What about female ministry?
Whoa. Before you go any further, dude, what about all the fine examples of women leaders in the Bible? Or did you just miss them while reading through your thick, male-focused glasses?
I know it’s a strawman, but I think there are three implications in the previous question that are revealing:
- First, nobody is saying that there are no women in the Bible. Sometimes I wonder if biblical headship is equated with the belief that women only show up in the Bible when they a) sin, b) have children, or c) seduce men. Of course, this isn’t true. Women are in the Bible in all their full humanity and worth. But it seems that somewhere along the way, biblical headship has become mischaracterized by a feminist culture as a desire to suppress the remembrance of even the existence of women, whether good or bad, in the past. Thus, today we have such a heavy focus on women’s studies; on “rediscovering” women of note in history and theology; on focusing on the “ignored” gender, the “forgotten” gender, the “voiceless” gender, etc., etc. It’s why you see bumper stickers today like: “Well-behaved women rarely make history.”
But when you mischaracterize a belief or conviction people hold, it becomes all that much easier to “disprove” it. Such has been the case with biblical headship. By redefining biblical headship as the desire to sweep the remembrance of women under the rug ... all that becomes necessary to do is to show that women did exist. That they were there all along. But to do so is to completely miss the point. - Second, nobody is saying that there are not female leaders in the Bible, or women involved in ministry. The question is: are there females involved in certain types of ministry that are only valid for men?
- Finally, even if there were women involved in certain types of ministry that are only valid for men, the battle is not won for the evangelical feminist. It must be shown that a woman’s existence in such a role is sufficient reason to negate the very clear biblical commands against woman participating in such a role. In other words, it seems it has too often been assumed that we can negate the male headship commands if we can prove that women were in the very positions that were prohibited. But this ignores a very important principle that any Bible student must hold: We judge the actions, positions and roles of characters in the Bible based on the commands of the Bible, and not vice-versa. Just because Lot’s daughters slept with him (Gn 19:30-38) doesn’t mean we negate the biblical prohibition against incest (Lv 18:6-18). Just because Rachel (Gn 31:19) and Micah (Jdg 17:5) had idols does not mean we negate the commandment against idolatry (Lv 19:4). Just because Rahab was a prostitute (Jos 6:25; Hb 11:31) does not mean we lay aside God’s strong warning against sexual sin (1Co 6:13-20). And so on and so forth.
With these three points in mind, however, the Bible is not shy on the topic of women. In fact, au contra feminism, there were many well-behaved women who made history. There are whole books devoted to women (Ruth and Esther). Song of Songs is about a love story between a man and a woman. The book of Proverbs, in which wisdom is personified as a woman, ends with this illustrious poem praising the capable woman:
Proverbs 31:10-31 | Who can find a capable wife? She is far more precious than jewels. The heart of her husband trusts in her, and he will not lack anything good. She rewards him with good, not evil, all the days of her life. She selects wool and flax and works with willing hands. She is like the merchant ships, bringing her food from far away. She rises while it is still night and provides food for her household and portions for her female servants. She evaluates a field and buys it; she plants a vineyard with her earnings. She draws on her strength and reveals that her arms are strong. She sees that her profits are good, and her lamp never goes out at night. She extends her hands to the spinning staff, and her hands hold the spindle. Her hands reach out to the poor, and she extends her hands to the needy. She is not afraid for her household when it snows, for all in her household are doubly clothed. She makes her own bed coverings; her clothing is fine linen and purple. Her husband is known at the city gates, where he sits among the elders of the land. She makes and sells linen garments; she delivers belts to the merchants. Strength and honor are her clothing, and she can laugh at the time to come. She opens her mouth with wisdom and loving instruction is on her tongue. She watches over the activities of her household and is never idle. Her sons rise up and call her blessed. Her husband also praises her: “Many women are capable, but you surpass them all!” Charm is deceptive and beauty is fleeting, but a woman who fears the LORD will be praised. Give her the reward of her labor, and let her works praise her at the city gates.
