2008 issue 5-6 - women in the church - counsel of chalcedon

8/12/2019 2008 Issue 5-6 - Women in the Church - Counsel of Chalcedon

1/9

Women in thehurch

Joseph Morecraft IIIChalcedon Presbyterian ChurchCumming G

The Bible makes clear that each congregationhas the authority from God to elect t ~ ownofficers, rather than having officers imposedon it by church or state. But who in the

congregation has the duty to vote for churchofficers? Is it the privilege of every baptizedmember of the church? Of every communingmemher, hut not of non-communing members?Of adult members but not children? Of

both? Of men and women? Does the Biblehave any direction to give us on this issue?

Before we see what the Bible leads us to believeon this subject, we must keep in mind that thesubject of voting rights is emotionally charged.'Vornen suffrage is even more highly charged

emotionally. Regardless of what the Bible maysay, people become excited when they feel anyencroachments on, injuries to or denials oftheir perceived human and civil rights. And,in this age of egalitarianism, those feelings areall the more intense when people feel that theyare viewed as inferior to other human beings.

Therefore, when we ask the Bible to direct

us as to what we are to believe and practiceregarding the identity of those who are to vote incongregations for their church officers, we mustearnestly pray that God's Spirit would enlightenour hearts and minds, govern our emotions,

and help us to think clearly, as in all matters offaith and practice our desire must be to bring

our every thought into captivity to Christ.

The indication of the Bible regarding women

The Counsel of Chalcedon


2/9


3/9

Vnmen in the hurch

6

political office, to as absolutefreedom from her husband in themarriage relation as she enjoyedbefore her union to him, and toas absolute control of her ownproperty and earnings as that

claimed by the single gentleman,as against her own husband.

DISCUSSIONS, Vol. III, p. 501.IIis words are right on the money

What is the modern theory ofwomen suffrage" and woman's

rights based on? Where did it

come from? It arose out of theanti-christian egalitarianism ofthe bloody French Revolutionof 1789 that sought to expungeChristianity from France with itsrallying cry, "Liberty, Fraternity,Equality." This faith believes thatlegislation and human rights mustdisregard all distinctions of sexand treat both sexes with total

equality in every respect. Thisradical theory of human rights,which most people in our country

belicve, including most Christians,teaches that every human being

is naturally independent, owesno duties to civil or ecclesiasticalsociety

savethose

freelyconceded

in the 'social contract'; is thenatural equal of every otherhuman except as he or she

has forfeited liberty by crime.Legislation and taxation are unjustunless based on representation,

which means the privilege ofeach man under government tovote for his governors. f thesepropositions were true, then,

indeed, their application to womenwould be indisputable. -- They

can quote the Declaration ofIndependence in the sense these

radicals hold it: "We hold thesetruths to be self-eVident; thatall men are by nature equal andinalienably entitled to life, libertyand the purse of happiness. "Alljust government is founded in theconsent of the governed." t ist rue that this document, rationally

interpreted, teaches something

wholly different from the absurdequality of the radical, whichdemands for every member ofsociety all the specific franchises[privileges, liberties and rights]

which any member has.

The wise men of 1776 knewthat men are not naturally equal,in strength, talent, virtue, or

ability; and that different ordersof human beings naturally inheritvery different sets of rights andfranchises, according as they are

qualified to enjoy and employthem for their own good andthe good of the whole. But theymeant to teach that in one veryimportant respect all are naturallyequally. This is the equalitywhich .Joh recognized (31:15)1as existing between him and his

slave; the equality of a commonorigin, a common humanity andimmortality. t is the equalityof the golden rule. By this right,that human being whom the

laws endow with the smallestfranchises in society has the same

kind of moral right to have that

small franchise respected by hisfellows, as the man who justlypossesses the largest franchise.

