ALPB Forum Online

ALPB => Your Turn => Topic started by: Daniel L. Gard on July 03, 2017, 09:31:22 AM

Title: Ecumenical News
Post by: Daniel L. Gard on July 03, 2017, 09:31:22 AM
Trigger warning: this is a "fake news" article but may cause sensitive Lutheran souls to find comfort in a plate of tuna casserole.

http://channel45news.com/2017/07/episcopal-church-suspends-full-communion-agreement-with-elca/
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: revjagow on July 03, 2017, 02:05:34 PM
Trigger warning: this is a "fake news" article but may cause sensitive Lutheran souls to find comfort in a plate of tuna casserole.

http://channel45news.com/2017/07/episcopal-church-suspends-full-communion-agreement-with-elca/

Or beer and hymns.  8)

And, OK, I'll show my ignorance... why would flax albs be an offense?
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Daniel L. Gard on July 03, 2017, 02:45:09 PM
Trigger warning: this is a "fake news" article but may cause sensitive Lutheran souls to find comfort in a plate of tuna casserole.

http://channel45news.com/2017/07/episcopal-church-suspends-full-communion-agreement-with-elca/

Or beer and hymns.  8)

And, OK, I'll show my ignorance... why would flax albs be an offense?

No idea. I am a Lutheran. :)
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Charles Austin on July 03, 2017, 03:02:29 PM
"Alb" means "white." If they are flax-colored, they are not white.
Another reason why this intended spoof is not very spoofy.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Daniel L. Gard on July 03, 2017, 03:24:43 PM
"Alb" means "white." If they are flax-colored, they are not white.
Another reason why this intended spoof is not very spoofy.

<sigh>.............right on time. Have some lime jello with stuff in it. You will be fine.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Charles Austin on July 03, 2017, 03:34:37 PM
 I am already fine. And I'm having mussels and clams and a nice strong garlic sauce, the garlic having been grown in my own garden. Sautéed garlic scrapes will enhance the chicken later.
Have avoided lime Jell-O for many years, much to my benefit.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: DCharlton on July 03, 2017, 07:21:16 PM
Trigger warning: this is a "fake news" article but may cause sensitive Lutheran souls to find comfort in a plate of tuna casserole.

http://channel45news.com/2017/07/episcopal-church-suspends-full-communion-agreement-with-elca/

I think that is one of the points of contention.  Episcopalians call it a casserole, while some Lutherans insist it is a tuna "hot dish".
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Randy Bosch on July 03, 2017, 07:26:15 PM
Trigger warning: this is a "fake news" article but may cause sensitive Lutheran souls to find comfort in a plate of tuna casserole.

http://channel45news.com/2017/07/episcopal-church-suspends-full-communion-agreement-with-elca/

I think that is one of the points of contention.  Episcopalians call it a casserole, while some Lutherans insist it is a tuna "hot dish".

Isn't the ELCA - TEC CCM clear regarding this critical issue?
If part of a tuna casserole is dispensed to a member's plate, is it still a casserole?  A hot dish could be dispensed to a member's plate and still be a hot dish if the plate is kept warm enough. 
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Daniel L. Gard on July 03, 2017, 08:02:20 PM
Trigger warning: this is a "fake news" article but may cause sensitive Lutheran souls to find comfort in a plate of tuna casserole.

http://channel45news.com/2017/07/episcopal-church-suspends-full-communion-agreement-with-elca/

I think that is one of the points of contention.  Episcopalians call it a casserole, while some Lutherans insist it is a tuna "hot dish".

Isn't the ELCA - TEC CCM clear regarding this critical issue?
If part of a tuna casserole is dispensed to a member's plate, is it still a casserole?  A hot dish could be dispensed to a member's plate and still be a hot dish if the plate is kept warm enough.

I understand that the dish issue is rather important. Lutherans have gone to paper or styrofoam plates while Episcopalians insist on china.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Dave Likeness on July 03, 2017, 08:51:28 PM
For the past 30 years some  Lutheran churches have enjoyed an automatic dishwasher
in their kitchen. Some have enjoyed a fellowship hall with seating for 300 or more at tables
and chairs.  These fellowship halls host a Saturday men's breakfast,  Easter breakfast,
Sweet Heart Dinners for Valentine's Day, Funeral luncheons, Wedding receptions, and the
last goes on.  Paper plates have become adiaphoria for many and forbidden for others.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: DCharlton on July 03, 2017, 09:01:55 PM
Trigger warning: this is a "fake news" article but may cause sensitive Lutheran souls to find comfort in a plate of tuna casserole.

http://channel45news.com/2017/07/episcopal-church-suspends-full-communion-agreement-with-elca/

I think that is one of the points of contention.  Episcopalians call it a casserole, while some Lutherans insist it is a tuna "hot dish".

Isn't the ELCA - TEC CCM clear regarding this critical issue?
If part of a tuna casserole is dispensed to a member's plate, is it still a casserole?  A hot dish could be dispensed to a member's plate and still be a hot dish if the plate is kept warm enough.

I think it is an issue of cultural sensitivity.  ELCA Lutherans from the Gulf Coast call it a "tuna casserole", while people from the Dakotas and Minnesota are said to call it a "hot dish".  According to my wife, this cultural divide also exists between Lutherans from Ohio and Lutherans from the Upper Midwest.  Ohioans are similarly unfamiliar with the term "hot dish". 

This is where the TEC could stand to learn from the ELCA.  We have decided that whether it is a "hot dish" or a "casserole" is a matter of Bound Conscience.  We have decided to take a Big Tent approach to pot-luck dinners. 
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Matt Hummel on July 03, 2017, 09:46:01 PM
All I know is my Catholic (Ordinate) parish includes Episcopalian foodways as part of the Patrimony. So, I love Easter Morning breakfast- smoked salmon, bloody marys, mimosas and other good eats. Not looking back!
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: SomeoneWrites on July 04, 2017, 08:44:59 AM
All I know is my Catholic (Ordinate) parish includes Episcopalian foodways as part of the Patrimony. So, I love Easter Morning breakfast- smoked salmon, bloody marys, mimosas and other good eats. Not looking back!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeaGXjD_iDY
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Matt Hummel on July 04, 2017, 02:48:34 PM
All I know is my Catholic (Ordinate) parish includes Episcopalian foodways as part of the Patrimony. So, I love Easter Morning breakfast- smoked salmon, bloody marys, mimosas and other good eats. Not looking back!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeaGXjD_iDY

 ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Richard Johnson on July 04, 2017, 06:04:39 PM
I am already fine. And I'm having mussels and clams and a nice strong garlic sauce, the garlic having been grown in my own garden. Sautéed garlic scrapes will enhance the chicken later.
Have avoided lime Jell-O for many years, much to my benefit.

Was that you I saw on the beach with Gov. Christie?  8)
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Charles Austin on July 04, 2017, 09:42:55 PM
No, but Island Beach State Park, where New Jersey has a beach home for the guv, is "my" park; and I am there at least once a week during the season. Christie? Don't get me started.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: David Garner on July 07, 2017, 08:20:44 AM
When ecumenism goes wrong.....

https://twitter.com/c_of_e/status/882879351020294144
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: SomeoneWrites on July 07, 2017, 10:09:26 AM
When ecumenism goes wrong.....

https://twitter.com/c_of_e/status/882879351020294144

Oh man, the replies...
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: bookpastor/Erma Wolf on July 07, 2017, 11:07:15 AM
 What has been totally overlooked is the real problem with bringing lime jello tuna fish casserole to Episcopal meals: revealing upper Midwest Lutheranism's secret weapon in mission-driven discipling. One simply does not share that with just anyone.  >:(

  Especially since the Episcopalians obviously did not appreciate what had been placed before them. Those foolish Lutherans were just casting pearls before swine!  (I just hope they didn't include the marshmallows in the spurned offering.)

  Besides -- who knew Episcopalians had potlucks?   ::)
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: gan ainm on July 07, 2017, 11:08:13 AM
Joint Declaration article. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/07/reformed-sign-on-to-joint-declaration-find-no-theological-differences-with-lutherans/

More on Ecumenical News. It seems much of liberal Christianity is congealing into a large pile of mush.  :'(
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: MaddogLutheran on July 07, 2017, 11:50:33 AM
When ecumenism goes wrong.....

https://twitter.com/c_of_e/status/882879351020294144

Oh man, the replies...
Yes! It's free entertainment to read replies/comments and enjoy the GIFs at moments like this.

