"We Must Affirm that the Papacy is the Anti-Christ"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jordan_Francis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TriuneUnity said:
Read the Augsburg Confession…oops…wait, nevermind…
Click to expand...
Yeah, you’d like that wouldn’t you?

But then, wouldn’t you have to reciprocate by watching “The Journey Home” or enrolling in an RCIA program, or something like that?

😛
 
Peter_J said:
Yeah, you’d like that wouldn’t you?

But then, wouldn’t you have to reciprocate by watching “The Journey Home” or enrolling in an RCIA program, or something like that?

😛
Click to expand...
haha…I’ve been through RCIA. The Journey Home doesn’t really interest me much because I’m not “into” conversion stories on TV regardless of the church involved. I do enjoy EWTN sometimes, though. I think Fr. Mitch Pacwa is great, and Fr. Corapi.
 
Getting back to the topic. Why or who must affirm that the Papacy is the Anti-Christ?

I think this statement is in error.
 
Jordan_Francis said:
I was surprised because the article seems to indicate this is an official Lutheran position. Well there are extreme Catholic positions all over the internet, I would say most of them disregard the Church’s own re-evaluations of her harsh words.

True. But a Creed is quite different from Scripture. Above all the Lutherans agree with that much.
Click to expand...
Well, remember: The Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation signed a historic document known as the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JD). This document was the fruit of almost thirty years of ecumenical dialogue. If the pope were the antichrist, I don’t think the Lutherans would have signed an agreement with him. LOL
KenEOTE said:
Getting back to the topic. Why or who must affirm that the Papacy is the Anti-Christ?
I think this statement is in error.
Click to expand...
Methinks that Youthinks correctly
 
KenEOTE said:
Getting back to the topic. Why or who must affirm that the Papacy is the Anti-Christ?

I think this statement is in error.
Click to expand...
It is the position of confessional Lutheranism, based on our confessional documents.
 
TriuneUnity said:
It is the position of confessional Lutheranism, based on our confessional documents.
Click to expand...
So, you are saying that the Lutheran World Federation signed the historic document Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JD) with the antichrist? LOL
 
terryobrien80 said:
So, you are saying that the Lutheran World Federation signed the historic document Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JD) with the antichrist? LOL
Click to expand...
No, terry. See the other thread on Proposal for my answer to this.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Where are these documents if we need them for referencing one never knows does one 👍
TriuneUnity said:
It is the position of confessional Lutheranism, based on our confessional documents.
Click to expand...
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
At the Vatican?
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
O.k. this is available at my library church synagogue, its free reading anywhere, Thank you 👍

Back to the topic, where is the OP so many times a topic gets started and its creator leaves off. Is he/she saying that the Pope is Anti-Christ? because the bible says there are many of them, so what we need is a definition of that term
 
TriuneUnity said:
818: “However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.”

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.”

2089: Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. “Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”

Protestants would be considered schismatic, not heretics. There is no such thing as a Christian heretic that Roman Catholics would call “brothers in the Lord.” Would they have said that about Arius or Nestorius?
Click to expand...

Whether they would or not at those times, is irrelevant. What is relevant is that now they do. FWIW, the CCC is for teaching what is to be believed - what it won’t usually do is show the details of the thinking behind the paragraphs: it is a catechism, not a theology text.​

Why the change ? Because the Church has developed its understanding of the Church & of what that understanding implies. No doctrine stands today where it stood in 325 or 431 (nor between those dates). This may make things difficult for some of the arguments that the Church believes what it did, but that’s life. The continuity is like that between an acorn & the oak it grows into - not like that of an inorganic thing like a stone. Acorns are meant to grow, organically, into oaks, otherwise they won’t produce fruit. They change in one way, so as to avoid changing in another. The teaching authority in the Church has to discern between development that is authentic, & development (or lack of it) that harms the Gospel either by fossilising it, or by developing it in a way that is unhealthy.

As for schism: Protestants cannot be schismatics unless they were born into the Catholic communion, were baptised into the Church united with the Papacy, & professed the Catholic faith as their own, before leaving the CC & adhering to a body already schismatic; unless they founded a schism of their own.

Those born into a schismatic body are not schismatic in a formal manner unless they make the schism their own faith by a conscious act. Lutheran babies are not schismatics. Lutherans unaware of any reason to be anything but Lutheran are not schismatics; for mere knowledge of what the CC teaches is not of itself faith; they can be formally culpable of schism only if (rightly or wrongly) they sincerely believe the claims of the CC & do not do what they can, God assisting them, to become members of the CC in a visible manner.

The Magisterium has a better grasp of all these details than most laity are likely to; it should. It is the M.'s purpose to get these things right. Since we don’t have these details (unless there are bishops & professional theologians on the fora), we won’t. So there is room for misunderstanding what they say. The Magisterium says things about non-Catholic Christians it would not have said even a century ago because it has developed; not because it is ignoring or rejecting its past teaching, but because it is being faithful to it, & to its mission.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Gottle Of Geer Says:
As for schism: Protestants cannot be schismatics unless they were born into the Catholic communion, were baptised into the Church united with the Papacy, & professed the Catholic faith as their own, before leaving the CC & adhering to a body already schismatic; unless they founded a schism of their own.

Those born into a schismatic body are not schismatic in a formal manner unless they make the schism their own faith by a conscious act. Lutheran babies are not schismatics. Lutherans unaware of any reason to be anything but Lutheran are not schismatics; for mere knowledge of what the CC teaches is not of itself faith; they can be formally culpable of schism only if (rightly or wrongly) they sincerely believe the claims of the CC & do not do what they can, God assisting them, to become members of the CC in a visible manner.

Those are some pretty tall words there Pilgrim let me ask a question, does knowing Jesus Christ help our case, we may not have knowledge of what the CC teaches 😊
 
I have said it before on this forum that Catholics do not appear united on a number of fronts; and this is certainly one of them. Many of you don’t seem to really know your own teachings on what to call Protestants; ie., heretics, scismatics, or whatever.

Getting back to the original post though; what about the anti-christ question?

I see the OP as being out of touch with Biblical reality, for the Bible mentions “antichrist” in the plural sense. Is there official Catholic teaching that would enlighten us on what Catholics believe regarding “antichrist?”
1Jo 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
Click to expand...
By some of the personal opinions expressed on this thread, maybe Catholics really prefer to call us Protestants “antichrist?” I would be interested if someone could show us the official teachings on this.
 
!John 4:7
“Beloved, let us love one another, because love is of God; everyone who loves is begotten by God and knows God. Whoever is without love does not know God, for God is love.”
It seems that whatever statements we make to one another about our faith we must look at the motivation behind these statements. Love is what unites us to God and through His Love we open to the deeper truths of our faith and God.
It seems that the anti-Christ is anything or anyone who does not love as Christ loves.
 
Ronald_E said:
!John 4:7
“Beloved, let us love one another, because love is of God; everyone who loves is begotten by God and knows God. Whoever is without love does not know God, for God is love.”
It seems that whatever statements we make to one another about our faith we must look at the motivation behind these statements. Love is what unites us to God and through His Love we open to the deeper truths of our faith and God.
It seems that the anti-Christ is anything or anyone who does not love as Christ loves.
Click to expand...
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Which version of the bible do you use Ronald, if you read in the scriptures you will find definitions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top