Guest post: Why Women Should Not Be Pastors

By Brian Allison
Pastor of Unionville Baptist, Unionville, Ontario.  

http://www.bibleviews.com/womenpastors.html

 
INTRODUCTION
We are witnessing in the church today an unprecedented phenomenon and trend. More women are training for, and entering into, the pastoral ministry than in any other time in the history of the church. The reaction to this relatively new phenomenon ranges from bitter outrage to hearty endorsement. Quite often, the discussions and debates over the propriety of a woman pastor are contentious and divisive ones. Such consequences, of course, are inevitable when the issues reduce to one of commitment to the Scriptures themselves as constituting the very truth of God. High regard for the integrity, sufficiency, authority, relevancy, and inerrancy of the Scriptures naturally results in a sense of obligation and necessity to acquire the accurate interpretation of those Scriptures, as well as to promote the faithful practice of the same.

Compelling sociological factors, which have been engendered by the feminist movement, have pressed the church to address and rethink the general issue of the role of women in the church, as well as the specific issue of the propriety of women becoming pastors. My aim in this paper is simply to present a Biblical view on the pastoral ministry, with the specific question of concern being: Should women be elders or pastors in the church? In discussing such a controversial and potentially explosive issue, the watchword surely must be: "Speaking the truth in love."

A BIBLICAL EXEGESIS ON THE ELDERSHIP
 

The predominant term used for the spiritual leaders in the church is elder (presbuteros). It occurs 14 times in this capacity, as opposed to the more frequently used term today 'pastor' (poimne) which occurs only once in this same capacity. The other term which is used for the spiritual leader is 'overseer' (episkopos) which occurs 4 times in this capacity. These three designations are used interchangeably in the New Testament for the same ecclesiastical office (cf. Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:1, 2). Elders (bishops, pastors) are representatives and ambassadors of Jesus Christ for the church (cf. 2 Cor. 5:18-21). In addition, they are stewards, for they have been entrusted with the welfare of the church (Tit. 1:7). Their primary responsibility is to care for (epimeleomai) the members of the spiritual body of Christ (1 Tim. 3:5), for which they will have to render an account (Jas. 3:1; Heb. 13:17).
Elders have two main duties or functions in the exercise of their care for the church. First, they are to oversee the membership. The apostle Peter exhorts the elders to "exercise oversight" (episkopeo) over the flock of God (1 Pet. 5:2). That is, elders are to superintend the affairs and activities of the church. They are the guardians of Christ for His heritage. They are to protect the whole membership from false doctrine and heresy (Acts 20:28). Elders are to exercise this management in an attitude of readiness, eagerness, and humility, without "lording it over those allotted to [their] charge, but proving to be examples to the flock" (1 Pet. 5:3).

The second duty or function of elders is to shepherd the membership. The apostle Paul exhorts the Ephesian elders "to shepherd [poimaino] the church of God which He purchased with His own blood" (Acts 20:28). That is, elders are to attend or minister to the (spiritual) needs of the body of Christ. This duty can be compared to that of a sheepherder who tends a flock of sheep. The sheepherder guides the sheep to water and pasture; he shelters and guards them; grooms and shears them. Jesus Christ likens His people to a flock of sheep (John 10:7-16). As sheep, believers require guidance and nourishment. Christ Himself is the chief Shepherd (1 Pet. 2:25) Who "shall guide [His own] to springs of the water of life" (Rev. 7:17). Elders, who are the undershepherds of the chief Shepherd, have a similar responsibility.

This figurative tending or shepherding of the sheep is literally and primarily seen in the teaching and instruction of spiritual truth. Elders tend to the spiritual needs of the flock of Christ by preaching and ministering the Word of God Mark records, "And when He [Jesus] went ashore, He saw a great multitude, and He felt compassion for them because they were like sheep without a shepherd; and He began to teach them many things" (Mk. 6:34). Accordingly, Christ has provided "pastors [poimne] and teachers [didaskalos]" for His spiritual sheep (Eph. 4:11). Christ has not provided pastors in addition to teachers, but pastors who are teachers. In Ephesians 4:11, Paul is speaking of only one office. Thus Paul instructs Timothy that elders must be "able to teach" (1 Tim. 2:2). All elders must have the ability or gift to teach.

THE ELDER'S ROLE

The role of an elder in the church, which is patterned on the role of the Lord Jesus (see 1 Pet. 2:25 - poimne, episkopos), is basically that of an overseer and shepherd (or teacher). He has an administrative function to perform, as well as a didactic one. The Scriptural witness to this fact is conclusive. For instance, Paul addresses the Ephesian elders and reminds them that "the Holy Spirit [had] made [them] overseers, to shepherd the church of God" (Acts 20:28). Further, he requests of the Thessalonian believers to "appreciate those who diligently labor among [them], and have charge over [them] in the Lord and give [them] instruction" (1 Th. 5:12). Peter exhorts elders to "shepherd the flock of God . . .exercising oversight" (1 Pet. 5:2). Even the writer to the Jewish Christians exhorts, "Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith" (Heb. 13:7).

REASONS AGAINST WOMEN BEING PASTORS

With this background exegetical teaching on the pastorate, I now address more particularly the issue of the propriety of woman pastors or elders. The Scriptures unquestionably teach that women are not to be elders. I will present three reasons to support this contention.

1. Eldership Qualifications

First, the specific qualifications outlined for those aspiring to the pastorate or eldership strongly imply that such candidates are to be men (1 Tim. 3:1-7; Tit. 1:5-9). The overseer or elder is required to be the "husband of one wife" (1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:6). Furthermore, he must be a person who "manages (proistemi) his own household well (kalos)," which is prerequisite for taking care of the church (1 Tim. 3:4,5). The management of the household, according to the Scriptures, is primarily the man's, rather than the woman's, responsibility. The man is considered the 'head' in the home under Christ (cf. 1 Cor. 11:3). Management of the household by men is further substantiated when the similar qualification for deacons is examined. It reads, "Let husbands of only one wife, and good managers [lit, managing well - kalos proistemi] of their children and their own households" (1 Tim. 3:12). This statement leaves no doubt as to who is to manage the household. Consistency, therefore, demands that the similar qualification for those aspiring to be pastors must also refer to men and not women.

2. Women Prohibited

The second reason why women are not to be pastors or elders is because the Scriptures specifically prohibit such action. The apostle Paul, in communicating to Timothy the policies, practices, and principles which are to govern "how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God" (1 Tim. 3:15) states:

But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression (1 Tim. 2:12-14).
This prohibition is not directed against teaching or exercising authority (i.e., having rule) in the abstract or universal sense, but rather teaching and exercising authority within the specific context of the church. Paul furnishes the rationale or ground for such a prohibition. The first reason for such a prohibition is a cosmological one; the second reason is a juridical one.

A) The Cosmological reason for Prohibition

First, women are not to be pastors or elders because "Adam was first created, and then Eve." God created the world with a particular design and structure. He imposed a certain order and form on His creation. He created the cosmos with particular operative principles and laws; and in His wisdom and plan, the man was created first. This peculiarity of God's cosmos had significant and determinative consequences. Man, being first in the creation order of rational, earthly existence, stood as the natural head. The woman was created after the man to fulfill the role of a "helper suitable for him" (Gen. 2:18, 20). The woman was created under (not unequal nor inferior to) the man. Priority in creation, according to the divine design, naturally entails leadership (cf. 1 Cor. 11:3, 7ff.). The man's creation involved the endowment of leadership; the woman's creation involved the endowment of cooperation to that leadership. Even the source of the woman's creation symbolizes this leadership-follower creational principle. Woman was created from a rib taken from man's side, which suggests a dependent relationship.

