I am often confronted with many
arguments for the idea that women should be in pastoral leadership. I hear
that many women were leaders in the Bible from Deborah, to Anna, to Lydia, and
I think we should look at each of these. It seems that the first thing we have
to look at is what do we mean by leadership?
I think the question points to eldership (overseer). In other words, can a
woman be an elder in the church? A pastor is an elder by office, and therefore,
the question is ultimately, should a woman be a pastor (overseer) in the church? This
is the question that this article ultimately seeks to answer.
It seems that this is a good place
for us to see what the scriptures say about women in leadership and
then discuss them in turn. Following this examination of scriptures, I will list
several arguments concerning the biblical stance, some in regard to the
biblical female characters already mentioned. But first, let's look at how the family unit is supposed to operate. Let us also keep in mind the word, "order."
1 Peter 3:1-7. “Likewise, wives,
be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word,
they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see
your respectful and pure conduct. Do not let your adorning be external—the
braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear—but
let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable
beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious. For
this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by
submitting to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And
you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is
frightening.
Likewise,
husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the
woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life,
so that your prayers may not be hindered.”
Peter starts this new idea writing
to a very specific group of people: Wives.
In the same fashion as the prior text, Peter explains that in the family unit,
there must be an authoritative figure. The responsibilities must fall on one
head. The reason for this, Peter explains, is because if any of your husbands
do not believe in the gospel, they may see your conduct and when we see
conduct, we act accordingly.
Peter is banking on the power of
influence. He is talking about a voluntary submission. He is saying that people will have more influential power by being respectful with pure conduct, as opposed to the contrary. First I think we should understand what the goal is here. Peter
says, “Even if some do not obey the Word, they may be won without a word by the
conduct of their wives” (v. 1). The goal is that they
come to know Christ!
What tools do we have for making this environment as malleable as possible for salvation?
Peter talks about conduct. He says
that women should “…be subject to your own husbands… because they may be won over by
your conduct.” The way one handles situations matters more greatly than one might think.We will discuss this in greater detail further below.
Peter is saying that what makes
one beautiful is not the way her hair is braided… she can lose her hair. Then
what is it that makes you beautiful? He is saying that the ornaments and
jewelry you put on yourself is not what makes beauty, those things can be
stolen or lost. Where then is your beauty? How about skimpy clothes? It shows
the sleek silhouette of your body, but what happens when that isn’t as sleek as
it used to be? Where then is your beauty? Peter reasons that a woman’s beauty
must come from something else.
I think it is most natural for
women to value beauty. Beauty is what first attracts a man. I have seen psychological
studies on how fast a man can know if he is attracted to a woman. Several men
were shown pictures of random women’s faces and it was discovered that men
could detect attraction or not in less than a few seconds. With women looking
at pictures of men’s faces, it took about ten seconds.
But seriously, I think what Peter
is saying here is that women should not misplace their value in beauty.
Peter is saying that wives should definitely have value in beauty, but it
should be used for the benefit of the gospel. That it should be used in
bringing your husband into the kingdom of God. Now that is objectively beautiful. The world does not decide what is
beautiful…
I find that gentleness is a common
theme with Peter. He mentions it several times in regards to character and how
one should respond. He is on this kick with gentleness. He is saying that your
beauty should come from inside you rather than outside you. He is saying that
in your heart is where imperishable beauty is found. This is where
gentleness comes from. This is where a quiet spirit comes from. The heart being
full of these things, in Peter’s mind, is what equals beauty. He is saying that
there is nothing more beautiful than the true heart of a true wife. Seriously, the heart of a wife is powerful enough to
drop her husband to his knees to fervently thank Jesus for her. It happens
to me all the time. I think this is what Peter is trying to communicate.
He then discusses fear. Whaaat?
Peter is saying that wives back in the day did not fear anything when in their
right minds. As with anyone, when they were in their right frame of mind, they
placed their hope in God and feared nothing (v. 5). I think that Peter is
keenly aware of some things here. I think he knew that if wives placed their
hope in their husbands, it would ultimately end in despair. He is saying that
wives need to get their priorities right. When they mistake real beauty for
being outward rather than inward, they will be putting their hope in something
that is incorrect. In a world of relationships that are disastrous, Peter is
saying that your hope belongs in God
alone. If it is in your husbands, then it is in the wrong place. (v. 6). You do not fear anything that is
frightening because your real hope is in God.
