As an LCMS pastor myself, I'm glad to have a guy like Bryan Wolfmueller in our ranks. He's well read and can teach as much to layman as he can to fellow pastors.
Recently became Lutheran. I'm having my doubts as any new convert should. But Pastor Wolfmueller and Pastor Jordan Cooper are keeping me well in line. I thank God for them both. From Pentecostal to Eastern Orthodox catechumen to finally Confessional Lutheran!
@@Mygoalwogel well ultimately I felt lied to. The caricatures made about Protestantism simply were not true at the end of the day when you actually read the reformers. Calvin’s institutes and Melanchthons on the authority of the church were instrumental. And what broke the camels back was Chemnitz examination on the council of Trent. The Protestant claim to history is a strong one.
@@4emrys Did you read the whole thing? I've read snippets and would love to read the entirety, but unless it's free somewhere, I'll have to wait until my kids are less expensive. :)
@@Mygoalwogel the institutes and Melanchthons works are all free. Chemnitz examination I have all 4 volumes in hard copy form. They were pretty expensive but I have heard that they’re free somewhere on the internet. If you hand over your email/discord, I can send you some pdfs.
From Pentecostal (graduated from an AG college), to Episcopalian, flirted with Eastern Orthodoxy, but now a Confessional Lutheran. Truly the approach to properly distinguishing Law and Gospel did it for me. Now reading the Scriptures I can finally say, "Now I get it!"
Pastor Wulfmueler has got to be the single best person to give a basic introduction to Lutheranism! He is so good at distinguishing it from general American Evangelicalism.
Love this! I’m in the process of becoming a member of the LCMS (Lutheran) church. Love their understanding of justification and the Sacraments! I went to a reformed seminary but am convinced of the straightforward understanding of Scripture.
Hi Aaron! I’m in the same boat :) I’m from a pentecostal background, and like you found the Lutheran tradition to be simple and straightforward with the bible! Praise be to God to hear another testimony. I pray that everyone listens to the Word of God, and follow the conviction, even if that means going to a church I don’t agree with, but what we need are Christian brothers and sisters genuinely convicted and sensitive to the Holy Spirit, not practicing tradition for the sake of tradition, but for the sake of the gospel!
I also went through a similar experience growing up in an Evangelical/pentecostal church. All I can say is amen to all the Pastor said, and it reminds me of how and why I became a Lutheran (LCMS).
All the LCMS churches we’ve attended over the past two years have had ‘close’ communion rather than ‘closed’ communion, and I think that is a very insightful and wise move, as well as completely consistent with Scripture.
@@wyattfuchs6839 Closed communion generally means one has to be a member of that church, or a member of another church within the same denomination, in order to partake. Close communion generally means one agrees with the stated understanding that church has regarding communion, and affirms their practice of communion, without needing to be a member specifically of that church or the denomination.
Great Video Austin. I’m a Christian thanks to Calvary Chapel. I attend a LCMS church. I am so grateful to Calvary Chapel and trust me if you have a wayward love one ( none believer) you want a brother in the Calvary chapel to witness to him or her. They are the Marines of the church:).
Hey Austin! Missed your live comment on my video yesterday, but you are doing great work brother! Your channel has become a great place for Christians from all backgrounds to gather and learn!
I am really enjoying your interviews with other denominations, Austin. As a former Confessional LCMS Lutheran, I still greatly appreciate Pr. Wolfmueller's clear and amiable approach to sharing the Christian faith. He was an excellent choice to share an historic Lutheran perspective on things. Pr. Jordan Cooper (Just and Sinner) would be another excellent choice too. As a former Lutheran, I pray that you Austin, and everyone who happens upon this video, will earnestly seek out the truth of the Reformation, though. I agree with Pr. Wolfeuller that the doctrine of justification and the idea of sola fide was the primary theological cause for dividing the western church. Unfortunately, as many very learned and well-meaning Lutherans often do, Pr. Wolfmeuller doesn't understand the Catholic position on justification and therefore doesn't realize that it was the original Lutherans that were in error. Pr. Wolfmeuller says he was convinced of the Gospel that "conversion is a monergistic act and that God alone gives us the gift of faith and salvation". However, he then implies that Catholicism teaches something different. This, unfortunately, shows he doesn't understand the Catholic view of justification. Justification is a gift of God (CCC 153, 1996, 2010). Faith is the root of justification (Council of Trent Session VI. CHAPTER VIII.). The Catholic Church emphatically teaches that no one merits initial justification from God. It is a free gift given based solely on God calling us to Him and gifting us with faith as seen here in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC). *CCC 2010 Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion.* For anyone interested, here is a link to my blog series exploring the theological reasons why I left Lutheranism for Catholicism. I especially recommend the 3 parts specifically on sola fide for anyone interested in learning more about the dispute over justification. www.follyofthecross.com/category/catholicism/fullness-of-the-truth/ *To cut to the chase, Lutherans got it wrong when they taught justification is Christ's very own righteousness imputed to us.* This lead to many of their other errors saying that we are saved by faith *alone* in Christ. Protestant theolgian Alister McGrath even concluded the idea of imputation was a brand new theological idea with the Reformers in his gigantic study on the history of the doctrine of justification: "A fundamental discontinuity was introduced into the western theological tradition where none had ever existed, or ever been contemplated, before. The Reformation understanding of the nature of justification [as imputation] must therefore be regarded as a genuine theological novum." Alister McGrath - Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification. Vol. I. Pg. 186 Learning what the Catholic Church actually teaches about justification is what lead me to now believe that Luther got it wrong and the Catholic Church has always been right. Sadly, so many people have no idea what the Catholic Church actually teaches and so they reject Catholicism based on objections to things the Church doesn't even teach. *“There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”* - Blessed Bishop Fulton J. Sheen Please, keep seeking after truth, Austin! I will continue to pray with you for the unity of the Church. John 17:21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. John 10:16 - there will be one fold and one shepherd. Epeshians 4:3-6 - one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father Romans 16:17 - I urge that there be no divisions among you
I have the impression that whenever they are to explain the “sola fide” dogma (Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and pretty much everyone not Protestant refute it), they try to use the dogma of “sola gratia” for it and depict non-Protestants as if they were supporters of Pelagianism (if it was not the Catholic Church that condemned Pelagius more than 1000 years prior to the development of “sola fide”).
Wow, thanks for such a substantive comment! One of my favorite parts of making videos is interacting with well read people who can so clearly state their views, especially in a non-polemical way. Iustitia Dei is on my reading list for winter break. I think the debate around imputation is important, though I think sola fide can stand without it. In any case, glad you're enjoying the interviews, and you might be excited to hear that I also have Dr. Cooper coming on soon as well. God bless!
@@GospelSimplicity Thank you for your hard work to share these things with the world. I am sure it ins't easy to find time to put these videos together on top of your school work! I agree that one can formulate sola fide without imputation, but honestly, as soon as one admits that justification includes infused righteousness/infused charity (Romans 5:5, Ezekiel 36:25-27) you have 1) moved away from the reformation and what split the church and 2) will probably end up formulating justification in a way that is in line with the Catholic Church's teaching on justification (i.e. infused righteousness and the necessity of good works for maintianing our justification). You seem to have a true gift for navigating these tough eccumenical waters in a way that is substanitive and charitible. I pray you will have continued success with your studies and with your TH-cam channel. You certianly deserve it! And I also pray that God will bring all of us the clarity to see the truth in these matters and hopefully reunite us all in one Church again someday. God bless!
Lord guard us in this comment section, please, we can be so mean to one another, guard us from sin, please help us be more like you are and help us see others like you see us. Amen.
Let me preface my remarks by saying that I think Pastor Bryan is a great guy, I really like some of his videos, and I'm glad that he's preaching the good news of Christianity here on TH-cam. However, I had a few issues with his comments on the Catholic Church that I'd like to get out there. Sorry for the long rant, but some of these can't go unanswered. 21:49 "The Council of Trent will say things like, if anybody is confident of their salvation, let them be anathema." This is not at all what Trent says, and I don't know how Pastor Bryan arrived at this conclusion. He's referring to canon XVI of the sixth session, which actually says: "If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end, -unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema." Trent does not at all exclude trust and confidence in the Lord Jesus Christ and the efficacy of His sacrifice, but instead opposes a view which says that we can know with absolute certainty that we will be numbered among the elect. We can argue about how right that was, but what it is clearly not saying is that we can't have confidence of salvation. Pastor Bryan also seems to misunderstand the doctrine of purgatory, saying that purgatory implies that we are our own saviours rather than the Lord Jesus. The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that "All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven." (CCC 1031) In other words, our salvation is a separate issue to purgatory; if we are in purgatory, we have already been saved by the Lord Jesus. Purgatory purifies us of any remaining attachment to sin- for nothing unclean enters heaven- but it is certainly not where we save ourselves or others, because we cannot save ourselves or others. 33:06 Again, on the principle of "ex opere operato", Pastor Bryan misconstrues the Catholic teaching. Ex opere operato is not about the fruits of the sacraments, but about their validity. It's a doctrine against the Donatists, who believed that if the minister of a sacrament was a sinner, the sacrament was invalid. Contrary to this, ex opere operato means that the sacrament is valid independently of the spiritual disposition of the minister or the recipient, and depends instead on the sacrament itself and Christ who effects it. So even if a non-believer received the Eucharist, they would indeed be receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. However, since they are not properly disposed, in no way do they receive the grace of the sacrament or any of its fruits, which Pastor Bryan seems to claim is the case in Catholic teaching. A person does indeed need to have faith in the Christ and His real presence, and to be free of all mortal sins, to benefit from this sacrament; otherwise they are only "eating and drinking judgement upon themselves". 33:57 Pastor Bryan was very correct to say that he would get some grief for this claim. It's certainly true that some of the sacraments of the Catholic Church require a priest to act in the person of Christ in order for them to be valid, but this is not true of all seven as he claims. Anyone can be the minster of the sacrament of Baptism, and the couple themselves are the ministers of the sacrament of Marriage. Then he says that all of the sacraments come from the pope, but actually none of the sacraments need a pope to be valid- of the remaining seven, Holy Orders and Confirmation require a bishop, and the Eucharist, Confession, and the Anointing of the Sick require a priest. It's traditional for the pope (who is also a bishop) to confirm the appointment of new bishops, but he's not essential to ordination. The Pastor then goes on to claim St. Augustine as being for his position on the irrelevancy of priestly ordination, claiming that the sacraments depend only on the words of Christ and not on the priest having valid Orders. St. Augustine did affirm that Christ was the minister in each of the sacraments. But St. Augustine certainly believed in the importance of valid ordination and apostolic succession, as shown by the entire Donatist controversy, which was about not only the validity of Baptism, but also Holy Orders.
Hey Gandalf! Great to hear from you. Thanks for another really well thought out comment. Since these are primarily directed towards Pr. Wolfmueller, I won't respond to the points of concern, though I do think you raise some valid concerns.
I want to say as well that Pastor Bryan is a good guy to listen to and to hear the Lutheran viewpoint from. This reponse is similar to my own problems with some of his assertions and misinterpretations of Church teaching. I think every person should look into his claims in depth to see if they have weight and also to look at the sources he is mentioning in context. Thanks Austin for having different people on that hold to different views on the Christian faith and I'm really enjoying your content.
@@GospelSimplicity Of course, I wouldn't expect you to! I just meant to clarify these issues for onlookers. Thanks for the video, I enjoyed it and I learned some new things about Luther and Lutheranism that I didn't know before.
Gandalf: i also had concerns about Pastor Bryan’s comments; but I’m only your average catholic. I’ll count on you to itemize corrections in the future. (In fact, I’ll look at remarks section on other videos). My corrections don’t hold weight. I was relieved to hear Pastor Bryan acknowledge the medieval mind is different than that of today. Often, these arguments are made as if the Catholic Church has not changed since Luther’s time.
Hey Austin, I came to see this video after watching your discussion with Dr. Jordan B. Cooper. I’m a new sub, but I have been watching your content for a while now. I think that you’re doing a good job in the way you are reaching out to people from other denominations. Even though I’m a Roman Catholic from the Dominican Republic, I enjoy to listen to the differences and similarities that confessions of faith like Anglicans, Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, etc., have with Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox, for it is really refreshing to have discussions and maintain a conversation because even Jesus had detractors, however, he showed compassion and love to everyone, no matter if they were sinners or if they were of different ethnicity. I truly think you’re are doing God’s Work by teaching us the differences that exist inside the Christian faith. I would like to see you discussing with Jews and Muslims too, if you ever have the opportunity, that would be very interesting to see a discussion of scripture and faith. I want to wrap this up by telling you, to keep up with the good work and for Our Lord to bless you!
Looking forward to this. Was wanting to check out the Lutheran faith next. Studying our collective church history (and all of it, whether Orthodox or Catholic applies to every Christian. My dad was Lutheran, mother was Catholic, and both became born again and non-denominational when I was young. I know nothing of Lutheranism yet (except a tad about Martin Luther), but I'm loving studying my rich Catholic heritage. And that's the story behind my very Catholic looking username. Oh btw, "Tortured for Christ" is on Prime lately. A wonderful and brave Lutheran pastor that somehow survived the Gulags and torture catacombs of the USSR. Hard to get through, I'll warn you right now. I read the book years ago, and really Really didn't want to see a movie/documentary version, but it was informative. It goes to show you, the denomination matters so little. If you truly have the Holy Spirit, He can get you through anything. There's an unforgettable line that illustrates this. When his wife ended up in the work camps, she mentioned how on Saturdays, the Seventh Day Adventists took a beating every time. For all that too many Christians choose to marginalize them, they will die for that Saturday Sabbath, and have done.
keep seeking in your Catholic heritage beloved. Our Catholic faith is beautiful for many reasons but for me in a special way for how it creates a cultural identity for people...and its hard to wash off! The Catholic faith is rich and is the church that compiled the Bible (before the split with the East) and we have survived ans spread the gospel in a special way because it adapts to the cultures where it is planted and expresses Christ in the form of people who receive it. Our theology of the Incarnation of Christ-shared with our Orthodox family. God bless you and the Holy Spirit be with you!
