Can
Women be teachers, elders, and ministers
in the Church? By
Jack
Kettler
In this study, we
will seek to understand what the Scriptures
teach regarding women and the biblical
injunctions for them not to be elders or
ministers in Christ’s church. As in
previous studies, we will look at
scriptures, commentary evidence and
confessional support for the glorifying of
God in how we live.
“Shew me thy ways, O
LORD; teach me thy paths.” (Psalm 25:4)
The English word
“priest” comes from the Greek word
(presbuteros). The priests (presbuteroi)
are known today as “presbyters”
or “elders.” The words bishops, elders,
presbyters are used interchangeably,
see, (Acts 20:17-28; 1 Peter 5:1 1 Peter
5:2; Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:2).
The New Testament
offices listed above have their roots in the
Old Testament Israel’s system of
priests and elders along with the
patriarchs. In regards to Old Testament
priests, Aaron and his sons were called by
God to serve as Levitical priests. As
will be seen this calling was limited to
Aaron’s sons and has implications for
New Testament Church offices.
How did the New
Testament offices arrive? The roots of the
New Testament offices have their
beginning in the Old Testament.
For example, from the Baker’s
Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical
Theology on elders:
“The New Testament.
The office of elder in the New Testament
church cannot be fully understood
without the background of the Old Testament
local elder, an office still
functioning in New Testament Judaism with
duties pertaining to discipline and
leadership (cf. Luke 7:3 ; and the
implications of Matt 10:17; and John 9:22 ).
The first Christians were Jewish and the
office was familiar to them. Thus,
Luke did not need to explain his first
reference to Christian elders in Acts
11:30.
New Testament elders
(presbyteroi
[presbuvtero]) are also called
bishops (episkopoi [ejpivskopo])
without
implying any essential difference in the
office referred to. In Acts
20:17, 28 and Tit 1:5, 7 the two names are
used interchangeably. Also the
requirements for the office of the elders
and bishops are very similar (cf.
Titus 1:5-9; and 1 Tim 3:1-7). The term
“elder” stresses the connection with
the age of the office bearer, while the term
“bishop” emphasizes the nature of
the task that is to be done. A distinction
is made (in 1 Tim 5:17) between
those elders who rule well, especially those
who labor in the preaching and
teaching (who are now called ministers), and
others (who are now referred to as
elders and whose full-time task is directing
the affairs of the church).” (1)
Who are and what is an Old
Testament
Patriarch?
PATRIARCH; PATRIACHS
“pa'-tri-ark, patriarches). The
word occurs in the New Testament in
application to Abraham (Hebrews 7:4), to the
sons of Jacob (Acts 7:8, 9), and
to David (Acts 2:29). In Septuagint it is
used as the equivalent of the head of
the fathers' house, or of a tribe (1
Chronicles 24:31; 27:32; 2 Chronicles
26:12). Commonly now the term is used of the
persons whose names appear in the
genealogies and covenant-histories in the
periods preceding Moses (Gen 5; 11,
histories of Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob,
etc.; compare “patriarchal
dispensation”).” (2)
The Patriarchs:
Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob were patriarchs as were the heads of
the tribes of Israel were Reuben,
Simeon, Levi, Judah, Zebulon, Issachar, Dan,
Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Benjamin,
and Joseph’s sons Ephraim and Manasseh.
The reader will
notice that the priests and patriarchs were
all men. Patriarchy in the Old
Testament was a system where males exercise
main power and the principal roles
of leadership, and moral authority.
Deborah a prophetess
(Judges 4:4) and Esther in the Old Testament
were individual cases of women who
were in influential leadership roles. These
individual cases do not invalidate
the norm of male leadership in the Old
Covenant system. Prophets in the Old
Testament functioned external of the
governing body of elders and priests. The
prophets were sent to rebuke the leaders of
Israel or the nation itself.
This section of the
study will look at the Old Testament office
of the priesthood and its
implications for the question of women
elders and ministers.
What do the Scriptures say
regarding
the priesthood?
Old Testament priesthood was
restricted
to the sons of Aaron and was perpetual:
“And thou shalt gird
them with girdles, Aaron and his sons,
and put the bonnets on them: and
the priest's office shall be theirs for a
perpetual statute: and thou shalt
consecrate Aaron and his sons.”
(Exodus 29:9) (Underlining emphasis
mine)
“And thou shalt put
upon Aaron the holy garments, and anoint
him, and sanctify him; that he may
minister unto me in the priest's office. And
thou shalt bring his sons,
and clothe them with coats: And thou shalt
anoint them, as thou didst anoint
their father that they may minister unto me
in the priest's office: for their
anointing shall surely be an everlasting
('olam) priesthood throughout
their generations.” (Exodus 40:13–15)
Comments:
The Hebrew word 'olam
(everlasting) can have a temporal
aspect ascribed to it. It can be used
regarding ordinances in the Older Covenant
that were to be kept by the people of
Israel, which were not carried over into
the New Covenant Church practice in
their Older Covenant forms. The
outward
Old Covenant forms changed, the substance of
the forms did not. Said another
way, there are discontinuities and
continuities between covenants. The temporal
aspect was the forms changed. The
everlasting aspect was the substance did not
change. In truth, there are significant
discontinuities and continuities in
redemptive history when moving from the
Older Covenant into the New Covenant
era. To illustrate this, Saturday/Sunday
Sabbath practice,
circumcision/baptism, Passover/communion,
and priesthood/elder pastor changes.
Besides, there is a
fundamental change in the Old Covenant high
priesthood because of Christ Jesus
and His role as the only priest after the
order of Melchisedec. Instead of many
high priests, there is now only one high
priest, the Lord Jesus Christ. From
many high priests to one is a critical
discontinuity. One continuity going into
the New Covenant is the continued leadership
role of men.
The next passage regarding
Aaron’s sons
carries the death penalty for its
violation:
“But only you and your
sons can serve as priests at the altar
and in the most holy place. Your
work as priests is a gift from me, and anyone
else who tries to do that work
must be put to death.” (Numbers
18:7CEV)
Gill's Exposition of
the Entire Bible provides valuable
information on Numbers 18:7:
“Therefore, thou and
thy sons with thee shall keep your priest's
office, observe all the duties of
it, and keep
out others
from intruding into it: for
everything of the altar: both of incense and
of burnt offering with respect to burning
incense on the one, and offering
sacrifices on the other; both were to be
done by priests, and by no other: and
within the vail; in the most holy place,
where the high priest entered but once
a year, and he only with incense, and the
blood of sacrifices, see Hebrews 9:7,
and ye shall serve; do all the business that
is to be done at either altar,
whether in the court, or in the holy place,
and whatsoever is to be done in the
most holy place within the vail: I have
given your priest's office unto you as
a service of gift; it was not what they had
taken to themselves of their own
will, or had thrust themselves into, but
what the Lord had called them to, and
had freely invested them with, see Hebrews
5:4, and the
stranger that cometh nigh shall be put
to
death; any common person, as
the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan;
any Israelite, one that is a stranger from
the priests, though a Levite, as
Aben Ezra; such an one might not come either
to the altar of burnt offering to
offer any sacrifice upon it, or the altar of
incense, to burn incense on that,
or trim the lamps, or put the shewbread in
order, or to do anything peculiar to
the priest's office.” (3)
Moving into the New
Testament:
New Testament Scriptures that
are
relevant to the question of women teachers
and elders:
Paul’s commandments to the
Churches:
“Let your women keep
silence in the churches: for it is not
permitted unto them to speak; but
they are commanded to be under obedience, as
also saith the law. And if they
will learn anything, let them ask their
husbands at home: for it is a shame for
women to speak in the church.What? Came the
word of God out from you? Or came it unto
you
only? If any man think himself to be a
prophet, or spiritual, let him
acknowledge that the things that I write
unto you are the commandments
of the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 14:34-37)
Comments:
First, Paul says,
“Let your women keep silence in the
churches.” There is some debate as to what
this means. If it is literal, this will
prohibit women teachers.Also,
Paul says in the above passage “as also
saith the law.” When Paul says this, he is
most certainly referring to Genesis
3:16, “Unto the woman he said, I will
greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy
conception; in sorrow, thou shalt bring
forth children, and; thy desire shall
be to thy husband, and he shall rule over
thee.” Paul’s instruction is in
regards to the creational patriarchal order
that he says is still binding.
