It sounds like we have something else in common. How bout if I PM you with my brother’s name and you do likewise?Tell you what, you pray for my relative’s conversion and I’ll pray for yours!
Worked for Augustine also. “Accessible to all men…easy to read…”
*All Is Vanity
1 The words of the Preacher,[a] the son of David, king in Jerusalem.
2 Vanity** of vanities, says the Preacher,
vanity of vanities! All is vanity.
3 What does man gain by all the toil
at which he toils under the sun?
4 A generation goes, and a generation comes,
but the earth remains forever.
5 The sun rises, and the sun goes down,
and hastens[c] to the place where it rises.
6 The wind blows to the south
and goes around to the north;
around and around goes the wind,
and on its circuits the wind returns.
7 All streams run to the sea,
but the sea is not full;
to the place where the streams flow,
there they flow again.
8 All things are full of weariness;
a man cannot utter it;
the eye is not satisfied with seeing,
nor the ear filled with hearing.
9 What has been is what will be,
and what has been done is what will be done,
and there is nothing new under the sun.
10 Is there a thing of which it is said,
“See, this is new”?
It has been already
in the ages before us.
11 There is no remembrance of former things,[d]
nor will there be any remembrance
of later things[e] yet to be
among those who come after.***
No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend’s
Or of thine own were:
Any man’s death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
by John Donne
“Man did not weave the web of life, he is but a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself”. Chief Seattle.
Deep down, it all comes to our ego and the fear of being wrong. It is as if we have forgotten that we don’t become right(eous) by our own power… but that it is because of the Cross and our Lord.
Apart from the Cross, all is vanity - as the Preacher says.
Good. A bit like “let every man be a liar (a bit wrong) but only God is True”(not wrong in any fashion). Some fear is proper , for we are gullible sheep , unless as noted in post, we remember to cling to the Cross, the Good Shepherd.
There is no refuting that, but that was not my point. My point again is that Luther not only DID practice PI but for the first 5-7 years of his Revolt against the Church, actually taught that that was Christian doctrine and that PI should be practiced by everyone. So the question then becomes (and has been) specifically and exactly how and why Lutheranism found it necessary to refute the early teachings of its founder.I appreciate the fact that you acknowledge that, as a tradition, Lutheranism does not practice private interpretation regarding doctrine.
Jon, within the context of my post, that being that my claim that Lutheranism repudiated the early Luther, is 100% accurate. My comment was specifically in regards to Luther’s early teaching on the authority of the Church vs. the authority of the individual. Lutheranism directly contradicted and completely repudiated this early teaching of Martin Luther.I think it a tad overstated that Lutheranism completely repudiated Luther. After all, the Small and Large Catechisms and the Smalcald Articles are in the Book of Concord.
I assume you already do if you are a Trinitarian and have a bible…
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)Anyway, how ‘bout them Cowboys? I’m bettin’ that all the RC’s on this thread are Philly fans, if they follow football…
As long as it works for you, right…?
Every Protestant Church has their own version of the truth. It was the truth they were taught and the truth they believe and spread to others.
Although I am a die hard Roman Catholic, and if it came down to 2 people on earth believing in the RCC it would be Myself and the Pope
I do believe that it is okay for them to have Salvation and not be a member of the RCC. And I know many better Protestants that put me to shame as a Catholic at times.
But I am trying harder every day to be better.But you see, Topper, that actually is the point, even if it is not the point you wish to make. The point was, in my earliest posts on the topic in this thread, and is in this my current post, that the Lutheran practice, regarding doctrine, does not include personal interpretation. That is the point. what Luther, or Melanchthon, or anyone prior thought of personal interpretation isn’t important to the point I was making.
That isn’t important to me, anymore than to determine why Zwingli was wrong about the Eucharist, or where any number of Catholics were wrong about any number of things in history.
And I disagree with anyone who takes that view. It isn’t the view I take, so I feel no urge or obligation to defend something I do not agree with, regardless of its (human) source.
And I would contend, as I did earlier, that this is not entirely true. Lutherans today take essentially the same view as Luther did regarding, for example, the Marian doctrines of the perpetual virginity, the IC, and the the Assumption. They are not articles of faith (unlike the virgin birth and Holy Theotokos), and therefore Lutherans have the liberty of personal judgement on them. It is only regards doctrine that we exclude it.
I don’t see where we have repudiated scripture or the confessions.
If one reads the conclusion, one sees the intention. The UAC is a confessional statement of our faith, which laid out what the Reformers believed was the true faith of the Church Catholic.
The Reformers were given the opportunity to present the Confession at Augsburg in 1530, by the authorities of the time.
I see the topic important, but not your approach to it, with all respect. The point of the earlier discussion was the use of private interpretation, and there are indeed some communions that allow for unfettered PI, but Lutheranism isn’t one of them. If Luther’s view was different than the position of the Lutheran tradition within the One Holy Church, then honestly, other than as a mention, it isn’t all that important.
Jon-
Randy, this is just plain unfair. :dts:Jon-
I guess the question that I keep hearing in the back of my mind is, "How much of the Luther can you shed and still BE Lutherans?
It seems to me that the more move away from what Luther actually taught the more you are anything BUT “Luther-an”, and if that is true, in which direction are you moving?
Toward Calvin?
Toward some other branch of Protestantism?
Toward Catholicism?
I mean, what is the point of being “Lutheran” without any Luther left???
That’s why I dubbed you the “ninja Catholic”. You’re there, hiding in plain sight :nunchuk:
Seriously, it will be a big deal to you when you finally “out” yourself, but the rest of us will simply say, “Yeah, Jon. We know.”
Serves me right for asking rhetorical questions.
Lutherans did not name themselves that. They name themselves “evangelicals.”
Is cynacism due to someone finding truth outside one’s established comfort zone ? Where is our rejoicing for one soul that is converted ? Shall we be bah humbug like the Sanhedrin towards the healed blind man ? As a Catholic posted, the proof is in the pudding. Christ apparently has many wells besides the one we are accustomed to drink from.
That is a little rough. How about just a D-1 unranked team? Besides , Notre Dame played like a D-3 team last time they met 'Bama.
Oh, all right. I retract the D-3 comment, and will leave it at NC State, Duke, and UNC.
Yep. And Sunday worship, too. That’s courtesy of the authority of the magisterium as well.
I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said here, rinnie.