Reunion Between Catholics And Lutherans

[mortify ii]

Apparently there has been a paradigm shift in the concept of "reunion" which no longer requires Lutherans to return to the Catholic church, but rather requires the realization that Catholics and Lutherans are already part of one large community, the body of Christ. 

 

The year 2017 will mark the 500th year of the Protestant Revolution, and I sense some very interesting events are ahead of us, the Vatican has released the following publication in preparation for the momentous year:

 

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/lutheran-fed-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_2013_dal-conflitto-alla-comunione_en.html

 

 

 

"Catholics and Lutherans realize that they and the communities in which they live out their faith belong to the one body of Christ. The awareness is dawning on Lutherans and Catholics that the struggle of the sixteenth century is over. The reasons for mutually condemning each other’s faith have fallen by the wayside. Thus, Lutherans and Catholics identify five imperatives as they commemorate 2017 together."

 

 "As members of one body, Catholics and Lutherans remember together the events of the Reformation that led to the reality that thereafter they lived in divided communities even though they still belonged to one body. That is an impossible possibility and the source of great pain. Because they belong to one body, Catholics and Lutherans struggle in the face of their division toward the full catholicity of the church. This struggle has two sides: the recognition of what is common and joins them together, and the recognition of what divides. The first is reason for gratitude and joy; the second is reason for pain and lament."

[Guest]

Awesome

[chrysostom]

I think you are reading into these documents something that they do not say.  They do NOT advocate an "ecumenism of non-return".  It is one thing to have certain shared goals and to acknowledge whatever doctrinal unity there is, though it be impaired.  It is altogether a different thing to say that this doctrinal unity need not be overcome - which is something I simply did not read in these documents.

 

Here is Dr. Bryan Cross on true ecumenism:

 

 

If the pursuit of compromise were the only possible type of ecumenicism, then truth-loving Protestants and Catholics could not engage in it. But there is another type of ecumenicism. This type of ecumenicism does not make general agreement on doctrine its goal. Rather, this ecumenicism has complete agreement on doctrine as its goal, or more precisely, complete agreement on what each person believes to be essential doctrine. Moreover, and perhaps most importantly, it rejects compromise regarding what anyone believes to be truly essential as a means of achieving its goal. As a result, there is no pressure to compromise in order to attain this ecumenicism’s goal. Instead of proposing compromise as a means to reaching a watered-down unity, this type of ecumenicism recognizes that we are not fully united until we are doctrinally united on every doctrine about which anyone believes to be essential. In this ecumenicism we do not sweep our essential doctrinal differences under the rug. We even straightforwardly, and in genuine charity and sincerity, remind each other that the other person’s position, from the point of view of our own tradition, is nothing less than heresy. And nobody is insulted by such utterances, not only because we recognize that they are presented in a genuine charity that is rooted first in a deep love for God, but also because such bracing honesty reveals as fundamental something that those engaged in this type of ecumenicism deeply share, namely, a love for and deep commitment to the truth.

Edited April 11, 2014 by chrysostom

[mortify ii]

I think you are reading into these documents something that they do not say.  They do NOT advocate an "ecumenism of non-return".  It is one thing to have certain shared goals and to acknowledge whatever doctrinal unity there is, though it be impaired.  It is altogether a different thing to say that this doctrinal unity need not be overcome - which is something I simply did not read in these documents.

 

Here is Dr. Bryan Cross on true ecumenism:

 

Are both Lutherans and Catholics part of the body of Christ, or does the body of Christ reside in the Roman Catholic Church?

[chrysostom]

Are both Lutherans and Catholics part of the body of Christ, or does the body of Christ reside in the Roman Catholic Church?

 

It's not either/or.

[mortify ii]

It's not either/or.

 

Not sure what you mean, but I personally have difficulty understanding how Catholics and heretics are both part of the body of Christ. My understanding was that salvation lies within the Catholic Church, and to separate yourself from the Church brings one into considerable spiritual danger. Apparently we have been mistaken, since despite heresy and tearing the Church apart, heretics and Catholics remained united:

 

"As members of one body, Catholics and Lutherans remember together the events of the Reformation that led to the reality that thereafter they lived in divided communities even though they still belonged to one body"

[Anastasia13]

It's not either/or.

 

That would mean that Lutherans are and are not in the same Body of Christ. That might need a little more explaining.

[Guest]

Just because you aren't Catholic doesn't mean you separate yourself from the Church....Most people are invisibly ignorant to the complete truth.......And did I misread what you said or are you implying Lutherans are heretics ? Man its 2014 lol How about accepting those who sincerely follow Christ and Love God to the best of their ability ? Not everyone comes to full knowledge and takes the plunge and becomes Catholic....And who knows mabey God wants it that way or he blinds people intentionally.......Cause I know some really great christians who aren't Catholic and it doesn't do anyone any good when the pharisee mortify cast the title heretic onto them and questions their sincerity in their walk with Christ....

Edited April 12, 2014 by Guest

[mortify ii]

Just because you aren't Catholic doesn't mean you separate yourself from the Church....Most people are invisibly ignorant to the complete truth.......And did I misread what you said or are you implying Lutherans are heretics ? Man its 2014 lol How about accepting those who sincerely follow Christ and Love God to the best of their ability ? Not everyone comes to full knowledge and takes the plunge and becomes Catholic....And who knows mabey God wants it that way or he blinds people intentionally.......Cause I know some really great christians who aren't Catholic and it doesn't do anyone any good when the pharisee mortify cast the title heretic onto them and questions their sincerity in their walk with Christ....

