2012 Synod on Evangelisation....wish we could piggyback

[Dave_Poedel]

Reading through this press release, I find that other than a reference to "perpetuate the sacrifice....", there is nothing that we as Lutherans could not sign on to.  Face it, Rome speaks our language much better than Ablaze! or any Evangelical program.


Permalink: http://www.zenit.org/article-30749?l=english
Pontiff Announces New Evangelization Synod

Will Be Held in 2012

VATICAN CITY, OCT. 24, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI announced today the theme for the next general assembly of the Synod of Bishops: The new evangelization.

The Pope made the announcement today at the closing Mass of the Special Assembly for the Middle East of the Synod of Bishops, and repeated it before praying the Angelus at midday with those gathered in St. Peter's Square.

The next Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops will be held in 2012, and will be dedicated to the theme "The New Evangelization for the Transmission of the Christian Faith," the Pontiff said.

Noting that today marked not only the end of the Mideast synod, which considered the theme "Communion and Witness," but also World Mission Sunday, which considered the theme "The Building of Ecclesial Communion is the Key to Mission," the Holy Father called attention to the similarities between the themes.

"Both invite us to look upon the Church as a mystery of communion that, by its nature, is destined for the whole person, and to all people," he said.

Quoting Pope Paul VI, he added, "The Church exists to evangelize, that is to say, to preach and to teach, to be the channel of the gift of grace, to reconcile sinners with God, to perpetuate the sacrifice of Christ in the Holy Mass, which is the memorial of his death and of his glorious resurrection."

"The missionary task," Benedict XVI reflected, "is not to bring about revolution in the world but to transfigure it, drawing power from Jesus Christ who 'convokes us at the table of his Word and Eucharist, to taste the gift of his Presence, to form ourselves in his school and live more and more consciously united to him, Master and Lord.'"

[David M. Frye, OblSB]

Face it, Rome speaks our language much better than Ablaze! or any Evangelical program.

If Rome speaks in ways that subject proclamation to the "metalinguistic stipulation" of "justification by faith" (Gritsch and Jenson), is that reason enough to hoist the "Mission Accomplished" banner atop the almost five-hundred-year Reformation project? Time to go home?

[Team Hesse]

Quoting Pope Paul VI, he added, "The Church exists to evangelize, that is to say, to preach and to teach, to be the channel of the gift of grace, to reconcile sinners with God, to perpetuate the sacrifice of Christ in the Holy Mass, which is the memorial of his death and of his glorious resurrection."

"The missionary task," Benedict XVI reflected, "is not to bring about revolution in the world but to transfigure it, drawing power from Jesus Christ who 'convokes us at the table of his Word and Eucharist, to taste the gift of his Presence, to form ourselves in his school and live more and more consciously united to him, Master and Lord.'"

Wow, the poor old boy just doesn't understand. The Old Adam is alive and still refusing to die to his Lord. sigh  So many souls to reach, so little time!

Lou

[ptmccain]

Face it, Rome speaks our language much better than Ablaze! or any Evangelical program.

If Rome speaks in ways that subject proclamation to the "metalinguistic stipulation" of "justification by faith" (Gritsch and Jenson), is that reason enough to hoist the "Mission Accomplished" banner atop the almost five-hundred-year Reformation project? Time to go home?

But Rome does not "speak our language" - which is to say, still does not confess the Biblical Gospel of Christ in a manner faithful to Holy Scripture. Rome is much nicer, there have been improvements, etc. but Rome is still Rome. It has not, unlike modern liberal Lutherans, compromised, or given up, its theological heritage for the sake of ecumenical compromise. The Canons of the Council of Trent regarding justification are still very much in full force and, as an examination of the Catechism of the Catholic Church demonstrates, the Canons of Trent on justification are still very much the foundation of Rome's understanding of the Gospel.

[Dave_Poedel]

Tsk, Tsk.....no vision, no progress.  Until we recognize that WE are catholics in exile, and our home on this earth is in Rome, and that she will never use our language and describe things exactly as we do....well, we'll just remain a little sectarian group triumphalist in our excellent Theology of the Cross......and no one will hear us, because we are not willing to listen.  No, we hoist our 500 year old flag and circle the wagons.  No one hears us, because our language is our own and we only talk to ourselves......no one listens because we are so confident that we have everything exactly correct that we have no need to listen.

I understand completely.  Y'all continue talking to yourselves, a couple of us are looking outside the circle to see who are friends are or could be. Perhaps y'all are right, and I am wrong.  I'm willing to be proven wrong and will repent when that happens......but I'm seeing another vision for the future........don't know where it will lead.......in the meantime, back to my Call to proclaim Christ and Him crucified and risen, and to feed His sheep on Word and sacrament........Amen, come Lord Jesus.

[ptmccain]

We are not catholics in "exile." We are catholic Christians, just not *Roman* Catholic christians.

As I've said before, what is catholic is not necessarily Roman, and what is uniquely Roman, in terms of doctrine, most surely is *not* catholic.

