If Women Can't Have Authority Over Men in the Church, Why Are They Expected to Teach in School?

WELS - Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.

Very conservative; infant baptism with 3 drops of water; closed communion (only other WELS or those having the same beliefs are allowed to take it); communion wine, not grape juice (because they believed original Biblical communion was performed with real wine, not grape juice): speaking in tongues is of the devil; does not believe in the Rapture or the literal 1000 year Reign of Christ; no women may attend board meeting, serve on leadership staff, or become pastors... However, women could teach in their schools, even up to, as stated in the original post, college level.

At least, this is how it was in the church I attended. I grew up in the Lutheran school system from kindergarten through 12th grade, as well as every vacation bible school and Sunday school class along the way - which just makes me someone who grew up surrounded and steeped into church teaching and culture, nothing more.

Assemblies of God - pretty much the exact opposite.

Adult, full-submersion baptism; open communion (anyone can take it) with grape juice; speaking in tongues (but NOT as something necessary for salvation); believes in the literal Rapture and 1000 year Reign of Christ; has women involved in all areas of the church (often as co-leaders with their husbands.) Again, this is only the church I went to.

I have found a staggering amount of differences just between churches of the same denominations.

Inconsistencies: I tend to use the word "inconsistency" rather than "false doctrine" because I often found the difference between what was preached and what was carried out to be troubling, and some wouldn't technically be considered a false doctrine.

My most often-used example was at my Lutheran high school: any girl who became pregnant out of wedlock was asked not to come back as soon as her pregnancy was discovered. But yet, the father (if he was at the school) was allowed to stay.

While fully intended with faith in mind, the school was a bare-bones organization with a massive debt and high tuition fees because they wanted to keep it completely independent of any outside money, so that they had full control over what was taught (which is understandable.) They wanted to keep their doctrine sound according to their own teachings with no outside lobbying or special interests.

I understand that having young, unmarried teenage girls walking down the halls of a Christian school promoting a Christ-centered education would not be seen as very reputable, nor would it have drawn the larger numbers of students they needed to keep the school running.

But as a teen, I was deeply troubled by the fact that we were required to attend daily devotions, classes, and lessons on God's love, mercy, and forgiveness, but yet someone with a visible sin was publicly put away and forced to go elsewhere for her education. Isn't this a time when she would need a presumably Christ-centered surrounding the most? And wouldn't have this been a good learning experience for other students, to see the family of God in action when caring for this girl and her soon-to-be child?

The pastor I spoke about (whom I would have supported) had a child who was part of a couple in this situation (but yet all of his other children were model students), so for me, this hit very close to home.

P.S. I am adopted. There is no record of my parents, but children are usually not abandoned under good circumstances.

I thank God that my own birth mother did not attend the Lutheran high school that I did. She would have been kicked out as soon as they knew I existed. But if my father had been there, he would have been allowed to stay.

Well I really like the pentecostal church. Up until they started talking about oneness. I found the pentecostal church to be the most Spiritual churches thus far. Especially the spanish services. I attended a few in San Francisco.

That almost sounds like a cult. Seems very legalistic with very little leg room. I know that following principles in the bible is the best way to go about things, but to not allow mistakes is kind of overboard.

Carrying on appearance must mean getting rid of people at all costs, even if they are well respected huh? I mean to be honest this sounds kinda gangster. Some John Gotti type level. You break the rules, you gotta go. Clip the guy. No mercy. Just like that.

But the problem with mob mentality and following rules with no mercy, overlooks the Gospel. Forgiveness, mercy, love, second chances times 70. Lutherans sound like a cult. Wouldnt surprise me if there was money laundering in the shadows somewhere.

And that is only because within the home the husband is the head (authority over) the wife, and wives are to be in submission or subjection to THEIR OWN husbands according to the Lord.

That does not in any way nullify God's pattern for men and women within the assembly. The instructions are quite clear, and if people chose to ignore them or disobey them, then they will give account.

The Bible DOES NOT permit women to (a) preach, (b) teach, or (c) take authority as a pastor or elder within the local church. Indeed women are commanded to be silent during worship.

However, older or mature Christian women are encouraged to teach the younger women what their responsibilities are within the home.

I have to agree that after spending so much time, study, and immersion in two extremely different denominations, I would find things within each one that did indeed feel like a cult. The past several years I've been searching for what I hope to be able to call a true church "home", although I've attended many churches along the way, because I find that for myself, I need the accountability of a body of believers. (Otherwise... I start asking too many questions, thinking in too many different directions, and you can see the results right here in this thread.)

I want to stress that I have found wonderful, Godly people in most every place I attended whom I am immensely grateful for. I am NOT meaning to somehow discredit any denomination, but merely point out some of my own observations within them.

But I also found a lot of extremes, which always got me into a bit of trouble. If I asked too many questions or didn't go along with the program, I was rebelling and shouldn't be listened to until I agreed with what I was being told (which is part of what built my tenacity, and/or stubbornness, depending on how you look at it.)

I've told this story often as well - my avatar will often feature pictures of stuffed owls, which I know is more fitting for a 5-year old. But there were elders in the Assemblies of God church I attended that literally saw demons in everything, and once told me I had to get rid of a hand-stitched picture of an angel holding a baby (because they said it had the same spirit behind it as Satan holding the demonic baby in "Passion of the Christ",) and that Christians must not have any kind of image of things like snakes, bats, owls, or creatures of the night in their homes.

My entire personal Bible study as a Christian has been focused on trying to find out for myself whether or not these types of "teachings" hold any (holy) water or not. I was told that it was wrong to have images of snakes (not that I would want them, but I'm just saying) because, of course, it was a serpent that deceived the woman in the Garden of Eden.

But during my own study, I found it immensely interesting that in one particular situation, God had sent a plague of poisonous snakes among the people as punishment, and yet told Moses to place a bronze snake on a pole, proclaiming that whoever looked at it would live. (I could be wrong, but isn't this the same image the medical field uses today?)

These are the kinds of "inconsistencies" I'm always asking about.

A good friend pointed out to me that cats are actually nocturnal (creatures of the night), but these elders weren't telling people to get rid of their pet cats (at least not that I knew of.) Maybe if I would have had a pet cat, they would have told me to chuck it into the trash as well.

There is no doubt in my mind that these were Christ-centered, loving, Godly people. When a close relative got sick, they were the first ones at the hospital praying for them. But for whatever reason, I couldn't help but wonder, or dare think, that some of their teachings were a bit... skewed, at best.

I've always personally really liked owls, so I admit that I purposely bought them and use them as a small reminder to hopefully never cater to legalism again (as well as asking for God's help with recognizing and discerning it.)

Oneness is a sect on it's own. Regular Pentecostals don't believe you have to be baptized to be saved or speak in tongues to be saved.

That’s discrusting.

You might be right. I remember it was all about recieving the Holy Spirit in that church. They would lay hands and it was intense. I remember falling at the altar a few times when the pastor would put his hand to my forehead, without touching me at all.. You cant really counterfeit that. No skin to skin contact. Just the Holy Spirit's presence.

I'm kidding of course. I am not switching to Islam. I am planning to attend a new church. You might want to try it. It's mega church founded and based in the Philippines. I think they have a church in the USA.

http://www.ccf.org.ph

Hey Dino. Im sorry for disrespecting you erlier. I got alot of backlash for it. Deservingly.

Thought id appologize for it. God bless..

That almost sounds like a cult. Seems very legalistic with very little leg room. I know that following principles in the bible is the best way to go about things, but to not allow mistakes is kind of overboard.

Carrying on appearance must mean getting rid of people at all costs, even if they are well respected huh? I mean to be honest this sounds kinda gangster. Some John Gotti type level. You break the rules, you gotta go. Clip the guy. No mercy. Just like that.

But the problem with mob mentality and following rules with no mercy, overlooks the Gospel. Forgiveness, mercy, love, second chances times 70. Lutherans sound like a cult. Wouldnt surprise me if there was money laundering in the shadows somewhere.

Hey Dino. Im sorry for disrespecting you erlier. I got alot of backlash for it. Deservingly.

Thought id appologize for it. God bless..

Highest respect to you for making this post, TLC! I apologize as well for being overly sarcastic to you.

Thank you for continuing to contribute your thoughts, such as:



It's interesting that you point this out, because this highlights the seemingly very thin line between obeying the Word of God and crossing over into legalistic extremes that absolutely no one can live up to, which are the types of boundaries I'm always left questioning.

The pastor I've been mentioning in my posts led a solid Christian life and has a solid, lifelong marriage. They have several children, and all but one are the types of people any parent would want their child to become.

One of his children starting rebelling in their teens, and was part of a couple at my Lutheran high school who had a child out of wedlock. They got married, had the baby, but then that pastor's child (by now a full-grown adult) cheated on their spouse, had a child with yet another person, and went on to leave their first spouse for that person.

At every step, some members of the congregation were calling for the pastor's dismissal due to the passages you had mentioned (starting with 1 Timothy 3) which say that a church leader is to be blameless, the husband of only one wife, and must be able to keep his children and his household in order.

They felt that to allow him to remain a pastor would be unbiblical, even though he could not control his child's actions, and most certainly not after that child had become an independent adult.

But this is what happens when "the letter of the law" is followed to the exact letter.

I don't know everything that went on behind the scenes, but I was very relieved when they finally allowed him to keep his position.

But the bible is the truth. So I cant disregard the bible as truth because of mans flaws. The pastor you mentioned, he must have lacked something with this child. Maybe not enough attention, not enough love. Something caused all of that. We all make mistakes. But some are more costly. So our mistakes if they are going to affect someone else, their is a price to pay. Thats a reason why a pastors position is handcombed with a microscope and tweasers. Peoples lives are at stake.

But for average Joe, mistakes are bound to happen. So they should let up off of Joe Blow and let him deal with his daughter in a loving manner. There is still hope for her. She needs Jesus in her life. Only Jesus can fix any mess.

I disagree with always blaming the parent for something that goes wrong with a child or for the choices the child makes, but that's just me.

Personally, I feel sorry for pastors and their families for this very reason. The expectations for perfection are so high, there's no room left to be human.

What saddens me most is exactly what you're saying - "It's ok if I mess up or make mistakes... I'm just one of the flock"; but ministry leaders are given absolutely no leniency.

I just say this as someone who has sometimes cried over the immense pressures I've seen put on spiritual leaders, and the emotional, spiritual, and physical harm it has caused them.

Well the developement of a child has alot to do with their parents and their surroundings. That falls under Child developement. And so these can have longterm affects. I wanted to get into counselling so I know a bit about it.

And as far as leaders having stricter rules is actually a good thing. When we have the opposite you get abuse of power. So there are two spectrums to how you can view this. I would take the more rigid regement over a biased leadership any day.

If they will sugar coax anything a leader does, they will get away with murder. So the fact that they will not be biased to someone in position and hold a higher standard for leaders is commendable.

I'm not sure what your experiences have been in churches, but all I can say is, stating how things should be is one thing, and it usually sounds very good on paper.

But seeing those rules put into action, and watching the casualties that can be caused by going too far in either direction (whether legalism or leniency), is quite a different experience (especially if you wind up being one of the casualties.)

So what would you do differently? If you could make a difference?

Do you mean that women cannot sing and praise God during worship service? That's really sad to think about.

That's an awesome question, and one I certainly don't have the answers to.

But most of all, I would want to allow for some kind of compassion, and advocate that pastors, teachers, and spiritual leaders are still human too, and that has to be balanced with all the expectation.

For instance, in the example of the pastor I keep using - they were a typical Lutheran family with several children. To have removed him from his position would have taken away their entire livelihood, and seeing as the requirements are so intensive, he had nothing else to fall back on to support his family.

Now, I'm certainly not saying, "Look the other way if their situation is bad enough!" Absolutely not.

But I think balance is an important key. Such as, let's look at his life as a whole. He's had a successful Christian marriage to one woman. He's completed all his training with honors. None of his other children have rebelled. He's had a clean record for his entire time as a pastor. And what do the congregations he's served had to say about his character and service? I would stress that his entire career and track record needs to be considered, not just someone else' actions.

I would also want to try to establish support systems for spiritual leaders and their families in order to try to help keep them from burning out, and I would hope they would be treated with compassion.

Mostly, I would hope to see consistency in what was taught. If they don't believe women can teach men, then make it mandatory that all teachers must be male, at all levels (again, easier said than done. I doubt they'd find enough males who wanted to teach, and I think many parents would be reluctant to send their children to school with an all-male staff.)

At the very least, they would need to stop having female teachers at their colleges. I'm not saying I agree with all of these teachings, I'm just saying, if this is what THEY believe, they have to uphold it throughout, not just here and there.

And, as this seems to be one of my pet issues... I would allow girls who accidentally became pregnant to finish out their time at my old high school. I understand that they would say sin can't go unpunished, but why does the punishment have to mean denying them their Christian education?

But again, I know that's seen as bad for business, and is something that would never happen.