Present Day Lutheran-Catholic Relations

[lcmslutheran]

This is the most bizarre post yet; someone “projecting” RC teachint.

How In the World can Topper’s understanding of the LCMS be incorrect when he is quoting from the Concord Book and leaders like Preus of the LCMS? Do you also disagree with Preus as well? Good grief!

Does that mean they are misinterpreting scripture with their personal opinion that differs from you or that of another LCMS member?

Hey, I was great friends with a LCMS preacher and he echoed the Concord Book, the Pope AND the Office was the AntiChrist. He was all for Preus and his writings.
So who is right? How do you even determine who is right when you disagree with your leaders who have spent years in college training for the seminary. My friend had a Master’s in Exegesis. He was the one that told me to read the book by Preus “Why I am a Lutheran” to better understand where he was “coming from.”

Mary.

It’s called the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, an aspect of Protestant theology that I also like.

Again, what we -the LCMS pals- are trying to do here is akin to explain somebody who grew up in the Soviet Union how the US Supreme Court rulings work. What the US Supreme Court decides might be legally binding at the time it decides things, but that doesn’t prevent citizens from disagreeing with Supreme Court decisions not to push, at a later time, for a different outcome. Lawrence v. Texas (2003) overturned Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) and the US constitution didn’t change a single iota in between.

The LCMS lives by Sola Scriptura when it comes to its theology. The reports of its Commission on Theology and Church Relations are issued to be theologically significant but they don’t have, within the LCMS, the status an encyclical has within the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[MaryT777]

It’s called the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, an aspect of Protestant theology that I also like.

Again, what we -the LCMS pals- are trying to do here is akin to explain somebody who grew up in the Soviet Union how the US Supreme Court rulings work. What the US Supreme Court decides might be legally binding at the time it decides things, but that doesn’t prevent citizens from disagreeing with Supreme Court decisions not to push, at a later time, for a different outcome. Lawrence v. Texas (2003) overturned Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) and the US constitution didn’t change a single iota.

The LCMS lives by Sola Scriptura when it comes to its theology. The reports of its Commission on Theology and Church Relations are issued to be theologically significant but they don’t have, within the LCMS, the status an encyclical has in the Roman Catholic Church.

So basically anyone can believe what they’d like as long as it’s based on Scripture then.
Yes then it’s a Protestant Church really at the end of the day just like any other.

Mary.

 

[lcmslutheran]

So basically anyone can believe what they’d like as long as it’s based on Scripture then.
Yes then it’s a Protestant Church really at the end of the day just like any other.

Mary.

Pretty much, but by being part of a Lutheran congregation, you also abide to specific meanings and interpretation methods of scripture. The LCMS, for example, takes the position of the inerrancy of the Bible, which itself is different from the position of literal biblical teaching but also different from the en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_criticism method used by the ELCA (and at times by the Catholic Church).

When it comes to my congregation, I can be expelled if I fail to live by the standards set in Galatians 5:19-21 unrepentant.

So denying the authority of a single person deciding theological matters for all Christian believers is part of the doctrine of the “antichrist” when it comes to the office of the papacy. It is “anti Christ”, in the sense, that the papacy is very difficult to defend on biblical authority alone.

 

[JonNC]

=Topper17;12819218]Ok, so you disagree with Preus as I knew you would. What’s the difference though - right? When Preus wrote that article he was the First VP of the LCMS, which of course means that he was essentially proclaiming the position of YOUR communion. That’s what people in that kind of position do. Furthermore, it is people who CORRECTLY represent the beliefs of their organizations who RISE to that kind of authority. In other words, in part, Preus rose to his position BECAUSE he espoused the ‘correct’ LCMS positions.

Some LCMS Lutherans would disagree with your notion here, when thinking of former Pres. Gerald Kieschnick.

That would be 1st VP Preus to you Bub!

Actually, Pastor is a perfectly acceptable title.

He had the second most authority in your 2 million member communion, in which by the way, it is the church which determines doctrine. At the time he was in a decision making role for your whole communion and as such, his ‘position’ is a lot more ‘official’ than yours. In fact, the position that he took is exactly how your communion as acted on the matter.

Um, I don’t think that how a communion practices ecumenical dialogue is a matter of doctrine.

As for your conversation with a team member – ok so spill it. Who did you talk to specifically?

And give you a chance to trash? Not a chance.

You might have suggested that the LCMS ‘sign on’ to the JDDL, but as you must admit, they have NOT. Furthermore, the LCMS obviously WILL NOT. So again, it seems like you find yourself in opposition to, if not the official teaching of your Communion, at least to its ACTIONS.

Obviously, you can’t say that with any kind of authority, first because you have none, second, because you are not in control of the dialogue process. It will be up to our respective communion’s leaders to determine that.

Again Jon, your personal view is obviously at odds with that of your communion.

Maybe, may not. As I said, if one looks at the structure of the document I referred to earlier (yes, one has to click the link and read it), it appears to be in the format that I described earlier. Now, I don’t know if Pr. Preus agrees with that format or not, but there it is.

For the record, my statements deal with the reality as it exists. Yours is based on what you WISH the facts were.

Ok. Click the link I provided for the document, “The Hope of Eternal Life”, and see if the format I explained is apparent in the document or not. This isn’t a me vs. you situation, or my opinion vs. yours. It is a matter of how the dialogue teams operate. If it appears to others that the dialogue operates differently than the way it appears to me, I am willing to stand corrected.

As for the ‘old condemnations’, they are STILL your official teaching, which after 450 years, and with even as super offensive as they are to Catholics, Lutherans will not repeal them.

OK, again. Catholic condemnations , too, are offensive to Lutherans. Those condemnations, from both sides, are not in a vacuum. They express, however offensively, the real differences our communions have. When those differences are resolved, the condemnations go away.
Further, you, of all people, don’t get to say what Lutherans will or will not do. Lutheran synods make that decision.

In my ‘typical way’ Jon?

Yes, and you’ve employed it here in this post again.

I am NOT ‘pretending’ anything. I am NOT saying what I THINK your LCMS position is. What I am saying is that YOUR 1st VP Preus informs us as to what that position is, and that he has FAR more authority to define that position than you do. All I am trying to do is keep people from being misinformed as to what the LCMS and Lutheranism teaches.

This is really quite simple. Have you read the dialogue statement I provided? Have you looked at the structure and format that it is presented in? Is my presentation of that dialogue structure essentially accurate? If it is, and the LCMS participated in that document, then the LCMS practices dialogue in that way.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

It’s called the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, an aspect of Protestant theology that I also like.

Again, what we -the LCMS pals- are trying to do here is akin to explain somebody who grew up in the Soviet Union how the US Supreme Court rulings work. What the US Supreme Court decides might be legally binding at the time it decides things, but that doesn’t prevent citizens from disagreeing with Supreme Court decisions not to push, at a later time, for a different outcome. Lawrence v. Texas (2003) overturned Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) and the US constitution didn’t change a single iota in between.

The LCMS lives by Sola Scriptura when it comes to its theology. The reports of its Commission on Theology and Church Relations are issued to be theologically significant but they don’t have, within the LCMS, the status an encyclical has within the Roman Catholic Church.

True, but we also see the truth of scripture rightly reflected in the Augsburg Confession, etc. What makes the Lutheran tradition within the Church Catholic unique - our confessional statements - Augsburg, the Apology, the Small Catechism, etc.

Jon

 

[commenter]

This thread is fairly informative, but just a request to avoid attributing motives, patterns, etc to the other posters. Our main goal is to get to Heaven, and to help others - including other posters - get to Heaven. A second goal is to learn, and share information that other people might not have, which might be useful to ourselves, and to others. A third goal is to have fun showing off our online debating skills, which occasionally result in Reason providing us a flash of insight.

One problem with polemics is that we ourselves tend to stop learning while we are engaging in it. I like a thread where I learn stuff I didn’t know before.

ok, back to the thread…

 

[MaryT777]

Some LCMS Lutherans would disagree with your notion here, when thinking of former Pres. Gerald Kieschnick.

