women as priests

[Ace777]

Why is it sexist to point out that the only reason Phoebe's role as a deacon is in question, is because she was a woman?

BEcause no one cares. We know what the Bible says so that is not an issue for anyone. Their are bigger fish to fry and more important things to consider.

It's why we get abuse, insults,

That is not why. Persecutions is a part of being a christian. You should rejoice if you are persecuted because then you know that you are serving God. 2 Timothy 3 12 "all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution."

Given that this thread is in the Christian philosophy and ethics section, and the OP specifically asked about more than what the Bible says, I'd say our discussion is actually rightly broader than that.

Of course we have to look at when and how long women have been a priest and why this is all so resent. Why did your church go many hundreds of years without ordaining women? If it was so in the beginning then they should have been ordaining women from the beginning. But you sat they did not begin until very recently.

I never ever questioned that God is calling you because He is calling everyone. You are the one who has to reflect and decide if you are being faithful to His calling upon you and your life. In fact you seem to be taking time of right now to do just that. People in you line of work complain that they will suck the life out of you and you have to get off with God to get your battery recharged. You can only give people what God gives you to give to them. But he also can give to you what He can get through you to others.

Are you wondering how effective your ministry is or are you ok with that?

 

[Ace777]

That is what people disagree on

I am not trying to agree with anyone. I am just trying to understand what their logic and reason is.

The Catholic church lists many female saints.

I studied up a lot on Mother Teresa a long time ago. She never even wrote anything, but a lot of people talked to her and wrote about her. I was not very impressed with the women that was on TV a few years ago. So I changed the channel and did not pay any attention to it. There is a question of women televangelists but again I do not watch them or pay any attention to them.

 

[Paidiske]

BEcause no one cares. We know what the Bible says so that is not an issue for anyone. Their are bigger fish to fry and more important things to consider.

No one cares... that Phoebe was a deacon? I'm still puzzled as to why the discussion is "sexist."

It is an issue, though. You might say we know what the Bible says; well, the Bible says, right there, in very plain text, that Phoebe, a deacon of the church... and yet people will still say the Bible says that a woman can't be a deacon.

Are there bigger fish to fry? More important things to consider? I guess that depends. If you're a woman with a vocation, wanting to live your life in obedience to God, there might not be bigger fish to fry. Of course, if you're a bloke, and you just want the annoying women to shush so that you can get on with what you think is important (and enabling woment to serve to the fullness of their capacity isn't on your radar), then maybe it might seem irrelevant.

Of course, if it's not important to you, no one is obliging you to engage with this discussion.

That is not why. Persecutions is a part of being a christian.

But I am not talking about persecution for being a Christian. I am talking about such hostile behaviour towards us for being women in ministry, mostly from other Christians.

In fact you seem to be taking time of right now to do just that.

Believe it or not, even clergy aren't expected to do church-related work every waking second of their lives.

Are you wondering how effective your ministry is or are you ok with that?

I have a consistent practice of reflecting on my ministry and its effectiveness. I'm not going to pretend that it's perfect, because of course no one is (and nor is any set of circumstances, either), but on the whole I can see how God is at work in and through the work that I'm doing.

 

[Strong in Him]

I am not trying to agree with anyone. I am just trying to understand what their logic and reason is.

I think a lot depends on how people read, and understand, 1 Tim 2:12, and other verses.

When I joined these forums, there was someone who said, in one of the threads, that his wife didn't speak at all in church. Not to pray, say "Amen" or anything - because of her belief that God had said that women should be silent. There are those who concede that women can speak, and even proclaim God's word, but that the same Timothy verse forbids them from "having authority over" - i.e. being ordained. Some have told me, on these forums, that women can lead, be CEOs, bank managers etc. but that once "in church" they must be submissive and not seek to lead. It has been said, on one hand, that God will not allow a woman to lead men. Yet, on the other, it was fine for Deborah to lead the whole nation because she wasn't "in church" and she lived before 1 Tim 2:12 was written.

Even on these forums there has been a wide range of debate and little, if any, agreement as to what these "clear" Scriptures mean.

 

[Strong in Him]

That is not why. Persecutions is a part of being a christian.

Persecution by the world and/or other faiths because we belong to Christ, yes.
Persecution by other Christians for doing something which that Christian considers to be wrong, no.

You should rejoice if you are persecuted because then you know that you are serving God.

Ah, if Paidiske is insulted and persecuted by other Christians for being a female priest, it shows that she is serving God?
So by opposing and persecuting her, the protestors are actually affirming that which she was called to do? Interesting.

Of course we have to look at when and how long women have been a priest and why this is all so resent.

Women in leadership is not recent.
Have you ignored what I said about Deborah the judge, Catherine of Siena, female saints and so on?
The church went through a period where healing and the gifts of the Spirit were not acknowledged. Anyone who had a prophecy, word of knowledge or the gift of healing may well have been tried, and executed, for witchcraft.

Is the argument, "it has always been done this way, so anyone who does different is obviously wrong" a good one?
What about when Jesus was born; God, the Word, became flesh? That had never happened before. But just because God had not been born as a human in the days of Adam and Eve and all through the OT, does that mean it was impossible for it to happen?
Many thought so - and they crucified their Messiah.

 

[Ace777]

It is an issue, though. You might say we know what the Bible says; well, the Bible says, right there, in very plain text, that Phoebe, a deacon of the church... and yet people will still say the Bible says that a woman can't be a deacon.

I think I remember this means someone that serves food. Which the women did do in the beginning. Remember we talked about the dispute between Martha and her sister.

Diakonos, meaning one who serves, a servant. A preacher is a minister or servant of Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 4:6). His work is to serve the Lord's Word, the Gospel to all men (Acts 6:4; Rom.

