Author Topic: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy  (Read 21470 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,673
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« on: April 18, 2010, 08:21:59 AM »
I was baptized Lutheran, have Lutheran roots, and have respect for Lutheranism as an attempt to return to the original ways of the church. Lutheranism and Orthodoxy have differences. I believe many tenets can be reconciled, while on other points, should accept the Orthodox way. We Orthodox accept Lutheran baptism as legitimate in the sense that they do not require added baptism, although their method and their understanding of the details of baptism may be mistaken in some way. Further, I think some Scandinavian bishops may have maintained apostolic succesion, even if they do not accept its full importance. So I think the Lutheran church is not completely without grace or legitimacy, and that a reapproachment should be possible between the churches in the future. Of course, people would have to want to get together, and their separation for the last millenium does not make this look likely in the very near future.

LUTHERANISM SHOULD ACCEPT THESE ORTHODOX POSITIONS

1. THE NICENE CREED- Our Statement of Faith.
Lutherans should accept the Nicene Creed in its original form. God the father is the main source, "the Godhead," the father of Jesus, and consequently the source of the Holy Spirit too. The Holy Spirit descended on Jesus at his baptism. The Holy Spirit may now proceed through Jesus as he performed miracles, but its ultimate source is God the father, so the western churches' filioque is misleading. An ecumenical agreement was reached with Orthodox that explained it as the "Holy Spirit which proceeds from the father and through the son." But inventing new words for the Creed are unnecessary. The original one was correct and the western one is misleading. Even the Catholic church allows eastern Catholics to use the original Nicene Creed. Lutheranism complains about the Catholic churches' inventions, so it should give up the invention of the filioque.

2. AUTHORITY OF CHURCH TRADITIONS
Lutheranism rejects church traditions as a form of authority, yet accepts the Bible as infallible. How can you say that the one decision of the church to choose which books are in the Bible is infallible, but all the other teachings of the church lack authority? The Bible itself is a tradition and teaching of the church. They accepted some books and rejected other myth-style gnostic writings. If from the days of the early church when the Bible was written, the Diadochi writings gave instructions on church life, and the church fathers shared teachings interpreting the Bible as they got it two generations removed from Jesus himself, these teachings should have authority. The gospels say Jesus taught many things that simply did not fit into the Bible. How many books would all Jesus' sayings fill? That is another reason why the earliest oral traditions have authority when interpreting important points in the scriptures. First, if you trust the church enough to trust that it can put together an infallible Bible, you should give importance to what they have to say about it. Second, the church fathers writing a few generations after Jesus had oral traditions passed down by the apostles, who had a deeper understanding than the meaning of the Bible's plain words. It's not enough to say my personal interpretation is what's important, not the fathers, because that way everyone can end up with sincere, inspirational interpretations that oppose eachother. Since protestants reject church authority, many churches-Adventists, Puritans, Pentacostals, etc. with many different teachings result.

Unfortunately, I find that Lutherans have an excuse for complaining about the idea of the authority of church traditions. Our teaching is often presented in a very simplified form, accepting the Lutherans', and perhaps Roman Catholic misconceptions of Tradition as "THE FINAL AUTHORITY". This misconception portrays each part of the churches' tradition as infallible, like a pronouncement of the Roman Pope. So if Roman saints like St Augustine develop a doctrine like original sin, or the "Holy Synod of ROCOR" (which rejoined the rest of the Orthodox churches three years ago) develops a doctrine about Tollhouses where demons act as a judge instead of Jesus, then people who accept and fall under the authority of those churches must accept these teachings as the "Final Authority." Lay people cannot disagree or disobey them because they, not personal beliefs, are "final authority."

I strongly suspect that the reality is different. A protestant website claims:
Quote
Kallistos Ware asserts that Tradition includes: (1) the Bible, (2) the Seven Ecumenical Councils and the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, (3) local councils, (4) the Fathers, (5) the liturgy, (6) canon law (officially established church rules governing faith and practice), and (7) icons. In order to avoid conflicting authorities within Tradition, he proposes a "hierarchy" of Tradition within the church. The contemporary church is the final authority in interpreting the Scriptures, the later councils, and the Fathers, while the definitions of the Ecumenical Councils are taken as irrevocable.27 He considers the liturgy and icons beyond any question, while canon law is subject to change by the contemporary church.28

Aside from this quote, my understanding is that the Seven Ecumenical Councils are the only "infallible" decision-making bodies. I would construe Ware's hierarchy to place the sources' authority in that order. I disagree that icons alone are beyond any question, since local councils and the fathers have not approved the icons of Stalin and Ivan the Terrible, whether or not they were blessed by priests. Plus, icons have been written in many different ways, and I would be hard pressed to blindly accept that they are all correct. Instead, the hierarchy of authority is necessary to avoid conflicting authorities, where for example church fathers have been known to disagree on important issues.

Further, I doubt that ecumenical councils themselves are infallible unless they are confirmed by the entirety of the church. I believe there were instances like iconoclasm where later ecumenical councils overturned earlier ones. In conclusion, Lutheranism is wrong to reject church tradition as an important source of authority. Perhaps to emphasize its importance we often say tradition has "final authority." But it would be wrong to say that each of the 7 sources of Tradition alone is "beyond question." If the Bible, the councils, and nearly all the fathers were unlcear on something, it would be very hard to accept a viewpoint based only on icons and one or two church fathers. Whatever the merit to original sin or Tollhouses, I cannot accept a few church fathers or local councils like ROCOR as Final Authority, even were I in ROCOR. I believe Lutherans misunderstand the too-often used term "Final Authority" and the idea that icons are "beyond question", since Ecumenical Councils have overturned earlier decisions, and icons have been rewritten in a range of styles and meanings: from three dimensional Latin ones in Carpathian churches, to ancient white-skinned Russian wooden statues, to Arabic ones with child-like faces, all three of which are theologically problematic.

2. APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION
Lutherans reject the importance of passing down leadership positions in the church between Bishops. I believe this results from the fact that Lutheranism itself was a grass-roots movement. Rather than choose the ways of the priest-less Russian Old Believer sect, they chose to reject Apostolic Succession. After Jesus' ascension, the apostles chose another apostle to replace Judas. Whether or not the positions of the twelve apostles have been maintained until today, the very early church was made of 12 leaders, apostles, and they chose other apostles to take their places in its leadership. I accept that Apostolic Succession could be broken if all the church leaders and bishops were destroyed without appointing anyone, in which case we could select new leaders like the Lutherans did. The Old Believer Sect was divided on this very question. Either way, I believe Apostolic Succession is important to what makes a church to be a church "of the apostles."

