Can someone explain Lutheran confession/absolution?

[PreachersWife2004]

Luther had just been freed from one of the worst situations a person on earth can be in. (we aren't supposed to talk / post about it on this site, but you can get and read any of thousands of books about it as God provides them) .

He still had a lot of 'carry-over' sin from his past, some of which he never got passed. Apparently from what others wrote later he went much farther in grace than his congregations did (they may have hung on to some of past sins for fear of changing too much or whatever reason). It was a miracle of God's that he was called and saved and listened and obeyed by faith in God through grace in Jesus Christ to be saved !
Thank God for His Own Plan and Purpose, Amen.

I'm not exactly what you're referring to with the underlined portion. I'm unaware of anything Luther was going through that couldn't be talked about on this site...

 

[Tangible]

Here is the portion of the Small Catechism on private C&A

The Small Catechism - Book of Concord

 

[Tangible]

I live in England so I've no first hand knowledge of the LCMS, but if it has discontinued or never ever practised confession before a pastor I'd be interested to know why that is.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church of England is a confessional Lutheran synod in communion with the LCMS.

Evangelical Lutheran Church of England

Evangelical Lutheran Church of England - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Edward65]

The Evangelical Lutheran Church of England is a confessional Lutheran synod in communion with the LCMS.

Evangelical Lutheran Church of England

Evangelical Lutheran Church of England - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wouldn’t join the ELCE, because like the LCMS, it endorses the Formula of Concord’s teaching on predestination, which I regard as a denial of God’s sovereignty over both salvation and damnation. I agree with Luther’s position in The Bondage of the Will that God predestines people to both heaven and hell, and not just to heaven as taught by the Formula.

 

[Tangible]

I see. If you're not a Lutheran then it's probably best that you don't join a Lutheran church.

 

[Lizabth]

I agree with all the teaching of the Book of Concord that was extant at the time of Luther, so I regard myself as a Lutheran and would have been accepted as a Lutheran during Luther’s lifetime.

Yep...I am one of those too, but in an LCMS congregation(as it is the best thing going where I live). I am not a voting member, however. I had no problem with confirming Luther's Small Catechism and love my church quite a lot. It is not hyper-confessional. Reverent and liturgical, however.

 

[Lizabth]

PW...am I correct in thinking you are WELs?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

PW...am I correct in thinking you are WELs?

yes, why?

 

[Lizabth]

I was just wondering if I recalled correctly. My mind is gettin' old.

 

[KEPLER]

<Staff Edit>

When Luther wrote BoW, he was debating only with Erasmus, who was representing the RC position (God predestined those whom he foresaw would cooperate with Grace). The FoC, in its explication of predestination is aimed at the Reformed position which, in its logical yet perverted 'solution' to the crux theologorum, had invented the heresy of limited atonement. Luther himself taught universal atonement (AE 25: 375-6).

I would suggest that if you affirm limited atonement, you kindly leave the Lutheran forum to the Lutherans. If you deny limited atonement, then please just be civil.

K

 

[jinc1019]

When Luther wrote BoW, he was debating only with Erasmus, who was representing the RC position (God predestined those whom he foresaw would cooperate with Grace). The FoC, in its explication of predestination is aimed at the Reformed position which, in its logical yet perverted 'solution' to the crux theologorum, had invented the heresy of limited atonement. Luther himself taught universal atonement (AE 25: 375-6).

I would suggest that if you affirm limited atonement, you kindly leave the Lutheran forum to the Lutherans. If you deny limited atonement, then please just be civil.

K

I am totally lost on this...How does the Book of Concord differ prior to Luther compared to after him?

 

[KEPLER]

I am totally lost on this...How does the Book of Concord differ prior to Luther compared to after him?

It doesn't, except to those who willfully read it (or read Luther) in the way they want to. Calvinists always want to read BoW as if Luther is a proto-Calvinist. The problem with this is that they haven't read enough Luther. Luther constantly says over the top things, and then turns around and qualifies them. It's his rhetorical signature. Frankly, Luther didn't give much of a rat's patootie about predestination. If he could have ranked important doctrines, predestination would have ranked somewhere down with the proper color of the carpet in the sanctuary. Why should we bother with the actions of God which He hasn't chosen to disclose when we have the wonders of the cross to behold?

