Women's Ordination in the LCMS

Started by Buckeye Deaconess, June 10, 2011, 03:02:18 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: David Garner on July 18, 2011, 02:41:44 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on July 18, 2011, 02:37:57 PMThe fact that a female can do all the functions of the ordained and God works through them, is a strong argument in favor of ordaining women. If God were against it, I'm sure that he would make his desires known.

This is an outstanding argument, except for the part where He did make His desires known through His Apostle.........


We are certain God did in Paul's letter to the Galatians among other passages.
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Scott6

Quote from: David Garner on July 18, 2011, 02:41:44 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on July 18, 2011, 02:37:57 PMThe fact that a female can do all the functions of the ordained and God works through them, is a strong argument in favor of ordaining women. If God were against it, I'm sure that he would make his desires known.

This is an outstanding argument, except for the part where He did make His desires known through His Apostle.........


Yup.  And the near-universal consensus of His Church, past and present.

Dan Fienen

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on July 18, 2011, 02:37:57 PM
Quote from: Scott Yakimow on July 18, 2011, 01:11:00 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on July 18, 2011, 12:47:51 PM
Quote from: Scott Yakimow on July 18, 2011, 12:37:10 PM
Elsewhere, he and the other reformers marshaled many biblical arguments as to why we baptize infants.


I didn't say that his "it works" argument was the only one, but it is one of his arguments.


If a female pastor officiates at a baptism, does the baptism work? Is God present in the Word and water to bring salvation to the baptized?


If a female pastor presides at communion, does the sacrament work? Is God present in the Word, loaf, and cup to bring salvation to those who believe?


If a female pastor preaches the gospel, does it work? Is God present in the Word forgiving the sins of all the penitent?


I know that 8 days is a long time to remember stuff, but already once in response to you...


Yet another example of deja vu all over again, a potpourri of Groundhog days, and hundreds of first dates (just to include most every image out there).


The fact that a female can do all the functions of the ordained and God works through them, is a strong argument in favor of ordaining women. If God were against it, I'm sure that he would make his desires known.

As far as that argument goes, what evidence do you present to demonstrate that when a female pastor baptizes the baptism is efficatious, when a female pastor presides at communion that the sacrament "works," or that when a female pastor preaches the gospel forgiveness of sins happens?  You assume that it works and that since, under your assumption it works, it must be God pleasing that it happens.  Those are two assumptions - can you demonstrate the truth of the first or if the first is true, that entails that the second is true?

It is a long held belief that official acts performed by unworthy persons in the office are still valid, even if they are a knave, rogue or heretic.  Does that mean that we should knowingly ordain knaves, rogues and heretics since if their official acts are valid that must mean that God is pleased with those ordinations?

Dan
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

Scott6

Quote from: Dan Fienen on July 18, 2011, 02:47:45 PM
It is a long held belief that official acts performed by unworthy persons in the office are still valid, even if they are a knave, rogue or heretic.  Does that mean that we should knowingly ordain knaves, rogues and heretics since if their official acts are valid that must mean that God is pleased with those ordinations?


Yup.  Of course this would follow if coherent thought is considered a virtue.

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: Dan Fienen on July 18, 2011, 02:47:45 PM
As far as that argument goes, what evidence do you present to demonstrate that when a female pastor baptizes the baptism is efficatious, when a female pastor presides at communion that the sacrament "works," or that when a female pastor preaches the gospel forgiveness of sins happens?  You assume that it works and that since, under your assumption it works, it must be God pleasing that it happens.  Those are two assumptions - can you demonstrate the truth of the first or if the first is true, that entails that the second is true?


The same evidence that Luther used.

QuoteIt is a long held belief that official acts performed by unworthy persons in the office are still valid, even if they are a knave, rogue or heretic.  Does that mean that we should knowingly ordain knaves, rogues and heretics since if their official acts are valid that must mean that God is pleased with those ordinations?


Well, if they meet all the other requirements we have for ordination, why shouldn't they be ordained? I know of two pastors who have been convicted of homicide and are on the ELCA clergy roster. One's felony occurred before attending seminary and ordination, the other occurred afterwards.

I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Carol Schmidt

Quote from: Scott Yakimow on July 18, 2011, 08:33:29 AM
Quote from: Carol Schmidt on July 18, 2011, 01:46:50 AM

I've printed your links along with conversation surrounding your posts and notice they are all from the same thread five years ago.  Should be interesting to hear how it went back then.  Thanks.  I'll read and get back to you.


Yup, there was that thread and some others, but if my memory serves (and it may not), that is where I laid out a lot of the research for my argument.  The other post of importance would be the one from Chrysostom in 2008 that I linked earlier as that was "independent" correlation of what I was saying re: authentein referring to the authoritative preaching from the bema during worship, like I had said back in 2006.


In any case, I look forward to your response.


And please don't forget about the positive argument.  It is important in any discussion seeking to overturn such a long-standing and near-universal practice to show that the Church has simply been wrong in its reading of Scripture (particularly 1 Tim 2, as that's what we're talking about), that it can't be read that way and that Scripture teaches that God calls women into the pastorate.

This is going to take some time.  Because your arguments are spread back 5 years (and I have not yet looked back to find your 2008 post), it will be helpful, if you have the time, to present your argument in one reading, as concisely as possible for now.  I will make an attempt at doing the same.  We can concurrently continue discussion, which will probably be helpful in the development of each case. 

For now, I'll begin with the first two posts you linked to from 2006, where you make your argument for reading  διδάσκειν and αὐθεντεῖν as a hendiadys.  I understand your argument, that διδάσκειν and αὐθεντεῖν must both be read as either positive or negative, but not one positive and the other negative.  I don't think that's entirely out of the realm of possibility, but I do think you jump to unnecessary conclusions regarding the consequence of not reading both words as positive.  A possible reading where both words are negative might be, "...to lecture in a dominating way..."  To talk down to, use speech that is dismissive and silencing of the other.

You also stated that your "position [re: hendiadys] is a minority one on this point."  (10/13/2006 comment #49)  What occurs to me in your discussion of Kostenberger's study (10/14/2006 comment #56) is that where a hapax legomenon appears the question is, What's different here?  Something was happening in the congregation that was unusual, so even if "Paul never mixed positive and negative terms" in other places, he also never used the word αὐθεντεῖν in any other place.

Even with the additional "48 instances of this construction" in "nearly all extant Greek literature" used to support his conclusion, this is a very small population and I would think that the specific infinitives along with the context in which they were written would also need to be studied.

David Garner

#1071
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on July 18, 2011, 02:58:45 PMWell, if they meet all the other requirements we have for ordination, why shouldn't they be ordained? I know of two pastors who have been convicted of homicide and are on the ELCA clergy roster. One's felony occurred before attending seminary and ordination, the other occurred afterwards.

Perhaps it would help illustrate the point if I took one of the three examples given and substitute it in your first sentence for the pronoun you used:

"Well, if heretics meet all the other requirements we have for ordination, why shouldn't they be ordained?"

Now, lets proceed to answer the question and perhaps we'll get somewhere.
Orthodox Reader and former Lutheran (LCMS and WELS).

Dan Fienen

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on July 18, 2011, 02:58:45 PM
Quote from: Dan Fienen on July 18, 2011, 02:47:45 PM
It is a long held belief that official acts performed by unworthy persons in the office are still valid, even if they are a knave, rogue or heretic.  Does that mean that we should knowingly ordain knaves, rogues and heretics since if their official acts are valid that must mean that God is pleased with those ordinations?


Well, if they meet all the other requirements we have for ordination, why shouldn't they be ordained? I know of two pastors who have been convicted of homicide and are on the ELCA clergy roster. One's felony occurred before attending seminary and ordination, the other occurred afterwards.

Do you mean that they are currently knaves, rogues or heretics, or that they were at one time such but had since repented?  You miss my point, but I suspect that you wanted to miss my point.  The princple is that the efficacy of official pastoral actions does not depend on whether the office holder is truly suitable for the office, by reason of character or other qualification.  Does that mean that since we understand that the sacramental acts of ordained persons are still valid and efficacious, that we therefore should not ask if the person should be ordained or is a proper candidate for ordination - everybody is qualified since their official acts are valid despite their unsuitability? 

Dan
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

Scott6

Quote from: David Garner on July 18, 2011, 03:40:46 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on July 18, 2011, 02:58:45 PMWell, if they meet all the other requirements we have for ordination, why shouldn't they be ordained? I know of two pastors who have been convicted of homicide and are on the ELCA clergy roster. One's felony occurred before attending seminary and ordination, the other occurred afterwards.

Perhaps it would help illustrate the point if I took one of the three examples given and substitute it in your first sentence for the pronoun you used:

"Well, if heretics meet all the other requirements we have for ordination, why shouldn't they be ordained?"

Now, lets proceed to answer the question and perhaps we'll get somewhere.


Does the new software have a "Like" button?

SmithL

Quote from: Scott Yakimow on July 18, 2011, 03:59:27 PM
Does the new software have a "Like" button?

How's this for the next best thing to a "Like" button?

Scott6


Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: David Garner on July 18, 2011, 03:40:46 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on July 18, 2011, 02:58:45 PMWell, if they meet all the other requirements we have for ordination, why shouldn't they be ordained? I know of two pastors who have been convicted of homicide and are on the ELCA clergy roster. One's felony occurred before attending seminary and ordination, the other occurred afterwards.

Perhaps it would help illustrate the point if I took one of the three examples given and substitute it in your first sentence for the pronoun you used:

"Well, if heretics meet all the other requirements we have for ordination, why shouldn't they be ordained?"


I doubt that they would pass the seminary courses. Thus, they would not meet all the other requirements.
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: Dan Fienen on July 18, 2011, 03:47:34 PM
Do you mean that they are currently knaves, rogues or heretics, or that they were at one time such but had since repented?  You miss my point, but I suspect that you wanted to miss my point.  The princple is that the efficacy of official pastoral actions does not depend on whether the office holder is truly suitable for the office, by reason of character or other qualification.  Does that mean that since we understand that the sacramental acts of ordained persons are still valid and efficacious, that we therefore should not ask if the person should be ordained or is a proper candidate for ordination - everybody is qualified since their official acts are valid despite their unsuitability? 


The efficacy of a pastoral act doesn't depend on the office holder. However, I believe that over time, God would find a way to rid his church of unfaithful and unrepentant people seeking to function as pastors. Lay people are pretty good at seeing through phoniness.


However, our church body does not let just anybody be ordained. We have requirements that have to be met before the laying on of hands for ordination.


No one has questioned Luther over his use of "it works" to argue for infant baptism. (Albeit, it's not the whole argument). But there are all these criticisms of using "it works" as part of the argument for women's ordination. Why?
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

David Garner

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on July 18, 2011, 05:30:08 PMI doubt that they would pass the seminary courses. Thus, they would not meet all the other requirements.

Quite the bit of sophistry there.

Assume they do.  Do you ordain the heretic?
Orthodox Reader and former Lutheran (LCMS and WELS).

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: David Garner on July 18, 2011, 05:58:37 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on July 18, 2011, 05:30:08 PMI doubt that they would pass the seminary courses. Thus, they would not meet all the other requirements.

Quite the bit of sophistry there.

Assume they do.  Do you ordain the heretic?


If one is a heretic, they will not meet our requirements for ordination. They will not be ordained. That is what I assume.
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk