Ok… I was suspecting that you’ve only made a cursory examination of our theology,this post indicates it.I think you have not only failed to hold them, but dispense with alot of them altogether. Apostolic succession for one thing, the veneration of icons and sacred relics, monasticism and prayer to the saints. Orthodox, Catholics and orientals could be wrong on this, but I don’t think so. It’s more than just some loose cannon Lutheran churches, its the church as a whole.
Really?No they didn’t and that is an insult to the
integrity of the Church. If they did it wouldn’t be dogma.
Actually, our two main emphases are word and sacrament, but I understand your point, and provide a simple, basic quote from Luther: "There is no justification without sanctification, no forgiveness without renewal of life, no real faith from which the fruits of new obedience do not grow.”=IgnatianPhilo;12004276]I don’t think your theology is shallow, rather I think you have two main emphases. Sola fide and Sola scriptura, around which the entire theology is interpreted. These form of the base of Lutheran theology whenever I hear a Lutheran speak. Sola scriptura in that you are fiercely loyal to scripture and want to ground nearly everything in it. That view has problems. Sola fide to the point where I have not heard a Lutheran exclaim you must change your life, you must devote yourself to God. Can a Lutheran even say that? (Yes I also know that you approve of Good works, but see it from the angle of Monergism instead of Synergy. These emphases are not based in the fathers, though certainty you can find fathers with those beliefs (maybe not monergism but I do not know) but rather from Luther.
Faith is a divine work in us.** It changes us and makes us to be born anew of God (John 1). It kills the old Adam and makes altogether different people, in heart and spirit and mind and powers, and it brings with it the Holy Spirit.**
Oh, it is a living, busy, active, mighty thing, this faith. And so it is impossible for it not to do good works incessantly. It does not ask whether there are good works to do, but before the question rises, it has already done them, and is always at the doing of them.
He who does not these works is a faithless man. He gropes and looks about after faith and good works and knows neither what faith is nor what good works are, though he talks and talks, with many words about faith and good works.
Faith is a living, daring confidence in God’s grace, so sure and certain that a man would stake his life on it a thousand times. This confidence in God’s grace and knowledge of it makes men glad and bold and happy in dealing with God and all His creatures.
And this is the work of the Holy Spirit in faith. Hence a man is ready and glad, without compulsion, to do good to everyone, to serve everyone, to suffer everything, in love and praise to God, who has shown him this grace.
**And thus it is impossible to separate works from faith, quite as impossible as to separate burning and shining from fire. **Beware, therefore, of your own false notions and of the idle talkers, who would be wise enough to make decisions about faith and good works, and yet are the greatest fools.
Therefore, pray to God to work faith in you. Else you will remain forever without faith, whatever you think or do.”
I guess the answer is yes, because we preach Christ crucified. But when what Luther says reflects this, why should we want to exclude what he says? In the same way, we should not reject what Pope Francis says simply because he is not Lutheran, when what he says preaches Christ crucified.I suppose the question is, can your church stand without regard to Luther, the Lutheran tradition and the bible alone? I don’t think so. There is a tradition which cannot be contradicted within the Lutheran church, despite claims to bible alone. I do not see how Lutheran’s can claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic faith (of Nicea) when they are so radically disconnected from the traditions before them.
Says who?You are not iconoclasts, but you reject Nicea 2 all the same.
If you had read my statements carefully, I was very specific and I do not think I was in error. Regarding apostolic succession, you ultimately have to hold in order for your church to have any legitimacy that Apostolic succession, via laying down of hands of the clergy from one generation to another is unnecessary for genuine service as clergy in the church. What good is to say that you want it? Why do you want it? The only reason you might want it, is to fulfill a lacking within the ministry of the Lutheran church which I do not think any faithful Lutheran truly believes.Ok… I was suspecting that you’ve only made a cursory examination of our theology, but this post indicated truly indicates it.
Per our confessions we would like to have apostolic succession. We have icons. We can have relics. We’d like “monasteries [to] be restored to the useful purposes for which they had been founded”
I’m not trying to convince you that we’re anything other than far form perfect, but we’re not full-on pants-on-head crazy either.
If you could accept this:Says who?
Jon
I can generally agree with these statements once clarified.Actually, our two main emphases are word and sacrament, but I understand your point, and provide a simple, basic quote from Luther: "There is no justification without sanctification, no forgiveness without renewal of life, no real faith from which the fruits of new obedience do not grow.”
