Lutheran Confessions - Infallible?

[benjohnson]

Go on…I would like to see that :slapfight:

I should also point out that I’m new to faith - I’ve only read the bible about twice.

But even so, frankly, I’m not that big a fan of ‘prooftexting’ as if each person can discern the same correct meaning from each text. Obviously, there are passages that leave no room for debate - but even seemingly easy passages seem to inspire in individuals a really weird propensity to twist and turn.

A good example is “This is my body.” To me, this is abundantly clear and requires no commentary. But for some, they absolutely need that commentary and teaching because they seem to think to think that Jesus commands us to have a light snack of crackers and grape juice in the middle of our service.

Even if my misgivings about ‘prooftexting’ were not true, it still shouldn’t do it as I understand it: As using Scripture to explain the Lutheran Confessions would force me to pretend to not be Lutheran - for under Lutheran teaching, I don’t get to do that. Scripture is interpreted by the church. Not me. Especially not me, because I’d make a mess of it.

Being rather clever, you’ve probably noticed that I worked myself into a corner: I believe the Confessions are a right reflection of Scripture because I believe in the Church’s teaching about the Confessions and Scripture.

Sound’s almost Catholic doesn’t it? But that doesn’t make me freak out at all !! Lutherans are ok with this - we don’t claim that Catholics got it all wrong, only a few things wrong.

 

[JonNC]

Jon, curious though I am… what scripture to do you refer to that supports the statement above?

Is not the teaching authority of the Church in scripture?

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=aidanbradypop;10720340]So where in Scripture do you find that tradition, creeds, confessions…etc are a witness to Scripture? If the confessions witness or proclaim the Gospel, then we should be about to see where in Scripture it states as much. Right? Scripture Alone is very clear. One should leave by and practice what Scripture speaks and nothing more. If a practice or tradition cannot be backed up by Scripture, then one should find that practice, doctrine or tradition to be invalid. Right?

More than the teaching authority of the Church? If the Church determines that the Apostles Creed is a right reflection of scripture, then it is. Would you not agree with that?

There are groups that “live” by Scripture and nothing else. Well at least their view of certain Scriptures. IMHO, and please do not take it beyond that lol, The Lutheran faith seems to proclaim Sola Scriptura but the very belief cannot be backed up with the Scriptures they give sole authority to.

How?

See how I get confused? I admit that I have not read all the way through the BoC. Am I missing something?

Only that your perception of sola scriptura is that of those who you mention in the second paragraph, who reject any tradition at all, which, of course, is a tradition.

Jon

 

[aidanbradypop]

I should also point out that I’m new to faith - I’ve only read the bible about twice.

But even so, frankly, I’m not that big a fan of ‘prooftexting’ as if each person can discern the same correct meaning from each text. Obviously, there are passages that leave no room for debate - but even seemingly easy passages seem to inspire in individuals a really weird propensity to twist and turn.

A good example is “This is my body.” To me, this is abundantly clear and requires no commentary. But for some, they absolutely need that commentary and teaching because they seem to think to think that Jesus commands us to have a light snack of crackers and grape juice in the middle of our service.

Even if my misgivings about ‘prooftexting’ were not true, it still shouldn’t do it as I understand it: As using Scripture to explain the Lutheran Confessions would force me to pretend to not be Lutheran - for under Lutheran teaching, I don’t get to do that. Scripture is interpreted by the church. Not me. Especially not me, because I’d make a mess of it.

Being rather clever, you’ve probably noticed that I worked myself into a corner: I believe the Confessions are a right reflection of Scripture because I believe in the Church’s teaching about the Confessions and Scripture.

Sound’s almost Catholic doesn’t it? But that doesn’t make me freak out at all !! Lutherans are ok with this - we don’t claim that Catholics got it all wrong, only a few things wrong.

Thanks for your honesty. I wish more Lutherans here felt the same way. I really need to meet different Lutherans lol

 

[aidanbradypop]

More than the teaching authority of the Church? If the Church determines that the Apostles Creed is a right reflection of scripture, then it is. Would you not agree with that?

I have no problem with Confessions or Creeds. When I was a Baptist, they had a problem with Creeds and the likes. Those Creeds were not found in Scripture. The Anabaptist claim to live by Scripture. You and I should have a full face of hair if we lived 100% by the Bible.

Only that your perception of sola scriptura is that of those who you mention in the second paragraph, who reject any tradition at all, which, of course, is a tradition.

