Brothers Bayly

« The children of divorce... | Main | A new category on this blog: Woman deacons... »

Tuesday, 27 May 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451d09d69e200e5529a15128834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Woman Deacons: East Lanier Community Church (PCA) steps back...:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

You characterize progressives in the church as committed to the argument that "a woman may do anything a non-ordained man may do," as if that is their flawed starting point. That is an unnecessary concession, it seems to me, and I don't understand why traditionalists refuse to employ that logic themselves. Of course it needs to be wedded to a high view of office, which is largely absent in both sides of the debate on the role of women in the church. Genuine progress in this debate demands a reconsideration of the sanctity of office. After all, egalitarianism in the church extends far beyond gender issues.

Similarly, I remember a pastor once remarking that he agreed with "a woman may do anything a non-ordained man may do" but did not agree with "a woman *should* do anything a non-ordained man may do" that he would be very interested in seeing what would happen if the proposal were made at presbytery that "we need to seriously restrict what non-ordained men may do".

I think the question of "what may a non-ordained man do" is quite important to this whole morass. On the other hand, that alone would not deal with the issue of women in authority over their husbands or other men in non-church settings.

Tsk, I forgot to say the more important thing: praise God for blessing East Lanier Community Church's with humility and submission to the denomination and standards they have joined themselves to. Submitting to the standards is honorable, and realizing that one cannot submit and leaving is honorable (or at least can be). Seeking to remain by evasion of the clear meaning of the standards is the real problem, and I am glad that this congregation has not chosen that road.

>Of course it needs to be wedded to a high view of office, which is largely absent in both sides of the debate on the role of women in the church.

Well, John, I don't know what you mean by "largely absent," but it's certainly not absent in the two churches represented by the writers of this blog.

>egalitarianism in the church extends far beyond gender issues.

Quite true. As I said in the sermon this past Lord's Day, it permeates the Western world, which is exporting it everywhere else.

The offices that are undervalued are not the ordained offices--that's why they're being fought over. The most undervalued offices in the church are the unordained offices of "man" and "woman."
Every individual is called by God to fill one or the other without mixing, mingling or confusion. A woman may do anything a non-ordained man may do? Shouldn't this statement be absurd at face value? Can a woman be the head of her home when her husband is alive and well? Won't this necessarily be played out in the church? Or are they to become an unmarried couple with no relational ties once they enter the sanctuary? A man is a man all the time--inside the church and out. It the calling of a man to be a man and a woman to be a woman. God has ordained them thus. Let us exalt these offices.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Brand New