 

Josh, what's being promoted here is a pan-Christianity. The One Holy and Apostolic Church headed by the Roman Pontiff is no longer seen as the true and inviolate religion. Those separated from her are no longer required to join her for their salvation. Instead a new concept of Church is being promoted, on that is larger and more formless, that can encompass a myriad of doctrinal beliefs that are mutually exclusive. This is of course heresy, and heresy has been considered a danger thing since the time of the Apostles. Those who adulter the Gospel and teachings of our Lord are not to be taken lightly, right belief is necessary. 

[Guest]

The Church of the beast music come. It's prophesied. I see your concern. These are the last days...A false church and new world order is coming.....There will be many signs and wonders and even the elect will be deceived if that were possible......I pray the Lutherans will not be amongst them as well as the Catholics....

Edited April 12, 2014 by Guest

[Guest]

The Church of the beast music come.

* must come

[mortify ii]

I find some of these quotes so heretical and contrary to the Faith that they're disturbing, but perhaps the issue is with me. Maybe I'm the person in the wrong here and should just go with the flow? I mean who speaks of "heresy" anymore.

[Benedictus]

There isn't 'one' Lutheran church though. They have national divides, and many others, and there isn't so much of a central body. If you expect reunion with Lutherans where there are women priests, laity and priests allowed to be in homosexual marriages and so on then I doubt that's going to happen (It's difficult even among Lutherans themselves). If anything I'd like to see closer ties with the Eastern Orthodox churches.

Mortify ll  - Institutional union means very little if there isn't a real spiritual union of belief, practice and purpose. Union is essentially spiritual compatibility within the mystical body of Christ.  I don't think the sort of union you advocate (essentially diplomatic agreement between structures) will ever get anywhere unless it's driven on a true purpose and commitment. If people see it as lacking authenticity or compromising on beliefs then they will walk away, as history shows us, regardless of what the structural bodies do.  A Tablet magazine reading Catholic may be dismissed over this view, but that as it is.

Edited April 12, 2014 by Benedictus

[Ice_nine]

I find some of these quotes so heretical and contrary to the Faith that they're disturbing, but perhaps the issue is with me. Maybe I'm the person in the wrong here and should just go with the flow? I mean who speaks of "heresy" anymore.

 

Hey, I understand you're confusion, disheartenedness (that's not a real word) or whatever concerning these matters. Things confuse me too. But think about it, I'm sure the Church has always been like this, in terms of in-fighting and people more or less advocating heresy. Only now with the internet, there's just information overload. We basically can know everything the Pope says within about two minutes time. When in history have we ever had such immediate access to the Pope's and Bishop's thoughts concerning everything? 

 

Instead of only major documents and homilies surviving, the Pope has a twitter feed type thing going on. If throughout the last two millennia we had access to as much information, I think the picture would look a lot more even-keeled i.e. things would look just as bleak and screwy as they do nowadays. Weren't Jansenism and Arianism really popular in their heyday? Now it's modernism with its tentacles everywhere. I don't think it's more evil than any other heresies, just the one that's giving us the most trouble in our current epoch.

 

Nothing in this post answers how we should address this, or what is legitimately concerning over what is not. These are answers that I do not have, but in all honesty I just wanted to make a post because I find your topics revolve almost solely around the rotten fruits of VII as it were. With all due respect, because I feel similarly torn over such things, it is very discouraging. I'm not saying you should sweep it under the rug or ignore the problem, but I think we should try to take a more balanced approach in that let's talk about the good and positive things in the church alongside the things that concern us. Otherwise, if it IS all doom and gloom, why bother being faithful?

[AugustineA]

 

I'm a little surprised that in 1983 the international dialogue between Catholics and Lutherans affirm Luther was a witness of Jesus Christ, and that Catholics cannot ignore his message. This would be one of those articles of the Church that I will humbly disagree with so long as is acceptable. Others may be able to align themselves with the teaching, but some of the rhetoric he spewed was vitriolic. He even referred to the Pope as the antichrist in Adversus Execrabile Antichristi Bullam. Okay.. continuing to read and drink my coffee.. 

 

Paragraph 7: "As part of the ecumenical movement, praying together, worshipping together, and serving their communities together have enriched Catholics and Lutherans." This is a confusing statement, historically, as the Council of Trent declared protestants anathema. To the best of my understanding anathema means cursed, the opposite of blessed. Aren't we supposed to employ avoidance strategies with heretical groups? Outgrowing the council of Trent's condemnations would make sense if the Protestants changed, but to the best of my limited knowledge I only see them becoming more fragmented and radical.

 

Maybe someone more experienced could build a bridge for me here. Par. 8 and some of Par. 12 explains their methodology, which makes sense as a historian.. but looks like a huge can of worms in terms of positioning continuity of Church teaching...   :(

 

Par. 50: Historically, it looks like the Papal Bull in response to Luther, Exsurge Domine, was a little hastily put together. But if we were to ignore it as a document of its time and not timeless church teaching, is it possible to look at this commemoration in the same way? It's disappointing to me to see that Par. 50 seems to interpret Exsurge Domine with even less scholarly charity than wikipedia. But that's aside the point. If anyone's interested, the Jan. 3rd version of the Bull Decet Romanum Pontificem was Luther's excommunication.

 

The Church's response to the "reformation", the council of Trent, lead to a resurgence the in the faith, and I'm a bit anxious the Church, faced with a similar situation (par. 12), is taking the opposite response today (Par. 88). There's a giant blind spot in this document's section on the history of the reformation -- it calls Trent polemical and leaves out the spirituality, art, music, religious orders and and general vibrance of the counter reformation and following four centuries, jumping directly into Vatican II, Par. 90. 

 

Par. 102 is where we get into theology, and since I'm just a concerned peasant I'll leave it there. God bless

 

Edited April 12, 2014 by AugustineA