So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:27)
There is a fundamental difference between man and woman; not a difference of dignity, but of role and responsibility. Contrary to cultural assumptions, gender is not incidental to our personhood, but is instead essential to who we are as humans. In the beginning, God created us male and female in His own image. We were not created as asexual beings, but male or female. This basic distinction serves as the basis for God’s expectations of us. At the core of who we are is not undifferentiated humanity, but manhood or womanhood, and this differentiation plays out in every area of life.
But how should this theological conviction be applied in our personal lives and churches? What are those unique roles and responsibilities and where are the boundaries? What is black and white and what is gray?
Though not exhaustive, this paper will hopefully provide sufficient clarity for how we seek to implement our theological convictions as a local church. But first, what are those theological convictions?
Theological Convictions
You might think of beliefs regarding gender roles as existing on a spectrum. At one end of the spectrum is the opinion that there are no fundamental differences between men and women. This view, called egalitarianism, holds that any historical role distinctions based on gender are cultural and/or sinful rather than biblical – meaning they are a result of something other than God’s good design. Thus, in keeping with the redemptive trajectory of Scripture, women are free to serve in just about any way that men can. Therefore, an egalitarian holds to the conviction that women can pastor, preach, teach, and exercise authority with equal opportunity as men.
On the other end of the spectrum is the more traditional historic view. Some might call this patriarchy while others choose the term complementarianism. Even between these two terms, there can be grades of difference in conviction and application and each term represents a spectrum of accompanying beliefs, but what they share in common is the belief that God has designated certain roles and responsibilities of men that He has prohibited women from practicing. While those who claim the term patriarchy and those who call themselves complementarians might differ on which exact roles and responsibilities are limited, they nonetheless agree in principle on a distinction on the basis of gender.
The reality of a wide spectrum of application has led many to wonder if the term complementarianism is even a helpful descriptor today. For example, some complementarians would merely maintain that women cannot serve as elders, but that they can and should do anything an unordained man can do. This position has been called soft or thin or narrow complementarianism.
On the other hand, there is a lot of overlap between hard, thick, or broad complementarianism and patriarchy. In fact, there is so much overlap that the edges between the two are often blurred. What one person calls hard complementarianism might very well be another’s patriarchy and vice versa. What they hold in common is the idea that women are not only prohibited from serving as elders (contra egalitarianism), but that the prohibitions extend to other roles as well such as preaching, teaching in certain contexts, and so forth (contra thin complementarianism).
More important than having a specific label is having a general idea of where one fits on the spectrum. For instance, examining how a church or individual answers the following questions would help diagnose their relative location on the complementarian/patriarchy spectrum:
- Can a woman ever preach in a normal congregational worship service?
- Can a woman ever teach in a mixed gender Bible or theological class at church?
- Can a woman perform the functions of an elder as long as she doesn’t possess that title?
- Can a woman teach in a seminary setting?
- Can a woman lead worship?
- Can a woman serve as a deacon?
- Can a woman serve as the president of a denomination or parachurch organization?
- Should a woman serve in political office?
- Should a mother generally work outside the home while her children are young?
- Is male headship in the home merely a seldomly exercised deciding vote/veto?
The more questions that one answers “yes,” the further they are toward a softer complementarianism whereas “no” answers pushes one toward the harder complementarianism/patriarchy side.
Such application boils down to an even deeper theological divide between softer and harder forms of complementarianism or patriarchy. In particular, where one finds themselves is often related to how they might answer the following questions:
- Recognizing the real threat of both, what is the greater danger to the church today, chauvinism and abuse of authority by men or the emasculation and feminization of the church and surrounding culture?
- Are biblical boundaries and restrictions between the sexes good and beautiful and to be celebrated or are they a cause of embarrassment? Should we be proud of and excited about biblical gender roles or should we seek to downplay and hide them?
- Are biblical boundaries and restrictions somewhat arbitrary or did God assign distinct roles on the basis of how He wired and created men and women? In other words, should women not serve as elders or lead their homes simply because God says so or did God say so because of creation order and gendered strengths and gifts?
At Reformation, we find ourselves on the stronger complementarian/patriarchy side of the spectrum. While some of our elders would prefer to call themselves complementarian and others would use the term patriarchy and while we might answer a couple of practical questions differently, we all have a similar approach and come to similar conclusions on most of the questions above.
While we do not require our members to land exactly where we do, we do think it important to give clarity on how our theological convictions are expressed within the context of our church. No church is complete without the mutually beneficial service of men and women. We need men to serve as God designed them to serve and women to serve as God has designed them to serve. But in order to do that, we need clarity on how God has designed each gender to serve. What are the differences and how are those communicated in practice?
