From the Institute-of-Lutheran-Theology
By Kip Allan Tyler
Throughout the history of God’s people men and women have been called by God to serve God and His people faithfully. This has happened in various ways as demonstrated in Holy Scripture. We are going to take a journey through God’s Word, so please take out your Greek New Testaments.First of all we need to understand, the term ‘pastor’ does not appear in the Bible. The etymology of this word is traced through Latin and not Greek. The Latin word for “pastor” means a herder of a flock and the verb pascere means “to feed.”
The closest koine Greek word would be found in 1 Peter 5:1-2 where the πρεσβυτέρους (Adjective Accusative Plural Masculine πρεσβύτερος) “elder” is to ποιμάνατε (Verb 2nd Person Plural Aorist Active Imperative ποιμαίνω) “shepherd, feed, tend” the flock of God among them.
Although the term pastor is not mentioned in the New Testament it is common among us today. The role of a pastor is really an amalgamation of numerous Old Testament and New Testament functions, such as priest, servant, overseer, prophet, teacher, etc.
The challenge in this study is to not only look at the passages from the Bible which have been used by some to deny the possibility of women serving as pastors, but also attempt to understand the role of women throughout Scripture and reconcile the seeming Biblical tension.
A verse often cited to argue against a woman serving as a pastor is 1 Timothy 2:11-12 which is translated in the NIV as “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” Paul is writing to Timothy giving him advice as he provides leadership for the church in Ephesus which is being influenced by false teachers. (cont.)
The full Bible Study: The-Role-of-Women-as-Pastors
_______________________________________________________________
“Overall, I am not too crazy about women pastors in the church. Although, I have met some very good ones.”
That statement alone, has gotten me literally booted off some blogs by LCMS bloggers, with whom I was previously quite friendly. A couple of them (they will remain nameless) will no longer even speak to me.
I have also been booted off blogs by ELCA bloggers, as well (not on this topic), just to be fair.
This can be a great discussion if we can keep from getting emotional. Please read the entire Bible study before commenting pro or con.
I’m going out to the desert to visit my Mom later today (at least a five hour roundtrip) so I won’t be able to participate until later tomorrow.
This can be a heated topic, so I’m asking all that would like to participate to keep the discussion civil. No name calling, please.
Remember, like Dennis Prager, I prefer “clarity, rather than agreement.”
We probably aren’t going to win anybody over, here. But we can make some good arguments and hopefully learn a thing or two ourselves.
Filed under: Women Pastors |
The Old Adam Lives! 
St Steve,
The question is not whether women have significant roles within the church? Overseer is not a role to play but rather a calling. Would the Holy Spirit call a woman into the office of the public ministry? No. We can make that statement precisely because God will not go against his word.
I have reviewed many different studies, having been in the RCA and the ELCA, on this issue but the sections of scripture fobidding it still remain. When we start setting aside or trying to do away with clear teaching of scripture we have all seen where that has led at an extremely high rate. With rare exception every church body who gave female ordination has went on the ordain impenitent sinners as well. This is not to say it is a sin to be female but rather the discounting of scripture.
God’s peace.
One way of approaching this topic, which I believe helps to advance the discussion in a constructive way, is to look at the assumptions involved in understanding the relevant biblical texts. I’ve many times heard the remark that the hermeneutic used to open up the office of ordained ministry to women is the same hermeneutic that has now opened up the office in some denominational bodies to GLBT folks.
Do you believe this is correct? Or, does the bible study at issue engage the same means of interpretation of the texts that are used to justify the inclusion of other, more clearly anti-Christian, ministers?
Steve,
I never like the idea of women pastors either until I heard several share their stories of how God called them and how they tried so hard to resist that call. Now of course, God’s done the same thing in my own life.
I think it’s just important that we don’t put God in a box and try to dictate to the almighty how his work should be done.
God’s peace.
Aren’t we supposed to test every spirit, to see whether it’s of God? With the measuring stick being whether it agrees with the Scriptures?
Pastors are one thing but my old church also allowed women elders. My current pastor has practical reasons he does not want to want women elders… he became a head pastor at 23 due to an affair the previous pastor had.
He sees the elder board not just as direction giving to the Church be develops a spiritual intimacy with some of them…. one of which he only shares with his wife of anyone of the opposite sex.
