ELCA elects female presiding bishop

  • Thread starter Thread starter steido01
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
EvangelCatholic said:
But let’s be honest, there is no significant theological difference between Lutherans.
Click to expand...
This is the ELCA:

Our Christian/Lutheran feminist prayers and liturgy reach back into the storehouse of tradition to bring forth names as Mother, Shaddai, Sophia, Womb, Midwife, Shekinah, Kudalini, She Who Is. They do so out of renewed insights into the nature of the Gospel empowered by the risen Christ-Sophia.

Our Mother who is within us
we celebrate your many names.
Your wisdom come.
Your will be done,
unfolding from the depths within us.
Each day you give us all that we need.
You remind us of our limits
and we let go.
You support us in our power
and we act with courage.
For you are the dwelling place within us
the empowerment around us
and the celebration among us
now and for ever. Amen
Sounds exactly like the LCMS!!
🤷
 
=EvangelCatholic;11101918]As a Lutheran, I am not suggesting that episcopacy/ Apostolic Succession are necessary but it is the norm in Lutheranism as the Church continues to restore catholicity. The Provoo Communion in Europe and full communion between the ELCA and Episcopal Church in the USA was based on AS to strengthen unity. If a Reformed minister is called to serve a Lutheran parish, the blessing of the bishop confers Apostolic Succession on him/ her as well. In its effort to find communion among other Christians, the ELCA is influencing spiritual thought and devotion to such things as the Real Presence, weekly Mass, Holy Absolution, etc.
Click to expand...
I got this, though I was not aware that the Reformed were involved in Porvoo. I thought it was Anglicans and Lutherans. Hopefully, that Reformed pastor must confess the real presence, deny limited atonement, etc. But that’s another issue. The issue is female ordination.
As a former Missouri Synod Lutheran, I think the obsession on minute things to separate us is very unfortunate. Why researching the difference between the LCMS and nearly all other Lutherans, I came across this article considering infant communion as another example of Missouri Synod nit-picking and divisiveness:
Click to expand...
YOu had to research because it is not us changing the scripture and confessions to suit our modernist POV. It is not typical in the western Church to commune infants. That is a fact.
But let’s be honest, there is no significant theological difference between Lutherans. What it comes down to is how we, as Christians, deal with others and the greater good of inclusion. Female ordination is becoming a non-issue among Lutherans, Anglicans and many other denominations. Human sexuality is viewed quite differently today than what was the mores of past centuries. Pope Francis is certainly touching on these issues also
Click to expand...
Female ordination is an issue, I promise you. If anyone thinks Pope Francis is planning to allow for female ordination, I think they are kidding themselves. Female ordination is heterodox, and outside of catholicity.

Human sexuality is viewed differently in the secular world, but we are not of this world. Sexual sin is sexual sin. Period. And like any other sin, we bring it to a merciful and forgiving God. Then we strive to go and sin no more!! Giving permission to go and sin some more, particularly but not exclusively to some clergy, is not inclusiveness, it is in opposition to scripture and the faith, and it doesn’t matter whether humans have decided it is ok now when it wasn’t centuries ago. Inclusiveness is welcoming all sinners, confessing our sins, and striving to live the godly life, growing in His grace. Inclusiveness is not getting to pick the sin you wish to continue committing.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
I got this, though I was not aware that the Reformed were involved in Porvoo. I thought it was Anglicans and Lutherans. Hopefully, that Reformed pastor must confess the real presence, deny limited atonement, etc. But that’s another issue. The issue is female ordination.
Jon
Click to expand...
The Reformed Church is not in communion with Provoo Lutherans/ Anglicans. But the ELCA is in full communion with Reformed bodies. For a Reformed minister to serve a Lutheran parish, the teachings of the Augsburg Confession is required; in other words, the Reformed pastor must essentially believe/ preach/ celebrate the sacraments, etc as a Lutheran priest would do.
 
EvangelCatholic said:
The Reformed Church is not in communion with Provoo Lutherans/ Anglicans. But the ELCA is in full communion with Reformed bodies. For a Reformed minister to serve a Lutheran parish, the teachings of the Augsburg Confession is required; in other words, the Reformed pastor must essentially believe/ preach/ celebrate the sacraments, etc as a Lutheran priest would do.
Click to expand...
And a Lutheran pastor, to serve in a Reformed parish, must deny Augsburg? :eek:
Its just surreal.

Jon
 
benjohnson said:
This is the ELCA:

Our Christian/Lutheran feminist prayers and liturgy reach back into the storehouse of tradition to bring forth names as Mother, Shaddai, Sophia, Womb, Midwife, Shekinah, Kudalini, She Who Is. They do so out of renewed insights into the nature of the Gospel empowered by the risen Christ-Sophia.

Our Mother who is within us
we celebrate your many names.
Your wisdom come.
Your will be done,
unfolding from the depths within us.
Each day you give us all that we need.
You remind us of our limits
and we let go.
You support us in our power
and we act with courage.
For you are the dwelling place within us
the empowerment around us
and the celebration among us
now and for ever. Amen
Sounds exactly like the LCMS!!
🤷
Click to expand...
It is so absurd that I won’t even comment on it.

Wait! I just did. 😉

Jon

EDIT: Luther must be spinning in -]her,/-] his grave.
 
JonNC said:
The problem is, Ben, I believe each parish signs on to this when their parish is formed, or joins the ELCA. I don’t think it is cut and dried as we might think. I know TEC has the same arrangement.

Jon
Click to expand...
It really depends on what the predecessor body was. One of the predecessor synods, I think ALC, always had ownership of the church buildings. And some church-starts in the last 25 years or so are owned directly by the synod.

But there is stealing going on as well - the ELCA leadership is forcing churches to accept new bylaw that make it much more difficult to escape. For example - they now require ‘counseling’ under terms set by Bishop. This allows for the ELCA to say that the church didn’t go through concealing properly and withhold permission to leave. They also made voting standards much harder - requiring more time between votes.

They also ‘deroster’ pastors who are even remotely involved - and sealing their pensions in the process. They have become much more litigious - the ELCA has been very vocal in suing the pants off anybody that doesn’t have their ducks in a row.

My family is still involved in one ELCA church, know from first-hand experience how nastily the ELCA leadership is when it comes to protecting it’s precious money hoard like some sort of idol. One local ELCA church here in the PNW was pressured to shut down just to fund the local synod.
 
benjohnson said:
It really depends on what the predecessor body was. One of the predecessor synods, I think ALC, always had ownership of the church buildings. And some church-starts in the last 25 years or so are owned directly by the synod.

But there is stealing going on as well - the ELCA leadership is forcing churches to accept new bylaw that make it much more difficult to escape. For example - they now require ‘counseling’ under terms set by Bishop. This allows for the ELCA to say that the church didn’t go through concealing properly and withhold permission to leave. They also made voting standards much harder - requiring more time between votes.

They also ‘deroster’ pastors who are even remotely involved - and sealing their pensions in the process. They have become much more litigious - the ELCA has been very vocal in suing the pants off anybody that doesn’t have their ducks in a row.
Click to expand...
No surprising. This is how liberals define tolerance. :rolleyes:

Jon
 
EvangelCatholic said:
The Reformed Church is not in communion with Provoo Lutherans/ Anglicans. But the ELCA is in full communion with Reformed bodies. For a Reformed minister to serve a Lutheran parish, the teachings of the Augsburg Confession is required; in other words, the Reformed pastor must essentially believe/ preach/ celebrate the sacraments, etc as a Lutheran priest would do.
Click to expand...
And then, presumably, revert back to his/her Reformed beliefs when he/she returns to his/her Reformed church to believe/preach/celebrate? :rolleyes:

Momentarily ignoring the idiocy of an individual (much less a supposed minister of Word and Sacrament!) switching his beliefs to suit that Sunday’s particular denominational flavor, what kind of example does this set for the simple and little ones of a congregation? I’m reminded of the parable in Mark chapter 4 and I shudder to think where those little seeds are taking root when the ELCA scatters the seeds to the winds of relativism and never waters or tills with the unchanging Word of God. I pray that at least some good fruit could still come from that body. 😦

It’s clear to me that the “progress” of the ELCA -including the recent election of Elizabeth Eaton- does not bode well for the ELCA’s ecumenical efforts with orthodox Christian bodies.
 
