Posted on 07/10/2007 8:10:26 AM PDT by topcat54
The death of Pope John Paul II and the election of Pope Benedict XVI have drawn great attention to the papacy in recent months. Such intense interest is remarkable. Much of it relates to the personality and accomplishments of John Paul II. He was a man of great courage and contributed significantly to the collapse of communism in eastern Europe.
Part of the interest also results from the powerful images that Rome can offer television cameras. Some of the greatest art and architecture of western civilization serve as a backdrop for elaborate rituals performed by gloriously clad clerics.
Part of the appeal for manyincluding non-Roman Catholicsis the sense of continuity and certainty provided by the institution of the papacy. The office of the pope connects us with the past, with a time of greater Christian presence and influence at all levels of society and culture in the west. It also speaks of certain moral standards defended against the relativism of our times.
All of these elements of appeal for the papacy went largely unexamined by the media. I heard few authentically Protestant voices challenging the papacy on historical or theological terms. A few Protestant leaders briefly provided words of praise for John Paul II, but the only criticism of papal theological positions came from more liberal Roman Catholics.
Perhaps the nature of the event (and of the media) made it unlikely that much Protestant opinion would be expressed. But in Americawith many more Protestants than Roman Catholicsone might have expected some media exploration of why Protestants do not acknowledge the pope as the head of the church. The repeated claims that the pope is the successor of Peter and that the papacy is a 2000 year old institution went unexplored and unchallenged.
This Protestant silence says much about the state of Protestantism today. After observing the postponement of a royal wedding and the presence of the Prince of Wales, the prime minister and the Archbishop of Canterbury at the papal funeral, one Oxford historian declared, Protestant England is dead. Similarly, in America the reaction to the death of John Paul II was surprising. Our president, a Methodist, ordered American flags flown at half-staffan honor not even accorded Winston Churchill. And while Mrs. Lillian Carter headed the American delegation to the funeral of John Paul I, the president and two former presidents represented the United States at this funeral. Does the American response indicate that Protestant America is more interested in religious toleration or a Christian united front than it once was?
Historic Protestant View of the Pope
Historically Protestants have been very critical of the papacy as an institution. They have rejected the papacy for its theological claims and for its tyrannical exercise of power over the churches.
Romes Claim #1: The Bishop of Rome is the earthly head of the whole church. Protestants have wanted to show historically and theologically that this claim is invalid. They have argued that the papacy is not a 2000 year old institution. Even if Peter did minister and die in Rome, it can not be demonstrated that he was bishop there in the Roman Catholic sense of that word. For Rome a bishop is a separate office in the church superior to the ministers (or priests) who serve under him. If Peter was a bishop in Rome, he was bishop in a New Testament sense where bishop is simply another term for minister or elder (see Titus 1:5-7). In I Peter 5:1 Peter simply refers to himself as a fellow elder.
Certainly many churches in the first five hundred years of the history of the church did not recognize a sovereign authority in the bishop of Rome. The churches of Eastern Orthodoxy have never recognized such a claim, and many churches in the western part of the Roman empire during those early centuries did not recognize them either.
Romes Claim #2: Peter is the rock on which the whole church is built. Roman Catholics have argued that Jesus indicated that the church is built on Peter as its rock, appealing to Matthew 16:18, 19. Peter (Petros) confesses that Jesus is the Christ, and Jesus responds that on this rock (petra) he will build his church. Most Protestants have insisted that Jesus the Christ is the rock on which the church is built. (Some argued that Peter as the confessor and believer in Christ stood for the faith of the church and in that sense was the rock.) Peter in his first epistle sees Jesus as the rock, calling Jesus the rock of offense (I Pet. 2:8). Also the keys of the kingdom given to Peter in Matthew 16 are not uniquely given to him, for Matthew 18:18 shows that they are given to all the disciples.
Even if Peter were the head of the entire church and the rock on which the church is built as the leading apostle, that fact would not demonstrate that Peters power could be passed on to anyone else. Only Jesus makes apostles, and even Rome grants that the office of apostle does not continue in the church beyond the first century.
The Pope as Antichrist: In Europe during the Middles Ages voices were raised against the claims of the Bishop of Rome. Some medieval Christiansnotably radical followers of St. Francis of Assisi and of John Husargued that the pope was in fact the Antichrist because of his power, wealth and corruption. The popes use of military power, his accumulation of vast wealth and various moral scandals in the Vatican all seemed to support this belief.
