Faith

Unmarried Evangelical Pastor Seeking Work Decries ‘Singlism’ Bias in Church Hiring

We’ve all heard of wrongful sexism and even racism in the workplace, but now at least one unmarried and unemployed evangelical pastor claims there’s a whole new “ism” facing his profession: “singlism” — churches’ preference for hiring married pastors over unmarried ones.

Mark Almlie was laid off in the spring of 2009 and is still struggling to find work. After applying to more than 500 job postings, Almlie faces a field where those doing the hiring overwhelmingly prefer married people and, especially, married men with children, the New York Times reports.

Mr. Almlie, 37, has been shocked, he says, at what he calls unfair discrimination, based mainly on irrational fears: that a single pastor cannot counsel a mostly married flock, that he might sow turmoil by flirting with a church member, or that he might be gay. If the job search is hard for single men, it is doubly so for single women who train for the ministry, in part because many evangelical denominations explicitly require a man to lead the congregation.

Mr. Almlie, an ordained evangelical minister who lives in Petaluma, Calif., has also had to contend with the argument, which he disputes with scriptural citations of his own, that the Bible calls for married leaders. “Prejudice against single pastors abounds,” Mr. Almlie wrote in articles he posted on a popular Christian blog site in January and February, setting off a wide-ranging debate online on a topic that many said has been largely ignored.

Some evangelical churches, in particular, openly exclude single candidates; a recent posting for a pastor by a church on Long Island said it was seeking “a family man whose family will be involved in the ministry life of the church.” Other churches convey the message through code words, like “seeking a Biblical man” (translation: a husband and a provider).

“I’ll get an e-mail saying ‘wonderful résumé,’ ” Mr. Almlie said in an interview. “Once I say I’m single, never married, I never hear back.”

Unlike other forms of workplace discrimination, the Times notes that religious institutions are exempt when it comes to hiring for religion-related positions.

But it is really fair to say the churches are “discriminating”?  I’m a Catholic female and know that, according to church tradition, I will never be able to become a priest.  Before my generation, women weren’t even allowed to be alter servers.  Men who do become priests are not allowed to marry, but is continuing such traditions really a matter of discrimination?

R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., says it‘s unfair to accuse churches of discrimination in Almlie’s case.  “Both the logic of Scripture and the centrality of marriage in society,” he told the Times, justify “the strong inclination of congregations to hire a man who is not only married but faithfully married.”  In this light, Mohler advises his seminary students that “if they remain single, they need to understand that there’s going to be a significant limitation on their ability to serve as a pastor.”

It’s true, single pastors are rare, especially among conservative churches.  In more mainline Protestant denominations, roughly one in six senior pastors are single.  And after the sexual upheavel in recent decades, it’s understandable that many churches depend on married pastors to reinforce the image of the traditional family.

The Times also includes speculation that churches rely in pastors’ spouses as a source of unpaid labor.

While he searches for a job, Almlie says he’s also looking for a life partner.  Ultimately, he says, he does not begrudge not being hired and understands the church’s underlying desire to have a model family lead the congregation.

Comments (141)

1 2 3
  • GIDEON612
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:07pm

    I am troubled by most of these comments. If you do not know your direction….talk to God. Have we gotten so far from The Truth?, which yes is another Name of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

    Report Post » GIDEON612  
    • Jezreel
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 11:07pm

      I agree. That is because people do not seek to know God or HIs truth. A hireling does not care for the sheep. When the wolf comes, they flee. Hirelings are those who do it for a paycheck. It is very sickening and very grieving to the spirit to actually see the blindness of most of the people in our country when it comes to truth. They rather heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears. They will get what they want and have what they fear the most that will come upon their own heads.

      Report Post »  
  • commonsenseguy
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:07pm

    is he first baptist,second baptist,methodist ,united methodist..catholic , jewish,black liberation,etc?????? he never said,,just complained ,we have several small country churches who use preachers from other cities 20 to 30 miles away,the small church starts early,while the larger church starts at the regular time,so what is the big deal,i think it is about money,not religion .but anyway,there is work,if he would just wait like evreybody else,or take a less paying job,sounds like real world america,some have jobs,some don’t.get over it.

    Report Post »  
  • seeks4truth
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:04pm

    If I remember correctly Jesus was single…or are the evangelicals going to say Jesus was married?
    I’m a bible believing Christian and think this is stupid. We teach our children to wait for the partner God has for them, and yet we won’t let a Godly pastor lead a church? I know a lot of married pastors that don’t know the first thing about being a good marriage counselor.
    A pastor should preach the gospel and give the sacraments rightly, end of story period. Heck it seems like all the Apostles left their wives and children to preach the Word…
    I wonder if these churches would let Jesus, Paul, Timothy or any other biblical man who chose Christ over family to preach the gospel.
    Good luck to pastor Almlie.
    Check out Rebecca St. James to see a godly woman who waited for the right man…why can’t a man wait for the right woman?

