Women’s Ordination Not a Dead Issue in the LCMS, by Pr. Rossow

The voices in support of women’s ordination in the LCMS have grown stronger and not weaker in the last few years as evidenced by the sprouting up of a new website at  www.thecreatorstapestry.com.

The good news is that so far the site is getting little if any response. The posted articles have few or no comments on them. (With all you clicking on the above link I am sure their numbers will sky-rocket for a day or two.) It looks like the site is only a couple of weeks old but according to reports on the site, the group that has put it together has been around for the last few years. More good news is that this group was hoping for more support for their cause to come out of the recent CTCR report than surfaced.

The CTCR’s report is titled “The Creator’s Tapestry” and  was sent out to all LCMS rostered workers a couple of weeks ago. It has gotten little attention amidst all of the buzz about the  presidentital nominations. On the surface the document toes the Biblical line but I was dissapointed in the overall motif chosen to convey the Biblical doctrine of God’s creation of  male and female. “The Tapestry” is a motif that comes from the toleration crowd. The gay and lesbian crowd likes to speak of “human-kind” as one big tapestry and one big tent under which all can live in harmony.

The booklet speaks of the order of creation but we are left wishing that the notion of order would have been the very principles of organiazation for it instead of the weaker theme  of  tapestry. The subtitle is also weak: “Scriptural Perspectives on Man-Woman Relations…” Since when have we adopted the post modern  approach of “perspectives” on revelaed truth? Christians do not have “perspectives” on doctrine. Instead, we study the Scriptures to discover the propositional truth therein.  Our grandfather’s spoke of “the order of creation” but now we are speaking of “tapestries” and “perspectives.”

I am not prepared yet to give a thorough review of the booklet but just thought you might want to know about this website that has popped up. This and the situation Mollie spoke of yesterday paint a picture of a church body that has lacked in Biblical oversight for the last several years.

About Pastor Tim Rossow

Rev. Dr. Timothy Rossow is the Director of Development for Lutherans in Africa. He served Bethany Lutheran Church in Naperville, IL as the Sr. Pastor for 22 years (1994-2016) and was Sr. Pastor of Emmanuel Lutheran in Dearborn, MI prior to that. He is the founder of Brothers of John the Steadfast but handed off the Sr. Editor position to Rev. Joshua Scheer in 2015. He currently resides in Ocean Shores WA with his wife Phyllis. He regularly teaches in Africa. He also paints watercolors, reads philosophy and golfs. He is currently represented in two art galleries in the Pacific Northwest. His M Div is from Concordia, St. Louis and he has an MA in philosophy from St. Louis University and a D Min from Concordia, Fort Wayne.

Comments

Women’s Ordination Not a Dead Issue in the LCMS, by Pr. Rossow — 101 Comments

  1. THE WELS stance is looking better and better. No confusion, no tolerance for deviation. From te letter of the women above wshe has spnt 25 years serving n caitiesw that truly usrp spirital authoirty over men. Where was direction and leadership all those years that let her do tses things? So angry, I sound….but are all ur Pastors born without male genetaliawhere are thw Confessional men in this synod?

  2. @Norm Fisher #49

    I don’t think that overture made it to resolution status, let alone made it to the floor. Ooops–here it is. Resolution 3-07 TO STUDY CTCR REPORTS RELATING TO SERVICE OF WOMEN IN THE CHURCH.

    It referenced overtures that called for rescinding, reaffirming, more study, etc, and so this, “Let’s keep on conversing” was the result. It passed 870-286. This may account for the report that is the basis for this thread. See 2007 Convention Proceedings, P. 122.

    No way was the Wyoming Overture going to make it to the floor as is. No way. We’re just going to keep the “conversation” ongoing.

    Cheeky? You bet. True dat? Yep!

    Johannes

  3. @John #15
    The tragic reality is they don’t have to. Why should the leave when false doctrine is permitted? Why should they leave when there are so many of the same ilk?

    OR, as “friend” Louderback has said on LQ, “You leave. We won.”

  4. Helen :@John #15 The tragic reality is they don’t have to. Why should the leave when false doctrine is permitted? Why should they leave when there are so many of the same ilk?
    OR, as “friend” Louderback has said on LQ, “You leave. We won.”

    Based on recent threads at LQ, I wonder if he was only talking about people leaving LQ?

  5. With all due respect, I don’t believe that any issue should be viewed as a “dead” issue, so long as we live in a sinful world.

    As this particular issue is written about in Scripture, we can be assured that it has existed since the beginnings of the Church. I’m willing to bet that it has risen its head multiple times in the past, as it rears its head today. Sure, it crops up in different ways at different times, but this, I would argue, is precisely why God’s faithful should never hope to see it viewed as a “dead” issue.

    If we as a synod were to view this as a “dead” issue, even if only politically, we would be presenting satan with just the opportunity he needs to wreak havoc in our synod. I can imagine him licking his chops watching faithful and confessional pastors resting upon their laurels, unprepared to respond to this challenge, and therefore unprepared to respond to this challenge gently and patiently–an even worse matter!