3. Praying to Saints
The Orthodox position is that we do not communicate with the saints in the same way we communicate with God- we show respect for saints and talk to them, we don't worship or pray to them. To me, this sounds like a difference of degree. But I don't care what you want to call it. All Christians are saints, but the church designates certain exceptional ones "as saints." (You may disagree with the church's designation of certain people as saints in certain cases for less-than-saintly behavior, but the concept stands). We should show respect to saints and to their memory just like we show respect to anyone we love and whose spiritual teachings etc. we respect. If we respect someone, why not show it? Our way of kissing icons and bowing seems to be an eastern custom from a time when people bowed and kissed emperors. It seems out of place in the west, but that doesn't make it wrong. It is just an eastern way to show respect, we have kept our eastern culture in the church, and we should show the respect we feel.

In Psalms, David addresses prayers to angels. Other times in the Old Testament, prophets see angels, and I assume there is communication. Jesus met Moses and Elijah in The Transfiguration. If you believe people are in heaven after they die, why should that wall them off and make them powerless? Being in heaven, they can hear our communications, and can help us in some way.

I don't understand how that is objectionable as a mediator. If Lutherans ask eachother to pray for them when they are on earth, why can't they ask it when the other person is in heaven?
« Last Edit: April 18, 2010, 08:25:07 AM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,673
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2010, 09:14:37 AM »

POSITIONS OF LUTHERANISM AND ORTHODOXY THAT ARE RECONCILABLE


1. THE SACRAMENTS
Based on my reading of the article "LUTHER HAD HIS CHANCE," Lutherans and Orthodox agree that Baptism and Communion are the two most important sacraments. Lutheranism seems to accept that the other sacraments have value. But Lutherans differ among themselves what that value is, if it exists at all. The positions are reconcilable because Lutheranism accepts the viewpoint that the other sacraments have value, even if not all Lutherans do. Therefore, the Orthodox position is acceptable to Lutheranism.

2. COMMUNION
Based on my reading of the article "LUTHER HAD HIS CHANCE," the original Lutheran teaching, where the bread and wine becomes Jesus' body and blood is similar to Orthodoxy. The Roman doctrine of transubstantiation developed later. The Ecumenical Patriarch Jeremias in corresponding with the early Lutherans that we do not believe the Eucharist is a chunk of Jesus' flesh and physical blood flowing out of his veins.

The Patriarch explained: "It would indeed be blasphemy to say that the Lord gave to His disciples the flesh that He bore to eat or the blood in His veins to drink, or that He descends physically from heaven when the mysteries are celebrated." Personally I accept that the Eucharist is not just symbolic, because if Jesus is everywhere in the world, then why shouldn't he be in the Eucharist, especially when he says he is?

3. JUSTIFICATION: The Orthodox definition, vs. A Lutheran redefinition that uses "Sola Fide."
Lutheranism defines "Justification" in a non-scriptural way that disagrees with its use in the Book of James. They try to get around it by saying they mean it in a different sense than James does. That's correct. But then they should have picked a different word! When they use the term "justification," they mean our salvation, not our theosis, our justification, or our being made righteous.
For us Orthodox, we must repent of our sins, be baptized, accept the Holy Spirit, believe in Jesus, and have faith to be saved. To obtain and maintain our faith, we must have works, because faith without works is dead. We also enter into communion with Jesus, and become one with him through the Eucharist.
We have an additional process of theosis, whereby the believer follows God, does good works, and becomes a just person/ is made just and righteous.

Lutheranism has all of this too, they just made up their own terminology, although they would not admit it.
Lutherans accept that to have faith and keep it you have to have good works, because that's what St James says.

The first problem is that they redefined "justification"- becoming just, from St James' use of the term- to mean "becoming saved," that initial step where your sins are forgiven and you enter into Communion with Jesus. Lutherans believe in becoming righteous and just people too. When you do good works, it makes you more of a righteous person than if you sat at home and did nothing. (I assume they don't place much importance in this step though, because their slogan results in emphasizing faith over works).

The second problem is that their slogan Sola Fide is too simplistic. What they mean by it is that Grace, not works is the vehicle and instrument BY WHICH the believer receives the grace and benefits of communion. Their slogan does not mean that following God does not make you a righteous person or that good works aren't necessary for your faith. What it means is that faith is the "telephone wire" by which you make your "connection" to God. When you get communion, the telephone wire that hooks you up to God is your faith at the time, not previous good works. As protestants say, "you can't earn your way into heaven." This is just an argument over semantics. They will admit you need good works to have faith in the first place like St James says, and if you don't then your faith isn't real. What they are talking about is the technical process of salvation and communion. To enter into communion with Jesus, faith is the instrument, the telephone line, and good works are just the support for that. They separate the act of communion, repentance, believing, and being forgiven (which they misleadingly summarized as "justification")  from the process of becoming righteous, which we correctly call "justification." Thus they fail to understand that they are arguing over semantics. It is even harder for us Orthodox to understand it, since they don't!

Finally, even if they are right that faith, not good works, is the technical means by which Christians receive grace at the moment of coming together with Jesus, they are still wrong to say Sola Fide. That's because faith is not the only tool by which you commune with Jesus at the Eucharist. The sacrament itself is an instrument, and your partaking of it is a good work. If you didn't take the Eucharist, then even Lutheranism would admit that you weren't going through a Eucharistic communion at that point. If you weren't baptized (with/without chrismation), then you wouldn't have the Holy Spirit at that point. The sacraments themselves are instruments and tools that believers use to receive the benefits of grace.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2010, 09:15:16 AM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Punch

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,799
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2010, 10:18:22 AM »
The best thing to do is to read the correspondence between the Tublingen theologians and Patriarch Jeremias II in the 16th Century.  The Tubingen school was probably the most "Catholic" of the bunch, and most sympathetic to reconciling the Church.  They probably represent "true" Lutheranism more than most of the modern Lutherans.  The Patriarch's responses to their inquiries are just as true now as then.
I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,673
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2010, 12:53:23 PM »
Yes. The article "Luther Had His Chance" refers to the dialogue between Patriarch Jeremias and the original Lutherans.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2010, 12:53:36 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Punch

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,799
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2010, 01:32:32 PM »
I believe that another issue that has to be addressed is the differences between Lutherans.  There are at least three main sects of Lutheran here in the United States alone.  The most conservative are the Wisconsin Synod (WELS).  The Missouri Synod (LCMS) is a conservative moderate.  The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) has drifted so far from Luther's teachings that I have my doubts as to whether or not it still qualifies as Christian.  Interestingly, it seems to be the ELCA that has been having the most "dialogue" with the Orthodox due to its heavy participation in the Ecumenical Movement.  And, it is also no surprise that the Church that seems to be having the most fruitful dialogue with the ELCA is the Antiochian Archdiocese, since both tend to be the most Ecumenical and liberal of their respective faiths.

One thing that struck me while studying Theology, first as a Lutheran and later as a part of the Orthodox Church, is the reverence that Scriptures is held in the conservative Lutheran Churches.  When one reads Lenski's Commentaries on the New Testament, it is obvious that the words of the Scriptures are THE word of God, and they are not to be questioned.  What is questioned is our ability to understand the perfect Word of God as imperfect humans.  The books of Christian Dogmatics written by Pieper also show the same reverence.  It is also clear that the conservative Lutherans do not outright reject or despise the Fathers, they simply do not hold them authoritative.  It seems that the conservative Lutherans are still fighting the Reformation, while the liberals are full swing into Ecumenism.  It was a stark, and shocking, contrast to read the commentaries on the New Testament by Paul Terazi.  I could not believe that I was reading an Orthodox work since the heavy use of textual criticism would have made any ELCA Lutheran (and quite possibly the Devil) proud!  In fact, studying modern Orthodox writings put out by SVS and other SCOBA churches is one of the major factors that drove me out of the SCOBA Churches and into the ROCOR.  If it were not for the ROCOR and the Greek Synod in Resistance, I would likely have returned to the Lutheran Church.

Even among the conservative Lutherans, there are differences in the degrees by which things are believed.  Take the Body and Blood of Christ.  Luther teaches that the Body and Blood of Christ is present in, with and around the bread and wine, but the bread and wine remain bread and wine.  What does this mean in a practical manner?  There was confusion, and this could be seen when determining how to handle the left over bread and wine from Communion.  Some would just put the wafers back into the packet and pour the wine back into the bottle.  Some (like the faction to which I belonged) would treat the leftovers with the highest reverence and would bury what could not be consumed.  It all depended on how much you believed the bread and wine had changed, and those of us who were traditionalists held almost a Roman Catholic regard for the consecrated gifts.  Among the liberal Lutherans, the view toward Communion is almost Calvinist.

I believe that there will be a unification of the Lutheran and Orthodox Churches one day.  However, this will be a union in apostasy and Antichrist.  I do not believe that you will see a union among the conservative factions of either Church since both recognize Ecumenism as a great evil, and have no real desire to discuss matters with those outside of their respective circles.  Since both believe strongly in the power of the Holy Spirit to work in the individual, they both believe that a person searching for the Truth will find it (although they differ in WHERE they will find it).  As such, there is no need for "dialogue".  One does not discuss the Faith, one confesses it.     
I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

Offline Rufus

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,337
  • Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5 on: April 18, 2010, 02:30:14 PM »
Quote
It was a stark, and shocking, contrast to read the commentaries on the New Testament by Paul Terazi.  I could not believe that I was reading an Orthodox work since the heavy use of textual criticism would have made any ELCA Lutheran (and quite possibly the Devil) proud!

Uh oh! my priest is friends with Terazi!  :o :o :o

Offline Punch

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,799
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6 on: April 18, 2010, 02:56:46 PM »
Quote
It was a stark, and shocking, contrast to read the commentaries on the New Testament by Paul Terazi.  I could not believe that I was reading an Orthodox work since the heavy use of textual criticism would have made any ELCA Lutheran (and quite possibly the Devil) proud!

Uh oh! my priest is friends with Terazi!  :o :o :o

I have heard from several that he is a very good man.  I had one person who knows him go as far as to try to tell me that he is not as radical as some take him to be, he just wants to make people think.  I simply do not like (putting it mildly) his commentaries on the Scripture.  Perhaps some of the problem is the great reverence that I had for the Orthodox Church when I was a Lutheran.  Even Luther and later Lutheran Commentators had great respect for "The Church of the East".  I thought that the writings of the Fathers were the commentary on the Scriptures used by the Orthodox Church and was taken somewhat aback to find the same things being taught in Orthodox seminaries as was being taught in the liberal Lutheran seminaries.  Perhaps if I re-read his works now, after maturing another 16 years, I may not be taken as far aback as I was shortly after my conversion. 
I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

Offline HandmaidenofGod

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,397
  • O Holy St. Demetrius pray to God for us!
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #7 on: April 18, 2010, 05:35:25 PM »
Quote
It was a stark, and shocking, contrast to read the commentaries on the New Testament by Paul Terazi.  I could not believe that I was reading an Orthodox work since the heavy use of textual criticism would have made any ELCA Lutheran (and quite possibly the Devil) proud!

Uh oh! my priest is friends with Terazi!  :o :o :o

Anyone who has taken Old Testament Studies at St. Vlad's knows Fr. Terazi.

From what I hear, he's quite a character.  :laugh:
"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope." Jer 29:11

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,350
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #8 on: April 18, 2010, 05:39:33 PM »
Quote
It was a stark, and shocking, contrast to read the commentaries on the New Testament by Paul Terazi.  I could not believe that I was reading an Orthodox work since the heavy use of textual criticism would have made any ELCA Lutheran (and quite possibly the Devil) proud!

Uh oh! my priest is friends with Terazi!  :o :o :o

I have heard from several that he is a very good man.  I had one person who knows him go as far as to try to tell me that he is not as radical as some take him to be, he just wants to make people think.  I simply do not like (putting it mildly) his commentaries on the Scripture.  Perhaps some of the problem is the great reverence that I had for the Orthodox Church when I was a Lutheran.  Even Luther and later Lutheran Commentators had great respect for "The Church of the East".  I thought that the writings of the Fathers were the commentary on the Scriptures used by the Orthodox Church and was taken somewhat aback to find the same things being taught in Orthodox seminaries as was being taught in the liberal Lutheran seminaries.  Perhaps if I re-read his works now, after maturing another 16 years, I may not be taken as far aback as I was shortly after my conversion. 

