tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9387707.post115775404332224527..comments2024-01-05T13:36:55.379-06:00Comments on Two-Edged Sword: Is the Heidelberg Catechism Lutheran?Leehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10422257306176024118noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9387707.post-7020984426716719652018-04-16T02:36:45.007-05:002018-04-16T02:36:45.007-05:00I am trying to learn what I can about the various ...I am trying to learn what I can about the various catechisms. (at this point, whether the Heidelberg catechism is Lutheran-theology-slanted) Although my understanding is so slight, I'm still stepping in here with questions, hoping that I don't irritate any of you. <br /><br />In your blog, I read, "...based on Luther’s exposition of the Second Article of the Smaller Catechism." Then, in the comment from John H. I read, "I used to agree with Heidelberg and disagree with the Small Catechism, and now it's the other way round. At no point, however, have I been indifferent as to which one was correct - and I'm sure you're not either." <br /><br />First question: Are the "Small Catechism" and the "Smaller Catechism" one and the same?<br />Second question: DO you agree with John H? ...do you agree with the Small Catechism rather than the Heidelberg?<br />Third question: What would a more descriptive "title" be for the Small or Smaller Catechism.<br /><br />Thanks a bunch for your time and help. - Mommy B.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9387707.post-1157974938139924922006-09-11T06:42:00.000-05:002006-09-11T06:42:00.000-05:00Thanks for the link, and thanks in particular for ...Thanks for the link, and thanks in particular for the further information on the Heidelberg Catechism's origins. I accept that the Lutheran confessions were not a <I>source</I> for Heidelberg, though it still looks very much like certain Q&As in Heidelberg were intended to counter the Lutheran position.<BR/><BR/>But, just to clarify the position taken in my post, I was not remotely trying to claim Heidelberg as a Lutheran document. My posts were precisely intended to <I>contrast</I> Heidelberg's Calvinism with the teachings of Lutheranism. <BR/><BR/>And I agree entirely with your statement that Heidelberg "was written to unite Lutherans with Reformed by making them Reformed". So there was nothing "accidental" in my "admission" that Heidelberg disagrees with Lutheran teachings.<BR/><BR/>My point about the pastoral vs the didactic was that there is a discernable shift between the Small Catechism (which sets out what "the head of the household is to teach his family" on Christian basics) and the Heidelberg Catechism, whose division into "Lord's Days" moves the focus onto weekly catechetical instruction by the pastor. The Small Catechism has been described as "the only catechism that can be prayed".<BR/><BR/><I>I think [Heidelberg] ought to be viewed as separate from the Lutheran view and sources, and thus, it should simply be viewed as different.</I><BR/><BR/>Actually, I think the word there is "wrong". Seriously. Just as someone who confesses Heidelberg is (by doing so) obliged to conclude that the Lutheran confessions are not merely "different" or "weaker/stronger" on the sacraments, but <I>wrong</I>. <BR/><BR/>We can disagree over our respective confessions, I hope in a spirit of mutual respect and "the friendship of the baptised", but what we can't do is simply shrug our shoulders and say, "Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks".<BR/><BR/>I used to agree with Heidelberg and disagree with the Small Catechism, and now it's the other way round. At no point, however, have I been indifferent as to which one was correct - and I'm sure you're not either.John Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11074559601919298190noreply@blogger.com