Can Women Pastor ?

[Sister Alvear]

It has often been pointed out by Greek scholars that Paul's practice of mentioning Prisca's name before that of her husband emphasizes that she was the more prominent leader. Just as today we would address a letter "Mr. and Mrs.," so in ancient times, the husband's name was customarily given before the wife's. Prisca must have been an outstanding Christian worker for Paul to have reversed custom by honoring her in this way.

The brief, personal letter II John is addressed to a church and its pastor, a woman with whom the apostle John evidently had warm ties. John opens the letter, "to the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth. . ." "Children" was a term of endearment that John used for Christian believers. (I. John 2:1, 12, 18, 28). "Truth" was a term John often used in his writings for the revelation of Jesus (See, for example, John 1:14, 17; 8:32; 16:13; I. John 1:6-8; 2:4, 21; 3:19; II. John 4; III John 3-4.) The word "elect," while it usually refers to believers as chosen by God for salvation, can also be used to refer to the ordained clergy. The second-century church father Clement of Alexandria does this repeatedly in his Stromata book 6, chapter 13. John's use of these terms plus the general tone of the letter with its pastoral direction as in verse 10 demonstrate that II John was written to a Christian church, not just a family.

While scholars agree that II John was addressed to a church, most balk at the idea that the "elect lady" was its pastor. They try to get around this by spiritualizing these terms, saying that they are metaphors for the church. This approach ignores the universal Greek practice of naming a letter's recipient(s) at the beginning. Without an addressee or location, it cannot explain to whom or how the letter was delivered. It also ignores the plain sense of the text. Additionally, its logic is inconsistent because if both the "lady" and the "children" stand for the church, how could the letter be written to "the church and the church?" If so, to which church is it written? No one writes a letter to a symbol but to a real person or group.

Interestingly, both of the Greek words in II John 1 which are ordinarily translated into English as "elect" and "lady" were also used in the first century as women's names just as today we might name a girl "grace" or "Missy." A number of Greek manuscripts of II John 1 use initial capitals for either or both of these words, indicating personal usage.

In the second century, Clement of Alexandria identified the "elect lady" as a specific individual. He wrote that II John "was written to virgins. It was written to a Babylonian lady by name Electa." (Clement of Alexandria, Fragments from Cassiodorus IV, 1-2 tr. by William Wilson, Fathers of the Second Century, A. Cleveland Coxe, ed., New York: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1885, vol. 2, p. 576.) Although he does not elaborate, it appears from this statement that Clement had heard of this woman and knew that she was the spiritual leader of virgins. Why he called her Babylonian is a mystery since Babylon had ceased to be a nation many generations earlier. Perhaps she was of Babylonian descent or came from pagan Rome, which Christians often derisively called "Babylon." Electa may have been the leader of an order of Christian virgins, or Clement may have assumed that her followers were virgins because of the growing emphasis on asceticism in his day, a half-century after the letter was written.

During the early and medieval periods of church history, it was very common for devout women to dedicate their homes for Christian worship and to attract other similarly minded people to join them. Usually, the converts who came under the pastoral care of such women were household members or women colleagues. In Electa's case, if Clement is correct, they were dedicated Christian virgins who constituted one of the order of the clergy in the ancient church along with widows.

This brief letter closes by conveying a greeting from the church of another woman-"the children of your elect sister greet you." This woman was evidently their pastor since John again uses the term "children" which in his writings means Christians under the care of a spiritual leader. Also, he calls her "elect" which either means ordained or chosen.

An interesting possibility exists that these two women pastors were natural sisters as well as sisters in the Lord and in His work. We know from the late third and early fourth century church historian Eusebius that in his later years, the apostle Philip and two of his four daughters who were prophetesses lived at Hierapolis in Asia. A third daughter lived in Ephesus, the city where John preached. Unlike the other apostles who were martyred decades earlier, the apostle John lived to a very old age, possibly over 100 years. Close ties existed between John, the church at Ephesus, and Philip and his daughters. It is possible that after Philip's death, John wrote his second epistle to one of Philip's surviving daughters still ministering at Hierapolis (the "elect lady" or "Lady Electa") and conveyed greetings from her sister's church at Ephesus. If so, we have in II John evidence that these daughters of Philip established and led Christian communities.

