Protestants and Holy Communion

[Cinette]

Originally Posted by JonNC

Irreparable? That seems a rather low opinion of the power of the Holy Spirit. That said, he had an huge amount of help from some folks in Rome at the time.
Look at the fruits! There is no central authority, there is discord, the churches keep splitting each time there is a disagreement (literally scores of denominations - in fact hundreds of scores!!) the churches have watered down beliefs. If you compare the beliefs of the denominations today to what Luther believed you will see how the beliefs have changed. Even Luther must be turning in his grave!

So, what teachings of the historic Church am I aloud to agree with then. The Doctrines of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church - the Church founded by Jesus himself.

Alas, your belief that I am sincere doesn't answer the question as to whether you think I am shallow.

You are misguided but not shallow
I only question that they have universal jurisdiction or infallibility ex cathedra.
The Deposit of Faith, the Authority given to Peter by Jesus - it would not make sense to found a Church without Authority. The Holy Spirit is there guiding the Church despite the weakness of humans within the Church. Without the H Spirit there would be no Church. You can't tell me that the H Spirit is there guiding all the denominations! Surely!

Cinette
Jon[/quote]

[jcrichton]

Originally Posted by JonNC

Source please, where he said James was not part of the canon.



He preached from James his entire life.




Well, this is better than being charged with being anti-catholic, or "a new oracle".

Jon

Hi, Jon!

...Luther may not have said that it was not part of the Canon but he spoke very uncharitable about James, Hebrews and Apocalypse... he even decided that he had the authority to add to the actual Biblical text as he plummeted the simple and dissenters into that ominously treacherous trek against Christ's Church:

Luther added the word "alone" (allein in German) to Romans 3:28 controversially so that it read: "thus, we hold, then, that man is justified without the works of the law to do, alone through faith"[8] The word "alone" does not appear in the original Greek text,[9] but Luther defended his translation by maintaining that the adverb "alone" was required both by idiomatic German and the apostle Paul's intended meaning.[10]

...Luther places himself above even the Sacred Scriptures as he makes himself sole and complete authority of the Word of God.

Initially Luther had a low view of the Old Testament book of Esther and of the New Testament books of Hebrews, James, Jude, and the Revelation of John. He called the Letter of James "an epistle of straw," finding little in it that pointed to Christ and His saving work. He also had harsh words for the Revelation of John, saying that he could "in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it."[11] In his translation of the New Testament Luther moved Hebrews and James out of the usual order, to join Jude and the Revelation at the end, and differentiated these from the other books which he considered "the true and certain chief books of the New Testament. The four which follow have from ancient times had a different reputation."[12] His views on some of these books changed in later years.

...again, the mighty falls on his sword as he makes himself complete authority over the Word of God, defining and redefining things on his ego trip.

It is completely surprising to me that you claim to seek enlightenment while deriding the Church as you embrace Protestanism with sheer delight (translation: Catholic Church errs vs. you and Luther and his supporters and followers who are all fully inspired).

Maran atha!

Angel

[jcrichton]

Originally Posted by JonNC

Tom,
Without sounding argumentative, which councils are accepted by Orthodoxy?

I am a Lutheran. These are the ones Lutherans accept.

Jon

Could you define Orthodoxy?

Maran atha!

Angel

[jcrichton]

Originally Posted by JonNC

Luther recognized the disputed nature of the Antilegomena, which dates back to Eusebius.
With James, the issue was, primarily, the question of authorship, again a historic question long before Luther. Luther did have trouble James' message, but not in the way Catholic apologists sometimes present it.


Regarding sola fide, James does not contradict it. It is law oriented, sure. And it properly reminds us that a faith without works is a dead, not a living faith.

Jon

...yet sola fide does not exist!

...the closest Scriptures get is "not by faith alone!"

How do you account for Luther's adding to Scriptures?

Maran atha!

Angel

[tqualey]

Hi, JonNC,

You are not being argumentative ... I honestly do not know. I am guessing that they go up to 1057 - but, I am not sure. This would take in the 4th Council of Constantinopel in 869AD but not the 1st Lateran Council in 1183. Do you know? A reference would be appreciated. Thanks

I think that the Orthodox have had their own Councils, do the Lutherans believe these? At some point the Lutherans abandoned the Pope and never signed on to the Patriarchs of Orthodoxy.

God bless

Originally Posted by JonNC

Tom,
Without sounding argumentative, which councils are accepted by Orthodoxy?

