This article is primarily concerned with a proposition contained in the Acts of Synod 1978, p. 530, top of page, and referred to the churches for study. I quote: “The fact that Paul’s most explicit statements concerning the wife’s (woman’s) role in the church are made within the context of specific historical situations raises the question whether Paul’s teaching on this matter is complete. This makes it difficult to formulate rules on the basis of Paul’s teaching taken only from a few of his explicit statements.”

This proposition raises the question whether Paul’s teaching with regard to women’s role in the church is complete. This concluding question is not arrived at haphazardly. On page 485 of Acts of Synod 1978 one may read the following: “Our committee was appointed by the Synod of 1975. It is the third committee within the space of eight years to deal with the matter of women in ecclesiastical office.”

And what is more, all the churches of the Christian Reformed denomination have had this matter Synodically assigned to them for study. Much reaction both for and against came to light. And now out of all the studying that has been done on the matter the above mentioned proposition is born with special emphasis on the possibility that we do not have a complete Bible. But why this historical detail, you ask? Answer: some future Synod, possibly the very next, will have to openly declare to our Christian Reformed constituency one of two things: we have a complete Bible, or we do not have a complete Bible. Which shall it be?

Now let us look at the proposition a bit more closely. Note the wording (to paraphrase a bit): Are Paul’s teachings complete? This then implies that if Paul’s teaching in the matter of women’s role in the church is not complete, implementation is necessary to supply that which Paul does not say. To do this one must then have recourse to extra-Scriptural material which in substance necessarily will be either fallible or infallible. Let us examine this course of procedure a bit further.

The chief concern in the proposition under consideration is whether women’s role in the church includes the offices of ministers, elders, and deacons. Plainly the reasoning behind this concern is that when Paul assigned only men to the above–named offices he did this under the influence of the historical situations of his days. But since then, so the thought continues, times have changed so that now the question may legitimately be asked whether women ought not also to serve in the above-named offices in the same capacity as men. And since the grounds for this kind of administration are not found in Paul’s teaching and therefore not in the Holy Scriptures themselves, these will then have to be produced from extra-Scriptural sources. This kind of situation also requires that we then be working with materials that in their very nature are either fallible or infallible.

Consider first implementing Paul’s teaching with infallible materials. This of necessity would require prophetic gifts capable of producing infallible revelation. Claims to such gifts go contrary to the very nature of Holy Writ. Yet they have been all too common throughout the history of the church. Such religious activity is the product of undue emotional impulses which in their expression override the objective truth of God’s Word. Such religious activity and claims to special gifts appeal to religious subjectivism so rampant in our days. It is the part of wisdom to guard against permitting any such emotional surge and its consequences to make inroads into our circles.

Possibly then Paul’s teaching could be implemented with fallible material? But consider once more ensuing difficulties.

First. Is It conceivable that God’s infallibly inspired Word can be implemented with fallible human thinking?

Second. Men’s rights as office holders in the church are based upon the infallible teachings of the Holy Scriptures, while the rights of women serving in the same capacity would be resting on the foundation of fallible human thinking. This would bring about a state of inequality between office holders and a condition of unfairness to women serving in that capacity.

Third. After Peter’s confession of the true identity of Jesus, the Lord replied: “And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 16:18, 19, NIV). In this response to Peter’s confession Jesus lays the foundation upon which He will build His church. And that this foundation contains the essential elements for the proper constitution of ecclesiastical government is plain from the responsibility Jesus gives to Peter for the handling of the “keys.”

When Jesus gives Paul a large place in establishing His church and organizing it into congregations under the management of governing bodies it is only natural to believe that He fully and infallibly informed the apostle of the instructions He gave to Peter regarding the constitution of His church.

And Paul following these instructions with infallible precision, included along with all the essentials of ecclesiastical government, also this element that he excluded women from its offices. And Paul with his infallible insight into the affairs of the church could not but understand this element as being implied in Jesus’ instructions to Peter. In other words Jesus was His own commentator on what He meant by the responsible managing of the “keys of the kingdom.” And that is why Paul in arranging the affairs of the church excluded women from its offices.

There is therefore no room for the idea that Paul let himself be carried along by historical situations characteristic of his times when in his inspired writings he did not permit women to serve in ecclesiastical offices. And with this falls also the suggestion that we possibly have an incomplete Bible.

Therefore let us return to the Scriptures‘ own claim to completeness as outlined in Rev. 22:18, 19: “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book” (NIV).

Let us then take our stand with regard to women in church government on the Synodical decisions of 1975 which read as follows: “That the practice of excluding women from the ecclesiastical offices recognized in the Church Order be maintained unless compelling biblical grounds are advanced for changing that practice.” And, “that sufficient biblical grounds have not been advanced to warrant a departure from our present practice of excluding women from the ecclesiastical offices recognized in the Church Order” (Acts of Synod p. 78). Note: These last quoted declarations of Synod are as much a part of our study of the role of women in the church as any other matter pertinent to the case.

Ring Star is a retired Christian Reformed pastor in Jenison, Michigan.