What is keeping Orthodox and Lutherans from unifying?

[JonNC]

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?

I will resist the temptation to provide quotes from the Fathers regarding faith alone as the way we access justification, because they would have no knowledge of the controversies in the Medieval western Church. I would say, however, that we would view the more problematic issues as happening, not in the ancient Church, but during the time just following the Schism leading up to the Reformation.

The confessions, ISTM, site things that are primarily of the western Church, that are not issues in the east. That’s not to say we don’t have differences with Orthodoxy. We do, but the Reformers were focused on concerns in the western Church.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

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?

Its a scriptural doctrine, not just Lutheran. But the Priesthood of all Believers does not preclude the necessity of a ministerial priesthood, since, 1st, it is scriptural to have presbyters, and 2nd, they carry out the responsibilities of the Church to preach the word and administer the sacraments.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

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

I personally think that the idea of an invisible church is overstated if left to stand alone. Clearly, if the role of the Church is to preach the word and administer the sacraments, there is a obvious visibility in that, even if there s a lack of institutional unity.

Jon

 

[Peter_J]

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?

I think you’ve gotten the wrong idea (possibly stemming from the little joke I made earlier). I don’t think anyone is/was questioning Jon’s catholicity. But on this forum when we say “Catholics” we generally mean “members of the Roman Communion” (i.e. “those in full communion with the Pope”).

Of course, “Catholics” would be defined differently on a protestant or Orthodox forum, but that’s beside the point.

P.S. Also keep in mind that the term “Roman Catholic” isn’t interchangeable with “Catholic” because the former usually means “Roman-*Rite *Catholic”.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I will resist the temptation to provide quotes from the Fathers regarding faith alone as the way we access justification, because they would have no knowledge of the controversies in the Medieval western Church. I would say, however, that we would view the more problematic issues as happening, not in the ancient Church, but during the time just following the Schism leading up to the Reformation.

The confessions, ISTM, site things that are primarily of the western Church, that are not issues in the east. That’s not to say we don’t have differences with Orthodoxy. We do, but the Reformers were focused on concerns in the western Church.

Jon

I think we could both quote the fathers who seem to equally speak on the need to do good works and the absolute need to be faithful. But I would still ask historically, where was the church exactly? Can you identifiy that which was the true church through the centuries? After all there could not be a time in which there was not a true church or else Christ is found to be a liar.

 

[Brandall]

I think you’ve gotten the wrong idea (possibly stemming from the little joke I made earlier). I don’t think anyone is/was questioning Jon’s catholicity. But on this forum when we say “Catholics” we generally mean “members of the Roman Communion” (i.e. “those in full communion with the Pope”).

Of course, “Catholics” would be defined differently on a protestant or Orthodox forum, but that’s beside the point.

P.S. Also keep in mind that the term “Roman Catholic” isn’t interchangeable with “Catholic” because the former usually means “Roman-*Rite *Catholic”.

I got all that. Perhaps you missed my joke. Hate it when you have to explain a joke

I was working off of your joke.

 

[JonNC]

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!

Don’t underestimate yourself.

Jon

 

[Peter_J]

I got all that. Perhaps you missed my joke. Hate it when you have to explain a joke

I was working off of your joke.

Oh! I guess I’ve gotten a bit too accustomed to people putting a hundred emoticons after every joke.

 

[JonNC]

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.

This was very kind. Thank you.

Jon

 

[pablope]

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

As I recall, this historic practice was…there was a bishop’s authority to ordain due to circumstances…and is not the norm.

So…if a bishop refused to grant that authority…what should one do…obey? Or buck the bishop and go ahead and do it anyway?

Or if a bishop refused to grant the permission…should one instead pray…and strive to understand the bishop’s refusal to grant the permission? and continue praying that the bishop change his mind…or throw a tantrum…and say…I will do it anyway, regardless of what bishop decided?

If the second is the choice…that why even have the bishop… Why have a church? Of what use is the binding and loosing authority of the bishop?

