STUDY GUIDE for Getting Down to Basics: The
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Robert D. Hawkins
LEX OR A NDI LEX CREDENDI THE CON F ESSION al INDI ff ERENCE TO AL TITUDE Robert D. Hawkins t astounds me that, in the twenty-two years I have shared Catholics, as the Ritualists were known, formed the Church Iresponsibility for the liturgical formation of seminarians, of England Protection Society (1859), renamed the English I have heard Lutherans invoke the terms “high church” Church Union (1860), to challenge the authority of English and “low church” as if they actually describe with clar- civil law to determine ecclesiastical and liturgical practice.1 ity ministerial positions regarding worship. It is assumed The Church Association (1865) was formed to prosecute in that I am “high church” because I teach worship and know civil court the “catholic innovations.” Five Anglo-Catholic how to fire up a censer. On occasion I hear acquaintances priests were jailed following the 1874 enactment of the mutter vituperatively about “low church” types, apparently Public Worship Regulation Act for refusing to abide by civil ecclesiological life forms not far removed from amoebae. court injunctions regarding liturgical practices. Such prac- On the other hand, a history of the South Carolina Synod tices included the use of altar crosses, candlesticks, stoles included a passing remark about liturgical matters which with embroidered crosses, bowing, genuflecting, or the use historically had been looked upon in the region with no lit- of the sign of the cross in blessing their congregations.2 tle suspicion. It was feared upon my appointment, I sense, For readers whose ecclesiological sense is formed by that my supposed “high churchmanship” would distract notions about the separation of church and state, such the seminarians from the rigors of pastoral ministry into prosecution seems mind-boggling, if not ludicrous. -
The Book of Concord FAQ God's Word
would be no objective way to make sure that there is faithful teaching and preaching of The Book of Concord FAQ God's Word. Everything would depend on each pastor's private opinions, subjective Confessional Lutherans for Christ’s Commission interpretations, and personal feelings, rather than on objective truth as set forth in the By permission of Rev. Paul T. McCain Lutheran Confessions. What is the Book of Concord? Do all Lutheran churches have the same view of the Book of Concord? The Book of Concord is a book published in 1580 that contains the Lutheran No. Many Lutheran churches in the world today have been thoroughly influenced by the Confessions. liberal theology that has taken over most so-called "mainline" Protestant denominations in North America and the large Protestant state churches in Europe, Scandinavia, and elsewhere. The foundation of much of modern theology is the view that the words of What are the Lutheran Confessions? the Bible are not actually God's words but merely human opinions and reflections of the The Lutheran Confessions are ten statements of faith that Lutherans use as official ex- personal feelings of those who wrote the words. Consequently, confessions that claim planations and summaries of what they believe, teach, and confess. They remain to this to be true explanations of God's Word are now regarded more as historically day the definitive standard of what Lutheranism is. conditioned human opinions, rather than as objective statements of truth. This would explain why some Lutheran churches enter into fellowship arrangements with What does Concord mean? non-Lutheran churches teaching things in direct conflict with the Holy Scriptures and the Concord means "harmony." The word is derived from two Latin words and is translated Lutheran Confessions. -
Lutherans Respond to Pentecostalism
TLC 4 TLC THEOLOgy in thE LifE OF thE Church Vol. 4 The spread and influence of diverse expressions of Pentecostalism through out the world, especially in Africa, is posing significant challenges to Lutheran as well as other churches. At a seminar of the Lutheran World Federation in South Africa, theologians discussed how they are responding to these challenges. Articles in this book highlight how some Lutheran convictions to Respond Pentecostalism Lutherans and understandings can counter, balance or expand upon Pentecostal beliefs and practices. Contributors include: J. Kwabena Asamoah-Gyadu, Ghana; Ibrahim Bitrus, Nigeria; Musawenkosi Biyela, South Africa; Samuel Dawai, Cameroon; Hans-Peter Grosshans, Germany; Guillermo Hansen, Argentina/USA; Paul John Isaak, Namibia/Switzerland; Rogate Mshana, Tanzania/Switzerland; Sarojini Nadar, South Africa; Cheryl S. Pero, USA; Gertrud Tönsing, South Africa; and Galana Babusa Yako, Kenya. Lutherans Respond The editor, Karen L. Bloomquist, directs the Department for Theology and Studies, LWF, Geneva, Switzerland. to Pentecostalism LWF The Lutheran World Federation – A Communion of Churches ISBN (Europe) 978-3-905676-68-6 DTS-Studies-201002-text.indd 10 02/03/2011 15:55:18 PM Lutherans Respond to Pentecostalism edited by Karen L. Bloomquist on behalf of the Lutheran World Federation— A Communion of Churches Lutheran University Press Minneapolis, Minnesota Previous volumes in the Theology in the Life of the Church series Karen L. Bloomquist (ed.), Being the Church in the Midst of Empire. Trinitarian Reflections Simone Sinn (ed.), Deepening Faith, Hope and Love in Relations with Neighbors of Other Faiths Karen L. Bloomquist (ed.), Identity, Survival, Witness. Reconfiguring Theological Agendas Lutherans Respond to Pentecostalism Theology in the Life of the Church, vol. -
Melanchthon Versus Luther: the Contemporary Struggle
CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY Volume 44, Numbers 2-3 --- - - - JULY 1980 Can the Lutheran Confessions Have Any Meaning 450 Years Later?.................... Robert D. Preus 104 Augustana VII and the Eclipse of Ecumenism ....................................... Sieg bert W. Becker 108 Melancht hon versus Luther: The Contemporary Struggle ......................... Bengt Hagglund 123 In-. Response to Bengt Hagglund: The importance of Epistemology for Luther's and Melanchthon's Theology .............. Wilbert H. Rosin 134 Did Luther and Melanchthon Agree on the Real Presence?.. ....................................... David P. Scaer 14 1 Luther and Melanchthon in America ................................................ C. George Fry 148 Luther's Contribution to the Augsburg Confession .............................................. Eugene F. Klug 155 Fanaticism as a Theological Category in the Lutheran Confessions ............................... Paul L. Maier 173 Homiletical Studies 182 Melanchthon versus Luther: the Contemporary Struggle Bengt Hagglund Luther and Melanchthon in Modern Research In many churches in Scandinavia or in Germany one will find two oil paintings of the same size and datingfrom the same time, representing Martin Luther and Philip Melanchthon, the two prime reformers of the Church. From the point of view of modern research it may seem strange that Melanchthon is placed on the same level as Luther, side by side with him, equal in importance and equally worth remembering as he. Their common achieve- ment was, above all, the renewal of the preaching of the Gospel, and therefore it is deserving t hat their portraits often are placed in the neighborhood of the pulpit. Such pairs of pictures were typical of the nineteenth-century view of Melanchthon and Luther as harmonious co-workers in the Reformation. These pic- tures were widely displayed not only in the churches, but also in many private homes in areas where the Reformation tradition was strong. -
Defending Faith
Spätmittelalter, Humanismus, Reformation Studies in the Late Middle Ages, Humanism and the Reformation herausgegeben von Volker Leppin (Tübingen) in Verbindung mit Amy Nelson Burnett (Lincoln, NE), Berndt Hamm (Erlangen) Johannes Helmrath (Berlin), Matthias Pohlig (Münster) Eva Schlotheuber (Düsseldorf) 65 Timothy J. Wengert Defending Faith Lutheran Responses to Andreas Osiander’s Doctrine of Justification, 1551– 1559 Mohr Siebeck Timothy J. Wengert, born 1950; studied at the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor), Luther Seminary (St. Paul, MN), Duke University; 1984 received Ph. D. in Religion; since 1989 professor of Church History at The Lutheran Theological Seminary at Philadelphia. ISBN 978-3-16-151798-3 ISSN 1865-2840 (Spätmittelalter, Humanismus, Reformation) Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2012 by Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproduc- tions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was typeset by Martin Fischer in Tübingen using Minion typeface, printed by Gulde- Druck in Tübingen on non-aging paper and bound Buchbinderei Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Germany. Acknowledgements Thanks is due especially to Bernd Hamm for accepting this manuscript into the series, “Spätmittelalter, Humanismus und Reformation.” A special debt of grati- tude is also owed to Robert Kolb, my dear friend and colleague, whose advice and corrections to the manuscript have made every aspect of it better and also to my doctoral student and Flacius expert, Luka Ilic, for help in tracking down every last publication by Matthias Flacius. -
Reappropriating Luther's Two Kingdoms by CRAIG L
Reappropriating Luther's Two Kingdoms by CRAIG L. NESSAN n the Lutheran tradition the usual villain lurking behind apparent Ifailures to oppose political tyranny has been Martin Luther's teach ing on the "two kingdoms." The failure of the German Lutheran churches adequately to resist the Nazi regime and the quietism of the Lutheran church in the United States in relationship to political questions are but two examples of the apparent insufficiency of Luther s two kingdoms teaching. Moreover, questions can be raised about the adequacy of this political ethic for Luther himself, espe cially in light of his stance during the rebellion of the peasants and his writings against the Jews. Is it possible to re-appropriate Luther's two kingdoms teaching as a viable political ethic for the church in its ministry and mission at the beginning of the twenty-first cen tury?1 Walter Altmann has sketched four models that in various ways dis tort the relationship of church and state.2 First, there can be a sepa ration of church and state with a demonization of politics. This oc curs especially in theologies that focus on salvation as an escape from this evil world. Second, there can be separation of church and state whereby politics is understood to be autonomous from religious in fluence. This approach usually functions with a very positive esti mation of the political order as an instrument of God's creative and ordering power. Altmann cites not only Nazi Germany but also the prevailing view in the United States as examples of this model. -
The Lord's Prayer in Luther's Catechism
Word & World Volume 22, Number 1 Winter 2002 The Lord’s Prayer in Luther’s Catechism JAMES ARNE NESTINGEN S COMMONLY AS IT APPEARS IN PERSONAL DEVOTION AND THE LITURGICAL life of the church, the Lord’s Prayer draws surprisingly little theological atten- tion. Children raised in the Christian faith often learn it as the first full paragraph of their speech; if new Christians don’t get a full treatment in adult instruction, they quickly come to know the prayer as generations have, by saying it with the congregation in services or with those standing with them at the close of a meeting. Yet for all the prominence of the prayer, full theological treatments are not nearly as common as might be expected. I. RECENT SCHOLARSHIP This has not always been the case. The World War II generation of German theologians, perhaps just because of their experience, produced some classic stud- ies, most all of them published in English translations. Joachim Jeremias and Ernst Lohmeyer did full dress New Testament studies, Jeremias setting it in the context of first-century prayer, Lohmeyer paying particularly close attention to the escha- tology.1 Helmut Thielicke published a classic set of sermons on the Lord’s Prayer 1Joachim Jeremias, “The Lord’s Prayer in Light of Recent Research,” in The Prayers of Jesus, trans. John Reu- mann (London: SCM, 1967) 82-107; Ernest Lohmeyer, “Our Father”; An Introduction to the Lord’s Prayer, trans. John Bowden (New York: Harper & Row, 1965). Luther’s explanations of the Lord’s Prayer are not concerned primarily with cor- rect doctrine. -
The 'Evangelical' Heart of Pietist Anthony William Boehm
Digital Commons @ George Fox University Faculty Publications - Portland Seminary Portland Seminary 2016 The ‘Evangelical’ Heart of Pietist Anthony William Boehm Daniel L. Brunner George Fox University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/gfes Part of the Christianity Commons Recommended Citation Brunner, Daniel L., "The ‘Evangelical’ Heart of Pietist Anthony William Boehm" (2016). Faculty Publications - Portland Seminary. 109. https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/gfes/109 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Portland Seminary at Digital Commons @ George Fox University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications - Portland Seminary by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ George Fox University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Heart Religion: Evangelical Piety in England & Ireland, 1690–1850 John Coffey The ‘Evangelical’ Heart of Pietist Anthony William Boehm Daniel L. Brunner DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198724155.003.0004 Abstract and Keywords German Lutheran Pietism, as represented by Philipp J. Spener and August H. Francke’s institutions at Halle, is one noteworthy outworking of the ‘spiritual’ revival during the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. The foremost proponent of Halle Pietism in England was Anthony William Boehm (1673–1722), whose literary activity became significant in English religious life. This chapter evaluates the ‘evangelical’ nature of Boehm’s Pietist voice in the ‘tunnel period’ between the Restoration and the Evangelical Revival. Using the lens of David Bebbington’s quadrilateral—conversionism, activism, biblicism, and crucicentrism—the article explore the similarities and dissimilarities between Pietism and evangelicalism at the nexus of Boehm’s publications. -
![[Formula of Concord]](https://docslib.b-cdn.net/cover/9966/formula-of-concord-1099966.webp)
[Formula of Concord]
[Formula of Concord] Editors‘ Introduction to the Formula of Concord Every movement has a period in which its adherents attempt to sort out and organize the fundamental principles on which the founder or founders of the movement had based its new paradigm and proposal for public life. This was true of the Lutheran Reformation. In the late 1520s one of Luther‘s early students, John Agricola, challenged first the conception of God‘s law expressed by Luther‘s close associate and colleague, Philip Melanchthon, and, a decade later, Luther‘s own doctrine of the law. This began the disputes over the proper interpretation of Luther‘s doctrinal legacy. In the 1530s and 1540s Melanchthon and a former Wittenberg colleague, Nicholas von Amsdorf, privately disagreed on the role of good works in salvation, the bondage or freedom of the human will in relationship to God‘s grace, the relationship of the Lutheran reform to the papacy, its relationship to government, and the real presence of Christ‘s body and blood in the Lord‘s Supper. The contention between the two foreshadowed a series of disputes that divided the followers of Luther and Melanchthon in the period after Luther‘s death, in which political developments in the empire fashioned an arena for these disputes. In the months after Luther‘s death on 18 February 1546, Emperor Charles V finally was able to marshal forces to attempt the imposition of his will on his defiant Lutheran subjects and to execute the Edict of Worms of 1521, which had outlawed Luther and his followers. -
