Not practicing SS in Lutheran churches

[steido01]

Catholic Missions were established in CONUS right after Columbus in what is now Florida, Georgia, Texas and California. I may be missing some States.

Absolutely, Jose! Fantastic work done by those brave men too. I was referring to just the Thirteen Colonies and chartered congregations (or dioceses) there in order to show how silly the previous poster’s point was.

Now a thread on Christianity in pre-American America would be fun…

 

[marywarfield]

Calm down please. You need a break from CAF.

Another threat again? Do you normally report every
Catholic who disagrees with you? Isnt that what you
did with me on the last thread and to Topper prior?

And people believe there can be unity with Lutherans?
I Just don’t believe that will ever happen.
And sorry that is my opinion in which I have both
the legal right and theological right to hold.
Threads like this is why I believe unity is impossible.
the Lutherabs here cannot agree in the topic-SS.
Cannot agree whether they are Protestants or not.
Cannot understand they can be called catholic
but not Catholic.
Do not understand that considering the Pope to
be an Antichrist is not an example of Sacred Tradition.

This is not very encouraging to Catholics when it comes
to unity. How can we unify with you? Who ARE you?

And when the point is made you threaten to report.
Over and over and over.
Why doesn’t Topper want to be your dialogue partner?
For the same reason I and others don’t. You reported
him and the others and me over and over.

Evangelical? I think not.

And worst of all you remain constantly off topic.
The Declarations on Unity are NOT the topic.
The Bible and how it is interpreted and why by Lutherans
is the topic.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

The answer is no, they do not have that authority. You are right, they are important theological dialogues, but they are not part of the Teaching of the Church, and tdo not have the authority of dogma and doctrine.

Can you cite a source on the impact declarations on doctrine have between Lutherans and Catholics? It seems to me that mutual declaration [JDDJ] holds a lot of weight especially when the discussion favorably includes either eucharistic hospitality or full-communion.

The Lutheran World Federation, representing Lutheran theology, views the Dialogue/ Declaration as a covenant/ road map to reunion. And not some far off effort but rather an implementation of the recommendations that Lutherans and Catholics begin the process of reconciliation.

 

[marywarfield]

Can you cite a source on the impact declarations on doctrine have between Lutherans and Catholics? It seems to me that mutual declaration [JDDJ] holds a lot of weight especially when the discussion favorably includes either eucharistic hospitality or full-communion.

The Lutheran World Federation, representing Lutheran theology, views the Dialogue/ Declaration as a covenant/ road map to reunion. And not some far off effort but rather an implementation of the recommendations that Lutherans and Catholics begin the process of reconciliation.

Yes. The Catechism of the Catholic Church. The Declarations
are not binding in belief or faith of ANY Catholic.
Not infallible. Not the Dogma of the Catholic Church.
Not one of the Articles of Faith which must be adhered
to by all Catholics.
Impact? Who can know? Maybe another fifty years
and we will see.

 

[guanophore]

Can you cite a source on the impact declarations on doctrine have between Lutherans and Catholics? It seems to me that mutual declaration [JDDJ] holds a lot of weight especially when the discussion favorably includes either eucharistic hospitality or full-communion.

The Lutheran World Federation, representing Lutheran theology, views the Dialogue/ Declaration as a covenant/ road map to reunion. And not some far off effort but rather an implementation of the recommendations that Lutherans and Catholics begin the process of reconciliation.

This document summarizes the various levels of authority of documents and Teachings in the Church. Much to marywarfield’s dismay, I am sure, a Pontifical Council is is a powerful and authorative body. Pontifical Councils are like committees that work on special projects for the Pope. They are comprised of experts in the field, and draft documents that can assist in clarifying problems and how they are to be solved. You can see many of these Councils working toward Christian Unity here.

The Lutheran Documents are included in Dialogue with the Churches and Ecclesial Communities of the West. At this poiint, they are basically position statements outlining points of unity, and areas that still need work. They are not doctrinally binding as yet, but what you have stated is true, those who do not accept them are in contradiction with the Vatican.

