Protestant Statements of Faith and Catechisms: Luther's Small Catechism

[GladTidings]

For some reason, I did not realize the Presbyterians were so steeped in Calvinism. Do Presbyterians evangelize? If so, why if God has already made people who He has predestined to reject Him?

 

[GladTidings]

Chapter 25, number 5. I agree with this as far as describing the denominations.

 

[ltwin]

For some reason, I did not realize the Presbyterians were to steeped in Calvinism

Historically, Presbyterians by definition were always Calvinists. Today, the more liberal, mainline Presbyterian denominations have moved far away from “orthodox” Calvinism, but the more traditional and evangelical Presbyterians are definitely of the Calvinist variety.

Do Presbyterians evangelize?

Yes.

If so, why if God has already made people who He has predestined to reject Him?

Not a Calvinist, but they would say because evangelizing (“the preaching of the Word”) is a means of grace. How are those who are predestined to believe going to believe unless they hear the gospel being proclaimed?

 

[GladTidings]

Who gave Luther the right to create his own church? Who gave my parents the right to create their own church? Sure they might have had good intentions, but how much of it was arrogance? Didn’t Adam and Eve seek to become godlike and to answer their own questions and make the rules? It seems similar to Luther, Calvin.

 

[GladTidings]

Thank you for the information.

 

[JonNC]

Who gave Luther the right to create his own church?

He didn’t, anymore than two churches were formed when Rome and the Orthodox split.
There is only one true Church. Sadly today it is divided

 

[AugustTherese]

He didn’t, anymore than two churches were formed when Rome and the Orthodox split.

There is only one true Church. Sadly today it is divided

Please, quit lumping the Orthodox Church and Protestant ecclesial communities in with the One, undivided Church Christ founded.

 

[GladTidings]

Chapter 29, number 7. “Worthy receivers.” 1 Cor. 11:27 “Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.”

Is this to be thought of as, they will symbolically have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord? How do they know they are unworthy? Do they do an examination of conscience first? Are we talking about people who have at least prayed to God and asked for forgiveness? How do they know they have been forgiven? Because they know that they know that they know?

 

[Kei]

I don’t think you understood what I was saying, obviously they had Faith in and to God, but this was made clear in their works, justified by this Faith in doing them as opposed to purely because of them. Had Abraham decided to circumcise himself because of health reasons but not for God, it would have what merit? Had Abraham moved to circumcise himself upon God’s command but died half way through, what effect would this have had on merit?
But as Paul said, we no longer have the works of the law as circumcision to rely upon, but are one in Jesus Christ, and should work out our salvation in fear and trembling in Him with love, hope, and faith.

 

[GladTidings]

Chapter 25, number 5.

So, the gates of hell will prevail against some “pure” churches? Matthew 16:18.

 

[GladTidings]

Chapter 8, number 8. No free will? God decided who makes it to glory? Is it a popularity contest?

 

[lanman87]

Chapter 25, number 5.

So, the gates of hell will prevail against some “pure” churches? Matthew 16:18.

You have to remember that in Reformed Theology the Universal Church and the Church institutions aren’t the same thing. The universal church is made of the elect. That is the church that the gates of hell will not prevail against. As I once heard it put, “The church is God’s people, doing God’s Will, empowered by God’s Spirit, to the Glory of God”. To say that the gates of hell will not prevail against it doesn’t mean the church is perfect. It means the church (God’s people) will ultimately prevail over Satan and that there will always be the church (God’s people) on earth carrying out His work, until Christ returns. The elect (God’s people) are found in various church organizations and while those organizations may fail, the Church (people of God) will always exist and carry out God’s work and Glorify God.

 

[GladTidings]

You mean the ekklesia?

 

[GladTidings]

Chapter 30, number 2. Incorrect understanding of John 20:23.

 

[ltwin]

I don’t think you understood what I was saying

I do understand, and we could discuss the role of works in salvation till the cows come home. But I’ll just restate that Presbyterians see the Old and New Covenants as different dispensations of the one covenant of grace. The covenant of works is something else as explained by Presbyterian minister R. C. Sproul:

The covenant of works refers to the covenant that God made with Adam and Eve in their pristine purity before the fall, in which God promised them blessedness contingent upon their obedience to His command. After the fall, the fact that God continued to promise redemption to creatures who had violated the covenant of works, that ongoing promise of redemption is defined as the covenant of grace.

Technically, from one perspective, all covenants that God makes with creatures are gracious in the sense that He is not obligated to make any promises to His creatures. But the distinction between the covenant of works and grace is getting at something that is of vital importance, as it has to do with the Gospel. The covenant of grace indicates God’s promise to save us even when we fail to keep the obligations imposed in creation.