The conviction that the pope was the Antichrist was held by almost all Protestants in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. When the pope refused to support reformation in the church and began to use the power of his office to persecute the advocates of reform, Luther concluded that the pope was Antichrist. Most other Protestants followed Luther in that belief.
Historic Protestant View: Biblical Basis
These early Protestants appealed to various texts of the Bible to support their contention. They cited 2 Thessalonians 2:3,4,9,10: Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God .The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Those Protestants noted that the Pope opposed the truth and claimed miracles to support his unbiblical teaching. They argued that he seated himself in the heart of the church which is the temple of God and took divine prerogative to himself, especially in changing the Gospel of grace.
They also applied Revelation 13:6,7 about the beast to the pope: It opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that is, those who dwell in heaven. Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them . (See also Daniel 7:25.) Protestants claimed that Romes rejection of the doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone was a blasphemy against God and his grace in Christ. This doctrine was anathematized, or denounced as accursed, at the Council of Trent (1545-1563), a council which Rome believes is an official ecumenical council of the church. Trents anathemas were approved by the popes and remain a condemnation of that doctrine to this day. Further, many Protestant believed that because the popes supported the persecution of Protestants, leading to the martyrdom of tens of thousands of them in the sixteenth century, the papacy was revealed as the Antichrist.
Historic Protestant View: The Confessions
So strong was this Protestant conviction about the Pope that it was incorporated into several Protestant confessions. Philip Melanchthon in the official Lutheran Apology of the Augsburg Confession, (1531), Article 15, wrote: If our opponents defend the notion that these human rites merit justification, grace, and the forgiveness of sins, they are simply establishing the kingdom of Antichrist. The kingdom of Antichrist is a new kind of worship of God, devised by human authority in opposition to Christ .So the papacy will also be a part of the kingdom of Antichrist if it maintains that human rites justify.
Martin Luther wrote even more strongly in the Lutheran confessional document, the Smalcald Articles (1537), Part 2, Article 4, The Papacy, this is a powerful demonstration that the pope is the real Antichrist who has raised himself over and set himself against Christ, for the pope will not permit Christians to be saved except by his own power, which amounts to nothing since it is neither established or commanded by God.
The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647), chapter 25, section 6 declared: There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God.
While confessional Lutherans have not changed their confessional statements, most American Presbyterian churches have removed the declaration that the pope is Antichrist from their confession.
Conclusion
If many Protestants today are not persuaded that the pope is the Antichrist, what should we say of him? Has the theology of the Roman Catholic Church about the pope and about the Gospel changed? The Roman Catholic Church has changed some of its claims about being the only institution in which one can find salvation. It is willing to call Protestants in some sense separated brothers. There does seem to be more toleration and less commitment to coercion on the part of the bishop of Rome. We should be glad for these changes.
Still the basic teaching about the authority of the pope has not changed and the teaching about the Gospel also has not changed. The Roman Catholic Church still anathematizes the Protestant and biblical doctrine of justification.
The most important criterion by which any minister must be evaluated is this: did he preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ? As Paul taught clearly: But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed (Gal. 1:8). By that standard we must conclude that Pope John Paul II was no more a success than his predecessors since the time of the Reformation. Let us pray that Pope Benedict XVI, a very learned man, may come to see the truth as it is in Christ and teach it faithfully.