We have already encountered Eve in the Garden of Eden. Job valued his daughters so much he gave them a portion of his inheritance:
Job 42:14-15 | He named his first daughter Jemimah, his second Keziah, and his third Keren-happuch. No women as beautiful as Job’s daughters could be found in all the land, and their father granted them an inheritance with their brothers.
Sarah (Gn 17:15), evidently a beautiful woman (see Gn 20:2), had faith in God (Hb 11:11) and performed the remarkable feat of giving birth to Isaac at ninety (Gn 21:1-3), creating an entire nation. Though she was a capable woman, she honored her husband Abraham and submitted to his leadership, even calling him “Lord” (1Pt 3:6). The Egyptian midwives Shiphrah and Puah are singled out for honor because they feared God over and above Pharaoh, being willing to spare the lives of the Hebrew children (Ex 1:15-22). Zipporah saved her husband Moses’ life from God’s anger with her quick thinking (Ex 2:24-26). Zelophehad’s daughters, Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah boldly requested their dead father’s inheritance (they had no brothers), resulting in the establishment of a permanent ordinance that a dead man’s daughters were to be preferred over his brothers for the inheritance (Nm 27:1-11). The prostitute Rahab showed faith in God by housing the Israelite spies (Jos 2:1), thereby saving her family from destruction (Jos 6:17-25), gaining mention in the genealogy of Jesus (Mt 1:5) and the “hall of faith” (Hb 11:31). Achsah was given land in the Negev to own from her father Caleb (Jdg 1:15).
Ruth loyally accompanied Naomi back to Israel (Ru 1:22), bravely provided for Naomi (2:2-3), and graciously and humbly won the heart of Boaz with her wisdom and foresight. Hannah spoke boldly to Eli the priest (1Sm 1:15); and her heartfelt prayer was heard by God (1Sm 1:19), so that she gave birth to Samuel; and as his loving mother, influenced the entire nation. Intelligent, beautiful Abigail was a model of wisdom, submission, and discretion, making peace in a dispute between two hot-tempered men, and directing her servants to save her life and the lives of her household (1Sm 25). Bathsheba (2Sm 11:3) won the heart of a king and mothered the crown prince, again influencing the entire nation. Esther was used by God to save her nation in a way that no man could; she was raised to her “royal position for such a time as this” (Est 4:14). Shallum’s daughters helped him repair part of the wall surrounding Jerusalem during the time of Nehemiah (Neh 3:12).
Of all the people in the world, it was a woman, His mother Mary, who probably had the most influence on Jesus and spent the most time with Him (Mt 1:16; c.f. Jn 2:1-5). God revealed His will to Mary through an angel (Lk 1:30-38). Likewise, Mary’s relative Elizabeth (Lk 1) mothered and influenced the great John the Baptist, whom “among those born of women no one is greater” (Lk 7:28). Dorcas (or Tabitha) a disciple of Christ, was known for her charity. Through her resurrection from the dead, many believed in the Lord (Ac 9:36-42). Priscilla aided her husband Aquila in teaching the great Apollos (Ac 18:26), and she and her husband were counted among Paul’s fellow workers (Rm 16:3). (Some choose to find meaning in the fact that Priscilla’s name is mentioned before Aquila’s sometimes—this seems like grasping at straws; I call my parents “Mom and Dad” sometimes, and “Dad and Mom” other times, but I am always aware that my dad is our family’s spiritual authority). Rhoda was the first recorded person to see Paul after his escape from prison and granted him entrance to the house (Ac 12:13). Lydia was one of the first converts in Macedonia (Ac 16:14), and persuaded Paul and Silas to accept her hospitality (15). Mary worked very hard for the Roman church (Rm 16:6). Lois and her daughter Eunice raised up Timothy in the Christian faith (2Tm 1:5).
Many women were also involved in the ministry of Jesus (and to Jesus). His own mother, of course, influenced Him. Other women ministered to Jesus, helping Him and following Him around (Mt 27:56; Mk 40:41). Peter’s mother-in-law ministered to Christ and His apostles (Mk 1:30-31; Mt 8:14-15; Lk 4:38-39). Christ honored many women through healings and teachings. One example might be the woman at the well. Jesus’ disciples “were amazed that He was talking with a woman” (Jn 4:27), yet Jesus treated her intelligently and fairly—He taught her about spiritual things (13-14, 21-24), and held her responsible for her sin (16-18). She spread the word in her town about Jesus (28-30, 39). And Jesus treated women in this way all throughout His ministry. Suzanna and Joanna were two of the women who supported Jesus and His disciples financially (Lk 8:3), Martha and Mary of Bethany ministered to Jesus, welcoming Him into their home, and He did not shy away from teaching them spiritual truths (Lk 10:38-42; c.f. Jn 12:2). Martha and Mary both exhibited strong faith, perhaps even stronger than that of Jesus’ male disciples (Jn 11:22, 24, 27; Lk 10:39). He cared so much about them that He came and raised their brother Lazarus from the dead (Jn 11). Mary Magdalene, also, ministered to Jesus by anointing His feet (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9; Jn 12:2-8). Finally, it was Christ’s female disciples who were privileged with discovering His resurrection first (Mt 28:5-8; Mk 16:5-8; Lk 24:2-9; Jn 20:1-2).
Yet, though these women were very active and involved in Christ’s ministry, when it came to leadership roles, Christ did not choose any female apostles. He chose twelve men. This is highly significant. If Christ had wanted to promote equality of men and women in leadership roles, why didn’t He select six men and six women? A common response is that Christ didn’t want to upset the social order of that day and raise unnecessary suspicion by travelling with women. But this is unsatisfactory for two reasons: 1) Christ never compromised with social order when a moral issue was at stake (not afraid to eat with sinners, cleanse the temple, publicly rebuke the Pharisees, etc.), and the patriarchal society of first-century Israel would have been a rather large moral issue for Jesus if we are to see Him as a feminist, and 2) Jesus did in fact travel with women (Lk 8:1-2).
In many ways and in many different varieties, these women in the Bible ministered to men: to their fathers, to their husbands, to their sons, and to their brothers in Christ. They ministered to women also, and to children. And they even ministered to our Lord Jesus Christ! To state that female ministry is not in the Bible would be like saying that sin isn’t in the Bible. It’s there.
But, it also argued, there are other women in the Bible that minister in a different way. In a more authoritative way. In a way that seems to go against biblical headship.
For example, prophetesses. Miriam is called a prophetess (15:20), who identified herself as one the Lord spoke through (Nm 12:2). Deborah was not only a prophetess but also a judge of Israel (Jdg 4:4), to whom men went for judgment (4:5). The prophetess Huldah was consulted by Hilkiah the priest and other male leaders during Josiah’s reign, and gave these men the word of the Lord (2Kgs 22). The prophetess Anna received the news of the Messiah with gratitude and praise (Lk 2:36-38). In Acts 21:9, we that read Philip the evangelist had four virgin daughters who prophesied, and we see this prediction in Acts:
Acts 2:17 | And it will be in the last days, says God, that I will pour out My Spirit on all humanity; then your sons and your daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, and your old men will dream dreams.
Finally, we see in 1 Corinthians 12:28 that prophecy appears to be a more important gift than teaching: “God has placed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, next miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, managing, various kinds of languages.”
But these examples of women are not actually as potent as they might seem. First, Miriam, as far as we know, confined her ministry to women (Ex 15:20-21), which is perfectly compatible with biblical headship. Additionally, God made the distinction between being a prophet and being a leader of God’s people like Moses very clear to Aaron and Miriam (Nm 12:6-8).
