The Ordination of Women:
An Issue among ‘Spirit-filled’ Churches
from the African Diaspora
By Antipas L.
Harris
Question
Should women be ordained in the Pentecostal churches
within the African Christian Diaspora?
Thesis Statement
In
this paper, I will describe the ecclesiological problem of women’s
ordination from a case study that I observed in Berlin, Germany. I wish to
claim that the issue of excluding women from ordination is a result of a
sociological contrivance that oppresses women. The churches safeguard the
issue under the canopy of theological claims. It is appropriate for the
churches, which exclude women from ordained ministry, revisit this problem
theologically. In this essay, I will exploit the issue using the Wesleyan
quadrilateral approach for the analysis. I hope to submit a systematic and
an intelligible argument that explains why the Pentecostal churches should
treat women equally as men in the area of ministerial ordination.
Case Study
The
Council of Christian Communities of an African Approach in Europe
cosponsored an African Christian Diaspora Conference with Humbolt
University, Berlin, Germany, Rostock University, Rostock, Germany, and
University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. On September 11-15, 2003, the
conference was held in Berlin, Germany. The theme was “The Berlin-Congo
Conference 1884-The Partition of Africa and Implications for Christian
Mission Today.” The council invited me to present on the situation of
the African American Churches. More than 100 delegates were present for
the conference. Pastor Johannes Wilson and Archbishop Madelia Oku-Adagame
were both among the delegates present. Pastor Wilson and Archbishop Oku-Adagame
are also board members of the Council of Christian Communities of an
African Approach in Europe. Both are pastors of Pentecostal churches.
Wilkins is Pastor of an independent Pentecostal church in northeast
Germany. Oku-Adagame is Archbishop of Born Again Christ Healing Church
International and Pastor of the Mission House in Hornsey, London. Wilkins
is originally from Sierra Leon and Oku-Adagame is originally from Nigeria.
On Friday afternoon during general assembly Dr. Niki
Cerela, an anthropologist and assistant professor of Africana Studies at a
State University, presented a paper on the churches of the Aladura in
Africa. According to the presentation, women of the Aladura are not
allowed into the fellowship during menstrual period. This ruling is their
Christian interpretation of Leviticus’ temple laws (See Lev. 11-15).
Any preaching Aladuran woman can minister to the
congregation but only during their permitted time to enter the
congregation. Therefore, the preaching women exercise their gifts in the
villages away from the church setting when they are menstruating. They
might be approved to speak in the church when they are not menstruating.
Women, furthermore, might become ordained ministers only after menopause,
according to the presentation.
Dr. Cerela’s presentation commented on the
church’s unique, seemingly oppressive views on women and the ministry
within the policies of the Aladuran church. This presentation sparked
flames of responses all over the conference room. Some were from the
leaders of the Aladuran church who sought to justify their policies. We
were a bit surprised that in the midst was the current Prima, son of the
late founder of the movement, from the Nigerian Church of the Aladura.
Others were particularly interested in the movement because it is
charismatic in nature, and though it restricts women’s ministry, it does
not make sweeping claims that women are not allowed to preach.
Cerela’s account was in defense of the oppressive
treatment of Aladuran women. Her reading of the situation left the
listeners with the inclination to criticize the Church of the Aladura for
misogynist polity. The Prima raised his hand. When permitted to speak, he
introduced himself and fiercely commented that the presentation was a
western-centric reaction to a church within a society that is satisfied
with itself. He confidently said that the presentation did not correctly
interpret the situation from a Nigerian perspective.
“The women,” commented the Prima, “are
respected and considered sacred vessels. They bear the children. It would
be too much on a woman for her to bear the responsibility of ordination
during the flowering of her age.” By this statement, the Prima evaded
the issue of prohibiting menstruating women in the sanctuary because of
the claim that they would defile the “Lord’s House” with their
impurity. Astoundingly, he was not pressed on this point.
The discourse heated when Pastor Johannes Wilson
decided to grace the podium with his prepared comments. With complete
confidence, he said, “At creation God created man first. The man is the
head of the woman. God created the man to be the leader. A woman might be
able to preach, but she is not supposed to have authority over the man.
