digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Sunday School teacher fired because she's a woman

wwnytv.net — Mary Lambert, who has taught Sunday School at Watertown's First Baptist Church for 54 years, said she received a letter from church leaders telling her she can no longer teach at the church, because she's a woman, they then pro ceded to quote the bible.

Who dugg this? Made popular Aug 21, 2006

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

219 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -21/+66The Bible is riddled with such... oddities.

    1 Corinthians, 14:34-35: "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. 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."

    Leviticus 19:20: "And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that is a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free."

    Genesis 3:16: "Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."

    It also often contradicts itself. Here's a good example:

    Romans 13:9: Thou shalt not covet.

    1 Corinthians 12:31: Covet earnestly the best gifts.
  • zephc, on 10/12/2007, -11/+48Fundamentalism FTW!
  • The_Wallbanger, on 10/12/2007, -5/+39"Yeah... um, we're going to have to let you go. It's not you, it's management... actually it's Jesus. Read right here... um, our hands are tied."

    There's a bible quote for every situation, isn't there?
  • thebairyhum, on 10/12/2007, -9/+43Most churches are pretty cut and dry about either letting women teach or not. If she had taught there for 54 years prior to being DISMISSED (not fired, this is a church btw) then this "difference" of opinions is why she was told to leave. So before we go off on these Bible theses about why you think it's wrong, read the article, this doesn't sound like it has anything to do with her being a woman if she'd already been teaching there for that long.
  • nreynolds, on 10/12/2007, -2/+35Can you sue for being dismissed from VOLUNTEER work? What are you going to sue for, all that money you.... wouldn't have made if you still worked there?
  • zephc, on 10/12/2007, -4/+33Cute. I like how I'm getting dugg down because people think fundamentalism (in any religion) is somehow NOT a literal interpretation of the associated religious text(s), which seems to be case here (at least from what we know from the report).
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -14/+39If you are a Christian, if you say the Bible is the word of God, and if your god is infallible, then this is what you support. There is no opposite to it.

    Then of course, sometimes the Bible is literal, sometimes its symbolic. ***** NO! In actuality, it's packed full with approvals of hate, racism, and violence.

    No matter what you tell yourself in order to hide the reality you don't want to know is there, you support it! Read the Bible again, you'll see its a load of *****. Hopefully you will change, we need more atheist.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -12/+34Yeah, like when you want to sell your daughter.

    "Exodus 21:7-8: And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her."
  • imikedaman, on 10/12/2007, -12/+34"Why do some people (I'm assuming you're an atheist) have to try to force their beliefs on each other?"

    I'm an athiest, and I have to put up with wave after wave of religious nuts acting all elitist on me because they've "found religion" and I haven't. Stop acting like this is a one-sided problem.
  • Halaster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21@gh02t
    While Silentshadow's comment was pointless, in no way did he force his belief's on anyone at all. All the guy said is he does not care about the article because its about a Sunday School Teacher. He did not go into preaching why, or anything at all. He gave a single line response.

    If I state I do not care about something, I am not trying to force my beliefs upon you. I am stating a fact about my beliefs. :)
  • Arkitan, on 10/12/2007, -8/+26But the letter that they gave here said that she wasn't allowed to teach there any more because she's a woman.
  • thebairyhum, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16"Lambert said she believes there's more to her dismissal than meets the eye.

    She said she and Pastor LaBouf have had differences of opinion concerning the direction of the church.

    Tim LaBouf, who is also a member of the Watertown City Council, did not respond to repeated attempts for comment."

    You think maybe the leaders of the church hadn't read that well known passage from the bible until now?
  • pbjorge12, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16This translation ( http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/1corinthians/1corinthians12.htm ) has this "Strive eagerly for the greatest spiritual gifts."
    In Exodus it spoke of not coveting posessions...While 1 Corinthians 12:31 says to covet or strive earnestly for spiritual gifts which is a totally different matter...
  • theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Theres WAY more to this story that what this report says. That much I GUARANTEE! Every chucrh I have ever been to (and yes, I generally attend Baptist churches when I infrequently attend) has women Sunday School teachers. Every single last one of them.

