|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
calling any Lutherans-sacraments - 6/3/2008 5:15:38 PM
|
|
|
drussell52
Posts: 137
Joined: 4/24/2008
From: Michigan
Status: online
|
Hi, I have been attending a Lutheran church with my wife for a few years, in fact, was raised in this denomination but left for several years as an adult. I never joined, as I do not agree with all the points of their faith, i.e. the sacraments. I notice since returning, there is a big push if you will on infant baptism being the way one enters the kingdom of God, they call it a means of God's grace, as I understand it, and Communion is regarded similarly. I want to understand from any Lutherans, Roman Catholics or other such similar faiths, does this substitute for one spending time consistently in God's word to help their faith grow? If you receive communion let's say twice a month, is that kind of your dose to go out there and be all the Lord wants you to be? Was there a time in the faith, when baptism and communion as sacraments received less promotion if you will in sermons and such? I think it's the Reformed church who seem to allow folk to decide if they want their toddlers baptized, blessed, or dedicated, and find this more in keeping with how God would want things done, by faith.. Thanks for the assist on this one!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: calling any Lutherans-sacraments - 6/3/2008 7:37:36 PM
|
|
|
JesKlu
Posts: 557
Joined: 4/16/2007
Status: offline
|
I attended the Roman Catholic Church for 19 years of my life, and for nearly 2 years, I have attended the LCMS, and now, on May 18, 2008 on Trinity Sunday, I became a member of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.
In scripture it does point out that in baptism God gives the person remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38-39). It is a means of grace, meaning a way in which God the Holy Spirit gives you forgiveness of sins, creates faith, strengthens faith, and causes you to grow spiritually. In Communion it is the same thing. Communion strengthens your faith and you also receive forgiveness of sins through Communion as we receive the Lord's body and blood in, with, and under the bread and wine.
Receiving the sacraments is in no way an excuse to not spend time in the Word of God. The Word of God is also a means of grace by which creates faith, strengthens faith, grants remission of sins. So, lets say a parent baptized their child. The Holy Spirit planted a seed/created faith in the child. It is the parents job to cause that seed/faith to grow by spending time with their child in the Word of God, which is an act of God's love. So no, the Sacraments are not to replace the Word of God and actually, what causes Baptism to be a sacrament? What causes Communion to be a Sacrament? By combining the external substance with God's Word, and hence then it becomes a Sacrament, so the Word of God is always at the center. But back to the original point, the Sacraments do not replace the Bible, but there should be frequent use of the Sacraments alongside the reading of God's Holy Word. There is no excuse not to read.
Your sister in Christ Jesus,
Jessica
_____________________________
And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them and said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: calling any Lutherans-sacraments - 6/3/2008 8:10:42 PM
|
|
|
BookerG
Posts: 82
Status: offline
|
The way I would explain the Lutheran view of the sacraments as it differs from other faiths is that our focus is entirely on what God has done and is doing for us and in us, and not on what we are doing. They are not mere remembrances or something I do to dedicate myself to God, but gifts of God and means of grace. The means of grace, the things God uses to communicate his undeserved love to us and to create or strengthen our faith. But there is only one means of grace, the Gospel in Word and Sacrament. One Gospel, one means of grace, but that Gospel is offered to us both in the Scriptures and in the two Sacraments. Both are vital; neither Word nor Sacrament should ever be neglected. I'd describe a sacrament as the Gospel made visible or personal. That is, the power and value of the sacraments is the very same Gospel that we are given in Scriptures to strengthen and nourish our faith, but in the sacraments it is attached, by God's command and promises, to something visible that helps me to realize that all of those Gospel promises are not just for all people in general, but specifically for me individually, and for my child personally. As I taste what God has given me personally, I know Jesus shed his blood and sacrificed his body for me. As the water pours over my baby's head, I know God desires to claim this very child as his own and pours out his Holy Spirit and the gift of faith for the child's salvation.
