News:


Main Menu

Dr. Root became Catholic?

Started by Jay, August 15, 2010, 11:04:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

John Theiss

I was caught by a comment of Dr. Root's in post 59 above with respect to redemption - one that would seem to reflect the classical understanding of infused grace which then allows us to cooperate in our salvation - thus all that extra stuff in the Apology following a rather simple statement in the AC.  One could argue that it is a legitimate interpretation of the wording of the Joint Declaration "Justified by Faith through Grace".  In effect my faith becomes the work that I do through God's grace to obtain justification.  Faith active in love is then saving faith, rather than faith trusting in the promises of God.  As I do not know Dr. Root please note that I am not stating that he believes this.  But all of us have had experience with same words, different meanings (as, for example, baptism in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints).

passerby

Quote from: George Erdner on August 16, 2010, 12:45:10 PM
Quote from: Jay on August 16, 2010, 12:39:02 PM
I realize that Dr. Root's conversion/reception/whateveryouwanttocallit is another opportunity to examine our differences with our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters.

However, my more immediate concern (and the reason why I started this thread by posting the link and referencing Braaten's "brain drain" comment from a few years ago) pertains to where the theological leadership for the evangelical catholic wing (whatever is left of it, anyway) of the ELCA is going to come from.  Braaten and Jenson continue to write periodically, but are hopefully enjoying their well-earned retirement, and Root, Willken, Mattox, Huetter, etc. are all gone.  How many are left who have published much?  Frank Senn is one of the few that comes to mind.        

Why should the ELCA have an Evangelical Catholic "wing"? I realize that the early rhetoric of the ELCA was for it to be all things to all people (aka "the big tent"), but subsequent actions indicate that the ELCA leadership is taking it to a position of defining it's own unique and novel new orthodoxy, which is unlike any Lutheran understanding that ever came before. Isn't a subtle purge of those in the ELCA who don't want to drink the Kool-Aid a normal and expected part of the plans and objectives of the ELCA leadership?

Perhaps "purge" is too strong a word to describe the subtle way in which the traditionalists are being marginalized and given incentive to leave, but the result is the same.

Well, many who view themselves as evangelical catholic have no problem with the ELCA. You are defining one segment of evangelical catholics. There are people like Bouman at the ELCA headquarters, Robert Schaeffer, the ecumenical officer of the ELCA, St. Peter's Lutheran Church in NYC (which uses the tem evangelical catholic as an identifier more than Lutheran in its literature) who claim the evangelical catholic label and support the ELCA and most of its revisions. The evangelical catholics represented by the ALPB are the traditionalists. It can be argued that the ALPB represents the original evangelical catholics in Lutheranism but the term has become so inclusive as to include revisionists and traditionalists. 
Richard Cimino

passerby

Quote from: Jay on August 16, 2010, 12:39:02 PM
I realize that Dr. Root's conversion/reception/whateveryouwanttocallit is another opportunity to examine our differences with our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters.

However, my more immediate concern (and the reason why I started this thread by posting the link and referencing Braaten's "brain drain" comment from a few years ago) pertains to where the theological leadership for the evangelical catholic wing (whatever is left of it, anyway) of the ELCA is going to come from.  Braaten and Jenson continue to write periodically, but are hopefully enjoying their well-earned retirement, and Root, Willken, Mattox, Huetter, etc. are all gone.  How many are left who have published much?  Frank Senn is one of the few that comes to mind.        

Maybe David Yeago at Southern Seminary. You're right, though evangelical catholic traditionalist theologians are few and far between now.
Richard Cimino

Richard Johnson

Quote from: passerby on August 19, 2010, 07:04:41 PM
Well, many who view themselves as evangelical catholic have no problem with the ELCA. You are defining one segment of evangelical catholics. There are people like Bouman at the ELCA headquarters, Robert Schaeffer, the ecumenical officer of the ELCA, St. Peter's Lutheran Church in NYC (which uses the tem evangelical catholic as an identifier more than Lutheran in its literature) who claim the evangelical catholic label and support the ELCA and most of its revisions.

Perhaps this is just sloppy or ambiguous writing on your part, but for the record, Robert Schaeffer is the executive for worship and liturgical resources of the ELCA; the "ecumenical officer" is Donald McCoid, who most certainly does not "support the ELCA and most of its revisions."
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS

Harvey_Mozolak

I have been wondering... Southern Sem has had a cluster of more traditional in theology profs/theologians...  maybe because they are in the south, they were call there purposely because of there positions, they attracted each other and so forth...
of course whatever the reason, they have had not only a freedom but also a friendly environment to be more traditional, not stand out, not be under fire by fellow profs and students...

so my question is, does anyone suppose that there are more traditional profs and theologians in the ELCA who are in more hostile settings at seminaries and colleges and who are not sticking ther necks out these days and are not publicly taking issue with those we call revisionists?

