LCMS and JDDJ (Joint Declaration the Doctrine of Justification)

[aidanbradypop]

The LC-MS position on JDDJ can be found here lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=339
The problem is that the Catholic Church did not change it’s position from what was stated at the Council of Trent. The LWF agreed to disagree. The Missouri Synod looked at it and said that nothing actually changed.

That is my experience with the LCMS Lutherans in my town. They are opposed to anything that smacks of Catholicism and felt the JDDJ was a sell out on Lutheranism and a sad day for the Lutheran Faith.

It could simply be demographics when it comes to how anti Catholic some people are. The LCMS here in Fargo as actually very loving and work well with the Catholic Church on a lot of social issues. The LCMC (the fundamentalist of Lutheranism) are not so nice. The ELCA are constantly attacking the LCMS here so us Catholics get a bit of a break lol.

 

[MaryT777]

It could simply be demographics when it comes to how anti Catholic some people are. The LCMS here in Fargo as actually very loving and work well with the Catholic Church on a lot of social issues. The LCMC (the fundamentalist of Lutheranism) are not so nice. The ELCA are constantly attacking the LCMS here so us Catholics get a bit of a break lol.

What does LCMC stand for?

 

[aidanbradypop]

What does LCMC stand for?

Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ

 

[steido01]

My, this thread has been taken on a rather unpleasant ride. I’d like to get back to the OP, but I do need to correct a misunderstanding.

And to conclude my original point, due to being very anti-Catholic the LCMS did not agree to the declaration. The are very opposed to anything that smacks of Roman Catholicism for they believe the Papacy is the Antichrist and that our religion is in error.

Whoa, now. Let’s tone down the rhetoric here and take a step back. The LCMS is hardly Anti-Catholic. We recognize that our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters are our fellow Christians and we are not opposed to anything that “smacks” of Roman Catholicism - when the gospel is proclaimed freely, how can we possibly argue? What we are opposed to, as our ancient Confessions explain, is when humans require a submission to other humans that, in the Lutheran understanding, God does not command.

And, as I’ve already noted, it means nothing to say that a given church body thinks another church body is in error; all church bodies teach that other bodies are in error at some point. There is no need to keep repeating it; we are all fully aware that Christianity has multiple denominations. While the LCMS certainly believes Rome has some errors (and vice-versa), we don’t say “Roman Catholics go to hell” or actively try to convert Roman Catholics - THAT would be Anti-Catholic. You are our brothers and sisters in Christ. Again, if this is not your personal experience with the LCMS, I apologize on behalf of my Synod and assure you it is not the norm.

DelsonJacobs:

To illustrate: If someone said they were not opposed to the United States or were not anti-American but made the following statement: “I believe the Presidency is the Antichrist.” Would that not make them anti-American? And** if one calls the Presidency the Antichrist, what are they calling the person who takes the office of the president? **If the head of the country is the Antichrist, what are they saying about those who follow the president and the country at large?

So what does it make the LCMS when it calls the Papacy the Antichrist? Is the Antichrist a person or an office? If one calls the office the Antichrist, what does it say of the man who holds that office? What does it say of those who follow the Pope or are member of the Church?..

In your previous post, you said you understood the difference between the Office of the Papacy and the pope, but here you conflate the two again. hn160 tried to clarify it for you, but it seems to have been lost. I’ll try again.

We can love and revere the men who serve as pope - and, indeed, we have been particularly fond of Pope Benedict XVI, who some have jokingly called “the Lutheran Pope” for his doctrinal closeness and openness to our faith. We are also quite taken by Francis’ humility, and are optimistic he will continue the work of his predecessor. When the pope acts in charity and humility, he is certainly sharing the example that Christ set for us.

At the same time, we can be opposed to the idea that the Bishop of Rome has supreme, divinely-bestowed jurisdiction over all of Christendom (just ask the Orthodox). This is laid out in our Confessions:

• The Roman Pontiff claims for himself [in the first place] that by divine right he is [supreme] above all bishops and pastors [in all Christendom].

