Sometimes I think this Pope is a moron.

I think the Holy Father's gift (and his curse) is simplifying things. In a very general sense, yes, he's right. Do we not have the same baptism? Shouldn't we be unified?

Of course there are complications to that what with Luther inventing silly doctrines out of whole cloth, redefining the Eucharist and other things. This does lead to something about Pope Francis that I find a bit irksome though. He has a funny tendency to place the burden on the Catholic Church regarding unification as though she's intransigent here when, by and large, most Lutheran bodies aren't even willing to come to the table.

To be perfectly honest though, I'm not completely sure why he's bothering. There are 72 million Lutherans worldwide... and the number gets smaller every year. Sooner or later you'll need a microscope just to find them. The members will either die off or else have to join the Church or other Protestant bodies. The problem will solve itself before too long.

But if it really means that much to him, well, he could factually point out that Rome is ready to discuss reconciliation whenever they are.

Athanasias said:

Its true. I can say that. I am a Catholic and I know its true as well as many do. Not all Popes are equal in their intellect or holiness and history bears that out. Francis means well and has some holiness about him but at times seems like he has the mind of a 3rd grader when it comes to doctrine. This is no offense to our Lutheran brothers and sister but even Lutherans know there is a real difference between the Lutheran and Catholic view of the Eucharist and the Mass itself. That was a key reformation issue.

And Yet Francis in response to a question about a husband and wife(Catholic and Lutheran) receiving the Eucharist says its the same. Now that is moronic! Even a undergrad student of theology knows the difference . Heck ask any Lutheran Sem student or Catholic Sem.

Here is what Pope Francis said(slaps face and shakes head)

"He then went on to say that, when sharing, “there aren’t differences between us” and doctrine becomes the “same”. Doctrine, he said, is a “difficult word to understand — but I ask myself: don’t we have the same Baptism? If we have the same Baptism, shouldn’t we be walking together?

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edwa...lord-about-receiving-eucharist/#ixzz3sWGxdJZh

For goodness sake sometimes I think this Pope is really an idiot! God help us we have had idiot popes before and we have had scoundrel popes before. I just can't wait till this guy is out. Benedict must be cringing when he hears Francis say garbage like this!

Click to expand...

My conclusion is to thank you for your perspective, and to put you on ignore, given the perspective.

mark46 said:

My conclusion is to thank you for your perspective, and to put you on ignore, given the perspective.

Click to expand...

...

Don't you think this is just a bit of an overreaction?

Assuming that the Pope's words were not taken out of context, there are some pretty straightforward implications here. If sharing a common baptism is all that we need to be in communion with one another, then there is no point of belonging to the Catholic Church, a baptism received in any church is by default valid. This obviously contrasts with thousands of years worth of Catholic teaching, but does that necessarily matter when a single man can change doctrine whenever he wants? This is another instance where I struggle with the infallibility of the Pope...

I think part of the problem is that Lutheranism doesn't actually have a hierarchy with whom the Catholic Church can engage in ecumenism in order to mend the bridges as they exist in ecclesial relations, sadly...

GoingByzantine said:

... does that necessarily matter when a single man can change doctrine whenever he wants? This is another instance where I struggle with the infallibility of the Pope...

Click to expand...

Papal infallibility doesn't mean that everything the Pope says in infallible. It means that when the Pope speaks ex cathedra it is considered infallible. The Pope can say whatever he wants whenever he wants and many have the most recent infallible statement by a Pope has been in 1950 when the publication of Munificentissimus Deus in which Pius XII declared the Marian dogma of the Assumption infallible.

Athanasias said:

Some of them have somewhat of a hierarchy(lcms is a bit different from ELCA) and some even use an episcopal model but yeah not in the same way we do. However the Vatican has been having dialogs with them as well.

Click to expand...

Those dialogues are great. Hell, I enjoy a good religious studies throw down as much as the next guy. But they are not the political changes which body-politics like massive religious communities need in order to achieve political unity. Dialogue doesn't lead to unification, change does.

I don't pay very close attention, to be honest. But it seems to me he has made similar overtures to the Orthodox, tending to minimize our differences.

I think any efforts to reach true unity are admirable. But I distrust efforts that would seem to use the method of trying to say we are not that different, without honestly examining just what the differences are. Pretending two groups are the same when they are not looks like an effort to "absorb" the other.

