Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2019 · 67th Convention, Tampa › Page 304
LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2019, Page 304
front matter 1
front matter 2
front matter 3
front matter 4
front matter 5
front matter 6
front matter 7
front matter 8
front matter 9
front matter 10
front matter 11
front matter 12
front matter 13
front matter 14
front matter 15
front matter 16
front matter 17
front matter 18
front matter 19
front matter 20
front matter 21
front matter 22
front matter 23
front matter 24
front matter 25
front matter 26
front matter 27
front matter 28
front matter 29
front matter 30
front matter 31
front matter 32
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
Page 111
Page 112
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120
Page 121
Page 122
Page 123
Page 124
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 133
Page 134
Page 135
Page 136
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141
Page 142
Page 143
Page 144
Page 145
Page 146
Page 147
Page 148
Page 149
Page 150
Page 151
Page 152
Page 153
Page 154
Page 155
Page 156
Page 157
Page 158
Page 159
Page 160
Page 161
Page 162
Page 163
Page 164
Page 165
Page 166
Page 167
Page 168
Page 169
Page 170
Page 171
Page 172
Page 173
Page 174
Page 175
Page 176
Page 177
Page 178
Page 179
Page 180
Page 181
Page 182
Page 183
Page 184
Page 185
Page 186
Page 187
Page 188
Page 189
Page 190
Page 191
Page 192
Page 193
Page 194
Page 195
Page 196
Page 197
Page 198
Page 199
Page 200
Page 201
Page 202
Page 203
Page 204
Page 205
Page 206
Page 207
Page 208
Page 209
Page 210
Page 211
Page 212
Page 213
Page 214
Page 215
Page 216
Page 217
Page 218
Page 219
Page 220
Page 221
Page 222
Page 223
Page 224
Page 225
Page 226
Page 227
Page 228
Page 229
Page 230
Page 231
Page 232
Page 233
Page 234
Page 235
Page 236
Page 237
Page 238
Page 239
Page 240
Page 241
Page 242
Page 243
Page 244
Page 245
Page 246
Page 247
Page 248
Page 249
Page 250
Page 251
Page 252
Page 253
Page 254
Page 255
Page 256
Page 257
Page 258
Page 259
Page 260
Page 261
Page 262
Page 263
Page 264
Page 265
Page 266
Page 267
Page 268
Page 269
Page 270
Page 271
Page 272
Page 273
Page 274
Page 275
Page 276
Page 277
Page 278
Page 279
Page 280
Page 281
Page 282
Page 283
Page 284
Page 285
Page 286
Page 287
Page 288
Page 289
Page 290
Page 291
Page 292
Page 293
Page 294
Page 295
Page 296
Page 297
Page 298
Page 299
Page 300
Page 301
Page 302
Page 303
Page 304
Page 305
Page 306
Page 307
Page 308
Page 309
Page 310
Page 311
Page 312
Page 313
Page 314
Page 315
Page 316
Page 317
Page 318
Page 319
Page 320
Page 321
Page 322
Page 323
Page 324
Page 325
Page 326
Page 327
Page 328
Page 329
Page 330
Page 331
Page 332
Page 333
Page 334
Page 335
Page 336
Page 337
Page 338
Page 339
Page 340
Page 341
Page 342
Page 343
Page 344
Page 345
Page 346
Page 347
Page 348
Page 349
Page 350
Page 351
Page 352
Page 353
Page 354
Page 355
Page 356
Page 357
Page 358
Page 359
Page 360
Page 361
Page 362
Page 363
Page 364
Page 365
Page 366
Page 367
Page 368
Page 369
Page 370
Page 371
Page 372
Page 373
Page 374
Page 375
Page 376
Page 377
Page 378
Page 379
Page 380
Page 381
Page 382
Page 383
Page 384
Page 385
Page 386
Page 387
Page 388
Page 389
Page 390
Page 391
Page 392
Page 393
Page 394
Page 395
Page 396
Page 397
Page 398
Page 399
Page 400
Page 401
Page 402
Page 403
Page 404
Page 405
Page 406
Page 407
Page 408
Page 409
Page 410
Page 411
Page 412
Page 413
Page 414
Page 415
Page 416
Page 417
Page 418
Page 419
Page 420
Page 421
Page 422
Page 423
Page 424
Page 425
Page 426
Page 427
Page 428
Page 429
Page 430
Page 431
Page 432
Page 433
Page 434
Page 435
Page 436
Page 437
Page 438
Page 439
Page 440
Page 441
Page 442
Page 443
Page 444
Page 445
Page 446
Page 447
Page 448
Page 449
Page 450
Page 451
Page 452
Page 453
Page 454
Page 455
Page 456
Page 457
Page 458
Page 459
Page 460
Page 461
Page 462
Page 463
Page 464
Page 465
Page 466
Page 467
Page 468
Page 469
