The role of women in the church is one of the defining pressure points facing the church today. Feminism has made deeper inroads into evangelicalism than many realize, intensifying pressure to conform to the spirit of the age. It is often claimed that denying women the offices of pastor or elder disparages them and suppresses their God-given gifts. At the same time, many evangelicals profess to uphold the Bible’s teaching on male leadership in the church while undermining its intent in practice. This article addresses three key errors driving today’s confusion before offering a positive biblical vision for the service of women in the church.

What is Ministry?

One of the most prominent errors leading to much of the misunderstanding about the role of men and women in evangelical churches is confusion about the word “ministry.” The word is sometimes used today to refer to the work of those in the ordained office of pastor and elder. Many people, however, use the word more broadly to refer to all activity in the church with a spiritual focus, from women’s book study groups to men’s fellowship breakfasts to soup kitchens for the poor. Standard English dictionary definitions of the word ministry reflect both uses: “the act of serving” and “the profession, duties, and services of a minister” (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 5^th edition). Diakonia is a Greek word in the New Testament that sometimes means “service,” in a way that corresponds with the broader usage of most Christians today when they use the word “ministry.” Martha “was distracted with much serving” (Luke 10:40). The Christians in Antioch send “service” (ESV: “relief”), i.e. material aid, “to the brothers living in Judea” when they hear of a famine there (Acts 11:29; see also Rom. 15:31; 2 Cor. 8:4; 9:1, 12–13). The saints in the church in Thyatira are commended for their “works and love and faith and service and endurance” (Rev. 2:19; see also Rom. 12:7).

Overwhelmingly, however, the word diakonia is used in a more restricted sense. It still means “service,” but it is restricted in the sense that it refers to the work of men appointed by God to preach the word and rule over the church. This service can only be carried out by men, specifically those designated by God for this special work. Of the thirty-four uses of the word diakonia in the New Testament, most are used in this way. Matthias replaces Judas “in this ministry” of being an appointed “witness” to Christ (Acts 1:17). The apostles “devote [themselves] to prayer and to the ministry of the word” (Acts 6:4). Paul refers to his calling as “the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24; see also Acts 21:19). In fact, Paul uses this term more than any other New Testament author, and in precisely this way, to explain how the gospel was spread through his preaching and teaching (see, for example, Rom. 11:13; 2 Cor. 3:8–9; 4:1; 5:18; 6:3; 11:8; Col. 4:17; 1 Tim. 1:12; 2 Tim. 4:5, 11).

This predominant usage of the word diakonia in the New Testament is what has led to the English word “ministry” being used to describe “the profession, duties, and services of a minister.” The related word diakonos, which refers to one engaged in diakonia, is used similarly to diakonia: it simply means someone who carries out “service” of some sort (which can be carried out by many different kinds of people: see, for example, Matt. 20:26; Mark 9:35; John 2:9; Rom. 13:4 [referring to civil magistrates]; 16:1; etc.).

Sometimes, however, diakonos is attached to the “service” or “ministry” of the word, or of the relief of the physical needs of the saints. These two kinds of service can only be carried out by men appointed by God: see, for example: 1 Cor. 3:5; 2 Cor. 3:6; 6:4; Eph. 3:7; 6:21; Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:7, 25; 4:7; 1 Tim. 3:8; 4:6. 

Ultimately, “ministry” can refer broadly to all Christian service or more narrowly to the proclamation of God’s word and pastoral shepherding by qualified men. Both uses are valid, but only if we recognize they describe two distinct realities in Scripture. To avoid confusion, we may distinguish between “service” and “ministry,” but the key point remains: the ministry of the word and authoritative diaconal ministry (ala 1 Tim. 3:8–13) is reserved for men called to that office.

Ephesians 4:11–12, one of the main proof texts appealed to for women’s ordination and female leadership in the church, can rightly be understood once we make this linguistic distinction. In that text, Paul writes of how Jesus, in ascending triumphantly to the right hand of the Father after his victory at the cross, “gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ . . . .” One can clearly see that there is a distinction between those appointed to “offices” of the word of God (4:11) and the saints who receive that word (4:12). Understanding that the word diakonia can mean any sort of act of service to another then clarifies Paul’s meaning: he never blurs the line between those men appointed to proclaim the word and those called to receive it from their hands, the latter of whom are then equipped to serve (diakonia) one another in a multitude of other ways (hospitality, physical needs, and so on).

If we do not make a distinction between ministry-service of the word (by appointed men) and service in the broader sense, we will find it nearly impossible to adhere to the Bible’s teaching on male-only leadership in the church. This is exactly what is happening even in ostensibly “complementarian” churches that give lip service to the idea of male-only leadership, but deny it in actual practice. There is much angst in these circles, in fact, among those who kick against the goads, believing that women must in some way also be teachers of the word. They may claim that they do not believe in women’s ordination, but they reject the biblical distinction between the fundamentally different types, or categories, of service: the ministry of divinely called men and the service of everyone else in the church, including women. This, then, leads to a series of additional errors about the divinely appointed role of women in the church. In this article, I will address two of these increasingly common errors.

Attending to the Spiritual Needs of Women

One of the most common errors I see repeatedly today is the idea that only women can meet the spiritual needs of other women. This is routinely put forward—in churches that claim to be complementarian—as a reason why there must be some form of church-sanctioned teaching “by women, for women” in the church. In other words, there is a need for a female “ministry of the word” (even if it is not called that). This might seem plausible at first. Who better understands what women go through than other women? There is no denying that Christian women are called to serve and encourage one another in the church. Titus 2:3–5 is a good example of this very thing. Older Christian women are to “teach what is good” to the younger women in the church, specifically to “train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their husbands . . . .” Despite how this text is often taken today, it does not sanction the appointment of women to any sort of official position of leadership in the church, nor is about women becoming church-appointed teachers of the Bible. This is obvious if you continue into verse 4 (part of the same sentence in Greek): the things the older women are to teach the younger women all have to do with personal holiness in the domestic sphere. The older women, in their normal interactions with the younger women in the church, are to help those younger women thrive in the sphere in which God primarily has called them to serve: the home. The fact that some professed complementarians might bristle at the previous sentence is proof of how deeply the tentacles of feminism have penetrated into the church. Female service to God, family, and church, centered on the domestic sphere, is indispensable and of inestimable value and worth, though it is usually behind the scenes and un-lauded by the world (which is why it is so routinely disparaged by feminists).

Loving service by women for other women in the church, however, does not mean that only women can meet the spiritual needs of women. God has appointed elders—who can only be men—for the spiritual oversight of all believers: men and women, boys and girls (1 Tim. 3:1–7; 5:17; Heb. 13:17; 1 Peter 5:1–3). God did not make a mistake when he decreed that only men could serve as shepherds and teachers of the whole church. There is no special insight into the female psyche or female spirituality from which male elders are excluded, preventing them from carrying out the role God has assigned to them. God never appoints anyone to an office without also providing the gifts necessary to fulfill it faithfully. This is not to deny that women understand other women in ways men do not, at least intuitively. Denying this commonsense truth would be ridiculous. But this does not change the fact that God has appointed only male elders to attend to the spiritual needs of the whole church.

Is there a legitimate place for women to assist the elders and deacons as these men fulfill their calling? Of course. Elders may, when appropriate, consult women in the church regarding issues unique to women’s circumstances. They may also involve women when addressing sensitive pastoral situations (abuse, etc.) or particular diaconal needs. My denomination, the Presbyterian Church in America, without downplaying male-only leadership, rightly makes room for such circumstances (see the PCA’s Book of Church Order, 9-7). The basic point remains: the spiritual shepherding of men and women is the responsibility of the church’s elders, and God grants them the gifts necessary to carry out that calling faithfully. No “official” or “semi-official” teaching or shepherding office for women is needed, nor is one biblically permitted.

One-on-One Discipleship of Women by Men

A second error, which is becoming more common, is the insistence that for women to have their spiritual needs met they must have personal access to the male leadership of their church. This increasingly takes the form of the claim that churches must find a way for individual women to spend time alone with male leaders, that their need of discipleship will be otherwise unmet. This might seem, at first blush, like the exact opposite of the previous error, but it routinely goes hand-in-hand with it. There appears to be a subtext in this, namely that it is the height of unfairness to deny such access to women who desire it. If a male church leader is willing to meet one-on-one with other men in the church, so the argument goes, he should be willing to do the same with women. If male church leaders are unwilling to do so, women will not have the same ability to serve in the church in “visible leadership,” which one prominent voice contends is necessary for women in the church.

