Quote:
Originally Posted by UntoHim
My friend Evangelical you are speaking of leadership in a totally different manner than what many of us are speaking. As a matter of fact, you are speaking of leadership in a different manner than Witness Lee taught:
All these cases prove that the leadership among God's children today should not be official, permanent, or organizational. On the contrary, it depends always upon spiritual capacity. God ordained it this way in order to set aside the human concept of leadership.
From ministrybooks.org
|
Yes because the person I was replying to, QOSTA, spoke of leadership in a "totally different manner than what many of us are speaking". They said "Men hold positions of power in the LC system". "Why aren't women represented in positions of power and be involved in high level decision making?" That to me says they aren't well versed in the ministry and that is their perception as an outsider. But I don't see you correcting them about this. The reality (setting aside perceived hypocrisy for the moment) is as you said, there are no official leadership positions.
However whether they are official positions or unofficial positions it does not change anything on the matter of female leadership. In Catholicism, women might complain they can't be a priest or a bishop. In the LC or brethren movement, women might complain they can't be an elder. So whether Lee was a hypocrite or not doesn't change the fundamental topic we are discussing.
You have not given a satisfactory answer to my question:
If women are in "non-teaching leadership roles" anyway by virtue of being married to an elder, what is the problem?
You then raised the matter of dress style which I don't see as relevant.
There are only two possible positions on this issue -egalitarian, or complementarian. Neither of these views are affected by the style of leadership.