DAVID SCAER
ORDINATION:
HUMAN
RITE or
DIVINE
ORDINANCE
Concordia Theological Seminary Press
Fort Wayne, Indiana
ORDINATION: HUMAN RITE OR DIVINE ORDINANCE
In the Knubel-Miller Lectures of 1956 Conrad Bergendoff began his second lecture, "The Doctrine of the Ministry," with what now appears to be an overly cautious remark and understatement, 1 "In no area of doctrine has the Lutheran church in America had greater difficulty than in the matter of the ministry." Nearly two decades after these words have been spoken within the context of a historical judgment, they took on near prophetic character when a movement within the Missouri Synod began ordaining without the proper synodical authority. Though such questions as the inspiration and the inerrancy of the Bible, the use of the historical critical method, and the place of Lutheranism within the modern ecumenical movement were the real matters at the heart of the division, it was the question of ordination -- who could dispense it and who could receive it -- that led to the termination of several synod officers and what seems now to have been an inevitable split. For those who are acquainted with the tabloid publications of this newer movement within the Missouri Synod, it seems self-evident that there is an obsession not only in taking photographs of ordinations but also trying to get as many people as possible into one photograph. We cannot unravel the dispute about these contemporary ordinations at this time, but only remark that if ordination is on the level of an adiaphoron1a then any censure against them seems a little too harsh and the prominence given them through newspaper pictures seems a trifle exaggerated. Even those who are committed to a strong congregationalism and to firm anti-sacerdotalistic feelings seem to find more intrinsic value in an ordination administered by a synod president or vice-president than an ordinary pastor. Frequently great funds of money are spent in transporting the right person to convey the ordination to the candidate. Within the Missouri Synod there are those pastors who are proud, perhaps rightfully so, that they can trace their ordination directly back to C.F.W. Walther - an apostolic succession of a different kind. In such thinking Perry County has only replaced Rome and Jerusalem.
A. The Rite of Ordination in the Pastoral Epistles
One New Testament scholar recognizes that the Pastoral Epistles represent a more highly developed theology and church organization and have dubbed these developments as Fruhkatholizismus, "early catholicism," Since it is claimed that such a highly developed theology, e.g., verbal inspiration and organization, e.g., a system of a bishop and elders would have been unknown by St. Paul, who allegedly favored a more charismatic attitude to the church, he obviously cannot be considered the author.2 We will not debate the authorship of the Pastoral Epistles but answer the question of whether or not ordination was known and practiced in that part of the early church to which the pastoral Epistles are directed. It is recognized that the Pastoral Epistles came from one source. For the sake of convenience Paul will be identified as the author. There are three passages which speak to this question: 1 Timothy 4:14; 5:22; and 2 Timothy 1: 6. Though the laying on of hands is not infrequently mentioned throughout the Scriptures, 3 these three passages are specifically connected with receiving an office or the transferring of the office to someone else. Also for the sake of convenience the hand laying ceremony shall be designated as ordination. 3a
(1) 1 Timothy 4:14
The first reference to this particular ceremony is 1 Tm. 4:14. "Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophetic utterance when the elders laid their hands upon you." (RSV) 4 There are several concepts which lose their essential vigor in English translation. The word gift is charisma. Charisma is something which is concrete and is for its meaning dependent on charis, the word for grace. Though charis is most frequently used of God's gracious attitude whereby He justifies the sinner for Christ's sake, Paul also uses the charis of his apostolic office. 5 This charis may manifest itself in various charismata at God's pleasure. In 1 Tm. 4:14 Paul is not speaking of a variety of charismata 6 which have been given to Timothy, but only one charisma. Since Paul in other places speaks about his apostolic office as a charis which has been given to him,7 it might not be wrong to suggest that charisma that Timothy has is a continuation or at least a continuation of the charis of Paul's own apostolic office.
The charisma, possessed by Timothy, is further described as existing "in you," en soi. The gift or endowment which has been transmitted to Timothy involves function, an obligation even a sacred duty. What he possesses, he is obligated to use. While there is no suggestion Timothy has undergone any type of internal transsubstantiation, the pericope certainly indicates that a type of consubstantiation has taken place. 8There is in a real sense an exchange of attributes between the gift and Timothy. This is a genus idiomaticum of a different type. Paul says that Timothy has a gift which exists within him. The "in you" cannot be overemphasized. It is repeated in 2 Tm. 1:6. Something divine and not human has been given Timothy. It also has a certain objective character in that it has been given to him from the outside.
