Women Pastors?

nolidad said:

Pastors have three titles in teh NT Epistles.

Bishop ( episkope)
shepherd (poimen)
and teacher (didaskolos)

Each shows a particular responsibility they have in overseeing their church.

Click to expand...

Good to know. It makes sense because some pastors don't make good teachers-let's be honest. Some pastors are weak in upper leadership positions. They say yes to whoever has enthusiasm/money/or likes them. Rarely have I personally witnessed an all-star pastor who can do it all. Most pastors I have come across are excellent at relational nurturing or evangelical outreach. Love them but we all have our niches. Some are wonderful teachers of truth. These pastors are the rarest today. Ministry attracts all sorts because we need all sorts. Amen. Women are generally more emotional. We have our strengths but overall spiritual head honcho of a flock ain't it I reckon.

Scripture Sweets said:

It really is important to know your gifts from God. We must use our God given gifts to glorify the Lord and build up each other. Does that pertain to men only? I would think not. Women in the church have been monumental in helping the body of Christ. Women preachers and women pastors are included. However, women as senior pastors without their husband as the leader maybe a problem.

Click to expand...

No. Women pastors are not included. What you posted is 100% non scriptural.

ItIsFinished! said:

No. Women pastors are not included. What you posted is 100% non scriptural.

Click to expand...

Many Christians would disagree with you.

Anthony2019 said:

I belong to a denomination that accepts women as priests and their ordination has my full support.

If a woman came to Jesus and asked if they could serve him by becoming a minister, a preacher or teacher, I find it very hard to imagine that he would turn down their request. Can you imagine it? A woman coming to Jesus saying "Lord I love you and want to serve you. I want to reach out to others and teach them, look after them and proclaim the gospel. I want to be a pastor of your flock", and then Jesus saying "sorry, but you are not suitable, eligible or worthy enough to serve me in this way, because you are the wrong gender".

How can we become such blatant perpetrators of injustice, when our Lord has clearly commanded us through divine teaching, throughout the gospels and almost the entirety of the old and new testament, to care for those we have neglected: the oppressed, the widows, the orphans and foreigners. Jesus virtually excluded no-one who wanted to serve Him, in fact He always commended and welcomed it.

Click to expand...

He (Jesus/The Word) forbade women to be pastors.
Clearly I might add.
Be able to serve Him? Absolutely.
As a pastor?
Absolutely not.

Archivist said:

Many Christians would disagree with you.

Click to expand...

And??
They would than disagree with The Word of God as well in regards to this particular topic.

Archivist said:

The Society of Friends has had female ministers since the 1600s.

Click to expand...

From Wiki:


The little info box next to the Wiki article informs us:


---

I'm sorry...can you do a little better on the "being an actual Christian church/denomination/organization" front than a group that doesn't require its members to actually believe in God, and has variable theology depending on the individual meeting? The question is whether or not Christian groups should have female pastors, not whether or not amorphous groups that may or may not believe in anything should have them.

I dare say if that's what becomes of groups that adopt female pastors, then the OP's question is better answered by the current state of the Quakers than anything any of the rest of us could say.

ItIsFinished! said:

And??
They would than disagree with The Word of God as well in regards to this particular topic.

Click to expand...

No, we would just disagree with your interpretation. And you are, of course, entitled to your interpretation.

dzheremi said:

From Wiki:

Quakers, also called Friends, belong to a historically Christian denomination known formally as the Religious Society of Friends or Friends Church.[2] Members of the various Quaker movements are all generally united by their belief in the ability of each human being to experientially access the light within, or "that of God in every one".[3]

Some profess the priesthood of all believers, a doctrine derived from the First Epistle of Peter.[4][5][6][7] They include those with evangelical, holiness, liberal, and traditional Quaker understandings of Christianity. There are also Nontheist Quakers whose spiritual practice is not reliant on the existence of God. To differing extents, the movements making up the Religious Society of Friends/Friends avoid creeds and hierarchical structures.​

The little info box next to the Wiki article informs us:

Theology Variable; depends on meeting​

---

I'm sorry...can you do a little better on the "being an actual Christian church/denomination/organization" front than a group that doesn't require its members to actually believe in God, and has variable theology depending on the individual meeting? The question is whether or not Christian groups should have female pastors, not whether or not amorphous groups that may or may not believe in anything should have them.

I dare say if that's what becomes of groups that adopt female pastors, then the OP's question is better answered by the current state of the Quakers than anything any of the rest of us could say.

Click to expand...

And I know many Friends who would disagree with you.

Archivist said:

No, we would just disagree with your interpretation. And you are, of course, entitled to your interpretation.

Click to expand...

No interpretation. Just the clear inspired written Word of God.
There are no private interpretations.
No women pastors.

Archivist said:

And I know many Friends who would disagree with you.

Click to expand...

Well of course...I'm sure many Friends do have solid beliefs, do believe in God, and so forth. That's not the point. The point was that if you're going to point to the Friends as an example of a Christian denomination that has had women pastors since the 1600s or whatever, it is right that we be aware that their status as a specifically Christian denomination is at best variable, as they do not necessarily require belief in Christianity in particular.

So they're not a great example of that.

ItIsFinished! said:

No interpretation. Just the clear inspired written Word of God.
There are no private interpretations.
No women pastors.

Click to expand...

Your interpretation. You are entitled to it.

dzheremi said:

Well of course...I'm sure many Friends do have solid beliefs, do believe in God, and so forth. That's not the point. The point was that if you're going to point to the Friends as an example of a Christian denomination that has had women pastors since the 1600s or whatever, it is right that we be aware that their status as a specifically Christian denomination is at best variable, as they do not necessarily require belief in Christianity in particular.

So they're not a great example of that.

Click to expand...

And can you show that this is because of female ministers? Provide the evidence to support your claim.

ItIsFinished! said:

He (Jesus/The Word) forbade women to be pastors.
Clearly I might add.

Click to expand...

No he didn't. Not at all.

Archivist said:

And can you show that this is because of female ministers? Provide the evidence to support your claim.

Click to expand...

I didn't claim that in the first place. Note the word 'if'.

I think it is beyond needing much verification that the adoption of female ministers signals a liberalization of theology overall (precisely because groups that are more theologically conservative are likely to be ecclesiologically conservative as well, and hence never innovate 'female pastors' in the first place), but I would not go so far as to draw a straight line between that and the loss of belief in God. It's one of those things that might portend that in the future (depending on when/if the liberalization stops at some point, which realistically no one can know), but by no means guarantees it. I trust that all the Anglicans and Lutherans in this thread, including the one female clergyperson who has posted so far, do very much believe in God and in Christianity in particular.

dzheremi said:

I didn't claim that in the first place. Note the word 'if'.

I think it is beyond needing much verification that the adoption of female ministers signals a liberalization of theology overall (precisely because groups that are more theologically conservative are likely to be ecclesiologically conservative as well, and hence never innovate 'female pastors' in the first place), but I would not go so far as to draw a straight line between that and the loss of belief in God. It's one of those things that might portend that in the future (depending on when/if the liberalization stops at some point, which realistically no one can know), but by no means guarantees it. I trust that all the Anglicans and Lutherans in this thread, including the one female clergyperson who has posted so far, do very much believe in God and in Christianity in particular.

Click to expand...

Ah yes, the word “if.” So you could be totally wrong.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but that is all you are giving us.

Archivist said:

Ah yes, the word “if.” So you could be totally wrong.

Click to expand...

Well yeah. So could you. So could any of us. Again, I'm talking about if this is what eventually happens to groups that have this feature, and since I can't tell the future, I'm not equipped to make any predictions. Maybe the Anglicans or the Lutherans or the whoevers that have female clergy will continue on as they are now for hundreds of years, or maybe they'll be like the Quakers by some point, without any really strong theological stances they are necessarily required to have (say, if those who follow after John Shelby Spong's way of being 'Christian' somehow become very influential in these groups). I have no way of knowing.

But again, I would also say to look at what even creating these kinds of positions in the first place says about where they seem to be headed, if you're interested in speculating on the future. Generally, past behavior is a pretty good indicator of future results. Not all the time, of course, but I'd be very surprised if a person like Katharine Jefferts Schori were to give up her position in the Episcopal Church and convert to a traditionalist SSPX Catholic or Eastern Orthodox or some similarly traditional form of Christianity. It just doesn't seem very likely.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but that is all you are giving us.

Click to expand...

Insofar as concerns any church or communion to which I do not belong, I've never presented my posts as being anything else.

Darren Brown said:

Should women be pastors?

Click to expand...

1 Timothy 3:1-10 to me means we need a qualified couple. Our Apostle Paul here says what qualifies a man to be a "bishop". But he is married. And I understand a woman in Jesus is the helper of the man . . . helping him to become all which qualifies him.

They are one with each other. So, he is not alone.

Archivist said:

Your interpretation. You are entitled to it.

Click to expand...

Repeating a erronious futile statement in regards to the topic at hand doesn't make it true.

Gregorikos said:

No he didn't. Not at all.

Click to expand...

Actually He did.
Your blatant denial of the truth will not change that fact.

ItIsFinished! said:

Actually He did. Your blatant denial of the truth will not change that fact.

Click to expand...

Let's look at that

You Said

He (Jesus/The Word) forbade women to be pastors. Clearly I might add. Be able to serve Him? Absolutely. As a pastor? Absolutely not.

Click to expand...

Gregorikos said:

No he didn't. Not at all.

Click to expand...

Your outright claim does not seem to have been substantiated. I am not aware of any place in the gospels where Jesus forbids women from ministry or any sort. Your suggestion that @Gregorikos is in blatant denial of the truth would seem to be the 'alternative fact', and unless you are able to substantiate the claim you are so passionate about, then your argument must fail.

If you have evidence that Jesus who discussed theology with the Samaritan Woman at the Well (John 4) at any stage forbade women to be pastors, then you need to declare it with evidence. It was after all this same Jesus, following his resurrection commissioned Mary Magdalene to go and tell the men folk (John 20).