But the sacraments are just one small part of the Gospel message. I wouldn't condone neglecting GOd's Word and saying the Sacraments are plenty, any more than I would recommend that churches just read John 3:16 to the people every Sunday and send them home, as if that's all the Gospel they need.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: calling any Lutherans-sacraments - 6/4/2008 8:15:33 AM
|
|
|
drussell52
Posts: 137
Joined: 4/24/2008
From: Michigan
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BookerG
The way I would explain the Lutheran view of the sacraments as it differs from other faiths is that our focus is entirely on what God has done and is doing for us and in us, and not on what we are doing. They are not mere remembrances or something I do to dedicate myself to God, but gifts of God and means of grace. The means of grace, the things God uses to communicate his undeserved love to us and to create or strengthen our faith. But there is only one means of grace, the Gospel in Word and Sacrament. One Gospel, one means of grace, but that Gospel is offered to us both in the Scriptures and in the two Sacraments. Both are vital; neither Word nor Sacrament should ever be neglected. I'd describe a sacrament as the Gospel made visible or personal. That is, the power and value of the sacraments is the very same Gospel that we are given in Scriptures to strengthen and nourish our faith, but in the sacraments it is attached, by God's command and promises, to something visible that helps me to realize that all of those Gospel promises are not just for all people in general, but specifically for me individually, and for my child personally. As I taste what God has given me personally, I know Jesus shed his blood and sacrificed his body for me. As the water pours over my baby's head, I know God desires to claim this very child as his own and pours out his Holy Spirit and the gift of faith for the child's salvation.
But the sacraments are just one small part of the Gospel message. I wouldn't condone neglecting GOd's Word and saying the Sacraments are plenty, any more than I would recommend that churches just read John 3:16 to the people every Sunday and send them home, as if that's all the Gospel they need.
JesKlu and BookerGee, thanks for your help on this. I wish you weell in your faith journey! This topic may be a bit sensitive for me as I have been participating in an on line study of Galatians for several months, and one thing the Galatians were facing, was a return to a belief that said if you want to be in with God, you need to be a proselytic convert to our sect of Judaism as opposed to Paul's message which was faith alone in the Savior equals the breaking down of ethnic and personal barriers between individual and people groups. So, when I hear in a sermon the sacraments getting promoted I hear the Galatians issue in a different garb. When I receive communion, I am probably between the Protestant view of remembering, and the Lutheran view of His presence in where I go mentally. My sin broke His body as I chew on the wafer, his blood covered and covers me as I partake of the wine. Just this week, I was reading a commentary on the Sermon on the Mount, and invite the Savior to come in my secret places and reshape them, so glad He shows up to do his saving work in all of us! Blessings to both of you, and again thanks, also may god :) on any others who read this and share. David
|
|
|
|
|
RE: calling any Lutherans-sacraments - 6/4/2008 11:44:58 PM
|
|
|
colliefan
Posts: 2518
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Raleigh, NC
Status: offline
|
I go to an Anglican church which has similar views on the Eucharist. After I partake of the elements I form a sign of the cross asking God to sanctify my mind, heart, and entire body.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: calling any Lutherans-sacraments - 6/5/2008 4:56:17 PM
|
|
|
doinkdom
Posts: 3943
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: The higher lowcountry
Status: offline
|
You might consider a study of Covenant Theology to better understand the Lutheran position on infant baptism. It does not replace a declaration of faith as required in the bible.
“Consubstantiation” is a term commonly applied to the Lutheran concept of the communion supper, though some modern Lutheran theologians reject the use of this term because of its ambiguity. The expression, however, is generally associated with Luther. The idea is that in the communion, the body and blood of Christ, and the bread and wine, coexist in union with each other. “Luther illustrated it by the analogy of the iron put into the fire whereby both fire and iron are united in the red-hot iron and yet each continues unchanged” (The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, F.L. Cross, Ed., London: Oxford, 1958, p. 337).
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
|
RE: calling any Lutherans-sacraments - 6/6/2008 12:20:15 AM
|
|
|
JesKlu
Posts: 557
Joined: 4/16/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: doinkdom
You might consider a study of Covenant Theology to better understand the Lutheran position on infant baptism. It does not replace a declaration of faith as required in the bible.
