Lutherans and the Papacy

[JonNC]

Could a Missouri Synod pastor be in the audience of the Pope as a visitor which may include prayers?
Thanks,
Mary.

Yes. The concern is to avoid the appearance of unionism and syncretism.

Jon

 

[Jotto]

Why is infallibilty such an issue? People act as though infallibility was magically pulled out of a clerical hat. Its been around long before Christianity.

Which no doubt explains why so many of the Fathers attending Vatican Council I were openly or quietly opposed to its proclamation.

 

[JonNC]

Please explain how having women on the council of your congregation is consistent with the Scriptural injunctions to be found in First Timothy 2:12. Or is the council in your congregation like most lay councils in Roman Catholic parishes which have a consultative role but no real authority?

Not in a teaching role. While elders are part of the spiritual team of the parish, council positions are more administrative. I don’t see a female as treasurer as violating scripture or the confessions

Jon

 

[Jotto]

The initial criticism to me was that I was wrong to call all catholics roman Catholic. That is that there are other catholics of other rites. I concede this obviously but I see no reason to say that these are outside of the Roman catholic church when ultimately they are all under the roman pope and derive their catholicity from him. That is they are not Catholic in of themselves, the Melkite cannot say “I am Catholic without the pope” because he is catholic by being in communion with the pope of Rome. Am I wrong here? Am I so unjustified in referring to all catholics (who bend the knee to rome) as roman Catholic? I understand what catholics believe concerning hierachy but Im talking about something a little deeper. What is catholicity and where is it derived from? It seems to flow out from the pope because he is the dispenser of such things through his Bishops which only he can appoint which then flows to the people. I don’t believe myself to be wrong here.

Keep in mind that there was a time in the Western Church when all bishops including the bishop of Rome was chosen by the acclamation of the people of the diocese in question. The words of this exclamation are still to be found in the ritual for episcopal consecration, namely, “Dignus est!” "He is worthy! Without this exclamation one could not be consecrated. But now this exclamation of the laity though still said no longer has it’s original significance; and the earlier understanding of the Church Catholic that there is a mutual accountability between a bishop and his people no longer formally exists.

 

[Jotto]

Not in a teaching role. While elders are part of the spiritual team of the parish, council positions are more administrative. I don’t see a female as treasurer as violating scripture or the confessions

Jon

O.K. Now explain to me why a woman teaching theology at one of the Missouri Synod’s colleges is different from a woman teaching adult males in a congregation.

 

[MaryT777]

Again, let us not give an uncharitable misrepresentation of the LCMS. Prayer with fellow Christians, whether private or public, is never an issue. What is important is the context: is it simply an opportunity for prayer, or is it actually an “ecumenical” worship service? It is acceptable to participate in the first, it would promote syncretism to “robe up” and participate in the second. LCMS Guidelines for Participation in Civic Events:

Emphasis mine.

Absolutely, Mary. I am happy and proud to say that the question is not a hypothetical one: blogs.lcms.org/2008/lcms-leaders-attend-ecumenical-meeting-with-pope. I have bolded the key issue. Note that the article makes a special point to say that the entire service was performed by Roman Catholics. It would have been wrong, in the LCMS’ view, to participate (as we do not share communion).

Don,
Thanks for the link, I recall that now
“Please greet all in the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod for me” Love it.
Greeting y’all as well.
Mary.

 

[Nicea325]

Which no doubt explains why so many of the Fathers attending Vatican Council I were openly or quietly opposed to its proclamation.

And the same went with the “Mother of God” when it was proclaimed. Opposition is due to concerns of misunderstanding the concept/term.

 

[benjohnson]

O.K. Now explain to me why a woman teaching theology at one of the Missouri Synod’s colleges is different from a woman teaching adult males in a congregation.

Perhaps teaching is not the same as preaching the gospel and ministering the sacraments?

