I’m still mulling over the SBC decision that a woman cannot be any type of “pastor,” and I wonder if this could lead to a crisis of pastoral care where women are not able to exercise the office or role of a pastor.
No, I don't think you're overplaying the differences at all. I think part of the reason we see more women than men in the healthcare field (especially as RNs, etc.) is because it is one of the places women are free to use their gifts. It's welcome and needed.
One author I read last year described men and women working together at the "Blessed Alliance" and I've adopted that language because I do think together we're stronger together and we are definitely created to complement each other in ministry.
But at the same time, I've also noticed how certain behaviours from women are not okay in some contexts, but if our male counterparts display that behaviour, it's judged/received differently. For example, I've been observing this last year how many male pastors cry (or appear to cry) during a message and how they're seen as vulnerable and compassionate, but when the same behaviour comes from a woman, at least in the church context, it's often viewed as weak or 'too emotional'. It's been an interesting observation.
And to loop back around to your observations, I think you're spot on. Women, on the whole, make excellent spiritual care practitioners, directors, and pastoral care pastors. What a loss for us when it's absent.
Yes, I think you're right. If women show ambition or assertion, they can be regarded as "unhinged". Vulnerability in a man is a sign of his openness while in a woman it is treated as a sign of weakness. Valid points.
I love reading your commentary, not only because you are so knowledgeable, but also because you are thoughtful and reasonable, which must come from a humble heart, which in turn is, if not empathetic, then at least sympathetic! It also seems to me that, if you are uncomfortable around people crying, it is because you ARE empathetic! But I still accept that you are better suited to academic study than to counseling, and applaud you for your self-awareness!
I do agree with you about male-female differences and complementarity. As to whether your logic would convince complementarians, I have doubts, unfortunately, because they, in general, seem very committed to limiting women because they think Scripture does, and to codifying it ways that can be promulgated and enforced.
Some years ago I had a major life changing accident that left me hospitalised at length. Once a week, a beautiful, wonderful, older female lay Chaplain would bring me Communion. One day, just after receiving the Eucharist, I had a massive emotional catharsis in her presence. This wonderful woman was the face of Christ to me...
There is no area of my own denomination that would not be greatly improved by and through having women Priests/pastors. Alas, I am a Roman Catholic and I suspect I stand more of a chance of seeing a rainbow flag draped over the door of my local Sydney Cof E, or the likes of the afore mentioned king Wally Lewis wearing a NSW origin jersey. Somethings can never happen....
Can I respectfully suggest this:- The likes of the SBC et al are actually afraid of women....
I suspect that this is a common fear held my many men in faith communities....
They are afraid of them precisely because at some level they know that many female pastors would actually do a better job at pastoring than many men.
I think it is also probable that many men manage the "problem of female allure" by subjugating women. This is a common unconscious psychological defense mechanism used to manage internal conflict within ones self. I suspect this is more of a factor in the complimentarian mind space than we are willing to admit.
Do you remember when Al Mohler said “the function is the role and the role is the function”? Part of the issue is their narrow interpretation of pastor. At my Southern Baptist college, one of the textbooks stated, "A pastor's primary duty is to preach, not to visit the sick." In my pastoral care and counseling class, we spent a significant amount of time crafting wedding and funeral sermons. (Side note: I was initially barred from taking this class because of my gender.)
I'm a Southern Baptist Church Planter with the SEND Network (so don't tell anyone I'm a subscriber to your substack newsletter...haha). I greatly appreciate your reflections, challenges and directness. I just want to say that for me the person, manner and virtue of Jesus is central to the whole debate. Jesus Christ is pastoral and so men and women alike are to reflect His compassion, care, and wisdom. I agree with you that inherent in femaleness is a more general, "bio-neuro", disposition toward nurturing care (I hope I've understood you correctly). The leadership of the church should be familial with both fathers and mothers providing needed leadership and care. I guess what I find missing in this latest reflection is simply the acknowledgment that the differences of application are due to the the differences in biblical interpretation. I know you've addressed the exegetical and interpretational differences in other posts but I think it's important to not lose sight of the fact that the understanding of God's Word in application is always at the root. The fact is, complementarians and egalitarians interpret and apply certain texts differently. There may be no difference in our understanding of the value of men and women, the different strengths of men and women, or the need for both men and women leading and serving the church and yet there will remain the distinction of reserving a particular office (elder/bishop/pastor) for men. I'm sure most on the egalitarian side of things will find me naive, but I honestly believe the complementarian understanding of Scripture does not deny the church of men and women the greatest potential for kingdom impact in the world but enhances our witness. Obviously there are many outworkings of complementarianism that I loathe and despise, many of which exist in the SBC of which I'm a part. You have not minced words in calling out the aberrations. Thank you! I guess I'm just wanting to be a voice here that might serve as a reminder that some of us complementarians still value humility and benefit greatly from the leading voices of women all over the world. I'm not the Christian "model of a modern major general" but for what it's worth, here I stand.
Dr. Bird, I can understand what you are trying to communicate. However, although I am pro-women as pastors, you post sounded way too feminists in the secular feminist way. It’s scary, at least to me.
Jose, I am many things, but not a secular feminist. In particular, acknowledging how the biological differences between men and women can find a social expression is something that many avid feminists would deny. They'd argue that women have no predisposition to be nurturers rather than builders. Men and women are blank slates and those dispositions are projected onto them. The fact that there are fewer female engineers is proof of how patriarchal the engineers profession is. Of course they'd never say the reverse about the large percentage of women in nursing. So, I think I'm far off them!
No, I don't think you're overplaying the differences at all. I think part of the reason we see more women than men in the healthcare field (especially as RNs, etc.) is because it is one of the places women are free to use their gifts. It's welcome and needed.
One author I read last year described men and women working together at the "Blessed Alliance" and I've adopted that language because I do think together we're stronger together and we are definitely created to complement each other in ministry.
But at the same time, I've also noticed how certain behaviours from women are not okay in some contexts, but if our male counterparts display that behaviour, it's judged/received differently. For example, I've been observing this last year how many male pastors cry (or appear to cry) during a message and how they're seen as vulnerable and compassionate, but when the same behaviour comes from a woman, at least in the church context, it's often viewed as weak or 'too emotional'. It's been an interesting observation.
And to loop back around to your observations, I think you're spot on. Women, on the whole, make excellent spiritual care practitioners, directors, and pastoral care pastors. What a loss for us when it's absent.
Have a great day!
Carmen, thanks for that!
Yes, I think you're right. If women show ambition or assertion, they can be regarded as "unhinged". Vulnerability in a man is a sign of his openness while in a woman it is treated as a sign of weakness. Valid points.
I love reading your commentary, not only because you are so knowledgeable, but also because you are thoughtful and reasonable, which must come from a humble heart, which in turn is, if not empathetic, then at least sympathetic! It also seems to me that, if you are uncomfortable around people crying, it is because you ARE empathetic! But I still accept that you are better suited to academic study than to counseling, and applaud you for your self-awareness!
I do agree with you about male-female differences and complementarity. As to whether your logic would convince complementarians, I have doubts, unfortunately, because they, in general, seem very committed to limiting women because they think Scripture does, and to codifying it ways that can be promulgated and enforced.
Bonnie, thank you from the bottom of my quasi-empathetic heart!
Some years ago I had a major life changing accident that left me hospitalised at length. Once a week, a beautiful, wonderful, older female lay Chaplain would bring me Communion. One day, just after receiving the Eucharist, I had a massive emotional catharsis in her presence. This wonderful woman was the face of Christ to me...
There is no area of my own denomination that would not be greatly improved by and through having women Priests/pastors. Alas, I am a Roman Catholic and I suspect I stand more of a chance of seeing a rainbow flag draped over the door of my local Sydney Cof E, or the likes of the afore mentioned king Wally Lewis wearing a NSW origin jersey. Somethings can never happen....
Can I respectfully suggest this:- The likes of the SBC et al are actually afraid of women....
I suspect that this is a common fear held my many men in faith communities....
They are afraid of them precisely because at some level they know that many female pastors would actually do a better job at pastoring than many men.
I think it is also probable that many men manage the "problem of female allure" by subjugating women. This is a common unconscious psychological defense mechanism used to manage internal conflict within ones self. I suspect this is more of a factor in the complimentarian mind space than we are willing to admit.
Do you remember when Al Mohler said “the function is the role and the role is the function”? Part of the issue is their narrow interpretation of pastor. At my Southern Baptist college, one of the textbooks stated, "A pastor's primary duty is to preach, not to visit the sick." In my pastoral care and counseling class, we spent a significant amount of time crafting wedding and funeral sermons. (Side note: I was initially barred from taking this class because of my gender.)
Hello Dr. Bird,
I'm a Southern Baptist Church Planter with the SEND Network (so don't tell anyone I'm a subscriber to your substack newsletter...haha). I greatly appreciate your reflections, challenges and directness. I just want to say that for me the person, manner and virtue of Jesus is central to the whole debate. Jesus Christ is pastoral and so men and women alike are to reflect His compassion, care, and wisdom. I agree with you that inherent in femaleness is a more general, "bio-neuro", disposition toward nurturing care (I hope I've understood you correctly). The leadership of the church should be familial with both fathers and mothers providing needed leadership and care. I guess what I find missing in this latest reflection is simply the acknowledgment that the differences of application are due to the the differences in biblical interpretation. I know you've addressed the exegetical and interpretational differences in other posts but I think it's important to not lose sight of the fact that the understanding of God's Word in application is always at the root. The fact is, complementarians and egalitarians interpret and apply certain texts differently. There may be no difference in our understanding of the value of men and women, the different strengths of men and women, or the need for both men and women leading and serving the church and yet there will remain the distinction of reserving a particular office (elder/bishop/pastor) for men. I'm sure most on the egalitarian side of things will find me naive, but I honestly believe the complementarian understanding of Scripture does not deny the church of men and women the greatest potential for kingdom impact in the world but enhances our witness. Obviously there are many outworkings of complementarianism that I loathe and despise, many of which exist in the SBC of which I'm a part. You have not minced words in calling out the aberrations. Thank you! I guess I'm just wanting to be a voice here that might serve as a reminder that some of us complementarians still value humility and benefit greatly from the leading voices of women all over the world. I'm not the Christian "model of a modern major general" but for what it's worth, here I stand.
Dr. Bird, I can understand what you are trying to communicate. However, although I am pro-women as pastors, you post sounded way too feminists in the secular feminist way. It’s scary, at least to me.
Jose, I am many things, but not a secular feminist. In particular, acknowledging how the biological differences between men and women can find a social expression is something that many avid feminists would deny. They'd argue that women have no predisposition to be nurturers rather than builders. Men and women are blank slates and those dispositions are projected onto them. The fact that there are fewer female engineers is proof of how patriarchal the engineers profession is. Of course they'd never say the reverse about the large percentage of women in nursing. So, I think I'm far off them!