|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The high church Anglican relationship to Lutherans
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
In my class, my professor told us that the strangest part of the controversy that spawned the Oxford Movement was that the high church Anglicans were quite resistant to the idea of a joint Bishopic in Jerusalem with the Lutheran Church. Theologically he opined, the high church Anglicans were closer to the Lutherans in terms of theology.
To be honest, among high church Anglicans, I've never found many of them thrilled about our joint cooperation with Lutherans in terms of open communion. Some Anglo-catholics would rather draw us closer to Rome than to Augsburg.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
High Church Anglicans are not Broad Church. For them, the middle way is the correct way not one of many options. High Church Episcopalians opposed both Low Church cooperation with other Evangelicals during the Second Great Awakening and while embracing the Tracts objected to advanced Anglo-Catholicism. Now, the primary objection to working with Lutherans is an understanding of the historic episcopate. The compromise between Lutherans and Anglicans doesn't go far enough for enough for some High Churchman.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
Here's one self-identifying Anglo-Catholic/catholic Anglican who is all for our communio in sacris with Lutherans and for Augsburg as opposed to Rome.
An explication of why this is the case would be fairly lengthy and my bedtime draws nigh.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
As a high church Lutheran who regularly hangs out with Anglo-Catholics, I have encountered a range of attitudes.
1) Close relations with Lutherans are okay provided they have taken on the episcopate. (This is true in Canada and the US, in addition to its established existence in other places.)
2) Sexuality sometimes affects opinions on this issue. The fact is that Rome isn't going to change its position, but there are Lutherans who are quite willing to compromise on episcopal ordination issues. Lutherans do bring a strong Eucharistic theology to the table, and therefore make potentially viable partners. Of course, there are still Anglo-Catholics who know that a Roman reunion isn't going to happen, but still aren't crazy about throwing in their lot with the Lutherans.
3) Lutherans? You've got to be kidding me. We are Catholic, not Protestant. (This is probably the rarest of opinions that I had encountered...many people I have met who seem to have subscribed to this in the past have softened with age.)
For what it's worth, I look forward to a day when actual congregational-level partnerships increase, and I hope that there will eventually be a sharing of oversight between TEC-ELCA and ACC-ELCIC. I think joint office space will come first.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
I am an anglo-catholic whose church (liberal catholic in flavour) was an local ecumenical project with lutherans for 8 years.
During that time, we had two husband and wife job shares i.e. both couples comprised two ordained Lutheran pastors.
The Lutherans took their turn on the rota to preside at the eucharist. As they weren't episcopally ordained, I was uncertain as to the validity of their eucharists but I was assured that these (EKD) Lutherans were taking episcopacy into their system. In fact, that was a lie. Many are strongly opposed to the historic episcopate.)
As the Church recognises 'baptism by desire', I accommodates the Lutherans on an 'ordination by desire' parallel.
On a personal level, I have enjoyed working with my Lutheran colleagues and miss them now that we are no longer an LEP. However, I reckon it very unlikely than anglo-catholics will get on well with Lutherans because:
1 they don't like having the eucharist every week - it gets in the way of preaching
2 they don't believe that the real presence resides in the elements apart from their use - so they don't do ablutions and are happy for the left over wine to be thrown down the sink and the bread to be thrown in the waste basket
3 they celebrate Reformation Sunday. We catholically-minded Anglicans see little to celebrate here. Commiserate more than celebrate.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Flossymole
Apprentice
# 17339
|
Posted
Posted by Leo
quote:
As the Church recognises 'baptism by desire', I accommodate the Lutherans on an 'ordination by desire' parallel.
Could somebody tell me what 'baptism by desire' means, please?
Posts: 43 | From: Derbyshire UK | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Although the row in the OP comes from C19 England, I don't think most English Christians are as aware of Lutherans in the flesh as US Christians are. We tend to think of them as Christianity for Germans and Scandinavians. Leo is quite unusual in that many of us may well have never met one.
I thought they did have bishops and apostolic succession. I'm fairly sure some Swedish ones I met abroad said they did. I thought that was what the word 'Porvoo' referred to.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
Imagine you are stuck on a deserted island. You have just been attacked by a Komodo dragon, and you are probably not going to survive. You earnestly regret never having been baptized, and desire from the inner depths of your being to be baptized, but no one is around to do so. Baptism by desire suggests that, by virtue of your want, you will receive the benefits of baptism anyway.
Enoch, you will find many bishops and examples of apostolic succession in worldwide Lutheranism. Sweden is a good example, and because of this known and acknowledged fact they caused Rome great consternation by being one of the first Lutheran groups in the world to ordain a woman.