• Secondly, he adds also that by divine right he has both swords, i.e., the authority also of bestowing kingdoms [enthroning and deposing kings, regulating secular dominions etc.].

• And thirdly, he says that to believe this is necessary for salvation. And for these reasons the Roman bishop calls himself [and boasts that he is] the vicar of Christ on earth.

The second one is, in today’s world, anachronistic. The pope no longer is a kingmaker, so that’s one less thing keeping us from unity. The first could be reconciled if the pope acknowledged that he is simply “first among equals” to his fellow bishops, and not a lord over them - we’d have little problem having a pope like that. It’s the third one that really hangs up us Lutherans. In our view, claiming that submission to the office of the papacy is necessary for salvation detracts from Christ’s Gospel. We believe that anything that acts contrary to Christ’s Gospel is acting anti-to-Christ, or anti-Christ. Please do not confuse or conflate the Lutheran understanding of antiChrist with the popular protestant idea of THE Antichrist. In short, antiChrist is simply the Lutheran label for anything that obscures the Gospel - and we do not limit the label to others; we are constantly examining our own pastors to ensure that the Gospel is proclaimed without obstruction.

Now, back to the OP…

 

[JonNC]

My, this thread has been taken on a rather unpleasant ride. I’d like to get back to the OP, but I do need to correct a misunderstanding.

Whoa, now. Let’s tone down the rhetoric here and take a step back. The LCMS is hardly Anti-Catholic. We recognize that our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters are our fellow Christians and we are not opposed to anything that “smacks” of Roman Catholicism - when the gospel is proclaimed freely, how can we possibly argue? What we are opposed to, as our ancient Confessions explain, is when humans require a submission to other humans that, in the Lutheran understanding, God does not command.

And, as I’ve already noted, it means nothing to say that a given church body thinks another church body is in error; all church bodies teach that other bodies are in error at some point. There is no need to keep repeating it; we are all fully aware that Christianity has multiple denominations. While the LCMS certainly believes Rome has some errors (and vice-versa), we don’t say “Roman Catholics go to hell” or actively try to convert Roman Catholics - THAT would be Anti-Catholic. You are our brothers and sisters in Christ. Again, if this is not your personal experience with the LCMS, I apologize on behalf of my Synod and assure you it is not the norm.

In your previous post, you said you understood the difference between the Office of the Papacy and the pope, but here you conflate the two again. hn160 tried to clarify it for you, but it seems to have been lost. I’ll try again.

We can love and revere the men who serve as pope - and, indeed, we have been particularly fond of Pope Benedict XVI, who some have jokingly called “the Lutheran Pope” for his doctrinal closeness and openness to our faith. We are also quite taken by Francis’ humility, and are optimistic he will continue the work of his predecessor. When the pope acts in charity and humility, he is certainly sharing the example that Christ set for us.

At the same time, we can be opposed to the idea that the Bishop of Rome has supreme, divinely-bestowed jurisdiction over all of Christendom (just ask the Orthodox). This is laid out in our Confessions:

The second one is, in today’s world, anachronistic. The pope no longer is a kingmaker, so that’s one less thing keeping us from unity. The first could be reconciled if the pope acknowledged that he is simply “first among equals” to his fellow bishops, and not a lord over them - we’d have little problem having a pope like that. It’s the third one that really hangs up us Lutherans. In our view, claiming that submission to the office of the papacy is necessary for salvation detracts from Christ’s Gospel. We believe that anything that acts contrary to Christ’s Gospel is acting anti-to-Christ, or anti-Christ. Please do not confuse or conflate the Lutheran understanding of antiChrist with the popular protestant idea of THE Antichrist. In short, antiChrist is simply the Lutheran label for anything that obscures the Gospel - and we do not limit the label to others; we are constantly examining our own pastors to ensure that the Gospel is proclaimed without obstruction.

