Female Pastors or Ministers?

[bridgeforsale]

What does all think about females in the clergy? I know what Paul said in his letter to Timothy, but many denominations (even some moderately conservative ones) are licensing female preachers. I recently moved and one of the few churches near my home has a female pastor. Honestly I think she's a good minister, but I won't lie, I have a problem with it given the NT language on the subject. Anyone knowledgeable here? I would really like to know if there's any basis in scripture that supports females in the clergy?

[James Peter]

Well, its gets a little complicated and you come pretty close to saying 'this part of Scripture contradicts this part' BUT if you look at Acts, Romans, Colossians etc. you will see that there were women in leadership functions in the early Church (and arguably even called 'apostles' by Paul). You then have the problem of the passage in 1 Corinthians (which there is some evidence for it being a later insertion rather than part of the original text and thus not actually being 'part of Scripture') and the problem of the Pastorals (generally recognised by scholars as being non-Pauline and dating from maybe two generations after Paul's death and thus cannot carry apostolic authority)...

It is hard to hold to a high view of inerrancy and not simply be forced to flat out deny that these issues exist. The vast majority of NT scholars though are convinced that they do exist. There were female leaders in some of the earliest Christian Churches but around the second century the emerging powers in the Church were male and patriarchal and thus set the direction of things to come and banished groups with female leaders onto the fringes and often ended up branding them heretics.

[Zguy28]

I on the other hand, do take a high view of Scripture and believe in inerrancy. We do not allow women in the So. Baptist Convention to hold the position of Pastor as it is unscriptural.

1 Tim 2:11-13

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve.

Also, if you read throughout Acts, whenever mentioning the church leadership, it is always men. You don't ever hear them say "Listen brothers and sisters".

I know in the early church, there were Deaconess' who's job it was to serve the women of the church in matters such as baptism, so that men would not be put into situations of temptation.

The SBC explains it this way in the Baptist Faith and Message:

Baptist Faith and Message

VI. The Church

A New Testament church of the Lord Jesus Christ is an autonomous local congregation of baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel; observing the two ordinances of Christ, governed by His laws, exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them by His Word, and seeking to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth. Each congregation operates under the Lordship of Christ through democratic processes. In such a congregation each member is responsible and accountable to Christ as Lord. Its scriptural officers are pastors and deacons. While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.

The New Testament speaks also of the church as the Body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.

Matthew 16:15-19; 18:15-20; Acts 2:41-42,47; 5:11-14; 6:3-6; 13:1-3; 14:23,27; 15:1-30; 16:5; 20:28; Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:2; 3:16; 5:4-5; 7:17; 9:13-14; 12; Ephesians 1:22-23; 2:19-22; 3:8-11,21; 5:22-32; Philippians 1:1; Colossians 1:18; 1 Timothy 2:9-14; 3:1-15; 4:14; Hebrews 11:39-40; 1 Peter 5:1-4; Revelation 2-3; 21:2-3.

© source where applicable

Source: http://www.sbc.net/bfm/bfm2000.asp#vi

[bridgeforsale]

Well, its gets a little complicated and you come pretty close to saying 'this part of Scripture contradicts this part' BUT if you look at Acts, Romans, Colossians etc. you will see that there were women in leadership functions in the early Church (and arguably even called 'apostles' by Paul). You then have the problem of the passage in 1 Corinthians (which there is some evidence for it being a later insertion rather than part of the original text and thus not actually being 'part of Scripture') and the problem of the Pastorals (generally recognised by scholars as being non-Pauline and dating from maybe two generations after Paul's death and thus cannot carry apostolic authority)...

It is hard to hold to a high view of inerrancy and not simply be forced to flat out deny that these issues exist. The vast majority of NT scholars though are convinced that they do exist. There were female leaders in some of the earliest Christian Churches but around the second century the emerging powers in the Church were male and patriarchal and thus set the direction of things to come and banished groups with female leaders onto the fringes and often ended up branding them heretics.

Great info....thanks JP

[Abelard]

If you want inerrancy skip back a few pages to 1 Cor 14.

1Cr 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
1Cr 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

There is no mention of the office of Pastor in the Bible, so clearly we are not supposed to have Pastors at all. That is clearly non-scriptural as is allowing women to speak or teach each other. Get on it, non-errantists! Fire those Pastors and duct tape those women!

[Zguy28]

If you want inerrancy skip back a few pages to 1 Cor 14.

1Cr 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
1Cr 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

There is no mention of the office of Pastor in the Bible, so clearly we are not supposed to have Pastors at all. That is clearly non-scriptural as is allowing women to speak or teach each other. Get on it, non-errantists! Fire those Pastors and duct tape those women!

I really don't know what you are trying to say here...but I will take my best shot at responding.

You say Pastor is not a Scriptural office. I say it is. Potato, potaato. Pastor, overseer. Same thing.

Acts 20:28, Philippians 1; 1 Tim 3; Titus 1; 1 Peter 5.

[Teallaura]

Ya know, there is a way to reconcile the two. Jumping ship at every passage that makes you actually have to think doesn't accomplish much, inerrantist or otherwise.

For the record, I am an inerrantist and I am in candidacy for the ministry. I won't debate the matter because I have no intention of listening to the vitriol (that's you literalists blasting everyone whose opinion differs from your own) or the mind numbing stupidity (that would be you non-inerrantists screaming that it's irreconcilable). I found those things to be happening in this thread already.

There are a couple of good papers on the matter (that don't chuck the whole Bible in the name of 'progress') in another thread on the topic in this forum. I may link it later, but probably not since I have little intent of coming back to this thread. If I don't just search the topic - you shouldn't have any trouble finding it if you are interested.

[James Peter]

There are ways to harmonise the passages but not without going against what the experts on the individual passages in question are pretty convinced they mean. I guess thats what all Systematic Theology does though, tries to build a whole but in doing so neglects the parts.

[Abelard]

1 Peter 5 says the overseer is not to be a paid position. Sounds more like a board chairman than a pastor to me.

Rom 16: Paul unmistakably defines the woman Phoebe as a diakonos ( minister or elder).

Women always have been and always will be ministers and leaders in the Church of Jesus Christ.

[bridgeforsale]

There are ways to harmonise the passages but not without going against what the experts on the individual passages in question are pretty convinced they mean. I guess thats what all Systematic Theology does though, tries to build a whole but in doing so neglects the parts.

Can you elaborate on what you mean here JP? When I study scripture; or when I read theologians like Wesley (whom I find had an excellent grasp on the meaning of Scripture) I find consistency in the entire Bible. Sometimes it's a struggle; for example not all of Christ's parables are amenable to easy interpretation. However, I work at interpretting the Bible with a presumption of consistency, and inerrancy (though I would not define myself as a fundamentalist or literalist).

Although I'm an ardent Wesleyan, I'm starting to have problems with mainline denominations as IMO they have responded to diminishing church attendance by liberalizing rather than evangelizing (as I believe Christ calls us to do). My view is that the errancy doctrine opens up a slippery slope that cannot logically be contained & thus in the end the word of God will be perveted to fit the contemporary view of the day. Having just moved I attended a Methodist Church I never attended before (because it's just around the corner from my house) & discovered the church is led by a female minister. Frankly, I thought she was a good preacher, however, I find it difficult to attend a church led by a woman given the language by Paul in Timothy. Of course I do not like the idea of making a choice of what church to attend based on the gender of my pastor. This goes against my own deeply held secular beliefs of basic equality. So I'm finding myself in somewhat of a pickle.

I will say, however, another thing that turns me off to mainline denominations is empty pews. When I went to this service last Sunday & found no one under 60 years old (with the exception of maybe two or three people). This to me is a dying church. IMO real Christians attend service every Sunday (unless they have a really good reason not to). It seems to me that mainline protestants & catholics sort of attend church on holiday's & just go through the motions, with no real devotion to Christ. Only the grandparents of the average 20, 30, or 40 something Christians are actually observant in these churches. These senior citizens were probably observant their whole lives, so I don't think it's a case of people only reaffirming their faith because they're close to death. I think it's a case of dying churches. They have no energy, no youth, they don't particularly evangelize, they have great roots in the community, they have relationships with scouting organizations and the big charities like the United Way & Habitat for Humanity, but for some reason they're like the parable in Mark, where Christ talks about the seed that is planted in poor soil & grows but eventually withers away (I'm paraphrasing of course).

The evangelical churches like say Restoration movement churches (like Church of Christ) IMO tend to attract only those who are serious about their Christianity. Maybe because they're newer than mainline denominations? However, these movements have been around for a while & it seems to me they attract people beyond those who are born into it. I'm not decided on this issue, but I will say that it seems to me that the success of evangelical churches may be an indicator that they're really being guided by the Holy Spirit? Just some thoughts.....

[bridgeforsale]

1 Peter 5 says the overseer is not to be a paid position. Sounds more like a board chairman than a pastor to me.

Rom 16: Paul unmistakably defines the woman Phoebe as a diakonos ( minister or elder).

Women always have been and always will be ministers and leaders in the Church of Jesus Christ.

Hmmm....thanks

I've just read an excellent essay on this issue, as I am grapling with it. There obviously were many female leaders of the early church, which Paul himself distinguished in his letters. Of course it would seem that Paul contradicts himself in his many praises of these female church leaders (which included teachers & deacons), as compared to the language in his letter to Timothy? However, I'm persuaded (because I do read scripture with a presumption of consistency) that Paul did intend to bar females from preaching in his letter to Timothy. Here's an excellent passage I found that is providing me with some guidence:

Paul
affirms that some20 have turned away from "a
pure heart, clear conscience, and genuine
faith" and have lost their way in foolish
discussions by desiring to be 'teachers of
the Law' even though they do not understand
what they are saying or the matters about
which they are being so dogmatic 1:6-7

I also read many other passages where Paul affirms he had no problem with female pastors, and essays discussing the context & issues Paul was addressing in his letter to Timothy (namely what was going on in Ephesus at the time e.g. feminizing of diety, fanatical & dogmatic preaching, etc.).

Perhaps I have started to become overly dogmatic; though I am confident I retain a pure heart & clear conscience.....so I guess I can thank God for the internet....LOL

I guess I have to work my other issues regarding my denomination, but at least you guys helped guide me on this one (it's always a great feeling to gain a sort of closure on interpretting a particular issue in scripture). My main problem with relying on outside sources, rather than scripture itself, is that it can lead to the slippery slope I discussed in my last post. For example, the Episcopalian church of the US allowing homosexual ministers. While I believe that Christ's mercy extends to homosexuals (everyone can be saved....regardless of sexual preference) I do believe strongly that homosexuality is a sin, which is well supported throughout the Bible (both the NT & OT). My concern obviously is the slippery slope created by change in tradition & how over reliance on non-scriptural sources can lead to perverting the word of God. I think certain things are set in stone, I also think there's sort of an ambiguous balance between over reliance on the law (or legalism) and changing or doing away with the law. It's purity of heart that matters most. This purity (that I believe I gained through being saved by the Holy Spirit entering my soul) leads us to Bible study and trying to figure out these questions for ourselves. It's hard to navigate the fine line between studying the Bible out of a pure love of God & not becoming sort of stuck on certain passages & overly dogmatic. I guess this is the road between justification & sanctification Wesley talks about?

[Zguy28]

Can you elaborate on what you mean here JP? When I study scripture; or when I read theologians like Wesley (whom I find had an excellent grasp on the meaning of Scripture) I find consistency in the entire Bible. Sometimes it's a struggle; for example not all of Christ's parables are amenable to easy interpretation. However, I work at interpretting the Bible with a presumption of consistency, and inerrancy (though I would not define myself as a fundamentalist or literalist).

Although I'm an ardent Wesleyan, I'm starting to have problems with mainline denominations as IMO they have responded to diminishing church attendance by liberalizing rather than evangelizing (as I believe Christ calls us to do). My view is that the errancy doctrine opens up a slippery slope that cannot logically be contained & thus in the end the word of God will be perveted to fit the contemporary view of the day. Having just moved I attended a Methodist Church I never attended before (because it's just around the corner from my house) & discovered the church is led by a female minister. Frankly, I thought she was a good preacher, however, I find it difficult to attend a church led by a woman given the language by Paul in Timothy. Of course I do not like the idea of making a choice of what church to attend based on the gender of my pastor. This goes against my own deeply held secular beliefs of basic equality. So I'm finding myself in somewhat of a pickle.

I will say, however, another thing that turns me off to mainline denominations is empty pews. When I went to this service last Sunday & found no one under 60 years old (with the exception of maybe two or three people). This to me is a dying church. IMO real Christians attend service every Sunday (unless they have a really good reason not to). It seems to me that mainline protestants & catholics sort of attend church on holiday's & just go through the motions, with no real devotion to Christ. Only the grandparents of the average 20, 30, or 40 something Christians are actually observant in these churches. These senior citizens were probably observant their whole lives, so I don't think it's a case of people only reaffirming their faith because they're close to death. I think it's a case of dying churches. They have no energy, no youth, they don't particularly evangelize, they have great roots in the community, they have relationships with scouting organizations and the big charities like the United Way & Habitat for Humanity, but for some reason they're like the parable in Mark, where Christ talks about the seed that is planted in poor soil & grows but eventually withers away (I'm paraphrasing of course).

The evangelical churches like say Restoration movement churches (like Church of Christ) IMO tend to attract only those who are serious about their Christianity. Maybe because they're newer than mainline denominations? However, these movements have been around for a while & it seems to me they attract people beyond those who are born into it. I'm not decided on this issue, but I will say that it seems to me that the success of evangelical churches may be an indicator that they're really being guided by the Holy Spirit? Just some thoughts.....

I have personally seen that very thing in the UMC. Everyone I have attended was dying, the youth and young adults (if there were any) were not involved and they had no adult bible study groups. It was different altogether when I began attending a Southern Baptist church. While there are dead churches, and live churches, most of the So. Baptist I have been to seem to be alive, except for one. The one I am member at is really getting the youth involved in evangelism and discipleship with evangelistic outings, bible study, and AWANA.

As far as the gender thing goes though, I prefer to err on the side of caution. I believe we are all equal in Christ, but we just have different roles.

Is a woman the spiritual leader of a home? Or is it the man? Who is responsible according to scripture?

[bridgeforsale]

I have personally seen that very thing in the UMC. Everyone I have attended was dying, the youth and young adults (if there were any) were not involved and they had no adult bible study groups. It was different altogether when I began attending a Southern Baptist church. While there are dead churches, and live churches, most of the So. Baptist I have been to seem to be alive, except for one. The one I am member at is really getting the youth involved in evangelism and discipleship with evangelistic outings, bible study, and AWANA.

As far as the gender thing goes though, I prefer to err on the side of caution. I believe we are all equal in Christ, but we just have different roles.

Is a woman the spiritual leader of a home? Or is it the man? Who is responsible according to scripture?

hmm, good view. As I said I've moved somewhat recently & am trying out new churches. Tonight I'm going to check out a Bible study in a restoration church (I think it's Church of Christ). I like the restoration movement, so I'm going to give it a try.

[Zguy28]

hmm, good view. As I said I've moved somewhat recently & am trying out new churches. Tonight I'm going to check out a Bible study in a restoration church (I think it's Church of Christ). I like the restoration movement, so I'm going to give it a try.

I don't know much about restoration churches, I don't think there is one near me. Don't they believe you only get the Holy Spirit at your water baptism? I could definitely be mistaken. Godspeed to you in finding a church that is rooted in sound doctrine.

[bridgeforsale]

I don't know much about restoration churches, I don't think there is one near me. Don't they believe you only get the Holy Spirit at your water baptism? I could definitely be mistaken. Godspeed to you in finding a church that is rooted in sound doctrine.

I checked it out.....notwithstanding my problems with mainline denomination I think I'll stick with the UMC. The pastor there (notwithstanding her gender) is very knowledgeable & I'm not going to grow in my faith if my pastor doesn't know much more than me about scripture, church history, theology in general, etc. Moreover, I've resolved my problems with females in the ministery. Paul spoke many times throughout his letters about female pastors, teachers, & deacons he held in high regard. Examining the context of his letter to Timothy clearly Paul did not mean to ban females from the ministery (he was addressing a problem specific to the church in Ephesus e.g. feminazation of god, heretics, mixing paganism with Christianity, etc.).

In addition, I think the empty pews in mainline churches are not a reason to leave what IMO is an excellent belief system. In fact it's all the more reason to stay and work to re-energize Christ's church. These problems are probably specific to the Northeast (where I'm from). I understand southern churches of all denominations are pretty full on Sunday. I won't let the lack of church attendence frustrate me, rather I'll view it as an opportunity to work hard & bring more souls to Christ (or back to Christ). Wesleyan theology for me offers the best interpretation of scripture & understanding of the true nature of Christ that I have ever read. I've read all the greats (pretty much) from Augustine to Calvin and Luther and Aquanis....etc. etc. IMO Wesley blows them away by miles.