 

[marywarfield]

This document summarizes the various levels of authority of documents and Teachings in the Church. Much to marywarfield’s dismay, I am sure, a Pontifical Council is is a powerful and authorative body. Pontifical Councils are like committees that work on special projects for the Pope. They are comprised of experts in the field, and draft documents that can assist in clarifying problems and how they are to be solved. You can see many of these Councils working toward Christian Unity here.

The Lutheran Documents are included in Dialogue with the Churches and Ecclesial Communities of the West. At this poiint, they are basically position statements outlining points of unity, and areas that still need work. They are not doctrinally binding as yet, but what you have stated is true, those who do not accept them are in contradiction with the Vatican.

Why would that dismay me? If it is not dogma,
or infallibly declared, or an article of faith, I don’t see
the Council as requiring me to believe it. I do believe they
would be dismayed by your obvious attempt
to exaggerate the weight of their authority.

And no ALL Catholics are not required to. Elieve everything
the Vatican utters. Which must be a great relief to those in the
Vatican since they all still put their pants on one leg at a time
like…you.

 

[marywarfield]

And again I repeat Evangel Carhiluc and Guanaphore are
seriously off topic and derailing the entire thread.
The Joint Agreement of Unity is NOT the topic.
The Bible, SS and Lutheran using SS is. Perhaps
you two could begin a thread on the Unity Declarations
and Pontifical councils or something.

 

[guanophore]

Why would that dismay me? If it is not dogma,
or infallibly declared, or an article of faith, I don’t see
the Council as requiring me to believe it.

Pontifical Council statements are considered ordinary teaching of the Magesterium.

I do believe they would be dismayed by your obvious attempt to exaggerate the weight of their authority.

They act within Papal authority. Do you receive the catachesis of the Popes?

And no ALL Catholics are not required to. Elieve everything the Vatican utters. Which must be a great relief to those in the
Vatican since they all still put their pants on one leg at a time
like…you.

I think I have to go with Evangel on this one. Your attitude seems to be contrary not only to the sentiments of Vatican 2, but also the findings of the Pontifical Council. I recognize your right to refuse to accept the work of the Council. God created all of us with a free will, so that we can turn away from the direction He leads.

And again I repeat Evangel Carhiluc and Guanaphore are
seriously off topic and derailing the entire thread.
The Joint Agreement of Unity is NOT the topic.
The Bible, SS and Lutheran using SS is. Perhaps
you two could begin a thread on the Unity Declarations
and Pontifical councils or something.

Actually the Joint Agreements, on Justification as well as the Real Presence and other matters are integrally related to SS. SS was designed as a way of culling the wheat from the chaff, as are the Unity Declarations and Pontifical Councils. It is much more likely will will progress in unity by these methods than we will by SS. As you have correctly noted, SS is defined differently in different communions, and even within the same communion. Jointly drafted statements from the Pontifical Council can serve to ground discussion around a certain specific definition.

 

[marywarfield]

Pontifical Council statements are considered ordinary teaching of the Magesterium.

They act within Papal authority. Do you receive the catachesis of the Popes?

I think I have to go with Evangel on this one. Your attitude seems to be contrary not only to the sentiments of Vatican 2, but also the findings of the Pontifical Council. I recognize your right to refuse to accept the work of the Council. God created all of us with a free will, so that we can turn away from the direction He leads.

Actually the Joint Agreements, on Justification as well as the Real Presence and other matters are integrally related to SS. SS was designed as a way of culling the wheat from the chaff, as are the Unity Declarations and Pontifical Councils. It is much more likely will will progress in unity by these methods than we will by SS. As you have correctly noted, SS is defined differently in different communions, and even within the same communion. Jointly drafted statements from the Pontifical Council can serve to ground discussion around a certain specific definition.

Now who is hysterical? You know I write very plainly
without a lot of flourish. So I just don’t see how you are
able to get sidetracked in every post I make.

