"The crowds follow him, except for tiny groups of Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants. Chased by the Antichrist, they tell him, 'You have given us everything except for the one thing that interests us, Jesus Christ,'"
"Today, in fact, we run the risk of having a Christianity that puts Jesus with his cross and resurrection into parentheses,"
"There also are relative values such as solidarity, love for peace and respect for nature. If these are given an absolute value or uprooted from or placed in opposition to the proclamation of the fact of salvation, then they become the basis for idolatry and are obstacles on the path to salvation."
Writing from the perspective of a confession that has some rather specific things to say about the Antichrist, I am profoundly appreciate of the witness given by Cardinal Biffi who served the Roman Catholic community as archbishop, bishop, priest, and deacon. Before his death in 2015, he showed himself to be prescient with respect to the challenges of our present day and the godless culture that has become the hallmark of Western Europe today. Rome could use more folks like him -- people who are willing to speak up against the current tide of obtuse words and progressive direction promoted by Pope Francis. Alas, the few voices that remain to challenge the current occupant of the Vatican are under distinct pressure to cave in or be silent before Francis and the direction he has set for Rome.
12 comments:
Cardinal Giacomo Biffi in a 2007 Lenten Retreat us
Who do you suppose wrote this?"
Actually the person who wrote the quoted phrases was Vladimir Sergeyevich Solovyov (1853-1900), a Russian Orthodox philosopher who sympathized with the Roman Church and accepted papal supremacy.
In a 2007 Lenten Retreat meditation, Cardinal Giacomo Biffi quoted from a book written by Solovyov.
Of course, Lutherans who hold a quia subscription to the Book of Concord of 1580, recognize that Holy Scripture's description of the Antichrist fits the pope.
And quia folk say, Mass.
And Priest.
As Rev. Daniel Preus stated, "The word 'mass,' Luther believed, should be defined as the sacrifice that the priest offers for sin. It should never be used to speak of that sacrament which grants to believers the body and blood of Christ and the forgiveness of sins."
Or as Luther prayed: "May God grant to all devout Christians such hearts that when they hear the word "mass:' they might be frightened and make the sign of the cross as though it were the devil's abomination; on the other hand, when they hear the word "sacrament" or "Lord's Supper;' they might dance for pure joy...." [AE 38: 227]
When did Rev. Daniel Preus become a litmus test for all things Lutheran?
Vehse, you are a pathetic, pestiferous boil on this blog.
Do you really have nothing better to do with your time? Is your decrepitude so crippling you must find your pleasure in posting your inane babbling here?
Are you actually unaware of the fact that you are a laughing stock across Lutheran websites?
I've heard from others that you are now a part of a schismatic little congregation in Austin, Texas, so at least you have now found, at last, your true visible church on earth.
LOL
In his writings Rev. Preus offers a far better litmus test of what is Lutheran, Christian, and decent than what you write, McNonymous @ 6:07 PM.
OTOH, if I want to find the most disgusting, maggot-infested pile of excrement on the sidewalks of San Francisco, your post would certain serve as a useful litmus test.
Augsburg Confession 24 refers to the Mass as it was retained. It's a great term that we use in our Lutheran Confessions and there is no issue with the term as we faithfully believe in and practice holy Mass in our churches.
Article XXIV: Of the Mass. (Augsburg Confession)
1] Falsely are our churches accused of abolishing the Mass; for the Mass is retained among 2] us, and celebrated with the highest reverence.
In his article, "Luther and the Mass: Justification and the Joint Declaration" (Logia, X:4, Reformation 2001, 13-19), Rev. Daniel Preus stated:
"By 1533, however, Luther carne to the conclusion that 'mass' should no longer be used in reference to the sacrament of the altar. Luther's Letter Concerning His Book on the Private Mass is very illuminating in regard to his distinction between the two."
The 1537 Smalcald Articles distinguishes between the mass ("the greatest and most horrible abomination") and the Lord's Supper ("The Sacrament of the Altar").
"I'll take "dragon's tail" for $500, Alex."
BTW, Vladimir Sergeevic Solovyev discussed what he saw as the Antichrist in his 1900 book, The Three Dialogues and the Story of the Antichrist.
In 1580 the Book of Concord retained the term "Mass" in the confessions which we are required to uphold.
Let's teach and practice according to the BOC, our official doctrine.
The problem with this argument is that it seems to pretend that the Book of Concord was a unitary whole, written as a unitary document. It is a series of documents written by different men at different times and places. Both Augsburg and the Smalcald Articles are part of the Book of Concord. It is worth noting that the Articles were written later than Augsburg.
The BOC's use of the term "mass" is not based on a Scriptural command any more that the BOC's claim that a magnet smeared with garlic juice loses its magnetism.
Post a Comment