That is what the bible says. A woman should not pastor. The man is the
head. That is why pastoring is a man’s job.” The crowd sighed and
began to whisper in division. However, Wilson, though somewhat out of
context with his comments, was confident that he had spoken “the
truth.” He added, “Look at Jesus’ twelve disciples. They were only
men. Jesus did not send women to carry out the great commission.”
When Wilson sat down, Archbishop Madelia Oku-Adagame
boldly stood up to counter his argument. She said, “Wait a minute! My
Lord said, ‘There is neither male nor female.’ God can use anybody God
wants to and whenever God wants to if they only submit to God. Hallelujah!
What gets me is that people are always saying, ‘the Bible said this and
the Bible said that.’ Tell me, what did the Spirit say? ‘The letter
kills, but the Spirit gives life’ (II Corinthians 3:6).”
Theological Argument Concerning
the Ordination of Women
John Wesley said that in theological analysis,
scripture should be primal, but scripture, tradition, experience, and
reason should be used together as tools for developing intelligent
theological conclusions. While some Pentecostal churches have used
scripture and traditions in their carved out theological position against
women’s ordination, they have not done so without flaw; furthermore,
they have not considered the important roles of experience and reason
together with scripture and tradition in the development of their
position. First, I will address the problems with the Sola
Scriptural approach. It has been
particularly important for Pentecostals because the movement has
identified itself as “People of the Bible.” Often black Pentecostals
are quoted saying, “If the Bible said it, I believe it.” However, the
contemporary genius of biblical hermeneutics says that many claims for
“what the Bible says to us” are in fact only interpretations of the
Bible. These interpretations vary depending on the interpreter.
The dominant history of biblical interpretation has
been in the hands of men who sociologically have interpreted scripture
through gender-bias hermeneutics that present biblical Christianity in a
way to justify the exclusion of women from ordained ministry. Feminist
critiques, such as that of Elizabeth Schussler Fiorenza, have uncovered
the biases of a male dominated history of biblical interpretation,
advocating a “remedial and revisionist aim” (Schussler Fiorenza: 21).
The feminist revisionist theologians argue, “Biblical texts have been
patriarchalized by interpreters who have projected their androcentric
cultural bias onto biblical texts. Consequently, the Bible must be
“de-patriarchalized” because, correctly understood, it actually
fosters the liberation of women” (Schussler Fiorenza: 23).
Furthermore, it is difficult to make interpretive
judgments on “what the Bible says” without considering the historical
context within which the Bible was written. Most of the societies
surrounding Bible times were patriarchal. Moreover, androcentric records
have blinded interpreters from the significance that women have played in
the history of these societies and in the earliest Church. Schussler
Fiorenza says, “By not problematizing the androcentric frame and
patriarchal models of historiography in general and of early Christian
history in particular, one can not but reinscribe into contemporary
biblical interpretation the historical marginality or insignificance of
women” (83). The question worth exploring has to do with the liberating
power of God that is counter-cultural. Some Christians are willing to
embrace the liberation of Christ from slavery. Yet, many Christians, as
illustrated in the case study, still struggle over the liberating power of
Christ for women who from biblical times until now have suffered similar
kinds of oppression as slaves.
If Pentecostals are committed to an allegiance to
“what the Bible says,” they must consider all of “what the Bible
says,” whether one is for or against the ordination of women. Mary
Hayter warns, “If the Bible is to be authoritative in matters of faith
and conduct it must be the Bible rightly interpreted” (2). One must take
into account the historical context of the passage; yet one should not
make a conclusion based on history alone. The passage must be held in
dialogue with a contemporary context. One must consider its relevance to a
contemporary context in relations to an understanding of the mission of
God in the world.
J Bright warns that, furthermore, when one selects
passages of the Bible that seem to support a favored position on an issue
over a disfavored position, we risk “no more than a vast collection of
proof texts which one may call upon at discretion in order to support
one’s own arguments or confute those of one’s opponents. That is a
misuse of the Bible’s authority” (41, 47). If one chooses to value
scripture at all in the process of making an intelligent, theological
conclusion, one must confront all passages of the Bible concerning the
issue. Specific to the issue of women in the church the Bible, on the one
hand, suggests that the woman is subordinate to the man (Genesis 3:16; I
Corinthians 11:2-16 and I Corinthians 14: 33ff). One the other hand, there
is evidence in scripture that women held leadership roles among the people
of God i.e., Miriam (Exodus 15: 20-26), Deborah (Judges 4-5), Esther (Book
of Esther), Junia (Romans 16:7), and Chloe (I Corinthians 1:11). The main
New Testament passage used for the newly found liberty in Christ for women
is Galatians 3:27f. How does one responsibly develop a theology using the
Bible alone when the Bible is unclear on an issue?
