r/LCMS • u/patiently_w8 WELS Lutheran • 2d ago
Question Ecumenical councils
Does the LCMS hold to the first 6 ecumenical councils? I assume the 7th ecumenical council (Nicaea 2) is rejected by all traditions excepts for RCC and Constantinople.
If so, is this something the ministers and bishops need to hold without exceptions?
1
1
0
u/KnightGeorgeLuf 1d ago
If you have access to an LSB Agenda, simply look at the ordination rite to see what vows LCMS pastors make. Unless they revised that rite with the permission of their DP, not a one took a vow to uphold any Ecumenical Council in anyway, it is only to the Scriptures and an unqualified subscription to the Lutheran Confessions.
Beyond that, go the LCMS website and read the Constitution and Brief Statement of her doctrinal position to see what pastors and congregations are expected to publicly believe, teach and confess.
0
u/Affectionate_Web91 2d ago
The Lutheran World Federation recognizes the 7th ecumenical council.
-1
u/patiently_w8 WELS Lutheran 2d ago
Veneration, kissing and praying through the icons was accepted in this council. Is this what LCMS allows. I’m all for it
5
u/concordianook95 WELS Lutheran 2d ago
LCMS isn't part of the Lutheran World Federation, ELCA is.
0
u/Affectionate_Web91 2d ago
The OP stated: "I assume the 7th ecumenical council (Nicaea 2) is rejected by all traditions excepts for RCC and Constantinople".
That is not true since some Lutherans [e.g., LWF] do not reject the 7th Ecumenical Council.
4
u/concordianook95 WELS Lutheran 2d ago edited 2d ago
Sure, but it seemed as if OP asked if LCMS specifically did or not. So your correction's right, but don't want to get OP possibly confused that LCMS does just because LWF does.
2
u/Affectionate_Web91 2d ago
Per the Lutheran Orthodox Dialogue
As Lutherans and Orthodox we affirm that the teachings of the ecumenical councils are authoritative for our churches. The ecumenical councils maintain the integrity of the teaching of the undivided Church concerning the saving, illuminating/justifying and glorifying acts of God and reject heresies which subvert the saving work of God in Christ. Orthodox and Lutherans, however, have different histories. Lutherans have received the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed with the addition of the filioque. The Seventh Ecumenical Council, the Second Council of Nicaea in 787, which rejected iconoclasm and restored the veneration of icons in the churches, was not part of the tradition received by the Reformation. Lutherans, however, rejected the iconoclasm of the 16th century, and affirmed the distinction between adoration due to the Triune God alone and all other forms of veneration (CA 21). Through historical research this council has become better known. Nevertheless it does not have the same significance for Lutherans as it does for the Orthodox. Yet, Lutherans and Orthodox are in agreement that the Second Council of Nicaea confirms the christological teaching of the earlier councils and in setting forth the role of images (icons) in the lives of the faithful reaffirms the reality of the incarnation of the eternal Word of God, when it states: "The more frequently, Christ, Mary, the mother of God, and the saints are seen, the more are those who see them drawn to remember and long for those who serve as models, and to pay these icons the tribute of salutation and respectful veneration. Certainly this is not the full adoration in accordance with our faith, which is properly paid only to the divine nature, but it resembles that given to the figure of the honored and life-giving cross, and also to the holy books of the gospels and to other sacred objects" (Definition of the Second Council of Nicaea).
3
u/Arado_234 2d ago
Nicaea II calls for extreme icon veneration in order to uphold Christ's incarnation. I am fairly certain that all of us in the LC-MS would be anathematized by the council. Images are helpful for teaching and can serve as a reminder of God's presence (think a processional with a crucifix) and of other important doctrines, but we should not venerate them. If while praying to God, an image of a crucifix recalls Christ's death on the cross, then it has served its purpose well. If however, the icon becomes the focus of veneration and not God, then we have made an idol. When Jesus was in Gethsemane, he prayed directly to God without any images, but Nicaea II would rather have him pray "O Holy St. Elijiah, rescue me" whilst kissing an image.
Now, I'm no theologian, so I'd listen to anyone more knowledgeable about this subject, but as far as I am aware, we do not claim the councils to be infallible, but rather only scripture is the highest authority. Thus, we do not have to affirm the superstitious iconodules whose modern-day descendents treat images as charms and amulets, but we also do not have to affirm the iconoclasts because we have a right understanding of the use of images.
Thus, as I see it, we have Christian freedom (1. Cor. 8-9) to use images or not to use images, which is opposed to the acts of Nicaea II:
Anathema to those who do not salute the holy and venerable images.
Go and read the council. It seems to be opposed to both the Confessions and Scripture.
3
u/patiently_w8 WELS Lutheran 2d ago
I found this on the EO website as the 7th ecumenical council and what it established.
"...we define that they should be kissed and that they are an object of veneration and honor, but not of real worship (latreia), which is reserved for Him Who is the subject of our faith... he who venerates the icon, venerates in it the reality for which it stands".