...about Church and Ministry, by all means read, mark, learn and inwardly digest THIS.
Kudos to our northern brothers! I think we need a LCC South District. :) This is, bar none, the best summary I've yet encountered on the topic. When you begin with our Lord, you can't go wrong!
14 comments:
Glad you liked it. When I read it before our convention I was very pleased and I think our CTCR did a great job! I am looking forward to hearing and reading some commentary on it.
I want to thank you especially, Pr. Keith, for drawing my attention to it. Was it adopted by the LCC?
I believe that it was simply put forward as a study document. The other document, equally well written by our CTCR, was adopted in the following: Resolution 08.1.02 To Commend the CTCR Document “The Public Reading of Scripture in the Divine Service”
for Study and Response ADOPTED (as amended. However, I can't find that document on the net yet. But it too is well worth the read. I have it in hardcopy and I am sure somewhere it must be available in digital. I will set to work on it.
The other documents are within the larger book of convention documents.
I am a Pastor from the Great White North and would love to have an LCC district south of the border, though we would screen applications... ;-)
I like this paper too, but there is an interesting problem brewing with this one. There are many pastors who are preparing rebuttal papers denouncing this one as irresponsible for not properly first addressing Walther's Church and Ministry which is our official statement since 1852. Because of this I am greatly confused now more than ever. Is Walther against this position? I didn't think so, but there are quite a number of Pastors who are saying it is!
Please help me out understand just what Walther says because I am confused. I put a post up on Rev. Rossow's question on the St John the Steadfast website... I understand a lot, but I do not understand the romanticised Waltherianism or romanticised Loehe-ism. Thanks for any help you might have.
I would be most interested in seeing their rebuttal. The most unWaltherlike thing in the paper is the assertion that Christ KEEPS His authority and doesn't delegate it! I think there's huge Scriptural and Confessional strength to the position. The ultimate question, though, is not does this paper stand up to Walther; it is does this paper stand up to the Sacred Scriptures and the Lutheran Symbols? Is there any point at which it over-reaches what they teach?
One thing that the paper did not address was Norman Nagel's article on the "principally and immediately" as LOGIC terms in Tractatus. If Nagel is correct on that, then it even strengthens the position the paper is taking. It was printed some years ago in CJ, but I don't remember the date. Nagel's point (which some Synodocrats disparage as Walther revisionism) is that Walther himself would want to be understood according to the Symbols; and if he missed a point in the Symbols, he'd want us to go with them and not with him.
"The ultimate question, though, is not does this paper stand up to Walther; it is does this paper stand up to the Sacred Scriptures and the Lutheran Symbols? Is there any point at which it over-reaches what they teach?"
Yes, I agree. However, I have heard many times now the thought (excuse?) that our accepted documents of LCMS/LCC are almost like confessions in and of themselves. I do not believe that they have that level of authority. First is Holy Scripture, then the BoC of 1580 as an exposition thereof. Do the accepted statements of LCMS/LCC then take the third place? If so, then hadn't they be added to our ordination vows and repeated at every installation? I want to know EXACTLY what I am subscribing to!
Just a further thought.
Concerning the document, "The Public Reading of Scripture in the Divine Service," the workbook version (un-amended, I assume) is available in the convention workbook segment at this link: http://www.lutheranchurch.ca/synod
2008/workbook_g.pdf
It begins on page G.7 and goes through page G.22.
It looks to be clearly argued and well written. Were the amendments very significant?
Sorry, the above address doesn't seem to work. You can find the document by going here:
http://www.lutheranchurch.ca/synod2008/ workbook.html
and clicking on the "workbook G" link.
Nagel's reference to logic terms employed in the Treatise may be found in CJ 15:4.439f.
I've already sent in my response to the CTCR document. I could forward it to you, if you wish.
The Rev. J. Rinas
Rev. Rinas,
I would love a copy of your response... please send it to christlu@ntl.sympatico.ca
Rev. Rinas,
I would also be interested in your resposne to the document! Thanks.
oursaviourlutheranchurch@hotmail.com
Me three. Weedon@mac.com
Rev. Rinas,
Thank you for the document! I think you have raised some very good points! In particular with regard to the terminology we employ in the Church today and in particular in LCC with the term Deacon.
Post a Comment