Here are a handful of ways in which our doctrine plays out at Reformation.
Practical Applications
Will we have female elders?
Given that female eldership is the historic dividing line between egalitarianism and complementarianism, this should be obvious. The Bible is clear that women are not to “teach or exercise authority over men” (1 Timothy 2:12) and that elders should be duly-qualified men (1 Timothy 3). Based on a holistic theology of women’s roles, we believe that it is not only unwise, but sinful to appoint females to the office of elder. Therefore, Reformation will never have female elders.
Furthermore, our convictions demand that we not only prohibit females from holding the title and office of elder, but that we also restrict the functions of eldership to males. We believe that what Scripture limits isn’t merely the title, but also the activities that are associated with that office (e.g. teaching and exercising authority, 1 Timothy 2:11-15).
Will we have female deacons?
The question of deacons (or deaconesses) is trickier given that the office doesn’t inherently entail teaching or exercising authority. In addition, many traditions throughout Church history have had female deacons well before modern feminism’s influence. While we cannot say that it would necessarily be sinful to appoint female deacons, our elders have determined that we will not do so for various reasons; which can be found (including the pros and cons for each perspective) in our blog on the topic.
Will we allow women to preach or teach in a formal worship gathering?
Again, 1 Timothy 2:12 is clear that women are not to teach or exercise authority over men. While some “narrow” complementarians make room for female preaching under the authority of the elders, that seems quite the exegetical stretch from Paul’s meaning. We believe that Scripture prohibits not merely the title of elder, but also the two functions of teaching and exercising authority over men. Furthermore, we question how there can be such a thing as non-authoritative preaching given the fact that preaching and teaching are inherently authoritative since they are founded upon the authority of God’s word itself. For these reasons we do not allow a woman to preach or teach in a formal gathering such as Sunday worship, theological equipping class, or other such mixed-gendered contexts.
Will we allow females to teach in children’s and youth contexts?
The Bible declares that though men bear the primary responsibility for teaching in the home, wives and mothers play an indispensable role in this area as well (Proverbs 1:8). When Paul prohibits women from teaching men, he is not forbidding all females from teaching all males, but rather the teaching of the apostolic deposit to adult males by women.
We believe that mothers should absolutely teach their sons, and we think it is just as appropriate for women to teach boys and girls in the church. This is not only allowed, but necessary for the healthy functioning of the church!
Therefore, we allow and encourage women to help teach in children’s contexts. As children get older and especially into later high school, we will generally transition to having men teach and lead in contexts where both sexes are present. Where exactly this line between boyhood and manhood exists is culturally ambiguous so we will need to show grace to each other as one person’s idea of a boy is another’s idea of a man and vice versa. As this line is also a bit biblically gray, so our application will be less dogmatic, but in general we will encourage male leadership and teaching for most high school mixed-sex contexts.
Will we allow females to read and pray during worship services?
Like the question of female deacons, this is in need of greater explanation. Paul is clear that there is a place for public prayer and prophesy for women (1 Corinthians 11) so it seems an extreme overreaction to forbid any and all participation by women in a worship service. Again, we could not say that allowing a woman to serve in this way would be sinful or necessarily entail a capitulation to culture.
However, we have chosen to restrict the reading of Scripture and prayer during Sunday services given that we view these as part of the pastoral responsibility of feeding the flock. In that sense, the issue isn’t that men can read and pray while women cannot. Rather, at Reformation, we have determined that reading and praying in this particular context will only be for those who are elders (or perhaps those who are being trained or assessed as elder candidates).
For more thoughts on why reading (and praying) might be wisely limited to pastors, consider the following resources by Tim Challies, Jacob Gerber, and John Piper.
Will we allow females to read and pray in other contexts?
Given that Paul explicitly allows for women to pray and prophesy, we likewise want to make room for public participation in the life of the body for the women of our church. One way in which this occurs is in our monthly prayer meeting (first Wednesday of each month at 6pm at the church) where women are encouraged to pray, share, and read Scripture (all of which they do regularly). In addition to this, there are countless informal contexts where women can pray, speak, and read such as a community group, Bible study, etc.
Will we allow women to sing or play instruments?
We believe that the act of leading worship carries a degree of teaching and/or exercising authority. For this reason, we will not allow women to lead worship during our Sunday services.
However, the elders believe that there is a noted difference between leading worship and simply accompanying and following the leadership of a male worship leader. We think an analogy exists here in how Paul deals with female praying and prophesying in 1 Corinthians 11. He is okay with both of these happening as long as there is a sign of authority (a head covering in that particular context) to show submission to male headship. In a similar way, a woman singing or playing an instrument to accompany a male leader seems an appropriate extension of this principle of female participation under male leadership. Therefore, we have no theological problems with a woman doing so.
