Is it okay to go to a church with a female pastor?

[returnn23]

He also chose only Jews.
So?

"Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful."

Source: Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (May 22, 1994) | John Paul II

 

[Strong in Him]

Please read the following:

“In the apostolic era different forms of diaconal assistance offered to the Apostles and communities by women seem to have been institutional. Thus Paul recommends to the community at Rome ‘our sister Phoebe, servant [he diakonos] of the Church at Cenchreae’ (cf. Romans 16:1-4). Although the masculine form of diakonos is used here, it cannot therefore be concluded that the word is being used to designate the specific function of a ‘deacon’; firstly because in this context diakonos still signifies servant in a very general sense, and secondly because the word ‘servant’ is not given a feminine suffix but preceded by a feminine article. What seems clear is that Phoebe exercised a recognized service in the community of Cenchreae, subordinate to the ministry of the Apostle. Elsewhere in Paul’s writings the authorities of the world are themselves called diakonos (Romans 13:4), and in Second Corinthians 11:14-15 he refers to diakonoi of the devil."

Source: History of Deaconesses | EWTN

According to my Greek dictionary, Diakonos can be translated as servant, deacon or Minister.
According to my interlinear Greek NT, Jesus used this word in Mark 9:35 - "he must be the servant of all" - and in John 12:26 - "where I am, my servant will be."
Paul uses this word about himself in 1 Corinthians 3:5 - he and Apollos were Ministers of the Gospel - and in Ephesians 3:7 he says that he became a Minister of the Gospel. The same word is used of Phoebe in Romans 16:1, a deacon of the church.

 

[Strong in Him]

"Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful."

Source: Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (May 22, 1994) | John Paul II

But God has all authority.
And, with respect, not being a Catholic, I don't listen to the Pope.

 

[returnn23]

But God has all authority.
And, with respect, not being a Catholic, I don't listen to the Pope.

I understand but the Catholic Church followed the example of Christ who acted freely as God.

 

[Strong in Him]

I understand but the Catholic Church followed the example of Christ who acted freely as God.

So how did Christ treat women then?
He taught them - women were not allowed to learn, yet Mary of Bethany sat at his feet in the place reserved for male student Rabbis.
He allowed them to proclaim the Gospel - the woman at the well went and told the men in her town that she had found the Messiah.
Women were said to be unreliable witnesses - yet Christ chose a woman to the the first witness to the resurrection and to go and tell the male disciples.

Jesus elevated women far above the status accorded to them by society. He healed women and called an unclean woman "daughter". He forgave a woman caught in the act of adultery who had broken the law and deserved to be stoned. He taught that they should not be divorced for no reason at all, but that God made both men and women in his image, and it was he who joined a couple together.

If Christians, and the church, seek to love as Jesus did, they should treat women in the same way - "love does not dishonour others", 1 Corinthians 13:5.

 

[returnn23]

So how did Christ treat women then?
He taught them - women were not allowed to learn, yet Mary of Bethany sat at his feet in the place reserved for male student Rabbis.
He allowed them to proclaim the Gospel - the woman at the well went and told the men in her town that she had found the Messiah.
Women were said to be unreliable witnesses - yet Christ chose a woman to the the first witness to the resurrection and to go and tell the male disciples.

Jesus elevated women far above the status accorded to them by society. He healed women and called an unclean woman "daughter". He forgave a woman caught in the act of adultery who had broken the law and deserved to be stoned. He taught that they should not be divorced for no reason at all, but that God made both men and women in his image, and it was he who joined a couple together.

If Christians, and the church, seek to love as Jesus did, they should treat women in the same way - "love does not dishonour others", 1 Corinthians 13:5.

There is the often repeated misconception that Jesus and His disciples were influenced by the customs of that time. They knew them but did not follow them regarding this subject. Then there is the often repeated idea that, regardless of what Christ did, not ordaining women was a mistake or somehow overlooked. There is nothing in the New Testament to support that. Finally, in the interest of secular ideas, women should not be denied any job, including priest. But the situation established by Jesus does not support that idea.

"2. The Declaration recalls and explains the fundamental reasons for this teaching, reasons expounded by Paul VI, and concludes that the Church "does not consider herself authorized to admit women to priestly ordination."(3) To these fundamental reasons the document adds other theological reasons which illustrate the appropriateness of the divine provision, and it also shows clearly that Christ's way of acting did not proceed from sociological or cultural motives peculiar to his time. As Paul VI later explained: "The real reason is that, in giving the Church her fundamental constitution, her theological anthropology-thereafter always followed by the Church's Tradition- Christ established things in this way."(4)'

 

[Paidiske]

I strongly disagree. In the Catholic Church, women are barred from Holy Orders, and Deacon. This non-debate has been going on for years. Women who are ordained violate this prohibition and are excommunicated.

Neither the OP nor most participants in this thread are Catholic, and Catholic positions are not authoritative for us. I'm not excommunicated, since I was never a Catholic in the first place. I am, however, a parish priest in the Anglican church, and answer the OP from that perspective.

 

[returnn23]

Neither the OP nor most participants in this thread are Catholic, and Catholic positions are not authoritative for us. I'm not excommunicated, since I was never a Catholic in the first place. I am, however, a parish priest in the Anglican church, and answer the OP from that perspective.

I understand but I will answer from my perspective.

 

[Strong in Him]

There is the often repeated misconception that Jesus and His disciples were influenced by the customs of that time. They knew them but did not follow them regarding this subject. Then there is the often repeated idea that, regardless of what Christ did, not ordaining women was a mistake or somehow overlooked. There is nothing in the New Testament to support that. Finally, in the interest of secular ideas, women should not be denied any job, including priest. But the situation established by Jesus does not support that idea.

I wasn't talking about whether or not Jesus would have been in favour of ordaining women. I was answering your statement that the catholic church follows Jesus' example.

Jesus' actions showed that he valued, and affirmed, women. Contrary to the norms of the day, Jesus taught, healed and forgave women. He allowed them to proclaim his word. He deliberately chose that a woman would be the first witness to the resurrection.

Some Christians, and churches, try to repress women, say that we cannot do what God calls us to do; that he would not give us certain gifts. I have been told on these forums (not by you) that I am disobedient, deluded, mistaken because I am a lay preacher. I have had my call to proclaim the Gospel dismissed with the words "we're in end times; God allows sin to continue."
I am not saying that you or the catholic church have done this - but anyone who is claiming to follow Jesus' example and love as he loves, cannot act this way. Because, quite simply, Jesus would not have done.

 

[Benjamin Müller]

Luke 2:36-37 And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity; And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day.

Luke 8:1-3 Now it came to pass, afterward, that He went through every city and village, preaching and bringing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God. And the twelve were with Him, [2] and certain women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities—Mary called Magdalene, out of whom had come seven demons, and Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward, and Susanna, and many others who provided for Him from their substance.

I said the Holy Spirit doesn't discriminate towards women; that doesn't mean the Holy Spirit is going to lead particular women do to evangelical services of speaking. Anna served in the Temple, and therefore would have been involved in holy temple services that would have been appropriate for a woman to perform. Certain women followed with Jesus during his ministry assuming traditional female roles, they would offered services such as cooking, washing, sewing, being the social circle (women are great at socializing)

Obviously women wouldn't be sent out onto the field to preach. Christ told his disciples that I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Women being the weaker and fairer sex would be far more vulnerable to attacks. Men are fit, mentally and physically, to deal with the pressures of the ministry at that time when persecution would land them in prison and take their very lives.

Women have a role in the ministry, but the Holy Spirit will lead each one to do what they are capable and gifted to do. Women were made as companions "a help-meet". They don't rule the roost; the hierarchy remains. But women have their gifts; they have their skills; and if a woman is a great service to the ministry then that gift, given or exaggerated by the Holy Spirit, should never be thwarted. We serve God and God decides each role in the body; whether your the foot or the little toe, everyone serves a purpose. Whether male or female, we all serve a purpose. I've heard some terrible male speakers and some wonderful women speakers. The Holy Spirit will guide each woman to do what God has called her to do. And if God finds her an acceptable teacher or speaker, he'll place her where she can serve others.

If she is able to teach or speak according to the Word of God and no error has been found in her and she is edifying others then let the Holy Spirit do its work through her.

Acts 5:39 but if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it—lest you even be found to fight against God.”

 

[Strong in Him]

I said the Holy Spirit doesn't discriminate towards women; that doesn't mean the Holy Spirit is going to lead particular women do to evangelical services of speaking.

Why not? The woman at the well went back to her town and told the men that she had found the Messiah.
There are, and have been, a number of female evangelists.

