Anne Graham Lotz and 800 pastors’ shame
Oct 24th, 2008 by Cheryl Schatz
CBMW relates a story told by Anne Graham Lotz in the Washington Post where Mrs Lotz writes:
What legitimate, Biblical role do women have within the church? That question demanded an answer early in my ministry when I accepted an invitation to address a large convention of pastors.
When I stood in the lectern at the convention center, many of the 800 church leaders present turned their chairs around and put their backs to me. When I concluded my message, I was shaking. I was hurt and surprised that godly men would find what I was doing so offensive that they would stage such a demonstration, especially when I was an invited guest. And I was confused. Had I stepped out of the Biblical role for a woman? While all agree that women are free to help in the kitchen, or in the nursery, or in a secretary’s chair, is it unacceptable for a woman to take a leadership or teaching position?
While CBMW writer Brent Nelson writes about the en masse action of many of the 800 pastors in a negative fashion…
Such a shameful event should have never happened.
…what action does he say should have happened?
I grieve that someone in a decision-making role, did not wisely preclude a woman from speaking to a large group of pastors who chose to express their biblically sound concerns in such a shameful fashion. The commands to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15), are equally as important to obey as the command for a woman not take spiritual authority over men. (emphasis added by WIM)
While CBMW’s article says that women are not to be elders or pastors and this is apparently the “clear” prohibition that CBMW espouses, Anne Graham Lotz doesn’t appear to be either an elder or a pastor. What Mrs. Lotz does in her ministry is preach the good news to whoever the Lord Jesus brings in her pathway. She writes:
Mary Magdalene was actually the very first evangelist! Since Jesus had obviously been present when Peter and John were there, why did He withhold Himself from them, but reveal Himself to Mary? He could so easily have given the task of announcing His resurrection to Peter and John, but instead He had given it to Mary. I believe He was making an undeniable, obvious statement that reverberates through the centuries, right up until our own day. Women are commanded and commissioned to serve Jesus Christ in whatever capacity He calls them, within or without the organized church, in word or in deed.
CBMW writer Brent Nelson agrees that Mary was commissioned to preach the gospel of the resurrection to the Lord’s disciples, but this doesn’t support Anne Graham Lotz.
Mary seeing Jesus and being commissioned to tell the disciples of his rising is indeed an honor, but certainly does not qualify her to take the role of an Elder or Pastor to men.
While I will not be discussing women elders or pastors in this article, CBMW’s article appears to be a sleight of hand bringing confusion regarding official positions of ordination with the call to preach and teach outside of ordination. This confusion is precisely what CBMW itself seeks to avoid when they state that women can minister but not have a “pastorate”.
Imprecision is the handmaid of confusion, and confusion the prelude to bondage (John 8:32). We would do well to make a distinction between women in ministry (which the Bible affirms) and women in the pastorate (which the Bible forbids - 1 Timothy 2:12).
Is Anne Graham Lotz called by God to ordination? She says no:
This space is not long enough to address the issue of ordination which carries with it the right to marry, bury, baptize, and have authority over church members. I do not believe God has called me to be ordained, but I know many women who believe He has called them. Some of these women pastor in countries where the male leadership has been decimated by persecution and imprisonment, and out of necessity they have stepped up to fill the void. (emphasis added by WIM)
What is Anne Graham Lotz called to do? She writes about what the Lord’s commission means to her:
For me, it means going wherever God sends and giving out His Word to whomever He puts in front of me.
So if Anne Graham Lotz is not called to be ordained as a pastor and she is not ordained as an elder, then why would 800 pastors have “biblical sound concerns” to have her speak to them as an invited guest speaker? Again CBMW’s Brent Nelson writes:
I grieve that someone in a decision-making role, did not wisely preclude a woman from speaking to a large group of pastors who chose to express their biblically sound concerns in such a shameful fashion. The commands to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15), are equally as important to obey as the command for a woman not take spiritual authority over men. (emphasis added by WIM)
The mindset of CBMW is that women are not allowed to preach the gospel to Christian men because this constitutes taking “spiritual authority” over men. It is only a smokescreen in this case when they say that the Bible forbids women to be pastors and elders, because this has nothing to do with Mrs. Lotz. Anne Graham Lotz is an evangelist not a pastor or an elder, yet she is forbidden according to CBMW, to preach the good news to pastors while they can at the very same time agree that Mary was commissioned by Jesus to preach the good news to the disciples. CBMW affirms that Jesus’ commission for Mary was a godly thing for a woman to obey. This sleight of hand and confusing talk brings great harm to the body of Christ when women are hindered from speaking the truth of God’s word to the body of Christ.
