What is the difference? ELCA vs. LCMS

  • Thread starter Thread starter jinc1019
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
For whoever was discussing the removal of the Deuterocanon from Protestant Bibles: Luther did edit his German Bible differently; he placed these books in a separate section. He publicly critiqued several of them. He did not remove them. He, even in Lutheran theology, does not have the ability to alter the canon. As for the curiosity of history that has American Lutherans using Bibles without the Deuterocanon, the reason for this is that most, if not all, English translations of the Bible were led by Reformed translators. These Christians did remove those texts. Need proof? The lectionary of the ELCA still has readings from Sirach, Wisdom, etc.
 
ndismyhome said:
For whoever was discussing the removal of the Deuterocanon from Protestant Bibles: Luther did edit his German Bible differently; he placed these books in a separate section. He publicly critiqued several of them. He did not remove them. He, even in Lutheran theology, does not have the ability to alter the canon. As for the curiosity of history that has American Lutherans using Bibles without the Deuterocanon, the reason for this is that most, if not all, English translations of the Bible were led by Reformed translators. These Christians did remove those texts. Need proof? The lectionary of the ELCA still has readings from Sirach, Wisdom, etc.
Click to expand...
👍

Jon
 
ndismyhome said:
For whoever was discussing the removal of the Deuterocanon from Protestant Bibles: Luther did edit his German Bible differently; he placed these books in a separate section. He publicly critiqued several of them. He did not remove them. He, even in Lutheran theology, does not have the ability to alter the canon. As for the curiosity of history that has American Lutherans using Bibles without the Deuterocanon, the reason for this is that most, if not all, English translations of the Bible were led by Reformed translators. These Christians did remove those texts. Need proof? The lectionary of the ELCA still has readings from Sirach, Wisdom, etc.
Click to expand...
LC-MS’s Concordia Publishing House recently published The Apocrypha with Lutheran Notes as a companion to their The Lutheran Study Bible with Lutheran Notes.
 
nitesnake said:
It’s not a curiosity at all, it was founded by Martin Luther, hence the name “Lutheran.” Profess whatever you like. It is a church without valid holy orders or apostolic succession founded by a heretic who presumed to speak for Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
Mary: Amen. They replaced the Pope with Luther really in all aspects IN MY OPINION.
 
MaryT777 said:
Mary: Amen. They replaced the Pope with Luther really in all aspects IN MY OPINION.
Click to expand...
Actually It’s secular historical fact. Anyone can consult any reputable history book and learn that. If people want to address it honestly, they would admit it. Not that it means anything to me, it doesn’t. But I am new to this forum. So I’m wondering, why the charade from the protestants on here concerning this? I don’t get it…
 
benjohnson said:
Are you sure you are Catholic? The reason I ask is that all the Catholics I have had the pleasure to meet in person have been treated me kindly, have been quite thoughtfull, and have have wisdom to add to any conversation.

Thait said, You are right to proclaim that from the Catholic point of view we lack proper apolstolic sucession and indeed Father Luther was excommunicated, but to think that for a moment that he presumed to speak for Jesus Christ is perposterous. Luther for all his many faults was a well trained Catholic monk, and he would have never done such a thing.

I’ll point out the proper name of our origional church is “Evangelisch Kirche” and we profess not Luther but the origional catholic creeds and the Confessio Augustana.
Click to expand...
Is it true that Luther became a monk because he was not hit by lightening?
Or is that fiction?
Mary
 
MaryT777 said:
Is it true that Luther became a monk because he was not hit by lightening?
Or is that fiction?
Mary
Click to expand...
He was caught out in a severe storm and when lightening struck a nearby tree, he prayed to St. Anne and promised that if he lived he would become a monk. At the time, he was set to enter law school.
 
nitesnake said:
Actually It’s secular historical fact. Anyone can consult any reputable history book and learn that. If people want to address it honestly, they would admit it. Not that it means anything to me, it doesn’t. But I am new to this forum. So I’m wondering, why the charade from the protestants on here concerning this? I don’t get it…
Click to expand...
Lutherans do not look upon Luther as a pope or put him on a pedestal as Catholics do with certain saints. Luther was human and he is a saint and a sinner as we all are, yes even you. But he did reveal the corruption that was in the Church at the time. The Church at the time did not like to see its dirty laundry put out to the public. Really, praying to relics of saints! There is nothing in the Lutherans Confessions that the Catholic Church could not agree to.
 
hn160 said:
Lutherans do not look upon Luther as a pope or put him on a pedestal as Catholics do with certain saints. Luther was human and he is a saint and a sinner as we all are, yes even you. But he did reveal the corruption that was in the Church at the time. The Church at the time did not like to see its dirty laundry put out to the public. Really, praying to relics of saints! There is nothing in the Lutherans Confessions that the Catholic Church could not agree to.
Click to expand...
I’ve no doubt that most of what you’re saying is true. My point is, and has been, that the Lutheran church simply does not have apostolic succession so they don’t have valid holy orders. Therefore, (outside of marriage and baptism) they don’t have valid sacraments.

But perhaps I’m wrong. Maybe there is some wise Catholic priest or deacon around here that could clear this up for me.
 
nitesnake said:
I’ve no doubt that most of what you’re saying is true. My point is, and has been, that the Lutheran church simply does not have apostolic succession so they don’t have valid holy orders.
Click to expand...
From a catholic viewpoint this is true -most American Lutherans churches lack traditional apostolic succession. European and some American Lutheran churches have tried to maintain their succession or have re-grafted it on - but for the similar reasons to why the Catholic church doesn’t view the Anglican apostolic succession as valid, I would imagine that the Lutheran attempts are probably considered invalid by the Catholic church.

From a Lutheran standpoint, apostolic succession doesn’t effect the validity of our sacraments as we view them as gifts from God in totality.

That said,I’d personally like to see my church seek traditional apostolic succession, but then again, it doesn’t really bug me.

Appostolic Sucuession ins’t a cure - the Arieans had bishops, and the one could buy your way to being a bishop in the middle ages, Leo X wasn’t ‘perfect’ either. Our first bishop, before the LCMS was truly founded, had to be excommunicated for alleged embezzlement. The American ELCA has bishops, and depending on the church, you’ll get could get confessional Lutheranism or downright crazy people who think God is a female.
 
Lutherans came to the US in various ethnic waves from a multitude of countries. Each wave held strong to their culture and language; and it wasn’t uncommon for multiple Lutheran Churches to be within miles of one another: Prussian, Danish, Dutch, Norwegian, English, French, and etc… It wasn’t until the late 1800’s that literary American English, became standardized in the US for most Lutheran Churches. I was born in the late 70’s and through my high-school graduation in the late 90’s still had thick accented German pastors. Though that’s not the case now. These various Synods began to merge together, 1st based on common heritage and dialect. Then they began further merging into larger Synods that were statewide.

In the late 1950’s English was dominant enough for full integration of all Lutheran Church bodies who were interested in doing so. By the 1960’s the Evangelical Lutheran Church Synod of Missouri; Evangelical Lutheran Church Synod of Wisconsin; and (ALC) American Lutheran Church were the primary and largest congregations. These three merged together to form the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America/Canada.

The Scandinavians brought their High Church Piety Lutheranism into the new denomination from their roots with ALC. This included the heavily Remonstrant (Arminianism) or Free-Will theology that’s associated with United Church of Christ, Methodists, Pentecostal, and Charismatic theological denominations that traditionally leaned non-denominational, in that they look for theology well outside of Lutheranism.

The Low Church Orthodoxy of Confessional Lutheranism from the Wisconsin and Missouri branch of the Church disagreed with the modernism, liberalism, and progressive aspects that were working into the Church from ALC affiliated congregations.

The 1970’s Seminex walk-out occurred in protest, with ALC affiliated students challenging fundamentalists within Concordia Seminary. The large and organized ELCA brought with it unprecedented growth, which hastened the ordination of new pastors too quickly, unprepared to stand on solid theology, and lacking adequate Hebrew and Greek. After resignations and excommunications; these Church bodies broke apart from the ELCA back into the original three denominations. The ALC affiliates retained the ELCA name, while not all ALC Churches had completely joined the ELCA initially, so that name was technically taken. The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS) emerged from the Evangelical Lutheran Church Synod of Missouri; and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS) emerged out of the Evangelical Lutheran Church Synod of Wisconsin.

