Anyone Reading From Conflict to Communion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randy_Carson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ve not read this particularly but I feel that God has put a love for Protestants into my heart (I used to go to Presbyterian PCA and Lutheran churches).

I’d be very interested in reading it and seeing different viewpoints.
 
I got 30 pages into before I realized that there’s no Gospel in it. I skimmed the later and appreciated the efforts involved, but can’t say that much good fruit will come of this document itself.

Frankly there’s some troubling phrases in it - “What happened in the past cannot be changed, but what is remembered of the past and how it is remembered can, with the passage of time, indeed change. Remembrance makes the past present.”

Sounds like revisionism and I’d rather ask for forgiveness from my Catholic friends for the wrongs that we have done, than to ‘forget’ those sin in a censoring of history.

The document seems the work of committees and of bureaucrats and not of the church.

While I appreciate the sentiment and desire for unity - true Christian unity will not come from diminishing ourselves till we reduce our teaching to mush, but will come when we see the Christ in each other’s church, and with both reluctance and joy we kneel around the altar.

my $.02
 
Randy_Carson said:
lutheranworld.org/sites/default/files/From%20Conflict%20to%20Communion.pdf

If so, what are your thoughts?

:coffeeread:
Click to expand...
Seems like an accurate and carefully worded document for the most part. My critiques and comments are:
  1. I didn’t see any mention of Luther’s rejection of the allegorical method of biblical interpretation. This constitutes a major turning point in the history of biblical studies and reading Scripture and thus is a gross oversight.
  2. I don’t think the section on Luther’s understanding of Tradition and how it works in actual practice was very strong. Luther’s explanation of the validity of infant baptism would have worked well here.
  3. The document makes it seem like Luther was some sort of one-man band running the Reformation, although the authors do (very) obliquely mentioned that ordinary lay people were involved. Certainly Luther was a vitally important figure, but the Reformation is more about ordinary people accepting a new paradigm of understanding Scripture and their roles within Christianity than one person’s particular theology. If Luther’s ideas hadn’t struck a chord with a broad populace, he would have simply ended up like Hus.
  4. The rift between the German people and Rome was much deeper, older and more established than the document lets on. Certainly Luther fanned the flames, but this conflict had been smoldering for centuries. (Read the 11th-12th century Carmina Burana, for a taste.) This is akin to saying that the English Reformation started with Henry VIII instead of Henry II.
 
Some thoughtful replies. What is happening between Catholics and Lutherans has gone under the radar, so to speak, for the average layman. But both Catholics and Lutherans will likely realize soon that things are changing.
 
Dave_Noonan said:
  1. The rift between the German people and Rome was much deeper, older and more established than the document lets on. Certainly Luther fanned the flames, but this conflict had been smoldering for centuries. (Read the 11th-12th century Carmina Burana, for a taste.) This is akin to saying that the English Reformation started with Henry VIII instead of Henry II.
Click to expand...
Which part of the Carmina Burana? I’m singing Carl Orff’s setting of it to music in my High School choir, and God is never even mentioned in it.
 
BrethrenBoy said:
Which part of the Carmina Burana? I’m singing Carl Orff’s setting of it to music in my High School choir, and God is never even mentioned in it.
Click to expand...
You’re singing only a few pieces of poetry selected by Orff. The Carmina Burana is a huge collection, containing numerous invectives and satirization of abuses within the Church.
 
Randy_Carson said:
So, Lutherans, what do you think of that review of history? Is it a “fair and balanced” portrayal of the events of the 16th century that we can use for dialogue?
Click to expand...
It’s a fairly good synopsis given the depth of the topic and the amount of words given to it - it captures what I feel is the hardest thing about the whole history - that “it didn’t have to be this way” if only more time was given and less brashness was in shown.
 
benjohnson said:
It’s a fairly good synopsis given the depth of the topic and the amount of words given to it - it captures what I feel is the hardest thing about the whole history - that “it didn’t have to be this way” if only more time was given and less brashness was in shown.
Click to expand...
So, if Francis were to announce the establishment of Lutheran Ordinariates (as Benedict did for Anglicans), what would your reaction be?
 
Randy_Carson said:
So, if Francis were to announce the establishment of Lutheran Ordinariates (as Benedict did for Anglicans), what would your reaction be?
Click to expand...
My hunch is that the Vatican will not suggest an Ordinariate. I don’t think it helped relationships between Archbishop of Canterbury and Pope Benedict. Interaction with Lutherans probably deal more with theological differences and not so a matter of apostolic succession; the sticking point Anglicans have with the Church of Rome.

Pope Benedict was approached by Lutheran bishops and LWF after the Declaration of Justification to explore eucharistic hospitality; a pressing issue of inter-denominational families who want to take holy Communion in both the Lutheran and Catholic churches; this is especially the case in Germany.

Pope Francis may pursue closer ties with Lutherans as reflected in this document, “From Conflict to Communion”. I noticed that the end of the document leaves open the question of where do we go from here.

I do think Lutherans probably desire reunification with Roman Catholics more than the other way around but historically Pope John 23rd got the ball rolling, so to speak, and both sides have dialogued for over 50 years.
 
EvangelCatholic said:
My hunch is that the Vatican will not suggest an Ordinariate. I don’t think it helped relationships between Archbishop of Canterbury and Pope Benedict. Interaction with Lutherans probably deal more with theological differences and not so a matter of apostolic succession; the sticking point Anglicans have with the Church of Rome.

Pope Benedict was approached by Lutheran bishops and LWF after the Declaration of Justification to explore eucharistic hospitality; a pressing issue of inter-denominational families who want to take holy Communion in both the Lutheran and Catholic churches; this is especially the case in Germany.

Pope Francis may pursue closer ties with Lutherans as reflected in this document, “From Conflict to Communion”. I noticed that the end of the document leaves open the question of where do we go from here.

I do think Lutherans probably desire reunification with Roman Catholics more than the other way around but historically Pope John 23rd got the ball rolling, so to speak, and both sides have dialogued for over 50 years.
Click to expand...
But what would your reaction be? 🤷
 
Randy_Carson said:
So, if Francis were to announce the establishment of Lutheran Ordinariates (as Benedict did for Anglicans), what would your reaction be?
Click to expand...
If the Augsburg Confession was accepted then I would urge my church to join - an Ordinate would not be necessary, though we’d have to help you with your hymnody.

The first act together would be replace “On Eagles Wings” with “Allein zu dir, Herr Jesu Christ”

youtube.com/watch?v=SQyl36gAejk
 
benjohnson said:
If the Augsburg Confession was accepted then I would urge my church to join - an Ordinate would not be necessary, though we’d have to help you with your hymnody.
Click to expand...
OMG! Thank you!! :extrahappy:

I actually sing, “Now Thank We All Our God,” literally every morning in my prayer time as part of something I put together for “Lauds” based on the pattern of Tierce, Sext None, and Compline which I learned when I was a candidate at a Trappist Monastery.

If you’ll bring your hymnal, I’ll get out my old Methodist hymnal, and we’ll show these cradle Catholics what real hymns are about. 👍
 
Randy_Carson said:
But what would your reaction be? 🤷
Click to expand...
Benedict referred to the Augsburg Confession as a “Catholic” statement of faith. If the Vatican accepts Lutherans, warts and all, without compromise to papal infallibility, then there will be no reason for Lutherans to not return to our Roman roots.
 
benjohnson said:
If the Augsburg Confession was accepted then I would urge my church to join - an Ordinate would not be necessary, though we’d have to help you with your hymnody.
Click to expand...
I’m a bit partial to the entire Formula of Concord - Smalkald Articles and all. I don’t know if a Roman acceptance of just the Augsburg Confession would be enough to snag me, personally, but if the Augsburg Confession and the Apology to the Augsburg Confession were allowed in their unadulterated entirety, I would be faced with a huge crisis of conscience!

I’m with y’all on hymns. Uffda!
 
Randy_Carson said:
OMG! Thank you!! :extrahappy:

I actually sing, “Now Thank We All Our God,” literally every morning in my prayer time as part of something I put together for “Lauds” based on the pattern of Tierce, Sext None, and Compline which I learned when I was a candidate at a Trappist Monastery.

If you’ll bring your hymnal, I’ll get out my old Methodist hymnal, and we’ll show these cradle Catholics what real hymns are about. 👍
Click to expand...
First, you’d need to get rid of the Marty Haugen hymns. That stuff has to go, man :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top