Author Topic: Unity and the Means of Grace  (Read 28864 times)

Weedon

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #345 on: November 30, 2010, 10:30:58 AM »
Pr. Hebbeler,

A most interesting piece by Wright.  I'm not sure he persuaded me, but it is the best attempt to avoid the implications we in the LCMS read in that passage that I've ever encountered.  Wright always gives one furiously to think.  Thanks!

Revbert

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #346 on: November 30, 2010, 10:44:48 AM »
Pr. Hebbeler,

A most interesting piece by Wright.  I'm not sure he persuaded me, but it is the best attempt to avoid the implications we in the LCMS read in that passage that I've ever encountered.  Wright always gives one furiously to think.  Thanks!

You're welcome, dear brother.  As one who is also part of a denomination without female pastors (we do ordain women to the diaconate, however), I find this piece helpful in at least having a calm discussion of the issue.

Mike Bennett

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
    • View Profile
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #347 on: November 30, 2010, 11:13:23 AM »
How does a lector exercise authority over others?

The lector simply reads what God says to us in the Bible - a link in a communications chain.  It is not the job of the lector to interpret or explain the messages he or she reads but to be a courier.


If the reader does not teach, then we should not call him a lector.

If the Scripture readings are not lessons, then we should not call them that.


This is an interesting question.  I've always been of the "lector simply reads what God says to us in the Bible" school

But based on

+ Involvement in competitive high school speech and in business presentations,

+ Preparing to read the lessons when I'm assigned, and

+ Listening painfully to the reading of people who have no clue how to read aloud what's on the printed page,

I don't think I really believe that any more.  The reader can read welll or poorly.  Reading well requires the reader to understand what (s)he thinks is being conveyed by the written word to apply appropriate cadence, emphasis, vocal tone, etc., and that in itself requires at least some rudimentary degree of interpretation of what's on the page.

Mike Bennett
“What peace can there be, so long as the many whoredoms and sorceries of your mother Jezebel continue?”  2 Kings 9:22

pr dtp

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #348 on: November 30, 2010, 11:52:40 AM »
Here we go again, forgetting the giants upon whose shoulders we stand....

Specifically:

"Hence the highest office is that of the ministry of the Word, with which all other offices are also conferred at the same time. Every other public office in the church is part of the ministry of the Word or an auxiliary office that supports the ministry, whether it be the elders who do not labor in the Word and doctrine (1 Tim. 5:17) or the rulers (Rom. 12:8) or the deacons (the office of service in a narrow sense) or whatever other offices the church may entrust to particular persons for special administration. Therefore, the offices of Christian day school teachers, almoners, sextons, precentors at public worship, and others are all to be regarded as ecclesiastical and sacred, for they take over a part of the one ministry of the Word and support the pastoral office." 

"Again: “To whom ever the office of preaching is committed, to him the highest office in Christendom is committed: he may then also baptize, celebrate Mass [the Lord’s Supper], and perform all the cure of souls [Seelsorge]; or, if he prefers not to, he may tend only to the preaching and leave the baptizing and other auxiliary functions to others, as Christ did, and Paul, and all Apostles, Acts 6”

Funny looking guy, kinda sickly wrote these words.... C Ferdinand WW. Y'all might have heard of him?

Seems to think the pastor doesn't have to be the Chief Operating Officer.... (which is what the pastor is, if he HAS to do all these things, because the laity are not to...)



As to the hyperbole that lectors are teachers, the case has been made that hymns teach as well.  If lectors cannot be women, and the "must remain silent" is because lectors teach, then it should be applied in Pr. Bohler's congregations as well to those women who would teach by singing.  Consistency in application of your theory is always appreciated.   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D








pr dtp

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #349 on: November 30, 2010, 12:20:58 PM »


Pr. J & S,

Do you think that Dr. Walther would say that you are arguing his points properly?
- Don't know- can't ask him - but it is clear he didn't think the pastor had to read the Old Testament and Epistle Readings, or do everything in the church - including baptism.  By the way - since one of the quotes above is from C&M, it isn't just "his point", but rather I do believe we have agreed as a synod that it is our view.

Do you think that Dr. Walther permitted women to publicly read the Scripture lessons during the public service?
- I haven't read he forbade it either, do you have such a citation? 

Do you think that Dr. Walther restricted women from singing hymns or singing in a choir during the public service?
- He would be foolish to do so.  But the issue is not women singing, it is about the argument that being a lector is equivelant to teaching and therefore forbidden in correlation to the assertion the hymns are teaching, in correlation to women cannot teach but must remain silent. 

Do you think there may be a distinction between being publicly set aside as an individual to take over a part of the one ministry of the Word and support the pastoral office as Walther writes and acting as a member of the congregation?
-  Depends on what you mean as being "publicly set aside".  If that is "Called and ordained" I have no problem with people being "called and ordained" to offices other than the pastoral office, whether de facto or de jure.  I have long maintained that we should ordain deaons and deaconesses and lutheran educators to those offices, and I would contend that but for semantics we do. We call them, set them aside, pray over them, and install them.  So what is the difference between "commissiioned" and "Ordained", in view of the historic practices toward these offices?

Serious questions, all, for which I am interested in your answers.
- you have them!

kls

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #350 on: November 30, 2010, 12:25:59 PM »
The little girl reading was adorable . . . doubtful it was during worship based on the surroundings in the video.  What a sweetheart.

Aside from Scriptural reasons, I still have a hard time hearing the Word of God (specifically those passages where God and Jesus speak directly) not coming from a man.  Perhaps it's the work of James Earl Jones as the voice of God that did it for me.  :D  I think women are very gifted readers and believe they can do so in venues other than worship.  I place a high value on any representation of Jesus or God remaining true to the male characteristics that the Bible very clearly lays out for us.  So it should go in worship, in my humble (and certainly not agreed with by all) opinion.

kls

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #351 on: November 30, 2010, 12:31:20 PM »
I guess considering that point then and the season, then we should consider whether women should read the Magnificat reading.

Or instead when it is sung from the back of the church in the choir loft in a woman's voice . . . love it!  I'm sure the issue of women singing in worship is going to be brought up now.  Maybe someone with more energy than I have today can be ready to counter it (or suggest a new thread).   ::)

pr dtp

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #352 on: November 30, 2010, 12:34:07 PM »
I guess considering that point then and the season, then we should consider whether women should read the Magnificat reading.

Or instead when it is sung from the back of the church in the choir loft in a woman's voice . . . love it!  I'm sure the issue of women singing in worship is going to be brought up now.  Maybe someone with more energy than I have today can be ready to counter it (or suggest a new thread).   ::)

It was - 7 minutes earlier than your post.

I would be curious about your opinion regarding walther's delegation of what you prefer to be the pastor's role, in the citations above...

kls

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #353 on: November 30, 2010, 12:46:47 PM »
For me, it is as simple as this statement by the LCMS relating to Female Communion Assistants:

"The commission strongly recommends that to avoid confusion regarding the office of the public ministry and to avoid giving offense to the church, such assistance be limited to men" [1985 report on Women in the Church, 47]. While stopping short of saying on the basis of clear scriptural directions in this area "Thus saith the Lord," the Commission argues that the principal concern must be to preserve the uniqueness of the pastoral office as it relates to the role of women in the church."

Am I going to leave a worship service or not commune at a service where women are reading?  No.

kls

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #354 on: November 30, 2010, 01:05:00 PM »
So, what of the woman who publicly sings the Magnificat from the back of the congregation?  I'd need to know more of the history, but I'd say we are playing rather loosely with being silent in such a circumstance.

If our hymnody is firmly rooted in Scripture as we claim, and women sing along, well then . . . ?  I'm not aware of any doctrinal or liturgical issues with respect to female soloists during worship, but I have no problem being informed if there are.  The President's installation service included a female singing a Psalm (somewhat solo and somewhat with a group, I suppose).  I hesitate to delve into the realm of church music, as I am completely deficient on the subject.  Just my two cents for what it's worth, though.

Sandra

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
  • Baptizatus sum.
    • View Profile
    • Baptizatus Sum
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #355 on: November 30, 2010, 01:07:59 PM »
As a woman, it is my place of honor to receive the service of those men the Lord has placed in the congregation to serve me (and the rest of the laity for that matter) through the preaching and teaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments. I definitely have the better portion in this arrangement, why would I (or any other woman) give it up?
Sandra (Ostapowich) Madden
sandramadden1119@gmail.com

Karl Hess

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #356 on: November 30, 2010, 01:22:19 PM »
J and S--
Yes, Walther would have forbidden women reading the Scripture.  He forbade women from speaking in the congregational assembly.  You can find that in his Pastorale.

ptmccain

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #357 on: November 30, 2010, 01:23:25 PM »
Walther was opposed to laity performing functions he believed were those of the pastoral office. That would have excluded laity, period, men or women, from reading the Scriptures in the public Divine Service.

Karl Hess

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #358 on: November 30, 2010, 01:27:36 PM »
Walther was opposed to laity performing functions he believed were those of the pastoral office. That would have excluded laity, period, men or women, from reading the Scriptures in the public Divine Service.
Perhaps Walther would have been opposed to laity distributing communion to help the pastor, or reading the lessons.  (In fact, probably).  But that is not the only reason he would have been opposed to women reading the Scripture.

He opposed women speaking in the voter's assembly.  He based this on the same readings that we usually interpret to mean only that women should not exercise the functions of the pastoral office, namely 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2.  There is no doubt that the LCMS' present position on this, knowingly or unknowingly, says that Walther taught wrongly on this point. 

It's in the Pastorale.

Karl Hess

  • Guest
Re: Unity and the Means of Grace
« Reply #359 on: November 30, 2010, 01:30:50 PM »
By the way, Paul, do you believe that the synod is in error when it allows laymen to read lessons and distribute communion?  If so, can you give me your arguments from Scripture and the Confessions on this?  I would like to hear this argument from someone who doesn't seem to have Romeward leanings on the office of the ministry.  My congregation had both lay lectors and elders assisting with communion when I arrived, and I figured I was doing my duty if I didn't give in to the push to have women read (which had not yet been allowed.)