    Thank God we have people loudly challenging this issue, in order that our faithful and confessional pastors may respond kindly and lovingly “to show which of you have God’s approval.” Do you think that women’s ordination will be the greatest challenge to the church? Certainly not, but it does serve a purpose of sharpening those who wish to remain faithful to God’s word for greater challenges.

    And let us not forget those who are honestly–as opposed to hard-heartedly (of course, we cannot truly tell which is which)–struggling with and seeking an answer to this issue. What a great opportunity for us to put into practice the gifts of God in teaching them! What a wonderful manner in which God and His word can bring forth from us the fruits of faith as we peacefully persevere in his steadfast teaching and love.

    Yes, there are those who are unrepentant and hardhearted. It would be nice of them to shut up. But we cannot control them. We can only, by the working of God’s Holy Spirit, love them and those around them and cling to and contend for the faith once and for all delivered to us by the saints.

  6. Pr. Frahm,
    They’re better at handling it & containing it than LCMS is or has chosen to be.

  7. Pr. John A. Frahm :
    WELS has a lot of the same problems the LCMS does – church growth movement, pietism, lay ministry, etc.

    Dutch :
    Pr. Frahm,
    They’re better at handling it & containing it than LCMS is or has chosen to be.

    As Pr. Frahm says, WELS faces similar problems and is indeed susceptible to the CG folks and pietism issues. As Dutch correctly says, right now WELS doctrinal issues are in relatively good standing with discipline being exercised as needed. It is by God’s grace and gifts that WELS is walking a difficult line between the forces of Satan. As Christians, we continue to be vigilant whether LCMS or WELS or ELS or _______ brothers and sisters.

    I am comfortable (should I be comfortable afflicted or afflicted from my comfort) in saying WELS has little if any issues with the lay ministry. Lay ministers usually exist in the form of congregational called elders being called by the voter’s assembly to cover for pastor taking vacation. There are no lay people readers in the WELS churches I have attended, though they might exist. Perhaps Dutch can correct me?

  8. From the document:

    “Women are not to exercise the unique authority of the pastoral office. Only
    men may be pastors and hold other church offices that are charged with
    assisting the pastor in carrying out his pastoral authority.”

  9. Pr. John A. Frahm :
    WELS has a lot of the same problems the LCMS does – church growth movement, pietism, lay ministry, etc.

    Pr. Frahm, since you are in Greeley, CO., perhaps you know Paster Spaude at St. Peters Lutheran in Fort Collins, CO. (WELS). I attend there when visiting my parents, who attend the LCMS church (Peace With Christ Lutheran). Usually we attend both services on Sunday. I can safely say that there are more CG and lay ministry confusion at “Peace with Christ” than “St. Peters”. Perhaps I need to drive to Greeley and visit Gloria Christi this summer when visiting CO.

  10. Perry,
    No, there are no laity readers in my church. Although I will say this.
    Before I knew, it was error, I was asked to read the Old Testament & Epistle. I have never been given a greater honor than that. Ever!
    Now, I have public speaking background. Nothing annoyes me more than someone, who has not prepared to read or pronounce God’s Word in public. Give Him & His Word a bit. You teach others when you read It!!!!!
    Let alone give It, the due.

    I did so, I did question the propriety, but was assured it was “ok”. That would be LCMS.
    Now, in the gambit of ways, I have served, this one thing, gave me the most joy.
    I was able to read the Scriptures in public. Not for instruction, in my mind. I was allowed, to speak & read my Lord’s Word, publically. I’ve been to Speakers Corner in London (several times), I had my Bible when I went, I couldn’t even get near it!!!!!
    There is no greater honor, that can or may be given than this! I am sad, that I did so in ignorance. I would not have done so otherwise.
    But…I will say, it is a high point, for me. I know the realm in which we dwell, I know what others, outside our nation suffer for the Words, I had the freedom to speak. Not teach, w/intent, just to be able to read aloud, in public. I will not do so again. I know why. I knew then. I trusted elders & a holder of the Divine Office when they told me “it’s okay, really, you can. It is up to us to answer for it, not you. Go ahead”
    That, is just one item, one moment, in one congregation, in one denomination.

    WELS has our “church & change” we have our Rev. Jeske & his minions. We have all this, however….we see it for what it is, we give it no foothold, nor do we acknowledge any power to it. That is finite, it will come, as all things do. But, today is today and it is all we are ever promised or given. So, we speak out, we fight the Good fight, and we cling to the Cross, and to the One Who bought & paid for us, w/o our own worth or merit. It is why we here, do what we do. Not for a Synod or denom, but for Him. If it isn’t for HIM, and to HIM, as HE asks, it will not last, nor will it ever bear good fruit.
    It’s why we left Perry.

  11. Dear Mr. Lund,

    As you know, comparing one LCMS congregation to one WELS congregation doesn’t really prove much. Both congregations are filled with sinners, and pastoral care must always be slow, careful, loving, and compassionate.

