Theologian: Soon "breakthrough" for a common supper

katholische.de (google translation) ^ | August 12, 2017 | unknown

[ebb tide]

Wolfgang Huber, former Council President of the Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD), believes in a "breakthrough" at the communion of Protestants and Catholics to the Ecumenical Church Day of 2021. "I can not imagine that we will celebrate this church day without A breakthrough has been achieved in the area of ​​Eucharistic hospitality, "said the former bishop of Berlin in the interview of the" Weser-Kurier "(Saturday). Until the event in Frankfurt am Main 2021 something must move.

"Machistort des Papstes" less promising

According to Huber, the next steps in the Eucharist and the Lord's Supper will be "decentralized". "My feeling is that Pope Francis wants to broaden the scope of individual bishops' conferences for ecumenically relevant decisions, and sees this path as a more promising one as a central path for the whole world church and a breakthrough through a pope's power," said Huber.

The former bishop of the Evangelical Church of Berlin-Brandenburg-Silesian Oberlausitz was 75 years old on Saturday. Berlin's Archbishop Heiner Koch congratulated him with a congratulatory letter: Koch thanked him especially for the "strong accents" which he had placed both in the Protestant church and in the ecumenism. He praised Huber as a "strong integrator" and recalled that the fusion of the Evangelical Church of Berlin-Brandenburg with the Evangelical Church of the Silesian Oberlausitz fell in his office in 2004.

Huber was born on 12 August 1942 in Strasbourg. From 1994 to 2009 he was a bishop of Berlin, and from 2003 to 2009 he was the presidency of the Evangelical Church in Germany. Before that, he was himself president of the church. In his own words, however, it was self-evident for him to leave the office before his bishop's election. "For me the church day movement is characterized by the fact that it is a lay movement that cooperates with the Church, but on the basis of reciprocal freedom", he explained. At the Kirchentag this year in Berlin and Wittenberg you got the feeling of a joint event. "From the old counterpart of the church and the church day nothing was visible to the outside." He wanted something more friction, however. "Friction generates fire," says Huber. (JHE / KNA)

[Mom MD]

There is but one mediator between man and the Father - Jesus Christ. He alone is our judge and advocate. PERIOD.

[The Cuban]

Wrong comment. Apologies

[zek157]

Nice show of your true self. Wander over to your caucus and keep that sentiment with your own.

[trebb]

The feeling is mutual with your new-found false religion.

LOL! Can't go wrong with following the Bible, which elevates one Man - Jesus, as the path to God and Eternal Life.

I may have missed the part where Jesus told them, "Peter, when you and only you and your descendants (or kinda-sorta descendants), break bread and pour wine, do it in remembrance of me."

Organized "Grace before a meal" is wonderful. Telling others that they "don't qualify" to recognize Jesus via the method is really insane since He died for even the very worst of us.

[ealgeone]

You also disagree with Jesus about having a “personal” relationship with him. He told the apostles, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them. Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”

If only you'd read Acts you'd understand how this was accomplished.

So, in John’s gospel, Jesus clearly says that our relationship with him here on earth is not absolutely direct, but is mediated by certain men.

Exactly how Roman Catholicism depicts the relationship between Christ and man....at arms length. Good thing we have the NT to show us otherwise.

"No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you. John 15:15 NASB

casting all your anxiety on Him, because He cares for you. 1 Peter 5:7 NASB

31What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? 32He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? 33Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; 34who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. 35Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36Just as it is written, “FOR YOUR SAKE WE ARE BEING PUT TO DEATH ALL DAY LONG; WE WERE CONSIDERED AS SHEEP TO BE SLAUGHTERED.” 37But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. 38For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 8:31-39 NASB

[piusv]

The logical next step in the Vatican II Revolution.

[Wuli]

Those, humans, always seeking “unity” and “solidarity” are always the ones from whose efforts empires are built and tyrants arise.

[ebb tide]

See post #5 and then get back to me.

[ebb tide]

I may have missed the part where Jesus told them, "Peter, when you and only you and your descendants (or kinda-sorta descendants), break bread and pour wine, do it in remembrance of me."

I have no idea of what you're babbling about but you may have missed the part where Jesus said, "And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." Matthew Chapter 16.

[ebb tide]

...since He died for even the very worst of us.

But His Blood was shed for "many", not for "all of us".

[Iscool]

You also disagree with Jesus about having a “personal” relationship with him. He told the apostles, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them. Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”

In other words, Jesus gave the apostles the power to JUDGE, and then to forgive or refuse forgiveness.

Now, it would clearly be preposterous for Jesus to give this power to the apostles unless the faithful were going to TELL their sins to the apostles.

So, in John’s gospel, Jesus clearly says that our relationship with him here on earth is not absolutely direct, but is mediated by certain men.

But for those of us who read and believe the bible we see that in Hebrews that the church is directed to go directly to the T hrone of Grace to find mercy and help...And we know the one on that Throne is Jesus...