Earlier you accused me of being “prejudiced” because
I asked if Lutherans want to be Protestants or Catholics?
I think that was a reasonable question considering
so many Lutherans on this forum adopt “Catholic” as part
of their user name while protesting papal infallibility.
I didn’t see MY “prejudice” here hahaha.

Now you tell me I am in conflict with the Vatican
and “refuse to believe in the work of the Council”.
Both are false statements of my position.

My position is simply I don’t believe unity will actually
occur. I believe the councils are doing fab work.
Hats off to them. I am not in conflict with the Vatican
as I wish for unity as well.

I just don’t believe it will ever fully occur. I do not
believe Lutherans depending on which group you
mean by that, quite “get” what’s happening here
and will stalemate the process ultimately
from pride.

My stating that the Declaration is not dogma does
not indicate agreement or disagreement just objective
fact.

Please stop misrepresenting my statements. It’s
dishonest.

 

[pablope]

Those are questions best addressed to fellow Catholics/ Holy See. Ultimately one has to accept credibility or settle for hysteria.

Wait a minute…you got me confused…you said…"
Originally Posted by EvangelCatholic View Post
Yes, my denying or ignoring current Catholic thought/ official declarations with Lutherans. One only need read any post by Topper to see overt resistance to Vatican 2

And now we have a problem with the Vatican? What do you think is our problem with Vatican?

 

[marywarfield]

Wait a minute…you got me confused…you said…"
Originally Posted by EvangelCatholic View Post
Yes, my denying or ignoring current Catholic thought/ official declarations with Lutherans. One only need read any post by Topper to see overt resistance to Vatican 2

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Return to the topic of the OP

 

[Annie39]

In the course of these many posts we did stray off topic it is true but we gleaned enough information to prove my contention that Lutherans do not believe in sola scriptura. A good case in point is the exchange I had with Don. It is posted below. I had no intention to score more “gotcha” points anymore than Socrates tried to score gotcha points. I believe in critical thinking. It is clear IMHO that Don believed that he had been “got”.

Annie

“Originally Posted by Annie39
Sooo you believe in pirma Confessions then. Correct?

Annie

It seems like you’re looking to score more “gotcha!” points.

If it personally helps you to think of us that way in light of your personal definitions and understandings, sure. But bear in mind that your personal definition and understanding of Sola Scriptura are not congruent with the historical Lutheran understanding. I wouldn’t describe us that way. After all, if Lutherans are to ‘blame’ for Sola Scriptura, then it seems only logical that the Lutheran definition of the practice ought to be the ‘correct’ one. In the academic world, it is.

---

Don”

 

[JonNC]

In the course of these many posts we did stray off topic it is true but we gleaned enough information to prove my contention that Lutherans do not believe in sola scriptura. A good case in point is the exchange I had with Don. It is posted below. I had no intention to score more “gotcha” points anymore than Socrates tried to score gotcha points. I believe in critical thinking. It is clear IMHO that Don believed that he had been “got”.

Annie

“Originally Posted by Annie39
Sooo you believe in pirma Confessions then. Correct?

Annie

It seems like you’re looking to score more “gotcha!” points.

If it personally helps you to think of us that way in light of your personal definitions and understandings, sure. But bear in mind that your personal definition and understanding of Sola Scriptura are not congruent with the historical Lutheran understanding. I wouldn’t describe us that way. After all, if Lutherans are to ‘blame’ for Sola Scriptura, then it seems only logical that the Lutheran definition of the practice ought to be the ‘correct’ one. In the academic world, it is.

---

Don”

Hi Annie,
If you wish to claim that you do not believe we practice sola scriptua, then ok. But from our perspective, from the practice we have always used, we describe it as sola scriptura, based on the definition, "the sole rule and standard according to which all dogmas together with [all] teachers should be estimated and judged are the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and of the New Testament alone". IOW, scripture scripture is the only final norm for holding doctrine, dogma, teachings, etc. accountable. And since it is the Church that sets doctrine, SS is a practice of the Church.

