Catholics and Lutherans are able to “confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works” (JDDJ §15). We also recognize together that: “Our consensus in basic truths of the doctrine of justification must come to influence the life and teachings of our churches. Here it must prove itself. In this respect, there are still questions of varying importance which need further clarification” (JDDJ §43). In this spirit we offer the following modest clarifications and proposals.
We are united as Christians in our common baptism, common affirmation of Scripture and common life in Christ; as Lutherans and Catholics by our common commitment to the goal of full communion, our common affirmation of justification, and our common understanding that more agreement is necessary before full, sacramental communion can be restored. In this text we recognize the importance of our agreement, propose new stages of agreement, and celebrate the gifts we can receive from one another in our practice and understandings of ministries and structures within the Church as community of salvation.
This dialogue also recognizes that we are not proposing to settle all of the church-dividing issues before us. We have not attempted to resolve the important ecclesiological issues of the ordination of women or the authority by which such a decision is made, nor the full meaning of apostolic succession in ordained ministry and how we might be reconciled. We have not addressed the level of communion in ministries and structures that would be necessary for even interim Eucharistic communion. We are, however, convinced that the clarifications and research represented by this text make an important contribution in the stages toward reconciling these and other elements along the path toward full communion.
The reader will find this text a bit longer than earlier publications of this dialogue. Biblical and historical material that was prepared and presented in supporting essays over the years of this study has been summarized here. Needless to say, not all of the historical, biblical, and theological research on which this text is based is presented here nor is it included in the supporting essays. It will be important for the reader to review some of the earlier research of the U.S. and international dialogues to clarify further the context of these arguments.
This agreed text may be published both by itself and in a volume with some supporting essays. In the volume of essays, only a selection of those which contributed to the dialogue is published. Those not summarized in the final document but which further clarify the historical background, are included. Some of the biblical, historical research, and overview of previous dialogues will be published as articles elsewhere. As we build a common understanding of our biblical and historical heritage, this research becomes an increasingly important resource for our teaching and preaching. It adds to the serious theological literature produced in an ecumenical mode.
The method used to present our conclusions takes account of the “internally differentiated consensus” method employed by the Joint Declaration. “Lutheran and the Catholic explications of justification are in their difference open to one another and do not destroy the consensus regarding the basic truths” (JDDJ §40). As our dialogues approach the ecclesiological issues noted above, in the context of the Church as community of salvation, we will continue to seek agreement on matters that have been seen as church dividing. These agreements, of course, will be tested by the faith of our people and the appropriate leadership structures in our churches before they attain the level of reception and authority we now accord the Joint Declaration.
It is only by reappropriating our common heritage in Scripture and the shared tradition that we can follow the call of Christ to that common future for which he so earnestly prayed on the night before he was delivered for us. We can only humbly receive that grace of unity by the power of the Holy Spirit, obediently continuing on the pilgrimage to which God has called us. The labors of our biblical and theological scholarship are one element in the mosaic of our common prayer, service and life together, as we step out into that mysterious and arduous path that lies before the Church.
Bishop Charles Maahs, Bishop Richard Sklba, cochairs
Lutheran Roman Catholic Dialogue in the United States, Round X
This understanding can be seen as a return to the pattern of the early church in which the basic
ecclesial unit was a face-to-face assembly. Nevertheless, such a return involves a break with the pattern,
both patristic and medieval, in which the bishop heads the local church. The office of ministry is included
as an essential element of the local church in the Lutheran understanding, but this office is seen as
exercised by the pastor/presbyter.
The Conference of Bishops can issue general decrees only in those
cases in which the common law prescribes it, or a special mandate of the
Apostolic See, given either motu proprio or at the request of the Conference,
determines it. In other cases the competence of individual diocesan Bishops
remains intact; and neither the Conference nor its president may act in the name of
all the Bishops unless each and every Bishop has given his consent.(70)
The entire Catholic priesthood, including the bishop of Rome, is wounded in an important
dimension of its ministry insofar as unity and communion are lacking with other churches and their
ministries.
Commenting on this point, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation on the Doctrine
of the Faith, wrote in 1993 to Bavarian Lutheran bishop Johannes Hanselmann:
If the actions of Lutheran pastors can be described by Catholics as "sacred actions" that "can truly
engender a life of grace," if communities served by such ministers give "access to that communion in which
is salvation," and if at a eucharist at which a Lutheran pastor presides is to be found "the salvation-granting presence of the Lord," then Lutheran churches cannot be said simply to lack the ministry given to
the church by Christ and the Spirit. In acknowledging the imperfect koinonia between our communities and
the access to grace through the ministries of these communities, we also acknowledge a real although
imperfect koinonia between our ministries.
that social ministry organizations, educational institutions, chaplaincies, and other
church agencies engage together in activities that further the gospel and the common good.
123 On our journey toward full communion, including mutual recognition of ministry and
churchly reality, this round of dialogue has sought to help Lutherans and Catholics move toward that goal:
- by accepting koinonia of salvation as an interpretive lens for this study;
- by proposing an analysis of the varying local, regional, national, and worldwide
realizations of the koinonia of salvation as a framework within which to consider mutual
recognition of ministries;
- by recalling the issues of recognition of ministries as discussed in Round IV in Eucharist
and Ministry and of reconciliation of ministries stressed in Facing Unity;
- by relating ministerial communion to ecclesial communion, with recognition of imperfect
ecclesial communion leading to recognition of imperfect ministerial communion;
- by clarifying ministerial identity in relation to service to various levels of ecclesial
communion;
- by demonstrating the normative complementarity of congregational and regional structures
and ministries; and
- by examining in a preliminary way the role of national and worldwide structures and
urging a "patient and fraternal dialogue" on the possibility of a worldwide minister of unity.
124. A fuller mutual recognition of ministries cannot be separated from a fuller common life in
Christ and the Spirit. Lutherans and Catholics have together found a greater common basis in the Gospel
as can be seen in the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. Mutual recognition of doctrine,
ministries, and ecclesial realities, rooted in a common existence in the one Body of Christ, can bear fruit by
the grace of God in life shared together.
125. Ministry and structures of communion are at the service of the koinonia of salvation
realized in the life of the church. Mutual recognition of ministry and of ecclesial reality are important
conditions for our full and uninhibited common participation in the salvation given us in Christ and the
Spirit. We offer our work to our respective churches with the prayer that it may foster the koinonia in
salvation we are convinced is the will of our Risen Lord.
126. "Salvation," "church," and "ministries" will be treated chronologically below in various
segments of the New Testament. Koinonia as a biblical term has been introduced above (§§11-13). A term
with a range of meanings,(192) koinÇnia and its related verbs and adjectives occur 38 times in the New
Testament. The background for this terminology lies entirely in the Greek world, with no counterpart term
in Hebrew and little significant use of koinÇnia in the Greek translations of the Hebrew Scriptures.(193)
There is no recorded usage by Jesus, and little about it in the gospels (Luke 5:10, "partners" in the fishing
business). KoinÇnia is preeminently a Pauline term.
127. One possible starting point in the Greek world is the adjective koinos,(194) "common" or
"communal," as at Acts 2:44, believers "had all things in common (koina)," or Titus 1:4, our "common
faith" (NRSV "the faith we share"). Thus, to koinon could refer to the state, the public treasury, the
commonwealth, or (with agathon) the common good. A "public" and financial side may cling to the
terminology in Christian usage. The Greek adage "Friends have all things in common," is reflected in Acts
4:32, "No one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in
common (koina)."
128. A second approach is through the verb koinÇnein, which can mean (1) "have a share" of
something (Heb. 2:14, human beings all share in flesh and blood) or (2) "give a share" of something (the
Philippian church shared funds with Paul, Phil. 4:15).(195) Language of participation can also be used,
"having a part" in something or being a partner.
129. Pioneering studies, mainly by Protestants, emphasized "participation" or "fellowship."(196)
Later commentators, often Catholic, stressed "association," "community," and "(church) fellowship," sometimes
with a sacramental emphasis, cf. Latin communio.(197) Increasingly it was concluded that no single clear-cut
meaning is possible; koinÇnia is a multivalent term.(198) One may speak of church fellowship, grounded in
participation in Christ.(199) New Testament studies sometimes have an eye toward ecumenical
implications.(200)
130. How much of the structured church as koinÇnia of salvation can be traced back to Jesus of
Nazareth himself? As a general principle one must take care "not to read in evidence from later sources or
theories."(201) "The church" is known from the earliest Pauline writings, which antedate the written Gospels
(e.g. 1 Thess. 1:1; 2:14; Gal. 1:2, 22; 1 Cor. 1:2; 4:17; 7:17; 2 Cor. 8:1). H‘ ekkl‘sia often denotes in
such passages a particular or local church in a certain area, but it eventually comes to mean "the church" in
a sense transcending local or geographical boundaries (see below). Significantly, however, ekkl‘sia, in
either a local or a transcendent sense, is not mentioned in the Gospels of Mark, Luke, or John--or in other
New Testament writings such as Titus, 2 Timothy, 1-2 Peter, 1-2 John. Ekkl‘sia (church) is used in
Matthew 16:18: "You are Peter (Petros), and on this rock (petra) I will build my church" (cf. 18:17 of the
local assembly). This church-founding statement is paralleled in John 21:15-17 in a post-resurrection
setting, without the word ekkl‘sia; Peter's role is to feed the "flock" of Christ.(202) There is little more that
one can cull from the Gospels about the structure of Jesus' church to be built.(203)
131. Jesus had followers (Mark 1:18; 2:15; Matt. 4:20; Luke 5:11, 28; John 1:37, 40),
eventually called "disciples,"(204) i.e. those taught by Jesus (Mark 2:16; Matt. 5:1; Luke 6:13; John 2:2), and
even "apostles," i.e. those sent forth by him to carry on his mission (Mark 6:30; Matt. 10:2; Luke 6:13).
One can speak of a "Jesus-movement," but such disciples or apostles are not portrayed in the Gospels as
aware of themselves as "church" during Jesus' earthly ministry. The charge to "make disciples of all
nations" (Matthew 28:19-20; differently formulated in Luke 24:47) comes from the risen Christ.
132. It is as an effect of the Christ-event that the New Testament speaks of salvation (sÇt‘ria
and the verb sÇzein), e.g. Matt. 1:21 ("he will save his people from their sins"); John 3:17 ("that the world
might be saved through him") and John 12:47 ("I came not to judge the world, but to save the world"). He
is said to "save" individuals as he heals them (Matt. 9:21-22; Mark 5:34; 10:52), and in Luke Jesus is
announced as sÇt‘r, "savior," (Luke 2:11; cf. 19:9-10).
133. Jesus lays hands on individuals during healings or cures (Mark 6:5; 8:23, 25; Matt. 19:13,
15; Luke 4:40; 13:13), but never for commissioning or ordaining, as occurs in the Old Testament (e.g.,
Moses commissioning Joshua, Num. 27:18-19; Deut. 34:9).(205) Church structures develop as the Jesus-movement evolves after the resurrection.(206)
134. In the Acts of the Apostles "the fellowship" (h‘ koinÇnia) is the first term that occurs for
Jesus' followers as they share their faith and life in common (2:42). Another early name for them is "the
Way" (h‘ hodos; 9:2; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22).(207) Ekkl‘sia becomes in later chapters of Acts the
standard and enduring designation of Christians as a group (8:1, 3),(208) in Jerusalem (11:22; 15:4) and
elsewhere (11:26; 13:1; 14:23, 27; 15:3, 41). In time, there also appears an awareness of ekkl‘sia that
transcends local boundaries (9:31 ["the church throughout all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria"]; 12:5; 15:22;
20:28 ["the church of God"]).
135. The Twelve and the apostles function in the early chapters of Acts. The Twelve initially
guide the early Jerusalem church, with Peter as its spokesman (Acts 1:15; 2:14). Later, the Seven are
chosen "to serve tables" (Acts 6:2-5; cf. 21:8): "These men they presented to the apostles, who prayed and
laid their hands on them" (6:6),(209) which is the last time the Twelve are mentioned. The apostle James, the
brother of John, is not replaced at his death (12:1-2), as was the case after the death of Judas Iscariot
(1:16-17). "Apostles" still are mentioned as having a part in the Jerusalem "Council" (Acts 15:2, 4, 6, 22,
23), where they are always linked with hoi presbyteroi in the Jerusalem church. After 16:4, the apostles
disappear from the Lucan story. In the subsequent Christian tradition there is no office called either the
"apostolate" or "the Twelve."(210)
136. Pauline use of ekkl‘sia for a local or particular church often involves "house churches" (1
Cor. 16:19; Rom. 16:5; Phlm. 2; Col. 4:15).(211) Such groupings of Christians were usual in the pre-Constantinian period for various functions, but nothing in the Pauline letters links the house church with the
eucharistic celebration.(212) In some Pauline letters the phrase, "the church(es) of God" (1 Thess. 2:14; Gal.
1:13; 1 Cor. 11:16; 15:9), seems to refer to the mother-communities of Jerusalem or Judea; but it
eventually is extended to the Corinthian community (1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1), as the idea of the church
regional and universal begins to emerge (1 Cor. 6:4; 10:32; 11:22). The latter idea becomes even clearer in
the Deutero-Paulines (Col. 1:18, 24; Eph. 1:22; 3:10, 21), even if it is never said to be mia ekkl‘sia, despite
the emphasis in Ephesians on the unity of the church.
137. Ekkl‘sia occurs in 3 John 6, 9, 10 for a local congregation, but there is otherwise no
awareness in the Johannine Gospel or Epistles of ekkl‘sia in either a local or a universal sense.
Commentators speak either of a "Johannine community," "Johannine circle," or "a community of the
Beloved Disciple," characterized by their contrast with those they opposed: "the Jews" (e.g. 2:6, 13; 5:1,
16; 6:4; 8:48, 52; 19:40); crypto-Christians (9:22, 30-38); disciples of John the Baptist (4:1).(213)
138. Many Pauline and Johannine verses using koinÇnia-terms have been cited above (§§11-13). No New Testament passage using koinÇnia is directly related to ekkl‘sia, but "the fellowship of his
Son, Jesus Christ our Lord" (1 Cor. 1:9) is the underlying reality expressing the union of Christ and
Christians in the "one body" of Christ, which is the church. Passages using koinÇnia or koinÇnein tell us
little about the structure of such fellowship or the ministries exercised by Christians in it. Paul's
description of Titus as "my partner (koinÇnos)" in 2 Corinthians 8:23 says nothing about Titus's specific
ministry. Galatians 6:6, in a reference to oral instruction, possibly a baptismal catechesis, says, "Let the
one who is taught the word share (koinÇneitÇ) all good things with the one who teaches."(214)
139. Salvation, as an effect of the Christ-event, is an important element in Pauline theology. In
light of Old Testament imagery of Yahweh delivering his people Israel (Isaiah 45:15; Zechariah 8:7), Paul
sees that deliverance now coming through Christ: Christians "are being saved" by the cross of Christ (1
Cor. 1:18, 21). 1 Corinthians 15:2 speaks of "the gospel...by which you are saved" (cf. 2 Cor. 2:15). Paul
identifies "the gospel" as "the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes" (Rom. 1:16). Only
in Philippians 3:20 does Paul call Jesus sÇt‘r, and as such he is still awaited. The end result is still
something of the future, having an eschatological aspect (1 Thess. 2:16; 5:8-9; 1 Cor. 3:15; 5:5; Rom. 5:9-10; 8:24 ["In hope we have been saved!"]; 10:9-10, 13). He urges the Philippians, "Work out your own
salvation in fear and trembling" (2:12), adding immediately, however, "for God is at work in you, both to
will and to work for his good pleasure" (2:13), lest anyone think that salvation is achieved without God's
grace.(215) In the passages cited, Paul addresses Christians in the plural; a corporate sense of salvation is
thereby expressed. Hebrews 2:3 cautions Christians, "...how shall we escape if we neglect such great
salvation, which was initially announced by the Lord and attested to us by those who heard him?".
140. In the New Testament, explicit indications of the early church's ministries are diverse and
lack uniformity.(216) In his earliest letter, Paul counsels Thessalonians to "respect those who labor among
you and who are over you (proïstamenous) in the Lord and admonish you" (1 Thess. 5:12),(217) but with no
details about their specific titles or functions. The three participles (laboring, standing over, admonishing)
refer to one group, either a group of leaders or all members of the community together.(218)
141. In Philippians, Paul greets the saints at Philippi, along with episkopoi kai diakonoi, often
rendered, "overseers and ministers,"(219) possibly meaning two ministries not otherwise defined. Some see
"overseers and ministers" as referring to the same reality (a hendiadys), and thus to one ministry,
"overseers who serve."(220) The two titles, however, more likely arose in Philippi out of the Greco-Roman
distinct usage of episkopos and diakonos in government, guilds, and societies.(221) Possibly episkopoi
designates leaders of Philippian house churches. Diakonoi may imply agents of the overseers, perhaps in
financial matters.(222)
142. In 1 Corinthians the conception of the church as "the body of Christ" first emerges in
12:27-28 and becomes an important notion in the Deutero-Paulines (Col. 2:17; Eph. 4:12; cf. Col. 1:18;
Eph. 1:22-23; 4:15-16). In that body, where all members have some function, Paul lists, among the various
gifts (charismata) coming from the Spirit and endowing the members, those whom "God has appointed in
the church": apostles, prophets, teachers, miracle-workers, healers, helpers, administrators, and speakers in
tongues (12:28). Romans 12:6-8 lists them in abstract form: prophecy, ministry, teaching, exhorting,
contributing, leading, and acts of mercy. Note also the gifts to the church from the ascended Christ in
Ephesians 4:11: apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers. Apropos of such passages, an
earlier round of this dialogue commented that "some of these categories belong in the special Ministry of
the church (e.g. apostles, prophets, teachers) and that others reflect the ministry of the people of God (acts
of mercy, aid, and helping), and that some are hard to categorize (healing, teaching)."(223)
143. In Acts 14, it is said of Paul and Barnabas "In each church they installed presbyters
(presbyterous kat' ekkl‘sian) and with prayer and fasting commended them to the Lord" (v. 23).(224) In
Paul's own uncontested letters, "presbyters" are never mentioned. At Acts 20:17, the Apostle addresses the
Ephesian presbyterous t‘s ekkl‘sias, counseling them to keep watch over themselves and "over the whole
flock, of which the Holy Spirit has appointed you overseers (episkopous), to shepherd the church of God"
(Acts 20:28).(225) Here the "church of God" is clearly under the supervision of "presbyters," who are called
"overseers" appointed by the Holy Spirit. So the question arises, What is the difference in the New
Testament between presbyteros and episkopos? Moreover, it is noteworthy that episkopoi in this passage
are understood as "appointed" by "the Holy Spirit," and not by apostles; so even if they carry on a ministry
begun by apostles, there is no indication that their authority to do so is transmitted to them by apostles.(226)
144. The Pastoral Epistles stress structured ministry and orthodox teaching, especially Titus
and 1 Timothy. But ekkl‘sia appears only three times: in 1 Timothy 5:16 (probably meaning the local
congregation in Ephesus); 3:5 (ekkl‘sia tou theou, "God's church," with a more universal connotation);
and 3:15 ("the household of God..., the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth,"
probably meant in a universal sense). The concept of the body of Christ is absent from the Pastoral
Epistles, as is the term koinÇnia. The church is the collectivity of Christians that must be properly
managed and governed in the interest of sound doctrine.
145. In the Pastoral Epistles, ministry is described, first, apropos of Titus and Timothy and,
second, of other members of the church. In the first case, Titus and Timothy function as emissaries of the
author, but they are called neither episkopos nor presbyteros.(227) The author seeks to make sure that the
apostolic gospel will continue to be preached without contamination or perversion. Timothy is instructed to
administer the church of Ephesus, above all to "teach" (1 Tim. 4:11, 16; 6:2; cf. 2 Tim. 2:2, 24), and "not
be hasty in the laying on of hands" (1 Tim. 5:22).(228) Titus too is to exercise his "authority" (epitag‘, Titus
2:15), to amend what is defective in the church of Crete, and appoint presbyters (1:5); he is also to "teach
what befits sound doctrine" (2:1). In the second case, among the tasks that others are to carry out in
Ephesus and Crete are teaching (1 Tim. 4:13, 16; 5:17; Titus 1:9); "the work of an evangelist" (2 Tim 4:5);
preaching the Word (2 Tim. 4:2; cf. 1 Tim. 5:17); exhorting (1 Tim. 4:13); guarding the deposit (1 Tim.
6:20); caring for the "public reading of Scripture" (1 Tim. 4:13); and common prayer (1 Tim. 2:8). There
is, however, no reference to eucharistic ministry in the Pastoral Epistles, nor any indication about who
would preside over it.
146. The titles for Paul,(229) "herald," "apostle," and "teacher of the Gentiles" (1 Tim. 2:7), are
given to no one else in these letters. Timothy is to be kalos diakonos, "a good minister," of Christ Jesus (1
Tim. 4:6),(230) but here diakonos is used generically and hardly means that he was a "deacon." Timothy has
been commissioned(231) by the laying on of hands by the presbyteral college (presbyterion, 1 Tim. 4:14), and
by the laying on of hands by the writer (2 Tim. 1:6); i.e. a grace (charisma) has been conferred on
Timothy, which was not simply the "authority" (epitag‘) of an office bestowed. Nothing similar is said of
Titus, who is directed "to appoint presbyters in every town" (Titus 1:5).
147. The Pastoral Epistles list qualities to be sought in individuals who are called episkopos,
"overseer" (in the singular),(232) presbyteroi, "presbyters" (in the plural),(233) diakonoi, "ministers" or
"intermediary agents,"(234) and ch‘rai, "widows."
148. The qualifications of the episkopos are set forth in 1 Timothy 3:1-7:(235) eight positive, five
negative, with the most important being "skillful in teaching" (didaktikos, 3:2), but he is also to "provide
for (epimel‘setai) God's church" (3:5), implying an administrative role.(236)
149. The term presbyteros is used in Pastoral Epistles in two senses: (1) as an adjective
denoting dignity of age, "older" (1 Tim. 5:1, "older man"; 5:2, "older woman");(237) and (2) as a substantive,
a title for a Christian community official, "presbyter" (Titus 1:5; 1 Tim. 5:17, 19). In Titus 1:5-9, the
author lists many of the same qualifications, required for the episkopos in 1 Tim. 3:1-7, as requirements for
the presbyteroi, and Titus 1:5-9, which begins with qualifications of "presbyters," suddenly shifts in v. 7 to
episkopos, "an overseer," where the qualifications are ten positive and seven negative. The most important
differences from 1 Timothy is that the episkopos is now called theou oikonomos, "God's steward" (1:7)
and an exhorter with sound doctrine (1:9). Moreover, in 1 Timothy 5:17, the author speaks of "presbyters
who preside well" and "those who labor in preaching and teaching," which may denote two different kinds
of presbyters.(238)
150. In the Pastoral Epistles, diakonos and diakonia are used in a generic sense: "minister" and
"ministry" (1 Tim. 4:6; 2 Tim. 4:5); and also in a specific sense of a group often called "deacons." The
qualifications for the latter are given in 1 Timothy 3:8-13, five positive, three negative; some of them echo
the qualifications for the presbyters and overseers. This institution in the early church may be a
development of the action taken in Acts 6:1-6, resulting in the appointment of the Seven (Acts 21:8); but
they are never called diakonoi in Acts, even though their function is said to be diakonein trapezais, "to
serve tables."(239) Scholars debate whether gynaikas (1 Tim. 3:11) refers to women deacons (somewhat like
Phoebe of Rom. 16:1) or to the wives of deacons.(240)
151. Finally, mention must be made of the enrolled ch‘rai, "widows," of 1 Timothy 5:3-16,
where the qualifications are set forth for those who may be considered such. What their function would be
in the structured church is not explained.(241)
152. Of the four groups, episkopos seems to be the most important, being called theou
oikonomos, "God's steward" (Titus 1:7; 1 Tim. 1:4; cf. 1 Tim. 3:15).
153. The real problem is how to distinguish presbyteroi from episkopos in the Pastoral Epistles,
and to say what the difference is in function or role that they are thought to play.(242) Interpreters debate
whether in the Pastoral Epistles the church-structure involves two or three offices: either deacons and
bishop/presbyters; or deacons, presbyters, and bishop, each clearly distinct.(243)
154. In other New Testament writings, presbyters (presbyteros/-oi) appear widely for
Christians serving as community leaders (Acts 11:30; 20:17; Heb. 11:2; Jas. 5:15; 1 Pet. 5:1, 5; 2 John 1;
3 John 1), with no hint of accompanying episkopos or diakonos. The author of 1 Peter even speaks of
himself as "fellow elder" (sympresbyteros) as he exhorts other presbyteroi.(244) Whatever its origin,
"presbyter" was a frequent designation of office in the New Testament, even if the term tells us little about
the nature of this office.
155. Churches in the New Testament period were related to each other in terms of concern and
sharing. For instance, in Acts 15, Paul and Barnabas are sent by the Antiochene church to the apostles and
presbyters of Jerusalem to consult them about whether Gentiles have to be circumcised and observe the
Mosaic law in order to "be saved" (Acts 15:1-2; the so-called Jerusalem Council; cf. Gal 2:1-10). Concern
for other churches is found in the decision of James and other Jerusalem leaders to send a letter to the
particular churches of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia about porneia ("fornication" [NRSV] or "unlawful
marriage" [NABRNT]) and dietary matters (Acts 15:13-29).(245) Here one sees the mother-church of
Jerusalem guiding the activity of daughter-churches.
156. Paul manifests concern for koinÇnia in his appeals to his churches for a contribution for
"the saints" in Jerusalem (1 Cor. 16:1; 2 Cor. 8:1-5; Gal. 2:9-10).(246) Often the churches of one area send
greetings to other churches (1 Cor. 16:19 [Aquila and Prisca and their house church]; Rom. 16:23; cf. Col.
4:13, 15-16). Such a sharing of concern for other ecclesial communities of a certain region is a form of
koinÇnia, even if the term itself is not used.
157. To summarize, the New Testament evidence reveals that after the resurrection of Jesus his
followers became aware of themselves as ekkl‘sia, a community united by faith in him and sharing a
destiny of salvation. They spoke of the koinÇnia in which they shared. Leadership always existed in the
earliest Christian churches, some of it Spirit-appointed, some of it established by Apostles or others; but no
one pattern of leadership emerged. Jesus' words to Simon Peter imply a Petrine function among his
followers in his church to be built or flock to be fed, but they supply no specific form of that function.
According to Acts, the Twelve impose hands on the Seven, who are to "serve tables," but some of whom
act as preachers and teachers. Others appoint presbyters in local churches, and Paul greets episkopoi kai
diakonoi as distinct from the rest of the Christians of Philippi. Yet the specific function of these ministers
is never fully stated. Even when desired qualities of episkopos, presbyteroi, or diakonoi are spelled out in
the Pastoral Letters, the precise function of such ministers of the Christian community remains unclear.
158. The ministry and structures which serve the church as a koinÇnia of salvation have
changed in various ways over 2000 years. In what follows, we attempt to present the phases of that
development that are most relevant to this dialogue. There will be a single narrative for developments up to
the Reformation (see §§159-170); distinctive Catholic and Lutheran developments starting with the
Reformation will receive separate treatments (see §§171-242).
A. Developments in Service to Koinonia
1. Church Structures and Leadership
159. After, or even in some cases contemporary with, the developments exhibited in the New
Testament, a certain variety in the structure of the churches(247) began to yield to the pattern that became
normal after Constantine. It became customary for each church to have a single principal leader, who was
often assisted by counselors and one or more deputies; the terminology used by Ignatius of Antioch has
become standard for these roles: bishop, presbytery or group of elders, and deacons.(248) Together these
leaders were responsible for the activity and especially the cohesion of the church they served.(249) Cohesion
between churches was part of their task, and it was carried out by letter,(250) personal travel,(251) and meetings
(synods), even in the second and third centuries.
