What is keeping Orthodox and Lutherans from unifying?

[IgnatianPhilo]

A quote from Irenaeus would help, but let me just say that the document claims that we would accept AS with that historical lineage, our differences as to whether or not they are of divine command or human notwithstanding. **We justify our existence based on historic practice of the Church that presbyter ordination is valid by divine law when bishops are not available or willing to ordain.
**
Jon

Hence the difference between us in regards to apostolic succession. You cannot just declare yourself a Bishop no matter how right you think you are. As for what Irenaeus says I think he states it pretty clearly with regaurds to the succession of the Bishops of Rome being one essential reason for their legitimacy, that they can trace their Bishops to those of the apostles. I am not saying Ireneaus didn’t rely on faith or scripture, but what I am saying is that he considered it pivotal in the argument against the gnostics that one had this connection to the apostles or at least to a church established by the apostles, this was one of the keys of his theology.

1. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.
2. The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome dispatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spoke with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels.

Book three against heresies, Chapter two

There isn’t this idea of the ancient Christians that one can simply make oneself a bishop apart from the church, make someone a priest apart from the church, institute the Eucharist without being ordained for it. I would note also Clement’s exhortation to the corinthians to not go against what the apostles had instituted in terms of their established priest.

Apostolic succession is not mere faith, it is historical as well.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Why should it? All it means to the Lutheran is that the orthodox as well as the Roman church have deviated from what the apostles gave. It might only hold concern if the Lutherans accepted apostolic succession.

But that’s just it…both the Orthodox and the Catholic Church have judged that Lutheranism has deviated sufficiently from the Apostolic faith as to prevent communion.

Now, regarding Catholicism, the Lutherans want to say, well, “It’s really an issue of the papacy, and we are in full agreement with the Orthodox on this matter.”

But the Orthodox say, “Actually, it’s a little deeper than that.”

So, what is a Lutheran to do?

Matthew 18:15-18
15 “If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector. 18 “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Well, Lutheran, two or three are testifying that despite your earnest belief in and desire for a valid Eucharist, YOU DO NOT HAVE IT. :nope:

 

[benjohnson]

Well, Lutheran, two or three are testifying that despite your earnest belief in and desire for a valid Eucharist, YOU DO NOT HAVE IT. :nope:

But that doesn’t trouble us at all - we don’t depend on our fellow humans promulgating a valid Eucharist.

The Eucharist in Lutheran theology is entirely a gift from God.

Some Lutheran pastors don’t even move their hands during the words of institution to drive home the point that this is God’s service and not ours.

 

[Peter_J]

But that doesn’t trouble us at all - we don’t depend on our fellow humans promulgating a valid Eucharist.

The Eucharist in Lutheran theology is entirely a gift from God.

Some Lutheran pastors don’t even move their hands during the words of institution to drive home the point that this is God’s service and not ours.

Although I don’t agree with your conclusion (i.e. I don’t believe that Lutherans have a valid Eucharist) I appreciate the logic of saying that your conclusion shouldn’t be based on the views of Catholics and Orthodox. I can relate, in fact, because in my experience far too many Catholics are far too concerned about the fact that the Orthodox don’t recognize the validity of our sacraments.

 

[Randy_Carson]

But that doesn’t trouble us at all - we don’t depend on our fellow humans promulgating a valid Eucharist.

The Eucharist in Lutheran theology is entirely a gift from God.

Some Lutheran pastors don’t even move their hands during the words of institution to drive home the point that this is God’s service and not ours.

So, can you, as a Lutheran, celebrate the Eucharist privately for yourself or with a few friends?

Or is ordination necessary?

 

[Peter_J]

Although I don’t agree with your conclusion (i.e. I don’t believe that Lutherans have a valid Eucharist) I appreciate the logic of saying that your conclusion shouldn’t be based on the views of Catholics and Orthodox. I can relate, in fact, because in my experience far too many Catholics are far too concerned about the fact that the Orthodox don’t recognize the validity of our sacraments.

P.S. It may not matter too much, but I just realized that I posted ^^ this after misreading your last post. You said:
“But that doesn’t trouble us at all - we don’t depend on our fellow humans promulgating a valid Eucharist.”
but I read it as something along the lines of “we don’t depend on our fellow humans [Catholics and Orthodox] recognizing the validity of our Eucharist.”

 

[benjohnson]

So, can you, as a Lutheran, celebrate the Eucharist privately for yourself or with a few friends?

Or is ordination necessary?

Certainly! Please remember that I’m a pretty dim-blub when it comes to Lutheran theology.

The celebrant must be a pastor or a bishop as per the Wittenberg Concord of 1536: “Nothing has the character of a sacrament apart from the use instituted by Christ.”

 

[Brandall]

I’ve been lurking on this thread since it began and I just don’t understand how you got from analyzing the possibility of an Orthodox/Lutheran merger to questioning JonNC’s Catholicism. What has happened here?

The biggest positive to this discussion is witnessing the grace of the Lutheran members while in the thick of it. Carry on.

 

[jimkhong]

I’ve been lurking on this thread since it began and I just don’t understand how you got from analyzing the possibility of an Orthodox/Lutheran merger to questioning JonNC’s Catholicism. What has happened here?

The biggest positive to this discussion is witnessing the grace of the Lutheran members while in the thick of it. Carry on.

I agree. The level-headedness of the Lutheran members in the face of opprobrium in this and other threads has greatly impressed me.

If we have more people like this on both sides, we could achieve reunion where ego divides us and cooperation where doctrine is truly the issue.

 

[benjohnson]

Nor do we say that they are condemned, simple by being in communion with one said person.

Jon

Indeed!

While the current Papal office still have echoes of some of those dread marks mentioned in our confessions, we pray for the Pope and those in communion with him and thank God for such good examples of Christianity.

 

[steido01]

So, can you, as a Lutheran, celebrate the Eucharist privately for yourself or with a few friends?

Or is ordination necessary?

Article IV of the Confessio Augustana:

Of Ecclesiastical Order they teach that no one should publicly teach in the Church or administer the Sacraments unless he be regularly (that is, properly) called.

I really think it would be helpful for everyone who wants to discuss Lutheranism to read the Lutheran Confessions; they are rather straightforward.

 

[benjohnson]

I really think it would be helpful for everyone who wants to discuss Lutheranism to read the Lutheran Confessions; they are rather straightforward.

To be fair, that would be a rather a high bar for our friends here.

Especially when we have enough trouble getting Lutherans to read them

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

But that’s just it…both the Orthodox and the Catholic Church have judged that Lutheranism has deviated sufficiently from the Apostolic faith as to prevent communion.

Now, regarding Catholicism, the Lutherans want to say, well, “It’s really an issue of the papacy, and we are in full agreement with the Orthodox on this matter.”

But the Orthodox say, “Actually, it’s a little deeper than that.”:

What divides us ultimately is the dichotomy of traditional Christianity versus the reformation principle of faith alone. Lutherans seemingly would have no qualm with saying the ancient church erred at some point but if the churches at the time of Luther and thereafter were in error, where was the true church before then? I don’t believe Lutherans consider the ante Nicene church and the post nicene church (at least until Augustine) corrupt to the point of no return, but the question must be asked where was the church which hades could not prevail against before Luther became aware of faith alone?

 

[benjohnson]

but the question must be asked where was the church which hades could not prevail against before Luther became aware of faith alone?

I’ll try to keep the lid the can-o’-worms that is “Faith Alone” - as I understand it, we would say the church is still here in the believers. Some of those believers are Lutheran, others are not.

The Nicene Creed’s says we “believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church”

As with many things of faith, we believe in this unity even though we can’t see it.

 

[Nine_Two]

Certainly! Please remember that I’m a pretty dim-blub when it comes to Lutheran theology.

The celebrant must be a pastor or a bishop as per the Wittenberg Concord of 1536: “Nothing has the character of a sacrament apart from the use instituted by Christ.”

But isn’t one of the central Lutheran doctrines, the “priesthood of all believers”?

Isn’t setting some aside as having a special relation to God a violation of that?

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I’ll try to keep the lid the can-o’-worms that is “Faith Alone” - as I understand it, we would say the church is still here in the believers. Some of those believers are Lutheran, others are not.

The Nicene Creed’s says we “believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church”

As with many things of faith, we believe in this unity even though we can’t see it.

Did the fathers of Nicea have the idea of the invisible church in mind when they were saying this?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Certainly! Please remember that I’m a pretty dim-blub when it comes to Lutheran theology.

The celebrant must be a pastor or a bishop as per the Wittenberg Concord of 1536: “Nothing has the character of a sacrament apart from the use instituted by Christ.”

Ah. So, ordination is required.

Ordination by whom? Who or what gives that person the authority to ordain a new priest who may consecrate the bread and wine for the sacrament?

And who ordained him before that?

Do you see? This is what Catholics call Apostolic Succession, and this is what we maintain was lost within Lutheranism and Anglicanism (but maintained within the Orthodox Churches).

So, while you believe that Jesus really meant “This is my body…this is my blood”, and you go through the motions of the liturgy, Jesus isn’t really present because your pastors do not have valid ordination in order to confect the elements of the Eucharist.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I’ve been lurking on this thread since it began and I just don’t understand how you got from analyzing the possibility of an Orthodox/Lutheran merger to questioning JonNC’s Catholicism. What has happened here?

The biggest positive to this discussion is witnessing the grace of the Lutheran members while in the thick of it. Carry on.

JonNC represents Lutheranism very well.

Melzerboy does the same for Judaism.

But to be fair, there are some very patient and gentle Catholics here, also.

I’m just not one of them!

 

[Randy_Carson]

I really think it would be helpful for everyone who wants to discuss Lutheranism to read the Lutheran Confessions; they are rather straightforward.

As is the Catechism of the Catholic Church, but…

 

[Randy_Carson]

What divides us ultimately is the dichotomy of traditional Christianity versus the reformation principle of faith alone. Lutherans seemingly would have no qualm with saying the ancient church erred at some point but if the churches at the time of Luther and thereafter were in error, where was the true church before then? I don’t believe Lutherans consider the ante Nicene church and the post nicene church (at least until Augustine) corrupt to the point of no return, but the question must be asked where was the church which hades could not prevail against before Luther became aware of faith alone?