Scott, what your comment made me think of is the importance of connecting the Kingdom to the gospel. If the church is to preach salvation to the world, and that salvation involves the proclamation and embodiment of the advancing Kingdom of God then how we live is directly tied to what we proclaim. If, at the heart of Kingdom is a restored community between humans and their fellow brothers and sisters and between humans and their God, then how women are supported and gifted by the church matters.

Also, there seems to be a difference between discussing these things with “friends in Christ” and asking someone to come and give spiritual leadership to a church. I’m leaning towards the conviction that someone who is asked to come give spiritual leadership to a church should be in rather close fellowship (theologically and ethically) with that church. Of course, so much hinges on how “rather close” is defined…

I certainly see your dilemma, and the force of your question – because if unity in the Spirit is not to be pitted against faithfulness to the Gospel, then lines have to be drawn. False unity would be unity which exists apart from faithfulness to the Gospel – merely the absence of conflict, rather than the peace of Christ.

Which is why I have to (respectfully) disagree with you on this issue, Nathan, when you state that “women in pastoral leadership is not worth causing the division.” This seems to me to be the case only if the issue of women pastors has nothing to do with the call and gifts of the Spirit, if the Gospel and church unity have nothing to do with the concrete, communal transcendence of social divisions.

But it seems to me the latter is not the case, and thus that faithfulness to the Gospel requires that we seek to witness in our churches to that reign in which the enmity of Jew/Greek, male/female, slave/free is absolved by God’s grace and our relations with one another are healed.

I don’t think this at all settles the question you asked, Jason, of whether or not you should invite one who believes females are by nature not able to be called and gifted by the Spirit for pastoral leadership. I just mean to point out that it seems to me faithfulness and unity can’t be opposed, if our proclaiming the Gospel means we have to live it too.

But it does seem to me that we have to take account of the always broken character of our unity, this side of the eschaton, the ever present wrestling with the powers of sin. And thus perhaps we have to approach issues like this with humility, seek to engage those with whom we disagree – particularly where we feel unfaithfulness to the Gospel is at stake – and open ourselves up to the possibility of the Spirit’s work in mutual correction and edification. I don’t know whether that means invite the guy, or start a long conversation with him, explaining why you can’t yet invite him. But I certainly don’t think “avoiding the issue” does anything but lead to a semblance of unity.

There’s my two cents.
Peace,
Scott

I have spent the past 3 years at a church where the majority would agree with me, but with a pastor that would agree with you. He has respected the positions of the church majority and has not addressed the issue from any point of controversy. This can be done successfully.

So, my response to your question is that neither fidelity to the gospel nor unity in the Spirit has to be the trump. The gospel can be proclaimed, and Christians can be taught to think for themselves, while unity is preserved.