Hi Annie,
I was a member of the LCMS Lutheran Church for 10 years and still have LCMS Lutheran friends. I NEVER heard anyone including the Pastor of a Church with whom I had a social relationship with he and his wife refer to their church or themselves as Evangelical Catholics. I’m interested in when some Lutherans began refering their church or themselves as Evangelical Catholics. Can you help me out here?
As you probably know, on this thread the claim was made that the use of the name ‘Evangelical Catholic’ by Lutherans is ‘historic’. Like you I doubted that and have asked for the details of that historic usage, three times I think now. The lack of a response so far proves my point, that the use of EC by Lutherans is something very recent. In fact, a Lutheran Professor has addressed the subject:
“Luther and Modern Church History”, by James Kittelson, Lutheran Professor of Church History, Luther Seminary, St. Paul, MN, all quotes from pages 259-60, in “The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther”,
“There are at least two respects in which this subject (Luther and modern church history) can easily conceal more than it elucidates. **The more obvious of these is the all too-tempting impetus to ascribe to Luther everything in contemporary Christianity of which the author approves. This tendency is most obvious in the pictures of Luther that derive from German Protestants and Lutherans in particular………” **
Here Kittleson describes a form of what I call the “Legend of Luther”.
"From the perspective of those who seek the most precise and unvarnished truth about Luther possible, the currently most guilty party on this score is the ecumenical movement as it has been pursued in many quarters since Vatican II. Those among them who seek the formal reuniting of separated churches and at the same time carry the label “Lutheran” are particularly prone to seek in him elements that might be used to service their agenda of contemporary institutional ecumenism……One group (which is very prone to ‘find the good’ in Luther), North Americans all, pursue one version or another of the argument that in his heart of hearts Luther wanted to reform the Church of Rome and deeply regretted the division that nonetheless followed and remains characteristic to this day. Roughly speaking, this party, which calls itself ‘evangelical catholics’, divides into two groups.”
It is worth noting that Kittelson does not refer to these two groups as ‘Evangelical Catholics’ with a capitol ‘C’. The one group according to Kittelson “is very prone to ‘find the good’ in Luther.” I appreciate this statement because I DO love a good understatement. As you know Annie, we see a lot of evidence for this phenomenon here on CA. I have seen other Honest Reputable Protestant Scholars (HRPSs) describe this as ‘under-reporting the negative aspects of Luther while over-reporting the positive aspects.’
Interestingly, Kittelson says that this is strictly a North American phenomenon, which means that it is not a larger Lutheran phenomenon.
**“One seeks accommodations between evangelical and Roman Catholic teaching on the central subjects of justification, faith, grace, and the like, while the other gives up on the core of Luther’s theology and turns directly to his (allegedly) undeveloped understanding of ‘the church’ as both spiritual and this-worldly reality.” **Kittelson
I have always said that one of the things I appreciate about Lutherans is that they are extremely doctrinal, meaning that they understand the importance of doctrine, and are willing to defend what they believe against what they ‘know’ to be wrong. However, Kittleson states that the two different types of ‘Lutheran Evangelical Catholics’ are much more willing to cave in on doctrinal matters in hopes of reaching accommodation with Rome. The one group is willing to back down on even justification, what the other is willing to redefine (at least for Lutherans) the definition of ‘the church’ as being more in line with a Catholic understanding.
As you know, we have seen a lot of evidence of what Kittelson describes here on CA.
**“Some of course take both avenues toward their goal, which is, quite simply, full reunion with the Church of Rome. In each case, the historical record blocks their path of seeking support from Luther for their fondest undertaking, unless they falsify, distort, or minimize it.” James M. Kittelson, Lutheran Professor of Church History, Luther Seminary, St. Paul, MN, in “The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther”, **pg. 260
This last passage from Kittelson is the money quote (as if the first few weren’t). He admits that the history of Lutheranism itself is an obstacle to reunion with Rome, and in fact Luther himself is an impediment to the unity desired by Evangelical Catholics, that is, ‘unless they falsify, distort, or minimize it’. I would suggest that the Lutheran Confessions are part of the ‘historical record’ which reduces the possibility of reunification.
What is interesting about this text from Kittelson is that it gives us a better understanding of the small subset of Lutheranism which refers to itself as ‘Evangelical Catholic’. It appears that they are more interested in reunion with Rome than in standing fast by Lutheran doctrines. This would explain a lot of the ‘considering swimming’ comments that we hear, and also the idea that Lutherans could possibly come into communion with Rome while somehow retaining their Confessions, which of course is impossible in the real world.
Annie, I would be interested in your thoughts about this quote. Spina, I know that you are interested in this issue so your comments would be welcomed also.
God Bless You Annie, Topper
