Women's Restrictions?

[LilLamb219]

On another thread Flipper wrote: I wish there were more female WELS members on here. I would love to hear their take on the more severe restrictions on women.

I don't go to a WELS church, but my female cousin does. Could you please tell me what kinds of restrictions there are? Especiall the "severe" ones. Thanks!

[Flipper]

Thanks for starting this!

My understanding is that women have no voting rights on church affairs, nor can they hold office (I'm not talking elders, but the board of directors, treasurer, etc.). I'm just curious as to how women feel about this.

[LilLamb219]

OIC

Thanks for clarifying.

Well, I don't know how the women in the WELS churches feel about it, but as a lady in a LCMS church, I prefer not to vote and to not hold any office unless it's in the Ladies Society group or another small committee (which is mostly run by ladies anyway).

[filosofer]

The old standard about no women voters was: Men sat on one side, women sat on the other during worship. Voters' Meetings were held immediately following, so they remained, as did the women, although they silent. The men would discuss freely, but when it came time to vote, the men all looked at their wives, the wives would nod, and the men would vote accordingly. ;)

In my first call as pastor, I served a dual parish (LCMS) - one congregation had women voters, the other did not. When there was a joint voters' meeting, the women from the one congregation could vote, the women from the other could not.

Interestingly, the congregation with women voters also had the most spiritually mature men for congregational leaders. The elders knew the Bible, knew what it was to be Lutheran, and desired to reach the lost for Christ. The congregation with no women voters struggled for male leadership. Sad but true. Over a period of years of my teaching Bible studies requiring elders to attend, the men finally began to growth in the faith. It took time, but the results were well worth it.

[catzinjammies]

We were WELS for 6 years (another story for another day p'raps) and I was never bothered by the no vote/no office rules. I had just left an LCMS church that had been feminized beyond recognition and was ready for some strong male leadership in a church. The pastor questioned me about how I would feel about such rules, and I told him that I trusted God to guide the men of that church to do His will, so not a problem for me. We ultimately left WELS for other reasons, but not because I was not allowed to vote.

CIJ

[Jim47]

We were WELS for 6 years (another story for another day p'raps) and I was never bothered by the no vote/no office rules. I had just left an LCMS church that had been feminized beyond recognition and was ready for some strong male leadership in a church. The pastor questioned me about how I would feel about such rules, and I told him that I trusted God to guide the men of that church to do His will, so not a problem for me. We ultimately left WELS for other reasons, but not because I was not allowed to vote.

CIJ


Hi CIJ :wave:


May I ask if it was the fellowship rules with other organizations that caused you to leave?

[ByzantineDixie]

Hi CIJ :wave:


May I ask if it was the fellowship rules with other organizations that caused you to leave?

About the only time I ever wish I was WELS is during Voters' meetings. I am thinking how cool it would be to gather up all my church women friends have have a shopping spree...while the men sit back at church and argue over budgets, facility repairs and the carpet color in the Sancturary.

Woohoo...who knew there could be such liberation in WELS!

(Jim...just joking with you...OK not joking. I actually would do this if I were WELS. At a minimum we'd go out for lattes!)

[Flipper]

About the only time I ever wish I was WELS is during Voters' meetings. I am thinking how cool it would be to gather up all my church women friends have have a shopping spree...while the men sit back at church and argue over budgets, facility repairs and the carpet color in the Sancturary.

Woohoo...who knew there could be such liberation in WELS!

(Jim...just joking with you...OK not joking. I actually would do this if I were WELS. At a minimum we'd go out for lattes!)

Part of me would be right there with you... up until some program there that I thought was beneficial got cut. I'd much rather have the responsibility of voting, so if a program got cut, I would understand exactly why, after ALL present members voted.

When I was RCC, none of the parishnors had much in voting rights, men or women. The priests and the diocese made our decisions. One of the neatest experiences I ever had after becoming a member was 2 weeks later, when I could vote in a member's meeting. That in itself was liberating.

[catzinjammies]

Hi CIJ :wave:


May I ask if it was the fellowship rules with other organizations that caused you to leave?

Hi Jim, in the end, yes, that rule started a pebble to roll that became a boulder which crashed right through our church, splitting it. The particular church we attended was borderline Amish in it's exclusivity. The legalistic stance of the president of the congregation left no room to spread the word of God. The whole story is long and rather sad, p'raps I'll elaborate sometime...earlier in the day for sure! I must retire since my 4:30 am wake up is coming too quickly!!!

CIJ

[Jim47]

Hi Jim, in the end, yes, that rule started a pebble to roll that became a boulder which crashed right through our church, splitting it. The particular church we attended was borderline Amish in it's exclusivity. The legalistic stance of the president of the congregation left no room to spread the word of God. The whole story is long and rather sad, p'raps I'll elaborate sometime...earlier in the day for sure! I must retire since my 4:30 am wake up is coming too quickly!!!