Today there are ministers who want to be rock stars and have people bow down and serve them. We already covered that at the beginning of this conversation. You said you were offended by that.

 

[Paidiske]

I think I remember this means someone that serves food.

Sort of, in part. Deacons were originally created (in the church) to look after practical matters, like distributing food to the widows. But even within the book of Acts we quickly see that their role is not confined to that; Stephen did "great wonders and signs," spoke publicly (leading to his martyrdom) and so on; Philip (the evangelist and deacon, not to be confused with the apostle of the same name) preached and evangelised with great success, baptised the Ethiopian eunuch and so on; Phoebe carried Paul's letter and was his envoy to the church in Rome; and very early we see deacons taking on various forms of leadership in the church, as assistants to the bishops, as those who administer baptism, and other things as well.

Today there are ministers who want to be rock stars and have people bow down and serve them. ...You said you were offended by that.

What I said I was offended by, was the suggestion that the ordination of women was an "anti-Christian agenda."

It's true that there are ministers who want to be rock stars, and so on. The whole celebrity pastor thing. The reality, though, is that very few people in ministry are of that mindset; and the vast majority are here out of a sincere desire to serve. I would also find the suggestion that everyone in ministry is there out of a desire to have others bow down to them rather offensive, because it's untrue, and because it deeply misrepresents sincere people who give their all to God and God's church.

 

[David Lamb]

I think I remember this means someone that serves food. Which the women did do in the beginning. Remember we talked about the dispute between Martha and her sister.

Diakonos, meaning one who serves, a servant. A preacher is a minister or servant of Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 4:6). His work is to serve the Lord's Word, the Gospel to all men (Acts 6:4; Rom.

Today there are ministers who want to be rock stars and have people bow down and serve them. We already covered that at the beginning of this conversation. You said you were offended by that.

Yes, it does. For example, the description of the first miracle of Jesus, changing the water into wine, includes this:

“When the master of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and did not know where it came from (but the servants who had drawn the water knew), the master of the feast called the bridegroom.” (Joh 2:9 NKJV)

There, the word translated as "servants" is indeed "diakonos". Many English translations of the bible, including the New King James Version, translate "diakonos" as "servant" in Romans 16:1:

“I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the church in Cenchrea,” (Ro 16:1 NKJV)

 

[Ace777]

I'm still puzzled as to why the discussion is "sexist."

This is the statement you made that I said was "sexist" I said it is the kind of stuff you hear from feminists.

"I'd suggest that if it were a man being referred to here, there'd be no hesitation in identifying him as a deacon."

 

[Paidiske]

This is the statement you made that I said was "sexist" ...

"I'd suggest that if it were a man being referred to here, there'd be no hesitation in identifying him as a deacon."

And why is that sexist? The assumption that a woman cannot be a deacon despite a text saying otherwise is sexist; it's not sexist to point that out!

 

[Ace777]

Is God against women doing these things?

You keep forgetting my origional statement that everyone has a calling everyone has a ministry. Older women are to teach the younger women and the younger women are to teach the children. You really do not want men teaching the children because there is alot of abuse with that. If women were doing what the Bible tells them to do then they would not have time to do what they are told not to do.

People really need to judge themselves. It is not my place to judge you. Even the women caught in adultery. Jesus said let those who are without sin thrown the first stone. Everyone would have to stone everyone and there would be no one left.

Remember, deacons in the early church were responsible for distributing food, along with other tasks related to the church. Deacons, or diakonoi in Greek, meaning "servant"), also assisted the bishop during the liturgy, administration, and distribution of alms to the poor. The original use of the word diakonos may have been specific to serving people food, but it later came to mean any kind of service.

This is why a bishop has to lay hands on everyone. To pass the annointing down from Peter but also so they can help them to minister to people. This is why the real issue begins when they want to have homosexual or female bishops. This is when the churches split and go off to start their own church.

 

[Paidiske]

This is why a bishop has to lay hands on everyone. To pass the annointing down from Peter but also so they can help them to minister to people. This is why the real issue begins when they want to have ... female bishops.

Why is that an issue? If that's your view of what's happening in ordination, why is it any less valid when a woman does it?

 

[Ace777]

very early we see deacons taking on various forms of leadership in the church, as assistants to the bishops, as those who administer baptism, and other things as well.

So at what point does it become not ok for them to be women. No one objects to women serving the food but they object to women being a servant to the Bishop.

 

[Paidiske]

So at what point does it become not ok for them to be women. No one objects to women serving the food but they object to women being a servant to the Bishop.

That's complicated. In some traditions they stop altogether. In other traditions they're differentiated as "deaconesses" and treated as "not real deacons."

 

[2PhiloVoid]

That's complicated. In some traditions they stop altogether. In other traditions they're differentiated as "deaconesses" and treated as "not real deacons."

The real rub here is that we've moved through and into the 21st Century, and not only have civil and human rights ideas flourished and grown, but also (as you already know) Biblical, Literary, Cultural and Historical Studies of not only the Bible itself, but also of the eras in which the biblical corpus was written.

So, with the added bonus of burgeoning fields like Hermeneutics and Historiography and other related academic engagements, we now know we SHOULDN'T BE reading the bible alone or even with merely complementary application of Church Tradition. No, we have multifold contexts by which to better understand what we're reading, or to even question what we're reading when we flap open our Sacred Literature in the New Testament, literature that has, for too long, been read as if it was drop-kicked off of Cloud 9 and into the brains of the authors.

We no longer live in an age that has to be beholden to such a naive position where Biblical Exegesis is at stake, even where reading 1 Timothy or 1 Corinthians is the locus of our theologizing....about women's place in the Church.

 

[St. Helens]

ADMIN HAT ON

Thread locked for review and likely will not be reopened due to multiple violations of flaming and goading.
ADMIN HAT OFF​