| Part of a series on
Christianity
and Gender |
| Theology |
|
Female disciples of Jesus |
| 4 major positions |
|
Christian Egalitarianism |
| Church and society |
|
Christianity and homosexuality |
| Organizations |
|
Christians for Biblical Equality |
| Theologians and authors |
| Feminist: Letha Dawson Scanzoni · Anne Eggebroten · Virginia Ramey Mollenkott Egalitarian: William J. Webb · Kenneth E. Hagin · Gordon Fee · Frank Stagg · Paul Jewett · Stanley Grenz · Roger Nicole Complementarian: Don Carson · John Frame · Wayne Grudem · Douglas Moo · Paige Patterson · Vern Poythress Patriarchal: Doug Phillips · R. C. Sproul, Jr. · Douglas Wilson |
| Part of a series on |
| Women in Society |
|---|
|
Society
Business · Education · Workforce · Politics (in Australia) · Military · Legal rights · History · Nobel Prize · Animal advocacy
|
|
Science and technology
|
|
Arts and humanities
|
|
Popular culture
|
| Feminism portal |
Gender roles in Christianity vary considerably today as they have during the last two millennia. This is especially true with regards to marriage and ministry.
Christianity emerged from societies that traditionally placed men in positions of authority in marriage, society and government. From the time of the early church, women were not ordained to the priesthood. Nevertheless, as religious sisters and nuns, they came to play an important role in Christianity through convents and abbeys and have continued through history to be active - particularly in the establishment of schools, hospitals, nursing homes and monastic settlements.
Within Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, a particular place of veneration is reserved for Mary, the Mother of Jesus, which has kept a model of maternal virtue central to their vision of Christianity. Marian devotion is however, generally not a feature of Protestantism. Women are recalled as saints within the various Christian traditions: among their number contemporaries of Jesus, subsequent theologians, abbesses, mystics, founders of religious orders, military leaders, monarchs and martyrs, evidencing the variety of roles played by women within the life of Christianity.
The Catholic and Orthodox Churches, and many conservative Protestant denominations assert that only men can be ordained as clergy. Ordination of women is becoming increasingly common in some Protestant churches.
Contents |
Christianity developed as a sect of Judaism in the First Century AD. It therefore inherited the depictions of women already existing within the Hebrew Bible (known to Christians as The Old Testament) and through history, the women of these Jewish texts have been important in the development of Christian theology, art and attitudes to women.
In the Book of Genesis, Adam and Eve were said to be the first man and the first woman. Adam was created first, and Eve from Adam's rib. Some commentators have suggested that Eve being God's second Creation indicated female inferiority, but in calling Eve "flesh of my flesh" others say a relationship of equality is implied. In a later episode, Eve persuades Adam to join her in eating from forbidden tree of knowledge of good and evil - angering God, who casts them out of the Garden of Eden.[1] These accounts were drawn upon by Christian theologians in the development of the doctrine of Original Sin.
Elsewhere, earthy depictions are given of the bearers of the children of Abraham, the Father of Judaism. His Egyptian slave girl Hagar bore Ishmael, while his wife Sarah bore Isaac. Hagar and Ishmael were banished, but with God's promise that Ishmael's descendants would found a great nation (the Arabs). Isaac's descendants meanwhile were to become the Israelites.[2]
Others appearing in the texts include Rebekah, the wife of Isaac, who tricked Abraham into blessing her second son as heir; Delilah, who brought down the mighty warrior Samson; the Queen of Sheba who was overwhelmed by the splendour of King David's court; and the cursed Jezebel, who conspired with her husband to have an innocent man killed and was in turn killed for her crime.[3]
Beyond generally accepted social standards which are continually shifting, Christianity sets a moral standard, regarding attitudes toward and treatment of women, as was personally exemplified by Jesus.[4]
Jesus always showed the greatest esteem and the greatest respect for woman, for every woman, and in particular He was sensitive to female suffering. Going beyond the social and religious barriers of the time, Jesus reestablished woman in her full dignity as a human person before God and before men ... Christ’s way of acting, the Gospel of his words and deeds, is a consistent protest against whatever offends the dignity of women.
— John Paul II, "Thoughts on Women─Address to Italian Maids," April 1979
The New Testament of the Bible refers to a number of women in Jesus' inner circle - notably his Mother Mary (for whom the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodoxy hold a special place of adoration) and St. Mary Magdalene who discovered the empty tomb of Christ. But the Church says that Christ appointed only male Apostles (from the Greek apostello "to send forth").[5]
Among the most famous accounts of Jesus directly dealing with an issue of morality and women is provided by the story Jesus and the woman taken in adultery, from verses 7:53-8:11 of the Gospel of John. The passage describes a confrontation between Jesus and the scribes and Pharisees over whether a woman, caught in an act of adultery, ought to be stoned. Jesus shames the crowd into dispersing, and averts the execution with the famous words: "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her". According to the passage, "they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last", leaving Jesus to turn to the woman and say "go, and sin no more". This passage has been immensely influential in Christian philosophy.
Another revealing story contained in the Gospels as to Jesus' own attitude to women is found in the story of Jesus at the house of Martha and Mary. In this story the woman Mary sits at Jesus' feet as he preaches, while her sister toils in the kitchen preparing a meal. When Martha complains to Mary that she should instead be helping in the kitchen, Jesus says that in fact, "Mary has chosen what is better" (Luke 10:38-42, New International Version).
From the beginning of the early Christian church, starting with Jesus, women were important members of the movement. The examples of the manner of Jesus reveal his attitudes toward women and show repeatedly how he liberated and affirmed women. Both complementarians and egalitarians see Jesus as treating women with compassion, grace and dignity.[4] The gospels of the New Testament, especially Luke, often mention Jesus speaking to or helping women publicly and openly, contrary to the social norms of the time.[6] He reached out to the marginalized in his society and thus, his appeal was great.[4] Martha's sister Mary sat at Jesus' feet being taught, a privilege reserved for men in Judaism. Jesus had female followers who were his sponsors,[Lu 8:1-3] and he stopped to express concern for the women of Jerusalem on his way to be crucified,[Lu 23:26-31] while Mary Magdalene is recorded to be the first person to have the privilege of seeing Jesus after resurrection, having been charged by Jesus to tell others of what she had seen even though the testimony of a woman was at that time not considered valid.[Mk 16:9] As time went on and the disciples continued to spread Jesus' message by word of mouth, groups of Christians organized within the homes of believers. Those who could offer their home for meetings were considered important within the movement and assumed leadership roles.[7]
According to historian Geoffrey Blainey, women were probably the majority of Christians in the first century after Christ. The First Century Apostle Paul emphasised a faith open to all in his Letter to the Galatians:[8] "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ".
The letters of Paul—dated to the middle of the 1st century CE—and his casual greetings to acquaintances offer information about Jewish and Gentile women who were prominent in the movement. His letters provide clues about the kind of activities in which women engaged more generally.[9]
Some theologians believe that these biblical reports provide evidence of women leaders active in the earliest work of spreading the Christian message,[12][13] while others reject that understanding.[14] The evidence also indicates that these women "ministered" in supporting roles of the church much as the women who followed Christ supported his ministry.
From the very beginning of the early Christian church, women were important members of the movement, although some complain that much of the information in the New Testament on the work of women has been overlooked.[15] Some also argue that many assumed that it had been a "man's church" because sources of information stemming from the New Testament church were written and interpreted by men. Recently, scholars have begun looking in mosaics, frescoes, and inscriptions of that period for information about women's roles in the early church.[15]
From the early patristic age, the offices of teacher and sacramental minister were reserved for men throughout most of the church in the East and West.[16] Tertullian, the 2nd century Latin father, wrote that "It is not permitted to a woman to speak in church. Neither may she teach, baptize, offer, nor claim for herself any function proper to a man, least of all the sacerdotal office" ("On the Veiling of Virgins").
Origen (AD 185-254) stated that,
Even if it is granted to a woman to show the sign of prophecy, she is nevertheless not permitted to speak in an assembly. When Miriam the prophetess spoke, she was leading a choir of women ... For [as Paul declares] "I do not permit a woman to teach," and even less "to tell a man what to do."[17]
Christian historian Philip Schaff records early church fathers of the 3rd and 4th centuries as teaching regarding 1 Cor. 14:34-35:
From the early patristic age, the offices of teacher and sacramental minister were reserved for men throughout most of the church in the East and West.[16] Tertullian, second century Latin prelate, wrote that "It is not permitted to a woman to speak in church. Neither may she teach, baptize, offer, nor claim for herself any function proper to a man, least of all the sacerdotal office.""On the Veiling of Virgins"
In early centuries, the Eastern church allowed women to participate to a limited extent in ecclesiastical office by ordaining deaconesses.[16]
Women commemorated as saints from the early centuries of Christianity include several martyrs who suffered under the Persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire, such as Agnes of Rome, Saint Cecilia, Agatha of Sicily and Blandina. In late Antiquity, Saint Helena was a Christian and consort of Emperor Constantius, and the mother of Emperor Constantine I. As such her role in history is of great significance as her son Constantine legalised Christianity across the Roman Empire, and became a convert himself - ending centuries of mistreatment of Christians and altering the course of world history. Similarly, Saint Monica was a pious Christian and mother of Saint Augustine of Hippo, who after a wayward youth, converted to Christianity and became one of the most influential Christian Theologians of all history.
In the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Church, the priesthood and the ministries dependent upon it such as Bishop, Patriarch and Pope, were restricted to men.[16] The first Council of Orange (441) forbade the ordination of women to the diaconate.[16]
As Western Europe transitioned from the Classical to Medieval Age, the male hierarchy with the Pope as its summit became a central player in European politics, however many women leaders also emerged at various levels within the Church. Mysticism flourished and monastic convents and communities of Catholic women became powerful institutions within Europe. Marian devotion blossomed, setting a model of maternal virtue at the heart of Western civilization.
With the establishment of Christian monasticism, other influential roles became available to women. From the 5th century onward, Christian convents provided opportunities for some women to escape the path of marriage and child-rearing, acquire literacy and learning, and play a more active religious role. In the later Middle Ages women such as Saint Catherine of Siena and Saint Teresa of Avila, played significant roles in the development of theological ideas and discussion within the church, and were later declared Doctors of the Roman Catholic Church. The Belgian nun, St Juliana of Liège (1193-1252), proposed the Feast of Corpus Christi, celebrating the body of Christ in the Eucharist, which became a major feast throughout the Church. In the important Franciscan movement of the thirteenth century, a significant part was played by religious women like St. Clare of Assisi. Arguably the most famous female Catholic Saint of the period is St. Joan of Arc who took up a sword and achieved military victories for France, before being captured and tried as a "witch and heretic", after which she was burned at the stake. A papal inquiry later declared the trial illegal. A hero to the French, sympathy grew for Joan even in England and in 1909 she was canonised a saint.[18]
The historian Geoffrey Blainey, writes that women were more prominent in the life of the Church during the Middle Ages than at any previous time in its history, with a number of church reforms initiated by women. In the 13th Century, authors began to write of a mythical female pope - Pope Joan - who managed to disguise her gender until giving birth during a procession in Rome.[19] Blainey cites the ever growing veneration of the Virgin Mary and Mary Magdalene as evidence of a high standing for female Christians at that time. The Virgin Mary, was conferred such titles as Mother of God and Queen of Heaven and, in 863, her feast day, the "Feast of Our Lady", was declared equal in importance to those of Easter and Christmas. Mary Magdalene's Feast Day was celebrated in earnest from the 8th century on and composite portraits of her were built up from Gospel references to other women Jesus met.[20]
Through history there have been many notable Christian female monarchs. Among the most notable of all Christian noblewomen must be Helena of Constantinople, the mother of the Emperor Constantine. Constantine's Edict of Milan of 303AD ended the persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire and his own conversion to Christianity was a significant turning point in history.[21] A network of European monarchies established power throughout Western Europe through the Medieval period. Men were generally given precedence to reign as monarch, however aristocratic women could achieve influence.
The first Russian ruler to convert to Christianity was Olga of Kiev around 950AD. She is an important figure in the spread of Christianity to Russia and remembered as a saint by the Catholic and Orthodox churches alike. Italian noblewoman Matilda of Tuscany (1046-1115) is remembered for her military accomplishments and for being the principal Italian supporter of Pope Gregory VII during the Investiture Controversy. Saint Hedwig of Silesia (1174-1243) supported the poor and the church in Eastern Europe and Jadwiga of Poland reigned as monarch of Poland and, within the Catholic Church, is honoured as the patron saint of queens and of a "united Europe".[22] Saint Elisabeth of Hungary (1207-1231) was a symbol of Christian charity who used her wealth to establish hospitals and care for the poor. Each of these women were singled out as model Christians by Pope John Paul II in his Mulieris Dignitatem letter on the dignity and vocation of women.[23]
As sponsor of Christopher Columbus' 1492 mission to cross the Atlantic, the Spanish Queen Isabella I of Castille (known as Isabella the Catholic), was an important figure in the growth of Catholicism as a global religion, for Spain and Portugal followed Columbus' route to establish vast Empires in the Americas. Her marriage to Ferdinand II of Aragon had ensured the unity of the Spanish Kingdom and the royal couple agreed to hold equal authority. Spanish Pope Alexander VI conferred on them the title "Catholic". As part of legal reforms to consolidate their authority, Isablla and Ferdinand instigated the Spanish Inquisition. The Catholic Monarchs then conquered the last Moorish bastion in Spain at Granada in January 1492 and seven months later, Columbus sailed for the Americas. The Catholic encyclopedia, credits Isabella as an extremely able ruler and one who "fostered learning not only in the universities and among the nobles, but also among women". Of Isabella and Ferdinand, it says: "The good government of the Catholic sovereigns brought the prosperity of Spain to its apogee, and inaugurated that country's Golden Age".[24]