It's like some ignorant person was farming Wikipedia entries...
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Keith Falk on July 07, 2017, 02:23:47 PM
What has been totally overlooked is the real problem with bringing lime jello tuna fish casserole to Episcopal meals: revealing upper Midwest Lutheranism's secret weapon in mission-driven discipling. One simply does not share that with just anyone.  >:(

  Especially since the Episcopalians obviously did not appreciate what had been placed before them. Those foolish Lutherans were just casting pearls before swine!  (I just hope they didn't include the marshmallows in the spurned offering.)

  Besides -- who knew Episcopalians had potlucks?   ::)


Isn't an Episcopalian potluck a meal catered by a member's catering company?   ;D


At Trinity Lutheran Seminary, we shared space/profs/etc with Bexley Hall.  You could always pick out the Lutherans from the Episcopalians during the social times... Lutherans had the beer, Episcopalians had the wine.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: MaddogLutheran on July 07, 2017, 02:29:46 PM
What has been totally overlooked is the real problem with bringing lime jello tuna fish casserole to Episcopal meals: revealing upper Midwest Lutheranism's secret weapon in mission-driven discipling. One simply does not share that with just anyone.  >:(

  Especially since the Episcopalians obviously did not appreciate what had been placed before them. Those foolish Lutherans were just casting pearls before swine!  (I just hope they didn't include the marshmallows in the spurned offering.)

  Besides -- who knew Episcopalians had potlucks?   ::)


Isn't an Episcopalian potluck a meal catered by a member's catering company?   ;D


At Trinity Lutheran Seminary, we shared space/profs/etc with Bexley Hall.  You could always pick out the Lutherans from the Episcopalians during the social times... Lutherans had the beer, Episcopalians had the wine.
Oh man, I didn't realize our senior pastor's Episcopal liturgical tendencies had tentacles everywhere...our winter "theology on tap" series in our off-the-narthex gathering space is (member) catered with wine (not beer) served.  *Gasp*  the horror!   ::)

Not to worry, we also do proper pot lucks (sans any alcohol) on weekends, and during the Wednesdays of Lent (soup suppers).
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Richard Johnson on July 07, 2017, 10:02:33 PM

  Besides -- who knew Episcopalians had potlucks?   ::)

Been one now for four years, and no potlucks.

But on the other hand, no sherry.  :o
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Mark Brown on July 08, 2017, 10:06:31 AM

  Besides -- who knew Episcopalians had potlucks?   ::)

Been one now for four years, and no potlucks.

But on the other hand, no sherry.  :o

I knew they had let things slide, doctrine-schmoctrine, but no sherry?!?  Turn out the lights boys and play taps.  This one's dead.

On the bright side, that means a good tradition is up for grabs.  Worshipping Jesus, with a slight air of superiority, since 2017.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Richard Johnson on July 08, 2017, 01:16:29 PM

  Besides -- who knew Episcopalians had potlucks?   ::)

Been one now for four years, and no potlucks.

But on the other hand, no sherry.  :o

I knew they had let things slide, doctrine-schmoctrine, but no sherry?!?  Turn out the lights boys and play taps.  This one's dead.

On the bright side, that means a good tradition is up for grabs.  Worshipping Jesus, with a slight air of superiority, since 2017.

Well, maybe it's that my congregation has kept the doctrine but let the sherry slide!
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Michael Slusser on July 08, 2017, 01:24:51 PM
Joint Declaration article. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/07/reformed-sign-on-to-joint-declaration-find-no-theological-differences-with-lutherans/

More on Ecumenical News. It seems much of liberal Christianity is congealing into a large pile of mush.  :'(
The Vatican's Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has issued  a note on this event: http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi (http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi) The Note includes this:
"The Reformed Churches bring to the ecumenical consensus around this fundamental doctrine a particular concern for the relationship between justification and a commitment to justice in the world. Grace leads to and requires 'good works' in bringing about God's kingdom of justice, peace and reconciliation. Justification leads to solidarity with the victims of social disorder and opposition to systems of social and economic injustice. By sharing an understanding of this Christian imperative, Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed are able to find wider and more intensive ways of working together in the service of suffering humanity."

The coherence of that brief set of assertions is not clear to me, and may be quite problematic to Lutheran participants on this Forum.

Peace,
Michael
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Team Hesse on July 08, 2017, 01:37:32 PM
Joint Declaration article. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/07/reformed-sign-on-to-joint-declaration-find-no-theological-differences-with-lutherans/ (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/07/reformed-sign-on-to-joint-declaration-find-no-theological-differences-with-lutherans/)

More on Ecumenical News. It seems much of liberal Christianity is congealing into a large pile of mush.  :'(
The Vatican's Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has issued  a note on this event: http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi (http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi) The Note includes this:
"The Reformed Churches bring to the ecumenical consensus around this fundamental doctrine a particular concern for the relationship between justification and a commitment to justice in the world. Grace leads to and requires 'good works' in bringing about God's kingdom of justice, peace and reconciliation. Justification leads to solidarity with the victims of social disorder and opposition to systems of social and economic injustice. By sharing an understanding of this Christian imperative, Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed are able to find wider and more intensive ways of working together in the service of suffering humanity."

The coherence of that brief set of assertions is not clear to me, and may be quite problematic to Lutheran participants on this Forum.

Peace,
Michael


Oh my....


Lou
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Dave Likeness on July 08, 2017, 02:07:13 PM
In some real ecumenical news, our Chamber of Commerce is sponsoring a slow-pitch softball game tonight.

It will feature the Knights of Columbus against the Masonic Lodge.   The proceeds go to Jewish Relief Fund.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 08, 2017, 03:00:03 PM
Joint Declaration article. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/07/reformed-sign-on-to-joint-declaration-find-no-theological-differences-with-lutherans/

More on Ecumenical News. It seems much of liberal Christianity is congealing into a large pile of mush.  :'(
The Vatican's Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has issued  a note on this event: http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi (http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi) The Note includes this:
"The Reformed Churches bring to the ecumenical consensus around this fundamental doctrine a particular concern for the relationship between justification and a commitment to justice in the world. Grace leads to and requires 'good works' in bringing about God's kingdom of justice, peace and reconciliation. Justification leads to solidarity with the victims of social disorder and opposition to systems of social and economic injustice. By sharing an understanding of this Christian imperative, Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed are able to find wider and more intensive ways of working together in the service of suffering humanity."

The coherence of that brief set of assertions is not clear to me, and may be quite problematic to Lutheran participants on this Forum.

Peace,
Michael


Hasty agreement without sufficient study of terms and how they are defined (ie. justification, sanctification) always leads to unification without solid support.  If each party uses these terms differently then we are not talking about agreement but obfuscation.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Charles Austin on July 08, 2017, 03:36:51 PM
I do not think that the more than 40 years of talks it took to reach our statement on justification, the involvement of people of varying views from all over the world can be considered "hasty agreement".
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: John_Hannah on July 08, 2017, 03:58:20 PM
Joint Declaration article. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/07/reformed-sign-on-to-joint-declaration-find-no-theological-differences-with-lutherans/

More on Ecumenical News. It seems much of liberal Christianity is congealing into a large pile of mush.  :'(
The Vatican's Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has issued  a note on this event: http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi (http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi) The Note includes this:
"The Reformed Churches bring to the ecumenical consensus around this fundamental doctrine a particular concern for the relationship between justification and a commitment to justice in the world. Grace leads to and requires 'good works' in bringing about God's kingdom of justice, peace and reconciliation. Justification leads to solidarity with the victims of social disorder and opposition to systems of social and economic injustice. By sharing an understanding of this Christian imperative, Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed are able to find wider and more intensive ways of working together in the service of suffering humanity."

The coherence of that brief set of assertions is not clear to me, and may be quite problematic to Lutheran participants on this Forum.

Peace,
Michael

That "press release" note hardly does justice to the hard work that went into the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JDDJ).  Cardinal Ratzinger (later Benedict XVI) likely would not approve.   

Peace, JOHN
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: DCharlton on July 08, 2017, 04:06:13 PM
Joint Declaration article. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/07/reformed-sign-on-to-joint-declaration-find-no-theological-differences-with-lutherans/

More on Ecumenical News. It seems much of liberal Christianity is congealing into a large pile of mush.  :'(
The Vatican's Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has issued  a note on this event: http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi (http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi) The Note includes this:
"The Reformed Churches bring to the ecumenical consensus around this fundamental doctrine a particular concern for the relationship between justification and a commitment to justice in the world. Grace leads to and requires 'good works' in bringing about God's kingdom of justice, peace and reconciliation. Justification leads to solidarity with the victims of social disorder and opposition to systems of social and economic injustice. By sharing an understanding of this Christian imperative, Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed are able to find wider and more intensive ways of working together in the service of suffering humanity."