Harvey Mozolak
Harvey S. Mozolak
my poetry blog is listed below:

http://lineandletterlettuce.blogspot.com

ptmccain

#95
Harvey, that would be a pleasant thought, to be sure. Unfortunately, I'm not noticing many graduates of the ELCA seminaries in the past five-ten years leading any sort of charge against the various theological errors in the ELCA. Do you? Maybe I've just missed it, but this is a pretty clear indication there is not a "pocket of resistance" at various ELCA seminaries working their influence on future generations of ELCA pastors.

This is why I've become utterly convinced there is no foreseeable possibility of any significant reformation/change/recovery from within the ELCA and I do not believe ELCA congregations can have any reasonable hope that they will receive confessionally orthodox graduates from their seminaries.

passerby

Quote from: Richard Johnson on August 19, 2010, 07:24:11 PM
Quote from: passerby on August 19, 2010, 07:04:41 PM
Well, many who view themselves as evangelical catholic have no problem with the ELCA. You are defining one segment of evangelical catholics. There are people like Bouman at the ELCA headquarters, Robert Schaeffer, the ecumenical officer of the ELCA, St. Peter's Lutheran Church in NYC (which uses the tem evangelical catholic as an identifier more than Lutheran in its literature) who claim the evangelical catholic label and support the ELCA and most of its revisions.

Perhaps this is just sloppy or ambiguous writing on your part, but for the record, Robert Schaeffer is the executive for worship and liturgical resources of the ELCA; the "ecumenical officer" is Donald McCoid, who most certainly does not "support the ELCA and most of its revisions."

More like just plain mistaken writing. Sorry. I knew that but got it mixed up.
Richard Cimino

Charles_Austin

ptmccain writes:
This is why I've become utterly convinced there is no foreseeable possibility of any significant reformation/change/recovery from within the ELCA and I do not believe ELCA congregations can have any reasonable hope that they will receive confessionally orthodox graduates from their seminaries.
I comment:
Still "understanding" our pain, are you? Or adding to it by such declarations?
(See my humble advice over on that other thread.)

Paul L. Knudson

Paul McCain, I wonder if you have been reading Gerhard Forde.  Seems your references to those who really see the law as foundational to a right relationship to God and the Gospel assisting you in fulfilling it and along the way being in right relationship resonates with Forde's contention.  If Root holds the positions you note, this would surely be cause for Forde, if he were still living, to make similar points that you make.

In a later post, however, you speak out of some ignorance.  No, there may not be multitudes of pastors coming out of ELCA seminaries leading the charge for centering us in Jesus Christ and confessional foundations, but students of Stephen Paulson at Luther are among those stepping up.  They may well, however, find themselves leaving the ELCA soon in face of next to no support from the powers at be.  Students of New Testament professor at Luther, Craig Koester, are also well grounded in trusting Scripture as God's Word to us.  There are others, probably not enough unfortunately, but the landscape is not totally barren.

DCharlton

Quote from: ptmccain on August 19, 2010, 08:00:16 PM
Harvey, that would be a pleasant thought, to be sure. Unfortunately, I'm not noticing many graduates of the ELCA seminaries in the past five-ten years leading any sort of charge against the various theological errors in the ELCA. Do you? Maybe I've just missed it, but this is a pretty clear indication there is not a "pocket of resistance" at various ELCA seminaries working their influence on future generations of ELCA pastors.

Your analysis misses a key factor.  If the seminary community would be hostile to professors who dissented from the theological drift of the ELCA, it would be even more hostile toward seminarians with those views.  A tenured professor has some security.  A first year student has almost none.  In addition, the curriculum that was adopted would be determined largely by the revisionist majority, so the dissenting professors would only have influence in the courses they taught, while the revisionist influence would extend to the curricululm, the mandatory speech codes, worship resources, etc..

The situation I described already existed at TLS in Columbus over 20 years ago.  A few dissenters spoke out at the time.  Some of them were driven away, some stuck it out.  Another group kept a low profile, sucked it up, and graduated.  A third group, drank the kool-aide but recovered in the decades following graduation. 

You are correct, however, in that the ability of dissenters among faculty and student bodies to hang on will become much more difficult in years to come.
David Charlton  

Was Algul Siento a divinity school?

A Catholic Lutheran

Quote from: passerby on August 19, 2010, 07:04:41 PM
Quote from: George Erdner on August 16, 2010, 12:45:10 PM
Quote from: Jay on August 16, 2010, 12:39:02 PM
I realize that Dr. Root's conversion/reception/whateveryouwanttocallit is another opportunity to examine our differences with our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters.