    I encourage you to bring your concerns to my friend the Rev. Ralph Patrick. I served as his assistant pastor at Peace With Christ for about a year.

    I think you may find Pr. Patrick to be a different sort of pastor than you expect.

    Yours in Christ,

    Rev. Charles Lehmann

  12. Rev. Charles Lehmann :
    Dear Mr. Lund,
    As you know, comparing one LCMS congregation to one WELS congregation doesn’t really prove much. Both congregations are filled with sinners, and pastoral care must always be slow, careful, loving, and compassionate.
    I encourage you to bring your concerns to my friend the Rev. Ralph Patrick. I served as his assistant pastor at Peace With Christ for about a year.
    I think you may find Pr. Patrick to be a different sort of pastor than you expect.
    Yours in Christ,
    Rev. Charles Lehmann

    Thank you for responding Pastor Lehmann. I figured I would put my foot in my mouth whether literally or figuratively. The last time I attended Peace with Christ was the first time I heard Pastor Patrick and I was impressed as he was (IMHO) better than the previous pastor (whose name I do not recall). My parents (Richard and Elenore Lund) also speak well of improvement in liturgy and pastoral concern for the flock at Peace with Christ. I am not back peddling however is saying that in the past, Peace with Christ has had a pastor with some questionable ways and method.

    If I sounded as if WELS are not sinners, I assure you that is NOT the case. Sinners through and through, and saints through and through.

    Blessings and I appreciate making the connection Pastor Lehmann.

  13. @Pr. John A. Frahm #66

    Agreed in the pastoral care of Pastor Patrick. See my response to Pastor Lehmann. I enjoy attending both services on a Sunday at both LCMS and WELS congregations. However, my parents will NOT go to the WELS church. My father is extremely belligerent about close communion and he can not understand it between WELS and LCMS. I will leave that issue alone; it is not germane to this discussion.

  14. Pr. John A. Frahm :
    Here’s a paper by Rolf Preus that some might find helpful in regard to WELS:
    http://www.christforus.org/Papers/Content/OldMinistryDebate.html

    Thank you Pastor Frahm. I just scanned this paper and already am prepared to dive in. It will no doubt add to my historical framework of the Lutheran Church in America.

    There are so many fine and wonderful resources here in people, data and other gifts of God. Someday I hope to visit or meet some of you. Blessings and thank you.

  15. This is Dr. Barbara Brunworth (no “s” in my name). Shirley G., April 22, # 10, you apparently did not learn your catechism in 7th grade regarding the 8th. commandment. Your post is slanderous. You have implied that I in some way espoused the philosophy of ‘open marriage’ in my class on Marriage and Family at Concordia U., Seward. If I assigned you to read “Open Marriage” (since that was 35 years ago I won’t agrue that with you), it most certainly was not done with any intent but to make you aware of current thinking by the secular world in the mid 1970’s. You owe me an apology.

  16. Barbara B.,

    Thank you for making the effort to respond to Shirley #10. I hope she is still reading and will take time to respond. As you say, if the book was assigned for the purpose of study that is a far different thing than what is asserted on comment #10.

    Shirley was attempting to support the point of my post with further evidence. That brings up this question. Do you reject what is taught on http://www.thecreatorstapestry.com where your paper is posted? I am glad to hear that you were only using the open marriage text as an example of heresy and paganism but what about the issue at hand?

    TR

  17. Greetings,

    I would warmly invite anyone who is in Ft. Collins to visit Peace with Christ. What you will find is not a perfect congregation (whatever that means), but one that is doing her best to be evangelical and Lutheran. While we have taken some very positive steps these past five years (elimination of women as lectors, addition of every sunday communion and introduction of common cup, renewal of historic liturgy and hymns, for example), there is still a great deal of work to be done. However I am convinced that this process is a slow one that is best achieved by patient teaching and preaching, rather than via a heavy-handed and authoritarian approach. I would ask that if anyone has questions or concerns about Peace With Christ. our practice, or my pastoral approach to please feel free to contact me.

  18. Tim R. @#72,

    Will you please explain what is taught on http://www.thecreatorstapestry.com ? Considering your exegesis of Dr. Brunworth’s comment, your explanation should be revealing.

    And thank you so much for helping me finally understand the missing verse 9 in 1Tim. 2. When I went back to read comment #10, the “s” ShirleyG used to mispell Brunworth had been magically removed. Problem solved!

  19. @Ralph Patrick #73

    Pastor Patrick,

    A shameful sinner I have been in my comments in comparing Peace to St. Peter there in Fort Collins. I was enjoyed services at both. Since your arrival, the positive changes have been noticed by my parents. You will have to give my regards to them in church. Forgive my sin and God bless your work at Peace.

  20. Pr. Rosso,
    I will make this one attempt to explain to one and all in this venue. Thereafter I will not continue to defend myself and the women who went to Pres. K. et.al. since it too often becomes a never ending round of accusations rather than a respectful discussion. Resolution 3-10 was passed by the convention in 1995 and after ten years had not been acted upon. The resolution resolves, “that the CTCR coordinate a comprehensive study of the scriptual relationship of man and woman, together with the faculties of both seminaries, making use of other persons who are competent in the area of theology, including women.” It is Pr. K.’s responsibility as Pres. to make sure resolutions of conventions are carried out. Thus we went to him.

    Eight men and eight women (one more woman was added to fill in for a woman who was ill at one of the meetings and then was invited to continue to participate) were chosen to discuss the questions posed in the resolution as the CTCR ‘listened in’. Only two of the seven women who went to Pr. K. were part of the nine. The women spanned the life stages i.e. young to old and represented various roles such as Deaconess, wives of Pastors, commissioned workers, LWML leaders, professional women including an M.D. and Ph.D. – all who believe firmly that Scripture is God’s Word. Due to my expertise, by invitation, I presented the paper with the title given to me.

    As Dr. Nafzgar commented at the opening meeting, the CTCR has received more correspondence on the ‘issue’ of women’s service in the church than any other in its years in existence. The four meetings were taxing to say the least. We were all working to maintain a climate in which discussion allowed an exchange of differences of opinion formed through study of Scripture. The original group of seven was very disappointed, however, beause the resolution specifically asks for a comprehensive study with women included – not a discussion of prejudices. Since the men chosen were all theology professors the ‘table’ we were at was unbalanced. Two women shared the responsibility of presenting challenges which reflected the resolution. And though women came with their Bibles, the discussions never evolved into studies.

    Some of you beligerently commented that these questions were answered a long time ago and in effect we have no right to question. Let me say this about that. Because of my profession I have poured over Scripture praying for God’s wisdom in understanding His intent for male and female in all matters. I have seriously studied Scripture for 49 years. Yes, I am one of the ‘old’ women now. With an agenda of my own? Only that I continue to lead people to the risen Lord, people who many times want to dismiss the Bible completely because they believe a book about the lives of people thousands of years ago has no relevance for them.

    Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. His people are not and therefore the church is not. The verses that are so often used as proof texts do not fit Jesus’ interaction with females. The gender balance in His teaching of parables is remarkable. Paul’s obvious respect for the women he mentions as co-workers with him in the task of spreading the Gospel and their leadership roles cannot be ignored. Genesis was used, misused and abused by Jews to justify the taking of many wives and concubines for eons. What makes us think that we are not vulnerable to the same errors of interpretation? At the time, they were simply following the customs of all cultures which permitted multiply wives but they justified it by saying “God said”.

    I continued to ask, “Then what is the Bible saying in regard to women?” For the last five years, I have more intensely studied the culture of the Greek, Roman, and Jewish people B.C. and A.D. With a greater understanding of the world Paul lived in, some of the seemingly condradictory statements make sense. The religious practices and beliefs of the cults the men and women came out of needed correcting. There is much to be said about Paul’s words in context but it is too extensive to be addressed here.

    I firmly believe God’s Word speaks to us today in a changing culture where society no long espouses a hierarchical understanding of male/female. But to refuse to examine our traditional understanding of certain texts leaves those of us who believe there is reason to question in the same position as Luther, troubled in heart and mind because what he had been taught did not fit what the Holy Spirit has been speaking to him. Many of you said you want those of us who question to leave. This is sad to me because I believe “moderates” and “conservatives” need correction by the other as we continue to try and be the church God desires.

    Finally, you ask whether I reject what is presented in The Creator’s Tapestry? What is written as a final draft does not reflect what was asked for in Res. 3-10. The initial draft was done after one meeting and the tone was offensive to those who wanted a study not a rehash. The first section of the final draft was a laborious effort by a team to respect the cultural context out of which the Res. 3-10 questions emanate. The last section reflects the reality that there was no Bible study done addressing the sincere concerns of Res. 3-10 drafters. It simply says the same thing and the questions of Res. 3-10 still stand to be studied when in fact there is more than one view of possible interpretation. There were no formally trained female theologians at the table. Again, the blog makes accusations that those with questions or alternate interpretations are feminists. I think Jesus and Paul were feminists if the definition of such is that women were an equal part in God’s plan to tell the world of salvation through His Son Jesus Christ.

  21. Trends and perspectives to keep in mind:
    1. Our partner Lutheran church in Japan seems to be leaning strongly in the direction of ordaining women, and representatives of the JLC have been engaged in recent talks with LCMS officials on the subject.

    2. As discussions increase at various levels with ELCA members who have become further distanced from their own church body by its recent decision regarding the permitting of homosexuals in the ministry, it is quite clear that the matter of ordaining women is no longer debatable, i.e., it is a settled matter. Those who want to reach out to disaffected members of the ELCA must recognize this obstacle to any kind of formal relations.

