Saturday, March 08, 2008

When Lutheran Attack

I sometimes get way ahead of myself and my mouth frequently gets me into trouble. That being said I was recently reinvited back to a Lutheran blog to speak on a few topics. I got banned within 2 days of being back (big surprise since I am a hardcore Catholic), and I was reminded of that movie "the Village". The village was about a group of people that willingly took themselves away from the world and put up a big wall to block everything they didn't understand out. In doing so they isolated themselves to a few books and the same repeated thinking generation after generation.

To me the Lutheran church and ideology is just like that. They got a few books, concord, confessions, and their misinterpreted bible and threw up this big wall around their teachings and minds to block out anything that might cause them to challenge their belief system. Don't get me wrong, the people on this forum as extremely intelligent, most of them are pastors and they are highly educated.. and yet they fail to see the simplicity of Christs message about unity, love, and communion in his one body.

I left their forum for a while to allow them to recoup after my massacre, I do not think they enjoyed one second of me being there. I leave as a humbled and contrite Christian who is seeking a better way of approaching such hard headed individuals. Maybe God will bless me with the gift of a better tongue to answer them with wisely, a mind that will not deceive me, and a heart to learn to love my fellow Christians who are off the trodden path.

Pax et Christi,

Michael

7 comments:

The Unknown Lutheran said...

Michael:
I think that you have not come across the hard headed people you think that you have... I think you met the hard head and the hard head was you.

Pastor Weedon is one of the most charitable Lutheran pastors we have - he has a great respect for the fathers of the church and has a great understanding of the Roman Church and the way you treated him was shameful.

I truly suggest you read the Book of Concord, especially the Augusburg Confession and its appology. Tell what is not catholic about them.

I would take Fr. Weedon's advice and talk to your priest.

He meant this for your own good.

St. Michael the Archangel said...

Unknown. I do not need to speak to my priest about blogging with you all.. to me that is not necessary and was just a way for your group to avoid answering the tough questions that I posed. Yes I have done research on him and see that he is a traditional Lutheran. I will continue to blog, just not back on your site and I do not need to speak to a Priest about it.. I have done nothing wrong, theologically or retorically.

The Unknown Lutheran said...

Michael:
I would like you to consider one more thing about your blogging.

You quoted Archbishop Sheen at the bottom of your posts.

I am well acquainted with how Archbishop Sheen taught and spoke as I listen to him every morning on the way to work.

While he takes a very hard stance against athiests and communists, he never takes such a brutal approach to those baptized in the name of the Triune God.

I suggest you take that as an example for your future efforts.

St. Michael the Archangel said...

Unknown,

When the people were selling in Gods temple, what did Jesus do? He ripped off the cord around his waist and whipped them out of his fathers house.

(Soon to be st.) Bishop Sheen, was a great man, I have listed to many a tape by him. Now I do have an irish temper, I will not deny that. When I challenged your group, no one could base a good response on the scriptures, you had to keep going back to your book of concord to argue your point. I proved one thing when I was there.. that
A. The Papacy isn't the Anti-Christ
B. The book of concord was the only document that was anti-papist.

I am not a saint, nor am I like God. I am a human being who falls many a time. That being the case, I cannot and will not back down and allow someone to drag my church and faith through the mud, because they would rather believe a lie then to face the truth. Even more so that there is Ministers on there.. I hold your ministers more responsible for leading the flock astray as God will hold them more responsible than the people.

Your suggesting that I take something into account, I will .. but in the meantime, how about you look at your own words and that of your followers. How would Christ react to you today when your calling St. Peter, Cephas, the Anti-Christ? He chose him and you teach that he is the devil.. it doesn't make sense.

PS: I have asked a Priest and I will dutifully post his respose whether it be yea or nea.

The Unknown Lutheran said...

I don't believe any one in the group on LQ called St. Peter the anti-christ. They called the man that occupies his so called chair the anti-christ - and without using the Book of Concord we can discuss this.

