(left) Kay Goldsworthy- the first female Bishop in the Anglican/Episcopal church in Australia (right): Apostle Paul (Rublev)
Having previously issued a provocation to think again, I now want to spell out my own view on a complex topic.
In the circles I have moved in a lot of people seem to have got stuck on the fact that NT “Eldership” appears to be male…
The flow of thought in I Timothy is unmissable and I can fully see why evangelical believers differ on the question. This is the text where a lot of people either stick or get stuck. However we can proceed from this sticky point in a number of ways ways. Firstly we need to conisder carefully just what Paul may have been organising and what he meant by the specific role of“elder”. In churches today the word “elder” is often used to describe in effect a guardian, a trustee, board of reference, or an accountability body for ministry leaders within a local church ministry. That may well not be what Paul meant by “elder”.On the other hand some fully equate the word “elder” with “leader”. When this is done women are left with no “leadership”role in the body at all.
Teresa of Avila - visionary theologian, community leader, protector of the Counter Reformation and patron to John of the Cross (portrait by Carole Odell)
The reason I do not make those equations is that if we read the rest of Paul’s material in the NT we discover a large number of women ministers. Women are named who are hosting and gathering churches, there are women who teach, there are two women named among the (small a) apostles, and a number named (and many others implied) in prophetic ministry. If women are gathering, teaching, apostoling and prophesying in Paul’s churches then I think we are on a weak footing to say that leadership in the churches is male!
Jackie Pullinger - a woman in a proven apostolic ministry
I favour the view that if a text in Scripture affords two possible interpretations, one should favour the interpretation which agrees rather than fights with other Scriptures. In other words we do not interpret Scripture against itself. For example Paul’s teaching in I Corinthians 11 that women in church should be silent and not talk has to be interpreted in a way that leaves room for women to prophesy - as they are taught to do in that very same epistle - and in the way reported in Acts 16.
Who would deny Phyllis Tickle’s prophetic and teaching contribution to the churches?
Another example: When Paul says that he does not permit a woman to teach-and-have-authority over a man we can read that in two ways. The first interpretation is that Paul is forbidding women both to teach and to having authority over men - i.e. a ministry and authority/order issue. Or Paul is ruling out a woman teaching-and-having-authority - i.e. it is only an authority/order issue. Since we see a woman’s teaching minstry strongly affirmed in Luke and Paul’s references to Priscilla we have to rule that first interpretation out. (Priscilla and her husband are described together as teaching churches and specifically teaching the (small a) apostle, Apollos.)
Elaine Storkey embodies a renownedly insightful and weighty gift of teaching to the churches
For me the next point is a pivot point in our hermeneutics on this issue. The passage in I Tim about elders and deacons has a flow vis An elder should be the husband of one woman (gunaikos)…he should be such and such…. Deacons, likewise should be so and so. The women (gunaikos) also should be so and so. A deacon should have only one woman (gunaikos). The flow of thought is clear to me; that here we have a passage about elders, deacons and their (gunaikos) wives. If that is so then Paul has given no explicit mention in this text of women elders or women deacons. This raises the question: Does that omission mean that women elders and are women deacons not part of Paul’s picture? Does that omission mean that women elders or deacons, therefore, are theologically impossible?
Let’s think about that: To say an Elder should be this kind of man; is that the same as asserting that an elder cannot be a woman? After all a huge proportion of the Sciptures is addressed specifically to males - including the ten commandments. Does that mean that women are excluded? We are told that “thou” shallt not covet they neighbour’s “wife.” Surely by that teaching we infer immediately that in the same way a woman should not covet her neighbour’s husband. Who would fault that logical step? I would suggest, then, that what is logical in our handling of the Ten Commandments must be logical also in our handling of I Timothy.
Some may feel that leaves a margin for doubt. However, if it does I believe that Paul decisively closes that margin by referring explicity in Romans 16 to Phoebe (a woman) - the “Deacon” at the church at Cenchrea. Clearly Paul does not see his work in Romans 16 as being in conflict with I Timothy 3. So evidently - notwithstanding that “deacons should have but one wife” - in Paul’s churches a Deacon can be female. This key fact tells us in what light we need to read the whole of I Timothy 3 . .
Deacon and Prophetic voice in the churches - Mother Teresa
What I have said above unpacks the logic in Scripture of the inclusive approach. It is a hermeneutic which refuses to interpret Scripture against itself but instead chooses those interpretations which hold all the Scriptures together in agreement. If you have a view which fits all the texts - except a couple - then something in your view is awry.
I Timothy 3 can not be set in opposition to acknowledging Phoebe-the-Deacon in Romans 16 because I Timothy 3 does not actually rule women deacons out. It is simply that in that passage Paul mentions only the male version of the scenario - just like the Ten commandments! In that light we can return from a different angle to what we thought was a sticky text. If in Paul’s mind there is no conflict bewteen what is written in I Timothy 3 and the engagement of a female Deacon, then it follows automatically that the adjacent words concerning Elders, likewise, do not exclude the possibility of women elders.
This provides a picture that makes far better sense - for how could we have in Paul’s churches female gatherers/hosts, teachers, deacons, prophets and apostles…and not elders. The moment Phoebe is accepted as a deacon, there is no logic with which you can use I Timothy 3 as grounds for ruling women out of whatever it was that the Apostle Paul meant by“elders/eldership”. The fuller picture rules it out.
Bessie Pereira whose eldership has been welcomed and valued by many in the missional/simple churches’ scene, and who heads up the diaconal ministry that is OIKOS Australia
This is one of those areas where contemporary evangelicals need to be very careful that their theological method is running with the insights of the reformed method. Most of us have a priori conclusions we have to set carefully to one side if we are to listen to the full voice of the Scriptures and not read-in our conclusion or explain away verses that we can’t get to fit. That is the hermeneutical journey I have had to make. this is what it means to be ecclesia semper reformandum.
Having spoken emphatically, I want to repeat that I can understand why evangelicals differ on this issue. I have to say that because it has taken me a number of years to make that hermeneutical journey; to really engage with the fuller picture of the New Testament and then to do the work of joining the dots! (That’s why I so appreciate what Aaron Snow shares in his guest post (below on this blog) on “The Art of Changing Your Mind!”) However the view of Paul as a mysoginist has always grieved me at an instinctual level. One cannot say such things while at the same time affirming the authority of Scripture. And I have always felt a sense of empathy with my namesake. That’s why I want to assert that the Pauline pattern - the NT pattern - does not exclude women from these vital leadership roles. Read the end of Romans - the most Pauline of Pauline texts - and you will find the leadership and diaconal ministry of women wholeheartedly celebrated by the Apostle to the Gentiles.
Where there is very much less room for manoeuvre is in the presentation of NT women in apostolic and ministry. So in conclusion I just throw out the question; could it be when the churches operate in a way that is more truly apostolic andprophetic the that leadership ministry of women becomes unmissable?! Take a look at the stories of the most God-blessed missionary movements of the Church through history and you may well find that it is a conclusion hard to escape!
