Virtually everyone has an opinion concerning the viability of women teaching or preaching within the church. Most of these opinions are felt deeply and held fervently within both genders. As such, we must use caution and sensitivity to address this issue. To alienate godly men or women who seek sincerely to honor God through service within the church is detrimental to both the individuals and to the church itself.
Even so, one must still address this increasingly critical issue. Failure to do so deprives the individual and church body of blessings received when each believer properly uses his or her gifts for the glory of God and the edification of the entire church. Susan Hunt tells us that “Gender-aloneness was ‘not good’ in the garden and the same is true in the church.” [1]
This paper seeks to answer the question; May godly, gifted women rightly serve as teaching elders or senior pastors in the Church? One must assume that if it honors God for women to teach and preach within the church, one would be sorely mistaken to seek to prevent it. If, however, it honors God for women to engage in different roles, restricted from the role of a teaching elder or senior pastor, one would be equally mistaken to permit it. How do we know what God finds honoring? “We must go to the Scriptures and determine what is needful for women to do,” says Susan Hunt.[2] Indeed, she is right.
Positions
If one holds scripture to be authorative, one will inevitably also hold either an egalitarian or a complementarian position. Egalitarians and complementarians each derive most, if not all, of their position from scripture. While they each place a high value on scripture and even concern themselves often with the same passages, their interpretation of these passages can differ significantly.
Both positions uphold some of the same biblical doctrines. One such doctrine is the doctrine of the Imago Dei taught in Genesis 1:27. Because God made both in His image, men and women are equal in worth and value. Both positions also affirm that the Holy Spirit has blessed all believers, male and female, with spiritual gifts for edification of the church. Utilizing these gifts as intended is the only way for the individuals, as well as the church, to be spiritually healthy.
In Acts 2, Paul tells us that, in addition to gifts, God has promised that both men and women would be able to prophesy.
And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy. (Acts 2:17-18)
With so much in common, these two views still have significant differences. The egalitarian position deviates from the complementarian in that it holds that the bible teaches that men and women are fundamentally equal. This is not the same as equal in worth and value. This equality eliminates any functional differences between men and women. The egalitarian argues that there should be no dissimilarity between the roles of men and women. In contrast to many traditional cultures, including the church, the egalitarian would argue that the bible does not teach that there is a hierarchal structure in the home or the church. This specifically includes roles pertaining to the church leadership such as teaching elders and pastors. Rebecca Groothuis is a proponent of this view. She says, “the idea that women are equal in their being, yet unequal by virtue of their being, is contradictory and ultimately nonsensical.” [3]
The egalitarian interpretation of Galatians 3:28 also supports this position. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28). How can one support the idea of men and women having differing roles, within the church or otherwise, if this passage actually teaches that there is no male or female?
A complementarian would interpret this verse, and many others, differently. One who holds the complementarian view would embrace the idea that, even though men and women are equal in worth and value, they are still fundamentally different.
Galatians 3:28 simply says that we have a special kind of unity in the body of Christ. Our differences as male and female are not obliterated by this unity; rather, the unity is beautiful in God’s sight particularly because it is a unity of different kinds of people.[4]
Men and women, they would argue, exist to serve different purposes. A complementarian would suggest that scripture not only exemplifies these differing roles, it requires them.
While insisting that the roles for men and women are different, this position holds that the two roles compliment each other in necessary and beneficial ways in both the home and the church.
Support
While both the egalitarian and the complementarian positions claim to uphold scriptural principles, only one seems compelling. The complementarian position is the most logical response to biblical teaching.
1 Timothy 2:11-15 is a passage that clearly anchors the complementarian position.
Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing–if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control. (1 Tim 2:11-15)
Paul is explicit when he says, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man.” Obviously, Paul holds this position or he would not have written this. Does Paul hold this position in an absolute sense? Does Paul’s restriction apply to all environments? It seems that there is very little room to say otherwise. In fact, in the preceding verses Paul clarifies that this is not just an issue for the home but for the church as well.
I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works. (1 Tim 2:8-10)
Wayne Grudem says, “according to the context of this passage, the setting in which Paul does not allow a woman to teach and have authority over a man is the assembled church, where Bible teaching would be done.” [5] One can easily agree with Grudem’s statement. Paul writes that in “every place” men gather they should pray with lifted hands. This corporate gathering of prayer is, as Grudem says, the “assembled church.” In contrast to Paul’s desire for men to pray, he desires the women, with modesty and self-control, to do “good works.” This clearly communicates a different, yet complimentary, role for men and women.
