The first great theological battle my father fought was over the question of women’s ordination. He was originally ordained in the United Presbyterian Church, until the Pittsburgh presbytery determined not only that women could be ordained but that those who disagreed could either leave or face discipline. My father also was perfectly happy to have women speak to thousands, men and women at Ligonier conferences. There was a time when all teaching series offered by Ligonier were either by my father, his mentor John Gerstner, or Elizabeth Elliott. What gives?
What gives is that central to our confusion on the issue of women preachers is a foundational weakness on the question of preaching. It is not a too high view of women that leads to women preachers but a too low view of preaching. Preaching is what happens when a man with authority speaks from the Word to the congregation under his care. His authority in that context is, however nuanced, profoundly distinct from any “authority” carried in the context of a conference or a book or a teaching series. Like apocryphal literature, what we take in from those not ordained as elders may be quite useful pious wisdom. It cannot be preaching with authority.
The one and only time I had to serve detention as a school student was my last year of high school. I skipped mandatory chapel. I arrived on time. I took my seat. And when Mrs. Bunny Hill, a delightful woman and teacher, stood up to speak I stood up and walked out. I was wrong to have done so. Addressing a chapel meeting at a high school, if the speaker was Mrs. Hill, my father or the Archbishop of Canterbury isn’t preaching and lacks the authority of preaching. My concern then, when Beth Moore stands behind the pulpit on Mother’s Day morning, or the women’s group leader at my local church isn’t that there is a woman preaching. My concern is that the church is gathering without the Word being preached.
Many years ago, before I had ever been ordained, I was invited to speak at a Reformation Celebration put on by Reformed churches in the San Francisco Bay area. A pastor who had served in that difficult world for decades, a genuine hero to me, drove me to the airport after I spoke. My heart soared when he said to me, “That was an outstanding talk that you gave.” And all the air went out of the balloon when he continued, “It would have been even better if you were ordained.”
Worse than women in pulpits, I would argue, is that we have sheep in pews who recognize no authority in their shepherds whatsoever. We have shepherds who likewise either don’t recognize their own authority or who don’t find authoritative preaching to be necessary. I’m enormously grateful for the impact of many wise women in my life, especially my precious wife. I, in turn, see the Word preached as something radically more compelling than a message shared.
Sad to see you restrict that commandment for women not to teach or take authority to only be preaching. That is exactly the excuse that is being used in the SBC and all over the place to say that they can teach as long as they aren’t the head pastor (whatever that means). The Bible is clear in what it says, it doesn’t need to watered down (or contextualized if you’d rather use that word).
Pretty sure my point had everything to do with authority, not whether someone has the title of “head pastor.” The Bible does indeed says what it says, and nothing I’ve said in the least suggests watering it down or contextualizing it.
And you handled it the same way, by minimizing the text to the least we can apply it to. If a woman is teaching a sunday school class, or a chapel service it still goes too far. In fact, before Moo re-interpreted things in the big blue book, the orthodox church didn’t even have women teaching women (so for a millenia and a half), they followed the given guidelines of what women were allowed to teach the younger women.
No, I handled it by maximizing the import of authoritative teaching. The text, not me or Moo, speaks of exercising authority. Feel free, however, to have the last word.