Catholic woman ordained in Lutheran Church

[MaryT777]

Discussing the possible “tone” of a post is to me off topic for sure.
It’s the internet after all.

 

[JonNC]

From the ELCA document:

. Although at this time this church lacks consensus on this matter, it encourages all people to live out their faith in the local and global community of the baptized with profound respect for the conscience-bound belief of the neighbor. This church calls for mutual respect in relationships and for guidance that seeks the good of each individual and of the community. Regarding our life together as we live with disagreement, the people in this church will continue to accompany one another in study, prayer, discernment, pastoral care, and mutual respect.

The paragraph starts out by saying “at this time”. To my ELCA brothers;
Why would the understanding not be what it was 100 years ago? Should our understanding of Church teaching on sexual relationships outside of marriage be different now simply because secular teaching on the matter has changed?

Jon

 

[ndismyhome]

Out of curiousity, how is you believe that you are able to discern anger from any posting?

I could very well be incorrect, and if I am I apologize. I thought that the tense grammar was indicative of being written in haste due to frustration or anger. But, like I said, I very well could be wrong.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m not Catholic (although I enjoy the fellowship on this forum) and I respect the opinion of** those that do believe there is something inherently wrong with a woman being a spiritual leader,** but I respectfully disagree.

If by the bolded section you are referring to Catholic teaching, you gave misrepresented that.

The Catholic Church has never proclaimed that women cannot be a spiritual leader.

Here’s a spiritual leader who’s a woman who has been going strong for decades.

http://www.ewtn.com/Mother_041902.jpg

Not to mention these women spiritual leaders:

The Blessed Mother
Mother Teresa
Teresa of Avila
St. Catherine Laboure
St. Catherine of Sienna
St. Joan of Arc…

 

[ndismyhome]

I believe this is on topic as the differences as to women ordination are indeed based on how much autonomy an individual parish has to institute doctrine.

Mary.

Actually this would be a red herring argument pertaining to the particular issue raised. Porknpie disagreed with something I stated concerning a particular document, I tried to clarify my point. Bringing in conformity to Christ adds a new discussion to that particular topic. Is it relevant to this discussion at large? Of course. But I don’t see how it (conformity) has anything to do with what a document says or doesn’t say.

 

[ndismyhome]

Discussing the possible “tone” of a post is to me off topic for sure.
It’s the internet after all.

I am unclear how maintaining civility in a discussion is irrelevant to the topic. Perhaps you can explain further?

 

[MaryT777]

IF someone truly feels a post is in violation of Catholic answers Forums then it should be reported. I don’t recall “tone” being in violation. That’s in the eye of the reader; everyone has different posting styles and if you stick around long enough you get to “know the posters.”

 

[ndismyhome]

From the ELCA document:

The paragraph starts out by saying “at this time”. To my ELCA brothers;
Why would the understanding not be what it was 100 years ago? Should our understanding of Church teaching on sexual relationships outside of marriage be different now simply because secular teaching on the matter has changed?

Jon

Well, I can’t really defend such a position, as it is clearly suspect in Christian theology. If I have come across as being one who defends these theological moves in the ELCA, then I have misrepresented myself. I am part of an ever smaller group of traditionalists who resist such moves in the ELCA. As far as your point about whether doctrine or morality change, I hold to the eternality of the Law (Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration II par. 50). Thus,
it is impossible for any person or church to alter what God has ordained in his creation.

 

[ndismyhome]

IF someone truly feels a post is in violation of Catholic answers Forums then it should be reported. I don’t recall “tone” being in violation. That’s in the eye of the reader; everyone has different posting styles and if you stick around long enough you get to “know the posters.”

I never said that anyone was in violation. I was just trying to make my point.

 

[Porknpie]

If by the bolded section you are referring to Catholic teaching, you gave misrepresented that.

The Catholic Church has never proclaimed that women cannot be a spiritual leader.

Here’s a spiritual leader who’s a woman who has been going strong for decades.

http://www.ewtn.com/Mother_041902.jpg

Not to mention these women spiritual leaders:

The Blessed Mother
Mother Teresa
Teresa of Avila
St. Catherine Laboure
St. Catherine of Sienna
St. Joan of Arc…

I would add my wife and mother (order matters not)

 

[PRmerger]

I would add my wife and mother (order matters not)

Case closed!

 

[pablope]

If by the bolded section you are referring to Catholic teaching, you gave misrepresented that.

The Catholic Church has never proclaimed that women cannot be a spiritual leader.

Here’s a spiritual leader who’s a woman who has been going strong for decades.

