tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post6032666730702012642..comments2023-11-05T02:55:10.230-06:00Comments on Gottesdienst Online: SELK: Reports of our demise have been greatly exaggeratedPr. H. R.http://www.blogger.com/profile/16756503062523543708noreply@blogger.comBlogger87125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-46991635773518403502010-12-13T08:20:00.986-06:002010-12-13T08:20:00.986-06:00The Rev. Dr. Torgerson sent me this comment via em...The Rev. Dr. Torgerson sent me this comment via email - and I think it puts a good capstone on the discussion. I will soon create another post at the top inviting discussion on related points. - +HRC<br /><br />M Becker again -- also in a missive to me -- claims that there are "clear majorities" in the SELK for women's ordination.<br />For the umpteenth time let me set the record straight: NEVER ONCE was there a majority either in the General Pastoral<br />Conference (which must needs consider all matters of doctrinal import before the General Synod can make a decision on<br />the issue involved) or in the General Synod itself -- again -- NEVER ONCE was there a majority for the introduction of<br />WO; generally it was one-third in favour, two-thirds against; not even to speak of the two-thirds needed to change Art. 7<br />of the SELK constitution. Where's the majority?<br /> <br />Becker's argument: The Augsburg Confession does not mention (he probably means: does not prescribe) the issue. My<br />counter-argument: Why should Melanchthon, better yet: the Church catholic say anything about something that was not in<br />the least under contention? And Brother Weedon rightly pointed out: Confessio Augustana claims that the "Lutherans" have<br />introduced "no innovation"! Surely, even M Becker must admit: WO is exactly that: novum.<br /> <br />And it was most interesting to follow M Becker's line of argumentation: Verses going against his view are labelled "most<br />likely an interpolation"; points made which he does not like are a "disconnect from this 21st-century western world"; that<br />"all" -- including women -- "may legitimately pray and prophesy publicly" is then by slight of hand used as an argument in<br />favour of women in the teaching/preaching ministry of the Church and the presidency at the worship service. The arguments<br />from the order of creation are simply dismissed as "out of date"; and any arguments against WO are simply labelled "not<br />substantive".<br /> <br />One last point about our SELK and its discussion process: it was and is extremely painful; it has opened up the question<br />of the continuance of our church body as part of the catholic tradition and obedience to a dominical command. The whole<br />discussion process has almost paralyzed our outreach, preoccupied pastoral conferences, foisted a discussion on parishes<br />and church members that does nothing to strengthen their faith or enhance their spiritual life.<br /> <br />Some months ago the German news magazine "Focus" in an article called for a "Frauenquote" (women's quota) in the<br />public ministry of the Church. In my letter to the editor I gave this reminder: "There already is such a quota, and it is 0%.<br />And it is adhered to by the majority of Christians since the beginnings of the Christian Church to this day: Eastern Orthodox,<br />Roman Catholics, Traditional Anglicans and Confessional Lutherans."Pr. H. R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16756503062523543708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-82563581378642194122010-12-13T07:49:14.929-06:002010-12-13T07:49:14.929-06:00Dear Dr. Becker,
I hope you will tell your studen...Dear Dr. Becker,<br /><br />I hope you will tell your students that you came to this site and picked this fight. There is no "witch hunt." You sought us out. You provoked us. You were in no way ignorant of our position or the position of the LC-MS.<br /><br />I hope you will also inform them that the martyrs of old who suffered and died for their confession suffered and died. They didn't get applauded by their students, admired by their peers, keep their positions, etc. I have no idea what your personal crosses are or how you might be suffering. But clearly this action has brought you no hardship or difficulty. I hope you aren't tempted to dishonor the suffering of the saints by claiming their glory as your own, or if you are, that you resist it. <br /><br />Your students would also be well served to learn what slander and libel are. Here is a very clear example: "The interlopers and political opportunists who were the Preus brothers . . . They played on people's fears and acted purely politically." <br /><br />Repent. <br /><br />Repent for the slander and judging of motives. Repent for twisting the Scriptures in regard to the Office of the Holy Ministry and for being dishonest in your allegiance and promise to teach the LCMS position.<br /><br />I respect men of conviction and conscience. If you believe that the Missouri Synod is violating the will of God as revealed in the Holy Scriptures by forbidding the ordination of women, then by all means, be a man, and follow your conscience. Leave the LCMS. You won't be a martyr. You won't be Luther or a hero of the faith. But at least you will have integrity and pure motives.<br /><br />I will now call the bishop and see if we can help you in this direction for you own good.<br /><br />Yours in Christ,<br /><br />Dave Petersen<br />Redeemer, Ft. WaynePetersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12953264105046882429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-39663554694646708112010-12-13T07:40:09.411-06:002010-12-13T07:40:09.411-06:00Fr. Becker,
