Modernisation of Religion to be Equal to Women

[Gokul43201]

So, how is it different with church?

There are no rules with the BBC saying a woman can not become the Chairman or the Director General. There are also no rules saying a woman will be in the good graces of the management if she is submissive to the men that work there and calls them her masters.

 

[BobG]

Women have all the rights that men do as far as performing on the BBC is concerned. There is no discrimination involved there.

Different story with the Church.

Which church?

Roman Catholic Church - The church has taught that when the People of God, the membership of the church, prayerfully and devoutly reach a consensus on a topic, that this is also the will of God. Numerous surveys have indicated a near consensus in North America and much of Europe in favor of female ordination. However, this does not extend elsewhere in the world, where the feminist movement has not been as influential. Hence, no female ordination.

Anglican and Episcopal - Most North American and European provinces allow female ordination. Most Far East provinces don't allow female ordination, plus a few North American and European provinces don't. They don't have the same strong central control the Catholic Church does, so there's variation.

Eastern Orthodox - "This priesthood is Christ's, not ours...And if the bearer, the icon and the fulfiller of that unique priesthood, is man and not woman, it is because Christ is man and not woman." Pretty much a statement of gender discrimination that will not change - ever.

Presbyterian - We affirm the Good News of Christ’s Gospel contained in the Old and New Testaments, authoritative and ever judging of human cultures, and hence liberating of all peoples from cultures of submission and gender inequality.

Other protestant religions - Most liberal and mainline Christian denominations (e.g. Congregationalists, some Lutherans, the Presbyterian Church (USA), the United Church of Canada, United Church of Christ, United Methodist Church, etc.) ordain women and give them access to other positions of power.

A study by the Hartford Seminary, 5 commented upon by the Boston Globe, 6 has examined the Christian denominations which do ordain women. The study shows that the number of clergywomen in 15 large Protestant denominations has skyrocketed over the past two decades. For example, between 1977 and 1997, female clergy:

in the American Baptist Church has increased from 157 to 712;
in the Episcopal Churches in the USA has increased from 94 to 1,394;
in the United Methodist Church has gone from 319 to 3,003.

Unitarian - According to Time magazine, the liberal Unitarian Universalist Association, has the highest percentage of female clergy -- over 50%. (The UUA is regarded by many as a non-Protestant, non-Christian denomination.)

Southern Baptist (the conservative branch of the Baptist Church) - No absolute central control, but a strong recommendation. "There is no biblical precedent for a woman in the pastorate, and the Bible teaches that women should not teach in authority over men... Far less than one percent of churches cooperating with the Southern Baptist Convention have ever called a woman as pastor."

Debate continues:
An unknown Methodist minister in Charlotte, NC concluded that the root cause of the SBC prohibition against ordaining women could be traced back to Genesis where Eve is said to have brought sin into the world. The minister said, with tongue solidly in cheek:

"Men can be ordained because Adam blamed Eve; however, women can also be ordained because Eve blamed the serpent; But under no circumstances should we ordain snakes."

To which Bernie Cochran of Pullen Memorial Baptist Church said:
"Especially, I would add, since they speak Hebrew with a forked tongue and tend to lisp -- terribly."

- from female clergy

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catholic and Eastern Orthodox definitely discriminate by gender, although the Catholic church allows that they may change their policy some time in the future.

Protestant religions have a lot of variation in their policies with gender discrimination fading just as it is in other aspects of our culture.

To say "different story with the Church", you really have to be more specific. 23.9% of Americans are Catholic and would know exactly what you're talking about. 51.3% are Prostestant and may or may not know what you're talking about.

 

[BobG]

Actually, when I was in Girl Scouts, we had a boy that used to sit in on a lot of our meetings. We just considered him as a brother tho, so none of us cared.

I was a groundbreaker. I was in the group of boys that were the first to legally camp out at the local Girl Scout camp (Camp Ledgewood).

We were a co-ed Explorer Post, though, not a Girl Scout troop. The local Boy Scout camp wouldn't allow us to camp on their grounds because we had females. Even the Girl Scout camp only allowed us to camp there in the winter when camping out was a lot less popular.

 

[Gokul43201]

To say "different story with the Church", you really have to be more specific. 23.9% of Americans are Catholic and would know exactly what you're talking about. 51.3% are Prostestant and may or may not know what you're talking about.

The OP was talking about a BBC show, so I figured this was about the Catholic Church (if I recall correctly the CoE finally agreed to allow female Bishops only a few months ago - it was a big deal, and all over the news).

I sort of disagree with the link you posted on the position of the Southern Baptist Church. I am pretty sure they explicitly do not permit female ordainment. I remember this came up last year when they pulled all copies of a Christian magazine that carried pictures of 5 female pastors on its cover from all the bookstores that they owned.

Edit: Found it - http://www.christianpost.com/Ministries/Culture/2008/09/s-baptist-bookstores-pull-magazine-featuring-female-pastors-20/index.html

Over 100 Christian bookstores run by the Southern Baptist Convention have pulled from their shelves this month's issue of Gospel Today Magazine, which features a cover story about female pastors.
...
The Southern Baptist Convention, the nation's second largest Christian denomination, officially opposes females serving as pastors. In 2000, the denomination overwhelmingly adopted a revised statement of faith that said the pastoral role should be restricted to men.
...

 

[drankin]

I'm curious why anyone in this forum really cares how religions handle gender issues. As long as we all have the freedom NOT to participate, what's the big deal?

 

[arunma]

I sort of disagree with the link you posted on the position of the Southern Baptist Church. I am pretty sure they explicitly do not permit female ordainment. I remember this came up last year when they pulled all copies of a Christian magazine that carried pictures of 5 female pastors on its cover from all the bookstores that they owned.

The SBC actually used to have many female pastors. I think it was back in the 60s and 70s that they decided to return to orthodox Biblical doctrine, and began removing theologically liberal seminary professors and pastors, including the female pastors. I don't know if there are any remnants, but probably not.

 

[Proton Soup]

The SBC actually used to have many female pastors. I think it was back in the 60s and 70s that they decided to return to orthodox Biblical doctrine, and began removing theologically liberal seminary professors and pastors, including the female pastors. I don't know if there are any remnants, but probably not.

as far as i know, they do not allow women in any church offices.

but if you want to make their heads spin, ask them about Phoebe.

 

[TVP45]

I'm curious why anyone in this forum really cares how religions handle gender issues. As long as we all have the freedom NOT to participate, what's the big deal?

Unfortunately, we do not have the freedom to not participate. Our rights to choose an abortion, birth control, morning after pills, marriage partners, adoption, euthanasia, treatment with stem cells, etc are all affected by religious beliefs, some based on a legitimate set of ethics, some based on personal prejudices. If the SBC wants to tell me how to live my life (and they do), then they better expect me to get right back in their faces.

 

[Proton Soup]

Which church?

hey now, don't forget muslims and jews. they're as deserving of our meddling as the rest.

 

[BobG]

The SBC actually used to have many female pastors. I think it was back in the 60s and 70s that they decided to return to orthodox Biblical doctrine, and began removing theologically liberal seminary professors and pastors, including the female pastors. I don't know if there are any remnants, but probably not.

Of course there are. Well under 1% is not 0%. I think the non-zero percentage is more reflective of the hierarchy of the SBC; not their policy on gender equality. In other words, the SBC can very strongly recommend individual churches take certain positions, but they don't have absolute control.

Edit: In other words, I don't think Gokul really disagreed with what I meant. I just think my trying to be technically accurate made the situation seem more cloudy than it was.

 

[drankin]

Unfortunately, we do not have the freedom to not participate. Our rights to choose an abortion, birth control, morning after pills, marriage partners, adoption, euthanasia, treatment with stem cells, etc are all affected by religious beliefs, some based on a legitimate set of ethics, some based on personal prejudices. If the SBC wants to tell me how to live my life (and they do), then they better expect me to get right back in their faces.

So basically you are complaining because people that have religious beliefs have a say in how their government legislates.

I still don not understand how you are forced to participate in gender segregation in a religious institution if you do not attend. Are you somehow forced to attend?

 

[TVP45]

So basically you are complaining because people that have religious beliefs have a say in how their government legislates.

I still don not understand how you are forced to participate in gender segregation in a religious institution if you do not attend. Are you somehow forced to attend?

No, I'm not complaining, I'm 'splaining. I am not forced to participate. You asked why I care that these people are flaming @#$@!*&& and I responded. If they want to meddle in my life (and they do and they started it), then by God I'm going to meddle in theirs!

 

[BobG]

Unfortunately, we do not have the freedom to not participate. Our rights to choose an abortion, birth control, morning after pills, marriage partners, adoption, euthanasia, treatment with stem cells, etc are all affected by religious beliefs, some based on a legitimate set of ethics, some based on personal prejudices. If the SBC wants to tell me how to live my life (and they do), then they better expect me to get right back in their faces.

And, presumably, if the 24% of unaffiliated (including atheist) voters that oppose abortion in most cases tried to tell you how to live your live, then you'd get right back in their faces, as well? And maybe convert to Judaism since only 14% of Jews believe abortion should be illegal? Evangelicals, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, are the only groups where over 50% believe abortion should be illegal. (Views about abortion)

Are you condemning the people in religious groups because their political views are different than yours? And are you condemning everyone else that has different political views than yours right along with them?

Or are you condemning them because their religious views are different than yours?

 

[arunma]

I'm curious why anyone in this forum really cares how religions handle gender issues. As long as we all have the freedom NOT to participate, what's the big deal?

I have a definite opinion on the subject.

as far as i know, they do not allow women in any church offices.

but if you want to make their heads spin, ask them about Phoebe.

I'm familiar with this, actually. It doesn't turn out to be a particularly strong argument in favor of egalitarian gender roles in church offices.

 

[Gokul43201]

I'm curious why anyone in this forum really cares how religions handle gender issues. As long as we all have the freedom NOT to participate, what's the big deal?

Perhaps, because many churches like to take children at particularly young and impressionable ages and teach them (among other things) things that they are hardly capable of questioning even if they were allowed to, one might wonder exactly how much freedom many church-goers really have in choosing a way of life.

I recall the response of Frank Schaeffer in a recent NPR interview, when asked about this issue. He explains the nature of the indoctrination he underwent, and his journey following his struggles with his faith.

Interview here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97998654

The whole interview is worth the listen, but the relevant parts are at about 22-25 minutes in, and again at 28:45.

 

[TVP45]

And, presumably, if the 24% of unaffiliated (including atheist) voters that oppose abortion in most cases tried to tell you how to live your live, then you'd get right back in their faces, as well? And maybe convert to Judaism since only 14% of Jews believe abortion should be illegal? Evangelicals, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, are the only groups where over 50% believe abortion should be illegal. (Views about abortion)

Are you condemning the people in religious groups because their political views are different than yours? And are you condemning everyone else that has different political views than yours right along with them?

Or are you condemning them because their religious views are different than yours?

Look, it's real simple. If I want to sodomize the cute cop that directs traffic at 41st and Lexington, that's no skin off your nose or anybody else's. So, everybody needs to butt out of my business. A workable democracy has to have individual rights and those rights have to be guaranteed except when they conflict with your rights. I have a fundamental, God-given right to fall in love with any gender I please, no thanks to pious busy-bodies. Likewise with abortion. If you and the atheists don't like it, don't have it.

Rationalism is not a religious belief. It does not, and should not, have to grant equal time to religion in a free society.

And, don't dare to put words in my mouth. I'm not condemning anybody. I'm just saying if those fools want a fight, I ain't backing down.

 

[Proton Soup]

I'm familiar with this, actually. It doesn't turn out to be a particularly strong argument in favor of egalitarian gender roles in church offices.

it doesn't apply across the board, only to the office of Deacon.


so what do you base your denomination of Egalitarianism on? the Letter to the Egalatians?

 

[arunma]

so what do you base your denomination of Egalitarianism on? the Letter to the Egalatians?

Pun aside, I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Perhaps you could clarify.

 

[Proton Soup]

Rationalism is not a religious belief. It does not, and should not, have to grant equal time to religion in a free society.

i don't think a free society is what you want

 

[Proton Soup]

Pun aside, I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Perhaps you could clarify.

why should religion be egalitarian? whose business is it anyway?

 

[arunma]

why should religion be egalitarian? whose business is it anyway?

