Does It Really Matter?

[SCPO]

       

SCPO,

What do you think is the white elephant or the big picture that both church bodies are missing? 

PJ

PJ,

      Check out some of the uncharitable comments being posted over on the "Bridge Collapse" thread and see if you think behavior such as this from Church leaders might prompt a typical Lutheran member to take a look at another denomination. 

Regards,

Senior   

[JMOtterman]

SCPO,

Yep. 

PJ

[scott3]

Check out some of the uncharitable comments being posted over on the "Bridge Collapse" thread and see if you think behavior such as this from Church leaders might prompt a typical Lutheran member to take a look at another denomination. 
Regards,

Senior   

Senior,

I'm reasonably sure that the "uncharitable comments" were not "uncharitable" if by that you mean unmotivated by love and concern for the well-being of those involved.  Rather, the comments are motivated out of care and concern for all involved in the tragedy so that they might place their hope on the One who deserves such hope; that is, that people look for the comfort that God gives by his conquering of death in Christ Jesus.  A thread of concern for those hurt by the tragedy was started, and then a positive citation of an inter-faith worship service was inserted into that thread thereby changing the entire discussion. 

If it is a thread of expressing care and concern in the midst of tragedy -- great.  There is no debate there but full-hearted agreement and a deep desire to show care to all in the midst of tragedy.

If the thread becomes one of saying that such care should be expressed in the form of an inter-faith worship event, then those who think that all people are best served by placing our hope only in the one who rose as the first-fruits from the dead will have difficulty participating.

A thread of concern for the victims should be focused on that, but if expressing such concern involves agreeing that an inter-faith worship event is a good idea, then there's a problem.

[Charles_Austin]

Scott writes:
A thread of concern for the victims should be focused on that, but if expressing such concern involves agreeing that an inter-faith worship event is a good idea, then there's a problem.

I comment (as I did over there):
No one has to agree that an inter-faith worship event is a good idea. But it will happen; and some of our Lutheran bishops will take part. That's it. We (and they) know that folks in the LC-MS don't like this. You don't have to tell us. But is this really the time to try and clobber our bishops? It seems - as I said over there to the one most wrought up about this - exceedingly insensitive.

[Brian Stoffregen]

If the thread becomes one of saying that such care should be expressed in the form of an inter-faith worship event, then those who think that all people are best served by placing our hope only in the one who rose as the first-fruits from the dead will have difficulty participating.

I can think of no better way to reach the masses -- especially those who most need to hear about our hope in the One who rose as the first-fruits from the dead -- than at a huge inter-faith event. Holding a Lutheran prayer service at a congregation will (1) not bring in nearly as many people, and (2) be attended primarily by Lutheran believers.

"Inter-faith" does not mean giving up our unique faith and proclamation; but we can emphasize what we believe, without degrading others in such a service. I could certainly see myself including a statement about the risen Jesus Christ being the first-first from the dead in a prayer at such a service.

[scott3]

But is this really the time to try and clobber our bishops? It seems - as I said over there to the one most wrought up about this - exceedingly insensitive.

Well, the bishops have a responsibility to care for the flock.  If they are not properly exercising their care, then they are not doing what God called them to do.

There is no requirement that I know of for people to express care and concern through an inter-faith service.  Rather, there are many avenues that they could have taken to publicly and consistently express their care and concern most effectively as ministers of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

On one level, I do empathize with them.  I do believe that they were honestly doing what they thought was appropriate to comfort people.  The problem is that true comfort comes through Jesus, and as public ministers of the Gospel, they need to be about proclaiming that clearly.

If they clearly say that salvation and true comfort only comes through the great hope that we have in the great resurrection of all on the Last Day of whom Jesus has already arisen as the first-fruits of the dead -- the resurrection where only those who cling to Christ will live with him forever -- then I would have less of a concern with it though I would still consider such participation unwise and giving the appearance of a contradiction at the heart of the message.


[I just noticed that I constructed a sentence of which any German-speaker should be proud as it never seems to end...]

[Mike Bennett]

But is this really the time to try and clobber our bishops? It seems - as I said over there to the one most wrought up about this - exceedingly insensitive.

Well, the bishops have a responsibility to care for the flock.  If they are not properly exercising their care, then they are not doing what God called them to do.

There is no requirement that I know of for people to express care and concern through an inter-faith service.  Rather, there are many avenues that they could have taken to publicly and consistently express their care and concern most effectively as ministers of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

On one level, I do empathize with them.  I do believe that they were honestly doing what they thought was appropriate to comfort people.  The problem is that true comfort comes through Jesus, and as public ministers of the Gospel, they need to be about proclaiming that clearly.

If they clearly say that salvation and true comfort only comes through the great hope that we have in the great resurrection of all on the Last Day of whom Jesus has already arisen as the first-fruits of the dead -- the resurrection where only those who cling to Christ will live with him forever -- then I would have less of a concern with it though I would still consider such participation unwise and giving the appearance of a contradiction at the heart of the message.

Is one prayer service in Minneapolis going to become the cancer that invades every topic on this forum?  Mention of it immediately dominated the "Prayers for Minneapolis ....." topic.  Then somebody started a topic with the apparent sole purpose of scolding somebody who disagrees with him.  Now it's being discussed here.  LCMS doesn't do joint prayer services, except for the ones who do. ELCA people do, except for the ones who don't.  OK?

Mike Bennett 

[Richard Johnson]

But is this really the time to try and clobber our bishops? It seems - as I said over there to the one most wrought up about this - exceedingly insensitive.

Well, the bishops have a responsibility to care for the flock.  If they are not properly exercising their care, then they are not doing what God called them to do.

There is no requirement that I know of for people to express care and concern through an inter-faith service.  Rather, there are many avenues that they could have taken to publicly and consistently express their care and concern most effectively as ministers of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

On one level, I do empathize with them.  I do believe that they were honestly doing what they thought was appropriate to comfort people.  The problem is that true comfort comes through Jesus, and as public ministers of the Gospel, they need to be about proclaiming that clearly.

If they clearly say that salvation and true comfort only comes through the great hope that we have in the great resurrection of all on the Last Day of whom Jesus has already arisen as the first-fruits of the dead -- the resurrection where only those who cling to Christ will live with him forever -- then I would have less of a concern with it though I would still consider such participation unwise and giving the appearance of a contradiction at the heart of the message.

Is one prayer service in Minneapolis going to become the cancer that invades every topic on this forum?  Mention of it immediately dominated the "Prayers for Minneapolis ....." topic.  Then somebody started a topic with the apparent sole purpose of scolding somebody who disagrees with him.  Now it's being discussed here.  LCMS doesn't do joint prayer services, except for the ones who do. ELCA people do, except for the ones who don't.  OK?

Mike Bennett 

Well said, Mike. I would propose that we drop this discussion right now. In a month or two, if someone wants to talk more in the abstract about the matter of interfaith worship, start a thread about it. But as several have said, this is a matter about which we obviously disagree, and this is not a good moment to be debating it in this forum. Please, folks, on this one, just have the common sense and courtesy to keep silent--if for no other reason than that raising this question in this context at this time will not in any way be productive for anyone.

[Deb_H.]

LCMS doesn't do joint prayer services, except for the ones who do. ELCA people do, except for the ones who don't.  OK?
Mike Bennett 

And Catholics don't except for those who do --
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293394,00.html
Hoping it's not too soon to add on to this thread, but this news item caught my attention when I heard it on the radio yesterday, so I looked it up online.

Yes, this is only one bishop and he's obviously in his own camp on more than one Catholic issue.  But there are things said in this article that I have heard elsewhere and they are being repeated with increasing frequency, in particular these lines:
"It reinforces the fact that Muslims, Christians and Jews all worship the same God," (As it gets repeated, it has now become a "fact.")
  and 
"I don't think the name is as important as the belief in God and following God's moral principles. I think that's true for all faiths." (Is following moral principles the important thing?  Sounds like working one's way into God's good graces (heaven?) to me.)


In getting back to the title of this thread, does it really matter what we call God?
And how do we explain that we don't all worship the "same God," when we all know and profess that there is only One?

Debbie Hesse