    Report Post » seeks4truth  
  • Islesfordian
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:48pm

    “But it is really fair to say the churches are “discriminating”?”

    Yes it is. But discriminaqtion is a very good thing, as long as the right things are being discriminated. One who does not discriminate between palatable food and the merely edible will generally not cook great meals. One who does not discriminate between an honest man and a thief will soon have his wallet missing. A church that does not discriminate between a man who knows his Bible and an ignoramus will have to suffer really awful and probably heretical sermons. Etc.

    Discriminating between a black man and a white man is foolish because there is no relevant difference, unless you want to perform a very realistic production of Othello. Discriminating between a Christian and a Jew is irrelevant in most jobs except those that require a commitment to the Christian faith.

    Report Post » Islesfordian  
  • Tnredneck
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:45pm

    The last thing I would want if being counseled on marriage or problems with raising children is someone who had no experience in these matters himself. If anything you think the church leaders need be well qualified in these matters. I wouldn‘t want a doctor operating on me that wasn’t qualified or without experience. Same goes for church leaders. It’s like an elder of the church telling me my kids are unruly while his own are in jail.

    Report Post »  
    • Islesfordian
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:28pm

      If you have cancer do you want your doctor to have had cancer too? How does a married pastor really help you taht much better? His marriage is not YOUR marriage. All he can do is point you to the spiritual and general truths about marriage and expect you to apply them yourself. Honor and love your wife and don’t cheat on her. What’s hard to understand?

      I am not married and understand these things as well as most married men. Better, in some ways, because I don’t have a marriage whose trouble might bias me in one direction of another in order to defend myself. Experience can instruct. It can also blind.

      It’s YOUR marriage. Your pastor isn’t going to save it for you. That isn’t his job. It’s YOUR job. The Holy Spirit is not going to give him any more special insight than you could have if you just got down on your knees and started praying for your wife and marriage.

      Besides, what happened to getting advice from your parents

      Report Post » Islesfordian  
  • 338lapua
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:41pm

    The whole concept of going to “school” to become a pastor is just bizarre. All that is needed is a Bible and an understanding of Gods word. Any organized religion is simply a business, turning out product. This gent has done the homework, and still he has no livlihood. Strange, but he is not conforming to the business model of the particular “faith” he is trying to glom onto. The Catholics have their parameters, the others all have theirs, if he truly thinks he is a Christian he should understand that contrary to what he thinks, trials and tribulations are a part of life. Put down your life, take up my cross, and follow me. Quit whining. A real leader of a Bible believing flock does not care what people do or think. God is no respecter of persons. Start from nothing, build a flock, stop waiting for someone else to do the lifting.

    Report Post »  
    • Islesfordian
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:18pm

      Consider that the apostles went to school for three years. It was a peripatetic discipleship course, but a discipleship course nonetheless. All masters had their disciples. Jesus was not different in this. Merely having a Bible does not make you wise in its understanding. This takes schooling under wise amnd experienced men of God. Schools dedicated for the training for ministry is what created the university system we have now. It is the basis for all education.

      Report Post » Islesfordian  
    • sbleve
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 6:55am

      There is no better platform of higher learning than OJT – hands on with the guidance of a journeyman mentor. A tinsmith at one time was an apprentice under the hand-corporal at times of an expert tin worker.

      Elite universities have for eternity attempted to control the ingress egress of the notion that academic institutions are the key to intellectual salvation.

      Preachers, persons of the cloth, do not save another persons soul. Soul saving, the final step, is a single personal choice. Be wary of gospel betrayal that uses the form of collective anything.

      Report Post » sbleve  
  • Islesfordian
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:40pm

    “While he searches for a job, Almlie says he’s also looking for a life partner.”

    THIS is the problem. Pastors who have a dual objective of tending to the flock while also looking for a mate will be compromised in the way they pastor the single women in their parish. The occasion for unwitting abuse is high. The best practice would be to exclude all the women in the congregation as possible mates and look outside, but that would be very difficult.

    Report Post » Islesfordian  
  • whiskeybomb
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:36pm

    Why doesn’t he just start his own Church? Is he a terrible pastor? If so then that is probably the real reason no one wants to hire him, if not then he just started his own congregation who will determine if what he offers is sufficient to their spiritual needs.

    Report Post »  
  • NLenz
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:29pm

    Hmm..single, never married, you can’t be a preacher. Guess even Paul of Tarsus would have been out of luck with these churches, eh?

    Report Post »  
    • Ozymandias
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:36pm

      Since Saul of Tarsus was a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin or council of which required the members to be married Saul/Paul was most likely a widow.

      Report Post » Ozymandias  
  • Veritas
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:24pm

    A church does not have to be like any other employer. It is treated more like a club that discriminate based on whatever they want.