And Jesus told Paul to tell us in Romans for those cases where we don't know what to pray, the Holy Spirit inside of us prays to God for us...He certainly doesn't pray to a priest or bishop...

1Jn 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

That's a guarantee...I don't see where a priest can intervene and deny any forgiveness, do you???

Joh 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

According to what Jesus says here neither you nor any other man can deny forgiveness to anyone...

[narses]

He told the apostles, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them. Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”

[narses]

He told the apostles, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them. Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”

[boatbums]

It's almost pointless to try to explain to dyed-in-the-wool Roman Catholics that the way they have been taught to understand certain verses of Scripture doesn't necessarily mean that it is what these passages actually say. They read that Jesus said to Peter, "...on this rock I will build my church...", and that automatically MUST mean Peter is the foundation of the church - the Catholic one, of course. We can show them that many of their OWN church fathers and doctors taught it was Peter's profession of faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God that the church/body/bride of Christ would be built upon - that Jesus is the ROCK, but they mostly ignore them.

They MUST ignore them because they also believe Peter was the first "Pope" of Rome and will claim that they can trace ALL their Popes back to him, even though that is NOT factual and cannot be verified. There WAS no universal Pope for centuries after the last Apostle died. And even IF they could be, that doesn't automatically confer "Apostleship" on every man (or woman) that came after him or that he has an "infallibility" gift to declare true doctrine outside of what Scripture teaches. There were some pretty unsavory (putting it nicely) characters that played as Pope over the years - certainly NOT the kind that Jesus would have anointed and sent out to evangelize.

Jesus Christ is the Rock upon which our faith rests (not a church) and He is the chief cornerstone upon which the spiritual house of His body is built of which we ALL as believers are like living stones:

As you come to Him, the living stone, rejected by men, but chosen and precious in God’s sight, you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture: “See, I lay in Zion a stone, a chosen and precious cornerstone; and the one who believes in Him will never be put to shame. (I Peter 2:4-6)

Expect the barbs that will be shot at us because what they hold unto is based upon human pride and not the word of God. Because we believe in Jesus we will NEVER be put to shame. PTL!

[narses]

He told the apostles, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them. Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”

[boatbums]

He told the apostles, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them. Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”

Ah, yes, ANOTHER misunderstood passage Catholics have been taught means their "priests" have inherited a power to forgive or retain sins that Jesus ONLY gave to his Apostles. Yet, we have NO examples of the Apostles ever actually doing that. Wonder why? The preaching of the gospel of the grace of God is how anyone can be forgiven for all their sins when they believe. If someone refuses to believe in Jesus Christ, his sins are not forgiven. Are you aware that the RC practice of private "auricular" (to the ear) confession to a priest was NOT practiced until the 7th. century! Your own catechism admits that:

“Over the centuries the concrete form in which the Church has exercised this power received from the Lord has varied considerably. During the first centuries the reconciliation of Christians who had committed particularly grave sins after their Baptism (for example, idolatry, murder, or adultery) was tied to a very rigorous discipline, according to which penitents had to do public penance for their sins, often for years, before receiving reconciliation. To this ‘order of penitents’ (which concerned only certain grave sins), one was only rarely admitted and in certain regions only once in a lifetime. During the seventh century Irish missionaries, inspired by the Eastern monastic tradition, took to continental Europe the ‘private’ practice of penance, which does not require public and prolonged completion of penitential works before reconciliation with the Church. From that time on, the sacrament has been performed in secret between penitent and priest. This new practice envisioned the possibility of repetition and so opened the way to a regular frequenting of this sacrament. It allowed the forgiveness of grave sins and venial sins to be integrated into one sacramental celebration. In its main lines this is the form of penance that the Church has practiced down to our day” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1447).

You can read more if you dare HERE.

Here is a better understanding of what Jesus said:

Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, etc.—In any literal and authoritative sense this power was never exercised by one of the apostles, and plainly was never understood by themselves as possessed by them or conveyed to them. (See on [1919]Mt 16:19). The power to intrude upon the relation between men and God cannot have been given by Christ to His ministers in any but a ministerial or declarative sense—as the authorized interpreters of His word, while in the actings of His ministers, the real nature of the power committed to them is seen in the exercise of church discipline. (Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary)

I predict that you will continue to post this verse as if NOTHING was ever said to explain it properly so as to presume Jesus was Apostlizing every Roman Catholic priest that ever existed to hear "confession".

[Iscool]

He told the apostles, (except for the apostle Paul who was the apostle to the Gentiles) “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them. Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”

[trebb]

I have no idea of what you're babbling about but you may have missed the part where Jesus said, "And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." Matthew Chapter 16.

And ever since, other mortals have had the power to grant/deny the communion with God and the entry to Heaven......

[trebb]

But His Blood was shed for "many", not for "all of us".

Who was excluded?

[trebb]

First I remember hearing from you - enjoyed and agreed with what you said. God Bless.