Pastoral Excellence – Pentecostal Style

By James P. Bowers

Chapter Two -

The Ordination of Women as Bishops
and
the Biblical Tradition

For Pentecostal believers, any theological discussion must be informed by the biblical tradition. Often the text speaks directly to certain issues, like the doctrine of Spirit Baptism or Divine Healing. However, sometimes issues faced by contemporary interpreters are not directly addressed by Scripture, or are addressed in ways that create a certain amount of tension for the interpreter, as the text may say different things about the same issue. On those occasions, the interpreter does not have the luxury of simply restating Scripture but must construct with biblical materials, seeking to discern the biblical way forward, even though the biblical witness is complex, perhaps even striking the interpreter as though it is skewed. This is certainly the case as the Church seeks to come to a biblical position on the issue of the ordination of women as Bishops. This short study seeks to highlight certain aspects of the biblical text that would appear to be relevant in the Church’s deliberation on this important but controversial issue.

It is manifestly clear from a reading of the Gospels that women filled important roles in the life and ministry of Jesus. They found a place as disciples who were not only taught by Jesus (Luke 10.38-42), but also ministered to him out of their means (Luke 8.1-3). Perhaps the significance of their role in the community envisioned by Jesus is signaled by the fact that a woman was chosen and commissioned by Jesus to be the first preacher of his resurrection, clearly the most important message ever proclaimed (Mt. 28.1-10; Mk 16.1-8, 9-11; Lk. 24.1-12; Jn 20.11-18). The significance of this choice is all the clearer when viewed against the first-century Jewish context which denied the validity of a woman’s witness in a court of law. That Jesus would first entrust this most strategic message to a woman indicates that in his community, the standards of this world are turned upside down and that women would play prominent roles. Paul comes very close to this idea when he says that in Christ Jesus ‘there is neither male nor female’ (Gal. 4.4).

It is sometimes claimed that the absence of a woman from among the Twelve apostles is an indication that women were limited in some ways with regard to their participation in ministry. However, such a view is not convincing for at least two reasons. First, the imagery of the Twelve is quite obviously connected in some way with the (reconstitution of) the Twelve tribes of (the new) Israel. The inclusion of a woman in the Twelve would no doubt obscure this connection for some, given the patriarchal orientation of first-century Jewish society. Second, there exists good biblical evidence that at least one woman in the early church was identified as an apostle. In Romans 16.7, Paul makes reference to Andronicus and Junia, who are identified as his relatives, as his co-prisoners, and as being believers before him. Most importantly for this discussion is that he describes them as ‘outstanding among the apostles’. Evidence that this phrase means Andronicus and Junia were regarded as apostles in the early church comes in two forms. First, this phrase was understood in precisely this fashion by early Christian interpreters. Second, later scribes sought to change the feminine Junia to the masculine Junias owing to their discomfort with the idea that there was a woman apostle. Unfortunately for this position, the masculine name Junias never occurs in antiquity! According to Paul, an apostle must have seen the resurrected Lord and been commissioned as an apostle by him. From the evidence of Romans 16.7 there seems to be little doubt that even this most significant office in earliest Christianity was open to women.

Not only is there at least one female apostle mentioned in the Bible, there are also numerous women who function prophetically or serve as prophetesses. The prophetic activity of Mary (Lk. 1.46-55), Elizabeth (Lk. 1.41-45), and Anna (Lk. 2.36-38) accompany the birth of Jesus. The expectation of Acts 2 that ‘sons and daughters will prophesy’ finds partial fulfillment in the four daughters of Philip who are identified as having the gift of prophecy (Acts 21.9). In his admonitions with regard to decency and order in worship, Paul describes the way in which he expects women to prophesy (1 Cor. 11.2-16). Even the negative evidence of a false prophetess in the Book of Revelation (2.20) implies that the community knew of true prophetesses as well, for the false prophetess is not condemned on account of her gender but her false teaching and practice.

The Gospel according to John adds to our knowledge of the role of women in the early church. In addition to the fact that the mother of Jesus appears to possess a special understanding of Jesus' person and mission (Jn 2.3-5), other women at times demonstrate a deeper understanding of Jesus' teaching than others in the Gospel. This positive view of women is strengthened by the fact that after all the male disciples (except the disciple whom Jesus loved) have abandoned Jesus at his crucifixion, the women disciples are found at the foot of the cross (Jn 19.25). In keeping with the other Gospels, John also records that the first witness to proclaim the message of Jesus' resurrection is a woman, Mary Magdalene (Jn 20.11-18). However, the Gospel also reveals that a certain Samaritan woman filled the role of evangelist. The primary result of her encounter with Jesus is that she comes to understand that he is the Messiah. It is her testimony/witness that results in many Samaritans believing in Jesus (Jn 4.39). It should perhaps be pointed out that aside from the witness of John, who came as a witness in order that all might believe through him (Jn 1.7), no one else in the Gospel compares with the Samaritan woman as an evangelist.

Acts 18.24-26 indicates that at least one woman in the early church functioned as a teacher. This text reveals that Apollos, an eloquent speaker from Alexandria who was deficient in his understanding of the way of God, was taken aside and instructed more fully by Priscilla and Aquilla. The fact that Priscilla's name precedes that of her husband, a strange occurrence in ancient documents, indicates that she was regarded as the lead teacher of the two. That she served as the teacher of a prominent male minister would appear to be quite clear from this text.

Among the many individuals mentioned by Paul at the conclusion of his letter to the Romans, is an individual named Phoebe (Rom. 16.1). The striking thing about this reference is the fact that Paul refers to her as a deacon ( diavkonon), using the same term that he uses elsewhere for male leaders (1 Tim. 3.8). Significantly, Phoebe is not here described as a deaconess, but as a deacon, indicating that a woman could fill the role of deacon in the early church.

To this evidence might be added the names of women who hosted (and lead?) house churches (Mary - Acts 12.12; Nympha - Col. 4.15) and the numerous women mentioned by Paul as his co-laborers and fellow servants in the ministry (cf. those mentioned in Rom. 16.1-15 [Prisca, Mary, Tryphaena, Tryphosa, Persis, the mother of Rufus, Julia, and the sister of Nereus]; Phil. 4.2 [Eudioa and Syntyche]; 2 Tim. 4.21 [Claudia]; and Phile. 2 [Apphia]).

Given the sheer quantity of the biblical evidence with regard to the participation of women in the ministry of the early church, it is somewhat surprising that there is even a debate with regard to their role in the ministry of the contemporary church. Although other issues sometimes come into the discussion, it appears that the major reason for reluctance on behalf of some as to the full participation of women in the church' ministry comes down to two passages found within the writings of Paul. These two texts appear to prohibit women from speaking, teaching, or exercising authority over a man: 1 Cor. 14.33b-36 and 1 Tim. 2.9-15. Both of these passages speak about the silence of women and taken by themselves have been interpreted to mean that there was no place for the role of women in public worship.

The challenge then is how to construct a biblical position on the role of women in ministry that takes account of these divergent views. In other words how do we reconcile these passages? I offer the following observations as a way forward on this very difficult issue.

First, whatever 1 Cor. 14.33b-36 and 1 Tim. 2.9-15 mean, they should not be allowed to nullify the vast preponderance of biblical texts dealing with women and ministry. To do so would be the equivalent of allowing Paul’s words ‘tongues shall cease’ and ‘I would rather speak five intelligible words…than ten thousand words in a tongue’ to nullify all the other biblical passages with regard to speaking in tongues.

Second, while all Scripture is inspired, not all Scripture is universally applicable. Such is rather clearly the case with the ‘Kosher’ food laws found in Acts 15.20, which never appear again in New Testament discussions regarding the inclusion of Gentiles in the church. In like fashion, although various New Testament passages include admonitions to slaves and slave owners, owing to the political realities of the Roman world, what Christian would want to argue that slavery is an institution that is pleasing to God? Rather, such texts appear to be temporary accommodations to the fallen state in which the church ministers. These texts are inspired and, consequently, should not be dismissed from our Bibles owing to the fact that they may still speak to believers who find themselves in such oppressive situations, but clearly they do not describe the ideal for which the church must strive.

Third, given the fact that there are so many biblical texts that affirm the role of women in ministry, is it not likely that 1 Cor. 14.33b-36 and 1 Tim. 2.9-15 are best understood as similar temporary accommodations which are not understood as representing the ideal, but rather are necessary owing to the curse incurred as a result of the fall? That such passages remain in our Bibles and continue to speak to contexts where the oppression of women is a daily reality should not be used as a license to subordinate women in other contexts, anymore than slavery texts should be used as advocating slavery where it does not exist.

Fourth, the interpretive model of the early church found in Acts 15, when faced with the question about the Gentiles, may also help guide us as we seek to make our way on the issue of women in ministry. There, the activity of the Spirit within the community led the church to a passage of Scripture that spoke about the inclusion of Gentiles, even though there were numerous Old Testament texts that spoke of their exclusion. Perhaps we are in a similar situation now, where the Spirit must lead us in order to come to a biblical position with regard to the role of women in ministry. Given the preponderance of passages supporting the full participation of women in the leadership of the church and the fact that as Pentecostals we know first hand that God has and does anoint women to lead, are we not dangerously close to testing God (Acts 15.10) by placing barriers before our sisters who have been called by God? Are we not depriving the church and ourselves of valuable resources in the end-time harvest in which we find ourselves? Let us not send our daughters elsewhere in order for them to fulfill the call of God upon their lives. Let us empower them by removing unnecessary hindrances to their ministry.

__________________________________________________________

For example, cf. the words of John Chrysostom, ‘And indeed to be apostles at all is a great thing. But to be even amongst these of note, just consider what a great encomium this is! But these were of note owing to their works, to their achievements. Oh! how great is the devotion of this woman, that she should be even counted worthy of the appellation of apostle!’ Cited in W. Sanday and A.C. Headlam, The Epistle to the Romans (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1895), p. 423.

For example, Martha is the only character in John to pick up on Jesus' teaching about the resurrection at the last day (11.24). In addition, she makes an (almost) unrivaled confession of Jesus when she says, ‘Yes Lord, I have believed that you are the Christ, the Son of God, the One coming into the World’ (Jn 11.27).