Actually, Pastor is a perfectly acceptable title.

Um, I don’t think that how a communion practices ecumenical dialogue is a matter of doctrine.

And give you a chance to trash? Not a chance.

Obviously, you can’t say that with any kind of authority, first because you have none, second, because you are not in control of the dialogue process. It will be up to our respective communion’s leaders to determine that.

Maybe, may not. As I said, if one looks at the structure of the document I referred to earlier (yes, one has to click the link and read it), it appears to be in the format that I described earlier. Now, I don’t know if Pr. Preus agrees with that format or not, but there it is.

Ok. Click the link I provided for the document, “The Hope of Eternal Life”, and see if the format I explained is apparent in the document or not. This isn’t a me vs. you situation, or my opinion vs. yours. It is a matter of how the dialogue teams operate. If it appears to others that the dialogue operates differently than the way it appears to me, I am willing to stand corrected.

OK, again. Catholic condemnations , too, are offensive to Lutherans. Those condemnations, from both sides, are not in a vacuum. They express, however offensively, the real differences our communions have. When those differences are resolved, the condemnations go away.
Further, you, of all people, don’t get to say what Lutherans will or will not do. Lutheran synods make that decision.

Yes, and you’ve employed it here in this post again.

This is really quite simple. Have you read the dialogue statement I provided? Have you looked at the structure and format that it is presented in? Is my presentation of that dialogue structure essentially accurate? If it is, and the LCMS participated in that document, then the LCMS practices dialogue in that way.

Jon

Topper, quit being “so typical” I personally am not into psychoanalyzing posting styles. Everyone has their own style and most are typical in some way. A poster may use any style they would like in keeping with forum rules of course.

Now back to the thread…

 

[Ridgerunner]

That wasn’t my experience in my time within Lutheranism. Now, there are Lutherans who are, for all intents and purposes, generic evangelical Americans so there are going to be exceptions, but in general Lutheranism is near identical to Catholicism with respect to how beliefs are learned; catechism, liturgy, sacramental participation. All confessional Lutherans are required to abide by the Small Catechism and Augusburg Confession. If a member of a congregation publicly disagrees or teaches differently, they risk excommunication. There is a reason that along with Catholics, Lutherans have the largest private school system in the US. It was to avoid education by American Protestant (i.e., Puritan/Reformed) religious ethics.

“Private” interpretation within a Lutheran context is not the same thing as what evangelicals mean by it.

I have no claim to expertise in Lutheranism. Also, my experience of discussing it with Lutherans is limited to LCMS folks. But it is my clear impression that there are some really major differences between, say, country LCMS and other versions, particularly urban ones. If one goes to, say, the most liberal Lutheran congregation in St. Louis without reading the sign out front, is he going to be entirely sure he’s not in an Assembly of God congregation?

 

[Per_Crucem]

Topper, quit being “so typical” I personally am not into psychoanalyzing posting styles. Everyone has their own style and most are typical in some way. A poster may use any style they would like in keeping with forum rules of course.

Now back to the thread…

That you say that is so very typical

 

[Per_Crucem]

I have no claim to expertise in Lutheranism. Also, my experience of discussing it with Lutherans is limited to LCMS folks. But it is my clear impression that there are some really major differences between, say, country LCMS and other versions, particularly urban ones. If one goes to, say, the most liberal Lutheran congregation in St. Louis without reading the sign out front, is he going to be entirely sure he’s not in an Assembly of God congregation?

Probably not. It is very much determined by region, for sure. Urban centers are more likely to try to appeal to what the SBC or non-denom church is doing down the street so that they can appeal to the same demographic. That is, after all, the basis of the church growth movement. It’s also very much determined by whether the area sports a confessional seminary. Ft. Wayne, for example, has a greater number of parishes that are liturgical and traditional, because that is how the seminary is.

My comments were mainly directed at Lutheranism as a whole historically.

 

[Selah_KY]

Why would we take advice as to how to achieve doctrinal unity from a communion which is as doctrinally fractured as Lutheranism?

I would bet you could get a dozen different answers in the first 20 from just Lutherans.

Given the number of different opinions on this one thread, there’s no question you are right. I imagine there are far more opinions here on CAF outside of this thread.

Is the Catholic Church willing to state that salvation is not dependent on being in communion with the Bishop of Rome, either directly or indirectly, which is what the positive reformulation amounts to?

The Catholic Church already teaches this! I’m in a rush and I don’t have time to find a source - hopefully someone else will jump in.

Some LCMS Lutherans would disagree with your notion here, when thinking of former Pres. Gerald Kieschnick.

And herein lies the crux of the problem within the LCMS. Former President Pr. Kieschnick was voted out (not by a huge margin) in favor of Pr. Harrison. Of course, those who voted for Pr. Kieschnick believe him to be the definitive speaker for our synod while those who voted for Pr. Harrison do likewise for him. And they could totally change places in the “official” position at the next election. It will just depend on who is the most fired up and who sends delegates. And then we’ll go through the same thing four years after that… INSANITY!

In any case, thanks to Pr. Kieshnick and Pr Preus, through their involvement in The Benke Affair (said in my most ominous, dark side voice), my eyes were opened to the level of dysfunction within the synod as a whole.

I personally am not into psychoanalyzing posting styles.

“Ain’t nobody got time for that!” :tiphat:

 

[Memaw]

We have a fine woman associate pastor in my church and LGBT people are welcome there as well. These are two reasons that I go to an ELCA church and I’m not the only refugee there from more conservative denominations. There are lots of people in my church who were raised LCMS and have found a home in the ELCA along with several Baptists that I know of (I was raised Baptist) and even some former Catholics. Thank God there is more than one choice of church for us to belong to

Yes and whose “choice” is that?? Certainly not God’s. Jesus prayed that ALL would be ONE. One Faith, One Baptism. ONE Church and ONE LORD. Look what has happened over the past 500 years. Seems many Christians have followed the example of the Israelite’s of the Old Testament… God Bless. Memaw

 

[JonNC]

=Selah KY;12820503]
The Catholic Church already teaches this! I’m in a rush and I don’t have time to find a source - hopefully someone else will jump in.

I give the CC credit for trying to soften it, but “invincible ignorance”, and the positive reformulating of Unam sanctam still leaves some concern about this topic, obviously, and not only for Lutherans.

And herein lies the crux of the problem within the LCMS. Former President Pr. Kieschnick was voted out (not by a huge margin) in favor of Pr. Harrison. Of course, those who voted for Pr. Kieschnick believe him to be the definitive speaker for our synod while those who voted for Pr. Harrison do likewise for him. And they could totally change places in the “official” position at the next election. It will just depend on who is the most fired up and who sends delegates. And then we’ll go through the same thing four years after that… INSANITY!

I won’t argue that our form of polity is particularly helpful, to be honest, anymore than I am happy with the congregationalism.
Thus far, however, it seems that the differences between the camps are more practice and liturgical than they are doctrinal.

In any case, thanks to Pr. Kieshnick and Pr Preus, through their involvement in The Benke Affair (said in my most ominous, dark side voice), my eyes were opened to the level of dysfunction within the synod as a whole.

Not only Pr. Benke, but Pr. Morris as well. That’s not to say that the LCMS has a corner on "dysfunction, as our Catholic friends can attest to regarding recent problems in a small sector of the priesthood, and how it was handled by some bishops.

Jon

 

[Topper17]

Hi pab,

But which is the true Lutheranism? There are those who believe the pope is the anti-Christ and say that is the true Lutheran teaching and are the true lutherans?

And you say otherwise, Father K…So which is which?

You point to the core problem with Lutheranism. NOBODY has the right to define what it is, what it isn’t, what it teaches and what it doesn’t teach. Neither does anybody have the authority to proclaim which ‘version’ of Lutheranism is ‘superior’ to the rest.

