LCMS Pastor Jonathan Fisk and the Keys of the Kingdom

[SalusaSecondus]

Many Lutherans may indeed think that - but if I’m reading correctly, what you’ve described is the heresy of receptionism.

More info in this CAF thread:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=850733

Most pastors in the WELS hold to receptionism. Although there are some that don’t. That’s because the WELS was founded by German missionaries content with the Prussian Union, so we have some Calvinist proclivities. That as opposed to the “Old Lutherans” who founded the LCMS.

 

[Thorolfr]

Many Lutherans may indeed think that - but if I’m reading correctly, what you’ve described is the heresy of receptionism.

More info in this CAF thread:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=850733

Apparently Luther and Melanchthon believed this since this is what it says in the Wittenburg Concordia which was signed by a number of Lutherans including Martin Luther, Philipp Melanchthon, Johannes Bugenhagen, Justus Jonas, Caspar Cruciger, Justus Menius, Friedrich Myconius, Urban Rhegius, and George Spalatin. The Wittenburg Concordia states:

They confess in the words of Irenaeus, that in this sacrament there are two things, one heavenly and one earthly. Therefore they hold and teach that with the bread and the wine the body and blood of Christ are truly and essentially present, are distributed and received. Although they do not believe in a transubstantiation, that is, in an essential transformation of the bread and wine into the body and blood, and** they do not hold that the body and blood of Christ are localiter**, that is, spatially enclosed in the bread or are permanently united in some other way apart from reception in the sacrament, they nevertheless admit that through the sacramental union the bread is the body of Christ, etc. For apart from reception – for example, when the bread is laid aside and kept in the tabernacle or carried about and put on display in the procession, as happens in the papacy – the body of Christ is not present.

The Wittenburg Concordia was composed by Melanchthon and is cited in the Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord. The above quote from the Wittenburg Concordia is from Charles P. Arand, Robert Kolb and James A. Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions: History and Theology of the Book of Concord(Fortress Press, 2012).

 

[Thorolfr]

Agreed.

And this is an indictment of our poor catechesis that any Lutheran would hold such a heterodox position, that being receptionism.

The Augsburg Confession:
*Article X: Of the Lord’s Supper.

1] Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed* 2] to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach otherwise.

Jon

I still don’t understand how it can be poor catechesis and heterodox to hold something that both Luther and Melanchthon held.

 

[spedteacherita]

I think he’s done this more in the last couple years than earlier. Lutheran pastors that appear too cozy with Catholic or Orthodox positions can be hammered by the confessionals. By confessionals, I mean the vocal ones who howl when a sheep leaves the fold for “other” pastures - such as the outrage when Joshua Genig left.

It makes me weary, all the striving against each other.

And, Jon, if I understand correctly, it is the words of Christ as well as the the elements used that - does not turn the elements into the body and blood - but His presence is there because of the Word and the elements used.

God bless,

Rita

****I don’t know what I did but this should have been posted in response to Jon’s post. Sorry!

 

[benjohnson]

Apparently Luther and Melanchthon believed this since this is what it says in the Wittenburg Concordia

The short answer is that the Sacramental acts ends with the consumption of the Body and Blood or the proper disposal there of.

What you’re reading is a counter to the sad practice of the time of people exclusively engaging in Eucharistic Adoration in leu of actually receiving the Sacrament as instructed by Christ Jesus.

 

[steido01]

Apparently Luther and Melanchthon believed this since this is what it says in the Wittenburg Concordia…

No it was not. You’re misunderstanding the text, as Ben explained.

No real Lutheran believes in Receptionism, and this should be obvious from our practice. It starts with the fact that Lutherans stand or kneel during the Words of Institution (why bother if Christ is not yet present?), typically kneel to commune (why bother if He’s not yet on the tongue?), and even if it’s “walk-through” communion, at least the head remains bowed and the hands folded during the approach (again, why bother if He isn’t yet present?). Afterward, we take great care to properly dispose of any remnants, though it is better if they are entirely consumed. This is why most Lutheran churches do not reserve the Sacrament - not because of anything against the practice, per se, but because Christ told us to “take and eat,” not to store for later - it would be terrible if His Body and Blood were accidentally dropped!

