The winter meeting of the Committee for Women in the C.R.C. took place on January 27 at Calvin Seminary. The chief feature of the evening’s program was an address by the Alvin J. Vander Griend on the subject, “The Full Use of Women’s Gifts.” Dr. Vander Griend is Associate Minister of Evangelism for the Board of Home Missions. He holds a post of prominence and influence throughout the denomination and so his views should be of great interest to those who are following the progress of the current contest over women in office in the C.R.C.
The present writer will call attention only to some of the many points raised by Dr. Vander Griend. It must be said that his address covered a vast sweep of territory. Readers are advised to get bold of a tape or transcript of the speech in its entirety before reaching any final conclusions about Dr. Vander Griend’s position in the current debate.
Before dealing with specifics, two general observations are in order. Perhaps the greatest strength of Dr. Vander Griend’s address was its fine Christian spirit. It was easy to listen to him, even when he was saying things with which one may not agree. He set a good example for everyone to follow, and displayed a genuine concern for the well-being of the whole Church.
Nevertheless I regard his address as a failure. Specifically, it failed to reach any conclusion regarding the announced topic. Too much time was devoted to making a point which is generally agreed upon. Is there anyone in the Church today who opposes the full use of women’s gifts? Is not the real question that of determining the rightness of the claims certain women make to having certain gifts?
A Reaction Against Special Offices
It is precisely at this point that trouble has arisen in the Church. For too long the people of God regarded His gifts as given only to the favored few. Now the trend runs in the opposite direction; everyone is claiming that he or she has this or that gift. Our forebearers would be shocked at the arrogance and self-centeredness with which some press their claims. It is enough for these people to say, “I have this gift, so you must now put me into this office.” And let no one say otherwise!
Now it is here that Dr. Vander Griend’s address only serves to make matters worse. He laid great stress on the matter of gifts given to all believers. Who would disagree? But he waived the question of office, and what can only be called the gift of office. See Eph. 4:11. It is plain that there is a gift of office, and that it is given only to some and not to all believers. Historically the Church has been guided by such passages as I Tim. 2:11, 12 in determining who may rightly claim to have this gift.
But, as noted, Dr. Vander Griend expressly waived this question, and as a result gave the clear impression that he supports this notion that anyone may lay claim to any of the gifts, and that all such claims must be admitted. It was in this connection that he made his strongest statement of the evening:
Any system, any structure, any tradition which discourages the use of members’ gifts is working at cross purposes with Christ who gave them, and thwarting His intent; . . . is grieving the Holy Spirit . . . ; and . . . ought if possible to be eliminated or changed or reformed.
The speaker put no limits on this assertion. He made it very clear that he regards the C.R.C. as having such a system, structure, and tradition. And he certainly did not rule out the elimination of such systems, structures, and traditions even if they could be shown to stand on Scriptural ground.
Another feature of the address was Dr. Vander Griend’s attempt to turn the tables on those who claim that society ought not to set the agenda for the Church. Many say that in opening the offices to women, the Church is being squeezed into the mould of secular thought, and that ought not to happen. Vander Griend believes that on the contrary it was society that caused the repression of women‘s gifts in the Church in the first place. This repression began in the 3rd or 4th century and has been going on ever since. If society is now changing, it is only going in the direction in which the Church ought to have been leading it all along.
Dr. Vander Griend qualified this assertion with the disclaimer that he wasn’t in this instance quite sure of the facts. A study of the history involved will show that the facts won’t support this new thesis. It is rather the case that the Church today is ignorant of her own history. Down through the centuries gifted men and women have made enormous contributions to the life of the Church. Church history has its heroes and its heroines, both sung and unsung. To our shame we today are largely unaware of them.
Loose Use of Scripture
Some attention should be given to the way Dr. Vander Griend used Scripture as he developed his theme. His method can only be called suggestive rather than exegetical. While this method may have helped to confirm the opinions of those who share the speaker’s viewpoint, I found it to be a source of dissatisfaction and frustration .
Vander Griend singled out three words in the New Testament. First, the verb, to prophesy. He cited passages from Acts and I Corinthians, which showed various people in the act of prophesying. But does it follow that all who prophesy at some time are in fact to be regarded as prophets in the sense of Eph. 4:11? Vander Griend seemed to say so when he asked, “Where are the women prophets today?” But this is simply not the case, as a study of the whole of Scripture teaching shows.
His second word was the Greek word diakonos (and not diakonon as AVG incorrectly stated), variously translated as servant, minister, and deacon. Paul calls himself a diakonos, and he calls Phoebe a diakonos. Does this mean that they are both servants? or both ministers? or both deacons? It would take a great deal of study to decide the point, but Vander Griend ignored all possibilities except for the one best suited to his own purposes.
The third word discussed was the verb to labor, in Greek, kopiao. The speaker cited three passages where it occurs. Mary bestowed much labor on Paul and his associates (Rom. 16:5) ; Paul labored abundantly as an apostle (I Cor. 15:10); and those set over the church at Thessalonica are said to labor (I Thess. 5: 12). Vander Griend suggested that Paul used this verb to denote official ministry, and that he really saw no difference between Mary’s “official” ministry and his own, or that of those set over the Thessalonian church. But kopiao does not have this specialized meaning; it simply refers to hard work of any kind in any context. See Matthew 11:28; Acts 20:35; Ephesians 4:28; and II Timothy 2:6.
Does it need to be said that this method of handling the Scriptures is of little use toward resolving the points at issue today? It is not so much that Vander Griend reaches the wrong conclusions, but that he leaves too much unsaid, and too much room for misinterpretation.
Alleged “Tension” in Paul?
Dr. Vander Griend is to be commended, however, for the valiant attempt he made in the conclusion of his address to point out that there are two sides to the question of women in office, and that both sides may point to certain passages in Scripture to support their position. He went to some length to point out what he calls a “tension” in Paul’s writings between on the one hand his teaching about gifts in I Corinthians and on the other, the restrictions which he places on the use of women’s gifts in I Timothy. He concluded with a warm appeal to all and sundry to work toward a resolution of this tension.
But does such a tension really exist in Paul’s writings? I suggest that there is one important point that Dr. Vander Griend has overlooked. In his desire to promote the use of gifts in the Church, he makes the unwarranted assumption that all gifts are given to all believers, men and women alike. We have already tried to show that his assumption overlooks the important teaching about office in the Church found in Ephesians 4:11. What Paul tells Timothy is that the exercise of office in the Church is restricted to men; and nowhere in all his writings does he contradict himself. We may therefore conclude that while some gifts are given to all believers, the gift of office is given only to men. Women may indeed prophesy, and in fact they have always done so; but they are not called either by the Word or the Spirit to the office of prophet in the Church. This is the historic view of the Church, and it is eminently Scriptural. The best interests of the Church would be well served if Dr. Vander Griend and all other officebearers would accept it and uphold it in their public ministrations.
Ray B. Lanning is the pastor of the Bethel Christian Reformed Church of Grand Rapids, Michigan.