My problem in all of this is something else. If unity is merely on the basis of doctrinal content and the practice is all over the page, unity becomes not something concrete, tangible, and visible but something theoretical. It becomes a matter of the mind. Unity would then live in the imagination and not on the ground. More than simply describing unity, this also effectively renders doctrine itself as something passive, quiet, and incidental. If unity cannot be expressed in words and a formula, then does it exist at all? In other words, if what marks us as Lutherans is that we say we are but we can diverge in the content and practice of it without any formative boundaries, is Lutheran even a thing anymore?
Rome has highly legislated the practice General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM for short). That has not kept the folks on the fringe from experimenting with rites and content and it has left it to the bishop to decide who and when the line is crossed. Because this line is different wherever you go, it means that even the detailed and direct instruction of the Roman Mass is not formative much less restrictive. Rome is struggling to figure this out along with deciding that the line seems to be where Latin begins and the vernacular ends.
Is being Lutheran (or Roman, for that matter) a concrete matter or something theoretical? If it is not concrete and real, then it is theoretical and that means it is nothing to bother about. I do not fall into this position. I think the confessional documents of Lutheranism are not simply descriptive but prescriptive. We have the Mass (weekly, with all the usual ceremonies, vestments, lectionary, etc., as in AC 24). If even the majority fail to keep these, that does not negate nor render the confession null and void. It simply points out that those failing so are not following their own confession. It is not simply a matter of rules or control but confession and faith. If this does not apply to worship, it will not apply to anything else.
2 comments:
The word of God is doctrine, not theoretical, and we need to have unity in following it. There are the doctrines of men which were written by synods and live on in the traditions of denominational distinctives which arose from scripture and complement or explain theological positions. Distinguishing between the doctrines of the faith and ceremonial traditions must be ongoing in the church. If we are holding to a ceremonial practice which does not enhance the Gospel message, we ought to reconsider their intrinsic value, rather than just mindlessly continue retaining them. As for unity, it remains elusive because of denominational fracturing and disagreements between church leaders over the centuries. We need to love God, follow the Gospel of Christ, preach grace and the cross, share it with others, and let the rest remain for theologians to argue. Soli Deo Gloria
"I wish it were easy enough to write out a list of things that cannot be changed, should not be changed, could be changed, and should be changed."
While the Book of Concord can hardly be considered simply as a list, there is the Brief Statement of 1932 with its list of 19 Lutheran confessional doctrines. Of course, one or more items on this list are still ignored by numerous LCMS members.
Post a Comment