Page 470
Page 471
Page 472
Page 473
Page 474
Page 475
Page 476
Page 477
Page 478
Page 479
Page 480
Page 481
Page 482
Page 483
Page 484
Page 485
Page 486
Page 487
Page 488
Page 489
Page 490
Page 491
Page 492
Page 493
Page 494
Page 495
Page 496
Page 497
Page 498
Page 499
Page 500
Page 501
Page 502
Page 503
Page 504
Page 505
Page 506
Page 507
Page 508
Page 509
Page 510
Page 511
Page 512
Page 513
Page 514
Page 515
Page 516
Page 517
Page 518
Page 519
Page 520
Page 521
Page 522
Page 523
Page 524
Page 525
Page 526
Page 527
Page 528
Page 529
Page 530
Page 531
Page 532
Page 533
Page 534
Page 535
Page 536
Page 537
Page 538
Page 539
Page 540
Page 541
Page 542
Page 543
Page 544
Page 545
Page 546
Page 547
Page 548
Page 549
Page 550
Page 551
Page 552
Page 553
Page 554
Page 555
Page 556
Page 557
Page 558
Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
304
II. THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS
© 2018 The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
1333 S. Kirkwood Road
St. Louis, MO 63122
888-THE LCMS • lcms.org/ctcr
Ecumenical Discussions
on Justification
This work may be reproduced by churches and schools for their own use in the study
of the Scriptures. Commercial reproduction, or reproduction for sale, of any portion
of this work or of the work as a whole, without the written permission of the copyright
holder, is prohibited.
– the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification
Le a de r’s
Art illustration provided by Concordia Historical Institute, concordiahistoricalinstitute.org.
Used with permission.
Gui de
2. The Ecumenical Movement
The witness of a divided Christianity on the mission field:
The ecumenical movement is one of the important
movements in the history of the church in the twentieth
century. It was born in part out of the frustration of
the mission field. Many denominations were sending
missionaries to the same area, competing with each other.
Non-Christians were asking: Which of you is the true
Christian? If you Christians do not even agree on this, how
and why should we choose? It was also born out of the
new situation after World War I, when the churches were
confronted with aggressive atheist communism, bent on
destroying all religion. Thus, the question was: Can different
Christian churches cooperate? But in order to cooperate,
churches had to discuss their theological differences.
Ecumenical Discussions on Justification
– the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification
Leader’s Guide
Introduction
Have you ever attended a Roman Catholic funeral? How was
it similar to a Lutheran funeral? What was different? How did
the people and the priest talk about salvation? Did the topic
of justification (how we are righteous before God) come up?
Alternatively, or additionally, a clip from the funeral service
of Justice Antonin Scalia can be used, if it is deemed appropriate and will not lead the class into a different direction:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIq1fYzMhcc, from 10:20
to 12:55. What strikes the participants as different from what
they hear at a Lutheran funeral? According to this sermon,
what is the basis for entering heaven?
The difference in preaching at a funeral in a Lutheran and
a Roman Catholic Church has to do primarily with the
different beliefs on justification. But haven’t we overcome
these differences?
A breakthrough between Lutherans and Catholics?
Almost 20 years ago, a major announcement went through
the news: Lutherans and Roman Catholics had overcome
their differences in the doctrine of justification, so that there
was a common answer to the question: How is a person
saved? Some Lutherans hoped that, after this important
step, unity between the churches or least intercommunion
(i.e. that both churches would freely allow members of the
other church to go to Communion at their altars) would
be near. However, neither of these things have happened.
On October 31, 1999 (Reformation Day), the “Joint
Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification” (JDDJ), was
signed in Augsburg, Germany, by the LWF and the Papal
Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity as an official
agreement. Although this document is now almost 20 years
old, it is still important. In July 2017, the World Alliance
of Reformed Churches signed JDDJ, and some Anglicans
have given their assent.1 Many Lutherans in the LWF — this
includes the ELCA in the United States — are convinced
that JDDJ has solved the disagreement on the doctrine of
justification between Roman Catholics and Lutherans.
The “Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification”
(JDDJ) in 1999:
It would have been a great step toward Christian
unity if the document at the center of this news story
had accomplished such agreement. Called the “Joint
Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification,” the statement announced a new agreement on the doctrine
of justification between the members of the Lutheran
World Federation (LWF), an international community
of Lutheran churches, and the Roman Catholic Church.
In this Bible study we will look at the background and
some of the key content of this ecumenical document.
We will seek to explain why The Lutheran Church—
Missouri Synod maintains that the Roman Catholic
teaching on justification still contradicts the biblical
teaching and that therefore the divisions of the time
of the Reformation are still necessary for the sake of
the Gospel.
Leader’s Guide |
2019 Convention Workbook
Lutheran-Roman Catholic conversations:
As part of the ecumenical movement, there have been
dialogues on a national level between Lutheran Churches
and the Roman Catholic Church. The LCMS participated
in these conversations for some time. Internationally, the
LWF, an organization that encompasses a large number of
Lutheran churches (but not the LCMS) also had a dialogue.
In the 1990s, an effort was made to bundle the results
of all these dialogues into one document that would be
officially adopted.
When JDDJ was signed, the euphoria was great. “Lutherans
and Catholics Agree on Justification” was the headline in
the news. President Alvin Barry of the LCMS published
advertisements in newspapers declaring that the LCMS
did not agree with JDDJ and that not all Lutherans agreed
with it. What were the issues? Why could the LCMS not
agree with it?
1
1
The Anglican Consultative Council affirmed key elements of JDDJ in 2017.
2 | Ecumenical Discussions on Justification
3. The Reformation Background
Discussion Question: How was the doctrine of justification
controversial in the time of the Reformation?
First, let’s review the Roman Catholic position at the time of
the Reformation.
The controversy about indulgences was central to the
Roman Catholic position on justification during this time.
Indulgences were sold because even after sins were forgiven,
there was still a stain — namely, temporal punishment for
sins. If one did not bear this temporal punishment on earth,
one had to bear it after death, in purgatory. But (said the
church) an indulgence can remove the temporal punishment after death. The question on justification was: Was the
blood of Christ alone a sufficient means to free man from
sin and its consequences?
Maybe this statement will come up in the class discussions:
“Roman Catholics thought they could earn salvation.”
Strictly speaking, this was not quite true in the time of
the Reformation — but the idea of merit was important.
Merit means that one has to do something, and then God
will give what is needed. Some theologians at the time of
the Reformation said: If an unbeliever does what he can,
then God will give him grace to become a Christian. James
Kittelson, in his biography of Martin Luther, describes it thus:
The theology that Luther was taught therefore amounted
to a contract between God and human beings. God graciously initiated the contract for the sake of Christians,
the elect. God did so by creating a world that included
the church and human beings who strove for self-preservation. In this way, grace was protected by locating it
both in the church and in the makeup of human nature.
At the same time, a place was found for human initiative.
Individual Christians had active roles to play in their
own salvation. All that was necessary was to fulfill the
human side of the contract. This theology made such
good sense and was so pervasive in Luther’s day that
everyone encountered it. It appeared not only in depictions of God’s righteousness and mercy, but also in a
slogan that at least university students knew by heart:
‘God will not refuse grace to those who do what is within
them.’ It appeared in sermons for lay people as well. One
preacher commonly exhorted his congregation, ‘Do what
is within you. Use well your natural powers and whatever
special gifts God has given you!’ Salvation would follow.