Present Day Lutheran-Catholic Relations

[benjohnson]

IOW, not a single patriarch - East or West - has declared the CoN ordinations valid.

If I remember correctly, most Othodox patriarchs don’t even think Catholic or Lutheran baptisms are valid.

That said, our local Lutheran Church was given a set of icons comissioned by the Orthodox. Their statement was “A Church needs icons.”

 

[JonNC]

Why? concordiakoinonia.com/2013/05/16/a-reflection-on-the-holy-spirit-by-pr-scott-murray-his-daily-e-mail-reflections-memorial-moments-memorial-lutheran-church-houston-tx/

Apology Article XIV

Article XIV: Of Ecclesiastical Order.

24] The Fourteenth Article, in which we say that in the Church the administration of the Sacraments and Word ought to be allowed no one unless he be rightly called, they receive, but with the proviso that we employ canonical ordination. **Concerning this subject we have frequently testified in this assembly that it is our greatest wish to maintain church-polity and the grades in the Church [old church-regulations and the government of bishops], even though they have been made by human authority [provided the bishops allow our doctrine and receive our priests]. For we know that church discipline was instituted by the Fathers, in the manner laid down in the ancient canons, with a good and useful intention. **25] …

As I replied top Pablope, presbyter ordination is valid, as it is part of the historic Church even before the Reformation, but it is not the “canonical” way. What we do is an exception to that canonical practice. Melanchthon here states that it is our “greatest wish”, and the canons are of good and useful intent. We should endeavor to follow the confessions, even in this area, recognizing that while the exception is valid, its still an exception.

Jon

 

[Steve_Timm]

There were some things left over from the last thread, on How I Learned to Love Luther AND the Bomb, or something like that (when I can, perhaps I will post a link, if I am not murdered by an enraged mob of CAF regulars by the time I make it through this OP ), that I think might be worth continuing discussion on. Let me list them, and things we should NOT discuss.

1. Why, when a number of popes have said the path to reconciliation is forgiveness, do Catholics persist in NOT forgiving Luther for, among other things, disobeying the Pope?

2.DO Catholics believe Lutherans when they say Pope Francis is not, personally, the anti-Christ? If you want to find someone who actually DOES say that sort of thing, there is always Google, if you need that in your life.

1. What do you Catholics and Lutherans need from each other for reconciliation to occur?
2. What do you Catholics and Lutherans need to do personally to effect reconciliation?
3. Do you need to personally ask for forgiveness from the other side for your behavior, attitude, thoughts, actions, etc., that are less than Christian perfection? This is Lent, so here I am helping you.
4. I know there are two number 4’s. Now there are three 4’s. . I LIKE the number 4. Now there are six 4’s.seven 4’s. (Stop that, Tomi!)

Things not to discuss:

1. Luther’s personal habits, comments, language, mental condition, or comments about the same or other things about Luther, personally, others have said about him. Personally, I don’t give a rip.
2. Posters who post exhaustively on #1.
3. The mental habits of someone who would write this OP.

There. Now I am going to run and HIDE.

Hi, Tomyris!!

Thank you for posing this question!! I think this is an interesting question to propose in light of Lutheran/Catholic relations.

Here is my take on the issue…

I am not sure why the Catholic Church has not forgiven Luther. Luther was standing up to the corrupt power brokers of his day. In my opinion, there is nothing to forgive. He was doing what was morally right and just at the time.

Speaking as a Lutheran, I don’t believe at all that the Pope is the Anti-Christ. I think Protestants who think that are strange!! The Pope is infallible when speaking ex-cathedra. He is not a sinless man. He is at best, a redeemed sinner like you and I. Any practicing Catholic would tell you that. God has given that grace to the Pope (infalliability) when speaking on faith and morals from the chair of St. Peter (ex-cathedra).

Personally, I love the Catholic faith. The Catholic faith is the truth!! I have no problems with the Catholic practice of the faith, per se, but I have questions about certain dogma and doctrines they hold to. I would have to understand more about what, exactly, reconciliation means between Lutherans and Catholics and what specific things need to be reconciled.

Yes, I think forgiveness is necessary for both sides!! Both the Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church need to reach out to each other in love and forgiveness towards each other. We need to respect each other and how the other chooses to worship. Christ commanded us to love, not to hate!! I love my Catholic brethren!! They are very cool!!!

Anyways, this is just my two cents!!!

Take care all!!

Steve Timm

 

[Randy_Carson]

Which goes back to the question I have been asking…how do you know? if you have read the previoius posts…the CofN did something in the 1800/1900s…to somehow regain this AS…meaning they lost it somehow in the 1500s…and so the questions raised.

