tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post2088029633901269534..comments2023-11-05T02:55:10.230-06:00Comments on Gottesdienst Online: Calendar Trainwreck?Pr. H. R.http://www.blogger.com/profile/16756503062523543708noreply@blogger.comBlogger156125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-9624350840087585952011-01-12T20:59:18.507-06:002011-01-12T20:59:18.507-06:00I usually toss the CTS calendar but 2011 hangs pro...I usually toss the CTS calendar but 2011 hangs proudly on my study wall. Can't wait for March.WM Cwirlahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12317197804776939257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-63059197237217683542011-01-11T14:08:35.780-06:002011-01-11T14:08:35.780-06:00Dear Paul:
Ouch!
Personally, I think Jughead is ...Dear Paul:<br /><br />Ouch!<br /><br />Personally, I think Jughead is on dope...Rev. Larry Beanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06705910892752648940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-35090326292343103712011-01-11T13:38:21.322-06:002011-01-11T13:38:21.322-06:00I suspect reading an Arch book instead of the serm...I suspect reading an Arch book instead of the sermon might actually be a great improvement in certain places, whether to children, or to adults.<br /><br />: )Rev. Paul T. McCainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04846468267196335350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-14384676775780917132011-01-10T06:41:14.856-06:002011-01-10T06:41:14.856-06:00Fr. Beane,
Dang it, I was cleverly trying to avoi...Fr. Beane,<br /><br />Dang it, I was cleverly trying to avoid having to address the "why not women" issue. So much for that! It was a good try, though. :) <br /><br />I do think you are onto something with your theory that our elders serve as functional deacons. I'm not sure that it necessarily follows that we're barking up the same tree as Wichita 89, though. Our practice of having elders assist the pastor in our congregations long predates the tragic decision to ignore AC XIV made there. Prior to that, it was understood (if not upheld everywhere) that elders were to assist the pastor in performing his duties, but not to perform those duties on their own. That is still the default understanding throughout our synod regarding elders. <br /><br />As for "why not women," the understanding is that, while our "functional deacons" are not preaching or administering the Sacraments, they are assisting with functions associated with the OHM, and are exercising authority, under the discretion of the pastor, and so women are prohibited from that service. I would argue that, even after the resolution passed in 2004, this is still the default position among us. <br /><br />My congregation, too, requires our elders to be male (as well as our congregational president and vice president), for the reasons stated above. <br /><br />Are those reasons valid? I believe they are. <br /><br />The real tragedy among us is that we allow two contradictory beliefs to exist simultaneously in this area, which creates much confusion in our synod. Why does that congregation allow women elders and this one doesn't? And, how can they both be right at the same time? <br /><br />I pray that we will eventually take a fresh look at this in the future and reach some agreed upon decisions around the the Word of God and our Confessions.Rev. Thomas C. Messer, SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13740553600700598394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-34316673725981357912011-01-09T22:46:25.851-06:002011-01-09T22:46:25.851-06:00Dear Eric:
I was actually wondering more about th...Dear Eric:<br /><br />I was actually wondering more about the *red.* <br /><br />But a lot of people don't know that a very early rubric has been discovered in an early edition of the Book of Common Prayer (Dcn. Gaba can probably tell you what year...) that reads like this:<br /><br />"Heere ye prieft planteth his pofterior mufculature fecurely within ye chancell in a dignified mannere, whilft ye deacon ringeth ye bell for ye children to trudge forwarde fullenly that they mayeft obferve ye rite of ye Children's Meffage, ye Arch Booke, ye Tales of ye Vegetablation, ye ftocking puppette, et cetera fimilare longfuffering puerile entertainments..."<br /><br />I mean, this is a breakthrough!<br /><br />But Fr. Weedon is still trying to find a *Lutheran*But 16th century rubric...Rev. Larry Beanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06705910892752648940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-77091021439183699162011-01-09T21:36:00.211-06:002011-01-09T21:36:00.211-06:00If you read from a CPH arch book, does that then c...If you read from a CPH arch book, does that then count as saying the black? =o)Rev. Eric J Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17747919365522145094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-55616500728714620552011-01-09T17:22:35.357-06:002011-01-09T17:22:35.357-06:00Dear Paul:
