.
I think two different issues are going on…
ANY association may create policies regarding membership and conflict resolution. To my knowledge, all denominations do that (including mine). FOR THAT ASSOCIATION (club, group, organization, whatever), that applies to those IN THAT association. If I belong to the Toyota Owners’ Club and one polity is that members must own a Toyota, and I sell my Toyota, then I may no longer be a member of that organization. Now, most congregations and denominations have a creedal statement somewhere (often in their constitution) stating not only what that congregation and/or denomination believes, but also MAY require those in official membership to ascribe to such. If there is a dispute, it MAY have a prescribed way to resolve that issue, and if one is clearly in violation of the agreed-upon polity, one may be excluded from the organization. In THIS sense, it can be argued that The Catholic Church had the “right” to kick out anyone that it its own determination according to its own creedal position, could be removed (call it what you like). If that organization is the LDS and one holding official membership in that group comes to view the RCC as correct, it would be within the “rights” of the LDS to “remove” that person from the organization’s membership. It’s a whole other issue whether that person is WRONG or a non-Christian or no longer a part of CHRIST’S church - but any organization can remove anyone from it’s membership roles if such is done in comformity with the polity of that organization. In THAT sense, The Catholic Church had the “right” to remove Luther (we’re talking POWER here, nothing more). It’s a separate issue whether it did so in comfority with it’s own polity and if Luther was wrong.
The other issue is what interpretation is correct? This ASSUMES two things: First of all, that the Rule is Scripture (otherwise, interpretations don’t matter) and secondly that all teachers/interpeters are ACCOUNTABLE. Thus, the question of this thread is one that Catholics, Mormons, as well as all members of all the cults are exempt. They all reject that Scripture is the authority and that teachers are accountable. The question is MOOT coming from any of them, and frankly, I wouldn’t waste my time trying to address an issue they regard as moot. Their position is: One is correct if one says, “I’m right so I’m right, therefore I’m right so I’m right, so there. Just accept whatever I say with docility.”
For for those that regard God as the Authority (not self alone) and regard all we teachers as accountable for what we say and for what we insists God says (wasn’t it Jeremiah who stated that God has a particular distain for those who say “God says” when God said no such thing?), then the issue of correctness comes into play. As a Lutheran, I believe that we are to look to the church, for I believe that God gave His Word to the church (not exclusively to ME) and that God leads His church (not exclusively ME). This CORPORATE view of the church that Lutherans and Orthodox Christians embrace means we are not simply to look to SELF for this arbitration, but to the church. Lutherans do that for our teachings - looking to the 3 Ecumenical Creeds and the true ecumenical church councils - although, like the Orthodox, we don’t view OUR arbitrations as infallible. Our “problem” is the same as that felt by the Orthodox (whether Oriental or Eastern) - true ecumenical councils are impossible (the OO I think embraces only the first 4 - and not as infallible, the EO embraces the first 7 although again not infallible). The last true council ended around 800 if my memory off the top of my head is correct. The struggle for power between East and West, the constant attempt of the West and the Bishop of Rome to take more and more and more power, to be regarded as unaccountable, all that pretty much terminated any sense of the church as Christians and replaced it with all the ME-ism, institutionalism, denominationalism we see today. In a lot of ways, I agree with the Orthodox - Christianity was shattered, but worse, it was politicized, polerized, institutionalized, and the embrace of truth became overwhelmed by the quest for power/authority/control/lording it over others. In the absence of any possibility of a true ecumenical council, there is no clear answer for how to resolve conflicts BETWEEN various positions - only for within them. As a Lutheran, I join the Orthodox in lamenting this. We need to work to restore a sense of humility, community, accountability. We have a LOT of work to do, for I disagree with many that things got better in the 20th century, I think what is seen as improved humility and community is instead increased relativism and a lack of concern from truth. Right now, the best we can do is seek resolution on an individual level - among us - and work to form a consensus. Don’t be TOO discouraged: that’s EXACTLY how the early church did it.
so, you say that when you guys have an issue of discordia on Scriptures enterpretation you take to the Bible?
