Information on good Lutheran theologians

[Daniel9v9]

If by contemporary you mean still among us, I think some real heavyweight theologians would be:

• Rev. Dr. John Kleinig - A fantastically insightful theologian.
• Rev. Dr. David L. Adams - A great OT scholar and exegetical theologian.
• Rev. Dr. Joel D. Biermann - A terrific dogmatician.

Others that I really like and often recommend would be:

• Rev. Bryan Wolfmueller - A great teacher and defender of the faith with a real gift for teaching.
• Rev. William Weedon - Great on Biblical commentary and Church History.

I guess Hutter, Krauth, Pieper, Webber, Neve, Reu, Weidner, Engelder, Arndt, Laache, Kretzmann, Hoenecke, Shmid, and Franzmann also deserves mentioning. They're contemporary-ish.

 

[Kalevalatar]

Hi Kalevatar,

I have know of Mannermaa's proposition of a closeness between Luther's understanding of justification and the Orthodox concept of theosis. What I did not know - until I read it on Wikipedia just now - is that Mannermaa was critical of the Leuenberg Konkordie. And in fact the Finnish church is only a participating member - Member Churches | Communion of Protestant Churches in Europe CPCE

hat is your beef with Leuenberg? And what does this mean in practical terms?

Hi Till!

I suppose the short answer would be that the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland's beef with with the LA is that it is just too universal and generic "European Protestant."

Rev. Dr. Tomi Karttunen is our guru on ecumenical issues and you can read his excellent detailed full summary on the issue here.

1) LA is based on the idea of ”minimal consensus” and remains thus pretty open to various interpretations. The theological work after the Agreement has reduced various interpretations, but the text is still ambivalent and differs from the line of the ELCF to underline the whole Augsburg Confession, and our Lutheran confession in general, as the basis of interpretation. This is connected with the perception that

2) A grounds the church fellowship upon the distinction between ”basis” (Grund) and ”shape” (Gestalt). Then the ultimate interpretation is that only the act of justification is the qualitative basis and the explicated doctrine is the historically determined, quantitative shape or expression. Although the final version of the Agreement doesn’t represent this ultimate interpretation, but points out more than the previous versions the meaning of the doctrine, the consequence from that point of departure still seems to be that the content and meaning of the faith, and of the confession become dimmer.

3) LA’s key concept ”church fellowship” (Kirchengemeinschaft) is too unclear and indefinite. Its interpretation through the concept of ”koinonia”, on the other hand, brings the intentions of the counterparts nearer to each other, but it doesn’t take away the problem of many interpretations which are caused by the starting point. Moreover, the distinction between “basis” and “shape” brings problems to the objective of aiming toward the goal of visible unity.

4) LA’s decree of validity is unclear. In some cases, it has had no effects on the life of the churches which have signed. In other cases, it is seen to define a “protestant” ecumenical identity.

5) LA’s character as a confessional book and its relations to the confessional writings of the subscribed churches is unclear. The official interpretation is that LA doesn’t replace the confessions of the signers, but they remain valid. On the other hand, in the hymnals of the German Land Churches LA is among the ”confession like” documents printed in the appendix.

6) The most difficult single problem of LA is still the formulation of the doctrine of Eucharist. It is not satisfactory, according to our Lutheran understanding. There are still also other problematic articles of doctrine.

 

[Till Schilling]

Hi Till!

I suppose the short answer would be that the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland's beef with with the LA is that it is just too universal and generic "European Protestant."

Rev. Dr. Tomi Karttunen is our guru on ecumenical issues and you can read his excellent detailed full summary on the issue here.

Thanks, Kalevalatar. So the reasons are theological and philosophical concerns. Not pratical.

Is there a pratical difference? Would a Finnish pastor refuse a Dutch Reformed communion? Would a Finnish Lutheran student on an Erasmus program in Berlin be warned not to commune in a "Prussian" church?

 

[Kalevalatar]

Thanks, Kalevalatar. So the reasons are theological and philosophical concerns. Not pratical.

