More Active Posts
Front Page
At the apex
 |
 43 Comments |
“I am astounded that in this day and age many churches still don’t allow women to preach.”
I heard it again on the radio today and it always feels like fingernails down a chalk board. Never mind the church policy issue for now; it’s the “in this day and age” part that grates.
My favorite line in Disney’s “Sleeping Beauty” comes where the prince announces — to his father’s protestation — that he’s going to marry a peasant girl:
Prince: “Now, father, you’re living in the past. This is the fourteenth century. Nowadays…”
King: “Nowadays I’m still the king, and I command you to come to your senses.”
Next time some expert on the radio says she rejects this or that position or tradition because it isn’t “modern” or “progressive,” I would like to hear her interviewer redirect the conversation to more substantial avenues — such as whether the position has merit or is “true.”
 |
Topic: Front Page, Odds & Ends |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: enlightenment, humility, modernity |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
Both comments and pings are currently closed. |  |
Share this: |
Off-key
I’d like to see things decided on merit and truth, too, but that’s not going to happen in this fallen world. Not everything that’s “new” — or progressive — is good for us. (We see this in our children everyday — they’ve been sexualized by our progressive culture.)
This is why we need to teach history better, so that people will be able to see that from generation to generation the same mistakes are made. Technology may be new, but human emotions and desires haven’t changed in millenia. Some things are constant, and people are pretty constant. There have always been saints; there have always been Hitlers. Only their technology changes.
It is chronological snobbery to be sure, but I for one am glad women’s rights have come a long way. Many societies in the Middle East are stuck in the 15th Century. Not good places to raise daughters, no?
Not allowing women to preach in the churches? Something about I Corinthians, maybe . . . ?
It is just as senseless to ignore history and the legacies it passes down to us as it is senseless to blindly accept everything history passes to us.
Today, we are much closer to the first form of senselessness mentioned above than to the second.
What’s acceptable to people comes and goes. What’s acceptable to God comes and stays. His Word cannot change.
All He does is just and good, and all His commandments are trustworthy. They are forever true, to be obeyed faithfully and with integrity. Ps 111:7-8
The Bible and its guidance is the rock of truth that stands for all time. Departures from it should be labeled “deviant,” not “progressive.”
Women teaching elders, i.e., preachers, are not allowed by any truthful interpretation of Biblical text. This does not rule out their significant and vital presence in other church roles. Indeed, we would be lost without them.
From a seemingly logical and human standpoint, irrefutable arguments can be made for the leadership of some gifted females as pastors and elders. I acknowledge that. Some male pastors are terrible and could easily be replaced by a seemingly better qualified woman. However, that is not what God, our leader, allows. And no one is to substitute their logic and their arguments for God’s. From the very beginning (Gen 3) that has been our problem as human beings—we wish to take His place. We wish to be autonomous in our own reasoning and logic.
We are rebels against the authority of the sovereign, creator God of this universe. That fault is our primary problem and we manifest it in countless ways, including this issue of the desire of “progressive” females to usurp a position forbidden to them by the sovereign God. This is a test, and they have failed as surely as they failed in the Garden thousands of years ago.
If Andree were a member of my church she could not be an elder, but she would wield great positive influence with her gifts employed in her God ordained role. She would exercise real leadership in many ways and would be respected and followed in the role God intended for her. God has called us all to be servants and to be content with what He has assigned us to do. This includes male pastors and elders whose primary role is service, not the glory of a title or position.
Anyone, male or female, whose primary motive is to stand above the congregation and bask in a preaching role does not have a servant’s heart and is unqualified for the position. Modern female “progressives” who covet that role, in defiance of Scripture, disqualify themselves from the very start.
Our entire modern culture, especially “progressive” women, lacks humility and the ability to be content with a servant’s heart.
I agree with most of those who posted on this thread: that God’s Word is unchanging; that it is for yesterday, today and tomorrow; that He didn’t write the Bible for another people at another time but He wrote it for all of us for all time.
That said, I think the clarity with which we see Scriptures that prohibit women teaching men and being in authority over men should cause us to ask if there are other Scriptures that we, as individuals, ignore or marginalize because those Scripture are too difficult to follow or too difficult to understand.
In other words, there but for the grace of God go I.
New is only good if it is really better. New isn’t always better.
Joel Mark, do you favor or oppose women preaching/pastoring?
Most men who preach today may as well be women.
Re: #10
Your remark isn’t very complimentary of women.
If the men aren’t preaching the way they ought to, that’s not because they are like women. It may be because they aren’t living up to God’s standards or doing their job well. Whatever.
It’s not nearly as insulting to women as it is to men. I meant that today’s preachers may as well be women because they’re effeminate. So women may as well be in the pulpit. It’s okay for women to be effeminate. It’s just not okay for men to be emasculate.
Anyway, regarding #9 - I’m pretty sure Joel Mark is not for women preachers, given his theological views on so many other posts of his. He and I disagree on a lot, but I know we don’t disagree on that.
That Joyce Meyer sure has a big Adam’s apple.
Bianca,
To whom are you referring? I don’t know of any effeminate preachers around here. I’m not saying they don’t exist it is just puzzling to me.
Bianca - 12
You certainly must have a corner on “effeminate” pastors. We have never been in a church where a pastor was “effeminate”- They have all been strong male leaders.
Your broad strokes against pastors aren’t fair.
15 (Adios) I don’t mean around here as in this blog. I’m talking about our nation in general.
16 (Victoria) Praise the Lord for the strong male leaders in your church. That’s a sign of God’s blessing on the congregation’s you’ve been in. Yes, there are some strong male leaders and preachers, and I’m not saying there aren’t. However, the general tenor of preaching in this country is very effeminate. I’m not talking about the way most people think of ‘effeminate’ today. I guess you just have to be able to see it.
The effeminate issue, if there really is one, is superficial and also impossible to quantify for purposes of meaningful discussion.
The real issue is what the Scriptures say on this subject and the counter trends of modern society that are ruining many churches and denominations.
As I said, if ya can’t see it, ya just can’t.
I have always been miffed by linear bigotry. History is the road map to the future and yet a relativist culture is still clinging to the 60’s anti-establishment like some teenager justifying peer pressure; “everyone’s doing it nowadays”. Yeah, and everyone’s building a Golden Calf too but that didn’t work out so well. Everyone’s building a tower to their own god or utopia and that didn’t work so well either. Human evolution is a misnomer. How is it that Paul got it more than anyone I have ever known in my lifetime and he wore sandals and a cloak? Enlightened my *#%!
I agree with the comments that defer to scripture as the ultimate authority for the church. I also have some practical considerations. About three years ago I started attending a church which teaches from scripture that only men are to exposit God’s word. At first I found this teaching to be astonishing and I didn’t agree with it. At my church, only men teach including teaching the children. My practical observations after three years are these: My new church exhibits strong male leadership in every area. Men, young and old, aspire to be leaders in the church. Women are loved and respected in their God-given roles. The love and unity expressed by the body is palpable. God’s word is loved and honored as the highest authority. There is a real feeling of safety as the men of the church have taken the teaching of God’s word seriously and responsibly. I would never go back to a church with women leaders or a woman teaching elder. My former church and its denomination are in real trouble which began, I believe, when it departed from scripture in this area.
Hi Kathleen,
Aquila and Priscilla are always spoken of ‘together’ its also evident that when they took Apollos into their home they both “expounded unto him they way of God more perfectly.”
24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.
25 This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.
26 And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.
Acts 18:24-26
I believe the Scripture below speaks for itself. Women can certainly be teachers to other women and children. After all mothers teach their own children. There is no Scripture that I know of that condemns women from teaching other women or children.
1 But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:
2 That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience.
3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;
4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,
5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed
Titus 2
Here again we see that Paul is making a point as to Priscilla and Aquila as to their service to him. Also the fact that a church was located in their home.
I don’t believe for a moment that women should be over looked as a real part of the Church. There is no place that tells us women can be pastors, but it doesn’t say anything about women not being teachers.
Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus:
Romans 16:3
The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house.
1 Corinthians 16:19
Kathleen [21]: It’s great that your church has strong male leadership and is centered on God’s Word. However, I would agree with Victoria that only allowing the men to teach the children is taking the NT teaching in this area too far.
In addressing the roles of men and women in I Tim 2 and in I Cor 14, the context is order in the church, and it doesn’t have to do with ability or inferiority. And the teaching did not mean that the women were not to teach in the church at all. It meant that they were: a] not to teach the men; and b] not to teach in the worship services. Obviously, they were to teach the children - Paul acknowledged to Timothy that his very spiritual foundation came from his mother and his grandmother [II Tim 1:5; 3:15]. And obviously the older women were to teach the younger women - Titus 2:3-5 instructed them to do just that. The issue wasn’t their gift of teaching; but their obedience to divine order.
I agree with Victoria in her description of Priscilla and Aquilla. There is a great deal that women can and should do in today’s church. Teaching children is an extension of their vital teaching role in the home. Teaching and sharing with other women, in ways that no man could ever do, is also vital.
Women also teach men by their example of service and humility. This cannot be overemphasized. Although this kind of teaching is not from a formal role in the church structure, it carries more weight than most of us realize. Who cannot fail to be humbled by the example of someone like Mother Theresa? I am not a Catholic and we would disagree on many theological points, but she has taught me much, even though it has been indirectly and from a distance. Godly women can teach men good things in many, many ways.
Another aspect of the Biblical position is this: it forces men to do their job. We sometimes are lazy, indifferent, and would rather do other things than care for the flock, If an energetic and talented woman is allowed to fill the position, many men are more than happy to let her do it. Men can then go on about their business, whatever it is, and let her do the work. In our society men all too often abdicate their responsibilities in this fashion, both in the church and in the home.
