Denominations which allow Women Pastors.

[PRmerger]

I believe what I believe and anyone else can believe whatever they want to believe.

Well, if you mean that in the sense that it’s a free country and you can’t stop anyone from believing and professing things which aren’t true…well, yeah.

But as a Catholic you ought to be very concerned with people saying things like, “God hates homosexuals”.

Very concerned indeed.

 

[Sy_Noe]

In reading through this thread, a question arises. How can faithful Catholics come to believe they are so immensely certain they know without first having had to just place faith and belief in writings and interpretations?

 

[PRmerger]

In reading through this thread, a question arises. How can faithful Catholics come to believe they are so immensely certain they know without first having had to just place faith and belief in writings and interpretations?

I don’t see how this question should be any different for you, or for any Christian.

How do you answer that question, Sy?

 

[Sy_Noe]

I don’t see how this question should be any different for you, or for any Christian.

How do you answer that question, Sy?

It’s different for me because I know I have faith and beliefs but I suppose I’m humble enough to accept that I’m human and I don’t go around proclaiming I am immensely certain when I know I’m talking about matters of faith. But then I suppose my nature is such that I don’t necessarily need everything spelled out for me either. I’m fine with gray and people being able to study and pray and come to their own conclusions about faith matters. No perhaps not everyone will necessarily reach the same conclusion or even the one that turns out to be true. But I guess I just understand that’s part of faith.

 

[steido01]

While researching something else I came across this quote from Martin Luther concerning women.

So anyone can baptize, and when they do so, they are participating in the priestly function inherent in all believers. This is new news because…?

Acknowledging the Priesthood of All Believers, which even the Roman Catholic Church does, is not equivalent to endorsing female ordination. Women are not called to the teaching office of public ministry, no matter how many baptisms one may participate in. To suggest this based on Luther’s words demonstrates an incredible suspension of logic and an ignorance for the intention of the text.

 

[steido01]

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?

“When,” eh?

 

[Irishgal49]

I am a woman that aspires to attend seminary after college, God willing. I feel I have as much to give as any man, to God and for God, so I am at peace. God bless ! Kelly

Wonderful! I went to seminary --it was the greatest time of my life. Feel free to email me if you want to chat. I was ordained in the United Methodist Church in 1996. I pastored two churches for five years. I had to drive 3.5 hours there on Monday, take classes T-Th and then drive 3.5 hours home on Thurs night for 3 years. It was so worth it. I wore out a brand new car too! LOL

 

[JonNC]

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.

I am absolutely opposed to “cultural male preference” regarding ordination. Instead, I look to scripture and the historic teaching of the Church which is based on the faith, not cultural preferences. OTOH, it is secular progressive cultural pressure that some have succumbed to in deciding to go against orthodoxy and ordaining women.

Curious, where will Missouri Synod Lutherans go -]when/-] if the LCMS accepts female pastors?

A huge “if”, but if that were to happen, I would look for a home where orthodoxy continues.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

There are certain things God calls all believers to do, many of which do not require a ministerial priesthood.

My sons are in middle school. They will never know what carrying a human in the womb feels like…

I think on both points we are in agreement.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

I’m neither Lutheran nor Anglican, so I don’t know what this means: “insistence for cultural male preference”

It is the claim by many who support female ordination that the male only ministerial priesthood is not a command of God, but instead a relic of ancient paternalistic culture.
It is their view that God would not want us to make such distinctions, and we need to respond to our “more enlightened” understanding of the equality of the genders.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

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.

And the question becomes; what do we know today that Christ did not know, or Paul did not know? What do we know today that the ECF’s did not know? What do we know today that the Lutheran Reformers did not know?

As you can see, Stew, the argument is not based on scripture, or for Lutherans, even the confessions (the reason the confessions do not respond directly to the question is because the very idea of ordained females was unheard of, and probably would have been considered heresy). The argument is completely couched in progressive, secular, and feminist arguments.

Jon

 

[PRmerger]

It’s different for me because I know I have faith and beliefs but I suppose I’m humble enough to accept that I’m human and I don’t go around proclaiming I am immensely certain when I know I’m talking about matters of faith. But then I suppose my nature is such that I don’t necessarily need everything spelled out for me either. I’m fine with gray and people being able to study and pray and come to their own conclusions about faith matters. No perhaps not everyone will necessarily reach the same conclusion or even the one that turns out to be true. But I guess I just understand that’s part of faith.

Curious, this.

It reminds me of what Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong calls the tragic Protestant “Quest for Uncertainty”.

It’s a paean to the worship of the unknown.

This worship of uncertainty, however, is an unknown concept in Scripture.

God does not want us to be uncertain.