In addition, Paul says
his instructions “are the commandments of
the Lord,” and he says “churches.”
“Churches”
are mentioned in the plural. Therefore, “the
commandments of the Lord” are not
issued to just one church. These
commandments of the Lord are different from
a
culturally conditioned directive like “Greet
one another with a holy kiss. All
the churches of Christ greet you” (Romans
16:16). Greeting or parting with a
kiss is still a norm in some Mediterranean
countries. This custom never took
hold in Northern European countries.
Sexually modest clothing would be a
commandment. The actual type of clothing
styles can vary from country to
country and be culturally conditioned. For
example, Jesus probably wore a
Middle Eastern robe that was the norm in
Israel. A robe, however, is not
commanded in the twenty-first century. A
commandment is not a suggestion, and it
signifies divine rule.
How are these
commandments of God implemented in the
Church? The following abridgment of
James W. Scott’s article on women speaking
in the church explains this quite
well.
May Women Speak in
Church? By James W. Scott
What Speaking Is Forbidden?
“As we have already
indicated, the speaking that is forbidden to
women is public speaking, or
speaking out, in the church assemblies.
Speaking in general seems to be
prohibited.
Praying (that is,
leading in prayer) must be included in this
speaking. Indeed, 1 Timothy 2:8
specifically states that “men” (in Greek,
“males,” not “people”) are to “pray
in every place [of worship], lifting up holy
hands [that is, leading in
prayer].”
Since singing is a
form of “speaking” (Ephesians 5:19) and
“teaching” (Colossians 3:16), it would
also come within the scope of activity
prohibited to women. This would rule out
“special music” sung by women.
However, it is
important to distinguish between an
individual addressing the congregation and
the congregation as a whole worshiping God
audibly in the recitation of a
prayer or the singing of a hymn. One aspect
of such congregational speech is
that the members of the congregation speak
to one another (Ephesians 5:19), but
in this case no individual teaching or
leading is involved.
Would it be right for
a minister to read a sermon or
congregational prayer written out for him by
a
woman? Clearly not. Consider, then, whether
it is right for him to lead the
congregation in singing a song written out
by a woman. As much as we may like
the sentiments expressed by, say, Fanny
Crosby, her words should not be given
authority in the worship of the church. To
sing her hymns in public worship is
to make her a teacher, a worship leader, and
a prayer leader in the church
assembly.
Is there any way to
escape the relentless logic of the rule of
silence? Yes, says James B. Hurley,
in Man
and Woman in Biblical Perspective
(Zondervan, 1981, pp. 185-94): the speaking
prohibited to women in verses 34-35
is the judging of prophets mentioned briefly
in passing way back in verse 29.
And since prophecy has ceased, so has the
judging of prophets, and thus this
passage can now be ignored (pp. 185-94)!
However, verses
33b-36 form a distinct unit, not a
continuation of the previous discussion of
spiritual gifts. Thus, the previous
discussion cannot be imposed on the passage
to provide a limitation on its language.
Second, there is not
the slightest hint in verses 33b-36 that the
judging of prophets is in view. If
Paul merely didn't want women to judge
prophets, why didn't he simply say so?
Third, verses 34-35
are much too far from verse 29 to suppose
that a reference there to evaluating
prophets would control the subject matter of
verses 34-35. Various kinds of
speech are mentioned in verses 26-32; why
should anyone think that verse 34
harks back to verse 29?
For these reasons,
Hurley's view must be rejected.
