Note: on the accuracy of the tallies posted, please refer to the statement under the Intro to this dialogue: Intro to the DialogueListing of Emails:
1. WICO: Assessing the Significance of the Issue (April, 2000)2. WICO: Unity in the Church (April, 2000)
Galatians 3: 3. Galatians 3:28 Part I: Slave and Free (May, 2000)
4. Galatians 3:28 Part II: Male and Female (June, 2000)
5. Galatians 3:28 Part III: Jew & Greek (May, 2001)
6. Galatians 3:28 Part IV: Galatians 3 and Social Equality (June, 2001)
7. Galatians 3:28 Part V: Adoption and Accompanying Privileges (August, 2001)
8. Part VI: Galatians 3 In Summary (October, 2001)
I Timothy 2: 9. I Timothy 2 Part I: Pertains to Worship (February, 2002)
10. WICO & I Tim. 2:12: To Domineer or To Have Authority? (September, 2004)
11. WICO: For Authenteo as "to Murder" (September, 2004)
12. WICO: Authenteo - A Positive Infinitive (October, 2004)
13. WICO: Kretschmer on Distinguishing Noun and Verb (October, 2004)
14. WICO: The Correct Translation of Authenteo in I Timothy 2 (November, 2004)
15. WICO: Conclusion of Emails on Authenteo (November, 2004)
Dialogos Studies Home Page
1. WICO: Assessing the Significance of the Issue (April, 2000)
B. Characterizing the issue The present polarization in the denomination is directly tied in with how we categorize the issue of women in office and the church's stand on that issue. Some view the church’s stand as a reflection of fundamental and confessional principles of Scripture. Others suggest that the issue may be viewed as adiaphora, like eating meat versus eating only vegetables (see Rom. 14). Is women's ordination CONFESSIONAL in the sense that the main articles of the Apostles' Creed are confessional? Does it merit class- ification along with essential doctrines of salvation or the nature of God? Does it undermine the teachings about Jesus, his birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and present reign? Does it detract from the Bible's teaching about the Holy Spirit and the way of salvation? In a case of serious doctrinal error we know what needs to be done. If this ordination issue were an essential confessional issue, our salvation would depend on it. That is not the case. Is women's leadership among God's people A MORAL ISSUE, like committing adultery, killing, stealing, or any other violation of God's covenant code? If it were, the Lord himself would hardly have used Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah in positions of authority. If it were such a moral issue, it would test whether our faith is real or fake. Does the issue then belong to the ADIAPHORA, the disputable matters? We judge that such a designation is not really satisfactory either. In I Corinthians 11:16 Paul concludes his discourse on the relationship between men and women in the church with this rather blunt statement: "If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice, nor do the churches of God." His stance here is different from the tolerance about the adiaphora he expresses in Romans 14. Then what kind of issue is it? Perhaps a more helpful approach can be made from the WISDOM literature of the Bible. The Bible's wisdom literature is intended to help God's people to model their conduct, individually and communally, after the principles that reflect God's will for living beneficial and productive lives. . . . the church was given wisdom principles to guide her in the regulation of worship and in the appointment of officebearers (I Tim. 2:3; I Cor. 11:2-16). Wisdom principles help people pull together insights and truths from a number of spheres: the nature of the created order, observable societal principles and circumstances, and, in particular, the nature of humankind as illuminated by God's special revelation. Wisdom teachings provide boundaries and goals for human life in the presence of God. Couldn’t the women-in-office issue be approached from a similar perspective? How can the church act wisely today? How can it discern the nature of God's created order, God's intention for the relationship between male and female within the body of Christ, and the ministry of the church in the world today? The debated New Testament passages about women's roles in the church are embedded in passages where Paul addresses the organizational life of God's people, and great wisdom is required to discern their meaning. Characterizing the issue as a wisdom issue seems more accurate than categorizing it as a doctrinal, moral, or disputable matter, as summarized above. Characterizing an issue as a wisdom matter in no way lessens the authority of any passage of Scrip- ture from which the teaching is drawn. But attempting to characterize an issue proper- ly is of genuine help in discerning the area and the extent of our differences on the issue. It also helps us to know how to respond appropriately when we reach differing conclusions. * * * * * * * * * * * * * (The above quote is from pages 27 and 28 of the report. Bold text and capitalization has been added in order to highlight the four options given by the report.) Do you consider the matter a confessional issue? A moral matter? Adiaphora? Or a matter best characterized as one of wisdom principles?
