LCMS and JDDJ (Joint Declaration the Doctrine of Justification)

  • Thread starter Thread starter MaryT777
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MaryT777 said:
Jon,
I’m not sure what you mean by this.
Can you re-say this in Catholic-ese. LOL!
Mary.
Click to expand...
As a Lutheran, I speak Catholic-ese with an accent. 😃

Dustin said,
Example: Lutherans here in my area believe they are the Catholic Church as Christ intended and they are the purest form of Catholicism. That creates a problem when it comes to dialogue and future declarations. Agree
Click to expand...
My point was that the Catholic Church believes it is the purest form of Catholic teaching. We both believe the same thing, and it is up to Church leaders to work it out.

Jon
 
:tiphat:
JonNC said:
As a Lutheran, I speak Catholic-ese with an accent. 😃

Dustin said,

My point was that the Catholic Church believes it is the purest form of Catholic teaching. We both believe the same thing, and it is up to Church leaders to work it out.

Jon
Click to expand...
Thanks I could understand that point with the accent.
:::tiphat:
 
JonNC said:
It’s long enough to plan on most of the weekend. Lutherans and Catholics together do not come up with particular compact documents.

:rotfl:

Jon
Click to expand...
I’ll look for a cliff note version. I read an entire book on the JDDJ which was interesting but did indeed take quite a bit of time.
 
JonNC said:
And as you know, Jose, Lutherans are not denominationalists. We are also the OHCAC
Jon
Click to expand...
Yes, in an imperfect union but part of us nonetheless.
steido01 said:
Right. The overall point I’m trying to make is that both church bodies see themselves as the OHCAC:
  • Rome views itself (and kinda-sorta some Orthodox) as the OHCAC, and no one else.
  • The LCMS sees itself as part of the OHCAC (obviously, we’d consider ourselves the clearest expression), and considers other orthodox Christians to be part of it as well, even though they may err in some doctrine.
Click to expand...
Well Don, we have this guy in Rome who was given the keys of the kingdom and who was commanded by Christ to feed and tend His sheep. That position has not been vacated yet.

It is not our opinion, it is a fact. In order to say that we are not the OHCAC, you would have to demonstrate how exactly we stopped. And then you would have to get around what Christ said when He declared that the gates of hell will not prevail against it. Because if you say that you are the OHCAC and we are not, then you have to demonstrate how exactly we failed and how then you were appointed to continue on. IOW how the keys were transferred to you.
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
Yes, in an imperfect union but part of us nonetheless.

Well Don, we have this guy in Rome who was given the keys of the kingdom and who was commanded by Christ to feed and tend His sheep. That position has not been vacated yet.

It is not our opinion, it is a fact. ** In order to say that we are not the OHCAC, you would have to demonstrate how exactly we stopped. **And then you would have to get around what Christ said when He declared that the gates of hell will not prevail against it. Because if you say that you are the OHCAC and we are not, then you have to demonstrate how exactly we failed and how then you were appointed to continue on. IOW how the keys were transferred to you.
Click to expand...
If you read what Don said, Jose, we are not claiming that you stopped. I think that was his point, that we don’t view ourselves with that type of exclusivity. You are the Church, too, where the word is preached and the sacraments administered.
What we would say is that the claims of the office of the papacy are heterodox.

As for the keys, they are given to St. Peter for the Church. The keys are that of the Church, and we are part of the Church, and therefore exercise the keys.

On the gates of Hell, the word that is used is “will”. That’s future. The gates of Hell will not prevail. For the gates of Hell to prevail, they must prevail against the whole Church, including the Church Triumphant. Not gonna happen, makes by humans on earth notwithstanding.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
If you read what Don said, Jose, we are not claiming that you stopped. I think that was his point, that we don’t view ourselves with that type of exclusivity. You are the Church, too, where the word is preached and the sacraments administered.
What we would say is that the claims of the office of the papacy are heterodox.

As for the keys, they are given to St. Peter for the Church. The keys are that of the Church, and we are part of the Church, and therefore exercise the keys.

On the gates of Hell, the word that is used is “will”. That’s future. The gates of Hell will not prevail. For the gates of Hell to prevail, they must prevail against the whole Church, including the Church Triumphant. Not gonna happen, makes by humans on earth notwithstanding.

Jon
Click to expand...
Yet the LCMS teaches the Catholic Church preaches the Word with a works righteousness slant and disagrees vehemently with Transubstantiation. If we have perverted the Gospel and the Sacrament how can we be a Church in your definition?

Jon, do you feel you are in the minority of LCMS members that have such a benevolent feeling towards the Catholic Church for it seems different than what I’ve experienced personally .

Mary.
 
MaryT777 said:
Jon, do you feel you are in the minority of LCMS members that have such a benevolent feeling towards the Catholic Church for it seems different than what I’ve experienced personally .

Mary.
Click to expand...
Not to answer for Jon, but here in the Pacific NW, there’s a strong connection between ‘more-orthodox’ Christians. We don’t have any choice really if we are to survive - we’re really could be one generation away from losing the Gospel here.
 
benjohnson said:
Not to answer for Jon, but here in the Pacific NW, there’s a strong connection between ‘more-orthodox’ Christians. We don’t have any choice really if we are to survive - we’re really could be one generation away from losing the Gospel here.
Click to expand...
:amen:
Well said I couldn’t agree more with the frightening reality of this statement. It make my hair stand on end to think about it.
 
