Disagreements between Catholics and Protestants

[Faith]

I was very clear in asking her if I’m right or not, asking her if there is not just no Confirmation classes but no Confirmation, period? She said that I’m right, there aren’t. Then she, too, mentioned the Sacrament Instruction class. But I think it’s just for kids in that typical age group.

 

[Albion]

OTOH, God could’ve created in 6 natural days and the earth could still be old….but then again, that doesn’t address my belief in theistic evolution. Do you believe in theistic evolution?

Personally, I don't even like the term. That's because it seems to suggest that the 'Theory of Evolution' which is usually attributed to Darwin is being adapted to fit Christian belief by accepting as correct the evolutionist's process but simply stipulating in addition that of course it was God who put all this into motion.

I'm content to believe that creation occurred in stages as Genesis indicates and that it was God who did this.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

OTOH, God could’ve created in 6 natural days and the earth could still be old….but then again, that doesn’t address my belief in theistic evolution. Do you believe in theistic evolution?

May I ask why you feel the need to hold to theistic evolution? You might find this article from a former theistic evolutionist of interest:
Why I rejected ‘theistic evolution’

 

[Faith]

May I ask why you feel the need to hold to theistic evolution? You might find this article from a former theistic evolutionist of interest:
Why I rejected ‘theistic evolution’

I don’t need to, I just do.

 

[Josiah]

We've gotten WAY off topic!

The issue is not evolution or the LCMS. The issue is not what is required belief. The issue is disagreements between Catholics and Protestants.


Again...

1. As a former Catholic and one active at ecumenical sites like this for nearly 25 years, I think this topic is not a helpful one (especially when so general). We can of course discuss SPECIFIC doctrines and/or practices in Catholicism or "Protestantism" (which Protestant???) and that can be helpful IF the point is to better understand each other and where we differ. If done with mutual respect, this can be good. But wide open, very general discussions like this only serve to divide. Another problem: There is no such thing as "Protestant", there are several faith communities within Protestantism and each has quite a different relationship to Catholicism. Remember: there was more than one Reformation. At some points, Protestants may disagree with other Protestants more than they do with Catholics. Your discussion with the Lutherans here would be very different than with Free Will Baptists for example.


2. Again, as a former Catholic, I think the DIVIDING doctrines for Lutherans would be...
+ Doctrine of the Church
+ Epistemology
+ Justification/Sanctification (THE issue both the Catholic Church and Luther said was central to the disagreement)
We could discuss each of those.

There are other issues, probably not "deal breakers" such as Transubstantiation (rather than just Real Presence), Purgatory (as dogma as in the unique Catholic form), some Marian views (as dogma anyway, perhaps okay as "pious opinion"), and some others.


3. And, my brother, I had to laugh when I read your emphasis on what SCRIPTURE says. Friend, you just lost the whole debate, essentially by surrendering the epistemology to Protestants. Catholicism does NOT rest on Scripture alone (much less one's interpretation of such) BUT on "the three legged stool" of Scripture (as understood by CATHOLICISM), Tradition (AS defined by and understood by CATHOLICISM) and the Magisterium (the leadership of CATHOLICISM) - all 3 legs EQUAL and INTERDEPENDENT. Catholic apologetics DO and MUST insist on that, it entirely falls if it submits instead to a very, very radical form of Protestant epistemology as you did in the opening post. Since you are Catholic at an ecumenical site, brother, be careful. Folks are (mostly) nice here so you'll get away with it but....


And note: I'm a strong, conservative/confessional Lutheran. But I still use my Catholic Catechism (and probably agree with 95% of the 2,865 points in it); I'm strongly liturgical and Sacramental; I'm very pro-life, etc. Pretty much all my family is Catholic and I know of none who actually agree with Catholicism more than I do, odd as I realize that is.


Several links are provided in post # 8



Blessings!


- Josiah



.

 

[Castle Church]

ACatholicism does NOT rest on Scripture alone (much less one's interpretation of such) BUT on "the three legged stool" of Scripture (as understood by CATHOLICISM), Tradition (AS defined by and understood by CATHOLICISM) and the Magisterium (the leadership of CATHOLICISM) - all 3 legs EQUAL and INTERDEPENDENT. Catholic apologetics DO and MUST insist on that, it entirely falls if it submits instead to a very, very radical form of Protestant epistemology as you did in the opening post.

