Do you believe women can be preachers/pastors?

Faith & Science Conversation
102

Thanks for your gracious message.

I linked to Vosper’s story because Jennifer’s page - who is saying “Yes” to the OP’s question, while I and several others here have answered “No” - says she was on track for ordination in the UC, then changed her mind/heart. It is indeed a different argument about “atheist clergy”, but a related one in this case that, again, this issue wouldn’t be coming up if it was a Catholic or Orthodox church. Vosper simply would not have been there in the first place. You agree with that at least, right?

No one yet has responded to my first comment above: “only in Protestantism”. Should that be considered as an “accurate” statement? No one has commented on “Why women can’t be priests” by Roman Catholic Mary Turris. Why do you think that is, Merv? Is it because you and others here believe the Catholic teachings are wrong about “women’s ordination”, which flow from both Scripture and Tradition?

“To a strong assertion that “Women should never be, or cannot be pastors”, all I have to do is provide one counter-example”

Sorry, but it seems you are not understanding, Merv. Non-Protestants can make that “strong assertion” because it is taught in Scripture, as highlighted above, as well as continued in the Tradition. Catholics & Orthodox don’t tend to get worked up about the heresies and deviations in schismatic Protestant churches. The fact that there are Protestants in this thread saying the same thing as I am, should give you pause to reflect.

I’ve spoken with many Protestants, Merv. Have you spoken with Catholics, or a single Eastern Orthodox Christian to hear what the oldest Christian tradition going right back to Christ’s disciples has to say about whether or not “women can be priests”? If not, then I would suggest it might open up your awareness a bit to give it an honest try.

103

Yeah let mee uhhh go back in time to get my high school book and translate it. Heres a little advice . Why dont you start searching things up and trying to stand your ground instead of discrediting people here providing no evidence whatsoever yourself. If you are claim im wrong when you find time do a little research and provide me with your evidence. You canr prove im wrong since you havent provided any links either. Soo uhh yeahh . You only beleive im wrong. You cant prove it mate

1 Like
104

Since Marcion accepted only the letters of Paul and a variant of the Gospel of Luke as authoritative, I don’t think your point about Marcion is helping your argument very much.

105

Yes, I can “imagine” it well b/c I’m Canadian too & used to attend a UCC church briefly as a child. I’ve followed this sad & unnecessary story over the past couple of years.

In my reading, the UCC could easily have made it about “theology” from the start and solved the issue in a much better way than how they have handled it so far (it’s not over yet!). They chose otherwise.

It’s not a requirement of Canadian law to continue to hire someone who damages and harms your organisation. I believe you are in agreement with me that Vosper is damaging and harming the UCC, yes?

In any case, I don’t wish to waste another second on Vosper’s atheism play here. The requested “Biblical support” against the ordination of women I believe has been provided up thread. It is enough to have settled the issue for many of us, without having to address that popular “-ism” word.

There are of course “women religious” who are in monasteries, which hasn’t been raised here yet. I’ve visited a couple, and even stayed for a week at one, and they are wonderful! But again, that’s not typically an “evangelical” conversation.

106

Yes, I’m in agreement on that.

And yes, for long centuries there have been women in cloistered communities. But for most women throughout Christian history, it was a choice between serving God as a nun or accepting the rigid norms of marriage and obedience to men.

Recently, I’ve been watching many episodes of “Digging for Britain,” which airs on TVO on Mondays. (I don’t know if you get TVO programs where you live, but “Digging for Britain” is about the history of Great Britain as revealed through recent archaeological digs.) One thing that keeps coming up is the important role that Anglo-Saxon women played in the founding of English monasteries and their related economies. In fact, women played a far more important role in the spread of Christianity throughout Great Britain than the later “victors” were willing to admit in their historical accounts.

If you’re Canadian, then you know about the Tommy Douglas’s fantastic contribution to Canadian life through his relentless pursuit of universal health care. That’s another thing that isn’t in the Bible (except indirectly through Jesus’ teachings on healing for all those who need it), but it took a Christian pastor to read between the biblical lines and say it was the right thing to do.

107

I suppose it could be. I’m not Catholic (and I forget … have you said that you are?) In any case, yeah - it’s common knowledge that women are not allowed as priests (or in Eastern Orthodox either per Nick’s information above.) So I guess that leaves us Protestants (which I would self-identify as, btw - being Anabaptist myself).

Well, yeah; it wouldn’t be the first time the Catholics were wrong about some things, right? … even by their own admission to hear Franciscan Priests like Richard Rohr tell it (or even others too like Bishop Robert Barron, if Rohr is a little ‘too out there’ for you.) It would seem that plenty of Catholics are willing to give the Protestant Reformation its due without necessarily abandoning the Catholic tradition over it themselves.

As for “flowing from scripture”, I think I’ve done a fair enough presentation of scriptures above to show that exclusion of women does not just “flow from scripture” without problems. It can if you take a very blinkered view of scriptures, but those of us who like to read the whole and try to discern the entire narrative arc - we see quite another story emerging from scripture, and merely see ourselves as those calling others back to the very things that they so want to be seen as being established in.

Actually … if I found something that Protestants were united around - now that would be something worthy of profound reflection. Protestant disagreement over stuff almost seems more the norm - so we’re used to that.

As to what Christ himself or his disciples, or even all the early apostles said specifically about all this, … they didn’t. As has been pointed out above already, they all came into an already established religious tradition (that already had excluded women from a whole lot of stuff … and gentiles and tax collectors and Samaritans.) All of that tradition doesn’t just get overturned overnight (as the Lord himself knows - hanging from the cross as He was for associating with and favoring these ‘sorts’.) So when people start getting uppity about who can and cannot do this or that because of some “unfortunate” categorical status they were born with, it is good to look to scriptures to see if you have justification for such exclusion. When that comes up dry, and we in fact find instead scriptural support and trajectory toward the opposite of what you are saying, then it’s good reason to revisit what the Catholics and others might have mistakenly insisted upon in the two thousand years since. I say “might” because I’m not a Catholic (or anti-Catholic either) and don’t have much of a dog in that fight. If they have good reasons for their traditions, I’m sure they feel they can ably defend them for their own reasons and on other grounds. Scriptures just aren’t one of them (or at least not a very convincing one) is all I’m suggesting.

2 Likes
108

Maybe you mean Schindler was “metaphorically” put on trial as a Nazi war criminal, because he wasn’t actually put on trial. Could you clarify, please?

And since you’ve brought up Schindler, it seems like a good time to remember all the brave souls everywhere who ignored the unloving dictates of WWII Axis leaders and listened to their own conscience as they helped countless oppressed peoples (Jews and many others) escape imprisonment in the death camps. (And in the interests of historical accuracy, a lot of WWII Allied leaders weren’t much better when it came to compassion for the unjustly oppressed.)

Because we’re all children of God, and no one deserves to be enslaved in that way.

109

Heh! So very true!

1 Like
110

Substantiate your otherwise hearsay claim with a reference.

111

Prove me wrong. Or you know just state that you believe im wrong,which you already did

112

If the question were if women can be priests, “only in Protestantism” might be correct. But the topic is actually about whether women may be preachers/pastors. Catholics have ministry associates who may be men or women, and their duties often include preaching and pastoral care. They are not ordained and not priests, but the main things they cannot do are things that nobody does in many branches of Protestant churches, such as bless the eucharist or confer sacramental blessings. In areas not readily served by a priest, a ministry associate may be the primary or even only pastor to serve a Catholic community.

So no, it’s not only in Protestantism.

The biblical argument you applauded up-thread was for elders being only married men who have raised children. The Catholic church generally limits priests to celebate men. That you see these two positions as “the same thing” – even though any candidate accepted by one is rejected by the other – perhaps shows that you have not allowed the finer points of the cases to be heard.

4 Likes
113

“I suppose it could be.” - Merv

Yes, it does appear to be so. Thank you.

“Scriptures just aren’t one of them (or at least not a very convincing one) is all I’m suggesting.”

But in fact, they are, as Mi Scrumm showed above. That your individual “interpretation” of those verses says otherwise to you, as a protestant, is not all that surprising. Both the Catholic and Orthodox churches share this teaching, as it goes right back to Jesus.

“Protestant disagreement over stuff almost seems more the norm”

Yeah, thus BioLogos, right?

“They [women] are not ordained and not priests” - Marshall

That’s the correct answer. Thank you.

As for Protestant novelties to historical Christian teachings? Yes, also. Which ones? Hint: this is one of them.

114

I didn’t mean to make this sound like some sort of grudging concession. I think the reason you had to struggle to get an answer to your question is that it was so trivial, and most of us probably didn’t see the point. We (most of us I suppose) aren’t Catholics here. So perhaps you have Catholics and the Orthodox on “your side” (though, as Marshall pointed out, you really don’t even appear to have that, given that he has pointed out distinctions you still seem oblivious about). But even if you did … then the only thing left would be to see if you could corral those pesky scriptures into your corner. But you haven’t been able to find any convincing scriptural case except to those who were already prone to leaning on the “traditions of men” and using a few isolated verses to prop up faulty understandings.