    The new Pastor obvioulsy didn't like this lady for one reason or another (quite possibly she is a royal bitch, or either he is just plain an *****, whatever). But he was just looking for some excuse to get rid of her, and grasped at straws.
  • bugsy187, on 10/12/2007, -30/+40Well, it makes sense to ignore the bible when it makes crass, bigoted comments. It's not moral to treat women the way the passage states. Aside from that, nobody takes the entire book literally, even devout Christians.

    For the record, and so you can evaluate my by bias, I take the bible as a complete work of fiction.
  • bobmagoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10did you just agree to your own comment?
  • gh02t, on 10/12/2007, -20/+29@silentshadow
    Why do some people (I'm assuming you're an atheist) have to try to force their beliefs on each other? Why do you have to be rude about what other people believe or don't believe? It's fine to believe or not believe in whatever you choose, but you don't have to be an ass to other people who don't see things your way. Its not like we can prove any of this either way for sure.
  • chumb01, on 10/12/2007, -8/+17I am a Christian and attend church regularly. Unfortunately, I have seen a lot of scripture taken out of context. Remember that the verse quoted was taken from a letter sent to a church in a very cultural context. So trying to apply this in a different cultural context would be very inappropriate.

    Anyway, there is either more than meets the eye or a very warped pastoral team who decided to do something and just wanted justification.
  • greymaxcat, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man."
    These wackjobs obviously aren't married.
  • Rikkochet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Actually, the letter was signed by the church clerk.. the pastor's WIFE.
    Yeah, I bet there was just a clash of personalities going on behind the scenes. I've seen people "laid off" because they weren't wanted around anymore - smells like more of the same.
  • twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10They don't have "priests", they are ministers.
  • wiccidnu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@gh02t

    "Why do you have to be rude about what other people believe or don't believe? It's fine to believe or not believe in whatever you choose, but you don't have to be an ass to other people who don't see things your way."

    I will continue to be at least rude, and most likely very hostile, to any religion like christianity that openly advocates my murder for being an open-minded, rational questioner that doesn't believe in their god. How many times does the bible have to say I must (not should, not could, but must) be stoned before it is acceptable to be more than a little angry?
  • duality, on 10/12/2007, -17/+25nazuraki, you need to brush up on your understanding of how the bible works. For a Christian, the book of Exodus is for historical purposes only.

    Besides, the scripture they quote in the article only means that she can't teach a class with men in it. Taking this as close to scripture as possible, they shouldn't have a problem with the basic fact that she's a woman and a teacher; after all, the bible would still allow her to teach a women's class, or a class for children.

    Personally, the fact she was dismissed wasn't suprising. The way she was dismissed was suspicious, though, as is the fact that it happened so abruptly. There are times when a church is wrong, even on matters of scripture. In fact, my entire family once walked out on a church because, through their inaction, they labelled my grandfather as a liar, despite evidence to the contrary. (We have heard that that congregation is now only about half the size it originally was.)

    A church relies on open and intelligent communication between its members to resolve disputes. It is unwise to attend a church where this trait is lacking.
  • dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Enough with this, and back to the point:

    How would a letter telling her she's fired because she's a woman be better than a letter telling her she's fired because she's "just not working out?"

    It sounds to me more like new, more fundamentalist management. Certainly the community can't be happy about this. If the woman wasn't any good, I assure you she wouldn't have been in her position for 50 some-odd years. This seems like a big mistake on the church's part.
  • NOFXY, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@ hardkoretom

    "Religion is about being open minded..."

    Since when?!
  • deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Probably because the right wing nutters are especially rabid when they're living among "the enemy" It never ceases to amaze me how vile and close minded these people can be. I bet this lady was teaching more progressive views and they wanted to run her out of the church. This is a very common problem. A lot of churches are disbanding over internal political squabbles these days.
  • sigma419, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@ imikedaman:

    You haven't found religion? Last I saw it, it was it was under the couch cushions. You should look there.
  • WDot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Yeah, well, the church I did all my religious class had female teachers as half the staff. Heck, a few of the supervisor at the church I did a part time job at were women. I'm not a Baptist, so I don't know their ways, but to me being a woman shouldn't keep you from volunteering at a church. I can't even comprehend this.

    Remember, the Bible was written for the culture of the time. If you interpret cultural circumstance for God's law, I can't help you.
  • theGrue, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6To quote the Reverend Timothy Lovejoy, "have you ever really read that thing? Technically, we're not even allowed to use the bathroom."
  • imikedaman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"You haven't found religion? Last I saw it, it was it was under the couch cushions. You should look there." -- sigma419

    A quarter! God's good grace has shone down upon me! :-D
  • szelij, on 10/12/2007, -10/+16Obviously the pastor hasn't been watching television. The lady should sue for discrimination but since she's worked for 54 years for the church, i don't think shes the kind of person who would be after money.

    But i really think she should sue them. It's the american way after all..
  • mhopgood, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@imikedaman

    What is your support for that position? Regardless, let me try to address your statement. I cannot prove that people did not attempt to impose their views when writing down the events of Biblical times any more than you can prove that they did. I can, however, offer this up for you to consider.

    You say that most of the Bible is hardly the word of God. The first thing to consider is how you make a discernment between which is which. If we assume, for the moment, that your position is correct, that much of the Bible is man' interpretation, how do we decide which is which. The answer is, we can't. For the Bible to be an authority in our lives, which is a pillar in the Christian faith, we must either wholly accept it or wholly reject it. To say that part is true and part is false is to put our own interpretation of what we feel should be right and wrong in front of what the Bible says -- in essence, we would be guilty of exactly what we are accusing the Biblical authors of doing.

    So, how can come to accept the Bible as untainted by personal bias? Take this into consideration for a moment. We know that God is omniscient and omnipotent -- all knowing and all powerful -- the dictionary.com definition defines God to be this way, and is another pillar of the Christian faith. So, try to imagine things from God's perspective: knowing that the Bible would be not only the single most important item in the formation of the Christian faith, and in His infinite wisdom, wouldn't He in trust its authorship to those who He knew would not delude His message with their own biases?

    For a more personal account, I have seen Christians set aside many differences for the sake of God. While I am by no means heralding Christians as better people than anyone else, I truly believe that people can set aside their personal agendas for the sake of God, and I would say that, if such people exist, they are the ones that God would in trust the authorship of the Bible to.
  • SweeterThnEqual, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I don't think the people on Digg represent the most Christian demographic. People interested in Science and Technology can be religious, but i think it comes with the territory that a lot of them will not be. They digg stories that might not be cheer leading for the church, because they have no invested interest in the church. It's not surprising, and it doesn't make the all bigots.

    A difference in opinion does not constitute bigotry, intolerance of others' opinions does.
  • KAIZENfocus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Before assumptions are made about the use the Bible it should be noted that this is a religious belief. As a citizen of the US we enjoy religious freedom. If the Baptist Church she attends came to a better understanding of a passage it would be their right to act in such a way. I think it is a little messed up how they went about it...but as far as what they did, it is a religious institution, and as such they can behave in such a manner.

    As for the Bible, it requires study and understanding bedore one should make ignorant comments as those that are posted above. Such as the Old Testament is History!

    As for me, I don't really care what you think. After all you don't have to answer to me of that fateful day, you will have to answer to God. Better get to studying.....
  • lukehudson, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8obviously the Pastor is not familiar with Matthew 7:12...do unto others as you would have them do unto you
  • ladymix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5That's disgusting. I mean obviously she wasn't let go because she was a woman, she was let go because she has had disagreements with the Pasteur but why on god's earth (ha!) did he feel the need to put that passage in the letter. Not only is that disgusting and offensive it's down right stupid because now he has been featured for being sexist. Way to go.
  • coriaceous, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9The story is national as of 21 Aug. Poor Rev. Tim LaBouf. Poor Watertown, NY. As an American Baptist, his theology is bizarre, considering the ABC-USA has always ordained women.
  • Arkonnan, on 10/12/2007, -9/+14@duality

    It must be nice to pick and choose which rules you want to follow. I'm sure if I find enough rules I don't like, I can write them off as being "for historical purposes" as well. It makes me feel like less of a hypocrite when I'm giving the "Good Christian" speech.
  • TheNik, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Since when can you pick and choose doctrine of a religion to follow?

    Hypocrites.
  • dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11How about in genesis, where it talks about women being subject to men? Anyone think that's just a teeny bit backwards?

    By the way, I love how when parts of the Bible don't make any sense in a contemporary context, they're all of a sudden "for historical purposes," or are "subject to interpretation." Who would have thought a book that is the very basis for an entire religion could be so *elastic*...
  • hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@duality
    For the name you have chosen you sure are clueless about such concepts. It isn't as cut and dry as all that. For some Christians sure, the Old Testament may be for historical purposes. There are differing beliefs within Christianity, and for some, the Old Testament is to live by and Christ is a realignment of what the Old Testament means.
  • mrmatchgame, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Reason #5,785 why Religion sucks: People take the bible too serioulsly!!!
  • terrix, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5if you consider the context of who Paul was talking to, the situation Paul was discussing, and the Greek words Paul used.

    A) When Paul said women should not teach or hold positions of leadership in a church he used the greek word for older women(not just women since we only have one word for women) which denoted marriage (since women pretty much got married or became prostitutes in those days). The reason for this is because the man is supposed to be head of the household and if the woman holds a position of leadership above her husband it would cause a conflict of interest and conflict in the home, its kind of like the arguements that start if your wife or husband is your boss at work. Now ideally the Bible teaches that both the husband and wife should reach a unanimous decision together about things its only in situations where a decision can't be agreed upon by either party, the husband would have veto power. C.S. Lewis did a great job of explaining this in Mere Christianity, a good example of this is where situations where someone is in dispute with a family member, mother's tend to instinctively protect their kids and fend for them whether they are at fault or not where as a man will more likely find a diplomatic solution to a problem.
    B) Women were mostly uneducated at the time, they also asked simple, and inane questions that disrupted the meetings or worship which is why they were told to wait til they got home and asked their husbands. Since women generally were either illiterate or had trouble reading and interpreting scripture it was a bad idea for them to teach men since it seemed to be a problem of them getting it wrong more times then right.

    The social situations that were prevalent when Paul wrote those letters has long since changed, which is why looking at the context is important. Paul's letters were letters of advice to the church's to solve problems that he heard about from others occuring at the churches. Its easy to apply his statements in a blanket fashion which is what a lot of churches do, but you find Paul's choices were more logical if you look at when and how he said something.
  • netsui, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You gotta hand it to those christians...They sure know how to ***** things up.

  • christianw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4somewhere in nevada penn and teller are sitting somewhere reading this news and saying "we told them so"
  • TheBarge, on 10/12/2007, -11/+14Nice finds nazuraki. Not sure why you're being dugg down, but here's a digg from me.
  • phatt-matt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Doesn't the Catholic church believe the Bible?
  • wiccidnu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@hardkoretom

    I wish there actually was a "fake" that we could test for deity-ness, but the reality is that we neither see nor hear any god, which means that you need to prove that it exists, rather than us non-believers proving that it doesn't (how does one prove something doesn't exist?). Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence!

  • thewebguy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5i would be greatly surprised if there was not some other issue and the pastor thought he had a slick way out of any responsibility. looks like he was wrong..
  • bobmagoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4reading and hearing about this kind of crap saddens me. what person is going to want to come and experience Christ if this is how he is represented. petty crap like this should be dealt with internally. it makes me mad that this stuff happens, all it does is lead to a view of Christianity that... well i dont have to tell you, just look at all of the comments above mine
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 219 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.