Denominations which allow Women Pastors.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Truth_Faith13
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TheSeeker2014 said:
you know what, you are right… it did veer off topic. I will stop commenting to prevent clutter. 🙂
Click to expand...
Porknpie, if you wish to continue the conversation, which has been pointed out above that it was off topic, I will be more than happy to answer PMs if you want.
 
It is just a matter of time. That is why I question Lutherans and Anglicans [two historic branches of the holy Catholic Church] who argue against female priests. The day is coming where only minor splitter groups of Lutherans/ Anglicans will hold out on their insistence for cultural male preference; and these synods/ dioceses will eventually diminish, in my opinion. Curious, where will Missouri Synod Lutherans go when the LCMS accepts female pastors?
 
EvangelCatholic said:
It is just a matter of time. That is why I question Lutherans and Anglicans [two historic branches of the holy Catholic Church] who argue against female priests. The day is coming where only minor splitter groups of Lutherans/ Anglicans will hold out on their insistence for cultural male preference; and these synods/ dioceses will eventually diminish, in my opinion. Curious, where will Missouri Synod Lutherans go when the LCMS accepts female pastors?
Click to expand...
I suspect they would continue in their orthodoxy, where ever that might take them. Though I doubt your premise, as to the LCMS.

GKC
 
JonNC said:
Well, my daughter, for example, as a teacher in a Lutheran parochial school, is doing God’s will without the collar.
However, there are certain things God’s will calls the Church to do, that require a ministerial priesthood.
Click to expand...
There are certain things God calls all believers to do, many of which do not require a ministerial priesthood.
My daughter can’t be called for that collar.
Click to expand...
My sons are in middle school. They will never know what carrying a human in the womb feels like…
 
EvangelCatholic said:
It is just a matter of time. That is why I question Lutherans and Anglicans [two historic branches of the holy Catholic Church] who argue against female priests. The day is coming where only minor splitter groups of Lutherans/ Anglicans will hold out on their insistence for cultural male preference; and these synods/ dioceses will eventually diminish, in my opinion. Curious, where will Missouri Synod Lutherans go when the LCMS accepts female pastors?
Click to expand...
I’m neither Lutheran nor Anglican, so I don’t know what this means: “insistence for cultural male preference”
 
GKC said:
I suspect they would continue in their orthodoxy, where ever that might take them. Though I doubt your premise, as to the LCMS.

GKC
Click to expand...
The other option, of-course, is to stay in the Anglican Communion, as you have, and avoid, at all costs, any interaction with female clergy. What does one do when visiting other parishes? Do you call ahead to ask if the priest is a male?
 
TheSeeker2014 said:
no, one cannot take away the choice of another…

EDIT ] does your stance" Otherwise, you would have been Muslim. Because of their sword. " imply that you would deny Christ if someone held a sword to you now? Just curious.
Click to expand...
What PR is saying (I believe), is that if it wasn’t for the Crusades, the Muslims would have taken over the entire holy land, and would have continued until they had also taken over the entire known world, at that time. If that happened, we would certainly all be Muslim, now. I think you need to do some reading from sources that actually explain the true reasons behind fighting the Crusades, instead of from sources that continue to twist the truth for the sole purpose of making the Catholic Church, and the Popes, appear to be evil.
 
EvangelCatholic said:
The other option, of-course, is to stay in the Anglican Communion, as you have, and avoid, at all costs, any interaction with female clergy. What does one do when visiting other parishes? Do you call ahead to ask if the priest is a male?
Click to expand...
What makes you think I am in the Anglican Communion?

GKC,* posterus traditus Anglicanus*
 
TheSeeker2014 said:
How do you know if someone’s thoughts are a correct interpretation of the Word of God?

Ask God Himself. What exactly He says. Simple, but not quick.
Click to expand...
The Bible says…from 1John 4… Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world……………6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

So the question is…to whom should we listen to? Who is the “us” in the passage?

St. Paul gives the example:

Galatians 2:2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.
 
PRmerger said:
You do realize, Tom, that you are professing a dogma here, yes?

Why do you permit yourself to profess dogma, but object to the CC doing the same?
Click to expand...
You wrote this in response to me writing, “Doesn’t it seem by what Jesus said that He considered Himself more important than the “dogma” about Him?”

You can call it dogma if you want but what I was doing was expressing my opinion.

As far as “Why do you permit yourself to profess dogma, but object to the CC doing the same?”, it is YOUR opinion that I “object to the CC” professing dogma, I wrote no such thing, what I wrote was that people, some of whom are members of the CC, seem to put dogma above God.

Not all Catholics seem to put dogma above God and Jesus’s Church is people and not all of those that are of Jesus’s Church would be considered Catholic by “membership” in the entity called the Catholic Church.
 
Porknpie said:
Hi Tom,

When Jesus said these words, take note of who he was talking to. He was not speaking to the crowds. He was speaking to his apostles, those that were his original Bishops of His Church. He promised to guide them to all Truth, them being … His Church.

PnP
Click to expand...
We are HIS CHURCH.

Are you trying to say that Jesus meant the Holy Spirit only for the original Apostles, or only for the “higher-ups” not for ALL OF US, HIS CHURCH?

I disagree if that it what you think and I also think that the Church disagrees, seeing as it speaks of the Holy Spirit in quite a few of the sacraments, so to speak.
 
PRmerger said:
No. I didn’t ask if you should “talk with these people”.

My question is more nuanced.

Giving you examples of Christian beliefs which are really whacky tells us that** all of us draw lines** where we say, “This is not consonant with Christian beliefs.”

You do it. I do it.

The Catholic Church does it.

I am asking you why you permit yourself to do this without permitting me or other Catholics, or the CC to do it.

Now you can say that you don’t draw lines, but that would be disingenuous.

Or foolish.

Because that means that you would worship with the Reverend Fred Phelps and feel just as comfortable proclaiming his dogma that God hates homosexuals as you are saying God loves homosexuals.

And that’s just

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ma24sw5D041rpmw1no1_r1_500.gif
Click to expand...
As far as “I am asking you why you permit yourself to do this without permitting me or other Catholics, or the CC to do it. Now you can say that you don’t draw lines, but that would be disingenuous.”, I believe what I believe and anyone else can believe whatever they want to believe.

I have no idea where you came up with the idea that I am not permitting you or others to “draw the line”, so to speak, I have no desire to tell others what to believe or not to believe and even if I did, how could I possibly do this?

You seem to read things into what other people write as opposed to reading what they write.

And as far as, “No. I didn’t ask if you should “talk with these people”. My question is more nuanced.”, like it or not, that is my answer, I am allowed to answer questions as I see fit and to me “worship” just might have a wider, so to speak, meaning than it does to others.
 
Tom_Baum said:
We are HIS CHURCH.

Are you trying to say that Jesus meant the Holy Spirit only for the original Apostles, or only for the “higher-ups” not for ALL OF US, HIS CHURCH?

I disagree if that it what you think and I also think that the Church disagrees, seeing as it speaks of the Holy Spirit in quite a few of the sacraments, so to speak.
Click to expand...
You understand that I am speaking to the teaching office of The Church.

Catechism below. 🙂

890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals.

PnP
 
stewstew03 said:
But seriously… “insistence for cultural male preference” means what, exactly?
Click to expand...
Stewstew, you asked this question before; sorry for the delay.

Among Lutherans, the argument against female clergy is very difficult to articulate according to the Confessions. The steady transition toward female priests/ bishops is undeniable among Lutherans.

I see wonderful priests/ pastors proclaiming the Word and celebrating the Sacraments to a world so desperately in need, [regardless of gender] as much more important than a weak argument/ sentiment against females.
 
While researching something else I came across this quote from Martin Luther concerning women.
Certainly the view of at least some of the early Reformers was consistent with this attitude. Martin Luther, in particular, had a ‘theology of the word’ which meant that anyone, including women, could act in a ‘priestly’ manner:
Click to expand...
To baptize is incomparably greater than to consecrate bread and wine, for it is the greatest office in the church — the proclamation of the Word of God. So when women baptize, they exercise the function of priesthood legitimately, and do it not as a private act, but as a part of the public ministry of the church which belongs only to the priesthood. (‘Concerning the Ministry’, LW 40:23)
ugleyvicar.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/could-lay-celebration-renew-church-of.html
Click to expand...
 
Tom_Baum said:
You wrote this in response to me writing, “Doesn’t it seem by what Jesus said that He considered Himself more important than the “dogma” about Him?”

You can call it dogma if you want but what I was doing was expressing my opinion.
Click to expand...
An opinion is something like, “I think butter pecan is better than chocolate chip ice cream”.

This, however, is not an opinion, but a statement about God which you believe to be true: “Doesn’t it seem by what Jesus said that He considered Himself more important than the “dogma” about Him?”

As such, that’s a dogma.
As far as “Why do you permit yourself to profess dogma, but object to the CC doing the same?”, it is YOUR opinion that I “object to the CC” professing dogma, I wrote no such thing, what I wrote was that people, some of whom are members of the CC, seem to put dogma above God.
Click to expand...
Can you give an example of what putting “dogma above God” looks like?
Not all Catholics seem to put dogma above God and Jesus’s Church is people and not all of those that are of Jesus’s Church would be considered Catholic by “membership” in the entity called the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
If they are baptized in the Triune formula using water they are in His Church, although some may be imperfectly joined to it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top