How can churches balance tradition with the evolving role of women in society and the church?

[santhia petter]

As society evolves, so does the role of women in every sphere, including the church. How can churches stay true to tradition while also empowering women to step into leadership roles? Should the church adapt its stance to reflect cultural shifts, or is it essential to preserve traditional views on gender in ministry? I'd love to hear how others think we can balance these two important aspects.

 

[jonathanbrickman0000]

A very difficult set of issues indeed. But I start and end, with the certainty that being "true to tradition" is the game of the dead and the condemned. We need to be true to God. We need to deny ourselves, take up our crosses, and follow Christ the Lord, or else we will never be worthy of Him. But I think an essence of your question remains absolutely vital, and this is: How do we consider men and women appropriately, especially in a church?

And I must opine, that the question does boil down to whose voice in the Holy Scripture we consider most important. When we compare those voices, whose supercedes all? We have Christ the Lord who rewarded women who violated tradition and talked back to the Lord, presenting what they thought was cause for Him to do other than He had said He would do, He rewarded them, and He did as they asked. And we have other voices, who demand that women remain in silence and all subjection at all times. As for me, I will walk in the example of Christ the Lord, and I shall desire to never walk otherwise, no matter what claims are made for the other voices. My flesh is more than fifty years old, I was reborn in 1997, and I can recount several women who have been and are my teachers in Christ to this day, some elder, some younger. And I shall spit upon anyone who curses me in this, metaphorically speaking only

But I do not speak for any entire local church. And I don't know that I ever will, as long as the Lord keeps me in this world. The local church in which Sweet Lori and I work, treats women well, but cannot consider women in teaching roles except to other women. I see why and how their limitation exists; because of the wonderful adherence to so much that Christ the Lord has said, including quietly accepting informal roles where women may teach men as both find able in Christ, I find myself happily able to serve and participate in good conscience.

And I have not thus far run into a church that does in fact adhere to "neither male nor female in Christ Jesus" while caring for many things Christ the Lord has said, done, and discussed. The few churches I have encountered that do so adhere, have all encouraged people to affirm many kinds of sin. It is a very sad thing to me. But it may just be that the Comforter has not yet changed enough people to make this possible. After all, we have only seen five hundred years of His strong depowering of the swearing of vows, and the male/female behavior thing is not impossibly the more difficult set of changes to be made. The swearing of vows by Apostles is discussed only a very few times; the male/female situation has a much larger order of magnitude.

 

[follower]

Should the church adapt its stance

No. Not in anything even though historically it tried - it was wrong to try, the motive is sinful and impure.

 

[Christ_empowered]

I don’t think so. I’m pretty egalitarian so keep that in mind.

Leading a church ️ is a calling from God. God has decreed that only morally upright men can lead churches. This would indicate that women and not so morally upright men who lead churches were not called by God.

At a practical level it just works better when men lead. I’m egalitarian…a female president would be nice …and that’s my observation. Female pastors are often a sign of moral decay and or a serious decline in membership already. Having morally unfit men lead is also not of God and can also have disastrous consequences.

 

[for_his_glory]

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them" (Genesis 1:27).

Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created" (Genesis 5:2).

It is interesting to note that God called both male and female, "Adam" in the day they were created. Adam means "man." Adam and Eve were created with God-ordained differences from each other, but together they made a full "man," or a complete picture of God Himself. There was perfection in their union. Their differences were not a source of discord or inequality, but a beautiful compliment to each other. Together, God gave them the task of overseeing His creation.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth" (Genesis 1:28).

Notice that God gave the above commission to them both. There is no hint that there was anything but equal authority between man and woman as they existed in a sinless state. What changed things? In the next few chapters of Genesis, we find that sin entered the heart of Adam and Eve. The result was a temporary curse placed upon both man and woman, which would affect the whole earth.

This curse has affected all aspects of creation, from the ground itself (infested with weeds and thorns) to human relationships. (I say temporary, because in Christ this curse is removed, as we shall see later on).