It is the equality embodied inthe great maxim of the BritishConstitutions: ' that before thelaw all are equal.' -- The samelaw which shields the earl'sentailed estates, equally protects

the peasant's cottage."- RobertL. Dabney, DISCUSSIONS, Vol.II, pp. 114-116. This is theequality which is thoroughly

consistent with that wide diversityof natural capacities, virtues,station, sex, inherited possessions,which inexorable fact discloses

everywhere and by means ofwhich social organization ispossible. But in place of this .. ourmodern politician now teaches,

under the same name, the equality

of the Jacobin, of the 'Sans

culotte,' which absurdity claims

for every human the same speCificpowers and rights. -- Our fathersvalued liberty, but the liberty forwhich they contended was eachperson's privilege to do those

things and those only to whichGod's Law and providence gavehim a moral right. The liberty ofnature which your modern asserts

is absolute license: the privilegeof doing whatever a corrupt willcraves, except as this license iscurbed by a voluntary 'socialcontract.' The fathers of ourcountry could have adopted the

sublime words ... Lex Rex, the Lawis king. -- But now .. the supremelaw is the will or caprice of whathappens to be the major mob, thesuggestion of the demogogue whois most artful to seduce."- Dabney,DISCUSSIONS, Vol. IV, pp. Sf.

So then, back to our subjectof voting rights in the church.The indication of the Bible isthat baptized adult male heads ofhouseholds in the congregation,

(not under church discipline), havethe authority to vote for church

officers in that congregation. Ofcourse, this runs counter to thehumanistic, egalitarian principle

of universal suffrage so sacredin our age; so we will lay out theBiblical basis for our positionin an attempt to show that thisviewpoint did not originate with

men but with the living God,VIlO, because He loved thethought of woman, created her.

But I want you to understand

that Christ is the head of everyman, and the man is the head ofa woman, and God is the head ofChrist. -- ... he is the image andglory of God; but the woman isthe glory of man. -- For man doesnot originate from woman, butwoman from man; for indeed manwas not created for the woman'ssake, but woman for the man's

The ounsel qf halcedon


4/9

s a k e ~I Corinthians 11:3, 7 8, 9

This text tells us that God,who created human beings, hasan order by which He wantshuman society to be structured,

rejection of which spells deathfor that society. He has clearlyand sufficiently revealed all thenecessary elements of I-lis socialorder in the Biblc, which is Hisrevealed will for us. This socialorder is representative in nature,based upon a headship principle.

God is the I1ead of Christ.

Christ is the Head of every man.

Man is the head of woman. 2

As God has authority overChrist, Christ has been giventhe authority over a11 men; andman has God-given authorityover woman. Just as man reflectsGod's image, woman reflectsGod's image in her role as man'scounterpart, completing him.

Just as the faithful cxistence ofman brings praise and honor toGod, the faithful existence ofwoman brings praise and honor

to man under God. 'Womanis man's glory because he isincomplete without her-However,

in the Lord, neither is the womanindependent of man, nor is manindependent of woman. For asthe woman originates from theman, so also the man has his birththrough the woman; and all thingsoriginate from God, 11:11-12.

Contrary to all the radicaltheories of human equality thatswirl around us that give to humanbeings natural and absoluteautonomy, the Bible assumesthat there are orders of humanbeings naturally unequal in theirinherited rights, as i n their bodilyand mental qualities; that Godhas no t ordained any human

Making the Nations Christ s Disciples

being to this proud independence

[autonomyL but placed all insubordination under authority,the child under its mother, themother under her husband, the

husband under the ecclesiastical

and civil magistrates, andthese under the Law, whoseguardian and avenger is GodI-limself."- Robert L. Dabney,DISCUSSIONS, Vol. II, p. 107

This subordination of womanto man, which does not implythe inferiority of woman to man,relates to human society generally.In the family, the woman is tobe submissive to the headship ofher husband, Ephesians 5:22, 23.Women in places of civil authority,because of the abdication ofman, is a sign of God's judgmenton that socie ty-O My peopleTheir oppressors are children,

and women rule over them. 0My people Those who guide youlead you astray, and confuse thedirection of your paths, Isaiah3:12. And the principle of thesubordination of women to menin the governing of the churchis seen in the follOWing verses.

