Denominations which allow Women Pastors.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Truth_Faith13
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s all in the eyes of the beholder.
Actually, that’s not the Catholic position.

Perhaps you might find that a position that has merit if you were in dialogue on a Bible Alone forum.

But on the Catholic Answers forum the claim that “it’s all in the eyes of the beholder” is untenable.

Our eyes submit to Christ and His Body, the Catholic Church.

So it is the CC which does the beholding. Not our eyes.
 
The Pentecostals have always had more open policies towards women. You have to be careful, though, to differentiate between ordination to the pastorate, and ordination to a specific calling that is not the pastorate. In Evangelical Protestant churches of all denominations, there is usually a “Senior Pastor” who is “in charge” of everything that happens in the church–the “head shepherd,” and there are many “Associate Pastors” serving under his leadership. Often, these “associate pastors” are not ordained, but have training and education appropriate for their very specific duties in the church.
True that. In general, most Pentecostal senior pastors and even senior denominational officials are men. However, being “ordained” by a denomination is a different thing from being hired to “pastor” or “shepherd” a congregation. There are many Pentecostal ministers who are licensed and ordained ministers and are thus qualified to pastor a church who nevertheless are not pastors of a church. Some ordained ministers are teachers in Bible colleges and seminaries and others are officially recognized evangelists or missionaries. Whether or not they pastor a church, however, they have been ordained to the ministry and gone through the same process as pastors have. They are all ordained but some are not shepherding a church.

I think everyone needs to keep that in mind. In evangelical churches, “ordained minister” is not synonymous with “pastor.” An ordained minister could be an evangelist or a teacher or both pastor-teacher-evangelist. Billy Graham, for example, is an ordained minister who has been both a full time pastor and a full time evangelist at different stages of his ministry.
Other examples of “pastors” who are not ordained would be “Outreach Pastor,” “Children’s Pastor,” Women’s Pastor," “Business Pastor,” “Youth Pastor,” “Senior Citizen’s Pastor,” “Christian Education Pastor,” “Missions Pastor,” etc.

Sometimes these people are ordained by their denominations, but often they are not. They usually have a degree from a Christian college that is associated with their denomination (or closely related in beliefs), and they are trained in the specific needs of their ministry. E.g., youth pastors have extensive training and education in the needs of teenagers.
Yes, our current youth pastor is actually an ordained minister. But our old youth pastor was the pastor’s wife, whose sole qualification was that she was passionate about youth.

Another thing. In many churches, the pastor will “co-pastor” with his wife, even though she is not ordained nor was she elected or called to be pastor. The idea being that the husband and wife are a unit and that she shares in his ministry.

A visiting evangelist made some waves years ago when he told our church that we HAD to address the pastor’s wife as “Pastor so and so.” Some people got mad, not because they doubted that the lady in question could co-pastor with her husband but that the VISITING evangelist commanded us to give her a courtesy title.
Again, there are always exceptions, but my husband and I (he grew up in the Assemblies of God denomination) have yet to see any Senior Pastor in any Pentecostal church.
There have been notable exceptions. Aimee Semple McPherson pastored a mega-church in Los Angeles in the 1930s. She left the AG and started the Church of the Foursquare Gospel. Another name that readily comes to mind is Maria Woodworth-Etter. She was an evangelist who eventually planted a church that is today affiliated with the Assemblies of God.
It’s possible that the African American Pentecostal churches might have women who are Senior Pastors or Senior Elders. ??
It depends. There was an African-American Pentecostal denomination that was founded by a woman specifically because larger denominations like the Church of God in Christ only wanted women to be used in evangelism, missions and charity work.

I believe (but could be wrong) the Church of God in Christ still does not allow women to pastor churches, but they still do a lot of “ministry” under different labels.
 
I don’t have a problem with women serving as pastors in non-Catholic churches.

Women can often manage a parish, keep folks under budget, counsel families, give good advice, be nurturing and welcoming…much better than men can.

Now, women being ordained to the priesthood–not so much.

