Question about Full Communion

[EverChanging]

I like to follow developments in various denominations, especially mainline Protestant denominations -- such as Anglicanism, Lutheranism, the United Methodist Church, etc. and groups outside of Protestantism, such as Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, etc. I also have many Episcopalian friends and a degree of familiarity with the structure of the services, the BCP, and Anglican history.

I'm curious about the recent developments of full communion between the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America and the Episcopal Church as detailed in Called to Common Mission. It is fascinating to me that Episcopalians are transferring the episcopate to another denomination, something I can't imagine Roman Catholics ever doing.

My question involves the transfer of clergy from one denomination to another:

22. In this Concordat, the two churches declare that each believes the other to hold all the essentials of the Christian faith, although this does not require from either church acceptance of all doctrinal formulations of the other. Ordained ministers serving occasionally or for an extended period in the ministry of the other church will be expected to undergo the appropriate acceptance procedures of that church respecting always the internal discipline of each church. For the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, such ministers will be expected to preach, teach, and administer the sacraments in a manner that is consistent with its "Confession of Faith" as written in chapter two of the Constitution, Bylaws, and Continuing Resolutions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. For The Episcopal Church, such ministers will be expected to teach and act in a manner that is consistent with the doctrine, discipline, and worship of The Episcopal Church. Ordained ministers from either church seeking long-term ministry with primary responsibility in the other will be expected to apply for clergy transfer and to agree to the installation vow or declaration of conformity in the church to which she or he is applying to minister permanently.

I understand that for the first time, Evangelical Lutheran ministers not within the episcopate will be able to consecrate the eucharist at Episcopal alters, an interesting development for a church claiming apostolic succession. But I am unclear about the last part of this statement in bold -- does this mean that if a Lutheran pastor is transferred into the Episcopal Church to become Anglican clergy, (s)he will not be required to receive ordination as a priest from a bishop within the episcopate? Or does a declaration of conformity entail that a Lutheran pastor intending to become an Episcopalian minister will have to undergo ordination as a priest like anyone else seeking to become a rector in the Episcopal Church?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

There are a number of different Episcopal church organisations in the USA.
Which one is involved in this? and is it itself in communion with Canterbury? As far as I no only the ECUSA is

I have not heard of this in the UK Anglican church.

 

[EverChanging]

This is the Episcopal Church in communion with the See of Canterbury and the rest of the Anglican Communion.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

WELCOME TO THE ANGLICAN LUTHERAN SOCIETY

The report linked above, gives an excellent outline of the processes going on between the world Anglicans and Lutherans, up to 2009
I was aware of the Nordic link but was not aware of the wider links.
It seems that these links are going on everywhere and are furthest advanced in Canada. However, not all linkages are as advanced as each other, so a three country situation is far from clear. as would be the position of Priests be in any three linked countries.
The Nordic Lutheran countries have the same relationship to the Church of England as do the Scottish,Irish and welsh Anglican churches.

I feel it will be a long time before all Anglican and Lutheran churches have such simple relationships.

 

[EverChanging]

I understand much of the process. My main question relates to the transfer of a Lutheran pastor who has not been ordained into the priesthood by a bishop in the historic episcopate. Would such a pastor, seeking to become an Episcopalian rector, be required to submit to ordination by an Episcopalian bishop, or would he be simply received into the Episcopal church without ordination, like an Old Catholic or Roman Catholic priest would?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I understand much of the process. My main question relates to the transfer of a Lutheran pastor who has not been ordained into the priesthood by a bishop in the historic episcopate. Would such a pastor, seeking to become an Episcopalian rector, be required to submit to ordination by an Episcopalian bishop, or would he be simply received into the Episcopal church without ordination, like an Old Catholic or Roman Catholic priest would?

That is not clear at all.
A Church of England Priest always needs the permission ( licence) of an American Episcopalian bishop, to take services or work in his diocese. It seems the C of E agreement allows the same arrangement for Lutheran Nordic Priests.

However what the arrangements will be for American / Lutheran/Episcopal Priests will be, seems totally unclear.

However Lutheran priests must be considered qualified with out further ordination as far as the C of E is concerned.

Luther was himself an Ordained Priest as were most of their early priests, so perhaps the apostolic succession is established in the Lutheran Church.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

This is well worth reading as it gives verse and chapter of the problem and the eventual solution. LINK The Apostolic Succession of The Anglican Mission in America

For their part the Episcopal Church had a long history of faithfully carrying forward the historic episcopate. They have church laws that prohibit ministers who are not ordained in the proper line of succession, and they were not keen on breaking those laws now: "Do we abandon a 1,000-year-old practice here just because the Lutherans object to it?"
The Lutherans' obvious lack of enthusiasm for the historic episcopate also had the effect of sending the boomerang back the other way: Does the Bible really require this practice? My friend Brent Robbins also noted that the Lutheran Church has its origins in a courageous monk (Martin Luther) who risked his life and stood up to the most powerful man in Europe (Holy Roman Emperor Charles V) in order to preach justification by faith. The Episcopal/Anglican church has its origins in a King (Henry VIII of England) who wanted to divorce his wife (Catherine of Aragon) in order to marry his pregnant lover (Anne Boleyn) instead. Who's illegitimate now?
A compromise was reached: The Lutheran Church would be grafted into the line of apostolic succession over a period of time. Every new ELCA bishop would be consecrated with an Episcopal bishop present to join in the laying on of hands. The existing Lutheran bishops and pastors would be grandfathered in (some grandmothered in), and could minister in ECUSA services without any further ordination. It would take a generation to accomplish this graft, but over that time the historic episcopate would spread throughout the entire Lutheran church. And after that time no ELCA Lutheran would ever have to worry about it again.
The "phase-in" compromise was written into the Lutheran-Episcopal Concordat of Agreement of 1997, and the ECUSA approved this agreement at their national convention in July 1997. But then, in a stunning development, the ELCA rejected the Concordat in August of that same year! The vote fell 6 votes short of the 2/3 majority needed for approval.
Now what? Well, it was obvious from the moment the vote was announced that the overall goal was still intact: fellowship between the two churches. In fact, a follow-up measure was passed overwhelmingly, saying basically: keep trying. And they did.

 

[EverChanging]

That is not clear at all.
A Church of England Priest always needs the permission ( licence) of an American Episcopalian bishop, to take services or work in his diocese. It seems the C of E agreement allows the same arrangement for Lutheran Nordic Priests.

However what the arrangements will be for American / Lutheran/Episcopal Priests will be, seems totally unclear.

However Lutheran priests must be considered qualified with out further ordination as far as the C of E is concerned.

Luther was himself an Ordained Priest as were most of their early priests, so perhaps the apostolic succession is established in the Lutheran Church.

It is my understanding that an Evangelical Lutheran pastor can celebrate the Eucharist in Episcopal churches, but I would assume if he converted to the Episcopal faith, he would be required to undergo ordination by a bishop within the episcopate like anyone else; this seems to be the implications of the canon laws I've read, and it does not make sense to me that the Episcopal Church would take the time and effort to transfer the historic episcopate to the Evangelical Lutherans if they would accept one of their pastors into the ranks of the Episcopal clergy without ordination by an Episcopalian bishop, and it would seem this would be necessary to continue to uphold the agreements by the churches of the Anglican Communion to retain the traditional episcopate. Still, the wording is quite vague.

I have heard of the idea you suggest that I put in bold letters. A minority of Methodists believe they are within apostolic succession because there is the idea that in an emergency, a priest can consecrate a bishop because the distinction between priests and bishops evolved in a later period of time, that a bishop is merely a priest in a higher office. John Wesley accepted this view when he began ordaining others because he did not have bishops available. Thus, the Methodists and perhaps Evangelical Lutherans would have retained the succession through consecrations and ordinations carried out by priests.

Supposedly, a string of bishops died out in North Africa without consecrating successors, so priests took it upon themselves to consecrate bishops, and their lines of succession are still considered valid by Rome, whom as far as I know, does not accept priestly consecrations of bishops. Do you know if this is true of the North African Church? Do Anglicans accept the validity of priests consecrating bishops in an emergency, like John Wesley did?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Ordination is a once only sacrament, like baptism.
If a priest is able to celebrate the Eucharist in the other Church, this is accepting the validity of his ordinating. No additional Ordination would have any further purpose.

However To be a priest in that other Church would require him to accept any requirements as to articles of faith and duties as that other faith required. he would have to become a full member of that other faith in a similar way require of a lay person. in addition he would be required to take the same vows as others joining the priest hood in that church.

 

[EverChanging]

However To be a priest in that other Church would require him to accept any requirements as to articles of faith and duties as that other faith required. he would have to become a full member of that other faith in a similar way require of a lay person. in addition he would be required to take the same vows as others joining the priest hood in that church.

Then why does the Episcopal Church insist on ordaining other ministers who convert who are not within the apostolic succession? This is a part of their canon laws. And the canon laws applying to Lutheran pastors specifically mention reception and ordination if they convert to the Episcopal faith.

Edit: When I refer to a Lutheran pastor who wants to become an Episcopalian rector, I am referring to those who have not been ordained by a bishop within the historic episcopate.