ALPB Forum Online
ALPB => Your Turn => Topic started by: Mark Brown on October 20, 2015, 12:25:57 PM
-
From the NY Times "On Religion" space...http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/us/more-students-secular-but-feeling-a-call-turn-to-divinity-schools.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/us/more-students-secular-but-feeling-a-call-turn-to-divinity-schools.html?_r=0)
...Here she was, starting her graduate studies in religion when she did not know the definition of liturgy, had never read the Bible and could not have identified a major theologian like Karl Barth, even if it would have won her a fortune on “Jeopardy!” Yet something in organized religion hinted at an answer to the atomized, unmoored life she led...
She added, “I wanted to create a meaningful community that came together based on a shared goal rather than a shared religious creed.”...
Second, divinity school offers even atheists and spiritual seekers a language of moral discourse and training in congregational leadership. The traits appeal to nones who aspire to careers in activism, social work, chaplaincy or community organizing rather than taking to a pulpit...
Within higher education, divinity programs often stand apart from the cult of relativism in the liberal arts and the utilitarian emphasis in professional schools focusing on business and law, for example....
After putting aside the cynical blind leading the blind reaction, I'm having a hard to not coming to the following conclusion. This is exactly the type of thing you end up with when theology is rooted in the first article instead of the third article, when it comes from creation instead of from the heart of the church. You end up with people looking for God in "sacred scriptures" like Harry Potter and Jane Eyre. You end up with the desire for moral language (law) without any real foundation. You end up with those desiring lasting community based on goal, but not realizing that the goal is the eschatological one - sanctification. Education, specifically Christian Education, is rooted in the third article which presupposes the revelation of creation and justification. Otherwise it looks like this. Maybe not immediately. You can coast on fumes for a while and there is a lot of ruin in most institutions, but this is the fin de siècle.
-
Yes, by all means, let us lament the fact that people who may not have a theology are going to seminaries to learn about theology. They are there, after all, for the wrong reasons and - since we are so darned insecure - their presence may contaminate the purity of whatever we think is there.
I think it's terrific that the people described in that article are at seminaries. It's better than having them squeeze together and create their own seminary and theology.
-
One of the blessings of being a Lutheran is that our seminaries exist for the purpose of training pastors, not for letting people play around trying to make up their own religion.
-
As one who was blessed to go through "The System" of Pre-ministerial
training at Concordia High School, Milwaukee, Concordia Junior College,
Milwaukee, and Concordia Senior College, Ft Wayne, I have one hope
for today. That before a student enters one of our LCMS seminaries,
please attend an LCMS Concordia University.
I realize that many second career seminarians do not have that choice.
However, if a high school graduate feels called to the Holy Ministry,
it would help him immensely to have 4 years on a Lutheran University
campus and take some pre-ministerial courses.
-
Yes, by all means, let us lament the fact that people who may not have a theology are going to seminaries to learn about theology. They are there, after all, for the wrong reasons and - since we are so darned insecure - their presence may contaminate the purity of whatever we think is there.
I think it's terrific that the people described in that article are at seminaries. It's better than having them squeeze together and create their own seminary and theology.
Please tell me how they are learning about theology? What exactly is the content of their learning? And did you pick up that the critique was not aimed at the students but at those who would design the curriculum? The students desires are not all bad, but there is no one to actually teach. It would be great if they found their way into a Dr. Arand confessions class, or a Dr. Gibbs class on Matthew, or a Dr. Lessing class on Amos. (Or a Dr. Adams class on Genesis/Exodus.) But that is not what happens. And then what happens when a student with an M.Div., $35,000 of debt and no way to get a real job leaves? Do congregations start looking like great bases for community organizing? They bring all that deeds not creeds pixie dust and edgy doubt in the ministerial office to congregations? The same people who designed the curriculum say not our fault you stodgy Pharisees. They have replicated themselves and extend the complete lack of a real education to those congregations. If it came from the heart of the church, if it was real love which education ultimate is a work of, they would be instructed in the truth - like Jesus did with the Rich Young Man the past two weeks.
-
The person cited in the story is going to Harvard Divinity school, and I think there will be some content to what she learns there. Good professors even.
-
I don't see why this is that surprising, considering Harvard Divinity School is entirely non-sectarian and interreligious anyway. Yale, U Chicago, and Vanderbilt - though officially Christian - probably have similar people all over the place. (My guess is that other top schools like Princeton, Duke, and Baylor are noticeably more "Christian" than these other four, however).