Is there a pratical difference? Would a Finnish pastor refuse a Dutch Reformed communion? Would a Finnish Lutheran student on an Erasmus program in Berlin be warned not to commune in a "Prussian" church?

Ah, let me just admit that I am out of my depths here already! I'm not a theologian, so please do take this with a grain of salt: I'm answering purely as a lay believer.

But yes, there are practical differences too.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland is a full member of the Porvoo Communion
(Porvoo-Bårgo is the Finnish town wherein the agreement was signed, so that kind of member), a full communion (altar and pulpit fellowship) of the Nordic and Baltic Evangelical Lutheran Churches, the Anglican Churches of England (The Church of England) and of Ireland, the Church of Wales, the Scottish Episcopal Church, as well as the two Mediterranean reformed churches in Portugal and Spain. If you compare the two agreements, LA and Porvoo, side by side, the Porvoo is clearly more thorough, if you will, more in-depth theologically, but also with very concrete practical implications.

The Eucharistic service, above all:

that in all our churches the Word of God is authentically preached, and the sacraments of baptism and the eucharist are duly administered

The episcopate, for example, is a sign, our sign, of visible, historic unity and with practical implications when it comes to, say, the consecrations of bishops. When the current Archbishop Luoma was consecrated, in addition to the Finnish Bishops, the traditional apostolic laying on of hands was aided by Archbishop Emeritus Anders Wejryd from the Church of Sweden, Bishop Helga Haugland Byfuglien from the Church of Norway, Bishop Peter Skov-Jakobsen from the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Denmark, Bishop Agnes Sigurdardottir from the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Iceland, Archbishop Urmas Viilma from the Estonian Evangelical Lutheran Church, and Archbishop Michael Jackson from the Church of Ireland. In addition, bishops from all Nordic countries, Estonia, the Faroe Islands, Poland, England and Ireland, the United States, South African and the Holy Land, Palestine and Jordan were witnessing, as well as the General Secretary of the Lutheran World Federation, Rev. Dr Martin Junge. For me, as a lay member and a Lutheran, this sort of apostolicity -- historic apostolicity -- of the Church and the episcopacy as the visible sign and practical tool, if you will, of the continuation of the life and ministry of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church is important.

The Episcopate

The acknowledgement of oversight or episkope is also a uniting factor in Porvoo. All the Porvoo churches had maintained the tradition of episcopal oversight from the time of the Reformation, but not all maintained an unbroken apostolic succession. The Porvoo Common Statements deals with this in chapter IV.

The conclusion is that the churches acknowledge that each church has maintained an orderly succession of episcopal ministry within the continuity of its pastoral life, focused in the consecrations of bishops and in the experience and witness of the historic sees.

"We acknowledge that the episcopal office is valued and maintained in all our churches as a visible sign expressing and serving the Church’s unity and continuity in apostolic life, mission and ministry.

And the churches commit themselves to welcome persons episcopally ordained in any of our churches to the office of bishop, priest or deacon to serve,[..] in that ministry in the receiving church without re-ordination; – by invitation and in accordance with any regulations which may from time to time be in force.”

On the practical side, pastors from the Lutheran churches have worked in Anglican churches and vice versa. If you are a Brit and a member of the C of E and stuck in Finland because of Covid and Brexit, you can get confirmed or married in the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland and get your child baptized, without having to become a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland. You can attend an Anglican Mass by a pastor of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland.

What are the practical implications of Porvoo?
Any baptized member of one of the Porvoo churches is, according to the Porvoo Agreement, to be regarded as members of our own, and should be welcomed to receive sacramental and other pastoral ministrations.

Would a Finnish pastor refuse a Dutch Reformed communion? Would a Finnish Lutheran student on an Erasmus program in Berlin be warned not to commune in a "Prussian" church?

