Author Topic: Ecumenical News  (Read 5001 times)

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 15014
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Ecumenical News
« Reply #75 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?
Retired ELCA Pastor. Former national staff Lutheran Church in America And the Lutheran world Federation, Geneva. Former journalist. Now retired and living in Minneapolis.

SomeoneWrites

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2596
    • View Profile
Re: Ecumenical News
« Reply #76 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just a teensy bit possible, that there is a tiny bit of arrogance involved in dismissing the Confessions as in part out of date and their teachings dispensable in the face of new agreements that broaden interpretations so that everybody can agree with new statements, though each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. 
LCMS raised
LCMS theology major
LCMS sem grad
Atheist

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13472
    • View Profile
Re: Ecumenical News
« Reply #77 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.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 44618
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: Ecumenical News
« Reply #78 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.
"The church had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

gan ainm

  • Guest
Re: Ecumenical News
« Reply #79 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/

Dave Benke

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13384
    • View Profile
    • Atlantic District, LCMS
Re: Ecumenical News
« Reply #80 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