JonNC said:
If you read what Don said, Jose, we are not claiming that you stopped. I think that was his point, that we don’t view ourselves with that type of exclusivity. You are the Church, too, where the word is preached and the sacraments administered.
What we would say is that the claims of the office of the papacy are heterodox.

As for the keys, they are given to St. Peter for the Church. The keys are that of the Church, and we are part of the Church, and therefore exercise the keys.

On the gates of Hell, the word that is used is “will”. That’s future. The gates of Hell will not prevail. For the gates of Hell to prevail, they must prevail against the whole Church, including the Church Triumphant. Not gonna happen, makes by humans on earth notwithstanding.

Jon
Click to expand...
Yes, thank you Jon. I did read much into Don’s post.

What threw me off was his comment about the LCMS being the clearest expression of the OHCAC and how others are in error. So while Don is including us, which rubs me the wrong way I have to admit, he does imply that there is error in our teachings. We did not separate, Luther and the other Reformers left the Church.Things were sure not pretty in the Church at the time, but neither were they during St. Catherine of Sienna’s times.
 
JonNC said:
As for the keys, they are given to St. Peter for the Church. The keys are that of the Church, and we are part of the Church, and therefore exercise the keys.
Click to expand...
They are the Church’s because they were given to St. Peter. No St. Peter, no keys. I can borrow the keys as long as I am with St. Peter.
JonNC said:
On the gates of Hell, the word that is used is “will”. That’s future. The gates of Hell will not prevail. For the gates of Hell to prevail, they must prevail against the whole Church, including the Church Triumphant. Not gonna happen, makes by humans on earth notwithstanding.
Click to expand...
As long as we see things as expressed in Dominus Iesus, I’m ok 🙂
 
steido01 said:
Not -THE- anti-Christ.

We Lutherans on here have been very careful to differentiate between our definition of “anti-to-Christ” and the mythological character that dispensationalists talk about. Please do not inadvertently add modern connotations to our ancient, and biblical, language by adding “the.”

Since the word “antichrist” has been more or less hijacked by the fictional “Left Behind” series and similar ilk, I sometimes wish we could find another word to describe our beliefs. But the second we use a new word, you can guarantee that both Lutherans and non-Lutherans would accuse us of modifying the Confessions. As Confessional Lutherans, we can’t do that. All we can do is try to explain what we mean as best as we can, and hope that people understand.

Now, can this* please* go to a different thread? This one was about the LCMS and the JDDJ, and we almost made it back to the topic…
Click to expand...
So…in summary…what you are saying is…instead of the usual saying of respect the office…you respect the office holder but do not respect the office…🤷

Ok…now back on the topic.
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
Yes, thank you Jon. I did read much into Don’s post.
Click to expand...
No worries, Jose! It happens to the best of us. 🙂

So our churches disagree on what, or who, holds the Power of the Keys. It’s a complex issue, and that’s why we entrust it to our theologians! 😃
 
steido01 said:
No worries, Jose! It happens to the best of us. 🙂

So our churches disagree on what, or who, holds the Power of the Keys. It’s a complex issue, and that’s why we entrust it to our theologians! 😃
Click to expand...
It is really not too complicated. The evil one makes one think it is complicated to divide. And guess what…he did.
 
steido01 said:
No worries, Jose! It happens to the best of us. 🙂

So our churches disagree on what, or who, holds the Power of the Keys. It’s a complex issue, and that’s why we entrust it to our theologians! 😃
Click to expand...
There have been numerous converts to the CC…who did not find this complicated.

I would say it is complicated only to those who argue about it…and who consider the papacy the anti-Christ…🤷

But why is it…prior to Luther…no one in the west doubted about the keys?

Or why is it…a Catherine of Sienna…can recognize the value of the holder of the keys…and effected her reforms through the keys without causing a splitting of the Church or the altar?
 
pablope said:
There have been numerous converts to the CC…who did not find this complicated.

I would say it is complicated only to those who argue about it…and who consider the papacy the anti-Christ…🤷

**But why is it…prior to Luther…no one in the west doubted about the keys?
**
Or why is it…a Catherine of Sienna…can recognize the value of the holder of the keys…and effected her reforms through the keys without causing a splitting of the Church or the altar?
Click to expand...
Why in the west? The east doesn’t count?
 
pablope said:
There have been numerous converts to the CC…who did not find this complicated.

I would say it is complicated only to those who argue about it…and who consider the papacy the anti-Christ…🤷

But why is it…prior to Luther…no one in the west doubted about the keys?

Or why is it…a Catherine of Sienna…can recognize the value of the holder of the keys…and effected her reforms through the keys without causing a splitting of the Church or the altar?
Click to expand...
The issue of the keys was in dispute 500 or more years prior to Luther.

I wonder if Catherine’s reform attempts had the same potential impact on revenue stream.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
And long before the Reformation, but this still doesn’t resolve the question of who is right.

Jon
Click to expand...
hmmmm.?..one unbroken line of succession all the way back to Peter or Martin Luther was Peter’s great great great great great great…great grandson? 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top