Independent Lutheran Journals Debate Full Communion Proposal

CHICAGO (ELCA) -- Several independent journals addressing the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) presented various positions on a proposal which outlines a relationship of "full communion" between the ELCA and The Episcopal Church. The Lutheran Commentator opposed the proposal; two publications of the American Lutheran Publicity Bureau (ALPB), Delhi, N.Y., supported the plan.
"Called to Common Mission (CCM): A Lutheran Proposal for a Revision of the Concordat of Agreement" must be approved by two-thirds of the ELCA Churchwide Assembly, meeting Aug. 16-22 in Denver, before it can be offered to the Episcopal Church. CCM charts a course for Lutheran-Episcopal full communion which would open possibilities for the exchange of clergy and other cooperative ministries.
ALPB publishes Lutheran Forum quarterly and Forum Letter monthly. The Rev. Ronald B. Bagnall, Grace Lutheran Church, Trenton, N.J., edits Lutheran Forum. The Rev. Russell E. Saltzman, Christ Lutheran Church, Stover, Mo., edits Forum Letter.
A round of Lutheran-Episcopal dialogues that began in 1983 developed a proposal for full communion between the two churches, "The Concordat of Agreement," and issued it in 1991.
A convention of the Episcopal Church approved the Concordat in 1997. The proposal failed to win a two-thirds majority of the ELCA assembly that year by six votes. The assembly asked that the Concordat be revised, taking its debate into account and clarifying the technical language of the dialogue. CCM was issued in November 1998 as that revision.
Lutherans and Episcopalians agree on the doctrine of "apostolic succession," an ongoing faithful proclamation of Christ. Episcopalians bring to the relationship the "historic episcopate," a succession of bishops as a sign of unity back to the earliest days of the Christian church.
Many critics of CCM oppose the idea that the ELCA incorporate the historic episcopate.
"The only reason for adopting the historic episcopate is to enter full communion with Episcopalians. That was one of the arguments made in support of episcopal succession in the first 'Concordat,'" wrote Saltzman in May 1999.
"We dismissed it at the time. We instead argued then that Lutherans ought to answer the question for themselves, not for the Episcopalians. That was then and this is now. We repent of it," said Saltzman. "Historic succession is not a question to be answered by Lutherans alone."
Saltzman said "there is nothing in 'Called to Common Mission' implying that we must adopt historic episcopal succession in order to be recognized as a church by the Episcopalians. There is every awareness, though, that we are adopting episcopal succession only for the purpose of showing that we are in full communion with them. Adopting an episcopal polity simply shows how that visible communion is expressed."
Lutherans enjoy a certain amount of "theological latitude" when it comes to organizing their church, said Saltzman.
"Episcopalians are clear: There can be no reconciliation of ministries unless the ELCA adopts the historic episcopate. Their unwavering demand is directly in conflict with Lutheran freedom which includes the freedom from being required to adopt any particular structure for true unity," wrote James D. Torgerson, editor of Lutheran Commentator, published six times a year from Maple Plain, Minn.
"For Episcopalians, like Catholics, clergy are sacramental mediators between Christ and believers: No bishop, no church (in its fullness). No priest, no communion," said Torgerson in a direct response to Saltzman published on the Commentator's Web site.
"For Lutherans, the church has only one priest, Jesus Christ himself. He does not need sacramental bishops who alone can ordain, or sacramental priests who make Communion happen," said Torgerson. "Luther rejected this traditional Catholic system in which clergy are special mediators. He taught that Christ himself is the sole mediator in the speaking of the Word and administering of the sacraments."
"Episcopalians do not accept Lutherans as we are. They insist that we take on their sacramental, historic episcopate," said Torgerson.
Bagnall, in a Spring 1999 editorial with three former editors of Lutheran Forum, said the 16th century reformers who shaped the Lutheran church "did not totally reject but conservatively revised the traditional orders for Baptism, confession, the Eucharist and ordination."
"Their deepest desire was to maintain the episcopal polity of the Western Church. And they solemnly pledged that they would not omit anything that would serve Christian unity and concord," wrote Bagnall; the Rev. Paul R. Hinlicky, docent in systematic theology, Lutheran Theological Faculty, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia; the Rev. Leonard R. Klein, Christ Lutheran Church, York, Pa.; and the Rev. Glenn C. Stone, Jackson Heights (Queens), N.Y.
The Lutheran Forum editors confessed opposing the Concordat in 1997 and "applauded" two revisions made by CCM: "The historic episcopate may be received by the ELCA from other Lutheran churches in episcopal succession as well as from the Episcopal Church. Ordained ministers of the Episcopal Church serving in congregations of the ELCA will be expected to do so in accord with its (the ELCA's) 'Confession of Faith.'"
Other Lutheran journals, such as the quarterly publications Dialog, St. Paul, Minn., and Lutheran Quarterly, Milwaukee, regularly feature articles and letters for and against CCM but have not taken official editorial positions on one side of the subject or the other. --- --- --- The Lutheran Commentator's home page is at <http://www.luthercomment.org/>.

For information contact:
John Brooks, Director (773) 380-2958 or NEWS@ELCA.ORG
http://listserv.elca.org/archives/elcanews.html