160. A special role in this maintenance of koinonia was played by the consecrated eucharistic
bread itself, whether taken to those who were unable to attend the common liturgy,(252) offered as a sign of
koinonia from one bishop to another,(253) or shared from the bishop's liturgy to the altars of other eucharistic
celebrations in the neighborhood of his city, the so-called fermentum.(254) The exclusion of a Christian from
the eucharistic assembly was intended to bring about conversion, serving as a grave warning to repent, and
even in serious cases of apostasy in persecution this koinonia could be restored as death approached.(255)
Likewise the refusal to be "in communion" was the most solemn declaration that koinonia did not exist.(256)
161. Koinonia was exhibited through the participation by other neighboring bishops in the
ordination of a new colleague.(257) Letters of communion established the same kind of link with bishops
farther away, attesting both to the orthodoxy of a new bishop's belief and the integrity of his election, thus
certifying his place as a successor to the apostles. Among the criteria which made communion with other
bishops possible, we should note the use of orthodox scriptures,(258) the common celebration of the principal
Christian festivals,(259) and the exclusion of those denounced by other churches as heretics.(260)
162. The oldest and largest churches played a leading role in maintaining these bonds.(261)
Sometimes prominence was determined by Roman imperial organization, e.g., the early importance of the
see of Caesarea Maritima in Palestine, the Roman provincial capital, whose prerogatives are preserved
even at the Council of Nicaea (325); and the sudden rise to prominence of Byzantium, renamed
Constantinople, as the eastern capital of the Roman Empire, recognized at the Council of Constantinople
(381) and even more emphatically in the 28th canon of Chalcedon (451), which was not accepted by the
church of Rome. Another sort of prominence derived from Christian history: Thus in the fourth century
Jerusalem, which had an insignificant place in the Roman scheme, came to take precedence of honor over
Caesarea Maritima in Palestine, the capital city of the province, and was deemed a fifth patriarchate at the
Council of Chalcedon (451).
163. Up into the third century, there seems not to have been a clear distinction between the titles
"bishop" and "presbyter:" the former could be seen as a presbyter with the main responsibility for a
church, and the authority and powers necessary for carrying out that responsibility.(262) At first churches
could be designated by a pair of terms, ekklesia and paroikia, as in "the church of God which sojourns
(paroikousa) at...."(263) Even if quite small, churches would normally be led by someone who could be
called a "bishop;" village and rural churches were headed by country bishops (chorbishops) until the fourth
century.(264) The collegial presbyterate was concerned mainly with decision-making and doctrine and cannot
be shown to have priestly liturgical duties until the mid-third century.(265) Apart from that, we are poorly
informed about the ways in which pastoral leadership and care were exercised in different settings.
2. The Special Nature of Metropolitan Churches
164. In very large city churches such as the one in Rome, there might be a number of different
Christian communities or "schools," existing side-by-side, serving different populations, sometimes
complementing each other, sometimes competing with each other. The several congregations faced the rest
of the Christian world with a single voice, which we call that of the "bishop," but the internal arrangements
of the church in Rome and in other large centers of Christian population are unclear to us. In Rome a
unified structure can be seen by the third century.(266) At the beginning of the 250s, Cornelius lists the
membership of his community as, in addition to the bishop, "forty-six presbyters, seven deacons, seven
sub-deacons, forty-two acolytes, fifty-two exorcists, readers and door-keepers, above fifteen hundred
widows and persons in distress, all of whom are supported by the grace and loving-kindness of the
Master...."(267) Such large numbers could hardly have met in a single place, but Cornelius does not inform
us about the various congregations which must have existed in Rome and how they were related to each
other.
165. The church of Rome and its bishop claimed a certain precedence(268) and broad
responsibility in the church as a whole, founded upon its connection with the apostles Peter and Paul, who
preached in Rome and were martyred there,(269) and this claim was generally accepted by other churches,
though they did not hesitate to speak up for their own rights and traditions.(270) Irenaeus of Lyon made a
case for the continuous orthodoxy of the church of Rome and its presiding bishops, one after another,(271)
and though he insisted that a similar case could be made for the other ancient churches, such as Ephesus,
Rome's role as a benchmark of orthodoxy only grew with the passage of time.
B. Communion and Ministry in the Patristic and Medieval Church
166. With the legalization of Christianity in the Roman Empire,(272) the number of Christians
rose rapidly, and structure and ministry in the church developed to meet the task of assuring continuity of
doctrine among those newly added to the church, consistency of discipline in the many new Eucharistic
communities, and communion in the apostolic faith in the church as a whole. The boundary between laity
and clergy became more distinct, and certain tasks (e.g. catechesis) were absorbed by the clergy, especially
the presbyters.(273) Larger churches, instead of subdividing into smaller ones headed by their own bishops,
developed in the opposite direction, with the suppression of the institution of chorbishop(274) and the
delegation of pastoral responsibility to presbyters under the bishop's authority.(275) Cities in the western
church seem not to have been divided into parishes before the ninth century.(276) In rural areas, the rising
number of proprietary churches erected by newly converted feudal lords(277) and the many local
congregations cared for by monasteries(278) were gradually integrated into this episcopal structure as well.
Bishops tried to foster the unity of the congregations under their care by gathering their clergy regularly(279)
and by encouraging the urban clergy to live in community.(280)
167. The emperor Constantine and his successors encouraged the bishops to continue the
practice of meeting in councils or synods, and Canon 5 of the Council of Nicaea, which Constantine
convened, legislated that provincial and regional councils should be held regularly. This legislation, which
was reiterated by later directives, was observed to a varying degree in different times and regions.(281)
Greater councils, including those technically known as "ecumenical" councils,(282) were of great importance
for the maintenance of communion, though they were not always successful in achieving church unity.(283) In
addition, communion among churches coexisted with and even benefitted from a hierarchical grouping,
under the metropolitan (bishop of the metropolis of the civil diocese)(284) and the patriarch, through whom
each congregation was in communion with the rest of the church.(285) A high level of leadership, both
doctrinal and disciplinary, was offered by the patriarchs: the bishops of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, to
which were later added Constantinople as the "new Rome" and seat of the emperor, and Jerusalem as the
church of origin of Christianity and a focus of pilgrimage.(286) Though as a practical matter "the
organization of the church in five patriarchates did not last long,"(287) the ideal has continued to be a
powerful symbol of the compatibility of distinction between churches and effective communion.(288)
168. While these developments made it difficult to envisage every local parish as embodying
everything which is required in order to be "church," the ancient equivalence of presbyter and bishop was
not forgotten. Jerome insists upon that equivalence when he is making the argument that it is normal for
bishops to be chosen from among the presbyters of the church, rather than from the deacons.(289) He argued,
"For also at Alexandria, from Mark the evangelist down to bishops Heraclas and Dionysius, the presbyters
always chose one of themselves and, having elevated him in grade, named him bishop-just as if an army
might make an emperor by acclamation, or deacons choose one of themselves, whom they know to be hard-working, and call him archdeacon. For what, apart from ordaining, does a bishop do which a presbyter
does not?" "Ambrosiaster" (thought to be Pelagius), in his comments on the Pauline epistles, makes the
same point regarding New Testament usage.(290)
Both Jerome and Ambrosiaster are reflected in the De ecclesiasticis officiis of Isidore of
Seville (c. 560-636). He tells us that "'Bishop,' as one of the prudent says, is the name of a work, not of
an honor.... Therefore we can say in Latin that the bishop superintends, so that someone who would love
to preside but not to assist may understand that he is not a bishop."(291) For Isidore, presbyters correspond
to Old Testament priests as bishops do to the high priest. Presbyters and bishops are alike in regard to the
Eucharist, teaching the people, and preaching; he adds:
and only on account of authority is ordination and consecration
reserved to the high priest, lest if the discipline of the church were arrogated by
many it might dissolve concord and generate scandals.(292)
Isidore, like Jerome and Ambrosiaster, cites 1 Tim. 3:8, Tit. 1:5; Phil. 1:1, and Acts 20:28, and his
other sources are as follows: the line about bishops as superintendents is from Augustine;(293) the statement
about the common duties of bishops and presbyters, with a purely disciplinary restriction of certain powers
to the former, comes from an anonymous treatise "On the Seven Orders of the Church;"(294) and the
comments on Scripture are from Pelagius' commentary on 1 Timothy. All Isidore's observations about the
bishop/presbyter relationship are taken up by later canonical and theological authors, particularly Peter
Lombard,(295) and become part of the standard repertory of authorities with which western Christian
theologians had to deal.(296)
169. How undefined the distinction between presbyters and bishops was can also be seen
occasionally on the practical level, where there were some striking instances of presbyters exercising
powers typical of bishops when the occasion called for it. For example, two eighth-century missionaries,
Willehad and Liudger,(297) whom Charlemagne had sent to convert the Saxons on his eastern border,
ordained clergy for the churches they founded, long before they themselves received consecration as
bishops. In the fifteenth century, three different popes delegated the power to ordain to abbots who had not
been ordained to the episcopate; in two of those cases, the privilege included ordination to the priesthood.(298)
For many medieval theologians, the limiting of ordination to bishops was associated with the episcopal
dignity, but not with orders as such. After the introduction of pseudo-Dionysius' De ecclesiastica
hierarchia into Latin theology in the early thirteenth century, Dionysius' pervasive arrangement of
everything in patterns of three seems to have deepened the sense of a distinction among the orders of
deacon, presbyter, and bishop.(299)
170. While the communion among local congregations was primarily the charge of the bishop,
there were various attempts to assure unity in the church on a wider scale during the Middle Ages. In the
East, the rise of Islam, the Russian adoption of Christianity, and the growth of autocephalous churches led
to the type of structure characteristic of the Orthodox communion. In the West, the church of Rome
maintained and developed an ascendancy which was often advanced by the desire of other particular
churches to free themselves from domination from lay feudal lords. The bishops of Rome claimed that
anyone in the church might appeal to them,(300) and that they inherited the power of St. Peter.(301) The
Symmachan Forgeries of the sixth century,(302) the "Donation of Constantine" of the eighth,(303) and the False
Decretals brought in from France in the ninth century(304) all tended to support and promote the papal
primacy. Bernard of Clairvaux hailed that primacy as universal(305) and despite challenges from figures like
Marsilius of Padua and scandals like the Great Schism of the West papal primacy persisted into
Reformation times. The struggle against feudal control of the church was not an unmixed success,
however: in the process, bishops, abbots, and the popes themselves became feudal lords and consequently a
part of that system;(306) and the pope's success in divesting kings of responsibility for the ecclesia
universalis laid the groundwork for the rise of the autonomous state and the dichotomy between sacred and
secular.
171. The traditional, though varied and often unsettled, medieval structures of church and
ministry provided the background for the Lutheran reformers of the sixteenth century and "the impact of
the gospel"(307) that they brought to the fore. They sought removal of unacceptable aspects and renewal of
the existing church, not wholesale restructuring, as part of their conservative reformation. But, with some
exceptions outside the Holy Roman Empire,(308) the bishops of the day, many of whom had feudal positions
to protect, refused to endorse the aims of the Wittenberg reformers and would not ordain candidates
committed to the Reformation gospel. In spite of this opposition, the reformers continued the principle of
one ordained ministry, employing a variety of approaches to structure, on the basis of biblical and patristic
sources and medieval precedents. Self-appointment to the ministry was not even considered, nor was direct
appointment by the Spirit. The steps Lutherans took in this emergency situation were not all intended to be
permanently normative. New situations in later times stimulated further development and often variety in
Lutheran praxis for church and ministry within the framework of the confessional commitments of the
sixteenth century.
A. The Nature of the Church as Communion and its Ministry
1. Communion and Local Church
172. Communion as a term applied specifically to the church is not found in the writings of the
Reformers or their opponents. But Luther does apply the closely related notions of the communion of saints
and eucharistic communion. His sermon on The Blessed Sacrament of the Holy and True Body of Christ
and the Brotherhoods(309) seeks to provide a basis for Christian life in both church and city. The
transforming power of love, the bonds of unity, and participation in the Body of Christ (comprehending
both Christ and fellow Christians) are all centered in the Lord's Supper:
[T]he blessing of this sacrament is fellowship and love.... This
fellowship is twofold: on the one hand we partake of Christ and all saints; on the
other hand we permit all Christians to be partakers of us, in whatever way they
and we are able. Thus by means of this sacrament, all self-seeking love is rooted
out and gives place to that which seeks the common good of all; and through the
change wrought by love there is one bread, one drink, one body, one community.
This is the true unity of Christian brethren.(310)
The faithful truly participate in Christ and Christ in them.(311) In this relationship they share the
goods or gifts that are the fruits of that communion. These goods include a sharing not only in each other's
joys, but also in each other's sufferings.(312) Such mutual participation is communicated through the means of
grace, a sacramental reality that presumes ministers of the word.(313) The existence of ministers, in turn,
presumes an ecclesiastical ordering or structure, in short, a church as communion.(314)
173. According to the Augsburg Confession, "The church is the assembly of saints in which the
gospel is taught purely and the sacraments are administered rightly" (CA 7), and "...no one should teach
publicly in the church or administer the sacraments unless properly called" (CA 14). Because the local
congregation has the word proclaimed and the sacramental gifts of God, it is "church," in that place, in the
full sense. In lands that embraced the teaching of Luther, the local church continued to be geographically
and often physically the same as that which had existed previously, in village, town, or city. Lutheran
immigrants in the United States and Canada formed local congregations where they settled.(315) In such
assemblies Lutherans participate in Christ and live out their faith.(316)
174. For Luther and the Lutheran tradition, the local church, to use biblical language (as in
Ezek. 34, John 10, 1 Pet. 5:1-4), consists of a shepherd and the flock. The term "shepherd" refers to the
pastor with tasks of word and sacraments, "the flock" to the people of God in a particular place. The
pastor as minister of word and sacrament also has oversight responsibilities in the congregation. Luther
could describe the pastor/bishop as a supervisor or watchman, i.e., one who carefully observes his flock to
see to it that among them the word is taught and proclaimed in its purity, that the sacraments are used
rightly, and that the community strives to live according to the word and command of God.(317) Such a
function is common to all ordained ministers whether they preside over a congregation or a diocese, and it
takes the form of personal oversight.(318)
175. It can further be argued, as of critical importance, that all visible means and structures, all
the institutional realities of the church, must reflect and embody the gospel in as clear and as unmistakable
a manner as possible. Therefore koinonia can neither be forced, nor can it exist apart from faith. A true
faith (i.e., one that is a participation in Christ) will foster a communion that is authentic (i.e., one that is a
real participation in Christ).
2. The One Office of Pastor/Bishop
176. That the office of presbyter and bishop was one and the same was a teaching widespread
in the Middle Ages inherited ultimately from Jerome and the New Testament. Luther asserted the position
from 1519 on.(319) He wrote in 1520:
according to the institution of Christ and the apostles, every city
should have a priest or bishop, as St. Paul clearly says in Titus 1[:5]....
According to St. Paul, and also St. Jerome, a bishop and a priest are one and the
same thing. But of bishops as they now are the Scriptures know nothing. Bishops
have been appointed by ordinance of the Christian church, so that one of them may
have authority over several priests.(320)
Luther's point was "that originally the episcopus was the leader of the congregation in one city,
i.e., the pastor, and not the leader of a diocese with many such congregations."(321)
177. In the Lutheran Confessions, this position is forcefully expressed in the Treatise on the
Power and Primacy of the Pope:
It is universally acknowledged, even by our opponents, that this power
is shared by divine right by all who preside in the churches, whether they are
called pastors, presbyters, or bishops. For that reason Jerome plainly teaches that
in the apostolic letters all who preside over churches are both bishops and
presbyters.... What, after all, does a bishop do, with the exception of ordaining,
that a presbyter does not?"(322)
178. The Reformers, while denying any jure divino difference between presbyter (pastor) and
bishop, also allowed, however, for the later, historical development of the episcopal office beyond the
individual congregation and even for "distinctions of degree" between bishops and pastors. But this is by
human authority, not by divine right.(323)
179. This understanding of the relation between bishop and presbyter not only opened
possibilities for needed reform of the episcopate, but also justified the establishment of new (though
recognizable) forms through which the ministry of oversight could be exercised alternatively, if necessary
and as circumstances required. Melanchthon applied this reasoning and developed it to meet the urgent
practical problem of providing for the orderly succession of ministers in areas that embraced the movement
for reform. He maintained that, inasmuch as in the ancient church presbyters had been permitted to ordain,
presbyters may once again assume this function in the absence of responsible bishops, as the current crisis
clearly demanded, for the sake of the gospel. When bishops become heretics or refuse ordination,
Melanchthon said, then "the churches are by divine right compelled to ordain pastors and ministers for
themselves."(324) Luther also had claimed that the church should not be deprived of ministers on account of
neglectful, cruel, or renegade bishops. "Therefore, as the ancient examples of the church and the Fathers
teach us, we should and will ordain suitable persons to this office ourselves...."(325) Such action should not
be regarded as a deliberately provocative or independent attempt to forge a new ecclesiastical structure.
One index of their firm hope to avoid schism is that, while one Lutheran ordination may have taken place in
Wittenberg in 1525, there were no more till 1535.(326) The Lutherans believed they were proposing the more
ancient, and thus original, ministerial structure more conducive to authentic koinonia.
180. The Reformers, as indicated above, embraced the view that the office of bishop developed
historically, after the New Testament period, as that of a presbyter with special oversight in an area larger
than a single congregation or town. While established by human authority, this structure, "was instituted
by the Fathers for a good and useful purpose."(327) As early as 1522, Luther sketched what an Evangelical
bishop would be like, oriented to the gospel of justification and the church as a communio for salvation.
His tract, Against the falsely named Spiritual Estate of the Pope and Bishops, was an appeal for support
from, and reform by, the then reigning bishops.(328) It has been argued that, "Had this attempt been
successful, the German Lutheran churches--and most of the United ones [Lutheran and Reformed]--would
today have a similar appearance to those of Scandinavia."(329) But none of the bishops within the Holy
Roman Empire supported the Reformation. The Lutheran charges against them therefore increasingly
became that they were not true bishops but princes, and ultimately opposed the gospel.
181. Fundamental was the problem of the power of bishops. The locus classicus of the
Lutheran argument regarding this power is found in Augsburg Confession Article 28, "In former times
there were serious controversies about the power of bishops, in which some people improperly mixed the
power of the church and the power of the sword." The reformers requested that bishops restrict themselves
to doing what is according to the gospel: "the power of the keys or the power of the bishops is the power of
God's mandate to preach the gospel, to forgive and retain sins, and to administer the sacraments.... If
bishops possess any power of the sword, they possess it not through the command of the gospel but by
human right, granted by kings and emperors...." The reformers' indictment of the bishops was that they
were using the power of the sword to impose and enforce religious practices contrary to the gospel.(330)
182. While Augsburg Confession Article 28 was immediately concerned with the practical need
to distinguish temporal from spiritual power, it also contained a positive proposal to reform and reorient the
church's episcopal structure by returning it to its evangelical, spiritual, and pastoral foundations.
Consequently, according to the gospel, or, as they say, by divine right,
this jurisdiction belongs to the bishops as bishops (that is, to those to whom the
ministry of the Word and sacraments has been committed): to forgive sins, to
reject teaching that opposes the gospel, and to exclude from the communion of the
church the ungodly whose ungodliness is known--doing all this not with human
power but by the Word. In this regard, churches are bound by divine right to be
obedient to the bishops according to the saying [Luke 10:16], "Whoever listens to
you listens to me."(331)
B. Structures for Regional Oversight
1. The German Lands
183. It soon became apparent in Reformation territories that, if the aims of the reformers were
to be carried through in the life of the churches, the oversight that they believed was a special task of the
bishops continued to be necessary to congregations embracing the Evangelical faith. A number of steps
were taken to carry this out in an Evangelical way.
184. (a) The traditional system of episcopal visitation of congregations had collapsed and the
reigning bishops would scarcely carry out visits with encouragement and admonishment along the lines of
Reformation theology. Therefore Melanchthon provided an "Instruction" for visitation of the churches and
schools of Electoral Saxony, to which Luther wrote a preface (1528). This episkop‘ was to be conducted
by centrally appointed visitors from outside the individual parish, to measure what was being done by the
standards of the word of God.(332) Catholicity and accountability to the gospel criterion were involved.(333)
185. (b) In some exceptional instances, Catholic bishops in German lands joined the
Reformation.(334) Luther watched such developments with interest but was disappointed that no similar
cases of bishop and region becoming Lutheran occurred within the Empire.(335) Thus, outside of Prussia
(and Sweden and Finland), existing bishops did not come into the Lutheran orbit with their regional
churches.
186. (c) In three instances, pastors holding to the Reformation were appointed bishops of
existing dioceses in Saxony.(336) In one case, an attempt to involve an existing bishop in the consecration
came to nothing.(337) Luther and superintendents and pastors from nearby cities conducted the laying on of
hands in the ordination/installation service for two of these bishops; neighboring superintendents laid hands
on the third. An episcopate without political power and finance proved unworkable within the structure of
the Holy Roman Empire.(338) With the Smalcald War and eventually the Peace of Augsburg, such
experiments with Evangelical bishops came to an end. The Protestant princes took over as governors of the
episcopal sees, an inheritance of the prince-bishop of the Middle Ages. It was not until 1918, after the First
World War and the collapse of the Empire and creation of a republic in Germany, that the role of the prince
as summus episcopus finally was abolished.(339)
187. (d) There emerged, nonetheless, an office of oversight for the German Lutheran churches,
called Superintendent(340) (etymologically a Latin-derivative equivalent of episkopos, one who oversees),
Dekan, or Propst. In so doing, the reformers "held fast to the episcopal office itself."(341)
188. The domination of the church by the princes, especially after the Peace of Augsburg, and
the appropriation by the princes of the authority of the former bishops meant that the church in Germany
tended to be organized along the political lines of the principalities (not nationally, as in Sweden and
England, which were more unified politically). The problem that Augsburg Confession 28 originally
addressed, namely, the confusion of temporal and spiritual authority that had existed with the medieval
episcopate, continued to require solution.
2. Nordic Countries
189. The political and ecclesiastical situation in the Nordic lands was different from that of the
Holy Roman Empire. In both Nordic kingdoms (Sweden-Finland and Denmark-Norway-Iceland), civil
wars, more political than religious in motivation, opened the way for the introduction of the Reformation.
Since the ruling authorities in both kingdoms came to support the Reformation, the political realities that
forced the creation of new church structures in continental Europe did not exist in the North. Thus, the
Lutheran intention to preserve the episcopal structure was realized in the Nordic countries.(342)
190. In Sweden and Finland (under Swedish rule until 1809), the medieval episcopal structure
was preserved relatively intact. In the Swedish Lutheran Church Ordinance of 1571, the importance of
episcopacy was stressed as "an irreplaceable order of the church."(343) This document maintains that, while
"the distinction which now exists between bishops and simple priests was not known at first in
Christendom, but bishop and priest were all one office," the "agreement that one bishop among them [the
pastors] should be chosen, who should have superintendence over all the rest...was very useful and without
doubt proceeded from God the Holy Ghost...so it was generally approved and accepted over the whole of
Christendom," a ministerial function that has remained in the church "and must remain in the future, so
long as the world lasts, although the abuse, which has been very great in this as in all other useful and
necessary things, must be set aside."(344) This text has been reaffirmed in modern Swedish church
statements.(345)
191. While a succession of episcopal consecrations was threatened during the sometimes
tumultuous sixteenth century, it was not broken and has been continued in Sweden down to the present.(346)
In 1884, all three Finnish bishops died within a short period of time. As a result, no bishop was available
to consecrate a new bishop. After some debate, focusing on the question of inviting a Swedish bishop to
consecrate a bishop in Russian-ruled Finland, a new Archbishop was consecrated by a professor of
theology at the University of Helsinki.(347) After independence from Russia in 1917, Swedish bishops were
invited to participate in Finnish episcopal consecrations and a succession of consecrations was re-established.
192. In 1536, the Reformation was carried through in Denmark, which at that time ruled
Norway and Iceland.(348) The previous bishops were replaced in 1537 by "superintendents"(349) for the Danish
and Norwegian dioceses, consecrated by Johannes Bugenhagen, city pastor of Wittenberg. While a
succession of consecrations was thus broken, the medieval diocesan and cathedral structures were
preserved and bishops continued to exercise a ministry of oversight.(350) A significant episcopal continuity or
sucessio sedis or localis was preserved.
193. The ecclesial structures of the Baltic lands went through complex changes as political
power shifted among the Teutonic Knights, Poland, Sweden, and Russia.(351) Episcopal structures remained
in place for the most part in Estonia until Russian rule arrived in the early eighteenth century. Lutheran
churches in Latvia and Lithuania tended to follow patterns more like those in Germany with consistories
and superintendents. In the early twentieth century, following the independence of all three of the Baltic
republics, the Estonian and Latvian churches turned to episcopal structures. Swedish and Finnish bishops
were invited to participate in their episcopal consecrations and thus these churches deliberately entered
episcopal succession. World War II and the Soviet annexation led to a severe disruption of church life,
including the interruption of succession, but in both countries such succession was re-established when it
again became possible to invite foreign bishops to participate in episcopal consecrations. The Lithuanian
church gave the Chair of the Consistory the title "Bishop" in 1976 and the first bishop was consecrated by
the Estonian archbishop.
194. In the Porvoo Declaration (see §§69, 111, 118, 241) all the Nordic and Baltic Lutheran
churches (with the exception of Denmark and Latvia) have committed themselves theologically to "the
episcopal office . . . as a visible sign expressing and serving the Church's unity and continuity in apostolic
life, mission and ministry" and procedurally "to invite one another's bishops normally to participate in the
laying on of hands at the ordination of bishops as a sign of the unity and continuity of the Church."(352) As a
result, all the Nordic and Baltic churches are episcopally structured and all but Denmark have taken on
succession as a sign of unity and continuity.
195. In other nearby countries, the Swedish episcopal succession was reintroduced into Finland
early in the twentieth century;(353) into Latvia after World War I (but later interrupted);(354) and into Estonia in
the 1960s.(355) The Porvoo Common Statement envisions the process extending to Norway and Iceland
(Denmark otherwise).(356)
C. Beyond the Local and Regional: the Universal Church
196. Reformation critiques of the papacy were shaped by the contrast developed during the
Middle Ages between that which was jure divino and that which was jure humano. For the Lutheran
Reformers, this distinction was exhaustive and exclusive: every practice in the church was either jure
divino or jure humano. No practice could be both; no practice could be neither. For the most part, the
Lutherans held that only practices mandated by God within Scripture or practices directly implied by the
gospel could be jure divino. That which was jure divino could not be changed by human design; that
which was jure humano was open to human alteration. Because the Lutherans could not find an
unambiguous institution of the papacy in Scripture, they denied its jure divino character.
197. Luther subscribed to the universal ministry of the bishop of Rome, but especially in view
of what he saw as a long history of abuses, he could not accept the claim that papal primacy existed by
divine right (jure divino). The bishop of Rome could claim such primacy (even given the history of abuse),
he acknowledged, but only by human right (jure humano). As Luther became convinced that the pope was
deliberately obstructing the preaching of the gospel, he did not hesitate to draw on the traditional popular
apocalyptic imagery and call the pope "Antichrist"(357) Luther saw the pope's intransigence as a sure
indication that the last days were at hand. Such a strong reaction need not be read as a simple rejection of
his earlier acknowledgment of a possible universal ministry, but rather as an expression of despair
regarding the apparently irreformable nature of the papacy. The pope appeared unlikely to do what all
ministry was established to do, namely proclaim the word of God, administer the sacraments, and guard the
truth of the gospel.(358)
198. This negative assessment of the papacy did not rule out the possibility that Lutherans
might accept a universal ministry involving the bishop of Rome, provided its authority was based clearly in
the gospel and spoke for it.(359) As Luther states in his commentary on Galatians (1531-35):
All we aim for is that the glory of God be preserved and that the
righteousness of faith remain pure and sound. Once this has been established,
namely that God alone justifies us solely by his grace through Christ, we are
willing not only to bear the pope aloft on our hands but also to kiss his feet."(360)
199. Even before the Council of Trent, priestly ministry had begun to develop in new ways in
the Catholic church. The need for renewal, which was already widely recognized, was answered by the
creation of specially trained priests not restricted to particular parishes or dioceses in their work. More
than a dozen new religious orders of priests were founded in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries,
e.g. Jesuits, Theatines, etc., to preach the gospel both in Europe and in newly discovered lands, to promote
deeper piety among the clergy and the faithful, and to work in education and care for the sick. Reform of
the older orders and of the diocesan clergy took place in many countries, and was reinforced by the
Council's insistence that bishops reside in their dioceses and visit parishes regularly. While the religious
priests were ordained for the work of their orders, not as pastors of local churches, they brought a more
vigorous and consistent preaching of the Gospel and a revival of congregational life to Catholic parishes,
and their example stimulated the diocesan clergy to greater zeal.(361)
A. The Council of Trent
200. In the face of the controversy and restructuring of the church involving the Lutherans, the
Council of Trent attempted to sort out what it understood to be Catholic teaching regarding ordination. It
undertook this task cautiously and conservatively, with a view toward addressing the most pressing of the
contemporary challenges enumerated above. During the debates at the Council of Trent, many of the issues
with which this dialogue is concerned made their appearance.(362) Long discussion was devoted to questions
about the ministry of bishops, including whether bishops' ministry was de iure divino: how could one avoid
eroding papal primacy or dismissing the respectable tradition which saw sacerdotium as adequately
exemplified in the simple priest?(363) Regarding the latter issue "it became clearer and clearer that the
gradations of Order, the steps of the sacramentum ordinis, lead not to the simple priest but to the
bishop,"(364) but the issue of the relation between bishop and pope remained intractable.(365) In the end, lest
there be no decree on the sacrament of Order at all, the Council fathers produced simplified canons which
left untouched several matters in dispute.(366) While the debate about the sacrament of Order was longer and
more complex than any other besides the debate over justification, the decree itself with its canons was
brief, owing mainly to the variety of theological and canonical approaches which existed to the
understanding of priesthood. Both the Lutheran attempts at reforming the presbyterate and episcopate
described earlier and Trent's extended and sometimes contentious debates on the sacrament of Order should
be considered in light of this variety.