I remember that when I embraced Orthodoxy, I thought that it was not that different from the conservative Evangelical Lutheranism I knew.  Years later (acutally decades) I came across my old copy of the Book of Concord, and looking through it, having been in the Orthodox Church so many years, I thought to myself as I flipped through the pages, over and over, "I used to believe THAT?"
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline Punch

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,799
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #9 on: April 18, 2010, 08:03:01 PM »
Quote
It was a stark, and shocking, contrast to read the commentaries on the New Testament by Paul Terazi.  I could not believe that I was reading an Orthodox work since the heavy use of textual criticism would have made any ELCA Lutheran (and quite possibly the Devil) proud!

Uh oh! my priest is friends with Terazi!  :o :o :o

I have heard from several that he is a very good man.  I had one person who knows him go as far as to try to tell me that he is not as radical as some take him to be, he just wants to make people think.  I simply do not like (putting it mildly) his commentaries on the Scripture.  Perhaps some of the problem is the great reverence that I had for the Orthodox Church when I was a Lutheran.  Even Luther and later Lutheran Commentators had great respect for "The Church of the East".  I thought that the writings of the Fathers were the commentary on the Scriptures used by the Orthodox Church and was taken somewhat aback to find the same things being taught in Orthodox seminaries as was being taught in the liberal Lutheran seminaries.  Perhaps if I re-read his works now, after maturing another 16 years, I may not be taken as far aback as I was shortly after my conversion. 

I remember that when I embraced Orthodoxy, I thought that it was not that different from the conservative Evangelical Lutheranism I knew.  Years later (acutally decades) I came across my old copy of the Book of Concord, and looking through it, having been in the Orthodox Church so many years, I thought to myself as I flipped through the pages, over and over, "I used to believe THAT?"

I can certainly sympathize with that.  As Chairman of the Board of Elders in a Wisconsin Synod parish, I was responsible for leading the adult Bible Study.  I was also responsible for delivering the Sermons when the pastor was out of town.  My journey to Orthodoxy began as I was reading not only the Book of Concord, but the Commentaries by Lenski and Dogmatics by Pieper.  I kept reading where "the Fathers erred when . . . " and started to wonder who these continuously erring Fathers were.  I picked up a book called "The Apostolic Fathers" and read that.  In it, I found what I really believed.  The problem was as time went on I would read the Book of Concord and say "I really do not believe that". 
I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

Offline jnorm888

  • Jnorm
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,517
  • Icon and Cross (international space station)
    • Ancient Christian Defender
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2010, 02:43:32 AM »
Quote
The books of Christian Dogmatics written by Pieper also show the same reverence.  It is also clear that the conservative Lutherans do not outright reject or despise the Fathers, they simply do not hold them authoritative.  It seems that the conservative Lutherans are still fighting the Reformation, while the liberals are full swing into Ecumenism.  It was a stark, and shocking, contrast to read the commentaries on the New Testament by Paul Terazi.  I could not believe that I was reading an Orthodox work since the heavy use of textual criticism would have made any ELCA Lutheran (and quite possibly the Devil) proud!  In fact, studying modern Orthodox writings put out by SVS and other SCOBA churches is one of the major factors that drove me out of the SCOBA Churches and into the ROCOR.  If it were not for the ROCOR and the Greek Synod in Resistance, I would likely have returned to the Lutheran Church.

Sometimes I wonder if this is the reason why some Orthodox become atheists and agnostics. Yeah, I saw the samething when I became Orthodox 3 years ago. I think the Orthodox picked it up by going to liberal/modernist Protestant and Roman Catholic schools/programs, and so........that's what they teach! You are what you eat......or chew your teeth on. I think as more conservative protestant and Roman Catholics convert to SCOBA EO Churches, the less you will see highercriticism being advocated as strongly as it once was.

For we all know what that stuff is, and we are mostly vocal about it. The same will be true for other liberal protestant ideas in Orthodoxy.....like women ordination, contraception, abortion, gay marriage.......etc.


We know where all this stuff comes from.......it's nothing more than deja vu for alot of us.

« Last Edit: April 19, 2010, 02:59:21 AM by jnorm888 »
"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/

Offline Doubting Thomas

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 887
  • Anglican (but not Episcopagan)
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #11 on: April 19, 2010, 03:41:35 PM »

I believe that there will be a unification of the Lutheran and Orthodox Churches one day.  However, this will be a union in apostasy and Antichrist. 

Why can't there be a TRADITIONAL orthodox ecumenism, using the Scriptures AND the earliest patristic consensus (as the guide for interpreting them) as our starting points?
"My Lord and My God!"--Doubting Thomas, AD 33

Offline Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,017
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South (OCA)
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #12 on: April 19, 2010, 05:13:17 PM »
Dear Punch and Rufus: Chris is Risen!

There is no such thing as "Terazi" or "Paul Terazi," at least not on this board. He has been an Orthodox priest for a long time and deserves to be referred as such. Father Terazi should be just fine. Thanks.

Indeed He is Risen!

Offline Punch

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,799
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #13 on: April 19, 2010, 08:23:16 PM »

I believe that there will be a unification of the Lutheran and Orthodox Churches one day.  However, this will be a union in apostasy and Antichrist. 

Why can't there be a TRADITIONAL orthodox ecumenism, using the Scriptures AND the earliest patristic consensus (as the guide for interpreting them) as our starting points?

That would be wonderful, except that if the Lutherans (or other well meaning conservative Christians) considered the earliest patristic consensus as authoritative, the would likely already be Orthodox, therefor eliminating the need for ecumenism.  Now, if you are referring to ecumenism between the various Traditional Orthodox sects, I pray for that.  However, I do not think that it is within the conservative mindset to seek such unity.  The tendency seems to be to withdraw into isolation.  The common mindset seems to be that given two drums of liquid, one poison and the other pure water, no amount of pure water added to the poison drum will make it drinkable.  But only  a few drops of poison will render the water undrinkable.  So, the tendency is to avoid anything perceived as poison.  Consequently, what is pure avoids poison, while what is already tainted sees no need to avoid what is already spoiled.  I am not sure that I completely agree with this way of seeing things, but it seems to explain what I have seen.  When I ask about the command to "go and make disciples of all nations", I am told that the heathen are not tainted, but are like a dry land waiting for the water of the Gospel.  The heretic and the apostate have rejected the water and only wish to poison what is pure.  The question then becomes "at what point does liberalism become heresy, or even apostasy"?  On the other hand, I believe it would be equally fair to ask "at what point does a conservative become like a Pharisee or a Donatist"? 
I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #14 on: April 19, 2010, 08:34:57 PM »
Dear Punch and Rufus: Chris is Risen!

