Why do orthodox Lutherans reject epjscopacy?

[Indifferently]

I have a great affinity for orthodox Lutherans and especially those of the Missouri Synod variety in the United States. So to any Lutherans on this board, what are the readons that Lutheranism rejects the succession of bishops which has governed the Church since earliest times?

We share much in common, but this is the major stumbling block for me.

 

[JonNC]

I have a great affinity for orthodox Lutherans and especially those of the Missouri Synod variety in the United States. So to any Lutherans on this board, what are the readons that Lutheranism rejects the succession of bishops which has governed the Church since earliest times?

We share much in common, but this is the major stumbling block for me.

I consider myself rather confessional and orthodox, and I strongly support succession for the reasons stated in the confessions.

Jon

 

[pablope]

I have a great affinity for orthodox Lutherans and especially those of the Missouri Synod variety in the United States. So to any Lutherans on this board, what are the readons that Lutheranism rejects the succession of bishops which has governed the Church since earliest times?

We share much in common, but this is the major stumbling block for me.

I thought they call their synod head a bishop?

 

[Ad_Crucem]

I have a great affinity for orthodox Lutherans and especially those of the Missouri Synod variety in the United States. So to any Lutherans on this board, what are the readons that Lutheranism rejects the succession of bishops which has governed the Church since earliest times?

We share much in common, but this is the major stumbling block for me.

Not all do. The reason is because the episcopacy, while the Office of the Holy Ministry is seen as being a divine institution of Christ, the makeup of that episcopacy is not. That is to say, that it is held that the form of church government as well as a succession of individuals is something that was present in the church by human design and not by apostolic mandate. Even Lutheran bodies that did maintain succession or bishops did so with the understanding that they were doing so for good order and cohesion and not to fulfill a commandment of Christ.

 

[Indifferently]

I consider myself rather confessional and orthodox, and I strongly support succession for the reasons stated in the confessions.

Jon

Very interesting Jon, thank you. Do you have any articles I can read on the issue?

 

[Ad_Crucem]

I thought they call their synod head a bishop?

In Lutheran terms, a bishop is a presbyter and a presbyter is a bishop. The head of a synod could be referred to as a bishop, but so could the pastor at the local congregation. They see the terms as interchangeable.

 

[JonNC]

I thought they call their synod head a bishop?

Not all, for a few goofy reasons which I don’t get. In the LCMS district (diocese) leaders are called “presidents” in part because their duties include more than just things rated to the office of bishop. It is still kind of silly.

Jon

 

[Indifferently]

I rather enjoy looking up Pastor Matthew Harrison’s sermons on Youtube.

 

[steido01]

Not all, for a few goofy reasons which I don’t get. In the LCMS district (diocese) leaders are called “presidents” in part because their duties include more than just things rated to the office of bishop. It is still kind of silly.

Jon

Indeed. I’ve never really understood why we don’t just refer to our DP’s as bishops. My own personal opinion is that it’s an unfortunate holdover from early American history. You know, the whole “We’re-trapped-in-America-with-a-bunch-of-Reformed-folks-so-don’t-look-too-Catholic!” thing. Pity, really. I think we miss out on greater chance for ecumenism because other church bodies look at us and, at first glance, dismiss us as some run-of-the-mill protestant church.

Indifferently:

Do you have any articles I can read on the issue?

Article XXVIII of the Augsburg Confession is a good place to start.

To understand why American Lutheranism (particularly the LC-MS) along with Australian Lutheranism (to some degree, anyway) have embraced a largely congregational polity, it might be helpful to read some history on the Prussian attempt at unionism and the resulting fear of state-appointed bishops among Lutherans. Another good thing to research would be the Altenburg Debates. They’re like a time capsule - the American Lutherans are discussing whether to remain episcopal, or whether it was even essential. I don’t know of any online sources, otherwise I’d link you…

Edit: I meant to stress that American Lutherans have not so much rejected the traditional episcopacy, as they have adopted a congregational polity. The Apostolic teaching is what ultimately matters to Lutherans.

 

[JonNC]

In Lutheran terms, a bishop is a presbyter and a presbyter is a bishop. The head of a synod could be referred to as a bishop, but so could the pastor at the local congregation. They see the terms as interchangeable.

Well, to an extent. The title bishop will have specific duties attached to it. So, a presbyter with those duties would be a bishop. Without the duties, it would not make sense to address a presbyter are bishop.

Jon

 

[benjohnson]

You know, the whole “We’re-trapped-in-America-with-a-bunch-of-Reformed-folks-so-don’t-look-too-Catholic!” thing. Pity, really.

We did have an honest-to-goodness Bishop right from the start of our American journey - but he was a bit too enamored with the ladies and then ran off with the money. Perhaps the Devil has schemed to inflict us with lousy leaders beginning with Leo X. The current DP here sure fits the bill.

 

[ltwin]

I have a related question. In my occasional reading about the Protestant Church in Germany after the Reformation, I come across reference to “superintendents” presiding over the Lutheran Church. I never really dug any deeper into it. I know that today the Evangelical Church in Germany has bishops. Can anyone give me any insight?

