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

[Albion]

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.

None of these is enshrined in God's revealed word, though.

We cannot compare societal evolution, even in a good direction, with the standard all of us Christians agree is our guide to morals, church practices, and all of that.

If, on the other hand, we were dealing with something that is not established by God himself, such as the liturgical colors, the manner of distributing the Communion elements, or such....THEN I would probably agree with your contention as would most other people, I think.

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.

I see no evidence of that. The Anglican and Catholic churches which do not ordain women still are more than supportive of having them as leaders in such positions as eucharistic ministers, readers during the liturgy, members of the church councils, Sunday School Superintendents, delegates to the policy-making national conventions, etc.

None of the women mentioned in the New Testament that are cited during debates by today's proponents of women's ordination held positions that show us that women in the early church were "much more equally treated" than this.

 

[garee]

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.

Yes until the time of reformation faithless Israel (not all Israel is not born again again from above just a remnant).. The faithless Jew established a pagan form of government .A hierarchy of venerable men lording it over the non venerable pew sitters. Women was not allowed to participle in the ceremonial shadows , a high wall 15 foot separated the woman form the Jewish men and another high wall separated the Jews from the gentile .

When the time of reformation came the walls fell down. Today men and woman can gather together under the new ceremonial law (1 Corinthians 11) .The head of hair covering for the woman (her glory) and no covering of the head of hair for the men . Woman hair their representative glory .No glory other than the unseen glory that the ceremony pointed to was to be seen(by faith) believing God not seen) They worked together a one to point ahead to the unseen glory which we will receive when we receive our new bodies.

It will be as a new creation neither male nor female Jew nor Gentile as the chaste virgin bride .. . Christians the church .

 

[Paidiske]

None of these is enshrined in God's revealed word, though.

We cannot compare societal evolution, even in a good direction, with the standard all of us Christians agree is our guide to morals, church practices, and all of that.

I'm not really sure what you mean. Scripture offered only a very mild challenge to the institution of slavery; now most Christians agree that slavery is an offence against the dignity of every person made in the image of God. Scripture offered only a very mild challenge to patriarchy, but similarly many of us have come to see that patriarchy is an offence against the dignity of every person made in the image of God. It's exactly parallel.

If, on the other hand, we were dealing with something that is not established by God himself, such as the liturgical colors, the manner of distributing the Communion elements, or such....THEN I would probably agree with your contention as would most other people, I think.

Well, at least we both agree we're dealing with something far more fundamentally important than whether the paraments are blue or violet for Advent.

Of course, the worth and dignity and value and gifting and calling and full participation in the Church and its life and mission, of women as well as men, are established by God himself, but some people like to overlook that.

I see no evidence of that.

Well, we've been over that many times and you dismiss whatever is raised. I don't really see any point to go over it again.

 

[garee]

I'm not really sure what you mean. Scripture offered only a very mild challenge to the institution of slavery; now most Christians agree that slavery is an offence against the dignity of every person made in the image of God. Scripture offered only a very mild challenge to patriarchy, but similarly many of us have come to see that patriarchy is an offence against the dignity of every person made in the image of God. It's exactly parallel.



Well, at least we both agree we're dealing with something far more fundamentally important than whether the paraments are blue or violet for Advent.

Of course, the worth and dignity and value and gifting and calling and full participation in the Church and its life and mission, of women as well as men, are established by God himself, but some people like to overlook that.

Well, we've been over that many times and you dismiss whatever is raised. I don't really see any point to go over it again.

Scripture infallibly informs us and warns us against patriarchy. Kings and princes or fathers that lord it over the non venerable pew sitters.

The first century reformation came (Hebrews 9) and made desolate kings, princes. fathers in Israel .The abomination of desolation.

We serve one form of Government as it is written by the finger of God called; all thing written in the law and the prophets (sola scriptura) The two witnesses of our Holy Father in heaven

 

[Unqualified]

What about Aquila and Priscilla. A teaching team and married. Calvary Chapels puts only one restriction on women- they cannot be senior pastors. Men teach men and women teach women.

 

[garee]

What about Aquila and Priscilla. A teaching team and married. Calvary Chapels puts only one restriction on women- they cannot be senior pastors. Men teach men and women teach women.

Hi I would offer

They were not married to each other.

In that way according to the promise of Joel he sends us out of the assembly into the whole world two by two as a kingdom of priest after the new order. Which is no hierarchy of venerable lording it over the faith of the non-venerable . (the abomination of desolation Kings in Israel)

When families of more than one gather together they must follow the new testament ceremonial law. (1 Corinthians 11) Both woman, men and children make up the ministry as a family . They are to be examples to the flock as joint minsters just like. The father and the Son

Two working as one to form a government of peace .

1 Peter 5:3 Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being examples to the flock.

 

[DragonFox91]

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.

I've seen some of your posts, & while you seem to have more liberal theology then me, this is a topic I tend to be a bit more liberal on.

I think women leaders would've been stoned in those days. It's always taught during Easter how scandalous it even was for women for sharing Jesus's empty tomb b/c they were women. How much more scandalous would it would've been for the leaders of all the early churches to be women. At the time God needed a religious "revolution" & not a gender revolution.

How much of what we interpret as "theology" really shouldn't be interpreted as such? Paul's writings are individual letters written to specific churches going thru their own specific problems.

That being said, I do think it's an area that needs to be carefully tread even today. We need to make sure the scandal is still the cross, & isn't choosing women pastors just to choose women pastors. I tend to be of the opinion men should be vetted first, then if no good option or a really, really good woman comes along, choose the woman.