There is no such thing as "Terazi" or "Paul Terazi," at least not on this board. He has been an Orthodox priest for a long time and deserves to be referred as such. Father Terazi should be just fine. Thanks.

Indeed He is Risen!

Amen to that.

Offline Punch

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,799
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #15 on: April 19, 2010, 08:49:29 PM »
Dear Punch and Rufus: Chris is Risen!

There is no such thing as "Terazi" or "Paul Terazi," at least not on this board. He has been an Orthodox priest for a long time and deserves to be referred as such. Father Terazi should be just fine. Thanks.

Indeed He is Risen!

Well, I am sorry to have to disagree with you, but in the world where he sells his books, he is known all over as Paul Terazi and as Paul Nadim Terazi, so such a man certainly exists.  In fact, on the four books that he authored that I have read, he does not use the honorific "Father" on the cover.  Since it was his role as author that I was discussing, Paul Terazi is quite correct since that is how he himself markets his wares.  It is also common convention that, when reviewing ones work, the last name without honorific is an acceptable means of denoting an author.  I have seen him addressed as Doctor Paul Nadim Terazi, so I was not sure if he was a priest or a theologian (who are not always ordained priests) until I saw his name written as The Very Reverend Doctor Paul Nadim Terazi, making him an archpriest and not just a priest.  Given the multiple ways that I have seen him addressed, I chose to use the one that he himself chose when authoring his books.  However, if it makes you feel better and keeps some moderator from falling all over his keyboard trying to get to the green ink, I shall from henceforth and forevermore refer to him as Father.  I assure you that neglecting his honorific title was not done out of disrespect.  I may disagree with him, vehemently, but I do respect him.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2010, 08:50:16 PM by Punch »
I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 14,795
  • Unbreakable! He's alive, dammit! It's a MIRACLE!
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Censer-following zapivka-dipper
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #16 on: July 29, 2017, 04:43:44 AM »
WWLD?
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline Alpha60

  • Pray without ceasing!
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,114
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2017, 12:57:24 PM »
The prospect of a reconciliation between Lutheranism and Orthodoxy seems impossible, except perhaps in Finland, where one could imagine a scenario where the two state churches were forcibly merged.  Such a scenario seems extremely unlikely in present day Europe.

In the past, had there been, for example, a successful military alliance between Sweden and Russia, rather than an intense rivalry, one can envisage a scenario wherein the Church of Sweden would have become Orthodox.

In the US, the LCMS embraces a congregational polity, and it is theoretically possible for an LCMS parish to break away from that synod and join Orthodoxy, but such an event seems very unlikely.

Our best bet for evangelizing Lutherans in the West is to expand the Western Rite, because Lutherans favor worshipping in inculturated models; for example, the Lutherans of Ukraine use a horribly mutilated version of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.  The primary hymns of a high church Lutheran mass are the same as in the Roman mass (Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, etc.), and thus, our Western Rite Vicarates provide a worship experience compatible with high church Lutheran worship.

However, many Lutherans might balk at our rejection of so much of the accumulated Protestant hymnography, which plays a much more important role in the sacramental life of the Lutheran Church than in the Anglican Church, to the extent that entire services are composed from chorales, the model preferred by Luther for hymn composition.  Hypothetically, the Orthodox Church could audit the 1941 Lutheran Hymnal, which in the US occupies a place of honor similiar to the 1928 Book of Common Prayer, and determine which hymns were acceptable and which hymns contained doctrinal errors, as a means of creating a hymn-based worship model to appeal to Protestants.   I would probably support such an effort, simply because I would like to see a scenario where no traditional Protestant has any reasonable objection to joining Orthodoxy beyond the discredited Five Solas, which are increasingly being recognized as errors, by the likes of the Bible Answer Man.  At the same time, I am not entirely comfortable with the chorale as a feature of the Divine Liturgy; if we allowed Lutheran chorales, their use would be restricted to the Divine Office and certain other services outside of the Eucharist.

But as far as an entire Lutheran denomination deciding as a whole to embrace the Orthodox Church, I just don't see that happening.   There have been murmurs in the RCC about creating Ordinariates for Lutherans similiar to those created for Anglicans, but no progress has been made towards this end, and I doubt any progress will be made.
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,109
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2017, 11:08:13 PM »
There is very easy to reconcile lutheranism with orthodoxy.
Orthodoxy contains instructions from God because in the East there were many wars and people did not have time to change instructions from God with instructions from people and as we saw this can be deadly.
In West people had peace and changed instructions from God with instructions from people therefore going into errors and possibly death.

So reconciliations is easy with people of lutheranism or catholicism or other faiths returning to instructions from God that is to Orthodoxy that will benefit them all. Under no circumstance orthodoxy should accept teachings of men that will bring everybody into delusion.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2017, 11:13:36 PM by pasadi97 »
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,109
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2017, 11:19:19 PM »
The comments above are self explanatory.
Lutheranism chooses so and so hymnography because that pleased Luther that is a man. Really? So a Church should please a man not God? Really?

Lutheranism pleases a man, Luther and his instructions that are not from God but from fallen angel, pleases a man that can not give salvation eternal life and entrance to heaven.
Orthodoxy pleases God containing instructions from God.

Lutherans should stop pleasing a man and his instructions and should return to God and his instructions that is Orthodoxy. Really they should return to God.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2017, 11:22:36 PM by pasadi97 »
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,109
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #20 on: August 01, 2017, 07:39:35 AM »
I don't think is a great idea to change hymns pleasing to God with hymns pleasing to Luther to appease Lutherans.

We should strive appeasing God and Lutherans should do the same.
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline Iconodule

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,378
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #21 on: August 01, 2017, 10:39:02 AM »
A-a mighty kremlin i-is our Go-o-od!
Quote
When a time revolts against eternity, the only thing to set against it is genuine eternity itself, and not some other time which has already roused, and not without reason, a violent reaction against itself.
- Berdyaev

If you would like a private forum for non-polemical topics, comment here.

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,109
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #22 on: August 01, 2017, 09:12:21 PM »
Russia is not my God or Orthodox God.
Anyhow the angel in Legend of White Cowl said that Russia will keep the true faith until the end, and this I think means it will keep the instructions from God until the end and will not replace them with instructions from people like Luther or Smith or White . If angel would say Sweden I would say Sweden. If the angel said France I would say France. Anyhow the angel said Russia and I say Russia.

So whomever wants to have no problem with eternal life should go to Eastern Orthodox Church of Russia. So when eternal life will be handled, Lutherans would shiver and Luther will not save them , Baptists would shiver because they threw the instructions on obtaining eternal life to garbage and did after their own imagination and Smith will not save them but people of Russian Church would smile because they kept the instructions from God on obtaining eternal life.
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline Iconodule

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,378
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #23 on: August 01, 2017, 09:18:10 PM »
The problem with the Legend of the White Cowl is that it is not true.
Quote
When a time revolts against eternity, the only thing to set against it is genuine eternity itself, and not some other time which has already roused, and not without reason, a violent reaction against itself.
- Berdyaev

If you would like a private forum for non-polemical topics, comment here.

Offline Alpha60

  • Pray without ceasing!
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,114
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #24 on: August 01, 2017, 10:33:42 PM »
A-a mighty kremlin i-is our Go-o-od!

ROFL!!!
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.

Offline Daedelus1138

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 991
  • Faith: Lutheran
  • Jurisdiction: ELCA
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #25 on: August 01, 2017, 10:42:16 PM »
Lutherans understand tiers of authority within the Bible by looking at the early Church and their witness to which books were accepted universally, and which were disputed.  Like the Orthodox, we have an open canon.   So, I don't see this as really being a huge problem.

Yes, the idea of the Father's erring is shocking to Orthodox ears but that's the conclusion I came to as well. I prefer to look at theology and confessions and treat them as an unfinished work, not as something set in granite.
"I have held many things in my hands, and I have lost them all; but whatever I have placed in God's hands, that I still possess."   - Martin Luther

Offline xOrthodox4Christx

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,322
  • Faith: Orthodox Catholic Church
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #26 on: August 01, 2017, 11:17:17 PM »
Lutherans understand tiers of authority within the Bible by looking at the early Church and their witness to which books were accepted universally, and which were disputed.  Like the Orthodox, we have an open canon.   So, I don't see this as really being a huge problem.

Yes, the idea of the Father's erring is shocking to Orthodox ears but that's the conclusion I came to as well. I prefer to look at theology and confessions and treat them as an unfinished work, not as something set in granite.


I'm sure Arius and Nestorius would agree with that statement.
I reject all that I wrote that isn't in accordance with the teachings of the Orthodox Church. Also, my posts reflect my opinions (present or former) and nothing else.

Offline WPM

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,679
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #27 on: August 01, 2017, 11:47:10 PM »
While becoming Orthodox over the years I still like the Lutheran church so why not attend both? ...
Learn meditation.

Offline Jackson02

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 658
  • St. Philaret of New York pray to God for us!
  • Faith: Genuine Orthodox Church
  • Jurisdiction: Inquiring
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #28 on: August 02, 2017, 12:14:16 AM »
Nobody can reconcile as long as Diego is here. Sorry I meant No to ecumenism!
« Last Edit: August 02, 2017, 12:16:15 AM by Jackson02 »
"Don't keep Orthodoxy to yourself as if it were some private treasure. Share it!"

Fr. Seraphim Rose

Offline GabrieltheCelt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,219
  • Son of a Preacher Man
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox OCA
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #29 on: August 02, 2017, 01:39:24 AM »
The Missouri Synod (LCMS) is a conservative moderate.

 My in-laws and wife are MO Synod Lutherans.  I'm still patiently working on my wife (here, I covet your prayers).  Anyway, a few weeks ago we were visiting my in-laws and I was reading one of their "Daily Bread" type booklets and noticed that their prayers began with crossing themselves and saying, "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."  My in-laws have never crossed themselves.  I once visited their church and no one crossed themselves there either.  I asked my mother in law about it and she said that some parishes emphasize crossing one's self and others don't.  She said she's heard of some that do but that she'd never seen it in her 65 years.  I found that interesting and odd.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2017, 01:39:47 AM by GabrieltheCelt »
"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying

Offline Alpha60

  • Pray without ceasing!
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,114
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #30 on: August 02, 2017, 05:28:49 AM »
The Missouri Synod (LCMS) is a conservative moderate.

 My in-laws and wife are MO Synod Lutherans.  I'm still patiently working on my wife (here, I covet your prayers).  Anyway, a few weeks ago we were visiting my in-laws and I was reading one of their "Daily Bread" type booklets and noticed that their prayers began with crossing themselves and saying, "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."  My in-laws have never crossed themselves.  I once visited their church and no one crossed themselves there either.  I asked my mother in law about it and she said that some parishes emphasize crossing one's self and others don't.  She said she's heard of some that do but that she'd never seen it in her 65 years.  I found that interesting and odd.

Indeed, there seems to be a lack of consistency on that point.  One of many problems just with that denomination.
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,152
  • Faith: without works is dead.
  • Jurisdiction: Foolishness to the Greeks
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #31 on: August 03, 2017, 11:50:48 AM »
Nobody can reconcile as long as Diego is here. Sorry I meant No to ecumenism!
LOL.

Our best bet for evangelizing Lutherans in the West is to expand the Western Rite, because Lutherans favor worshipping in inculturated models; for example, the Lutherans of Ukraine use a horribly mutilated version of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.  The primary hymns of a high church Lutheran mass are the same as in the Roman mass (Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, etc.), and thus, our Western Rite Vicarates provide a worship experience compatible with high church Lutheran worship.
I'm just not feeling it. Lutheranism has tended to be more confessionally allegiant versus many of the groups that have historically aligned with the WRO movement.

Quote
There have been murmurs in the RCC about creating Ordinariates for Lutherans similiar to those created for Anglicans, but no progress has been made towards this end, and I doubt any progress will be made.
I don't see that happening ever.
Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Take a breath, read Ecclesiastes 1:9.

