Okay, going out on a limb here…

I belong to a conservative denomination that ordains women (Wesleyan).

But here’s where I find the conflict in my own heart:

Are some women called to MINISTRY?  Absolutely.

Are women called to be PASTORS (especially senior or solo pastors)?  I don’t know.

I have to admit my own discomfort at having women be senior or solo pastors, mainly because I’m still struggling with the issue of authority over men.

I don’t think there are any doubts that there are some women who would do better than some men in the pulpit, but does that over-ride the authority issue?

Education opportunities for women exist now like they didn’t in NT times.  But does that over-ride the authority issue?

Can women serve on staffs led by men and still teach men?  Still working through this one..

Again, I’m still working through all this.  But one thing I think we need to be careful of is that we don’t frame the debate in terms that evoke “civil rights” or “oppression” of women in the pulpit.

The bottom-line issue is this: does scripture allow for women as senior or solo pastors?  On what grounds (on any side of the argument)?

Brian

I think it is ok for a woman to serve in a Pastoral role.  I too have problem with it being a S.P. role.  I would acknolwedge however that could be my own person biasis.  We teach men are to be spiritual leader of the house hold.  Are they not to be the spiritual leader in the church?

Todd, you are a glutton for punishment, posting gender articles three weeks in a row.

What I totally appreciate about the comments above is the tone (unlike other posts on this forum).  Am I imagining it, or is it more common (though not always, as evidenced by the posts above and a few others last week) for those in the complementarian camp to have a posture that sounds like an attack:

“this is what the scripture CLEARLY says, there are no other valid interpretations, and if you believe anything else you are sinning, twisting scripture to make is fit your personal agenda, pridefully unwilling to submit to biblical authority. . . .”

Whereas those in the egalitarian camp seem to more often have a posture that recognizes legimate diversity of opinion:

“this is MY UNDERSTANDING about what scripture says, on this particular issue, about which there are various interpretations, each one has validity and can be defended scripturally.  This is how I defend my understanding scripturally, but I could be wrong.”

Am I (as a practical egalitarian) just not hearing my own attacking posture on this issue?  Am I overly sensitive, feeling attacked (again, not by the comments above) rather than invited into a discussion with brothers and sisters who love Jesus just like me?  Am I blind to the militant feminists who go on the attack because I don’t want to see them?  Maybe they are out there, but I sure haven’t found them here on MMI (unless I’m one of them and don’t know it).

If there was doubt that this issue IS NOT clear in scripture, we need only to consider the fact that Mohler and Page, the So. Baptist Convention men quoted in the article, supported the ordination of women in the 1980’s and have now changed their minds.  The history of numerous denominations shows an indecisiveness on this issue, with changes in the “official position” based on the view of whoever is in power.  Obviously the bible didn’t change, and bible scholars of today aren’t smarter than the bible scholars of yesterday.  Again . . . it’s just that after prayerful and carefully study, and the best of hermeneutical homework . . . people end up with different answers.

Why is that so hard to admit for some people?

Wendi

I’m a man and my senior pastor is a woman (I’m a Methodist) and she brought me to God. I was dragged into church under protest by my wife for the sake of my kid. I was “wounded” by fundamentalists as a youth and one time said I would never enter a church again.  There are some things women are better at than men, and vice-versa of course, and one of them is healing.

Personally, I think the world would be a far better place if half our leaders were women, thereby significantly reducing the amount of testosterone-fueled decisions

I saw this post and said, “Stay away, let them handle it.  Don’t go near the bright light.” But here I am, drawn like a moth to a flame, in the middle of a conversation that has great potential to offend and great potential to mend.  Here are four questions I am asking of myself. 

Is my mind made up on this subject?

Do I really know what I believe the bible says about this topic? 

What would I have to see from scripture to make me change my mind on this subject?

Am I open enough in my heart to see something new? 

I am trying to answer these questions before I jump into what could be really lively.  The last conversation proved to be helpful and positive for me, thanks to those of you who engaged so patiently.  I do have a hunch that I am more firmly planted than I care to admit, partly because I want to be planted somewhere else but struggle to get there.  So before I really jump in I am going to “try” to answer these questions for myself.  I would ask you all to answer them too but don’t wait to jump in as I am counting on some of you to teach me.  Thanks, Leonard

Peter,

I hear you.  But does “example” always mean “doctrine?”

One of the principles I try to follow with studying scripture is that just because something happened in scripture doesn’t mean that it is supposed to happen or that it is supposed to be normative Christian experience.

There is a difference between narrative literature and doctrinal literature.  And while each type can contain portions of the other type, we need to be careful that we are not mixing the two in our interpretation.

Example: The apostles healed people in the book of Acts.  But does this mean that all believers are supposed to heal?  No.  Paul, in a doctrinal statement, says that not everyone has the gift of healing.

In the same way, the presence of women leaders in the NT does not necessarily mean that it is what scripture teaches should be the case.  It could be the same as my example in the previous post - men weren’t present or willing to take leadership, so it fell on the shoulders of godly women who were willing to step up and be used by God.

Restating for emphasis: I am struggling through this as well.  I have a leaning, which is probably obvious in my posts, but I want to make sure I am true to the bottom-line issue - does scripture allow it?  If so, then I must be willing as well, regardless of my initial leanings.

Brian

Can I say again (as I have on other recent MMI threads on this topic) I am SOOOOO grateful for the opportunity for thoughtful, honest, respectful discussion on this topic with some brothers, some “dudes” (to be “Driscollish) on this topic (thanks Todd!!).

I absolutely agree with you Brian, we need to be cautious about allowing our experience to inform our interpretation of scripture.  It should be the other way around, don’t you think?  However, that doesn’t mean that the experience of Israel under Deborah or Roland under his female pastor (as examples) is invalidated by using the scriptural filter, does it? 

There are probably better examples, but I think about the issue of polygamy.  Why is it that scripture doesn’t explicitly call this practice sin in either the OT or NT?  Israel was regularly chastised for taking pagan wives, but not for taking multiple wives (at least not as clearly or as intensely).  Paul advised young Timothy that elders must be the husband of “one wife,” but is this an admonishment against divorce (as many see it), or against the common cultural practice of polygamy?  This gets to the question Brian posed in response to Peter citing scriptural examples of women in leadership; [just because something happened in scripture doesn’t mean that it is supposed to happen or that it is supposed to be normative Christian experience.]

We would never think that polygamy (or slavery or women being required to cover their heads, or, or, or . . . ) as normative, doctrine that stands for all time and history.  So with scripture being, what . . . at least 65% narrative, and another significant amount reasonably understood contextually, how do we know when something IS normative?  I kept waiting for this discussion in seminary and it never happened.

So since my seminary professors never told us how to figure this one out (gratefully, they never TOLD us how to figure anything out), on this issue I find biblical justification for a contextual interpretation of the women in ministry leadership question because I apply two other factors.  First, what is the trajectory of biblical history as God is revealing Himself and His kingdom to humanity?  Take polygamy again.  During OT history, perhaps (this is pure speculation) this practice is allowed because women simply would not have been able to survive if not for the practice of men taking (and caring for) multiple wives.  Consider the plight of Ruth and Naomi (not that Boaz was a polygamist, but that these women could not even survive unless one of them remarried).  It seems completely reasonable, when considering the trajectory of God’s revelation, that God, through history, moved us toward a time when both scripture and culture aligned with His plan for one man and one woman as His plan for the family.  Similarly, I believe history is moving us toward a time where in ministry (note that I did not say marriage or life in general) aligns with God’s perfect kingdom plan and gender is irrelevant (which is partly why I apply Gal. 3:28 here).  Secondly, how does this doctrine, which I am considering to be normative, square with those things that I know unequivocally of God’s character from scripture?  God’s character, based on what we learn of Him in scripture, does not seem to discriminate between men and women in relation to the distribution of gifts or the advancement of His kingdom.

And finally (and most difficultly), on this issue, I have to put my heart in front of the mirror.  I have to ask myself questions not unlike those Leonard is asking himself.

How is my scriptural interpretation influenced by my own selfish ambition and pride (and I’d better not answer “not at all”)?

Really, how willing am I to have my mind changed?  I claim to “landed” in a particular place after careful and prayerful study.  So how does (or should or can) the HS influence me once I’ve “landed” somewhere? 

And the most difficult question for me as a woman is; what does this issue say about my ability to hear my own call from the Lord?  Nine times out of ten, when I tell someone that I just graduated from seminary, I’m asked “will you be going into women’s ministry or children’s ministry?” More than once, when I’ve expressed that I sense my calling to serve the local church as a generalist (Xpastor or Equipping Pastor) rather than specialist (women’s, children’s, etc), I’ve been told that I could not possibly be hearing this particular calling from the Lord, because such a calling simply doesn’t square with scripture.  Immediately my defensiveness and pride wells up and I’m ashamed to respond (which doesn’t mean I don’t).

Can we keep talking? 

Peter and Daniel, I understand (appreciate and agree with) your contextual take on the passages restricting women and the biblical examples of women in leadership, but how did you decide what is contextual and what is normative?  Or asked another way, does making a cultural context case (as you’ve done here Daniel) automatically mean that the passage SHOULD NOT be understood as normative?  How is it that you’ve managed to come to this conclusion?

Thanks again for the discussion.  Sorry for the long post, but I’ve got multiple thoughts here.

Wendi

Like Leonard said Wendi, your insights are invaluable.  It’s so nice to have you to talk with. 
You asked: “does making a cultural context case automatically mean that the passage SHOULD NOT be understood as normative?”
To which I answer (and I think you’d agree) ‘NO’.  Rather, all that it proves is that it may not be normative.  One then has the need to balance scripture with scripture, and more specifically with the movement of the Spirit through scripture (and so I think you’re correct to appeal to Gal. 3:28 here).  I find Webb’s ‘redemptive movement hermeneutic’ a wee bit simplistic for my taste, but I think it is essentially correct--we are to discern the movement of the Spirit through the thoroughly enculturated episodes of scriptural narrative.
I highly highly highly recommend this article by bishop NT Wright for some more nitty gritties on how this actually works, for those of you who are interested…
Much love,
-Daniel-

I finished looking at this issue a long time ago, which is maybe why I didn’t engage THIS discussion so much.

Priscilla, Junia, Deborah, et cetera… The specific examples of women in leadership in the Bible are too many to be ignored, unlike other literature of the period and before. I have found none of the arguments against women in leadership compelling, in some cases I have found them ridiculous (not the people who’ve posted here, though… very balanced indeed).

Wow, I was going to totally sit this discussion out--until I read what Rosemary had to say!

I am in total agreement with seeing Christ as Head of the Church, Not because he was fully human (male), but absolutely because Christ Is Fully God.  It’s God whom I follow.

Leonard et all,

Thanks for staying engaged in this discussion.

Maybe I shouldn’t have used the word “irrelevant.” I think you are right, from a kingdom perspective our uniquenesses (in gifting, gender, race, social strata, etc.) would be even more relevant, but not hierarchical or in any way divisive.  Rather, I envision (based on Gal.) that “in Christ” we ALL submit all we are to one another for the sake of the gospel.  Jesus gathers it all up, those differences matter and don’t matter at the same time.  They matter to Him but stop mattering to us.

A while back on MMI (maybe on this thread or maybe another), you (Leonard) used the example of you and I doing ministry in India, where gender would matter very much in regard to the advancement of the gospel.  I agree with you, and on a mission team with you in that setting, would gratefully cover my head, keep silent, allowing you and the other men to be the voice of the gospel.  I submit that this setting however falls short of the “kingdom.” If the kingdom were to be fully realized (which it will not be this side of heaven) we would each work in the role assigned to us based on our God-given wiring; not based on race, gender, or social strata.  This is how I apply Galatians and where, perhaps, you and I disagree.  Where we agree is that this passage is about unity and equity.

And one more note about the very few biblical examples of women in ministry leadership . . .

That there are any female names listed as leaders in ministry is HUGE, given the cultural context of both the OT and NT.  We can argue about Junia, but that is really not the point.  The point is to have ANY women listed as leaders or teachers went completely against the cultural norms, and I believe that the HS inspired these limited insertions to help us understand the trajectory . . . where God wanted us to head, long before heading in such a direction would have been considered by the culture of the day.  Without the inspiration of the HS, subtle inferences to women leaders would have been left out completely.  But scripture is inspired, and includes (albeit limited) women in leadership roles.  There is (IMO) a reason for this. 

Just my opinion here . . . and I love the dialogue.

Wendi