CBMW’s answer to a woman’s preaching the gospel to Christian men is that she should be hindered, stopped and forbidden from speaking in the first place. According to this CBMW article it would be a wise male leader who should have stood in the way of Anne Graham Lotz and prevented her from speaking the gospel to these Christian men. CBMW lifts up the pastors who turned their backs on Mrs. Lotz as godly men who showed their biblical concern in the wrong way. By turning their backs on Mrs. Lotz, these pastors were not preventing her from speaking to them, they were only showing a shameful action of contempt. Would CBMW’s counsel to these pastors have them walk out en masse instead of merely turning their backs?
Apparently CBMW believes that there were two shameful actions that happened the day Anne Graham Lotz spoke to those 800 pastors. The first shameful action was the men who turned their backs toward a godly sister in Christ. The other “shameful” action was apparently the mere fact that Mrs. Lotz would dare to speak the gospel in the presence of Christian men and that a Christian leader would dare to allow her to speak. CMBW’s Brent Nelson writes:
At the end of the day, it is the role of pastors and men to lead their congregations and families in understanding God’s design for the home and the church. When this kind of biblical leadership is lacking, sadly shameful things can happen. (emphasis is added by WIM)
CBMW through sleight of hand has now added to the scriptures that only men may lead Christians in the church and in the family towards understanding God’s design. Shame on CBMW for spiritually turning their back on God’s gifted women, and thus God himself by adding to God’s word things that God never said.
Listen to what CBMW believes Christian men shouldn’t be able to hear Anne Graham Lotz preach and apparently use their CBMW-based conscience to walk out:
What is even more confusing is how they have institutionalized the church with such things as ‘offices’. Seriously, who were the pastors of the churches at Ephesus, Corinth, Antioch, etc., just to name a few.
Think about ‘pastor’ in today’s sense and then try and answer that question. Was there only one church in Ephesus? What was considered a church in the NT? A gathering in the homes? Did each one have a pastor leading it? How often is the term ‘pastor’ even used in the NT?
If elders were so important then how come ALL the Epistles were not addressed soley to elders of those churches?
Some things just do not add up.
Lin… great observation. The Christ Model of Leadership is found in Matthew 20:25-28 where we are told that real leaders are those who humbly serve others. I see just as many women following this model of leadership in the church as I do men… perhaps more so! There have been many women in the church who have taught me much and many others that I would gladly follow.
BB
What would these stupid men have done if Billy Graham had introduced his daughter?
It’s a shame Anne didn’t have her shoes full of sand so she could have shaken it in their faces.
Their crude demonstration sounds like the one put on by the committed from the Executive Committee in their marching to the front, taking off their badges, and walking out of the Baptist World Alliance when the CBF was voted in.
Oops, I meant to write ‘committee’, but maybe ‘committed’ is a better word since through their jealously they were committed to be against anyone receiving money they figured should be coming to them.
Lin,
Great thoughts and you are right on!
Pastor Billy,
I loved that you rightly called it “The Christ Model of Leadership” in Matthew 20 and not the “male” model of leadership. All of us, men and women are to follow Christ’s model. It is God-ordained that the entire body of Christ has one role model not a male Messiah and a female Messiah. To be like Christ should be the cry of our heart - and that works itself out through serving one another.
Thank you for commenting and I welcome you here!
Rex Ray,
Your comment…
…really gave me food for thought. I doubt that if Billy Graham would have been there to introduce his daughter that they would have acted in such a shameful way. But if that would have been the case then they are doubly prejudiced.
I welcome you as well and hope that you come back to share your comments here. Even your typo was well stated!
The question is not who might teach, for Paul says anyone might.
The question is who will listen to any particular teaching. And if for some reason one feels they should not be listening, then to leave without commotion. You can discuss any concerns later with the elders in oversight. I am assuming a crowd and not a small group teaching where a question might be appropriate.
I personally have left some teachings when they used what I deemed to be manipulative tricks on the audience. I have also expressed my concerns to the leadership afterwards in other cases where I thought the teaching was flawed enough to cause harm.
Well the only person showing the true love of Christianity in that room was Anne Graham Lotz.
If they didn’t want to listen to a woman why did they go?
Looks as if they were just looking for an excuse to be rude - overinflated egos …… again
A reaction like this was most definitely planned in advance.
Sheryl,
Thanks for the nice words
The shameful actions of these men reminded me of a basketball coach who stood and turned his back to the game to show disrespect to the referees. He was rejected from the building.
It shows how narrow their legalistic minds are that sports demand higher conduct.
Lin,
You are soooo right their actions were planned in advance.
Just like Mosses and his brother planned to disobey God and not speak to the rock. I know the result of their sin will not be as theirs, but I hope someday they will be sorry.
Yes, the men that turned their chairs around were just being rude.
When I heard about this story, my respect for Anne went WAY up.
It is one thing to get this kind of stuff from pagans, but quite another to get it from believers. BY THEIR ACTIONS, they were disorderly, which a believer is not to be, especially in a church setting.
Cheryl,
Thank you for pointing out the sleight of hand in the CBMW article.
Yes, Lotz is NOT an elder or pastor so there is no problem with her speaking to a group of men because she is not in an authoritative role.
Surely they do not believe that everyone who speaks to a group of people is in an authoritative role? If they do, then we are in trouble.
It is my personal opinion, that after hearing Anne Graham Lotz speak on heaven, that the men in that room were intimidated by her obvious gifting from the Lord and that she shines brightly as someone who knows God’s word and how to present it. She is an amazing orator and is certainly by far one of the best I have ever heard. It is sometimes hard to admit, because of pride, that someone is better at something than we are, especially when that someone is a woman. :-)
Turning their chairs around is an act of an immature toddler. These are not men of God. These are toddlers who need a a time-out. The real men of God in that room were the ones who didn’t act like silly children and who were secure in their manhood enough that they could enjoy her presentation and be blessed by her words of wisdom.
What conference was this at? When did this incident take place?
Billy Graham said she was the best evangelist in the family. :o)
I like that image, they gave themselves a time out!
It makes something that they intended to shame the speaker into something that they did to themselves, by revealing their immaturity.
Lin,
That is interesting. It looks like Billie Graham was secure in who he was in God and he wasn’t into fleshly ambition that his daughter’s obvious giftings were a threat to his own ministry.
The way I look at it, it all boils down to control, power, fleshly ambition, and the need to be the greatest in the Kingdom without actually doing what it takes (being servant to all) to be the greatest.
The desire and laudable zeal to do all things “Biblically” can cause even the best of men (anthropos) to go against their consciences and what Lincoln called the better angels of our nature.
The mothers and grandmothers of these Southern gentlemen would be ashamed of them for the way they treated Lotz, and would surely want to take each one of them outside for a whippin’.
Don #6,
You are right in that the question should be no who can teach, but who should listen. If a person’s conscience is bothered by listening to a teacher, then they should do the right thing by leaving. Let the godly teacher continue to teach while the one’s whose conscience is bothered, leave.
Elizabeth,
There i no doubt in my mind that the protest was staged and was planned to be rude. They all knew that she was going to be a guest speaker. If their consciences were that weak, they should have stayed home or gone elsewhere instead of deliberately making an issue out of the word of God being preached by someone who was not of the “right” gender. If they really believed that she was doing something wrong merely because of her gender, they should have taken her aside after the meeting as discreetly as Priscilla and Aquilla did when they discreetly took Apollos aside and corrected him. It is not a godly thing to disgrace and embarrass a fellow believer in public in that manner.
Rex Ray #9,
I liked your story about the basketball coach. It shows that the behavior can be easy evaluated and seen for what it is when we remove the religious element.
Corrie #12,
You said:
What I have found is that the issue is so often hidden by the claim that it is about pastors and elders, but the fact is that they stop a woman from speaking to men, implying that the mere act of teaching men is an “authoritative” role. Their thinking seems to be that teaching the scriptures is something that requires taking authority over another person. But I ask does a woman have authority over another woman when she teaches her the bible? Apparently they don’t see women teaching women as taking authority over other women since they believe that teaching the word of God “with authority” is something that only men can do. If the same woman taught the same stuff to men that she taught to women, she is “usurping” authority that rightfully belongs to men. I find their reasoning confusing with much “sleight of hand” changes and redefinitions.
I agree. I can hear Anne Graham Lotz’s passion when I hear her preach. And she focuses on Jesus which makes her preaching so powerful.
Well said!!
Mrs. Lotz wrote that this was in the beginning of her ministry so that would have been quite a number of years ago. I also heard her on TV giving this same story. I don’t think she mentioned where the incident took place or who exactly was involved. It was a defining moment for Anne. It humiliated her and satan wanted to destroy her so that she would quit her work for Christ. But Anne did what all of us should do in a humbling moment like this. She went to Jesus. He gave her such a confidence from the word of God that she was doing what was right and that she was in his will that she forgave those men and went on in her work with great boldness continuing to preach the word.
Moments like this can either make us or break us. We can let the bad behavior of others define out ministry, or we can walk forth in boldness with our egos given to Jesus. It takes great boldness to walk out before an audience to preach God’s word, knowing that many in the audience are judging us as sinning against God. What Anne Graham Lotz did was put everything into focus. She would one day stand before God and give an account of her ministry call. She must obey Jesus and not men. Those same men will also stand before Jesus and give an account of what they did.
If I remember right, Mrs. Lotz said in an interview on TV that men like this must not usurp God’s authority over his own sheep in that they must not physically stop women from ministering. We can deal with the shame that is leveled our way, but if any were to physically stop her from speaking, then the ones who did this would have to answer directly to God himself for their actions. She hoped that it would never come to this because her desire is to serve Jesus in everyway that He has called her. No one should stand in the way of a godly woman going about the business of the Lord Jesus.
Corrie #15,
This is well said. Wanting preeminence without doing what is necessary for preeminence (giving up of one’s own ambition and humbling oneself to serve others) is taking a short cut to leadership. But there is no such short cut in the Kingdom of light. Jesus gave no other way than the way he lived out his leadership - and that is humble servanthood, caring for the sheep above caring for one’s own needs. We have way too many egos in leadership that have been allowed to circumvent the Lord’s way.
Greg,
Your words about mothers and grandmothers of the pastors there who acted in a rude fashion made me laugh.
Christians are dying in the Congo, Darfur, Iraq and elswhere while the American evangelical Church is still debating such
inconsequentials as whether women should preach/ teach/ speak or not……………………………….!!
My concern about Anne Graham Lotz is not whether or not she should be preaching and teaching . She seems to have a gift for biblical exposition and her personal life appears free from moral blemish. However, sadly she does seem to have supported Southern Baptist leaders like Rev Jerry Falwell and Senator Jesse Helms in their homophobic and racist views.
Ayla,
Anne Graham Lotz certain does appear to be free from moral blemish although of course we know that we are all sinners in constant need of the Savior’s cleansing work daily. I think that it would be very unfair to call her “homophobic”. This means a fear of homosexuals. I don’t think that expressing the biblical view of sin qualifies her to be called “homophobic”. All of us have inherited sin from our conception and the person who lives a life of telling lies is called a liar. The bible is very hard on those who are “liars” and it says that those who live a life of lies and whose habit it is to practice lies will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. While we can rightly identify lying as a sin, we can still treat those who are liars as human beings. Jesus died for liars too and if they will turn from their sin and repent they can be cleansed. Same thing for adulterers. I have no doubt that people are born with this inclination for lying and cheating etc because we are all born in sin, but our opportunity is to love the sinner while not supporting or condoning the sin. I do not think that Anne is unloving or fearful at all. That is just my take.
Thanks for popping in. And welcome!