13 comments

1. Perhaps more NAPARC denominations should solve the problem by following the Koreans in sending young women to seminary to become jondosanim and assigning them to teach women and children, and selecting qualified older women to be kwonsanim, providing leadership to younger women.

   I say “more” because at least two NAPARC denominations officially have kwonsanim and jondosanim, and every one of the PCA’s Korean presbyteries has them as well.

   It’s not like there isn’t a huge body of Reformed churches doing that already. And they were taught to do that, in many cases, by Princeton-trained missionaries back when Princeton was a solidly conservative seminary before the split that created Westminster.

   I’m very much aware of the problems of Korean church life. But they’re clearly doing something right, and most of our American churches aren’t.

   Give women legitimate things to do and most of the arguments end. Women who want to serve and not take authority spend their time serving. Women who want authority get shown for what they are, and in a conservative church, once that’s clarified, they get shown the door.

   Reply ↓

2. I cannot speak to what happens in any given weekday RUF meeting. In one sense no PCA church “has” women deacons because such is an impossibility — they cannot be ordained. The ratification of Item 1/Overture 26 at the last PCAGA means calling an unordained person a “deacon” is now strictly prohibited. It will take time to see how this plays out in the churches and courts, but the trend is away from fast-and-loose ecclesiology.

   Reply ↓

   • Thanks Brad that helps I just ask cause I I keep seeing a biblical pattern in the church and it’s always been guys leading. Just food for thought.

     Reply ↓

3. Brad why do women teach during RUF meetings? And why do a lot churches in the PCA have women deacons?

   Reply ↓

   • Dave,

     Is the teaching done under the auspices of RUF authoritative?

     I’ve been in Sunday School classes led, occasionally by females. I’ve attended conference talks by females (e.g., Rosaria Butterfield). Was that wrong?

     Reply ↓

     • Thats a good question Dr. i just ask because the RUF summer session in my area is being lead by two women. I’ve talked to the men who lead during the semester and they said that its alright. Some of the women have lead during large group. Should students go to that if its being led by women. where is the line that we should draw when it comes to women teaching. Shouldn’t we be encouraging the men in our reformed circle and like Bill Belichick said to “Do your job” and be the primary leaders. Isn’t the old testament filled with examples on women leaders being a sign for judgement Isiah 3:12? I don’t mean anything in an aggressive way Dr just a lot of this has been on my mind and would love to hear what you have to say. Thanks again Dr

       Reply ↓

       • The way one answers this question is determined by the answer to another question: is this teaching binding?

         If this is a casual, informal gathering or one such that the teaching is not binding then I don’t see the issue.

         I understand that RUF is an extension of the ministry of the PCA to college campuses and that RUF chapters are led by ordained ministers, but I don’t know that every single session they hold is an ecclesiastical meeting.

         I’m much more concerned about females preaching the word of God in stated worship services than I am about other kinds of gatherings.

         If no one is obligated to be there, and if the teaching is not finding or if there is no sanction or discipline involved, then I’m not sure there is any principle atstake.

         https://heidelblog.net/2016/05/sunday-school-the-role-of-women-authority-and-culture/

         Reply ↓

         • If I may jump in, gentlemen, I agree with you, Dr. Clark, that the preaching and “binding teaching” criteria easily exclude women (and unordained men!) from the pulpit and office(s) of minister/elder and that things like RUF should be viewed with greater flexibility since the believer is not conscience-bound by Scripture to participate. Easy peasy, I suppose.

           The difficulty, I think, and now I’m sympathizing with Dave, does come to things like SS and SG since, at least in our time, they have become defacto “unofficial-official” teaching arms of the church.

           Given the situation we now find ourselves in, would it not be better and more scripturally appropriate to leave things like Sunday School and Small Group teaching to the ministers (and elders) who have been gifted, called, and ordained to teach and shepherd the flock?

           Why does Brother Bob—before we even consider Sister Sally—get a weekly teaching slot for his SG endorsed by the church, but yet the church will not call him to be an ordained teacher in the church?

           I think, as you alluded to in the article from 2016, we desperately need to recover the distinction between the ordained and the laity. Then, we will see that this is not really about women, per se; it’s about the proper roles of officers and laity.

           I welcome any sharpening thoughts or comments, especially since what I’m advocating for is a fairly restrictive and minority view in our time.

         • Hi Brandon,

           Does SG = “small groups”?

           I think we agree. See my latest reply to Dave.

         • Ha! Yes. You decoded correctly—I should’ve made that more clear; my apologies.

           But it looks like we’re in substantial agreement from what I can see from your response to Dave.

           There will always be some ambiguity, I think. Churches that are at least mindful of the distinctions between officers and laity and also between official ecclesiastically endorsed teaching and unofficial teaching (e.g., folks gathering for a book study/discussion of Packer’s Knowing God) may choose to promote a SS or SG class while also maintaining that the unordained teachers don’t officially speak on behalf of the church. It’s a straddling of the fence in some ways, and I’m still not comfortable with it, but there are inevitable trade-offs one must make in life, even in our tiny world of NAPARC churches.

           As always, thank you for taking the time to flesh things out a bit more here in the comments; I trust it’s been a blessing to far more than just myself!

         • But Dr what about the pattern through out church history. Hasn’t it been men who have been leading since the beginning of the church? What about in the home shouldn’t it be the father who leads privately family worship? If men are around shouldn’t they be leading class. Dr your a professor when your in a class aren’t you leading? Dr it just seems weird that student go to a meeting lead by women when there are ordained men who went to seminary that around to lead. What would you say about the pattern. Shouldn’t we follow a biblical pattern?

         • I guess another point Dr what about the world we live in. Isn’t like a crazy statistic that when kids don’t have a father or male role model in the home, whose not present that they are more likely to use drugs go to jail and struggle. We live in time where so many dads are too busy for their own kids and you see the effects. Doesn’t the world need more men stepping into leadership roles and helping out. Being present to teach others. Don’t we need that in the church. More guys stepping into leaderships roles?

         • Dave,

           I’m going to reply to both comments here.

           I agree that the culture is in free-fall and the family (nuclear and extended) is in grave jeopardy and that is a huge issue for all of us, Christians included but it doesn’t determine what we should or shouldn’t think about the role of females in the church.

           As to the “biblical pattern,” indeed we should but discovering that pattern is a matter of paying close attention to Scripture and not merely reacting to the culture.

           I’m not defending female preachers or females teaching authoritatively in the church. Both are forbidden by God’s Word (e.g., 1 Tim 2:11–12) but I’m also opposed to the “sit down and shut up” view of the role of females in the church as an institution or considered as an organism, i.e., among Christians generally. As I’ve argued, we need to recover a proper view of office and when teaching is authoritative, it should be done by officers, not laity.

           When teaching is not authoritative or when it is informal, females leading bible studies is less problematic. Should females be consistently leading bible studies with males? If that is happening, I agree that suggests that the men are not taking seriously their calling and that there is a problem in the formation of elders and pastors in the church—which I think is the case.

           Nevertheless, and I hope female readers will see/hear me on this, there is significant evidence in the New Testament that females played an important role in the life of the church. I discussed this in some detail in my series on Romans. Take a listen to episodes 51 and 52. Paul says, “Help her with her work.” That’s the word of God. Look at other places in the NT where females play a significant role in the life of the church. I’m convinced that Euodia and Syntache were the founding members of the church at Philippi and that their argument is why Paul wrote Philippians. Paul freely calls females “co-workers in the gospel,” which is an exalted title. It was a husband and wife who, in my view, explained the history of redemption to the likely author of Hebrews: “[Apollos] began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately” (Acts 18:26; ESV). It is significant that Priscilla’s name comes first. This wasn’t formal teaching but it was certainly teaching.

           This is why I’ve been asking what the status of an RUF bible study is. If it is authoritative, office teaching by the church then it should be done by qualified males and preferably those holding a teaching office. If it isn’t authoritative or official, then there is more flexibility. Again, should females teaching males be habitual? Probably not but that gets us to the crisis of leadership formation in our churches.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.