Terri Jo Ryan had a good article in this morning's Trib. You can read it HERE.
The print edition of the story had two statements with two boxes beside it. The first statement read (loosely): Be next in line to the most powerful position in the world. The box next to it was checked. The next statement read: Lead a local congregation. The box next to it was X'ed out.
I understand there were some straw men (or straw women?) in the article, but it's good fodder for discussion.
5 comments:
This conversation has been going on at www.newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith
Several prominent theologians from all sides have weighed in. The question was posed something like this: "Is it hypocritical to think that a woman can lead a nation but not a congregation." I very much appreciate how N. T. Wright answered the question:
"No, it isn't hypocritical. There might well be perfectly coherent guidelines as to why a woman might lead in one area and not in another. It isn't hypocritical, after all, to think that the church is not just 'another human organization' or a society like any other; it's Christian common sense."
And keep in mind, Wright supports women in the pastorate. I thought this was a very clear-headed answer that shows that, while he does not agree with us conservatives on this, he at least can grasp our reasoning, and an Elizabeth I, a Maragaret Thatcher, or a Sarah Palin does not necessarily pose a problem to complementarian theology. Although I am unaware of anything put out by Piper on this, I'm going to keep checking his webpage because I know that if he addresses the issue, he will do so in a thoughtful and theologically informed way.
Sorry, try this URL instead:
newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/
Craig,
Happy Birthday old man:P
Luke
Craig,
Go to this link for a good discussion of the issue:
http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=2470
Post a Comment