, (i.e. baptised)

  1. *]accept all the means of salvation given to the Church
    *]together with her entire organization,
    *]who—by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith,
    *]the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion—are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ,
    *]who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops.

    taking that same list and applying that to validly baptised Protestants, they don’t meet the requirements for being “in” the Church.

    "Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, (i.e. baptised)

    1. *]-]accept all the means of salvation given to the Church /-]
      *]-]together with her entire organization, /-]
      *]-]who—by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, i.e. the Catholic profession of faith /-]
      *]-]the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion—are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ,/-]
      *]-]who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops./-]

      Protestants are NO on all 5 points. Ergo they are **NOT **“in” the Church.
Click to expand...

    1. Well put. We fought a lot of wars and a lot of our blood was shed in order to establish our separation from the See of Rome. That shouldn’t be discounted in any conversation regarding the validity of Protestantism.
 
LutheranScholar said:
The message of Jesus Christ coming to Earth to redeem mankind and establish His Church, which is proclaimed by every Christian body, is indeed a worthy message and those who disseminate it have every right to do so.
Click to expand...
Amen!

But I would add that it is of great import that message is the true kerygma, and not one that has been vitiated by men.

That’s why Catholicism is so greatly troubled by the obscenity of these tens of thousands of differing Christian denominations, each proclaiming some varying message of the true kergyma.
 
LutheranScholar said:
What a Catholic considers heresy is exactly that: what a* Catholic *considers heresy. The average Protestant isn’t overly concerned about what a Christian from another communion thinks of his or her church… again, a Protestant body might have its own ideas on what actually constitutes heresy. Remember, Luther was excommunicated by somebody who probably had less than pure motives for the excommunication. Luther and his people requested an open council and they never got one. Yeah, Protestantism has as much right to exist as Catholicism or any other Christian body. Again, showing a Protestant a Catholic document showing movements the Catholic Church officially disapproves of means very little to the Protestant. Zealotry ( as I’ve seen here) sometimes relates very strongly to the Truth, sometimes relates hardly at all. The message of Jesus Christ coming to Earth to redeem mankind and establish His Church, which is proclaimed by every Christian body, is indeed a worthy message and those who disseminate it have every right to do so. Rights established, I might add, first by our victory in the Thirty Years War and later by our Protestant forebears who put their ideals of religious freedom into the very Constitution that our country is supposed to go by in the first place.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the conversation is about “right to exist” . Anyone can come up with anything and say it is Christian…Westboro baptists?? That doesn’t mean it is Christian.

So the real question is…does someone have the right to create a division in the Church?

1 Corinthians 1:10-13

I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

Romans 16:17-18

I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.

Titus 3:9-11

But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Luke 11:17

But he, knowing their thoughts, said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and a divided household falls.

Ephesians 4:3-6

Eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

“I therefore did what belonged to me, as a man devoted to unity. For where there is division and wrath, God does not dwell. To all them that repent, the Lord grants forgiveness, if they turn in penitence to the unity of God, and to communion with the bishop. I trust [as to you] in the grace of Jesus Christ, who shall free you from every bond. And I exhort you to do nothing out of strife, but according to the doctrine of Christ. When I heard some saying, If I do not find it in the ancient Scriptures, I will not believe the Gospel; on my saying to them, It is written, they answered me, That remains to be proved. But to me Jesus Christ is in the place of all that is ancient: His cross, and death, and resurrection, and the faith which is by Him, are undefiled monuments of antiquity; by which I desire, through your prayers, to be justified.”

-Ignatius of Antioch letter to the Philadelphians

“Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons.”

— St. Ignatius Of Antioch, Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.

Seems the answer is clear…
 
Memaw said:
Then why do you need a Church, since you have the Bible the Catholic Church gave you? God Bless, Memaw
Click to expand...
The Church that gave us the Bible predated Trent by centuries. The Church that gives us the Word and Sacraments is vital to our corporate worship. I find it amusing that Catholicism claims credit due to the early Western Christian Church which the Lutheran Church also grew out of, as did the Anglicans. Luther and the other Protestants of Northern Europe felt that Rome had slidden into apostasy, that this Church had muted the Gospel message in favor of promoting their own authority. So, after excommunications, anathemas and warfare, the Protestant Churches became entrenched in Northern Europe and became relatively powerful. The belief that we could all approach God on our own, without a priestly intermediary or the Vatican’s seal of approval, held powerful appeal and the Bible, translated into the language of the people, put into the hands of learned men of the people ( how many colleges and universities are Protestant in origin?) gave the people what they needed to stand against the tyranny inherent in a religious monopoly. In places where the Inquisition held sway, obviously, this Reformation of the Western Church wasn’t going to get very far. We need the Church, the same Church that Christ established on Peter’s Confession, which was the very Rock of the Church, to guide us through this life, feed and nourish our faith through Word and Sacrament and to assist us in grooming our young to continue to live the life of the Gospel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top