Now, back to the OP…

Don,
Save this post in a file. The topic comes up often, and I don’t think a better more loving response could be offered.

Jon

 

[aidanbradypop]

Don,
Save this post in a file. The topic comes up often, and I don’t think a better more loving response could be offered.

Jon

Don’t make his head bigger…lol

It was a nice Lutheran viewpoint

 

[JonNC]

Don’t make his head bigger…lol

It was a nice Lutheran viewpoint

The thing, Dustin, is we have to learn to believe what we each say about what our communion teaches. Not just a nice Lutheran viewpoint, it accurately and clearly expresses the Lutheran view.
Yeah, we have our knuckleheads who speak of Catholics in very anti-Catholic ways, just as there are Catholics who are very anti-Lutheran. It is also true that our documents regarding each other are 450-500 years ago, and therefore contain language that the modern ear takes offense to, and that’s a good thing. Whether the term be antichrist or heretic, the other side is offended. So, we have to look past the language of the past, and look forward to improving our relationship in the 21st century.

Jon

 

[aidanbradypop]

The thing, Dustin, is we have to learn to believe what we each say about what our communion teaches. Not just a nice Lutheran viewpoint, it accurately and clearly expresses the Lutheran view.
Yeah, we have our knuckleheads who speak of Catholics in very anti-Catholic ways, just as there are Catholics who are very anti-Lutheran. It is also true that our documents regarding each other are 450-500 years ago, and therefore contain language that the modern ear takes offense to, and that’s a good thing. Whether the term be antichrist or heretic, the other side is offended. So, we have to look past the language of the past, and look forward to improving our relationship in the 21st century.

Jon

Very true…and for the sake of the thread…the JDDJ would have been a nice place to start. I believe, smack me if I am wrong, that the majority of Lutherans are not like you. A lot of the ones I have come across are more like EC. They demand the Church to bend at the knee or take a quote from Pope_______ out of context.

That LCMC friend of mine (not him again lol) did that very thing with the “Who am I to judge” quote. He was ELCA at the time of the JDDJ and was extremely upset with the Lutherans who signed the document.

I just do not see many Lutherans in my area that want to share in the same Church as Catholics because they believe they are the true Church and we are “lost” sheep.

How can you have anything “joint” with people like that?

 

[steido01]

Don,
Save this post in a file. The topic comes up often, and I don’t think a better more loving response could be offered.

Jon

Aww, shucks…

I did miss a point, though. There have been 11 official rounds of dialogue between Roman Catholics and Lutherans since 1964. The LCMS participated in all but one (Round X). We are all for unity with Rome, so far as our Confessions allow.

As the LCMS response to the JDDJ states:

[W]e should seek every opportunity to enter the dialogue with the Roman Catholics. Otherwise, who will fairly and with integrity represent the Lutheran Confessions and deal honestly with the condemnations [of the Council of Trent]?

We have to be honest about our history if we are ever to achieve a real unity.

 

[JonNC]

Very true…and for the sake of the thread…the JDDJ would have been a nice place to start. I believe, smack me if I am wrong, that the majority of Lutherans are not like you. A lot of the ones I have come across are more like EC. They demand the Church to bend at the knee or take a quote from Pope_______ out of context.

That LCMC friend of mine (not him again lol) did that very thing with the “Who am I to judge” quote. He was ELCA at the time of the JDDJ and was extremely upset with the Lutherans who signed the document.

I just do not see many Lutherans in my area that want to share in the same Church as Catholics because they believe they are the true Church and we are “lost” sheep.

How can you have anything “joint” with people like that?

I would contend that the average Lutheran and average Catholic in the pew really doesn’t think about the other Church. It’s wonks like us that do. Most don’t see a need to share a church, they are happy to be what they are. Sort of, live and let live.

