How do you feel about female pastors/leaders?

[LifeMaiden]

The thread "Is the Bible Sexist or Not" spun off a little into what I think would make some interesting discussion. One member in the thread believed that something was just wrong with having female pastors. I'd be curious to hear why he or she feels this way.

And just as importantly, how do you as Christians feel about women leaders in your church? Keep in mind of course that we'll probably be talking largely about Protestant Christians. Many churches now allow women to be pastors and bishops. Do you think the Catholic Church should allow women to be priests, bishops, and cardinals? Are we ready or ever will be ready for a female pope? Why or why not?

[Saruman]

I do not believe that the role of the woman should be as a pastor, a leader in the church, simply because this is what has been taught in the Scriptures (that is, I believe Pastor Paul, Paul the Apostle, spoke concerning this particular issue).

At the church I attend, it is also like this: the man leads the flock as pastor. However, what is critical to note is that we understand and recognize the extreme importance the woman has in the Body of Christ. We are certainly not against women being missionaries, and spreading the Gospel to others. And the senior pastor's wife leads the women's joyful life Bible study, a program that has been held and enjoyed by women for a couple of decades or so.

I've always understood and gratefully accepted that the woman was made not from Adam's head, nor from Adam's foot, but from his rib, his side. The woman is equal to the man, and as such plays such a critical role not only in the church, but in society at large.

But for the woman, I do not believe she should lead a congregation. It just isn't the role the woman was meant to fill.

[Lucy the Marshwiggle]

I agree with Saruman 100%. I couldnt have said it better

[broken.]

I am a complete supporter of women in pastoral/leadership positions. There are some great, powerful women in the Bible. A great biblical example of a woman in leadership is Deborah. God appointed her judge over Israel, and she lead them into victory and brought them into a time of peace. In the NIV she is called a prophetess. Esther is another great woman in leadership; after becoming queen she helped save her people and brought the man who wanted to destroy them to justice. God does not place limits on what a woman can do for Him.

On a more personal note, I'm studying to be a music pastor and I will be obtaining my minister's license next year (which will give me the title of pastor) and attending seminary.

[Ephinie]

I don't have a problem with women being pastors at all. I think that saying it's all right for them to be missionaries but not pastors of congregations is a condradiction in terms, as one of the primary roles of a missionary is to lead, at least until it can get onto its own two feet, a congregation of new believers.

I also think that if the pastor is someone who is married, whether that pastor be man or woman, that person's spouse should be an equal partner in the ministry. It should be something they are doing together, and, if possible, I think that both parties should be ordained.

As for whether or not the Catholic Church should allow women priests, I can't speak much to that specific point as I know very little about Catholicism. That church has centuries of tradition behind it, and I generally tend to side with tradition rather than the new thing. However, there are cases where tradition needs to change or where a new tradition needs to be made. This could very likely be one of those cases. I doubt the Catholic Church at large is "ready" for it, though.

Also, I'm pretty sure the Orthodox Church does not allow women priests, either. As far as I know, the Southern Baptist Convention has historically (and still does) taken a very strong stand against women pastors. In fact, at one point, they even yanked all female missionaries from the field and revoked their ordination. Other Baptist denominations, I'm not sure about. I think most of them are against it.

The Assemblies of God is, officially, very much in favor of women in the ministry- including women in pastoral positions. There are still plenty of good ol' boys who have a problem with it, having come from a much more traditional upbringing than what young AGers are exposed to these days. I've never met any AG person younger than thirty that had any qualms about women in pastoral positions, though. broken. doesn't want to admit it, but HER senior pastor at the church she goes to is personally very against women as pastors and in higher ministry positions. So there are still influential elements in the AG that tug against women pastors. I doubt those elements will be around much longer than twenty years at the most, though.

[BroncoCop]

Howdy!!!!

I would have to agree that there are many strong and powerful women mentioned in the Bible. Many of whom had positions of power within Israel. We must not stray from the fact that these women, while in positions of power, would defer their authority to their husbands. Take for example the story of Esther. While she had obvious power and authority as queen, ultimately she allowed the authority to rest upon the shoulders of her husband.

Thus is the way of God's people. Husbands/Fathers are the spiritual head of the household, regardless of the household, be it a church, a home, or otherwise. As I commonly practice within my own household, my wife makes all the important decisions regarding the household, however, when she needs something or wants something I am the one she asks. Whether it be a decision about the children or about money, or anything else for that matter.

So I would suppose that my opinion is set. For a church to be truly Biblical and Christian based, I believe that it should be a man leading the flock.

BroncoCop

[inkspot]

This is very interesting. I have worshipped in churches with women in pastoral leadership positions, and cannot but believe they are called and chosen. I have some clients in India, where far and away most of the congregation is women, and so if they want leadership positions filled, they must fill them sometimes with women -- which I thought was an odd attitude. "Oh, all right, there's no one else ... I guess you'll do," but in actuality, it is a huge step forward in India and very liberating for women to be entrusted with responsibility, because gender roles are traditionally very strict in India. So to see a woman who has never really even interacted with men outside her relatives discover she can have a real ministry to all kinds of people, and know she is pleasing God in what she does, that's pretty thrilling.
:)

[Aslan's Son]

My personal stand is that there's only one position a woman's not meant to fill, and that's the position of "seniour pastor" in my church, a. k. a. leader of the church. Like Saruman said, Scripture states that God didn't make that role for women--it was a man's only position. I don't think the Bible is sexist against this issue--there are women who lead in children's ministries, music ministries, and are even deaconesses at times. So women can be great workers in the church, just not as head of it.

[broken.]

Howdy!!!!

I would have to agree that there are many strong and powerful women mentioned in the Bible. Many of whom had positions of power within Israel. We must not stray from the fact that these women, while in positions of power, would defer their authority to their husbands. Take for example the story of Esther. While she had obvious power and authority as queen, ultimately she allowed the authority to rest upon the shoulders of her husband.

Thus is the way of God's people. Husbands/Fathers are the spiritual head of the household, regardless of the household, be it a church, a home, or otherwise. As I commonly practice within my own household, my wife makes all the important decisions regarding the household, however, when she needs something or wants something I am the one she asks. Whether it be a decision about the children or about money, or anything else for that matter.

So I would suppose that my opinion is set. For a church to be truly Biblical and Christian based, I believe that it should be a man leading the flock.

BroncoCop

Just out of curiosity, what would you say about a single mom household?

[Malacandra]

Just out of curiosity, what would you say about a single mom household?

[wild guess]That God would have preferred it to be a married mom household, with a man involved in the family other than as a sperm donor?[/wg]

But otherwise, you gotta run with what you got, I guess.

[HarryPevensiePotterGirl!!]

Hurray for women pastors! I think that when Paul was talking about how women shouldn't be in those roles, he wasn't talking about all women everywhere for all of time. I think he was talking about the particular situation that the people he was writing to where in.

A woman was good enough to Jesus' mother. A woman was good enough to judge Israel. A woman is good enough to be my pastor.

[SkandarLover892]

my pastor is a woman.

[EveningStar]

To my distinguished audience, some of whom are rather sophisticated in their knowledge of Scriptures.....

Paul left fully half of all new churches in the care of women pastors.

There was an incident in one particular church dominated by women who espoused some very strange beliefs. The letter to that church was clear that they were to basically stow it and let the men put the church back on track.

Most churches in the first century were in private homes where women were the movers and shakers. It has been postulated that the overriding reason why large basilicas and cathedrals were built was to get the Church away from the power and influence of women.

Personally I believe the soul of a woman and the soul of a man are identical, and their bodies...and perhaps some inborn behavioral tendencies...are feminizing influences. But as "people"...meaning unique combinations of strengths and weaknesses...women and men are HUMAN.

With that said, if your local congregation has trouble accepting a female pastor, and it would be divisive, surely that is a legitimate consideration. Yet, on the other hand, can we say that you should turn away a black pastor or oriental pastor because of their race because that may be divisive?

There is no clear answer on this. But I'd rather see a woman be a pastor than a lawyer anyday. Same is true about a man.

[NarniaNerd91]

my pastor is a woman.

So is mine,And I personally think there's nothing wrong with a woman ministering to a church.A woman Knows God's love just as well as a man does.A man couls seek the same as a woman could seek.It's not "anything you can do i can do better" type thing,Anyone could be a mighty Man or Woman of God if God calls you to preach and you're a woman,go ahead :D I'm not condoning those who believe different.I'm only stating what I believe.

[SkandarLover892]

exactly. what church do u go to?

[Tsukiko]

my Mum & Dad dont like Woman Pastors...i dont really care about it

[EveningStar]

My late father that fought the Japanese in World War II was never very crazy about them as a people. Does that mean there shouldn't be any Japanese? Same principle, really.

