Got a question

[TheCosmicGospel]

WWLD? lol

 

[seajoy]

WWLD? lol

new bracelet coming out?

 

[DaRev]

I could see maybe him doing it if they asked all the available pastors around to come and they all said no

Of Ecclesiastical Order they teach that no one should publicly teach in the Church or administer the Sacraments unless he be regularly called.

The "regular call" refers to those who are called and ordained acording to the practice of the Church. The laity should not administer the Sacraments because they have not been authorized to do so. If your congregation president insists on doing this, your church will be in conflict with the Confessions and the practice of the LCMS. If I were you and this goes through, I would contact both the circuit counsellor and the district president and tell them your concerns and that you will not participate in that congregation if they go against the teachings of the Lutheran Church.

 

[DaSeminarian]

I would also add that until a Pastor can be brought in for the Sacrament that they stop having it at that congregation. There are other Office services like Matins or Morning Prayer that can be done. DS can even be done without Holy Communion (Pg 5 TLH).

 

[ctay]

I didn't get to go to church yesterday, decided to go to a VBS meeting for a little while this morning. I asked one lady if she knew who the next speaker was said she didn't know, kind of said something that I wouldn't mind some of the older pastors coming. She said maybe they will since they had to follow LCMS rules. The president of the church did the service yesterday, no communion.

 

[ctay]

Well found out tonight that he is doing the service not this sunday but next sunday and may give communion. He still thinks he can. I'm planning on leaving anyway after VBS is over with this coming week.

 

[porterross]

That's unbelievable and unfortunate for the congregation. Surely, someone else will also voice their concerns and the error with such a practice before it happens or do they care about being part of the synod, really?

 

[ByzantineDixie]

I had something similar happen when I was still at my husband's parish. Here is some information I pulled out of a CTCR document then that may be of value to you. (I haven't followed this entire thread and apologize if someone else has brought this up earlier.)

http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/CTCR/Theol_lord_supper1.pdf ​

C. Practice in Accord with the Doctrine of the Office of the Public Ministry

1. The Pastoral Office​

The regularly called and ordained pastors of the church are to officiate at the administration of Holy Communion. God's Word describes both the universal priesthood and the office of the public ministry as divine institutions (1 Peter 2:9-10; Titus 1:5-9). Edmund Schlink, writing on the confessional view of church and ministry, succinctly states:​

The Confessions do not permit us to place the universal priesthood as a divine institution over against the public ministry as a human institution. The idea of a transfer of the rights of the universal priesthood to the person of the pastor is foreign to the Confessions. The church does not transfer its office of preaching the Gospel and administering the sacraments to individuals in its membership, but it fills this office entrusted to it by God, it calls into this office instituted by God. In this office the pastor therefore acts in the name and at the direction of God and in the stead of Jesus Christ. He acts with authority not on the basis of an arrangement made by believers but on the basis of the divine institution.​

[22]

The Augsburg Confession underscores the importance of a regularly called pastor for the administration of Holy Communion:​

It is taught among us that nobody should publicly teach or preach or administer the sacraments in the church without a regular call (AC XIV). ​

Our teachers assert that according to the Gospel the power of keys or the power of bishops is a power and command of God to preach the Gospel, to forgive and retain sins, and to administer and distribute the sacraments (AC XXVIII, 5). ​

Accordingly, the Apology explains:
But let us talk about the term "liturgy." It does not really mean a sacrifice but a public service. Thus it squares with our position that a minister who consecrates shows forth the body and blood of the Lord to the people, just as a minister who preaches shows forth the gospel to the people, as Paul says (I Cor. 4:1), "This is how one should regard us, as ministers of Christ and dispensers of the sacraments of God," that is, of the Word and sacraments; and II Cor. 5:20, "We are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God" (Ap XXIV, 80).​

​

 

[Studeclunker]

I've been following this and find a few things very worrysome.


First; the intention of this congregational president insisting on giving communion no matter what.


Second; this is not only a sure sign of a complete lack of respect for the Euchrist, but also signs of meglomania on this CPs part.

Writing to the Circuit Counselor and District President sounds like the right thing to do. Even if you leave the congregation, this needs to be done.

 

[DaRev]

Writing to the Circuit Counselor and District President sounds like the right thing to do. Even if you leave the congregation, this needs to be done.

I concur. Even if you do leave the congregation, it would be a good idea to write to the circuit counselor and DP and let them know your disdain and your reason for leaving.
If there are others in the congregation who feel as you do, perhaps they could add their signatures to the letter.

 

[ctay]

He just got finished with his Lay studies and he said they told them there that he could give communion.

 

[ctay]

There's a thing here go to page 28, I think that's where they get it from not unless I misunderstand it.
http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/CTCR/2004%202006%20DISSENT%20DOC.pdf

 

[DaRev]

He just got finished with his Lay studies and he said they told them there that he could give communion.

The document that you linked makes it very clear that only in extra-ordinary conditions may one who is not called and ordianed perform the functions of the pastoral office. I do not believe that the situation in your congregation fits with extra-ordinary circumstances, especially if there are retired pastors available to handle the vacancy. What your congregation president is doing goes against the clear practice and doctrine of the synod.

I doubt that his "lay studies" automatically makes him a licensed deacon with the synod. If this is indeed the case, then I have a real issue with this.

 

[ctay]

I know there are about 5 retired pastors in the area. These people don't want old ones. I don't feel he's right.

 

[DaRev]

I know there are about 5 retired pastors in the area. These people don't want old ones. I don't feel he's right.

Is your congregation actively seeking to call another pastor? If so, the "old ones" as they call them would only be there temporarily.

They could always call one from the seminary.

 

[ctay]

Yes they started with the call process. One lady was pitching a fit right after the pastor said he was leaving saying she didn't want any of the pastors around here coming to the services. Said she didn't like them. I told her it only be temporary.

 

[DaRev]

Yes they started with the call process. One lady was pitching a fit right after the pastor said he was leaving saying she didn't want any of the pastors around here coming to the services. Said she didn't like them. I told her it only be temporary.

Sounds like she needs to be reminded what going to church is all about. It's not about the popularity of the pastor. (I have a few folks here that need to be reminded of that as well.)

 

[ctay]

There's a few people like that in this church. I go to worship and serve and don't care if the pastor is old or young just so long as he preaches the word right.

 

[ByzantineDixie]

He just got finished with his Lay studies and he said they told them there that he could give communion.

Yes, I was told the same thing when I was in the program...of course, being a woman I was told I would not be able to administer the sacrament (duh!) but my male counterparts in the program were told they could.

 

[DaSeminarian]

Yes, I was told the same thing when I was in the program...of course, being a woman I was told I would not be able to administer the sacrament (duh!) but my male counterparts in the program were told they could.

My question would be: Who told him that he could do this now that he finished his studies?

Personally if I were you I would abstain from communion on the grounds that he is not truly qualified.

This is grounds for "In statu confessionis" which means that you let him know why you abstained so that he understands your position.