The ELCA has switched to the (rNIV) or Revised New International Version Bible which uses neutered gender affiliations to dilute those connotations to Scripture. The ELCA abolished closed-communion and are now in open-communion with (UMC) United Methodist Church bilaterally; and all other Churches that recognize the Trinity and Baptism. In addition to ordaining women, they’re now heavily pushing non-celibate LGBT ordinations, who will be emerging among congregations very soon. These controversies and progressive liberalism has now splintered the ELCA into: (ELCM) Episcopal Lutheran Campus Ministry, (LCMC) Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ, and some others too small to mention; while the (LCA) Lutheran Church in America, (NALC) North American Lutheran Church, and LCMS continue to draw dissident ELCA congregational members.
 
hn160 said:
Lutherans do not look upon Luther as a pope or put him on a pedestal as Catholics do with certain saints.
Click to expand...
you are as confused about what Catholics believe (Pope on Pedestal) as some Catholics are as confused as to what Lutherans believe (Pope Luther). 🙂
Luther was human and he is a saint and a sinner as we all are, yes even you
Click to expand...
And you know he is a Saint how and by what authority?
But he did reveal the corruption that was in the Church at the time.
Click to expand...
there is some truth here. He did see abuse of indulgences in Germany that were not however being practiced world wide. These were sins of men, not corruption of the Church on Faith and Morals. The gates of hell shall not prevail. Christ protects his Church from error not from sinful men.
The Church at the time did not like to see its dirty laundry put out to the public.
Click to expand...
The Church stopped the local abuse on indulgences…but Luther brought a new Gospel based on bible alone and faith alone. This is the elephant in the room…that the Church responded to with the Council of Trent.
Really, praying to relics of saints!
Click to expand...
Relics of saints is a form of devotion and piety…just like your wearing a cross. 🙂 And biblically we can see some things as well

2 Kings 13
20 In the year of Eliseus’ death and burial, the country was being ravaged by freebooters from Moab. 21 Some of these appearing suddenly when a dead man was being carried out to his funeral, the bearers took fright, and threw the corpse into the first grave they could find; it was that of Eliseus. And no sooner had it touched the prophet’s bones, than the dead man came to life again, and rose to his feet.

The Catechism is clear on forms of devotion and piety

Popular piety

1674 Besides sacramental liturgy and sacramentals, catechesis must take into account the forms of piety and popular devotions among the faithful. The religious sense of the Christian people has always found expression in various forms of piety surrounding the Church’s sacramental life, such as the veneration of relics, visits to sanctuaries, pilgrimages, processions, the stations of the cross, religious dances, the rosary, medals,180 etc.

1675 These expressions of piety extend the liturgical life of the Church, but do not replace it. They "should be so drawn up that they harmonize with the liturgical seasons, accord with the sacred liturgy, are in some way derived from it and lead the people to it, since in fact the liturgy by its very nature is far superior to any of them."181
There is nothing in the Lutherans Confessions that the Catholic Church could not agree to.
Click to expand...
Could start with…I don’t believe Catholic’s hold to the office of the Pope being the Anti-Christ. 😦 From lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=552

However, the Scriptures also teach that there is one climactic “Anti-Christ” (Dan. 7:8,11, 20-21, 24-25; 11:36-45; 2 Thessalonians 2; 1 John 2:18; 4:3; Revelation 17-18). . . Concerning the historical identity of the Antichrist, we affirm the Lutheran Confessions’ identification of the Antichrist with the office of the papacy whose official claims continue to correspond to the Scriptural marks listed above. It is important, however, that we observe the distinction which the Lutheran Confessors made between the office of the pope (papacy) and the individual men who fill that office
I love my Lutheran brothers in Christ but the above is…no comment…
 
Porknpie said:
And you know he is a Saint how and by what authority?
Click to expand...
If I’m not mistaken, Catholics typically use the word “Saint” for people recognized by the Church and canonized as such.

But… as a Lutheran, I would have no problem addressing you as Saint Porknpie as you obviously turn to God for your salvation and are a repentant and forgiven sinner. We can truly give no higher honor than to recognize in each other the God-given life within us that responds to Grace.

Let me explain:

In Lutheran theology, the saints are all repentant and forgiven Christians in heaven or on earth. We recognize them as saintly or holy because God has recognized them. When you read ‘saint’ in the Augsburg Confession and other liturgical documents and the liturgical calendar we mean those saints that had a special grace.

So when we say,“Luther was no Saint” it means that we don’t feel that he had a special grace worthy of reverence. Buy we would have no problem calling him Saint Luther - for he struggled with himself and died in Christ just we all hope and pray to do.

Now frankly, when I first heard this Lutheran definition - I thought “HOW ABSURD! If pretty much everybody around me is a saint, then what’s the point!” But truly, this is how we should think of each other - that nothing is more important about ourselves than our relationship with God, and we should recognize this in each other and build each other in faith.

So, I say to all of you saints reading this: may God continue to bless you, and may God continue to be with you.
 
