Protestant Council to Determine Canonicity

[SextusEmpiricus]

A valid continuation of the western church would be the term I use.

Our confession states that:
“Scripture…sets before us Christ alone as mediator, atoning sacrifice, high priest, and intercessor.”—Augsburg Confession Art. XXI.[4]

Hence why our church organization tends to be much ‘flatter’ per 1 Corinthians 4:1: “No one should regard us as anything else than ministers of Christ and dispensers of the mysteries of God.”

You may not be able to answer this, and I do not intend to single out Lutherans on this thread, but does this mean that only Lutherans are ministers of Christ? Or are you saying that all professing Christians - from televangelists to orthodox - are entrusted with the “mysteries of God”? And if that is true, would not all professing Christians be dispensing the same message? And given that they obviously do not all dispense the same message, how does one separate truth from fiction?

 

[MaryT777]

Thanks, although I wouldn’t go quite *that *far. More like Catholics accepting something because a Lutheran synod decreed it.

I know; I had to exaggerate to make a point
Peace in Christ,
Mary.

 

[benjohnson]

You may not be able to answer this, and I do not intend to single out Lutherans on this thread, but does this mean that only Lutherans are ministers of Christ? Or are you saying that all professing Christians - from televangelists to orthodox - are entrusted with the “mysteries of God”? And if that is true, would not all professing Christians be dispensing the same message? And given that they obviously do not all dispense the same message, how does one separate truth from fiction?

As I undersand it, the “mysteries of God” are the Grave giving Sacraments.

We Lutherans can get quite prideful, but even we have to thank God that there are excellent ministers of Christ in other churches. Sadly, we would have to remark that there are poor ministers in those churches (as well as our own.)

As for the truth, our confessionals obviously reflect God-given truth. It must be apparent to all!

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

A valid continuation of the western church would be the term I use.

Our confession states that:
“Scripture…sets before us Christ alone as mediator, atoning sacrifice, high priest, and intercessor.”—Augsburg Confession Art. XXI.[4]

Hence why our church organization tends to be much ‘flatter’ per 1 Corinthians 4:1: “No one should regard us as anything else than ministers of Christ and dispensers of the mysteries of God.”

How is Christ alone an interecessor?

 

[Peter_J]

As I undersand it, the “mysteries of God” are the Grave giving Sacraments.

We Lutherans can get quite prideful, but even we have to thank God that there are excellent ministers of Christ in other churches. Sadly, we would have to remark that there are poor ministers in those churches (as well as our own.)

As for the truth, our confessionals obviously reflect God-given truth. It must be apparent to all!

Took me a moment to realize that you meant “Grace giving”.

 

[SextusEmpiricus]

As I undersand it, the “mysteries of God” are the Grave giving Sacraments.

We Lutherans can get quite prideful, but even we have to thank God that there are excellent ministers of Christ in other churches. Sadly, we would have to remark that there are poor ministers in those churches (as well as our own.)

As for the truth, our confessionals obviously reflect God-given truth. It must be apparent to all!

Whether they are “excellent” or “poor” has nothing to do with “truth” (unless I have missed something).

 

[steido01]

Based on my understanding (as I mentioned in another post), the Lutheran church serves as the “magisterium” (for lack of a better term) for Lutherans. And, similarly, it seems to me that the confessions are authoritative as well.

Therefore, in response to the question - “How do you know the DC’s were not inspired by God?” The Lutheran response is - “Because my church tells me they are not inspired.” (Oversimplified for the sake of brevity). On the other hand, the Catholic response to a similar question would be - “Because the early church councils have examined the evidence.”

Have I made an accurate conclusion (based on responses from this thread)?

Your conclusion could be accurate about a given protestant group that had decided the DCs were not inspired… but again, Lutheranism has never officially made that claim, because it does not believe itself to have the authority to do so(Jon, Ben, et al. please feel free to jump in).

