![By Jpatokal (Self-photographed) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons](https://aws.hackingchristianity.net/wp-content/files/1024px-Jeddah_Marriott_no_women_sign.jpg)
While I loudly advocate for women in ministry, let me stop to say that you and I are in fact unequal.
Sure, we are in ministry together, and you likely have the same size church as I, but does that make us equal?
I did not grow up in a world that discouraged me from speaking in church, having authority over a man, and especially discouraged me from becoming a pastor.
In college on my way to seminary, I was never rejected by my peers because “women don’t do pastoral ministry.”
In seminary, it was never assumed I was there to get my MRS.
To become ordained, I never had to answer “who will take care of the children.” To serve a church, I was never asked how long I expected my maternity leave to be.
In my professional ministry, I have not introduced myself and they ask if that means I work with children. When I answer the phone at church, no one asks to speak to the real pastor. I’ve never gotten anonymous notes telling me not to wear dangly earrings in the pulpit, to deepen my voice (okay, as a nasal tenor, yes I actually have), and how uncomfortable it is seeing me preach while pregnant.
Among my town’s colleagues, I have not been disinvited to preach at high school baccalaureate, nor turned down by the funeral home at the family’s request. I have had no difficulty whatsoever with a boys club mentality in the Church, and in the Church, I will not face added scrutiny or referred to as the “token.”
Even my fair-minded colleagues encourage me to the senior pastorate, not to middle-management, consulting, or associate ministry.
So, you and I cannot be equal.
Because to be in the pulpit, you have already overcome far more than I will ever face.
===
Notes:
- The form is inspired by the excellent viral letter regarding female engineers by Jared Mauldin.
- The above are all real examples shared by female colleagues or found in the excellent book There’s a Woman in the Pulpit.
Thoughts?
I’ve had most of these, except the pregnant one, wasn’t a preacher back then. My favorite is still “How can you be a mother and a pastor?”
This may make our experiences different, but sadly, it is the fact that it often KEEPS it different that saddens me. Sometimes I get to glimpse into the experiences and shaping of my male colleagues, and sometimes they can see into mine, but these are rare and unique experiences. I believe if we shared more often, glass ceilings, ‘alternate paths in ministry’, and blatant sexism would be reduced if not eliminated. Thanks for speaking to this!
I have every one of those comment said to me with added bonus, “Oh is your husband in ministry to?” I could not just be in ministry or someone could not be married to me, not in the business? Thanks Jeremy, once again for putting out there how it is. Looking forward to your piece that compares our salaries and appointments! Keep saving the church one article at a time!:)
I get that question all the time WITHOUT people knowing I am part of a clergy couple. My spouse was part time all of 2 yrs of his career and after 20 years decided to retire to be a fulltime stay-at-home dad. Then he said please tell them no if they ask about my clergy status.
Thank you, Jeremy. And I am thankful for the clergywomen who went before me. The churches where I’ve had the most difficulty have been the ones where I’ve been the first clergywoman to serve.
In the north, I had no idea what my sisters in the south experienced till I came here. The first church I served wouldn’t even let me be an Associate, or Assistant. My label was Director of Christian Ed. When I filled in for the “senior” pastor, people would walk out if I dared to step in the pulpit. Finally, I realized that to be in ministry in the south, I had to be fairly creative. I found my dream job at a state institution for the differently able. I was there till it was closed, thirteen years later. Now I’m back in pastoral ministry. It is interesting where I am now. I am an Associate to a man who was my student. The people accept me here, but they probably will always see a man in the senior pastor role.
Thanks for the “There’s a Woman in the Pulpit” shout-out, Jeremy, and for being a friend to clergywomen.
Thank you for this true and insightful article. The one thing I have experienced numerous times that you did not mention is the amount of sexual harassment by seminary professors, colleagues and supervisors and their male colleagues who ignored our complaints and truth-telling.
Yes. My husband and I overlapped our processes with his ordination taking place the year I was commissioned. I was pregnant as I went through the dCOM level and BOM for ordination and each time I was asked questions about work family balance that my husband was not. Each church I served while pregnant had never had to deal with maternity leave and I was told over and over they’ve never had to deal with it. I had a DS joke they were going to ordain me in a wading pool in case my water broke. It has not been easy. However, I’ve also watched my husband have issues when he puts family before ministry let alone take paternity leave. We as a church are not always good at being counter cultural.
Oh my, yes! Could relate to so many of these (I’ve been ordained 27 years, so I go back a long way). Here’s one I experienced this year: “Why don’t you come to the Christmas Bazaar Craft Workshop, the previous pastor’s wife always did!” Apparently I’m supposed to be The Pastor’s Wife, as well as The Pastor.
One of my predecessor’s widows was still here in my current church when I arrived. For a full year, she pestered me about putting a garden in at the parsonage because that’s what the pastor’s wife was supposed to do. And every time, I reminded her that I am the pastor, and that if there ever is a pastor’s husband, he might or might not put in a garden. Finally, on my first anniversary, she stopped asking, though she griped about the absence of a garden here until the day she died!
^^Truth. All true. As a young(er) clergywoman, I also recognize that my struggles in ministry, while still there, are not nearly as pronounced as the women who have gone before me. I have never once served a church as the first clergywoman. For THOSE women, who have made my ministry more fruitful because I didn’t have to deal with half the “stuff” that people brought to the table (particularly outright hostility), I am forever thankful.
Great post. Thank you. I’m reminded of an introductory meeting I had in a rural parish as the first woman appointed to serve in this church. My son was 6 months old and my daughter 5. My husband was just beginning law school so I was the sole provider for my family. After a good but virgorous interview, one old farmer leans back in his chair and said “now let’s renegotiate the salary, we can’t let her earn as much as the man she’s replacing.”
Thank you Jeremy for being courageous and posting this great article. And thank you for your support of clergywomen.
Thank you for the support. When I pushed for an official benevolence policy at an outreach meeting one of my older members told me not to “worry my pretty little head” about it. It is experiences like this that make me appreciate articles like yours.