Finally, there are several examples of Luther and other Lutherans taking great pains to show proper reverence to the consecrated Body and Blood. In one instance, Blood spilled from the chalice, and Luther stooped down to lap it up like a dog. Congregants cried at the sight. In another, Blood spilled onto the altar and seeped in deeply enough that it could not be cleaned. Luther had that portion cut out and burned, in keeping with the old methods of ancient church. Why bother if Christ only exists on the tongue?

Do read that thread Ben linked. It’s useful.

Post 1 and Post 2

 

[Thorolfr]

No it was not. You’re misunderstanding the text, as Ben explained.

No real Lutheran believes in Receptionism, and this should be obvious from our practice. It starts with the fact that Lutherans stand or kneel during the Words of Institution (why bother if Christ is not yet present?), typically kneel to commune (why bother if He’s not yet on the tongue?), and even if it’s “walk-through” communion, at least the head remains bowed and the hands folded during the approach (again, why bother if He isn’t yet present?). Afterward, we take great care to properly dispose of any remnants, though it is better if they are entirely consumed. This is why most Lutheran churches do not reserve the Sacrament - not because of anything against the practice, per se, but because Christ told us to “take and eat,” not to store for later - it would be terrible if His Body and Blood were accidentally dropped!

Finally, there are several examples of Luther and other Lutherans taking great pains to show proper reverence to the consecrated Body and Blood. In one instance, Blood spilled from the chalice, and Luther stooped down to lap it up like a dog. Congregants cried at the sight. In another, Blood spilled onto the altar and seeped in deeply enough that it could not be cleaned. Luther had that portion cut out and burned, in keeping with the old methods of ancient church. Why bother if Christ only exists on the tongue?

Do read that thread Ben linked. It’s useful.

Post 1 and Post 2

The Wittenburg Concordia, composed by Melanchthon and signed by him, Martin Luther and Spalatin among others very clearly says, “For apart from reception…the body of Christ is not present.” So are you saying that those individuals were not “real Lutherans” or didn’t know what they were signing? The Wittenburg Concordia also says of the signers, “they do not hold that the body and blood of Christ are localiter, that is, spatially enclosed in the bread or are permanently united in some other way apart from reception in the sacrament.”

 

[steido01]

I’m not sure how many forum frequenters are familiar (look at that alliteration) with Pastor Fisk of the LCMS, but he does at least a weekly YouTube video on some issue of Lutheran doctrine and/or biblical interpretation.

I follow him regularly. His understanding of Lutheranism, as it pertains to the purity and clarity of the Gospel it shares, is fantastic.

His YouTube video of June 5, 2015, Everlasting Extras - Absolution and the Hebrew Roots Movement, addressed absolution and the keys of the kingdom. Often, even when it seems unnecessary to the topic, his videos run to a distinction of Lutheranism from a warped (and seemingly bigoted Reformation Era) understanding of Catholicism.

This is my only (and sizable) regret about his posts. While he explains Lutheranism well, I wish he would be more charitable in his explanations of other religions – but then again, his audience is largely young, Lutheran teens and college students, who are mostly male (if you couldn’t tell from the trendy wooshing, swooshing and pop culture references). That’s meant to keep their interest.

For instance in this video, he calls the confection of the Eucharist by the priest magic, which is odd considering the Lutheran belief in a form of the Real Presence.

Well, to the Lutheran, the idea that the priest himself confects the Eucharist is offensive, at best. While the priest unquestionably acts in persona Christi, Lutherans posit that it is God who actually makes the Sacrament present and Christ alone who made the once-and-for-all sacrifice. When the priest prays that God find “my sacrifice and yours” to be worthwhile, to Lutheran ears it sounds as if the priest is trying to be God or summon God. Whether it’s intended that way or not, to the Lutheran it sounds blatantly contrary to the notion that God brings his Grace to us in the Sacraments. In other words, it sounds like some kind of scary magic.

