Lutheran Confessions - Infallible?

[Tomster]

Heck there’s nothing wrong to deferring to authority, I’m Catholic after all.
My best thought is if a poster can’t or doesn’t want to answer a question they should
should not.
Jon is on here quite a bit and he always shows up.
It just adds to the volume of posts to always say well “Jon correct me if I’m wrong”
etc.

That said, the more posts the merrier right?

Absolutely Mary. Catholics rightly defer to legitimate authority. The teaching authority of the Church and Sacred Tradition and the Bible. Can’t go wrong there.

Unfortunately our Lutheran brothers and sisters have rejected all of that and are all left to fend for themselves. That is their tradition.

 

[stewstew03]

…
Lutherans follow the Lutheran Confessions because they are a right reflection of the Scriptures; they do not follow individual private judgments or interpretations.
…

Yep… as we’ve already demonstrated on this thread… the Confessions are fides ecclesiastica (Lutheran version).

.

 

[steido01]

Catholics rightly defer to legitimate authority. The teaching authority of the Church and Sacred Tradition and the Bible. Can’t go wrong there.

Unfortunately our Lutheran brothers and sisters have rejected all of that and are all left to fend for themselves. That is their tradition.

Where do you find any of your claims in our Confessions? “Word Alone” does not mean total abandonment of church authority or Sacred Tradition.

 

[Tomster]

Aren’t you asking a loaded question? Lutherans follow the Lutheran Confessions because they are a right reflection of the Scriptures; they do not follow individual private judgments or interpretations. It seems like you’re creating a definition of Lutheran tradition that is contrary to what we profess and expecting us to follow your rules.

Right reflection? In some areas? Possible. Are they infallible? You would be the first to say no. Take a good look at the history of Lutheranism in Amercan in just the twentieth century. These devoted Christians looked at the Confessional Statements, read them, compared them to what the Bible said, and split into a great many separate faith communities. So much for your statement denying private judgment or interpretations. All of the breakaway Lutheran communities each thought they got it right. And, believe me, there were a great many of them.

 

[benjohnson]

We are looking for your own personal interpretations or, if you will, private judgments which should be based on the Bible and the Bible alone.

We don’t do that - that would be crazy (at least in my case.)

We don’t deny tradition at all, we only test it against scripture for correctness as a practice of the church.

I’m curious as to what you think our church is like! I have a vision of a padded room where people throw bibles at each other and everybody uses them like a ‘Choose Your Own Adventure.’

“If you think Mary is the Theotokos, turn to page 487. Otherwise turn to page 782.”

 

[benjohnson]

These devoted Christians looked at the Confessional Statements, read them, compared them to what the Bible said, and split into a great many separate faith communities.

Sadly, many people who came to America as Lutherans really were more ‘reformed’ due to European politics and intrigue. Even then, the secularism of the 20th century is probably the proximate cause of their current foundering.

As an aside, I urge Catholic to be very cautious in thinking that secularism has passed them by - in my opinion the influx of Catholic immigrants has hidden the effects in this country.

 

[benjohnson]

@Ben, you seem to be coming along very well in your understanding of Confessional Lutheranism. It wouldn’t hurt to respond more often with Scripture or quotes from the Confessions.

Kind of you to say!

 

[steido01]

Right reflection? In some areas? Possible.

I’ll take that as progress.

Are they infallible? You would be the first to say no.

Correct.

Take a good look at the history of Lutheranism in Amercan in just the twentieth century. These devoted Christians looked at the Confessional Statements, read them, compared them to what the Bible said, and split into a great many separate faith communities. So much for your statement denying private judgment or interpretations. All of the breakaway Lutheran communities each thought they got it right. And, believe me, there were a great many of them.

History may disagree with you here. Lutheranism in America was very well-connected and what little difference that existed between Synods was generally considered adiaphora (look up the history of the Synodical Conference). It wasn’t until Reformed influences and their liberalizing effects (along with the accompanying anti-Catholic-and-anyone-who-acts-like-them sentiments) crept in to some Synods that fellowship was eventually broken. The breakaway groups you speak of do not hold a quia view of the Confessions. These quatenus churches practice what is essentially a Calvinized form of “Lutheranism,” to varying degrees, and entirely misrepresent the name.

 

[Erich]

No literate person could possible deduce such abuses are within the confines of confessional Lutheranism. That there are people who abandon the Christianity of the apostles and yet claim ownership of the name of others speaks to their failures and not of ours.

Sadly, Lutherans are not the only ones to experience such people.

The thread subject is about Lutheran confessions and their possible consequences…not what happened to those outside Lutherans.

This thread got away from me, and I’m only now catching up.

I could be wrong, but the first thing I thought of when I read Ben’s post was that he was talking about Lutherans who abandoned the Christianity of the apostles and yet claim ownership of the name Lutheran.

For example:

ELCA: female clergy, female bishops, partnered gay and lesbian clergy, health plan pays for abortions

LCMC: female clergy, no bishops (according to crossalone.us/2006/comparisonlcmc.pdf), no gay and lesbian clergy, health plan does not pay for abortions

LCMS: no female clergy, women may serve as congregation president/chairperson

WELS: no female clergy, women may not vote within their congregations where authority is exercised over men

Which of these is closest to the Christianity of the apostles?

I don’t think He at all is ok with competing doctrines.

Agreed!

 

[Tomster]

We don’t do that - that would be crazy (at least in my case.)

We don’t deny tradition at all, we only test it against scripture for correctness as a practice of the church.

I’m curious as to what you think our church is like! I have a vision of a padded room where people throw bibles at each other and everybody uses them like a ‘Choose Your Own Adventure.’

“If you think Mary is the Theotokos, turn to page 487. Otherwise turn to page 782.”

Talk about testing traditions within Lutheranism . . .

What is Lutheranism’s reason d’etre as distinct communion in the twenty-first century?

There is no agreement to this question among Lutherans. There is a a basic divergency of attitutde though. On one side there are the conservatives (a word used to show distinction), who distinguish Lutheranism as essentially an adherence to the principles enunciated in a half dozen “symbolic documents,” beginning with the Confession of Augsburg (1530) and ending with the Formula of Concord (1577). Without this adherence, it would be quite impossible “correctly to acknowledge God and call upon Him to preserve harmony in the Church and to bridle the audaccity of such as invent new doctrines.”

At the other extremes are those who are looking for a fusion of Lutheran and other denominations, and liberals (again, a word to show distinction) who do not hesitate to dismiss Lutheran Confessions as dated, outmoded, and no more binding than any other statement of religious sentiment. Arguing against rigid conservatists, they insist that, “Symbolism is no part of original Lutheranism. The full symbolic system contended for was not adopted until 1580, after the Lutheran Church had existed more than a half century.”

Moreover the Formula of Concord itself declares that the Scriptures alone are the norm by which “all doctrines are to be examined.” Since “the official declaration of historical Lutheranism plainly declares that with new light and more adequate interpretation of the biblical writings, changes in doctrine are not only anticipated but necessary.” There is scarcely need, say the modernists, to point out that the Lutheran Confessions “contain many views no longer tenable. We would, for instance, hesitate to call the Pope the Antichrist. We might well question the Christological doctrine on the ubiquity of Christ’s body. Even the position which Luther himself took on the interpretation of the Eucharist may fairly be challenged.”

Between these extremes is a variety of opinion that defies classification.

Can the real Lutheran Church be identified? And, if so, who will authoritatively make this identification? Is it really possible for anyone within Lutheranism to make this determination? Can the answers to these questions be found by individuals searching the Scriptures?

I hope your curiosity has been satisfied because mine hasn’t. I need some answers here.

 

[benjohnson]

I could be wrong, but the first thing I thought of when I read Ben’s post was that he was talking about Lutherans who abandoned the Christianity of the apostles and yet claim ownership of the name Lutheran.

Indeed! I was referring to those Lutherans who have abandoned much of their own faith in the face of modernity.

Sadly, no Lutheran synod has entirely escaped these times and we all have fallen short in some way. But even then, a broken synod may have many whole churches, thanks be to God!

 

[Tomster]

Indeed! I was referring to those Lutherans who have abandoned much of their own faith in the face of modernity.

Sadly, no Lutheran synod has entirely escaped these times and we all have fallen short in some way. But even then, a broken synod may have many whole churches, thanks be to God!

What good is the synod if it is broken? Who has the authority to fix it? Who is to say that this modernity that you speak of, Ben, isn’t the correct form of Lutheranism? If only you could respond by citing chapter and verse on these very important issues. Stay true to your tradition, Ben. Seriously.

 

[Tomster]

This thread got away from me, and I’m only now catching up.

I could be wrong, but the first thing I thought of when I read Ben’s post was that he was talking about Lutherans who abandoned the Christianity of the apostles and yet claim ownership of the name Lutheran.

For example:

ELCA: female clergy, female bishops, partnered gay and lesbian clergy, health plan pays for abortions

LCMC: female clergy, no bishops (according to crossalone.us/2006/comparisonlcmc.pdf), no gay and lesbian clergy, health plan does not pay for abortions

LCMS: no female clergy, women may serve as congregation president/chairperson

WELS: no female clergy, women may not vote within their congregations where authority is exercised over men

Which of these is closest to the Christianity of the apostles?

Agreed!

Thank you very much. And each and everyone of these groups still claims the title Lutheran. I wonder how they would justify their positions by citing chapter and verse?

 

[Isaiah45_9]

We don’t do that - that would be crazy (at least in my case.)

We don’t deny tradition at all, we only test it against scripture for correctness as a practice of the church.

I’m curious as to what you think our church is like! I have a vision of a padded room where people throw bibles at each other and everybody uses them like a ‘Choose Your Own Adventure.’

“If you think Mary is the Theotokos, turn to page 487. Otherwise turn to page 782.”

Brother,

How can you test Tradition while being apart from It?

 

[benjohnson]

Between these extremes is a variety of opinion that defies classification.

That we have plenty of joy filled work in preaching the Gospel in front of us is certainly true!

 

[Tomster]

We don’t do that - that would be crazy (at least in my case.)

We don’t deny tradition at all, we only test it against scripture for correctness as a practice of the church.

I’m curious as to what you think our church is like! I have a vision of a padded room where people throw bibles at each other and everybody uses them like a ‘Choose Your Own Adventure.’

“If you think Mary is the Theotokos, turn to page 487. Otherwise turn to page 782.”

There is a lot of truth in the third paragraph of your post, Ben, whether you realize it or not. No joke. Take a serious look at the history of Lutheranism especially at its beginnings. I will admit, though, that I have yet to find instances where a padded room was used in their deliberations.

 

[Tomster]

Brother,

How can you test Tradition while being apart from It?

 

[benjohnson]

How can you test Tradition while being apart from It?

You question is perceptive: that if you are wholly enmeshed in a way of doing things, what would trigger an examination of your mode of operation. For me, it’s usually when the deficiencies become apparent - and even then, some deficiencies are better to be suffered than rebelled against.

So to answer directly: I don’t think we claim to be apart from tradition, only that we discount those authorities that are contrary to Scripture, with tradition being one of those authorities.

The obvious question, I would think, would be then to wonder if Lutherans examine their own church with such a standard.

In my case, one would have to acknowledge the deficiencies in our own church and wonder if rebelling against them would bring us closer to the cross. I can say loudly that for me and my family the answer is a rather loud ‘NO!’

 

[benjohnson]

What good is the synod if it is broken?

Ah HA! Here’s where Lutheran acknowledgement of potential imperfection in the church comes into play - in that my imperfect pastor in an imperfect church has led me to the cross and the perfect man and perfect God who died for all of us.

That God grants grace to imperfect creatures is a joy! Indeed our salvation depends on it.

I understand the Catholic have a much higher image of their own church, and I’m happy for you that you’re able to sustain it. Alas, I am not able, and probably why I remain happily in God’s hands in my church.

 

[steido01]

Rather than measuring Lutheranism by Ben, or Jon, or myself, wouldn’t it make more sense to define it by what the Lutheran Confessions actually state? Lutheranism, when properly practiced, should be identifiable to any observer. @Tomster, could you please respond to my question in post #140?

I have a hunch that once we start taking a look at what the Confessions actually say, we may find that some of the groups calling themselves Lutheran are no more Lutheran than Rosemarie Smead is Catholic…