Thank you for the support. One of my superintendents was once asked- “how could you let her get pregnant?” It’s been a journey of being a first woman in many roles. I was ordained before my husband, and each maternity leave was a novel experience for my male ds’. I’ve experienced some of the best and some of the worst- I am grateful I was called, grateful for the courage and encouragement, and long for the time when being effective is what we’re known for.
I liked your reply about effectiveness. My first appointment was to a church who had never had a woman pastor and said they didn’t want one. My DS asked whether they wanted an unqualified man or a qualified woman. They reluctantly chose me . After five years of ministry there I was moved. When they were told I was Leaving they said “we have one request – can we have another woman?” So it is up to clergy women to pave the way for other women by showing the churches just how effective they are.
It’s uncanny how true all of these are. I’ve never been disinvited to speak at a baccalaureate and I’ve never been rejected by a family at a funeral home. Besides those two, every single one of these has happened to me, and I’ve only been in the ministry for 6 years. I am fortunate to be young, and I have had many women go before me. To all of you, thank you.
The other big one I get is when people find out I’m a pastor they assume my husband is as well. He teaches 6th grade
Thank you for this article and putting my experiences into words.
When I completed a certificate of theology program at a nearby seminary, the graduation was held at a nearby church which could accommodate graduates, faculty, family and friends. Each year, the seminary would contact a nearby church and request permission to use their sanctuary and in the spirit of cooperation, the request was usually granted. But in 2014, a nearby church that had granted the seminary’s request withdrew the permission after the pastor learned the graduation speaker was a clergywoman. It’s reported that he said “no woman would ever speak from his pulpit.” Sad that in the 21st century, such attitudes still persist.
Great article. Did your article resonate from….
http://easterneronline.com/36007/letters-to-the-editor/letter-to-the-editor-stem/
It sure did! That’s why Jared’s letter is mentioned prominently in Note #1.
😉
Thank you, Jeremy!
Brought to mind the SPRC meeting when this old white guy said to me, “The only reason God’s letting a few women be in ministry is because the church isn’t raising up its young men right.”
16 years later, I had a different old white guy try to feed me grapes at the “meet & greet” for the new pastor (me). He was trying to put grapes into my mouth — feed them to me. I kept politely refusing until he said, “Then I’ll just have to turn you over my knee and spank you.” At that point, I looked him in the eye and with quiet, firm conviction said, “In which case, I will press charges.” He then kind of deflated & mumbled something trying to excuse his behavior and slunk away. (Note, neither of these incidents occurred in the church I currently serve).
Jeremy, I deeply appreciate your words. I’ll never forget the time I was in my robe and stole, greeting people before worship, when a man asked me if I was the secretary. I thought he was joking so I laughed a little. He was not trying to be funny. He then proceeded to shake my hand as hard as he could to make his point. That was almost ten years ago. This experience was one of many experiences of this kind, experiences that continue to this day. Thank you for your words…
Thank you so much for this. I’m 41 years old and have been serving in ministry since before I went to seminary in 1997. I have never felt the effects of discrimination against my gender until I became a senior minister a couple of years ago. My congregation is amazing in every way and never does anything to imply I’m inferior to a man. But people in the community do. It’s especially hard when a woman and her children start visiting our church, fall in love with it and want to stay, but eventually leave because the husband/father refuses to come to a church with a female pastor. Things like that have caused me to doubt myself at times, worrying that my gender it’s actually hurting my little church. A mentor of mine asked me the other day, “so, do you think God made a mistake calling you to the ministry or to your church? Was God wrong? Does God make mistakes?” That cleared things up for me. It’s time to pull up my big girl pants and focus on God’s Will, not the world’s.
Thank you for your understanding. In my 31 years in ordained ministry, I have broken ground as the first woman in 4 of my 5 appointments. It hasn’t been easy but it has been my calling. I am thankful for those who have received me with open arms and helped raise and encourage me. I am thankful (maybe less so) to those who stood against me because it has caused me to totally surrender to God and count wholly on God’s grace and for me to remain faithful to God ‘s call. I have all those things that you have mentioned and some more but, God is Good! and sent encouragers all along the way too.
I was once told to lower my (already low) voice so I could sound more masculine….by a woman. “That’s what Maggie Thatcher did,” she proceeded to say, “and it gave her a man’s authority!” I did get a good laugh out of that one.
Thank you, Jeremy! Thank you. So well written—- and true!
The reader will notice at the outset that the question of our paper is not, Is it right, or Is it expedient, or Is it reasonable, that a woman should speak in the Church? but, Is it Scriptural? It is not a question of custom, or the teaching, or the practices of the Church in general, but “What saith the Lord?” This must settle everything for the true believer, and it is for such that we write. It is a matter which concerns only those who profess to be governed by the Holy Scriptures, by which the man of God is “thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (2 Tim. 3:16). And to maintain a godly order in the Church, or assembly, is surely one of these “good works.” There is no need therefore to turn to history, or to tradition, in deciding the matter.
We proceed, then, to enquire into what God has said in His Holy Word about the woman speaking in the Church.
The first scripture we turn to is the well-known passage in 1 Cor. 14:34, 35: “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.” Here it is plainly laid down that the woman is NOT to speak in the Church, or assembly. It must be understood that “the Church” here is not a building, or edifice of any kind, but the assembly of God’s saints, His people. The expression, “in the Church,” or “Churches,” is used five times in this chapter (vers. 19, 28, 33, 34 and 35), and it always means the gathering of the Christians in assembly. The place — whether it be a special building, a hall, a private house, or even the open air — is of no importance, as it is not the place, but the persons and purpose of the gathering.
This being understood, we next inquire what the “silence” mentioned here means. Does the apostle mean silence in an absolute sense, or a “conditional silence” as some have suggested, in their efforts to justify the practice of women preaching, praying, or testifying in Christian gatherings? A glance over the chapter down to the 34th verse, makes plain that the apostle is giving instruction to the men as to the exercise of their gift. He says in verse 23, “If therefore the whole Church be come together into one place,” etc. They were to speak only one at a time; and two or three speakers was to be the limit; the others were to judge. “Ye may all prophesy one by one,” he says. They had carried their speaking to an excess, evidently, for he says in verse 26, “How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, everyone of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.” Whatever the exercises mentioned here may have been, the brethren were abusing their liberty, with too much speaking. This he proceeds to correct, down to end of verse 33. Then he turns to the sisters, and commands that they “keep silence in the Churches.” There is no attempt to regulate the manner or frequency of their taking part (as with the men); he simply commands they should be silent, saying, “It is not permitted unto them to speak.”
To say, as some have, in attempting to evade the force of this passage, that the word here means to “chatter,” gossip, or whisper during “service,” is but to betray the weakness of their position, when they must resort to such arguments to defend their opposition to what the apostle lays down in such plain terms.
The same Greek word for “speak” is used throughout this chapter. In verse 21 it is used of God thus: “With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people.” No, reader; the word does not mean chatter, or anything else than just to ‘speak;’ and the apostle says, “It is a shame for women to speak in the Church.” In view of this, how can any contend that the woman may, and should, speak in the Church, exercise her gifts and her ability — though it may be better than that of the men?*
{*Some, in an opposite direction, have questioned the propriety of women taking part in congregational singing. They misunderstand the spirit and purpose of the apostle’s teaching, which is not to restrict the heart’s joyful liberty before the Lord, but to maintain God’s order among His people. Singing is part of collective worship, in which all have equal freedom; there is no thought of teaching or leadership in it; and worship is as fully woman’s part as man’s. — [Ed.}
“Oh,” some flippantly answer: “That was Paul; he was a bachelor, and was trying to keep women down.” Is this the estimate in which you hold the Word of God? Is Scripture to you but the word of Paul, or Peter, or any other man? If so, it is no use to discuss this question further with you, for our only standard of authority is the Holy Scripture; and if the Bible is not wholly and everywhere the word of God to you, we have no authority to appeal to, and may as well, right here, dismiss the subject. But we would ask those to whom “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God,” to read verse 37: “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.” This must settle everything for the soul subject to Scripture. These are not the arbitrary orderings of a mere man, biassed in favor of his own sex, or prejudiced against women, but “the commandments of the Lord,” and therefore to be submitted to and obeyed without question.
Others tell us that this prohibition was only of local application, that it meant just the women of Corinth, who were loud and brazen, and unqualified to take part in the public exercises of the assembly. Who told them, we ask, that women in the Corinthian Church were different, less modest or decorous, than the women of other localities? Scripture does not — nor even history, if it were allowable to appeal to anything outside the Bible.
But is the application of the passage limited to the women of Corinth alone? Read the ascription in the beginning of the epistle; to whom is it addressed? “Unto the Church of God which is at Corinth . . . with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours” (1 Cor. 1:2). This is decisive — is it not? The instructions given in the epistle are not of mere local application, but are intended for, and addressed to, all professing Christians everywhere — all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord. And in the very passage under discussion the apostle does not say “your Church,” but “the Churches,” which forbids limiting the prohibition to the local Church at Corinth. “As also saith the law,” he adds, meaning, not one particular passage, but the whole tenor of the Old Testament. (See Gen. 3:16 and 1 Peter 3:5.)
The woman’s place is one of subjection and retirement, not of leadership. This disposes entirely of the contention of those who say that this was “only Paul.” He had the law as a second witness to add force to what he says by the Spirit of God. And instead of the apostle being against woman, as some unjustly charge him to be, he everywhere honors her in her proper sphere, and commands her husband to love her, even as Christ loved the Church (Eph. 5:25; Col. 3:19). In Romans 16, where he makes honorable mention of a number of believers, not a few of the names are those of women. To quote another, “The annals of ancient and modern literature may be searched in vain for anything at all comparable with the dignity and tenderness of treatment which this apostle demands for women in the marriage relation (Eph. 5) ; and no writer of ancient or modern times has done so much to elevate and bless her. Look at her where his writings are unknown or despised, and look at her when men come practically under the power of his teachings. In the one case woman lives as in a hell on earth; in the other, she is cherished and loved as Christ loved the Church, for whom He gave Himself. Yet this is the man who is denounced by decent and respectable women, prominent in the W.C.T.U. movement, as ‘a crusty old bachelor.'”
To confirm what has been said above as to 1 Cor. 14:34, as having not a local but a general application to all believers, we quote again from the late Dr. James H. Brookes: “All expositors of any value agree in connecting the text with the preceding verse; that verse reads as follows: ‘For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all the Churches of the saints.’ It is obvious that a period should be after the word peace, and that a new sentence begins with the statement, ‘As in all the Churches of the saints, let your women keep silence in the Churches.’ This view is confirmed by what the apostle says elsewhere when discussing the same subject of woman in the Church; he says, ‘If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God'” (1 Cor. 11:16).
The Corinthians, in this matter of the women speaking in the Church, seemed to take the ground of many in our own day, who say that this is something each Church or person must decide for himself. They may have thought themselves free to do as they pleased in this matter: the apostle checks this by saying, “What! came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?” (ver. 36); that is to say, Have you authority from the Lord what you shall do in this matter? The word of God has not come from you, but to you. They were therefore to submit to the commandment of the Lord by the apostle.
Before leaving this passage, it may be necessary to answer the suggestion made by some, that the prohibition applies to married women only; for how, say they, could they ask their husbands at home if they were unmarried? Can such suppose that a married woman is less qualified to speak in the Church than one not married ? The thought is simply that questionings should be at home — not in the assembly.
Some have scoffed at the idea of an intelligent woman asking a question of her dull husband at home. This is the reasoning of a worldly mind, rather than of one who honors the Lord and His Word. Another has aptly answered it by saying, “A Christian woman taking the place assigned her by the great Head of the Church, testifies of Him and for Him by a silence more effective than eloquent speech.”