Thank you so much for doing these video interviews, Austin! I have enjoyed listening to so many of them, especially the ones on Orthodox and Catholic faith traditions, and will continue to listen. Denominationally, I belong to an evangelical Lutheran church on the conservative side (in Scandinavia), so this is pretty close to me, although I am not half as high-church. Lately, I have been wondering about how psychology and personality plays into our choices when it comes to what appeals to us denominationally/theologically. It would be really interesting if you would adress that in the future.
Glad you're enjoying these! It's interesting that you mention the psychology of denominational choice because it's something that I've been thinking about lately as well. I just need to find someone smarter than me who could talk about it well
@@GospelSimplicity I’ve vaguely heard mention of a British guy called Steve Cockram in this context. You may perhaps want to check out if he meets your criteria. I’m looking forward to whatever you come up with. Blessings!
Keep up these ecumenical discussions. You are a breath of fresh air on TH-cam. 10 minute bible guy also did some great stuff. Actually his multi-part video with Pastor William Weedon was a great video on Lutherans (if I say so myself as a former Lutheran who still has many warm feelings for the Lutheran Church, but am gratefully Catholic).
@@GospelSimplicity Pastor Weedon has a TH-cam channel now, to complement the podcast. Check it out if interested! We're working on posting a new video each week. -Peter
What I like from Luther's view than differs from modern protestantism is their practice of Crucifixes, Sacred Images, Real Presence. view of Mary & Sign of the Cross
You should do the episcopal/Anglican church next that would be so interesting. There is so much diversity in beliefs among the members of the Anglican communion.
I appreciate the dialogue. I love how you ask questions and do not correct or try to change his mind you just listen. I could, as I am sure others did, go through a litany of the things he misconstrued or got wrong. I do not agree with him basically everytime he says "Catholics believe" I do not know if this gentleman has a preconceived bias, the priest he talked to was not well formed, or he is just ignorant of church teaching. Fulton Sheene O.P.N🙏 would have a lot to say to him. I wonder why he needed Sola Fide in his church? Either way I hope he will eventually take a honest open view with out any preconceived ideas about this and look for truth. As I continue to pray for you as well, Austin. Another great interview. Thanks!
I do enjoy listening to the perspectives of the different faith traditions. Whether it is Lutheran, Anglican, or Orthodox, the question inevitably comes back to their relationship with the Catholic Church. It is interesting to note that whenever the Catholic Church exercised authority, splits and schisms emerged.
This will be a good video. I’m curious about the Lutheran view of Mary since Martin Luther held a very strong Marian devotion. I asked a Lutheran pastor about it and he said that Luther was a bad Lutheran in that regard, which seemed counterintuitive.
Thanks! We're already talking about a follow up, so if there's anything else you'd like to see after watching it, feel free to leave questions for the follow up
@@amandah8178From small catechism THE HOLY GHOST.III. HIS WORKMANSHIP. The Holy Christian Church, the Communion of Saints. WHAT THE CHURCH IS. The Church is "The Communion of Saints" or fellowship of believers. It consists of all those persons who truly believe in Christ. [Matt. 16:16, 18] We call it the Workmanship of the Holy Ghost, because He brings men to faith and thus produces the Church. HE CALLS, GATHERS, ENLIGHTENS AND SANCTIFIES THE WHOLE CHRISTIAN CHURCH ON EARTH, AND PRESERVES IT IN UNION WITH JESUS CHRIST IN THE TRUE FAITH. [Eph. 3:25-27] The Church may also be called the Holy Spirit's Workshop, because He abides and works in it through the Means of Grace,-the Word of God and the Sacraments. WHEN FOUNDED. The Holy Christian Church was founded on the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Ghost was poured out upon the disciples. [Acts 2:1-41] On that day the Gospel of the crucified and risen Saviour was first preached by the apostles, the first converts were made, and the first Christian baptisms were administered. VISIBLE OR INVISIBLE. The Church is invisible, because we cannot read men's hearts nor tell who are real believers. But if we regard the Church as an external organization which includes all who profess to believe, it is visible. In this outward visible Church there are many persons who are not real believers. But Christ knows His own. [II Tim 2:19+, John 10:14+] The angels on the day of judgment will separate the hypocrites from the true Christians. [Matt. 13:41, 42] THE MARKS OF THE CHURCH. The Church is found wherever the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered. For wherever God's Word is preached, some persons believe it, [Isa. 55:10, 11] and where believers are, there is the Church. THE CHURCH IS ONE. It consists of the true believers out of all the different churches, denominations, and sects. There is one Flock, with one Shepherd. [John 10:16] The Church is the Body of which Christ is the Head. [Col. 1:18, Eph 1:22, 23] ITS NAMES. The Church is called Holy, because the Holy Spirit works in it and through it, and because its members, though not perfect, lead holy lives. It is called Christian, because it consists of those who believe in Christ. It is called Catholic or Universal, because it is meant to include all men everywhere. Catholic does not mean Roman Catholic. MILITANT AND TRIUMPHANT. The Church, consisting of true believers, is one and the same Church on earth and in heaven. On earth it is the Church Militant, because its members are still fighting the good fight of faith. [I Tim. 6:12+] In heaven it is the Church Triumphant, because its members have won the victory of faith. [Rev. 7:9-14, Rev. 2:18, Rev. 3:21] The only way into the Church Triumphant is through the Church Militant.
Reading a book that goes into depth on what led up to the reformation and how politics gets intertwined and how normal ppl views it decade by decade. I have a new measure of respect for Luther that he did not intend on creating the great split but actually wanted to work within the Church framework. The history of it all is really interesting, however I still don't agree or understand how it all leads to the protestant position.. it makes no sense and do not follow, however bad a certain pope was at the time or because the topic of indulgence. I really want to understand the leap/jump, so I will finish my book and def watch this and hope it gives me insight!
Here's something I found from Here I Stand by Roland Bainton. Luther's own confessor kept telling him he needs to accept God's forgiveness...so why did Luther feel the need to leave and accept God's forgiveness and grace when he was already and repeatedly counseled as a Catholic to do so? I see a similarity between him and Ignatius Loyola...but one went his own way in pride and the second humbled his pride.
@Pastor Bryan wolfmueller's Dear Hei: The main thing that Roman Catholics demonstrate, is their acceptance of the canon of Sacred Scripture, along with their acceptance of non-canonical material, while having remained a unified whole. The Roman Catholics have demonstrated how unity happens. Though Catholics Canonized beliefs that are not consistent with Sacred Scripture, they at least have remained one in their own worldwide church body, because their full doctrine remains what it is, and no separate statements are allowed to exist to contradict what Catholics have canonized. It is this demonstration that has brought shame on modern Protestants, especially with respect to the LCMS altering of the divine offices, explained in the Large Catechism (Lutheranism). Luther sided in with God's Word, which warns that division would happen when the truth is deliberately mis-represented. For LCMS, Closed Communion became the order, when the Large Catechism does not support this. Division, between Wisconsin Synod, and Evangelical Lutheran Synod, with the LCMS and ELCA is the result of pure doctrine tampering. Both LCMS and ELCA continuosly live by an altered doctrine other than their own. The Wisconsin Synod and Evangelical Lutheran Synod refuses Wisconsin Synod and ELS the elements of communion, if they are a visitor from another member congregation. Presently, the only Lutheran Church body, that has stopped the practice of doctrine altering, is The Lutheran Congregations in Mission For Christ.
Hey, have you given any thought between hosting an exchange of ideas between differing Churches on your channel? Would be great for Catholic priests, Lutheran priests, and Orthodox priest have a talk with each other with you moderating the whole thing. Would take a lot of work but it would be paramount for us as Christians getting to learn about each other. As you can see from these comments having counter arguments to Pr. Bryan, there is much need for clarification on both sides and that would help all of us come to the truth.
YES. I would love to make this happen. I would want to be careful to really get the right people and set the right atmosphere because I would want to see a discussion, not a debate. It's definitely a future goal though
"We are all on our way and the Lord is using our conversations to bless us"... Meanwhile, 500 years after the reformation have bred thousands of different denominations all teaching different versions of the Truth... He who does not gather with me, scatters. - Lk 11:23
Even Roman Catholic apologists day they're aren't thousands of denominations. There are about 7 main denominations in Christendom. The article to which you refer actually states that there are 242 different denominations under Roman catholicism, so you probably don't want to stick with that view.
Hello sir! My name is Logan and I'm sure this question will seem backwards from what you're used to seeing. I am a committed Eastern Orthodox Christian and I love the fact that you have recently spent a lot of time diving deep into Orthodoxy and Catholicism. I think your "a Protestant " videos about these two great Christian traditions have been helpful to many people. However, I've noticed that you don't have a lot of videos about liturgical protestant churches. I think visiting and offering your thoughts on what you experienced at an traditional Anglican and Confessional Lutheran church would be just as beneficial for people as your Catholic and Orthodox videos. Would you ever be interested in doing something along those lines? Thanks for all that you do and may God bless your work!
Very strange (?) Weird (?) Neat (?) Cool (?). I first discovered you from fellow Orthodox friends on Facebook. I used to be Lutheran and attended St. Paul's Lutheran Church in Austin where Pr. Wolfmueller is now the pastor. I still love that church and visited last year during Advent and met him. Very nice and knowledgeable. If there had been more Confessional Lutheran pastors (and laity), it might have taken me bit longer to become Orthodox. On a side note, you might be interested in a new book: "Thinking Orthodox" by Eugenia Scarves Constantinou. She taught New Testament at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology and I think she has a TH-cam Channel too. You might want to interview her too.
So very fascinating! I had a difficult decision to leave my lutheran church in order to convert to the catholic church. That was mainly because the catholic church has more and more attracted me, not because I wanted to leave. But - the lutheran church here in Germany has in big areas ceased to be lutheran in the way I thought it should be and as pastor Wolfmueller described it. Whereas the catholic church (at least here) seems to have learned from the reformation and integrated it's best parts, has become more evangelical in the literal sense. Luther would be catholic today I think, being glad about the changes...
@@hei7586 Can. 994 All members of the faithful can gain indulgences, partial or plenary, for themselves, or they can apply them by way of suffrage to the dead.
Pastor Bryan is indeed a good man. But anytime I listen to him or other Lutherans pastors about theology I cannot get my head around. Everything is so confusing and not sure where they stand for nowadays. I have huge respect for them, but it's almost impossible to understand how a person be saved in their tradition... All good anyway. Thanks for sharing this video.
@@GospelSimplicity . Thank you. Its worth exploring why Lutherans practise sacrament of confession while that can contradict theirs very theology . To practise sacrament of confession implies that apart having faith there is the need to be a better person with works and trying to not repeat same sins. In Lutheran theology man sins no matter what and there is nothing we can do about it, only faith can save us. Therefore what's the point of the confession in their tradition then? If your works and your redeem cannot do anything to save you, but only faith can save you i really don't see the point of to practise confession in similar manner of Catholic tradition. Similar question would be about holy communion, if they believe that receiving body of Christ cancel our sins and save us, again what's about the faith alone and the man is always sinful no matter what. I still struggle to understand who go to heaven and who to hell in Lutheran tradition. They seem to have a mixed bags of traditions and beliefs that in somehow contradict themselves (with all due respect). Now it's worth noting that not all lutherans churches practise the confession, some of them stick with only 2 sacraments. Unfortunately when there isn't an universal authority (apart the Bible), the risk is to have different approaches and theologies in same churches. Apart this I enjoy Bryan's sermons and admire his huge passion about Christ, and being Catholic it's good to listen to his podcasts and videos. All the best! :)
@@IOT4747 I might be able to help a bit. As I understand it, Lutheran theology is primarily pastoral, to bring the gospel of peace, joy and love. Also saved by faith in Christ's work and word, not just by faith vaguely defined. An example, when I sin, how do I know that Jesus still forgives me and forgives this particular sin? By faith in His promise of forgiveness tied to the words of the pastor. Or if I doubt I am truely united to Christ and His Holy Church, I can come to Him and recieve Christ on my tongue; and so by faith in His promise tied to the bread and wine I recieve well, with peace and joy, the Holy Communion with Christ and the saints. The Lutheran appraoch aims at bringing the peace of Christ to the troubled conscience and at troubling the self-righteous one. We would also hold that the Holy Spirit (who we recieve in faith not by works) does make us holy, changing our desires to pure rather than sinful, but that is only finished when our mortality is finished (death is the wages of sin, if you have no sin you shouldn't get paid). Regarding heaven and hell, those who reject Christ's promise and work for us are rejected, those who trust (by faith) Christ's promise and work recieve it and so live forever forgiven in Him. (I think one difficulty is that we have a more eastern/ancient approach to Christology and a higher value of mystery, for instance it maybe possible to define all Lutheran teaching from the starting point of the interpenetration of the two natures in Christ)
@@j.g.4942 , thanks for your beautiful words. If you don't mind I'd like then to continue to ask few things about what you just said. So what's happens if you don't receive the communion, are you still saved if you truly believe in Christ? If you have faith in his words and his holiness and you don't receive the communion, can you still be saved? From what you say, it seems so but yet there is emphasis on getting the communion to receive the fully holiness and forgiveness of the sins. Then you mention about when we sin, if you are in doubt use the sacrament of the confession, which is ok. Everything makes sense...and if you repeat the same sin? It seems something is missing in the equation - forgive me if I use elementary language, but I try to make it simple. In Catholic tradition we try to work everyday on trying to be better and be good christians - hence praying, faith and good works wherever is possible. But if you don't try to repent yourself, redeem and trying to be better...how do you know you are in the right path? I appreciate your optimism and beautiful words...just guessing it's something missing in the equation. With all due respect and admiration in what you say it doesn't seem as linear as Catholic approach (both confession and communion) despite they have a lot of similarity. Thanks anyway for your reply! :)
@@IOT4747 Thank you for your kindness and concern, my words haven't been called beautiful before (especially not on youtube); yet I'll try to address your questions. Just as Dismas the thief was saved by trust in Christ's Word and work, and all the saints before him, God can save people apart for Baptism and the Eucharist (ass we call them the Means of Grace). Yet clearly from Christ's promise of forgiveness and life, regeneration, the Holy Spirit, adoption, union, righteousness and even Himself, in these means, we can't say they are not needed. Again, for the sake of the Christian, we point to Christ's sure Word of promise in His work through the Means of Grace to point them to Christ's Word and work. Christ Jesus is true and His promise sure, where everything else is a sandy foundation. Regarding repeated sin, we confess it again and trust God at His Word, that He is righteous and just to remove it from us and destroy it in Christ's crucifixion (1 Jn 1). Does this mean we should continue to sin? By NO means! As St Paul would write. In the divine liturgy we are asked 1 to confess our sin, 2 if we trust Jesus' word of forgiveness, and 3 "do you intend, with the help of the Holy Spirit, to live as in God's presence and to strive daily to lead a holy life, even as Christ has made you holy?" I think perhaps a difference is that we say it is only by the Holy Spirit that we do good works, that our desires are changed and that we are made holy. Another way to say that is, all the good we do is from Christ, given to us by the Holy Spirit. So if my words are beautiful it is only because of Christ, and if one is a saintly person it is the light of Christ shining through them. So we are always pointing to Jesus and not to oneself, because Jesus is sure and I am not as reliable. To summarise, we know Christ Jesus is true and reliable, and that we are not. He promised life and forgiveness in Baptism and Holy Communion, so I can be sure I recieve it. When I sin, I know Christ's blood is more powerful than any sin and can cleanse me from all unrighteousness, so I turn to Him in confession, recieve the absolution throughHis promise through the Pastor, and strive to live the life of Christ, by the strength the Holy Spirit provides. How do I know if I'm on the right path? I trust in the promises Jesus has given me, I can be sure of them; I listen to His Word written and preserved down the ages through the church by the Holy Spirit; and I pray asking for His mercy and the direction of the Holy Spirit. Lord have mercy on us all. And the peace of God be with you.
