Ministry and Women

Darrell J. Pursiful

A biblical understanding of the ministry of women must begin with the core value of the Kingdom of God that there can be no racial, ethnic, or gender barriers (Gal 3:28). A careful reading of Scripture will bear out the validity of this core value as it applies to women in ministry.

God's Plan in Creation

God's plan for men and women is amply demonstrated from the first two chapters of Genesis. In Genesis 1:26, "man" obviously refers to all of humankind. This is borne out in 1:27, where "man" is specifically defined to include both "male and female." Both men and women were thus created in God's image and given the same responsibilities, namely: to be fruitful and multiply, to fill and subdue the earth, and to have dominion over the animals (Gen 1:28). In a passage which deals in some detail with the issues of authority and hierarchy, not a single word is spoken regarding women being under submission to men.

The narrative of Genesis 2 retells the story of Genesis 1:26-27 in much greater detail. Here we learn that the woman was created to be the man's "helper." The Hebrew word used here for "helper" (‘ezer) occurs twenty-one times in the OT and never indicates a person in a subordinate position. In most cases the word in fact refers to God! In its other occurrences, 'ezer generally refers to an ally, not an assistant. The word should thus suggest a strong, resourceful partner who is at least an equal.

The Results of Sin

When sin entered the picture of human existence, it damaged all of the good relationships that God had established. Most obviously, it damaged the relationship that humans previously had with God. It also damaged humans' relationships with creation and with each other.

God's statement addressed to Adam in Genesis 3:17-19 is equally applicable to Eve. Sin has brought death, toil, weeds, and sweat upon all people. Neither the man nor the woman is "cursed" in this passage. The serpent is cursed (Gen 3:14). The ground is cursed (Gen 3:17). But nowhere does this passage indicate that the man is cursed, much less the woman.

Even so, men and women must live with the results of their sin, and one of those results is that the mutuality that existed between Adam and Eve has now become damaged. Eve's husband will now rule over her. This domination of woman by the man is not part of God's perfect plan, but a rebellion against that plan. In other words, God's statement to Eve is not a decree of what should happen but a warning of what would happen.

It must be noted that if everything in this passage were expressions of God's will, then people must never pull up weeds in their gardens or give pain-killers to women in labor! The point of the passage is not that God wants these things to happen, but that God declares that these things will be a part of sin entering the realm of human existence and distorting the original divine plan.

Jesus as Savior from Sin

Jesus' ministry, and especially his death and resurrection, was aimed at re-establishing the situation at Creation. The ministry of Jesus had to do with reversing the effects of sin in human lives and in the world. It is clear that the work of Christ was meant to save people from the penalty of sin, but Jesus was also concerned to save people from the results of sin. This is seen, among other things, in his miraculous healings and casting out of demons.

Jesus also worked to restore the horizontal relationships that were damaged by the Fall. Therefore, he ate with sinners, conversed with Gentiles, and treated women as the equals of men.

He conversed freely with women (John 4:4-42; Mark 5:33-34 || Luke 8:47-48; Mark 7:24-30 || Matt 15:21-25).

He touched and was touched by women (Mark 5:24b-34 || Luke 13:10-17; Mark 1:29-31 || Matt 8:14-15; Mark 5:21-24a, 35-43 ||; 7:36-50).

He taught Torah to Mary of Bethany (Luke 10:38-42), violating a deep-seated prohibition against teaching the law to a woman.

Furthermore, Jesus told parables in which "women's work" is exemplary of God's redemptive activity (baking bread in Matt13:33; cleaning house in Luke 15:8-10). God, it seems, does not mind being represented by women.

Women in Ministry in the New Testament Church

The church in the NT era followed through on the radical teachings of Jesus. Only toward the close of the first and into the second centuries did Christianity begin to turn its back on the kind of biblical equality that Jesus taught and exemplified.

The Magna Carta for Christian equality is Galatians 3:28: "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male or female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus." Some insist that this verse pertains to salvation but not to offices in the church. That is to say, they raise the question of how far the principle of equality is to be applied.

One must wonder whether Paul would have ever so limited the meaning of "no longer Jew or Greek." Is it conceivable that Paul would have agreed that Jews and Greeks are "spiritually" equal because they may both be saved on an equal basis, but that in practical terms only Jews may hold church office? But "no longer male or female" is structurally parallel to "no longer Jew or Greek." The only way to interpret this verse literally is to assert that what is true of Greeks in terms of privileges and responsibilities in the church must be true of slaves and women as well. What is true "in Christ" must also be true "in the church."

When one turns to the rest of the NT record, one finds abundant evidence for women serving in a wide variety of ministry positions in the primitive church.

1. There were women apostles. Among the people that Paul greets in Romans 16 are Andronicus and Junia, whom he identifies as respected apostles (Rom 16:7). Although some interpret the second name as Junias, a masculine name, it is certain that Paul intended Junia, a feminine name. Junia was a very common woman's name in Roman times, but Junias as a man's name is literally unknown in any other ancient text. Until the 13th century, Junia was assumed to be a woman.

Apostles included a group much larger than the Twelve and Paul. The frequent references to "false apostles" would be meaningless if the apostles were a small, well-defined group. Along with the prophets, Paul considered them to be the foundation of the church (Eph 2:19-20).

2. There were women "church workers." Throughout Paul's writings there are references to an extensive group of helpers and co-ministers which Paul calls his "fellow workers." These workers include many of Paul's closest associates, including Titus (2 Cor 8:23), Timothy and Epaphroditus (Phil 2:22, 25), Aristarchus, Mark, and Jesus Justus (Col 4:10-11). They were often the people Paul sent on fact-finding and trouble-shooting missions to the churches he had founded. It is not impossible that "fellow worker" was Paul's affectionate term for an apostolic associate.

If these "workers" are not technically apostles, at the very least they are the envoys of the apostles: clearly a position of leadership and authority. Since it fell to apostles or their representatives to appoint elders in the churches (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5), it is not implausible that those whom Paul called "workers," we might call pastors, elders, or overseers. This possibility is borne out in 1 Thess 5:12, where the function of those who "labor among you" involves both leading and instructing.

Women are numbered in this group who "work with me in Christ Jesus" (Rom 16:3), "worked very hard among you" (Rom 16:6), are "workers in the Lord" who "worked hard in the Lord" (Rom 16:12) and "labored side by side with me in spreading the gospel" (Phil 4:2-3). Since the same wording is used for women (Priscilla, Mary, Euodia, Syntyche, etc.) as for men (Aquila, Titus, Timothy, Epaphroditus, etc.), the only logical conclusion is that Paul considered the ministry of these people to be equal in honor and scope, regardless of gender.

3. There were women prophets. The case for women prophets is irrefutable. On the day of Pentecost, Peter quoted the prophecy of Joel that in the last days (i.e., beginning at Pentecost), both men and women would prophesy (Acts 2:17). The daughters of Philip were just some of the women about whom Joel spoke (Acts 21:8-9). Paul established guidelines for the proper exercise of the prophetic role by women (1 Cor 11:4-5). John rebukes the prophetess "Jezebel" for her heresy and immorality, but never for usurping a "male only" leadership role (Rev 2:20-23).

Prophecy refers to publicly speaking forth the things that God has brought to mind through divine inspiration. Its purpose is to build up, encourage, and comfort believers (1 Cor 14:3-5) and may even contribute to the conversion of unbelievers (1 Cor 14:22-25). Along with the apostles, Paul considered prophets to be the foundation of the church (Eph 2:19-20).

Before moving on we must note that in the church, God appointed "first" apostles and "second" prophets (1 Cor 12:28). Apparently in Paul's thinking, these were the two ranking or pre-eminent offices. According to 1 Cor 12:28, the teaching office is only "third" by comparison. One must therefore wonder at Paul's logic, were he found to advocate women apostles and prophets but forbid women teachers! As the NT indicates, however, such is not the case.

4. There were women teachers. One noteworthy woman teacher was Priscilla, who, along with her husband Aquila, were associates of Paul (Acts 18:1-4, 24-28; Rom 16:3; 1 Cor 16:19). In almost every instance, the Greek text lists Priscilla first, which is highly unusual in the culture of the ancient world, and which most likely suggests that of the two, Priscilla was the more prominent. Priscilla was a teacher of Apollos (Acts 18:24-28), who was, incidentally, a man.

5. There were women pastors. The terms "elder," "shepherd," and "overseer" (along with their more sophisticated cousins "presbyter," "pastor," and "bishop") are interchangeable in the NT (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet 5:1-2). From all available evidence, the office was one of leadership, decision-making, and spiritual guidance. The precise terminology for this role had not been established in NT times. Presumably, those with suitable gifts used them, and were called by various terms in various churches. The principle functions of elders/pastors are teaching and guidance (1 Tim 3:2, 4).

