Woman leaves Lutheran church, National adoption of resolution prompts action

At any rate, take a read of this Kontakion and see if what the East believes to have been the purpose of the crucifixion isn’t somewhat different from what you see in the West.

Thanks for posting the link to this. I can't imagine what the difference between the Eastern and Western view of the crucifixion is. (I like Augustine and had no idea he had little influence on the Eastern church.) Clearly I have a lot of studying to do.

It's troublesome to me (as a Protestant) to be "bound" by anything but Scripture, so I suppose my next stop will be the Book of Concord.

I understand completely! The church is bound, but members of the congregation are only bound by conscience. Articles of faith or "confessions" are a form of glue that holds a church together. If you don't believe in the articles of faith put out by a church you go elsewhere. You know you're not going to hear a sermon extolling the Rapture at a Lutheran church, because the church doesn't recognize sufficient support for it in the Bible. Or, if you do hear a sermon in favor of it, the pastor is teaching something other than the stated teachings of the Church & should be challenged about it. If the challenge is ignored, there's a way to deal with it.

Formatting links eludes my memory banks & I'm using some HTML, so this ain't gonna format for you. There's a link on this page to a PDF file of the Book of Concord.

http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=522

The ELCA is the liberal "wing" of the Lutheran Church, isn't it?

In the U.S., yes. Compared to some European Lutheran Churches, they're almost reactionary.

But what shocked me (and in some ways still does!) is that we Lutherans tend toward the Eastern Orthodox at all!

Me too, but if you think about it, Luther didn't set out to form a Church. By the time he realized that was the result, anti-Papist sentiment probably left him favoring the only other big game in town, the Eastern Orthodox Church.

I had no contact with any Orthodox (there aren't that many in rural Nebraska) growing up, and had very little idea of who they were or what their beliefs are.

I think I knew some Eastern Orthodox people while I was growing up, but church wasn't a topic of conversation with any of them. Like you, I had no idea what they teach. I gave them serious consideration when I began to church shop, but realized that the LCMS is where I belong. It was like coming home, tho I still miss the old red hymnal.

It has been a very fascinating discovery for me to study Eastern Orthodox theology. In part because there is a lot that is like "Lutherans", and because there is so much that is totally unlike anything Western.

I agree!

1. I am in in a private online discussion group with many leaders of the ELCA orthodox renewal movements, theologians, etc. Then there is freerepublic. I do NOT get my information about the ELCA, the CWA, the synods, etc. from the media.

2. Pastor Eric and others like him agree with me about the things that get me angry, and even more so sad and heartbroken. The only thing they did not agree with me about was about staying in the ELCA, no matter what. Now they have changed their tune. But we still do not really agree, because I say that we should all go home to Orthodoxy, not form a new denomination that will split and split again.

3. I am an ELCA Lutheran who attends a Serbian Orthodox church about once a month, but cannot of course take Communion there. The Serbian Orthodox Church knows all about me, including our beloved Bishop, who is a scholar and builds churches—the polar opposite of our ELCA “bishop”. As you can see, I am on my way to becoming Orthodox. I’ve done much to build bridges between the Orthodox (including Serbs) and Lutherans, but that is not what the ELCA revisionist mis-leaders want.

4. I used to support women’s ordination, but no longer do so. Women’s ordination is how we ELCA Lutherans got in trouble. As soon as we ordained women, the demands for “inclusive language”, with its multitide of heresies, followed. Soon thereafter came the demand for “gay” ordination. Ordination is not a civil right, but a gift from God. We all stumbled when we made ir a civil right.

Since this thread has turned into somthing of a Lutheran-Orthodox discussion, I will post this here:

There was a colloquium on Orthodoxy for Lutherans in Detroit earlier this month (Sept. 10-11), sponsored by St Andrew House:

http://www.orthodoxdetroit.com

I wasn’t there, but helped one of the speakers with questions to respond to.

The audio versions of the presentations at that colloquium are now avaiable on the Internet:

http://ancientfaith.com/specials/lutheran_colloquium

There is also link to a full-text version of Reader Christopher Orr’s presentation on that same Web page. Please do not use it, since you will get a long, unformatted mess. The better version (formatted) is at:

http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dgb96k3k_11dz22sz

No, Rdr. Orr did not give the whole thing in his oral presentation at the colloquium, only part of it! But the complete text version contains many useful resources.