Some people won't change. Some people can't. But for those who do, however reluctantly, however tentatively, there is a blessing....as a poet once said...

They called me a rebel, a scoundrel, a lout
They drew a circle to keep me out
But love and I had the wit to win
We drew a circle that took them in

John B.

[NarniaNerd91]

exactly. what church do u go to?

lifesprings...its pentacostal..hehe

[LifeMaiden]

My late father that fought the Japanese in World War II was never very crazy about them as a people. Does that mean there shouldn't be any Japanese? Same principle, really.

Some people won't change. Some people can't. But for those who do, however reluctantly, however tentatively, there is a blessing....as a poet once said...

They called me a rebel, a scoundrel, a lout
They drew a circle to keep me out
But love and I had the wit to win
We drew a circle that took them in

John B.


I hope your late father kept in mind that Japanese Americans such as my uncle and other relatives fought and died for THIS country in World War II. It really rankles me when people mention the 'Japanese' in World War II because all my older relatives were interned because many Americans couldn't distinguish the face of a loyal American who was of Japanese descent versus the people in Japan.


Regarding female pastors, I have no problem with it. One member here mentioned that he thought it was wrong because Eve was created from Adam's rib, or something to that effect ( correct me if I misinterpreted that) so women should not be pastors or church leaders. I guess by that token, women who aspire to become pastors should just put their dreams and goals on a backburner and sit in the congregation instead of leading it.

[echoscot]

A very interesting comment that I hadn't thought of was posted about Paul leaving many churches in the care of women pastors. I need to do some more research on that myself.

Now, I will put myself out on a limb here. I do not have anything against a woman being a pastor, but I have really not found any that I have listened to that I care for as pastors. Perhaps I am just carrying a subconcious prejudice, I don't think that I am. I like some things they have to say, but I just haven't been "moved" so to speak by too many women. There are, of course, exceptions to that and on occasion even ones I don't like have taughts me some great insights.

[LifeMaiden]

A very interesting comment that I hadn't thought of was posted about Paul leaving many churches in the care of women pastors. I need to do some more research on that myself.

Now, I will put myself out on a limb here. I do not have anything against a woman being a pastor, but I have really not found any that I have listened to that I care for as pastors. Perhaps I am just carrying a subconcious prejudice, I don't think that I am. I like some things they have to say, but I just haven't been "moved" so to speak by too many women. There are, of course, exceptions to that and on occasion even ones I don't like have taughts me some great insights.


I agree with that, Echoscot. I think we get so used to seeing men in the roles of pastors and other church leaders that it is hard to get used to seeing a woman there in the pulpit.

I think Billy Graham's ministry is either being run by his daughter, or she has a seperate ministry. I'm not sure who's poised to take over his place.

I actually go back and forth regarding women in the Catholic Church being priests or bishops, and I'm definitely not ready to see a Pope Jean Pauline as opposed to a Pope John Paul LOL. Personally, I could not really see a woman being Pope. A nun in the Catholic Church can fulfill a powerful female role, and Mother Superiors wield much power in the Church as well. Man, I was scared of the nuns at my school LOL

[EveningStar]

Just on a lark, look up "Pope Joan". No, really.

Everyone argues over whether it was a legend or there was some truth to it...a woman that pretended to be a man and made it to Pontiff...only to be found out and killed. Though it seems like only a myth--the Holy See's official position on it--still it is traditional for Popes to avoid looking at the spot where she supposedly died, and routes through Rome are planned to avoid the Pope passing the spot.

Call it one of history's more intriguing wrinkles.

John

[she-elfwarrior19]

I am a complete supporter of women in pastoral/leadership positions. There are some great, powerful women in the Bible. A great biblical example of a woman in leadership is Deborah. God appointed her judge over Israel, and she lead them into victory and brought them into a time of peace. In the NIV she is called a prophetess. Esther is another great woman in leadership; after becoming queen she helped save her people and brought the man who wanted to destroy them to justice. God does not place limits on what a woman can do for Him.

On a more personal note, I'm studying to be a music pastor and I will be obtaining my minister's license next year (which will give me the title of pastor) and attending seminary.

Thankyou!!!!!:)
I dont see why women shouldnt be pastors, it seems some of you seem sexist about this saying only the "men" should lead the church. Women can just as well be leading a church.

[LifeMaiden]

Thankyou!!!!!:)
I dont see why women shouldnt be pastors, it seems some of you seem sexist about this saying only the "men" should lead the church. Women can just as well be leading a church.



Ummm...Saruman, do you have anything to say about that LOL? I think he was the only one here who basically didn't believe women should be pastors or church leaders because it seemed...'wrong.' ( going back to Eve being created from Adam's rib and all that)

[LifeMaiden]

I do not believe that the role of the woman should be as a pastor, a leader in the church, simply because this is what has been taught in the Scriptures (that is, I believe Pastor Paul, Paul the Apostle, spoke concerning this particular issue).

At the church I attend, it is also like this: the man leads the flock as pastor. However, what is critical to note is that we understand and recognize the extreme importance the woman has in the Body of Christ. We are certainly not against women being missionaries, and spreading the Gospel to others. And the senior pastor's wife leads the women's joyful life Bible study, a program that has been held and enjoyed by women for a couple of decades or so.

I've always understood and gratefully accepted that the woman was made not from Adam's head, nor from Adam's foot, but from his rib, his side. The woman is equal to the man, and as such plays such a critical role not only in the church, but in society at large.

But for the woman, I do not believe she should lead a congregation. It just isn't the role the woman was meant to fill.



That sounds a little hypocritical to me. If the woman IS equal to the man, then why shouldn't she lead a congregation? What role in your opinion was a woman meant to fill?

[Parthian King]

IM, in my movement there is ordination of women. That said, Saruman's position is not, in my opinion, hypocritical (though as a missionary, I do see, and always have seen a philosophical conflict in allowing women to minister overseas as missionaries, but not here in similar roles). Men and women are equal in essence (since both are created in the image of God), but they are different in giftings and roles. Biology alone makes this clear, but I think it is pretty evident in the respective pysches of the two sexes. Saruman's position is not the opposite of the egalitarian position, but rather is commonly known as the complementarian position: men and women complement each other--in God ideal economy they aren't in competition.

As one who has pastored myself, with a supportive wife who has never felt that calling, I can say from experience that my wife has very much helped steer the life of the church through her influence upon me. Influence from the position of "wife-viceroy" is far more powerful than many moderns give it credit, and always has been.

[LifeMaiden]

IM, in my movement there is ordination of women. That said, Saruman's position is not, in my opinion, hypocritical (though as a missionary, I do see, and always have seen a philosophical conflict in allowing women to minister overseas as missionaries, but not here in similar roles). Men and women are equal in essence (since both are created in the image of God), but they are different in giftings and roles. Biology alone makes this clear, but I think it is pretty evident in the respective pysches of the two sexes. Saruman's position is not the opposite of the egalitarian position, but rather is commonly known as the complementarian position: men and women complement each other--in God ideal economy they aren't in competition.

As one who has pastored myself, with a supportive wife who has never felt that calling, I can say from experience that my wife has very much helped steer the life of the church through her influence upon me. Influence from the position of "wife-viceroy" is far more powerful than many moderns give it credit, and always has been.


But by that token when you say in God's ideal economy men and women aren't in competition, that could also apply to jobs outside being a pastor of a flock. Are you also saying that in the business world, a woman should not be in competition with a man, for example, she shouldn't be the CEO of a company, or be at West Point with men, or in other areas of life? Or be a firefighter, baseball player, or other arenas which have been traditionally reserved for men? Why should wanting to be a pastor or church leader be out of bounds for a woman? Biologically speaking, yes, men and women are different, but it's also a result of sociological conditioning as well. Women who are competitive and aggressive have always been seen in an unfavorable light, as being more masculine. So many women, as girls, often tone down that competitiveness in themselves. I'm glad I never did. As a fitness trainer, I've been in competition with men for YEARS at the gym. YEARS.


Yes, I agree that women have traditionally had much more influence than modernists care to give. Take it from one who knows. Asian culture for example...well, the women in my family did everything. And they were quietly running the show behind the scenes. But if a woman wants to be out in the forefront of things, and be a pastor, CEO, military officer, or whatever...I don't see that as competing with men.

[she-elfwarrior19]

Ok then IceMaiden to one of you then seem like it.

[-Forever_Young-]

Wow, isn't this weird... I recently visited a church where there was a woman pastor. I kept telling myself, "This isn't right!" But then I realized she was a good pastor, and that there should be more of them. She read the gospel with emotion and was overall a very good pastor. So at first it didn't feel right, but then I got to like her.

I do think that female pastors do a pretty good job, I don't really see why there shouldn't be more of them. But I like male pastors/priests, too. They both teach us about God and the Bible (and ourselves) so what difference does it really make? These are just my thoughts on this.