'Vives, be subject to yourown husbands, as to the Lord.For the husband is the head ofthe wife, as Christ also is thehead of the church, He Himselfbeing the Savior of the body.But as the church is subject toChrist, so also the wives oughtto bc to their husbands' ineverything.- Ephesians 5:22-24

This passage is making the pointthat in the home the husband isresponsi ble for loving headship,i.e., governing authority, direction,protection and provision. And thewife is to be in loving submissionto his loving headship. But thispassage also has implications forthe place of women in the churchas well, for she is to be subject

W 1nen in the Churc

to her husband in everything.This includes what happens in

the home, but also what happensoutside of the home. The Churchis made up of families and if it isimproper for the wife to exercise

dominion over her husband inthe privacy of the home, it isimproper for her to exercisedominion over her husbandoutside of the home in the Church.f she cannot be the head of one

family, she cannot be head ofthe Church which is made up ofa number of families."- 'VayneMack, TIlE ROLE OF WOMEN INTHE CHURCH, p. 11. In otherwords, a woman cannot occupy aposition in the church which she

cannot hold in her own home.f she cannot rule jn the home,

she cannot rule in the church.

Just as Christ is the covenant

head of His church, representing,lOVing and being in charge of her,so the husband is thc covenanthead of his wife, representingher and all their children. Eachhome is to be a small republic,with a representative head whorepresents that family, and who ina covenantal sense is that family.But the modern family, even whcnit has not disintegrated, insists

upon functional parity between

husband and wife. But despiteof what we think, a husband is ahead and a lord-his fiefdom maybe tiny, and he is frequently notworthy of it. -- The man is anindiVidual, a private person, butas husband he also holds a publicoffice... He and his wife are both

indiVidual citizens of this smallrepublic, and they each have theirindividual perspectives. But heis also a public person, and iscalled to function in that role asthe representative head of hishousehold. -- When understoodin a household, the applications ofthis foundation truth [of covenantheadship]' not surprisingly can be

Continued on Page 29


5/9

Continued jTom page 7

found everywhere. And a t everypoint, they will reveal how muchthis knowledge of headship andsubmission is completely out ofstep with the spirit of the age. -One example should suffice. Wehave accepted, as a self-evidenttruth in both church and state,that women should have the right

to vote. \\Te believe this becausewe think it was unfair that onlymen used to be able to vote. Webelieve this because we thinkthat, back in our dark ages, menused to vote as individuals, andthat women as individuals wereconsidered too silly to be able tovote. They were not to troubletheir little heads about it... So we

all took to the barricades; womenwere granted the right to vote,and the sound of triumph wasgreat in the land. - Douglas Jonesand Douglas Wilson, ANGELS INTHE ARCHITECTURE, pp. 113f,

We are told that in the olddays, society did not care whatwomen thought about things,

it only wanted to hear what thehusbands had to say. Now, weare more enlightened, we wantto hear from both wives andtheir husbands. The problem

with this viewpoint is that itfails to recognize the covenantalrelation of husband and wife asa household. The real questionis: what does the household,the familial republic, think.

\Ve discover this by asking therepresentative spokesman, the

covenant head. He would answer

for his family, and in speaking,represented'them. In other

words, the issue is not whethermen votc as opposed to women,The issue is whether families canvotc. In our modernist blindness

and folly, we did not enfranchisewomen, we discnfranchised thchousehold. And consider where

it has gotten us. When husbandsand wives agree, voting the samc

lVlaking the Nations ChTist s Disciples

way, all we have done is multiplythe entire vote tally by two, Andwhen they disagree, all that has

happened is that their votes cancelout the voice of their household, Jones and Wilson, pp. 116-117

Let the women3 keep silent

in the churches; for they are notpermitted to speak, but let themsubject themselves, just as the Law

also says. And if they desire tolearn anything, let them ask their

own husbands4 at home; for it isimproper for a woman to speak inchurch,- I Corinthians 14:34-35

The fact that in no Christian

church was public speaking

permitted to women was itselfa strong proof that it wasunchristian, i.e., contrary tothe spirit of Christianity. Paul,however, adds to the prohibitionthe weight of apostolic authority,and not of that only but also theauthority of reason and SCripture.It is not permitted to them tospeak. The speaking intended ispublic speaking, and especially

in the church. -- The rationalground for this prohibition isthat it is contrary to the relationof subordination in which thewoman stands to the man that sheappear as a public teacher. -- Thescriptural ground is expressed inthe words as also saith the law, i.e.,the will of God as made known inthe Old Testament. -- The desirefor knowledge in women is not tobe repressed, and the facilitiesfor its acquisition arc not to bedenied them. The refinement and

delicacy of their scx, however,should be carefully preserved.They may learn an they wish toknow without appearing before

the public. For it is a shamcfor women to speak in church.The word used is aischTonwhich properly means 'ugly,deformed.' It is spokcn of anything which excites disgust. As

Women in the hUT h

the peculiar power and usefulness

of women depend on theirbeing the objects of admirationand affection, any thing which

tends to excite the oppositesentiments should for that reasonbe avoided. - Charl es Hodge, ICORINTHIANS, pp. 304-305

Let a woman qUietly receiveinstruction with entiresubmissiveness. But I do not allowa woman to teach or exerciseauthority over a man, but toremain quiet. For it was Adam

who wa first creation, and then

Eve. And it was not Adam whowas deceived, but the womanbeing quite deceived, fell into

transgression.- I Timothy 2:11-14

Since God's social order involvesthe subordination of woman tothe leadership of men, becauseof the order of creation, i.e., manwas created first, and Eve wasdeceived by Satan, in the church,

women are not to teach men,

nor are they to lead in public

worship nor to exercise authorityand rule over men. The reason

for this order is not becausewomen are the inferior sex, butbecause of a sovereign God'sordering of creation and societyaccording to the good pleasureof His will. This principle wouldexclude women from voting forchurch officers in congregationalmeetings because voting is theexercising of government and

rule. The act of voting is anact of authority in the church;and women are prohibited the

authority to rule over the church.

. . . the calling or electing ofchurch-officers {is] a part ofecclesiastical jurisdiction.. In

chOOSing officer-bearers, thepeople seem necessarily toexercise a species of power, andtheir can seems, in so far, to havean authority over the individuals


6/932

omen in the hurch

who are its objects, and toconstitute in part what goes inordinary cases to determine the

ca11 of God. -- In my opinion ..the exclusion of women froman explicit choice or formalvote .. rests on the apostolical

prohibition, I Corinthians14:34,35; I Timothy 2:11,12 .. 1

Corinthians 11:3-16. It is true thatthe apostle does not speak directly

of voting, and that public teachingis something different from it,but I think the considerationswhich he adduces are applicableto both 1 Corinthians 11:3-16appears to me to suggest ideaswhich it would be difficult to

reconcile with women's takingan active par t in the publicmanagement of ecclesiasticalaffairs, giving their voices, andinfluencing the determinations ofthe society, equally with the men,including their own husbandsand, indeed, in most instancestaking the determination into

their own hands .. - ThomasM'Crie, 'ON TIlE RIGHT OFFEMALES TO VOTE, pp. 672-673in MISCELLANEOUS WRITINGS.

The apostle Paul bases his

prohibition of women to holdplaces of governing and teachingauthority on the Creation and Fall.

First, the Bible says that Godcreated man first, and then Hecreated woman, who was taken

from the body of man, Genesis2:22. The purpose of the woman'screation and existence is to be ahelpmeet for man, in a sense inwhich the man was not origina11ydesigned as a helpmeet for thewoman. Hence God, from thebeginning of man's existence asa sinner, put the wife under thekindly authority of the husband,making him the head and herthe subordinate in domesticsociety. - Robert L Dabney,DISCUSSIONS, Vol II, p. 106.

