Roman Catholic teachings denounced by Orthodox groups?

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Yes there is a difference. The Evangelical Lutheran Church (ELCA) does not subscribe to the Confessions. I don't know why they continue to call themselves 'Lutheran'. I asked this on the ELCA forum but haven't received a reply.

Unless there's a difference between Lutheranism and Evangelical Lutheranism (and if there is, I'm sorry; I was not aware of this, so you can feel free to ignore this post), it seems that Lutheranism is classified as a mainline church. See this link via JSTOR to a book put out by NYU Press on Mainline Christianity (under the section titled "The Mainline's Slippery Slope An Introduction").

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Is the point of either really to save us from disagreements? Heck, in the Bible itself, in the portion of Acts that deals with the Apostolic Council in Jerusalem, we are told that St. Paul withstood St. Peter to his face, because he was in the wrong. So there's disagreement between the apostles themselves in the Bible. Almost like Sts. Peter and Paul couldn't just open up the NT and see what it said...

Funny lol.
This thread has been reduced down to the bare bones of what it means for Scripture or Tradition (namely Roman Catholic) to have pride of place, because of the insistence by some Catholics that Sola Scriptura is 'Nuda Scriptura', rather than 'Scripture is the only source of doctrine for the Church' and that this 'Nuda Scriptura' has created thousands of denominations.

I've never asked anyone in my own Church about this, but the way I look at tradition when it comes to things like the subject of this thread is that one of the good things it does is it provides for us an understanding of both what we're doing and why we're doing it that way and not some other way. So, for instance with baptism, if someone were to ask "Why are we required to renounce former beliefs in order to join the Church?", we can point to the same section of Acts (which, yes, it is right to call both tradition and scripture; I don't put up big barriers between the two, as St. Paul commands us to hold to what is taught whether by word or by the epistle) to make the point that our holy fathers since the beginning of the faith have stood against those who wanted to bring the errors of their previous belief system into the Church, whether on account of appearing to be in agreement with the powerful (as was the case then; St. Peter was temporarily accepting of the Judaizing faction from Jerusalem), or not wanting to give up a beloved pet-belief even though it is anathema, or for any other reason.

This is the proper understanding of Tradition, in my opinion. So long as we realize that we cannot predicate upon God. I appreciate too that you do not separate Tradition and Scripture. Tradition informs both our beliefs and practices. But again, for Lutherans, only that which Scripture witnesses to is doctrine.

At least that's the point of view I've sort of absorbed via osmosis in my own communion. These things are for us so that we may be better fed, not to spite others for not being one of us.

Beautiful. Yes!

 

[tampasteve]

Unless there's a difference between Lutheranism and Evangelical Lutheranism (and if there is, I'm sorry; I was not aware of this, so you can feel free to ignore this post), it seems that Lutheranism is classified as a mainline church. See this link via JSTOR to a book put out by NYU Press on Mainline Christianity (under the section titled "The Mainline's Slippery Slope An Introduction").

There is a difference. The more conservative Lutheran bodies like the LCMS, ELS, WELS (all of these are USA primarily) are certainly not mainline as defined by most interpretations of what classifys the mainline denominations. The "Evangelical" part of the ELCA name is a call back to the traditional meaning of Evangelical as was used in Germany and the Nordic countries in times past.

Yes there is a difference. The Evangelical Lutheran Church (ELCA) does not subscribe to the Confessions. I don't know why they continue to call themselves 'Lutheran'. I asked this on the ELCA forum but haven't received a reply.

I replied in the Lutheran forum too. But in direct reply here, which is a slightly different question than you asked over there, the ELCA does subscribe to the Confessions. However, they do not see them in the exact same light as the Confessional Lutheran bodies. But this view is really more in line with most global Lutheranism. Globally Lutherans may be more socially conservative than the ELCA, but they are not really as dogmatic about the Confessions as the socially conservative bodies found in the USA and Canada.

Being Lutheran is more than being strictly Confessional.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

I just saw your reply. Thank you so much. You seem to say, that for ELCA, the Confessions are a guiding principle but not an actual Confession of Faith. Am I misunderstanding you?

There is a difference. The more conservative Lutheran bodies like the LCMS, ELS, WELS (all of these are USA primarily) are certainly not mainline as defined by most interpretations of what classifys the mainline denominations. The "Evangelical" part of the ELCA name is a call back to the traditional meaning of Evangelical as was used in Germany and the Nordic countries in times past.

I replied in the Lutheran forum too. But in direct reply here, which is a slightly different question than you asked over there, the ELCA does subscribe to the Confessions. However, they do not see them in the exact same light as the Confessional Lutheran bodies. But this view is really more in line with most global Lutheranism. Globally Lutherans may be more socially conservative than the ELCA, but they are not really as dogmatic about the Confessions as the socially conservative bodies found in the USA and Canada.

Being Lutheran is more than being strictly Confessional.

Agreed. It's also about sausage and beer

 

[tampasteve]

I just saw your reply. Thank you so much. You seem to say, that for ELCA, the Confessions are a guiding principle but not an actual Confession of Faith. Am I misunderstanding you?

I think that is a pretty fair assessment of how they are seen in the ELCA. Probably stronger than just a guiding principal, but not a strict unbendable constitution as it were.

Agreed. It's also about sausage and beer

Now, that I can get behind! You might find this thread interesting, it is a combined ELCA member brewery/church in Orlando Florida.

 

[Albion]

There is a difference. The more conservative Lutheran bodies like the LCMS, ELS, WELS (all of these are USA primarily) are certainly not mainline as defined by most interpretations of what classifys the mainline denominations. The "Evangelical" part of the ELCA name is a call back to the traditional meaning of Evangelical as was used in Germany and the Nordic countries in times past.

You may remember this, but when the ELCA was created, the name proposed by the leadership was just LCA, but the people, the ordinary delegates to that convention, made it known that they wanted the word "Evangelical" to be used as well.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

I think that is a pretty fair assessment of how they are seen in the ELCA. Probably stronger than just a guiding principal, but not a strict unbendable constitution as it were.



Now, that I can get behind! You might find this thread interesting, it is a combined ELCA member brewery/church in Orlando Florida.

Haha! Cool.

 

[concretecamper]

Why would I as a Catholic consult with nonCatholics? For argument's sake.

I didn't ask you this question

 

[concretecamper]

But if we follow your logic, then, the Dominicans and Franciscans are two different churches because they, historically haven't agreed (e g., the Immaculate Conception), yet are in communion with one another.

I couldnt have said it better myself

Tradition doesn't save us from disagreements any more than Scripture does.

I get the feeling you are not distinguishing between disagreements and separation.

BTW: Next Level Church in NC is another one. I've listed I think 5 so far, and I'm not even warmed up.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

I am asking you.

I didn't ask you this question

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

I couldnt have said it better myself

It took the Pope to tell them to cool their jets.

I get the feeling you are not distinguishing between disagreements and separation.

No. The fault is yours on two accounts. 1) First you are arguing with me about my theology (what Sola Scriptura means) which is very presumptuous of you. 2) Secondly, you are the one not distinguishing between disagreements and separation. The churches you cited are not separated from each other (they practice open communion). But you cite them as examples of a multiplicity of divisions.

BTW: Next Level Church in NC is another one. I've listed I think 5 so far, and I'm not even warmed up.

You can stop because you've shown nothing other than that you fail in charity (are prideful and presumptuous) and are a low level troll (arguing just to argue).

 

[Abaxvahl]

your citation of '10s of thousands' denominations (you still haven't provided me with a source).

One of the sources people use for that (and the only one I know of) is some thing that said there were 43K Christian denominations. The problem with it though is that it split Christian beliefs by geography and organizational body instead of beliefs, so according to that (I think I remember this being the exact number they said) there were over 200 "Roman Catholic" groups, because it did not count Catholicism in the USA as the same faith as Catholicism in Nigeria for instance, because we have different dioceses and so on. It split Baptists like that as well despite them all believing basically the same thing, and even Lutherans. It is therefore not accurate and is a bogus claim. I will try and find where it is...


Found it! The Facts and Stats on 33000 Denominations: World Christian Encyclopedia (2001, 2nd edition)

It is a false claim that makes ALL Christians (including us) seem more divided than we actually are. Like I said there are like 4 Old Churches (possibly 6 calling to mind some other schisms, Old Believers and Old Catholics, although the latter due to ordaining women is losing it's succession), 10 or so Protestant groups, and a bunch of non-Christian heretics (Mormons and JWs do not even count to me, nor does any Unitarian). Although as you showed in this thread you can by a different categorization reduce the number of Protestants, and since you've studied it more I think your categorization is accurate.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Thank you for the link. I really appreciate it and also for your thoughts. They were beautifully articulated.

One of the sources people use for that (and the only one I know of) is some thing that said there were 43K Christian denominations. The problem with it though is that it split Christian beliefs by geography and organizational body instead of beliefs, so according to that (I think I remember this being the exact number they said) there were over 200 "Roman Catholic" groups, because it did not count Catholicism in the USA as the same faith as Catholicism in Nigeria for instance, because we have different dioceses and so on. It split Baptists like that as well despite them all believing basically the same thing, and even Lutherans. It is therefore not accurate and is a bogus claim. I will try and find where it is...


Found it! The Facts and Stats on 33000 Denominations: World Christian Encyclopedia (2001, 2nd edition)

It is a false claim that makes ALL Christians (including us) seem more divided than we actually are. Like I said there are like 4 Old Churches (possibly 6 calling to mind some other schisms, Old Believers and Old Catholics, although the latter due to ordaining women is losing it's succession), 10 or so Protestant groups, and a bunch of non-Christian heretics (Mormons and JWs do not even count to me, nor does any Unitarian). Although as you showed in this thread you can by a different categorization reduce the number of Protestants, and since you've studied it more I think your categorization is accurate.

 

[concretecamper]

1) First you are arguing with me about my theology (what Sola Scriptura means) which is very presumptuous of you

I am not arguing with you about SS. I addressed another poster and YOU inserted yourself into it.

