Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Switch to Forum Live View 500 Years of Reformation
3 years ago  ::  Jul 25, 2014 - 4:59PM #1
Sparky81
Posts: 18
Pretty sad that it looks like there are no Lutherans hanging out here. I have seen thier own worlds in their own like-minded blogs but ti would be nice to speak in front of the general community of fellow Christians and be where non-believers gather, as well.

500 years have nearly passed and, for many Christians, the gospel is still fettered to the magisterium of the RC Church and hidden by their traditions and the word of their heirarchy above scripture. Still others are trying to meet God halfway either by looking inside themselves to "come to faith", looking to perfrom good works to increase personal holiness and aid in sanctification, or waiting for a spirit-induced fit of incoherent babbling as a mark that God has favored them.

We have the antidote. The Good News that Christ has died once, for all so that we do not have to face the penalty for our sins. He has wholly redeemed us and now means us to lead the life He has planned for us (Eph 2:8-10). We apply this gosepl in Baptism, we celebrate the Lord's Supper and receive the actual body and blood or our Savior. The Holy Spirit creates the faith in us that we cannot come to by ourselves. We have the authority of scripture and no need for private revelations or secret codes. Christ and the Holy Spirit intercede for us - we need no priests or saints or, dare I say, Co-Redemptrix (She who cannot be refused by her son, according to many). No. We have the power and privilege to speak directly to God on behalf of others and ourselves.

The Reformation continues. Our work is far from done. While the Body of Christ, the True Church, is not now and never has been divided, Chrisitians are still divisive and insecure, still searching. We know, by faith, that  we have found life in Christ - there is nothing to seek. We live out a fruitful life becasue God works His will in us, not for our salvation but for His glory and the benefit of others. Sola Gratia! Sola Fide! Sola Scriptura! Soli Deo Gloria! Amen!
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 04, 2014 - 12:15AM #2
teilhard
Posts: 53,304

One of the genuinely serious -- almost universally unacknowledged and therefore unexplored -- Problems with the very Foundation of The "Lutheran" Reformation ... is that "Luther-an-ism" is itself a Human Eccesial Institutional (and "Magisterial") "Tradition" ... that cannot be "proven from Scripture," despite the much proclaimed (supposed) "Luther-an" Devotion to "Sola Scriptura" ...



"Isn't it ironic, don't you think ... ???  ... a little TOO ironic ... ???"


                                      -- St. Alanis Morissette

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 04, 2014 - 6:03PM #3
Sparky81
Posts: 18
Tradition implies rite and, certainly, we preserve rites in so far as they contribute to worship an respect historical Christian practice. But rites are not the church and are not doctrine. They are malleable. However, orderly worship is discussed by both the patriarchs of the Old Testament and St. Paul. Rite is not an evil. Liturgical tradition is part of identity and public worship is a witness. The use of scripture in liturgical form is both teaching and preaching doctrine. Being churchly as opposed to simply discoursing is an inclusive practice as those with varying degrees of intelligence and strength of faith can grow together.

Magisterial makes no sense as the priesthood of all believers negates a magisterium. So, you've lost me there.

To be sure, Luther preferred the label "Christian". I do, as well. But many non-Christians both claim and are given the label: eg. Mormons, Jehova's Witnesses, some Universalist and non-Trinitarian sects. The world likes syncretism and equation of doctrine. "Lutheran" at least gives a clue as to scriptural position and doctrine.

If you wish to make a point of doctrine held by Lutherans that is non-scriptural, I would like to hear it. Scripture has authority and, as Christians, we can refer to the reflections of the church fathers from the beginning. A rich body of faithful thought.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 10, 2014 - 10:33PM #4
teilhard
Posts: 53,304

The deutero-Canonical Status of The Lutheran Confessions certainly is not "Scriptural" ...


The Canon of Scripture Itself remains in dispute within The catholic Church ...


The History of the Development of a MULTITUDE of conflicting contending various "Protestant" Sects -- ALL of them claiming that THEY are TRULY "Biblical" -- certainly indicates The Folly of "Sola Scriptura" ... For Instance, The Sects disagree profoundly about "Baptism" and "The Real Presence in The Eucharist" ... !!!


And again ... "Sola Scriptura" itself is only marginally "Scriptural" ...



Sep 4, 2014 -- 6:03PM, Sparky81 wrote:

Tradition implies rite and, certainly, we preserve rites in so far as they contribute to worship an respect historical Christian practice. But rites are not the church and are not doctrine. They are malleable. However, orderly worship is discussed by both the patriarchs of the Old Testament and St. Paul. Rite is not an evil. Liturgical tradition is part of identity and public worship is a witness. The use of scripture in liturgical form is both teaching and preaching doctrine. Being churchly as opposed to simply discoursing is an inclusive practice as those with varying degrees of intelligence and strength of faith can grow together. Magisterial makes no sense as the priesthood of all believers negates a magisterium. So, you've lost me there. To be sure, Luther preferred the label "Christian". I do, as well. But many non-Christians both claim and are given the label: eg. Mormons, Jehova's Witnesses, some Universalist and non-Trinitarian sects. The world likes syncretism and equation of doctrine. "Lutheran" at least gives a clue as to scriptural position and doctrine. If you wish to make a point of doctrine held by Lutherans that is non-scriptural, I would like to hear it. Scripture has authority and, as Christians, we can refer to the reflections of the church fathers from the beginning. A rich body of faithful thought.




Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Oct 28, 2014 - 9:40PM #5
teilhard
Posts: 53,304

Reformation Sunday ...

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Oct 29, 2014 - 7:51AM #6
Jupiter6208
Posts: 2,483

The 500th Anniversary is in 2015 correct?

"A person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person."  Dave Berry
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Oct 31, 2014 - 11:25PM #7
teilhard
Posts: 53,304

October 31, 2017 -- 500th Anniversary of The 95 Theses ...

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Nov 01, 2014 - 8:06PM #8
Jupiter6208
Posts: 2,483

Ah ok. thanks.

"A person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person."  Dave Berry
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 18, 2014 - 3:15AM #9
Roymond
Posts: 3,779

I see some issues here.



First is the matter of priests.  The claim that the priesthood of all believers does away with special priests is a false one that Luther would not support.  The priesthood of all believers was also true in the Old Testament; that's where Peter gets the statement on which the New Testament affirmation of a priesthood of all believers rests.  But the Old Covenant had priests, and Luther maintained that priesthood.  The problem with Rome was not that they had a priesthood, but that they had it backwards, still on the Old Covenant model:  under the Old Covenant, there is a priesthood becuase the true High Priest, Messiah, had not come; under the New Covenant, there is a priesthood precisely because He has.  Under the Old Covenant, believers came to God through the priesthood because the Messiah had not yet opened the door; under the New, God comes to believers through the priesthood because the Messiah has opened the door of access.  The Old Covenant priest stood in the place of a Messiah Who had not come; the New Covenant priest stands in the place of a Messiah who has.



This is why the pastor/priest proclaims, "In the stead and by the command of my Lord Jesus Christ...."  It is why the Eucharist is celebrated by an ordained pastor/priest, who stands in the place of Christ to speak His Words, to be His hands.  This is why the pastor/priest wears vestments; he does not appear as himself, but stands in for the One Who is for the moment gone from us, but Who shall return and we be with Him forever.




This leads to the second matter, of a magisterium.  The magisterium has not vanished bcause of the priesthood of all believers.  Indeed, the magisterium is the fruit of the promise of Christ that He would send the Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth, which Paul explained in part when telling us that the Holy Spirit sends gifts to the church, among them teachers.  Dr. Martin Luther was a teacher the Holy Spirit gave to the church, though Rome did not acknowledge him either as that or as the prophet he also was, fulfilling the New Covenant prophet's function of expounding the Word of God and declaring woe to those who wander from it.  C. S. Lewis was commenting on this when he noted the strain of teachers throughout the cenrturies who gave the same, unswerving message, from the Apostles and their students and the rest of the Church Fathers of old, down to us today.




In turn, this leads to a third matter, that of the Lutheran Confessions.  As compiled in the Book of Concord, there are two types of confession, really: the universal, and the occasional.  The Augsburg Confession is universal, a statement of Christian truth as held from the beginning; the Apology (Defense) is a companion to it.  The rest are occasional, i.e. for specific occasions to settle matters among Christians.
But these are no more "deutero-Canonical" than are the great Creeds and definitions of the actual ecumenical Councils; they are restatements of the same faith, with authority only because they set forth what has been always and everywher believed.




Then there is the matter of saints.  We do, indeed, need saints, as examples who have gone before us. even as the hymn says.  We need them also as intercessors, though no more than the saints who stand besides us when we pray.  There is no problem with the Roman Catholic prayer asking for the intercession of the archangels and Mary and all the other saints to pray for us; we are, after all, bidden to pray one for the other, which includes the idea that we may ask others to pray for us.  That they are gone to the Church in glory while we remain in the Church militant is no bar to our fellowship.  One may object that a single person such as Mary cannot possibly pray for everyone who asks her to do so, but then that is not necessary; if our prayers go up as incense, as they do, then she can affirm all the prayers addressed to her and pass them to God, even as we do when we pray together in the liturgy, lifting in unison our commendation of the prayers of us all, spoken and unspoken, the the throne of God our Father.



The matter of Sola Scriptura is related to that of the matter of the magisterium, but should be addressed alone.  Sola Scriptura is not a principle that says what our only source is, but what our only final authority is.  We learn from the Fathers things which are not in the scriptures, but we assess them in light of the scriptures.  Sola Scriptura does not say that councils and teachers may not bring us to truth, only that they cannot go where Holy Writ bars the way.  It is a cry against a magisterium that stands not under scripture but over it; it is not a cry against any magisterium at all -- if it were, we would turn aside educated pastors, instead of demanding that they be educated.



In this way, we see that the New Testament itself teaches Sola Scriptura, when it commends the Bereans for not believing the words of an Apostle but turning to the scriptures to see if the things he said were so.  That is the meaning of the principle:  anything we find of uncertain nature, we are to judge according to the scriptures; and more, that we do not do this alone, but together as the Body of Christ, led by those gifts the Spirit has given: pastors, teachers, and so on.
It follows that Lutheranism is not a new "ecclesial institutional... tradition", but a return to that of the Fathers.




As for the canon of scripture, it is not in dispute; it is ony that many are ignorant of what the canon is.  Lutherans hold to the ancient canon, which assigns trustworthiness to books in terms of homologoumena, antilegomena (indeed, on one occasion the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod got a national group of evangelical churches to reaffirm this!), and on to less and less trustworthy.  The two I named are those within the New Testament itself;  the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistles of James and Jude, the second Epistle of Peter, the second and third Epistles of John, and the Revelation are antilegomena, which means "spoken against".  Traditionally, no doctrine is to be based on these books, though they may be used to support a doctrine based in the homologoumena.  Rome committed great error, though, when it assigned these two and more categories of books the same authority, throwing aside the teachings of the early church on the matter, and most so-called Protestant sects do the same by ignoring the distinction within the New Testament collection itself.



For good reading on such matters, I highly recommend The Conservative Reformation and Its Theology, by Charles Porterfield Krauth.  (best price here: www.cph.org/p-661-the-conservative-refor...)

Quick Reply
Cancel
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook