Women and Ministry

Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents

The role of women in the church is one of the main pressure points the church faces in today’s culture. The inroads of feminism in evangelical churches are much greater than many realize, and the resulting pressure to conform to the spirit of the age is intense. It is routinely suggested that if we do not grant women the office of pastor, elder, or spiritual leader in our churches we disparage women, denying their God-given gifts, and much more. There are increasingly large numbers of evangelical Christians who claim to adhere to the Bible’s teaching on male-only leadership in the church, but who deny the spirit of that teaching in practice.

In this article, I will address three errors at the heart of the contemporary confusion, before concluding with a positive presentation of the Bible’s teaching on the service of women in the church.

What is Ministry?

One of the most prominent errors leading to much of the misunderstanding about the role of men and women in evangelical churches is confusion about the word “ministry.” The word is sometimes used today to refer to the work of those in the ordained office of pastor and elder. Many people, however, use the word more broadly to refer to all activity in the church with a spiritual focus, from women’s book study groups to men’s fellowship breakfasts to soup kitchens for the poor. Standard English dictionary definitions of the word ministry reflect both uses: “the act of serving” and “the profession, duties, and services of a minister” (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 5^th edition). Diakonia is a Greek word in the New Testament that sometimes means “service,” in a way that corresponds with the broader usage of most Christians today when they use the word “ministry.” Martha “was distracted with much serving” (Luke 10:40). The Christians in Antioch send “service” (ESV: “relief”), i.e. material aid, “to the brothers living in Judea” when they hear of a famine there (Acts 11:29; see also Rome 15:31; 2 Cor 8:4; 9:1, 12–13). The saints in the church in Thyatira are commended for their “works and love and faith and service and endurance” (Rev 2:19; see also Rom 12:7).

Overwhelmingly, however, the word diakonia is used in a more restricted sense. It still means “service,” but it is restricted in the sense that it refers to the work of men appointed by God to preach the word and rule over the church. This service can only be carried out by men, specifically those designated by God for this special work. Of the 34 uses of the word diakonia in the New Testament, most are used in this way. Matthias replaces Judas “in this ministry” of being an appointed “witness” to Christ (Acts 1:17). The apostles “devote [themselves] to prayer and to the ministry of the word” (Acts 6:4). Paul refers to his calling as “the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24; see also Acts 21:19). In fact, Paul uses this term more than any other New Testament author, and in precisely this way, to explain how the gospel was spread through his preaching and teaching (see, for example, Rom 11:13; 2 Cor 3:8–9; 4:1; 5:18; 6:3; 11:8; Col 4:17; 1 Tim 1:12; 2 Tim 4:5, 11). This predominant usage of the word diakonia in the New Testament is what has led to the English word “ministry” often becoming associated with the narrower definition of “the profession, duties, and services of a minister.” The related word diakonos, which refers to one engaged in diakonia, is used similarly to diakonia: it sometimes simply means “service” of some sort (which can be carried out by anyone: see, for example, Matt 20:26; Mark 9:35; John 2:9; Rom 13:4 [referring to civil magistrates]; 16:1; etc.) and sometimes is attached to the “service” or “ministry” of the word, or of the relief of the physical needs of the saints (which can only be carried out by men appointed by God: see, for example: 1 Cor 3:5; 2 Cor 3:6; 6:4; Eph 3:7; 6:21; Phil 1:1; Col 1:7, 25; 4:7; 1 Tim 3:8; 4:6). 

In the end, the English word “ministry” can be used to refer broadly to all acts of Christian service, or narrowly to refer to the work of gospel proclamation and pastoral shepherding by qualified men. Either is acceptable, but only if we recognize that we are referring to two different things in the Bible. To avoid confusion, we could use the two different words: “service” and “ministry,” but the most important thing is that we recognize that these are different ways of serving in the church, and that the ministry, or service, of God’s word is restricted to men called to that ministry.

Ephesians 4:11–12, one of the main proof texts appealed to for women’s ordination and female leadership in the church, can rightly be understood once we make this linguistic distinction. In that text, Paul writes of how Jesus, in ascending triumphantly to the right hand of the Father after his victory at the cross “gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ . . . .” One can clearly see that there is a distinction between those appointed to “offices” of the word of God (4:11) and the saints who receive that word (4:12). Understanding that the word diakonia can mean any sort of act of service to another then clarifies Paul’s meaning: he never blurs the line between those (men) appointed to proclaim the word and those called to receive it from their hands, the latter of whom are then equipped to serve (diakonia) one another in a multitude of other ways (hospitality, physical needs, and so on).

If we do not make a distinction between ministry-service of the word (by appointed men) and service in the broader sense, we will find it nearly impossible to adhere to the Bible’s teaching on male-only leadership in the church. This is exactly what is happening even in ostensibly “complementarian” churches that give lip service to the idea of male only leadership, but deny it in actual practice. There is much angst in these circles, in fact, among those who kick against the goads, believing that women must in some way also be teachers of the word. They may claim that they do not believe in women’s ordination, but they reject the biblical distinction between the fundamentally different types, or categories, of service: the ministry of divinely called men and the service of everyone else in the church, including women. This, then, leads to a series of additional errors about the divinely appointed role of women in the church. In this article, I will address two of these (increasingly common) errors.

Attending to the Spiritual Needs of Women

One of the most common errors I see repeatedly today is the idea that only women can meet the spiritual needs of other women. This is routinely put forward—in churches that claim to be complementarian—as a reason why there must be some form of church-sanctioned teaching “by women, for women” in the church. In other words, there is a need for a female “ministry of the word” (even if it is not called that). This might seem plausible at first. Who better understands what women go through than other women? There should be no denying that Christian women are called to serve and encourage one another in the church. Titus 2:3–5 is a good example of this very thing. Older Christian women are to “teach what is good” to the younger women in the church, specifically to “train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their husbands . . . .” Despite how this text is often taken today, it does not sanction the appointment of women to any sort of official position of leadership in the church, nor is about women becoming church-appointed teachers of the Bible. This is fairly obvious if you continue into verse 4 (part of the same sentence in Greek): the things the older women are to teach the younger women all have to do with personal holiness in the domestic sphere. The older women, in their normal interactions with the younger women in the church, are to help those younger women thrive in the sphere in which God primarily has called them to serve: the home. The fact that some professed complementarians might bristle at the previous sentence is proof of how deeply the insidious tentacles of feminism have penetrated into the church. Female service to God, family, and church, centered on the domestic sphere, is indispensable and of inestimable value and worth, though it is usually behind the scenes and un-lauded by the world (which is why it is so routinely disparaged by feminists).

Loving service of women for other women in the church, however, does not mean that only women can meet the spiritual needs of other women. Why is this? The answer is simple: God has appointed elders, who can only be men, for the spiritual oversight of all believers, men and women, boys and girls (1 Tim 3:1–7; 5:17; Heb 13:17; 1 Pet 5:1–3). God did not make a mistake when he decreed that only men could serve in the office of shepherds over, and teachers of, the whole church, male and female. There is no special insight into the female psyche or female spirituality that a male elder is shut off from, thus preventing him from carrying out the role he has been assigned by God. God never appoints anyone to a position for which he does not also provide the necessary gifts. This is not to deny that women understand other women in ways that men do not, at least intuitively. It would seem fairly ridiculous to deny this commonsense truth. This does not, however, change the fact that God has appointed only male elders to attend to the spiritual needs of the whole church. Is there a legitimate place for women to help the elders and deacons of the church as these men fulfill their calling? Of course. The elders could, if the situation called for it, consult women in the church about specific issues pertaining to the unique life circumstances of women. They could, if appropriate, have women in the church with them when attending to sensitive pastoral issues (abuse, etc.), or to help with specific diaconal needs. My denomination, the Presbyterian Church in America, without downplaying male-only leadership, makes room for a variety of such circumstances, and rightly so (see our Book of Church Order, Section 9-7). The basic point remains true: the spiritual shepherding of men and women is the responsibility of the elders of the church, and God grants them the necessary gifts to carry out this calling faithfully. No “official” teaching or shepherding position for women is needed, nor is one biblically allowed.

One-on-One Discipleship of Women by Men

A second error, which is becoming more common, is the insistence that for women to have their spiritual needs met they must have personal access to the male leadership of their church. This increasingly takes the form of the claim that churches must find a way for individual women to spend time alone with male leaders, that their need of discipleship will be otherwise unmet. This might seem, at first blush, like the exact opposite of the previous error, but it routinely goes hand-in-hand with it. There appears to be a subtext that it is the height of unfairness to deny such access to women who desire it. If a male church leader is willing to meet one-on-one with other men in the church, so the argument goes, he should be willing to do the same with women. If male church leaders are unwilling to do so, women will not have the same ability to serve in the church in “visible leadership.” There is an obvious logic to this: the men appointed to positions of leadership are the ones who teach and lead and therefore are (as it were) “where the action is.” This sentiment, of course, completely inverts the Bible’s teaching on church leadership, which is supposed to be driven by a desire to serve, not by self-promotion or self-exaltation (Mark 9:35; 1 Cor 9:19; 2 Cor 4:11–12; Phil 1:1). Leaders in the church are warned to seek such leadership only from a desire to glorify God and care for God’s people, not to make much of themselves (Heb 13:17; James 3:1; 1 Pet 5:1–3). Sadly, in a fallen world, the desire of many women and men to take for themselves positions of leadership in the church is ungodly: the desire to be calling the shots, to be in on the action, to be able to tell others what to do, to be admired, to be thought of as one who knows more than others. It is not driven by a desire to die to self and serve for the wellbeing of God’s people. I haven’t even mentioned the insanity of married men and women meeting routinely alone and privately with members of the opposite sex who are not their spouses (pastoral shepherding of women should be in public space, even if there is privacy involved).