Paul also gives clarity concerning the role of a teaching elder in 1 Timothy 3:2. “Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach” (1 Tim 3:2). Titus 1:6 echoes the same idea that an elder must be male.
This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you– if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. (Titus 1:5-6).
In the appointment of elders, Paul directs the reader to choose a “husband of one wife.” Much debate exists concerning the idea of marriage in this passage; however, the fact that Paul is referring to a man, goes uncontested. At least from Paul’s perspective, a teaching elder must be a man.
The complementarian position is not just a biblical principle. It was a biblical practice as well. Luke records men and women serving along side of one another in different, yet complementary, roles. Soon afterward he went on through cities and villages, proclaiming and bringing the good news of the kingdom of God. And the twelve were with him, and also some women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod’s household manager, and Susanna, and many others, who provided for them out of their means. (Luke 8.1-3)
As Jesus shared the gospel from town to town, both men and women accompanied Him. The inner twelve, all men, joined Him in preaching and teaching the gospel. Luke tells us that women joined Him as well. These women, however, were not preaching or teaching. Instead, they “provided for them out of their means.” This was clearly an equally valuable complementary role.[6]
In addition to the explicit commands found primarily in Paul’s writings, scripture also contains implicit support to the complementarian position. One of the strongest of these is that this view more closely exemplifies the roles and relations within the Trinity than any other position. While both the egalitarian and the complementarian position claim to be founded on the accurate interpretation of scripture, only the complementarian position reflects both the equal worth and the distinct roles expressed by the Trinity.
What does the Trinity have to do with gender roles? Grudem rightly says, “This point is at the heart of the controversy, and it shows why much more is at stake than the meaning of one or two words or one or two verses in the Bible. Much more is at stake…we are talking about the nature of God himself.” [7] God has purposely designed the roles of men and women to illustrate the roles played out by the individual persons of the Trinity. This is a loving act of self-revelation from the triune God.
1 Corinthians 11:3 shows the parallel between the two. “But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God” (1 Cor 11:3). Here Paul clearly equates woman’s submission to her husband to Christ’s submission to God the Father. This parallel is critical because it shows that one can be equal in personhood and value with another and yet still be in subjection to them in the roles that they are called to play. Paul, once again, makes it clear, though equal in one sense, a husband has authority over his wife.
Grudem also points out that the idea of equal personhood and separate roles for men and women is not a concept isolated to the institution of marriage. It applies to the church as well. In fact, it existed within the nature of the Godhead before all else was made. “It began in the relationship between the Father and the Son in the Trinity. The Father has eternally had a leadership role, an authority to initiate and direct, that the Son does not have. Similarly, the Holy Spirit is subject to the Father and the Son and plays yet a different role in Creation and in the work of salvation.” [8]
Egalitarian proponent Gilbert Bilezikian does not see this in the same light. He suggests, “Nowhere in the Bible is there a reference to a chain of command within the Trinity.” [9] Bilezikian is sorely mistaken. John 3:16 is clear that God the Father “gave his only Son” and in John 4:34 Jesus refers to God the Father as “him who sent me.” To give or to send another strongly suggests an authorative and submissive relationship, even if the roles are voluntary.
The key here is that the idea of authoritative and submissive roles exists beyond marriage itself. It exists in the very nature of God. As such, God has chosen to reveal that about Himself through the establishment of hierarchical relationships in both marriage and the church. Men and women have God given complementary roles that, if exercised rightly will bring both a better understanding of God and blessings from Him.
Objections
Opponents of the complementarian view offer objections that range from the reasonable to the irresponsible. Irresponsible banter merits no response. However, reasonable objections or concerns warrant genuine analysis. Egalitarians have raised two such objections that will be addressed in the following paragraphs.
The first of these objections, common in many egalitarian writings, involves the egalitarian interpretation of Galatians 3.28. Paul says, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28). Indeed one can see the egalitarian concern. If Paul means to suggest that there is no male and female, one obviously cannot claim any distinction between the two.
Let us look into the context of which Paul makes this statement. Richard Hove tells us “Galatians 3—4 is an extended response to Galatians 2:11-14, where Paul records his rebuke of Peter for his ‘hypocrisy’ in the way in which he related to Gentiles.” [10] As a part of Paul’s reprimand of Peter for his treatment of Gentiles, Paul reminds Peter that the gospel is available for everyone and, for that very reason; everyone is equal in Christ. John Piper and Wayne Grudem conclude that all persons are “equally justified by faith (v. 24), equally free from the bondage of legalism (v. 25), equally children of God (v. 26), equally clothed with Christ (v. 27), equally possessed by Christ (v. 29).” [11] Even so, they add, “Galatians 3:28 does not abolish gender-based roles established by God and redeemed by Christ.” [12]
Hove points out that to say that we are “all one in Christ Jesus,” means that “we are united, that there should be no factions or divisions among us, that there should be no sense of pride and superiority or jealousy and inferiority between these groups that viewed themselves as so distinct in the ancient world.” [13] For Paul to say that we are all one it means that we are one in the body of Christ. It does not mean, however, that there are not differences in both our function and our purpose. Romans 12:4-5 adds even more clarity. “For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5).
The next argument, and one of the most troubling, is the claim that complementarians hold inconsistent views of scripture. This objection suggests that complementarians are not reliable in the way they interpret and, more importantly, adhere to scripture. One of the passages mentioned most often is in 1 Corinthians 14.
As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. (1 Corinthians 14:33b-35)
What is suggested is that complementarians use this passage to justify their positions on submissive roles for women, yet, very few hold to the idea that women should actually be silent in church.
This argument is true. Complementarians do not hold that women should be silent in church and yet they still hold that 1 Corinthians 14:33b-35 teaches that women cannot serve as a teaching elder or a senior pastor in the church. Is this hypocrisy? It is not. The reason is that this verse does not require women to be completely silent. Grudem explains, “This is evident because Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11, just three chapters earlier, that women who pray should have their heads covered, which assumes that they could pray and prophesy aloud in church services.” [14] If Paul accepts women praying or prophesying in church, what is the restriction found in verse 1 Corinthians 14? Grudem suggests that the distinction is found in the words, “but should be in submission.” Women should be silent in church when it “involves assuming the possession of superior authority in matters of doctrinal or ethical instruction.” [15] Again, when properly understood, this verse supports the complementarian view that women are not to exercise authority over men.
Conclusion
Rightly understood, these two verses in 1 Corinthians not only restrict women’s roles within the church, but they empower them as well. While women cannot hold authority over men within the church, they can pray and prophesy in church. These are two roles or functions within the church that many would be reluctant to allow women to fulfill. Even so, Paul did not express any concern over women praying and prophesying in the church. If we genuinely seek the whole counsel of God’s word, we will see many more opportunities for women in ministry than we will restrictions.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bilezikian, Gilbert. Beyond Sex Roles: A Guide for the Study of Female Roles in the Bible. Grand Rapids MI: Baker Book House, 1985.
Groothuis, Rebecca. Good News for Women: A Biblical Picture of Gender Equality. Grand Rapids MI: Baker Books, 1996.
Grudem, Wayne. Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood. Wheaton IL: Crossway Books, 2002.
________. Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth: An Analysis of More Than One Hundred Disputed Questions. Sisters OR: Multnomah Publishers, 2004. PDF, http://www.cbmw.org/images/onlinebooks/evangelical_feminism.pdf. (accessed September 10, 2007).
Hunt, Susan. “Women’s Ministry in the Local Church: A Covenantal and Complementarian Approach.” Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, 11., 2 (Fall 2006): 37-47.
Mickelson, Alvera, ed. Women, Authority & The Bible. Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity Press, 1986.
Piper, John and Wayne Grudem, eds. Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Wheaton IL: Crossway Books, 1991.
REFERENCES
Douglass, Jane Dempsey and James F. Kay, eds. Women, Gender, and Christian Community. Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1997.
Winston, George and Dora Winston. Recovering Biblical Ministry by Women: An Exegetical Response to Traditionalism and Feminism. Xulon Press, 2003.
Eldred, O. John. Women Pastors: If God Calls, Why Not the Church?. Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1981.
[1] Susan Hunt, “Women’s Ministry in the Local Church: A Covenantal and Complementarian Approach,” Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood 2, no. 11 (Fall 2006), 38.
[2] Ibid., 38.
[3] Rebecca Groothuis, Good News for Women: A Biblical Picture of Gender Equality (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Books, 1996), 55.
[4] Wayne Grudem, Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood (Wheaton IL: Crossway Books, 2002), 43.
[5] Grudem, Biblical Foundations, 65-66.
[6] Hunt, “Women’s Ministry,” Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, 45.
[7] Grudem, Biblical Foundations, 48.
[8] Ibid., 51.
[9] Gilbert Bilezikian, Beyond Sex Roles: A Guide for the Study of Female Roles in the Bible (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Book House, 1985), 241.
[10] Grudem, Biblical Foundations, 108.
[11] Ibid., 106.
[12] Ibid., 106.
[13] Ibid., 42.
[14] Wayne Grudem, Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth: An Analysis of More Than One Hundred Disputed Questions (Sisters OR: Multnomah Publishers, 2004), 232.
[15] Ibid., 233.
No responses yet