Either way, from your opening question to me, I stand by my response, that it was poor practice in the parish(es) you attended as a Lutheran that they did not use the confessions in catechesis.
Regardless, I am thankful that you are blessed in word and sacrament where you are.

His peace,
Jon

 

[spina1953]

Regrettably, yes. Poor catechesis is a scourge on each communion, be it Roman Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, what have you.

Conversely, there are folks who actually have taken the time to at least read and learn about what other denominations believe. Many of them are kind enough to share their wisdom on these boards. Personally, I think it’s our Christian duty to seek understanding of our separated brothers - how else can we expect to come to a fuller earthly unity? That’s why this Lutheran owns and regularly reads a Catechism of the Catholic Church (it lives on my bookshelf, just below an ESV, an NIV, a Douay-Rheims, the Book of Concord and my favorite hymnals).

Hi steido: I have to agree with you on your post as that should be the way we all need to be to seek understanding. I try to learn what other denomination think and believe even though I may not agree with their beliefs or thinking but respect their beliefs any6way as I would want them to for me. However I will not disrespect anyone for what they believe or not believe since that is not my intention nor style. I know that at times it may get somewhat heated but that happens in any debate one has with another. maybe one day all Christians will come together in peace and love and those who promote hatred against others of different faiths and beliefs will end. thanks and peace to you,

 

[steido01]

In the course of these many posts we did stray off topic it is true but we gleaned enough information to prove my contention that Lutherans do not believe in sola scriptura. A good case in point is the exchange I had with Don. It is posted below. I had no intention to score more “gotcha” points anymore than Socrates tried to score gotcha points. I believe in critical thinking. It is clear IMHO that Don believed that he had been “got”.

Annie, look. My point was simply that you can call something whatever you want - that doesn’t make it so. You’ve taken our phrase, Sola Scriptura, and given it a new meaning that we have never given it. Now, I don’t blame you for this, since many protestant groups have commandeered and perverted our teaching to suit their own purposes. But changing our terminology is discourteous; I don’t understand why you wouldn’t take us at our word when we explain what our teaching means. It’s akin to telling a zoologist that the zebra he’s tending to is actually a clam.

Re-definer: “Why do you care for clams all day if you say you work with zebras?”
Zoologist: “Pretty sure this is a zebra. If you have time, come read my zoology textbook. I’d be happy to teach you what I know.”
Re-definer: “Nope! I’m never reading your clearly biased and offensive book. That’s a clam and I know it!”
Zoologist: “Hmm. Well, I’ve been studying zoology my whole life. I can assure you, this is a zebra, not a clam. The definition is right here in my textbook. It has pictures, too.”
Re-definer: “No! No! No! Stop talking about your book. I knew a zoologist, and he never talked about any textbooks. I know that clams are horses with white and black stripes!”
Zoologist: “Well, we call that a zebra. But if it helps you to understand what one is, by all means, call it a clam.”
Re-definer: “GOTCHA!”

Do you understand what we’re saying here? We can disagree about what we ought to believe, but one can’t seriously expect to tell someone what they believe.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Hi Annie,
If you wish to claim that you do not believe we practice sola scriptua, then ok. But from our perspective, from the practice we have always used, we describe it as sola scriptura, based on the definition, "the sole rule and standard according to which all dogmas together with [all] teachers should be estimated and judged are the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and of the New Testament alone". IOW, scripture scripture is the only final norm for holding doctrine, dogma, teachings, etc. accountable. And since it is the Church that sets doctrine, SS is a practice of the Church.

Either way, from your opening question to me, I stand by my response, that it was poor practice in the parish(es) you attended as a Lutheran that they did not use the confessions in catechesis.
Regardless, I am thankful that you are blessed in word and sacrament where you are.

His peace,
Jon

I was thinking about this and remembering being a 12 year old catechumen It seems we were always in church. And going to a parochial school meant daily Matins/ Wednesday Mass. That is a very Missouri Synod practice of immersing children into the faith. So going back to my parish for catechism on Saturdays meant daily attendance. All boys in catechism served as acolytes [crucifer, thurifer] and the primarily reason why there could be a dozen altar boys per service at Our Saviour’s School.

