Pope Francis meets with Rev. Jens-Martin Kruse at Rome’s Evangelical Lutheran Church on Nov. 15 2016
Posted on 06/23/2017 9:12:09 AM PDT by ebb tide
Pope Francis meets with Rev. Jens-Martin Kruse at Rome’s Evangelical Lutheran Church on Nov. 15 2016
The commission consists of representatives from all three denominations, all bound to secrecy.
The journalist, who is well known in Italy for his accurate reporting of all things happening in the Vatican, has said that while this news is merely a “rumor” at this point, his “sources are usually good.”
According to his sources, the commission is finding little difficulty in finding common ground in the “liturgy of the word”. Tosatti reports: “After the confession of sins, asking for forgiveness, and reciting the Gloria, there would be the readings and the Gospel.”
He also said that the commission is allegedly studying the problem of the Creed. Protestant churches prefer to pray the Apostles’ Creed, although they do recognize the Nicene Creed. The Catholic Church alternates between them. So not even this point should be a major problem.
The presentation of the gifts likewise does not present a major obstacle to the project.
According to Tosatti, the central issue lies in the Eucharist, since the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist is profoundly different from that of the Lutherans or of other Protestant denominations. Catholics believe in Transubstantiation and the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, while Protestants believe that it is merely a memorial.
Tosatti reports that a possible “solution” being proposed is that the words of Consecration be replaced by silence:
But how can a common liturgy be celebrated that clearly differs in the wording right at the most important point of the event?
One of the proposed possible solutions would be silence. It would mean that after the Sanctus, at the moment in which normally during the Mass the priest would say the words: “Father, you are holy indeed…” the different celebrants would keep silent, everyone mentally repeating “his own” formula.
The silence is broken in the congregation with the recitation of the Our Father. It is still not clear how the lines for Communion would be formed.
In light of this well-founded rumor, we should take heed of the remarks of Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, a close collaborator of Pope Francis and currently the President of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts. The Vatican cardinal has suggested that we stop thinking of sacraments so rigidly as only either valid or invalid. For the sake of ecumenism, he opined that we should start looking into sacraments perhaps having “imperfect” or “partial” validity. Below are his exact words, as published in his exclusive interview with Edward Pentin of the National Catholic Register:
We say, everything is valid; nothing is valid. Maybe we have to reflect on this concept of validity or invalidity. The Second Vatican Council said there is a true communion [between Catholics and Protestants] even if it is not yet definitive or full. You see, they made a concept not so decisive, either all or nothing. There’s a communion that is already good, but some elements are missing. But, if you say some things are missing and that therefore there is nothing, you err. There are pieces missing, but there is already a communion, but it is not full communion. The same thing can be said, or something similar, of the validity or invalidity of ordination. I said let’s think about it. It’s a hypothesis. Maybe there is something, or maybe there’s nothing — a study, a reflection. ∎
by John Supplers, Veritas Vincit
An excommunicated, heretical Catholic priest.
What is a protestant ant?
John 5:24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.
Salvation by faith and eternal security all in one statement from Jesus Himself.
Jesus promised that if we believe we are already (past tense) saved, have passed from death into life, and do NOT come into judgment.
Therefore, when He is talking about the judgment of those in the grave a few sentences on, He could not have meant those who are already saved as their judgment is over with.
He says *the hour is coming* which refers to a future judgment and those who believe are exempt from it.
I dare wonder if you were to be brave enough to go the Vatican and nail your complaints to the door....how would you be found?
Innocent? Or guilty of heresy?
According to the Four Dubia Cardinals in their latest letter to Francis questioning him,:
We do not share in the slightest the position of those who consider the See of Peter vacant [ie. sedevacantists], nor of those who want to attribute to others the indivisible responsibility of the Petrine munus [ie. that Benedict is the true pope].
they don't even condemn the sedevacantists as non-Catholic!
I given justification many times: both Martin Luther and Jorge Bergoglio were/are Catholic heretics. Luther would never have had called Bergoglio a heretic; for Heaven's sake, Bergoglio is even celebrating Luther's revolt.
There is still no difference in what you do daily and what Luther did.
Big difference.
No there’s not. You’re basing your posts on your own interpretation of Catholic thought.
You don’t know what I interpret and what I don’t.
Thank you for responding to that question. I appreciate the aptness of your answer.
