lcms and wels diffs?

[DaRev]

i need an ibuprofen.

Did you know that causes ulcers? Stick with the Extra Strength Tylenol.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

The immediate context is about worship. But who leads the public worship service? Who should and shouldn't lead the public worship service? That's the point. The greater context concerning who leads the public worship service is carried in chapter 3. I'm not the one taking the context out of order. It's in perfect order.

Again, you're not seeing the context correctly. I suppose that you would then have to agree that women must wear hats in the worship service since Paul talks about that in 1 Corinthians 11. Do you wear head coverings to your worship services? Using your singular contextual logic, you had better, because that's what the Bible says, right?

You call it singular contextual logic, but you're the one fixated on ONE POINT of Timothy. You're the one who thinks that verse three means verse two is talking about the pastoral office.

If what you believe is true, why do you let women read scriptures then? It says that women should be silent in church, correct? How do you tie that to the pastoral office?? Or do you really honestly believe that a woman just can't deliver a sermon?

As I said, the way your synod believes ends up causing more questions, it doesn't answer them.

But the fact is that the context is what guides us through the word of God and helps us to determine what it says. 1 Timothy 2 is talking about the role of women in the worship service. It's not specifically talking about the role of women in other areas, whether in the congregation or elsewhere. This is what the WELS is applying across the board. They take something that is specifically talking about the teaching/preaching office in the worship service and applies it to everything in the congregation. If they want to do that, fine. But don't say that we're wrong because we apply it as written.

That's just it, you DON'T do it as written. If you did, you would believe as we do that the passage talks of no authority over men in the church. You have not shown that the passage is talking about the pastoral office. I have shown where it says "a man".

Kinda like when God gives a woman a spiritual gift of finance or other administrating, but the WELS says "here's your gift, but you can't use it because only men are allowed to use their spiritual gifts in the congregation."

Um, no, kinda not. We do have women administrators in our synod. Where did you get the idea that we didn't?

I guess you're now beginning to see the folly of your point of view. Good. We're getting somehwere now.

No, I'm really learning a lot about the folly of the LCMS belief. It really is "have your cake and eat it too". If the men don't feel like stepping up, no biggie...the women will just take care of it. Must make a lot of women in the LCMS feel empowered, though. But boy, must really burn their butts that they can do all the work but they still can't get into that pulpit. Ouch.

Do you have to ask his permission to cook something for yourself, then? Or do you just go hungry on those occasions?

Nope, I don't have to ask for permission.

Women can't publicly and actively dishonor a man's authority where the women have no authority in the Church.

If a husband votes one way and his wife votes another, what does that say about the couple?

And if your aunt and uncle nearly divorced, I'm sure there is a much bigger issue between them than a voting matter in a church.

Don't recall saying there wasn't...but the voting issue was HUGE. Ya know how they got over it? They switched synods. They realized that LCMS' doctrine actually pits women against the men. Guess they saw the folly of your doctrine as well.


Really..."a man" must equal "pastoral office" because the next part of the passages refer to the pastoral office? I'll be scratching my head over that one for a long long time.

 

[twin.spin]

But that's what it looks like you're saying here in post # 141 before you deleted it:

Here is the link:

Scriptural principles of man and woman roles | Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS)

Originally Posted by twin.spin

I wasn't saying that women didn't have a supporting role with Jesus in his ministry.
​

But that's what it looks like you're saying here in post # 141 before you deleted it:


Originally Posted by twin.spin

IMO there wasn't any women as part of the traveling party group of "disciples" that we would consider the 12 (or the 72 that was sent out) that was with Jesus in his three year ministry.
​

The women who had a supported Jesus in his ministry wasn't part of the traveling party group of "disciples" that we would consider the 12 (or the 72 that was sent out) that was with Jesus in his three year ministry. That would be in keeping of the counting with the feeding of the five \ seven thousand.

The 12 \ 70-72 disciples were men only supported by the women\wives.

 

[DaRev]

You call it singular contextual logic, but you're the one fixated on ONE POINT of Timothy. You're the one who thinks that verse three means verse two is talking about the pastoral office.

That's because I know how to read.

If what you believe is true, why do you let women read scriptures then? It says that women should be silent in church, correct? How do you tie that to the pastoral office?? Or do you really honestly believe that a woman just can't deliver a sermon?

Reading from the Bible in front of a group of people is not a specific function of the pastoral office. Any lay person can read from the Bible.

That's just it, you DON'T do it as written. If you did, you would believe as we do that the passage talks of no authority over men in the church. You have not shown that the passage is talking about the pastoral office. I have shown where it says "a man".