2. WICO: Unity in the Church (April, 2000)
In this email you are invited to give your input on the matter of the relevance of unity in the body of Christ to this matter. Once again, a couple excerpts from the report to Synod will be included and a question for evaluation is given at the end. From the report: Of the numerous New Testament passages which call for unity among Jesus' followers, perhaps the most moving of all is John 17:20-23. In what has become known as the high-priestly prayer, Jesus shows deep compassion for the well-being of his church. He points to threats which will come from external forces, from the devil’s manifest- ation of power (John 17:11-19). He also addresses the internal threat of disunity (John 17:20-23). Most noteworthy is his deep desire and abiding will, captured in the repetition of verses 21 and 23, that unity within his church is to be a witness to the world: "May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me" (v. 23). The Lord's goals for the church are furthered through unity. Disunity is a negative witness, both to the outside world and to the church’s own members, especially to the young, new Christians, and the weak in faith. Christ’s emphasis in John 17 is expanded in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians. The members of the church, i.e., "those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy" (I Cor. 1:2), have an urgent responsibility to work for unity (I Cor. I:10-13). Quarrels and divisions within the body are in direct opposition to what the church fellowship ought to be like. Paul understood that his mandate as an apostle was so to proclaim the gospel that all eyes would be fixed on the central figure of Christ. Partisan allegiances which divide the body detract from that essential goal of the gospel ministry. (Page 27) ~ According to the criteria presented by both Luther and Calvin, dividing the church over an issue such as women in office is justified only if it can be clearly demonstrated that the church has lost the marks of the true church and has, in fact, lost the real presence of Christ in the preaching of the gospel and the administration of the sacraments. When members are unable or unwilling to make such a claim, in the Reformers' opinion, the onus rests upon members to remain within the church, working where necessary toward reform and a clearer understanding of the Word of God. (Page 30) ~ Conclusion: The firmly held differences regarding the women-in-office issue have placed a severe strain on the unity we have in Christ. Some are not sure that the Christian Reformed Church still desires to remain true to the Word of God. Others have definitely interpreted the actions of Synod 1995 as a sign that the church has forsaken its loyalty to Scripture and has capitulated to trends in society contrary to God's Word. On the basis of that inter- pretation some members and congregations have even left our fellowship, and some denomina- tions with which we had long-standing relations have cut these ties. This is a sad development for everyone involved. To this point in the history of the women-in-office debate within the Christian Reformed Church, the diversity of opinion has in some ways been like a strong centrifugal force, tearing apart those who belong together. In the preceding sections we have demonstrated how other doctrines and conclusions with regard to the unity of the body of Christ may provide a strong enough centripetal force to withstand and overcome the forces which divide. In light of the biblical demand for unity, few developments could create greater joy in the present situation than the nurturing of mutual trust, the exercising of patience where there is a lack of clarity, and the healing of the ties that have been broken, both within the denomination and within the broader church community. (Pages 31-32) INPUT Given: a) a strong majority consider the ordination of women a matter of wisdom principle, and b) the Scriptures place a high value on unity in the body of Christ; the proper biblical response is: a) regardless of what decision is made by Synod, this issue does not warrant breaking fellowship with the CRC, and b) we must continue to study the Scriptures in order to determine what is God's will with respect to this wisdom principle.
3. Galatians 3:28 Part I: Slave and Free (May, 2000)
STATEMENT FROM THE SYNODICAL REPORT Everyone agrees that this text, among other things, declares that male and female share equally in salvation in Christ. But there are reasons to see broader implications in the text. 1.) It is remarkable that here in Galatians Paul should include the pairs slave-free and male-female. The two issues implied by these pairs are not discussed elsewhere in the letter, which is primarily about the Jew-Gentile agenda. The fact that he includes them suggests that this trio of paired opposites had become part of an early confession that announced the universality and inclusiveness of the new covenant. It is likely that the confession was meant to counter the chauvinistic statements found in the Jewish cycle of morning prayers in which the (male) believer thanked God that he had not been made a Gentile, or a slave, or a woman. This early baptismal confession would thus announce the church's belief that in Christ the old racial schisms and cultural divisions had been healed. ( Report from the Committee to Review the Decision re Women in Office for Synod 2000, pg. 17; a link to the report is contained on the Dialogos site.) RESPONSE The leading paragraph from the report quoted above indicates that male and female share equally in salvation in Christ. The report goes on, then, to state there are reasons to see broader implications in the text. The real crux of current discussions has to do with whether there are broader implications and if so, what they are. In order to have a good understanding of the context, let's take a close look at Galatians 3:18-29. This passage is loaded with terms that relate to salvation. The term inheritance is found in verse 18 and "heirs" is found in verse 29. The word "promise," which has to do with how we obtain our salvation is found in this passage six times. Grace is mentioned in verse 18. A mediator is referred to in verses 19 and 20; a mediator is one who brings salvation. Verse 21 speaks of imparting life, which is also a way of speaking of salvation. That verse also mentions righteousness - only the righteous will be saved. Six times we find the word faith. The concept of believing is contained in verse 22. Justification is discussed in verse 24. The phrase "lead us to Christ" in verse 24 is another way of referring to salvation. Verse 26 contains the words "sons of God." in verse 27 we find a reference to baptism, and the phrase "clothed with Christ." In verse 29 we read "belong to Christ" and "Abraham's seed." These are all references to the concept of salvation. In only twelve verses we find as many as 27 instances of either direct reference to salvation or the use of words that are very closely related to salvation. Galatians 3:28 is often read by those advocating the ordination of women as though each of the three pairs is an injunction against a major social injustice. That interpretation, however, leaves verse 28 as a very tiny island isolated from the rest of the book. Why would Paul deal at length with the matter of law versus faith, then turn for one short verse to deal with no less than three major social injustices, and immediately return once again to deal at length with the law versus faith question? How would these verses all fit together, where is the integrity of the text as far as this interpretation is concerned? Is Paul's intent here in verse 28 to be the great leveller, to make all things the same? If it is seen as his intent to say that there is absolutely no distinction between Jews and Gentiles etc., that they are the same, then Paul contradicts himself. In Romans 3:1-2 Paul says, "What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Much in every way! First of all, they have been entrusted with the very words of God." The statement "Much in every way!" is a very strong statement. In some regards the above may be seen as splitting hairs. On the other hand, the two possibilities given above get at the very heart of the present discussion on women in office. Galatians 3 speaks directly and emphatically to the matter of salvation. As far as salvation is concerned the Jewish morning prayer is to be negated; with respect to salvation there is no difference between Jews and Gentiles, they are both saved by grace. This does not necessarily mean, however, that in all regards there is no longer any difference between a Jew and a Gentile. To claim that goes against what Paul says in Romans 3. To take Galatians 3:28 as saying that across the board there is no difference between a Jew and a Gentile, a slave and a free man, a man and a woman is taking the passage beyond what it was intended to say. To say that men and women are the same based on Galatians 3 is to claim something that the verse was never intended to support. Galatians 3 deals with salvation. In order to learn how women relate to men and vice versa, we need to go to other passages in God's Word that deal with that specifically. There are a number of passages that address male/female relationships that can lead us along the path of God's will without making the mistake of trying to read into the passage a message that was never intended to be there.
4. Galatians 3:28 Part II: Male and Female (June, 2000)
STATEMENT FROM THE SYNODICAL REPORT Everyone agrees that this text, among other things, declares that male and female share equally in salvation in Christ. But there are reasons to see broader implications in the text . . . 2) As noted in the translation of Galatians 3:26-29 above, the grammatical construction of the pair "neither male and female" is different from that of the other two pairs, which read "neither . . . nor." It has been rightly discerned that this was done deliberately to pick up the language of Genesis 1:27 ("male and female created he them"), thereby indicating that in Christ male and female are restored to their original equal participation in the image of God and the concomitant call to jointly exercise dominion over creation. (Pages 16 & 17) RESPONSE It is possible that the words "male and female" form a connection to Genesis 1:27. There is a problem, however, with the above interpretation that says Galatians 3:28 therefore restores men and women to their original and equal participation in the image of God. If "male and female" is a reference to their original equality, then Galatians 3:28 says it is NEITHER that equality. In some fashion the "neither" in verse 28 negates the "male and female." This is important to note. What should we then make of these words? We need to take a closer look at the words "there is neither" (ouk eni). The term "eni" is not a common term as it is found only seven times in the New Testament, three of those are in this verse. If Paul had simply wanted to say "there is not," he could have used the words "ouk estin" which were far more frequently used. A number of commentators, perhaps in an effort to explain Paul's choice of words, claim that Paul is placing emphasis on the matter here. There are other Greek words that Paul could have used had that been the case. The word "ouxi" is a bit sharper in tone. The Greek language also has the ability to place emphasis by repeating the negative particle. Some verses such as Luke 23:53 even use triple negatives. Another strong term Paul could have used is the "ma genoito" as is found in verse 21. It is then doubtful that Paul chose these words in an effort to place emphasis. The words "ouk eni" (the longer form is "ouk enesti") literally translated mean "it is not in." If we translate the words of verses 26-28 in a literal sense an interesting balance comes to light: For you are all sons of God through faith IN Christ Jesus . . . It is NOT IN Jew nor Greek, it is NOT IN slave nor free man, it is NOT IN male and female For you are all one IN Christ Jesus. This passage emphasizes these Christians are IN Christ; it is NOT IN Jew/Greek . . . they are IN Christ. These words show that "it is not in Jew nor Greek" etc. is in contrast to being in Christ. When "there is neither Jew nor Greek" is contrasted with being in Christ, it is being used in the sense of "it doesn't matter if you keep the law or if you don't." Our salvation comes through faith in Christ. When the matter of the comparison between male and female comes up, the words "there is neither" must be used in exactly the same sense. Therefore, the meaning of "there is neither . . . male and female" must be that when it comes to salvation, it doesn't matter whether you are male or female. This is in keeping with countering the Rabbinical morning prayer. Paul is saying it doesn't matter whether one is Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female. What matters is that we are in Christ, our salvation is most important. The conclusion of this matter is that Paul chose very particular words in this passage to emphasize the contrast between being in Christ and the matter of whether one is Jew or Greek, male or female. To conclude from this verse that Paul is stating male and female are once again equal ignores both this careful contrast that is woven into this passage and it ignores the fact that Paul in some way would have to be negating this "original equal participation." Therefore, this point concerning "male and female" from the report does not support the position that women should be ordained in the Christian church. [This response was written by Herb Kraker.]