There are two opposing camps on the issue of women’s ordination (a critical part of the larger issue of women’s roles in church ministry and leadership). The Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) maintains the position of “complementarianism”. Both men and women are equal in essence but different in role, with women in subordinate (but not inferior) position under male leadership in both family and church. CBMW publishes Journal of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Wayne Grudem, J.I. Packer and Mary Kassian are among the notable spokespersons for this camp. Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE) counters such a perspective with an egalitarian view. Men and women are equal in both essence and role, with God-given and gender-blind gifts exercised in mutual submission. CBE publishes Priscilla Papers. Ronald Pierce, Rebecca Groothuis and Gordon Fee are some of the evangelical feminists for this camp which is also known as the feminist criticism. This paper is based on three journal articles (see bibliography), all written by women, and summarizes their arguments, source of authority, assumptions, scriptural evidence, and blind spots and concludes with my learning and reflection.
In reviewing Grudem’s Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth: an Analysis of 118 Disputed Questions, Karen Fulton singled out gender roles and individuality and cast doubt on the adequacy of Grudem’s arguments. For example, while Adam’s naming animals may connote authority, but Eve’s naming (“She shall be called woman”) is without such a requisite subject noun. Adam’s authority over Eve is thus not firmly established on the naming formula. The assumed intrinsic association of maleness or masculinity with leadership by Grudem is also seen without merit.
In a friendly review of Grudem’s book, Sharon James credited him for his acceptance of women’s gifting in evangelism and prophesy. James then identified three significant arguments advanced by Grudem. First, the Son’s subordination to the Father, even if only temporary during his incarnation, examplifies the complementarian model of “equal in essence, different in role”, contrary to Kevin Gile’s egalitarian reading of Trinity. Webb’s redemptive hermeneutic movement “nullifies the moral authority of the New Testament”. Groothuis’s equating “different in role” to unequal in role thus unequal in being commits a logical fallacy based on the feministic presupposition (but never biblical teaching) that male leadership or patriarchy is wrong. Second, Catherine Kroeger’s redefinition of kephale as source, rather than authority over, by appealing to Chrysostom as well as Greek literature, was groundless upon closer examination of the context. Third, egalitarianism was blamed for a plethora of social ills, including biblical liberalism, church membership decline, marriage breakdown, intolerance to the complementarians, and approval of homosexual practice.
Sharon James also reviewed the opposing egalitarian views expressed in Discovering Biblical Equality. She complimented this comprehensive collection of egalitarian essays as a one stop source for their main arguments but faulted them for failing to listen to and engage with the complementary perspective which is different from the “traditionalist” hierarchical and patriarchal view. Such a failure commits the logical fallacy of excluded middle (the middle being the complementarian view between the two extremes of egalitarian and hierarchical views), according to John Piper. This failure also sets up a straw man of, for example, strongly hierarchical marriage in which a power-driven husband rules over a submissive wife. James appealed to her own marriage experience where she affirms her husband as her leader who does not pretend or have to know all. Seeing nothing positive about being a man or woman, James says, “It was this vacuum of positive teaching about BM&W (as well as a failure to be convinced by the egalitarian biblical arguments) that led me to reject egalitarianism some years ago”.
Ruth Gouldbourne countered with a review in support of the egalitarian stance. She bemoaned what she terms “biblical badminton”, trading bible verses and/or their own favorite interpretations without resolving the differences. She commended the balanced biblical scholarship in exploring the hermeneutical assumptions and philosophical presuppositions. She affirmed Groothuis’s assessment of complementarian’s illogical link between equal in being and unequal in role. Gouldbourne also appreciated Kevin Giles’s rejection of subordinationism (Son’s purported subordination to the Father). She also found Webb’s redemptive movement hermeneutics helpful. She believed it was possible to be both evangelical and egalitarian, and she agreed to Alice Matthews’s plea for reconciliation between both sides.
Mary Kassian’s article on the history of feminism and the church, an excerpt and summary of her own book The Feminist Gospel: the Movement to Unite Feminism with the Church (Wheaton: Crossway, 1992), dates the beginning of secular feminism to 1790s and early 1800s. Women gained their right to vote in 1920 and joined the workforce also. In 1960s, Betty Friedan’s book “The Feminine Mystique” americanized the French philosopher Simone deBeauvoir’s 1949 book “The Second Sex”, catalyzing a renewed movement for women to become like men in all areas of life inside and outside family. During the same period, Katharine Bliss began her Christian version of the feminism movement with her 1952 book “The Service and Status of Women in the Church”. Mary Daly took up the task of feminizing theology with her 1968 book “The Church and the Second Sex” before she left the Catholic Church. Feminists soon realized their biological destiny was a burdensome baggage that they must unload. Their efforts bear much fruit in many fronts: claim their right to name, recast negative psychological emotion as a healthy response to patriarchy, reclaim prehistorical matriarchy, appreciate their own bodies and practice holistic medicine, have right to abort and freedom to have sex with whomever they like. Kate Millette epitomized the movement’s achievement when she openly confessed her lesbianism with Gloria Steinem. Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza took up the unfinished task of unchurched Mary Daly to reinterpret the Bible. Since 1970s, secular feminists (such as Merlin Stone and Robin Morgan) returned to witchcraft to rediscover feminine spirituality. Letty Russell joined the chorus by feminizing God in the church. The Bible is becoming gender-neutral, notably with NRSV, TNIV and the just released NIV. The two streams have merged to become biblical feminism, a watershed event. Mary Kassian’s narration is an interesting way of framing evangelical feminism in recent historical window of last two centuries far detached from biblical history.
Grace Ying May and Hyunhye Pokrifka Joe’s 1997 rebuttal to J.I. Packer’s 1991 Christianity Today’s article “Let’s stop making women presbyters” is grounded on both biblical and historical record. They pointed out the apparent internal contradiction between 1Cor. 14:34f, 1Tim. 2:11-14 and 1Tim.3:12, Rom.16, not to mention OT precedence in Deborah, Huldah, and the Prov.31 woman. They also noted Packer’s own inconsistency by allowing women to preach and teach under male supervision. They exegeted kephale in 1 Cor 11:8, 11-12 as clearly meaning “origin” of being in the context, and ezer in the Creation account not as subservient helper but a person of equal, if not greater, strength and ability. Nowhere in Gen.2 establishes a male headship. They further argued the authority in 1Cor.11:10 is mutual. They asserted that the mutual submission principle (Eph.5:21), not the alleged “male headship principle” (Eph.5:23), governs the husband-wife and other male-female relations. The maleness of Christ as the second Adam ought not to be misconstrued as male superiority, but rather his humanness. Christ’s subordination is an example for all, not just women. On the historical record, they noted Packer’s inaccurate assertion that feminism is a secular phenomenon of the 21st century. Harriet Beecher Stowe, Sojourner Truth and other sisters played a leading role in abolition movement. Women also led in mission and relief works after Civil War. After WWI, women in church became more marginalized, partly due to dispensationalism and a desire to make church more appealing to men. They agreed to Packer’s statement on women’s exercising of God-given gifts including preaching and teaching. The spiritual gifts are never gender-biased. The first Christians in the early church lived by an egalitarian teaching of Christ. The modern Pentecostalism and women ordination simply followed a biblical and historical precedence. Qualified women and men must be ordained in a status quo changing, continuously reforming, gender-neutral, human ritual that affirms God’s calling to them.
Meditating on the arguments and counterarguments offered from both sides of women’s ordination helps me to see the divisive issue from different perspectives. Each side seems to have their favorite scriptural verses and historical precedence to back up their own view. A person’s own prior ideological inclination shaped by whatever circumstances in their upbringing will undoubtedly color or distort the reading and interpretation of the Scripture and history. Neither side is immune to this. A tentative and learning attitude with an open mind is always needed for a fair dialogue. Personally, I find it inconsolable and unbiblical to assign any God-given gifts to members of one specific gender. God’s empowering gifts of all types have evidently been given without regard to gender throughout history. Our imperfect understanding of theology must be continually informed by God’s work both recorded in biblical time and being recorded in our time. This is not to downgrade the supremacy of the Scripture, but to exalt God’s truth that must be practiced in all times. Women’s ordination will become a non-issue in New Heaven and New Earth where gender difference will cease. This issue therefore cannot be part of the essential biblical truth. Bickering over this nonessential truth shed more heat than light. Let God continue to call women and men to serve him. All God’s children are elected princesses and princes destined to rule with Christ. In that sense, we are all leaders in training for the unimaginably bright future.
Bibliography:
1. Karen Fulton, Ruth Gouldbourne and Sharon James “Biblical truth and biblical equality: a review article on two recent books from IVP on evangelical feminism and biblical manhood and womanhood” Evangelical Quarterly, 78(1):65-84 (2006)
2. Mary Kassian “The history of feminism and the church” Journal of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Part I in 3(4): 8-9, 1998; Part II in 4(1):12-13, 1999; Part III in 4(2-3), 17-19, 2000.
3. Grace Ying May and Hyunhye Pokrifka Joe “A Response to J.I. Packer's Position on Women's Ordination”, Priscilla Papers, 11(1):1-10, 1997, first accessed online on
No comments:
Post a Comment