Are you offended/disturbed by female clergy in Protestantism?

[benedictus2]

I disagree. Everything that is truly beautiful is a reflection and illustration of something which is true.

Yes, that is true. Because truth will always be beautiful. It is the lie that is ugly.

Good post Peter.!

 

[benedictus2]

Would that it would work! Instead, it seems that this “liquid courage” only fuels Uncle Ponty’s pontifications. :sad_yes:

Indeed. That is one of my pet peeves on the CAFs. Actually, I have 2.

-the phantom poster who posts and is ne’er to be seen again, or returns 20 pages later to post and fly away again.

-the ex-Catholic (usually with descriptors such as “altar server”, "12 years of Catholic schooling with nuns!’) who are adamantine that some :whacky: belief they’re professing was taught by the CC. And the fact that they’re an ex-Catholic means that, by golly, they’re speaking with authority.

Yeah that gets me too. How people can think they are credible is beyond me though.

I wonder if this is the equivalent of hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Someone said that the greatest enemy of the Catholic Church are ex-Catholics.

 

[benedictus2]

Since I belong to a denomination that was, and, in some instances, still is, Protestant Christian, I would like to reply.

To answer the OP’s original question, no, I am not disturbed by female clergy. Why would I object? According to the last statistics I saw, about half of the UU clergy are female and they do a good job of it.

As it happens, a Universalist congregation was the first Christian church to ordain a women. That was in 1863.

Contrary to what others have posted, this did not lead to the downfall of our churches. Unitarian Universalists are still going strong.

Which begs the question. are those who object most to female ministers more concerned about the messenger than the message?

Seeker

And this is where the understanding lacks. The priest acts in Persona Christi so the messenger images the Message.

However, female ministers are okay because they are just ministers. They are not priests. As Spiritbound said above, we also have female Bible study leaders.

 

[PRmerger]

Someone said that the greatest enemy of the Catholic Church are ex-Catholics.

Yes. And I heard that the largest denomination is Catholics, and the next largest denomination is, sadly, ex-Catholics.

 

[benedictus2]

Indeed. That is one of my pet peeves on the CAFs. Actually, I have 2.

-the phantom poster who posts and is ne’er to be seen again, or returns 20 pages later to post and fly away again.

-the ex-Catholic (usually with descriptors such as “altar server”, "12 years of Catholic schooling with nuns!’) who are adamantine that some :whacky: belief they’re professing was taught by the CC. And the fact that they’re an ex-Catholic means that, by golly, they’re speaking with authority.

I was thinking about this and I agree with the order of your peeves. Peeve no 1 rightly takes first place. The worry is when Peeve no 2 acts like peeve no 1.

 

[PRmerger]

I was thinking about this and I agree with the order of your peeves. Peeve no 1 rightly takes first place. The worry is when Peeve no 2 acts like peeve no 1.

OMG, yes! That is most exceedingly maddening!

 

[1234]

Aah but 1234 I wasn’t using it as an excuse. You really ought to read what I wrote better.

My point was that if Protestants and public officials do it too and they ARE MARRIED, then obviously it is not celibacy that has to be the cause of the abuse.

I didn’t imply that celibacy is the case of the abuse. I made no allegations regarding cause. Actually, I think that the abuse was caused by pedophiles and other abusers (sadists, in the case of the Irish) who entered seminary and religious life to have access to the underage and undefended (Irish orphans, the deaf boys in Milwaukee). Because of the closed, unsupervised, hieratic world of Catholic institutions at that time, again especially in Ireland, the pedophiles could operate undetected and unpunished. Very frightening and reprehensible.

 

[benedictus2]

I didn’t imply that celibacy is the case of the abuse. I made no allegations regarding cause.

Oh come on 1234 feigning innocence will not do.

What do you mean then by

The all don’t endorse a celibate clergy either, especially now that they see the potential consequences.

What potential consequence of celibacy do you mean here?

 

[dzheremi]

but as for vocations and ministries in other churches I hope you’d become more humble.

