Showndown in Texas Over a Woman’s Turn in the Pulpit.
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Thu, August 28, 2008
- Viewed 201
- (60) comments so far
Another measure of the controversy is that Mark Bailey, president of Dallas Theological Seminary, has removed himself from a team of regular guest preachers at Irving Bible Church.
The Dallas seminary, which supplies pastors to Bible churches around the country, has long had close ties with Irving Bible Church. But Dr. Bailey said that he and his wife, Barby, were amicably distancing themselves for “personal convictions and professional reasons.”
The newspaper article continues: According to the elders, the Bible presents “an ethic in progress leading to full freedom for women to exercise their giftedness in the local church.”
But the elders also concluded that their office “seems to be biblically relegated to men.” So Mrs. Roese will preach at Irving Bible Church under the authority of an elder board that will continue to be all male.
That’s fine with Mrs. Roese, who noted with a laugh that she already works for her husband. Steve Roese is the church’s executive pastor.
Mrs. Roese is a seasoned women’s conference speaker who has preached to churches in the Northeast.
She said she has had much encouragement from women and men in the church but is aware of the controversy caused by the elders’ decision to have her preach.
“There are great theologians in the conservative evangelical world who come down on both sides,” she said. “I do want us to be loving in our disagreement. There’s something powerful in that.”
In summary, here’s what the elders concluded:
Elders of Irving Bible Church spent 18 months studying the question of women in ministry, including whether women should be allowed to preach. Their key conclusions:
•The accounts of creation and the fall (Genesis 1-3) reveal a fundamental equality between men and women.
•Women exercised significant ministry roles of teaching and leading with God’s blessing in both Old and New Testaments.
•Though the role of women was historically limited, the progress of revelation indicates an ethic in progress leading to full freedom for women to exercise their giftedness in the local church.
•Key New Testament passages restricting women’s roles were culturally and historically specific, not universal principles for all time and places.
•Though women are free to use all of their giftedness in teaching and leading in the church, the role of elder seems to be biblically relegated to men.
Click here to read the whole story...
What do you think?
According to the Dallas News, the all-male elder team at Irving Bible Church spent 18 months studying the Bible, reading other books, hearing guest speakers and praying about the possiblity of having Jackie Roese, the church's teaching pastor to women (and a doctor of ministry student) preach from their pulpit on a Sunday. They concluded that despite "problem" passages, the Bible doesn't prohibit a woman from instructing men in theological matters. Last Sunday, Roese spoke, for the first time, to all 3,500 plus people who attended Irving Bible Church.
According to Senior Pastor Andy McQuitty, "She's an eminently qualified and gifted preacher."
But in nearby Denton, TX, the Rev. Tom Nelson of Denton Bible Church begs to differ. He said his friends in Irving are on "dangerous" ground: "If the Bible is not true and authoritative on the roles of men and women, then maybe the Bible will not be finally true on premarital sex, the homosexual issue, adultery or any other moral issue," he said. "I believe this issue is the carrier of a virus by which liberalism will enter the evangelical church."
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
CS on Thu, August 28, 2008
A woman wants to teach in a church? That’s wonderful. Here’s the thing that gets me, though: the title of “Pastor” being applied to her.
How do we get around the commands of 1 Timothy 3 and how it says that a bishop (pastor) must be the husband of one wife? The ruler of his house? Having children (since there are even pastors who have no kids)?
—
CS
Nora Beerline on Fri, August 29, 2008
Phil,
You say, “This church, which is being cheered by most, has restricted women from being elders! Why isn’t there an outcry about that from the egalitarian side of this argument?” I guess you could say we are picking our battles. Or maybe you could say we are trying to be “unifying,” which, apparently is out of character for us egalitarians.
You also say, “Why do we think that submitting to authority means that we’re somehow “less than” or “less valued?” ‘To that I say, Phil, you are not the one who has been told that you cannot exercise your gifts or fulfill your calling.
And, Phil, with all due respect, the curse was put on the cross with Jesus—it is not a law that we have to adhere to. By your logic, women should not be given painkillers during childbirth either.
CS says, “A woman wants to teach in a church? That’s wonderful. Here’s the thing that gets me, though: the title of “Pastor” being applied to her.” So you selectively choose the portions of I Timothy that you wish to follow—the teaching part can be ignored, but the authority part must be strictly adhered to?
Also, do you really believe that having children is a requirement for being a bishop/overseer? I guess Jesus, Paul, and Timothy would be disqualified from church leadership on that basis as well.
Matthew—I ask you the same questions that Wendi posed—and one more. Do you really believe that women are saved through childbirth? If so, what about single or infertile women?
Wendi argued this much more eloquently than I, but the point is that it is a rare church indeed who is strictly and consistently faithful to a literal interpretation of I Timothy. Why is this? Because it is very difficult to keep 1/2 of your entire congregation from exercising their God-given gifts. And here’s the other dirty little secret—if most churches attempted to do so, ministry as we know it would fail because we women are everywhere, doing just about everything!
Phil DiLernia on Fri, August 29, 2008
Nora these strawman ... oops straw-woman ... arguments really don’t enhance your case at all. I tried to give you a biblical analysis and even expressed I had no problem with the woman giving a message. And I also express that at our church we have greatly increased opportunities for women in leadership of our church. Why did you retort with snotty and inflamatory remarks? Now let me respond to them.
I never said that egalitarians are not unifying but I did say that I thought it was strange that nobody got heated up over this church’s stance on eldership while they were defending women’s rights ... etc. I think the observation is a valid one. That’s my opinion. Your response about picking battles could have been debated but your childish addition of egalitarians not being unifying ... etc. ends all that. While unifying commentary and analysis may not be out of character for egalitarians they seem to be out of character for you.
You may find this hard to believe Nora but many men, including myself, have been told that they cannot excercise a “gift” for various different reasons in the church. By the way, I’ve also experienced that in Corporations and Athletics as well. One of the hardest lessons for humans to learn is to take a “no” with grace and trust in God as we move on. So don’t feel so “special” that you’ve been told “no” on occassion. You’re not the first, the last, nor is the female gender the only one to “suffer” such a horrible fate.
Your last comment was preceded “with all due respect” and then you quickly disrespect me! When did I say that women should not be given painkillers during childbirth! If that’s your use of argumentive logic I hope and pray that you do not represent a majority of women because you would be doing them a disservice. As a matter of fact this type of accusational, snotty, type of argumentation is probably what prompted Paul to tell women to “be silent in the churches.” You’re very 1st Century Nora.
Where in scripture does it say that the “curse” was put on the cross with Jesus? By that logic we would no longer be toiling for our work and earnings. Huh? Do you have experience with work? If so then you’ll know that we are all toiling still. In fact, women have joined men in their toil!
Our sins were put on the cross with Jesus and not the curse given in the Garden of Eden. Paul even says that those who depend on the Law live under a curse and this after Jesus’ death! (Galatians 3:10) So, it cannot be that Jesus nailed any curse on His cross.
Concerning the curse given in the Garden of Eden, The Bible says in Revelation 22:3 that AFTER we see Jesus in Heaven face to face that “there will no longer be any curse.” Until then we’ll be cursed with men and women arguing over who gets to do what, etc. etc.
Leonard on Fri, August 29, 2008
If you kid’s don’t stop that bickering I am going to pull this car over and I will settle it… Oops, sorry I forgot what I was going to say. Here it is.
Phil, I think I have an answer to at least one of your questions. You ask; 1- Why do we think that submitting to authority means that we’re somehow “less than” or “less valued?” That is at the heart of all of this.”
I think one reason is the ones who are in “authority” have made it seem so. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. I think we can see historically, societally, politically and religiously that men in power have a tendency to “lord it over” and give the impression that they really are better.
I also struggle with the “trajectory” of truth but I do believe in our understanding of the bible, we cannot ever forget the “who” in terms of time, place and audience.
I am good with the idea of women in ministry, women in the pastorate, women teaching and speaking in the church. I am not good with a woman as a Senior Pastor. I know it happens, I know some have much fruit, I know many who are and they are always welcome at my table and in my church, but my understanding has not sufficiently evolved to let me go that far. By the way we do have women preach and teach from the pulpit in our church (no not just on mothers day) and we have done it in teams, solo with and without me there.
CS – I think the words of Paul were not meant as a check list of markers but rather a description of the places where character is revealed. I do not think Paul was saying must be married, must be a father, must be a man… but rather if he is married, he should only have one wife at a time, if he is a father he should have a healthy home… Paul would never have written if HE/SHE because his time and culture could not sustain that thinking. The description of a pastor/elder IMO are markers of character not markers of gender, social status, fertility…
Peter Hamm on Fri, August 29, 2008
Leonard,
Thanks for not pulling the car over. Are we there yet? Huh?
Nora Beerline on Fri, August 29, 2008
Phil,
First of all, please let me apologize for what you characterize as “snotty and inflammatory remarks.” In a blog, or any written communication, tone is always difficult to convey and read, and perhaps we have misunderstood each other. Let me clarify a couple of things.
You said, “I never said that egalitarians are not unifying,” but let me point out in your first post that you said, “If this lady understood the controversy and was as gentle and UNIFYING as she seemed to come across why would she have allowed her church to spend 18 months on this issue” (emphasis added). This is where I inferred that you felt that her refusal to “stand down” as an egalitarian was not UNIFYING, your word, not mine. Quite frankly, you touched a hot button there for me, because often times, when egalitarians try to exercise their gifts, they are painted as being divisive, hence my response. Now if I read something into your comment that was not there, I do apologize, but it did sound as if you were villifying an eminently qualified teacher for wanting to minister to her congregation in the way that the Lord had equipped her. Also, the article stated that the Elders had spent 18 months studying and praying about this issue, which sounds like a good thing, so why would she interfere?
Then you say, “ If that’s your use of argumentive logic I hope and pray that you do not represent a majority of women because you would be doing them a disservice.” Agreed. I would absolutely be doing women a disservice if I claimed to represent a majority (or even minority) of them. There are many, many women far more able than I to defend their gifts and abilities. It is interesting to note that you extrapolate my comments to be representative of a majority of women, however. I never took your comments to be representative of a majority of men.
“As a matter of fact this type of accusational, snotty, type of argumentation is probably what prompted Paul to tell women to “be silent in the churches.” You’re very 1st Century Nora.” Wow. That’s just plain hurtful, Phil. I am sincerely sorry that my comments were so hurtful to you that they elicited that type of a response. (Of course, I have never seen any “snotty type of argumentation” from any of the men on this blog, so that must be why they are allowed to speak freely.)
As for the “curse” subject, I have already made this post too long, but I do feel that you are greatly reading into Genesis 3:16. In your earlier post it sounded to me as if you were suggesting that the curse of Genesis was a law or commandment that had to be followed, which is why I responded the way that I did. If my understanding was incorrect, I do apologize.
I don’t know you, Phil, but I do know that I do not want to enter into a hurtful conflict with a brother in Christ. For jumping the gun earlier, again, I am truly sorry.
Nora
Phil DiLernia on Fri, August 29, 2008
Hi Len! You never gave me an answer about those Starbucks coffees!
About your analysis that men have a history of lording their leadership over women ... who can argue that? Jesus addressed it so I’m guessing that this has been a problem for over 2,000 years and quite frankly since the beginning of human history. Isn’t that what God said would happen in the curse of Genesis 3?
At the same time, however, we need to teach the truth that submissiveness is a dirty word in the human genetic and yet a beautiful thing in God’s Kingdom. Hence, Jesus’ submissiveness results in the Name that is above all others and a person whom every knee would bow before!
Why can’t we teach those in authority NOT to lord it over those they are in authority to while at the same time teaching those that are under authority to be so in a loving submissive manner?
Why can’t we teach that the body is arranged as God has seen fit (1 Corinthians) in order for it to operate at maximum efficiency, unity, AND as a great witness to the world around us?
I hope we can agree that man’s sin against women in the past does not give women the right to sin in the present against men?
Phil DiLernia on Fri, August 29, 2008
Nora:
Now that we’re talking with each other let me clarify what confused you about my original post.
My comment about this lady was not meant to be stretched across the universe of egalitarians. It was an observation about her. She is teaching in the church, goes out on the road, etc. etc. so I found it interesting that she let her church go through this process for so long, and to the point of ruining their relationship with DTS, when she claimed to sympathize with those who were uncomfortable with her preaching. Why not stand down? It would have, in my opinion, showed more maturity. That’s my opinion only and I do not speak for the universe of men.
I’m sorry that I sinned when I said that comment about 1st Century women. It was meant to be snotty in return and I guess I succeeded. Please accept my apology.
But can’t you see that your use of the following comment about men’s attitudes as an excuse for your own is not the way to dialog? That renders your previous apology as somewhat tainted. Can’t you see that? If you can’t then I’m sorry again but I’m really trying to point something out. BTW, it’s just as wrong if and when men do it.
If you understood my comments on the curse as something to be “followed” then, in my opinion, that just exposes that this subject is a hot button for you and maybe too hot. In my opinion this is an opportunity to review your own heart as to why this subject means so much. Is it God’s calling or your own pride? Only honest reflection in prayer AND bible study can tell you which. I’m not qualified to do so.
However, just to be square, the curse is not something to be followed. The curse is an explanation for the reality which we face every day. And that reality of the human condition will not change, as I stated earlier, until we see Jesus face to face in Heaven (Revelation 22:3)
ALL THAT BEING SAID ... I’m for women increasing their use of gifts however this church’s biblical analysis, in my opinion, was lacking.
Let’s shake hands and move on.
Linda Stanley on Fri, August 29, 2008
Re: Wendi’s comments about women serving in ministry with different titles and pay - exists in many churches for whatever reason just like in the corporate world.
The point about women in leadership, women pastors, teaching, preaching, etc., - women I’ve spoken with that feel called to leadership, teaching, etc., aren’t interested in shoving men out of leadership to get to the top. They just want to be in the game and allowed to play - not sidelined. It’s not a competition or a ladder climbing thing. It’s about serving, contributing and helping build the Kingdom. There is plenty of room out there for both men and women to teach, preach and lead.
CS on Fri, August 29, 2008
Wendi:
“If it is not biblically correct for a woman to fill the role of pastor, then don’t allow her to fill such a role. But don’t change the title of a clearly pastoral job, lower the pay grade and then smugly persuade yourself that you are following some scriptural mandate.”
I agree wholeheartedly with this. Hypocrisy and inequality in compensation and titles are wrong.
Nora:
“So you selectively choose the portions of I Timothy that you wish to follow—the teaching part can be ignored, but the authority part must be strictly adhered to?”
Actually, I was thinking of Titus 2:3-5, which says that the older women should teach the younger women how to behave.
“Also, do you really believe that having children is a requirement for being a bishop/overseer? I guess Jesus, Paul, and Timothy would be disqualified from church leadership on that basis as well.”
I’m sorry to say, but this is a straw man argument. Jesus is Lord—that pretty much exempts Him from this discussion. Paul was an Apostle, which was different from being a bishop. As for Timothy, we know how Paul admonished him through 1 Timothy. My conclusion would be that he would follow God’s instructions for leadership as given through Paul, assuming that Timothy’s role was also to be a bishop.
Leonard:
“The description of a pastor/elder IMO are markers of character not markers of gender, social status, fertility…”
I see the character qualities to which you refer interspersed within the description of the office, such as good behavior, not after money, and not a novice. But, I still look at the words like, “aner,” and, “gune,” which, within their context, still mean clearly a man and wife. When you also add in things like 1 Timothy 2:12-13, where Paul lays out the Adam-Eve concept just before going into 1 Timothy 3, I have no choice to believe that gender is an imperative role in someone being called a, “pastor/bishop,” or not.
—
CS
No Difference on Fri, August 29, 2008
IMHO, (as a man in ministry), women have been unjustly oppressed in many of our southern-based US denoms. Where are the biblical examples of women in ministry in today’s exposition?
-Junias (Rom 16:7) was an apostle
-Phoebe (Rom 16:1) was a deacon
-2 John was written to a female pastor
-Priscilla’s role in ministry is astounding (not to mention much scholarly debate surrounding the fact that she may have authored Hebrews)
These examples only scratch the surface. AND…this all took place in the Ancient Near East where repression of female authority was the rule.
When will we escape our prejudices and biases in favor of the “priesthood of all believers” that many of us claim?
No Difference on Fri, August 29, 2008
@CS… gune also is normally translated “woman,” not always “wife.” It’s a contextual call.
Leonard on Fri, August 29, 2008
ND, much debate from the early fathers over whether Junias was a man or a woman or whether it says Junias was an apostle or approved by the apostles. It is not an open and shut case concerning Junias.
Phil DiLernia on Fri, August 29, 2008
So is this what the other church meant by “slippery slope?” From preaching sermons to being the Vice President of the United States!
http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/smile.gif
... this is only a joke ... I repeat ... this is only a joke!!
Have a great day!
No Difference on Fri, August 29, 2008
@Leonard… Actually any biblical passage relating to women in ministry has become “much debated.” E.g., why would various translators translate diakonos as deacon in every occurence except when it is in the context of women. It then becomes “servant.”
Page 2 of 4 pages < 1 2 3 4 >
Post a Comment