Certain women followed with Jesus during his ministry assuming traditional female roles, they would offered services such as cooking, washing, sewing, being the social circle (women are great at socializing)

Jesus healed women - are you saying they wouldn't have told anyone else what he had done for them?
Which verses say that the women who followed Jesus assumed traditional female roles?

Obviously women wouldn't be sent out onto the field to preach. Christ told his disciples that I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Women being the weaker and fairer sex would be far more vulnerable to attacks.

How do you know?
Jesus sent 70 people out to preach his word - how do you know that none were women?

Men are fit, mentally and physically, to deal with the pressures of the ministry at that time when persecution would land them in prison and take their very lives.

Is that why women followed Jesus to the foot of the cross, while the men ran away and hid behind locked doors?

Women have a role in the ministry, but the Holy Spirit will lead each one to do what they are capable and gifted to do.

Yes - and he leads some of us to preach and others to be ordained as Ministers.

Women were made as companions "a help-meet".

That doesn't say, or mean, inferiority.
The Holy Spirit is our helper; he's not inferior to us.

They don't rule the roost; the hierarchy remains.

That's why Deborah was called by God to be judge over the whole nation, I suppose?

But women have their gifts; they have their skills; and if a woman is a great service to the ministry then that gift, given or exaggerated by the Holy Spirit, should never be thwarted.

Including preaching or being ordained.

We serve God and God decides each role in the body; whether your the foot or the little toe, everyone serves a purpose. Whether male or female, we all serve a purpose. I've heard some terrible male speakers and some wonderful women speakers. The Holy Spirit will guide each woman to do what God has called her to do. And if God finds her an acceptable teacher or speaker, he'll place her where she can serve others.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Is it okay to go to a church with a female pastor?

A while back I left my old church where I grew up because I didn't feel my relationship with God was growing. I would often show up every Sunday because I was being forced to my family and it made me hate church and God at the time. Also, I felt like I was riding on my parents faith rather than actually believing the bible and reading and studying it on my own. So I decided to take a break from church for a little and go somewhere else. The church in previous attended was a church of Christ that was very traditional. This new church I've been going to seems a little more modern. They use instruments which I don't really see an issue with even though my family does, but they also have a female pastor. She's not a lead pastor but she comes up occasionally and preaches but the lead pastor is a male. And this is where the issue comes in. Ive been doing my my own research and I often find that in books like 2 Timothy it forbids it, but I really enjoy coming here. I've felt my relationship with God growing, I've been praying more, and I have a desire to come to church now. But this has been tugging at me for the last few weeks. Please help.

Of course it's ok.

And assuming that 2 Timothy is an authentic work of Paul, I don't think the teaching therein "forbids" women from being ordained as ministers of the Gospel in Church.

 

[Faithfulandtrue]

You are doing the right thing seeking God and building your own faith not like you said riding your parents faith. I believe you are on the right path switching churches to grow closer to the Lord. In my opinion though I would maybe consider looking into another church. Usually with the female pastor thing, other theological errors can arise later on. Not because it was a woman speaking it(she could be preaching truth for all I know) but because usually when churches lean towards "we don't need to do this biblically" in one area what's to stop them in another. With that said, I don't know what they are preaching and maybe they are preaching truth. I just know from the I've experienced with churches with female pastors.

 

[Strong in Him]

If it was a Biblical teaching, and divine command, that women could not be ordained as members of the clergy, they wouldn't be.
I'm pretty sure that no Christian woman would deliberately seek to do something that was clearly against God's command - if they tried, I have no doubt that men would correct their thinking and refuse to train them.
And God would have to learn that he could not call women to serve him in this role unless his church agreed.

 

[Benjamin Müller]

@Strong in Him - You took too much offense to my reply and distorted my points. I am being fair in my statement towards women: they are the weaker sex biologically and therefore not cut out for war on the frontline fields. But women are absolute assets to the work of God all the same.

You mention Deborah; and she was a fine prophetess / general behind the lines, but it was Barak leading the charge in warfare--and that's the point I'm making. Women are better at holding their power behind the line than directly on the frontline, face-to-face in combat. There are exceptional women in some cases, as Deborah was an exceptional leader, but she worked from headquarters so to speak. The Apostles were on the frontlines, doing face-to-face combat when they were sent out.

Paul was stoned; sent to the lions; whipped; imprisoned. What man would want to see their female companion endure that? Especially in that age where women did not have the same rights as men according to the law.

