Who is the Church? According to Lutheranism.

[LizaMarie]

I agree with a poster up in the Anglican section who has said that the "Traditional Church."is the Roman, Orthodox and Lutheran/Reformed. These are churches where the gospel is preached and the sacraments rightly administered. And this is what I still believe, and why it is hard for me to believe that the Church is only the RCC or Orthodox or whatever.
I do know that today that confessionals Lutherans would say that the invisible church would be anyone who professes Jesus Christ as savior and trusts in his death on the Cross as payment in full for our sins. So this would be the invisible church that Luther talked about.
I have been inquiring in Orthodoxy, and was one time looking into the RCC, but I was a bit put off that the RCC basically say you cannot be saved outside of the Catholic Church(unless one is ignorant that it is necessary for Salvation) and the Orthodox will say they know where the Church is, but not where she isn't(which I like a lot better) but outside of Orthodoxy the Western churches are hetrodox and do not have valid sacraments.
I also know that when the idea of church was written by Luther and the Reformers let's face it there were not so many sects and schisms as there are today. So would they consider Anabaptists part of the Church?
I have always been a "Mere Christianity" Christian, but the reason I went back to traditional Lutheranism, is I very much believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist and regenerational Baptism. In fact I would go on to say I don't understand why we don't have the other 5 sacraments as well.

 

[tampasteve]

I have been inquiring in Orthodoxy, and was one time looking into the RCC, but I was a bit put off that the RCC basically say you cannot be saved outside of the Catholic Church(unless one is ignorant that it is necessary for Salvation) and the Orthodox will say they know where the Church is, but not where she isn't(which I like a lot better)

As a former Catholic, I have heard that exact statement in the RCC too. I would say the RCC is actually more accomodating as to who is Christian and who is not, compared to Orthodoxy.

but outside of Orthodoxy the Western churches are hetrodox and do not have valid sacraments.

At least the RCC recognizes Orthodox and Church of the East sacraments, Orthodox don't extend that outside. IIRC they even recognize some Anglican Apostolic Succession, even if they do not believe it is licit.

I also know that when the idea of church was written by Luther and the Reformers let's face it there were not so many sects and schisms as there are today. So would they consider Anabaptists part of the Church?

That is hard to say...I think they would recognize that they are Christian, but that their understanding of the faith is incorrect. Luther very much disagreed with Zwingli on the Real Presence, but he recognized them as Christian.

I have always been a "Mere Christianity" Christian, but the reason I went back to traditional Lutheranism, is I very much believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist and regenerational Baptism. In fact I would go on to say I don't understand why we don't have the other 5 sacraments as well.

We don't have them because the scriptures and Jesus was not explicit about them, that is the reason we have the two that we do. But that is not to say that they should not be revered and practiced anyways. The Lutheran churches do practice all of them, just not as Sacraments. At least we do still keep them compared to many churches that have dropped them all together. Lutherans still have confirmation, unction, marriage, confession (personal and corporate), and to a degree Holy Orders. In fact, the Lutheran position on Vocation would esteem a few of those Sacraments greatly.

 

[Victor in Christ]

in reformed churches its the new Messianic order which started with Christ.

The New Messianic Order

 

[LizaMarie]

As a former Catholic, I have heard that exact statement in the RCC too. I would say the RCC is actually more accomodating as to who is Christian and who is not, compared to Orthodoxy.

At least the RCC recognizes Orthodox and Church of the East sacraments, Orthodox don't extend that outside. IIRC they even recognize some Anglican Apostolic Succession, even if they do not believe it is licit.

That is hard to say...I think they would recognize that they are Christian, but that their understanding of the faith is incorrect. Luther very much disagreed with Zwingli on the Real Presence, but he recognized them as Christian.

We don't have them because the scriptures and Jesus was not explicit about them, that is the reason we have the two that we do. But that is not to say that they should not be revered and practiced anyways. The Lutheran churches do practice all of them, just not as Sacraments. At least we do still keep them compared to many churches that have dropped them all together. Lutherans still have confirmation, unction, marriage, confession (personal and corporate), and to a degree Holy Orders. In fact, the Lutheran position on Vocation would esteem a few of those Sacraments greatly.

I agree with you at least since Vatican 2 that the RCC is more generous as to who is Christian. We Lutherans would be an ecclesial community whose sacraments are not valid(since we do not have valid Apostolic succession according to the RCC.)and the Orthodox would be in schism but their sacraments are considered valid as they have valid Apostolic succession according to the RCC.
I do know that the Orthodox consider no one's sacraments to be valid outside their own.
Sometimes I have gotten frustrated with the fact that within confessional Lutheranism I've seen a lot of contemporary worship slipping in, I don't want to go into detail but I used to attend an evangelical non denominational Church and I left that Church and came back to the Lutheran faith of my childhood because of the fact that I think liturgy is important(besides other theological reasons.)
I just don't want to go down the contemporary worship path.

 

[LizaMarie]

in reformed churches its the new Messianic order which started with Christ.

The New Messianic Order

Can you give me a synopsis of what it says as I time have time now to watch the whole video?

 

[LizaMarie]

I agree with you at least since Vatican 2 that the RCC is more generous as to who is Christian. We Lutherans would be an ecclesial community whose sacraments are not valid(since we do not have valid Apostolic succession according to the RCC.)and the Orthodox would be in schism but their sacraments are considered valid as they have valid Apostolic succession according to the RCC.
I do know that the Orthodox consider no one's sacraments to be valid outside their own.
Sometimes I have gotten frustrated with the fact that within confessional Lutheranism I've seen a lot of contemporary worship slipping in, I don't want to go into detail but I used to attend an evangelical non denominational Church and I left that Church and came back to the Lutheran faith of my childhood because of the fact that I think liturgy is important(besides other theological reasons.)
I just don't want to go down the contemporary worship path.

One big reason I remain a Lutheran is because I still consider us and other Protestants to be part of the Church(plus the Lutheran understanding of Justification)

 

[Shane R]

So would they consider Anabaptists part of the Church?

Anabaptists were the one group that the magisterial reformers and the Roman Catholics could agree to persecute.

In fact I would go on to say I don't understand why we don't have the other 5 sacraments as well.

It is not the most ancient practice to list seven sacraments. There are disputes regarding this number; let this be their goal: that necessary things be retained and that they be distinguished from those which are not necessary. Ceremonies divinely instituted in the preaching of Christ must also be distinguished from other works which do not pertain properly to the new covenant.

If the general rule is that they want every work commanded by God to which some promise has been added, to be called a sacrament, then prayer, patience under the cross, almsgiving, and forgiving of injury are sacraments. For to these works divine promises have always been added.
-Melancthon
​

Interestingly, Melancthon rejected unction, or anointing the sick, as a sacrament. "But the rite of anointing as it now exists is only a superstitious ceremony. Therefore this rite of unction. . . is to be rejected."

 

[Victor in Christ]

Can you give me a synopsis of what it says as I time have time now to watch the whole video?

sorry, but the preacher in the video explains it better than i ever could. All i can do is comfort you now by saying have patience and wait on the Lord. He will grant you the time to listen to it and study it word by word in due course for your blessing and learning.

god Bless.

 

[LizaMarie]

Anabaptists were the one group that the magisterial reformers and the Roman Catholics could agree to persecute.

It is not the most ancient practice to list seven sacraments. There are disputes regarding this number; let this be their goal: that necessary things be retained and that they be distinguished from those which are not necessary. Ceremonies divinely instituted in the preaching of Christ must also be distinguished from other works which do not pertain properly to the new covenant.

If the general rule is that they want every work commanded by God to which some promise has been added, to be called a sacrament, then prayer, patience under the cross, almsgiving, and forgiving of injury are sacraments. For to these works divine promises have always been added.
-Melancthon
​

Interestingly, Melancthon rejected unction, or anointing the sick, as a sacrament. "But the rite of anointing as it now exists is only a superstitious ceremony. Therefore this rite of unction. . . is to be rejected."

Isn't anointing of the sick in the Bible? (James 5: 14-15)Not saying it should necessarily be a sacrament.

 

[tampasteve]

Isn't anointing of the sick in the Bible? (James 5: 14-15)Not saying it should necessarily be a sacrament.

Yes, in several places. I think the key is that in the time of Luther and Melancthon the ceremony had become distorted and warped. Among other reasons, people were treating the oil as if it had healing ability in itself, much the way they treated relics.

 

[Shane R]

Isn't anointing of the sick in the Bible? (James 5: 14-15)Not saying it should necessarily be a sacrament.