 

[pablope]

Good stuff!

But I’m afraid that while we Lutherans understand the desire (if not need) for a united church, and for communion with all of God’s adopted children, we just don’t see the necessity of condemning (or at least saying they are anathema) if they are not in communion with one particular person.

But if that person is the symbol of authority and unity…why would you not be one with that authority?

Have you stopped to think and muse and meditate as to the consequences of going on one’s own?

 

[pablope]

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.

Why not? Should it not be cause for concern?

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

Well…don’t you think the Eucharist in both East and West is a gift from God to?

 

[JonNC]

=pablope;11177490]As I recall, this historic practice was…there was a bishop’s authority to ordain due to circumstances…and is not the norm.

So…if a bishop refused to grant that authority…what should one do…obey? Or buck the bishop and go ahead and do it anyway?

If a church/parish needs a priest, why would/should a bishop withhold ordination?

Or if a bishop refused to grant the permission…should one instead pray…and strive to understand the bishop’s refusal to grant the permission? and continue praying that the bishop change his mind…or throw a tantrum…and say…I will do it anyway, regardless of what bishop decided?

If a church/parish needs a priest, why would/should a bishop withhold ordination?

Should not said bishop exercise his duty as a bishop? And if he does not, should then a congregation be left without word and sacrament, simply because a bishop should throw a tantrum, and not exercise his church given responsibilities?

If the second is the choice…that why even have the bishop… Why have a church? Of what use is the binding and loosing authority of the bishop?

What of it, if he chooses not to extend the sacraments to a parish? Is this not an abuse of power?

Jon

 

[Memaw]

If a church/parish needs a priest, why would/should a bishop withhold ordination?

If a church/parish needs a priest, why would/should a bishop withhold ordination?

Should not said bishop exercise his duty as a bishop? And if he does not, should then a congregation be left without word and sacrament, simply because a bishop should throw a tantrum, and not exercise his church given responsibilities?

What of it, if he chooses not to extend the sacraments to a parish? Is this not an abuse of power?

Jon

If your bishop abused his power would that be a good enough reason to start your own church??? Wonder where that would lead?? Seems that has happened before. God Bless, Memaw

 

[JonNC]

But if that person is the symbol of authority and unity…why would you not be one with that authority?

We do want to be, but the problem is he has claimed for himself authority and power not granted to him either in scripture or the early Church. Were he to return to the symbol of authority he was originally intended to be, the reality of unity with him might be much greater.

I have heard it said on more than one occasion that, for a Lutheran, it is vital that each morning, one must decide anew if being in schism with this symbol of authority and unity is and continues to be justified (no pun intended). For most Lutherans in the pew, this is not something often pondered because, frankly, they see no need to ponder it, or are unaware of the question.
But for Lutherans who venture more deeply into the faith, it is an important, and personally speaking, an often distressing question.

Jon

 

[pablope]

If a church/parish needs a priest, why would/should a bishop withhold ordination?

If the bishop withheld his ordination…there is a reason for the bishop doing this…and then it is his responsibility to provide someone to be the shepherd of the parish.

As I asked…what should one do…pray for the bishop, continue to pray and seek his understanding…and win him over with charity and wisdom…or buck his authority and throw a tantrum and do as one wishes?

If a church/parish needs a priest, why would/should a bishop withhold ordination?

 

[pablope]

We do want to be, but the problem is he has claimed for himself authority and power not granted to him either in scripture or the early Church.

Were he to return to the symbol of authority he was originally intended to be, the reality of unity with him might be much greater.

But Jon…when you say the thing above…(in blue)…are you not then making yourself the authority to define what that authority is?

As I always asked…if not the bishop of Rome…what is the alternative do you propose?

I have heard it said on more than one occasion that, for a Lutheran, it is vital that each morning, one must decide anew if being in schism with this symbol of authority and unity is and continues to be justified (no pun intended). For most Lutherans in the pew, this is not something often pondered because, frankly, they see no need to ponder it, or are unaware of the question.
But for Lutherans who venture more deeply into the faith, it is an important, and personally speaking, an often distressing question.