[ 18. November 2012, 16:50: Message edited by: Olaf ]
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
High church Lutherans in the USA do not treat the Eucharistic elements with disrespect after Mass. The nature of the ecclesiology of apostolic succession and the episcopal ministry is complicated and has been somewhat discussed here on the Apostolic Succession thread.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
uffda
Shipmate
# 14310
|
Posted
Attitude really has everfything to do with it. I have written a few times about my very cordial relationship with the priests and people of our local Episcopal Church. As the neighboring Lutheran pastor, I have been asked to sub in, on occasion for both weekday and weekend liturgy, and our Episcopal friends have helped us at our church by coming over and leading the eucharist when needed. We celebrate Maundy Thursday as a joint service each year. We have participated in each others ordination services, and genuinely enjoy each other's company. Even a weekday liturgy at the Episcopal Church will be more formal than our Lutheran Liturgy. They always comment that our liturgy is more "laid back."
Yet the Eucharist is consecrated, the people of God are fed, and two local congregations are learning that their view of "church" is becoming just a little bit bigger. One can always find reasons to turn away from fellowship. But what Lutherans and Episcopalians/Anglicans have in common is far more than what separates them.
--------------------
Invincibly ignorant and planning to stay that way!
Posts: 1031 | From: Buffalo, NY | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
gorpo
Shipmate
# 17025
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf:
For what it's worth, I look forward to a day when actual congregational-level partnerships increase, and I hope that there will eventually be a sharing of oversight between TEC-ELCA and ACC-ELCIC. I think joint office space will come first. [/QB]
It´s written in the destiny that the EPCUSA and ELCA will merger one day. It makes no sense that in the same town there is 1 espicopal and 1 lutheran parish with 40 worshippers on a sunday each, that is not enough to sustain the building. And there are episcopal dioceses with fewer then a thousand active members, which makes logically impossible to sustain a bishop. The confessional differences between the denominations have been made irrelevant by the fact none of them is actually confessional anymore. Merging will be the only solution for the denominations to still have a significant membership for at least a few more years.
Posts: 247 | From: Brazil | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
However, I reckon it very unlikely than anglo-catholics will get on well with Lutherans because:
1 they don't like having the eucharist every week - it gets in the way of preaching
2 they don't believe that the real presence resides in the elements apart from their use - so they don't do ablutions and are happy for the left over wine to be thrown down the sink and the bread to be thrown in the waste basket
I don't recognize these Lutherans at all. Disbelief in the real presence? Mishandling of the elements? Considering communion a waste of time compared to preaching?
Yeccchhh. Doesn't sound like any Lutherans I've ever known, met or been.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rowen
Shipmate
# 1194
|
Posted
Intriguingly enough, as there is no Lutheran Church in my region... And none for several hundred kms.... They come to my church- the Uniting Church in Australia, as opposed to anything else in town.
However, the local Anglican Church is rather low. But I guess we are too.
A retired Lutheran Lay Worker regularly preaches in my main church, if I am doing services in our other towns. He doesn't celebrate the Eucharist, but he is appreciated by church goers in my absence.
Mind you, all the Salvation Army folk in town come to us too. Some Catholics come on the weeks the priest can't make it to our remote township. We are talking very remote here, in Australian terms.
And everyone feels fine about having a woman minister.
[ 18. November 2012, 23:31: Message edited by: Rowen ]
--------------------
"May I live this day… compassionate of heart" (John O’Donoghue)...
Posts: 4897 | From: Somewhere cold in Victoria, Australia | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
gorpo
Shipmate
# 17025
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
However, I reckon it very unlikely than anglo-catholics will get on well with Lutherans because:
1 they don't like having the eucharist every week - it gets in the way of preaching
2 they don't believe that the real presence resides in the elements apart from their use - so they don't do ablutions and are happy for the left over wine to be thrown down the sink and the bread to be thrown in the waste basket
I don't recognize these Lutherans at all. Disbelief in the real presence? Mishandling of the elements? Considering communion a waste of time compared to preaching?
Yeccchhh. Doesn't sound like any Lutherans I've ever known, met or been.
Maybe because that´s not actually what those lutherans think, but what someone thinks they think.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
It´s usual that most lutheran congregations don´t have the eucharist every week. To say that is because they "don´t like it" or "gets in the way of preaching" is only an outsider´s opinion, which probably have nothing to do with their own reasons.