201. Trent's doctrine on the sacrament of Order was formulated in a decree of session XXIII
(15 July 1563).(367) Priesthood (sacerdotium) itself is linked to sacrifice in the Old Testament; the new
visible priesthood to which Jesus Christ entrusted "...the power to consecrate, offer, and administer his
body and blood," along with the power of forgiving sin, is linked to the eucharist, the sacrifice of the New
Testament. The New Testament prescribes only how priests and deacons are to be ordained, but other
orders of ministers, ascending by degrees to the priesthood, go back to the beginning of the church.
Scripture, the apostolic tradition, and patristic tradition all say that grace is conferred by ordination, which
must therefore be accounted a sacrament of the church. Because ordination, like baptism and confirmation,
"imprints a character that cannot be destroyed or removed," the council insists the priesthood that
ordination confers is permanent and not to be confused with the spiritual power received by all the
baptized. Regarding the difference between priests and bishops, the Council says that bishops, who
succeed the apostles and receive from the Spirit the task of "ruling the church of God," are superior to the
priests, and can confer confirmation, ordain, and "do many other functions for which the lower order has
no power." As for the laity, whether congregations or civil magistrates, the Council denies that they have a
necessary, much less a sufficient, role in ordination. It is important to note, however, that while the council
fathers maintained that the hierarchy was instituted by divine ordinance, they took no position on whether
the declared superiority of bishops over priests was instituted jure divino.(368)
202. Eight canons condemning views opposed to the Council's doctrine were attached to the
doctrinal decree. It can be said of them that they "are purely 'defensive.' They simply defend the
legitimacy and validity of Catholic ordinations but say nothing whatever about the ministries of the
Protestant churches."(369) While canon 3 boldly says that ordination is "a sacrament ... instituted by Christ
the Lord" (a Christo domino institutum), canon 6 says that the hierarchy of bishops, presbyters, and other
ministers was "instituted by divine ordinance" (divina ordinatione institutam), a slightly less lofty claim
which still distinguishes hierarchy from mere human invention.(370) Canon 7 insists upon the power of
bishops, in particular that power which they do not have in common with presbyters and which makes them
higher than the latter,(371) namely the power to confirm and ordain.
203. The eighteen canons of the reform decrees of session XXIII reinforced the connection
between the power of Order and the power of jurisdiction, located above all in the bishop. Between the
first canon, on the requirement of residency for all who have the care of souls, and the eighteenth, which
prescribed the formation of seminaries, come canons concerned with fitness for ministry and the proper
procedure for advancing people though the degrees of ordination. The central role of the bishop was
underlined again and again, and privileges granted earlier to other prelates or church bodies were
rescinded.(372) This reorientation of the sacrament of Order in the direction of the bishop could not be carried
through completely at Trent because the council was unable to clarify the relation of episcopacy and papal
primacy, but it did succeed in articulating the difference between bishop and priest in sacramental, and not
merely jurisdictional, terms.(373)
204. Modern ecumenical dialogue has included a re-examination of the decrees of the Council
of Trent and the debates which led up to them. One of the fullest studies of the eight canons on the
sacrament of Order has been produced by the Ökumenische Arbeitskreis (Ecumenical Working Group)(374)
as part of their study of the Tridentine anathemas on the sacraments. It noted a difference of emphasis
between the Reformers, who stressed the primacy of the task of proclamation of the gospel including the
administration of the sacraments, and the bishops at Trent, who "still held fast to the concept of sacerdos,
or priest, and the relationship of this to the sacrifice of the mass."(375) It is not apparent whether the decree
describes or refutes the positions of the Lutheran reformers, and with what accuracy; canons 2, 6, and 8
rejected opinions of radical Reformers such as the Anabaptists, which were not shared by Luther. The
group's study concluded that canons 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 are not applicable to Lutherans today; canon 7 is still
applicable in part, since in Catholic teaching and practice priests are ordained by bishops only.(376)
B. The Roman Catechism (1566)
205. While the Council of Trent itself was quite guarded in many of its statements about the
sacrament of Order, the Roman Catechism issued at the Council's behest attempts some simple
explanations. It distinguishes between the internal priesthood by which "all the faithful are said to be
priests" and the external priesthood which pertains "only to certain men who have been ordained and
consecrated to God by the lawful imposition of hands and by the solemn ceremonies of holy Church, and
who are thereby devoted to a particular sacred ministry."(377) In regard to the external priesthood, whose
office "is to offer Sacrifice to God and to administer the Sacraments of the Church," the Catechism says,
Now although (the sacerdotal order) is one alone, yet it has various
degrees of dignity and power. The first degree is that of those who are simply
called priests.... The second is that of Bishops, who are placed over the various
dioceses to govern not only the other ministers of the Church, but the faithful also,
and to promote their salvation with supreme vigilance and care.(378)
There follow three higher degrees: Archbishops, Patriarchs, Supreme Pontiff.(379) The bishop is
declared to be the exclusive administrator of the sacrament of Order, although "It is true that permission
has been granted to some abbots occasionally to administer those orders that are minor and not sacred."(380)
One can observe in these texts the absence of the sharp polemic or analytical intensity that appear in other
genres and later Catholic authors.
206. The Council of Trent itself, as we have just noted, defended Catholic doctrine about the
sacrament of Order without dealing specifically with the Reformers' arguments. After the Council of Trent,
Catholic theologians like Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621) responded more directly to the Protestant
Reformers' views on church structure and ministry. In his Disputations on the Controversies of the
Christian Faith,(381) Bellarmine defended the traditional medieval doctrine that bishops and presbyters share
one priesthood, but he argued for bishops' superior power of both order and jurisdiction.(382) He dealt at
length with the New Testament texts in which bishops and presbyters seem to be one and the same (Phil. 1,
1 Tim. 3-4, Titus 1, Acts 20), and especially with arguments drawn from Jerome's interpretation of those
passages in his Letter to Evangelus. In an apparent rebuttal to Reformers like Melanchthon, Bellarmine
questions the inference from the letter that every presbyter is a bishop. If at the start all presbyters were
true bishops, then the distinction which was already known to Jerome must have arisen when some
accepted ordination of a lower degree. This, says Bellarmine, would not help Jerome to prove his argument
that presbyters had more claim than deacons to be promoted to bishop; therefore it is more likely that
bishops arose as a higher degree of Order than the presbyterate.(383)
207. Bellarmine was influential, but his solution to this question of the origin of the hierarchy
was not the only one proposed by Catholic scholars. At the end of the 19th century, Pierre Batiffol
proposed a more complicated evolution. First, the successors of the missionary leadership in the primitive
church were overseers (i.e., episcopoi) in each community, perhaps several of them working in partnership
at first but eventually just one. Presbyter, thought Batiffol, was the name applied in each place to the first
converts, benefactors, and owners of house-churches.
Thus one could be a presbyter without priesthood, and that must have
been the case with many of the first presbyters. But it was from among these
presbyters without priesthood that they chose--if not by necessity, at least in
fact--the members of the community who were raised to the function of
episkopé.... This primitive presbyterate was the original envelope of the
hierarchy; as a simply preparatory form, it disappeared. Just the word was
preserved to designate the priests, that is, the bishops subordinated to the chief
bishop.(384)
Thus, unlike Bellarmine, Batiffol theorized that later presbyters did come into being as bishops of
inferior rank: the role of bishop began as
a liturgical, social and preaching function, the episcopate-an
episcopate of several persons, like the diaconate; the plural episcopate disappears
when the apostles disappear, and separates to give rise to the chief episcopacy of
the bishop and the subordinated priesthood of the priests.(385)
That meant that later priests were really descendants of the bishops, not of the early presbyters.(386)
While this might seem to favor the Reformers' view, Batiffol's theory was diametrically opposed to an
ecclesiology which saw bishops as a human invention, necessary only for practical reasons; such a
description would apply more properly to presbyters.
208. For two centuries after Trent, Catholic theology took the form of treatises (often
polemical) on particular topics; but eventually the demand for comprehensive theological education called
forth new-style scholastic textbooks known as "manuals." One of the first of the sets of manuals included
a volume on the sacrament of Order by Thomas Holtzclau, S.J. (1716-1783).(387) He set himself against
many of the Reformers' ideas. He denounced any claim that civil rulers have a God-given right to
authorize ordinations,(388) and argues that Jerome's Letter to Evangelus "attributes to bishops a different
degree of Order, by apostolic tradition or jure divino, a greater dignity in the Church as Aaron excelled the
Levites."(389) He was aware of disagreements among Catholics concerning the extraordinary minister of
Order, including whether a simple priest could ordain by papal delegation.(390) He rejected the idea that a
simple priest could confer the presbyteral order under any circumstances, even with papal delegation, and
he could find neither actual instances nor plausible arguments, though he cited alleged instances.(391) Later
manuals continued to report the view of some other Catholic theologians that all the powers of bishops are
radically contained in the sacrament of Order conferred in the ordination of presbyters, though incapable of
exercise until enabled by the granting of appropriate jurisdiction.(392) Already in Holtzclau we can observe a
trait of the manuals which contributes to the incomplete way in which more recent Catholic tradition has
treated the issues of the present dialogue: the theology of the church appears early in the manuals, as an
argument for the authority and credibility of the church's teaching(393); the theology of the sacrament of
Order, on the other hand, resides in the final section of the manuals, usually between anointing of the sick
and marriage.(394) In this arrangement of the material, there is no occasion to ask how the relation of bishop
and presbyter might be paralleled by the relation between diocese and parish.(395)
B. Vatican I and Subsequent Developments
209. Vatican Council I (1869-1870) approved two dogmatic constitutions: Dei filius, the
Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, on the relationship between faith and reason, and Pastor
aeternus, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ, on the primacy of the papacy and the
infallibility of papal pronouncements ex cathedra. Three positions were represented at the Council: a
group of ultramontane infallibilists led by Manning and Senestrey, who upheld the infallibility of all papal
teaching, including the Syllabus of Errors, and who advocated papal infallibility as the source of the
Church's infallibility; the majority of the bishops who wanted to strengthen papal authority, and who were
thus open to defining papal infallibility; and a third group, comprising about one fifth of the Council, who
vehemently opposed defining papal infallibility. Because more than 60 members of this third group
deliberately left Rome before the final vote, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Pastor aeternus)
was passed on July 18, 1870, with only two negative votes. Because of the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian War, the council adjourned prematurely on October 20, 1870.
210. Pastor aeternus taught that "a primacy of jurisdiction over the whole church of God was
immediately and directly promised to the blessed apostle Peter and conferred on him by Christ the Lord."(396)
Furthermore, "whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains, by the institution of Christ himself, the
primacy of Peter of the whole church."(397) It also taught the Roman pontiff is the successor of Peter, vicar
of Christ, head of the whole church, and father and teacher of all Christian people. He has been given full
power to rule and govern the universal Church. Consequently, "the Roman church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other church. And that this jurisdictional power of the Roman
pontiff is both episcopal and immediate."(398) The Council added that this power of the supreme pontiff does
not detract from that ordinary and immediate power of episcopal jurisdiction by which individual bishops
govern their particular churches. Nevertheless, because of the premature adjournment of the council, the
theology of the papacy was not inserted into a larger theology of the episcopacy.
211. The Council defined papal infallibility as a divinely revealed dogma, but specified strictly
limited conditions under which infallibility is given by God:
that when the Roman pontiff speaks ex cathedra, that is, when in the
exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his
supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be
held by the whole church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him
in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to
enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions
of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church,
irreformable.(399)
The Council's definition of papal infallibility limited its scope far more than what the
Ultramontanes had advocated. Infallibility is assistance given by God first and foremost to the church.
Like a council, the pope teaches infallibly on the church's behalf under certain conditions. Infallibility
protects the pope from error only when he speaks in his official capacity as "the shepherd and teacher of all
Christians," not as an individual theologian. The content of the teaching must be directly related to
revelation. The pope does not teach infallibly out of his own abilities, but by virtue of "divine assistance."
His definitions are not subject to the juridical ratification of the church.
212. The treatment in the 1917 Code of Canon Law does not explicitly lay out the relationships
between bishop and pastor, diocese and parish. Some slight attention to dioceses and parishes is prefaced
to the treatment of clerics, i.e. Canon 215-16 of the 1917 Code. Canon 215 names the major territories,
including dioceses, which it is the prerogative of supreme ecclesiastical authority, i.e., the pope, "to erect,
reconfigure, divide, merge, suppress." Canon 216 lists lesser territories, which include parishes.
Thereafter the nature of those forms of church must be inferred from what the Code says about bishops and
pastors, as if they were functions of their ordained ministers, not realities in their own right. What is clear
is the sense that smaller realizations of church are formed by subdivision of larger ones, not larger ones by
the accumulation of smaller. As a canonist's study of pastors says, parishes arose relatively late: but, in
the fourth century,
there appeared among the chapels and oratories that dotted the Gallic
and Spanish countryside a more permanent pastoral institution called the "ecclesia
baptismalis" or "ecclesia major." Here for the first time there was established a
stable, juridic relationship between the faithful in a definite locality and one
individual church that was presided over by a priest.(400)
Until the ninth century, cities were not divided into parishes but were served from the cathedral
church.(401)
213. In the 1947 Apostolic Constitution Sacramentum ordinis, Pope Pius XII revised the ritual
of ordination to the diaconate, presbyterate, and episcopate, spelling out what is essential for the validity of
each rite.(402) Pius XII brought the Latin rite back into conformity with Eastern tradition by insisting upon
the laying on of hands and prayer, rather than the presentation of the liturgical vessels, as the essential rites
of ordination. This also was the practice of the Reformers. For purposes of this dialogue, it is important to
note the pope's insistence on the "unity and identity" of the sacrament of Order, "which no Catholic has
ever been able to call in question," despite the fact that there are slightly different rites for ordaining
deacons, presbyters and bishops,(403) and that the pope refers to the three "orders" in the plural when
discussing the rites. The new prayer for the ordination of the bishop asks God to "complete in your priest
the fullness of your ministry."(404)
C. The Second Vatican CouncilC. The Second Vatican Council
1. The Papacy
214. The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) confirmed the teaching of Vatican I regarding
the institution, the permanence, the nature and import of the sacred primacy of the Roman Pontiff and his
infallible teaching office.(405) The Roman Pontiff is the visible source and foundation of the unity of the
Church both in faith and in communion.(406) The council situates this teaching, however, within a theology
of the episcopacy that balances and complements the teaching on the papacy of Vatican II with an
emphasis on collegiality. Thus the teaching on the episcopacy provides a context for the teaching on the
papacy and yet is itself interpreted within a teaching on papal authority.
2. Episcopacy
215. Bishops represent an historical continuation of the apostolic office and therefore are
essential to the Roman Catholic understanding of the apostolicity of the church.(407) LG speaks of a
succession that goes back to the beginning by which the bishops are the "transmitters of the apostolic
line."(408) They thus serve the church's communion in apostolic faith. Among the principal tasks of bishops,
preaching of the gospel is pre-eminent.(409)
216. By virtue of their episcopal consecration and hierarchical communion with the bishop of
Rome and other bishops, bishops constitute a college or permanent assembly whose head is the bishop of
Rome.(410) A bishop represents his own church within this college, and all the bishops, together with the
pope, represent the whole church.(411) The bishop is responsible for the unity and communion of his church
with the other churches. The college of bishops does not constitute a legislative body apart from the pope,
but includes the pope as member and head of the college. The episcopal college exercises its collegiality in
a preeminent way in an ecumenical council. Bishops chosen from different parts of the world may also
serve in a council called the Synod of Bishops where they act on behalf of the whole episcopate in an
advisory role to the bishop of Rome.(412) Episcopal conferences, "a kind of assembly in which the bishops of
some nation or region discharge their pastoral office in collaboration"(413) are another form of collegial
activity. Collegiality is also exercised by the solicitude of the bishops for all the churches, by contributing
financial resources, training lay and religious ministers for the missions, and contributing the services of
diocesan priests to regions lacking clergy.(414)
217. Although the Roman pontiff can always freely exercise full, supreme and universal power
over the church, the order of bishops is also the subject of supreme and full power over the universal
church, provided it remains united with the head of the college, the pope.(415)
218. Vatican II teaches that the fullness of the sacrament of Order is conferred by episcopal
consecration.(416) The priesthood of the bishop is a sharing in the office of Christ, the one mediator.(417) By
virtue of his ordination, a bishop's authority is proper, ordinary, and immediate.(418) This means that a
bishop possesses authority by virtue of his ordination that is not juridically delegated by the bishop of
Rome. The exercise of this authority, however, is ultimately controlled by the supreme authority of the
Church.
3. Presbyterate
219. The Vatican II documents define the nature and function of the presbyterate in relation to
the episcopacy. The Constitution on the Liturgy subordinates both the local parish to the diocese and a
priest to the bishops: "since the bishop himself in his church cannot always or everywhere preside over the
whole flock, he must of necessity set up assemblies of believers. Parishes, organized locally under a parish
priest who acts in the bishop's place are the most important of these, because in some way they exhibit the
visible church set up throughout the nations of the world."(419) Priests depend on bishops for the exercise of
their power and are united with them by virtue of the sacrament of Order.(420) In a certain sense presbyters
make the bishop present. The "unity of their consecration and mission requires their hierarchical
communion with the order of bishops."(421) As the fellow-workers of bishops, priests "have as their first
charge to announce the gospel of God to all."(422)
220. Through the sacrament of Order priests are "patterned to the priesthood of Christ so that
they may be able to act in the person of Christ the head of the body."(423) Priests exercise their sacred
function above all in the Eucharistic worship. They also exercise the office of Christ, the shepherd and
head, according to their share of authority in their pastoral work.(424) In addition to their care of individuals,
priests are exhorted to form real Christian community, embracing not only the local but also the universal
church.(425) In their own locality priests make visible the universal church.(426) Priests are to "take pains that
their work contributes to the pastoral work of the whole diocese, and indeed of the whole church."(427)
221. Along with their bishop priests constitute one presbyterium.(428) By virtue of their common
ordination and shared mission, all priests are bound together in a close fraternity. This is symbolized by
their laying on of hands with the ordaining bishop in the ordination rite. No priest can adequately fulfill his
charge by himself or in isolation. Thus "priestly ministry can only be fulfilled in the hierarchical
communion of the whole body."(429)
222. The Second Vatican Council balanced a theology of the papacy and the universal church
with a renewed emphasis on the episcopacy and the local church, with the help of resources that had been
recovered from the biblical and patristic heritage. The understanding of church as communion shaped its
teaching on collegiality. These Catholic developments have been driven by the desire to be faithful to its
tradition, and at the same time to be open to renewing its structures of ministry.
223. Throughout Roman Catholic history, the emphasis on the unitary nature of the office of
ordained ministry has remained constant. There is but one sacrament of Order conferred in discrete
ordinations of bishops, presbyters, and deacons. The unitary nature of the sacrament mitigates differences
between Lutherans and Roman Catholics on the distinctions between presbyter/pastor and bishop.
A. The Reformation Heritage Continued
224. The impact of Luther and the Confessions (IV.A. above) continued over the centuries
through "one order of ordained Ministers, usually called pastors, which combines features of the episcopate
and the presbyterate,"(430) in local congregations and in structures for regional oversight, including
episcopacy (IV.B. above). In contrast to the Middle Ages there was emphasis on preaching of the word
and administration of the sacraments in concrete relationship with a congregation; church office was seen
"over against" (gegenüber) congregation, an office grounded in the priority of the word of God which
constitutes the church (cf. §62).(431)
225. For all the adherence to "one office of ministry," there were varieties of structural patterns
among Lutherans in church organization, and different emphases in the periods of Lutheran Orthodoxy and
Pietism (in its emphasis on the priesthood of all baptized believers), the Confessional Revival in the
nineteenth century, and later under the influence of the ecumenical movement (see below §§243-47).(432) As
Lutherans emigrated from Europe to other parts of the world and mission work produced new churches,
especially in Africa and Asia, the Lutheran confessional tradition adapted to new needs and possibilities.(433)
226. A significant step in Germany was the introduction of the office of bishop as spiritual
leader in the decade after World War I, when princes ceased to exercise the role of "bishops pro tempore"
or Summepiskopat in Protestant territorial churches (see above §190). "[L]egislative features were
entrusted to the synod, but the administrative functions more or less to single individuals," standing vis-à-vis or gegenüber the synod, just as the office of ministry stands "over against" the local congregation.(434)
Luther's ideas were recovered to become part of a picture of what an Evangelical bishop would be, in
distinction from the usually congregational Pfarramt (pastoral office), a distinction only by human law.
During the Nazi period (1933-45) and Kirchenkampf (Church Struggle), "'spiritual leadership' became in
an unexpected way concrete;"(435) a dubious Führerprinzip (leader principle) was introduced into the church,
even while some bishops opposed the Nazi take-over of the Protestant churches. After 1945 the term
bishop came to be used in additional Landeskirchen. The concept of "synodical episcopate" (synodales
Bischofsamt) developed, with emphasis on the bishop as preacher and "pastor of the church" (speaking for
the church, ecumenical contacts) as well as pastor pastorum (e.g. in ordination and visitation).(436) The
United Evangelical Lutheran Church in Germany (VELKD) developed a Conference of Bishops (from
member churches), with a Presiding Bishop; the Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD) did not.
B. Specific Developments in North America
227. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America reflects the backgrounds of many immigrant
streams from Lutheran lands in central, northern, and eastern Europe. Their coming, settling in, and
amalgamation stretch from the seventeenth century (Dutch and Swedish colonies in New Amsterdam [New
York] and the Delaware Valley) until the present, when immigrants are more likely from Africa or Asia.
The ELCA is "the child of many mergers, not just the one that occurred in 1987-88."(437)
228. The pioneer pietist mission pastor Henry Melchior Muhlenberg (1711-1787) illustrates the
situation in colonial America and the beginnings of the United States. His experiences are reflected by
many later clergy serving Lutheran immigrants. Muhlenberg was sent by Gotthilf August Francke, of
Halle, to serve three "United Congregations" (Philadelphia, New Hannover, and Providence [Trappe]), "the
Lutheran people in the province of Pennsylvania."(438) He traveled there via London in order to meet with
the Court Preacher to the Hannoverian king of England. Muhlenberg, in the face of self-appointed
itinerants and congregations sometimes beguiled by them, demonstrated his authority in America by
exhibiting his letters of call and instruction from "the Rev. Court Preacher," whom he regarded, along with
the revered fathers in Halle, Germany, to whom he sent regular reports, as his ecclesiastical superiors.
229. In many ways Muhlenberg was more a unifier of congregations, to be served by trained
and properly called pastors, than a planter of new congregations. His efforts led to the formation of the
first Lutheran synod in North America, the Ministerium(439) of Pennsylvania and Adjacent States, in 1748.
The history of "the three dozen or so church organizations and church bodies that finally were united in the
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America" often parallels aspects of Muhlenberg's ministry and the
founding of the Ministerium of Pennsylvania. The sheer number of synods formed over the years(440)
suggests how strong the desire of individual congregations was to work with other congregations for larger
purposes beyond the local community of word and sacrament. The concern to have pastors ordained by
other Lutheran pastors, often across lines of language, ethnicity, and even views on ministry, can be seen in
the histories of these groups.(441)
230. Lutherans in North America inherited from Europe, and took part in, debates over the
ministry in the nineteenth century, outcomes from which were sometimes reflected in the positions and
practices of synods in America. At one extreme was the "transference theory" (Übertragungslehre), that
authority is transferred from the local priesthood of believers to one of its members to serve as minister.(442)
This position found reflection in The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod,(443) e.g., C. F. W. Walther (1811-1887): "The holy ministry is the authority conferred by God through the congregation, as holder of the
priesthood and of all church power, to administer in public office the common rights of the spiritual
priesthood in behalf of all."(444) But a statement for the Missouri Synod in 1981 moves away from the
transference theory: "The office of public ministry … is not derived" from "the universal priesthood of
believers."(445)
231. At the opposite extreme, opposing any transference theory, were views that stressed
ministerial office and its authority as divine institution, apart from or at least prior to the local congregation
or universal priesthood. In a time of change in society, there was a revival of emphasis on the Lutheran
Confessions. F. J. Stahl (1802-1861) saw the contemporary preaching office as identical with the New
Testament office of apostle. He favored episcopacy because "it alone can guarantee authority of
administration and spiritual care," authority in contrast to majority or mob rule.(446) A. F. C. Vilmar (1800-1868) emphasized that only pastors can ordain, determine doctrine, and decide who is qualified for
ordained ministry.(447) J. K. Wilhelm Loehe (1808-1872), pastor in Neuendettelsau, Bavaria, emphasized
presbyter-bishops closely connected with the divine order of salvation.(448) His vision of the church remained
rooted in the local congregation.(449) The institutions he created in Neuendettelsau had great influence in
America through support of pastors for Lutheran immigrants who became part of the Missouri Synod and,
more importantly, the Iowa Synod.(450) In between what have been called "low"and "high church" extremes
were a variety of views on ministry, though differences on ministry were not the chief obstacle to American
Lutheran unity.
232. Because the ministry is a matter on which Lutherans, while having certain confessional
and theological commitments, possess degrees of flexibility to meet changing situations and needs in
church, society, and culture, there have periodically been studies and action on the topic by Lutheran
bodies. In the course of the 1970s, the predecessor bodies of the ELCA all adopted the term "bishop,"
which was carried over into the ELCA.(451)
233. The ELCA mandated in 1988-1994 "an intensive study of the nature of ministry" with
"special attention" to: "1) the tradition of the Lutheran Church; 2) the possibility of articulating a Lutheran
understanding and adaptation of the threefold ministerial office of bishop, pastor, and deacon and its
ecumenical implication; and 3) the appropriate forms of lay ministries to be officially recognized and
certified by this church, including criteria for certification, relations to synods, and discipline." The study
presented recommendations in four areas, of which two are of particular relevance to this dialogue.(452)
234. First, the reaffirmation of the universal priesthood and of all baptized Christians in their
various callings in the world and in the church was received with probably the greatest enthusiasm of all
proposals.(453)
235. Second, the final report found that "threefold ministry" (or other "folds") "is not the way
in which most of the people of this church approach the issues either of unity or mission."(454)
Recommendations followed the heritage of, as an LWF study put it (see below §237), "basically one
ministry, centered in the proclamation of the Word of God and the administration of the Holy Sacraments,"
by pastors "within and for a local congregation" and by bishops "with and for a communion of local
churches."(455)
236. Specifically, the ELCA Churchwide Assembly voted:
To reaffirm this church's understanding that ordination commits the
person being ordained to present and represent in public ministry, on behalf of this
church, its understanding of the Word of God, proclamation of the Gospel,
confessional commitment, and teachings. Ordination requires knowledge of such
teachings and commitment to them. Ordained persons are entrusted with special
responsibility for the application and spread of the Gospel and this church's
teachings.(456)
And with regard to bishops:
- To retain the use of the title "bishop" for those ordained pastoral ministers
who exercise the ministry of oversight in the synodical and churchwide
expressions of this church; and
- To declare that the ministry of bishops be understood as an expression of
the pastoral ministry. Each bishop shall give leadership for ordained and
other ministries; shall give leadership to the mission of this church; shall
give leadership in strengthening the unity of the Church; and shall provide
administrative oversight.(457)
C. Aspects of Ministry in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America in Light of World Lutheranism and Ecumenism
237. American Lutheran churches, in dealing with ministry issues in the second half of the
twentieth century, did not do so in isolation but often cooperatively and with international Lutheran and
ecumenical resources. The Lutheran Council in the U.S.A. (1966-1987), involving The Lutheran
Church-Missouri Synod and the bodies that merged into the ELCA, produced studies on the Ministry and
on Episcopacy.(458) Its study on women's ordination will be noted in §242 below, note 455. The Lutheran
World Federation provided studies on the ministry, episcopacy, the ordination of women, and laity.(459)
LWF leadership at times was active in advocating bishops in episcopal succession. There was also
Lutheran involvement in producing and responding to the Faith and Order Commission report, Baptism,
Eucharist and Ministry.(460) In such ways the ELCA received and participated in worldwide treatments and
understandings on ministry and structure, while being able to act appropriately for its own particular
situation.
