Yes or no?

[JonNC]

So why was it such a big deal (struggle) for Luther to leave the Catholic Church? Why not join one of these communities you describe above? You do agree it was one of the biggest events in Christianity for Luther to leave the Catholic Church, right? Today when someone leaves the Catholic Church there is not quite the same hoop-la, why is that? Isn’t It because he [Luther] started something no one else would do? He left the “One”-Holy-Catholic-and Apostolic Church. Why else do you consider him your “hero” (I believe I have heard you say)?

Peace!!!

Placing aside our difference in terminology (see my above posts), it should be a big deal, a struggle, daily, for every Lutheran to remain outside communion with the Bishop of Rome, not because our salvation depends on being in communion with him, but because he is the Western Patriarch, and the goal of the Reformation was/is not division, but reform. For the Reformation to be successful, no Lutheran should be outside communion with him. That should be the goal. I as a Lutheran take a moment most everyday to consider whether or not division from him is still valid.

Jon

 

[KjetilK]

I would encourage you to read the works by Pagels…

No one should read Pagels. She is no scholar, she is a hack. Fr. Paul Mankowski puts it best. The background is that Pagels ‘slightly’ changed a quote from Irenaeus, since he didn’t say what she wanted him to say. Here is a relevant section:

Pagels has carpentered a non-existent quotation, putatively from an ancient source, by silent suppression of relevant context, silent omission of troublesome words, and a mid-sentence shift of 34 chapters backwards through the cited text, so as deliberately to pervert the meaning of the original. While her endnote calls the quote “conflated,” the word doesn’t fit even as a euphemism: what we have is not conflation but creation.

Put simply, Irenaeus did not write what Prof. Pagels wished he would have written, so she made good the defect by silently changing the text. Creativity, when applied to one’s sources, is not a compliment. She is a very naughty historian.

Or she would be, were she judged by the conventional canons of scholarship. At the post-graduate institute where I teach, and at any university with which I am familiar, for a professor or a grad student intentionally to falsify a source is a career-ending offense. Among professional scholars, witness tampering is no joke: once the charge is proven, the miscreant is dismissed from the guild and not re-admitted.

I am not calling for academic sanctions but, more simply, for clarification. Pagels should be billed accurately — not as an expert on Gnosticism or Coptic Christianity but as what she is: a lady novelist.

 

[adf417]

Placing aside our difference in terminology (see my above posts), it should be a big deal, a struggle, daily, for every Lutheran to remain outside communion with the Bishop of Rome, not because our salvation depends on being in communion with him, but because he is the Western Patriarch, and the goal of the Reformation was/is not division, but reform. For the Reformation to be successful, no Lutheran should be outside communion with him. That should be the goal. I as a Lutheran take a moment most everyday to consider whether or not division from him is still valid.

Jon

Understood Jon, however I am curious if House would concur with your post.

Peace!!!

 

[JonNC]

Understood Jon, however I am curious if House would concur with your post.

Peace!!!

I don’t know. His is a different experience, having come out of the Catholic Church, whereas I am a life-long Lutheran. My hope would that, whatever led him to leave the CC would not further keep him out if, say, corporate unity were to occur.

Jon

 

[Sy_Noe]

Maybe those who tell you no don’t believe that even if the answer is yes, it was not what the CC grew into later. So maybe a better question would be was the Church Christ meant to establish the CC today? I’m just offering you more thread material.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

House Harkonnen

I have not read all of the post, But you seem to go under the assumption that the Catholic Church and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same in the eyes of the Church. This is not True. There are 23 sui iuris churches That comprise the Catholic Church the Roman or Latin Church is the largest and most recognized. The other 22 are in union with the Bishop of Rome (the Pope). Along with these Churches there have been various heretical groups but this has been the structure form the beginning. The Great schism with the east saw many (most of ) the Bishops of theses of churches break union with Rome over the years many have came back that is why we have today both Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholics of the Same rite.
So when the early fathers wrote of the catholic church it would not matter if the used a C or c as in there world it would not matter as they were one and the same. all Bishops of were in union with one another and with Rome. If they used Roman they would have been addressing just that segment of the church in the west.
All that said these type of discussion would be so strange to the person of the early church as they could not see a person that says they are part of the catholic church and not be in union with the Bishops of church be they east or west and the schism of 1000 would greatly sadden them.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Placing aside our difference in terminology (see my above posts), it should be a big deal, a struggle, daily, for every Lutheran to remain outside communion with the Bishop of Rome, not because our salvation depends on being in communion with him, but because he is the Western Patriarch, and the goal of the Reformation was/is not division, but reform. For the Reformation to be successful, no Lutheran should be outside communion with him. That should be the goal. I as a Lutheran take a moment most everyday to consider whether or not division from him is still valid.

Jon

Amen Jon.

Question. What issue from Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses (basically the start of the reformation) has not been address by the Church. and in what way were they not address in an satisfactory way?

 

[steido01]

Amen Jon.

Question. What issue from Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses (basically the start of the reformation) has not been address by the Church. and in what way were they not address in an satisfactory way?

The 95 Theses are not really a Lutheran document, at least not reflective of our theology (though the document has some historic value). Frankly, they’re a Catholic academic exercise. To know why we Lutherans continue our protest, the documents that actually need to be studied are the Confessions; namely Confessio Augustana, the Roman Confutation and the Apology to the Augsburg Confession. Also useful would be the Smalcald Articles and the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope. The 95 Theses really have no authoritative place in Lutheranism.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

The 95 Theses are not really a Lutheran document, at least not reflective of our theology (though the document has some historic value). Frankly, they’re a Catholic academic exercise. To know why we Lutherans continue our protest, the documents that actually need to be studied are the Confessions; namely Confessio Augustana, the Roman Confutation and the Apology to the Augsburg Confession. Also useful would be the Smalcald Articles and the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope. The 95 Theses really have no authoritative place in Lutheranism.