In regard to your letter of June 14, ...Fr. Becker,<br /><br />In regard to your letter of June 14, 1999: Um, wow. <br /><br />I think you just lost your argument about Luther again. When he was confronted with what he felt was unfair persecution (that could have led to his death!) he gave a clear confession of what he thought was the truth. <br /><br />When you faced possible expulsion from a teaching position in the MO Synod - you obfuscated and refused to answer a simple question. <br /><br />I am glad that you now have a position that does not hinder you in this regard. You've gone on record in front of your students, here on this blog, on your own blog, in print and in speaking engagements: you believe, teach, and confess that women should be ordained. <br /><br />You're wrong. But at least you are now being honest and up front. <br /><br />+HRCPr. H. R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16756503062523543708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-69799339318457791252010-12-13T06:53:28.611-06:002010-12-13T06:53:28.611-06:00Dear Dr. Becker,
Thanks for the clarification to ...Dear Dr. Becker,<br /><br />Thanks for the clarification to my question... Please indulge me with one more: Do you believe our Lord Jesus Christ could just as well have become incarnate as a woman? Why or why not? Because it seems to me that this is more than just a practical question.<br /><br />Thanks again!<br />Jon KrenzRev. Jonathon T. Krenzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967155085700010936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-30999181572951525092010-12-13T06:13:07.837-06:002010-12-13T06:13:07.837-06:00Matt, thanks for showing how you avoided answering...Matt, thanks for showing how you avoided answering these questions, clearly and directly.<br /><br />You were not asked what the Synod "believes" but what you, Matthew Becker, personally, believe, teach and confess.<br /><br />An opportunity for honest confession was presented to you. You chose not to be honest.Rev. Paul T. McCainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04846468267196335350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-4694085226217333392010-12-13T00:33:35.093-06:002010-12-13T00:33:35.093-06:00What is to be preferred:
Herr Dummkopf Becker or ...What is to be preferred:<br /><br />Herr Dummkopf Becker or Doktor Dummkopf Becker? Or perhaps it should be Herr Doktor Dummkopf Becker? (Alright, I'm just being silly.)<br /><br />But I have to chuckle that as soon as I had observed in my prior comment that the one thing that this doctrinal dispute cannot be, an adiaphoron, you then promptly realized that you had to backtrack and start insisting that the whole matter is adiaphoron. Quite humorous, professor Becker. But you've been caught.<br /><br />Also, to let you know how fair this opponent is treating you, I will say that if the situation was reversed, and that there was a No-WO pastor in the ELCA who kept on insisting that the ELCA should become No-WO when the ELCA is doctrinally pro-WO, then I'm perfectly okay with the ELCA disciplining and possibly ex-communicating the No-WO pastor out of its ranks and suggesting that he join the LCMS. <br /><br />Fair's fair. So if I support LCMS booting out a pro-WO agitator, I'll also support ELCA booting out a No-WO agitator from its ranks. Fair is fair.Truth Unites... and Divideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08891402278361538353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-29232610005358923152010-12-12T23:47:40.869-06:002010-12-12T23:47:40.869-06:00Presidium of the LCMS
...This letter is in respon...Presidium of the LCMS<br /><br />...This letter is in response to your letter of June 14, 1999...<br /><br />You have asked me, “Do you believe and clearly affirm that according to the Word of God the pastoral office is to be held only by men?”<br /><br />My response: The position of our Synod is that “those statements of Scripture which direct women to keep silent in the church and which prohibit them to teach and exercise authority over men [viz., 1 Cor. 14:33b-36; 1 Tim. 2:8-15] we understand to mean that women ought not hold the pastoral office” (1969 Resolution 2-17; cf. 1971 Resolution 2-04; 1977 Resolution 3-15; 1986 Resolution 3-10; 1989 Resolution 3-14; 1995 Resolution 3-17; 1998 Resolution 3-25A). I honor and uphold all of these synodical resolutions in the sense that the Synod itself states in Bylaw 1.09, b (cf. 1.09 c, 7). Although your questions may be using the expression “believe and clearly affirm” in the same sense as the Synod’s “honor and uphold,” I hope you will understand that I prefer to use the Synod’s own formulation.