Closely akin to the passage we have had before us is that in 1 Tim. 2:11-15: “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. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved (preserved) in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.” This also relates to woman’s place in the assembly, for although the epistle is not addressed to an assembly directly, it is written that Timothy might know how to conduct himself “in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15).
The woman was to learn in silence — not suffered to teach. Learning, in silence, with all subjection, was her God-given place. This place she was to take; not in resentful, sullen silence, but with glad and willing obedience to the command of the Lord, which is the only kind of obedience acceptable to Him. It is the “perfect law of liberty,” and to the subject, loyal soul, “His commandments are not grievous.”
The silence enjoined here includes even audible prayer by the women in the place of public assembly, for in verse 8 the apostle says, “I will therefore that the men pray, everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.” I have given the article to men, for so the Revised Version renders it. This instruction relates to public places evidently, not to the privacy of the closet, where the woman has fullest privilege of communion with God in prayer, supplication, and thanksgiving. In public, the apostle says to the woman, she is to be “in silence.” All this is in full accord with, and enforces what was laid down in 1 Cor. 14.
The silence enjoined upon women in the assembly does not rest on one single text of Scripture (though the humble believer should not need more), but is found in various portions of the Word. And, as it is written, “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established,” the verses before us are a second witness of what God ordered, and for which we must, therefore, “earnestly contend” (Jude 3) .
But we have here in Timothy what is not so plainly told us in Corinthians, i. e., the reason why the woman is not to teach in the assembly. Two reasons are given: one is, Adam’s priority in creation, implying headship; the other, that the woman was deceived by the tempter. It says that “Adam was not deceived” like the woman. He sinned with his eyes open. He was even more guilty than his wife, but it was she who was deceived. And having proved herself a bad leader in this respect, in God’s wise government she was debarred from the place of authority or teaching in the Church. We should not say that her place is inferior to that of the man, but different, We might say that, positionally, man is superior — not in himself; as has been aptly said: “Here (in 1 Tim. 2:14) we get the first and most powerful warning against woman taking the lead — at the very start of man’s journey across the ocean of time.” And the same writer adds: “Witness the revolt! — in that fashionable freak of religion called ‘Christian Science,’ it exalts woman, scoffs at marriage and childbearing; it declares that death is mere imagination, and need never be. Witness the revolt in the Suffragette Movement, to put woman on a political equality with man; and extremists among them scoff at the marriage contract and childbearing.” And he adds, “In the present day the great majority of spiritist mediums are women. Modern Spiritism began with women. It is an hysterical woman, Mrs. E. G. White, who by her blasphemous pretensions has been the leader, and largely the inventor of that wicked system called Seventh-day Adventism. Christian Science — which is neither Christian nor scientific — owes its origin to Mrs. Eddy — a woman of bad repute. Theosophy, as known in the Western Hemisphere, was popularized by a woman — Mrs. Besant.” And we might add to the list the present-day Tongues Movement, with its attendant fanaticism and immorality (in spite of its pretentious claims to “perfect holiness”), in which women are the most prominent and enthusiastic leaders.
This is not indeed to slight woman; for, as we have stated before, it is only positionally that man is above woman. And it is only as to this positional place, or priority, that we contend here. As another has said, “It is not a question here of woman’s ability. It is gladly admitted that compared with man, woman exhibits no inferiority of genius, culture, tact, speech, etc. And outweighing all her gifts and graces, is the demonstrated fact that her presence and power in the service of Christ are, under God, essential to the success, and even to the continuance of the Church. If she were removed from the sphere of action, probably every congregation of Christians in the land would soon become a stagnant pool. As a rule, woman is certainly the most effective force, not only in the family, “but in the Church, to maintain a consistent testimony for Christ, and to ‘strengthen the things which remain'” And this is from the pen of one who strenuously raised his voice against the woman speaking in the Church — Dr. J. H. Brookes.
The same eloquent writer says further, in favor of the woman’s devotion to Christ, and her zeal for His cause, “Christ came to save sinful women as well as men, and it is to the glory of His grace that we find among the former no recorded instance of a denial of His name, nor of apostasy from His cause. But it is a fact that of these brave and devoted women, He did not choose one as an apostle; nor did He choose one to go with the seventy, who were commissioned as public heralds to proclaim His approach to every city and place whither He Himself would come. The women who loved Him for His saving grace seemed to be more than content to follow His steps, to minister to Him of their substance, to speak His praise personally and privately; and when they could do nothing more, they offered Him the most grateful and acceptable service, the only service they could render, as they gazed upon Him on the cross through their streaming tears, and then came to anoint His precious body and to weep at His grave.”
But it is not only in the Church that the woman is to be in subjection; there are two other spheres in which she is to maintain the same attitude in reference to the man — in the home and in the world.
We turn back to 1 Corinthians 11, for this. We read there, “But I would have you to 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.” Here is given us the woman’s place in the natural sphere. Man is the head. Neither does this imply inferiority (else Christ would be essentially inferior to God, His Father — a thought impossible to those who believe in His eternal Deity); but, positionally, and as Man, the blessed Son took the place of subjection and obedience to the Father. In verses 4-7 the apostle directs that in prayer or prophesying, the woman, as a sign of her subjection to the man, is to cover her head; while the man, on the contrary, is to uncover his head. This custom of covering (observed everywhere in Christian assemblies until the more recent years of lawlessness), has been a witness for ages of the truth set before us here, of the headship of the man over the woman. “For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman, but the woman for the man,” the apostle says in vers. 8, 9. Then in vers. 10-16 he concludes the subject, giving the reasons why the woman should be covered while in the act of prayer: “For this cause ought the woman to have [the sign of] authority on her head, because of the angels,” as the R.V. renders ver. 10. The holy angels are interested in God’s family on earth. They have witnessed the fearful revolt of some of their fellows in heaven, in ages past, “who kept not their first estate.” They look now to see subjection to God’s authority and order in the circle of the redeemed. As has been beautifully expressed, “The Church, therefore, is the lesson-book which the angels especially delight to study, the brightest mirror that reflects the manifold and supernal glory of the triune God; and if the angels see the woman leaving her place of subjection and silence in the Church (woman as a type of the Church, sitting at the feet of Jesus and learning of Him), the lesson-book will be blotted, the mirror blurred, as the angels bend down to contemplate with adoring wonder.” (See 1 Peter 1:12 and Eph. 3:10.)
