Another Question on women in the Church

[Southern Presbyterian]

Why is it that we [that is - the Church in general in modern times] seem to want to see how close we can get to the line God has drawn without actually crossing it? The Pharisees were on the opposite end of the spectrum. They put up hedges to keep people from even approaching the Law of God and in time they regarded the hedges as equal to the Law. What equivocations will we make if we continue to "push the envelope"?

God says that women are not to exercise authority in the Church. Why do we insist on creating "gray areas"?

{Not a judgment, just a thought and my }

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

Why is it that we [that is - the Church in general in modern times] seem to want to see how close we can get to the line God has drawn without actually crossing it? The Pharisees were on the opposite end of the spectrum. They put up hedges to keep people from even approaching the Law of God and in time they regarded the hedges as equal to the Law. What equivocations will we make if we continue to "push the envelope"?

God says that women are not to exercise authority in the Church. Why do we insist on creating "gray areas"?

{Not a judgment, just a thought and my }

 

[Vonnie Dee]

This is sooo true!! Only the Pastor or Elder should read scripture. They are speaking for God to the congregation.

I don't even let others read in my Sunday School class. One person only should read the scripture (in this case, me, the teacher), not everybody. People's minds tend to wander when different people read. It should be clear and authoritative.

And that's the way it is - Grymir [/QUOTE]

Is there discussion in your Sunday School class? If so, what happens if someone wants to backup their discussion point with scripture? Do they give the text and you read it? I'm just wondering what this would look like in real life.
I am also wondering about giving testimonies. I attended a church that asked for testimonies from the previous year close to Thanksgiving. People often have scriptures that they cling to especially if they have come through a tough time. In your opinion, should they just give the testimony and keep the verse private? Or, should we not be giving public testimony of God's work in our lives in church in the first place? (I am a woman, but I'm asking in general, since the discussion has opened to unordained men.)

 

[raekwon]

What if the sermon is pre-written by the pastor, and the woman is asked to deliver it?

Then that's the authoritative proclamation and exposition of God's Word, and thus prohibited. Obviously.

My question was an honest one, though.

And mine was also. The point was to illustrate that it's not what is being delivered that is objectionable, but the person doing the delivery. The authority expressed or held in preaching and the authority expressed or held in leading the congregation in corporate prayer are each expressed and held by the person actually doing the leading - and do not lie a text which is merely read.

If one views leading the congregation in prayer as an authoritative function, then it matters not who wrote the prayer. The argument against a woman reading a printed prayer is the same as the argument against a woman reading a printed sermon. To preach or to lead the congregation in prayer are both functions that bear authority and must therefore be done only by those in rightful positions of authority.

If, on the other hand, one views leading the congregation in prayer as a NON-authoritative function, then it ought not to matter who wrote the prayer.

Since I hold the former opinion, I don't care who composed the prayer - it's not allowed.

It looks like this is where we differ, then. I'm not saying that authority isn't vested in the person up front, but primarily (in the case of the reading and exposition of Scripture), the authority does indeed lie in the text, not in the reader. In the case of corporate prayer, I just don't see any "usurping of authority", because I don't know that that's an authoritative function. One doesn't assume spiritual oversight of the church (or any such thing) by virtue of delivering a prayer in corporate worship, and the delivery of a prayer doesn't imply such a thing either.

I will say, though (before I'm pegged by everyone as some liberal/emergent/tree-hugger), that I certainly believe that it's preferable for an elder (whether the primary pastor or another) to deliver most of the prayers during corporate worship (especially if they're extemporaneous prayers), if just for wisdom's sake. I'm just not at the point where I can say that it's biblically forbidden for another to do so.

 

[toddpedlar]

Then that's the authoritative proclamation and exposition of God's Word, and thus prohibited. Obviously.

My question was an honest one, though.

And mine was also. The point was to illustrate that it's not what is being delivered that is objectionable, but the person doing the delivery. The authority expressed or held in preaching and the authority expressed or held in leading the congregation in corporate prayer are each expressed and held by the person actually doing the leading - and do not lie a text which is merely read.

If one views leading the congregation in prayer as an authoritative function, then it matters not who wrote the prayer. The argument against a woman reading a printed prayer is the same as the argument against a woman reading a printed sermon. To preach or to lead the congregation in prayer are both functions that bear authority and must therefore be done only by those in rightful positions of authority.

If, on the other hand, one views leading the congregation in prayer as a NON-authoritative function, then it ought not to matter who wrote the prayer.

Since I hold the former opinion, I don't care who composed the prayer - it's not allowed.

It looks like this is where we differ, then. I'm not saying that authority isn't vested in the person up front, but primarily (in the case of the reading and exposition of Scripture), the authority does indeed lie in the text, not in the reader. In the case of corporate prayer, I just don't see any "usurping of authority", because I don't know that that's an authoritative function. One doesn't assume spiritual oversight of the church (or any such thing) by virtue of delivering a prayer in corporate worship, and the delivery of a prayer doesn't imply such a thing either.

I will say, though (before I'm pegged by everyone as some liberal/emergent/tree-hugger), that I certainly believe that it's preferable for an elder (whether the primary pastor or another) to deliver most of the prayers during corporate worship (especially if they're extemporaneous prayers), if just for wisdom's sake. I'm just not at the point where I can say that it's biblically forbidden for another to do so.

I'm curious to press this further, though. If authority is not vested in the preacher, but in the text only, what is your argument against a woman reading a sermon prepared and written by a man in public worship?

Further, if the authority really only lies in Scripture alone, then why can't a woman come up with her own sermon and preach it?

 

[Grymir]

This is sooo true!! Only the Pastor or Elder should read scripture. They are speaking for God to the congregation.

I don't even let others read in my Sunday School class. One person only should read the scripture (in this case, me, the teacher), not everybody. People's minds tend to wander when different people read. It should be clear and authoritative.

And that's the way it is - Grymir

Is there discussion in your Sunday School class? If so, what happens if someone wants to backup their discussion point with scripture? Do they give the text and you read it? I'm just wondering what this would look like in real life.
I am also wondering about giving testimonies. I attended a church that asked for testimonies from the previous year close to Thanksgiving. People often have scriptures that they cling to especially if they have come through a tough time. In your opinion, should they just give the testimony and keep the verse private? Or, should we not be giving public testimony of God's work in our lives in church in the first place? (I am a woman, but I'm asking in general, since the discussion has opened to unordained men.)

Hi Vonnie! When I say that I read in Sunday School class, I'm talking about the lesson part only. Some Sunday School classes will have various people read and then they either have each person tell what they think the verse says (which is a really, really bad idea), or the teacher will expound on what it means. I just mean that the teacher should read and expound. When a discussion comes up (and they do!), people are free to add and use their scripture. That makes for a good class, as I like it when people do this, because it means they are thinking about what I'm teaching.

I like the testimonies. When someone goes through a tough time, or comes to the LORD, it's great to hear how scripture spoke to them, and to hear them relate it to others. Some people don't like testimonies, because they are too subjective, or they may misapply a verse, but I think they are O.K.

I hope this helps, as by reading your response, I should have been more clear. - Grymir

 

[holyfool33]

I would say that it would be a violation of Paul's teaching. To allow women to read scripture or pray in the pulpit. That is the place where the pastor and or deacon exposit God's word and the men of the church read the word. Now as far as praying in prayer groups no problem with that but women should not pray or read scripture that is a violation of Paul's teaching.