CIJ


We recently did a bible study on that and it is very hard to understand and it requires a lot of understanding. The thing is Mission work can still be done, it just needs to be done without agreeing with their doctrines.

[Protoevangel]

About the only time I ever wish I was WELS is during Voters' meetings. I am thinking how cool it would be to gather up all my church women friends have have a shopping spree...while the men sit back at church and argue over budgets, facility repairs and the carpet color in the Sancturary.

Woohoo...who knew there could be such liberation in WELS!

(Jim...just joking with you...OK not joking. I actually would do this if I were WELS. At a minimum we'd go out for lattes!)
I think that if the so-called "restrictions" were as bad as they are often made out to be (not here, necessarily), you would be in the kitchen making lattes for the men... and snacks too... barefoot!

Not that that would be a bad thing... (See, I'm just still scared to say that anyone might potentially be wrong about anything!) ;)

[ByzantineDixie]

I think that if the so-called "restrictions" were as bad as they are often made out to be (not here, necessarily), you would be in the kitchen making lattes for the men... and snacks too... barefoot!

OK...that really does change the complexion of everything. On second thought maybe choosing that carpet color isn't such a bad idea after all!

Not that that would be a bad thing... (See, I'm just still scared to say that anyone might potentially be wrong about anything!) ;)

Yes, please remember you are from the "other side". You are not permitted to use the word "wrong" here. You are only permitted to post sweet fellowship posts here telling us what great people we are, or asking us questions we can answer so we feel important and loved or admiring us for the "we are right, you are wrong" stance we take on all things. Ah....some days the gift of sarcastic tongues bears more fruit than others. ;)

Dan...ya know you are OK in my book and I won't even blink twice if you say the word "wrong". :hug:

[Jim47]

I think that if the so-called "restrictions" were as bad as they are often made out to be (not here, necessarily), you would be in the kitchen making lattes for the men... and snacks too... barefoot!

Not that that would be a bad thing... (See, I'm just still scared to say that anyone might potentially be wrong about anything!) ;)

There are a couple Bible verses that refer to this, and I can only think of this one for right now.

Maybe you'all can help me out?

Ro 14:1 Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.

[Jim47]

Still looking for help with those Bible verses.


I did however think of another way to explain what I was trying to say.

The beliefs that WELS have concerning fellowship with other organizations is indeed hard to understand, I'm not sure I'm fully capable myself, but what I was trying to say is I believe it requires a very throuough Bible study "and" subjecting yourself to God's Word concering these things and putting aside our human emotions and reasoning.

The love God put in our hearts makes us want to share with everyone the special gift He has given us, but what He doesn't want is for us to join in beliefs with these people.

An OT example is the Children of Israel taking on the pagan beliefs of the countries they took over. Please understand, I am not saying that other Lutheran churches are all wrong, I just believe that God wants us to hold on to His teachings anstead of conforming to the world.

My apologies if I offended anyone as that was not my intention.

[ByzantineDixie]

Please understand, I am not saying that other Lutheran churches are all wrong,

That's OK, Jim, as a WELS, since this is your "safe house" forum, too, I believe you can use the "W" word without negative repercussions.

Now it has been my experience that while WELS does teach "no prayer with those outside the fellowship" many of the laity actually do not adhere very well to this rule. For example...at the big family Thanksgiving dinner, they will usually pray with non-WELS family members. But I admit I have had limited exposure and my anecdotal information may not represent the body at large.

[ChiRho]

That's OK, Jim, as a WELS, since this is your "safe house" forum, too, I believe you can use the "W" word without negative repercussions.

Now it has been my experience that while WELS does teach "no prayer with those outside the fellowship" many of the laity actually do not adhere very well to this rule. For example...at the big family Thanksgiving dinner, they will usually pray with non-WELS family members. But I admit I have had limited exposure and my anecdotal information may not represent the body at large.

Before praying for a meal, I will ask those dining with me (and Alisha) if they believe that they are sinners deserving of Hell, but redeemed by Christ alone. I have gotten some funny stares, awkward answers and even some walk-outs, but it is better than praying with ungodly people. Apparently, Christianity is not en vogue.

Pax Christi,

ChiRho

[Flipper]

I'm betting you aren't very fun at dinner parties. :P

[SPALATIN]

I'm betting you aren't very fun at dinner parties. :P

ya think? ;)

[ChiRho]

Hey, if you wanna pray like Benke, go ahead. Just don't waste your time, ink, or paper on my invitation to that kind of dinner party. I wont be coming.