Jon

Indeed that is a tradition. But Scripture Alone is also a tadition (that explains why it is not found in Scripture) Would you agree? Just as the Confessions are a tradition as well.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Being rather clever, you’ve probably noticed that I worked myself into a corner: I believe the Confessions are a right reflection of Scripture because I believe in the Church’s teaching about the Confessions and Scripture.

Sound’s almost Catholic doesn’t it? But that doesn’t make me freak out at all !! Lutherans are ok with this - we don’t claim that Catholics got it all wrong, only a few things wrong.

I have more time than I though so I will write a bit more.

I believe that anyone who prescribes to Scripture Alone will find that they also are in a corner. Why? Many different denominations have certain tradition much like the Lutheran Confessions. The Book of Common Prayer is among the many. As I believe the CCC is a reflecion of Scripture and Tradition, I would hope you felt the same about the BoC. If you are going to be Lutheran or Methodist, you better be the best one you can possibly be.

As I have stated MANY lol times in the past, although I have many issues with Lutheranism, I consider the LCMS faith a friend of mine and God’s.

 

[JonNC]

=Tomster;10711762]Steido,

In reference to #2 in my outline, by searching the Scriptures Martin Luther gave to Lutheranism one of its most cardinal principles, traditions if you will. Luther concluded that man’s nature was totally corrupt by the Fall. This cardinal principle led logically to most of his other theological innovations. Man’s nature is totally depraved and inclined to only to evil declared the German friar. Man is a sinner in whatever he does and all his actions are disgusting to God.

This is true. Do you think that a man, on his own, without grace, is capable of coming to justification?

How could such a worthless creature be justified, be made pleasing to God? In an age when religion had become for all to many the mechanical performance of external devotions and Nominalism had undercut the orthodox positions of Thomism, Luther proclaimed his discovery of the truth that justification was by faith alone. Salvation is a free gift of God which man cannot merit. All is grace, pure grace.

You just answered your question; by grace one is justified, by faith, and not by his own works. The Spirit works grace through the fallen sinner, through the hearing Word, through Baptism.

Soon justification by faith became associated with three other principles not inherent in the original doctrine nor acceptable to the Church. These were the denial of free will, the doctrine of extrinsic justification, and the denunciation of all good works. Luther denied that man could co-operate with the actual graces God bestowed before justification. The Church, on the other hand, traditionally taught that man could reject God’s graces through the exercise of free will. By extrinsic justification the German Reformer taught that the act of justification is something entirely outside of man. Man remains a sinner, totally depraved, but God, so to speak, looks the other way. God covers man’s sins with a cloak but the sins remain. Justification never never touches the inherently sinful nature of man… The Catholic view is radically different.

From Augsburg

Article XVIII: Of Free Will.

1] Of Free Will they teach that man’s will has some liberty to choose civil righteousness, and to work 2] things subject to reason. But it has no power, without the Holy Ghost, to work the righteousness of God, that is, spiritual righteousness; since the natural man 3] receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, 1 Cor. 2:14; but this righteousness is wrought in the heart when the Holy Ghost is received 4] through the Word. These things are said in as many words by Augustine in his Hypognosticon, Book III: We grant that all men have a free will, free, inasmuch as it has the judgment of reason; not that it is thereby capable, without God, either to begin, or, at least, to complete aught in things pertaining to God, but only in works of this life, whether good 5] or evil. “Good” I call those works which spring from the good in nature, such as, willing to labor in the field, to eat and drink, to have a friend, to clothe oneself, to build a house, to marry a wife, to raise cattle, to learn diverse useful arts, or whatsoever good 6]pertains to this life. For all of these things are not without dependence on the providence of God; yea, of Him and through Him they are and have their being. “Evil” 7] I call such works as willing to worship an idol, to commit murder, etc. 8] They condemn the Pelagians and others, who teach that without the Holy Ghost, by the power of nature alone, we are able to love God above all things; also to do the commandments of God as touching “the substance of the act.” For, although nature is able in a manner to do the outward work, 9] (for it is able to keep the hands from theft and murder,) yet it cannot produce the inward motions, such as the fear of God, trust in God, chastity, patience, etc.

From the Confutation:

In the eighteenth article they confess the power of the Free Will - viz. that it has the power to work a civil righteousness, but that it has not, without the Holy Ghost, the virtue to work the righteousness of God. This confession is received and approved. For it thus becomes Catholics to pursue the middle way, so as not, with the Pelagians, to ascribe too much to the free will, nor, with the godless Manichaeans, to deny it all liberty; for both are not without fault.