In the reformation, Martin Luther was convinced that
the church should make its doctrinal claims Sola
Scriptura. Pentecostals have
adopted this claim. They have been resistant to questioning the “written
Word.” Pentecostals, therefore, have been called “People of the
Book” (Ma: 54; McClung: 607). The ambiguity of biblical hermeneutics
that emerges from contemporary scholarship, however, forces one to
acknowledge that doctrinal claims should not depend upon scripture alone.
In addition to the flawed application of scripture,
some Pentecostal churches have relied upon church traditions that were
highly influenced my social contrivances that resulted into of theological
ambiguities concerning women’s roles in the church. In the survey of
Church history, women were commissioned for several different roles in
early centuries. Yet, some of the functions of those roles remain unclear.
The early Middle Ages account for women’s ministries such as canonesses,
abbesses, nuns, women bishops and women priests. However, the most
ambiguous roles are those of the “women bishops” and “women
priests.” Gary Macy, professor of religious studies a the University of
San Diego, writes, “Apart from living chastely, the form of life which
“women bishops” and “women priests” entailed is unclear” (7).
Some traditions argue that these positions held no other function than the
wife of a male bishop or priest. Yet, contemporary scholarship has found
reasons to insist that these offices may have held independent clerical
positions (Cooke and Macy: 8).
Different traditions hold different doctrines on the
issue. While the Roman Catholic Church has not ordained women, it has
demanded that its male priests remain celibate. The church values the
ministries of women, such as abbess and nuns. Many of its great spiritual
leaders and teachers such as Julia of Norwich, Claire, Teresa of Avila,
and Mother Teresa are remembered for their important work in the history
of the Catholic Church. Many women have been declared saints just as men
and some even are remembered by official festivals held in their honor
(i.e., October 15th is “the feast of St. Teresa of Avila).
Yet, the church’s official position is that women may not be ordained as
priests. The Reverend David Maloney gives account of the ruling of the
Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, published January 27,
1977. According to him, the document declares,
The constant tradition (of the Roman Catholic
Church), according to which only men are ordained priests, come from
Christ and the apostles, and the Church is bound to follow that norm
because Christ intended it to remain permanently as a norm for the
Church”(Maloney: 7-9)
The church does not seem to use scripture to warrant
this claim. There is no claim of the speaking of the Spirit on the issue.
Even, reason is not exercised to produce this conclusion. As presented in
Maloney, refusal to ordain women in the Roman Catholic Church is a norm
that is passed down by tradition (Maloney: 9). The church is committed to
its on tradition, disregarding any other method for theological
development.
The
Anglican Church, perhaps influenced by the rich heritage of women
leadership as Queens in England, has been open to the value of women
leadership in their churches and do ordain women to priesthood.
Interestingly, though Roman Catholics and Anglicans have common
ecclesiological ancestry, each has different commitments pertaining
clerical ordination. The Anglican Church both ordains women and men
priests and permits its clergy to marry. In the opening sentence of the
“World Anglican Journal”1999 edition the reporter states, “The
ordination of women as priests remains the main obstacle to the union of
the Anglican and Roman Catholic churches” (http://www.anglicanjournal.com/125/04/world02.html).
Like Anglicans, Pentecostals traditionally have not
accepted the value of Roman Catholic views in the area of celibate
priests. The Catholic Church’s views on the issue of women ordination,
moreover, might not have proper relevance to the Pentecostal context
without raising the relevance of celibate male priests. An even stronger
relationship between the Pentecostal movements and the broader church
history of major traditions on this issue might be the Eastern Orthodox
Church.
Pentecostal movements do not share a common major
church tradition as their ancestor. The movement has evolved through
Spirit-renewals in almost every denomination. One might say that the
movement, as a unit, is the product of many traditions. This might even
shed light on why so many conflicting views on the issue of women
ordination. Pentecostal movements that develop out of many church
traditions share common value emphasis on the workings of the Holy Spirit
and the freedom of the Holy Spirit to liberate people from demonic powers.
An appropriate way to respond to this issue with probable productivity,
therefore, might be to take seriously a major tradition that has valued
the working of the Holy Spirit. The Eastern Orthodox Church, for example,
has valued the work of the Holy Spirit perhaps more intentionally than
both the Roman Catholic Church and the Anglican Church.
Incidentally, the Eastern Orthodox Church does not
ordain women. It, also, does not prohibit its priests from marriage. The
problem with the Eastern Orthodox Church has pertained to its
contradicting concern for social action. Stanley Harakas describes the
“reawakening of the long-dormant tradition of Eastern Orthodox social
consciousness and concerns” (9). In his book, he describes centuries of
Bishops that have led the Eastern Orthodox Church in movements of social
concerns. These concerns, however, seem focused on world hunger, traffic
safety, public policy, race relations and human rights (see Harakas).
However, the ecclesial hierarchy of the Eastern Orthodox Church, similarly
to that of the Roman Catholic Church, is historically male dominated. Any
of its theology for social action has focused on the liberation within the
structures of society, beyond the structures of the Eastern Orthodox
Church. The church has not changed nor even seems to recognize the
oppressive theology that governs its hierarchical structure. An
institution that advocates the liberation of social structure must do an
introspective-evaluation for internal structures of oppression. The
Eastern Orthodox Church demonstrates a need to reconsider the oppressive
social contrivances that it promotes when it prohibits the ordination of
women. Therefore, a mere adaptation of an Eastern Orthodox tradition on
this issue is insufficient for any movement that values the Holy
Spirit’s prophetic voice in broader areas of social injustice.
While some Pentecostal movements (often called
Spirit-filled churches) have valued the prophetic experience towards
social liberation, many of them have not utilized the experience of
prophecy to liberate women from their exclusion in ordained ministry. A
major African American Pentecostal headquarters, Mason Temple Church of
God in Christ, of Memphis, Tennessee, opened its pulpit to the civil
rights leader, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King. From its pulpit, King preached
his final prophetic sermon against racial and economic injustice.
Ironically, even the Church of God in Christ has not changed its doctrine
that prohibits the ordination of women ministers. It is fitting that a
movement that takes seriously the experience of the Holy Spirit to cause
“sons and daughters to prophesy (proclaim)” (Acts 2:17) demonstrate
the same quality of experience in its ecclesial structure.
Why not ordain men and women to prophesy (proclaim or
preach)? There are many competent women for preaching. I have been to
churches and church conferences where men and women preached. In my
judgment, some of the women’s homiletical abilities have been incredibly
powerful. Other than by obvious gender differences, there has been little
difference between the homiletical abilities of either. In some cases,
women’s speaking abilities, pulpit confidence and presence, and proof of
preparedness to deliver a sermon has been better than men.
It is inadequate to judge the effectiveness of
preaching by gender differences. I cannot argue here from empirical data.
There are several accounts, however, where within African American history
people have benefited in their spiritual walk or Christian journey from
women evangelists and pastors. For example, we hardly hear of the roles
that women have had in the spiritual experience of black slavery.
According to C. Eric Lincoln and Lawrence H. Mamiya, many slave women
preached the gospel in the worship services held on the plantations
(270-280). Their roles as preachers helped to sustain the spiritual life
of the oppressed slaves day to day (Israel: 3).
By the end of the eighteenth century during the great
religious revival era of camp meetings when Freewill Baptists, Christian
Connection, and Methodists allowed women to preach and exhort more freely
than before; women preachers emerged in large numbers. Between 1800 and
1845, women preachers in several denominational churches were accepted as
evangelists, but not as ordained ministers. The male dominated
hierarchical structures of the Black Church could not resist the
effectiveness of women ministries. These women were, however, free to
preach from the pulpits of churches (Israel: 3); yet, the prominent social
structures that prohibited the liberation of women in society crippled the
Black church such that it was unwilling to affirm them in ordained
ministry. In essence, by permitting women to speak but prohibiting their
ordination, the church remained guilty of gender oppression.
Amanda Smith (1837-1915), a Spirit-filled, African
American woman evangelist traveled from the United States to South Africa
to Liberia and to India preaching and discipling new converts. Adrienne M.
