Lutheran leader acknowledges Reformation's 'damaging aspects' [CC]
- Status
W
WorkerPriest
Guest
Not much new there, unfortunately. I found the LWF president’s words sadly anemic… but that has been the curse of the LWF for a long time. While the JDDJ is a fascinating development between Lutherans and Roman Catholics, I think there are much more pressing issues within the LWF that will be problematic.
Frankly, I see greater fraternity between confessional, orthodox Lutherans (regardless of their affilitiation with the LWF) and Roman Catholics emerging at the grass roots levels, where we have found common cause to speak to the culture of death from a firmly Scriptural and patristic perspective, preaching together against mortal sin and for repentance and faith in Christ.
Peace to you.
Frankly, I see greater fraternity between confessional, orthodox Lutherans (regardless of their affilitiation with the LWF) and Roman Catholics emerging at the grass roots levels, where we have found common cause to speak to the culture of death from a firmly Scriptural and patristic perspective, preaching together against mortal sin and for repentance and faith in Christ.
Peace to you.
R
rr1213
Guest
Interesting
B
Barbkw
Guest
“We rejoice because of the ways in which we have reached new levels of theological understanding and agreement, notably in the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. This is a landmark ecumenical accomplishment: its implications are still being explored in many local contexts around the world and in our international theological dialogue.”
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html
JOINT DECLARATION ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION by the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church
Preamble
1.The doctrine of justification was of central importance for the Lutheran Reformation of the sixteenth century. It was held to be the “first and chief article”[1] and at the same time the "ruler and judge over all other Christian doctrines.
"[2] The doctrine of justification was particularly asserted and defended in its Reformation shape and special valuation over against the Roman Catholic Church and theology of that time, which in turn asserted and defended a doctrine of justification of a different character.
From the Reformation perspective, justification was the crux of all the disputes. Doctrinal condemnations were put forward both in the Lutheran Confessions[3] and by the Roman Catholic Church’s Council of Trent. These condemnations are still valid today and thus have a church-dividing effect.
2.For the Lutheran tradition, the …"
Continued at:
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html
JOINT DECLARATION ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION by the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church
Preamble
1.The doctrine of justification was of central importance for the Lutheran Reformation of the sixteenth century. It was held to be the “first and chief article”[1] and at the same time the "ruler and judge over all other Christian doctrines.
"[2] The doctrine of justification was particularly asserted and defended in its Reformation shape and special valuation over against the Roman Catholic Church and theology of that time, which in turn asserted and defended a doctrine of justification of a different character.
From the Reformation perspective, justification was the crux of all the disputes. Doctrinal condemnations were put forward both in the Lutheran Confessions[3] and by the Roman Catholic Church’s Council of Trent. These condemnations are still valid today and thus have a church-dividing effect.
2.For the Lutheran tradition, the …"
Continued at:
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html
P
pablope
Guest
Hi, Jon,
For my own information, is the LWF a different group to the ELCA and LCMS? There is no connection between the three?
I read the statement, and this is my two cents worth:
To start on the path of reconciliation, there has to be an admittance of one’s fault, regardless of who is at fault…and there has to be humility to accept that fault. I thought the statement about the damages of the reformation, whether one agrees or not, is a start in the right direction. I see humility in the statement. It reduces the heat and gets all on the path to meaningful dialogue.
Humility also lets down pride, and I think it should be exercised by all sides, as a path towards the reconciliation.
Blessings to all…and merry christmas to all too…
pablo
Hi Pablo,
The Lutheran World Federation is a federation of many Lutheran synods worldwide. The ELCA is a member of the LWF, the LCMS is not. The LCMS is a member of the International Lutheran Council, whose members tend to be more conservative and orthodox than those of the LWF.
I, too, think this helps. The Catholic Catechism states, in regards the Reformation, that there is fault enough to go around, and I believe this to be the case, and also a recognition on the CC’s part of its role in the horrible situation of our disunity.
And also to you,
Jon
P
Petergee
Guest
Yes a grudging and heavily qualified admission that the protestant revolt (so-called “Reformation”) had “damaging aspects”. But even that is progress. It’s rare to meet a protestant who will admit that their forefathers’ decision to split off from the Church was a bad thing that resulted in 200+ years of vicious bloodshed of Christians by Christians. .
How do you know that their admission was grudging? Is there some special insight you have regarding these men and their statement to the pope?
There is no doubt that the events that led to the Reformation, and those thereafter, have done terrible damage to the unity of Christ’s Church, to its outreach and ministry. Our ability to present the message of Christ to the world is wounded by our division.
