Lutheran Confessions - Infallible?

[Isaiah45_9]

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!’

I understand you point about perception. But that is not what I was referring to.

Scriptures as Paul said are breathed out by God, that is: the Old Testament that Paul had at the time in his hands. Given that Paul was the Apostles for the Gentiles and the Gentile tongue of the day was mostly Greek, we have to inevitably come to the conclusion that it probably refers to the Septuagint. Also given to the fact that Paul did not include the table of contents when he made the reference, we have to understand that this Church already had an understanding of what the reference to Scriptures was.

This gives birth to Christian Tradition and within this Christian Tradition the New Testament is born. Born within the confines of the Catholic Church.

If you stand on the outside and don’t understand the Sacramental life of the Church and how Scriptures are used in this context, it would be impossible to test Tradition with Scriptures, given that Scriptures are part of this Tradition.

So unless you are willing to jump in and experience the Catholic Faith D), it would not be possible to truly see how Scriptures are consistent with the Tradition of the Church.

 

[benjohnson]

So unless you are willing to jump in and experience the Catholic Faith D), it would not be possible to truly see how Scriptures are consistent with the Tradition of the Church.

Remember, we don’t view ourselves as ‘breaking away.’ Lutherans don’t claim to be outside the Church - we make a positive profession to believe in the one holy, catholic and apostolic church.

From our viewpoint, when we were no longer in communion with the bishop of rome, we still had our monitories, cathedrals, bishops, archbishops and continued in this fashion. Obviously, history hasn’t been kind to us.

I do appreciate the invitation! Of course, you’re more than welcome in our church, and with joy we count you as a good brother in Christ!

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Remember, we don’t view ourselves as ‘breaking away.’ Lutherans don’t claim to be outside the Church - we make a positive profession to believe in the one holy, catholic and apostolic church.

From our viewpoint, when we were no longer in communion with the bishop of rome, we still had our monitories, cathedrals, bishops, archbishops and continued in this fashion. Obviously, history hasn’t been kind to us.

I do appreciate the invitation! Of course, you’re more than welcome in our church, and with joy we count you as a good brother in Christ!

Thanks ben,

I did visit various LCMS prior to coming back to the Catholic Faith. If I weren’t a Catholic, I’d be a Lutheran (LCMS) for sure .

I do count you, batman and Jon (special affection for him ) and other separated brethren as brothers in Christ as well.

Peace be with you Ben.

 

[JonNC]

I enjoy reading Jon’s posts, but in response to Ben’s post; there ARE INDEED other
LCMS posters on this forum that are very well versed in their Faith.

Mary.

Agreed! And at least one ELCA pastor far more knowledgeable than me.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

But …is JohNC infallible?

Indeed, I am not. I do notice, however, that Catholics often defer to each other here.

If my jumping in has offended someone, I apologize. I wasn’t speaking for Ben, or any other Lutheran, but simply for myself.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Respectfully, no Jon. The questions were posed to Ben.

Honestly, I wasn’t really asking permission, just being polite. The fact is that on a forum such as this a lot of cross-posting goes on. Catholics insert themselves in conversations, as to others, and I’m happy for the fact. For example, Gabriel of 12 was away for a while, and now is back. He has commented on a number of posts, adding what I believe to be good, well thought out comments.

Additionally, I always welcome your comments, even if I didn’t direct a post or question to you.

Jon

EDIT: I might add that Ben’s response came first, so I don’t believe I interfered with his response, or influenced it. Besides, Ben does a pretty good job, anyway.

 

[Porknpie]

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

What’s interesting about your quote is that the Church selected scripture as tested by Tradition.

 

[benjohnson]

What’s interesting about your quote is that the Church selected scripture as tested by Tradition.

Thus we all should be as one!

In God’s time, I pray for it!

 

[studentoflove]

2 Thessalonians 2:15

Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Dont stop following Peter because of Judas. That is kind of harsh but you get the point.

Jon, the Luthern church may have had bishops and whatnot but they still broke away. It is NOT a continutation of the the One Church. That would be called the Catholic Church. That is fact.

 

[aidanbradypop]

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…

Ms Smead is a nice lady…lol…leave her alone

I get what you are saying though. With any faith there will be people like that. A bit sad

Agreed! And at least one ELCA pastor far more knowledgeable than me.

Jon

gnuss I believe his name is, is a wonderful poster and I enjoy when he jumps in.

 

[gcnuss]

gnuss I believe his name is, is a wonderful poster and I enjoy when he jumps in.

Thank you for your kind words. I can only hope that I live up to my press. And, most certainly, I am much in awe of a number of the Catholics who post here and of my Lutheran brothers, especially Jon who does such a good job of presenting Lutheran beliefs.

 

[Porknpie]

Thank you for your kind words. I can only hope that I live up to my press. And, most certainly, I am much in awe of a number of the Catholics who post here and of my Lutheran brothers, especially Jon who does such a good job of presenting Lutheran beliefs.

Jon does a nice job presenting the Catholic beliefs too…

 

[MaryT777]

Pastor Gary:
It’s always nice to have the ELCA point of view. I have friends in both synods.
Mary.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Thank you for your kind words. I can only hope that I live up to my press. And, most certainly, I am much in awe of a number of the Catholics who post here and of my Lutheran brothers, especially Jon who does such a good job of presenting Lutheran beliefs.

 

[JonNC]

Jon does a nice job presenting the Catholic beliefs too…

Compliment accepted, with humility.

Jon

 

[Tomster]

Ben,

I have come up with what I think to be a good outline of Lutheran doctrine. Read it over and critque it if you will. Add or subtract from it but please give us good reasons why.

1. Original justice was connatural to Adam, like sight to the eyes.
2. Original sin (loss of original justice) has, therefore, corrupted intrinsically human nature in such a way that man is no longer capable of doing any good at all.
3. By original sin human reason has degenerated and free will no longer exists.
4. Therefore, man is no longer responsible for his acts, especially since he is tyrannically dominated by concupiscence, which is intrinsically sinful even in its instinctive movements.
5. Man, fallen through original sin, is incurable, so deeply that not even God can heal him anymore. Therefore the Redemption is entirely a work extrinsic to us, a work done by Christ, who substitutes Himself for us in order to pay the penalty of our sins to the divine justice (penal substitution). Human justification is done extrinsically - in a negative way, i.e., by covering up sin (not by removing it), and in a positive way, i.e., by attributing to us the holiness and the merits of Christ.
6. There is no habitual grace in us; actual grace is not a power or a quality of the soul, but it is God Himself working in us.
7. The only good act man can do is the act of fiducial faith or abandonment of self to God, by which he confides in His mercy and trusts that his sins have been pardoned.
8. Consequently, the sacraments have no longer any raison d’etre: Luther keeps baptism, penance (by which the remission of sins is declared but not effected), and the Supper (which is no longer the Mass). The bread and wine in the Eucharist remain as they are, but Christ makes Himself present in them (companation), not through the consecration alone, but also by virtue of the faith of the faithful.
9. The monarchical Church with its hierarchy is a human institution: there is no intermediary between the individual and God. The only source from which man can and must draw divine truth is the Bible, interpreted individually under the illumination of God (free thought and inquiry). Tradition has only a human value. The true Church of Christ is the invisible Church (influence of Wycliff and Huss).
10. The denial of indulgences, of purgatory, of the invocation of the saints, of prayers for the dead.

Steido,

Since Ben and Jon have stuck out and failed to critique the outline I provided with Scripture references is there any possiblity that you’re up to it?

 

[steido01]

Steido,

Since Ben and Jon have stuck out and failed to critique the outline I provided with Scripture references is there any possiblity that you’re up to it?

I could certainly take a stab at it this weekend, if it would aid in your understanding of Lutheranism. “If I may,” that is. However, the Scripture I would cite would be more or less the same as those given by our Lutheran forefathers in the Confessions, which cite Scripture at each point of doctrine. Wouldn’t it be easier to simply read the Confessions?

Rather than defining Lutheranism and then asking Lutherans to defend it, might we have a better discussion if we take a look at the Confessions article-by-article in a new thread? This might also serve to clear up some confusion I’ve noted in previous posts (see #140). Let me know and I’d be happy to start it.

Yours in Christ,

 

[Tomster]

I could certainly take a stab at it this weekend, if it would aid in your understanding of Lutheranism. “If I may,” that is. However, the Scripture I would cite would be more or less the same as those given by our Lutheran forefathers in the Confessions, which cite Scripture at each point of doctrine. Wouldn’t it be easier to simply read the Confessions?

Rather than defining Lutheranism and then asking Lutherans to defend it, might we have a better discussion if we take a look at the Confessions article-by-article in a new thread? This might also serve to clear up some confusion I’ve noted in previous posts (see #140). Let me know and I’d be happy to start it.

Yours in Christ,

You’re on deck. Let’s stick to my outline if you please. And, above all, let’s remember what the the title of this thread is - “Lutheran Confessions - Infallible?”

Before you start preparing your response, though, you say that “the Scriptures I would cite would be more or less the same as those given by our Lutheran forefathers in the Confessions”.

Let’s clarify: Are you saying that you, personally, have the authority to add or subtract the Scriptural underpinnings used by your Lutheran forefathers?

 

[benjohnson]

Rather than defining Lutheranism and then asking Lutherans to defend it, might we have a better discussion if we take a look at the Confessions article-by-article in a new thread? This might also serve to clear up some confusion I’ve noted in previous posts (see #140). Let me know and I’d be happy to start it.

I would think this would be better for all of us - both Lutheran and Catholics alike.

Attempting to defend a straw-man argument is neither good for the person creating the straw-man nor the person defending it. It was an error on my part not to recognise this situation.

 

[steido01]

You’re on deck. Let’s stick to my outline if you please. And, above all, let’s remember what the the title of this thread is - “Lutheran Confessions - Infallible?”

Before you start preparing your response, though, you say that “the Scriptures I would cite would be more or less the same as those given by our Lutheran forefathers in the Confessions”.

Let’s clarify: Are you saying that you, personally, have the authority to add or subtract the Scriptural underpinnings used by your Lutheran forefathers?

Not at all. I would simply cite the same Scripture passages they did. Scripture is infallible.