When Eve ate the forbidden fruit and enticed Adam to sin with her, one of the consequences for women was the loss of equality with men, as men were to rule over women, instead of men and women ruling together. She would now be "ruled by her husband." However, when Jesus came as sinless Man and died as the Messiah on the cross for us, all things were restored positionally. In actuality, the restoration of man (men and women) began to take place at that very moment.

Though the complete cleansing of the curse has not yet been manifested on the earth, the day is coming when it will be so. Or to put it another way, all those who receive Jesus as Savior receive restoration as Sons of God, but not all of us walk in that restoration--yet. Through Jesus, the curse upon women has been lifted. Women no longer have to receive pain in childbirth nor are they inferior to man with him ruling over them. Women can now be restored to their original place and plan that God had for all His "sons." Although we do not see all things restored at this time, "legally" in the spiritual realm, they already have been.

Adam was the head of the first race of mankind; and Jesus is the head of the last race, the adopted children of God. God only sees two races--the Adamic race (all natural-born mankind) and His children through Jesus (all those born of the spirit).

"For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive" (I Corinthians 15:21-22).

Once we are born into the kingdom of God, we become new creatures in Christ. In the Spirit, we find there is "neither male nor female," just as there are neither race distinctions nor class separations. The Lord looks on the hearts of His new creatures and therefore does not discriminate when He offers His love and privileges. Women are not excluded from any of God's promises nor callings merely because of their sex.

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."

Within God's own nature we find these same qualities. Both men and women are to become like Him as we are conformed to His image. Since this is true, there are times that under the unction of the Holy Spirit a woman should assert herself boldly. (This assertion, however, should not necessarily be toward others, but rather toward the enemy, Satan!) For men and women to become over comers they must have this boldness and authority over the devil. God still desires that His people rule and reign with Him. His intention is to qualify us for that position, whether we are male or female. "And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen" (Revelation 1:6).

Even though "kings" is a masculine term, this is the ultimate destination He desires for all of His people. The Lord often uses both male and female terms to refer to both sexes. Women are to live in the "hidden man of the heart" (1 Peter 3:4). Both men and women in the church are referred to as "the bride of Christ." God has both a masculine and feminine nature. The mother heart of Jesus was evident as he prayed over Jerusalem.

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" (Matthew 23:37).

Submission is considered to be a feminine trait. However, Jesus submitted to the cross under the direction of the Father. If we walk in the Spirit, we too will possess both the masculine aggressiveness and feminine submissiveness of God.

Both submissiveness and aggressiveness are God-given strengths. Yet, both can be perverted, so that we become submissive and aggressive in the wrong ways, with the wrong attitudes. Because these qualities are so misused and misunderstood by the world, they have become distasteful and despised. If aggression is frowned upon, submission is viewed in an even more negative light in western culture. We equate submission with weakness and lack of spirit. Nothing could be further from the truth. There was never a human being more submitted to God than Jesus Christ-- yet never was there one as completely resistant to the system of the world! It took extraordinary submissiveness and aggression for Jesus to overcome the world. For the Christian, whether we are male or female, He is our model. We are to possess His qualities and use them according to the needs around us.

"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.

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

 

[WIP]

Three years ago we called a woman pastor and so far we have been very blessed. In our Lutheran church deaconesses have served from way back from what I can tell and we have one female deaconess today. In our church we have a church council with deacons and deaconesses that work closely with the pastor. The role of the deacons/deaconesses is to work with the pastor to watch over the spiritual life of the church and concerns of the congregation.

So was it wrong for us to call a woman as a pastor? To answer this I have to ask, and I've asked myself this same question, is it wrong for a woman to share the Gospel of Jesus? After all, sharing the Gospel is teaching, is it not? It's teaching about who Jesus is and why we need Him. So far, that is precisely what our pastor has been doing - sharing the Gospel. On that note, I have not had any issue whatsoever with our pastor to date.

 

[jonathanbrickman0000]

It all depends, really, on which voice is considered most important. There are whole longstanding schools of church-pastorship, where it is taught that since the Hebrews rejected Jesus, Jesus delivered His authority and position of instruction to the Apostle Paul, so whenever we have a question between Jesus and Paul, we should do as Paul says. The Holy One has been gradually depowering such monstrosity, but it's still very strong in many places.