Secondly, there is a clear difference between the male prophets in the Old Testament like Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel and female prophets like Deborah and Huldah. The male prophets proclaimed the word of the Lord openly and publicly, in the city square, but Deborah and Huldah prophesied privately (Jdg 4:5; 2Kgs 22:14) in a way that was compatible with male leadership. Additionally, Deborah was not a leader of Israel like the other male judges were. Other judges would lead the Israelites into battle, but God’s word to Deborah was that this was for Barak to do (Jdg 4:6-7). Rather than asserting her own leadership, she deferred to him. The fact that Barak wasn’t willing to shoulder this leadership on his own is grounds enough for God’s giving the honor of killing Sisera to another—a woman. But note the honor is not given to Deborah, but to Jael (17-21). Finally, it is unstable, to say the least, to take a story from the book of Judges, of which the main theme seems to be: “everyone did whatever he wanted” (17:6; 21:25), as the model of what godly headship should look like. The book of Judges outlines, in sometimes painful detail, the moral confusion and ethic bankruptcy of the nation of Israel during those times. (Perhaps we might also like to take the Benjaminite bride-kidnappings in Judges 21:20-24 as a model of good courtship?).
In the New Testament, while Anna, the four virgin daughters of Philip, and various other eschatological women prophesy, and while 1 Corinthians 12:28 holds prophecy as more important than teaching, New Testament female prophesy actually supports male headship rather than disproves it. In 1 Corinthians 11:3-10, Paul specifies that female prophets are to be adorned visibly in a way that symbolizes their submission to male leadership. Thus we may assume that these prophetesses prophesied in a way that openly acknowledged their support of male leadership.
There is another woman in the Bible who is called a servant, or deaconess, of the church: Phoebe:
Romans 16:1-2 | I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a servant [diakonos] of the church in Cenchreae. So you should welcome her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints and assist her in whatever matter she may require your help. For indeed she has been a benefactor [prostatis] of many—and of me also.
The Greek word diakonos means “a waiter, servant; one who performs any service, an administrator.” It is often used to refer to deacons in the church. If this is what the word means here, than it does not necessarily make a very strong case against male headship. Thomas Schriener notes: “Even if women were appointed as deacons, they were not appointed as elders (1Tm 3:1-7; Ti 1:5-9). Two qualities demanded of elders—being apt to teach (1Tm 3:2) and governing of the church (1Tm 3:5)—are not part of the responsibility of deacons (cf. also 1Tm 5:17; Ti 1:9; Ac 20:17, 28ff).” The other word, prostatis, means “a female guardian, protector, patroness”. Some contend it should mean “leader” here. It seems more likely that this refers to Phoebe being a helper or benefactor to Paul than to being his leader, since the only one Paul places in authority above himself is Christ, and not even the male, Jerusalem apostles (Gl 1:6-7, 11). It would not be unreasonable to assume that Phoebe was the one who carried the letter to the Romans for Paul.
Finally, there is the mention of Junia:
Romans 16:7 | Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow countrymen and fellow prisoners. They are noteworthy in the eyes of the apostles, and they were also in Christ before me.
It is fairly certain that Junia is a woman. Though the phrase can be translated as it is here: “noteworthy in the eyes of the apostles”, some claim that it is more naturally translated “outstanding among the apostles.” Which would make Junia a female apostle. If this is the case, however, it does not mean that Junia was an apostle in the right of Paul or Peter or the rest of the twelve. The Greek word apostolos can simply mean “envoy, or messenger” (2Co 8:23; Php 2:25). In John 13:16, Jesus uses the word apostolos when he says, “I assure you: A slave is not greater than his master, and a messenger is not greater than the one who sent him.” It is plausible that Andronicus and Junia were sent out as missionaries, much like we send out missionaries today.
In sum, even a cursory sweep of the women in the Bible seems to enhance, rather than detract from, the biblical ordinance of male headship. It is not surprising to the complementarian to find that biblical women tended to act according to the purpose for which they were created after all—to glorify God as man’s complement. In no way is this demeaning or patronizing; rather, Jesus affirms that the greatest Christians are not necessarily those with the most authoritative roles (see Mt 20:25-28). These women exemplified greatness through their loving, intelligent service and ministry.
Men only (ouch)
Childhood. That wonderful, nostalgic time when the block was the entire world, candy was to die for (maybe it still is), bikes were transformed into motorcycles with a simple piece of cardboard of a sturdy leaf...
...and boys made forts with big “No girls allowed!” signs on the front.
A few years ago, I pulled my car into a parking space, congratulating myself on how close to the building it was. I wasn’t that late, but it would be nice not to have to walk so far. I was just opening my door to get out of the car when I noticed the little sign in front of me: “Reserved for President.”
Oops.
In many ways, exclusivism has become a dirty word in our society. We react against the word “only.” We dismiss the “boys only” sign in front of the fort, because they will grow up; we dismiss the “president only” parking space because, well, you have to work really hard to gain that position. But we don’t dismiss the “men only” sign hanging on the pastor’s office door. Christian men should know better. They shouldn’t be so exclusive.
And in the face of societal pressure, how does one answer that charge? How does one show that they are not, in fact, an evil, chauvinistic, arrogant, selfish male looking to create a glorified “boys only” club?
I have three answers, I’m not sure if any will really satisfy you if you are so inclined not be satisfied by them, but here they are:
First, exclusivism does not always make you unhappy. Here is a list of “only” signs that I rather suspect would not immediately offend you if you happened to be excluded by them:
- A “Jews Only” sign in front of a Nazi gas chamber (you might and should be offended that Nazis were killing Jews, but you wouldn’t be offended particularly at your own exclusion).
- A “Women Only” sign in front of a female restroom.
- An “Employees Only” sign on a back storeroom door.
- A “Professionals Only” sign in front of a sewer system.
- A “Children Only” sign in front of a bouncy castle (okay, maybe this one does!).
While these signs refer to different types of exclusivism in different contexts, still they make my point that universally, exclusivism is not always bad.
My second answer is that God is not interested in full equality.
How does that statement strike you? Of course you might say God is very interested in full equality among humans. And you would be aligning yourself with many in our culture to do so. But if you hold that view, then I have some very serious questions for you.
Why hasn’t God given me the body of Lebron James (Lebron haters: insert name of other favorite player here)? With a body like that, I could really bring God glory through my gracious athletic movements (and crazy dunks!). Why can’t I be “equal” with Lebron? Even if I spent all my time in the gym, I would never attain his height or his strength. Why? Because God wasn’t interested in giving me the same genes as Lebron. You might say that my desire to be “equal” with Lebron James is immature and selfish. But rather, I respond, it would be a great avenue for me to be a public witness for Christ, both through my gracious temperament on court when things get heated and through my spoken personal testimony in interviews and the like.
Again, why doesn’t God allow children to be pastors? That’s easy, you say. They’ll get their chance when they’re older. Actually, some won’t. Some will die before adulthood. Some will become seriously mentally or emotionally disabled for life. Some will get started on another career track and lose their opportunity. Some might lose their faith before adulthood. If God is interested in full equality, He should let them be pastors now. But, you say, we don’t let children be pastors because they are immature, inexperienced, and incapable, not because of something innate about their nature. Then you obviously have not seen some kids. I don’t care how spiritual you are. Some kids are more spiritual than you. Some kids have insights into the Bible that you don’t. Some kids can preach (yes, preach. I’ve seen them) better than you can. Plus, Jesus said we must have faith like little children. It seems they could best exemplify a simple-trusting faith. But you say, the vast majority of children are not capable of fulfilling all the duties required of the pastorate. But why should we discriminate against the children who are capable? Why should we stereotype those children because of the rest?
But you say, they’re too short to look out over the pulpit. Well, now you’re just being mean!
The fact is that God seems more interested in human distinction and difference than in human similarity. God is more interested with what we do with the distinctive body, talents, looks, intelligence, and roles that we have been given than making sure that everyone has equal outcomes or even equal opportunity.
My final answer is very simple. I think the Bible says so. Certainly we need to examine our beliefs. Certainly we need to ask why. But at the end of the day, if the Bible says so, than that is all the answer we need.
0 comments:
Post a Comment