Anyway, amongst all the literal handwaving, I get lost on what the keys actually mean in Lutheranism. It feels like there is an internal incoherence within this doctrine and an incoherence of this doctrine with the rest of the doctrine regarding Lutheran “orders”. Could somebody help me flesh this out? It just seems like a bunch of sophistry to me in order to distance Lutheranism as far from Catholicism as possible. (Sorry if this should have been under “Non-Catholic Religions”; I wasn’t sure.)

Perhaps this will help. From the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod’s Christian Cyclopedia:

The Office of the Keys is spiritual (Mt. 20:25–26; Jn 18:36; 2 Co 10:4; Eph 6:10–17); it includes all spiritual rights, duties, and privileges necessary for the welfare of the church on earth, e.g., the conveying of grace to mankind through preaching, administering Baptism and Lord’s Supper, and through mutual conversation and consolation. In particular, the Office of the Keys gives power to forgive and retain sins (loosing and binding), i. e., not merely to announce and to declare to men the remission or retention of sins, but actually to give forgiveness to penitent sinners and to deny forgiveness to impenitent sinners (Jn 20:23; 2 Co 2:10). See also Justification, 6.

Be sure to visit the link. If you’re interested in reading further, several Lutheran sources are named at the bottom of the page.

 

[MaryT777]

I follow him regularly. His understanding of Lutheranism, as it pertains to the purity and clarity of the Gospel it shares, is fantastic.

This is my only (and sizable) regret about his posts. While he explains Lutheranism well, I wish he would be more charitable in his explanations of other religions – but then again, his audience is largely young, Lutheran teens and college students, who are mostly male (if you couldn’t tell from the trendy wooshing, swooshing and pop culture references). That’s meant to keep their interest.

Well, to the Lutheran, the idea that the priest himself confects the Eucharist is offensive, at best. While the priest unquestionably acts in persona Christi, Lutherans posit that it is God who actually makes the Sacrament present and Christ alone who made the once-and-for-all sacrifice. When the priest prays that God find “my sacrifice and yours” to be worthwhile, to Lutheran ears it sounds as if the priest is trying to be God or summon God. Whether it’s intended that way or not, to the Lutheran it sounds blatantly contrary to the notion that God brings his Grace to us in the Sacraments. In other words, it sounds like some kind of scary magic.

Perhaps this will help. From the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod’s Christian Cyclopedia:

Be sure to visit the link. If you’re interested in reading further, several Lutheran sources are named at the bottom of the page.

So are you truly saying being less than charitable to other religions is what keeps the interest of his audience; mainly young people?

Geez.

Mary.

 

[steido01]

The Wittenburg Concordia, composed by Melanchthon and signed by him, Martin Luther and Spalatin among others very clearly says, “For apart from reception…the body of Christ is not present.” So are you saying that those individuals were not “real Lutherans” or didn’t know what they were signing?

No, I’m saying you’re misunderstanding what you’re reading.

In their time, the Eucharist would be “confected” solely for use in adoration, without even the intent for it to be used as Christ instituted; that is, for congregants to “Take, and eat” for the forgiveness of sins during the Mass. What the signers are saying is that the Sacrament couldn’t possibly be a Sacrament when it’s intentionally “confected” for a purpose that is not sacramental. Christ gave us instructions for the Sacrament. This is very simple.

 

[steido01]

So are you truly saying being less than charitable to other religions is what keeps the interest of his audience; mainly young people?

Geez.

Mary.

No. I said it fits the type of blunt, somewhat-combative “guy talk” that attracts the gamer culture common to young men. (Ever been in a football locker room?)

I said pretty clearly that I’d prefer he were more charitable when explaining others’ beliefs.

