Is it time that the Church catholic wrestle with some of our ecclesiology, the way we are Church? This isn't a debate about the emergent movement VS the traditional way - they both have voice and place; this isn't a debate to return the Church to the "worship wars" of the 90's, been there-done that; this isn't a debate about incense VS projection devices in worship. This is a debate about just how we do the "business of Church"
It's an interesting month for Christ's bride. For example, in the month leading up to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America's Churchwide Assembly we have seen the two following events.
1. The investigation of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious and their theology by the Vatican. There are some very interesting articles that can be found at the National Catholic Reporter website. It seems as if some of the teaching and theology of the Women's Religious Orders of the Roman Catholic Church (NUNS) are seen as being out of line with Vatican teaching. In a sense the U.S. Nuns have been called to recant of some of their teaching with formal investigations ongoing.
2. The Bishops of the Episcopal Church USA have decided to further push the envelope on the ordination of homosexual Bishops creating further tension within the Anglican Community. Their move has been seen by many as being a unilateral decision causing alienation and dissension within both the ECUSA and the Anglican World Communion. There is much background available on the web, but I would call your attention to an interesting blog written by Jonathan Wynne-Jones in The Sunday Telegraph.
3. The ELCA will be meeting in Assembly next week in Minneapolis with many great mission topics on the table. Resolutions surrounding HIV/AIDS, the Lutheran Malaria Initiative, a possible social statement on Justice for Women will be discussed. However, a month from now the only thing that the world will know about is what did the ELCA decide about the ordination of people in committed same-sex relationships. You can read more at the ELCA website. This decision will not be made by Papal decree or by Bishops but by clergy and laity, young and old, seminary trained and those who may not have graduated high school.
So, my friends - the question is this. What's the best way for the Church to make decisions about her identity? Papal decree? Decisions made by Bishops and teaching theologians? How about by democratic vote? It seems to me, during the last three months we are seeing that the both ways of "doing Church" seem to be flawed in some ways. As a voting member to the ELCA CWA I have spent hours reading and studying the documents and I will confess to being confused and overwhelmed by all of the material and information. However, I am shocked in talking to some other voting members who have not opened their packets as of today.
As one of the voting members - I would appreciate your prayers - your support - and your thoughts as the Lutheran Rite of the one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church wrestles with difficult questions and what it means to be Church.
Blessings
David+
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Saturday, June 13, 2009
The Confessional Seal
I think I may have stumbled across one of the reasons that Lutherans, Roman Catholics, and others are hesitant to take advantage of the gift of Private Confession and Absolution. I was appalled as I took part of a conversation among colleagues. During this conversation the concept of the "Confessional Seal" came up. Out of 10 people in the room during the conversation, only 2 felt that the Confessional Seal was SACRED. Others believed that while it was important, that "for the greater good", violating the seal of the confessional would not only be acceptable but appropriate.
I think I understand the concept of greater good (but I don't know how or who defines it). I see where that idea comes in to play when in a counseling relationship, but the confessional seal in my opinion is sacred and must never be violated. Luther himself near his death said that he had never violated the seal of the confession.
Jon Berg, in his paper on Lutheran Liturgical Practices states, "Undoubtedly, at this point you are thinking of possible “exceptions” to the rule. Indeed, there are exceptions to the rule of confidentiality of pastoral counseling, but none for the confessional. First of all, the pastor must be clear, especially with non-members, that the confessional assumes complete confidentially, his study does not. Yes, the confessional is not that spot where one confesses, but when one confesses, although to maintain the distinction of the “where” is helpful"
From our Roman Catholic bretheren we hear from Canon Law, " A priest, therefore, cannot break the seal to save his own life, to protect his good name, to refute a false accusation, to save the life of another, to aid the course of justice (like reporting a crime), or to avert a public calamity. He cannot be compelled by law to disclose a person's confession or be bound by any oath he takes, e.g. as a witness in a court trial. A priest cannot reveal the contents of a confession either directly, by repeating the substance of what has been said, or indirectly, by some sign, suggestion, or action.”