-
I don't see why this is that surprising, considering Harvard Divinity School is entirely non-sectarian and interreligious anyway. Yale, U Chicago, and Vanderbilt - though officially Christian - probably have similar people all over the place. (My guess is that other top schools like Princeton, Duke, and Baylor are noticeably more "Christian" than these other four, however).
Indeed. Let us not confuse divinity schools with seminaries, particularly Harvard Divinity School which is hardly Christian.
"What is the difference between Harvard Divinity School and a seminary?
Harvard Divinity School was established in 1816 as the country's first nonsectarian theological school. It is dedicated to educating future leaders in religious life and thought with the resources and support of the wider Harvard University. Seminaries are typically affiliated with a particular religious denomination, and may or may not be affiliated with a larger university. We recommend that you contact the denominational seminaries that interest you for additional information about their programs, resources, and student life. We are happy to share detailed information about HDS."
"I am not affiliated with a particular religious or spiritual tradition. Is there still a place for me at HDS?
Yes! Students come to HDS from a variety of spiritual and religious backgrounds, including non-religious backgrounds. We have a number of students that are not affiliated with a religious tradition. What all HDS students share in common is a willingness to explore the complexities of religious thought and life through academic curiosity and practical engagement."
http://hds.harvard.edu/admissions-aid/frequently-asked-questions
-
No surprises at all in the judgmental responses here.
-
No surprises at all in the judgmental responses here.
Harvard Divinity School is being judgmental?! :o How so?
-
No surprises at all in the judgmental responses here.
How you pack so much irony in so few words continually amazes me.
-
No surprises at all in the judgmental responses here.
How you pack so much irony in so few words continually amazes me.
He is a professional writer, you know ...
-
No surprises at all in the judgmental responses here.
How you pack so much irony in so few words continually amazes me.
I'm amazed at how Charles pulls off a one-man circular firing squad. ::)
-
I repeat. People are interested in studying theology. Should we not be pleased with that?
-
I repeat. People are interested in studying theology. Should we not be pleased with that?
I guess it depends on if you see these schools simply as graduate programs for the study of theology, or if they are designed for the formation of pastors. If the former, then, by all means, bring 'em all in. But if the idea is to create and train shepherds to tend their flocks, then recruiting non-believers to the cause is somewhat problematic, no?
-
I repeat. People are interested in studying theology. Should we not be pleased with that?
Where did you get the idea that there's an interest in studying theology?
The young woman seems interested in studying humanism, philosophy, spirituality, etc. I don't see much of a mention about theology other than HDS stating that it "was established in 1816 as the country's first nonsectarian theological school. It is dedicated to educating future leaders in religious life and thought with the resources and support of the wider Harvard University."
Religious studies and theology are not the same. Google "theology vs religion."
Pleased? Or not pleased? It's a free country. Perhaps she'll stumble upon a Bible.
-
Yale Divinity School produced the following theologians:
Frederick Buechner, Stanley Hauerwas, Richard Hays,
Reinhold Niebuhr, H.R. Niebuhr, William Willimon. and
Barbara Brown Taylor. What they have in common
is this: Several became prominent professors as well
as well-known preachers. All have become popular
authors as well as good theologians.
Bottom Line: Seminaries produce parish pastors and
Divinity Schools produce professors and theologians.
-
Yale Divinity School produced the following theologians:
Frederick Buechner, Stanley Hauerwas, Richard Hays,
Reinhold Niebuhr, H.R. Niebuhr, William Willimon. and
Barbara Brown Taylor. What they have in common
is this: Several became prominent professors as well
as well-known preachers. All have become popular
authors as well as good theologians.
Bottom Line: Seminaries produce parish pastors and
Divinity Schools produce professors and theologians.
Harvard Divinity School produced the following "theologians":
-Ralph Waldo Emerson, philosopher, poet, and essayist
-Horatio Alger, scholar and novelist
-Reza Aslan, author and Islamic scholar
-George Madison Bodge, author, historian, and Unitarian minister
-Tom Chappell, founder of Tom's of Maine, large producer of natural personal care products
-Tom Chick, actor, editor and video game journalist
-Greg Epstein, Humanist Chaplain at Harvard University, and author of the New York Times Bestselling book, Good Without God: What a Billion Nonreligious People Do Believe
-Theodore Parker, prominent Unitarian and transcendentalist Unitarian minister, scholar, abolitionist and author of the line, "...the moral...arc of history...bends toward justice..."
