[ohioWfan]

"Husband of one wife," is not, to me, enough in and of itself to defend an absolutely-no-women-in-authority position.

There are churches which do not allow women to teach Jr High Sunday School classes because they think 13 year old boys are men, and women are Biblically mandated not to teach them......and there are churches that ordain women as complete equals in authority in the church.

I suspect the truth, as it usually is, is somewhere in between those two positions, and equally devout believers draw the line at different spots on the continuum. The danger comes when people ascribe the 'absolute' status to arguable positions that only belong to the essentials of Christian doctrine, i.e. the divinity of Christ, the cross, and the resurrection.

[HatSteel]

The point Ohio (Is that Ohio Wesleyan?) is that those who cite the "husband of one wife" verse are not ignorant bumpkins. They really do have a point, and those who discount their point because of theological liberal bias are only cheating themselves of the opportunity to think their way biblically and clearly through this issue.

Personally, I'm satisfied that there was a female order of deaconesses, but that there was no similar order of female elders.

The "no male or female" verse in Galatians can legitimately be limited to "God's acceptance" of anyone, no matter sex, race, economic condition.