I am a Lutheran. These are the ones Lutherans accept.

Jon

[tqualey]

Hi, Cinette,

Indeed! Without the Holy Spirit we would have all sunk to the bottom of the sea!

Seriously, I think one of the real issues deals with how closely do today's Churches adhere to the Founders of their Churches. I think Luther would truly be amazed that those who claim to follow him today - have no special devotion to Mary as he did, have allowed homosexual unions (the Evangelical Lutherans, not the Missouri Synod group - but all of the Lutheran Churches in Germany). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._homosexuality

Other Protestant groups are ordaining women, ordaining homosexuals, ordaining women, do not condemn abortion or embryonic stem cell research.

Contrast this with the Catholic Church following Christ. Marriage is a Sacrament and can only be between a man and woman, same sex unions are condemned, abortions and embryonic stem cells research is condemned becaue life is respected, the ordinatin of practicing homosexuals is also condemned.

In brief, there are many differences on what is taught today and what is taurht from the an.
boat going up and down the river.

God bless

Tom

Originally Posted by Cinette

You are misguided but not shallow
I only question that they have universal jurisdiction or infallibility ex cathedra.
The Deposit of Faith, the Authority given to Peter by Jesus - it would not make sense to found a Church without Authority. The Holy Spirit is there guiding the Church despite the weakness of humans within the Church. Without the H Spirit there would be no Church. You can't tell me that the H Spirit is there guiding all the denominations! Surely!

Cinette
Jon

[/quote]

[Cinette]

Originally Posted by tqualey

Hi, Cinette,

Indeed! Without the Holy Spirit we would have all sunk to the bottom of the sea!

Seriously, I think one of the real issues deals with how closely do today's Churches adhere to the Founders of their Churches. I think Luther would truly be amazed that those who claim to follow him today - have no special devotion to Mary as he did, have allowed homosexual unions (the Evangelical Lutherans, not the Missouri Synod group - but all of the Lutheran Churches in Germany). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._homosexuality

Other Protestant groups are ordaining women, ordaining homosexuals, ordaining women, do not condemn abortion or embryonic stem cell research.

Contrast this with the Catholic Church following Christ. Marriage is a Sacrament and can only be between a man and woman, same sex unions are condemned, abortions and embryonic stem cells research is condemned becaue life is respected, the ordinatin of practicing homosexuals is also condemned.

In brief, there are many differences on what is taught today and what is taurht from the an.
boat going up and down the river.

God bless

Tom

[/quote]
Look at the fruits and you will find the Church Jesus founded. Just arrived home and in time for our rosary novena. Will try to contact tomorrow.

God Bless
Cinette

[jcrichton]

Originally Posted by tqualey

Hi, Cinette,

Indeed! Without the Holy Spirit we would have all sunk to the bottom of the sea!

Seriously, I think one of the real issues deals with how closely do today's Churches adhere to the Founders of their Churches. I think Luther would truly be amazed that those who claim to follow him today - have no special devotion to Mary as he did, have allowed homosexual unions (the Evangelical Lutherans, not the Missouri Synod group - but all of the Lutheran Churches in Germany). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._homosexuality

Other Protestant groups are ordaining women, ordaining homosexuals, ordaining women, do not condemn abortion or embryonic stem cell research.

Contrast this with the Catholic Church following Christ. Marriage is a Sacrament and can only be between a man and woman, same sex unions are condemned, abortions and embryonic stem cells research is condemned becaue life is respected, the ordinatin of practicing homosexuals is also condemned.

In brief, there are many differences on what is taught today and what is taurht from the an.
boat going up and down the river.

God bless

Tom

Hi, Tom!

I cuncur with you, the liberties taken by non-Catholic Christians go from troublesome to fully anti-Biblical and anti-Christian.

But I caution that devoted Catholics should not fall asleep as Satan continues to make strides into the Body of Christ... just this Sunday I've learned of a "Catholic" parish where the new motto seems to be "everything goes as long as people feel good and seem happy."

They are making great strides in ecumenism:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/08/ny...Borders&st=cse

The church’s high ritual and its open and inclusive approach appeal to people born to the faith, converts, Christians of other denominations and, particularly, young families. The priests have also made a special point of welcoming Catholics who have been distressed by some of the church’s politics or its sometimes rigid hierarchy.

St. Boniface is an example of an intentional parish, a phrase some members of the clergy use to describe a destination church that attracts people from beyond its geographic boundaries.

