When you read the history of the Mills Church, from our early years as Minnetonka Union through the growth and expansion of Minnetonka Community Church, one thing that remains constant is our commitment to do life under the authority of God and His Word. This has been and will be an unwavering and nonnegotiable commitment for us.
This Sunday our covenant community will vote to affirm two new members of the Elder Team who happen to be women. This is not the first time in the history of our church that we have had women leading. We have had women and men leading together all along, though we did not have an official Elder Team throughout most of our church’s history. The Elder Team was established in the late 1970’s, about 80 years after this church started. Women have not yet served on this team.
When moving to an elder form of government, this church appropriately turned to the Bible to adopt Biblical standards for its new leadership structure. There are two main texts that address elders specifically in the Bible, Titus 1:5-9 and 1 Timothy 3. Furthermore, in 1 Timothy 2, Paul gives specific restrictions upon women serving in leadership capacities. Therefore, in its desire to be faithful to the scriptures, our church adopted a male only policy for serving on this team. This decision was based on Scripture, and the motivation was to be faithful to the teachings of the Bible rather than faithful to whatever any particular culture or society feels should be done at any given point in time. This desire to be formed by the scriptures is a noble pursuit, and it is not always a simple one.
Some teachings in scripture are incredibly clear. They may be hard to live out, but it is not because they are confusing or ambiguous. For example, loving God and loving others is a clear command all throughout the Bible. It is to be taken absolutely seriously, literally and with a commitment to a life filled with opportunities for growth and transformation. The challenge, however, with understanding what the Bible teaches about women and men in leadership is that the Bible presents what seems to be two conflicting messages that are not at all easy to reconcile.
The apostle Paul, on the one hand, is very affirming of the women he has served with (Rom. 16). He is a strong supporter of the priesthood and giftedness of every believer. It certainly does not appear that gifts of the Spirit are determined by being male or female (Rom. 12, 1 Cor. 12, Eph. 4). Paul presents that one of the central ramifications of Jesus’ death and resurrection is the formation of a new humanity that is no longer marked by the worldly divisions based on social class, such as slave or free, nationality, such as Jew or Gentile, or gender (Eph. 2, Gal. 3:26-28, Col. 3:11). On the other hand, however, Paul writes Timothy and restricts women’s teaching and leadership capacities in the church (1 Tim. 2).
Thus, the desire to be a church that is shaped by the Word of God is challenged by our struggle to understand these seemingly conflicting Biblical teachings regarding the appointing of spiritually gifted women to serve as elders of our church.
Now, if this was purely a cultural question, it would be very easy to answer, “Yes. We should have women serving as elders.” In our western democratic culture, it is offensive that we would even be wrestling with this question. However, this is not a cultural question. This is a scriptural question. It is an incredibly noble endeavor to wrestle with the implications of God’s Word. And it is deeply important that we are not our own authority on how to live and move in the world we find ourselves. Our job is to submit ourselves to the Lordship of Jesus Christ and to faithfully show ourselves approved to handle and apply the teachings of the Bible to life.
A Brief History of Our ProcessSince the formation of our elder board in the late 1970’s, our church has maintained a unity among diverse opinions on the topic of women serving in leadership. However, we recognize that we can’t simultaneously practice two positions at our church. In 2004 the elder team invited me to make this the subject of my thesis work. We wanted to do an in depth study of the issue and see if we couldn’t come to a greater understanding and reconciliation of the Bible’s teaching.
As a result of that study, the board charged me to take the church through the Bible’s teaching on the subject of women and men in leadership. In the fall of 2006, I began a 12 week teaching series on the topic with our entire congregation. You can listen to this series online at http://dlandt.typepad.com/the_way_of_jesus/leadership_for_women_and_men (scroll down to mp3 files). In the spring of 2007, the elder team drafted an updated policy stating that women and men should in fact serve together in all manner of ministries and capacities at our church.
Why Our Conclusions ChangedThere was no question that the apostle Paul was issuing restrictions to Timothy about women serving as teachers and leaders in the church at Ephesus (1 Tim. 2). The question was, “Is this restriction missional or ontological?” A missional restriction is a particular restriction for the sake of the church’s mission at a particular time and place. An ontological restriction is binding for all times because it has to do with how and who we were created to be.
Great people disagree on whether this case is missional or ontological. One general rule in making these interpretive decisions is to look to see if there are similar situations that can shed some light on the instance at hand. In other words, are there other cases where Paul seems to send apparently conflicting messages on a subject, and is there a unifying reason for this tension?
Example One: “Neither Jew nor Gentile”Paul’s biggest challenge in church planting was the inclusion of Gentile believers alongside Jewish believers in Jesus. Most Jewish believers believed that Gentiles could only share in salvation if they took on the marks of Jewish identity. This is why there is so much conversation around circumcision in Paul’s letters. Paul argues that there is a new ontology in Jesus, a “new humanity” (Ephesians 2:15). Therefore, there is “neither Jew nor Gentile” (Gal. 3:28).