It is, I'll give you the full paragraph since Melancthon didn't spend much time on the subject:

At one time, anointing with oil was a medical concern. For God, in order to invest the fathers and the prophets with some authority, therefore equipped them from the beginning with the gift of healing, as in the case of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Isaiah, and men like them who were physicians by profession. And it is through these men that, together with the doctrine of the true religion, there was spread information about the physical world, things pertaining to plants, and other aspects of nature. Christ revived this ancient custom when He sent the apostles, ordered them to heal the sick, and equipped them with the gift of healing. This gift remained in the church also later, and it is certain that many are still healed by the prayers of the church. It is useful to point these things out so that we may learn that a healthy body is a gift of God which He gives us so that we might serve others. He wants this to be sought and fostered with some diligence. But the rite of anointing as it now exists is only a superstitious ceremony. And invocation of the dead was added, which is ungodly. Therefore this rite of unction with its additions is to be rejected.
​

I don't agree with him but I found it interesting that of the seven sacraments known in the Roman church of his time, unction was the most objectionable one to him.

 

[LizaMarie]

Interesting. I have long wished the Church wasn't divided....for thoses of us who were born and raised outside the Roman or Eastern Church it is interesting to discover that we may not make it to heaven. I'm not saying that is what they teach but still it was a jolt.

 

[tampasteve]

Interesting. I have long wished the Church wasn't divided....for thoses of us who were born and raised outside the Roman or Eastern Church it is interesting to discover that we may not make it to heaven. I'm not saying that is what they teach but still it was a jolt.

Interesting is a good way to look at it, comfortable in your confession. I think that more times than not people in that position are offended, often without looking into the theological reasons why. I was a convert to the RCC, so my route was a little different.

 

[Victor in Christ]

Interesting. I have long wished the Church wasn't divided....for thoses of us who were born and raised outside the Roman or Eastern Church it is interesting to discover that we may not make it to heaven. I'm not saying that is what they teach but still it was a jolt.

Ecclesiastical separation is a holy thing, it was and is still necessary to teach and preach the Gospel against false doctrine. In this age its needed because so many false doctrines have risen which water down the Gospel. The Gospel of salvation is no longer spiritual, its more about what a person can gain (in a worldly sense) from attending God's house, being a member, and elder, and deacon, a minister, a Priest, a Bishop, a Pope, a moderator.

Ecclesiastes 5 - Keep they foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools; for they consider not that they do evil.

 

[FaithT]

Interesting. I have long wished the Church wasn't divided....for thoses of us who were born and raised outside the Roman or Eastern Church it is interesting to discover that we may not make it to heaven. I'm not saying that is what they teach but still it was a jolt.

I’m a bit confused. Are Lutherans and other non Catholics supposedly not making it to heaven?

 

[TKA_TN]

I agree with you at least since Vatican 2 that the RCC is more generous as to who is Christian. We Lutherans would be an ecclesial community whose sacraments are not valid(since we do not have valid Apostolic succession according to the RCC.)and the Orthodox would be in schism but their sacraments are considered valid as they have valid Apostolic succession according to the RCC.
I do know that the Orthodox consider no one's sacraments to be valid outside their own.
Sometimes I have gotten frustrated with the fact that within confessional Lutheranism I've seen a lot of contemporary worship slipping in, I don't want to go into detail but I used to attend an evangelical non denominational Church and I left that Church and came back to the Lutheran faith of my childhood because of the fact that I think liturgy is important(besides other theological reasons.)
I just don't want to go down the contemporary worship path.

I love the liturgy, my wife not so much. She loves contemporary services, I think sacraments, Lutheran view on justification are important. I believe in the real presence. We have a Lutheran church that only does contemporary in our city and it’s a compromise, but I still get word and sacrament.

 

[FaithT]

I love contemporary services, which my church has. We still have prayer, communion, sermons (“message”) and everything, but the pastors wear street clothes, the music is contemporary and Sermons are done as a series.

 

[tampasteve]

I’m a bit confused. Are Lutherans and other non Catholics supposedly not making it to heaven?

I believe that more or less officially the stance now is that Christians that are not Catholic will go.... we're just going to be in Purgatory a lot longer.

 

[FaithT]

One big reason I remain a Lutheran is because I still consider us and other Protestants to be part of the Church(plus the Lutheran understanding of Justification)

What’s Justification?

 

[FaithT]

I believe that more or less officially the stance now is that Christians that are not Catholic will go.... we're just going to be in Purgatory a lot longer.

But 1) how do we get out of Purgatory?
And, 2) Lutherans don’t believe in Purgatory anyway, right?

Does anyone here have Scriptural support for Purgatory or the Lutheran belief that there is no such thing (assuming we don’t believe in it).