Israel informs that Rev. Smith was responsible for initiating the message
of “sanctification” among the African Methodist Episcopal Churches in
northeast United States of America (51). She had gifts to attract people
to listen to her preach the Word of God. An observer who was present at
one of Smith’s services at the Mountain Lake Park Camp Meeting in
Maryland recalls,
The pressure for seats in and around and near the
pulpit was almost crushing. … Until after ten o’clock, this gifted
and holy woman of God poured out her bright brain and loving heart on
that audience…The crowd lingered to the late closing. It was
impossible to make room for an altar service… (Christian
Standard: 5).
In
her own Autobiography, Smith recalls that when she preached, “the fire
seemed to fall on all the people” (112). Perhaps, “the fire”
(presumably, Smith is speaking of the Holy Spirit) was free to fall
because there was openness to women leadership and hearing the gospel
through the voice of women. Israel notes,
Smith’s career developed out of the black
religious heritage from the era of slavery, trends among Methodists, the
late-nineteenth-century holiness revival, and the temperance movement,
all of which either directly or indirectly encouraged public leadership
roles of women (3).
Furthermore, born in Hazelhurst, Georgia, in 1891, by
1925 Ida B. Robinson became one of the first known African American female
bishops. She was founder of the Pentecostal church, Mt. Sinai Holy Church
of America. According to Harold Trulear account of Elder Minerva Bell’s
(Bell is the author of the Mt. Sinai Holy Church’s history) interview
with someone named Mary Jackson, Bishop Robinson claimed that during
prayer the Holy Spirit spoke to her to “Come out on Mt. Sinai and loose
the women” (Goff and Wacker: 313).
Trulear, in his article entitled “Ida B. Robinson:
The Mother as Symbolic Presence,” captures the motherly nature of the
office of pastor (Goff and Wacker: 309-324). In his description of
Robinson, he highlights the appropriateness of her femaleness in the
office of a Bishop. He says,
The concept of church birthing, in contrast to
church building, is consistent with the mother symbol of Ida B. Robinson
and with the notion of life affirmed in the black religious tradition
(Goff and Wacker: 314).
According to Trulear, this metaphor of birthing and
mothering churches was the driving forces that led Robinson’s concern
with issues relating to the quality of life. The mother symbol for the
office of “pastor” helped Pastor Robinson to structure her church. She
avoided the tendency to reduce church leadership to organizational
management and institutional maintenance (315). Through the metaphor of
her gender, she was compelled to the nurturing of persons, with specific
attention given to the development of mature individuals in both the
personal and communal spheres. Concisely stated, Rev. Robinson was pastor
as mother. She understood new converts as new children to be reared in
holiness. After every sermon, she would sing her theme song: “This is
the church of Mt. Sinai. Oh you can’t join it. You’ve got to be born
in it. This is the church of Mt. Sinai” (Goff and Wacker: 315).
According to Trulear, for the members of the Mt. Sinai Holy Churches of
America these mothering qualities and birthing image helped to cultivate
good life for individuals within the Mt. Sinai Holy Churches and the
community life of these churches (315).
Of course, the stories of Smith and Robinson and
their experiences as evangelist and pastor/ Bishop, alone, are not
substantial enough to make a theological analysis on the issue of
ordination of women. Two women cannot represent the concept of “women in
the ministry.” To borrow from the language of Harold Trulear, the
historicity of these and other stories requires deeper “investigation,
their complexity mandates analysis, and their efficacy pleads for
imitation” (Goff and Wacker: 324). These stories, however, are important
part of the History of Christian experience. These women’s ministries
are equally accountable as the stories that any male ordained ministry
might contribute.
In light of a corrected view of scripture, critical
view of tradition balanced with an objective view of experience, reason
suggests that not only is the Spirit capable of using women but also has
used women in significant ways that have not been recognized by the church
at least in the same manner as men. It is amazing that the Holy Spirit has
used women, such as Amanda B. Smith and Ida B. Robinson, to convince
people of the gospel, despite the gender limitations that they face from a
patriarchal society. God might do even greater work through women when the
social contrivances adopted by many churches to restrict women are changed
in order for them to be privileged to ordained ministry.
