Ty Gibson on Women's Ordination

[brotherly love]

My how you have twisted my words from what I thought I was writing.

Hard to imagine how what I said could have been read as you have given it back to me.

If anyone else reads me as you read me, I'd have to rewrite it to clear up the muddy water.

how could someone read it any differently

Unfortunately, the incorrect Roman church position that a man is the vicar of Christ appears to be the one that headship theology advocates are trying to bring into the SDA Church with their opening wedge that only a man can be Christ's representative as an ordained minister. Some trash has entered the church since 1844 and it's still trying to enter today. Would Satan try to corrupt all the churches except ours?

Look at your own words like "headship theology advocates" and 'their". These words are specific to people.

 

[brotherly love]

It is true that not all positions of the Roman church are incorrect, but the specific one Gibson's position was compared to was according to Paul. Here is how he describes it, and how he describes those who hold it. I would not want to hold views "of the same cloth," because if I did it appears I would be in apostasy.

4 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

² Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

³ Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. I Tim 4:1-3

 

 

 

 

 

 

In order to claim apostasy in one half of the verse, you would also have to apply the same apostasy in the other half of the verse. Let me explain:

The Catholic church beleives that a preist or nun has to be unmarried.-this goes against the plain teachings of the old Testament and the New Testament in relation to the priesthood and pastors/bishops etc.,

The Catholic church does not teach this other to clergy and is a very pro-marriage and pro-life church. It is only applicable to the preists/Nuns. The passage is general, and does not say only priests will be forbidden.

Here is where you would have to apply the same accusation of apostasy against yourself. The SDA congregation also would fall in line with your own reasoning as it preaches to abstain from meats. I grew up with this teaching, and even in camp hope meat was not permitted. This is taught to everyone and not just the clergy. The SDA church would fit the bill closer than the Catholic church in your own reasoning.

Both are Christian churches that dont fit the label of the text, this can only be done by torturing the text on either side

 

[hch]

how could someone read it any differently

Unfortunately, the incorrect Roman church position that a man is the vicar of Christ appears to be the one that headship theology advocates are trying to bring into the SDA Church with their opening wedge that only a man can be Christ's representative as an ordained minister. Some trash has entered the church since 1844 and it's still trying to enter today. Would Satan try to corrupt all the churches except ours?

Look at your own words like "headship theology advocates" and 'their". These words are specific to people.

 

Perhaps this will help:

Unfortunately, the incorrect Roman church's position that a man is the vicar of Christ appears to be the position that headship theology advocates are trying to bring into the SDA Church.

The headship theology advocates opening wedge is a modified form of the incorrect Roman church's position that only a man can be Christ's representative. That representative (vicar of Christ) would HAVE TO BE a man as the ordained minister.

Some trash like (a modified form of the incorrect Roman church's position that only a man can be Christ's representative) has entered the church since 1844. And unsound teachings are still trying to enter today. Would Satan try to corrupt all the churches except ours?

 

[hch]

 

to wrongfully accuse someone of something he didn't do, isn't exactly a charming Christian virtue..

hch quite obviously is referring to various dogmas, NOT people, as "trash".... 

 

Rudywoofs

Thank you for stating what I had thought was the obvious gist of my post. I elaborated that post a little to help our brother to see what I was saying outside of the frame of reference that got him so entangled in the terminology.

[brotherly love]

Perhaps this will help:

Unfortunately, the incorrect Roman church's position that a man is the vicar of Christ appears to be the position that headship theology advocates are trying to bring into the SDA Church.

The headship theology advocates opening wedge is a modified form of the incorrect Roman church's position that only a man can be Christ's representative. That representative (vicar of Christ) would HAVE TO BE a man as the ordained minister.

Some trash like (a modified form of the incorrect Roman church's position that only a man can be Christ's representative) has entered the church since 1844. And unsound teachings are still trying to enter today. Would Satan try to corrupt all the churches except ours?

 

It still does not clear it up at all.

Firstly, you grossly misrepresent a Biblical viewpoint and then make a false connection with papal representation. You would actually offend many people with your own words. Searching for truth would require a person to represent what a person actually believes.

Where in the New Testament does it say a pastor/bishop or priest only represents God? There may be some extreme person you might be able to dig up on the net, but what you are claiming is not a claim of those you are trying to discredit.

Secondly, a false message can only be delivered and spread through people. Lets put this into perspective: If a church or a group in a church outside of the SDA umbrella made a claim that SDA's are a cult led by satan and has just propped up another form of a pope in Ellen White and this trash is trying to enter their churches.

Would you understand this to be just the doctrine, or also the people who believe and spread the doctrine?

 

Edited July 23, 2015 by brotherly love

[hch]

It still does not clear it up at all.

Firstly, you grossly misrepresent a Biblical viewpoint and then make a false connection with papal representation. You would actually offend many people with your own words. Searching for truth would require a person to represent what a person actually believes.

Where in the New Testament does it say a pastor/bishop or priest only represents God? There may be some extreme person you might be able to dig up on the net, but what you are claiming is not a claim of those you are trying to discredit.

Secondly, a false message can only be delivered and spread through people. Lets put this into perspective: If a church or a group in a church outside of the SDA umbrella made a claim that SDA's are a cult led by satan and has just propped up another form of a pope in Ellen White and this trash is trying to enter their churches.

Would you understand this to be just the doctrine, or also the people who believe and spread the doctrine?

 

Do you suppose that because of your predisposition to read things into a statement: it is difficult for you to understand some things that others see very clearly?

Regarding your firstly point - what are you talking about?

Thirdly you ask: "Where in the New Testament does it say a pastor/bishop or priest only represents God? " Since I never took such a position, I wonder why you would ask me?

And secondly: I Would understand this to be a total misunderstanding of the doctrine, and a misunderstanding of the people who believe and spread the doctrine. [Frequently people (and even SDA's) have notions that Ellen White taught this or that; when in fact she taught the opposite of what they thought she taught.]

 

[brotherly love]

Regarding your firstly point - what are you talking about?

Thirdly you ask: "Where in the New Testament does it say a pastor/bishop or priest only represents God? " Since I never took such a position, I wonder why you would ask me?

And secondly: I Would understand this to be a total misunderstanding of the doctrine, and a misunderstanding of the people who believe and spread the doctrine. [Frequently people (and even SDA's) have notions that Ellen White taught this or that; when in fact she taught the opposite of what they thought she taught.]

 

First point: you grossly misrepresented a groups beliefs. I will enlarge and bold the part that is in great question as a misrepresentation

"Unfortunately, the incorrect Roman church's position that a man is the vicar of Christ appears to be the position that headship theology advocates are trying to bring into the SDA Church.

The headship theology advocates opening wedge is a modified form of the incorrect Roman church's position that only a man can be Christ's representative. That representative (vicar of Christ) would HAVE TO BE a man as the ordained minister"

Your glaring misrepresentation is that headship folk believe a pastor is a sole representative of Christ, and hence only a man could be a representative of Christ. You then go a step further with your misrepresentation and marry it with Catholicism and their Pope for added emotional appeal.

The second point: You make a claim on the behalf of others you oppose-so I asked you the question. I believe in headship, but none of what you wrote comes even close what i believe from scripture.

Thirdly: You never really answered my post.

 

 

[Tom Wetmore]

Brotherly  love, would you care to consider the clear and unambiguous statement repudiating the headship heresy written by the seminary theologians?  You might just better utilize your time by taking the time to search for it.  

[brotherly love]

 

Some theologians embrace womens ordination and some reject it. I have read both sides.

In reality this topic and struggle is old hat and was defeated by the church in its infancy. It surfaces in corrupt cultures, or cultures that have become corrupted-those who rely on their own wisdom and knowledge.

Here is an excerpt from the final verse of the gnostic gospel of Thomas

Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life."

Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."

While no one here is a gnostic of course, but the mentality and fight was the same. A women was considered inferior as she was designed, and the role she played in the community of faith. The wisdom of the bible clearly teaches on our differing roles-men were not to be women, and women were not to be men. This is taught in the whole of the Bible.

Gnosticism did not stand a chance as it was weak and created a weak family and community of faith that could not be sustained. This is why the church is likened to a family with each gender embracing their sexuality and role with love.

It is your choice to embrace the wisdom of God or to follow your own wisdom.

 

 

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

The let us clarify the Roman Catholic position in regard to married priests:

It does not claim that a priest has to not be married.  Rather it claims that it can have a rule that priests must not be married and that as this is a church rule, the Pope can at any time change it.

As an actual fact the Roman Catholic Church does not and has not required that all of its priests not be married.   When I was on the teaching faculty of the U.S. Army Chaplain School, we had a Roman Catholic priest come through our school who was married to a female Army officer.  He had obtained a papal dispensation, as a married person, to become a Roman Catholic priest.  As I understand it, there is a small order of RC priests in Europe that have always been   allowed to be married.  In addition the RC Church is in full communion with some denomination that allow their priests to be married.

The following statement is wrong:

The Catholic church beleives that a preist or nun has to be unmarried.-this goes against the plain teachings of the old Testament and the New Testament in relation to the priesthood and pastors/bishops etc.,

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Let me provide some further clarification:

The Catholic church has both a section that practices what is called a Roman Rite.  This is the section that is most common in the United States  It also has a section that practices an Eastern  Rite.  This section is most common in certain European countries.  Both are part of the Catholic Church and both recognize the same Pope as their spiritual leader.

The Eastern Rite Catholics are NOT of Orthodox background.  The Orthodox churches are a different denomination from the Catholic denomination.  While the Orthodox do give some recognition to the Pope who serves as the head of the Catholic churches, the Orthodox have their own leader who is their head.

Actually Catholics in the United States are present in both the Eastern and the Roman rites.

The Catholic Pope in more recent times has allowed more Eastern rite priests to practice their "holy orders" in the United States and also in certain European countries than ahs been allowed in the past.

There is much posted on the Internet on this.  See the following:

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/2015/02/08/Eastern-Catholics-rejoice-in-the-restoration-of-married-priests/stories/201801220001

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/why-cant-a-priest-ever-marry

http://catholicism.about.com/b/2009/11/19/reader-question-are-there-married-catholic-priests.htm

 

Edited July 24, 2015 by Gregory Matthews

[Gregory Matthews]

Another comment on this issue:

NOTES:

1) The  following applies to the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church:

2) A "cleric" is always a priest.  but, a priest is not always a cleric.  A priest who is allowed to practice the Holy Orders is a cleric.  A cleric who is not allowed to practice the Holy Orders remains a priest, normally.

3) The following may not be the latest edition/revision.

4) The Canon law cited below is clear that the Pope can grant a dispensation form celibacy and allow priests and  clerics to be married.

Cannon Law 291 states:

Apart from the cases mentioned in can. 290, n. 1, the loss of the clerical state does not carry with it a dispensation from the obligation of celibacy, which is granted solely by the Roman Pontiff.

 

[phkrause]

Some theologians embrace womens ordination and some reject it. I have read both sides.

In reality this topic and struggle is old hat and was defeated by the church in its infancy. It surfaces in corrupt cultures, or cultures that have become corrupted-those who rely on their own wisdom and knowledge.

Here is an excerpt from the final verse of the gnostic gospel of Thomas

Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life."

Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."

While no one here is a gnostic of course, but the mentality and fight was the same. A women was considered inferior as she was designed, and the role she played in the community of faith. The wisdom of the bible clearly teaches on our differing roles-men were not to be women, and women were not to be men. This is taught in the whole of the Bible.

Gnosticism did not stand a chance as it was weak and created a weak family and community of faith that could not be sustained. This is why the church is likened to a family with each gender embracing their sexuality and role with love.

It is your choice to embrace the wisdom of God or to follow your own wisdom.

 

 

 

 

You actually think the so called gospel of Thomas has some kind of validity??

[brotherly love]

You actually think the so called gospel of Thomas has some kind of validity??

Would you be willing to re-read my post? The thrust of my post was what the early church had to over come.

 

[brotherly love]

The let us clarify the Roman Catholic position in regard to married priests:

It does not claim that a priest has to not be married.  Rather it claims that it can have a rule that priests must not be married and that as this is a church rule, the Pope can at any time change it.