1. "There is no salvation outside of the Church". In the Roman understanding this means that those outside of the Church are not in union with the Pope - with the exception of the Orthodox. This denies Holy Scripture - because it is Baptism that brings us into the Body of Christ. As St. Peter wrote "baptism now saves you". In a great paradox the Roman Church accepts baptism using the trinitarian formula as valid - although many thousands of baptisms take place without his blessing.
2. The Church is found where the Gospel is preached and the Sacraments are properly administered. The Gospel is John 3:16 amongst hundreds of other passages which you would never argue against. The Sacraments are what Christ says they are - this is my Body, this is my Blood, baptize all nations, receive the Holy Spirit - whoever's sins you forgive are forgiven and whoever's sins you retain are retained. St. Peter was the rock - his confession that Jesus is the Christ is the foundation of the Body of Christ the Church. The One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is the body that took the God breathed scriptures and put its seal of authority on the canon of the Bible - why is there not a passage that clearly states "I will govern the entire church on earth through the Papacy." Why is there no prophecy stating that Rome will be the seat of ecclesial authority?
3. Why did the last Pope take as his motto "totus tuus" meaning totally yours, putting himself in the hands of the Blessed Virgin Mary to bring him to Christ. I am not writing that the Blessed Virgin Mary does not pray for us, but why didn't he put his trust in Christ alone, since scripture, which was approved by the Roman Church, tell us that Christ in the one mediator between God and Man - and that Christ is the way, truth and life?

Thank you for talking to your priest, I look forward to seeing this response.

TUL

St. Michael the Archangel said...

Question:

I have been blogging with a group of Lutherans on their private forum, most of these Lutherans are Pastors and they are hardliners. I was invited to the group by a loyal member who wanted to discuss logic and philosophy with me. I have been active in the past week participating in such discussions that call the Pope the Anti-Christ, etc. - Michael


Michael:



In answer to your question, my question in return to you would be, "What do you think you're going to accomplish by defending the faith?"



When someone feels that the faith needs to be defended, it implies that something's wrong. Jesus never defended the faith. He never told us to defend the faith. He told us to have faith. No one can convince another to have faith. Faith is a gift. If one has faith, he or she can share faith with others. But one can never expect that another is going to receive it from him or her. It only can be given by God. In fact, to have those expectations is actually contrary to the Gospel. We are not to have expectations. We sow where we do not reap and reap where we do not sow.



It has been my experience that no one in those rooms is there to share or to learn, but rather feed their egos and look for support of the like minded in conspiracy. There is no search for truth from that point of departure. It is only a vehicle for ego. And, if someone wants to know what E-G-O stands for, it's "Easing God Out”. To think that we have the power to give faith is to make a false God before God. Faith needs no defense. There comes a time to "shake the dust" from one's sandals. If we can't do that, we must question where our faith really is. Is it in me or in God?



God bless,

Father Amaro

Siarlys Jenkins said...

As a non-Lutheran Protestant, who has had the pleasure of a visit from Michael at my site, and of responding to his comment, I would just like to note that ALL doctrine is mortal man's pitifully inadequate attempt to fit God into a box that the human mind can comprehend. That is of course an impossible task, but we puffed up arrogant humans too often fight bloody wars over the difference. I have been to Roman mass several times with an elderly Hispanic friend, have volunteered with Catholic Workers a few times for a year or two, and often attend a Wisconsin Synod Lutheran church (invited by a friend who is a member, the pastor knows I can't join, we have interesting and mutually respectful discussions about evolution and other things we disagree about). Incidentally, I include the "triune" speculations about the nature of the Creator as fallible doctrine: Jesus didn't say WHAT the father, the son, and the holy ghost are. I believe they relate to God as three blind men related to the elephant. But God knows, I don't, and none of you do either.

Jesus said that "all the law and the prophets" hangs on two commandments, to love God with all your heart, soul and mind, and to love your neighbor as yourself. Anyone who wants to add to that can talk until they are blue in the face, but I don't have to worry about it, becaue the person talking, however bold, determined or hard-headed, is not the authority. God will do as God chooses, regardless of what we all think. That is comforting to me.

Michael lists the Chronicles of Narnia as some of his favorite books. Michael, do you recall in The Last Battle where the prince of the idol-worshipping Calormenes comes to recognize Aslan as the one to adore, and is ashamed of his sincere devotion to Tash? Aslan explains, Tash is so evil, that any good and sincere devotion to him was really devotion to me, while any evil thought devoted to me was really devoted to Tash.