When our understanding is not in alignment with Scripture, it is not God who must change. People want their ears tickled. They want to hear what they agree with. We don't grow into godly people by continuing to live like the unrighteous.
Is change easy? No, admittedly not but difficulty doesn't give us a pass.
In my opinion, churches have absorbed unbiblical teaching because it is easier to surrender than to stick to the Word. They fear the world more than they fear God. Every time the church moves the stick, they open themselves up to even greater apostasy and then become a church that sees no problem using the Bible as a Super Bowl prop and punting it around their building. Yes, that did happen. If they bothered to listen to what Christ would say to them as their toe lifted His Word into the air, I wonder what He would have said? Better to fear Him than man.
Thank you for sharing! I grew up the opposite of you, believing that women cannot be pastors, but even more so, that women cannot even preach to a congregation, only to other women and children. I was raised in an Independent Baptist Church. Throughout my adult years, it's always felt weird to me when women would get up on stage to preach a sermon in front of a coed congregation. I've honestly tried to get myself to a place where I'm okay with women pastors, and no matter how I hard I try to get there, I cannot fully—for the same reasons got you to become a complementarian. The most I've ever been able to feel comfortable with is women speaking in church, but never pastoring an entire congregation. I am grateful for the words you've put to the inner voice that's been with me for so long.
Thank you for your very balanced post. I have been on the fence about this issue for a few years, and after reading what you wrote, I have a bit more clarity. My issue has always been that, no matter the intention, women have been limited in the church. Limited by men, not by God. The body of Christ is made up of men and women, and I believe it is important to see them working together in all areas of the church.
Thank you for this post! I grew up complementarian, shifted briefly to egalitarian, then went back to my roots after getting married. Funnily enough, establishing roles within your marriage in a way that honors God is crucial to both of you feeling fulfilled and in line with Gods created order.
I loooove Mike Winger! I’m glad to have found another fan.
I grew up in Orthodox Judaism -- definitely no female rabbis in my world! I became a Christian in my early 20s and attended Baptist, Anglican, and non-denominational churches for about the first five years, before my husband (now a pastor) and I settled into Lutheranism. All that to say, I think I have a fairly well-rounded perspective on the issue, and I appreciate your honesty and intellectual curiosity! My view has softened somewhat in the last six years or so, but a male pastor does feel more appropriate, for lack of a better word. In general, male authority figures click with me more than female authority figures (bosses, doctors, teachers, etc.). I'm not saying I'm right, but that's a lifelong way that I've interacted with the world.
I think, where I have landed pretty firmly, is this: whether women should or should not be pastors, it can't be because it isn't fair otherwise. For two reasons -- life isn't fair, so get over it. And, no one "gets" to be a pastor. God *calls* certain people to be pastors, and then He works them like hell to lay themselves down, over and over and over and over and over and over again, for their flocks. It's not, like, a cushy gig. (I say that as the wife of a pastor who heads a wonderful church full of wonderful people. It can be wonderful, but it isn't cushy.) I get frustrated when I run into this idea of we're all equally capable of being pastors, and if it weren't for those mean old guys, there'd be as many female pastors as male pastors. It isn't true. Most of us -- men and women -- aren't capable of being pastors, and an even smaller number of us would want to if we actually understood what went into it.
And two, whether a church is comfortable with a female pastor or not, it should be recognized that both positions have some precedent. Male-only pastors have gargantuan historical precedent and (at least in my understanding) more Biblical precedent, but, in this day and age, female pastors also have some historical precedent, and I have heard some compelling Biblical precedent too. But I've seen and heard some pretty nasty dealings from pastors and denominational bodies who are pro-female pastors towards those who aren't, and that isn't right. (It isn't everybody, and it certainly isn't right when it's going in the opposite direction, either, but I'm thinking about the situations that *I've* seen and heard.) The church we were in while my husband was in seminary, for example, was an old church whose members (all 30 of them) were in their 70s or above and had worshipped there, together, for most of their entire lives. When their pastor resigned and they needed a new one, they needed a governing body who understood their personality and could lead them to a pastor who was right for *them*. Instead, they got derisive comments and people who were just doing the bare minimum to appear helpful, because they had said they preferred a male pastor. You don't take a body of 30 people in the last years of their lives and shame them and ridicule them until they're bullied into a new opinion on an unresolved theological issue. That isn't the way to treat people. (Again, I know many egalitarians who would never do this, but I unfortunately also know many who would, and do.)