True saving faith must have accompanied with it renewal of life.
Luther, quoted in the confessions:
I guess the answer is yes, because we preach Christ crucified. But when what Luther says reflects this, why should we want to exclude what he says? In the same way, we should not reject what Pope Francis says simply because he is not Lutheran, when what he says preaches Christ crucified.
Jon
We would be unwilling to say he condemned himselfReally?
Saint Thomas Aquinas would say otherwise - he felt that the Blessed Virgin would have to at one time had to been sinful otherwise she would not have to have been redeemed by Christ.
It’s not that Lutherans think Saint Thomas Aquinas is correct, it’s just that we’re unwilling to say that he’s condemned himself.
Presbyer ordination, like saying 'one holy Christian and Apostolic Church" in the Nicene Creed are just issues of the LCMS being stubborn. The Lutheran-Catholic Dialogue explore the historic necessity facing the early Lutherans after the Reformation and why there were no ordinations in Germany for 40 years. These “continental” Lutherans ran out of priests because the local Catholic bishops refused to ordain these Lutheran priests. That did not occur elsewhere because the local 'Sees" of Sweden/ Estonia etc became Lutheran.Presbyter ordination does not need to be in quotes. It is attested to, along with apostolic succession, in the confessions as valid under divine law.
I am quite aware of the attempts among Lutherans to reclaim AS, and I applaud those efforts, but presbyter ordination is equally valid.
Jon
Ok, then we’re on the same page as far as that.We would be unwilling to say he condemned himself
either as it was declared dogma centuries after Acquinas
kicked the bucket.
I don’t think your being disingenuous - and I understand that written communication comes across as being more dire than maybe is intended.If you had read my statements carefully, I was very specific and I do not think I was in error.
Could you explain how being part of the worlds-longest-game-of-tag is necessarily to proclaim the Gospel and receive the Sacraments? Our claim to being apostolic is a claim about our apostolic teaching.Regarding apostolic succession, you ultimately have to hold in order for your church to have any legitimacy that Apostolic succession, via laying down of hands of the clergy from one generation to another is unnecessary for genuine service as clergy in the church.
We’d like to remove any barrier to reconciliation.What good is to say that you want it? Why do you want it? The only reason you might want it, is to fulfill a lacking within the ministry of the Lutheran church which I do not think any faithful Lutheran truly believes.
We have relics and icons - and we’re free to pray with them. It’s just not a requirement. Attached is a photo of a Lutheran church not ten miles away from me.True you do not reject Icons, but you neither venerate them nor have any desire to possess relics and venerate those relics and icons.
Some Lutherans reacted too strongly, it is certain.Also relics were an idea totally rejected by the early Lutheran’s in their exchange with the Patriarch of Constantinople on the basis that it is not found anywhere within scripture, in fact so were alot of things the Orthodox accepted and still accept to this day.
The quote I gave you about monasteries is from our Confessions - we have nothing against proper monasteries.In so far as monasteries go, I see Martin Luther’s rejection of vows of celibacy and the rejection of “monkery” as an attitude which pervades Lutheranism (maybe not your opinion) to this day. I also see in the same document the argument against monasticism which I have heard protestants (including Lutherans) make to this day, that it creates two classes of Christians and that such a thing, is not found in scripture. That the monk tries to earn his salvation by doing lots of good things, instead of trusting in God.
If Lutherans have given you the idea that we reject AS, icons, monasteries then feel free to what them over the head - preferably with copy of our confessions. That there are Lutherans that don’t understand our own confessions is sadly no surprise!Perhaps Lutheran thought isn’t as universal as I once thought because I see you arguing something different than what Luther or those before you have, indeed what some currently have argued. I could be wrong, but I don’t think i have erred in judging what you ultimately reject.
Sure! Where the Gospel is proclaimed and the Sacraments are administered - such as in your church and in the Roman Catholic church. Generally, we express it as a non-exlusive claim for our own church.But these are side issues to my main point of trying to understand how the Lutheran church understands itself as the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic church. Do not Lutheran’s for instance hold the possibility that there are other true church communions besides their own?
You might find this interesting, then.If you can accept such a decree, I won’t say anything further. But I believe no protestant church can accept such a decree. Except for really high church Anglicans but even that’s a stretch. I think ultimately if you were to accept Nicea 2, Luther would have to be rejected.