For, of course, being a priest is not about what one does. If it were, then of course women could be priests. For sometimes women do a better job at priestly duties than men can.

The priesthood is about who one is. Ontologically.

And, as such, a woman can never be a priest.
Several years ago I promoted Catholic Big Brothers programs, attended Mass and spoke before several Catholic parishes. One inner-city church was so remarkable in the love they expressed during worship. The wonderful Dominican nuns leading worship and, when necessary, distributing holy Communion. I was touched.by God in these parishes.
 
There are two separate points, using women as leaders and teachers and secondarily a formal process of ordination placing those church members separate above and beyond the other faithful brothers and sisters. Those who don’t accept women as leaders tend to title them Evangelist, Prophetess, Sister, only Pastor if she is married and her husband is the official Senior Pastor of the local congregation even if she takes the bulk of the teaching elder role. When new members or visitors arrive you can guess at that church background when they address our teaching pastor’s wife, “First Lady” or “Pastor”. The Church of God In Christ one of the larger Pentecostal organizations, perhaps the largest in North America, does not ordain women. but Foursquare and the Assemblies of GFd do.
This is very much in line with my experience and understanding as well. 👍

It’s surprising how many people say they don’t believe that women should be pastors, but when it comes to a woman whose ministry they enjoy and who is doing all the “functions” of a pastor they will insist on calling her something other than pastor all the while allowing her to continue to pastor by any other name.

I’ve heard of churches making the husband the “pastor” on the church sign all the while all the actual pastoral work is done by the wife and everyone knows that her husband’s designation as “pastor” is just ceremonial so that “male headship” is maintained.
 
True that. In general, most Pentecostal senior pastors and even senior denominational officials are men. However, being “ordained” by a denomination is a different thing from being hired to “pastor” or “shepherd” a congregation. There are many Pentecostal ministers who are licensed and ordained ministers and are thus qualified to pastor a church who nevertheless are not pastors of a church. Some ordained ministers are teachers in Bible colleges and seminaries and others are officially recognized evangelists or missionaries. Whether or not they pastor a church, however, they have been ordained to the ministry and gone through the same process as pastors have. They are all ordained but some are not shepherding a church.

I think everyone needs to keep that in mind. In evangelical churches, “ordained minister” is not synonymous with “pastor.” An ordained minister could be an evangelist or a teacher or both pastor-teacher-evangelist. Billy Graham, for example, is an ordained minister who has been both a full time pastor and a full time evangelist at different stages of his ministry.

Yes, our current youth pastor is actually an ordained minister. But our old youth pastor was the pastor’s wife, whose sole qualification was that she was passionate about youth.

Another thing. In many churches, the pastor will “co-pastor” with his wife, even though she is not ordained nor was she elected or called to be pastor. The idea being that the husband and wife are a unit and that she shares in his ministry.

A visiting evangelist made some waves years ago when he told our church that we HAD to address the pastor’s wife as “Pastor so and so.” Some people got mad, not because they doubted that the lady in question could co-pastor with her husband but that the VISITING evangelist commanded us to give her a courtesy title.

There have been notable exceptions. Aimee Semple McPherson pastored a mega-church in Los Angeles in the 1930s. She left the AG and started the Church of the Foursquare Gospel. Another name that readily comes to mind is Maria Woodworth-Etter. She was an evangelist who eventually planted a church that is today affiliated with the Assemblies of God.

It depends. There was an African-American Pentecostal denomination that was founded by a woman specifically because larger denominations like the Church of God in Christ only wanted women to be used in evangelism, missions and charity work.

I believe (but could be wrong) the Church of God in Christ still does not allow women to pastor churches, but they still do a lot of “ministry” under different labels.
Thanks for all these clarifications.

I question whether Aimee Semple McPherson really “pastored” a church in the sense that most of us think of pastoring a church nowadays. She was doing 6 live worship services a day. These worship services were like “shows” in the sense that they made use of stage sets and props, actors, live music, and a script. At least some of these worship services were broadcast over the radio to a very large audience of enthralled listeners all over the United States.

All that doesn’t leave a lot of time for visiting the shut-ins, teaching classes, sitting down with the board and treasurer to hammer out a budget, etc. I don’t question that she was managing a very successful evangelical “business,” but that’s not the same as pastoring a church, which involves looking out for the souls of the members and visitors.
 
This is very much in line with my experience and understanding as well. 👍

It’s surprising how many people say they don’t believe that women should be pastors, but when it comes to a woman whose ministry they enjoy and who is doing all the “functions” of a pastor they will insist on calling her something other than pastor all the while allowing her to continue to pastor by any other name.

I’ve heard of churches making the husband the “pastor” on the church sign all the while all the actual pastoral work is done by the wife and everyone knows that her husband’s designation as “pastor” is just ceremonial so that “male headship” is maintained.
What we all need to remember is that “pastor” is just another word for “shepherd,” and there have always been shepherdesses.

However, in the United States, the understanding of “pastor” is “person in charge.”

A person can be in charge of one aspect of a church; e.g., in charge of children’s ministries. So I can understand referring to that person as “pastor.”

I have no problem with that, although I feel uncomfortable with it. It’s just a name.

What I have a problem with is a woman as the Senior Pastor (or head shepherd) of a church. I do not believe that God created women for this role. Of course, I do not think God created Protestantism, either. He allows it, but it is not His plan for Christians.
 
Most denomination do not have the dogma of “in persona Christi” so I dont see the problem to be honest.
 
Thanks for all these clarifications.

I question whether Aimee Semple McPherson really “pastored” a church in the sense that most of us think of pastoring a church nowadays. She was doing 6 live worship services a day. These worship services were like “shows” in the sense that they made use of stage sets and props, actors, live music, and a script. At least some of these worship services were broadcast over the radio to a very large audience of enthralled listeners all over the United States.

All that doesn’t leave a lot of time for visiting the shut-ins, teaching classes, sitting down with the board and treasurer to hammer out a budget, etc. I don’t question that she was managing a very successful evangelical “business,” but that’s not the same as pastoring a church, which involves looking out for the souls of the members and visitors.
Yeah, but you can ask that of any megachurch pastor men or women. If you run a church of thousands with large programs and a constant preaching schedule, how much time can you really devote to looking after the soul of your thousands of members? I think all American Christians need to rethink what a pastor is supposed to do. That doesn’t change the fact that she was considered the pastor by those who attended her church. Just as it doesn’t change the fact that John MacArthur is considered the pastor of the 8,000 people who attend Grace Community Church in California.

And when it comes to the things like board meetings and budgets, I’m pretty sure that Semple-McPherson was engaged in all of that stuff. She also was personally involved in the soup kitchens that her church sponsored for the hungry during the Great Depression.
 
Actually, that’s not the Catholic position.

Perhaps you might find that a position that has merit if you were in dialogue on a Bible Alone forum.

But on the Catholic Answers forum the claim that “it’s all in the eyes of the beholder” is untenable.

Our eyes submit to Christ and His Body, the Catholic Church.

So it is the CC which does the beholding. Not our eyes.
Fair enough. I wasn’t speaking as a Catholic and was under the impression this was a sub- forum in which non Catholics could also express their positions.
 
Fair enough. I wasn’t speaking as a Catholic and was under the impression this was a sub- forum in which non Catholics could also express their positions.
I don’t think you’re understanding my point, Sy.

Firstly, you are always welcome to express your opinions (within the confines, of course, of charitable dialogue), no matter how abstruse or inutile they may be.

So please do not interpret my response above as saying, “You cannot express your opinions here.”

I was simply making the point that it’s inutile to make that type of comment when you are in dialogue with Catholics, for we do not believe that the Bible ought to be interpreted without the lens of the Faith which gave us this Bible.
 
Fair enough. I wasn’t speaking as a Catholic and was under the impression this was a sub- forum in which non Catholics could also express their positions.
I don’t think you’re understanding my point, Sy.

Firstly, you are always welcome to express your opinions (within the confines, of course, of charitable dialogue), no matter how abstruse or inutile they may be.

So please do not interpret my response above as saying, “You cannot express your opinions here.”

I was simply making the point that it’s inutile to make that type of comment when you are in dialogue with Catholics, for we do not believe that the Bible ought to be interpreted without the lens of the Faith which gave us this Bible.
Perhaps an analogy would help.

Let’s say you’re on a Sports Forum, Sy. You are in dialogue with soccer fans. You say, “Well, the infield fly rule is too confusing.”

I respond by saying, “Well, that’s not part of the game of soccer. Perhaps if you were in dialogue with baseball fans your point would have some merit. But with soccer folks, we don’t really get too bothered by the infield fly rule.”

And then you say, “Well, I was under the impression that I was free to post my opinions.”

True, dat.

It’s just that your opinion is of very little value in soccer discussions.
 
Note: The United Methodists are not an Evangelical Protestant denomination. They are a Mainline denomination.

The United Methodists also welcome openly homosexual pastors, and accept abortion as a necessary course of action in some circumstances (not just rape or incest). These stands are utterly opposed to Evangelical Protestant teachings.

Also, sometimes when churches break away from their denomination and become non-denominational, they keep the same name, or a very similar name. Confusing, I know!
The United Methodist proudly consider themselves both mainline and Evangelic the actual link from Methodist circuit riding preachers straight to a local Holiness congregation. Actually like the Anglicans there is a fight among American UMC and the broader international church. They do not officially accept open gay clergy nor perform ceremonies for same sex commitments (the last few pastors who have been tried have been disciplined and stripped of their credentials and reassigned by their Bishops) and actions more reflect a case of don’t ask don’t tell. In the last General Conference the conservatives won the day
 
The United Methodist proudly consider themselves both mainline and Evangelic the actual link from Methodist circuit riding preachers straight to a local Holiness congregation. Actually like the Anglicans there is a fight among American UMC and the broader international church. They do not officially accept open gay clergy nor perform ceremonies for same sex commitments (the last few pastors who have been tried have been disciplined and stripped of their credentials and reassigned by their Bishops) and actions more reflect a case of don’t ask don’t tell. In the last General Conference the conservatives won the day
Hmm. So is this article incorrect? christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/june/is-gay-marriage-destroying-united-methodist-church.html?paging=off

And the UMC is not on the list of Evangelical denominations: nae.net/membership/current-members
Why not?
 
I don’t think you’re understanding my point, Sy.

Firstly, you are always welcome to express your opinions (within the confines, of course, of charitable dialogue), no matter how abstruse or inutile they may be.

So please do not interpret my response above as saying, “You cannot express your opinions here.”

I was simply making the point that it’s inutile to make that type of comment when you are in dialogue with Catholics, for we do not believe that the Bible ought to be interpreted without the lens of the Faith which gave us this Bible.
Also, a note of clarification: I was not making any personal comment about whether *your *opinions are abstruse or inutile. I was merely saying that *all *opinions are welcome, even if they may be unhelpful.
 
Hmm. So is this article incorrect? christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/june/is-gay-marriage-destroying-united-methodist-church.html?paging=off

And the UMC is not on the list of Evangelical denominations: nae.net/membership/current-members
Why not?
No the article is correct notice they say they are rebels as the broader denomination is struggling to stop the off shoots. Just as British Anglicans are doing one thing even though they are being outvoted by African Anglicans. It is still the UMC doctrine, at least until the next conference in 2016 not to have openly gay pastors or conduct same sex marriages even if some American Bishops don’t enforce their rules. Figure like the Obama administration choosing not to defend the Protection of Marriage Act only he didn’t have to contend with Nigerians and Ugandans voting against in a UN which has overall jurisdiction the US as compared to the American UMC leadership does with regards to their general conference

There are many Evangelic Church organizations which are not members of the NEA. There are as many reasons to join as there are not. Maybe they disagree with some mission statement, maybe they just have no wish to send some money the NEA’s way to be included on the NEA letterhead and in their mailing list.
 
ignoring the nastier comments - it is a good question

In the secular realm the crusade for gender equality began with the movement for female suffrage & then continued with the role of women during WWII -the push for equal wages-the incease of women recieving college degrees (now the majority)-it was inevitable that this movement would spill over into the Clergy-

I believe it occurred as the denominations gave in to secular pressure-the concept that the Apostles were all male and therfore hence and forever only males could become Priests really it not a defensible postion form a logic point of view

The Orthodox and RC ( and a few branches such as the Copts) have been steadfast in denying the Priesthood to females and to my amazement this seems to be perfectly fine with the majority of the adherents of these denominations

I must say that in some way I admire them for sticking to their position-as it goes against the secular tide-in my denomnation many of the branches from the Southern Hemisppheres also do not odrain females

in the Episcopal Church female Priests have beem a mixed bag-they did contribute to the ongoing schism in our Church but are not the main eason for it

In my opinion accept it for what it is -the Church accomadating a seculalr crusade-what I think will happen sometime is that the secular establishment will try to remove the tax exemption from the denominations that won’t ordain women

that is another discussion
 
Also, a note of clarification: I was not making any personal comment about whether *your *opinions are abstruse or inutile. I was merely saying that *all *opinions are welcome, even if they may be unhelpful.
Clarification and previous analogy understood. The thing is the topic is not why Catholics forbid females priests. When It is why denominations allow female pastors, it seems to me Catholics might not be the best source for answers to that question but rather non Catholic Christians in those denominations that do allow female pastors. Hopefully more of them will come forth to offer helpful reasons besides just saying those denominations don’t follow your faith;s teaching authority.
 
Clarification and previous analogy understood.
👍
The thing is the topic is not why Catholics forbid females priests. When It is why denominations allow female pastors, it seems to me Catholics might not be the best source for answers to that question but rather non Catholic Christians in those denominations that do allow female pastors. Hopefully more of them will come forth to offer helpful reasons besides just saying those denominations don’t follow your faith;s teaching authority.
Firstly, as this is a* Catholic* forum, you are going to get, well, Catholic responses. Lots of them. Most of them.

Secondly, as this dialogue segued, it was YOU who brought up the Catholic Faith.

To wit:
These are your words (bold mine):
Not me but someone else might say there’s a problem with Paul saying women are to be silent in churches and yet there are women lectors, Eucharistic ministers, etc. Some people have a problem with women having their feet washed on Holy Thursday because the original apostles were men and yet some priests humbly perform the the act today in the 21st century. Times change. Things change. I don’t know if the women I mentioned followed their own will. All I know is they personally say they felt a calling. In any case yes of course they departed from **Catholic **teaching. Apparently they lost faith in it’s teaching authority.
And I simply responded that Paul’s words must be understood with the lens of the Faith which gave us these words.

And that only in a Bible Alone forum would there be a problem with Paul’s injunction to have women be silent in church while yet having women lectors.

Incidentally, the Catholic Church has no women Eucharistic ministers.

Priests and deacons are Eucharistic ministers.

All lay people are Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion.

Not Eucharistic ministers.
 
Over the past several years Anglicans and Lutherans seem to want to be Catholic, whereas before the only issue mentioned was that the Anglican Communion was part of a branch theory and that in some way they were part of the historic catholic church. Although even today many Anglicans feel they are Protestant. It is very confusing.
We’re Anglican: we’re good at confusing, confused, blurry, and downright unbelievably mixed up! 😃

As our liturgy says, we are catholic (small ‘c’), and that is a very good description of Anglicanism, but we are quite definitely Protestant in that most of us willingly remain outside of the Roman Catholic Church. That said, we tend to get on rather well. My parish shares important services with a Catholic church, and celebrates the Eucharist on an altar which they gave to us.

Yes, some Anglicans do decide to become Catholic, or to combine the two in Anglo-Catholicism, but I might also mention that traffic across the Tiber is not unidirectional. It is … a broad range, and being broad is what we specialise in.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top