Posted on 01/26/2016 8:53:41 AM PST by NRx
It was no more than a minor blip on the ecclesiastical screen. So minor, in fact, that many Catholic news agencies didn't even pick it up. This past October, to very little fanfare, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), in conjunction with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), announced the publication of a joint document titled "Declaration of the Way: Church, Ministry, and the Eucharist." Released in preparation for the five hundredth anniversary of the Protestant Reformation in 2017, the 118-page declaration was the result of a dialogue between members of ELCA and the U.S. bishops' Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs.
As with most modern ecumenical efforts, the declaration is a font overflowing with positivity. Its core is made up of thirty-two "Statements of Agreement" that delineate the shared beliefs of the Catholic Church and the Lutheran communion on three central themes: Church, ministry, and Eucharist. The declaration states that Catholics and Lutherans agree, for example, that the Church is "apostolic" and "indefectible," that the ordained ministry is "of divine origin" and "an essential element," and that through the Eucharist "the church participates in a unique way in the life of the Trinity" and that participation in the Eucharist "is a pledge that our life in Christ will be eternal." Needless to say, these are rather broad and general statements.
Where Catholics and Lutherans disagree is in the details. And there are disagreements -- after all, that's why there was a Reformation, and why Lutherans aren't Catholics and Catholics aren't Lutherans. (It's ludicrous to have to point out such obvious facts, but in ecumenical affairs, obvious facts often get in the way of the good feelings everyone is so anxious to promote.)
(Excerpt) Read more at newoxfordreview.org ...
Eucharist translates (in the Lutheran world) to “memorial meal”.
Wouldn’t Zwingli and Calvin be over-joyed?
I think so.
What do the orthodox RC among us think of the violation of their Altar?
To be fair, Lutherans believe in the “Real Presence” in the Eucharist (not just some kind of “spiritual” presence). Luther got into an argument with those who said the Eucharist is just a “symbol” or “memorial.” That being said, Catholics would see the Lutheran view as being insufficient and ultimately incompatible. However Luther’s view was closer to the Catholic view than Zwingli’s or Calvin’s.
ELCA does not equal Lutheran. The ELCA continues to diverge from historical Lutheranism. To compare and contract, there are a few differences between the ELCA and the LCMS.
The LCMS proclaims the real presence in communion. The ELCA accepts other views.
The LCMS practices closed communion. The ELCA does not.
The LCMS only ordains male pastors. The ELCA does not.
The LCMS considers homosexuality a sin. The ELCA does not.
The LCMS stands against abortion. The ELCA allows for abortion under certain circumstances.
The LCMS proclaim that Scripture IS God's word. The ELCA promotes the idea that Scripture contains God's word, along with a bunch of other human ideas.
The LCMS proclaim the virgin birth. The ELCA accepts other views.
The LCMS pastors pledge to follow and uphold the confessional Lutheran documents contained in the Book of Concord. The ELCA pastors promise to follow the confessions only so far as they think the confessions agree with Scripture, and only so far as they believe that Scripture is indeed the word of God.
Agreed, but...
Once a Christian agrees to the consistent use of “eucharist”, they have travelled down the ^wide-path^ and entered through the ^wide gate^.
ELCA has committed to this error.
Tao:
Be circumspect in your assignation of ^LCMS^ practice.
The LCMS has “relationship” problems (altar-not-pulpit). There are a majority of LCMS parishes that would agree with your “list” but, many in the ^salt water districts^ pay only minimal lip-service.
On another side...You and I, likely, have met over the last 15 years.
ELCA is a disgrace.
Yes, there is a problem with the LCMS as you have stated. It becomes complicated with the benefits package that the LCMS offers. Some would leave the LCMS, but they can't because they are invested in their retirement and other perks.
I am hopeful that the LCMS can come to term with its heretical components. This problem is widely know. About a year ago, the synod president wrote an excellent post about this issue.
Matt Harrison - I am saying that if my Synod does not change its inability to call such a person to repentance, and remove such a teacher where there is not repentance, then we are liars, and our confession is meaningless.
Uh, no offense, but in my circle (LCMS Lutheran) Eucharist translates from the Greek eucharisto to “thanksgiving” indicative of the fact that we give thanks for the gifts (remission of sins and eternal life) we receive by His grace and through His Sacraments.
Luther and Zwingli attempted a reconciliation at Marburg, but Zwingli only accepted the “symbol” of the meal. Luther, on the other hand, took Christ at His Word: “This IS my body. This IS my blood.”
In the orthodox LCMS world, there is no reference to a “memorial meal”, except as being called heretical.
Well stated. I hope and pray he is able to move this issue forward towards resolution (or at least action).
Not be a snark, but, in your LCMS world does “thanksgiving” translate to “sacrament”?
It seems to me that, by choosing ELCA representatives to be their "dialog partners," the U.S. Catholic Bishops (USCCB) have clearly shown their LACK of interest in achieving any such close fellowship with the LCMS.
I would be a tad more respectful of "ecumenism" if we (Catholics) dialogued first with our near brethren in faith and morals, the Orthodox and the LCMS. These are people with whom we really have a great deal in common: we still see in each other the recognizable distinctives of historic Christianity.
Then, when we've concluding the serious part of the program, the rest can come in for coffee and donuts. That would be "hospitality" on a bit more of an honest basis.
Luther's view was insufficient.
Calvin's was incomprehensible.
Zwingli's was incompatible and indefensible.
Luther's view. There is bread and there is wine. There is true body and there is true blood. The body and the blood are in, under, and with the bread and wine. How can this be? It is a mystery that we accept.
To be blunt, yes. It is one of two sacraments instituted by Christ himself. The RCC claims 7. We maintain that 2 are true sacraments (means of grace) and that the other 5 are “sacramental”, meaning they have aspects of a sacrament, but were not directly instituted by Christ.
The thanksgiving translation is tied to a larger theme of what our Germanic forbears referred to as the Haupt Gottesdienst, the High Service of God. This concept has been bastardized over the years by the use of “church service” which carries a connotation that we (the church) are somehow performing a service to God by our worship.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The idea of the High Service of God should inform us as to what God does for us through Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist. The “service” is done by God, for man, and for that grace we are eternally thankful. Hence, the tie-in.
I would argue the following:
eucharist = thanksgiving /=/ sacrament.
To provide a “eucharist meal” allows all sorts of heterodox belief before the Altar of God (AKA: y’all come!).
To explain to the “locus” parishioners that we (LCMS) serve an “Eucharist” allows too much to intrude and ultimately asks that you (as pastor/bishop) defend the broad-view practice when you should teach the narrow-view practice. This, of course places YOU in a ^politically^ difficult position among your parishioners.
Maybe we should take this offline?
Again, I think you and I have intersected before...
:: Luther’s view was insufficient ::
To which Luther consistently acquiesced. Yet, better to be insufficient so that The Church is properly revealed through time and instruction.
We are a catechizing church, yes?
Would love to continue the discussion. Offline is probably better. I agree with certain of your points, and think we are of similar mind, but semantics may be getting in the way.
I feel like we have discussed before as well. Look forward to your Freepmail.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.