Women preachers/pastors

[PollyJetix]

Do you think a celibate person being more focused on God than a married person is true?

It is possible that one who is married could be pulled into dealing with cooking, cleaning, making money, etc, more than one who is unmarried. After all, Paul says this can happen.
But being single is no guarantee that free time and attention will be spent on God.

And I have known many married couples who prayed and ministered together, and they were much stronger as a team than they would have been as singles.

 

[Sammy-San]

1 Peter 2:9-10

All of those who are IN CHRIST are kings and priests.

Every redeemed soul is adopted by God, the King of the Universe.
In Christ, we are seated in heavenly places, at the Father's right hand.
We now reign in Him, and satan is a defeated foe, under our feet.
This is the position of every true believer, in Christ. We reign in Him. Now.

The only mediator between God and man is Jesus.
We need no fallen human to stand before God for us, to offer up sacrifices on our behalf, since Jesus came and changed that kind of priesthood.
Now we are EACH part of the universal church, the temple of God... and each of us is a caretaker and priest of God in our earthly physical bodies, which is the Temple of the Holy Ghost.
Each believer is a priest offering up the sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving before the Lord.

Christ, who is both our Sacrifice, and also our High Priest, was offered once for all.
He does not need to be offered again on our behalf, by an earthly priest.

I do not negate the role of pastors, in leading the flock of God.
But the idea of an earthly priesthood in the church is not biblical.
It creates the idea of a more holy caste standing on Christ's behalf, over a less-than-sanctified laity.

But Christ will have a sanctified church. The entire church. Not just a select caste of priests and monks and nuns.

What do you think of the person on this thread who commented that priest is synonymous with an elder?

 

[PollyJetix]

What do you think of the person on this thread who commented that priest is synonymous with an elder?

Perhaps traditionally, in certain churches. But not Biblically.

 

[Sammy-San]

Perhaps traditionally, in certain churches. But not Biblically.

So the issue is the term is bibically improper? For example, do you think other religions using the term priest is improper? Words have more than one meaning-so defining them can be difficult.

 

[PollyJetix]

So the issue is the term is bibically improper? For example, do you think other religions using the term priest is improper? Words have more than one meaning-so defining them can be difficult.

Other religions are completely improper. So whether they call their "leaders" by the term "priest" makes no difference.
The way the Bible uses the term is the way we ought to use it.
Otherwise, we allow the world to define our terms... which hands them tremendous power.

 

[Sammy-San]

Other religions are completely improper. So whether they call their "leaders" by the term "priest" makes no difference.
The way the Bible uses the term is the way we ought to use it.
Otherwise, we allow the world to define our terms... which hands them tremendous power.

What about Messianic rabbis-do you think they are priests?

 

[PollyJetix]

What about Messianic rabbis-do you think they are priests?

No. Not Biblically. Anyone who receives the work of Christ, enters into the New Covenant, which has only ONE mediator between God and man. Anyone else trying to label themselves as a "priest" is playing outside the rules of the New Covenant.

 

[Sammy-San]

No. Not Biblically. Anyone who receives the work of Christ, enters into the New Covenant, which has only ONE mediator between God and man. Anyone else trying to label themselves as a "priest" is playing outside the rules of the New Covenant.

Is priest and mediator synonymous?

 

[PollyJetix]

Is priest and mediator synonymous?

A priest is one who offers sacrifices on behalf of another person.
A mediator is one who speaks on behalf of another. A go-between.

 

[Paidiske]

Except that, in English, priest has two meanings. It has that older, sacrificial meaning; but it also is basically a contraction of "presbyteros," meaning elder.

So when an English-speaking Christian uses the word "priest," you need to clarify whether they mean it in the sense of "one who offers a sacrifice," or "elder."

 

[Sammy-San]

Except that, in English, priest has two meanings. It has that older, sacrificial meaning; but it also is basically a contraction of "presbyteros," meaning elder.

So when an English-speaking Christian uses the word "priest," you need to clarify whether they mean it in the sense of "one who offers a sacrifice," or "elder."

Is the priesthood of all believers biblical?

 

[PollyJetix]

Except that, in English, priest has two meanings. It has that older, sacrificial meaning; but it also is basically a contraction of "presbyteros," meaning elder.

So when an English-speaking Christian uses the word "priest," you need to clarify whether they mean it in the sense of "one who offers a sacrifice," or "elder."

I know the etymology of the word does have that lineage.
However, in the realm of concepts, in the New Testament, are we not told clearly that all of God's people are "a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people"?

Is not the body of each believer a temple of the Holy Spirit? Therefore, within each Spirit-temple, the believer is the priest of that temple, and no one else can offer the sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving that are to come from within that temple. The idea that another person is a "priest" over them detracts from the reality of each of us are priests.

Yes, we have "presbuteros" in the church...but we are better off using terms that are not colored by Old Testament usage which subconsciously elevates those elders in the minds of the laity to the level of priesthood, in the sense of offering sacrifices on behalf of the people. Only Christ stands in that place. Hebrews 8:1-3

 

[Paidiske]

The reality is, though, that "priest" is a term used by many Christians. I'm a priest, in the sense of elder; that's the term my denomination uses and it would be problematic to seek to change it. So all I can do is seek to make sure that people understand that it means "elder" and not that I offer sacrifice on anyone else's behalf, which is why I keep making the point in threads like this.

 

[Sammy-San]

I know the etymology of the word does have that lineage.
However, in the realm of concepts, in the New Testament, are we not told clearly that all of God's people are "a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people"?

Is not the body of each believer a temple of the Holy Spirit? Therefore, within each Spirit-temple, the believer is the priest of that temple, and no one else can offer the sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving that are to come from within that temple. The idea that another person is a "priest" over them detracts from the reality of each of us are priests.

Yes, we have "presbuteros" in the church...but we are better off using terms that are not colored by Old Testament usage which subconsciously elevates those elders in the minds of the laity to the level of priesthood, in the sense of offering sacrifices on behalf of the people. Only Christ stands in that place. Hebrews 8:1-3

Is the issue that a priest is an elevated title?

 

[Zoii]

That assumes that the Bible is the product solely of some humans who recorded their own views on religious (and other) matters. I can't think of anywhere within the spectrum of Christian thought where such a notion has a place.

Let me try to illustrate. You probably wear clothing of mixed fibres, you probably don't condone stoning, you probably eat shellfish, and you probably wouldn't condone the marrying of your daughter to her rapist. To say that the bible's espoused values are FIXED and not apt to reconsidering in light of our evolving culture, simply isnt true - because our culture within Christianity HAS evolved. To say some things can be reconsidered BUT not women preaching is irreconcilable. If some things can be brushed aside due to evolved cultural norms, then so can the notion of women preachers.

And besides there ARE female preachers and to deny that they exist and function well is like sticking your head in the sand and saying "no no no".

 

[PollyJetix]

Is the issue that a priest is an elevated title?

No. "Pastor" is also an elevated title.
The issue is that the term "priest" has the Old Testament connotation of one who prays to God for you, and is holier than you have to be, and who offers up a sacrifice to God on your behalf.
This understanding is very much the same as I believe the RCC uses it. The Eucharist, the confessional, etc... these are priestly duties more in line with the OT, not the NT.

 

[Paidiske]

Ah well... let's not derail this off topic into a discussion of how we understand or practice the Lord's supper. We could perhaps start another thread for that if need be!

 

[Philip_B]

No. "Pastor" is also an elevated title.
The issue is that the term "priest" has the Old Testament connotation of one who prays to God for you, and is holier than you have to be, and who offers up a sacrifice to God on your behalf.
This understanding is very much the same as I believe the RCC uses it. The Eucharist, the confessional, etc... these are priestly duties more in line with the OT, not the NT.

In fairness the argument you present is an argument for no role of leadership or specific guidance, and no definition of our separate, distinct and unique gifts and skills. The priest in a parish community does not need to be the most holy person in the community, and in my mind probably isn't. They may well have particular gifts in preaching, administration, pastoral care or liturgy, and because we like multitaskers probably all of the above. I personally the semantics are not the issue. The largest majority of Christians belong to Churches that embrace three orders of ministry in the foundation of the structure coming from the early Church (2nd Century, and probably starting in the 1st Century) and those three orders of ministry have consistently been called for that period of time, Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. In the Churches that have evolved since the 16th Century there has been a tendency to use other titles as a point of distinction, and generally where they did not embrace the historic episcopate.

This thread is discussing if women might be considered as candidates to fulfil these roles, or Bishops, Priests and Deacons, and however else that role might be described in other Churches such as Minister, Pastor, Preacher, etc. I suspect the force of the thread is not about Bishops as there are many other considerations there.

 

[PollyJetix]

In fairness the argument you present is an argument for no role of leadership or specific guidance, and no definition of our separate, distinct and unique gifts and skills.

Not at all.

 

[Albion]

Let me try to illustrate. You probably wear clothing of mixed fibres, you probably don't condone stoning, you probably eat shellfish, and you probably wouldn't condone the marrying of your daughter to her rapist. To say that the bible's espoused values are FIXED and not apt to reconsidering in light of our evolving culture, simply isnt true - because our culture within Christianity HAS evolved.

Well, no. You are not citing some presumed "evolution" that we guess is justified because "times change" or something like that which we simply stipulate.

Here you are citing a change that the Bible itself explains. When that is what we're dealing with, of course we are not going by our own hunches but by the authority of the Bible.

And besides there ARE female preachers and to deny that they exist and function well is like sticking your head in the sand and saying "no no no".

Easy divorce, same-sex marriage, and child ministers are also accepted in some churches. Your argument is that that must be right because they exist. I don't think that's a sound argument.