Sorry, but between your tradition and scriptures, I’m going with scriptures. You can have the traditions.

1 Like
115

So far I’ve not seen snd scriptural support for women as pastors. I would like to see someone posts a few verses that show support for women as pastors. I will go back through the posts since I last shared my opinion. Nothing I’m saying had anything to do with tradition except that of Christ and his apostles.

1 Like
116

Are you defending the evils of slavery? Really?

Yeah… especially not when the politicians, ideologues, and carpetbaggers figure out a way to exploit them for THEIR benefit!

117

“as Marshall pointed out, you really don’t even appear to have that” - Merv

Well, actually, Marshall wrote this:

“They [women] are not ordained and not priests”

True. And that’s enough in itself already, as it makes the single point I wished to make, which is surely NOT “trivial”, but rather historically significant and impactful. And it means a person can faithfully answer “No” to the OPs question.

Mi Krumm’s verses quoted at length have covered this adequately already, as do the teachings of the early Church Founders, which Merv might not be familiar with, since his attention seems to be mainly on post-15th century “reformers” and late-modern thinking, rather than on the first 4 century “founders”, the Ecumenical Councils, and what the historical Christian tradition says.

Notably, Marshall didn’t address my question to him:

“Yes, I’m aware of what “the Protestant argument” has been for. That Protestantism actually does introduce “novelties” to historical teachings of the Christian Church is obvious though, right?”

The Protestant novelties on this topic come ahead in priority of the OP’s question because without the Protestant Reformation, @Vivi_O2 most likely wouldn’t have asked the OPs question. Catholic and Orthodox women don’t usually take such a “protesting” position towards the Christian Church as “secular feminism” these days might demand (see Mary Turris defending the Catholic Church against “reformers”). Perhaps that’s why Marshall hasn’t addressed it yet? (But c’mon Merv, please play fair; I’m not going to call Marshall “oblivious” for not yet addressing it, that doesn’t sound “full of grace” or “seasoned with salt”. He seems like a decently smart guy, who maybe just didn’t know much about the Catholic and Orthodox teachings and the history of the Christian Church on this topic.)

This is what I asked to Jennifer, as I thought it would help the conversation, given that her words seem to reflect what the other “pro-women clergy” advocates are saying, still indirectly.

“it appears you are making an argument that “the Christian Church needs to evolve” (prescriptive) so that women can become clergy (only in protestantism), since you wanted at one point to become one yourself. Does this accurately reflect your argument?”

It seems what Jennifer calls “evolution”, instead, it is possible to call simply “theological novelties” made during the Protestant Reformation and by later protestants, which is what led to the current denominationalism (which Merv seems to mourn, indirectly). Forgive me, folks, but I don’t see “disunity” and “fragmentation” as “progress” or as “advancement”. It seems rather like “disintegration” or schismatic “devolution”.

118

Saying that we see woman as owners of a house that the congregation meets is does not mean they are pastors by any means.

Showing that a couple preaches the gospel to the lost while carrying out the great commission does not mean they are pastors.

Saying that this or that women was a fantastic disciple that was well known to the apostles does not mean in any way they were pastors.

Saying that a woman had the gift of a prophecy handed to her does not mean she’s a elder.

There is not a single female elder mentioned in the entire Bible and you never see Jesus, or the apostles say that anyone other than those that met the qualifications in Timothy and Titus are elders.

Paul was not an elder. He was an apostle that has completely different qualifications. Paul, being among the council of elders to lay hands on Timothy did not make Paul an Elder. Eldership, which are the overseers and pastors are not the same as apostles or teachers.

If we want to honestly discuss doctrine then that’s developed by scripture, not what we wish it said.

1 Like
119

Protestants, catholics, and orthodox movements all have pros and cons snd they all are open to failures.

1 Like
120

This is excellent and right on point:

“If we want to honestly discuss doctrine then that’s developed by scripture, not what we wish it said.”

121

"When you wonder why there’s this pattern of all-male ordination, some people have a ready answer: it’s because the early Christians were dumb. We know better now.

Somehow the concept of evolution leaks over from biology to theology, and it’s presumed that our generation is what the Holy Spirit was aiming at when he came out with flawed prototypes like St. Macrina and St. John Chrysostom.

I suspect the reverse is true, and that we’re blind to some spiritual realities that were obvious to earlier Christians." - Frederica Matthewes-Green (Women's Ordination - Frederica)