I've pointed out the context numerous times. If you can't comprehend that, it's not my problem.

Um, no, kinda not. We do have women administrators in our synod. Where did you get the idea that we didn't?

So I take it that they only administrate those things that only pertain to women?

Nope, I don't have to ask for permission.

So you do exercise some of your own authority in the household. How do you get away with that?

If a husband votes one way and his wife votes another, what does that say about the couple?

That they both have their own points of view and they're independant thinkers.

Don't recall saying there wasn't...but the voting issue was HUGE. Ya know how they got over it? They switched synods. They realized that LCMS' doctrine actually pits women against the men. Guess they saw the folly of your doctrine as well.

It's not "our doctrine", it's God's.

Really..."a man" must equal "pastoral office" because the next part of the passages refer to the pastoral office? I'll be scratching my head over that one for a long long time.

No, the verse is in the context of the role of women in the worship service and relates to the teaching/preaching office. How many times do I have to say it. It's as clear as crystal. I guess I'll be scratching my head over your inability to comprehend something so clear.

And you haven't answered the question about wearing hats in church. Do you?

 

[seajoy]

And you haven't answered the question about wearing hats in church. Do you?

Isn't that the one the ELCA always uses on us in the general TCL forum to prove why there should be women pastors?

 

[twin.spin]

And you haven't answered the question about wearing hats in church. Do you?

No doubt ... a woman who doesn't wear a hat in church is exercising authority over a man.

Really DaRev, if you're going to get silly about it, then why not start requiring men and women to wear a LCMS Yarmulke or Kippah to set the example for the rest of us ......

 

[DaRev]

Isn't that the one the ELCA always uses on us in the general TCL forum to prove why there should be women pastors?

Precisely, because they, too, take it out of its proper context. What I'm hearing here is that there needs to be a direct application of a verse regardless of its greater context. If the WELS believes that the verse in 1 Timothy 2 applies generally across the board, then it only seems fitting that they would also require women to wear hats in church since there is also a verse in the Bible that says they must wear hats in church. If the WELS doesn't require women to wear hats in church, then why is it they have no problem with that issue within the given context, but they can't seem to see 1 Timothy 2:12 in its given context?

Before I go any further with this discussion, I want to apologize for some of the things I wrote. I've been a bit too sarcastic with Becky and it wasn't called for. We really shouldn't be batting each other over the head with the 8th Commandment, and for my part, I seek forgiveness. Mea culpa.

I would like to make one last attempt to explain why the LCMS has the policy it does regarding this issue and the Biblical basis for it.
There is only one office within the Church that is Biblically instituted, and that is the office of the pastoral ministry. It is the only office where the duties are described in various places and the eligibility requirements are spelled out. The pastoral office is the only one that has any authority placed upon it, which is the authority given by Christ to preach, administer the sacraments, and exercise Church discipline (office of the keys). Those passages that speak of authority in the Church are speaking of this authority. When Paul writes about women not teaching or having any authority over men, it is in the context of this authority that is given to the Church within this one divinely instituted office. God does not call women to serve in this one divinely instituted office. This is made very clear in the Scriptures. Thus, the LCMS does not and will not ordain women to the pastoral office.

Other offices within the congregation are man-made and given man-made duties and responsibilities. There is no Biblical restriction for women to hold man-made offices or exercise whatever man-made authority these offices may be given. The only exception to this would be those offices in the congregation whose duties would involve the carrying out the functions of the pastoral office or the accountability of the functions of the pastoral office, keeping in line with Paul's statement that women shall not have authority over men (the authority of the office) within the context of this one divinely instituted office in the Church and the authority given to it.

Some have tried to use 1 Corinthians 12:28 as a proof text that God has instituted other offices in the Church. But this verse is not talking about offices, but rather spiritual gifts, the ability given to individuals to do certain things, as Paul says in verse 7 "for the common good". The things alluded to in verse 28 are mentioned in verses 8, 9, and 10. These verses speak specifically to spiritual gifts given to individual members of the body of Christ, and there's no mention of women being denied these gifts of the Spirit. Much of that chapter talks about the body of Christ being made up of individual members. But no where in Scripture are other offices instituted nor any specific qualifications or duties for such other offices given. The only exception might be the position of "deacon" (what we call in our churches today "elders") mentioned in 1 Timothy, but even this position is linked directly to the pastoral office.

This is, in a brief way, the Biblical basis of the LCMS's position on the service of women in the Church.

