Your View On Women As Pastors

That has nothing to do with women as pastors. I am sure some would use that passage to justify sexual perverts being pastors or bishops!

 

I agree...I stated that at the top of page 2 as well.

 

I give you credit for being consistent. Respectfully submitted.

 

Thanks Marcia, for making the Scripture clear.

 

"Of the second sort are the hours appointed for public prayers, sermons, and sacraments; quietness and silence under sermons; the singing of hymns; the places appointed for these services, and the days fixed for the celebration of the Lord's supper; the prohibition of Paul, that women should not teach in the Church, and the like; . . .
. . . these things are not necessary to salvation, and ought to be applied to the edification of the Church, with a variety suitable to the manners of each age and nation, therefore, as the benefit of the Church shall require, it will be right to change and abolish former regulations, and to institute new ones." ---John Calvin, Institutes, vol. 4, ch. 10, sec. 29-30.

 

One has to read between the lines in order to justify women pastors. It's just not there in black and white.

 

1. I don't think we should make determination on spiritual issues based on Calvin's opinions.

2. Calvin is wrong: It is not Paul's prohibition, but rather, it is God's. It's explained above in 1 Tim. and also the principle in Eph 5:23

 

If we are going to get technical, the passage that deals with husband of one wife is talking about bishops.. not pastors..

If God calls them.. and a church chooses them.. .so be it.
I know churches that are thriving, that have women pastors.

I know churches that are dying that have men pastors...

And for the record, Baptists have had women pastors for over 100 yrs....

reading the word "pastor" into this passage is inconsistent if you claim others are reading "women" into it...
both words are missing.

 

There are many reasons not to use that text for this issue, so I don't.

Sorry, TT, I do not think God calls women to be pastors. They may think they are called, they may even seem to be great pastors, but I don't see biblical support for it, but rather against it. I think what I posted above puts the weight behind the view against women as pastors.

Whether churches are thriving or dying with men or women pastors is not the criteria we should use.

 

Many churches thrive while doing unbiblical things.

The earlier point is most compelling: if a woman cannot exercise headship over her husband, then he could not be a member of the church she pastors. The matter of headship is at the root of Paul's doctrine.

 

From a practical point of view, men respond better to male leadership.

Call it a weakness, whatever, but it has to be male leadership -- not a feminized man.

I've encountered many "manly" men, and I can tell you I'd be embarrassed to drag them into far too many churches, where the songs talk about "Falling in Love with Jesus," Kissing His Face," "Walking in the garden" and the pastor breaks down and cries telling a phony story about a little boy and his dying mother.

Sorry, but men respond to men -- not sissies.

 

Some woman pastors have been very good preachers of the word. Bless them, and the scriptures are not crystal clear against female pastors.

My group happens to oppose female pastors, but I don't. We send them to the mission field. Then, that Bible verse does say, "Here am I, Lord, send her..."

Cheers,

Jim

 

Check out some baptist history...

http://www.abcosh.org/resources/pdf/women.pdf

 

Whoa there, I was just asking a question for clarification. Take it easy there buddy.

 

Just in case you didn't click on the link in my previous post.. here it is again.
http://www.abcosh.org/resources/pdf/women.pdf

 

I voted no given how it is worded, but I go to school with many gifted women who feel called to preach and have had churches confirm their calls. That should count for something, but I still stubbornly see Scripture limiting elders to men only. I'm more open with deacons, and I certainly think churches could do much more to incorporate women than they do now.

I agree with Tiny Tim that ordaining women is not some post-feminist movement in America. Inasmuch as Baptists in America were part of evangelicalism in the nineteenth century, they were innovators, including ordaining women to preach.

I don't know if I'm as comfortable as Dr. Skeels is in linking Calvinism to opposition to ordaining women though. Nathan Hatch argues in "The Democratization of American Christianity" (a great book by the way) that the populist spirit of evangelicals in the early nineteenth century reacted against the theology Calvinism and the necessity of a formally trained clergy. However, that is different from pinning opposition to ordaining women to Calvinist theology per se.

Mimi Hadad at the Center for Biblical Equality has also written some articles on ordaining women in the evangelical heritage. I bet she has some of them posted over at the CBE website.

 

The Baptist Faith and Message (2000) excludes women as pastors, although it leaves open the possibility of women serving as deacons.

In view of this, I guess I will start a new thread. Sorry, I don't know how to do a poll.

 

If it were left up to me, all would be welcome to be pastors, elders, deacons; but it is up to God and I believe the scripture is plain and clear on the subject. Many folks massage the scripture and ignore other scripture in order to justify what they feel like should be "fair". I do not mean to be disrespectful or mean and I know there are some churches that feel led by the Spirit to have women as pastors, elders or deacons but I do not believe that spirit to be Holy.
God has His reasons for the order He states in His Word. He sees the big picture, we do not. Prayers for all.

 

I believe that women are taking a more and more dominant role in the churches because of the abject failure of men to lead, both in the home and the churches. It is my belief that this will ultimately lead to an apostate church. There is a strong movement within the Roman Catholic to name Mary as co-redeemer. That movement is led by men.

That being said I have often wondered if the prophecy in Revelation of the woman called Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots [Revelation 17:5] will not be fulfilled when women dominate an apostate church. Of course we are all entitled to be wrong when discussing Revelation.

