ORDINATION OF WOMEN
AND RELATED ISSUES
(Monday) Karl Naslund left a comment on my ordination of women post yesterday. It's a significant concern and I think it is worth responding to at this level. He wrote:
Whenever I read EO or largely Catholic websites (like Mere Comments, for example), I'm always struck by how easily they draw a connection between ordaining women and permissive attitudes towards perverse sexuality. It usually goes something like "First the Protestants ordained women, and now they're ordaining Gene Robinson...etc.."

Sadly, when I look at other denominations, the connection does appear to be true. Can the Covenant buck this trend?

A few observations:

1. Not all groups which ordain women have gone down the slippery slope -- contrary to what people say on Mere Comments. This is especially evident in the Wesleyan-Holiness tradition. The Salvation Army has ordained women from the outset. More examples: The Church of the Nazarene, Free Methodist Church, Wesleyan Church, Church of God (Anderson) have all ordained women for years and remain conservative voices. The problem is that these groups are just not on the parochial radar screens of the Anglican, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox pundits.

2. The churches which see this as a stewardship issue are healthier than those which frame it as a gender equality issue and try to read it in terms of justice, and ultimately entitlement. The fact is that no one is entitled to serve in the church and there will be some contexts where it is just not feasible for some people to serve. There are more churches where I cannot serve than where I can serve. This has nothing to do with fairness.

However, if the issue is framed in terms of stewardship you end up in a better spot. There are women with great pastoral gifts. These gifts have been given to the church. We need to figure out how to use them -- for the sake of the church.

3. We do ordain women in the Evangelical Covenant Church and have done so since the early part of the 20th century (although all those early ordained women served in world missions). In 1976 the annual meeting voted to not object to the ordination of women for ministry in local churches. There had not been any rule against such happening earlier so in a sense the 1976 action was a resolution affirming the status quo.

4. We do not ordain active homosexuals or allow our clergy to "bless" same-sex unions. Neither of these issues is really up for consideration. This isn't to say that there aren't a small number of people who would like them to be -- but it's just not going to happen.

Last week I saw a church bulletin from a United Church of Christ congregation. Above the order of worship was the statement -- "We are an open and affirming church" -- code words for the fact that they accept homosexuality. In the Covenant we are "an open and unaffirming church." Homosexuals, like other sinners, are welcome (We won't single you out for your sin). But don't expect us to affirm your sin -- whether it be gluttony, hatred, racism, adultery, or homosexuality. We're not going to beat you up but we'll gently encourage you to consider embracing Christ's gift of freedom -- that which comes from being "in him."

Our big concern at this point is figuring out how we can say this with grace, and without turning homosexual activity into the #1 problem on someone's top-ten list of sins.

A few helpful links:

A short summary of the biblical arguments for women in ministry

Ethical Principles for Covenant Ministers -- includes statements on sexuality

Annual Meeting Resolution on Human Sexuality