[tottyfruitty]

i think that only men should should be preachers and leaders
women can be like leaders of youth groups but in the Bible it says that women should not preach publically and well we are Christians and we are followers of the Bible no matter how sexist we think that that sounds we should still follow it beside men were put on earth to be leaders and like it or not they are the stronger sex
dont get me wrong women preachers may be good but it says in the Bible that they shouldnt
it is like saying well even though it says in the Bible that you shouldnt get drunk getting drunk is fun though so it is okay. we must stick to the rules and laws in the Bible for it is the word of God
well thats just what i think

[SOS~]

I think that God made people equally.Woman can lead just as well as men.There are many woman in the bible that lead.

[arwenelizabeth]

I actually wrote my thesis for my bachelor's degree on this topic! Well, specifically on the topic of the debate surrounding the ordination of women in the Catholic Church, since I was getting my degree in theology from a Catholic college.

I can't speak for the many Protestant denominations represented here, since I'm not a member of any of them, but I can speak on the Catholic doctrine since I've studied it extensively.

People always talk about "whether the Catholic Church should have women priests" but what most of them don't know is that the Catholic Church has already spoken on the topic. It will not be ordaining women. Here are the documents which give the reasons: Inter Insigniores (http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_df76ii.htm) and Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_jp02os.htm). They're pretty heavy going, but worth reading if you're really interested.

Incidentally, there are a lot of people, Catholic and otherwise, who are extremely unhappy about this. But I personally, having studied the teaching, think it's justified and fair.

People assume that it's unfair to women to not allow them to be priests like men, but that is not necessarily true. It depends on what "equality" really means. There's a huge tendency among humans to assume that a person's importance is a function of his or her power and role in society. Politicians, CEOs, movie stars - these are the important people, while gardeners and janitors are "nobodies." But God does not see it that way. In his eyes, holiness is what is important, not power. (C.S. Lewis picks up on this very theme in, among other places, The Great Divorce, which is well worth reading.) Catholic teaching is that all people are equally valuable in God's eyes, and the refusal to allow women to be priests does not contradict this, because power has nothing to do with being valuable to God.

But I don't want to take up too much space ranting in this forum. If you're interested in more on this topic, here's (http://ennorath.typepad.com/arwens_blog/2005/04/on_vocations_an.html) a little essay I wrote about it a while ago.

[she-elfwarrior19]

Thanks for sharing that, its interesting.

[LifeMaiden]

i think that only men should should be preachers and leaders
women can be like leaders of youth groups but in the Bible it says that women should not preach publically and well we are Christians and we are followers of the Bible no matter how sexist we think that that sounds we should still follow it beside men were put on earth to be leaders and like it or not they are the stronger sex
dont get me wrong women preachers may be good but it says in the Bible that they shouldnt
it is like saying well even though it says in the Bible that you shouldnt get drunk getting drunk is fun though so it is okay. we must stick to the rules and laws in the Bible for it is the word of God
well thats just what i think

Yes but there were powerful women leaders in the Bible though, as some of the members here have indicated. You truly believe that men are the stronger sex? I find that hard to believe in this day and age when women have shown the contrary and it isn't off limits for women to do anything they want to. MAYBE men might be stronger physically, but in many ways, women I think can be stronger...it's why they're mothers for one thing;) and traditionally have raised the children. What would you have to say to those Christians here, who by all means also follow the Bible, who are all in favor of women pastors? Does this mean that they aren't following the rules of the Bible by their support of women in church leadership positions?

[she-elfwarrior19]

Yes but there were powerful women leaders in the Bible though, as some of the members here have indicated. You truly believe that men are the stronger sex? I find that hard to believe in this day and age when women have shown the contrary and it isn't off limits for women to do anything they want to. MAYBE men might be stronger physically, but in many ways, women I think can be stronger...it's why they're mothers for one thing;) and traditionally have raised the children. What would you have to say to those Christians here, who by all means also follow the Bible, who are all in favor of women pastors? Does this mean that they aren't following the rules of the Bible by their support of women in church leadership positions?

I agree i dont find men are the stronger, i dont see how people think the males are stronger, i believe we are equal. I dont agree with people saying men are stronger, just because people might think they are phsically stronger, some are some arent, females are stronger in many things that males arent. I just think we are equal and that anyone who wants to preach should.

[Parthian King]

IM, it is difficult for me to argue for a position that I don't necessarily hold. I believe that women can pastor effectively, especially in teaching and nurturing roles. They can also be excellent motivators and organizers.

But even as we speak about "feminine traits" and "masculine traits," there is an a priori admission of difference. I rejoice in those differences. It is my opinion that we need to be very careful on this point, and saturate ourselves (or at least fully educate ourselves before rejecting) the biblical view of the sexes and sex relations. For one, it is far more complicated than some make it; it is hardly the oppressive cariacature that modern feminists make it (be they men or women). The modern feminist movement in its purest form seeks to obliterate all differences between the sexes, while the Bible would argue that to do that is not only denying that which is self-evident, but it also is throwing away riches. The constant pitting of men vs. women is a losing game. To constantly live that way, viewing all male/female relations and roles through that prism will cause one to miss the nuanced and ultimately redemptive view of Scripture.

For instance, after my post I perceived in other posts the simple and monolitic assertion that "women are equal to men." Again, that is both true and untrue. Women have the same value as men in God's eyes. But women do not have the same gifts as men, generally speaking, any more than men have the same gifts as women (you yourself point this out when it comes to the begetting and birthing of children).

I really do think that the way forward in this issue (its implications are far weightier than a discussion in a forum) is to begin with that simple distinction. Once we come to a peace that God has chosen to create a race in His image that is at the same time made up of two sexes that are distinct but meant to work together to glorify Him, and in the big picture not compete with each other, I think we'll be on the road to seeing things as He does. Of course, if we are interested in a functionally atheistic attempt at societal engineering, we will always be at each others throats. The groups that Paul says are "one in Christ" (Jew/Gentile, lower class/upper class, male female) will always be at war with each without Him.

[LifeMaiden]

IM, it is difficult for me to argue for a position that I don't necessarily hold. I believe that women can pastor effectively, especially in teaching and nurturing roles. They can also be excellent motivators and organizers.

But even as we speak about "feminine traits" and "masculine traits," there is an a priori admission of difference. I rejoice in those differences. It is my opinion that we need to be very careful on this point, and saturate ourselves (or at least fully educate ourselves before rejecting) the biblical view of the sexes and sex relations. For one, it is far more complicated than some make it; it is hardly the oppressive cariacature that modern feminists make it. The modern feminist movement in its purest form seeks to obliterate all differences between the sexes, while the Bible would argue that to do that is not only denying that which is self-evident, but it also is throwing away riches. The constant pitting of men vs. women is a losing game. To constantly live that way, viewing all male/female relations and roles through that prism will cause one to miss the nuanced and ultiamtely redemptive view of Scripture.

For instance, after my post I perceived in other posts the simple and monolitic assertion that "women are equal to men." Again, that is both true and untrue. Women have the same value as men in God's eyes. But women do not have the same gifts as men, generally speaking, any more than men have the same gifts as women (you yourself point this out when it comes to the begetting and bithing of children).

I really do think that the way forward in this issue (its implications are far weightier than a discussion in a forum) is to begin with that simple distinction. Once we come to a peace that God has chosen to create a race in His image that is at the same time made up of two sexes that are distinct but meant to work together, and in the big picture not compete with each other, I think we'll be on the road to seeing things as He does.


Women do not have the same gifts as men, meaning that, in your opinion, they shouldn't be allowed to go to West Point, be CEO's of companies, or be firemen and baseball players, in other words. What you're saying sounds backwards and totally at odds with what most women think, regardless of whether or not they are feminists. That's what I'm hearing from you, PK, and I'm very disappointed that you believe that women should not be in the positions not only in church leadership, but in other areas of work, life, and society. I think it's living in the past to think that a woman can't or shouldn't compete with men. That's pure nonsense to me. I don't have to be a feminist to think that it's nonsense. If you had a daughter who aspired to be a church leader, a soldier, a fireman, or a CEO of a company, you'd be doing her a big disservice to discourage her from attaining her dreams and goals.

" Compete" with each other is ridiculous in the way it sounds and the way it comes across, PK. Since when is it 'wrong' or against God or whatever for a woman to be ambitious and want to be in a world where there happens to be more men than women? Imagine if all women thought the way you do, and men too. There'd be no room for women doctors, lawyers, or any of the professions once dominated primarily by men. I'm just having a hard time understand people who think that because a woman wants to choose a job as a pastor, CEO, doctor, lawyer, or whatever...that means she's in 'competition' rather than 'complimentary' to a man. Which means I guess by my own profession, I should just work at the front desk at the gym rather than be in 'competition' with the male fitness trainers at my gym, and settle for being a secretary instead of having my name on my office/room there, and not 'compete' with men in marathons, but stand by the wayside and complement my 'husband' who decides to participate in the race.


