Women in the Missional Church
Introduction
This paper will seek to explore whether the controversy of women in leadership that divides congregations, denominations and can serve to splinter Christendom is a relevant question in the emerging or missional Church. With the increasing emphasis on team-based leadership and the gifting of the Holy Spirit (of both men and women), this controversy may no longer be a relevant one. The first section of this paper will look at what the Bible says about the status and role of women in the Church, both from the Old and New Testaments. Secondly, the leadership style that the missional Church advocates and the role of women in it will be explored. Finally, these two sections will be brought together into a kind of dialogue to see if this issue is even a question in the missional Church.
The thesis of this paper is that the Bible, our experience, the work of the Holy Spirit and the living Christ strongly affirms the full equality of women in Church leadership. Leadership in the Missional Church is moving away from hierarchies and power structures that traditionally have oppressed women towards team based leadership. In light of this, as well as with increasing support among scholars for equality, the question of women in leadership may no longer be a relevant one.
Woman in Ministry-Introduction
Throughout the history of the Church there have been ebbs and flows on a number of controversial issues. This is often in response to, or as a result of the degree of revival or lack thereof. The opposite of the Church in a state of revival is an "institutional Church" in the worst sense of the phrase in which traditions which perhaps have no value in our day are held onto. The stance of certitude could characterize this type of Church well. This section will explore the question of Biblical interpretation and then more specifically the Old and New Testament views on women in leadership and also the status of women in general society.
It's All a Matter of Interpretation
The Bible, throughout history due to incorrect or downright bizarre interpretation has been used to support a number of things that in hindsight are clearly wrong. Some examples are the Crusades, apartheid in South Africa, Hitler and the Holocaust and slavery in the United States. Today the Bible is often used to support homosexual leaders in the Church, despite no positive antecedents for the practice. Every time the Bible is used to "support" something, it is a matter of interpretation and hermeneutical application as we decide what the text says to us today. This should be obvious enough with a quick perusal of a theological library and the multitude of books that claim Biblical support for very different sides of many issues. Church history shows us the same thing, in that new denominations are formed based on different interpretations of the same text. The issue of women in leadership is no different in that the multitude of views on the topic should be a signal to us that the Bible is ambiguous in this area and that perhaps something more than the Bible is needed to give us direction.
The Art of Theological Reflection
Killen and DeBeer define certitude as tolerating only what fits into our pre-determined categories. In this stance, we presume to know how God works. This is often a consequence of simplistic Biblical application that denies our experience. The opposite of this is self-assurance which trusts only experience and ignores the fact that tradition can often offer many ways to perceive this experience. A better stance is one of exploration that seeks to integrate experience, with religious heritage (including the Bible) with the hope that new truth and meaning for living will result. The implication of this which may be disturbing to some is that there is no single appropriate Christian answer to all situations in all times and places. This paper will seek to integrate religious heritage (including Church history and the Bible) in dialogue with experience and discerning the times that we find ourselves in today for a method of Biblical interpretation.
The Shape of Practical Theology
Also relevant to this discussion of Biblical interpretation is Ray Anderson's book in which he begins by cautioning us of the danger of using the work of God against the word of God in our lives. We worship the resurrected Christ and it is Jesus who serves as a hermeneutical criterion as we interpret Scripture. It is to the resurrected Jesus that we submit our experience as well at the text. This is because it is in light of the living Jesus that all our interpretation and actions will be judged. In essence, Anderson's "work" and "Word" of God is the same as Killen and DeBeer's experience and religious heritage. Mickelson notes that Biblical interpretation often has as much to do with the emotions and experiences of the people as with the exegesis of the passage. Although considerable time will be spent exploring the relevant texts from the Bible in this paper, keep in mind that these findings must be held in tension with our own experience, the experiences of those throughout history, as well as the work of the living God in our lives and communities.
On Being the Church
Ray Anderson offers a helpful quote by Colin Gunton that stresses the importance of the continuation and sustaining of the Church by the Spirit in the present versus a focus on the past institution of the Church by Christ. If this happens, "fewer self justifying" and harmful linkages with the past will be retained, leaving the focus on the Spirit for the constitution of the Church. This has the potential to move away from the very specific passages written by a Paul to a very specific audience to a more balanced approach. If the Spirit is at work in our Churches today, calling women and men into ministry, then it is to deny Christ if we deny women a place in leadership because Jesus sends the Holy Spirit to enable the Church on Earth to continue His work and mission.
A New Kind of Christian
Also helpful to this discussion of Biblical interpretation is Brian McLaren's book, A New Kind of Christian which is written from a missional Church perspective. McLaren exhorts his reader not to put confidence in an institution, certain ideas or an interpretation of faith but instead to put confidence in God. We need to return again and again to the Bible but not with the standard interpretations that leave no room for new understandings. Church tradition is often very different from the real events of the Gospels.
Although the real authority is God and not the Bible, which is open to misinterpretation, in our modern world the Bible is often treated like an encyclopedia or rule book where sides are picked on any issue within the Church and defended. McLaren makes the point that perhaps this is pointless and that the Church is called to transcend this. We are to approach the Bible not like scholars but as seekers who are trying to learn how to live. We are not to pose questions of the text but to let it pose questions of us. An authoritative Biblical view of an issue as controversial as women in leadership cannot be found. So although this may be the case, it is still relevant to our discussion and would be doing injustice to the topic to not examine the key Old and New Testament passages. However, it must be kept in mind that the Bible cannot give us a final, authoritative answer but must be held in tension with the authority of God, experience and the fullness of our religious heritage.
The Old Testament View of Women
Any discussion of what it means to be human best begins with the creation accounts found in Genesis one and two. The question that arises is whether the woman, because she is created second and from the man is inferior? Also related to this is whether the fall in the garden is solely Eve's fault or whether Adam and Eve have equal roles to play. The answers to these questions will have significant implications for our discussion today of the role of women in the Church because they are at the very heart of what is means to be human.
Creation
Genesis 1:26-28 shows us that man and woman are both created in God's image. Both are given dominion over the Earth and both are commissioned to fill the Earth and subdue it. It is almost absurd to suggest that men more completely reflect the divine image because in Genesis one this is definitely not the natural reading of the text. Subduing and having dominion clearly implies leadership, of which Eve is a part of. There is no suggestion that man is more like God than the woman. The creation account in Genesis two, while containing some different details also does not imply any inferiority on the part of the woman. There is some suggestion based on Genesis two that because Adam is created first, he is superior. However, this leads us to the question of whether creation is superior to humanity simply because it is created first.
In Genesis 2:18, the woman is described as a "helper" to the man. This has been used by advocates of the traditional male headship view to support the idea that women are only able to assist men in ministry and can not have any authority or responsibility. However, helper does not imply inferiority. Instead, the more natural reading is a relationship that is mutual and complementary. Eve is an equal partner with Adam in fulfilling the creation mandate that is assigned to them without distinction. Of the twenty times the verb is used in the Old Testament, it is never used to imply inferiority and actually refers to God as helper seventeen of those times.
The Fall
While it is true that in the Garden of Eden, Eve is the first to eat the forbidden fruit, this is not the point of the story. The author is making the point that both Adam and Eve are autonomous and that both choose to eat. While the Serpent does approach Eve first it appears that Adam is with her the whole time. Once they are confronted by God, Eve tries to blame the Serpent and Adam tries to blame Eve. Neither excuse is satisfactory and both are held accountable by God for their sin in a direct, independent way. If God does not allow Adam's excuse as valid, then why should we still blame the women for the fall today?
As a result of the Fall, God curses the serpent, Adam and Eve. Part of the curse of the women is that her husband will rule over her. Grenz makes the suggestion that in hostile environments, males generally dominate whereas in more favorable environments, there is more equality. The cursed ground which results in a life of toil is clearly unfavorable and perhaps why Adam will rule over Eve.
Yesterday's picture of a cursed ground and pain in childbirth is very different from today with agricultural advances that increase productivity and obstetrics that reduces pain in childbirth. The culture in which we find ourselves with regard to equality among the sexes is very different as well. Hebrew culture is strongly patriarchal, which is perhaps in part reflected in the curse of a man to rule over his wife. Today, at least in North America, women are generally considered to be equal in almost all spheres of life except the Church. If we are willing to accept reduced pain in childbirth and reduced toil while farming as part of human progress and God's plan, then why are we so slow in accepting greater equality among men and women as well?