And yes, preaching is central to the lutheran service, so that a huge liturgical service with a 5 minutes sermon is not what you would expect. And lutherans don´t believe that the bread "becomes" the body of Christ and maintaings that characteristic after the service is over. That doesn´t mean they don´t believe in "real presence". They just don´t believe in transsubstatiation. Which doesn´t mean they act with disrespect with the elements after the service is over.
Posts: 247 | From: Brazil | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
sonata3
Shipmate
# 13653
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I thought they did have bishops and apostolic succession. I'm fairly sure some Swedish ones I met abroad said they did. I thought that was what the word 'Porvoo' referred to.
Porvoo is a communion of Anglican (British Isles) and Lutheran (Baltic and Scandinavian) churches (the two Iberian Anglican churches have joined recently, and I think the Lutheran Church of Denmark also recently became a part of this communion). Anglicans have always assumed that the Swedish church (and those churches derived from it, in Finland and Estonia) has had the historic episocpate. As I understand it, having the historic episcopate was not required of churches in this communion in order to have a mutual recognition of each other's ministries, but with Anglican and Swedish bishops participating in episcopal ordinations, it won't be long before all of the churches in this communion have the historic episcopate.
When the Swedish church entered into an inter-communion relationship with the Church of England in the 1920s, they made it clear that they thought they held the historic episcopate, but did not want it to be considered an essential part of the inter-communion relationship.
The Porvoo agreement addressed the whole problem of the historic episcopate at great length. The discussion is extended, and too long to quote here. Paragraph D51 is probably relevant to this discussion: " The use of the sign of the historic episcopal succession does not by itself guarantee the fidelity of a church to every aspect of the apostolic faith, life, and mission. There have been schisms in the history of churches using the sign of historic succession. Nor does the sign guarantee the personal faithfulness of the bishop. Nonetheless, the retention of the sign remains a permanent challenge to fidelity and to unity, a summons to witness to, and a commission to realize more fully, the permanent characteristics of the Church of the apostles."
And, in para. 54: "...all our churches have lacked something of that fullness which God desires for his people."
Still, the document notes the value of the churches of the Porvoo agreement "...being served by a reonciled and mutually recognized episcopal ministry."
The Lutheran churches in El Salvador and Tanzania claim the historic episcopate.
--------------------
"I prefer neurotic people; I like to hear rumblings beneath the surface." Stephen Sondheim
Posts: 386 | From: Between two big lakes | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
Gorpos, I note that you are in Brasil apparently. I know nothing of Lutherans there. Here in the USA I have never know Lutherans who did not formally proclaim the Real Presence of Christ in the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist. Indeed, in many parishes one used to have to sign a card before coming to the altar, stating that one believed that OL&SJC is truly present under the outwared species of bread and wine. Further, some Lutheran parishes reserve the MBS and bring Communion to the sick/house-bound from the parish Eucharist, evidencing the belief that the Real Presence is an objective reality in the Elements that does not change, is not confined to the celebration of the Holy Eucharist itself.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Further, some Lutheran parishes reserve the MBS and bring Communion to the sick/house-bound from the parish Eucharist, evidencing the belief that the Real Presence is an objective reality in the Elements that does not change, is not confined to the celebration of the Holy Eucharist itself.
I'd even go as far as saying that it is extremely commonplace for Lutheran churches in the US to reserve for this purpose. Even in my ultra-low church upbringing this was the norm, and nobody even gave it a second thought. Tabernacles are few and far between, but certainly not unheard of. Often the reservation takes place in the pastor's travel kit.
In places where the ablutions are not as meticulous as an Anglo-Catholic expects, I would describe the general sacristy attitude as trust in the grace of God.
[ 19. November 2012, 02:09: Message edited by: Olaf ]
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
k-mann
Shipmate
# 8490
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
However, I reckon it very unlikely than anglo-catholics will get on well with Lutherans because:
1 they don't like having the eucharist every week - it gets in the way of preaching
2 they don't believe that the real presence resides in the elements apart from their use - so they don't do ablutions and are happy for the left over wine to be thrown down the sink and the bread to be thrown in the waste basket
3 they celebrate Reformation Sunday. We catholically-minded Anglicans see little to celebrate here. Commiserate more than celebrate.
What you are descibing is a typical German and/or American situation. In the Church of Norway most parishes celebrate the Eucharist every sunday, believe that the real presence are there no matter what, and don't celebrate reformation sunday. I didn't even know it existed until a few years ago.
--------------------
"Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt."