However, my more immediate concern (and the reason why I started this thread by posting the link and referencing Braaten's "brain drain" comment from a few years ago) pertains to where the theological leadership for the evangelical catholic wing (whatever is left of it, anyway) of the ELCA is going to come from.  Braaten and Jenson continue to write periodically, but are hopefully enjoying their well-earned retirement, and Root, Willken, Mattox, Huetter, etc. are all gone.  How many are left who have published much?  Frank Senn is one of the few that comes to mind.        

Why should the ELCA have an Evangelical Catholic "wing"? I realize that the early rhetoric of the ELCA was for it to be all things to all people (aka "the big tent"), but subsequent actions indicate that the ELCA leadership is taking it to a position of defining it's own unique and novel new orthodoxy, which is unlike any Lutheran understanding that ever came before. Isn't a subtle purge of those in the ELCA who don't want to drink the Kool-Aid a normal and expected part of the plans and objectives of the ELCA leadership?

Perhaps "purge" is too strong a word to describe the subtle way in which the traditionalists are being marginalized and given incentive to leave, but the result is the same.

Well, many who view themselves as evangelical catholic have no problem with the ELCA. You are defining one segment of evangelical catholics. There are people like Bouman at the ELCA headquarters, Robert Schaeffer, the ecumenical officer of the ELCA, St. Peter's Lutheran Church in NYC (which uses the tem evangelical catholic as an identifier more than Lutheran in its literature) who claim the evangelical catholic label and support the ELCA and most of its revisions. The evangelical catholics represented by the ALPB are the traditionalists. It can be argued that the ALPB represents the original evangelical catholics in Lutheranism but the term has become so inclusive as to include revisionists and traditionalists. 

I have been thinking about this for some time...  See my latest post on the "How do you define Evangelical Catholic" thread...

Pax Christi;
Pr. Jerry Kliner, STS

ptmccain

Quote from: DCharlton on August 20, 2010, 11:19:21 AM
Your analysis misses a key factor.  If the seminary community would be hostile to professors who dissented from the theological drift of the ELCA, it would be even more hostile toward seminarians with those views.  A tenured professor has some security.

James Nestingen might have a different perspective on your analysis.

Russ Saltzman

Quote from: justified and sinner on August 16, 2010, 11:02:01 AM

Sorry - you change this much - you have been converted.  When Scott Hahn converted, there was such a discussion in the Catholic Church - it was a conversion.  The same for Newman, and I would think Neuhaus as well


As for Neuhaus, no. He never regarded moving to Rome as a "conversion." He preferred phrases like "fulfilling his Lutheranism" or "embracing" Rome. An article title he used describing the experience is telling: How I Became the Catholic I Was.

There is a funny story on "embracing" Catholicism. He was going on against the term "convert" and "conversion" with some fellow Catholics. Conversation moved on to more mundane matters, and he mentioned that the neighbors in the next building were converting their apartment to gas. One of his guests suggested instead, the phrase should be, "they were embracing gas."

Russell E Saltzman
former editor, Forum Letter
former columnist, www.firstthings.com
essayist, https://aleteia.org/author/russell-e-saltzman/
email: russell.e.saltzman@gmail.com
Facebook: Russ Saltzman

DCharlton

#103
Quote from: ptmccain on August 20, 2010, 11:35:19 AM
Quote from: DCharlton on August 20, 2010, 11:19:21 AM
Your analysis misses a key factor.  If the seminary community would be hostile to professors who dissented from the theological drift of the ELCA, it would be even more hostile toward seminarians with those views.  A tenured professor has some security.

James Nestingen might have a different perspective on your analysis.

Yes, but relatively speaking, he had more security than a first year student would.  My point was not that it was not difficult, but to address the assertion that the lack of orthodox graduates meant that there were no orthodox professors.  Furthermore, I assume that Nestingen's problem was that he didn't keep his mouth shut and stay out of church politics, as others have done.  (I'm not saying that he should have done that.)  An example would be Wally Taylor at TLS.

I agree that a situation where professors have to keep a low profile and where students are under severe pressure to conform is not sustainable over the long term.  In fact, I think that day may have already passed.  It was hardly sustainable 20 years ago when I was in seminary.
David Charlton  

Was Algul Siento a divinity school?

jpetty

Quote from: ptmccain on August 19, 2010, 08:00:16 PM
Harvey, that would be a pleasant thought, to be sure. Unfortunately, I'm not noticing many graduates of the ELCA seminaries in the past five-ten years leading any sort of charge against the various theological errors in the ELCA. Do you? Maybe I've just missed it, but this is a pretty clear indication there is not a "pocket of resistance" at various ELCA seminaries working their influence on future generations of ELCA pastors.

This is why I've become utterly convinced there is no foreseeable possibility of any significant reformation/change/recovery from within the ELCA and I do not believe ELCA congregations can have any reasonable hope that they will receive confessionally orthodox graduates from their seminaries.

Yes, that can cause a real problem.  Witness the LCMS since 1974.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk