Over recent years,
considerable thought has been invested in considering what roles are
appropriate for women to fill within the Church. While significant changes have been,
disagreement and inconsistencies still exist throughout the Church. An example
of this discrepancy can be seen in a 2010 survey: of the 4 major groups of
Baptist Churches that support women in ministry in theory, approximately 1.5%
had put their beliefs into practice and currently had women serving as pastors
(Hartman 66). Most notably, controversy exists about whether or not women
should be free to serve in pastoral roles, which involve teaching and
admonishing both men and women in their pursuit of Christ. This issue became
personal for me when I encountered a woman who was extremely gifted at Bible
study and teaching, yet her gift was rejected and restricted by her prior
church due to her gender. She felt frustrated, hurt, and out of place within
the church because she struggled to fit into the pre-defined role that had been
set out for her. She highly valued Scripture and respected the authority of her
church leaders, but wrestled with her identity and was forced to look outside
the church and pursue her gift independently from her church.
My friend was not
alone in her struggle. A survey I
conducted through surveymonkey.com on Facebook, confirmed the broad range of
experiences throughout the church. Respondents came from a range of
denominations included 86 women, 8 men, and one who did not specify. Of those
surveyed, 74% felt it was biblical for a woman to hold a pastoral role and 26%
did not. These results were fairly
consistent with the survey conducted by survey experts with The Barna Group,
who found that 24% of churches did not allow women to serve on pastoral staff. Based on my survey results, most who felt it
was not biblical for women to serve as pastors also felt that women were free
to serve in the church without restriction – they were content with the current
roles. However, those who felt that it was biblical for women to serve as
pastors, but had not seen it in their local church felt women face limitations–
they were dissatisfied with their current roles. According to Barna, 16% of
women feel that their opportunities at church a restricted by gender. While
this is not a large percentage, Barna points out that this is out of a
population of about 70 million church-going women; this means about 11.2
million women are dissatisfied by their current limitations within the church.
Eleven
million is no small number. Considering that these are real people with a real
desire to serve Christ facing a real struggle, they deserve real answers. For
this reason it is necessary to consider what the Bible says about women serving
in pastoral roles and consider the practical implications on how this topic
should be approached in the church today. It is first necessary to examine the
positions for and against women in pastoral roles. Next, it is important to
examine the experience and results of women who are currently serving in
pastoral roles within the church. Final consideration will be given on how to
respond in the midst of the current tension.
To
begin, it is necessary to consider the understanding of church leaders who feel
that the Bible explicitly restricts women from serving in pastoral roles. According
to the Christian Apologetic Research Ministry website, the most compelling
argument against women assuming a role that includes teaching or exercising
authority in a co-ed setting comes directly from scripture:
“A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 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
deceived, fell into transgression” (1 Timothy 2:11-14 NASB).
“The women are to keep silent in the
churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves,
just as the Law also says. 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 Corinthians 14:34-35).
These instructions seem quite clear
“I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man” – this is a
direct statement with little room for confusion. Among the Bible study tools
available on biblegateway.com, including Matthew Henry’s Commentary, The
Reformation Study Bible, and Asbury Bible Commentary, there is little debate
over the meaning of these words. ( “Authority” here is translated from the Greek
authentés which is not used anywhere else in the New Testament, but seems to
imply an aggressive, domineering attitude (Celoria 20).) Paul was stating that
the women being address should not teach or exercise authority. Paul then
strengthens his argument by referencing the Old Testament order of
creation. Corinthians takes it a step
further and instructs the women not to fully engage in learning while at
church, yet should wait until they get home to ask their husbands. Taken at
face value, woman’s ability to even learn scripture is dependent upon her
husband. Taken alone, Paul has clearly laid a blueprint for women to play
secondary roles in church.
Theologians
who hold to the literal translation are correct in their value for remaining
true to scripture. They maintain an orthodox, not liberal, approach to
scripture; that is, they place value in what they believe the text originally
meant, as opposed to working backward and attempting to assimilate Christianity
to fit modern thought (Bingham 150).
However, theologian G.C. Berkouwer explains the problem with examining
only the literal translation of scripture without seeking to understand the
full context of its meaning.