A rather strong warning is given by Paul concerning the charisma given Timothy. "Do not neglect the gift." A similar warning is given by the writer to the Hebrews, "if we disregard so great a salvation (2:3)." If the text from Hebrews is at all informative for our purposes, it should suggest that the charisma possessed by Timothy is a permanent possession which may be used or which may be neglected, but which nevertheless in some sense remains. The charisma as an intensely personal possession of Timothy is further reinforced by the word order. The RSV translates this section "the gift you have." This translation not only lacks precision, but it fails to catch Paul's meaning. Timothy does not only have the gift as a possession, as one might his own money or goods, but he has the gift within himself. A word for word translation would be rendered "the in you gift. "9
The charisma which Timothy has now within him was given to him at one time and not several times and it was given him by God. The use of the aorist "was given" can only imply that Paul is referring to a specific past act of which Timothy was the recipient. There is no mention that Timothy had undergone this ordination more than once or that it should be repeated, though new duties are conferred upon him. This one past act continues to remain valid and obligatory for him. The use of the aorist passive at this point has other far reaching theological significances. It is quite common to use the passive in Hebrew theology as a circumlocution for God as the subject. Though God is not mentioned, it is God who has given Timothy his charisma. A word of Scripture and the laying on of the hands were accompanying factors or means through which the gift had been bestowed.
The use of the word `give' in the passive aorist is used in the New Testament to suggest the giving of a particular divine authority for carrying out a designated task. 12 A few instances may be cited. Jesus at the end of Matthew claims, "All authority has teen given to me." Here again the use of the passive points to God as the one who has given Jesus this authority. The Matthean ending certainly should be read in connection with Mt. 10:1 where Jesus transfers authority to His disciples. "And he called to his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits,..." The remarkable sameness of the words "healing every disease and infirmity" between Mt. 9:35, describing the activity of Jesus, and Mt.10:1, describing the activity of the disciples indeed suggest that there has been a transference of authority from Jesus to the disciples. In Mt 10:1 the passive tense of `give' is not used as in Mt. 28:19 and 1 Tm. 4:14, however the aorist is used indicating that such authority was transferred to the disciples at one specific time. The use of the active voice instead of the passive in Mt.10:1 can be explained. Here is an editorial remark of the Evangelist and not the verbatim words of Jesus. The Evangelist is reporting what Jesus gave and what the disciples received. Parallels to the bestowal of authority are found in 2 Cor.13:10, "in order that when I come I may not have to be severe in my use of the authority which the Lord has given me," and 2 Peter 3:15 were Peter says of Paul that he has wisdom given by God for handling certain doctrinal matters in his epistles, "So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him." The transference of authority from God to Jesus and then from Jesus to the apostles is then paralleled in the bestowal of the charisma to Timothy through the instrumentality of hands. 13
According to the RSV translation the actual bestowal of the charisma is said to have taken place "by prophetic utterance when the elders laid their hands upon you." The NEB present another view with its translation: "Do not neglect the spiritual endowment you possess, which was given you, under the guidance of prophecy." At first glance it would appear that the RSV is to be preferred since it expresses better the thought contained in the genitive of means, dia propheteias. It would also support a view acceptable to Lutherans that the office or the gift was bestowed on Timothy through the instrumentality of the word, i.e., propheteia, rather than through the hands. Eduard Lohse in attempting to avoid a contradiction between 1 Tm. 1:14 and 2 Tm. 1:6 where the hands are clearly the instruments through which the gift is bestowed takes dia propheteias as an accusative. On the basis of prophetic utterances Timothy was initiated into his office. Thus God's activity in ordination is direct. Parallel to this would be Acts 20:23 : where the Holy Spirit is said to have appointed the elders as overseers over thee flock.14 This is not a new thought since in ordination it is God and God alone who bestows the gift.
The translation of presbyterion as "elders" here is also equally infelicitous. Paul does have a word for elders, presbyteroi, but it is not the one used in this pericope. Used here is presbyterion, a word stressing the unity of the elders as an official group.15 Timothy was not given the charisma in a haphazard fashion by clergymen who happened to be present, but he was given the charisma through a predetermined action of the council of pastors. 16 The use of presbeterion indicates that the clergy were an organized group participating in decisions concerning ordination. In Acts 15 they also appear as a group to make decisions. In 2 Tm. 1:6 Paul claims to have bestowed the charisma on Timothy with no mention of the presbyterion. This problem must be handled below.
After Paul has urged Timothy to treat and understand his charisma with special deference, he has special instructions for Timothy in how the laying on of hands should be used. This passage, 1 Tm. 5:22, "Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands" comes towards the end of a section in which Paul has certain instructions for Timothy in the general supervision of the clergy. There are instructions concerning salary arrangements and judicial proceedings against elders who have been charged.17 Then follows the instruction concerning the laying on of hands. These instructions may be summarized as maintaining pastors in their office, removing pastors from their office, and inducting pastors into their office. There is a natural flow of thought here -- how pastors are to be paid, removed, and replaced.
