The Role of Women in Ministry

What is Mountain View Community Church’s understanding of the role of women in the church (ministry)?

At the start of clarifying a position on this controversial topic, it must be noted that the only agreement among evangelical Christians on this issue is that there is no agreement. Some scholars have noted that the issue of the role of women in ministry is “the most emotionally charged issue in American evangelicalism today.” Every person who addresses this issue comes to it with some presuppositions which influence their examination of the issue. The presuppositions come from both the traditions in which one was raised and from the current context (culture) of a person’s life. Our goal in this paper is to state the position of the Elders at Mountain View Community Church (MVCC) as we understand the scriptures as given to us by our Heavenly Father.

While we are humbled by the seriousness of the task, we pray with all our hearts that the position of MVCC on this issue is biblically sound. We recognize that the issue has been debated throughout church history. We have arrived at the conclusion that women can serve in any appropriate position of leadership except those of Elder or pastor, through a careful interpretation of the relevant scriptures. We do this with a desire that MVCC be the Lord’s church in this community.

Two Positions

The two main positions on this issue are usually referred to as egalitarian and complementarian. Egalitarians generally believe that there should be no restrictions on women in ministry and that total equality exists between the genders. Complementarians believe that men and women complement each other and have unique and distinct roles within God’s creation. Yet, even within these two positions, degrees of difference exist. If the positions were plotted on a spectrum or continuum with extreme egalitarianism on the left and total or strict complementarianism (often called the “hierarchical view”) on the right, our position would be midway between center and extreme right. It could be labeled the moderate complementarian position.

Key Texts

The key texts surrounding the issue of the role of women in ministry for the New Testament church are 1 Timothy 2:9-15, 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, Galatians 3:28 and 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. While a complete examination of these texts is well beyond the scope of this paper, we will be stating some conclusions from these passages which form the foundation of our moderate complementarian position.

From 1 Timothy 2:9-15, we conclude four main ideas:

First, Paul’s words are written for the context of public or corporate worship (such worship is not limited to Sunday services but includes gatherings of Believers where the Word of God is taught authoritatively). Such an understanding of this text explains the example in Acts 18:25-26, where Pricilla is found privately teaching Apollos along with her husband Aquila.

Second, we conclude that Paul is writing to men and women in general and not husbands and wives as some commentators conclude based on the ambiguity of the Greek terms used.

Third, Paul’s admonition that women learn in “quietness” is not a reference to being “silent” (this also occurs in 1 Corinthians 14:34) but is similar to 1 Peter 3:4 where Peter talks of the “unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit.” In other words, we interpret Paul’s desire for women to learn with a quiet and gentle spirit that is not disruptive or divisive in the worship setting. In addition, 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 reinforces the same concept with a further appeal to the creative order set forth by God.

Fourth, we conclude that Paul’s words for women to learn in “full submission” are the submission of women in a corporate worship setting to the male leaders within the church.

The most controversial verse regarding this issue is I Timothy 2:12, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” We conclude that a woman teaching in this context refers to the public teaching of scripture within the corporate body. In addition, we believe that Paul’s words about not permitting a woman to “have authority over a man” are consistent with the biblical principle of male headship. A number of comments are relevant regarding this passage:

Biblically, we see the male headship principle beginning in Genesis 2 & 3 when God seeks out the man and holds him accountable for the sin of eating the forbidden fruit and this principle continues through the Old Testament and into the New Testament.

While exceptions to the male headship principle exist, most notably Deborah the judge and the prophetess Miriam in the Old Testament, the principle is still sound. The principle is most clearly articulated in I Corinthians 11:3 when Paul writes, “I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.” While some interpret the word for head (kephale in the Greek) to mean source, we, along with many evangelical scholars, understand the term to refer to authority.

Finally, we do not believe that Paul is articulating a principle that is bound by his unique cultural context but is consistent with the biblical principles of male headship throughout scripture. In other words, we hold that the concept of biblical Headship as it relates to teaching is a principle based upon creation and not time-bound one as some have asserted.