Interesting that the document that really started Luther’s protest holds not authority within the community that bares his name.

 

[KjetilK]

Interesting that the document that really started Luther’s protest holds not authority within the community that bares his name.

That would only be ‘interesting’ if Lutheranism was about following every thing Luther ever did, say, or write. The label ‘Lutheran’ was, in fact, made by its opponents, and in many European countries they prefer to say ‘evangelical’ or ‘evangelical catholic.’

One problem with this is that in English, ‘evangelical’ has now been defined as the modern evangelical movement. In Norwegian, we distinguish between ‘evangelisk’ (Lutheran) and ‘evangelikal’ (modern low church evangelicalism).

 

[FathersKnowBest]

From the Augsburg Confession:
Also they [churches of the Augsburg Confession]** teach that one holy Church** is to continue forever.
and
** …in doctrine and ceremonies nothing has been received on our part against Scripture or the Church Catholic**.

Lutherans believe, as taught in the Augsburg Confession, that there is one Church, the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, of which we are a part, a communion within it, a tradition within it. Not a separate Church, but indeed members of the one holy Church.

Absolutely. All you need do is define “one” in a different sense than it was intended in the Creed.

Sadly, a different sense than that which Christ used in His High Priestly Prayer (John 17).
:bighanky:

 

[JonNC]

Absolutely. All you need do is define “one” in a different sense than it was intended in the Creed.

Sadly, a different sense than that which Christ used in His High Priestly Prayer (John 17).
:bighanky:

Actually, it is precisely the meaning of one in the creed, as we find in Ephesians:
4There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

One Church in sad division is still only one Church. Christ made only one Church, which includes the Church Triumphant, the Church Suffering if one identifies purgation in such a way, and all of us in the Church Militant. Pray that Christ’s call in John 17 be fulfilled.

Jon

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Actually, it is precisely the meaning of one in the creed, as we find in Ephesians:
4There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

One Church in sad division is still only one Church. Christ made only one Church, which includes the Church Triumphant, the Church Suffering if one identifies purgation in such a way, and all of us in the Church Militant. Pray that Christ’s call in John 17 be fulfilled.

Jon

I agree that Ephesians contains the definition of “one” that we find in the creed.
Sadly, I disagree that Catholics and protestants share one faith.
That does include Lutherans, although our faiths are much closer than many other protestants.
(This is especially true of MS Lutherans, who share most of our beliefs.)

 

[JonNC]

I agree that Ephesians contains the definition of “one” that we find in the creed.
Sadly, I disagree that Catholics and protestants share one faith.
That does include Lutherans, although our faiths are much closer than many other protestants.
(This is especially true of MS Lutherans, who share most of our beliefs.)

Let’s then, work on it, and pray for it…
…together.

Jon

 

[whoisdiss]

Not the Roman Catholic Church, but the catholic church. All of these quotes of dishonestly and erroneously capitalized it as to make it seem like they were speaking of a particular modern day denomination.

If you mean the Roman rite of the Catholic Church then well yes, but the “modern day denomination” has always existed since the first century. The Catholic Church as a whole is not Roman Catholic, because that is a rite in the Church. All Roman Catholics are Catholic, but not all Catholics are Roman Catholic. I see you are Lutheran, a denomination which trys to identify itself as apart of the universal church. But like Saint Agustine says, “Even the heretics want to be called Catholic.”

 

[JonNC]

If you mean the Roman rite of the Catholic Church then well yes, but the “modern day denomination” has always existed since the first century. The Catholic Church as a whole is not Roman Catholic, because that is a rite in the Church. All Roman Catholics are Catholic, but not all Catholics are Roman Catholic. I see you are Lutheran, a denomination which trys to identify itself as apart of the universal church. But like Saint Agustine says, “Even the heretics want to be called Catholic.”

Am I, a cradle Lutheran, a heretic?

Jon

 

[adf417]

Am I, a cradle Lutheran, a heretic?

Jon

Do ya fish much Jon? Crickets are sometimes better than worms.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

I agree that Ephesians contains the definition of “one” that we find in the creed.
Sadly, I disagree that Catholics and protestants share one faith.
That does include Lutherans, although our faiths are much closer than many other protestants.
(This is especially true of MS Lutherans, who share most of our beliefs.)

I Believe that it was Pope Benedict XVI that said ( and I paraphrase here not quote) All Christians are members of the One church, by virtue of our baptism we share the same faith, although those faith communities that are not in communion with Rome are missing on the benefits of the fullness of truth.

So in my words they are members of the family they just don’t show up for the get togethers.

 

[cmodrmac]

" I am not calling for academic sanctions but, more simply, for clarification. Pagels should be billed accurately — not as an expert on Gnosticism or Coptic Christianity but as what she is: a lady novelist."

wow - an umbelievable response -she is a Professor (full) at Princeton -scholar -historian-

 

[cmodrmac]

a little more information:

Elaine Pagels, née Hiesey (born Palo Alto, California, February 13, 1943), is the Harrington Spear Paine Professor of Religion at Princeton University. The recipient of a MacArthur Fellowship, she is best known for her studies and writing on the Gnostic Gospels. Her popular books include The Gnostic Gospels (1979), Adam, Eve, and the Serpent (1988), The Origin of Satan (1995), Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas (2003), Reading Judas: The Gospel of Judas and the Shaping of Christianity (2007), and Revelations: Visions, Prophecy, and Politics in the Book of Revelation (2012).[1]

the McArthur scholarships are the “genius awards”