In summary, the most important thing to remember that is relevant to our discussion of women in the Church with regard to creation and the fall is that any form of gender hierarchy is a result of the fall. It is not God's original intent for His creation. Male rule is a prescription because of sin but with the coming of Jesus, He becomes the curse for us (Gal. 3:13). Jesus brings freedom from the type of judgments found in Genesis three. In Christ there is freedom and women are able to move beyond the effects of the curse. The lust for power is what the first sin in the Garden is really all about and it is in sin that the Church is still living in with regard to women being denied positions of leadership and authority.
Baptism and Circumcision
In the Old Testament era, circumcision serves as a sign of the covenant between God and Israel. It is a clear marker of hierarchy (Jew vs. Gentile, male vs. female). However, this sign of the covenant is replaced by baptism in the New Testament, of which both male and female can participate freely in. In Galatians (3:28 more specifically) Paul affirms that all distinctions which are used to establish social hierarchies along the lines of gender, nationality, and social status are now gone because of the freedom and equality that is found in Christ. In baptism, we are united with Christ in His death for a life of service to the world. Since we are all called to general ministry, then why is at least half of Christendom excluded from representative ministry solely on the basis of gender?
Priesthood
In the Old Testament only men are priests. The reasons for this are a bit unclear but it is clear that females are not the only ones excluded from this special service. Only middle-aged, Jewish Levites who are not handicapped and who married the right type of person are qualified. Gender is not the only or perhaps even most important criteria. This leaves the question of whether there is still some form of hierarchy or special access to God by a certain group of people in the New Testament era. Perhaps it is in the form of ordination or is the concept of universal priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2) now more valid? Based on Hebrews 7:11-10:25, the office of the priest ceases when Jesus becomes the perfect sacrifice once for all. It is because of this that we now all have direct access to God. In the same way that baptism signifies that all are called to general ministry, all believers, male and female included are called to serve as ministers, or priests of God. If, in ordination some are called to a more specific ministry, it should be reflective of the general call to priesthood and therefore be comprised of both male and female.
Examples from the Old Testament of Women in Leadership
Ray Anderson in The Shape of Practical Theology makes the case that ordination of women and ordination of practicing homosexuals are inherently different thing. The reason for this is that there are Biblical antecedents, or examples from both the Old and New Testaments of women in leadership. Although it is not generally the norm, that is not the most important consideration. Even Paul, who at times appears to restrict women to certain roles affirms Phoebe as a deacon and Junia as an Apostle. For those who advocate strongly against women in leadership in the Church there remains the unanswered question of what to do with these clear examples of women leaders both from the Old and New Testament times. Homosexuality, on the other hand is different because the Bible offers no positive examples of this practice.
Some examples of women in leadership from the Old Testament include Miriam (Ex. 15:20) who is the first person recorded to lead congregational worship. Deborah (Judges 4:1), along with Samuel are the only two people who are both judges and prophets, which are both positions of considerable spiritual authority. Huldah is a prophetess who is faithful to God during some of the darkest days of Israel when most others fall away (2 Kgs 22:54). Esther is called to act with boldness in a strategic position to further the purposes of God's Kingdom.
Summary of the Old Testament Evidence
The Old Testament in general and more specifically the creation and fall accounts, the Levitical Priesthood as well as covenantal circumcision are used to support the idea that women should not hold positions of authority or leadership within the Church. However, the creation and fall accounts show Adam and Eve having mutual authority over creation and mutual responsibility for the sin in the Garden. The exclusive priesthood and circumcision found in the Old Testament are transformed into the priesthood of all believers and baptism with Jesus. Although there are not many examples of women in leadership in the Old Testament, there are some, which we must take seriously.
The New Testament View of Women
The Gospels
In the whole debate about whether women should hold positions of leadership in the Church, the Gospels and Acts are often ignored to the detriment of the discussion. The passage from Matthew 20:25-27 about the greatest being the servant of all is often forgotten in the power culture than many Churches in North America operate out of. The Gospels tell us the story of Jesus, each in their own unique way. It is the story of Jesus that is perhaps most revolutionary in the area of gender relations in the Church in that He treated women in a way that is very contrary to what is expected of a first century Jewish man. Jesus viewed women as persons and included many of them among his followers.
John four records the story of Jesus meeting the Samaritan women at the well. In essence, she becomes the first evangelist in the Gospels. In the story of Mary and Martha in Luke 10:38-42, Mary takes the same place as a disciple would, at the feet of her master. This is in sharp contrast to Martha who was acting out of the traditional cultural norms of her day. Yet, Jesus does not relegate Mary to this role as well but allows her to remain with Him and become His disciple. John 5:1-11 describes the women caught in adultery and her accusers. Jesus, rather than condemning her as the Jewish leaders do, offers unconditional love. At the time of Jesus' death, the male followers flee, leaving only the women. In John 20:17 we see Mary being commissioned by Jesus to go and speak as a witness for Him as the first one to meet the resurrected Chist. In the life, death and post-resurrection life of Jesus, we see Him clearly affirming the status of women in society and the religious world.
Jesus-the Egalitarian
Thomas Oden says the Christ event is the same yesterday, today and forever but that because history moves along and times change, new meanings are added to it. In the Jewish culture at the time of Jesus, women had very few rights or privileges afforded to them. Jesus, in the culture that he is incarnate, plants seeds of egalitarianism in that His inclusion of women in almost all aspects of His ministry is probably quite shocking. Today, the ideas of equality, dignity and human rights for all are emphasized. Because of this, it is sometimes easy to forget just how shocking Jesus' words and actions really are to a first century audience. In light of this revolutionary stance of Jesus, the full realization of Jesus' deeper intention can be understood even further. Based on Scripture, reason and tradition, with the seeds that Jesus plants, Oden advocates for full equality of women in ministry. There is irony in that even though Jesus and His Kingdom do not reflect the patterns of this world, Conservative Christians seek to maintain the status quo in their denial of a place for women in the Church.
Pentecost
Acts 2 records the coming of the Holy Spirit. The text indicates that men and women are both equally endowed with the Holy Spirit in order that they might have power to witness to the resurrection. Grenz argues that this is the foundational quality for ministry in the New Testament Church. The prophesy quoted by Peter in Acts 2 (Joel 2:28-32) says that the Spirit will be poured out on all and that men and women would prophesy. We see further examples of women prophesying in the early Church with Philip's daughters in Acts 21:9. 1 Corinthians 14:31 says that all will prophesy and no indication is given by the context or surrounding verses that this only refers to men.
The Pauline Passages
The Gospels, Acts and the Old Testament all play an important role in a correct understanding of the gender debate in the Church. However, the importance of these passages pales in comparison with the emphasis placed upon the Pauline Corpus. According to interpretation, Paul is either enlisted to support full equality for women or he effectively relegates women to secondary status in the nursery with the children in the Church. This can sometimes even have the air of the bizarre, in that a women is able to "speak" a word but not give a sermon or can lead worship but must turn her back to the congregation because facing them implies some sort of authority over them.
This next section will explore some Pauline passages in more depth to gain a better understanding of the context in which they are written as well as to find meaning in them for us today. For truly we live in a different world than when Paul lived and the Spirit has been at work for 2000 years in our midst since Pentecost. So to take these passages and apply them very literally is to disregard our own experience and the hermeneutic of the living, risen Christ. As Robert Clouse puts it so well, "The New Testament does not present a clear pattern which can be applied at all times and in all places for structuring the Christian community…"
1 Timothy 2
In the extreme, 1 Timothy is often used to support the thesis that all women, in all places and times are not to have any part in teaching or speaking in a Church and in some cases, in all spheres of society (including the home where the man has authority over his wife and the business world where the women cannot work outside the home). At the very least, 1 Timothy 2 gives no indication that women are not to speak God's praise in worship, offer a testimony, read Scripture, pray out loud, request a hymn or lead singing even if this passage is taken quite literally to mean that women are not to teach men. 1 Timothy 2:12 in particular has often been used to form comprehensive doctrines of Church leadership. The problem with this is that the verse contains a verb (authentein) that occurs only once in the New Testament and scholars are unsure what it actually means in context.