What you won’t find is some admission that Luther, et al, acted in a vacuum, or that the leaders of the Church at that time were innocent in their actions regarding these events.
As the Catholic Catechism says, *But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame." *
Jon
P
Petergee
Guest
The fact that it has taken them nearly 500 years to give even this extremely limited and heavily qualified (and virtually contradicted in the following phrase) admission that there was some damage caused by their founders’ separation from and antipathy to the Church.
W
WorkerPriest
Guest
I sense that you are not well versed in ecumenical statements between Lutherans and Roman Catholics, even since Vatican II. There has been much said, and much written, by parties on both sides, lamenting the effects of actions taken (and those not taken) which have weakened our common witness to Christ.
What Jon points out is absolutely true, and both communions have been repentant about their own actions for quite some time. This has facilitated a great deal of healing and Christian charity between Lutheran and Roman Christians. There is no need to perpetuate the war. When all the dust of centuries old arguments is finally settled, what we are left with is the Church as it is, today. Christians are divided, and we need to work toward reconcilliation which is honest, faithful, and humble.
Peace be with you.
What Jon points out is absolutely true, and both communions have been repentant about their own actions for quite some time. This has facilitated a great deal of healing and Christian charity between Lutheran and Roman Christians. There is no need to perpetuate the war. When all the dust of centuries old arguments is finally settled, what we are left with is the Church as it is, today. Christians are divided, and we need to work toward reconcilliation which is honest, faithful, and humble.
Peace be with you.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
I am always left with bewilderment regarding Jesus’s telling us that the Holy Spirit would lead us to “all truth” and the “gates of hell would not prevail” and other such triumphal language for the Church if Jesus meant for it to ending up being cleaved and morphed into a myriad number of contradicting bodies? My Anglican rector told me that he believes all Protestant and Catholic and Orthodox bodies together still comprise the Church by nature of our baptism and confession that Christ is Lord. I have trouble buying that. Jesus and Paul deplored the idea of schism and prayer that we “may all be one” seems paramount on the Lord’s agenda. One of the Christian bodies must be the fullness of Truth that Jesus promised or otherwise it seems a contradiction. My Anglican rector told me, “you’ll never find a perfect theological Church” and I was left scratching my head. 
Hi Scott,I am always left with bewilderment regarding Jesus’s telling us that the Holy Spirit would lead us to “all truth” and the “gates of hell would not prevail” and other such triumphal language for the Church if Jesus meant for it to ending up being cleaved and morphed into a myriad number of contradicting bodies? My Anglican rector told me that he believes all Protestant and Catholic and Orthodox bodies together still comprise the Church by nature of our baptism and confession that Christ is Lord. I have trouble buying that. Jesus and Paul deplored the idea of schism and prayer that we “may all be one” seems paramount on the Lord’s agenda. One of the Christian bodies must be the fullness of Truth that Jesus promised or otherwise it seems a contradiction. My Anglican rector told me, “you’ll never find a perfect theological Church” and I was left scratching my head.
On balance, I agree with you, but also with your rector. And here’s how.
First, I agree with your rector that, as the Lutheran confessions say, the Church is the community of believers, where the word is preached and the sacraments administered. That isn’t to say that all communions are completely orthodox in theology. For example, I believe that members of the Reformed churches are, indeed members of the Church, even though they have heterodox teachings, in the Lutheran view. And I also believe that the early councils come closest to a perfect theological Church.
On the other hand, my response to the statement that “you’ll never find a perfect theological Church” is, what about the Church Triumphant? My point is that the Holy Spirit is leading to all truth, but leading is an active, ongoing term, not a finite, temporal term. There is evidence of this leading, most notably in the last 60 years or so. The key for those of us in the Church Militant is to continue to allow ourselves to be led closer together. there are times when we find it very hard to take each other’s hand. Those are the times that we must each take the Holy Spirit’s hand.
Believing that all Christians are part of the Church is not a relativist view. It isn’t saying that I’m ok, you’re ok in our theological differences. Some teachings are clearly wrong, and I pray God’s mercy on those who are, even if one of them is my Church’s.
Jon
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
I guess it’s the cradle Catholic in me that views the Holy Spirit leading us to all truth temporally. Of course in the eternal scheme of things, the Church Triumphant (as you correctly name it) is the final destination of full exposure to the Truth in the person of Christ face to face in all spiritual union with Him, but I was of the understanding that the Holy Spirit leads us to truth in this life through the Church, through the divine Word, through prayer, but especially through the hierarchy of apostolic succession in an ongoing elaboration and explanation of God’s will for us along with the deposit of faith. I guess I just have a Catholic understanding of it. I do not view Reformed churches, pentacostal churches, and the vast array of other splinter groups as “the Church” and I’m constantly feeling I’m not “in the Church” where I am either…
As an aside, I was watching the SF Giants road to glory tonight on Comcast Bay Area channel. Talk about temporal glory!
