No Women Preachers is a Shell Game
Some denominations, including Catholics, still exclude woman from being priests/preachers. They can do this by refusing to issue the credentials by the governing body.
I just finished reading a large book on the topic of women in the faith, The Preachers Wife; The Precarious Power of Evangelical Women Celebrities by Kate Bowler. Bowler spent a exhaustive amount of time and money traveling and interviewing women who are preachers, preacher's wive or celebrity speakers.
While the prohibition of women behind the pulpit continued, many women developed their own opportunity to preach. One was a Catholic, Mother Angelica. She formed her own production company and satellite network. She had some run ins with male clergy but they were unable to stop her version of preaching.
On the Protestant side there have been a couple dozen women who built broadcasting and entertainment companies. These women went right past the male prohibition against preaching and did more or less whatever they wanted to do. Preaching, music, books, conferences and speaking tours had some effect on what eventually was preached by men.
Even during their periods of success, however, these women would often pay homage to their husbands and imply the husbands ran the business and their household. Mostly people did not believe this.
What is clear from the book is that there are two spheres where religion operates. One is the church where congregations hire a minister and a certain set of rules is followed. The rule of no women preachers lives there. The other is the marketplace of being on TV, performing live, selling books and videos and earning fees. In this sphere the prohibition against women preaching is present but unenforceable.
Among the many mistakes being made in conservative Christianity right now, opposition to abortion rights, gay rights and endorsement of Trump, the prohibition of women preachers ranks among the most damaging to the future of the faith.
Why not just let the market decide this? Don't you trust the market? Each religious denomination and religion is a private organization. If women or men don't want to participate, they don't have to participate. You seem to be upset with the invisible hand of the market.
ReplyDeleteDon't think abortion is a sin and don't want to hear about it? Join the ABCXYZ denomination. Don't think men should be on the pulpit? Join the WOMANX religion. Don't like retired econ professors who live in Iowa? Join the REPofIOWA cult.
Seriously, you might as well be complaining about the price at the pump in Boise vs. Newark.
As the 1992 Bill Clinton used to say, "It's the economy, stupid."
"Why not just let the market decide this? Don't you trust the market?" Isn't that what is happening right now when Christian numbers are falling? Or, what happened back when they were rising? That the market will decide is my point. I think the market is deciding it likes institutions where there is equal opportunity. That is absent in denominations that prohibit woman from preaching.
DeleteMarket, economics. I was just using your language and your sphere of understanding.
DeleteIf you want to explain any religion's numbers falling by marketing and economics, no one will stand in your way.
However, you haven't explained how a loosening of moral certainties has caused a religion or a denomination to gain market share. A good case can be made for the exact opposite. The only reason my Church, the Roman Catholic Church, hasn't changed is because some dogmas are just that, i.e. unchangeable.
Look, the Way of the Cross is not an easy life. We are more or less guaranteed some suffering, hardship, etc. With that as a marketing pitch, how do you explain the vast numbers of believers worldwide?
Matt 10;15 "..how do you explain the vast numbers of believers worldwide." By the claim followers will not have to die. Many want to believe this is true so they do--even though so far as we know it is not.
DeleteSurely you can amend your statement to "... I know it is not." from "... we know it is not."
DeleteYou can also amend it from "Many want to believe ..." to "Many believe ..."
The second correction is an obvious fact borne out by simply counting noses. The first correction may escape you again. You contradict yourself. YOU may think you KNOW that there aren't MANY believers but you actually do KNOW there are many believers. Now, on to what I believe you meant, despite your improper English. You simply think there is no afterlife while many do believe there is an afterlife. Religion does not refute science but science is simply the study of the physical and natural world. Science can refute some religious beliefs but I know of know of no Catholic belief it refutes.