 

[Ad_Crucem]

Well, to an extent. The title bishop will have specific duties attached to it. So, a presbyter with those duties would be a bishop. Without the duties, it would not make sense to address a presbyter are bishop.

Jon

True, as far as duties go. But they would not be seen as separate divisions within the Office of the Holy Ministry. But American Lutheran ecclesiology is all rather messed up anyway, esp. the congregational polity.

 

[JonNC]

True, as far as duties go. But they would not be seen as separate divisions within the Office of the Holy Ministry. But American Lutheran ecclesiology is all rather messed up anyway, esp. the congregational polity.

Agreed

Jon

 

[EvangelCatholic]

The vast majority of Lutherans worldwide accept and use episcopacy as the form of church governance. But even in Scandinavia & Baltic countries where Apostolic Succession has never been interrupted, Lutherans view episcopal structure as helpful but not necessary.

American Lutherans [minus LCMS] have followed the Provoo Communion of European Lutherans and Anglicans; thus the full communion and eventual merger of Lutherans and Episcopalians in the U.S/ Canada.

 

[pablope]

True, as far as duties go. But they would not be seen as separate divisions within the Office of the Holy Ministry. But American Lutheran ecclesiology is all rather messed up anyway, esp. the congregational polity.

Maybe…just maybe…this is your purgatory for not believing in purgatory…

On a serious note…thanks for the replies…and Jon too.

 

[Indifferently]

The vast majority of Lutherans worldwide accept and use episcopacy as the form of church governance. But even in Scandinavia & Baltic countries where Apostolic Succession has never been interrupted, Lutherans view episcopal structure as helpful but not necessary.

American Lutherans [minus LCMS] have followed the Provoo Communion of European Lutherans and Anglicans; thus the full communion and eventual merger of Lutherans and Episcopalians in the U.S/ Canada.

The problem there is, is ELCA really Lutheran? Is TEC really Anglican? Seeing as the former has downplayed the Book of Concord, and the latter abandoned both the Prayer Book and Thirty Nine Articles, and both are rather liberal now even about Holy Scripture itself, what exactly will this merger look like?

 

[steido01]

I have a related question. In my occasional reading about the Protestant Church in Germany after the Reformation, I come across reference to “superintendents” presiding over the Lutheran Church. I never really dug any deeper into it. I know that today the Evangelical Church in Germany has bishops. Can anyone give me any insight?

In my limited understanding, the pastoral and administrative duties of the early Evangelical Catholic (Lutheran) superintendents was identical to that of Roman Catholic bishops.

The issue -again, as I understand it- was with who appointed bishops/superintendents. Evangelical Catholics, in their understanding of the ECFs, believed this power rested with the local church (which, in the 1500’s, was typically spoken for by the local prince/elector), not with Rome. The local political forces that appointed the superintendents didn’t want to be confused with Roman bishops, so they used the Latin “Superintendens” rather than the Greek “Episcopos.” The differentiation between “bishop” and “superintendent” simply notes that one was an Evangelical Catholic, and the other Roman.

Evangelical Catholics favored an episcopal form of polity from the beginning, just not one that had a secular tendril (the Confessions speak of bishops wrongly “wielding the sword” in addition to their rightful Office of the Keys).

Again, this is my understanding. It’s been a few years since I studied early Reformation history… If someone else can clarify, please do!

 

[steido01]

The problem there is, is ELCA really Lutheran? Is TEC really Anglican? Seeing as the former has downplayed the Book of Concord, and the latter abandoned both the Prayer Book and Thirty Nine Articles, and both are rather liberal now even about Holy Scripture itself, what exactly will this merger look like?

The UUA 2.0?

In all seriousness, there are still some strong orthodox folks in both groups, and they are working diligently to right their ships. “For the sake of ten,” I’ll keep praying for them and hope that they can (but I’ve got a life preserver floating in the water, just in case…).

 

[EvangelCatholic]

The problem there is, is ELCA really Lutheran? Is TEC really Anglican? Seeing as the former has downplayed the Book of Concord, and the latter abandoned both the Prayer Book and Thirty Nine Articles, and both are rather liberal now even about Holy Scripture itself, what exactly will this merger look like?

Can you explain that the ELCA is not “really Lutheran”?

Last time I checked, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, like all Lutherans profess the Apostles’, Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds as true declarations of the faith. The ELCA accepts the Unaltered Augsburg Confession as a true witness to the Gospel, acknowledging as one with it In faith and doctrine all churches that likewise accept the teachings of the Unaltered Augsburg Confession.

The ELCA accepts the other confessional writings in the Book of Concord, namely, the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, the Smalcald Articles and the Treatise, the Small Catechism, the Large Catechism, and the Formula of Concord, as further valid interpretations of the faith of the Church.

The ELCA confesses the Gospel, recorded in the Holy Scriptures and confessed in the ecumenical creeds and Lutheran confessional writings, as the power of God to create and sustain the Church for God’s mission in the world.