"Article IV or ya motha's a (word meaning one prone to prostitution; rhymes with store)!"

Pax Christi,

ChiRho

[Flipper]

"That" kind of dinner party? What kind of a dinner party would that be, Chi Chi? I don't follow.

[ChiRho]

"That" kind of dinner party? What kind of a dinner party would that be, Chi Chi? I don't follow.

Hey, if you wanna pray like Benke, go ahead. Just don't waste your time, ink, or paper on my invitation to that kind of dinner party. I wont be coming.


That kind of Yankee Stadium type of party.

[SPALATIN]

Hey, if you wanna pray like Benke, go ahead. Just don't waste your time, ink, or paper on my invitation to that kind of dinner party. I wont be coming.


That kind of Yankee Stadium type of party.

Chi Rho,

I hardly think that you are going to be praying with Moslems or Hindus and considering them as equal to Christianity. However, aren't we to be salt and light to the lost? When you pray, you should pray to the One and only God, Father of Christ and in union with the Holy Spirit.

Don't ask them to leave but pray correctly and put no other God's above yours. Benke's mistake was more that he failed to do this, not so much that he was there. Had Benke put Jesus above all others there wouldn't be such a problem in the LC-MS that stems from that event or even earlier.

[ChiRho]

Chi Rho,

I hardly think that you are going to be praying with Moslems or Hindus and considering them as equal to Christianity. However, aren't we to be salt and light to the lost? When you pray, you should pray to the One and only God, Father of Christ and in union with the Holy Spirit.

Don't ask them to leave but pray correctly and put no other God's above yours. Benke's mistake was more that he failed to do this, not so much that he was there. Had Benke put Jesus above all others there wouldn't be such a problem in the LC-MS that stems from that event or even earlier.

I dont think you understand what I meant. I will try to be clearer.

My girlfriend's brother graduated from college this summer. In his specific field, there is an abundance of Hindu and Muslim people. Some are his friends. No problem there. But when they came to his celebration dinner, his grandfather stood up and began to pray a universal prayer of thanks. I exited stage left. I was ridiculed by the "christians" for being so disrespectful. All I could think about was the irony of the situation. Who was disrespectful? On to the graduation...

At a state school nonetheless (where church is supposed to be walled from state; whatever that means...actually it just means anything but Christianity), they opened with an invocation. A Jewish Rabbi, stood and prayed. I was trapped between so many people, that I could not leave. So, I gritted my teeth and endured it without reverence. As he finished, Alisha's mom looked right at me and said, "That was so nice, I didn't expect a prayer!" To which I returned, "Yeah, it's not everyday I get to hear the pagan's pray to Satan." She looked at me, puzzled with hate. Then I informed her that, it was no Christian with the long curly sideburns and the funny hat. It was an Orthodox Jew. The family gasped that they all had bowed reverently and prayed with him. Walking to my car at the conclusion of the evening, I realized that my first instinct was the correct one. I should never have gone.

Pax

[Protoevangel]

I think that if the so-called "restrictions" were as bad as they are often made out to be (not here, necessarily), you would be in the kitchen making lattes for the men... and snacks too... barefoot!

Not that that would be a bad thing... (See, I'm just still scared to say that anyone might potentially be wrong about anything!)
OK...that really does change the complexion of everything. On second thought maybe choosing that carpet color isn't such a bad idea after all!

Yes, please remember you are from the "other side". You are not permitted to use the word "wrong" here. You are only permitted to post sweet fellowship posts here telling us what great people we are, or asking us questions we can answer so we feel important and loved or admiring us for the "we are right, you are wrong" stance we take on all things. Ah....some days the gift of sarcastic tongues bears more fruit than others. ;)

Dan...ya know you are OK in my book and I won't even blink twice if you say the word "wrong". :hug:
You are filled with the Spitit Rose! The gift is flowing like a hershey bar on a car's dashboard on a hot Georgia Summer day! ;)

I wasn't implicating the LCMS/WELS people. It is the rule itself that is bizarre, and which I was using as a springboard for my budding career as a comedian. I suppose I shouldn't leave my day job? :sigh: --> :D

[Protoevangel]

I think that if the so-called "restrictions" were as bad as they are often made out to be (not here, necessarily), you would be in the kitchen making lattes for the men... and snacks too... barefoot!
There are a couple Bible verses that refer to this, and I can only think of this one for right now.

Maybe you'all can help me out?

Ro 14:1 Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.
I hope you don't think I was being critical.

I do disagree with some aspects of the practice, but illustrating my disagreement was not my intent when making that post. I was meaning to say that things cannot possibly be as "bad" as some people try to make it out to be (mainly ELCA people I know). If the WELS women agree that only men are mandated by Scripture to vote etc. I am sure they do not begrudge the cross they carry. Unlike when I disagree with the ELCA on an issue, I recognize WELS as being confessional, Lutheran, and Christian in it's reasoning and presuppositions. We can discuss these issues "in house" as it were. Discussing with other ELCA people, on the other hand, I feel much more like a missionary brining God's Word to the lost.

[SPALATIN]

You are filled with the Spitit Rose! The gift is flowing like a hershey bar on a car's dashboard on a hot Georgia Summer day! ;)

I wasn't implicating the LCMS/WELS people. It is the rule itself that is bizarre, and which I was using as a springboard for my budding career as a comedian. I suppose I shouldn't leave my day job? :sigh: --> :D

I agree. I think Rose is filled with the Spitit too. ;)

[Jenna]

There are many women who feel very comfortable with their husband speaking for their family, when it comes to church decisions. If he is the priest of your home, a part of your one-flesh, it is reasonable for many women to trust the decisions of the man who has authority to lead. Not only that, it goes a long way to cultivating submissiveness in a woman's heart if her husband loves her, so she will know that what she says to him in private will possibly influence any major decisions.

Here is a question that comes to mind. Is it a restriction if a woman believes the same and adopts a church practice that she believes to acceptable and/or not in conflict with scripture? :)

....just rambling....

[Jim47]

I hope you don't think I was being critical.

I do disagree with some aspects of the practice, but illustrating my disagreement was not my intent when making that post. I was meaning to say that things cannot possibly be as "bad" as some people try to make it out to be (mainly ELCA people I know). If the WELS women agree that only men are mandated by Scripture to vote etc. I am sure they do not begrudge the cross they carry. Unlike when I disagree with the ELCA on an issue, I recognize WELS as being confessional, Lutheran, and Christian in it's reasoning and presuppositions. We can discuss these issues "in house" as it were. Discussing with other ELCA people, on the other hand, I feel much more like a missionary brining God's Word to the lost.

No Sir! I had no problem with what you said. I think its just a much deeper subject then most people realize.

Scripture can be very confusing on certain issues if you look at only a hand full of verses and form a decision.

[C.F.W. Walther]

I'm in LCMS and thinking about going to WELS or ELS just because of the conservative stance and confessionalism. Truthfully I'm not against women voters but Walther and Luther and the WELS, ELS support no voting for women. I've read extensively the reasons and all I can do is support the decision. I've seen too many divisions in ALL the so called Lutheran denominations and can only say that even though I might not condone all the precepts of one or the other, I have to support one no matter what I believe. Otherwise more descension will prevail again and fragmentation will grind on.

[Jim47]

I'm in LCMS and thinking about going to WELS or ELS just because of the conservative stance and confessionalism. Truthfully I'm not against women voters but Walther and Luther and the WELS, ELS support no voting for women. I've read extensively the reasons and all I can do is support the decision. I've seen too many divisions in ALL the so called Lutheran denominations and can only say that even though I might not condone all the precepts of one or the other, I have to support one no matter what I believe. Otherwise more descension will prevail again and fragmentation will grind on.


That is a very accurate description of just exactly what we have to do.

[KagomeShuko]

I agree. I think Rose is filled with the Spitit too. ;)

Rose is definitely filled with the Spirit (even if we do disagree on things)! Having met her personally, I say this with full confidence!

Stein Auf!
Bridget

[SPALATIN]

Rose is definitely filled with the Spirit (even if we do disagree on things)! Having met her personally, I say this with full confidence!

Stein Auf!
Bridget

Hey I was making fun of Danhead's spelling typo. he's the one who spelled
Spirit as Spitit.

[stlsweeti]

There are many women who feel very comfortable with their husband speaking for their family, when it comes to church decisions. If he is the priest of your home, a part of your one-flesh, it is reasonable for many women to trust the decisions of the man who has authority to lead. Not only that, it goes a long way to cultivating submissiveness in a woman's heart if her husband loves her, so she will know that what she says to him in private will possibly influence any major decisions.

.

Ditto Jenna:thumbsup:

[Browneyes84]

I actually had a conversation with a WELS pastor at school when I had walked by their table. I'm kinda interested in catholicism but I still have my "protestant ways" haha. He explained to me that in church affairs, which are NOT secular, they try to follow the Bible's precepts on male headship. It doesn't mean that women can't be leaders, but in Christian marriage, church affairs and leadership, God had ordained men to take upon that leadership role. Is that really the summarization of the restriction? Should it really be called a restriction, I mean it's not like WELS is saying women have to cover their hair and not utter a sound in the church. I've been to a New Testament Christian church that believed that and in my mind, THAT is much more of a severe restriction than following the Biblical commandment that the man is to be the head such as Jesus is the head.

[Jim47]

I actually had a conversation with a WELS pastor at school when I had walked by their table. I'm kinda interested in catholicism but I still have my "protestant ways" haha. He explained to me that in church affairs, which are NOT secular, they try to follow the Bible's precepts on male headship. It doesn't mean that women can't be leaders, but in Christian marriage, church affairs and leadership, God had ordained men to take upon that leadership role. Is that really the summarization of the restriction? Should it really be called a restriction, I mean it's not like WELS is saying women have to cover their hair and not utter a sound in the church. I've been to a New Testament Christian church that believed that and in my mind, THAT is much more of a severe restriction than following the Biblical commandment that the man is to be the head such as Jesus is the head.


Kinda neat to see an old thread revived! :thumbsup:

I'm not sure if I can improve any on what has already been discussed, but I'll try a simple explaination.

WELS believe that only men can preach, hold office on the church council or vote.

Women can, and are encouraged to serve in many other ways. In our church women can serve with men counting the offerings, teaching Sunday school, serving on Alter guild, doing Mission work, serving on Mission committees and attending seminars for them, and any number of other things that does not place them in direct leadership/headship over a man.

While we had our last Pastor, when ever it came time for an upcoming voters meeting, He would have the elders call all the widows of the congregation to see what their opinions were on any issues at hand. We as men of the congregation are taught to keep our wives in mind when voting, because God has instructed us to love and care for them just as Jesus cared for His Church. Its not a "men lord it over women thing". The men have agonized for many long hours in meetings over certain issues. And when it comes to things like picking new carpet or paint, we all listen to the ladies.

Yes, we have some women who look down on this belief, but I think in there hearts they really believe it, they just have trouble accepting it, but do abide by it. All in all, we have a very peacful congregation.

[archigeek]

I've been a member of both ELCA and LCMS (but not WELS) churches and truthfully I found wonderful things in both churches.

One of the wonderful things to me about the ELCS is the lack of restriction of members who wanted to serve. Sure, in the LCMS anyone can serve, but we restrict members from serving in specific ways without consideration of their ability to do so. I have spent a lot more time as a member of a conservative LCMS church and found it to be very rewarding, but I find myself asking the question, "how can it be right to tell someone not to serve God in the way they are most able"?

Just what is the logic and the Biblical basis for it? I don't seem to recall what it was and it makes no sense to me at this point in my life.

In this day and age there are certainly women with the ability to lead, and the ability to preach as well as any man. Is it not wrong to restrict them from serving God in the way that they are most able?

[Jim47]

I've been a member of both ELCA and LCMS (but not WELS) churches and truthfully I found wonderful things in both churches.

One of the wonderful things to me about the ELCS is the lack of restriction of members who wanted to serve. Sure, in the LCMS anyone can serve, but we restrict members from serving in specific ways without consideration of their ability to do so. I have spent a lot more time as a member of a conservative LCMS church and found it to be very rewarding, but I find myself asking the question, "how can it be right to tell someone not to serve God in the way they are most able"?

Just what is the logic and the Biblical basis for it? I don't seem to recall what it was and it makes no sense to me at this point in my life.

In this day and age there are certainly women with the ability to lead, and the ability to preach as well as any man. Is it not wrong to restrict them from serving God in the way that they are most able?


I'm quite tired right now, but perhaps others will be able to better ansswer your question. Here are some scriptures that address your question, there are many more besides these.


1Ti 2:11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Eph 5:22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Col 3:18 Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.

Col 3:19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.

*** 2:1 You must teach what is in accord with sound doctrine. 2 Teach the older men to be temperate, worthy of respect, self-controlled, and sound in faith, in love and in endurance.

*** 2:3 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. 4 Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children, 5 to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.

*** 2:6 Similarly, encourage the young men to be self-controlled. 7 In everything set them an example by doing what is good. In your teaching show integrity, seriousness 8 and soundness of speech that cannot be condemned, so that those who oppose you may be ashamed because they have nothing bad to say about us.

*** 2:9 Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, 10 and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.

*** 2:11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. 12 It teaches us to say "No" to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13 while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

*** 2:15 These, then, are the things you should teach. Encourage and rebuke with all authority. Do not let anyone despise you.

[SPALATIN]

I've been a member of both ELCA and LCMS (but not WELS) churches and truthfully I found wonderful things in both churches.

One of the wonderful things to me about the ELCS is the lack of restriction of members who wanted to serve. Sure, in the LCMS anyone can serve, but we restrict members from serving in specific ways without consideration of their ability to do so. I have spent a lot more time as a member of a conservative LCMS church and found it to be very rewarding, but I find myself asking the question, "how can it be right to tell someone not to serve God in the way they are most able"?

Just what is the logic and the Biblical basis for it? I don't seem to recall what it was and it makes no sense to me at this point in my life.

In this day and age there are certainly women with the ability to lead, and the ability to preach as well as any man. Is it not wrong to restrict them from serving God in the way that they are most able?

Certainly the verses that Jim gives to your post are adequate. I will say this. Since when is ability itself the precursor to serviing God. Perhaps you might look to what Luther says about vocation and how we witness within that. It is not the women's ability to preach that keeps her from doing it but on what God commands in his word.

[Browneyes84]

I've moved past the whole women cant preach and just accepted that as God's Word. But MANY other denoms in Christianity have and follow the same thing.

But the thing is a lot of people try to take that into secular affairs. Just becuase a woman cant be president of a church group doesnt mean she wouldnt be able to be a CEO in a company, or be a doctor, or anything else like that?

[Flipper]

I'm quite tired right now, but perhaps others will be able to better ansswer your question. Here are some scriptures that address your question, there are many more besides these.


1Ti 2:11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Eph 5:22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Col 3:18 Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.

Col 3:19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.

*** 2:1 You must teach what is in accord with sound doctrine. 2 Teach the older men to be temperate, worthy of respect, self-controlled, and sound in faith, in love and in endurance.

*** 2:3 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. 4 Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children, 5 to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.

*** 2:6 Similarly, encourage the young men to be self-controlled. 7 In everything set them an example by doing what is good. In your teaching show integrity, seriousness 8 and soundness of speech that cannot be condemned, so that those who oppose you may be ashamed because they have nothing bad to say about us.

*** 2:9 Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, 10 and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.

*** 2:11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. 12 It teaches us to say "No" to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13 while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

*** 2:15 These, then, are the things you should teach. Encourage and rebuke with all authority. Do not let anyone despise you.

I thought historically, Paul was speaking to specific women in specific problem churches.

I also don't think 2:9 was directed to women - but can mean an employer/employee relationship that we are all subject to if we work.

[LutherNut]

I thought historically, Paul was speaking to specific women in specific problem churches.

The inspired, inerrant Word of God applies to all people of all time. The argument you use here is the same used by the ELCA to justify ordaining women, tolerating homosexual behavior, supporting abortion, etc. The only real way to justify these things in the church is to trash and put down God's Word, making it something that it's not. Although Paul is indeed addressing a problem within a specific Church, the teaching that he applies to this problem is God's teaching to all people. (see 1 Corinthians 14:37) Paul isn't simply making up a rule that only applies to a certain people at a certain time. If that were the case, then his writings have no business being in the canon of Scripture.


Jay:wave:

[Jim47]

The inspired, inerrant Word of God applies to all people of all time. The argument you use here is the same used by the ELCA to justify ordaining women, tolerating homosexual behavior, supporting abortion, etc. The only real way to justify these things in the church is to trash and put down God's Word, making it something that it's not. Although Paul is indeed addressing a problem within a specific Church, the teaching that he applies to this problem is God's teaching to all people. (see 1 Corinthians 14:37) Paul isn't simply making up a rule that only applies to a certain people at a certain time. If that were the case, then his writings have no business being in the canon of Scripture.


Jay:wave:


:thumbsup:

[Flipper]

The inspired, inerrant Word of God applies to all people of all time. The argument you use here is the same used by the ELCA to justify ordaining women, tolerating homosexual behavior, supporting abortion, etc. The only real way to justify these things in the church is to trash and put down God's Word, making it something that it's not. Although Paul is indeed addressing a problem within a specific Church, the teaching that he applies to this problem is God's teaching to all people. (see 1 Corinthians 14:37) Paul isn't simply making up a rule that only applies to a certain people at a certain time. If that were the case, then his writings have no business being in the canon of Scripture.


Jay:wave:

Actually, I wasn't arguing, just bringing up what I was taught regarding Biblical history - and it was at an LCMS college.

Still, I don't see any basis for the master/slave analogy Paul uses to mean within a marriage. In an employment situation, yes.

[LutherNut]

Actually, I wasn't arguing, just bringing up what I was taught regarding Biblical history - and it was at an LCMS college.

Unfortuately, there are still a few leftovers from the pre-Seminex days who still hold to the historical-critical view of Biblical interpretation.

Still, I don't see any basis for the master/slave analogy Paul uses to mean within a marriage. In an employment situation, yes.

I'm not sure where you see this. Paul isn't suggesting at all that a woman is in servitude to her husband, but rather the husband and wife each have roles given them by God. The husband is to provide and care for his wife and family. The wife is to assist him in this, but not desire to do this herself. This comes directly to the post-Fall roles that God imposed on Adam and Eve in Genesis 3.


