Angry Lutherans
It seems that a lot of Lutherans (and others) have gotten all up tight about the recent statement from the Vatican about the state and nature of other Christian churches. Is anyone surprised at all that the Curia would make statements that support the Curia and Rome? I’m not. I mean, isn’t that their job?
When I was ordained, I promised to teach and preach in accord with the Book of Concord and Holy Scripture. Here’s a little of what they say about the Pope’s assertion that one must be in communion with him to realize the fullness of salvation:
Thus, as has often been said, it [the Papacy] is a human fiction. It is not commanded. There is no need for it. And it is useless. The holy Christian church can survive quite well without such a head. It would have been better off if such a head had not been raised up by the devil. The papacy is not necessary in the church, because it exercises no Christian office, and thus the church must continue and endure without the pope. Smalcald Articles 4:5, 6
I would also commend to you the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope. It starts off very directly:
The Roman Pontiff claims for himself [in the first place] that by divine right he is [supreme] above all bishops and pastors [in all Christendom].
Secondly, he adds also that by divine right he has both swords, i.e., the authority also of bestowing kingdoms [enthroning and deposing kings, regulating secular dominions etc.].
And thirdly, he says that to believe this is necessary for salvation. And for these reasons the Roman bishop calls himself [and boasts that he is] the vicar of Christ on earth.
These three articles we hold to be false, godless, tyrannical, and [quite] pernicious to the Church.
Yeah, yeah, I know. It is not nice in this ecumenical age to dredge up 16th century rhetoric. Sorry! Perhaps this more modern quote from Carl Piepkorn is better (Tip of Papal Crown to Pr. Weedon for this gem).
The Lutheran Church does not equate any ecclesial community – its own, the Roman Catholic, or any other large or small – with the one holy catholic and apostolic church. It respects the right of the Roman Catholic Church to determine the canonical licitness of the ordinations performed within that communion and does not seek to impose Lutheran standards of canonical licitness upon the Roman Catholic community. By the same token it reserves to itself the right to establish its own standards of canonical licitness in the case of ordinations on those points where the divine law (jus divinum) makes no prescriptions and to reject those of other denominations as binding in matters that cannot be established as being of divine right.
Ok, so I guess I lift some of this nastiness up just to say, “Who cares what B16 or the Curia thinks?”
And, in the spirit of honesty and perhaps confession, we need to admit that Lutherans have said and done some rather…er…uncharitable things when it comes to Roman Catholics in the past. Trust me, anti-Catholicism is still alive and well in ELCA churches. I hear it all the time, be it explicit or implicit. So, let’s lick our ecclesial wounds and go back to living the Gospel.
July 13, 2007 at 5:18 pm
One of the reasons I have problems with those Lutherans who get on and on about the Bible and what it means is that they (some?? all??) of them also subscribe to these other statements IN ADDITION to the Bible.
Lutherans like to have things both ways. wink. From “our website”:
“Is Lutheranism the Only True Religion?
Do Lutherans believe theirs is the only true religion?
Lutheranism -The Only True Religion?
This question was once put to the late Dr. Elson Ruff, editor of The Lutheran. His answer was, “Yes, but Lutherans don’t believe they are the only ones who have it. There are true Christian believers in a vast majority of the churches, perhaps in all.” The ELCA Confession of Faith says “This church confesses Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Gospel as the power of God for the salvation of all who believe …”
July 13, 2007 at 8:36 pm
I’m unwilling to shrug my shoulders and simply say, “Who cares what B16 or the Curia thinks?” when they say such stupid things from such a powerful pulpit. We in the Main Line gripe and moan every time a silly Christian Evangelical leader says something stupid on TV – so why not offer a strong critique when the Pope does the same from his bully pulpit?
And “Anti-Catholic” sounds so nasty, a term in the same genre of hate as antisemitism. And though I know that froth-at-the-mouth anti-catholics exist, just as antisemites exist, I’m not sure that theological debate and honest frustration with our Catholic brethren is the same as being “anti-Catholic.” That word seems too strong to be applied to most of the responses to the Vatican’s recent statement that I’ve read.
July 14, 2007 at 6:42 am
Chris – I think anti-Catholicism does still exist, not in theological debate but in lived forms of Lutheranism. I have overheard too many nasty (and I do mean nasty and mean-spirited) comments about from otherwise good Lutheran folks. I have read a few anti-Catholic statements over this latest statement, though primarily on a ‘piskie blog (Leftist are a nasty group when they want to be). Most of the Lutherans I read have expressed anger and frustration, but not been too negative.
And I guess you called me on the thing with Evangelicals…you are right there. I am guilty as charged. But again, I drive at the point that what they said was not: 1. New 2. Shocking 3. Inconsistent with previous statements.
So Chris, here is the thing – if we ever end up at an ELCA event together, we need to have some beers and theological talk! It beats the hell out of typing!
PS – I love that Ruff quote and use it in our new member’s class. You lift up something interesting: that we do in fact adhere to tradition AND Scripture through our use of confessional writings. We simply then couch this as saying that the BOC is simply explaining Biblical doctrines, which is shady in some ways.
July 14, 2007 at 8:47 am
Yes, LP, I’ve been on some “other” Lutheran blogs that get very pissy about the Confessions. And accuse some of us of being the E*CA. Funny thing is that as a dyed in the wool Lutheran, attended a college named after Him (ML, not Jesus) and such, I never even met the Confessions except by name in the local church constitution. But nobody ever trotted them out for all to see.
Then I started reading blogs and they are mentioned all over the place.
July 14, 2007 at 6:19 pm
This is what happens when thinking around ecumenism was somehow all is going to be kumbaya. We have significant disagreements as Christian bodies, and I don’t think we can really do ecumenical conversation without airing our disagreements openly. I for one agree with Lutherans that I can accept the papacy…reformed to the Gospel. And to be frank, I don’t see such that the papacy has made those steps and I should be free to say so. That doesn’t mean I don’t converse with Roman Catholics…many are good friends of mine, and we have solid fellowship together. Anti-Catholicism exists; I’ve heard it. In other countries, Anti-Protestantism also carries a baggage that is more than mere words, but here in the U.S. our history is such that Anti-Catholicism was quite nasty in certain periods. On the other hand, B16 and others have exploited this in my opinion by suggesting that the scandals of late were due to such bias in the media.
July 17, 2007 at 12:05 am
I can’t add any more than what has already been stated here, except that as with the Pope, I am vicar for four more weeks.