The Reformation swept through Europe during the 16th Century, ending centuries of unity among Western Christendom and bringing Protestantism into being as both a political and religious opponent of Catholicism. For the first time in centuries, the religion of an heir to the throne became an intensely important political issue. The refusal of Pope Clement VI to grant an annulment in the marriage of King Henry VIII to Catherine of Aragon saw Henry establish himself as supreme governor of the church in England. Rivalry between Catholic and Protestant heirs ensued. Mary I of England, was his eldest daughter and succeeded the throne after the death of her Protestant younger half brother Edward VI. Later nicknamed "Bloody Mary" for her actions against protestants, she was the daughter of Catherine of Aragon, and thus remained loyal to Rome and sought to restore the Roman Church in England. Her re-establishment of Roman Catholicism was reversed after her death in 1558 by her successor and younger half-sister, Elizabeth I. Rivalry emerged between Elizabeth and the Catholic Mary Queen of Scots, finally settled with the execution of Mary in 1587. The religion of an heir or monarch's spouse complicated intermarriage between royal houses through coming centuries.
Consorts of the Holy Roman Emperors were given the title of Holy Roman Empress. The throne was reserved for males, thus there was never a Holy Roman Empress regnant, though women such as Theophanu and Maria Theresa of Austria, controlled the power of rule and served as de facto Empresses regnant. The powerful Maria Theresa acquired her right to the throne of the Hapsburg dominions by means of the Pragmatic Sanction of 1713, allowing for female succession - but had to fight the War of the Austrian Succession to secure her right to reign. Following victories, her husband, Francis Stephen, was chosen as Holy Roman Emperor in 1745, confirming Maria Theresa's status as a European leader. A liberal-minded autocrat, she was a patron of sciences and education and sought to alleviate the suffering of the serfs. On religion she pursued a policy of cujus regio, ejus religio, keeping Catholic observance at court and frowning on Judaism and Protestantism - but the ascent of her son as co-regnant Emperor saw restrictions placed on the power of the Church in the Empire. She reigned for 40 years, and mothered 16 children including Marie-Antoinette, the ill-fated Queen of France.[25] With her husband she founded the Catholic Habsburg-Lorraine Dynasty who remained central players in European politics into the 20th century.
One effect of the Protestant Reformation in several of the countries in which it took root was to bring an end to the long tradition of female convents which had existed within Roman Catholicism, and which the Reformers saw as bondage.[26] By shutting down female convents within the movement, Protestantism effectively closed off the option of a full-time religious role for Protestant women, as well as one which had provided some women a life in academic study.[27] Among the many nuns who abandoned the monastic life was the wife of Martin Luther, Katherine von Bora.
The majority of Protestant churches upheld the traditional position,[28] and restricted ruling and preaching roles within the Church to men until the 20th century, although there were early exceptions among some groups such as the Quakers and within some Pentecostal holiness movements.[29]
John Knox (1510–1572) also denied women the right to rule in the civic sphere, as he asserted in his famous First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regimen of Women.
Baptist theologian Dr. John Gill (1690–1771) comments on 1 Corinthians 14:34,35, stating
In Gen_3:16, "thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee". By this the apostle would signify, that the reason why women are not to speak in the church, or to preach and teach publicly, or be concerned in the ministerial function, is, because this is an act of power, and authority; of rule and government, and so contrary to that subjection which God in his law requires of women unto men. The extraordinary instances of Deborah, Huldah, and Anna, must not be drawn into a rule or example in such cases.[30]
Methodist founder John Wesley (1703–1791) and Methodist theologian Adam Clarke (1762–1832) both upheld male headship, but allowed that spiritual Christian women could publicly speak in church meetings if they "are under an extraordinary impulse of the Spirit" (Wesley),[31] and that such were to obey that influence, and that "the apostle lays down directions in chap. 11 for regulating her personal appearance when thus employed.” (Clarke)[32] Puritan theologian Matthew Poole (1624–1679) concurred with Wesley, adding,
But setting aside that extraordinary case of a special afflatus, [strong Divine influence] it was, doubtless, unlawful for a woman to speak in the church.[33]
Matthew Henry (1662–1714) in his commentary, entertains allowing “praying, and uttering hymns inspired” by women, as such “were not teaching”.[34]
Within the Church of England, King Henry VIII's dissolution of the religious houses swept away the convents which had been a feature of Christianity in England for centuries. Anglican religious orders and Sisterhoods were later re-established within the Anglican tradition however.
Amidst the backdrop of Industrial Revolution and expanding European Empires, a number of notable educational and nursing religious orders were established by or for Catholic women during the 17th-19th centuries, and Christian women played a central role in the developing or running of many the modern world's education and health care systems. Out of other Christian traditions arose women like Florence Nightingale, who assisted with the development of modern nursing.[35]
Within Catholicism, the Sisters of Mercy was founded by Catherine McAuley in Dublin, Ireland in 1831, and her nuns went on to establish hospitals and schools across the world.[36] The Little Sisters of the Poor was founded in the mid-19th century by Saint Jeanne Jugan near Rennes, France, to care for the many impoverished elderly who lined the streets of French towns and cities.[37][38] In Britain's Australian colonies, Australia's first canonised Saint, Mary MacKillop, co-founded the Sisters of St. Joseph of the Sacred Heart as educative order for the poor in 1866 and by the time of her death her order had established a 117 schools and had opened orphanages and refuges for the needy.[39]
For much of the early Twentieth century, Catholic women continued to join religious orders in large numbers, where their influence and control was particularly strong in the running of primary education for children, high schooling for girls, and in nursing, hospitals, orphanages and aged care facilities. The Second Vatican Council of the 1960s liberalised the strictures of Catholic religious life, particularly for women in holy orders, however, in the latter half of the 20th century, vocations for women in the West entered a steep decline. The Catholic Church conducted a large number of beatifications and canonisations of Catholic women however, of women from all over the world: St. Josephine Bakhita was a Sudanese slave girl who became a Canossian nun; St. Katharine Drexel (1858-1955) worked for Native and African Americans; Polish mystic St. Maria Faustina Kowalska (1905-1938) wrote her influential spiritual diary;[40] and German nun Edith Stein was murdered by the Nazis at Auschwitz.[41]
In the latter 20th Century following the Second Vatican Council, three Catholic women were declared Doctors of the Church, indicating a re-appraisal of the role of women within the life of that Church: the 16th Century Spanish mystic, St. Teresa of Ávila; the 14th Century Italian mystic St. Catherine of Siena and the 19th century French nun St. Thérèse de Lisieux (called Doctor Amoris or Doctor of Love).
While Catholicism and Orthodoxy adhered to traditional gender restrictions on ordination to the priesthood, Ordination of women in Protestant churches has in recent decades become increasingly common. The Salvation Army elected Evangeline Booth as its first female General (worldwide leader) in 1934.[42] New Zealander Penny Jamieson became the first woman in the world to be ordained a bishop of the Anglican Church in 1990.[43] (although the queens of England have for centuries inherited the position of the Supreme Governor of the Church of England upon their ascensions to the throne).
In the developing world, people continued to convert to Christianity in large numbers. Among the most famous women missionaries of the period was Mother Teresa of calcutta, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 for her work in "bringing help to suffering humanity".[44] Much admired by Pope John Paul II, she was beatified in 2003, just six years after her death.[45]
Many Christian women and religious have been prominent advocates in social policy debates - as with American nun Helen Prejean, a Sister of Saint Joseph of Medaille, who is a prominent campaigner against the Death Penalty and was the inspiration for the Hollywood film Dead Man Walking.[46]
Some 19th-century Christian authors[47] began codifying challenges to traditional views toward women both in the church and in society. Only since the 1970s have more diverse views become formalized.
There are four main viewpoints in the modern debate. They are known respectively as Christian feminism, Christian Egalitarianism, Complementarianism, and Biblical patriarchy.
Christian Feminists take an actively feminist position from a Christian perspective.[48] Recent generations have experienced the rise of what has been labeled by some as "Christian feminism" —a movement that has had a profound impact on all of life, challenging some traditional basic Christian interpretations of Scripture with respect to roles for women.[49]
However, Christian feminism represents the views of the more theologically liberal end of the spectrum within Christianity. In contrast to the more socially conservative Christian egalitarians, Christian feminists tend to support homosexual rights and a pro-choice stance on abortion.[50][51] The Evangelical and Ecumenical Women’s Caucus, a major international Christian feminist organization, values "inclusive images and language for God."[52]
Christian Egalitarians' interpretation of Scripture brings them to the conclusion that the manner and teachings of Jesus, affirmed by the Apostle Paul, abolished gender-specific roles in both the church and in marriage.
