Denominations which allow Women Pastors.

I’m curious to know how so many churches have decided to allow women pastors. I can find hundreds of reasons not to allow women pastors aside from the obvious biblical passages but I haven’t been able to find reason to allow women pastors.

The following passages are the main ones of interest:

1 Tim 2:12 …11A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.…

1 Tim 3:2…1It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do. 2An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money.…

1 Corinthians 14:34 …33for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. 34The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 35If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.…

Got to love it when people take the bible out of context and use it wrongly against a group of people.

the first statement comes from a letter from Paul which was written to an actual congregation, it concerned a group of women that were disruptive in a church, Paul didn’t have any trouble with women teaching and that part of the bible has been used again women for centuries, probably since the time when men believe woman didn’t have souls

So you’re catholic and think women should be pastors? :confused:

I’m not taking the bible out of context or using it against anyone. I stated the verses of interest and asked for an explanation of women pastors. All the churches who accepted women pastors have never explained biblically why it should be. Not that I can find anyway.

What about the second one? It’s a bit difficult to be husband to one wife when you are a woman?

In such a search, it is also helpful to search for those denominations which have embraced contraception divorce, euthanasia, fetal research, same-sex whatever and who knows what else. It has all occurred in very recent times. When did God change, I wonder?

Actually i dont agree with women pastors, most of the time i find women annoying so having one in that position would irritate me, but i dont agree with people using the sentence Jesus only had male disciples thats why women cant be priests or pastors etc, on the other hand i do believe in priests being allowed to marry and my parish priest doesnt seem to have any problems with me thinking that.

the problem i have is that people use the bible to explain their behavior in how they treat people and thats wrongs

Well that’s all fine & dandy but what has that got to do with my post? I’m asking those who accept women pastors to explain why and how they view the passages mentioned? I haven’t even mentioned the disciples?

Was i was trying to get at is that bible versus are taking out of context, i wasn’t saying you had taken them out of context

why not find some versus that support women pastors then you might find your answers that you are looking for.

Yes I am a Catholic but wasn’t officially before easter 2014 i was C of E that accept women, i still dont know why they have them no one has ever answered that question for me, but maybe thats what God is calling them to do, who knows.

But the CofE is what I mean…I’ve been on their website and it only states what year they started. No explanation of why.

I don’t now a verse which supports women pastors. The only one I know which is used is Galatians (I think) talking about neither male nor female etc but that’s talking salvation not elders/teaching authority. As far as salvation is concerned we are indeed all equal in Christ.

is one needed? Or are you just curious? Which is certainly fine, by the way…

The Bible teaches that God is not a respecter of persons, and He will use any and all who will yield to Him, regardless of race, age, or sex.

Galatians 3:28 - “…neither male nor female…for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

Well, Christ knew this also, did He not? Saint John Paul II has declared that the Church has no authority to ordain women. If we are submissive and obedient, we listen to him.

Note that all such attacks on the Church have come in a very short span of time. After almost 2,000 years, why would that be, and who would incite such protest?

Let me mention that Protestants support the idea of the universal priesthood of all believers. Therefore, there are no ordained priests in protestant Churches, male of female. Ministers can be men or women, but they are not priests.

Most Lutherans ordain women especially in Western Europe. Faces in the Church of Sweden

We Anglicans are Protestant, and we have priests, both men and women. Some of us even have women bishops. :eek:

We Anglicans have ‘priests’, not ‘pastors’, some of whom are women, and the change was mostly based upon the perceived lack of a reason not to have them: the Biblical passages demonstrating Paul’s views on women are arguably specific to their context (or even their writer) and are thus inconclusive; Anglicanism recognises the role of human reason in comprehending what is right or wrong (i.e., we are not a sola scriptura church); some people who happen to have two X chromosomes also happen to make good priests.

It seems to me, this proves that Catholics and Lutherans do not together profess the same faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Catholics and Lutherans are very much apart; in fact, there can never be Communion among those of the faith of these women cleric and us (Apostolic Catholic and Orthodox).

To be sure this process is thankfully in the hands of holy Father, Francis

What are your thoughts about Lutherans being welcome into the Catholic Church as a “sister communion”?

Building on these and other insights, the Roman Catholic participants
offer additional affirmations as part of their concluding
statement in bold-face type. They acknowledge in the “spirit of the
Second Vatican Council that the Evangelical-Lutheran communities
with which we have been in dialogue are truly Christian churches,
possessing the elements of holiness and truth that mark them as organs
of grace and salvation”. Furthermore, they report having found
“serious defects in the arguments customarily used against the validity
of the Eucharistic ministry of the Evangelical-Lutheran churches”,
and add that they “see no persuasive reason to deny the possibility of
the Roman Catholic Church recognising the validity of this ministry”.
The Roman Catholic dialogue group then appeals to the authorities
of their church to “recognise the validity of the Evangelical-Lutheran
ministry and, correspondingly, the presence of the body and blood
of Jesus Christ in the Eucharistic celebrations of the Evangelical-Lutheran

The Evangelical-Lutherans propose a “ministry serving the unity
of the Church universal”; a primacy which would be “more pastoral
than juridical”; “so structured …] that it clearly serves the Gospel
and the unity of the Church of Jesus Christ”; the “possibility of reconciliation,
which would recognise the self-government of Evangelical-
Lutheran churches within a communion”; “acknowledge the Evangelical-
Lutheran churches …] as sister churches, which are already
entitled to some measure of ecclesiastical communion”; “affirm a
new attitude towards the papacy ‘for the sake of peace and concordin the Church’ and …] for a united witness to Jesus Christ in the
world”; a “renewed papacy would in fact foster faithfulness to the
Gospel and truly exercise a Petrine function within the Church”.78

There is a realisation that Evangelical-
Lutherans will “presumably not be in a position to adopt the same
relationship to the see of Rome that is currently held by Roman
Catholics”. But they suggest that a “distinct canonical status may be
worked out by which Evangelical-Lutherans could be in official communion
with the church of Rome. Such a restoration of communion,
we believe, would be of great benefit to Roman Catholics, and
to Evangelical-Lutherans, enabling them both to share in a broader
Christian heritage.”79

The rejection of the ministerial priesthood did set them on a divergent course which remains unabated. And, that is not me saying that, it was the decision of the Greek Orthodox Church who in the 16th century, on foundational grounds, rebuffed a proposed alliance made by Philipp Melanchthon and others.

My thoughts are “impossible”, because, while it may theoretically been bounced around a couple decades ago - as we’ve seen repeatedly with the Anglicans - any agreements made today, are effectively meaningless tomorrow, the protestants keep shifting the goalposts.

There is absolutely no impediment to any Lutheran being received into full communion with the Catholic Church. It simply means becoming Catholic which, so far, is considered unreasonable.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit