One of the reasons I was confused when I first began to understand that many limit the types of spiritual ministry that men might receive from women due to certain passages of Scripture, was my understanding that I Corinthians 12 describes spiritual gifts as those given by God, via the Holy Spirit, to various members of Christ’s body for the good of the whole body, without specification of age, gender, education, etc. The gifts are given for “the common good,” v. 7. It does not say that some gifts are only given for some parts of the body and not others, only that not everyone receives the same gifts. But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body, just as He desired. If they were all one member, where would the body be? But now there are many members, but one body. (vv.18-20)
It also says, And the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you”; or again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” On the contrary, it is much truer that the members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary; and those members of the body which we deem less honorable, on these we bestow more abundant honor, and our less presentable members become much more presentable, whereas our more presentable members have no need of it. But God has so composed the body, giving more abundant honor to that member which lacked, so that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.
So I am wondering, how do complementarians square the “limitation” verses with this passage? Any references to articles, etc. are much appreciated.
I don’t know if this is exactly what you are asking, but just recently I was reading an (old) article by Opal Reddin about women in ministry. Reddin was a minister in the Assembly of God denomination, I believe. Anyway, I don’t know if she characterized herself as complementarian, but perhaps she would have. Anyway, her article did put a distinction between “the headship of the husband in marriage” and women ministering to the body of Christ. In other words, she believed that women weren’t restricted in what they could do in ministry in church and that doing so was not in conflict with the husband being head of the wife.
AoG has women pastors, one church I visited had 4 women out of 7 total pastors, altho the senion pastor was a man. So that aspect would be a given, I do not know what they teach on marriage.
This article on CBMW mentions 1 Corinthians 12, and affirms that women are gifted and called to serve. However, they take other passages, such as 1 Timothy 2, to set up parameters within which the universal gifts may be used.
So basically they affirm women’s gifting but say they are limited by other verses outside of 1 Cor 12.
http://www.cbmw.org/Journal/Vol-13-No-1/Women-in-Ministry-Practical-Application-of-Biblical-Teaching
Here’s the thing. One would expect any restrictions on a ministry to be specified at the time of its institution. See Aaron as high priest for example.
The Piper/Grudem answer: Having a spiritual gift is not a warrant to use it however we please.
Their example is the restriction on using the gift of tongues only where there is an interpreter.
We do not deny to women the right to use the gifts God has given them. If they have gifts of teaching or administration or evangelism, God does want those gifts used, and He will honor the commitment to use them within the guidelines given in Scripture.
(Above quotes from CBMW.)
Of course this raises the sticky question (which I’ve never seen satisfactorily answered) of whether it is more important for a woman to obey the Great Commission or to avoid teaching a man even if there are no men around to witness in her place. The loophole for the (hyper-)reformed is that God will take care of the man’s salvation.
So for comps, the (supposed) verses on women not teaching men have more weight than the gifting and witnessing verses.
We are to use any gifts we have to build up the body of Christ, knowing that God is a God of order, so we are to do things in order, with the elders charged with oversight.
So what to do if you do not agree with the elders’ interpretation of some Scripture? One can go privately to discuss concerns, and if one’s concerns are important enough decide to go elsewhere.
In response to Don Johnson’s first comment “I do not know what they teach on marriage”:
I meet with a Pentecostal congregation (not AoG), and I’m not 100% sure what we teach on marriage, either.
For example, the elder who kept insisting in one message that he was sorry to inform the men that the responsibility to be the priest of the home was on their shoulders was the same elder who told the men that the “my way or the highway” mentality didn’t work. For the most part, we get that the woman submits to her husband and the husband loves his wife. We don’t often get any nitty gritty on what that entails. I did dare to broach the subject with the pastor of the terminology “priest of the home.” The conversation seemed frustrating, but we both agreed we would continue to search the scriptures (and we were probably each secretly vowing to pray that God would enlighten the other).
Thanks, all. Amanda and zhouya, what you said about women using their gifts “within certain parameters” was what I suspected. Makes you wonder, though, why Paul wouldn’t have mentioned this in I Corinthians, and other places where gifts are discussed, if it were so important (as Don also suggested).
As (the other) Bonnie’s comments imply, the matter also gets sticky and complicated when trying to sort out husbands vs. other men as receptors of women’s authority or leadership.