238. Ordaining women to the ministry of word and sacrament occurred in German,
Scandinavian, and other European Lutheran churches prior to the decision to do so in the United States.
The significant debate in Sweden and its decision to ordain women as priests in 1958 was a turning point
for many.(461) A Lutheran Council study, carried out in 1968-69, centered especially on scriptural questions.
The LCA and ALC voted at conventions in 1970 to ordain women.(462) The practice, found also in the
AELC, was readily carried into the ELCA. Since Lutherans have one office of ministry, no theological
obstacle existed to female pastors becoming bishops.(463)
239. The ELCA, in addition to sharing in the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification
with the Roman Catholic Church, has entered into full communion(464) with Reformed, Episcopal, and
Moravian churches in the United States.(465) Although Reformed polity and ordering of elders and deacons
differ from Lutheran practices, the ministry did not emerge as an issue in A Formula of Agreement.(466) The
ELCA entered into full communion with two Moravian provinces in North America in 1999; ministry was
treated in the section "Mutual Complementarities."(467) Thus the ELCA has entered into full communion
with churches holding varying views of ministry.
240. Anglican emphasis on episcopacy made Lutheran-Episcopal dialogue toward full
communion a more complicated matter. After narrowly failing to achieve the necessary two-thirds majority
at the 1997 Churchwide Assembly of the ELCA, a proposal for full communion between the ELCA and
The Episcopal Church, entitled "Called to Common Mission,"(468) was approved by the ELCA Churchwide
Assembly in 1999(469) and subsequently affirmed in 2000 by The Episcopal Church. In this agreement, the
two churches commit themselves "to share an episcopal succession that is both evangelical and historic"
(see §12). Lutherans and Episcopalians promised "to include regularly one or more bishops of the other
church to participate in the laying-on-of-hands at the ordinations/installations of their own bishops, as a
sign, though not a guarantee, of the unity and apostolic continuity of the whole church"; episcopé is valued
as "one of the ways, in the context of ordained ministries and of the whole people of God, in which the
apostolic succession of the church is visibly expressed and personally symbolized in fidelity to the gospel
through the ages" (see §12). Each church "remains free to explore its particular interpretations of the
ministry of bishops in episcopal and historic succession," whenever possible in consultation with one
another (see §13).
241. "Called to Common Mission" was able to refer to the 1993 full communion agreement
between British and Irish Anglican Churches, on the one hand, and Nordic and Baltic Lutheran Churches
on the other, the Porvoo Common Statement.(470) The Meissen Agreement between the Church of England
and the Evangelical Church in Germany(471) represents the stage of "interim eucharistic hospitality," not full
communion. The Waterloo Declaration(472) between the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada and the
Anglican Church of Canada, adopted in 2001, provides for full communion. "Called to Common Mission"
and these other Lutheran/Anglican agreements represent variations on a common vision of apostolicity and
episcopacy in the church.
242. The ELCA and other Lutheran churches, in varied relations of communion with other
churches, have reflected their Lutheran commitments, demonstrated ecumenical openness, and honored the
heritages of their partners in dialogue. These agreements, with their differences, all reflect a firm belief in
the Church as ko inonia of salvation.
1. Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue, 9 volumes: 1. The Status of the Nicene Creed as Dogma of the Church (1965) (L/RC - 1); 2. One Baptism for
the Remission of Sins (1966) (L/RC -2 ); 3. The Eucharist as Sacrifice (1967) (L/RC - 3); 4. Eucharist and Ministry (1970) (L/RC - 4); 5. Papal
Primacy and the Universal Church (1974) (L/RC - 5); 6. Teaching Authority and Infallibility in the Church (1980) (L/RC - 6); 7. Justification by Faith
(1985) (L/RC - 7); 8. The One Mediator, the Saints, and Mary (1992) (L/RC - 8); 9. Scripture and Tradition (1995) (L/RC - 9). Vols. 1-4 were
originally published by the Bishops' Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, Washington, D. C., and the U.S.A. National Committee of the
Lutheran World Federation, New York, N.Y. Vols. 5-9 were published Minneapolis: Augsburg. Vols. 1-3 have been reprinted together in one volume by
Augsburg (n. d.) as has vol. 4 (1979).
2. Its members included, Catholics, the Rev. Avery Dulles, S. J., Bronx, N.Y.; the Most Rev. Raphael M. Fliss, Bishop of Superior, Wisconsin; the Rev. Patrick
Granfield, O.S.B. Washington, D.C.; Brother Jeffrey Gros, F.S.C., Washington, D.C.; the Rev. John F. Hotchkin, Washington, D.C.; Dr. Margaret O'Gara,
Toronto; the Most Rev. J. Francis Stafford, Archbishop of Denver (chair); the Rev. Georges Tavard, Milwaukee; Dr. Susan K. Wood, S.C.L., Collegeville,
Minn.; Lutherans, the Rev. H. George Anderson, Decorah, Iowa (elected Presiding Bishop of the ELCA in 1995); the Rev. Sherman G. Hicks, Chicago;
Dr. David Lotz, New York, N.Y.; Dr. Daniel F. Martensen, Chicago; the Rev. Joan A. Mau, Washington Island, Wis.; Dr. John H. P. Reumann,
Philadelphia; Dr. Michael J. Root, Strasbourg, France; Dr. William G. Rusch, Chicago (until 1995); Bishop Harold C. Skillrud, Atlanta (chair). A
Consultation involving U.S. and European Lutherans and Catholics, Feb. 18-21, 1993, at Lake Worth, Fla., had assessed the dialogues to date and examined
future possibilities.
3. The Objectives were described thus: "The ultimate goal is to establish full communion between our churches. This round of dialogue should focus on
church-dividing issues and communion-hindering differences. There may result mutual instruction of our churches, learning from each other, and
convergences that contribute to deeper koinonia between Lutherans and Catholics." "Structures" and "Ministries as Servants and Bonds of Koinonia" were
to include the local, regional, national, and international, with "the themes of authority and freedom (collegiality, conciliarity)" running "through the entire
document."
4. Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification: The Lutheran World Federation and The Roman Catholic Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
2000). Gemeinsame Erklärung zur Rechtfertigungslehre (Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Otto Lembeck/Paderborn, Bonifatius-Verlag, 1999; Lutherischer
Weltbund, Päpstlicher Rat zur Förderung der Einheit des Christen).
5. Others, listed in the Joint Declaration 27-28, include The Condemnations of the Reformation Era: Do They Still Divide? ed. K. Lehmann and W.
Pannenberg (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), from the work by the Joint Ecumenical Commission of the Roman Catholic Church and churches of the
Reformation (Lutheran, Reformed, United), published as Lehrverurteilungen--kirchentrennend? I. Rechtfertigung, Sakramente und Amt im Zeitalter
der Reformation und heute, Dialog der Kirchen 4 (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder/Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, © 1986); II. Materialien zu den
Lehrverurteilungen und zur Theologie der Rechtfertigung, Dialog der Kirchen 5 (1988); III. Materialien zur Lehre von den Sakramenten und vom
kirchlichen Amt, Dialog der Kirchen 6 (1990). The study in Germany dealt especially with the condemnations (anathemas) attached by the Council of
Trent to its decree on Justification (1547) and statements of condemnation in the Lutheran Confessions.
6. The reading continues: "This gospel frees us in God's sight from slavery to sin and self (Rom. 6:6). We are willing to be judged by it in all our thoughts
and actions, our philosophies and projects, our theologies and our religious practices. Since there is no aspect of the Christian community or of its life in
the world that is not challenged by this gospel, there is none that cannot be renewed or reformed in its light or by its power.
"We have encountered this gospel in our churches' sacraments and liturgies, in their preaching and teaching, in their doctrines and exhortations. Yet
we also recognize that in both our churches the gospel has not always been proclaimed, that it has been blunted by reinterpretation, that it has been
transformed by various means into self-satisfying systems of commands and prohibitions.
"We are grateful at this time to be able to confess together what our Catholic and Lutheran ancestors tried to affirm as they responded in different
ways to the biblical message of justification. A fundamental consensus on the gospel is necessary to give credence to our previously agreed statements on
baptism, on the Eucharist, and on forms of church authority. We believe that we have reached such a consensus." L/RC - 7, §§161.-164. 73-74.
7. See n. 5 Lehrverurteilungen--kirchentrennend? esp. Vol. III, and The Condemnations of the Reformation Era, where 147-59 deal with the ministry.
8. In the international dialogue, attention was given to Church and Justification: Understanding the Church in the Light of the Doctrine of Justification
Lutheran-Roman Catholic Joint Commission (Geneva: LWF, 1994) (LWF/RC - 9). Apostolicity is the theme of the new round of international dialogue,
begun in 1994.
9. Nineteen of them in the New Testament, three in the Septuagint Old Testament; see further §§126-129.
10. This calling depends on God's faithfulness and involves election (1 Cor. 1:2, "called [to be] saints"; 1 Thess. 1:4; Rom. 8:33). Paul regularly assumes
a response in faith to the message of the gospel (as in 1 Thess. 1:5), followed by baptism (1 Cor. 6:11, "washed, sanctified, justified"), with a resulting
koinonia (1 Cor. 1:9, with Christ). No passage in Paul, however, connects koinon-terms with baptism. But note 1 John 1:6-9, koinonia with God, the blood
of Jesus cleanses us from sin; "if we confess our sins, God who is faithful and just will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness"; cf. R.
Brown, The Epistles of John, AB 30 (Garden City: Doubleday, 1982) 242-45.
11. Both aspects are stressed by J. Hainz, Koinonia: "Kirche" als Gemeinschaft bei Paulus (Biblische Untersuchungen 16; Regensburg: Pustet, 1982).
A. Weiser, "Basis und Führung in kirchlicher Communio," Bibel und Kirche 45 (1990) 66-71, speaks of "spiritual" dimensions (with God) and "societal."
12. Cf. O. Cullmann, Katholiken und Protestanten. Ein Vorschlag zur Verwirklichung christlicher Solidarität (Basel,Reinhardt, 1958); trans. J. Burgess,
Message to Catholics and Protestants (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1958). Cullmann, later a Protestant observer at the Second Vatican Council,
suggested, as early as 1957, "a yearly offering by both sides for one another; by Protestants for needy Catholics, and by Catholics for needy Protestants"
(9-10) as a step toward Christian solidarity. The collection and koinÇnia in the New Testament are mentioned, 33-39. It could today take the form of
parish and diocesan gathering of gifts.
13. Thus, e.g., "diocese" (Latin dioecesis) reflects terminology from Roman provincial administration, likewise "synod" and "council." Cf. A. Brent, The
Imperial Cult and the Development of Church Order: Concepts and Images of Authority in Paganism and Early Christianity before the Age of
Cyprian, Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 45 (Leiden: Brill, 1999), who claims (77), "The Order of the Christian community, constituted by an
apostolate whose koinÇnia continued the teaching and healing ministry of Jesus along with the breaking of bread (Acts 2,42), was the true means of
producing the pax dei, in contrast to Augustus' pax deorum," (cf. Luke 2:14; 19:38), thus "a refashioned Christian version of the Augustan saeculum
aureum."
14. A Patristic Greek Lexicon, ed. G. W. H. Lampe (Oxford: Clarendon, 1964), "koinÇnia" B.3.b., "community of essence," of Father and Son, citing
Athenagoras (2nd cent.), Dionysius Alexandrinus (3rd cent.), Basil and Gregory of Nyssa (4th cent.), of the Trinity, and Chrysostom (4th-5th cent.).
15. Christoph Schwöbel, "Koinonia," RGG 4th edition, 4 (2001) 1477-79; Rolf Schäfer, "Communio," RGG 4th edition, 2 (1999) 435-38.
16. Nicolai Afanasev, L'Eglise du Saint-Esprit (Paris: Le Cerf, 1975). John D. Zizioulas, Being as Communion. Studies in Personhood and the Church
(Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir Seminary Press, 1985) interpreted koinonia in light of the anti-Arian trinitarianism of St. Athanasius. It is an ontological
reality founded on the identity of Jesus Christ with the eternal Word of God. Because, by virtue of the Incarnation, substance is seen to possess "almost
by definition a relational character," the faithful who are united with Christ by faith and the Spirit are necessarily in the mutual relationships of a
Communion that is at the same time spiritual and sacramental. John D. Zizioulas, Eucharist, Bishop, Church, tr. Elizabeth Theokritoff (Brookline, MA:
Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001).
17. G. Florovsky, "Le corps du Christ vivant," in Florovsky et al, La sainte Eglise universelle. Confrontation oecuménique (Paris: Delachaux et Niestlé,
1948) 12, quoted in Zizioulas, Being as Communion (above, n. 16), 124. Thus a synthesis of Christology and Pneumatology is manifest in the Communion
of the Church and the Churches. Since Pneumatology implies eschatology and communion, which coincide in the Holy Liturgy, one may say that
"eschatology and communion have determined Orthodox ecclesiology" (131).
18. See Thomas Best, Gunther Gassmann, eds. On the Way to Fuller Koinonia, Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1993. (Santiago) and the earlier
working document and discussion paper, "Towards Koinonia in Faith, Life, and Witness," 263-95. "The unity of the Church to which we are called is
a koinonia given and expressed in a common confession of the apostolic faith; a common sacramental life entered by the one baptism and celebrated together
in one eucharistic fellowship; a common life...; and a common mission..." (Canberra 1991, 2.1, p. 269), thus a gift, as well as a calling.
19. The Final Report of ARCIC-I (1993), in Growth in Agreement, Ecumenical Documents II, ed. H. Meyer and L. Vischer (New York/Ramsey:
Paulist/Geneva: WCC, 1984) 62-67; ARCIC-II, The Church as Communion, in Growth in Agreement II, ed. J. Gros, H. Meyer, and W. G. Rusch, Faith
and Order Paper 187 (Geneva: WCC/Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000) 328-43; ARC-USA, "Agreed Report on the Local/Universal Church" (1999)
summed the matter up thus, "'Communion' has emerged...as the concept that best expresses the reality of the Church as diverse yet one on faith, as both
local and universal," Origins 30:6 (2000) 85-95; Pentecostal-Roman Catholic, "Perspective on Koinonia" (1989), in Pneuma 12 (1990) 117-42, in
Growth in Agreement II 735-52, and in Deepening Communion, ed. W. G. Rusch and J. Gros (Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference,
1998) 399-421; Christian Church/Disciples of Christ-Roman Catholic, "The Church as a Communion in Christ" (1992), Growth in Agreement II 386-98
and Deepening Communion 323-39; Anglican/World Methodist Council, "Sharing in Apostolic Communion" (1996), Growth in Agreement II 55-76;
Catholic/World Methodist Council, "The Church as Koinonia of Salvation" (2001). Cf. S. Wood, "Ecclesial Koinonia in Ecumenical Dialogues," One
in Christ 30 (1994) 124-45.
20. Miroslav Volf, After Our Likeness: The Church as Image of the Trinity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998) and "Kirche als Gemeinschaft:
Ekklesiologische Überlegungen aus freikirchlicher Perspektive," Evangelische Theologie 49 (1989) 52-76. Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, An Introduction To
Ecclesiology: Ecumenical, Historical and Global Perspectives, Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press (2002).
21. Ludwig Hertling, Communio: Church and Papacy in Early Christianity, trans. with introduction by Jared Wicks (Chicago: Loyola Univ. Press,
1972), 4-5 and 2; German, in Xenia Piana: Miscellanea historiae pontificiae 7 (1943) 1-48; cf. "Communio und Primat," Una Sancta 17 (1962). [J.
Reumann, "Toward U.S. Lutheran/Roman Catholic Dialogue on Koinonia," paper for L/RC Coordinating Committee, April 1996]. For a survey of
theologians on this see Dennis M. Doyle, Communion Ecclesiology: Vision and Versions (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2000).
22. See Jérôme Hamer, L'église est une communion. Paris: Cerf, 1962. English tr. Ronald Matthews, New York: Sheed and Ward, 1965. Jan Jacobs,
"Beyond Polarity: On the Relation between Locality and Universality in the Catholic Church," in Of All Times and Places: Protestants and Catholics
on the Church Local and Universal, edited by Leo J. Koffeman and Henk Witte (Zoetemeer: Meinema, 2001) 49-68, at 55-58.
23. Church of Churches. The Ecclesiology of Communion (Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1992) p. xii. This very defective translation of Eglise
d'Eglises: L'ecclésiologie de communion (Paris: les Editions du Cerf, 1987) 9 ("au donné biblique") should not be used without checking the French
text. Cf. also Walter Kasper, Theology and Church (New York: Crossroad, 1989, German 1987), "The Church as a Universal Sacrament of Salvation"
111-28, and "The Church as Communion: Reflections on the Guiding Ecclesiological Idea of the Second Vatican Council" 148-65 (literature in n. 5).
Avery Dulles, Models of the Church (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1974) 56 treated koinonia as "a network of friendly interpersonal relationships" and
as "a mystical communion of grace" under "The Church as Mystical Communion" (43-57), rev. ed. (1987), 60-61 and 47-62.
24. The Second Extraordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (1985), Ecclesia sub Verbo Dei Mysteria Christi Celebrans pro Salute Mundi.
Relatio Finalis, II. C. 1. Available in English in Origins 15, 27 (Dec. 19, 1985) 448. John Paul II reaffirmed this in his Post-Synodal Apostolic
Exhortation, Christifideles Laici, December 30, 1988, §19.
25. Communionis notio, Origins 22, 7 (June 25, 1992) 108-12. This text (1) equates "the Church of Christ" with "the worldwide community of the
disciples of the Lord" (§7), which is more than "a communion of Churches"; (2) while there is a close connection between the eucharist and the Church,
the eucharist is not sufficient by itself to ensure the being of a church; and (3) the communion is also served by institutions, like religious communities,
that are not confined to one particular church; unity in diversity is one aspect of the communion. Cf. also Jörg Haustein, "Entmythologiseirung einer
Zauberformel: Schreiben der Glaubenskongregation über die Kirche als Communio," MD: Materialdienst der Konfessionskundlichen Instituts Bensheim
43 (1992): 61-62.
26. Directory §§13-15; Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, "Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism," Origins
(June 29, 1993) 129, 131-60.
27. Ut unum sint 11, Origins 49 (June 8, 1995) 51-72, §11-14.
28. Koinonia: Arbeiten des Oekumenischen Ausschusses der Vereinigten Evangelisch-Lutherischen Kirche Deutschlands zur Frage der Kirchen-
und Abendmahlgemeinschaft (Berlin: Lutherisches Verlagshaus, 1957). The essay by Werner Elert, "Abendmahl und Kirchengemeinschaft in der alten
Kirche," 57-78, was expanded as a book translated by Norman Nagel as Eucharist and Church Fellowship in the First Four Centuries (St. Louis:
Concordia, 1966).
29. Harding Meyer, "Zur Entstehung und Bedeutung des Konzepts 'Kirchengemeinschaft.' Eine historische Skizze aus evangelischer Sicht," in Communio
Sanctorum: Einheit der Christen - Einheit der Kirche, Festschrift für Bischof Paul-Werner Scheele, ed. Josef Schreiner and Klaus Wittstadt (Würzburg:
Echter Verlag, 1988) 204-30; Eugene L. Brand, Toward a Lutheran Communion: Pulpit and Altar Fellowship, LWF Report 26 (Geneva: LWF, 1988);
Communio/Koinonia: A New Testament-Early Christian Concept and its Contemporary Appropriation and Significance, A Study by the Institute for
Ecumenical Research, Strasbourg, 1990, repr. in W. G. Rusch, ed., A Commentary on 'Ecumenism: The Vision of the ELCA' (Minneapolis: Augsburg,
1990) 119-41; The Church as Communion: Lutheran Contributions to Ecclesiology, ed. Heinrich Holtze, LWF Documentation 47 (Geneva: LWF,
1997), including "Toward a Lutheran Understanding of Communion," 13-29. [Reumann, April 1999, "'Koinonia' in Lutheran Use"].
30. LWF Constitution, Art. 3; text in From Federation to Communion: The History of the Lutheran World Federation, ed. J. H. Schjørring, P. Kumari,
N. A. Hjelm; V. Mortensen, coordinator (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997) 530; the 1947 Constitution said simply "a free association of Lutheran churches"
(p. 527).
31. Church and Justification: Understanding the Church in the Light of the Doctrine of Justification, Lutheran-Roman Catholic Joint Commission
(Geneva: LWF, 1994).
32. Church and Justification (§§51-62).
33. Joint Working Group between the Roman Catholic Church and the World Council of Churches, The Notion of "Hierarchy of Truths" and The
Church: Local and Universal. Faith and Order paper no. 150. (Geneva: WCC Publications, 1990), para. 13 ff.
34. Within Roman Catholicism, the terms "particular church" and "local church" are often used interchangeably. Most often Vatican II uses the term
"particular church" to refer to the diocese, but this term can also refer to churches in the same rite, region, or culture. There is no standard practice
governing the use of this terminology. In spite of Vatican II's use of the term "particular church," this term has not enjoyed widespread acceptance.
Whether or not it refers to a diocese or a larger region has to be discerned from its context. The present document explores the asymmetry between Lutheran
and Roman Catholic understandings of what constitutes the basic unit of ecclesiality implied by the term "local" or "particular" church.
35. A forthright expression of this pattern is found in Ignatius (Smyr. 8.1), but the bishop as head of a local community came to be the common pattern.
36. Christus Dominus, 11.
37. Lumen gentium, 26, states that "the faithful are gathered together through the preaching of the Gospel of Christ, and the mystery of the Lord's Supper
is celebrated 'so that, by means of the flesh and blood of the Lord the whole brotherhood of the Body may be welded together.'"
38. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 41, states, "The principal manifestation of the church consists in the full, active participation of all God's holy people in
the same liturgical celebrations, especially in the same eucharist, in one prayer, at one altar, at which the bishop presides, surrounded by the college of priests
and by his ministers."
39. SC, 42.
40. Church and Justification, 85.
41. Nicholas Sagovsky, Ecumenism, Christian Origins and the Practice of Communion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) 128.
42. Council of Nicea, canon 4.
43. LG, 26. The Latin text speaks of a "sacrament of order" (singular) rather than "of orders" (plural); "Episcopus, plenitudine sacramenti ordinis
insignitus, est 'oeconomus gratiae supremi sacerdotii' . . . " (emphasis added).
44. Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope (TPPP), para. 63. The Book of Concord, ed. by Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert (Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 2000), 340.
45. On Lutheran church structures around the world, see E. Theodore Bachmann and Mercia Brenne Bachmann, Lutheran Churches in the World: A
Handbook (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989). The German Lutheran churches are organized regionally within the nation rather than nationally, but they
still have this threefold structure. Lutheran churches of course recognize the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
46. An exception is Wolfgang Huber, Kirche, 2nd ed. (Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1988).
47. LG, 28. Cf. Presbyterorum ordinis, 4-6.
48. For some exceptions see James A. Coriden, The Parish in Catholic Tradition: History, Theology and Canon Law (Paulist Press, 1997); U.S. Bishops'
Committee on the Parish, "The Parish: A People, A Mission, A Structure," Origins 10 (§41, March 26, 1982) 641, 633-646; Philip J. Murnion, "Parish:
Covenant Community," Church 12.1 (Spring, 1996) 5-10.
49. Ad Gentes, 37; Provision 9.11., in the Constitution, Bylaws, and Continuing Resolutions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, 2001
ed., (Chicago: ELCA), 58. (CBCR)
50. Provision 9.11. in the CBCR, 58.
51. See Provision 9.21. in the CBCR, 58.
52. Provision 9.41. in the CBCR, 60. The same text is found in required provision *C4.03. in the Model Constitution for Congregations as contained
in the ELCA churchwide constitution, 221-222.
53. LG, 26.
54. LG, 26. Even though the document does not actually say that these groups are parishes, it does refer to them as local congregations. The text affirms
that Christ, by whose power the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church is gathered together, is present in these communities.
55. Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults, 9.
56. Provision 8.11. of the CBCR, 50.
57. Provision 3.02. of the CBCR, 20.
58. Werner Elert, The Structure of Lutheranism, translated by Walter A. Hansen (St. Louis: Concordia, 1962) 369.
59. Provision 10.21. in the CBCR, 75.
60. Provisions †S6.03. and †S8.12. in the Constitution for Synods as printed in Constitutions, Bylaws, and Continuing Resolutions of the Evangelical
Lutheran Church in America (2001 version), 187-89 and 193-95.
61. LG, 23.
62. LG, 23.
63. The Church of Sweden and the German Landeskirchen are examples.
64. The ELCA is only a slight exception to this pattern of national organization; it includes a Caribbean Synod in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
65. Provision 13.21. in the CBCR, 90.
66. Provision 8.71. in the CBCR 54.
67. This lack was noted in an important address by E. Clifford Nelson to the 1963 Assembly of the Lutheran World Federation, "The One Church and
the Lutheran Churches," in Proceedings of the Fourth Assembly of the Lutheran World Federation, Helsinki, July 30-August 11, 1963 (Berlin:
Lutherisches Verlagshaus, 1965).
68. CD, 38. "Pope Paul VI, in his 1966, Motu Proprio Ecclesiae Sanctae, called for Episcopal Conferences to be established wherever they did not yet
exist; those already existing were to draw up proper statutes; and in cases where it was not possible to establish a Conference, the Bishops in question were
to join already existing Episcopal Conferences; Episcopal Conferences comprising several nations or even international Episcopal Conferences could be
established. Several years later, in 1973, the Pastoral Directory for Bishops stated once again that 'the Episcopal Conference is established as a
contemporary means of contributing in a varied and fruitful way to the practice of collegiality.' These Conferences admirably help to foster a spirit of
communion with the Universal Church and among the different local Churches." (John Paul II, Motu Proprio, "On the Theological and Juridical Nature
of Episcopal Conferences" (Apostolos suos), 21 May 1998, §5. Ecclesiae sanctae and the Pastoral Directory of Bishops, Origins Vol. 28, No. 9 (July
30, 1998) p. 153, §5.
69. Ibid.
70. Ibid.
71. LG, 23 stipulates that "individual bishops, in so far as they are set over particular churches exercise their pastoral office over the portion of the people
of God assigned to them, not over other churches nor over the church universal. But as members of the Episcopal college and legitimate successors of the
apostles, by Christ's arrangement and decree, each is bound to be solicitous for the entire church; such solicitude, even though it is not exercised by an act
of jurisdiction, is very much to the advantage of the universal church."
72. LWF Constitution, Article III: Nature and Function.
73. LWF Constitution, Article III: Nature and Function.
74. John Paul II, address 12 September 1987, printed in Origins 17:16 (1 October 1987) 258. Here John Paul II extends the assertion in LG 8, that the
Church of Christ subsists in the Roman Catholic Church to the relationship between the universal church and particular churches.
75. LG, 23.
76. TPPP, 60f.
77. TPPP, 72.
78. See §§187-188 for ordinations in continental Lutheranism by pastors with responsibilities as superintendent; for bishops continuing to ordain in Nordic
countries, see §§189-195.