The coherence of that brief set of assertions is not clear to me, and may be quite problematic to Lutheran participants on this Forum.

Peace,
Michael

Hasty agreement without sufficient study of terms and how they are defined (ie. justification, sanctification) always leads to unification without solid support.  If each party uses these terms differently then we are not talking about agreement but obfuscation.

I'm not sure that's the problem with the JDDJ.  The problem, I believe, is that very few are interested the subject matter of the discussion.  "Who today wants to talk about theological matters like justification, when the real problem is injustice?"

This perspective is is expressed quite well by the statement above: "By sharing an understanding of this Christian imperative, Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed are able to find wider and more intensive ways of working together in the service of suffering humanity."  As we often hear, "social justice is the gospel".  Better to get on with the real work of the Church.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: pearson on July 08, 2017, 04:17:27 PM

The Vatican's Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has issued  a note on this event: http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi (http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi) The Note includes this:
"The Reformed Churches bring to the ecumenical consensus around this fundamental doctrine a particular concern for the relationship between justification and a commitment to justice in the world. Grace leads to and requires 'good works' in bringing about God's kingdom of justice, peace and reconciliation. Justification leads to solidarity with the victims of social disorder and opposition to systems of social and economic injustice. By sharing an understanding of this Christian imperative, Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed are able to find wider and more intensive ways of working together in the service of suffering humanity."

The coherence of that brief set of assertions is not clear to me, and may be quite problematic to Lutheran participants on this Forum.


Indeed.  Thank you, Father Slusser, for noting this juxtaposition of incongruities.  For Lutherans like Pr. Stoffregen and myself, who resist the confusion of doctrinal affirmations with ethical considerations, the summary posted above is an unsavory porridge.

Tom Pearson
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 08, 2017, 04:27:43 PM
I do not think that the more than 40 years of talks it took to reach our statement on justification, the involvement of people of varying views from all over the world can be considered "hasty agreement".


Well, it is possible for scholars to make mistakes.  In this case two items:  need for discussion on what terms mean.  The other issue is a real in-depth look at how we define and interpret what is going on in Genesis 1-3 as well as in Romans 5.  There has been insufficient discussion about original sin as defined and interpreted in RCism and Lutheranism at the level of the ecumenical.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Charles Austin on July 08, 2017, 04:39:13 PM
Yes, Pastor Rahn, it is possible for scholars to make mistakes. And it is possible for anyone to make mistakes, including those who contend that scholars and all others make mistakes.
I sometimes find that I am willing to set myself aside and learn from, listen to, and be guided by people who are - in certain areas of faith, life and grand matters - more experienced and smarter than I. Even if this means I learn something or follow a conclusion that - left to myself - I might not like.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 08, 2017, 04:53:39 PM
Yes, Pastor Rahn, it is possible for scholars to make mistakes. And it is possible for anyone to make mistakes, including those who contend that scholars and all others make mistakes.
I sometimes find that I am willing to set myself aside and learn from, listen to, and be guided by people who are - in certain areas of faith, life and grand matters - more experienced and smarter than I. Even if this means I learn something or follow a conclusion that - left to myself - I might not like.

That is all well and good.  However in this case I feel my scholarship offers a deeper insight than many who have served on the dialogue teams.  Also, JDDJ might have provided some good and well-intentioned assertions.  But it is a disaster, at least from the Lutheran side, as to how justification by faith was defined and then discussed when the Lutheran Confessions should have been sourced more.  Look at the subject of justification which was taken up by the dialogue team years ago.  Robert Bertram sat on that team.  He does an infinitely finer job in defining justification and faith than his fellow Lutheran colleagues who sat with him.  RCism at least officially, cannot get their head around what is discussed in the Apology about this, for instance.  Melanchthon was able to expose a flaw in RCism (read Trent) having to do with what faith is and what justifying faith does in the Scriptures.  He provides biblical support and realizes that the hermeneutic which Trent (official RCism) was using differed substantially from what the Lutherans were asserting.  This simply has not changed throughout the years, despite Vatican II as well as despite the dialogues.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Charles Austin on July 08, 2017, 09:55:14 PM
Pastor Rahn writes:
That is all well and good.  However in this case I feel my scholarship offers a deeper insight than many who have served on the dialogue teams.  Also, JDDJ might have provided some good and well-intentioned assertions.  But it is a disaster, at least from the Lutheran side, as to how justification by faith was defined and then discussed when the Lutheran Confessions should have been sourced more. 
I comment:
You may, of course, set your scholarship above that of the theologians, pastors, professors, bishops and cardinals who created that document. I am not able to do that.
As to whether it is a "disaster," that too is your assessment and not that of the church bodies around the world who have taken that document seriously and see it as inspired and helpful.

Pastor Rahn writes:
RCism at least officially, cannot get their head around what is discussed in the Apology about this, for instance.  Melanchthon was able to expose a flaw in RCism (read Trent) having to do with what faith is and what justifying faith does in the Scriptures.  He provides biblical support and realizes that the hermeneutic which Trent (official RCism) was using differed substantially from what the Lutherans were asserting.  This simply has not changed throughout the years, despite Vatican II as well as despite the dialogues.
I comment:
Again, your words and even those concerning Trent, take a totally different viewpoint than those involved in the years of dialogues. I suggest you look up the sermon on Luther preached to the papal household earlier this year by the chaplain to the pope and his staff. There is more "Luther" than "Trent" in that sermon.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 09, 2017, 06:23:11 PM
Joint Declaration article. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/07/reformed-sign-on-to-joint-declaration-find-no-theological-differences-with-lutherans/

More on Ecumenical News. It seems much of liberal Christianity is congealing into a large pile of mush.  :'(
The Vatican's Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has issued  a note on this event: http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi (http://www.news.va/en/news/vatican-note-on-reformed-churches-signing-of-justi) The Note includes this:
"The Reformed Churches bring to the ecumenical consensus around this fundamental doctrine a particular concern for the relationship between justification and a commitment to justice in the world. Grace leads to and requires 'good works' in bringing about God's kingdom of justice, peace and reconciliation. Justification leads to solidarity with the victims of social disorder and opposition to systems of social and economic injustice. By sharing an understanding of this Christian imperative, Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed are able to find wider and more intensive ways of working together in the service of suffering humanity."

The coherence of that brief set of assertions is not clear to me, and may be quite problematic to Lutheran participants on this Forum.

Peace,
Michael

Hasty agreement without sufficient study of terms and how they are defined (ie. justification, sanctification) always leads to unification without solid support.  If each party uses these terms differently then we are not talking about agreement but obfuscation.

I'm not sure that's the problem with the JDDJ.  The problem, I believe, is that very few are interested the subject matter of the discussion.  "Who today wants to talk about theological matters like justification, when the real problem is injustice?"

This perspective is is expressed quite well by the statement above: "By sharing an understanding of this Christian imperative, Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed are able to find wider and more intensive ways of working together in the service of suffering humanity."  As we often hear, "social justice is the gospel".  Better to get on with the real work of the Church.

This is telling.  The ghosts of the Reformation haunt us today as well.  Justice issues have to do with rightness under the law.  But we know from Romans that APART FROM LAW A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD HAS APPEARED.  That apartness is what follows in the biblical text, ie. having to do with Christ's death on the cross fulfilling and setting aside justice issues under the law as a way toward rightness.  Now I'll be the first to acknowledge that rightness under the law continues with us to the grave.  An important and necessary function.  It is the function and inner working of history both individual as well as societal.  THat much I give to the left hand kingdom.  However the Church has been given the specific mission to convey rightness under the Gospel, that is Christ's specific and unique mission recorded in the New Testament through his life, death and resurrection, et.al.  That is what the CHurch should be doing and preaching.  THere is too much confusion between issues of seeking rightness in life lived under the law, ie. nomological existence, seeking justice for others; and the existence witnessed to by the apostles first and the public Church later on.  God's law is one thing.  THe gospel is another.  We tend to combine rather than keep apart each existence.  THe distinction is blurred.   By keeping each apart from one another will prove the vast differences and effectiveness of each way of life.  THere was a reason why the Lutherans accentuated this necessity by exposure during the 16th century.  Penance and the indulgences were the items which kicked this off for both Luther and Melanchthon.  The Roman church then, or at least in the Papacy, had confused the two.  THis confusion continues today officially in their documents.  Trent still has force in RCism.  As Traditio, Vatican II does not render Trent ineffective.

Hint regarding this separate means of rightness from Galatians is this telling verse in chapter 2:21, "...if justice comes through the law then Christ died for nothing."

