A pastor to deacon...

Now we know what Noah believed. And what Episcopals practice.

No deacon of my church will have:
"sacerdotal power"
"Pastoral office"
"ordained over a church"
"episcopal"
</font>[/QUOTE]Dr. Bob, with all due respect, notice the use of the semi-colon between each example Noah Webster has given. It's not a colon and then followed by each example separated by a comma being in succession, the semi-colon delegates separate applications. Also "episcopal" doesn't indicate The Episcopalain Church, it only is indicative of the church led by a bishop, hence I Timothy 3.

Deacons do have ministerial functions in the church, but not sacredotal power. Deacons are ministering to the needs of the congregation in areas such as financial assistance for an example.

Also, you can't apply the word "ordain" as defined in the way you have miscontrued it to all passages of scripture where it is used. Pull out your concordance and relate it to the passage in context and you'll see that.

In His Holy Service,

Brother Ricky

 

Larry, by your 5 or 6 posts concerning the ordaining of deacons, you have constantly refuted the accountability of the man as the initial process of ordination. It may not be that way in your church, but it is that way in God's church.

I don't have a problem with being accountable, except when that person claims accountability as a measure to condemn, mistakingly of course.

Would I be wrong to assume you have a problem with being accountable? Just making that assumption by your insistance that accountability has nothing to do with ordination.

BTW, I wouldn't condemn Noah Webster so quickly, he too was a calvinist!

 

You can't be accountable BEFORE the fact. You must be QUALIFIED before the fact and your qualifications must be RECOGNIZED before the fact by whoever does the appointing. How can a person be held accountable for not being qualified to be a deacon BEFORE they are a deacon. Accountable means that you have to authority and responsibility to do something about it if they are not. If I am a member of your church, you have absolutely NO authority to do anything about the fact that I am not qualified to be a deacon. If being a deacon becomes something I wish to do then you may have have the authority to decide if I will indeed become a deacon but you still do not have any authority to do anything about my not be qualified. If I am (appointed, elected, ordained, chosen) or in any manner set as a deacon THEN and only then could you have authority to hold me accountable.

The word ordain just means to appoint someone or something to a position officially. It has come to take on a secondary meaning of appointing an elder and some people apparently believe the word now should be used exclusively for the high office of "Pastor". That is pure tradition and nothing else. The Bible uses ordain and ordained in a variey of ways including of a place, (see I Chron 17:9), of a rule, (see I Cor 7:17), and God's decision, (see I Cor 9:14)

The specialness of what Paul told Titus was in the office, not in the word "ordain".

 

Anyone else think we're talking past one another here?

 

[I wouldn't be so quick to say that my church is not God's church because I don't do something that Scripture doesn't command us to do. I have not refuted the accountability in anyway. I have fully affirmed it. Trust me, our deacons are accountable and I hold their feet to the fire, more than some of them would like in some cases. But I have refuted your notion that ordination is a tool of accountability. A man can be and should be accountable without ordination. My SS teachers are accountable and we don't ordain them. Every church member is accountable and we don't ordain them. My wife is accountable and she is not ordained. My point is that ordination and accountability are two different things that are not related. Ordaining someone does not make the accountable. They are already accountable.

Yes, you would be wrong. I have fully affirmed the rightness of accountability for every member of the church (and some on this board have called me a legalist for it). I have yet to ordain a single church member though. The reason is because ordination has nothing to do with accountability.

I don't understand why this is difficult ...

His theological positions are of no concern to me. The way that his definitions were being used was the concern at that point.

 

I dislike the word pastor since it is rather not an office to which the temporal leader of the church local should be called - it is a gift - and the excerise of the gift leads to a unique office

To answer the original question

Yes the pastor can be the deacon and the elder - but the idea is that these duties are almost impossible for one person to perform in a church of any size

So the reverend should be training his replacement so that he can either step aside as the preacher of the gospel and focus as a deacon or as an elder, or focus on the preaching of the word

The apostles were that until they asked the congregation to present names unto them

Timothy was that until he appointed elders in the church

So in a large well-established church I would say no - the reverend should be neither deacon nor elder, but in a smaller, younger church - it is permissible for a time


As to a verse regarding the ordination of deacons - it is SO CLEARLY Acts 6:1-6 - since what office do you wish to say was being created there

I say Stephen was a deacon - what office do you say he was if not a deacon

And the Catholic church ordains deacons in that they have their own vows - A Catholic would be able to go into more detail - but the deacon does have some minsterial and all the other fancy words that I forget since Im going ot be late for work.

Some branches of the Reform do so as well

I recall faintly rumours of the Lutheran doing so as well - at least the germanic Lutheran - who had this atrractive young lady when I was younger

 

Now we know what Noah believed. And what Episcopals practice.

No deacon of my church will have:
"sacerdotal power"
"Pastoral office"
"ordained over a church"
"episcopal"
</font>[/QUOTE]Main Entry: sac·er·do·tal
Pronunciation: "sa-s&r-'dO-t&l, "sa-k&r-
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin sacerdotalis, from sacerdot-, sacerdos priest, from sacer sacred + -dot-, -dos (akin to facere to make) -- more at SACRED, DO
Date: 15th century
1 : of or relating to priests or a priesthood : PRIESTLY
2 : of, relating to, or suggesting sacerdotalism
- sac·er·do·tal·ly /-t&l-E/ adverb


Main Entry: sac·er·do·tal·ism
Pronunciation: -t&l-"i-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1856
: religious belief emphasizing the powers of priests as essential mediators between God and mankind
- sac·er·do·tal·ist /-t&l-ist/ noun


A BAPTIST churtch with the minister acting as mediator between the members and God?

 

OK, we've figured out what Webster and the SBC, and various other churches DO but, no one has looked at what the Greek says the words used for "ordain" mean. I looked up every one of them (and there are several). I am not going to quote them all, it would take too long. Just get out your Strong's and look them up. There is no hint in any of them that the word means anything other than the general idea of appoint, set in place, or something very similar. The word "ordain" could legitimately be used to say that you are "ordaining" a member to be an usher. The mystical aspect is there PURELY by tradition (which is why Websters has it) and NOT because that is what the Bible teaches.

 

Webster gives the full definition. He has placed the particular definition to apply to the particualr position. He NEVER said deacons have sacredotal power, you said he did! How sad

Seems to be another attempt to "hijack" this thread by your erroneous imputations.

 

The position that one is "appointed" to delegates his duties. The pastor IS ordained to have sacredotal powers as to seek the face of God as to lead the congreagtion. (That is if the "deacon board" will let him)

Deacons are not ordained to have sacredotal power, neither are nursery workers appointed by volunteering, ss teachers by election, ushers by appointment. Their only "power" is to carry out their duty as allowed and appointed by the church, and that is under pastoral authority. (Oh No! Pastoral authority?)

This ones for Larry; Of course their accountability is firsat considered before EVER appointing anyoine to any position whther ordained in the sense of having sacredotal power or NOT!

 

Welcome aboard, ITNAC. If you would have been paying attention, you would know that I have been saying this since the idea of accountability first came up on this thread. Accountability is required of every believer, whether they have sacerdotal power or not. But I am glad you have finally caught up here, at least to some degree.

 

Welcome aboard, ITNAC. If you would have been paying attention, you would know that I have been saying this since the idea of accountability first came up on this thread. Accountability is required of every believer, whether they have sacerdotal power or not. But I am glad you have finally caught up here, at least to some degree. </font>[/QUOTE]Only problem with that utopian apsect is that you can't make every believer accountable, but you can require the accountability of that person before allowing them to hold a position in the church. If they won't remain accountable while in that position, then removing them from it is justified.

BTW, I've been about ten steps ahead of you for awhile.

 

Accountability is expected from every believer. The level of accountability which they will involve themselves is determinate for the positions that they hold.

Unfortunately, your posts did not reflect that. Your post continually confused ordination with accountability. That is why I welcome you aboard. You seem to have finally moved past that false conception that you conveyed.

 

Accountability is expected from every believer. The level of accountability which they will involve themselves is determinate for the positions that they hold.

Unfortunately, your posts did not reflect that. Your post continually confused ordination with accountability. That is why I welcome you aboard. You seem to have finally moved past that false conception that you conveyed. </font>[/QUOTE]Oh, I haven't renigged my stance on the fact before ordination will ever be considerd that the accountability of the individual will be first examined.

Somehow I picture you as some one who gets up in the morning, looks at himself in the mirror, and starts argueing with himself.

 

That wasn't the issue. I believed that long before this discussion came up. That did not seem to be your position from your posts. We must remember that ordination and accountability are not the same.

You should get a better picture.
I don't argue with many, if any. I do try to explain things to people and go out of my way to continue a conversation if it appears there is continued misunderstanding. I have a tendency to be too longsuffering in most cases, hoping that the next thing I say will be the thing that helps them to understand.

 

Pastors are ordained to a position with sacredotal duties.
Deacons are ordained to a position without sacredotal duties.
SS Teachers are ordained to a position with their particular duties.
The Janitors are ordained to a position with its own duties.

There is nothing special about the word "ordained" it is the POSITION that is special.

The qualifications for Pastors and Deacons are spelled out in scripture and anyone desiring that position must be QUALIFIED (not the word accountable) BEFORE they are appointed. AFTER they are appointed THEN they are accountable for what they do and whether or not they are fullfilling those responsibilities.