'Vil1iam Hendriksen explainsthat: In His sovereign wisdomGod made the human pair in

such a manner that i t is naturalfor him to lead, for her to follow;

for him to be aggressive, for herto be receptive... The tendencyto follow was embedded in Eve'svery soul as she carne forth

from the hand of her Creator.Hence, it would not be right toreverse .. Why should a womanbe encouraged to do things thatare contrary to her nature? Her

very body, far from preceding thatof Adam in the order of creation,was taken out of Adam's body.Her very name- I sh - sha -was

derived from his name-Ish ,Genesis 2:23. It is when thewoman recognizes this basic

distinction and acts accordingly

that she can be a blessing to theman, can exert a gracious yetvery powerful and beneficentinfluence upon him, and can

promote her own happiness, untoGod's glory. - NEW TESTAMENTCOMMENTARY: Thessalonians,Timothy, Tit us, pp. 109-110.

Male and female made hethem. In order to ground humanSOCiety God saw it necessary tofashion for man's mate, not hisexact image, but his counterpart.Identity would have utterly

marred their companionship,and would have been an equalcurse to both. But out of thisunlikeness in resemblance it must

obViously follow that each is fittedfor works and duties unsuitahlefor the other. And it is no morea degradation to the woman thatthe man can best do some thingswhich she cannot do so well, thanto the man that woman has hernatural superiority in other things.But t will be cried: Your Bibledoctrine makes man the ruler,

woman the ruled. True. -- t

was essential to the welfare ofboth husband and wife, and of the

offspring, that there must be anultimate human head somewhere.

-- . . . o be governed under thewise conditions of nature is oftena more privileged state thanto govern. -- Now, a wise Goddesigns no clashing betweenhis domestic and political andhis ecclesiastical arrangements.

He has ordained that the manshall be head in the family andthe commonwealth; it would be

a confusion full of mischief tomal{e the woman head in theecclesiastical sphere.- Dabney,DISCUSSIONS, Vol II, pp. 111-112

Second, Eve fell because she

was deceived by Satan, whereasAdam sinned without beingdeceived, I Timothy 2:14. Doesnot that mean that, whatever

her strength, the woman is not

constitutional1y fitted to be theasserter, maintainer and defender

of the Christian Faith? - DonaldMcCleod, THE PLACE OF WOMENIN THE CIIURCII, p. 10. Shelistened to Satan and sinned

before Adam, to whom she gavethe forbidden fruit. Eve was theleader and Adam was the follower.

She led in the way of sin, whenshe should have fo11owed in thepath of righteousness. - Hence,let none of her daughters followher in reversing the divinelyestablished order. -- Let not thedaughter of Eve teach, rule, lead,when the congregation gathers

for worship. Let her learn, notteach; obey, not rule ; follow, notlead. - Hendriksen, p. 110.

What we have said, however, isin no way to imply the inferiorityof women, for the role of womenin the Bible is not a degradingone. The pOSition of being insubjection is not a less dignifiedposition. 'Vomen are equallyas precious to God. Women areco-heirs of all of God's blessings. John Otis, Implications of

The ounsel of halcedon


7/9

Presbyterian Government for theRole of Women," THE COUNSELOF CIlALCEDON, Jan.-Feb. 1990,pp. 29f. When Galatians 3:28says that there is neither Jew norGreek, there is neither slave nor

free man, there is neither maleor female; for you are all onein Christ Jesus, it is not sayingthat these distinctions have no

meaning at all; rather it is sayingthat the blessings of salvation areequally enjoyed by all in Christ bygrace through faith, regardless ofrace, social status or sex. Whilethe responsibilities of governmentin the church are laid on the

shoulders of men, the privilegesof salvation in the church areequally shared and enjoyed by

men and women. No conflictexists between Galatians 3 andI Corinthians 14 or I Timothy 2.Galatians is concerned with theprivileges of salvation all believersshare in Christ, and I Corinthians1 4 and I Timothy 2 are concernedwith duties and responsibilities

not all believers share.

. . . he teaching of this passage

[Galatians 3:28] is both preciousand important. t affirms thepriesthood of all believers.Women, no less than men, haveaccess to God through JesusChrist. They share to the fullin the privileges of justification,sanctification, adoption. They

may have the same a."lsuranceof God's love, the same peace ofconscience, the same joy in the

Holy Spirit. Equally certainlythey may serve. That is not

open to question. Indeed thcymust serve. They have theirown ministry .. the natural

spontaneous and necessary result

of salvation. They are caught up,equally with men, in the work ofredemption, in the sequence ofelection, salvation and service.In response to the divine mercy,they must present themselves

NlakiTl/J the Nat ions Ghrist s D isciples

as living and holy sacrifices toGod.- Donald MeCleod, TIlEPLACE OF WOMEN, p. 7

In 1991, two Christianwomen, who are also wives andmothers, have expressed theiropinion about whether or not

this view of the role of womenin the church is one degradingto women. They have written:

'Ve write out of the realizationthat our personal pilgrimages

for the last fifteen years havesolidified our adherence to theposition of male headship in thechurch. 'Ve are increasinglyconvinced of the theologicalrightness of this position. But themore urgent motivation is to helpChristians move beyond confusionand debate over our roles towardactive concern about the needsaround us. \Ne are convincedthat the church provides thatmost appropriate context forChristian women to serve the

Savior. We further contend thatrather than being restrained by

our exclusion from ordination,

women are actually freed from therestraint of positions of authorityto be exquisite expressions ofthe Biblical meaning of a helperleader. 'Vhen women insist onrole interchangeability withinthe church, everyone loses. Butwhen women are creatively

giving spiritual, emotionaland practical help, they add aunique and vibrant dimension

that permeates an entire

church fellowship and brings

completeness to its ministry.-Susan Hunt and Peggy Hutcheson,LEADERSHIP FO R WOMEN INTHE CHURCH, pp. 10, 11.

One may ask, How arc singlewomen, either unmarried

or widowed or divorced,represented in the congregation?f unmarried, they remain

1V 1nen in the Church

under their father's authority, ICorinthians 7:36f f widowed ordivorced, and perhaps in chargeof a family, they are representedthe same way as the wholec o n g r e g t i o n ~ t h r o u g htheir

elected elders."- John Otis, pp. 29f.

Not all male members of thechurch are allowed to vote forchurch officers. In the New1'estament we also see theprinciple of maturity of leadershipin the church, Exodus 12, Isaiah 3,I Timothy 3, and I ThessaloniansS:12f. n Isaiah 3, we learn twothings about government in thehands of immature males: (1).

t is detrimental to society; and(2). t is a sign of God's judgmenton that society. The Lord saidconcerning disobedient Israel: Iwill make mere lads their princesand capricious children will ruleover them, and the people will beoppressed, Isaiah 3:4. Paul said toTimothy concerning governors inthe church: He must be one whomanages his own household well,keeping his children under control

with all dignity (but if a man docs

not know how to manage his ownhousehold, how will he take careof the church of God' )- Timothy3:4-S. This principle of matureleadership means that only adultmale heads of households and notimmature males still dependentupon their fathers and still under

their father's authority should

be given the responsibility tovote. The rule of the churchmust be in the hands of mature,responsible leaden;;, not in the

hands of immature people,adolescents or children. Votingfor church officers is, by its verynature, an expression of the rule,authority and government ofthe church, therefore it shouldbe reserved for responsible andmature Christian men, not boys.SChildren should not have a vote inthe congregation, which includes


8/934

l1l(mten in th hurch

adolescent male communing

members of the church stilldependent upon their fathers.