So yes, a Finnish pastor in good faith could not participate in a Dutch reformed Communion any more than they could participate in a Roman Catholic Communion. And a Finnish Erasmus student would not seek out a Prussian church to commune in, I would not think. We are quite aware of our distinct Lutheran identity, thanks to the almost universal Lutheran confirmation school that 80% of Finnish teens aged 14-15 participate in.

As the Rev. Dr. Karttunen outlines, the LA is too wishy-washy (and non-existent Lutheran) to sign in on, yet it is in the ecumenical interest of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland to nevertheless particiate in the dialogue of the Leuenberg churches. It is a bit of a paradox that because the ELCF considers the AL to be too feel-good vague and thus, basically a chat club, the ELCF nevertheless strongly feels that it is very important to participate in the chat club as an out-member, even when you think there is not enough meat to actually become a full member.

Also, bear in mind that the original ELCF-LA considerations were made against the 1970s Cold War ecumenical talks with the then-Orthodox Church in the Soviet Union, which were quite ground breaking, globally.

As a fairly typical member of the ELCF, I feel that my "natural" international reference group are the fellow Nordic Lutheran national/state churches and the Baltic Lutheran Churches with whom we share centuries of common history, as well as with the UK/British Island Anglican/Episcopal Churches. I admit to being rather, well, massively ignorant when it comes to the continental European Reformed/Protestant Churches and their histories and theologies. I apologize!! It is only now that you mention that I even stop and think about it. So thank you for that, for making me reflect. I sincerely hope we can continue this dialogue and learn from each other. So, your turn. Tell me about your church and help me understand where you come from, please.

 

[Till Schilling]

I sincerely hope we can continue this dialogue and learn from each other. So, your turn. Tell me about your church and help me understand where you come from, please.

I should have known I will get myself into trouble and should have kept quiet. Ok, with lots of caveats - I am no expert, might be wrong, am not even (anymore) a member of any of those churches - I will try. Should I bore you - or others - with stuff you already know, just ignore me.

I will focus on Germany and Switzerland. Obivously, this is where the reformation took place. Or began. In - and that is important as you will see - the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation. Which, as you undoubtedly know, was not one unified country or kingdom but more of a federation. The Swiss more and more carved out their own space for themselves within the Empire - the Confoederatio Helvetica - which again was - as the name says - more a federation. Now why does this matter with regards to our subject? Because it is the reason that even today in Germany and Switzerland there are many regional churches - Landeskirchen - which should NOT be translated with the term state church. The Evangelical Church of Germany - Evangelische Kirche Deutschlands - and the reformed Church of Switzerland are not churches but federation of churches. In the case of the EKD churches with different confessions and different ways of church government. And different names. Some of them are called evangelisch-lutherisch and these are of course Lutheran churches which are members of the LWF - others are simply called evangelisch, these ones are typically united (but not all, some are Lutheran). The point is - and that will be strange for Americans - they are regional and cannot expand across the borders of their region. So if for instance you find yourself in Düsseldorf and are not happy with the united regional church there, the Evangelical Church of the Rhineland, because you would prefer to be in a Lutheran church, then you have to move. For example to Munich where you can attend the Evangelical-Lutheran Church of Bavaria.

Where does this come from? As you know the regional rulers within the Empire - remenber not a strongly unified empire with a strong central ruler but more a federation in which the emperor faced many challenges to his influence and power - played an important role in the reformation: the CA whilst written by Melanchthon was presented to the emperor by those rulers who had joined the reformation. Also remember that in Germany bishops did not join the reformation. this is where the concept of a regional church with the regional ruler as head of that church - in a way replacing the bishop - comes from.

Now, when a ruler joined the reformation that meant his entire region had to join as well. The individual conscience was ignored: cuius regio, eius religio. So Germany - and Switzerland religiously started to look like a patchwork bed cover: Catholic regions and regions that joined the reformation. But it did not end there: We know that the reformation split. Mainly over the question of the presence of Christ in the elements of the Eucharist. The 1529 discussions between Zwingli and Luther in Marburg come to mind. So the reformation split into two confessions: Lutheran and Reformed. Within Switzerland only the Reformed confession remained but in Germany both confessions existed, again initially sperated into different regions but over time as the cuis regio, eius religio principle was not enfored anymore and as some people moved and as anyway the shape of regions or lands changed both confessions started having churches in other regions. Add to that the Reformed refugees from France - the Huguenots - who were allowed to settle in the, until than pretty much exclusively Lutheran Brandenburg - the region around Berlin - and you get a pretty colourful patchwork quilt. Still the vast majority of Germany's protestants were Lutheran but there were important exceptions - e.g. the rulers of Prussia, the Hohenzollern family joined the Reformed faith - and anyway more and more regions or lands were split between Lutheran parts, Reformed parts and Catholic parts within that land.

To sum it up: due to the fact that here - in Germany and Switzerland - the reformation took place but failed to gain the dominance as it has in Scandinavia but likewise the Catholic church failed to regain the dominance it had and has in Southern Europe, Switzerland and even more so Germany ended up as confessional patchworks. With a lot of suspicion and tensions. Some examples:
Little know fact: Switzerland had a civil war in 1847!! between Catholic cantons and Reformed ones.
I remember having to collect money for the German Evangical development aid ageny as part of my confirmation classes in the 1980s and (not a few) Catholics on whose doors I knocked refused to give.
Karl Barth, the Swiss Reformed who worked as a theology professor in Germany in the 1930s and was the main influce behind the Barmer Declaration of the the confessing church against the growing influce of Nazism was looked at with a lot of suspicion by the Lutheran theologian Werner Elert, who refused to support the Barmer Declaration because of theological differences. So much for shortsightedness.

So, going back to the year 1600, after the hot phase of the reformation has ended, we have a Germany with three confessions - Catholic, Lutheran and Reformed. But the idea of uniting the Reformed and the Lutheran confession had not gone away and come up again and again. Most powerfully by the king of Prussia who in 1817 - the long moribund Holy Roman Empire had by then quite unceremonially been put to death by Napoleon - par ordre du mufti created the Prussian Church Union. Which caused some Lutherans to split from that church, others to emigrate to the US and was one of the causes for the creation of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod.

This creation of united churches continued and today in terms of membership about half of the believers in the EKD (Evangelical Church of Germany) are members of a united church and half are members of a Lutheran church. But anyway now - since about 1950 - full altar and pulpit fellowship consists and at university students do not study Lutheran or Reformed theology but "Evangelische Theologie". The move to unite Reformed and Lutheran churches did and does actually continue. Either unite them directly into one church or into a federation of churches. For example in Austria the Evangelische Kirche A.B. und H.B. is a federation between a Lutheran (A.B. = Augsburger Bekenntnis) church and a reformed (H.B. = Helvetisches Bekenntnis) church. In France in 2013 a new and fully united church was created: Église protestante unie de France.

You can see how it would have been a small step from full altar and pulpit fellowship between Lutheran and United Evangelical churches in Germany to full altar and pulpit fellowship with the Reformed churches of Switzerland and elsewhere. This is the road to Leuenberg.

So what is spirituality in a United or a Reformed church like and how would it differ from your Finnish Lutheran experience: simpler liturgy, no vestments other than a black talar, definitely no smells and bells, no pictures in the church even though that is not so strict anymore, the Lord's supper only once a month. Probably greater independe of the individual congregation, no bishop or if there is a bishop, his role is less pastoral. Strong focus on diakonia. Brainy. What about double predestination, pneumatic understanding of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist? What about these confessional differences? Mainly regarded as being of historical interest only. The reformed churches of Switzerland do now consider themselves "bekenntnisfrei" - without a confession. In fact one of the initial Reformed reactions towards the Joint Declaration on Justifaction by the LWF and the Catholic Church was: "We don't understand why this was necessary, we are not interested in theological debates from the 16th century. We focus on the problems of the world of the 20th century."


Hope this was not too boring and at least contained some things you did not know yet.

As the Rev. Dr. Karttunen outlines, the LA is too wishy-washy (and non-existent Lutheran) to sign in on,

I hope I could show you that the statement of "non-existent Lutheran" is incorrect. Leuenberg contains as members many Lutheran churches - also from Scandinavia and the Baltic - but also from Germany. As they are individual regionals churches like Ev.-luth. Kirche Bayerns, Ev.-luth. Kirche Sachens etc you might not be aware of them but they represent roughly 10 million Lutheran believers. Also the additional 10 million from united churches also have a Lutheran heritage. In my perception the Lutheran element in these united churches is stronger than the Reformed influence. Even though both are there and are visible.

Now, regarding Leuenberg being wishy-washy and Porvoo much more solid. Forgive me, but I had to smile. I lived in England and was a member of the Church of England. And one of the things I loved about the CofE is that it allowed my wife and me to be in one church despite different opinions. The CofE has different church parties with - in my opinion - different confessions. At least two. The evangelical low church party is Reformed in their sacramentology, the Anglo-Catholic church party is - well - Anglo-Catholic in their sacramentology. Both confessions differ from Lutheran sacramentology. What you Nordic Lutherans do of course have in common with the CofE is that the bishops joined - had to join - the reformation and therefore both of you kept the sign of apostolic succession. The importance of which - I must admit - was never understood by my German conservative Evangelical mind. For me it is important to share the faith of the apostles. Not just a sign.

Anyway, I will end here and wish you all the best,

Till

 

[Kalevalatar]

Hope this was not too boring and at least contained some things you did not know yet.

Not at all! Thank you so very much, Till, for your time and effort to write such a thorough reply! I wish I could recommend your post more than once.

Continental Central European / Holy Roman Empire history is hugely fascinating, but also gets very complex and confusing like in two seconds , thanks to all those wars and alliances, marriages & territorial acquisitions and patrilineal primogeniture/inheritance. We have but the three Vasa brothers -- Eric XIV, John III, and Charles IX of Sweden -- engaged in a bit of a Game of Thrones, and I have trouble keeping their timelines and alliances straight!

So what is spirituality in a United or a Reformed church like and how would it differ from your Finnish Lutheran experience: simpler liturgy, no vestments other than a black talar, definitely no smells and bells, no pictures in the church even though that is not so strict anymore, the Lord's supper only once a month. Probably greater independe of the individual congregation, no bishop or if there is a bishop, his role is less pastoral. Strong focus on diakonia. Brainy. What about double predestination, pneumatic understanding of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist? What about these confessional differences? Mainly regarded as being of historical interest only. The reformed churches of Switzerland do now consider themselves "bekenntnisfrei" - without a confession. In fact one of the initial Reformed reactions towards the Joint Declaration on Justifaction by the LWF and the Catholic Church was: "We don't understand why this was necessary, we are not interested in theological debates from the 16th century. We focus on the problems of the world of the 20th century."

For our church and for me as a member, the three most important things are 1) the Lutheran Confessions, our "rule book," wherein things negotiable and unnegotiable are laid out as well as beliefs and practices we reject. It makes things quite simple, since it's basically love it or leave it.

2) The episcopacy and the apostolic succession: bishops and laying on of hands, highly visual ritual as it is with the vestments, very princely staff and stuff, it's about agreement, accountability, oversight, continuity. We are but 4 million believers. What would or could happen if this clique of like-minded people, for decades and centuries, debated theology amongst ourselves? Cultish mass delusion probably. What I see has happened to some other churches, when people disagree and quickly go and establish their own church based on their own personal beliefs, no oversight, no self-reflection and no actual debate. For our bishop to be consecrated, there has to be an agreement not just among our own bishops but among our entire global community of bishops that our bishop candidate is teaching and upholding the theology we all agree on.

Our parishes are independent, however, and do have quite distinct individual characters, even if it isn't obvious to some from outside, depending on the parish's demographic above all.

3) The Mass, the sacraments and the liturgy, which hasn't changed all that much. I suppose the low/high church liturgy is more of an acquired taste. For me, the comfortable and familiar rhythm of the liturgy is what transports me to that state where I can, well, meet God, if you will. I run. I have my own pre-run, get ready and warm-up rituals to help me get into that glorious "flow" state of mind. Running is still the thing and and what gives me real joy, not the ritual themselves, to sort of illustrate.

Both mission work and diakonia, local and global, are actually very big in our church. When asked what Finns most value about the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland, the church's diakonia work gets overwhelming thumbsup. It's big, it's visible, it's everywhere. The annual nationwide Common Responsibility Campaign by our church is the largest annual fundraising campaign in Finland.

I hope I could show you that the statement of "non-existent Lutheran" is incorrect.

I think the context here is the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland's ecumenical dialogue with both of the two big "mother" chuches, the Moscow Patriarchate and the Vatican, which have been going on for decades. The strong Evangelical Lutheran identity, with strong theology, is the foundation that enables those negotiations, or Moscow and Vatican would not be in the table with the tiny Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland. Even back in the 1970's there was disagreement even among the Finnish bishops regarding being a full member or merely an observing chat member of the Leuenberg. One gets the sense that Leuenberg was collateral damage compared to Moscow and Vatican, but especially re: Moscow. The Cold War, Finland's geopolitical positions next-door to the Soviet Union and history with Russia/CCCP, the Orthodox (state!) Church of Finland and Finnish/Lutheran minority churches in Soviet Union.

Here, the Joint Declaration on Justifaction by the LWF and the Catholic Church you mention, was huge. The very fact that the Roman Catholic Bishop of Helsinki, Teemu Sippo, participated side by side with the Lutheran clergy and the Lutheran Archbishop in the huge traditional outdoor Mass of Suvivirsikirkko, Summer Hymn Church, was ... well, I was in tears. The Catholic Bishop, the Orthodox Metropolitan Bishop, the Lutheran Archbishop, the President and so forth regularly attend the ecumenical Christmas service and the ecumenical service of the opening of the parliamentary session, but this was in 2017, the Commemoration of the Reformation 500 years before, and it was a Mass, i.e. an Eucharist service. And the Pope went to Lund, Sweden, to attend a Mass there.

Long past history, yes, but if you think about all the precious lives lost because of intra-Christian fight between the Catholics and the Protestants, not just in the power struggles in the Thirty Years' Wars but in Northern Ireland in our time (well, my time anyway!), it is a step forward, a step that needs to be taken.

I admire the Contental European Reformed and Protestant Churches' commitment to here and now, tackling concrete problems of today rather than dwelling in the past. I would like to think that my church, too, is and can be active and proactive in today's life, side by side with dusty theological debate and somewhat old-fashioned ecumenical pursuits. The ELCF, despite championing families, is a true groundbreaker in recognizing singlehood, single households (44% of all households!) and challenges thereof, loneliness, here in Finland, so much so that even the public social services turn to the church's "singleness" expertise.

Now, regarding Leuenberg being wishy-washy and Porvoo much more solid. Forgive me, but I had to smile. I lived in England and was a member of the Church of England. And one of the things I loved about the CofE is that it allowed my wife and me to be in one church despite different opinions. The CofE has different church parties with - in my opinion - different confessions. At least two. The evangelical low church party is Reformed in their sacramentology, the Anglo-Catholic church party is - well - Anglo-Catholic in their sacramentology. Both confessions differ from Lutheran sacramentology.

Most outsiders tend to not understand, since the myth of the homogenous Nordic/Scandinavia is so strong, is that Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland, too, is an umbrella organization, not unlike the plural, multi-party Finnish Parliament. We have the very ultra-ultra conservative Laestadians (no TV, no alcohol, no makeup, no contraception, no-trousers and all kinds of no-nos mostly directed to control the women and the girls) to the liberal rainbow pastors, who, for instance, say they want to marry same-sex couples even though the bishops and the Synod maintain that bless people, bless unions and families, but do not marry in the church (civil marriage,2018, is very recent thing in Finland, the most conservative of the Nordic countries).