— Paul Tillich
Katolikken
Posts: 1314 | From: Norway | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
k-mann
Shipmate
# 8490
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by gorpo:
And lutherans don´t believe that the bread "becomes" the body of Christ and maintaings that characteristic after the service is over.
Yes, they do. Those that don't are closet calvinists. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
[ 19. November 2012, 23:17: Message edited by: k-mann ]
--------------------
"Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt."
— Paul Tillich
Katolikken
Posts: 1314 | From: Norway | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
k-mann, I wouldn't even say it is the typical American situation anymore or indeed in my experience of Lutherans in the USA in the 1980s. The sermon wasn't an excessive emphasis even in services without Holy Communion, and whereas most Lutheran parishes probably used to have the Eucharist every Sunday, albeit on alternating Sundays for the different service times, more and more parishes these days (especially in the ELCA, which I follow more than the LC-MS)are entirely eucharistic in their Sunday liturgies, pretty much like the Episcopal Church. However, Reformation Sunday is pretty universal amongst American Lutherans.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
posted by Sonata:
quote:
Porvoo is a communion of Anglican (British Isles) and Lutheran (Baltic and Scandinavian) churches...
It includes the episcopal church in Ireland too.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras: Gorpos, I note that you are in Brasil apparently. I know nothing of Lutherans there. Here in the USA I have never know Lutherans who did not formally proclaim the Real Presence of Christ in the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist.
When I'm in Brazil, I attend a Lutheran church (IECLB), but I've never heard them talk about the Real Presence. They may formally believe in it, but if they do they aren't very loud about it. I found nothing about it on there website, and for example their position on children participating in the Holy Meal (Portuguese) doesn't mention it.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Ummm....the Augsburg Confession article ten seems fairly explicit to me
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
fletcher christian: Ummm....the Augsburg Confession article ten seems fairly explicit to me
Yes, and I did find it on the IECLB website. However, there seems to be a difference between official doctrine and folk confession here. In my experience when talking with Lutherans in Brazil about this, what I mostly hear is: "Catholics believe in transsubstantiation, we don't."
For example, in this discussion about Ecumenism (Portuguese), the reaction of 01-06-2005 08:26 says: "How can we celebrate a Supper together [with the Catholics], if they believe in transsubstantiation and we believe that the sacrifice of Christ was unique and sufficient?" It's things like this that I hear most often within the IECLB.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
I think you're confusing the doctrine of real presence with transubstantiation and also muddying the waters with ideas of the sacrificial element of the mass. But none of what they are saying seems terribly un-Anglican/Episcopalian or un-Lutheran and a rejection of those things is not a rejection of real presence either.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
In my experience when talking with Lutherans in Brazil about this, what I mostly hear is: "Catholics believe in transsubstantiation, we don't."
For example, in this discussion about Ecumenism (Portuguese), the reaction of 01-06-2005 08:26 says: "How can we celebrate a Supper together [with the Catholics], if they believe in transsubstantiation and we believe that the sacrifice of Christ was unique and sufficient?" It's things like this that I hear most often within the IECLB.
I'm no theologian (and to some Shipmates am now about to demonstrate this) and I don't know Portuguese. I can guess where Brazilian Lutherans might be coming from, and why, but I think they are over-simplifying.
Real Presence ≠ transubstantiation, nor that the sacrifice of Christ is not unique and all-sufficient, nor even that each Mass is a separate sacrifice.
Real Presence is that the bread and wine become in some way the body and blood of Christ. There are a number of different views as to how this happens or what happens. Transubstantiation is a subclass of this, founded in a particular late medieval way of looking at the nature of matter.
Nor does belief that the bread and wine truly become the body and blood of Christ necessitate that the Lord's Supper is a separate sacrifice, rather than a re-presentation of Jesus's original sacrifice - an understanding which is also entirely compatible even with a solely memorialist understanding.
The CofE does not oblige its members to commit themselves to any specific understanding of exactly what happens to the bread and wine. I suspect though that most of its members believe that 'something happens' i.e. in some form of Real Presence. I also suspect many would agree with Elizabeth I.
quote:
"Twas God the word that spake it.
He took the bread and brake it;
And what the word did make it
That I believe and take it."
It does however commit itself to the belief that Christ's sacrifice on the cross is all sufficient. From the 1662 Book of Common Prayer Prayer of Consecration:-
quote:
"who made there (by his one oblation of himself once offered) a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world; and did institute, and in his holy Gospel command us to continue, a perpetual memory of that his precious the death and sacrifice, until his coming again:"
Although these words are not used now at every Communion Service, they are in Eucharistic Prayer C in Common Worship. As far as I know, there's no faction even in the highly factional CofE that disagrees with them.