 

[MaryT777]

Not in a teaching role. While elders are part of the spiritual team of the parish, council positions are more administrative. I don’t see a female as treasurer as violating scripture or the confessions

Jon

Jon
I believe the Pastor’s wife actually taught a Bible study Wednesday nights in the LCMS
Our Redeemer I visited. I saw that in the bulletin and was surprised. (It was short like 45 minutes)

Is that unusual?

That’s a voluntary study of course so men need not come I suppose.

 

[Jotto]

And the same went with the “Mother of God” when it was proclaimed. Opposition is due to concerns of misunderstanding the concept/term.

Perhaps in some cases it was a matter of misunderstanding, but among those who disagreed were some of the Church’s leading historians and theologians. Some of them were so adamant in their opposition to this ultimate expression of Ultramontanism that they were willing to be excommunicated.

 

[MaryT777]

Perhaps teaching is not the same as preaching the gospel and ministering the sacraments?

Exactly.

 

[Nicea325]

Perhaps in some cases it was a matter of misunderstanding, but among those who disagreed were some of the Church’s leading historians and theologians. Some of them were so adamant in their opposition to this ultimate expression of Ultramontanism that they were willing to be excommunicated.

And opposition conclusively makes it false? Again, infallibility is always misunderstood even today and by Catholics. I usually come to the conclusion most have never read or studied the teaching on infallibility. Many always confuse it with impeccability or elevate it to something unrealistic.

 

[Jotto]

Exactly.

The preaching of the Gospel and presiding at Communion is not what is at question here… What women are being denied in Missouri Synod congregations is not only the responsibilities of ordination but any leadership authority where she would be in a position (along with the male members of a congregational governing board) to hold a pastor accountable for how he carried out his ministry or teach a Bible study course in which male adults were participants though if she did the same thing in an academic setting, that is o.k. To put it simply if it can be shown that women were not permitted to play any governing role in the Church described in the Epistles of the New Testament, they should not be allowed to carry out that kind of responsibility in contemporary congregations

On the other hand it does seem to be the case that the female members of Missouri Synod congregations are being allowed responsibilities which 50 years ago would not have been permitted. As I’ve said before, things, including how we do church, evolve even in the Missouri Synod.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Such questions do become “closed” once the perceived inconsistency that has generated them is resolved. The question of whether only men are capable of re-presenting Christ in the worshipping community may well be closed for you and many others; but clearly it is not resolved for many, many others. And for now perhaps the only resolution possible is for Roman Catholics to do what they now in growing numbers are doing, namely, establish schismatic communities where the core of the Faith is maintained and practiced but where women and homosexual people are not excluded from leadership within the community. Men and women who have grown up within the Missouri Synod who come to find this perception of womanhood no longer tolerable can readily transfer their membership to other Lutheran communities.

On the other hand, I must say, it seems to me the Missouri Synod handles this question in a manner that is somewhat more consistent with Scripture than the Roman Catholic Church currently does. For you all appear to perceive quite correctly that reflecting the consensus of its surrounding society, the Apostolic Church did not believe that women by their very nature were fit to be leaders in any social context other than the running of a household. And since it was generally seen as inappropriate for women to be the leader in any community where, with the exception of slaves, adult men were members, the question of women being set aside as the leaders of Christian communities was not an issue.

Thus in an attempt to conform itself to this Biblical model, the Missouri Synod classically did not and, I believe, still usually does not accept women in any leadership position in the congregation where they would then have authority over men. If the Missouri Synod were more thoroughly consistent with this Biblical norm (perhaps we should say New Testament Norm as clearly in the early life of Israel reported in the Torah, women once did have authority over men as “judges,”) they would actively discourage women from playing leadership roles not only within the institution of the Church but in society at large. But realizing that this battle is long lost, you content yourselves with maintaining the subjection of women to men only within the public life of the congregation.

Roman Catholic and Orthodox practice choose to ignore the historical likelihood that the Early Church was against women being leaders in any social context that would give them authority over men; and they therefore draw the line only at ordination to the presbytery and the episcopacy. This adjustment makes their communities far more amenable to how modern men and women perceive of themselves. But from the perspective of mainline Protestants (as well as many members of the Roman Catholic Church), it denigrates the significance of baptism as a sacramental rite, which we now realize under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, makes women as much as men full members of the Body of Christ and therefore inherently capable of re-presenting Christ in any human context to the same extent as men.

