Author Topic: The Ordination of Women  (Read 28729 times)

John Theiss

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 239
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #240 on: December 18, 2010, 02:27:13 PM »
I believe Leo X said something similar re:  Brother Martin.

Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11291
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #241 on: December 18, 2010, 02:29:30 PM »
I believe Leo X said something similar re:  Brother Martin.

Your point?

I second Rev. Yakimow's suggestion:

"If you like, perhaps you could share his principal arguments and we could see where they lead..."
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but it’s not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

ptmccain

  • Guest
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #242 on: December 18, 2010, 02:31:29 PM »
I believe Leo X said something similar re:  Brother Martin.

Why stop there? Let me see your bet and raise you.

Pilate said the same thing to/about Jesus.

So, now the proponents of the ordination of women may compare themselves to Martin Luther and to the Lord Christ.

John, if you would care to set out here on this forum the major points of your recommended book on the subject, I'm sure Pastors Yakimow and Kirchner will prove to be worthy opponents in a debate.

Pr. McCain is just not interested, because he is like Pope John XXIII, call me Pope John Paul, if you prefer.

 :)
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 02:33:48 PM by ptmccain »

mariemeyer

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 4309
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #243 on: December 18, 2010, 03:10:04 PM »
Began thread with the recognized LCMS definitive defense of a male pastorate as stated in the 1985 CTCR report Women in the Church (WIC). The report has been affirmed by three LCMS conventions and is a resource used by many essayists in Women Pastors? 

The essence of the synod’s defense of a male pastorate is the authority of male headship in relation to women.  It is not clear whether this authority is inherent in maleness or whether it is assigned to Christian men only. In any case, the LCMS does not apply male headship to society. The stated reason is the absence of any Biblical laws related to male headship in society.

WIC and the CTCR report Human Sexuality acknowledge that headship in the home results in functional hierarchy and a certain inequality of authority. This inequality of authority, necessary for unity and order in the home and the well being of the wife, is applicable to the Church. In both reports women/wives are subordinate, but equal, though not in the exercise of authority. An article in the Lutheran Witness later stated that women/wives in the Church are “with authority,” but they may not be “in authority.”

Ultimately, the LCMS defense of a male pastorate is based on the premise that the pastoral office is a headship position of authority in relation to the congregation.  Since headship is a male vocation, only men, according to their position in the OC and the HS may be ordained to the pastoral office. 

Question: What is the basis for concluding the pastor is head of the congregation? Is the authority of the pastor in relation to the congregation like the authority of a husband in relation to his wife?  In what way does Scripture apply headship to the pastoral office?  Is there a difference in how the pastor relates to the men of his congregation and how he relates to the women of his congregation. 


Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11291
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #244 on: December 18, 2010, 03:38:04 PM »
Is the authority of the pastor in relation to the congregation like the authority of a husband in relation to his wife?  

Perhaps if you started with the proposition that the authority of the Christ in relation to his bride, the church, is like the authority of a husband in relation to his wife...

E.g., "In marriage we see a picture of the communion between Christ and His bride, the Church."  [LSB, p. 275]
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 03:40:01 PM by dgkirch »
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but it’s not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

mariemeyer

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 4309
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #245 on: December 18, 2010, 04:22:03 PM »
Is the authority of the pastor in relation to the congregation like the authority of a husband in relation to his wife?  
Perhaps if you started with the proposition that the authority of the Christ in relation to his bride, the church, is like the authority of a husband in relation to his wife...
E.g., "In marriage we see a picture of the communion between Christ and His bride, the Church."  [LSB, p. 275]

I think there is something backwards in saying the authority of Christ in relation to his bride, the church, is like the authority of a husband in relation to his wife.  The husband/wife relationship mirrors the relationship of Christ to the Church.  Christ is the Head of the Church who uses His authority to lift up the Church as His counterpart on earth. He then entrusts His authority over sin to Her with the commmand that She exercise authority as He has given it to Her.


Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11291
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #246 on: December 18, 2010, 04:30:29 PM »
Okay. Saying that something is "like" something else is not hierarchical. I merely used your order and replaced one who stands in the stead and by the command of Christ with the principal.

I.e., it's your order, so change it if you wish.

But if you don't mind I don't care to modify the LSB rite to:

"In the communion between Christ and His bride, the Church, we see a picture of marriage."

I'd like to keep it the way it is. Nor do I care to discontinue using the term "the Bride of Christ (the Church)" and start characterizing a marriage as "Husband and Church" or "Church and Groom."
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 04:44:52 PM by dgkirch »
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but it’s not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 17024
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #247 on: December 18, 2010, 05:04:54 PM »
Began thread with the recognized LCMS definitive defense of a male pastorate as stated in the 1985 CTCR report Women in the Church (WIC). The report has been affirmed by three LCMS conventions and is a resource used by many essayists in Women Pastors? 

The essence of the synod’s defense of a male pastorate is the authority of male headship in relation to women.  It is not clear whether this authority is inherent in maleness or whether it is assigned to Christian men only. In any case, the LCMS does not apply male headship to society. The stated reason is the absence of any Biblical laws related to male headship in society.

WIC and the CTCR report Human Sexuality acknowledge that headship in the home results in functional hierarchy and a certain inequality of authority. This inequality of authority, necessary for unity and order in the home and the well being of the wife, is applicable to the Church. In both reports women/wives are subordinate, but equal, though not in the exercise of authority. An article in the Lutheran Witness later stated that women/wives in the Church are “with authority,” but they may not be “in authority.”

Ultimately, the LCMS defense of a male pastorate is based on the premise that the pastoral office is a headship position of authority in relation to the congregation.  Since headship is a male vocation, only men, according to their position in the OC and the HS may be ordained to the pastoral office. 

Question: What is the basis for concluding the pastor is head of the congregation? Is the authority of the pastor in relation to the congregation like the authority of a husband in relation to his wife?  In what way does Scripture apply headship to the pastoral office?  Is there a difference in how the pastor relates to the men of his congregation and how he relates to the women of his congregation. 


As usual, I question the usefulness of the phrase "defense of the male pastorate". It is not, nor has it ever been, a defensive position. It is simply the shape of the Christian religion, which itself is the proper shape of humanity. By setting it up as something in need of defense, you appropriate the position of status quo for the revisionist practice of ordaining women.   

Charles_Austin

  • Guest
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #248 on: December 18, 2010, 05:23:44 PM »
Peter writes:
As usual, I question the usefulness of the phrase "defense of the male pastorate". It is not, nor has it ever been, a defensive position. It is simply the shape of the Christian religion, which itself is the proper shape of humanity.
I ask:
And those who do not have an all-male pastorate? Not the Christian religion? Not humanity?

Peter writes:
By setting it up as something in need of defense, you appropriate the position of status quo for the revisionist practice of ordaining women.
I comment:
"Defense" is a word that can be neutral, like "apology" in some settings. (The "apology" to the Augustana, for example.) Can it not mean "explain"?

Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11291
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #249 on: December 18, 2010, 05:28:38 PM »
Peter writes:
As usual, I question the usefulness of the phrase "defense of the male pastorate". It is not, nor has it ever been, a defensive position. It is simply the shape of the Christian religion, which itself is the proper shape of humanity.
I ask:
And those who do not have an all-male pastorate? Not the Christian religion? Not humanity?

Yes, but heterodox, so not the proper shape. IOW, a female pastor of the Bride is akin to a homosexual relationship and, therefore, not the proper shape of humanity.

Peter writes:
By setting it up as something in need of defense, you appropriate the position of status quo for the revisionist practice of ordaining women.
I comment:
"Defense" is a word that can be neutral, like "apology" in some settings. (The "apology" to the Augustana, for example.) Can it not mean "explain"?

Good example which bolsters Peter's point about not needing to be in the defensive posture.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 05:30:29 PM by dgkirch »
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but it’s not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42667
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #250 on: December 18, 2010, 05:36:12 PM »
Yes, but heterodox, so not the proper shape. IOW, a female pastor of the Bride is akin to a homosexual relationship and, therefore, not the proper shape of humanity.

No more so than the relationship of a male member of the Bride of Christ with the Bridegroom.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11291
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #251 on: December 18, 2010, 05:45:04 PM »
Yes, but heterodox, so not the proper shape. IOW, a female pastor of the Bride is akin to a homosexual relationship and, therefore, not the proper shape of humanity.

No more so than the relationship of a male member of the Bride of Christ with the Bridegroom.

Ah, no. that's an invalid comparison that changes the analogy. The male member is a member of the Bride through his baptism so his gender is not applicable anyway. Gal 4:28.  Christ and His Church is the level of the analogy and the relationship. The Church, as the Bride, and its relationship with a female pastor in the stead of Christ, however, is a picture of a homosexual one.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 06:19:00 PM by dgkirch »
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but it’s not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

mariemeyer

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 4309
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #252 on: December 19, 2010, 03:53:37 PM »
As usual, I question the usefulness of the phrase "defense of the male pastorate". It is not, nor has it ever been, a defensive position. It is simply the shape of the Christian religion, which itself is the proper shape of humanity.

Peter:

Peter, I would respectfully ask you to think through the above statements. 

For most of Church history, the idea that women not serve as pastors fell into the same category as women not being physicians, lawyers, university professors, etc. Well into the 19th century few women had the opportunity for higher education. There was a not uncommon perception that they were not emotionally or intellectually suited for careers suited to men (see Darwin and Freud).      Until the time of Florence Nightingale it was not considered appropriate for women to leave her home and care for the sick beyond her family. (When the church of England told her to stay home and crochet, she went to Germany where deaconess nurses were being trained by Lutheran pastor Fliedner.) 

Once women became educated, they entered "male" professions. In time the question was asked, "Why not the ministry?" Initially single Christian women became non-ordained missionaries where they served as evangelists, medical missionaries, teachers and Christian advocates for abused wmen and neglected children. In the Roman Catholic Church they became seminary professors and pastoral counselors.

Meanwhile the LCMS quesioned whether women should teach an adult Bible Class if men were present. To defend the various restrictions placesd on the service of women in the church, the LCMS adopted as it's primary defense against women teaching Bible Class the order of creation as defined by Fritz Zerbst. Today the order of creation, said to be based on texts in the Old and New Testament is the primary defense of a male pastorate. It has been become a defensive posture, one that was not necessary when women were not educated.

The irony is that within the last few years the CTCR has been accused of soft pedaling this defense by persons who think that God forbids women in areas beyond the pastoral office.  Some essayists in Women Pastors" consider this defense of a male pastorate a faith issue.

If I understand your comments above the fact that women, by virture of their created femaleness, are to subject themselves to the authority of men belongs to the shape of the Christian faith which is the shape of humanity.  How do you avoid concluding that all women are subject to all men or that a woman must be under the authority of one man, father, husband or elder brother or ?


Mike Bennett

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
    • View Profile
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #253 on: December 19, 2010, 07:58:59 PM »
As for the North American Lutheran Church and its "study" of the issue. It was clear to me watching the proceedings that the NALC has no intention of studying the issue with a view toward abandoning this unapostolic and anti-catholic practice, but rather to bolster the practice by studies that are more theologically oriented. I think that is a key point to make.

1. I am not a member of the NALC.  At the assembly where it was formed I signed the list for the minutes disavowing any participation in its formaion, though as a layman there was no "reason" for me to do so.  I simply wanted it to be clear.

2. Having said that, what you've written above is as blatant a violation of the Eighth Commandment as I've confronted recently.  You have no earthly idea what NALC's intention is, and your pretending otherwise is inexcusable. 

3. As Mrs. Meyer has in the introductory posting of this topic been meticulously clear in stating here position, both personal and theological, regarding women's ordination, do you now publicly undertake to abandon your habit of hectoring her about it, as though she somehow owes you a statement of her positon?

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

George Erdner

  • Guest
Re: The Ordination of Women
« Reply #254 on: December 19, 2010, 08:41:55 PM »
Life would sure be a lot simpler if analogies were proof.

It is an accurate statement to say, "Sugar is like honey, as both are sweet". It is also an accurate statement to say, "Sugar is not like honey, as sugar is granulated crystals and honey is a sticky fluid". Any statement that says "X is like Y" is only valid when, in context, the similar characteristics of X and Y are what is being discussed. Even if the Apostle Paul writes it down in an Epistle, the comparisons are only as accurate as they really are.

The relationship between Jesus and His church is similar to many other relationships. Those similar relationships are valuable as illustrations of aspects of that relationship, but they are not identical. Christ is indeed like a bridegroom to His church in some ways. That doesn't mean Christ is responsible for mowing the lawn, taking out the garbage, or holding the TV remote. Christ is like a shepherd to His church. That doesn't mean he literally uses a wooden crook to pull us out of places.

There is only one thing less useful than attempting to stretch analogies far beyond their breaking points. That is pedantic, sophist nitpicking at the obvious aspects of the analogies that do not apply. Such questions should be expected from high school kids in the 10th grade, or college students in their second year of study. Graduates of seminary should be above such sophomoric rhetoric.