The Lutheran Study Bible

[Mike Bennett]

You do not agree that called males need to be celibate, as the RCC, but not the EOC's require.

Just to add to the complications - though an Orthodox priest may marry before being ordained, he may not marry after ordination.  And Orthodox bishops are selected from among the monks, who are celibate.

Mike Bennett

[vicarbob]

Let's complicate things even more, in the RCC, Deacons may be married before Ordination, but not afterward, unless one receives special permission from the Pope. One such case happened in NY in the not too distant past. Married deacon with two very young children was widowed. The Pope granted his request (through the Bishop) to allow him to marry while in Orders, for the sake of the children!
Pax,
Bob

[grabau14]

Vicar Bob writes: the 'ordering" is of human design in the Confessions, is it not?

If by "ordering" you mean ordination, then no, it is not by human design.

"If ordination is interpreted in relation to the ministry of the Word, we have no objection to call ordination a sacrament.  The miniistry of the Word has God's command and gracious promises: If Ordination is intrepreted this way, we shall not object either to calling the laying on of hands a sacrament"

Melanchthon's defintion of the sacrament-command of God and promises are associated with the OHM.

Who would've guessed that you would be a Missourian on this issue  :  Regarding ordination we teach that it is not a divine but a commendable ecclesiastical ordinance (BS: Of the Public Ministry, 33)

[Weedon]

Although, Fr. Uttenreither, to be fair we must note the terms have broad and narrow meanings, and that when the Symbols cede to ordination the title of "sacrament" it is the broader term in view, while when the BS (what a God-given abbreviation, don't you think?) states that ordination is a commendable human ordinance the reference is to the narrow sense in view, merely the laying on of hands.

[grabau14]

You are correct, Fr. Weedon.  You're such a Lutheran .

I just like to think in broad terms when it comes to the sacraments.  Plus my aversion to the 1943 Catechism's decree that there are only two sacraments makes me want to be "liberal" with regard to numbering.  BTW, Scaer's lectures on the 7 Sacraments of Rome and the confessions defintion of sacrament is a hoot- especially with regard to marriage.

To quote Scaer:  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 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.

[Scott6]

I didn't even bother to apply to UVa because I knew they wouldn't want me.

Sniff.  We do try to keep the riff and the raff off grounds.



But what I do have to say is disturbing is to walk around and realize that I'm over twice the age of an incoming first year (don't call them freshmen!).

[Brian Stoffregen]

Let's complicate things even more, in the RCC, Deacons may be married before Ordination, but not afterward, unless one receives special permission from the Pope. One such case happened in NY in the not too distant past. Married deacon with two very young children was widowed. The Pope granted his request (through the Bishop) to allow him to marry while in Orders, for the sake of the children!
Pax,

The RCC has two orders of deacons: transitional and permanent. Permanent deacons may be married. I know two who are -- and the wife of one is an ELCA minister. The son of the other was a transitional deacon who was later ordained a priest.

[Charles_Austin]

Calvin's structure for the church in Geneva had four orders: minister, doctor, deacon and elder.

[Dadoo]

Brother Jed's church order at the Severeville Full Gospel Holiness Church had three orders: been bit, not been bit yet, and got bit and died.

[Steverem]

Brother Jed's church order at the Severeville Full Gospel Holiness Church had three orders: been bit, not been bit yet, and got bit and died.

[golf clap] Well played, Pastor Kruse! [/golf clap]

[Erme Wolf]

Brother Jed's church order at the Severeville Full Gospel Holiness Church had three orders: been bit, not been bit yet, and got bit and died.

That's Sevierville, Brother Kruse.  (Named for John Sevier, pronounced same as severe, first governor of the State of Franklin, soon known as Tennessee.)  But you'd be mighty welcome at the Voice of Victory Full Gospel Church, with or without your own copperheads.

[Steverem]

By the way,  there's a good review of TLSB on The Internet Monk's blog:  http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/some-thoughts-on-lutheranism-and-evangelicalism-a-brief-review-of-the-lutheran-study-bible

[Brian Stoffregen]

Brother Jed's church order at the Severeville Full Gospel Holiness Church had three orders: been bit, not been bit yet, and got bit and died.

What does TLSB say about those verses in Mark 16?

[grabau14]

Brian,

Note:  Some manuscripts end the book with 16:8; while others include 9-20 immediately after verse 8.  A few manuscripts insert additional material after v. 14; one Latin manuscript adds after verse 8 the following: But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told.  And after this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation.  Other manuscripts include this same wording after verse 8, and then continue with verses 9-20.   TLSB, p. 1697

Mark's abrubt ending:  As the ESV text note for 16:9-20 shows, these verses do not appear in a number of early Greek manuscripts.  This likely means they were not part of Mark's original composition, which may have used a "suspended" ending that left readers wanting to learn more about Jesus and His deisciples.  The longer ending was perhaps added later to satisfy people's interests.  TLSB. p. 1653.

As to verse 18 (snakes), the note states:  God promises to protect us, but we should not tempt or test Him.  Cf. Acts 28:3.....

Now, just buy the book so you can read the rest for yourself.

[revjagow]

Brian,

Note:  Some manuscripts end the book with 16:8; while others include 9-20 immediately after verse 8.  A few manuscripts insert additional material after v. 14; one Latin manuscript adds after verse 8 the following: But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told.  And after this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation.  Other manuscripts include this same wording after verse 8, and then continue with verses 9-20.   TLSB, p. 1697

Mark's abrubt ending:  As the ESV text note for 16:9-20 shows, these verses do not appear in a number of early Greek manuscripts.  This likely means they were not part of Mark's original composition, which may have used a "suspended" ending that left readers wanting to learn more about Jesus and His deisciples.  The longer ending was perhaps added later to satisfy people's interests.  TLSB. p. 1653.

As to verse 18 (snakes), the note states:  God promises to protect us, but we should not tempt or test Him.  Cf. Acts 28:3.....

Now, just buy the book so you can read the rest for yourself.