I feel that the response to the book of James from Lutheranism is not particularly strong as James says, "you see that a man is justified by works" before saying "and not by faith alone". With that first section I don't think the response of faith worked out in love and charity works out... That being said, the works that James are speaking of are works of love. Now the Catholic church actually teaches that the works that justify us are not ours but Christ's through us. Without grace, and obedience to Christ, no works we perform have any merit whatsoever. In conversations with protestants I generally describe the Catholic position by faith+obedience because of the connotations attributed to the word "works". Thanks for another great video Austin!
Another point is that there seem to be many many misunderstandings about Catholic justification theology 🙈. And also the papacy. I'm sure you've got a good idea of this already though Austin
It concerns me that the original mainstream Protestant churches have declined in numbers and influence as this points to further removal of Christianity from its original structure. I am worried that over a passage of time the Christian faith will gradually fly away from its original ideals.
Even as a Catholic I see the decline in mainline Protestantism as something to be mourned. Sure we have our differences, but the impact they had on Christianity and the American ethos especially, it feels like we are losing something of our national identity
Don’t forget about the Anglicans (in the US we are the ACNA). The English Reformation paralleled the Continental Reformation and is the worlds 3rd largest Christian tradition with all of the Protestant theology with the fullness of the ancient liturgy.
I love watching your videos, but there is one that I think you have missed. Have you tried visiting an Ecumenical Catholic Church? And talking to the pastor? (I think that is what I would be if one were available in my area, but as it is I would have to travel several hours.)
I am catholic and I live overseas. I would like to know if evangelicals have tried to convert Lutherans to evangelicalism. If someone has experienced that.
In the Live chat, when I was concerned that monergism was a heresy in the early Church...I meant to say monothelitism, a related heresy specifically about the Person of Christ.
Well, I think the interpretation of the effect of the Lord’s Supper is still very different from the Catholic teachings. Let alone the preserving substance of bread and wine within the substantive Body and Blood of the Lord. The Catholic Church says it is no longer bread and wine in substance, but only in the accidental forms of appearance. That’s why, to make a dogmatic concise Latin term or expression (a dogma is a formal proclamation made to reduce the theological complexity of a revealed truth or set of truths) we don’t say they are “transformed”, since the accidental form does not change through the Mystery, but they are “transubstantiated”, since the change is in the substantive reality, not in the formal appearance. The Eastern Orthodox in general agree with it but do not appreciate the fact of it being made dogmatic by Catholics, so as to emphasize the mystical dimension of it. I refer to the “forgiving of sins” effect in the particular. The Words of Institution do not remove sins “per se”. Let me explain the Catholic Church’s 2000 years old teachings here. The Eucharist is the sacrament of the all-delivering love of Lord and, since it is the fullness of Christ’s presence in total communion with the People of God, it enforces the New Covenant reality of a definitive and perennial loving relationship between God and his elects. The purpose of Eucharist is not to remove sins, but to give the Pilgrim (or Militant) Church a foretaste of the Great Banquet in the Heavenly Jerusalem (Triumphant Church) and give the spiritual nourishment to the faithful in order to confer the sanctifying grace needed to perfect our faith and our capacity to love God and our neighbors. I know our protestant brothers abandoned the “sacramentality value” (varying degrees here, of course) and basically dropped the sanctification to pretty much a figure of language since Luther hamartiology hiperfocused on salvation and hipofocused on saintity ( _“Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect”_ , Matthew 5, 48; or _”You are to be holy to me because I, the Lord, am holy”_ , Leviticus 20, 26), even though some denominations still have a some sacraments, like the Lutherans themselves. Actually, if anyone with mortal sin eats the body and blood of the Lord, that not only means an unfruitful disposition to receive the Most Blessed Sacrament, but a grave sacrilege: _“So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord”_ (1 Corinthians 11, 27). This can only be explained by the real and substantive presence in those strict physical elements of the Sacred Body of Christ despite the preserved accidents, because no one can be condemned of vilipending boiled wheat or fermented grape juice on faith or say it was referring to that “part” of the sacrament and not the other. Not only this, but a serious consciousness in faith is demanded: _“Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without DISCERNING the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves”_ (1 Corinthians 11, 28-29). So faith is fundamentally in need here to recognize it. With that we agree with him: it is not a theatrical or symbolic act (Zwingli) or a spiritual anti-material presence (Calvin), connected to the depreciation he had on the material order, even though it is really the spiritual consecration from priests acting “in persona Christi” that changes the material substance to make Jesus’ words true, for the sacrament causes what it signifies. But it is the sacrament of reconciliation/ penitence/ confession that absolves from the mortal sins, not the sacrament of the Eucharist. Besides, in the Holy Mass the venial sins are forgiven in the formal prayers subsequent to the Penitential Act, in the beginning of it. Greetings from Brazil.
A couple questions and I’m humbly asking which isn’t easy to show in writing. So, if the mid evil church was what Luther was standing against and that’s gone according to the pastor, why bother staying outside protesting any longer? Are there still demands that haven’t been met? Is it the idea of a Pope and not wanting his authority? Why is sola scriptura held so highly when it can’t be found in the Bible? Does the Lutheran church have Eucharistic miracles? Now this is the mom of sons wondering out loud, I can’t help but wonder if Pr Bryan making the choice of denomination, vocation and marriage all at the same was a wise thing to do? I wonder if being Catholic was given a fare opportunity? God bless you both🙏🏻
Great questions. So I could only guess at his answer, but my guess is he might respond that the medieval church’s theology was enshrined in the Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, and thus the issues live on.
Very late in commenting, long videos are difficult with young children, but I REALLY appreciate his acknowledging the nasty things that Luther said about the Catholics. I grew up Catholic in the Bible Belt and even as a child I had my faith attacked by mostly Evangelicals, including hearing celebrations after the death of Pope John Paul II died because it was the "death of the antichrist". In college when we where then assigned to read side by side Luther, Calvin, and St Francis de Sales "The Catholic Controversy" I had an extremely hard time separating out and distancing Luther's theological arguments from the general vitriol against the Catholic church. I found St Francis de Sales, and your approach so much more refreshing to approach the theological debate as terribly important but done with great charity.
Glad you enjoyed it! Sorry to hear about your negative experiences with Protestants in the past. That is unacceptable. Hopefully this channel is a small step in the right direction towards seeing less of that in the future. God bless
A couple points from a wavering Catholic (with some measure of philosophical/theological training): (1) The Catholic Church also proclaims that the reception of Communion forgives us our sins. Mortal sins, however, make us unworthy to participate in that fellowship with other believers and to participate sacramentally in the Communion. However, the Scriptural witness is not a mere "forgiveness" but that, without receiving Communion, one does not have "life within you." (2) Ex opere operato actually means the opposite of what he explained. It means that, while one will ultimately participate in the sacrifice by receiving the sacrament with less understanding or diminished devotion, one will not receive the full benefit of sacramental grace in all of its strength and vitality. (3) Properly speaking, the ministerial priesthood is not necessary for baptism or marriage, per se in Roman Catholicism. So, his notion there is inaccurate. Likewise, because Catholics distinguish between liceity (lawfulness) and validity, they also do not rely on the Pope for the validity and potency of their sacraments. Contrast that with the Eastern Orthodox view, which views that those not united to the Church lack grace and therefore cannot convey the effect or power of the sacraments to others, thus rather conflating liceity and validity. (4) The approach on the normative function of the Scriptures presents an interesting problem. If the Scripture is the only authority that regulates correct belief (sola scriptura), then what authority corrected the Church before the Scriptures were compiled and agreed upon? And considering that the Church up until Luther did not accept this sole normative function of the Scriptures, how could one accept as "useful" the forms that were specifically created in the context of such beliefs. Rather, we see in Luther an utter distaste for any kind of sacrificial concept of the Mass (or oblation), even though the liturgy developed and took shape in the context of believing that the Divine Liturgy was a sacrifice. (5) It strikes me that Luther's view of James and his preference for the "theological treatises" (that are actually pastoral treatises, but whatever) of Romans and Ephesians demonstrates how influenced he was by the Western scholarly theological tradition. However, it is problematic because it suggests that the testimony, as is found in James, of the Christian life is somehow distinct from our conception of God. James's letter is profoundly theological, precisely because, in showing what the Christian life looks life, he is showing us what God is like and how he saves us (as if those concepts could be separated).
Question : Luther was a priest. But Lutheranism does believe in priesthood. So..., Luther did not believe in the sacrament that he himself received??? Please correct me if the former statements are wrong.
@@thejoshuaproject3809 Yes, yes, I'm aware that he left the priesthood. But the fact that he entered in the first place means that he initially believed in the sacrament of ordination to the priesthood. I'm just curious of how different is the ordination of the priesthood from that of pastors in Lutheranism, and why does he have a strong disbelief on the priesthood. I get his disbelieve in papacy, but priesthood is a bit, uh, more common(?), especially because it exists in Orthodox Christianity as well. I have not been very exposed to Lutheranism so pardon my ignorance.
I have a question for Pastor Wolfmuller. You present a convincing case for Lutheranism, and as a Catholic, my issue is somewhat similar to yours. You have an issue with trusting in the teaching authority of the Magisterium based on the Papal office. I have an issue trusting in the authenticity of the accuracy of Luther's teaching based on just him. He makes reference to the fathers, but it is a far stretch for me to trust in the wisdom of one man's reading of the fathers above the series of councils, saints, other fathers of the church up to the Reformation. Brilliant as he was, he is one Augustine versus the whole series of others. It requires me to believe that after the Apostolic Fathers, or up to which ever period of Fathers you ascribe to, that the church erred and allowed error to creep in. Here I refer to error not the corruption of practices. Overt dependence on saints, devotions, etc. I find that hard to believe. I thank you for the wonderful sharing and this deeper understanding of Lutheranism, though I am curious too if your views are similar to the European and other Lutheran synods across the world. To what extent can I take your portrayal of Lutheranism to be how all Lutherans see their own position. I noted in the comments a particular disagreement on the perpetual virginity of our Blessed Mother.
@@GospelSimplicity This is also true of the Roman Church as well in Europe and North America. The growth if any is from immigrants from Latin America and even they are looking to other churches.
If you are Swedish. There is the Mission Province. It is A confessional Lutheran Church in Sweden that rejected the liberal thinking of that church that is in altar and pulpit fellowship with the LCMS.
This is correct about the sacrament of matrimony. The bride and groom are marrying each other. They exchange vows, not the priest. The priest is there to ask if they have come there freely and without reservation, if they will love and honor each other as long as you live and if they will accept children lovingly from God and raise them according to the law of Christ and his Church. After he obtains their consent he has them speak their vows to each other, not him. A deacon can also officiate a wedding, though he can’t offer Mass. www.catholicweddinghelp.com/topics/catholic-wedding-vows.htm
Dear Mygoalwogel: It is The Roman Catholic Church that has been a good demonstration of doctrinal unity (No tampering with what is Scriptural or Un-Scriptural).
