All Comments for: Pastor Charged with Criminal Discrimination | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2007 > November (Web-only)

Christianity Today, November (Web-only), 2007 |

Pastor Charged with Criminal Discrimination

Finland's courts step in after visiting pastor refuses to lead service with a woman.

Sarah Pulliam | posted 11/01/2007 09:13AM

A Finnish district court prosecutor recently charged a member of the Finland state church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland (ELCF), with criminal discrimination for refusing to work with a female ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 25 of 29 comments.

Page: 1 2

Show All

David

Posted: November 05, 2007 10:39 AM

Cathy and Claire are partially right. As to the availability of God's grace, therefore salvation, there is no difference whether you are male or female, slave or free, etc. Unfortunately (for their perspective) that is not the focus of the matter at hand. Quite simply it is whether or not the lady in question can pass the physical for a pastor (1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:6)...which, it seems, she cannot.

Jim	Posted: November 04, 2007 11:35 PM


I simply dont understand the concept of a state church. The Bible tells us not to take our grievances into the worldly arena. I pray that the United States government never takes it upon itself to interfere in issues related to the church and it's interpretation of the Bible. Whether you agree with female pastors or not, the biggest issue here is Government interference in church issues.

Pastor Di

Posted: November 03, 2007 7:01 PM


A particular female Pastor? Was it personality incompatibility? I am grateful to be serving in a church that recognises that the Holy Spirit does not gift according to gender. In 3 churches I have enjoyed recognition as one of the Team and respected for one who has God's call on her life.

Claire Jones

Posted: November 03, 2007 1:23 PM


I agree with Gilbert, and the first comment. It shouldn't be a matter for the state and he has as much right to refuse.. I believe it's his loss and in time if he looks for the Lord's guidance in these matters he could change his mind down the road, because in Him, there is neither male or female, and the gentleman is straining at a gnat....Love in Christ...

Olaf Raasch

Posted: November 02, 2007 9:51 PM

These leaders are fair behind the times. Of course you can have female ministers and there are plenty examples in the New Testament. What needs to be observed, however, that this fem. minister is subject to the minister in charge and all is well. This is accepted by most Spirit filled ministers in the Lords church. Real problems do arise with homosexual ministers. Nobody can lead the church of God with this baggage. And the government can not legilate against a bible trained conscience. No court in the west would uphold a forced violation of ones conscience.

Matt	Posted: November 02, 2007 11:38 AM

In response to Brett: since when did salvation hinge on being anti-feminist? When did Christ ever say that putting a woman in leadership is grounds for eternal damnation? And how does this article promote feminism? It seems to me that it's just reporting on what's going on in the church. And you couldn't have found a more loving and less childish way of criticizing Christianity Today's response to feminism than by calling it Christianity Astray? Besides, at various points the New Testament makes references to women prophets. Then, in 1 Cor 12:28, Paul states that God appointed "first apostles, second prophets, third teachers...." If there was a female prophet, appointed second before teachers, then why shouldn't a woman also be allowed to a teacher/pastor?

ray	Posted: November 02, 2007 10:08 AM

If only churches would remain with the truth of God's Word instead of importing the personal opinions of folks, there would not be such problems in the church. However, man seeks to overturn the truth of God's Word, which is sin. When God says, through his apostle Paul, that women are not to be in authority over man, man sinfully tries to twist that prohibition to suit his own sinful desire for autonomy. God's Word, however does not respect any person. Jesus says, "Thy Word is Truth" and man, to his shame, wants to turn God's Word into a lie. To be sure, Satan is behind such twisted of Scripture, but the answer is to turn to the Lord in repentance and accept God's Word as it stands.

David Roth

Posted: November 02, 2007 8:49 AM


The Poll is faulty to begin with - the choice of NO because the Scriptures prohibit women in pastoral ministry isn't even given consideration.

Craig

Posted: November 02, 2007 8:34 AM

Such a decision by a pastor is repugnant to the revelation of God's self through the Incarnation. God became flesh for us without repulsion or discrimination with regard to the human condition. It is the very human condition that Christ redeems. This is meant for all, not just male pastors in Finland. If a person is baptized, then they are a part of the royal priesthood of all believers. As such, essentials and accidents of an individual should not be barriers to ordination or a reason for an all out refusal to work with a person of a different gender, strictly speaking from agapeist ethical understandings of the moral Christian life, both public and private.

Matthew Lucas Twain

Posted: November 02, 2007 4:13 AM

How can you justify "I understand concept X in ways a, b and c. Person 2 understands concept X in ways b, c and g, but not a. However, under inspection of exhibits J5 and G3 I conclude the concepts f6 and k9, which I further understand as supportive of the validity of my understanding of concept X, whilst obviously invalidating support of Person 2's understandings." ? I am only curious how you have the ability to "understand" (or subjectively interpret meaning from words, which is what you do, by my "understanding", of how a human mind comprehends reality) a concept in a way that another person may not, and claim you have the correct understanding. Given that: a person can understand a concept in a way that might be different than another person's, and that this is consistently related to subjective interpretation, how can you have confidence in your specific Dogma and mythologies, when such a wide variety exist in the past and present? I only ask because I'm not certain of my beliefs

Fred	Posted: November 01, 2007 10:11 PM

If a pastor does not agree with the policies of the organizition he serves in than he has no business teaching and preaching in it. He should find himselve an organization he can agree with or find himself another job. I don't know why Jesus didn't pick any women apostles but to exclude women from serving as pastors is simply another form of legalism. God has no problem in preventing women from preaching if that is what He wants to do, why don't we leave it up to him.

The G

Posted: November 01, 2007 9:24 PM

If your church is registered with the state and is a 5013c Not For Profit, then you are a state church. When you signed up for that you placed yourself under their control. Now you can be sued. Before you couldn't. One day this will happen to you. If a church is called to court they MUST not show up. If they do, they acknowledge the state has jurisdiction over them and the court will proceed. But if you don't show up, you have the constitution behind you. Churches need to become unincorporated now. They cannot be taxed unincorporated. Wake up Church! If anything the church needs to call the government in to hear her charges, against it!

Jeff Russell

Posted: November 01, 2007 9:03 PM

Ask yourself this question. If we accept the tenant of John 1m then we can rightly assume that God knew his word would forever stand. We can also rightly assume that by Christ's example we would know how to make GOdly decisions. O.K.... we know that the Word of God is not conformed to the culuitre, that the Word of God transcends the culture and seeks to transform it. Operating under the above paradigm, Jesus knew full well his life and teachings would last for eternity. Yet, he picked 12 male apostles. He knew the future ramifications for all future generations in the formation of the church on earth. He had every opportunity to select a woman (or 2) but did not. Now remember, you can't use the culture of the times as an excuse because if you make the statment that God's Word is sensitive to the needs and morays of the culture, then every perversion practiced in today's society should be the foundation on which we determine how Biblical doctrine should be understood.

Carmen

Posted: November 01, 2007 6:32 PM

Another option was needed on the poll. (It's difficult to cover everything with yes/no answers.) These are disagreements that should be handled within the church, not taken to the courts. Regardless of whether one considers that the male pastor is right or wrong in his belief, love and grace should rule over both the moment and the situation at large. An anti-discrimination victory may be a personal coup but it will hurt the church at large. It would be better to suffer personal embarrassment (on either side) in a single incident than turn this into a national circus.

Gilbert

Posted: November 01, 2007 5:27 PM


If SHE is FREE to share then HE is FREE to refuse (end of story)

Irene Voysey

Posted: November 01, 2007 3:35 PM

The Lord Jesus NEVER humiliated, embarrassed, demeaned, shamed or emotionally hurt a woman. To do so in His church and in His name is to deny His boundless grace and His unbiased love. The apostle Paul said, `Follow my example as I follow the example of Christ.' (1 Cor.11.1) We understand Paul's meaning when we truly understand the love and grace of Jesus in an era when the demeaning of women didn't rate a single headline.

Carl	Posted: November 01, 2007 2:25 PM

God has gifted all believers with ministry gifts. I do believe that the Pastor of a church should be a man according to my interpretation of scripture. I think that the evangelical Christian world has created confusion and misunderstanding of scriputural guidelines by using the term pastor for so many ministry roles. (Pastor of Worship, Youth Pastor, Children's Pastor, etc) Now what we used to call pastor is invariably called Senior Pastor. All believers in any local body of Christ pastor or priest one another. Although we can and should encourage all women to serve in all teaching and ministry areas as God calls them, I still believe that the scriptures reserves the roles of pastor, deacon, and elder for men. I don't believe the pastor in Finland was being discriminatory in his stance and his willingness to step aside for the service in question was a gracious thing to do. He was acting on his beliefs and I encourage everyone to do that. Let us disagree without being disagreeable.

Marlene

Posted: November 01, 2007 2:24 PM

This is not a matter for the state. The apostle Paul said in 1 Cor. 6:1 "Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?" The state needs to remove themselves from the situation and the church needs to work out it out. This kind of behavior is opening up doors for issues for gay preachers to take their matter to the courts. It's time for people to operate in the standards that Jesus Christ has shown Himself to be for us. I agree with scripture in the order that is set in 1 Timothy for the church, however, the pastor was out of character in his behavior and actions towards the woman pastor. That was not Christ - like. As Christians we are suppose to be the light and the salt of the earth. What is happening in the house of God and among His people?

Chris

Posted: November 01, 2007 12:40 PM


Why is there a woman pastor to begin with? The elders of the church are to be men, according to the Apostle Paul. It's a criminal offense?!? This is why America was founded to begin with, to get away from a state church.

Jim	Posted: November 01, 2007 12:27 PM

Mysoginistic tendencies in Christianity are not based in the Gospels, but in Greek cultural influences. Women were key leaders of the early church, including the roles of Elders and Bishops. Paul referred to Phoebe as a deacon...definitely an ordained role... among other notes. the discrimination against women in the church must stop if the church is to be relevant in the present, let alone the future. To make the leap from accepting women to the issue of homosexuality belies the difficulty churches have with human sexuality. To link these issues is absurd!

Cathy

Posted: November 01, 2007 12:06 PM

Though I believe it wrong for the visiting pastor to refuse to work with a woman, it is his conviction from his understanding of the Scriptures. I may disagree with him, but I also believe it is his right to be so convicted. He may want to re-evaluate how his actions in light of God's love & God not being a respector of persons. In the Kingdom of God there is no male or female. I believe we were set free of such legalism in Jesus. The woman pastor was gracious in leaving...she put the congregation & the visiting pastor above herself, as it should be. Here, I agree there should be NO state churches. It does get to be quite a mess.

Kim	Posted: November 01, 2007 12:01 PM


Slippery slope issue. The state must stay out of the workings of the church or it's state controlled churches. Let one issue be decided by the state and they all will eventually. That's scary stuff!

Brett

Posted: November 01, 2007 11:48 AM

Feminism is a damnable form of modern paganism and idolatry. And Christianity Astray magazine is wicked and apostate for its promotion of it. Even the form of your questionaire shows a decided bias and promotion of Gnostic feminism. But you will all find out on the Day of Judgment when you are cast into hell just how important 1 Cor.14:34-35 and 1 Tim.2:11-15 are to the Gospel of Christ. Feminists and all those who support female leadership in church and government will burn in hell under the wrath of God. 1 Cor.6:9-10 and Rev.21:8!

EEF	Posted: November 01, 2007 11:27 AM

The question is not "is it fair", but is it in accordance with scripture. Both the OT and NT hold men responsible for the spiritual condidtion of those whom they serve, I repeat, those whom they serve. In the case of the NT, the leadership is to serve the church, not lord over it or control it. Men who pass this on to the women in the church are shirking their responsibility, and frankly I am ashamed of them. I count it a priviledge to serve, but do feel the weight of the responsibility. My prayer is that I become more Christlike, and serve all He puts before me. He is the one to be glorified, not me or any man or women. Christ is the one who died that we might be reconciled to the Father. By his death we now have the ability to have a direct relationship with God the Father, as we appropriate His sacrifice. By the way, as we appropriate his sacrifice we gain a permenant relationship with the Father which results in Eternal Life.

Keith F

Posted: November 01, 2007 11:21 AM


This is an unfortunate mess that could have been avoided. I don't like where this will lead. The next article from Finland will be about a pastor refusing to serve with a homosexual pastor...

Page: 1 2

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment