Roman Catholics and Confessional Lutherans Explore Deeper Ties | First Things

Bob Preus wrote Justification and Rome to fight the Romanists in the LCMS

"You guys are a bunch of pansies."

Roman Catholics and Confessional Lutherans Explore Deeper Ties | First Things:

Roman Catholics and Confessional Lutherans Explore Deeper Ties

February 5, 2013

Mathew Block

In 1976, Joseph Ratzinger—then still a professor—suggested “it might be possible to interpret [the Augsburg Confession (CA)—i.e., the primary Lutheran confession] under the laws of the empire as a catholic confession.” He continued: “Efforts are underway to achieve a Catholic recognition of the CA or, more correctly, a recognition of the CA as catholic, and thereby to establish the catholicity of the churches of the CA, which makes possible a corporate union while the differences remain.”

While Ratzinger—now Benedict XVI— would not continue a campaign for such acceptance, it is nevertheless a striking comment from the man who would be pope. At the very least, it demonstrates a particular interest in Roman Catholic-Lutheran dialogue which has continued into the present.

This past September, for example, Pope Benedict XVI met with former students in Castel Gandolfo, Italy, to discuss the subject of Roman Catholic dialogue with Lutherans and Anglicans. This get-together between the pope and his former students is an annual tradition that dates back to the 1970s, and the topics of discussion are chosen by the pope himself. Benedict even invited an emeritus Lutheran Bishop, Ulrich Wilckens, to lead the discussion.

While this is the most recent nod by the pope to Lutherans, it is hardly the first. Only a few months earlier, Pope Benedict XVI announced the new prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The man chosen? German Bishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, a veteran of Lutheran-Roman Catholic ecumenical dialogue. Among other things, he served as the Catholic head of the International Lutheran/Roman Catholic Commission on Unity.

These events reflect increasingly congenial relations between Roman Catholics and Lutherans. But what is more, there are signs Roman Catholics are interested in exploring deeper ties with a specific group of Lutherans—namely, confessionalLutherans.

In the United States of America, for example, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod have recently become allies over the subject of religious liberty in the face of the Health and Human Services contraceptive mandate. And in Canada, very tentative discussions between the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and Lutheran Church–Canada have also begun. These churches are members of the International Lutheran Council, an international association of Lutheran churches known for their more traditional interpretation of the authority of Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions—hence the term “confessional” Lutherans.

To be sure, this is not the first time Roman Catholics and Lutherans have held dialogues. In 1999, the Vatican and the mainline Lutheran World Federation (LWF) agreed to a “Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification.” But notably absent from the discussion were confessional Lutherans. Yet many confessional Lutherans nevertheless recognized that a substantial step forward had been taken, even if they were reluctant to sign on themselves.

Now Roman Catholics and confessional Lutherans have embarked on their own tentative discussions. Two early meetings took place in 2007 between the German confessional Lutherans and the Vatican, followed by six formal discussions from 2008 to 2010 between the Johann Adam Möhler Institute for Ecumenics (a Roman Catholic institution in Paderborn, Germany) and the confessional Lutheran Theological Seminary Oberursel. In order to ensure global representation, a representative of the International Lutheran Council was among the Lutheran party.

At the end of these meetings, the committee issued a report recommending “the leaders of both churches to install on the international level an official ecumenical dialogue between the [confessional] International Lutheran Council and the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.” The International Lutheran Council agreed to discuss the recommendations at its next international conference.

That conference took place this past September in Niagara Falls, Canada. From September 16 to 21, the head bishops and presidents of confessional Lutheran church bodies around the world met for a week of dialogue and discussion. And, in what is perhaps a sign of the times, Bishop Gerard Paul Bergie of St. Catharines, Ontario, brought formal greetings to the ILC on behalf of the Roman Catholic Bishops of Canada—the first time a Roman Catholic has addressed an ILC convention since its founding. In his remarks, Bishop Bergie noted Vatican II’s emphasis on ecumenical dialogue, stressing the value to be found in working together.

Immediately following the bishop’s remarks, Dr. Werner Klän (a professor at Lutheran Theological Seminary Oberursel and a participant in the recent discussions between confessional Lutherans and Roman Catholics) reported on the successes achieved in the German discussions. In noting it was Roman Catholics who initiated conversation with confessional Lutherans, Dr. Klän suggested there was “a deep rooted disappointment [among] Roman Catholics—in Germany at least— with the Lutheran World Federation or some of its member churches.”

While dialogue between Roman Catholics and mainline Lutherans continues, a desire has arisen among Roman Catholics to begin looking to confessional Lutherans for more fruitful dialogue. The Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, while still under the presidency of Cardinal Walter Kasper, contacted the Independent Evangelical Lutheran Church in Germany (SELK), Dr. Klän reported, to “fathom the chances of having something like a dialogue established between the two church bodies, the Roman Catholic Church in Germany and [SELK].” Dr. Klän and SELK’s Bishop Hans-Jörg Voigt were subsequently invited to visit the Unity Secretariat in Rome to meet with Cardinal Kasper and Msgr. Dr. Matthias Türk (responsible for the PCPCU’s Lutheran relations). This consultation led to the six-part discussions in Germany.

“One cannot deny that the church is influenced and affected by worldly societal trends,” said Dr. Klän in his report to the ILC. “The challenges that Christianity is facing today are not restricted to one church body. And that is why it makes sense to look for alliances with Christians and churches we might find agreement with on certain issues.”

He continued: “In many a way it may be hoped that confessional Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue on the world level could contribute to pursuing the goal of communicating foundational principles of Christian faith and defending them against being watered down, being contradicted, being challenged, and neglected not only from outside Christianity, but also within the realm of established church bodies. That is why it makes sense to me for the ILC and its member churches to enter into a theological dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church.”

The Roman Catholic Church seems to agree. When the German discussions ended, the participants issued a report encouraging both churches to enter into formal dialogue. Responding to that report, the new president of the PCPCU, Cardinal Kurt Koch, wrote in 2011 to Bishop Voigt of the SELK, informing him that the Roman Catholic Church is highly interested in starting an official dialogue with the ILC.

The Executive Council of the ILC, for its part, crafted a resolution to be voted on at the ILC’s next international conference, calling on the ILC “to aspire to open up an official dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church.” It also encouraged the development of theological discussions between confessional Lutherans and Roman Catholics on the regional and national level.

On September 20, 2012, that resolution came before the assembly of the International Lutheran Council in Niagara Falls, Canada. It passed without opposition. That vote—and the unanimity by which it passed—may well determine what shape Roman Catholic-Lutheran dialogue takes in the future. Chances are that “shape” that may have a decidedly “confessional” bent.

Mathew Block is editor of the Canadian Lutheran magazine. Follow him on Twitter @captainthin.

Become a fan of First Things on Facebook, subscribe to First Things via RSS, and follow First Things on Twitter.

'via Blog this'

Spinning the Bishop Stephan Story - Missouri Mythology

The Missouri Synod fabricates the CFW Walther saga, and they also spin the Bishop Stephan story.

This is a summary, based on reading in: 
Zion on the Mississippi, 
In Pursuit of Religious Sexual Freedom, 
Servant of the Word, etc.


#1 - Bishop Stephan and his followers were orthodox Lutherans persecuted by the government for their doctrinal purity.
Fact - Stephan, his congregation, and his clergy followers were cell group Pietists. Stephan's congregation was given permission to engage in conventicles because of its history and original Bohemian (Pietistic) membership. Read up on the Zinzendorf connection.

#2 - Walther did not sign the covenant making Martin Stephan their bishop-for-life.
Fact - Walther signed it. Walther was the bishop's enforcer but Stephan mistrusted CFW and called him a "fox."

#3 - Walther and his clergy removed Stephan for false doctrine, a claim that contradicts #1.
Fact - Walther and the clergy accepted Stephan's religious leadership, and Walther's false concept of justification came directed from Stephan and never changed. Therefore, if Stephan was a false teacher all along (as any Lutheran would concede), then Walther was a false teacher the entire time.

#4 - Walther and the clergy suddenly found out about Stephan's adultery in America, when women confessed their sins after a particularly moving sermon.
Fact - Stephan was known for his female groupies in Dresden, lived with his mistress at the spa (where he was treated for syphilis), installed a young woman in a room in his parsonage, faced the court (represented by Marbach, Vehse) for his philandering and late night walks with young women, took his mistress rather than his wife to America, and created problems for having young women around him in St. Louis. One was Walther's young niece, whom Walther kidnapped.

#5 - The Saxons, once they found out about Stephan's adultery, offered him three choices, so he voluntarily left Perryville, Missouri for Illinois.
Fact - Walther's hand-picked mob threatened Stephan's life, stripped and searched him, stole all his gold, books, and personal possessions, then forced him at gunpoint across the Mississippi, probably on a steamer.

#6 - Stephan stole money as he left the group or had his mistress bring stolen money to him.
Fact - Walther and his mob stole from Stephan. First Walther manipulated the title to the 80 acres given to Stephan by the colony. (Kieschnick did something similar and became DP, the SP of the LCMS. They wanted a true Waltherian.) Leaving Stephan supporters in St. Louis, Walther brought the mob down to rob and depose Stephan. All the clergy leaders knew the bishop was a serial adulterer, and the two lawyers (Vehse, Marbach) defended the bishop in court back in Dresden. Mrs. Stephan testified about her husband's many affairs. The crisis in leadership had to be syphilis among the young women and the bankrupt state of the group from Stephan and clergy mismanagement.

#7 - The bishop's wife was at fault for his wandering ways - Walther, quoted in Servant of the Word.
Fact - This slander alone should suffice to prove how malicious Walther was. Stephan's syphilis killed his wife and led to many of his children being born severely damaged from congenital syphilis. You do not want to read about what this does to children. They were institutionalized and died young. Stephan had a dozen (12) children, so he did not appear to be neglected. David Scaer just fell off the beet wagon or he was ignorant of the facts. His review of the Stephan book has the advantage of apparent candor. Stephan was treated for eczema, says Scaer! When a man has children born with congenital syphilis, they can be deaf and have malformed teeth. Three of Stephan's children were born deaf.

All these facts can be sorted out by studying various accounts of the Saxon voyage. Stephan left from house arrest for his many crimes. Walther evaded arrest warrants for kidnapping. His future mother-in-law (who also helped with the Perryville riot) was thrown into jail for her part.

Thus far - the Human Nature of C. F. W. Walther, usurper extraordinaire.

VirtueOnline - News

VirtueOnline - News:

Rhode Island Red
in blue.

Rhode Island Episcopal Bishop Falsely Cites Empirical Evidence to Support Marriage Equality

News Analysis

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org 
February 4, 2013

Religious figures most often extract from their faith when speaking for or against marriage equality. Their spiritual life either confirms or condemns equality.

Bishop Nick Knisely, the Episcopal Bishop for Rhode Island, bucked that trend recently by citing both faith and science when he declared his support for marriage equality. He weighed the empirical evidence and has seen the light, he says.

"Part of what informs my opinion is that before I became a priest and then a bishop, I was a scientist. So I know the importance of trusting evidence that we see with our own eyes," he wrote in a letter distributed to parishioners this weekend.

VOL: Science demands more than mere observation. It demands that any hypotheses be tested against evidence, evidence that will stand up in a court of law just as DNA does. The Oxford English Dictionary defines the scientific method as: "a method or procedure that has characterized natural science... consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses." The fact that Knisely says that he has [only] seen with his eyes that gay relationships work (a very small and limited number it should be observed as there are less than 1.5% homosexuals in the nation and even fewer in Rhode Island) does not verify the legitimacy of all (or any) such relationships. 

The truth is Knisely is short on science and even shorter on theology. Below is his justification for the legitimacy of same sex relationships from Scripture.

KNISELY: I have seen what St. Paul describes as the fruits of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23) in the married lives of two men and of two women. I have seen relationships that are loving, mutual, and monogamous and that have lasted a lifetime. Jesus tells us that we must test each tree by looking at the goodness of its fruit (Luke 6:43-45). Across our congregations and communities, I can see the goodness of gay and lesbian couples and their families.