Accordingly, the nature of the creation order (i.e., the inherent structures and principles of this particular cosmos) presumably remain universal and unalterable. Indeed, this very fact provides the basis for Paul's argument for the propriety of head coverings in his address to the Corinthian church. He states:
For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake. Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels (1 Cor.11:8-10). It is interesting that when Paul teaches on topics that pertain to man-woman relationships, his basis is usually the creation order, the original design and structure of the cosmos, and not cultural peculiarities or trends. Paul advances his various arguments in reference to the universal or absolute foundations.

So when Paul instructs Timothy concerning proper administration in the church, acknowledging the preeminence and the necessity of conformity to God's original design (which still bears a universal character), he reasons, "For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve." In the church, the echoes of the original (sinless) creation must resound as the recreation is in progress, though in the consummation of all things, the original creation will be supremely surpassed.

B) The Juridical Reason for Prohibition

The second reason for Paul's prohibition which excludes women from the pastoral ministry or eldership, as stated in 1 Timothy 2:14, concerns the divine pronouncement of judgement. The rule of the man and the submission of the woman has a juridical basis. "It was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression." The woman listened to the serpent (i.e., the devil) and disobeyed the commandment of God to refrain from eating the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:16, 17; 3:2, 3). The whole creation, through Eve's lead, became corrupt though the structures and inherent principles of the creation remained intact. Yet the man, as the natural head, was held ultimately responsible. It was when he ate of the forbidden fruit that "the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked" (Gen. 3:7).

Part of the divine pronouncement of judgement for Eve (and thus for all women) was: "Yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" (Gen. 3:16). As long as the curse of sin is upon the creation, the judgement remains in force. The judgement applies to this earthly existence until the establishment of the new creation order. Even those who comprise the church of Jesus Christ remain subject to this judgement because they continue to live and function in this fallen and accursed world, and thus remain subject to its laws and conditions. The Spirit's regenerative and renewing work in the believer is not perfected while the believer remains part of this fallen creation. The physical body is yet to undergo a spiritual transformation. Thus, while the body remains identified with this corrupt creation, it remains subject to the divine judgement on creation. The work of the Spirit has begun to reverse the effects of sin in the believer, but complete eradication will not be "until the period of restoration of all things" (Acts 3:21). If the curse remains upon the earth, then the divine judgements remain in force. The curse and the judgements are inseparable. Though the believer has been ultimately delivered from the curse (of decay and death), he nevertheless remains affected by it while he remains in this world. The woman, therefore, through divine juridical pronouncement, must submit to the rule of the man and not usurp authority, particularly in the Christian home and church, where God's Word, whether pronounced at creation or on the isle of Patmos, should be willingly obeyed.

Paul understood and appreciated the universal and inflexible applicability of this juridical pronouncement or edict as evidenced in his reference to it as the ground for the justification of the exclusion of women from the pastorate. In addition to this particular injunction given to Timothy, he similarly enjoins this church practice on the Corinthian congregation. He commands:
Let the women keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but let them subject themselves just as the Law [i.e., the five books of Moses] also says. And if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church (1 Cor. 14:34, 35).Paul's basis of argument is the juridical pronouncement or edict of God, which is still in force during this present age. The woman is not to be an elder or pastor in the church because Adam was not deceived, "but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression." Hence this apostolic prohibition or regulation concerning women and the pastoral ministry constitutes normative church practice.

3. Pastoral Ordination

The third, and final, reason why women are not to be elders or pastors in the church concerns the matter of ordination to the pastoral office. The New Testament Greek verb which means 'to ordain' in reference to an official post or formal office is cathistemi. It can also be translated 'to appoint' or 'to put in charge'. The ideas of managerial responsibility and oversight seem to be implied in its usage. The verb occurs 21 times in the New Testament, with 5 of its occurrences referring to a specifically religious/ecclesiastical role or function. Three occurrences refer to the formal office of the high priest under the rubric of the Levitical administration (Heb. 5:1; 7:28; 8:3). The other two occurrences refer to the particular offices within New Testament ecclesiology (Acts 6:3; Tit. 1:5).

With respect to the Levitical administration, the high priest of Israel was always a man. Old Testament Scriptures, tradition, and history indisputably establish this factordained the office which pertains to religious ministry (see Ex. 28, 29; Lev. 8, 9, 21f; Num. 8, 18). Accordingly, though diversity does exist between the Old and New dispensations, organic unity is clearly evident. The first occurrence of cathistemi in reference to New Testament ecclesiology pertains to the diaconate. In Acts 6, the formal office of the diaconate is created under apostolic authority and oversight. The apostles themselves give instruction on the procedure for securing personnel to serve as deacons. The instruction is "But select from among you, brethren, seven men [aner - - male] of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom who we may put in charge [cathistemi] of this task [i.e., the daily serving of food]."

The second, and final, occurrence of cathistemi in reference to New Testament ecclesiology concerns the pastor-ate or eldership. In Titus 1:5, this particular office is in view. The apostle Paul had commissioned Titus, an apostolic representative, to "appoint [cathistemi] elders in every city". Paul proceeds to give the necessary, and normative, qualifications of those who are to be ordained to this office. It becomes quite apparent that the apostolic teaching pertaining to ordination is that a candidate must be a man. The apostle states: "If any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife (mias gunaicos aner, lit, a male of one woman)" (Tit. 1:6; cf. 1 Tim. 3:2). Nowhere in the New Testament is there a set of alternative qualifications, which strongly suggests that the ordination of women is certainly not founded on clear Biblical grounds.

It is interesting that the New Testament teaches that there are only two formal ecclesiastical offices, the diaconate and the pastorate (cf. Phil. 1:1), and the only two textual occurrences to ecclesiastical ordination in the New Testament Scriptures refer to these two offices respectively: The Scriptures provide sufficient information in order to draw some sound conclusions about the nature of ecclesiastical ordination. The only two witnesses to this religious, official act virtually agree in substance. Accordingly, the plain conclusion of the Scriptures is that only men are to be ordained to an ecclesiastical office. This teaching appears to be the Biblical pattern, and is thus currently relevant.

We have a responsibility to stem the tide of ecclesiastical compromise and Scriptural prostitution, and to summon the church of Christ back to Biblical truth and faithfulness.

__________________

The above article is from the September/October 1999 issue of The FCM Informer. The editor writes about the "Purpose of this 'Informer' Issue":

Because of the aggressive offense being waged by the radical feminists across the Mennonite Church today, we have devoted most of this issue to the question of women in the ministry. Much of our church publishing energy is being used to "push" the feminist agenda including attempts to feminize God. It is past time that true Biblicists respond to this blasphemy. Historian William Manchester has said, "the erasure of distinctions between the sexes is not only the most striking issue of our time, it may be the most profound the race has ever confronted."

Those who are not familiar with the work of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood would be well served in contacting the Council at P. O. Box 317, Wheaton, IL 60189 and asking for a copy of "The Danvers Statement". The ten "Affirmations" of CBMW are a major contribution to promoting the true Biblical position.


______________________-
The author is the Pastor of Unionville Baptist at Unionville, Ontario.

You are welcome to make copies of the above article provided you show the copyright information and bibleviews.com source.

Guest post - "Women pastors / preachers? What does the Bible say about women in ministry?"

This post is taken from www.gotquestions.org, with permission

Question: "Women pastors / preachers? What does the Bible say about women in ministry?"

Answer: There is perhaps no more hotly debated issue in the church today than the issue of women serving as pastors/preachers. As a result, it is very important to not see this issue as men versus women. There are women who believe women should not serve as pastors and that the Bible places restrictions on the ministry of women, and there are men who believe women can serve as preachers and that there are no restrictions on women in ministry. This is not an issue of chauvinism or discrimination. It is an issue of biblical interpretation.

The Word of God proclaims, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent” (1 Timothy 2:11-12). In the church, God assigns different roles to men and women. This is a result of the way mankind was created and the way in which sin entered the world (1 Timothy 2:13-14). God, through the apostle Paul, restricts women from serving in roles of teaching and/or having spiritual authority over men. This precludes women from serving as pastors over men, which definitely includes preaching to, teaching, and having spiritual authority.