I realize that the above remarks may be misinterpreted by many of the fine women who post on this Forum. I want to assure them that I have nothing but respect for them, particularly since they usually more than hold their own in debate. So if any are offended please accept my apologies.


http://www.cwfa.org/articles/609/CFI/cfreport/index.htm

United Methodist Bishops Elect Radical Feminist Leaders; 5/16/2002
Bishop Sharon Brown Christopher to head Council of Bishops

Bishop Sharon Brown Christopher assumed the office of president of the Council of Bishops on May 3 while Bishop Sharon Rader was elected to continue her position as secretary — a post she has held for six years. Bishop Christopher is the first woman to hold the position of council president in the history of the UM Church.

RE-IMAGINING A NEW HERESY

Both women were early supporters of the “Re-imagining Movement,” which was founded in 1993 by a broad spectrum of feminist radicals who cast aside Christian orthodoxy and promoted a lesbian-affirming religiosity that denied the atonement of Christ and featured pagan rituals and worship of various “goddesses” in place of the Christian godhead. United Methodist bishop, Earl G. Hunt, said, “No comparable heresy has appeared in the church in the last 15 centuries. This material must be eradicated from Christian thinking.”

Mark Tooley, executive director of the United Methodist Action Committee of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, said the president of the United Methodist Council of Bishops is “largely a symbolic post.”

“However, it is sad that the bishops of this denomination could not elect a colleague who is committed to orthodox Christianity and to the beliefs of John Wesley,” Tooley said. “Once again, the Council of Bishops has shown that it is insular and more concerned about relationships among the bishops than with the Council’s overall accountability to the whole church.”

Bishops Christopher and Rader were among those who vehemently denied that the Re-imagining movement was heretical and defended their participation in an open letter sent to the church shortly after the initial “re-imagining” conference. “A Time of Hope — A Time of Threat,” was signed by over 800 other churchwomen and testifies to the depth of feminist radicalism present in the UM Church. The letter states in part (emphasis added):

This is a time of hope. The partnership of women and men in the United Methodist Church is growing—in the Council of Bishops, in Annual Conferences, in local congregations, and in theological schools…the voices of women are being heard, and cooperation among Christian women increases denominationally and ecumenically. In theological books, sermons, and liturgies, women are singing a new song.

But this is also a time of threat…For years the United Methodist Church has been divided by controversy over the leadership of women, reproductive rights, inclusive language, and homosexuality. As women have addressed these issues, the clash of theological perspectives has intensified. At the heart of the conflict are diverse images of God…the dynamics of control and power. What is at stake is…who will set the agenda for the future of the church.

CRITICS ARE ‘HOMOPHOBES’

The letter suggested that verbal attacks on the Re-Imagining Conference in Minneapolis, were intended to “split and weaken the United Methodist Church,” resulting in the following consequences (emphasis added):
“Refusing to acknowledge the positive relationship between sexuality and spirituality, present in both Christian tradition and contemporary theological writings, deprives the church of a rich and essential wholeness.

“Accusing feminist, womanist, and other women theologians, as well as our theological schools, of departing from historic Christian faith is an attempt to constrict the work of the Holy Spirit.

“Engaging in verbal violence against lesbians reveals the homophobia in the church and denigrates the rich contributions that homosexual persons have made to the church through the centuries.”

The letter also noted (emphasis added):

“The use of the term, ‘heresy,’ in our time, may be a way of refusing to hear the voices of those who have been marginalized in the life of the church. Today creative theological minds explore a whole range of issues, including the biblical meaning of God’s Wisdom, Sophia, (like God’s Word, Logos). Similarly, in light of social experience, such as slavery and female sexual abuse, understandings of sacrifice, atonement, and martyrdom are being reexamined.

“The scriptural promise of the Holy Spirit creates the space and the inspiration for new faith experience and fresh theological insights in every era. We stand strongly in the United Methodist tradition, which honors theological diversity and encourages openness to emerging theological initiatives.”

Although supporters of the movement reject claims that denial of fundamental Christian beliefs, pagan rituals, and goddess worship constitute heresy, an observer at the 1998 conference disagreed. Donna Hailson, a clergywoman of the American Baptist Church, wrote the following for the Ecumenical Coalition on Women and Society (ECWS):

“At Re-imagining, we heard denied the deity and sinlessness of Jesus Christ. Lifted in His place, by one speaker, was the Cosmic Mother, the Mother Goddess of the Aztecs and others. This speaker, Mary Castellanos, said, ‘Mary is the composite of ancient, current, and future manifestations of the one who will not be suppressed…the ageless and universal sisterhood: Isis, Aphrodite, Bridig…whom I propose to you is the one whom we must continue to re-imagine.’ Castellanos went on to suggest that participants embrace the Virgin of Guadeloupe as a unifying ‘goddess of the Americas.’ Later, the ‘revival preacher,’ Barbara Lundblad, encouraged the people to laugh at the Bible and Jesus and twisted the words of her text, John 20, to insist that re-imaginers not hold on to Jesus, because some in the group had already heard ‘altogether too much’ about Jesus.”

As reported by the ECWS, the final ceremony of the conference weekend was the “ritual biting of the apple to symbolize a woman’s solidarity with Eve in her rebellion and determination to grasp knowledge regardless of the consequences.”