 

[santhia petter]

In my view, based on the spirit of the Bible and the light of God's Word, we must understand that in Christ, all humans are equal. As stated in Galatians 3:28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." This verse tells us that in the eyes of God, both men and women hold equal value, and both are given the same honor.

Jesus Christ always treated women with respect and equality. The story of Mary and Martha in Luke 10:38-42 is an example of how Jesus allowed Mary to sit at His feet and learn, showing that women, too, have the right to be taught and grow spiritually.

The Bible also speaks of several women who played important roles in the spiritual life and exhibited leadership abilities, such as Deborah (Judges 4), who was a judge of Israel. This shows that women, too, were entrusted with leadership roles and have been endowed with the ability to lead.

Women’s roles are not limited to the home or family, but they are also of great importance in the church. The spirit of the Bible is that everyone, whether male or female, holds equal worth in the eyes of God, and through His Word, we are all guided on our paths.

Therefore, we must all follow Christ’s teachings and honor one another, including empowering women in their spiritual journey and service. In God's eyes, we all have equal value, and it is our duty to respect one another’s rights and roles.

A very difficult set of issues indeed. But I start and end, with the certainty that being "true to tradition" is the game of the dead and the condemned. We need to be true to God. We need to deny ourselves, take up our crosses, and follow Christ the Lord, or else we will never be worthy of Him. But I think an essence of your question remains absolutely vital, and this is: How do we consider men and women appropriately, especially in a church?

And I must opine, that the question does boil down to whose voice in the Holy Scripture we consider most important. When we compare those voices, whose supercedes all? We have Christ the Lord who rewarded women who violated tradition and talked back to the Lord, presenting what they thought was cause for Him to do other than He had said He would do, He rewarded them, and He did as they asked. And we have other voices, who demand that women remain in silence and all subjection at all times. As for me, I will walk in the example of Christ the Lord, and I shall desire to never walk otherwise, no matter what claims are made for the other voices. My flesh is more than fifty years old, I was reborn in 1997, and I can recount several women who have been and are my teachers in Christ to this day, some elder, some younger. And I shall spit upon anyone who curses me in this, metaphorically speaking only

But I do not speak for any entire local church. And I don't know that I ever will, as long as the Lord keeps me in this world. The local church in which Sweet Lori and I work, treats women well, but cannot consider women in teaching roles except to other women. I see why and how their limitation exists; because of the wonderful adherence to so much that Christ the Lord has said, including quietly accepting informal roles where women may teach men as both find able in Christ, I find myself happily able to serve and participate in good conscience.

And I have not thus far run into a church that does in fact adhere to "neither male nor female in Christ Jesus" while caring for many things Christ the Lord has said, done, and discussed. The few churches I have encountered that do so adhere, have all encouraged people to affirm many kinds of sin. It is a very sad thing to me. But it may just be that the Comforter has not yet changed enough people to make this possible. After all, we have only seen five hundred years of His strong depowering of the swearing of vows, and the male/female behavior thing is not impossibly the more difficult set of changes to be made. The swearing of vows by Apostles is discussed only a very few times; the male/female situation has a much larger order of magnitude.

 

[Free]

As society evolves, so does the role of women in every sphere, including the church. How can churches stay true to tradition while also empowering women to step into leadership roles? Should the church adapt its stance to reflect cultural shifts, or is it essential to preserve traditional views on gender in ministry? I'd love to hear how others think we can balance these two important aspects.

It isn’t a matter of staying true to tradition neither should the Church base its doctrine or practice on what is going on in culture. Everything is to be based on what Scripture says.

That women and men are equal in every way is abundantly clear in the Bible. However, it doesn’t follow that God has ordained the same roles within the Church or in the home. What matters is what the Bible says about the different roles of men and women, and it seems to say that within the Church and the home, there is male headship and women are not to have spiritual authority over men.

 

[for_his_glory]

It isn’t a matter of staying true to tradition neither should the Church base its doctrine or practice on what is going on in culture. Everything is to be based on what Scripture says.

