Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [liturgy-l] Re: Holy Spirit and Gender

Expand Messages
  • Nathan Nettleton
    ... As Jan Hofland made fairly clear in his post, we only know the Montanists through the writings of their opponents. I had a professor in College who set out
    Message 1 of 34 , Sep 30, 2000
      jonwest@... wrote:
      >
      > Ahh yes Montanists, the model for women's ordination and the Church, not!
      >
      > The Montanists did not believe that sins were forgiven after Baptism--hmm I
      > wonder if Constantine knew them?

      As Jan Hofland made fairly clear in his post, we only know the
      Montanists through the writings of their opponents. I had a professor in
      College who set out to do his Chuch History doctoral thesis on
      Montanism, but ended up doing it on the opposition to Montanism because
      there are absolutely no surviving writings of the Montanists.

      Therefore any confident assertion about their beliefs is about as
      reliable as holding an opinion on the beliefs of Jesus based solely on
      the writings of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.

      Peace and hope,

      Nathan

      _____________________________________
      Nathan Nettleton
      Pastor, South Yarra Community Baptist Church
      Melbourne, Australia
      mailto:nathan@...
      _____________________________________
    • atombomb
      Blessed be God. ... Because I am so busy I am content to go whichever way people decide, but I too enjoy that discussion whenever it comes up, and I do not
      Message 34 of 34 , Oct 3, 2000
        Blessed be God.

        "Jan J.H.Hofland" wrote:
        >
        > Greetings to all,
        >
        > With all due respect, I'm (partly) to blame for a theological discussion on
        > our _liturgy_ list. I tried to indicate that my interest is (partly)
        > liturgical. I am sympathic ( no more, no less) toward referring to the Holy
        > Spirit as "She" which, ofcourse, has consequences as to long
        > standing/traditional liturgical texts as well as the wording of prayers,
        > songs and the message.
        >
        > The responses have been learned and well meant, but nevertheless largely
        > outside of the liturgical scope of our list or without a thought toward
        > liturgical consequences for the one theological stand or the other. I
        > hereby kindly suggest that we terminate this discussion, unless we are able
        > to relate it to the liturgy of the church.
        >
        > Gee, I liked the discussion, but as co-owner of the list I've got to draw
        > the line somewhere :-).

        Because I am so busy I am content to go whichever way people decide, but
        I too enjoy that discussion whenever it comes up, and I do not think it
        is in the least unrelated to liturgy. We're talking, after all, about
        the proper language for hymnography and doxology, and also eventually
        about the ordination or not of women. So I will engage the topic as best
        I can, or not, depending on the decision, but I would be happy to
        continue, tongue hanging out as I sprint to keep up sometimes.

        Regards,

        John Burnett
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.