Vatican cardinal opens door to Lutheran ordinariates
#21
This is great news.

Luther, for all his heresy, never denied transubstantiation which is the cornerstone of our sacramental lives. And I think that ANYTHING which brings protestants closer to the Church is a good thing.
Reply
#22
(10-31-2012, 04:24 AM)loggats Wrote: This is great news.

Luther, for all his heresy, never denied transubstantiation.....

Wrong. He clearly believed and taught consubstantiation, which is heretical.
Reply
#23
(10-30-2012, 03:47 PM)OldMan Wrote: Come one, come all! Bring your heresy and we'll find a way to work it into the hermeneutic of continuity... How disgusting!

It is not about Lutherans bringing their heresy, it's about the Lutherans accepting the plenitude of the Catholic faith as a community.

:) :) :)
Reply
#24
(10-30-2012, 07:04 PM)Cordobes Wrote: Seriously, what great particularities exist in the Lutheran service  to justify a separate liturgical body? Couldn't they be well served in the Pauline mass?

What would they even call such an ordinariate? There's no getting around the word "Lutheran."

(edited language)

Maybe they could call it Evangelical, or Augustinian, or de Augsburg?
Reply
#25
(10-31-2012, 04:43 AM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(10-31-2012, 04:24 AM)loggats Wrote: This is great news.

Luther, for all his heresy, never denied transubstantiation.....

Wrong. He clearly believed and taught consubstantiation, which is heretical.

You're right, I just did some research - always thought he remained faithful, at least in that  :((

Still - I'm glad for the Lutherans, getting closer to the faith through this dialogue.
Reply
#26
In the so-called Anglican ordinariates, Anglicans become Roman Catholics, and retain some cultural elements related to the patrimony of the Anglo-Saxon tradition. This is a great thing. They are catechized and convert to Catholicism.

I don't know what the Lutheran idea is meant to be, but I find it difficult to draw a good parallel with what the converting Anglicans did. "Angles" is a word that relates directly and clearly to culture, language, etc. "Luther' is a guy, specifically a heretic. To say "Anglican" patrimony is to connect people with some specifics of culture; to say "Lutheran" patrimony is to connect people with a person, in this case a heretic.

It is true that at this point, we (and especially the cardinal) are throwing around terms like "Lutheran" ordinariate. But the fact is that if it is made on the model of what we call the Anglican ordinariate, we would be talking about people who would have to go from being Lutherans to being Catholics. The kinds of people that left the ANglican church for the Catholic ordinariates are people who by and large agree with trads more so than with NO catholics. They are disaffected Anglicans, running from the multiplication of heresies and abuses there. These are good people, so I would not worry about it, but rather welcome it.
Reply
#27
(10-31-2012, 12:57 PM)maldon Wrote: It is true that at this point, we (and especially the cardinal) are throwing around terms like "Lutheran" ordinariate. But the fact is that if it is made on the model of what we call the Anglican ordinariate, we would be talking about people who would have to go from being Lutherans to being Catholics. The kinds of people that left the ANglican church for the Catholic ordinariates are people who by and large agree with trads more so than with NO catholics. They are disaffected Anglicans, running from the multiplication of heresies and abuses there. These are good people, so I would not worry about it, but rather welcome it.

In both the case of the Anglicans and the Lutherans there is consider fragmentation.  There isn't just one group and I have a feeling only the most traditionally minded of these Lutheran groups would even remotely consider joining the Catholic church.  If this is the case, then we may find only a small group joining the Catholic church.  Small groups are good: it's easier to catechize them.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)