I would appreciate some input on this one:
http://centralityofthegospel.wordpress.com/2009/08/29/a-complicated-scenario-of-sin-homosexuality-forgiveness-mercy-and-grace/
A website ran a board this week for people to submit what they believed to be the ‘worse’ verse in the bible:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=76
Whilst there were the predictable Old Testament submissions regarding killing, it was announced on the radio this morning that the highest votes were placed for Paul’s words to Timothy regarding not having women ‘have authority’ over a man (1 Timothy 2:12).
In the discussion which followed, a Muslim questioned how Christians could today could deny the validity of such an instruction if it were God-given, and if it were not, why is it in the New Testament?
The answer to this matter has to lye in the manner of understanding currently being discussed over at Mocking Bird on the actual nature of order and headship that God provided within Creation;
http://mockingbirdnyc.blogspot.com/
in the series being run regarding men and women and the nature of our mutual submission to Christ (- the very nature of ‘rule’ and ‘authority’ is thereby expressed by the love conveyed from God through such giving of ourselves to Him and to each other).
I think this has to underpin our approach to Christian life and ministry.
In thinking about this, one notes the example of Christ. He was perfectly good to women, included them where others would not, encouraged them when traditionally perhaps, not. I mean, the man was good, I’ll eat out of his hands.
Still, he only sent out men. Is that because “non decet?”, i.e. it was not “seemly”, “proper”? Or is there more to it?
In Roman society, the patriarch was very strong. It would have been very unseemly for women to show public authority. The man could put his family to death by his simple decree, if he chose.
Also, a lot of other religiosity has to with pro-creating, fertility, harvesting, phallic symbols, sex. Judeo-Christianity is different. We don’t need inappropriate relationships.
Yet, Paul, mentions the “law”. What “law” is this? So it is more than “decet”, what is “seemly”. It is a rule. Do we still have rules. We do.
How do I “feel about it”? If there are things right and wrong in the worship of the living God, then I’d better listen. If Christ, our dear Lord, could be so humiliated, mocked, whipped and so on, I think I can stand back when told to. I can be giving honor to another, as we always should be doing anyways. Think of others more highly than yourself.
Yet, the “submit” does not sound really good. First of all, because all hands and minds are needed to work together. Each one must have his own kind of honor and involvement. I think a man is much better off thinking of the woman as a “partner” than someone who needs to obey. Each relationship works out its own particular way of handling things. This can still be done with mutual respect.
“Submit” does not sound right because, once we think of it as such, it becomes more like “oppression”. I need a “submit” without oppression. It’s like “humility blushes to look at itself.” When you are thinking of being humble you are already no longer humble. When you are thinking of “submitting” yourself or someone else, the freedom is out the window. You want to “submit” in freedom and not make a big fuss in any which way about it.
There, that’s it for now.
Acts 21:9
He had four unmarried daughters, who prophesied.
Miriam (Exodus 15:20,21; Micah 6:4)
Deborah (Judges 4:4,5)
Huldah (2 Kings 22:14-20; 2 Chronicles 34:22-28)
Noadiah (Nehemiah 6:14)
Anna (Luke 2:36-38)
Philip’s four unmarried daughters (Acts 21:9)
hmmmmmm
Free of emotion and full of scripture. Good response.
Steve,
Haven’t read the Bible Study yet. So excuse me, please.
I have always had a problem though with your quote, about not being in favor, but finding some women to be very good pastors.
Honestly I begin to wonder what makes for a good pastor? It seems to me that they can’t help but be undermining the word of God. I don’t think good pastors do that.
Willoh roots? How many pastors do you know that prophesy in any other manner than that they proclaim God’s word? Being able to prophesy, and being a pastor are two different things.
Steve,
I read what I could stomach for now. Quite frankly, I sure hope there are better exegetes than that in the ranks of these splinter groups. I’m really at a loss as where even to begin with a critique here. Essentially it is all re fried hash. Nor, does it begin to take scripture or the pastoral office, which does have a certain amount of inherent authority built in, and recognizing that you as a pastor have authority is not the same as abusing authority, being egotistical, and prideful.
Bror,
Thanks for reading my paper. I consider myself a conservative when it comes to God’s Word, but not necessarily a conservative to church tradition. I appreciate tradition and its value, but I will sacrifice it if it is at odds with Scripture.
I certainly am not a Greek professor, but I have enjoyed studying the language and even teach New Testament Greek on Saturday mornings. I know you find my paper in error and hard to stomach, but I would like to carry on a further discussion concerning the biblical texts. I was taught that every translation is an interpretation and we need to guard against subjectivity. So I tried to set aside my preconceived ideas and let the text speak.