To be clear, the claim is that they always had valid orders and that Porvoo was really just an ecclesiatical group hug. :grouphug:

The fact that one of the groups invited to attend was an otherwise obscure and insignificant little church whose clergy just happened to have valid orders. But that was just a coincidence, really. I’m sure they would have been invited even if their orders were not valid, right?

Well…consider this…if the CofN is confident they have AS…so why refuse the validation, so as to settle the question, once and for all…and that is why I asked…Father K…who would do this validation (which he has been sidestepping).

Can’t. Getting a ruling requires admission that your own hierarchy 1) can be judged, 2) requires outside assistance, and 3) does not have the final authority.

 

[Randy_Carson]

That said, our local Lutheran Church was given a set of icons comissioned by the Orthodox. Their statement was “A Church needs icons.”

Another example of their desire to correct what they perceive to be your shortcomings.

 

[Dorothy]

Steve Timm,

"Yes, I think forgiveness is necessary for both sides!! Both the Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church need to reach out to each other in love and forgiveness towards each other. We need to respect each other and how the other chooses to worship. Christ commanded us to love, not to hate!! I love my Catholic brethren!! They are very cool!!! >>

Thank you for your entire post! It is much appreciated.

Yes, forgiveness is needed from both sides. I am aware that Luther had a right to be upset with corruption.

I must admit that I am saddened by the change in doctrine that took place (faith alone) - but I will leave that
to those who are discussing these matters, and I will pray for unity.

 

[Steve_Timm]

Steve Timm,

"Yes, I think forgiveness is necessary for both sides!! Both the Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church need to reach out to each other in love and forgiveness towards each other. We need to respect each other and how the other chooses to worship. Christ commanded us to love, not to hate!! I love my Catholic brethren!! They are very cool!!! >>

Thank you for your entire post! It is much appreciated.

Yes, forgiveness is needed from both sides. I am aware that Luther had a right to be upset with corruption.

I must admit that I am saddened by the change in doctrine that took place (faith alone) - but I will leave that
to those who are discussing these matters, and I will pray for unity.

Hi, Dorothy!!



Thank you for your kind comment!!

I agree with you on being sad about the direction most Protestant practitioners have taken the faith (as in faith alone saves) But, and this is where I think most Catholics don’t know, is that Luther did not teach, nor do Lutherans believe that you are saved by faith alone. Luther taught that faith, accompanied by works, saves. Works are a natural byproduct of faith!! Faith must be accompanied by works and vice versa!!

 

[KjetilK]

To be clear, the claim is that they always had valid orders and that Porvoo was really just an ecclesiatical group hug.

Are you here to have a respectful discussion at all?

The fact that one of the groups invited to attend was an otherwise obscure and insignificant little church whose clergy just happened to have valid orders. But that was just a coincidence, really. I’m sure they would have been invited even if their orders were not valid, right?

And Bush was totally behind 9/11, right?

Can’t. Getting a ruling requires admission that your own hierarchy 1) can be judged, 2) requires outside assistance, and 3) does not have the final authority.

Right back at you.

 

[Picky_Picky]

To be clear, the claim is that they always had valid orders and that Porvoo was really just an ecclesiatical group hug. :grouphug:

The fact that one of the groups invited to attend was an otherwise obscure and insignificant little church whose clergy just happened to have valid orders. But that was just a coincidence, really. I’m sure they would have been invited even if their orders were not valid, right?

Can’t. Getting a ruling requires admission that your own hierarchy 1) can be judged, 2) requires outside assistance, and 3) does not have the final authority.

I’m not sure why you feel it necessary to adopt such a condescending tone of voice: Porvoo is not just a hug; it is intercommunion. Try this:

anglicancommunion.org/media/102178/porvoo_common_statement.pdf

Who you have decided is an “obscure and insignificant little church” I have no idea. Porvoo is a communion of 15 churches. Some of them are indeed small, but that hardly makes them “insignificant”: they are Christian churches serving Christian congregations. Several of them are in fact the national churches of their countries.

Perhaps you are not aware of the Church of England’s ecumenical work. Its close relations are not only with the Porvoo churches, or those in the Anglican Communion, or the Old Catholics or the Moravians; it is also working for visible unity with the Lutheran and Reformed churches of France, the Evangelical Church in Germany (little? insignificant?), and the Methodist Church of Great Britain.

Strange that here, where people are so often bemoaning the disunity of the Church and the “30,000 denominations”, the best you can offer towards real achievements in bringing Christian churches together is disparagement.