All that people can do is proclaim what they personally believe or what their particular brand of Lutheranism teaches. In either case, they are falling back on the personal opinions of individuals.

God Bless You pab, Topper

 

[Topper17]

Hi Kjet,

He (Preus) is NOT proclaming Lutheran teaching. What is Lutheran is not what any Lutheran Church happens to teach, but what can be found in the confessions.

I think that this points out the overall problem within Lutheranism, which is that there is so much disagreement, including even disagreement on what is and what is not included in the Confessions.

God Bless You Kjet, Topper

 

[Topper17]

Hi pab,

Include here the dizzying and very wordy explanations of trying to explain away the anti-christ how it meand something different…or explaining away why the sacraments were reduced…or why SU is not consub…just for starters…:whacky::hypno::hypno:

Agreed. What I find to be the most offensive is the tortured ‘explanations’ as to why the very clear language about the antichrist and the ‘adherents’ SOMEHOW don’t mean what they so obviously say. To me at least, those ‘explanations’ only make the original language that much worse in that they are insulting to our intelligence.

The mantra that we hear constantly, that it isn’t the pope PERSONALLY who is considered to be PERSONALLY the antichrist, does not help whatsoever. The fact is that Lutherans, including ALL of them here on CA, consider the Pope to be ‘antichrist’ in ANY WAY at all, which of course is ridiculous. No matter how much dancing around is done, that is supremely offensive.

God Bless You pab, Topper

 

[KathleenGee]

Problem is…if we had Sola Scriptura from the beginning, then there would be no Eucharist, no bishop, no value for virgins and celibates…we would be fractured from the very beginning with personal interpretation which is not in line with the Church being as a ‘convocation’, a gathering of believers.

 

[commenter]

I give the CC credit for trying to soften it, but “invincible ignorance”, and the positive reformulating of Unam sanctam still leaves some concern about this topic, obviously, and not only for Lutherans.

There’s nothing wrong with someone asserting that they have the fullness of truth (i. e. the papacy as the heart of the Magisterium, which is the heart of expression of Catholic dogma, incorporating Scripture and Tradition). It’s not politically correct to say the word “infallible”, but who cares about that? The claim should be examined on its merits. Consider the possibility the claim may be true.

The American dogma is that “All truths are create equal”; “No person or group can have a better view of truth than any one else”; Each person must find or define the truths that work best for them". The fact that the CC, even today, makes a claim to the fullness of the truth may make Catholicism unamerican, but making the claim doesn’t prove or disprove the claim. It’s silly to say “I won’t join any church that claims to have the fullness of humanly accessible truth; I will only go to those that say truth is distributed incompletely and equally to all persons, to all churches.”

You and I are Americans saturated - biased - with the American dogma, egalitarianism and subjectivism.

 

[KjetilK]

You point to the core problem with Lutheranism. NOBODY has the right to define what it is, what it isn’t, what it teaches and what it doesn’t teach. Neither does anybody have the authority to proclaim which ‘version’ of Lutheranism is ‘superior’ to the rest

This only makes sense if Lutheranism is a a Church, and not an ecclesial tradition. But Lutheranism is the latter, not the former.

So if it is a problem for, say, the LCMS, that Lutheranism cannot be clearly defined, it is equally a problem for, say, the Russian Catholic Church, that Byzantism cannot be clearly defined either.

Problem is…if we had Sola Scriptura from the beginning, then there would be no Eucharist, no bishop, no value for virgins and celibates…we would be fractured from the very beginning with personal interpretation which is not in line with the Church being as a ‘convocation’, a gathering of believers.

My guess is that your knowledge of Sola Scriptura comes from some online Roman Catholic apologist. Because the way you phrase it, I hope it didn’t come from a Lutheran.

 

[benjohnson]

In any case, thanks to Pr. Kieshnick and Pr Preus, through their involvement in The Benke Affair (said in my most ominous, dark side voice), my eyes were opened to the level of dysfunction within the synod as a whole.

The fact that the LCMS survives it’s own leadership is proof of the Holy Spirit’s guidance.