Interestingly, very few ELCA parishes joined the LCMS when leaving the Synod. :confused:
 
JonNC said:
The problem is, Ben, I believe each parish signs on to this when their parish is formed, or joins the ELCA. I don’t think it is cut and dried as we might think. I know TEC has the same arrangement.

Jon
Click to expand...
Not until recently. And many parishes, who hold the title to their real estate free and clear, under ordinary law, and in many cases predate the establishment of the Episcopal Church, are finding that this means little when General Convention passed a canon in 1979 stating that all such property was (henceforth) to be held in trust for the general Church. Thus bypassing all normal rules for establishing a trust, under general law.

GKC
 
JonNC said:
Female ordination is an issue, I promise you. If anyone thinks Pope Francis is planning to allow for female ordination, I think they are kidding themselves. Female ordination is heterodox, and outside of catholicity.

Human sexuality is viewed differently in the secular world, but we are not of this world. Sexual sin is sexual sin. Period. And like any other sin, we bring it to a merciful and forgiving God. Then we strive to go and sin no more!! Giving permission to go and sin some more, particularly but not exclusively to some clergy, is not inclusiveness, it is in opposition to scripture and the faith, and it doesn’t matter whether humans have decided it is ok now when it wasn’t centuries ago. Inclusiveness is welcoming all sinners, confessing our sins, and striving to live the godly life, growing in His grace. Inclusiveness is not getting to pick the sin you wish to continue committing.

Jon
Click to expand...
Excellent! 👍
 
It’s the nature of small groups who start losing people to adopt heteropraxis and hederodoxis…

It happened with (from the Catholic view) Lutherans to a slight degree.
“Old Catholics” to a great degree, so much so that Utrecht isn’t in communion with many of it’s own splinters. Many now ordain women.
It’s also the way the Mariavites went - they’ve been ordaining women since the 1940’s or before.
It’s also the way of many “independent orthodox” churches.

Don, Jon: Re Consubstantiation: as I said before, the definition that Catholics use is broad and by exclusion. Your not a consubstatialist if you believe Real presence by Transubstantiation, or if you deny the real presence. Even the LCMS falls into it as a corporate body, because it teaches real presence but not transubstatiation. Same goes for Ordination: what you call Ordination, we don’t. Your ordination is merely an endorsement, from a Catholic view; invalid on its face.
 
Aramis said:
It’s the nature of small groups who start losing people to adopt heteropraxis and hederodoxis…

It happened with (from the Catholic view) Lutherans to a slight degree.
“Old Catholics” to a great degree, so much so that Utrecht isn’t in communion with many of it’s own splinters. Many now ordain women.
It’s also the way the Mariavites went - they’ve been ordaining women since the 1940’s or before.
It’s also the way of many “independent orthodox” churches.

Don, Jon: Re Consubstantiation: as I said before, the definition that Catholics use is broad and by exclusion. Your not a consubstatialist if you believe Real presence by Transubstantiation, or if you deny the real presence. Even the LCMS falls into it as a corporate body, because it teaches real presence but not transubstatiation. Same goes for Ordination: what you call Ordination, we don’t. Your ordination is merely an endorsement, from a Catholic view; invalid on its face.
Click to expand...
Well, apparently everyone agrees with Humpty Dumpty. Which should end the discussion.

GKC
 
steido01 said:
I can’t see it doing anything to help relations with the Roman Catholic Church or other orthodox bodies like the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod (LCMS), which do not practice or allow female ordination to the pastoral office.
Click to expand...
andrewstx said:
Please define orthodox, I don’t think our definitions match.

To me orthodox means taking the creeds literally and seriously, and the Holy Scriptures seriously but not literally.

My definition does not include any kind of politics.
Click to expand...
:confused:

Don’t the RCC and LCMS fit that definition?
 
GKC said:
Well, apparently everyone agrees with Humpty Dumpty. Which should end the discussion.

GKC
Click to expand...
Well, it is a most provoking thing when a person doesn’t know a cravat from a belt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top