It is interesting to reflect that, in contrast to the men, many, but not all, of our female ministers are single. Why is this a cultural ‘norm’?
Very good question, Michael - my initial reaction is that there might be a male insecurity thing going on here (ie guys thinking that there is no way they could ever ask such a woman out)....
Hi David,
That tended to be my gut answer to the question as well - but I’m wondering what exactly it means. That is, why are ‘guys thinking there is no way they could ever ask such a woman out’?
Inquiring minds (particularly those of single women in ministry!) want to know ;)
Would it? Somehow, my gut reckons it could be seen as a potential conflict of interest for a minister to marry one of his cures, along the same line as doctors marrying their patients or a judge marrying a particular litigant while said litigant is pursuing procedings before him/her.
Why?
When people mix business and pleasure, scandalous rumours can emerge. In working for the care and edification of his parish, it is crucial that a rector be seen as impartial vis-a-vis his parishioners, which task becomes considerably more difficult when personal considerations intrude.
Would it? Somehow, my gut reckons it could be seen as a potential conflict of interest for a minister to marry one of his cures, along the same line as doctors marrying their patients or a judge marrying a particular litigant while said litigant is pursuing procedings before him/her.
Why?
When people mix business and pleasure, scandalous rumours can emerge. In working for the care and edification of his parish, it is crucial that a rector be seen as impartial vis-a-vis his parishioners, which task becomes considerably more difficult when personal considerations intrude.
Michael
As I indicated in a previous post [#15] the relationship between a pastor and members of his congregation is not necessarily what you call a “patron-client style” relationship. I.e., there is not necessarily any dependency issues or increased vulnerability such as exist in a doctor-patient relationship or the like. So to generalise on this basis about whether pastors should ever pursue an attraction to a parishioner on this basis is not really valid. [I would also add that to describe pastoral responsibilities as “business” and personal relationships as “pleasure” is an unhelpful application of secular categories in this context.]
Having said that, there are good reasons to be cautious, and not to rush into such a relationship thoughtlessly; Jean has indicated some of these in her post above, as have you with regard to the potential for a rector to be seen as showing partiality. But I can’t see any justification for being prescriptive on this.
I’d like to point out that ministry is not ‘business’. Ministry is about service and about relationships. It’s not about compartmentalizing the activities I do for these hours of my day from the activities I do for those hours of my day and so on. The minute we start treating ministry as business and the people we are ministering to as clients or customers is the minute we aren’t in the ‘business’ of serving people anymore (pardon the pun).
As such, I think the idea of impariality in the sense you are using it is also flawed. A minister is in the business of serving and caring for people. That is going to happen in a whole lot of different ways. With some it will mean spending copious amounts of time with them one on one. For others it will mean catching up with them briefly and praying for them in private. For others again it will mean an act of service. For yet others (and in fact for all) it will mean faithful biblical preaching and teaching. No minister is going to serve every member of his congregation in exactly the same way, spending exactly the same time with them, relating to them in exactly the same fashion.
Instead, his impartiality should manifest itself in the fact that he loves and serves each and every one of them as a brother in Christ and a servant of the gospel.
I’m really having trouble seeing how a single minister forming a reciprocal relationship with an available, single, Christian woman in his parish in such a way that he and she are above reproach and not courting scandal, is going to make it difficult for him to be impartial in the way that he loves and serves his entire congregation.
No minister is going to serve every member of his congregation in exactly the same way, spending exactly the same time with them, relating to them in exactly the same fashion.
Dani
I agree very much with the conclusions you draw, but to be fair to Michael’s argument I don’t think that impartiality implies all that you have said. I suspect that it’s more to do with the fact that a romantic involvement could be seen as somehow biasing the minister to listening to that person’s opinions, caring for their needs, etc., more than others. The flaw in Michael’s argument here is that this potential exists in lots of relationships, not just romantic ones. We pastors have to be sensitive to that perception, but not controlled by it.
Thanks for the helpful input Bob :) I can see what you mean :)
BTW- I wasn’t meaning to imply you agreed with everything I said with my jinx- it was just more that we both disagreed with the importation of the ‘business’ analogy
No minister is going to serve every member of his congregation in exactly the same way, spending exactly the same time with them, relating to them in exactly the same fashion.
Dani
I agree very much with the conclusions you draw, but to be fair to Michael’s argument I don’t think that impartiality implies all that you have said. I suspect that it’s more to do with the fact that a romantic involvement could be seen as somehow biasing the minister to listening to that person’s opinions, caring for their needs, etc., more than others. The flaw in Michael’s argument here is that this potential exists in lots of relationships, not just romantic ones. We pastors have to be sensitive to that perception, but not controlled by it.
Bob
Hi,
Yes, the potential for seriously biased involvement certainly exists outside romantic relationships.
Years ago, I experienced a (non-Anglican) married minister whose every “second” sermon seemed to involve a lengthy anecdote of his social activities with one particular family that was heavily involved in the parish.
Gaaaaaa!
I could quote other examples but won’t for pastoral reasons.
Does that mean that, by your line of reasoning, we should be hesitant about advocating the employment of ANY single person in a position of parish ministry?
HI Dani,
Glad I was clearer this time!
In all honesty I am not advocating any position as such...more just stimulating some discussion as to why the situation is as it is (i.e. very few unmarried ministers)...I don’t have an issue with it per se - my pastor is unmarried.
The discussion here is looking good, but I note we haven’t actually touched on the NT teaching that though Marriage is good, singleness is superior as it allows the person to devote themselves to the Lord without distraction.
Quoting from the HSBC, 1 Cor 7:
32 I want you to be without concerns. An unmarried man is concerned about the things of the Lord—how he may please the Lord. 33 But a married man is concerned about the things of the world—how he may please his wife— 34 and he is divided. An unmarried woman or a virgin is concerned about the things of the Lord, so that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the things of the world—how she may please her husband 35 Now I am saying this for your own benefit, not to put a restraint on you, but because of what is proper, and so that you may be devoted to the Lord without distraction.
This of course applies to all people - not just those in ministry. Paul also gives good reasons why people should get married - so he’s certainly not anti-marriage.
The discussion here is looking good, but I note we haven’t actually touched on the NT teaching that though Marriage is good, singleness is superior as it allows the person to devote themselves to the Lord without distraction.
Quoting from the HSBC, 1 Cor 7:
32 I want you to be without concerns. An unmarried man is concerned about the things of the Lord—how he may please the Lord. 33 But a married man is concerned about the things of the world—how he may please his wife— 34 and he is divided. An unmarried woman or a virgin is concerned about the things of the Lord, so that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the things of the world—how she may please her husband 35 Now I am saying this for your own benefit, not to put a restraint on you, but because of what is proper, and so that you may be devoted to the Lord without distraction.
Mike
To deduce from this passage that singleness is “superior” to marriage would in my view be to interpret scripture contrary to scripture. The status given to marriage in both Old and New Testaments (Genesis 1-2, Ephesians 5, etc.) can hardly allow for it to be seen as an inferior state to singleness. Rather, I think Paul is offering a pragmatic argument in 1 Corinthians, i.e., that when looking at the two states purely with regard to how much time one has at his/her disposal for gospel proclamation, singleness has the edge (so to speak). To draw more than that from this one passage is fraught with difficulties.
Regards,
To deduce from this passage that singleness is “superior” to marriage would in my view be to interpret scripture contrary to scripture.
...that when looking at the two states purely with regard to how much time one has at his/her disposal for gospel proclamation, singleness has the edge (so to speak). To draw more than that from this one passage is fraught with
Thanks Bob.
However, there is no argument here that marriage is bad. Just that singleness is superior.
How superior? It allows the person to be more fully devoted to the Lord. That’s a fairly significant edge.
Of course Paul does show it is not appropriate to remain single in all circumstances (one of them being if you are acting improperly to the one you are engaged to).
It’s also interesting to note that in the New Testament we learn that marriage is a metaphor for our relationship with Christ. In the new heaven and new earth, marriages won’t last, but our relationship with Christ will. The New Creation in Christ has turned marriage on its head.
Bob - what would you argue is the relationship between singleness and marriage?
It’s also interesting to note that in the New Testament we learn that marriage is a metaphor for our relationship with Christ. In the new heaven and new earth, marriages won’t last, but our relationship with Christ will. The New Creation in Christ has turned marriage on its head.
Yeah, I think this is significant...There seems to be progression concerning the place of marriage from the garden to the NT to the age to come...From the expeted norm to an option to a thing of the past.
. . . there is no argument here that marriage is bad. Just that singleness is superior.
How superior? It allows the person to be more fully devoted to the Lord. That’s a fairly significant edge.
Of course Paul does show it is not appropriate to remain single in all circumstances (one of them being if you are acting improperly to the one you are engaged to).
It’s also interesting to note that in the New Testament we learn that marriage is a metaphor for our relationship with Christ. In the new heaven and new earth, marriages won’t last, but our relationship with Christ will. The New Creation in Christ has turned marriage on its head.
Bob - what would you argue is the relationship between singleness and marriage?
Mike
Mike
My problem is with the generalised use of “superior”. Singleness is seen as superior with regard to a particular dimension of the Christian life, vis a vis, availability for gospel service; it is not superior in every way. Marriage, one could argue, has the advantage of displaying to the world the glorious relationship between Christ and his church. [NB. It’s not “our” relationship if by that is meant us individually that is pictured in marriage - we are not individually brides of Christ.] While the earthly marriage relationship is temporal, the thing it signifies is eternal and outlasts even the very sphere where singleness is superior, i.e., the proclamation of the gospel.
As to the relationship between singleness and marriage, I don’t know if there is more to be said than what I have just said, except that they are both equally valid states before God, both of which have the potential to further the work of the kingdom and bring glory to God.
It is interesting to reflect that, in contrast to the men, many, but not all, of our female ministers are single. Why is this a cultural ‘norm’?
Very good question, Michael - my initial reaction is that there might be a male insecurity thing going on here (ie guys thinking that there is no way they could ever ask such a woman out)....
Touching on this then, and slightly changing topic, is it that single women are able to focus more on gospel ministry to other women, where as married women focus on gospel ministry to their families as a priority, that it is a cultural norm?
My problem is with the generalised use of “superior”. Singleness is seen as superior with regard to a particular dimension of the Christian life, vis a vis, availability for gospel service; it is not superior in every way.
I think you are limiting what Paul is saying in 1 Cor 7. Paul isn’t talking about Gospel service (in terms of Christian ministry per say). He’s talking about living in the last days, in light of the resurrection, and Christ’s return. In that situation, Paul urges the Corinthians to remain in the situation they are in - if they are married, stay married. If single, stay single. His preference is singleness, but he goes to great lengths to assure readers of the validity of their current relationships, and honoring both them and God.
But you’re certainly right that singleness is not superior in every way. In fact, Paul points out a couple of circumstances where marriage is the preferred option. That’s the problem with using “superior” to describe it - people can hear it as meaning in every circumstance, in every situation. But that’s too simple.
So whilst singleness may not be superior in every way, it is superior for those (or at least the Corinthians) living in light of the resurrection awaiting the return of Christ.
Bob Cameron - 12 June 2008 06:41 PM
As to the relationship between singleness and marriage, I don’t know if there is more to be said than what I have just said, except that they are both equally valid states before God, both of which have the potential to further the work of the kingdom and bring glory to God.
You certainly have no argument from me here -both are equally valid states before God. Marriage is a wonderful gift from God, to be treasured, honored, and defended. And in whatever situation we are in, we are to serve Christ first and bring glory to God.
Granted, I may have overstated my case to make a point. I’m fairly comfortable with your analysis of 1 Cor 7. And from that point on I think we’re pretty much on the same page (oh dear, sorry for that!).
Granted, I may have overstated my case to make a point. I’m fairly comfortable with your analysis of 1 Cor 7. And from that point on I think we’re pretty much on the same page (oh dear, sorry for that!).
It is interesting to reflect that, in contrast to the men, many, but not all, of our female ministers are single. Why is this a cultural ‘norm’?
Very good question, Michael - my initial reaction is that there might be a male insecurity thing going on here (ie guys thinking that there is no way they could ever ask such a woman out)....
Hi David,
That tended to be my gut answer to the question as well - but I’m wondering what exactly it means. That is, why are ‘guys thinking there is no way they could ever ask such a woman out’?
Inquiring minds (particularly those of single women in ministry!) want to know ;)
Hi Dani
There are at least two possible reasons that come to mind, both of which seem to be to be related to the prevailing wisdom here in Sydney about the respective roles of men and women:
1. I suspect that some guys may (subconsciously) be reluctant to date a woman who is more heavily involved in ministry than they are, on the basis that it would be difficult to exercise headship in a relationship where their partner is (seemingly) more spiritually mature than they are.
2. As a practical matter, it seems to me that quite a number of women who are in ministry throw themselves so fully into ministering into other women that they just don’t have (or make) the time in a church setting to get to know the guys. This also means that the guys find themselves unable to get to know the women who are in ministry, as they never get the chance to talk with them.
Both these issues lead me to the conclusion that some of the women need to “be themselves” a bit more when they are around the guys, rather than always being focused just on their ministry…
The opinions expressed in this forum belong to the individual posting the message and may not represent the view of the Sydney Diocese of the Anglican Church. Click here to read the Posting Policy.
Everyone is welcome on our forums, but please keep comments on-topic and civil. Any flaming or general nastiness will be deleted. No unsolicited advertising is allowed. All comments, suggestions, bug reports, etc. related to the forums should be directed to Robert Moller. Click here to read our complete Posting Policy.
report bugs
Get the latest Sydney stories, Culture and Indepth on your mobile device. Visit sydang.mobi