Rev. Jonathon Krenz's Page

Hey Jon! Nice to see you. How are things, and remind me where your parish is?

Yep, that's Joseph. He's going to be a year old around Easter. Things are great in Joliet, but I think it needs more than one pastor. Would you like to come to Joliet and split my salary?

Hey Jon, welcome to the trail. Its good to have another Western Michigan young pastor on here.

Hey Jon! Great to see you here. Missed you at Symposia this year. Hope all is well with you.

The Friar

Jon,

That is VERY understandable! I will be in prayer for you and your family. Things are going well here in west-central Minnesota. Where are you again? Where ever it is I know your church is blessed to have you as their pastor. The blessings of the Trinity be yours.

The Friar

Hi Jon, where is Tim a pastor at? Is he in MN North or MN South? Did you go back to Fort Wayne last week? Hope all is going well with you in Michigan? Do you get a chance to talk with Chris much? Hope to see you sometime soon?
Don

Jon,

I'm always surprised that anyone knows what an Oxfordian is. I consider the Historical-critical method to be acceptable when dealing with literature...even with the Bard.
What say ye?

So have you made your decision for deVere? Or do you believe in miracles of literature from tailor's sons?

John,

Have a pastoral/communion question for you that I could use some help. Here at Pilgrim there is the practice of just filling up the flagon with as much wine as possible and then after it has been consecrated to simply poor the left over blood back into the bottle that holds unconsecrated wine. Basically they mix consecreated wine with unconsecrated week after week. It has been mentioned by a fellow pastor in the circut that such is a Reformed practice--that we should really measure just enough for each service and consume after each service what has been left over, or poor it down the pisina. Have any thoughts?

Chris

John,

I found this quote from Dr. Tom G. Hardt in his essay entitled, "The Sacrament of the Altar" very telling:


"The reality which flows forth from God's creative words cannot lightly be made to cease merely because the communicants have completed their communion. In two extensive letters to Simon Wolferinus, Luther attacks that man's teaching and practice according to which the presence ceased with the communion itself, for which reason the priest could without reproach mix consecrated and unconsecrated elements after mass. This error cast unhappy shadows over Luther's old age, and Wolferinus is to be considered equivalent to a Zwinglian. Of course Luther does not wish to claim here that the bread carried around in the Roman sacramental procession or the bread reserved in the sacramental tabernacle was a valid Sacrament, the true body of Christ. Such things are outside the institution of Christ, which speaks of a meal. Within this meal, which is the mass, the Sacrament is, however, a sacrament with all the consequences of this fact. The meal of Christ lasts until all have received the Sacrament, drunk of the chalice and eaten up the pieces of bread.149 What remains after the end of the communion (reliqua or reliquiae) is therefore consecrated by Christ to be His holy body and blood and is to be received carefully and with reverence by the priest or another person as Sacrament. For Luther it is thus a dogmatic demand that in the mass everything that has been consecrated is to be consumed. This abolished both the possibility of the Roman abuse of carrying the host from the altar as a Sacrament and the possibility of the Protestant abuse of treating the remaining elements as mere bread and wine. These two Luther letters were quoted diligently by the following generation of Gnesio-Lutherans. Evidently the Lutheran Confessions, too, refer to these letters in the discussion about the extension of the Sacrament in time, although the fact that the reference to the page number was omitted hence made this reference somewhat unclear"

Chris