Those who oppose dialogue, in my opinion, seem to be responding to Christ’s call for unity in a way I do not understand.

Jon

 

[aidanbradypop]

I would contend that the average Lutheran and average Catholic in the pew really doesn’t think about the other Church. It’s wonks like us that do. Most don’t see a need to share a church, they are happy to be what they are. Sort of, live and let live.

Those who oppose dialogue, in my opinion, seem to be responding to Christ’s call for unity in a way I do not understand.

Jon

You are probably correct. We (posters) are probably the ones that think about it the most.

 

[DelsonJacobs]

Whether you call the office “anti-Christ” in order to define the Papacy as “anything that obscures the Gospel,” to define the Christ-appointed office of the Pope by these terms is as anti-Catholic as you can get.

 

[pablope]

UOTE=steido01;11049853]My, this thread has been taken on a rather unpleasant ride. I’d like to get back to the OP, but I do need to correct a misunderstanding.

Whoa, now. Let’s tone down the rhetoric here and take a step back. The LCMS is hardly Anti-Catholic. We recognize that our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters are our fellow Christians and we are not opposed to anything that “smacks” of Roman Catholicism - when the gospel is proclaimed freely, how can we possibly argue? What we are opposed to, as our ancient Confessions explain, is when humans require a submission to other humans that, in the Lutheran understanding, God does not command.

Really? Do you follow what your pastor says every sunday? That is requiring human submission…does it not?

How about from 1john4:

6 We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.

Or from Luke: He who listens to you listens to me…

or1sam15:

22 And Samuel said,

“Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices,
as in obedience to the voice of the Lord?
Surely, to obey is better than sacrifice,
and to heed than the fat of rams.

QUOTE]And, as I’ve already noted, it means nothing to say that a given church body thinks another church body is in error; all church bodies teach that other bodies are in error at some point. There is no need to keep repeating it; we are all fully aware that Christianity has multiple denominations. While the LCMS certainly believes Rome has some errors (and vice-versa), we don’t say “Roman Catholics go to hell” or actively try to convert Roman Catholics - THAT would be Anti-Catholic.

Would calling someone the antiChrist… does it not fall in this category?

In your previous post, you said you understood the difference between the Office of the Papacy and the pope, but here you conflate the two again. hn160 tried to clarify it for you, but it seems to have been lost. I’ll try again.

We can love and revere the men who serve as pope - and, indeed, we have been particularly fond of Pope Benedict XVI, who some have jokingly called “the Lutheran Pope” for his doctrinal closeness and openness to our faith. We are also quite taken by Francis’ humility, and are optimistic he will continue the work of his predecessor. When the pope acts in charity and humility, he is certainly sharing the example that Christ set for us.

Then how about stopping to call the office the Anti-Christ for starters? And it seems there is a lot of mental gymnastics being engaged here…

At the same time, we can be opposed to the idea that the Bishop of Rome has supreme, divinely-bestowed jurisdiction over all of Christendom (just ask the Orthodox). This is laid out in our Confessions:

Then…if it is not the bishop of Rome…who do you propose as the alternative? If Christianity is to speak as one voice…if it is not the bishop of Rome…who do you propose as the alternative?

Would the world today pay any attention to what the LCMS president says? Would the world listen to Constantinople?

The second one is, in today’s world, anachronistic. The pope no longer is a kingmaker, so that’s one less thing keeping us from unity. The first could be reconciled if the pope acknowledged that he is simply “first among equals” to his fellow bishops, and not a lord over them - we’d have little problem having a pope like that. It’s the third one that really hangs up us Lutherans. In our view, claiming that submission to the office of the papacy is necessary for salvation detracts from Christ’s Gospel.

Could this still be a hangup from a medieval mindset also?

We believe that anything that acts contrary to Christ’s Gospel is acting anti-to-Christ, or anti-Christ.

How has the bishop of Rome taught anything contrary to the gospel of Christ?

 

[JonNC]

Whether you call the office “anti-Christ” in order to define the Papacy as “anything that obscures the Gospel,” to define the Christ-appointed office of the Pope by these terms is as anti-Catholic as you can get.

And to direct anathemas at us and claim our teachings are heretical is anti-Lutheran.
So, where do we go from here?

Jon

 

[benjohnson]

And to direct anathemas at us and claim our teachings are heretical is anti-Lutheran.
So, where do we go from here?

Jon

Quite so! There’s enough strong words from all sides!

To DelsonJacobs:

We can bicker and argue over these important problems between our two churches, or we can set them aside for awhile in order to proclaim the Gospel (together) to a fallen world.

Know that even though my church holds a low opinion of the Office of the Pope, we prayed for the cardinals during the papal election, and we have prayed for Pope Francis.

Whatever LCMS member has caused you to be angry, I apologise as much as I’m able for them.

 

[DelsonJacobs]

And to direct anathemas at us and claim our teachings are heretical is anti-Lutheran.
So, where do we go from here?

Jon

There are no “anathemas” directed at Lutherans or claims that your teachings are heretical. If we viewed it as so the Catholic Church would not be trying to build bridges with such things as the JDDJ, would we? Who wants to be in communion with people they view as heretics? That wouldn’t make sense now, would it?

While in the past Catholics and Lutherans held such views, the JDDJ clearly explains and demonstrates that both sides of the declaration now agree that such views of the past by both Lutherans about Catholics and Catholics about Lutherans were incorrect, regrettable and no longer apply.

The argument that I have presented was that the LCMS is anti-Catholic in that it holds Catholicism’s central office as anti-Christ. Posters from the LCMS claimed that such was not being anti-Catholic. But is it being pro-Roman Catholic to call the office held by Pope Francis the office of the Antichrist?

And now in your post you want me to admit that I am being anti-Lutheran? After admitting that the LCMS believes that my religion looks to the office of the Antichrist for leadership and direction you feel I need to admit to being anti-Lutheran? How is that reasonable?

 

[DelsonJacobs]

Quite so! There’s enough strong words from all sides!

To DelsonJacobs:

We can bicker and argue over these important problems between our two churches, or we can set them aside for awhile in order to proclaim the Gospel (together) to a fallen world.

Know that even though my church holds a low opinion of the Office of the Pope, we prayed for the cardinals during the papal election, and we have prayed for Pope Francis.

Whatever LCMS member has caused you to be angry, I apologise as much as I’m able for them.

My words are strong because they defend the office instituted by the Light of the World, the Papacy which is pro-Christ and not anti-Christ as you say.

If you hold a low opinion of the Office of Pope but the Roman Catholic faith holds it in the highest regard, why do you keep arguing with me that you are not anti-Catholic? Are you pro-Papacy or anti-Papacy? If you call the Papacy the Antichrist, what does that make you?

If you are anti-Papacy you are definitely not being pro-Catholic, and that is the point I keep making and the point you keep denying. He who is not pro-Catholic is what?

Strong words? I do not believe my words are* strong enough.* The Papacy is of Christ. The one who holds the office is one with the office. Those who view things otherwise are not pro-Catholic. The LCMS did not join the JDDJ because they don’t make deals with the office of the Antichrist (or the Papacy, as they believe) and those that follow the Antichrist (Catholics). That is what I said in my original post on this thread and that you have been arguing against.

 

[MaryT777]

Very true…and for the sake of the thread…the JDDJ would have been a nice place to start. I believe, smack me if I am wrong, that the majority of Lutherans are not like you. A lot of the ones I have come across are more like EC. They demand the Church to bend at the knee or take a quote from Pope_______ out of context.

That LCMC friend of mine (not him again lol) did that very thing with the “Who am I to judge” quote. He was ELCA at the time of the JDDJ and was extremely upset with the Lutherans who signed the document.