It is, furthermore, reasonable for society and the
church to affirm the leadership roles of women based on their
effectiveness as leaders in history in broader categories than in the
history of the Church. Women have played significant leadership roles that
have benefited society, for example, in abolitionist and civil rights
movements, the medical field, in astronomy, in education etc. Abigail
Adams (1744-1818), Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797), Emma Hart Willard
(1787-1870), Sojourner Truth (1797-1883), Mary Lyon (1797-1849), Catherine
Beecher (1800-1878), Harriett Tubman (1820-1913), and Rosa Parks (1913- )
were only a few courageous female advocates that led revolutionary acts in
history. Abigail, the wife of President Adams, led preliminary advocacy
for women’s rights to vote in America. Mary Wollstonecraft led in a
struggle for women’s rights long before the Women Rights movement began
in 1920; she founded a school for women. Emma Willard founded seminaries
for women’s preparation in the ministry. Sojourner Truth was a female
slave abolitionist and minister. Harriet Tubman
was an abolitionist who was so bold to lead the Underground Railroad until
slavery was abolished. Rosa Parks led the civil rights movement when she
refused to give up her seat to a white man forty years ago on December 1,
1955; she was tired and weary from a day of work.
In many cases, it
seems that women might have been bolder than the men. Interestingly, no
man is reported to have resisted segregation to the extent of initiating
the Civil Rights movement. Men such as Martin King are the most noted for
their work in the movement. However, it was the courageous voice of a
woman that pierced the heart of injustice when she spoke up and said,
“No!” What if Rosa Parks had not spoken up? What if she had succumbed
to society’s oppositions? First, she is female. Second, she is black.
Yet, her resistance to social contrivances that were against her gave way
to the civil rights movement that has produced the social liberation that
we enjoy today. One might say that God used the voice and actions of a
woman. Why would we not want to ordain the voice that God uses? By
excluding women from ordained ministry, we fail to affirm the voice of God
that speaks through her for the good of society and for the good of the
church.
Conclusion
It is, moreover, insufficient conclusion to determine
a theological claim on the issue of women’s ordination based solely on
scripture, tradition, experiences, or reason. However, when all four are
held together as sources for doing Pentecostal theology, an intelligent
theological conclusion is that women should indeed be permitted into
ordained ministry. Exclusion of women in ordained ministry is a
conformation to a social contrivance. This problem has influenced the way
that a patronized society has read scripture, interpreted the
effectiveness of the Christian tradition, discerned the movement of the
Spirit in experiences, and listened to the power of reason. The exclusion
of women in ordained ministry cannot be warranted on the bases that
majority of traditions within Christian history have submitted. Experience
and reason are important in developing a theological response to this
issue.
As so-called “People of the Book,” Pentecostals
might learn from feminist revisionists that the Bible when “de-patriarchalized,”
actually advocates the liberation of women (Schussler Fiorenza: 23). This
“de-patriarchalization” within Pentecostal circles might provide a
clearer understanding of the consistency of the move for women liberation
in the Spirit-filled church with Paul’s claim, “Where the Spirit of
the Lord is there is liberty.” This liberation should certainly begin in
the ministry of the Spirit, as claimed by the Spirit-filled churches, also
called Pentecostal churches.
Ella and Henry Mitchell make the profound point on
the issue of women in ministry that it seems most fitting to move beyond
the deep bias of societies and follow the abundantly evidence of God’s
work in Jesus Christ as the church’s pattern of operation (15). They
identify the most important characteristics of Jesus’ earthly ministry
to have been grace and compassion, justice and equality, and the freedom
to become fulfilled children of God (Mitchell: 15). If the Pentecostal
churches would follow these principles today, they would liberate women in
the church to serve with equal opportunity to exercise their God-given
gifts in the vocation of ordained ministry. In addition, I believe that
Pentecostals might be more effective in discipleship than any former
institutional church in the history of Christian traditions if they resist
social constraints, including the gender biases, within its church
structure that submits it to societal norms.
The Case Study
In the case study above, several issues emerge.
However, I have only chosen to respond to one of them. However, it is
interesting that the church of the Aladura, as presented, relies on Old
Testament laws for Christian practice: menstruating women are not allowed
in the sanctuary of their churches. One might wonder to what extent is the
Church of the Aladura consistent in its adapting temple laws to its
Christian practices. For example, are castrated men, midgets, eunuchs
allowed in the sanctuary of the churches? These were all mostly males who
where prohibited in the Temple according to the temple laws of Deuteronomy
23:1. This question, however, is not addressed in the case study or in my
recollection of the seminar in Berlin, Germany.
Pastor Johannes Wilson, also, seems committed to
certain passages of the Bible. He bases his objection to women’s
ordination on patriarchal readings of scripture. One might note that he
only quotes the passages that seem to esteem male dominance. He then reads
into the passages the issue of women ordination.
The
Pentecostal might ask, in ordained ministry, what is the authoritative
voice-the preacher or the Word being preached. If the voice of the
preacher is the authoritative voice, then the authority of the gospel is
reduced to human authority. If the Word being preached is the
authoritative voice, then the issue of gender discrimination in ordained
ministry based on a biblical claim that the “man is the head” appears
less valuable. If the latter is true, Wilson’s argument for male
ordination grounded in his scriptural claims contained in the quotation
that follows are weakened: “she (the woman) is not supposed to have
authority over the man… A woman should not pastor. The man is the head.
That is why pastoring is a man’s job.” One might ask, what is the goal
of preaching-to get people to follow the preacher or to spread the gospel
with intentions to convince people to follow Jesus? A normative
Pentecostal view is that the purpose of preaching is to fulfill the Great
Commission: Go into all the world making disciples, baptizing them in the
name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to
obey whatever I have commanded you...”(Matthew 28:19). In essence, the
goal is to make disciples for Christ and not followers of people.
Alas,
I concur with Archbishop Madelia Oku-Adagame’s position on women’s
ordination but her method of argumentation weakens her argument. I believe
that God is free to call whomever God chooses to preach, and that genders
and ethnicities should not exclude one from ordination. The archbishop
says,
My Lord said, ‘There is neither male nor
female.’ God can use anybody God wants to and whenever God if they
only submit to God. Hallelujah! What gets me is that people are always
saying, ‘the Bible said this and the Bible said that.’ Tell me, what
did the Spirit say? ‘The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life’
(II Corinthians 3:6) (Excerpt is taken from case study).
The method of arguing reveals an emotive response
rather than a critical theological response to the issue. First, she
quotes Paul and names him the Lord: “My Lord said, ‘There is neither
male nor female.’” Secondly, she uses Scripture to argue against the
usage of Scripture: “What gets me is that people are always saying,
‘the Bible said this and the Bible said that.’ Tell me, what did the
Spirit say? ‘The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life’ (II
Corinthians 3:6)” Thirdly, she relies on what the Bible says about the
Spirit to value the speaking of the Spirit against the Bible.
I
believe that my theological response is equally as passionate as the
archbishop is; yet it is more theologically convincing than hers. I have
not violated my faith commitments as a Pentecostal minister. In addition,
the theological argument against the social problem of women’s
ordination is academically intelligible and is appropriate to the cases
study offered above.
Bibliography
Bright, J., The
Authority of the Old Testament (London 1967)
Cooke, B. and Macy, G. (editors), A History of Women and Ordination V1: The Ordination
of Women in a Medieval Context (The Scarecrow Press, Inc.: Lanham,
Maryland, and London, 2002)
Goff, James R. and Wacker, Grant, Portraits of a Generation: Early Pentecostal Leaders (University of
Arkansas Press: Fayetteville, 2002)
Hayter, M., The
New Eve in Christ (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company: Grand
Rapids, MI, 1987)
Israel, Adrienne M., Amanda
Berry Smith (Scarecrow Press, Inc: Lanham, Maryland and London, 1998)
Lincoln, Eric C. and Mamiya, Lawrence, H., The
Black Church in the African American Experience
(Duke University Press: Durham, N.C., 1990)
Maloney, David, M., The
Church cannot ordain Women to the Priesthood: Declaration Of
the Congregation fro Doctrine of the Faith (Franciscan Herald Press:
Chicago, IL, 1978)
“Mountain Lake Park,” Christian
Standard, 23 July 1891
Mitchell, Ella P. (editor), Women: To Preach or not to Preach (Judson Press: Valley Forge, PA
1991)
Schussler-Fiorenza, But
She Said: Feminist Practices of Biblical Interpretation (Beacon Press:
Boston, MA, 1992)
Smith, Amanda Berry, Autobiography:
The Story of the Lord’s Dealings with Mrs. Amanda
Smith, The Colored Evangelist (1893) (first reprint-Chicago:
Afro-American Press, Division of Afro-American Books, Inc., 1969)
|