Does the Word of God forbid women to pastor churches?
I have a friend who recently started a church. Normally that would be considered a good thing. But this friend of mine received many phone calls from Christians who discouraged the venture. The reason…my friend is a woman. Many Christians believe that women should not pastor churches. I’ve looked into this issue considerably and cannot find any concrete scriptural evidence that forbids women to become pastors. However, some would vehemently disagree with me.
The main point of debate has to do with how some interpret the passage of scripture found in 1 Timothy 3:1-7. It reads, “Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. (If anyone does not know how to mange his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. He must also have a good reputation with outsiders so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.” (NIV)
The term “overseer” is synonymous with “pastor.” Since the scripture identifies an overseer by roles that apply to men (i.e. husband of but one wife, managing the family) many theologians argue that this in itself is enough to prove that the role of pastor is not for women. However, if this is the case, then we should see no place in scripture where a woman has held a position that is identified by roles that apply to men. But on the contrary, we do. Phoebe, a woman, is identified as a deacon in Romans 16:1-2, yet the office of deacon is identified by roles that apply to men. Romans 16:1-2 (NLT) reads, “Our sister Phoebe, a deacon in the church in Cenchrea will be coming to see you soon.” It should be noted that the NIV, NASB, and King James versions use the word “servant” instead of “deacon” while the NLT uses the word “deacon” and the Amplified version uses the word “deaconess.” Clearly this is a point of contention among biblical scholars. However, the same Greek word (“diakonos”) that is used for “servant” in Romans 16:1 when identifying Phoebe is the exact same Greek word that is used for the “deacon” in the passage of scripture that defines the role of a deacon, which is found in the following passage of scripture: “Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. They must first be tested and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons. In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything. A deacon must be the husband of but one wife, and must manage his children and his household well.” (1 Timothy 3:8-12 NIV)
There is no doubt that the scripture identifies the office of deacon by roles that apply to men (i.e. husband of one wife, manage household well) just as the scripture identifies the office of pastor by roles that apply to men. If then a woman can be a deacon despite the fact that the office of deacon is identified by roles that apply to men, then it follows that a woman can be a pastor despite the fact that the office of pastor is identified by roles that apply to men.. Therefore the argument that says a woman cannot be a pastor because the office of pastor is identified by the roles of men is made void since there is a woman (Phoebe) identified in scripture that served in a position in the church that is identified by the roles of men.
To take the point further, if the conservative view says that since the office of pastor is identified by roles that apply to men and therefore women cannot hold position in that office, then the conservative view should also say that since the office of pastor is identified by roles that apply to married men then single men cannot hold position in that office. If we are to look at the passage of scripture in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 conservatively then there should be no double standards in interpretation when it comes to gender. The passage says that a pastor should be the husband of but one wife and should be able to manage his family. This therefore defines the office of pastor, not just generally by roles that apply to men, but more specifically by roles that apply to married men. If we apply the same conservative view to men as some do to women when looking at the passage, then we would have to conclude that single men should not pastor. However, even though some in the church might agree with this conclusion, most of us in the church would find this conclusion erroneous and a misinterpretation of scripture, even those who use the same reasoning to forbid women to pastor. This is where the double standard lies.
The unsettling part to all of this is that the church will put up with a man serving in the office of pastor who does not meet the qualifications of 1 Timothy 3:1-7 before it puts up with a woman serving in the office of pastor, who does. Not only should a pastor have no more than one wife and be able to manage his family but he must be above reproach (not be guilty of disgrace), he must have control of his temper, he must be self-controlled (not prone to fall into temptations of the flesh), he should be respectable, he should be hospitable, he should be able to teach, he should not be a drunkard, he should not be quarrelsome, he should not be violent, he should not be a recent convert, and he should not be a lover of money. It is safe to say that if a pastor fails at meeting even one of these qualifications, he is, according to 1 Timothy 3:1-7, not qualified to serve in the office of pastor. However, there are many male pastors in the church who do not meet these qualifications and the church merely winks at them.
Those who argue against women serving as pastors also use 1 Timothy 2:11-12, to support their position. It reads, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” This was part of Paul’s instructions to Timothy as to how Timothy was to care for the church at Ephesus during the time that Paul would be in Macedonia. Those who argue that women should not pastor emphasize the part in which Paul says that he does not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man. If a woman is not to have authority over a man, then it follows that she is not to pastor a church, since undoubtedly to do so would put her in a position in which she would have authority over men. However, many theologians see Paul’s instructions to Timothy as specifically applying to how Paul thought it best for the church at Ephesus to function due to the customs of that time and they emphasize the fact that Paul personalized his instructions by using first person. In other words, he was saying to Timothy something like, “this is how I do things in the church at Ephesus and I suggest that you follow my lead on this.” If indeed Paul’s instructions to Timothy regarding the church of Ephesus applies to all churches today then not only should women not serve as pastors, but women should not teach Sunday school, women should not teach Bible study, women should not be choir leaders or choir directors, and women should always sit still in Bible study and Sunday school never saying a word or asking a question. But the church today doesn’t exercise such restrictions on women because it realizes that, the way that Paul was instructing Timothy had a direct correlation to the culture of Ephesus at the time.
There are just a couple of other things that must be looked at regarding this issue. The first has to do with the fact that serving as a pastor is listed as a spiritual gift, as attested to in the following passage of scripture: “But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it. This is why it says: When he ascended on high, he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men. What does “he ascended” mean except that he also descended to the lower earthly regions? He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe. It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ (Ephesians 4:7-13).
The scripture says that Christ has given “some to be pastors.” The word “some” is not gender specific. In other words, “some” applies to human beings as a whole, which of course includes women. There are those who might like to argue that where the scripture says, “and gave gifts to men,” designates gender specification of men only. But when looking at the Greek it is clear that “men” in this context is simply an English translation for “mankind” or “human beings.” Therefore women are not excluded from receiving the gift of pastor. Logically then, if God has given women the gift of pastor then it stands to reason that there are women that he would call to the office of pastor as well. The definition of the word “pastor” is not diminished when it is applied to women.
Finally, there is an example in scripture whereby it appears that a woman actually functioned in the role of a pastor. The entire letter of 2 John is a letter from John the Apostle to whom the New International Version and New Living Translation translates as the “chosen” lady and her children. The King James Version translation reads the “elect” lady. Verses 9-10 (NIV) reads, “Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him.” Verse 10 in the New Living Translation reads a little differently. It says, “if someone comes to your meeting and does not teach the truth…” The operative word here is “meeting.” All would agree that during the times of the early church many church meetings were held in houses. If indeed this chosen lady held a church meeting in her home and was directly instructed not to let anyone into the meeting who taught opposite the teachings of Christ, then it is not a stretch to presume that it is quite possible she was the primary leader of a church assembly, which, in essence is the function of a pastor.
There are opposing interpretations that attempt to nullify any possibility that this chosen lady could have been a pastor. The main opposing interpretation is that this “chosen lady” was not really a woman but was instead a local church and that her children were the members of that local church. In other words the term “chosen lady” was just a figure of speech, a metaphor used to refer to the saints of a local church and its members. The problem with this interpretation is that, nowhere else in scripture is the word “lady” used as a metaphor for the church. Furthermore, John closes his letter by saying to this chosen lady “I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete.” (v.12). This is the exact same closing that John used in his letter that he wrote to his male friend, Gaius (third letter of John). John also greets Gaius in the same way that he greets the chosen lady. In verse 4 of John’s third letter, John also refers to children as he did in his letter to the chosen lady. However, theologians do not question that John is talking to an actual man in his letter to Gaius, but there is question as to whether or not John is talking to a woman in his letter to the chosen lady although both the letters are quite similar in style. The point here is that the argument that John was referring to a local church in his second letter instead of to an actual woman is indeed a weak one. After all, he speaks of hoping to visit with her and talk to her “face to face.” It is quite apparent that there was definitely a woman who John referred to as “chosen” and that this woman assembled the saints together in her home, for what could have very possibly been a sacred assembly. Thus, it is evidently conceivable that this lady functioned in the role of pastor. It is also possible that she did not. But the possibility that she could have, should not be denied.
There is simply no concrete scriptural evidence that forbids women to pastor. If we say that a woman can be in authority over a man as long as there is man in authority over her, then we must say that a woman can pastor a church as long as there is a man in authority over her (just as Paul was in authority over Timothy). And if we contend that women should not serve as pastors because it puts them in authority over men, then we must take it as far to say that women should not perform any service at all in the church which puts them in authority over men. Otherwise, we become hypocrites. And if we say that women should not perform any service at all in the church which puts them in authority over men, then we must sincerely ask ourselves…where would that leave the church? Overall, when it’s all said and done, if a woman believes she is called to pastor a church then she should seek to pastor one. For it is better to obey God rather than man. So to my friend I say, carry on my dear sister in the Lord, no matter how many discouraging phone calls you get, carry on.
The main point of debate has to do with how some interpret the passage of scripture found in 1 Timothy 3:1-7. It reads, “Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. (If anyone does not know how to mange his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. He must also have a good reputation with outsiders so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.” (NIV)
The term “overseer” is synonymous with “pastor.” Since the scripture identifies an overseer by roles that apply to men (i.e. husband of but one wife, managing the family) many theologians argue that this in itself is enough to prove that the role of pastor is not for women. However, if this is the case, then we should see no place in scripture where a woman has held a position that is identified by roles that apply to men. But on the contrary, we do. Phoebe, a woman, is identified as a deacon in Romans 16:1-2, yet the office of deacon is identified by roles that apply to men. Romans 16:1-2 (NLT) reads, “Our sister Phoebe, a deacon in the church in Cenchrea will be coming to see you soon.” It should be noted that the NIV, NASB, and King James versions use the word “servant” instead of “deacon” while the NLT uses the word “deacon” and the Amplified version uses the word “deaconess.” Clearly this is a point of contention among biblical scholars. However, the same Greek word (“diakonos”) that is used for “servant” in Romans 16:1 when identifying Phoebe is the exact same Greek word that is used for the “deacon” in the passage of scripture that defines the role of a deacon, which is found in the following passage of scripture: “Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. They must first be tested and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons. In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything. A deacon must be the husband of but one wife, and must manage his children and his household well.” (1 Timothy 3:8-12 NIV)
There is no doubt that the scripture identifies the office of deacon by roles that apply to men (i.e. husband of one wife, manage household well) just as the scripture identifies the office of pastor by roles that apply to men. If then a woman can be a deacon despite the fact that the office of deacon is identified by roles that apply to men, then it follows that a woman can be a pastor despite the fact that the office of pastor is identified by roles that apply to men.. Therefore the argument that says a woman cannot be a pastor because the office of pastor is identified by the roles of men is made void since there is a woman (Phoebe) identified in scripture that served in a position in the church that is identified by the roles of men.
To take the point further, if the conservative view says that since the office of pastor is identified by roles that apply to men and therefore women cannot hold position in that office, then the conservative view should also say that since the office of pastor is identified by roles that apply to married men then single men cannot hold position in that office. If we are to look at the passage of scripture in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 conservatively then there should be no double standards in interpretation when it comes to gender. The passage says that a pastor should be the husband of but one wife and should be able to manage his family. This therefore defines the office of pastor, not just generally by roles that apply to men, but more specifically by roles that apply to married men. If we apply the same conservative view to men as some do to women when looking at the passage, then we would have to conclude that single men should not pastor. However, even though some in the church might agree with this conclusion, most of us in the church would find this conclusion erroneous and a misinterpretation of scripture, even those who use the same reasoning to forbid women to pastor. This is where the double standard lies.
The unsettling part to all of this is that the church will put up with a man serving in the office of pastor who does not meet the qualifications of 1 Timothy 3:1-7 before it puts up with a woman serving in the office of pastor, who does. Not only should a pastor have no more than one wife and be able to manage his family but he must be above reproach (not be guilty of disgrace), he must have control of his temper, he must be self-controlled (not prone to fall into temptations of the flesh), he should be respectable, he should be hospitable, he should be able to teach, he should not be a drunkard, he should not be quarrelsome, he should not be violent, he should not be a recent convert, and he should not be a lover of money. It is safe to say that if a pastor fails at meeting even one of these qualifications, he is, according to 1 Timothy 3:1-7, not qualified to serve in the office of pastor. However, there are many male pastors in the church who do not meet these qualifications and the church merely winks at them.
Those who argue against women serving as pastors also use 1 Timothy 2:11-12, to support their position. It reads, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” This was part of Paul’s instructions to Timothy as to how Timothy was to care for the church at Ephesus during the time that Paul would be in Macedonia. Those who argue that women should not pastor emphasize the part in which Paul says that he does not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man. If a woman is not to have authority over a man, then it follows that she is not to pastor a church, since undoubtedly to do so would put her in a position in which she would have authority over men. However, many theologians see Paul’s instructions to Timothy as specifically applying to how Paul thought it best for the church at Ephesus to function due to the customs of that time and they emphasize the fact that Paul personalized his instructions by using first person. In other words, he was saying to Timothy something like, “this is how I do things in the church at Ephesus and I suggest that you follow my lead on this.” If indeed Paul’s instructions to Timothy regarding the church of Ephesus applies to all churches today then not only should women not serve as pastors, but women should not teach Sunday school, women should not teach Bible study, women should not be choir leaders or choir directors, and women should always sit still in Bible study and Sunday school never saying a word or asking a question. But the church today doesn’t exercise such restrictions on women because it realizes that, the way that Paul was instructing Timothy had a direct correlation to the culture of Ephesus at the time.
There are just a couple of other things that must be looked at regarding this issue. The first has to do with the fact that serving as a pastor is listed as a spiritual gift, as attested to in the following passage of scripture: “But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it. This is why it says: When he ascended on high, he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men. What does “he ascended” mean except that he also descended to the lower earthly regions? He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe. It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ (Ephesians 4:7-13).
The scripture says that Christ has given “some to be pastors.” The word “some” is not gender specific. In other words, “some” applies to human beings as a whole, which of course includes women. There are those who might like to argue that where the scripture says, “and gave gifts to men,” designates gender specification of men only. But when looking at the Greek it is clear that “men” in this context is simply an English translation for “mankind” or “human beings.” Therefore women are not excluded from receiving the gift of pastor. Logically then, if God has given women the gift of pastor then it stands to reason that there are women that he would call to the office of pastor as well. The definition of the word “pastor” is not diminished when it is applied to women.
Finally, there is an example in scripture whereby it appears that a woman actually functioned in the role of a pastor. The entire letter of 2 John is a letter from John the Apostle to whom the New International Version and New Living Translation translates as the “chosen” lady and her children. The King James Version translation reads the “elect” lady. Verses 9-10 (NIV) reads, “Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him.” Verse 10 in the New Living Translation reads a little differently. It says, “if someone comes to your meeting and does not teach the truth…” The operative word here is “meeting.” All would agree that during the times of the early church many church meetings were held in houses. If indeed this chosen lady held a church meeting in her home and was directly instructed not to let anyone into the meeting who taught opposite the teachings of Christ, then it is not a stretch to presume that it is quite possible she was the primary leader of a church assembly, which, in essence is the function of a pastor.
There are opposing interpretations that attempt to nullify any possibility that this chosen lady could have been a pastor. The main opposing interpretation is that this “chosen lady” was not really a woman but was instead a local church and that her children were the members of that local church. In other words the term “chosen lady” was just a figure of speech, a metaphor used to refer to the saints of a local church and its members. The problem with this interpretation is that, nowhere else in scripture is the word “lady” used as a metaphor for the church. Furthermore, John closes his letter by saying to this chosen lady “I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete.” (v.12). This is the exact same closing that John used in his letter that he wrote to his male friend, Gaius (third letter of John). John also greets Gaius in the same way that he greets the chosen lady. In verse 4 of John’s third letter, John also refers to children as he did in his letter to the chosen lady. However, theologians do not question that John is talking to an actual man in his letter to Gaius, but there is question as to whether or not John is talking to a woman in his letter to the chosen lady although both the letters are quite similar in style. The point here is that the argument that John was referring to a local church in his second letter instead of to an actual woman is indeed a weak one. After all, he speaks of hoping to visit with her and talk to her “face to face.” It is quite apparent that there was definitely a woman who John referred to as “chosen” and that this woman assembled the saints together in her home, for what could have very possibly been a sacred assembly. Thus, it is evidently conceivable that this lady functioned in the role of pastor. It is also possible that she did not. But the possibility that she could have, should not be denied.
There is simply no concrete scriptural evidence that forbids women to pastor. If we say that a woman can be in authority over a man as long as there is man in authority over her, then we must say that a woman can pastor a church as long as there is a man in authority over her (just as Paul was in authority over Timothy). And if we contend that women should not serve as pastors because it puts them in authority over men, then we must take it as far to say that women should not perform any service at all in the church which puts them in authority over men. Otherwise, we become hypocrites. And if we say that women should not perform any service at all in the church which puts them in authority over men, then we must sincerely ask ourselves…where would that leave the church? Overall, when it’s all said and done, if a woman believes she is called to pastor a church then she should seek to pastor one. For it is better to obey God rather than man. So to my friend I say, carry on my dear sister in the Lord, no matter how many discouraging phone calls you get, carry on.
posted by Elreta Dodds at 4:08 AM
7 Comments:
I'am so glad to read this teaching cause a had alloth of strugle with this topic. so many times i was bombarded with that only man can be a preacher...but also I had one vers that i always use to keep my peace Galatians 3:28. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. Amen And God bless you!
Here's the problem, while it is obvious that a woman can be a deacon(ess) because we see that example in the Bible, it can be said that a woman can not pastor, because that example does not appear in the Bible. That's a very important example to let slip through the cracks, and it's one I don't think we should take lightly.
Anonymous said that "it can be said that a woman cannot pastor because that example does not appear in the Bible." But to the contrary, it does. Colossians 4:15quotes Paul as saying, "Give my greetings to the brothers at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her house" (NIV). Hmmm...sounds like a pastor to me. The name is feminine in the Greek as is the pronoun that's placed before the word "house." But many Bible scholars have been so opposed to any interpretation of scripture that might lead one to think that women can pastor, that for years the passage was translated as "Nymphas and the church in his house" (KJV). Biblical scholars now admit that this particular passage is actually referring to a woman and that past translations depicting the person as a man were erroneous. Furthermore, we cannot ignore 2 John (particularly verse 10) in which the "chosen lady" (NLT) is depicted as having meetings in her house. The entire letter gives credence to the conclusion that the meetings were what we would consider to be church services today. --Elreta Dodds
Very good article...Thank you! Two out of three comments very good, as well. God is no respecter of persons. We are to submit to another in the fear of God Eph 5:21
How does this connect with 1 Corinthians, especially 14:34-35 or 1 Timothy 2:8-15 where it is quite clear about the role of women?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home