There are many “objections” to this view of women in ministry. A common one is that Paul restricts women from teaching because in the first century, women were typically uneducated. However, 1 Timothy 2:11-14 nowhere mentions educational status. If education were a qualification for ministry, the majority of Jesus' disciples would not have been qualified. A second common objection is that Paul only restricted the women of Ephesus from teaching (1 Timothy was written to Timothy, who was the pastor of the church in Ephesus). The city of Ephesus was known for its temple to Artemis, a false Greek/Roman goddess. Women were the authority in the worship of Artemis. However, the book of 1 Timothy nowhere mentions Artemis, nor does Paul mention Artemis worship as a reason for the restrictions in 1 Timothy 2:11-12.

A third common objection is that Paul is only referring to husbands and wives, not men and women in general. The Greek words in the passage could refer to husbands and wives; however, the basic meaning of the words refers to men and women. Further, the same Greek words are used in verses 8-10. Are only husbands to lift up holy hands in prayer without anger and disputing (verse 8)? Are only wives to dress modestly, have good deeds, and worship God (verses 9-10)? Of course not. Verses 8-10 clearly refer to all men and women, not only husbands and wives. There is nothing in the context that would indicate a switch to husbands and wives in verses 11-14.

Yet another frequent objection to this interpretation of women in ministry is in relation to women who held positions of leadership in the Bible, specifically Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah in the Old Testament. This objection fails to note some significant factors. First, Deborah was the only female judge among 13 male judges. Huldah was the only female prophet among dozens of male prophets mentioned in the Bible. Miriam's only connection to leadership was being the sister of Moses and Aaron. The two most prominent women in the times of the Kings were Athaliah and Jezebel—hardly examples of godly female leadership. Most significantly, though, the authority of women in the Old Testament is not relevant to the issue. The book of 1 Timothy and the other Pastoral Epistles present a new paradigm for the church—the body of Christ—and that paradigm involves the authority structure for the church, not for the nation of Israel or any other Old Testament entity.

Similar arguments are made using Priscilla and Phoebe in the New Testament. In Acts 18, Priscilla and Aquila are presented as faithful ministers for Christ. Priscilla's name is mentioned first, perhaps indicating that she was more “prominent” in ministry than her husband. However, Priscilla is nowhere described as participating in a ministry activity that is in contradiction to 1 Timothy 2:11-14. Priscilla and Aquila brought Apollos into their home and they both discipled him, explaining the Word of God to him more accurately (Acts 18:26).

In Romans 16:1, even if Phoebe is considered a “deaconess” instead of a “servant,” that does not indicate that Phoebe was a teacher in the church. “Able to teach” is given as a qualification for elders, but not deacons (1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:6-9). Elders/bishops/deacons are described as the “husband of one wife,” “a man whose children believe,” and “men worthy of respect.” Clearly the indication is that these qualifications refer to men. In addition, in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:6-9, masculine pronouns are used exclusively to refer to elders/bishops/deacons.

The structure of 1 Timothy 2:11-14 makes the “reason” perfectly clear. Verse 13 begins with “for” and gives the “cause” of Paul’s statement in verses 11-12. Why should women not teach or have authority over men? Because “Adam was created first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived.” God created Adam first and then created Eve to be a “helper” for Adam. This order of creation has universal application in the family (Ephesians 5:22-33) and the church. The fact that Eve was deceived is also given as a reason for women not serving as pastors or having spiritual authority over men. This leads some to believe that women should not teach because they are more easily deceived. That concept is debatable, but if women are more easily deceived, why should they be allowed to teach children (who are easily deceived) and other women (who are supposedly more easily deceived)? That is not what the text says. Women are not to teach men or have spiritual authority over men because Eve was deceived. As a result, God has given men the primary teaching authority in the church.

