Four and Twenty+ Blackbirds: A little more on AC XIV

12 May 2009

A little more on AC XIV

Let's play a guessing game.

One of the following statements is from the Wittenberg faculty in 1674; the other is....not. Which is from that distinguished faculty and whence the other? (and no fair Googling!)

Statement A.

An Laici casu necessitatis possint absolvere, quemadmodum baptizare possunt?

Praesuppono, quaeri tantum de absolutione, an ea in casu necessitatis, a Laicis fieri debeat et possit: non vero quaestionem eam de subsequente Sacramenti Sanctae Eucharistiae exhibitione, hanc enim per Laicos nullo modo fieri posse (licet baptismus ab illis in casu necessitatis possit administrari, nec administratus debeat iterari) intelligi debere, nostri Theologi, uti notum est, passim demonstrant.

"Are laymen able to absolve in a case of necessity as they are able to baptize?

"I presuppose that the question is put only concerning absolution, whether it ought and is able to be performed by laymen in a case of necessity: this question is certainly not to be understood concerning the subsequent administration of the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, for our theologians, as is known, demonstrate time and again that this is in no way able to come about through laymen (of course, baptism is able to be administered by them in a case of necessity, nor should the minister perform it again)."

Statement B.

Et hoc utique sacramentum nemo potest conficere, nisi sacerdos, qui fuerit rite ordinatus.

"And certainly, no one is able to perform this sacrament [the Eucharist] except a priest who has been ordained by rite (rite ordinatus)."

Note what occurs in both statements: the verb posse (to be able). Both statements say that a layman is not able to perform the Sacrament. Not that it would merely be impolite or against good order for a layman to preside at the Sacrament, but that he has no ability, power, or authority to do so. The verb debere (ought, should) builds on that reality. A layman ought not take upon himself the duty of presiding at the Supper because he, in fact, cannot because he has been given no authority to do so, by definition. Therefore, if some layperson should attempt to perform this sacrament, it would be no sacrament at all, but a blasphemy.

I am fully aware that some Lutherans of the 19^th and 20^th centuries disagree. But, gentle reader, do you think there is even the slimmest chance that the Wittenberg faculty of 1674 could have been right and these other Lutherans wrong? If you can admit even the slimmest chance that this is in fact the case, well then, this “lay ministry” business takes on something of an increased importance, wouldn't you say?

Look at the situation through the lens of the argumentation of Pascal's wager. If the Wittenberg faculty is wrong, and yet we follow their prescribed procedure and cease and desist any condoning of laity presiding over the Supper – what have we lost? Precious little – for all we will then lose is discord and disorder and the violation of the clear wording of AC XIV. But if we allow our consciences to be eased by the pronouncements of those 19^th and 20^th century Lutherans who say laity are able to (even if they ought not for the sake of good order) preside over the Supper and those theologians turn out to be wrong – egads, but we've got quite a bad situation on our hands.

At any rate, back to our game: which is which and whence the other?

+HRC

5 comments:

Mike Keith said...: Great post - well said. I presnted at one of our District conferences n this very issue. I posted my paper, such as it is, on my blog:

http://scottishlutheran.blogspot.com/2008/07/could-layperson-consecrate-elements-for.html; Tuesday, May 12, 2009 at 3:37:00 PM CDT
Bryce P Wandrey said...: I am going to guess that the second is from the faculty because the first uses the 1st person singular pronoun. Hence, I will guess the first is from Chemnitz's Enchiridion.; Tuesday, May 12, 2009 at 3:59:00 PM CDT
Pr. H. R. said...: Mike,

Great paper! What the MO Synod needs more than anything, in my opinion, is for her international partner churches to call her to repentance on this score. Keep up the good work.

Bryce,

I don't want to give anything away for our other contestants. I'll just encourage you and others to keep guessing. . .

+HRC; Tuesday, May 12, 2009 at 6:20:00 PM CDT
WM Cwirla said...: There is a subtle difference. The first statement refers to the manner in which the Lord's Supper is given (or not); the second refers to the person doing it. The first statement is Lutheran; the second is Roman Catholic.

We come to the same conclusion but by different routes and for different reasons.; Tuesday, May 12, 2009 at 6:32:00 PM CDT
Pr. H. R. said...: I don't know that anybody's going to get closer - so I think we can give Cwirla the cigar.

The second quotation is from the Fourth Lateran Council, 1215.

And he also honed in on the appropriate verbiage. Lutherans talk about the exhibitio of the sacrament - its delivery/giving up/administration - which is not able to come about through laity (fieri per laicos).

Roman Catholics like to talk of a priest (sacerdos - another give away) confecting the Sacrament - conficere.

But it is interesting, isn't it, that as in so many other areas dealing with the sacraments we and Rome do end up in the same place through different paths. I think this is a testament to the Lutheran view of the need for the Reformation: the catholic Church needed reforming - accretions, false understandings of the right things, had crept in and needed to be cleared away. But no "new church" needed to be formed. . .

+HRC; Tuesday, May 12, 2009 at 9:04:00 PM CDT

Post a Comment

The Twenty-Four Elders (and a few living creatures)

Rev. Benjamin Ball
St. Paul, Hamel, Illinois

Rev. Larry Beane
Salem, Gretna, Louisiana

Rev. Paul Beisel
Immanuel, Iowa Falls, Iowa

Rev. Peter Bender
Peace, Sussex, Wisconsin

Rev. Eric Brown
Trinity, Herscher, Illinois

Rev. Heath Curtis
Zion, Carpenter, Illinois

Rev. William Cwirla
Holy Trinity, Hacienda Heights, CA

Rev. Dr. Burnell Eckardt
St. Paul, Kewanee, Illinois

Rev. Erich Fickel
St. Paul, Chesterton, Indiana

Rev. William Foy
Prince of Peace, Valparaiso, Indiana

Rev. John A. Frahm III
Trinity, Boulder Junction, Wisconsin

Rev. Robert Franck
Mount Olive, Duluth, Minnesota

Rev. Dr. Gifford Grobien
CTS, Fort Wayne, Indiana

Rev. Dr. Kent Heimbigner
Charity, Burleson, Texas

Rev. Dr. Steven Hein
Colorado Springs, Colorado

Rev. Rich Heinz
St. Johns, Chicago, Illinois

Rev. David Kind
University Lutheran, Minneapolis

Rev. Brent Kuhlman
Trinity, Murdock, Nebraska

Rev. Alan Ludwig, Professor
Lutheran Theological Seminary
Novosibirsk, Russia

Rev. Todd Peperkorn
Holy Cross, Rocklin, California

Rev. J. Richard Sawyer
Good Shepherd, Brandon, Mississippi

Rev. Robert Schaibley, emeritus
Shepherd of the Springs,
Colorado Springs, Colorado

Rev. Dr. Richard Stuckwisch
Emmaus, South Bend, Indiana

Rev. Jacob Sutton
Immanuel, Terre Haute, Indiana

Rev. Ralph Tausz
Apostles, Melrose Park, Illinois

Rev. David Jay Webber
Redeemer, Scottsdale, Arizona

Rev. William Weedon
Lutheran Public Radio, Collinsville, IL

Rev. Dr. Georg Williams
Zion, Ainsworth, Nebraska

Rev. Kyle Wright II
St. Matthew, Hamlet, Indiana

Rubrics and Blogistics for the Blackbirds

Unlike the Ten Commandments, these are not written in stone (though some of them are pretty solid). Those who may be reading over our shoulders might also find these interesting.

1. Be reverent and courteous. Piepkorn's fundamental pair of rubrics for the conduct of the Service are likewise pertinent here. It's simply faith toward God and love toward others. All the other rules and rubrics are an application of those principles to specific questions.

2. Our blog is a public forum, and we are all public servants of the Word. Therefore, what we write and the manner in which we write ought to reflect an appropriate decorum. Though you may sometimes wonder, there are people reading what you have to say. The majority of them will mostly be quiet about it, and many will probably never respond with any comments, but they will benefit, and they will appreciate it.

3. Although this is a public forum, don't be self-conscious about your writing, and don't attempt to play to the crowd. Simply address yourself pastorally to the topics you take up for consideration, as you would respond to members of your own parish who are asking about or need to be told such things as pertain to their Christian faith and life.

