To the question when is he returning to Rome, this was his reply...I highlight here the portion that made me laugh it made my tummy so gassy...
Sir,
Going back to Rome? Has the Church of Rome stopped opposing the Biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone? Has it stopped issuing indulgences for works? Has it stopped forbidding priests to marry (the doctrine of demons)? Has it stopped the virtual goddess worship of idolatrous Mariolatry and putting other intermediaries, other than Jesus, between God and Man? Has the Pope stopped propping up these and other Anti-Christian positions?The answer is no.
The signing of an ambiguously worded document by a group of unrepresenative LINOs (Lutherans In Name Only) has solved none of the issues raised in the Book of Concord.
There is no need for me to return as I am in a Church which teaches the Word of God purely and administers the sacraments correctly.
When is the Church of Rome genuinely going to reform its doctrines
and practices?
I like the LINO bit. There is no where to return because the Colonial Boy has found his home.
31 comments:
Dear Kuya,
Have you heard that a certain Dan Woodring recently defected to Rome from the LCMS? I got wind of it when I checking out on Benjamin Harju's blog which took me to Mr. Hollywood's. Good to note that despite my differences with Pastor McCain, he is taking a stand on this issue and the reliquae.
It's funny how folks would leave the Lutheran communion over issues such as the reliquae which are not even directly related to doctrine. This reflects their attitude towards what are exactly is the "shape" of doctrine. I mean they denounce Ablaze! and yet withold the same from the much more dangerous or grievous error of justification by faith and works of Rome! Amazing, truly amazing.
I think it's clear, consciously or sub-consciously, that they place non-essentials matters like the liturgy on par with doctrine. This is dangerous, for we can never appeal to Scripture for justification precisely because none can be found. What is not Catholic is considered as such, and what is Catholic such as justification sola fide is rejected as such.
Dear A.S.
Yes I have heard of him because Schuetzie featured one of his post. The RC converts must be basking at their win.
This is what I have observed with the blogs from the US, they equate many things with JBFA, they even equate indeed the liturgy with it.
The thing is that no one dares to define really what they mean by that word. But the BoC says that when things are adiaphora they should remain so, instead these teachers claim now that the liturgy is needed to protect the Gospel. And there is the twist, because they start adding and adding.
I find the folk who shoot Ablaze! and then pay homage to Rome as if the latter is harmless compared to the former. This is astounding because evangelicalism and Romanism are the same! They are both Semi-Pelagian in fact the latter is more dangerous, and yes as you said, I agree.
So nowadays, I notice I am reacting indifferent now so I stick with the BoC.
Have you been to Dr. Ichabod lately? He has been featuring some of your truly's comments. I will list a couple here which I believe is absolutely insightful... he predicts more from LCMS will sinuflect to Rome....
http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2008/07/not-dead-orthodoxy-but-synod-worship-to.html
then for featuring my comments and more analysis from him...
http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2008/07/self-perpetuating-synod-worship.html
http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2008/06/l-p-cruz-guest-writer.html
LPC
Great to hear that, Kuya! The Lutheran confessional remnant are standing up against apostasy within the broader Lutheran churches!
The SSP-type are confessional Lutherans. They pick and choose, they ignore the rest, blatantly ignore the rest, the twist the clear meaning of some, and so on and so forth. They are not even catholic for the simply reason they make that which is non-essential to be essential.
Can you imagine a catholicity defined by non-essentials? It's laughable!
Bro. A.S.
It is so important for folk to listen to their critics, like Dr. Ichabod.
I find it interesting that Dr. Ichabod articulates somethings that get registered in my mind as I surf the blogworld.
As you said, considering such groups in question, they seem to be more tender or soft and amicable to Rome than they are to the others, to the point that they seem to paint Lutheranism as not having an evangelicality at all.I mean they paint a picture that is skewed. The ones that get lured are the evangelical refugees like myself who may not search the Scripture or the BoC for their pontifications. The BoC has an 'evangelicality' that such folk deny or ignore.
I just don't believe them so I pass by.
These folk claim we have not worshipped rightly at all because of this or that rubric not being used in the liturgy etc etc.
There is where the non-essentials become the essentials.
Dr. Ichabod I believe is correct, they are sinuflecting or genuflecting to Rome.
They do not exegete the Scripture instead they quote their fathers here or there. They have good things to say but they are not the means of grace. They are not God's Word.
BTW I see you are busy contending for the faith. I see your comments in other blogs! Good stuff.
Kuya Lito
Dear Kuya,
The SSP-type fools should read the blessed Malachi Martin's account of Vatican II!
A.S.
They should also read Luigi DeSanctis.
http://extranos.blogspot.com/search?q=desanctis
But I doubt if their tack will change even then. When one is already bent, it is not facts that matter.
DeSanctis was an officer of the Inquisition just before it was closed.
He became a Waldensian and his grave is found in the Reformed Cemetery in Europe. I have not read an account that rebuts his semi-non-fictional novel, based on what he experienced as a Vatican officer.
