Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!seismo!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: math1h3@JANE.UH.EDU (David H. Wagner) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: A pastoral letter to the members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Message-ID: Date: 26 Jun 91 04:15:33 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of Houston Lines: 102 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article , math1h3@JANE.UH.EDU (David H. Wagner) writes: >Our moderator writes: >>[Do you have any references other than Rom 16:17-18? There are a >>number of reference about using excommunication in the case of moral >>offenses, but I can't immediately think of one suggesting it for >>doctrinal disagreement. (I had supplied some more references, including Amos 3:3, 2 Cor 6:14, 1 Tim 1:8-11, 1 Cor 1:10. > >[I don't see in any of this any Biblical passages that counsel >breaking fellowship over doctrinal disagreements. Amos 3:3 is really >tenuous, if you look at the context. As you point out yourself, 2 Cor >6:14 is talking about non-Christians, and you don't *really* mean to >say that Christians you disagree with are non-Christians. I believe that yes, Christians must try to prevent divisions. I think Luther really tried to come to agreement with Zwingli--not by compromising, but by explaining the Scriptures to him. And in fact they came to agreement on everything except the Lord's Supper. And so, to their mutual regret, they had to go their separate ways. Regarding the use of 2 Cor 6:14, I think that at various points in its history, the church has come to a point where at least one side has to say, 'We have tried to come to terms, but you persist in teaching this false doctrine. Therefore we have to recognize that a division has occurred, and that you and we are practicing two different religions. Therefore our fellowship is broken.' In particular this is what happened between the Lutherans and the Catholics. Now the Formula of Concord, 1580, was written some time after this split had taken place (we might say the split started with Luther's excommunication). Yet some were still trying to achieve a false peace by compromising with Rome on Adiaphora. The authors of the Formula (Martin Chemnitz, James Andrae, others) recognized the danger to the church this represented (people might return to thinking of Rome as 'The Church', other forms of backsliding) and so emphasized the split with the words of 2 Cor 6:14. >You talk about teaching false doctrine as a sin. Although you don't >cite any Scripture here (aside from the 1st Commandment, Just for clarification, Lutherans call "You shall not misuse the name of the LORD you God", the second commandment. Some number them otherwise, and I do not judge them. > Their comments in doing so tend to associate >false teaching with causing divisions. It seems to me that it's one >thing to eject a teacher of false doctrine in order to prevent him >from causing divisions, and another to deal with the differences once >they have occurred. I claim that in refusing communion to those who >disagree with you, you are compounding the damage. Is the damage done by maintaining a separation, or by teaching false doctrine? Just a few more references: Jude, 2 Peter 2, Galations 1:8-9, 1 Tim 1:18-20, 2 Tim 2:16-18, 2 Tim 3:1-9, particularly v. 5, 2 Tim 4:1-4,. As for avoiding fellowship: "Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him" --Titus 3:10. You might say that this applies only to those who get involved in "foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law." But you have already admitted that false doctrine causes divisions. In my Bible there is a suggestion that Titus 3:9,10 is connected to Titus 1:10-16. Let me try to explain how I would apply this in ordinary church life (apart from major schisms). Suppose a church member disagrees with me in doctrine, say, in a Bible class. Do I insist that he be kicked out, then and there? No. I try to explain the truth of Scripture to him--particularly as it is taught in this church. If he agrees with me, or even says, 'I'll have to think about that for a while', fine, I have no problem in continuing in fellowship with him. But if he continues to argue with me, and, moreover, is wrong, and makes trouble, or secretly goes about trying to win people over to his views, then out he goes--or I go. I find this preferable (and more scriptural, and perhaps even more loving) than the sort of fighting that is going on in the LCMS or the SBC. David H. Wagner a confessional Lutheran "Built on the Rock the Church doth stand Even when steeples are falling; Crumbled have spires in ev'ry land, Bells still are chiming and calling, Calling the young and old to rest, But above all the soul distrest, Longing for rest everlasting." --"Kirken den er et gammelt Hus" v. 1 --Nicolai F. S. Grundtvig, 1837. My opinions and beliefs on this matter are disclaimed by The University of Houston.