    Report Post » Veritas  
  • Dumbsht
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:17pm

    @Ozymandias

    Looks like you been to some churches you didn’t like. Move on forget it live the righteous life.
    Ever heard of the visible church vs. Invisible church ?

    I would prefer the stability of a married leader (W/ good faithful relationship) of the church.

    Report Post »  
    • Ozymandias
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:34pm

      @ DumbSht (what a poor choice of moniker.)

      The invisible church is no church at all. Only a fool follows a fool and the foolish of the fools follows a young fool. A minister should be first well grounded in faith and the scriptures being able to challenge the “gainsayers.” It is nice when they are married however, the best of the minister statesmen I have known are elderly widows. The Apostle Paul was most likely a widow. RIP J.B. McInteer. Evangelical Churches unfortunately give those no “grounded or rooted in the face” both a reason to doubt and leave the Church of Christ based upon their petty squabbles, and give the unrighteous who really are only seeking controversy a means an reason to blaspheme the name of Jesus as the Christ the Son of God.

      Report Post » Ozymandias  
  • ramburner
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:12pm

    No getting around Titus 1:6 “If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.” and 1 Tim 3:1-7 “This [is] a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.” We must get back to the Bible and learn to use it as our defender. What part of “… the husband of ONE wife” don’t we understand? We did not write the words, but if we believe God, then we know there was a good reason for them. We need to be able to quote the Word at every chance to defend those things that are right and rebuking things that are wrong. This may seem harsh, but we are called to be ambassadors for Christ, and we should know, we will be ridiculed and made fun of and even so much as put to death for our Lord. Get ready, the time is coming when we will not be allowed to even utter these words without fear for our life!

    Report Post »  
    • Tnredneck
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:21pm

      Looks like those times are about here. I will defend Christ and I WON’T fear!

      Report Post »  
    • Ozymandias
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:23pm

      Titus is giving the qualifications of an Elder or leader who oversees the congregation, not a preacher-gainsayer. People are too soon to follow a single man walking off a cliff, however, two are more elders are designated as being the leader of the atonomous Christian church. There is a conflict of interest when the Pastor/Preacher is also the governing entity. It’s like Congress voting themselves a raise on a regular basis its a “conflict of interest.” More than one Evangelical church has split over this oversight in the scriptures as well as sexual misconduct. You cannot go on feelings alone, led by the Spirit, yes, but only through faith according to the scriptures.

      Report Post » Ozymandias  
    • Islesfordian
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:25pm

      Surely you can’t be interpreting “the husband of one wife” as meaning that he must be married. Since this was Paul who wrote this, who was unmarried himself, the natural meaning must be to exclude men with MORE than one wife. That would apply to polygamists and likely also to those divorced and remarried, and possibly also to the widowed and remarried.

      Report Post » Islesfordian  
    • 338lapua
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:26pm

      All the prophets and all the apostles…..killed, killed, killed!

      Report Post »  
    • momprayn
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:07pm

      The scriptures given in 1 Timothy are regarding a pastor should be the answer, period….I agree. I was just getting ready to post the very same thing when I saw this already….”He must have a well-behaved family, with children who obey quickly & quietly. For if a man can’t make his own little family behave, how can he help the whole church?” 1 Tim. 3:4-5 And it’s not re elders or deacons – they are elsewhere. So…it’s not “discriminating” it‘s the qualifications needed for the job and therefore if you’re single, you’re not qualified. So simple and people make everything complicated. Re getting paid to be the preacher, there are verses about they should get paid (1 Tim. 5:18) ; but it depends on the situation. Sometimes the congregations cannot afford them, so I think if you think God has called you there, you should get a job and not be a burden on them – as I think Paul said he did. If people would just stick to the scriptures when questioning and deciding, everything would be much better, to say the least!!!! And yes, I agree – get ready — the church has gone into apostasy and getting worse with time plus we have our govn’t/libs trying to destroy it.

      Report Post »  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 12:00am

      Isles is correct in his exegesis. Under your exegesis then Paul would not be qualified to be an elder. The qualification was for a church that would have had men who had more than one wife at the time of their conversion. This is not what God intended and so Paul gives the instruction that an elder, if married have only one wife. Think about it. You have a married elder and he is in that position and then his wife dies. He is no longer able to be an elder? That it is an inappropriate exegesis. You guys are guilty of proof texting (reading a meaning into a verse). This meaning into the scriptures rather than let the scriptures speak for themselves. Your meaning does not fit into the whole council of God or into the apostles situations that would have written it down. Just for disclosure I am not catholic. I am fully protestant and very committed but we must divide the word rightly and to suggest that marriage is a qualification to be an elder is not an accurate reading of the instruction contextually.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
  • TJexcite
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:12pm

    I just hope his faith is not broken with the rejection of those who he wants lead in faith.