Ah, I see. Actually I would suggest that in accordance with American religious freedom, religious groups should be permitted to set whatever rules they like. If one religious group wishes to bar one gender from specific offices (or not), it should be free to do so.

 

[TVP45]

i don't think a free society is what you want

It is exactly what I want. Read the thread carefully. The question was aked why I care if various churches exclude women and I replied that they participate aggressively in political life and, in doing so, seek to limit my freedoms. From my point of view, they don't get a free pass just because they're religious; I don't see Methodists, for example, as being any different from Rotarians. If the Rotary Club tries to influence legistlation that limits my freedoms, I'm going to go have a talk with them. Likewise, if a church group tries to stick their big noses into my pants, I'm going to do all I can to criticize them, to challenge their tax status, etc. They're free to have any religious beliefs they want; they're just not free to force those on me.

 

[drankin]

Perhaps, because many churches like to take children at particularly young and impressionable ages and teach them (among other things) things that they are hardly capable of questioning even if they were allowed to, one might wonder exactly how much freedom many church-goers really have in choosing a way of life.

I recall the response of Frank Schaeffer in a recent NPR interview, when asked about this issue. He explains the nature of the indoctrination he underwent, and his journey following his struggles with his faith.

Interview here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97998654

The whole interview is worth the listen, but the relevant parts are at about 22-25 minutes in, and again at 28:45.

This is off the topic of gender in religious organizations specifically.

It sounds like you have issue with a parents right to indoctrinate their children (religious or otherwise) as they see fit. Basically, there is nothing that can be done about this in a free society.

 

[TVP45]

Ah, I see. Actually I would suggest that in accordance with American religious freedom, religious groups should be permitted to set whatever rules they like. If one religious group wishes to bar one gender from specific offices (or not), it should be free to do so.

The question is whether we as a society have a legitimate and pressing reason to have women not be treated as second-class folks. If we decide we really need women as fully participating members of our country, then we have a right to force that on any group. Religious freedom in the US has two fundamental principles: right of expression and no establishment. Those two principles frequently conflict. Secular society has the right and responsibility to pass and enforce legistlation that affects religious practice from time to time.

 

[Gokul43201]

This is off the topic of gender in religious organizations specifically.

Yes, but I was trying to answer your question which asserted certain freedoms, a priori.

 

[Proton Soup]

It is exactly what I want. Read the thread carefully. The question was aked why I care if various churches exclude women and I replied that they participate aggressively in political life and, in doing so, seek to limit my freedoms. From my point of view, they don't get a free pass just because they're religious; I don't see Methodists, for example, as being any different from Rotarians. If the Rotary Club tries to influence legistlation that limits my freedoms, I'm going to go have a talk with them. Likewise, if a church group tries to stick their big noses into my pants, I'm going to do all I can to criticize them, to challenge their tax status, etc. They're free to have any religious beliefs they want; they're just not free to force those on me.

of course not, and they have no authority to force those on you. they're just off doing their own thing, and you don't fall under their authority except to the extent you choose to submit to it. however, it is you that wishes to use the power of the State to force your rules on others.

anyway, i guess i see your point. it's the risk of living in a free society. as long as you are only using your free speech rights like everyone else to influence legislation, then you're really no different than they are.

 

[Proton Soup]

The question is whether we as a society have a legitimate and pressing reason to have women not be treated as second-class folks. If we decide we really need women as fully participating members of our country, then we have a right to force that on any group. Religious freedom in the US has two fundamental principles: right of expression and no establishment. Those two principles frequently conflict. Secular society has the right and responsibility to pass and enforce legistlation that affects religious practice from time to time.

just so we're being clear here, what you're proposing is a religious belief.

 

[TVP45]

just so we're being clear here, what you're proposing is a religious belief.

No. To be absolutely clear, what I'm proposing is a political belief. It has nothing to do with a Deity or spirital values. It is straight out of Hobbes, with a twist of Locke.

 

[Topher925]

The question is whether we as a society have...

You do know that currently there are more women in the US (no data for other countries) than men right?

http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/p20-544.pdf

So really, if majority rules then we men should be the "second-class folks".

 

[mgb_phys]

So really, if majority rules then we men should be the "second-class folks".

I take it you aren't married then?