WOMEN IN MINISTRY
By Pastor Randy Barnett
The “woman issue” is one
that I approach here with caution, not desiring to add to the controversy that
has surrounded this topic for almost 2000 years. My intent in this essay is to attempt to bring the saints into
unity within the church. May I here
suggest that unity does not mandate conformity. The love we have in our hearts for our brothers and sisters in
Christ Jesus is the unifying factor, not the singleness of beliefs on such
peripheral subjects as the woman issue.
I will make no attempt here to persuade or convince but merely to
present the two sides and raise our attention to the higher level – the level
of love between the brethren.
Believers who proclaim that women are to
remain silent in the church [allow us for the sake of this essay to call them
the purists] have a strong biblical
case. The apostle Paul clearly speaks
to this issue in I Corinthians 14:34-35 and I Timothy 2:11-15. In each case his thoughts on the subject
relegate women to a silent, non-participatory role in the church. Men and women of God desire to accept the
Word of God as it is written and none dares add to or take from It. For that reason, purists on the subject hold
to the literal commands given by
Paul. Such diligence to Scripture is
commendable.
On the other hand, believers who possess
an equal love for God and for His Holy Word feel differently about this topic.
[these we will call the progressives] To the progressives women should play key
roles in the church. The beliefs of these pregressives are not wishful thinking
nor mere opinion but carefully considered truths from the whole counsel of the
Word of God. Let it not be said of
these that they in any fashion willingly compromise the Word of God. Their case is equally as strong as the
purists. They too are to be commended
for their careful attention to truth.
The primary concern this writer has with
this issue is that it remains a point of division between those on either
side. Such is wrong and is sin. There
is to be no divisions in the church. If the woman issue had eternal
ramifications or were core to our Christian faith, such differing views would
be intolerable; however, this is not the case.
Whether women minister of not falls under the category of what this
writer calls peripheral doctrine. Peripheral doctrine is any biblical
perspective that one can derive from the Bible which, although dear to the one
who believes it, is not integral to salvation. This is in contrast to what is called core doctrine. Core
doctrine, on the other hand, is any truth from the Bible which is integral to
salvation. In other words, it is core
to our Christian faith.
Some examples of peripheral doctrine are:
1) mode of baptism – whether one immerses or sprinkles. 2) The day one deems to be the day of
worship. 3) whether the eating of meat or the drinking of alcohol is
permissible. 4) our eschatology – what
we believe about the end times. Each of
us perhaps has strong feelings about these, and that is fine. As Paul says in Romans 14:5 “…let each be
fully convinced in his own mind.” Why
is it all right for us to fail to all believe the same on these subjects? Because none of these beliefs is integral to
salvation nor does any eliminate us from the Covenant despite how we
believe. On such issues it is
critically important for believers on both sides to agree to disagree
agreeably. Accepting one another is a
command by God - let us be diligent to obey this command.
Core doctrines do not afford us such
personal opinions and individuality.
Examples of core doctrine are: 1) Jesus’ identity as the Messiah, 2) the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, 3) the truth that Jesus is the Son of God,
4) that salvation is by grace through faith and not by works of our own,
5) the truth
that Jesus was crucified and rose from the dead. What makes these beliefs “core?”
Because each is vital to God’s plan of salvation through His Son Jesus. These beliefs are what makes each of us
Christian. They are non-negotiable,
immutable, and set for eternity.
The case the purists propose is straight
forward in that they declare that the church should simply do what the Word
says which is to silence women in the church.
Admittedly, each passage seems simple and thus to the purist should be
incontestable. This sentiment is heralded by noted commentator Matthew
Henry: (MATTHEW HENRY’S COMMENTARY.
Volume VI. pp 584-585 – MacDonald Publishing Company)
“….our spirit and conduct
should be suitable to our rank. The
natural distinctions God has made, we should observe. Those he has placed in subjection to others should not set
themselves on a level, nor affect or assume superiority. The woman was made subject to the man, and
she should keep her station and be content with it. For this reason women must be silent in the churches, not set up
for teachers; for this is setting up for superiority over the man.”
The progressives, on the other hand,
derive their belief from numerous other passages of Scripture. A good example of this is by an anointed
scholar, pastor, and man of God, Dr. Jack Hayford, in his commentary on this
subject (pp.1168 “Kingdom Dynamics” of the SPIRIT FILLED LIFE BIBLE by Nelson
Publishers) says:
“It is puzzling why the place of women in
ministry is contested by some in the church.
Women had an equal place in the Upper Room, awaiting the Holy Spirit’s
coming and the birth of the church (Acts 1:14). Then Peter’s prophetic sermon at Pentecost affirmed the OT [Old
Testament] promise was now to be realized: “your daughters” and
“maidservants” would now share fully
and equally with men in realizing the anointing, fullness, and ministry of the
Holy Spirit, making them effective in witness and service for the spread of the
gospel.
Though the place of men seems more
pronounced in the number who filled leadership offices, there does not appear
to be any direct restriction of privilege.
Note: 1) the direct mention of Phoebe as a deacon (“servant,” Greek,
diakonia, Rom. 16:1); 2) John’s letter
to an “elect [chosen] lady with instructions concerning whom she allows to
minister in her “house” (a designation for early church fellowships), 2 John);
and 3) I Corinthians 1:11 and
Philippians 4:2, where Chloe and Euodia seem to be women in whose homes
believers gather. The method of
designation suggests they were the appointed leaders in their respective
fellowships.
The acceptance of women in a public place
of ministry in the church is not a concession to the spirit of the feminist
movement. But the refusal of such a
place might be a concession to an order of male chauvinism, unwarranted by and
unsupported in the Scriptures. Clearly,
women did speak – preach and prophesy – in the early church (see I Timothy
2:8-15).”
______________________________________________________________ RBM –
J120299 Randy Barnett
Ministries Oklahoma City
What has become clear is that this subject is not clear in the
Bible. If it were, there would be
singleness of thought on it. Ours is
now the task to prevent our individual beliefs from separating us from our
brothers and sisters who feel differently than we do. Let love prevail. Just as
we might receive the Lord’s Supper with an orthodox believer whose belief is
transubstantiationary and different than our own, let us accept women and those
who accept women in ministry with respect and courtesy, submitting to the
higher call which is to love.