VOL: This is a complete misuse and shameless interpretation of St. Paul's description of the "fruit of the Spirit" in which the apostle says "the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law."

First of all this interpretation of "fruit" was never uttered in the context of homoerotic relationships. The Apostle would disavow any such use or definition precisely because he condemned such behavior in his epistle to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 6:9-10) - "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." (NIV).

In Romans 1:26-27 Paul writes, "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." (NIV)

There is no parsing of these Scriptures that lends any legitimacy to men and women living in same-sex relationships. Furthermore, there is not a single verse(s) of Scripture from Leviticus to St. Paul that upholds sodomy in any kind of relationship, committed or uncommitted. Knisely conveniently glosses over these Scriptures in favor of a verse that is descriptive of the believer's walk with the Lord. So if two men or two women are in a same sex relationship, they are automatically not exercising the fruit of the (Holy) Spirit because by their behavior they have excluded themselves from the context of St. Paul's exhortation to believers.

Relationships must be weighed against the Bible's specific rejection of sex outside of marriage and Jesus' own words reinforcing Gen. 1 "male and female made he them". That sexual matrix has never been reopened to accommodate post-modern attitudes to sexual behavior, however "loving, mutual, and monogamous" they might be.

Furthermore, the bishop's observation defies the law of non-contradiction. Knisely is making Scripture mean what he wants it to mean and then making it fit the Procrustean bed of homosexual desire that the Apostle Paul eschews.

Knisely cannot have it both ways. He cannot say and affirm what St. Paul does not and then turnaround and use other Scriptures, also written by St. Paul, to affirm something he wants that St. Paul clearly has made no reference. This is a dishonest use of Scripture.

Not only has Knisely blurred the lines between religion and science, he has made a mockery out of Scripture to suit a handful of people, most of whom will never darken the doors of an Episcopal Church. They may applaud what he says, but they are not coming through the Red Doors of an Episcopal Church and dropping large checks in the plate.

Support for marriage equality in Rhode Island is at an all-time high. Knisely is riding the crest of the political (and popular) wave. Rhode Island's House of Representatives passed marriage equality legislation in a 51-19 vote. Its Senate is expected to vote on marriage equality legislation in the spring, after its historic passage in the House last month. 

KNISELY: As the Episcopal Bishop of Rhode Island, I support the bill before the General Assembly that would allow same-sex couples to marry in our state, not in spite of my Christian faith, but because of it. 

VOL: The Church has been and should be a counter culture. "Be not conformed...but be ye transformed" is the cry of Scripture, specifically St. Paul. By going along with the culture on this very serious issue, he abuses Scripture, compromises the church's stand, a stand not shared incidentally by Roman Catholic Church officials in the state. Evangelicals also eschew the legitimacy of same-sex relationships. Knisely's understanding and interpretation of Scripture is seriously misinformed.

KNISELY: Episcopalians are not unanimous in our views, but in the Episcopal Church we find our unity in common prayer, not in common opinion. Even so, through many years of prayerful discussion, the majority of Christians in the Episcopal Church have come to believe that it is possible, and even common, for two people of the same-sex to live covenanted, faithful lives together in service to God, just as people in traditional marriages do. We have also learned that it is possible to protect the consciences of those who disagree within our church and still live together in community.

VOL: Episcopalians find their unity primarily in Scripture (see Hooker) but not in "common prayer". If that were true, there would be no need for the rise of the Anglican Church in North America, nor would we have seen the flight of some five dioceses from TEC. "Common prayer" does not over-ride heresies and apostasies in which TEC is thigh deep. The Global South, now more than 80% of the Anglican Communion, is united around the authority of Scripture and its clear condemnation of sex outside of marriage. If "common prayer" were the rule, the communion's primates from the Global South would have met in Dublin over "common prayer" with Jefferts Schori. They did not because more was stake than "common prayer" - the very nature of the church and truth itself. 

KNISELY: The Episcopal Church has been blessed for many years by the life and ministry of gay and lesbian couples, both lay and ordained. I have seen how they contribute to the common good of a congregation and a community by creating stable, loving homes. 

