Transubstantiation, Consubstantiation, Sacramental Union

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thorolfr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JonNC said:
It sounds like there is significant catechesis that needs to take place.
Click to expand...
Or perhaps they just recognise that if one is unable to distinguish between the definitions of two terms, the terms refer to the same thing.
JonNC said:
It seems that the confutators would disagree with your analysis, at least in some articles.
Click to expand...
Yes. But that doesn’t change the fact that the Lutherans who issued Confessio Augustana did not think that they were opposed to Rome on the topics covered in its first part. And transubstantiation was widely known to be the teaching of ‘the Church of Rome.’ There is just no way that the Reformers didn’t know the teaching of Rome on this issue. And since they, the Reformers, maintained that these articles contained nothing contrary to the teaching of Rome (on these topics), the natural thing is indeed to conclude that Confessio Augustana does indeed teach transubstantiation. And the Confutation does indeed read the 10th article as compatible with transubstantiation. So yes, the Formula of Concord is a breach with Confessio Augustana. Which is why I’m glad that my Church never accepted it.*
  • This doesn’t mean that those who did not accept it are not ‘confessional.’ The Formula of Concord is written 50 years after Confessio Augustana, and was never accepted by all. It is a (erroneous) piece of academic writing, being no more confessional than, say, Karl Barth’s books for the Reformed or Karl Rahner’s books for the Roman Catholics.
 
KjetilK said:
There is just no way that the Reformers didn’t know the teaching of Rome on this issue. And since they, the Reformers, maintained that these articles contained nothing contrary to the teaching of Rome (on these topics), the natural thing is indeed to conclude that Confessio Augustana does indeed teach transubstantiation.
Click to expand...
If the reformers agreed with transubstantiation in the Augsburg Confession in 1530, why did Luther, Melanchthon and other Lutherans reach an agreement with Martin Bucer and his Reformed colleagues only 6 years later in 1536 in the Wittenburg Concordia that explicitly rejected transubstantiation?
 
Thorolfr said:
If the reformers agreed with transubstantiation in the Augsburg Confession in 1530, why did Luther, Melanchthon and other Lutherans reach an agreement with Martin Bucer and his Reformed colleagues only 6 years later in 1536 in the Wittenburg Concordia that explicitly rejected transubstantiation?
Click to expand...
Why do people do all kinds of nonsense?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top