Another contribution to the endless controversy

[Brian Stoffregen]

She writes: But while half of the church is trying to convince us to quit our jobs, the other half wants to cheerlead for us as gladiatorial smashers of the patriarchy.

It can be the same person doing both. I overheard a member of another congregation stating that he didn't agree with female pastors. This surprised me because one of the three pastors at his congregation was a woman. I asked, "What about Sally?" "Oh, Sally. I like her. She's different."

[Weedon]

I think the point Peter was making is that this not an “endless controversy” but “settled matter” depending. It is absolutely settled for the church historically speaking; and now it is absolutely settled for revisionists or progressives or whatever the current name is. The point is, Donna has no intention of being convinced otherwise. Nor do I. It’s not that we don’t understand each other’s reasonings; but that understanding them, we reject them. To her, I am in error. To me, she is in error. This is never going to change, until the day we stand before the Throne and all error is lost in the light of His shining truth and holiness.

[Brian Stoffregen]

I think the point Peter was making is that this not an “endless controversy” but “settled matter” depending. It is absolutely settled for the church historically speaking; and now it is absolutely settled for revisionists or progressives or whatever the current name is. The point is, Donna has no intention of being convinced otherwise. Nor do I. It’s not that we don’t understand each other’s reasonings; but that understanding them, we reject them. To her, I am in error. To me, she is in error. This is never going to change, until the day we stand before the Throne and all error is lost in the light of His shining truth and holiness.

Doesn't the differences about this "settled matter" indicate a measure of relative truth (to bring a topic from another discussion). What is settled and true for you, is not the same thing that is settled and true for me. You have your reality about women's ordination and I have mine.

[Weedon]

Nope. One of us has the truth of the matter, which alone is God-pleasing and revealed. The other has human opinion.

[DCharlton]

Nope. One of us has the truth of the matter, which alone is God-pleasing and revealed. The other has human opinion.

Both can be wrong.  Both can't be right.

[DCharlton]

I think the point Peter was making is that this not an “endless controversy” but “settled matter” depending. It is absolutely settled for the church historically speaking; and now it is absolutely settled for revisionists or progressives or whatever the current name is. The point is, Donna has no intention of being convinced otherwise. Nor do I. It’s not that we don’t understand each other’s reasonings; but that understanding them, we reject them. To her, I am in error. To me, she is in error. This is never going to change, until the day we stand before the Throne and all error is lost in the light of His shining truth and holiness.

One of the nice things about there being an ELCA and a LCMS is that we are not caught up in an endless controversy.  When two groups cannot reach agreement on such an important issue as who should be ordained, it is better for them to go their separate ways.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Dr. Francis Monseth, the late Dean of the Free Lutheran Seminary, noted that every Lutheran group that teaches the inerrancy of Scripture ordains only men.  That is what leads to different opinions on women's ordination.

This is likely true among Lutherans but not among other conservative Protestants. For example, there are Pentecostals who confess inerrancy but commonly have women ministers. For them the gifts of the Spirit would trump other concerns about order or apostolic norms. These are reasons to look past passages that might restrict the practice.

[Coach-Rev]

Dr. Francis Monseth, the late Dean of the Free Lutheran Seminary, noted that every Lutheran group that teaches the inerrancy of Scripture ordains only men.  That is what leads to different opinions on women's ordination.

This is likely true among Lutherans but not among other conservative Protestants. For example, there are Pentecostals who confess inerrancy but commonly have women ministers. For them the gifts of the Spirit would trump other concerns about order or apostolic norms. These are reasons to look past passages that might restrict the practice.

Did you not see my post?  It is most definitely NOT true. 

Dr. Francis Monseth, the late Dean of the Free Lutheran Seminary, noted that every Lutheran group that teaches the inerrancy of Scripture ordains only men.  That is what leads to different opinions on women's ordination.

and this would simply not be true.  The NALC holds to it, and ordains women.  From the NALC "Commission on Theology and Doctrine:"  "the Bible is a truthful, reliable book that will not lead us into error or falsehood, nor does it contain error or falsehood."  (The Bible As The Word of God - Statement paper, p. 14).

And with that, I really don't want to get into a debate over the differing views either.  Simply pointing out that his statement is untrue.

[GalRevRedux]

I think the point Peter was making is that this not an “endless controversy” but “settled matter” depending. It is absolutely settled for the church historically speaking; and now it is absolutely settled for revisionists or progressives or whatever the current name is. The point is, Donna has no intention of being convinced otherwise. Nor do I. It’s not that we don’t understand each other’s reasonings; but that understanding them, we reject them. To her, I am in error. To me, she is in error. This is never going to change, until the day we stand before the Throne and all error is lost in the light of His shining truth and holiness.

This may sound strange to you, but I have never thought of this as a matter of being”in error” or not. I can live with differences in interpretation and practice. Maybe that is my ELCA roots coming to light. I do realize that, to LCMS folks, “WO” (how I adore that abbreviation - not) is a matter so egregious as to be heretical. Yet the NALC, my church body, has built an amicable and respectful relationship with the LCMS in spite of the presence of many like me within its ministerium. Yes, some matters are non negotiable - we agree about that. Anyway, I am not interested in rehashing the old pro and con stuff, it’s been done to death around here. We all just talk past each other, you’re  right about that too. I leave it to God.

Dr. Phil often asks “Would you rather be right or happy?” when dealing with broken families. Clearly being right is the most important thing in some parts of the church’s broken family, too.

I simply thought it was a worthwhile read, insightful and enlightening. No agenda, hidden or otherwise.

Donna

[Tom Eckstein]

Dr. Francis Monseth, the late Dean of the Free Lutheran Seminary, noted that every Lutheran group that teaches the inerrancy of Scripture ordains only men.  That is what leads to different opinions on women's ordination.

This is likely true among Lutherans but not among other conservative Protestants. For example, there are Pentecostals who confess inerrancy but commonly have women ministers. For them the gifts of the Spirit would trump other concerns about order or apostolic norms. These are reasons to look past passages that might restrict the practice.

Ed, I've found that one reason certain Pentecostal groups (such as AOG) allow women to be "pastors" or "ministers" is that they do not have a Lutheran understanding of the pastoral office.  In fact, they use the title "pastor" very loosely.  For example, at the AOG in my city they've had several "youth pastors" whose functions are limited to what an LCMS DCE would do.  Thus, when they hear the LCMS say "We don't allow women to serve as pastors!" they often think we mean that we don't allow women to do any kind of church work.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Dr. Francis Monseth, the late Dean of the Free Lutheran Seminary, noted that every Lutheran group that teaches the inerrancy of Scripture ordains only men.  That is what leads to different opinions on women's ordination.

This is likely true among Lutherans but not among other conservative Protestants. For example, there are Pentecostals who confess inerrancy but commonly have women ministers. For them the gifts of the Spirit would trump other concerns about order or apostolic norms. These are reasons to look past passages that might restrict the practice.

Did you not see my post?  It is most definitely NOT true. 

Dr. Francis Monseth, the late Dean of the Free Lutheran Seminary, noted that every Lutheran group that teaches the inerrancy of Scripture ordains only men.  That is what leads to different opinions on women's ordination.

and this would simply not be true.  The NALC holds to it, and ordains women.  From the NALC "Commission on Theology and Doctrine:"  "the Bible is a truthful, reliable book that will not lead us into error or falsehood, nor does it contain error or falsehood."  (The Bible As The Word of God - Statement paper, p. 14).

And with that, I really don't want to get into a debate over the differing views either.  Simply pointing out that his statement is untrue.

No, Coach. I did not see your post. I just came from praying the Service of Commendation with someone and dropped in on this thread.

Do you have a link to the NALC paper you cite? I would like to read it.

[Tom Eckstein]

I think the point Peter was making is that this not an “endless controversy” but “settled matter” depending. It is absolutely settled for the church historically speaking; and now it is absolutely settled for revisionists or progressives or whatever the current name is. The point is, Donna has no intention of being convinced otherwise. Nor do I. It’s not that we don’t understand each other’s reasonings; but that understanding them, we reject them. To her, I am in error. To me, she is in error. This is never going to change, until the day we stand before the Throne and all error is lost in the light of His shining truth and holiness.

This may sound strange to you, but I have never thought of this as a matter of being”in error” or not. I can live with differences in interpretation and practice. Maybe that is my ELCA roots coming to light. I do realize that, to LCMS folks, “WO” (how I adore that abbreviation - not) is a matter so egregious as to be heretical. Yet the NALC, my church body, has built an amicable and respectful relationship with the LCMS in spite of the presence of many like me within its ministerium. Yes, some matters are non negotiable - we agree about that. Anyway, I am not interested in rehashing the old pro and con stuff, it’s been done to death around here. We all just talk past each other, you’re  right about that too. I leave it to God.