    Report Post » TJexcite  
  • Ozymandias
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:08pm

    @Herman_Cain,

    Your as silly as any woman born. Jesus did not have a wife because he would not be able to claim that he was in the father and the father was in him. Secondly, a wife would never believe that a man who leaves on a Friday with 12 men and does not come home until Sunday has been resurrected from the dead. A woman would never buy that excuse.

    Report Post » Ozymandias  
    • ZAH
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:19pm

      I believe “Herman Cain” (yeah, right…) has been reading the Gospel according to Dan Brown.

      Report Post »  
  • conversationpc
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:03pm

    He searching for a “life partner”?

    Report Post » conversationpc  
    • Tnredneck
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:08pm

      Now there’s a sign!

      Report Post »  
    • towerguy
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:48pm

      Excellent catch. One wonders if this is the way the single pastor phrased it, or if the NYT reporter wanted to skew the reporting.

      Report Post » towerguy  
    • teachermitch32
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 11:03pm

      My question exactly. The statement regarding “life partner” was not in quotes, but one has to wonder if the interviewee (spelling please) phrased it that way. If he did he is already swallowed up in the “world” and has no business teaching others.

      Report Post »  
  • Tnredneck
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:02pm

    Hint…. 1 Timothy chapter 3. It
    Takes experience!

    Report Post »  
  • Ozymandias
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:58pm

    That’s because in Evangelical Churches they expect both the Pastor/Preacher/Evangelist and his wife to be a “tag-team” holy-roller circus act with the “Holy Hands Raised” wave every 15 minutes. The man speaks to the congregation at large and the woman convinces the other silly women that she is their “high priestess.“ Evangelicals are supposedly ”led by the Spirit” however, their message is more often than not a Dr. Feelgood, Everything gonna be alright, and God wants everyone to be rich. This is not the Gospel, “Good News” that Jesus taught. Like he said of the Jews, “this people honors me with their mouth by their heart is far from me. Also see I Corinthians 14:34-35 If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. In addition there has been more than one Pastor of the Evangelical church who has built a huge following only to be found liking men better than women. Caveat emptor!

    Report Post » Ozymandias  
    • Tnredneck
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:05pm

      And it’s a shame. That’s why the scripture is very clear on this matter. Church leaders must be proven and above reproach

      Report Post »  
    • 338lapua
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:24pm

      Man, as much as I hate to put people in a box……I spent time in several evangelical churches. You hit the nail pretty much square on. They have a model they need all to fit in, including their version of clergy. The message is whatever keeps the money rolling in. The business model says married, wife talented in breeding and leading the “worship team”, rosy cheeked children. Ten percenters all.
      Sick and sad. He needs to read his Bible, start a Bible study group, and earn his money actually being productive in society. Idle hands,you know.

      Report Post »  
    • GIDEON612
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:16pm

      @Ozymandias
      I agree with you. You have it right. People call me a zealot, but I have seen the Hand of God. I believe this gentleman is going against what has been either revealed in his heart, by the Holy Spirit, or has let the still small voice to go faint and going in the wrong direction. There is a great need of those to spread the Word, but to get rich by doing it……..those spaces are overcrowded.

      Report Post » GIDEON612  
    • calijohn
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 11:54pm

      “..above reproach…..”
      which church?

      Report Post »  
  • Showtime
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:54pm

    I try to stay out of the marrital status of a preacher. That’s his business, not mine. There’s too much going on to worry about that. At least he’s not wanting to cut the throats of those who ARE married!

    Report Post » Showtime  
  • Showtime
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:52pm

    Newsmax is reporting that there are nine Democrats saying Obama “impeachable on Libya.”

    Report Post » Showtime  
  • obama_binpharteen
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:51pm

    This is almost like getting a better auto insurance rate because you are married. I suppose they think it shows stability.

    Report Post » obama_binpharteen  
  • Tnredneck
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:49pm

    I will side with what the scriptures say. If you don‘t know what it says it’s time to pull out the bible and read it. That’s where you will find the truth.

    Report Post »  
  • TommyGunn
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:49pm

    the churches who wont hire him may wanna refer back to Jesus, who was a single rabbi, without whom there would be no church.

    Report Post »  
    • jedi.kep
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 10:36pm

      One Christian single whining about not getting a job. Boooohooo! Crybaby.

      Report Post » jedi.kep  
    • Oil_Robb
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 6:38am

      In reality maybe he doesnt have what it takes and should show up early and set up chairs. I wanted to be a pro athlete when I was single, buy I didnt hit .300 and couldnt get a fastball over nintey mph

      Report Post »  
  • Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:45pm

    It worked for Jesus, I believe he was single.

    Report Post » Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra  
    • Herman_Cain
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:50pm

      I believe he had a wife and was not mentioned out of respect from his disciples.