We memorized Luther’s Small Catechism and spent easily 30 minutes individually reciting to the pastor. I had 22 kids in my class

 

[JonNC]

I was thinking about this and remembering being a 12 year old catechumen It seems we were always in church. And going to a parochial school meant daily Matins/ Wednesday Mass. That is a very Missouri Synod practice of immersing children into the faith. So going back to my parish for catechism on Saturdays meant daily attendance. All boys in catechism served as acolytes [crucifer, thurifer] and the primarily reason why there could be a dozen altar boys per service at Our Saviour’s School.

We memorized Luther’s Small Catechism and spent easily 30 minutes individually reciting to the pastor. I had 22 kids in my class

Hi EC,
Raised LCA, my catechesis wasn’t quite that intense, but we were immersed in the Catechism, served as acolytes, were required to attend Sunday School where we learned about the martyrs, the early Church, etc., and worship. When we visited other Lutheran parishes, we always got a Sunday School attendance card so we would get credit in our home parish.
Catechetical training lasted three years before Confirmation, and in those days, first Holy Communion.
I think we in both synods have failed to maintain this high level of catechesis, and we should return to it.

Jon

 

[Annie39]

Hi Annie,
If you wish to claim that you do not believe we practice sola scriptua, then ok. But from our perspective, from the practice we have always used, we describe it as sola scriptura, based on the definition, "the sole rule and standard according to which all dogmas together with [all] teachers should be estimated and judged are the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and of the New Testament alone". IOW, scripture scripture is the only final norm for holding doctrine, dogma, teachings, etc. accountable. And since it is the Church that sets doctrine, SS is a practice of the Church.

Either way, from your opening question to me, I stand by my response, that it was poor practice in the parish(es) you attended as a Lutheran that they did not use the confessions in catechesis.
Regardless, I am thankful that you are blessed in word and sacrament where you are.

His peace,
Jon

Hi Jon

I wonder how one says “the only final norm for holding doctrine, dogma, teachings, etc.” in Latin.

Do you have a quote by Martin Luther defining Sola Scriptura as you do?

I have a quote: Unless I am convinced by Scripture and by plain reason and not by Popes and councils who have so often contradicted themselves, my conscience is captive to the word of God. To go against conscience is neither right nor safe. I cannot and I will not recant. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me. (Martin Luther)

If you order a steak in a restaurant and the waiter brings you hamburger…is that steak?
If you order lobster and the waiter brings you canned tuna…is that lobster? IMHO your definition of SS is not SS and I believe it’s clear.

You keep referring to “Confessions”. The men who wrote that book are not Church Fathers. I’m thinking that you don’t believe that they were infallible. I’m thinking that those folks found it necessary to redefine what Sola Scriptura meant because they realized that Luther had gotten it wrong. Did they find anything else about Luther’s theology that they may have disagreed with? Did they update that too?

My sister says that I should read Ellen G. White’s THE GREAT CONTROVERSY which explains what Seventh Day Adventists believe (she thinks she believes in SS too BTW). Until then I can’t comment on her belief system. Very nice Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints young man thinks that the Book of Mormon just might be the ticket.

I think that this topic has run its course. I don’t expect I’ll be posting on this thread again unless I read something very compelling. You can have the last word. I plan to read it but probably won’t reply

Annie

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Hi EC,
Raised LCA, my catechesis wasn’t quite that intense, but we were immersed in the Catechism, served as acolytes, were required to attend Sunday School where we learned about the martyrs, the early Church, etc., and worship. When we visited other Lutheran parishes, we always got a Sunday School attendance card so we would get credit in our home parish.
Catechetical training lasted three years before Confirmation, and in those days, first Holy Communion.
I think we in both synods have failed to maintain this high level of catechesis, and we should return to it.

Jon

It is still there in parish schools, college chapels and seminaries though referred to as discussion groups.