Women in Ministry?

Women in Ministry

Robbie L. Rogers

If we say, speaking in general terms as all conclusive, A Man is liken to God,@ who would you say woman is liken to? Woman nurtures, like the Holy Spirit, and has her interests wholly on her family=s needs. Man in contrast is normally consumed by his own needs and career. In reality he usually displays neither God, Holy Spirit, nor Jesus. Only woman most always displays all three, it's her nature to do so.

God said woman was to be man=s helper, so is the Holy Spirit, and often God himself is asked to be our helper, A Lord help me, save me a worthless sinner.@ A helper is also a servant, a server. A server in the church is a helper to the priest, in serving communion, the chalice bearer. Often the licensed chalice bearer is also a Eucharistic minister.

We are all taken aback by the new thinkers, conservative Christians such as we. They say we should spell woman and women as w o m y n. They want a new role for her apart from man. They want same sex marriages, and homosexual priests too.

Are we conversely wanting Old Testament living? Old Testament courts did not recognize women=s testimony in the courts. Yet, we know women were the first witnesses to the fact that the resurrection of Christ had occurred, not I believe an accident of God. Ruth herself was the beginning of the line of Christ.

In Old Testament life men had many wives, often many concubines. In Old Testament Days it was considered adultery only if a Jew had sex with another Jew out of wedlock, okay if with a prostitute, or gentile. Okay???!! How can that be? So then when we ask the question, AAre we then to establish an orthodox New Testament life.@ Most would answer to that with a resounding, ANO!!@ Christ came to give us new life, life free from laws, and yet He came completing the laws.

What of divorce? Are we to apply the law saying adultery is the only reason, Christ Himself seems to say so. Should we return to this? Of course the optimum is, sin should not occur, causing no divorce. Do we then apply the old Jewish adultery standard which allows male promiscuity but holds a woman to a stricter code where even speaking to another male is judged as adultery? Numbers 5:11-31 speaks of a horrible justice that it seems Moses may have given as coming straight from God. Will we then propose such a code which demands stoic adherence to laws.

God also allowed the Israelites to have a king, they pestered Him for many generations before He acquiesced to their desires. Does this mean we too should have a king? Foolishness, we say.

What about New Testament living? Yes! Then should women keep silent in the church as many propose? Ha and double ha! There are eight women prophets mentioned in the Bible: Miriam, Exodus 15:20, 21; Debra, Judges 4:4-14; Huldah, II Kings 22:14-20; Anna, Luke 2:36-38; and four of the daughters of, presumably, apostle Phillip, Acts 21:8-9. Should they and the many lady deacons mentioned in New Testament church writings have kept silence?

How about the women who spoke with the resurrected Christ or angel, should they have kept silent? Should have all of the old and New Testament women leaders kept silent? Does Paul in fact even say this or is it merely wrong translation, scholars argue this over and over. I believe Paul is most likely jumping up and down mad at the way his writings have been twisted making him appear a women hater. Many say he was speaking to an unruly group of women who were brought into the family of God by way of marriage, bringing the baggage of many other gods with them; it is of this that Paul seems to be speaking to. Women, keep quiet about your tendencies toward the way it was where you came from. Check it out. It is against Paul's character to tell women to keep quiet. He ministered and respected too many of them to have such a condescending attitude.

The question should be, should we at deny the personification of the Holy Spirit in our midst a voice? Women kept the church going many years when most men stayed away. Most likely there would not have been a church without the women=s voice being heard, in all manner of capacities. Should they have kept silent? A call to silencing the voice of women in church is preposterous indeed and would nail the coffin closed on the church Christ expects to find when He returns.

Yes scriptures ought not be tampered with, and to not heed them is sinful indeed; but, we are at the core of something greater here. The scriptures are there to help us understand God and His ways. To give us wisdom and understanding of Him. God did not give us the Bible that it would itself become king. Many were put to death by the church that held to the standard of laws rather than the standard God puts forth, Christ. It is hard for us to comprehend a world without the printed and translated scripture. Yet those who did such work were put to horrible deaths for doing such mighty work. Is that same type hierarchy in place today? Yes, it is often so. Many would impose orthodox standards today.

Deuteronomy 22 speaks of proper clothing; I Corinthians 14 and I Timothy 2 speaks of silence for women; Leviticus 15, 20 and 21 speaks of not taking a woman into marriage who is put away and not laying or touching her or her garments if she is in her sickness for she is unclean and must be separated as was the woman whom Jesus healed in Matthew 9 and Mark 5 after spending 12 years unclean and separated.

Paul himself was said to be part of the Nazarite movement that adhered to great traditions and strict life. Many other great biblical characters were said to belong to the same religious order. Within this order we find many women written of, working equal to men as mentioned in numbers 6:1-8 and elsewhere. Should they too have been silent?

Can it all be summed up in I Peter 3:7, A You husbands live with your wives in an understanding way, as with a weaker vessel, since she is a woman; grant her honor as fellow-heir of the Grace of Life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.@

Are we denying the nurturing of the family, of the church? Shall we deny the right, if called by God, for a woman to serve as chalice bearer? How can this be? Yet, some say so. Though their voice grows fainter it remains strong through a unified or nothing at all standard.

When a unified quality requirement is established even the faintest voice shouts volumes and with full authority over actions and direction of any church or group. It is a wonderful thing to want unity in governing, yet it is an unrealistic goal for all things to come about this way, for in doing so many other good and worthwhile things could also be silenced.

I prayed dutifully and long over this so called issue, of which I call a non-issue. For years, as others can attest to, my wife felt called to such service to God. The call started during the previous priest= s time. It was regretted possibly by some of the same people who say nay now, though eventually she was allowed to become the first woman lay reader, with the stipulation, at the morning service only. God anointed her reading as most will agree. Other women now read, even at the 10 o= clock service. Still the same debate goes on. Should women be silent; and should women serve the chalice; and now should women be Eucharistic ministers?

Who can be so presumptuous as to deny God? None would admit to having done so on purpose. Nonetheless, are there godly women in our midst who are called by God to serve as helpers, as nurturer, as witnesses to Christ= s compassion by serving the chalice, and taking the sacraments to the sick who are unable to come and receive? I have served for many years off and on in this capacity and know the grueling importance of the ministry, and the importance of being called by God to do so. I have known many who served out of duty rather than calling. I can think of no one I would rather receive the cup from and be ministered to than my wife, or any such godly Christian lady whom God called to this ministry.

What will happen if we allow such a thing to happen? Is the next step women priest? If called by God in the same manner, I say, A Yes and amen!@ To do so would only bring more completeness to the church, which is often rightly criticized for its lack of caring, lack of nurturing.

How do we allow these changes when looking at the scripture? This is truly a confusing and perplexing issue indeed. How can we dismiss what we see written in what we profess to follow? It all boils down to who do we believe God is? Those of olden days had no written word. In the beginning Abraham knew God only as, Aone who provides.@ He taught this and the aspects he learned of God= s character and the witnesses lived on and on. Did it all work out? No. Noah, was in a similar position.

Scripture eventually was recorded, though most could not read and many did not understand. Traditions kept the Jewish people going, and they demanded law after law after law. Christ came to fulfill the laws and establish a new Covent. The disciples went out preaching the great commission, many heard, understood, and believed, though most could not read, nor was there much written.

Now let's look at the "three legged stool" concept, which I believe is a generational cursed mistake. Tradition is what killed Jesus. Tradition is man's doing, not God's. That's the way we've always done it is one of the most inane statements I've ever heard. Now does that mean we should not consider the old ways, of course we should for they most often are from needs that caused the need to exist in the first place. So reason and tradition are definitely to be considered; but if we are to have a stool let it be a one legged stool held up by Scripture, God's word alone.

What about Apostolic succession? Yikes, another bone headed generational cursed mistake. This is exactly the way the enemy of God would have us think. Look at the scriptures, especially the Old Testament. Did God ever guarantee His mantle would be on any one group of people regardless to how they behave? Ha; and double hah! Man is mostly always for seating himself higher than he deserves, in almost all situations. That there is a divine seat on earth (or profession), one held only for those who are deemed heirs to the seat is worse than preposterous. Where did that come from except from man's desire to be greater than those he considers beneath him.

Yes we need and should apply many other aspects of what God gave us in order to understand what He is saying (including our brain); but never, never, should anything be given equal standing on such a stool that the church would find a seat on. If there are such men or groups as the Pharisees and Sadducees they would cry foul at all of this. Are we to align ourselves with them? Unfortunately, there are many among us who are doing so today.

Faith was what the early people had. Faith in a personal God, Christ, and Holy Spirit, only faith. Without faith it is impossible to please God. Ask yourself, A what would God do? What would Holy Spirit do? What would Christ do?@ If such a woman is called, and I know many are, are we at present denying God, Jesus, and Holy Spirit?

If following such reasoning, does it mean homosexual priests and same sex marriages will come about, absolutely not. Is the same argument, that wrong translation makes God only seem to oppose the homosexual, warranted? Not unless we totally abandon what we believe is the character of God as written down through the ages. God almost destroyed humanity repeatedly to punish His people for two things, having other Gods and a largely sinful and wicked way: adultery, homosexual behavior and such.

Have we left our first love behind? Are we tied up in legalistic issues? Can we pick and chose what to follow? Do we understand it all. All these things are confusing, yet, the issue of homosexuality and same sex marriage is a non-issue. To accept it as a sanctioned way of life by the church is the highest form of twisting God=s character.

Yes we must have compassion, embracing them as the sinners, offering them the truth, helping them in the ways of healing. Never should we embrace their ideals or lifestyles, unless we seek total destruction of the church.

May will agree that sin, blockages, often cause a delay in God's blessing, and once the sin is removed and dealt with through repentance His blessings pour forth. The issue of women serving in ministry is truly also a non-issue. How can we deny it. Only blessings will pour out on us.

Thus it becomes simple.

Blessings are good and to be desired, curses are bad and to be avoided.

Let= s accept the blessings and deny the curses.