7 The Seventh Ecumenical Council, the Second Council of Nicaea in 787, which rejected iconoclasm and restored the veneration of icons in the churches, was not part of the tradition received by the Reformation. Lutherans, however, rejected the iconoclasm of the 16th century, and affirmed the distinction between adoration due to the Triune God alone and all other forms of veneration (CA 21). Through historical research this council has become better known. Nevertheless it does not have the same significance for Lutherans as it does for the Orthodox. Yet, Lutherans and Orthodox are in agreement that the Second Council of Nicaea confirms the christological teaching of the earlier councils and in setting forth the role of images (icons) in the lives of the faithful reaffirms the reality of the incarnation of the eternal Word of God, when it states: "The more frequently, Christ, Mary, the mother of God, and the saints are seen, the more are those who see them drawn to remember and long for those who serve as models, and to pay these icons the tribute of salutation and respectful veneration. Certainly this is not the full adoration in accordance with our faith, which is properly paid only to the divine nature, but it resembles that given to the figure of the honored and life-giving cross, and also to the holy books of the gospels and to other sacred objects" (Definition of the Second Council of Nicaea)."There is a problem here Houston- both with “one” andI don’t think your being disingenuous - and I understand that written communication comes across as being more dire than maybe is intended.
Could you explain how being part of the worlds-longest-game-of-tag is necessarily to proclaim the Gospel and receive the Sacraments? Our claim to being apostolic is a claim about our apostolic teaching.
We’d like to remove any barrier to reconciliation.
We have relics and icons - and we’re free to pray with them. It’s just not a requirement. Attached is a photo of a Lutheran church not ten miles away from me.
Some Lutherans reacted too strongly, it is certain.
The quote I gave you about monasteries is from our Confessions - we have nothing against proper monasteries.
If Lutherans have given you the idea that we reject AS, icons, monasteries then feel free to what them over the head - preferably with copy of our confessions. That there are Lutherans that don’t understand our own confessions is sadly no surprise!
Sure! Where the Gospel is proclaimed and the Sacraments are administered - such as in your church and in the Roman Catholic church. Generally, we express it as a non-exlusive claim for our own church.
That there are wayward people in His church is no surprise. If I find a wayward Catholic, does that negate Catholic teaching?So we have to say that Lutheranism is not “One”.
For one thing it is not unified within itself or with
any other group and has no final “judge” to be
visibly or physically accessed.
You got me! I don’t make the claim that their practices are confessional, let alone apostolic.How in the world does a SOLA SCRIPTURA
Church consider ordaining married lesbians to be
indicative of apostolic succession?
But you gr a problem there Ben- it is a LutheranThat there are wayward people in His church is no surprise. If I find a wayward Catholic, does that negate Catholic teaching?
You got me! I don’t make the claim that their practices are confessional, let alone apostolic.
Great question!But you gr a problem there Ben- it is a Lutheran
Church with a gay Lutheran reverend married to
another Lutheran. And you are saying what? This
is Apostolic? It is a legitimate Lutheran church. Do ALL
Lutheran Churches agree with this behavior? If not
why not? And where do you go for a resolution so
you can be once again ONE and APOSTOLIC?
Iowajay responded to this with what I had understood. But what, here, explicitly would I have to reject Luther over?If you could accept this:
We, therefore, following the royal pathway and the divinely inspired authority of our Holy Fathers and the traditions of the Catholic Church (for, as we all know, the Holy Spirit indwells her), define with all certitude and accuracy that just as the figure of the precious and life-giving Cross, so also the venerable and holy images, as well in painting and mosaic as of other fit materials, should be set forth in the holy churches of God, and on the sacred vessels and on the vestments and on hangings and in pictures both in houses and by the wayside, to wit, the figure of our Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ, of our spotless Lady, the Mother of God, of the honourable Angels, of all Saints and of all pious people. For by so much more frequently as they are seen in artistic representation, by so much more readily are men lifted up to the memory of their prototypes, and to a longing after them; and to these should be given due salutation and honourable reverence ( aspasmon kai timhtikhn proskunh - sin ), not indeed that true worship of faith ( latreian >) which pertains alone to the divine nature; but to these, as to the figure of the precious and life-giving Cross and to the Book of the Gospels and to the other holy objects, incense and lights may be offered according to ancient pious custom. For the honour which is paid to the image passes on to that which the image represents, and he who reveres the image reveres in it the subject represented. For thus the teaching of our holy Fathers, that is the tradition of the Catholic Church, which from one end of the earth to the other hath received the Gospel, is strengthened. Thus we follow Paul, who spake in Christ, and the whole divine Apostolic company and the holy Fathers, holding fast the traditions which we have received. So we sing prophetically the triumphal hymns of the Church, “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Sion; Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem. Rejoice and be glad with all thy heart. The Lord hath taken away from thee the oppression of thy adversaries; thou art redeemed from the hand of thine enemies. The Lord is a King in the midst of thee; thou shalt not see evil any more, and peace be unto thee forever.”