...Catholics no longer live in a Catholic world, explained David Gibson, author of “The Coming Catholic Church: How the Faithful Are Shaping a New American Catholicism,” and a St. Boniface parishioner.

“Catholicism now is more about making choices,” he said, and for some, that means traveling to parishes where they feel affirmed.

“MEETING them where they are” is a mantra among St. Boniface’s five priests and a lay brother, who make it a point to invite new faces to monthly home-cooked lunches in the rectory.

...When a lesbian couple approached one of the priests, the Rev. Mark Lane, about baptizing their child, they were afraid he would turn them away, he said. But they were welcomed. For Father Lane, 55, the parish’s openness simply reflected Christ’s teachings to love everyone. Even if that could be taken as an implicit critique of the church’s position on homosexuality, the parish did not make the family occasion into a cause.

“The danger is, you turn that into a platform and forget about the persons involved, and I think that’s wrong,” Father Lane said. The two mothers stood at the font with their child along with everyone else. “The symbol is visually powerful, but that’s enough.”

The priests prefer to address controversial issues like same-sex marriage and the death penalty outside of Mass, and while anti-abortion marches are listed in the church bulletin, they are not announced after services. Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio, head of the Diocese of Brooklyn, recently wrote a letter condemning the Obama administration’s mandate that health insurance cover birth control; the letter was distributed in the church, but the priests have preferred to address the debate one on one with parishioners.

...Satan is winning souls... and too often "Catholics" are not only following the crowds but leading them... even as they profess to being Catholic Christians.

Maran atha!

Angel

[Cinette]

Originally Posted by jcrichton

Hi, Tom!

I cuncur with you, the liberties taken by non-Catholic Christians go from troublesome to fully anti-Biblical and anti-Christian.

But I caution that devoted Catholics should not fall asleep as Satan continues to make strides into the Body of Christ... just this Sunday I've learned of a "Catholic" parish where the new motto seems to be "everything goes as long as people feel good and seem happy."

They are making great strides in ecumenism:

...Satan is winning souls... and too often "Catholics" are not only following the crowds but leading them... even as they profess to being Catholic Christians.

Maran atha!

Angel

Some years ago my husband and I left a parish for which we considered to be anti-Catholic practices. The Eucharist was consecrated from pizza bread which made crumbs which would be swept up and scattered in the garden for the birds!. The inclusive language and many other things disturbed us so we left. I must say that at the same time the priest had been instrumental in my husband's conversion but ultimately he was "overtaken" as we got to learn more about the faith. So I went from holding him in high regard (because he did have many views which coincided with ours) to shaking my head in disbelief at his liberal attitudes!!

[jcrichton]

Originally Posted by Cinette

Some years ago my husband and I left a parish for which we considered to be anti-Catholic practices. The Eucharist was consecrated from pizza bread which made crumbs which would be swept up and scattered in the garden for the birds!. The inclusive language and many other things disturbed us so we left. I must say that at the same time the priest had been instrumental in my husband's conversion but ultimately he was "overtaken" as we got to learn more about the faith. So I went from holding him in high regard (because he did have many views which coincided with ours) to shaking my head in disbelief at his liberal attitudes!!

Sadly, this is becoming far too common... as if the world did not have enough red-hot coals burning a path to hell, our Catholic Priests and Religious are becoming so ennamoured with the world that they consciously choose the world over God even though they have full knowledge that to be friends with the world means to have enmity against God!

...hey but as long as everything is politically correct... let lose the gates of hell!

Maran atha!

Angel

[JonNC]

Look at the fruits! There is no central authority, there is discord, the churches keep splitting each time there is a disagreement (literally scores of denominations - in fact hundreds of scores!!) the churches have watered down beliefs. If you compare the beliefs of the denominations today to what Luther believed you will see how the beliefs have changed. Even Luther must be turning in his grave!

Most of the ones you refer to didn't follow Luther to begin with. Why would one expect them to do so now?

The Doctrines of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church - the Church founded by Jesus himself.

Someone here said they couldn't understand why I do accept the first 7 councils.

=Cinette;9172375]You are misguided but not shallow

Well, again, that's better than being accused of being anti-catholic or a new oracle.

The Deposit of Faith, the Authority given to Peter by Jesus - it would not make sense to found a Church without Authority. The Holy Spirit is there guiding the Church despite the weakness of humans within the Church. Without the H Spirit there would be no Church. You can't tell me that the H Spirit is there guiding all the denominations! Surely!