From an Orthodox point of view, my opinion is the same whether dialoging with Coptic Orthodox, Catholics, Lutherans, etc. It is necessary, IMO, to bring to light all possible differences and discuss them honestly, else any "reunification" might be only an uneasy truce and inspire even more schisms among those not convinced - so not a good method for that reason. In my opinion.

thecolorsblend said:

...

Don't you think this is just a bit of an overreaction?

Click to expand...

lol actually no, it's a very typical reaction to the truth.
people either love to hear the truth, or they hate it and turn away.

Athanasias said:

My problem is I come in contact with devout Lutheran seminarians weekly and they are actually interested in real dialog and ecumenical stuff but then they read this Pope and they know this is not true and that makes them suspect. Benedict would not have had this issue. I know Lutherans who loved him because he didn't water down the truth or compromise. I am not saying Francis is doing that but he really needs to be careful how he phrases things because he does not win points with conservative lutheran groups for saying what he has been about Catholic/Lutheran Eucharist. And even they know that.

Click to expand...

very true, but we also have to take into acount that the venue for these remarks was in a Lutheran church.
It's not polite to dis your hosts in their own house.

thecolorsblend said:

I think the Holy Father's gift (and his curse) is simplifying things. In a very general sense, yes, he's right. Do we not have the same baptism? Shouldn't we be unified?

Of course there are complications to that what with Luther inventing silly doctrines out of whole cloth, redefining the Eucharist and other things. This does lead to something about Pope Francis that I find a bit irksome though. He has a funny tendency to place the burden on the Catholic Church regarding unification as though she's intransigent here when, by and large, most Lutheran bodies aren't even willing to come to the table.

To be perfectly honest though, I'm not completely sure why he's bothering. There are 72 million Lutherans worldwide... and the number gets smaller every year. Sooner or later you'll need a microscope just to find them. The members will either die off or else have to join the Church or other Protestant bodies. The problem will solve itself before too long.

But if it really means that much to him, well, he could factually point out that Rome is ready to discuss reconciliation whenever they are.

Click to expand...

Feelin' the love.

In the spirit of the original post, I offer a short, HUMOROUS bit of SATIRE illustrating many of the same points. Be sure and stick around after the credits.

The Lutheran Satire there actually inspires a couple of questions, though I agree with how shocking it sounds for question number 4 ...

Within Lutheranism, is there NO CHANCE WHATSOEVER that the grace of God could find a person who never heard the articulation of the Gospel?

And further, would Lutherans teach that God would "save" one who had "faith alone" (that really needs to be defined, because the question that comes to mind is the Scripture that says "even the demons believe"), but that God would "save" on the basis of faith alone - without any disposition of one's heart toward God? That actually does sound like "salvation for demons" ...

Please forgive me, I'm not looking to be contentious. But I had to go back and freeze that part of the video and read the actual statement and think about what it was really saying?

Not sure if you understand that the sources cited in the video are official RCC statements ...

Tangible said:

Not sure if you understand that the sources cited in the video are official RCC statements ...

Click to expand...

I didn't look them up, but that's what I took them to be, yes. And I've read them before.

I understand the video is meant to be satire, and so I understand that it rather misrepresents the Catholic position. It is not my place to defend the Catholic Church, per se, since we have differences with them as well.

But yes, I was seriously asking whether Lutheranism would completely restrict the grace of God as being totally unable to reach people apart from the Gospel.

This can mean those who live in places and times such as to never had opportunity to hear the Gospel, infants, those with limited mental capacity, perhaps one blind/deaf who never learned nuanced communication (admittedly this would be very rare), and any other imaginable circumstance where one might not have heard the Gospel. Is God's grace incapable of reaching them?

And as to the second part, would Lutheranism affirm that simply believing alone (as I said, "faith alone" must be defined), but could one really simply believe in the existence of God, or the truth of the Gospel, and yet have NO disposition toward God whatever - and yet "be saved"? Ostensibly against his will? I know a couple of persons who believe in the Gospel, but for their own reasons, frankly hate God. They have no desire to be "saved", no disposition in their hearts toward Him.

Does Lutheranism say these people are undoubtedly "saved" while those in the first case, who never had opportunity to hear the Gospel, though they may even intuit God, seek Him, and turn their hearts and dispositions to love - will undoubtedly be impossible for God to save???

I'm really not trying to be contentious. I'm just taking the extreme position in order to inquire if Lutheranism really totally disagrees with these Catholic statements?