Are women pastors against God’s will? A post about that topic prompted an interesting and ironic response from one of my readers.
A funny thing happened the other day at this blog. A reader left an interesting comment on my post about women pastors. No, the fact that someone left a comment wasn’t all that funny. Instead, it was what this reader had to say about my take on the issue.
I wrote about the Southern Baptist Convention’s narrow defeat of an amendment to the convention’s constitution that would officially ban women pastors. A majority of Southern Baptists apparently believe that because the Bible says so, women shouldn’t be pastors.
On the surface, I think that, in this day and age, is a ridiculous notion. At the time the Bible was written, it was a very male-dominant world. Women in the society in which the Bible was written were expected to remain silent in the background. Men made all the decisions. Men were always the authority figures.
This is the 21st century. While some might feel that women should still be “barefoot and pregnant,” cooking and cleaning while the man acted as the sole breadwinner, others believe — rightfully — that this is outmoded thinking.
But when it comes to women pastors, there are churches that won’t hear of it.
I belonged to a church that allowed women to have all of the responsibilities of a pastor. It just didn’t call them pastors. A man who had the same responsibilities would carry the title of pastor. I doubt if God was fooled by that.
I’ve also attended churches whose lead pastors were women. The women who preached had moving, well-constructed lessons. I got something out of them. I’ve attended churches in which the lead pastors were men. Some of them likewise produced meaningful lessons.
But if I’m honest, I’ve heard more lukewarm sermons delivered by men than women.
An ironic response
I saw that someone chose to comment on the post. Honestly, I’m always a little surprised and grateful that someone in this day and age would do so. The days of blogs receiving scores of comments are long gone. My blog analytics tell me that people are reading. So I don’t worry so much about comments anymore.
But it’s nice when someone does leave one.
This particular comment started off a bit snide. Granted, it’s hard to read tone in written words. But the words the commenter, “Suzi,” left, did have a snide feel about them. Here’s how she started:
IF you believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, and IF you actually read it, you’ll recall that the question that caused the fall was “Did God really say…” Genesis 3:1.
Those capitalized ifs seemed a bit snide to me. She — the commenter’s name was Suzi so I have to assume it’s a she — proceeded to tell me a bit more about her take, even giving me what she called “a trustworthy statement” from 1 Timothy.
“Sounds like God’s design is for men to be pastors,” she ended.
I don’t normally set out to be snide in response to any comment. Generally, when I feel someone’s being disrespectful, I just delete their comment. If you can’t show me respect, you’re not even heard here.
But I made an exception this time around. I thought she made an unintentional point. So I wanted to be very intentional in my answer.
Here’s how I responded:
Again, operating under the assumption that “Suzi” is female, I jumped on a point that I thought should be obvious to anyone:
By your name, “Suzi,” it appears you’re a woman. So why are you trying to tell a man what he should or shouldn’t believe about the Bible, particularly if you believe only men should be pastors?
Ironic.
And borrowing your capitalization, IF you believe what you claim, not only should you not attempt to minister to me on a Biblical issue, as a man, I shouldn’t even be willing to listen to what you have to say on such matters since you’re not also a man.
Maybe now you can see how silly such an edict might sound these days.
I find it funny that Suzi, who thinks pastors should be men, and apparently agrees that women shouldn’t be in teaching positions over men, would then try to “teach” me something. I have to assume that Suzi must recognize that the name “Patrick” might just belong to a man.
But she still tried to teach this man something.
So which is it? Should a woman dare try to educate a man on anything Biblical or not?
Let me be clear…
I think it would be silly of me as a man to think a woman couldn’t teach me something about the Bible. I was being facetious with Suzi, and if she’s reading this post, I hope she took my response in the spirit in which it was meant.
I’ve said it before and I have no problem repeating it now: I know some incredible women of faith.
I can think of several for whom I’d use the clichéd phrase, “prayer warrior.” If I felt I needed some extra prayers on something — more than I might send up on my own — they’d be among the first I’d call. I’d call them before I’d call a man for any such intercession.
And I’ve known women who know their Bibles better than I probably ever will. I’d have to be the stupidest man on Earth to believe that there isn’t a woman out there who could genuinely teach me valuable lessons about God.
To borrow a little snideness from Suzi, IF you read the Bible, and IF you believe it to be the inerrant word of God, you must remember what happened when the greatest moment in the New Testament occurred. After Jesus Christ rose from the dead, an angel appeared to the women who had come to take care of his body at the tomb.
The angel told the women Christ had risen. Then this angel instructed the women to go to the disciples and tell them “He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee.”
Think about that for a moment. The greatest message in the entire Bible was given to women who were told to tell it to men.
One has to wonder why the angel didn’t appear to a man so that he could have delivered such an important message.
If the fact that God chose women to deliver the most important message in all of Christianity doesn’t at least give you pause from the position that only men are valuable as communicators in church communities, then the logic of your reasoning escapes me.