<br /> <br />Your second question is: “Do you believe and clearly affirm that to teach that the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod is wrong when it confesses that only men should hold this office is to teach contrary to the Word of God?”<br /><br />My response: To the extent that your second question repeats your first question and does not go beyond or conflict with Article II of the Constitution, the carefully nuanced 1969 Resolution 2-17 (reaffirmed in all the subsequent synodical resolutions on this matter cited above), 1962 Resolution 6-01, 1965 Resolution 2-08, and 1971 Resolution 5-24 (especially by requiring “a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer” also to this question), and to the extent that the formulation “believe and clearly affirm” has the same meaning as the official synodical formulation “honor and uphold,” and with the assumption that this second question merely asks for my opinion about a hypothetical situation involving someone else teaching that the LCMS position is wrong (and does not in fact ask about my own theological position or refer to something I am alleged to have taught), and despite the fact that this second question does not provide any information that might have a bearing as to why and in what respects this hypothetical individual teaches that the LCMS position is wrong (e.g., has this hypothetical person perhaps questioned whether the verb “confesses” is theologically appropriate for an affirmation of this kind?), please accept my response to your first question as also my response to your second question.<br /> <br />I believe there must be continuing study and discussion of the relevant Scripture passages which underlie 1969 Resolution 2-17 and similar resolutions, and which may also relate to the question I was addressing in my Roselle presentation, namely, whether there is a Scriptural basis for denying women the opportunity to teach theology in a university of the LCMS or to teach the Word of God to men and women in certain other capacities. Matthew BeckerMatthew L. Beckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11059030026435971613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-36195043140045150412010-12-12T21:33:48.057-06:002010-12-12T21:33:48.057-06:00Paul M.,
What do you mean when you write, "Y...Paul M.,<br /><br />What do you mean when you write, "You were asked to tell The LCMS Praesidium what Scripture passages you use to teach that the ordination of women is contrary to the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions"? I don't understand this statement.<br /><br />The best theologians the LCMS has produced were active in the LCMS between 1931 and 1975, after the death of F. Pieper and before Anaheim. Several profs. were able to continue teaching at the undergraduate level well into the 1990s, but they had to be very careful.<br /><br />The interlopers and political opportunists who were the Preus brothers turned Missouri in a very, very bad direction. They played on people's fears and acted purely politically, under a veneer of outdated seventeenth-century orthodoxy. And I write this as someone who likes JAO Preus III, who was my professor at seminary. I would encourage you and all others to read the new book about that era that will soon be published by Fortress Press. Talk about a scandal. And we're still suffering under their baneful influence. <br /><br />I'm glad that their perspective, though held by an apparent political majority, at least for the time being, is not by any means a unanimous position. <br /><br />Paul, is your goal to remove from the synod all of those who would be open to the ordination of women? Do you really think you can purify the synod? <br /><br />You might succeed in removing me, but what then? I guess you'll go after the next person, and the next, and the next...<br /><br />What a waste of time and energy, imo, esp. when we share so much in common and that our real, common goal ought to be the same as St. Paul's, doing all things so that by any means we might save some.<br /><br />Fraternally yours,<br />Matthew BeckerMatthew L. Beckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11059030026435971613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-59066887567917796462010-12-12T20:41:17.735-06:002010-12-12T20:41:17.735-06:00Matt,