And none of us can honestly say we’ve been without sin; therefore, none of us except Jesus could have ever kept the covenant of works. But the larger point of covenant theology is that God has been offering grace and redemption to mankind throughout history, not just when Christ came on the scene. The Old Testament was an expression of that redemptive plan.

If a Jewish person was trying to use “works of the law” to earn righteousness, then that would be falling into a covenant of works. If a Christian is using legalism to earn righteousness, then that is also a falling into a covenant of works. Thankfully, we are not under a covenant of works but under grace.

 

[ATraveller]

Thanks for pointing that out. I’ll use that link in the OP.

 

[ATraveller]

I’m not sure if the Confession is favouring Zwingli or Calvin so there’s some difficulties.
But I think this is reasonably similar in a general way from a Baptist with some Calvinist theology:

What does eating “in an unworthy manner” refer to? The context that we have just seen would say, it means 1) failing to appreciate what the bread and cup signify—that Christ loved the church and died for her—and then 2) failing to feel any remorse that our attitudes and actions are so inconsistent with the love of Christ, and then 3) failing to renounce those attitudes and actions and turn to the path of love, and then 4) failing to trust Jesus for forgiveness and for the power to walk in love.

Or let’s put it positively. What does it mean to eat the Lord’s Supper worthily, properly? And here I bid all parents to assess yourselves and your children here. The Lord’s Supper is a call to self-examination. 1) Do you see and savor what the bread and cup signify—that Christ loved the church and gave himself for her? 2) Do you feel remorse—do you feel bad—that your attitudes and actions are inconsistent with the love of Christ for his church and for the poor in particular? 3) Do you renounce those attitudes and actions and turn from them into the path of love, and say, “I will not treat the church as something cheap; I will love the church and cherish the blood-bought people of God; I will not humiliate the poor; I will love the poor and serve the poor”? 4) And do you trust Jesus for the forgiveness of these bad attitudes and actions and for the will and power to walk again in love?

If so, eat and drink at his table. There are no perfect saints at the Lord’s table. We are all debtors to grace. Forgiveness is our only hope of acceptance. But look carefully here, lest you think that forgiveness and grace mean there is no severe fatherly discipline.

Why We Eat the Lord's Supper, Part 3 | Desiring God

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

He didn’t, anymore than two churches were formed when Rome and the Orthodox split.

There is only one true Church. Sadly today it is divided

Please, quit lumping the Orthodox Church and Protestant ecclesial communities in with the One, undivided Church Christ founded.

No. I intend to speak what I believe. The one True Church is not only and exclusively in communion with the pope

 

[AugustTherese]

No. I intend to speak what I believe

And, I respect that. As stated before, you do so with much cordiality.

The one True Church is not only and exclusively in communion with the pope

Well, then that means the True Church is not one, but many - with various doctrines, various ‘Bibles’, different ‘Sacraments’, etc. etc.

 

[ltwin]

Is this to be thought of as, they will symbolically have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord?

Presbyterians do not believe in a symbolic Eucharist. They believe that Christ is spiritually present in Holy Communion. This is what is meant by the first sentence in paragraph 7: “Worthy receivers outwardly partaking of the visible elements in this sacrament, do then also, inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually, receive and feed upon Christ crucified, and all benefits of His death.” This is different from symbolic communion.

How do they know they are unworthy?

Paragraph 8 defines what “unworthy” means from the Presbyterian view: in two places it says “ignorant and wicked men” and “ignorant and ungodly persons.”

Do they do an examination of conscience first?

That would be part of it. The other side to this is that historically in Puritan/Presbyterian churches (the Westminster Confession was written by English Puritans and then adopted by Scottish Presbyterians) people who were not “members in good standing” so to speak would not be admitted to Holy Communion. In Scotland, actually, the preachers would spend a lot of time preparing the congregation before a communion season and only those who were known to be living godly lives would be given communion tokens before hand. If you didn’t have a token, you would not be allowed to partake. See Wikipedia’s article on Communion token.

Are we talking about people who have at least prayed to God and asked for forgiveness? How do they know they have been forgiven? Because they know that they know that they know?

From a Presbyterian viewpoint, a worthy person is someone who first and foremost has faith (since its actually impossible to receive Christ’s body and blood by any other means than faith).

In regards to knowing that we are forgiven, the Confession states:

V. Men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but it is every man’s duty to endeavour to repent of his particular sins, particularly.(k)

VI. As every man is bound to make private confession of his sins to God, praying for the pardon thereof;(l) upon which, and the forsaking of them, he shall find mercym) so, he that scandalizeth his brother, or the Church of Christ, ought to be willing, by a private or public confession, and sorrow for his sin, to declare his repentance to those that are offended, who are thereupon to be reconciled to him, and in love to receive him.(o)