Paul's admonishment to Timothy about the careful use of the laying on of hands does not apply to the use of the hands in prayers for individuals, for the sick, or even for those who may be entrusted with a particular church function other than the clerical office. No word of caution in using the laying on of hands would be appropriate in any situation where good wishes or heavenly blessings in a general way are being given to the recipient. The word of caution, "Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands," suggests that Paul is referring to one particular type of action whose effects have such a lasting value that they can be undone if at all only through great difficulty. Paul's word of caution to Timothy points to a period of probation, judgment, and criticism which is to proceed the ordination of the actual laying on of the hands and not everyone who considers himself a possible candidate for this particular ceremony is to receive it. There might be a question who the phrase immediately following "nor participate in another man's sins" is to be taken. The Greek text is punctuated in a way that it follows naturally the phrase "Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands." The mede, 'neither,' indicates that these are connected actions. Thus the thought would be that if Timothy did lay hands upon or ordain the wrong type of a person, he would share in the sins connected with the conduct of that man's office. The NEB catches this understanding when it provides this translation: "Do not be over-hasty in laying on hands in ordination or you may find yourself responsible for other people's misdeeds." The Greek here, koinonei hamartiais, participation in sins, is the same type of language used to describe the participation of the eucharistic bread in Christ's body 18 and the Holy Spirit's participation in the life of the Christian.19 The laying on of hands is not an isolated act, but an act through which t.he performer of the act has a part in the actions of the one on whom the act is performed.
(3) 2 Timothy 1: 6
Paul's second letter to Timothy is recognized as more personal than the first,20 Therefore it is not surprising that while Paul in the first letter states that Timothy was ordained through an act of the council of elders, he states here in the second letter that he himself has as responsible for it . Several aspects of Timothy's life come across Paul's mind - his sincere faith, the faith of his mother and grandmother, and his ordination for which Paul claims responsibility. The faith of his mother and grandmother now dwells in Timothy, but the charisma in Timothy is not from his mother or grandmother, but is through Paul. "Hence I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you through the laying on of my hands."
In the 2 Tm. 1:6 passage the ordination is placed in the middle of Paul's description of Timothy's life as a Christian and not along side of other clerical instructions and admonitions as in the two citations in 1 Tm. Paul's admonition to Timothy about his receiving the laying on of hands or ordination is preceded by reference to the faith of his mother and grandmother and Timothy's own faith. For the sake of this faith, I would assume in the sense of preserving it. Paul addresses Timothy about his ordination. Faith is not individualistic but of a shared possession. Timothy is said to share the same faith as did his mother and grandmother. Faith is not only something shared but it is described as dwelling within the believer. One cannot avoid seeing the parallel between the faith that dwells in the believer and the charisma within Timothy. Both faith and the charisma exist en soi in Timothy.21 Both 1 and 2 Tm. see the charisma as a quality within Timothy. Faith is however quite distinguishable from the charisma given Timothy. There is no one for one equation between faith and charisma. The charisma exists for the sake of faith. The reverse is certainly not suggested. The ordination exists for the benefit of the church and the church's faith.
The admonition to remember is not simply the act of recalling, but recalling in such way that one brings into the present as a reality an act which was accomplished in the past. The admonition to remind is cognate to Jesus's admonition to celebrate the Lord's Supper in His memory.22 What happened to Timothy in the ordination or the laying on of the hands still continued to have validity even though it was given through a past act. The RSV's use of "rekindle" catches Paul's admonition to Timothy to attend to his gift. Divided into parts the word anazopyrein means to make the fire come alive again. The NEB provides a vivid translation with: "That is why I remind you to stir into flame the gift of God which is within you through the laying on of my hands."22a. In the first Epistle of Clement the same word is used in connection with revitalizing faith.23 Timothy's ordination is looked upon by Paul as a one time act which may take on new meaning in the present. There is no suggestion that it is to be repeated. 24
It is assumed that charisma referred to in the 2 Tm. 1:6 passage is of the same type mentioned in 1 Tm. 4:14, but in 2 Tm. 1:6 it is specifically called God's charisma. It was pointed out in the discussion of 1 Tm.4:14 the use of passive aorist certainly indicated that God was the giver of the charisma, This is confirmed in 2 Tm. 1:16 where it is called God's charisma. God is the one who bestows the charisma and men only serve as instruments in the actual bestowal. Of course this is not unlike Baptism and the Lord's Supper in which Jesus is always the baptizer and the celebrant!
