The
Role of the Christian Women in the Family, Church and Society
By: Rev.
Larry D. Ellis
Many Christians, both women and men, believe very
fervently that, while husbands should certainly love their wives as
Christ loves the church and gave himself for it, God has divinely
appointed the husband to be the one who makes the final decision in
matters within the family. Many of these men would seek the advice of
their wives, especially if the husband was not well informed on the
issue. However, should the husband and wife disagree, he would make the
decision and his wife should gratefully submit to his God-appointed
decision-making authority. They say that the husband is the head of the
wife, as Christ is the head of the church. The wife receives the benefit
of the husband's oversight and spiritual protection. If a woman remains
single, this role is to be provided by her father or some other older
married male. This is believed to be the God-ordained authority
structure for the family.
These men and women would also, naturally, carry this
paternal authority from the home into the church. Therefore, women,
however gifted are precluded from shouldering the ultimate
responsibility for decision-making in the family or the church. Women
would certainly be encouraged to teach both the female and male children
both in home and in the church, but they would be restricted from
teaching adult men in either venue. After all, these proponents will be
quick to point out that Paul did not allow women to teach or have
authority over men. Clearly they would acknowledge that men and women
are of equal value in the eyes of God, but that God has appointed
different roles for them within the family and church. A logical
corollary to this thinking is that within the Christian church, women
should not be ordained or be placed in any position of authority over
men. This would certainly preclude women from being priests and pastors
or at least senior pastors. It would also preclude them from being
elders or deacons, if these are the decision-making body within the
church. They see a thoroughly consistent reading, interpretation and
application of these doctrines. God has not changed his position since
the Apostle Paul was teaching and therefore, these prohibitions then are
still what God has ordained for today and the future. Some churches even
excuse women from the congregational meetings, since they would not be
authorized to vote on pending matters. The women (and also the men) must
rely entirely on the males in the church for discernment of the Lord's
will on these church matters. Because these Christians believe that
their conviction on these issues is rooted in Holy Scripture, and they
desire to be Christians obedient to God, they will not yield to today's
egalitarian politically correct values, which to not subscribe to these
divinely-appointed Christian roles.
If you asked many of these same Christians, what are
the best biblical passages to affirm a different position from this,
they often cannot think of any biblical support that would do so. They
have enthusiastically read bible teaching that support the patriarchal
model but have not similarly read bible teaching by authors who have
come to a very different theological position, through their study of
the scriptures. In fact some of these persons find it amazing that
anyone who says that they study the scriptures could ever come to a
position that disagrees with their own patriarchal point of view.
Clearly, they believe that these theological liberals must have embraced
(or fallen into) today's culture and political correctness rather than
endorse what is clearly God's biblical role for women.
Just as my brothers and sisters with whom I have now
come to disagree, I recognize the social pressure to accept the values
of our progressive thinking on equal pay for equal work, education and
experience and legal equality in many areas of our society for both
sexes. However, the strength of these pressures pale when compared to
being faithful to what I believe is God's plan for our lives together as
revealed in Holy Scripture. There are those who are fueled by great
senses of injustice against women both in and out of the church. These
may very well be valid processes by which they come to their impassioned
conclusions, which might in many ways appear to be consistent with mine.
However, that is not the arena that I, personally, find compelling,
should it be inconsistent with what I believe is taught in the
scripture. I believe that the Holy Spirit can confirm the truth that God
has revealed through his scripture to each one of us. A myopic and
non-investigative learning process is a sad indictment against the
formation of a mature Christian thinking process. The indictment is not
just the limitation of options for women in ministry, but that these
persons have never studied and researched the scriptures to understand a
view, which is in opposition to their unquestioned view. If one's
theological conclusions are inconsistent with someone else's, and the
critic cannot explain what they see to be problems in the other person's
understanding, they have not gone very deep into their own learning
process. The author believes that Godly Christians can differ on certain
spiritual matters even after considerable prayer and study. This topic
appears to be one of those arenas. However, when one pursues spiritual
insight, under the direction of the scripture and the Holy Spirit, they
should not be afraid to study an opposing view; rather they might even
be challenged to do so, in order to gain a deeper understanding. It is
the author's desire to stimulate discussion on this very important issue
and show that one who has a very high value of the scriptures can come
to a set of very different conclusions on many of these matters from the
patriarchal view described above.
Ultimately, each of us is accountable to God for his
or her beliefs as well as their actions. It is this personal spiritual
discernment process, scripture study and evaluation of our own
individual track of orthodoxy that brought to the surface such actions
as Martin Luther's disagreement with numerous the Roman Catholic Church
policies that ultimately produced the Protestant Reformation and John
Wesley's formation of spiritual clubs at Oxford, while he remained in
the Anglican Church, a vision that was well outside the mainstream of
his church, the formation of many church denominations as well as
countless other spiritual emphases. Simply replicating the only position
that we have been taught will not be very convincing, when we are given
the opportunity to discuss this issue with others, nor will it ever
bring us to the same intensity of personal convictions as when we have
embraced truth through a critical eye and heart, even if the end result
is the same.
The author will examine some of the passages that are
commonly used to restrict the opportunities to women. He will give
explanations that he finds very encouraging toward the call to ministry
of women in the kingdom of God. These ideas are not meant to be
exhaustive on the subject, but instead to show that the "traditional"
role of women will be challenged with a more detailed look at these
scriptures. The translation of the Hebrew and Greek scriptures is an
immensely difficult task. We are fortunate to have a number of excellent
translations. Nonetheless, many times English translation of the
scriptures can modify the meaning of the original texts, due to the many
nuances of languages. This is also compounded as the vernacular use of
English changes from generation to generation. Even the most accurate of
translations into a second language can introduce nuances into a text
especially as the culture and language changes both geographically and
over time and certainly between different cultures. Examination of a few
passages and studies of some of these key words will prove quite
enlightening and helpful in our pursuit of truth on this very important
subject.
Head of, submit to, love
Ephesians 5:21-33 (KJV) says, "Submitting yourselves
one to another in the fear of God. Wives, submit yourselves unto your
own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife,
even as Christ is the head of the church; and he is the savior of the
body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives
be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even
as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might
sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he
might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or
wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without
blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that
loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh;
but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord of the church; for we
are member so his body, of his flesh, and his bones. For this cause a
man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined unto his wife,
and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery; but I speak
concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in
particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she
reverences her husband."
The opening verse is often translated, "Be subject to
one another out of reverence for Christ." This theme of being subject to
one another is extended from this opening verse to those that follow and
deals with a wide variety of relationships. It starts with the mutuality
between husbands and wives. Husbands and wives are exhorted to be
subject to one another. This was in sharp contrast to the practice and
traditions of that day. The text then calls children to honor and obey
their parents as well as exhorting parents to not provoke their
children. It continues exhorting slaves to be subject to their earthly
masters and concludes with the statement "Masters, do the same to them"
(their slaves.) The passage supports mutually based adult relationship
operating with loving consideration of each other. In Galatians 3:28 the
Apostle Paul said, "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer
slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are
now one in Christ Jesus." In the context of the chapter we see that Paul
is not saying that we no longer have two sexes or that we no longer have
slaves and masters. He is saying that the gift God of eternal life both
transcends all these distinctions and that each of us is on equal
standing with God no matter what our earthly heritage or circumstances
are. God does not see the class or gender distinctions that we see
within our own cultures. In fact he calls us to the same frame of
reference by saying that we are all one in Christ.
Again, in this Ephesians 5 passage Paul, does not
reference authority or dominance but does say be subject to one another.
However, the subject of authority between a husband and wife is
specifically addressed in I Corinthians 7 as it relates to their sexual
relations. "The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and
likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority
over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not
have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one
another except perhaps by agreement for a set time." If the wife were
expected by God to "submit" to her husband in all things, this would be
squarely in conflict with what Paul taught the husband about his body.
Fortunately for both, there is no command for the wife to unilaterally
submit nor is there any command to the husband to make certain his wife
is in submission to him or anyone else.
Head of the wife…
Paul explains in Ephesians 5 that, "The husband is
head of the wife, as Christ is head of the church." In English the word
head refers to the physical head of one's body. In addition it also
connotes and denotes being the boss, the one who is in charge of the
agenda. There is a Greek word for this concept that is translated head
in English. The word is arche. It is the one recognized by all
who is charged with the responsibility of deciding. It means "head" in
terms of leadership and also point of origin. It is used when referring
to the beginning in the sense of the first or point of inception. We use
this Greek word as a prefix in words such as archaeology, archetype and
archives. It was also used for head in the sense of headwaters of a
river. Arche was also used when denoting the 'first" in terms of
importance. We still use it as a prefix in such words as archangel,
archbishop, archenemy, and archduke. These all refer to leadership. It
is used throughout the New Testament, including writings by Paul to
designate the head or leader of a group of people such as "chief",
"prince", and "ruler". If Paul believed that husbands should command
their wives and rule over then, Paul could have used the word arche. He
was well aware of the word arche when he wrote of how the husband was to
be head of the wife, but he deliberately chose a different word. This is
very consistent with Paul's teaching that the husband should love his
wife as Christ loves the church and gave himself up for her.
There is no such authoritarian meaning present in the
word used here in the text. The Greek word actually used here by Paul
was kephale. This also can mean the head of the body but not in
the sense of boss. It was also used to mean "foremost" in terms of
position (as a cornerstone in a foundation or capstone over a door. It
was never used to mean leader, boss, chief or ruler. Kephale is
also a military term. It means one who leads, but not in the sense of
director, General or Captain or someone who orders the troops from a
safe distance. Its meaning is quite the opposite. A
kephale was the one who is
out front in the sense of the soldiers who are at the front lines of
battle or even out doing reconnaissance gathering information to bring
back to the troops in order to make certain the mission can be
accomplished. In these images there actually is no intention of the
husband being the one who is in primary authority. The husband is called
to the front lines in support and protection of his wife.
These two words in Greek can both be translated head
in English. One means "boss" and the other means "physical head" or "the
first soldier into battle". Unfortunately, an English-speaking person
who reads that the husband is the head of the wife will infer that the
husband is to rule over the wife. This is what Aristotle taught and most
Hellenized people thought. It was certainly the cultural practice of the
day. The husband was an arche to his wife, head of the household
and ruler over all his family. Paul deliberately went against the
culture and religious tradition and used a very different word. Sadly,
people who rely only on an English translation cannot know this due to
the present connotation of the word head.
The author believes that a fundamental consequence of
Jesus' earthly ministry here is to elevate womanhood to equal status
with manhood in the family, church and society. Jesus initiated the
liberation of women from the cultural strongholds that perpetuated
self-deprecating mindset in the women of the day. The males in society
ran the Jewish, Greek and Roman secular and sacred societies. Women
seldom if ever challenged this structure. They had no individual or
collective economic, political or social power. Many men both then and
now have generally maintained the status-quo, enjoying self-indulgence
while their wives essentially maintain two full-time jobs and generally
work more hours than do most men. The author believes that women do not
simply have equal value with men but different roles in the family and
church. The roles or the ministry to which one is called is determined
by God's call to us individually, not one's gender.
The husband is not accountable to God for the
spirituality of his wife. "Every person will give account of himself to
God." (Romans 14:12) The husband is not called to pontificate anything
within the family. Nowhere in scripture is he called to be the
intermediary between his wife and God or his wife and anyone else. He is
never instructed to insist that she blindly go along with his opinions
or to embrace his convictions without examination. It is ironic that the
very passage where Paul teaches the early church to bring unity and
mutuality into marriage relationships is widely used to denounce it and
perpetuate the cultural and religious tradition of a patriarchy.
