I don't think that something like the Book of Concord even makes sense without the mystical theology underlying all of the ideas about faith alone, man's passivity in justification, the indwelling of God and union with God, cooperation with the Holy Spirit in sanctification, etc. I mean, it does make sense as being logically consistent and such, but with something like Tauler and the Theologia Germanica as the "backdrop"' to the Lutheran confessions you really get the depth and mystical grounding for much of the confessions. Trying to separate Lutheranism from its mystical roots is one of the biggest mistakes in the history of the tradition, imo, as so much is lost and what is left easily gets quite dry and lifeless. You're really doing a good thing here, shining light on these things!
Dr Cooper, just letting you know that currently on the just and sinner website the modern devotional resources category is missing from books. It's only accessible by clicking the drop down menu under devotions. I didn't know that the daily office book was out yet until yesterday.
@@London-Lad I'm not as familiar, but from some Anglicans I know who are a bit more mystical in orientation, it seems that they may fall a bit more into that Dionysian camp than Lutherans would be comfortable with. Who is representative of the Anglican mystical tradition?
T S Eliot is indirectly the reason why I became Lutheran. He idolized Donne and I ended up Reading and loving all of the metaphysical poets. Reading the Four Quartets introduced me to John of the Cross and Julian of Norwich. I didn't understand the sacramental world view before then. I think Eliot's high art approach is difficult but he sought to recover the worldview of those mystics and poets in the baroque era and make the case that our modern age can be retaken because in reality nothing has changed. We do live in a world with angels and demons, life and death, a tragedy and comedy for each soul, good and evil, and all this under the providence of God. The mystic writers and metaphysical poets helped me to shift my rationalist attitude.
@@DrJordanBCooperI know you don't have much free time but the vision Eliot had for the future of poetry and Christianity is very insightful. He wouldn't have been at all surprised by the fact that Jordan Peterson and symbolism would be the first step in reversing the nihilism and materialism. I know you enjoyed Arnold's Culture and Anarchy. If you ever get a chance to read Eliot's essay "the metaphysical poets" (or any they're all great) he argues that not since then have we had such unity in thought and feeling. He argues that this incarnational perspective is present in medieval writers, Elizabethan writers, and the metaphysical poets are the last of their kind. It can be attributed to a decline in belief in sacramental theology and the medieval model. This "dissociation of sensibilities" at least in poetry results in a split between the overly intellectual (Pope, Dryden, etc) and the overly emotional (Wordsworth, Shelley, Byron, etc). Eliot tried to revive the idea of a realist (as opposed to a nominalist) perspective of language and symbols through his theory of the objective correlative.
I think Tauler was concerned with the ontological reality of God's presence rather than subjective religious experiences, i.e., focused more on the eternal birth of the Word in the soul and the soul's union with God through detachment, rather than on experiential mysticism as such. This is probably true of Eckhart, too, except that, for Eckhart, it's not just Christ being present through grace, but the actual eternal process of divine generation occurring in the detached soul's ground. This formed part of the basis for accusations of heresy against him.
Lutherans get so weirded out by the word mysticism. It isn’t charismatic at all to believe God’s Word where He states in a number of places that He indwells His children. Charismatic is making a babbling sound with your mouth and pretending that you are speaking the language of angels, it’s twitching and having a “holy”, spasm. Believing God’s Word is the most Lutheran thing a Christian can do.
I don't think that something like the Book of Concord even makes sense without the mystical theology underlying all of the ideas about faith alone, man's passivity in justification, the indwelling of God and union with God, cooperation with the Holy Spirit in sanctification, etc.
I mean, it does make sense as being logically consistent and such, but with something like Tauler and the Theologia Germanica as the "backdrop"' to the Lutheran confessions you really get the depth and mystical grounding for much of the confessions.
Trying to separate Lutheranism from its mystical roots is one of the biggest mistakes in the history of the tradition, imo, as so much is lost and what is left easily gets quite dry and lifeless. You're really doing a good thing here, shining light on these things!
Piety found a home in Lutheranism in Norway...in the US the Free Lutherans have their roots in these Norwegian Lutherans.
Dr Cooper, just letting you know that currently on the just and sinner website the modern devotional resources category is missing from books. It's only accessible by clicking the drop down menu under devotions. I didn't know that the daily office book was out yet until yesterday.
@williampeters9838 thanks. We're currently remaking the whole website.
@@DrJordanBCooper Okay good, I'll be ordering that and a few items for Christmas gifts. Enjoyed the article!
It's funny you say that because I've been nestling myself into Anglican Mysticism.
@@London-Lad I'm not as familiar, but from some Anglicans I know who are a bit more mystical in orientation, it seems that they may fall a bit more into that Dionysian camp than Lutherans would be comfortable with. Who is representative of the Anglican mystical tradition?
Some of the best representatives are poets. John Donne, Thomas Traherne, George Herbert, Henry Vaughn, etc.
Also, while a medieval anchoress, Julian of Norwich is greatly loved and admired.
T S Eliot is indirectly the reason why I became Lutheran. He idolized Donne and I ended up Reading and loving all of the metaphysical poets. Reading the Four Quartets introduced me to John of the Cross and Julian of Norwich. I didn't understand the sacramental world view before then. I think Eliot's high art approach is difficult but he sought to recover the worldview of those mystics and poets in the baroque era and make the case that our modern age can be retaken because in reality nothing has changed. We do live in a world with angels and demons, life and death, a tragedy and comedy for each soul, good and evil, and all this under the providence of God. The mystic writers and metaphysical poets helped me to shift my rationalist attitude.
@@DrJordanBCooperI know you don't have much free time but the vision Eliot had for the future of poetry and Christianity is very insightful. He wouldn't have been at all surprised by the fact that Jordan Peterson and symbolism would be the first step in reversing the nihilism and materialism. I know you enjoyed Arnold's Culture and Anarchy. If you ever get a chance to read Eliot's essay "the metaphysical poets" (or any they're all great) he argues that not since then have we had such unity in thought and feeling. He argues that this incarnational perspective is present in medieval writers, Elizabethan writers, and the metaphysical poets are the last of their kind. It can be attributed to a decline in belief in sacramental theology and the medieval model. This "dissociation of sensibilities" at least in poetry results in a split between the overly intellectual (Pope, Dryden, etc) and the overly emotional (Wordsworth, Shelley, Byron, etc). Eliot tried to revive the idea of a realist (as opposed to a nominalist) perspective of language and symbols through his theory of the objective correlative.
Could you make a video recommending Lutheran theology books for beginners?
In a previous video, he mentioned these 3 books. Freedom of the Christian, Large Catechism, Luther's commentary on Galatians.
@@EloquentEagle find the video Five Lutheran Books Every Christian Should Read on the channel.
@@DrJordanBCooperThese are great recommendations, Dr. C!
@@DrJordanBCooperI truly appreciate it, sending thanks from Sweden
@@DrJordanBCooper Should I start with the Little and Large Catechism and the Book of Concord before reading those?
*for the algorithm*
Could you explain what is meant by the Mystical Tradition?
Doesn’t Tauler still belong to the Dionysian tradition through Eckhart?
I think Tauler was concerned with the ontological reality of God's presence rather than subjective religious experiences, i.e., focused more on the eternal birth of the Word in the soul and the soul's union with God through detachment, rather than on experiential mysticism as such. This is probably true of Eckhart, too, except that, for Eckhart, it's not just Christ being present through grace, but the actual eternal process of divine generation occurring in the detached soul's ground. This formed part of the basis for accusations of heresy against him.
He did have mystical fights with the devil on the toilet, so I guess he didn't really abandon charismatic Christianity
Lutherans get so weirded out by the word mysticism.
It isn’t charismatic at all to believe God’s Word where He states in a number of places that He indwells His children. Charismatic is making a babbling sound with your mouth and pretending that you are speaking the language of angels, it’s twitching and having a “holy”, spasm. Believing God’s Word is the most Lutheran thing a Christian can do.
🙉🙈🙊👏👍yeah Dr.Cooper Christus pro nobis -& Christus in nobis- Frederick R. HARM..?ARTICALXL OF THE Formula of Concord.hidden will of God.