What did the Church Fathers think of women preachers or teachers?

[RDKirk]

That depends entirely on church polity.

Ah, but that's the problem and the confusion. Scripturally, preaching is a spiritual gift, pastor is a church office. Because we have conflated the two, now there is unnecessary confusion about the role of women.

The same thing has happened with "deacon." Originally a deacon was a designated servant to the congregation and a deacon could easily be male or female (such as Phoebe). Now "deacon" has been conflated with "overseer" in many denominations and there is confusion.

I don't mean to get into the debate about women as leaders in the congregation, but it's only this necessary conflation of terms that drags other issues such as preachers and deacons into that debate. There should not be a question about women as either deacons or preachers even before we get to the debate about women as congregational leaders because neither began as a congregational leadership office.

 

[Paidiske]

Ah, but that's the problem and the confusion. Scripturally, preaching is a spiritual gift, pastor is a church office. Because we have conflated the two, now there is unnecessary confusion about the role of women.

The same thing has happened with "deacon." Originally a deacon was a designated servant to the congregation and a deacon could easily be male or female (such as Phoebe). Now "deacon" has been conflated with "overseer" in many denominations and there is confusion.

I don't mean to get into the debate about women as leaders in the congregation, but it's only this necessary conflation of terms that drags other issues such as preachers and deacons into that debate. There should not be a question about women as either deacons or preachers even before we get to the debate about women as congregational leaders because neither began as a congregational leadership office.

I agree there is confusion about roles, tasks, and so on. I'm not sure I agree with everything you say here. I can find NT reference to the apostles being commanded to preach, and mention of at least some elders preaching, but no mention of preaching as a spiritual gift. And I would question whether "pastor" is a separate office from "elder."

But we could go on nit-picking such details forever. The reason that all of this gets dragged in, I think, to the women debate is that deacons are (now) recognised as ordained rather than lay people, and preaching has in many places been restricted to the ordained also; and so for many the nub of the issue is this question of ordination. But I would maintain (pace Albion) that a clear systematic division of roles into "ordained" and "lay" significantly postdates the NT. That was simply not the way the earliest church thought about the people who led and served it.

 

[hedrick]

It seems that things changed between the NT and the early church. There wasn’t much time involved. In much of the NT we don’t have clear offices, though 1Tim is an exception. My guess is that as the church moved to conceiving of leaders as priests, it moved to all male priests. There are some indications of a few female priests, but they are contested, and even if true are rare.

 

[pescador]

Is there are valid reason, apart from the Law, that women should not be priests today?

Women during the time of the Bible were very, very limited in their societal roles. Very, very few were free of their domestic roles and even fewer were educated. However, those days are long past in (at least) Western, educated societies. The only thing keeping women today from being priests is unfounded bigotry.

 

[Albion]

Is there are valid reason, apart from the Law, that women should not be priests today?

This thread asks about the attitude of the Church Fathers, and we know that answer to that question. The Apostolic church didn't have any.

However, they did have women in positions of responsibility and leadership, but just not as clergy. So that rebuts the idea that they couldn't have been considered for such positions because of societal norms at that time.

 

[hedrick]

This thread asks about the attitude of the Church Fathers, and we know that answer to that question. The Apostolic church didn't have any.

You mean they didn't have any priests, right? Male or female.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

The before and after

Exo 19:6
And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

Rev 1:6
and he made us ' a Kingdom of Priests in the service of God,' his Father! --to Him be ascribed glory and dominion for ever. Amen.

 

[RDKirk]

Is there are valid reason, apart from the Law, that women should not be priests today?

Women during the time of the Bible were very, very limited in their societal roles. Very, very few were free of their domestic roles and even fewer were educated. However, those days are long past in (at least) Western, educated societies. The only thing keeping women today from being priests is unfounded bigotry.

What is notable is that women figure far more prominently in the 1st century church, than we would expect in comparison to the limitations of their roles in secular society. If scripture had totally ignored the activity of women, it would have been easily in line with the secular sources of the time.

But the real basis of debate in this thread is the fact that there don't appear to be clear "two or three witness" limitations on the roles of women in scripture, particularly in the New Testament.

 

[Albion]

You mean they didn't have any priests, right? Male or female.

?? Of course the first century church had priests (i.e. presbyters, bishops, elders).

 

[garee]

I would like to recall my points on women teachers and women preachers. I think that there would be a difference between a woman teaching the true gospel and a woman preaching the true gospel. Here is the link:
There is a difference between teaching and preaching the gospel

I admit that this is a subject that I have very strong views on. I have a question however. I know that there are many people, including here that have their views on women preachers especially. However, I believed that provided if a woman was actually called to preach, and provided that preached the true gospel, where or how would be judged? What did the Church Fathers believe in females who preached the true gospel, not a false gospel? How would she be judged according to them?

Would she be judged by Jesus in the Judgement seat of Christ like all believers? Or, would she be judged in the Great White Throne anyways? Personally, if she were to preach a true gospel from the pulpit, provided that she was truly called, I don't believe that she would be judged at the Great White Throne. It would make Jesus' words seem contrary to scripture.

I believe that all believers including the women preachers that I have described earlier will not take park in the Great White Throne. Jesus was no sexist; He treated women with the utmost dignity and respect. I have my doubts about anyone who preaches or teaches the true gospel and lived and obeyed by the true gospel will be judged like those who are not. There are many males as well who are false prophets that will obviously take part in the Great White Throne of Judgment because of their unrepentant deeds.

I believe that if she has no business preaching the gospel because she is a woman, then could it be possible that though her work will be burned up, though she will enter Heaven, but scarcely. Was that what the Church Fathers taught, or are women teaching provided that she does not overstep her bounds by usurping the man's authority. However, I would think that there is or would be a difference between a teacher or a preacher.

I am not so sure how many would agree or disagree what I have written, but as a woman who is a Baptist, it would be an unpopular view. So what is your view on women teachers and teachers? What would the Church Fathers' opinion be? Would they be opposed to both women who teach and women who teach? It means that they may or may not have divided women who teach gospel differently from women who preached the gospel. Or would a woman who preaches is doing the same thing as teachers?

I would suggest first and foremost we are informed believers are lovingly commanded to preach the gospel, plant the spiritual unseen seed. or water it with the doctrines of God that fall from heaven and are bound on earth .

But we are also informed to call no man on earth teacher as good Master Lord and in the same way call no man on earth Holy Father. One is our teaching good master our Father not seen. If our Holy Father not seen does not create the increase freely giving us his unseen understanding mankind has believed in vain. He or she that plants or waters is considered nothing.

1 Corinthians 3:6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

When the time of reformation (first century) came the hierarchy the pagan form of government .Kings in Israel the abomination of desolation was made desolate to no effect. This is when the veil was rent and Christ said it is finished. . . Nothing could be added or taken away .that perfect that we look back to had come.

The fulfillment of the promise to Joel had come restoring the order before there were kings in Israel the time period of the judges. Men and woman's prophets form all the nations of the world.

Acts 2:15-17 King James Version (KJV)For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

No longer could what are called venerable men lord it over the believers who did have the Spirit of Christ working in them (men and woman ).

The high wall that separated Jewish woman from the Jewish men from participating in the ceremonies and the other wall that separate Jews form gentiles came down .

In the zeal of the reformation women prophets and gentile were used restored the virtue of man and woman as one new creature. Which was lost in the garden of Eden representing. The chaste virgin the virtuous bride of Christ, the new creature. .

It was then that the new ceremonial law. .(1 Corinthians 11) the head of hair covering for the woman and no covering for the hair of head of man that involved both man and woman to represent the restored order of Judges came about. Two working as one .