Somebody who knows more about this will have to correct me if I am wrong, but I'm not even sure that the modern Roman Catholic Church would dissent that much from them.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Enoch: Real Presence ≠ transubstantiation
I agree, and I'm probably guilty of confusing them from time to time (I'm neither Catholic nor Lutheran, so neither of the two doctrines is particularly important to me).
I guess I mostly agree with what gorpo said:
quote:
gorpo: [Brazilian?] lutherans don´t believe that the bread "becomes" the body of Christ and maintaings that characteristic after the service is over. That doesn´t mean they don´t believe in "real presence". They just don´t believe in transsubstatiation. Which doesn´t mean they act with disrespect with the elements after the service is over.
To this, Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras replied:
quote:
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras: Gorpos, I note that you are in Brasil apparently. I know nothing of Lutherans there. Here in the USA I have never know Lutherans who did not formally proclaim the Real Presence of Christ in the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist.
Maybe the confusion already started here.
In my experience, IECLB Lutherans believe that God is really present in the Holy Supper, not in a transubstantiated way in the Wine and Bread but in some way He's in there, and most imporantly He's present within the Fellowship shared at Holy Supper.
I hope I expressed myself well.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Flossymole
Apprentice
# 17339
|
Posted
Posted by Olaf in reply to 'Baptism by desire?'
quote:
Imagine you are stuck on a deserted island. You have just been attacked by a Komodo dragon, and you are probably not going to survive. You earnestly regret never having been baptized, and desire from the inner depths of your being to be baptized, but no one is around to do so. Baptism by desire suggests that, by virtue of your want, you will receive the benefits of baptism anyway.
Thanks Olaf
Posts: 43 | From: Derbyshire UK | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
2 they don't believe that the real presence resides in the elements apart from their use . . . .
I don't recognize these Lutherans at all. Disbelief in the real presence?
I think the key is in the bolded. leo didn't say Lutherans don't believe in the Real Presence, which as others have noted is not the same as transubstantiation. He was saying that the Lutheran understanding is that the Real Presence is tied to the context of the Eucharist.
That has always been my understanding -- that whether during the Service proper or in communion of the sick, it is only when the elements are joined with the Word in the celebration of Communion that the RP is, well, present. Wasn't Luther's analogy that of the iron in the fire that, while in the fire, remains iron yet also contains the fire, but when removed no longer contains the fire?
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by k-mann:
quote:
Originally posted by gorpo:
And lutherans don´t believe that the bread "becomes" the body of Christ and maintaings that characteristic after the service is over.
Yes, they do. Those that don't are closet calvinists.
I think you are confusing Calvin with Zwingli there!
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
posted by Sonata:
quote:
Porvoo is a communion of Anglican (British Isles) and Lutheran (Baltic and Scandinavian) churches...
It includes the episcopal church in Ireland too.
Which was in the British Isles last time I looked at a map.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Not quite. Thats quite a different understanding of the statement of the Augsburg Confession, which from what I understand is a fairly important document. Also, it doesn't ring true with some Lutherans who practice Benediction (unless the office, or whatever it is) that accompanies the act is considered the 'word' part.
Also, I'm afraid Leo's assertions don't ring true from my experience. Not so very long ago I entertained just over 40 Lutheran clergy from various parts, none of whom would have ever thrown the bread into the bin and the wine down the sink, and who at a service in a 'low' church here were utterly and genuinely appalled and concerned at the use of a tissue to wipe the chalice which was then discarded to the bin afterwards. Every last Lutheran cleric commented on this practice in negative terms throughout the course of the stay, as far as my memory serves. In fact, in all my years in Ireland I don't think I have ever met a single Presbyterian minister who would discard the bread and wine down the sink or in the bin. I have only ever seen this done in 'low' C of I parishes.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Not quite. Thats quite a different understanding of the statement of the Augsburg Confession, which from what I understand is a fairly important document. Also, it doesn't ring true with some Lutherans who practice Benediction (unless the office, or whatever it is) that accompanies the act is considered the 'word' part.
It doesn't seem to me that Article X of Augsburg helps much. All it says is
quote:
Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach otherwise.
That doesn't seem inconsistent at all with the understanding I have had that the sacramental union exists only in the context of the sacrament and ceases to exist after communion.
Obviously a Lutheran can address this better than I; perhaps there is a range of views acceptable among Lutherans in this regard?
And I know the XXXIX Articles don't have the same standing within Anglican circles as Lutheran confessions among Lutherans, but is the fact that some (is it many?) Lutherans practice benediction that different from the fact that some Anglicans do, despite Article 28?
quote:
In fact, in all my years in Ireland I don't think I have ever met a single Presbyterian minister who would discard the bread and wine down the sink or in the bin. I have only ever seen this done in 'low' C of I parishes.
But doesn't this point out that treatment of the elements after communion doesn't necessarily correlate to adherence to particular views on the Real Presence? That those Presbyterian ministers would not discard the bread and wine down the sink or the trash basket wasn't because they believed there had been any change in the bread or wine, but because the elements had been "set apart from all common use to the holy use and mystery for which Christ has appointed them." As a result, they are to be disposed of reverently.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
The classical Lutheran view of what happens to the elements in the Eucharist is known as sacramental union. The bread and wine continue to exist in their natural substance, yet Christ becomes truly present "in, with, and under" the elements when the words of institution are pronounced in the eucharistic celebration. This is somewhat less ambiguous than the classical Anglican obfuscation on the subject, but is more ambiguous than transubstantiation. The latter involves really quite subtle metaphysical distinctions and arguably isn't - in its more purely Thomist formulation - necessarily all that different to sacramental union in practical effect(though expressed quite differently), so long as it is understood that sacramental union does not imply that the RP is confined to and dependent upon the context of Holy Communion itself. But both Anglican and Lutheran speculative theological opinion and popular understandings have been all over the place on the nature of Christ's presence in the Eucharist. Overall, Anglicans historically have actually had a less high view of the Eucharist than what is set forth in the classical Lutheran theological formularies, most notably in the Augsburg Confession.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
However, I reckon it very unlikely than anglo-catholics will get on well with Lutherans because:
1 they don't like having the eucharist every week - it gets in the way of preaching
2 they don't believe that the real presence resides in the elements apart from their use - so they don't do ablutions and are happy for the left over wine to be thrown down the sink and the bread to be thrown in the waste basket
I don't recognize these Lutherans at all. Disbelief in the real presence? Mishandling of the elements? Considering communion a waste of time compared to preaching?
Yeccchhh. Doesn't sound like any Lutherans I've ever known, met or been.
Lutherans are very different the world over.
The four I was talking about (and one more who succeeded them but in a different part of our diocese) were part of the KD from Bavaria, covered by the Meissen Agreement.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Also, I'm afraid Leo's assertions don't ring true from my experience. Not so very long ago I entertained just over 40 Lutheran clergy from various parts, none of whom would have ever thrown the bread into the bin and the wine down the sink,.
So what do they do with them?
Ours didn't do ablutions. They just dumped the remains on the credence table.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
... Ours didn't do ablutions. They just dumped the remains on the credence table.
Is it possible that in their home circles, it was somebody else's role to deal with disposal, a verger, or the German equivalent of a churchwarden, say?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
[QUOTE]
For example, in this discussion about Ecumenism (Portuguese), the reaction of 01-06-2005 08:26 says: "How can we celebrate a Supper together [with the Catholics], if they believe in transsubstantiation and we believe that the sacrifice of Christ was unique and sufficient?" It's things like this that I hear most often within the IECLB.
As others have remarked, this confuses transubstantiation (a particular explanation of the mechanics of the Real Presence in the Eucharist) with the sacrifice of the Mass. It's also a caricature of RC teaching about that sacrifice; the Roman Catholic Church does not believe, and has never taught, that Christ is sacrificed anew in each celebration of the Eucharist. Some individual RCs have advanced that notion, but they are in error by their own communion's standards.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
posted by Nick:
quote:
It doesn't seem to me that Article X of Augsburg helps much.
the text I have on the shelf beside me is a little different from yours; possibly hence the confusion. Mine says that Christ is really present 'with, in and through' the Eucharist. But I think that when you're dealing with the Lutherans you are essentially dealing with a confessional church, so there's a host of other confessional materials; some Lutherans will tell you there are libraries of confessional materials.
quote:
That doesn't seem inconsistent at all with the understanding I have had that the sacramental union exists only in the context of the sacrament and ceases to exist after communion.
I don't think I stated that this was the belief. If I implied that somewhere I do apologise for muddying the waters, but I certainly didn't mean to imply this.
quote:
But doesn't this point out that treatment of the elements after communion doesn't necessarily correlate to adherence to particular views on the Real Presence? That those Presbyterian ministers would not discard the bread and wine down the sink or the trash basket wasn't because they believed there had been any change in the bread or wine, but because the elements had been "set apart from all common use to the holy use and mystery for which Christ has appointed them." As a result, they are to be disposed of reverently.
I think you've missed the point I was trying to make here. Your point is exactly the point I was making; but as it happens the Presbyterian Church in Ireland has actually affirmed its belief in the real presence (but perhaps thats a discussion for another thread).
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Fr Weber: It's also a caricature of RC teaching about that sacrifice
I didn't say that I agree with this person.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
I didn't mean to imply that you did! But it's a common misstep; lots of Protestants seem to think that the RCs believe themselves to be immolating Christ anew with each Mass.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
On your three points of difference:
quote:
1 they don't like having the Eucharist every week...
Lots of Anglican churches will agree with that. Including the parish I'm at. I would prefer a Eucharist at every main service myself, but so far I've lost the argument.
quote:
2 they don't believe that the real presence resides in the elements apart from their use - so they don't do ablutions and are happy for the left over wine to be thrown down the sink and the bread to be thrown in the waste basket
At least some evangelical Anglicans would fit that description. In my own experience most would hold to some form of the doctrine of real presence (though I have heard few stridently memorialist sermons), and all would treat the elements with reverence, but formal ablutions during the service are rare- most would put one of those whateveryoucallthem cloths over the elements and consume them reverently in the vestry afterwards. Like it says in the prayerbook. Reservation has been rare in evangelical CofE churches and when its done is usually done specifically for home communions and often the congregation would simply not notice it.
quote:
3 they celebrate Reformation Sunday.
Most CofE churches wouldn't, its not a big deal here. But some do. And I've mentioned it in sermons myself, though not made it the main topic of the sermon, that was the reading for the day. And anyway, as the calendar falls out it nearly always gets trumped by All Saints. But its right there in the lectionary. In italics ("Commemorations are printed in italics."):
quote:
October
[...]
18 Luke the Evangelist
19 Henry Martyn, Translator of the Scriptures, Missionary in India and Persia, 1812
25 Crispin and Crispinian, Martyrs at Rome, c.287
26 Alfred the Great, King of the West Saxons, Scholar, 899
26 Cedd, Abbot of Lastingham, Bishop of the East Saxons, 664
28 Simon and Jude, Apostles
29 James Hannington, Bishop of Eastern Equatorial Africa, Martyr in Uganda, 1885
31 Martin Luther, Reformer, 1546
[ 20. November 2012, 17:41: Message edited by: ken ]
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
In my own experience most would hold to some form of the doctrine of real presence (though I have heard few stridently memorialist sermons)
I have always wondered how memorialist Anglicans (most of whom are very strident indeed about the XXXIX) justify going against the plain language of the BCP and Articles, which support at least a virtualist doctrine of the Real Presence. At least extreme Anglo-Catholics admit to a desire to undo the Reformation!
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
posted by Sonata:
quote:
Porvoo is a communion of Anglican (British Isles) and Lutheran (Baltic and Scandinavian) churches...
It includes the episcopal church in Ireland too.
Which was in the British Isles last time I looked at a map.
Less colonialist terminology thank you very much.
[ 20. November 2012, 18:06: Message edited by: CL ]
--------------------
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." - Athanasius of Alexandria
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Says Ian Paisley ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
fletcher, I think we both may be talking at odds a bit.
quote:
the text I have on the shelf beside me is a little different from yours; possibly hence the confusion. Mine says that Christ is really present 'with, in and through' the Eucharist.
That is a little different, and I am familiar with the "in, with and under/through" language, as well as the term "sacramental union."
quote:
But I think that when you're dealing with the Lutherans you are essentially dealing with a confessional church, so there's a host of other confessional materials; some Lutherans will tell you there are libraries of confessional materials.
As a Presbyterian, I understand that completely.
quote:
quote:
That doesn't seem inconsistent at all with the understanding I have had that the sacramental union exists only in the context of the sacrament and ceases to exist after communion.
I don't think I stated that this was the belief. If I implied that somewhere I do apologise for muddying the waters, but I certainly didn't mean to imply this.
No, you didn't. That's what I was saying my understanding has always been -- that the sacramental union exists only through the celebration of the sacrament/communion. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
I did do some looking around on the web, and most of what I found on the subject was mostly agnostic, if you will -- along the lines of we know Christ is present in the sacrament, but Scripture is silent as to whether that presence continues after the sacrament/after all have communed and so we don't speculate.
quote:
I think you've missed the point I was trying to make here. Your point is exactly the point I was making; but as it happens the Presbyterian Church in Ireland has actually affirmed its belief in the real presence (but perhaps thats a discussion for another thread).