      Report Post » DemocracyisTyranny  
    • Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:53pm

      Maybe she was just a nag.

      Report Post » Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra  
    • ThoreauHD
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:01pm

      How many married penniless homeless guys have you met?

      Report Post » ThoreauHD  
    • Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:05pm

      Most of them are divorced. That is why they are homeless. (Sarcasm)

      Report Post » Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra  
    • Herman_Cain
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:06pm

      Penniless during his 3 year ministry. He had family dude.

      Report Post » DemocracyisTyranny  
    • Islesfordian
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:19pm

      Jesus was NOT married. His Bride is the church. Paul was not married, while Peter was. The church has through the ages seen the ministry as a higher calling than marriage. In the east if you are single when you are ordained you must remain single.

      As far as marriage counceling. That is not part of the natural duties of a pastor. The pastor is to lead people to Jesus and remind them of the responsibilities of being a Christian.

      But theer IS a marriage bias in the Protestant churches. Part of it may be Romaphobia and part of it may be due to a the church becoming too comfortable in the world. marriage is an institution of THIS world, not the next. Christians living a “Christian” life that is this world focussed with begin to see as unnatural the Christian life which is so dedicated to the LORD that it renounces marriage.

      Report Post » Islesfordian  
    • Hermeneuticals
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:27pm

      What makes you believe Jesus had a wife?

      Report Post » Hermeneuticals  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:37pm

      @ ISLES……thank you for posting what I would have. Some people have strange ideas fostered by fantasy out of Hollywood.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:49pm

      @ ISLES……I would not say that married people are less than single people in their worth or position as it is an institution instituted by God. It also reflects beautifully the Lord by portraying a spiritual reality in our physical world by the husband wife relationship and its intimacy and love reflecting the Church with Christ and vice versa. Also, in the procreation of children that are then loved and cared for in a way that reflects God’s love for us as children. Paul argued it was better in the sense that marriage would cause you to have worries in this life and could be a distraction from the Lord. Singleness is only able to be done properly when it is a gift given by God according to Paul. I think we may agree here but just wanted to balance comments on this. Just my 2 cents

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • Islesfordian
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:01pm

      Watch, I do not say they are less in worth, but marriage to be done right requires much work. So does the ministry. In oreder not to create a bad marriage a married minister must be less avaiable to the ministry than a single man could be. There are benefits in being an exemplar of marriage to the people, but the risks are doubly bad when the marriage suffers. There is little as spiritually damaging to a church than the break up of a pastor’s marriage, expecially if the pastor shares in the blame for its demise.

      I also think that making the pastor be a model for marriage is adding to his duties unnecessarily. Why cannot the married lay leaders of the church serve in this capacity. I dislke the clericalism that has the minister do and be EVERYTHING in the church related to God while the rest of the church just come to “be fed”. The creation of the order of deacons speaks to the idea that the rest of the church needs to pick up the slack and not make the pastor do everything.

      Report Post » Islesfordian  
    • GIDEON612
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:03pm

      Please stop using the name Herman_Cain when you make these flat-earthed comments. There is no mention of Jesus being married because the Church is His bride. But you have failed to read the Bible or Josephus.
      Change your name and stop discrediting Herman Cain.

      Report Post » GIDEON612  
    • seeks4truth
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:09pm

      I guess if your beliefs come from the DaVinci Code you could argue the point, but if you take the bible as it is then Jesus was single. God has nothing against marriage, so if Jesus was married there would be no reason to hide it.

      Report Post » seeks4truth  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:48pm

      @ ISLES we are in agreement my friend just wanted clarification. I agree the pastor is not the do all man the others need to step up to the plate and I agree with what you stated. I thought we probably agreed on this!

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • NeoFan
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 10:50pm

      If Jesus had children would the authority have been transferred down through his posterity? Like Billy and Franklin Graham and Pat and Gordon Robertson?

      Report Post »  
  • Oil_Robb
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:45pm

    You cant blame the churches for wanting to make sure that The Pastors needs are met…..Look what happens when Pope this and Cardinal that and thats not even taking into account what Father so and so has done around the world when not having a lawful mate.

    Report Post »  
    • Islesfordian
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:07pm

      No one “needs” to be married, unless they have so little control over their desires that they are lustful. A pastor’s needs are that he spend time in prayer and the word of God, that he is not overly distracted by petty quarrels among the people and that he stay healthy and respectable among the people. Everything after that is gravy.

      Report Post » Islesfordian  
    • foobear
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 1:02am

      @Islesfordian

      The desire to reproduce is a natural one, and in accordance with, well, all of the Old Testament – having a baby is the highest blessing from God, and barrenness is the worst curse.

      It’s only the Roman Catholic Church that has perverted voluntary chastity into a mandatory requirement for its clergy (and directly *against* Paul’s pastoral commandments for them to be married and have had children already), and so all the scandals we’ve had recently is the natural result.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • Oil_Robb
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 6:29am

      And God will reduce your testostirone levels?…….Ya right

      Report Post »  
    • Oil_Robb
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 6:49am

      The fact of the matter is that evangilists dont have to walk thousands of miles and leave families for a long period, neither do they have to pick up and move at a moments notice because they might be LION food by day break. There is no practical reason why a Pastor should not have a wife as he lives right around the corner from where he ministers 99/100 times. Also It might bring the statistics down around the world of YOUNG CHILDREN beein SODOMIZED at a high rate and causeing believers and non believer to turn away from GOD.

      Report Post »  
    • DLG123
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 3:01pm

      1Cor 7:30-40
      I tell you, brothers, the time is running out. From now on, let those having wives act as not having them, 30 those weeping as not weeping, those rejoicing as not rejoicing, those buying as not owning,
      31 those using the world as not using it fully. For the world in its present form is passing away.
      32 I should like you to be free of anxieties. An unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord. 33 But a married man is anxious about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, 34 and he is divided. An unmarried woman or a virgin is anxious about the things of the Lord, so that she may be holy in both body and spirit. A married woman, on the other hand, is anxious about the things of the world, how she may please her husband. 35 I am telling you this for your own benefit, not to impose a restraint upon you, but for the sake of propriety and adherence to the Lord without distraction. 36 If anyone thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, and if a critical moment has come and so it has to be, let him do as he wishes. He is committing no sin; let them get married. 37 The one who stands firm in his resolve, however, who is not under compulsion but has power over his own will, and has made up his mind to keep his virgin, will be doing well.
      38 So then, the one who marries his virgin does well; the one who does not marry her will do better.
      39 A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whomever she wishes, provided that it be in the Lord. 40 She is more blessed, though, in my opinion, if she remains as she is, and I think that I too have the Spirit of God.
      Peace be with you,
      DLG

      Report Post » DLG123  
  • HappyStretchedThin
    Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:43pm

    Hmmm…No photo…;-)

    Report Post » HappyStretchedThin  
    • Herman_Cain
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 7:51pm

      Is not marriage counselor part of a Pastors job?

      Report Post » DemocracyisTyranny  
    • Islesfordian
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:31pm

      No. Saving souls is the pastor’s job. In the days when Christians obeyed the Bible and took the vows the made more seriously you didn’t need so much counceling to be married. You just needed a community and a church that supported the marriage.

      Report Post » Islesfordian  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:35pm

      And thus begins the world creeping into the church……it is a small step to the government using anti-discrimination laws to force churches to hire homosexuals etc…… I know it is not illegal at this point, but you can see the direction it is headed and the slant the NYT wants to put on this situation (haters, discriminators, racists, bigots, male chauvinist homophobes, anything to put Christians in a bad light) Unfortunately this man fit right into their agenda being a pastor himself, they were more than happy to parade his grievance to a mass audience to prove their assertions about Christian evangelicals……….. Mark my words it is headed in that direction. Although there is absolutely no reason a single man cannot lead a body scripturally or practically speaking, churches are free to have their preference. Paul was single and argued in scripture that singleness had its advantages over being married. But is it possible there is any other factor in this man not being hired other than him being single? I find it hard to believe all those rejections were based on that fact alone. Of course the NYT reported nothing of that aspect.

      And of course we have our liberal posters that like to say the Blaze fans the flames of Christian ire by posting such stories that are not news worthy. My my what do we have here? A story from their beloved NYT. Hmmmm I wonder what they will say about this? I know………not a thing, not one thing !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • NeoFan
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:35pm

      Why is it that Pastors need to be paid and Jesus gave us the gospel for free?
      Should the widows mite go to pay for a person to preach when our exemplar
      took no lucre for doing the same?

      Report Post »  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:41pm

      @ NEOFAN………….

      Deuteronomy 25:4
      Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.

      Pastors are paid not to present the gospel (although some charlatans peddle it for profit) but so they can dedicate their full attention to the ministry and oversight of those placed under their leadership rather than be distracted by having to work a secular job. However, some do both if the shepherd a smaller flock that cannot fully support them by their tithes. It is totally scriptural and endorsed by Jesus.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • Islesfordian
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:53pm

      Watch, don’t forget the NT context in 1 Tim 5:17, “Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching”

      Report Post » Islesfordian  
    • NeoFan
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 8:55pm

      I know many people that work a full time job and an extra 30 hours in the teaching of the gospel and do a fine job. I think having to work a regular job like everyone else help them to understand the people they are teaching and not act above them. Kinda like Jesus being poor and helping the poor.
      Please explain what the ox has to do with this and give me the endorsements for full time paid clergy made by Jesus. I would really like one of his endorsements for someone like Benny Hinn.
      Thanks in advance.