Who is not humble? The ones who disregard the Church and its teachings in Rome, in Constantinople, in Alexandria, in Antioch, and in Jerusalem? (The five ancient sees that comprise the Pentarchy are united on this issue, so it makes sense to put them together.)

I do not see any lack of humbleness in those who continue in the old ways despite the modernizing world. The trouble is, of course, that the majority of the Protestant churches have no respect for or grasp of Christianity, so they follow something else, dreamed up by someone else, at some other time, to suit whatever needs they have (women who want to be “clergy”, worshipers who want happy clappy rock concerts instead of liturgical worship, homosexuals who want their church to be a vector of political grievances, etc). Is it really a lack of humbleness to say that those who have strayed so far away are in fact so far away? I don’t think so. This is Christianity. It is not about you, and it is not about me, and it is not about what we like, are comfortable with, desire, etc.

You speak from a standpoint of faith in an authority, namely the authority of Rome to interpret Scripture and tradition.

Try again. I am not Catholic, and this is not a uniquely Catholic position, but is the position of every Apostolic Church all those in communion with the same (see previous paragraph).

In my country people greatly respect women pastors, as do I too, although I am no longer Protestant. And believe me, the problem in my former church is not women-pastors, but a generel lack of faith which is exactly like what I experience in many Catholic parishes… and tell me, what are WE doing wrong since many congregations are thinning out? Or could it be that the decline among us have the same causes as in the assemblies of our brothers and sisters?

Again, as I am not a Catholic this “we” business is a little bit off the mark. When I was still in union with Rome, I would have responded to this by saying that I am not seeing the correlation that you are apparently seeing. I have been both Protestant and Catholic at different points in my life and see the malaise that can be found in both as having unique manifestations and causes (though some are also the same/analogous), none of which are very helpful in this discussion as they do not relate to the OP.

Now, I have spoken to people of many faiths who tried to attack Christianity, but none of them mentioned women ministers as a sign of ludicrisy. That belongs to you proud Catholic brother who just want’s to sound like and deal superficially with the mystery of the sincere service to God in other churches while your other brothers here cheer for your fast and simple statements.

Your tone here is verging on a personal attack that I feel is very much unfounded. If you have read any of my recent posts over the past several months after returning from a 6-7 month sabbatical, you’ll note that the last thing I would intentionally present myself as is any sort of “Super Catholic” figure. Go ahead and think whatever you want of my position, but please do not pretend to have intimate knowledge of my motives without at least superficial knowledge of the theological and ideological bases on which I’ve come to this position. For instance, if you re-read the post you’re replying to you’ll see that I provided a link to the original meaning of the Latin from which the English “abomination” derives, because I think it is particularly illustrative of the effect of female clergy on the churches that have them. They are to be treated as an “ill omen” (not a “sign of ludicrisy”) because destruction and ruin follows in their wake. You can disagree with this on principle, but in that case reality disagrees with you. Feel free to ask any of the conservatives left among the Anglicans if you need a non-Catholic/non-Orthodox source on that.

Now there is one branch of Christianity that seems to grow and bear fruit all over the world and that’s Pentecostalism… It’s the fastest growing, and they have women preachers too… Just saying that, God seems to bless them inspite of how anti-christian you think they are… and by the way, please don’t use that word, you have no right to say someone is anti- Christian just because they believe that the gender that brought Christ into the world and stood at the Cross/the greatest Alter are worthy to serve equally at that alter.

I’ll use whatever words I find appropriate, thank you, and I’ll invite you to do the same. To me it is ANTI-CHRISTIAN to go against what Christ has taught, and what Christ has demonstrated, and what Christ has established – and female clergy and their supporters do just that. So do many other people (we all do, sometimes; that’s what sin is).

Pentecostalism is a dangerous foolishness. It grows in many places due to its emotionalism and physicality, but true religion is not emotionalism or physicality. It is also dangerous to look upon what is currently popular as being blessed by God by virtue of its popularity. God may allow a great many bad things for the greater good, but His blessing is something else. Pentecostals may grow in certain regions, but they are not so much blessed as effective in ingratiating themselves with the local populations in ways that orthodox Christianity cannot (because it would not allow them many of the practices and beliefs to which they are accustomed, which Pentecostalism in many ways mirrors quite closely).

In short, I think you’re all turned around on this issue and every other thing you’ve brought up.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Stay on the topic of the OP please

 

[MissMarlene]

… female ministers are okay because they are just ministers. They are not priests. As Spiritbound said above, we also have female Bible study leaders.

Well if you’d said that earlier I think I wouldnt have felt a need to debate you.
Some women preachers have had and have huge anointings over their life. We cannot begin to fathom the greatness of God in how he uses women in other churches.

I know a woman pastor personally who in 1968 - before ever hearing about near death experiences - died during an lifethreatening procedure and went to. what I suppose was the gates of heaven, and she met Jesus and according to her He blessed her for her future ministry as pastor in the Lutheran Church. She wrote a book that has comforted a great many dying people wherein she also wrote that during her experience two things were clear to her, that reincarnation doesnt exist and that the Catholics are right about the dead praying for us. She is by the way working for unity and praying the Rosary from time to time with Catholics.
But I know… that will not convince anyone who doesn’t know this humble lady personally.
I also met Heidi Baker, missionary and preacher in Africa. Through her prayer and laying on of hands a whole hospital full of colera patients was emptied, no one dying since she walked in the door. She is preaching and children with Aids get healed in her ministry, Muslims come to faith in the True God and Heidi also baptises people in the ocean down in Mozambique. I have never met a person with such childlike faith as her, and I am sure that God is very pleased.
Then there is Kathryn Kuhlman… she has long been with God. While she was alive, as the flawed female person she was, she held gatherings where thousands of people got healed and came to faith. It seems God didnt see her gender and her vanity and old age as He used her to preach and heal in His name.
Then there are my local pastors, who, many of them, whatever certain people here claim, are serving their churches well. They are conservative Lutherans and preach and serve according to their conscience and in agreement with their church which is dying not because of womens ministry but because of politicians who have become too involved with the church and the lack of Authority to ship these to where they belong… The good women pastors are NOT motivated by disobedience but by a belief that it is willed by God and that their Scripture interpretation is the true one.

 

[MissMarlene]

To Dzheremi

I can’t currently find you post, so I can’t give you any thorough answers and I’m not sure that would really help either.
Your last notion, that everything I say is pretty far fetched is your personal oppinion that you are entitled to have, however I hope we do agree on certain core values and teachings since we both belong to the Christian family.

My issue with your post is also not whether your conclusions are to some extent right (in the sense of going back to the question about what God indended). But my issue is with how you assume that people who are not living according to the authority of interpretation that you do, are necessesarily living in
*conscious disobedience *and that they somehow must be foolish to believe what they do.
If you only sounded like you think such things about other Christians who are trying their best to serve God, and you didn’t really mean it like this, then I apologize. I hope I am wrong but if you really hold those oppinions, then yes, I would say its a sign both of pride and lack of understanding and I can only ask that you get a broader picture of how God works with the world as it is…

 

[pnewton]

Yes, it disturbs me. For almost 2000 years of Christendom the qualifications that Paul gave was understood to mean that the role of the the clergy was to be filled by men, not women. After feminism took hold, this interpretation has been challenged. As I do have never seen that Scripture interpretation should be influenced by current events, I will go with the “majority of the dead” and side with what Christians have taught (Catholilc and Protestants) throught history. When I see female clergy, I feel the same as if I saw a five year old dressed as a clergyman, or a man dressed as a woman. It is incongruous to me.

 

[nickybr38]

I attended a church that was led by a female minister for many years.

I noticed a few things.

1. Although she was a great speaker she was often so consumed with being ‘fair’ and ‘ecumenical’ that I couldn’t respect much of what she said. You know what I’m talking about? Those people who speak powerfully but are unwilling to say; THIS is truth… she wouldn’t do that, because she never wanted her truth to infringe on someone elses truth. I’m not saying men never do this, but I will say that in all my years of ‘church hopping (my mother was a church hopper and I got dragged along everytime she made a move)’ I never saw a male pastor who ever compromised what he believed to save offending someone in the audience.
2. Her parishioners had no respect for her. This had NOTHING to do with her personality. She was tough, she was loud, she was the kind of lady I would have NEVER back talked (despite her ecumenism). But I saw, on several occasions, members of her congregation SPEAK UP during church services to correct her if she did something they didn’t like. “OH You should read THIS bible verse…” IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SERVICE. It was disturbing and I hate to say it but I truly doubt this would have happened had a man been at the pulpit. And yes she would address these people and this problem but inevitably it would happen again and again…
3. On a few rare occasions we had guest male speakers and every time we did, without fail, members of the congregation (usually the female members - mind you we only had three male members) would comment on how NICE it was to see a man in the front of the church.
4. She couldn’t seem to decide if we were at a Christian church, Buddhist, Native… etc. She’d use traditional worship motions from other religions (for example, she used this odd ‘bell’ thing to call everyone to worship, I forget which religion she took it from but she did explain what it was). I think she did this because she thought they were ‘pretty’. And I have to agree that some of the other traditions that she brought in were beautiful in their own way BUT they weren’t Christian traditions…

I am not offended when I see female clergy… but I do wonder how effective a female can be in that position. No matter how much we scream about equality the bottom line is men in leadership are given a certain amount of respect just by being male that women have to work HARD to earn and sometimes the only way a woman earns that respect is through behaving in very masculine ways.

Whether it’s right or wrong for this to be so, it’s what I’ve seen in my experience and I really don’t think female clergy can be as effective as male clergy because of this innate desire we ALL (male and female) seem to have to respect male leadership more then female leadership.

To the person who made the comment about female clergy leading to gay clergy and etc… do you have any real data you can provide to support that position? I can think of a few churches off the top of my head (the one I attended supported female clergy, gay clergy, gay marriage AND was drastically falling in numbers. The church I attended was down to a scant 10 families by the time I left) but I’d be curious to know if there’s more then one example of this.

 

[dzheremi]

To Dzheremi

I can’t currently find you post, so I can’t give you any thorough answers and I’m not sure that would really help either.
Your last notion, that everything I say is pretty far fetched is your personal oppinion

I wrote that you are turned around on this issue (you are embracing an incorrect position), not that everything you say is far-fetched. Please stop reading things into my posts that I do not write.

But my issue is with how you assume that people who are not living according to the authority of interpretation that you do, are necessesarily living in
*conscious disobedience *and that they somehow must be foolish to believe what they do.

Again, you are reading things into my posts that aren’t there. In fact, in post #222 I wrote the following:

I know that many people who support women’s ordination really do not understand how utterly anti-Christian it is, and hence are not being purposely defiant.

That says the exact opposite of what you claim I am saying. Please read more carefully.

 

[1234]

I attended a church that was led by a female minister for many years.

I noticed a few things.

1. Although she was a great speaker she was often so consumed with being ‘fair’ and ‘ecumenical’ that I couldn’t respect much of what she said. You know what I’m talking about? Those people who speak powerfully but are unwilling to say; THIS is truth… she wouldn’t do that, because she never wanted her truth to infringe on someone elses truth. I’m not saying men never do this, but I will say that in all my years of ‘church hopping (my mother was a church hopper and I got dragged along everytime she made a move)’ I never saw a male pastor who ever compromised what he believed to save offending someone in the audience.
2. Her parishioners had no respect for her. This had NOTHING to do with her personality. She was tough, she was loud, she was the kind of lady I would have NEVER back talked (despite her ecumenism). But I saw, on several occasions, members of her congregation SPEAK UP during church services to correct her if she did something they didn’t like. “OH You should read THIS bible verse…” IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SERVICE. It was disturbing and I hate to say it but I truly doubt this would have happened had a man been at the pulpit. And yes she would address these people and this problem but inevitably it would happen again and again…
3. On a few rare occasions we had guest male speakers and every time we did, without fail, members of the congregation (usually the female members - mind you we only had three male members) would comment on how NICE it was to see a man in the front of the church.
4. She couldn’t seem to decide if we were at a Christian church, Buddhist, Native… etc. She’d use traditional worship motions from other religions (for example, she used this odd ‘bell’ thing to call everyone to worship, I forget which religion she took it from but she did explain what it was). I think she did this because she thought they were ‘pretty’. And I have to agree that some of the other traditions that she brought in were beautiful in their own way BUT they weren’t Christian traditions…

I am not offended when I see female clergy… but I do wonder how effective a female can be in that position. No matter how much we scream about equality the bottom line is men in leadership are given a certain amount of respect just by being male that women have to work HARD to earn and sometimes the only way a woman earns that respect is through behaving in very masculine ways.

Whether it’s right or wrong for this to be so, it’s what I’ve seen in my experience and I really don’t think female clergy can be as effective as male clergy because of this innate desire we ALL (male and female) seem to have to respect male leadership more then female leadership.

To the person who made the comment about female clergy leading to gay clergy and etc… do you have any real data you can provide to support that position? I can think of a few churches off the top of my head (the one I attended supported female clergy, gay clergy, gay marriage AND was drastically falling in numbers. The church I attended was down to a scant 10 families by the time I left) but I’d be curious to know if there’s more then one example of this.

I can only speak from direct observation. The church that I know best in my area has a woman pastor and is thriving. It is a mainstream denomination and women pastors in that denomination are common, possibly at or near the majority. This may make a difference.

 

[benedictus2]

Well if you’d said that earlier I think I wouldnt have felt a need to debate you.

You felt you had to debate me because you misunderstood my post. If you had read it properly then you would have known what I was saying.

Note what I mean by ministers. They are people with a ministry. (Refer my mention of female Bible Study Leaders).

Some women preachers have had and have huge anointings over their life. We cannot begin to fathom the greatness of God in how he uses women in other churches.

v
v
v
v
vThe good women pastors are NOT motivated by disobedience but by a belief that it is willed by God and that their Scripture interpretation is the true one.

And this was my whole point about nuns. Nuns do all sort of ministry within the Church. As a matter of fact lay people do to.

I make a distinction between ordained Pastors and ordinary ministries. Ordained women are a no-no.

And it is precisely a corrupt theology and understanding of scripture that makes these denominations think that ordination is okay.

And before you fall back again on your relativist position, a reminder that belief does not determine truth.

 

[benedictus2]

** I know that many people who support women’s ordination really do not understand how utterly anti-Christian it is, and hence are not being purposely defiant.**

That says the exact opposite of what you claim I am saying. Please read more carefully.

Yes, yes, yes.! It is totally pagan as evidenced by the way most proponents espouse new age and pagan beliefs.

 

[benedictus2]

I attended a church that was led by a female minister for many years.

I noticed a few things.

1. Although she was a great speaker she was often so consumed with being ‘fair’ and ‘ecumenical’ that I couldn’t respect much of what she said. You know what I’m talking about? Those people who speak powerfully but are unwilling to say; THIS is truth… she wouldn’t do that, because she never wanted her truth to infringe on someone elses truth.

And that in a nutshell is the problem. Is there such a thing as your truth or my truth? Truth is independent of what we believe. If our “truths” contradict each other then someone is holding on to a lie.

This is the evil of relativism that most people just don’t see…

You put that very well Nicky.

 

[benedictus2]

I think the question that needs to be answered is Why have priestesses when the Bible speaks to the contrary.

The usual answer is gender equality. But this is to profoundly misunderstand gender equality. Can we say that males are hard done by because they cannot have babies (or as some feminists view it - the female is hard done by because they can have babies)?

If the answer is empowerment then that shows they’ve completely missed the point of what the ordained priesthood is about.

If the answer is to serve, well, women are already doing all that in the different ministries and apostolates in the Church.

So what valid reason is there?