The Bible says, “No,” to this. Men have jobs to do in the church and they must step up and do them or they will not get done. They cannot pass the buck to someone else. Women do not do the church or their menfolk any favors when they step into the breach and allow men to neglect their responsibilities.
Nowadays eating shrimp isn’t detestable…
Michael - I agree. I’ve heard it said that it is better to let something remain undone or a post remain unfilled than for the wrong person to step in.
Nowadays eating shrimp isn’t detestable…
More like, delectable.
Shrimp that has gone bad is pretty detestable.
#26, #28
Sometimes when no one steps up to lead or work in a certain program at church, it’s because it’s a program that isn’t needed/wanted anymore, but the church tries to continue doing the old program because that’s what they’ve always done.
It’s exciting to see churches that are open enough to God’s leading to support people who have a passion to start new programs or ministries, rather than trying to shoehorn volunteers into areas that don’t fit their gifts and passion.
Of course, there are some things that simply need to get done. If the church has a nursery and someone who usually serves is sick and they need a replacement, I need to be willing to help out even if taking care of 1-year-olds is not what I do best.
Pauline (#31),
Regarding many of our church programs, your points are well taken.
However, for the jobs of elder and pastor the Bible allows only men to fill those positions. When men fail to step forward and take on those jobs it intensifies the modern trend for women to move into those positions. This should not be the case, and it certainly would not be if male Christians took their faith more seriously. That means getting off the couch, making the time for study and personal Christian growth, and then using those talents God has given them in His service. Then they will grow into becoming qualified as teachers, deacons, elders, godly husbands and fathers, or some other ministry God has designed for them.
Men who only warm the pew on Sunday and let others do the work, just don’t cut it. They are irresponsible, lazy louts and God will one day hold them to account for their neglect.
It’s odd that Christianity, a religion designed for women and children, doesn’t allow women preachers.
I’ve always felt it is less to do with “allowing” women and more about holding men accountable to be men and live sacrificially for their wives. The same Greek word is used about Jesus on the cross. To die for.
Given our druthers, we’d be sitting home on the couch on Sunday’s instead of being a husband and father to our families. Just saying…
a religion designed for women and children,
“Take your son, your only son – yes, Isaac, whom you love so much – and go to the land of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will point out to you.” Genesis 22:1-18
It’s ok people. It was all a joke.
Michael Martin - I agree with all you have written in your posts above. I lead inductive Bible studies to women and so often a well-meaning acquaintance will suggest I go to seminary and become a preacher. I would never do that. And for all the reasons you suggest. It does go right back to Gen 3. Women are only too happy to take on roles and responsibilities that don’t belong to them, and men are only too happy to abdicate - one less responsibility to deal with.
It brings to mind how in the Old Testament, several of Abraham’s sons and their descendants had roles and responsibilities.
David was of the kingly tribe of Judah, and not of the priestly tribe of Levi. And yet he had a priestly heart. He did everything he could do within his own role to contribute to the building of the temple, and he worshipped with abandon. I often wonder if he did not sometimes secretly wish he were a Levite. He never overstepped into the Levite’s God-given role, but he did contribute mightily in gathering materials and writing much of the worship music used in the temple.
No doubt, he could have decided that he wanted to be both priest and king - and done a reasonably good job of it - but he chose to maintain the order God established by God.
Would that Christian women would take a lesson from King David.
Klasko,
Good post and excellent points. I just went to the “Meet The Regulars” pages to read your info, but you were not there. Those pages were established some time ago when the blog underwent a major revision. But I think people can update them anytime.
I think it always helps to know a little bit about where a blogger (good or bad) is coming from, so to speak–especially if they have good insights like yours.
Best wishes!
Michael Martin - I don’t know how one goes about becoming a regular. I used to be a regular when the blog was first underway, first under the name Karen, and then Karen L. (Back in the days of David Zuniga and the troll Badonicus). This was for about a year and a half. Then I went on a hiatus from blogging and have been back since Dec. If I am ever invited to be one of the regulars, I will certainly write my bio so people will know who I am.
Klasko,
I don’t think you have to be invited. If I am not mistaken, those pages are available for anybody who wants to post their info there. However, I could find no way to do that, so I sent an email to Lynn Vincent who manages the blog to see if she could help out.
Thanks, Michael.
Klasko,
Below is the text of my msg to Lynn and her reply. I’ll look forward to reading your info when you send it in and Lynn posts it.
Happy blogging,
Mike
Lynn,
How does one go about updating info on the “Meet the Regulars” pages, or add a new person to those pages? I ask because another blogger expressed an interest in adding her name and info to the list. So I searched the site but could find no apparent way to add or change the info on those pages.
Thanks,
Mike Martin
Hi Mike,
We do all the updating for that page back here at the WMB ranch. Just have the other blogger send her bio to me…150ish words, upper/lower case (in other words, NOT all caps). I’ll put it up.
Thanks!
Lynn
OK Mike - I sent in my bio and I’m now on the regulars list.
Great! I read your info. Glad to have you on board.