Should Women be Pastors?

[gracebyfaith]

About a week ago, I met a lady pastor who seemed very affective
in her ministry.  Her husband was also in pastoral ministry, he recently
retired to part time, she was still full time.

I was raised in an environment where I think I remember hearing of
only one woman pastor in our particular denomination and very, very
few women with their minister's license.  Why do you think this role is
primarily dominated by men?  And do you think women should be pastors
or exercising authority over men, according to Scripture?

Please share your thoughts, even if only an opinion - thanks.

[fidei in nuce]

Gracebyfaith,

Since this is in the 'learn about' section, would you please inform me as to role of a pastor in the Oneness movement?  What is the fundamental role of thier ordination [license]?  I think that will help me understand what you are referring to when you speak of 'authority over men."

[Acumen]

Fidei,

Since this is in the 'learn about' section, would you please inform me as to role of a pastor in the Oneness movement?  What is the fundamental role of thier ordination [license]?  I think that will help me understand what you are referring to when you speak of 'authority over men."

First, welcome to the forum.

I can't speak for the leaders of UPCI (oneness movement), and I'm ignorant of the criteria they apply to seekers of ministerial licensure.  However, I know their general position on female pastors, and their conclusion is similar to the Roman Catholic church, however the reasoning is different.  The Roman Catholic church, as I'm sure you're well aware, do not ordinate women because none of the divinely selected twelve apostles were women, and only a baptized man can receive the sacred ordination. 

According to UPCI, women are not to attain positions of authority as based on 1 Timothy 2:11, 12, which reads:  1 Tim 2:11-12  Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Their understanding of this passage is women must be in submission to man's spiritual authority.  Some (I'm not sure what %) UPCI ministers have women ministers in their church structure, however they are under some male leadership at some point.

-Acumen

 

[gracebyfaith]

Thanks Acumen, you explained it much better than I would have.

The lady Pastor that I met wasn't UPCI, but it made me consider the
UPCI traditions.  And like everything else, I began to question, "Why?"

Fidei in nuce, I'm not sure of the exact job description, but I'm
it would include to feed the sheep and preparing them for the work
of the ministry.  There are some obvious duties that would be more
administrative.

I've also witnessed (another obvious) depending on the personality
of the particular pastor, their leadership style and role can be completely
different compared to the upci pastor up the road.  Some seem to
use their assumed authority more heavily than the next.

UPCI seems to be extreme in many views when it comes to women. 
I attend a oneness Pentecostal church, though I'm not in agreement
with some of the UPCI traditions.

I'm trying to imagine what other obstacles a woman pastor would
encounter different from those of a woman leader. 

Do we believe women should be completely silent in the church,
or just not quarrelsome?  Why would that be any different than
a quarrelsome man?  I don't believe Paul was literally meaning
silent, but rather to contemptuous and also taking into consideration
the culture he lived in. 

Fidei in nuce, please translate your name for me - thanks. 

[fidei in nuce]

‘Fidei in nuce’ is translated faith in a nutshell

Thanks for the reply.  I always found that verse from II Timothy problematic.  In Paul's second epistle to the Corinthians, he has women prophesying.  Was it in Church?  Who knows!  But the part of II Tm that I would refer you to are verses 13 and 14—“For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.”  Being brought back to creation and the fall and encompassing all that the creation story would envision within us, we would see that being a woman is more than just having a smooth face and being a male is more that broad shoulders and hair everywhere.  There’s something intrinsic to the identity of man and woman.

Putting aside the intention of who’s to blame; Adam or Eve [remember that it was through Adam that all man sinned], the Catholic Church would see those unique roles of transcendence and imminence, respectively, imaging God.  Then in the function of the ministerial priesthood, the female would literally be out of place.  Yes, Christ chose no women as Apostles and the Catholic Church sees itself with no authority to do otherwise, but it must go beyond a vertical positioning between the sexes.  Don’t you think?

My question was speaking to this when I asked how the purpose of ordination would relate to this complimentary and uniqueness of male and female in the Oneness movement.  In what sense is not having a women instruct a man understood?  Talk to you soon!

[Acumen]

Fidei,

I always found that verse from II Timothy problematic.

You ain't the only one.

Putting aside the intention of who’s to blame; Adam or Eve [remember that it was through Adam that all man sinned], the Catholic Church would see those unique roles of transcendence and imminence, respectively, imaging God.  Then in the function of the ministerial priesthood, the female would literally be out of place.  Yes, Christ chose no women as Apostles and the Catholic Church sees itself with no authority to do otherwise, but it must go beyond a vertical positioning between the sexes.  Don’t you think?

It's curious that Eve was the first to sin, and yet Adam brought sin into the world.  Could it be that Adam, being the spiritual head of Eve, must take responsibility for Eve's sin?  Did not Jesus, as our spiritual head, take responsibility for our sin by dying on the cross?

My question was speaking to this when I asked how the purpose of ordination would relate to this complimentary and uniqueness of male and female in the Oneness movement.  In what sense is not having a women instruct a man understood?  Talk to you soon!

And that's the rub!  It's not talked about often -- every now and then, it's preached from the pulpit, but for me it never clarified much.

-Acumen

[gracebyfaith]

I'm guessing UPC doesn't address the topic of women pastors much
because generally speaking it's not much of a consideration to them. 
Again, I think some of their traditions/man made doctrines pertaining to
women are very extreme.

I don't believe Adam was held accountable for Eve's sin.  Each were
given their own consequences for their own individual sins.  In fact,
Christ "chose" to lay down His life, it wasn't forced upon Him.  Love is
always a choice.  The Father didn't send a different person in the God
head - He came Himself (oneness).  I think this reinforces the idea that
"each" will give an account for his own actions.

Do you know of any reasons why women shouldn't be pastors?  If we
can prophecy and be used in the gifts, is there much of a difference? 
Remember I think Paul was addressing a particular culture where women
didn't have a voice.  I don't think Paul devalued women, I think the
culture restricted them.  For the sake of unity and harmony in the body,
there were some guidelines.  This didn't make it a law, just a custom.

[Acumen]

Grace,

Then why does sin enter the world through Adam when Eve was the first to sin?

[gracebyfaith]

I'm not sure, but maybe because Eve came from Adam's side? 
How does that sound? 

[Acumen]

Not bad.

[fidei in nuce]

I don't believe we should read too much in to Romans v.12, converning who sinned first.  St. Paul, recognizing that Jesus is the new Adam who brings life, is simply lining up genders by stating that it was the first Adam who brought death.

It's fun to speculate whether death originated with Adam or Eve, but I think they were both fully culpable.  The timeline of who went first is an imposition on the image of us all sharing in that sin.  Anyway, that is my initial thoughts.

[Acumen]

Fidei,

I don't believe we should read too much in to Romans v.12, converning who sinned first.  St. Paul, recognizing that Jesus is the new Adam who brings life, is simply lining up genders by stating that it was the first Adam who brought death.

I disagree.  In 1 Timothy, Paul makes a point of illumination that Adam was the first formed, and it was Eve who had been deceived.  There might be a good reason why Eve sinned first, and yet Paul focuses on Adam as the catchall.  For instance, if Adam (as the spiritual head) takes responsibility for both of their sins, it may help explain why women don't play a leadership role in the church.  Or perhaps, originally Adam wasn't the spiritual head, and Eve's femine propensity for being deceived disqualified women from leadership positions?  Or perhaps, it's like what Grace said -- that Adam is used as the catchall because Eve literally came from Adam, and Paul had this in mind when composing the analogy.

-Acumen

[Acumen]

El,

The role of women in "pastoral authority" is not based on who sinned first, it is based on the role of masculinity and femininity.

Fancy seeing you here.  I didn't realize you came here to ask us some questions.

I don't think anyone claimed that pastoral authority is based upon who sinned first.  My point is that maybe there is a good reason why Paul chose not to pin the blame on Eve when he said sin came into the world through one man.

There is a very profound purpose to why some are male and some are female, it's not a matter of the dominance of one over the other, it's a matter of a reciprocal give and take. 

Let me ask you a question.  Can any denomination other than the Catholic church come up with "profound" ideas without actually copying the Catholic church, or is this type of language only reserved for the one true church?

Male priests are a matter of representation not a birthright, they represent the role of Christ as priest and giver of the sacraments.  Women have every right and every obligation to lead as it concerns those things which are in response to the "giver," to receive and to respond.

Sounds like just a nicer way of saying that women are to be submissive (taking it) and men should be leading (giving), or was there something more profound that I missed?

-Acumen

[Acumen]

Yeah, sure.

[fidei in nuce]

I will reply to the further comments on Romans v.12, but since this is the information forum, I would like to ask what is the importance of the connection between the gender and teacher in the Oneness movement?  The male-only Catholic ordained priesthood does not fall back on I Timothy to support it.  And part of the reason may rely in this comment.

I still say that St. Paul is juxtaposing the two Adams [I awkwardly said, lining up genders].  Even if we literally say that Eve sinned first by deception and Adam sinned knowingly, I don’t think that is St. Paul’s point.  This is treatise on justification through Christ with a reference back to the sin ‘of one man’ [v.12] as the new Adam ‘was a type of the one who was to come’ [v.14].  Sin came through Adam, because in their worldview, a woman could not transmit the nature.  St. Thomas Aquinas speaks to this in the Summa, saying, “so that the semen by its own power transmits the human nature from parent to child, and with that nature the stain which infects it…” ST I-II, q81, a1. [Cf. Reply to Objection 2].  The nature was in the semen and the woman provides the fertile womb.  Without hubris, we know that they were unaware of the genetic contribution of the woman.  So, in spite of the sin of both parents, death came through Adam.

Rather than going into an exegetical view of I Timothy, I was wondering in what way it is critical to the ‘ordained’ clergy of the Oneness movement?  If it is critical, then maybe it’s worth a shot!

[Acumen]

Fidei,

I will reply to the further comments on Romans v.12, but since this is the information forum, I would like to ask what is the importance of the connection between the gender and teacher in the Oneness movement?  The male-only Catholic ordained priesthood does not fall back on I Timothy to support it.  And part of the reason may rely in this comment.

I don't know if the oneness movement has a creed on the role of women in the church, if that is what you're inquiring about.  The most we know about it comes from "pulpit preaching."  The Catholic Church had no difficulties specifying why women aren't to be pastoral leaders without a single reference to a particular scriptural passage, however protestants must rely on scripture for such specifications.  I would presume that there isn't a oneness creed on the matter primarily because there isn't much scriptural instruction on the matter.

I still say that St. Paul is juxtaposing the two Adams [I awkwardly said, lining up genders].  Even if we literally say that Eve sinned first by deception and Adam sinned knowingly, I don’t think that is St. Paul’s point. 

Right, but why limit Paul's scope to the juxtaposition?

This is treatise on justification through Christ with a reference back to the sin ‘of one man’ [v.12] as the new Adam ‘was a type of the one who was to come’ [v.14].  Sin came through Adam, because in their worldview, a woman could not transmit the nature.  St. Thomas Aquinas speaks to this in the Summa, saying, “so that the semen by its own power transmits the human nature from parent to child, and with that nature the stain which infects it…” ST I-II, q81, a1. [Cf. Reply to Objection 2].  The nature was in the semen and the woman provides the fertile womb.  Without hubris, we know that they were unaware of the genetic contribution of the woman.  So, in spite of the sin of both parents, death came through Adam.

That's an interesting take on the issue.  I have a lot of respect for Thomas Aquinas, but like any other philosopher, his thinking isn't necessarily infallible.  I like Grace's comment better . . . that since Eve came directly from Adam, sin essentially came into the world through Adam.

-Acumen

[fidei in nuce]

Acumen,

As for Aquinas, he's never infallible.   I was just using him as an example for the worldview expressed by anyone alive prior to the 18th century; that the sinful nature cannot be transmitted through a woman [vessel], but through the man [seed].   The analogy that is similiar is how we take a plant seed and place it in the soil to grow.  Everything potential and essential to the nature of the plant, is contained in the seed; the women can only be the receptor.  Death came through Adam [and the good nature through Christ as St. Paul is making the case for--justification], because only the male is capable of this transmission.

There might be second and third century commentary on this topic, but I don't have time to look it up at the moment.  If you find any, let me know!  I do recall writings speaking of St. Mary undoing the know tied by Eve...[maybe St. Ireneaus?].  Thanks!

fidei in nuce 

[gracebyfaith]

The giving and taking concept is interesting.  Personally, as a woman
in the church, I'm glad I'm not relegated to a taker only (an inferior
role in my estimation and with an oppressing tone). 

The principles of giving are taught to men and women alike - WE are
the body of Christ.  As Christ gave, WE all give.  I'm reminded of how
some churches don't allow women to sit with men, and those who don't
allowed women to take communion unless the patriarch of the family
or even her son (male) is there to give it to her?  Anyway.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate a truly masculine MAN - I married
one )  However, my husband doesn't treat me like my role is restricted
to anything other than my own limitations/gifts.  He leads our family, but
he doesn't feel the need to remind me that he's a MAN or "the priest" in
our home.  Whenever I've seen a man or leader have to TELL people
they are the man or leader with expectations that you should line up
behind them, it seems they're pulling a power play - trying to gain control. 
That's a different topic.

I see God giving gifts to the church to be operated by whomever it was
given (male/female), all for the edification of the body.  He is not limiting
these gifts (including the gift of a pastor) to male only.  I would expect
there to be clarification on these matters in the Scripture if He intended
there to be a distinction.

Personally, I would prefer Scripture when it comes to how the Church
is to be ordered.   

Just my opinion

[gracebyfaith]

El,
There is a pattern I see in your posts.  You tend claim many things,
most I skim over, EXCEPT when you claim that there are plenty of
Scriptures.  Then you'll provide only 1-2 obscure Scriptures that
don't prove your position.

I'll be waiting for all these Scriptures that supposedly "explicitly
and implicitly" teach only men should be pastors.  That was the
topic.  Not trying to be rude, but I don't really care what traditions
the Catholic church continue to follow.  I care about what the
Scriptures say on topics discussed.

Sincerely,
GracebyFaith

[fidei in nuce]

GraceBy Faith,

I am unable to respond with scripture at the present, but I will do that, because your question is an honest one.  Too, I don't think you're being rude...I've found your post to quiet in tone...thanks!

But, I have made no appeal to Catholic Tradition.  My only reference outside of Sacred Scritpure was to Aquinas and that was for a historical mindset, not as material proof!

Fidei In Nuce