Women in Ministry

But really...women in leadership

Ah, the embattled topic! As I actually am a woman, and I’m in ministry, you might be hesitant to trust my perspective on these things. But I hope that as you come to know me, you will recognize that my allegiance to Christ, my training, and my high view of Scripture all make me a pretty reliable interpreter. So let’s dive in, shall we?

First things. Although my title reads, “Women in Ministry,” we all know that the real issue that makes this an embattled topic is not women in ministry, but women in leadership in ministry. Specifically women exercising leadership by either teaching men, preaching to the congregation, or having administrative authority as a deacon, elder or a senior pastor. Indeed, as church history testifies (and our own varied experience confirms), without women in ministry the church would never have survived. Who would have supported Jesus and his disciples while they were on the road? Where would the educational and children’s programs of our world be? What about Church fellowship gatherings and Bible studies? Missions and relief organizations? Music ministries of every sort? Committee service and church accounting and budget-balancing? One doesn’t have to look far to recognize that women have been the backbone of the local church, relief organizations, and international mission efforts for centuries.

But women in ministry in leadership—leadership over men—well, that’s the rub. And the reason for the conflict is both culture and interpretation. I can’t change your culture (although the Gospel commands that each of us submit our cultural norms to that of the Kingdom), but perhaps I can have some impact on your interpretation. Most specifically, your hermeneutics. That’s likely a new word to many of you. It is defined as, “the science of interpreting Scripture.” And, yes, there is a science of interpreting Scripture.

As we enter this discussion, hermeneutics are especially important. That because it seems that the Bible is contradicting itself. Consider Acts 2:17-18, the birth of the Church, when Peter declares: “In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy!” Coming from Peter’s Old Covenant perspective (the New Testament had not yet been written), this is a radical statement. There was no office higher in Israel’s theocracy than that of prophet, and this declaration that sons and daughters, men and women would be prophesying in the New Covenant was truly astounding. This declaration is confirmed when Paul, in 1 Corinthians 11:5, tells the women of the Corinthian church, “Ladies, when you prophesy, make sure your head is covered.”

But then Paul circles back in the same book, to the same church, saying that women are not allowed to speak in church! (1 Corinthians 14:34). And in 1 Timothy 2:12 Paul tells the women of the Ephesian church that they were not to teach or hold authority over a man but, “must remain quiet.” And this from the same disciple who traveled and taught with Priscilla while she preached and taught and discipled men and women! Including in Ephesus! Ok, now I’m confused.

Let’s begin with a few introductory remarks, specifically some remarks regarding the folks who resist women in positions of leadership in the church. The good folk of the Presbyterian Church of America, the Evangelical Free Church, and the Southern Baptists. Are these churches and their representatives simply misogynists? Bigots? Woman-haters? No, not typically. Although there are always ideologues out there, pharisees essentially—who are blindly committed to a particular position in the name of “holiness” but who are actually just recreating their own personal biases in the name of the Bible. Yes, those people are definitely out there. But, generally, the folks who are self-critically committed to excluding women from positions of leadership are doing so because of their commitment to the authority of Scripture. A value I happen to respect very highly.

These folk see the move toward women in leadership as culturally motivated, not motivated by Scripture, and they won’t compromise. And as regards their commitment to the authority of Scripture, again, I commend them—I plant my flag on that same mountain. Indeed, our task as Christ-followers is to allow Scripture to shape us, to change us—not for us to change it. So the question we should be asking as we approach this topic and others is: “What does Scripture say about this topic?” Not “What is my particular community doing these days?”

In the next month or so I will be releasing a video lecture that answers that key question: “What does Scripture say about women in ministry?” It will come out on the Seedbed platform and be copied to my various social media sites. But as that lecture is still in editing (and it is a long lecture!), I thought it would help build some interest for this challenging conversation by offering a quick flyover to the core hermeneutical issues at hand. Or stated in another fashion, how do we reconcile a Gospel preached to “male and female,” female disciples, the empowerment of male and female for service by means of the Holy Spirit, and Peter and Paul’s statements (and actions!) endorsing women in teaching, preaching, and administrative roles, with other passages that discredit the same?

The answer? Hermeneutics. This conversation demands that we recognize the difference between normative and situational passages. A normative passage is one intended to apply to all believers in all times and in every place. A situational passage is one intended to apply to only some believers in a particular situation (some call these “occasional” passages). When reading our own indigenous, 21st century literature, we recognize these differences intuitively. But when reading the New Testament, we as non-native readers often struggle to tell one type of text from the next. As a result, we the Church, sometimes unintentionally elevate what is situational to what is normative. And sometimes we demote what is normative in the text to what is situational. Obviously, not the intention of the biblical authors ….

So let me try a “teaser” here. What might be a normative declaration regarding the nature of the New Covenant? One such normative statement is that God’s grace and empowerment for service and sanctification are available to Jew and Greek, slave and free, and male and female. This is a radically new message from that of the Old Covenant in which the people of God were ethnically identified as the offspring of Abraham, only men could serve as priests and kings, and slaves were not considered full citizens of the Kingdom. But in the New Covenant, each of these categories of image-bearers are identified as equal heirs of the kingdom: ”If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise” (cf. Gal 3:26–29 NIV11). This message is repeated over and over again in the New Testament. How is it that such a mixed multitude has become one “household of faith” (Gal 6:10), “brothers and sisters in Christ” (Col 1:2) regardless of our ethnicity, gender, or socio-economic background? The answer is that when Jesus rose from the dead, as the “firstborn of the dead” (Col 1:18), he launched a new lineage … a new tribe. These are normative (or shall I say, “covenantal”) statements.

And whereas in the Old Covenant the infilling of the Holy Spirit for service was limited to a select few, in the New Covenant we find the gifting and empowerment of the Holy Spirit being extended, once again, to Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female (1 Corinthians 12-14). And whereas in the Old Covenant we found that the presence of the Holy Spirit among his people was confined to a structure we know as the Tabernacle, set apart for his presence with cloud, wind, and fire (Exod 40:33–38; cf. 1 Kgs 8:1–13), in the book of Acts we find that the Church is being set apart for the indwelling of the Presence by wind and fire as well (Acts 2:1-4). And once again, these “living stones” being built up into “a spiritual house” (1Pe 2:5) will include Jew and Gentile, slave and free, male and female: “your sons and your daughters shall prophecy … both men and women!” (Acts 2:18).

Paul fills out this picture in 1 Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4 where he teaches us that the gifts of the Holy Spirit and the offices of the Church are God’s to give, and they are, once again, available to all. Their purpose? To grow the Church. These are normative passages. And as a result of this covenantal foundation, we aren’t surprised to find Romans 16 chock full of women’s names who were serving in these capacities. Junia’s faithful service as an apostle, Phoebe a deacon, Tryphena, Tryphosa, and Persis who are all celebrated for their hard work for the Kingdom. And what of Priscilla? Celebrated for her teaching ministry at Rome, Corinth and Ephesus—a woman who risked her life for Paul’s. We could also talk about Euodia and Syntyche in Philippians and so many more serving in an array of capacities governmental and spiritual.

But then we encounter those other passages. 1 Cor 14:34-35, where women are commanded to be silent. 1 Tim 2:12 where women are forbidden to teach. And we are confused. How can both of these profiles of the early church be true? How can Paul in one breath celebrate Priscilla’s teaching gift (in Ephesus!), and in the next say that no woman in the Ephesian church can teach? 

The answer? Hermeneutics. As I will demonstrate in the longer lecture to come, brothers and sisters, some of these texts are normative, and some are not. Some apply to every believer everywhere, and some were intended to apply only in particular churches due to particular crises. We will learn that the competitive spirit of the Corinthian church in their practicing of the gifts of tongues and prophecy was marginalizing their female members. We will study the troubled church at Ephesus, where emerging Gnosticism and the Artemis cult were threatening to destroy the work of God in that community of faith, and the young widows of that congregation who had become uniquely vulnerable to the false teachers working against Paul and the Holy Spirit.

Have I caught your attention? More to come …