Читать книгу Amt, Ordination, Episkopé und theologische Ausbildung / Ministry, ordination, episkopé and theological education - Группа авторов - Страница 14

6. The Leuenberg Agreement referred to the question of ministry in article 13, stating that it “is the task of the Church to transmit this gospel through the spoken word in preaching, through pastoral comfort, and through Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. In preaching, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, Jesus Christ is present through the Holy Spirit. Justification in Christ is thus imparted to people, and in this way the Lord gathers his church together. He works through various forms of ministry and service and through the witness of all the members of his church.” Moreover, it named ministry and ordination among the differences of doctrine which demand further study (LA 39, see above no. 2).

7. The Neuendettelsau Theses on the consensus about the question of “Ministry and Ordination” (1982/1986) represent the first step in this further work. Building on the basic doctrines of the Lutheran and the Calvinist Reformation, they identify a wide range of agreements among the Protestant churches regarding the understanding and the structure of ministries, the understanding and practice of ordination and also the ‘service of episkopé’ (cf. the quotes below, no. 59 and fn. 28, 31 and 62). But the statements were rather general, and the specific significance of this agreement is not always clear. The 4^th General Assembly of the LCF in 1987 accepted the Neuendettelsau Theses as “a basic guideline for future ecumenical conversations”.

8. The Tampere Theses (1986), which were also received by the General Assembly in 1987 and partially incorporated into the document The Church of Jesus Christ,³ represented a further step. In the first thesis, referring to the Theological Declaration of Barmen (1934), article III, and to CA V, it is stated that “a ministry pertaining to word and sacrament, the ministerium verbi […] belongs to the being of the church”, but that “the whole congregation and not just the ordained ministry have the responsibility for the proclamation of the word and for the right use of the sacraments” (p. 114).

9. The second thesis deals with the connection between the general priesthood and the “ordained ministry”. But it does not state whether the ordained ministry is derived directly from the priesthood of all believers or if it has a deeper root in a special calling by Christ.

10. Regarding the “service of leadership” (episkopé), the third Tampere Thesis states that the leadership of the congregation is also exercised through other ‘ministries’ [Dienste] and does not only fall to the ordained ministry” (p. 115). Notwithstanding the remaining differences, it is stated that the LCF churches “are nevertheless agreed that such differences in church structure do not impede a ‘church fellowship’ in the sense of pulpit and table fellowship. The reciprocal acknowledgement of ministry and ordination is not impeded so long as the question of church leadership remains subordinate to the sovereignty of the word” (p. 116). Even if it is recognised that in ecumenical dialogue the Protestant churches can and should “learn from other, non-Reformation churches”, “no single historically-derived form of church leadership and ministerial structure should or can be laid down as a prior condition for fellowship and for mutual recognition” (p. 116).

11. The 1994 study The Church of Jesus Christ summarises the fundamental agreement between the LCF churches in the following way:

1.“that all Christians participate through faith and baptism in the offices of Christ as prophet, priest and king and all are called to witness to the gospel and to pass it on and as well to intercede before God for one another (priesthood of all believers)”;

2.“that the ministry of the public proclamation of the gospel and the administration of the sacraments is fundamental and necessary for the church. Wherever the church exists, it needs an ‘ordered ministry’ of public proclamation of the gospel and administration of the sacraments. This ministry is exercised and shaped in a variety of different ways. This diversity bears the impress of historical experiences and is determined by the different interpretations of the task of the ministry. We can accept the different forms of ministerial office and service in our churches as an enrichment and as a gift of God. In this sense the historic episcopate and the structured ministry in a synodical and presbyteral form of church order can both be appreciated as serving the unity of the church. The fundamental mission of the church is the criterion for the practice and arrangement of ministries and services”;

3.“that the ministry of public proclamation is conferred through ordination (the ‘ordained ministry’ in the terminology of the Lima documents). It is rooted in a special commission of Christ but it always also needs the priesthood of all believers (Neuendettelsau-Theses 3 A). The Word of God constitutes this ministry which serves the justification of the sinner. It has a serving function for word and faith”;

4.“that the expression ‘ordered ministry’ refers to the totality of all ministries and services in the church in the sense of thesis 3 of the Tampere Theses. The ministry conferred through ordination is part of this ordered ministry” (p. 119–120).

12. In 1998, the Executive Committee of the Leuenberg Church Fellowship published a statement about the agreements then recent between Anglican churches on the one hand and the EKD and Nordic and Baltic Lutheran churches on the other.⁴ While appreciating what is aimed at and gained in these agreements, it held fast to the Leuenberg model as “a model of church unity which is based on the Reformation understanding of the unity of the Church as a community of churches” (nos. 2–3). Thus, the stimuli for further talks about the apostolic succession are received rather reluctantly (cf. the quote in the Resource Material, fn. 119). In contrast, the document The Shape and Shaping of Protestant Churches in a Changing Europe, received by the CPCE Assembly 2006, expresses itself in a more open way: “The common emphasis on episkopé for the unity and leadership of the church is important for a closer relationship between the churches of the Porvoo Agreement and those of the Leuenberg Agreement, even if there are different views and shapes of episkopé.”⁵