There is also a link to the (PDF) text version of Father John Fenton’s prsentation at the colloquium, entitled “Creeds and Confessions in Orthodoxy”, on the following Web page:

http://holyincarnation.org/inquirers.php

This colloquium was designed to help Lutherans to get a better understanding of Orthodox Christianity, via language and concepts familiar to Lutherans, and to answer questions that Lutherans are likely to have about Orthodoxy. However, learning about Orthodoxy is always primarily experiential, and there is no subsititute for experiencing Orthodox worship (especially the Divine Liturgy) for oneself. The colloquium at least included a Vespers service.

Tkanks for the links. I’ll take a look at them in the morning.

“However, learning about Orthodoxy is always primarily experiential, and there is no subsititute for experiencing Orthodox worship (especially the Divine Liturgy) for oneself.”

This is of course absolutely correct. Everytime I listen to some of the borderline heretical, Western style preaching I hear from convert priests on ancient faith radio, I cringe. I understand, I suppose at some level, that Orthodoxy probably can be fruitfully explained to, lets say, Lutherans, in terms “Lutherans undestand”, but I must say, HS, that you and others both here on FR and whom I have have met out in the world, seem to have developed a good understanding of Othodox theolgy and praxis by experiencing Orthodoxy on its own terms. Because I have seen you fellows do so fine, I have to question the propriety of what the crowd at Ancient Faith Radio and their fellow travelers are doing, especially since some of them have very large axes to grind and vrtualy no time as Orthodox Christians before they were ordained.

As I read your post, it almost seemed as though some of the differences between East and West you mention are a matter of semantics. Keeping in mind that I know very little about Orthodox teachings, what you call "an unceasing process towards perfection" Protestants might call sanctification. We recognize that process but don't call it salvation. But every Protestant church I've attended considers sanctification vital.

And this: "This is salvation; completion of personality, transfiguration, elevation to the throne of God, theosis." Isn't this just extending salvation to its logical conclusion? In other words, it's a process most (all?) Protestants believe will take place for the saved after death. It's as though I believe in concepts A, B, C, and D -- and you do too -- but I label only concept A "salvation," whereas you label concepts A-D "salvation." Am I totally misunderstanding you?

Also: "[Salvation] is universal as far as God's will and action are concerned; it is not universal as far as man's will and action are concerned." I agree with you here, and some of the Protestant denominations I've attended in the past would too. We're not all Calvinists. (In fact, I've only met one Protestant in my whole life who was a Calvinist!)

I like what C.S. Lewis said about this: "One attempt to define causally what happens there [where God and man meet] has led to the whole puzzle about grace and free will. You will notice that Scripture just sails over the problem. 'Work out your own salvation in fear and trembling' -- pure Pelagianism. But why? 'For it is God who worketh in you' -- pure Augustianism. It is presumably only our presuppositions that make this appear nonsensical. We profanely assume that divine and human action exclude one another like the actions of two fellow-creatures so that "God did this" and "I did this" cannot both be true of the same act except in the sense that each contributed a share."

The church is bound, but members of the congregation are only bound by conscience. Articles of faith or "confessions" are a form of glue that holds a church together.

I see. I guess that's similar to the less formal doctrinal statements that nondenominational churches put out.

You know you're not going to hear a sermon extolling the Rapture at a Lutheran church, because the church doesn't recognize sufficient support for it in the Bible.

I know this is a side issue, but I wonder how many churches teach the Rapture. It seems to be a popular idea among TV evangelists, members of the media who like to mock Christianity, and so on, but how many Christian churches actually teach this? The last church I attended, the Evangelical Free Church, taught against it. I suspect it's better known in pop culture than in actual churches.

I guess that's similar to the less formal doctrinal statements that nondenominational churches put out.

I never knew that nondenominational churches put anything like that out & I "shopped" a couple of them. It makes sense that they do.

Both nondenominational Bible churches that I "shopped" in my area teach it. One was a small church & the other one was quite large, connected to an even larger congregation in another nearby suburban community. I've no idea how widespread it is, but it is out there & not just something the media is making up to make Christianity look bad.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.