Abstract
This chapter briefly introduces the problem of ecclesial disunion and the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification’s (JDDJ) contribution to healing the division between Catholics and Lutherans. It also outlines the argument of the book.
It shows that critiques of the Declaration fall into two categories: those related to the content of the faith as presented in the JDDJ and those related to the possibility of a differentiated consensus at all. In order to answer the second critique, the book uses Catholic and Lutheran agreement on the anthropology of the baptized Christian as a test case. The introduction demonstrates why this is a felicitous test case.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Pope John Paul II, encyclical letter, “Ut unum sint” (May 25, 1995), §1.
- 2.
See Jens Holger Schjørring, Prasanna Kumari, and Norman A. Hjelm, eds., From Federation to Communion: The History of the Lutheran World Federation, (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997), 375–81.
- 3.
See Peter Hünermann, “Excommunication–Communication: an Essay in Layered Analysis,” Horizons 36 no.2 (2009), 285–340.
- 4.
That is, that true Christian doctrine is attested “semper, ubique, et ab omnibus” a principle that Vincent of Lérins’ augments by a second describing the continuity of Christian doctrine with what preceded it. Both are found in Vincent’s Duo Commonitoria, (Migne PL 50.0640; 0667–68).
- 5.
Augsburg Confession, Latin Text, Conclusion of Part I, 1–2. The Book of Concord, Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert, eds., (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000). I will cite the Lutheran Confessional documents from this translation, unless otherwise noted. Hereafter, Book of Concord = BC, Augsburg Confession = AC.
- 6.
Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, 2–3, from the Kolb–Wengert translation. Hereafter, FC.
- 7.
Confutation of the Augsburg Confession, Epilogue. Sources and Contexts of the Book of Concord, Robert Kolb and James A. Nestingen, eds., (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001), 139. Hereafter, CAC.
- 8.
Ibid.
- 9.
Before the break became final, the Reformers repeatedly stipulated that many differences of practice, including the papacy, the mass, and monastic vows could be accepted if only agreement on justification could be reached. See, among others, Melanchthon’s appendix to the Smalcald Articles, in which he professes that “if [the pope] would allow the gospel,” Lutherans would even accept his superiority over the other bishops, albeit “by human right.” Smalcald Articles, Subscriptions. BC, 326. By 1537, when the Smalcald Articles were written, Luther himself believed that the papacy was beyond reformation. Earlier in the decade, however, in a letter to Melanchthon dated June 29, 1530 he wrote: “Just as I have always written, I am prepared to concede all things to them, if only the gospel is allowed its freedom among us. But, I am not able to concede on anything that fights against the gospel.” “Ego sicuti semper scripsi, Omnia eis concedere paratus, tantum solo euangelio nobis libere permisso. Quod autem cum euangelio pugnat, concedere non possum.” WA B 5.407. Volumes of the Weimar Kritische Gesamtausgabe will be cited as WA. When the English of the American Edition of Luther’s Works is cited, it will be as LW.
- 10.
Lutheran World Federation and Roman Catholic Church, Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000). Hereafter, JDDJ.
- 11.
Harding Meyer defines differentiated consensus as containing “a statement, which states in fundamental and essential content the agreement attained on a doctrine that until now was disputed, and a statement which says, how and why the remaining doctrinal differences can be evaluated as admissible and do not call into question the agreement in its fundamental and essential aspects.” Harding Meyer, “Die Struktur ökumenischer Konsense,” 60–74 in Versöhnte Verschiedenheit: Aufsätze zur ökumenischen Theologie I, (Frankfurt/M: Lembeck, 1998), 74.
- 12.
See Robert Masson, Without Metaphor, No Saving God: Theology after Cognitive Linguistics, (Leuven: Peeters Press, 2014).
- 13.
CDF and PCPCU, “Response of the Catholic Church to the Joint Declaration of the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation on the Doctrine of Justification,” Information Service 98 (1998), 93–95. In German: Friedrich Hauschild, Udo Hahn, and Andreas Siemens, eds., Die Gemeinsame Erkärung zur Rechtfertigungslehre: Dokumentation des Entstehungs und Rezeptionsprozesses, (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009), C.55.
This book collects a nearly complete documentary history of the JDDJ from June of 1993 to July of 2006. Although many of these documents are publically available in other forms, I will be citing many texts from this volume. I will also note their original publication data when it is available. Documents from this book will hereafter be referenced by their document number, thus, GER–DER, C.55.
- 14.
See Wilfried Härle, “Lutherische Formeln—tridentinisch interpretiert,” epd-Dokumentation no. 43/99(1999):5. Available at http://goo.gl/a1xlEX. Accessed September 19, 2014.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rinderknecht, J.K. (2016). Introduction: The Problem of Ecclesial Disunion. In: Mapping the Differentiated Consensus of the Joint Declaration. Pathways for Ecumenical and Interreligious Dialogue. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40099-0_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40099-0_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-40098-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-40099-0
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)