 

[MaryT777]

No. I said it fits the type of blunt, somewhat-combative “guy talk” that attracts the gamer culture common to young men. (Ever been in a football locker room?)

I said pretty clearly that I’d prefer he were more charitable when explaining others’ beliefs.

Yes you did.

Mary.

 

[Duane1966]

Well, to the Lutheran, the idea that the priest himself confects the Eucharist is offensive, at best. While the priest unquestionably acts in persona Christi, Lutherans posit that it is God who actually makes the Sacrament present and Christ alone who made the once-and-for-all sacrifice. When the priest prays that God find “my sacrifice and yours” to be worthwhile, to Lutheran ears it sounds as if the priest is trying to be God or summon God. Whether it’s intended that way or not, to the Lutheran it sounds blatantly contrary to the notion that God brings his Grace to us in the Sacraments. In other words, it sounds like some kind of scary magic.

Catholics have always believed the it is God who makes the Sacrament present, from the very first Mass ever celebrated. From Father Z’s blog:

At the Offertory the priest says “my sacrifice and yours”. He acts and speaks in the person of Christ, the Head of the Body, the Church. He calls the people, Body of the Church, into complementary unity. He invites them to pray that his sacrifice, according to his manner of offering sacrifice as an ordained priest, and their (“your”) sacrifice, according to how the baptized offer gifts and sacrifices, will be accepted.

What the priest does is done is for service. A priest is not less in need of a Savior than anyone else present.

St. Augustine of Hippo (d 430), speaking of his role as bishop, described his relationship with his flock in the best way when he said, “I am a bishop for you, but a Christian with you” (s. 46.2).

Were ten thousand baptized men, women and children to pronounce the words of consecration over their bread and wine, the offerings would remain bread and wine. One priest, alone or with a congregation, ***by God’s power changes the people’s bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. *** The baptized unite their way of offering sacrifice to his way.

“My sacrifice and yours” is an important and long-needed improvement.

Here is something I can recommend for your deeper active participation in this invitation by the priest.

It can help to identify ourselves with the gifts placed on the altar for consecration.

The congregation is invited by the priest to unite their sacrifices to those he offers in his manner of offering.

We all have both burdens and reasons to rejoice. Therefore, when the priest or deacon is preparing the chalice, when he puts drops of water (the symbol of the human) into the wine (the symbol of the divine) to be mingled – the lesser being transformed within the greater – try consciously to place into that chalice all your cares, aspirations, sentiments of gratitude, petitions, and all that you are. Let it all be joined, before they are stupendously transformed by God.

This may make the invitation and then the response ring with something new each time you hear it and respond in turn.

Pray, brethren, that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God, the almighty Father.

May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of his name, for our good and the good of all his holy Church.

Well, to the Lutheran, the idea that the priest himself confects the Eucharist is offensive, at best.

Do Lutherans believe that anyone can say the Eucharistic prayers?

The Sacrament of Holy Eucharist is of such dignity that it is confected **only in the Person and by the authority of Christ himself. Hence, a priest is one ordained and appointed to act as Christ’s instrument, and to use Christ’s own voice and authority in confecting the Holy Eucharist at Mass. **Only a duly ordained priest can consecrate the elements of bread and wine and so confect the sacrament of Holy Eucharist. Only the priest can offer this sacrament as sacrifice, and he does this when he celebrates Holy Mass.

 

[MaryT777]

Catholics have always believed the it is God who makes the Sacrament present, from the very first Mass ever celebrated. From Father Z’s blog:

At the Offertory the priest says “my sacrifice and yours”. He acts and speaks in the person of Christ, the Head of the Body, the Church. He calls the people, Body of the Church, into complementary unity. He invites them to pray that his sacrifice, according to his manner of offering sacrifice as an ordained priest, and their (“your”) sacrifice, according to how the baptized offer gifts and sacrifices, will be accepted.

What the priest does is done is for service. A priest is not less in need of a Savior than anyone else present.

St. Augustine of Hippo (d 430), speaking of his role as bishop, described his relationship with his flock in the best way when he said, “I am a bishop for you, but a Christian with you” (s. 46.2).

Were ten thousand baptized men, women and children to pronounce the words of consecration over their bread and wine, the offerings would remain bread and wine. One priest, alone or with a congregation, ***by God’s power changes the people’s bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. *** The baptized unite their way of offering sacrifice to his way.

“My sacrifice and yours” is an important and long-needed improvement.

Here is something I can recommend for your deeper active participation in this invitation by the priest.

It can help to identify ourselves with the gifts placed on the altar for consecration.

The congregation is invited by the priest to unite their sacrifices to those he offers in his manner of offering.

We all have both burdens and reasons to rejoice. Therefore, when the priest or deacon is preparing the chalice, when he puts drops of water (the symbol of the human) into the wine (the symbol of the divine) to be mingled – the lesser being transformed within the greater – try consciously to place into that chalice all your cares, aspirations, sentiments of gratitude, petitions, and all that you are. Let it all be joined, before they are stupendously transformed by God.

This may make the invitation and then the response ring with something new each time you hear it and respond in turn.

Pray, brethren, that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God, the almighty Father.

May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of his name, for our good and the good of all his holy Church.

Do Lutherans believe that anyone can say the Eucharistic prayers?

The Sacrament of Holy Eucharist is of such dignity that it is confected **only in the Person and by the authority of Christ himself. Hence, a priest is one ordained and appointed to act as Christ’s instrument, and to use Christ’s own voice and authority in confecting the Holy Eucharist at Mass. **Only a duly ordained priest can consecrate the elements of bread and wine and so confect the sacrament of Holy Eucharist. Only the priest can offer this sacrament as sacrifice, and he does this when he celebrates Holy Mass.

Well said. I have also wondered then what is the role of the Pastor in Holy Communion in a LCMS Church. Is he even necessary? Could an elder say the words of institution?

Mary.

 

[Thorolfr]

Well said. I have also wondered then what is the role of the Pastor in Holy Communion in a LCMS Church. Is he even necessary? Could an elder say the words of institution?

Mary.

Probably. Since the pastor doesn’t have any special magical power in this regard, I wouldn’t say that it is impossible for a non-pastor to say the words of institution, although it would probably be discouraged since a non-pastor might not have the proper knowledge and training to do it properly.

 

[SalusaSecondus]

Probably. Since the pastor doesn’t have any special magical power in this regard, I wouldn’t say that it is impossible for a non-pastor to say the words of institution, although it would probably be discouraged since a non-pastor might not have the proper knowledge and training to do it properly.

Anyone can. The person just has to be called by the congregation to do so. It’s not about the person saying the words, it’s about who said them in the first place.

 

[MaryT777]

Anyone can. The person just has to be called by the congregation to do so. It’s not about the person saying the words, it’s about who said them in the first place.

So there is a stipulation, that they be called by the Congregation. Does the Bible mandate that someone be called by the Congregation say the words of Institution or is that a Concord book teaching?

Mary.

 

[Thorolfr]

Anyone can. The person just has to be called by the congregation to do so. It’s not about the person saying the words, it’s about who said them in the first place.

 

[SalusaSecondus]

So there is a stipulation, that they be called by the Congregation. Does the Bible mandate that someone be called by the Congregation say the words of Institution or is that a Concord book teaching?

Mary.

No. It’s from the Augsburg confession.

 

[Thorolfr]

Anyone can. The person just has to be called by the congregation to do so. It’s not about the person saying the words, it’s about who said them in the first place.

I remember a friend of mine telling me that he recently visited a LCMS congregation whose pastor recently retired and someone else in the congregation who graduated from a Lutheran college with a degree in Christian Education is basically acting as interim pastor even though he is not ordained. So it is not necessary to be ordained to say the words of institution in a Lutheran church.