The only possible
qualification that I can see in the rule of
silence is that the verb “speak”
has the nuance of “assert one's views” or
“express oneself.” The similar
instruction in 1 Timothy 2:11-12 also
requires women to remain silent, but more
specifically prohibits teaching and other
leading.
If this is so, it
would be proper for a woman to give a
personal testimony, report, announcement,
or prayer request to the congregation,
provided that it does not become
exhortation, teaching, or leading in
worship. (Whether such activity is
appropriate in a worship service is a
separate question.) The woman must be
careful to remain “in subjection” (that is,
not leading the assembly).” (4)
The New Testament biblical
pattern of
authority:
“Wives, submit
yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is
fit in the Lord.” (Colossians 3:18)
“But I would have you
know, that the head of every man is Christ,
and; the head of the woman is the
man, and; the head of Christ is God.” (1
Corinthians 11:3)
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
Bible Commentary explains the apostle
Paul on 1 Corinthians 11:3:
“3. The Corinthian
women, on the ground of the abolition of
distinction of sexes in Christ,
claimed equality with the male sex, and,
overstepping the bounds of propriety,
came forward to pray and prophesy without
the customary head-covering of
females. The Gospel, doubtless, did raise
women from the degradation in which
they had been sunk, especially in the East.
Yet, while on a level with males as
to the offer of, and standing in grace (Ga
3:28), their subjection in point of
order, modesty, and seemliness, is to be
maintained. Paul reproves here their
unseemliness as to dress: in 1Co 14:34, as
to the retiring modesty in public,
which becomes them. He grounds his
reproof here on the subjection of woman
to a man in the order of creation.
The head—an
appropriate expression, when he is about to
treat of woman's appropriate
headdress in public.
Of every man …
Christ—(Ephesians 5:23).
Of … woman … man —(1Co
11:8; Ge 3:16; 1Ti 2:11, 12; 1Pe 3:1, 5, 6).
The head of Christ is
God—(1Co 3:23; 15:27, 28; Lu 3:22, 38; Joh
14:28; 20:17; Ephesians 3:9). “Jesus,
therefore, must be of the same essence as
God: for, since the man is the head
of the woman, and since the head is of the
same essence as the body, and God is
the head of the Son, it follows the Son is
of the same essence as the Father”
[Chrysostom]. “The woman is of the essence
of the man, and not made by the man;
so, too, the Son is not made by the Father,
but of the essence of the Father”
[Theodoret, t. 3, p. 171].” (5)
“Let the woman learn
in silence with all subjection. But I suffer
not a woman to teach, nor to usurp
authority over the man, but to be in
silence.” (1 Timothy 2:11-12)
Matthew Poole's
Commentary on 1 Timothy 2:12
are helpful:
“But I suffer not a
woman to teach; not to teach in the public
congregation, except she be a
prophetess, endued with extraordinary gifts
of the Spirit, as Mary, and Anna,
and Huldah, and Deborah, and some women in
the primitive church, concerning
whom we read, 1 Corinthians 11:5, that they
prophesied.
Nor to usurp
authority over the man: ordinary teaching of
the woman was a usurpation of
authority over the man, who is the head,
which the apostle also forbade in 1
Corinthians 11:3, and here repeateth. It is
probable that the speaking of some
women in the church who had extraordinary
revelations, imboldened others also
to aim at the like, which the apostle here
directs his speech against. Nevertheless,
women may, and it is their duty to instruct
their children and families at
home, especially in the absence of their
husbands.” (6)
Comments:
We can conclude from
the above Scriptures and commentary that
women are not allowed to teach or lead
in public worship services. Women can teach
in Sunday school classes, present
information in congregational meetings,
speak and lecture in theology
conferences. The above Pauline passages rule
out women ministers and
elders.
Qualifications for church
officers that
speak to the prohibition of women elders:
“A bishop (elder) then
must be
blameless, the husband of one
wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour,
given to hospitality, apt to teach.”
