Church, Religion, Jesus Christ, Christianity and Christian salvation
 

Love, Christianity, Jesus and Salvation: HOME


To Receive Future Posts By Email, Enter Your Email Address


Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

 Subscribe To RSS


Previous Articles

The Lord's Supper Is Radical Hospitality?

United Methodist Church Preaching Another Gospel

Should A Pastor Mislead Small Children Concerning ...

Scripture Does Not Change

Revelation 3:15,16 - Neither Hot Nor Cold

The Entire Bible

Jeremiah 31:33

Is Hell Real?

Psalm 52:7

Psalm 53:2,3

Salvation

- Invitation

- Salvation Prayer

- Perhaps Today

- Eternal Life

- How Good Do You Have To Be?


Topics

- Christianity's Greatest Enemy

- Does God Bless America?

- Christian Faith

- Marriage and Divorce


Resources

Helpful Resources

Other Web Sites

Online Bookstore


Talk With Us

Letters:
Read Our eMail


Powered by Blogger


Love, Christianity, Jesus and Salvation

It seems like Christianity and Jesus are increasingly under attack. What's going on? What we'll be looking at is what happens when Christians use human wisdom to interpret the Bible, twisting scripture away from its intended message. This blog is dedicated to using Scripture itself to interpret and help us understand Scripture. You are welcome to add your comments and thoughts. Other viewpoints are welcome. Disagreements are welcome.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

United Methodist Church - Women As Pastors

My last four posts may seem like I'm attacking the United Methodist Church. I'm not. Each of the problems I wrote about are not the result of United Methodist doctrine. United Methodist doctrine, as published in the Book of Discipline, is sound with only two exceptions that I've noticed... one of which I'll discuss in this article -- women as pastors.

The United Methodist Church allows the ordination of women as pastors. As we will see, although not prohibited by the Bible, there is a Biblical problem with this in some circumstances.

An article in the current issue of The Progressive Christian Magazine (a United Methodist related publication) discusses the topic of women as pastors. I'd like to use that article as the jumping off point for this discussion. There is a lot in the article and I'll talk about those other points in a future post.

The article is called "Blaming Our Ugliness on God" by The Rev. Scott Campbell. Concerning women as pastors he begins by stating:

"...even more distressing is the willingness of so many religious people to offload responsibility for the basest inclinations onto Scripture, canon law and books of church order, thus insulating themselves from the responsibility to be personally accountable for their decisions and actions."

This statement sounds like someone who is claiming Judges 21:25 as the way to live our lives -- "everyone did as he saw fit". Except in Judges everyone doing as they see fit, making their own decisions and actions independent of God, was not a good thing. Here Rev. Campbell is implying it is a good thing.

Rev. Campbell continues in the next paragraph by implying that not allowing women as pastors is something conservatives incorrectly blame on the Bible. He feels they should take personal responsibility for this:

"Bishops and others in authority would have to look candidates for ministry in the eye and declare, 'I judge you unfit for ministry because you are a woman. I hereby take full responsibility for denying your call.'""

In other words, Rev. Campbell is saying that the Bible does not prohibit women from being pastors, it is the men in some churches who are preventing women from being pastors. We'll look at scripture and see if this is true in a moment.

A few paragraphs later he states:

"We could go on to cite numerous all-too-familiar instances of the ways in which even the most conservative churches pick and choose which Biblical mandates they consider binding. Few 'Bible-believing' churches today, for example, insist on a literal adherence to Paul's injunction against women speaking in church. Suffice it to say that no sane person can claim to be an absolute biblical literalist."

He's stated two things: the Bible does not prohibit women from being pastors and although the Bible says women may not speak in church, no one follows this command. This implies that if the Bible did prohibit women from being pastors, we should ignore that prohibition. The reality is that his understanding of these teachings is 180 degrees un-Biblical in both cases.

Women Speaking In Church

So what does the Bible say? Here are the verses that talk about women not speaking in church:

1 Corinthians 14:34 says, "women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak..."

It seems straight-forward and clear... except that by quoting just this verse we are reading it totally out of context.

In 1 Corinthians 14, verses 26-40 Paul is talking about conducting worship services in an orderly manner. For example, people speaking in tongues or speaking prophecy are instructed to not do so all at once, but speak in an orderly manner so that it may strengthen the church.

How we interpret a verse must fit within the context of the surrounding verses as well as the entire Bible. In other parts of the Bible we read about women prophets and women deaconesses. These are positions that would result in women speaking in church. Also notice that in verse 26 Paul says "everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, or revelation, a tongue or interpretation." The term "everyone" includes men and women, so both men and women are speaking and worshipping in church.

If he is not telling women they can't speak in church, what is Paul talking about in verse 34? Notice that verse 35 goes on to say:

"If they [women] want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home..." The overall problem Paul is discussing is disorderly behavior in church. Apparently some women in the Corinthian church were behaving in a disorderly manner, speaking out of turn, questioning others and disrupting the church service. He is telling them to be quiet, don't disrupt the service. They should raise their inquires and objections at home, so they can be dealt with in a manner that is not disruptive.

This is why conservative churches do not take these verses to mean woman can not speak in church. That is not consistent with other Scripture and these verses do not say that. They say that women (and men) should not be speaking out in a disruptive manner in church.

Women as Pastors

The verse that is taken to say women can not be pastors is 1 Timothy 2:12. However, this verse does not say that. Here is what it says:

"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man..."

Again we can not yank this verse out of it's context. We must understand it based on the immediate context of the verses around it, as well as in the context of the complete Bible.

This instruction is given in the context of Paul's instructions for worship (verses 1 through 15). In other places in the Bible women do have authority over men. For example, Deborah was a prophetess and a leader of Israel. She had authority over men. In the 1st Timothy context Paul is saying that women are not to have spiritual authority over men. They are not to be teachers of men in the context of spiritual teaching.

This means that a woman may be a pastor, if she is pasturing a church that only has women and children. Since part of a pastor's job is to teach and be a spiritual authority, a woman may not be a pastor of a church that has men as members.

For example, in a large church a woman might be the administrative head of the church, placing her in administrative authority over a male pastor. She may teach the pastor skills such as accounting or facility management. But she may not be in spiritual authority over the male pastor.

Paul makes it very easy for us to put this command in the context of the rest of Scripture. Paul goes to Genesis to back it up.

1 Timothy 2:12-14 says: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner."


Labels: , ,

2 Comments:

At 9:37 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am a theologically conservative united methodist pastor. Probably not as far right theologically as yourself, though. I found your articles related to your experience in a particular United Methodist Church interesting because I too have delt with Progressive Chrsitianity in my congregation. I had a self-proclaimed Progressive Chrsitian in my church who was going to teach Progressive Christianity to his Sunday School Class. After reviewing the cirriculum I did not allow him to teach it because it was contrary to UM doctrine.

I do have one comment about this particular article though. You state that the magazine, "The Progressive Christian" is a UM related magazine. I do not believe it is. Here's what the magazine said about itself on its own website:

"The Progressive Christian is an independent religious magazine of commentary, news and reflection. It is published bi-monthly by the Boston Wesleyan Association, chartered in 1864 in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as a not-for-profit publisher of religious materials. Its predecessor publication, Zion's Herald, founded in 1823, was at the forefront of the 19th century Social Gospel movement and a pioneering witness to progressive Christianity throughout its distinguished 183-year history.

The Progressive Christian is unrelated to any official body of the church and therefore enjoys total editorial freedom as a responsible voice in the world of mainstream religious journalism. The editor is Stephen Swecker, a religious journalist and editor recognized nationally for more than a quarter of a century for his writing, editing and photographic abilities. Mr. Swecker lives and works in North Berwick, Maine."

 
At 9:02 PM, Blogger BrickBalloon said...

Pastor...

I praise the Lord for conservative voices in the United Methodist Church, and that those who believe in God's word for what it says are in the majority.

Thank you very much for your comment. I am glad to get this corrected. I have removed the statement that Progressive Christian is a UM related magazine.

I had not intended to imply it was an official publication of the United Methodist Church, but I was under the mistaken impression it was essentially a publication for United Methodists.

For example, while I was in New England it showed up in mailboxes of United Methodist lay leaders who did not know why they were receiving it. They had never heard of the magazine and had not subscribed or requested a copy. My father, who was one of the ones who received a copy, initially assumed it was from the church and that it reflected the official doctrinal position of the United Methodist church. I did some investigation on the internet and found the same statement you did. So we did cleared up that it was not an official United Methodist publication, although the name "Wesleyan" still brought John and Charles to mind with the resulting association with the Methodist church..

But I was not thinking outside of the United Methodist "box".

I apologize for the assumption that it was a publication for United Methodists. I was not thinking about members of other, more liberal denominations, that surely would be interested in the Progressive Christian magazine.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

  We'd love to hear from you: Contact us
  Mission to America, Inc. is a 501(3)c non-profit corporation
Mission to America Home | About Us | Site Map | Please Support Us
Mission To America home All contacts are confidential About us Please support us Salvation Through Christ Christian salvation