2) Secondly, you are the one not distinguishing between disagreements and separation. The churches you cited are not separated from each other (they practice open communion). But you cite them as examples of a multiplicity of divisions.

the fact that they practice open communion is irrelevant. Certain Lutheran Churches practice open communion and they would never be considered to be part of #6 Unity on the Bay Church in Miami FL USA

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

I am not arguing with you about SS. I addressed another poster and YOU inserted yourself into it.

Well, considering that this is a debate forum
and not a 1-to-1 private chat, none of the participants can be accused of 'inserting'. And you are arguing with me. You keep citing churches in response to me. Bad form.

the fact that they practice open communion is irrelevant. Certain Lutheran Churches practice open communion and they would never be considered to be part of #6 Unity on the Bay Church in Miami FL USA

Communion (the ultimate sign of unity) is irrelevant? Ok. It is no more irrelevant than the Franciscans and Dominicans arguing but still showing up side by side to partake of the Eucharist.

 

[concretecamper]

Communion (the ultimate sign of unity) is irrelevant? Ok. It is no more irrelevant than the Franciscans and Dominicans arguing but still showing up side by side to partake of the Eucharist.

ask any of the Churches I listed what they believe about communion and you will quickly see that it is irrelevant.

I notice you didnt address my Lutheran example....hmmm?

Well, considering that this is a debate forum

sure it is, but you accused me of arguing with you, which I wasn't

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

They believe that it is a symbol. What does that have to do with anything? Most will commune all baptized or professing Christians, because their doctrinal disagreements are not so grave (to them) as to say, 'You're not one of us'. They are one body in Christ. Stop dividing them.

ask any of the Churches I listed what they believe about communion and you will quickly see that it is irrelevant.

I notice you didnt address my Lutheran example....hmmm?

This is why I think that you are a troll. The ELCA, like the others claim the same, namely, that all Christians are welcome to receive the Eucharist. I finished having a very lovely conversation about this on the ELCA forum.

Give it up. Your multiplicity of churches does not equate to Sola Scriptura divides us.

 

[concretecamper]

Most will commune all baptized or professing Christians, because their doctrinal disagreements are not so grave (to them) as to say, 'You're not one of us'.

according to you, not them.

Stop dividing them

I'm not, they are doing a fine job at it themselves.

This is why I think that you are a troll. The ELCA, like the others claim the same, namely, that all Christians are welcome to receive the Eucharist. I finished having a very lovely conversation about this on the ELCA forum.

so, according to your posts, the ELCA is the same denomination as Unity on the Bay Church becasue each would give the other communion?

Give it up. Your multiplicity of churches does not equate to Sola Scriptura divides us.

the 10s of thousands of denominations proves otherwise.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

according to you, not them.
I'm not, they are doing a fine job at it themselves.
so, according to your posts, the ELCA is the same denomination as Unity on the Bay Church becasue each would give the other communion?
the 10s of thousands of denominations proves otherwise.

Think of these denominations as theological schools (like monasteries). They commune with each other, but they don't necessarily agree and may even duke it out.

 

[tampasteve]

Think of these denominations as theological schools (like monasteries). They commune with each other, but they don't necessarily agree and may even duke it out.

I think the ELCA, in spite of my issues with some of their stances, summarizes it fairly well (in regards to their Full Communion Partners):

Full communion is when two denominations develop a relationship based on a common confessing of the Christian faith and a mutual recognition of Baptism and sharing of the Lord’s Supper. This does not mean the two denominations merge; rather, in reaching agreements, denominations also respect differences. These denominations worship together, may exchange clergy and also share a commitment to evangelism, witness and service in the world. Each entity agrees that even with differences, there is nothing that is church-dividing.

A central document to Lutherans is the Augsburg Confession. Article VII of the Augsburg Confession states that “the true unity of the church” is present where the gospel is rightly preached and sacraments rightly administered. The ELCA is committed to this model of full communion as an authentic expression of Christian unity.

Characteristics of full communion

For the ELCA, the characteristics of full communion are theological and missiological implications of the gospel that allow variety and flexibility. These characteristics stress that the church act ecumenically for the sake of the world, not for itself alone. They will include at least the following, some of which exist at earlier stages:

• common confessing of the Christian faith
• mutual recognition of Baptism and a sharing of the Lord's Supper, allowing for joint worship and an exchangeability of members
• mutual recognition and availability of ordained ministers to the service of all, subject to the disciplinary regulations of other denominations
• common commitment to evangelism, witness and service
• means of common decision-making on critical common issues of faith and life
• mutual lifting of any condemnations that exist between denominations.

NOTE: the ELCA is in Full Communion with the Episcopal Church, United Methodist Church, Presbyterian Church (USA), Reformed Church in America, The Moravian Church and The United Church of Christ.

It should also be noted that there is a similar recognition of communion with the Anglican Communion in Europe and the Lutherans via the Porvoo Communion, not to mention various United Churches globally that nationally unite formerly different denominations such as Lutherans, Reformed, Anglicans, etc. in their countries.