    Sexual egalitarianism remains a strong influence in our culture. It goes beyond male / female to sexual proclivities of many kinds. It is no coincidence that the decision to ordain women in the early 1970s in other Lutheran bodies was followed some 40 years later by the ELCA’s decision to permit homosexuals in their ministerium. The pressure had been there for long before, of course — with a fore-ordained conclusion. Their cousins in the Episcopal church have traveled the same road. When the image of God (male and female He created them) is blurred or rejected, confusion is sure to reign.

  22. Pr. Rossow,

    Your title is indeed truth; there are those in the LCMS whom continue to make sure that “women’s ordination is not a dead issue in the LCMS”. I dare say that the rooted plant needs pruning and grafting at the 2010 convention.

    In Christ.

  23. Here’s David Berger’s review of the Wyneken piece, “Let’s Include Women in the Pastoral Office.” I referenced that in my post #38 above. Norm mentioned Rev. Karl Wyneken in his post #36 above.

    http://seminary.csl.edu/facultypubs/Home/tabid/36/ctl/Details/mid/514/ItemID/90/Default.aspx

    As I read Ms. Brunworth’s latest post, it has vaguely familiar arguments. Unfortunately, her characterization of some of these posts as “belligerent” is slightly overstated, but not totally inaccurate. On the other hand, it will take someone more smarter than I to do an exigesis of her post. We owe it to ourselves and to her to present a non-belligerent, but cogent. response.

    Johannes

  24. @Perry Lund #78

    You can bet your life savings that the issue of women’s ordination is a “settled issue” and “closed question” and very very dead in the ELCA. Voices that raise similar questions as Ms. Brunworth above would be silenced if they ask to reconsider women’s ordination. No way will the ECLA ever reconsider this question. Bishop Hanson’s call to continue the “conversation” wouldn’t have a chance if the conversation included women’s ordination. It’s a done deal. The Holy Spirit has spoken, and women’s ordination is no longer to be debated, discussed, considered, or questioned.

    Anybody wanna bet?

    Johannes (not an MCP, nor belligerent)

  25. Surely, there are some good points here concerning LCMS management — but that is the extent of your efforts.

    If a bureaucracy is what you want, go start one. Start your own branch off the Lutheran root. You can be as rigid as you wish, for as long as you wish it.

    What sickens more moderate Christians is the kind of arrogance displayed in your posts. All of you forget that you are not in “control” of how God’s spirit reaches out to people or how people reach to him: isn’t that precisely why Luther wished to revamp Catholicism? To take control out of the hands of men and place it in faith — by God’s grace alone? What made you all the benders of scripture?

    It is brash arrogance to judge those you do not know or understand. Even if that is not the point of your posts, many of the exclusionary mindsets presented have led to this. What is ironic is that fears of the “postmodern” and those you wish to exclude (A gay man is approaching, oh my!) are some of the very people you should feel humbled by Christ to approach. Be grateful for faith, bow down and accept your load. Jesus did not die on a cross to argue over the LCMS; he demands that you take in those unwanted. “Let the dead bury the dead and follow me” is not a rhetorical question.

    My faith is secure in Christ, and it is done by him, through him, and with him. I do not fear the future or your condemnation. I do not fear contemporary worship or healthcare reform. Why? Christ knows the backbone of his gospel; if you get the main points that is all you need: love god first and love others as you would love yourself.

    Y’all should try a little simplicity. My simple plan is to drop this link. Adios amigos and God’s blessings.

  26. Norm,
    I think in light of posts #76 & #81, do we have any idea of when the Katy Luther blog will be up & running? I believe it is most needed & rather timely.
    Also,…I believe 1 Peter 3, touches on quite a few lovely points as to “women”. I prefer Peter’s “post” to the forementioned ones.

  27. @Timothy C. Schenks #57

    Based on recent threads at LQ, I wonder if he was only talking about people leaving LQ?

    Tim, I believe he was referring to leaving lcms. The discussion followed Pr. Stefanski (and congregation) being forced out of Mid South District. About 2004?
    [The congregation left with their confessional Pastor.]

    (Louderback has another story about Stefanski’s congregation, but since he was still in Florida at the time, that is just a parrot talking.)

  28. @Dutch #82
    Dutch, I don’t think these women who want to be Pastors & theologians will be interested in a “women’s group”. Or do I misunderstand?

  29. @Tilly Patts #81

    My faith is secure in Christ, and it is done by him, through him, and with him. I do not fear the future or your condemnation. I do not fear contemporary worship or healthcare reform. Why? Christ knows the backbone of his gospel; if you get the main points that is all you need: love god first and love others as you would love yourself.

    Dear Tilly,

    At the risk of sounding “brashly arrogant,” please be advised that you are woefully confusing Law and Gospel here. The “main points” of the Gospel are not “love God and others.” That is Law, my friend, and that Law demands perfect obedience, which is quite impossible for sinners like you and me. The Gospel (i.e. the Good News) is that Christ fulfilled that Law perfectly in our place and died on the cross to atone for all our sins. Those are the “main points” of the Gospel.

