Pastor on trial for refusal to work with female minister

[ms]

TESTING THE FAITH
Pastor on trial for refusal to work with female minister
Court charges him and 2 other church leaders with criminal discrimination

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: November 3, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern



© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

A pastor who refused to work with a female minister because of his biblical convictions has been charged with criminal discrimination by a Finnish court.

Ari Norro will be on trial Nov. 16 for allegedly violating Finland's laws barring discrimination in the workplace or in public based on gender and other grounds, including sexual orientation, Christianity Today magazine reported.

Norro is a member of the Lutheran Evangelical Association in Finland, a group within the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland that believes the Bible does not allow women to serve as pastors.

In March, Christianity Today reported, he was scheduled to preach at a communion service in the southern town of Hyvinkää as a visiting pastor. When Petra Pohjanraito showed up for her shift to help distribute communion, Norro said he must leave, because he could not take part in a service with a female pastor.

"We were totally embarrassed by her arrival, for we understood very well that she was coming (to serve) at the altar," Norro told Christianity Today.

(Story continues below)


Norro said he offered to leave the church, but Pohjanraito decided to leave instead.

The incident was turned over to police when the chair of the Hyvinkää Church Council filed a request for an investigation, according to the Finnish daily Helsingin Sanomat.

Christianity Today said two other church leaders also have been charged for not interfering to prevent the alleged violation of law.

The case could impact the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Finland's controversy over whether homosexuals can be ordained and whether pastors can bless same-sex couples.

Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, former president of IsoKirja College in Finland, insisted the government has nothing to do with religion and wants to stay out of the discussion.

"This case has nothing to do with religion; it has everything to do with a perceived lack of equality," he told Christianity Today.

Norro contends he did not commit a crime, because his country's constitution – which says no one should be treated differently because of his religious convictions – overrules the state penal code.

"Naturally, to be accused is far from being pleasant," Norro told CT. "It's sad that the church can't resolve problems like this one (by itself). In this case, the church itself winds a rope round its neck, and then gives the end of the rope to the … state (court)."

Norro, who probably would be fined if found guilty, argues other denominations, such as the Greek Orthodox Church and the Catholic church, do not ordain women, but they are not accused of committing a crime.

He fears pastors in Finland soon will be put on trial for refusing to work with a homosexual pastor or even for teaching God does not approve of homosexual relationships.

[powderman]

Practicing, unrepentent homosexuals cannot be pastors, and they are abominations in Gods eyes. POWDERMAN. 

[Swampman]

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (King James Version)

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Also the Bible tells us that a minister must be the husband of one wife, and that a woman should not be in authority over a man.

Women cannot be ministers in a Christian church.

[billy_56081]

Swampman You beat me to it.

Ole Rooster Cogburn was kinda partial to that verse.

[BlkHawk73]

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (King James Version)

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Also the Bible tells us that a minister must be the husband of one wife, and that a woman should not be in authority over a man.

Women cannot be ministers in a Christian church. 

So women are to be subserviant, and any questions they have are only to be asked to the man, yet they cannot ask any of these questions they might have in a church...?  No woman can hold any postion of authority over a male? 

 Yeah, that's modern thinking. 

Practicing, unrepentent homosexuals cannot be pastors, and they are abominations in Gods eyes. POWDERMAN. 

  correction...practicing, unrepentant pedophiles...

Good thing all that money they take in can buy thier laywers to get them off...errr,  out of prison...

  Guess that so often preached Golden Rule only applies when it's beneficial to the one preaching it.

[powderman]

I've heard good testimonies from women, and there are several churches I know of that have female pastors, but,  I don't believe that women should preach either. POWDERMAN. 

[Swampman]

I didn't write the Bible.  I can only report what it says.

I'm not concerned with modern thinking or the "golden rule."

[Dee]

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (King James Version)

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Also the Bible tells us that a minister must be the husband of one wife, and that a woman should not be in authority over a man.

Women cannot be ministers in a Christian church. 

So women are to be subserviant, and any questions they have are only to be asked to the man, yet they cannot ask any of these questions they might have in a church...?  No woman can hold any postion of authority over a male? 

 Yeah, that's modern thinking. 

Nope, blackhawk. It's BIBLICAL thinking. You are not seeing the whole picture here. The scripture is speaking of during services and teaching men. They (the older women) ARE to teach to younger women, and children. This scripture is to be taken in context. AND, do you really think a woman (as a minister) can teach you how to be the MAN OF THE HOUSE?

Practicing, unrepentent homosexuals cannot be pastors, and they are abominations in Gods eyes. POWDERMAN. 

  correction...practicing, unrepentant pedophiles...

Correction! parcticing, unrepentant HOMOSEXUALS Romans Chapter 1 verses 22 thru 27.

Good thing all that money they take in can buy thier laywers to get them off...errr,  out of prison...

  Guess that so often preached Golden Rule only applies when it's beneficial to the one preaching it.

Guess one NEEDS to get into his Bible to better understand what he is talking about.

[powderman]

dee. Now you are rewriting the Bible. I assume you are referring to the catholic priests. POWDERMAN. 

[Dee]

dee. Now you are rewriting the Bible. I assume you are referring to the catholic priests. POWDERMAN. 

Perhaps one of us is mis-understanding the other. Where am I re-writing the Bible.

[ms]

Perhaps one of us is mis-understanding the other. Where am I re-writing the Bible. Your not when I put this topic on dee I thought of you.ms

[Dee]

Oooooooooook?

[PartsMan]

My mom is a retired Disciples of Christ minister.
I think he was wrong and would not go to hear him preach.

But I also think he is entitled to his opinions and beliefs.
There is absolutely no reason for the state to get involved.
Put it in the news and let the people decide if they want to hear him preach.

[dcewolf]

Aside from the Biblical views of what is right or not...  I find it silly that a VISITING pastor was brought up on charges    The Finnish must have some interesting way of enforcing their laws.  He isn't the one running that church or making decisions for them, he was a visitor -- seems really no different than a person not wanting to eat at a restaurant because they have a really nasty restroom.  -- He saw something he disagreed with and was going to leave.

As far as the stance on women pastors -- kinda hard to get around the whole man of one wife thing.

[alpha wolf]

  I think he was right.  My mother is a pastor at her church and I refuse to hear her speak. 

[ironglow]

  Blackhawk;

        I and i am sure many here are not the least bit swayed by "modern thinking"..that's exactly what has gotten our country in such a real mess over the last 30 years...

   Dee gave you the straight Bible info..now sometimes we don't like what the Bible tells us, but that doesn't give us permission to try to rewrite God's word !

   

     ..Reminds me of a story about the great evangelist, Billy Sunday :

    It seems that one day Bro Billy gave one of his tough- on-sin sermons..and may have crimped a few "feelings".
  As the people filed out , past the famous preacher..one lady took him to task..she said :
       

     "Pastor Sunday; That was a pretty rough sermon..kinda like petting a cat by running your hand against the way the hair lays !"

           Billy paused for a moment, and replied, " Lady, maybe it's time to turn the cat around !"...

       So; when the "gays" start to whine about how the Bible actually views them..maybe it's time to "turn the cat around."

   As far as women preaching, I tend to agree with Dee, swampman & powderman..but I wouldn't dream of trying to tell other churches how to run their show.

   Government interfering with churches..there should be no such thing..
  I find it comical how some groups (e.g. ACLU) clamor for "seperation of "church & state"...but are continually wanting the govt to take away the tax-free status of
 various "religious organizations"...just shows what phony, hateful, hypocrites they are..

[toysoldier]

I used that quote to open a Bible study class. Followed it with 1 Cor. 11:4-6, telling men to pray with bare heads, and women to pray covered or have their heads shaved. Then on to Col 3:22--"Slaves, obey your earthly masters...". I then asked what we were to do with Paul, whose injunctions seemed to clash strongly with what we now consider moral and righteous. It started a good conversation. There is, of course, no easy way to resolve the conflict, if at all. Those whose simplistic thinking goes no further than the Bible (as translated under the direction of the notorious homosexual King James) quote such parts as they like, ignoring as the injunctions to kill disrespectful children and have a mob stone to death adulterers.

[powderman]

DEE, I apologize Sir, I was in error. POWDERMAN. 

[ironglow]

   Toy soldier;

          Whatever King James was... is of no consequence ! Remember; God used a big fish to convince Jonah where to go , and a donkey to scold Balaam !
  
    King James did not DO the translating..he only ordered it done. As a matter of fact, the scholars who were chosen for the job were a luminous group, who worked with so much diligence and with so many checks & balances that they could not help but do an outstanding job.
        
   God chooses the foolish things to confound the wise...and the weak things to confound the mighty ( I Cor 1: 27 )...thus it actually points to likely Godly intervention, in that God should use an evil King in doing a great and good work !
    
  Most of the verses you used as bad examples come from the Old Testament; we now live under A New Covenant..a new deal, so to speak.

  The New Testament passage you cite ( Col 3: 22 ), you should read in "whole Bible" context ! Yes, slavery was spoken of, but that does not mean it was approved of !

  Actually, slavery in a New testament context most often refers to slavery toward some kind of sin or some false religion...

   In Eph 6:9 & Col 4;1 slave owners are told to take good care of their slaves, and in Col 3: 22, slaves are told to be peaceable.

    Yes, Jesus could at that time have risen up and freed all slaves, healed all the sick, raised up all the dead and brought on the millennial kingdom..but that was not God's plan for that time .

   Were I in your Sunday School class at that time, I would have challenged you on those conclusions !

    Frankly, I have taught Sunday School for many years, often do relief preaching and have spoken (as Chaplin) at several American Legion funerals, and if I could not believe that the Bible were TRUE in it's ENTIRETY,I could have done none of those things . My conscience would have forbidden me !
    
   I simply do not subscribe to  "cafeteria style" Bible usage..

   Slavery, as an institution, has been ended in this country..and praise God for it !

   There are however, some countries in this world where slavery is still widespread ( e.g. Sudan& Darfur ), and some whole countries either enslaved ( N. Korea & Cuba ) or becoming   enslaved, ( Venezuela ) .
   There are people enslaved by false religions ( cults ) or whole nations enslaved by religion ( Middle East, North Africa & etc) and millions more enslaved by drugs (sorcery), alcohol, pornography, vile music, filthy "Hollywood lifestyles, hedonism and dissolute living...
    
    I wonder when the usual outspoken, "beautiful people" and politicians are going to rise up, speak out, and campaign against these forms of slavery ?


  BTW: If this discussion is to continue, perhaps we should continue in " Misc relig" thread..

[Swampman]

"1 Cor. 11:4-6, telling men to pray with bare heads, and women to pray covered or have their heads shaved."

First off that's not what it says.

What it means is that men shouldn't pray or worship with their hat, on and women shouldn't cut their hair.  It still applies.

[ironglow]

  There is room for discussion in  I Cor 11: 4-6   but I really think swampman has the correct view..

  Quite obviously, in vs 5, a woman that shaves her head , dishonors it..and in vs 6 it reiterates..if a woman is to uncover her head,
   (cut hair very short), she may as well go ahead and shave it !

   At least, that's the way I read it !

[williamlayton]

First---I agree with women not being pastors---on several levels.
This thought does not have any basis based on inability, lack of knowledge or lack of training.
I find that we attempt to change a order of things based on a worldly thinking and this worldly thinking is in defiance of what God wants and designs.
Now--if you want too say outmoded thinking--old fashioned--or anything else, that is OK. It matters not too me and I will guarantee that God's word does not return void---whether out of the mouth of a woman or out of the mouth of a man, However; that is clearly not the way god intended this too be.
Now what are the consequences?? Imano--but there are consequences.
Blessings

[SHOOTALL]

back to the org. post , the man minister offered to leave !
the woman instead left on her own , someone else called the cops !
for the life of me i can't see a crime ?
as far as gay's preaching , bet one could be found in alot of religions if we looked ! its a sin for sure but then we see sin all the time now don't we !
in a world where 50% or more marriages end in divorce at least some are due to men walking out and not leading their family , maybe most ! if a woman is left to run the family with out support from the males of the church ( as in coming down hard on men who desert their family ) maybe they feel they have the right to do all the male duties !
If we as males insist on cutting down the women for their actions maybe we should get our own actions in order first !
No I'm not saying women preachers are right or wrong , just make sure you are pure in action before you condemn !

[williamlayton]

Explain "Pure in action."
Blessings

[SHOOTALL]

Well i see many people watch a man run around on his wife and not stay home and raise his children . Yet he keeps his job , his friends etc. even no , shall we say directional guidance from a minister . We are our brothers keeper , right ?
I find it hard to condemn a woman for seeking to learn the Bible and witness  yet not make the man who vowed to be her husband stay and keep up hie vow !
Like Dee said ya can't pick and choose !
enlightenment and blessings to you also !

[ironglow]

 Shootall;

      I believe the real difference between many of us is in the exegesis of the Bible itself . Some tend to take some parts and excuse them as "allegory", myth, "just Paul's interpretation" or "first century thought patterns".
     I believe,such men as Dee, Powderman, myself and others are literalists..we tend to believe that the Bible is "God breathed" in every word and it means exactly as it says.  I believe that is why Dee said "you can't pick and choose"..meaning God wants us to observe all He said...not pick what we wish to obey..and choose to ignore others.

   For the situation in question we refer to I Timothy 2: 12..." ..But I suffer the woman not to teach, nor usurp the authority over the man, but to be in silence." Then in the next few verses it is explained and elaborated upon, by our creator.

   Some would say "that's just Timothy's view" and go ahead as if it were not the way God wants things..but for the literalist, every word is God's word and very important for our
instruction and edification..

  For me, if the Bible is not God's word in it's entirety..I may as well read any book. ...And I fear that those who do not take it literally, respect it no more than any other book..

   As far as the example of a husband or Pastor (minister) not living up to God's standards, that is an unfortunately all too common thing with men AND women , so the the example makes an important, but moot, point..
   
    William made an important distinction, woman is not lesser..we just have different roles in God's plan for his local church !

[Dee]

"1 Cor. 11:4-6, telling men to pray with bare heads, and women to pray covered or have their heads shaved."

First off that's not what it says.

What it means is that men shouldn't pray or worship with their hat, on and women shouldn't cut their hair.  It still applies.

Swampman, that is EXACTLY what it means. You are dead on sir. As far as the length of the womans hair that is NOT addressed however, it is this old Bible believer's feelings that men should LOOK LIKE MEN, and women should LOOK LIKE WOMEN, and yes, I am talking about clothes also.

[Dee]

DEE, I apologize Sir, I was in error. POWDERMAN. 

No problem.

[Dee]

Shootall;

      I believe the real difference between many of us is in the exegesis of the Bible itself . Some tend to take some parts and excuse them as "allegory", myth, "just Paul's interpretation" or "first century thought patterns".
     I believe,such men as Dee, Powderman, myself and others are literalists..we tend to believe that the Bible is "God breathed" in every word and it means exactly as it says.  I believe that is why Dee said "you can't pick and choose"..meaning God wants us to observe all He said...not pick what we wish to obey..and choose to ignore others.

ironglow, you are correct, in your analogy of my view of the Bible, and it's message to us all. I doubt NOTHING it says, nor do I question it's origin. God PRESERVED what God wanted PRESERVED. Nothing more, nothing less, and if one starts picking and choosing scriptures to suit one's PREFERENCE, then one needs to go back and read Romans Chapter 1 verse 22, as it would certainly fit their attitude.

   For the situation in question we refer to I Timothy 2: 12..." ..But I suffer the woman not to teach, nor usurp the authority over the man, but to be in silence." Then in the next few verses it is explained and elaborated upon, by our creator.

Once again ironglow, dead on. Scripture MUST be taken in context for what it was meant, and backed up with OTHER scripture, not opinion.

   Some would say "that's just Timothy's view" and go ahead as if it were not the way God wants things..but for the literalist, every word is God's word and very important for our
instruction and edification..

Amen to that, and if one disagrees with your statement, refer back to Romans Chapter 1 verse 22. Their still trying to do it their way, instead of God's.

  For me, if the Bible is not God's word in it's entirety..I may as well read any book. ...And I fear that those who do not take it literally, respect it no more than any other book..

There ya go.

   As far as the example of a husband or Pastor (minister) not living up to God's standards, that is an unfortunately all too common thing with men AND women , so the the example makes an important, but moot, point..
   
Exactly we are to live a life that is PLEASING to God. Sin we will, but we should hate even our own sin.

    William made an important distinction, woman is not lesser..we just have different roles in God's plan for his local church !

And that is the problem. We have LOST OUR DIRECTION in many churches, by injecting vanity into the order of things, and confusing EQUALITY with job description for the man AND the woman.

Excellent points!

[ironglow]

  Right on, Dee;


    Too many " Cafeteria Christians " around...

     Unfortunately for them, the 66 books of the Bible aren't supposed to be used as a menu..where we pick only the things we "like"..