Again in this pericope the close and intimate association that Timothy has with the charisma may be noted. The charisma is now in him (en soi). Though the charisma has to be rekindled, it is nevertheless still there, V. 7, "for God did not give us a spirit of timidity but a spirit of power and love and self-control" points to the fact that Timothy had the charisma but that he was not exercising it to its complete dimensions. The parallel to a weak faith is striking. 25
The actual way in which the charisma was bestowed is handled slightly different in 2 Tm. 1:6 than it is in 1 Tm.4:14. In 2 Tm.1:6 it is said that the charisma has come "through the laying on of my hands." The accompanying act of the laying on of the hands by the council of elders has been replaced by the instrumentality of Paul's hands alone. In 1 Tm 4:14 the emphasis is on a past event and in 2 Tm. 1:6 the emphasis is on a present reality though given in the peat. The charisma exists in Timothy now. In 2 Tm.1:6 there is no mention of the prophetic word as the instrument of the bestowal. His mother and grandmother were the instruments to bring faith, but Paul is the instrument for the giving of the charisma.26
The nature of the charisma is decided by v. 7, "for God did not give us the spirit of fear; but of power and of love and of self-control." V. 7 has language which is also strongly reminiscent of 1 Tm. 4:14. The word 'give' is used in the aorist active, instead of the passive, but God is specifically designated as the giver of the 'spirit.' The word 'us' suggests that Paul is referring only to himself and Timothy and not all Christians in general. The American Translation is correct in offering here 'Spirit' instead of 'spirit' as in the RSV.27 Certain ordination hymns asking for the bestowal of the Holy Spirit on the candidate seem to have firm support in 2 Tm. 1:7.28
If the Pastoral Epistles are from the same source, then 1 Tm. 4:14 and 2 Tm. 1:6 are both referring to the same historical incident in which Timothy received the charisma. The grammar in each case points back to one past event and not several. Timothy has not received the charisma twice, but once. In one case from the council of elders and the other time from Paul. The best possible construction from the data is that ordinations were performed by the entire council of elders under the leadership of one of its members who had a supervisory authority over the clergy (l Tm. 5:17-22).29
The problem presented in the title of this paper "Ordination: Human Rite or Divine Ordinance" should in some way be resolved. In resolving the question of ordination, the issues of its necessity and absolute necessity must be avoided. Even though baptism is divinely commanded, it is not absolutely commanded.30 There is that area of divinely mandated ordinances which are not to be labeled as adiaphora but which also may not be considered absolutely necessary.31 Thus if it can be shown that ordination is divinely mandated, it does not follow that it is absolutely necessary. The question of necessity is frequently the least helpful. At this point the only evidence thus garnered can be laid out.
I personally find it very difficult to designate as a human rite or adiaphoron any ceremony in which God is the Giver and the Holy Spirit is the recipient, which can only be administered under certain stringent conditions, which carries with it a threat, which makes the acting participant in the rite responsible for the activities of the recipient of the rite, and which gives the recipient a gift which remains.
In the Lutheran Confessions ordination receives consideration in the Apology XIII, 7-13, in the Treatise, 60-73, the major portion of "The Power and Jurisdiction of Bishops," and in The Smalcald Articles III, X.
In the Apology ordination is discussed in the article of the sacraments. Even though Melanchthon set forth a definition for what constitutes a sacrament in this article, i.e., "rites which have the command of God and to which the promise of grace has been added," Lutherans have not considered themselves bound or restricted by this definition.32 Thus while the Apology lists the sacrament of penance or absolution as genuine sacraments, most Lutherans would limit themselves to two sacraments, Baptism and the Lord's Supper.33 In handling the traditional seven sacraments of the church, Melanchthon gives top listing to Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and Penance and puts confirmation and extreme unction on the lowest shelf. Marriage is one step higher than extreme unction and confirmation. It does have God's command, but has meaning within the sphere of creation and not redemption.
In this hierarchy of the seven sacraments, Melanchthon places ordination in what appears to us to be the middle. It is preceded by Baptism, Penance, and the Lord's Supper and followed by marriage, confirmation, and extreme unction.34 The Lutherans objected to the Roman Catholic ordination through which the priest is empowered to offer the unbloody sacrifice of the mass. Melanchthon rightly calls attention to the denial of the atonement involved in such a concept.35 However, given a new definition ordination may be considered a sacrament. "If ordination is interpreted in relation to the ministry of the Lord, we have no objection to call ordination a sacrament. The ministry of the Word has God's command and gracious promises:" "If ordination is interpreted this way, we shall not object either to calling the laying on of hands a sacrament." 36 The command of God and promises, the two elements comprising a sacrament according to Melanchthon's own definition, are both associated with the ministry. 37 By extension, he is willing to apply the term sacrament to the actual laying on of the hands.38 The discussion of ordination at this point in the Apology is not that extensive. Perhaps someone will argue that the imposition of the hands is not really the important element, but the command of God with the gracious promises connected with that command. True enough! However that same argument could be turned on Baptism and say that it is not the water that is important but the command and promise of God. Such a thought is even suggested by Luther in the Small Catechism: "It is not the water that does them, but the word of God in and with the water and faith that trusts such word of God in the water."39
While the Treatise on the Power and the Primacy of the Pope spoke to the question of the equality of bishops over against the Roman claim to Petrine supremacy, the supplemental and companion "Treatise on the Power and Jurisdiction of Bishops" speaks to the equality of all clergy, bishops and pastors, alike. The question of equality surfaced in the matter of ordination. According to Roman Catholic tradition, priests could administer only five of the seven sacraments, with confirmation and ordination reserved for the bishops. For confirmation the Lutherans had little use.40 But ordination was connected with the pastoral office and in this matter the Lutherans had a firm investment in seeing that it was continued. The success of the Reformation depended in supplying recognized pastors for the congregations. Though Lutherans were willing to accept the ordination from the Roman Catholic bishops, they were being deprived of such ordinations as a form of punishment. The refusal of the bishops to ordain was an attempt to confine Lutheranism. In the wake of this development the Lutherans ordained their own pastors.41
One statement in the Treatise seems to consign ordination to a mere rite, i.e., an adiaphoron: "Afterwards a bishop either of that church or of a neighboring church, was brought in to confirm the election with the laying on of hands; nor was ordination more than such a confirmation." Such a statement would at face value speak finally and determinatively to the divine and human nature of ordination. The German translation of the original Latin however is very informative at this point. The German translation which according to confessional principles is the binding interpretation of the original, informs us that the matter being discussed is the ordination of a bishop into his position. "Darzu kam der Bischof, am selben Ort oder in der Nahe gesessen, (der) und bestatiget den gewahlten Bishof durch Auflegen der Hande, und ist dazumal die Ordinatio nichts anderst geweszt dann solche Bestatigung." 42 Ordination of the bishop by another bishop would then be that ceremony or rite of confirmation which established the bishop in his place of authority.
Ordination is treated very highly in the Treatise. In several places it is said that the church retains the necessary right of calling, electing, and ordaining pastors. "Quare necesse est ecclesiam retinere jus vocandi, cligendi et ordinandi minstros." It would be an anachronism to suggest that we are looking upon a certain congregational activity. The issue here is not one of polity, but the right of Christians to have pastors. The jus vocandi, the right of calling, refers to the process whereby a person is prepared for the office. The jus eligendi, is the process of choosing and does not necessarily refer to a democratic type procedure like an election by all qualified adults, male or female in a congregation. In the sense of a congregational election neither Luther nor Melanchthon were ever elected. The jus ordinandi refers to the rite or ceremony in which the office was conferred.43
The Treatise in the discussion of ordination begins by stating that those who preside over the churches whether they are pastors or elders or bishops have a command to engage in the various churchly rites.44 The one difference between bishops and other clergy was in the matter of ordination which historically was assigned to the bishop by agreement and not divine command. The grading is of human origin, but the ordination whether it be by bishop or pastor is of divine right. '`Manifestum est ordinationem a pastore in sua ecclesia factam jure divino ratam esse."45 The discussion at this time was not on what actions to take When priests or pastors were unwilling to carry out their functions, but what actions to take when the bishops refused to perform their functions of ordaining. The Lutheran answer was that the church could no more be deprived of pastors than it could be deprived of preaching, Baptism, the Lord's Supper or any other gift her Lord intended for the church. Ordination by a pastor is seen as the usual means in which this office is perpetuated.
The reader will come to the conclusion that the writer not only has adopted a very serious attitude to ordination, but that he considers it is more than an adiaphoron, a human rite. The New Testament and the Lutheran Confessions do not know of congregational and lay ordination. According to the Lutheran Confessions the church retains the right to have pastors and where the church is there the church is under obligation to institute baptism, preaching, absolution, the Lord's Supper, and the office of the ministry.
Whether a statement on ordination and the ministry will ever be acceptable to all Lutherans or all the members of one particular synod seems doubtful, if Lutheran church history is informative. But regardless of the confusion which the Lutheran Church is experiencing on this issue, it will take comfort in the high respect with which the office of the ministry is regarded by our by people and the great care attached to the conduct of ordination. One student who was known for what I would consider as congregational fanaticism was graduated from this institution and was inducted into office with as much splendor as one can find in Texas. The ceremony of ordination itself is being further adorned with placing of stoles and chasubles on the shoulders of the candidate and the reception of chalice and Bible and baptismal shell. These ceremonies might just be ecclesiastical substitutions for orb, scepter and crown. Perhaps it is because of the uncertainty of the divinity of the office and the rite that it is being adorned with earthly ornament. My own observations are that the marriages and ordinations of graduated seminarians seem to becoming ghastly long near two hour trials of endurance. There is also a desire to collect the highest and widest selection of church officials. Like child dedication ceremonies in Baptist type churches, I can only conclude what they profess to be only a human ceremony may in fact be a divine ordinance. I was ordained in the regular 10:45 service back in my father's church in Brooklyn and we had to scrounge around to find two footloose Missouri Synod pastors. The service was simple and confined to the 60 minute limit. I have no certificate of my ordination, but if I did I would be proud to display it on my wall as many do. For if by baptismal certificate reminds me that I have been chosen by Christ for eternity, then my ordination certificate would remind me that I was chosen by Christ for service in His church and to share with Him and apostles and all pastors of the Lord that one office of caring for Christ's Church. As long as I have life I will never be able to escape or disregard the words of Paul, "I now remind you to stir into flame the gift of God which is within you through the laying on of my hands." (NEB)
1 The Doctrine of the Church in American Lutheranism (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1956), p. 19.
la. Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics III. Trans. Walter W. F. Albrecht. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1953), p. 454.