Rubbish.

[LifeMaiden]

I agree i dont find men are the stronger, i dont see how people think the males are stronger, i believe we are equal. I dont agree with people saying men are stronger, just because people might think they are phsically stronger, some are some arent, females are stronger in many things that males arent. I just think we are equal and that anyone who wants to preach should.


Yes, thank you, She Elf...and by the standards Parthian King states, by saying women should 'complement' men and not compete with them, ( no one here is denying that men and women are different, by the way... and it's wrong to group all feminists and the feminist movement by saying that they did a disservice to men AND women, because the feminist movement that I personally believe it allowed doors to be opened to women in MANY CAREER areas where women were previously barred from entering)...women shouldn't be pastors, newcasters, soldiers, CEOs, firefighters, athletes, and just about any other profession which was formerly, and perhaps still is, dominated by men. We're supposed to be 'complementary' to men which means sit in the sidelines rather than get out in the open and play the game. We should all just sit around and have babies and be married and stay at home, be secretaries and homemakers rather than pursue our dreams as women to be doctors and lawyers. This sounds worse than some of the men I've met from Asia.

[Twilightdryadhobbit]

I think this is an interesting issue to debate in theory, but what happens when you look at it in the real world? What do we say about women who hear a strong call from God, and become pastors in Churches and help lead a lot of people to Christ? My father is a pastor in the Methodist Church, and they do believe in having women pastors, and I know a few personally who seem to have a strong calling from God, including a friend of mine who plans on becoming a pastor when she can go through seminary and graduate. Should we say that these women should ignore what they hear God telling them? Of course not, but I am curious what someone with an opposite opinion would say about women who hear a direct call to ministry, or have been pastors successfully all thier lives? Was their's a mistaken calling, or am I totally misunderstanding your position?

On a side note, I also believe that taking care of the family (With a husband of course) is an incredibly important job that a women can do best, and that should figure into her decision to become a pastor if she is married and has children. But this also delves into the issues of thier personal relationship's with Jesus. If they're close enough to him to be always hearing his voice and following his plans for thier lives, they can't be mistaken about thier calling. I just like to discuss them too.

[Parthian King]

Women do not have the same gifts as men, meaning that, in your opinion, they shouldn't be allowed to go to West Point, be CEO's of companies, or be firemen and baseball players, in other words.

Whoa, IM. I'm disappointed that you're disappointed! I was deliberately restricting my remarks to the ecclesiatical and domestic world. I have no problem at all with women filling the roles you mention here. I do think that as they do so they should in a way that best employs their feminine talents, but in principle I have no problem with it at all.

You're reading war in my words where there is none...

[LifeMaiden]

I actually wrote my thesis for my bachelor's degree on this topic! Well, specifically on the topic of the debate surrounding the ordination of women in the Catholic Church, since I was getting my degree in theology from a Catholic college.

I can't speak for the many Protestant denominations represented here, since I'm not a member of any of them, but I can speak on the Catholic doctrine since I've studied it extensively.

People always talk about "whether the Catholic Church should have women priests" but what most of them don't know is that the Catholic Church has already spoken on the topic. It will not be ordaining women. Here are the documents which give the reasons: Inter Insigniores (http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_df76ii.htm) and Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_jp02os.htm). They're pretty heavy going, but worth reading if you're really interested.

Incidentally, there are a lot of people, Catholic and otherwise, who are extremely unhappy about this. But I personally, having studied the teaching, think it's justified and fair.

People assume that it's unfair to women to not allow them to be priests like men, but that is not necessarily true. It depends on what "equality" really means. There's a huge tendency among humans to assume that a person's importance is a function of his or her power and role in society. Politicians, CEOs, movie stars - these are the important people, while gardeners and janitors are "nobodies." But God does not see it that way. In his eyes, holiness is what is important, not power. (C.S. Lewis picks up on this very theme in, among other places, The Great Divorce, which is well worth reading.) Catholic teaching is that all people are equally valuable in God's eyes, and the refusal to allow women to be priests does not contradict this, because power has nothing to do with being valuable to God.

But I don't want to take up too much space ranting in this forum. If you're interested in more on this topic, here's (http://ennorath.typepad.com/arwens_blog/2005/04/on_vocations_an.html) a little essay I wrote about it a while ago.


If power truly HAS nothing to do with being valuable to God, then why should power therefore only be in the hands of men? We know for a fact that some of the men in the Church have abused their power. Why aren't they thinking along the same lines you are? If we are all equal in God's eyes no matter what job or rank we have, then why is there even a need for hierarchy or the 'ranks' we see in the Church, from priest to bishop, archbishop, cardinal, and Pope? There should be NO one person who has a title that indicates he or she is more valuable or powerful than another. Technically, if we were to truly be equals in God's eyes, then there should be NO titles indicating power or rank.


As for the Catholic Church, I honestly don't really care whether there's ever a female bishop or archbishop, because to me, a Mother Superior or a nun holds power and important in the context of the Church itself. But we went off on a tangent regarding other professions as well, and the idea that uhhhhhh...women should not 'compete' with men but be 'complimentary.' Sort of like a jigsaw puzzle..where a piece can have different edges, but fit together very well. That comparison, I'm afraid, may not be as accurate when it comes to women in the workplace, the armed services, and so forth.

[onlymystory]

I'm going to jump in here and say that (and I say this in the nicest way) I think you might be getting the wrong idea about what PK is saying, IM. I don't think he meant to say that women can't do the same job as men. I think what he was saying is that too often men and women focus on the same argument. That women are just as good as men and can do everything men can do. I think he was trying to say that while we are all equal as human beings, we have different strengths and instead of thinking we all need to be just as good as everyone else at everything we should embrace our gifts. There's absolutely nothing wrong with you being a trainer at a gym. I would never be able to do that simply because fitness and nutrition is not really my thing. Just as most of the guy trainers in your gym probably couldn't debate the influence of The Canterbury Tales on modern day literature. We have different gifts and the key is to embrace them and enjoy our differences. Its not that we shouldn't or can't do something. And there are plenty of women who can do the same things men can do and many men who can't do things women can and vice versa. Its just that we need to recognize our individual limitations. And I emphasize individual imitations. Its not a group thing, each individual has different gifts and we need to start learning to embrace them.

And I will add that my idea of feminism is not this whole garbage of do whatever men can do. (I'd go insane if someone told me to go work in construction or something. of course I'd hate fashion too.)

True feminism is the belief that every woman should be allowed to be exactly who she really is. And I think that's the way we should view everyone. Men and women should be allowed to be exactly who they really are.

[LifeMaiden]

I clearly think that when someone states women should be complimentary to men rather than in competition with them, it means that we shouldn't be in the same arenas as men, particularly in the workplace, and in the church. But I'll have to let PK answer to that one.

I believe that people, men or women, should be respected for whatever CHOICE they make, whether it means they do stay home as a homemaker, as my mother did, and many women of her generation did, or choose to have kids and a career, or choose to be a pastor of a Church, or choose to go and be a soldier and fight in Iraq. Yes, people have different gifts and talents, and this is apparent in what professions and interests they pursue. But I simply don't agree with people who don't think a woman shouldn't be pastor of her church. If that is her talent and area of expertise, to preach and to lead a congregation, then why shouldn't she be able to do that and it should be fine in the eyes of God?

The point of feminism is NOT to tell women to do 'whatever men do'...but that if THEY WANT to pursue a career in an area which has traditionally and largely been men, such as construction or firefighting, they SHOULD be able to do it FREELY and OPENLY without legal restrictions or prejudices or sexism. It's about CHOICES. And we know at one time, women weren't allowed to be doctors or lawyers. Those professions were seen at one time as 'something only men should do. " And yes, a woman or a man should be exactly what they feel like being...but if that means a woman feels and has a talent for being a pastor, they by all means, why shouldn't she pursue that?

[LifeMaiden]

Whoa, IM. I'm disappointed that you're disappointed! I was deliberately restricting my remarks to the ecclesiatical and domestic world. I have no problem at all with women filling the roles you mention here. I do think that as they do so they should in a way that best employs their feminine talents, but in principle I have no problem with it at all.

You're reading war in my words where there is none...


Haha...* feels like the biggest ham in the world now* I didn't see that post til now. You see what happens when my thinking and typing get ahead of my 'take a deep breath before I respond' mechanism?


Okay well, I was under the impression that when you said women should be complimentary rather than competitive with men, that could also apply to all the professional world that I mentioned. If you're not against women in those realms becoming what they are (doctors, etc) then I don't understand why the opposition to the ecclesiastical world. Domestic, maybe...because I can't abide men who allow themselves to get pushed around by women. I've seen women start acting LIKE men in the business world, and even with some of the trainers I personally know. I don't think it's attractive for a woman to be bossy, mean, overly aggressive (assertive IS NOT the same thing) and be crude, but I've seen them fall into that trap.


