Overheard on a Lutheran forum…..about Open Communion
I appreciated this comment overheard on a Lutheran Internet forum…. what do you think?
Open communion is a function of denominationalism. It really destroys the whole concept of church by allowing anyone and everyone to be their own church. Closed communion takes division seriously; open communion does not. The NALC and LCMC will have to decide if they are in full communion with the ELCA. If so, their leaving was an exercise in pointlessness; why make a point of disassociating in some outward way if you’re going to insist that the only unity that matters remains unchanged? But if not, why not? Open communion simply means that nothing beyond individual opinion ultimately matters; the church cannot confess anything, because it cannot separate itself from contrary confessions.
I’ve wondered the same thing for the last two years. If you’re going to break fellowship with a communion, why would you still wish to commune with them? Otherwise it’s useless to break fellowship.
I have been reading your blog on my Kindle It is most interesting. I ordered and received my copy of Lutheranism 101. I am retired now, but still teach the 5th and 6th pre confirmation kids in our church in Waco, TX. I am going to use it as a guide to present my lessons.I don’t it is quite down to their level, but as a guide, I think it will work well. I would love to teach a high school level class or even adult class actually using the Course book and the full text. I downloaded and printed the leader’s guide to assist me in prepration for the classes. Thank you for bringing this material go my attention on your Kindle Blog.
On a personal note, I am John Speckhard’s cousin. I have a feeling you may know John. Greet him for me if you should see him. Thanks.
Henry
I agree with the point, but many do not see the point. Fellowship becomes a point all its own, which nothing must be allowed to disturb, including points of controversy. IOW one does not have fellowship because of something shared, one has fellowship then goes about sharing. Those who stand for something always come out the bad guy in this view, because it is they who are seen to break fellowship by creating division over what they stand for.
Get Werner Elert’s _Eucharist and Church Fellowship in the First Four Centuries _ tr. N.E. Nagel, CPH 1966. Exhaustive treatment. It’s been years, but it’s time to go through his material again, for the issue is before us all the time.
If I understand correctly, what our people miss is this: the Supper of our Lord does not *cause* fellowship, but is the *result* of fellowship.
CPH reprinted this (see http://www.cph.org/p-2889-eucharist-church-fellowship-in-the-first-four-centuries.aspx?SearchTerm=Eucharist%20and%20Church%20Fellowship%20in%20the%20First%20Four%20Centuries ). Available as eBook or for your Kindle.
–Ken Larson
It’s interesting that even non-Lutherans get this: http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=24-05-016-v
Solid quote! It would seem to me that many remembered the Sacrament but forgot the Church and the inter-relatedness of the two.