Dr. Phil often asks “Would you rather be right or happy?” when dealing with broken families. Clearly being right is the most important thing in some parts of the church’s broken family, too.

I simply thought it was a worthwhile read, insightful and enlightening. No agenda, hidden or otherwise.

Donna

Even though I respect much of what the NALC stands for, I believe they have a bit of a blind spot when it comes to WO.  Not only are there no positive affirmations of WO in Holy Scripture, but there are clear prohibitions of WO in Scripture that have been recognized as settling the issue by the vast majority of the Church catholic throughout history - and that is still the case in 2021.  Therefore, those minority of Christians who have jumped head first into the practice of WO in open rejection of the practice of the Church catholic are not acting in Christian humility on this issue.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Dr. Francis Monseth, the late Dean of the Free Lutheran Seminary, noted that every Lutheran group that teaches the inerrancy of Scripture ordains only men.  That is what leads to different opinions on women's ordination.

This is likely true among Lutherans but not among other conservative Protestants. For example, there are Pentecostals who confess inerrancy but commonly have women ministers. For them the gifts of the Spirit would trump other concerns about order or apostolic norms. These are reasons to look past passages that might restrict the practice.

Ed, I've found that one reason certain Pentecostal groups (such as AOG) allow women to be "pastors" or "ministers" is that they do not have a Lutheran understanding of the pastoral office.  In fact, they use the title "pastor" very loosely.  For example, at the AOG in my city they've had several "youth pastors" whose functions are limited to what an LCMS DCE would do.  Thus, when they hear the LCMS say "We don't allow women to serve as pastors!" they often think we mean that we don't allow women to do any kind of church work.

Thanks, Tom. They do have different views of ordination and ministry as they come from the Wesleyan and Revival traditions. But Pentecostal women do preach, which doesn't happen in the traditional Lutheran congregations.

Have you ever discussed deaconesses with them? I've not had the opportunity.

[Tom Eckstein]

Dr. Francis Monseth, the late Dean of the Free Lutheran Seminary, noted that every Lutheran group that teaches the inerrancy of Scripture ordains only men.  That is what leads to different opinions on women's ordination.

This is likely true among Lutherans but not among other conservative Protestants. For example, there are Pentecostals who confess inerrancy but commonly have women ministers. For them the gifts of the Spirit would trump other concerns about order or apostolic norms. These are reasons to look past passages that might restrict the practice.

Ed, I've found that one reason certain Pentecostal groups (such as AOG) allow women to be "pastors" or "ministers" is that they do not have a Lutheran understanding of the pastoral office.  In fact, they use the title "pastor" very loosely.  For example, at the AOG in my city they've had several "youth pastors" whose functions are limited to what an LCMS DCE would do.  Thus, when they hear the LCMS say "We don't allow women to serve as pastors!" they often think we mean that we don't allow women to do any kind of church work.

Thanks, Tom. They do have different views of ordination and ministry as they come from the Wesleyan and Revival traditions. But Pentecostal women do preach, which doesn't happen in the traditional Lutheran congregations.

Have you ever discussed deaconesses with them? I've not had the opportunity.

Ed, yes, I agree with you that the AOG has women preach.  In fact, many AOG congregations also have non-ordanined men and women preach "if the Spirit leads."  Again, the LCMS and AOG have different views of the pastoral office.

I've been able to clear up the confusion with the local AOG people - especially since our congregation has had a deaconess for the past three years!  What's really interesting is that the majority of AOG people take Scripture very literally, and so when I point out the NT texts on the prohibition of women in the pastoral office, they usually acknowledge that the LCMS has the more biblical stance on this issue.  In fact, I know of some AOG congregations that will NOT allow women to preach in a public service precisely because the Scripture's prohibitions against this practice.  They are not as interested in the practice of the Church catholic on this issue simply because they tend to ignore the teaching of the Church catholic on many other issues as well.

[Coach-Rev]

Do you have a link to the NALC paper you cite? I would like to read it.

You can find it here:  https://thenalc.org/wp-content/uploads/Documents/Teaching%20Statements/The-Bible-as-the-Word-of-God-Final.pdf