79. See the discussions in Kurt Schmidt-ClauSsen, "The Development of Offices of Leadership in the German Lutheran Church: 1918-Present, "in
Episcopacy in the Lutheran Church? Studies in the Development and Definition of the Office of Church Leadership, edited by Ivar Asheim and Victor
R. Gold (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970), 72-115; Wilhelm Maurer, Das synodale evangelische Bischofsamt seit 1918, Fuldaer Hefte 10 (Berlin:
Lutherisches Verlagshaus, 1955).
80. Council of Trent, Session 23, Canons on the sacrament of Order, 6.
81. Council of Trent, Session 23, Chapter 4.
82. Council of Trent, Session 23, Canons on the sacrament of Order, 7.
83. DH 3860. Pius XII, "Sacramentum ordinis," Acta apostolicae sedis 40 (1948) 5-7.
84. LG, 21.
85. LG, 28; PO, 2.
86. LG, 20.
87. Avery Dulles, "Ius Divinum as an Ecumenical Problem," Theological Studies 38 (1977) 689.
88. Vatican II defines the diocese as "a portion of the people of God whose pastoral care is entrusted to a bishop in cooperation with his priests" (CD, 11).
89. Code of Canon Law, can. 521 º1.
90. Code of Canon Law, can. 519.
91. LG, 28.
92. LG, 28. PO, 8.
93. LG, 28.
94. CIC, can. 529 º2.
95. Lutheran World Federation, The Lutheran Understanding of Ministry (1983), reprinted in Ministry: Women, Bishops, LWF Studies (1993), para.
21.
96. Presbyterian polities stress the interrelation of the face-to-face assembly and the regional community of such assemblies. Ministry at the regional level,
however, is exercised by the presbytery as a college rather than by a single ordained minister such as a bishop. The possibility of such a polity has not been
a part of the discussions of this dialogue. While Lutheran churches have generally included a regional ordained minister of oversight, a presbyterian polity
has not been seen as unacceptable, and the ELCA is in full communion with the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Catholic theology requires the presence
of a bishop.
97. LG, 26.
98. LG, 21.
99. LG, 27.
100. LG, 25.
101. LG, 19.
102. LG, 22.
103. LG, 24.
104. LG, 20.
105. See especially Luther's Preface to the 1528 Saxon Visitation Articles (LW 40, 271) and, more comprehensively, Werner Elert, "Der bischöfliche
Charakter der Superintendentur-Verfassung." Luthertum 46 (1935): 353-367.
106. See orders cited in Werner Elert, "Der bischöfliche Charakter der Superintendentur-Verfassung." Luthertum 46 (1935): 355f.
107. Kurt Schmidt-Clausen, "The Development of Offices of Leadership in the German Lutheran Church: 1918-Present," in Episcopacy in the Lutheran
Church? Studies in the Development and Definition of the Office of Church Leadership, edited by Ivar Asheim and Victor R. Gold (Philadelphia: Fortress
Press, 1970), 72-115.
108. Provision †S8.11. of the Constitution for Synods as printed in Constitutions, Bylaws, and Continuing Resolutions of the Evangelical Lutheran
Church in America (2001 version), 193.
109. Provision †S8.12. of the Constitution for Synods as printed in Constitutions, Bylaws, and Continuing Resolutions of the Evangelical Lutheran
Church in America (2001 version), 193.
110. Provision †S8.12.h. of the Constitution for Synods as printed in Constitutions, Bylaws, and Continuing Resolutions of the Evangelical Lutheran
Church in America (2001 version), 194.
111. "Called to Common Mission: A Lutheran Proposal for a Revision of the Concordat of Agreement" (Chicago: ELCA, November 1998), 12. (CCM)
112. Porvoo Common Statement, in Together in Mission and Ministry: The Porvoo Common Statement. London: Church House Publishing, 1993,
para. 58a vi. (Porvoo)
113. LG, 18; cf. 22-23.
114. Papal Primacy and the Universal Church. Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue V, ed. by P. C. Empie and T. A. Murphy (Minneapolis: Augsburg,
1974) II 34, p. 30. As early as 1972, the "Malta Report" stated "But in the various dialogues, the possibility begins to emerge that the Petrine office of
the Bishop of Rome also need not be excluded by Lutherans as a visible sign of the unity of the church as a whole 'insofar as [this office] is subordinated
to the primacy of the gospel by theological reinterpretation and practical restructuring'" (66).
115. John Paul II, UUS, 94.
116. Ibid., 95.
117. Ibid.
118. Ibid., 96.
119. U.S. Lutheran-Catholic Dialogue, Papal Primacy and the Universal Church, para. 30.
120. WA 54, 231; LW 41, 294; cf. Harding Meyer, "Suprema auctoritas ideo ab omni errore immunis: The Lutheran Approach to Primacy" in Petrine
Ministry and the Unity of the Church, ed. by James Puglisi (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1999) 16-18.
121. On the shape of such reforms, see Papal Primacy and the Universal Church, paras. 23-25.
122. BC, ed. by Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000), p. 326.
123. This ambiguity with regard to the precise nature of the ius divinum/ius humanum distinction was pointed out in the international Roman
Catholic-Lutheran dialogue on "The Gospel and the Church" ("Malta Report," 1972), §31: "Greater awareness of the historicity of the church in
conjunction with a new understanding of its ecclesiological nature, requires that in our day the concepts of the ius divinum and ius humanum be thought
through anew.... Ius divinum can never be adequately distinguished from ius humanum. We have ius divinum always only as mediated through particular
historical forms." The problem was addressed by George Lindbeck in his article, "Papacy and Ius Divinum : A Lutheran View" in Papal Primacy and
the Universal Church.
124. The issue of "apostolic succession" was taken up by the USA Lutheran-Roman Catholic Dialogue IV, Eucharist and Ministry (1970), 138-188 in
articles by McCue, Burghardt, and Quanbeck. Note the Common Statement, §44. It expands the notion of apostolic succession beyond that of a succession
in episcopal office to include transmission of the apostolic gospel and grants that Lutherans have preserved a "form of doctrinal apostolicity," leading to
the tentative conclusion of the Catholic participants that they "see no persuasive reason to deny the possibility of the Roman Catholic Church recognizing
the validity of this Ministry" (54). See more recently the Lutheran-Roman Catholic Joint Study Commission, The Ministry in the Church (1981), 62: "The
apostolic succession in the episcopal office does not consist primarily in an unbroken chain of those ordaining to those ordained, but in a succession in the
presiding ministry of a church, which stands in the continuity of apostolic faith and which is overseen by a bishop in order to keep it in communion with
the Catholic and Apostolic church" (quoted also in The Niagara Report. Report of the Anglican-Lutheran Consultation on Episcope, 1987, 53). See
also Baptism, Eucharist, Ministry. Report of the Faith and Order Paper No. 111 (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1982), 35: "The primary
manifestation of apostolic succession is to be found in the apostolic tradition of the church as a whole. Cf. the ELCA-Episcopal Church full communion
agreement, "Called to Common Mission" (1999), 12.
It should be noted that the Dogmatic Constitution of Vatican II on the Church stated: "Among those various ministries which, as tradition witnesses,
were exercised in the Church from the earliest times, the chief place belongs to the office of those who, appointed to the episcopate in a sequence running
back to the beginning (per successionem ab initio decurrentem), are the ones who pass on the apostolic seed." (LG 20 [tr. W. M. Abbott (ed.), 39]). Other
translations of the cited Latin phrase wrongly use the word "unbroken." Thus A. P. Flannery (ed.), Documents of Vatican II (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1975) 371: "in virtue consequently of the unbroken succession, going back to the beginning." Similarly, S. Garofalo (ed.), Sacro Concilio Ecumenico
Vaticano II: Constituzioni, Decreti, Dichiarazioni (Milan: Editrice Ancora, 1966) 189: "per successione che decorre ininterrotta dall'origine." See also
Ecclesia de eucharistia, Origins 32:46 (1 May 2003) 753-768, 28, 29.
125. Augsburg Confession VII.1; LG, 20.
126. Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, The Church as Communion, §31.
127. Anglican-Lutheran International Continuation Committee, The Niagara Report, paras. 28-30; in J. Gros, et al., Growth in Agreement II, 17f.
128. CCM 12.
129. Apology XIV.1.
130. BC Kolb and Wengert, 90-103; Robert Kolb and James A. Nestingen, Sources and Contexts of the Book of Concord (Minneapolis: Fortress Press,
2001), 137-139.
131. Georg Kretschmar, "Die Wiederentdeckung des Konzeptes der 'Apostolischen Sukzession' im Umkreis der Reformation," in Das bischöfliche Amt:
Kirchengeschichtliche und ökumenische Studien zur Frage des kirchlichen Amtes, edited by Dorothea Wendebourg (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and
Ruprecht, 1999), 300-44.
132. For an example of a vehement rejection by the Reformers of the argument that episcopal succession is essential to a valid ministry, see Philip
Melanchthon, "The Church and the Authority of the Word," in Melanchthon: Selected Writings, translated by Charles Leander Hill (Minneapolis:
Augsburg, 1962), 130-86. Latin original in Melanchthons Werke im Auswahl, vol. 1, 323-386.
133. See also World Council of Churches Faith and Order Commission, Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, Faith and Order Papers, 111 (Geneva: World
Council of Churches, 1982), M38.; Warren A. Quanbeck, "A Contemporary View of Apostolic Succession," in Eucharist and Ministry: Lutherans and
Catholics in Dialogue IV, p. 187; The Lutheran responses to BEM on ministry and succession are analyzed in Michael Seils, Lutheran Convergence?
An Analysis of the Lutheran Responses to the Convergence Document "Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry" of the World Council of Churches Faith
and Order Commission, LWF Report 25 (Geneva: Lutheran World Federation, 1988), 126-131. A more positive reading of Lutheran responses is in
Michael Root, "Do Not Grow Weary in Well-Doing: Lutheran Responses to the BEM Ministry Document." dialog 27 (1988): 23-30.
134. CCM 12.
135. Cf. Niagara Report, paras. 54-55.
136. This analysis presumes that bishops and pastors working within congregational, parochial, and diocesan structures are paradigmatic for ecclesiology.
137. Roman Catholic-Lutheran Joint Commission, 1994, para.93.
138. SC, 42.
139. CD, 15.
140. LG, 28.
141. AC, 7.
142. WA 30II: 421 quoted in Althaus 1966, 288, n. 10.
143. The major exception here might be The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. For a significant Missouri discussion of these issues, see Pieper 1950-1957, vol. 3, 419-435.
144. "Concerning the Ministry," Luther's Works, American Edition 40:41.
145. See Quenstedt, cited in Heinrich Schmid, Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (1899; rpt. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1961), p.
591.
146. See Conrad Bergendoff, The Doctrine of the Church in American Lutheranism, The Knubel-Miller Lecture, 1956 (Philadelphia: Board of
Publication of the United Lutheran Church in America, 1956).
147. Roman Catholic-Lutheran Joint Commission, The Ministry in the Church, 1981, 49 (emphasis in original text).
148. See SC, 10.
149. See SC, 41. Karl Rahner makes this point in "Theology of the Parish," in The Parish: From Theology to Practice, ed. by Hugo Rahner
(Westminster, Maryland: The Newman Press, 1958) 23-35. He identifies the parish as "the representative actuality of the Church; the Church appears
and manifests itself in the event of the central life of the parish" (25). Rahner argues that the church is necessarily a local and localized community. It
achieves its highest degree of actuality where it acts, that is, where it teaches, prays, offers the Sacrifice of Christ, etc. For Rahner the parish is not a division
of a larger segment of the church, but "the concentration of the Church into its own event-fullness" (30). The parish is "the highest degree of actuality of
the total church" (30). See also Jerry T. Farmer, Ministry in Community: Rahner's Vision of Ministry, Louvain Theological and Pastoral Monographs
§13 (Leuven: Peeters Press and Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1993) 134-136.
150. In the reference just cited, Rahner also makes the point that the parish and the pastor are jure divino in the same way that the Church, papacy, and
episcopate are, even though a canonist would not easily concede this point. Ibid., 25.
151. Joint Working Group, para. 13.
152. Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, 1991, para. 39.
153. Peter Brunner, "The Realization of Church Fellowship." In The Unity of the Church: A Symposium, papers presented to the Commission on
Theology and Liturgy of the Lutheran World Federation (Rock Island, Illinois: Augustana Press, 1957): 22.
154. Ibid., 18f.
155. CN, 7.
156. U.S. Lutheran-Catholic Dialogue Round IV, Eucharist and Ministry, proposed, "As Lutherans, we joyfully witness that in theological dialogue with
our Roman Catholic partners we have again seen clearly a fidelity to the proclamation of the gospel and the administration of the sacraments which confirms
our historic conviction that the Roman Catholic church is an authentic church of our Lord Jesus Christ. For this reason we recommend to those who have
appointed us that through appropriate channels the participating Lutheran churches be urged to declare formally their judgment that the ordained Ministers
of the Roman Catholic church are engaged in valid ministry of the gospel, announcing the gospel of Christ and administering the sacraments of faith as
their chief responsibilities, and that the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are truly present in their celebrations of the sacrament of the altar"
(paragraph 35); and "As Roman Catholic theologians, we acknowledge in the spirit of Vatican II that the Lutheran communities with which we have been
in dialogue are truly Christian churches, possessing the elements of holiness and truth that mark them as organs of grace and salvation. Furthermore, in
our study we have found serious defects in the arguments customarily used against the validity of the eucharistic Ministry of the Lutheran churches. In
fact, we see no persuasive reason to deny the possibility of the Roman Catholic church recognizing the validity of this Ministry. Accordingly we ask the
authorities of the Roman Catholic church whether the ecumenical urgency flowing from Christ's will for unity may not dictate that the Roman Catholic
church recognize the validity of the Lutheran Ministry, and, correspondingly, the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the eucharistic celebrations
of the Lutheran churches" (paragraph 54). The International Lutheran-Roman Catholic Commission text, Facing Unity, which built on earlier agreements,
outlines a proposal for Lutheran-Catholic unity by stages including mutual teaching of the apostolic faith, mutual engagement in apostolic mission, and
recognition and reconciliation of apostolic ministries by mutual installation/ordination of bishops. Unlike "Called to Common Mission," it does not propose
immediate, full mutual recognition of ministry, but a phased recognition and reconciliation.
157. Unitatis redintegratio, 3. Lutherans long had a complex view of the ecclesial status of the Roman church, stressing both its character as church and
its perceived failings that were asserted to undercut its faithfulness in a fundamental way. On Rome as church despite its failings, see LW 26.24; for an
apparently contrary assertion, see LW 41.144.
158. UR 4.
159. CN, Origins 22/7 (June 25, 1992), para. 17.
160. Cf. Church and Justification, 153-156.
161. Decree on Ecumenism, 7.
162. John Paul II, UUS, 15.2.
163. "Called to Common Mission" describes the ELCA's relationship of full communion with The Episcopal Church.
164. UR, 3.
165. UR, 3.
166. Briefwechsel von Landesbischof Johannes Hanselmann und Joseph Kardinal Ratzinger über das Communio-Schreiben der Römischen
Glaubenskongregation," Una Sancta, 48 (1993): 348.
167. Roman Catholic/Lutheran Joint Commission, The Ministry in the Church (Geneva: Lutheran World Federation, 1982), paras. 75-77. Defectus
is translated as "lack" in the English edition of UR on the Vatican Web site (para. 22c), in UUS, para. 67, and in the official English translation of the
Catechism of the Catholic Church, para. 1400. See also Ecclesia de eucharistia, 30.
168. Walter Kasper, "Die apostolische Sukzession als ökumenisches Problem," in Lehrverurteilungen - kirchentrennend?: III Materialien zur Lehre
von den Sakramenten und vom kirchlichen Amt, edited by Wolfhart Pannenberg (Freiberg i.B.: Herder, 1990), 345.
169. Growth in Agreement II, 443-484.
170. See Arthur Carl Piepkorn, "A Lutheran View of the Validity of Lutheran Orders." In Eucharist and Ministry: Lutheran and Catholics in Dialogue,
vol. IV, edited by Paul C. Empie and T. Austin Murphy (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1979), p. 215; Wolfgang Stein, Das kirchliche Amt bei Luther
(Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1972), 192f.
171. For example: "It is a definite conclusion that no one confers holy orders and makes priests less than those under the papal dominion. A semblance,
indeed, of ordination and of making priests is magnificently present but it behooves the king of semblance to grant nothing but semblance so as to guarantee
his abominations" (LW 40.15; WA 12, 176). See further Helmut Lieberg, Amt und Ordination bei Luther und Melanchthon (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht, 1962), 168-171.
172. JDDJ, 40.
173. LG, 25.
174. Kolb and Wengert, Apology to the Augsburg Confession, 14, 222-223.
175. Church of Sweden Church Ordinance of 1571, in John Wordsworth, The National Church of Sweden (London: Mowbray, 1911), p. 232; on this
Ordinance and its importance for later Swedish theology, see Sven-Erik Brodd, "The Swedish Church Ordinance of 1571 and the Office of Bishop in an
Ecumenical Context," in The Office of Bishop: Swedish Lutheran-Roman Catholic Dialogue LWF Studies (Geneva: Lutheran World Federation, 1993),
147-157.
176. "Called to Common Mission: A Lutheran Proposal for a Revision of the Concordat of Agreement" (Chicago: Evangelical Lutheran Church in
America, 1999), esp. paras. 15-21; Together in Mission and Ministry. The Porvoo Common Statement with Essays on Church and Ministry in Northern
Europe (London: Church House Publishing, 1993), esp. paras. 34-57 of the Common Statement; Called to Full Communion: The Waterloo Declaration
(http://generalsynod.anglican.ca/ministries/departments/doc.php?id=71 &dept=primate), esp. paras. A 3, 5.
177. Although there is no general Catholic ruling on Lutheran orders, consistent Catholic practice has been to re-ordain Lutheran ministers entering the
Catholic priesthood.
178. John Reumann, "The Ordination of Women: Exegesis, Experience, and Ecumenical Concern," in Ministries Examined (Minneapolis: Augsburg
Publishing House, 1987).
179. Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, 4 (cf. Origins 24 [June 9, 1994], 51). Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, From "Inter Insigniores" to
"Ordinatio Sacerdotalis," (Washington: U.S. Catholic Conference, 1996).
180. UUS,§79.1.4.
181. UUS, para. 96.
182. UUS, 94.
183. Recent discussion on the reform of the papacy in the light of UUS includes Carl Braaten and Robert Jenson (eds.), Church Unity and the Papal
Office: An Ecumenical Dialogue on John Paul II's Encyclical UUS (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2001); Michael J. Buckley, Papal Primacy and the
Episcopate: Towards a Relational Understanding Ut unum sint: Studies on Papal Primacy (New York: Crossroad, 1998); William Henn, The Honor
of my Brothers: A Short History of the Relation between the Pope and the Bishops Ut unum sint: Studies on Papal Primacy (New York: Crossroad,
2000); Hermann J. Pottmeyer, Towards a Papacy in Communion: Perspectives from Vatican Councils I & II Ut unum sint: Studies on Papal Primacy
(New York: Crossroad, 1998); John R. Quinn, The Reform of the Papacy: The Costly Call to Christian Unity (New York: Crossroad, 1999); James
Puglisi (ed.) Petrine Ministry and the Unity of the Church (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1999).
184. UR, 4.
185. Porvoo Common Statement, para. 45.
186. "Therefore we ask the Lutheran Churches: 1) if they are prepared to affirm with us that papal primacy renewed in the light of the gospel, need not
be a barrier to reconciliation; 2) if they are able to acknowledge not only the legitimacy of the papal Ministry in the service of the Roman Catholic
communion but even the possibility and the desirability of the papal Ministry, renewed under the gospel and committed to Christian freed, in a larger
communion which would include the Lutheran churches; 3) if they are willing to open discussion regarding the concrete implications of such a primacy
to them." from "Toward the Renewal of Papal Structures" Part C, "Lutheran Perspectives" paragraph 32, 22-23.
187. Cf. Papal Primacy and the Universal Church, its use of the "Petrine principle" and questions to Lutheran churches, including "that papal primacy,
renewed in light of the gospel, need not be a barrier to reconciliation" (§32), and including to the Roman Catholic Church, "if it is prepared to envisage
the possibility of a reconciliation that would recognize the self-government of Lutheran churches within a communion" (§33); The Ministry in the Church,
Roman Catholic/Lutheran Joint Commission (Geneva: LWF, 1982) §§67-73 = Growth in Agreement 269-71; Harding Meyer, "Suprema auctoritas"
in Petrine Ministry and the Unity of the Church, 15-34, esp. 29.
188. UUS, 11. Cf. UR, 3.
189. JDDJ, 15.
190. UR, 3.
191. Facing Unity (1985), §92-93; §120-122.
192. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (hereafter BDAG), rev. and ed. F. W. Danker
(Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2000) 552-53 offers four basic definitions (in boldface type, meanings, functional use; English equivalents in italics):
[1] "close association involving mutual interests and sharing, association, communion, fellowship, close relationship," as in marriage or friendship
or the bond of life that unites Pythagoreans; Phil. 1:5 a close relation with the gospel, or with the poor (Rom. 15:26);
[2] "attitude of good will that manifests an interest in a close relationship, generosity, fellow-feeling, altruism," 2 Cor. 9:13, generosity in sharing;
[3] abstract term for the concrete "sign of fellowship, proof of brotherly unity; even gift, contribution"; Rom.15:26 might fit here, so might 1 Cor
10:16ab, "a means for attaining a close relationship with the blood and body of Christ";
[4] participation, sharing in something, Christ's sufferings (Phil. 3:10), the body and blood of Christ (1 Cor. 10:16), the Holy Spirit (2 Cor. 13:13),
faith (Phlm. 6).
Cf. further F. Hauck, "koinos, ... koinÇnia, etc.," (German 1938), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans) 3 (1965)
789-809, supplement in Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer) 10/2 (9179) 1145-46; J. Hainz, "koinÇnia etc.,"
(German 1981), Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans) 2 (1991) 303-5.
193. In the Old Testament the noun, verb, and adjective occur 25 times. There are seven more New Testament examples if compounds (synkoinÇnos,
synkoinÇnein) are counted, for a New Testament total of 45 instances. There are a maximum 119 occurrences in the entire Greek Bible if koinos,
"common" or "impure," is included. Examples that do occur are mainly in later (deuterocanonical) books under Hellenistic influence; koinÇnia occurs
only at Wisdom of Solomon 6:23 and 8:18, for associating with wisdom and her words. Charts on koinon-terms in J. Reumann, "Koinonia in Scripture:
Survey of Biblical Texts," in On the way to Fuller Koinonia, ed. T. F. Best and G. Gassmann, Faith and Order Paper no. 166 (Geneva: WCC Publications,
1994) 39, where all New Testament passages are treated, and bibliography provided, some of which cannot be included here.
194. BDAG 551-52.
195. BDAG 552. The verb metechÇ, "have a share in, partake of something," is sometimes associated with koinÇnein, as at 1 Cor. 10:17 (cf. 16) and
10:21, 30; and Heb. 2:14. Cf. N. Baumert, KOINONEIN und METECHEIN--synonym? Eine umfassende semantische Untersuchung, SBB 51
(Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2003) distinguishes them and gives a variety of meanings to koinÇnein, not a single sense that some like Hainz (n. 11
above) sought.
196. J. Y. Campbell, "KOINÆNIA and its Cognates in the New Testament," Journal of Biblical Literature 51 (1932) 352-82; H. Seesemann, Der Begriff
KOINÆNIA im Neuen Testament, BZNW 14 (Giessen: Töpelmann, 1933); Hauck (n. , above). A. R. George, Communion with God in the New
Testament (London: Epworth, 1953) took communion as "have a share, give a share," and sharing, partly in reaction to those who made "the Fellowship"
a name for the church, as was argued by C. A. Anderson Scott, Christianity According to St Paul (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1927, reprinted
1961) 158-69.
197. K. Kertelge, "Abendmahlsgemeinschaft und Kirchengemeinschaft im Neuen Testament und in der Alten Kirche," in Interkommunion - Konziliarität.
Zwei Studien im Auftrag des Deutschen ökumenischen Studienausschusses, Beiheft zur Ökumenischen Rundschau 25 (1974) 2-51, reprinted in Einheit
der Kirche: Grundlegung im Neuen Testament, ed. F. Hahn, K. Kertelge, & R. Schnackenburg, Quaestiones Disputatae 84 (Freiburg: Herder, 1979) 94-132, and "Kerygma und Koinonia: Zur theologischen Bestimmung der Kirche des Urchristentums," in Kontinuität und Einheit, Festschrift for F. Mussner,
ed. P.- G. Müller & W. Stenger (Freiburg: Herder, 1981) 317-39. R. Schnackenburg, "Die Einheit der Kirche unter dem Koinonia-Gedanken," in Einheit
der Kirche (1979) 52-93. J. Hainz, Koinonia (1982), above n. .
198. So J. M. McDermott, "The Biblical Doctrine of KoinÇnia," Biblische Zeitschrift N.F. 19 (1975) 64-77 and 219-33. J. Hainz, Koinonia: (see note
11 above), was critical of earlier studies for failing to find an underlying unity or for reading in traditional dogmatic theology (178, 185, 188); history of
research and results, 162-204.
199. F. Hahn, "Einheit der Kirche und Kirchengemeinschaft in neutestamentlicher Sicht," in Einheit der Kirche (above, n. 197) 9-51. Hahn (13-14)
suggested that the Greek koinÇnia is like the Latin participatio and partly like communio, while the German Gemeinschaft is like Latin societas.
200. J. G. Davies, Members One of Another: Aspects of Koinonia (London: Mowbray, 1958), originally presented to the World Council of Churches'
Division of Interchurch Aid and Service to Refugees; G. Panikulam, KoinÇnia in the New Testament: A Dynamic Expression of Christian Life, Analecta
Biblica 85 (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1979); J. Hainz, Ekklesia: Strukturen paulinischer Gemeinde-Theologie und Gemeinde-Ordnung, Biblische
Untersuchungen 9 (Regensburg: Pustet, 1972); Hainz' Koinonia (above, n. 11) includes sections on Roman Catholic, Reformation, and Orthodox views
on the concept (206-72). Reumann's tradition-history approach (above, n. 193) was presented at the Fifth World Conference on Faith and Order in 1993.
Further, S. Brown, "Koinonia as a Basis of New Testament Ecclesiology?" One in Christ 12 (1976) 157-67; J. D. G. Dunn, "'Instruments of Koinonia'
in the Early Church," One in Christ 25 (1989) 204-16; K. Kertelge, "Koinonia und Einheit der Kirche nach dem Neuen Testament," in Communio
Sanctorum: Einheit der Christen - Einheit der Kirche, Festschrift für Bischof Paul-Werner Scheele, ed. Josef Schreiner and Klaus Wittstadt (Würzburg:
Echter Verlag, 1988) 53-67.
201. J. Reumann, "Church Office in Paul, Especially in Philippians," Origins and Method: Toward a New Understanding of Judaism and Christianity:
Essays in Honour of John C. Hurd (JSNTSup 86; ed. B. H. McLean; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993) 82-91, esp. 83. See J. P. Meier, "Are
There Historical Links between the Historical Jesus and the Christian Ministry?" Theology Digest 47/4 (2000) 303-15; E. Schweizer, Church Order in
the New Testament (SBT 32; London: SCM, 1961) 20-33 (2 a-m).
202. Today it is widely recognized among New Testament interpreters that the added assertions in Matthew 16:16b-19 may be a retrojected account of
an episode in the gospel tradition rooted in a post-resurrection appearance of the risen Christ, such as that preserved in John 21:15-17. In other words, Matt.
16:16b-19 may be a Matthean version of the "feed my lambs/sheep" conversation of John 21. See, e.g., R. E. Brown et al. (eds.), Peter in the New
Testament: A Collaborative Assessment by Protestant and Roman Catholic Scholars (Minneapolis: Augsburg; New York: Paulist, 1973) 83-101. Cf.
J. Roloff's estimate: "Vielmehr tritt Petrus an dieser Stelle lediglich als Garant der Jesusüberlieferung in Erscheinung, die die Grundlage von Verkündigung
und Leben der Gemeinde darstellt" (Exegetische Verantwortung in der Kirche: Aufsätze (ed. M. Karrer; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1990)
339. Cf. P. Perkins, Peter: Apostle for the Whole Church (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000) 86. Such an interpretation of the Caesarea Philippi scene would
not deny that Jesus founded a "church," but it would reveal rather an awareness that his early followers had of themselves as the "flock" or "church," which
developed during the course of the decades between A.D. 30 and 90, when the Matthean and Johannine Gospels were eventually composed. In other words,
Matthew would have interpreted with hindsight the meaning of Peter's acknowledgment and the implications of Jesus' reaction to it in thus formulating
the church-building statement, which appears on Jesus' lips.