Though our weekly worship is volunteer-led and we may currently have limited options as far as qualified female singers and musicians, we are open to and excited for future possibilities in this area. In other words, a lack of female presence on stage in this capacity on any given week is not necessarily due to theological conviction, but rather practical considerations.
Will we allow women’s Bible studies?
The Bible is clear that older women should teach and train younger women (Titus 2:3-5). Though the content of that teaching and training in the context of Titus is more domestic than doctrinal, there is nothing in Scripture to absolutely prohibit a woman from teaching another woman biblical truth.
That women should be encouraged to learn is absolutely clear. Immediately before prohibiting female teaching, Paul explicitly commands female learning (1 Timothy 2:11). So the question isn’t whether women should learn Bible and theology. They absolutely should! The question is instead the best context for that learning to occur. Is that best accomplished in women’s only spaces or is that instead the primary responsibility of a husband (1 Corinthians 14:35, Ephesians 5:26) and the pastors of a local church (Ephesians 4:11-12, et al)?
We are not averse to women’s Bible studies in principle. As leaders of Reformation charged by God with care for the church entrusted to us, we are opposed to the wrong person teaching the wrong material or otherwise compromising or contradicting the biblically based theological convictions of the church. Currently, we have one formal Bible study that is open to both men and women and is taught by our pastors and/or staff. On an informal level, there are a number of Bible studies and book studies that are led by and geared toward women. Furthermore, if any woman is interested in starting an informal study and would like help in assessing a study or material, the elders would be happy to help provide some direction.
How else can women serve?
Scripture is clear that there is a certain and distinct beauty and glory in women managing their own homes and we want to push back against the cultural disdain associated with what is such an essential biblical responsibility (Titus 2:3-5; 1 Timothy 5:14). One of the things that each of the waves of feminism has done is attempt to cultivate discontentment in women’s hearts toward domesticity. Rather than finding joy and purpose in the places where God places them, culture entices women to rebel against that design and look for meaning and purpose elsewhere. As we’ve often said, nothing is more antithetical to true femininity than feminism!
One of the strategies of the enemy is to shift our focus from what we do have to what we don’t have. We see that even in the opening chapters of Genesis. Adam and Eve are surrounded by bountiful goodness and yet they are fixated on the one prohibition. In a similar way, the enemy would want nothing more than for a woman to discount abundant service opportunities and to instead become preoccupied by a few prohibitions.
So, one way in which women serve the body is simply by being good wives and mothers, just as one way in which our men serve is by being faithful husbands and fathers. We begin with this fundamental role in order to show where Scripture places priority. While women can serve outside of the home, such service should never be to the detriment or neglect of this fundamental role.
That said, there are countless other ways for the women of Reformation Church to serve the body. On a formal level, there are opportunities for women to help with greeting, ushering, childcare, assisting with potluck brunches, cleaning the church, playing an instrument, helping with the website, helping with audio, etc. In addition to this, we have myriad opportunities for women to serve informally by mentoring other women and young girls (Titus 2), starting book studies, hosting dinners, building community, etc. There is no shortage of opportunities for women to use their gifts and passions in God-honoring ways in our church.
Conclusion
Clarity of theological conviction and subsequent application is essential for flourishing as a community. Though we do not expect every member to land in the exact same position on each of these questions, hopefully the clarification is helpful for establishing expectations.
While not exhausting the gambit of questions that may arise in response to our theological convictions, our goal is that this paper provides a generally helpful guideline as to how the elders approach the topic and why.
We believe that role and responsibility distinctions are not archaic shackles to be broken, but are incredibly beautiful gifts from our God to image unity and diversity in the body. The hope of Reformation Church is not that women would feel stifled by these distinctions, but would instead find great freedom to minister within the boundaries that God has placed around them. That they would throw off the philosophical presuppositions of feminism which inherently demeans femininity and embrace the vision of the beauty of womanhood that Scripture provides by knowing, loving, and obeying the prescriptions and prohibitions of the Word of God.
At the same time, our hope for our men is that we would not misapply headship as a license to suppress or oppress, but rather steward the opportunity to lay down our lives in humble self-sacrificial leadership which mirrors Jesus Christ. The church, in order to properly function, needs both men and women working together as God has designed and equipped them to see lives changed by the gospel of Jesus Christ for the glory of God.
Recommended Resources
For more on the dangers and consequences of feminism and a number of helpful resources on complementarianism and patriarchy, check out our recent Culture and Theology on the topic.