As an aside, I was watching the SF Giants road to glory tonight on Comcast Bay Area channel. Talk about temporal glory!
K
KathleenGee
Guest
Guerny,
Your Anglican pastor is correct.
The rite of baptism is Catholic and incorporates all who are baptized into the Body of Christ which is – that word again – the Mystical Body of Christ.
Christians do not realize if they use this Catholic form that they are indeed being baptized into the Church. When they do decide to enter, all they need to do is profess the Creed and Church norms. Then they can immediately begin participating in the fullness of the Church through the reception of the Sacraments.
Your Anglican pastor is correct.
The rite of baptism is Catholic and incorporates all who are baptized into the Body of Christ which is – that word again – the Mystical Body of Christ.
Christians do not realize if they use this Catholic form that they are indeed being baptized into the Church. When they do decide to enter, all they need to do is profess the Creed and Church norms. Then they can immediately begin participating in the fullness of the Church through the reception of the Sacraments.
The key word here is “leading”. It isn’t “has led”. It isn’t finite or once and done. It is an ongoing process. the Spirit is leading us. I have no doubt that He is leading you and me at this time.
the Catholic Catechism says:
Now, whether or not one confesses that all grace and truth has been entrusted in the institutional Catholic Church, the Catholic Church states all blessings come from Christ and lead to Him. If the Spirit uses our communions as a means of salvation, how can it be said that we are not being led?
If we are Baptized into Christ, are we not Baptized into His Church?I guess I just have a Catholic understanding of it. I do not view Reformed churches, pentacostal churches, and the vast array of other splinter groups as “the Church” and I’m constantly feeling I’m not “in the Church” where I am either…
As for who is the Church, Lutherans identify the Church as the congregation of believers, where the word is preached and the sacraments are administered. This doesn’t minimize heterodox teaching, which carry their own dangers, but it does recognize, as the CCC does, that those you mention are Christians, part of the body of Christ, and part of the Church, even if one views them as imperfectly so.
Jon
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Didn’t I say “leading” and not “led?” Maybe I don’t understand where I erred there?
Anyone baptized it baptized into Christ and His Church. Protestants, from a Catholic point of view, are imperfectly in union with the Church, participating in illicit forms of worship, cut off from holy orders and the sacraments (most of them at least), lacking a sacrificial priesthood and thus being “ecclesiastical communities” and not churches proper. I think Benedict correctly spelled out the difference no matter how much it stings the Protestant to hear it. Sola scriptura and congregational Christianity are not part of the Sacrificial, sacerdotal priesthood. So it’s like a person participating in kernels of the Truth, in part and not in whole and fullness. That’s what I’d say my take is on it. I’m sure other Catholics could put it better or expound upon the notion better.
I think the Holy Spirit uses people outside of Catholicism, yes. Look at the Episcopal Church and their role in abolitionism, Protestant Christians running soup kitchens and amazing charities all over the world, men like Martin Luther King, Protestant presidents and congressmen who have fought the pro-life fight, protestants who protest abortion, you name it. Many Catholic converts were HIGHLY-nourished in Protestant churches to love, comprehend, and preach the Bible in a deep, meaningful way before coming to the fullness of Catholic faith.
Anyone baptized it baptized into Christ and His Church. Protestants, from a Catholic point of view, are imperfectly in union with the Church, participating in illicit forms of worship, cut off from holy orders and the sacraments (most of them at least), lacking a sacrificial priesthood and thus being “ecclesiastical communities” and not churches proper. I think Benedict correctly spelled out the difference no matter how much it stings the Protestant to hear it. Sola scriptura and congregational Christianity are not part of the Sacrificial, sacerdotal priesthood. So it’s like a person participating in kernels of the Truth, in part and not in whole and fullness. That’s what I’d say my take is on it. I’m sure other Catholics could put it better or expound upon the notion better.
I think the Holy Spirit uses people outside of Catholicism, yes. Look at the Episcopal Church and their role in abolitionism, Protestant Christians running soup kitchens and amazing charities all over the world, men like Martin Luther King, Protestant presidents and congressmen who have fought the pro-life fight, protestants who protest abortion, you name it. Many Catholic converts were HIGHLY-nourished in Protestant churches to love, comprehend, and preach the Bible in a deep, meaningful way before coming to the fullness of Catholic faith.
- Status