Not to mention these women spiritual leaders:

The Blessed Mother
Mother Teresa
Teresa of Avila
St. Catherine Laboure
St. Catherine of Sienna
St. Joan of Arc…

And two of them are doctors of the Church…Teresa of Avila and Catherine of Sienna, in addition to Therese of Lisieux and the most recent one…St. Hildegard of Bingen.

 

[Porknpie]

Actually this would be a red herring argument pertaining to the particular issue raised. Porknpie disagreed with something I stated concerning a particular document, I tried to clarify my point. Bringing in conformity to Christ adds a new discussion to that particular topic. Is it relevant to this discussion at large? Of course. But I don’t see how it (conformity) has anything to do with what a document says or doesn’t say.

ND -

I was simply asking the question…

**“why would consensus matter?” **

The subject of the OP is Catholic woman ordained in the Lutheran Church. Being in conformity to Christ is relevant to the topic (as it was in the article).

I’m trying to think when being in conformity to Christ is not a relevant question on any CAF thread. I can’t think of one off the top of my head.

 

[hn160]

@Porknpie - All I’m saying is that there are people here who are not on board with such a move. Furthermore, the ELCA is not as episcopally structured as we like to portray ourselves. Congregations still have a certain degree of autonomy in conforming or resisting such moves. Is it a mess? Absolutely! Is it problematic? Yes! Is it as monolithic as most people like to portray it? No.

Did you ever read The Conservative Reformation by Charles Porterfield Krauth? In this book he states the three stages of error and how error pushes truth out of the church. Sooner or later those that hold to orthodoxy in the ELCA will be asked to leave or keep silent because they are a disturber of the peace of the ELCA, after all doctrine is set by National Assembly, not by Scripture. The ELCA is in lockstep with the other liberal Churches in their Common Communion. How many congregrations have left the ELCA over these issues?

 

[JonNC]

Well, I can’t really defend such a position, as it is clearly suspect in Christian theology. If I have come across as being one who defends these theological moves in the ELCA, then I have misrepresented myself. I am part of an ever smaller group of traditionalists who resist such moves in the ELCA. As far as your point about whether doctrine or morality change, I hold to the eternality of the Law (Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration II par. 50). Thus,
it is impossible for any person or church to alter what God has ordained in his creation.

Actually, you’ ve posted here enough to feel pretty confident you
Would not. Well said

Jon

 

[ndismyhome]

Did you ever read The Conservative Reformation by Charles Porterfield Krauth? In this book he states the three stages of error and how error pushes truth out of the church. Sooner or later those that hold to orthodoxy in the ELCA will be asked to leave or keep silent because they are a disturber of the peace of the ELCA, after all doctrine is set by National Assembly, not by Scripture. The ELCA is in lockstep with the other liberal Churches in their Common Communion. How many congregrations have left the ELCA over these issues?

Point taken.

 

[ndismyhome]

ND -

I was simply asking the question…

**“why would consensus matter?” **

The subject of the OP is Catholic woman ordained in the Lutheran Church. Being in conformity to Christ is relevant to the topic (as it was in the article).

I’m trying to think when being in conformity to Christ is not a relevant question on any CAF thread. I can’t think of one off the top of my head.

I think we’ve misunderstood each other. You seemed to disagree with my take on the document. I tried to clarify what the document said. I never moved past this. It seems that you moved to whether what the document says is valid or not, which is a different point of discussion than what the document states.

At any rate, consensus only matters if one uses the historic consensus of the Church, esp. the Scriptures, to weed out heterodox theology and morals. Why does it matter? Because Truth matters. Because knowing the true, historical, and risen Messiah makes all the difference in the world.

I did not answer you right away because the type of consensus that you seemed to ask about was one of a merely temporal fashion, which is only as valuable as the winds of culture are at any given time. Which, in effect, is not a whole lot. If any offense has been given, please accept my apologies.

In Christ,
ND

 

[CopticChristian]

I am unclear how maintaining civility in a discussion is irrelevant to the topic. Perhaps you can explain further?

If you go back and read my post that you responded to you will see just a few statements of fact.

You seem to be rather angry concerning this present topic.

You thought, believed and posted that it was your belief that there was anger…

Out of curiousity, how is you believe that you are able to discern anger from any posting?

I asked and you responded…

I could very well be incorrect, and if I am I apologize. I thought that the tense grammar was indicative of being written in haste due to frustration or anger. But, like I said, I very well could be wrong.

You state you could be incorrect. The apology is not necessary. Your thinking concerning grammar, is an inference, based on what, I do not know. How is it you believe that you can determine haste and frustration from the written word. It reminds me of the joke…

Dear ma…I am writing real slow…cause I know you can’t read fast…

You now here state…

I am unclear how maintaining civility in a discussion is irrelevant to the topic. Perhaps you can explain further?

Let me make it simple. If you want to maintian civility, if you believe someone has anger or frustration…do a very simple thing…

ask…

After reading your post…I felt, thought, believed you were angry or frustrated. Am I correct in assuming this…to which I would have said…

No:thumbsup:

Whatever you believe, whatever you think is based on your interpretation and understanding and remains conjecture until it is confirmed.

 

[Offdoodykcrn]

If by the bolded section you are referring to Catholic teaching, you gave misrepresented that.

The Catholic Church has never proclaimed that women cannot be a spiritual leader.

Here’s a spiritual leader who’s a woman who has been going strong for decades.

http://www.ewtn.com/Mother_041902.jpg

Not to mention these women spiritual leaders:

The Blessed Mother
Mother Teresa
Teresa of Avila
St. Catherine Laboure
St. Catherine of Sienna
St. Joan of Arc…

My apologies - I should have been more precise. What I referred to as ‘spiritual leader’ should have been made more specific as ‘ordained priest’ - which is the subject of this thread. Obviously, the Catholic Church values women, as evidenced by the many wonderful, highly educated nuns that continue to demonstrate strong leadership skills. My husband’s aunt is a nun, an RN, and currently is a hospital administrator. There seems to be only one limitation placed on the circumstances of one’s gender: becoming a priest. I am currently unaware of any circumstance in which a nun ‘outranks’ a priest, regardless of the amount of education, training or experience. It is possible that I am incorrect on this point, but my time spent in Catholic school and what has been reported in the news (for example: 60 Minutes report of the LCWR being sanctioned by the Vatican on a variety of topics), supports the appearance of women being subservient to men in the eyes of the Church. Each religion has the right to determine their own beliefs, traditions and direction. I simply don’t understand women who describe themselves as Catholic, yet ordained in the Lutheran church, rather than just embracing the position as ordained Lutheran priests.

 

[PRmerger]

There seems to be only one limitation placed on the circumstances of one’s gender: becoming a priest.

Actually there’s lots of limitations “placed on the circumstances of one’s gender”. The most obvious one being a woman can never be a Father.

I am currently unaware of any circumstance in which a nun ‘outranks’ a priest, regardless of the amount of education, training or experience.

I find it curious that you use the word “outrank”, and even put it in quotation marks. That it has been placed in quotation marks indicates that you know that there really is no such thing as a priest outranking a nun, or, a man outranking a woman.

If anything, as a priest is a humble servant, it would appear that nuns “outrank” priests.

It is possible that I am incorrect on this point, but my time spent in Catholic school and what has been reported in the news (for example: 60 Minutes report of the LCWR being sanctioned by the Vatican on a variety of topics), supports the appearance of women being subservient to men in the eyes of the Church.

It is only because it is received that way that the appearance is given that women are being subservient to men in the eyes of the Church.

I find it interesting that in the earliest days of the Church those who objected to Christianity liked to point out that the Church was a haven for the poor, and for women. Christianity had so many female converts during the early days of Christianity.These ancient anti-Christianwriters used to belittle Christianity by calling attention to the fact that the Christian Church was full of poor people and women. As if this fact besmirched Christians“See what a stupid sect this is! Women are flocking to this religion!”

However, I think this proclaims the profound dignity that Jesus gave to those who were on the margins of ancient society - namely, the poor and women. And it inspires confidence in the fact that Catholicism was attractive to women, in stark contrast to the customs of the day. Thus, we Catholics ought to dismiss any criticism society has regarding the Church’s alleged “oppression” of women, knowing that even the early anti-Catholics pointed out how women were drawn to the Christian Church!

Each religion has the right to determine their own beliefs, traditions and direction.

Well, yes and no. No one is saying that a religion isn’t free to declare, say, that short people are destined by God to be the slaves of tall people. But to the degree that it has departed from Truth is the degree to which it ought not be embraced.

I simply don’t understand women who describe themselves as Catholic, yet ordained in the Lutheran church, rather than just embracing the position as ordained Lutheran priests.

Again, yes and no. They ought not call themselves Catholic when they have declared themselves divorced from the Faith. But if they seek Lutheranism, they appear to be simply creating a church designed after their own image, rather than conforming their image to Christ’s.