Men, Women and Biblical Equality[53] was prepared in 1989 by several evangelical leaders to become the official statement of Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE). The statement lays out their biblical rationale for equality as well as its application in the community of believers and in the family. They advocate ability-based, rather than gender-based, ministry of Christians of all ages, ethnicities and socio-economic classes.[54] Egalitarians support the ordination of women and equal roles in marriage, and are more conservative both theologically and morally than Christian feminists.
A scripture passage they consider key to the advocacy of full equality of responsibility and authority for both women and men is contained in a Pauline polemic containing three antitheses:
There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
— Galatians 3:28
Christian Egalitarians interpret this passage as expressing that the overarching teaching of the New Testament is that all are "one in Christ." The three distinctions, important for Jewish life, are declared by Paul to be invalid in Christ. Therefore, among those "in Christ" there must be no discrimination based on race or national origin, social level, or gender. They respect the natural biological uniqueness of each gender, not seeing it as requiring any dominant/submissive applications of gender to either marriage or church leadership.
David Scholer, prominent New Testament scholar at Fuller Theological Seminary, affirms this view. He believes that Galatians 3:28 is “the fundamental Pauline theological basis for the inclusion of women and men as equal and mutual partners in all of the ministries of the church.”[56] Galatians 3:28 represents "the summation of Paul's theological vision," according to Pamela Eisenbaum, professor at Iliff School of Theology, who is one of four Jewish New Testament scholars teaching in Christian theological schools.[57][58]
Christian Egalitarianism holds that the submission of the woman in marriage and womanly restrictions in Christian ministry are inconsistent with the true picture of biblical equality. The equal-yet-different doctrine taught by Complementarians is considered by them to be a contradiction in terms.[59]
Conservative theologian Roger Nicole, a Baptist considered an expert in Calvinism and regarded as one of the preeminent theologians in America, is a Christian Egalitarian and also a Biblical Inerrantist. He recognizes that biblical egalitarianism is still viewed by many as inconsistent with biblical inerrancy, although he disagrees. He writes that "the matter of the place of women in the home, in society, and in the church is not an issue that can be conclusively determined by a few apparently restrictive passages that are often advanced by those who think that subordination represents God’s will for women."[60]
I believe that most, if not all, of the restrictions on women in society have no basis in Scripture, and that those maintained in the Church are based on an inadequate interpretation of a few restrictive passages, which put them in contradiction with the manifest special concern and love of God for women articulated from Genesis to Revelation.
— Roger Nicole, 2006
A limited notion of gender complementarity is held and is known as "complementarity without hierarchy."[61]
Complementarians believe that God made men and women to be equal in personhood and value but different in roles. They understand the Bible as teaching that God created men and women to serve different roles in the church and the home.[62] In the 1991 book Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, leading Complementarian theologians outlined what they consider to be biblically sanctioned definitions of masculinity and femininity:
The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood[63] was prepared by several evangelical leaders at a Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) meeting in Danvers, Massachusetts, in December 1987. The statement lays out their biblical rationale for male priority and female submission in the community of believers and in the family. Additionally it cites a set of concerns shared by complementarians over other contemporary philosophies about gender:
They attribute these ills to the "apparent accommodation of some within the church to the spirit of the age at the expense of winsome, radical Biblical authenticity which…may reform rather than reflect our ailing culture."[63]
Complementarians tend to be biblical inerrantists who take a more literal view of biblical interpretation. They disagree with Christian Egalitarians on theological positions related to gender,[64] such as in holding that:
Primary texts in the New Testament which are understood to support male headship include 1 Corinthians 11:3, 1 Timothy 2:12 and Ephesians 5:22ff:
In Galatians 3:28, complementarians believe that the Apostle Paul is establishing that all believers, no matter what their racial, social, or gender status, share the same spiritual status in their union with Christ. However, they do not believe that or any other scriptures put an end to positional and functional distinctions based on gender, which they see as being clearly stated and upheld in the New Testament, as a matter of Christian principle.
Complementarians' understanding is that both Old and New Testaments do prescribe a male-priority based hierarchy and gender roles in the church and in marriage, where women have equal dignity with men but subordinate roles.
Biblical patriarchy as expressed by the Vision Forum is similar to Complementarianism in that it affirms the equality of men and women, but goes further in its expression of the different gender roles. It asserts that "a husband and father is the head of his household, a family leader, provider, and protector" and that the "God-ordained and proper sphere of dominion for a wife is the household and that which is connected with the home".[65]
Biblical patriarchy maintains that women do not have authority over men in the church and in the home, but also deny that women should rule in the civic sphere.[66] Thus, William Einwechter calls the Complementarian view referred to above, "two point complementarianism", and regards the biblical patriarchy view as "three-point" or "full" complementarianism.[67][68][69]
Although much of the contemporary literature settles on the terms Complementarianism and Christian Egalitarianism, a number of other more pejorative terms are frequently encountered.
William J. Webb describes himself as a "complementary egalitarian." He defines this as "full interdependence and 'mutual submission' within marriage, and the only differences in roles are 'based upon biological differences between men and women'." He uses "Complementarianism" to describe what he calls "a milder form of the historical hierarchical view."[71]
Complementarian scholar Wayne A. Grudem objects to Webb's use of "complementary" and "egalitarian" together to describe a thoroughly egalitarian position. Calling the terminology "offensive and confusing," he reasons that doing so simply confuses the issues by using the term "complementary" for a position totally antithetical to what complementarians hold. Grudem finds Webb's use of the term "patriarchy" to be especially pejorative because of its connotations in modern society. He also rejects the term "hierarchicalist" because he says it overemphasizes structured authority while giving no suggestion of equality or the beauty of mutual interdependence.[72]
In general, all evangelicals involved in the gender debate claim to adhere to the authority of the Bible. Egalitarians typically argue that the dispute has arisen because of differences in interpretation of specific passages.[73] Nevertheless, Wayne Grudem and other complementarians have accused egalitarians of adopting positions which deny the authority, sufficiency and inerrancy of scripture.[14][74]
…I believe that ultimately the effective authority of Scripture to govern our lives is at stake in this controversy. The issue is not whether we say we believe the Bible is the Word of God or that we believe it is without error, but the issue is whether we actually obey it when its teachings are unpopular and conflict with the dominant viewpoints in our culture. If we do not obey it, then the effective authority of God to govern His people and His church through His Word has been eroded.
— Wayne Grudem (emphases original), Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth[14]
The egalitarian and complementarian positions differ significantly in their approach to hermeneutics, and specifically in their interpretation of biblical history. Christian egalitarians believe that male and female were created equally[Gen. 1-2] without any hierarchy of roles.[75] God created both woman and man in His own image and likeness. God made the first couple equal partners in leadership over the earth. Both were jointly commissioned to “be fruitful and multiply...to fill the earth...subdue the earth...and rule over it.”[Gen. 1:28] At the Fall, God prophesied to Eve that one result of sin entering the human race would be that her husband would "rule over" her.[Gen. 3:16][76][77] Conservative Christian theologian Gilbert Bilezikian points out that throughout the Old Testament era and beyond, just as God had prophesied, men continued to rule over women in a patriarchal system which he sees as being a "compromise" or "accommodation" between sinful reality and the divine ideal.[76] The coming of Jesus is understood as moving forward from Old Testament patriarchy, re-instituting full equality of gender roles, as succinctly articulated in Galatians 3:28.[76][78] New Testament passages such as Ephesians 5:22-24 which teach submission of wives to husbands are typically understood by egalitarians as a temporary accommodation to a harsh 1st century culture.
The Christian egalitarian hermeneutic has received a highly systematic treatment from William J. Webb, professor of New Testament at Heritage Theological Seminary, Ontario, Canada. Webb argues that a major challenge is determining which biblical commands are "transcultural" and therefore applicable today, versus those which are "cultural" and therefore only applicable to the original (1st century) recipients of the text.[71] His "redemptive movement" hermeneutic is justified using the example of slavery, which Webb sees as analogous to the subordination of women. Christians today largely perceive that slavery was "cultural" in biblical times and not something that should be re-introduced or justified, although slavery was (a) found in the Bible and (b) not explicitly banned there.[71] Webb recommends that biblical commands be examined in light of the cultural context in which they were originally written. According to the "redemptive approach", slavery and women's subordination are found in the Bible; however, the same Scriptures also contain ideas and principles which, if developed and taken to their logical conclusion, would bring about the abolition of these institutions.[71] According to that ideal, biblical patriarchy should be replaced by the "all one in Christ Jesus" proclamation of Galatians 3:28 which says "There is no Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus."
Some other New Testament instructions that are almost universally considered "cultural" and therefore only applicable to the original (1st century) recipients of the text are for women to wear veils when praying or prophesying,[1 Cor 11:5-6] Christians to wash each other's feet (a direct command from Jesus in the Upper Room discourse,[Jn. 13:14-15] the instruction, appearing five times in the New Testament, to greet one another with a holy kiss[79]—among others.