 

[DaRev]

No doubt ... a woman who doesn't wear a hat in church is exercising authority over a man.

Well, according to the Bible, a woman who doesn't is dishonoring men.

Really DaRev, if you're going to get silly about it, then why not start requiring men and women to wear a LCMS Yarmulke or Kippah to set the example for the rest of us ......

I would think that the WELS would require that to set an example to us, since we don't seem to have it right in your eyes.

But the bottom line is it is silly. That's the point.

 

[ContraMundum]

As a comment, the Lutheran Church I used to belong to made a big deal about the wearing of headress in worship for women, so much so that it created a split way back. It was even argued that the Confessions presupposed that the wearing of head coverings for women in worship was a moral obligation and orthodox and that the Confessions taught that removing of head covering in public was an adiaphora (They refer to AC, XXVIII, 55, 56 as "proof")

 

[PreachersWife2004]

That's because I know how to read.

So do I. I realize you apologized already for the remark, though.

Reading from the Bible in front of a group of people is not a specific function of the pastoral office. Any lay person can read from the Bible.

There's a reason why the readings are called "lessons".

I've pointed out the context numerous times. If you can't comprehend that, it's not my problem.

No, you haven't pointed out anything. So it's not my problem.

So I take it that they only administrate those things that only pertain to women?

Nope. But their positions aren't such that they have any authority over men. Hey...we even have a female principal! Go figure! (her entire staff is female, though...we probably lose points for that one). We have female music ministers, we have a few females who head up the Youth Group in their church. I was even a co-chair of one of our anniversary committees, although that name was pretty honorific because I didn't have to do anything.

The key is that no position filled by a woman has authority over any men in the church.

So you do exercise some of your own authority in the household. How do you get away with that?

Bwahahaha. Yes, because eating my own supper is exercising authority. I knew that was the route you were going for, and it's an incredibly poor strategy. Anyone who knows the role of man and woman in a marriage knows that a good Godly husband isn't going to exercise his authority in such a manner that his wife would have to ask if she could eat dinner. That would be an abuse of the husband's role in the marriage.

Very poor analogy.

That they both have their own points of view and they're independant thinkers.

And that they're divided on a church issue. As a Godly spouse, I will never speak against my husband in the church, whether he is a pastor or not. I hope other Godly wives would do the same...yet your church allows them to freely.

I wonder what the divorce rate is for people in the LCMS.

t's not "our doctrine", it's God's.

Yes, it's your doctrine, as much as our doctrine is our doctrine.

I've heard many denominations defend their positions by saying that it's not them, it's God. Don't go down that same path.

No, the verse is in the context of the role of women in the worship service and relates to the teaching/preaching office. How many times do I have to say it. It's as clear as crystal. I guess I'll be scratching my head over your inability to comprehend something so clear.

You have yet to prove that. Even in your "clarification" post you don't prove that. You are still guessing that because the next part of the book talks about the pastoral office that 1 Tim 2 MUST also be talking about that.

I have the words on my side...you simply don't. You have yet to show where "a man" = "the pastoral office".

And you haven't answered the question about wearing hats in church. Do you?

Nope. Just like I assume you don't cut your hand off when it causes you to sin. Are you really going to go that route? You know that wearing a hat to church is adiaphora, but the roles of men and women as set forth by God are not.


Anyway, I'm pretty clear on the subject matter and why I believe the LCMS is wrong for allowing women certain authoritative rights in their churches.

 

[twin.spin]

What I do hope is that it has become very clear from the positions stated what the difference is between LCMS and WELS \ ELS.

But after reading all your posts DaRev, I don't see how (if you are the latest example of the current generation of ministers in the LCMS) how there is going to be any near future resolutions between the two.

So I wonder when you say "There are many of us that are feverishly working on precipitating the necessary changes to turn our synod back around." turned around to just exactly when.....meaning if one would compare doctrinally held views, what could one say today's LCMS would resemble, LCMS of the 70's, 60's or prior to the '30's?

 

[DaRev]

You have yet to prove that. Even in your "clarification" post you don't prove that. You are still guessing that because the next part of the book talks about the pastoral office that 1 Tim 2 MUST also be talking about that.

I've mentioned this at least three times already. I'll make one last attempt, then I'm finished with it. 1 Timothy 2 talks about the role of women in the worship service. I assume you read the NIV Bible. Open yours and look at the beginning of 1 Timothy 2. What does it say? Mine says "Instructions on Worship". It then goes on to talk about women in the worship service. Paul says that women are not to "teach or have authority over a man" in the worship service. The context is about the worship service. Worship service. The words "teach" and "authority" are what tie this section to the next where Paul speaks of the eligibility for holding the authoritative teaching office. Who "teaches" in the worship service? Who has the authority given by Christ to teach, preach, and administer the sacraments in the worship service? Men are givine that role and responsibility. Women are not. They aren't given that authority to preach and administer the sacraments in the worship service.

I don't know how to make it any clearer.

I have the words on my side...you simply don't. You have yet to show where "a man" = "the pastoral office".

The words in the text are clear as crystal. See above.

Anyway, I'm pretty clear on the subject matter and why I believe the LCMS is wrong for allowing women certain authoritative rights in their churches.

There's no doubt you believe that, but I firmly believe you're wrong. Plain and simple.
As I said before, if the WELS wishes to apply this across the board to all positions in the congregation, including the man-made offices, that's their perogative. But don't say that we're wrong because we apply it as written.

 

[alexnbethmom]

1 Timothy 2 talks about the role of women in the worship service. I assume you read the NIV Bible. Open yours and look at the beginning of 1 Timothy 2. What does it say? Mine says "Instructions on Worship". It then goes on to talk about women in the worship service. Paul says that women are not to "teach or have authority over a man" in the worship service. The context is about the worship service. Worship service. The words "teach" and "authority" are what tie this section to the next where Paul speaks of the eligibility for holding the authoritative teaching office. Who "teaches" in the worship service? Who has the authority given by Christ to teach, preach, and administer the sacraments in the worship service? Men are givine that role and responsibility. Women are not. They aren't given that authority to preach and administer the sacraments in the worship service.

Rev, thank you - you have managed to make it 100% crystal clear with just this one paragraph and i can now, in good conscience, continue on the path i'm walking with the Lord. This subject has made me absolutely bananas, watching this ping pong session and then with the bible study yesterday, but my headache can go away now - so thank you very much!!

 

[Zecryphon]

Originally Posted by twin.spin

I wasn't saying that women didn't have a supporting role with Jesus in his ministry.
​

But that's what it looks like you're saying here in post # 141 before you deleted it:


Originally Posted by twin.spin

IMO there wasn't any women as part of the traveling party group of "disciples" that we would consider the 12 (or the 72 that was sent out) that was with Jesus in his three year ministry.
​

The women who had a supported Jesus in his ministry wasn't part of the traveling party group of "disciples" that we would consider the 12 (or the 72 that was sent out) that was with Jesus in his three year ministry. That would be in keeping of the counting with the feeding of the five \ seven thousand.

The 12 \ 70-72 disciples were men only supported by the women\wives.

The original 12 disciples were men, on that we agree. But where we disagree is that women didn't travel with Jesus in His ministry and before you deny you ever said that, let me quote you here:

The women who had a supported Jesus in his ministry wasn't part of the traveling party group of "disciples" that we would consider the 12 (or the 72 that was sent out) that was with Jesus in his three year ministry.

The scriptures in Luke 10 make no mention of the gender of the 72 disciples that Jesus sends out. So I don't know how you can say with any authority that they were men only. Especially in light of the fact that there were women followers of Jesus at His crucifixion, and that Jesus first appeared to Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matthew 28:1-9), when He was resurrected from the dead.

There are also the "Daughters of Jerusalem" (Luke 23:37-41), who were local disciples, not women who had followed Jesus from Galilee. Then there were the Galilean women (Luke 23:55-24:11) Among the women mentioned in Luke 8:1-2. These faithful disciples cared for the body of Jesus like family members.

"Daughters of Jerusalem" (Luke 23:27-28)

Luke 23:27 And there followed him a great multitude of the people and of women who were mourning and lamenting for him.
Luke 23:28 But turning to them Jesus said, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children.

"The Death of Jesus" Luke 23:44-49

Luke 23:44 It was now about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour,
Luke 23:45 while the sun's light failed. And the curtain of the temple was torn in two.
Luke 23:46 Then Jesus, calling out with a loud voice, said, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!" And having said this he breathed his last.
Luke 23:47 Now when the centurion saw what had taken place, he praised God, saying, "Certainly this man was innocent!"
Luke 23:48 And all the crowds that had assembled for this spectacle, when they saw what had taken place, returned home beating their breasts.
Luke 23:49 And all his acquaintances and the women who had followed him from Galilee stood at a distance watching these things.