VOL: That is not scientific evidence. It is mere observation at best and pandering at worst. The nature of marriage cannot be changed because a handful of people want it so. It is ontologically impossible and theologically untenable. Bishop Gene Robinson was noted for his narcissism, self-aggrandizement, self-promotion, mucho whining, and a diocese that went nowhere under his administration. He got out early because he saw a way to promote sodomy in Washington DC, get a fat TEC pension, and more money from a think tank. Robinson was ALWAYS about Robinson and never the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

KNISELY to his diocese: "As your Bishop I respect and honor your right to disagree with me. A key part of what it means to be a member of the Episcopal Church is that, as long as we all agree that we believe Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior, we can hold varied and diverse opinions on most other issues and still meet each other in Christ at God's altar."

VOL: That will hold till some future General Convention when a resolution is passed making Rites and same-sex marriages mandatory in all dioceses just as it happened with women's ordination. It is spiritual death by a thousand cuts.

'via Blog this'

Gossip Site? - Ichabod Is a Doctrinal Discussion Site, Where the Odious Dogma of UOJ Gets Fair Treatment. Top Ten for the Last Seven Days

The Holy Spirit Teaches Man Better Than Books May 23, 2012	1371
Project Gutenberg - Apology of the Augsburg Confes... May 14, 2012	597
Ecclesia Augustana: Decisions, Decisions. WELS, LC... Jan 31, 2013, 2 comments	81
From Pastor Paul Rydecki - Faith Alone Justifies Feb 2, 2013, 1 comment	52
Comment and Selections from Intrepid Lutherans Jan 29, 2013, 2 comments	50
Pastor Nathan Bickel and Brett Meyer Comment on Ec... Feb 2, 2013	48
Wisconsin Inquisition Grows in Scope, Even Though ... Jan 29, 2013	40
Pastor Paul Rydecki - Luther’s translation of 2 Co... Feb 1, 2013, 1 comment	34
Study the Issues for Your Shelves, Starting with t... Jan 29, 2013, 2 comments	33
Mid-week Lentent Service Mar 18, 2009, 1 comment	31

---

---

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "Gossip Site? - Ichabod Is a Doctrinal Discussion S...":

The UOJ people are prone to accuse the JBFA people of gossip because they (the UOJ people) are the ones being scrutinized and called to account for their public anti-Scriptural and anti-Luther teaching.

Nathan M. Bickel
www.thechristianmessage.org
www.moralmatters.org

---

bruce-church (https://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Gossip Site? - Ichabod Is a Doctrinal Discussion S...":

The antinomian UOJers have no limits on what they say against justification by faith proponents. In Walther's day they said that the Norwegian Professor Schmidt was pro-UOJ until he didn't receive a professorship in St. Louis. What really has the ring of truth is that Professor Schmidt did his homework and became convinced the Walther was wrong on UOJ. Anyway, there's nothing wrong in pointing out UOJers' antinomian ways, though UOJers may call it pure gossip. 

***

GJ - Servant of the Word, a gushing hagiography of Walther, allows that CFW made a face when Schmidt was suggested for the post. The statement was more like, "He didn't but even if he did..."

That sounds like Wayne Mueller. There is no Church Growth in WELS, but if there is, it is done in harmony with the Confessions.

In WELS, "confession" has an entirely different meaning, of course. It always goes with a plea bargain and lighter sentence.

This is my theory - take it as an opinion. Walther was jealous of the abundant talents of Schmidt and determined not to allow Stephan's UOJ from Halle to be displaced by justification by faith. 
The state district elections were bypassed for a direct synod election that Walther could control. Fuerbring complained about that, and Ludwig was not one to complain about Missouri or his uncle Ferdy.

Notice that the refutation of Schmidt depends on an ad hominem argument: "Schmidt did not get elected to the seminary post, so he became an opponent. That was the real election controversy." This canard is repeated endlessly among the SynCons. Why pit justification without faith against justification by faith when a personal attack is so much easier.

Likewise, Walther presents many Luther quotations in his little election book as referring to him, ostensibly the American Luther fighting for the truth in a wilderness of Lutheran false doctrine.