Then after he explains how wives
are to live, some husbands were probably like “What about us? …What are we just
chopped liver?” Ok maybe it wasn’t quite like that, but in any event, I hope
you are making the connections of how this applies to us today. Peter says that
husbands should live with their wives in an understanding way, showing honor to
the weaker vessel… Whoa! Didn’t Peter
ever hear about feminism? What is wrong with him?! You see how I keep putting
all the weight on Peter? I don’t want any part of this madness. “I’m sorry
Pete, but you’re on your own.” Look at what he says here...
He is saying that husbands should
show honor to our wives. What he is saying is that our wives are a thing of
beauty. We should treat them as such. He is saying that they are the weaker
vessel, but what does this mean? I have
been making bowls lately out of wood… some of them are super cool looking, mostly
by accident, and this one that I made I was blown away myself. I dropped this
bowl after I finished it on the cement and my heart sank. I thought that I
broke it after putting several hours into making it something useful and yet,
beautiful. Now, if I were making paper plates and I dropped one, how would I
feel then? Would my heart sink? How many times have we used aluminum pie pans as
Frisbees? Would anyone ever do this with a wooden bowl that he just made? No. We show the wooden bowl honor as a weaker vessel. No one would not play
football with a lamp. We would show it honor, just as we should our wife. We would put it in a place of honor in our home. We would keep it clean and
unhindered. We would protect it from danger. You, O man, would do all of these
things because you have a role to carry out. The Bible says that they are heirs
with us of the grace of life. Peter says, show them
honor so that your prayers may not be hindered. Catch that. Something
that hinders your prayers is how you treat your wife.
Arguments For and Against the Role of Women in Pastoral Leadership
Continue to keep the word, "order" in mind...
Colossians 3:18-19. “Wives,
submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives,
and do not be harsh with them.”
This verse calls women to submit
to their husbands as well. Why is it fitting in the Lord to do so? Because the
idea here is much like what Peter was discussing above: conduct. I think a more
fitting term here would be order. It
is orderly for a voluntary submission of a wife to her husband because this gives
order in the family unit, much like it does in the church. This submission does
not place a woman in an inferior role to a man, but merely makes the operation
a well-oiled machine.
1 Corinthians 11:3-16. But I
want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the
woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies
with his head covered dishonors his head. But every woman who prays or prophesies
with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head
shaved. For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair
cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her
head shaved, then she should cover her head.
A man ought not
to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the
glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was
man created for woman, but woman for man. It is for this reason that a woman
ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels. Nevertheless,
in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For
as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from
God.
Judge for
yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does
not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace
to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is
given to her as a covering. If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we
have no other practice—nor do the churches of God.”
Paul uses five arguments in the above
passage and all of them point to submission, which ultimately give order to the
operation of the church. The body of Christ is absolutely meant to be a place
of order as opposed to disorder. Imagine someone peeking into the windows of
the church building and seeing chaos. What would they think if there were chaos
among “the body of Christ?” Who would want a part of that? The church is where
people come to find hope and rest and come to know more about eternal life. In contrast, a bar fight is the last place someone would go for these things. Paul
frequently addresses order and behavior in his letters. Again, this submission does
not mean inferior. It means a voluntary submission.
Ephesians 5:22-33. Wives, submit
to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife
even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now
as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to
their husbands.
Husbands, love
your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he
might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so
that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or
wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the
same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his
wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and
cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body.
“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife,
and the two shall become one flesh.” This mystery is profound, and I am saying
that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his
wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.”
Again, this passage reveals to Paul's
readers the proper behavior of men and women in the body of Christ through the
separation of roles. He establishes for the Ephesians (and for us) the way
that men and women are to treat each other in the family units and ultimate in
the body of Christ. Also noteworthy is that men are not without authority
themselves. Men are under the authority of Christ. Women are under the
authority of men.
Galatians 3:28. “There is
neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female,
for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
I frequently hear this verse being
used against the idea that women cannot be leaders in the church. The problem
with this is a frequent one: it is taken out of context. But how? The question
must be asked, what is this verse referring to? What is it talking about? We
are all one in Jesus? Let’s look at two verses prior to this in order for us to
have some contextual background… “For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God,
through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on
Christ.”[1] This
is clearly discussing salvation. In other words, it doesn’t
matter who or what we are, as long as we are human beings, we can be saved.
This verse/passage does not mention leadership in the church in any form. It does not address the way a church is supposed to behave, but discusses something entirely different.
