Episcopal VS Lutheran

[lordsservant]

I am a member of the Episcopal Church. What are the theological differences between Lutheran and Episcopal? I am considering attending a Lutheran Seminary.

 

[D.W.Washburn]

The ECUSA and the ELCA are in full communion. Clergy ordained into one church body can serve, with some small qualifications, in the other.

I think that the Episcopal Church has a larger biblical canon. Following Martin Luther, the Lutherans use the 66 book Protestant Bible, while the Episcopal church uses the Catholic canon which includes the deuterocanonical books.

Another difference is in sacramentology. Lutherans recognize only two Sacraments: Baptism and the Eucharist. The Episcopal Church calls these the "great" or "necessary" Sacraments but also considers marriage, confession, confirmation, unction and ordination to be "conditional" Sacraments.

The Episcopal Church recognizes Apostolic Succession as a necessary mark of the Church. Lutherans see Apostolic Succession as "adiaphora" (an indifferent matter). For this reason, some new Lutheran pastors refuse to be ordained into Apostolic Succession.

Those are probably the major differences between our two church bodies, and, realistically, as major differences go, they're pretty minor.

By the way, which school are you considering?

Peace.

 

[lordsservant]

Thank you for your answer. It cleared up all of my questions. Also thank you for your blessings. I am not sure how they work, as I am new to CF. But I will take all The blessings I can get. lol. I am checking out The Lutheran Theological at Philadelphia. I am registered to meet with them on March 19th.

 

[D.W.Washburn]

I'm glad to have helped. I hope that your visit to LTSP is productive and beneficial. If you get the chance, let us know how it went.

 

[IowaLutheran]

I am a lifelong Lutheran and a current ELCA seminarian, but have attended a midweek service at a local Episcopal Church for several years and have filled in when the priest has been absent to lead morning prayer.

Regular Guy's list sums it up pretty well - the primary difference is the Anglican emphasis on the episcopacy. In the ELCA, we have bishops, but view them as being for the good order of the church (the bene esse) as opposed to being of the essence (esse) of the church.

Regarding sacraments, though, I offer the following observations:

(1) There is one confessional Lutheran view of the nature of the real presence in communion - Christ is present in a sacramental union between the body and blood of Christ and the bread and the wine. In other words, Christ is present in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine. In Anglicanism, there is more diversity in terms of how Christ is present. Some have a belief similar the the Roman belief, some appear to believe in a more "spiritual presence."
(2) As far as the number of sacraments, I have a different take than what Regular Guy posted - I think that Lutheran and Anglican theology in this area is perhaps not identical, but similar. I wrote about this extensively on the Anglican forum here at CF a few months ago, and you can see the context of my post here - http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=45229774#post45229774

Here's what I wrote:

It is commonly taught and understood that Lutherans only call two things "sacraments". This is what I learned in confirmation, and it is based on Luther's Small Catechism, which states that there are three elements to a sacrament - they are:

1. instituted by God;
2. in which God Himself has joined His Word of promise to the visible element;
3. and by which He offers, gives and seals the forgiveness of sin earned by Christ.

By this definition, only baptism and communion make the cut.

The Small Catechism is a part of the Lutheran Confessions found in the Book of Concord. However, there is no definitive list in the Book of Concord of the number of sacraments.

While the Small Catechism is the primary teaching document of the Lutheran Church, the Augsburg Confession is generally regarded as the primary confessional document which all other confessional documents measure up against.

Article 13 of the Augsburg Confession talks about sacraments, and does not list them. In response to the AC, the Catholics insisted that the Lutherans accept the 7 sacraments. In the Lutheran response (Melancthon's Apology of the Augsburg Confession, also a part of the Book of Concord) three rites are specifically declared sacraments: baptism, communion, and confession/absolution ("for these have the command of God and the promise of grace"). In Luther's Smalcald Articles (also in the Book of Concord), confession/absolution is also called a sacrament.

So, there is a precise definition to the sacraments in Lutheran theology found in the Small Catechism, which limits the number to two, and then there is a slightly broader definition which allows confession/absolution to be added.

Reading on in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, though, it is apparent that there can be a broader understanding of sacraments within Lutheranism. His criticism of the Roman Catholic system was that once you get beyond the main three he listed, Rome had arbitrarily limited the number to 7. Marriage is a case in point - it is not one of the three primary sacraments because it was not instituted in the New Testament and relates to the bodily life instead of the promise of forgiveness of sins. However, he acknowledges a sacramental quality to marriage because it is commanded by God. Melancthon then points out that if marriage is counted as a sacrament because it has the command of God and some promise added to it, then the list of sacraments must be longer than 7 - he gives the example of prayer, which has the command of God, but is not listed in the 7.

Specifically as to ordination, Melancthon is willing to call ordination a sacrament with reference to the ministry of the Word, but does not include it within the three primary sacraments. The Confessions do not address the impact of ordination on the person. Generally, Lutherans do not view ordination as causing a permanent mark on the soul, so you are correct in that the community and a call is important to ordination. As I understand Catholic/Anglican theology, which leads to the conclusion, "once a priest, always a priest" regardless of whether the person is called to serve. Lutherans, however, do have the laying on of the hands, and the invocation of the Holy Spirit to move within the ordained person.

To conclude, I have heard Anglicans refer to the 2 "major" and the 5 "minor" sacraments. To put Lutheran theology into Anglicanese, I think the concept of "major" and "minor" sacraments is not completely foreign to Lutheranism, although Melancthon would be inclined that if you are going to call anything beyond the primary 2 (or 3) a "sacrament", there are more then 5 minor sacraments.

 

[D.W.Washburn]

I'll take that as a friendly amendment, Iowa.

The argument about whether confession is the third Sacrament is an old one. The Roman Catholic Church makes a distinction between Sacraments (of which they count 7) and "sacramentals" which are sacrament-like actions. Leaning on Luther's definition of a Sacrament, which you stated so clearly, I would consider confession, marriage, unction, etc as something like a "sacramental."

 

[IowaLutheran]

I agree that those things are probably best labeled "sacramental" given their unclear status in the confessions.

BTW - I like your Phish Phriday thread.

 

[lordsservant]

You both have given me alot of information to clear things up, thankyou

 

[Korah]

Referring to RegularGuy's Post #2, I would say he treats "Episcopal" as if it were all "Anglo-Catholic" (which I was when I was Episcopalian). He takes no account of the Evangelical branch that derives from Calvinism and the Thirty-Nine Articles. But then, modern Episcopalianism pay no heed to the Thirty-Nine Articles. (I didn't when I was Episcopalian.)
Korah

 

[D.W.Washburn]

Referring to RegularGuy's Post #2, I would say he treats "Episcopal" as if it were all "Anglo-Catholic" (which I was when I was Episcopalian). He takes no account of the Evangelical branch that derives from Calvinism and the Thirty-Nine Articles. But then, modern Episcopalianism pay no heed to the Thirty-Nine Articles. (I didn't when I was Episcopalian.)
Korah

Could be...

After all, I live in the "Biretta Belt."

What would you say are the differences between the ELCA and the Evangelical branch of Episcopalianism?

 

[LutheranHawkeye]

Could be...

After all, I live in the "Biretta Belt."

What would you say are the differences between the ELCA and the Evangelical branch of Episcopalianism?

Hehe my favorite -ism to say Episopalianism. :

 

[Korah]

Could be...
After all, I live in the "Biretta Belt."

What would you say are the differences between the ELCA and the Evangelical branch of Episcopalianism?

Is there an "Evangelical" branch of Episcopalianism?
In the bigger historical context, that branch withered after the 1850's, and so much so that by 1870 Cumming had broken off and started his own church, the Reformed Episcopal Church. (They and some other Anglicans could also be called Fundamentalist.) The Evangelicals always sent their missionaries abroad and converted Africa, that is now where Evangelical Anglicanism is, but the Anglo-Catholic "missionaries" stayed home and converted Episcopalians from evangelical to Anglo-Catholic. Over-simplifying, of course.
So today the only on-fire evangelical Anglicans in the United States are in continuing churches (and even those are more Anglo-Catholic than not) or in very bad temper within The Episcopal Church (TEC).
To return to the question, ELCA is very little Calvinist, if at all, yet Evangelical Anglicans by their commitment to the Thirty-Nine Articles are necessarily somethat Calvinist. Moreover, they are the Anglicans who interpret the Thirty-Nine Articles in a very Calvinist direction instead of explaining them away as John Henry (later Cardinal) Newman did. They take the narrowest, anti-ecumenical portion of Anglicanism and intensify it.
In sharp contrast, the ELCA takes the narrow, harsh things about Lutheranism (the later portions of the Book of Concord and the later dogmatism of the gnesio-Lutherans and the yet later Walther emigration) and mellow them or reject them altogether.
But Anglicanism is more than just Anglo-Catholics and Evangelicals. As I said, Evangelicals shade off into Calvinists. There's three "branches". There is also simply a traditional wing that wants their church to just stay the same or even go back to an earlier form. (Until the 1970's the main worship service was a very Protestant "Morning Prayer" as opposed to a Mass at 8:00 AM that no one attended.) There is the liturgical wing that brought about the 1979 Book of Common Prayer with liturgical prayers almost identical to Roman Catholics. There has long been a liberal wing. An "Affirming Catholic" wing has taken dominance, shading off into the outright radicals that want to reshape the church around homosexual rights. Plus there are Charismatic Episcopals, some in the church of that name and some in TEC.
Korah