In the secular world it would be a shock and a protest to draft women into military service for the United States Army to serve on frontlines. However if they were drafted to act as nurses and secretaries, that would be found as much more appropriate work for a female by the general population. And preaching the Word is a form of spiritual warfare. In c. 30 AD women held traditional roles in Israel, they wouldn't be out there face-to-face with adversaries proselytizing. It would be just as much of a shock culturally had women been drafted to go out and do such things as the apostles.

I'll concede that women would have preached the Kingdom of God and Christ within their circles. They had their children to raise and husbands to serve. The single woman could take more upon herself, true, but not forgetting the widows or orphans is just as much a service to God as it is going to Rome to speak before dignitaries. Women have their place and it's NOT on the frontlines. I don't want to see women on any frontline to suffer at the hands of such barbarity.

Women are inferior in different aspects where men are strong, but you know what, men are inferior in areas where women are strong. Equality is lie. But everyone has their strengths based on gender, physical shape; education and so on, and each person lends their support in the area where they excel. Women are pillars, and their strength to any force comes from behind the lines. That's where they serve best.


Satan has distorted gender roles from the time Paul was preaching to even now. Divide and conquer. Men have oppressed women, and women have understandably rebelled against that, but if each gender would be humble enough to acknowledge we need each other and that we all have weakness and acknowledge each gender stereotypically serves different roles, we'd all be better off. If a woman excels in something that is stereotypically masculine, I don't care, nor am I jealous, let her serve, let her be ordained: the problem is when women exalt themselves as equal to or better than men when they, individually, are not. And that was more than likely situations that were cropping up in Paul's time. If a woman is gifted in her ministry she doesn't need to defend herself; the Holy Spirit that guides her will be the justification before the masses.

 

[Strong in Him]

@Strong in Him - You took too much offense to my reply and distorted my points.

I'm sorry, but it's a little unfair to write the things you wrote and then when someone challenges it, say "you took too much offense."
There is no evidence to suggest that the women who followed Jesus, for example "assumed traditional female roles". How do you know they "would have offered" skills such as sewing, for example?

I am being fair in my statement towards women: they are the weaker sex biologically

In some areas, maybe. But, on average, women live longer than men - and some have multiple pregnancies. How strong do you have to be to go through all that?
There are women today who serve in the armed forces, and, in the UK during the war, the women worked as land girls.

You mention Deborah; and she was a fine prophetess / general behind the lines, but it was Barak leading the charge in warfare

Read it again.
Deborah told Barak that God wanted him to take 10,000 men to go to fight Sisera, Judges 4:6. Barak said, "I'll only go if you go with me", Judges 4:8. Deborah agreed, but said that because Barak had said that, Sisera would be delivered into the hands of a woman. And he was - it was a woman who smashed a tent peg through his skull, Judges 4:21.

Women are better at holding their power behind the line than directly on the frontline, face-to-face in combat. There are exceptional women in some cases, as Deborah was an exceptional leader, but she worked from headquarters so to speak.

Barak was too scared to go unless Deborah went with him, so she did.

The Apostles were on the frontlines, doing face-to-face combat when they were sent out.

They weren't engaged in physical fighting, and I'm sure that women would have been just as persecuted for their faith as men were.

Paul was stoned; sent to the lions; whipped; imprisoned. What man would want to see their female companion endure that?

What's that got to do with it?
Christians were being persecuted for their faith and for declaring that "Jesus is Lord"; I can't believe that the Romans would have let women off and allowed them to dishonour Caesar.

In the secular world it would be a shock and a protest to draft women into military service for the United States Army to serve on frontlines.

Maybe - but elsewhere, women do this.

And preaching the Word is a form of spiritual warfare.

Preaching is proclaiming the Good News - teaching about God, his word, his will and his ways. It's not about going into armed, face to face combat with organists or church wardens (whatever it feels like sometimes.)

Spiritual warfare is spiritual - between God and the devil. We are all - including women - told to put on the armour of God and stand firm against the devil, Ephesians 6. The battle is not ours; Jesus has already won the victory. We are not told that we would not be able to cope with spiritual warfare, because not many women physically go to war.

I'll concede that women would have preached the Kingdom of God and Christ within their circles. They had their children to raise and husbands to serve.

Not all women are, or have been, married.
Those of us who are, serve Christ first and foremost.

Women have their place and it's NOT on the frontlines. I don't want to see women on any frontline to suffer at the hands of such barbarity.