So, where does this leave us. First off, from what my research has shown, not that many clergy face "mandatory reporting" violations in The Confessional. Secondly, other than child abuse, the idea that my colleagues expressed about "the better good" seems to me to be a very slippery slope for what Dietrich Bonhoeffer said was a divine mandate. What is the definition of greater good? For me, divine mandate is much easier to define.
I think I understand the concept of greater good (but I don't know how or who defines it). I see where that idea comes in to play when in a counseling relationship, but the confessional seal in my opinion is sacred and must never be violated. Luther himself near his death said that he had never violated the seal of the confession.
Jon Berg, in his paper on Lutheran Liturgical Practices states, "Undoubtedly, at this point you are thinking of possible “exceptions” to the rule. Indeed, there are exceptions to the rule of confidentiality of pastoral counseling, but none for the confessional. First of all, the pastor must be clear, especially with non-members, that the confessional assumes complete confidentially, his study does not. Yes, the confessional is not that spot where one confesses, but when one confesses, although to maintain the distinction of the “where” is helpful"
From our Roman Catholic bretheren we hear from Canon Law, " A priest, therefore, cannot break the seal to save his own life, to protect his good name, to refute a false accusation, to save the life of another, to aid the course of justice (like reporting a crime), or to avert a public calamity. He cannot be compelled by law to disclose a person's confession or be bound by any oath he takes, e.g. as a witness in a court trial. A priest cannot reveal the contents of a confession either directly, by repeating the substance of what has been said, or indirectly, by some sign, suggestion, or action.”
So, where does this leave us. First off, from what my research has shown, not that many clergy face "mandatory reporting" violations in The Confessional. Secondly, other than child abuse, the idea that my colleagues expressed about "the better good" seems to me to be a very slippery slope for what Dietrich Bonhoeffer said was a divine mandate. What is the definition of greater good? For me, divine mandate is much easier to define.
The look of shock on my colleagues faces when I told them that if necessary I would stand in contempt of court before I would break the confessional seal told me more than any words could say. For those of us feeling the call to bring back Private Confession and Absolution to the good order of our congregations, I pray that we may be bold enough to borrow from Luther, "Here I stand I can do no other, so help me God."
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
What's in a name
In my early years in ministry I would politely correct folks when they addressed me as "Father" instead of "Pastor" - then as I got more comfortable with my own identity I decided that it wasn't a big deal so I let it go without so much as a comment. Now, I am referred to as a priest or "Father" on a fairly regular basis and I have found I don't even notice. Even in the Confessions Luther mixed the usage of the terms Pastor and Priest.
So, I began to ask myself - is there a difference? First I took a look at The ELCA Task Force on the Study of Ministry that occurred from 1988-1993. Very little was said about any distinction as the primary focus of the document was examining the "three-fold" ordering of ministry shared by our Anglican and Roman Catholic brothers and sisters. The ELCA rejected the ordination of diaconal ministers at that time - which is interesting considering the rapid expansion of the Synodically Authorized Ministry programs in many Synods today.
Then came good old Merriam Webster which defines the following:
PRIEST: "one authorized to perform the sacred rites of a religion especially as a mediatory agent between humans and God."
PASTOR: "a spiritual overseer ; especially : a clergy(person) serving a local church or parish"
Honestly, that wasn't a great deal of help - the gap between overseer and mediatory agent seems to be as wide and as impossible to cross as the Grand Canyon.
My colleague in this blog identifies himself as a presbyter, so I once again broke out Merriam Webster:
PRESBYTER: "a member of the governing body of an early Christian church"
Again, I feel the Pastoral Office is more than just part of the governance of the parish. So, I am left with the question -> Who are we who serve in the Pastoral Office? Is there a difference, does it matter?
I find myself regularly returning to the words first spoken to many of us at the time of our ordination, "According to apostolic usage you are now to be set apart to the office of Word and Sacrament in the one holy catholic Church by the laying on of hands and by prayer."