That women and men are equal in every way is abundantly clear in the Bible. However, it doesn’t follow that God has ordained the same roles within the Church or in the home. What matters is what the Bible says about the different roles of men and women, and it seems to say that within the Church and the home, there is male headship and women are not to have spiritual authority over men.

But, if the husband is not a Christian, but the woman became a Christian after they were married then who has the Spiritual authority in the household?

 

[Free]

But, if the husband is not a Christian, but the woman became a Christian after they were married then who has the Spiritual authority in the household?

Then she would be the spiritual authority, at least for herself and any children, although she is still to submit to her husband (1 Pet. 3:1).

 

[for_his_glory]

Then she would be the spiritual authority, at least for herself and any children, although she is still to submit to her husband (1 Pet. 3:1).

But, what if the husband is not of God and leads his family down a bad path leading his family into worldly desires?

1Peter 3:1 Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives

Eph 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the Saviour of the body.

If the husband refuses to turn back to God then how is he sanctified by his wife

1Co 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
1Co 7:13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
1Co 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.

 

[Free]

But, what if the husband is not of God and leads his family down a bad path leading his family into worldly desires?

Then the wife would not follow along.

 

[WIP]

within the Church and the home, there is male headship and women are not to have spiritual authority over men.

A question this brings up is what does spiritual authority mean?

 

[jonathanbrickman0000]

Well asked, WIP. In my own household, I prefer the only spiritual authority to be the Comforter. Often He speaks to Lori about things I understand less, and in order for me to do right, I must listen to her and do as she says.

 

[Free]

A question this brings up is what does spiritual authority mean?

It means what Scripture tells us:

1Co 11:3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. (ESV)

Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.
Eph 5:24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. (ESV)

1Ti 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. (ESV)

It means having God-given authority in spiritual matters, such as that of the apostles and teachers:

2Th 3:14 If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. (ESV)

Heb 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you. (ESV)

Men have no inherent authority over women outside of the family and spiritual matters both within the family and church. In business, the only authority a man may have over a women is simply conferred by having a superior position within a company, but a woman may also have authority over a man. In the Church, however, it means that women cannot be in positions of authority over men, such as a pastoral role.

 

[WIP]

I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.

How do you understand this with regard to women sharing the Gospel of Christ? Does this mean it is wrong for a woman to share the Gospel with a man, particularly if the man has not yet heard the Gospel? For to do that, she must speak and she must speak the truth and in so doing she is teaching that ignorant man about Jesus.

 

[WIP]

In the Church, however, it means that women cannot be in positions of authority over men, such as a pastoral role.

I wonder if that depends on how the pastoral role is identified. For example, in some church denominations, the pastor is in charge like a ruler and what he says goes, whereas in others, not so much for the role is more like that of a shepherd that watches over the flock and guides the flock but does not lord it over the flock.

 

[jasonc]

How do you understand this with regard to women sharing the Gospel of Christ? Does this mean it is wrong for a woman to share the Gospel with a man, particularly if the man has not yet heard the Gospel? For to do that, she must speak and she must speak the truth and in so doing she is teaching that ignorant man about Jesus.

if a couple is equally yoked .

then why would a husband then teach ,equip his wife if God called her to be a pastor and gifted her .

there's more to just knowing the bible . it's a drive .I met my pastor at 0615 in the dark before my job route because he asked me ,I sat in his van enjoying wa wa before breakfast .

if my job allowed him I could see him walking my route with me to minister .
that's more then just proclamation of the gospel .

besides
the words are clear .

if a man desires to be an elder .

he must be a husband of one wife

a woman elder is akin to transgender logic .

it's now If a woman desires to be an elder she just be a husband of one wife .

it's a secondary issue but the command to provide etc is more for men then women .sure women can teach and minister but authority ?

if Jesus wanted women to be apostles why didn't he pick one ?

 

[WIP]

if Jesus wanted women to be apostles why didn't he pick one ?

And yet, Jesus said to let the children come to Him and if we do not receive the kingdom of God like a child, we will not enter. So, children can be our role model of faith but He didn't choose a child to be an apostle either.