-Sarah Warn, Editor-in-Chief; founder of AfterEllen.com
-Edmund Sears, Unitarian theologian
-
Perhaps the distinction between a divinity school and a seminary is key here, as has been suggested. By seminary I am primarily referring to a school for training pastors to serve in congregations. An academic trade school in effect, much as law schools are for training students to practice the various varieties of the profession of the law, medical schools to train students to pursue a career in medicine. I would object to students seeking to pursue a career in church work/leadership without sharing the faith proclaimed by the kind of church that they are going to lead and being committed to that faith.
On the other hand, religious studies as a general academic subject should be open to all who have a interest. Why not? However their spiritual journey turns out, it can be helpful for them. But for those who wish to be pastors in our churches or other professional church workers we should insist on a commitment not just to spirituality in general or a vague religiosity, but a commitment to Biblical beliefs in accord to the Lutheran Confessions.
The question for our schools is whether it would be useful for us to provide the more general academic track for anyone interested as well as our more narrowly focused course of study to train men to be pastors in our churches and men and women to be other church workers.
-
The question for our schools is whether it would be useful for us to provide the more general academic track for anyone interested as well as our more narrowly focused course of study to train men to be pastors in our churches and men and women to be other church workers.
Don't we already have that? For example, MA and PhD programs at Sem StL.
http://www.csl.edu/admissions/academics/choose/
-
Pastor Don Kirchner forgot to mention one of the illustrious
graduates of Harvard Divinity School: Dr. Walter A. Maier who
became a professor at Concordia Seminary, St. Louis and the
famous Lutheran Hour Speaker on radio until his death in 1950.
-
Pastor Don Kirchner forgot to mention one of the illustrious
graduates of Harvard Divinity School: Dr. Walter A. Maier who
became a professor at Concordia Seminary, St. Louis and the
famous Lutheran Hour Speaker on radio until his death in 1950.
Thanks, Dave. He wasn't on the list I looked at. Are you sure that he graduated from HDS or was it Harvard University? I found this:
"[Maier] received an M.A. in Semitic language, literature and history from Harvard University in 1920; and in 1929 became the twentieth person to ever receive his doctorate from Harvard in Semitics."
He already was an ordained minister, graduating Sem StL, when he headed to Cambridge, MA.
-
Theology is for proclamation.
RPG+
-
Theology is for proclamation.
RPG+
I read that somewhere! ;) An excellent book.
-
Theology is for proclamation.
RPG+
I read that somewhere! ;) An excellent book.
I heartily agree. :)
-
I still do not get the sense of irritation. Yes, our seminaries are for preparing pastors and presumably for those already "religious." (What if an atheist wanted to enroll in Concordia Seminary? Would it be allowed?) But should we not be glad that people are studying religion or spirituality or divinity or the mysteries of the universe? Is it not possible that some good can come from that?
I suppose not, for such people will not be indoctrinated with "Lutheran" theology, or taught only in the "Christian" tradition.
-
Is it not possible that some good can come from that?
Of course. I already suggested that she might stumble upon a Bible. You seem to be the one who is irritated, Charles. You're arguing with yourself.
-
Pastor Don Kirchner forgot to mention one of the illustrious
graduates of Harvard Divinity School: Dr. Walter A. Maier who
became a professor at Concordia Seminary, St. Louis and the
famous Lutheran Hour Speaker on radio until his death in 1950.
Indeed, Piotr Malysz - an LCMS pastor and theologian - is a recent graduate of Harvard Divinity School with the Th.D.
-
No, we should not really be glad that unbelievers are studying in divinity schools because they become the Elaine Pagels and Matthew Foxes and others who befuddle the faithful by calling into question all that is believed, taught and confessed in our churches. I recall something Frederick Buechner wrote, btw. He was teaching for a semester at Harvard Divinity School and began his classes with a prayer. One of the students came to him and said she and others felt uncomfortable with that because they were atheists. If I recall, he didn't know how to respond.
-
I still do not get the sense of irritation. Yes, our seminaries are for preparing pastors and presumably for those already "religious." (What if an atheist wanted to enroll in Concordia Seminary? Would it be allowed?) But should we not be glad that people are studying religion or spirituality or divinity or the mysteries of the universe? Is it not possible that some good can come from that?
I suppose not, for such people will not be indoctrinated with "Lutheran" theology, or taught only in the "Christian" tradition.
If you read irritation from me you need to up your reading skills. I'm not irritated that some may come not out of faith but curiosity, they simply will leave with their lack of faith challenged and a good theological education. Not everyone who attends Seminary ends up a pastor. My oldest brother graduated from CSL not with an M.Div but an MAR (Masters of Arts in Religion) and went on to serving God and His church, just not as a pastor. Seminary certainly was not wasted on him. One of my classmates graduated with an M.Div but not the additional Diploma that certified him for ordination and to be a pastor in the LCMS. Wasted? He still received a great theological education.
A question that needs to be considered is how much of the resources available should be used to support general religious education. Not that such would be a bad use of resources, but resources are finite and needs to be used well.
-
A question that needs to be considered is how much of the resources available should be used to support general religious education. Not that such would be a bad use of resources, but resources are finite and needs to be used well.
I don't understand.
-
Yale Divinity School produced the following theologians:
Frederick Buechner, Stanley Hauerwas, Richard Hays,
Reinhold Niebuhr, H.R. Niebuhr, William Willimon. and
Barbara Brown Taylor. What they have in common
is this: Several became prominent professors as well
as well-known preachers. All have become popular
authors as well as good theologians.
Bottom Line: Seminaries produce parish pastors and
Divinity Schools produce professors and theologians.
You forgot to include moderator, Richard Johnson. (His daughter also went there.)
-
A question that needs to be considered is how much of the resources available should be used to support general religious education. Not that such would be a bad use of resources, but resources are finite and needs to be used well.
I don't understand.
Denominational Seminaries' mission is primarily to train pastors for the churches of the denomination and secondarily to train other church workers. So the staffing and curriculum is geared to that end. Someone who wants to study religion in general would likely want a somewhat different curriculum. To offer a general religious studies curriculum suitable for the Nones could take additional resources. How much such coursework could be used in the pastor preparation track and how much expense there would be to appeal to the Nones would have to be considered.
-
Educational Bio of Walter A. Maier:
Concordia High School, Bronxville
Concordia Junior College, Bronxville
Boston University, Bachelor of Arts, 1913
Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Bachelor of Divinity, 1916
Harvard Divinity School, 1916-1918
Harvard Graduate School, 1918-1920
Bottom Line: As a result of his academic work during 1916-20,
Harvard granted him a Doctor of Philosophy.
-
Educational Bio of Walter A. Maier:
Concordia High School, Bronxville
Concordia Junior College, Bronxville
Boston University, Bachelor of Arts, 1913
Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Bachelor of Divinity, 1916
Harvard Divinity School, 1916-1918
Harvard Graduate School, 1918-1920
Bottom Line: As a result of his academic work during 1916-20,
Harvard granted him a Doctor of Philosophy.
No. "Maier studied at Harvard Divinity School from 1916 to 1918, and at Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences** from 1918 to 1920. These four years saw the completion of course requirements for both Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy degrees...[Maier] received an M.A. in Semitic language, literature and history from Harvard University in 1920; and in 1929 became the twentieth person to ever receive his doctorate from Harvard in Semitics." It appears that he did not complete and defend his dissertation until 1929 when he received his doctorate from Harvard University, not HDS.
Bottom line, Maier did not graduate Harvard Divinity School as you stated, which is why he was not on the list I read and why I did not forget.
Pastor Don Kirchner forgot to mention one of the illustrious
graduates of Harvard Divinity School: Dr. Walter A. Maier...
**"The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences is the academic unit responsible for many post-baccalaureate degree programs offered through the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard University."
-
A question that needs to be considered is how much of the resources available should be used to support general religious education. Not that such would be a bad use of resources, but resources are finite and needs to be used well.
I don't understand.
Denominational Seminaries' mission is primarily to train pastors for the churches of the denomination and secondarily to train other church workers. So the staffing and curriculum is geared to that end. Someone who wants to study religion in general would likely want a somewhat different curriculum. To offer a general religious studies curriculum suitable for the Nones could take additional resources. How much such coursework could be used in the pastor preparation track and how much expense there would be to appeal to the Nones would have to be considered.
Sem StL has both M.A. and Ph.D. degree programs. I would think that one could do a form of "general religious studies" in either of those programs. In fact, there certainly are students from other denominations taking coursework at CSL.
-
Yale Divinity School produced the following theologians:
Frederick Buechner, Stanley Hauerwas, Richard Hays,
Reinhold Niebuhr, H.R. Niebuhr, William Willimon. and
Barbara Brown Taylor. What they have in common
is this: Several became prominent professors as well
as well-known preachers. All have become popular
authors as well as good theologians.
Bottom Line: Seminaries produce parish pastors and
Divinity Schools produce professors and theologians.
Gee, it also produced me. And Pastor Wolf. Into which category do we fall? :o
-
I have known many "theologians" produced by our seminaries and many pastors produced by places like Harvard Divinity School. The suggestion that the school determines what one is doesn't fly.
-
Yale Divinity School produced the following theologians:
Frederick Buechner, Stanley Hauerwas, Richard Hays,
Reinhold Niebuhr, H.R. Niebuhr, William Willimon. and
Barbara Brown Taylor. What they have in common
is this: Several became prominent professors as well
as well-known preachers. All have become popular
authors as well as good theologians.
Bottom Line: Seminaries produce parish pastors and
Divinity Schools produce professors and theologians.
I could give you at least as long a list of names, all parish pastors, who studied at Yale Divinity School. As a matter of fact, YDS (at least through the mid-eighties when I was there) had as one of its goals the training of parish pastors.
And I am more than dismayed at the implication here that parish pastors and theologians are two seperate and distinct entities, and the one cannot and is not supposed to be the other.
Balderdash. >:(
Parish pastors had better be theologians. Otherwise they are cheating their parishes.
Oh, why not? I will list a few parish pastors who came out of Yale Divinity School:
Peter Marty, Leah Schafer, Henry Brinton, Nadine Lehr, Sally Colgrove, Jeff Merkel, Stephen Petrica, Robert Bader, Laura Sugg, Richard Johnson, John Wolf. And yes, myself. And there are more.
There are also those who are professors, authors, deans of other divinity schools, and other esteemed posts outside of parishes. So?
And I will also remind those here, that one can become a fine parish pastor even if one's M.Div. is from Harvard Divinity School. One such person (before being elected to serve as a bishop): Pastor Elizabeth Eaton.
-
Yale Divinity School produced the following theologians:
Frederick Buechner, Stanley Hauerwas, Richard Hays,
Reinhold Niebuhr, H.R. Niebuhr, William Willimon. and
Barbara Brown Taylor. What they have in common
is this: Several became prominent professors as well
as well-known preachers. All have become popular
authors as well as good theologians.
Bottom Line: Seminaries produce parish pastors and
Divinity Schools produce professors and theologians.
I could give you at least as long a list of names, all parish pastors, who studied at Yale Divinity School. As a matter of fact, YDS (at least through the mid-eighties when I was there) had as one of its goals the training of parish pastors.
And I am more than dismayed at the implication here that parish pastors and theologians are two seperate and distinct entities, and the one cannot and is not supposed to be the other.
Balderdash. >:(
Parish pastors had better be theologians. Otherwise they are cheating their parishes.
Indeed.
Very few clergy (or even bishops) have advanced degrees in theology. They are not the church's theologians.
As one with four degrees in Theology, including a Ph.D., I would respectfully disagree. The real theologians are those who teach and confess where the Church is found - that is, where the altar and pulpit offer God's gifts to His world.
Most of the damage that has been done to the Church's theology has been done by those with advanced degrees.
One of Dr. Gibbs pet peeves, a pastor stating, "I'm no theologian, (I don't have an advanced degree..)" Gibbs: "Yes you are! You are a theologian of the Church, and you are the theologian of that congregation to which you've been called."
-
Theology is for proclamation.
RPG+
I read that somewhere! ;) An excellent book.
The book to which you refer is Theology is for Proclamation by Gerhard O. Forde. I agree it is an excellent book which is why I do not understand why LCMS theologians find fault with Forde.
In regard to the Church as "hidden" rather than invisible he writes, "The church knows itself to be the hearer of the gospel. If it knows itself properly it will have no illusions about itself. It will know that it is constantly in the position of the hearer and that it will desire and have to hear ever and again. it will know that such speaking and hearing cannot be taken for granted. It will know itself to be the company of those who are always sinners who live from the concrete, present tense proclamation (simul iustus et peccator). it sill know that it cannot life today on yesterday's gospel. It must hear again and again and assembles so as to hear, and takes steps it can to guarantee that it will indeed hear the gospel. It orders, cares for, and gather around the public office.
"As such the church is hidden and revealed. It is hidden because the hearing of faith in not directly discernible or certifiable by the canons of this age. As such the church of 'true believers' is an object of faith. It is the 'body of Christ,' the company of those who have been out to death and raised in Christ. The way of that company can never be comprehensible to this age. Its existence is a matter of faith. We believed in the holy catholic church,
"The church is revealed in the preaching of the Word and the administration of the sacraments..
see pages 188 ff
Marie
-
Another excellent book by Gerhard Forde:
"On Being A Theologian Of The Cross"
Reflections on Luther's Heidelberg Disputation, 1518
Eerdmans 1997 Paperback 121 pages
-
Theology is for proclamation.
RPG+
I read that somewhere! ;) An excellent book.
The book to which you refer is Theology is for Proclamation by Gerhard O. Forde. I agree it is an excellent book which is why I do not understand why LCMS theologians find fault with Forde.
In regard to the Church as "hidden" rather than invisible he writes, "The church knows itself to be the hearer of the gospel. If it knows itself properly it will have no illusions about itself. It will know that it is constantly in the position of the hearer and that it will desire and have to hear ever and again. it will know that such speaking and hearing cannot be taken for granted. It will know itself to be the company of those who are always sinners who live from the concrete, present tense proclamation (simul iustus et peccator). it sill know that it cannot life today on yesterday's gospel. It must hear again and again and assembles so as to hear, and takes steps it can to guarantee that it will indeed hear the gospel. It orders, cares for, and gather around the public office.
"As such the church is hidden and revealed. It is hidden because the hearing of faith in not directly discernible or certifiable by the canons of this age. As such the church of 'true believers' is an object of faith. It is the 'body of Christ,' the company of those who have been out to death and raised in Christ. The way of that company can never be comprehensible to this age. Its existence is a matter of faith. We believed in the holy catholic church,
"The church is revealed in the preaching of the Word and the administration of the sacraments..
see pages 188 ff
Marie
Marie;
I, too, have been somewhat surprised at the animus expressed toward Forde by some LCMS theologians. Since I attend LCMS continuing ed events on a regular basis, I have experienced this on several occasions. In the last Concordia Journal there is an article on sanctification where Dr David Scaer states in a footnote "Gerhard Forde's highly regarded exposition of the law and the gospel was not based on the atonement which he denied."(page 247) This is where I would guess many dislike Forde. I discussed this with some of my friends who were graduate students and close friends of Forde. Their comment is that this is finally a misreading of some things he said removed from the context in which he said them. Forde was not a fan of "atonement theories" per se. Theories remain in the realm of ideas. He was much more interested in the concrete reality of the atonement won for us on the cross, a reality which no one theory can fully explain or comprehend, and a reality he embraced as a theologian of the cross.
There are the beginnings of a plan to hold a theological conference on this subject through ILT.
Lou
There are also a significant number of LCMS theologians who enthusiastically embrace Forde's work.
-
and that is a touchy subject, Lou, like a number of others that Lutherans should discuss and talk about but while we scream at each other excesses (and they exist to be sure), no one is willing to trim the edges where some theology has oozed and set up beyond Scripture and beyond the presence we know in the incarnate, crucified, risen and returning Lord.
-
Sometimes some in Missouri simply grab any excuse (or contrive one) to prove we are better than anyone in the ELCA (and any other Lutheran body).
Peace, JOHN
-
Sometimes some in Missouri simply grab any excuse (or contrive one) to prove we are better than anyone in the ELCA (and any other Lutheran body).
Peace, JOHN
I don't think that at all, John. I think Missourians take theology seriously but sometimes react too quickly to rhetoric that comes from a different place that is making a different point for a different context. Then the reaction becomes almost dogmatic and defensiveness sometimes takes over. But all in all, taking theology seriously is not a bad thing. I have crossed swords with some in Missouri but at the end of the day I have rarely felt we could not share a Mountain Dew or two....
Lou
-
Having the urge to assert that we are better than others is not unique to Missouri. I've observed some from other church bodies imply that about their own church body on occasion and their headquarters aren't in the Holy City on the Mississippi. (Personally, I'm quite proud of my humbleness 8) )
-
Sometimes some in Missouri simply grab any excuse (or contrive one) to prove we are better than anyone in the ELCA (and any other Lutheran body).
Peace, JOHN
Some people in the LCMS take whatever chance they get to take another pot shot at the LCMS, too, obviously. So we're equal opportunity critics.
-
Having the urge to assert that we are better than others is not unique to Missouri. I've observed some from other church bodies imply that about their own church body on occasion and their headquarters aren't in the Holy City on the Mississippi. (Personally, I'm quite proud of my humbleness 8) )
We are Lutherans. We're a modest people and we never make a fuss. The world would be a better place if they were all as modest as us. Garrison Keillor
-
Sometimes some in Missouri simply grab any excuse (or contrive one) to prove we are better than anyone in the ELCA (and any other Lutheran body).
Peace, JOHN
Some people in the LCMS take whatever chance they get to take another pot shot at the LCMS, too, obviously. So we're equal opportunity critics.
Regardless of who makes a reference to "some" persons, I submit profitable discussions call for specifics.
I am "someone" who has referred to specific significant problems with various LCMS theological statements. Hopefully they are not pop shots, but carefully thought out statements including those that refer to the "order of creation" and "the headship structure."
I have also called attention to Missouri's self image as the Lutheran Church Body that has the pure doctrine others want. One has only to read how 2013 pre-convention statements portrayed the LCMS. Hopefully they will be toned down before the 2016 convention.
I am troubled by LCMS criticism of Forde such as has been written by Dr. Jack Kilcrease and published in the CTQ. Forde's When God Meets Man, Luther's Down-to-Earth Approach to the Gospel is well worth reading and reflecting upon as we approach the 500th Anniversary of the Reformation. Hopefully CPH will offer the laity something other than trinkets to ponder the significance of Luther's down to earth understanding of the way of the cross.
Marie Meyer
-
Sometimes some in Missouri simply grab any excuse (or contrive one) to prove we are better than anyone in the ELCA (and any other Lutheran body).
Peace, JOHN
Some people in the LCMS take whatever chance they get to take another pot shot at the LCMS, too, obviously. So we're equal opportunity critics.
Regardless of who makes a reference to "some" persons, I submit profitable discussions call for specifics.
I am "someone" who has referred to specific significant problems with various LCMS theological statements. Hopefully they are not pop shots, but carefully thought out statements including those that refer to the "order of creation" and "the headship structure."
I have also called attention to Missouri's self image as the Lutheran Church Body that has the pure doctrine others want. One has only to read how 2013 pre-convention statements portrayed the LCMS. Hopefully they will be toned down before the 2016 convention.
I am troubled by LCMS criticism of Forde such as has been written by Dr. Jack Kilcrease and published in the CTQ. Forde's When God Meets Man, Luther's Down-to-Earth Approach to the Gospel is well worth reading and reflecting upon as we approach the 500th Anniversary of the Reformation. Hopefully CPH will offer the laity something other than trinkets to ponder the significance of Luther's down to earth understanding of the way of the cross.
Marie Meyer
Even if you don't want pot shots, your last line is.
You clearly have not seen the CPH academic catalog that just hit the mailboxes. Nor the Christmas catalog. Nor the regular catalog. There are things for everyone in that plethora of catalogs. And you can go to cph.org but you don't have to go to. You can check Amazon and see the CPH offerings that are there. They often have better pricing than what you can get directly from the company.
If you want trinkets, cph has it. If you don't want trinkets, cph has non-trinket items as well.
Jeremy
-
One of the concerns of Gerhard Forde:
He feared the church had fallen into antinomianism. He felt there was
a failure for Christians to admit our guilt as real sinners. Instead, Christians
see themselves as victims and the church becomes a support group. The
pulpit becomes a place to offer affirmation and build self-esteem. In the
process the message of the pastor is reduced to the level of greeting card
sentimentality.
Obviously, Gerhard Forde wants to hear the law/gospel message from
the pulpit and the good news of Jesus Christ who died on the cross to
forgive our sin.
-
One of the concerns of Gerhard Forde:
He feared the church had fallen into antinomianism. He felt there was
a failure for Christians to admit our guilt as real sinners. Instead, Christians
see themselves as victims and the church becomes a support group. The
pulpit becomes a place to offer affirmation and build self-esteem. In the
process the message of the pastor is reduced to the level of greeting card
sentimentality.
Obviously, Gerhard Forde wants to hear the law/gospel message from
the pulpit and the good news of Jesus Christ who died on the cross to
forgive our sin.
You know, Dave, when you are not trying to be funny, you say some good stuff.
-
I am troubled by LCMS criticism of Forde such as has been written by Dr. Jack Kilcrease and published in the CTQ. Forde's When God Meets Man, Luther's Down-to-Earth Approach to the Gospel is well worth reading and reflecting upon as we approach the 500th Anniversary of the Reformation.
I wouldn't worry too much about Jack's criticism of Forde in those two articles for CTQ. Some of what he says has some merit, some of it doesn't. I've heard through the grapevine that there might be some work coming out that addresses some of Jack's criticisms. I've also sensed with Jack's writing in the past two years or so a shift back toward a position like Forde's (and perhaps Bayer's) - probably generated by some of the sanctification controversies in certain Lutheran circles. Those who desperately want to rehabilitate the law as a sanctifying instrument have, I think, pushed him back in that direction somewhat.
-
One of the concerns of Gerhard Forde:
He feared the church had fallen into antinomianism.
Alas, one of the problems we have in the ELCA -- and I suspect that some in the LCMS have noticed this -- is that so many of our antinomians are Fordeans. :(
Pax, Steven+
-
One of the concerns of Gerhard Forde:
He feared the church had fallen into antinomianism.
Alas, one of the problems we have in the ELCA -- and I suspect that some in the LCMS have noticed this -- is that so many of our antinomians are Fordeans. :(
Pax, Steven+
I submit that the majority of "Fordeans" hold to Law and Gospel as taught in Scripture and the Confessions. His writing have been misused by antinomians and legalists in both the LCMS and the ELCA. Within LCMS circles Forde came to be regarded as antinomian because he concluded a correct understanding of the third use of the Law did not forbid the ordination of women. IOW, Scripture neither commands nor forbids the ordination of women.
If Forde's writings in Christian Dogmatics Vol. II (Braaten/Jensen), The Work of Christ, and The Christian Life, are not consistent with a correct understanding of Law and Gospel, I missed it. Others may conclude other wise.
Marie Meyer
Marie Meyer
-
One of the concerns of Gerhard Forde:
He feared the church had fallen into antinomianism.
Alas, one of the problems we have in the ELCA -- and I suspect that some in the LCMS have noticed this -- is that so many of our antinomians are Fordeans. :(
Pax, Steven+
I submit that the majority of "Fordeans" hold to Law and Gospel as taught in Scripture and the Confessions. His writing have been misused by antinomians and legalists in both the LCMS and the ELCA. Within LCMS circles Forde came to be regarded as antinomian because he concluded a correct understanding of the third use of the Law did not forbid the ordination of women. IOW, Scripture neither commands nor forbids the ordination of women.
If Forde's writings in Christian Dogmatics Vol. II (Braaten/Jensen), The Work of Christ, and The Christian Life, are not consistent with a correct understanding of Law and Gospel, I missed it. Others may conclude other wise.
Marie Meyer
Marie Meyer
{I suspect that this gives a clearer picture of what response was from Steven and what was from Marie}
-
One of the concerns of Gerhard Forde:
He feared the church had fallen into antinomianism.
Alas, one of the problems we have in the ELCA -- and I suspect that some in the LCMS have noticed this -- is that so many of our antinomians are Fordeans. :(
Pax, Steven+
And, yet, so many Fordeans - or folks within that circle - were vehemently opposed to the ELCA's revisionist policy regarding the ordination of practicing homosexuals.
-
Sorry for having posted incorrectly...the following reflects my thoughts.....
I submit that the majority of "Fordeans" hold to Law and Gospel as taught in Scripture and the Confessions. His writing have been misused by antinomians and legalists in both the LCMS and the ELCA. Within LCMS circles Forde came to be regarded as antinomian because he concluded a correct understanding of the third use of the Law does not forbid the ordination of women. IOW, Scripture neither commands nor forbids the ordination of women.
If Forde's writings in Christian Dogmatics Vol. II (Braaten/Jensen), The Work of Christ, and The Christian Life, are not consistent with a correct understanding of Law and Gospel, I missed it. Others may conclude other wise.
Marie Meyer
-
And, yet, so many Fordeans - or folks within that circle - were vehemently opposed to the ELCA's revisionist policy regarding the ordination of practicing homosexuals.
I know Forde was. My experience and conversation with Fordeans, however, is not the same as yours.
spt+
-
And, yet, so many Fordeans - or folks within that circle - were vehemently opposed to the ELCA's revisionist policy regarding the ordination of practicing homosexuals.
I know Forde was. My experience and conversation with Fordeans, however, is not the same as yours.
spt+
Perhaps. But there have been plenty of evangelical catholics as well who have gone the same direction in support of this kind of thing. That being said, I don't think revisionism on human sexuality is entailed by Forde's theology, just as it isn't entailed by evangelical catholicism (whatever that might be).
-
Perhaps. But there have been plenty of evangelical catholics as well who have gone the same direction in support of this kind of thing. That being said, I don't think revisionism on human sexuality is entailed by Forde's theology, just as it isn't entailed by evangelical catholicism (whatever that might be).
True enough, Svensen.
Pax, Steven+