Posted on 08/24/2006 10:02:06 AM PDT by presidio9
A U.S. Baptist preacher has publicly defended himself for firing a female Sunday School teacher after more than 50 years on the job because he believes the Bible bans women from teaching men.
Watertown First Baptist Church Pastor Tim LaBouf, also a city council member in Watertown, N.Y., said women could fulfill any role or responsibility they wanted to -- outside the church.
"My belief is that the qualifications for both men and women teaching spiritual matters in a church setting end at the church door, period," LaBouf said in a statement on the church Web site (http://www.nnyinfo.com/firstbaptist).
LaBouf and the church board fired Mary Lambert, 81, earlier this month in a letter that cited the scriptural qualifications for Sunday School teachers, Lambert said.
"They quote First Timothy Two, 11-14: A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent," Lambert said, reading from the letter.
"I was astonished," she said. "I would not go back and teach as long as this is their thinking."
Watertown is 250 miles northwest of New York City.
William Carlsen, executive minister for American Baptist Churches of New York State, said U.S. Baptist Churches are autonomous and that there would not be many other Baptist Churches that share LaBouf's view.
"A considerable number if not a majority of American Baptist Churches have been quite aggressive in affirming the place of women's leadership roles within the church," Carlsen said.
The board of the Watertown First Baptist Church said in a statement on its Web site that the scripture rules concerning women teaching men in a church setting had only played a small part in Lambert's sacking.
"Christian courtesy motivates us to refrain from making any public accusations against her," the board said.
>>>My wife is my HELPER and as she fulfills her role which benefits my family without measure, is allows God to guide me clearer in our direction as a family. >>>
Exactly my point. You are the supremo and she merely assists...
>>>No merely about it in my marriage. My wife and I work as a team. Without either of us carrying our weight the family would suffer.>>>
Hmmm, that would seem to be the definition of partner. Of course we are splitting hairs here. But as a woman (and you might be surprised to find, unless she is completely brainwashed) might not find it nice to be referred to as the 'helper'. That's why I like partner. Equal ground, equal in all ways. We may do different things, such as he tends to the garden, I do the cooking and canning. But we are partners shouldering the work equally but in different ways. But I am not his 'helper', I find that distasteful.
>>>"Why does there have to be 'role differences'? I don't feel attacked, I feel disgusted."
Because each and every person has gifts and challenges. Things they excel at and things they stink at.
Do you suggest that men and women are exactly the same?>>>
No, not at all. But to exude that men are doing the 'the main job' and women are the 'helper' is insulting. Whether you like it or not.
>>>2 Heads on anything is a freak. You cannot have 2 leaders in 1 country. You can't have 2 leaders in 1 business. You can't have 2 leaders in 1 military and you can't have 2 leaders in any home. >>>
So why does it have to be the man that is the 'leader'? Of course since MAN wrote the Bible, he can CLAIM it is God's wishes.
>>>My wife trusts me to lead and has faith in God and his word to work according to it. >>>
Good for you and your pitiful wife.
"But as a woman (and you might be surprised to find, unless she is completely brainwashed) might not find it nice to be referred to as the 'helper'."
I would respectfully suggest that you've been brainwashed by mainstream that the term "helper" is negative.
"That's why I like partner. Equal ground, equal in all ways."
As someone else suggested the term partner in this context implies more than I would want to use. She's not my partner; she's my wife and I am her husband.
"But we are partners shouldering the work equally but in different ways. But I am not his 'helper', I find that distasteful."
My wife doesn't but I don't use it other than to say "can you help me with this". We're also not equal in all ways. She's better at some things and I in others. We complement each other making a whole thats greater than the individual parts.
LOL! You and I must be twin sisters of different mothers. To me, the Bible is such a man's book, with almost nothing in it for females (sorry, but that's the way I read it).
The men can be complex, deep thinkers with shades of grey and spiritual battles and great words to give the world. They the movers and the shakers, the givers of all great written works and yadda yadda
The women?
Good girl or slut. Not much in between. (and yes, I while I liked Esther, I was on Vashti's side too!)
Emphasis mine.
In another book Paul makes it very clear that when he says "I" he does not mean "The Lord."
My personal belief, and I am not an M. Div., is that Paul had this rule in Ephasus because of discipline problems he encountered there. Ephasus was a center of Diana worship. It is not inconceivable that women converts were having trouble accepting their new lowered status as equals to the men in the Church and Paul found this approach important for discipline.
I will not hold people who disagree with this interpretation as unChristian. I have heard their arguments and find them (both men and women) to be thoughtful and based on their notion of Biblical fidelity.
Shalom.
"So why does it have to be the man that is the 'leader'? Of course since MAN wrote the Bible, he can CLAIM it is God's wishes. "
If you want you can go back and read the original versions of the bible. Would you question this if they used "woman". If you are arguing about men/women you are missing the point.
"Good for you and your pitiful wife."
That was rather mean.
I said that someone would one day know whether we were stupid to worship Jesus Christ. You said that I was cliaming to be psychic.
Wayne read what I wrote correctly.
For the record, you never called being a Christian "stupid." You were responding to something that I wrote to someone else.
Shalom.
Yawn. Logical fallacy: guilt by association.
Next.
>>>2 Heads on anything is a freak. You cannot have 2 leaders in 1 country. You can't have 2 leaders in 1 business. You can't have 2 leaders in 1 military and you can't have 2 leaders in any home. >>>
So why does it have to be the man that is the 'leader'? Of course since MAN wrote the Bible, he can CLAIM it is God's wishes.
>>>My wife trusts me to lead and has faith in God and his word to work according to it. >>>
Good for you and your pitiful wife.
"To me, the Bible is such a man's book, with almost nothing in it for females (sorry, but that's the way I read it). The men can be complex, deep thinkers with shades of grey and spiritual battles and great words to give the world. They the movers and the shakers, the givers of all great written works and yadda yadda
The women?
Good girl or slut. Not much in between. (and yes, I while I liked Esther, I was on Vashti's side too!)"
You seem very hung up on prooving yourself to be equal to men to the point it destroys relationships. Such are the fruits of feminism.
To say that it must be interpreted correctly is not to say that it is open for interpretation.
The Bible can and has been misunderstood. G-d is perfect but the Bible is written in language to be ready by people. People are not perfect.
Shalom.
Absolutely - according to Reuters.
And, as we all know, Reuters is ALWAYS right.
Shalom.
Oh and Paul did NOT like girls,
Uh huh, nope...
Bad....and sex was bad because women made you want to have it with THEM!
He's the original Grumpy Old Man if you ask me. I know I would have slapped him silly.
(yes, he's my LEAST favorite writer in the Bible).
I hope you didn't base that assertion on the Reuters version of the story before reading the Pastor's own words on the subject in post 15.
Shalom.
Thank you.
Why did my wife have to be the one to nurse our children?
You don't act disgusted, you act attacked. I am a bad psychologist, but you might want to ponder your reaction to the obvious differences we are born with. They are not belittling, they are beautiful (and I'm not just talking about breasts).
Shalom.
No,
I'm fighting for hard won sanity and fragile self worth. That's all.
And if it means being honest about what I've seen since I was a child, then so be it. But as long as I can remember, God was always that angry man out there who hated me....just cuz.
I don't consider myself a feminist.....just a human that wants to be treated with kindness and respect.
Partner expresses contract, not covenant.
If you use the word to refer to your covenant relationship with your husband, that's fine. But you should understand, especially in this homosexual millenium, that partner does not carry the best of connotations in a love relationship.
Shalom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.