Luke 10:39

[Tigger45]

Luke 10:39

So I heard that for Mary first to be actually just hanging out in the main room reserved just for men, was extremely bold not to mention she was sitting at the Lord's feet while He taught would imply He was grooming her for ministry and not just for her own personal discipleship?

Any thoughts?

 

[Paidiske]

I've read/heart this too - that where Mary was sitting was the position of a favoured disciple, one being prepared to be a rabbi.

Certainly it was culturally unusual for her to be among the disciples of a rabbi; that was something men did. Jesus was subverting his culture's gender norms in allowing her to be there.

It's interesting that we don't hear mention of her later. I wonder if she Lazarus and Martha became leaders of a Christian community in Bethany after the resurrection?

 

[Tigger45]

I've read/heart this too - that where Mary was sitting was the position of a favoured disciple, one being prepared to be a rabbi.

Certainly it was culturally unusual for her to be among the disciples of a rabbi; that was something men did. Jesus was subverting his culture's gender norms in allowing her to be there.

It's interesting that we don't hear mention of her later. I wonder if she Lazarus and Martha became leaders of a Christian community in Bethany after the resurrection?

I guess if you take that particular incident coupled with 'women' being the first witnesses to the empty tomb and reporting back to the apostles, it starts to build a case for women ministers.

Do you think the first century church saw ordination the way it ended up developing or was there a division between clergy and lay ministry.

 

[Paidiske]

No, the clergy-laity division was later than that. There were a variety of people taking up a variety of roles; not always very well-defined, but the later division of deacons/priests/bishops as clergy and teachers/prophets/deaconesses/evangelists (etc) as lay ministries is not evidenced in first century documents.

 

[FireDragon76]

I hesitate to even use the term "role" as that implies modern, utilitarian assumptions about ministry, particularly the need for efficiency (BTW, I think the state churches of Europe seriously distorted this). During parts of the Church's history, the offices have had much less to do with efficient utility in the modern sense, and more about expression of the reality of the Kingdom of God.

I do think this impacts the debates about woman's ministry, too. The debates are tied up in a focus on roles and power, stuff that was probably not as relevant in the early Church. Esp. because ministry in the early church would not necessarily be equivalent to being a pastor today, depending on your view of what a pastor is.

 

[All4Christ]

It's interesting that we don't hear mention of her later. I wonder if she Lazarus and Martha became leaders of a Christian community in Bethany after the resurrection?

Lazarus was appointed bishop of Kition, but the three of them (Mary, Martha and Lazarus) were missionaries to various regions after the resurrection. Our tradition teaches that they worked together closely in the evangelism, though only Lazarus was chosen to be bishop.

Orthodox Tradition also teaches that Mary and Martha were among the myrhh bearing women, despite their names not being mentioned.

 

[Tigger45]

I hesitate to even use the term "role" as that implies modern, utilitarian assumptions about ministry, particularly the need for efficiency (BTW, I think the state churches of Europe seriously distorted this). During parts of the Church's history, the offices have had much less to do with efficient utility in the modern sense, and more about expression of the reality of the Kingdom of God.

I do think this impacts the debates about woman's ministry, too. The debates are tied up in a focus on roles and power, stuff that was probably not as relevant in the early Church. Esp. because ministry in the early church would not necessarily be equivalent to being a pastor today, depending on your view of what a pastor is.

Of course respecting the SoP of this sub-forum do you feel women could function as a first century pastor?

 

[FireDragon76]

Of course respecting the SoP of this sub-forum do you feel women could function as a first century pastor?

That's really a tough question, as I would rather focus on elevating the conversation beyond just debating exegesis or giving my own personal opinion, which is invariably shaped by my own feelings and experiences (most of which have been very positive in regards to women pastors).

It's a lot like what Paidiske said, there wasn't a sharp distinction between clergy and laity, though apostles seem to be given preeminence, so in some ways this begs the question of whether pastors as your average Protestant now days understands the term, even existed back then. When the concern about good order became more paramount, then I think questions about women's roles became more pertinent. So I would tend to emphasize that the modern concept of pastor is something that has developed gradually. We can't delve into this issue without delving also into the history of ministry, I believe the Bible alone doesn't give us the clearest answers.

I think this issue should be handled today in a culturally sensitive way, so as not to confuse the Law and the Gospel. But still, the focus should be on good order and the well-being of the Church. So I think its complicated.

 

[FireDragon76]

Researching a related issue that I raised on Traditional Theology, to try to understand the diversity of Lutheran responses towards the question of whether they should retain an ordained diaconate, really drove home for me how much the vocation of pastor has been culturally conditioned.

My ow personal sensibility and intuition is that the Church should preach the Kingdom of God to some extent not just through traditional preaching but also through its being. So I think we should move beyond purely functionalist views of clergy that would reduce ordained ministry to a "pink collar" helping profession. That's why I think a certain amount of a high church perspective is necessary, especially in this day and age in North America where there is so much spiritual confusion (a theme at church yesterday that the pastor preached about, in light of the polarization of politics in the US).

 

[All4Christ]

While there weren't roles quite as defined as today, the defined role of bishop was very early, as can be seen by apostles appointing regional leaders during the apostolic era. The role of priest is essentially an extension of the bishop, since the regions were too large for the bishops to closely oversee the congregations. That's why in the Orthodox Church, bishops are priests as well. They technically aren't any higher except for administrative purposes, though it may not seem that way at times. One of my favorite times that the bishop came was when he came for a bridesgroom's Matins and just served as one of the priests. When he led the congregation in the The Bridegroom Comes at Midnight...it was a pretty special moment.

ETA: It is important to remember that the liturgy truly should be a work of the people, not the work of a priest. I really appreciate that about my parish now, and about the more liturgical traditions.

 

[Tigger45]

Here's the Lutheran Orthodox churches' position on female ordination. The Lutheran Orthodox Church, inc - LOC General News

Women in the Ministry

There is much debate today concerning women in positions of leadership in the ministry. Setting the basic tone is Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

How does all of this lead up to women ministers? Perhaps you are thinking that although we have laid a biblical foundation for "neither male nor female" in Christ, certain verses in the New Testament still seem to ban women from ministry positions in the church. Let's examine these verses for the true interpretation.

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law" (1 Corinthians 14:34).

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence" (1 Timothy 2:11-12).

In these verses, Paul cannot be addressing women who were in the ministry, but rather those in the congregation who were out of order. How do we know this? We have many such proofs, many from Paul himself. Here is a partial list of women who were all in influential positions of leadership in the early church.

Pheobe (Romans 16:1-2): This woman was a deaconess of the church in Cenchrea, who was beloved of Paul and many other Christians for the help she gave to them. She filled an important position of leadership. It would be a difficult stretch of the imagination to say that this woman fulfilled her duties without ever speaking in the church!

Priscilla (Acts 18:26): Priscilla and her husband Aquila are often mentioned with great respect by Paul. Together they were pastors of a church in Ephesus, and were responsible for teaching the full gospel to Apollos. We are informed that they both taught Apollos, and pastored the church together. In fact, Priscilla is sometimes listed ahead of Aquila when their names come up. This has led some to speculate that of the two, she was the primary teacher and her husband oversaw the ministry. At any rate, we see here a woman in a very prominent position of teaching and pastoring. (Other references to Priscilla and Aquila are Acts 18:2, 18; Romans 16:3, and I Corinthians 16:19).

Euodia and Syntyche (Philippians 4:2-3): Here we see reference to two women who were "true yokefellow" and who labored with Paul in the advancement of the gospel.

Junia (Romans 16:7): In this verse we see Paul sending greetings to Andronicus and Junia, his "fellow-prisoners" who are of note among the apostles. Junia is a woman's name. In some modern translations, an "s" has been added (Junias) because the translators were so sure a woman could not be an apostle, that they assumed a copyist has accidentally dropped the "s." However the proper male ending would have been "ius," not "ias." No church commentator earlier than the Middle Ages questioned that Junia was both a woman and an apostle.

Though there were other women throughout the Bible in positions of leadership, such as prophetesses, evangelists, judges, leaders, etc., the above references should be enough to establish that women were indeed a vital and normal part of church leadership. Paul expected women to speak in the church, or else why would he have given the following directive? It would have been useless to give directions for women who were speaking in the church, if they were never allowed to do so.

1 Corinthians 11:5, "But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven."

Furthermore, if Paul believed that all women should never teach or speak in church, why does he commend many women who did just that?

Even in Paul's day, there were those who tried to twist the meaning his words.

"...His (Paul's) letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do other Scriptures, to their own destruction" (2 Peter 3:16).

It is a fair conclusion that the testimony of the bulk of Scripture, church history and God's anointing upon them, all speak plainly for women being able to fulfill all positions of the five-fold offices of apostle, prophet, pastor, evangelist and teacher.

The Lord gave the church gifts of His choosing in the form of men and women who would lead the church into perfection (Ephesians 4:8-12).

It is the Lord who calls men and women to His ministry. He does not call special people, but the call goes out to "whosoever will." First, we are called to salvation; then as we walk in obedience to Him, He calls for us to be baptized in His Holy Spirit. As we continue to obey and follow Him, He then may choose us to serve Him in a full-time ministry. He chooses people for the ministry out of those who have walked in obedience to His other calls. He desires that all follow, but can only choose those who are obedient. These men and women who have answered the call are set in the ministry by Jesus Himself. Man's ordination does not qualify them, but the ordination of God does. Men will recognize those who are truly called by Him. They will even recognize women who are called of God as God empowers them with His anointing and power which cannot be denied.

When this Scripture says, "appointed and gave men to us," it does not mean just the male sex. The same man whom God created in the beginning which included male and female is the one referred to here. These "men" are both male and female and they have a responsibility to bring others into the maturity that they possess.

Based on what we believe to be sound scriptural examples, we welcome the work of women in the ministry and support the ordination of qualified women called to His service.