1 Timothy 2:8-15. “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. 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.”[2]
Saved from what? This word does
not mean in context that she will be saved from her sins by giving birth to
children. It means that she will be “preserved (from insignificance) by means
of her role in the family.”[3] In
other words, childbearing is a huge deal, a huge role to assume, and all men
and women come through only women. This is a great honor! It is a deeply special thing that women are the childbearers, and it is also special that men are the authority figure. Paul is using the order in the family unit to explain the order in the church. A man will never be
able to assume the childbearing role. Likewise, a woman is not to be in an authoritative leadership role over men.
Imagine if men were somehow also
able to have babies. I think this is the idea that Paul is talking about here.
What kind of chaos would there be if men were able to also have babies? Think
of the competition between men and women! It would be as divisive as if someone thought
that women could be pastoral leaders in the church… Oh wait, that is already a source
for division… and this division is a disorderly disaster in some situations. This is not how things are supposed to be. Just like it would be
a disaster if men were having babies, it would also be a disaster for women to
be leaders in the church.
I do not mean that it would be a complete
loss of order if men were able to have babies, eventually we would pretend to
have some type of order for the craziness, and we would function haphazardly as
a society. But compared to how it is supposed to be, it would be a disaster. Much
like having female pastors. Men would not make themselves look bad. Why? Because there would be no
reason if the Church were what it was meant to be. There would not be division
in local church bodies over such things, because this issue would not exist. Just
like Men cannot have babies, there is no issue of competition.
When God cursed women in Genesis,
He said “Your desire will be for your husband, yet he will rule over you”[4] This
meant that her desire will be for the
man’s position. There is an issue of
competition because of this desire. This calls for voluntary submission. Now whether that desire was part of the curse
or that position was part of the curse is in question. Perhaps this is a
false dilemma, but if so, then the position would not exist, and there would be
no order in the Garden. This would have lead to chaos if mankind had any type of
autonomy. The Garden of Eden was absolutely a place of order as we can see from
reading the account of it. Disorder came when the serpent (Satan) whispered
into Eve’s ear. Satan was clearly acting out of order in his deception. This is
why it makes more sense that desire for the position was the focus of the
curse. If there were no desire, then the positions (or role) would not matter.
If the desire were absent, then the order would be complete. At this point, the reader should continue having childbearing in mind. Most (in an extreme sense) men do not
wish that they could also bear offspring. This was not part of the curse. There
was even order to the curse found in Genesis chapter three. In any event, the
Bible is clear that men do not have babies, and women are not to be in
pastoral leadership in the body of Christ, the household of God.[5]
I frequently hear that “If men are
not stepping up, then women need to take their place in pastoral roles.” For
starters, where does it say that in the Bible? Secondly, this
responsibility is not on women, but on men. If men are not stepping up, this
burden is on them. On top of all of this, God does not need anyone to make His
gospel spread. What kind of God would He be if He needed anything? Therefore,
God does not need men or women for anything, including being leaders in the church,
but has established the proper order for His church.
An argument for women as overseers
is that women are prophets as well as men, but the problem is that this is
speaking of prophecy, not leadership over men or local bodies of Christ. Again, this is an issue of eisegesis; inserting ideas into the text. For instance, Anna was a prophetess.[6] Does
this mean that she lead a church? Definitely not. If the church is "the pillar and the foundation of the truth," then we need to make sure that the stress fractures that we get in the foundation are addressed.
Another related argument I hear is that the word "ordination" is not found in the Bible, or that it is something (evil or incorrectly) carried over from Catholicism, but when someone says this, it is severely misled for at least two reasons. One being that just because the word ordination is not in the Bible does not mean that the ideas and principles of it are not. This would be like saying that when Jehovah's Witnesses argue that the word, "Trinity" is not found in the Bible that this would be a good argument. This is theologically and logically absurd.
Secondly, maybe the villainized Catholics were onto something when they ordained men in the church. Let's look at 1 Timothy 5:17-25,
Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.” Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear. In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels I charge you to keep these rules without prejudging, doing nothing from partiality. Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, nor take part in the sins of others; keep yourself pure. (No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments.) The sins of some people are conspicuous, going before them to judgment, but the sins of others appear later. So also good works are conspicuous, and even those that are not cannot remain hidden.
Paul is talking about elders in this context as the first sentence clearly reveals. He goes on to say that an elder is worth his wages, that a charge against an elder must be on the evidence of more than one witness, and that Timothy and those under him are to keep these rules... Then he says, "Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands..." What this means is that a body of believers is not to be too quick to lay hands on an elder to make him an elder. This sounds a lot like ordination, doesn't it? Earlier in 1 Timothy, we find in chapter three that there are many qualifications of becoming an elder. How does one become an elder if there is no one to recognize that he is indeed called by God? This also sounds a lot like ordination. As stated, maybe the Catholics were/are on to something.
“But didn’t Lydia have a home
church?” Read Acts 16. Lydia did not have a home church, but she had the
apostles of Christ stay with her. She clearly had a powerful gift of
hospitality.[7]
Does the New Testament abrogate
the Old Testament? Some people look at the Old Testament and see that Deborah is
recorded in the Bible as a great leader,[8]
and they try to use this as an argument for women pastoral leaders in the New
Testament church. But the question is, was she a leader in the New Testament church?
Did the church exist at this time? The answer is clearly, no. Deborah was not a
church leader because the church did not even exist yet. The body of Christ was
not yet established.
The problem, as mentioned several
times before in this article, is that this assumption also makes a common
violation, which is that it is taken out of context. We can literally make the
Bible say anything when we do this. For instance, believe it or not, the Bible,
of all things, says “There is no God.”[9] If
you see the context that this verse is in, it will immediately make sense. Some
things are not so easily understood, or do not seem to stand out so
drastically, but this is an example of a common mistake in biblical discussion.
Does this mean that women have
different spiritual gifts? No! The issue here is roles. If there is any question, we can ask, “Can
women teach?” the answer is Yes! When Paul, the old man, writes to the young
preacher, Titus, he says in Titus 2:3-5, “Likewise, teach the older women to be
reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine,
but to teach what is good. Then they can urge the younger women to love their
husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to
be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the
word of God.” Teaching, by its nature, assumes an authority over the students. This is why Paul says in the 1 Timothy 2 passage above, that "I do not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over man..." A woman can and should definitely (and accurately!) teach biblical doctrines both to children and younger women.
Men and women have different roles.
Men cannot bear children. Women should not be authoritative leaders in the Body of Christ. I’ll briefly
mention the transgender issue here because this also seems to be at the heart
of the issue for female pastoral leadership. The reason that transgenderism is
such a colossal disaster is because it is so far from the truth. For instance, is
it true that a man can become a woman or vice versa? Absolutely not. When
people get away from the truth, disaster is sure to follow. Remember, disaster
comes in many levels. Some things are more disastrous than others., and this is one
of them. See what it is doing not only to society, but to the individuals
themselves. They are cutting off perfectly healthy body parts and mangling them
by having another human recreate them. It will never be what it is supposed to be, and
people often make the claim that there is no difference between genders, but
the very fact of the transition reveals that there is a difference. By
transitioning, one is saying that one gender is better than the other. It is not true that any man should become a woman, and it is not true that a man can become a woman. Likewise,
it is not true, according to the Bible, that a woman should be an authoritative pastor, no matter
how much she is forced into the position.
Did Jesus make a mistake in
describing His church? Does He not know that this is the 21st
century? Seriously, the church is not what people make it, it is what Jesus makes
it. It cannot be changed based on our desires. Jesus doesn’t make mistakes. The Bible is the manual
for how the church should look. It is where we go for troubleshooting.
We might think that this is a
cultural issue, but then what else would be a cultural issue? Where would we
draw the line on what is cultural? Homosexuality? Abortion? The world already draws the line on transgenderism
and abortion and homosexuality. In fact, there is no line. The point is, having
female pastors is not a slippery slope, but making the teachings of the Bible
out to be something cultural is fallacious and dangerous. Paul says that people will remove this
line in the sand in 2 Timothy 4:3-4. He says, “For the time will come when
people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires,
they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their
itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and
turn aside to myths.” We are at this time. People have removed the line between
what is cultural and what is not. In so doing, they have distanced themselves
from what is true.
Do we want to be found as the
bride of Christ when He returns for His bride as disorderly? Unkempt hair, torn clothing, missing a shoe, etc... As the reader can
clearly see, one of the main themes in the New Testament is how the church (the
body of Christ) is supposed to behave. The reason for this is because the
church is to have order, and order speaks volumes to the world (of disorder). I encourage you to go back and look at all of these
passages listed and have the word, order,
in your mind as you read them.
Written by Nace Howell through the grace of the Lord Jesus
© Nace Howell, 2020
[1] Galatians
3:26-27.
[2]
Emphasis mine.
[3] Litfin,
A. Duane. “1 Timothy.” The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the
Scriptures. Ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck. Vol. 2. Wheaton, IL: Victor
Books, 1985. 736. Print.
[4]
Genesis 3:16.
[5]
Ephesians 2:19.
[6]
Luke 2:36-38.
[7]
Romans 12:13.
[8]
Judges 4.
[9]
Psalm 14:1.
Comments
Post a Comment