Philip Melanchthon: Justification As the Renewal of the Intellect and the Will
CHAPTER THREE PHILIP MELANCHTHON: JUSTIFICATION AS THE RENEWAL OF THE INTELLECT AND THE WILL Melanchthon has had the dubious honor of being the lupus fabulae of the history of Lutheranism. The reason for this hostility must be understood in context of controversies which followed Luther’s death and resulted in party-forming. The followers of Luther were split into a number of rival parties, two of which the most prominent were the Philippists, who were supporters of Melanchthon’s theology and style, and the Gnesiolutherans, who tried to identify themselves as the genuine followers of Luther.1 Melanchthon tried to formulate Lutheran theology in such a way as to maintain a connection with Calvinist theologians. During Luther’s lifetime, he had already sought an alliance with the Roman Catholic Church. Melanchthon’s ecumenical interests became apparent in Regens- burg (1541) and in the Leipzig interim (1548). The formulations of the interim in particular was interpreted as a deviation from Luther’s teachings. These accusations came from Joachim Mörlin, among others, whose comment embodies the ambivalent status of Melanchthon. He is our Preceptor, and Preceptor he shall be called. But when he speaks about the Lord’s Supper, free will, justifi cation of man, or actions concerning interims, then you, Philip, shall be praised by the devil, but me nevermore.2 Melanchthon’s notion of justifi cation evolved over the years so that the role of renewal in justifi cation varied. His greatest difference from Luther was his way of depicting renewal as the causal renewal of the 1 A third minor party was the Swabachian group, who were followers of Johannes Brenz. -
Benefitting from Luther's Small Catechism
MAJT 28 (2017): 67-76 BENEFITTING FROM LUTHER’S SMALL CATECHISM … AS A CALVINIST by Daniel R. Hyde1 MARTIN LUTHER (1483–1546) was a hero. His contemporaries depicted him as everything from the angel of Revelation 14, an apostle, Daniel redivivus, Ezekiel’s good shepherd, one of three Mary’s at the tomb of a resurrected Christendom, prophets like Elijah, Enoch, Isaiah, and Jeremiah, and even Hercules Germanicus complete with lion pelt clothing and a club beating medieval theologians to death. 2 When Heinrich Bullinger (1504–1575) rejected the claim that Luther was an apostle, this led many of Luther’s followers to respond with lengthy refutations in sermons and writings that he in fact was an apostle.3 Perhaps this is to be expected of Luther’s fellow “Lutherans” (anachronistically speaking). What is not so expected is how Protestants of the “Reformed” or “Calvinist” kind (again, another anachronism) spoke of him in heroic terms. As early as 1520, Ulrich Zwingli (1484–1531) called Luther a contemporary Elijah.4 As well, after Luther died, the tendency for the Reformed was to focus their criticism on Luther’s so-called followers while leaving “the Big Man” alone. An example of this occurred one year after the Book of Concord was published (1580), when Christopher Grandmundt published a refutation of Lutheran “ubiquitist” theologians such as Jakob Andreae (1528–1590). Grandmundt said Andreae took extreme statements Luther uttered in the heat of controversy in order to buttress the Gnesio (“true”) Lutheran position. In contrast, Grandmundt said Luther merely exhibited his weakness in these utterances; it was his followers who were in serious error. -
The Formula of Concord As a Model for Discourse in the Church
21st Conference of the International Lutheran Council Berlin, Germany August 27 – September 2, 2005 The Formula of Concord as a Model for Discourse in the Church Robert Kolb The appellation „Formula of Concord“ has designated the last of the symbolic or confessional writings of the Lutheran church almost from the time of its composition. This document was indeed a formulation aimed at bringing harmony to strife-ridden churches in the search for a proper expression of the faith that Luther had proclaimed and his colleagues and followers had confessed as a liberating message for both church and society fifty years earlier. This document is a formula, a written document that gives not even the slightest hint that it should be conveyed to human ears instead of human eyes. The Augsburg Confession had been written to be read: to the emperor, to the estates of the German nation, to the waiting crowds outside the hall of the diet in Augsburg. The Apology of the Augsburg Confession, it is quite clear from recent research,1 followed the oral form of judicial argument as Melanchthon presented his case for the Lutheran confession to a mythically yet neutral emperor; the Apology was created at the yet not carefully defined border between oral and written cultures. The Large Catechism reads like the sermons from which it was composed, and the Small Catechism reminds every reader that it was written to be recited and repeated aloud. The Formula of Concord as a „Binding Summary“ of Christian Teaching In contrast, the „Formula of Concord“ is written for readers, a carefully- crafted formulation for the theologians and educated lay people of German Lutheran churches to ponder and study.