 

[benjohnson]

Well…don’t you think the Eucharist in both East and West is a gift from God to?

Certainly!

 

[JonNC]

=pablope;11177558]

If the bishop withheld his ordination…there is a reason for the bishop doing this…and then it is his responsibility to provide someone to be the shepherd of the parish.

Explore, then the complaints of the Evangelical parishes of the time.

As I asked…what should one do…pray for the bishop, continue to pray and seek his understanding…and win him over with charity and wisdom…or buck his authority and throw a tantrum and do as one wishes?

If the only way to provide word and sacrament was through presbyter ordination, and to ignore the bishop’s temper tantrum, then do so, since he chooses to act as a brute, and not a shepherd.

But Jon…he just exercised his duty as a bishop…the bind and loose authority…to withhold ordination for a reason…for all you know, he already has a plan to provide a priest.

As I asked…As I asked…what should one do…pray for the bishop, continue to pray and seek his understanding…and win him over with charity and wisdom…or buck his authority and throw a tantrum and do as one wishes?

Explore the complaints of the evangelical parishes. The candidates for ordination in the Evangelical parishes even put their lives in danger. Who was throwing the tantrums?

For all you know…he is already finding another way to provide a priest…it may not to be your liking…in fulfillment of his duties as a bishop to tend his sheep.

Or not.

Let me tell you a real story…years ago, parishioners threw stones at the parish convent…because they did not like their priest because he stopped dancing parties on Black Saturday.

The bishop withdrew the priest…and did not provide a priest to the parish for sometime…making it hard for the parishioners…they had to travel far to receive the sacrament…they had to make sacrifices…and until the parish repented…did the bishop again provide a priest.

What should one do in this case…ordain a priest on your own?

ISTM the issue here is vastly different than the Reformation era, don’t you think?

When a bishop decides to withhold ordination…do you think this is abuse of authority? Or there is wisdom behind this…guided by the Holy spirit in his decision…for a reason unknown to the laity?

I think in the case of the Reformation era, it was clearly an abuse of power.

Jon…the bishop was given the authority to bind and loose…if he does that…then there is a reason…as I asked:

what should one do…pray for the bishop, continue to pray and seek his understanding…and win him over with charity and wisdom…or buck his authority and throw a tantrum and do as one wishes?

What should one do…Jon?

I believe the Evangelical parishes acted in the only way they could, in order to provide the people with word and sacrament. It’s sad, indeed, that it came down to that. Hopefully, we can fix it.

Jon

 

[steido01]

I think we could both quote the fathers who seem to equally speak on the need to do good works and the absolute need to be faithful.

And neither us nor the fathers would deny the necessity of good works.

But I would still ask historically, where was the church exactly? Can you identifiy that which was the true church through the centuries? After all there could not be a time in which there was not a true church or else Christ is found to be a liar.

The true church was in Rome (and still is); the true church was in Constantinople (and still is); the true church can be in Timbuktu (and She will persist!). There is perhaps no way for a Lutheran to answer this question in the manner you are requesting; we believe that the gates of hell have not prevailed against His church (and never will). There is no “great apostasy” to point back to. Wherever local churches bear the Marks of the Church (OHCAC) there She is - regardless of whatever man-made customs or beliefs that may attempt to blemish her or interfere with the proclamation of the Gospel to the faithful. There is evil in this world. There will always be sinners (and their mistaken teachings) serving in the church. We are not Donatists. I am reminded of what the LCMS’s current president, Matthew Harrison, said upon his election, “I wish to inform you that you have kept your perfect record of electing sinners as president of the Missouri Synod."

This is why Lutherans can, on one hand, acknowledge that Roman Catholics are indeed Christians “for we received the Word from them [the Church in Rome],” while simultaneously holding that the papacy bears certain marks anti-to-Christ. The church always persists in Truth - in spite of Man’s best efforts to have Her do otherwise.