      Report Post »  
    • foobear
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:03pm

      It’s actually Biblical. Read your 1 Tim 3:2 or Titus 1:6.

      People in authority positions in the church are required to be married and have well-raised children. This is something the Roman Catholic Church loves to ignore.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • SlimnRanger
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:04pm

      I have never had a pastor that was single but i really have no problem with it

      Report Post »  
    • Islesfordian
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:33pm

      FOOBEAR, you don’t know how to read the text. The context shows that it means NO MORE THAN one wife. Given how he wishes everyone were unmarried as he was, if Paul meant that a pastor should be married he would have said just that without giving the number “one”.

      Report Post » Islesfordian  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:44pm

      @ ISLES ………….

      @ NEOFAN………..

      17 The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. 18 For Scripture says, “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,”[a] and “The worker deserves his wages.”[b] 19 Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. 20 But those elders who are sinning you are to reprove before everyone, so that the others may take warning. 21 I charge you, in the sight of God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, to keep these instructions without partiality, and to do nothing out of favoritism.

      The worker deserves his wages. How can an elder direct the affairs of the church without distraction if they have to work a full time job (maybe with overtime)? If Paul argues it is better not to be married because you can be more fully devoted to God then How does a minister need to fully focus on the ministry. I can’t always go visit the sick and dying. Yes honor, but who was it that instituted the Levitical priests receive a percentage of the offerings to support their duties as Gods ministers? I believe it was God. Now certainly some peddle the word for profit and care nothing for the sheep this man is called a hirling by the Lord. Notice Paul says especially those whose WORK is preaching and teaching. If it is their work is not the worker worth his wages? How is it that we may receive spiritual riches from them and yet not support them financially? It seems like more than a fair trade. We do not ask unbelievers to pay for the preaching of the Gospel rather I sacrificially give so that he may be fully devoted to the work so unbelievers can receive it free of charge. How much better he be fully devoted to this rather than working full time?

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • jzs
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:45pm

      Otherhand, you’re trying to drag “the Government” into this. This is nothing more or less than a pastor who thinks he‘s discriminated against because he’s single. The NYT reported on that. Do you doubt that churches are hesitant to hire a 37 year old single pastor? I don’t. But I agree there’s probably more to him not getting hired besides him being single. The very fact that he’s making that claim, and talking to the NYT, makes me think he‘s in denial about the real reasons he’s not being hired. And he‘s probably ended any chance that he’ll ever be hired by doing so.

      But don’t start making this into a conspiracy and an attempt for “the Government” to interfere with the hiring practices of Churches.

      Report Post » jzs  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:45pm

      @ FOOBEAR I agree with ISLES the context doesn’t mean you must be married but rather that if you are you may not have more than one wife. Check your context more closely friend.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:57pm

      @ JZS..you do know that these laws have already tried to be introduced as law do yo not? It really is not a conspiracy as much as it has been attempted by some at this point. I am just pointing out that we need to be very mindful of the possible slippery slope here.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • HappyStretchedThin
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 9:59pm

      JZS,
      As usual, you‘re the one who can’t read, and accuse others of illiteracy.
      Otherhand didn’t say the govt was intruding in this case, he said the WORLD was.
      And that it was an easy step from THERE to govt control.
      You’re not only malliterate, but naive as well. The govt DOES intrude too much into hiring practices almost everywhere. If you think mission-creep won‘t eventually lead them even into places the Constitution shouldn’t allow them to go, it will be the efforts of patriots like the Blazers who will have prevented it.

      Report Post » HappyStretchedThin  
    • godlovinmom
      Posted on March 22, 2011 at 10:01pm

      okay I’m gonna take a stab at this…Paul said if you need the companionship (sex) of a woman it is better to be married…but I believe he perferred non-married men…you know nothing coming between you and preaching the gospel…I know that scripture says if you’re to be a pastor….1. a man 2. the husband of one wife and so on…I believe Jesus doesn’t care whether your married or not…as long as your spreading his word and not a false doctrine. Never belonged to any church where the pastor did not have to work for a living…

      Report Post » godlovinmom  
    • NancyBee
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 12:40am

      Maybe God is trying to teach him something….maybe God knows best and he will lead him to the right place….but as for has the photo goes…..does it matter what he looks like?