I just do not see many Lutherans in my area that want to share in the same Church as Catholics because they believe they are the true Church and we are “lost” sheep.

How can you have anything “joint” with people like that?

You can’t. I would be curious how many LCMS Lutherans are really that open to a unified Church with “Rome.” I would guess based on my experience here in my town with LCMS , Our Redeemer.
Mary.
Mary

 

[concretecamper]

JonNC:

Quote:

Originally Posted by steido01

My, this thread has been taken on a rather unpleasant ride. I’d like to get back to the OP, but I do need to correct a misunderstanding.

Whoa, now. Let’s tone down the rhetoric here and take a step back. The LCMS is hardly Anti-Catholic. We recognize that our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters are our fellow Christians and we are not opposed to anything that “smacks” of Roman Catholicism - when the gospel is proclaimed freely, how can we possibly argue? What we are opposed to, as our ancient Confessions explain, is when humans require a submission to other humans that, in the Lutheran understanding, God does not command.

And, as I’ve already noted, it means nothing to say that a given church body thinks another church body is in error; all church bodies teach that other bodies are in error at some point. There is no need to keep repeating it; we are all fully aware that Christianity has multiple denominations. While the LCMS certainly believes Rome has some errors (and vice-versa), we don’t say “Roman Catholics go to hell” or actively try to convert Roman Catholics - THAT would be Anti-Catholic. You are our brothers and sisters in Christ. Again, if this is not your personal experience with the LCMS, I apologize on behalf of my Synod and assure you it is not the norm.

In your previous post, you said you understood the difference between the Office of the Papacy and the pope, but here you conflate the two again. hn160 tried to clarify it for you, but it seems to have been lost. I’ll try again.

We can love and revere the men who serve as pope - and, indeed, we have been particularly fond of Pope Benedict XVI, who some have jokingly called “the Lutheran Pope” for his doctrinal closeness and openness to our faith. We are also quite taken by Francis’ humility, and are optimistic he will continue the work of his predecessor. When the pope acts in charity and humility, he is certainly sharing the example that Christ set for us.

At the same time, we can be opposed to the idea that the Bishop of Rome has supreme, divinely-bestowed jurisdiction over all of Christendom (just ask the Orthodox). This is laid out in our Confessions:

The second one is, in today’s world, anachronistic. The pope no longer is a kingmaker, so that’s one less thing keeping us from unity. The first could be reconciled if the pope acknowledged that he is simply “first among equals” to his fellow bishops, and not a lord over them - we’d have little problem having a pope like that. It’s the third one that really hangs up us Lutherans. In our view, claiming that submission to the office of the papacy is necessary for salvation detracts from Christ’s Gospel. We believe that anything that acts contrary to Christ’s Gospel is acting anti-to-Christ, or anti-Christ. Please do not confuse or conflate the Lutheran understanding of antiChrist with the popular protestant idea of THE Antichrist. In short, antiChrist is simply the Lutheran label for anything that obscures the Gospel - and we do not limit the label to others; we are constantly examining our own pastors to ensure that the Gospel is proclaimed without obstruction.

Now, back to the OP…

Don,
Save this post in a file. The topic comes up often, and I don’t think a better more loving response could be offered.

Jon

Yes, a well presented post, and I will even go as far as to say loving too…but it is racked with misconceptions and errors.

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android

 

[pablope]

The pope isn’t the anti-Christ, but the Papacy is the anti-Christ because it sets man-made laws that interfer with the Gospel. If the pope would be just another bishop, then no problem. I am not trying to argue with you, just trying to explain the confessional Lutheran view.
The Book of Concord, bookofconcord.org/, is a good starting point.

The papacy and the Pope has has an umbilical cord going back 2000 yrs. By calling the papacy the anti-Christ…how does this not make you anti-pope?

but the Papacy is the anti-Christ because it sets man-made laws that interfer with the Gospel.

And what are these so called man-made laws that interfere with the gospel?