Love…
The husband is no more expected to autonomously make
the financial decisions than the wife is expected to autonomously
conceive their children. However, he is called to love his wife like
Christ loved the church. (Ephesians 5:25) That means that the husband's
love and devotion to his wife is so unassuming that he does not insist
upon his own way. He is to be patient, kind, not arrogant or rude. (I
Corinthians 13:4) His love is voluntarily given to his wife, just as
Christ voluntarily gave his life for us. "But God commended His love
toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
(Romans 5:8) Jesus' prayer to his Father in heaven in the Garden of Gethsemane the night before he was
betrayed is such an example of this love. Jesus did not want to die for
the church. He prayed that he would not have to do this. Yet, he loves
us all and his Heavenly Father so much he voluntarily yielded his life
to the Roman injustice and his Father's plan so that we would be given
eternal life. This is the scope and intensity of sacrificial love that
Paul is talking about - not about the husband being the boss of the
wife. The challenge of this voluntary unconditional love to which God
has called the husband is quite a sufficient challenge for all husbands
to take on. There is no need to enlarge the circle of responsibilities
beyond that which God has ordained within our marriage relationships.
Helper, Chronology of Creation
Genesis 2:18 is typically translated "The Lord God
said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a
helper as his partner." The word helper is the Hebrew word ezer.
In English the word "helper" or "helpmeet" implies a position of
subordinance - one being directed by someone in authority over the
helper, guiding their actions so as to accomplish the desired task in a
wisely-supervised manner. However, the word ezer does not connote
an inferior or subordinate status. In fact, when it is not referring to
Eve, it appears seventeen times in the Old Testament, and each time it
refers to God. Certainly no one believes God to be subordinate to
humankind and likewise one should not infer from this passage that women
should be subordinate to men.
The first three chapters of Genesis about Adam and Eve
give rise to some common social extrapolations that are often applied to
the entire human race. Some argue that since Adam was made before Eve,
Adam (male) is superior to Eve (female). It is fascinating that no one
carries us to the logical conclusion that cows are superior to man,
since cows were created before men and women, and that fish are superior
to cows since they were created first. Also some give significance to
the order in which the first couple fell to temptation, drawing an
inference that since Eve sinned first, women are more easily led into
error than men are. Since Adam was tempted by Eve, clearly women
constitute a moral threat to men. Some would also infer that women are
morally more vulnerable and easily led astray than men.
Even if this should be true, women would not be any less
responsible than men to God for their choices and actions. Remember
Romans 14:12. The passage
could just as easily suggest that husbands and wives are meant to
provide each other with moral fortitude, and when this fails, sin can
enter into their relationship and change it. A second interpretation
suggests that the serpent deliberately chose Eve because she was the
stronger, not the weaker of the two. After all, it took all of the skill
of the tempter to lead Eve to sin, while a simple act of handing the
forbidden fruit to Adam was sufficient to lead him to sin. The serpent
may have chosen the stronger of the two, knowing that if she fell for
his line, the other would follow her example. A third interpretation
focuses on the result of the sin for the couple, in which she now
desires him and he rules over her. If this kind of marital relationship,
far from being divinely ordered, is the product of sin and God's curse,
then it is to be avoided rather than commended. It is characteristic of
marriage outside of God's grace. To prescribe this kind of relationship
is to advocate living under the penalty of sin imposed on Adam and Eve,
as if Christ brought nothing new to our marriage relationships.
Teaching and Spiritual Leadership
In First Timothy 2:12, Paul writes that "I do not
permit woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in
silence". The statement is actually in the present tense and could be
translated "I do not presently permit …." However, in I Corinthians 11,
he assumes that women will both pray and prophesy (what today would be
thought by many to mean preaching). His concern in
Corinth is that,
when women speak in church, they should have their head covered as a
sign of purity and modesty. Even today there is a vestige of this
culture that says veil or covering is considered respectable attire for
women in public. The Orthodox Church certainly maintains this tradition
along with certain Roman Catholic orders. Even today in many
conservative Muslim cultures women still must embrace this strict dress
code. In one congregation
Paul says he does not permit women to speak and in another he affirms
their speaking and preaching. (Acts 2:18 also
see Joel 2:28-29.) Depending on the local situation with each
congregation - Paul's specific practices dramatically differ. We do not
have any detailed explanation from him as to why he established these
differences, but scripture is clear that Paul affirmed both. It is
common for a lot of bible teachers who use these passages to argue so
strongly for women's subordination and non-speaking in worship
conveniently ignore what the same passages say about dress codes and
hair styles-veils and long hair in I Corinthians as well as braided
hair, gold, pearls, or costly clothing prohibited in I Timothy. The
array of evangelical women you see on Christian television attest to the
fact that our fundamentalist friends don't take the Bible very literally
as they might say or at best they are selectively literal! If those
things are applicable only to certain cultures either the first century
where abuses were prevalent, which the author believes that they are,
then none of these recommendations should be interpreted to be
universally true. Patriarchal anarchy and sexism belong to the first
century. Paul took steps to change the politically correct right of
males control into a new era. The great new revolutionary principles of
New Testament Christianity were not fully realized within first century
culture, nor in our own time, but fortunately, change had begun.
Although we see no women specifically identified as
pastors in the New Testament, neither do we see any men specifically
identified as pastors. The author believes that God can and does call
some women to teach their male peers and even serve as their pastor.
Women can be called to the ministry of deacon and elder within the
church community. Principles and themes within the scripture as well as
examples support these "non-orthodox" callings by God. Women have been
the backbone of virtually all Christian churches, Christian communities,
and missionary work around the world. They pray, teach, call on the
sick, share their faith, organize others in ministry, lead ministries of
music, write Christian teaching literature and serve on the mission
fields throughout the world. These ministries are widespread for both
single and married women throughout Christendom in almost all
denominations. Well known Baptist missionaries like Lottie Moon (to China) and Mother Theresa, thousands
of other Roman Catholic nuns, and millions of other Christian women have
given their lives to serve Christ. In spite of these, the roles which
require ordination (priests, pastors, elders and deacons) have
traditionally been denied to women in many churches. Also in some
circles the teaching of men by women is not permitted, although
ordination is not relevant here. In one of the churches, the Apostle
Paul did instruct that women were not to teach men and that women were
to learn in silence. We will look more in detail and in context of this
isolated event. The author believes that even these instructions were in
sharp contrast to the traditions of the day that did not even educate
women. Separate genderized roles but equally valued worth is no better
than "separate but equal" was for racial equality in the United States prior to the Civil
Rights legislation. The
author believes that this teaching of separated ministry calling but
equal value by God is not biblical.
Keep Silence
In First Corinthians 14:34-35 (NASB) we read, "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."
This entire chapter is focused on the importance of
bringing order out of the chaos that was the experience in their public
worship at Corinth, the church that
was experiencing many abuses. There was confusion due to the disruptive
practice of people speaking at the same time. This was particularly a
problem with some of those speaking in tongues. Paul's specific guidance
there may simply mean that certain women were offenders in this matter.
Also, these churches were immersed in a culture that only immoral women
would speak in public. To permit a woman to speak in worship might have
been too culturally shocking and mar the reputation of the early church.
Women were not formally educated in anything and were even intentionally
isolated at home to take care of the needs of their husbands and
families. Paul did dramatically break with tradition and say that women
should be taught spiritual truth. Note Paul addressed this passage to
the women's responsibility to voluntarily subject themselves, not to men
to make certain that the women did so. They are exhorted to be subject
here to the Law, not their husbands. Also though he cites "the Law" in
this passage as calling for the submission of women, in Galatians and
Romans, he strongly insists that Christ is the end of our obligation to
the Law. Also, I Corinthians 11 shows that Paul assumes that women will
both pray and prophesy in the Christian community.
Ordination
Ordination in the New Testament times was a very
nebulous thing. The word as a noun does not even appear in the New
Testament text, and at least a dozen different words are translated in
the infinative ("to ordain"). In its primitive expression, it seems to
have been a way for the churches to bless and encourage persons with
gifts for ministry. Nothing magical was involved with the ordination
process. It is just a way of confirming a person's call to specific
ministry by persons other than themselves. The licensing of religions by
the Romans my have hastened the formalizing of ordination as we now know
it. It's important to remember that Christianity started as a movement
and then it became a structure. It began as Christ-followers, who
evolved into formalized churches. Clearly, in the New Testament period
itself, ordination was not a very clear-cut practice. Today it does
serve to some level of regulation of who can and cannot do certain types
of ministry within specific churches as well as provide certain legal
status and responsibilities to those who are ordained in certain
countries. Neither of these two consequences of ordination appears to
have any biblically-based authority.
Concluding Thoughts
I am happy to see that certain portions of the
Christian Church are in transition on this important subject.
Unfortunately, some of the transition appears to me to be rooted in
traditions that oppose the ministry of women in the pulpit and opposed
to encouraging them to operate out of their God-given leadership gifts
within the nuclear family. However, some of the trends are that
throughout the world more and more women have been responding to God's
call to pastoral and leadership vocations. They are in congregations
where the Holy Spirit has called forth their spiritual gifts for
leadership and teaching ministry and these women have faithfully
responded to God's call. They are preparing for effective leadership in
ministry. Today women constitute approximately twenty per cent of the
enrollment in the Southern Baptist seminaries - well over two thousand
women. In 2000 women were 23% of the student enrollment at Dallas
Theological Seminary and 46% in Episcopal seminaries. Presbyterian and
Methodists seminaries have long sought out women to train in pastoral
ministry. An increasing number of local churches have begun to include
women in their elders and deacon groups- and many church staffs now
include women who are professionally trained and ordained as ministers
of the Gospel or priests. Sadly, many in the more conservative
evangelical groups would perceive most of these churches as liberal
churches, at times saying that these churches do not believe the bible.
The word "liberal" used in this context is not a compliment, but
actually a statement of criticism standing in sharp contrast to their
understanding of their unilateral and comprehensive "truth" on this and
a few other controversial issues. It is this mind-set that precludes a
serious examination of what the bible teaches.
An important thing to consider about the role of women
in the more conservative Christian churches is that this issue about the
role of Christian women is based on a difference in how to interpret
scripture. There may well be other agendas such as traditional sexism
and cultural chauvinism in some venues, but in conservative biblical
circles, the issue is how one is to interpret the New Testament. There
is a particular mind-set, which denies ordination for women and always
affirms a pattern of female subordination in the family and elsewhere.
There are others of us, who take the bible just as seriously as our more
conservative friends, who see significant contrast to this position
within the New Testament itself. Also, some who theologically affirm
women in leadership ministry are actually culturally entrenched against
it. These women and men simply have a cultural preference for male
leadership. In some cases, they have not had the benefit of women
pastors. They just feel more comfortable with a male pastor or priest
than with a woman. The challenge for us is to live out of our faith
values discerned from God's word NOT be held hostage to our cultural
biases, no matter which side of this issue appeals to us personally.
This divergence in theology and cultural preferences is not new and
should call us to dialogue with one another, not to name-calling.
Notwithstanding the longstanding cannons of the Roman
Catholic Church, most Christians, who form their individuated theology
from their own understanding of scripture and mostly from the writings
of the apostle Paul. Despite the perceptions drawn by many who read
isolated portions of his teachings in the New Testament, Paul was a
pretty remarkable advocate of women's rights. In his own lifetime he did
begin living out some of the implications of his theological ideas. In
Ephesians 5, his call for the submission of wives to husbands is clearly
based on his calls for mutual submissiveness between husbands and wives
and within the church family just a few verses above (vs. 15-21). Paul
also takes great pain to tell husbands to love their wives as themselves
(vs. 28 and 33). This is clearly reminiscent of Jesus' words about the
great commandments. And that is a far cry from the cultural manipulation
of women, which characterized much of first-century life both inside and
outside the church!
Paul's lists of helpers include many women's names.
Popular rabbinic language would have listed them as "the wife of"
someone, but Paul calls them by their own names-not their husbands'
names. In Philippi, he preached to a group of women (Acts 16)
without men being present. Paul lists a businesswoman in that group
named
Lydia who was a strong leader in the
Philippian church. While Jewish rules required at least ten males to
start a synagogue, Paul and a handful of women helped start a church!
(Interestingly enough, the letter to the Philippians is the most
affirming and gracious letter that Paul wrote. Obviously, this church
was well begun!) Some of Paul's warmest accolades are for the women who
faithfully served in these fledgling churches. The apostle with much
gratitude greets Priscilla, Claudia, Tryphena, Tryphosa, Mary, Julia,
and others. In Romans 16, Paul mentions Phoebe, "our sister, who is a
deacon of the church in Cenchrea." The word is "deacon" there, though
the Greek term is sometimes translated as "servant" or "minister". The
same Greek word is used in the I Timothy 3 passage where the
qualifications for deacons are outlined. The verb form of the same word
is used in Acts 6, where seven men were set aside for a specific social
ministry.
I believe that Jesus chose to start where people were.
He was obviously calling into existence a faith-community in which
traditional sexism - patriarchies as well as racism and slavery could be
overcome. He called us to become one in our marriages. He called us to
seek and develop unity in our churches and world. Unity is not sameness,
but being of one heart, cooperating together and unifying our
diversities to serve God together. Such could not be accomplished by
swift, simple, radical confrontation either in the church or the
culture. There is the fact that all twelve of Jesus' disciples were
male-what about that? Before you read too much into the fact that all
twelve of the disciples were male, remember that all twelve were also
Jewish and presumably were circumcised. No one believes that Christian
discipleship should be exclusively Jewish for all time to come... why
make that assumption about the superiority of maleness in Christian
ministry and leadership?
I pray that you will seek the word and Spirit of God
as you examine this fundamental issue of our Christian practice.
________________________________________
Bibliography and recommended reading:
This article is by no means to be an exhaustive
treatment of this important topic. It its goal has been to stimulate
your biblical studies, especially if you have followed the popular
teaching that women are to be excluded from pastoral leadership within
the Christian church or if you think that the bible puts male
"authority" in charge of the nuclear family. I strongly recommend you
secure copies of the Bristow and Williams books listed below for a much
more in depth exegesis of these and other bible passages. These two
books as well as Dr. Turner's sermon linked below were a great deal of
help in the formation of this article. I offer my thanks to these
writers for their refreshing contribution to our theological growth. The
Beck book presents great insights from both points of view and dispels
the typical simplistic approach by both sides. Both the Knight Book and
the more recently published Strauch book are in clear support of the
authoritarian model. If you have never studied a view different from the
one that you presently hold, these following publications will present
you with a plethora of perspectives and theological positions.
What Paul Really Said About Women
by John Temple Bristow (Harper San Francisco, 1988) ISBN
0-06-061063-8
Man as Male and Female by Paul K. Jewett (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1975)
Apostle Paul And Women in the
Church by Don Williams (G/L Regal Books, 1977) ISBN 0-8307-0669-0)-
currently out of print (but can be ordered used through Amazon.com)
Two Views on Women in Ministry - edited by James R Beck and
Craig L Blomberg. (Zondervan Publishing Hose, 2000) ISBN 0-310-23195-7.
Two essays in support of the egalitarian and two essays in support of
the complimentarian roles of women in ministry. Both sides are very
scholarly and treat the scriptures with very high regard. These two
seminary professors from the same seminar do an excellent job in
analyzing these contrasting positions.
Men and Women - Equal yet Different by Alexander Strauch (Lewis
and Roth Publishers, 1999) ISBN 0-936083-16-6
The New Testament Teaching on the Role Relationship of Men and Women
by George W. Knight III (Baker Book House, 1977) ISBN 0-8010-5383-8.
- Internet resources available:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/5145/index.htm
Christian
Womanhood in a Changing Church, Sermon by Dr. William L. Turner, South Main
Baptist Church, Houston TX
-
Christians for Biblical Equality