The Indispensable Role of Women in the Church

It is sometimes said that the kinds of arguments I’ve presented above disparage women’s gifts, that they render their contribution to the work of the church unnecessary. Far from it. Women are absolutely indispensable to the work of the church, but we must be faithful to the Scriptures in how we articulate that indispensability. Women are vital to the life of the church, but never in a teaching or leadership capacity. The Bible could not be any clearer about this: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet” (1 Tim 2:12). One should note that this verse does not say that a woman is only restricted from teaching a man. It says a woman may not teach. This is a prohibition on women engaging in the ministry of the word, which is restricted to men who are elders. Titus 2:3–5 (discussed above) is no counterexample, since that text does not refer to the official ministry of the word in an ecclesiastical setting, but to the informal teaching of domestic duties by older women to younger women in the church. There simply is no biblical category of church-sanctioned “visible female leadership” in teaching God’s word that is parallel to the official ministry of the Word by the elders. That God’s calling for women to be oriented toward the domestic sphere seems disparaging toward women is yet another example of the contemporary influence of feminism. It is precisely as men and women joyfully carry out their unique vocations in their unique spheres that the church flourishes.

What, then, is the role of women in the church? To begin with, all biblical texts that speak of general Christian service among believers apply, texts like Ephesians 4:12 with its teaching that all believers are to engage in the “work of ministry [service], for the building up of the body of Christ.” Those aspects of Paul’s teaching in Romans 12 that do not pertain to the ministry of the word are also relevant: “service,” “generosity,” and “mercy” (Rom 12:7–8). The positive import of Titus 2:3–5 is essential: wiser, older women inculcating in the younger women of the church reverent behavior, avoiding slander and drunkenness, pursuing goodness, loving their husbands and children, self-control, purity, a focus on excellence in household management, general kindness, and godly submissiveness to their husbands. The fruit that has been produced by such labors among godly women in church history is inestimable: we have many famous examples in the influence of godly wives and mothers (Augustine, the Wesleys, Charles Hodge, J. Gresham Machen, etc.), but many millions more whom we know nothing of today. But the Lord knows their faithful service, which rewarded in their lives, and continues to reward eternally. In discussing the place of men and women in the church, we must remember Christ’s warning: “Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven” (Matt 6:1). Faithful service to the Lord should not be about being making a name for oneself. We are to serve the Lord “in secret,” knowing that our heavenly Father sees and will reward us (Matt 6:4, 6, 18; etc.).

Lastly, consider all the godly women Paul mentions in Romans 16, and all the vital work they accomplished in service to the Lord and in support of the advancement of the gospel. Phoebe, who was a patron to many believers, likely hosted a church in her house (Rom 16:1–2). Prisca, along with her husband Aquilla, risked her very life to serve Paul in some way (Rom 16:3). Mary “worked hard” for the saints (Rom 16:6). Junia, along with her (likely) husband Andronicus, were well known by the apostles for their faithful service, which even led to their imprisonment at some point (Rom 16:7). Tryphaena and Tryhposa were “workers in the Lord” (Rom 16:12). Rufus’ mother was so sacrificial in her service to Paul in his ministry that he says she was like a mother to him (Rom 16:13).

Conclusion

The point of all of this is that women are never treated in the New Testament as unnecessary. I’m sure there are men in the church who disparage women and treat their service as unnecessary. But abuses do not change the biblical mandate. Just as it is “not good that the man should be alone” (Gen 2:18), the church simply cannot carry out its mission apart from the sacrificial service of its women (and men). But we must not seek to place women into roles and positions that the Lord has restricted to men alone: the ministry-service of word and sacrament, and the shepherding and ruling that is the calling of male elders alone. Just as the family cannot flourish without a husband and wife joyfully and vigilantly serving God according to their vocations, so will it be with men and women in the church.

---

Image Credit:

Share This