Early in my ministry I had the pleasure of hearing Carl Braaten speak to a gathering of clergy and we were scolded for falling away from our first love, namely the ministry of Word and Sacrament. For becoming Jacks (Jills) of all trades while neglecting the very thing that we are called to.
Today, I wrestle with whether I am a Pastor, a Priest, or a Presbyter or some combination of all of the above - I also know that in reality it doesn't make a difference by what we are called - but those words from the Rite of Ordination and from Braaten ring in my ears this rainy Wednesday as I have received absolution and am about to preside at Table.
May we, in the midst of things that swirl around us like sexuality studies, synod assemblies, unattainable congregational and personal expectations not lose sight of our first love and our primary call - to the Office of Word and Sacrament.
Blessings
So, I began to ask myself - is there a difference? First I took a look at The ELCA Task Force on the Study of Ministry that occurred from 1988-1993. Very little was said about any distinction as the primary focus of the document was examining the "three-fold" ordering of ministry shared by our Anglican and Roman Catholic brothers and sisters. The ELCA rejected the ordination of diaconal ministers at that time - which is interesting considering the rapid expansion of the Synodically Authorized Ministry programs in many Synods today.
Then came good old Merriam Webster which defines the following:
PRIEST: "one authorized to perform the sacred rites of a religion especially as a mediatory agent between humans and God."
PASTOR: "a spiritual overseer ; especially : a clergy(person) serving a local church or parish"
Honestly, that wasn't a great deal of help - the gap between overseer and mediatory agent seems to be as wide and as impossible to cross as the Grand Canyon.
My colleague in this blog identifies himself as a presbyter, so I once again broke out Merriam Webster:
PRESBYTER: "a member of the governing body of an early Christian church"
Again, I feel the Pastoral Office is more than just part of the governance of the parish. So, I am left with the question -> Who are we who serve in the Pastoral Office? Is there a difference, does it matter?
I find myself regularly returning to the words first spoken to many of us at the time of our ordination, "According to apostolic usage you are now to be set apart to the office of Word and Sacrament in the one holy catholic Church by the laying on of hands and by prayer."
Early in my ministry I had the pleasure of hearing Carl Braaten speak to a gathering of clergy and we were scolded for falling away from our first love, namely the ministry of Word and Sacrament. For becoming Jacks (Jills) of all trades while neglecting the very thing that we are called to.
Today, I wrestle with whether I am a Pastor, a Priest, or a Presbyter or some combination of all of the above - I also know that in reality it doesn't make a difference by what we are called - but those words from the Rite of Ordination and from Braaten ring in my ears this rainy Wednesday as I have received absolution and am about to preside at Table.
May we, in the midst of things that swirl around us like sexuality studies, synod assemblies, unattainable congregational and personal expectations not lose sight of our first love and our primary call - to the Office of Word and Sacrament.
Blessings
Friday, May 22, 2009
More on Private Confession
I am doing more reflecting on Private Confession, about the power of Private Confession and Forgiveness. I have been thinking a great deal about what our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters call the “Sacrament of Reconciliation.”
Luther fell short of calling Reconciliation a Sacrament, but just barely short. So why is it that we don't make use of this gift? Not just Lutherans, but my Roman Catholic brothers and sisters do not often make use of this gift. It is interesting that I have more folks who are traditionally outside of the Church ask about reconciliation than people inside the life of the congregation. I wonder why that is?
Is it because that we are embarrassed to admit to a brother or sister, especially to our Pastor or Priest that we have sinned? Trust me, so has Pastor or Father. Is it because we are afraid to admit to God our sins? Trust me, God knows. Or is it because if we give voice to our sin then we have to shine the light into our own hearts and see the darkness that has taken up residence?
