Roman Catholic teachings denounced by Orthodox groups?

[tampasteve]

Can we at least put the Luther and Sabbath quotes to rest? He just did not mean it as a 7th Day Sabbath, any cursory search of his writings would tell you that. I would garner to say the same or similar would be found from Spurgeon, etc.
Luther:

"Jesus was not speaking of the ceremonial law but of the moral law, which was in existence long before Moses and the patriarchs. It is, in fact, the universal law of humanity, though Moses gave the clearest expression to it. Similarly, the Sabbath or rest day is a universal law in order that the people may assemble for the worship of God. But that they should assemble on the seventh day applies only in the case of the Jews, and the observance of this day is not incumbent on other peoples."'​

(coloring mine)
Further, he was quite vehemently against it:

"We find in our day in Moravia a foolish rabble folk that call themselves the Sabbathers. They contend that we must, according to the Jewish regulations and customs, keep the Sabbath; and perhaps they will yet in time lay a similar requirement for circumcision.

"There are in Austria and Moravia, as it is reported to me, people at this time that in Jewish manner keep the Sabbath and compel circumcision. If these people come in contact with people that are not properly instructed in God's Word, they will do great damage."​

Let's not take this into a debate about ceremonial vs moral law, that is for another thread. But please stop using quotes from non-Sabbaterian theologians out of their proper use and context?

Link to further text

 

[BobRyan]

You are restricting the term Sabbath in a way Luther did not. Luther never would agree with you that Scripture restricts the 7th day Sabbath to Saturday.

I said Luther had some good ideas about the origin of the Sabbath - then I simply quote Luther.
You are free to argue with his statement if you wish.

===============================

BobRyan said: ↑
Creative writing? I never said Luther did not attend Sunday services.

Even so - he did also say this

================

“God blessed the Sabbath and sanctified it to Himself. It is moreover to be remarked that God did this to no other creature. God did not sanctify to Himself the heaven nor the earth nor any other creature. But God did sanctify to Himself the seventh day. This was especially designed of God, to cause us to understand that the ‘seventh day’ is to be especially devoted to divine worship….

"It follows therefore from this passage, that if Adam had stood in his innocence and had not fallen he would yet have observed the ‘seventh day’ as sanctified, holy and sacred…. Nay, even after the fall he held the ‘seventh day’ sacred; that is, he taught on that day his own family. This is testified by the offerings made by his two sons, Cain and Abel. The Sabbath therefore has, from the beginning of the world, been set apart for the worship of God…. For all these things are implied and signified in the expression ‘sanctified.’

Although therefore man lost the knowledge of God by sin, yet God willed that this command concerning the sanctifying of the Sabbath should remain. He willed that on the seventh day both the word should be preached, and also those other parts of His worship performed which He Himself instituted.”

Martin Luther, The Creation, A Commentary on Genesis,” Vol. I, pp. 138-140,

================

We could "suppose" that Luther believed that at some point Sabbath was changed from the 7th day to week-day-1 - or maybe he had some other idea for getting to a change.

Can we at least put the Luther and Sabbath quotes to rest? He just did not mean it as a 7th Day Sabbath,

Feel free to insert any meaning into it that you wish - that does not 'change the quote'. Or is it his own text itself that you object to? (OR is the objection that his statement is known to exist?)

We often argue on this kind of thread that "people need to study church history" - well this is a great example of bringing up a fact in history that some might not allow to be read or noticed.

 

[BobRyan]

Further, he was quite vehemently against it:

"We find in our day in Moravia a foolish rabble folk that call themselves the Sabbathers. They contend that we must, according to the Jewish regulations and customs, keep the Sabbath; and perhaps they will yet in time lay a similar requirement for circumcision. ​

​

And the above is an example of a quote from Luther that "exists" but the solution to its existence is not to simply delete it. That would solve nothing and prove nothing.

We can find very strong statements from the Pope in Dies Domini about the 7th day Sabbath commandment - in moral law of God applicable to all mankind - starting in Eden - but that does not mean he and others did not also condemn it in some fashion at some point.

 

[BobRyan]

Can we at least put the Luther and Sabbath quotes to rest? He just did not mean it as a 7th Day Sabbath,

I agree that we can find condemnation of the 7th day Sabbath and carefully ignore or delete any text from Luther that mentions the 7th day Sabbath in a positive way. That is a form of censorship that some might suggest for readers of historic fact..

=======================================

"They [the Catholics] allege the Sabbath changed into Sunday, the Lord's day, contrary to the Decalogue, as it appears, neither is there any example more boasted of than the changing of the Sabbath day. Great, say they, is the power and authority of the church, since it dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments."​

—Augsburg Confession of Faith, Art. 28, par. 9.

"They [Roman Catholics] allege the change of the Sabbath into the Lord's day, as it seemeth, to the Decalogue [the ten commandments]; and they have no example more in their mouths than they change of the Sabbath. They will needs have the Church's power to be very great, because it hath dispensed with the precept of the Decalogue."​

—The Augsburg Confession, 1530 A.D. (Lutheran), part 2, art 7, in Philip Schaff, the Creeds of Christiandom, 4th Edition, vol 3, p64 [this important statement was made by the Lutherans and written by Melanchthon, only thirteen years after Luther nailed his theses to the door and began the Reformation].


========================

Not sure why it is left to me to affirm Lutheran statements in the past - since I am not Lutheran -- you would think someone else would have some interest in Lutheran documents here.

 

[dzheremi]

How did this thread titled "Roman Catholic teachings denounced by Orthodox groups?" degenerate into a protracted argument about whether or not Luther -- who is neither Roman Catholic or Orthodox -- thought this or that about the Jewish Sabbath? It's very weird.

 

[BobRyan]

How did this thread titled "Roman Catholic teachings denounced by Orthodox groups?" degenerate into a protracted argument about whether or not Luther -- who is neither Roman Catholic or Orthodox -- thought this or that about the Jewish Sabbath? It's very weird.

look at the OP carefully - it also describes the Orthodox liturgy that demands that Lutherans publically denounce certain Lutheran positions as heresy, if they want to join the Orthodox.

I have just bolded and underlined the text so it won't be skimmed over.

Since Orthodox and Lutheran posts here are in some cases in agreement - I wanted to be sure that the Lutheran-specific part of that liturgy is noted.

 

[dzheremi]

I didn't miss it the first time around, and my question remains unanswered.

It would seem that this thread has outlived its usefulness, if it had any for you you, as the OP.

 

[rturner76]

How did this thread titled "Roman Catholic teachings denounced by Orthodox groups?" degenerate into a protracted argument about whether or not Luther -- who is neither Roman Catholic or Orthodox -- thought this or that about the Jewish Sabbath? It's very weird.

With certain theology, it always comes back to the Sabbath. In the Church there is basically 2 days of rest. Nass is offered on Saturday and Sunday with some Abby chapels offering mass 5 times a day 7 days a week.

Orthodoxy is more concerned with the different councils the western church approved that the eastern church didn't agree with. The East and West excommunicated each other when Rome tried to unite the whole church under The Vatican from my understanding.

 

[BobRyan]

I didn't miss it the first time around, and my question remains unanswered.

It would seem that this thread has outlived its usefulness, if it had any for you you, as the OP.

It just got referenced in new thread as an example of differences that do exist between these groups just when someone was claiming "all was well until the 16th century"

 

[BobRyan]

With certain theology, it always comes back to the Sabbath. In the Church there is basically 2 days of rest. .

It was just one example of 'differences'

 

[dzheremi]

It just got referenced in new thread as an example of differences that do exist between these groups just when someone was claiming "all was well until the 16th century"

Yep. Anyone can claim anything, and hence lots of people do. Did you ask them what they thought caused things to become unwell in the 16th century in particular? I don't pay attention to Chalcedonian history unless I have to, so I can't think of what that might have been, but the fact that I've not heard it before (whereas you can basically learn about stuff like the Great Schism, the Massacre of the Latins, the Fourth Crusade, yadda yadda yadda by osmosis just by being here) would make me curious.

 

[dzheremi]

With certain theology, it always comes back to the Sabbath. In the Church there is basically 2 days of rest. Nass is offered on Saturday and Sunday with some Abby chapels offering mass 5 times a day 7 days a week.

That's a difference from Orthodoxy too, and seemingly dating back to before the Chalcedonian Schism (referenced in your Pope Leo I's 445 letter to HH Pope Dioscorus, if I recall correctly, as one of those things that Alexandria ought to adopt from Rome so that the two great sees can be "one in all things"). We do not offer liturgy multiple times a day in the Coptic Orthodox Church, as the same altar cannot be used more than once (I'm sure I've read the reasoning behind this prohibition in the fathers before, but the exact source and argument is escaping me right now).