I did miss the point. Sorry about that.
But I think you may have missed what I said, as well. I didn't say the Presbyterian ministers wouldn't have believed in the real presence, I said they wouldn't have believed in a change in the bread and wine. Did the recent PCI affirmance differ there?
The Reformed and Presbyterian confessions have always affirmed the real presence, but they have also consistently declined to physicalize that presence in the bread and wine. Indeed (and to bring this a little closer to the thread subject), the differing understanding of the real presence was one of the two or three major points on which agreement had to be hammered out when the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America entered into full communion status with the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the Reformed Church in America and the United Church of Christ. But it was clear to all that what was being resolved were differing understandings of the real presence, not real presence vs. memorialism.
[ 20. November 2012, 18:17: Message edited by: Nick Tamen ]
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Says Ian Paisley
What can I say, I'm fond of the old rogue.
--------------------
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." - Athanasius of Alexandria
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
@Nick
Hmm, where do I start? We are definitely at cross purposes here and I suspect that if I try to come at it again that I might start to look like a dog with a bone, and truly thats not my intention at all.
I don't think the PCI stance differed at all from that and certainly didn't affirm transubstantiation in any sense. What I meant when using that example (and I'll admit I wasn't very clear at all) was that whether you are Baptist, Presbyterian, Reformed, Methodist, whatever, and you celebrate the Eucharist/Communion/Lord's Supper, you are taking the everyday and setting it aside for an uncommon use - a sacred and holy use if you will. So even people who think it is a purely memorialist act of holiness tend not in my experience to chuck it in the bin afterwards. Granted they may not have the same concerns about crumbs and bits on the floor etc, but they won't necessarily bin it afterwards either. So that related to Leo's experience - which was clearly different, but I was arguing wasn't common.....even though.... I have seen this done in 'low' c of i parishes; generally it must be said to either (sadly in my view) make a political point or a skewed theological one.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
@Nick
Hmm, where do I start? We are definitely at cross purposes here and I suspect that if I try to come at it again that I might start to look like a dog with a bone, and truly thats not my intention at all.
No problem. We're good and (I think) on the same page of the hymnal.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
... Ours didn't do ablutions. They just dumped the remains on the credence table.
Is it possible that in their home circles, it was somebody else's role to deal with disposal, a verger, or the German equivalent of a churchwarden, say?
I can't ask them now because they have gone back to Bavaria.
However, they specifically refused to do the ablutions and explained why. They also refused the lavabo because they said it connected them to Pontius Pilate - when i explained that it had to do with Eucharistic sacrifice, they said they didn't believe in it.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
uffda
Shipmate
# 14310
|
Posted
Some of the questions that have surfaced about Lutheran Eucharistic practice have come up because of our evolving understanding of the frequency of communion.
When Lutherans celebrated the Eucharist quarterly or monthly, it was occasional enough that people did not ask questions about saving the leftover bread and wine until the next celebration. It was either consumed or disposed of reverently.
Similarly questions about the longevity of the Presence of Christ in the sacrament did not arise. Our pastors were trained to celebrate the Eucharist each time they brought communion to the sick or hospitalized, so unconsecrated bread and wine were brought and the pastor repeated the words of institution over them. That has been evolving in the past 20-30 years as weekly communion became the norm, and more and more of the laity are acting as communion ministers, because sick or homebound members now want the Eucharist more frequently. When laity take communion to homebound or hospitalized members a direct connection is verbalized between the Sunday parish eucharist and these elements that have been brought from thr altar. To my knowledge no one has ever suggested that the eucharistic presence ceases if it is Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday after the Sunday eucharist.
Everything is connected to our understanding that the consecrating pastor does not "change" the bread and wine into anything. The Pastor, as the ordained servant of the Word, repeats the Words of Institution over the bread and wine. These words are viewed as Christ's PROMISE to be present, so the question of Christ's presence "in, with, and under" the bread and wine
revolves around our trust in the promise of Christ when he said "do this for the remembrance of me." What draws Lutherans, Anglicans, and Roman Catholics together is the common understanding that Christ's presence is located
in the eucharistic specias themselves, rather that in the action of eating or drinking. Faith is not required for the consumption of Christ's Body and Blood. Anyone receiving communion, whether faithful or faithless, received Christ's Body and Blood.
--------------------
Invincibly ignorant and planning to stay that way!
Posts: 1031 | From: Buffalo, NY | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