A woman in a role of leadership or a position of power in which only men have traditionally been part of does not HAVE TO ACT LIKE A MAN. In fact you can go a lot further in life if you don't :D .


I think that dryadhobbit makes some good points about a woman being 'called' to becoming a pastor, and feels this call is obviously from God. What then? People do have strong callings that I believe firmly are from the Higher Power. And if a woman then has this calling to be a pastor or church leader, why should she not act upon it?

[Parthian King]

I clearly think that when someone states women should be complimentary to men rather than in competition with them, it means that we shouldn't be in the same arenas as men, particularly in the workplace, and in the church. But I'll have to let PK answer to that one.

Well, there's a big part of the problem, IM. I never said "women should be complementary to men. Period." I said that I believed that the biblical view of roles for the sexes is a complementary one, that is, that God created the two sexes to work together in complementary fashion--they are to complement each other. The context for this complementary relationship is the family and the spirit in which it is to operate is one of worship towards God. In that context, and in that spirit, the man's weaknesses and strengths are complemented by the woman's weaknesses and strengths, and the woman's by the man's. Subordination is functional, not essential, and is therefore a two-way street. IM, you seem to take that I say my wife complements me as a lower role. I cannot count the times I have been saved from a career-destroying faux pas by my wife's urgent glance, a hand squeeze, or kick under the table. I have similarly brought perspective to her when it was needed, and have saved her pain and difficulty. This is the complementary relationship.

As for women pastors, um, for the nth time, I have no problem with it! But the way you phrased it makes me home in on an issue: You speak of motivation and talent when it comes to the pastorate; I would speak of calling and that only. For me the issue is not our choice, but God's. I can think of some great women of the Pentecostal movement of which I am a part (Mother Etter of Indianapolis, Aimee Semple McPherson of the Four Square Church, Kathryn Kuhlman the healing evangelist)--none of them would ever argue that what they did was their choice. This is why I edited the post you quoted, adding the "glory of God" as a key element. If we ask in everything we do, "Is this God's will? How would God have me relate to others? What is His plan?" Well, competition would go right out the window, because we'd be so busy wrestling with ourselves in the pilgrimmage of the Christian life, we'd think that pure silliness.

The mountain we have to climb, IM, the one we struggle against, is US.

EDIT: Just saw you new post. Cool. :D

[LifeMaiden]

My struggle in life is summed up like this:

Life is but a flight of stairs. I keep falling down. I've been bruised. I've knowingly stepped on a stair that I knew I should have avoided but stepped on it anyways, and often found myself at the bottom of the staircase. But I keep climbing...and one day I might just reach the top :D


Hmm...I should probably go back and delete some of those posts of mine.

[Parthian King]

IM, we're good. Be at peace. You have made the critical step of bowing before Christ Jesus. The submission you make to Him is sweet, not oppressive. He will heal you, and help you see things His way. But rejoice! In Him, you are condemned to victory. His is the upside down Kingdom, wherein servants are kings, the submitted rule, the weak are strong, the last are first, and the crucified Lord is raised and reigns over all forever and ever. It's a four-dimensional paradox, and you have come out of a world of seeing things through dark glasses where the one-dimensional Rule of the Fist carries the day. But that rule is a lie, and was overthrown when Jesus said, "Not my will, but Thine be done."

You are on your way, and we are all thrilled by it.

[Aslan's Beloved Daughter]

I too believe that women are equals, we are all equals. If men can preach, why can't women? We are all children of God, and we all have our own power to teach about God. If women can be missionaries, why can't we be pastors or preachers, etc.? That makes no sense to me.

God gives us all our own spiritual gifts. Sure, some of us still haven't found it yet, but we all have one. God gives us all equal love and the Holy Spirit works through each and every one of us. Not just men, not just women. We are all God's people, and we can all make a difference in the world. It should NOT depend on your gender. If a woman is called to work in the world for Christ, there is nothing that we can do to stop it. It is a part of our destiny and what we can do for God's kingdom!

[she-elfwarrior19]

Thanks so much Aslan-Beloved_Daughter, alot of people needed to here that, thanks:) I agree 100% with you!

[Wunderkind]

I agree with Saruman 100%. I couldnt have said it better
Me neither.I agree with Saruman too :)

[Aslan's Beloved Daughter]

ur welcome she-elfwarrior19!

[Wendygirljp]

IMHO, women, in most societies, even though it looks like they are not, really ARE the bosses of families, including over the husband. Watch a man talk to his wife about having a tryst. Her decision, not his, unless she agrees to allow him to decide. Same with control of the money, usually.

Matriarchial societies are nurturing in nature, so why should not women be religious leaders as well?

Just another thought.

[she-elfwarrior19]

LOL Aslans-beloved-daughter. Yes right you are Wendygirljp.

[LifeMaiden]

IMHO, women, in most societies, even though it looks like they are not, really ARE the bosses of families, including over the husband. Watch a man talk to his wife about having a tryst. Her decision, not his, unless she agrees to allow him to decide. Same with control of the money, usually.

Matriarchial societies are nurturing in nature, so why should not women be religious leaders as well?

Just another thought.
Hey I'm Asian, and I know this firsthand. It appeared to me at FIRST when I was very young that...well, the women didn't have much power in their relationships with men...because as a rule, most Asian men are very traditional. There is no sense of chivalry. But through time I learned to appreciate the woman's power in the family because honestly...without her those men would not have been able to hold those families together. I saw that these women ran the show and controlled a lot more than they appeared to on the surface.

[Parthian King]

Latino culture is much the same. For all the machismo, there is commonly a wholesale abdication of true male leadership, and the women have to lead to hold things together. Ironically (given the title of this thread), many of the women I have dealt with in Ecuador and elsewhere are crying out for their men to be leaders--they are tired of leading things in the family and want a responsible man to cover them so they can raise their children.

That's why, in the midst of this, I brought up the whole thing about vicious competition between the sexes. The pattern is that men use their brute strength and economic advantage to try and control their women, and women manipulate and undermine the men's authority. Both are caught in an age old trap, and neither wins. God has a better way.

[BroncoCop]

Just out of curiosity, what would you say about a single mom household?


Broken,

I understand what you are saying. There are provisions for single parent households. This is where the spiritual leader of the church comes in. A single mother should be able to turn to him in those times of need. A pastor/preacher....whatever.... has the moral responsibility to look after those women in need.

This was taught to me by my brother (a Baptist minister) when I was a single parent. I hope it helps.

Sincerely
BroncoCop

[Ephinie]

Broken,

I understand what you are saying. There are provisions for single parent households. This is where the spiritual leader of the church comes in. A single mother should be able to turn to him in those times of need. A pastor/preacher....whatever.... has the moral responsibility to look after those women in need.

This was taught to me by my brother (a Baptist minister) when I was a single parent. I hope it helps.

Sincerely
BroncoCopI'm a little confused about what you mean here, as far as what a woman heading a single parent household is supposed to expect from a pastor/preacher. The idea of a pastor filling in as a spiritual head can be nothing but a symbolic role. A single mom is still the sole income earner of the family. She is still the sole decision-maker regarding day to day matters that involve her children. She decides what school they go to, what to feed them, what activities they participate in, and sets the tone for the rest of the household. She is, functionally and practically, the head of the household. No matter how much "moral support" or "spiritual leadership" anyone may THINK that a pastor could play in such a family, the simple fact of the matter is that a woman who raises a family on her own stands alone.

[BroncoCop]

I'm a little confused about what you mean here, as far as what a woman heading a single parent household is supposed to expect from a pastor/preacher. The idea of a pastor filling in as a spiritual head can be nothing but a symbolic role. A single mom is still the sole income earner of the family. She is still the sole decision-maker regarding day to day matters that involve her children. She decides what school they go to, what to feed them, what activities they participate in, and sets the tone for the rest of the household. She is, functionally and practically, the head of the household. No matter how much "moral support" or "spiritual leadership" anyone may THINK that a pastor could play in such a family, the simple fact of the matter is that a woman who raises a family on her own stands alone.


You are right in many of the points that you make. As a single father for a time I too had to stand alone in all that I did. Yes, a single mother is the head of her household, it is not fair or right that this should be for her though. A pastor should be there for her in guideance of spiritual matters, that is what I was getting at.

Remember too that single families are not God's ideal. Divorce, death, even military deployments happen. In most cases many single parents have family they can receive help from, in some cases the single parent has none. I have friends that are single parents, and they struggle with what you describe.

