Luther "would not have elevated them to dogma"--how could a priest elevate anything to a dogma?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PRmerger
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
gurneyhalleck1 said:
Hey, give me a break man. Della’s saying some “out there” stuff. I’m trying to find common ground. Cats are the only thing we agree on. :p…oh wait, and Tolkien! Love him, too! C.S. Lewis is ok. Tolkien is the master! Yeah, we have two commonalities, cats and Tolkien. We’re on a roll baby! 😃
Click to expand...
Oh I know…you just have to be open to my attempts at providing the necessary Cats (thus leading to common ground and ultimately conciliatory conversation!)

Perhaps this is more appropriate (though, again, not as Lutheran dogma):
http://media.canada.com/5f4aa900-9e28-4adf-a6a3-afa5261ed237/cats.jpg
 
You know outside of this forum NOBODY would get that joke! Good thing you’re with us! 😛 Just hope the long ZZ top beards don’t get in the batter! 😃
Bluegoat said:
You know, if you’re a fan of Toll House cookies, the Orthodox may get you yet…
Click to expand...
 
gurneyhalleck1 said:
This post does not deserve a reply. A total head-scratcher. And the idea that the Church instituted Christ’s Mass? Wow. That’s totally bizarre. The Catholic Church is quite clear that JESUS CHRIST (like my use of caps? I’m trying to catch up with yours! :p) instituted the Mass. Yes, Jesus instituted the Mass, not the Church. The priesthood comes from Christ, not the reverse. :rolleyes:
But thanks for the advice about cookies and milk. You must be in a Santa mood. The thick and nasty sarcasm aside, it’s great advice. I think I’ll go out and buy some Toll House Morsels right away…so I can “chill” :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Don’t be ridiculous. You know perfectly well what I meant. But since you’re determined to make a “thing” out of it I’ll explain it for you. The Church instituted CHRISTMAS or “Christ’s Mass”, a special Mass to celebrate the birth of Christ. There was no celebration of Christ’s Mass=Christmas until the 4th century. C’mon, you know that’s what I meant. You and Bluegoat both I don’t appreciate your infantile efforts to make “points” when you knew perfectly well what I was talking about. :mad: Grow up.
 
Okay, there’s been a gross misunderstanding here, for which I take the blame. :o I did not in any way mean that the Church established the Mass. I was talking strictly about the celebration of Christmas, which is called “Christ’s Mass”=Christmas (Christ’s Mass being shortened to Christmas as the centuries passed) because it was established by the Church to be celebrated on December 25th as a Mass to remember the Birth of Christ.

This special Mass, or Solemnity as we now call it, wasn’t established until the 4th century. Up until that time there was no Mass celebrated concerning the birth of Christ except perhaps Epiphany. That is all I was referring to, not the establishment of the Mass itself which Christ did on Holy Thursday. I thought that was obvious considering we were talking about how Christmas is sometimes celebrated with plays and programs in all Christian churches.
 
gurneyhalleck1 said:
Sadly, Mike, you’re not the first to make that argument, which is completely VALID. Martin Luther is not the whole of Lutheranism. But many Catholics who don’t know much about Lutheranism assume as much. They ignore Melanchthon, Chemnitz, Georg Calixtus, Leonhard Hutter, Johann Gerhard, Nicolaus Hunnius, and thirty other big names in Lutheran history that shaped the Lutheran faith into what it is. Martin Luther is the high-profile spark of the Reformation and a soft, huge target. The Book of Concord, put together in 1580, was assembled long after Luther’s death. Chemnitz was the major contributor to that, which set more of the standard for orthodox Lutheranism than Luther had contributed previously. Melanchthon’s role in Lutheranism was huge and he did a lot of the heavy lifting. He also frequently was divergent in thinking from Martin Luther himself. So Lutheranism was not an ideaological monolith to be fair. It had plenty of rangling, debate, prayer, and study amidst a wife array of personalities. Luther, like I said, is the soft target of anti-Protestant folks because he was the spark, the beginning of the movement.

As you correctly point out, just because Luther believed something of individual piety or theology, if it isn’t a part of the Large or Small Catechism, Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, and other mainstream Lutheran orthodox focal points, it isn’t then automatically gospel. I hear the argument all the time, “Luther was against birth control! For God’s sakes! Luther was opposed to it so we all must be!” They hate Luther until he agrees with 'em! 😛
Click to expand...
Or sing A Mighty Fortress is Our God, hymn 526 in their red hymnals. Strange!
 
Let’s talk cats and Aragorn, Gandalf, and Gimli, it’s a lot safer :p:cool:
Della said:
Okay, there’s been a gross misunderstanding here, for which I take the blame. :o I did not in any way mean that the Church established the Mass. I was talking strictly about the celebration of Christmas, which is called “Christ’s Mass”=Christmas (Christ’s Mass being shortened to Christmas as the centuries passed) because it was established by the Church to be celebrated on December 25th as a Mass to remember the Birth of Christ.