BTW:  Justification has the nuance of what it means to find resolution under the law.  Justice includes the death of the sinner.  Someone gets their due because they have failed to render complete and thorough rightness which God demands before his face.  It is what happens before the Judge, finally.  This is what happens when one expects rightness based on the law.  And God approves this as it is God's law to begin with.  To find justice under the law one should expect "death", "retribution", someone's comeuppance.  That is what is rendered in that arena but only in that arena and limited in that arena (court).

But APART FROM LAW a righteousness of God has appeared, that is in Jesus.  THere is no retribution for sinners there in this other arena because all retribution has been placed on Christ's shoulders as he is the friend of sinners.  He takes justice (death) for us, and in place of us.  See 2 Corinthians 5.

The Church's unique mission is to emphasize this apartness by showing the contrast and the conflict that occurs within each person who has been baptized into this narrative, the bpdy of Christ.

I challenge the dialogue team to take up this theme and once again the glaring difference between Augsburg and Rome will appear.  I guarantee it.  From there real dialogue could and would then commence.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Dave Likeness on July 09, 2017, 07:09:43 PM
The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church  (1994)

Page 483...."Justification establishes cooperation between God's grace and man's freedom.
Man's part is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God........with the prompting
of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent."

Lutherans reject any synergism whereby man cooperates in his attaining faith.
Lutherans believe that faith is a gift of God, not a human work.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Charles Austin on July 09, 2017, 07:15:55 PM
So write your response and your concerns to the dialogue team, Pastor Rahn. Or engage them in some sort of dialogue with your views. If you had these concerns, did you express them at any time during our decades of dialogue or when the document on justification was being discussed?
Take you concerns into the fray. It could be interesting.
But as for this humble correspondent, I'll stick with the guidance from people much smarter than I am and their work and report and suggestions.
(You might be smarter than I am, too, but I'm not yet ready to make that determination.)
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Dan Fienen on July 09, 2017, 11:42:10 PM
I do not think that the more than 40 years of talks it took to reach our statement on justification, the involvement of people of varying views from all over the world can be considered "hasty agreement".
So, we should acknowledge, respect and follow the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into JDDJ and other such agreements.  Yet the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into the Lutheran Confessions (not to mention the willingness of the Confessors to defenf their confessionat risk of their lives) can be dismissed with an airy "We're not in the 1580's anymore."  How long before JDDJ becomes outdated and unfashionable and can be dismissed with a "That's so 20th Century, we aren't 20th Century people anymore."?


When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?  At 500 years perhaps the real celebration needs to be the realization that Luther and the Reformers ars far past their sell by date.  We are, or at least some of us are, far wiser, more knowledgeable, and sophisticated than those old drunken German peasants.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 01:09:35 AM
The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church  (1994)

Page 483...."Justification establishes cooperation between God's grace and man's freedom.
Man's part is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God........with the prompting
of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent."

Lutherans reject any synergism whereby man cooperates in his attaining faith.
Lutherans believe that faith is a gift of God, not a human work.


Faith is a gift of God. Do humans have to do anything to receive this gift of faith or is there universal salvation for all?
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Charles Austin on July 10, 2017, 07:11:48 AM
Pastor Fienen writes (as usual):
So, we should acknowledge, respect and follow the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into JDDJ and other such agreements.  Yet the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into the Lutheran Confessions (not to mention the willingness of the Confessors to defenf their confessionat risk of their lives) can be dismissed with an airy "We're not in the 1580's anymore." 
I comment (as usual with with a sigh):
You petulantly overstate once again. No, we do not "dismiss" the confessions, nor do we dishonor those who prepared them. But it is not 1580, either in the world or in the church. Their is nothing "airy" about my statement. It is just plain common sense.

Pastor Fienen writes:
How long before JDDJ becomes outdated and unfashionable and can be dismissed with a "That's so 20th Century, we aren't 20th Century people anymore."?
I comment:
Actually, I do hope that this document becomes "outdated," that is, replaced by an agreement that brings us even closer together in the body of Christ. Don't you?

Pastor Fienen writes:
When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?
I comment:
Well, didn't that first confession of faith, "Jesus is Lord," fade with the development of the creeds.

Pastor Fienen:
At 500 years perhaps the real celebration needs to be the realization that Luther and the Reformers ars far past their sell by date.  We are, or at least some of us are, far wiser, more knowledgeable, and sophisticated than those old drunken German peasants.
Me:
More silly overstatement. It has nothing to do with wisdom, knowledge or sophistication or sobriety. It has to do with healing, fellowship, cooperation, mission and proclamation in the Body of Christ, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Why are you so persistent and nearly fanatic in attempts to preserve the disunity in the church? Luther's goal was correction, not schism. The confessions, particularly Augustana, were intended to be reconciling documents.
Do you believe that every single dispute, situation, theological argument, biblical interpretation, and ecclesial structure is exactly, precisely, and immutably as it was in 1580?
Do you believe that the words spoken then - to a particular situation - are the final words to be spoken about faith and life and the Church? Can you possibly be that arrogant about our particular family of faith?
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Donald_Kirchner on July 10, 2017, 08:18:43 AM
The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church  (1994)

Page 483...."Justification establishes cooperation between God's grace and man's freedom.
Man's part is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God........with the prompting
of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent."

Lutherans reject any synergism whereby man cooperates in his attaining faith.
Lutherans believe that faith is a gift of God, not a human work.

Faith is a gift of God. Do humans have to do anything to receive this gift of faith or is there universal salvation for all?

And, again, we start out the week with an ambiguously defined term, needlessly thrown out as bait in response to a statement which should elicit an "Amen." "Lutherans believe that faith is a gift of God, not a human work."
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Team Hesse on July 10, 2017, 08:32:29 AM
The ecumenical statement posted upstream on social justice, Pastor Rahn's observations about JDDJ, and the quote from the RC catechism of 1994 are pretty clear evidence that the need for continuing reformation of the church catholic remains acute.


The sermon preached to the Pope in the Vatican, the fact of JDDJ (with all of its flaws), the participation of Fr Schlusser in this discussion, and the fact that RC people are no longer bent on exterminating the "Lutheran Heresy" are all positive signs that some progress has been made.


Neither Pollyanna nor Cassandra,


Lou
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Steven Tibbetts on July 10, 2017, 09:57:18 AM

Pastor Fienen writes:
When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?
I comment:
Well, didn't that first confession of faith, "Jesus is Lord," fade with the development of the creeds.


No, it didn't.

One probably ought not seek to overcome overstatement with different overstatement.

Pax, Steven+
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 10, 2017, 10:07:15 AM

Pastor Fienen writes:
When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?
I comment:
Well, didn't that first confession of faith, "Jesus is Lord," fade with the development of the creeds.


No, it didn't.

One probably ought not seek to overcome overstatement with different overstatement.

Pax, Steven+

Pr. Tibbetts is correct.  "Jesus is Lord" remains intact fully.  See Romans 10.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 11:29:07 AM
Pastor Fienen writes (as usual):
So, we should acknowledge, respect and follow the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into JDDJ and other such agreements.  Yet the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into the Lutheran Confessions (not to mention the willingness of the Confessors to defenf their confessionat risk of their lives) can be dismissed with an airy "We're not in the 1580's anymore." 
I comment (as usual with with a sigh):
You petulantly overstate once again. No, we do not "dismiss" the confessions, nor do we dishonor those who prepared them. But it is not 1580, either in the world or in the church. Their is nothing "airy" about my statement. It is just plain common sense.

Pastor Fienen writes:
How long before JDDJ becomes outdated and unfashionable and can be dismissed with a "That's so 20th Century, we aren't 20th Century people anymore."?
I comment:
Actually, I do hope that this document becomes "outdated," that is, replaced by an agreement that brings us even closer together in the body of Christ. Don't you?

Pastor Fienen writes:
When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?
I comment:
Well, didn't that first confession of faith, "Jesus is Lord," fade with the development of the creeds.

Pastor Fienen:
At 500 years perhaps the real celebration needs to be the realization that Luther and the Reformers ars far past their sell by date.  We are, or at least some of us are, far wiser, more knowledgeable, and sophisticated than those old drunken German peasants.
Me:
More silly overstatement. It has nothing to do with wisdom, knowledge or sophistication or sobriety. It has to do with healing, fellowship, cooperation, mission and proclamation in the Body of Christ, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Why are you so persistent and nearly fanatic in attempts to preserve the disunity in the church? Luther's goal was correction, not schism. The confessions, particularly Augustana, were intended to be reconciling documents.
Do you believe that every single dispute, situation, theological argument, biblical interpretation, and ecclesial structure is exactly, precisely, and immutably as it was in 1580?
Do you believe that the words spoken then - to a particular situation - are the final words to be spoken about faith and life and the Church? Can you possibly be that arrogant about our particular family of faith?