I had not meant to make anyone angry with my comment. However, if any one chooses to be angry at me for my view I can understand. I tend to take a rather hard line in how I feel about single parenting. My heart aches for all those saddled with that burden, and in many cases of single mothers I blame the fathers for their lack of compassion, and have little room in my heart for those men.

Sincerely
BroncoCop

[LifeMaiden]

Latino culture is much the same. For all the machismo, there is commonly a wholesale abdication of true male leadership, and the women have to lead to hold things together. Ironically (given the title of this thread), many of the women I have dealt with in Ecuador and elsewhere are crying out for their men to be leaders--they are tired of leading things in the family and want a responsible man to cover them so they can raise their children.

That's why, in the midst of this, I brought up the whole thing about vicious competition between the sexes. The pattern is that men use their brute strength and economic advantage to try and control their women, and women manipulate and undermine the men's authority. Both are caught in an age old trap, and neither wins. God has a better way.


Yes, I actually agree about that vicious competition within that framework. My great grandfather was a Baptist minister, and he was a very strict man. He was not abusive, but he expected that people obeyed him, and that included his wife, my great grandmother. However, she held enormous influence over him, from what I have heard from other family members who knew them. She didn't have to do it in a brutal way or scream, yell, or act in any manner that was unfeminine. She did it in ways that you mentioned your wife did, by a kick LOL under the table, a hand on the arm, or a look. She pretty much ran the household because my greatgrandfather was very busy with the church activities and as pastor, as well as teaching Sunday school.

[BroncoCop]

Yes, I actually agree about that vicious competition within that framework. My great grandfather was a Baptist minister, and he was a very strict man. He was not abusive, but he expected that people obeyed him, and that included his wife, my great grandmother. However, she held enormous influence over him, from what I have heard from other family members who knew them. She didn't have to do it in a brutal way or scream, yell, or act in any manner that was unfeminine. She did it in ways that you mentioned your wife did, by a kick LOL under the table, a hand on the arm, or a look. She pretty much ran the household because my greatgrandfather was very busy with the church activities and as pastor, as well as teaching Sunday school.


Thus is the way things are. The men are the kings, but the real power behind the throne are the women. I don't know how I ever got along without my wife assisting me by running things at home while I am busy at work. Out of respect for all of the hard work she does I am more than happy to help her in anything she needs done, or give her anything she wants.

The latino countries suffer greatly. I once read something that stuck in my mind like gum on the bottom of your shoe.

Why is it that the USA has been more successful in life than all of the latino countries that help make up the Americas?

Answer: Because the settlers of the USA came to this land looking for God
The settlers of the Latino countries came looking for gold.

Sincerely
BroncoCop

[LifeMaiden]

Whoa that's a pretty controversial statement there LOL BroncoCop. The settlers of Jamestown actually came looking for gold too...except they found Natives with corn ( maize) instead of the precious metal. 'God' went out the window once the settlers found out how profitable America really was in terms of commerce. Don't forget that the Spaniards came to the Americas looking for the fountain of youth as well as the gold. I basically believe all of those who sought out new worlds to explore were interested in some form of wealth to be gained by their mother countries....that was the purpose of having colonies after all to begin with. It was more about GOLD than about GOD in every New World. Colonies were there to bring economic benefits to the mother countries.

I think a lot of the traditionalism has to do with the Church, actually, in Latin America. If you take a look at many Asian cultures, particularly Japan, you will see that chivalry does not exist there. But while it appears on the SURFACE that the men are domineering, once they come home, it's the women who take over...they manage the finances and pretty much run the households, where there, they are the queens :).

For me personally, I have to admit that I'm always pleasantly surprised when I turn on the tv and there's a channel that features a female pastor or preacher. But I also find it hard to get used to at the same time! Because I'm simply used to seeing men in those positions.

I sometimes watch this Catholic channel and I love watching the nuns...Mother Superiors are very powerful women in the Church. To me nuns and priests have always been pretty equal even though a nun of course, cannot say the Mass.

[Wendygirljp]

Ice Maiden,

As I am also Asian, for lack of a better term, I understand that the male puts up "airs" of being "superior", but still it is the woman who controls even the husband. One of my older students in a private lesson came in late one day, completely upset. I asked him why he was so unnerved. He was angry at his wife for shopping and not taking care of him. When I asked what it was he needed care, he said he had to wait for nearly two hours to have his tea made. I asked him why he didn't make his OWN tea! His comment: "I don't know how to make it!"

Here, in Japan, the men act as if they are in charge, but in the house, on average, they are extremely mild, many times begging for money from their wives for their "lunch money" or permission and cash to go to a dinner with his co-workers at the end and beginning of the fiscal year.

"Poor babies!" :))

[Ephinie]

LOL @ Wendygirl! That was a great story. It's never occurred to me that tea is something that could be all that hard to make. Also, the idea of a man begging his wife for money or for permission to go out with his friends seems, to me, comical. I'm sure those poor guys who do it don't see it that way, though!That reminds me of the Last Samurai when the kid is insisting on giving Tom sake, and the chick is all like,

"No," and the kid is like,

"It's my village," and the chick is like,

"It's my house." And that was that.

To back up what IceMaiden said about early American settlers, she is right. Those settling in Jamestown did so for economic opportunity, though personally I think they got a lot more than they bargained for! They had a horrible time getting things off the ground, and the death rate... woah. Being a colonist in those days SUCKED. The only specific groups of colonists who could be described as having come here, "Looking for God," were the Pilgrims - more accurately called the Separatists. Yeah, everyone knows that whole Mayflower bit. Of course, even with them, the argument could be made that their motivation for coming was not really religious but cultural. There was this one group of them that had escaped religious persecution in England by moving to Holland, but then they got upset when their children started speaking Dutch. They wanted to preserve their English heritage. If the real issue had been religious freedom, they would have been able to stay much more comfortably in Holland. Even on the Mayflower itself, not all of the passengers were Separatists. They had to share the boat with financial venturers as well.

Personally, I don't see much about Colonial New Enland's culture and tone that can be admired. Ever read the Scarlett Letter? Okay, yes, it's fictional. It's still useful for showing how people behaved and thought, though. Don't forget Salem. Yes, most of the witches were acquitted later... but what good is that after you're already dead? OF COURSE, there were many, MANY early colonists who were sincere, devout Christians. However, there were a lot of others who just went through the motions because that was what was profitable for them. The climate made it politically expedient to belong to a church, especially since NOT attending church could get you arrested! In some communities, they even made you pay a fine if you decided to go to a church that was a different denomination than the main one.

Also, in some towns, it was a crime to celebrate holidays, especially Christmas! I'm serious... people believed that celebrating birthdays and holidays was un-pious. There was a huge emphasis on piety, which can be seen as a good thing. They were very hard on sin and were big on accountability. While that is something that we need more of in society today, the Pilgrims took it to the opposite extreme. There was very little mercy or forgiveness for malefactors. And again, that was only in some colonial communities - mostly in the north. In the south, colonies were all about cash crops. Some areas were virtually Godless.

I don't know as much about South American colonies, so I am unable to make an effective comparison. I do, however, know that there were a lot of Catholic missionaries that ministered to those colonies. That's part of the reason why some are still mostly Catholic to this day.

And now that I've written all of this, I realize that it's WAY off topic. But I'm gonna post it anyways, just cause it took me so long to write!

[BroncoCop]

Interesting that my statement would be turned into a historical discussion.

Yes it was about the pilgrims, and all the spanish looking in north america for the yadda yadda yadda..........

The point is that we are definately a blessed nation, especially in comparison to many of the other countries of this continent.

sincerely,

BroncoCop

[Ephinie]

Yes, I think we can all agree that we are a blessed nation - not only in comparison with the other nations on the American continents, but also in comparison with the rest of the world.

And forgive me; my degree was in history. Sometimes it's hard NOT to turn something into a historical discussion, because I look at almost everything through the lense of how things were in the past compared to how they are now.

[BroncoCop]

Yes, I think we can all agree that we are a blessed nation - not only in comparison with the other nations on the American continents, but also in comparison with the rest of the world.

And forgive me; my degree was in history. Sometimes it's hard NOT to turn something into a historical discussion, because I look at almost everything through the lense of how things were in the past compared to how they are now.


Those that do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.......


In regards to history, myself, I could go on and on about it. I agree that those with a passion for history have a hard time not finding comparisons in today's world.

[LifeMaiden]

Ice Maiden,

As I am also Asian, for lack of a better term, I understand that the male puts up "airs" of being "superior", but still it is the woman who controls even the husband. One of my older students in a private lesson came in late one day, completely upset. I asked him why he was so unnerved. He was angry at his wife for shopping and not taking care of him. When I asked what it was he needed care, he said he had to wait for nearly two hours to have his tea made. I asked him why he didn't make his OWN tea! His comment: "I don't know how to make it!"