Very interesting conversation!

 

[benjohnson]

To put it simply if it can be shown that women were not permitted to play any governing role in the Church described in the Epistles of the New Testament, they should not be allowed to carry out that kind of responsibility in contemporary congregations

It’s not q question of ‘permission’ but of following scripture, but otherwise I agree - Men and women have differing roles in the Church just as in the family. Unproductive trouble seems to come when we attempt to mix and match contrary to scripture.

 

[hn160]

Exactly.

At my church, the pastor does all the teaching of adults and the catechism group, he allows women to teach a woman’s group and children but never men.

 

[JonNC]

O.K. Now explain to me why a woman teaching theology at one of the Missouri Synod’s colleges is different from a woman teaching adult males in a congregation.

Perhaps we’re speaking of the ministerial role. That seems to me to be the factor. A college teacher is not in the role of pastor.

Jon

 

[Jotto]

It’s not q question of ‘permission’ but of following scripture, but otherwise I agree - Men and women have differing roles in the Church just as in the family. Unproductive trouble seems to come when we attempt to mix and match contrary to scripture.

Yes, my friend, follow Scripture. That is exactly what we are discussing. How does one decide between how the Early Church “followed Scripture” and how we in our day “followed Scripture.” For example, you all (M.S.) see no license in the New Testament for women having authority in the Church. I think you are essentially right. Such was the regard for women the writers of the New Testament that in referring to all the members of a congregation they addressed them, men and women, as “brothers,” And even though such language is jarring for most Americans today, except when quoting Scripture, most of us including faithful members of the Missouri Synod, would not think of doing so. The lesson apparently being, “Just because Paul addressed women in the congregations he wrote to as if the women there were not worthy of being addressed as women, we, unless quoting Paul, would do well not to do that.”

Or to take another example of how one follows scripture, the Church of the first two centuries forbad its members to shed blood as judges, soldiers, etc. This is how they understood the teaching of Jesus that we should “love your enemy.” How do most of us follow this little bit of Scripture (including many other passages relating to homicide in the New Testament) yes, we , including the Missouri Synod, see nothing wrong with sending our young men and women off to slaughter their fellow human beings and even provide them with military chaplains to bless them while they are doing that.

It seems that the rule of “follow Scripture” by itself does not tell us how Scripture is to be understood (which is another way of saying that our Catholic brethren are quite right to challenge the Lutheran notion of “Sola Scriptura” as it is usually understood.) So my question to you is why is it that how the Missouri Synod “follows” Scripture conforms to how the first congregations who read these Scriptures understood them in some cases, but clearly rejects how the first Christians understood them in other cases?

Or more simply “the Bible teaches that women did how hold offices of authority in congregations” so neither should we. But how the first Christians understood the command of Jesus to love one’s enemies and Paul taught that our true enemies are not “flesh” and “blood,” we must say how they understood these teachings does not mean we should understand them in the same way.

 

[Jotto]

At my church, the pastor does all the teaching of adults and the catechism group, he allows women to teach a woman’s group and children but never men.

Ask you pastor sometime if a female professor of theology were a member of your congregation as long as she does not do in the church building what she does in her classroom is her being a teacher of adult men o.k?

 

[BrethrenBoy]

Or to take another example of how one follows scripture, the Church of the first two centuries forbad its members to shed blood as judges, soldiers, etc. This is how they understood the teaching of Jesus that we should “love your enemy.” How do most of us follow this little bit of Scripture (including many other passages relating to homicide in the New Testament) yes, we , including the Missouri Synod, see nothing wrong with sending our young men and women off to slaughter their fellow human beings and even provide them with military chaplains to bless them while they are doing that.

Which I’d why the Anabaptist believe war is sin. Though we do have female pastors…