More here: bookofconcord.org/confutatio.php#article18
According the Confutation, this is not an issue between us.

Sanctifying grace alters the nature of the soul, blots out what is sinful, permits it to partake in the divine nature, makes it a dwelling place of the Holy Trinity, incorporates man in the Mystical Body of Christ, makes him a child of God and heir of heaven, and places him in a position to perform supernaturally good, meritorious works, that is, works that have the power to earn the beatific vision, the participation in God’s own unending blessedness.

Other than the meritorious works phrase, what is the issue here? We would say that good works of the regenerate are good in His eyes, even though sin is part of our lives. Do they merit us salvation? No. Are they required of us by God? Yes. As Christ says:
“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38This is the great and first commandment. 39And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 40On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

Jon

 

[aidanbradypop]

You just answered your question; by grace one is justified, by faith, and not by his own works. The Spirit works grace through the fallen sinner, through the hearing Word, through Baptism.

Jon

St. James would beg to differ here.

 

[JonNC]

St. James would beg to differ here.

I don’t think he does. In fact, I think James agrees with Paul, and he further lets the regenerate know that works are necessary, to which we agree.

Jon

 

[aidanbradypop]

I don’t think he does. In fact, I think James agrees with Paul, and he further lets the regenerate know that works are necessary, to which we agree.

Jon

We do. I believe it is a simple case of different wording. The Lutherans I know believe that one should produce good works if one is faith to Christ. A good tree will produce sweet fruit, and a bad tree will produce sour or no fruit at all. St. James stated that man is not saved by faith alone. Our works play apart in our salvation. Agree?

 

[MaryT777]

We do. I believe it is a simple case of different wording. The Lutherans I know believe that one should produce good works if one is faith to Christ. A good tree will produce sweet fruit, and a bad tree will produce sour or no fruit at all. St. James stated that man is not saved by faith alone. Our works play apart in our salvation. Agree?

I don’t know Ben; are you sure the LCMS States good works are necessary for salvation?
Officially?

Can you quote official doctrine from the Concord book that says works play a part in our salvation?

 

[JonNC]

We do. I believe it is a simple case of different wording. The Lutherans I know believe that one should produce good works if one is faith to Christ. A good tree will produce sweet fruit, and a bad tree will produce sour or no fruit at all. St. James stated that man is not saved by faith alone. Our works play apart in our salvation. Agree?

Only in this sense: God commands us to do good works - to love our neighbor as ourselves. Failure to do as God has commanded is sin. Repeated, unrepented sin can lead to a loss of saving faith. The Formula of Concord states:
*6. Accordingly, we also believe, teach, and confess that when it is said: The regenerate do good works from a free spirit, this is not to be understood as though it is at the option of the regenerate man to do or to forbear doing good when he wishes, and that he can nevertheless retain faith if he intentionally perseveres in sins. *

Jon

 

[benjohnson]

I don’t know Ben; are you sure the LCMS States good works are necessary for salvation?
Officially?

Can you quote official doctrine from the Concord book that says works play a part in our salvation?

If I wrote that, I’m wrong! Good works are a product of the Grace through Faith. If you have no good works then obviously somethings amiss, or you just received saving Grace. In Lutheran though, works done before Grace are not responsive good work as we do no good work without God.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Only in this sense: God commands us to do good works - to love our neighbor as ourselves. Failure to do as God has commanded is sin. Repeated, unrepented sin can lead to a loss of saving faith. The Formula of Concord states:
*6. Accordingly, we also believe, teach, and confess that when it is said: The regenerate do good works from a free spirit, this is not to be understood as though it is at the option of the regenerate man to do or to forbear doing good when he wishes, and that he can nevertheless retain faith if he intentionally perseveres in sins. *

Jon

I believe the non Catholic understanding of “works” often becomes tangled up in false information from other non Catholics and even fallen away Catholics I have noticed.

Works seems like something we have to clock in for and get paid for. It should be viewed more as an act of charity and love.

Christ commanded us to do many things and even through the Apostles he commanded such things. I believe both of our faiths teach basically the same doctrine but simply word it differently.

 

[PRmerger]

By the way, you are confusing “Affirming the Consequent,” which is an invalid form, with “Affirming the Antecedent”, a valid form.

Valid
Affirming the Antecedent:
If A is infallible, then B is infallible.
A is infallible.
Therefore, B is infallible.

Invalid
Affirming the Consequent
If A is infallible, then B is infallible.
B is infallible.
Therefore, A is infallible.

