Female ordination

[Andrewn]

It's actually quite different from Anglicans when it comes to Deacons.

We also have Elders who may or may not be in a position of senior pastor, and we also have non-ordained lay ministers as senior pastors. Lay preachers were a big part of Methodism.

In the United Methodist church, a senior pastor doesn't require ordination. Both ordained or licensed clergy and lay ministers can function as senior pastors. In some cases, they don't even need to be Methodist.

I'm getting confused with all the info.

 

[bekkilyn]

I'm getting confused with all the info.

You don't really need to worry about it, and sorting it all out, especially since if you're Anglican, and this group is Anglican, these church structures really aren't going to be applicable to most anyone here. My point out of all of it is that the churches and church structures that exist today are not the same as in the 1st century. The 1st century church no longer exists as such and so whatever ordination customs they had as part of whatever church structures they had (typically very informal) aren't going to apply to us today.

The laws of the land are also very different, so if Paul advised against something based on a secular legal code of ancient Rome (so that Rome wouldn't come down hard in persecuting a church that had barely gotten started), that's not going to apply to us today either. For example, if it was illegal by Roman law for a woman to speak in a public assembly (which it was) then it was very unlikely that Paul would send out women to preach in all of those places where it was forbidden to them by law just so that they could get arrested and attract even more attention from the empire, and that's just one example.

The church cannot be anything less than transformative, which means that it must be alive to the people of today, who are typically not very inclined to living life exactly as they did back in the secular Roman empire with all the same laws and customs, including more people who were slaves than than there were citizens.

It really comes down to whether or not God has called a given person into ministry, and when I very noticeably see the Holy Spirit working in a woman, a black person, a Chinese person, etc., then who am I to decide the Spirit is wrong based on looking at scripture through a very imperfect human lens?

 

[Andrewn]

For example, if it was illegal by Roman law for a woman to speak in a public assembly (which it was) then it was very unlikely that Paul would send out women to preach

Would you please show me evidence of that. My own information is that Roman women were able to speak in public assemblies. One example is Hypatia of Alexandria. Wikipedia reads:

Hypatia (born c. 350–370; died 415 AD) was a Hellenistic Neoplatonist philosopher, astronomer, and mathematician, who lived in Alexandria, Egypt, then part of the Eastern Roman Empire. She was a prominent thinker of the Neoplatonic school in Alexandria where she taught philosophy and astronomy. She is the first female mathematician whose life is reasonably well recorded. Hypatia was renowned in her own lifetime as a great teacher and a wise counselor.

We also know that women frequently functioned as priests in pagan temples.

It really comes down to whether or not God has called a given person into ministry, and when I very noticeably see the Holy Spirit working in a woman, a black person, a Chinese person, etc., then who am I to decide the Spirit is wrong based on looking at scripture through a very imperfect human lens?

The Spirit blows where it pleases. All kinds of ministry are open to women as lay persons and as deacons. The only question is whether they should be the senior leader / elder / pastor in a church.

The church cannot be anything less than transformative, which means that it must be alive to the people of today, who are typically not very inclined to living life exactly as they did back in the secular Roman empire with all the same laws and customs,

This is a completely different discussion and I have to disagree with you there. There are limits / borders of behavior set in the Bible. I believe they're eternal.

 

[bekkilyn]

Do you have references to substantiate this info?

If you are genuinely interested in the topic and not just seeking to argue in order to find an "ah hah!" loophole just to "prove" that women are unsuitable for ministry, here are a couple of book suggestions:

"What Paul Really Said About Women: The Apostle's Liberating Views on Equality in Marriage, Leadership, and Love" by John T. Bristow

"Man and Woman, One in Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Paul's Letters" by Philip Barton Payne

Note that these are both written by men so that they'll have credibility, and I also remember that at least one of them supports biblical inerrancy and so isn't just taking a "liberal" approach.

Also, Marg Mowczko's blog has many researched articles:

Marg Mowczko | Exploring the biblical theology of Christian egalitarianism

Enjoy!

 

[Albion]

According to the rules of this forum, non-Anglicans may only post in fellowship but not debate or teach against the belief system of Anglican churches.

 

[bekkilyn]

According to the rules of this forum, non-Anglicans may only post in fellowship but not debate or teach against the belief system of Anglican churches.

I am sincerely curious as to which Anglican belief system non-Anglicans are teaching against here? Females are ordained as priests and even bishops within the Anglican Church.

 

[Albion]

I am sincerely curious as to which Anglican belief system non-Anglicans are teaching against here? Females are ordained as priests and even bishops within the Anglican Church.

I promise to catch up to you about your question when you open your thread on some general theology or controversial theology or similar forum.

 

[bekkilyn]

I promise to catch up to you about your question when you open your thread on some general theology or controversial theology or similar forum.

Well I already know that you are personally staunchly opposed to women in ministry and I have argued with you on the topic before, so I don't think having another new argument over it and hashing out all of the same things would be of value to either of us regardless of which forum it was on. One of the reasons why I gave Andrewn sources of information on the topic is because I did not want to continue going back and forth on it and anyone sincerely interested is going to find more in-depth information by reading those sources (and others they may lead to) than I have time to provide right now anyway.

 

[Andrewn]

Note that these are both written by men so that they'll have credibility, and I also remember that at least one of them supports biblical inerrancy and so isn't just taking a "liberal" approach.

Also, Marg Mowczko's blog has many researched articles:

Marg Mowczko | Exploring the biblical theology of Christian egalitarianism

Enjoy!

Thank you for the references. I need to study this subject.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

The fact is that ordained women have totally blessed the church. God let this happen.

As for deacons, here a deacon is someone in their first year after ordination, typically their curacy.

 

[Albion]

As for deacons, here a deacon is someone in their first year after ordination, typically their curacy.

To be clear, it is a separate order (bishop, presbyter, deacon) with its own particular calling and duties.

A deacon is not a provisional or apprentice priest, even if his role looks that way at first glance. Most are later ordained as priests/presbyters, although many are permanent deacons from the start.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

To be clear, it is a separate order (bishop, presbyter, deacon) with its own particular calling and duties.

A deacon is not a provisional or apprentice priest, even if his role looks that way at first glance. Most are later ordained as priests/presbyters, although many are permanent deacons from the start.

‘‘tis here.

 

[Paidiske]

Ah, actually, Naomi, although you might find that the vast majority of deacons go on to be ordained as priests, throughout the Anglican church the diaconate is an order in its own right, and distinctive deacons (those who don't go on to be ordained priests) are a thing.

 

[Andrewn]

Is it sometimes the other way around where a priest would leave his parish and become a deacon or archdeacon in a different parish or in the diocese? And how do these titles relate to others like "canon" or "episcopal priest?"

 

[Paidiske]

Is it sometimes the other way around where a priest would leave his parish and become a deacon or archdeacon in a different parish or in the diocese? And how do these title relate to others like "canon" or "episcopal priest?"

Okay, so, two separate things.

1) Orders of ministry. Threefold; deacon, priest and bishop. In Anglican practice, you have to be ordained a deacon before you can become a priest, and a priest before you can become a bishop; but they are distinct orders with different emphases in ministry. A deacon is not just a trainee priest but has a distinct role and function.

2) What you do; what your job role is. That could be things like being a parish priest, a chaplain, a canon (part of the governing body of a cathedral), and so on. Some priests function as archdeacons which (confusingly) is not a separate order of ministry, but a particular role to do with leadership and administration in the wider church (by which I mean wider than a parish).

So I am a priest, and I lead a parish. I could leave the parish and work in a school or hospital or some other setting, but I would still be a priest.

Does that sort of make sense?

 

[Andrewn]

a canon (part of the governing body of a cathedral), and so on. Some priests function as archdeacons which (confusingly) is not a separate order of ministry, but a particular role to do with leadership and administration in the wider church

Thank you. You defined the terms "canon" and "archdeacon." What is an "episcopal priest?"

 

[Paidiske]

Thank you. You defined the terms "canon" and "archdeacon." What is an "episcopal priest?"

I'm not really sure either. Are they referring to a priest in an Episcopalian church, perhaps?

 

[Andrewn]

I'm not really sure either. Are they referring to a priest in an Episcopalian church, perhaps?

Some priests in the Anglican diocese of Quebec are "episcopal priests." I guess they could be originally ordained in the Episcopalian church of the USA.

Clergy

 

[Albion]

Some priests in the Anglican diocese of Quebec are "episcopal priests." I guess they could be originally ordained in the Episcopalian church of the USA.

Clergy

As I read that link, it does appear to me that they are referring to priests who are members of The Episcopal Church (in the USA) but have been licensed to serve in the Anglican Church of Canada.

 

[Arcangl86]

Yeah I agree that's probably the case. They probably are in Quebec temporarily and don't wish to formally transfer to the ACC.