Martin Luther |
I saw recently that a joint commission of Bishops and
Theologians representing both the Catholic Church in the United States and the
Evangelical Lutheran Church In America (ELCA) are forwarding to Rome and to the
General Convention of the ELCA) a proposal authorizing Eucharistic sharing
between Lutherans and Catholics in recognition of the significant doctrinal
agreements that have been reached in the fifty years of Ecumenical dialogue
since the Second Vatican Council.
I must admit that I was startled at the proposal. (“Startled” doesn’t mean that I don’t like
it, only that—much like the “Francis Agenda” at the recent Synod on the Family,
I am amazed how fast the Church is ready to move in this papacy.) There are significant issues to be addressed,
not the least of which is the Elephant on the Coffee Table of Valid (Apostolic)
Orders. The Catholic Church believes
that during the Reformation the Apostolic Succession of the Lutheran hierarchy
and ministry was “lost.” This is a
serious question because the authority to preside at the Eucharist, to forgive
sins, to confirm, to ordain, and to anoint the sick depend—in Catholic
theology—on the minister of the sacrament standing in an unbroken succession of
clergy whose ordinations can be traced back to the Apostles.
Now frankly, the Apostolic Succession is a highly complex
issue. Can only bishops ordain
priests? There are historical precedents
before the Council of Trent (and I believe there is even one within the century
after Trent) where the Catholic Church recognized ordinations conducted by a
presbyter (priest). (Ironically I came across this information about forty years ago in a series of essays by
theologians and historians who were
involved in the same Lutheran Catholic dialogue process that is making the
recommendation of Eucharistic sharing,)
If priests can validly ordain, then Apostolic Succession has been
retained in the Lutheran Church.
Moreover, in some strains of Lutheranism, most notably the Swedish, the office and ministry of Bishops was maintained
in continuity with the pre-Reformation Church.
The argument was made by Catholics that in rejecting the Eucharistic
doctrines of the Catholic Church, most notably Transubstantiation and
Eucharistic Sacrifice, even those Episcopal Churches in the Lutheran Communion
suffered a break in the Apostolic lineage.
But again, things are much more complex.
Recent ecumenical dialogues have established that there is no essential
difference between the Catholic formula of Transubstantiation and the Lutheran doctrine
of Consubstantiation. As Catholics are bound to the doctrine of the
Real Presence and not essentially to the doctrine of Transubstantiation (which
is only one way of explaining the Real Presence) there is quite a bit of room
for accord here. Actually
Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation are, at the root, essentially the same
when one understands the difference between Thomistic (Scholastic and
neo-Scholastic) thought in the Catholic Tradition and the Neo-Platonic or
Augustinian philosophy espoused by Luther and the theologians who followed
him. When Luther says that the bread and
wine remain bread and wine but Christ is truly Present “in, with, and under”
the forms of bread and wine he means what we Catholics mean in saying that whle
the “accidents” of bread and wine remain unchanged, their substance is
transformed into the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity (and, though we forget
to add it, humanity) of Christ. The
physical and chemical properties of bread and wine remain bread and wine.
While we have come a tremendous distance in a common
understanding, I am not hopeful that this proposal will be accepted by
Rome. (I think the ELCA will be all over
it like ants at a picnic.) The highly
sensitive issue of Apostolic Orders has not been addressed and a solution has
not been found for it. More important
are the unspoken agendas. Rome, even
after Vatican II, can’t seem to move away from an “unconditional surrender”
approach to Ecumenism. With Rome you
pretty much have to buy the whole ball of wax and we have some issues
here. We won’t even bring up the
Assumption of the Blessed Virgin or purgatory.
Women’s ordination is a stumbling block all of its own. Katholic Krazies will go berserk about this proposal
as the ELCA supports “a woman’s right to choose” as well as Same-Sex
marriage. And of course most of the Krazies
just hate ecumenism in general because they get a lot of their energy just from
hating.
In the end it is a huge fuss over nothing. I see Lutherans and Presbyterians and
Episcopalians and even the odd Greek Orthodox coming up the aisle in our Church
for Holy Communion every Sunday. My Methodist
sister-in-law even has permission from the local Catholic bishops to receive
Holy Communion. She is at mass with my
brother every Sunday. Used to run the
kid’s choir in the parish. Hardly anyone
in town knows that she technically isn’t a Catholic. And hey—Catholics in the Lutheran Church: I
know we aren’t supposed to go to Communion but I’ve seen priests—even fairly
uptight ones that like to get all dolled up like Cardinal Burke—kneeling at the
Lutheran rail. Most Catholics don’t have
a clue about the prohibition and it wouldn’t stop them if they did. As in so many ways, the faithful are out in
front while the magisterium puts their mitered heads in the sand and the
theologians all wriggle and moan like they need a laxative.
So am I condoning Eucharistic Sharing with Lutherans? Don’t have to any more than I have to condone
the sun coming up in the East. It is
just a fact of life. Sure the krazies
are beside themselves, “goin’ to fight it with everything in me” one
writes. But the words of Jesus remain: ut unum sint.
Now, for another matter. I am taking a few weeks off while on a secret mission. keep me in your prayers and I will keep you in mine.
Good luck on you secret mission and I will pray for you. Don't forget to keep praying for Papa Francesco....
ReplyDeleteYou will be missed.
ReplyDeletethanks, but God wiling it is only a couple of weeks
Delete