I think this is key to the Catholic position. Trying to prove the Catholic position using scripture alone doesn't work - and it does not have to. The Catholic position does not claim to be Scripture Alone, and it is stronger using all of the tools available rather than fighting as if one arm is behind the back.

Many (most?) successful Catholic apologists prove the necessity of Tradition and Petrine Primacy and work their way back from there to tie in the scripture, and that is a more successful approach IMO.

 

[Faith]

Nor does the LCMS

There are lay persons in the ELCA who hold to evolution and some who don't. Just like in the LCMS and probably every church. But it's not dogma in any Lutheran denomination known to me.



.

So, out of all the people i’ve talked to in my church, so far all are creationists and believe In a young earth. Would you say that I’m the only one there with these beliefs? Do you personally know of any member of the LCMS who believes in evolution and a young earth besides me?

 

[Lamb]

So, out of all the people i’ve talked to in my church, so far all are creationists and believe In a young earth. Would you say that I’m the only one there with these beliefs? Do you personally know of any member of the LCMS who believes in evolution and a young earth besides me?

Why does it make a difference?

What do they all believe about Jesus? That's your focus.

 

[Faith]

Why does it make a difference?

What do they all believe about Jesus? That's your focus.

I’d like to know that I’m not the only one.

 

[Lamb]

I’d like to know that I’m not the only one.

Of course you aren't. I belong to some Lutheran groups on Facebook and I see people with differing beliefs on the matter. It's adiaphora.

 

[Josiah]

Of course you aren't. I belong to some Lutheran groups on Facebook and I see people with differing beliefs on the matter. It's adiaphora.

As her own pastor has told her.



.

 

[Faith]

Of course you aren't. I belong to some Lutheran groups on Facebook and I see people with differing beliefs on the matter. It's adiaphora.

Good.



.

 

[Albion]

So, out of all the people i’ve talked to in my church, so far all are creationists and believe In a young earth. Would you say that I’m the only one there with these beliefs? Do you personally know of any member of the LCMS who believes in evolution and a young earth besides me?

Hi, Faith. You are certainly not the only one. As I wrote in an earlier response, what you oppose is typical of Confessional Lutherans. By that I mean that it's the prevailing view but not that it's held unanimously. Not at all.

It's also worth a mention that theistic evolution, which you incline towards, is a lot better in several important theological ways than atheistic evolution.

But the most important understanding may be what I and others here--and your pastor also--tried to impress upon you. Theistic evolution concerning the days of Creation is not the enemy of an essential doctrine and, therefore, it should not be seen by you as an impediment to you belonging to the LC-MS.

To tell the absolute truth, there is hardly any denomination anywhere in which every member agrees on every last item of interpretation in Scripture...and yet they are all harmonious members so long as the essential doctrines such as the nature and identity of Jesus, the sacraments, and so forth, are not in question.

And then there are also some church bodies in which even essential doctrines are believed by some members in good standing, and the church authorities don't care. That is not what you are "getting into" with the LC-MS and it's nothing that Josiah or I or others here would say for you overlook, if it were what you were facing. But it's not.

 

[Faith]

Hi, Faith. You are certainly not the only one. As I wrote in an earlier response, what you oppose is typical of Confessional Lutherans. By that I mean that it's the prevailing view but not that it's held unanimously. Not at all.

It's also worth a mention that theistic evolution, which you incline towards, is a lot better in several important theological ways than atheistic evolution.

But the most important understanding may be what I and others here--and your pastor also--tried to impress upon you. Theistic evolution concerning the days of Creation is not an essential doctrine and, therefore, it should not be seen by you as an impediment to you belonging to the LC-MS.

To tell the absolute truth, there is hardly any denomination anywhere in which every member agrees on every last item of interpretation in Scripture...and yet they are all harmonious members so long as the essential doctrines such as the nature and identity of Jesus, the sacraments, and so forth, are not in question.

And then there are also some church bodies in which even essential doctrines are believed by some members in good standing, and the church authorities don't care. That is not what you are "getting into" with the LC-MS and it's nothing that Josiah or I or others here would say for you overlook, if it were what you were facing. But it's not.

Thanks!