Interestingly, from what I've read of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church (our daughter church, having received her first bishops after the death of HH St. Frumentius during the time of HH St. Athanasius the Apostolic of Alexandria), in the time of Emperor Zara Yaqob (15th c.), the emperor ordered that altars be constructed in all churches in the empire which were to be dedicated to the Theotokos (the Ethiopians have always been incredibly strong in their devotion to the Theotokos, as we all are), which then I suppose technically would have allowed more than one liturgy per day to be served at those churches which already had a main altar established without violating the aforementioned norm. I'm not sure if that subsequently developed as an Ethiopian practice or not, though, since I've never attended an EOTC parish or asked any of the Ethiopians I've worshipped with.

Orthodoxy is more concerned with the different councils the western church approved that the eastern church didn't agree with.

Change 'Orthodoxy' to 'the Eastern Chalcedonians', and sure.

The East and West excommunicated each other when Rome tried to unite the whole church under The Vatican from my understanding.

I thought it was that the Papal legates had placed a bull of excommunication on the altar of the Hagia Sophia in the middle of the Eastern Chalcedonians' liturgy, even though that's not really how excommunications are supposed to work (remember when the Pope of Rome tried to excommunicate the churches of Asia during the Quartodeciman controversy? It didn't work out too well), and the Roman Pope they were supposedly representing had actually died while they were en route to Constantinople? That's what I've read anyway. At any rate, it's a sad event in the history of Christianity, and may God heal it in His time by His power, in accordance with His good will.

 

[tampasteve]

How did this thread titled "Roman Catholic teachings denounced by Orthodox groups?" degenerate into a protracted argument about whether or not Luther -- who is neither Roman Catholic or Orthodox -- thought this or that about the Jewish Sabbath? It's very weird.

Because, like nearly always happens, it devolved into Sabbath Worship and an attempt to shoehorn quote mined, out of context quotes, from Luther (among others) to support that position.

 

[BobRyan]

Yep. Anyone can claim anything, and hence lots of people do. Did you ask them what they thought caused things to become unwell in the 16th century in particular? I don't pay attention to Chalcedonian history unless I have to, so I can't think of what that might have been, but the fact that I've not heard it before (whereas you can basically learn about stuff like the Great Schism, the Massacre of the Latins, the Fourth Crusade, yadda yadda yadda by osmosis just by being here) would make me curious.

I agree that that that split in 1000 A.D. would be "noticeable" as compared to the claim that no real divisions were noticed until Luther made an objection.

 

[BobRyan]

Okay. We know that you did not reach the understanding of SDA doctrine simply by reading and studying the Bible.

no ... we don't

 

[BobRyan]

It may be "odd" in your particular case, but your fellow Adventist, SabbathBlessings, seems to portray her beliefs as stemming entirely from the Bible alone without any significant interpretive and prophetic role by Mrs. White.

You again misinterpret what I said. I am not denying that the SDA church was blessed with the gift of prophesy, but that does not change our belief in Sola Scriptura and everything must be tested by scriptures and the scripture is the authority.

Interesting how that keeps happening

 

[BobRyan]

Can we at least put the Luther and Sabbath quotes to rest?

I don't think Gospel writers in the New Testament were using the term "Sabbath" to claim that Jesus was in the synagogue on week-day-1 in Matt 4 and Luke 4:31.

31 And He came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee; and He was teaching them on the Sabbath; 32 and they were amazed at His teaching, because His message was delivered with authority
33 In the synagogue there was a man possessed by the spirit of an unclean demon, and he cried out with a loud voice, 34 “Leave us alone!​

So while he probably did affirm the Sabbath commandment itself for Christians - he probably thought it was changed at some point to week-day-1 and no doubt affirmed Church attendance on Sunday as being in compliance with that still-valid Sabbath commandment.

===================================


"The observance of the Lord's Day (Sunday) is founded not on any command of God, but on the authority of the Church." Augsburg Confession of Faith.

"They [the Catholics] allege the Sabbath changed into Sunday, the Lord's day, contrary to the Decalogue, as it appears, neither is there any example more boasted of than the changing of the Sabbath day. Great, say they, is the power and authority of the church, since it dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments." -Augsburg Confession of Faith, Art. 28, par. 9.


"They [Roman Catholics] allege the change of the Sabbath into the Lord's day, as it seemeth, to the Decalogue [the ten commandments]; and they have no example more in their mouths than they change of the Sabbath. They will needs have the Church's power to be very great, because it hath dispensed with the precept of the Decalogue." The Augsburg Confession, 1530 A.D. (Lutheran), part 2, art 7, in Philip Schaff, the Creeds of Christiandom, 4th Edition, vol 3, p64 [this important statement was made by the Lutherans and written by Melanchthon, only thirteen years after Luther nailed his theses to the door and began the Reformation].