This special Mass, or Solemnity as we now call it, wasn’t established until the 4th century. Up until that time there was no Mass celebrated concerning the birth of Christ except perhaps Epiphany. That is all I was referring to, not the establishment of the Mass itself which Christ did on Holy Thursday. I thought that was obvious considering we were talking about how Christmas is sometimes celebrated with plays and programs in all Christian churches.
Click to expand...
 
Della said:
Good, because I don’t. 😛

I said nothing against Christmas plays, Lutheran or Catholic or anyone else’s.🤷 And why shouldn’t Catholics be glad that we started the whole Christmas tradition by celebrating Christ’s Mass. Without that no one would be celebrating with plays or anything else. I think it’s good for everyone to be reminded of where Christmas came from and what it truly is meant to celebrate.
Click to expand...
That’s great and I agree. By the way, the Pagan Germans called and they would like their tree back when you are done making it into a Christmas tree.
 
PRmerger said:
Well, then…that’s it? The above response is why I needed to start another thread?

Sheesh!

5 posts and another thread started for this response?

:ehh:
Click to expand...
You’re the one that was so hot to make such a big deal out of my statement that was really another topic separate from the OP.

Sorry to disappoint. I’ll try for something a little more contentious next time. :rolleyes:
 
gurneyhalleck1 said:
Let’s talk cats and Aragorn, Gandalf, and Gimli, it’s a lot safer :p:cool:
Click to expand...
I guess it must be. 😉 Although, I’m still puzzled why stating a simple historical fact should cause such consternation. :confused:

And sorry, Mikeoffaith. This thread never seemed to ever really “catch hold” of any real topic.

Oh well, “Happy Christmas to all and to all a good night!” :christmastree1:
 
that’s not what caused the “consternation” but nevermind…let’s move on…🙂
Della said:
I guess it must be. 😉 Although, I’m still puzzled why stating a simple historical fact should cause such consternation. :confused:

And sorry, Mikeoffaith. This thread never seemed to ever really “catch hold” of any real topic.

Oh well, “Happy Christmas to all and to all a good night!” :christmastree1:
Click to expand...
 
Mikeoffaith said:
You’re the one that was so hot to make such a big deal out of my statement that was really another topic separate from the OP.

Sorry to disappoint. I’ll try for something a little more contentious next time. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yes. This was indeed a big disappointment. Could have been answered in the same thread with 2 sentences.

And just so I know we’re on the same page: you acknowledge that Fr. Luther, a priest and not a bishop, could never have elevated a teaching to a dogma, correct?
 
PRmerger said:
Yes. This was indeed a big disappointment. Could have been answered in the same thread with 2 sentences.

And just so I know we’re on the same page: you acknowledge that Fr. Luther, a priest and not a bishop, could never have elevated a teaching to a dogma, correct?
Click to expand...
We’ll work on something better and see if we can turn that disappointment around.

I don’t see the difference between a priest or a bishop when it comes to elevating a teaching to dogma. Even on this thread there is no one that has stated that even a Roman Catholic bishop other than the one of Rome could elevate a teaching to dogma. However, as with anything the fact of could, should or would are subjective and relative. Could Luther have elevated it to dogma? I’m sure he could have just as much as I could. Would it be just as binding as if I had, probably. Would he have? Probably not. Should he have? Again probably not.
 
Mikeoffaith said:
We’ll work on something better and see if we can turn that disappointment around.

I don’t see the difference between a priest or a bishop when it comes to elevating a teaching to dogma. Even on this thread there is no one that has stated that even a Roman Catholic bishop other than the one of Rome could elevate a teaching to dogma. However, as with anything the fact of could, should or would are subjective and relative. Could Luther have elevated it to dogma? I’m sure he could have just as much as I could. Would it be just as binding as if I had, probably. Would he have? Probably not. Should he have? Again probably not.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your thoughts.
 
And Luther didn’t just function in a vacuum. He wrote a lot of commentaries and had forceful, passionate theological positions and debate but in the end he was one of a long line of brilliant men who together formulated Lutheran doctrine and the belief system. Anti-Luther critics ironically give him more credit than he deserves sometimes in an attempt to slam him. 😛
Mikeoffaith said:
We’ll work on something better and see if we can turn that disappointment around.

I don’t see the difference between a priest or a bishop when it comes to elevating a teaching to dogma. Even on this thread there is no one that has stated that even a Roman Catholic bishop other than the one of Rome could elevate a teaching to dogma. However, as with anything the fact of could, should or would are subjective and relative. Could Luther have elevated it to dogma? I’m sure he could have just as much as I could. Would it be just as binding as if I had, probably. Would he have? Probably not. Should he have? Again probably not.
Click to expand...
 
Mike,

Maybe I’m in the mood to stick up for Luther because I just got back from my second presentation of the Grace Lutheran Christmas Show. I couldn’t get over the godly, reverent, charming, fun, talented production they had. Those kids were just driven by the Spirit. The school my son attends, an LCMS Lutheran school, is just exceptional. They are so loving to everyone there and just radiate Christ. People can trash Lutherans all they want but boy they’re a Holy Spirit-driven group. I thank God for the school! 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top