“Consubstantiation” is a term commonly applied to the Lutheran concept of the communion supper, though some modern Lutheran theologians reject the use of this term because of its ambiguity. The expression, however, is generally associated with Luther. The idea is that in the communion, the body and blood of Christ, and the bread and wine, coexist in union with each other. “Luther illustrated it by the analogy of the iron put into the fire whereby both fire and iron are united in the red-hot iron and yet each continues unchanged” (The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, F.L. Cross, Ed., London: Oxford, 1958, p. 337).
Heelo doinkdom,
I agree with the fire-iron analogy. Another way to look at it a similar way is the two natures of Christ. Christ is fully God and fully man, all in one person, but the two natures remain distinct from each other; but the sacramental union is a different union from that of the two natures of Christ. About the term consubstantiation, we don't use that term. Confessional Lutherans use the term Sacramental Union to explain our beliefs about the Lord's Supper.
This view was put forward by Martin Luther in his 1528 Confession Concerning Christ's Supper:
“ Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacramental_Union
We though, do not use the term consubstantiation for the following reasons:
This view is sometimes identified as consubstantiation in that it asserts the simultaneous presence of four essences in the Eucharist: that of the consecrated bread, the Body of Christ, the consecrated wine, and the Blood of Christ; but it differs in that it does not assert a "local" (three dimensional, circumscribed) presence of the Body and Blood in the sacramental bread and wine respectively, which is rejected as "gross, carnal, and Capernaitic" in the Formula of Concord.[7] The term "consubstantiation" has been associated with such a "local" inclusion of the Body and Blood of Christ in the sacramental bread and wine as has the term "impanation." Lutherans have also rejected the designation of their position as consubstantiation because it is a philosophical explanation of the Real Presence as they believe transubstantiation is.
Martin Luther distinguished this doctrine from that of transubstantiation and impanation in this way:
“ ... we do not make Christ's body out of the bread ... Nor do we say that his body comes into existence out of the bread [i.e. impanation]. We say that his body, which long ago was made and came into existence, is present when we say, "This is my body." For Christ commands us to say not, "Let this become my body," or, "Make my body there," but, "This is my body."[8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacramental_Union
I hope this information has helped you to understand more about the Lutheran beliefs about the Sacrament of the Altar.
Your sister in Christ Jesus,
Jessica
_____________________________
And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them and said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: calling any Lutherans-sacraments - 6/6/2008 10:52:20 AM
|
|
|
doinkdom
Posts: 3943
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: The higher lowcountry
Status: offline
|
Forgive me up front, but I did giggle with the terminology conflicts.
Commonly used terms do not always drill down to the integral parts of specific doctrines. Thank you for doing that.
I was baptized LCMS and was also confirmed in the LCMS and attended as a full active member until my 20's or so. I have definite reformed beliefs now, but they do not all line up with LCMS.
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
|
RE: calling any Lutherans-sacraments - 6/21/2008 8:24:57 AM
|
|
|
drussell52
Posts: 137
Joined: 4/24/2008
From: Michigan
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: doinkdom
Forgive me up front, but I did giggle with the terminology conflicts.
Commonly used terms do not always drill down to the integral parts of specific doctrines. Thank you for doing that.
I was baptized LCMS and was also confirmed in the LCMS and attended as a full active member until my 20's or so. I have definite reformed beliefs now, but they do not all line up with LCMS.
Hi, David here to thank all of you for your input on the sacraments, again. Doinctum, when I was in college a few years ago, I attended a Reformed Church which made provision for parents who wanted to either baptize their children or dedicate them, found that to be more diplomatic compared to the Lutheran faith insistance on baptism. Since I started studying the Hebrew roots of the Christian faith, I ran across a reformed congregation in Philadelphia that is both messianic and Covenant theology in its presentation. When one realizes covenant is a 2-way street, it sure enriches one's relationship with our LORD. When one understands grace to be favor instead of some state, or archaic term, wow, things come to life! I'm glad I came back to visit this post and thank each of you for your time and thoughts. To the Anglican person, sorry I forgot your name, thanks for the reminder of God's grace being ever continuous. See you at some other topic, shalom!
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