(c)2005 Westminster Seminary California All rights reserved
here’s a list of simply major lutheran denominations:
Lutheran World Federation
Bolivian Evangelical Lutheran Church
Christian Lutheran Church of Honduras
Church of Denmark (Evangelical Lutheran Church in Denmark)
Church of Norway (Evangelical Lutheran Church of Norway)
Church of Sweden
Church of Iceland (Evangelical Lutheran Church of Iceland)
Estonian Evangelical Lutheran Church
Ethiopian Evangelical Church Mekane Yesus (EECMY)
Evangelical Church of the Augsburg Confession in Slovakia
Silesian Evangelical Church of Augsburg Confession
Evangelical Church of the Lutheran Confession in Brazil
Evangelical Lutheran Free Church of Norway (Associate member)
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Chile
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Guyana
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Hanover
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Papua New Guinea
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Russia and Other States
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Southern Africa
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Suriname
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Venezuela
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Colombia
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland
Evangelical Lutheran Church of France
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Hong Kong
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Latvia
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Tanzania
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Thuringia
Evangelical Lutheran State Church of Mecklenburg
India Evangelical Lutheran Church
Japan Evangelical Lutheran Church
Japan Lutheran Church (associate member)
Lutheran Church in Chile
Lutheran Church in Great Britain
Lutheran Church of Australia (associate member)
Lutheran Costarican Church
Malagasy Lutheran Church (Madagascar)
Mexican Lutheran Church
Nicaraguan Lutheran Church of Faith and Hope
North Elbian Evangelical Church
Salvadoran Lutheran Synod
United Evangelical Lutheran Church (Argentina)
Evangelical Community Church - Lutheran
Augustana Evangelical Catholic Communion
Protestant Lutheran Church in Bavaria
Protestant Lutheran State Church of Brunswick
[edit]United and uniting churches with Lutheran roots
Evangelical Church in Germany
Protestant Church in the Netherlands
[edit]International Lutheran Council
China Evangelical Lutheran Church
Christian Evangelical Lutheran Church of Bolivia
Evangelical Lutheran ChurchSynod of France and Belgium
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Argentina
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Brazil
Evangelical Lutheran Church of England
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Ghana
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Haiti
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Ingria in Russia
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Paraguay
Evangelical Lutheran Church of the Republic of Chile
Evangelical Lutheran Free Church of Denmark
Free Evangelical Lutheran Synod in South Africa
Gutnius Lutheran Church
Independent EvangelicalLutheran Church
India Evangelical Lutheran Church
Japan Lutheran Church
Lanka Lutheran Church
Lutheran Church - Canada
Lutheran ChurchHong Kong Synod
Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod
Lutheran Church in Korea
Lutheran Church in Southern Africa
Lutheran Church in the Philippines
Lutheran Church of Australia (associate member)
Lutheran Church of Guatemala
Lutheran Church of Nigeria
Lutheran Church in Singapore and Malaysia
Lutheran Church of Venezuela
Lutheran Synod of Mexico
[edit]Confessional Evangelical Lutheran Conference
All Saints Lutheran Church of Nigeria - Nigeria
Bulgarian Lutheran Church - Bulgaria
Christ the King Lutheran (Nigeria) - Nigeria
Confessional Evangelical Lutheran Church (Mexico) - Mexico
Evangelical Lutheran Church “Concord” - Russia
Confessional Lutheran Church (Latvia) - Latvia
Czech Evangelical Lutheran Church - Czech Republic
Evangelical Lutheran Confessional Church (Finland) - Finland
Evangelical Lutheran Confessional Church (Puerto Rico) - Puerto Rico
Evangelical Lutheran Free Church (Germany) - Germany
Evangelical Lutheran Synod (Peru) - Peru
Evangelical Lutheran Synod - United States
The Lutheran Church of Cameroon - Cameroon
Lutheran Church of Central Africa Malawi Conference - Malawi
Lutheran Church of Central Africa Zambia Conference - Zambia
Lutheran Confessional Church (Sweden and Norway) - Sweden and Norway
Lutheran Evangelical Christian Church (Japan) - Japan
Ukrainian Lutheran Church - Ukraine
Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod - United States
Gereja Lutheran Indonesia - Indonesia
[edit]Unaffiliated Lutheran denominations
American Association of Lutheran Churches (AALC)
Apostolic Lutheran Church of America
Association of Free Lutheran Congregations
Church of the Lutheran Brethren of America
Church of the Lutheran Confession (CLC)
Concordia Lutheran Church (Sweden)
Concordia Lutheran Conference
Evangelical Lutheran Free Church (UAC)
Evangelical Catholic Church
Evangelical Community Church-Lutheran
Evangelical Lutheran Conference & Ministerium of North America (ELCM)
Laestadian Lutheran Church
Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (USA)
Latvian Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Lutheran Church of New Zealand
Lutheran Churches of the Reformation (LCR)
Lutheran Churches of the Reformation in Nigeria
Lutheran Ministerium and Synod - USA
Lutheran Church of Cameroon
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Congo EELC-Brazzaville
Church of the Lutheran Brethren of Chad
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Cote dIvoire
Lutheran Church in Eritrea
Lutheran Church in Ethiopia
Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Gambia
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Guinea
Evangelical Lutheran Mission (Liberia)
Lutheran Church of Central Africa (Malawi & Zambia)
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Sudan
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Togo
Lutheran Church of Togo
Good Samaritan Evangelical Lutheran Church (India)
Latvian Evangelical Lutheran Church in Tamil Nadu
North Western Gossner Evangelical Lutheran Church
The Lutheran Church in India
Japan Lutheran Brethren Church
Laos Evangelical Lutheran Church
Tagakaulo Lutheran Church of Christ in the Philippines
The Lutheran Church of the Republic of China
Chinese Lutheran Brethren Church
China Lutheran Gospel Church
Lutheran Mission in Thailand
Siberian Evangelical Lutheran Church
Who's offended?