Seeking the Rite of Reconciliation (trusting Luther I will stop a little short of calling it a Sacrament, but just barely) is difficult, it can be frightening, intimidating, overwhelming. However, that is nothing new. Do you remember the story of Adam and Eve in the garden after eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil? They hid themselves from God, and then instead of admitting what God already knew to be true, they sought to place blame. Do we feel that same sense of shame too? I believe that we can feel too. We think that God loves us more when we're doing good. We can even try to make ourselves believe God doesn't know about our wrongdoing. But God knows or sin and invites us to “approach his throne of grace with boldness” (Hebrews 4:16)
What we need to remember is that God's love outweighs our sin. ALWAYS! God shows us God's love in the Story of the Prodigal Son. Do you remember the story? To me the most amazing part is not that the younger son squanders his inheritance, or the older son resents the father's response. What amazes me is what happens between the prodigal and the father. The son is heading for home, telling himself that he is going to confess to his father that “I am not worthy to be called your son: make me as one of your hired servants.” He repeats this on his journey home, then the father sees him and runs out to greet him before the words “I'm sorry” ever come from the sons mouth. God, like the father in the story is waiting and watching for us to come home, to trust his promise of mercy and forgiveness.
I believe that the early church and the reformers have given us clear instruction. Luther said, “For this reason I have a high regard for private confession, for here God's word and absolution are spoken privately and individually to each believer for the forgiveness of his sins, and as often as he desires it he may have recourse to it for this forgiveness, and also for comfort, counsel, and guidance. Thus it is a precious, useful thing for souls, as long as no one is driven to it with laws and commandments but sinners are left free to make use of it, each according to his own need, when and where he wishes; just as we are free to obtain counsel and comfort, guidance and instruction when and where our need or our inclination moves us. And as long as one is not forced to enumerate all sins but only those which oppress him most grievously.”
That being said I have been asked if I am available to hear confession. The answer is an unequivocal yes. If you wish to to have private conversation about this please feel free to email me at frdave0507@gmail.com
Luther fell short of calling Reconciliation a Sacrament, but just barely short. So why is it that we don't make use of this gift? Not just Lutherans, but my Roman Catholic brothers and sisters do not often make use of this gift. It is interesting that I have more folks who are traditionally outside of the Church ask about reconciliation than people inside the life of the congregation. I wonder why that is?
Is it because that we are embarrassed to admit to a brother or sister, especially to our Pastor or Priest that we have sinned? Trust me, so has Pastor or Father. Is it because we are afraid to admit to God our sins? Trust me, God knows. Or is it because if we give voice to our sin then we have to shine the light into our own hearts and see the darkness that has taken up residence?
Seeking the Rite of Reconciliation (trusting Luther I will stop a little short of calling it a Sacrament, but just barely) is difficult, it can be frightening, intimidating, overwhelming. However, that is nothing new. Do you remember the story of Adam and Eve in the garden after eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil? They hid themselves from God, and then instead of admitting what God already knew to be true, they sought to place blame. Do we feel that same sense of shame too? I believe that we can feel too. We think that God loves us more when we're doing good. We can even try to make ourselves believe God doesn't know about our wrongdoing. But God knows or sin and invites us to “approach his throne of grace with boldness” (Hebrews 4:16)
What we need to remember is that God's love outweighs our sin. ALWAYS! God shows us God's love in the Story of the Prodigal Son. Do you remember the story? To me the most amazing part is not that the younger son squanders his inheritance, or the older son resents the father's response. What amazes me is what happens between the prodigal and the father. The son is heading for home, telling himself that he is going to confess to his father that “I am not worthy to be called your son: make me as one of your hired servants.” He repeats this on his journey home, then the father sees him and runs out to greet him before the words “I'm sorry” ever come from the sons mouth. God, like the father in the story is waiting and watching for us to come home, to trust his promise of mercy and forgiveness.
I believe that the early church and the reformers have given us clear instruction. Luther said, “For this reason I have a high regard for private confession, for here God's word and absolution are spoken privately and individually to each believer for the forgiveness of his sins, and as often as he desires it he may have recourse to it for this forgiveness, and also for comfort, counsel, and guidance. Thus it is a precious, useful thing for souls, as long as no one is driven to it with laws and commandments but sinners are left free to make use of it, each according to his own need, when and where he wishes; just as we are free to obtain counsel and comfort, guidance and instruction when and where our need or our inclination moves us. And as long as one is not forced to enumerate all sins but only those which oppress him most grievously.”
That being said I have been asked if I am available to hear confession. The answer is an unequivocal yes. If you wish to to have private conversation about this please feel free to email me at frdave0507@gmail.com
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Some thoughts on ecclesiology
From The Augsburg Confession - Article VII - What is the Church? "Likewise, they teach that one holy church will remain forever. The church is the assembly of saints in which the gospel is taught purely and the sacraments are administered rightly."
This simple statement has my mind racing this evening. I am wrestling with Lutheran Ecclesiology, or as is the case at least in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America - our multiple ecclesiologies. First, let's come to a common definition of ecclesiology. "Ecclesiology is the study of the church. The word Ecclesiology comes from two Greek (ἐκκλησίᾱ and λογία) words meaning "assembly" and "word" - combining to mean "the study of the theological understanding of the church."
Rev. Tim Olson in his short paper, "A Reflection on Ecclesiology, A Lutheran Perspective opens with the following, "I shared with a colleague who teaches at a seminary that I had been asked to submit a brief paper on the ecclesiology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). He laughed. Then he offered and encouraging word, saying, “It should be a short paper. I’m not sure we have an ecclesiology.” While his statement was intended as humor, like anything funny, it had a patina of truth. Given the diversity of thought within the Lutheran tradition regarding congregational identity, the role of clergy, the place of bishops, and a host of other issues, it seems on the surface that Lutherans provide a kind of warehouse for competing understandings of the church."
It does seem that we in the ELCA have a hodge-podge of ecclesiological ideas. On one hand we enter into full-communion agreements with those who pariticate in the tradition of the historical episcopy yet also enter into ecumenical agreements with those who do not follow the understanding of real presence in Eucharist. We have those clergy who wear collars and vestments, and those who may not own a clerical collar. There are congregations who function as the primary expression of the ELCA, and those who see themselves as a part of a larger collective of believers. Dr. Olson refers to a "warehouse for competing understandings" and that is true, but it also leaves many of us with a feeling of ecclesiological schizophrenia. Just who are we anyway?
Eric Gritsch and Robert Jensen in their book, "Lutheranism:A Theological Movement and its Confessional Writings" states, "Luther was an ecumenist, not a sectarian." Luther's intent, I believe can be strongly stated as one who saw what we know as the Reformation as a confessional, reforming movement within the one holy catholic and apostolic church.
I take comfort in the reality that even though the ELCA is a place that continues to wrestle with congregational identity, the role of clergy, the place of bishops that we are indeed a gathering of people around Word and Sacrament. We are a gathered around the life giving Cross of Christ. I would pray that in the coming years we would begin to sort through our warehouse of understandings for it would seem that many of the questions we wrestle with surrounding worship, full communion, human sexuality and the other issues that have dominated our conversations for the past 20 years could be easier addressed if we had a better grasp on who we are as a people.
I realize for many the idea of our structure and identity seems like adiaphora (matters not regarded as essential to faith but nevertheless as permissible for Christians or allowed in church.) So, I ask for your input. Does Article VII give us the freedom for multiple ecclesiologies under one umbrella, and can we continue to function with our differed understandings? Or does Luther's understanding and call for good order, specifically in Article XXVIII call us to prayerfully and thoroughly begin to look at and refine our understanding of our identity and structure as we continue to faithfully gather under the cross?
This simple statement has my mind racing this evening. I am wrestling with Lutheran Ecclesiology, or as is the case at least in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America - our multiple ecclesiologies. First, let's come to a common definition of ecclesiology. "Ecclesiology is the study of the church. The word Ecclesiology comes from two Greek (ἐκκλησίᾱ and λογία) words meaning "assembly" and "word" - combining to mean "the study of the theological understanding of the church."
Rev. Tim Olson in his short paper, "A Reflection on Ecclesiology, A Lutheran Perspective opens with the following, "I shared with a colleague who teaches at a seminary that I had been asked to submit a brief paper on the ecclesiology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). He laughed. Then he offered and encouraging word, saying, “It should be a short paper. I’m not sure we have an ecclesiology.” While his statement was intended as humor, like anything funny, it had a patina of truth. Given the diversity of thought within the Lutheran tradition regarding congregational identity, the role of clergy, the place of bishops, and a host of other issues, it seems on the surface that Lutherans provide a kind of warehouse for competing understandings of the church."
It does seem that we in the ELCA have a hodge-podge of ecclesiological ideas. On one hand we enter into full-communion agreements with those who pariticate in the tradition of the historical episcopy yet also enter into ecumenical agreements with those who do not follow the understanding of real presence in Eucharist. We have those clergy who wear collars and vestments, and those who may not own a clerical collar. There are congregations who function as the primary expression of the ELCA, and those who see themselves as a part of a larger collective of believers. Dr. Olson refers to a "warehouse for competing understandings" and that is true, but it also leaves many of us with a feeling of ecclesiological schizophrenia. Just who are we anyway?
Eric Gritsch and Robert Jensen in their book, "Lutheranism:A Theological Movement and its Confessional Writings" states, "Luther was an ecumenist, not a sectarian." Luther's intent, I believe can be strongly stated as one who saw what we know as the Reformation as a confessional, reforming movement within the one holy catholic and apostolic church.
I take comfort in the reality that even though the ELCA is a place that continues to wrestle with congregational identity, the role of clergy, the place of bishops that we are indeed a gathering of people around Word and Sacrament. We are a gathered around the life giving Cross of Christ. I would pray that in the coming years we would begin to sort through our warehouse of understandings for it would seem that many of the questions we wrestle with surrounding worship, full communion, human sexuality and the other issues that have dominated our conversations for the past 20 years could be easier addressed if we had a better grasp on who we are as a people.
I realize for many the idea of our structure and identity seems like adiaphora (matters not regarded as essential to faith but nevertheless as permissible for Christians or allowed in church.) So, I ask for your input. Does Article VII give us the freedom for multiple ecclesiologies under one umbrella, and can we continue to function with our differed understandings? Or does Luther's understanding and call for good order, specifically in Article XXVIII call us to prayerfully and thoroughly begin to look at and refine our understanding of our identity and structure as we continue to faithfully gather under the cross?
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Clarification
I received an email with a question that I would like to address publicly in order to head off misconception. The email asked, "Is the name Lutheran Fathers a backhanded attempt to discredit the ordination of women?"
After rubbing my eyes to see if I read the email correctly - it was late, too late for me to respond in a more timely letter I went to bed, feeling weary. This morning with a clearer mind and spirit I feel that I can answer that for both my brother and myself with a resounding NO. If the blog allowed Greek I would respond with "Mae Genetau" - but since I am stuck with the bounds of English a simple NO will have to suffice.
Some of the most intelligent, gifted, passionate, and brilliant pastors and priests we know are female. The very simple reason we chose Lutheran Fathers is - (drum roll please) we are both male. No hidden agenda, no backhanded attempt to discredit anyone. This is simply an expression of the authors identity and we pray that no offense has been taken by anyone who may think otherwise. Also, from time to time we hope, that some of those brilliant, passionate, and gifted females my write a piece for us at LF. So, if you are an Evangelical Catholic female with a passion for writing - please get in touch!
After rubbing my eyes to see if I read the email correctly - it was late, too late for me to respond in a more timely letter I went to bed, feeling weary. This morning with a clearer mind and spirit I feel that I can answer that for both my brother and myself with a resounding NO. If the blog allowed Greek I would respond with "Mae Genetau" - but since I am stuck with the bounds of English a simple NO will have to suffice.
Some of the most intelligent, gifted, passionate, and brilliant pastors and priests we know are female. The very simple reason we chose Lutheran Fathers is - (drum roll please) we are both male. No hidden agenda, no backhanded attempt to discredit anyone. This is simply an expression of the authors identity and we pray that no offense has been taken by anyone who may think otherwise. Also, from time to time we hope, that some of those brilliant, passionate, and gifted females my write a piece for us at LF. So, if you are an Evangelical Catholic female with a passion for writing - please get in touch!
Saturday, May 16, 2009
On Private Confession - I
On Private Confession
It has been said by some that I am more Catholic than Lutheran. Some have said that as a compliment, others have said it with a little more venom in their voice. That being said I believe that there is something that we Lutherans can learn from our Roman brothers and sisters. What is that you ask? I believe that we can learn from the role of Private Confession in the lives of God's people.
Luther and Melancthon understood the importance of Private Confession and Absolution in the life of the believer. “Confession has not been abolished in our churches. For it is not customary to administer the body of Christ except to those who have been previously examined and absolved. The people are also most diligently taught concerning faith in the word of absolution, about which there was a great silence before now….Nevertheless, confession is retained among us both because of the great benefits of absolution and because of other advantages for consciences “ (Augsburg Confession XXV) We also see Luther's understanding of Private Confession at other places in his writings, “Since Absolution or the Power of the Keys is also an aid and consolation against sin and a bad conscience, ordained by Christ himself in the gospel, Confession or Absolution ought by no means to be abolished in the Church…” (Smalcald Articles Part III, Art. VIII). Martin Luther wrote in the Large Catechism regarding Private Confession and Absolution: “Christ himself entrusted absolution to his Church and commanded us to absolve one another from sins. So if there is a heart that feels its sin and desires consolation, it has here a sure refuge when it hears in God’s Word that through a fellow human being, God absolves a person from sin."
What I think many of us fail to understand is that Private Confession is a place where the Church truly functions as the Church. In Private Confession the Chruch is exercising the “Keys of the Kingdom” as set forth in the Gospels.
Private Confession and Absolution is the personal, individual reception of forgiveness of sins from God given through the pastor or a fellow Christian. Christ comes to us through the means of grace: the Holy Scriptures, Baptism, and Holy Communion. Not only does he offer forgiveness of sins to us through these means of grace, but also through private confession and absolution.
Does a person NEED Confessional Absolution?
In a word, “No”. A person does not need to participate in Private Confession in order to receive God's forgiveness of sins. When we participate in Public Confession on Sunday mornings, when we confess our sins to God in the privacy of our own hearts we believe that God hears our pleas and cries and grants us God's grace, mercy, and forgiveness. So no, a person does not NEED Private Confession in order to be forgiven. However, I believe that Private Confession is the essence of God's grace made manifest among God's people.
We have all been in relationships. Whether with family members, loved ones, good friends, all of us are involved in relationships with other people. I am sure that all of us at one point have had to ask a person we love to forgive us. I am convinced that the three most powerful words that people can speak to one another are “I forgive you.” I know that many will say that the words “I love you” may pack more power, but I challenge that Love without Forgiveness is empty and void. Therefore, to hear the words of forgiveness spoken to you is the most powerful tool of reconciliation and relationsip that we have.
Do I need to confess everything?
No, you don’t need to confess any specific sins. Of course, you may want to do so. There is great spiritual and psychological benefit in baring your soul. King David writes about his experience in Psalm 32. Sometimes a person cannot find real peace and assurance of God’s forgiveness without full disclosure of what is troubling him or her.
Do I have to go to a pastor?
Again, the answer is no. Any Christian may hear confession and assure you of God's forgiveness. We must remember though that the pastor is under the “confessional seal” and is bound to confidentiality. The pastor may not share with others what has been confessed to and forgiven by Christ.
In Conclusion.
I would encourage Christ's Church, especially those of us in the Lutheran Rite of Christ's Church to recapture our “First Love”, to reclaim the gift given to us in Holy Scripture and retained by Brother Martin and the other reformers. Let us proudly claim our Lutheran identity and restore Private Cofession to Christ's Church.
It has been said by some that I am more Catholic than Lutheran. Some have said that as a compliment, others have said it with a little more venom in their voice. That being said I believe that there is something that we Lutherans can learn from our Roman brothers and sisters. What is that you ask? I believe that we can learn from the role of Private Confession in the lives of God's people.
Luther and Melancthon understood the importance of Private Confession and Absolution in the life of the believer. “Confession has not been abolished in our churches. For it is not customary to administer the body of Christ except to those who have been previously examined and absolved. The people are also most diligently taught concerning faith in the word of absolution, about which there was a great silence before now….Nevertheless, confession is retained among us both because of the great benefits of absolution and because of other advantages for consciences “ (Augsburg Confession XXV) We also see Luther's understanding of Private Confession at other places in his writings, “Since Absolution or the Power of the Keys is also an aid and consolation against sin and a bad conscience, ordained by Christ himself in the gospel, Confession or Absolution ought by no means to be abolished in the Church…” (Smalcald Articles Part III, Art. VIII). Martin Luther wrote in the Large Catechism regarding Private Confession and Absolution: “Christ himself entrusted absolution to his Church and commanded us to absolve one another from sins. So if there is a heart that feels its sin and desires consolation, it has here a sure refuge when it hears in God’s Word that through a fellow human being, God absolves a person from sin."
What I think many of us fail to understand is that Private Confession is a place where the Church truly functions as the Church. In Private Confession the Chruch is exercising the “Keys of the Kingdom” as set forth in the Gospels.
Private Confession and Absolution is the personal, individual reception of forgiveness of sins from God given through the pastor or a fellow Christian. Christ comes to us through the means of grace: the Holy Scriptures, Baptism, and Holy Communion. Not only does he offer forgiveness of sins to us through these means of grace, but also through private confession and absolution.
Does a person NEED Confessional Absolution?
In a word, “No”. A person does not need to participate in Private Confession in order to receive God's forgiveness of sins. When we participate in Public Confession on Sunday mornings, when we confess our sins to God in the privacy of our own hearts we believe that God hears our pleas and cries and grants us God's grace, mercy, and forgiveness. So no, a person does not NEED Private Confession in order to be forgiven. However, I believe that Private Confession is the essence of God's grace made manifest among God's people.
We have all been in relationships. Whether with family members, loved ones, good friends, all of us are involved in relationships with other people. I am sure that all of us at one point have had to ask a person we love to forgive us. I am convinced that the three most powerful words that people can speak to one another are “I forgive you.” I know that many will say that the words “I love you” may pack more power, but I challenge that Love without Forgiveness is empty and void. Therefore, to hear the words of forgiveness spoken to you is the most powerful tool of reconciliation and relationsip that we have.
Do I need to confess everything?
No, you don’t need to confess any specific sins. Of course, you may want to do so. There is great spiritual and psychological benefit in baring your soul. King David writes about his experience in Psalm 32. Sometimes a person cannot find real peace and assurance of God’s forgiveness without full disclosure of what is troubling him or her.
Do I have to go to a pastor?
Again, the answer is no. Any Christian may hear confession and assure you of God's forgiveness. We must remember though that the pastor is under the “confessional seal” and is bound to confidentiality. The pastor may not share with others what has been confessed to and forgiven by Christ.
In Conclusion.
I would encourage Christ's Church, especially those of us in the Lutheran Rite of Christ's Church to recapture our “First Love”, to reclaim the gift given to us in Holy Scripture and retained by Brother Martin and the other reformers. Let us proudly claim our Lutheran identity and restore Private Cofession to Christ's Church.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)