Abstract
Cultural
values have influenced many policy decisions in the church, and gender roles
are no exception. Though difficult to
shake, presuppositions must take a back seat to good exegesis of
scripture. The Bible is clear that women
are not to “teach or to exercise authority over a man” (1 Tim 2:12 ESV), and
there is no contextual reason to believe this is anything but a universal
mandate. So, although women can enjoy
the same value, salvation, and spiritual-gifting as men; they are not allowed
to serve as pastors or elders.
The Feminine Pastorate: A Biblical Understanding of
Gender Roles in the Church
“Let
a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness.
I do not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man” (1
Timothy 2:11-12). This rule has been
widely accepted and practiced throughout church history, but has come under
fire in recent years. Growing sentiments
of feminism, equality, freedom, and personal rights are much to blame. There is not anything inherently wrong with
these ideologies, but when the church puts them above the word of God, they
become idols and lead many astray.
Scripture does not stutter in its assignment of roles to men and women,
and the church must not either. Though
they may fill the vast majority of roles in the church, women are not to occupy
the office of pastors or elder.
There
are many, though, that disagree. Some
flat out deny the authority of scripture, claiming the Bible is a flawed book
written by flawed human beings. Admittedly,
scripture was written by flawed human beings; but according to 1 Timothy, these
authors were simply the means by which God communicated His word. Like the prophets of old, these men were
“carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21 ESV), resulting in a text that
was “breathed out by God” (2 Timothy 3:16 ESV).
Liberal churches are quickly moving away from the supremacy of Christ
and His word, and in doing so are leaving the foundation they were built on.
In
his article, “United Methodism and the Ordination of Women,” Rev. Frank Gulley
(n.d.) says, “The result of the interplay between the Bible, tradition, reason,
and experience has caused Methodists to arrive at conclusions that are
contradictory to a literal reading of certain biblical passages.” Given, there are parts of scripture that are
not meant to be taken literally (psalms, parables, etc.), but opposing a literal
interpretation because it goes against “tradition, reason, and experience” (Gulley),
is flat out rejecting the authority of scripture. 1 Corinthians says, “Let no one deceive
himself. If anyone among you thinks that
he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is folly with
God” (1 Corinthians 3:18-19 ESV). To
filter scripture through one’s own “tradition, reason, and experience” (Gulley),
instead of seeking to understand the author’s intended meaning within its
context, is not only foolish, it’s blasphemy; for doing so puts one’s own
wisdom and understanding above that of God Himself!
Some
accept the authority of scripture, but claim commands limiting roles to a specific
gender were unique to first century Jewish and Greek culture, or a specific
situation in the recipient church; and therefore, no longer apply. In The
Book of Resolutions of The United Methodist Church — 2008, the United
Methodist General Conference (2008) states,
Christianity was
born in a world of male preference and dominance. Practices, traditions, and
attitudes in almost all societies viewed women as inferior to men, as having
few talents and contributions to make to the general well-being of society
aside from their biological roles. This was true of the Judaic society of which
Jesus was a part (p. 516).
It
is valid and necessary to consider that scripture contains some culturally and
situationally specific commands. Doing
so helps the reader properly interpret the text – context is king. The issue with the passages in question is
that there is no contextual reason to believe the contained commands were
intended solely for the culture of the time, or situation at hand. In fact, the opposite is true.
As
John MacArthur (2012) points out, “When the apostle Paul said that a woman
should not ‘teach or exercise authority over a man’ (1 Timothy 2:12), he did
not follow that statement with a cultural argument…The reasons he gave are that
the woman was created after the man, and that she was deceived when acting
independently of his leadership.” If
Paul’s restriction on women was meant solely for that culture, his justification
for the command would be cultural. Yet,
his reason is God’s created order, which is applicable to every society: past,
present and future. There is no
alternate interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:8-15 that stays faithful to context.
The
greater scope of scripture has been manipulated several ways in attempts to
justify the negation of Paul’s words in 1 Timothy. Passages that highlight gender equality, such
as “there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians
3:28b ESV), are often used to legitimize the female pastorate. Gulley (n.d.) claims that if Christians
accept Biblical teachings of gender equality, they must allow both genders to
occupy every role in ministry. The
United Methodist General Counsel (2008) echoes Gulley’s statements. They say, if there are no gender distinctions
in salvation, baptism, and discipleship, there is no reason to believe there
would be in ministry (p. 516).
All
of this logic assumes that equality and distinction cannot coexist, but
scripture tells a different story. Henry
Bechthold (2011) shows that the context of Galatians 3 is clearly not speaking
of leadership roles in the church.
Rather, the subject at hand is salvation and consequently becoming
children of God. Galatians 3:23-29
states that Christ justifies believers by faith without regard to ethnicity,
social status, or gender. It speaks of
equality in value and sonship, not all-encompassing uniformity. Uniqueness in gender physicality alone
destroys this philosophy of universal sameness.
It is no contradiction to say that scripture affirms the equality of men
and women, yet differentiates their roles.
Using Galatians to justify the violation of commands prohibiting women
from teaching men (1 Timothy 2:12) or requiring them to be in submission (1
Corinthians 14:34) is unfaithful to the text and simply unacceptable.
Some
bring up God’s use of certain women throughout Biblical history as a way to
justify female leadership in the church.
Rev. Joy Moore (n.d.), an elder in the West Michigan Annual Conference
(UMC) and instructor of preaching at Asbury Theological Seminary, argues that
“The restrictive meaning of ‘accepting a position of authority’…goes against
the authority afforded Deborah, Phoebe, Pricilla [sic], and Lydia.” At first glance, this argument seems to put a
roadblock between the interpreter and the literal rendering of 1 Timothy 2:12.
Problems
like this arise when words are removed from their context. The reader must remember that Paul is giving
commands specifically for the local gathering of the church. Deborah judging Israel (Judges 4) was in a
different time, society, covenant, and situation. The church had not yet been established, so
trying to draw a parallel with Paul’s commands in 1 Timothy is futile. It is also important to remember that some
things in scripture are descriptive (simply describing something as it
happened), and some are prescriptive (commands intended to prescribe how things
should be done). Descriptive narrative
in the Bible teaches much, but never trumps specific, prescriptive
mandates. One can use the example of Deborah
to shed some light on the subject, and see that God has used women to lead in
certain situations; but to say this story trumps Paul’s command is unfounded.
In
fact, upon further review of the Deborah situation, it actually does more to
support Paul’s command than refute it.
The book of Judges tells the story of a dark time in Israel, as they
were continuing a cycle of temporary obedience, then turning away, then
suffering the consequences of their sin.
Here, God appointed a woman to lead Israel, not as a celebration of
gender equality, but as a judgment against Israel. Isaiah 3 lists, “women rule over them”
(Isaiah 3:12b ESV), as a judgment against Judah after they rebelled against
God. There is much blessing in God’s
intended created order. His reversing
that order is a way of removing His hand of blessing, and in doing so,
pronouncing judgment. Similarly, in
Romans 1, God gives humanity over to their own desires to compromise His
created order, as a harsh judgment on their rebellion.
As
far as Phoebe, Priscilla, and Lydia are concerned, there is no evidence in the
text to suggest they violated Paul’s commands to women in any way. Phoebe, a servant or deaconess (Romans 16:1),
is never recorded as teaching or taking authority over a man. Priscilla (Acts 18), along with her husband,
pulled aside a passionate new believer to correct him and help him preach more
accurately. This was in a private
setting; and beyond that, it is not clear if she or her husband did the bulk of
the explaining. There is no reason to
think that she taught (in a church gathering) or took authority over a
man. To suggest such a thing is wildly
hypothetical, as there is no evidence for it in the text. Lastly, Lydia (Acts 16:14,40) is mentioned as
being saved and extending hospitality, but never taking authority in the
church. God’s use of these women, and
many others throughout the Bible, are strong evidences that God highly values
women and uses them in many ways. However,
they fall short of suggesting that there is no distinction between the roles of
men and women in the church.
The
same paradox between distinction and value is true of Jesus. He possesses all of the same value, deity,
and privilege as the Father, yet is positionally distinct, submitting Himself
under the Father. The Holy Spirit is
another example. He is just as much God
as the Father and the Son, yet is positionally subservient to both. If Jesus, the creator of the universe
(Colossians 1:16), takes no exception to holding a submissive position – but
actually finds sustenance in it (John 4:34) – why would anyone? The answer is in Genesis 3: the fall, and
consequential sin nature, gave humans a sense of pride, entitlement, and hunger
for power. This is a problem for men and
women alike.
It
is important to remember that men are also in a submissive role: to
Christ. To think that one’s value is
wrapped up in role or authority is not only wrong, it is anti-Christ. For the teachings of Jesus are clear that all
authority is God’s, and that a person’s value is wrapped up in Him, not any
works or position. It is important to
accept this, for it reaches far beyond the realm of gender roles and into the
very meaning of life itself!
Another
thing to consider is the vastness of roles and uses that are intended for
women, sometimes at the exclusion of men.
1 Timothy 2:15 says, “Yet [women] will be saved through childbearing –
if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.” By the previous verse, it is clear this is
not talking about spiritual salvation, but deliverance from the stigma of
leading the entire human race into rebellion against God. What a privilege women have in continuing
life from generation to generation!
Women also have specialized roles in leading and instructing other women
(Titus 2:3-4), and children. All
spiritual gifts are available to women and should be used to their full
capacity. There are many teaching
opportunities that do not involve teaching or taking authority over men, in the
church today. There are actually very
few roles that women do not qualify for according to scripture.
When
all is said and done, women should take joy in their submissive roles, as men
should in theirs, and as Christ does in His.
It is not a burden to submit and follow, it is a privilege. If the church is going to experience all of
the blessings and promises in God’s word, it must first submit itself under
scripture and obey it in faith, regardless of any consequences or offenses that
may result. Worshipping God by picking
and choosing what to believe and obey in His word is not true worship of Him. For this type of worship is directed, not at
the creator who revealed Himself in the Bible, but at what each person has made
God to be in his or her own mind: the god who fits one’s personal ambitions and
desires, the god which God calls an idol.
The Christian must repent of this, and turn back in faithful obedience
to the God of the scriptures.
References:
Bechthold, H.
(2011, February 06). Women elders and pastors. Retrieved April 19, 2012 from http://www.christianarticles.net/articledetail.php?artid=5884&catid=80&title=Women+Elders+And+Pastors&fb_source=message
Gulley, F.
(n.d). United Methodism and the ordination of women. Retrieved April 19, 2012
from http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?mid=1086
Hoehner, H.
(2007, December). Can a woman be a pastor-teacher?. Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society, 50/4, 761–71. Retrieved April 13, 2012,
from http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/50/50-4/JETS_50-4_761-771_Hoehner.pdf
MacArthur, J.
(2012). Can women serve as elders in the church?. Retrieved April 5,2012, from http://www.gty.org/resources/questions/QA127/can-women-serve-as-elders-in-the-church
Moore, J.
(n.d.). Women in ministry. Retrieved April 13, 2012 from http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?mid=1087
United Methodist
General Conference. (2008). The Book of
Resolutions of The United Methodist Church. Nashville: The United Methodist
Publishing House