Those who hold to the egalitarian position cite a number of passages. The two passages most often used are Galatians 3:28 and Acts 2:17-18. In response to those passages we hold the following:

Galatians 3:28 is often used to endorse the idea that headship is a model that was ended with the coming of Christ and now there is no distinction between male and female. This view is flawed in several crucial ways. First, it is true that there is no difference between genders or ethnic origins as it pertains to salvation, but the context limits that former distinction to salvation only, it does not extend it to Headship. Second, as far as Headship is concerned, the passage is silent on the issue; otherwise God would be contradicting Himself since 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, and 1 Timothy which hold to headship were all written after Galatians!

Acts 2:17-18 occurs at Pentecost and Peter cites a passage out of Joel 2:28-32 to explain what was happening (the pouring out of God’s Spirit). The passage references women doing the same things as men (i.e. prophecy, visions, dreams, etc.) and is therefore used as evidence of a new egalitarian age. Again, we reject the interpretation for biblical reasons. First, while it is accurate that men and women are eligible to receive the gifts of teaching and prophecy the passage does not expand the scope or define the situations for each. Since headship is not redefined the two ideas are reconciled by the complementarian position of women teaching in appropriate settings (There is no evidence that women were preaching at Pentecost). Second, the point of Peter’s reply is directed at the supernatural manifestation of the Holy Spirit, it is not a new teaching regarding the roles of men and women. 

We see no distinction between men and women in regards to their inherent worth as created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27) or in their ability to be full heirs and members of the Church of Jesus Christ. In this regard we hold Galatians 3:28 that in Christ, “there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” This verse does not alter role differentiation between male and female as outlined in other parts of scripture, it informs us that all people, regardless of their gender or status can receive the full inheritance that is available in Christ Jesus.

Applications

The question then becomes “To what degree does MVCC enable women to serve using their gifts and leadership in the Body of Christ?” The central issue within the context of this question may be rephrased as “When can women teach and exercise authority in doing so?” As the Elders of MVCC we have come to several principle-centered conclusions regarding women teaching men:

First, women may teach other women. While this may seem obvious, it requires noting because there is an important and unique place women teachers hold in the lives of other women and such a vital ministry should not be minimized. Furthermore, it is clearly Paul’s desire for women to minister to other women (see Titus 2:3-5). 

Second, women may teach alongside a qualified male in mixed group settings. This point has a variety of situations included in it. Examples include: 1) a woman leading a class where the curriculum has been previously affirmed by the Elders and staff and where a qualified male is present serving as the women’s spiritual covering; 2) a women partnering with a qualified male in a Life Group or Life Course setting.

Third, women may teach males who have not yet reached legal or intellectual maturity. We realize that there is much debate around what Paul meant. We take the word for man in 1 Timothy 2:12 to refer to an adult male (Andros). We hold that males that have not reached maturity in our church may be taught by women. 

Fourth, women are precluded from preaching from the pulpit or from teaching adult males without a qualified male present as a covering.

Summary

How do we summarize such a complex issue which requires multiple interpretative decisions regarding the biblical evidence? While some pick and choose various scriptures to hold more weight or relevance than others, we have tried to arrive at a position that looks at the entire canon of the New Testament specifically, but also the principles found in the Old Testament as well. Even with a belief of the principle of male headship, there are still tremendous opportunities for women to serve within the local church, even in various leadership positions. Women can teach children, other women and even men in small group settings under the authority of the Elders or qualified men. The limitations for women based on our understanding would be the role of an Elder or pastor; these are gender exclusive roles, but they are the only ones. For example, women can have significant staff and volunteer leadership roles serving as ministry leaders, team leaders, worship leaders, counselors, and in finance and administrative positions.

Our understanding would be labeled a moderate complementarian position because it does not deny or restrict women from all leadership positions within the church, only those of Elder and pastor. We put forth this statement based on our study of the scripture, but we recognize that it is not binding on every other local church. The challenge for the church is to affirm the inherent worth of all people, male and female, while at the same time express in loving ways the biblical distinctions regarding the roles for men and women. In the overall ministry of the Christ’s church those distinctions are few.