Here, in Japan, the men act as if they are in charge, but in the house, on average, they are extremely mild, many times begging for money from their wives for their "lunch money" or permission and cash to go to a dinner with his co-workers at the end and beginning of the fiscal year.

"Poor babies!" :))


My great grand parents are from Japan, so yeah LOL I know all about the thing in Japan. But even with those who are born here, second generation, it seems as though they still adhere to that notion where the woman should do everything...and the notion of chivalry just doesn't exist. Men don't hold doors open for women in our culture.

[BroncoCop]

My great grand parents are from Japan, so yeah LOL I know all about the thing in Japan. But even with those who are born here, second generation, it seems as though they still adhere to that notion where the woman should do everything...and the notion of chivalry just doesn't exist. Men don't hold doors open for women in our culture.


Chivalry can be found, but it is so rare these days, you would have better luck tripping over a 5 carat diamond ring in downtown Manhattan during rush hour with a blindfold on.

I can remember getting yelled at by a "womans right activist" for standing up in a room to give her my chair during a seminar. It was not a pretty argument, but the gist of it was that I was taught that a man stands and offers his chair when a woman enters the room.

I actually LIKE that my wife runs things.

[Ephinie]

I can remember getting yelled at by a "womans right activist" for standing up in a room to give her my chair during a seminar. It was not a pretty argument, but the gist of it was that I was taught that a man stands and offers his chair when a woman enters the room. Holy crap, that's extreme. I can't see any logical reason why a woman's rights activist would object to that, but some people are just special. And I mean "special" in a purely short-bus sort of way. I would think that having men defer to us in ways such as offering their chairs would be a GOOD thing, because it shows that they respect us. I would also think that women's rights activists would welcome a little extra respect. But yeah... like I said... special.

And oh yeah...I have never seen a man actually do that. Give his chair up for a woman, I mean. Guys around here are very good at opening doors for us, though.

[BroncoCop]

Holy crap, that's extreme. I can't see any logical reason why a woman's rights activist would object to that, but some people are just special. And I mean "special" in a purely short-bus sort of way. I would think that having men defer to us in ways such as offering their chairs would be a GOOD thing, because it shows that they respect us. I would also think that women's rights activists would welcome a little extra respect. But yeah... like I said... special.

And oh yeah...I have never seen a man actually do that. Give his chair up for a woman, I mean. Guys around here are very good at opening doors for us, though.


That is good, it just goes to show that some men are still taught properly.

With 3 daughters and 1 wife, I probably look like an idiot in the parking lot of Wal-Mart when I open the doors to the van for ALL of them. :p

I like that.... special.... *lol*..... the best part of it was that the other women in the room were overheard making comments about that ladies behavior. It was most gratifying to hear the other women bring her down a notch for not accepting.... she completely refused my offer and sat on the floor..... special is right.

[LifeMaiden]

Chivalry can be found, but it is so rare these days, you would have better luck tripping over a 5 carat diamond ring in downtown Manhattan during rush hour with a blindfold on.

I can remember getting yelled at by a "womans right activist" for standing up in a room to give her my chair during a seminar. It was not a pretty argument, but the gist of it was that I was taught that a man stands and offers his chair when a woman enters the room.

I actually LIKE that my wife runs things.


Well now see, that's what I blame feminists for. If women's rights activists weren't so stupid about things, they would see that a man being a gentleman is something that should be TREASURED, not yelled at. It's a strange thing why they would equate that with being equal. I guess maybe some women just can't appreciate those gallant gestures. Here's what strikes me as funny. A guy buddy was telling me that he went out with a gal and she got annoyed at him when he opened the car door for her, yet, she expected him to pay for the dinner. Like, " yeah dude, don't open that car door, I can do it myself. " Well okay, this is what I would have told her if I was the guy, " Hey don't expect me to pay for dinner, you can do it yourself too."



I love it when guys do stuff like that. And I also don't mind holding open the door for a guy sometimes too.


There was a stupid feminist statement Gloria Steinem said: " Women need men like fish need bicycles." Well that's the problem right there...by saying that 'women don't need men' ....she just defeated the whole purpose of the women's movement. We DO need men, and admitting that you need a man sometims doesn't make a woman any less powerful or less equal.

[BroncoCop]

Well now see, that's what I blame feminists for. If women's rights activists weren't so stupid about things, they would see that a man being a gentleman is something that should be TREASURED, not yelled at. It's a strange thing why they would equate that with being equal. I guess maybe some women just can't appreciate those gallant gestures. Here's what strikes me as funny. A guy buddy was telling me that he went out with a gal and she got annoyed at him when he opened the car door for her, yet, she expected him to pay for the dinner. Like, " yeah dude, don't open that car door, I can do it myself. " Well okay, this is what I would have told her if I was the guy, " Hey don't expect me to pay for dinner, you can do it yourself too."



I love it when guys do stuff like that. And I also don't mind holding open the door for a guy sometimes too.


There was a stupid feminist statement Gloria Steinem said: " Women need men like fish need bicycles." Well that's the problem right there...by saying that 'women don't need men' ....she just defeated the whole purpose of the women's movement. We DO need men, and admitting that you need a man sometims doesn't make a woman any less powerful or less equal.



Well put!!!!

I will be the first to congradulate that young man in the above post.

I will also be the first to admit I could not make it without a woman.... tried that and failed miserably

[LifeMaiden]

Actually it was ME who told him he should have said to that chick, " Hey, since you wanted to open your own car door, now you should pay for your own dinner..." LOL. My guy buddy is kind of shy. But he was saying that it bothered him that women don't seem to appreciate the little things guys do...and I said, " No, there are women who do. The ones who don't can ride their own bicycles under water with those fish...."


Back to the women pastor thing....isn't Billy Graham's daughter poised to take over his ministry rather than his son???

[BroncoCop]

Actually it was ME who told him he should have said to that chick, " Hey, since you wanted to open your own car door, now you should pay for your own dinner..." LOL. My guy buddy is kind of shy. But he was saying that it bothered him that women don't seem to appreciate the little things guys do...and I said, " No, there are women who do. The ones who don't can ride their own bicycles under water with those fish...."


Back to the women pastor thing....isn't Billy Graham's daughter poised to take over his ministry rather than his son???


I believe you are correct, but I have also heard that his son will be assisting her.... I am not really sure as I have not heard much said about it lately, but the last I heard was that she was taking over.

LOL

underwater bicycling......LOL

Try THAT Lance Armstrong!

I actually have attended churches with femal pastors, as a visitor. I found their messages to be very biblical, and very direct. I don't have a problem with women giving the messages, and preaching and such. A lot of women I know could give a very powerful and relavent message.

I just don't think they should be the actual "head" of the church. It just reminds me too much of Genesis 3:16

Then He said to the woman, "You will bear children with intense pain and suffering. And though your desire will be for our husband, he will be your master."

[LifeMaiden]

There's a huge part of me that, despite how independent and strong I am as a woman, that a man should take charge of many aspects in life. I can't respect a man who allows himself to be henpecked by his wife or girlfriend, and it wouldn't seem right if I could kick more butt than a man can. More women these days should not be afraid to admit that they would like to have a chivalrous gentleman in their lives who will walk BY their side, not AHEAD of them, or BEHIND them, and who isn't afraid to take charge and protect her.


In terms of a woman being the 'head' of a church, I can't ever picture a woman being a pope, nor would I want to see one. As I said before, women in the Church ( Catholic) can wield immense power as nuns, Mother Superiors, and I believe as laypersons. Nearly all the teachers at my schools were nuns, and the head of the educational department was a very tall, intimidating nun named Sister Ann Francis. She made the priests AND the monsignor tremble in her presence.

[Wendygirljp]

The issue of people acting in a mature manner has a wide spectrum, obviously, as human nature is a strange nature in itself. I think sometimes we filter what we see, sometimes focusing on one point and missing another.

Yes, even on the Tokyo train system, some men are "MCP" in the seat department, but at the same time, there are some others who are more than willing to give up their seat for a lady, a senior, or someone handicapped in some obvious way, even with the seats reserved specifically for those "in need". In fact, the number seems to be about equal. We have even seen television commercial messages (CM) about being extra aware for those who need to sit down, do help the younger folks to learn that it is important.

As you may or may not know, unlike in the U.S., we in Japan are taught from elementary school to think of others' feelings, and not to be so "self-sufficient" (nice way to say self-centered or egocentric.) Parents start that lesson even earlier on.

I hope even just a few who may read this idea will either continue to assist others with kindness, or for those who do NOT do so, begin to assist others with kindness. It comes back, either way! It is like an amplified echo. What you "put out" comes back to you much louder.

[LifeMaiden]

The issue of people acting in a mature manner has a wide spectrum, obviously, as human nature is a strange nature in itself. I think sometimes we filter what we see, sometimes focusing on one point and missing another.

Yes, even on the Tokyo train system, some men are "MCP" in the seat department, but at the same time, there are some others who are more than willing to give up their seat for a lady, a senior, or someone handicapped in some obvious way, even with the seats reserved specifically for those "in need". In fact, the number seems to be about equal. We have even seen television commercial messages (CM) about being extra aware for those who need to sit down, do help the younger folks to learn that it is important.

As you may or may not know, unlike in the U.S., we in Japan are taught from elementary school to think of others' feelings, and not to be so "self-sufficient" (nice way to say self-centered or egocentric.) Parents start that lesson even earlier on.

I hope even just a few who may read this idea will either continue to assist others with kindness, or for those who do NOT do so, begin to assist others with kindness. It comes back, either way! It is like an amplified echo. What you "put out" comes back to you much louder.



America has always prided itself on individualism....rather than thinking about the group, which is more common in other cultures such as Japan where individualism is more suppressed and considered somewhat selfish.

[Sunrise]

A cultural standard that runs rather counter to Christian teachings, interestingly. I guess it started out as a means toward self-responsibility, which is good, but it's become a monster. The human tendency toward selfishness given free reign.

That's cool about those commercials, Wendygirljp. It's neat that people in your culture are taught to defer to the comforts of others; it's something I really want to instill in my kids, and you're right; American culture can make that difficult.

That's really what chivalry was supposed to be about, I think. Not treating women as "weaker", but showing deference to them out of respect. If you were traveling with some important foreign dignitary or somebody from a royal family, you would give up your seat, etc. to them out of respect for their position. Why did it suddenly become degrading to women when men did the same for them?

[Narborg]

Hay.
IO dont have a problem with women in ministry. What people have to remember is that Paul was writing in a time when women got vertally no education compered to men and that in Jewish cutre men and women were separated. What Paul was saying was aclelly quite libreal for the time. I dont have a bible on me, so I want coment futher now.

[Quentilian]

I do not believe that the role of the woman should be as a pastor, a leader in the church, simply because this is what has been taught in the Scriptures (that is, I believe Pastor Paul, Paul the Apostle, spoke concerning this particular issue).

At the church I attend, it is also like this: the man leads the flock as pastor. However, what is critical to note is that we understand and recognize the extreme importance the woman has in the Body of Christ. We are certainly not against women being missionaries, and spreading the Gospel to others. And the senior pastor's wife leads the women's joyful life Bible study, a program that has been held and enjoyed by women for a couple of decades or so.

I've always understood and gratefully accepted that the woman was made not from Adam's head, nor from Adam's foot, but from his rib, his side. The woman is equal to the man, and as such plays such a critical role not only in the church, but in society at large.

But for the woman, I do not believe she should lead a congregation. It just isn't the role the woman was meant to fill.

i agree. though im no against women as speakers :o

[Mrs.E.Cullenukinfuts]

I think that women and men should be able to preach, it's not like the women are going to say something totally different from the men it's going to be the same, but some people don't like that i guess :p

[LifeMaiden]

I think that women and men should be able to preach, it's not like the women are going to say something totally different from the men it's going to be the same, but some people don't like that i guess :p


It takes some time to get used to I think also...because men have always held that position traditionally. I'm usually pretty surprised if I turn on the tv and there's a religious show with a female preacher or pastor. There's this one Catholic channel where the nuns pretty much get equal screen time along with the friars and priests. I like this one young nun who hosts an art history show :D

[she-elfwarrior19]

I also think that anyone who wants to preach God's word can feel free to do so.

[-Princess of the Bow-]

I don't agree. I believe men are like the head of homes and churches. My mom says that God put Adam (a man) in charge of the garden of Eden and in the Bible it says that women are supposed to submit to their husbands and the husbands should be over them. But for a woman to be the head of a church it would put her higher than her husband.

[Goldenrod22]

I think as badly as we would like to change the Bible's word about deacons, elders, and pastors in order to fit our 'modern' age, we have to be biblically honest in approaching anything as serious as leading a church. The Bible clearly states in the New Testament the requirements for an elder, deacon, or pastor, one of which is being husband of one wife. In this outline for leaders, there is no indication that the role should be shared by a woman.

Beyond that, though, is the deeper issue behind why women are asking the question, 'Can I be a pastor?'
The tendency today is to answer the question by allowing our modern day culture to affect how we interpret any of the Bible's standards. It then becomes not about 'Can I be a pastor?' but instead 'The Bible is outdated as it applies to women, so can I be a pastor?'
When you do this, allowing the current feminist movement or the popular opinion to rule you and your opinion of the Bible, you lose sight of what it means fundamentally to be a man or woman of Christ. You are saying with your question (note her that I'm not above questioning, I am always looking for answers to certain questions about heaven and such) that the Bible only applies when it matches the culture.
Do you see what I'm saying?
If the Bible tells of women and the roles they were in (that have changed dramatically since then) simply as ones of submission to their father, Father in heaven, and husband (if they had one), then maybe I'm missing out on why this is such a tragedy to women today. You didn't see Priscilla in the Bible bemoaning being the poor, burdened, uneducated wife of Aquila. Neither did she pastor or lead a church. She gladly helped at Aquila's side with the work they did in Christ's name.

[Adanedhel]

Women offer a different type of leadership and perspective that is so very vital to the church. It would be wrong to supress their envolvement.

[broken.]

I think as badly as we would like to change the Bible's word about deacons, elders, and pastors in order to fit our 'modern' age, we have to be biblically honest in approaching anything as serious as leading a church. The Bible clearly states in the New Testament the requirements for an elder, deacon, or pastor, one of which is being husband of one wife. In this outline for leaders, there is no indication that the role should be shared by a woman.

Beyond that, though, is the deeper issue behind why women are asking the question, 'Can I be a pastor?'
The tendency today is to answer the question by allowing our modern day culture to affect how we interpret any of the Bible's standards. It then becomes not about 'Can I be a pastor?' but instead 'The Bible is outdated as it applies to women, so can I be a pastor?'
When you do this, allowing the current feminist movement or the popular opinion to rule you and your opinion of the Bible, you lose sight of what it means fundamentally to be a man or woman of Christ. You are saying with your question (note her that I'm not above questioning, I am always looking for answers to certain questions about heaven and such) that the Bible only applies when it matches the culture.


Okay, this is how I'm interpreting what you're saying (please correct me if I'm wrong). You're saying that I shouldn't even be asking if I can be a pastor because by doing so I'm stepping outside of what the Word of God says and into popular or feminist opinion? That dosen't seem fair to me. I don't want to be a pastor just because the world says that as a woman I should be demanding placement in a male-dominated profession. I'm not trying to get power just so I can rule over people, I'm serving God and the church in the capacity that He's called me into.

[Solya]

Women are just as rooted and as wise as men, so I see no reason why they should be deprived of having the role of a leader within any sort of church. :) The reason why the roles of women in the Bible have always been those of supporters is because that's just the way it was back then... that's why there's nothing in the Bible which says that women should be allowed to become priests/pastors and so on and so forth.

No man is better than a woman. No man will ever be above me and I will not submit myself to a lesser role than that of an equal. Fundamentally speaking I am just as valuable as a man, and I am a child of God just like a man is. Women should be allowed to play a critical role in church because we were born equal to men. A woman can be just as filled with love for God's teachings as a man. Why should we keep silent and let the men reign over everything? Our opinions are just as valuable as theirs.

[inkspot]

Solya, since you reject mainstream Christian teaching, I am curious about the foundation for your opinions of what ought to happen in a Christian church.

(Not that I disagree with you -- I am just curious about your interest in and strong opinions on issues dealing with orthodox Christianity when you have rejected it.)

[Solya]

Foundation for my opinions are still the facts that I grew up in a Roman Catholic family, that I visit the church here in town whenever I need support and that I visit a priest who is a close friend of the family every once in a while. :) My rejection of some teachings doesn't mean that I have closed down every door which leads back to my childhood. I have strong opinions on Christianity because my entire environment is Roman Catholic. ;)

[inkspot]

Foundation for my opinions are still the facts that I grew up in a Roman Catholic family, that I visit the church here in town whenever I need support and that I visit a priest who is a close friend of the family every once in a while. :) My rejection of some teachings doesn't mean that I have closed down every door which leads back to my childhood. I have strong opinions on Christianity because my entire environment is Roman Catholic. ;)
I see, thank you.

[anna.the.gentle]

I agree with Saruman 100%. I couldnt have said it better
i second that motion!

[noticeablyNARNIAN]

I believe that sex should really play no role in the decision of pastor/minister/youth pastor. I believe that a woman who is powerful in her faith, and who has a connection with God, would be just as well-suited to the job as a male pastor.

I do believe that God does not care about what gender leads a church. I believe he cares that the person is truly devoted to Him and His word.