"Say the black, do the re...,&quo...Dear Paul:<br /><br />"Say the black, do the re...," wait, what?<br /><br />;-)Rev. Larry Beanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06705910892752648940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-17466736825261648542011-01-09T17:05:33.309-06:002011-01-09T17:05:33.309-06:00I was going to post something about the liturgical...I was going to post something about the liturgical Schutzstaffel on the prowl for the heretics among us inviting little children up to give them a message during the Divine Service, but I see I'm too late, the discussion has drifted off into a conversation about elders and AC XIV.<br /><br />Oh, well.Rev. Paul T. McCainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04846468267196335350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-87786627960426781822011-01-09T15:41:12.643-06:002011-01-09T15:41:12.643-06:00Dear Br. Latif:
Yes, I was imprecise in my words!...Dear Br. Latif:<br /><br />Yes, I was imprecise in my words! I *meant* what you were referring to: lay assistants. Thanks for the clarification.Rev. Larry Beanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06705910892752648940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-49358203544894056332011-01-09T15:30:17.344-06:002011-01-09T15:30:17.344-06:00Dear Tom:
I honestly can't remember where Dr....Dear Tom:<br /><br />I honestly can't remember where Dr. Eckardt's article appeared. Maybe we can get it reprinted here on GO.<br /><br />Once again, one of the things that makes me wonder about our practice is why we (most of us) insist that our elders be male.<br /><br />Should a woman be put into that office and be permitted to distribute the elements? In the RC church, this is not only common, I would say typical. Women routinely perform the functions that your (and my) Board of Elders performs. My church requires elders to be male.<br /><br />If they aren't preaching and administering, why do they need to be male?<br /><br />My own theory is that, while unordained, our Boards of Elders are functional deacons. And if that is the case, it makes me wonder if we're barking up the same tree as Wicheta 1989.<br /><br />My theory may well be all wet. I'd love a discussion about it.<br /><br />Personally, I greatly appreciate my Board of Elders, and I do rely on them quite a bit in giving pastoral care. But men come and go from the Board of Elders (they are elected in my congregation). And even that being said, there is a saying in my parish: "once an elder, always an elder" - which suggests a vestigial self-understanding of being something more than just being a lay assistant in carrying out these duties.Rev. Larry Beanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06705910892752648940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-88763991308807640452011-01-09T14:36:30.884-06:002011-01-09T14:36:30.884-06:00Fr. Beane,
I'd love to read what Fr. Eckardt ...Fr. Beane,<br /><br />I'd love to read what Fr. Eckardt has written about this. Did his article appear in a past issue of <i>Gottesdienst</i>?<br /><br />I think I'm about where you are on this, although I may be a little less itchy about it than you are. I wish things were less "messy" among us, and I agree that it would have been best to have never deviated from our received tradition in this area - an ordained diaconate, rather than the innovative "lay elders" we have, would be much preferred. Fr. Petersen had an excellent article in <i>Gottesdienst</i> about this a while back. <br /><br />But, we have what we have. The question is: Does what we have violate AC XIV? I don't think it does, since I'm not convinced that assisting is administrating. But, I could be wrong (it's been known to happen from time to time). <br /><br />What is truly messy about this is our inconsistency from congregation to congregation. If we're going to have elders (and, like it or not, we are), then we should allow Fr. Curtis to draw up some canons that we would all submit to regarding their service among us. But, of course, that will happen right after pigs start flying and hell freezes over. <br /><br />My elders serve as crucifer, read the OT and Epistle, and assist with the Distribution. They have been thoroughly trained for this service, they take it seriously, and I couldn't be more pleased with their faithful assistance. That assistance is a blessing to me, and until it can be shown that such assistance puts us at odds with our confession of the faith, I will gladly receive it. Neither the elders nor the congregation is the least bit confused by this. If I were to say, "I'm going on vacation and the elders will preach and administer the Sacrament in my absence," both the elders and the congregation would set me straight that no such thing was going to happen. Why? AC XIV.Rev. Thomas C. Messer, SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13740553600700598394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-58014068964630396592011-01-09T00:30:41.678-06:002011-01-09T00:30:41.678-06:00"I'm not convinced that the pastor using ..."I'm not convinced that the pastor using other men's hands to assist constitutes a violation of AC14."<br /><br />Fr. Beane:<br />To be clear, I would in no way make the statement that the pastor using other men's hands to assist constitutes a violation of CA XIV. What I suggest diverges from the Confession is specifically when those men are men who are neither assisting priests nor actual deacons.Dcn Latif Haki Gaba SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13032212390625343868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-8197927183596198732011-01-09T00:19:58.738-06:002011-01-09T00:19:58.738-06:00Fr. Messer:
You write, "Your bringing in the...Fr. Messer:<br /><br />You write, "Your bringing in the example of a physician administering medication to you argues against your position, since a physician often uses physician's assistants and nurses to distribute the medication he administers."<br /><br />The point of my medicine analogy is that the one who gives me the medicine, no matter what his title is, cardiologist, nurse, whatever, can be said to be "administering" it to me, since "administer" can simply be defined as a meting out or dispensing something, whether religiously, or medically.Dcn Latif Haki Gaba SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13032212390625343868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-52165722711475139042011-01-08T16:38:45.375-06:002011-01-08T16:38:45.375-06:00Dear Tom:
I believe Dr. Eckardt wrote a piece abo...Dear Tom:<br /><br />I believe Dr. Eckardt wrote a piece about it a while back that makes a good case that administration includes distribution.<br /><br />Maybe he will report it for discussion.<br /><br />Although I wish we had never deviated from our received tradition, and though I think what we have now is a mess ("elders" being used as functional pastors, etc.), I'm not convinced that the pastor using other men's hands to assist constitutes a violation of AC14.<br /><br />But the one thing nagging at me is the question of why, if it is only assisting and not administering, why do most of our congregations insist that the elders distributing the sacrament be men? It suggests that they are doing pastoral work.<br /><br />That is unresolved in my own mind. I am firmly on the fence on this one. Like I said, the reality is that in my parish, it would be received badly if I were to change this - to the point of distraction from the holiness of the distribution itself. It's just not worth a fight over.Rev. Larry Beanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06705910892752648940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-91610683435538986142011-01-08T15:45:55.224-06:002011-01-08T15:45:55.224-06:00Rev. Deacon Gaba,
Thanks for the response. I do ...Rev. Deacon Gaba,<br /><br />Thanks for the response. I do appreciate you bringing this subject up, since I do believe it worth our time to discuss. <br /><br />I guess I simply cannot understand how employing elders (and, yes, I concur with probably everyone here that it is an unfortunate title, etc.) to assist the pastor in Distributing the Holy Sacrament is unfaithful to what we profess and confess. Your allusion to having acolytes, etc. assist is a red herring. We're talking about men within the congregation who have been elected to serve as elders. These men are not "administering" the Sacrament, not by any of the definitions of that term I have seen. The pastor is administering, they are assisting. <br /><br />If you asked every member of the congregation I serve if they thought our elders were administering the Sacrament, they would say, quickly and decisively, "No!" Most of them would go on to tell you that our elders are not permitted to administer the Sacrament, and a great many of them would even refer to AC XIV. <br /><br />Your bringing in the example of a physician administering medication to you argues against your position, since a physician often uses physician's assistants and nurses to distribute the medication he administers.<br /><br />I have a high regard for the Holy Sacrament of our Lord's very Body and Blood and do my very best to treat our Lord as reverently and respectfully as I can, but I am not convinced that such reverence and respect must include making sure that no layperson touches the sacred vessels. I'm sorry, but that just seems a little over the top, even for an ultra-confessional chap like me. But, then again, maybe the fact that this seems over the top to me negates my having that pristine title. <br /><br />Whatever the case, I remain unconvinced that employing elders to assist the pastor in the Distribution is unfaithful to what we profess and confess, since I do not believe that such assistance results in administration. Does our practice jive completely with the practice of the OHCAC throughout her history? No. Our practice could be improved to bring us more in line with that tradition and history, for sure. But, is our practice, in and of itself, unfaithful to what we profess and confess? I don't see it.Rev. Thomas C. Messer, SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13740553600700598394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-15570716062300784972011-01-08T14:25:24.468-06:002011-01-08T14:25:24.468-06:00I don't see you chalking anything up to the me...I don't see you chalking anything up to the medium. But I am content with you reading me however you will. Also, no one has claimed that you have to defend this. Defend it or don't. The point is that you have openly made the claim that this is a good and appropriate thing, and so I openly challenge you on it. And if your latest comment is your defense, so be it. I won't ask you about it further. <br /><br />On the other hand, turning now toward anyone else who might be interested in diuscussing the topic, I will say that claiming that a practice has the consent of the faithful, the approval of the faithful, the specific election of the faithful, or that it is a very common practice, hardly makes for an argument in a discussion on matters confessional Lutheran.