I would be happy with a period after empower women and drop the rest of the sentence. I don't believe that this announcement squares with Scripture and while many in the Vineyard leadership have thought this for a long time, I was able to live with it since the decision was left to local congregations. But this does three things:
- it allows female leadership across local congregations which would force a local congregation to either live within that or leave the Vineyard should a female be appointed as regional or higher leader
- the language chosen by the Board confuses empowering women with women being in authority over men. I am all for empowering women. I'm not supportive of female headship over male.
- in the past the argument had been Scriptural. This announcement included verbiage like, "some women are called and gifted to provide leadership at both the local and trans-local levels of the church. To refuse to do this violated my convictions" which indicates perception was either higher than Scripture or used to interpret Scripture. Also, words like "they did not want to be offensive to those who believed differently". While I value the sensitivity, it doesn't show the error in the Scriptural understanding of the dissenters (like me).
Oh no, that which we feared when we were young has come ... JRW always said that every denomination should plan its own demise.
Technorati Tags: current events, women
10 comments:
Well written comments, Rick. And, of course, you know I agree.
Randy
I used to be concerned about the Vineyard's flirtation with hyper-charismaticism and it's sometimes fluctuation or shift away from its Evangelical roots. The last four years I've perceived a tug from the seeker/emergent family, and I even hear it in the new worship music VGM releases.
Eventually I think we have to decide if were within the Evangelical stream or not. And that decision will ultimately decide if I stay with the Vineyard or not. This current decision does not sit well with me, and I'm sure my pastor is dreading the phone conversation we'll be having this week ...
I have to agree with you Rick. As a woman, it can be hard to hear someone put a ceiling on what I can do, but the reality is that this was God's decision--not man's. We need to be able to tell the difference.
Shannon - one thing for sure though, most of us need improvement on the empowering women piece. I certainly have not done all I can. We need to be smart about how to maximize all that God has given each of us.
this may be tangential to the subject at hand, but i've often wondered why exactly we get overly focused on one person leading a local congregation in our post-Jesus first coming day and age. i asked this question several times when i have heard steve nicholson and others teach church-planting, etc. they seem to give lip-service to building a team and having accountability, yet most of the focus and energy is on one person over a church. be that as it may, the fact is most churches do in fact have that 'the-buck-stops-here' guy, i'm not really arguing against that (except to nuance it with 'first-among-equals' kind of understanding, but again, that is a different topic). i have been out of the country and i have not read through bert's statement - my freakin' acrobat reader is acting up this morning - so i will read it as soon as i can.
Steve - thanks for the comment.
I spent 12 years in a Vineyard that paid lip service to "first-among-equals". It was a dictatorship and when the senior pastor was "right" we all loved it and when he was "wrong", wow - there was a lot of pain. Eventually I was asked to step out of leadership for a number of reasons. To be fair, I had some issues that I needed to deal with. But one of the key reasons was a conflict with this personality and the lack of team leadership.
Prior to that, in a discussion with our RO, it became clear that my senior pastor was not alone in his "dictator" approach. The RO held the same view. While he had a leadership team, when I asked how he managed conflict with them he said if worse comes to worse, he would "fire them all". And this wasn't just a poorly executed joke, he had done that in the past.
Since there was only one Vineyard in our area, I ended up leaving for that reason. Very sad.
Through a series of moves I'm back and I am a defender of team-leadership with a "first-among-equals" in there. I just pray that more of our leaders "practiced what they preached".
If you don't get Acrobat rolling, you could email me your address and I could send a sloppy word version. My email is in the sidebar.
thanks rick. you can e-mail it to me at shamilton@vcccm.org
i too have been afflicted by a dictator rulling the roost through a 'first-among-equals', to which i responded much the way you did...see ya! but, again like you, i am praying for accountability, the conviction of the Holy Spirit and people 'practicing what they preach.' thanks in advance for the word version...
Rick, I am sorry to find this post so late in the discussion. I fear you may have moved onto other things by now. Regardless, I will weigh in with my view on this.
I completely disagree with you... at least until someone can convince me I am wrong.
First, I can't find where the teachings of Jesus support the notion that women should be forbidden to lead.
Second, I am pretty sure that the Scriptural directives you mention were from Paul and he said "I forbid..." and commanded Timothy to do the same. Viewed contextually and culturally he was protecting women with this directive because they were viewed as property in that day and would likely be killed if they stood up and tried to lead men in anything let alone matters of religion.
Lastly, in the suffering church throughout the impoverished areas of Asia, male Christian leaders are being imprisoned and killed. So it is their wives who end up picking up the torch and leading underground churches. This is per a fellow Vineyard pastor Mark Macallister with Project Asia. So are those women violating scripture?
I think the Bible teaches that God will appoint the most humble and the most capable to lead, male or female.
Would love to hear your thoughts.
Peace.
Mike - thanks for the comments and I appreciate your views. I also wish I was smart/spiritual enough to add more value to the conversation - unfortunately I am not. The articles posted on the AVC USA site do a nice job representing both sides of this question.
At risk of falling into the 1 Co 1.12 trap, I choose to follow Piper and Grudem on this issue. Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood is a great reference. Grudem's new book on which he gives an extension interview at Adrian Warnock's blog should also be good - certainly the interview is worth reading.
With that, I suppose it would be a copout if I didn't respond.
I think you are correct in that Jesus doesn't explicitly say He forbade women any role. At the same time I do not see that He explicitly supports them in any role. Certainly Jesus did not model anything contrary to what Paul describes.
To your second point. I don't see Paul speaking culturally and my concern is that this is a dangerous position to take (the old slippery slope issue).
With that said, I see your point and I don't think you are on bad ground, but I don't think you are on provable ground and I think the weight of the text as well as the whole of Scripture results in a different conclusion.
So net, yes I think these women are violating Scripture and deep inside I hope I'm wrong.
Rick, Very cool response and you didn't cop out either which I appreciate. This does prove one thing however; much like the opposing views of escatology (my $10 word for the day), predestination, and the creation story... this is also not easy to figure out.
God help us both!
Post a Comment