How many of them are you saying are not "in Communion", or do not adhere to a common creed(s), with each other?
424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church. From the RC Catechism.
It seems clear to me that any church that places ultimate authority in one man is not consistent with the structure of the church during the Apostolic era.
the better question is how many aren’t and aren’t on that list.
which is exactly why any religion that put’s it’s faith in every man is mistaken.
Allies in what war? The Christian faith? Conservative politics?
If you believe that the gospel of Roman Catholicism is the gospel of the Bible, then you ought to be a Roman Catholic. They were here first, after all. (No offense to the Orthodox.)
Frankly, I'm surprised that Reformed protestants even care. God can choose to elect anyone He chooses - even the Pope.
If you think this is about God's secret sovereign election (decretive will), then you do not understand reformed theology.
>>Allies in what war? The Christian faith? Conservative politics?<<
The war against Christianity in general not a war for the Christian faith.
The war against those who want to convert, enslave or kill us.
I’m sure you’re not saying that the Catholics are not willing to stand with other Christians in this fight or that you don’t want us on your side.
what do you mean by *here*?
I am Lutheran-Missouri Synod and can state for a fact that we are in communion with many of the Lutheran “branches” you mentioned above. You have to remember that just because a body of Lutherans in a particular country or region gives itself a name, does not mean it’s defined by a separate theology or doctrine. Some groups are definitely far-out liberal or marginally Christian, denying even the fundamentals that mainline Catholics and Orthodox all adhere to. But that is the exception. By and large, we all consider each other brothers in Christ.
You answered with: yeah thats why everyone and their brother starts protestant churches, lets face it youll are in such a massive disarray as to what scripture means youre a single bible study from calling eachother heretics and finding another room to rent for your singing and reading classes.
How does that answer either question? I will ask them once more. And I will also ask you whether you consider churches as denominations? What is the difference in your opinion? Which one did you mean?
What's that?
>>What’s that?<<
The infidels who Love our Lord Jesus Christ.
are you in communion with this one?
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jul/07070307.html
i consider any set of folks with different leaders and beleifs to be a different denomination; that said why split heretics.
I’m no expert on every denomination, but I don’t believe we are in communion with any of the churches in the Lutheran World Federation. The state Lutheran church of Sweden, and Norway for example are not with us due to liberal teachings like the one you just mentioned. I think Finland is with us, though. I’ve been to Lutheran churches in Sweden and the pastors there preach to empty churches, except for a few very senior citizens and some kids fulfilling their communion lesson obligations. For all intents and purposes the state Lutheran church in Scandinavia is mostly dead. I think they are overreaching in their doctrine (per your example)in order to appear more appealing to the masses. Just my opinion, of course.
As to whether Peter and therefore every Pope since has some special power not vested anywhere else on Earth, I am reminded of the Rock which Moses struck to bring forth water for life of the people. Christ is the Rock, not Peter, but object of Peter's profession is the rock upon which The Holy Spirit is given to the believer. Arguing with Catholics over this 'doctrine' is a thoroughly covered territory that needs no further survey. There is no 'victory' to be won or defeat to be borne in the exercise.
so you’d agree then that when protestant folks deviate from doctrine in obvious ways it creates a separate denomination yes?
Selah
Did you know that we used to have over a million different Protestant denominations? How could we be adding five new ones weekly, if 96% of them have already healed their divisions since the beginning of this year?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.