Order was needed and not that a woman or gentiles cannot preach the same gospel as the Jewish man but in order to create virtue which was lost in the garden of Eden by the over zealous woman. Woman and gentiles were to preach it at home . Then they could share their new found faith with their spouse.

Today God sees no difference between man and woman, Jew or gentile .We are to know no no man or woman after the flesh, the temporal things seen.

We could use more Deborah's or Rehab's as Judges to preach the good news. It takes two to fulfill the preaching ministry husband and wife . Either can become the silent partner .No lone wolves.

 

[Albion]

Today God sees no difference between man and woman, Jew or gentile .

But yesterday, he presumably did not. Is that it? So this means that God, who is described in Scripture as unchangeable actually does change his mind...according to how his Creatures change their own opinions.

That is the underlying argument in this kind of theory, which by the way is used by most proponents of women's ordination...and it's inherently defective.

We could use more Deborah's or Rehab's as Judges to preach the good news. It takes two to fulfill the preaching ministry husband and wife . Either can become the silent partner .No lone wolves.

Wrong again. To be a judge, or Bible Study leader, or a member of the congregation's governing board, or many other such posts of responsibility and leadership are NOT positions equivalent to being the pastor (which is the position that sparks this familiar controversy).

 

[Paidiske]

But yesterday, he presumably did not. Is that it? So this means that God, who is described in Scripture as unchangeable actually does change his mind...

He does change the way he deals with us. Before Christ there was a temple with animal sacrifice and an all-male priesthood that was only for Jews of a specific lineage. After Christ there are none of these things.

 

[hedrick]

He does change the way he deals with us. Before Christ there was a temple with animal sacrifice and an all-male priesthood that was only for Jews of a specific lineage. After Christ there are none of these things.

Please note that this does not imply that God changes, just that there are different covenants.

Furthermore, not all Christian behavior is due to God's unchanging will. In the 1st Cent having female leaders would have been unusual. They would have found it hard to be effective, and might even have caused scandal. The early church needed its scandal to be the scandal of the cross, not its choice of leadership. Today it is scandal not to allow women to be leaders, and also distracts from the scandal of the cross.

 

[Albion]

He does change the way he deals with us. Before Christ there was a temple with animal sacrifice and an all-male priesthood that was only for Jews of a specific lineage. After Christ there are none of these things.

I could have been more specific, I guess. The transition from the Hebrew religion to the church of Christ was of course intended from all eternity and the Bible makes that transition evident in various ways. What we are speaking of here doesn't have that sort of long-range plan or any hint of how the change, if made, would represent a major new stage in the history of God's salvific work.

 

[RDKirk]

Please note that this does not imply that God changes, just that there are different covenants.

Furthermore, not all Christian behavior is due to God's unchanging will. In the 1st Cent having female leaders would have been unusual. They would have found it hard to be effective, and might even have caused scandal. The early church needed its scandal to be the scandal of the cross, not its choice of leadership. Today it is scandal not to allow women to be leaders, and also distracts from the scandal of the cross.

That was the issue as well with slavery. The earlier Spartacus slave rebellion (and that had been the most recent of three Servile Wars) was very much in the minds of Roman government. Anything that had smelled like incitement to slave revolt would have been put down ruthlessly.

 

[garee]

But yesterday, he presumably did not. Is that it? So this means that God, who is described in Scripture as unchangeable actually does change his mind...according to how his Creatures change their own opinions.

That is the underlying argument in this kind of theory, which by the way is used by most proponents of women's ordination...and it's inherently defective.


Wrong again. To be a judge, or Bible Study leader, or a member of the congregation's governing board, or many other such posts of responsibility and leadership are NOT positions equivalent to being the pastor (which is the position that sparks this familiar controversy).

God does not change it was his intention from the beginning to create the bride of Christ the church as a new creature neither male nor female Jew nor Gentile .As sons of God mankind we are not what we will be.

Abel is the first recorded member of the bride and first recorded martyr. The first century reformation restored the order to when there a was no hierarchy of men the pagan foundation. Kings. princes or fathers a hierarchy of men in Israel .The abomination of desolation

To be a judge, man or women they must be sent with prophecy the word of God the gospel of our salvation. Receiving the end of that faith from the beginning. As apostles sent with the word of God we can plant the incorruptible seed and water it with the doctrines of God, but God the teacher causes the born again growth if any . In that way sent ones (apostles) are nothing.

In that way Jesus the chief apostle informs us his flesh the temporal seen profits for nothing. (John 6) It is the unseen work of the Father the one master teacher and Lord that alone can profit

1 Corinthians 3:6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

 

[Paidiske]

I could have been more specific, I guess. The transition from the Hebrew religion to the church of Christ was of course intended from all eternity and the Bible makes that transition evident in various ways. What we are speaking of here doesn't have that sort of long-range plan or any hint of how the change, if made, would represent a major new stage in the history of God's salvific work.

I disagree. What we are speaking of here - the living out of the full equality of men and women in ministry as in every other aspect of life - is to my view exactly part of that transition to the Church of which Christ is the head. It's not a new stage in salvation history, it's the realisation of the implications of the incarnation and all that came after.

 

[garee]

I disagree. What we are speaking of here - the living out of the full equality of men and women in ministry as in every other aspect of life - is to my view exactly part of that transition to the Church of which Christ is the head. It's not a new stage in salvation history, it's the realisation of the implications of the incarnation and all that came after.

Exactly not the beginning of the church which began in Genesis with Abel the first martyr but a restoration that came about because of the time of reformation.

God had given over the faithless Jews to elect a king (abomination of desolation)because of their jealously of all the surrounding Pagan nation .
This was not permanently but until the time of reformation had come. A carbon copy of the 15th century reformation.

The faithless elder assembled themselves not called to assemble by God in whom they did not beleive in.

1 Samuel 8:4-7 Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations. But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the Lord.
And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.

The Spirit of Christ that dwelt in Samael and other judges as prophets that declared the will of our unseen God like Deborah informed Samuel it not you they are rejected as king but me heavenly father, the unseen King of kings and Lord of lords. This showed they had no faith coming from sola scriptura.(all things written in the law and the prophets) but rather served the oral traditions of men as doctrines of men inspired from the earth ..

Hebrews 9:8-10 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Which was a figure (parable)for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

Returning the government of peace that surpasses our human understanding. The work of Father and Son working togethter to bring born again peace.

Restoring it to the period of Judges men and woman prophets with no earthly representative the promise of Joel .

No hierarchy of venerable men lording it over the faith of the non venerable pew sitters .Again the abomination of desolation making the word of God (sola scriptura) without effect.

Acts 2:15-17 King James Version (KJV) For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all fleshevery nation) and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,(declare the will of God not seen) and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

 

[Albion]

I disagree. What we are speaking of here - the living out of the full equality of men and women in ministry as in every other aspect of life - is to my view exactly part of that transition to the Church of which Christ is the head. It's not a new stage in salvation history, it's the realisation of the implications of the incarnation and all that came after.

What prevented God from transitioning to his desired form of church governance for 2000 years? And please do not say that it was a chauvinistic society which prevented God from going ahead with his plans.

 

[Paidiske]

What prevented God from transitioning to his desired form of church governance for 2000 years? And please do not say that it was a chauvinistic society which prevented God from going ahead with his plans.

Certainly I think human sinfulness and disobedience is part of the answer. I also think that God's purposes have unfolded gradually as we have learned and grown. We see similar impulses in the end of slavery, the end of apartheid (and the end of Christian justifications given for those institutions) and so on.

Of course I do believe women were much more equally treated in the very primitive church, but it has been long painful centuries to recover that.

Ecclesiastes says that God has made everything suitable for its time; and when it was the suitable time, this next step in our growth and obedience as Christians became possible.