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?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"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? "
ReplyDeleteExcellent questions. They also raise more questions for me.
I have to publicly admit that Ecclesiology is not an area of expertise for me, in fact, I greatly appreciated the definition, as I have heard the word thrown around a lot (particularly at Synod Assemblies) and am sure I knew the definition a long time ago. However, this is not territory I am familiar exploring lately. So thank you for the forum and the topics.
To address the questions you raise, I will draw from territory that is familiar to me- systems theory. If we think of the church as a body, as St. Paul pictured, diverse parts are not only welcome, but important to the functioning of the whole. The question becomes, at what point is homogeneity necessary for the functioning of the whole.
Differences bring great strengths as new 'DNA' is brought into the body, and allows the whole to adapt and grow and resist illness. If a system is too much alike, its resistence is lower to tolerating challenges.
However, if there is not a unifying force in the body, at some point for the sake of the body, the system will reject a piece as not being a part of itself.
What could the unifying force in the ELCA be? The altruistic side of me says of course it is the Cross of Christ. But as I look at the ELCA particularly, I wonder if we are in practical terms truly finding ourselves unified by the cross. Not the fault of the cross, but of our own tendency of First commandment breaking in which we put other things before God, whether that be our structures, our leaders, our own ways of coming to God through our piety,our finances or our egos.
At what point do our structures and identities return us to the cross, and at what point do they draw us away from it? What do we find in the ELCA that draws us together above all else?
RevSis (posting as anonymous as I'm having trouble getting my post to go through.)
I concur with your points - your conclusion is spot on, but your questions leave me scratching my head. Everything that Luther says, the central message of Scripture is The Cross - I just don't see that being lifted up nearly enough as we go about the sorting out of who and WHOSE we are.
ReplyDeleteFor example, at our recent Synod Assembly we heard very little about the tremendous work of the Lutheran World Federation and their work in the Middle East Peace Process along with folks from Canterbury and The Vatican.
For me, that is a sign of The Church - that is The Church being what we have been called to be. However, instead we spend our time sorting through the hot button issue of the day, expending energy and passion - and it's been this way since the ELCA was founded.
I hear alot of "THEM" and "THOSE PEOPLE" talk coming out of the mouths of people, and I'm one of THOSE PEOPLE who are guilty of the sin. That too has been the modus operandi for too many years. It's always THEIR FAULT - whether the there means "black shirt clergy" or the "haugien pietists" - the "blue staters or the red staters" - the laity or the clergy - it seems as if this wrestling with WHO we are needs to happen soon "in order that" (see how Biblical that was?) we can live out WHOSE we are in Mission under the cross.
Another part of the problem within the ELCA is that we do not quite understand the different "expressions" of the Church. For some, the Church=the congregation. For others it is larger, and means the Synod or the ELCA. Others give lip service to "all the baptized," but what they really mean is their own little corner of the vineyard.
ReplyDeleteIn my way of thinking, the Church is much larger. For the ELCA to work independently of the rest of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church is rather vain and does not take into account the other traditions within the Tradition. We are moving on so many issues without consulting our ecumenical "partners," issues that are indeed important. We do not seem to consider what our sisters and brothers in the Roman or Anglican Communions, or the Orthodox Communion are doing, except to be critical, and yet we are willing to make belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist "negotiable."
It is almost as if we are running amok with our ecclesiology and watering it down to nothing and forgetting WHO and WHOSE we are, and what our mission is to be.
Ah, there is my brother! Amen and Yay verily and all of those other affirmative cries! That is the exact question I asked at our Synod Assembly - and was told it was a "campaign speech" for Bishop by a colleague. I think it's a VALID and ESSENTIAL question and is necessary for us to see beyond our parochial myopia!
ReplyDelete