203. In Luke 22:31-32, Jesus prays for the repentant Simon that he might "strengthen" his "brethren." This supportive Petrine function, however, is set
out in a context making no mention of ekkl‘sia.
204. This title seems to be derived by the evangelists from the Hellenistic world, because talmîd is almost wholly absent from the Old Testament (save
in 1 Chr. 25:8, used of pupils in the Temple choir!). Math‘t‘s occurs in the Septuagint of Jer. 13:21; 20:11; 46:9, but always with a variant reading that
makes the deriving of the New Testament usage from it problematic. See further J. A. Fitzmyer, "The Designations of Christians in Acts and Their
Significance," in Commission Biblique Pontificale, Unité et diversité dans l'Eglise (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1989) 223-36, esp. 227-29.
205. See further E. Lohse, Die Ordination im Spätjudentum und im Neuen Testament (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1951) 19-21. Cf. J.
Newman, Semikhah (Ordination): A Study of Its Origin, History and Function in Rabbinic Literature (Manchester: Manchester University, 1950) 1-3.
From Old Testament passages, rabbinic tradition developed its practice of ordination, a practice attested only several centuries later in the Tannaitic
Midrashim (Sifre Num. 27:18 §140; Sifre Deut. 34:9 §357); cf. Str-B, 2. 647-48.
206. J. Roloff has summed up the matter: "Jesus, to be sure, neither founded the Church nor installed office-holders, but even so by his calling of followers,
by establishing a community of disciples, and by his summons to service he supplied the momentum, without which the post-Easter development of the
Church would not be explicable" ("Amt / Ämter / Amtsverständnis IV," TRE 2 [1978] 510). Similarly, H. von Lips, "Amt, IV. Neues Testament," RGG4
1 (1998) 424-26.
207. See further J. A. Fitzmyer, "The Designations of Christians in Acts" (above, n. 204), 227, 229-32.
208. The first occurrence (Acts 5:11) is a comment of the author himself about the effect of Ananias's deception as he uses a term current in his own day
to report how "fear fell upon the whole church," i.e. the whole Jerusalem church.
209. J. Fitzmyer, "The Acts of the Apostles," Anchor Bible 31 (New York: Doubleday, 1998) 343. Although the Seven are chosen diakonein trapezais,
"to serve tables," they are not called diakonoi by Luke. The later ecclesiastical tradition often considered them to be the first "deacons." See 1 Clem. 42:4.
Luke hardly intended his readers "to see the origin of the diaconate in this episode."
210. Bishops in the Catholic tradition are regarded as successors of the Apostles (Vatican II, LG §20); cf. F.A. Sullivan, From Apostles to Bishops: The
Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church (New York: Newman, 2001). Does that mean successors of the "Twelve Apostles" (Matt. 10:2;
Rev. 21:14)? In the New Testament, others beyond the Twelve bear the title apostolos: Matthias, Acts 1:26; Barnabas and Paul, Acts 14:4, 14; unnamed
"apostles," 2 Cor. 8:23; and possibly Andronicus and Junia, Rom. 16:7. See further J. Hainz, Kirche im Werden: Studien zum Thema Amt und Gemeinde
im Neuen Testament (ed. J. Hainz; Munich/Paderborn: Schöningh, 1976) 109-22.
211. Although the phrase h‘ kat' oikon ekkl‘sia does not occur in Acts, the idea may be found in Acts 2:46; 5:42; 12:12 and may be derived from the
conversion of individuals and their "households" (Lydia, Acts 16:15; the jailer, 16:34; Crispus, 18:8; possibly also "the house of Jason," 17:5). On the
house church, see R. Banks, Paul's Idea of Community: The Early House Churches in Their Historical Setting (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1980);
F. V. Filson, "The Significance of the Early House Churches," JBL 58 (1939) 105-12; H. J. Klauck, Hausgemeinde und Hauskirche im frühen
Christentum (SBS 103; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1981); A. J. Malherbe, "House Churches and Their Problems," Social Aspects of Early
Christianity (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University, 1977) 60-91; W. Rordorf, "Was wissen wir über die christlichen Gottesdiensträume der
vorkonstantinischen Zeit?" ZNW 32 (1986) 476-80.
212. In such gatherings the paterfamilias or prostatis, "patroness" (Rom. 16:2), presumably provided the leadership in the house church, which eventually
came to be called episkop‘ (1 Tim. 3:1).
213. See further P. Benoit, "L'Unité de la communion ecclésiale dans l'Esprit selon la quatrième Evangile," Unité et diversité dans l'Eglise (see n. 204
above), 265-83; R. E. Brown, The Community of the Beloved Disciple (New York: Paulist, 1979); F.-M. Braun, "Le cercle johannique et l'origine du
quatrième évangile," RHPR 56 (1976) 203-14; R. Fernández Ramos, "La comunidad joánica," Ciencia Tomista 106 (1979) 541-86; H.-J. Klauck,
"Gemeinde ohne Amt? Erfahrungen mit der Kirche in den johanneischen Schriften," BZ 29 (1985) 193-220.
214. See further J. Hainz, Koinonia: "Kirche" als Gemeinschaft, 62-89 (above, n.); idem, "KoinÇnia," EDNT 2. 303-5, esp. 304. Cf. J. Reumann,
"Koinonia in Scripture" (n. 193 above), 48-49.
215. See further N. Brox, "SÇt‘ria und Salus: Heilsvorstellungen in der Alten Kirche," EvT 33 (1973) 253-79; K. H. Schelkle, "SÇt‘r" and "SÇt‘ria,"
EDNT, 3. 325-29.
216. In 1 Corinthians 3:5-15, Paul hints at the role that all ministers in the church are to play for its upbuilding; they are there as "God's fellow workers,"
as he comments on his own and Apollos' role.
217. As translated by the RSV, similarly in NABRNT; the NRSV has "those who labor among you, and have charge of you in the Lord and admonish
you." So too J. Roloff, "Amt," TRE 2 (1978) 521: "Vorsteher"; F. Neugebauer, In Christus: En ChristÇ: Eine Untersuchung zum paulinischen
Glaubensverständnis (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1961) 139-40; C. Masson, Les deux épîtres de saint Paul aux Thessaloniciens (CNT 11a;
Neuchâtel/Paris: Delachaux et Niestlé, 1957) 71-72,
In Rom. 12:8, the same participle appears, ho proistamenos en spoud‘, which the RSV there renders, "he who gives aid, with zeal," but the NRSV
has, "the leader, in diligence"; and the NAB, "if one is over others, with diligence." Compare 1 Tim. 5:17, where the perfect participle of the same verb
is used, proestÇtes presbyteroi, "elders who rule" (RSV, NRSV), "presbyters who preside" (NAB). Cf. 1 Tim 3:4, 5, 12; Josephus, Ant. 8.12.3 §300
("govern"); 12.2.13 §108 ("chief officers").
Some commentators, however, would rather translate the three verbs thus: "who labor, give care, and admonish." Thus J. Reumann, "Church Office"
(n. 201 above), 89; A. J. Malherbe, First Thessalonians (AB 32B; New York: Doubleday, 2000) 310-14; R. F. Collins, "The First Letter to the
Thessalonians," NJBC, art. 46, §37; E. J. Richard, First and Second Thessalonians (Sacra Pagina 11; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1995) 267-68.
218. See J. Hainz, Ekklésia: Strukturen paulinischer Gemeinde-Theologie und Gemeinde-Ordnung (BU 9; Regensburg: Pustet, 1972) 37-42; also idem,
"Die Anf~nge des Bischofes- und Diakonenamtes," and "Amt und Amtsvermittlung bei Paulus," in Kirche im Werden (n. 210 above) 91-108, 109-22.
219. NRSV has "bishops and deacons," but with a marginal note, "overseers and helpers." The same twosome occurs later in 1 Clement 42:4-5
(supposedly based on the LXX of Isa. 60:17); Didache 15:1.
220. See G. F. Hawthorne, Philippians (WBC 43; Waco, TX: Word, 1983) 9-10; A. Lemaire, Les ministères aux origines de l'église: Naissance de
la triple hiérarchie: évêques, presbytres, diacres (LD 68; Paris: Cerf, 1971) 27-31, 96-103, 186; "The Ministries in the New Testament," BTB 3 (1973)
133-66, esp. 144-48.
221. The origin of the office of "overseer" is debated. See H. Lietzmann, "Zur urchristlichen Verfassungsgeschichte," ZWT 55 (1914) 97-153, repr. in
Das kirchliche Amt im Neuen Testament (Wege der Forschung 189; ed. K. Kertelge; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1977) 93-143; J.
M. Balcer, "The Athenian Episkopos and the Achaemenid 'King's Eye,'" AJP 98 (1977) 252-63; H. W. Beyer, "Episkopos," TDNT, 2. 618-20; L. Porter,
"The Word episkopos in Pre-Christian Usage," ATR 21 (1939) 103-12; A. Adam, "Die Entstehung des Bischofsamtes," Wort und Dienst 5 (1957) 104-13;
W. Nauck, "Probleme des frühchristlichen Amtsverständnisses (I Ptr 5,2f.)," ZNW 48 (1957) 200-220, esp. 202-7; H. Braun, Qumran und das Neue
Testament (2 vols.; Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1966), 2. 329-32; W. Eiss, "Das Amt des Gemeindeleiters bei den Essenern und der Christliche Episkopat,"
WO 2 (1959) 514-19; J. A. Fitzmyer, "Jewish Christianity in Acts in Light of the Qumran Scrolls," Studies in Luke-Acts: Essays Presented in Honor
of Paul Schubert... (ed. L. E. Keck and J. L. Martyn; Nashville: Abingdon, 1966) 233-57, esp. 245-48; J. Hainz, "Die Anfänge des Bischofs- und
Diakonenamtes," Kirche im Werden (n. 210 above), 91-107; R.E. Brown "Episkop‘ and Episkopos: The New Testament Evidence," TS 41 (1980) 322-338. On house churches and episcopacy, see E. Dassmann, "Zur Entstehung des Monepiskopats," JAC 17 (1974) 74-90; "Haus-gemeinde und
Bischofsamt," in Vivarium: Festschrift Theodor Klausner... (JAC Ergänzungsband 11; Münster in W.: Aschendorff, 1984) 82-97; Ämter und Dienst in
den frühchristlichen Gemeinden (Hereditas 8; Bonn: Borengässer, 1994); G. Schöllgen, "Hausgemeinden, Oikos-Ekklesiologie, und monarchischer
Episkopat," JAC 31 (1988) 72-90; "Bischof, I. Neues Testament," RGG4, 1. 1614-15; J. Reumann, "Church Office" (n. 201 above), 87-89; "One Lord,
One Faith, One God, but Many House Churches," Common Life in the Early Church: Essays Honoring Graydon F. Snyder (ed. J. V. Hills et al.;
Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998) 106-17. Cf. B. L. Merkle, The Elder and Overseer: One Office in the Early Church, Studies in Biblical
Literature 57 (New York: Peter Lang, 2003).
222. See J. N. Collins, Diakonia: Re-interpreting the Ancient Sources (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990) 235-37; cf. BDAG, 230: "agent,
intermediary, courier." J. Roloff suggest that it was "aus der Funktion beim Gemeindemahl entwickelt" ("Amt," TRE 2 [1978] 522).
223. Eucharist and Ministry (Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue 4; New York: USA National Committee of the LWF; Washington, D.C.: USCC, 1970)
10 n. 6.
224. J. Fitzmyer, "Acts" (n. 209 above) 534-535. Roloff considers this as unhistorical ("ganz sicher ungeschichtlich"), "Amt," TRE 2 (1978) 521.
225. J. Fitsmyer, "Acts" (n. 209 above), 673.
226. See F. A. Sullivan, From Apostles to Bishops, 65 ("such authority was seen as coming directly from the Holy Spirit or the risen Christ").
227. "The anachronistic comparisons of these figures with 'apostolic delegates' or 'metropolitans' or 'monarchical heads' or 'coadjutors' are seductively
charming, but the text of the Pastoral Epistles employs the father-child model for expressing the way in which the apostolic task was shared and transmitted"
(J. D. Quinn, The Letter to Titus (AB 35; New York: Doubleday, 1990) 71.
228. Our translation. This might refer to the commissioning or ordaining of an episkopos or presbyteroi, but its meaning is debated. Some commentators
have even understood it as a penitential rite because of the following clause about participation in the sins of another. See N. Adler, "Die Handauflegung
im NT bereits ein Bussritus? Zur Auslegung von 1 Tim. 5,22," Neutestamentliche Aufsätze: Festschrift für Prof. Josef Schmid... (ed. J. Blinzler;
Regensburg: Pustet, 1963) 1-6; J. P. Meier, "Presbyteros in the Pastoral Epistles," CBQ 35 (1973) 323-45, esp. 325-37.
229. The Pastoral Epistles are widely regarded as Deutero-Pauline, perhaps by a disciple or disciples in the Pauline School. Cf. Raymond E. Brown, An
Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Doubleday, 1997) 662-68: "about 80 to 90 percent of modern scholars would agree that the Pastorals
were written after Paul's lifetime," having "some continuity with Paul's own ministry and thought, but not so close as manifested in Col. and Eph. and
even 2 Thess." (668). On various hypotheses, see J. D. Quinn, "Timothy and Titus, Epistles to," Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992)
Vol. 6 568-69.
230. In 2 Tim. 4:5 the author charges: "Do the work of an evangelist (ergon euangelistou), fulfill your ministry (diakonian)."
231. Or "ordained," since it is not easy to say precisely what is implied by this "laying on of hands." Acts 8:18 associates it with the gift of the Spirit.
Note also lectio varia in some MSS of 1 Tim. 4:14: presbyterou. Cf. Heb. 6:2.
232. Often translated later "bishop."
233. This term often is rendered "elders." That translation is acceptable for members of local councils in various towns in pre-Christian Judaism: e.g.
among Jews in Jerusalem (Acts 4:5; 6:12), or in the Old Testament (Josh. 20:4; Ruth 4:2). As a designation for those with a special function among
Christians, "presbyters" is preferred (as in Acts 11:30; 15:2, 4, 6, 22; 21:18).
234. Later called "deacons."
235. The abstract noun episkop‘ means "the act of watching over" or "visitation," as in Luke 19:44 and 1 Pet. 2:12; in Acts 1:20 it denotes a "position"
or "assignment"; but in 1 Tim. 3:1 it is used in the sense of "engagement in oversight, supervision," of leaders in Christian communities, i.e. the office of
overseer (BDAG, 379).
236. The term is used in a generic sense in 1 Pet. 2:25 of Christ, who is called episkopos tÇn psychÇn hymÇn, "guardian of your souls."
237. Corresponding substantives presbyt‘s and presbytis occur in Titus 2:2-3.
238. See R. E. Brown, Priest and Bishop: Biblical Reflections (New York: Paulist, 1970) 34-40.
239. It is debatable whether one should understand "tables" in a dining sense or in a banking sense (i.e. "to look after financial tables"). See W. Brandt,
Dienst und Dienen im Neuen Testament (NTF 2/5; Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1931; repr. Münster: Antiquariat Th. Stenderhoff, 1983); E. Schweizer,
Church Order (n. 201 above), 49 (3 o), 70 (5 i).
240. See Ambrosiaster, Ad Tim. prima 3.11 (CSEL 31/3. 268); J. N. D. Kelly, Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles (HNTC; New York: Harper &
Row, 1963) 83-84; R. M. Lewis, "The 'Women' of 1 Timothy 3:11," BSac 136 (1979) 167-75.
241. See B. B. Thurston, The Widows: A Women's Ministry in the Early Church (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1989) 36-55.
242. Even though one might argue from Titus 1:5-9 that episkopos and presbyteroi stand for one administrative office in the Cretan church, one cannot
predicate that one office so easily of the Ephesian church, because the qualifications of the episkopos are treated in 1 Timothy 3, quite distinctly and
independently of what is said about presbyteroi in 1 Timothy 5, so that the church in Ephesus might have been structured with these administrators
separately considered. This might affect one's consideration of regional churches and the way they received each other in hospitality or eucharistic sharing
more so than in structural uniformity. See J. Reumann, "Koinonia in Scripture" (n. 193 above), 63 (§52); R. Schnackenburg, "Ephesus: Entwicklung einer
Gemeinde von Paulus zu Johannes," BZ 35 (1991) 41-64; W. Thiessen, Christen in Ephesus: Die historische und theologische Situation in
vorpaulinischer und paulinischer Zeit und zur Zeit der Apostelgeschichte und der Pastoralbriefe (TANZ 12; Tübingen/Basel: Francke, 1995).
243. See G. W. Knight, "Two Offices (Elders/Bishops and Deacons) and Two Orders of Elders (Preaching/Teaching and Ruling Elders): A New
Testament Study," Presbyterion 12 (1986) 105-14; F. M. Young, "On episkopos and presbyteros," JTS 45 (1994) 142-48 (on the origin of the
presbyterate as distinct from that of the episcopate and the diaconate); R. A. Campbell, The Elders: Seniority within Earliest Christianity (Edinburgh:
Clark, 1994); J. D. Quinn, "Ministry in the New Testament," Eucharist and Ministry (see n. 183 above), 69-100, esp. 97.
244. For presbyteroi as derived from the "elders" of the Jewish synagogue, see J. T. Burtchaell, From Synagogue to Church: Public Services and Offices
in Earliest Christian Communities (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992); and "Amt, III. Antikes Judentum," RGG41 (1998) 424. For
backgrounds in the Greco-Roman world, see in contrast R. A. Campbell, The Elders (n. above), 67-96, 246, 258-59.
245. Note that Paul is informed about this decision in Acts 21:25, on his return to Jerusalem at the end of his third missionary journey. Nothing is said
about it in Galatians 2. See further J. A. Fitzmyer, The Acts of the Apostles (AB 31; New York: Doubleday, 1998) 538-67, 691-94; on porneia as "illicit
marital union," rather than the traditional "unchastity" or "prostitution," 557-58; i.e., BDAG porneia 2, rather than 1.
246. In Romans 15:26 koinÇnia is the word for "contribution," which in this case comes from Achaia and Macedonia.
247. In the New Testament, Apostolic Fathers, and apologists we encounter apostles, prophets and teachers, then bishops and deacons, presbyters (Didache
11,3-12; 13,1-7; 15,1-2; 1 Clement 42,4; 44,1-6; Polycarp, Ep. Phil. praef.; 5,1-6,3), teachers and leaders (Justin speaks of the "president," 1 Apol. 61,
65 and 67; he himself was a teacher [Mart. Iust. recension C, 3,3]), and various others in service to their communities.
248. For the three titles in conjunction with each other, see Ignatius, Magn. 2; 6; 13,1; Trall. 2,3; Philad. praef. and 7,1; Polyc. 6,1. For the presbytery
as a group, see Eph. 2,2; 4,1; 20,2; Magn. 6,1; 7,1; 13,1; Trall. 2,2; Philad. 7,1. The bishop is to be respected as the grace of God, in the place of God,
as Jesus Christ or the Father or the commandment, or followed as Jesus Christ follows the Father. The presbytery is to be respected as the law of Jesus
Christ, God's council or the apostles. The deacon is to be respected as the one who serves Jesus Christ or his mysteries, or as Jesus Christ himself, or as
God's commandment.
249. In the bishop Ignatius says he meets the bishop's church (Ephes. 1,3 and Magn. 6,1; in Magn. 2 he meets their church in all three ranks). He asks
for messengers to be sent to his own people to give them encouragement, and for his church to be remembered in prayer.
250. See the section "Communio through Letters" in Hertling, Communio (above n. ) 28-36; Werner Elert, Eucharist and Church Fellowship in the
First Four Centuries, tr. N. E. Nagel (St. Louis: Concordia, 1966) 125-160; and also the papyrus letters of recommendation studied by Hans Reinhard
Seeliger, "Das Netzwerk der communio: Überlegungen zur historischen Soziologie des antiken Christentums und ihrer Bedeutung für die Ekklesiologie,"
in Communio--Ideal oder Zerrbild von Kommunikation?, edited by Bernd Jochen Hilberath (Freiburg: Herder, 1999) 19-38.
251. 1 Clement, e.g. 51,1-4 (Rome even sends official emissaries: 65,1).
252. Justin, 1 Apol. 65,5 and 67,5. The absent are not only the sick: Otto Nussbaum, Die Aufbewahrung der Eucharistie (Bonn: Hanstein, 1979) 177.
253. The practice of sending eulogia, portions of consecrated bread from one bishop--especially a metropolitan--to bishops of nearby or dependent
churches was condemned by a Synod of Laodicea in the late fourth century (Synod of Laodicea, can. 14 [Mansi 2.566E]), which implies that the practice
existed earlier. See Robert F. Taft, "One Bread, One Body: Ritual Symbols of Ecclesial Communion in the Patristic Period," in Nova Doctrina Vetusque:
Essays on Early Christianity in Honor of Fredric W. Schlatter, edited by Douglas Kries and Catherine Brown Tkacz (New York: Peter Lang, 1999) 30-31.
254. In Rome in the fifth century, the bishop sent a particle of his eucharist to presbyters conducting services at tituli within the walls (but not beyond),
according to a letter of Innocent I to Decentius of Gubbio, March 19, 416; see Taft, art.cit. 32-34.
255. Tertullian, Apol. 39,4; on readmission to communion in the end, Cyprian, ep. 18,1; 55,13 (but repentance is required, 55,23).
256. Hertling, Communio, (above, n. 21) 36-42, e.g., "In some circumstances, a layman or the people could break off communion with their own bishop....
In these ruptures of fellowship, the essential issue is sharing in eucharistic communion (37).... From our point of view, it is striking that nowhere in antiquity
do we find a precise statement as to who had the right to excommunicate someone. Instead, it appears that everyone had this right--which, however,
corresponds exactly with the early Christian conception of communio" (41).
257. Council of Nicaea I (325), canon 4, says that all the bishops of a province should take part, but in any case at least three.
258. The growth of agreement concerning authoritative texts, what is called the "formation of the canon" of scripture, involved the inclusion of some texts
and the exclusion of others. The condemnation of Marcion in the 140s solidified the Christian commitment to their Jewish biblical heritage, and through
exchange and copying the churches came to possess and use quite similar collections of their own basic texts.
259. Easter is a good example. See the controversy described in Eusebius, H.E. 5,23-25, and the resolution of the date at the Council of Nicaea (325),
mentioned in its synodal letter, paragraph 3, Socrates, H.E. 1,9.
260. Warnings about heretics, e.g., Eusebius, H.E. 4,7,6; 5,13,1-4; 5,18,1; 5,19,1-4; 6,43,3; 7,30; Socrates, H.E. 1,6 and Theodoret, H.E. 1,4 (regarding
Arius).
261. On the importance of the principal churches in maintaining and documenting koinonia via letters and lists of the orthodox, see Hertling, Communio,
(above n. ) 30-35.
262. New Testament texts cited by the Fathers in this connection include especially Acts 20:17-28; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:5-10; 1 Tim. 3:1-7 and 4:14. Ignatius
of Antioch addresses Polycarp of Smyrna as "bishop" (ep. ad Polyc. praef.), but Polycarp's own letter to the Philippians never mentions the term, suggesting
that titles were fluid in the mid-second century.
263. Numerous examples include 1 Clement, Polycarp To the Philippians, the Letter of the martyrs at Lyons and Vienne (Eusebius, H.E. 5,1-3). When
the term "dioecesis" was taken into Christian use later, it bore no resemblance to the imperial (civil) diocese.
264. See the Dictionnaire de droit canonique, ed. R. Naz, s.v. "Chorévèque" (Jacques Leclef). In the East, the institution survived into the 8th century,
although Canon 57 of the Synod of Laodicea (Mansi 2.574B) in the fourth century calls for the replacement of such village or country bishops by pastors
who travel amongst these small communities (periodeutas). The Synods of Ancyra, Neocaesarea, and Nicaea's "regulations consistently emphasize the
full dependence of the chorepiscopus on the real head of the community, who alone defined the sphere of his functions," says Karl Baus in The Imperial
Church from Constantine to the Middle Ages, volume two of History of the Church, edited by Hubert Jedin and John Dolan (New York: Seabury Press,
1980) 233.
265. Alexandre Faivre, Ordonner la fraternité: Pouvoir d'innover et retour à l'ordre dans l'Église ancienne (Paris: Cerf, 1992) 33 and 80-82.
266. Peter Lampe, Die stadtrömischen Christen in den ersten beiden Jahrhunderten, 2nd ed. (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1989) 334-342,
suggests as early as the late second century; Allen Brent, Hippolytus and the Roman Church in the Third Century (Leiden: Brill, 1995) 417-432, would
put the date of a monarchical bishop in Rome later.
267. Eusebius, H.E. 6,43,11.
268. One of the best treatments of the development of Rome's preeminence, up till the sixth century, is Robert B. Eno, The Rise of the Papacy
(Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1990). Eno participated in many earlier rounds of the U.S. Lutheran-Catholic Dialogue. See also James F. McCue and
Arthur Carl Piepkorn, "The Roman Primacy in the Patristic Era," in Papal Primacy and the Universal Church, edited by Paul C. Empie and T. Austin
Murphy (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1974), 43-97.
269. Irenaeus, haer. 3,1,1 (cf. Eusebius, H.E. 5,8,2-4) and 3,3,2. Willy Rordorf, "Was heisst: Petrus und Paulus haben die Kirche in Rom 'gegründet'?
Zu Irenäus, Adv. haer. III,1,1; 3,2.3," in Unterwegs zur Einheit, FS Heinrich Stirnimann, edited by Johannes Brantschen and Pietro Salvatico
(Freiburg/Schweiz: Universitätsverlag, 1980), says that they "founded" it by their oral preaching, constituted it by the installation of bishops.
270. See the examples of Victor and Irenaeus in the Easter controversy (Eusebius, H.E. 5,23-25); Stephen, Firmilian, Dionysius of Alexandria and Cyprian
in the dispute about rebaptizing heretics (Cyprian, ep. 69-75 and Eusebius, H.E. 7,9,1-5).
271. Irenaeus, haer. 3,3,3. In the huge literature on this passage, which has been rather tendentiously summarized by Domenic Unger in "St. Irenaeus
and the Roman Primacy," Theological Studies 13 (1952) 359-418, and "St. Irenaeus on the Roman Primacy," Laurentianum 16 (1975) 431-445, one
can discern the desire of scholars to maximize or to minimize the basis of the Roman church's importance. Walter Ullmann, "The Significance of the
Epistola Clementis in the Pseudo-Clementines," Journal of Theological Studies n.s. 11 (1960) 310-11, contends that Linus and Cletus may have been
Roman bishops, but the first proper successor or "heir" of Peter, succeeding to his powers, was Clement, and that the language in Irenaeus supports this.
Enrico Cattaneo, "Ab his qui sunt undique: una nuova proposta su Ireneo, Adv. haer. 3,3,2b," Augustinianum 40 (2000) 399-405, thinks that Irenaeus
is referring to the succession of presbyters, and emends undique to presbyteri.
272. Edict of Galerius, 311, Eusebius, H.E. 8,17,3-10; Licinius and Constantine's declaration of toleration ("Edict" of Milan), 313, Eusebius, H.E.10,5,2-14. In 380, Christianity was given almost exclusive legal status in the Roman Empire (Codex Theodosianus XVI 1,2; see Creeds, Councils and
Controversies, edited by J. Stevenson [New York: Seabury, 1966] 160-161). We are less well informed about the legal circumstances in other parts of
the Christian world.
273. Faivre, Ordonner la fraternité, 77-84, 93-96. Faivre calls the process "sacerdotalization."
274. In the West, these first appear early in the eighth century in Germany, especially Bavaria and Frankish lands, but have virtually disappeared by the
eleventh and twelfth centuries. From the first they are assistants to the bishop, and teach, oversee, confirm, consecrate altars and churches, ordain clergy
(even major orders), take part in synods. Dictionnaire de droit canonique, s.v. "Chorévèque," 691-93. Archpriests were an earlier phenomenon
(Merovingian times): as the number of country converts grew, they needed more service than a deacon could give, and the priest in charge of them came
to live with them. He did not have authority over several churches, nor could he ordain (A. Amanieu, "Archiprêtre," DDC 1,1007-1009). See also note
264 above.