Those, therefore who dare to think or teach otherwise, or as wicked heretics to spurn the traditions of the Church and to invent some novelty, or else to reject some of those things which the Church hath received (e.g., the Book of the Gospels, or the image of the cross, or the pictorial icons, or the holy reliques of a martyr), or evilly and sharply to devise anything subversive of the lawful traditions of the Catholic Church or to turn to common uses the sacred vessels or the venerable monasteries,[1] if they be Bishops or Clerics, we command that they be deposed; if religious or laics, that they be cut off from communion.
The holy Synod cried out: So we all believe, we all are so minded, we all give our consent and have signed. This is the faith of the Apostles, this is the faith of the orthodox, this is the faith which hath made firm the whole world. Believing in one God, to be celebrated in Trinity, we salute the honourable images ! Those who do not so hold, let them be anathema. Those who do not thus think, let them be driven far away from the Church. For we follow the most ancient legislation of the Catholic Church. We keep the laws of the Fathers. We anathematize those who add anything to or take anything away from the Catholic
We anathematize the introduced novelty of the revilers of Christians. We salute the venerable images. We place under anathema those who do not do this. Anathema to them who presume to apply to the venerable images the things said in Holy Scripture about. idols. Anathema to those who do not salute the holy and venerable images. Anathema to those who call the sacred images idols. Anathema to those who say that Christians resort to the sacred images as to gods. Anathema to those who say that any other delivered us from idols except Christ our God. Anathema to those who dare to say that at any time the Catholic Church received idols.
Many years to the Emperors, etc., etc.
fordham.edu/halsall/source/nicea2-dec.asp
If you can accept such a decree, I won’t say anything further. But I believe no protestant church can accept such a decree. Except for really high church Anglicans but even that’s a stretch. I think ultimately if you were to accept Nicea 2, Luther would have to be rejected.
K so this particular church in Kansas City could maybeGreat question!
The Lutheran church has written documents called the Confessions that we view as reflecting Scripture - if a church claims to be ‘Lutheran’ and yet doesn’t follow the Confessions then it is in need of correction as it’s certainly not following apostolic teaching.
Sadly, one could argue that there are many Lutheran churches that are no longer steadfast in their proclamation of the Gospel.
Let me add this preface:K so this particular church in Kansas City could maybe
be compared to the “Evangelical Catholic Church” just
started in Bend by a former RC priest advertising gay marriage
etc. ok I get that. But what happens in our case is
we just say well not in communion with Rome bye bye.
Is that how Lutherans deal with this as well?
The Church in Kansas City is I believe ECLA or
something like that.
So what do Lutherans consider the “primary” or
“real” if you will Lutheran Church and what is a
“transgressors” Church do to speak?
And where does this correction you speak of come
from?
And is it a common phenom now for Lutherans
to appoint known married gays as pastors and reverends?
Yes. But primacy and authority in a non militaryLet me add this preface:
"I do not think there are many among Bishops that will be saved, but many more that perish.”
St. John Chrysostom, Extract from St. John Chrysostom, Homily III on Acts 1:12.2
With that in mind:
To figure out if an Lutheran church is practicing the ancient faith is rather easy even as a lay-person: compare their actions and teachings against the confessions and scripture. From there, it’s quite obvious that the abuses you are seeing are not as Christ would have us act and therefore not Lutheran.
Lutherans handle it in similar manor as the Catholic church does - we admonish the sinner, and if that fails, we break of communion with them. We’re a bit strict, so even some of our more confessional churches are not in communion with each other.
Don’t get me wrong, I can see the appeal of a Papal authority - and we acknowledge the primacy of Peter’s office. I pray that our differences narrow - especially in these secular times.