Following the retirement of Pope Benedict XVI, a number of Lutherans (myself included) were left wondering what support his successor might lend to future Lutheran/Roman Catholic discussions. Few Roman Catholics have understood Lutherans so well as did Benedict. As John Allen Jr. has written, “Lutherans are to Benedict what the Orthodox were to John Paul, the separated brethren he knows best and for whom he has the greatest natural affection.” The theological disagreements between Roman Catholics and Lutherans were of course not undone under Benedict’s papacy, but one could at least be sure that the subject itself was of importance to the man.
What ought we to expect from newly elected Pope Francis? Some Lutherans are beginning to fill in the blanks for us. In a news release, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America quotes Bishop Mark Hanson as saying he is “encouraged that Pope Francis has worked with Lutherans in Argentina.” Unfortunately, the release fails to give any examples of that work. The Lutheran World Federation does a bit better and mentions that Pope Francis (then still Archbishop of Buenos Aires) took part in local Buenos Aires activities commemorating the adoption of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification in 1999, but is also light on details.
Lutherans in Argentina are also speaking positively to the media (here and here) about the former archbishop’s elevation, so its fair to say he’s had some involvement at the national and local level with Roman Catholic-Lutheran dialogue. And if the associations of the pastors above are anything to go by, Pope Francis’ past dealings with Lutherans have impressed members from both the Lutheran World Federation (LWF) and the International Lutheran Council (ILC), the two largest global associations of Lutheran churches. (Of the Lutherans interviewed in the above two articles, Edgardo Salvucci is a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Argentina (an ILC church with just over 28,000 members), and Cloivis Eloi Kurtz is a member of the United Evangelical Lutheran Church in Argentina (a LWF church with about 11,000 members). Both sound optimistic about good relations with the Pope going forward.
Whatever Pope Francis’ previous experience in Catholic/Lutheran dialogue, one thing is sure: he will have the opportunity for more of it during his papacy if he should so choose. Dialogue with the Lutheran World Federation continues, and burgeoning dialogue with confessional Lutherans is also on the horizon.
March 15th, 2013 | 2:49 pm
I have to wonder what the purpose of a Lutheran-Catholic dialogue would be, and why Lutherans would think it to be of any importance what the head of the Catholic Church thinks of us. I hold no ill will towards him and hope he does a great job of preaching the Gospel to Catholics worldwide, but unless the discussion involves how the Catholic Church has over the centuries invented Biblical “truths” contrary to Revelation 22:18 that need to be re-evaluated, there’s little point. We’re not in Christian fellowship with Catholics and there are important reasons for that.
Greg (WELS, Virginia)
March 16th, 2013 | 8:26 am
One purpose, Greg, is to make good on our confession (in the introduction to the Augusburg Confession) that “we will omit nothing, so far as God and conscience allow,” that furthers the unity of the church.
March 19th, 2013 | 4:52 am
I find it humorous Greg, that you accuse the Catholic Church of “inventing Biblical truths contrary to Rev. 22:18″- didn’t your esteemed Luther add the word “alone” to Romans 3:28, thus insuring your own schism from God’s Sacred Word?
March 20th, 2013 | 11:23 am
Dear Ricky D.: Depends on your point of view. If you are a strict literalist, that insisting on only “word to word” translation, then no translations of the Bible fit the bill–even Catholic ones–because English (and other languages as well) often has no equivalent words many Greek and Hebrew words. But if the translator is given to scope to render the ancient text to give it its full meaning, then Luther is quite Catholic in practice in this instance– all other differences with Rome aside.
March 20th, 2013 | 6:09 pm
Mick, I suggest that you look at the Msgr Ronald Knox version of the Bible, one of, if not the best English translation of Holy Scripture. The “scope” you opine of was the primary focus of Msgr Knox- to render an English translation that held to the true meaning and flow of the author’s divine inspiration- be it Latin, Greek, Hebrew.
Luther’s insertion of the German “alein” or “alone” has nothing to do with worthy translation but simple arrogance. Working himself into a hissy fit because of penitential insecurities is hardly the foundation of good biblical scholarship. As he would mention later, “All that I learned , I learned from the papists”. I’ll stick with St Jerome for true scholarship.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact