tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post4270315321605499107..comments2024-03-27T15:47:46.091-05:00Comments on Pastoral Meanderings: What I Can Say and What I CannotPastor Petershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10653554256101480140noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-13831669467499451552010-01-17T06:15:04.467-06:002010-01-17T06:15:04.467-06:00Ah Forde... now there is a name you don't hear...Ah Forde... now there is a name you don't hear as often as you should... good point.. yes, good point.Pastor Petershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10653554256101480140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-34531390503882155442010-01-16T20:06:46.990-06:002010-01-16T20:06:46.990-06:00Pr. Peters:
Good thoughts.
I had similar thinki...Pr. Peters:<br /><br />Good thoughts. <br /><br />I had similar thinking expressed to me by one of my parish's new members comparing the Confession & Absolution in LSB Rite 1 and LSB Rite 3. The direct language of the older rite was observed by him as carrying the full weight of Christ's words much more than the language of the newer rite. There was no doubt that he was rightly being called a sinner, and less-than-no doubt that he was rightly declared forgiven.<br /><br />Your thoughts also seemed to resonate in my mind with Gerhard Forde's critique of preaching among American Lutherans. Preachers became afraid to or unable to "do the text," to actually perform what the words of Christ say. When His Word condemns, it actually does so. When His Word absolves, it actually does so. The one authorized to speak on Christ's behalf must be able to carry the full force of His words and not just talk about them.<br /><br />LTZRev. Luke T. Zimmermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06248166785577564914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-63480001419307155952010-01-16T16:10:33.298-06:002010-01-16T16:10:33.298-06:00Pr Peters,
Thank you for this post. Too many time...Pr Peters,<br /><br />Thank you for this post. Too many times I am hearing the weak passive absolution. I fear it leaves me in doubt so I need read what Jesus mandated to back it up. My ears need to hear: "In the stead and by the command of my Lord Jesus I forgive you all you sins...."<br /><br />The passive sounds to much like what I used to hear in the reformed church. Better than nothing but not particularly directed at sinners. I suppose the belief in Limited Atonement makes one hold back for you can never be sure if any or none of the people are died for.David Cochranehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08632064391675580145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-49044549854845983812010-01-16T15:33:50.845-06:002010-01-16T15:33:50.845-06:00Very well said. Your example of absolution is par...Very well said. Your example of absolution is particularly on point. We should not deny the authority that Christ has given us, but should use it in accord with his command and promise.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02880104662116194676noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-6005726032216207652010-01-16T11:26:27.677-06:002010-01-16T11:26:27.677-06:00Just a few thoughts for you on the use of the pass...Just a few thoughts for you on the use of the passive vs. the active voice. In the EO, the servant/handmaiden of God "is baptized in the name of..." Even at confession, the priest says that "I, who am a sinner, have no power to forgive sins but only our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ" and then absolution is given, again with the passive voice. however, as we receive the Eucharist, the priest says, "The servant/handmaiden of God receives..." I'm not sure why the passive voice is not used in this case. THere is no question that baptism, eucharist and absolution are gifts from God, hence why the passive is preferred. What is your take on that, fr.?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08038508116670615703noreply@blogger.com