Porknpie said:
Concerning the historical identity of the Antichrist, we affirm the Lutheran Confessions’ identification of the Antichrist with the office of the papacy whose official claims continue to correspond to the Scriptural marks listed above. .
Click to expand...
Yes… we’re stinkers. But read the rest of that document:

"The LCMS does not teach, nor has it ever taught, that any individual Pope as a person, is to be identified with the Antichrist. :o "

And… here’s why were being stinkers:

“To the extent that the papacy continues to claim as official dogma the canons and decrees of the Council of Trent which expressly anathematizes, for instance, the doctrine “that justifying faith is nothing else than trust in divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is that trust alone by which we are justified,” the judgment of the Lutheran confessional writings that the papacy is the Antichrist holds.”

So here’s what going on: We Lutherans read the Council of Trent and our understanding is that the Catholic Church with the Pope as it’s head is saying “Good works are needed for justification, and if you say otherwise, the you’re outside the Church (and are therefore going to a rather warm place when you die)”

Our reaction is “That’s seems rather crazy! That would be not only judging us in place of God, but you’re also judging us incorrectly. So crazy, that if we’re understanding you correctly, you must be an anti-crist. Perhaps, if you keep it up, and display all the marks in the bible, you’ll be THE Antichrist :eek:”

So our admonition is conditional - we don’t say the Pope is the Antichrist by itself, we’re saying that if you hold to this craziness then the Pope could wind up being the Antichrist.

Now my Catholic friends, at this point, get to whack me over the head and say "That’s not what we mean in Trent! Good grief you crazy Lutheran! Can’t you read ecclesiastical Latin? "

And then we Lutherans say “Oh… sorry my fault.”

But we still keep our eyes on you while we quietly sip or coffee in the corner. :coffee: Because we’re still bound and determined that we’re right and you’re wrong.

We’re stubborn like that. 😛
 
benjohnson said:
Yes… we’re stinkers. But read the rest of that document:

"The LCMS does not teach, nor has it ever taught, that any individual Pope as a person, is to be identified with the Antichrist. :o "

And… here’s why were being stinkers:

“To the extent that the papacy continues to claim as official dogma the canons and decrees of the Council of Trent which expressly anathematizes, for instance, the doctrine “that justifying faith is nothing else than trust in divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is that trust alone by which we are justified,” the judgment of the Lutheran confessional writings that the papacy is the Antichrist holds.”

So here’s what going on: We Lutherans read the Council of Trent and our understanding is that the Catholic Church with the Pope as it’s head is saying “Good works are needed for justification, and if you say otherwise, the you’re outside the Church (and are therefore going to a rather warm place when you die)”

Our reaction is “That’s seems rather crazy! That would be not only judging us in place of God, but you’re also judging us incorrectly. So crazy, that if we’re understanding you correctly, you must be an anti-crist. Perhaps, if you keep it up, and display all the marks in the bible, you’ll be THE Antichrist :eek:”

So our admonition is conditional - we don’t say the Pope is the Antichrist by itself, we’re saying that if you hold to this craziness then the Pope could wind up being the Antichrist.

Now my Catholic friends, at this point, get to whack me over the head and say "That’s not what we mean in Trent! Good grief you crazy Lutheran! Can’t you read ecclesiastical Latin? "

And then we Lutherans say “Oh… sorry my fault.”

But we still keep our eyes on you while we quietly sip or coffee in the corner. :coffee: Because we’re still bound and determined that we’re right and you’re wrong.

We’re stubborn like that. 😛
Click to expand...
So you’d agree that the statement below is a false one? We’re off topic… I’ll leave it at that.
Quote:
There is nothing in the Lutherans Confessions that the Catholic Church could not agree to.
Click to expand...
 
Porknpie said:
So you’d agree that the statement below is a false one?

There is nothing in the Lutherans Confessions that the Catholic Church could not agree to.
Click to expand...
I can’t possible know that for certain, but I would say there’s nothing too outraious in our confessions. Several Catholics I know have come to a understading of their Catholic faith by using them as teaching documents.

Pope emertis Benedict XVI in his pervious life was considering if our Ausburg Confession was in fact a Catholic document. That he didn’t immediatly discout it gives me hope.
 
hn160 said:
Lutherans do not look upon Luther as a pope or put him on a pedestal as Catholics do with certain saints. Luther was human and he is a saint and a sinner as we all are, yes even you. But he did reveal the corruption that was in the Church at the time. The Church at the time did not like to see its dirty laundry put out to the public.

Really, praying to relics of saints! .
Click to expand...
Yeah…what is your issue with this one? This is a jewish practice that the first Christians brought with them…and still practiced by Christianity that were not borne of the Reformation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top