what happens to someone between Lutheranism and Orthodoxy, where should they stay?

[Jacque_Pierre22]

If someone is not quite fitting into either of them, where should they go? For example, for me, while I agree with the principal of sola scriptura, and have been in the Lutheran church, certain practices of Lutheranism I disagree with as opposed to Orthodoxy such as rejecting the essence-energies distinction, and having statues instead of icons. Another big one is the Lutheran liturgy is not historical like Orthodoxy. However, I think because of the issue of "free will" or monergism/ faith alone however you want to call it, Orthodoxy would reject that I don't believe in a synergistic theosis as opposed to a Lutheran one (as in Jordan Cooper). There is a substantial neglect of studying the liturgy and the church fathers in Lutheranism with most emphasis on Chemnitz and Luther, even though both churches are supposed to be patristic. I wonder if should just join Orthodoxy due to these problems, as I don't disagree with that much in Orthodoxy. I'm a big proponent of the Orthodox liturgy and patristics and the fact that Lutheranism rejects Maximus, and other fathers and bases the entirety of their beliefs on Luther's modifications bugs me. I'm not sure Luther had it right on everything, just maybe free will but his other stuff like 2 kingdoms, and statues being monergistic is nonsense in my opinion, and I disagree with Lutherans discarding patristics and liturgical.

 

[prodromos]

Many of us who are converts to Orthodoxy came into the Church still carrying a lot of baggage from our former communions and not necessarily understanding or accepting everything the Church teaches. In my case it was a couple of years of attending Liturgy before I was received by Chrysmation into the Church and it took a few more years of marinating in the Church for me to shed all the errors I previously held to.

 

[ArmyMatt]

find out which one is Biblical and historically accurate, then go there regardless of how you feel.

 

[notRusskiyMir]

If someone is not quite fitting into either of them, where should they go? For example, for me, while I agree with the principal of sola scriptura, and have been in the Lutheran church, certain practices of Lutheranism I disagree with as opposed to Orthodoxy such as rejecting the essence-energies distinction, and having statues instead of icons. Another big one is the Lutheran liturgy is not historical like Orthodoxy. However, I think because of the issue of "free will" or monergism/ faith alone however you want to call it, Orthodoxy would reject that I don't believe in a synergistic theosis as opposed to a Lutheran one (as in Jordan Cooper). There is a substantial neglect of studying the liturgy and the church fathers in Lutheranism with most emphasis on Chemnitz and Luther, even though both churches are supposed to be patristic. I wonder if should just join Orthodoxy due to these problems, as I don't disagree with that much in Orthodoxy. I'm a big proponent of the Orthodox liturgy and patristics and the fact that Lutheranism rejects Maximus, and other fathers and bases the entirety of their beliefs on Luther's modifications bugs me. I'm not sure Luther had it right on everything, just maybe free will but his other stuff like 2 kingdoms, and statues being monergistic is nonsense in my opinion, and I disagree with Lutherans discarding patristics and liturgical.

You'll definitely have to deal with the sola scriptura if you pursue Orthodoxy. But seems to me your affinity for Orthodoxy's liturgical practices seems at odds with your retaining sola scriptura. While the various Orthodox liturgies are full of Biblical references, their structures and practices are largely based on tradition/Tradition. This is a bit rude, but I think you are over-thinking the matter. As Matt says, see which one is more Biblical and authentic.
Also, if you want to dive deeper, compare the Redemptive doctrines between the two. Orthodoxy to me is better linked to the Old Testament than any of the Catholic/Lutheran doctrines.

 

[Jacque_Pierre22]

You'll definitely have to deal with the sola scriptura if you pursue Orthodoxy. But seems to me your affinity for Orthodoxy's liturgical practices seems at odds with your retaining sola scriptura. While the various Orthodox liturgies are full of Biblical references, their structures and practices are largely based on tradition/Tradition. This is a bit rude, but I think you are over-thinking the matter. As Matt says, see which one is more Biblical and authentic.
Also, if you want to dive deeper, compare the Redemptive doctrines between the two. Orthodoxy to me is better linked to the Old Testament than any of the Catholic/Lutheran doctrines.

I've tried to understand sola scriptura and the "solo scriptura" debate and I can't make heads or tails of it, it's very convoluted with long 500 page books . How could I possibly know one way or the other.......

 

[ArmyMatt]

I've tried to understand sola scriptura and the "solo scriptura" debate and I can't make heads or tails of it, it's very convoluted with long 500 page books . How could I possibly know one way or the other.......

what is the difference from what you have seen?

 

[Jacque_Pierre22]

what is the difference from what you have seen?

I don't have any coherent thoughts on the topic. even the Reformed prebys and Reformed Baptists disagree on a lot and both adhere to sola scriptura, so to me the principle makes no sense.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I don't have any coherent thoughts on the topic. even the Reformed prebys and Reformed Baptists disagree on a lot and both adhere to sola scriptura, so to me the principle makes no sense.

well, then is sola Scriptura a belief that goes back to the beginning?

 

[Jacque_Pierre22]

well, then is sola Scriptura a belief that goes back to the beginning?

yes but there are varieties is what I'm saying in protestants applying it. this has to do with "principium quod"; different protestant groups apply reason differently and get different results in their interpretation. One of the EO patriarchs Platon Levshin reasoned just like a Calvinist in denying the genus maiestaticum, this is against a Lutheran view of sola scriptura, but he still used scripture in his reasoning, so it still comes down to the text. Catholics often would refer to tradition as the "unwritten" Word of God, in addition to Scripture. "Solo" scriptura is different, this is like word of faith people who interpret Scripture with no understanding and come up with random doctrines and prophecies; whereas Lutherans and Orthodox both made decisions in sort of a group/council setting, not individualistic. the end result of overuse of reason is "analytic theology" .