Not that you asked for my two cents...or my two dollars, as this turned into! But I do appreciate your thoughts and your references to other resources. Thank you for writing. And I echo your last footnote so fully! You hit the nail right on the head. An orthodox female pastor beats a heretical male pastor any day, and some issues are certainly bigger than others.
I read the title of your post and thought- there’s no way she went from believing women should not be pastors to believing they should be. I love resting in the biblical president. Plus women have enough work and leadership opportunities to serve the body without taking on men’s jobs.
Thanks for sharing your journey so thoroughly. I find it very interesting seeing someone move toward complementarianism, since the dominant trend seems to go the other way these days.
That said, I still wrestle with this entire debate. I can’t help but wonder:
If God designed men and women differently for leadership roles, why does Jesus never explicitly teach that?
Why does Paul commend women like Junia (called “outstanding among the apostles”) if eldership was a hard male-only line?
And why do we only apply these “clear readings” to women in leadership but ignore equally “clear readings” on slavery, head coverings, or polygamy?
I’m not saying these questions unravel your position, but they keep me from landing comfortably anywhere on this debate. I just find it telling that we’re still fighting over who gets to preach while Jesus was out there washing feet, feeding crowds, and challenging systems of power entirely.
Thanks again for sharing your perspective with humility.
Thank you for your cordial tone; I appreciate it. There are many things all Christians believe that Jesus never explicitly taught, such as the doctrine of the trinity or the hypostatic union, and the fact that he never explained all of these things in detail does not mean they are false. Jesus came to save the lost and establish the kingdom of God on Earth, not to give a systematic theology.
As for the whole slavery objection, I do acknowledge that the Bible permitted slavery for a time because of the hardness of human hearts. Ultimately, though, it was the Bible's idea of creation in the image of God that planted the seeds for the abolition of slavery, and the widespread adoption of Christian values are why people like you and I would say that slavery is wrong.
It is debated whether or not Junia was actually an apostle, as the phrase could also be translated as "well known to the apostles," and I do not take a position on the question of if she was an apostle or not. Even if she was, I still do not think that would outweigh the evidence on the complementarian side.
I strongly believe that preaching the gospel is of a much higher priority than this whole debate, and I acknowledge that it is a minor issue, hence why I am willing to attend a church with a female pastor. Thank you once again for your thoughtful and respectful comment!
I hear what you’re saying about Jesus not giving systematic theology, However, I do find it's interesting how the things he did directly teach on... (love your enemies, forgive endlessly, care for the poor) often get overshadowed by debates on topics he never mentioned.
With that beint said, I do appreciate your honesty about Junia and the translation debate. To me, it still feels like one of those areas where tradition leans heavily in one direction despite textual ambiguity.
And I get your slavery point, but it also highlights how we’ve reinterpreted or moved beyond certain biblical permissions over time. for instance...how do we know which passages are cultural accommodations and which are eternal principles? Especially when the fruit of egalitarianism seems to be women flourishing in ministry, while strict complementarianism often ends up supressing gifts that could serve the community.
I agree, though...the gospel and how Christians live it out matters far more than who gets to hold the mic. Still, it’s good to have these conversations. Keeps us all humble. Thanks again for engaging with me. .
This is what I really dislike about Protestantism- you are essentially forced to treat Christianity the way you treat political beliefs, taking every individual issue and then researching it on your own to decide what you believe about it- then you choose a denomination that most closely aligns with what you’ve come to believe. Bizarre to me that people see this as in any way conducive to people having a healthy life in the faith
I’m pretty sure the Bible has a thing or two to say about leaning on one’s own understanding.
And I would also like to point out the practical results of “Sola Scriptura”, that you have Protestants who all believe that their beliefs are “Biblical” and none of them can agree with each other, sometimes disagreeing over the most core tenets of our faith. If we are known by our fruits, the Protestant approach yields countless heresies (since even if you are Protestant, you disagree with most other Protestants of different shades), and never-ending division. Our God is not a God of confusion, remember
Pastors do more than just preach. They administer the sacraments and are spiritual leaders for the congregation and broader community. Sure, women are capable of doing all the things pastors are required to do, but I believe being a pastor is a very special calling reserved for specific men.
Well, it's lucky that you weren't on the spot to preach this view to the Apostle of the Apostles - Mary Magdalene. On that day in the garden. Or she might not have come forth publicly with her testimony of the Resurrection. What a horrific loss to the world that silence would have been.
The Pagans, by the way, always mocked the first Christians for this: "You listen to your women, and you believe what they say!"
They found that morally contemptible and spiritually corrupt.
Much of what passes for Christian piety today might be more Pagan in origin and content.
Just a thought.
Or, as a Catholic priest once said to me: "St. Paul is not God."
Jesus is, though.
He sent a woman from his very grave to speak to the men about his victory over death. The fact stands.
I never said that women could not publicly give a testimony! Obviously, Mary Magdalene was incredibly important, and nothing I say here diminishes that fact.
Clearly, you either neglected to read this post, or you did not understand anything you read. So, here is my refutation of your points.
1. I am not a Republican. I am a Canadian who has never lived in the United States, and Canada does not have a "Republican Party."
2. I have no idea why you would want my church to have a scandal; as I said, my church literally has a female pastor! It is a wonderful congregation of genuine and pleasant people, so please do not wish bad things on them.
3. I do not have a wife, nor have I ever gotten married to anyone. Marriage is not even something I want to pursue for my life, as I am aromantic asexual and would much prefer to be single!
4. You are free to dislike Tim Keller as much as you want, but he was a well-respected Christian, and speaking ill of him in such a manner is incredibly distasteful.
5. I do not have any children, nor do I ever plan on having any.
6. Praying for the death of people you have never met and know literally nothing about is wildly messed-up.
Truly, you seem to me to be an incredibly troubled and angry individual. I hold no resentment toward you; rather, I greatly pity you. The reasons why you feel these things so strongly are unknown to me, but if it is in part because of negative experiences you have had in the church, I apologize on behalf of any self-proclaimed Christian who has hurt or abused you in any way. God loves you, no matter how much you want to deny that, and I hope and pray that you will one day come to have a living and vibrant faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
When our understanding is not in alignment with Scripture, it is not God who must change. People want their ears tickled. They want to hear what they agree with. We don't grow into godly people by continuing to live like the unrighteous.
Is change easy? No, admittedly not but difficulty doesn't give us a pass.
In my opinion, churches have absorbed unbiblical teaching because it is easier to surrender than to stick to the Word. They fear the world more than they fear God. Every time the church moves the stick, they open themselves up to even greater apostasy and then become a church that sees no problem using the Bible as a Super Bowl prop and punting it around their building. Yes, that did happen. If they bothered to listen to what Christ would say to them as their toe lifted His Word into the air, I wonder what He would have said? Better to fear Him than man.
Thank you for sharing! I grew up the opposite of you, believing that women cannot be pastors, but even more so, that women cannot even preach to a congregation, only to other women and children. I was raised in an Independent Baptist Church. Throughout my adult years, it's always felt weird to me when women would get up on stage to preach a sermon in front of a coed congregation. I've honestly tried to get myself to a place where I'm okay with women pastors, and no matter how I hard I try to get there, I cannot fully—for the same reasons got you to become a complementarian. The most I've ever been able to feel comfortable with is women speaking in church, but never pastoring an entire congregation. I am grateful for the words you've put to the inner voice that's been with me for so long.
Thank you for your very balanced post. I have been on the fence about this issue for a few years, and after reading what you wrote, I have a bit more clarity. My issue has always been that, no matter the intention, women have been limited in the church. Limited by men, not by God. The body of Christ is made up of men and women, and I believe it is important to see them working together in all areas of the church.
True. I do think it is essential for women to be involved in the church, as all Christians have something to offer.
I like that we have a priest accompanied by his wife, our presbytera. It's a good way to do things, so far as I can tell. That's my experience.
I enjoyed reading this. Lewis was also autistic, for what it's worth.
Thank you for this post! I grew up complementarian, shifted briefly to egalitarian, then went back to my roots after getting married. Funnily enough, establishing roles within your marriage in a way that honors God is crucial to both of you feeling fulfilled and in line with Gods created order.
I loooove Mike Winger! I’m glad to have found another fan.
I grew up in Orthodox Judaism -- definitely no female rabbis in my world! I became a Christian in my early 20s and attended Baptist, Anglican, and non-denominational churches for about the first five years, before my husband (now a pastor) and I settled into Lutheranism. All that to say, I think I have a fairly well-rounded perspective on the issue, and I appreciate your honesty and intellectual curiosity! My view has softened somewhat in the last six years or so, but a male pastor does feel more appropriate, for lack of a better word. In general, male authority figures click with me more than female authority figures (bosses, doctors, teachers, etc.). I'm not saying I'm right, but that's a lifelong way that I've interacted with the world.
I think, where I have landed pretty firmly, is this: whether women should or should not be pastors, it can't be because it isn't fair otherwise. For two reasons -- life isn't fair, so get over it. And, no one "gets" to be a pastor. God *calls* certain people to be pastors, and then He works them like hell to lay themselves down, over and over and over and over and over and over again, for their flocks. It's not, like, a cushy gig. (I say that as the wife of a pastor who heads a wonderful church full of wonderful people. It can be wonderful, but it isn't cushy.) I get frustrated when I run into this idea of we're all equally capable of being pastors, and if it weren't for those mean old guys, there'd be as many female pastors as male pastors. It isn't true. Most of us -- men and women -- aren't capable of being pastors, and an even smaller number of us would want to if we actually understood what went into it.
And two, whether a church is comfortable with a female pastor or not, it should be recognized that both positions have some precedent. Male-only pastors have gargantuan historical precedent and (at least in my understanding) more Biblical precedent, but, in this day and age, female pastors also have some historical precedent, and I have heard some compelling Biblical precedent too. But I've seen and heard some pretty nasty dealings from pastors and denominational bodies who are pro-female pastors towards those who aren't, and that isn't right. (It isn't everybody, and it certainly isn't right when it's going in the opposite direction, either, but I'm thinking about the situations that *I've* seen and heard.) The church we were in while my husband was in seminary, for example, was an old church whose members (all 30 of them) were in their 70s or above and had worshipped there, together, for most of their entire lives. When their pastor resigned and they needed a new one, they needed a governing body who understood their personality and could lead them to a pastor who was right for *them*. Instead, they got derisive comments and people who were just doing the bare minimum to appear helpful, because they had said they preferred a male pastor. You don't take a body of 30 people in the last years of their lives and shame them and ridicule them until they're bullied into a new opinion on an unresolved theological issue. That isn't the way to treat people. (Again, I know many egalitarians who would never do this, but I unfortunately also know many who would, and do.)
Not that you asked for my two cents...or my two dollars, as this turned into! But I do appreciate your thoughts and your references to other resources. Thank you for writing. And I echo your last footnote so fully! You hit the nail right on the head. An orthodox female pastor beats a heretical male pastor any day, and some issues are certainly bigger than others.
Thank you for sharing your perspective; I enjoyed reading it!
I read the title of your post and thought- there’s no way she went from believing women should not be pastors to believing they should be. I love resting in the biblical president. Plus women have enough work and leadership opportunities to serve the body without taking on men’s jobs.
Thanks for sharing your journey so thoroughly. I find it very interesting seeing someone move toward complementarianism, since the dominant trend seems to go the other way these days.
That said, I still wrestle with this entire debate. I can’t help but wonder:
If God designed men and women differently for leadership roles, why does Jesus never explicitly teach that?
Why does Paul commend women like Junia (called “outstanding among the apostles”) if eldership was a hard male-only line?
And why do we only apply these “clear readings” to women in leadership but ignore equally “clear readings” on slavery, head coverings, or polygamy?
I’m not saying these questions unravel your position, but they keep me from landing comfortably anywhere on this debate. I just find it telling that we’re still fighting over who gets to preach while Jesus was out there washing feet, feeding crowds, and challenging systems of power entirely.
Thanks again for sharing your perspective with humility.
Thank you for your cordial tone; I appreciate it. There are many things all Christians believe that Jesus never explicitly taught, such as the doctrine of the trinity or the hypostatic union, and the fact that he never explained all of these things in detail does not mean they are false. Jesus came to save the lost and establish the kingdom of God on Earth, not to give a systematic theology.
As for the whole slavery objection, I do acknowledge that the Bible permitted slavery for a time because of the hardness of human hearts. Ultimately, though, it was the Bible's idea of creation in the image of God that planted the seeds for the abolition of slavery, and the widespread adoption of Christian values are why people like you and I would say that slavery is wrong.
It is debated whether or not Junia was actually an apostle, as the phrase could also be translated as "well known to the apostles," and I do not take a position on the question of if she was an apostle or not. Even if she was, I still do not think that would outweigh the evidence on the complementarian side.
I strongly believe that preaching the gospel is of a much higher priority than this whole debate, and I acknowledge that it is a minor issue, hence why I am willing to attend a church with a female pastor. Thank you once again for your thoughtful and respectful comment!
I hear what you’re saying about Jesus not giving systematic theology, However, I do find it's interesting how the things he did directly teach on... (love your enemies, forgive endlessly, care for the poor) often get overshadowed by debates on topics he never mentioned.
With that beint said, I do appreciate your honesty about Junia and the translation debate. To me, it still feels like one of those areas where tradition leans heavily in one direction despite textual ambiguity.
And I get your slavery point, but it also highlights how we’ve reinterpreted or moved beyond certain biblical permissions over time. for instance...how do we know which passages are cultural accommodations and which are eternal principles? Especially when the fruit of egalitarianism seems to be women flourishing in ministry, while strict complementarianism often ends up supressing gifts that could serve the community.
I agree, though...the gospel and how Christians live it out matters far more than who gets to hold the mic. Still, it’s good to have these conversations. Keeps us all humble. Thanks again for engaging with me. .
This is what I really dislike about Protestantism- you are essentially forced to treat Christianity the way you treat political beliefs, taking every individual issue and then researching it on your own to decide what you believe about it- then you choose a denomination that most closely aligns with what you’ve come to believe. Bizarre to me that people see this as in any way conducive to people having a healthy life in the faith
I'd rather go with what I believe the Bible says than be forced to accept whatever an infallible magisterium says.
In other words, you become your own magisterium.
I’m pretty sure the Bible has a thing or two to say about leaning on one’s own understanding.
And I would also like to point out the practical results of “Sola Scriptura”, that you have Protestants who all believe that their beliefs are “Biblical” and none of them can agree with each other, sometimes disagreeing over the most core tenets of our faith. If we are known by our fruits, the Protestant approach yields countless heresies (since even if you are Protestant, you disagree with most other Protestants of different shades), and never-ending division. Our God is not a God of confusion, remember
I was raised evangelical and one of the best pastors I met was a women. I’m
Catholic now. But I will
Never understand why Protestant are against women pastors if what pastors do in Protestantism Is preach. Women are called to preach the same as men.
Pastors do more than just preach. They administer the sacraments and are spiritual leaders for the congregation and broader community. Sure, women are capable of doing all the things pastors are required to do, but I believe being a pastor is a very special calling reserved for specific men.
Ordaining women is not canonical. It’s not a matter of opinions or debate.
Well, it's lucky that you weren't on the spot to preach this view to the Apostle of the Apostles - Mary Magdalene. On that day in the garden. Or she might not have come forth publicly with her testimony of the Resurrection. What a horrific loss to the world that silence would have been.
The Pagans, by the way, always mocked the first Christians for this: "You listen to your women, and you believe what they say!"
They found that morally contemptible and spiritually corrupt.
Much of what passes for Christian piety today might be more Pagan in origin and content.
Just a thought.
Or, as a Catholic priest once said to me: "St. Paul is not God."
Jesus is, though.
He sent a woman from his very grave to speak to the men about his victory over death. The fact stands.
I never said that women could not publicly give a testimony! Obviously, Mary Magdalene was incredibly important, and nothing I say here diminishes that fact.
Clearly, you either neglected to read this post, or you did not understand anything you read. So, here is my refutation of your points.
1. I am not a Republican. I am a Canadian who has never lived in the United States, and Canada does not have a "Republican Party."
2. I have no idea why you would want my church to have a scandal; as I said, my church literally has a female pastor! It is a wonderful congregation of genuine and pleasant people, so please do not wish bad things on them.
3. I do not have a wife, nor have I ever gotten married to anyone. Marriage is not even something I want to pursue for my life, as I am aromantic asexual and would much prefer to be single!
4. You are free to dislike Tim Keller as much as you want, but he was a well-respected Christian, and speaking ill of him in such a manner is incredibly distasteful.
5. I do not have any children, nor do I ever plan on having any.
6. Praying for the death of people you have never met and know literally nothing about is wildly messed-up.
Truly, you seem to me to be an incredibly troubled and angry individual. I hold no resentment toward you; rather, I greatly pity you. The reasons why you feel these things so strongly are unknown to me, but if it is in part because of negative experiences you have had in the church, I apologize on behalf of any self-proclaimed Christian who has hurt or abused you in any way. God loves you, no matter how much you want to deny that, and I hope and pray that you will one day come to have a living and vibrant faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
I have no idea who those people are, nor do I care. I also am not a Trump supporter.