I would contend that the holy Spirit is there guiding all of us. Unlike some, I believe the HS is guiding the Catholic Church. Now, I certainly don't believe that all of us are understanding His guidance, at least not completely.

Jon

[JonNC]

=jcrichton;9172389][font="Palatino Linotype"][size="3"][color="Blue"]Hi, Jon!

...Luther may not have said that it was not part of the Canon but he spoke very uncharitable about James, Hebrews and Apocalypse... he even decided that he had the authority to add to the actual Biblical text as he plummeted the simple and dissenters into that ominously treacherous trek against Christ's Church:

Read what he said about translation. He didn't add to scripture, he translated it. I know you are speaking of Romans 3:28. Notice that in no English Bible the word "allein" is there. why? It isn't necessary in the English.

...Luther places himself above even the Sacred Scriptures as he makes himself sole and complete authority of the Word of God.

Source, please, where he makes this claim, keeping in mind that a Catholic translator was using Luther's in his own efforts.

It is completely surprising to me that you claim to seek enlightenment while deriding the Church as you embrace Protestanism with sheer delight (translation: Catholic Church errs vs. you and Luther and his supporters and followers who are all fully inspired).

Amazing!! Where did I say either of these things? Where did I deride the Catholic Church?

Jon

[JonNC]

Originally Posted by jcrichton

Could you define Orthodoxy?

Maran atha!

Angel

Eastern Orthodoxy.

Jon

[JonNC]

Originally Posted by jcrichton

...yet sola fide does not exist!

...the closest Scriptures get is "not by faith alone!"

How do you account for Luther's adding to Scriptures?

Maran atha!

Angel

He didn't, unless you want to claim that by adding the Prayer of Manassess to his translation he was adding to scripture.

As for sola fide, maybe what your definition is of sola fide would help. Paul, on numerous occassions emphasizes that we are justiied by faith, without works of the law.
I might also add that this seems, to a great degree, an old argument between us. Seek out the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. And here is a link to James Akins on the subject.

As our sanctification progresses, these virtues within us are strengthened by God and we are able to more easily exercise faith, more easily exercise trust, and more easily exercise love. Performing acts of faith, hope, and charity becomes easier as we grow in the Christian life (note the great difficulty new converts often experience in these areas compared to those who have attained a measure of spiritual maturity).

However, so long as one has any measure of faith, hope, and charity, one is in a state of justification. Thus Catholics often use the soteriological slogan that we are "saved by faith, hope, and charity." This does not disagree with the Protestant soteriological slogan that we are "saved by faith alone" if the term "faith" is understood in the latter to be faith formed by charity or Galatians 5 faith.

One will note, in the definitions of the virtues offered above, the similarity between hope and the way Protestants normally define "faith"; that is, as an unconditional "placing our trust in Christ's promises and relying not on our own strength, but on the help of the grace of the Holy Spirit." The definition Protestants normally give to "faith" is the definition Catholics use for "hope."

However, the Protestant idea of faith by no means excludes what Catholics refer to as faith, since every Evangelical would (or should) say that a person with saving faith will believe whatever God says because God is absolutely truthful and incapable of making an error. Thus the Protestant concept of faith normally includes both the Catholic concept of faith and the Catholic concept of hope.

Thus if a Protestant further specifies that saving faith is a faith which "works by charity" then the two soteriological slogans become equivalents. The reason is that a faith which works by charity is a faith which produces acts of love. But a faith which produces acts of love is a faith which includes the virtue of charity, the virtue of charity is the thing that enables us to perform acts of supernatural love in the first place. So a Protestant who says saving faith is a faith which works by charity, as per Galatians 5:6, is saying the same thing as a Catholic when a Catholic says that we are saved by faith, hope, and charity.

Read more: http://www.catholicfidelity.com/apol...by-james-akin/

Jon

[JonNC]

Originally Posted by tqualey

Hi, JonNC,

You are not being argumentative ... I honestly do not know. I am guessing that they go up to 1057 - but, I am not sure. This would take in the 4th Council of Constantinopel in 869AD but not the 1st Lateran Council in 1183. Do you know? A reference would be appreciated. Thanks

I think that the Orthodox have had their own Councils, do the Lutherans believe these? At some point the Lutherans abandoned the Pope and never signed on to the Patriarchs of Orthodoxy.

God bless

I know, Tom, its wiki, but here it is, nonetheless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecumenical_Council

Jon