The fourth-century church historian Eusebius quotes a letter written by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, to Victor, bishop of Rome between 189-198 AD. "For in Asia, also, mighty luminaries have fallen asleep, which shall rise again at the last day, at the appearance of our Lord, when he shall come with glory from heaven, and shall gather again all the saints. Philip, one of the twelve apostles who sleeps in Hierapolis, and his two aged virgin daughters. Another of his daughters, who lived in the Holy Spirit, rests at Ephesus. Moreover, John, that rested on the bosom of our Lord, who was a priest that bore the sacerdotal plate, and martyr and teacher, he also rests at Ephesus." Quite possibly, the "elect lady" and her "elect sister" of II John are two of these "mighty luminaries" who "lived in the Holy Spirit" and whom Polycrates and Eusebius commemorated. (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book III, chapter. xxxi tr. by Christian Frederick Cruse, Grand Rapids, MI; Baker Book House, 1955, p. 116.)

[simplyme]

The fact that some women INSIST on being called pastor or that their work should be called pastoring, whether alone or with a husband, leads ME to believe that it is an "ego" thing., seriously, what else could it? Why bicker over a word? What difference should it make, as long as the LORD's work is being done, huh? Seems to me that the bible concept of 'not letting the right hand see what the left hand is doing' is a more humble attitude, than the desire of being seen by all as "someONE of great notoreity".
Maybe 'cause they perceive power in a word, a title? most women favoring being considerd a leader in ministry, from what i've observed on forums, insist on being on an EQUAL ground with men, its that sinister spirit of the world first spread by women (used not by GOD) of 'the world' (nonchristian) which has now leaked into the corporate church world., as far as organizations go anyway.
Not trying to be rude, although some may take it that way, I'm sorry if thats the case, yet..this is just my OPINION based on years of observation., and I think its a good question, btw : WHY BICKER over titles?

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by simplyme

The fact that some women INSIST on being called pastor or that their work should be called pastoring, whether alone or with a husband, leads ME to believe that it is an "ego" thing., seriously, what else could it? Why bicker over a word? What difference should it make, as long as the LORD's work is being done, huh? Seems to me that the bible concept of 'not letting the right hand see what the left hand is doing' is a more humble attitude, than the desire of being seen by all as "someONE of great notoreity".
Maybe 'cause they perceive power in a word, a title? most women favoring being considerd a leader in ministry, from what i've observed on forums, insist on being on an EQUAL ground with men, its that sinister spirit of the world first spread by women (used not by GOD) of 'the world' (nonchristian) which has now leaked into the corporate church world., as far as organizations go anyway.
Not trying to be rude, although some may take it that way, I'm sorry if thats the case, yet..this is just my OPINION based on years of observation., and I think its a good question, btw : WHY BICKER over titles?

Not trying to sound chauvinstic or insulting rather just using a Biblical term.
How can the "weaker vessel" lead or preside over that vessel it is weaker than?

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

were the men only helpers too? It is the same word in the original.

Were the men also in the 5-fold ministry? If so, pls. demostrate this from Scripture:__________? Besides, Paul had already explicitly forbid women from teaching/preaching in the church [I Tim. 2:11-15, I Cor. 14:34.....which you just refuse to deal w/ other than copy & paste].

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

LET me ask you this when does a home bible study cease to be a home bible study when according to you she can teach a home bible study...

All I said was that your great example of Priscilla & Aquila w/ Apollos was nothing more than a HUSBAND & WIFE together [not her alone w/ another man??] giving a home Bible study. I Tim. 2 is dealing w/ a public assembly of saints, not soul winning.....for probably the 10th time now [at least].
Many places inour world do not have buildings churches are their homes. I have given home bible studies and watched home bible studies grow into big numbers.
Remember church buildings were only built some 200 years after Acts...everyone met in homes, on river banks or where ever...

And?????? What's your point? I know this.

Dear Brother I ask you if women never worked and by workedI mean helping spread the gospl why oh why were they (church fathers) Not my church fathers but you know what I mean...so concerned with removing women from ministry...they had to be doing it to be removed from it.

