Author Topic: WordAlone  (Read 29815 times)

ptmccain

  • Guest
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #135 on: July 03, 2007, 07:03:30 AM »
Charles Austin bloviates:
No one has ever been able to show how adopting a form of the historic Episcopate (practiced in other Lutheran churches around the world, some of them even affiliated with the LC-MS) violates the Lutheran confessions. If it violates the Lutheran confessions, than the LC-MSers better start breaking some of their "fellowship" agreements.

I comment:
Again, somebody just isn't reading very carefully. To repeat what was previously said: The HE is a perfectly acceptable form of church polity, one a church may choose to adopt for itself. That's not the point. Making it a requirement for full communion is a contradiction of AC VII. None of the fellowship agreements between The LCMS and any other church have HE as a requirement for unity between our churches.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2007, 07:08:31 AM by ptmccain »

Charles_Austin

  • Guest
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #136 on: July 03, 2007, 08:09:25 AM »
Pastor McCain edits:
Charles Austin bloviates:

I object:
Editing words supposedly picked up and inserted into a posting via the "dark screen" method (which I do not use) is, I believe, a no-no. If you are going to pick up a post, pick it up exactly as it was posted; to edit it and make it look as if those words were in were the original post is dishonest.

Then: Let us set aside for a moment the matter of using insulting terms to refer to the posting of another person on this forum. Personally, I find that not helpful for dialog and a serious violation of online etiquette, especially in this forum, where we are all fellow members of the Body of Christ. The moderator has at times admonished people for the use of such terms and we should have learned from that in the past.
I don't like being insulted, but if people are going to do so, I would at least hope they do it with wit and proper use of the English language. "Bloviate" means to go on at length and to speak pridefully or boastfullly.
My posting was four lines long. If you find any "pride" or "boasting" in it, please point it out.
As for the historic episcopate: I doubt you will ever understand the nature of our agreement with the Episcopalians; and it really doesn't matter. Even if you understood this aspect of it, there would be lots of other things you could disagree with.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2007, 08:15:00 AM by Charles_Austin »

Gladfelteri

  • Guest
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #137 on: July 03, 2007, 09:00:58 AM »
So, if I was installed once by a pastor ordained in Denmark by a Swedish Bishop I have "it"?

Hard to say, Dave. Did he actually put his hands on you? Both hands? One hand? Only a few fingers? Plus, he is "just" a pastor, so I'm not sure he has sufficient episcopal "wattage" to transmit a clear HE signal.
The simple answer is as Erma noted above:  "no."  If a pastor/presbyter ordains another person a pastor/presbyter, the newly ordained may be in a presbyterial succession, but not in the historic apostolic succession.  For that, the person doing the ordaining must be a bishop in the apostolic succession.

ptmccain

  • Guest
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #138 on: July 03, 2007, 09:15:41 AM »
Pastor McCain edits:
Charles Austin bloviates:

I object:
Editing words supposedly picked up and inserted into a posting via the "dark screen" method (which I do not use) is, I believe, a no-no. If you are going to pick up a post, pick it up exactly as it was posted; to edit it and make it look as if those words were in were the original post is dishonest.

Then: Let us set aside for a moment the matter of using insulting terms to refer to the posting of another person on this forum. Personally, I find that not helpful for dialog and a serious violation of online etiquette, especially in this forum, where we are all fellow members of the Body of Christ. The moderator has at times admonished people for the use of such terms and we should have learned from that in the past.
I don't like being insulted, but if people are going to do so, I would at least hope they do it with wit and proper use of the English language. "Bloviate" means to go on at length and to speak pridefully or boastfullly.
My posting was four lines long. If you find any "pride" or "boasting" in it, please point it out.
As for the historic episcopate: I doubt you will ever understand the nature of our agreement with the Episcopalians; and it really doesn't matter. Even if you understood this aspect of it, there would be lots of other things you could disagree with.


Pr. Austin is right. Bloviate may not have been the proper word. My apologies.

pilgrimpriest

  • Guest
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #139 on: July 03, 2007, 10:25:30 AM »
So, if I was installed once by a pastor ordained in Denmark by a Swedish Bishop I have "it"?