In reading this, it struck me that in another discussion - on Romans 7 - that we confess that sin continue to reign in our lives; but then we seem to ignore that when talking about creeds and confessions. Wasn't the same sin Paul and we deal with present in those who composed those documents? Isn't it then possible that sinful motivations were also part of those confessions we hold so dear - and, perhaps through the Law we recognize the sin that's in them, repent, and move on?
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 11:31:54 AM
The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church  (1994)

Page 483...."Justification establishes cooperation between God's grace and man's freedom.
Man's part is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God........with the prompting
of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent."

Lutherans reject any synergism whereby man cooperates in his attaining faith.
Lutherans believe that faith is a gift of God, not a human work.

Faith is a gift of God. Do humans have to do anything to receive this gift of faith or is there universal salvation for all?

And, again, we start out the week with an ambiguously defined term, needlessly thrown out as bait in response to a statement which should elicit an "Amen." "Lutherans believe that faith is a gift of God, not a human work."


Faith us not repeating religious/Lutheran cliches, it is understanding the meaning of the words we speak. What do you mean when you state: "Faith is a gift of God, not a human work"? How does your understanding relate to people who do not believe?
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Donald_Kirchner on July 10, 2017, 11:37:47 AM
The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church  (1994)

Page 483...."Justification establishes cooperation between God's grace and man's freedom.
Man's part is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God........with the prompting
of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent."

Lutherans reject any synergism whereby man cooperates in his attaining faith.
Lutherans believe that faith is a gift of God, not a human work.

Faith is a gift of God. Do humans have to do anything to receive this gift of faith or is there universal salvation for all?

And, again, we start out the week with an ambiguously defined term, needlessly thrown out as bait in response to a statement which should elicit an "Amen." "Lutherans believe that faith is a gift of God, not a human work."

Faith us not repeating religious/Lutheran cliches, it is understanding the meaning of the words we speak. What do you mean when you state: "Faith is a gift of God, not a human work"? How does your understanding relate to people who do not believe?

Oh, I think what you call a cliche states the meaning quite clearly. Ephesians 2 certainly fleshes it out a bit more.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Dan Fienen on July 10, 2017, 11:43:23 AM


In reading this, it struck me that in another discussion - on Romans 7 - that we confess that sin continue to reign in our lives; but then we seem to ignore that when talking about creeds and confessions. Wasn't the same sin Paul and we deal with present in those who composed those documents? Isn't it then possible that sinful motivations were also part of those confessions we hold so dear - and, perhaps through the Law we recognize the sin that's in them, repent, and move on?


You've already indicated where part of the Athanasian Creed needs to be discarded.  Where else do you find sinful motivations and elements that need to be redacted from the Confessions so that we can move on to the bright ecumenical future you hold so dear?
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 11:49:15 AM

Pastor Fienen writes:
When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?
I comment:
Well, didn't that first confession of faith, "Jesus is Lord," fade with the development of the creeds.


No, it didn't.

One probably ought not seek to overcome overstatement with different overstatement.


Yet, "Jesus is Lord" does not occur in ELW's communion liturgies.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Dan Fienen on July 10, 2017, 11:54:00 AM

More silly overstatement. It has nothing to do with wisdom, knowledge or sophistication or sobriety. It has to do with healing, fellowship, cooperation, mission and proclamation in the Body of Christ, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Why are you so persistent and nearly fanatic in attempts to preserve the disunity in the church? Luther's goal was correction, not schism. The confessions, particularly Augustana, were intended to be reconciling documents.
Do you believe that every single dispute, situation, theological argument, biblical interpretation, and ecclesial structure is exactly, precisely, and immutably as it was in 1580?
Do you believe that the words spoken then - to a particular situation - are the final words to be spoken about faith and life and the Church? Can you possibly be that arrogant about our particular family of faith?
Arrogance cuts both ways.  Can it be possible, just a teensy bit possible, that there is a tiny bit of arrogance involved in dismissing the Confessions as in part out of date and their teachings dispensable in the face of new agreements that broaden interpretations so that everybody can agree with new statements, though each understanding them in their own way?


You are correct, Luther did not want schism, nor did he want the church further splintered among Awinglians, Lutherans and Anabaptists, etc.   Yet his and the other Reformers answer was not to make statements of belief vague enough that everybody could find a meaning in them that they could agree to.  One reformer made an attempt at that and his attempt was roundly rejected, Philip Melanchthon. 


Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 11:54:11 AM


In reading this, it struck me that in another discussion - on Romans 7 - that we confess that sin continue to reign in our lives; but then we seem to ignore that when talking about creeds and confessions. Wasn't the same sin Paul and we deal with present in those who composed those documents? Isn't it then possible that sinful motivations were also part of those confessions we hold so dear - and, perhaps through the Law we recognize the sin that's in them, repent, and move on?


You've already indicated where part of the Athanasian Creed needs to be discarded.  Where else do you find sinful motivations and elements that need to be redacted from the Confessions so that we can move on to the bright ecumenical future you hold so dear?


I've said that the troublesome section of the Athanasian Creed needs to be properly understood. It's the understanding that's more important than the words. Part of the sinfulness of our confessions is that we hold on to them so tightly that they become our means of salvation, e.g., if you don't believe as we do (as defined by our confessions,) you are not saved or your faith is defective or heterodox. Part of our sinfulness is that we have let our Confessions thwart Jesus' prayer that we all be one. It has been used as a tool of division - it a similar way to Paul's critique of the divisions in Corinth: we follow Luther, we follow Calvin, we follow the Pope, etc.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 11:55:36 AM
Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?


It depends if you want to keep the body of Christ splintered or work towards the unity Jesus prayed for.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 10, 2017, 11:56:12 AM
Pastor Fienen writes (as usual):
So, we should acknowledge, respect and follow the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into JDDJ and other such agreements.  Yet the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into the Lutheran Confessions (not to mention the willingness of the Confessors to defenf their confessionat risk of their lives) can be dismissed with an airy "We're not in the 1580's anymore." 
I comment (as usual with with a sigh):
You petulantly overstate once again. No, we do not "dismiss" the confessions, nor do we dishonor those who prepared them. But it is not 1580, either in the world or in the church. Their is nothing "airy" about my statement. It is just plain common sense.

Pastor Fienen writes:
How long before JDDJ becomes outdated and unfashionable and can be dismissed with a "That's so 20th Century, we aren't 20th Century people anymore."?
I comment:
Actually, I do hope that this document becomes "outdated," that is, replaced by an agreement that brings us even closer together in the body of Christ. Don't you?

Pastor Fienen writes:
When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?
I comment:
Well, didn't that first confession of faith, "Jesus is Lord," fade with the development of the creeds.

Pastor Fienen:
At 500 years perhaps the real celebration needs to be the realization that Luther and the Reformers ars far past their sell by date.  We are, or at least some of us are, far wiser, more knowledgeable, and sophisticated than those old drunken German peasants.
Me:
More silly overstatement. It has nothing to do with wisdom, knowledge or sophistication or sobriety. It has to do with healing, fellowship, cooperation, mission and proclamation in the Body of Christ, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Why are you so persistent and nearly fanatic in attempts to preserve the disunity in the church? Luther's goal was correction, not schism. The confessions, particularly Augustana, were intended to be reconciling documents.
Do you believe that every single dispute, situation, theological argument, biblical interpretation, and ecclesial structure is exactly, precisely, and immutably as it was in 1580?
Do you believe that the words spoken then - to a particular situation - are the final words to be spoken about faith and life and the Church? Can you possibly be that arrogant about our particular family of faith?


In reading this, it struck me that in another discussion - on Romans 7 - that we confess that sin continue to reign in our lives; but then we seem to ignore that when talking about creeds and confessions. Wasn't the same sin Paul and we deal with present in those who composed those documents? Isn't it then possible that sinful motivations were also part of those confessions we hold so dear - and, perhaps through the Law we recognize the sin that's in them, repent, and move on?

Not sure where this is coming from.  Are you saying that one who confesses "Jesus is Lord" confesses at the same time that they are sinners ?  Confession in the context of "Jesus is Lord" in Romans 10 means that one is out of oneself and into their Master and Lord.  In some sense homologeo (NT Greek for Confession) has that meansing of same-saying, ie. that when one confesses "Jesus is Lord" is saying at the same time that there is no other who is Master and Lord of one's life, ie. I and my neighbor are sinners.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Dan Fienen on July 10, 2017, 11:58:16 AM


Pastor Fienen writes:
When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?
I comment:
Well, didn't that first confession of faith, "Jesus is Lord," fade with the development of the creeds.