Many women excel in gifts of hospitality, mercy, teaching, evangelism, and helps. Much of the ministry of the local church depends on women. Women in the church are not restricted from public praying or prophesying (1 Corinthians 11:5), only from having spiritual teaching authority over men. The Bible nowhere restricts women from exercising the gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12). Women, just as much as men, are called to minister to others, to demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23), and to proclaim the gospel to the lost (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15).

God has ordained that only men are to serve in positions of spiritual teaching authority in the church. This is not because men are necessarily better teachers, or because women are inferior or less intelligent (which is not the case). It is simply the way God designed the church to function. Men are to set the example in spiritual leadership—in their lives and through their words. Women are to take a less authoritative role. Women are encouraged to teach other women (Titus 2:3-5). The Bible also does not restrict women from teaching children. The only activity women are restricted from is teaching or having spiritual authority over men. This logically would preclude women from serving as pastors to men. This does not make women less important, by any means, but rather gives them a ministry focus more in agreement with God’s plan and His gifting of them.

http://www.gotquestions.org/women-pastors.html

Women Bishops

 

 

On Tuesday this week, a vote in the House of Laity put paid, for the time being, to a change in the law to allow women to become bishops in the Church of England.

The democratic vote which upheld the Biblical standard of no women bishops moved some members of the House of Laity to tears. Were these the tears of relief that the Bible won out? I sincerely doubt it. More likely they were tears of frustration and anger. As one person said to me in an online message, “If this kind of discrimination was happening in any other form of employment it would not be allowed. I fail to see why a woman with a calling to ministry should be treated any differently from a man. Women were priests in the early church, and the only reason this was changed was when the Church allowed itself to become male dominated and the men reinforced their position by centuries of oppressing women, giving them the worst press imaginable and basically blaming them for all the evil in the world in order to keep them subjugated.
So having this anachronism being perpetuated today when people should really know better is totally and utterly indefensible.”

Who is right? Is anyone actually right, or is this a matter to be determined by the individual churches of the day? What does the Bible actually teach on this subject? Over the next couple of days, these blog posts will focus on this issue and see what the Bible teaches and what the Anabaptists and Amish believe on this touchy subject.

This was the third vote in the Synod. Any motion has to be passed by three bodies before it can become enacted. The first two, the House of Bishops and the House of Clergy, both agreed to the inauguration of women bishops. The last house, the House of Laity, voted to reject the proposal – by the narrow majority of 6 votes. Apparently it will be something like ten years before there is another vote. Somehow, I doubt it. I suspect that those with a vested interest in ordaining women to the status of bishop will get round the rule and there will be another vote before too long.

The Guardian ran an article about Jesus being happy with female apostles, yet gives not one shred of evidence for this assertion. Instead, it gets bogged down with some non-Biblical reference to menstruating women not being allowed to participate in the communion service and whether or not Junia, as mentioned in Romans, was a man or a woman:

In advance of Tuesday’s vote, the Independent printed an ‘open letter’ encouraging the Synod to ‘do the right thing’ and vote to accept women bishops:

“We believe wholeheartedly that this is the right thing to do, and that the time is now right to do it. There are many reasons for this belief, and we highlight just some here.

First, because the Bible teaches that “in Christ there is no male or female”, but all people are equal before God. Just as the churches have repented of our historic antisemitism and endorsement of slavery, so we believe that we must now show clearly that we no longer believe women to be inferior to men.

Secondly, Jesus treated women radically equally. He encouraged them as disciples, and chose a woman as the first witness to His resurrection, at a time when women’s testimony was inadmissible in law.

Thirdly, we have promised as clergy to “proclaim the faith afresh in every generation”. We fear that failing to take this step would do the opposite, proclaiming instead that the church is more interested in the past than the future.”

There is an underlying assumption here that women have to hold the same positions as men in order to be ‘equal’ – they quote ‘there is neither male nor female’ but fail to recognise the context has nothing whatsoever to do with church leadership, but is to show that Gentiles as well as Jews are acceptable in God’s kingdom. (The kingdom of Israel was almost exclusively Jewish). The Independent also suggests that in not allowing women to have the same positions of leadership within the church, means they are somehow inferior. They conclude that preventing women bishops simply confirms that the church is a thing of the past and implies therefore that it is irrelevant ion the present day and age.