K

 

[Lizabth]

Hey jinc: I could never get fully on board with baptismal regeneration. Nor the idea that baptism is necessary to salvation.

The idea that the layperson may have to perform a baptism in an emergency just sits wrong with me. If the person near death is one of God's sheep, they are perfectly safe in His care, sans baptism, just like the thief on the cross. Baptism only saves through Christ, and Christ alone saves us.

OF COURSE we should bring our infants and those professing faith to the sacrament of baptism, to be named in God's name. But should some soul not make it to the font prior to death, he is not condemned if he is one of God's elect.

I absolutely believe in the perseverance of the saints(that is, God's elect). His sheep hear his voice, and none of them will perish.

God is sovereign and his will my delight. I am perfectly content to rest there.

Edit: I was pleased that the Small Catechism linked baptismal efficacy with faith. This makes good sense to me, and I was happily able to confirm my understanding according to the SC.

 

[LilLamb219]

MOD HAT ON

Please follow the rules when posting. This one seems to apply here:
Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic.


MOD HAT OFF

 

[godenver1]

Hey jinc: I could never get fully on board with baptismal regeneration. Nor the idea that baptism is necessary to salvation.

The idea that the layperson may have to perform a baptism in an emergency just sits wrong with me. If the person near death is one of God's sheep, they are perfectly safe in His care, sans baptism, just like the thief on the cross. Baptism only saves through Christ, and Christ alone saves us.

OF COURSE we should bring our infants and those professing faith to the sacrament of baptism, to be named in God's name. But should some soul not make it to the font prior to death, he is not condemned if he is one of God's elect.

I absolutely believe in the perseverance of the saints(that is, God's elect). His sheep hear his voice, and none of them will perish.

God is sovereign and his will my delight. I am perfectly content to rest there.

Edit: I was pleased that the Small Catechism linked baptismal efficacy with faith. This makes good sense to me, and I was happily able to confirm my understanding according to the SC.

Very interesting. I'll have to re-read the small catechism, but coming from an evangelical background this is probably the biggest theological jump I'd make if I were to change to a Lutheran church.

Edit: it appears that you can't really expand on your beliefs, but I'm happy for you to pm if you want because I'd be very interested to hear how you reconcile your belief on baptism with the small catechism.

 

[Tangible]

The idea that the layperson may have to perform a baptism in an emergency just sits wrong with me. If the person near death is one of God's sheep, they are perfectly safe in His care, sans baptism, just like the thief on the cross. Baptism only saves through Christ, and Christ alone saves us.

There is nothing here contrary to the Lutheran doctrine of Baptism. Emergency baptisms are not for believers who have not been baptized, but for infants and children and those who come to faith at the end of their lives and wish to be baptized.

 

[LilLamb219]

MOD HAT ON

Closing thread for staff review.

MOD HAT OFF

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

MOD HAT ON

Closing thread for staff review.

MOD HAT OFF

Further to Lambies Mod Hat...

This thread has undergone a cleanup (purge more like), so if your post is missing it is either because it violated the rule below, or replied to a post that did which has been deleted.

Regarding this rule, those who are not members of this forum please heed it:

Congregational Forum Restrictions and orthodox Christian Only Forums
Members who do not truly share the core beliefs and teachings of a specific congregational forum may post in fellowship or ask questions, but they may not teach or debate within the forum. There are forums reserved for orthodox Christian members only. Please do not post in these forums unless you are truly a Nicene Creed, Trinitarian Christian (please see our Statement of Faith to know exactly what that is). If you wish to discuss unorthodox doctrines, you may do so in the Unorthodox Doctrinal Discussion forum.

Those who are members of this forum; please report any violations of this rule.

I'm going to reopen this thread, and we can all try again.

Mark
Staff Supervisor

 

[godenver1]

So just to clarify:

Lutheran confession differs because the clergyman doesn't forgive the sins of the confessor but declares God's forgiveness?

How much detail must one go into? must we confess (for example) sexual immorality or the specifics therein?

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

So just to clarify:

Lutheran confession differs because the clergyman doesn't forgive the sins of the confessor but declares God's forgiveness?

How much detail must one go into? must we confess (for example) sexual immorality or the specifics therein?

As little or as much as you need to.