Yet neither the ultra-conservatives nor the ultra-liberals want to call it quits, go on and establish their own churches. Not as long as -- as Calvin and Luther both taught -- wherever the Word of God is taught faithfully and wherever we see the sacraments administered according to the institution of Christ. Our church is not quick on the feet when it comes theological matters -- we debate stuff for decades before we change a single note in the hymnal! -- a big ships takes it time to change the course -- but on the other hand, we are big, we are wealthy, we have a big, professional organization of skilled employees, so when tragedy strikes, pandemia, tsunami or an earthquake, Estonia, or the Notre Dame fire, we can literally overnight raise and donate millions.

What you Nordic Lutherans do of course have in common with the CofE is that the bishops joined - had to join - the reformation and therefore both of you kept the sign of apostolic succession.

At least here in Finland, the Reformation was clergy-led. Finnish pastors studied in Wittenberg and/or in Vyborg with pastors who had in turn studied in Wittenberg, Rostock, Leuven, Reformation cities and universities, and thus found the ideas appealing and gradually started intergrating them into the parish life long before the Swedish King decided these new ideas were good for him and his reign and kingdom. It's a little bit of an accident that the Finnish and Swedish churches retained the Apostolic Succession, as (pro-Vatican) bishops consecrated bishops in the Apostolic Succession who would later on go full Lutheran and/or consecrate to-be Lutheran bishops and priests.

Sorry, you are probably not that interested in the finesses of the Finnish Reformation, and unless you are a Finn, why would you be!

The importance of which - I must admit - was never understood by my German conservative Evangelical mind. For me it is important to share the faith of the apostles. Not just a sign.

Yeah, I totally get that! Just that, for me, for us, it is not just a "sign." Okay, granted, that is the word I used, but the sign itself signifies much more. I try to believe the best of people -- at least I think I should! -- but the cynic and the pragmatic in me -- whether it is the government or the church -- cannot help saying, trust, but verify. Without oversight, without accountability (to the churchs and bishops in the Middle East, Africa North and South America, British Island Continental Europe and Norden), how do you know that you still maintain and share the same faith with the apostles?

Anyway, I will end here and wish you all the best,

Till

My pleasure!

You say you are no longer a member of any of those churches so I try to be as inclusive as I can by wishing you a good and merry Shrovetide, and stay safe, you and yours.

 

[Till Schilling]

I try to be as inclusive as I can by wishing you a good and merry Shrovetide, and stay safe, you and yours.

Two more days of chocolate, only two days.

 

[Kalevalatar]

Two more days of chocolate, only two days.

"How many semlor can you eat in one day?"
"Yes!"

 

[Till Schilling]

"How many semlor can you eat in one day?"
"Yes!"

This is a surprisingly similar tradition to our carneval food - Fasnachtsküchle

Fastnachtsküchle à la Oma Erni von sweetandjuicy | Chefkoch

Only that those are deep-fried!!! Traditionally in animal fat! Granted, noone uses animal fat anymore but they are bad, very bad...and delicious when they are fresh.

 

[FaithT]

Bump. I am looking for some new reading material for a flight in the coming months....any thoughts or suggestions?

What does it mean when someone writes “bump”?

 

[tampasteve]

What does it mean when someone writes “bump”?

Usually it's too "bump" up an old thread and bring it back. It's OK to do if one is asking or adding content, but sometimes people use it to just bump up a thread to get it back on the top of active threads, and that's kind of uncouth.

 

[FaithT]

Usually it's too "bump" up an old thread and bring it back. It's OK to do if one is asking or adding content, but sometimes people use it to just bump up a thread to get it back on the top of active threads, and that's kind of uncouth.

Ok