Church Fires Teacher for Being Female

Intrepid wrote


hhhmmmm!!!!!! Now i'm intrigued.......

It is interesting to me how clear language can so easily discarded. 14:35 looks as though it even prevents women from even asking a question in church, directing them to keep their mouths shut until they can ask their husbands at home.

From Barnes' Notes on the OT and NT

1 COR. 14:34

Let your women keep silence ... This rule is positive, explicit, and universal. There is no ambiguity in the expressions; and there can be no difference of opinion, one would suppose, in regard to their meaning. The sense evidently is, that in all those things which he had specified, the women were to keep silence; they were to take no part. He had discoursed of speaking foreign languages, and of prophecy; and the evident sense is, that in regard to all these they were to keep silence, or were not to engage in them. These pertained solely to the male portion of the congregation. These things constituted the business of the public teaching; and in this the female part of the congregation were to be silent. "They were not to teach the people, nor were they to interrupt those who were speaking" -- Rosenmuller. It is probable that, on pretence of being inspired, the women had assumed the office of public teachers. In 1 Cor. 11, Paul had argued against their doing this in a certain manner -- without their veils (1 Cor. 11:4), and he had shown, that "on that account," and "in that manner," it was improper for them to assume the office of public teachers, and to conduct the devotions of the church. The force of the argument in 1 Cor. 11:is, that what he there states would be a sufficient reason against the practice, even if there were no other. It was contrary to all decency and propriety that they should appear "in that manner" in public. He here argues against the practice on every ground; forbids it altogether; and shows that on every consideration it was to be regarded as improper for them even so much as "to ask a question" in time of public service. There is, therefore, no inconsistency between the argument in 1 Cor. 11:and the statement here; and the force of the whole is, that "on every consideration" it was improper, and to be expressly prohibited, for women to conduct the devotions of the church. It does not refer to those only who claimed to be inspired, but to all; it does not refer merely to acts of public preaching, but to all acts of speaking, or even asking questions, when the church is assembled for public worship. No rule in the New Testament is more positive than this; and however plausible may be the reasons which may be urged for disregarding it, and for suffering women to take part in conducting public worship, yet the authority of the apostle Paul is positive, and his meaning cannot be mistaken; compare 1 Tim. 2:11,12.

Anyone who wonders why the Paulists are controversial within Christianity simply needs to look at a situation like this.

I am not really familiar with Paulists. From what I understand they are Catholic Priests of a particular order. Is that correct? Are they different from other Catholics?

Intrepid, I'd describe the Paulists (I'm not a religious scholar, just a long-time student and currently doubting Christian) as one fringe of mainstream Christianity which believes in Paul's version, and interpretation, of events in early Christian history.


This is a generally interesting (though not to every Christian's taste, for sure) webpage (with many useful links) about the Apostle Paul.


http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/paul/paul.htm

Thanks for the link. I will read it later. Already, I am in disagreement with them since they consider Paul and not Jesus the founder of Christianity. I will give it every consideration, however.

From John Macarthur's Study bible/commentary on 1 cor 14:34-35

The context in this verse concerns prophecy but includes the general theme of this chapter ie tongues. Rather than leading they are to be submissive as Gods word makes clear . It is not coincidental that many modern churches that have tongues-speakings and claim gifts of healing and miracles also permit women to lead worship, and preach. Women may be gifted teachers but they are not permitted by God "to speak" in churches. In fact for them to do so is shameful. Apparently, certain women were out of order in disruptively asking questions publicly in the chaotic services.....

this is the view i take......Women can teach sunday school because its not a leadership position...The pastor is the leader of the CHurch and should lead the service...

From religioustolerance.org

on the topic of



http://www.religioustolerance.org/femclrgy.htm



I'm sure I'll be reading, and thinking, about this (along with other religious questions) for the rest of my life.

To reword my inquisition, I wonder how many people in the range of 140-150 IQ harbour beliefs in spooks, gods, deities, and other faith based propositions.

To all others, re: myself - Yes, I am a Satanist. No, I am not out to shock anyone, I am out to streamline my mind, so to speak. No, I do not worship anything , save myself. Satanism is autotheistic (a quick search of this site will bring up some of my opinions on that subject)

To Set - I think you're a dink too...
..which is partially why I enjoy reading your posts.
Namby pamby niceness has little use in a place like this if you ask me.
<---the smiley is special order just for you, because I know how you love them so

I worked my way out of the catholic church while still liking the paulists I knew. Ellwood Keiser (or similar name, he got sort of famous at one point) was a priest at my church... St. Paul's, as fate would have it. I liked it because all those folks were forward looking (!!) Most lib catholic church around at the time, or so I thought. I don't remember any sermons about shutting women up. But then I might have been daydreaming. So, let me add a smidge of doubt about how much all the Paulists agreed with Paul... 'course, that was then, mid sixties.

Clergywomen Find Hard Path to Bigger Pulpit
August 26, 2006
Clergywomen Find Hard Path to Bigger Pulpit
By NEELA BANERJEE
New York Times

In the 18 years since her ordination, the Rev. Elaine Puckett has wrestled with whether she should be in the pulpit at all.

When she left divinity school, Ms. Puckett, a United Methodist, thought that some day she might lead a large congregation in her hometown, Atlanta. Instead, she has shuttled between jobs as an associate pastor on someone else's staff or as the leader of a small congregation fighting to survive. In contrast, the men she was ordained with, for the most part, have moved on to run bigger churches.

"You begin to question your competence," said Ms. Puckett, 58, an associate pastor at the large Embry Hills United Methodist Church in Atlanta. "When you look at the endless cycle of one appointment after another after another like these, your endurance runs low."

The trajectory of Ms. Puckett's career is familiar to many other women in the Protestant clergy.

Whether they come from theologically liberal denominations or conservative ones, black churches or white, women in the clergy still bump against what many call the stained-glass ceiling ?- longstanding limits, preferences and prejudices within their denominations that keep them from leading bigger congregations and having the opportunity to shape the faith of more people.

Women now make up 51 percent of the students in divinity school. But in the mainline Protestant churches that have been ordaining women for decades, women account for only a small percentage ?- about 3 percent, according to one survey by a professor at Duke University ?- of pastors who lead large congregations, those with average Sunday attendance over 350. In evangelical churches, most of which do not ordain women, some women opt to leave for other denominations that will accept them as ministers. Women from historically black churches who want to ascend to the pulpit often start their own congregations.

This year, women were elected to lead the Episcopal Church, the United Methodist Church and the Presbyterian Church U.S.A. But such success has not filtered down to the congregational level, said the Rev. Dr. Catherine Stonehouse, dean of the school of practical theology at the Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Ky.

It is often easier for women in the mainline churches ?- historic Protestant denominations like Presbyterian, Lutheran, Methodist, Episcopal and the United Church of Christ ?- to get elected as bishops and as other leaders than to head large congregations, Dr. Stonehouse said.

People in the pews often do not accept women in the pulpit, clergy members said. "It's still difficult for many in this culture to see women as figures of religious authority," said the Rev. Cynthia M. Campbell, president of McCormick Theological Seminary, a Presbyterian seminary in Chicago.

The Rev. Dottie Escobedo-Frank, pastor of Crossroads United Methodist Church in Phoenix, said that at every church where she has served, people have told her they were leaving because she is a woman.

At a large church where she was an associate pastor, a colleague told her that when she was in the pulpit, he could not focus on what she was saying because she is a woman. A man in the congregation covered his eyes whenever she preached.

Conflicting interpretations of the Bible underlie debates over women's authority and ordination. Opponents of their ordination cite St. Paul's words in I Timothy 2:12, in which he says, "I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men; she is to keep silent." But proponents point to St. Paul again in Galatians 3:28, which says, "There is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Ms. Escobedo-Frank is familiar with the argument.

"People have written me in almost every church I have been in except the current one, and said, ?'Timothy says women can't preach, so how can you?' " she said.

In the first decade after ordination, men and women usually hold similar positions, said Jackson W. Carroll, professor emeritus of religion and society at Duke University Divinity School and author of "God's Potters: Pastoral Leadership and The Shaping of Congregations," published this year.

In their second decade in ordained ministry, however, 70 percent of men had moved on to medium-sized and large congregations, Mr. Carroll said, based on a 2001 survey of 870 senior and solo pastors. By comparison, only 37 percent of women led medium and large larger congregations.

In the mainline Protestant denominations, Mr. Carroll found that women made up 20 percent of lead or solo pastors. But of the pastors at the top of the pay scale, largely those who lead big congregations, only 3 percent are women. Of all conservative Protestant congregations, 1 percent are led by women, he said; of African-American churches, just 3 percent are led by women.

"It's a combination of age-old customs and democratic myopia: that in the marketplace of ideas and values, men matter most and that by definition, women have to take a back seat," said Dr. Alton B. Pollard III, director of black church studies and associate professor of religion and culture at the Candler School of Theology at Emory University.

Several denominations began ordaining women in the 19th century, from the Quakers and the Christian Connection Church, a forbear of the United Church of Christ, to the churches of the Wesleyan-Holiness tradition. One of the precursors to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) first ordained women in 1956, the same year that the United Methodist Church granted full clergy rights to women. The church bodies that ultimately formed the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America first ordained women in 1970, and the Episcopal Church officially ordained them in 1976.

When the Pentecostal movement started in 1906, it did not bar women from preaching. But over time, congregations have limited women's leadership.

The country's largest Protestant denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention, does not encourage the ordination of women, although some individual congregations and other Baptist groups do.

Dr. Kenyn M. Cureton, vice president for convention relations at the Southern Baptist Convention, said, "The biblical passages that restrict the office of pastor to men do not negate the inherent worth and equal value of both women and men before God, but rather focus on the assignment of different roles and responsibilities to the genders."

Individual congregations generally have a great deal of say about who will be in their pulpits. This is especially true of the larger, wealthier congregations in all denominations, even in the United Methodist Church, in which bishops appoint ministers to congregations, said Adair T. Lummis, faculty associate in research at the Institute for Religion Research at Hartford Seminary in Connecticut.

For the most part, congregations want a young married man with children, according to research Ms. Lummis conducted in 2001. "The whole demographic image of a pastor had not changed much since the 1950's," she said.

Smaller, poorer congregations will hire a woman, but often, only grudgingly, clergy members said.

"When we met with the search committee in Louisville, people on it said to me, ?'We really didn't want a woman, because we know that we're dying when we get a woman,'" the Rev. Lucia Oerter said of her experience at John Knox Presbyterian in Louisville three and half years ago.

In interviews with 15 women ministers, most said they had worked or were working at small congregations, often those that were dwindling. In all cases, the ministers had built up Sunday attendance. But such a track record is often not enough to win a post at a larger, more affluent congregation.

A Presbyterian minister in Northern California, who asked not to be identified because she did not want her congregation to know she was looking for a new post, said she received 65 rejections when applying for a job in the mid-1990's. Over the last two years, as she has sought to move to a larger church, she said she has been passed over by 15 churches, even though her own church is thriving and she teaches preaching at a prestigious seminary.

"When a senior pastor is consulted about whom he would like to succeed him, there aren't any women on those lists," the minister said. "The good-old-boy network starts there."

Experts on women in the clergy said that while the leaders of mainline denominations support women in the ministry, not enough is done to back their rise.

One small but important step male pastors can take, these experts said, is to get congregations to hear women preach. For example, those pastors can ask women to be guest preachers or have them fill in when they go on vacation.

"I speak differently than a man does," Ms. Escobedo-Frank said. "To hear the fullness of God's voice, you need to hear both men and women. People's ears are opened more because of the surprise, and they are delighted by surprise."

Certainly, not every minister wants to lead a large congregation. And in Protestant traditions that do not ordain women, such as evangelical megachurches, lay women who lead youth groups or women's groups influence the faith of hundreds of congregants in a way that a woman minister in a small church cannot.

The Rev. Alise D. Barrymore, 37, grew up in the Church of God in Christ, part of the Pentecostal movement. She is co-pastor of the Emmaus Community, a non-denominational, "post-modern African-American church" which she founded with another minister in Chicago Heights, Ill.

Like many women from conservative Christian backgrounds, she had to leave her denomination, hop-scotching from one tradition to another, to enter the pulpit.

The church she grew up in has powerful women as members, she said, but it does not ordain them. Yet she had long wanted to enter pastoral ministry. Women in the black Pentecostal tradition can be itinerant evangelists, but rarely pastors.

"You can't handle the sacraments, and it would not be rare for you to preach from the floor and not the pulpit, though that has changed a little bit in recent years," Ms. Barrymore said. "Names and nomenclature in the black church are so important: as a woman, you teach but don't preach. Yet the teaching sounds just like preaching."

Ms. Puckett, the United Methodist associate pastor in Atlanta, left pastoral ministry for a time, she said, because she felt that she could not get the kind of work she wanted. She returned because she felt called to preach. But answering that call, she said, is a struggle.

"I've felt depressed sometimes, but the support of friends and colleagues got me through," she said. "I'd ask them, ?'Is what I'm feeling about what is happening real or am I just crazy?' and they would tell me I'm not crazy."

That is sad. What would Christ say about this? Isn't that what you're supposed to ask? Surely you only listen for Jesus when you hear preaching...

This is just control of one body of people by another; maintenance of the status quo and power.

"This is the way we've always done it" - another stupid statement which consigns progress out the door.

I don't know who Timothy is, and I don't care - my question is why he is still being listened to. Doesn't the bible ever get an update?

Mame,
Are you proposing that the doctrine and word of God be changed to suit the times? The faithful, for the most part, accept what is written in the bible. Those who do not follow or believe it's teachings are free to think what they will.

I'm ill-equipped to argue about religion as I'm a non-believer. As I said, I don't even know who Timothy is. Obviously there are many differences between the sects because some allow female preachers and some don't. Some insist on women having their heads covered, and others don't.

Surely, however, one should allow for progress. If Jesus were resurrected today, what would his message be? Would he still say women were not allowed to preach? And don't the Quakers follow some scripture where they have to use certain tools (or can't use electricity or something)? Well, they didn't have electricity THEN, but we have it now, so surely he would accomodate his message to today's world.

I'll get you for that, you son of a kitsch . . .

Mame, I'd say you're better equipped than most to argue about religion. (especially with such a great tag line)

The problem with unqualified belief (as all belief is) is that you have to pick which bits to believe....no literal interpretation of any religious text is possible, otherwise they'd all agree. And if you just agreed with the bits that naturally felt right to you (as so many people feel they can)...you wouldn't need religion at all!

I guess she's equipped to argue it, but with a tagline like that she probably wouldn't be a follower of any religion. I think the one thing they all do agree on (in their texts) is the sanctity of every human life. (And that's not to say I think they act on that - they just spout it in their texts).


Agree with what? That's assuming there is one supreme version of perception of reality which is deemed the "literal". I don't agree that's true at all.
But that's what people do everyday. That's called life - some people call it religion I guess - but religion is about more than following a text- and that's why some people would feel that they still need it (or want it).

Not too familiar with the texts are you?