I will say this, you may have many problems...Matt,<br /><br />I will say this, you may have many problems, but a lack of confidence is not one of them. Does your hubris have no limits? Apparently not.<br /><br />You and I both know what happened a number of years ago. You were asked point blank what your position was on the ordination of women. You were asked to tell The LCMS Praesidium what Scripture passages you use to teach that the ordination of women is contrary to the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions.<br /><br />You dodged the questions. You lied about your position. It was a moment when integrity and honesty and courage was called for, and you failed utterly.<br /><br />I do not understand why you are in The LCMS. You obviously do not share her confession on any number of points.<br /><br />How and why you allowed yourself to become so enamored with Seminex era theology is beyond me. But it is quite evident to me, and many others, that you are simply living a lie right now. Your theological home is in the ELCA, and I would encourage you to seek its fellowship.<br /><br />Paul MCainRev. Paul T. McCainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04846468267196335350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-2734641138582877472010-12-12T19:22:53.441-06:002010-12-12T19:22:53.441-06:00Would "I believe one holy, catholic, and apos...Would "I believe one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church" be a confession against women being ordained?Brian P Westgatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15383132438753364755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-51686646374398839942010-12-12T19:05:24.944-06:002010-12-12T19:05:24.944-06:00Prof. Becker,
When Rev. McCain suggested that you...Prof. Becker,<br /><br />When Rev. McCain suggested that you take a look at the NALC it got me thinking about folks "splitting the difference" on WO and homosexual behavior. I have talked to many NALC folks/conservative ELCA folks who are opposed to blessing homosexual sin, but support WO. Many in Missouri have pointed to the connection between the two issues, but I have never been satisfied with arguments of how one can support one and not the other. <br /><br />So anyway, how do you support one and not the other. <br /><br />(And I guess I should say that my question assumes that you hold that homosexual behavior is forbidden by God. Unless you depart from our church's teaching on that issue as well, which would render my question moot.) <br /><br />Pastor David RamirezPastor David Ramirezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01777911480825540855noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-41459936433896706222010-12-12T19:04:24.184-06:002010-12-12T19:04:24.184-06:00No, Matthew, no. It is not an adiaphoron, for it ...No, Matthew, no. It is not an adiaphoron, for it is a matter on which God Himself has spoken and you have shown that the only way you can circumvent His word is by pretending to an interpolation. Please, my brother, repent of this. You promised that all your preaching, teaching, and administration of the Sacraments would in accord with the Sacred Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions. The Sacred Scriptures unequivocally state that women may not authoritatively teach in the Divine Service; the Lutheran Confessions state that we reject every novum in doctrine or ceremony. You cannot be faithful to your ordination promises and hold that a woman may be placed into the office of the holy ministry. Your Church, YOUR Church, confesses this.William Weedonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01383850332591975790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-77792615007283077882010-12-12T19:02:14.203-06:002010-12-12T19:02:14.203-06:00Fr. Becker,
More petitio principii. We are arguin...Fr. Becker,<br /><br />More petitio principii. We are arguing about whether or not a male-only clergy is part of the faith once delivered to the saints. I say it is. You say it isn't. I, and many others, have provided the Scriptures to prove it. You have attempted to argue your way out from under them, even going so far as to say something of them aren't really there. And, I might add, you never answered my question bout your view of the pastorals: are they truly Pauline, in your opinion?<br /><br />The Nicene Creed also doesn't say that we can baptize babies. But that is part of the faith once delivered to the saints. The Augsburg Confession doesn't have a specific article defining homosexual acts as sins - but they are. Nor does the Formula have an article on abortion - but abortion is still a sin. You see, there's this other book: the Bible. And it says a lot of stuff, too. As polemical documents, we cannot expect the ecumenical creeds and Lutheran Confessions to cover every topic that the Bible covers. <br /><br />And as Fr. Weedon pointed out, part of our Augsburg Confession is that we accept nothing new in our doctrine or ceremony. Now, as you yourself have argued, the ordaining of women to the ministry would indeed be a new thing - you say in ceremony, I say also in doctrine. You think that we are called to grow into this opinion. I say the Word of God forbids it - repeatedly!<br /><br />You cannot with any integrity claim to think that this is an open question within the LCMS or historic Lutheranism. You are arguing for a novum. We want nothing of it. <br /><br />My dear friend and colleague Fr. Weedon has spoken to you very pastoral words above. I urge you to heed them. I would much rather have such a keen mind and ardent spirit as yours within our fellowship. But if you continue in your preaching and teaching of false doctrine and uncatholic practice, I'm afraid that just simply will not be.<br /><br />+HRCPr. H. R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16756503062523543708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-3134878693485823432010-12-12T18:58:43.900-06:002010-12-12T18:58:43.900-06:00William Weedon,
As I have already written, I shar...William Weedon,<br /><br />As I have already written, I share the same faith as you. My confession of faith is identical to yours.<br /><br />You are urging someone who shares your same faith to remove himself from the synod in which he was baptized, in which he was taught the faith (never once did ordination into the holy ministry ever appear as a element in that faith, and I was instructed by Dr. L. Dean Hemplemann, who also served as preacher at my ordination), in which I first received the Lord's body and blood for the forgiveness of my sins, in which I was further instructed in the faith at seminary, in which I was ordained, and in which I have continued to serve for more than twenty years.<br /><br />We disagree about the practical issue of whether or not a qualified woman may serve as pastor. That's not an issue of faith or doctrine or confession. That's a practical question about an adiaphoron.<br /><br />Fraternal Greetings,<br />Matthew BeckerMatthew L. Beckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11059030026435971613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-81803655629928822162010-12-12T18:50:38.570-06:002010-12-12T18:50:38.570-06:00Brother Paul M.,
I answered the loaded questions ...Brother Paul M.,<br /><br />I answered the loaded questions that were put to me, just as Luther answered the loaded questions that were put to him.<br /><br />While I was not risking my neck, I was in a position in which I could lose my position at Concordia University, Portland, and all for reasons that did not and do not touch "the doctrine of faith."<br /><br />We aren't saved or justified by whether or not we "confess" that women may or may not be pastors. That would be like saying, "Our confession of faith includes the truth that Nimrod was a great hunter..." <br /><br />Look, I don't claim to be Dr. Luther. I'm a maggot sack compared to him. But his actions and faith have given me much inspiration and motivation over the years. Most especially from Dr. Luther I have been encouraged by two things:<br /><br />(1) I am baptized;<br /><br />(2) I did not seek to become a doctor of theology, but it was thrust upon me, much like it was for Dr. Luther. You can blame Dr. Nagel for that. I'm sure he regrets it, perhaps as much as Staupitz may have regretted ordering LUther to study for the doctorate.<br /><br />So I am baptized, as was Dr. Luther; and I am a doctor of theology, as was Dr. Luther; and my conscience, too, is captive to the word of God (not to the church, not to church councils or popes, or to human traditions within the church). I continue to preach and teach Scripture most Sundays (currently serving a pastoral vacancy), and serve as a professor of theology at a major Lutheran university. I continue to live out my the public vows I made at my ordination.<br /><br />Fraternal greetings,<br />Matthew BeckerMatthew L. Beckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11059030026435971613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-8956557586052492132010-12-12T18:42:56.185-06:002010-12-12T18:42:56.185-06:00We plead with you to repent, for that would be the...We plead with you to repent, for that would be the greatest joy of all; or if you insist on persisting in advocating this false doctrine and counterfeit practice to do the honest thing and depart from a Synod whose faith and confession you no longer espouse.William Weedonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01383850332591975790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-71644206638786049552010-12-12T18:39:39.543-06:002010-12-12T18:39:39.543-06:00Pr. H. R.,
And how did Dr. Luther know he was rig...Pr. H. R.,<br /><br />And how did Dr. Luther know he was right to act the way he did? So many of his Roman detractors said to him exactly what you are writing to me.<br /><br />We each must give an account before almighty God, who alone can judge who is right and who is wrong. Meanwhile, we act as we discern the Lord directing us.<br /><br />Fraternal greetings,<br />Matthew BeckerMatthew L. Beckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11059030026435971613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-16848542728325710002010-12-12T18:36:04.461-06:002010-12-12T18:36:04.461-06:00HRC,
Your definition of "faith" is defi...HRC,<br /><br />Your definition of "faith" is deficient. I confess the same faith as you because we both confess the Nicene Creed, the Apostles' Creed, and we adhere to the doctrinal content of the Augsburg Confession. None of these creeds and no other creed includes the line, "I believe in a male-only clergy," just as no other creed or confession contains the line, "I believe that a person should not purchase life insurance or pray with Christians who are not Missouri Synod." The synod has changed its positions on all sorts of issues, including slavery, and yet the synod's confession has not altered, since the doctrinal content of the Scriptures remains unaffected by these changes.<br /><br />You have too narrow a view of what constitutes "doctrine," what constitutes faith.<br /><br />I confess and teach orthodox Trinitarian dogma, orthodox Christological dogma, the doctrine of sin, the doctrine of justification by faith alone, the orthodox doctrine of baptism, the orthodox doctrine of the Lord's Supper, the orthodox doctrine of election, the doctrine of the church, the doctrine of government presented in AC 15, the orthodox doctrine about good works, the proper distinction between law and gospel, the orthodox doctrine of eschatology, and the orthodox doctrine of the holy ministry (AC V, XIV, XXVIII).<br /><br />And you think I do not have the same FAITH as you, all because I think God allows qualified women to serve as pastors? That's nonesense.<br /><br />I suppose if you had been living in the nineteenth century and were a devotee of Dr. Walther, you would think that I did not share the same Christian faith as you if I opposed slavery? What if I was in favor of life insurance in the early 20th century? Do you honestly believe you share the same dogmatic faith as our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters who believe in the immaculate conception of Mary, her bodily assumption into heaven, and the infallibility of the pope (who is still labeled the antichrist on the LCMS website)?<br /><br />To think that the doctrine of infant baptism, a clear dogmatic issue that is confessed in the Apostles' and Nicene creeds and the Augsburg Confession is on the same level as the practice of ordaining women is a truly false view.<br /><br />Your notions are too Judaistic, too narrow, too human. You are distorting a matter of human tradition, a matter that is an adiaphoron, into a doctrinal issue when the matter is merely a practical one. If a woman proclaims the gospel or administers the sacraments the gospel and sacraments are just as valid and efficacious as if a man did the proclamation and administration.<br /><br />I plead with you and all others who share your narrow views to reconsider what "doctrine" is, what "faith" is, what "the doctrine of faith" is, and what "practice" is. <br /><br />Fraternal greetings,<br />Matthew BeckerMatthew L. Beckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11059030026435971613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-20121234333709947552010-12-12T18:29:31.669-06:002010-12-12T18:29:31.669-06:00Matt,
No, you have not been "up front" ...Matt,<br /><br />No, you have not been "up front" Matt. When you were directly challenged to confess what you believed by the Praesidium of The LCMS, you prevaricated and refused to answer.<br /><br />And, by the way, you are no Martin Luther and Warren Schumacher is no Frederick the Wise, not by a long shot, in either case.<br /><br />PTMRev. Paul T. McCainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04846468267196335350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-14812721573795112512010-12-12T18:14:41.984-06:002010-12-12T18:14:41.984-06:00Father Hollywood,
You are right, adiaphoron is or...Father Hollywood,<br /><br />You are right, adiaphoron is originally from the Greek, but I learned the word first in my Latin class. The term is in fact found in Latin dictionaries as well as English.<br /><br />The point is, the singular is "adiaphoron," the plural, "adiaphora."<br /><br />Sincerely yours,<br />Matthew BeckerMatthew L. Beckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11059030026435971613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-27058959983886617542010-12-12T17:24:34.427-06:002010-12-12T17:24:34.427-06:00Fr. Becker,
That's petitio principii. You'...Fr. Becker,<br /><br />That's petitio principii. You're only like Luther if you are right - which is precisely the point under discussion. So such comparisons are not arguments in your favor - they are rather assumptions in your favor.<br /><br />+HRCPr. H. R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16756503062523543708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-54402099176801782482010-12-12T17:22:32.520-06:002010-12-12T17:22:32.520-06:00Paul M.,