.

stew, I think you can legitimately claim this:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Note to my literalist friends: we understand this is not a game to be “won”. It’s a discussion–nothing more and nothing less.

However, the GIF and the post match too sublimely to pass up posting it.

 

[Porknpie]

I believe the non Catholic understanding of “works” often becomes tangled up in false information from other non Catholics and even fallen away Catholics I have noticed.

Works seems like something we have to clock in for and get paid for. It should be viewed more as an act of charity and love.

Christ commanded us to do many things and even through the Apostles he commanded such things. I believe both of our faiths teach basically the same doctrine but simply word it differently.

We ARE: Saved by Grace…through faith…working in love.

Works are necessary but so is faith. It’s not “either / or” rather both.

Which is the greatest…faith, hope or love?

Love.

If faith was all that is needed for salvation, the greatest would be “Faith”!

Jesus say to be saved one must “follow the commandments”…doing so is a “work”.

Jesus says one must be baptised! … doing so is a “work”.

Jesus says we must eat his body and drink his blood in the Eucharist…doing so is a work.

Jesus says we must forgive one another or we will not be forgiven…if we are not forgiven, we can not enter heaven and must enter hell…forgiving is a work.

Catholics unanamious agree with every passage of scripture that says we are saved by Faith. Amen. But nowhere…no where in scripture does it say that we are saved by “faith alone”. The only time the words “faith alone” are used together in all of scripture…all of it are here…

[BIBLEDRB]James 2:24[/BIBLEDRB]



Pork

 

[aidanbradypop]

We ARE: Saved by Grace…through faith…working in love.

Works are necessary but so is faith. It’s not “either / or” rather both.

Which is the greatest…faith, hope or love?

Love.

If faith was all that is needed for salvation, the greatest would be “Faith”!

Jesus say to be saved one must “follow the commandments”…doing so is a “work”.

Jesus says one must be baptised! … doing so is a “work”.

Jesus says we must eat his body and drink his blood in the Eucharist…doing so is a work.

Jesus says we must forgive one another or we will not be forgiven…if we are not forgiven, we can not enter heaven and must enter hell…forgiving is a work.

Catholics unanamious agree with every passage of scripture that says we are saved by Faith. Amen. But nowhere…no where in scripture does it say that we are saved by “faith alone”. The only time the words “faith alone” are used together in all of scripture…all of it are here…

[BIBLEDRB]James 2:24[/BIBLEDRB]



Pork

 

[JonNC]

I believe the non Catholic understanding of “works” often becomes tangled up in false information from other non Catholics and even fallen away Catholics I have noticed.

Works seems like something we have to clock in for and get paid for. It should be viewed more as an act of charity and love.

Christ commanded us to do many things and even through the Apostles he commanded such things. I believe both of our faiths teach basically the same doctrine but simply word it differently.

Oh, Amen!!!

Luther, as quoted in the Formula of Concord:

Thus faith is a divine work in us, that changes us and regenerates us of God, and puts to death the old Adam, makes us entirely different men in heart, spirit, mind, and all powers, and brings with it [confers] the Holy Ghost. Oh, it is a living, busy, active, powerful thing that we have in faith, so that it is impossible for it not to do good without ceasing. 11] Nor does it ask whether good works are to be done; but before the question is asked, it has wrought them, and is always engaged in doing them. But he who does not do such works is void of faith, and gropes and looks about after faith and good works, and knows neither what faith nor what good works are, yet babbles and prates with many words concerning faith and good works. 12] [Justifying] faith is a living, bold [firm] trust in God’s grace, so certain that a man would die a thousand times for it [rather than suffer this trust to be wrested from him]. And this trust and knowledge of divine grace renders joyful, fearless, and cheerful towards God and all creatures, which [joy and cheerfulness] the Holy Ghost works through faith; and on account of this, man becomes ready and cheerful, without coercion, to do good to every one, to serve every one, and to suffer everything for love and praise to God, who has conferred this grace on him, so that it is impossible to separate works from faith, yea, just as impossible as it is for heat and light to be separated from fire.

Jon

 

[steido01]

Oh, Amen!!!

Luther, as quoted in the Formula of Concord:

Jon

Some days, I read these boards and I am disheartened by how far apart Catholics and Lutherans seem to be.
And then there are days like these. Hope is a great thing.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Some days, I read these boards and I am disheartened by how far apart Catholics and Lutherans seem to be.
And then there are days like these. Hope is a great thing.

Don’t be so negative all the time…

I enjoy your conversations as well! Thanks for posting here