2. Donald J. Selby, Introduction to the New Testament. (New York: Macmillan Company, 1971), pp. 410-2. Werner Georg Kummel, Introduction to the New Testament. Trans. A. J. Mattill, Jr. 14th Revise Edition. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1966), pp. 258-71. Willi Marxsen, Introduction to the New Testament. Trans. G. Buswell. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1968), pp. 169-216. Kummel provides an historical overview of the research done on the Pastoral Epistles. All three are agreed in placing the writings in the post-apostolic period.
3. The laying on of hands is mentioned in Acts, but there are noticeable dissimilarities between these citations and those from 1 and 2 Tm. In Acts 6:6 hands are laid on the seven chosen for the work of charity. This action is accompanied by prayer and there is no mention of a charisma being bestowed. In Acts 13:3 Paul and Barnabas are sent out by their fellow "prophets and teachers" with the laying of the hands and with prayer. In these citations from Acts a particular task is assigned to the recipients and the hand laying is accompanied by prayer. This position is supported by Ludwig Ott, "Das Weihesakrament", Handbuch der Dogmengeschichte, IV, 5 (Freiburg: Herder, 1969), p. 4. Ott identifies the hand laying ceremony in Acts 13:2 as a "Segensgeste" through which God's grace is implored upon the missionaries and their work. Acts 14:26 and 15:40 are regarded as "Ausendungszeremonie".
The differences between the citations in Acts and the Pastoral Epistles have been carefully delineated by Eduard Lohse, Die Ordination im Spatjudentum (Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1951), p. 71-9. This scholar does not see the consecration of Barnabas and Saul as an ordination act (p. 73). Lohse also lists the use of hands in the healing miracles of Jesus and the Apostles (pp. 69-71). It should be pointed out that the use of the hands is more than symbolical in the healing. "Es wird damit nicht nur eine symbolische Handlung vollzogen, sondern es handelt sich um ein Geheilten der Geneilten and an der Geistbegabung dere, denen die Hande aurfgelegt worden (p. 71)." The use of prayer is not mentioned in 1 and 2 Tm. There is also no mention of particular assignment to which Timothy has been consecrated.
3a.Both the NEB in its footnote translation of 1 Tm. 4:11 and its preferred translation of 1 Tm. 5:22 use the word "ordination" for the laying on of hands. The American Translation (Beck) also understands the hand laying ceremony as ordination. "Don't be in a hurry to ordain anyone." Lohse (op. cit., p. 13 p. 31) understands the hand laying ceremony as ordination.
4. Various translations of 1 Tm. 4:14 show noticeably different understandings. The KJV is not that different from the RSV. "Neglect not the gift that is thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." KJV does catch the concept of the elders as an organized unit which is required by presbyterion. Phillips presents a departure. "Do not neglect the gift that was given to you in the proclaiming of God's Word when the assembled elders laid their hands upon you." The phrase "In the proclaiming of God's Word" seems to be inexact and is capable of several interpretations." The NEB provides an interesting interpretation of charisma, but not a completely clear view of propheteia. "Do not neglect the spiritual endowment you possess, which was given you, under the guidance of prophecy, through the laying on of the hands of the elders as body." A footnote to the passage offers this substitution "through your ordination as an elder." (All citations are from the RSV, unless otherwise indicated.)
5. Karl-Heinrich Rengstorf, Apostolate and Ministry. Trans. Paul Pahl. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1966), p. 31
6. The classical pericope on the charismata is 1 Cor. 12. The vast variety of charismata in 1 Cor. 12 is not duplicated in the Pastoral Epistles. If 1 Cor. 12 is read in the light of the Pastoral Epistles, one could possibly conclude that the charismatic problem in the Corinthian church was essentially clerical and not lay oriented.
7. Rm. 1:5; 15:15; 1 Cor. 15: 9 -11.
8. In eucharistic theology the term transubstantiation is used to indicate that there has been an essential change by which the bread looses its substance as bread and becomes the body of Christ without loosing the outward appearances of bread. Such is the official position of the Church of Rome. Consubstantiation is the opinion that the body and bread exist side by side without any substantial change in either. This position is erroneously identified as the Lutheran position. The indelible character given the priest in ordination, according to Roman Catholic theology, does involve a substantive change or addition within the priest known as the character indelibis. This organic or substantive change may be seen as parallel to the transubstantion doctrine in the eucharist. Paul's ordination concept might very well be parallel to what is known as consubstantiation.
9. The NEB translation of charisma as "endowment" does suggest the quality of permanency which the word "gift" fails to convey in its entirety. An endowment is a gift given to a person or institution which continues to give even after the initial act of giving.
10. Lohse, op. cit., p. 4.
11. In Lutheran theology what Timothy has received is designated as a mediate call since it was directly given by God. A call directly given by God is called the immediate call. For a discussion of this matter see Heinrich Schmid, Doctrinal Theology of the Evanangelical Lutheran Church. Trans. Charles A. Hay and Henry E. Jacobs. (Minneapolis; Augsburg Publishing House; Third Revised Edition, 1899, 1961), pp. 606-7.
12. William F. Aradt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, l957), p. 192. Hereafter this work is designated BAG.
13. Greek grammar identifies sacta with hands as genitive of attendant circumstances, BAG, p. 510.
14. 0p. cit., p. 81-2.
15. Lohse points out that a "Kollequim" was used in the hand laying ceremonies in Acts 6 and 13. 0p. cit., p. 79.
16. In 1 Tm. 5:2 as well as in 1 Pt. 5:5 elders is used in the plural. Presbyterion, an official council of elders, should be distinguished from presbyteroi, simply more than one elder without suggesting any official group. Presbyterion is used of an official meeting of the Sanhedrin in Lk. 22:66 and Acts 22:5. The KJV is using the word "presbytery" and the NEB is using the phrase "elders as a body" provide acceptable translations. In Mt. 28:12 the Sanhedrin is called presbyterion symboulion.
17. 1 Tm. 5:17-20.
18. 1 Cor. l0: l6.
19. 2 Cor. 13:14.
20. Selby, Introduction, op. cit., p. 416. Cf. Lohse, op. cit., p. 82
21. 2 Tm. 1:4-6. Cf. Lohse, pp. 84-5.
22. BAG, p. 22.
22 a. The American Translation (Beck) is also inadequate here. "That is why I remind you to stir into a flame God's gift that is in you through the laying on of my hands."
23. As cited in BAG, p. 53. ''Let faith in him be rekindled." 1 Clement 27:3.
24. The concept that ordination is only the first installation service and that all installation services are equal to ordination certainly has no support in the Pastoral Epistles. Equation between installation is common in the Missouri Synod. John H. C. Fritz, Pastoral Theology. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1932), p. 62. Installation services may have their parallel in Acts 13:1-2 where the clergy at Antioch designate Paul and Barnabas for missionary work in Asia minor.
25. The disciples are called men of little faith, Mt. 6 :30; 8:26; 16:8. Faith was present but not in its fullest possible form. There seems to be no provision for them in the Pastoral Epistles.
26. In 1 Tm. 4:14 the hands of the council of elders are not as significant as Paul's hands in 2 Tm. 1:6. In 1 Tm. 4:14 they may be described as attendant circumstances and in 2 Tm. 1:6 the hands are the actual means. This might very well indicate that the rite of the ordination at this time was already assigned to just one of the elders, who later was recognized as the bishop. The other elders participated in the action, however. Arndt and Gingrich list early church citations where the bishop is part off the presbyterion. Quoted in this citation from Ignatius. "Bishop and presbyterion belong together as the strings to the harp." BAG, p. 706. Such an arrangement must have already been functioning at the writing of the Pastoral Epistles.
27.Arndt and Gingrich also understand the reference here as to the Holy Spirit. BAG, p. 683. Cf. Acts 20:28. Here the Holy Spirit is said to have appointed the elders.
28. The Lutheran Hymnal (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1941) 490, "Pour Out Thy Spirit From on High"; 401, "Send, O Lord, Thy Holy Spirit". The Veni Creator Spiritus (233, "Come, Holy Ghost, Creator Blest" is mentioned by Regis Prenter also as the appropriate ordination sequence Creation and Redemption Trans. Theodor I. Jenson. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967), p. 534. "By the laying on of hands together with prayer that gift over God alone is sovereign Lord is handed on, namely, his own Spirit which has been poured out upon his entire church, and this is expressed in the Pentecost sequence used at ordination: Veni sanete Spiritus." Luther's "Come, Holy Ghost, God and Lord", The Lutheran Hymnal is based on this medieval sequence.
29. Ludvig Ott offers the same solution. op. cit., p. 7. " . . . zusammen mit dem Apostel auch dat ortliche Presbyterkollegium die Hande auflegte." Lohse, op. cit., p. 82
30. Luther held ordination as necessary. This opinion was offered in the case of a certain Johann Sutel who had assumed the position of preacher at St. Nicolai Church in Gottingen. Luther was asked the question whether Sutel could celebrate the Eucharist without priestly ordination, priesterliche Weihe. His reply was no. Sutel should refrain from the celebration till he was ordained. Hellmut Lieberg, Amt. und Ordination bei Luther und Melanchthon (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1961), pp. l83-4. Francis Pieper places ordination among the adiaphorous practices (op. cit., 454) . Eduard Lohse, however, comes to another conclusion. Ordination cannot be regarded as the human connection between the teacher and his student (P. 97) and cannot be listed as an adiaphoron (p. 101).
31. Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics III. Trans. Walter W. F. Albrecht. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, l953), p. 20. "Baptism is not a matter of choice (an adiaphoron), but a divine ordinance; still no one may assert an absolute necessity or say that no one can obtain remission of sins and be saved without it."
32. Holsten Fagerberg outlines the differences between Luther and Melanchthon in their understanding of the sacraments. Both reformers held that the sacraments had materia and forma. While Luther saw materia as actual matter, e.g., Melanchthon saw acts as being included in the materia. A New Look at the Lutheran Confessions. Trans. Gene J. Lund. (St. Louis Concordia Publishing House, 1972), p. 163.
Herman Sasse's opinion on the sacraments is worth repeating. "The Lutheran Church has no dogma 'de sacramentis.' In the Augsburg Confession an article on the use (or purpose) of the sacraments follows the articles on baptism, the Lord's Supper, Confession, and Penance. At any rate, the attempts to understand the Sacrament of the Altar from a general concept of a sacrament should be abandoned." This is My Body (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1959) p. 26. The same caveat might also be applied to ordination. In so far as the Lutheran Church has no dogma on the sacraments, including or excluding ordination within a sacramental framework is not profitable.
33. Though it is recognized that the Lutheran Confessions have a sacramental understanding that does not limit the sacraments to Baptism and the Lord's Supper, in actual practice and teaching Lutherans do in fact have only those two sacraments. Cf. Arthur E. Neitzel, "The Sacraments", The Abiding Word, II, Ed. Theodore Laetsch. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1947), 367-393.
34. Apology XIII.
35. Apology XIII, l0. "Our opponents . . . . interpret the priesthood . . . in reference to sacrifice, as though the new covenant needed a priesthood like the Levitical to offer sacrifices and merit the forgiveness of sins for the people." Translation taken from The Book of Concord. Trans. and Ed. Theodore G. Tappert (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, l959), p. 212.
36. Ibid.
37. Francis Pieper who uses such terms as adiaphorous, church custom or ceremony to describe ordination (op. cit., p. 454) puts preaching before Baptism and the Lord's Supper in the hierarchy of necessity (op. cit., p. 253 and p. 290) .
38. Apology, XIII, 12.
39. This point is so important that Herman Sasse's observation is vital. ''Even in the most sacramental churches the Word is always regarded as that which constitutes the Sacrament. The element of `materia' is always inferior to the Word as the 'forma.' It is a general conviction of all churches that Luther expresses in his words on baptism: 'Without the Word of God the water is simply water and not baptism. But with the Word of God it is baptism.'" This is My Body. (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, l959), p. 373.
40. Apology, XIII, 6.
41. Smalkald Articles, III, X
42. Die Bekenntnisschriften der cvangelisch-Lutherischen Kirche, 6., durchgesehene Auflage (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1967), p. 492. The English translation provided by Tappert, op. cit., pp. 331-2, which comes from Melanchthon's Latin text, seems to put the ordination of pastors and bishops together. "The most common custom of the church bears witness to this, for there was a time when the people elected pastors and bishops. Afterwards a bishop, either of that church or of a neighboring church, was brought in to confirm the election with the laying on of hands; nor was ordination anything more than such a confirmation." The German translation quoted in the body of the paper however gives the impression that the last sentence is referring to the ordination of the bishop. My own translation of the controverted sentence is here provided. "After that the bishop came, from the same place or from a nearby place, and confirmed (established) the elected bishop through the laying on of hands, and that time ordination was nothing other than such a confirmation (establishment)." (Emphasis mine.) The reference seems to be to an elected bishop and not pastor.
43. Fagerberg sees all the calling, electing, and ordaining as part of one process. He however contends that the reformers, Luther and Melanchthon, did not recognize ordination as necessary. (0p cit., p. 249) This position however is contradicted by Lieberg (0p. cit., 229-32).
44. Bekenntisschiften, p. 489. "Evangelim enim tribuit his, qui praesung ecclesiis, mandatum docendi evangelium, remittendi peccata, administrandi sacramenta, praeterea jurisdictionem, videlicet mandatum cxcommunicandi eos, quorum nota sunt crimina, et resipiscentes rurus absolvendi."
45. 0p. cit., p. 490 Treatise, 85.