275. The late ninth century saw the replacement of earlier archpriests and chorbishops by rural deans and archdeacons, who supervised all types of parishes.
Ewig, in Friedrich Kempf, Hans-Georg Beck, Eugen Ewig and Josef Andreas Jungmann, The Church in the Age of Feudalism, "History of the Church
3," edited by Hubert Jedin and John Dolan (New York: Herder and Herder, 1969), 165-66.
276. Bernard M. Kelly, The Functions Reserved to Pastors, Catholic University of America Canon Law Studies 250 (Washington: Catholic University
of America Press, 1947) 4; he adds (8), "This parochial unity of the city (civitas) was one of the most characteristic marks of the ancient diocese. The
cathedral was the only parish church in the city. Around the ninth century, however, other parishes appeared in the city, administered by collegiate
chapters."
277. See the article by R. Schieffer, "Eigenkirche," Lexikon des Mittelalters III (München: Artemis-Verlag, 1986) 1705-08.
278. Pierre Riché, in Évêques, moines et Empereurs (610-1054), ed. Gilbert Dagron et al. (Paris: Desclée, 1993), 768-69, writing about the late ninth
and early tenth century, says that some bishops sold off churches to lay patrons, and rural churches were fortunate if they belonged to monasteries. On 697,
he gives as a rough estimate that during the ninth century, the proportion of monks who were priests and deacons rose from 20 percent to 60 percent.
279. See Riché (note 278 above) 695: "Every year the bishop gathered the urban and rural clergy at his palace. At that time, the diocesan statutes would
be formulated...." He is speaking of the ninth century.
280. One focus in the Carolingian reform of the clergy under Louis the Pious (814-840) was to bring urban priests together in a canonical life and to draw
rural priests closer together. Kempf, in Kempf et al., 307-311; cf. 330-332.
281. Ewig points out, in Baus et al., 532, that while church synods were separate in the sixth century, later "the boundaries begin to become blurred" with
royal councils. Y. M.-J. Congar, L'Ecclésiologie du haut Moyen Age (Paris: Cerf, 1968) 133, n. 11 speaks of a great number of councils in the 6th-8th
centuries, declining in the 9th and especially the 10th.
282. For example, the first reference to Nicaea I (325) as "ecumenical" came in 338, borrowing a term used by the world-wide associations of professional
athletes and Dionysiac artists, according to Henry Chadwick, "The Origin of the Title, 'Oecumenical Council,'" Journal of Theological Studies, n.s. 23
(1972) 132-135. Constantinople I (381) was called "ecumenical" soon after the fact, in 382. The ecumenical status of Ephesus II (449) never was
achieved, despite the fact that it seems to have complied with the proposed conditions for that designation as well as the acknowledged ecumenical councils;
see Wilhelm De Vries, "Das Konzil von Ephesus 449, eine 'Räubersynode'?" Orientalia Christiana Periodica 41 (1975) 357-398.
283. The conciliar attempts to hold the churches of the East together in the face of disagreements over the theology of the Incarnation, from Ephesus I (431)
through Constantinople III (680-681), ended in church division. For the painful story, see W. H. C. Frend, The Rise of the Monophysite Movement:
Chapters in the History of the Church in the Fifth and Sixth Centuries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), or Les Églises d'Orient et
Occident, edited by Luce Pietri (Paris: Desclée, 1998) 387-481: "Justinien et la vaine recherche de l'unité."
284. Wilhelm de Vries, "Die Patriarchate des Ostens: Bestimmende Faktoren bei ihrer Entstehung," in I Patriarcati orientali nel primo millennio,
"Orientalia Christiana Analecta 181" (Roma: Pontificium Institutum Studiorum Orientalium, 1968) 20-21, says, "The bishops were fundamentally equal,
but their cities were not." The leader of the Christian churches of each province was the bishop of its metropolis; he oversaw the election and ordination
of bishops, presided at synods and served as a court of appeal from the local bishops.
285. These groupings were reflected in an important liturgical affirmation of communion, where in the Eucharistic prayer itself the presider prayed
explicitly for the bishop of the place and for the patriarch or patriarchs through whom the congregation was in communion with the rest of the church. This
practice is well attested from at least the sixth century in both East (the "diptychs") and the West (the prayer "Memento" in the Roman rite); see Joseph
A. Jungmann, The Mass of the Roman Rite, tr. Francis A. Brunner (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1955) II 154-156.
286. Constantinople's importance was recognized at the Council of Constantinople (381); Jerusalem was first under the metropolitan of Caesarea in
Palestine and overseen by the church of Antioch, but its unique place in Christian history and piety was recognized when it was named a fifth patriarchate
at the Council of Chalcedon (451). Bernard Flusin, in Les Églises d'Orient et d'Occident, ed. Luce Pietri (Paris: Desclée, 1998) 510-511, says that "if
the system of five patriarchs ever existed, it was not yet fully developed"; at the time of Chalcedon, "patriarch" was not yet a technical term.
287. Vittorio Parlato, L'ufficio patriarcale nelle chiese orientali dal IV al X secolo: Contributo allo studio della 'communio', (Padova: Edizioni Cedam,
1969), 26-27, assigns several causes: "heresies, schisms, political factors, persecutions, occupation of Christian territories by the Muslims, and not least
the revival of nationalism in the Greek-speaking parts of the empire." By 543, Antioch had a Monophysite hierarchy, and its Melkite (imperial or
Chalcedonian) bishop preferred to live in Constantinople from 609-742, so a third patriarch of Antioch was chosen by the North Syrians; from 566 there
were competing Monophysite and Melkite patriarchs in Alexandria.
288. See H. Marot, "Notes sur la Pentarchie," Irénikon 32 (1959) 436-442; Ferdinand R. Gahbauer, Die Pentarchie-Theorie. Ein Modell der
Kirchenleitung von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart (Frankfurt: Josef Knecht, 1993).
289. Hieronymus, ep. 146 1,6, ed. I. Hilberg, CSEL 66 (Vienna: F. Tempsky, 1918) 310: "nam et Alexandriae a Marco euangelista usque ad Heraclam
et Dionysium episcopos presbyteri semper unum de se electum et in excelsiori gradu conlocatum episcopum nominabant, quomodo si exercitus imperatorem
faciat aut diaconi eligant de se, quem industrium nouerint, et archdiaconum uocent. quid enim facit excepta ordinatione episcopus, quod presbyter non
facit?"
290. Pelagius, Commentarii in Ep. 1 ad Tim. 3, 8, edited by A. Souter in three volumes, Texts and Studies 9,1-3 (Cambridge: University Press, 1922-31),
reprinted in Patrologiae Latinae Supplementum 1.1110-1374; the treatment of 1 Tim. 3.8 is at PLS 1.1351.
291. "Episcopatus autem, ut quidam prudentium ait, nomen est operis non honoris.... Ergo episcopum Latine superintendere possumus dicere; ut intelligat
non se esse episcopum qui non prodesse sed praeesse dilexerit." Isidorus Hispaliensis, De ecclesiasticis officiis II 5,8, ed. Christopher M. Lawson, Corpus
Christianorum Series Latina 113 (Turnholti: Brepols, 1989) 59 (PL 83.782).
292. II 7,2 (ed. Lawson [note 291 above] 65): "Praesunt enim ecclesiae Christi, et in confectione diuini corporis et sanguinis consortes cum episcopis sunt,
similiter et in doctrina populorum et in officio praedicandi; ac sola propter auctoritatem summo sacerdoti clericorum ordinatio et consecratio reseruata est,
ne a disciplina ecclesiae uindicata concordiam solueret, scandala generaret."
293. Augustine, civ.dei 19,19.
294. The treatise, De VII ordinibus Ecclesiae, appears among the spuria of Jerome in PL 30.148-162; the cited text from chapter 6 is in columns 155-56.
J. Lécuyer, "Aux origines de la théologie thomiste de l'Épiscopat," Gregorianum 35 (1954) 65, n. 24, says that PL gives a faulty text; see the critical
edition by A. Kalff (Würzburg, 1935). Lest we assume that the unknown author of "De VII ordinibus Ecclesiae" thought of bishops as simply presbyters
with special duties, we should note that the quoted words come from section six of that little treatise; the seventh section exalts the ordo episcopalis
remarkably (PL 30.158-159A). In contrast to later lists of the seven orders, this treatise lists diggers (fossarii), porters, readers, subdeacons, levites or
deacons, priests, bishops.
295. IV Sent. dist. 24, c. 11 and 12.
296. Thomas Aquinas, for example, in his lectures on Philippians 1:1, 1 Timothy 3:1, 4:14, and Titus 1:6 accepts the New Testament equivalence; Super
Epistolas S. Pauli lectura, ed. Raphael Cai, 8. ed. revisa (Torino: Marietti, 1953) II, 91, 231, 245, 305.
297. Vita s. Willehadi 5-8, in Monumenta Germaniae Historiae, Scriptorum t. II 380-83; Vita s. Liudgeri 19-20, same volume, 410-11. These presbyters
were mentioned already in a paper by the late A. C. Piepkorn, a member of an earlier round of the present dialogue, Eucharist and Ministry, edited by Paul
C. Empie and T. Austin Murphy (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1979) 221-22.
298. The popes were Boniface IX (Bull "Sacrae religionis," February 1, 1400), Martin V (Bull "Gerentes ad vos," November 16, 1427), Innocent VIII
(Bull "Exposcit tuae devotionis," April 9, 1489). See Ludwig Ott, Das Weihesacrament, Handbuch der Dogmengeschichte IV 5 (Freiburg: Herder, 1969)
106-107, and his Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, 6th ed. (St. Louis: B. Herder, 1964), 459, and other Catholic manuals since the discovery of Martin
V's bull in 1943, such as H. Lennerz, De Sacramento Ordinis (2 vols.; Rome: Gregorian University, 1953) 145-53 (Appendix I). A. C. Piepkorn cited
these instances in Eucharist and Ministry, 222-23. For a full discussion, see John de Reeper, "Relation of Priesthood to Episcopate," Jurist 16 (1956)
350-358.
299. Dionysius was thought to have been Paul's convert, so his testimony conflicted with the equivalence of bishop and presbyter in the New Testament.
Medieval theologians like Thomas Aquinas tried to resolve the conflict by postulating a very rapid development from Paul to Dionysius. Not until the
sixteenth century did theologians recognize that Dionysius wrote much later than the first century. In two of the passages of Thomas Aquinas cited above,
he notes that Dionysius gives the triple order; Thomas explains the difference by saying it was not that way at the very beginning.
300. Baus, 38-39 and 260, n. 58, describes the origins of this claim, which was strongly resented by the Eastern churches. Hamilton Hess, The Canons
of the Council of Serdica a.d. 343 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1958), 52, says, "None of the early references to the canons which were made by the Roman
church ascribe them to the Council of Serdica. Their attributed source, when given, is invariably the Council of Nicaea."
301. According to Walter Ullmann, "Leo I and the Theme of Papal Primacy," Journal of Theological Studies n.s. 11 (1960) 25-51., Leo's innovation
was a legal theory of the pope's inheritance of Peter's fullness of power, which Peter in turn had received from Christ. The notion of heir turned up first
in a letter written by Siricius (384-399): "We carry the burdens of all who are heavy laden-or rather, the blessed apostle Peter in us bears them, he who
protects us and keeps us safe as his heir in all points of his ministry, as we believe" (30-31). As Ullmann observes, the heir in Roman law acts in all things
with the full rights of the testator, and if he were not of the same moral stature as the testator, he would be unworthy (indignus), but heir nonetheless-in
this case, of Peter's office and fullness of power. Ullmann insists on several points: that it is Peter's office which is inherited, not his apostolic commission;
"that no pope succeeds another pope, but succeeds St. Peter immediately"; that this is not a matter of orders, so a layman can become pope; and that "bishops
received their (jurisdictional) office (not their sacramental ordo) from the pope" (33-35; 43; 50; 44-45). No unbroken line of succession is needed in this
theory.
302. Their "aim . . . was to prove by the example of alleged cases from the history of the papacy the principle that the first episcopal see cannot be subjected
to any court-Prima sedes a nemine iudicatur" (Baus, in Baus et al., 621). The Latin axiom has been retained in the Roman Catholic Code of Canon Law
(1917 Code: Can. 1556; 1983 Code: Can. 1404; 1990 Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium: Can. 1058).
303. Itself based on fifth-century forged acts of Pope Silvester (Baus, in Baus et al., 247), the Constitutio Constantini or "Donation of Constantine"
appeared in Rome under mysterious circumstances "not later than the early fifties of the eighth century," writes Walter Ullmann, The Growth of Papal
Government in the Middle Ages, 3rd edition (London: Methuen, 1970), 74-86.
304. Ewig, in Kempf et al., 168. On 169, he adds that the effect of these texts was not fully felt until they were incorporated into canon law collections
in the 11th century. For the decretals themselves, see PL 130 or the edition by P. Hinschius, Decretales Pseudo-Isidorianae et Capitula Angilramni
(Leipzig, 1863).
305. Colin Morris, The Papal Monarchy: The Western Church from 1050 to 1250 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), 206, says that plenitudo potestatis,
fullness of power, "had a long history beginning with the letter of Leo I [ep. 14,1], but up to the time of Gratian it had attracted little notice. Its use was
confined to Leo's letters and two pseudo-Isidorian texts based on it, and it simply contrasted the authority of the apostolic see with those (such as legates
or metropolitans) who had been authorized to perform a subordinate function. It was Bernard's De consideratione [consid. II 8,16; Opera III 424] which
introduced a new interpretation.... Bernard understood it as referring to the universal power of the Roman pontiff to intervene in all parts of the church."
306. Morris, Papal Monarchy, 388, observes, "The prince-bishop was not (or not only) produced by original sin, but by the structure of ecclesiastical
property."
307. The phrase "der evangelische Ansatz" is from Werner Elert, Morphologie des Luthertums, Bd. 1: Theologie und Weltanschaung des Luthertums
hauptsächlich in 16. und 17. Jahrhundert (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1931, 3rd ed. 1965); Bd. 2, Soziallehren und Sozialwirkung des Luthertums (1932),
as trans. by Walter A. Hansen, The Structure of Lutheranism, Vol. 1, The Theology and Philosophy of Life of Lutheranism in the Sixteenth and
Seventeenth Centuries (St. Louis: Concordia, 1962), p. xix for discussion on the rendering; on this impact and "The Office of the Ministry," 1:297-307
= Eng. trans. 339-51.
308. For example, Georg von Polentz, Bishop of Samland, and Erhard of Queiss, Bishop of Pomesania.
309. Preached in 1519; LW 35. 49-73.
310. LW 35.67. The "Brotherhoods" (Brüderschaften) were societies of laymen who practiced devotional exercises and good works (BC p. 54 n. 103).
They are here regarded by Luther as a distortion of true communio.
311. While Luther and his colleagues emphasized Christ the word, they did not exclude the Trinitarian tradition; see, e.g., Luther's explanation of the
Third Article of the Creed in his Large Catechism. Cf. Luther und die trinitarische Tradition: Ökumenische und philosophische Perspektiven,
Veröffentlichen der Luther-Akademie Ratzeburg, 23, ed. Robert W. Jenson (Erlangen: Martin-Luther-Verlag, 1994).
312. From the New Testament understanding of koinonia and this Sermon by Luther on "The Blessed Sacrament," Paul Lehmann has, more recently,
understood the church as a place where God's acts become concrete in the world, a place or field of relationships for ethical reflection; see his Ethics in
a Christian Context (New York: Harper & Row, 1963); Nancy J. Duff, Humanization and the Politics of God: The Koinonia Ethics of Paul Lehmann
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992).
313. CA 5; 28.8-9.
314. See several articles in The Church as Communion, ed. Heinrich Holze, LWF Documentation No. 42/1997 (Geneva: LWF, 1997), especially
Alejandro Zorzin, "Luther's Understanding of the Church as Communion in his Early Pamphlets," 81-92; Simo Peura, "The Church as Spiritual
Communion in Luther," 93-131. David Yeago, "The Church as Polity? The Lutheran Context of Robert W. Jenson's Ecclesiology" in C. Gunton, ed.,
Trinity, Time, and Church: A Response to the Theology of Robert W. Jenson (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, U.K, 2000) 236, states, "[T]he goal of Luther
and the early Lutheran movement was not to isolate the eschatological from the outward and bodily church but to ask how the communion of the church
could and should 'take up space in the world' in a manner appropriate to its eschatological character as the body of Christ. On this reading, therefore, the
Lutheran tradition already contains elements of something like a 'communion-ecclesiology' in its normative sources."
315. E. Clifford Nelson (ed.), The Lutherans in North America, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), 52-56.
316. Cf. Gerd Haendler, Luther on Ministerial Office and Congregational Function (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981); Dorothea Wendebourg, "The
Ministry and Ministries," Lutheran Quarterly 15/2 (Summer 2001) 159-94, esp. "The Local Ministry of the Pastor as the Primary Form of the Ordained
Ministry," 163-66.
317. LW 28.283; LW 39.154-155. Cf. LW 37.367: "The bishops or priests are not heads [of the church] or lords or bridegrooms, but servants, friends,
and-as the word 'bishop' implies-superintendents, guardians, or stewards." Such tasks are so important that subsequently in local congregations the elected
leadership of lay people, usually the congregational council, is assigned also a part in the task of oversight, shared with the pastor(s); ELCA Model
Constitution for Congregations, C12.04., "The Congregational Council shall have general oversight of the life and activities of this congregation, and
in particular its worship life, to the end that everything be done in accordance with the Word of God and the faith and practice of the Evangelical Lutheran
Church in America." Cf. *C9.03. for what ordained ministers are to do, including (besides preaching) sacraments, conduct of public worship, and pastoral
care, "and supervise all schools and organizations of this congregation."
318. See Dorothea Wendebourg, "The Reformation in Germany and the Episcopal Office" in Visible Unity and the Ministry of Oversight (London 1997)
54: "the Wittenberg theologians generally envisage [episcope] as taking place in personal rather than synodical form" (this is in the context of visitation
in parishes, on which see §184 below).
319. Martin Brecht, "Die exegetische Begründung des Bischofsamt," 10-14, and Heinz-Meinolf Stamm, "Luthers Berufung auf die Vorstellungen des
Hieronymus vom Bischofsamt," 15-26, esp. 15-17, in Martin Luther und das Bischofsamt, ed. M. Brecht (Stuttgart: Calwer, 1990).
320. LW 44.175 "An Open Letter to the Christian Nobility," The Christian in Society I (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, ed.) =WA
6:440.21-29.
321. Wendebourg, "The Ministry and Ministries," 184 n. 32, but she goes on, "Luther does recognize a difference between bishops and presbyters at a
time as early as that of the Pastoral Epistles, but it is a difference--and this is his point--within a single congregation led by one pastor-bishop: Here the
bishop had presbyters and deacons as his assistants." Cf. WA 6:440,33-35; LW 44.175, the pastor or bishop should "have several priests and deacons by
his side..., who help him rule the flock and the congregation through preaching and sacraments."
322. Kolb and Wengert, BC, p. 340. On Jerome, see §§163, 168 above.
323. As Melanchthon put it in the TPPP: "Jerome, then, teaches that the distinctions of degree between bishop and presbyter or pastor are established by
human authority [humana auctoritate]. That is clear from the way it works, for, as I stated above, the power is the same. One thing subsequently created
a distinction between bishops and pastors, and that was ordination, for it was arranged that one bishop would ordain the ministers in a number of churches.
However, since the distinction in rank between bishop and pastor is not by divine right [jure divino], it is clear that an ordination performed by a pastor
in his own church is valid by divine right." Kolb and Wengert, BC, p. 340. In this connection, Wendebourg speaks of "the office of diocesan bishop" as
"a secondary phenomenon, owing its existence to historical circumstance"; the tasks of pastor and bishop remain the same, though their areas of jurisdiction
differ; in principle, even the right to ordain is still embodied in the office of the local pastor. "The Ministry" 165.
324. TPPP, 72. On the historical and political context of the early Lutheran situation concerning the problem of episcopacy, see especially Wendebourg,
"The Reformation in Germany," 49-55.
325. Smalcald Articles, Part 3, Art. 10.3, Kolb and Wengert, p. 324; Cf. Formula of Concord Solid Declaration 10.19.
326. Archdeacon Georg Rörer was ordained to some office in the Stadtkirche at Wittenberg, on May 14, 1525; see Wendebourg, "The Ministry" 191
n. 91; at least this was Rörer's claim, Schwiebert, Luther and His Times 621; cf. WA 16:226; 17, xvii, xxxviii, 243; 38, 403. BC, ed. Kolb-Wengert, p.
324 note 159 (on Smalcald Articles III.10,3) says, "The first ordination by the Wittenberg reformers in Wittenberg took place on 20 October 1535." See
the more detailed note in BSLK (1930 ed., 458 note 2); involved is Luther's understanding that call (by a congregation) was the decisive matter (WA 38,
238, 7f.; 41, 240-42 and 457f.).
327. Apology 14.2, Kolb and Wengert, p. 222.
328. WA 10/2, 105-58; cf. Gottfried Krodel, "Luther und das Bischofsamt nach seinem Buch 'Wider den falsch genannten geistlichen Stand des Papstes
und der Bischöfe,'" in Martin Luther und das Bischofsamt, 27-65.
329. Wendebourg (n. 318 above), "Reformation," 55. The pre-Reformation dioceses would have had bishops "who could look back to a chain of
predecessors into the Middle Ages and in some cases even into antiquity" but after acceptance of Reformation teaching "committed to proclaiming the
Gospel according to the teaching of the Wittenberg Reformation and to undertaking their specific duties in accordance with it."
330. CA 28.1, 5, 19. Kolb and Wengert, p. 91-93.
331. CA 28.20-22. Kolb and Wengert, p. 95.
332. In the sense of Luke 19:44, oversight visitation; Besuchdienst.
333. WA 26:195-240; LW 40.269-320; Wendebourg, "The Ministry" 169-70.
334. Cf. J. Höß, "The Lutheran Church of the Reformation. Problems of its formation and organization in the middle and north German territories," in
The Social History of the Reformation. Festschrift H. J. Grimm, ed. L. P. Buck, J. W. Zophy (Columbus, 1972) 317-39; "Episcopus Evangelicus.
Versuche mit dem Bischofsamt im deutschen Luthertum des 16. Jahrhunderts," in Confessio Augustana und Confutatio, ed. E. Iserloh (Münster, 1980)
499-516. See also Merlyn E. Satrom, "Bishops and Ordination in the Lutheran Reformation of Sixteenth-Century Germany," Lutheran Forum 33/2,
Summer 1999, 12-15; Gerhard Tröger, Das Bischofsamt in der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche (1965) and "Das evangelische Bischofsamt," TRE 6.
Two of these were in Prussia, which was not part of the Holy Roman Empire, namely, Georg von Polentz, bishop since 1519 of the Samland (his see in
Königsberg) and Erhard von Queiß, elected bishop of Pomesania in 1523 but not yet confirmed by the pope or consecrated.
335. Wendebourg, "Reformation" 56-57. In the 1540s, Hermann von Wied, Archbishop and Elector of Cologne, was forced to abdicate when he sought
to reform his diocese along Evangelical lines (and died under excommunication in 1552), and Franz von Waldeck, in Osnabrück, had to renounce his turn
to Protestantism in order to remain bishop. The one exception was the Bishop of Brandenburg, Matthias von Jagow (bishop 1516-1544), who continued
to serve as a Lutheran bishop, for the territory under his secular control was not under the Emperor. Literature in Wendebourg, "Reformation," nn. 63-66.
336. Nikolaus von Amsdorff (1483-1565) in Naumberg (1542), Georg von Anhalt (1507-53) in Merseburg (1544), and Bartholomäus Suave in
Pomeranian Kammin (1545).
337. Hermann von Wied of Cologne, Matthias von Jagow, or one of those in Prussia.
338. See Wendebourg, Reformation, 58-62.
339. A. F. von Campenhausen, "The Episcopal Office of Oversight," 175.
340. A Superintendent was usually a prominent pastor from one of the cities who frequently worked with a consistory, to supervise, coordinate and provide
for the area's pastoral needs. Pastors of principal congregations in the territorial capitals, as was the case, e.g., in Electoral Saxony, were sometimes called
Generalsuperintendenten. Whatever the drawbacks might have been, such arrangements preserved a personal (rather than collective) form of oversight,
involving the authority (delegated by the prince) to make visitations.
341. A. F. von Campenhausen, "The Episcopal Office of Oversight in the German Churches, its Public Status and its Involvement in Church Decision
in History and the Present," in Visible Unity and the Ministry of Oversight. Second Theological Conference held under the Meissen Agreement between
the Church of England and the Evangelical Church in Germany (London: Church House Publishing, 1977), 171-83, who gives the other terms sometimes
used, like Landessuperintendent, Kreisdekan, or Prälat; quotations above from p. 173 and 181 n. 10 (P. Brunner, who thought that Superintendent
matched well the office of bishop in the early church). See further, D. Wendebourg, "The Office of Superintendent as a Distinct Type of Episcopate," in
"Reformation," 63-66, noting the "flexibility in the practical exercise of episkope" that "characterizes the form which the episcopal office takes in protestant
churches to the present day."
342. Dorothea Wendebourg, "The Reformation in Germany and the Episcopal Office," in Visible Unity and the Ministry of Oversight: The Second
Theological Conference held under the Meissen Agreement between the Church of England and the Evangelical Church in Germany (London: Church
House Publishing), 55f.
343. So Sven-Erik Brodd, in an excursus, "The Swedish Church Ordinance 1571 and the Office of Bishop in an Ecumenical Context," attached to The
Office of Bishop. Report of the Official Working Group for Dialogue between the Church of Sweden and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Stockholm
(Geneva: LWF, 1993) 148; compare 45-47 and 82 in the dialogue report itself. Brodd notes that in Petri's other writings both the monarchy and the
episcopacy are divinely-ordained institutions.
344. The translation is that of John Wordsworth, The National Church of Sweden (London: A. R. Mowbray, 1911), 232-233.
345. See Bishops' Conference [Church of Sweden], Bishop, Priest and Deacon in the Church of Sweden: A Letter from the Bishops Concerning the
Ministry of the Church (Uppsala: Bishops' Conference, 1990), 23-24.
346. On the history of episcopacy in Sweden, see Sven-Erik Brodd, "Episcopacy in Our Churches: Sweden," in Together in Mission and Ministry: The
Porvoo Common Statement with Essays on Church and Ministry in Northern Europe (London: Church House Publishing, 1993), 59-69.
347. On these events, see "The Church of England and the Church of Finland: A Summary of the Proceedings at the Conferences Held at Lambeth Palace,
London, on October 5th and 6th, 1933, and at Brandö, Helsingfors, on July 17th and 18th, 1934," in Lambeth Occasional Reports 1931-8 (London:
SPCK, 1948), 154-55 and Fredric Cleve, "Episcopacy in Our Churches: Finland," in Porvoo, 77-78.
348. On these events in Denmark, see Lars Österlin, Churches of Northern Europe in Profile: A Thousand Years of Anglo-Nordic Relations (Norwich:
Canterbury Press, 1995), 83-87 and Svend Borregaard, "The Post-Reformation Developments of the Episcopacy in Denmark, Norway, and Iceland," in
Episcopacy in the Lutheran Church? Studies in the Development and Definition of the Office of Church Leadership, Episcopacy in Lutheran Church?
(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970), 116-24.
349. The use of the term "superintendent" alongside that of bishop is not seen as indicative of a significant break with earlier understandings of the role
of the bishop; see Österlin, Churches of Northern Europe, 85 and Gerhard Pedersen, "Episcopacy in Our Churches: Denmark," in Porvoo, 87. The term
"bishop" was made standard again in 1685.
350. On the episcopate in Denmark, Iceland, and Norway, see the essays in Porvoo, 85-108.
351. Information in this paragraph is all taken from Porvoo, 109-23.
352. Porvoo, paras. 58a(vi) and 58b(vi); in Porvoo, 30-31.
353. Martii Parvio, "Post Reformation Developments of the Episcopacy in Sweden, Finland, and the Baltic States," in Episcopacy in the Lutheran
Church? Studies in the Development and Definition of the Office of Church Leadership, edited by Ivar Asheim & Victor Gold (Philadelphia: Fortress
Press, 1970), 132-135; Frederic Cleve, "Episcopacy in Our Churches: Finland," in Porvoo, 77f.
354. Ringolds Muziks, "Latvia," in Porvoo, 117-120.
355. Tiit Pädam, "Estonia," in Together in Mission and Ministry, 109-115.
356. Porvoo (note 352 above), p. 31; Gunnar Lislerud, "Norway," and Hjalti Hugason, "Iceland," in Porvoo, 93-99 and 101-108.
357. Cf. Scott Hendrix, Luther and the Papacy: Stages in a Reformation Conflict (Philadelphia, 1981), who, on the basis of Luther' s later reflections
on his early career, labels Luther's attitude toward the papacy even prior to 1517 as essentially "ambivalent" (p. 7). Melanchthon, in TPPP, 38, expressed
himself similarly: "Even if the Bishop of Rome did possess the primacy by divine right, he should not be obeyed inasmuch as he defends impious forms
of worship and doctrines which are in conflict with the gospel. On the contrary, it is necessary to resist him as Antichrist." Bernard McGinn, AntiChrist:
Two Thousand Years of the Human Fascination with Evil, San Francisco: Harper San Francisco (1994). Luther's usage is consistent with venerable
predecessors of the period, such as St. Birgitta of Sweden.
358. See e.g., Hendrix, 42-43, 69-70, 84, 156-159. Cf. Luther's Babylonian Captivity of the Church (LW 36.113). See also LW 36.115.
359. Empie, Murphy, Papal Primacy, 23-32, cf. Raymond Brown, et. al., Peter in the New Testament (New York: Paulist Press, 1973).
360. LW 26.99.
361. For a brief overview of the new orders, particularly the Society of Jesus (Jesuits), see Karl Bihlmeyer and Hermann Tüchle, Church History
(Westminster: Newman Press, 1966), III 83-98.
362. A summary can be found in Josef Freitag, "Church Offices: Roman Catholic Offices," in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Reformation, edited by
Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996) I 342-46, and in A. Duval, "The Council of Trent and Holy Orders," in [Centre de
Pastorale Liturgique], The Sacrament of Holy Orders (London: Aquin Press, 1962) 219-258. Fuller particulars are in Josef Freitag, "Schwierigkeiten
und Erfahrungen mit dem 'Sacramentum ordinis' auf dem Konzil von Trient," Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie 113 (1991) 39-51, and Josef Freitag,
"Sacramentum ordinis" auf dem Konzil von Trient, Innsbrucker theologische Studien 32 (Innsbruck: Tyrolia, 1991).
363. Freitag, ibid., 41-42.
364. Freitag, ibid., 44.
365. The question of papal authority was discussed at Trent in this context. "To prevent the cumulation of benefices with the cure of souls, the Spaniards
and the French requested the council to declare that the obligation of residence is jure divino and both of these national groups supported the thesis that
episcopal jurisdiction comes directly from God and not from the pope. The Italians vigourously opposed this opinion. Thus the old controversy regarding
episcopal jurisdiction and papal primacy was revived. Finally...it was agreed to dismiss this question without a decision." Bihlmeyer and Tüchle, Church
History III 110.
366. Duval, "Council of Trent" 244-45; Freitag, "Schwierigkeiten" 48-50. Freitag goes so far as to say that "Trent did not make any decision about a
determinate approach to understanding the sacrament of Order" (50).
367. Thus almost at the end of the Council, which closed December 4, 1563, and after the deaths of Luther and Melanchthon. The decree and canons
can be found in Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Decreta, ed. G. Alberigo et al. (Bologna: Instituto per le Scienze Religiose, 1973) 742-744, and translations
of that text such as Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, edited by Norman P. Tanner (London: Sheed & Ward, Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University
Press, 1990), and in DH 1763-78.
368. Session 23, chap. 4, can.7. DH 1768, 1776-1777. Cf. Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue IV, Eucharist and Ministry, "Reflections of the Roman
Catholic Participants," paragraph 40: "When the episcopate and presbyterate had become a general pattern in the church, the historical picture still presents
uncertainties.... For instance, is the difference between a bishop and a priest of divine ordination? St. Jerome maintained that it was not; and the Council
of Trent, wishing to respect Jerome's opinion, did not undertake to define that the preeminence of the bishop over presbyters was by divine law. If the
difference is not of divine ordination, the reservation to the bishop of the power of ordaining Ministers of the eucharist would be a church decision. In fact,
in the history of the church there are instances of priests (i.e., presbyters) ordaining other priests, and there is evidence that the church accepted and
recognized the Ministry of priests so ordained." See also §169 above and notes .
369. Harry J. McSorley, "Trent and the Question: Can Protestant Ministers Consecrate the Eucharist," in Eucharist and Ministry, 295.
370. Freitag, "Sacramentum ordinis", 374, says that canon 6 goes beyond the rejection of any Lutheran claim that there was no fundamental difference
of priesthood between priest and lay person: "[n]ow the sacerdotium is seen as a hierarchy of Order and as such is oriented on the bishop, not on the priest,"
priest being a concept embracing both presbyter and bishop.
371. Karl J. Becker, "Der Unterschied von Bischof und Priester im Weihedekret des Konzils von Trient und in der Kirchenkonstitution des II
Vatikanischen Konzils," in Zum Problem Unfehlbarkeit, ed. Karl Rahner (Freiburg-im-Breisgau: Herder, 1971), 289-327.
372. The privileges granted to abbots to give tonsure and minor orders to members of their religious orders, were not abrogated (can. 10), but even religious
order candidates for subdiaconate, diaconate, and presbyterate had to be examined and approved by the bishop (can. 12).
373. Freitag, "Sacramentum ordinis", 388
374. This group of Evangelical and Catholic theologians began working just after World War II; its work formed an important part of the background
to the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. For its history, see Barbara Schwahn, Der oekumenische Arbeitskreis evangelischer und
katholischer Theologen von 1946 bis 1975 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996).
375. Karl Lehmann and Wolfhart Pannenberg, The Condemnations of the Reformation Era: Do they still apply? (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 149.
The original, Lehrverurteilungen-kirchentrennend? vol. I, was published in 1985.
376. Ibid. 157.
377. The Catechism of the Council of Trent for Parish Priests, tr. with notes by John A. McHugh and Charles J. Callan, 2nd rev. ed. (New York: Joseph
F. Wagner, 1934), 330-31.
378. Ibid. 332.
379. "Above all these, the Catholic Church has always placed the Supreme Pontiff of Rome, whom Cyril of Alexandria, in the Council of Ephesus, named
the Chief Bishop, Father and Patriarch of the whole world. He sits in that chair of Peter in which beyond every shadow of doubt the Prince of the Apostles
sat to the end of his days, and hence it is that in him the Church recognizes the highest degree of dignity, and a universality of jurisdiction derived, not from
the decree of men or Councils, but from God himself. Wherefore he is the Father and guide of all the faithful, of all the Bishops, and of all the prelates, no
matter how high their power and office; and as successor of St. Peter, as true and legitimate vicar of Christ our Lord, he governs the Universal Church"
(ibid. 333). This is one of only two passages in the Roman Catechism that discuss the place of the Pope; the other, in the discussion of the unity of the
church in Part I on the Creed, refers to him simply as (after the Church's "one ruler and governor, the invisible one, Christ") "the visible one, the Pope,
who, as legitimate successor of Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, fills the Apostolic chair. It is the unanimous teaching of the Fathers that this visible head
is necessary to establish and preserve unity in the Church. . . ." (ibid. 102).
380. Ibid. 334.
381. Disputationes de controversiis Christianae fidei (Ingolstadt, 1586-93), cited here from Roberto Bellarmino, Opera omnia (Naples: C. Pedone
Lauriel, 1872). In the sections on ministry and the sacrament of Order, he argues with writings by Chemnitz, Calvin, and Melanchthon, as well as Luther
himself.
382. Secunda controversia I 14 (Opera omnia II 167-69). Chief among the bishops' special powers of order is the power to ordain; among the Fathers,
Bellarmine cites Jerome in his Letter to Evangelus ("What does a bishop do beyond what a presbyter does, except ordain?") not only in this section on order
but on 170 against Chemnitz, 171 against the Franciscan Miguel de Medina, and in his book De Sacramento Ordinis I 11 (Opera omnia III 773).
383. II Controv. I 15 (II 170-71).
384. Pierre Batiffol, Études d'histoire et de théologie positive, 2nd edition (Paris: Victor Lecoffre, 1902) 265. Batiffol's essay, "La hiérarchie primitive,"
occupies 223-75 of this second edition; it appeared first in Revue biblique in 1895.
385. Ibid., 266.
386. Ibid., 264.
387. Known generally as the "Theologia Wirceburgensis," it represents Jesuit instruction at the University of Würzburg, and Francis Schüssler Fiorenza,
"Systematic Theology: Task and Methods," Systematic Theology: Roman Catholic Perspectives (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991) I 30, calls it the first text
to present church teaching in the form of theses, followed by arguments. The first edition in fourteen volumes appeared in that city between 1766-71;
citations are from Holtzclau's "Tractatus de Ordine et Matrimonio," in Theologia dogmatica, polemica, scholastica et moralis, second edition, vol. 5,2
(Paris: Julien, Lanier, 1854), 295-584.
388. Diss. 1, c. 1, art. 3, §30-33, ibid. 325-27.
389. Diss. 1, c. 2, art. 7, §97, ibid. 367; cp. §105, ibid. 374.
390. Diss. 1, c. 2, art.9, §129, ibid. 394.
391. Diss. 1, c. 2, art. 9, §129-142, ibid. 394-401. One is the passage from John Cassian about Paphnutius and Daniel, which was cited also by Arthur
Carl Piepkorn, Eucharist and Ministry, 221. Holtzclau thought that a priest probably could not even be empowered to ordain a deacon, despite the faculty
conceded by Innocent VIII to Cistercian abbots in 1489; one key reason was that the Bull of concession had not been found (§143-44, ibid. 401-402).
392. Cf., e.g. the manuals of H. Lennerz (see above n. ); E. Hugon, De Sacramentis in communi et in speciali, 5th ed. (Paris: P. Lethielleux, 1927) 729-730; Francisco a P. Sola, "De sacramentis initiationis christianae," Sacrae Theologiae Summa IV, 3rd ed. (Madrid: B.A.C., 1956) 215.
393. See Francis Schüssler Fiorenza, Foundational Theology: Jesus and the Church (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 67-71. Besides the "Theologia
Wirceburgensis," many other manuals follow this pattern, such as the often-revised Manuale Theologiae Dogmaticae of J. M. Hervé (Paris: Berche et
Pagis, 1924-26 and on into the 1950's), where "De ecclesia" is in v. 1, "De ordine" in v. 4.
394. The latter placement may be due to the order in which the sacraments are named in the canons of the Council of Trent, Session 7, Canon 1 (D 844
= DS 1601); see page 1 of the volume containing Holtzclau's treatise on order.
395. Some 20th century manuals placed the treatise on the church among the means of sanctification, after the Incarnation and before the sacraments, but
the disjunction of church and ministry remained and neither parish nor diocese received explicit attention. E.g., Franz Diekamp, Theologiae dogmaticae
manuale, tr. Adolphus M. Hoffmann from the sixth German edition (Paris: Desclée, 1933-34), listed "De Ecclesia" for vol. 3, part 1, between Incarnation
and Grace; Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, translated by Patrick Lynch (Cork: Mercier Press, 1963), has "The Church" between "The
Doctrine of Grace" and "The Sacraments."
396. Pastor aeternus, Chapter 1.
397. Ibid., Chapter 2.
398. Ibid., Chapter 3.
399. Ibid., Chapter 4.
400. Bernard M. Kelly, The Functions Reserved to Pastors, Catholic University of America Canon Law Studies 250 (Washington: Catholic University
of America Press, 1947) 4.
401. Kelly, Functions 8: "This parochial unity of the city (civitas) was one of the most characteristic marks of the ancient diocese. The cathedral was the
only parish church in the city. Around the ninth century, however, other parishes appeared in the city, administered by collegiate chapters." DH 3857-3861.
402. Pius XII, "Sacramentum ordinis," Acta apostolicae sedis 40 (1948) 5-7. The Constitution was dated November 30, 1947.
403. Sacramentum ordinis, 2. This paragraph is not quoted in Denzinger-Schönmetzer or the more recent edition by Peter Hünermann.
404. Ibid. 5. Jean Beyer, "Nature et position du sacerdoce," Nouvelle revue théologique 76 (1954) 358, points out that while the 1917 Code of Canon
Law, canon 949, called the sub-diaconate, diaconate, and the presbyterate "sacred orders," Pius XII in this constitution applies the term to the diaconate,
presbyterate, and episcopate.
405. LG, 18.
406. LG, 18.
407. LG, 20.
408. LG, 20.
409. LG, 25, CD, 12.
410. LG, 19, 22.
411. LG, 22.
412. CD, 5.
413. CD, 38.1
414. CD, 6.
415. LG, 22.
416. LG, 21, 26 ; CD, 15.
417. See 1 Tim. 2:5; LG, 28.
418. LG, 27.
419. SC, 42.
420. LG, 28.
421. PO, 7.
422. PO, 4.
423. PO, 2.
424. LG, 28, PO, 6.
425. PO, 6.
426. LG, 28.
427. LG, 28.
428. LG, 28.
429. PO, 7, 15.
430. Eucharist and Ministry, Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue IV (1970), "Common Observations" §21, p. 14.
431. Thomas Kaufmann, "Amt," RGG 4th ed., 1 (1998) 428-29.
432. Cf. J. Reumann, "Ordained Minister and Layman in Lutheranism," in Eucharist and Ministry §§38-48, reprinted in J. Reumann, Ministries
Examined: Laity, Clergy, Women, and Bishops in a Time of Change (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1987) 36-41.
433. Gottfried Brakemeier, "Amt. 3. Außereuropäisch," RGG 4th ed. 1:429-30, where parallels in Roman Catholicism are noted (e.g., base communities
in Latin America, with their "Ortsgebundenheit," in light of Vatican II's "people of God" theology; cf. Faustino Teixeira, "Basisgemeinden in
Lateinamerika," 1:1156-57.
434. Hans Martin Mueller, "Bishop," Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church 1:311; Heinrich de Wall, "Bischof, 3. Evangelisch," RGG 4th ed., 1 (1998)
1622-23, with specific functions that include ordination and in some Landeskirchen even veto power over synodical decisions (Bayern, Württemberg). See
for details Schmidt-Clausen, cited above §66, note 107, who (110-15) treats a VELKD Declaration in 1957 on apostolic succession, of which the bishop
not a guarantee, but it is "an essential dimension" of "the Church in its entirety and all its members" (115). In Schmidt-Clausen note 112, Gregory Dix
is quoted on "that unhappy phrase 'the historic episcopate'" (see below, §246), as one particular theory under which so many "variant manifestations of
the episcopate" have been put, when the "apostolate" is the real question (Dix, "The Ministry in the Early Church," in The Apostolic Ministry: Essays
on the History and Doctrine of Episcopacy, ed. K. E. Kirk [London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1946] 296-98.
435. Schmidt-Clausen (n. 107 above), p. 97.
436. Martin Hein and Hans-Gernot Jung, "Bishop, Episcopate," The Encyclopedia of Christianity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans/Leiden: Brill) 1 (1999)
263-64; Gerhard Tröger, "Bischof, IV, Das synodale Bischofsamt," TRE 6 (1980) 694-96.
437. Lowell G. Almen, "Law and Koinonia: An Overview of the Structures and Ministries of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America," paper Dec.
2, 1999, quotation from p. 1. See further The Lutherans in North America, ed. E. Clifford Nelson (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975), where in the section on
the years 1650-1790 T. G. Tappert takes up clergy on 43-49, and for 1790-1840 H. George Anderson, 102-5 and 125; see also "Theological Education,"
104-8, 129, 204-6, 284-92, 432-34, 520.
438. The Journals of Henry Melchior Muhlenberg In Three Volumes, trans. T. G. Tappert and J. W. Doberstein (Philadelphia: the Evangelical Lutheran
Ministerium of Pennsylvania and Adjacent States and Muhlenberg Press, 1942, 1945, 1958), 1:7. Harvey L. Nelson, "A Critical Study of Henry Melchior
Muhlenberg's Means of Maintaining his Lutheranism," dissertation, Drew University, Madison, NJ, 1980: 373-74, observes how German settlers, "despite
the voluntaristic, pluralistic, congregationally oriented religious climate of the Middle Colonies … clung to their German views of the pastor and his office."
439. Muhlenberg envisioned especially a gathering of those ordained as pastors and serving as teachers, but even at the first meeting there was an effort
to have every congregation represented by members, often elders or deacons. The name "Ministerium," found also in New York and elsewhere, was retained
in eastern Pennsylvania until 1962.
440. Between 1840 and 1875, some fifty nine, listed in The Lutherans in North America, p. 175.
441. Cf. Charles P. Lutz, Church Roots: Stories of Nine Immigrant Groups That Became the American Lutheran Church (Minneapolis: Augsburg,
1985); J. Reumann, Ministries Examined, 71, "presbyterial succession."
442. So Justus Henning Böhmer (1674-1749) and J. W. F. Höfling (1802-1853). Cf. Reumann, "Ordained Minister" §44, repr. p. 39, with encyclopedia
references, and Edmund Schlink, Theology of the Lutheran Confessions, trans. P. F. Koehneke and H. J. A. Bouman (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1961) 244
note 13. In Böhmer's work in church law the influence of Pietism is to be seen; Detlef Döring, RGG 4th ed., 1 (1998) 1671; Höfling's Erlangen theology
distinguished the ordering of salvation (Heilsgeschichte) from church orders; the ministerial office rests on the universal priesthood, which is "the only
office that exists by divine right"; Hanns Kerner, RGG 4th ed., 3 (2000) 1830.
443. The Lutherans in North America, 155-57, 168-69, 178.
444. "On the Ministry," Thesis VII, in, among other places, D. H. Steffens, "The Doctrine of the Church and the Ministry," in Ebenezer, ed. W. H. T.
Dau (St. Louis: Concordia, 1922) 152-53; Reumann, "Ordained Minister," §§59-60 = repr. 45-46. Cf. So James H. Pragman, Traditions of Ministry:
A History of the Doctrine of the Ministry in Lutheran Theology (St. Louis: Concordia, 1983) 140-46; cf. Ministries Examined, p. 66-67.
445. The Ministry: Office, Procedures, and Nomenclature (St. Louis: Commission on Theology and Church Relations), Thesis 1, p. 25.
446. "Ordained Minister," §45 = repr. p. 40; Pragman 129-31, where Stahl's Kirchenverfassung is cited.
447. "Ordained Minister," §45 = repr. p. 39-40; Pragman 136-37. K. Scholder, RGG 3rd ed, 6 (1962) 1401-1403, notes Vilmar's stance against a
Kurhessen-Waldeck "Summepiskopat" that introduced the Church of the Prussian Union in some regions and his stand for separation of church and state.
Such views led to the "Renitent" or resistence movement in 1873, some of whose members emigrated to America. Vilmar regarded statements in the
"Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope" (69-70, 72) about congregations in emergencies electing and ordaining ministers as "superfluous remarks"
for an "inconceivable" situation, the absence of all pastors called by pastors (Schlink, Theology of the Lutheran Confessions, [above, n. 442] 244 note
12). At Treatise 72 the Kolb and Wengert ed. has not added the phrase to which A. C. Piepkorn called attention in Eucharist and Ministry, 110-11, note
14, adhibitis suis pastoribus, "the church retains the right to choose and ordain ministers using their own pastors."
448. "Ordained Minister" §58 = repr. 44-45, stressing Loehe's distrust of democracy and support for episcopacy as found in Scripture, i.e., identical with
the presbytery; Pragman 132-36. See Loehe's Three Books About the Church (1845; trans. 1908; Philadelphia: Fortess, 1969); Aphorismen über die
neutestamentichen Ämter: Zur Verfassungsfrage der Kirche (1849), rev. ed. Kirche und Amt: Neue Aphorismen (1851); S. Hebert, Wilhelm Löhes Lehre
von der Kirche, ihrem Amt und Regiment: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Theologie im 19. Jahrhundert (Neuendettelsau; Friemund-Verlag, 1939); J. L.
Schaaf, "Loehe's Relation to the American Church," diss. Heidelberg 1962.
449. Gerhard Schoenauer, RGG 4th ed., 5 (2002) 502, "eine apostolisch-episkopale Brüderskirche … innerhalb deren an der Bedeutung der Ortsgemeinde
als primäre Gestalt der Kirche festgehalten wird."
450. The Lutherans in North America, 158-59, 180-83, quotation from 181; 228, Missouri alleged "hierarchical tendencies" on church and ministry
in the Iowa Synod.
451. Ministries Examined, 200-219; Edgar R. Trexler, Anatomy of a Merger: People, Dynamics, and Decisions That Shaped the ELCA (Minneapolis:
Augsburg, 1991), 63-66, 85-86, 97-100, 112, 116-21, 141-43, 182-83, and passim. Points of debate over ministry lay elsewhere, especially involving
parochial school teachers and a wide variety of "deacons" and rostered ministers. There had been a long history of discussion in The Lutheran
Church-Missouri Synod on the ministerial status of teachers; cf. "Ordained Minister" §§65-66 = repr. 47-48 plus 67-68; Pragman 171-76. A particular
problem here were women day-school teachers; if considered "ordained," the LCMS would immediately have had the largest number of women clergy of
any U.S. church.
452. Together for Ministry §§152-63, 23-24. The other two recommendations of the task force related thirdly to the ELCA's officially recognized lay
ministries, which include deaconesses, deacons, certified lay professionals, and commissioned teachers, from predecessor bodies; ELCA Associates in
Ministry; and the creation of a new category of Diaconal Ministers. Fourth was a recommendation on "Flexibility for Mission" allowing, among other
items, for non-stipendiary ("tent-making") ministers and licensed ministers.
453. Together for Ministry §108, p. 16. Pragman 154-56 observed that the universal priesthood "was not a significant issue for 20th-century Lutheran
theologians." Similarly J. Reumann, "The Priesthood of Baptized Believers and the Office of Ministry in Eastern Lutheranism, from Muhlenberg's Day
to Ours," Lutheran Historical Conference 1999 (forthcoming).
454. Together for Ministry §§77, 79, p. 11.
455. The Lutheran Understanding of Ministry: Statement on the Basis of an LWF Study Project, LWF Studies, Reports and Texts from the Department
of Studies (Geneva: LWF, 1983), cited in Together for Ministry §123. Recommendations on bishops were purposely limited because of agreement that
major discussion should come on proposals from the Lutheran-Episcopal dialogue III (1983-91) in the Concordat of Agreement (1991, see §245-46
below).
456. 1993 Reports and Records: Vol. 2, Minutes (Chicago: ELCA, 1995) p. 691. Lowell G. Almen, "Review of Governing Documents of the
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America on the Role and Responsibility of Bishops as an Indication of the Underlying Theology of that Office," paper,
December 1, 2000, p. 6.
457. Lowell G. Almen, "Review of Governing Documents," 6-7, Minutes 692; the term of office of bishops was changed from four to six years, with
reelection possible; "constitutional provision †S8.12. was revised 'to reflect more clearly the pastoral and oversight functions of the bishop' in synods,'"
Almen p. 7, Minutes p. 692 for the resolution, 424-27 for the amended text of the provision. Almen 7-9 added a statement adopted by the ELCA
Conference of Bishops in 1999 for their collegial guidance, "Relational Agreement Among Synodical Bishops of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in
America."
458. The Ministry of the Church: A Lutheran Understanding, Studies series, Division of Theological Studies (New York: Lutheran Council in the USA,
1974), where ordination and installation were seen as kairoi in "the continuum of ordained ministry"; The Historic Episcopate (1984), including definition
of ius divinium as "divine law" according to God's word, by Christ's institution, with American Lutherans "free to create under the guidance of the Spirit
forms of leadership that embody episcopé and hold ecumenical promise"; see Ministries Examined, 75 and 163.
459. See note 455, above, for the 1983 report on Ministry. Episcopacy in the Lutheran Church? (1970) has been cited above in note 79. Lutheran
Understanding of the Episcopal Office, Reports and Texts series (Geneva: LWF Department of Studies, 1983). Women in the Ministries of the Church
appeared under the same auspices, also in 1983. The Ministry of All Baptized Believers: Resource Materials for the Churches' Study in the Area of
Ministry (Geneva: LWF, Department of Studies, 1980) reprints the 1974 LCUSA study (above, note 458) and other Lutheran and ecumenical documents.
460. The best-selling BEM document appeared as Faith and Order Paper No. 111 (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1982). Michael Seils, Lutheran
Convergence? An Analysis of Lutheran Responses to the Convergence Document "Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry" of the World Council of Churches
Faith and Order Commission (Geneva: LWF, 1988) found less agreement on ministry than on other areas. Cf. also Daniel Martensen, "Ministry," and
J. Reumann, "Eucharist and Ministry," in Lutherans in Ecumenical Dialogues: A Reappraisal, ed. Joseph A. Burgess (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1990),
123-35, 136-47.
461. In the extensive literature on the topic, see Krister Stendahl, The Bible and the Role of Women: A Case Study in Hermeneutics, trans. Emilie T.
Sander, Facet Books Biblical Series 15 (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1966); Brita Stendahl, The Force of Tradition: A Case Study of Women Priests in Sweden
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985).
462. See Ministries Examined 78-100 for the section "What in Scripture Speaks to the Ordination of Women?" originally published in Concordia
Theological Monthly 44 (1973) 5-30; 120-25 for "The Lutheran Experience," and 131-39 for subsequent discussions, including among Roman Catholics.
The LCMS in 1969 acted to allow women to vote in congregational or synodical assemblies and to serve on boards or agencies, provided there is no
violation of the orders of creation or women exercising authority over men (1 Tim. 2:11). Cf. Pragman, 158-77.
463. As of September 15, 2002, the ELCA counted 2,738 pastors who were women, out of a total of 17,725 ordained ministers. In 2003 there have been
seven bishops in the ELCA who are women.
464. Ecumenism: The Vision of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (adopted 1991), p. 14. "Preliminary recognition" can involve eucharistic
sharing but "without exchangeability of ministers." Under "full communion" there is not only mutual recognition of ordained ministers but also their
"availability … to the service of all members of churches in full communion, subject only but always to the disciplinary regulations of the other churches."
465. The Lutheran-Episcopal Concordat of Agreement, Lutheran-Reformed Formula of Agreement, and Joint Declaration (as then framed) were
presented together as Ecumenical Proposals, Documents for Action by the 1997 Churchwide Assembly of the ELCA.
466. The issues of the presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper and God's will to save (predestination) were treated in terms of "complementarity."
Affirmed together were "a ministry of word and sacrament as instituted by God," to which one is ordained once, "usually by presbyters," with recognition
of episcopé carried out by one ordained person or collegially (presbyteries and synods).
467. Following Our Shepherd to Full Communion: Report of the Lutheran-Moravian Dialogue with Recommendations for Full Communion in
Worship, Fellowship and Mission (© ELCA 1997), 38-42, with quotation above from p. 41. The Moravian Church has "a threefold ordained ministry:
deacons, presbyters (elders) and bishops," with one ordination (to deacon, "subsequent consecrations to other offices"), and "historic episcopacy." The
"historic episcopacy" was retained from the Ancient Moravian Church but with bishops as non-diocesan, so as to avoid competition in Germany with "the
established church and their offices" (p. 13), a feature continued in North America; cf. Piepkorn, Profiles in Belief 2:344-48.
468. "Called to Common Mission: A Lutheran Proposal for a Revision of the Concordat of Agreement" (Chicago: ELCA, November 1998).
469. 1999 Reports and Records: Assembly Minutes (Chicago 2000) 378, revised text as voted 378-87.
470. Porvoo (above, n. 352).
471. The Meissen Agreement: Texts (Council for Christian Unity Occasional paper No. 2, 1992) London.
472. Called to Full Communion (The Waterloo Declaration), available at the website www.elcic.ca, ELCIC Documents. It was preceded by Canadian
Lutheran Anglican Dialogue 1983-86 (CLAD I, with Report and Recommendations) and CLAD II, 1989, Interim Sharing of the Eucharist, with agreement
in 1995 to take steps toward full communion by 2001.