We continue to pray for our erring brethren in the Roman Church, asking that God would lead them back to the splendor of truth confessed in the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.

But you probably knew I would say that.

 

[Weedon]

Random thought of the day:  I wonder if there hasn't in fact been significant change in Rome due to the intentional (and growing) movement toward Biblical categories and away from scholastic categories.  Yes, beyond shadow of doubt, Rome's own way of thinking will never permit her to say Trent was wrong, but she seems these days to speak a different language than the scholastic language codified supremely in that council and I am sure that's a good thing.  I find myself swinging here between Padre Dave and Paul.  I think there has been some good progress in many areas, and I attribute much of it to a re-engagement with the source of theology:  the Sacred Scriptures.  Benedict's own approach especially seems quite content to allow the Scriptures to supply the categories of his thought and thus I tend to find much of his thought quite congenial to our Lutheran heritage.  He's about as near to us as I've ever read any Roman theologian come.  (Schmemann, by the way, approaches us in a similar way on the Orthodox side).  That's encouraging and hopeful, but it's still not quite there.  Benedict, after all, doesn't seem opposed to, um, INDULGENCES!  Grr.

[efretheim]

Random thought of the day:  I wonder if there hasn't in fact been significant change in Rome due to the intentional (and growing) movement toward Biblical categories and away from scholastic categories.  Yes, beyond shadow of doubt, Rome's own way of thinking will never permit her to say Trent was wrong, but she seems these days to speak a different language than the scholastic language codified supremely in that council and I am sure that's a good thing.  I find myself swinging here between Padre Dave and Paul.  I think there has been some good progress in many areas, and I attribute much of it to a re-engagement with the source of theology:  the Sacred Scriptures.  Benedict's own approach especially seems quite content to allow the Scriptures to supply the categories of his thought and thus I tend to find much of his thought quite congenial to our Lutheran heritage.  He's about as near to us as I've ever read any Roman theologian come.  (Schmemann, by the way, approaches us in a similar way on the Orthodox side).  That's encouraging and hopeful, but it's still not quite there.  Benedict, after all, doesn't seem opposed to, um, INDULGENCES!  Grr.

One wonders also if whether it is nessecary for the Roman Catholic Church to wholely embrace Lutheran theology, or if it is sufficient to allow Lutheran theology to flourish within the boundaries of the Roman Catholic Church and actively participate on the debate and shaping of theology of the Church, especially as long as there is no rejection of authorative statements from the scriptures and traditional understandings.  I.e. could this be a real case for bound conscious, but one where the discenters are not forced into silence, but allowed to preach against indulgences within the boundaries of the RC church?

[Weedon]

Erik,

It is an interesting speculation.  Certainly the Reformers originally asked for no more; Trent (which put them under a number of anthemas) changed the field a bit. 

The difficulty, as I see it, is the lack of foundation in the Scriptures and in the early fathers for some of this, and perhaps digging down to the root of the indulgence matter, even though the Lutheran Confessors seem to accept the notion of Christ's merit, we have to ask where this notion itself arises.  I am not certain, but I know that it early appeared in the Roman Canon and from that seems to have become rather a fixed piece of Western thinking.  But where in Scripture do we have anything approximating this merit?  Maybe Jerome rendered some Greek term with meritum in the Vulgate?  I'm not sure we've exactly solved anything by writing out the merits of the saints (which Rome quickly confesses are merits of Christ's life IN the saints).  Whence merit at all?

[pr dtp]

Somewhat appropos - given the week and the discussion:


161   Is It Right to Say that We are Justified by Faith Alone?

Absolutely. For in this article Scripture from time to time uses, repeats, and emphasizes exclusive particles, which are, e.g., freely by grace, Ro 3:24; Eph 2:8; according to His grace and mercy, 2 Ti 1:9; Tts 3:5; freely, by free gift, [Ger.] ohne Verdienst [without merit], Ro 3:24; not of ourselves, not by works, Eph 2:8–9; without the Law, without works, Ro 3:21, 28; 4:6. All these exclusive particles are comprehended in that one proposition (we are justified by faith alone), and are thereby simply, clearly, and aptly set forth, whence also this proposition was used by nearly all the fathers.

Basil in a homily on humility: This is perfect and unspoiled glorying in God, when one is not exalted because of his own righteousness, but acknowledges that he lacks righteousness and that he is justified alone by faith in Christ.

Hilary on Mt 9: This was forgiven by Christ through faith, because the Law could not yield, for faith alone justifies.

Ambrose on Ro 3: They are justified freely who do nothing, neither give in return; they are justified by faith alone, a gift of God.

The same on the call of the Gentiles: This has been determined by God, that he who believes in Christ is saved without work, receiving remission of sins by faith alone.
Jerome on Ro 10: God justifies alone by faith.  Being justified by faith, we have peace with God.


(Chemnitz, M., & Poellot, L. (1999). Ministry, word, and sacraments : An enchiridion (electronic ed.) (78). St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House.)