As an actual fact the Roman Catholic Church does not and has not required that all of its priests not be married.   When I was on the teaching faculty of the U.S. Army Chaplain School, we had a Roman Catholic priest come through our school who was married to a female Army officer.  He had obtained a papal dispensation, as a married person, to become a Roman Catholic priest.  As I understand it, there is a small order of RC priests in Europe that have always been   allowed to be married.  In addition the RC Church is in full communion with some denomination that allow their priests to be married.

The following statement is wrong:

 

 

My short statement on a celibate/unmarried Catholic priesthood was not intended to be an essay-so we should be careful when we use rare exception clauses to declare someone is wrong.

The thrust of the Catholic teaching on a celibate/unmarried preisthood is taught and enforced by the authorities. It is just that simple

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/why-cant-a-priest-ever-marry

Why can't a priest ever marry?

Answer

In the Eastern rites of the Church it is common for married men to be ordained to the priesthood. Further, in the Latin rite there are a few married men, converted ministers from other faiths, who are ordained to the Catholic priesthood. This, however, is not common. Finally, in neither the Latin rite nor the Eastern rites do priests (or deacons) marry after they have been ordained, except in extraordinary circumstances.

The reasons Latin rite priests can’t marry is both theological and canonical.

Theologically, it may be pointed out that priests serve in the place of Christ and therefore, their ministry specially configures them to Christ. As is clear from Scripture, Christ was not married (except in a mystical sense, to the Church). By remaining celibate and devoting themselves to the service of the Church, priests more closely model, configure themselves to, and consecrate themselves to Christ.

As Christ himself makes clear, none of us will be married in heaven (Mt 22:23–30). By remaining unmarried in this life, priests are more closely configured to the final, eschatological state that will be all of ours.

Paul makes it very clear that remaining single allows one’s attention to be undivided in serving the Lord (1 Cor 7:32–35). He recommends celibacy to all (1 Cor 7:7) but especially to ministers, who as soldiers of Christ he urges to abstain from "civilian affairs" (2 Tm 2:3–4).

Canonically, priests cannot marry for a number of reasons. First, priests who belong to religious orders take vows of celibacy. Second, while diocesan priests do not take vows, they do make a promise of celibacy.

Third, the Church has established impediments that block the validity of marriages attempted by those who have been ordained. Canon 1087 states: "Persons who are in holy orders invalidly attempt marriage."

This impediment remains as long as the priest has not been dispensed from it, even if he were to attempt a civil marriage, even if he left the Church and joined a non-Catholic sect, and even if he apostatized from the Christian faith altogether. He cannot be validly married after ordination unless he receives a dispensation from the Holy See (CIC 1078 §2, 1).

[phkrause]

Would you be willing to re-read my post? The thrust of my post was what the early church had to over come.

 

I did and I still have the same thought. So either your not saying it so I understand or I just don't understand what your saying!!

[hch]

... So either your not saying it so I understand or I just don't understand what your saying!!

It is nice not to be in that boat alone. I trust that your company will make the journey more pleasant.

[brotherly love]

I did and I still have the same thought. So either your not saying it so I understand or I just don't understand what your saying!!

Then I guess I assumed most would know church history

In reality this topic and struggle is old hat and was defeated by the church in its infancy. It surfaces in corrupt cultures, or cultures that have become corrupted-those who rely on their own wisdom and knowledge.

Paul was battling Gnosticism or its early counterpart in his epistles. The church overcame this teaching that relied on mans wisdom, and part of this so called wisdom was  embracing the curse. The bible teaches us how to minimize the curse of the battle of the sexes

Edited July 24, 2015 by brotherly love

[Gregory Matthews]

Eastern rite Catholics are subject to the Pope in Rome.  It is not a rare exception for them.

My short statement on a celibate/unmarried Catholic priesthood was not intended to be an essay-so we should be careful when we use rare exception clauses to declare someone is wrong.

 

 

[brotherly love]

Eastern rite Catholics are subject to the Pope in Rome.  It is not a rare exception for them.

 

 

 

Please read again. I think you believe you have a gotcha moment, but you are splitting hairs. Maybe i will have to insert a lawyers clause behind every statement. The message of the Catholic church is that a priest is to be unmarried and celibate. This goes against the old and New Testaments

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/why-cant-a-priest-ever-marry

Why can't a priest ever marry?

Answer

In the Eastern rites of the Church it is common for married men to be ordained to the priesthood. Further, in the Latin rite there are a few married men, converted ministers from other faiths, who are ordained to the Catholic priesthood. This, however, is not common. Finally, in neither the Latin rite nor the Eastern rites do priests (or deacons) marry after they have been ordained, except in extraordinary circumstances.

Edited July 24, 2015 by brotherly love

[brotherly love]

Gregory Matthews

Before we waste a bunch of time on the subject there is something I would like to clear up.

In normal communication it is not normative to list all the possibilities and exceptions. I mentioned that the Catholic church believes a priest or nun has to be unmarried and celibate. I am stating what they believe, and they will back it up in practice. It would not be realistic for me to state this and all the exceptions along the way. My post was not designed to do this on the topic.

In the same way i said that a headship person does not believe the pastor represents God, and not in a manner of a Pope. If we are to nit pick, then it could be said a pastor does represent God because he is a believer. Someone could probably dig up a headship fellow on the net who believes a pastor does represent God in a Pope like setting.

My words were not intended to tackle every situation and possibility. I believe you understand this.

[Gregory Matthews]

I am not attempting to "gotcha."   That is not what I do. 

You stated a generalization for the Catholic Church, which includes both Latin Rite and Eastern Rite.   As your later  quotation says, your generalization  is not true for Eastern Rite Catholics. 

Actually you have misunderstood my main issue with your statement.  In the statement that you made, you referenced a belief.   It is that which I have the  greatest objection to.     The Catholic church does not consider such to be a foundational belief.   It is a policy decision which the Pope can change an/or   allow rather than a doctrinal belief.

My references and your agreement as applied to Eastern Rite Catholics demonstrates that it is only a policy issue.

The Pope changes Church policy often.  The Pope seldom changes Church doctrine and then only when speaking ex cathedra.

 

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

How oftenj does the Pople speak ex cathedra?   Not very often.

2down vote

Papal Infallibility and when a Pope speaks Ex cathedra remain very unclear. Aside from canonization of saints, most experts will agree the Pope has spoken Ex cathedra at least twice: Pope Pius IX's 1854 definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary Pope Pius XII's 1950 definition of the dogma of the Assumption of Mary Other than that opinions among experts vary widely. More can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility#Instances_of_infallible_declarations share|improve this answer edited Mar 24 '14 at 14:52     answered Feb 21 '14

 

 

[brotherly love]

I am not attempting to "gotcha."   That is not what I do. 

You stated a generalization for the Catholic Church, which includes both Latin Rite and Eastern Rite.   As your later  quotation says, your generalization  is not true for Eastern Rite Catholics. 

Actually you have misunderstood my main issue with your statement.  In the statement that you made, you referenced a belief.   It is that which I have the  greatest objection to.     The Catholic church does not consider such to be a foundational belief.   It is a policy decision which the Pope can change an/or   allow rather than a doctrinal belief.

My references and your agreement as applied to Eastern Rite Catholics demonstrates that it is only a policy issue.

The Pope changes Church policy often.  The Pope seldom changes Church doctrine and then only when speaking ex cathedra.

 

 

 

I believe you are splitting hairs-the Catholic church defends a celibate heirarchy. If a person is married they will not call for a divorce of course, but if the priest becomes widowed they will not allow re-marriage. If a priest is not married, then they will not allow him to marry while a priest in the Latin rite. We could also address a eastern rite bishop-they are not allowed to be married. They also dont allow a married priest to remarry if they are predeceased by their wife.

In both the eastern and Latin churches there are restrictions on marriage and their heirarchy

Ask a person in authority in the Catholic church and they will defend and enforce these views. Protestants will not defend or enforce a celibate pastorship

This is the point and the thrust of my words.

FYI

I was just told by a friend peeking in that the eastern rite was only allowed to marry in their traditional areas, and were not allowed to marry outside of these areas, and the Pope lifted the ban last year to include non traditional area. kinda wierd, but something i did not know

 

 

 

Edited July 24, 2015 by brotherly love