Updated 12:47 pm.EST, Sun November 22, 2009

Opinion|Sun, Sep. 21 2008 12:47 PM EDT

Baptists, the Bible, and Women

By Richard Land|Christian Post Guest Columnist

In the wake of Gov. Sarah Palin’s selection as the Republican vice presidential nominee, there has been considerable “speculation” about why Evangelicals in general, and Southern Baptists in particular, have responded so favorably to her candidacy. As Sally Quinn reasoned in the Washington Post, if Southern Baptists are opposed to a woman being the pastor of a local church, why would they support a woman as vice president? Aren’t they being inconsistent, if not hypocritical?

Now we have David Gushee (a self-identified “moderate evangelical”) discussing the “Palin Predicament,” which he described as “how can the theological vision that women are subservient to men jibe with a Palin vice presidency?” (USA Today, 9/15/08).

As a Southern Baptist, a conservative Evangelical, and a member of both the committee that formulated the Southern Baptists’ confessional statement on “The Family” in 1998 and the committee that revised the denomination’s confession of faith (The Baptist Faith and Message) in 2000, I feel compelled to respond.

First, the Southern Baptist confessional statement does not state that “women are to be subservient to men.” Southern Baptists are clear that men and women “are of equal worth before God, since both are created in God’s image.”

Most Southern Baptists do believe that while husband and wife are equal, that in a marriage the wife is to voluntarily place herself under “the servant leadership of her husband.” They also believe that “While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.”

Why do they believe these things? They believe this is the clear teaching of the New Testament, which they take as authoritative for faith and practice in the home and the church.

In the Apostle Paul’s letter to the Ephesian Christians, he states clearly that husbands are to love their wives with the sacrificial love with which Jesus loved the church and gave Himself for it (Eph. 5:25). This was a radical doctrinal teaching in a first-century world where women had virtually no rights. In fact, one of the most extraordinary things about the New Testament is the prominent role accorded to women in its pages. As stated earlier, the Apostle Paul tells the wife to place herself under her husband’s servant leadership.

Similarly, in the first of his pastoral epistles (how things are to be done in the church) to Timothy, his son in the faith, the Apostle Paul instructs that “a woman is not to usurp authority over the man (1 Tim. 2:12). As have adherents to many other Christian faith traditions, most Southern Baptists have understood this to mean that women are not to be pastors of local churches, since the pastoral office is a position of authority. Consequently, the Baptist Faith and Message declares that “While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.”

For Baptists, who make a strict distinction between the local church congregation and other denominational or parachurch ministries, such a statement would not preclude women “gifted for service” from serving in leadership positions in the denomination as opposed to the local church. For example, the Washington office of the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission was led for several years by a woman who served ably in that role. Continue »

Pages: 12
Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
  • dll »
    Tue Nov 18, 2008 7:33 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    This article makes absolutely 0 sence. If a man is a pastor of a church and his wife is the president of the country, she is directly in authority over him and every other man in that county.

  • Mon Oct 06, 2008 6:25 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    It seems to me that God declared to Isreal that when the men of the nation become effeminate and women ruled, the nation had already descended to a level of worthlessness. If woman is the weaker of the gernders and was in the transgression, so that she needs to be under a man, she doesn't need to be leading the man of the home, or men of a nation. I don't remember reading where the Apostle Paul ever told women that they were to voluntarily subject themselves to their husbands. If so, then, husbands you can voluntarily love your wife or not. It's up to you. Also, if Sarah Palin becomes VP, which man will she be subject to, McCain or her husband? To whom does she give her allegiance? Who's helpmate is she? If a woman is qualified to rule a nation of men, then, don't tell any woman that she is not qualified to rule her house.

  • Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:20 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "I wonder, seriously, if Richard Land would be writing this if Hillary Clinton were the presidential nominee? "

    Yep. He's got a track record....

  • Tue Sep 23, 2008 9:15 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    chicago24,

    How does one take liberties with the Scripture if they are a biblical literalist? Wouldn't it be just the opposite? Land is a literalist in so far as he allows the Scripture to be his guide. This would be identified as practicing a good hermeneutic. He conforms to it, he doesn't force it to conform to him.

  • Mon Sep 22, 2008 8:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    chicago,please tell me what is the teaching that should be taken literally that he has violated?

  • Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:12 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    chicago24: So would you like to share your opinion on women in leadership?

  • Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:00 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    I wonder, seriously, if Richard Land would be writing this if Hillary Clinton were the presidential nominee?

    It seems all to often that biblical literalists feel free to take liberties with literal meanings of scriptures when it suits them, yet cling to literal meanings wh it doesn't

  • Sun Sep 21, 2008 6:19 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Dr. Land does a great job in explaining where a majority of Southern Baptists stand on the role of women in the local church. And because we say that women should not hold roles which would give them automatic headship over men, we are called sexists and chauvinists even though we have women in key roles of leadership throughout our convention and in many state conventions as well as our local churches. And in fact the only two positons that are impacted by this in the local church are the role of Senior Pastor and in churches where Deacons are seen more as Elders or a combination of Deacon and Elder they are not allowed to hold the role of Deacon.

  • Sun Sep 21, 2008 4:04 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Dr Land - Thank you for your word in time. This is a sober, Biblical and balanced discussion of the issue of women in the church and elsewhere. God bless you!

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Gifts
  • Health
  • DVD
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links