The World Needs Women Priests

[Archivist]

So now the word of God IS definitive. (??). Anyway you didn't name a single person there who was a deacon or presbyter, I noticed.

I’ve pointed out multiple times that Phoebe was a deacon.

 

[Albion]

I’ve pointed out multiple times that Phoebe was a deacon.

It takes knowing what the term referred to in that case.

 

[Strong in Him]

Aren't you saying that the Bible is sexist and unreliable or at least not applicable to our times?

No.

How does that differ from the point that was made about proponents of women's ordination often making their case on the basis of something other than Scripture and Tradition?

I was saying that in Bible times it was largely a male dominated world, but that didn't stop God from calling, and using, women to proclaim his word.
When Jesus came to earth he affirmed and elevated women.

So now the word of God IS definitive.

Never said it wasn't.
I DID say that it does not clearly teach that women cannot be ordained.

Anyway you didn't name a single person there who was a deacon

Apart from saying that Phoebe was a deacon?

 

[Archivist]

It takes knowing what the term referred to in that case.

Are you claiming that you have secret information?

 

[pescador]

Church "officials": priests, deacons, elders, church leaders of all kinds, are all supposed to be where they are because of certain qualities. Can anyone tell me that only men have those qualities? The idea that women who are filled with the Holy Spirit and other spiritual gifts can't officiate in a church in the 21st Century is ridiculous.

God made us different genders for physical purposes, e.g., tasks that require brawn and strength, or childbirth. That has no bearing on the mental, emotional, spiritual qualities or abilities; in those there are no differences.

Why are churches resisting the Holy Spirit??

 

[Albion]

No...I was saying that in Bible times it was largely a male dominated world, but that didn't stop God from calling, and using, women to proclaim his word.

Okay, but what does that have to do with women as priests, etc.?

When Jesus came to earth he affirmed and elevated women.

I agree with that, but it still doesn't affect the issue.

I DID say that it does not clearly teach that women cannot be ordained.

I doesn't clearly say that Martians ought not be ordained, either. Seriously, we do not take the view that if something, anything, isn't unequivocally and specifically ruled out in Scripture, then it's perfectly all right. And certainly not with all the guidance that Scripture and church history give us about the matter.

 

[Albion]

Church "officials": priests, deacons, elders, church leaders of all kinds, are all supposed to be where they are because of certain qualities.

Yes, but that is not the sum total of what is required. The New Testament verses that relate to this subject are quite specific, in fact.

Can anyone tell me that only men have those qualities?

Sure. If Christ called only men to be his Twelve even though he did respect women and have them as friends (as has been referred to by other posters), if the Biblical qualifications are explicitly about males, if the Apostolic church never HAD any known women clergy as defined in Scripture...then the alternate argument you are explaining to us is the following--they can do the job??

Is that it?

 

[Archivist]

Sure. If Christ called only men to be his Twelve even though he did respect women and have them as friends (as has been referred to by other posters), if the Biblical qualifications are explicitly about males, if the Apostolic church never HAD any known women clergy as defined in Scripture...then the alternate argument you are explaining to us is the following--they can do the job?

Wrong. As I have said before, e know very little about the early church. We do know, however, that Phoebe was a deacon (not a deaconess), that Mary was the first to preach the Good News of the Risen Christ and that Junia was an Apostle.

 

[Strong in Him]

I doesn't clearly say that Martians ought not be ordained, either. Seriously, we do not take the view that if something, anything, isn't unequivocally and specifically ruled out in Scripture, then it's perfectly all right. And certainly not with all the guidance that Scripture and church history give us about the matter.

If it was God's will, command and plan that women should not be ordained ever, he would have made that quite clear; through his Son and the Apostles.

Look at the OT; they were told to teach God's law to their children and tie it around their foreheads. The nation was told over and over again about God's law and covenant and what would happen if they disobeyed - they were told through Moses, Joshua, Ezra, the prophets and when Josiah found the book of the law in the temple. They might have tried to claim that it was too hard to follow, that they were under pressure from other nations, or bad kings - but they couldn't claim that they didn't know. Follow God's law, be blessed; depart from God's law and break his covenant, be punished.
Psalms 138:2 says that God has established above all things his name and his word - if someone was preaching God's word in God's name and he had commanded them not to; don't you think he's do something about it? Psalms 23:3 says that he will lead us in paths of righteousness for his name's sake - don't you believe that he is capable of leading and guiding his sheep so that they bring glory, not dishonour, to his name?

 

[Albion]

If it was God's will, command and plan that women should not be ordained ever, he would have made that quite clear; through his Son and the Apostles.

Well, his Son had not established his church until almost his leaving, and the Apostles did make it clear.

 

[Archivist]

Well, his Son had not established his church until almost his leaving, and the Apostles did make it clear.

But they did not “make it clear.” If they had this thread wouldn’t exist.

 

[Paidiske]

I suspect there are women trying to get themselves into what is not the priesthood. I have seen how women with a dominating spirit can be out to prove that women can be called to preach.

While there is no doubt that some women (and men) offer for ordination from poor motives, I would be careful about this line of argument. Requiring people who are oppressed - and yes, I will put women in a church that denies women ordination into that category - to always be meek, mild, gentle and nice about it is not just. Accusing people who are expressing a godly anger of things like a "dominating spirit" can be a matter of pouring salt into the wound.

If there were times when it was right for Christ himself to be angry, to raise his voice, to be forceful; if there are times when it has been right for his male followers to do so - and few of us would argue that there haven't - then we shouldn't deny that to women, either.

I doesn't clearly say that Martians ought not be ordained, either. Seriously, we do not take the view that if something, anything, isn't unequivocally and specifically ruled out in Scripture, then it's perfectly all right.

No, but Anglicans have also not historically held to a Puritan position that if it's not explicitly required in Scripture, it's forbidden, either. The arguments about things like surplices and wedding rings show us that.

There is a space between what Scripture unequivocally rules out, and what Scripture unequivocally requires; that is a space for wisdom and discernment. The entire matter of our church order sits within that space, and therefore is certainly open to ongoing change and development!

Edited to add: and really, the comparison to Martians is both ridiculous and insulting, as if women had no share in Christ's humanity. It's almost as bad as if you'd compared it to ordaining monkeys.

 

[Strong in Him]

Well, his Son had not established his church until almost his leaving,

He still would have said something.
He came to show us what God is like and teach us to do his will. If it was so vitally important that women would not be ordained leaders in his church, he would have not only said something but made sure that we all knew. He was quite capable of saying "I will build my church and women will never be ordained nor be leaders in it - ever". But he said no such thing.

and the Apostles did make it clear.

Again, if they had we would not be having all these debates.
Unless you are seriously suggesting that all female clergy are disobedient/deluded. In which case, what about all the make clergy who accepted their calls, trained and ordained them? Are they ignorant of the "clear" teaching of Scripture, or did the poor dears get sucked in by these deceitful women?

 

[Albion]

He still would have said something.

He did. The New Testament couldn't really be much more explicit.

Again, if they had we would not be having all these debates.

Certainly we would, just as "we" argue over the Eucharist, the Triune nature of God, the way to salvation, and so on. And all of these are discussed in Scripture, too.

But there is always going to be a debate over what Scripture means. Is it literal or figurative? Does it hold for everyone or just for people in that time period, or the Jews, or somebody else? Does Tradition outweigh it?

 

[Archivist]

He did. The New Testament couldn't really be much more explicit.

I agree. Scripture makes it very clear that women should be ordained as pastors/priests/ministers. Actually I would agree with what Strong in Him says in the next post, it isn’t explicit.

 

[Strong in Him]

He did. The New Testament couldn't really be much more explicit.

It isn't explicit; there's a lot of assumptions going on.
"Paul said, 'I do not allow a woman to speak or to snatch authority from a man' - that must mean that women can't preach, because it involves speaking, or be ordained because that would mean being in authority over men'. " What Paul did not allow, must be a command from God.
If it ever was, then clearly God's changed his mind since then. And Jesus did not teach it at all.

Certainly we would,

Not over this issue we wouldn't.
Or are you saying that even if Jesus HAD said, "I forbid any woman to have a leadership role in my church - anywhere, ever", there would still be women who went for it, and there would be male clergy who were disobedient enough to let them?

Does Tradition outweigh it?

Traditions can change.
Once, God's people set up stones/altars in special places if God had met them there - Abraham, Isaac, Jacob.
Then the tabernacle was built with the Ark of the Covenant, and if ever that ark was captured, Israel were in trouble; it was where God "lived".
Then the temple was built, and all the feasts and sacrifices took place there; it was God's house.
Now he lives in us; we are temples of the Holy Spirit.

Traditions can also be wrong; just because someone has done something for many years, it doesn't mean it is/was right. Look at the Middle ages - drowning people for being witches, when today we might say that they had the gift of healing or a word of knowledge from God. People used to talk about the gods throwing the furniture around - today we can describe a thunderstorm scientifically.

 

[Albion]

It isn't explicit; there's a lot of assumptions going on.
"Paul said, 'I do not allow a woman to speak or to snatch authority from a man' - that must mean that women can't preach,

because it involves speaking, or be ordained because that would mean being in authority over men'. " What Paul did not allow, must be a command from God.

My friend, if that is the tack you intend to take, I suggest that you direct your thinking at some member who holds that view. When replying to yours truly, who has repeatedly disavowed that POW, it's a strawman argument just as it is with most defenders of the historic priesthood.

 

[pescador]

Yes, but that is not the sum total of what is required. The New Testament verses that relate to this subject are quite specific, in fact.


Sure. If Christ called only men to be his Twelve even though he did respect women and have them as friends (as has been referred to by other posters), if the Biblical qualifications are explicitly about males, if the Apostolic church never HAD any known women clergy as defined in Scripture...then the alternate argument you are explaining to us is the following--they can do the job??

Is that it?

Which gender was the first to receive the news that Jesus was resurrected and entrusted with the task of informing others?

 

[Archivist]

My friend, if that is the tack you intend to take, I suggest that you direct your thinking at some member who holds that view. When replying to yours truly, who has repeatedly disavowed that POW, it's a strawman argument just as it is with most defenders of the historic priesthood.

First, what POW? I know of no prisoners of war under discussion here.

Second, this is a debate and discussion forum. People are going to express opposing views. You can say what you want about scripture being so very explicit on this this issue. My reply--and the reply of a great many Christians--is that it is not explicit. I believe that women should be ordained; that is one reason why I am a member of the ELCA.

 

[Albion]

We are talking about women as clergy. See the thread's title?