On the one hand, Paul instructs pastor Titus that teachers who tell Gentiles that they need to be circumcised in order to be saved “must be silenced” (Titus 1:11). On the other hand, Paul circumcises Timothy. We read in Acts 16:3 that “Paul wanted to take [Timothy] along on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek.” Paul’s action with Timothy seems deeply contradictory to his very strong theology against needing to do so. This tension is only resolved by understanding that Paul sometimes asks people to give up their new rights in Jesus for the sake of others (Rom. 14). Paul knows that there is a whole group of people who won’t even give the gospel a chance unless Timothy is willing to yield his rights in Jesus for the sake of others. Timothy’s sacrificial action may unburden his Jewish audience, who then may come into a relationship with Jesus. In time they will come to realize that God really is making a new worldwide family. Paul therefore asks Timothy to do something for the sake of the mission. Thus, Timothy’s circumcision is missional, not ontological.
Example Two: Neither Slave nor FreeOn the one hand, Paul in Colossians 3:11 implies that in Jesus, slavery is no longer ontologically justifiable, though the cultural assumption at the time was that certain people are meant to serve other, superior people. He invites Philemon to work out the implications of his new humanity in Jesus by neither punishing, nor re-enslaving his runaway slave Onesimus, but by freeing him and welcoming him back as a brother (Philemon).
On the other hand, Paul instructs slaves to submit to their masters as unto the Lord (Eph. 6, Col. 3, Tit. 2). Again, this seeming contradiction is missionally motivated. And here is an important Christian principle. The way unjust systems are overturned is not by a hostile takeover of the world, but by the sacrificial way of the cross of Jesus. The tension in Paul’s writing about slavery is a missional submission in light of a new ontological reality of equality in Jesus. The brilliance of Paul’s approach is that he invites Christians with cultural power, such as Philemon, to undo, because of a transformed heart, what most people think will only happen by violent revolution. Likewise, he invites Onesimus to return to Philemon and submit to the potential consequences of the law. Here both the slave and the freeman have an equal opportunity to participate in each other’s conversion to the way and life of Jesus. The system of slavery can be undone in the church family regardless of the national government or cultural sensibilities of that day. The church thus is called to be an alternative society putting a different governing system on display—namely Jesus’. This is not to say that Christians aren’t to engage in governing or lawmaking. William Wilberforce’s work to overturn Britain’s slave trade is a dramatic example of that. It is simply to say that the way of Jesus can be lived out now and does not depend on one’s country of origin or the present governing structures. No Christian can say, “I will live like Jesus only after we get laws that support the way of Jesus.”
A Missional Restriction and the New HumanityPaul describes the new ontological reality created in Jesus this way “So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:26-29). Paul pronounces this good news to a divided world along a triad of race, class, and gender. In each of these areas we find scriptural tensions as we both announce and live within this new reality. We must also sensitively allow people outside this new reality a chance to be transformed by it. The uniting principle is that the saving truth of the gospel spreads not by self-promotion--demanding that others acknowledge our new rights in Jesus, but by other-promotion—laying our new lives down for others to see Jesus Christ. This missional sensitivity makes followers of Jesus deeply dependent on the Holy Spirit. How do you know when to actualize who we are in Jesus and how do you know when to restrict yourself for the sake of someone else’s transformation? What the Bible gives us is the tension and the instruction to be filled with the Spirit, who will guide us into all truth (John 16:3).
In brief, the elders of the Mills Church believe that any teaching and leadership restrictions that Paul gave regarding women were missional rather than ontological.
We believe the trajectory of teachings overwhelmingly supports the empowerment of every believer, both men and women, to serve according to their gifts, abilities, and calling. We have evidence of women teachers and leaders all through the scriptures like Deborah, Israel’s Judge, prophetess Miriam, Hulda, Anna, and Philip’s four daughters, the deacon Pheobe, and Junia who was great among the apostles, to name a few. We believe that Timothy, having been circumcised for the sake of the mission, would have been familiar with understanding and implementing Paul’s missional restrictions in other areas of potential cultural division. Likewise, we need to be familiar with and understanding of when to curb our rights in Jesus with the need to meet people where they are.
If you would like recommendations on resources for further study, I have a multitude that I’d be happy to share that present various perspectives on this issue. I will close with the final paragraph of The Mills Church’s policy:
We recognize that, in regards to women serving in ministerial leadership, diversity of application exists in the Christian community. We do not make this a point that breaks fellowship with other Christians or denominations. In fact, we believe that fellowship with others is a non-severable reality because of what Jesus has accomplished. Therefore, it is our practice to extend grace and respect to everyone as we live out our convictions on this and all matters.
May the grace and peace of Jesus be with you,
David Landt
Lead Pastor The Mills Churchdlandt@millschurch.org
Recent Comments