Reporting on a decision by LifeWay Christian Stores to not promote a magazine whose cover story lauded female pastors, Chicago Tribune religion reporter Manya Brachear stacked the deck against the Christian bookseller, failing to speak to a staffer there for an explanation of a policy decision on a magazine the stores carry on their shelves. Yet if she had done her homework, Brachear may have found ample reason that the book store may have had to suspect the editorial judgment and theological conviction of the magazine in question.
In her September 25 post, "Gospel magazine too risque for rack," Brachear found room to quote the publisher of Gospel Today magazine and a female pastor featured in its September/October 2008 issue. Brachear snarked that the decision by Lifeway to put the magazine behind the counter was much like what convenience stores do to racy magazines:
Rev. Kimberly Ray never thought she'd be on the cover of a magazine considered too risque for the racks. But this month, Ray , the head of Angie Ray Ministries and Church on the Rock in Matteson, joined four other female pastors on the cover of Gospel Today magazine.
Because the article broke Southern Baptist rules about women in the pulpit, Lifeway Christian Bookstores, a chain run by the Southern Baptist Convention, pulled its glossy pages from the shelves and tucked it behind the counter where 7-Elevens normally stash Playboy and Penthouse.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓"There weren't naked women on the cover I assure you," said Teresa Hairston, the magazine's founder and publisher. "If it's credible journalism, then why is it being treated like pornography?"
Brachear went on to explain what the magazine is doing to fight back:
Gospel Today has mounted a counter campaign, urging churches and organizations to host Gospel Today Super Sunday to encourage people in their pews to support "holistic, credible, Christian journalism" by subscribing to the magazine at a discount price. They are also reconsidering whether they will distribute to Lifeway in the future.
Ray, whose own mother, Angie, was a pastor and South Shore community activist, was disappointed but not surprised by the bookstore’s response.
"Given the climate of our economic times when we have ... so many people calling us for prayer during this time, it seems a bit unusual that would still be a concern," said Ray, 42, the youngest pastor pictured on the cover. "We receive countless, hundreds of calls from people with real-life problems ... Given this time we’re living in now, it’s a little disappointing that it’s still an issue."
Brachear then closed the article by asking readers to leave in the comments section whether or not they think LifeWay's decision "amounted to censorship."
LifeWay is owned by the Southern Baptist Convention, and Brachear did briefly quote a policy statement by the SBC on the matter of women serving as pastors, so the position of the book seller was not completely left undefended. Even so, Brachear featured two proponents of female pastors against an impersonal policy statement, rather than tracking down the views of the store manager in question, or turning to a Baptist pastor or theologian to explain the SBC's doctrinal concerns with Gospel Today, which may go well beyond the current issue.
Indeed, if Brachear took a brief peek at Gospel Today's back issues , she may have wondered why the conservative Protestant bookstore carries a magazine that has given gauzy treatment to such as controversial figures as:
- Pro-gay marriage, pro-choice liberal activist Rev. Al Sharpton
- The modalistic prosperity gospel advocate T.D. Jakes
- So-called Rev. Run (late of Run DMC), who has described God as a "universal spirit that helps you help yourself."
- Wife beater Bishop Thomas Weeks who, freshly divorced, is running a reality show-like contest to find a new bride
Yup, it's safe to say LifeWay may have had good reason to yank Gospel Today altogether, much less tuck the latest issue behind the counter, considering the bookstore's mission of encouraging the faith of Christian customers, not confusing it with muddied theology.
A religion reporter attuned to controversies in the evangelical Christian community may have discerned that there's more than meets the eye with this controversy than a liberal media-friendly "glass ceiling" narrative. Unfortunately it seems Ms. Brachear is not such a reporter.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
LifeWay
September 29, 2008 - 13:25 ET by candanceThat store sells books written by women all the time and promotes the ministries of people like Joyce Meyer. Sounds to me like they didn't like the magazine for a variety of reasons.
What's up with this new trend of painting Christians as anti-feminist? I read a "review" for the movie Fireproof just the other day which insisted the film was insulting to women, even though the film did exactly the opposite.
Methinks it has something to do with Sarah Palin. These people never heard of LifeWay a year ago.
PS - Ken you should have included a photo of the women in question:
http://www.gospeltoday.com/store.php?crn=257
If my pastor, male or female, showed up in a magazine looking like that I'd be embarrassed.
