Not throwing stones at the SBC, because the RCC is just as bad if not worse, but the eccelesiological argument for gender restricted leadership is not exactly persuasive, either via tradition or scripture.
Doesn't make sense to me that having the wrong genitals can disqualify half the population from being the spiritual leader of a group.
A little off subject but am I doomed for hell for coping a feel with the Pastors daughter after that church social back in the 60s? I mean I would have gone further but she put up the stop sign after a little fooling around.
"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." (1 Timothy 2:11-12) "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak." (1 Corinthians 14:34) That's scripture. And if most members of the SBC are like I was growing up (that is, brainwashed), they are biblical literalists. As one of their leaders once said, there are conservatives and moderates but there is "no left pew" in the SBC.
This is perhaps true for imams, but nor for rabbis. a rabbi is a leader of a congregation and a teacher. They spend years in study and are ordained.
What do genitals have to do with gender? Are you a baptist or something? Could you find out? I'm not in a position to ask her. Two things here I can't figure out. Would women pastors don pinstriped suits and relentlessly knock on the door of anyone who ever stopped to use the bathroom in a Southern Baptist church? If they didn't, would they still be Southern Baptists?
Can a Yankee from north of the Mason Dixon Line answer an altar call and join the Southern Baptists? And if found out, what would happen to him or her? He or she could be considered some kind of informant or some demon sent by the devil. (I've known some mean Southern Baptists. While I was being baptized as a kid, somebody even stole my clothes.)
I just want to be clear - social science actually backs this up a bit. But the difference is shrinking. I've seen the difference between satisfaction of women working for men vs. women as low as a difference of 2% now. And when i say difference, that is just "satisfaction" broadly. There are plenty of other studies that show there are many benefits of having women in positions of power. Notably, less discrimination based on sex, more collaborative work, and significantly less sexual abuse of children.
I don’t think most Southern Baptists or other religious conservatives distinguish between biological sex and gender identity. That’s why I phrased it the way I did, trying to be a little provocative about the exclusive focus on peoples’ genitals. Seemed like a funny application of it in the spiritual context. I’m not saying they literally believe male genitals contain spiritual powers. They do believe that God has deemed men - and only men - to have the ability to be head of churches. I’m not sure why women can’t do it other than the belief that God doesn’t condone it.
Your last sentence there could be teased out a bit. But I’m guessing a deep dive wouldn’t get much traction with pagans.
The notion of men having a special spiritual role and authority is getting less and less traction with other Christians, too, which is why it’s become a point of disagreement. They can do what they want in their own churches of course. I find it antiquated but don’t expect them to care what I think.