4. Don't be intentionally provocative or controversial, but don't shy away from engaging topics in a way that challenges the status quo (from and within the parameters of the Word of God and our common confession of the same). By the same token, let us hold each other accountable to the apostolic doctrine. Do not fear correction, nor fear to question; that is the way in which we learn from one other and sharpen one another for the common good.

5. A helpful rule of thumb is akin to Luther's advice on confession: Don't make blogging into a torture, nor seek to invent things worth saying, as though to impress anyone. Instead, if there are matters weighing on your heart or mind, address them with the Word of God from within your office and station in life, and thereby allow your fathers and brothers in Christ to respond with the Word of the Lord from within their own vocations. (Blogging should not be a kind of virtual confessional; this rubric speaks only to the way in which one ought to approach this sort of writing and discussion.)

6. Our blog lands somewhere between an e-mail discussion list and a published theological journal. Less from-the-hip than e-mail groups, but less formal than a publication. Bear in mind that your posts can be edited (or removed) after the fact; so don't agonize over every jot and tittle up front, as though your posts had to be perfect from the outset. That's not to advocate recklessness, but do not be so scrupulous that you hesitate to say anything.

7. Our blog is something like an online Logia, and your posts may be compared to the "Theological Observer" in the CTQ, or the "Public Square" in First Things. Only this forum is much faster and allows for considerably more give and take, not only amongst ourselves but with others, too.

8. Make an effort to post at least once every other month. The more, the better, but don't try to force it. When things come up in the course of your pastoral vocation, consider the possibility of reflecting upon those matters on the blog (with appropriate discretion).

9. When you post something, "label" it with one or more of the twenty-four topics, whichever of those you are addressing. The blog will tally and catologue those things for us, which will be helpful. The precise list of topics may develop over time, but let's follow those parameters along the way; that will help to keep things on track.

10. Once someone has posted on a particular topic, there would be potentially two ways for the rest of us to respond (and we should be inclined to respond, as we are so minded and able): Either by way of comments under the post, which should be the normal approach; or, if you intend to offer a significant critique or a substantial addition, then you could write a follow-up post of your own. The goal, obviously, is not to compete with one another, but to dialogue with each other, to discuss and even to debate, as the case may be.

11. Don't blog in a spirit of melancholy, despair or bitterness. You don't serve yourself or your neighbor when you succumb to such things. At such times, seek out a father in Christ to lift you up and sustain you with the Gospel. Once you have been brought from trial and tribulation into renewed faith, then you might consider sharing aspects of that burden on the blog, retrospectively, in a way that helps to lead your readers into repentant faith along with you. It is one of the ways in which the cross bears fruit, not only in you and for your benefit, but also for the benefit of your neighbor. The hymns of Paul Gerhardt are such an example. Consider how comforting and helpful they are, because they always confess such faith in the Gospel: precisely in, with and under the Cross. By contrast, imagine the difference if Gerhardt had wallowed in self-pity and despair, instead of confessing the Gospel.

12. Our cooperative blog is not the place for posting sermons or extended quotations or lists of things or personal family adventures (though in some cases such things may provide the context for theological commentary). If you want to quote something, fine, but do so for the sake of providing your own assessment and constructive critique (whether pro or con).

Four and Twenty+ Blackbirds

12 May 2009

A little more on AC XIV

5 comments:

Facebook Page

The Twenty-Four Elders (and a few living creatures)

The Twenty-Four Topics

Blog Archive

The Mutual Conversation of the Brethren

Friends, Romans, Countrymen, et al.

On the Windowsill

Regular Readers

Contact the Administrator

Rubrics and Blogistics for the Blackbirds

Four and Twenty+ Blackbirds

12 May 2009

A little more on AC XIV

5 comments:

Facebook Page

The Twenty-Four Elders (and a few living creatures)

The Twenty-Four Topics

Blog Archive

The Mutual Conversation of the Brethren

Friends, Romans, Countrymen, et al.

On the Windowsill

Regular Readers

Contact the Administrator

Rubrics and Blogistics for the Blackbirds

Subscribe to Four-and-Twenty Blackbirds