T
Tomster
Guest
Jon,
Which Lutheran bodies, in your opinion, are a part of the correct continuation of Catholicism and which ones are not? Or are they all a part of the correct continuation of Catholicism?
- Status
Which Lutheran bodies, in your opinion, are a part of the correct continuation of Catholicism and which ones are not? Or are they all a part of the correct continuation of Catholicism?
M
MaryT777
Guest
Thanks Jon:
It would probably help if the confessional Lutherans could dialogue with Rome alone without the ELCA. I thought I remembered they wanted their own meeting when it came to the JDDJ. I read a book about it but I could be wrong. It’s been awhile
Mary.
I think when we talk about Lutheranism being a correct continuation of the western Church, we are talking about the orthodox teachings, encompassed in, primarily, the Augsburg Confession, it’s Apology, and the Small Catechism. To the extent that some synods have drifted from those teachings would indicate if they are continuing those truths. You would probably say the same about groups such as Old Catholics.
And let’s be clear about this: no knowledgeable Lutheran would or should say anything about Catholics in communion with the Bishop of Rome as being anything but true Christians. Further, The Catholic Church in communion with the Bishop of Rome has word and sacrament, and while we believe teaches some errors mixed with primarily truth, Christ offers His grace and salvation through her.
Jon
I think this is the direction it might be going in.
firstthings.com/onthesquare/2013/02/roman-catholics-and-confessional-lutherans-explore-deeper-ties
Jon
T
Tomster
Guest
Jon,
Which Lutheran synods, then, in your opinion, have drifted from the teachings you have outlined?
S
steido01
Guest
I speak only for myself, and not for Jon, but…
Tomster, I’m not sure labeling individual synods as ‘truly Lutheran’ or not would be particularly useful (or charitable). Even in the synods that have drifted furthest from orthodoxy, there are still good Lutherans trying their darnedest to “right the ship,” as it’s been said.
That said, some of the ELCA’s leadership, and much of its academia, have drifted from confessional Lutheranism toward mainstream liberal protestantism, maintaining a shell of Lutheran traditions, but professing a belief that is -and I understate- nebulous. This has been noted by other Lutheran bodies; the LCMS no longer considers the ELCA an orthodox Lutheran body, the Mekane Yesus Church (the major Lutheran body in Ethiopia and nearly twice the size of the ELCA) dissolved its fellowship with the ELCA and is seeking closer ties with the LCMS, and the Malagasy Lutheran church -despite the ELCA’s fierce PR campaign to say otherwise- appears poised to do the same. A return to confessional Lutheranism is rampant across Lutheranism, even in those synods that have strayed.
But I cannot stress my first paragraph enough. Lutherans exist even in those ‘Lutheran’ bodies that have grown most ‘ill.’ It would be unfair to consider them all part of the same “granfalloon.”
M
MaryT777
Guest
What can Lutherans do that stay in non orthodox Lutheran bodies like the ELCA to become more confessional? Do they vote on matters?
This is well said. I have relatives still in the ELCA, and they are indeed good Lutherans, frustrated by the leadership, yet unwilling to leave their home parishes for obvious reasons.
Jon
B
benjohnson
Guest
Generally, yes. Over 1000 churches have moved away from the ELCA in the past three years to join more orthodox synods.
A couple of thoughts.
- Stay close to the confessions, not as they are being reinvented, but how they were initially received. There are great Lutheran theologians of the ELCA predecessor bodies.
- Lutheran parishes have calling privileges. Be selective in your pastoral call process.
Jon
H
hn160
Guest
I don’t doubt that there are congregrations and individuals in the ELCA that remain faithful to Scripture and the Confessions. The problem is getting a pastor. The Synods of the ELCA in my experience will only give a vacate congregration one name of a pastor looking for a call. If there isn’t a valid reason to accept that person, then that church will wait to get another name. The synods really push women as pastors. My wife’s church which is a rural church in Pennsylvania refused to accept a female pastor, they were vacate a long time, in the end they accepted a female pastor. I really think that the best thing is to leave. The church that I grew up in and the one we left in Pennsylvania are now Rainbow churches. I was never so glad to find a church in the LC-MS.
From what I recall, that wasn’t the usual practice. The local synod would provide a list of pastors (I know this because my dad was on those lists more than once). I discussed this with my brother during the time of the 2011 Churchwide Assembly. He said that congregations were promised that no parish would be pressured or compelled to take any particular pastor, based on gender or gender preference. I told him then, “just wait”. From what you are saying here, it didn’t take them long.
Too bad your wife’s church didn’t consider asking for an LCMS pastor.
