M
- Status
T
Tomyris
Guest
Oh, also, He is not absent. Or do you deny Jesus promised us the Holy Spirit?
L
LutheranScholar
Guest
Quite right, so He did and He promised that the Holy Spirit would lead us, as well.
M
MaryT777
Guest
You believe that Lutheran Churches ordaining women, homosexuals, lax on issues such as life/ abortion on truly being led by the Holy Spirit?
Mary.
L
LutheranScholar
Guest
That’s not the Lutheran Church* I* attend, any more than I would assume that you would be involved with those Catholic groups that lobby for the same things. Pinning the position of the ELCA on our entire Confession seems a bit disingenuous, or maybe you’re not aware of the Confessional Lutherans who hold firmly to the Lutheran Faith as shown in the Lutheran Confessions.
T
Thorolfr
Guest
Yes!
L
LutheranScholar
Guest
:thumbsup: Exactly my point. 
Lutheran Churches tend to be a bit diverse, some denominations being very liberal indeed and others quite conservative.
P
pablope
Guest
The question is on the guidance of the Holy Spirit…so you are saying your Lutheran branch is being led to the traditional confessions and the elca is also being led by the HS in the opposite direction to disregard the traditional Lutherans confessional beliefs?
T
Thorolfr
Guest
I’ve got a copy of the Book of Concord (i.e. the Lutheran confessions), and I don’t believe that it has anything specifically prohibiting either women pastors or gay pastors. So the ELCA is not actually disregarding the Lutheran confessions. I could be wrong, but the differing views among Lutherans on these issues probably arise from differing interpretations of Scripture, not from something in the confessions themselves.
P
pablope
Guest
it is a Lutheran claim that the confessions are a right reflection of scripture…so agsin the question…which one is the HS actuall guiding?
and as a follow up…which scripture interpretation is right…the Elca or LCM?
P
pablope
Guest
if not Rome…them who would you say them should validate the claim of AS of the C of Norway?
S
spedteacherita
Guest
Unfortunately, the ELCA does not actually follow the confessions of the Book of Concord - if they allow practicing homosexuals to preach from the pulpit and marry same sex partners in their churches.
In the first section of the Epitome of the Formula of Concord in the Comprehensive Summary, Rule and Norm it states:
1] 1. We believe, teach, and confess that the sole rule and standard according to which all dogmas together with [all] teachers should be estimated and judged are the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and of the New Testament alone, as it is written Ps. 119:105: Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path. And St. Paul: Though an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you, let him be accursed, Gal. 1:8.
(bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php)
Scripture is clear that a homosexual lifestyle is not supported by Scripture.
Leviticus 18:22, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Romans 1:26-28, 1 Timothy 1:10-11, Leviticus 20:13
(openbible.info/topics/homosexuality)
Do people have feelings and inclinations toward SSA? Yep. Just as others who are attracted to the opposite sex - but if we act on sexual attractions outside of the boundaries of how God created us (for marriage) then we are committing a sin. Scripture is very clear on this.’’
God bless, all!
Rita
M
MaryT777
Guest
Do you believe the ELCA is being led by the Holy Spirit when it wrongly teaches these things contrary to the Bible? I don’t. That was the actual issue; the holy spirit leading the Lutheran Church. Surely the HS isn’t confused on these issues.
Mary.
S
spedteacherita
Guest
No. Absolutely not. I think any church with men involved has some issues.
But that does not mean that the HS is not involved in the church because there are many individuals within the church who lead their live led by Him.
God bless, Mary!
Rita
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
I have been thinking about your post, and I have some additional thoughts.
The question that comes to mind is this: anyone who considers Christianity has judged the evidence and made a choice about whether it is sufficient or not, but does that act of judgment make the believer the final authority over God Himself? Clearly not, so this type of judgement is not what I have in mind. Anyone who is a Christian has judged that he or she is not the final authority and has chosen to submit to God.
Now, consider the situation in which a Catholic may find himself with regard to a Church teaching that the use of artificial birth control is intrinsically evil. Some Catholics will decide to ignore the Church and do as they please. Others, however, may recognize the Church’s authority to speak on such matters and accept the teaching even though they do not necessarily agree and do not like having to change their practice of birth control. IOW, they have judged the Church’s teaching and disagreed with it, but they have submitted themselves to its judgment concerning contraception because of their prior recognition of the Church’s authority. So, where is the final authority in this case? With the individual who accepts or rejects the Church’s position or with the Church which has issued the teaching?
Now, back to Kjetilk.
If the Catholic Church declares that the Porvoo Communion has validly restored the sacrament of Holy Orders to the Church of Norway, great! This is one less impediment to the eventual healing of the wound created in the 16th century. If Rome declares that the apostolic succession of the Church of Norway WAS NEVER BROKEN, great! This should be a cause for celebration in that country because a great shadow of uncertainty would be lifted. (Whether or not anyone would ACTUALLY care is another matter.)
But if Rome should determine that the Church of Norway did not have valid orders prior to Porvoo, that should be cause for some sober reflection. And even if Rome should acknowledge that the Porvoo Communion has remedied a previous deficiency, that too, should give the thoughtful man pause. Why? Because it would mean that for 400 years the people of Norway were not served by a valid priesthood. It would mean that there really are such things as “right” and “wrong”, “valid” and “invalid” and that the decisions about them are not made in Oslo.
Now, assuming a negative assessment of the CoN ordinations, our friend, Kjetilk, would be in a similar position to the Catholic first reading Humanae Vitae. Would he ignore the Petrine authority and simply continue celebrating the sacraments knowing that his ordination had been declared invalid? Or would he accept Rome’s judgment, give up his livelihood, and resign his position in the Church?
This is what I was getting at in the post to which you responded. Either Kjetilk acknowledges a God-ordained authority ON EARTH greater than himself (and the king of Norway
) or he does not.As a Catholic, of course, I believe that there is compelling evidence to support a belief that the successor of Peter continues to hold the keys of the office of Royal Steward (cf. Mt. 16:18-19, Is. 22:20-22), and I contend that this support is far stronger than the case for the state-run Church of Norway which took control BY FORCE in 1536-37.
Of course, Kjetilk may argue that he has submitted himself to his bishop. Okay, but I would then ask who his bishop is submitted to? The king who is the constitutional head of the CoN? This is not a God-given authority, but the authority acquired AND MAINTAINED at the point of a sword, and while the swords have long been returned to their scabbards, the force of choice today is economic. What percentage of the paycheck drawn by a Lutheran priest in Norway comes from the state? But I digress…we need not delve too deeply into the inner workings of the state-run Church of Norway.
Jesus left a vicarious shepherd in charge of His flock. Others have established their own flocks outside of that plan. Either one sees this or one does not. That makes all the difference.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
It does. Which is why apologists strive to provide more and better evidence on the behalf of those who need it.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Has the Holy Spirit led us to the truth that the Lord’s Supper is purely symbolic as Presbyterians believe? Or that He is really and truly present in the Eucharist as Lutherans believe?
And does the sacrament of Baptism regenerate or not?
What about the ordination of women and practicing homosexuals and the validity of gay marriage?
Has the Holy Spirit led us to the truth of double-predestination and eternal security? Or is it true that no one is predestined to hell and that it’s possible to lose one’s salvation?
You’re both led by the Spirit into all truth…what say you, Gentlemen?
M
MaryT777
Guest
So the BOC does not prohibit women pastors or gay pastors?
What was the BOC counting on then on issues that were to come later; social issues such as this?
The Scriptures I would imagine as the sole rule and norm of Faith.
So do you truly believe the scriptures support women and gay pastors? Did Luther support as such, women pastors at least?
Mary.
K
KathleenGee
Guest
Great posts, Randy!
Tomyris…about the pope…our source of faith is Christ as defined by our universal Catechism. If the pope does not uphold any doctrine…we don’t support him where he errs…but he cannot in faith and morals…because for one, it is all written down in text form.
The popes of the Borgias and De Medicis, according to the deacon that contributed to our seminary on the papacy, shared that the Holy Spirit prevented all of them from any teaching.
The same authority from God that works through law and order…does the same, especially wouldn’t you think?..for His Church.
Catholics are Ecclesial Deists. Pablo…does very well in explaining it better than me. You can go to www.calledtocommunion.com, August 2009, ‘Ecclesial Deists’.
Catholics believe Christ is God enough, big and strong enough to found His Church on mortal and sinful men. We find our life in Christ, not the pope or priests as ends to themselves. Then we would have died out a long time ago.
It is all about where you keep your focus. I go to Church for Christ, not men.
Tomyris…about the pope…our source of faith is Christ as defined by our universal Catechism. If the pope does not uphold any doctrine…we don’t support him where he errs…but he cannot in faith and morals…because for one, it is all written down in text form.
The popes of the Borgias and De Medicis, according to the deacon that contributed to our seminary on the papacy, shared that the Holy Spirit prevented all of them from any teaching.
The same authority from God that works through law and order…does the same, especially wouldn’t you think?..for His Church.
Catholics are Ecclesial Deists. Pablo…does very well in explaining it better than me. You can go to www.calledtocommunion.com, August 2009, ‘Ecclesial Deists’.
Catholics believe Christ is God enough, big and strong enough to found His Church on mortal and sinful men. We find our life in Christ, not the pope or priests as ends to themselves. Then we would have died out a long time ago.
It is all about where you keep your focus. I go to Church for Christ, not men.
K
KjetilK
Guest
When you say that Rome’s potential acknowledgement that “that the Porvoo Communion has remedied a previous deficiency” would mean that “for 400 years the people of Norway were not served by a valid priesthood.” No, it would simply mean that Rome didn’t recognise the orders. You are simply begging the question. You are using your conclusion – that Rome needs to recognise orders for them to be valid – as a premise. But I don’t agree with the conclusion. Therefore you cannot argue using it as a premise. What we are discussing is whether or not Rome needs to recognise orders for them to be valid.
I do. It is my bishop. And bishops aren’t simply suffragans of the Pope.
Cont.
- Status