God wants us to know the Truth.

And we have it, in its fullness, in His Body.

You have been duped, again, Sy, into another canard that proclaims: “I think it’s fabulous (rather than a tragic scandal) that we can’t figure lots of things out in Christianity and that our Protestant sects endlessly contradict each other–to the tune of tens of thousands of differing Christian denominations ‘coming to their own conclusions’.”

 

[PRmerger]

It’s different for me because I know I have faith and beliefs but I suppose I’m humble enough to accept that I’m human and I don’t go around proclaiming I am immensely certain when I know I’m talking about matters of faith. But then I suppose my nature is such that I don’t necessarily need everything spelled out for me either. I’m fine with gray and people being able to study and pray and **come to their own conclusions **about faith matters. No perhaps not everyone will necessarily reach the same conclusion or even the one that turns out to be true

You do see where your paradigm here of people being able to study, pray and “come to their own conclusions” cannot argue against this guy:

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=20227&d=1403928673

For he will simply tell you: “Sy, I prayed and I studied and I came to my own conclusions. Exactly what you told me to do.”

Catholics, however, can be IMMENSELY CERTAIN that what the Rev. Fred Phelps is saying is, without doubt, indubitably, incontrovertibly, WRONG.

But, apparently, you’re not ok with that certainty.

That is a great sadness, indeed.

 

[Tom_Baum]

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.

Sometimes we seem to forget that God became One of us as a human being.

Have you ever heard of Mary Magdelene, I think it was, being referred to as the Apostle to the Apostles since it was her that Jesus SENT to the Apostles.

Apostle simply means one who is sent, at least that is what I think it means.

Therefore, it seems to me, that Mary Magdelene should be considered an Apostle especially if one considers Paul an Apostle since Jesus sent her and Paul, most definitely, considered himself an Apostle.

My namesake referred to the Jews as a “hardheaded and thick necked people”, I think that I have it phrased right, and Christians, of all persuasions, seem to be following in the footsteps of Judaism, at least in regard to this.

Two of, what I consider, the most important things that I have learned in my life, I learned in the 2nd grade and they are: God Is Love and We are all equal in God’s Eyes.

God picks whomever God picks for whatever “job” God picks one for whether we agree with God or not, in other words, God Is God and we ain’t.

 

[KjetilK]

…probably since the time when men believe woman didn’t have souls

And when was that?

Um-hum. And they all agree with you?

No.

It is never a matter of who we individually happen to agree with but rather Confessio Augustana.

JonC’s point is not entirely correct, grammatically. It is true that in most english translations, Confessio Augustana XIV states that “no one should publicly teach in the Church or administer the Sacraments unless he be regularly called” (here in the translation found at bookofconcord.org). But the pronoun is not there in either the Latin or German text. But that doesn’t mean that Confessio Augustana endorses women priests, or that you cannot argue that it prohibits women priests. (By ‘women priests’ I mean female priests and bishops, not necessarily deacons. And by ‘female priests and bishops’ I mean people who claim to be so, not people who actually are.) JonC’s point is true if we interpret the confession properly. The are at least two reasons that we can conclude that the confession rejects women priests:

(1) One can argue against women priests on the basis of Scripture, and in the preface of Confessio Augustana, the preface to Emperor Charles V, Scripture is held up as the source.

(2) One can argue against women priests on the basis of Tradition, in particular the writings of the Church Fathers. In Confessio Augustana XXI, it is said explicitly that “there is nothing [in *Confessio Augustana] that varies from the Scriptures, or from the Church Catholic, or from the Church of Rome as known from its writers.” The Latin text uses ex scriptoribus, ‘from its writers,’ while the German text uses aus der Väter Schrift, ‘from the writings of the Fathers.’ Confessio Augustana thus claims to hold the faith of the Fathers, and the ‘consensus’ of the Fathers is against women priests. For a popularised treatment, see Jimmy Akin’s The Fathers Know Best, part II.IX.46, which shows this consensus. I only have the Kindle version, without page numbers.

 

[Tom_Baum]

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.

Can you give an example of what putting “dogma above God” looks like?

If they are baptized in the Triune formula using water they are in His Church, although some may be imperfectly joined to it.

As I said, you can call it dogma, I call it my opinion.

As far as, “Can you give an example of what putting “dogma above God” looks like?”, look for yourself, it is pretty obvious at times.

Also considering, “If they are baptized in the Triune formula using water they are in His Church, although some may be imperfectly joined to it”, there are some that are not “baptized in the Triune formula using water” at all that are more perfectly joined to it than some of the baptized.

 

[Tom_Baum]

Well, if you mean that in the sense that it’s a free country and you can’t stop anyone from believing and professing things which aren’t true…well, yeah.

But as a Catholic you ought to be very concerned with people saying things like, “God hates homosexuals”.

Very concerned indeed.

I am more concerned with how God views us than how we view each other.

I also do not view God as a loving God but as a Being of Love and there is a vast difference between love being an attribute of God and God being a Being of Love.

I have been around long enough to know that it is a waste of time and energy and everything else to be upset about other people’s views, I can not change anyone else, in other words, it is hard enough living my life, I, most definitely, can NOT live anyone else’s life.

People can believe anything that they want, not as this being “a free country” but as a God-given freedom to believe whatever anyone wants to believe, but they should not be able to force those beliefs on anyone else and this does NOT just apply to the so-called “others”, it applies to everyone.

By the way, we are either ALL created in the “Image and Likeness of God” or none of us are, it does say, “Let Us make man (humans) in the…”, it does not say, 'Let Us make some of the …".

 

[Sy_Noe]

Curious, this.

It reminds me of what Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong calls the tragic Protestant “Quest for Uncertainty”.

It’s a paean to the worship of the unknown.

This worship of uncertainty, however, is an unknown concept in Scripture.

God does not want us to be uncertain.

God wants us to know the Truth.

And we have it, in its fullness, in His Body.

You have been duped, again, Sy, into another canard that proclaims: “I think it’s fabulous (rather than a tragic scandal) that we can’t figure lots of things out in Christianity and that our Protestant sects endlessly contradict each other–to the tune of tens of thousands of differing Christian denominations ‘coming to their own conclusions’.”

I’m not sure you read the entirety of my post or else you would have seen I said that not everyone will necessarily conclude that which will turn out to be true. I don’t take everything in the Bible literally. For instance I don’t believe all creation took 6- 24 hr days with the evening and the morning (24 hrs) being a day. I also give some consideration to the Bible being a product of the culture and times in which it was written. Take the topic. I believe women should be allowed to be pastors. And I believe when Christ returns it will be shown to be true. But that’s what I believe. We walk by faith not by sight. I understand you believe differently and accept the RCC as still being today the embodiment of His Truth. And that’s fine. That’s your faith. God may want us to know the Truth. But my point simply is even Roman Catholics get to the point of believing they know what that is… by starting in faith.

PS btw yes I believe Fred Phelps has concluded wrong too. God is love. Not hate. Good day PRMerger.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Sometimes we seem to forget that God became One of us as a human being.

Have you ever heard of Mary Magdelene, I think it was, being referred to as the Apostle to the Apostles since it was her that Jesus SENT to the Apostles.

Apostle simply means one who is sent, at least that is what I think it means.

Therefore, it seems to me, that Mary Magdelene should be considered an Apostle especially if one considers Paul an Apostle since Jesus sent her and Paul, most definitely, considered himself an Apostle.

My namesake referred to the Jews as a “hardheaded and thick necked people”, I think that I have it phrased right, and Christians, of all persuasions, seem to be following in the footsteps of Judaism, at least in regard to this.

Two of, what I consider, the most important things that I have learned in my life, I learned in the 2nd grade and they are: God Is Love and We are all equal in God’s Eyes.

God picks whomever God picks for whatever “job” God picks one for whether we agree with God or not, in other words, God Is God and we ain’t.

 

[BernadetteM]

I agree with Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong, who states (paraphrasing) that is is ridiculous to claim that there are Roman Catholics, and then a subgroup of Catholics who are not subject to the Roman Pontiff.

And I agree with St. Augustine who states (paraphrasing) that everyone wants to claim the name “Catholic”, but when a stranger comes to your town and asks where is the local Catholic Church, we all know which church you would direct him to.

I find St. Augustine’s statement a confirmation for me in my decision many years ago to become Catholic.

I attended an Anglo Catholic parish and in all its externals was more “Catholic” than Catholic parishes. We even had Catholic seminarians attend on Christmas to take part in our beautiful Mass. However, I always had a problems when speaking with someone I didn’t know and I suppose I implied I was Catholic, but always knew if they asked which parish I attended I would have a real problem being honest.

I do wonder what has happened over the last 20 years or so that some protestants feel the need to proclaim they are Catholic, as the Episcopal church and as far as I know the Lutheran church did not proclaim that they were Catholic. In fact, the Anglicans I knew from different parishes knew they were protestant. It appears that maybe their definition of Catholic does not mean being a member of the Church Christ started with Peter as its earthly leader, but that they feel catholic means only universal, which would require that at one time or another their denomination had many members throughout the world. This would be from the beginning two thousand years ago as the Church grew, not the past 500 years or so.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette