How bad is too bad?
- Thread starter JennyG
- Start date
- Status
toddpedlar
Iron Dramatist
At the outset? A church may have a sound doctrinal statement but if the leadership teaches and believes to the contrary, what worth is the doctrinal statement?
Andres
Puritan Board Doctor
I would say that a female pastor would be cause for dis-association from a church. The reason being is not so much the issue of the female pastor in and of itself, but rather that a female pastor shows that a church has abandoned the authority of scripture. Same thing as ordaining homosexuals. The issue becomes is the Word of God our final authority in matters of faith or not? If the answer is no, then in my opinion, there is nothing productive coming from that church.
"William The Baptist"
Puritan Board Freshman
On a funny note, I once was told I should become a pastor. After getting over my shock at such a terrible idea, I set the poor fellow straight as to why that was not only unbiblical, but something I would never even consider!
Andres
Puritan Board Doctor
It would be so helpful if the WCF would have told us at what point a church has degenerated so as to become a synagogue of Satan. But since there is more than one way to reach that point, it seems unlikely that there is one rule of thumb that will cover all scenarios. However, the point Andres identified, of respect for God's word, is probably the best candidate for broadest rule. When a church abandons respect for God's word, either theoretically or practically, whatever individual aberrations may occur are symptoms of a truly deadly disease.
I disagree profoundly. This depends either on assuming that women ministers are not such a big deal (an impossible assumption, since God has spoken clearly about gender roles), or on assuming that nothing except the very worst is all that big of a deal. But while "interfaith" services might be the very worst thing, heresies in doctrine, abominations in worship, and consistent, ongoing abuse in discipline are all very big deals as well. I doubt Tripel would remain in a church where the pastor was known to be an unrepentant embezzler - and yet there are still worse things.
Perhaps sooner than this, but certainly when a doctrinal statement has no more restraining power than the paper it's written on.
That's the reductio, but actually it was more a question of deciding between churches which all had at least something going for them.
Someone recently put it to me like this: "wouldn't it be better to have a woman minister, if she was seriously preaching the Evangelical gospel, than a man who wasn't?"
I always thought that hypothetical lady would be a walking oxymoron, but maybe there are two views?
---------- Post added at 01:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:58 PM ----------
...or then again, maybe not. In fact definitely not, you're all right I'm sure.
toddpedlar
Iron Dramatist
How credible is the proclamation of the Evangelical gospel from one who is willing to hold in disdain other parts of the Word? Would she really have any leg to stand on if some parts of Scripture are, in her mind, things to ignore?
The questioner you write about is giving you a false dichotomy. You don't choose between two evils, but reject them both.
Tripel
Puritan Board Senior
I don't believe I stated a definition, so you are incorrect. My comment was made within a certain context and in response to a Jenny's question.
If a church has a female pastor, it is in error, but it may also be the best option one has. I'm not justifying a female pastor, nor am I justifying men having sex on an alter.
---------- Post added at 10:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:56 AM ----------
I guess we'd have to disagree about what constitutes evil. A healthy church led by a woman is not "evil" in my opinion. Nor is a healthy arminian church.
Flawed? Yes.
Poor interpretation of parts of Scripture? Certainly.
Evil? No.
Tripel
Puritan Board Senior
I don't see how you can say that. There are places all over the world where the church has little to no presence. I can absolutely see how a church with a female pastor would be the best option.
I think the only reason you can say that, though, Daniel, is that for you a female pastor doesn't seem all that bad. For instance, to which of these defects would you compare a female pastor?
-> Unitarianism
-> Explicit adherence to the normative principle of worship
-> Advocacy of violent revolution against the State
-> Ultra dispensationalism
-> Consistent Armininiasm
-> Serial polygamist pastor
-> Theistic evolution espoused in church constitution
-> Collaborative endeavors for evangelism with area RCC churches
-> Unitarianism
-> Explicit adherence to the normative principle of worship
-> Advocacy of violent revolution against the State
-> Ultra dispensationalism
-> Consistent Armininiasm
-> Serial polygamist pastor
-> Theistic evolution espoused in church constitution
-> Collaborative endeavors for evangelism with area RCC churches
Tripel
Puritan Board Senior
It's not all that hypothetical. I'm moving to a spiritually dark place where a church led by a female pastor is one of the few options.
---------- Post added at 11:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 AM ----------
I do think it's bad. I consider it a major flaw and would have a really hard time being in such a church. As to your list, I'd put it somewhere between normative principle of worship and collaborative evangelism with RCC.
Thank you Todd, - that's exactly what I told her
---------- Post added at 06:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:18 PM ----------
Daniel, thanks for your thoughts too.
It's not too hypothetical where I live either. Options are limited.
Tnat's mainly why I was interested in the question, but I have to say I think the others are right
ericfromcowtown
Puritan Board Sophomore
I personally view an arminian church (poor interpretation) and a church with a female "pastor" (no interpretation) as two very different things. In fact I hate the term "female pastor" since there is no such thing. There is just someone pretending to be a pastor. How could I in good faith attend such a church, introduce myself to the person who just delivered the sermon, and address her as "Mrs. Smith." I can just imagine how things would go awkwardly down-hill from there.
Andres
Puritan Board Doctor
Hmmm...good point.
If a congregation with a female Pastor was my only option, I think I wouldn't have any option. I would continue to try to build a congregation by starting a local Bible study and go from there till a Pastor could be called.
Damon Rambo
Puritan Board Sophomore
I hate to point out Deborah, but I do think that I could see a time where a woman would be forced to lead as shepherd, due to a complete absence of men, or due to the men being cowardly/disobedient. For instance, if a huge women's group of 30 women got stranded on an island, without a man, would they be committing sin by having a woman pastor? If so, would they not sin in the opposite, by refusing the normal operations of God's church?
Of course, in such a strange scenario (which would never occur in the U.S. I am sure), it would not be "normative", and would only be until a man was available. Please note: I am just throwing out ideas...I would NEVER endorse a woman pastor, I am just showing a scenario when it might be permissible for a time.
Of course, in such a strange scenario (which would never occur in the U.S. I am sure), it would not be "normative", and would only be until a man was available. Please note: I am just throwing out ideas...I would NEVER endorse a woman pastor, I am just showing a scenario when it might be permissible for a time.
Deborah went but I am not sure she lead the Army. I believe Barak used her as a rabbit foot of assurance. Barak still lead the Army into battle. I have listened to the wisdom God shed through women before. I see no problem with that. But I am not so sure that that places them in a position such as Pastor. Sure she was one that people sought out for wisdom and judgment. But did she hold an office in the Church? I am not so sure you can make that distinction. Maybe you can.
This is a strawman. The scriptures plainly state that the older women are to lead the younger women.
This is a strawman. The scriptures plainly state that the older women are to lead the younger women.
Damon Rambo
Puritan Board Sophomore
Its not a strawman; I am not trying to make an argument. As I said, throwing out ideas. But in the above scenario, would not someone have to fulfill the obligations of pastor/elder? I think we would agree that a person simply teaching the younger, is not fulfilling the full breadth of Elder/pastor duties. But someone would have to fill that full leadership role.
toddpedlar
Iron Dramatist
EXACTLY.
A church with a "female pastor" is one that simply cannot be in any sense (no matter how good "body life" or whatever barometers one would choose to use to measure "health") deemed "healthy". It is sick, and rotten from the core, because, quite simply, it is a church without a pastor, but instead with a usurper in the role, disregarding the clear teaching of Scripture. Again, as I mentioned in a previous post - if such a person can disregard Scripture's teaching on the elder's office, how can ANY teaching come from her mouth with any credibility at all?
No, sorry. A church led by a woman pretending to be a pastor is no different in principle than one led by the four-year-old "preacher" that we talked about in another thread. It is a church with a non-pastor at the helm.
toddpedlar
Iron Dramatist
It wouldn't be "normative" but it also wouldn't be a church, and the woman doing the teaching could never be construed as a "pastor". This is why your statement was denoted a strawman.
Sorry about the straw man comment then.
But I find your question kind of out there and not likely since Christ is building His Church and the gates of Hell will not prevail. If He is building His Church and He is doing a work then I find it most unlikely that He wouldn't build it according to His plan. We can make hypothetical situations up all the time. But I am not sure that they are beneficial. Maybe they are. But I find it unlikely. BTW, I am fully amazed at the work of Lottie Moon. God does give discernment to women when men don't get it sometimes. But if it is discernment from God it will be discernment according to His working and order. But that is just my opinion. And we know my old adage on opinions. They are like armpits. Everyone does have a couple. Some people keep them clean but there is always a point where they start to stink. LOL
But I find your question kind of out there and not likely since Christ is building His Church and the gates of Hell will not prevail. If He is building His Church and He is doing a work then I find it most unlikely that He wouldn't build it according to His plan. We can make hypothetical situations up all the time. But I am not sure that they are beneficial. Maybe they are. But I find it unlikely. BTW, I am fully amazed at the work of Lottie Moon. God does give discernment to women when men don't get it sometimes. But if it is discernment from God it will be discernment according to His working and order. But that is just my opinion. And we know my old adage on opinions. They are like armpits. Everyone does have a couple. Some people keep them clean but there is always a point where they start to stink. LOL
"William The Baptist"
Puritan Board Freshman
Wasn't it considered shameful to have a woman leading them?
- Status