Jay:)

[Jim47]

Still, I don't see any basis for the master/slave analogy Paul uses to mean within a marriage. In an employment situation, yes.




This is a very hard teching to explain, and I may very well botch my attempt, but maybe someone else will understand what I am trying to say and help me out.

The scripture that came to mind is the very last verse in the following. I don't like to take scripture out of context, so here is the whole paragraph.

1Ti 2:1 I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone—

1Ti 2:2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.

1Ti 2:3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior,

1Ti 2:4 who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

1Ti 2:6 who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time.

1Ti 2:7 And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.

1Ti 2:8 I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing.

1Ti 2:9 I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes,

1Ti 2:10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

1Ti 2:11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.

1Ti 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

1Ti 2:13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.

1Ti 2:14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

1Ti 2:15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.


Again, lets focus on the last verse. I brought this scripture verse to my Pastor a while back in a Bible class. It was quite obvious to me that it was telling something deeper than, "women have to bear children to be saved". My Pastor jokingly commended me for picking out what he called one of the most difficult passages in the bible. But the actual explaination is quite simple. The answer or true meaning lies in the second part of verse 15. Bearing children actaully has nothing to do with it. What Paul is saying here is exactly what LutherNut said, "that we have God given roles" and when we faithfully perform these assigned roles, it pleases God. Why? Because we are then witnesses that what God has told us is true, and because we believe "His Word" and not our own reason or human logic.

Paul's explaination or righteousness through faith.

Righteousness Through Faith

Ro 3:21 But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify.

Ro 3:22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference,

Ro 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

Ro 3:24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

Ro 3:25 God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished—

Ro 3:26 he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

Ro 3:27 Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith.

Ro 3:28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.

Ro 3:29 Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too,

Ro 3:30 since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.

Ro 3:31 Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.

Abraham Justified by Faith

Ro 4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter?

Ro 4:2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God.

Ro 4:3 What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."

Ro 4:4 Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation.

Ro 4:5 However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.

Ro 4:6 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

Ro 4:7 "Blessed are they

whose transgressions are forgiven,

whose sins are covered.

Ro 4:8 Blessed is the man

whose sin the Lord will never count against him


This is in my eyes, why the historical critical method of accepting scripture is so wrong, plus there are scriptures that speak about this.

Mt 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

2 Tim:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

2Pe 1:19 And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.


Sorry if this has gotten a little lengthy and off course.

[Flatscan82]

On another thread Flipper wrote: I wish there were more female WELS members on here. I would love to hear their take on the more severe restrictions on women.

I don't go to a WELS church, but my female cousin does. Could you please tell me what kinds of restrictions there are? Especiall the "severe" ones. Thanks!

If you read the teachings of Jesus, women are equal to men. When you start reading all the letters of Paul, James, Jude, and Peter. Women are no longer equal. Some of the letters written in the NT were to Female leaders of churches. I don't like Paul or any of the apostles. The have strayed from Christ originally teachings. If anything women will get to heaven ahead of men any day. It was Christ who said blessed are the meek for they will inherit the kingdom of God, and if you compare a male to a female. By in large 70% of females are more meeker than men


there are a few other versus but need to look them up, but i need to get to my class.

[Browneyes84]

no women aren't equal but we aren't inferior either...at least that is what I have been taught. We are "different"...

[Flatscan82]

no women aren't equal but we aren't inferior either...at least that is what I have been taught. We are "different"...

I am a student of science the and a student of God. And what I know from science is that women only differ in the X and Y chromosomes, even then the lines are blurred because with certain birth defects you can have a Female that have both an X and Y chromosome. The only major difference being is that they can't not produce children.


And what then. Don’t we all come from the same place? The womb of our mother? You can bring up Adam and Eve if you would like. That god made Eve from the rib of Adam but didn't we all also descend from the womb of eve. And after Adam dies and the daughters of Adam produce children. Didn’t we also descend from their wombs with the seed of Adam’s sons who also came from the womb of Eve?

It says in the NT that God if he so wishes could rise up descendants of Abraham from rocks lying on the ground. If God could rise up a human from a stone then is it that far of a stretch to say that the word of God could be preached by a woman?

It also says in acts to “do not call what God has created profane” and the writers of the NT (outside of the 4 gospels of curse) have committed that sin my placing a woman lower than a man. For Christ says we are all children of God.

[Godfixated]

If you read the teachings of Jesus, women are equal to men. When you start reading all the letters of Paul, James, Jude, and Peter. Women are no longer equal. Some of the letters written in the NT were to Female leaders of churches. I don't like Paul or any of the apostles. The have strayed from Christ originally teachings. If anything women will get to heaven ahead of men any day. It was Christ who said blessed are the meek for they will inherit the kingdom of God, and if you compare a male to a female. By in large 70% of females are more meeker than men


there are a few other versus but need to look them up, but i need to get to my class.

We already discussed this before. Paul or any of the other apostles never once say that women are lesser than men. There are a couple of places in the Word where verses have been taken out of the context, mainly 1 Corinthians 14; yet, this passage is only talking about prophets wives.

[Flatscan82]

We already discussed this before. Paul or any of the other apostles never once say that women are lesser than men. There are a couple of places in the Word where verses have been taken out of the context, mainly 1 Corinthians 14; yet, this passage is only talking about prophets wives.

that may be so, but honestly i don't think Paul likes women very much..I think some little jewish girl really broke his heart one day:sigh:

[LilLamb219]

It also says in acts to “do not call what God has created profane” and the writers of the NT (outside of the 4 gospels of curse) have committed that sin my placing a woman lower than a man. For Christ says we are all children of God.

I really don't see that interpretation (that women are low-lifes). Adam was created first and then Eve was created for him and from his body. There is that type of connection and relationship that is carried over and should always be remembered. It's the same connection and relationship of the bride and bridegroom and Christ and His church. If we truly look to see how Christ treats His bride the church, we see how men should treat women.

As for the office of holy ministry, scriptures say that women should not preach. It goes back to the order of creation and what I just wrote. It's not about man being better than woman. It's just not a vocation that women should have.

[Jim47]

that may be so, but honestly i don't think Paul likes women very much..I think some little jewish girl really broke his heart one day:sigh:


That would be a bad assumption. If you look at scripture you will see that Paul held Godly women in high reguard.

Ac 18:1 After this, Paul left Athens and went to Corinth.
Ac 18:2 There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome.

Notice that he mentions the wifes name name but not the husbands name in the above scripture. Then in the following scripture he mentions her name before giving his name. Doesn't sound to me like Paul had a low opinion of women.

Ac 18:18 Paul stayed on in Corinth for some time. Then he left the brothers and sailed for Syria, accompanied by Priscilla and Aquila. Before he sailed, he had his hair cut off at Cenchrea because of a vow he had taken.
Ac 18:19 They arrived at Ephesus, where Paul left Priscilla and Aquila. He himself went into the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews.

Rather he showed respect for God's direction as was taught to him directly by Jesus. in the following scripture again Paul directs attention to yet another lady who had helped him is his ministry, and then again he mentions Priscilla and praises her work and then later in the following scriptures he again praises yet other women.

Ro 16:1 I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church in Cenchrea.
Ro 16:2 I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been a great help to many people, including me.
Ro 16:3 Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus.
Ro 16:4 They risked their lives for me. Not only I but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them.
Ro 16:5 Greet also the church that meets at their house.
Greet my dear friend Epenetus, who was the first convert to Christ in the province of Asia.
Ro 16:6 Greet Mary, who worked very hard for you.
Ro 16:7 Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.
Ro 16:8 Greet Ampliatus, whom I love in the Lord.
Ro 16:9 Greet Urbanus, our fellow worker in Christ, and my dear friend Stachys.
Ro 16:10 Greet Apelles, tested and approved in Christ.
Greet those who belong to the household of Aristobulus.
Ro 16:11 Greet Herodion, my relative.
Greet those in the household of Narcissus who are in the Lord.
Ro 16:12 Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those women who work hard in the Lord.
Greet my dear friend Persis, another woman who has worked very hard in the Lord.
Ro 16:13 Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a mother to me, too.
Ro 16:14 Greet Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas and the brothers with them.
Ro 16:15 Greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas and all the saints with them.
Ro 16:16 Greet one another with a holy kiss.
All the churches of Christ send greetings.
Ro 16:17 I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.
Ro 16:18 For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.
Ro 16:19 Everyone has heard about your obedience, so I am full of joy over you; but I want you to be wise about what is good, and innocent about what is evil.
Ro 16:20 The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet.
The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you.


Notice in verse 17 his warning about people causing devisions. It would be quite apparent to me that part of his warning included that women should be respected and that they should follow The Lord's direction given to them.

You might find it hard to believe but I have never heard one woman in my church voice a complaint why women shouldn't be considered in the Ministry. I think the following scripture also gives us direction in that Jesus did not seek equality with His Father.

Phil 2:1 If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. 4 Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.
Phil 2:5 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
Phil 2:6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
Phil 2:7 but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
Phil 2:8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!

It doesn't seem too hard to me that we should follow God's direction when our Savior gave His life so that we might be called "the children of God" :wave:

[ILoveYeshua]

nevertheless, they still should cover their head in church, right? and is that so much to ask, you ladies with beautiful flowing hair? =) trying to focus here! =)