Let Women Be Women:

Equality, Ministry & Ordination

by Peter Toon

Gracewing.  Fowler Wright Books, 1990 

Chapter  8 – Conclusion

      It is now possible in the context of what has been affirmed about the servant ministry and royal priesthood of all baptised believers in Jesus Christ, the Servant and the High Priest, to bring together the reasons why, I believe, this same Lord Jesus does not call women to the presbyterate/priesthood and episcopate today.

      To clear the deck I must first emphasise that his exclusion of women from these offices is:

      (a) not because women have an inferior status to men.  They are equal in dignity and honour as God’s creatures.

      (b) not because women are emotionally, mentally and physically incapable of doing the tasks associated with the work of a presbyter or bishop.  Obviously they are capable of these tasks.

      (c) not because women are religiously “unclean” through their monthly menstruation.  Such ideas of uncleanness belong to the old, not the new, covenant.

      (d) not because God loves women less than he does men.  God loves male and female equally with an everlasting love.

      The exclusion is for theological reasons – that is, they arise from within God’s revelation which is recorded for us in the Old and New Testaments.  I have already provided them in the context of my discussions in the last three chapters but here for the sake of clarity I shall set them out briefly. 

1.  The witness of the New Testament

      While it is evident that women engaged in a variety of tasks in evangelism and planting of churches in and after the apostolic age, there is no hint in the New Testament that women were chosen as bishops or presbyters.  Further the apostle Paul placed restrictions on what Christian women, in comparison with men, could do when the church met for corporate worship (see 1 Corinthians 11:2–16; 14:33–36; 1 Timothy 2:8–14).  These restrictions were based on the doctrines of creation and the origin of sin in human life (the fall) as these are provided in Genesis and confirmed in the New Testament (see especially 1 Timothy 2:12–14). 

2.  The testimony of Tradition

      In the Early Church two facts were taken at their face value:

      (i) that Jesus had chosen only men as his inner core of disciples, the Twelve, and Paul as the apostle to the Gentiles;

      (ii) that Paul had taught that women were not to preside over and preach in the worshipping congregations.  Thus while women served as deacons there was no attempt to set them apart as presbyters.  This position and approach remained constant in the whole Church (Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant) until very recently.  Doubts that the New Testament restricts the presbyterate to men only arose with the beginnings of what we now call the feminist movement. 

3.  The person and place of Jesus Christ

      Christianity affirms the dynamically central position of Jesus Christ, the exalted Lord, and the union of believers with him through the Holy Spirit.  Jesus is the head, husband and cornerstone of the Church of God (Ephesians) and the royal messenger and high priest (Hebrews).  To know God in and through Christ is to have eternal life and thus Christianity is in essence trusting, following, imitating, loving and serving this Lord Jesus.  Therefore, as I have often emphasised, all genuine Christian ministry of the whole church is in and with him for it is his ministry.

      However, Jesus, as the incarnate Son of God, was a male and so the Church has reasoned over the centuries that it is and will always be easier and more straightforward to remember that he is present and active in the congregation through the specific and ordained ministry of Word and Sacraments when his human agent is also a male.  At its simplest level this is only to state that a male is best represented by another male.  In its developed form it can be presented in terms of the priest as the icon of Christ (in Orthodoxy) or in terms of the priest in his sacramental activity sharing in a special way in Christ’s high priesthood (in Roman Catholicism).

      The maleness of Jesus is not accidental but essential to God’s plan of redemption for the sinful human race.  Jesus is the “Second Adam”, the “Last Adam” and our “Prophet, Priest and King” and his maleness is essential to all these. 

4.  The nature and reality of human beings

      God made human beings as male and female equal in dignity.  His plan for their relationship is given in both Old and New Testaments as “the man to lead, the woman to support: man to initiate, woman to enable; man to take responsibility for the well being of women, women to take responsibility for helping men.”  Since presbyters and bishops are placed over the household of faith as pastors and leaders they cannot be women.  For what God intended in creating the human race he intends as the rule in the society of those whom he is re-creating in the image of Jesus Christ. 

5.  The real character of the Church of God.

      The Church of God is not in the world to be as the world.  If it becomes as the world then it has ceased to be the salt of the world and the light of the world.  The Church is not in the world to take its guidelines from the best (in its judgment) that society can offer.  If it does this then it sets aside the sacred Scriptures as the rule of its faith and morality.  The Church is not in the world to serve the world as the world thinks a religious organisation ought to serve (as a humanitarian society only).

      The Church of God today is the continuation of the Church of yesterday and it will be the Church perfected and glorified tomorrow.  It has a supernatural character because the Lord Jesus is present in it by his Spirit so that it is his Bride and his Body.Thus its ordained ministry does not exist to symbolise and express what the modern world regards as vitally important but rather to be and do what the Lord Jesus desires.  His word tells us that he wants male presbyters and bishops.

 6.  The celebration of the feminine.

      Mary was the first disciple of her Son and the first Christian but she was not an apostle.  She is a symbol for us of both the true position of a woman as God’s creature and of the Church as the Bride of Christ.  She was wholly receptive to the word of God addressed to her and the action of God upon her.  She is the Mother of our Lord and our Mother (as we are in him) and she shows that women find their true ministry and vocation not in male roles of headship and representing (being an icon of) Christ but in their female role of receptivity, cooperation and response.  From this perspective and in this spirit there are many possibilities for the public ministries of women in the Church of God, developing from the ancient and honourable vocations of deacon and nun.

* * * * * * * * *

       I believe that these reasons for maintaining an all-male presbyterate or priesthood and episcopate do not point to male domination or male domineering.  Rather they point to men, called by God and already wholly involved in the one ministry and priesthood of Christ, receiving from Christ particular responsibilities concerning the care and rule of the churches, the preaching and teaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments.  If the men who are priests and bishops do not function as the servants of the servants of God then they are failing to live up to their sacred calling.  They contribute to the call for the Church to follow the wisdom of the world!

      I close this book by quoting from the Report of the House of Bishops (1988) of the Church of England.  Here the minority of bishops who opposed the ordaining of women as priests speaks:

      “There are those of us who believe that by continuing to ordain only men to the priesthood the Church of England will remain most faithful to the long tradition of the Church and continue to bear witness to the Gospel in our generation.  An all male priesthood will witness to those things about the nature and being of God which were signified in the particularity of Jesus’ maleness: a male priesthood will continue most faithfully to represent the priesthood of Christ in the sacramental life of the Church; it will point to the role and status of men in relation to women according to the purposes of God in creation and redemption, by testifying to the headship of men over women and the proper subordination of women to men.  Those of us who hold this view believe this to be an important witness in our society as men and women struggle to find new patterns of relationships and new roles for women.  Further, an all male priesthood will continue to be a powerful witness to the continuity of the Church’s ministry from the time of the Apostles till today, and a link with the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Old Catholic Churches, and thus be important for the continuity, the unity and the communion of the Church” (GS 829, p.98).

      I hope that the diocesan synods and the General Synod of the Church of England, as well as other parts of the Anglican Communion, will take these words to heart.

 Appendix

The proposed legislation for the C. of E.

      In November 1989 the General Synod of the Church of England gave provisional approval to a Measure called “Priests (Ordination of Women) Measure” and referred it to the dioceses.  Therefore during 1991 every diocesan synod (and probably every deanery synod and many parochial councils) will be discussing the Measure.  It is important to note that they will not be discussing the general principle of the ordination of women to the priesthood but the present Measure as it stands for it cannot be amended.

      In order to proceed this Measure must get a simple majority (50% + 1) in both the House of Clergy and the House of Laity in a majority of diocesan synods (i.e. in 23 or more).  If it fails to get that number it will fail.  However, if it does get a simple majority in at least 23 diocesan synods then it will be returned to the General Synod for final approval.  But here it will need to get a 2/3 majority (66.6%) in all three Houses (Bishops, Clergy, Laity) in order to be passed and sent to the Parliament at Westminster for final approval.

      The purpose of the Measure is to allow the General Synod “to make provision by canon for enabling a woman to be ordained to the office of priest”.  Yet included in the Measure as Part II are various provisions concerning what Bishops, parishes and cathedrals must declare and do.  To the ordinary person these may seem very confusing and burdensome and sure to cause trouble and heartache, if and when they are implemented.  Further, associated with the Measure (but not being voted upon in diocesan synods) is another piece of legislation (which will only need a simple majority in General Synod to be passed), known as the “Financial Provisions Measure”.  The purpose is to make provision for the relief of hardship of those clergy and church workers who resign their offices because they feel that the Church has acted contrary to the will of God in agreeing to the ordination of women as priests.  By making this provision, those in favour of the “Priests (Ordination of Women) Measure” hope to remove an obstacle to its being passed.  Thus until this Financial Measure is passed the major Measure on ordaining women cannot be voted on.

      I hope this brief explanation makes it clear that the issue being voted upon is far more complex than whether or not a woman should be ordained as a priest in the Church of England.  In fact some who think it right to ordain a woman may well vote against the legislation because they feel it is a sure way to create further and fixed divisions both in and between parishes and dioceses.