"The Resurrection of Jesus" (Matthew 28:1-9) & (Luke 23:55-24:11)

Mat 28:1 Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb.
Mat 28:2 And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it.
Mat 28:3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow.
Mat 28:4 And for fear of him the guards trembled and became like dead men.
Mat 28:5 But the angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified.
Mat 28:6 He is not here, for he has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where he lay.
Mat 28:7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead, and behold, he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him. See, I have told you."
Mat 28:8 So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples.
Mat 28:9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, "Greetings!" And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him.

Luk 23:54 It was the day of Preparation, and the Sabbath was beginning.
Luk 23:55 The women who had come with him from Galilee followed and saw the tomb and how his body was laid.
Luk 23:56 Then they returned and prepared spices and ointments. On the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment.
Luk 24:1 But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the tomb, taking the spices they had prepared.
Luk 24:2 And they found the stone rolled away from the tomb,
Luk 24:3 but when they went in they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus.
Luk 24:4 While they were perplexed about this, behold, two men stood by them in dazzling apparel.
Luk 24:5 And as they were frightened and bowed their faces to the ground, the men said to them, "Why do you seek the living among the dead?
Luk 24:6 He is not here, but has risen. Remember how he told you, while he was still in Galilee,
Luk 24:7 that the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men and be crucified and on the third day rise."
Luk 24:8 And they remembered his words,
Luk 24:9 and returning from the tomb they told all these things to the eleven and to all the rest.
Luk 24:10 Now it was Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women with them who told these things to the apostles,
Luk 24:11 but these words seemed to them an idle tale, and they did not believe them.

We can clearly see from scripture that women were a part of Jesus' ministry and a very active part of it. They didn't have just a supporting role. Also Acts 9:36 names Tabitha as a female disciple.

Act 9:36 Now there was in Joppa a disciple named Tabitha, which, translated, means Dorcas. She was full of good works and acts of charity.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Rev, thank you - you have managed to make it 100% crystal clear with just this one paragraph and i can now, in good conscience, continue on the path i'm walking with the Lord. This subject has made me absolutely bananas, watching this ping pong session and then with the bible study yesterday, but my headache can go away now - so thank you very much!!

So you are comfortable having authority over men in the church then? I guess bully for you. I'm not comfortable taking the word of God and misapplying it in such a manner.

If your pastor is WELS you're in the wrong church.

 

[alexnbethmom]

we don't have authority over men in the worship service, as it clearly states in the bible, and no, as i've said before, i'm LCMS - i happen to go to a WELS bible study because at the time i started going to this study, our church did not have a weekly bible study in place, as the person who normally hosted it had a stroke.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

we don't have authority over men in the worship service, as it clearly states in the bible, and no, as i've said before, i'm LCMS - i happen to go to a WELS bible study because at the time i started going to this study, our church did not have a weekly bible study in place, as the person who normally hosted it had a stroke.

But you do have women teaching, from the lectern and maybe not the pulpit. And you have women exercising authority over men in other areas. Would you vote against your husband in a voters' assembly?

I know you're LCMS. I didn't realize you were only attending a WELS bible study.

 

[Zecryphon]

Rev, thank you - you have managed to make it 100% crystal clear with just this one paragraph and i can now, in good conscience, continue on the path i'm walking with the Lord. This subject has made me absolutely bananas, watching this ping pong session and then with the bible study yesterday, but my headache can go away now - so thank you very much!!

Forgive me if I'm misreading the situation you're in and your response here, but what I would do, is compare everything that has been said here against Scripture, pray about it and follow God's leading and counsel on this one, and not rely on one paragraph by one man to be the final authority on this matter.

 

[Zecryphon]

we don't have authority over men in the worship service, as it clearly states in the bible, and no, as i've said before, i'm LCMS - i happen to go to a WELS bible study because at the time i started going to this study, our church did not have a weekly bible study in place, as the person who normally hosted it had a stroke.

Does your LCMS church have a Bible study now? If so, I would attend that one if I were you. At a WELS Bible study you're going to receive teachings that will not line up with what your LCMS church teaches as our two churches are not in fellowship. I remember an elder from my former LCMS church inviting me to weekly Bible study and I turned him down because the two churches are not in fellowship.

 

[QuiltAngel]

Hey guys, I am sure that alexnbethmom has already studied the scripture and is convinced that the LCMS has it right as she said in an earlier post. WELS members on here are not going to convince the LCMS members they are wrong and LCMS members are not going to convince the WELS members they are wrong.

We are each where we are because we are convinced the Synod where we are is correct in their teachings. Some of the posts on here come across as bullying to me. I am sure that is not how they are meant, but after 24 pages of discussion, that is how some of them come across.