It is beyond our purpose to attempt to explain all that these verses teach; the one point we would press is that man is head, not only in the Church, but everywhere; and in like manner is the woman’s place in subjection. Long hair is her glory; because by it she shows her ready submission to the place given her of God in nature; and on special occasions she is to have, in addition to her hair, a covering of some kind to give emphasis to the fact. If she refuses this, the apostle, in evident irony, says, “Let her also be shorn,” i.e., be altogether like the man. Some, to their shame be it said, have of their own accord gone to this length, showing thus their utter contempt for what is written in God’s Word, and the rebellion of their own hearts against their God-assigned place since the Fall. The man, on the other hand, and for a like reason, must not have long hair like the woman; for, says the apostle, “Doth not even nature itself teach you that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?”
Leadership, therefore, whether on platform or in assemblies, the street, or any public place, is forbidden to women by God’s Word.
What then can the woman do? some will ask. Much, indeed, and in many ways. What a large scope for her energies and gifts God has provided her in service, not only in her family, of which she is the loved and honored centre, but in meetings for women, in Sunday-school work, house-to-house visitation, tract distribution, and in much where the man is so inefficient — a nothing compared with the woman — as ministry among the sick.
To quote the well-chosen words of another: “The comfort and encouragement that an active, godly, Christian woman — moved by love to Christ and to souls, and yet governed by Scripture — can render, is incalculable. We profoundly respect such. Mary anointed the Lord for His burial. Martha served the Lord right well. Dorcas made herself deeply beloved by her good deeds. Phebe was a servant of the Church and a succorer of many. Lydia entertained the apostle Paul in her house. Priscilla, subject to the headship and leadership of her husband, helped Apollos to understand the way of God more perfectly. Women labored with Paul in the gospel. Would that the descendants of these godly women were found in every city and village of the world! Happy, blessed service! There is no room for women to repine at the divine restrictions set on their service. There is more work for them to do than they can ever overtake.”
But it is in the home circle, as the wife and “happy mother of children,” that the woman finds her special sphere in which to glorify God; it is here she shines the brightest, and we may add, exerts the mightiest influence. It is a remarkable fact, as another has pointed out, that in the books of Kings and Chronicles, where the reigning monarchs exerted such important influences with the people and in God’s testimony at the time, we are told some thirty times of “his mother’s name;” the Spirit of God thus pointing out to us what was probably the most important factor in the moulding of the character of the men who ruled His people Israel. Eternity alone will fully reveal all that Timothy (of whom Paul had no man so “like-minded”) owed to the early training received from his mother Eunice, and the influence, whether direct or indirect, of his grandmother Lois (See 2 Tim. 1:5).
“There is one special field,” says another, “indicated as the field of woman’s ministry — a sphere where holy living and discreet speech have their place (See Titus 2:4, 5).”
It remains but to notice and meet a few of the objections, and scriptures referred to, by those who refuse to believe that God means just what He says in the command, “Let your women keep silence in the Churches.” One of the most common is that women can often preach and pray better than the men. This may be so, but that does not justify them in disobeying the plain Word of God, commanding them to “learn in silence.” Deceivers might often preach more fluently than the true servants of God (they often have done so), but this is no reason for putting them in the pulpit or on the platform. A fluent tongue and a clever mind does not argue a call from God to preach. And if it be urged that “female evangelists” and Salvation Army “lassies” have been much used of God in the conversion of souls, we answer, It may be all true, but it still proves nothing. It is a well-known fact that during the Great Revival in Ireland in 1859, sinners were convicted of sin and converted while listening to Roman Catholic priests saying mass. Does this prove the mass to be according to God? We have known souls to be saved under the preaching of men of whom it was afterwards learned that they were living at the time in secret sin of grave nature; and God has even used unconverted men to bring sinners to Himself. The present writer was led to a decision for Christ by one whose life since that time evidences that he himself was not a really converted man.
So much for the argument that, because God in His sovereign grace makes use of women preachers, it must be right for them to preach. It was Finney who said that we must not even save a soul from death if we cannot do it in God’s appointed way. And when the great Spurgeon was once asked if he had heard a certain woman preach, he replied that a woman might preach very cleverly, but that it was contrary to nature. Vastly more important than either of these is the word of the Lord by Samuel to the rebellious Saul: “Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams!”
The case of Philip’s daughters who prophesied is often alleged as proof that it is right for a woman to preach. But this scripture does not say, nor does it even hint, that these women exercised their gift in public* They evidently uttered their prophecies in the privacy of their father’s house (See Acts 21:8, 9).** So, too, of the “praying and prophesying” of the woman in 1 Cor. 11:15 ; it could not be in public, for this was forbidden them — “and the Scripture cannot be broken.”
{*Prophesying, as generally spoken of in the New Testament, is not exactly what we call a “gift,” but rather what one, in true communion with God, speaks for “edification, and exhortation, and comfort” to the hearers. See 1 Cor. 13:9; 14:3, 4. — [Ed.
**We have an indirect confirmation of this in that the subject of Philip’s daughters’ prophesying is not mentioned, whilst Agabus’ prophecy concerning Paul’s bonds and imprisonment was publicly declared.}
Mary Magdalene and the woman of Samaria have been frequently referred to as having preached before men; but Scripture does not say so. The former was sent by the risen Lord with a message to His disciples (John 20:17). She was not sent to preach or to teach them, but just to carry the Lord’s glad message — a privilege of which any Christian woman might be the happy instrument. Likewise with the woman of Samaria; she too was the glad messenger of good news, that she had found Messias at the well! “The woman then left her waterpot,” the record reads, “and went her way into the city, and saith to the men, Come, see a Man that told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?” She told to all whom she met of the new-found joy of her heart, which it is the precious privilege of all to do. This, too, is all that can be said of the passage in Acts 2:17, 18. The daughters of Israel, Jehovah’s “handmaidens,” should prophesy, but where? Not in public preaching, certainly, for even “the law” forbade them that.
