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.
On the other hand, I will not discuss the actions of what some "Christians" have done. one, or a few, do not act for all. I will comment on the teachings of the Bible, which is where Christianity is based. The Bible gives definitive roles for both men and women. Nowhere in the Bible are women EVER degraded. In fact women have earned some high regard in the Bible, some of these women might not have been held in high regard or given esteem by average men.
Some points.
1- Even though it was Eve who committed the first sin, it was Adam given the blame and required to take responsibility.
2-The prostitute Rahab is mentioned and rescued, for giving aid to the Israelites, at Jericho.
3-A teenage peasant girl gave birth to the Messiah.
4-Christ talked to a Samaritan woman at the well. This might not seem like much, but one needs to understand the culture. The woman was a Samaritan. Jews despised Samaritans. Samaritans were viewed as riff raff. Jews would walk around Samaria, instead of walk through it, just to avoid Samaritans. The woman was at the well at the wrong time of day. The woman would gather water early in the day before the heat set in, and also to provide for their family first thing. But this woman was an outcast, because she was an adultress, maybe a prostitute. Christ knew this and yet approached her and spoke to her. Jews never spoke to Samaritans. And a pharisee would never speak to a adultress.
5-When others were outraged at a prostitute washing the feet of Christ, he was honored, and defended her.
There are many many more examples. If you would be genuinely interested in learning of these, send me a private reply, and I'll give you more and detailed info.
"Assuming the pastor was preaching something that was in fact idiotic & ungodly & not just according to someones opinion."I've seen pastors do silly stuff. After all they are people too. Most are not usually that dense though.
This is the reason that the New Testament motif is to have a plurality of elders in each local church. These elders have the responsibility to correct error and protect the flock from false teachers who will not takie correction.
I must note that the criterion for evaluating teaching is the adherence to what is taught in the Scriptures, not public opinion.
From the pastor: First let me address this issue in regard to how it applies to my role at First Baptist Church and some of the history that led up to the Board’s decision. As most of you are aware when I arrived at First Baptist Church the congregation was dwindling and the church was headed for eventual closure. In a short period of time we began to see tremendous growth in the church which made me and many others feel thankful and blessed. In a short period of time classrooms that did not have children in them for a number of years were filling up with children, other parts of the building that had not been used in years were now needing to be utilized as a result of our growth. New members began stepping up willing to serve on boards and in various areas within the church. Changes began to be made to maximize our growth and meet the needs of the growing congregation. The majority of our membership was genuinely excited about the growth and new hope for the future of the church, however, as you recall there were some who were unhappy with new members joining the church, changes that were being made and my performance in general as pastor. As a result a small group decided to forgo the mechanisms that we have in place for dealing with conflicts or disagreements within the church and elected to hire a local attorney and aired their grievances in a letter to the Watertown Daily Times.
So what we have here is this: An old woman is a member of a dying church. A pastor comes in and begins to revitalize the church, making changes she doesn't like. So, rather than keeping her problems with him inside the church where they belong, she (or others in her clique) GO TO THE FREAKIN' MEDIA.
The pastor and the Board decide to relieve her from her duties, and so as to avoid any potential lawsuit, they formally state only the Biblical grounds for her dismissal.
Bottom line - the woman was wrong to take her issues to the media. Paul specifically warns us against taking our internal problems outside the walls of the church.
"Bottom line - the woman was wrong to take her issues to the media. Paul specifically warns us against taking our internal problems outside the walls of the church."
Doesn't like she should be teaching anyone period regardless of their age or gender.
I've seen this behavior before and unfortunately its why many churches grow to a certain point and then flounder. People work hard to keep a church going and forget that its not about them or their hard work. Its about God.
I presume you are a minister?
You are very kind. I am what Churchmates have called a "logical evangelist." I only minister in a non-professional manner when the opportunity presents itself.
I was raised Episcopalian, educated Roman Catholic, and have worshipped with Lutherans, Assemblies of God, Independent Charismatic, Independent non-Charismatic, Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Messianic Jewish, and probably some other flavors of Christian that I can't remember. Each was very proud of its "distinctives" which caused me to study them. I have decided two things:
1) the things which divide us are much smaller than the things which unite us and
2) our pride makes it seem like the reverse.
I agree, totally ignorant .
Don't be silly. I couldn't have made myself more clear.
Jesus had minimal contact with females. Other than visiting Mary/Martha, other than healing a few, he had nothing beyond passing contact. His disciples were all males (understandable for the era). Granted, there were two women allowed to find him risen.
But still, it was like they were on the outside looking in.
And again, they were the black and white "virgin/whore" that is in the writings of the bible. It's narrow, simple....submit, be there, be good and no more.
A woman couldn't have gotten away with Peter's behavior, a woman wouldn't have been allowed to have been like Saul then Paul. A woman is either mother, saint, demon and temptress. But they have not of the facets or problems or thought or dreams like the great men do.....A woman didn't write or compliate the books of the bible, and it's very evident.
As for Paul not being real happy about women, and feeling very uncomfortable around them, it's pretty evident in his writings.
As for the church and what it does for you....Great for you!
The church never was a source of encouragement, nor did it assist me as well in my daily living as other pursuits, nor did it ever, EVER give me a feeling of being found after being lost....I stayed lost, from birth until I left.
When I left, I started finding my soul. I stopped trying to wear those size 4 shoes. It's not a 'one size fits all' religion.
The seven last words of a dying church.
"We've never done it that way before."
Shalom.
How about the entire book?
Look, you start with Eve tempting Adam and it all goes to heck in a handbasket. And again, women are pretty 2 D, either very very good (Ruth, Esther, Mary) or very very bad (Eve, Jezebel, Salome). No going from point A to salvation for them. Granted, there was Mary Magdeline, but geez louise, it was like they were "OK, she's here, now lets not talk about her!"
Fear of women (& their sexuality) and a total lack of understanding permeates the entire book. I'm not a feminist....I'm just someone who gets annoyed with authors who don't know their subject matter very well. While I've read of a few 3D males in the Bible that I can understand, I've never ever read of a real, 3D female. They just aren't there.
And it's pretty clear that unless you marry, you can't have sex. So, if you want to have sex (which is a normal human drive) you need to marry.
Problem is, you often find yourself bound to someone you don't like, much less love. I've seen just as many miserable marriages inside a church as I've seen happy. And I've seen more than one ole church widder woman taking off and actually coming alive after her husbands death. And I've seen fewer yet remarry. Not out of grief, but because (to quote several) "Don't wanna have to put up with a man tellin' me what to do". That was actually said to me in the vestibule one Sunday by Miss Mala come to think of it.....
ANYHOW>.....
I took three steps back and I looked at life, sex, relationships, the world etc for what it was. Yes, I strongly believe in marriage for raising children. I fostered enough kids to know that two strong adults (of both genders ideally) are necessary for controlling and raising children.
But, once you're out of your childbearing years. What then? The drive is still there but so is the need for a good relationship with a good person that actually knows you for who you are (and often, spouses ain't that person).
There is the reality of what goes on and then there is the painted ideal picture. Again, I have no regrets. Oddly, these posts I'm saving because they have caused me to put thoughts into words.
A good thing. Thank you for the questions.
I was once in a meeting explaining my position when someone said to me, "You have three people looking at you like this <confused look>. Please try again."
Point - if everyone on the thread thinks you are saying one thing and you think you are saying another, you probably could have made yourself more clear.
Shalom.
What the women did was understated, but it is there to be found.
Paul greets some who are leaders of their churches at the conclusions of his letters.
Don't be fooled by the number of words. Look at what they say.
Shalom.
You've ignored a lot of women. You've ignored Sarah and Hagar. You've ignored Rachel. You've ignored Bathsheba. You've ignored Esther. All did things that would easily be called wrong - manipulative, untrusting, lying. Yet all are part of the pantheon of faith. They were certainly women who went from point A to point B.
I understand how your reading of the Bible was from a particular viewpoint, but there is another viewpoint. You should now be in a position to open your mind to it.
Shalom.
The preacher is a knuckle-dragging idiot, his letter notwithstanding. Clear?
I understand what you're saying, but....
I just don't see any woman I have anything in common with (other than Salome & Vashti, but they were the bad girls)...
And I kinda like Esther (for obvious reasons)....but even she was great because she was so 'good' to start with....
Am I making sense?
Thanks, your comment is suggestive.
You could still interpret it, perhaps, as meaning that if it comes to a conflict of authority, women should bow to the greater authority of an adult man, not that women should refrain from ever telling men anything.
I'm not sure it applies to male children, at least younger children. Historically, the age of reason was thought to begin at seven, and adulthood at 21 (or among the ancient Jews, even older). And I doubt it means that women should not, for instance, tell men facts that they may not be acquainted with, although they should refrain from arguing how to interpret such facts.
Jesus chose all men to be Apostles, and I think that is more than merely following historical custom, as the modernists claim, because He didn't hesitate to violate custom when it was appropriate to do so.
That, and the history of the Church, is the reason why the Catholic Church has spoken out against women priests. A priest is supposed to act in persona Christi. Some postmodernists pretend that sex doesn't matter, but sexual difference and procreation go back to the very beginning, as described in Genesis, and obviously they part of God's chosen and built-in pattern for His creation.
Clear. You're a judgemental a$$.
Shalom.
"Clear?"
nope
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.