In contrast to egalitarian teaching, complementarians teach that male priority and headship (positional leadership) were instituted prior to the Fall[Gen. 1-2] and that the decree in Genesis 3:16 merely distorted this leadership by introducing "ungodly domination."[49] Complementarians teach that the male leadership seen throughout the Old Testament (i.e., the patriarchs, priesthood and monarchy) was an expression of the creation ideal, as was Jesus' selection of 12 male apostles and New Testament restrictions on church leadership to men only.[1 Tim. 2:11-14][49]
Complementarians criticize Webb's hermeneutic. Grudem argues that Webb expects Christians to pursue a "superior ethic" to that found in the New Testament, therefore undermining the authority and sufficiency of Scripture. He claims that Webb and some other evangelicals misconstrue the biblical teaching about both slavery and women, and inappropriately confuse the two. He writes that slavery is tolerated in Scripture but never commanded but in some cases is criticized, whereas wives are explicitly commanded to submit to their husbands and male leadership is never criticized. Additionally, Grudem believes that Webb's "redemptive-movement" hermeneutic (itself a variation of the "trajectory" hermeneutic commonly employed by egalitarians) ultimately relies on subjective judgments that are incapable of producing certainty about ethical views.[14]
Complementarians have traditionally held that Christian ministers ought to be men, because of the need to represent Jesus Christ, who was the "Son" of God, and incarnate as a male human being.[80][81] A related position is that while both male and female were made in the image of God, the woman shares in the divine image through the man because she was created out of him, and is his "glory."[1 Cor 11:7-8][82]
To us a priest is primarily a representative, a double representative, who represents us to God and God to us... We have no objection to a woman doing the first: the whole difficulty is with the second. But why? ... Suppose the reformer stops saying that a good woman may be like God and begins saying that God is like a good woman. Suppose he says that we might just as well pray to 'Our Mother which art in Heaven' as to 'Our Father'. Suppose he says that the Incarnation might just as well have taken a female as a male form, and the Second Person of the Trinity be as well called the Daughter as the Son. Suppose, finally, that the mystical marriage were reversed, that the Church were the Bridegroom and Christ the Bride. All this, as it seems to me, is involved in the claim that a woman can represent God as a priest does.
— C. S. Lewis, Priestesses in the Church? 1948
Christian egalitarians respond by arguing that God is not gendered, and that males and females image God equally and without any differences.[83] In addition, terms such as "Father" and "Son", used in reference to God, should be understood as analogies or metaphors used by the biblical authors to communicate attributes about God in a culture where men had social privilege.[83][84][85] Similarly, Christ became a male not because it was theologically necessary, but because 1st century Jewish culture would not have accepted a female Messiah.[83][84][85] Wayne Grudem takes exception to these egalitarian arguments, insisting that Christ's maleness was theologically necessary; he also alleges that egalitarians are increasingly advocating that God should be thought of as "Mother" as well as "Father", a move which he sees as theologically liberal.[14]
The Christian doctrine of the Trinity has become a major focus of the contemporary gender debate, specifically in relation to 1 Cor. 11:3. In 1977, George W. Knight III argued in a book about gender roles that the subordination of women to men is theologically analogous to the subordination of the Son to the Father in the Trinity.[86] Australian theologian Kevin Giles has more recently responded that complementarians have "reinvented" the doctrine of the Trinity to support their views of men and women, suggesting that some complementarians have adopted a heretical view of the Trinity similar to Arianism.[87] A vigorous debate has ensued, with some egalitarians moving towards the idea that there is "mutual dependence" within the Trinity, including "subordination of the Father to the Son", which must be reflected in gender role relations.[84] Wayne Grudem has countered this by asserting that mutual submission in the Trinity cannot be supported by scripture and church history.[14]
Modern complementarians argue that Genesis 1:26-28 and Galatians 3:28 establish the full equality of males and females in terms of status, worth and dignity.[49] Complementary roles in marriage and church leadership, including the primary authority of men and the submission of wives, are not thought to contradict this principle of ontological equality. The equation of role or functional subordination and ontological inferiority is considered to be a category confusion.[14]
Egalitarian author Rebecca Merrill Groothuis has objected to this position. She argues that "woman’s spiritual and ontological equality with man rules out the sort of subordination prescribed by gender traditionalists…. It is not logically possible for woman to be essentially equal to man, yet universally subordinate to man on the basis of an essential attribute (i.e., femaleness)."[88]
In general, the issues have been what the proper role of women is (a) in marriage; (b) in the church; (c) in society at large. Among the denominations, movements, and organizations that express or have previously expressed a view, there are four main views:
The above lists are examples and are obviously not exhaustive. It is not always clear into which category a church or movement falls.
The Wesleyan tradition and the Holiness and Pentecostal movements, as well as a growing number of contemporary Charismatic churches which draw from them, have increasingly accepted women as leaders on an equal footing with men.