Was Dr. Luther a coward or a wise serpen...Paul M.,<br /><br />Was Dr. Luther a coward or a wise serpent when he "hid" behind Fred, disobeyed the pope and his minions, and criticized the questions that those minions sometimes put to him?<br /><br />Fraternal greetings,<br />Matthew BeckerMatthew L. Beckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11059030026435971613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-71580597089803966922010-12-12T17:21:54.756-06:002010-12-12T17:21:54.756-06:00"The parenthetical statement in First Cor. 14..."The parenthetical statement in First Cor. 14:33b-36 is most likely an interpolation. "The textual corruption at this point would suggest this, as would later hyper-misogyny in early Christianity (as an overreaction against Gnostic female Christians), and the fact that other sections of the same letter clearly indicate that women did pray and prophesy publicly in Corinth (and elsewhere)."<br /><br />Always a sign of desperation, to allege an interpolation when and where the shoe pinches too tightly on one's own darling novel notions. May I recommend to my Lutheran friends (and fellow-contenders against the abomination of WO) the weighty tome ("weighty" in more ways than one) *Women in the Priesthood: A Systematic Analysis in the Light of the Order of Creation and Redemption* by Manfred Hauke, trans. by David Kipp (San Francisco, 1988: Ignatius Press). The book was published in German in 1986, and you may learn more about Hauke here:<br /><br />http://www.manfred-hauke.de/cv_lingua_eng.htm<br /><br />I would recommend, in particular (in the light of the foregoing discussion) Part II, Ch. V ("The Testimony of Saint Paul") and especially subsections 3 ("Saint Paul's position on female offices"), 4 ("The influence of Marcion: the kernel of truth in the interpolation hypothesis") and 5 ("The dogmatic value of I Corinthians 14:33b-38"), which together span pp. 357-396 of the book. I would also recommend his later (1995) book *God or Goddess: Feminist Theology, What Is It? and Where Does It Lead?* also published by Ignatius Press.<br /><br />Hauke, happily, regards the purported "ordination" of women to "the diaconate" as just as much an erroneous novelty as their "ordination" to the episcopate and presbyterate. On that subject, however, the best Catholic treatments are *The Diaconate: An Historical Study* by Aime-Georges Martimort, which appeared in French in 1982 and in English from Ignatius Press in 1986, and *Priesthood and Diaconate: The Recipient of the Sacrament of Holy Orders from the Perspective of Creation Theology and Christology* by Gerhard Ludwig Muller (now Bishop of Regensburg), which was published by Ignatius Press in 2002. All of these books are still in print, and easily available.<br /><br />As a Catholic, I will add that for many years I have been hoping and prating for a papal motu proprio "Ordinatio Diaconalis" to complement "Ordinatio Sacerdotalis" of 1994, and to cut off that particular hydra's head in the Catholic Church which many "Catholic dissenters" have begun to support as a way of evading orthodox belief on the subject of WO.William Tighehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16634494183165592707noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-33855360524245195722010-12-12T17:19:16.670-06:002010-12-12T17:19:16.670-06:00Fr. Becker,
You wrote, "There is no basis fo...Fr. Becker,<br /><br />You wrote, "There is no basis for ecclesiastical charges. That would only eventuate in majority-minority votes, and you all said, "We don't vote on doctrine.""<br /><br />You are publicly teaching contrary to the stated confession of the Missouri Synod. That's kind of, well, you know, the definition of the time when charges of teaching false doctrine are called for. <br /><br />As for "not voting on doctrine." That's a red herring tossed around incorrectly and to no good effect by folks on all sides in this and every other theological debate. <br /><br />The Fathers at Nicea were not "voting on doctrine" - as if the power of their vote created truth. But they sure did vote - or rather, confessed the faith. <br /><br />Father Becker, you confess a very different faith from the faith I confess and from the faith that the Missouri Synod confesses. <br /><br />To return to an earlier example of mine, we can look to the example of baptizing children. If an ordained preacher in the Missouri Synod starting making arguments against infant baptism in the same manner that you are making arguments against a male-only clergy. . . well, we would fraternally encourage him to repent of his false teaching. If he did not, and persisted in publicly teaching that babies should not be baptized, I'd bet dollars to donuts that eventually somebody sure is going to file ecclesiastical charges against him. <br /><br />The Missouri Synod confesses that infants should be baptized and that women should not be ordained. That's just the way it is. You can try to change either one if you feel compelled to do so - but just don't act surprised, hurt, or sanctimonious when finally somebody says, "Hmmm...I don't really think that fellow is confessing the same Scriptural faith we are confessing."<br /><br />+HRCPr. H. R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16756503062523543708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-52016190085108719042010-12-12T17:17:51.620-06:002010-12-12T17:17:51.620-06:00That's the NINETEENTH amendment from 1920 that...That's the NINETEENTH amendment from 1920 that allowed women the francise in the US.<br /><br />Matthew BeckerMatthew L. Beckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11059030026435971613noreply@blogger.com