May 13, 2005
Is Feminism more important than Shepherding?
It ain’t the Ocars but, it is coming time to choose leaders at my church. As a member of the Nominating Committee, I have reflected upon my role quite a bit. The gravity of selecting leaders that will serve our body of believers is not to be taken lightly. As such, I have been prayerfully fasting and considering who is equipped for these roles of leadership.
One issue in particular that has weighed on my heart is the role of women in these positions. Has feminism become more important than leadership or shepherding in our culture today? Are the values of equality or perceived inequality becoming more important than Biblical principles? Have women been suppressed by the Church? Are women as important to the body as men? I’d say YES on all accounts.
Dave Rudd has laid out some fair assumptions regarding those that oppose women as elders:
• Because Paul's letters to Timothy and Corinth were inspired, they are directly transferable to us today.
• The gender specific language in the lists of "elder qualifications" eliminates the possibility of female elders.
• The concepts of male "headship" within the family are transferable to the roles within the church.
• God has designed women and men with distinctives which enable them to perform different tasks efficiently.
Being a member of a church that does not allow for women to be ordained as Pastors or Elders, one might think this to be a non-issue or at least an issue that has already been dealt with in my church. To some degree it has, but there also seems to be another issue at hand, husbandless wives. By this I mean, families that have wives and mothers as the spiritual head rather than the husbands and fathers that are physically present.
“[T]he New Testament sees a close relationship between male leadership in the home and male leadership in the church. This is in part because the church is viewed as a “family,” and patterns of church life are imitated in the family, while patterns of family life are to be imitated in the church.” said Wayne Grudem in Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth, Chapter 2: A Biblical Vision of Manhood and Womanhood in the Church. He continues that, “male leadership in the home and in the church will likely stand or fall together.”
My fear here is that as family structures tend not to reflect a Biblical worldview, than neither will the leadership of the church. It is a slippery slope indeed and not easy to balance the deficiency of available male leadership with the overwhelming blessing of gifted women. Grudem offers up this exhortation in his conclusion on A Biblical Vision of Manhood and Womanhood in the Church, “I simply encourage churches to be careful not to prohibit what the Bible doesn’t prohibit, while they also attempt to preserve male leadership in the way Scripture directs.” Conversely I would add that churches should be careful not to exhibit what the Bible does prohibit.
Some may disagree on the Bible actually prohibiting female leadership when it comes to teaching Biblical truths in a congregational setting and governing or shepherding the church. I would be hard pressed to agree with their specific set of assumptions as Dave Rudd as offered or characterize them as anything other than liberal:
• Men and women are created equal (and often equal means identical)
• Biblical passages need to be interpreted in light of their context (and sometimes that means the particular words become irrelevant).
• The gospels are a higher authority than the epistles. (this is not always assumed, but often it is argued that Jesus would never have differentiated between genders)
In the end, I believe we are all attempting to glorify God and make known His eternal truths to a fallen world. I realize that I do not have much to offer to this conversation in the way of exegetical discourse, but I do have a passion to serve God. That is my attempt and this is my working out of that passion.