Jon
M
manualman
Guest
Perhaps I’m a jaded and cynical catholic, but this quote from Luther ain’t the sort I’ve heard from protestants before. What I have heard rather more often are the sort of Luther quotes (and let’s face it, the guy must NEVER have put down the pen) where Luther advises that works are meaningless and that even if a believer sins boldly, it is as nothing since he is saved by faith.That’s an interesting observation.
But we should be careful not to make hasty generalizations about protestants and confine them to a ‘granfalloon’ they are not a part of. The “faith alone” that some modern day protestants seem to endorse (“I have faith so my works don’t matter!”) is not “faith alone” as the Reformers taught it. Take, for example, the Lutheran understanding of the relationship between faith and works:
Quote:
“Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire!” - Martin Luther
iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/luther-faith.txt
So when a protestant subscribes to Sola Fide, he is not jettisoning the importance of works (if he is well-catechized, anyway). While some protestant groups are indeed rather far off regarding faith and works, Lutheranism, at least, is quite similar to Roman Catholicism. I’d dare to say that your thoughts sound an awful lot like Lutheranism.
Isn’t it fair to say that Luther believed that good works arise as an after-effect of the decision of faith while Catholicism sees good works as the physical manifestations of ongoing decisions to have faith? Note that neither of the above sinks to the caricature of “earning salvation” or “cheap grace” (the accusations that often fly back and forth).
Again, it’s dangerous to generalize about Protestantism, but my own experience of protestants has been one in which salvation is seen as a single event in time while Catholicism sees it as the process of a lifetime. Perhaps that difference is why the two sides struggle so hard over the import of our actions in life.
S
steido01
Guest
Thanks Jon, but I think you hit the nail on the head.
Because Lutheran pastors aren’t entirely placed by bishops, the congregation does hold some amount of weight in calling a pastor. This is perhaps the most direct way an individual congregation can correct church-wide errors. But as hn160 pointed out, a bishop with an ax to grind can make parish life difficult for faithful Lutherans. It’s a familiar story, sadly, and it won’t reverse itself unless the laity educates itself about the historic church - from the ECFs, to the Reformers, to the present day - and lovingly shares the truth at bible studies, church councils, community activities, etc. There are countless resources, knowledgeable people, and blog networks that can help those Lutherans who are “fighting the good fight.”
I fear that if I said much more here, I’d edge close to forum rules on evangelization… Feel free to PM me, if necessary.
S
steido01
Guest
Well, I’d agree with you. *Protestants *tend to ignore much of what Luther wrote, especially regarding Sola Fide. Lutherans don’t consider ourselves protestant; we think we’re catholic.
You seem to be referring to Luther’s letter to Melanchthon, where he exasperatedly explains that all “sin boldly.” If I had a nickel for every time this letter has been misapplied and misunderstood…
No where does he say, imply or indicate that we can sin, sin, sin simply because we have faith. The context is very important. The better way of understanding what he wrote is “Admit your sin boldly.” More info here: patheos.com/blogs/scriptorium/2009/08/sin-boldly/No. Lutherans do not -ever- subscribe to decision theology; we believe only God does the saving, and our works on their own could never merit eternal life. It might be more accurate to say that Lutherans simply see good works as the necessary manifestations of saving faith - a definition that is much closer to Roman Catholicism than some used to acknowledge. The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification may be a good read for you.
Your generalization about protestantism is not entirely unfounded; but, again, we Lutherans aren’t really protestants.
One of the problems with the fact that the guy never put down the pen is that sometimes the “sound-bite” are so dramatically out of context, and the "sin boldly"quote is near the top of that list. Since it is from a letter to Melanchthon, we must understand that it is not a doctrinal statement, and it assumes things not written. For example - confession. It also uses exaggerations so outlandish that one knows he is speaking hyperbolically.
EDIT - I am not accusing you of taking it out of context, only saying that it often is.
First I absolutely agree with your last statement here!
I don’t think Luther would abide the notion of “decision of faith”, but that said, Luther seems to think that faith and works are indivisible. Luther quoted for the Formula of Concord:
While I don’t struggle with what we call forensic justification, I do struggle with the idea of a one-time single event regarding justification. If we acknowledge that in Baptism we are regenerated in God and receive the Holy Spirit, it seems that is the start of justifying faith, which is built through the hearing of the word, and reception of the sacraments. So, while I know justification is the work of God in me, I can’t tell you what that one moment was, or if there even was a single moment/event.
I look forward to Steido’s response.
Jon
S
steido01
Guest
You explained the process better than I. My response neglected that little tidbit called “Holy Baptism.”
T
Tomster
Guest
Jon,
Would those errors you believe the current Catholic Church teaches be:
- Communion under one kind
- Celibacy
- Private Masses
- Compulsory confession
- Fast and abstinence commandments
- Monastic vows
- Episcopal power
- Status