It’s a fine distinction to make, but I think it’s an important one nonetheless - I would say that, while acknowledging the teaching position of the church, Lutherans would cite Scripture as the source of authority; any and all authority that a Lutheran “magisterium” holds would be derived from, and accountable to, Scripture. This understanding of authority is also why we do not claim our confessions to be inerrant (though we do not believe they err) or on the same level as Scripture; rather, they are simply a “right reflection” of it. In other words, the confessions do not serve as a “paper pope.” If Scripture does not explicitly define a belief or dogma (or a canon for itself), we will not -indeed, cannot- define it. This is consistent across Lutheran beliefs. For example, we take Christ at his word when he says, “This IS my body.” We do not attempt to explain how using aristotelian terms or passing it off as mere “representation” - instead, we simply accept the mystery.

So then the obvious question becomes, “Well, then how do you Lutherans identify an ‘inerrant, authoritative Scripture,’ if you won’t define a cannon?” Well, we do it the same way the ECFs did (of course, we have the benefit of their wonderful examples to help). It goes back to what I explained in post #30:

An authoritative, absolutely reliable, Scripture requires an authoritative, absolutely reliable table of contents, but there is no easy way around the historical question. Rome answers by asserting that the Holy Spirit guided the Council of Trent to vote correctly on the truth, and Protestants tend to look for earlier, divinely guided events leading to canonization.

The Lutheran approach to this problem is surprising in that we don’t seek to establish such a table of contents. We hold that the lack of definitive historical evidence cannot simply be eliminated by properly consecrated people getting together and taking a Spirit-guided vote, and so there ultimately isn’t anything we can do about it. In other words, no amount of voting, liturgical development, or theological reflection can answer for us whether Hebrews was written by an apostle or at least a close associate. The evidence just isn’t there.

So what’s our answer? Well, go back to that word, “canon.” “Canon” means “rule.” So the point of a canon isn’t to just have some final Table of Contents on which to draw up a dogma and so that we can excommunicate everyone who refuses to stop asking the historical questions, it’s to have a rule of faith for settling doctrinal disputes and the like.

Thus the Lutheran approach to the canon is to have a rule of interpretation essentially defined by the certainty to which we can establish a book’s origin:

• A dogma must be established by the universally attested books (homolegomena).
• Dogma may be corroborated by the contested books (antilegomena), and they may be read for historical background, advice, and other edifying purposes, but no dogma can be established from the antilegomena alone, nor can the antilegomena be pitted against the homolegomena.

Emphasis mine.

Some Lutherans Bibles have 66 books. Some have 73 books. Luther’s original had 74 books (he included the Prayer of Manasseh). So long as the Gospel is not deluded, the number of books is not of particular import to Lutherans.

 

[benjohnson]

Whether they are “excellent” or “poor” has nothing to do with “truth” (unless I have missed something).

In dialog with other religious people, I often couch ideas in ways in an attempt to not hurt their faith. For example, I have no doubt that the Catholic church is wrong in certain ways, but I also have no doubt that Catholics are beloved children in Christ.

So I don’t want to harp on our disagreements if it would hurt the faith of others.

Confessional Lutherans make a claim to be the ‘one true church’ - and while we would love others to see this truth, I personally will not drive a wedge between godly people and God in a clumsy attempt to persuade. I’ll leave it to the Holy Spirit.

If you find me drawing sharp impenetrable distinctions between our Church and other Churches, it’s probably because I gave in to the sins of pride and anger.

 

[SextusEmpiricus]

In dialog with other religious people, I often couch ideas in ways in an attempt to not hurt their faith. For example, I have no doubt that the Catholic church is wrong in certain ways, but I also have no doubt that Catholics are beloved children in Christ.

So I don’t want to harp on our disagreements if it would hurt the faith of others.

Confessional Lutherans make a claim to be the ‘one true church’ - and while we would love others to see this truth, I personally will not drive a wedge between godly people and God in a clumsy attempt to persuade. I’ll leave it to the Holy Spirit.

If you find me drawing sharp impenetrable distinctions between our Church and other Churches, it’s probably because I gave in to the sins of pride and anger.

I think that’s fair, ben, thank you. Though I suppose “truth” will be the victim of ecumenism…

 

[benjohnson]

I think that’s fair, ben, thank you. Though I suppose “truth” will be the victim of ecumenism…

Perhaps - though Confessional Lutherans get quite strident in ecumenical dialog.

But here on CAF and in our interactions with other Christians, we have to realize that we’re all ‘sheep’ and woe to any Christian that leads one of God’s sheep astray:

Mathew 18:6

“If anyone causes one of these little ones–those who believe in me–to stumble,** it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned** in the depths of the sea.”

 

[Isaiah45_9]

A valid continuation of the western church would be the term I use.

Our confession states that:
“Scripture…sets before us Christ alone as mediator, atoning sacrifice, high priest, and intercessor.”—Augsburg Confession Art. XXI.[4]

Hence why our church organization tends to be much ‘flatter’ per 1 Corinthians 4:1: “No one should regard us as anything else than ministers of Christ and dispensers of the mysteries of God.”

Indeed, but there is in fact a hierarchy and an order to carry on Christ’s ministry;

Appointed/Ordained

Christ chose 12 Apostles, whom He appointed to oversee His Church, John 15:16.

Throughout the New Testament we see and recognize that the Twelve appointed (ordained) others. The Early Church Fathers recognize the Twelve as the Bishops (Overseers) of the Church. When Judas Iscariot fell, the Apostles appointed Matthias in his place, Acts 1:25-26.

After they filled Judas’ place, the Twelve proceed to appoint Deacons, Acts 6:1-6. On this occasion they appointed seven (7) Deacons, Stephen among these seven. We clearly see how this appointment was made: The Bishops “Lay the Hands” on the Deacons. Not twelve guys standing by the side of the road, but those in authority: The Bishops.

Later we see Barnabas and Paul ordaining Priests (Elders) in Lystra, Iconium and Antioch, Acts 14:20-22. This is confirmed in Paul letter to Titus, whom Paul ordained as a Priest, in Titus 1:5. With further instructions to Titus to ordained more Priests.

Then in 1 Timothy 3, we see in detail the requirements for Bishops (Overseers) and Deacons. And in 1 Timothy 5:17-25, we see the ordination of Priests (Elders), and again in Titus 1:5-16.

So yes, Christ is our High Priest, but He ordained 12 to carry on His ministry and the 12 in return ordained more for His purpose.

In other words, Christ established His Church and a set of instructions to follow.

 

[Nicea325]

Indeed, but there is in fact a hierarchy and an order to carry on Christ’s ministry;

Appointed/Ordained

Christ chose 12 Apostles, whom He appointed to oversee His Church, John 15:16.

Throughout the New Testament we see and recognize that the Twelve appointed (ordained) others. The Early Church Fathers recognize the Twelve as the Bishops (Overseers) of the Church. When Judas Iscariot fell, the Apostles appointed Matthias in his place, Acts 1:25-26.

After they filled Judas’ place, the Twelve proceed to appoint Deacons, Acts 6:1-6. On this occasion they appointed seven (7) Deacons, Stephen among these seven. We clearly see how this appointment was made: The Bishops “Lay the Hands” on the Deacons. Not twelve guys standing by the side of the road, but those in authority: The Bishops.

Later we see Barnabas and Paul ordaining Priests (Elders) in Lystra, Iconium and Antioch, Acts 14:20-22. This is confirmed in Paul letter to Titus, whom Paul ordained as a Priest, in Titus 1:5. With further instructions to Titus to ordained more Priests.

Then in 1 Timothy 3, we see in detail the requirements for Bishops (Overseers) and Deacons. And in 1 Timothy 5:17-25, we see the ordination of Priests (Elders), and again in Titus 1:5-16.

So yes, Christ is our High Priest, but He ordained 12 to carry on His ministry and the 12 in return ordained more for His purpose.

In other words, Christ established His Church and a set of instructions to follow.

I just do not understand where so many Protestants get the belief with death of the Apostles their ministries and office ceased to exist?

 

[SextusEmpiricus]

Indeed, but there is in fact a hierarchy and an order to carry on Christ’s ministry;

Appointed/Ordained

Christ chose 12 Apostles, whom He appointed to oversee His Church, John 15:16.

Throughout the New Testament we see and recognize that the Twelve appointed (ordained) others. The Early Church Fathers recognize the Twelve as the Bishops (Overseers) of the Church. When Judas Iscariot fell, the Apostles appointed Matthias in his place, Acts 1:25-26.

After they filled Judas’ place, the Twelve proceed to appoint Deacons, Acts 6:1-6. On this occasion they appointed seven (7) Deacons, Stephen among these seven. We clearly see how this appointment was made: The Bishops “Lay the Hands” on the Deacons. Not twelve guys standing by the side of the road, but those in authority: The Bishops.

Later we see Barnabas and Paul ordaining Priests (Elders) in Lystra, Iconium and Antioch, Acts 14:20-22. This is confirmed in Paul letter to Titus, whom Paul ordained as a Priest, in Titus 1:5. With further instructions to Titus to ordained more Priests.

Then in 1 Timothy 3, we see in detail the requirements for Bishops (Overseers) and Deacons. And in 1 Timothy 5:17-25, we see the ordination of Priests (Elders), and again in Titus 1:5-16.

So yes, Christ is our High Priest, but He ordained 12 to carry on His ministry and the 12 in return ordained more for His purpose.

In other words, Christ established His Church and a set of instructions to follow.

Based on my understanding of what has been posted in this thread, it seems Lutherans would agree. The hierarchy for Lutherans is reflected in the Confessions (I think) and their Synods (if I have this correctly), both of which are directly connected to Christ.

The Lutheran hierarchy would look something like this:

1. 
   *]Lutherans at the top - all those who accept the truth of the confessions and the synods.
   *]Other excellent ministers of Christ in other churches - below Lutherans because they are not confessional Lutherans.
   *]Poor ministers of Christ in other churches - those that reject Lutheranism altogether.
   
   (I may not be accurate in describing this third rung on the ladder).

 

[pablope]

A valid continuation of the western church would be the term I use.

Which goes back to my original query…if as you say Lutheranism is a valid continuation of the western church…and as you and others have said, you rely on early church tradition…which always had patriarches and had connections to the Apostles…how can Lutheranism be a valid continuation is it has none of these?

And even call the patriarch of the west the anti-Christ?

And why still dispute the DC or question their canonicity?

Our confession states that:
“Scripture…sets before us Christ alone as mediator, atoning sacrifice, high priest, and intercessor.”—Augsburg Confession Art. XXI.[4]

 

[JonNC]

Your conclusion could be accurate about a given protestant group that had decided the DCs were not inspired… but again, Lutheranism has never officially made that claim, because it does not believe itself to have the authority to do so(Jon, Ben, et al. please feel free to jump in).

It’s a fine distinction to make, but I think it’s an important one nonetheless - I would say that, while acknowledging the teaching position of the church, Lutherans would cite Scripture as the source of authority; any and all authority that a Lutheran “magisterium” holds would be derived from, and accountable to, Scripture. This understanding of authority is also why we do not claim our confessions to be inerrant (though we do not believe they err) or on the same level as Scripture; rather, they are simply a “right reflection” of it. In other words, the confessions do not serve as a “paper pope.” If Scripture does not explicitly define a belief or dogma (or a canon for itself), we will not -indeed, cannot- define it. This is consistent across Lutheran beliefs. For example, we take Christ at his word when he says, “This IS my body.” We do not attempt to explain how using aristotelian terms or passing it off as mere “representation” - instead, we simply accept the mystery.

So then the obvious question becomes, “Well, then how do you Lutherans identify an ‘inerrant, authoritative Scripture,’ if you won’t define a cannon?” Well, we do it the same way the ECFs did (of course, we have the benefit of their wonderful examples to help). It goes back to what I explained in post #30:

Emphasis mine.

Some Lutherans Bibles have 66 books. Some have 73 books. Luther’s original had 74 books (he included the Prayer of Manasseh). So long as the Gospel is not deluded, the number of books is not of particular import to Lutherans.

Spot on, Don.
Jon

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Based on my understanding of what has been posted in this thread, it seems Lutherans would agree. The hierarchy for Lutherans is reflected in the Confessions (I think) and their Synods (if I have this correctly), both of which are directly connected to Christ.

The Lutheran hierarchy would look something like this:

1. 
   *]Lutherans at the top - all those who accept the truth of the confessions and the synods.
   *]Other excellent ministers of Christ in other churches - below Lutherans because they are not confessional Lutherans.
   *]Poor ministers of Christ in other churches - those that reject Lutheranism altogether.
   
   (I may not be accurate in describing this third rung on the ladder).

1. 
   To an extent this is true. However, the verse quoted by ben leads to demonstrate that only **Christ ** has a place of authority. Christ is the head, no doubt. But Christ also designated others to appoint/ordained more ministers. And there is clearly a hierarchy. It is also true that the one in the highest position should be the one that is the most servant, in other words - serves the most.
   
   The other problem we have is that ben said that the Lutheran Church is a continuation of the Western Church. This is true to an extent. They did branch out of the Catholic Church, in this aspect, Lutherans are a **separated **continuation. The problem with a continuation only is that their Bishops, Deacons and Priests would need to have been designated in **continuation **of Apostolic authority and communion. They are not in communion with Apostolic Succession, as such the ordinations are not in par with what is clearly expressed in Scriptures and how it has been done since the Apostles.
   
   They are no doubt an Ecclessial Community in an imperfect union with the Catholic Church but members of it through Baptism nonetheless.

 

[JonNC]

Based on my understanding of what has been posted in this thread, it seems Lutherans would agree. The hierarchy for Lutherans is reflected in the Confessions (I think) and their Synods (if I have this correctly), both of which are directly connected to Christ.

The Lutheran hierarchy would look something like this:

1. 
   *]Lutherans at the top - all those who accept the truth of the confessions and the synods.
   *]Other excellent ministers of Christ in other churches - below Lutherans because they are not confessional Lutherans.
   *]Poor ministers of Christ in other churches - those that reject Lutheranism altogether.
   
   (I may not be accurate in describing this third rung on the ladder).

1. 
   Gosh! That makes us sound arrogant to almost triumphalist.
   Safer to sat that if we didn’t believe what we say about our own beliefs, it would be sort of foolish to remain Lutheran.
   
   Jon

 

[SextusEmpiricus]

To an extent this is true. However, the verse quoted by ben leads to demonstrate that only **Christ ** has a place of authority. Christ is the head, no doubt. But Christ also designated others to appoint/ordained more ministers. And there is clearly a hierarchy. It is also true that the one in the highest position should be the one that is the most servant, in other words - serves the most.

The other problem we have is that ben said that the Lutheran Church is a continuation of the Western Church. This is true to an extent. They did branch out of the Catholic Church, in this aspect, Lutherans are a **separated **continuation. The problem with a continuation only is that their Bishops, Deacons and Priests would need to have been designated in **continuation **of Apostolic authority and communion. They are not in communion with Apostolic Succession, as such the ordinations are not in par with what is clearly expressed in Scriptures and how it has been done since the Apostles.

They are no doubt an Ecclessial Community in an imperfect union with the Catholic Church but members of it through Baptism nonetheless.

And the claim made by Lutherans (and no doubt others) is that Christ is indeed the head of the Lutheran Church, and therefore are endowed with authority in matters of Christianity (i.e., who may be rightly excluded from Christianity, which books are divinely inspired, etc.).

 

[MaryT777]

I think that’s fair, ben, thank you. Though I suppose “truth” will be the victim of ecumenism…

Let us pray the Truth at the Catholic Church defines it is never ever compromised for the
sake of ecumenism.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

And the claim made by Lutherans (and no doubt others) is that Christ is indeed the head of the Lutheran Church, and therefore are endowed with authority in matters of Christianity (i.e., who may be rightly excluded from Christianity, which books are divinely inspired, etc.).

To some extent, yes.

However, to my understanding, only the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Oriental Orthodox Church can actually trace their origins to Christ and the Apostles.

After the Reformation in the 1,500’s, a barrage of Christians denominations have formed. But these can only trace their origins from the 1,500’s forward.