Hard to say, Dave. Did he actually put his hands on you? Both hands? One hand? Only a few fingers? Plus, he is "just" a pastor, so I'm not sure he has sufficient episcopal "wattage" to transmit a clear HE signal.
The simple answer is as Erma noted above:  "no."  If a pastor/presbyter ordains another person a pastor/presbyter, the newly ordained may be in a presbyterial succession, but not in the historic apostolic succession.  For that, the person doing the ordaining must be a bishop in the apostolic succession.

And such succession must have canonical standing among the churches, otherwise the presbyter and his bishop are considered vagantes. That is, the presbyter (through his bishop) is recognized as a presbyter in good standing. For example, when he travels with a letter from his bishop he would be welcomed to serve at the altar of another bishop in another diocese. When there is a state of schism (as exists among the Eastern Orthodox with Rome and the Oriental Orthodox) the presbyter, although recognized as one in good standing--and often invited to stand in the altar--may not vest or stand in the altar in accordance with the discipline of his own bishop. This is how "good order" is maintained among churches in Apostolic Succession. Even in spite of the jurisdictional mess we have in America, it's how we separate the wheat from the flakes.

Fr. Bob

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42619
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #140 on: July 03, 2007, 01:21:32 PM »
Because we do not agree.
Where is the disagreement about rightly preaching the gospel and administering the sacraments?

I don't see the ordination of women as an issue of gospel preaching.

Don't we both proclaim that all people are sinners and have fallen short of the glory of God?
Don't we both proclaim that divine forgiveness for sinners comes to us by God's grace alone through faith in Christ alone?
"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]

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42619
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #141 on: July 03, 2007, 01:24:37 PM »
Pr. Austin is right. Bloviate may not have been the proper word. My apologies.
Do you apologize for adulterating the quote box?
"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]

Steven Tibbetts

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10214
  • Big tents are for circuses.
    • View Profile
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #142 on: July 03, 2007, 02:21:26 PM »

Where is the disagreement about rightly preaching the gospel and administering the sacraments?

I don't see the ordination of women as an issue of gospel preaching.

First, Brian, this is one issue of several in which the LCMS finds itself in disagreement with the ELCA.  So focusing solely on it doesn't address the issue.  (Though one should note that we in the ELCA recognize ourselves to be in full communion with those LWF churches that do not ordain women.)

Second, the ordination of women is a matter of rightly administering the sacraments.  If a woman cannot be ordained to the Office of the Holy Ministry (as the LCMS, many other churches that emerged from the Reformation, and some ELCA folk hold), then she cannot preside at the Holy Eucharist. 

Pax, Steven+
The Rev. Steven Paul Tibbetts, STS
Pastor Zip's Blog

Vern

  • Guest
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #143 on: July 03, 2007, 03:07:03 PM »
 :'( Charles, do you think that I can ever express an opinion without you insinuating that I'm wrong? I stand by my statement that the historic episcopate meant that only Episcopalian bishops could ordain. There were no Lutheran Bishops in the historic episcopate.


Vern

Richard Johnson

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10374
  • Create in me a clean heart, O God.
    • View Profile
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #144 on: July 03, 2007, 03:46:40 PM »
:'( Charles, do you think that I can ever express an opinion without you insinuating that I'm wrong? I stand by my statement that the historic episcopate meant that only Episcopalian bishops could ordain. There were no Lutheran Bishops in the historic episcopate.
Vern

At the commencement of CCM, there were no ELCA bishops in the historic episcopate. There were Lutheran bishops from some other churches (e.g., Church of Sweden), and of course as soon as new ELCA bishops were installed, there began to be a cadre of ELCA bishops in the historic episcopate.
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS

Dave_Poedel

  • Guest
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #145 on: July 03, 2007, 03:57:56 PM »
Just curious:  Have any ELCA Pastors requested "re-ordination" by one of the newly minted HE Bishops in the ELCA?

Mike Bennett

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
    • View Profile
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #146 on: July 03, 2007, 04:09:17 PM »
Just curious:  Have any ELCA Pastors requested "re-ordination" by one of the newly minted HE Bishops in the ELCA?

I'm sure somebody will have information on this.  I can only observe that such a request would be extremely weird, and I can't imagine that one would find a bishop who would do the deed.  You see, it really is true that CCM was for the purpose of reaching an ecumenical agreement, and not for the purpose of legitimizing something that had previously been other than legitimate.  Really.

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

mchristi

  • Guest
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #147 on: July 03, 2007, 04:35:40 PM »
:'( Charles, do you think that I can ever express an opinion without you insinuating that I'm wrong? I stand by my statement that the historic episcopate meant that only Episcopalian bishops could ordain. There were no Lutheran Bishops in the historic episcopate.

But your assertion, Vern, is not actually correct.  In addition to what Richard noted, there was nothing in CCM that required that bishops from the Episcopal Church had to ordain.  From the very beginning of when CCM went into effect, it was Lutheran bishops, those currently in the office, who ordained pastors.  And for the installation of bishops, a Episcopal bishop will normally be invited to participate (which is fitting, given our full communion relationship) but the requirement is not specifically for a bishop of the Episcopal Church.

Quote
19. In order to receive the historic episcopate, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America pledges that, following the adoption of this Concordat and in keeping with the collegiality and continuity of ordained ministry attested as early as Canon 4 of the First Ecumenical Council (Nicaea I, a.d. 325), at least three bishops already sharing in the sign of the episcopal succession will be invited to participate in the installation of its next Presiding Bishop through prayer for the gift of the Holy Spirit and with the laying-on-of-hands. These participating bishops will be invited from churches of the Lutheran communion which share in the historic episcopate. In addition, a bishop or bishops will be invited from The Episcopal Church to participate in the same way as a symbol of the full communion now shared. Synodical bishops elected and awaiting installation may be similarly installed at the same service, if they wish. Further, all other installations of bishops in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America will be through prayer for the gift of the Holy Spirit and with the laying-on-of-hands by other bishops, at least three of whom are to be in the historic succession (see paragraph 12 above). Its liturgical rites will reflect these provisions.
See the text at http://www.elca.org/ecumenical/fullcommunion/episcopal/ccmresources/text.html

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42619
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #148 on: July 03, 2007, 05:05:32 PM »
Just curious:  Have any ELCA Pastors requested "re-ordination" by one of the newly minted HE Bishops in the ELCA?
No need to. The ELCA certainly doesn't require it; and if an Episcopal church did require it of us who were ordained before CCM, they would be breaking the agreement in CCM.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2007, 05:08:30 PM by Brian Stoffregen »
"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]

Richard Johnson

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10374
  • Create in me a clean heart, O God.
    • View Profile
Re: WordAlone
« Reply #149 on: July 03, 2007, 06:00:22 PM »
Just curious:  Have any ELCA Pastors requested "re-ordination" by one of the newly minted HE Bishops in the ELCA?

I'm sure somebody will have information on this.  I can only observe that such a request would be extremely weird, and I can't imagine that one would find a bishop who would do the deed.  You see, it really is true that CCM was for the purpose of reaching an ecumenical agreement, and not for the purpose of legitimizing something that had previously been other than legitimate.  Really.

Mike Bennett

I agree, that would be weird. Of course a different, and in some ways more interesting question (and one to which there probably is an answer, but I don't know it) would be: if an ELCA pastor decides to become an Episcopal priest, would he/she be [re]ordained. The way I read the document's provisions for "interchangeability," it would appear not, but I wonder if there have been actual cases and how they have been treated.

Can't help but reflect on my own "ordination pedigree" here. Since I was originally ordained in the UMC, I could in theory trace that pedigree back in a succession of bishops with only one break (that of John Wesley's "consecration," the term he used, of two bishops for the American Methodists, and which he viewed as an "emergency situation"). Not that it matters to me, understand, I just think it is interesting. When I became a Lutheran, it was via the ALC, at least in part because at that time (1984) the LCA would have required me to be ordained again, and that just didn't feel right to me. But when I was received into the ALC, I had to avow that the Lutheran confessions were my confession. Someone being ordained--whether a life-long Lutheran or someone previously ordained in some other church but now being ordained into the ELCA--would have to avow only that he or she would teach according to those confessions (not that he or she actually believed them). I always though that a bit ironic.
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS