Talk:Lutheran orthodoxy

Christianity: Theology / Lutheranism Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Lutheranism (assessed as Top-importance).

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Humanism#Back to the sources|humanism]] The anchor (#Back to the sources) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Latin Usage in Liturgy

This last sentence in the first paragraph of the section on Worship and Spirituality ("As late as the time of Johann Sebastian Bach, churches in Leipzig still heard Polyphonic motets in Latin, Latin Glorias, chanted Latin collects and The Creed sung in Latin by the choir.") seems overly limiting and misleading, in my opinion. The truth is, prior to the modern ecumenical movement which resulted in the formation of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) there were Lutheran congregations in the United States continuing to conduct services in Latin on a regular basis, even after the Roman-Catholic Vatican II Council. I was born in 1961 and my first recollected experiences in Lutheran liturgy are as a boy soprano in a Lutheran Church in Decatur, Illinois (an affiliate of either the American Lutheran Church, ALC; or Lutheran Church in America, LCA). Well into the 1970s several churches I attended in the U.S. midwest conducted services in Latin on High Holy Days. It was not until The Lutheran Hymnal (1941), often referred to as The Red Hymnal was replaced by Lutheran Worship (1982, the Blue Hymnal) that Latin finally disappeared from the liturgy in entirety. However, even today, it is not uncommon for the Anthem to be a Latin setting and on a few rare instances a Hymn might even be sung in Latin in some churches. In my opinion, the continued use of Latin tends to be in direct proportion to the importance of musical spirituality in the congregation. --Symmerhill (a.k.a. Summerhilll) (talk) 21:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chart needs to be fixed

The chart on this page is completely false and should be removed. I tried to remove it but it wouldn't work! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpw062588 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The chart is biased and speaks with clear POV language: "The semper virgo is at best a pious opinion" and "reverence is discouraged by creative services....and ceremonies are instituted to entertain the bored" are examples of POV terms with an obvious slant for one half of the chart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.1.42.30 (talk) 22:01, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have not written the comparison, but I think it certainly is very useful to undestand differences in the whole world view, which can bee seen in religion before and after Enlightenment. It would not be right to say that it is "completely false" (especially when some statements are documented), but I agree that it is a bit polemic, which is unnecessary. However, this kind of comparison really requires knowledge and as we all know, Age of Orthodoxy is not specially well known. We should resist temptations to approach this issue ideologically from modern or old tendencies but continue to try to find historically important indicators of change. (Terot 19:01, 7 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

The chart is unsourced and reads like a rant. I'll move it to the talk page, but I honestly don't see its value except, as you said, as a polemic. Fishal (talk) 06:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pope as Antichrist

The article ought to verify on whether the notion of a Papal Antichrist is really an article of faith in Lutheran Orthodoxy. ADM (talk) 10:10, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is, given this doctrinal textbook from Google Books. It is an article of faith, as opposed to an article of morals, and while it is non-fundamental, agreement on it is still essential for establishing church-fellowship. Most Lutherans today of course wouldn't agree with this, but that is because they don't adhere to Lutheran Orthodoxy.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 07:40, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of Lutheran Orthodoxy to Contemporary Lutheranism

Lutheran Orthodoxy: "Churches" of the Augsburg Confession refers to trans-parish entities, i.e. territorial churches.	Contemporary Lutheranism: "Churches" refers to congregations, but not to trans-parish entities.
The true body and blood of Christ are present under the bread and wine.	Grape juice is offered in many places as an alternative.
Luther excommunicates a pastor who mixes consecrated wine with unconsecrated following the service.	Plastic disposable cups are used widely, tossed out unwashed after the service.
Private confession ought to be retained. Practiced as the norm. No one is admitted to the Sacrament unless he is first examined and absolved.	Private confession scarcely exists; in most parishes, not at all, in some parishes, just barely. Open communion the norm.
Only those rightly/ritely called should administer the sacraments and preach.	Unordained laity does both.
The traditional usages of the Church ought to be observed, which may be observed without sin. Uniformity of liturgy within territorial churches (i.e. not merely a parish-by-parish decision).	The traditional usages of the Church need not be observed (NB: "ought" and "need not" are logically contradictory).
The Mass (i.e. the historic liturgy) is maintained, observed with greatest reverence, and ceremonies exist to teach the unlearned.	The Mass is not maintained, reverence is discouraged by creative services (See, for example, http://www.thefellowship.com/ow/outreachworship.html), and ceremonies are instituted to entertain the bored.
The right to excommunicate belongs by divine right (a very strong phrase!) to the pastoral office, and the people are bound by divine right to follow them. (AC 28)	The right to excommunicate belongs by divine right to the congregation, and the pastors are bound by divine right to announce such excommunications. (Blue Catechism)
Mary is and remains a virgin after Christ's birth (FCSD 8.24, added by Chemnitz to reject the Reformed Peter Martyr Vermigli's denial of the semper virgo).	The semper virgo is at best a pious opinion.
Prayers for the dead are not forbidden, and are not useless. (Apology)	We must not pray for the souls of the dead (Blue Catechism).
The Scripture principle ("The Word of God alone shall establish articles of faith") is maintained in tension with the catholic principle ("In doctrine and ceremonies, we have received nothing new against Scripture OR the catholic church"). These two principles are not, of course, two "sources" of doctrine.	The catholic principle is gone.

Merge from Lutheran scholasticism

I propose merging Lutheran scholasticism into Lutheran orthodoxy. I think the content in Lutheran scholasticism can easily be explained in the context of Lutheran orthodoxy, and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Lutheran orthodoxy. Another possible merge target - Protestant scholasticism, but I believe that it is better to merge into Lutheran orthodoxy. The article on a similar topic has title Calvinist orthodoxy.--Lagelander (talk) 09:50, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]