I am deeply, deeply disturbed by the Southern Baptist Convention right now.
Thankfully, the vote about banning women in "pastor" positions did not go through permanently, and 25% of the messengers voted against it. It will have to be passed with 2/3 majority next year to be permanent.
I think the ultra-complementarian factor has been doing a lot of pushing and advocacy; hopefully there will be some pushing back.
I personally do not think a woman should be a senior pastor, but . . . I don't think that's a church decision that the convention as a whole should mandate for every single church. And a woman could be ordained for ministry and still be kept back from senior pastorhood, if that is necessity.
Al Mohler warns about the convention becoming too liberal, i.e., the next step will be acceptance of homosexual persons. Well, about that:
1. There are already people with same-sex attraction in the churches, who we hope, have repented and live celibately but keep it to themselves, which seems to be the biblical way to live anyway.
2. There is no reason to assume that ordained women means acceptance of homosexual sin. That is a slippery slope argument.
My personal opinion on this is that the complementarians are fearful of women being smarter than they are, better trained in theology, and more gifted for ministry. I get this strong opinion that these men are more interested in their own power and superiority than the gospel. They want to keep women "less than" and "not enough."
Our church sponsors a young woman in Togo who is an obstetrician, delivering babies and living for Jesus when she could be making hundreds of thousands a year here. And this woman is not "gifted enough" or "trained enough" or "smart enough" or "devout enough" to be ordained? To speak to men in a congregation? Seriously?
Where does this put me as a member of an SBC church?
Comments
Post a Comment