Issue 21 - A Discussion of Women in Ministry
Biblical Understanding
One of the big dividing lines of theological disagreement between Christian denominations and between individual believers these days is those who are “Complementarian” and those who are “Egalitarian.” Complementarian Christians believe that while men and women have equal value, they were ultimately created for different purposes. Egalitarian Christians believe that men and women can fulfill all roles in the family and in the church. Practically speaking, most of the disagreement primarily boils down to whether husbands are the head of the household, and whether women can be pastor/elder/overseers in the Church. Today’s newsletter will focus on the latter question. Countless pages have been written on this subject so I can only provide a cursory overview of the discussion, which is based on a single (very in-depth) podcast series that I link to below. Though I definitely don’t expect this single newsletter to either completely fortify your beliefs, or change your mind, I hope it spurs you to further inquiry.
Complementarianism is the official position of the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, as well as the Southern Baptist Convention and several other Protestant denominations. However, I want to be clear that this is not an issue that should break fellowship between Christians and so I am not claiming that one has to be complementarian be a true Christian.
While this is not considered a primary issue of salvation, the implications for religious practice are much bigger than, say, disagreements over End-Times theology. It is important enough that, whichever side of the debate you fall on, you should put some serious consideration into it. If you take only one thing away from this issue, please let it be my admonition that this is something you should take the time to look into and understand why you believe whatever you believe.
With that out of the way, let’s dive in.
Mike Winger “Pastor Mike” hosts an online ministry called “BibleThinker” that tackles questions about the Bible. A couple of years ago he did a 12-part series on complementarianism versus egalitarianism (which covers male headship in addition to women in ministry). Despite it’s length, I highly encourage you to listen to the whole thing which you could knock out in a couple of weeks’ commute (you can listen to the episodes through any podcast distributor). The official position of Mike’s denomination (Calvary Chapel - the denomination founded by Chuck Smith of “Jesus Revolution” fame) is complementarian. So you may not believe Mike when he says he came into this with an open mind wanting to be convinced of the egalitarian position. However, he is correct that in our society there is enormous pressure to be egalitarian and so it would be preferable to land there. While Christian sexual ethics or opposition to abortion can put Christians out of lockstep with society, the idea that women can and should be able to fulfill any role that men do is so fundamental to our society that there may not be any other Christian belief that is considered as backward and oppressive as the idea of excluding women from certain ministry roles.
One important thing to keep in mind is that the Bible explicitly says that only men can be pastor/elder/overseers, as I’ll show below. There are also other strong pieces of evidence that these roles were intended for men. So the egalitarian position depends on two strategies: trying to show that explicit commands and Biblical examples are just artifacts of a particular time and culture superseded by an overarching Biblical principle of equality between men and women, and trying to identify exceptions that would disprove the rule. So Mike’s podcast series is not primarily intended to review the case for complementarianism, but rather to examine the case against complementarianism.
Below, I provide some “Cliff Notes” on his discussion, which basically reaches three conclusions:
Women can be political leaders
Women can be church deacons (basically any ministry that’s not elder/overseer)
Women cannot be pastor/elder/overseers.
Before turning to the points he raises, let’s review some of the passages and facts that support the complementarian position.
Under Judaism, only men could be priests (and a quick Google search suggests female ordination of rabbis did not occur until the last 100 years).
All of the 12 apostles were men, as were the two most prominent leaders of the early church outside of the 12 (James and Paul).
When Judas died, the only two candidates put forward to replace him were men.
In both 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1, the description of an Elder/Overseer is clearly limited to men.
In 1 Timothy 2 Paul says “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man”
Now let’s turn to some of the topics Mike covered:
Egalitarian arguments from the Old Testament:
Male priesthood
Egalitarians argue that priesthood was limited to men because either:
Women’s monthly cycles made them regularly unclean and thus frequently unable to perform priestly functions, and/or
Because temple prostitution was so rampant in the surrounding cultures that having female priests would be a slippery slope to prostitution.
Mike counters that:
Women were allowed to do other things that unclean people couldn’t do.
Surrounding cultures had male temple prostitutes as well.
I will add that the story of Eli’s sons Hophni and Phinehas (1 Samuel 2) also diminishes these two points. There were women serving at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting (which they presumably couldn’t do when unclean) and their presence within the Tabernacle still led to sexual sin that corrupted the proper worship of God.
Deborah - Female Judge of Israel - functionally equivalent to a Head of State in that time period
From this Pastor Mike concedes that women can be political leaders
Mike notes that judges were not spiritual leaders - they had priests with them to interpret God’s laws.
Mike also notes that Deborah was the only judge who was not a military leader
God did not command her to lead the army out against Sisera, but had her relay His command to Barak.
Even though Barak insisted that Deborah come with him, he led the army, and he was punished for bringing Deborah by losing the honor due him for winning the battle.
Female prophets - There were definitely women serving as prophets in the Old Testament. Miriam (Moses’ sister), Huldah (contemporary of Jeremiah, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah), and Isaiah’s wife were all called prophetesses.
This Gospel Coalition article notes a key point about prophets as they relate to the question of pastor/eldership: prophets are not officially part of ‘the Priesthood/Church’ (in the modern context we might say there is no official church staff members serving as resident prophet, even though people fulfilling a prophetic role are part of the body of Christ). Prophets may advise or admonish priests and kings, but that doesn’t mean they then take on the roles/responsibilities of priests or kings.
I think the modern analog to female prophets could be roles within the Body of Christ, but outside of eldership, such as the following:
Female writers, podcasters, etc. who admonish and encourage believers or make calls to action.
Women who formally advise churches to provide a female perspective, while ultimate responsibility for decisions rests with the male elders.
The above is my speculation - but I think the key point is that prophets are not officially part of the priesthood/church hierarchy.
Egalitarian arguments from the New Testament:
Some egalitarians argue that hosting church in your house makes you an overseer (and several females are on record as hosting church). Mike countered that while hosting certainly gives somebody a level of authority over the proceedings, hosting church doesn’t make you an overseer of the church, and lists several problematic conclusions that arise from such an argument.
Automatically makes rich people church leaders by default (in early Church they were only ones with big enough houses to host)
Luke 9: 1-5 - Apostles stayed in whatever house would have them - did not imply authority.
Lydia, who some egalitarian scholars claim as overseer, began hosting church the day she was saved (Acts 16:15). It would not make sense for her to be considered an overseer her first day as a Believer.
Some egalitarians argue that Paul asking to fix a feud between two women implies they were church leaders (since it rose to the importance of Paul writing about it). Mike argues that nothing in the letter explicitly implies that they were church leaders so this is a weak argument.
Priscilla was the wife of Aquila and together they were a missionary couple with Paul. Paul greeted them both by name in three epistles, calling them co-laborers. In the book of Acts they pull Apollos aside and help clarify his theology. When she gave doctrinal instruction to Apollos, this was done in private, not formal/institutional.
At minimum, shows women can teach men, in private, with their husbands present.
Presence of husband could have been cultural (unusual for married women to be alone with other men)
Paul greeting women as co-laborers doesn’t make them all leaders unless everyone he greeted was also an apostle, which nobody argues.
Elder/overseer doesn’t refer to literal older people - otherwise they wouldn’t need to be appointed.
Elderly widows receiving funds in the New Testament weren’t being paid for ministry - they were on welfare in recognition of past Godly living.
Being a letter carrier didn’t make you the teacher or leader, even in the ancient world, so women delivering epistles doesn’t make them leaders (as some egalitarians argue).
Elder description - husband of one wife, rules over house well, “he”. Clearly male-oriented.
While elder’s wives don’t have qualifications, deacon’s wives do. The use of “likewise” implies that they have their own distinct list of qualifications related to participating in ministry. May have been deacon’s wives, but still did own deacon ministry.
Deacon is so clearly about men that Paul has separate discussion for female deacons. But he did not have a separate, analogous discussion of women related to eldership even though elder qualifications are also clearly male.
Deacon basically refers to every church ministry that isn’t elder.
Phoebe was “diakanos” of a specific church, which suggests she is an actual deacon, not just a generic “servant” of the church. But the text also doesn’t imply she was more than a deacon.
Mike concludes women can be deacons.
Some egalitarians point to Galatians 5:28 (“no longer male and female”) to argue that this overturns the original creation order under the new creation.
Paul never implies that’s the case in any other letters
Paul uses Genesis 1 and 2 frequently to uphold gender distinctions - including in 1 Timothy when he said women shouldn’t exercise authority over men (so Paul did not think original creation order was overturned by Christ).
Being an heir to Christ does not mean every position in the church is open to you.
Were Women Apostles in the New Testament:
Many egalitarians argue that women were apostles in the same sense of recognized church leaders such as “The Twelve,” Paul, or James (brother of Jesus), and if that’s the case, they argue such esteemed leaders would have to be equivalent to something like a pastor/elder. But was that really the case? Mike addresses this at length.
Jesus’ select apostles were all men. Judas’ two potential replacements were men. Paul and James, two church leaders outside of the disciples, were men.
There were women who funded and traveled with Jesus’ ministry (see e.g., Luke 8:1-3) - they were not ever referred to as apostles (either in the Gospels, or elsewhere in the New Testament).
That women traveled with Jesus’ ministry negates the argument that lack of female apostles was a cultural constraint based on the impropriety of women traveling with the male group.
1 Corinthians 9:5 talks about the right of apostles to have a wife - refers only to males, and their wives were not referred to as apostles.
NT Wright claims Mary Magdalene was an apostle, but if apostle just means “witness to the resurrection who tells others about it” then the word loses significance. However, nothing suggests that all witnesses (Paul referenced 500) were apostles.
The Bible never refers to her as an apostle.
Consensus view is that Junia was described using the word “apostle” - but even if true the word does not automatically imply elder leadership.
Majority of the consensus is that she is not “apostle” on the same level of Peter or Paul.
Word can also refer to missionary/church planter or witness to the resurrection - women were definitely all of those things.
Junia was not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament, which we would expect if she stood out among the apostles.
More recent Greek scholarship implies that Junia was “known to” the apostles rather than “known among” - while this hasn’t completely settled the debate, evidence was strong enough that the ESV translation went with this interpretation.
Mike’s Junia summary:
If she was an apostle, nothing explicitly indicating she had teaching authority over men.
Recent scholarship probably overturns consensus that she was apostle.
[My Addition]: It is Paul who says this about her (in Romans). It would be weird for him to grant her a title that he interpreted as equal to elder/overseer and then explicitly state elsewhere that he only thought men could fulfill that role.
There’s much more that could be said about this topic, but hopefully this has served as a useful primer for you. I would encourage you to download Mike’s podcasts to hear for yourself. And please reach out if you have thoughts about all of this - I always welcome dialogue!