Candy bars one day, arcane church structure debates the next.
In the course of some friendly e-conversation with a fellow UMC pastor regarding lay involvement in baptism and communion, I realized that we weren’t really disagreeing over baptism and communion.
Our differing viewpoints went back much further, to a fundamental debate in church history: the priestood of believers or apostolic succession?
Huh?
Under the doctrine of apostolic succession, the original 12 apostles (substituting Matthias for the recently departed Judas) conveyed spiritual responsibility and sacramental authority to their successors in ministry by laying hands on them. Paul alludes to this in I Timothy 4:14.
Well, that original “laying on of hands” has continued in an unbroken though widely divergent (think both Southern Baptist and Greek Orthodox!) line ever since. That’s what an ordination service is all about.
So apostolic succession determines much of the who, the where, and the when in celebrating the sacraments. Only persons who stand (or kneel) in apostolic succession — who are part of an unbroken line of heads who have hands laid upon them — can officiate or celebrate the sacraments. Our friends in the Catholic, Orthodox, and Episcopal worlds hold strongly to this belief. Because of our historic connection to the Episcopal (Anglican) communion, Methodists have held ever so moderately to it as well.
Yet with the Protestant Reformation of the 1500s came a renewed emphasis on a slighltly different doctrine: the priesthood of all believers. I Peter 2:9 says it this way: “But you are a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God . . .”
If we are all “priests,” then, we are all in ministry. We can serve one another in times of grief and in times of remembrance. We can teach one another rather than simply taking the clergy’s word for it. We can express gifts of tongues, healing, and miracles . . . together. I’d say we can even — gulp — celebrate baptisms together in the presence of the gathered church.
I suppose you can tell who landed where in my e-conversation. My friend stands and kneels in apostolic succession. I believe it to be a doctrine more suggested in Scripture rather than taught in it.
And I’m doing all I can to unleash the priesthood lurking inside so many Good Shepherd believers.
There is 1 comment
Talbot,
I’m not familiar with your discussion with John. I don’t know if that was posted or private?
But from your post, I’m a little confused.
1st- It’s true that the reformation stoked the fire of “priesthood of all believers” in the 16th century, but it’s also important to hold that in tension with context and the polyphony of voices on how that played out. Calvin would’ve advocated that proper worship was where the word was preached by those divinely called and the sacraments are duly administered according to Christ’s own appointment. That’s still in our (UMC) costitution. Martin Luther was worried about laity that had grown lax because of the waywardness of indulgences. He didn’t advocate they (laity) start serving communion and baptizing people.The mennonites have a strong sense of “priesthood of all believers” but I don’t know that they would lay aside lay training by those that have been trained in the “T”radition of the Church in seminary. I think they would happily share the task of the holy meal with those as long as someone was properly leading/influencing them. So I don’t see a radical shift in the reformation where all of a sudden the laity did everything without the gifts of leadership from the ordained, trained, etc. And I think that is what Apostolic Succession is, the laying on of hands to convey authority and spiritual gifting. That sounds biblical. I’m a little uneasy with your calling it a “doctrine more suggested…than taught”. I’m not sure what that means?
2nd- Again, I was not privy to your conversation with John, but from your post…I don’t see where “sharing” the responsibilities of ministry in baptism and communion is hindered in the UMC. Anybody can and is encouraged to assist. They just can’t preside…and for good or ill practically speaking I think it’s because that’s where training comes in now…and theologically, ministry is appointed, not taken. Just as spiritual gifts are in general. The work of the Holy Spirit can and is affirmed or denied by the Church (denomination & local) But I don’t ever remember a story in the Bible where Jesus takes a poll to see who wants to do what, “ooh ooh pick me” (and I don’t think Isa. 6 counts either)
We do speak in tongues, heal, teach, and celebrate the sacraments as the priesthood of all believers every week in the UMC. Sure it looks a little different here and there across the globe, but.
Finally, in a general sense the passage you quote isn’t really about ministry roles in the Church, is it? I see allusions to baptism/identity…we are a people “in Christ” and as a priest, by virtue of our baptism, we represent what that means to the world everyday. We put on display what we believe God is like by our words and deeds. A priest represents God before the people…shows them what the God they worship is like.
We also are charged to represent people before God “Lord remember your promises, remember your servant ______”. We do this in prayer & ministry for believers and people we’re inviting into the faith all the time, in churches that are hard & fast and churches that are loose on Apostolic succession.
Read again I Peter 2:11-25 and I think you’ll find submission to authority, even outside the church v.13 (of course this doesn’t mean committing known sin, etc.) to those who are kind and gentle, and even to those who are harsh, is talked about and reflective of Christ’s own mind & walk while he ministered among the people of the earth as the incarnate son of God.
So how should we think & walk as those who are following directions from a received tradition that’s older than we are.
Just thinking out loud.
Thanks for the interesting subject and conversation.
Peace,
Josh