2nd century appeals outside of the text do not explain I Tim. 2:11-15, I Cor. 14:34.

You do not seem to like (?) history however if you would take the time to read you will find history is full of writings about women who carried the gospel...such as Holy Prisca who preached....

Wrong. I enjoy history, but I do not put it on the same authoritative level as God-breathed Scripture. "Let God be true......"

I AM IN NO WAY talking about women trying to remove men and horrible things we may see I am talking about holy women of God such as mother Holmes that has been a solid rock in the gospel for as long as I can remember.

I certainly respect her consecrated lifestyle [as well as yours], but she is in violation of I Tim. 2:11-15 & I Cor. 14:34 if she gets up to "teach/preach" to the church. "God respecteth no man's person."

I grew up around her and never on time did I ever see her disrespect Elder AO Holmes or any man...she knew her place and worked faithfully all these years.

I understand when men speak of women that do not know their place however women that are holy know how to behave.

I have spoke in conferences and even preached in confernces here in America I really don't like to but if a pastor asks me to do it and Bro, Alvear feels ok about it I never refuse for I lift up the cause of missions and the needs of the world. I think a woman can express herself and her burden in the presence of men. That does not mean she is trying to hit them over the head with the Bible...I know a few women in the past that were quite outspoke and out of their place but that can be a man too...I have seen a lot of men that were out of their place.

I remember being in a certain place when dear Sister Rita Dawson got up to speak and some of the men went outside to play ball...my husband thought it rude and disrespectful. My husband looked at me and said, she knows more about the Bible than all those men combined...

Scripture reference please:_______? I would've been right there w/ them, since she was in flagrant violation of biblical commands. Strange how she can outright violate the clear language of the Bible, & yet when others resist this disobedience....they suddenly don't "know their Bible"???? Sorry, I see it just the opposite, she would be the one who apparently doesn't "know her Bible."

I think the first church all listened to each other...some had a song, some a gift to use...however all were subject to God, the pastor and one another...

While you're quoting from I Cor., why not quote Chp. 14:34....then actually obey it!

[rdp]

Originally Posted by simplyme

Important clarification, bravo brother! So simple to understand if one
really wants to.

Right! I honestly don't see what in the world they cannot see about this. Blessings Sis.................

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

While the New Testament does not tell us specifically what pastors did, we do know that both men and women provided spiritual leadership for churches which met in their homes. In the early church, almost all Christian meetings were held in private homes. Among these house-church pastors was Mary, the mother of John Mark, who later became a missionary with the apostles Paul and Barnabas. It was to her house church that Peter came in Acts 12:12 after an angelic visitor set him free from prison. The Bible says that many had assembled there and were praying, no doubt petitioning God for Peter's release. Their prayers were answered!

Another house church leader was Chloe, according to I. Corinthians 1:11. In that passage, Paul relates that "some of Chloe's household " had reported that there was strife among the Corinthian Christians. Those Chloe sent with this message to Paul were probably Christians who were members of her house church. They may have been relatives or household servants, or they may have been Christians who lives in the area and gathered at her home for worship. These believers would have come under Chloe's spiritual guidance, care and protection. But Chloe's influence extended beyond her own flock. Evidently, she had sent a deputation from her house church to Paul, who knew her or knew of her, to inform him of the need for correction in the Corinthian church. She was a trusted leader and source of reliable information for the apostle Paul.

Acts 16:14-15, 40 tells us about Lydia, Paul's first European convert to Jesus, who offered Paul hospitality in her home. Scripture relates that when Lydia was converted, her entire household was baptized and that her home became the first meeting place for European Christians. Lydia was a business woman who traded in valuable, dyed garments. The fact that Scripture mentions no husband or father indicates the high prominence of this woman. Since first-century Greek and Roman women were almost always under the legal guardianship of a husband or father, Lydia may well have been a wealthy widow or only daughter who inherited her parents' estate. Thus, she became the head of her own household. She either managed the family business or developed a business of her own after her husband's or father's death.

The Book of Acts says that Lydia's entire household was baptized upon her conversion to Christ. This follows the custom of ancient Roman families. Under paganism, household gods were believed to protect and help the family and its enterprises. Thus, it was the duty of members of these households, relatives, slaves, and their families to worship the gods adopted by the head of the household.

Roman households were often large since almost all businesses were home-based before the industrial age. Those who worked for Lydia in her business, and possibly others engaging in the trade who belonged to the dye-makers guild, would have been among her converts. By virtue of her position as head of household, Lydia had the opportunity and responsibility to lead all of its members to Christ and then to establish and lead them in the faith. This put her in a similar position to the modern-day pastor. To fulfill part of this responsibility, Lydia invited Paul to come and preach in her home.

Paul and Silas established their gospel mission headquarters in Lydia's house and no doubt preached there regularly. After their release from prison, Scripture tells us that they returned to Lydia's and, having met with the brethren, exhorted them. This may have been the first church planted on European soil, and its pastor was a woman.

Another New Testament woman who led a house church was Nympha (Col. 4:15). Paul sent greetings to her and to the church at her house. Some modern scholars try to get around this by saying that Nympha was "just" the hostess, not the pastor. If that were so, who did pastor her house church, and why would Paul so rudely fail to greet the pastor as well as the hostess?



Another woman house-pastor was Prisca, or Priscilla, as Paul often affectionately calls her. Romans 16:3-5 expresses his gratitude to her and her husband, Aquilla. This couple had a team ministry and worked with Paul in planting the gospel in Rome, Corinth and Ephesus. In his Roman letter, Paul sends greetings to the church that met in their house, which they pastored together.

In a hurry, but where does the actual texts referred to above ever ONCE state that these women were "preachers/teachers/pastors":_________? Pure speculation unstated by the text itself. Lydia was simply baptized, & then offered Paul housing. It's plumb silly to suggest that this qualifies her as now in the 5-fold ministry! Sheesh.........

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Bowas

Not trying to sound chauvinstic or insulting rather just using a Biblical term.
How can the "weaker vessel" lead or preside over that vessel it is weaker than?

Good points by both SimplyMe & Bowas, but really, we're probably just wasting our time. No matter how much Scripture/word definitions/lack of examples, etc. you give them, they just plod along like it's not there.

This is because it's what they WANT to believe, instead of allowing the evidence/text define their beliefs. This is a sad plight in Pentecost.

Jeffrey does seem to be in honest pursuit of truth though, to be fair.

God Bless you!

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

It has often been pointed out by Greek scholars that Paul's practice of mentioning Prisca's name before that of her husband emphasizes that she was the more prominent leader. Just as today we would address a letter "Mr. and Mrs.," so in ancient times, the husband's name was customarily given before the wife's. Prisca must have been an outstanding Christian worker for Paul to have reversed custom by honoring her in this way.

The brief, personal letter II John is addressed to a church and its pastor, a woman with whom the apostle John evidently had warm ties. John opens the letter, "to the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth. . ." "Children" was a term of endearment that John used for Christian believers. (I. John 2:1, 12, 18, 28). "Truth" was a term John often used in his writings for the revelation of Jesus (See, for example, John 1:14, 17; 8:32; 16:13; I. John 1:6-8; 2:4, 21; 3:19; II. John 4; III John 3-4.) The word "elect," while it usually refers to believers as chosen by God for salvation, can also be used to refer to the ordained clergy. The second-century church father Clement of Alexandria does this repeatedly in his Stromata book 6, chapter 13. John's use of these terms plus the general tone of the letter with its pastoral direction as in verse 10 demonstrate that II John was written to a Christian church, not just a family.

While scholars agree that II John was addressed to a church, most balk at the idea that the "elect lady" was its pastor. They try to get around this by spiritualizing these terms, saying that they are metaphors for the church. This approach ignores the universal Greek practice of naming a letter's recipient(s) at the beginning. Without an addressee or location, it cannot explain to whom or how the letter was delivered. It also ignores the plain sense of the text. Additionally, its logic is inconsistent because if both the "lady" and the "children" stand for the church, how could the letter be written to "the church and the church?" If so, to which church is it written? No one writes a letter to a symbol but to a real person or group.

Interestingly, both of the Greek words in II John 1 which are ordinarily translated into English as "elect" and "lady" were also used in the first century as women's names just as today we might name a girl "grace" or "Missy." A number of Greek manuscripts of II John 1 use initial capitals for either or both of these words, indicating personal usage.

In the second century, Clement of Alexandria identified the "elect lady" as a specific individual. He wrote that II John "was written to virgins. It was written to a Babylonian lady by name Electa." (Clement of Alexandria, Fragments from Cassiodorus IV, 1-2 tr. by William Wilson, Fathers of the Second Century, A. Cleveland Coxe, ed., New York: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1885, vol. 2, p. 576.) Although he does not elaborate, it appears from this statement that Clement had heard of this woman and knew that she was the spiritual leader of virgins. Why he called her Babylonian is a mystery since Babylon had ceased to be a nation many generations earlier. Perhaps she was of Babylonian descent or came from pagan Rome, which Christians often derisively called "Babylon." Electa may have been the leader of an order of Christian virgins, or Clement may have assumed that her followers were virgins because of the growing emphasis on asceticism in his day, a half-century after the letter was written.

During the early and medieval periods of church history, it was very common for devout women to dedicate their homes for Christian worship and to attract other similarly minded people to join them. Usually, the converts who came under the pastoral care of such women were household members or women colleagues. In Electa's case, if Clement is correct, they were dedicated Christian virgins who constituted one of the order of the clergy in the ancient church along with widows.

This brief letter closes by conveying a greeting from the church of another woman-"the children of your elect sister greet you." This woman was evidently their pastor since John again uses the term "children" which in his writings means Christians under the care of a spiritual leader. Also, he calls her "elect" which either means ordained or chosen.

An interesting possibility exists that these two women pastors were natural sisters as well as sisters in the Lord and in His work. We know from the late third and early fourth century church historian Eusebius that in his later years, the apostle Philip and two of his four daughters who were prophetesses lived at Hierapolis in Asia. A third daughter lived in Ephesus, the city where John preached. Unlike the other apostles who were martyred decades earlier, the apostle John lived to a very old age, possibly over 100 years. Close ties existed between John, the church at Ephesus, and Philip and his daughters. It is possible that after Philip's death, John wrote his second epistle to one of Philip's surviving daughters still ministering at Hierapolis (the "elect lady" or "Lady Electa") and conveyed greetings from her sister's church at Ephesus. If so, we have in II John evidence that these daughters of Philip established and led Christian communities.

The fourth-century church historian Eusebius quotes a letter written by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, to Victor, bishop of Rome between 189-198 AD. "For in Asia, also, mighty luminaries have fallen asleep, which shall rise again at the last day, at the appearance of our Lord, when he shall come with glory from heaven, and shall gather again all the saints. Philip, one of the twelve apostles who sleeps in Hierapolis, and his two aged virgin daughters. Another of his daughters, who lived in the Holy Spirit, rests at Ephesus. Moreover, John, that rested on the bosom of our Lord, who was a priest that bore the sacerdotal plate, and martyr and teacher, he also rests at Ephesus." Quite possibly, the "elect lady" and her "elect sister" of II John are two of these "mighty luminaries" who "lived in the Holy Spirit" and whom Polycrates and Eusebius commemorated. (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book III, chapter. xxxi tr. by Christian Frederick Cruse, Grand Rapids, MI; Baker Book House, 1955, p. 116.)

I have dealt w/ most of these hypothesis several times now. Just because a letter is addressed to a lady [if that's the case], does not mean she's in the NT 5-fold mimistry. The epistles were addressed to churches, does that mean the entire church is now considered in the 5-fold ministry?????? Eusibius wrote around 315-350 A.D. How in the world can you appeal to a writing almost 300 yrs. after the epistles were written & say, "See, God believes in women preachers"???????????????? What does this have to do I Tim. 2:11-15 or I Cor. 14:34. I guess some will just ignore these verses until Jesus comes???? Sad, very sad.

[rdp]

Blessings to all, but I'm probably not going to waste much more time here. You can send me a pvt. email if you want to contact me.

Blessings to all, may look in periodically.

Shalom!