MARTIN LUTHER ON THE IMPORTANCE OF FREE-WILL “…with regard to God, and in all that bears on salvation or damnation, (man) has no ‘free-will’, but is a captive, prisoner and bondslave, either to the will of God, or to the will of Satan.” (ref. From the essay, ‘Bondage of the Will,’ ‘Martin Luther: Selections From His Writings, ed. by Dillenberger, Anchor Books, 1962 p. 190). “Man is like a horse. Does God leap into the saddle? The horse is obedient and accommodates itself to every movement of the rider and goes whither he wills it. Does God throw down the reins? Then Satan leaps upon the back of the animal, which bends, goes and submits to the spurs and caprices of its new rider… Therefore, necessity, not free will, is the controlling principle of our conduct. God is the author of what is evil as well as of what is good, and, as He bestows happiness on those who merit it not, so also does He damn others who deserve not their fate.” (ref. ‘De Servo Arbitrio’, 7, 113 seq., quoted by O’Hare, in ‘The Facts About Luther, TAN Books, 1987, pp. 266-267). “His (Judas) will was the work of God; God by His almighty power moved his will as He does all that is in this world.” (ref. De servo Arbitrio, against man’s free will). MARTIN LUTHER ON CHRISTIAN LIVING “Be a sinner, and let your sins be strong, but let your trust in Christ be stronger, and rejoice in Christ who is the victor over sin, death, and the world. We will commit sins while we are here, for this life is not a place where justice resides… No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day.” (ref. ‘Let Your Sins Be Strong, from ‘The Wittenberg Project;’ ‘The Wartburg Segment’, translated by Erika Flores, from Dr. Martin Luther’s Saemmtliche Schriften, Letter No. 99, 1 Aug. 1521. - Cf. Also Denifle’s Luther et Lutheranisme, Etude Faite d’apres les sources. Translation by J. Paquier (Paris, A. Picard, 1912-13), VOl. II, pg. 404)) “Do not ask anything of your conscience; and if it speaks, do not listen to it; if it insists, stifle it, amuse yourself; if necessary, commit some good big sin, in order to drive it away. Conscience is the voice of Satan, and it is necessary always to do just the contrary of what Satan wishes.” (ref. J. Dollinger, La Reforme et les resultants qu’elle a produits. (Trans. E. Perrot, Paris, Gaume, 1848-49), Vol III, pg. 248).
MARTIN LUTHER ON THE VALUE OF SACRED SCRIPTURE “To my mind it (the book of the Apocalypse) bears upon it no marks of an apostolic or prophetic character… Everyone may form his own judgment of this book; as for myself, I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it.” (ref. ammtliche Werke, 63, pp. 169-170, ‘The Facts About Luther,’ O’Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p. 203). “The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible.” (ref. The Facts About Luther, O’Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p. 202). “…the epistle of St. James is an epistle full of straw, because it contains nothing evangelical.” (ref. ‘Preface to the New Testament,’ ed. Dillenberger, p. 19. - Cf. Also Jean Janssen, L’Allemagne et la Reforme. (Trans. E. Paris, Plon, 1887-1911). Vol II, Pg. 218).
Here is how LCMS differ from most Christians...they teach that their pastors speak for Jesus on earth and it is through the pastors that you are saved by God's grace. Their clergy hold the keys to heaven and are the way you are saved .
Looking forward to this talk ! I would also be interested in a talk regards Anabaptists . The Bruderhof and hutterite communities are very interesting.
Pastor Brian may be an expert in Lutheranism, but he expressed SO many false statements about Catholicism. We never bow to “bread” . The Pope is a bishop, the Eucharist is the source and summit of faith.....
Only the Catholic church has the priesthood of Jesus to consecrate the bread and wine into the body and the blood of Jesus Christ in the Holy mass. Jesus only funded ONE CHURCH, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. The Catholic church has 51 Eucharistic miracles that happened during the Holy mass. Jesus is telling us that HE IS present in His Divinity, Soul and Body in the Eucharistic sacrament. You cannot have the Eucharistic sacrament in the protestant church. What they give you there is just a piece of regular cracker and grape juice. And that is all. You need the Eucharistic sacrament for sanctification to be able to enter the kingdom of Heaven. Jesus Himself talk about this in the Holy Bible. 1. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me (John 6:54-57). 2. For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes (1 Corinthians 11:26). 3. They devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life, to the breaking of the bread and to the prayers. Awe came upon everyone, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles (Acts 2:42-43).
4. Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf (1 Corinthians 10:17). 5. I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died; this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die (John 6:48-50).
I like the pastor and listen to his podcast but I am a little perplexed by his opposition to the Eucharist being a means of grace and forgiveness of sins and being only for forgiveness of sins. Obviously (at least to me) partaking in the Eucharist and having sins forgiving would in fact lead to a deepening of grace. Also, his statement that Catholics have only one sacrament, the priest or pope, is fundamentally to misunderstand the sacramental system of the Catholic Church. In addition, his statement about the canon seems to uphold the Catholic position that the Bible is the book of the church and not the other way around. The Church could exist without the Bible but the Bible would not exist without the Church.
Its a bit strange to me too as a former confessional Lutheran. I think that Lutheran theology has also called the Eucharist (and Baptism) a "means of grace". They just mean something different - i.e. that it's an "occasion" of Grace, but not a "cause" of Grace (I am simplifying a bit but that is the rough distinction). EDIT - ACTUALLY HE NEVER SAYS IT IS NOT A MEANS OF GRACE. HE NEVER MENTIONS THE PHRASE. IT IS TRUE THAT LUTHERANS HAVE A DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDING WHEN THEY SAY "MEANS OF GRACE".
My guess is that Luther’s stand of faith alone does not allow the Eucharist to be a means of grace. It is a little unclear to me how predestination fits into all this but I feel it does. Calvin is credited with predestination but Lutheran doctrine is under credited for this. I in fact find the doctrine abhorrent.
@@ChristopherWentling . See this video from Pastor and Doctor Jordan Cooper who is quite deep in confessional Lutheran theology. Clearly it is Lutheran teaching that the sacraments can be described as a means of grace. th-cam.com/video/2A9G_K_T6-c/w-d-xo.html . As noted above, they don't mean exactly the same thing as Catholics when they use the phrase but of course are much closer to us than Calvinists etc.
@@ChristopherWentling Whoops. I watched the whole video. He never says the Eucharist is not a "means of grace". He never says that. So I will edit my other comments.
@@toddvoss52 thanks for the link, I will watch it. I probably should have been more careful before writing anything. I saw another video where Pastor made a distinction in the imparted grace in the Eucharist and my brain paraphrased it into ”means of grace.” I sometimes have a hard time understanding the subtlety of Lutheran theology when distinguishing itself from Catholicism. This isn’t the failure of Pastor Wolfmueller but more my own failing.
New Testament apocrypha? So we are ignoring the councils that established the Canon. So the claim that Lutherans were not saying something new is defeated here.
What he's saying is everyone has a responsibility to learn and think about the faith. If you're doing those things, you're doing theology. Thus, you're a theologian
"They believe in the real presence and the sacraments, but they're not Catholic." So I will watch this when I can, but we Anglicans and Lutherans generally consider ourselves Catholic. The problem is that the Papacy makes the false claim that they constitute the entirety of the Catholic Church, and the fact that many Protestants cede that claim to them is a tragedy. We are Catholic.
That's a fair point. I think the gap here is between the original meaning and the common understanding. I've talked before on this channel about catholicity and "Catholic" vs "catholic" but it just gets so messy clarifying so I generally just use the term in the colloquial sense of referring to the Roman Catholic Church. However, I'm all for a retrieval of the term and people who stress evangelical catholicity. I just think it's easier in writing than in youtube videos
@@GospelSimplicity I tend to use the term "Roman Catholic"; some Roman Catholics get offended by it, but there are many problems with being offended by it: 1) The Roman Catholic Church itself has officially referred to itself in this way. 2) It is literally our theology. Rome's theology that "there is no salvation outside of the (Roman) Catholic Church" is certainly offensive. 3) It isn't a denial of their catholicity; it's not even a denial of their claim to be the "One True Church". I did a video on this recently: th-cam.com/video/zttSS3u2qIE/w-d-xo.html
@@GospelSimplicity glad to hear that! I also have a few moderated debates with Roman Catholics on my channel: one on the Papacy and two on the question of whether or not Anglicans (I'm an Anglican) have valid Holy Orders. Long story short: if Anglicans have valid Holy Orders (in light of the 1552 Prayer Book), that seriously calls into question the validity of the Papacy since the Papacy has formally pronounced our Holy Orders "absolutely null and utterly void" (Apostolicae Curae). My hope is to debate Trent Horn on the Papacy some day. Tell him that! :P
define ‘entirety.’ You made the claim that “the papacy makes the false claim that they constitute the entirety of the Catholic Church,” like What? The Catholic Church is not the papacy, and no pope has said that they are the Catholic Church. What are you saying? Also, are you saying that Catholic is an euphemism for Christian? Just so you know it were the Protestants that called the Roman Catholics, Catholics, before that we Catholics called ourselves Christians and the European Continent was Christiandom. Idk you seem very confused.
Coming from a Catholic background (but not currently Catholic), I have more respect for the more liturgical traditions of Protestantism like the Lutherans and Anglicans than I do for the American Evangelicals and such. From where I'm standing, it seems that Evangelicals have a problem with throwing away good Biblical practices and doctrines simply because of their association with Catholics. So they don't have a high view of the sacraments, and they distrust church history and classical apologetics/theology and they don't have doctrinal confessions and they know nothing about the Saints and Early Church Fathers. These things are good, but they're also something that Catholics engage in. Not just Catholics obviously, but Catholics do have these things. To me, doing away with them just because Catholics do them and we're trying to move away from that is silly. It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Instead of throwing away everything and starting over from scratch like they did, we should look at how the Church has always done things and the traditions handed down through the ages, then test them against Holy Scripture and prune the things that don't work while keeping the things that do, like the Lutherans, Anglicans, and, to some extent, the Reformed. We shouldn't be dogmatic about tradition like the Catholics and Orthodox as that's idolatry and leads to abuse. The classical Protestant middle position, I think, is best. As the saying goes, the solution to one extreme is very rarely the opposite extreme.
This Pastor’s TH-cam channel is one of the major reasons I just attended my first Lutheran service yesterday and I plan to continue.
Nice!
Amen. LCMS here and I had a similar journey. Is means is ;)
Me too. Curently attending Lutheran Church-Canada (an affiliate of LCMS) and loving it.
I'm planning on joining our local LCMS church as well, leaving Baptist church
Hey! How's ur journey so far?
As an LCMS pastor myself, I'm glad to have a guy like Bryan Wolfmueller in our ranks. He's well read and can teach as much to layman as he can to fellow pastors.
He's great! I really enjoyed my time with him. Hopefully we'll do it again
@Pastor Bryan wolfmueller's I don't know what to say to that. Could you clarify?
@@DavidSinghiser this is a fake account.
@@ryansmith9427 Thanks! Now it makes sense.
Didn't sound like a Lutheran pastor plus the the bad style and punctuation. Should have checked it out.
I will be confirmed into the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, God-willing, on Pentecost (May 28)
Recently became Lutheran. I'm having my doubts as any new convert should. But Pastor Wolfmueller and Pastor Jordan Cooper are keeping me well in line. I thank God for them both. From Pentecostal to Eastern Orthodox catechumen to finally Confessional Lutheran!
Goodness, I've rarely heard of Orthodox (Or Palamite when I'm feeling feisty) turning Lutheran. What did it for you?
@@Mygoalwogel well ultimately I felt lied to. The caricatures made about Protestantism simply were not true at the end of the day when you actually read the reformers. Calvin’s institutes and Melanchthons on the authority of the church were instrumental. And what broke the camels back was Chemnitz examination on the council of Trent. The Protestant claim to history is a strong one.
@@4emrys Did you read the whole thing? I've read snippets and would love to read the entirety, but unless it's free somewhere, I'll have to wait until my kids are less expensive. :)
@@Mygoalwogel the institutes and Melanchthons works are all free. Chemnitz examination I have all 4 volumes in hard copy form. They were pretty expensive but I have heard that they’re free somewhere on the internet.
If you hand over your email/discord, I can send you some pdfs.
@@4emrys That's very generous of you! I'll keep your kind offer in mind when the semester ends.
Pastor Wolfmueller is SUCH a blessing!
I really appreciated the gentle, humble nature of Pastor Wolfmueller and his desire to see people know Jesus more deeply.
That’s of my favorite things about him
From Pentecostal (graduated from an AG college), to Episcopalian, flirted with Eastern Orthodoxy, but now a Confessional Lutheran. Truly the approach to properly distinguishing Law and Gospel did it for me. Now reading the Scriptures I can finally say, "Now I get it!"
That's great to hear!
Same here. Pentecostal turned Confessional Lutheran
Me too! Assembly of God 69 years. Now 70 and Confessional Lutheran ❤
@@debbiesinnercarr5402 Wow! No kidding! I'd love to hear your story!
Pastor Wulfmueler has got to be the single best person to give a basic introduction to Lutheranism! He is so good at distinguishing it from general American Evangelicalism.
It was so fun interviewing him! We're already discussing a follow up
I look forward to the interview!
Love this! I’m in the process of becoming a member of the LCMS (Lutheran) church. Love their understanding of justification and the Sacraments! I went to a reformed seminary but am convinced of the straightforward understanding of Scripture.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Hi Aaron! I’m in the same boat :) I’m from a pentecostal background, and like you found the Lutheran tradition to be simple and straightforward with the bible! Praise be to God to hear another testimony. I pray that everyone listens to the Word of God, and follow the conviction, even if that means going to a church I don’t agree with, but what we need are Christian brothers and sisters genuinely convicted and sensitive to the Holy Spirit, not practicing tradition for the sake of tradition, but for the sake of the gospel!
Me too. I first started to know the Gospel in the Lutheran church
I also went through a similar experience growing up in an Evangelical/pentecostal church.
All I can say is amen to all the Pastor said, and it reminds me of how and why I became a Lutheran (LCMS).
Me too!
Lutheran is the way, the closest expression of Biblical Christianity and the church’s tradition :)
De onde você é?
Thankyou Rev wolfmueller for helping me to find one true faith. Happy reformation week everyone.
I love your username. That's great haha
@@GospelSimplicity I'm glad you like it😊
So before Luther there was no a true faith?
@@virgopotens226 It became 'muddied'....it was 'added to'... it became about man...and works.
All the LCMS churches we’ve attended over the past two years have had ‘close’ communion rather than ‘closed’ communion, and I think that is a very insightful and wise move, as well as completely consistent with Scripture.
What does ‘close’ rather than ‘closed’ mean? Thank you! And God bless.
@@wyattfuchs6839 Closed communion generally means one has to be a member of that church, or a member of another church within the same denomination, in order to partake. Close communion generally means one agrees with the stated understanding that church has regarding communion, and affirms their practice of communion, without needing to be a member specifically of that church or the denomination.
I love how knowledgeable the pastor is. He knows those quotes and citations backwards and forward
That is great to see
Great Video Austin. I’m a Christian thanks to Calvary Chapel. I attend a LCMS church. I am so grateful to Calvary Chapel and trust me if you have a wayward love one ( none believer) you want a brother in the Calvary chapel to witness to him or her. They are the Marines of the church:).
Hey Austin! Missed your live comment on my video yesterday, but you are doing great work brother! Your channel has become a great place for Christians from all backgrounds to gather and learn!
No worries! Thanks Taylor! Keep up the good work
Obviously as a catholic i dont agree with everything pastor said but still a great discussion thanks austin
Thanks! I appreciate you being able to hold both things simultaneously
I am really enjoying your interviews with other denominations, Austin. As a former Confessional LCMS Lutheran, I still greatly appreciate Pr. Wolfmueller's clear and amiable approach to sharing the Christian faith. He was an excellent choice to share an historic Lutheran perspective on things. Pr. Jordan Cooper (Just and Sinner) would be another excellent choice too.
As a former Lutheran, I pray that you Austin, and everyone who happens upon this video, will earnestly seek out the truth of the Reformation, though. I agree with Pr. Wolfeuller that the doctrine of justification and the idea of sola fide was the primary theological cause for dividing the western church. Unfortunately, as many very learned and well-meaning Lutherans often do, Pr. Wolfmeuller doesn't understand the Catholic position on justification and therefore doesn't realize that it was the original Lutherans that were in error.
Pr. Wolfmeuller says he was convinced of the Gospel that "conversion is a monergistic act and that God alone gives us the gift of faith and salvation". However, he then implies that Catholicism teaches something different. This, unfortunately, shows he doesn't understand the Catholic view of justification.
Justification is a gift of God (CCC 153, 1996, 2010). Faith is the root of justification (Council of Trent Session VI. CHAPTER VIII.). The Catholic Church emphatically teaches that no one merits initial justification from God. It is a free gift given based solely on God calling us to Him and gifting us with faith as seen here in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC).
*CCC 2010 Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion.*
For anyone interested, here is a link to my blog series exploring the theological reasons why I left Lutheranism for Catholicism. I especially recommend the 3 parts specifically on sola fide for anyone interested in learning more about the dispute over justification.
www.follyofthecross.com/category/catholicism/fullness-of-the-truth/
*To cut to the chase, Lutherans got it wrong when they taught justification is Christ's very own righteousness imputed to us.* This lead to many of their other errors saying that we are saved by faith *alone* in Christ. Protestant theolgian Alister McGrath even concluded the idea of imputation was a brand new theological idea with the Reformers in his gigantic study on the history of the doctrine of justification:
"A fundamental discontinuity was introduced into the western theological tradition where none had ever existed, or ever been contemplated, before. The Reformation understanding of the nature of justification [as imputation] must therefore be regarded as a genuine theological novum."
Alister McGrath - Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification. Vol. I. Pg. 186
Learning what the Catholic Church actually teaches about justification is what lead me to now believe that Luther got it wrong and the Catholic Church has always been right. Sadly, so many people have no idea what the Catholic Church actually teaches and so they reject Catholicism based on objections to things the Church doesn't even teach.
*“There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”*
- Blessed Bishop Fulton J. Sheen
Please, keep seeking after truth, Austin! I will continue to pray with you for the unity of the Church.
John 17:21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.
John 10:16 - there will be one fold and one shepherd.
Epeshians 4:3-6 - one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father
Romans 16:17 - I urge that there be no divisions among you
I have the impression that whenever they are to explain the “sola fide” dogma (Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and pretty much everyone not Protestant refute it), they try to use the dogma of “sola gratia” for it and depict non-Protestants as if they were supporters of Pelagianism (if it was not the Catholic Church that condemned Pelagius more than 1000 years prior to the development of “sola fide”).
You hit it right on! I remember when i first read that in the cathechism and i began to understand what the catholic church teaches i was shocked!
Wow, thanks for such a substantive comment! One of my favorite parts of making videos is interacting with well read people who can so clearly state their views, especially in a non-polemical way. Iustitia Dei is on my reading list for winter break. I think the debate around imputation is important, though I think sola fide can stand without it. In any case, glad you're enjoying the interviews, and you might be excited to hear that I also have Dr. Cooper coming on soon as well. God bless!
@@GospelSimplicity Thank you for your hard work to share these things with the world. I am sure it ins't easy to find time to put these videos together on top of your school work!
I agree that one can formulate sola fide without imputation, but honestly, as soon as one admits that justification includes infused righteousness/infused charity (Romans 5:5, Ezekiel 36:25-27) you have 1) moved away from the reformation and what split the church and 2) will probably end up formulating justification in a way that is in line with the Catholic Church's teaching on justification (i.e. infused righteousness and the necessity of good works for maintianing our justification).
You seem to have a true gift for navigating these tough eccumenical waters in a way that is substanitive and charitible. I pray you will have continued success with your studies and with your TH-cam channel. You certianly deserve it! And I also pray that God will bring all of us the clarity to see the truth in these matters and hopefully reunite us all in one Church again someday.
God bless!
Thank you for interviewing this awesome Pastor, such a great gift to the Church. Godspeed and God's peace be with you.
Really loved talking with him
I’m currently taking the adult instruction class Pastor Wolfmueller made, interesting stuff.
That’s awesome!
Great interview Austin. Pastor Brian is Dynamic!
Thanks! He is indeed
Lord guard us in this comment section, please, we can be so mean to one another, guard us from sin, please help us be more like you are and help us see others like you see us. Amen.
Amen
You have a ❤️
This one is another little treasure .. thanks for sharing it.
O Mary conceived without sin : Pray for us who have recourse to thee.
God bless. ;o)
Glad you enjoyed it!
Let me preface my remarks by saying that I think Pastor Bryan is a great guy, I really like some of his videos, and I'm glad that he's preaching the good news of Christianity here on TH-cam. However, I had a few issues with his comments on the Catholic Church that I'd like to get out there. Sorry for the long rant, but some of these can't go unanswered.
21:49 "The Council of Trent will say things like, if anybody is confident of their salvation, let them be anathema."
This is not at all what Trent says, and I don't know how Pastor Bryan arrived at this conclusion. He's referring to canon XVI of the sixth session, which actually says:
"If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end, -unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema."
Trent does not at all exclude trust and confidence in the Lord Jesus Christ and the efficacy of His sacrifice, but instead opposes a view which says that we can know with absolute certainty that we will be numbered among the elect. We can argue about how right that was, but what it is clearly not saying is that we can't have confidence of salvation.
Pastor Bryan also seems to misunderstand the doctrine of purgatory, saying that purgatory implies that we are our own saviours rather than the Lord Jesus. The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that "All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven." (CCC 1031) In other words, our salvation is a separate issue to purgatory; if we are in purgatory, we have already been saved by the Lord Jesus. Purgatory purifies us of any remaining attachment to sin- for nothing unclean enters heaven- but it is certainly not where we save ourselves or others, because we cannot save ourselves or others.
33:06 Again, on the principle of "ex opere operato", Pastor Bryan misconstrues the Catholic teaching. Ex opere operato is not about the fruits of the sacraments, but about their validity. It's a doctrine against the Donatists, who believed that if the minister of a sacrament was a sinner, the sacrament was invalid. Contrary to this, ex opere operato means that the sacrament is valid independently of the spiritual disposition of the minister or the recipient, and depends instead on the sacrament itself and Christ who effects it. So even if a non-believer received the Eucharist, they would indeed be receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. However, since they are not properly disposed, in no way do they receive the grace of the sacrament or any of its fruits, which Pastor Bryan seems to claim is the case in Catholic teaching. A person does indeed need to have faith in the Christ and His real presence, and to be free of all mortal sins, to benefit from this sacrament; otherwise they are only "eating and drinking judgement upon themselves".
33:57 Pastor Bryan was very correct to say that he would get some grief for this claim. It's certainly true that some of the sacraments of the Catholic Church require a priest to act in the person of Christ in order for them to be valid, but this is not true of all seven as he claims. Anyone can be the minster of the sacrament of Baptism, and the couple themselves are the ministers of the sacrament of Marriage. Then he says that all of the sacraments come from the pope, but actually none of the sacraments need a pope to be valid- of the remaining seven, Holy Orders and Confirmation require a bishop, and the Eucharist, Confession, and the Anointing of the Sick require a priest. It's traditional for the pope (who is also a bishop) to confirm the appointment of new bishops, but he's not essential to ordination. The Pastor then goes on to claim St. Augustine as being for his position on the irrelevancy of priestly ordination, claiming that the sacraments depend only on the words of Christ and not on the priest having valid Orders. St. Augustine did affirm that Christ was the minister in each of the sacraments. But St. Augustine certainly believed in the importance of valid ordination and apostolic succession, as shown by the entire Donatist controversy, which was about not only the validity of Baptism, but also Holy Orders.
Hey Gandalf! Great to hear from you. Thanks for another really well thought out comment. Since these are primarily directed towards Pr. Wolfmueller, I won't respond to the points of concern, though I do think you raise some valid concerns.
I want to say as well that Pastor Bryan is a good guy to listen to and to hear the Lutheran viewpoint from. This reponse is similar to my own problems with some of his assertions and misinterpretations of Church teaching. I think every person should look into his claims in depth to see if they have weight and also to look at the sources he is mentioning in context. Thanks Austin for having different people on that hold to different views on the Christian faith and I'm really enjoying your content.
Excellent correction and clarification of his misunderstandings (I hope and assume in good faith).
@@GospelSimplicity Of course, I wouldn't expect you to! I just meant to clarify these issues for onlookers. Thanks for the video, I enjoyed it and I learned some new things about Luther and Lutheranism that I didn't know before.
Gandalf: i also had concerns about Pastor Bryan’s comments; but I’m only your average catholic. I’ll count on you to itemize corrections in the future. (In fact, I’ll look at remarks section on other videos). My corrections don’t hold weight. I was relieved to hear Pastor Bryan acknowledge the medieval mind is different than that of today. Often, these arguments are made as if the Catholic Church has not changed since Luther’s time.
Hey Austin, I came to see this video after watching your discussion with Dr. Jordan B. Cooper. I’m a new sub, but I have been watching your content for a while now. I think that you’re doing a good job in the way you are reaching out to people from other denominations. Even though I’m a Roman Catholic from the Dominican Republic, I enjoy to listen to the differences and similarities that confessions of faith like Anglicans, Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, etc., have with Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox, for it is really refreshing to have discussions and maintain a conversation because even Jesus had detractors, however, he showed compassion and love to everyone, no matter if they were sinners or if they were of different ethnicity. I truly think you’re are doing God’s Work by teaching us the differences that exist inside the Christian faith. I would like to see you discussing with Jews and Muslims too, if you ever have the opportunity, that would be very interesting to see a discussion of scripture and faith. I want to wrap this up by telling you, to keep up with the good work and for Our Lord to bless you!
Thank you so much for the support! Grateful to have you as a part of this community. That's an interesting idea. I'll see what I can do. God bless!
Looking forward to this. Was wanting to check out the Lutheran faith next. Studying our collective church history (and all of it, whether Orthodox or Catholic applies to every Christian. My dad was Lutheran, mother was Catholic, and both became born again and non-denominational when I was young. I know nothing of Lutheranism yet (except a tad about Martin Luther), but I'm loving studying my rich Catholic heritage. And that's the story behind my very Catholic looking username.
Oh btw, "Tortured for Christ" is on Prime lately. A wonderful and brave Lutheran pastor that somehow survived the Gulags and torture catacombs of the USSR. Hard to get through, I'll warn you right now. I read the book years ago, and really Really didn't want to see a movie/documentary version, but it was informative. It goes to show you, the denomination matters so little. If you truly have the Holy Spirit, He can get you through anything. There's an unforgettable line that illustrates this. When his wife ended up in the work camps, she mentioned how on Saturdays, the Seventh Day Adventists took a beating every time. For all that too many Christians choose to marginalize them, they will die for that Saturday Sabbath, and have done.
keep seeking in your Catholic heritage beloved. Our Catholic faith is beautiful for many reasons but for me in a special way for how it creates a cultural identity for people...and its hard to wash off! The Catholic faith is rich and is the church that compiled the Bible (before the split with the East) and we have survived ans spread the gospel in a special way because it adapts to the cultures where it is planted and expresses Christ in the form of people who receive it. Our theology of the Incarnation of Christ-shared with our Orthodox family. God bless you and the Holy Spirit be with you!
Thank you so much for doing these video interviews, Austin! I have enjoyed listening to so many of them, especially the ones on Orthodox and Catholic faith traditions, and will continue to listen. Denominationally, I belong to an evangelical Lutheran church on the conservative side (in Scandinavia), so this is pretty close to me, although I am not half as high-church. Lately, I have been wondering about how psychology and personality plays into our choices when it comes to what appeals to us denominationally/theologically. It would be really interesting if you would adress that in the future.
Glad you're enjoying these! It's interesting that you mention the psychology of denominational choice because it's something that I've been thinking about lately as well. I just need to find someone smarter than me who could talk about it well
@@GospelSimplicity I’ve vaguely heard mention of a British guy called Steve Cockram in this context. You may perhaps want to check out if he meets your criteria. I’m looking forward to whatever you come up with. Blessings!
Keep up these ecumenical discussions. You are a breath of fresh air on TH-cam. 10 minute bible guy also did some great stuff. Actually his multi-part video with Pastor William Weedon was a great video on Lutherans (if I say so myself as a former Lutheran who still has many warm feelings for the Lutheran Church, but am gratefully Catholic).
I love Matt's channel! Oh my, Pastor Weedon was incredible! Such an interesting guy. Loved those interviews
@@GospelSimplicity Pastor Weedon has a TH-cam channel now, to complement the podcast. Check it out if interested! We're working on posting a new video each week. -Peter
I love how often your posting ! Great content ! Very admirable , I’m 20 years old and you’re inspiring me to start a channel of my own very soon 🙏🏽
That’s awesome! God bless you in that endeavor
Do you feel Protestants are more similar to orthodox or to Roman Catholics , and why?
Thanks for this interview! I’ve enjoyed Pastor Bryan’s videos as well.
My pleasure!
What I like from Luther's view than differs from modern protestantism is their practice of Crucifixes, Sacred Images, Real Presence. view of Mary & Sign of the Cross
They are unique in many ways
You are a very respectful young man, about religion. keep doing what you're doing
Thanks!
You should do the episcopal/Anglican church next that would be so interesting. There is so much diversity in beliefs among the members of the Anglican communion.
I have an Anglican interview on the calendar coming up!
I appreciate the dialogue. I love how you ask questions and do not correct or try to change his mind you just listen. I could, as I am sure others did, go through a litany of the things he misconstrued or got wrong. I do not agree with him basically everytime he says "Catholics believe" I do not know if this gentleman has a preconceived bias, the priest he talked to was not well formed, or he is just ignorant of church teaching. Fulton Sheene O.P.N🙏 would have a lot to say to him. I wonder why he needed Sola Fide in his church? Either way I hope he will eventually take a honest open view with out any preconceived ideas about this and look for truth. As I continue to pray for you as well, Austin. Another great interview. Thanks!
Thanks for the encouragement!
@Pastor Bryan wolfmueller's Austin someone is spamming your account. Fyi
I do enjoy listening to the perspectives of the different faith traditions. Whether it is Lutheran, Anglican, or Orthodox, the question inevitably comes back to their relationship with the Catholic Church. It is interesting to note that whenever the Catholic Church exercised authority, splits and schisms emerged.
I'm so glad he makes it real to the lay person. You tube theologians, love it
He's great!
This will be a good video. I’m curious about the Lutheran view of Mary since Martin Luther held a very strong Marian devotion. I asked a Lutheran pastor about it and he said that Luther was a bad Lutheran in that regard, which seemed counterintuitive.
Thanks! We're already talking about a follow up, so if there's anything else you'd like to see after watching it, feel free to leave questions for the follow up
beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/p/martin-luthers-mariology.html?m=1
Proper title for her in Lutheranism is "mother of god" or" god bearer "but we do not ask for her intercession or that of any other saint.
@@abhinavalpheus3924 - Thank you for your response. How do Lutherans interpret and live out ‘the communion of the saints’ in the Apostles Creed?
@@amandah8178From small catechism
THE HOLY GHOST.III. HIS WORKMANSHIP.
The Holy Christian Church, the Communion of Saints.
WHAT THE CHURCH IS. The Church is "The Communion of Saints" or fellowship of believers. It consists of all those persons who truly believe in Christ. [Matt. 16:16, 18] We call it the Workmanship of the Holy Ghost, because He brings men to faith and thus produces the Church. HE CALLS, GATHERS, ENLIGHTENS AND SANCTIFIES THE WHOLE CHRISTIAN CHURCH ON EARTH, AND PRESERVES IT IN UNION WITH JESUS CHRIST IN THE TRUE FAITH. [Eph. 3:25-27]
The Church may also be called the Holy Spirit's Workshop, because He abides and works in it through the Means of Grace,-the Word of God and the Sacraments.
WHEN FOUNDED. The Holy Christian Church was founded on the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Ghost was poured out upon the disciples. [Acts 2:1-41] On that day the Gospel of the crucified and risen Saviour was first preached by the apostles, the first converts were made, and the first Christian baptisms were administered.
VISIBLE OR INVISIBLE. The Church is invisible, because we cannot read men's hearts nor tell who are real believers. But if we regard the Church as an external organization which includes all who profess to believe, it is visible. In this outward visible Church there are many persons who are not real believers. But Christ knows His own. [II Tim 2:19+, John 10:14+] The angels on the day of judgment will separate the hypocrites from the true Christians. [Matt. 13:41, 42]
THE MARKS OF THE CHURCH. The Church is found wherever the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered. For wherever God's Word is preached, some persons believe it, [Isa. 55:10, 11] and where believers are, there is the Church.
THE CHURCH IS ONE. It consists of the true believers out of all the different churches, denominations, and sects. There is one Flock, with one Shepherd. [John 10:16] The Church is the Body of which Christ is the Head. [Col. 1:18, Eph 1:22, 23]
ITS NAMES. The Church is called Holy, because the Holy Spirit works in it and through it, and because its members, though not perfect, lead holy lives. It is called Christian, because it consists of those who believe in Christ. It is called Catholic or Universal, because it is meant to include all men everywhere. Catholic does not mean Roman Catholic.
MILITANT AND TRIUMPHANT. The Church, consisting of true believers, is one and the same Church on earth and in heaven. On earth it is the Church Militant, because its members are still fighting the good fight of faith. [I Tim. 6:12+] In heaven it is the Church Triumphant, because its members have won the victory of faith. [Rev. 7:9-14, Rev. 2:18, Rev. 3:21] The only way into the Church Triumphant is through the Church Militant.
Man Austin, you always post some great questions
Thanks!
Austin,please refer him the the video of Dr Brant Pitre,Jesus and the Jewish roots of the Eucharist
👍🏻
As a former Lutheran I should find this interesting.
I hope you do!
And you became...?
@@rodionkadatskyi182 Catholic.
@@hellebartelsen8208 welcome home.. God bless us all!!! 🙏🙏🙏😇😇😇
Why did you become Catholic, if I may ask? I’m really just curious, no hate ☺️
Reading a book that goes into depth on what led up to the reformation and how politics gets intertwined and how normal ppl views it decade by decade. I have a new measure of respect for Luther that he did not intend on creating the great split but actually wanted to work within the Church framework. The history of it all is really interesting, however I still don't agree or understand how it all leads to the protestant position.. it makes no sense and do not follow, however bad a certain pope was at the time or because the topic of indulgence. I really want to understand the leap/jump, so I will finish my book and def watch this and hope it gives me insight!
Here's something I found from Here I Stand by Roland Bainton. Luther's own confessor kept telling him he needs to accept God's forgiveness...so why did Luther feel the need to leave and accept God's forgiveness and grace when he was already and repeatedly counseled as a Catholic to do so? I see a similarity between him and Ignatius Loyola...but one went his own way in pride and the second humbled his pride.
@Pastor Bryan wolfmueller's Dear Hei: The main thing that Roman Catholics demonstrate, is their acceptance of the canon of Sacred Scripture, along with their acceptance of non-canonical material, while having remained a unified whole. The Roman Catholics have demonstrated how unity happens. Though Catholics Canonized beliefs that are not consistent with Sacred Scripture, they at least have remained one in their own worldwide church body, because their full doctrine remains what it is, and no separate statements are allowed to exist to contradict what Catholics have canonized. It is this demonstration that has brought shame on modern Protestants, especially with respect to the LCMS altering of the divine offices, explained in the Large Catechism (Lutheranism). Luther sided in with God's Word, which warns that division would happen when the truth is deliberately mis-represented. For LCMS, Closed Communion became the order, when the Large Catechism does not support this. Division, between Wisconsin Synod, and Evangelical Lutheran Synod, with the LCMS and ELCA is the result of pure doctrine tampering. Both LCMS and ELCA continuosly live by an altered doctrine other than their own. The Wisconsin Synod and Evangelical Lutheran Synod refuses Wisconsin Synod and ELS the elements of communion, if they are a visitor from another member congregation. Presently, the only Lutheran Church body, that has stopped the practice of doctrine altering, is The Lutheran Congregations in Mission For Christ.
Hey, have you given any thought between hosting an exchange of ideas between differing Churches on your channel? Would be great for Catholic priests, Lutheran priests, and Orthodox priest have a talk with each other with you moderating the whole thing. Would take a lot of work but it would be paramount for us as Christians getting to learn about each other.
As you can see from these comments having counter arguments to Pr. Bryan, there is much need for clarification on both sides and that would help all of us come to the truth.
YES. I would love to make this happen. I would want to be careful to really get the right people and set the right atmosphere because I would want to see a discussion, not a debate. It's definitely a future goal though
"We are all on our way and the Lord is using our conversations to bless us"...
Meanwhile, 500 years after the reformation have bred thousands of different denominations all teaching different versions of the Truth...
He who does not gather with me, scatters. - Lk 11:23
Even Roman Catholic apologists day they're aren't thousands of denominations. There are about 7 main denominations in Christendom. The article to which you refer actually states that there are 242 different denominations under Roman catholicism, so you probably don't want to stick with that view.
Hello sir! My name is Logan and I'm sure this question will seem backwards from what you're used to seeing. I am a committed Eastern Orthodox Christian and I love the fact that you have recently spent a lot of time diving deep into Orthodoxy and Catholicism. I think your "a Protestant " videos about these two great Christian traditions have been helpful to many people. However, I've noticed that you don't have a lot of videos about liturgical protestant churches. I think visiting and offering your thoughts on what you experienced at an traditional Anglican and Confessional Lutheran church would be just as beneficial for people as your Catholic and Orthodox videos. Would you ever be interested in doing something along those lines? Thanks for all that you do and may God bless your work!
Very strange (?) Weird (?) Neat (?) Cool (?). I first discovered you from fellow Orthodox friends on Facebook. I used to be Lutheran and attended St. Paul's Lutheran Church in Austin where Pr. Wolfmueller is now the pastor. I still love that church and visited last year during Advent and met him. Very nice and knowledgeable. If there had been more Confessional Lutheran pastors (and laity), it might have taken me bit longer to become Orthodox.
On a side note, you might be interested in a new book: "Thinking Orthodox" by Eugenia Scarves Constantinou. She taught New Testament at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology and I think she has a TH-cam Channel too. You might want to interview her too.
That’s so interesting! Thanks for the recommendation too. Sounds interesting!
@Pastor Bryan wolfmueller's Spambot
Stratospheric. Thanks for this wonderful dialogue.
Glad you enjoyed it!
So very fascinating! I had a difficult decision to leave my lutheran church in order to convert to the catholic church. That was mainly because the catholic church has more and more attracted me, not because I wanted to leave. But - the lutheran church here in Germany has in big areas ceased to be lutheran in the way I thought it should be and as pastor Wolfmueller described it. Whereas the catholic church (at least here) seems to have learned from the reformation and integrated it's best parts, has become more evangelical in the literal sense. Luther would be catholic today I think, being glad about the changes...
Thanks for sharing some of your story!
Considering the Church of Rome is astill selling indulgences and venerating relics, He would still have major problems with it
@@CloudslnMyCoffee Please show me where someone could buy indulgences?
@@hei7586 Can. 994 All members of the faithful can gain indulgences, partial or plenary, for themselves, or they can apply them by way of suffrage to the dead.
@@Mygoalwogel [confused] What is the question to your answer?
Pastor Bryan is indeed a good man. But anytime I listen to him or other Lutherans pastors about theology I cannot get my head around. Everything is so confusing and not sure where they stand for nowadays. I have huge respect for them, but it's almost impossible to understand how a person be saved in their tradition...
All good anyway. Thanks for sharing this video.
Hmm, that's interesting. If we do a follow up, I'm sure he'd be happy to answer that question
@@GospelSimplicity . Thank you. Its worth exploring why Lutherans practise sacrament of confession while that can contradict theirs very theology . To practise sacrament of confession implies that apart having faith there is the need to be a better person with works and trying to not repeat same sins. In Lutheran theology man sins no matter what and there is nothing we can do about it, only faith can save us. Therefore what's the point of the confession in their tradition then? If your works and your redeem cannot do anything to save you, but only faith can save you i really don't see the point of to practise confession in similar manner of Catholic tradition. Similar question would be about holy communion, if they believe that receiving body of Christ cancel our sins and save us, again what's about the faith alone and the man is always sinful no matter what.
I still struggle to understand who go to heaven and who to hell in Lutheran tradition. They seem to have a mixed bags of traditions and beliefs that in somehow contradict themselves (with all due respect).
Now it's worth noting that not all lutherans churches practise the confession, some of them stick with only 2 sacraments. Unfortunately when there isn't an universal authority (apart the Bible), the risk is to have different approaches and theologies in same churches.
Apart this I enjoy Bryan's sermons and admire his huge passion about Christ, and being Catholic it's good to listen to his podcasts and videos.
All the best! :)
@@IOT4747 I might be able to help a bit. As I understand it, Lutheran theology is primarily pastoral, to bring the gospel of peace, joy and love. Also saved by faith in Christ's work and word, not just by faith vaguely defined.
An example, when I sin, how do I know that Jesus still forgives me and forgives this particular sin? By faith in His promise of forgiveness tied to the words of the pastor.
Or if I doubt I am truely united to Christ and His Holy Church, I can come to Him and recieve Christ on my tongue; and so by faith in His promise tied to the bread and wine I recieve well, with peace and joy, the Holy Communion with Christ and the saints.
The Lutheran appraoch aims at bringing the peace of Christ to the troubled conscience and at troubling the self-righteous one. We would also hold that the Holy Spirit (who we recieve in faith not by works) does make us holy, changing our desires to pure rather than sinful, but that is only finished when our mortality is finished (death is the wages of sin, if you have no sin you shouldn't get paid).
Regarding heaven and hell, those who reject Christ's promise and work for us are rejected, those who trust (by faith) Christ's promise and work recieve it and so live forever forgiven in Him.
(I think one difficulty is that we have a more eastern/ancient approach to Christology and a higher value of mystery, for instance it maybe possible to define all Lutheran teaching from the starting point of the interpenetration of the two natures in Christ)
@@j.g.4942 , thanks for your beautiful words. If you don't mind I'd like then to continue to ask few things about what you just said.
So what's happens if you don't receive the communion, are you still saved if you truly believe in Christ? If you have faith in his words and his holiness and you don't receive the communion, can you still be saved?
From what you say, it seems so but yet there is emphasis on getting the communion to receive the fully holiness and forgiveness of the sins.
Then you mention about when we sin, if you are in doubt use the sacrament of the confession, which is ok. Everything makes sense...and if you repeat the same sin?
It seems something is missing in the equation - forgive me if I use elementary language, but I try to make it simple.
In Catholic tradition we try to work everyday on trying to be better and be good christians - hence praying, faith and good works wherever is possible.
But if you don't try to repent yourself, redeem and trying to be better...how do you know you are in the right path?
I appreciate your optimism and beautiful words...just guessing it's something missing in the equation.
With all due respect and admiration in what you say it doesn't seem as linear as Catholic approach (both confession and communion) despite they have a lot of similarity.
Thanks anyway for your reply! :)
@@IOT4747 Thank you for your kindness and concern, my words haven't been called beautiful before (especially not on youtube); yet I'll try to address your questions.
Just as Dismas the thief was saved by trust in Christ's Word and work, and all the saints before him, God can save people apart for Baptism and the Eucharist (ass we call them the Means of Grace). Yet clearly from Christ's promise of forgiveness and life, regeneration, the Holy Spirit, adoption, union, righteousness and even Himself, in these means, we can't say they are not needed. Again, for the sake of the Christian, we point to Christ's sure Word of promise in His work through the Means of Grace to point them to Christ's Word and work. Christ Jesus is true and His promise sure, where everything else is a sandy foundation.
Regarding repeated sin, we confess it again and trust God at His Word, that He is righteous and just to remove it from us and destroy it in Christ's crucifixion (1 Jn 1). Does this mean we should continue to sin? By NO means! As St Paul would write. In the divine liturgy we are asked 1 to confess our sin, 2 if we trust Jesus' word of forgiveness, and 3 "do you intend, with the help of the Holy Spirit, to live as in God's presence and to strive daily to lead a holy life, even as Christ has made you holy?"
I think perhaps a difference is that we say it is only by the Holy Spirit that we do good works, that our desires are changed and that we are made holy. Another way to say that is, all the good we do is from Christ, given to us by the Holy Spirit. So if my words are beautiful it is only because of Christ, and if one is a saintly person it is the light of Christ shining through them. So we are always pointing to Jesus and not to oneself, because Jesus is sure and I am not as reliable.
To summarise, we know Christ Jesus is true and reliable, and that we are not. He promised life and forgiveness in Baptism and Holy Communion, so I can be sure I recieve it. When I sin, I know Christ's blood is more powerful than any sin and can cleanse me from all unrighteousness, so I turn to Him in confession, recieve the absolution throughHis promise through the Pastor, and strive to live the life of Christ, by the strength the Holy Spirit provides.
How do I know if I'm on the right path? I trust in the promises Jesus has given me, I can be sure of them; I listen to His Word written and preserved down the ages through the church by the Holy Spirit; and I pray asking for His mercy and the direction of the Holy Spirit.
Lord have mercy on us all.
And the peace of God be with you.
I feel that the response to the book of James from Lutheranism is not particularly strong as James says, "you see that a man is justified by works" before saying "and not by faith alone". With that first section I don't think the response of faith worked out in love and charity works out...
That being said, the works that James are speaking of are works of love. Now the Catholic church actually teaches that the works that justify us are not ours but Christ's through us. Without grace, and obedience to Christ, no works we perform have any merit whatsoever.
In conversations with protestants I generally describe the Catholic position by faith+obedience because of the connotations attributed to the word "works".
Thanks for another great video Austin!
Another point is that there seem to be many many misunderstandings about Catholic justification theology 🙈. And also the papacy. I'm sure you've got a good idea of this already though Austin
It concerns me that the original mainstream Protestant churches have declined in numbers and influence as this points to further removal of Christianity from its original structure. I am worried that over a passage of time the Christian faith will gradually fly away from its original ideals.
I can understand how that could be concerning
Even as a Catholic I see the decline in mainline Protestantism as something to be mourned. Sure we have our differences, but the impact they had on Christianity and the American ethos especially, it feels like we are losing something of our national identity
Just about every book in the new testament was a fight about doctrine ☺
YES! Thank you! 1:04
Don’t forget about the Anglicans (in the US we are the ACNA). The English Reformation paralleled the Continental Reformation and is the worlds 3rd largest Christian tradition with all of the Protestant theology with the fullness of the ancient liturgy.
You should have a conversation with reformed presbyterians!
Anyone in particular?
@@GospelSimplicity not sure how reachable they are but Carl Trueman and Adriel Sanchez are great. Was thinking OPC or PCA pastors
Have you watched the film The Overnighters? Mad respect for a lot of Lutherans...
I haven’t!
I love watching your videos, but there is one that I think you have missed. Have you tried visiting an Ecumenical Catholic Church? And talking to the pastor? (I think that is what I would be if one were available in my area, but as it is I would have to travel several hours.)
Looking forward to this!
Glad to hear that!
I am catholic and I live overseas. I would like to know if evangelicals have tried to convert Lutherans to evangelicalism. If someone has experienced that.
Austin, you are a very special young man. I hope you have a good job but maybe you can make a living doing this. God bless.
Thanks! Currently as a college student with little expenses, this is my job, though it’s not yet viable as a full time income
A better, more descriptive name for Lutheranism is Evangelical Catholicism.
In the Live chat, when I was concerned that monergism was a heresy in the early Church...I meant to say monothelitism, a related heresy specifically about the Person of Christ.
I was a little confused by that myself. Thanks for following up
Loved this. Have you reached out to any orthodox Methodists? Dr David Watson, Rev Keith Boyette?
I have not! I’d be open to it though
Well, I think the interpretation of the effect of the Lord’s Supper is still very different from the Catholic teachings.
Let alone the preserving substance of bread and wine within the substantive Body and Blood of the Lord. The Catholic Church says it is no longer bread and wine in substance, but only in the accidental forms of appearance.
That’s why, to make a dogmatic concise Latin term or expression (a dogma is a formal proclamation made to reduce the theological complexity of a revealed truth or set of truths) we don’t say they are “transformed”, since the accidental form does not change through the Mystery, but they are “transubstantiated”, since the change is in the substantive reality, not in the formal appearance. The Eastern Orthodox in general agree with it but do not appreciate the fact of it being made dogmatic by Catholics, so as to emphasize the mystical dimension of it.
I refer to the “forgiving of sins” effect in the particular. The Words of Institution do not remove sins “per se”. Let me explain the Catholic Church’s 2000 years old teachings here.
The Eucharist is the sacrament of the all-delivering love of Lord and, since it is the fullness of Christ’s presence in total communion with the People of God, it enforces the New Covenant reality of a definitive and perennial loving relationship between God and his elects. The purpose of Eucharist is not to remove sins, but to give the Pilgrim (or Militant) Church a foretaste of the Great Banquet in the Heavenly Jerusalem (Triumphant Church) and give the spiritual nourishment to the faithful in order to confer the sanctifying grace needed to perfect our faith and our capacity to love God and our neighbors.
I know our protestant brothers abandoned the “sacramentality value” (varying degrees here, of course) and basically dropped the sanctification to pretty much a figure of language since Luther hamartiology hiperfocused on salvation and hipofocused on saintity ( _“Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect”_ , Matthew 5, 48; or _”You are to be holy to me because I, the Lord, am holy”_ , Leviticus 20, 26), even though some denominations still have a some sacraments, like the Lutherans themselves.
Actually, if anyone with mortal sin eats the body and blood of the Lord, that not only means an unfruitful disposition to receive the Most Blessed Sacrament, but a grave sacrilege: _“So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord”_ (1 Corinthians 11, 27). This can only be explained by the real and substantive presence in those strict physical elements of the Sacred Body of Christ despite the preserved accidents, because no one can be condemned of vilipending boiled wheat or fermented grape juice on faith or say it was referring to that “part” of the sacrament and not the other. Not only this, but a serious consciousness in faith is demanded: _“Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without DISCERNING the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves”_ (1 Corinthians 11, 28-29).
So faith is fundamentally in need here to recognize it. With that we agree with him: it is not a theatrical or symbolic act (Zwingli) or a spiritual anti-material presence (Calvin), connected to the depreciation he had on the material order, even though it is really the spiritual consecration from priests acting “in persona Christi” that changes the material substance to make Jesus’ words true, for the sacrament causes what it signifies. But it is the sacrament of reconciliation/ penitence/ confession that absolves from the mortal sins, not the sacrament of the Eucharist.
Besides, in the Holy Mass the venial sins are forgiven in the formal prayers subsequent to the Penitential Act, in the beginning of it.
Greetings from Brazil.
Thank you for this thorough explanation!
Very well explained.. I salute you sir.
Austin are you from Canada as well? Noticed the roots shirt!
No, I just have an appreciation for their incredibly comfortable clothes. I'm from Maryland (USA)
A couple questions and I’m humbly asking which isn’t easy to show in writing. So, if the mid evil church was what Luther was standing against and that’s gone according to the pastor, why bother staying outside protesting any longer? Are there still demands that haven’t been met? Is it the idea of a Pope and not wanting his authority? Why is sola scriptura held so highly when it can’t be found in the Bible? Does the Lutheran church have Eucharistic miracles? Now this is the mom of sons wondering out loud, I can’t help but wonder if Pr Bryan making the choice of denomination, vocation and marriage all at the same was a wise thing to do? I wonder if being Catholic was given a fare opportunity? God bless you both🙏🏻
Great questions. So I could only guess at his answer, but my guess is he might respond that the medieval church’s theology was enshrined in the Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, and thus the issues live on.
Catholic Eucharist miracles can easily be faked
@@SoldierOfGod778 kindly search for the Corpus Christie miracle first before saying anything.. I have pity for you. God bless..
@@SoldierOfGod778 Do you understand how they verify and confirm these miracles? Look into how they verify Catholic Miracles.
Very late in commenting, long videos are difficult with young children, but I REALLY appreciate his acknowledging the nasty things that Luther said about the Catholics. I grew up Catholic in the Bible Belt and even as a child I had my faith attacked by mostly Evangelicals, including hearing celebrations after the death of Pope John Paul II died because it was the "death of the antichrist". In college when we where then assigned to read side by side Luther, Calvin, and St Francis de Sales "The Catholic Controversy" I had an extremely hard time separating out and distancing Luther's theological arguments from the general vitriol against the Catholic church. I found St Francis de Sales, and your approach so much more refreshing to approach the theological debate as terribly important but done with great charity.
Glad you enjoyed it! Sorry to hear about your negative experiences with Protestants in the past. That is unacceptable. Hopefully this channel is a small step in the right direction towards seeing less of that in the future. God bless
This host the one w/ glasses has such a smart timid sweet spirit.
Thanks!
I am EECMY Lutheran and i want know more about the Lutheran rosary ?
Have you seen Jordan Cooper's video on it?
You should host a friendly debate between Pr. Bryan Wolfmueller and a Catholic apologist
A couple points from a wavering Catholic (with some measure of philosophical/theological training):
(1) The Catholic Church also proclaims that the reception of Communion forgives us our sins. Mortal sins, however, make us unworthy to participate in that fellowship with other believers and to participate sacramentally in the Communion. However, the Scriptural witness is not a mere "forgiveness" but that, without receiving Communion, one does not have "life within you."
(2) Ex opere operato actually means the opposite of what he explained. It means that, while one will ultimately participate in the sacrifice by receiving the sacrament with less understanding or diminished devotion, one will not receive the full benefit of sacramental grace in all of its strength and vitality.
(3) Properly speaking, the ministerial priesthood is not necessary for baptism or marriage, per se in Roman Catholicism. So, his notion there is inaccurate. Likewise, because Catholics distinguish between liceity (lawfulness) and validity, they also do not rely on the Pope for the validity and potency of their sacraments. Contrast that with the Eastern Orthodox view, which views that those not united to the Church lack grace and therefore cannot convey the effect or power of the sacraments to others, thus rather conflating liceity and validity.
(4) The approach on the normative function of the Scriptures presents an interesting problem. If the Scripture is the only authority that regulates correct belief (sola scriptura), then what authority corrected the Church before the Scriptures were compiled and agreed upon? And considering that the Church up until Luther did not accept this sole normative function of the Scriptures, how could one accept as "useful" the forms that were specifically created in the context of such beliefs. Rather, we see in Luther an utter distaste for any kind of sacrificial concept of the Mass (or oblation), even though the liturgy developed and took shape in the context of believing that the Divine Liturgy was a sacrifice.
(5) It strikes me that Luther's view of James and his preference for the "theological treatises" (that are actually pastoral treatises, but whatever) of Romans and Ephesians demonstrates how influenced he was by the Western scholarly theological tradition. However, it is problematic because it suggests that the testimony, as is found in James, of the Christian life is somehow distinct from our conception of God. James's letter is profoundly theological, precisely because, in showing what the Christian life looks life, he is showing us what God is like and how he saves us (as if those concepts could be separated).
Its "poured out for *many*..."
Like he said, words matter.
I’m sorry, I’m not quite sure what you’re referring to. Care to bring me up to speed?
@@GospelSimplicity christ's words when He gave the chalice
Question : Luther was a priest. But Lutheranism does believe in priesthood. So..., Luther did not believe in the sacrament that he himself received???
Please correct me if the former statements are wrong.
@@thejoshuaproject3809 Yes, yes, I'm aware that he left the priesthood. But the fact that he entered in the first place means that he initially believed in the sacrament of ordination to the priesthood. I'm just curious of how different is the ordination of the priesthood from that of pastors in Lutheranism, and why does he have a strong disbelief on the priesthood. I get his disbelieve in papacy, but priesthood is a bit, uh, more common(?), especially because it exists in Orthodox Christianity as well.
I have not been very exposed to Lutheranism so pardon my ignorance.
The main problem with the Misery Synod is that it's based in Missouri.
Very edifying. Thank you.
My pleasure!
I have a question for Pastor Wolfmuller. You present a convincing case for Lutheranism, and as a Catholic, my issue is somewhat similar to yours. You have an issue with trusting in the teaching authority of the Magisterium based on the Papal office. I have an issue trusting in the authenticity of the accuracy of Luther's teaching based on just him. He makes reference to the fathers, but it is a far stretch for me to trust in the wisdom of one man's reading of the fathers above the series of councils, saints, other fathers of the church up to the Reformation. Brilliant as he was, he is one Augustine versus the whole series of others.
It requires me to believe that after the Apostolic Fathers, or up to which ever period of Fathers you ascribe to, that the church erred and allowed error to creep in. Here I refer to error not the corruption of practices. Overt dependence on saints, devotions, etc. I find that hard to believe.
I thank you for the wonderful sharing and this deeper understanding of Lutheranism, though I am curious too if your views are similar to the European and other Lutheran synods across the world. To what extent can I take your portrayal of Lutheranism to be how all Lutherans see their own position. I noted in the comments a particular disagreement on the perpetual virginity of our Blessed Mother.
The national Swedish church is Lutheran. They are more than a bit liberal and shrinking fast.
Most liberal churches are on a fast decline
@@GospelSimplicity This is also true of the Roman Church as well in Europe and North America. The growth if any is from immigrants from Latin America and even they are looking to other churches.
If you are Swedish. There is the Mission Province. It is A confessional Lutheran Church in Sweden that rejected the liberal thinking of that church that is in altar and pulpit fellowship with the LCMS.
@@drewS1818 There are numerous Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Tewahedo churches in Sweden.
Wow! Where is the simplicity?
It's simple in that we don't need to explain away inconvenient Bible verses about Baptism, the Lord's Supper, Absolution, Ordination, etc.
He made a mistake, we have 7 sacraments, baptism anyone can do it and marriage is confected by the spouses
This is correct about the sacrament of matrimony. The bride and groom are marrying each other. They exchange vows, not the priest. The priest is there to ask if they have come there freely and without reservation, if they will love and honor each other as long as you live and if they will accept children lovingly from God and raise them according to the law of Christ and his Church. After he obtains their consent he has them speak their vows to each other, not him.
A deacon can also officiate a wedding, though he can’t offer Mass.
www.catholicweddinghelp.com/topics/catholic-wedding-vows.htm
Dear Mygoalwogel: It is The Roman Catholic Church that has been a good demonstration of
doctrinal unity (No tampering with what is Scriptural or Un-Scriptural).
I became Lutheran
MARTIN LUTHER ON THE IMPORTANCE OF FREE-WILL
“…with regard to God, and in all that bears on salvation or damnation, (man) has no ‘free-will’, but is a captive, prisoner and bondslave, either to the will of God, or to the will of Satan.” (ref. From the essay, ‘Bondage of the Will,’ ‘Martin Luther: Selections From His Writings, ed. by Dillenberger, Anchor Books, 1962 p. 190).
“Man is like a horse. Does God leap into the saddle? The horse is obedient and accommodates itself to every movement of the rider and goes whither he wills it. Does God throw down the reins? Then Satan leaps upon the back of the animal, which bends, goes and submits to the spurs and caprices of its new rider… Therefore, necessity, not free will, is the controlling principle of our conduct. God is the author of what is evil as well as of what is good, and, as He bestows happiness on those who merit it not, so also does He damn others who deserve not their fate.” (ref. ‘De Servo Arbitrio’, 7, 113 seq., quoted by O’Hare, in ‘The Facts About Luther, TAN Books, 1987, pp. 266-267).
“His (Judas) will was the work of God; God by His almighty power moved his will as He does all that is in this world.” (ref. De servo Arbitrio, against man’s free will).
MARTIN LUTHER ON CHRISTIAN LIVING
“Be a sinner, and let your sins be strong, but let your trust in Christ be stronger, and rejoice in Christ who is the victor over sin, death, and the world. We will commit sins while we are here, for this life is not a place where justice resides… No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day.” (ref. ‘Let Your Sins Be Strong, from ‘The Wittenberg Project;’ ‘The Wartburg Segment’, translated by Erika Flores, from Dr. Martin Luther’s Saemmtliche Schriften, Letter No. 99, 1 Aug. 1521. - Cf. Also Denifle’s Luther et Lutheranisme, Etude Faite d’apres les sources. Translation by J. Paquier (Paris, A. Picard, 1912-13), VOl. II, pg. 404))
“Do not ask anything of your conscience; and if it speaks, do not listen to it; if it insists, stifle it, amuse yourself; if necessary, commit some good big sin, in order to drive it away. Conscience is the voice of Satan, and it is necessary always to do just the contrary of what Satan wishes.” (ref. J. Dollinger, La Reforme et les resultants qu’elle a produits. (Trans. E. Perrot, Paris, Gaume, 1848-49), Vol III, pg. 248).
First time I've been early enough for a premier ahahaha
Glad you could join!
@@GospelSimplicity Thanks! :)
With my eyes closed, he sounds very much like Fr Robert Barron. 😊
MARTIN LUTHER ON THE VALUE OF SACRED SCRIPTURE
“To my mind it (the book of the Apocalypse) bears upon it no marks of an apostolic or prophetic character… Everyone may form his own judgment of this book; as for myself, I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it.” (ref. ammtliche Werke, 63, pp. 169-170, ‘The Facts About Luther,’ O’Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p. 203). “The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible.” (ref. The Facts About Luther, O’Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p. 202).
“…the epistle of St. James is an epistle full of straw, because it contains nothing evangelical.” (ref. ‘Preface to the New Testament,’ ed. Dillenberger, p. 19. - Cf. Also Jean Janssen, L’Allemagne et la Reforme. (Trans. E. Paris, Plon, 1887-1911). Vol II, Pg. 218).
Here is how LCMS differ from most Christians...they teach that their pastors speak for Jesus on earth and it is through the pastors that you are saved by God's grace. Their clergy hold the keys to heaven and are the way you are saved .
Should we negate Gods ability to immediately do anything
Looking forward to this talk ! I would also be interested in a talk regards Anabaptists . The Bruderhof and hutterite communities are very interesting.
They are charming, in their own ways...
There are literally Ads every 3 minutes . . . STOP
Sorry, TH-cam auto places them and I hadn't reviewed them yet. Been in class all day. Just fixed it
Is the Sons of God overcome the world then
Pastor Brian may be an expert in Lutheranism, but he expressed SO many false statements about Catholicism. We never bow to “bread” . The Pope is a bishop, the Eucharist is the source and summit of faith.....
This is troll...it's not Pastor Wolfmueller.
Only the Catholic church has the priesthood of Jesus to consecrate the bread and wine into the body and the blood of Jesus Christ in the Holy mass. Jesus only funded ONE CHURCH, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. The Catholic church has 51 Eucharistic miracles that happened during the Holy mass. Jesus is telling us that HE IS present in His Divinity, Soul and Body in the Eucharistic sacrament. You cannot have the Eucharistic sacrament in the protestant church. What they give you there is just a piece of regular cracker and grape juice. And that is all. You need the Eucharistic sacrament for sanctification to be able to enter the kingdom of Heaven. Jesus Himself talk about this in the Holy Bible. 1. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me (John 6:54-57).
2. For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes (1 Corinthians 11:26).
3. They devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life, to the breaking of the bread and to the prayers. Awe came upon everyone, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles (Acts 2:42-43).
4. Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf (1 Corinthians 10:17).
5. I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died; this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die (John 6:48-50).
He's bashing Catholics. You can disagree, but don't bash. I'm in an interfaith marriage, Catholic and Jewish, his approach is disappointing.
What did you find as bashing? I like to think it's possible to disagree without bashing
I like the pastor and listen to his podcast but I am a little perplexed by his opposition to the Eucharist being a means of grace and forgiveness of sins and being only for forgiveness of sins. Obviously (at least to me) partaking in the Eucharist and having sins forgiving would in fact lead to a deepening of grace. Also, his statement that Catholics have only one sacrament, the priest or pope, is fundamentally to misunderstand the sacramental system of the Catholic Church. In addition, his statement about the canon seems to uphold the Catholic position that the Bible is the book of the church and not the other way around. The Church could exist without the Bible but the Bible would not exist without the Church.
Its a bit strange to me too as a former confessional Lutheran. I think that Lutheran theology has also called the Eucharist (and Baptism) a "means of grace". They just mean something different - i.e. that it's an "occasion" of Grace, but not a "cause" of Grace (I am simplifying a bit but that is the rough distinction). EDIT - ACTUALLY HE NEVER SAYS IT IS NOT A MEANS OF GRACE. HE NEVER MENTIONS THE PHRASE. IT IS TRUE THAT LUTHERANS HAVE A DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDING WHEN THEY SAY "MEANS OF GRACE".
My guess is that Luther’s stand of faith alone does not allow the Eucharist to be a means of grace. It is a little unclear to me how predestination fits into all this but I feel it does. Calvin is credited with predestination but Lutheran doctrine is under credited for this. I in fact find the doctrine abhorrent.
@@ChristopherWentling . See this video from Pastor and Doctor Jordan Cooper who is quite deep in confessional Lutheran theology. Clearly it is Lutheran teaching that the sacraments can be described as a means of grace. th-cam.com/video/2A9G_K_T6-c/w-d-xo.html . As noted above, they don't mean exactly the same thing as Catholics when they use the phrase but of course are much closer to us than Calvinists etc.
@@ChristopherWentling Whoops. I watched the whole video. He never says the Eucharist is not a "means of grace". He never says that. So I will edit my other comments.
@@toddvoss52 thanks for the link, I will watch it. I probably should have been more careful before writing anything. I saw another video where Pastor made a distinction in the imparted grace in the Eucharist and my brain paraphrased it into ”means of grace.” I sometimes have a hard time understanding the subtlety of Lutheran theology when distinguishing itself from Catholicism. This isn’t the failure of Pastor Wolfmueller but more my own failing.
New Testament apocrypha? So we are ignoring the councils that established the Canon. So the claim that Lutherans were not saying something new is defeated here.
I beg to disagree, If every Christian is a theologian, well, we could have more david koresh and jim jones.
What he's saying is everyone has a responsibility to learn and think about the faith. If you're doing those things, you're doing theology. Thus, you're a theologian
39:00
"They believe in the real presence and the sacraments, but they're not Catholic."
So I will watch this when I can, but we Anglicans and Lutherans generally consider ourselves Catholic. The problem is that the Papacy makes the false claim that they constitute the entirety of the Catholic Church, and the fact that many Protestants cede that claim to them is a tragedy. We are Catholic.
That's a fair point. I think the gap here is between the original meaning and the common understanding. I've talked before on this channel about catholicity and "Catholic" vs "catholic" but it just gets so messy clarifying so I generally just use the term in the colloquial sense of referring to the Roman Catholic Church. However, I'm all for a retrieval of the term and people who stress evangelical catholicity. I just think it's easier in writing than in youtube videos
@@GospelSimplicity I tend to use the term "Roman Catholic"; some Roman Catholics get offended by it, but there are many problems with being offended by it:
1) The Roman Catholic Church itself has officially referred to itself in this way.
2) It is literally our theology. Rome's theology that "there is no salvation outside of the (Roman) Catholic Church" is certainly offensive.
3) It isn't a denial of their catholicity; it's not even a denial of their claim to be the "One True Church".
I did a video on this recently:
th-cam.com/video/zttSS3u2qIE/w-d-xo.html
@@barelyprotestant5365 thanks for the link! I’ll have to check out your Trent Horn rebuttals as well. He’s coming on the show in a couple weeks
@@GospelSimplicity glad to hear that! I also have a few moderated debates with Roman Catholics on my channel: one on the Papacy and two on the question of whether or not Anglicans (I'm an Anglican) have valid Holy Orders. Long story short: if Anglicans have valid Holy Orders (in light of the 1552 Prayer Book), that seriously calls into question the validity of the Papacy since the Papacy has formally pronounced our Holy Orders "absolutely null and utterly void" (Apostolicae Curae).
My hope is to debate Trent Horn on the Papacy some day. Tell him that! :P
define ‘entirety.’ You made the claim that “the papacy makes the false claim that they constitute the entirety of the Catholic Church,” like What? The Catholic Church is not the papacy, and no pope has said that they are the Catholic Church. What are you saying? Also, are you saying that Catholic is an euphemism for Christian?
Just so you know it were the Protestants that called the Roman Catholics, Catholics, before that we Catholics called ourselves Christians and the European Continent was Christiandom.
Idk you seem very confused.
How old are you??
21
To learned and above mosts heads so how much value is words that convey nothing to others that want to learn
The foundation ? The corner stone is Who ?
Coming from a Catholic background (but not currently Catholic), I have more respect for the more liturgical traditions of Protestantism like the Lutherans and Anglicans than I do for the American Evangelicals and such. From where I'm standing, it seems that Evangelicals have a problem with throwing away good Biblical practices and doctrines simply because of their association with Catholics. So they don't have a high view of the sacraments, and they distrust church history and classical apologetics/theology and they don't have doctrinal confessions and they know nothing about the Saints and Early Church Fathers. These things are good, but they're also something that Catholics engage in. Not just Catholics obviously, but Catholics do have these things. To me, doing away with them just because Catholics do them and we're trying to move away from that is silly. It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Instead of throwing away everything and starting over from scratch like they did, we should look at how the Church has always done things and the traditions handed down through the ages, then test them against Holy Scripture and prune the things that don't work while keeping the things that do, like the Lutherans, Anglicans, and, to some extent, the Reformed. We shouldn't be dogmatic about tradition like the Catholics and Orthodox as that's idolatry and leads to abuse. The classical Protestant middle position, I think, is best. As the saying goes, the solution to one extreme is very rarely the opposite extreme.
I need to study Him