Where did they get such ideas? And are they right?

The arguments in favour of women bishops seem to major on assumptions, suppositions and what the Bible doesn’t say. For example. After the resurrection, Jesus appeared first to Mary Magdalene and sent her to tell the other disciples that He was alive, He had risen from the dead. From this, the pro-women bishops lobby deduce that Mary was an apostle. After all, the word ‘apostle’ means ‘one who is sent’. If therefore she was an apostle, why should she not have presided over the communion? “This is important as there are those that say such presidency (presiding over the Lord’s Supper) is an apostolic task and can only be exercised by those who are apostles...It is on this basis that some argue...only men can exercise this ministry. Yet it is assumed in 1 Corinthians that all members of the church are present and welcome at the Lord’s Supper and it is not clear that such presidency is limited solely to men”  [http://btcp.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/07/WomenBishops-2011-Print-BW.pdf].

This is a great leap of imagination; the Bible nowhere says Mary either did or didn’t preside over the communion service, but from other passages, where women are enjoined to learn in submissive silence, it is clear that women did not in fact take positions of leadership within the church.

A further argument, which tries to be based on the Bible, says that women clearly shared positions of leadership in the New Testament. For instance, women were allowed to prophesy (1 Corinthians 12v5), women deacons (Romans 16v1), a woman working with Paul (Romans 16v3) and a woman co-hosting a church (1 Corinthians 16v19). Add to that the argument that there is an ‘obvious’ contradiction in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, because in chapter 14 he says women are to be silent in the church, yet in chapter 11, he allows them to pray and prophesy.

Let’s take a closer look at some of these points.

1.      Women were allowed to prophesy, 1 Corinthians 12v5. This verse actually says: ‘There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit’. It does not mention prophesying at all, whether by men or women. However, there are other verses which do speak of women prophesying. In the modern world, we have come to understand the word ‘prophesy’ to mean telling the future. But it also means speaking forth what God has revealed. If I am speaking to someone in the street about God’s plan of salvation and His kingdom, then I am also prophesying. Philip’s daughters in the Acts of the Apostles are mentioned as being prophetesses (Acts 21v9). Just as Philip did, his daughters went about preaching the gospel. There is no indication that these women exercised their gift in the assembly of the church, or that it allowed them to be leaders in any church. Ah, you object,  there is another verse that shows women prophesying in church: 1 Corinthians 11v5 ‘But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head’. So, the argument runs, as long as women have their heads covered, they are allowed to pray and prophesy in the church. Hang on a minute – where does it say they exercised this right to pray or prophesy in the church? The fact is, it doesn’t. The fact is, there is clear indication from 1 Corinthians that this verse applies to women at times other than in church. In 1 Corinthians 1v2, Paul addresses his letter to ‘the church of God which is at Corinth’ – that’s right, you say, these words are addressed to the church and therefore are regulating what happens in church. Not at all, for the verse continues beyond those words: ‘to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, with all who in every place call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord’. Okay, so the letter is addressed to all Christians everywhere. How can I claim though that 1 Corinthians 11v5 does not refer only to women in church? After all, for decades, women have taken that to mean women ought to wear hats in church (and even that has been determined an anachronism and only cultural for Paul’s day). Take a look at the verses which immediately follow the instruction regarding head covering. Paul goes on to give guidance and correction regarding the way in which the Corinthians were celebrating the Lord’s Supper. Verse 18: ‘For first of all, when you come together as a church...’. So now Paul is addressing what happens when the Corinthians gather for worship. Which implies that the verses that come before about women wearing head coverings are not just for church services.

2.      Women were allowed to be deacons. The example the pro-women bishops lobby uses is Phoebe, mentioned once at the end of Romans (chapter 16v1). The word translated ‘deacon’ is actually the word for ‘servant’ (diakonos). All of Christ’s followers are servants – His servants, and servants to others especially to those in the church. The fact that Phoebe is singled out here is not because she held the office of deacon, but because her service in the church was exemplary and she is held up as an example to follow in service. How can I say she was not officially a deacon? Because Paul, when writing to Timothy, sets out the qualifications for a deacon: ‘Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well’ (1 Timothy 3v14). Does that sound like a description of a woman? Isn’t it funny that people will happily complain that a translation is wrong when it suits their purposes, but when their purposes are better served by accepting a particular translation, it is ignored? In modern translations, the word ‘diakonos’ is translated servant not deacon in relation to Phoebe.

3.      A woman worked with Paul (Romans 16v3): ‘Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus’. Was Paul a leader in a church? No, he was an itinerant missionary. Does this verse say that Priscilla was a leader in a church? No, it says she assisted Paul in his ministry. Does it say how she assisted him? No, so we cannot make assumptions that she was in any position of leadership. All Christians are commanded to take the gospel to everyone; Priscilla was doing just that, in conjunction with both Paul and her husband.

4.      A woman co-hosted the church (1 Corinthians 16v19). Again, this is a reference to Priscilla: ‘The churches of Asia greet you. Aquila and Priscilla greet you, with the church that is in their house’. Does this verse indicate that Priscilla was a leader in the church? No, it says that the church met in their home. Maybe their home was the only one that was big enough to accommodate such a gathering. Maybe it was a home that was most central. Maybe it was in a location where the Christians were more likely to be free from persecution. We are not told and can only speculate. But to speculate that Priscilla was a leader in the church just because the church met in her home is a step too far. The verse does not even imply that Aquila was a leader in the church, let alone his wife! And no-one has suggested that Mary, the mother of John Mark was a leader in the church, yet the early Christians gathered in her house for prayer when Peter was in prison for his faith (Acts 12v12). No, meeting in someone’s house does not suggest or imply that the owner of the house was a leader of the church.

5.      Paul’s contradiction. We have probably covered this in point 1 above, but to recap, there are those who say that Paul allows women to pray and prophesy as long as they have their heads covered, yet tells them to be silent in the church elsewhere in the same letter (1 Corinthians 11v5 cf 1 Corinthians 14v34). The point is, if women are to be silent in the church, then it is clear that 1 Corinthians 11 is not referring to what happens within a church meeting. Women are to be involved in spreading the gospel (with their heads covered); they are not permitted to have positions of leadership within the church.

6.      Women are treated as inferior. A king or queen has a child; that child grows into an adult. They are not yet king or queen themselves; they have a different role from the parent. That different role does not make them inferior. Likewise, in the Bible, God has decreed different roles for men and women. In the army, one is a communications officer, another looks after the rations for the soldiers, another has to take responsibility for making the decisions. All are necessary for the proper functioning of the team. If the communications officer started arguing with the leader over who should make the decisions, or who should be giving the orders, then chaos would ensue. Within the church, women are to be silent; they are not to hold positions of authority over men. This does not make them inferior; it simply means they have a different role to fulfil. In the next couple of days, I intend to take a further look at the role of women in the church from a positive perspective. What not come back and see what God has planned for a woman that makes her indispensible, having an honourable role of her own in God’s plan?  

As a matter of interest, since when did only bishops officiate at Communion in the Church of England? If that is the last bastion of ‘male domination’ in the Anglican church, then it seems to me they already have it wrong in allowing women to teach and lead in the churches. We need to remember it is God’s church, not ours. We cannot join a ‘club’ and then remake it in our own image. God has set forth the rules He wishes people to abide by for good order in the public assemblies; we cannot simply change that to suit ourselves and the ever increasing dominance of women.

When both men and women learn to accept the Bible as it is in truth, the Word of God, then there will be no further discussion on the place of women in church leadership. As a final comment, let us leave the discussion with a self explanatory verse from Timothy. God did not leave us clueless; He did not leave the subject of women’s place in the church to our own discretion. He was quite clear: ‘Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence’ (1 Timothy 2v11-12).