Since you believe that this passage is for non-Christians, then Jesus is saying that for unbelievers, those who performed good deeds will be raised unto salvation, but those who performed evil deeds are raised for eternal damnation?
His very words...
Those
If you fail to recognize of what period and in what context of righteousness ‘those raise to life’ are aimed, you will conflate that epoch, post Rapture and post apocalypse, with our epoch, The Church Age. What Jesus told those listening JEWS is not aimed at the Church Age of God’s Grace in Christ Jesus.
***Protestants believe that it is merely a memorial.***
That is so wrong. In fact, there is no such denomination as “protestant”.
There are hundreds of denominations, a few of which can actually trace back to those protest years starting with Luther and a few others.
No kidding? Have you ever wondered why?
I’m not finding “Church Age” “Rapture”, “post-Rapture” or “epoch” in any of the online Bible concordances. Can you help me out with a chapter and verse?
Paul gave extensive teaching on The Church Age but did nt use that term. The Rapture is taught by Paul in the two letters to the Thessalonians and in the Corinthian letters. The study of Revelations is required (no short cuts) to see the 'post Rapture' world of the Tribulation without The Bride of Christ present. As to the Great White Throne of Judgment and the Millenium, well you have a lot of study to see those aspects.
That wasn’t really my point. I was pointing out that therevis no such thing as a “protestant” denomination. In fact, very few if our modern denominations are based on those protests in the 1500s.
If you want my opinion why there are so many denominations, I’d be forced to say it’s because we reject the type of unity that Jesus called for.
So, people go their own way.
According to the Four Dubia Cardinals in their latest letter to Francis questioning him,:
We do not share in the slightest the position of those who consider the See of Peter vacant [ie. sedevacantists], nor of those who want to attribute to others the indivisible responsibility of the Petrine munus [ie. that Benedict is the true pope].
they don't even condemn the sedevacantists as non-Catholic!
I am reposting this post as it appears it has been ignored (much like my PM to ebb asking him whether he knew why my posts were deleted in one of his Catholic Caucus threads).
Even the hierarchy of the Church does not condemn any kind of sedevacantist as non-Catholic. They see it as a "position" that they do not hold, but they do not say that Catholics can't hold this position to be Catholic.
If these cardinals don't consider them non-Catholic, why do the FR posters and mods do so? Who are they to judge and treat Catholics as non-Catholic? It seems to me that this forum needs to allow for all Catholics to post in Catholic Caucuses.
This goes to the very heart of the problem of “Francis” who has been such a HOT HOT HOT HOT topic in the last couple of years, no?
The solution is going to come down to one thing in many ways: That to remain a strong Catholic one ought to be capable of identifying a false pope if one arises in his lifetime.
In light of testimony given by Archbishop John Purcell (1800-1883) that the Fathers of the First Vatican Council said that a heretical pope is impossible, that leaves only that the heresy being daily demonstrated by the man in white in Rome is being demonstrated by an imposter, by one rejected not so much by Sedevacantists, but by God Himself!:
Read the words of the attendee of the First Vatican Council below, those of aforementioned Archbishop John Purcell:
The question was also raised by a Cardinal, “What is to be done with the Pope if he becomes a heretic?” It was answered that there has never been such a case; the Council of Bishops could depose him for heresy, for from the moment he becomes a heretic he is not the head or even a member of the Church. The Church would not be, for a moment, obliged to listen to him when he begins to teach a doctrine the Church knows to be a false doctrine, and he would cease to be Pope, being deposed by God Himself.
If the Pope, for instance, were to say that the belief in God is false, you would not be obliged to believe him, or if he were to deny the rest of the creed, “I believe in Christ,” etc. The supposition is injurious to the Holy Father in the very idea, but serves to show you the fullness with which the subject has been considered and the ample thought given to every possibility. If he denies any dogma of the Church held by every true believer, he is no more Pope than either you or I; and so in this respect the dogma of infallibility amounts to nothing as an article of temporal government or cover for heresy.
(Abp. John B. Purcell, quoted in Rev. James J. McGovern, Life and Life Work of Pope Leo XIII [Chicago, IL: Allied Printing, 1903], p. 241)
I suppose we could say the early believers making up the Ekklesia were ‘protestants’, rebelling from Judaism. But that’s a odd way to identify them.
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.