The logic of this might seem to make sense: the men appointed to positions of leadership are the ones who teach and lead and therefore are (as it were) “where the action is.” This sentiment, of course, completely inverts the Bible’s teaching on church leadership, which is supposed to be driven by a desire to serve, not by self-promotion or self-exaltation (Mark 9:35; 1 Cor. 9:19; 2 Cor. 4:11–12; Phil. 1:1). Leaders in the church are warned to seek such leadership only from a desire to glorify God and care for God’s people, not to make much of themselves (Heb. 13:17; James 3:1; 1 Peter 5:1–3). Sadly, in a fallen world, the desire of many women and men to take for themselves positions of leadership in the church is ungodly: the desire to be calling the shots, to be in on the action, to be able to tell others what to do, to be admired, to be thought of as one who knows more than others. It is not driven by a desire to die to self and serve for the wellbeing of God’s people. I haven’t even mentioned the insanity of married men and women meeting routinely alone and privately with members of the opposite sex who are not their spouses (pastoral shepherding of women should be in public spaces, even if there is privacy involved).

The Indispensable Role of Women in the Church

It is sometimes said that the kinds of arguments I’ve presented above disparage women’s gifts, that they render their contribution to the work of the church unnecessary. Far from it. Women are absolutely indispensable to the work of the church, but we must be faithful to the Scriptures in how we articulate that indispensability. Women are vital to the life of the church, but never in an official teaching or leadership capacity. The Bible could not be any clearer about this: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet” (1 Tim. 2:12). One should note that this verse says two different things: that a woman may not exercise authority over a man and that a woman may not teach, the latter of which is a prohibition on women engaging in the preaching ministry of the word, which is restricted to men who are elders.

Titus 2:3–5 is no counterexample, since that text does not refer to the official ministry of the word in an ecclesiastical setting, but to the informal teaching of domestic duties by older women to younger women in the church. There simply is no biblical category of church-sanctioned “visible female leadership” in teaching God’s word that is parallel to the official ministry of the Word by the elders. That God’s calling for women to be oriented toward the domestic sphere seems to some to be disparaging toward women is yet another example of the contemporary influence of feminism. It is precisely as men and women joyfully carry out their unique vocations in their unique spheres that the church flourishes.

What, then, is the role of women in the church? To begin with, all biblical texts that speak of general Christian service among believers apply, texts like Ephesians 4:12, with its teaching that all believers are to engage in the “work of ministry [service], for the building up of the body of Christ.” Those aspects of Paul’s teaching in Romans 12 that do not pertain to the ministry of the word are also relevant: “service,” “generosity,” and “mercy” (Rom. 12:7–8). The positive import of Titus 2:3–5 is essential: wiser, older women inculcating in the younger women of the church reverent behavior, avoiding slander and drunkenness, pursuing goodness, loving their husbands and children, self-control, purity, a focus on excellence in household management, general kindness, and godly submissiveness to their husbands.

The fruit that has been produced by such labors among godly women in church history is inestimable: we have many famous examples of the influence of godly wives and mothers (Augustine, the Wesleys, Charles Hodge, J. Gresham Machen, etc.), but also many millions more of whom we know nothing today. But the Lord knows their faithful service, which he rewards in their lives, and continues to reward eternally. In discussing the place of men and women in the church, we must remember Christ’s warning: “Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 6:1). Faithful service to the Lord should not be about being making a name for oneself. We are to serve the Lord “in secret,” knowing that our heavenly Father sees and will reward us (Matt. 6:4, 6, 18; etc.).

Lastly, consider all the godly women Paul mentions in Romans 16, and all the vital work they accomplished in service to the Lord and in support of the advancement of the gospel. Phoebe, who was a patron to many believers, likely hosted a church in her house (Rom. 16:1–2). Prisca, along with her husband Aquilla, risked her very life to serve Paul in some way (Rom. 16:3). Mary “worked hard” for the saints (Rom. 16:6). Junia, along with her (likely) husband Andronicus, were well known by the apostles for their faithful service, which even led to their imprisonment at some point (Rom. 16:7). Tryphaena and Tryhposa were “workers in the Lord” (Rom. 16:12). Rufus’ mother was so sacrificial in her service to Paul in his ministry that he says she was like a mother to him (Rom. 16:13).

Conclusion

The point of all of this is that in the New Testament, women are never treated as unnecessary. I know there are men in the church who disparage women and treat their service as unnecessary, but abuses do not change the biblical mandate. Just as it is “not good that the man should be alone” (Gen. 2:18), the church simply cannot carry out its mission apart from the sacrificial service of its women (and men). But we must not seek to place women into roles and positions that the Lord has restricted to men alone: the ministry-service of word and sacrament, the shepherding and ruling that is the calling of male elders alone, and the diaconate. Just as the family cannot flourish without a husband and wife joyfully and vigilantly serving God according to their unique vocations, so will it be with men and women in the church.

This article originally appeared at American Reformer. The version here has been lightly edited.