Lifeway has no obligation
September 29, 2008 - 13:37 ET by Dan The Man 2Lifeway has no obligation to provide space for a "People" magazine promoting "gospel"
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
This is a remarkably simple issue.
September 29, 2008 - 13:41 ET by Mike BrattonThe office of pastor of a Christian church has its job specifications laid out in Scripture--in more than one location. From 1 Timothy chapter 3, we learn that among the qualifications, a pastor must be (not should, not ought to be, not it's a good idea but we're not going to get bent out of shape about it) hospitable, a good teacher, patient, and experienced in the Christian faith.
Oh, and he also must be the husband of one wife.
When a woman can legitimately (we do live in 2008, unfortunately) be the husband of one wife, then she can be a pastor. Since such a scenario is impossible, women cannot hold such a position in a local church. This doesn't short-circuit a woman's ability to serve in other capacities, of course, but it's the rule of inspired Scripture, and those of us who are Christians are bound to abide by it.
Brachear isn't much of a religion reporter if she can't process that concept. And the so-called "Gospel Today" isn't much of a magazine, for the reasons Mr. Shepherd has already listed.
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport...
Mike I am a SBC churchgoer
September 29, 2008 - 13:48 ET by Dan The Man 2Mike I am a SBC churchgoer and believe with all my heart that Paul wrote those qulification in mind for the early church and possible to a particular church taht was having problems with some of teh women who "knew" how to run things. We ned to look at the entire context and background to really make a decision about Female Pastors.
We must remember God placed all of Israel in the hands of a female Judge, read Pastor, and female Prophetess' were also ordained from God. So where does that fit into your worldview of Female Pastors?
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
There's a difference between
September 29, 2008 - 14:01 ET by Ken ShepherdThere's a difference between secular government, where the Bible has no restrictions by gender, and the exercise of eldership (teaching and governing authority) in the local church, which is restricted to men in the New Testament. The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood had some good thoughts on this a la Christians and their reax to Sarah Palin as McCain's veep pick.
See here:
Women should not be held back from an office that is not strictly forbidden in the Bible. Nevertheless, the question remains whether or not it is wise for a specific woman in a particular season of life to seek such an office — and the same would apply to any man. In evaluating individual cases, a spouse and a local church pastor would be a crucial source of counsel and a means of grace from God. Because of cultural voices to the contrary, we must remind ourselves of the unbelievably high calling of being a wife and mother, and that faithful service in the home is just as pleasing to God as national leadership.
So a female vice president, or even a female president, doesn't necessarily pose a dilemma for complementarians. It is inevitable in God's providence that a gifted woman will lead the United States, just as women have led England, Germany, India and many other countries around the world. We are looking forward to learning more about Governor Palin from her convention address this evening, and are grateful that the election is more than two months away. In the meantime, we will be praying for Todd and Sarah Palin as they face challenging decisions under the bright light of public scrutiny.
http://www.cbmw.org/...
well ken
September 29, 2008 - 14:11 ET by candanceI see both sides of the female pastor argument but am more inclined to believe we serve best in other places. There are some things that men are just better at, and pastoring is typically one of them, with a good woman at his side to help with family issues.
All of this is of course MHO and I do not feel like debating it with anyone. Articles like this love to stir up drama and get Christians arguing among themselves.
This article has an agenda of making people think LifeWay hates women, which is not the case at all.
Good quote, Ken.
September 29, 2008 - 14:27 ET by Mike BrattonThanks.
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport...
Hello, Dan.
September 29, 2008 - 14:20 ET by Mike BrattonSince you self-identify as someone who is part of an SBC congregation, I'll let you know that I'm a licensed SBC minister. Now that we've been properly introduced...
First off, what I've shared is not "my worldview." It is the plain reading of Scripture, and--as I observed previously--not a difficult thing to understand. My personal "worldview" on the issue, in the interest of full disclosure, is that it would be fine for women to occupy pastorates. However, God has spoken on the matter. It is, therefore, the responsibility of those of us who are Christians to respect His pronouncements, and to align our beliefs to what He has said in Scripture.
With regard to the Old Testament Israel office of judge, no, it is not an analog to the New Testament office of pastor. The Judge was a legal official, not a spiritual official, and as a matter of fact had to refer to the sitting priest on matters of a spiritual nature. Likewise, a prophet (or prophetess) does not mirror the office of pastor. The prophet is a spokesperson for God, imparting His truth as it is directly communicated to him (or her), and is not tasked with the day-to-day well-being of a small group of believers.
Pastors are, in essence, shepherds, operating at the discretion of the Great Shepherd. Do you have any comments, Dan, about the qualifications listed for such an office in 1 Timothy (referred to above) and Titus? Particularly the "husband of one wife" portion?
Yes, Paul was writing to a specific church about a specific situation, but he was writing to them under the direct inspiration of God the Holy Spirit. And since the Bible says in 2 Timothy 3:16 that all Scripture (not just those parts that aren't addressed to specific individuals or groups) is inspired by God, and profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness, we must not be so careless as to limit the Bible because of its historical context.
This isn't about "my worldview." If you don't like what the relevant Scripture says about the issue of female pastors, I can't really help you except to suggest you (and Manya Brachear, for that matter) discuss the issue with the Author.
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport...
dan the man...
September 29, 2008 - 17:52 ET by porpoiseboyso dan....where did you get the idea that "judge" = "pastor"? are you a hebrew scholar or something? i think that any reasonable and regular reader of the bible...even non-hebrew scholars ...would tend to equate "judge" with "leader", not pastor. and i believe God does indeed appoint woman leaders in the world.
but, since you saw fit to use the OT as a proof of how the NT church should be formed ( perhaps because you cannot find your hypothesis "proved" anywhere in the NT ) i will answer with that. the most equal office in the OT to the NT office of pastor would of course be priest. and there is no evidence of any woman priests ANYWHERE in the bible. not even when there seem to have been no decent preists to be found. you have eli and his sons...they were horrible, what about samuel's sons? did God replace them with capable women? never sir, never.
i really don't have ANYTHING against women, but what i cannot stand are comparisons that have absolutely no basis in fact. your comparison just does not stand up in the fire, sir. there are no biblical examples of women holding positions of spiritual/religious oversight. the "judges" were not religious leaders in the sense you wish to suggest them to make your point.
Sorry pal but that "early
September 29, 2008 - 23:48 ET bySorry pal but that "early church" dog, just don't hunt. My bible says Jesus Christ the SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER.
Hebrews 13:8-9 (King James Version)
8Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
9Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.
You will notice that as Paul was referring to the church leadership and their position over you, he said Jesus the same, yesterday today and forever. Most of the apostles thought that theirs was the LAST GENERATION, before the Rapture.
Read Pauls epistle to the Thessalonians upon which the Rapture is based...
1 Thessalonians 4:16-18
16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.
Clearly Paul thought that they would be alive when Christ returns for the church, Peter actually thought differently as you'll see in a minute. The idea of things being in any way different for the "early Church" is a piece of FALSE DOCTRINE that comes from those who want to imagine themselves to be "saved" WITHOUT doing what the Apostles did, i.e Baptism in Jesus' name NOT the empty titles, "Father Son Holy Ghost", according to Peters first Holy Spirit filled sermon on the day of Pentecost see Acts 2:1-38. You will notice that after Peter explains that speaking in tongues is the sign that God's spirit has been poured out (Acts 2:33), the people are "convicted" by their killing of the Lord and they ask Peter, "What Shall We Do?", i.e to be saved, to be relieved from the spiritual predicament which has caused this "Pricking of the heart" ( Acts 2:37) Peter's response is quite specific...
Acts 2:38
38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.\
Peter goes on to say that this method of salvation is the same for EVERYBODY, I wonder why they don't read that part? Notice that Peter says that the "promise" of the Holy Ghost which he JUST EXPLAINED is evidenced by the TONGUES which the people in Acts 2:13 were mocking, is the same for EVERYONE who the LORD WILL EVER CALL from that day forward!
Acts 2:39-40
39For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.
40And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Now see those who push the "early Church" theory are resting their fate on the spurious notion that what the Lord required of His Apostles and disciples and the more than THREE THOUSAND SAVED ON THE DAY OF PENTECOST, he does not require of later generations. A pretty pat way to explain why a church is a dead church and enjoys none of the benefits of the Spirit but hardly, "scripturally sound". Similarly, if it were not for FALSE DOCTRINE we wouldn't be having this debate. Women are not even permitted to SPEAK in the church, much less "pastor" ROFLMBO, "pastor", really?
1 Co 14:34-7
34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
36What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
37If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
See, Paul was so concerned with this bit of teaching that he backed it up with his authority as an Apostle by ridiculing your disagreement with the statement by asking if the "word" came from YOU or from him!
And since I've met some scriptural weirdos in my time who would now say that Paul was referring to the custom of the women having church in a different edifice. They'd say that this only meant that women were not to raise a ruckus during the preaching but were to ask for clarifications at home from their husbands, and that they can still "preach"... But unfortunately there's this...
1Timothy 2:12-15
11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being
deceived was in the transgression.
15Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
Kinda hard to "preach" without being "in authority" over men, huh? Paul doesn't talk about "customs" or the "times" he goes all the way back to the first woman to discuss faults inherent in the GENDER, not just for those women in the "early church". You MUST be born again (John 3:1-8) this hasn't changed nor has the method of salvation,(Acts 2:4, 38) most churches simply are no longer following it, preferring the "itching ears" approach. Good luck with that.
2Tim 4:2-4
2Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.
3For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
I would suggest that we are in the "itching ears" time now.
Dear Mike, redux
September 29, 2008 - 14:04 ET by Saint ZeroI'm also very familiar with this debate in the SBC. I'll say what I've said for years, that I'm not going to be the person who stands between someone who is clearly called by God and the job he has given them the talent to do.
Zero, there's one problem with your statement.
September 29, 2008 - 14:25 ET by Mike BrattonGod does not work at cross purposes with Himself, else He would be inconsistent and thus cease to be God. If God makes a clear statement in the Bible, as he does with regard to pastors, He will not call an individual in a way contrary to His previously revealed instructions in the Bible.
Women can be, and are, called by God to full-time vocational service.
They are never, ever, called to pastorates.
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport...
Which is basically a
September 30, 2008 - 00:08 ET byWhich is basically a pantywaist kind of way of saying that you don't really believe what the bible has to say on the subject. OR that if you do believe it, you're too weak to say or do anything about it, which is why you hide behind the idea that she might be "called". Either way, it's not good.
Because the bible is crystal clear that women CAN'T BE CALLED TO BE PREACHERS BECAUSE GOD IS THE ONE WHO TOLD PAUL THAT THEY SHOULD NOT EVEN SPEAK IN THE CHURCHES. ( 1corinthians 14:34)
What you or I think doesn't really matter what does matter is WHAT DOES THE WORD OF GOD SAY???? Now i just laboriously printed what the word has to say on that subject above read 1co 14:34, 1tim 2:12 for a start. So the really long winded question to you is, If the bible says that God cannot lie and if the bible condemns the idea of women preaching categorically. Isn't one calling the Lord, in fact, a dissembler, if one believes that He told Paul, to forbid women from even speaking, yet he would "call" one to preach unbeknownst to anyone but she who "hears" such a call? 1Corinthians 14:34-38
34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
36What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
37If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
They shouldn't even carry the magazine
September 29, 2008 - 13:41 ET by Ozark_SunshineConsidering that much of what this magazine writes is contrary to what the Bible says, I'm surprised it carries it at all. To the person who made comments about them carrying other women's material, Joyce Meyers never refers to herself as a pastor, as far as I know. But the Bible says that women shall not be over men in spiritual things such as teaching, so you need the first commentor needs to open his Bible before he opens his mouth, just like these women pastors need to. The women are false pastors and prophets and will be judged by God as so. They are feminists who refuse to be subservient to God or man, so shall they stand before God.
thanks ozark
September 29, 2008 - 13:48 ET by candanceThat first commentator will be sure to read her Bible before she opens her mouth. ;) As for Joyce Meyer, my point was simply that LifeWay is not prejudiced against women.
I'm not here to defend female pastors. And I explicitly said in my first post that those women looked embarrassing.
Shaping the news by making the New.
September 29, 2008 - 13:44 ET by Spinningplates2The un-Godly, while hating God still love to stir division among Christians. Much good has been done by and for women in the Christian Church even in churches that don't ordain women.
The picture of the women Pastors is priceless. I wish I owned the buffet near the Church where that picture was taken.