Richard Hollerman

We realize that perhaps we are belaboring this, but it would seem that the world is intent on disobeying Scripture. Does it seem this way to you? If you claim to be a follower of Jesus, we find this deplorable.

We just read an article (by A. J. Willingham) on how women are becoming pastors and church leaders at an unpresented rate. We realize that this is not the way it was years ago. In 1960 (for instance), the rate of women pastors was miniscule compared to today. Yes, we know that Methodists, Pentecostals, and the like installed women leaders. But this is not what Scripture teaches and what the “traditional” practice was (we dislike the word “tradition” for obvious reasons), but we must admit that the “traditional” practice of most Protestant denominations would be that women were outlawed from serving in leadership capacities.

Let us make a few things clear to begin. First, we believe in the inspiration and authority of the Word of God. Second, God intended that His Word would be believed and obeyed. The article stated that “women of color” was as the forefront of this objection to the Word of God. Perhaps this is not that it was intended to be but I am simply repeating the article. Next, to believe and obey Scripture is to believe and obey God himself. I guess we could go on but this would be sufficient to make the point we wish to make at this time.

Whatever happened in 1960 (the beginning of the so-called “Decade of Rebellion”) is something that has continued for these past 63 years. Although we find that feminism increasingly was on the scene, it goes beyond this. Various Protest denominations were the first to lead the way into this feministic perspective, but it is now to be found in many different denominations. The liberal Lutheran denominations, the liberal Methodists, the liberal Episcopalians (and nearly all of them are liberal now), and many others have allowed and permitted and even urged women to take the lead and rebel. We understand that the United Church of Christ and the Universalists and others now have more women who take the lead than men.

We must remember that many or most denominations and churches are way off on church leadership, but this gives no reason for this to “open the door” to female leadership rather than male leadership. We refer to rectors, bishops, presbyters, clergymen, teachers, and so forth. Today, we find people calling themselves “Reverend” and “Bishops” but they are not this at all. But let us go back to female leadership.

We realize that God forbids a woman to speak in the assembly, to have the lead over the man (in the assembly, in church, in the home, and elsewhere). We know that God forbids the woman to not only speak and lead but to have dominion over the man. So many scriptures say this that it would be superfluous to mention them. (See 1 Corinthians 11:3 as well as vv. 11:1-16 and 14:33-37). See also 1 Timothy 2:12-15; 3:1-7; Titus 1:7-9; 1 Peter 3:1-4; and many others.

We don’t imply, of course, that the opposite is good and right. We know that men (males) are wrong and evil, from God’s viewpoint. Whether this be male priests, male “ministers,” male bishops, they all are wrong and worth of God’s condemnation. Simply having “Reverend” before one’s name changes nothing. It is still wrong. We speak of male “ministers” or “pastors” or female “ministers” and female “pastors.” They all are wrong, from a Biblical stand point.

But here we are focusing on females (or women) for they are absolutely forbidden to have any leadership role in church, in the home, in society, or in other venues. We find in the article (“More Women are aiming to become church leaders. Together, they could change American Christianity”) would be before us and we need to reply to some of it.

Here we find this statement: “The right for women to be ordained and serve as faith leaders has been hard-won over decades, and in several major factions, like Roman Catholic and Southern Baptist Churches, women are barred from the highest levels of leadership.” How can we respond to this? First, we find this so much in this article is wrong and prejudiced. Hard-won? Yes, it should be. Churches that “bar” leadership to women? No, God has said No to women having a leadership role. They are absolutely forbidden to have a “leadership” role for they must not be leaders (from God’s standpoint). So this matter of “barring” woman is wrong!

We continue to read: “Among mainstream denominations that do ordain women, a sea change is occurring. More women are entering seminary and other theological programs with the intent of becoming priests. As it follows, more women are also occupying these roles after being ordained.” What? There should never be a Mainstream deamination. They should never “ordain” women for there is no such thing is “ordination.” They violate God’s will by entering “seminary” and “theological programs.” And they should never plan on becoming “priests” for this is wrong too (see 1 Peter 2:5, 9).Then we read that these “ordained” woman are entering roles that were never meant for women “after being ordained.” We find that there is so many offensive parts to this excerpt that we wonder how to proceed.

According to Alexis Abernathy, at Fuller Theological Seminary, we read that women are finding their place in the “faith” community. We find this: We know that Fuller, in California, is known as a liberal place and this should be kept in mind. Further, Alexis is a woman and according to the Bible, she should not “open her mouth” (according to the Scriptures)  . Further, we know that the Bible gives no allowance for a “Seminary” at all. According to the excerpt, is she is “chief academic officer.” We wonder how one can fulfil this position when she is not permitted (by God) to be a leader of any kind! She is a black woman according to the article. This should not be held against her, of course, but we do wonder.

We continue to read: “Female priests [and there is no such thing, as we know] still face alarming numbers of challenges navigating denominational structures built by and for men.” What? There should be “challenges” for this is absolutely wrong. Structures built by and for men? Of course, we know that denominations are wrong, per se. And men should not exclude women (for they have been “excluded” by God Himself).

As we continue to read, we read that “If church traditions have historically marginalized women and others, what leads those who have been excluded to forge on anyway?” First we must point out that “church tradition” have no place in our discussions. We know that tradition is something that is antithetical to what God would want. (See especially Matthew 15:2, 3, 6; Mark 7:5, 9, 13; Col. 2:8;1 Thess. 3:6).

We read that “more women in training, more women being ordained.” We find this so sad, for we know (if we are Biblically literate) that woman are not to be “ordained” to serve as “pastors.”  The report then refers to the Evangelical Lutheran Church. It says that “40% of the churches pastors are women.” We find this not only unacceptable but disgusting! Not only are women not to fill the shoes of the “ordained” but surely are not to become a “pastor”! Even the Unitarian Universalist denomination and the United Church of Christ (very liberal Protestant denominations) “ordain” more women than men! Not only is this wicked but unconscionable as well.

According to the article, Fuller is “one of the largest seminaries in the U.S. and one with a noted history” of women’s rights!. So sad! We read further, “How can we make the environment in which women are pastors more fruitful, productive and supportive?” It must not be done! Women (as we have said repeatedly) are NOT to be “pastors” thus are not to be “fruitful, productive and supportive.” It would be wicked for these seminaries to be in this way support women in their unscriptural endeavors.

We continue to read, “The argument against women in Christian leadership is largely based on a specific interpretation of the Bible.” Here we read of a woman, called a “fellow” (this is a term that traditionally referred to a man, not a woman) of “Chandler School of Theology” at “Emery University in Atlanta.” Here we wonder for these are evil and liberal institutions. According to the article, she was a “lifelong Episcopalian” (a wicked and liberal school and denomination).” The article then speaks of “women of color” which is a “red light” announcement.

The article speaks of the Southern Baptist denomination that expelled “several women-led churches” and refers to the Methodist denomination for denying “same-sex marriage and the ordination of LGBTQ clergy.” We are made to wonder about this. If the sodomite agenda is frowned upon (by God) and sodomite (and Lesbian, Bisexual, Transsexual, and Queer) people are forbidden to become “clergymen” and “clergy-women” (if there is such a thing), this is what should happen. In the Old Covenant, they were to be stoned to death, and although this may not be the case today, still they should be excommunicated or withdrawn from!

We read further, “Women who belong to faiths that don’t align with their views on how the church should be—for instance, in terms of gender outlook, face an added challenge when they feel called on to be the clergy.” First, we must say that people must not be punished for their views” for they have no views if they differ from what God would want. As for the fact that these people have views that differ from their “Gender” outlook they need to get their outlook right. They are not “called to the clergy” for no one is. They are not “Called” to the clergy for no one is “called” to this unscriptural position!

According to the article, a denomination may refuse to “call” a person who doesn’t “feel a call to seminary” and then it says that such a person may need to go elsewhere. Why not just agree with God and not desire a different position that God has not given? People “of color” (a black woman?) differs from this if they choose to “become a priest” (an unscriptural position) and then it says that such a person may be “called” to be a priest or a clergy “woman.” We find this so sad, for a woman is not called, she is not called to be a Clergywomen, she is not to be in anyway disobedient to God and His will.

This was sad reading and a wicked expose of hundreds of thousands of disobedient women in America (and around the world). When will they learn better? We wonder.