 

[ArmyMatt]

yes but there are varieties is what I'm saying in protestants applying it. this has to do with "principium quod"; different protestant groups apply reason differently and get different results in their interpretation. One of the EO patriarchs Platon Levshin reasoned just like a Calvinist in denying the genus maiestaticum, this is against a Lutheran view of sola scriptura, but he still used scripture in his reasoning, so it still comes down to the text. Catholics often would refer to tradition as the "unwritten" Word of God, in addition to Scripture. "Solo" scriptura is different, this is like word of faith people who interpret Scripture with no understanding and come up with random doctrines and prophecies; whereas Lutherans and Orthodox both made decisions in sort of a group/council setting, not individualistic. the end result of overuse of reason is "analytic theology" .

okay, so does what view of Scripture’s proper place goes back to the beginning?

 

[Justin-H.S.]

If someone is not quite fitting into either of them, where should they go? For example, for me, while I agree with the principal of sola scriptura, and have been in the Lutheran church, certain practices of Lutheranism I disagree with as opposed to Orthodoxy such as rejecting the essence-energies distinction, and having statues instead of icons. Another big one is the Lutheran liturgy is not historical like Orthodoxy. However, I think because of the issue of "free will" or monergism/ faith alone however you want to call it, Orthodoxy would reject that I don't believe in a synergistic theosis as opposed to a Lutheran one (as in Jordan Cooper). There is a substantial neglect of studying the liturgy and the church fathers in Lutheranism with most emphasis on Chemnitz and Luther, even though both churches are supposed to be patristic. I wonder if should just join Orthodoxy due to these problems, as I don't disagree with that much in Orthodoxy. I'm a big proponent of the Orthodox liturgy and patristics and the fact that Lutheranism rejects Maximus, and other fathers and bases the entirety of their beliefs on Luther's modifications bugs me. I'm not sure Luther had it right on everything, just maybe free will but his other stuff like 2 kingdoms, and statues being monergistic is nonsense in my opinion, and I disagree with Lutherans discarding patristics and liturgical.

Do Lutherans consider Luther to be a canonized Saint? (IE: St. Martin Luther)

If not, then why not? Do they just not believe in a communion of saints? If so, that by itself would disqualify Lutheranism from being a historical faith.

 

[Jacque_Pierre22]

Do Lutherans consider Luther to be a canonized Saint? (IE: St. Martin Luther)

If not, then why not? Do they just not believe in a communion of saints? If so, that by itself would disqualify Lutheranism from being a historical faith.

Lutherans believe we are all saints, so there is no canonizations; we also do not pray for the dead, because we don't believe the prayers do anything but are declaratory only for those still alive. It was a tradition we did away with because it became too confusing as to the meaning of it.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Lutherans believe we are all saints, so there is no canonizations; we also do not pray for the dead, because we don't believe the prayers do anything but are declaratory only for those still alive. It was a tradition we did away with because it became too confusing as to the meaning of it.

which is interesting, since prayers for the dead are in the Bible.

 

[Justin-H.S.]

Lutherans believe we are all saints, so there is no canonizations; we also do not pray for the dead, because we don't believe the prayers do anything but are declaratory only for those still alive. It was a tradition we did away with because it became too confusing as to the meaning of it.

Word/Concept fallacy.

It's true that any practicing Christian is a saint compared to the World, but among those saints there are those who are far and above more saintly and have the holy gifts from God. Those are the Saints we ask for intercessions from, so is Martin Luther considered a capital "S" saint?

 

[Justin-H.S.]

which is interesting, since prayers for the dead are in the Bible.

I saw a meme where Luther says "there's no prayers for the dead in the Bible," so a Catholic presents Maccabees, and in the next frame Luther is burning Maccabees, and restates that "there's no prayers for the dead in the Bible."

 

[ArmyMatt]

I saw a meme where Luther says "there's no prayers for the dead in the Bible," so a Catholic presents Maccabees, and in the next frame Luther is burning Maccabees, and restates that "there's no prayers for the dead in the Bible."

it’s actually in the New Testament

 

[Jacque_Pierre22]

Word/Concept fallacy.

It's true that any practicing Christian is a saint compared to the World, but among those saints there are those who are far and above more saintly and have the holy gifts from God. Those are the Saints we ask for intercessions from, so is Martin Luther considered a capital "S" saint?

there are no "official" capital S saints , but in actuality I would say Athanasius and Cyril of Alexandria receive the most extensive citations by Lutheran scholars, and of course Luther himself.

 

[Jacque_Pierre22]

okay, so does what view of Scripture’s proper place goes back to the beginning?

I guess Tradition trumps Scripture as we see with the current Creed controversy, Baptists don't wanna hold to them anymore

 

[ArmyMatt]

I guess Tradition trumps Scripture as we see with the current Creed controversy, Baptists don't wanna hold to them anymore

or Scripture is a part of tradition, neither trumps the other since they both reflect the same Truth.

 

[Justin-H.S.]

there are no "official" capital S saints , but in actuality I would say Athanasius and Cyril of Alexandria receive the most extensive citations by Lutheran scholars, and of course Luther himself.

Are titles important to Lutherans?

Do Lutherans use these titles when addressing people? Mr./Mrs., Dr., PhD, Pastor, President, Judge, etc; and yet "St." is where the line is drawn. Are secular titles are honored, but not the ecclesial ones?