Offline Daedelus1138

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 991
  • Faith: Lutheran
  • Jurisdiction: ELCA
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #32 on: August 12, 2017, 06:58:53 AM »
My in-laws have never crossed themselves.  I once visited their church and no one crossed themselves there either.  I asked my mother in law about it and she said that some parishes emphasize crossing one's self and others don't.  She said she's heard of some that do but that she'd never seen it in her 65 years.  I found that interesting and odd.

Historically Lutherans did cross themselves.  However we do not regard it as essential to the faith.  At my church, which is ELCA, you will see a substantial minority of folks crossing themselves.  It really depends on how much a given individual wants to distinguish themselves from Catholics.  The LCMS in particular can be very "Baptist" minded now days.
"I have held many things in my hands, and I have lost them all; but whatever I have placed in God's hands, that I still possess."   - Martin Luther

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #33 on: August 12, 2017, 01:22:54 PM »
The Missouri Synod (LCMS) is a conservative moderate.

 My in-laws and wife are MO Synod Lutherans.  I'm still patiently working on my wife (here, I covet your prayers).  Anyway, a few weeks ago we were visiting my in-laws and I was reading one of their "Daily Bread" type booklets and noticed that their prayers began with crossing themselves and saying, "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."  My in-laws have never crossed themselves.  I once visited their church and no one crossed themselves there either.  I asked my mother in law about it and she said that some parishes emphasize crossing one's self and others don't.  She said she's heard of some that do but that she'd never seen it in her 65 years.  I found that interesting and odd.

America has a long past of acute Catholic-hatred. There was even a successful political party dedicated to it. I imagine the last thing a German descendent circa WWI wanted was to appear unnecessarily ethnic.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline sestir

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
    • Weihos Bokos
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: independent
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #34 on: August 12, 2017, 04:17:10 PM »
Lutheranism rejects church traditions as a form of authority, yet accepts the Bible as infallible. How can you say that the one decision of the church to choose which books are in the Bible is infallible, but all the other teachings of the church lack authority? The Bible itself is a tradition and teaching of the church.

Scientists reject scientific articles as a form of authority1, yet accept the established theories as infallible2. How can you say that the one decision of the scientific community to choose which theories are established is infallible, but all the other teachings of the scientific community lack authority? The established theories them selves are articles and teachings of the scientific community.

1 Not really, but they should be peer reviewed, experiments repeated by independent teams and hypotheses corroborated.
2 ``Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially.'' — Wiki

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #35 on: August 12, 2017, 04:34:43 PM »
Lutheranism rejects church traditions as a form of authority, yet accepts the Bible as infallible. How can you say that the one decision of the church to choose which books are in the Bible is infallible, but all the other teachings of the church lack authority? The Bible itself is a tradition and teaching of the church.

Scientists reject scientific articles as a form of authority1, yet accept the established theories as infallible2. How can you say that the one decision of the scientific community to choose which theories are established is infallible, but all the other teachings of the scientific community lack authority? The established theories them selves are articles and teachings of the scientific community.

1 Not really, but they should be peer reviewed, experiments repeated by independent teams and hypotheses corroborated.
2 ``Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially.'' — Wiki

:o
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,152
  • Faith: without works is dead.
  • Jurisdiction: Foolishness to the Greeks
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #36 on: August 14, 2017, 04:42:30 PM »
Lutheranism rejects church traditions as a form of authority, yet accepts the Bible as infallible. How can you say that the one decision of the church to choose which books are in the Bible is infallible, but all the other teachings of the church lack authority? The Bible itself is a tradition and teaching of the church.

Scientists reject scientific articles as a form of authority1, yet accept the established theories as infallible2. How can you say that the one decision of the scientific community to choose which theories are established is infallible, but all the other teachings of the scientific community lack authority? The established theories them selves are articles and teachings of the scientific community.

1 Not really, but they should be peer reviewed, experiments repeated by independent teams and hypotheses corroborated.
2 ``Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially.'' — Wiki

:o

+1
Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Take a breath, read Ecclesiastes 1:9.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #37 on: September 24, 2017, 05:04:12 AM »
Quote from: Alpha60
There have been murmurs in the RCC about creating Ordinariates for Lutherans similiar to those created for Anglicans, but no progress has been made towards this end, and I doubt any progress will be made.
I don't see that happening ever.

How come? Because flipping off the RCC is too big a part of Lutheran identity?
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #38 on: September 24, 2017, 05:16:37 AM »
Lutheranism rejects church traditions as a form of authority, yet accepts the Bible as infallible. How can you say that the one decision of the church to choose which books are in the Bible is infallible, but all the other teachings of the church lack authority? The Bible itself is a tradition and teaching of the church.

Scientists reject scientific articles as a form of authority1, yet accept the established theories as infallible2. How can you say that the one decision of the scientific community to choose which theories are established is infallible, but all the other teachings of the scientific community lack authority? The established theories them selves are articles and teachings of the scientific community.

1 Not really, but they should be peer reviewed, experiments repeated by independent teams and hypotheses corroborated.
2 ``Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially.'' — Wiki

Sounds like you agree with Rakovsky, yes?

I think, using your analogy, the issue is less that Lutherans reject all but one scientific paper, but rather that they don't think that all the peer review and experiments of later centuries have been sound and the ones that didn't contradict that earliest study have been misread or drowned out by all the bad science.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2017, 05:20:20 AM by Volnutt »
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline WPM

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,679
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #39 on: September 24, 2017, 07:49:46 AM »
Ha, yeah

I think they tried to make it sound like they were rejecting you/me but didn't really mean anything.
Learn meditation.

Offline Alpha60

  • Pray without ceasing!
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,114
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #40 on: September 28, 2017, 06:42:15 AM »
I believe that another issue that has to be addressed is the differences between Lutherans.  There are at least three main sects of Lutheran here in the United States alone.  The most conservative are the Wisconsin Synod (WELS).  The Missouri Synod (LCMS) is a conservative moderate.  The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) has drifted so far from Luther's teachings that I have my doubts as to whether or not it still qualifies as Christian.  Interestingly, it seems to be the ELCA that has been having the most "dialogue" with the Orthodox due to its heavy participation in the Ecumenical Movement.  And, it is also no surprise that the Church that seems to be having the most fruitful dialogue with the ELCA is the Antiochian Archdiocese, since both tend to be the most Ecumenical and liberal of their respective faiths.

One thing that struck me while studying Theology, first as a Lutheran and later as a part of the Orthodox Church, is the reverence that Scriptures is held in the conservative Lutheran Churches.  When one reads Lenski's Commentaries on the New Testament, it is obvious that the words of the Scriptures are THE word of God, and they are not to be questioned.  What is questioned is our ability to understand the perfect Word of God as imperfect humans.  The books of Christian Dogmatics written by Pieper also show the same reverence.  It is also clear that the conservative Lutherans do not outright reject or despise the Fathers, they simply do not hold them authoritative.  It seems that the conservative Lutherans are still fighting the Reformation, while the liberals are full swing into Ecumenism.  It was a stark, and shocking, contrast to read the commentaries on the New Testament by Paul Terazi.  I could not believe that I was reading an Orthodox work since the heavy use of textual criticism would have made any ELCA Lutheran (and quite possibly the Devil) proud!  In fact, studying modern Orthodox writings put out by SVS and other SCOBA churches is one of the major factors that drove me out of the SCOBA Churches and into the ROCOR.  If it were not for the ROCOR and the Greek Synod in Resistance, I would likely have returned to the Lutheran Church.

Even among the conservative Lutherans, there are differences in the degrees by which things are believed.  Take the Body and Blood of Christ.  Luther teaches that the Body and Blood of Christ is present in, with and around the bread and wine, but the bread and wine remain bread and wine.  What does this mean in a practical manner?  There was confusion, and this could be seen when determining how to handle the left over bread and wine from Communion.  Some would just put the wafers back into the packet and pour the wine back into the bottle.  Some (like the faction to which I belonged) would treat the leftovers with the highest reverence and would bury what could not be consumed.  It all depended on how much you believed the bread and wine had changed, and those of us who were traditionalists held almost a Roman Catholic regard for the consecrated gifts.  Among the liberal Lutherans, the view toward Communion is almost Calvinist.

I believe that there will be a unification of the Lutheran and Orthodox Churches one day.  However, this will be a union in apostasy and Antichrist.  I do not believe that you will see a union among the conservative factions of either Church since both recognize Ecumenism as a great evil, and have no real desire to discuss matters with those outside of their respective circles.  Since both believe strongly in the power of the Holy Spirit to work in the individual, they both believe that a person searching for the Truth will find it (although they differ in WHERE they will find it).  As such, there is no need for "dialogue".  One does not discuss the Faith, one confesses it.   

ELCA has at least one objectively non-Christian parish, herchurch, formerly Ebeneezer Lutheran Church, which among other horrors sells "mother goddess rosaries" in which the Holy Cross is replaced by an idol of Aurora.

I don't worry about that happening in the Antiochian Church, nor would I agree with your assertion that they are the most theologically liberal.  The only Orthodox jurisdiction in the US that I can think of who has a handful of clergy who have caused offense by making statements of the sort one would expect from the ELCA, is the OCA, which is also not theologically liberal (unless you read the blog Monomachos, which strikes me as being a bit over the top in its criticisms of Syosset), with the statements made by the priest ar the Boston Cathedral and Archbishop Lazar Puhalo; two disagreeable things, both concerning homosexuality; in the case of Archbishop Lazar, he was ordered not to discuss it further.  The other priest in question, whose name escapes me, received an angry letter from a large number of OCA and Antiochian priests in Texas, and has not made any further statements against the faith in that regard that ai am aware of.

Let us pray that the Orthodox Church never becomes like the ELCA; I don't think it will.  Perhaps a liberal autonomous archdiocese, probably in Europe but quite possibly here, will break away from Moscow or Constantinople or Antioch or another parent church in order to "modernize."  If they do that, however, they will be in schism, canonically isolated, and will probably lose half their congregation (attendance at the ECUSA for instance plunged in 2003 with the appointment of a now retired homosexual bishop, and it had been in decline for decades, with the decline accelerting in the 1980s).  The present state of the ELCA makes me sad.

I like the LCMS and WELS, but they are absolutely committed to the various Lutheran doctrinal definitions, which are inimical ro our faith, for example, they could never accept our understanding of the Eucharist as sacrificial.
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #41 on: September 28, 2017, 08:28:53 AM »
Doesn't any kind of doctrine of the Real Presence imply a sacrifice, though? I mean, they're literally eating Jesus.
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,152
  • Faith: without works is dead.
  • Jurisdiction: Foolishness to the Greeks
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #42 on: September 28, 2017, 10:11:29 AM »
<NVM>
« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 10:12:03 AM by Agabus »
Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Take a breath, read Ecclesiastes 1:9.

Offline Daedelus1138

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 991
  • Faith: Lutheran
  • Jurisdiction: ELCA
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #43 on: December 11, 2017, 11:29:41 PM »
Doesn't any kind of doctrine of the Real Presence imply a sacrifice, though? I mean, they're literally eating Jesus.

No.  We do not believe the Lord's Supper involves killing Jesus all over again.

There is a sacrifice of praise, and in some ways it is "joined" to Jesus sacrifice, with our prayers of intercession, but we aren't really comfortable with the Roman interpretation that the priest is sacrificing Jesus or making him present.   We believe Jesus does that himself through his own words.

I think its more true what is going on in the Lord's Supper from our perspective is that it is anamensis or a memorial where Jesus is present physically, but we don't primarily see it as him being sacrificed.  It does connect us to his once-for-all sacrifice, however, through his original institution of the Lord's Supper.  So like the Anglicans, we stress the memorial aspects without negating that it is also a sacred meal.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2017, 11:36:37 PM by Daedelus1138 »
"I have held many things in my hands, and I have lost them all; but whatever I have placed in God's hands, that I still possess."   - Martin Luther

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Reconciling Lutheranism and Orthodoxy
« Reply #44 on: December 12, 2017, 01:17:45 PM »
... I think its more true what is going on in the Lord's Supper from our perspective is that it is anamensis or a memorial where Jesus is present physically, but we don't primarily see it as him being sacrificed.  It does connect us to his once-for-all sacrifice, however, through his original institution of the Lord's Supper.  So like the Anglicans, we stress the memorial aspects without negating that it is also a sacred meal.

I don't know if this is more confused or more sad. Lord, have mercy.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy