Is the Papacy the Anti-Christ?

Before, I answer this question I must state that this is not an Anti-Roman Catholic Blog. I am responding to statements from the Lutheran Confessions (Apology 15:18-19, Apology 24: 97-98, Smalcald Articles II-II-25, Smalcald Articles II-IV-10-14, Treatsie 39-41,57). But the Lutheran Confessions and the Scriptures define as doing the work of the Anti-Christ any Religious Gathering that shields people from the truth of the Gospel (Matthew 24:23-24, Matthew 24:5, Mark 13:21-22, 1 John 2:18-22, 2 John 7). This should not be confused with the ulitmate Antichrist in the Devil who is taught of in Revelation 17-18, and 2 Thessolonians 2. So these verses make a uniform witness that their are many false teachers who have sprung-up over the history of Christianity. The Lutheran Confessions were reacting very strongly in that, they felt Roman Catholic theology of the 16th century took people away from the merits of Christ. . The Council of Trent from 1545 to 1563 spoke of Justification by Faith as Heresy. So what the Lutheran Confessions define as the Anti-Christ is anything that teaches people anything other than the merits of Christ for salvation. So the New Age movement, and people from many Church bodies would fit this description.

This is not to say their aren't still Theological Disagreements between the brand of Orthodox Lutheranism that I follow, and Rome. This is inspite of agreements like The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. Though, if this document was much of a breakthrough at all should be debated. A lot of the arguments for this agreement seem centered on the idea of Roman Catholics accpeting Salvation is by Grace, and Christ's Merits. Roman Catholics made this belief clear at the Council of Trent.

However, problems still exist. The Roman doctrine of Justification as taught in their Cathecisms still makes Grace to much of a process in which grace is continually infused over time, where as Historical Lutheranism has also viewed the implementation of Grace as Forensic in that it is done once, and for all (Colossians 2:13-14). Rome still defines Grace as leading to good works, and this what JDDJ agreed to. This runs into the problem of making salvation into a Mormon like system. This very easily leads to the idea that Saving Grace, can be found in Pagan Religions, when Justification isn't defined alone by the merits of Christ. Although their are American-Evangelical Churches, and Churches in other denomiations I could of which I could offer similar critiques.

I am also critical of other Roman doctrines like: Praying to Saints, and their Doctrine of the Lord's Supper. Both ascribe qualities to finite human beings, that are never given scriptually since as omnipotence, and making the Lord's Supper valid. Disagreements also exist about the Role of the Pope-a Non-Biblical Office, and Mary. But the Major difference deals with Justification as Forensic as opposed to Infused.

That being said I would praise the Roman Catholic Church in they do have an accurate view of the Trinity, and does believe in Salvation by Grace through Christ. I would never say the Roman Catholic Church does not have Christian memebership, and leadership. I do admire Rome's strong stance on Abortion, and their level of doctrinal disciplined as levied against heretics like Matthew Fox. But I am only writing to point out what is meant by refrences in the Lutheran Confessions to the Papacy as the Anti-Christ . While, at the same time seeking to honestly address areas of Theological disagreement. If someone suggests to point out theological disagreements with another denomiaton, I would do it.