No, it didn't.

One probably ought not seek to overcome overstatement with different overstatement.


Yet, "Jesus is Lord" does not occur in ELW's communion liturgies.
Well, if the ELW doesn't use it, how can it be a confession of faith.  ELW being the last word in Lutheran worship and piety.  ??? "Jesus is Lord" fell out of regular use as other creeds amplified that confession and dealt with questions that "Jesus is Lord" did not address.  But it has never been rejected as no longer a correct confession of the faith.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 10, 2017, 11:58:31 AM
Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?


It depends if you want to keep the body of Christ splintered or work towards the unity Jesus prayed for.


Perhaps it is Rome (Papacy) which is/has the problem.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 10, 2017, 12:05:58 PM

Pastor Fienen writes:
When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?
I comment:
Well, didn't that first confession of faith, "Jesus is Lord," fade with the development of the creeds.


No, it didn't.

One probably ought not seek to overcome overstatement with different overstatement.


Yet, "Jesus is Lord" does not occur in ELW's communion liturgies.

And yet many of our collects/prayers of the day even in ELW conclude with "...through Christ OUR LORD."  Retaining these statements in our prayers maintains that "Jesus is Lord" in that everything we have, do and are goes through Jesus to the Father.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 12:19:46 PM
Pastor Fienen writes (as usual):
So, we should acknowledge, respect and follow the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into JDDJ and other such agreements.  Yet the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into the Lutheran Confessions (not to mention the willingness of the Confessors to defenf their confessionat risk of their lives) can be dismissed with an airy "We're not in the 1580's anymore." 
I comment (as usual with with a sigh):
You petulantly overstate once again. No, we do not "dismiss" the confessions, nor do we dishonor those who prepared them. But it is not 1580, either in the world or in the church. Their is nothing "airy" about my statement. It is just plain common sense.

Pastor Fienen writes:
How long before JDDJ becomes outdated and unfashionable and can be dismissed with a "That's so 20th Century, we aren't 20th Century people anymore."?
I comment:
Actually, I do hope that this document becomes "outdated," that is, replaced by an agreement that brings us even closer together in the body of Christ. Don't you?

Pastor Fienen writes:
When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?
I comment:
Well, didn't that first confession of faith, "Jesus is Lord," fade with the development of the creeds.

Pastor Fienen:
At 500 years perhaps the real celebration needs to be the realization that Luther and the Reformers ars far past their sell by date.  We are, or at least some of us are, far wiser, more knowledgeable, and sophisticated than those old drunken German peasants.
Me:
More silly overstatement. It has nothing to do with wisdom, knowledge or sophistication or sobriety. It has to do with healing, fellowship, cooperation, mission and proclamation in the Body of Christ, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Why are you so persistent and nearly fanatic in attempts to preserve the disunity in the church? Luther's goal was correction, not schism. The confessions, particularly Augustana, were intended to be reconciling documents.
Do you believe that every single dispute, situation, theological argument, biblical interpretation, and ecclesial structure is exactly, precisely, and immutably as it was in 1580?
Do you believe that the words spoken then - to a particular situation - are the final words to be spoken about faith and life and the Church? Can you possibly be that arrogant about our particular family of faith?


In reading this, it struck me that in another discussion - on Romans 7 - that we confess that sin continue to reign in our lives; but then we seem to ignore that when talking about creeds and confessions. Wasn't the same sin Paul and we deal with present in those who composed those documents? Isn't it then possible that sinful motivations were also part of those confessions we hold so dear - and, perhaps through the Law we recognize the sin that's in them, repent, and move on?

Not sure where this is coming from.  Are you saying that one who confesses "Jesus is Lord" confesses at the same time that they are sinners ?  Confession in the context of "Jesus is Lord" in Romans 10 means that one is out of oneself and into their Master and Lord.  In some sense homologeo (NT Greek for Confession) has that meansing of same-saying, ie. that when one confesses "Jesus is Lord" is saying at the same time that there is no other who is Master and Lord of one's life, I and my neighbor are sinners.


The confession: Κύριος Ἰησοῦς (1 Cor 12:3) is biblical. It is the Word of God. The confessions in the Book of Concord are seen as the human words - words composed by sinful human beings.


I believe that the biblical confession, Κύριος Ἰησοῦς, from the LXX world (which was primary the Christian Bible until the Vulgate based on the Hebrew, says even more than you state. κύριος was the LXX's translation of יהוה. Thus, for those early Christians, Κύριος Ἰησοῦς is declaring that Jesus is יהוה, the particular God revealed to Moses and throughout the Old Testament.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 12:21:02 PM
Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?


It depends if you want to keep the body of Christ splintered or work towards the unity Jesus prayed for.


Perhaps it is Rome (Papacy) which is/has the problem.


Their doctrines, like ours, are created by believers afflicted with the sin as Paul relates in Romans 7.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 12:26:55 PM


Pastor Fienen writes:
When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?
I comment:
Well, didn't that first confession of faith, "Jesus is Lord," fade with the development of the creeds.


No, it didn't.

One probably ought not seek to overcome overstatement with different overstatement.


Yet, "Jesus is Lord" does not occur in ELW's communion liturgies.
Well, if the ELW doesn't use it, how can it be a confession of faith.  ELW being the last word in Lutheran worship and piety.  ??? "Jesus is Lord" fell out of regular use as other creeds amplified that confession and dealt with questions that "Jesus is Lord" did not address.  But it has never been rejected as no longer a correct confession of the faith.


I never said that it had been rejected. It fell out of use. It wasn't seen as sufficient to properly understanding of Jesus. Would "I'm baptized and believe that Jesus is Lord," be a sufficient confession for entrance to the Table in an LCMS congregation?
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 10, 2017, 12:29:53 PM
Pastor Fienen writes (as usual):
So, we should acknowledge, respect and follow the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into JDDJ and other such agreements.  Yet the years of study, dialogue and theological reasoning that went into the Lutheran Confessions (not to mention the willingness of the Confessors to defenf their confessionat risk of their lives) can be dismissed with an airy "We're not in the 1580's anymore." 
I comment (as usual with with a sigh):
You petulantly overstate once again. No, we do not "dismiss" the confessions, nor do we dishonor those who prepared them. But it is not 1580, either in the world or in the church. Their is nothing "airy" about my statement. It is just plain common sense.

Pastor Fienen writes:
How long before JDDJ becomes outdated and unfashionable and can be dismissed with a "That's so 20th Century, we aren't 20th Century people anymore."?
I comment:
Actually, I do hope that this document becomes "outdated," that is, replaced by an agreement that brings us even closer together in the body of Christ. Don't you?

Pastor Fienen writes:
When did we realize that theology should come with a sell by date?
I comment:
Well, didn't that first confession of faith, "Jesus is Lord," fade with the development of the creeds.

Pastor Fienen:
At 500 years perhaps the real celebration needs to be the realization that Luther and the Reformers ars far past their sell by date.  We are, or at least some of us are, far wiser, more knowledgeable, and sophisticated than those old drunken German peasants.
Me:
More silly overstatement. It has nothing to do with wisdom, knowledge or sophistication or sobriety. It has to do with healing, fellowship, cooperation, mission and proclamation in the Body of Christ, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Why are you so persistent and nearly fanatic in attempts to preserve the disunity in the church? Luther's goal was correction, not schism. The confessions, particularly Augustana, were intended to be reconciling documents.
Do you believe that every single dispute, situation, theological argument, biblical interpretation, and ecclesial structure is exactly, precisely, and immutably as it was in 1580?
Do you believe that the words spoken then - to a particular situation - are the final words to be spoken about faith and life and the Church? Can you possibly be that arrogant about our particular family of faith?


In reading this, it struck me that in another discussion - on Romans 7 - that we confess that sin continue to reign in our lives; but then we seem to ignore that when talking about creeds and confessions. Wasn't the same sin Paul and we deal with present in those who composed those documents? Isn't it then possible that sinful motivations were also part of those confessions we hold so dear - and, perhaps through the Law we recognize the sin that's in them, repent, and move on?

Not sure where this is coming from.  Are you saying that one who confesses "Jesus is Lord" confesses at the same time that they are sinners ?  Confession in the context of "Jesus is Lord" in Romans 10 means that one is out of oneself and into their Master and Lord.  In some sense homologeo (NT Greek for Confession) has that meansing of same-saying, ie. that when one confesses "Jesus is Lord" is saying at the same time that there is no other who is Master and Lord of one's life, I and my neighbor are sinners.


The confession: Κύριος Ἰησοῦς (1 Cor 12:3) is biblical. It is the Word of God. The confessions in the Book of Concord are seen as the human words - words composed by sinful human beings.


I believe that the biblical confession, Κύριος Ἰησοῦς, from the LXX world (which was primary the Christian Bible until the Vulgate based on the Hebrew, says even more than you state. κύριος was the LXX's translation of יהוה. Thus, for those early Christians, Κύριος Ἰησοῦς is declaring that Jesus is יהוה, the particular God revealed to Moses and throughout the Old Testament.


Perhaps 1 Cor 12 passage is clearer than Romans 10 in that St. Paul confirms that the confession coming forth from the mouth of the sinner, "Jesus is Lord.."  testifies to God's power to destroy sin at that moment because no one, absolutely no one who confesses "Jesus is Lord" cannot say this EXCEPT by the Holy Spirit! 

Nice!
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 10, 2017, 12:31:02 PM
Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?


It depends if you want to keep the body of Christ splintered or work towards the unity Jesus prayed for.


Perhaps it is Rome (Papacy) which is/has the problem.


Their doctrines, like ours, are created by believers afflicted with the sin as Paul relates in Romans 7.

Yes, but nonetheless they attempt to clarify the treasure.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 12:33:05 PM
Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?


It depends if you want to keep the body of Christ splintered or work towards the unity Jesus prayed for.


Perhaps it is Rome (Papacy) which is/has the problem.


Their doctrines, like ours, are created by believers afflicted with the sin as Paul relates in Romans 7.

Yes, but nonetheless they attempt to clarify the treasure.


Certainly - and often in opposition to falsehoods that they saw present at the time.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 10, 2017, 12:49:26 PM
Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?


It depends if you want to keep the body of Christ splintered or work towards the unity Jesus prayed for.


Perhaps it is Rome (Papacy) which is/has the problem.


Their doctrines, like ours, are created by believers afflicted with the sin as Paul relates in Romans 7.

Yes, but nonetheless they attempt to clarify the treasure.


Certainly - and often in opposition to falsehoods that they saw present at the time.

I understand that the disunity in the church is a mark of the stumbling over the stumbling stone, the offense which is basic to the response to the Gospel as we read in 1 Cor.  Jesus in John's Gospel prayed for unity among believers which surely is concretely there in the power of the Holy Spirit even now through word and sacrament...but only there.  Perhaps Jesus' prayer is more eschatalogical in that it will come about because God desires it.  Our dialogues can only prepare for that while never achieving it.  I think we overstep God's boundary when we try to make unity happen, ie. using JDDJ as a tool for building a foundation based on our definitions without God's approval.  God's "No" still applies.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 02:33:33 PM
Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?


It depends if you want to keep the body of Christ splintered or work towards the unity Jesus prayed for.


Perhaps it is Rome (Papacy) which is/has the problem.


Their doctrines, like ours, are created by believers afflicted with the sin as Paul relates in Romans 7.

Yes, but nonetheless they attempt to clarify the treasure.


Certainly - and often in opposition to falsehoods that they saw present at the time.

I understand that the disunity in the church is a mark of the stumbling over the stumbling stone, the offense which is basic to the response to the Gospel as we read in 1 Cor.  Jesus in John's Gospel prayed for unity among believers which surely is concretely there in the power of the Holy Spirit even now through word and sacrament...but only there.  Perhaps Jesus' prayer is more eschatalogical in that it will come about because God desires it.  Our dialogues can only prepare for that while never achieving it.  I think we overstep God's boundary when we try to make unity happen, ie. using JDDJ as a tool for building a foundation based on our definitions without God's approval.  God's "No" still applies.


In 1 Corinthians the unity is created by sharing in the one loaf and one cup. "We who are many are one body." It may that it's our own sinfulness that requires the paperwork, of our full communion agreements, rather than just celebrating the sacrament together as the one family of God. The church has not fallen apart when LCMS clergy have open communion, or Roman Catholics commune in Lutheran congregations, or an RCC priest communes Lutherans in his parish. When we celebrate our unity through the sacrament in ways contrary to our paperwork, does that bring God's judgment or God's blessings? I think God is pleased when his children share his sacred meal together.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 10, 2017, 02:35:01 PM
Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?


It depends if you want to keep the body of Christ splintered or work towards the unity Jesus prayed for.


Perhaps it is Rome (Papacy) which is/has the problem.


Their doctrines, like ours, are created by believers afflicted with the sin as Paul relates in Romans 7.

Yes, but nonetheless they attempt to clarify the treasure.


Certainly - and often in opposition to falsehoods that they saw present at the time.

I understand that the disunity in the church is a mark of the stumbling over the stumbling stone, the offense which is basic to the response to the Gospel as we read in 1 Cor.  Jesus in John's Gospel prayed for unity among believers which surely is concretely there in the power of the Holy Spirit even now through word and sacrament...but only there.  Perhaps Jesus' prayer is more eschatalogical in that it will come about because God desires it.  Our dialogues can only prepare for that while never achieving it.  I think we overstep God's boundary when we try to make unity happen, ie. using JDDJ as a tool for building a foundation based on our definitions without God's approval.  God's "No" still applies.


I am certain that John meant something more than just an eschatological event. The disciples' love for one another is our witness to the world - in the here and now - that we are Jesus' disciples. Our disunity offers a different witness.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: readselerttoo on July 10, 2017, 03:01:17 PM
Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?


It depends if you want to keep the body of Christ splintered or work towards the unity Jesus prayed for.


Perhaps it is Rome (Papacy) which is/has the problem.


Their doctrines, like ours, are created by believers afflicted with the sin as Paul relates in Romans 7.

Yes, but nonetheless they attempt to clarify the treasure.


Certainly - and often in opposition to falsehoods that they saw present at the time.

I understand that the disunity in the church is a mark of the stumbling over the stumbling stone, the offense which is basic to the response to the Gospel as we read in 1 Cor.  Jesus in John's Gospel prayed for unity among believers which surely is concretely there in the power of the Holy Spirit even now through word and sacrament...but only there.  Perhaps Jesus' prayer is more eschatalogical in that it will come about because God desires it.  Our dialogues can only prepare for that while never achieving it.  I think we overstep God's boundary when we try to make unity happen, ie. using JDDJ as a tool for building a foundation based on our definitions without God's approval.  God's "No" still applies.


I am certain that John meant something more than just an eschatological event. The disciples' love for one another is our witness to the world - in the here and now - that we are Jesus' disciples. Our disunity offers a different witness.

And yet said unity remains actual.  Yes.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Charles Austin on July 10, 2017, 08:11:26 PM
Pastor Fienen persists (As we knew he would):
Arrogance cuts both ways.  Can it be possible, just a teensy bit possible, that there is a tiny bit of arrogance involved in dismissing the Confessions as in part out of date and their teachings dispensable in the face of new agreements that broaden interpretations so that everybody can agree with new statements, though each understanding them in their own way?

I comment:
No. No. And No. No one says the confessions are "dispensable" (or "disposable"?). No one says that everyone can understand anything in "their own way."
I really really really think you need to spend some serious time and study of how ecumenical theological dialogue works and how agreements are constructed. And I fear that you may never grasp the nature of these ecumenical concords because of your lack of experience and your continuing assertion that the Lutheran confessions are the last word in theology for all the ages.

Pastor Fienen:
You are correct, Luther did not want schism, nor did he want the church further splintered among Awinglians, Lutherans and Anabaptists, etc.   Yet his and the other Reformers answer was not to make statements of belief vague enough that everybody could find a meaning in them that they could agree to.  One reformer made an attempt at that and his attempt was roundly rejected, Philip Melanchthon.
I comment:
See above. Is it your view that our agreements are "vague" so that everyone can just find something to agree with? That is another indication that you have not followed the dialogue process or studied the agreements.

Pastor Fienen:
Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?
I comment:
Well, you obviously won't. And neither will we; although the idea of crafting a new confession in light of our time is - at times - appealing. But of course in your view, nothing new can be said in theology since 1580.
I ask again. Are you so willing to cling to a certain "Lutheran" formula for theology that you will automatically resist any ecumenical statement that is not simply that "Lutheran" formula stated again? Do you simply reject nearly 50 years of Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogues (with the LCMS part of those dialogues for a good portion of that time) and say nothing has changed since Augsburg or Trent?
Pastor Rahn has apparently decided that his views squish those views reached by our theologians, evaluated by our people and put into action as expressed in our ecumenical conclusions.
I guess it is your view that all those words written up to 1580 override anything that could be written since.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Steven Tibbetts on July 10, 2017, 09:15:09 PM

Yet, "Jesus is Lord" does not occur in ELW's communion liturgies.

It's next to the Athanasian Creed.

Zip+
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Steven Tibbetts on July 10, 2017, 09:21:44 PM
Part of the sinfulness of our confessions is that we hold on to them so tightly that they become our means of salvation, e.g., if you don't believe as we do (as defined by our confessions,) you are not saved or your faith is defective or heterodox.


I'm just going to let that sink in deeply.

Kyrie eleison...
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Steven Tibbetts on July 10, 2017, 09:25:01 PM
... because no one, absolutely no one who confesses "Jesus is Lord" cannot say this EXCEPT by the Holy Spirit! 


And, as Brian insists, it's not said in ELW.   ;)
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Dan Fienen on July 10, 2017, 10:04:02 PM
Well, you obviously won't. And neither will we; although the idea of crafting a new confession in light of our time is - at times - appealing. But of course in your view, nothing new can be said in theology since 1580.
I ask again. Are you so willing to cling to a certain "Lutheran" formula for theology that you will automatically resist any ecumenical statement that is not simply that "Lutheran" formula stated again? Do you simply reject nearly 50 years of Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogues (with the LCMS part of those dialogues for a good portion of that time) and say nothing has changed since Augsburg or Trent?
Pastor Rahn has apparently decided that his views squish those views reached by our theologians, evaluated by our people and put into action as expressed in our ecumenical conclusions.
I guess it is your view that all those words written up to 1580 override anything that could be written since.
Ironic historical note.  Back in the 70s during the "Battle for the Bible" Conservatives/Traditionalists wrote about the need for new doctrinal statements about the Bible since the issues concerning Scripture being discussed/debated at that time were not even under consideration at the time of the Reformation and the writing of the original confessions.

It was the Moderates/Revisionists that threw a fit and insisted that nothing could now be added or changed about the 1580 Confessions.  They were fixed as is.

That was then, this is now.  I guess it does all depend on whose ox is being gored.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Charles Austin on July 10, 2017, 11:13:04 PM
 You are being intentionally slow. You're not slow. You are not dense.  No one is adding to or changing the confessions of the 16th century. They stay as they are.
 It is not 1580. And, BTW, it is not 1972 either.
 Are you going to answer any of my questions?
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: SomeoneWrites on July 10, 2017, 11:17:11 PM
Pastor Fienen persists (As we knew he would):
Arrogance cuts both ways.  Can it be possible, just a teensy bit possible, that there is a tiny bit of arrogance involved in dismissing the Confessions as in part out of date and their teachings dispensable in the face of new agreements that broaden interpretations so that everybody can agree with new statements, though each understanding them in their own way?

I comment:
No. No. And No. No one says the confessions are "dispensable" (or "disposable"?). No one says that everyone can understand anything in "their own way."
I really really really think you need to spend some serious time and study of how ecumenical theological dialogue works and how agreements are constructed. And I fear that you may never grasp the nature of these ecumenical concords because of your lack of experience and your continuing assertion that the Lutheran confessions are the last word in theology for all the ages.

Pastor Fienen:
You are correct, Luther did not want schism, nor did he want the church further splintered among Awinglians, Lutherans and Anabaptists, etc.   Yet his and the other Reformers answer was not to make statements of belief vague enough that everybody could find a meaning in them that they could agree to.  One reformer made an attempt at that and his attempt was roundly rejected, Philip Melanchthon.
I comment:
See above. Is it your view that our agreements are "vague" so that everyone can just find something to agree with? That is another indication that you have not followed the dialogue process or studied the agreements.

Pastor Fienen:
Are we now to reedit and correct Article IV of the Augustana and Apology according to JDDJ?
I comment:
Well, you obviously won't. And neither will we; although the idea of crafting a new confession in light of our time is - at times - appealing. But of course in your view, nothing new can be said in theology since 1580.
I ask again. Are you so willing to cling to a certain "Lutheran" formula for theology that you will automatically resist any ecumenical statement that is not simply that "Lutheran" formula stated again? Do you simply reject nearly 50 years of Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogues (with the LCMS part of those dialogues for a good portion of that time) and say nothing has changed since Augsburg or Trent?
Pastor Rahn has apparently decided that his views squish those views reached by our theologians, evaluated by our people and put into action as expressed in our ecumenical conclusions.
I guess it is your view that all those words written up to 1580 override anything that could be written since.

I think about all this a lot.

I don't see any way that the LCMS could correct errors in the BoC.  On the other hand, I don't see the ELCA fully consistent with the BoC, at least in an exegesis consistent with Luther and the Reformers.  I fully haven't grasped why either haven't produced a new such document. 
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Dan Fienen on July 11, 2017, 11:33:52 AM

Pastor Fienen persists (As we knew he would):


Please make up your mind.  Do you want me to shut up or speak my mind?  Here you snidely jab at my continuing in the conversation.  Later:


Are you going to answer any of my questions?


Oh, I get it, you want to call me on the carpet and call me to account, you just want me to give up on stating by opinion.  After all, when you want my opinion you'll give it to me.


I ask again. Are you so willing to cling to a certain "Lutheran" formula for theology that you will automatically resist any ecumenical statement that is not simply that "Lutheran" formula stated again? Do you simply reject nearly 50 years of Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogues (with the LCMS part of those dialogues for a good portion of that time) and say nothing has changed since Augsburg or Trent?
I guess it is your view that all those words written up to 1580 override anything that could be written since.


You guess wrong.  Times have changed and neither the Roman Catholic Church nor Lutheran Churches are the same now as they were in 1580.  Much has changed in the RCC since 1580, much of it for the better.  There is much room for rapprochement.  Lutheran Churches have splintered since 1580.  Theologically some questions between the two church families may have been resolved and each side understands the other better.  New questions have arisen.  Much has changed.


What has not changed is God and His plan for salvation.  It is not up to us to establish unity between our church families at the expense of fudging on God's plan of salvation.


 Sectarianism is to be avoided.  And yes, the LCMS tends towards sectarianism.  On the other hand, so is doctrinal indifference.  From where we stand, that seems to be an every present temptation for the ELCA.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on July 11, 2017, 04:10:50 PM
Lutheran Churches have splintered since 1580.  Theologically some questions between the two church families may have been resolved and each side understands the other better.  New questions have arisen.  Much has changed.


I believe that Lutherans were already splintered prior to 1580. The Formula of Concord was an attempt to bring concord to the different Lutheran groups. It didn't succeed.
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: gan ainm on July 17, 2017, 07:29:05 AM
The World Communion of Reformed Churches Endorses the Joint Declaration on Justification - Dr. Albert Collver,  Director of Church Relations for the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod

A redefinition of justification doctrine makes "agreements" possible.  The episode is worth listening to.

http://issuesetc.org/2017/07/07/1881-the-world-communion-of-reformed-churches-endorses-the-joint-declaration-on-justification-dr-al-collver-7717/
Title: Re: Ecumenical News
Post by: Dave Benke on July 17, 2017, 03:25:05 PM
Well, you obviously won't. And neither will we; although the idea of crafting a new confession in light of our time is - at times - appealing. But of course in your view, nothing new can be said in theology since 1580.
I ask again. Are you so willing to cling to a certain "Lutheran" formula for theology that you will automatically resist any ecumenical statement that is not simply that "Lutheran" formula stated again? Do you simply reject nearly 50 years of Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogues (with the LCMS part of those dialogues for a good portion of that time) and say nothing has changed since Augsburg or Trent?
Pastor Rahn has apparently decided that his views squish those views reached by our theologians, evaluated by our people and put into action as expressed in our ecumenical conclusions.
I guess it is your view that all those words written up to 1580 override anything that could be written since.
Ironic historical note.  Back in the 70s during the "Battle for the Bible" Conservatives/Traditionalists wrote about the need for new doctrinal statements about the Bible since the issues concerning Scripture being discussed/debated at that time were not even under consideration at the time of the Reformation and the writing of the original confessions.

It was the Moderates/Revisionists that threw a fit and insisted that nothing could now be added or changed about the 1580 Confessions.  They were fixed as is.

That was then, this is now.  I guess it does all depend on whose ox is being gored.

Checking in on this.  Those who subscribe to the Confessions "quatenus," or insofar as they are in agreement with Scripture, would seem to me to be far more open to new confessional statements per se, because even our core confession could have gotten it wrong.  Why not try another one? 

However, those who subscribe in a "quia," or "because" the Confessional documents are in accordance with Scripture, would seem to me to be less open to a new confessional statement.  I suppose the reason it drew a response back in the day is because the new confession would have to be agreed to in a "quia" way as well.  I don't know if folks are ready at this phase of the Lutheran experiment for that kind of decisional agita. 

Dave Benke