If those whom Paul called his "fellow laborers" were pastors, then unquestionably there were women pastors (see above). Even if this equation cannot be made, there is significant evidence for the existence of women exercising a pastoral role.

The most natural way to read the address of 2 John 1, "to the elect lady and her children," is to see the "elect lady" as the leader of a house church, her "children" being the members of that community. In the Johannine writings, those under the watchcare of a spiritual leader are commonly called that leader's "children" (1 John 2:12, 14; 3 John 4; Rev 2:23; see also 1 Tim 1:2; 2 Tim 1:2; 2:1; Titus 1:4). The term "elect" was used by Clement of Alexandria (150-215) to refer to those set apart by ordination. "Lady" is the translation of kyria, the feminine form of the common word for "master." The term implies a position of authority and guardianship (see Gal 4:1). It is the most natural word for the head of a household.

In the first century, one prevalent word picture to describe the pastoral role was as a household steward. The pastoral epistles (1-2 Timothy and Titus) are filled with such imagery (see especially 1 Tim 3:14-15; 2 Tim 2:20-21). This was quite natural in that the church of the first century consisted of small groups gathered in private homes, and networks of such groups. In this context, the number of women who hosted congregations in their homes is noteworthy: Mary (Acts 12:12), Lydia (Acts 16:15), Priscilla (along with Aquila, Rom 16:3-5), "the elect lady" (2 John 1). Were all of these women pastors? Not necessarily, but Priscilla would have most certainly exercised her teaching gift within her house church, and the "elect lady" was surely seen by John as the spiritual guardian of her "children."

Another word picture, culturally related to household stewardship, is that of patronage. Romans 12:8 lists the spiritual gift of leadership. Four chapters later, Paul calls Phoebe a "benefactor" of many, including himself. The word translated "benefactor" is in fact the noun form of the verb used in Rom 12:8 for "the one who leads." The word connotes a powerful patron who is able to exert influence on behalf of those in his or her charge. This suggests that not only was Phoebe a "deacon" (see below), but that she held a status in her congregation such that others looked to her as an advocate, a benefactor, a "mover-and-shaker." This is not terribly far from the job description of NT eldership.

6. There were women deacons. Phoebe (Rom 12:1-2) is called "a deacon of the church at Cenchraea." Although the term used is sometimes translated "servant," it is exactly the same term (diakonos) used elsewhere for "deacon" or "minister." The Baptist NT scholar A. T. Robertson argued that the addition of the phrase "of the church" favors a technical meaning here. As the title of a formal church office, deacons apparently held responsibility primarily for the day-to-day administration of church affairs, with special interest in caring for the needs of the poor. Once again, however, we must remember that terminology was rather fluid in the first century. There is no inherent problem with Phoebe being described as both a "deacon" and a "leader."

1 Timothy 3:11 is most likely a reference to "women deacons." In Greek, the same word (gene) is used for "woman" or "wife." It is unlikely that Paul would establish qualifications for the wives of deacons but not the wives of overseers. The repetition of "likewise" also suggests that we are dealing with three orders of ministry. Paul gives qualifications for overseers, then says, "... deacons likewise ..." and finally "... women likewise ...." This may be a reference to an order of women which would, by the 3rd century, have gained the title "deaconess." Given the fluidity of church structures in NT times, it is not inconceivable that some churches would have a mixed body of male and female deacons (such as in Cenchreae?), while others would have two separate bodies (such as in Ephesus?). In Women in the Church, Grenz and Kjesbo suggest that the specific inclusion of women at this point does not imply a separate office, but is simply a reminder that "even" women are permitted to hold the office of deacon. This would be an important reminder, given the specifics of the situation in Ephesus (to which we shall soon turn).

In any event, there is no reason to assume that deaconesses were anything other than "female deacons," with all that that implies.

Two Difficult Passages

Two passages are crucial to the theory of a "male only" ministry. These passages are 1 Timothy 2:11-15 ("Let a woman learn in silence," etc.) and 1 Corinthians 14:34-36 ("Women should be silent in the churches," etc.). These passages are in fact the only ones in the entire NT that can be made to teach that men alone may be ministers. Other passages are inferred to teach this only when these two are made the center of gravity for the issue of ministry and women.

Before discussing these passages in detail, we should remember that their author, Paul, is our chief source of evidence on behalf of women ministers! It is principally from the writings of Paul that we discover that there were women apostles, prophets, teachers, elders, and deacons in the NT period. And not only do we know they existed, we know that Paul commended them. Here we are already led to suspect that these passages have been made to carry more weight than they can bear. Would Paul endorse women ministers on the one hand through both teaching and example, and on the other hand deny women a place in the ministry of the church?

How shall we address this matter? First, we must understand that in scripture there are both universal principles and regulations for specific historical situations. Sometimes it is easy to tell the difference. For example, no one would doubt that Jesus' command to pray for our enemies (Matt 5:44) is a universal principle intended for all Christians. But what of the command to greet one another with a holy kiss? What of the command that women should wear a head covering or that believers should not eat blood (no rare steaks!)? While it is true that all scripture is inspired by God and profitable (2 Tim 3:16), it is not true that all scripture is equally relevant to us in our particular cultural and historical settings.

The question is, is there any way in which these two passages may be read not as universal principles but as specific instructions for local situations? If there is, there relevance as absolute principles is undermined. For each of these passages, at least two counter-interpretations are suggested. The point is not to argue for any particular interpretation, but to raise "reasonable doubt" as to the "male-only-ministry" interpretation these passages have been given.

1 Timothy 2:11-15

Women did not receive formal education in the ancient world. This was a danger in Ephesus. Several passages in 1 and 2 Timothy speak of women's vulnerability to false teaching (1 Tim 4:7; 5:11-15; 2 Tim 3:6-7). Therefore, they must learn. And since they have never received formal training of any kind before, they must be specifically instructed as to how. Paul specifies that they must learn in "silence." This word ( hesychia ) refers to studious attentiveness or quietness. It is rendered as "settle down" in the NIV translation of 2 Thessalonians 3:12. That is to say, women must learn the same way men learn.

In 2:12, Paul uses an unusual Greek verb. He states that women are not to teach or authenteo a man. This difficult word is used only here in the NT. This in itself should send up a warning flag: it is unwise to build a doctrine on something mentioned only once in the Bible. (Mormons are guilty of doing this with the reference to "baptism for the dead" in 1 Cor 15:29.) Since the meaning of authenteo cannot be cross-checked against any other Bible passage, we are wise to proceed carefully.

In fact, authenteo is not the customary word for exercising authority. When it is used elsewhere in this time period, it always has a negative connotation. It may mean something like "to force oneself upon," and thus have the connotation of "lord it over" or "dominate." It is also used for committing murder or indulging in sexual immorality. There are at least two possible interpretations available to us:

1. Authenteo means "domineer over" and, in conjunction with Paul's warnings about false teachers, indicates women who intend to spread heresy within the church.

2. Authenteo means "commit sexual immorality with" and, in conjunction with prevailing cultural assumptions, indicates women who intend to bring pagan religious practices into the church.

In any case, forbidding women from teaching at this time (and the present tense can easily imply "I am not permitting (i.e., at this time)") would seem to be a sad but necessary step to preserve the doctrinal and/or moral purity of the church.

The First Possibility. The first interpretation sees Paul warning against women asserting a right to teach or lead to which they are not entitled. Since Paul has in mind false teachers who are making easy prey of spiritually immature women, it is not difficult to imagine women who have been deceived by these heresies and are now insisting on the right to spread them within the church. Paul will have nothing of this and insists that Timothy give these women the sound teaching they need.

The Second Possibility. Among the Greeks female teachers, virtually without exception, were high-class prostitutes who would offer "after school" love lessons to their male pupils. Such women were active in every major school of philosophy. The false prophetess in Thyatira (Rev 2:20) who "teaches fornication" may have been in this camp.

One of the many functions of women's religion in the ancient world was to promote fertility. This was often accomplished through ritual exhibitionism, promiscuity, or even rape. A woman in a position of religious leadership would almost certainly be understood in this light by the average pagan. The ancient association of sexuality with religion cannot be underestimated. Even in the 3rd century, Clement of Alexandria contended with groups who believed sexual promiscuity was acceptable Christian behavior. He calls such sinners authentai, the noun form of authenteo. He complains that some have turned love-feasts into sex-orgies and who speak of "mystical communion" through physical intercourse.

It is at least plausible that the injunction in 1 Timothy 2:12 is not about teaching per se but about its subject matter. If so, Paul's meaning could be rendered, "I forbid a woman to teach or practice sexual immorality with a man." A woman who would do so has not yet fully learned what the Christian message is all about. Therefore, she must "settle down" ( hesychia again) until she has been thoroughly discipled.

Paul concludes his point with the illustration of Eve (1 Tim 2:13-15). The unanimous interpretation of Genesis 3 in ancient times was that Eve's sin was not as great as Adam's. She was genuinely deceived and thus didn't act out of willfulness as Adam did. This is a fitting warning to the women of Asia Minor who, brought up in the gross immorality of these religious patterns, might not follow them out of rebelliousness but simply because they didn't know any better.

1 Corinthians 14:34-36

If 1 Timothy 2:11-15 does not teach a "male-only" ministry, we are left with 1 Corinthians 14:34-36 alone in all of the NT to do so. Three egalitarian interpretations of these verses are possible:

1. These verses are a scribal addition and do not belong in the biblical text at all.

2. These verses reflect the views of some of Paul's opponents.

3. These verses reflect Paul's regulations for disruptive behavior in church and do not address the "women in ministry" issue at all.

The First Possibility. There is some evidence that these verses did not even appear in the original autographs, but were in fact added by a later scribe. Some Greek manuscripts "misplace" these words to other places in the chapter, and a marginal note in Codex Fuldensis can be interpreted to mean that these words were understood to be a later scribal emendation.

The Second Possibility. Assuming these words belong in the text, what do they mean? At least two interpretations seem plausible. It may be that they are not Paul's words but his quotation of the teaching of others. Paul often quotes positions he intends to refute in 1 Corinthians. These are commonly identified in modern translations (1 Cor 1:12; 2:4; 6:12, 13; 7:1; 8;1, 4; 10:23). Does 14:34-35 fall into this category as well?

The first tip-off is the term, "the churches of the saints" (1 Cor 14:33b). This expression is used nowhere else in Paul's writings, and in terms of Pauline theology it is redundant. There are no other churches but churches of the saints! The term "saints" is, however, occasionally used with specific reference to the Christian fellowship in Jerusalem and surrounding areas (cf. 1 Cor 16:1). Thus, we may be talking about a group of Judaizing Christians, with whom Paul was often in conflict. This possibility is strengthened by the appeal to "the law" for the principle of female silence.

The rule that women should ask their husbands at home assumes that these women will be married. That assumption makes no provision for single women, even though Paul exalts the single life for both men and women in 1 Corinthians 7. It also assumes that the husbands have a basic biblical education. This is a fair assumption in a Jewish context but completely absurd among the Gentile Corinthians.

Finally, in the original Greek verse 36 begins with a strong break with what has come before. This is accurately rendered in the Amplified Bible: "What! Did the Word of the Lord originate with you [Corinthians], or has it reached only you?" Thus, verse 36 is Paul's refutation of the Corinthian position outlined in verses 34-35.

The Third Possibility. It may also be that these verses are Paul's own sentiments, but should be applied to the question of disruptive behavior in church meetings. Women's exposure to public meetings, and the kind of decorum they required, was severely limited in the first-century world. Therefore, they were confused about how to behave in church. Paul instructs them in proper conduct.

The command to be silent is given three times in 1 Corinthians 14, using the same Greek word ( sigato ). Twice the command is given to Christians generally (14:28, 30). Once it is given specifically to women (14:34). On each occasion, Paul's concern is with disorder or confusion during church meetings. It should be noted that the command to "be silent" here is phrased differently than in 1 Timothy 2. There, the word ( hesychia ) implies settling down and paying close attention to what is going on. Here, the verb ( sigao ) implies being quiet so as not to interrupt what is going on. "Hush!" would not be an inaccurate translation.

The first command is to the one speaking in tongues, that he or she be silent if there is no interpreter. The second command is to the one prophesying, who should be quiet "if a revelation is made to someone nearby." Paul is thus dealing with various forms of disorder during church services. It should also be noted that the word for "speak" here is the most general term available to Paul. It is not a word that automatically suggests preaching or other forms of formal discourse. It is the most natural word for Paul to use to refer generally to the act of "talking" in church.

Paul's regulation might be paraphrased as follows without taking any significant liberties with the Greek text: "Women need to 'hush' when they come to church meetings. It's not appropriate for them to keep on gabbing. Rather, they should submit themselves as the law says (by respecting the needs of others present?). If they don't understand something, let them ask their own husbands about it at home, because it's shameful for a woman to keep going on and on like that during the meeting."

Conclusion

There are ways to interpret these passages that have nothing to do with a "male-only" ministry. The fact that there is at least one way to deal with them as specific regulations for the first-century world is sufficient to raise doubts about the universal application of these passages today. Churches that want to be faithful to the life-changing ministry that Jesus began should make every effort to include women as equal partners in every aspect of church life and ministry.

Back to WRITINGS