But some women DO serve on the frontlines.
And preaching the Good News, even in the streets, is not at all the same as walking into physical warfare.

Women are inferior in different aspects where men are strong, but you know what, men are inferior in areas where women are strong. Equality is lie.

Yes, it's still a man's world.

Satan has distorted gender roles from the time Paul was preaching to even now.

He might try, but Jesus and Paul both affirmed women. Look at Romans 16 - the letter was delivered to the church at Rome by a woman, Phoebe. I wonder how dangerous that might have been?
Junias was outstanding among the Apostles. Priscilla hosted a church gathering in her home (and it does NOT say that she made the tea.)
In Philippi, Lydia was one of the first members of the church, and they had deaconesses there.
Paul once stayed with Philip, who had 4 daughters who prophesied.

Jesus chose a woman to be the first witness to his resurrection. The first person to say "I have seen the Lord; Christ is risen" was a woman.
And Jesus planned it that way.

Men have oppressed women, and women have understandably rebelled against that, but if each gender would be humble enough to acknowledge we need each other and that we all have weakness and acknowledge each gender stereotypically serves different roles, we'd all be better off. If a woman excels in something that is stereotypically masculine, I don't care, nor am I jealous, let her serve, let her be ordained:

So why all the words about preaching being spiritual warfare, with the implication that men are better at that, if you concede that God can call a woman to preach, or be ordained?

the problem is when women exalt themselves as equal to or better than men when they, individually, are not.

And who is doing that here?
Are you saying that men are incapable of exalting themselves, and thinking of themselves more highly than they should? I would disagree.

If a woman is gifted in her ministry she doesn't need to defend herself; the Holy Spirit that guides her will be the justification before the masses.

I'm sure he is.
But I'm not talking about the masses - I was responding to comments made by you on this forum.
Over the years, many female preachers and ministers have been criticised, or actually told that they are disobeying God, on these forums. If those sorts or statements are publicly made (not by you, I'm referring to other occasions), women have the right to respond and reply.

 

[Benjamin Müller]

If those sorts or statements are publicly made (not by you, I'm referring to other occasions), women have the right to respond and reply.

We serve the God who made the Heavens and the Earth; King of Kings and Prince of Princes, and we as his children are to reign as kings and priests--if we then represent the highest power in the universe then men and women both should behave in royal fashion and demeanor. Queen Elizabeth's motto was never complain, never explain and for a Christian who represents a higher throne, I believe this stance is appropriate for Christians. So I disagree with you. If anyone questions a person's credentials whether man or woman, they shouldn't have to explain anything; the Holy Spirit does the explaining. You represent Him; don't dignify personal attacks with a response.

Matthew 10:14 And whoever will not receive you nor hear your words, when you depart from that house or city, shake off the dust from your feet.

John 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

If someone dislikes the message, they will seek any reason to dismiss you: whether that be based on your gender; your education; your hometown. I've even seen people say "if he was such a man of God, wouldn't God heal him so he doesn't have to wear glasses". They dismissed the person because they wore glasses.

1 Sam 8:7 "And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them."

And if they dislike you for being a woman in the ministry, there's nothing you can do. You will never change their mind. Shake the dust off your feet.
--

I support women in the ministry, but I support traditional female roles unless the woman is particularly exceptional in the field. The dismantling of traditional female roles is Satanic. God made a clear division between genders and I don't believe in blurring lines. Ladies are ladies, Christian or not. And women should be treated respectfully as ladies and protected at all cost.

I was responding to returnn23 who claimed Christ only chose men to spread the gospel. My initial response was to him, and I was defending women in the ministry--that's why your hostility is bewildering to me. I think you distorted my comments into a negative light because that's what you were expecting. Perhaps I'm just poor at writing out my thoughts, but I really don't understand why you've jumped on me. I thought I made my points clear that I am a supporter of women in ministry if it's their calling, while also maintaining my stance on traditional female roles.

I was also addressing that the reason why the apostles were all men was because it was a tough world and it was not (and is not) traditionally or culturally appropriate to send women out on the "front-lines". Women would have been out getting stoned like Paul. . .or worse. The Great Commission was a very dangerous commission. When I said face-to-face combat I was simply using a war analogy to express the fact that their very lives were on the line for the sake of the gospel.

Once the men paved the way, then women (being good at household management) could come into the church and offer their services and help manage the church using and utilizing their organization skills and social skills and works of charity.

My point was that when it comes to conquering new worlds that type of ministry should be reserved for the men--which was what my mind was more focused on because I was explaining why the Apostles went abroad while the women didn't. And they didn't. Any women who was there would have been pillars of support, not the Green Berets.

Also, I never said men didn't exalt themselves; they do often.

If you're good at what you do then my message isn't towards you.

 

[friend of]

If anyone were to be contentious, we have no such scruple.

I personally have no problem with the notion of female pastors. If God is with them, then sure, why not.

 

[LesSme]

No, it is not okay. It is the Holy Spirit that is tugging at you to obey the Word which does not allow women to be pastors.

 

[Strong in Him]

We serve the God who made the Heavens and the Earth; King of Kings and Prince of Princes, and we as his children are to reign as kings and priests--if we then represent the highest power in the universe then men and women both should behave in royal fashion and demeanor. Queen Elizabeth's motto was never complain, never explain and for a Christian who represents a higher throne, I believe this stance is appropriate for Christians. So I disagree with you. If anyone questions a person's credentials whether man or woman, they shouldn't have to explain anything; the Holy Spirit does the explaining.

Yes, in some cases.
Yet if someone publicly questions another Christian's ministry or questions their credentials, they have a right to respond.

I support women in the ministry, but I support traditional female roles unless the woman is particularly exceptional in the field.

So unless a woman is an outstanding Minister or preacher, they should not do it?
How will they know what they can do, in God's strength, until they try?

My initial response was to him, and I was defending women in the ministry--that's why your hostility is bewildering to me.

I'm sorry if I've misunderstood your posts.
I'm also sorry if my response came across as hostile; that was not my intention. I am simply baffled by some of the things that you wrote.
You said, for example,

Certain women followed with Jesus during his ministry assuming traditional female roles, they would offered services such as cooking, washing, sewing, being the social circle (women are great at socializing)

Obviously women wouldn't be sent out onto the field to preach.

There is no Scriptural evidence that women followed Jesus "assuming traditional female roles" - so why would you say that? Yes, Martha, and probably others, offered hospitality - so did Zacchaeus and Simon the Pharisee. Your words conjure up a picture of women following Jesus around carrying detergent and sewing kits to keep an eye on the state of his laundry.
And how do you know that women "obviously" would not have been sent out to preach? Like I said, how do you know that the 70 that were sent out by Jesus did not include women?

I was also addressing that the reason why the apostles were all men was because it was a tough world and it was not (and is not) traditionally or culturally appropriate to send women out on the "front-lines".

I don't believe that's the reason Jesus only chose male disciples.

Women would have been out getting stoned like Paul. . .or worse.

The religious leaders nearly stoned a woman for committing adultery. That was the punishment by law; I doubt they would have said "women aren't physically able to bear this".

The Great Commission was a very dangerous commission. When I said face-to-face combat I was simply using a war analogy to express the fact that their very lives were on the line for the sake of the gospel.

That has always been, and still is, true.
There have been female missionaries who've been killed for their faith; it hasn't stopped the church sending them, or their being willing to go.

Once the men paved the way, then women (being good at household management) could come into the church and offer their services and help manage the church using and utilizing their organization skills and social skills and works of charity.

I'm sorry, but not only is that sexist, it has no Scriptural support.
Mary Magdalene was the first witness to the resurrection - the men were hiding in fear.
At Philippi it was Lydia and other women who were at the place of prayer, Acts 16:13. Paul preached the Good News and then went to stay with Lydia. Women were the first members of the church at Philippi - there is no evidence that men started the church and, when it was established, the women came along to offer tea and social skills.
Phoebe, a woman, was chosen by Paul to take his letter to the church at Rome. He had female co workers whom he commended for their work for the Gospel. He does not say that they only offered traditional female skills.

My point was that when it comes to conquering new worlds that type of ministry should be reserved for the men--

That's what I'm challenging - why should it be?
Have you read about the amazing work that Gladys Aylward did in China? Yes, she helped a lot of children - she also founded at least one church and taught the Gospel to men. She, Mother Teresa and others, worked in appalling conditions.

If you're good at what you do then my message isn't towards you.

Yes, but with respect, that doesn't make sense either.

The original question was "is it ok to go to a church with a female Pastor?"
You seem to be saying, "If a female pastor is good at what she does, it's fine and it's probably her calling. If she isn't good at being a pastor, she should stick to the traditional female roles".

That doesn't answer, from Scripture, whether or not women are called to be pastors.