 

[Memaw]

Everyone wants to be Catholic, Jon, but submitting to someone with real authority culls out the wannabes from the “will be’s”.

But I cover a different angle in post #559.

AMEN, that’s why they keep trying to mimic us. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Selah_KY]

Most Protestants (including most American Lutherans) don’t even care about apostolic succession, so discussions about who has it and who doesn’t are irrelevant to them.

This has been a topic of interest to me lately… when I was growing up in the 70s, we were taught in confirmation class that Lutherans (at least ALC Lutherans) did believe in apostolic succession and our pastors ordination could be traced back to Luther, and through him we were tied to the Catholic apostolic succession. When I looked to Wiki for the quick answer, it said that the LCMS does not follow it, but that many of the Scandinavian Lutheran churches did. I’m assuming since the merger, the ELCA doesn’t follow it. I haven’t had time to do more research than that.

Fr. K, does the Church of Norway have this belief?

 

[KjetilK]

This has been a topic of interest to me lately… when I was growing up in the 70s, we were taught in confirmation class that Lutherans (at least ALC Lutherans) did believe in apostolic succession and our pastors ordination could be traced back to Luther, and through him we were tied to the Catholic apostolic succession. When I looked to Wiki for the quick answer, it said that the LCMS does not follow it, but that many of the Scandinavian Lutheran churches did. I’m assuming since the merger, the ELCA doesn’t follow it. I haven’t had time to do more research than that.

Fr. K, does the Church of Norway have this belief?

Well, yes and no. We believe in apostolic succession, but not because we trace it back to Luther, but because we trace it back through our own bishops. In Scandinavia, the national churches broke off from Rome, as in England, with priests and bishops.

 

[benjohnson]

Another example of their desire to correct what they perceive to be your shortcomings.

Turning an act of generous acknowledgement and kindness between an Orthodox and Lutheran church into a polemic seems rather impetuous.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I’m not sure why you feel it necessary to adopt such a condescending tone of voice: Porvoo is not just a hug; it is intercommunion. Try this:

anglicancommunion.org/media/102178/porvoo_common_statement.pdf

Who you have decided is an “obscure and insignificant little church” I have no idea. Porvoo is a communion of 15 churches.

The Old Catholics were invited to participate because their ordinations were considered valid. In 2013, it was reported there were 115,000 Old Catholic attendees and adherents in the world.

 

[GKC]

The Old Catholics were invited to participate because their ordinations were considered valid. In 2013, it was reported there were 115,000 Old Catholic attendees and adherents in the world.

The OCs were included because they were already in communion with the Anglicans, and had been for 60 years. Furthering ecumenism was the idea.

GKC.

 

[KjetilK]

The Old Catholics were invited to participate because their ordinations were considered valid. In 2013, it was reported there were 115,000 Old Catholic attendees and adherents in the world.

Just stop. You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Randy_Carson]

The OCs were included because they were already in communion with the Anglicans, and had been for 60 years. Furthering ecumenism was the idea.

GKC.

I’m trying to follow the sequence of events and the timing, so please look at this through Catholic lenses for a moment, if you would.

Did that communion begin before or after Apostolicae Curae (1896)?

IOW, would it be possible to say that after the Catholic Church declared the Anglican orders to be invalid, the Anglicans connected with the OC in order to re-introduce valid ordinations?

And would it be possible to say that intercommunion was extended later to other Protestant groups which also had questionable validity?

I have no way of knowing with certainty that the Anglicans and the CoN acted to correct deficiencies, but I’m skeptical that they acted as they did PURELY out of a desire to be in communion with one another. Maybe that was the motivation, but it’s a very convenient cover story if the REAL purpose was to restore apostolic succession.

BTW - I found this site contains a bit of history:

The Porvoo Communion
porvoocommunion.org/porvoo_communion/history/

Near the bottom is a link to download a document entitled, “What made Porvoo possible?” There’s nothing about Norway, but a lot about Sweden; however, I cannot judge whether the information is accurate.

FWIW, my real purpose for asking a few questions in this thread is to encourage some deep reflection. I have put the questions forward…the rest is out of my hands.

By the way: This photo was taken from the website above. Is this a woman conducting some sort of ordination ceremony?

http://www.porvoocommunion.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/8175557139_c43740bcd0.jpg

Will the Lutheran CoN accept the ordination of women as meeting the four criterion frequently put forward by Kjetilk?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Will the Lutheran CoN accept the ordination of women as meeting the four criterion frequently put forward by Kjetilk?

Oh…never mind.

Helga Haugland Byfuglien is the presiding bishop of the Church of Norway.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Just stop. You have no idea what you are talking about.

You’re right. I had no idea…

Norwegian Woes
by William J. Tighe
touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-06-061-r

Excerpt:

So in 1997 the Samraad leaders began to discuss the possibility of obtaining “episcopal oversight” from the Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC), a member church of the now-collapsing Old Catholic Union of Utrecht (see my article “Old Catholics, New Doctrines: the Decline of the Union of Utrecht” in the January/February 1999 issue of Touchstone).

The PNCC insisted on two points, however: the Samraad make a clean and total break with the state church before coming under its aegis, and the Norwegian clergy undergo “unconditional” (re)ordination by a PNCC bishop, despite the fact that most of them had over the previous decade quietly obtained “supplemental ordination” from a sympathetic Swedish bishop (the Swedish church claims to have maintained the “apostolic succession”).

The Samraad leadership agreed to these conditions. But then, at the end of 1997, some of its key officials, mostly laity, as well as a majority of the ordinands associated with the organization, suddenly and unexpectedly joined the Roman Catholic Church. The consequent disarray meant that the implementation of the accord with the PNCC, scheduled for January 1998, had to be deferred to a more opportune time.

There’s a lot more in the article…but one has to ask WHY the PNCC would require the CoN priests to be re-ordained unconditionally.

In hindsight, it seems I had a pretty good idea about the validity of CoN ordinations from the get-go. :sad_yes:

 

[GKC]

I’m trying to follow the sequence of events and the timing, so please look at this through Catholic lenses for a moment, if you would.

Did that communion begin before or after Apostolicae Curae (1896)?

IOW, would it be possible to say that after the Catholic Church declared the Anglican orders to be invalid, the Anglicans connected with the OC in order to re-introduce valid ordinations?

And would it be possible to say that intercommunion was extended later to other Protestant groups which also had questionable validity?

I have no way of knowing with certainty that the Anglicans and the CoN acted to correct deficiencies, but I’m skeptical that they acted as they did PURELY out of a desire to be in communion with one another. Maybe that was the motivation, but it’s a very convenient cover story if the REAL purpose was to restore apostolic succession.

BTW - I found this site contains a bit of history:

The Porvoo Communion
porvoocommunion.org/porvoo_communion/history/

Near the bottom is a link to download a document entitled, “What made Porvoo possible?” There’s nothing about Norway, but a lot about Sweden; however, I cannot judge whether the information is accurate.

FWIW, my real purpose for asking a few questions in this thread is to encourage some deep reflection. I have put the questions forward…the rest is out of my hands.

By the way: This photo was taken from the website above. Is this a woman conducting some sort of ordination ceremony?

http://www.porvoocommunion.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/8175557139_c43740bcd0.jpg

Will the Lutheran CoN accept the ordination of women as meeting the four criterion frequently put forward by Kjetilk?

I’ve looked at the question of Anglican orders through a number of Catholic lenses, of a number of types, in the 15 years or so I’ve been interested in the subject. That’s not a novel one.

The Agreement of Bonn was 36 years post Apostolicae Curae. And Apostolicae Curae was roughly 25 years post the beginnings of the idea of the OCs and the CoE entering into some sort of communion, in some way. Discussed in Moss’ THE OLD CATHOLIC MOVEMENT.

Of course it would be possible to say that the CoE was chasing apostolic order, in Bonn. It would be a-historical, and would represent the sort of well-poisoning that is not uncommon, but anyone can say anything they wish, in that sense. One can, say, purport to reveal what is really behind the public line, on a given subject, exposing the real motivations and machinations of the perpetrators. I’ve had a certain shade of protestant do that, to me, more than once, in explaining things like how Catholics (like you and me, that is), really worship the BVM, not being taken in by all that dulia/hyperdulia/latria mumbo-jumbo. Folks believe what they will, what fits, what makes them comfortable, as oft as what can be best supported.

As to whether intercommunion was later extended to folks of dubious provenance, there’s the Church of South India incident.

I’ve studied the issue of Anglican orders for the stated 15+ years. I’ve not studied Porvoo much at all. But I can recognize the same sort of ecumenical impulses that started the CoE and the OCs talking, originally. But you seem to overlook a point. If the Anglicans chased, fervently, the OCs, to restore their orders, declared by Leo’s hand null and void in 1896, in 1932, and (remembering the logic of Ott, p. 458), did so to recover those orders, behind the public line, then having done so, of what utility would the OCs or PNCCs be in 1992? By all accounts, all concerned would suppose the Anglicans were bringing that gift to the table, and the altar, and the communion, already. They might have expired, perhaps?

GKC