"For up to this day mankind has absolutely trifled with the original and most special revelation of the Holy God, the ten words written upon the tables of the Law from Sinai."-"Crown Theological Library," page I78.

=============================== next

Here is Luther on the Sabbath - at creation in Genesis


“God blessed the Sabbath and sanctified it to Himself. It is moreover to be remarked that God did this to no other creature. God did not sanctify to Himself the heaven nor the earth nor any other creature. But God did sanctify to Himself the seventh day. This was especially designed of God, to cause us to understand that the ‘seventh day’ is to be especially devoted to divine worship….

It follows therefore from this passage, that if Adam had stood in his innocence and had not fallen he would yet have observed the ‘seventh day’ as sanctified, holy and sacred…. Nay, even after the fall he held the ‘seventh day’ sacred; that is, he taught on that day his own family. This is testified by the offerings made by his two sons, Cain and Abel. The Sabbath therefore has, from the beginning of the world, been set apart for the worship of God…. For all these things are implied and signified in the expression ‘sanctified.’

Although therefore man lost the knowledge of God by sin, yet God willed that this command concerning the sanctifying of the Sabbath should remain. He willed that on the seventh day both the word should be preached, and also those other parts of His worship performed which He Himself instituted.”

Martin Luther, The Creation, A Commentary on Genesis,” Vol. I, pp. 138-140, (Originally completed in 1545 – Link) translation by Professor J. N. Lenker, D. D., Minneapolis: 1901; and also “Copious Explanation of Genesis,” Vol. I, pp. 62, 68. Christiania: 1863. (Link) See also the translation by Henry D. Cole (Link)



https://wolfmueller.co/luthergenesis/

http://www.wolfmueller.co/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Genesis1-4Study.pdf

 

[fhansen]

starting at 35:48 and going up to 1:29:20 we see a long list of things that apparently must be "renounced" publically as in "I renounce this teaching" -- to join certain Orthodox churches. (Which suprised me somewhat). And a lot of those things are specifically stated to be Roman Catholic - that the these Orthodox groups say must be renounced as heresy.

38:20 begins a section on specifically renouncing certain doctrines of the Lutheran church.

43:43 A Roman Catholic priest converting - and must renounce certain Catholic doctrines

43:53-- "fake dogma that the Holy Spirit proceeds from ..."
46:57 -- "renounce the wrong doctrine that instead of Jesus Christ - the Pope is the head of the universal church"?

<Just a few short examples of the list to be renounced to illustrate that this is not merely about "politics" >

Now normally I would say "fine we expect some differences like that since they are different denominations" (Though I find it very unusual to have "I renounce this-or-that" in the actual liturgy of a christening or baptism or profession-of-faith vote into membership - for other denominations).

The reason I bring this up is that now and then in the General Theology forum we see complaints about "sola scriptura generates all those Protestant Denominations" as if there is no denominational difference in doctrine between Catholic groups and Orthodox groups - while claiming the "sola scriptura" doctrine is what creates differences and so Catholics supposedly have no such difference with the Orthodox groups as one might find between certain Protestant or Evangelical groups.

BTW - check out this post for a further point on SS vs tradition.




But the video in this OP appears to "shed more light" on that detail than one normally hears about in the General Theology forum.

From the video evidence here it appears their differences are as significant as any other difference between lets say Baptist and Presbyterian etc. In fact the Orthodox/vs/Roman Catholic list of "I renounce" may be much larger than one would find between Presbyterian and Baptist.

Most of the differences are hair-splitting by some Eastern Orthodox, some are close to being silly and in any case prompted by a desire to distance themselves from the CC, often at the expense of truth IMO. For its part the CC accepts EO doctrine as correct, except for its understanding of the role of the papacy, i.e. of authority in the church.

 

[prodromos]

Most of the differences are hair-splitting by some Eastern Orthodox, some are close to being silly and in any case prompted by a desire to distance themselves from the CC, often at the expense of truth IMO. For its part the CC accepts EO doctrine as correct, except for its understanding of the role of the papacy, i.e. of authority in the church.

Extremely patronising and grossly inaccurate.

 

[fhansen]

Extremely patronising and grossly inaccurate.

Ok. And how so?