My response to… “it just seems kind of clear when the scripture says a woman should not be in a position of authority over men in the church. Pastor is a big position of authority.” And other arguments like this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's using the same hermeneutical rubric that led to saying slavery was okay because Paul said slaves should stay slaves... You have to look at the context, the greater picture of scripture as a whole, what other specific things in that book say to the topic you’re discussing, etc.
Hermeneutics are a lot harder than the "It says it, so I do it" logic that many Christians use on this issue. For instance, Paul also says women should never be in church without their head being covered. Do all the women reading this wear hats to church every Sunday? Probably not. Are they then sinning? Also probably not.
The folks here who are saying a 100% no to women preaching may very well be right, I think there's a lot of evidence that says they could be, but I think people tend to ignore the valid arguments of their opposition on this and other common hermeneutical difficulties.
So let me introduce those who say an absolute no to woman pastors to some difficulties therein. Not saying I think these are bulletproof, just trying to introduce some food for thought on the side that seems to usually be a little less well represented in conservative Christian circles.
1. The role of pastor today didn't really exist in the churches Paul planted. Paul appointed teams of elders who would work out the role pastors do today. So we really don't have a direct NT analogy to a pastor. The closest thing we have (in my opinion) is prophet or apostle, which you will see in the next point creates difficulties. And the thing is, the role of the apostle is to lead through service and self sacrifice, much more so than to teach which is the primary responsibility we give the pastor today. So the question here would be, what's wrong with a woman leading in service? Especially when in most church governing structures the pastor is only in "authority" in that he helps create the vision, the elders/presbyters/deacons usually make the policy decisions (which makes me ask why many who don't want women pastors are okay with female deacons?)
2. Paul mentions a female apostle (Junia), female missionaries (Priscilla, who taught Apollos, a man, about Christ), female prophets, and female deacons in his end of letter greetings. Do missionaries never teach? Apostles were required to be able to explicate the letters they delivered, does that not count as teaching? The primary role of prophets was and is to apply the word of God to our current lives, that sounds a lot like a pastor to me.
3. Would women being pastors be a major issue without Paul's comment in I Timothy? Would we have major moral qualms without that comment? Which is horribly hard to place contextually by the way.
There are other interesting points to explore, but I think these demonstrate that there are hard questions that need to be answered by both sides. Due to that fact, I don't like placing as much emphasis on my position on the subject as a lot of other reformed pastors do, because I don't think one can have a scriptural answer without reservations or at least knowing that their position has problems, therefore I don't believe it's an issue worthy of breaking fellowship or unity over.
Hermeneutics are a lot harder than the "It says it, so I do it" logic that many Christians use on this issue. For instance, Paul also says women should never be in church without their head being covered. Do all the women reading this wear hats to church every Sunday? Probably not. Are they then sinning? Also probably not.
The folks here who are saying a 100% no to women preaching may very well be right, I think there's a lot of evidence that says they could be, but I think people tend to ignore the valid arguments of their opposition on this and other common hermeneutical difficulties.
So let me introduce those who say an absolute no to woman pastors to some difficulties therein. Not saying I think these are bulletproof, just trying to introduce some food for thought on the side that seems to usually be a little less well represented in conservative Christian circles.
1. The role of pastor today didn't really exist in the churches Paul planted. Paul appointed teams of elders who would work out the role pastors do today. So we really don't have a direct NT analogy to a pastor. The closest thing we have (in my opinion) is prophet or apostle, which you will see in the next point creates difficulties. And the thing is, the role of the apostle is to lead through service and self sacrifice, much more so than to teach which is the primary responsibility we give the pastor today. So the question here would be, what's wrong with a woman leading in service? Especially when in most church governing structures the pastor is only in "authority" in that he helps create the vision, the elders/presbyters/deacons usually make the policy decisions (which makes me ask why many who don't want women pastors are okay with female deacons?)
2. Paul mentions a female apostle (Junia), female missionaries (Priscilla, who taught Apollos, a man, about Christ), female prophets, and female deacons in his end of letter greetings. Do missionaries never teach? Apostles were required to be able to explicate the letters they delivered, does that not count as teaching? The primary role of prophets was and is to apply the word of God to our current lives, that sounds a lot like a pastor to me.
3. Would women being pastors be a major issue without Paul's comment in I Timothy? Would we have major moral qualms without that comment? Which is horribly hard to place contextually by the way.
There are other interesting points to explore, but I think these demonstrate that there are hard questions that need to be answered by both sides. Due to that fact, I don't like placing as much emphasis on my position on the subject as a lot of other reformed pastors do, because I don't think one can have a scriptural answer without reservations or at least knowing that their position has problems, therefore I don't believe it's an issue worthy of breaking fellowship or unity over.
More responses to issues regarding women in ministry…
First, the difference between Deacons and Elders. There may be a difference in their roles today, and possibly even in the New Testament. If there is a difference in the NT it likely lies in the fact that deacons are not expected to teach, though this does not disqualify them from doing so. However, if you look at the list of qualifications for the two positions, Deacons in I Timothy 3 and Elders in Titus 1, they are remarkably similar. I have two points to make here. First, there are female deacons referred to in the closing of Paul's letters, and yet the requirements for deacons refer specifically to a man. Why then would there be exemptions to the norm for deacons but not elders? Second, if teaching is the main difference between Deacons and Elders, isn't it true that both have authority and thus women should be allowed to be neither?
Another hole in the argument against female pastors is the question, if we can't trust women to teach men, why do we trust them to teach other women? Or kids! Especially kids, easily impressionable young minds. We seem to equate teaching with authority in our culture, and yet I don't think how that's supposed to go at all. I believe that I can teach John Piper something, does that mean I'm wiser than him or am in authority over him, absolutely not! It means that Jesus Christ dwells in my heart and can use me to speak truth into the life of my brothers in Christ, and I don't think Christ dwells any less richly in female believers than in myself.
Second is the common misinterpretation of the curse in Genesis. Genesis 3 says she will long for her husband, and he will rule over her. I see absolutely no connection of this passage to a woman automatically yearning to wrest power from men. I think we all want to wrest power from each other because we're human, not because we're women... cause I'm not... a woman that is... but I still want to take power that doesn't belong to me because I am human and sinful.
To wrap up, I think a large part of this debate is centered over the fact that the church today has a rather distorted view of the Pastor's position in the church. People keep bringing up words in reference to the Pastor such as authority, leadership, power, etc. I haven't heard anyone reference service, submission, servanthood, loving, caring, etc.
Do I know for sure what the answer is on this issue? No, I don't. This post is mainly to express that fact, and maybe to convince someone that the acceptance of female pastors is not a sign of the apocalypse or the abandonment of God's Word.
No comments:
Post a Comment