“…fundamentalists who lay all their stress on the divine origin of
the Bible but neglect and all but deny its human character...think they are
honouring God’s word, but their neglect of its human aspect leads them to
misinterpret it and to in fact abuse God’s word. It is only as we recognize the
human character of the Bible, interpreting each passage in its historical
setting that we will interpret it correctly” (Lane 259).
In short, to understand the meaning
it is necessary to understand the context. Just as saying “I love you” to a
dying loved one is an entirely different statement than saying “I love you” to the
stranger who found a misplaced cell phone. In this case, it may be even more
helpful to consider whether telling one’s children to “be quiet” is a statement
made with the intention of creating a binding law to prevent the children from
making noise from that point forward, or to simply cease from being disruptive
in that current moment. It appears likely that Paul’s statements were similar
to the later example. According to conservative evangelical New Testament
scholar Bruce W. Winter, “Paul’s restrictive words to women are to be read as a
reaction against the appearance of the ‘new woman’” (Bond 17). The women of
Rome had come into a new age and become “glamorous and assertive women, living
a life of parties and self-gratification and choosing their own lovers” (Winter
288). There was a movement of affluent women who had abandoned the traditional
values of marriage, child-rearing, and modesty in exchange for promiscuous,
lavish lifestyles where they ran the show. This cultural shift had created such
a problem within society that the Roman government eventually created new
legislation regarding marriage, divorce, and remarriage (White 291).
Just
like new believers in the church today, these women did not transform the
instant they entered the church. We see
Paul providing corrective instruction in the proceeding verses “Likewise, I
want women to adorn themselves in proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not
with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly garments, but rather by means of
good works, as is proper for women making claims of godliness” and then
continuing on to say “A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire
submissiveness…I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority…”
(Timothy2:9-13). It was Paul’s place to
create disciples of these women and he was instructing them on proper Christian
character. Paul was not in an ivory tower dreaming up theoretical theology, but
in the midst of birthing and laying foundations for the church. He was in the
mess of the everyday life of the church and willing to do what it took to
eliminate disorder or distraction from Christ. A final point can be made here
that in contrast to Jewish custom, which excluded women from learning the
Torah, women were instructed to learn and ask questions; this was a radical statement
coming from a former Jew, Paul (Celoria 21-2).
A second argument drawn from scripture to
restrict women from serving in a leadership capacity is the fact that the
twelve apostles were men, the Old Testament priests were men, and the major
leaders of Israel were men (Makanjuola 73).
Even studying 2000 years of church history can lead one to the
conclusion that it is expected that a majority of church leaders will be men
(Lane). However, to take a stance that God desires to entrust church leadership
exclusively into the hands of men and desires to forbid women from such a role is
to say that he would never put a woman in that role. The Lord would not desire to break his own
commands. In this case, if one is to state that Paul (under guidance from the
Holy Spirit) explicitly forbid women from ever teaching or having authority
within the church, then it would never be appropriate for a woman to do so.
Biblical examples exist which contradict this
idea. In Acts 16:14-15 Lydia was the first in her town to respond to Paul’s
gospel message; it is argued that she proceeded to lead her entire household to
faith, which would have required teaching (Celoria 22). Additionally, in Romans
16:1-2 Paul commends Phoebe and instructs the church to “help her in whatever
manner she may have need of you.” He tells them to be at her full disposal. The
New International Version refers to Phoebe as a deacon, which according to
biblegateway.com, “the word deacon refers here to a Christian designated to
serve with the overseers/elders of a church in a variety of ways.” Finally, in
Romans 16:3-5 Paul sends greetings to his fellow laborers Priscilla (or Prisca)
and Aquilla, who appear to have shared leadership of the church that met in
their house; it is argued that Priscilla may have been the more predominate
minister in this couple since it was unusual to mention the woman’s name first
(Canavan 6-7). Either way, it is clear that she was a valuable asset to Paul
and the churches. It can be seen in Acts 18:26 that Priscilla was in no way
treated as secondary “But when Priscilla
and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of
God more accurately;” if Paul had felt that a Priscilla was out of place in her
ministry, he certainly would have quickly rebuked her to “restore order” for
the sake of Christ. Instead, he did nothing but commend her (Canavan 7).
The
encouraging news is that while there are two sides to this issue, proponents of
each view draw their conclusions from their understanding of scripture. Next it
is important to consider the current situation in the church in light of the
biblical backdrop behind this issue. As mentioned previously, approximately 16%
of women in the Church feel negatively impacted by the effect of a restrictive
view within their current church. Now it is time to view the experiences of
those women. One respondent to the informal survey conducted for this paper
stated that she she was regularly rejected from youth pastor positions for
which she was qualified, receiving responses that stated that the hiring
organizations were only interested in qualified male applicants (Hunter). Not
only would that be extremely discouraging for a young woman who was called to
reach young people for Christ, but in the secular world it would be foundation
for a lawsuit. It sends the message “you are not valuable because you are not
the correct gender.”
For
women who feel called to serve in a pastoral capacity within the church, this
was not an isolated incident. An article in the Baptist Theological Journal, Already
But Not Yet: The Status of Women Baptist Pastors, explores the experience of
five pastoral search committees and 19
female pastors, most of whom were serving as the first ever female pastors in
their respective churches. In 2002 Sarah Jackson Shelton, who had 20 years of ministry
experience, was hired as pastor by Baptist Church of the Covenant (Hartman 70).
For her first few weeks on staff “protestors hurled rocks through church
windows, and members of the local Baptist association voiced objections,” due
to objections to a female pastor. Thankfully she has thrived on behalf of these
obstacles; David Goodwin, a member of the original search committee states “In
our church, we've only had male voices and male perspectives (in the pulpit).
Sarah has opened up a new faith walk for me. She phrases things differently and
focuses on different lines of scripture. I think it's made us a more faithful
congregation.” Considering that Paul's original focus had been on establishing
order within the church, destroying church property would not have been
consistent with honoring Paul's concern in 1 Timothy 2.
Another example is
found in Darren and Jessica Williams’s journey to be hired to co-pastor a
church; while several churches were interested in hiring Darren, they
ultimately rejected the couple's proposition of pastoring together (Hartman
72). Although they were seriously
considered as candidates, the churches sought to limit Jessica's role. One
church considered agreeing to allow Jessica serve as an associate pastor and
another asked if Jessica would agree to do nothing more than read scripture
during worship for her first several months on staff. During one interview
Jessica was asked "What should I call you, 'pastorette'?" They were
finally hired by a church where they are able to pastor equally and continue to
serve faithfully together. This experience seems to reflect value for tradition
more than educated interest in upholding scripture.
Of the 19 women
interviewed in this study several had come from churches where members prayed
for God to “change their hearts” and friends attempted to "straighten them
out" or help them regain a "biblical understanding of female
submission" (73). This means that
when they shared their desire to preach God's word and help others live out a
faithful Christian life, the church treated this desire as misguided or worse.
Regardless of one's take on whether or not women should be assigned certain
roles, instead of dismissing what these women felt was the Lord, would it not
seem biblical to encourage someone in a desire to nurture the spiritual
well-being of others?
Another concern
that still exists today is whether or not women will be effective at properly fulfilling
pastoral duties (Herrick 36-7). It is intuitive to believe that both men and
women are capable of failing. Therefore,
it is necessary only to explore whether or not women have experienced success
in pastoral or leadership roles within the church. Multiple examples can be
seen in the history of the Pentecostal church. Although the denominational
leadership preferred to appoint men as pastors, when they were short on men
they would appoint women. One example of a great success is that of Pentecostal
evangelist Lula Jones, who pastored the nine churches that grew out of her
ministry and performed foundation work for nine others (Roebuck 397). Multiple
other women experienced success in ministry during the time that they were
allowed to serve due to the shortage of male ministers. Another modern example
is Heidi Baker, whose ministry is directly tied to the creation of over 10,000
churches; it is typical for people to be healed of real conditions such as
deafness or blindness during her meetings, just as people did when they
encountered Jesus during his ministry (Stafford 19). Wouldn't it seem unusual
that the Lord would so greatly bless her ministry if he were against it? To ask
her to quit preaching would be to
ignore Jesus's priorities of healing people and setting them free, due to a few
controversial verses. While these are
just a few examples, the number of women successfully pastoring churches
continues to increase (Hartman 65).