But is there no other place than a public congregation to utter the praises, the mercies, and the wondrous works of God? The aged Anna was a “prophetess” we are told in Luke 2:36; her prophesying was in serving God, with prayer and fasting, giving thanks and speaking to all that looked for redemption, of the infant Saviour whom her own eyes had beheld in the temple. Elizabeth, “filled with the Holy Ghost,” prophesied with loud voice as to Mary, who had come to visit her in her retirement. Mary herself then breaks out in excellent praise to God her Saviour. Hannah, in the Old Testament, gives out, under the Spirit’s power upon her, a prophetic song of praise to Jehovah, whose glorious power and grace she celebrates in true prophetic style.
Referring, no doubt, to Miriam at the Red Sea, Psalm 68:11 says, “The Lord giveth the word,” the women that publish the tidings are a great host” (R.V.), which may also apply to any similar time when, moved by great deliverances, the women unite in praises to God their Defender. But all this is not preaching, or taking leadership over men at all, as the verse following clearly shows: “Kings of armies flee, they flee; and she that tarrieth at home divideth the spoil.” All this is not in the Church, nor of the Christian dispensation, but applies prophetically to Israel in the last days, and the destruction of their enemies. It is celebrations of earthly victories by the women with song, timbrel and dance, as was customary in Old Testament times.
The case of Deborah is often adduced to justify women taking the lead in prayer and gospel meetings; but there is no comparison between the perfectly proper conduct of an Old Testament woman encouraging a more timid man to go forth to fight an earthly foe, and the practice of Christian women praying and preaching publicly when expressly forbidden to do so by God’s Word. And it is not, as many suppose, that Deborah led the armies of Israel, and Barak simply acted as her lieutenant, but the reverse — even if Deborah acted in any commanding capacity at all: “And Deborah arose and went with Barak to Kedesh,” the narrative reads (Judges 4:9). She did not lead, but accompanied him.
It is a fitting place to quote here the words of another concerning the place of woman in Scripture: “Her place is emphatically not one of public testimony. There are sixty-six books in the Bible; and all their authors, who were distinctly chosen of God, were men. Not one was a woman. There were twelve apostles; they were all men. There were seventy sent out by the Lord, in addition to the twelve. We are not told that there was one women among them. In Acts 6 there were ‘seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom,’ chosen to serve tables; not one was a woman. There were many witnesses cited in 1 Cor. 15 to prove the resurrection of the Lord. Individual men are mentioned as witnesses, but there is no mention of a single woman. This is strikingly significant, as Mary is the first individual to see Christ risen, and was entrusted by Him with a wonderful message to the disciples. Her exclusion from the list of witnesses is the strongest possible proof that Scripture does not give to woman a place of public testimony. There were bishops appointed in the early Church; they were all men. Deacons and elders are described in 1 Timothy and in Titus; but they were all men. There are two witnesses in Rev. 11; they are prophets — not prophetesses, nor a prophet and a prophetess, but men.”
We will refer to but one more scripture, advanced by supporters of woman’s public ministry: it is Galatians 3:28. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” Let us note that it is not what we are in the flesh (in the body) that the passage speaks of, but of what we are “in Christ Jesus” — the risen One. It is of our standing in grace before God that the apostle speaks in this scripture. “In Christ” there is no sex, or its attending relationships, husband and wife, father, mother, and children. But those “in Christ” now are still in the body, with the relationships to which the commands, of which we have been speaking, attach. While we are here in the body these earthly relations exist, and God’s appointments and order are to be displayed in them. It would be a terrible thing indeed if being “in Christ” through divine grace, our responsibilities in nature were abrogated. To use Gal. 3:28 to support public ministry for women comes of strange and gross misunderstanding indeed!
Christian women, your place in relation to the man is so plainly laid down in God’s Word that you need have, and shall have, no doubt whatever as to the line of action that is yours to follow, if there is but the spirit of obedience to the Lord. And having no ground for doubt, you have no excuse for disobeying. The responsibility rests upon you to subject yourselves, not to the word of men, but to “the command of the Lord.” It is both your happiness and your honor to obey what is written. The world’s ways, and pride, and plaudits will not do in “that day” when the fire of God’s holiness “shall try every man’s work of what sort it is” (1 Cor. 3:13). “And if also a man contend in the games, he is not crowned unless he have contended lawfully” (2 Tim. 2:5, R.V.).
Service has no value in God’s eyes unless it be rendered with a willing and subject heart, and in conformity to the regulations laid down in His unchanging Word. May we all, both men and women, in the Church and in the home, and in our necessary intercourse with the world without, do only those things which please Him who “hath loved us, and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savor” (Eph. 5:2). We are sanctified, not only by the blood, but by the Spirit, “unto the obedience of Jesus Christ,” (1 Peter 1:2) — to obey as He obeyed. “It is written,” was ever uppermost in all His blessed pathway here of subjection and obedience to His Father. May this mind be in us which was also in Christ Jesus!
We cannot conclude our subject without quoting once more from the valuable pamphlet of the late Dr. James H. Brookes: “Women in the Church.” “The names of women are mentioned all through the sacred pages very much as the names of men; some of them standing forth as bright examples of faith and lofty devotedness, and illustrious usefulness in the service of God, and some of them exhibiting all the weaknesses and meannesses of our depraved nature. Deborah the prophetess was raised up, when the courage of man had utterly failed, to break the yoke of foreign oppression from the neck of prostrate Israel (Judges 4). In contrast, it was the prophetess Noadiah who sought by wicked machinations to defeat Nehemiah in his labor to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Neh. 6). Huldah, the prophetess, bore true testimony for Jehovah (2 Kings 22); but Miriam, the prophetess, although her song of triumph had rung out on the shores of the Red Sea, was smitten with the curse of leprosy for her insubordination, and for her complaint against her brother, Moses (Num. 12). Eve tempted Adam, who was base enough to lay the blame of his own sin upon his wife, and indirectly, upon God who took her from his side. Sarah led Abraham to do a grievous wrong, and then cruelly cast forth the hapless Hagar from her house. Rebekah connived with Jacob to cheat her firstborn out of his birthright blessing; but Jacob was made to know the value of a faithful woman in the loss of the gentle Rachel, whose sad death ended his earthly hopes and aspirations, terminating all that made life worth living, for on his dying bed he summed up his later years in the pathetic words, ‘As for me, Rachel died by me in the land of Canaan.’ The Sareptan widow was taught that the word of the Lord is truth only by the bitter lesson of deep personal affliction; but the Shunammite mother could say in unfaltering faith and unclouded peace, even over the dead body of her child, ‘It is well!’ The beautiful Abigail was a woman of good understanding, and she turned aside the wrath of David from his purposed folly; but the beautiful Bathsheba was the victim of his lust; and the brilliant reign of his son Solomon was marred, and Solomon himself ruined, by those whom the Holy Spirit describes as ‘outlandish women’ (Neh. 13:26).”
It is a notable fact that in the religious bodies or associations where women’s public speaking and leadership are sanctioned, as with “the Friends” and Salvation Army — expediency or the human will largely supplants the Word of God. In both of these, Christian baptism and the Lord’s Supper are wilfully disregarded; and wilful disobedience in one thing leads to many others.
Little more need be said on woman’s place according to Scripture. We have attempted to make our examination as exhaustive as possible in a pamphlet of suitable size for general circulation, though more might be said if that were necessary. In her place, woman is most beautiful and admirable — in devotedness especially. Out of her place, she may become the most effective tool of Satan for the ruin of men. It was “that woman Jezebel” that was suffered in the Church at Thyatira, to teach and to seduce Christ’s servants, introducing into the circle of God’s saints doctrines and corrupting influences of the worst type, seen in their full fruition in the Church of Rome to-day. And in a later day women have had prominent part in systems of error, far removed from Rome externally, but in some respects quite as insubject to Scripture and as wicked as the one designated as “the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth.”
In contrast, and as a beautiful example to the godly, is the aged Anna, of whom Scripture gives this worthy account: “She was the daughter of Phanuel (i.e. Penuel, the face of God), of the tribe of Aser (happy) . . . and departed not from the temple, but served God with fasting and prayers night and day.” She joined the venerable Simeon in his thanksgiving to God for His gift of the infant Christ, “and spake of Him to all that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.” As has been remarked, she gave her testimony, not in the congregation of the Lord, but in the temple. She had indeed seen “the face of God,” and was in consequence “happy,” not in public ministry, but personal testimony to the Lord, her Saviour.
Go and do likewise, Christian woman, and you too shall be “happy” — happy in the smile of God’s approval now, and by and by, at the “judgment seat of Christ,” with the word of His approval, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant; enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.” Amen!
Jeremy, thank you for your words of love, support and encouragement. As so many have already commented, I, too, have experienced the examples you cite and then some…
Susan, you have quoted the traditional passages which have been used to prohibit the full and equal participation of women in ministry. May I remind you that it was the women at the empty tomb who were given the task of announcing the news that Jesus was alive? No small role…
Dear Susan,
I was raised with the theology that you have posted here. It was extremely painful to be raised in that context but to be called by God to ordained Pastoral Leadership. –I had to leave the denomination of my birth and to seek a new spiritual home. Despite this journey, God is faithful and has used me to help others bear much good spiritual fruit in the leadership of my Presbyterian Church (USA) congregation. You too seem to have a heart for ministry. I invite you to seriously engage the Biblical scholarship that allows all people to use their God given gifts regardless of their gender and to allow yourself to dare ask if God is calling you to ordained pastoral ministry as well.
Here is a very helpful organization: http://www.cbeinternational.org/
Here is my quick summary of 12 Scriptural examples of women in leadership:
http://thoughtfulboldness.com/women-in-ministry-2/women-in-ministry/
Here is my article on the passage in Timothy:
http://thoughtfulboldness.com/women-in-ministry-2/i-suffer-not-a-woman-to-teach/
And here is a piece I wrote for a wedding I officiated about equality in marriage:
http://thoughtfulboldness.com/women-in-ministry-2/wives-be-subject-to-your-husband/
May God bless you in your ministry, now and in the future.
Pastor Karen
Karen, great links. Thank you. I would also invite folk to follow and emphasize the matriarchal threads that emerge along side the patriarchal stories, in both Hebrew and Christian scriptures, usually emphasized to the exclusion of women’s stories. It seems to me that it is truly a miracle of God’s leading that these stories survived throughout the male dominated centuries, waiting for a “fullness of time,” for those with ears to hear, eyes to see, voices to speak God’s word in our time.
At age 69, I feel both joy and sadness. Joy because of the continued movement, not only of women but of all people, who see, hear, and speak about the new spirit God is pouring out. Sad because so many are denied the affirmation of their communities of faith. All are differently gifted, and no gift of the spirit “too deep for words,” should be be scorned, denied, or excluded. I pray that all who have received the sacred breath of life will be received into loving faith communities.
And thanks to Jeremy, and those who posted.
Marcia
At the very least give credit where credit is due: C. Knapp, “Is it Scriptural for a Woman to Speak in the Church?” (1934), URL: http://www.stempublishing.com/authors/knapp/Woman_speak_church.html .
Most of these experiences have been true to me. I have been apologized to by members of the congregation for not liking me at first simply because I was a female clergy. I know people have left the congregation because of this, but I also know there are people I could speak to about the gospel in ways no one else can. Peace to all of you,
Thanks Jeremy. I have always wondered why people are so quick to down women in the pulpit when Jesus allowed women to be among the disciples, sitting at his feet when he taught which is the place of a disciple. And then when the most important message, that of his resurrection, needed to be delivered he sent Mary of Magdela with the news, if women are to be “silent.” Ladies keep preaching, and leading as senior pastors. God be with you all!
After three decades of pastoral ministry, this still brings tears to my eyes. Thank you for acknowledging years of over-functioning because we can’t just be average. But, as I read some of the comments, I wonder how much progress we’ve made. Sigh.
Thanks, Jeremy! I’ve had some fantastic colleagues, but have also experienced some of these slights and inappropriate comments. So grateful for those who hold that all have the vocation to share God’s love, and we do it better together than alone. (Solo pastor, rural congregation, first woman ever there, ELCA, ordained 17 years ago, 5th call Bi-vocational; also teach in an early childhood family education program.)
Thank you Jeremy,
I’m serving my 9th congregation and this is the 4th time serving as the first woman pastor and I thrice served as the first woman senior pastor. I delighted in the opportunity to serve as senior pastor and have a woman pastor in the associate position! I’ve experienced all that you mention and then some – especially once I became a single parent by choice (via adoption).
Thank you for your understanding and willingness to recognize the difference in our experiences. Although my experience includes some hate-filled and harrassing experiences, I deeply appreciate the fact that I have had wonderful and truly supportive man pastor colleagues consistently in my ministry. I also walk and serve side-by-side with many absolutely amazing woman pastor colleagues!
Serving a denomination (The United Church of Christ) that was the first to ordain a woman (1853) …our churches set their own salary packages. I serve in Virginia. Several years ago, the call committee had no problem that I was a woman, but told me “they had never paid a pastor that much”…$25,000 total package (salary, housing, travel, social security, and professional) for a part-time parish with full-time expectations…I had seen the budget, savings and other finance information before the meeting. They were financially in very good shape. The committee was made up entirely of women. My response, “When I was in seminary, I was NOT told that my tuition and/or books would cost less than the male pastors because I was female and/or would likely be serving small churches or as an associate. I then asked them to think about their own daughters and granddaughters…was this the model they wanted to present for them?” They voted the package without comment. We had a great relationship and the pastor who followed me is also female. It is important that we advocate for ourselves and those who follow us.
I used to work at a church as an administrative assistant. I cannot tell you how much mail came addressed to “The Pastor’s Wife”. Our minister was a woman, and I hated giving her that mail. One day she said, “Write back to them and tell them that the minister is female and currently identifies as heterosexual, but should either of those things change, she’ll let you know.”
At age 69 I just retired. Yes, the journey as an ordained female has had many trials, so similar to those named. In addition, during my ministry I also became a DIVORCED Single Parent, which added another layer of difficulty. As I reflect now I can see more clearly The Way I was privileged to travel.
I think it would be wonderful if our individual stories could become part of some kind of permanent record.
I largely appreciate the above statements and article. I am an ordained PCUSA minister and full time chaplain. Although my ordination process had many of the shared experiences listed above (although less than those who paved the way before me). I must also say that as a hospital chaplain I can enter into circumstances and provided support to people in our hospital that an older male chaplain may have difficulty possibly risking making the patient to feel uncomfortable or unsafe (trauma victims, male and female victims of military sexual trauma, young women undergoing miscarriage or fetal demise and victims of trafficking etc). I continue to have to respond to statement largely because I am 28 and a female chaplain but at the same time I know that being part of this demographic gives me permission to entered into circumstances and provided spiritual support to those who previously may not have been seen.
It is sad that those questions are still asked i am a retired accountant and i remember what women had to go through to get a job were we on birth control, how many times did we go to the washroom, we coukd not wear slcks even the women working in the warehouse unpacking incoming inventory, now some of these questions were also asked of men. When i told them in 1966 that i was pregnant it was not how long will you work but your last day is Friday. We were not to be allowed to be around men when pregnant because it showed exactly what i had been up to even though i was married. It really disturbs me that churches are still not wanting women in the pulpit.
Has anyone actually run the data to see if women clergy are equal to men? Growth, professions of faith and so on are measures of effectivity. How do men and women compare?
Probably hasn’t been done. But with both societal and ecclesial pressure against them, I doubt the standards of effectiveness (which were developed by men) would yield success for women overall. Look at how few women are church-planters, for instance.
Or the standards of effectiveness are gender neutral and women clergy are not the equal of men. Perhaps that is why there is no such study. We would not accept the results.
While I am not a minister, so many of these same experiences strike a chord for women who have served on church committees. Still today I find some of my strongest women friends (and men for that matter) easing away from me when I ask a question “better left to the guys,” particularly in the area of real estate and salary parity. I don’t really blame them because I didn’t really do anything to make myself “braver.” Just how I came out of the womb, and I thank God — most days. But I would just ask that any pastor or committee chairperson, or any UMC member at all to consider whether you might be more of a champion for all voices, who simply have questions or suggestions. And to be aware of the many ways women remain unheard, not only because of who we are but sometimes simply because we are unwilling to shout over another’s voice.
When I was at my first appointment (rural, two-point charge) and was preparing for my first funeral EVER as a pastor, the family asked another (fundamentalist Baptist) pastor (male, of course), and when I called to formally invite him, he made it clear that he was not interested in being collegial. He called the day of the funeral to tell my husband that he couldn’t participate after all because he’d been stung by bees. I think he rolled in the honey and hollered, “Come on, y’all, deliver me from this uppity Methodist woman who thinks she’s a preacher!”
I love this. I am an agnostic, but you nailed my style and my intent with the original letter. Which so many people missed.
I wanted to show men that they could acknowledge the privilege they have without being self deprecating. Just because something is easier, doesn’t meant it’s easy.
You read the letter, applied it to your world and then wrote this. I could not have asked for a more personal reply. Thank you.