Upon a closer look at the background of 1 Timothy, the meaning of this verse becomes more and more uncertain. The pastoral Epistles are occasional in nature, meaning they are written in response to a certain situation in a certain place. Taking verses from them and applying them to the Church structures of our day without exegeting well can be dangerous. In a concise summary of the Kroeger's Book I Suffer Not a Woman, Grady examines the city of Ephesus at the time the letter is written by Paul and it appears that women priests from the Cult of Dianna are infiltrating the Church, spreading false teaching and disrupting worship. The issue is perhaps not so much about the gender of the false teachers but more about people not trained to teach who are spreading disruptive doctrine. The words about silence and submission are likely a call to be teachable for those who are not yet trained in Scripture.
Grenz looks more closely at the original Greek in the formation of his argument. There is really only one command found in 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and this is found in verse eleven that a women is to learn. This in itself is a radical idea, with respect to the culture of the first century. The verses that follow describe how this learning is to occur. In the first century, silence is an indication of respect and would therefore have been appropriate for a learning situation. Submission implies receptivity. It is unsure whether or not Paul intends this demeanor to be directed towards Christ or to submit to orthodox teaching.
In Verse twelve, women are prohibited from teaching. This verb is in the present active indicative form, in which the true meaning is more likely to be, "I am not presently allowing." This is not a permanent prohibition because if it is, the imperative form of the verb would be used. The obvious question as to why there is a temporary ban is unclear. Perhaps it is because of cultural considerations where it is offensive for women to teach in the first century. Maybe it is because of the low level of education for women or maybe it only applies to Ephesian women.
1 Timothy 2:13-15 is debated widely in scholarly circles and there is almost as many interpretations as there are scholars! Because of this, these verses may not be very helpful in our discussion of the topic at hand. However, Grenz notes that the complementarian case for excluding women from ministry based on these verses is fragile at best.
In a good summary of 1 Timothy 11-15, Grenz notes that Paul's prohibition of women teachers who have authority is merely a short-term accommodation. Furthermore, in the long-term these women must be properly taught so that they would no longer be at the beginning stages of the faith. In 1984, J.I. Packer is quoted as saying that although the exegetical concerns of this passage are not resolved, the burden of proof now lies with those who would exclude women from teaching and ruling a congregation rather than those that would allow it.
1 Corinthians
Like 1 Timothy, 1 Corinthians is an occasional letter, written to a specific group of people at a certain time. This must be taken into account in any matter of interpretation of the book. The traditional interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 that excludes women from speaking in a Church setting often uses these verses to interpret the rest of the Bible in light of them. If it difficult for the traditionalists to move beyond these verses even though 1 Corinthians 14:31 says that all can prophesy. The brethren (adelphos) referred to in 14:26 confirms that Paul is speaking about both sexes because this noun is gender neutral. Earlier in the letter (1 Corinthians 11:4-5) Paul seems to assume that women will be praying and prophesying. That they must do so with heads covered is probably more a matter of social custom than an important matter of faith. There is uncertainty even in this in that it is unclear whether Paul is addressing a distinction between rich and poor, whether women are exercising their leadership role in an inappropriate way or if it is a struggle against a cultic ritual where unbound hair is involved in magical incantations.
In light of these ambiguities and discrepancies with other Pauline writings regarding these verses many critical commentators including Gordon Fee are now arguing that these verses are not from Paul's hand. They are more likely interpolations into the chapter and because of this carry no authority with regard to the Church.
Alternatively, there is also a possibility based on the structure of the passage that these verses represent the teaching of Paul's opponents and he merely quotes them as a rhetorical device. Perhaps he has a letter in front of him that he is answering. This would seem to be a plausible explanation for why these verses seem to contradict much of what Paul is saying previously about the full participation of all believers in worship. If this is true, it is ironic that first century Jewish legalists are still burdening the Church with their rules and regulations today when there is freedom in the Holy Spirit.
Galatians 3:28
In contrast to 1 Timothy 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 which are often used to subordinate women, Galatians 3:28 is often used by the egalitarians to argue for full equality in ministry and life in general between the genders. The options for interpretation of this verse range from Paul did not really mean these words, or only partially or that he knows exactly what he is writing. Besides commenting on the equality of male and female, Galatians 3:28 speaks also of Jews and Gentiles, slave and free. Elsewhere in the New Testament Paul argues strongly for the equal acceptance of Gentiles into the Church but he does not do the same for women and slaves. A plausible explanation for this is tha acceptance of women and slaves is not a major issue in Paul's day because women are already engaged in a meaningful way in the Church. Paul does not have to pose a defense against something that is not happening.
Which Text Gets Priority?
There is an obvious contradiction between 1 Corinthians 14, 1 Timothy 2 and Galatians 3:28. Gasque offers a simple solution to this quandary in that the problems Paul is facing in the Church are quite different from ours. While we struggle with restrictions and legalism, the first century Church struggled with too much freedom or liberty. Grenz, in response to this question notes that Galatians is written first and probably represents the lofty ideals of Christian community. What follows in 1 Timothy and 1 Corinthians are responses to certain abusive situations and not universal principles to be followed.
Summary of the New Testament Evidence
It is often easy when considering the topic of women in Church leadership from a New Testament perspective to get bogged down in the individual verses. In looking at these verses out of context, they appear to be contradictory and this leads us to no clear answer as to what it to be done in the Church today. But in their context, it does make a lot of sense as to why Paul would write what he wrote when restricting the roles of women in the various Churches. However, these commands or exhortations are found in Epistles that are written to a specific place as a result of a specific problem. We do not have these exact problems in our Churches, the culture is entirely different and the place is as well. Because of this, to transfer commands for specific Churches to the Churches and denominations of our day as blanket doctrinal statements is a risky proposition. We would do better to consider more fully the example of how Jesus treated women, giving attention to just how revolutionary his actions are in their context. By doing this, a more adequate theology for women in leadership could be formed than is present is many Churches today.
Leadership in the Missional Church
This section will explore leadership in the Missional Church with an emphasis on what this means for women in the Church. Four main ideas will be addressed. First, the role of the Holy Spirit will be discussed. Next, the call for the end to ordination and hierarchy within the Church will be explored. Thirdly, the value of team leadership as opposed to the solo pastor-teacher will be looked at. Finally, a model of leadership in the form of a web will be uncovered.
Wbere the Holy Spirit is, There is Freedom
Where the Holy Spirit is, there is freedom (2 Co 3:17). This includes Church worship but traditionally women have not had the same degree of freedom as men. The pattern of the Church throughout history has been renewal movements, characterized by the work of the Holy Spirit where women have the freedom to participate fully in Church life. Biblical leadership is a charismatic gift of the Holy Spirit and when the Spirit is at work, women are included in these giftings. However, as the emphasis on the Holy Spirit is lost and the Church becomes more institutionalized, women lose their places of leadership and authority. In revival, questions of distinctions in race, gender, class, etc are no longer important and Galatians 3:28 starts to be realized.
A true missional Church is actually missional. Bosch says that mission is, "…the good news of God's love, incarnated in the witness of a community, for the sake of the world." Although there is a community aspect, a true missional Church is outward-focused, existing for the sake of the world. In stagnate Churches, there is a tendency to turn inward and undue attention is often given to things like structure, polity and power issues. However, when the Spirit is present and at work, the Church will be fulfilling its mission and this will lead to more freedom and opportunities for all people, including women. Kimball notes that in the emerging Church, there is diversity and not the uniformity that characterizes the modern Church. The hope for the missional Church is that in diversity, the reign of God will be manifest and people's lives will be genuinely changed.
The End of Ordination
In the Mega Church, there is a move away from the traditional seminary preparing leaders for the Church. Instead the emphasis is on training and developing leaders from within the congregation who already have proven ministry skills in a lay capacity. Similarly, the missional Church authors are calling for an end to the traditional seminary and the process of ordination. The traditional model of ordination has been that the congregation calls and affirms the potential candidate, based on their conception of what kind of gifts are needed in order to be a pastor. The measuring model is that of the solo pastor as a teacher. However, this model of affirming leaders does not affirm the type of apostolic leaders that the missional Church most needs. The question that still remains unanswered in the literature is exactly how and where missional Church leaders can be affirmed of a call to ministry in the emerging Church.
The practical result of ordination of men only can be distorted images of God. In traditional Churches, where only males are ordained the result is often God made in their own image. God effectively becomes a masculine deity with the ordained minister acting as His representative. Also, God never institutes the office of ordained minister but instead calls, empowers and gifts everyone to preach the Gospel. When this gets distorted, often because of ordination, hierarchies remain. Even if women are allowed to participate in the Church as an ordained minister, it may not be a great victory because it is an unbiblical organizational structure taken from the world. Since denominations are becoming less and less important in North America, perhaps the whole process of Churches ordaining ministers to a certain denomination may be obsolete within the missional Church.
Team Leadership
The implication of moving away from the traditional, ordained leader within a congregation is that a new model must be put in its place. The common theme of the missional Church authors with regard to leadership is that it will need to be team-based, either at the congregational, denominational or geographic level. True leadership is found in a plurality of believers and it is only in this model that the priesthood of all believers will be realized. In Ephesians 4, Paul's vision for leaders is that they will equip the saints for the ministry in a corporate, spirit-empowered way. This model moves beyond the traditional clergy-laity distinction often found in the ordained ministry model of the pastor-teacher. Roxburgh calls this person who is able to operate out of more than one style a "synergist." The purpose of this leader is to creation vision and unity within the group, so that energy and skills can be released. The result of this team leadership is that large Churches will boost their community impact and that small Churches will be more likely to not remain small for long as curious people are attracted to this new model of leadership.
However, there is a caution that exists. This new type of leader must live an authentic life, which is to be keenly aware of strengths and weaknesses and to realize that he or she is not equipped to do all this is demanded of them. This is why team development is so important because no one can do all this is required of them but teams can do and be what the individual can not. In fact, this "super-star" mentality of what leaders should be does nothing to contribute to the health of the organization and may in fact harm it severely. In diversity of leadership, the leader will have to relinquish some control and more time will have to be spent in relationship building. Who in fact has the power in the organization will not be a big issue.
Grenz advocates for a new model of leadership in the Church that takes seriously the participation of all members, including women in the life and decision making of the community. The distinction between the leader and the followers will become less rigid and there will be a move away from the solo-pastor type of model. Because team leadership and decision making requires a diversity of viewpoints, women must be included because they tend to view the world differently then men.
Kimball presents a helpful chart that explores the difference between the modern leader and the emerging Church leader. The modern is characterized by the leader having the "plan," a CEO/Manager, concentrated power, hierarchical, goal driven and uniformity valued. This is the picture of the traditional male-dominated, ordained pastor-teacher still present in many of our Church in North America that are often run more like a business organization than the representation of the reign of God on this Earth. In contrast, the emerging Church leader is characterized by a willingness to solve problems together and to be a spiritual guide, diffused power, interconnectedness and relationships and diversity are valued. This is a picture of team leadership, which moves away from the ordained pastor as the central figure in the Church. It is in this model and not the former that women can most easily find a meaningful place within the Church and hold key positions of authority and decision making. In fact, to gain access to the leadership of a modern Church may not even be a victory at all because the very power-structures they hold fast to may not even be relevant today in our world.
The Web of Leadership
Leonard Sweet makes note of the large number of people leaving ministry and notes that something must not be working. Perhaps it is because the organizational style is out of touch with our times. Willhauck and Thorpe helpfully give a practical model for this idea of team leadership. They believe that the web can be used as a metaphor for leadership in the Church. There is a move away from a top-down style where only those at the top are connected to the leader because this is not the reality anymore. Health care and even the military are moving away from these models. In the age of internet and instant communication, we are all connected to teach other and the isolation of yesterday is no longer helpful. Hierarchies are not helpful to any organization because they are big and cumbersome, often breeding negative qualities within the system including mistrust and uncertainty. The irony is that although Churches operates in hierarchical models, Jesus did the opposite in that He and His disciples connect not just to those at the top of the power structure but are intimately involved in the life of many, in a web type of model.
In practical terms, the web can foster increasing communication and connectedness which has greater power today in the postmodern world than positional power. The web builds from center out in a never-ending process that has the potential to integrate and affirm those on the outside as just as valuable as those on the inside. For the missional Church, this type of model can minister well to those at the margins and perhaps carry out the mission of the Church in a more relevant way than the traditional hierarchy can. With its focus on relationships versus programs, the web can build strong and enduring networks that balance the power within any organization.
The web has the power to help people see and affirm their giftedness because the Holy Spirit is at the center of the web, emanating outwards. With this, there is a move away from filling spots in traditional Church programs to helping people utilize their gifts in response to the Holy Spirit's promptings in carrying out the mission of the Church. The roles of clergy and laity will be less-defined as the paid staff in Churches inspires the members to be in ministry.
This model of leadership can help women lead in creative ways, true to their style of being in the world. Women and men make decisions differently with women making them often based on caring and relationships. There is a willingness among women to share information, negotiate, multi-task and manage in a participatory kind of way. These traits are congruent with a web-type of leadership and in direct opposition to the hierarchical leadership style of the modern Church. In this model, gender will no longer be the defining factor in deciding who will be the leader because the power of the leader will be greatly diffused and the gifts of all will be affirmed.
Conclusion
The question that this paper is seeking to answer is whether the issue of whether women can fully participate in the Church is a relevant one to ask of the Missional Church. In examination of the evidence from the Old and New Testaments, as well as the last 2000 years in light of resurrected Jesus and the work of the Holy Spirit should show us that women are indeed called to hold key roles within the Church. It is Jesus who is the greatest example of all, in that the way He treats women is very radical, considering the culture that He lives in. Our standard Biblical interpretations can be flawed and this is increasingly being seen with regard to the issue of women in the Church. Perhaps McLaren says it best when he suggests we approach the Bible as honest seekers not asking specific questions of it, but instead coming as humble seekers and letting the Bible ask question of us.
The missional Church advocates a different style of leadership that is team, or web-based and that does away with ordination. The Holy Spirit is at the center and when this happens, divisions within the Church have traditionally been less important. Power is diffused and it matters less and less who holds the most. Due to the interplay of these two factors, that is increasing support for women in leadership based on careful exegesis of the relevant Scriptures and the style of leadership of the missional Church, the issue of women in leadership will no longer be a relevant question. It will still be argued and debated in the modern, hierarchical Churches but for those serious about participating in God's mission towards the world it will no longer be important who does this work. Anyone who is gifted and called by the Holy Spirit will be empowered and released for the work of the missional Church whether it is a man or woman.
Works Cited
Anderson, Ray S. The Shape of Practical Theology. Downers Grove: InterVarsity
Press, 2001.
Barna, George. The Power of Team Leadership. Colorado Springs: Waterbrook Press, 2001.
Bosch, David J. Transforming Mission. New York: Orbis Books, 2002.
Clark Kroeger, Richard & Catherine Clark Kroeger. I Suffer Not a Woman. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992.
Clouse, Robert C. Introduction. In Women in Ministry: 4 Views, eds. Bonnidell Clouse and Robert G. Clouse. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989.
Gasque, W. Ward. Response to Galatians 3:38: Conundrum or Solution? In Women, Authority and the Bible . Ed. Alvera Mickleson. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986).
Grady, J. Lee. 10 Lies the Church Tells Women. Florida: Creation House, 2000.
Grenz, Stanley J. Women in the Church. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1995.
Gunton, Colin. "The Church on Earth: The Roots of Community. In On Being the Church: Essays on the Christian Community, ed. Colin E Gunton and Daniel W. Hardy. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1989.
Killen, P. & DeBeer, J. The Art of Theological Reflection. New York: Crossroad,
2003.
Kimball, Dan. The Emerging Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.
Liefield, Walter C. A Plural View of Ministry. In Women in Ministry: 4 Views, eds. Bonnidell Clouse and Robert G. Clouse. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989.
Longville, Cedric. Go Tell My Brothers. UK: Paternoster Press, 1995.
McLaren, Brian D. A New Kind of Christian. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001.
Mclaren, Brian D. The Church on the Other Side. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000.
Mickelson, Alvera. An Egalitarian View. In Women in Ministry: 4 Views, eds. Bonnidell Clouse and Robert G. Clouse. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989.
Oden, Thomas C. Pastoral Theology. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1983.
Roxburgh, Alan J. Crossing the Bridge. USA: Percept Books, 2000.
Roxburgh, Alan J. "Missional Leadership: Equipping God's People." In Missional Church, ed. Darrell L Guder. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998.
Scorgie, Glen C. The Journey Back to Eden. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.
Snodgrass, Klyne R. Galatians 3:28: Conundrum or Solution? In Women, Authority and the Bible. Ed. Alvera Mickleson. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986.
Wagner, C. Peter. Churchquake. California: Regal, 1987.
Willhauck, Susan & Thorpe, Jacqulyn. The Web of Women's Leadership. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001.
This paper will seek to explore whether the controversy of women in leadership that divides congregations, denominations and can serve to splinter Christendom is a relevant question in the emerging or missional Church. With the increasing emphasis on team-based leadership and the gifting of the Holy Spirit (of both men and women), this controversy may no longer be a relevant one. The first section of this paper will look at what the Bible says about the status and role of women in the Church, both from the Old and New Testaments. Secondly, the leadership style that the missional Church advocates and the role of women in it will be explored. Finally, these two sections will be brought together into a kind of dialogue to see if this issue is even a question in the missional Church.
The thesis of this paper is that the Bible, our experience, the work of the Holy Spirit and the living Christ strongly affirms the full equality of women in Church leadership. Leadership in the Missional Church is moving away from hierarchies and power structures that traditionally have oppressed women towards team based leadership. In light of this, as well as with increasing support among scholars for equality, the question of women in leadership may no longer be a relevant one.
Woman in Ministry-Introduction
Throughout the history of the Church there have been ebbs and flows on a number of controversial issues. This is often in response to, or as a result of the degree of revival or lack thereof. The opposite of the Church in a state of revival is an "institutional Church" in the worst sense of the phrase in which traditions which perhaps have no value in our day are held onto. The stance of certitude could characterize this type of Church well. This section will explore the question of Biblical interpretation and then more specifically the Old and New Testament views on women in leadership and also the status of women in general society.
It's All a Matter of Interpretation
The Bible, throughout history due to incorrect or downright bizarre interpretation has been used to support a number of things that in hindsight are clearly wrong. Some examples are the Crusades, apartheid in South Africa, Hitler and the Holocaust and slavery in the United States. Today the Bible is often used to support homosexual leaders in the Church, despite no positive antecedents for the practice. Every time the Bible is used to "support" something, it is a matter of interpretation and hermeneutical application as we decide what the text says to us today. This should be obvious enough with a quick perusal of a theological library and the multitude of books that claim Biblical support for very different sides of many issues. Church history shows us the same thing, in that new denominations are formed based on different interpretations of the same text. The issue of women in leadership is no different in that the multitude of views on the topic should be a signal to us that the Bible is ambiguous in this area and that perhaps something more than the Bible is needed to give us direction.
The Art of Theological Reflection
Killen and DeBeer define certitude as tolerating only what fits into our pre-determined categories. In this stance, we presume to know how God works. This is often a consequence of simplistic Biblical application that denies our experience. The opposite of this is self-assurance which trusts only experience and ignores the fact that tradition can often offer many ways to perceive this experience. A better stance is one of exploration that seeks to integrate experience, with religious heritage (including the Bible) with the hope that new truth and meaning for living will result. The implication of this which may be disturbing to some is that there is no single appropriate Christian answer to all situations in all times and places. This paper will seek to integrate religious heritage (including Church history and the Bible) in dialogue with experience and discerning the times that we find ourselves in today for a method of Biblical interpretation.
The Shape of Practical Theology
Also relevant to this discussion of Biblical interpretation is Ray Anderson's book in which he begins by cautioning us of the danger of using the work of God against the word of God in our lives. We worship the resurrected Christ and it is Jesus who serves as a hermeneutical criterion as we interpret Scripture. It is to the resurrected Jesus that we submit our experience as well at the text. This is because it is in light of the living Jesus that all our interpretation and actions will be judged. In essence, Anderson's "work" and "Word" of God is the same as Killen and DeBeer's experience and religious heritage. Mickelson notes that Biblical interpretation often has as much to do with the emotions and experiences of the people as with the exegesis of the passage. Although considerable time will be spent exploring the relevant texts from the Bible in this paper, keep in mind that these findings must be held in tension with our own experience, the experiences of those throughout history, as well as the work of the living God in our lives and communities.
On Being the Church
Ray Anderson offers a helpful quote by Colin Gunton that stresses the importance of the continuation and sustaining of the Church by the Spirit in the present versus a focus on the past institution of the Church by Christ. If this happens, "fewer self justifying" and harmful linkages with the past will be retained, leaving the focus on the Spirit for the constitution of the Church. This has the potential to move away from the very specific passages written by a Paul to a very specific audience to a more balanced approach. If the Spirit is at work in our Churches today, calling women and men into ministry, then it is to deny Christ if we deny women a place in leadership because Jesus sends the Holy Spirit to enable the Church on Earth to continue His work and mission.
A New Kind of Christian
Also helpful to this discussion of Biblical interpretation is Brian McLaren's book, A New Kind of Christian which is written from a missional Church perspective. McLaren exhorts his reader not to put confidence in an institution, certain ideas or an interpretation of faith but instead to put confidence in God. We need to return again and again to the Bible but not with the standard interpretations that leave no room for new understandings. Church tradition is often very different from the real events of the Gospels.
Although the real authority is God and not the Bible, which is open to misinterpretation, in our modern world the Bible is often treated like an encyclopedia or rule book where sides are picked on any issue within the Church and defended. McLaren makes the point that perhaps this is pointless and that the Church is called to transcend this. We are to approach the Bible not like scholars but as seekers who are trying to learn how to live. We are not to pose questions of the text but to let it pose questions of us. An authoritative Biblical view of an issue as controversial as women in leadership cannot be found. So although this may be the case, it is still relevant to our discussion and would be doing injustice to the topic to not examine the key Old and New Testament passages. However, it must be kept in mind that the Bible cannot give us a final, authoritative answer but must be held in tension with the authority of God, experience and the fullness of our religious heritage.
The Old Testament View of Women
Any discussion of what it means to be human best begins with the creation accounts found in Genesis one and two. The question that arises is whether the woman, because she is created second and from the man is inferior? Also related to this is whether the fall in the garden is solely Eve's fault or whether Adam and Eve have equal roles to play. The answers to these questions will have significant implications for our discussion today of the role of women in the Church because they are at the very heart of what is means to be human.
Creation
Genesis 1:26-28 shows us that man and woman are both created in God's image. Both are given dominion over the Earth and both are commissioned to fill the Earth and subdue it. It is almost absurd to suggest that men more completely reflect the divine image because in Genesis one this is definitely not the natural reading of the text. Subduing and having dominion clearly implies leadership, of which Eve is a part of. There is no suggestion that man is more like God than the woman. The creation account in Genesis two, while containing some different details also does not imply any inferiority on the part of the woman. There is some suggestion based on Genesis two that because Adam is created first, he is superior. However, this leads us to the question of whether creation is superior to humanity simply because it is created first.
In Genesis 2:18, the woman is described as a "helper" to the man. This has been used by advocates of the traditional male headship view to support the idea that women are only able to assist men in ministry and can not have any authority or responsibility. However, helper does not imply inferiority. Instead, the more natural reading is a relationship that is mutual and complementary. Eve is an equal partner with Adam in fulfilling the creation mandate that is assigned to them without distinction. Of the twenty times the verb is used in the Old Testament, it is never used to imply inferiority and actually refers to God as helper seventeen of those times.
The Fall
While it is true that in the Garden of Eden, Eve is the first to eat the forbidden fruit, this is not the point of the story. The author is making the point that both Adam and Eve are autonomous and that both choose to eat. While the Serpent does approach Eve first it appears that Adam is with her the whole time. Once they are confronted by God, Eve tries to blame the Serpent and Adam tries to blame Eve. Neither excuse is satisfactory and both are held accountable by God for their sin in a direct, independent way. If God does not allow Adam's excuse as valid, then why should we still blame the women for the fall today?
As a result of the Fall, God curses the serpent, Adam and Eve. Part of the curse of the women is that her husband will rule over her. Grenz makes the suggestion that in hostile environments, males generally dominate whereas in more favorable environments, there is more equality. The cursed ground which results in a life of toil is clearly unfavorable and perhaps why Adam will rule over Eve.
Yesterday's picture of a cursed ground and pain in childbirth is very different from today with agricultural advances that increase productivity and obstetrics that reduces pain in childbirth. The culture in which we find ourselves with regard to equality among the sexes is very different as well. Hebrew culture is strongly patriarchal, which is perhaps in part reflected in the curse of a man to rule over his wife. Today, at least in North America, women are generally considered to be equal in almost all spheres of life except the Church. If we are willing to accept reduced pain in childbirth and reduced toil while farming as part of human progress and God's plan, then why are we so slow in accepting greater equality among men and women as well?
In summary, the most important thing to remember that is relevant to our discussion of women in the Church with regard to creation and the fall is that any form of gender hierarchy is a result of the fall. It is not God's original intent for His creation. Male rule is a prescription because of sin but with the coming of Jesus, He becomes the curse for us (Gal. 3:13). Jesus brings freedom from the type of judgments found in Genesis three. In Christ there is freedom and women are able to move beyond the effects of the curse. The lust for power is what the first sin in the Garden is really all about and it is in sin that the Church is still living in with regard to women being denied positions of leadership and authority.
Baptism and Circumcision
In the Old Testament era, circumcision serves as a sign of the covenant between God and Israel. It is a clear marker of hierarchy (Jew vs. Gentile, male vs. female). However, this sign of the covenant is replaced by baptism in the New Testament, of which both male and female can participate freely in. In Galatians (3:28 more specifically) Paul affirms that all distinctions which are used to establish social hierarchies along the lines of gender, nationality, and social status are now gone because of the freedom and equality that is found in Christ. In baptism, we are united with Christ in His death for a life of service to the world. Since we are all called to general ministry, then why is at least half of Christendom excluded from representative ministry solely on the basis of gender?
Priesthood
In the Old Testament only men are priests. The reasons for this are a bit unclear but it is clear that females are not the only ones excluded from this special service. Only middle-aged, Jewish Levites who are not handicapped and who married the right type of person are qualified. Gender is not the only or perhaps even most important criteria. This leaves the question of whether there is still some form of hierarchy or special access to God by a certain group of people in the New Testament era. Perhaps it is in the form of ordination or is the concept of universal priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2) now more valid? Based on Hebrews 7:11-10:25, the office of the priest ceases when Jesus becomes the perfect sacrifice once for all. It is because of this that we now all have direct access to God. In the same way that baptism signifies that all are called to general ministry, all believers, male and female included are called to serve as ministers, or priests of God. If, in ordination some are called to a more specific ministry, it should be reflective of the general call to priesthood and therefore be comprised of both male and female.
Examples from the Old Testament of Women in Leadership
Ray Anderson in The Shape of Practical Theology makes the case that ordination of women and ordination of practicing homosexuals are inherently different thing. The reason for this is that there are Biblical antecedents, or examples from both the Old and New Testaments of women in leadership. Although it is not generally the norm, that is not the most important consideration. Even Paul, who at times appears to restrict women to certain roles affirms Phoebe as a deacon and Junia as an Apostle. For those who advocate strongly against women in leadership in the Church there remains the unanswered question of what to do with these clear examples of women leaders both from the Old and New Testament times. Homosexuality, on the other hand is different because the Bible offers no positive examples of this practice.
Some examples of women in leadership from the Old Testament include Miriam (Ex. 15:20) who is the first person recorded to lead congregational worship. Deborah (Judges 4:1), along with Samuel are the only two people who are both judges and prophets, which are both positions of considerable spiritual authority. Huldah is a prophetess who is faithful to God during some of the darkest days of Israel when most others fall away (2 Kgs 22:54). Esther is called to act with boldness in a strategic position to further the purposes of God's Kingdom.
Summary of the Old Testament Evidence
The Old Testament in general and more specifically the creation and fall accounts, the Levitical Priesthood as well as covenantal circumcision are used to support the idea that women should not hold positions of authority or leadership within the Church. However, the creation and fall accounts show Adam and Eve having mutual authority over creation and mutual responsibility for the sin in the Garden. The exclusive priesthood and circumcision found in the Old Testament are transformed into the priesthood of all believers and baptism with Jesus. Although there are not many examples of women in leadership in the Old Testament, there are some, which we must take seriously.
The New Testament View of Women
The Gospels
In the whole debate about whether women should hold positions of leadership in the Church, the Gospels and Acts are often ignored to the detriment of the discussion. The passage from Matthew 20:25-27 about the greatest being the servant of all is often forgotten in the power culture than many Churches in North America operate out of. The Gospels tell us the story of Jesus, each in their own unique way. It is the story of Jesus that is perhaps most revolutionary in the area of gender relations in the Church in that He treated women in a way that is very contrary to what is expected of a first century Jewish man. Jesus viewed women as persons and included many of them among his followers.
John four records the story of Jesus meeting the Samaritan women at the well. In essence, she becomes the first evangelist in the Gospels. In the story of Mary and Martha in Luke 10:38-42, Mary takes the same place as a disciple would, at the feet of her master. This is in sharp contrast to Martha who was acting out of the traditional cultural norms of her day. Yet, Jesus does not relegate Mary to this role as well but allows her to remain with Him and become His disciple. John 5:1-11 describes the women caught in adultery and her accusers. Jesus, rather than condemning her as the Jewish leaders do, offers unconditional love. At the time of Jesus' death, the male followers flee, leaving only the women. In John 20:17 we see Mary being commissioned by Jesus to go and speak as a witness for Him as the first one to meet the resurrected Chist. In the life, death and post-resurrection life of Jesus, we see Him clearly affirming the status of women in society and the religious world.
Jesus-the Egalitarian
Thomas Oden says the Christ event is the same yesterday, today and forever but that because history moves along and times change, new meanings are added to it. In the Jewish culture at the time of Jesus, women had very few rights or privileges afforded to them. Jesus, in the culture that he is incarnate, plants seeds of egalitarianism in that His inclusion of women in almost all aspects of His ministry is probably quite shocking. Today, the ideas of equality, dignity and human rights for all are emphasized. Because of this, it is sometimes easy to forget just how shocking Jesus' words and actions really are to a first century audience. In light of this revolutionary stance of Jesus, the full realization of Jesus' deeper intention can be understood even further. Based on Scripture, reason and tradition, with the seeds that Jesus plants, Oden advocates for full equality of women in ministry. There is irony in that even though Jesus and His Kingdom do not reflect the patterns of this world, Conservative Christians seek to maintain the status quo in their denial of a place for women in the Church.
Pentecost
Acts 2 records the coming of the Holy Spirit. The text indicates that men and women are both equally endowed with the Holy Spirit in order that they might have power to witness to the resurrection. Grenz argues that this is the foundational quality for ministry in the New Testament Church. The prophesy quoted by Peter in Acts 2 (Joel 2:28-32) says that the Spirit will be poured out on all and that men and women would prophesy. We see further examples of women prophesying in the early Church with Philip's daughters in Acts 21:9. 1 Corinthians 14:31 says that all will prophesy and no indication is given by the context or surrounding verses that this only refers to men.
The Pauline Passages
The Gospels, Acts and the Old Testament all play an important role in a correct understanding of the gender debate in the Church. However, the importance of these passages pales in comparison with the emphasis placed upon the Pauline Corpus. According to interpretation, Paul is either enlisted to support full equality for women or he effectively relegates women to secondary status in the nursery with the children in the Church. This can sometimes even have the air of the bizarre, in that a women is able to "speak" a word but not give a sermon or can lead worship but must turn her back to the congregation because facing them implies some sort of authority over them.
This next section will explore some Pauline passages in more depth to gain a better understanding of the context in which they are written as well as to find meaning in them for us today. For truly we live in a different world than when Paul lived and the Spirit has been at work for 2000 years in our midst since Pentecost. So to take these passages and apply them very literally is to disregard our own experience and the hermeneutic of the living, risen Christ. As Robert Clouse puts it so well, "The New Testament does not present a clear pattern which can be applied at all times and in all places for structuring the Christian community…"
1 Timothy 2
In the extreme, 1 Timothy is often used to support the thesis that all women, in all places and times are not to have any part in teaching or speaking in a Church and in some cases, in all spheres of society (including the home where the man has authority over his wife and the business world where the women cannot work outside the home). At the very least, 1 Timothy 2 gives no indication that women are not to speak God's praise in worship, offer a testimony, read Scripture, pray out loud, request a hymn or lead singing even if this passage is taken quite literally to mean that women are not to teach men. 1 Timothy 2:12 in particular has often been used to form comprehensive doctrines of Church leadership. The problem with this is that the verse contains a verb (authentein) that occurs only once in the New Testament and scholars are unsure what it actually means in context.
Upon a closer look at the background of 1 Timothy, the meaning of this verse becomes more and more uncertain. The pastoral Epistles are occasional in nature, meaning they are written in response to a certain situation in a certain place. Taking verses from them and applying them to the Church structures of our day without exegeting well can be dangerous. In a concise summary of the Kroeger's Book I Suffer Not a Woman, Grady examines the city of Ephesus at the time the letter is written by Paul and it appears that women priests from the Cult of Dianna are infiltrating the Church, spreading false teaching and disrupting worship. The issue is perhaps not so much about the gender of the false teachers but more about people not trained to teach who are spreading disruptive doctrine. The words about silence and submission are likely a call to be teachable for those who are not yet trained in Scripture.
Grenz looks more closely at the original Greek in the formation of his argument. There is really only one command found in 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and this is found in verse eleven that a women is to learn. This in itself is a radical idea, with respect to the culture of the first century. The verses that follow describe how this learning is to occur. In the first century, silence is an indication of respect and would therefore have been appropriate for a learning situation. Submission implies receptivity. It is unsure whether or not Paul intends this demeanor to be directed towards Christ or to submit to orthodox teaching.
In Verse twelve, women are prohibited from teaching. This verb is in the present active indicative form, in which the true meaning is more likely to be, "I am not presently allowing." This is not a permanent prohibition because if it is, the imperative form of the verb would be used. The obvious question as to why there is a temporary ban is unclear. Perhaps it is because of cultural considerations where it is offensive for women to teach in the first century. Maybe it is because of the low level of education for women or maybe it only applies to Ephesian women.
1 Timothy 2:13-15 is debated widely in scholarly circles and there is almost as many interpretations as there are scholars! Because of this, these verses may not be very helpful in our discussion of the topic at hand. However, Grenz notes that the complementarian case for excluding women from ministry based on these verses is fragile at best.
In a good summary of 1 Timothy 11-15, Grenz notes that Paul's prohibition of women teachers who have authority is merely a short-term accommodation. Furthermore, in the long-term these women must be properly taught so that they would no longer be at the beginning stages of the faith. In 1984, J.I. Packer is quoted as saying that although the exegetical concerns of this passage are not resolved, the burden of proof now lies with those who would exclude women from teaching and ruling a congregation rather than those that would allow it.
1 Corinthians
Like 1 Timothy, 1 Corinthians is an occasional letter, written to a specific group of people at a certain time. This must be taken into account in any matter of interpretation of the book. The traditional interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 that excludes women from speaking in a Church setting often uses these verses to interpret the rest of the Bible in light of them. If it difficult for the traditionalists to move beyond these verses even though 1 Corinthians 14:31 says that all can prophesy. The brethren (adelphos) referred to in 14:26 confirms that Paul is speaking about both sexes because this noun is gender neutral. Earlier in the letter (1 Corinthians 11:4-5) Paul seems to assume that women will be praying and prophesying. That they must do so with heads covered is probably more a matter of social custom than an important matter of faith. There is uncertainty even in this in that it is unclear whether Paul is addressing a distinction between rich and poor, whether women are exercising their leadership role in an inappropriate way or if it is a struggle against a cultic ritual where unbound hair is involved in magical incantations.
In light of these ambiguities and discrepancies with other Pauline writings regarding these verses many critical commentators including Gordon Fee are now arguing that these verses are not from Paul's hand. They are more likely interpolations into the chapter and because of this carry no authority with regard to the Church.
Alternatively, there is also a possibility based on the structure of the passage that these verses represent the teaching of Paul's opponents and he merely quotes them as a rhetorical device. Perhaps he has a letter in front of him that he is answering. This would seem to be a plausible explanation for why these verses seem to contradict much of what Paul is saying previously about the full participation of all believers in worship. If this is true, it is ironic that first century Jewish legalists are still burdening the Church with their rules and regulations today when there is freedom in the Holy Spirit.
Galatians 3:28
In contrast to 1 Timothy 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 which are often used to subordinate women, Galatians 3:28 is often used by the egalitarians to argue for full equality in ministry and life in general between the genders. The options for interpretation of this verse range from Paul did not really mean these words, or only partially or that he knows exactly what he is writing. Besides commenting on the equality of male and female, Galatians 3:28 speaks also of Jews and Gentiles, slave and free. Elsewhere in the New Testament Paul argues strongly for the equal acceptance of Gentiles into the Church but he does not do the same for women and slaves. A plausible explanation for this is tha acceptance of women and slaves is not a major issue in Paul's day because women are already engaged in a meaningful way in the Church. Paul does not have to pose a defense against something that is not happening.
Which Text Gets Priority?
There is an obvious contradiction between 1 Corinthians 14, 1 Timothy 2 and Galatians 3:28. Gasque offers a simple solution to this quandary in that the problems Paul is facing in the Church are quite different from ours. While we struggle with restrictions and legalism, the first century Church struggled with too much freedom or liberty. Grenz, in response to this question notes that Galatians is written first and probably represents the lofty ideals of Christian community. What follows in 1 Timothy and 1 Corinthians are responses to certain abusive situations and not universal principles to be followed.
Summary of the New Testament Evidence
It is often easy when considering the topic of women in Church leadership from a New Testament perspective to get bogged down in the individual verses. In looking at these verses out of context, they appear to be contradictory and this leads us to no clear answer as to what it to be done in the Church today. But in their context, it does make a lot of sense as to why Paul would write what he wrote when restricting the roles of women in the various Churches. However, these commands or exhortations are found in Epistles that are written to a specific place as a result of a specific problem. We do not have these exact problems in our Churches, the culture is entirely different and the place is as well. Because of this, to transfer commands for specific Churches to the Churches and denominations of our day as blanket doctrinal statements is a risky proposition. We would do better to consider more fully the example of how Jesus treated women, giving attention to just how revolutionary his actions are in their context. By doing this, a more adequate theology for women in leadership could be formed than is present is many Churches today.
Leadership in the Missional Church
This section will explore leadership in the Missional Church with an emphasis on what this means for women in the Church. Four main ideas will be addressed. First, the role of the Holy Spirit will be discussed. Next, the call for the end to ordination and hierarchy within the Church will be explored. Thirdly, the value of team leadership as opposed to the solo pastor-teacher will be looked at. Finally, a model of leadership in the form of a web will be uncovered.
Wbere the Holy Spirit is, There is Freedom
Where the Holy Spirit is, there is freedom (2 Co 3:17). This includes Church worship but traditionally women have not had the same degree of freedom as men. The pattern of the Church throughout history has been renewal movements, characterized by the work of the Holy Spirit where women have the freedom to participate fully in Church life. Biblical leadership is a charismatic gift of the Holy Spirit and when the Spirit is at work, women are included in these giftings. However, as the emphasis on the Holy Spirit is lost and the Church becomes more institutionalized, women lose their places of leadership and authority. In revival, questions of distinctions in race, gender, class, etc are no longer important and Galatians 3:28 starts to be realized.
A true missional Church is actually missional. Bosch says that mission is, "…the good news of God's love, incarnated in the witness of a community, for the sake of the world." Although there is a community aspect, a true missional Church is outward-focused, existing for the sake of the world. In stagnate Churches, there is a tendency to turn inward and undue attention is often given to things like structure, polity and power issues. However, when the Spirit is present and at work, the Church will be fulfilling its mission and this will lead to more freedom and opportunities for all people, including women. Kimball notes that in the emerging Church, there is diversity and not the uniformity that characterizes the modern Church. The hope for the missional Church is that in diversity, the reign of God will be manifest and people's lives will be genuinely changed.
The End of Ordination
In the Mega Church, there is a move away from the traditional seminary preparing leaders for the Church. Instead the emphasis is on training and developing leaders from within the congregation who already have proven ministry skills in a lay capacity. Similarly, the missional Church authors are calling for an end to the traditional seminary and the process of ordination. The traditional model of ordination has been that the congregation calls and affirms the potential candidate, based on their conception of what kind of gifts are needed in order to be a pastor. The measuring model is that of the solo pastor as a teacher. However, this model of affirming leaders does not affirm the type of apostolic leaders that the missional Church most needs. The question that still remains unanswered in the literature is exactly how and where missional Church leaders can be affirmed of a call to ministry in the emerging Church.
The practical result of ordination of men only can be distorted images of God. In traditional Churches, where only males are ordained the result is often God made in their own image. God effectively becomes a masculine deity with the ordained minister acting as His representative. Also, God never institutes the office of ordained minister but instead calls, empowers and gifts everyone to preach the Gospel. When this gets distorted, often because of ordination, hierarchies remain. Even if women are allowed to participate in the Church as an ordained minister, it may not be a great victory because it is an unbiblical organizational structure taken from the world. Since denominations are becoming less and less important in North America, perhaps the whole process of Churches ordaining ministers to a certain denomination may be obsolete within the missional Church.
Team Leadership
The implication of moving away from the traditional, ordained leader within a congregation is that a new model must be put in its place. The common theme of the missional Church authors with regard to leadership is that it will need to be team-based, either at the congregational, denominational or geographic level. True leadership is found in a plurality of believers and it is only in this model that the priesthood of all believers will be realized. In Ephesians 4, Paul's vision for leaders is that they will equip the saints for the ministry in a corporate, spirit-empowered way. This model moves beyond the traditional clergy-laity distinction often found in the ordained ministry model of the pastor-teacher. Roxburgh calls this person who is able to operate out of more than one style a "synergist." The purpose of this leader is to creation vision and unity within the group, so that energy and skills can be released. The result of this team leadership is that large Churches will boost their community impact and that small Churches will be more likely to not remain small for long as curious people are attracted to this new model of leadership.
However, there is a caution that exists. This new type of leader must live an authentic life, which is to be keenly aware of strengths and weaknesses and to realize that he or she is not equipped to do all this is demanded of them. This is why team development is so important because no one can do all this is required of them but teams can do and be what the individual can not. In fact, this "super-star" mentality of what leaders should be does nothing to contribute to the health of the organization and may in fact harm it severely. In diversity of leadership, the leader will have to relinquish some control and more time will have to be spent in relationship building. Who in fact has the power in the organization will not be a big issue.
Grenz advocates for a new model of leadership in the Church that takes seriously the participation of all members, including women in the life and decision making of the community. The distinction between the leader and the followers will become less rigid and there will be a move away from the solo-pastor type of model. Because team leadership and decision making requires a diversity of viewpoints, women must be included because they tend to view the world differently then men.
Kimball presents a helpful chart that explores the difference between the modern leader and the emerging Church leader. The modern is characterized by the leader having the "plan," a CEO/Manager, concentrated power, hierarchical, goal driven and uniformity valued. This is the picture of the traditional male-dominated, ordained pastor-teacher still present in many of our Church in North America that are often run more like a business organization than the representation of the reign of God on this Earth. In contrast, the emerging Church leader is characterized by a willingness to solve problems together and to be a spiritual guide, diffused power, interconnectedness and relationships and diversity are valued. This is a picture of team leadership, which moves away from the ordained pastor as the central figure in the Church. It is in this model and not the former that women can most easily find a meaningful place within the Church and hold key positions of authority and decision making. In fact, to gain access to the leadership of a modern Church may not even be a victory at all because the very power-structures they hold fast to may not even be relevant today in our world.
The Web of Leadership
Leonard Sweet makes note of the large number of people leaving ministry and notes that something must not be working. Perhaps it is because the organizational style is out of touch with our times. Willhauck and Thorpe helpfully give a practical model for this idea of team leadership. They believe that the web can be used as a metaphor for leadership in the Church. There is a move away from a top-down style where only those at the top are connected to the leader because this is not the reality anymore. Health care and even the military are moving away from these models. In the age of internet and instant communication, we are all connected to teach other and the isolation of yesterday is no longer helpful. Hierarchies are not helpful to any organization because they are big and cumbersome, often breeding negative qualities within the system including mistrust and uncertainty. The irony is that although Churches operates in hierarchical models, Jesus did the opposite in that He and His disciples connect not just to those at the top of the power structure but are intimately involved in the life of many, in a web type of model.
In practical terms, the web can foster increasing communication and connectedness which has greater power today in the postmodern world than positional power. The web builds from center out in a never-ending process that has the potential to integrate and affirm those on the outside as just as valuable as those on the inside. For the missional Church, this type of model can minister well to those at the margins and perhaps carry out the mission of the Church in a more relevant way than the traditional hierarchy can. With its focus on relationships versus programs, the web can build strong and enduring networks that balance the power within any organization.
The web has the power to help people see and affirm their giftedness because the Holy Spirit is at the center of the web, emanating outwards. With this, there is a move away from filling spots in traditional Church programs to helping people utilize their gifts in response to the Holy Spirit's promptings in carrying out the mission of the Church. The roles of clergy and laity will be less-defined as the paid staff in Churches inspires the members to be in ministry.
This model of leadership can help women lead in creative ways, true to their style of being in the world. Women and men make decisions differently with women making them often based on caring and relationships. There is a willingness among women to share information, negotiate, multi-task and manage in a participatory kind of way. These traits are congruent with a web-type of leadership and in direct opposition to the hierarchical leadership style of the modern Church. In this model, gender will no longer be the defining factor in deciding who will be the leader because the power of the leader will be greatly diffused and the gifts of all will be affirmed.
Conclusion
The question that this paper is seeking to answer is whether the issue of whether women can fully participate in the Church is a relevant one to ask of the Missional Church. In examination of the evidence from the Old and New Testaments, as well as the last 2000 years in light of resurrected Jesus and the work of the Holy Spirit should show us that women are indeed called to hold key roles within the Church. It is Jesus who is the greatest example of all, in that the way He treats women is very radical, considering the culture that He lives in. Our standard Biblical interpretations can be flawed and this is increasingly being seen with regard to the issue of women in the Church. Perhaps McLaren says it best when he suggests we approach the Bible as honest seekers not asking specific questions of it, but instead coming as humble seekers and letting the Bible ask question of us.
The missional Church advocates a different style of leadership that is team, or web-based and that does away with ordination. The Holy Spirit is at the center and when this happens, divisions within the Church have traditionally been less important. Power is diffused and it matters less and less who holds the most. Due to the interplay of these two factors, that is increasing support for women in leadership based on careful exegesis of the relevant Scriptures and the style of leadership of the missional Church, the issue of women in leadership will no longer be a relevant question. It will still be argued and debated in the modern, hierarchical Churches but for those serious about participating in God's mission towards the world it will no longer be important who does this work. Anyone who is gifted and called by the Holy Spirit will be empowered and released for the work of the missional Church whether it is a man or woman.
Works Cited
Anderson, Ray S. The Shape of Practical Theology. Downers Grove: InterVarsity
Press, 2001.
Barna, George. The Power of Team Leadership. Colorado Springs: Waterbrook Press, 2001.
Bosch, David J. Transforming Mission. New York: Orbis Books, 2002.
Clark Kroeger, Richard & Catherine Clark Kroeger. I Suffer Not a Woman. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992.
Clouse, Robert C. Introduction. In Women in Ministry: 4 Views, eds. Bonnidell Clouse and Robert G. Clouse. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989.
Gasque, W. Ward. Response to Galatians 3:38: Conundrum or Solution? In Women, Authority and the Bible . Ed. Alvera Mickleson. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986).
Grady, J. Lee. 10 Lies the Church Tells Women. Florida: Creation House, 2000.
Grenz, Stanley J. Women in the Church. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1995.
Gunton, Colin. "The Church on Earth: The Roots of Community. In On Being the Church: Essays on the Christian Community, ed. Colin E Gunton and Daniel W. Hardy. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1989.
Killen, P. & DeBeer, J. The Art of Theological Reflection. New York: Crossroad,
2003.
Kimball, Dan. The Emerging Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.
Liefield, Walter C. A Plural View of Ministry. In Women in Ministry: 4 Views, eds. Bonnidell Clouse and Robert G. Clouse. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989.
Longville, Cedric. Go Tell My Brothers. UK: Paternoster Press, 1995.
McLaren, Brian D. A New Kind of Christian. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001.
Mclaren, Brian D. The Church on the Other Side. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000.
Mickelson, Alvera. An Egalitarian View. In Women in Ministry: 4 Views, eds. Bonnidell Clouse and Robert G. Clouse. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989.
Oden, Thomas C. Pastoral Theology. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1983.
Roxburgh, Alan J. Crossing the Bridge. USA: Percept Books, 2000.
Roxburgh, Alan J. "Missional Leadership: Equipping God's People." In Missional Church, ed. Darrell L Guder. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998.
Scorgie, Glen C. The Journey Back to Eden. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.
Snodgrass, Klyne R. Galatians 3:28: Conundrum or Solution? In Women, Authority and the Bible. Ed. Alvera Mickleson. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986.
Wagner, C. Peter. Churchquake. California: Regal, 1987.
Willhauck, Susan & Thorpe, Jacqulyn. The Web of Women's Leadership. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001.
posted by Jackie Bolen at 3:28 PM
1 Comments:
This is really insightful, thanks!
Post a Comment
<< Home