<br /><br />And allow me to interject again that my critique is with the thing itself, not with those who practice it. For we are speaking of a practice that is so common, it is ingrained in Missouri's very fiber. Yet it is always worth establishing first principles, and asking anew in each generation, Is this or that practice really faithful to what we profess, to what we confess?Dcn Latif Haki Gaba SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13032212390625343868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-10289031557822543092011-01-08T14:06:45.262-06:002011-01-08T14:06:45.262-06:00Latif,
I administer the Sacrament. The elders as...Latif,<br /><br />I administer the Sacrament. The elders assist me in the distribution. The congregation approves of this and even selects the elders who will do this. <br /><br />Both the Pastor and the people being served are content. No one is claiming a task unto themselves without the consent of the faithful. <br /><br />Moreover, this is a common practice within our Synod (if not the overwhelming majority practice at congregations with only one pastor), and thus shouldn't cause any major confusion (even though as Larry notes having a regular diaconate would be better - I approve of this idea, but alas, it is not the common custom in the LCMS).<br /><br />I don't know if this counts as a defense, and frankly, I don't know why you think that I must defend a common practice simply because you tell me to defend it. That's awfully rude, especially when you had previously said, "I can't wait to hear this." I can put the best construction on many things, but this tone is starting to make me uncomfortable. <br /><br />If it is not meant to be there, we can chalk it up to the medium -- I don't think single column comment posts set up the "prolegomena". I hadn't even been aware that this was supposed to be a debate.Rev. Eric J Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17747919365522145094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-72665036283863661722011-01-08T13:54:16.959-06:002011-01-08T13:54:16.959-06:00Fr. Messer:
You ask, "When elders assist with...Fr. Messer:<br />You ask, "When elders assist with the Distribution, are they administering the Sacrament?"<br /><br />I would certainly suggest that they are taking part in the administration of the Sacrament, yes. <br /><br />I suggest we seek the opinion and historical and liturgical input on this from our brethren in sister churches around the world. That might help broaden our perspective.<br /><br />I also suggest we ask your question the other way around, namely, Do we really teach that administrare pertains only to saying the Words of Christ over the bread and wine? If so, whence do we derive this notion?<br /><br />If it is true that the giving out of the Sacrament is not an administering of the Sacrament, then seriously why not have the acolytes help, even the poor girl acolytes, or the men and women who (unfortunately in my view) also read the lections?<br /><br />When a physician administers medicine to me, he serves the medicine to me, or he serves me with the medicine. We see this by looking closely at the word, Ad-minister. Some lexicographers even say that to administer is to give something ritually. I am the last to say we should lean on secular lexicography in Theology, but I do think in this case they show wisdom.<br /><br />Liturgical tradition forbids even the subdeacon from touching the sacred vessels in the Mass, though his service does bring him very close to the eucharist, and so he wears the maniple, and the eucharistic vestment (which in his case is the tunicle). Such liturgical tradition (upon which we could certainly elaborate), rather than the practice of having laymen serve the Sacrament, is what is affirmed and assumed by our Confession. But I'm open to all serious and respectful dialogue on the matter, and I hope the conversation continues.Dcn Latif Haki Gaba SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13032212390625343868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-78172679437003525522011-01-08T13:00:29.919-06:002011-01-08T13:00:29.919-06:00I agree that there is some lack of definition amon...I agree that there is some lack of definition among us concerning what "administration" means. Certainly, when the AC was written, only clergy were used as "eucharistic ministers" and the term "elder" was reserved (as it is scripturally) to ordained men.<br /><br />We American Lutherans have certainly inherited a practice that is quite a bit different than the catholic tradition of our Lutheran elders. In fact, the Presbyterian churches make a distinction between "teaching elders" (our "pastors") and "ruling elders" (our "board of elders"). I suspect we're once again suffering the fallout of someone 100 years ago deciding not to be Lutheran, and passing the mutation along to future descendants (that would be us).<br /><br />*Can* the pastor "delegate" the physical act of distribution without violating AC14? I have to admit that I'm undecided about it. When my congregation had two pastors, we limited the distribution to the ordained men.<br /><br />Now that I am the only pastor, we have reverted back to a lay elder assisting with the blood. He will take my direction as to whom to commune. And I commune him first after I have communed myself. I'm not entirely comfortable with this practice, but it would cause a riot if I were to insist on distributing everything myself. I know it, and I am just not going to die on that hill, even though it is the more traditional and historically Lutheran practice.<br /><br />By the same token, most LCMS churches only allow men to serve as "elders" - which implies that they are quasi-ordained ministers of some kind (since we limit the pastoral office to men). The LCMS allows women to be elders as long as they are not (I forget the exact wording) performing distinct functions of the pastoral office. Of course, should any layman, man or woman, be performing distinctly pastoral functions? Is this not what WELS was wrestling with when they had to deal with women saying the words of institution over bread and wine for other women to eat and to drink? Is this why we only ordain men and only let men serve on the Board of Elders?<br /><br />In short, we have a lot of things messed up. Our deviation from tradition has introduced a lot of confusion.<br /><br />And I believe it could all be fixed easily by changing from un-ordained lay assistants functioning as deacons (which is what we have now), to, well, actually having ordained deacons serving in this capacity. Once again, why not male deaconesses to fix this dissonance? <br /><br />And this makes a great point about tradition. It isn't always a question of "can" we do this or that?, or even "should" we do this or that? Rather, by holding to tradition (which is really the definition of conservatism) we avoid unintended consequences down the road. We avoid the opening of the proverbial "can of worms." (And yes, I know Eric is just itching to make a joke about the Diet of Worms right now - sorry to steal your thunder, Eric).<br /><br />Had we retained the practice of ordaining men to serve in the diaconate, and having deacons assist the pastor in the distribution - we would have never confused the faithful by applying a biblical term for the pastor ("elder") to an unordained lay assistant. That was a bad idea from the beginning. We would not be asking whether laymen can or should distribute, and we would have skirted (pun intended) the entire question of whether or not women can, may, or should assist in distribution.<br /><br />The problem would simply have never come up. That's the beauty of holding to tradition wherever possible to do so without sin (as our confessions advocate). The best way to get rid of bad, confusing, or questionable practice is never to introduce it at all.Rev. Larry Beanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06705910892752648940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-65243174275483696742011-01-08T12:25:16.326-06:002011-01-08T12:25:16.326-06:00Rev. Deacon Gaba,
When elders assist with the Dis...Rev. Deacon Gaba,<br /><br />When elders assist with the Distribution, are they administering the Sacrament? I have never understood the argument which begins with answering that question in the affirmative. Assisting the pastor in Distributing the Holy Sacrament is not a violation of AC XIV, unless it can be shown that such assistance is not merely assistance, but administration. I don't think such can be shown. And, if such could be shown, then there are a great many of us who have no business decrying the unfortunate decision made by our synod in convention in Wichita in 1989. After all, who are we to criticize "lay ministry" if we are guilty of employing "lay ministers" in our midst? <br /><br />One of my elders assists me with the Distribution every Sunday. I don't "patiently suffer this situation," since I am not convinced that this is a violation of AC XIV, or that it endorses and promotes what has become known as "lay ministry" among us. <br /><br />But, I am listening . . .Rev. Thomas C. Messer, SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13740553600700598394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-15854697358893196462011-01-08T07:48:37.082-06:002011-01-08T07:48:37.082-06:00Eric,
You write: "And actually, the burden is...Eric,<br />You write: "And actually, the burden isn't mine."<br /><br />Yes, it is. You have a certain practice, and appear proud of it. So defend it. <br /><br />You write: "Whenever someone does something that you don't like, they don't have to prove that it is permissible to you."<br /><br />This is not, in fact, about what I like personally. You have no reason to make such a claim of me. This is a churchly issue, not a personal one. Please be adult about this. <br /><br />You write: "If you are attempt to correct or reprove someone, you're the one who has to demonstrate that what they do is inconclusively improper."<br /><br />I am not here to correct or instruct you, a pastor of the church. As a brother, however, I will do so, if needbe. But you make it sound like liturgical and sacramental practice is subjective, and beyond criticism so long as no one has brought forth conclusive proof against it. Rather, what you do publicly in the church should be defensible with conclusive arguments from the Symbols, and the tradition of the Church.<br /><br />You write: " "I say you are wrong, prove to me that you aren't wrong" isn't correction."<br /><br />I have not begun to correct you. I have so far only been sorting out the necessary evil of the debating prolegomena with you. If you would like to defend the "duty" of your elders distributing the Sacrament, then show us how it conforms to the fourteenth article of the Augustana.Dcn Latif Haki Gaba SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13032212390625343868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-77509003723238250732011-01-08T07:21:19.486-06:002011-01-08T07:21:19.486-06:00And seriously, isn't it a bit weird to discuss...And seriously, isn't it a bit weird to discuss this question at the end of this discussion on children's sermons?Dcn Latif Haki Gaba SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13032212390625343868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-90241675940684717242011-01-08T06:37:04.596-06:002011-01-08T06:37:04.596-06:00Eric writes: "And I hate to tell you this - m...Eric writes: "And I hate to tell you this - my elder's duties aren't "fake". They have been given them by the congregation. Now, you might argue that this is a duty that is improperly given, but that's not fake or imagined."<br /><br />You "hate" to say these things? Why?<br /><br />The expectation placed upon your elders to handle and give out the Sacrament is not a true duty just because it was given to them by the congregation. Your congregation is wrong. And many pastors patiently suffer such situations, but dealing with the realities of pastoral exisgencies doesn't mean one should say a practice is proper just because it is mandated by the people. When I say this "duty" is imagined, I don't mean the elders themselves dreamed it up. What I mean is that this expectation of them is not one of their true duties; it is a false one. As a "duty" it is false, fake, imagined.Dcn Latif Haki Gaba SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13032212390625343868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-62771889923140401362011-01-08T06:19:26.860-06:002011-01-08T06:19:26.860-06:00Eric:
You say, "The RC policy would be the Eu...Eric:<br />You say, "The RC policy would be the Eucharistic Assistants."<br /><br />This is basically the same phrasing you used when you initially asked for my reaction to it. It is not very productive to explain a phrase using the same terms used in the question. To be sure, I had suspected that in general you had in mind the modern practice of the extraordinary ministers of the eucharist, but I wanted to get you, an articulate master of divinity, to articulate the practice you had in mind, and to tell me exactly what your question about it was. Your link told me for sure that the modern eucharistic ministers is what you generally had in mind.<br /><br />So the first thing to note is that, to be sure, the phenomenon of the so called eucharistic ministers is not brand new. (And that is why I wanted a clearer articulation of your question, since it seemed you may have had in mind something begun more recently.)<br /><br />It is postconciliar, and part of the whole decentralization of the Ministry in that communion. What is there possibly to support in that practice? Why do you ask about it? What is you opinion of it?<br /><br />Sadly, your "elders," I must say, are being told to do what amounts to what in the modern Roman Rite would be called the duties of the eucharistic ministers. I know that in many of our parishes, this predates the council, so I am not claiming that our elders handling the Eucharist comes from the abuses of the Novus Ordo. The RC eucharistic ministers phenomenon, rather, is a Protestantization of the RC Church, and of its understanding and practice of the Eucharist. Problems in the modern church float around, cross pollinate, and come back around. So while our own problems in this regard may predate Vat. II, today it is fair to say that it is also akin to the liturgical errors of modern Romanism.Dcn Latif Haki Gaba SSPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13032212390625343868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-28954561011603752011-01-08T00:51:53.806-06:002011-01-08T00:51:53.806-06:00I took another closer look at the calendar photo a...I took another closer look at the calendar photo and there's just something about the lighting. It's really not bright enough for the regular lighting you'd expect during a service. I think what we have here is actually a children's confession. The pastor and the boy are in a session of private confession wherein, perhaps, the red toy means sins loosed and the pink toy means sins bound. This interpretation certainly puts the whole subject into a much more solidly Lutheran frame, wouldn't you agree?Joannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09777514643611989502noreply@blogger.com