Your kuya Lito
Lito,
This is an unashamed plug, I'm afraid - I have a new post on WYD & indulgences on my humble (despite the pretentious title) blog:
acroamaticus.blogspot.com
MH
(sometimes a.k.a. 'acroamaticus')
Pr. M,
You Lutheran pastors are into Latin aren't you? ;-). How do I comment on your blog?
Right on re:indulgences. It is really silly for folk to agree with the RC on justification and then that is it.
One gets to be serious with justification when the practice that touches upon it are also eliminated. The Reformers did not discuss justification in isolation to the rest of the church practice, hence the Mass was on the table along with indulgences and priestly vows etc.
The RC has a system of merits which all religions except Christianity have.
Also I disagree with pastors who look at the RC only on paper and ignore the folk superstitious practices that the RCC tolerates.
LPC
Dear Evangelical brothers,
I am sorry to interupt your little anti-Catholic dialogue by inserting the views of a true blue dinky di ozzie cobber wombie Roman.
It is so easy to repeat old slanders and slogans -- it means you never really have to grapple with the fact that your brother in Christ also has some share in the truth...
Has the Church of Rome stopped opposing the Biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone?
I just love the confidence with which it is asserted that "the" biblical doctrine of justification is justification by faith "ALONE". I just love the way this is maintained despite the fact that the doctrine is unsupported by any biblical author, in fact, even denied by one.
Has it stopped issuing indulgences for works?
I was under the impression that indulgences were issued for the grace of Christ and the forgiveness of sins. Deary me. How could I be so mistaken?
Has it stopped forbidding priests to marry (the doctrine of demons)?
Until recently, there were many careers and offices in society that required celibacy, including nurses, teachers, university professors, and a whole range of jobs in which it was recognised that celibacy befitted the calling. Doctrine of demons?
Has it stopped the virtual goddess worship of idolatrous Mariolatry and putting other intermediaries, other than Jesus, between God and Man?
It doesn't matter how many times we deny that we worship Mary and the saints, you are going to keep asserting that we do. Ho hum. It does get tiresome. And the assertion that we place "other" mediators between us and God aside from Jesus. Well, my dear friend, so do you. Think about it next time you ask someone to pray for you. (If you don't mind, I will pray for you, but is that coming between you and Jesus if I do?)
Has the Pope stopped propping up these and other Anti-Christian positions?
I am sorry, but it does seem to be to be awfully uncharitable, and not to say blasphemous, to make such accusations about your fellow Christians and witnesses to Christ.
Charity first. Charity second. And Charity third. Apart from Charity you are as a clanging gong and a sounding symbol. Go read 1 Cor 13. Read, Learn and inwardly digest, as they say.
Latin? Well you know the Augsburg Confession was written in Latin and German, and the former version has the better claim to authority. And besides, I couldn't think of anything else at the time, and you had already taken 'extra nos'!!
"I just love the confidence with which it is asserted that "the" biblical doctrine of justification is justification by faith "ALONE". I just love the way this is maintained despite the fact that the doctrine is unsupported by any biblical author, in fact, even denied by one."
Galatians 2:16
"Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."
"Until recently, there were many careers and offices in society that required celibacy, including nurses, teachers, university professors, and a whole range of jobs in which it was recognised that celibacy befitted the calling. Doctrine of demons?"
1 Timothy 4:1-3
"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry ..."
(Obviously, it applies only to priests)
"It doesn't matter how many times we deny that we worship Mary and the saints, you are going to keep asserting that we do. Ho hum. It does get tiresome. And the assertion that we place "other" mediators between us and God aside from Jesus. Well, my dear friend, so do you. Think about it next time you ask someone to pray for you. (If you don't mind, I will pray for you, but is that coming between you and Jesus if I do?)"
There is a gulf between Heaven and Earth and hence a difference between that and the prayers of saints one for the other. Mary cannot hear the prayers of the Church Militant. Only God in His sovereignty is pleased to reveal that to her. But directly addressing Mary as an intercessor violates the principle of her limitations.
"I am sorry, but it does seem to be to be awfully uncharitable, and not to say blasphemous, to make such accusations about your fellow Christians and witnesses to Christ.
Charity first. Charity second. And Charity third. Apart from Charity you are as a clanging gong and a sounding symbol. Go read 1 Cor 13. Read, Learn and inwardly digest, as they say."
One anathema is good as the other ...
Over at the Concordia Lutheran Confessions blog, folks are discussing about the Papacy as the Antichrist. William Cwirla urged that a distinction be made between the pope as pope and the pope as the Bishop of Rome and all churches in communion with him. Such a distinction is unhelpful because it is superficial.
That a distinction is necessary is not denied. The dialectic, however, is between the Christian and Antichristian. But this is not to be confused with the simul of the totus, totus. In the case of the pope, he is the same continuing existing subject. So that, as a Christian, the pope reveals himself to be Antichristian. As Antichristian, the pope pretends to be Christian.
Without this dialectic therefore, the pope would not be Anichrist in the first place. It is only by comparing him with the Gospel that we can discern him for who is he is.
Secondly, whatever distinction which Cwirla made is also demolished by Trent and Vatican 1.
And Paul McCain says that the Sacrament of the Altar is distributed in the Roman Church. It is also unhelpful for the Sacrifice of the Mass is an abomination. Is there harmony between Christ and Belial?
Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you. I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty (not the pope, mind you ...)
I was wrong about Paul T. McCain after all. I was right about him earlier on. He's traitor to his mentor, the late Venerable Robert D. Preus.
Dave,
I know you are disappointed in the discussions here but as an ex-RC I do not only view what the RC pretends it teaches but also what it practices too or allows its people to practice without discipline or correction.
Take the case of celibacy. Jesus said it is a gift but it is not a requirement if one is to be called a minister/elder of the church, in fact it even says - the husband of one wife, so it presumes the elder is married as a normal course of things. St. Peter was married.
These are just one of those things that the RCC engage in double talk.
BTW, the RC apologists in the internet are just as happy to call us heretics too so it flows the other way.
LPC
Judas H Priest falling down the stairs.
"That's not what the church really teaches".
Pig's. (My favourite Aussieism)
Why in all the flavours of Baskin Robbins ice cream does this church full of apostolic successors teaching with apostolic authority have to spend so much time with these lists of "what the church really teaches" in the face of what the church is actually doing, and teaching?
I like your blog, acromaticus. Watch out though, someone might find "rome" in the word and bam, you're a ruddy cryto-papist.
P.E.
All that acromaticus has to do is to belong to SSP and bam... (LOL).
Incidentally I do not think he is a graduate of Ft. Wayne so it is harder for us to suspect anything insidious (LOL).
LPC
Thanks Past Elder - it's a work in progress. Do check back, I need readers to justify this 'indulgence'!
Lito, Sorry, what is SSP?? I'm out of the loop on that one.
Btw, I'm a graduate of *Luther* Seminary (before the name change), in Adelaide SA, not St Paul MINN or Fort Wayne IN, whose faculty was once graced by the presence of that notable anti-Romanist Hermann Sasse, who has been a theological mentor to me, may God rest his soul (oops!).
Pr. M.
SSP is not to be confused with SSPX. The former is a 'confessional' Lutheran ministerium'
http://www.stpaullutheranchurchhamel.org/SocietyofStPolycarp.html
My allusion to Ft Wayne as it is suggested that it has been producing graduates that have been sinuflecting to Rome/EO.
http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2008/05/bruce-church-note-byzantium-at-fort.html
You should read that for a laugh.
LPC
Judas at the races!
Is the Luther Seminary in St Paul MN now part of the ELCA -- or as we like to say, the E?CA.
I owe some bloody revisionist Lutheran pre ELCA seminary my first exposure to Luther's work. The boyfriend of a friend of my then girlfriend years ago was a seminarian there, and he groused that he couldn't find a copy of the Little Catechism anywhere, even at the sem bookstore.
So I was browsing in this Mennonite bookstore in town, and came across the LCMS Little Catechism synodical edition, and a volume called Three Treatises from Ausburg Press. Got two copies of the former and gave one to him. Mine and Three Treatises went largely unread, until I got involved with a Lutheran (WELS) parish after getting married to an LCMS woman who bolted after Seminex. Then they were right there, waiting for me! Babylonian Captivity blew me out the door and down the street. I knew I was in after that!
I'd belong to the SSP except I don't think I could hack the commitment to pray at least one of the hours daily. Guess I'll have to wait for a Third Order Secular to evolve.
I'll never join the SSP, unless it throws the clause of reunion out of the window straight into the gutter. It's not a catholic organisation, emphatically not.
Catholicity is "reducible" to the Gospel. If it ain't, then it's not catholic.
P.E.
Crikey. Bro. Jason and I need to sit down with you and talk you out of this secret society called SSP --- hehehehawhaw(LOL).
A little leaven leavens the whole lump.
BTW I cooked some runza's when the missus was spending time working with the Aboriginees in North Western Australia. I got some pics I will post soon. They have not been treated well. I am a bit angry.
I could not get to cook the dough. How do you do them things? So I ate the Runza Filipino style -- no dough but with rice.
I have an idea, I will introduce a damper runza here. Did you Aussie friend tell you about dampers?
LPC
A.S.
I pointed out that I am certain Synods have dialogs with other denoms and faiths and so I see no reason to replicate what Synods are doing.
Your kuya,
Lito
Judas Frogmaster, my stat counter (the Aussie one) and Live Traffic Feed (got the idea from you) indicate the Runza post among the most popular for those arriving on the blog from a search and/or on a particular page!
I have no bloody idea how to cook a Runza. When I want one, I drive to the Runza fast food place nearby and get one!
P.E.
I must put Nebraska in my to-see-list. I need to see how those Runza restaurants are running their business.
LPC
Hell, most people put Nebraska on their fly-over list!
I rather like it though. But I wouldn't want to live anywhere in it but Omaha. The rest is fun to visit. But I gotta live in Omaha.
On the other hand, any day now I might just haul off and move to San Juan. (Puerto Rico)
Rome's faith is rooted in the Bible in the same way Protestantism is (from a Sola Scriptura POV). I'm not saying that You can't make a good case for Your self; but, that again, so can the others. Sorry. :-\ Preaching to the choir ain't gonna change much about this. :-|
Post a Comment