I agree men have had more leadership responsibilities in both the Old and New Testaments. I agree Paul was concerned with some women as having authority, but then we are also left with Pricilla, Hulda and Deborah. Should we just throw them under the bus, because of years of tradition and label them as aborations?
I am not looking to pick a fight, but rather a civil discussion with others who are passionate about the Gospel. Show me where you disagree and why, I am always anxious to learn and reflect on God’s Word. In the end, we may agree to disagree.
I drafted this paper for my congregation as they were considering calling our first female pastor.
(As for the “splinter group”, remember Christianity and Lutheranism were both at one point “splinter groups.”)
By the way, how was the desert? did you enjoy Landscatter’s wind fest? I like how the have that anuually from Jan1st through Dec 31st.
Bror,
I don’t care for women politicians much, either. I think women (generally) are built with more emotion than men and more of a nurturing nature.
I happen to love Margaret Thatcher and would put her up against any man in the political arena.
I have met, and heard preach and teach, two women pastors who did an excellent job of proclaiming God’s Law and His gospel. Better than most male preachers I have ever heard.
Will God refuse to work through their preaching and teaching?
I say that when His Word is faithfully preached, he is there in it, no matter if it’s a man or a woman.
We all have different gifts and I believe the Word is not held captive by us, and our gifts, but the other way around.
I liked seeing my Mom. But I hated the 6 hour roundtrip drive through smoke and ash.
I’d prefer that pastors not have been in a marriage that has led to divorce, also.
But I would not trade my current pastor for one that has managed to not have been divorced.
We have three women pastors at our church. None of them take authority over the men. We have two male pastors who handle the men’s ministry. The women pastors proclaim the Word of God…that is the authority not the person making the delivery…*: )
Nancy,
“The authority is in the Word, not the person making the delivery.”
The finite contains the infinite. Amen.
That, I believe, is a proper understanding of the doctrine of the Word.
Steve,
Politicians is one thing, women usurping an office specifically denied to them by Holy Scripture is another.
What I hear you saying is I don’t much care for women, but here are a few I do like. The office of Prime Minister of England and who may or may not hold it is not addressed in scripture. The office of Pastor is.
As for divorced pastors, and pastors who have managed to remain married. Well that too is not addressed in scripture, though womanizers are barred from the office.
Nancy,
So the women go to a separate worship service then the men in your Church? Or the women “pastors” don’t preach and or handle the sacraments, but confine themselves to women’s Bible Studies, and hospital visits?
Amended
Bror,
I certainly realize that the Bible does not care who the PM of England is, I was trting to make a point about exceptions to the norm.
And you do realize that there conservative theologians in the church who disagree with you about the Bible and allowing divorce in the pastoral ministry.
I thought that the Bible says that there is to be no remarrying until the original wife is dead?
Does the Bible not say that?
Show me the passge where it says that divorce is alright for the pastor and also where it says that it is ok for him to be remarried. I don’t doubt that it’s in there if you say it is, I just want to see where it is.
“I have met, and heard preach and teach, two women pastors who did an excellent job of proclaiming God’s Law and His gospel. Better than most male preachers I have ever heard.”
You see this is just it. I don’t doubt that you did here them, and that they might have even done a good job rightly handling the text on that given day. However, lurking behind this whole scenario, is the fact that in order to do so, they broke with and ignored God’s word. 1 Cor 14, and 1 Timothy 2 both forbid women from doing this. It should also be noted that both of these very clear passages are dealing with the conduct of women in the Divine Service, or during worship specifically. (Which is why Priscilla, waited till after Apollos was done preaching, for a moment in private where she could talk to and instruct him, she did not do it publicly, or in the divine service, she never preached in a public setting such as the divine service. This is an aspect of the texts that is not dealt with at all in the Bible Study at issue.)
Now whether the Holy Spirit used these sinful women to bring faith to those who heard them that day quite irrelevant. God has and will use sinners, and where the word of God is spoken the Holy Spirit is at work.
However, by the mere usurping of this office by the women, those who heard them are now being tempted to ignore God’s word. They may not even realize it at this point. Yet, what are they to think when they go home and start reading the Bible on their own and come across these passages, what are these women going to tell these people when they come asking questions regarding these passages? How is the hermeneutic here applied going to effect their whole way of looking at scripture? It is no wonder to many a confessional Lutheran that the ELCA has gone where it has gone. Many today are waking up with a hangover wondering how a church could go so wrong. The issue of homosexuality, is one that still jars us much harder than the issue of women’s ordination. They are two separate issues, yet they are also interrelated. It isn’t that women’s ordination leads to the other that makes women’s ordination wrong. The fact that women’s ordination subverts the pastoral office, and ignores God’s word is what makes women’s ordination wrong. But once one has applied this sort of reasoning to get the desired result of women’s ordination, there is no wonder that that church body, absent of Homophobia (which is a bad reason to make any policy, but has kept a number of other churches from following suit.) would be led to make the decisions that the ELCA has.
Steve,
We might stick to the issue at hand. When it comes to divorce and remarriage there is no standard applied to the pastoral office that is not applied to the general Christian population. Divorce is certainly wrong, and God hates it. However, divorce and remarriage in and of themselves do not bar one from the pastoral office. Now if the pastor is divorcing his wife, against her protests, so he can run off with the deacon or deaconess, and shack up with him or her, that may be reason to reconsider the man’s credentials. The question that looms behind here is the reason for the divorce. It is not as cut and dry as does the one aspiring to the office of Bishop have a pair of testes.
Also,
I would debate those “conservative” theologians based on God’s word. I would not make the case that I merely like this pastor who happens to be divorced.
1 Timothy does not allow for an exception to the rule. It says that women are not to teach. Paul doesn’t go on to say, unless they are really gifted at it.
Many could make the same slippery slope argument with respect to allowing divorced pastors to continue in the ministry.
Homosexual activity is a clear violation of the orders of creation and a violation of God’s law.
Women pastos may not be a good thing, but it is certainly in a different category altogether.
Bror,
Jesus says in Matthew 19 :6-9 that if a divorced man remarries (unless the woman was unfaithful to him) that it is adultery.
Pastors certainly not live in the state of adultery, should they?
Steve,
Exactly. Read it again. There are stipulations written in there, aren’t there. It is not cut and dry, he is divorced, therefore living in adultery, therefore not qualified. “Unless the woman was unfaithful to him.”
So no pastors should not live in adultery.
Bror…hmmmm… ; )
Timothy 2:14-15 (New International Version)
14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
So…Adam either didn’t sin, or was in out-right rebellion of his own free choice…
Guess verse 15 leaves men in a heap of trouble…
Steve,
“Many could make the same slippery slope argument with respect to allowing divorced pastors to continue in the ministry.”
I am not making a slippery slope argument here. Read carefully.
A slippery slope argument would be: “women pastors is a bad thing because it will lead to openly gay pastors. women pastors isn’t a bad thing in itself, but this other is. So we don’t want women pastors.”
I am saying women pastors is a bad thing in and of itself, it ignores God’s word, (Which by the way references the orders of creation in its own argumentation.) And if you are wondering why your church body is where it is now, you only have to look at the hermeneutic it adopted for women’s ordination. You can’t hold to one and not the other. They are separate issues to be sure, but they are intertwined also. It is that way with God’s word, a little leven levens the whole lump.
There are churches out there that have as yet not allowed gay clergy, though they have women pastors, but I believe this only reveals a level of homophobia, theologically I do not believe they can maintain the discrepancy.
Nancy,
I don’t really see how? Could you explain what you are trying to get at, and how?
Steve, I think it is really important to remember something about Jewish society in terms of divorce. Divorce was permitted and adultery was committed while sticking to the letter of the law.
Ah ya, how convenient. If I divorce and get her divorced we can do it and everyone including God can’t find any fault with it. Hence the 9th and 10th commandment about “conniving” to do something that “only looks right”, turning away people’s wives and servants, etc., but is really wrong.–hypocrites that we all are.
So, Steve, I think your line of reasoning about divorced pastors is wrong and unfair.
We have some friends in the Lutheran church, he was an orthodox priest. He had a wife and four children. She up and left him. As he needed help coping with the children and with whatever else, he remarried. At that point he could no longer be a priest. This would be something Jesus meant? I don’t think so.
Perhaps, Nancy, you think the verse says men will be saved through childbearing? I suppose if that were the case us men would be in trouble. But the verse says nothing here about how men are to be saved, distinctly from women.
The truth of that little addendum, is that Paul was referencing the role women played in the salvation of all mankind, he was alluding to the first mention of the Gospel, that there would be enmity between “her seed” and the seed of Satan. That seed came forth in Jesus Christ, who bruised his heal on the head of Satan.
Then do you suppose that Paul could have been referring to Jewish culture when he is talking about women learning quietly and in submission rather than a prohibition to women ever being in the ministry??? I agree that women should not be taking authority over men, and that there is definitely an order in the family, for there should be one head only. Truly through child bearing all things have and had been restored at the time of this advise being given to Timothy.
Just for the record…I agree that Steve is a bit out of line with the divorce line of reasoning and as with women in the ministry…this is a case by case determination….being female does not equate one with homosexuality!
Nancy,
I really don’t know where you are coming from. there is nothing about the context that would say Paul is referring to Jewish culture only, in fact given the context, quite the opposite would be the case.
Nor, am I equating Female to being a Homosexual, far from it. I am saying though that if you are going to twist the clear word of God to justify giving the pastoral office for women, then there is nothing to stop you from doing so for the Homosexual.
Slippery-slope argument is consceded.
“There are churches out there that have as yet not allowed gay clergy, though they have women pastors, but I believe this only reveals a level of homophobia, theologically I do not believe they can maintain the discrepancy.”
I disagree.
Homosexual activity is a clear sin. Women in the pastoral ministry is not so cut and dried.
Gays are welcome in our church. Their non-repentance is not. We are phobic of man’s assertiveness, and wilfull desire to undo God’s Law.
Obviously we read these scriptures and understand them a bit differently.
We tend to put a greater emphasis on the use of the gifts rather than Paul’s telling us not to have women teach men.
I’m not a fan of women clergy, per se, because of which direction the churches seem to go in after women are allowed to preach and teach.
This is a question where I’ll admit, I certainly could be wrong. When I get to Heaven (Lord willing) God may ask me what in the world I was doing by giving any slack at all to the idea of women pastors.
Until then, I will stand by my not being in favor of it, (not on biblical basis, because I believe it is not as clear as many who take a more literal stance say it is) but because of the overall results in taking the church off the center and moving it to the left.
Brigitte,
My own pastor is a divorced man and I think that it is fine that he is still a pastor. He is repentant, and he has not tried to justify his disvorce.
My point is that these things are always not so cut and dried and that interpretations do vary amongst theologians and greek words and terms can mean differing things and so I like to return to the doctrine of the Word, wherein God does use the imperfect to accomplish His perfect will.
By the way, I too am divorced (although not a pastor).
I do believe that we have a forgiving God. Divorce can be really terrible, for anyone.
But we repent (by God’s grace) and are forgiven.
Again, my point is that there are good, conservative theologians in the church, who believe that divorce should disqualify one from the pastoral office. I do not agree with that.
Gotta run!
Thanks all, for your great and stimulating comments!
Ahhh, yes divorce…the unforgivable sin…Let’s just murder those exes then we can do the time, get forgiven, and start a church! Or even better have our own movie on Lifetime!…*; )
Notice the winkie…it’s just a joke!
Steve,
I think it is pretty cut and dry whether one is a woman or not. Generally, women do not have testes. I know of none that do. I suppose a hermaphodite aspiring to the office would make for a complication. Women are barred from preaching within the divine service, which makes it hard for them to be pastors. The texts dealing with this are cut and dry. What about these texts is not clear, where does it make any exceptions for any woman?
Nancy,
We know you were kidding, kiddo! 😀
Thanks, my friend, for helping to keep it light!
“Until then, I will stand by my not being in favor of it, (not on biblical basis, because I believe it is not as clear as many who take a more literal stance say it is) but because of the overall results in taking the church off the center and moving it to the left.”
What? Am I the only one barred from making a slipper slope argument? I’m not even making one, but you disagree with women’s ordination precisely because of a slippery slope argument!
Literal: woman means woman, teach means teach, authority means authority. Is there a more “spiritual” reading of this I am missing?
Bror,
“The texts dealing with this are cut and dry. What about these texts is not clear, where does it make any exceptions for any woman?”
This is where understanding the differences in the greek words used is helpful.
The Bible study I posted speaks to this.
You don’t buy it, and that is fine. My purpose in the post was not to convince anyone, but rather to air the other side of the story.
This may be instructive: Try asking proponents and opponents of women’s ordination ( or any other divisive church-related issue for that matter) to rank the importance of the following four terms in making decisions on these matters:
TRADITION
REASON
EXPERIENCE
SCRIPTURE
Scipture,
Reason (applied to scripture)
Tradition
Experience.
Steve,
The Greek for woman means woman.
‘Teach’, ‘silence’ , ‘permit’…those were the debatable words that I had in mind.
I would agree with Bror’s ranking. Much of the theological revisionism going on today would probably look like this:
Experience
Reason
Scripture
Tradition
(I’m being optimistic on the last two!)
I have heard some that would put it a bit differently:
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
Hmmm…
Scripture-always top in my list
Tradition (depends on the applied reason)
Reason (applied to tradition)
Experience-always last in my list
“‘Teach’, ’silence’ , ‘permit’…those were the debatable words that I had in mind.”
Steve,
Again, I’m not sure what is so debatable about these words. The verses are restricting the activity of women in the church, to teach, and have authority over men in the context of the divine service. These same restrictions are not applied to men. It seems then that men ought to be the ones teaching and holding the pastoral office.
Bror,
OK.
Luke 14:33
Jesus said, “Whoever does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple.”
The words are clear. Why do we get a pass on this?
How can pastors pastor a church and not live up to these clear words of Jesus?
The
experience
experience
experience
experience
crowd is certainly there. I have been in a discussion for almost a week now with some guys who would put personal intuition and/or feelings before any of the four were even considered. When someone decides to stand in judgment of God and call Him immoral; I know that they have crossed the line into complete nonsense.
I am a fundemantalist leaning legalist….
scripture
scripture
scripture
scripture
….. and only my interpretation of it.
tradition (only my tradition).
Thought I would swing the pendulum the other way! :-).
Women should not speak in Church and all should have long hair becuase thats what I like!!!!
Experience is evil!!!!
jk
:-).
Steve,
Why don’t the actively gay pastors get a pass then too? I mean I supposedly get a pass for not renouncing all I have. So why shouldn’t they get a pass. Were all in the same boat, and live in glass houses so we should just excuse one another. No sense in calling each other to the mat.
If were going to deal with this issue lets deal with the issue. Everyone knows that pastors are sinners, even when they are men. That does not make an excuse for ignoring then what God says about women holding that office.
So why don’t you repent?
Why do you ask for others to repent and ignore the clear teachings of scripture yourself?
You are a pastor, and should set the example, should you not?
If you were to renounce all that you own and take scripture seriously, then maybe people would take what you have to say more seriously.
Saying, “well I am a sinner” is just a lame excuse. You could give up all that you have , you just don’t want to.
If you’re going to be a biblical literalist, then you should be one, and not point your fingers at others, but do also what you ask of others.
We all use the Bible and we all use it differently. Wea ll read it differently.
You never really addressed the fact that words (I mentioned and were mentioned in the Bible study) have different meanings in the Greek.
I asked in the post that we not call each other names and you start throwing “homophobe’ around. You didn’t see me using the word mysogynist did you?
We do have a different doctrine of the Word. That is why I have nowhere to go now.
I sure as hell am not gouing to become a defacto Baptist like some Lutherans I know and I sure as hell will not subscribe to the liberal B.S. of the ELCA.
We will (for now) stay where we are (more than likely) and continue the ministry that we are doing.
A pox on both houses, the leagaistic right, and the liberal free-wheeling left.
Steve,
When we are talking about women in the pastoral office I think there is something that we need to be aware of. They will have there sins, just as I and all men, not just pastors will have sin. Being woman is not one of those sins. But being a woman who aspires to be a pastor is the sin. They aren’t sinning for being a woman, they are sinning for being a woman who passes themselves off as a pastor and as a steward of the mystery of God, when that has been forbidden them. They are sinning by taking on this office.
Now, I may or may not have renounced all I have. I would hope that if Jesus ever asked it of me, I would give it. In the meantime, I consider myself a steward, and a poor one at that of these material gifts he has given me. I sin in being a poor steward of these things, but I don’t see that barring me from being a pastor anywhere.
As for using the word homophobia. I did use it. Sorry. I was trying to use it in such a way as to not be calling another a name by using it.
As for where to go. I think you still have a good pastor in Mark. He might be wondering what to do now, but I might stick with him.
Steve, the line of reasoning with Luke 14:33 does not make any sense, here.
We all hope to have the strength and the grace to give up what is needed to be given up when the time and circumstance comes.
You don’t manufacture this and become a hermit in the desert eating locusts. If anything, it speaks to “submitting”, giving in, giving up, as even in the order of the church. If anything, it even speaks to not pounding your fist on the table for “rights”.
Brigitte,
I was trying to make a point about reading scripture literally, and how we will not do what it admonishes us to do.
Thanks, Brigitte.
Thanks, Bror, for the phone call.
Did we miss anything that advances the discussion from the out-of-band response? 🙂
Xan,
Probably, but I think I covered it with my post on Women’s Ordination, on my blog.
Thanks Bror,
Great post.
In trying to follow God’s Word on the issue of women’s ordination not just “work’s righteousness”?