      Report Post » NancyBee  
    • foobear
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 12:55am

      @Islesfordian

      Bzzt, wrong. It’s not <= 1 wives, it says "the husband of one wife" – means a church elder needs to be married, and to have raised well disciplined kids. If you think this means a church elder should have zero wives and zero kids, you couldn't be more wrong.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 1:20am

      @ FOOBEAR………..at the risk of being quarrelsome your exegesis is wrong. I am a protestant Christian and the line you are taking would disqualify Paul as an elder. If your rendering is correct then I am afraid it goes further than you want it to. Even married men could not be elders unless they have children based on your exegesis and keeping it consistent or deacons for that matter. Now do you really believe that Paul was stating that or was he saying that if they are married that they should have only one wife and that if they have children they should be obedient given his teaching on the benefits of staying single? Doctrines are not properly built on one scripture but rather on the whole council of God. What you espouse is in some conflict with other scriptural teachings and apostles condition of singleness themselves. What if the children grow up and leave home? Does he cease to be an elder? What if the wife dies? Sorry I know you have been an elder for 30 years and have all kinds of wisdom but your out cause your wife died? That makes no sense now and surely you see the intent of Paul‘s and therefore the Lord’s instruction. Funny Paul is writing these instructions to Timothy. Who does not appear to be a married man. This is where protestants have used faulty exegesis to oppose Roman Catholicism in some instances. The proper scripture for that would rather be that unless a man be gifted by God with singleness he should marry so as not to be consumed by lust.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 1:34am

      @ FOOBEAR do you see what Paul says beginning in verse 7 after discussing the issue of marriage. Now why would he wish that if it meant none of them could hold the position of an elder?

      1 Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. 3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7 I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • GODSAMERICA
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 5:01am

      @Islesfordian
      Actually, the congregation is supposed to be a testimony to non-believers to where as the “shine their light” it brings people into the church where the pastor shephards’ them, teaches them and counsels with them. In fact scripturally, if there are non-believers in a church then they are supposed to be cast out of the church as it is for fellowship and strengthening of fellow christians and gathering of like beliefs. In MOST cases if people wait for non-believers to come into a church then they will be waiting for a “cold day in hell”.

      Report Post » GODSAMERICA  
    • DLG123
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 12:36pm

      @FOOBEAR
      1 Tim 3:2 and Titus 1:6 says nothing about the Bishop being REQUIRED to be married… If you are married you can only be married once… This is a pretty weak argument.

      Report Post » DLG123  
    • jzs
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 1:53pm

      Happystretchedthing, “malliterate” isn’t a word.

      Report Post » jzs  
    • The Deacon
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 3:14pm

      Hmm, What were the names of the wives of Jesus disciples? Oh that’s right, they were not married.

      Report Post »  
    • foobear
      Posted on March 23, 2011 at 7:04pm

      @DLG123 “1 Tim 3:2 and Titus 1:6 says nothing about the Bishop being REQUIRED to be married… If you are married you can only be married once… This is a pretty weak argument.”

      Keep reading then. 1 Tim 3:4 “He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity (if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?)”.

      It’s hilarious watching RCC apologists try to explain that one away. The Vatican’s official policy on “unius uxoris virum” (Husband of One Wife) can be found here: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cclergy/documents/rc_con_cclergy_doc_01011993_bfoun_en.html

      Which basically tries to explain away the marriage requirement for bishops and deacons as “really meaning” that they’re married to the church, and so the mandated celibacy thing is cool. They very firmly refuse to look at 1 Tim 3:4.

      And yes, you’re absolutely right that Paul himself preferred the single life (as being married, he claims, distracts one from focusing on God), but acknowledged that his way was not for everyone (again, a knock against the RCC) and that he certainly wouldn’t mandate celibacy. Paul defended his right of all apostles to marry in 1 Cor 9, for example.

      You also have to read his stance against marriage in the eschatological light he cast his argument in.

      All told, the appropriate exegesis from all the relevant passages does indicate a preference for older married people of calm temperament, who have demonstrated the ability to lead and manage a household. So churches do have a basis for discrimination against younger, single pastors.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • DLG123
      Posted on March 24, 2011 at 3:25pm

      @FOOBEAR
      1Cor 7:30-40
      I tell you, brothers, the time is running out. From now on, let those having wives act as not having them, 30 those weeping as not weeping, those rejoicing as not rejoicing, those buying as not owning,
      31 those using the world as not using it fully. For the world in its present form is passing away.
      32 I should like you to be free of anxieties. An unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord. 33 But a married man is anxious about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, 34 and he is divided. An unmarried woman or a virgin is anxious about the things of the Lord, so that she may be holy in both body and spirit. A married woman, on the other hand, is anxious about the things of the world, how she may please her husband. 35 I am telling you this for your own benefit, not to impose a restraint upon you, but for the sake of propriety and adherence to the Lord without distraction. 36 If anyone thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, and if a critical moment has come and so it has to be, let him do as he wishes. He is committing no sin; let them get married. 37 The one who stands firm in his resolve, however, who is not under compulsion but has power over his own will, and has made up his mind to keep his virgin, will be doing well.
      38 So then, the one who marries his virgin does well; the one who does not marry her will do better.
      39 A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whomever she wishes, provided that it be in the Lord. 40 She is more blessed, though, in my opinion, if she remains as she is, and I think that I too have the Spirit of God.
      Peace be with you,
      DLG

      Report Post » DLG123  
1 2 3

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love