Those children and immature

males are represented by their

fathers. Therefore, we are left

with one conclusion: only adultmale heads of households shouldvote in congregational meetings,even if his household is comprisedonly of a single male, i.e., himself.

Before we conclude, let usreturn to the subject of womensuffrage, and clarify whatauthority and ministry Christian

women do have in the church.

First, a godly wife is herhusband's crown and j o y - Avirtuous woman is a crown toher husband, Proverbs 12:4. Sheis of inexpressible value to herhusband-\Vho can find a virtuouswoman? For her price is farabove rubies, Proverbs 31: 10.

Second, covenant children

are to honor their mothers just

as much as they honor theirfathers-IIonor your father and

mother , Exodus 20:12. They areto submit to the teaching of theirmothers just as much as they doto their fathers-My son, hear theinstruction of your father, andforsake not the law of your mother,Proverbs 1:8. The eye that mocksat his father, and despises to obeyhis mother, the ravens of the valleyshall pick it out, and the youngeagles shall eat it, Proverbs 30:17.

Third, I Timothy S : 9 ~15 tens us

many things that Christian womenmay do for Jesus Chr i s t -Le t awidow be put on the list only isshe is not less than sixty yearsold, having been the wife ofone man, haVing a reputationfor good works; and i she hasbrought up children, if she has

shown hospitality to strangers,i she has washed the saints'

feet, i she has assisted those indistress, and i she has devoted

herself to every good work Butrefuse to put younger widowson the list, for when they feelsensual desires in disregard of

Christ, they want to get married,thus incurring condemnation,

because they have set aside their

previous pledge. And a t the sametime they also learn to be idle,as they go around from houseto house; and not merely idle,but also gossips and busybodies,

talking about things not proper

to mention. Therefore, I wantyounger women to get married,bear children, keep house, and

give the enemy no occasion forreproach; for some have alreadyturned aside to follow Satan.

\Vornen are to have areputation for good works.In fact, they are to devotethemselves to every good work

Wornen are to bring upchildren. In fact, She shan besaved through the bearing ofchildren, i they continue in

faith and love and sanctity withself restraint, I Timothy 2:15.

\Vornen are to showhospitality to people.

Women are to serve people,meeting the needs of others,as they are able, even i itmeans washing feet.

Vlornen are to assist thosewho are in distress.

\Vomen are to practices e l f ~ d i s c i p l i n e

\Vomen arc not to be idleand arc not to neglect their

responsibilities at home. Theymay not go from house to hosueto gossip, but they may go fromhouse to house to minister,

encourage, comfort, serve.

'Vornen are to keep house. Awoman's home is her kingdom,and neither the secular nor the

ecclesiastical commonwealth.

Her duties in her home areto detain her away from thepublic functions. She is not tobe a ruler of men, but a lovingsubject to her husband. - Dabney,DISCUSSIONS, Vol. II, p. 106

Titus 2:3-5 tell us moreresponsibilities Christian women

have at home and in church:Older women likewise are to bereverent in their behavior, not

malicious gossips, nor enslavedto much wine, teaching what isgood, that they may encouragethe young women to love theirhusbands, to love their children,to be sensible, pure, workers athome, kind, being subject to their

own husbands, that the word ofGod may not be dishonored.

Older women are to be reverentand respectful in their behavior,

as model for younger women.

Older women should encourage

and teach younger women

how to be faithful Christianwomen, wives, daughters,mothers, and home-makers.

Married women should

love their husbands and theirchildren. They should be sensible,

pure, ldnd h o m e ~ m a k e r s

\Vives should be subject to their

own husbands so that the wordof God will not be dishonored.

Conclusion

Robert L. Dabney assigns toChristian women the highest ofhonors and responsibilities in

the restoration of the AmericanRepublic, after the devastation

The ounsel ql halcedon


9/9

of the South in the War Betweenthe States, in his article: TheDuty of the Hour. He writes :

... never before was the welfareof a people so dependent on their

mothers, wives and sisters, asnow and here. freely declarethat under God my chief hope

for my prostrate country is intheir women. Early in the war,when the stream of our noblestblood began to flow so liberallyin battle, said to an honoredcitizen of my State, that it wasso uniformly our best men who

were made the sacrifice there

was reason to fear that the stapleand pith of the people of the

South would be permanentlydepreciated. His reply was:

There is no danger of this whilethe women of the South are whatthey are. Be assured the motherswill not permit the offspring ofsuch martyr-sires to depreciate.

But since, this river of generousblood has swelled into a flood.'Vhat is worse, the remnant ofthe surviv ors, few, subjugated,disheartened, almost despairing

and, alas, dishonored, becausethey have not disdained life, onsuch terms as are left us; aresubjected to every influence from

without, which can be malignantlydevised to sap the foundationsof their manhood and degradethem into fit material for slaves. f

our women do not sustain themthey will s ink Unless the spiritswhich rule and cheer their homes

can reanimate their self-respect,

confirm their resolve, and sustaintheir personal honor, they willa t length become the base serfs

their enemies desire. Outsidetheir homes, everything conspires

to depress, to tempt, to seducethem. -- Only within their homes

is there, beneath the skies, oneray of light or warmth to preventtheir freezing into despair.

J 1 ; [ a h i n ~the Nations Christ s Disciples

THERE, in your homes, is yourdomain. There YOU rule withthe scepter of affection, and notour conquerors. 'Ve beseech you,wield that gentle empire in behalfof the principles, the patriotism,

the religion, which we inheritedfrom our mothers. Teach our

ruder sex that only by a deathlesslove to these can woman's dearlove be deserved or won. Himwho is t rue to these crown withyour favor. Let the wretch whobetrays them be exiled foreverfrom the paradise of your arms.Then shall we be saved, savedfrom a degradation fouler than thegrave. Be it yours to nurse withmore than a vestal's watchfulness,

the sacred flame of our virtuenow so smothered. Your task isunobtrusive; it is performed inthe privacy of home, and by thegentle touches of dail y love. But itis the noblest work which mortalcan perform, for it furnishes thepolished stones, with which the

temple of our liberties must berepaired. -- Such is your work;the home and fireside are thescenes of your industry. Butthe materials you shape are

the souls of men, which are tocompose the fabric of our churchand state. The politiCian, theprofessional man, is but the cheap,rude, day laborer, who movesand lifts the finished block to itsplace. You are the true artists,who endue it with fitness andbeauty; and therefore yours isthe nobler task.- DISCUSSIONS,Vol. IV pp. 120-122.

Women in the Church

Endnotes

1 Did not He that made me1nahe him? If did despise thecause of my man-servant aT

my maid-seTV[tnt when theycontended with 1W, what then

shall I do when God rises up?

2. Just as Christ is the head ofevery man, whether he is single or111mried, saved or lost, regardlessof whether he is recognized asstwh 01 not, so man is the headof woman. The same word isused for the male species in the.fiTst and second phrase. Christ isthe head of ever:)' man, whetherhe is a Ch1istian or not, whetherhe is a husband or not. Likewisein the plan of God, man is to behead of woman whether than

man is a husband or not andwhether the woman is a wifeaT not. He is talking about therelationship of the sexes and hesays very cleaTly that the head ofthe woman is the man. He does'not merely say that the head ofthe wife is the husband. - WayneMach, THE ROLE OF WOMENT THE CHURCH, p 13

3. The word, W01nen, meansw0111en , and not simply'wives,' Matthew 27:55; 9:20.

4. The Greek word translatedby the NASVas husbands is, infact, the more e n e r lword for'men.' In other words, if womenhave questions they are to ashtheir own men, which could

include their husbands, brothers,uncles,fathers, sons or elders.

5. Amendment XIV (2,lb) 0/the United States Constitutionsets forth the qualificationsjar those who may vote inelections as the male citizenswenty-one years of ~ e ,

2008 issue 5-6 - women in the church - counsel of chalcedon

Documents