(1 Timothy 3:2)
Barnes' Notes on the
Bible on 1 Timothy 3:2
provide essential information:
“A bishop - A
minister of religion, according to the
foregoing remarks, who has the charge or
oversight of any Christian church. The
reference here is doubtless to one who
had the government of the church entrusted
to him 1 Timothy 3:4-5, and who was
also a preacher of the gospel.
Must be blameless -
This is a different word (ἀνεπίλημπτον
anepilēmpton) from that rendered
“blameless” in Luke 1:6; Philippians
2:15; Philippians 3:6 (ἄμεμπτος
amemptos); compare however, Luke 1:6
note; Philippians 3:6 note. The word
here used does not mean that, as a necessary
qualification for office, a bishop
should be “perfect;” but that he should
be a man against whom no charge
of immorality, or of holding false doctrine,
is alleged. His conduct
should be irreprehensible or irreproachable.
Undoubtedly it means that if “any”
charge could be brought against him implying
moral obliquity, he is not fit for
the office. He should be a man of
irreproachable character for truth,
honesty, chastity, and general uprightness.”
(7)
In his comments,
Barnes leaves no room for women elders.
“One that ruleth well
his own house, having his
children in subjection with all gravity.”
(1 Timothy 3:4)
Matthew Henry's
Concise Commentary on 1 Timothy 3:1-7
is most helpful:
“3:1-7 If a man
desired the pastoral office, and from love
to Christ, and the souls of men, was
ready to deny himself, and undergo hardships
by devoting himself to that
service, he sought to be employed in a good
work, and his desire should be
approved, provided he was qualified for the
office. A minister must give as
little occasion for blame as can be, lest he
bring reproach upon his office. He
must be sober, temperate, moderate in all
his actions, and in the use of all
creature-comforts. Sobriety and watchfulness
are put together in Scripture,
they assist one the other. The families of
ministers ought to be examples of
good to all other families. We should take
heed of pride; it is a sin that
turned angels into devils. He must
be of good repute among his neighbor’s,
and under no reproach from his former life.
To encourage all faithful
ministers, we have Christ's gracious word of
promise, Lo, I am with you always,
even unto the end of the world, Mt 28:20.
And he will fit his ministers for
their work, and carry them through
difficulties with comfort, and reward their
faithfulness.” (8)
An observation:
The commentators and
scriptures use no gender-neutral language.
The leadership language is always
masculine. As seen in the previous passages,
regarding the qualifications of
deacons, male leadership is assumed.
“And let these also
first be proved; then let them use the
office of a deacon, being found
blameless. Even so, must their wives
be grave, not slanderers, sober,
faithful in all things. Let the deacons
be the husbands of one wife,
ruling their children and their own houses
well.” (1 Timothy 3:10-12)
Comments:
It is true that “wives,”
(γυνᾶικας
gunaikas), could mean women.
The apostle is dealing with the ordination
of elders and deacons. Let us assume
women to be the preferred translation. How
would verse 11 fit into the context
of Paul’s instructions to Timothy?
Dr. Leonard Coppes has some
pertinent observations
on this section of Scripture:
What then does one do with 1
Timothy
3:11:
“Women must likewise
be dignified, not malicious gossips, but
temperate, faithful in all things.”
Certainly, women
cannot be ordained-that is, invested with
authority to represent and
participate in ruling over men. Perhaps this
statement refers to the wives of
deacons as Peter Y. DeJong (The Ministry of
Mercy for Today, Grand Rapids,
1952, p. 97f.) argues. He notes that the
deacons of the New Testament times
would be faced with situations, which would
pre-empt their successful execution
of their responsibilities, and necessitate
the use of a woman (no doubt, he
says, their wives). For example, men could
hardly tend widows and women who
were ill. If so understood, the
qualifications for these women are
understandable. Another more plausible
explanation might be that Paul is here
speaking of women who were so used by the
church, but who were not ordained. This
would certainly explain why verse 10
precedes verse 11.
Verse 10 reads:
“Let these also first
be tested; then let them serve as deacons if
they are beyond reproach.”
If the intent was to
speak of women office-bearers that verse
would more consistently follow verse
11.
“Women must likewise
be dignified, not malicious gossips, but
temperate, faithful in all things.”
Our argument is
further strengthened (1) by verse 12 which
seems to contrast “deacons” with
“women” (vs. 11) and thus distinguishes the
wives of deacons and these women of
verse 11, (20 by verse 13 which suggests
that deacons are good candidates for
the eldership; and (30 by verse 8 which is
virtually parallel to verse 11
except that verse 8 begins with deacons
(therefore, deacons are different from
women).
The rest of the New
Testament makes it clear that women were
prominent in aiding (Rom. 16:1f.) and
otherwise serving (Rom. 16:3, 6) the
saints.” (9)
See * note below
under “for more study” for a different view
on the translation of (γυνᾶικας
gunaikas). This study argues
for the translation of “wives” rather than
“women.”
What can we learn from the
book of
Hebrews on the standards of ordination?
“For every high
priest taken from among men is ordained for
men in things pertaining to God,
that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices
for sins.” (Hebrews 5:1)
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
Bible Commentary on this passage from
Hebrews:
CHAPTER 5
“Hebrews 5:1-14.
Christ's High Priesthood; Needed
Qualifications; Must Be a Man; Must
Not
Have Assumed the Dignity Himself, but Have
Been Appointed by God; Their Low
Spiritual Perceptions a Bar to Paul's Saying
All He Might on Christ's
Melchisedec-like Priesthood.
1. For - substantiating
Hebrews 4:15.
Every - that is,
every legitimate high priest; for instance,
the Levitical, as he is addressing
Hebrews, among whom the Levitical priesthood
was established as the legitimate
one. Whatever, reasons Paul, is excellent in
the Levitical priests, is also in
Christ, and besides Excellencies, which are
not in the Levitical priests.
Taken from among
men—not from among angels, who could not
have a fellow feeling with us men.
This qualification Christ has, as being, like
the Levitical priest, a man
(Hebrews 2:14, 16). Being “from men,” He can
be “for (that is, in behalf of,
for the good of) men.”
Ordained - Greek,
“constituted,”
“appointed.”
Both gifts - to be
joined with “for sins,” as “sacrifices” is
(the “both … and” requires this);
therefore not the Hebrew, “mincha,”
“unbloody
offerings,” but animal whole burnt
offerings, spontaneously given. “Sacrifices”
are the animal sacrifices due according to
the legal ordinance [Estius].” (10)
Final concluding
observations:
“For after this
manner in the old time the holy women also,
who trusted in God, adorned
themselves, being in subjection unto their
own husbands: Even as Sara obeyed
Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters
ye are, as long as ye do well, and
are not afraid with any amazement.” (1 Peter
3:1; 5-6)
Peter calls the
married woman to be in subjection unto their
husbands and offers proof for this
by referring to Sara obeying Abraham.
Peter’s instruction is similar to what
Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14:34 where he
says “as also saith the law.”
The primary reference
in 1 Corinthians 14:34 is to Genesis 3:16.
The reference to the law may also be
a general reference to the whole Old
Testament system of patriarchy as defined
the
entry on PATRIARCH from the International
Standard
Bible Encyclopedia. See note 4.
In these next two
citations of Scripture, the leadership of
the Old and New Covenant Churches
pictured together in heaven.
In Revelation 4:4,
the twenty-four elders sitting on
twenty-four thrones surrounding the throne
of
God represents the entire church starting
with the twenty-four for the twelve
patriarchs (men) of the Old Testament and
the twelve apostles (men) of the New
Testament, see Revelation 21:12-14.
A pattern in Scripture:
1.God’s covenants were
made with the men Adam and the Adamic
covenant; Noah and the Noahic covenant;
Abraham and the Abrahamic covenant; Moses
and the Mosaic covenant; and David
and the Davidic covenant.
2.New Covenant is made with
the God-man, Christ Jesus, and the head of
the Church.
3.God is referred to in
masculine terms biblically. For example, a
brief list of similes used to
describe God is King, Father, Our Father,
Husband, and Him, and He.
These concluding observations
bring us
back to the New Testament declaration:
“But I would have you
know, that the head of every man is Christ;
and the head of the woman is the
man, and; the head of Christ is God.” (1
Corinthians 11:3) What Paul is saying
is creational as seen in Genesis 3:16 and an
ongoing New Testament norm.
In his Doctrinal Considerations of 1
Corinthians 11:3, Simon J.
Kistemaker
explains the parallels the headship
between and husband and wife and Christ
and
the Church. The continued headship of the
husband over the wife has inescapable
parallels to male church governance:
“In a discussion on
the word head in the current text, we ought
to look at the other places where
Paul uses this term. In his epistles, it
occurs seventeen times; of which seven
instances have the literal meaning of the
word and ten the figurative
connotation.
When Paul develops
his teaching of Christ’s authority over the
church and all creation, he
expounds the headship of Christ. In
Ephesians 1:22, Paul introduces Christ’s
headship with a reference to his heavenly
exaltation far above all “rule and
authority, power and dominion.” The text
itself speaks of the execution of
Christ’s divine authority: “And God placed
all things under his feet and appointed
him head over everything for the church.”
The theme that Christ is the head of
the church also occurs in Ephesians 4:15;
5:23; and Colossians 1:18; 2:19.
Christ is called the head over all things
(Col. 2:10).
In one passage, Paul
parallels the headship of Christ and the
church with the husband as the head of
the wife. In this particular text, we have a
parallel that is instructive for
interpreting 1 Corinthians 11:3. This is the
reading: “Wives, submit to your husbands
as to the Lord. For the husband is the head
of the wife as Christ is the head
of the church, his body, of which he is the
Savior” (Eph. 5:22–23). The analogy
of husband and wife to Christ and the church
is clear. The wife submits to the
husband as the church submits to Christ. But
headship has its own unique
quality, as the text indicates: Christ is
the Savior of the church, which is
his body. The church, then, has its
existence in him. Likewise, on the basis of
the account of Eve’s creation (Gen.
2:21–23), the husband acknowledges that the
woman is from man and is dependent on him.
Thus, headship signifies authority
but it also includes a reference to origin
that affects a continued
relationship.
We infer from the
parallel of 1 Corinthians 11:3 and Ephesians
5:22–23 that Paul presents
Christ’s headship as a model. Just as Christ
is the head of every man and of
the church, so the husband is the head of
the wife. As Christ submits to God
the Father, so the wife submits to her
husband.” (11)
A partial list of churches
that do not
ordain women, priests or ministers:
Orthodox Judaism does
not allow women Rabbis. The Eastern Orthodox
Church and the Roman Catholic
Church does not allow the ordination of
women to the offices of bishops or
priests. Conservative Presbyterian and
Reformed churches, the Southern Baptist
Convention churches, Reformed Baptists
churches, Lutheran Wisconsin Synod and
Missouri
Synod churches do not ordain women. This
list is not exhaustive. These different
expressions of the Christian faith agree on
the doctrine of male-only
ordination. Agreement on the non-ordination
of women is significant in light of
the other differences between these
churches.
A relevant question, does the
ordination of women lead to theological
liberalism?
In a review of “ANew
Path to Theological
Liberalism?” Albert Mohler seeks an
answer to this question:
“In Evangelical
Feminism, published by Crossway Books, Wayne
A. Grudem argues that evangelical
feminism now represents one of the greatest
dangers to the continued orthodoxy
of the evangelical movement. ‘I am concerned
that evangelical feminism (also
known as “egalitarianism”) has become a new
path by which evangelicals are
being drawn into theological liberalism,’ he
explains.” (12)
Dr. Gordon Clark on the
history behind
not ordaining women:
“The Protestant
Reformation, for all its opposition to
Romanism, never questioned the practice
of ordaining men only. Now, if this practice
has continued from the time of
Abraham down to 1960 or thereabouts, those
who are innovators surely must bear
the burden of proof. The Westminster
Confession indeed says, ‘All Synods…may
err, and many have erred.’ Therefore, it is
theoretically possible that the
Reformed Presbyterian Church is in error.
But when the agreement is worldwide
over 4,000 years, it is, I repeat, extremely
improbable. Therefore a
mountainous burden of proof rests on those
who advocate the ordination of
women.” (13)
Therefore, in light of the
above
biblical material, women cannot be
ministers’ or elders, nor teach in worship
services in the churches of Christ.
Notes:
1.Walter
A. Elwell, Editor Baker's
Evangelical
Dictionary of Biblical Theology,
(Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Book
House), p. 347.
2.James
Orr, M.A., D.D. General Editor, International
Standard
Bible Encyclopedia, Definition for
'PATRIARCH; PATRIARCHS', (Grand
Rapids, Michigan, Eerdmans Publishing), p.
2264.
3.John
Gill, Exposition of the Old and New
Testaments, Numbers, 9 Volumes, Romans,
(Grace Works, Multi-Media Labs), 2011, p.
261-262.
4.James
W. Scott is the managing editor of New
Horizons. He supplies his own Bible
translations. Reprinted from New
Horizons, January 1996.
5.Jamieson,
Fausset and Brown, Commentary
on the
Whole Bible, (Grand Rapids, Michigan,
Zondervan, 1977), p. 1211.
6.Matthew
Poole's Commentary
on the Holy Bible,
vol. 3, (Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson
Publishers, 1985), p. 778.
7.Albert
Barnes, THE AGES DIGITAL LIBRARYCOMMENTARY,
Barnes’
Notes
on the Bible, 1 Timothy, p. 3867.
8.Matthew
Henry, Concise
Commentary, 1 Timothy,
(Nashville, Tennessee, Thomas Nelson), p.
1964.
9.Leonard
J. Coppes, Who
Will Lead US: A Study in
the Development of Biblical Offices with
Emphasis on the Diaconate,
(Chattanooga, TN, Pilgrim Publishing
Company, 1977), pp. 136-137.
10.Jamieson,
Fausset and Brown, Commentary
on the
Whole Bible, (Grand Rapids, Michigan,
Zondervan, 1977), p. 1408.
11.Simon
J. Kistemaker, New Testament Commentary, 1
Corinthians, (Grand Rapids,
Michigan, Baker Book House, 1986), pp.
366-367.
12.Albert
Mohler, A New
Path to Theological
Liberalism?,
ttps://www.christianheadlines.com/columnists/al-mohler/a-new-path-to-theological-liberalism-1440039.html
Mr. Kettler has
previously published articles in the Chalcedon
Report and Contra
Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend
the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr.
Kettler is the author of the book defending
the Reformed Faith against attacks,
titled: The Religion That Started in
a Hat. Available at:
www.TheReligionThatStartedInAHat.com
For more study:
*
How should γυνᾶικας
gunaikas be translated in 1 Timothy
3:11–“women” or “wives”?
http://www.rbap.net/1-timothy-311-women-or-wives/
Recovering
Biblical
Manhood and Womanhood Edited
byJohn
Piper and Wayne Grudem
The
Ordination of Women by Dr. Gordon H.
Clark
http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=17
Who
will lead
us: A study in the development of Biblical
offices, with emphasis on the
diaconate by Dr. Leonard
J. Coppes
Where
can the
teaching of women ordination lead? By
Matt
Slick
https://carm.org/where-can-teaching-women-ordination-lead
Evangelical
Feminism:
A New Path to Liberalism? By
Wayne A.
Grudem
https://www.amazon.com/Evangelical-Feminism-New-Path-Liberalism/dp/1581347340
Dangerous
first
step Scholar Wayne
Grudem on how “evangelical feminism”
undermines Scripture and leads to
theological liberalism
https://world.wng.org/2006/11/dangerous_first_step
Women
Servants
https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/women-servants/
A
Historical
and Biblical Examination of Women Deacons by
Brian M.
Schwertley
http://www.all-of-grace.org/pub/schwertley/deacon.html