    By the way, we “brash, arrogant” confessional Lutherans do not fear “contemporary worship,” but reject, and speak out against it, precisely because it leads people to confuse Law and Gospel, as you have done here. As someone who has much experience with “contemporary worship,” I could cite numerous reasons why I believe this, should you so desire.

    Lastly, as someone who has spent countless hours reading and studying Luther, I am most confident that, were he alive today, he would be speaking out even more vehemently against the atrocities happening in our midst today than anyone here has. In fact, I think it safe to say that what you read on this site would be most mild compared to what Luther himself would have to say about the things being done today in his name.

    I encourage you to try to look past what you see as “brash arrogance” and actually listen to the arguments made by many here, for the intent is surely not to “control God’s Spirit” or to come off as “holier than thou,” but to articulate what the Holy Spirit has revealed to us in Holy Scripture and defend the same from those who preach otherwise.

    In Christ,
    Pr. Messer

  30. Helen,
    Oh, trust me, I don’t think they would either. However….many, many other’s do want something like that. For all the right reasons. If we don’t have or give other options, for what CGM & CW offer, no small wonder people hop on the latest, greatest, most self important bandwagon.
    Gloria Steinem, Oprah, & women’s toiletry ads, can keep their image & ideas of me & all things about me, & my positions. I do not want theirs.

    I prefer, am most content & most grateful, for the one Christ, in His Word, has lovingly & thoughtfully given to me & all His little girls. I am after all is said & done, HIS child.

  31. Pr. Messer and Dutch,

    First (to Messer), while it is obvious no one can perfectly love, these are by far the most important commandments established by Christ, are they not? Furthermore, the capacity to love is given by Christ: i.e., if you have faith in Him than the other two commandments are, while never met perfectly, within one’s limited understanding and limited capacity. We are expected to try to help others, not push them underfoot.

    As one who was raised as a LCMS Lutheran, I am perfectly aware about grace versus works. What I think occurs in these discussions is the attempt to ignore the value of grace so one can impose more law to others, thereby withholding grace by a very specific measuring stick. This is conveniently done by cloaking oneself in interpretation, suggesting that only those attunded to confessional Lutheranism have salvation. If this group cared less about “law,” the entire blog would not be so devoted to a particular reading of it.

    That is why I am no longer LCMS. If I am imperfect (and believe me, I know it) than I am not in a position to judge everyone else or to assume I know their spiritual heart; I can only, with a Bible and prayer, let grace affect me and my actions. Judging sin is a Godly act — it is, most literally His.

    And Dutch: before you bash “feminists,” realize it was with their efforts starting even before the 19thC that make it possible for you and me to now vote. Feminism did not start out of a need to have cosmetics or Oprah (media is an entirely separate issue), it started because women were unable to protect themselves and their children. Some of our most famous feminists set up homes for prostitutes, orphans, unwed mothers and the like — and if you notice, these are mainly categories of people that became trapped in these conditions through the predations of men.

  32. “This is conveniently done by cloaking oneself in interpretation, suggesting that only those

    attunded to confessional Lutheranism have salvation. If this group cared less about “law,”

    the entire blog would not be so devoted to a particular reading of it. ”

    “And Dutch: before you bash “feminists”…. ”

    “…and if you notice, these are mainly categories of people that became trapped in these

    conditions through the predations of men.”

    Strong words–which, being interpreted, really mean _____________? Notice the space between the quoted lines.

    Johannes

  33. Tilly,
    In what post, did I say I valued the tapestry site? Who said I was to do so? If I will not value what my own Mother, who brought suffrage into our congregation? Why would I do so for anyone else? I don’t.

    I value, trust, and am blest with my position as the Word, (Sola Scriptura) states it. I am a most confident, assured, balanced, and a most active women. It is & was where my courage, bravery, and voice & to coin the phrase, empowerment, have always come from. From His Word, unaltered & unterpreted, IT IS INERRENT, LITERALLY, TILLY, LITERALLY. Because I am confident in the place HE set before me, not as His creation thinks or set. His was, is, and is to come, what more could anyone else offer me, than Him?!

    I say so, who most heartily disagrees with you and those who support this type of theological arguement, as a woman in His Church. I do not need to be regcognized by men, to be valued by HIM. He does so, w/o their permission or addmission. It is why I am valued never the less. His eyes Alone matter. Why do they not to you?
    And so it is with you, Tilly. Whether you agree or believe, it is of little consequence. Your or my belief is not required for it be so, with Him.

    I already am of priceless value, if only to Him, for it is by the One Who came, bought, and am owned by, CHRIST HIMSELF. I am humble, obey, & submit, to HIM, not His creation. Sola Christos, Tilly, Sola Christos.

    Say what you will, if you do not run in tandem, you will be ignored by me & those women like me.
    I do so, by His Word, unaltered, unintrepreted. It is called discernment.

    That comes from His Spirit, through Sola Scriptura. Which is the Trinity, no part can negate any other part. True discernment of Law and Gospel. You offer nothing, He has not already taught me, you offer little compared with His Word.
    I have, but to look to those who walked before me, and that is a bit older than 1960. Sarah, Rachel, Hannah & Rebekah, have more to say to me, than any woman at your Tapestry site ever could.

    I am no feminist, look at what God Himself stated in Genesis. I will not embrace what was our just lot, by God Himself. Buck the system all you wager, I for one, will not follow you. I follow what He designed, not what His created have imagined for themselves.

    I am most humble, when I think on, Sarah, Rachel, Rebekah, Rahab, Deborah, Pricillia, etc, & that bothers you so very much, why?!

    What about what Peter, said in his letter, bothers you? It bothers me not at all! It is prize indeed to have a man, who walked w/our Lord & King, Jesu Christos, to say such to little old me & you~!

    He knew me! My angst, my worries, what they in the world would value vs what Christ valued. HE SHOULD KNOW, HE WALKED, TALKED, ATE, AND FOLLOWED HIM. ON HIS ROCK, CHRIST BUILT HIS CHURCH. AND HE WAS MARRIED, HELLO, HE WAS A HUSBAND WHO WALKED ONCE WITH CHRIST!!!! WHAT WOMEN WOULDN’T LISTEN TO WHAT HE SAID?!!!!

    What about what Peter said could bother you so much, you would ignore Sola Scriptura?
    I know to Whom I hold value, I am priceless to my Lord Jesus, in what ways I hold value, because what He taught I should believe, carries weight with me. Why does not His Word carry it with you, Tilly?

    Why does it not with you? I am sad you do not know such things. It is FREEDOM INDEED TO KNOW SUCH. Tilly, if you have never know your worth according to Christ & Sola Scriptura, it is no wonder you believe as you do. I am sad for you, you do not not know what courage Sarah had, nor bravery Deborah found, or Rahab trusted. I pray you do find His idea of such, someday. But, don’t make the mistake I & those like me, are ignorant, we aren’t. We just disagree, with every fibre of our being.

    Dutch-any letters, before or after my name, mean little in His Kingdom. No need to list.
    Such would confidence be!

  34. Dutch,

    If you are a woman, you are a feminist because you are the recipient of all its legal effects, like it or not.

    And by the way, HIS word is with me; that is precisely why I do know my worth and I appreciate that his grace has led me and others to fight for laws that protect women from a society that perpetuates abuse. Thankfully, I have a husband who believes men are just as corrupt as women. We both teach our daughter and our son that humanity is imperfect, but we also tell them that both sexes are worthy of equal respect.

    Be sad for me Dutch, go ahead and wallow in it. I sense this is your way of coping with certain issues that are unresolved, and not a Biblical response at all. After all, if we were going to take everything in the Bible so literally, we would be living in Christian communes, and possibly some of us would be the 2nd or 3rd wife. Some of us would be slaves like Hagar. And all of us would have arranged marriages. And none of these OT relationships reflect the marriage Christ prescribes “To love his wife as Christ loves the Church.”

    I’m not sure what you fear, but there is certainly no grace in it. Go ahead and flog yourself and let other women live as they deem fit.

    T

  35. For everyone else here (including Johannes),

    I realize this discussion is about women serving in the church, and part of my discussion with Dutch does not necessarily reflect this issue. However, take a look around you and think about how many women in your congregations (and your grandfather’s) are asked to suffer silently (to be Godly women) because church elders feel uncalled or unable to help an abused woman and her children. There is nothing Godly about asking a woman to continue taking a beating. There is nothing Godly about suggesting to her that she put up with one. While many LCMS congregation maybe more helpful or cognizant of the problem than a few decades ago, it is still a problem.

    Faith without deeds is dead, folks. Faith without deeds IS dead. This is just one reason out of many that explains why the LCMS church is a dinosaur heading toward extinction.

  36. @Tilly Patts #87

    Dear Tilly,

    First (to Messer), while it is obvious no one can perfectly love, these are by far the most important commandments established by Christ, are they not? Furthermore, the capacity to love is given by Christ: i.e., if you have faith in Him than the other two commandments are, while never met perfectly, within one’s limited understanding and limited capacity. We are expected to try to help others, not push them underfoot.

    Again, you are confusing Law and Gospel and presenting Christ as a New Moses, or Law-Giver, rather than the Savior He is. You speak of faith here as a commandment and posit that once one has obeyed that commandment, the other two commandments (love God and neighbor) are within one’s limited understanding and limited capacity.

    But, faith is a gift from God, given to us by the Holy Spirit through the means of grace (cf. Eph. 2:8-10). We are both brought to, and sustained in, saving faith by the Holy Spirit through the Holy Word and Sacraments. Faith is a Divine Gift, not a command (or, Law).

    I’d say more, but I fear, based on your other posts, that this would be an exercise in futility. I don’t know where you call home now (ELCA?), but it is obvious that you are being taught contrary to what we Lutherans believe, teach, and confess.

    Faith without deeds is dead, folks. Faith without deeds IS dead. This is just one reason out of many that explains why the LCMS church is a dinosaur heading toward extinction.

    Faith based on deeds is also dead. Just something to keep in mind. Also, just so you know, the LCMS is not a church, but a synod made up of churches. The LCMS can go extinct, but Christ’s Church will remain until He returns. You are woefully confused on this score as well.

    In Christ,
    Pr. Messer

  37. Yes, Pr. Messer,

    I do have faith as a gift — and because of the gift I find it wonderful to share Christ’s salvation by acknowledging Christ’s two most important commandments to his other children — there is no “confusion” there.

    I do not posit in any way that obedience gives faith and you are knowingly distorting what I wrote. But, let’s throw down a second gauntlet: I do think that James’ scripture means that through deeds this is one way (not the only way) God keeps our faith fed. Prayer and scripture are other ways. Communion is another way. There are several “deeds” that involve an action on the part of the believer. And while this is all “dead” without the spirit of grace, I think God is capable of withdrawing His grace when we knowingly decide to ignore the work (the deeds) put in front of us. God is capable of abandoning the faithless, and sometimes the faithless are on the front pew and not always the people outside the church doors.

    You have unconvincingly suggested the notion of a manichean faith. I do not believe in it. Actions on earth as an extension of our faith do count for something; Luther believed this or he would not have found it important to rebel against the corruptions affecting the believers in his day; you should agree as well, given this site’s attempt to lock everyone in a type of law.

    In fact, most of the criticism of “sin” in these posts, particularly those directed toward the rejection of homosexuals, feminism, etc are the result of making Jesus, as you say it, a “law-giver.” You cannot accuse me of this without absorbing the accusation yourself. All the posts that judge such groups are spewing ignorance concerning issues they do not understand, based on a keen sense of fear and hatred of what they do not understand, and a distortion of the human condition that they feel justifies their beliefs; it is partitioning the Bible to beat someone down and demonstrates none of the compassion believers should demonstrate for God’s children.

    And no, I do not in any way believe God’s church will disappear, but I do think it is possible the LCMS will, and soon. It is not extending the glass of water to those in need and obviously paying the price for it.

  38. @Perry Lund #31
    It is good that you did not go to St. paul. They have on their staff a teacher who once stated that the “bible contains the word of God but is not the Word of God.” I know, for this person taught me at the Senior College. Didn’t buy it then, don’t buy it now.

  39. @wrl #45
    Her name was Dr. Barbara Brunworth, and she deserves the respect of the title when speaking about her. Sine she has passed to her heavenly home, she now knows all the right answers to the intentions of Gods role for women, and I guarantee you, she is smiling, waiting to share with all of us that she was right . . . While we watch the LCMS die. And it is, except in places where scripture determines the direction of the church , and not stubborn refusal to admit possible wrong doing in bringing salvation to all . . . And by all!

  40. Txkrause (#95)

    “While we watch the LCMS die.”

    Are you referring to the number of people in the LCMS getting lower? The Muslims are growing; the Mormons are growing; lots of “churches” are growing. What is your point? Please tell me you aren’t really saying we should decide what God meant to say based on what will “grow the Church.”

    “where scripture determines the direction of the church”

    What Scripture? Based on your apparent support of the statement that the Bible contains the Word of God but is not the Word of God, how do you know that your pet sections of the Bible are the Word of God? How could “Dr. Barbara Brunworth” know that any of the Bible was the Word of God?

    “stubborn refusal to admit possible wrong doing in bringing salvation to all . . .”

    Since salvation is through the Word of God (the written one and the circumcised One), editing out parts of it (rather than steadfastly clinging to it) jeapardizes bringing salvation to all.

    “And by all!”

    Ordaining only some men, as God Himself ordains, could be seen as stubborn — or steadfast to the Word of God, our only hope of salvation.

  41. You know, It’s quite funny that there is nearly 100 comments on this one issue! If you all believe that the word is the final and bottom Line, with no need of debate, then why do we continue to argue it? The word goes out, without returning empty, and it is the Lord that brings conviction. We live in a fallen world that has truly lost the significance of Christ’s Sacrifice. Church’s splitting, People debating instead of evangelizing, being titled by their Denominational stance, rather than their given name “Son’s and Daughters of Righteousness”… It’s pitiful and especially in this day and age! We are a House divided and the repercussion is so visible…

    We find it so easy to quote sayings of Paul, James and John… But when it comes to God’s final saying, it is this… “…Your sons and daughters will prophesy…”~ Saith the Lord!

    Amen,
    Lets turn and Be on one accord!
    Child of Righteousness!

  42. Tilly Patts :Dutch,
    Be sad for me Dutch, go ahead and wallow in it. I sense this is your way of coping with certain issues that are unresolved,
    T

    This is so typical of Leftists: “attack your opponents with freudian psychoanalytic nonsense.” They try to do the same thing to Luther, Augustine, etc.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.