There
is an additional objection that even when women have initially laid the foundation,
men should take over as soon as the opportunity arises (Slick). However, the Bible since the
Bible advises that “the harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the
Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field” it
would seem most effective to have every worker serving at the greatest capacity
to which he or she has been called and gifted (Luke 10:2 NIV).
It
can be seen that there is still tension within the Church regarding women in
pastoral and church leadership roles. Though there is no quick resolution to
the differences in the Biblical interpretation on this issue, it is always
necessary to consider how to respond to an imperfect situation in a biblical
way. If one's biblical understanding and moral convictions lead one to believe
that a woman should not pastor a church, what is the biblical way to respond to
a woman who feels the Lord has called her to pastoral ministry? The Bible
presents these instructions which are less controversial and universally
applicable: “But the fruit of the Spirit is
love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such
things there is no law” and the second greatest commandment which states “Love
your neighbor as yourself (Galatians 5:22, Matthew 22:39 NIV). This means that
even when there is disagreement regarding the formality of what titles or
responsibilities are acceptable or unacceptable for a person of a particular
gender, the Bible is still clear about how Christians should treat one another.
The situations described earlier demonstrated failure in this regard. A better
way to respond would be to demonstrate genuine love for the woman who has been
brave enough to share her controversial desires, while considering how to
nurture the desires and gifts that the Lord has given her in a way that does
not violate one's own conscience. There may be creative ways to allow her to
cultivate her gifts without using formal titles or crossing lines that are
considered inappropriate for a woman in that church setting. This would be more
consistent with Paul's message and style than actions that cause her to feel
secondary to men. Pastor and founder of Mars Hill church in Chicago, Mark
Driscoll suggests an inclusive approach despite his beliefs that there are
certain roles reserved exclusively for men; he provides the following
suggestions for what women can do:
“anything from teaching a class, to leading a Bible
study, overseeing a ministry, leading as a deacon, speaking in church in a way
that is not preaching, leading worship music, serving Communion, entering into
full-time paid ministry as a member of the staff, and receiving formal
theological education—basically every opportunity in the church except what the
Bible and the elders deem elder-only duties.”
Secondly, the Bible
provides instruction for women who feel called to lead in the church, yet find themselves
unsupported. It is possible to continue to respect the authorities within the
church, while seeking the Lord’s guidance about the perceived call. To maintain
a quiet and teachable spirit while honoring those in authority is not at all
incompatible with a call to Christian leadership; in fact, it is a necessary
part of any leader's spiritual formation (Romans 13:1-2). Christine Cain, a
well-known evangelist out of Hillsong Church and international human
trafficking activist, provides the following advice for such women who are
struggling to be accepted:
“If your true priority is people and not a
position then there is always a place for you. If you get busy being about the
Father's business he will come and find you when he is ready to promote you. If
God anointed you then he will appoint you...If we are prepared to work in anonymity
and obscurity there is always plenty of work to be done.”
While it is necessary to support
women in pursuing the gifts and callings that the Lord has placed in their
lives, this is not to be done with the intention of pushing out or replacing the
men that the Lord has also called. It should not be substitution, but addition.
In America in particular, culture has created a climate that sets men up to
fail. Beginning with the radical feminist movement in the 60’s and leading up
to even into today, where men are regularly portrayed as fat, dumb,
beer-drinking fools, men lack solid role models (Dobson loc 2292-529). There is
absolutely a need for male role models within the church who demonstrate
integrity and Christ-like character. As discussed earlier, there is a need for more workers to go into the harvest, so
it needn’t be a competition. The church needs both men and women in leadership
to serve as role models and mentors for those who come along behind them.
People need to see something different in the church than the brokenness that
is seen elsewhere. Instead of men and women objectifying and competing with one
another, they need to see men and women honoring and submitting to one another
(Ephesians 5:21).
In
conclusion, given the complex nature, long-standing traditions, and
relationship to a woman’s feelings of personal acceptance and worth, it is wise
to view the biblical role of women in the church comprehensively and not
dogmatically. To say that one’s view is drawn from the authority of scripture
means that one must be willing to yield to the authority of all of scripture. For one who feels that
scripture prohibits women from teaching in church or leading in a co-ed
setting, it is important to consider how scripture says to relate to a woman
who may feel called to do so. Higher than Paul’s instructions on how to conduct
church (which consists of less than on page on this topic) is the call to love
one another unselfishly. What would it look like to love and value who desire
to pastor and teach others instead of treating them as misguided and
out-of-place? While there are still many obstacles for women pursuing pastoral
roles within the church, objections tend to lessen when one has a personal
relationship with a woman who is gifted for such a role. As Anglican
clergy-person and soon to be ordained priest, Tish Harrison Warren was told by
a fellow pastor and friend, "I'm
not sure where I stand on women's ordination. But I think you should get
ordained" (Warren). When women are viewed individually and not conceptually,
they are accepted despite theological uncertainty.
Considering
the entirety of Paul's Pastoral Epistles, one unifying theme is evident. Paul
was for anything that furthered the Gospel of Jesus Christ and against anything
that hindered it. I suggest that the Church should take that stance as well: if
it furthers the message of Jesus to let women lead, let them lead; if it
hinders the message of Christ (such as in a Muslim culture where it may cause
offense) use discretion. Always treat one another with love and dignity. This
interpretation encompasses a comprehensive, not narrow, view of scripture.
Additional helpful resources can be found here:
Fashioned to Reign: Empowering Women to Fulfill Their Divine Destiny
Powerful And Free
Works Cited:
“Christian
Women Today, Part 1 of 4: What Women Think of Faith, Leadership and Their Role
in the Church.” Barna Group. Pub. 14 Aug 2012. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. <https://www.barna.org/barna-update/culture/579-christian-women-today-part-1-of-4-what-women-think-of-faith-leadership-and-their-role-in-the-church
>The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan House, 1984. Print.
Stafford, Tim. "Miracles In Mozambique. (Cover Story)." Christianity Today 56.5 (2012): 18.MasterFILE Premier. Web. 10 Dec. 2013.
Bingham, D. J. . Pocket history of the church. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2002. 150. print.
Bond, Helen K., and Bruce W. Winter. "Roman Wives, Roman Widows: The
Appearance Of New Women And The Pauline Communities." Conversations In Religion & Theology 4.1
(2006): 17-24. Academic Search
Complete. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.
Canavan,
Rosemary. "First Century Inclusive
Language." Colloquium 39.1 (2007): 3-15. ATLA Religion
Database with ATLASerials. Web. 22 Nov. 2013.
CELORIA,
HEATHER. "Does 1 Timothy 2 Prohibit Women From Teaching, Leading, And
Speaking In The Church?" Priscilla Papers27.3 (2013):
20- 23. Academic Search Complete. Web. 1 Nov. 2013
Dobson,
James. Bringing Up Boys: Practical
advice and encouragement for those shaping the next generation of men..
Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc, 2001. eBook. Driscoll, Mark. "FAQ: Women in Ministry." Pastor Mark Driscoll. Web. 10 Dec 2013. <http://pastormark.tv/2011/09/20/faq-women-and-ministry>.
Hunter,
Nancy. Survey Monkey: Women in Church Leadership. Completed
11/22/2013. Survey Monkey Web
Survey. http://itsgonnabecool.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-results-are-in-what-do-people-think.html
. Web. 23 Nov. 2013
Lane,
Tony . A Concise History of Christian Thought. Grand Rapids: Baker
Academic, 2006. 259. print.
Makanjuola,
Mepaiyeda Solomon. "Assessing The Hypotheses Against Women Leadership In
African Christianity." Cross-Cultural Communication 9.4 (2013):
71-78. Academic Search Complete. Web. 1 Nov. 2013
Winter, Bruce W. "The 'New' Roman
Wife And 1 Timothy 2:9-15: The Search For A Sitz Im Leben." Tyndale
Bulletin 51.2 (2000): 285-294. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials.
Web. 5 Dec. 2013
