On Women IN OFFICE

J. Tuininga Lethbridge, Alberta

From the sublime to the ridiculous—that is how one might describe recent developments in our circles with respect to the Woman’s issue. What began perhaps as a needed corrective to our thinking regarding women has now developed to ridiculous proportions. The completely secular and even revolutionary overtones of the Women’s Liberation Movement are now being felt in our own circles. One wonders where it will all end.

Two recent examples: Calvinist Contact reports on the annual retreat of the Committee for Women in the CRC (a self-styled movement with revolutionary overtones), at which Marchiane Rienstra spoke. Says the reporter: “We celebrated communion together and I could sense that all of us were profoundly moved.”

First of all, here is a complete disregard of all biblical principles with respect to the sacrament of communion: it is not “in the assembly of the people of God” (Belgic Confession, Art. 35) under proper supervision; it is a denial of the unity and universality of the church as stated in Gal. 3:28. The latter text has had to carry a lot of illegal cargo under the service of trying to get women into church office, but here it is blatantly ignored. We have come full circle.

According to recent writers in The Banner, we may now call God “our Mother” and we should no longer sing songs which discriminate against women: “Rise Up O Men of God;” etc. We’ll have to eliminate phrases like, “Brothers, we are treading where the saints have trod;” “Ye that are men now serve him!” “All men, bring your gifts before Him” etc.

But that isn’t all: Imagine the metamorphosis that will have to overtake the Bible. Terms like “brotherhood” (Zech. 11:14; I Pet. 2:17), “brotherly love” (Rom. 12:10; Heb. 13:4; II Pet. 1:7) and “brethren” (Rom. 1:13; II Cor. 1:8; Gal. 6:1 & countless others) will have to be eliminated or added unto.

How utterly absurd! A little child can understand that these terms (like “man” in Gen. 1 are used in the generic sense and include women as well. But apparently some of the intellectuals among us cannot understand that. They seem to have a morbid fear of anything that sounds masculine. Too bad, how sad.

Sebastian T. Cammenga Holland, Michigan

An outstanding umpire in baseball’s finest hour, was known for his strong, although peculiar expression when a player was judged by him to be “safe” or “out.” Although not expressing himself in the best of English grammar, he would loudly announce, “It ain’t noth’in ‘till I calls it; but what I call it, IT IS!”

I find rather infrequent disputes among the millions of fans the world over, concerning umpires’ decisions. I discover no demand at all to change rules of this traditional (regulation) sport.

In my denomination, however, which I cherish dearly, I encounter plenty of pleading to alter Spirit-inspired, (although not infallible) regulations. In order to fit women into offices to which Christ chose twelve men, I even detect a near demand to change the Scripturally-set standard which declares God made woman out of the man, to be his proper helper, his assistant to rule in God’s Name, thus serving God together with him. In God’s plan, this is the woman’s most honorable position and proper place.

Suppose all of us listen more closely to the Umpire of the Universe, to the King of His Church, as He Himself divinely determines when in His Church women are “safe” (saved) and/or when they are officially: “out.”

I tremble to think of present and far-reaching consequences if we try to argue with THAT Umpire of Heaven! I would not, for a moment, dare to pray that He help Synod, or my Classis, or my Consistory, to change HIS rules. Would you?

Warren Lammers Dutton, Michigan

The time has come to be strong. For the Christian Reformed Church is desperately in need of courageous and fearless soldiers who dare to obey God’s Word. Too long many of the members in our denomination have been weakhearted or asleep, while others are proposing with clever arguments disobedience to the inspired, authoritative Word of God.

There is a decision facing Synod 1984 regarding the placing of women in ecclesiastical office. Some in our denomination eagerly desire this. Others view this as unbiblical and wrong. Meanwhile a host of people blindly walk along not knowing what to think.

How is it that Biblical scholars in the same church come to such opposite conclusions? Because some have adopted the New Hermeneutic which labels certain texts “historically conditioned,” they think these texts have been “legally” silenced or twisted around to mean something other than what they say (eg. I Tim. 2:11, 12; I Tim. 3:2–12).

When Jesus faced temptation in the wilderness, He answered boldly, “It is written.” He did not argue or debate with the devil. He did not ask Satan if these texts were historically conditioned. Today as in the Garden of Eden, Satan asks, “Has God really said?” “Or was it only the human being Paul who said?”

To those in our church who in innocent, godly fashion want to obey the whole Bible, these advocates of the “New

“Hermeneutic” would say, “You don’t really understand! The intellectual people who really understand these things can interpret the Bible better than the average person in the pew. Therefore, you ought to trust them.” People, the church has heard that argument before. The heresy of Gnosticism used it in the early church to say that the common believer was not as advanced in his faith or as important as the ones with “advanced” knowledge. The woman “Jezebel” in the church of Thyatira taught her followers by clever reasoning to justify sinful acts (Rev. 2:20). The Roman Catholic Church prior to the Reformation also reasoned that the common believer was not able to read and understand the Bible correctly; therefore the scholars ought to tell him what to believe. Now again, some tell us that if we reject their ‘“new” argument, we are not as intelligent as they.

But “behold your calling Christian, that not many wise after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called” (I Cor. 1:26, 27). And remember as well, that it is written in I John 2:27 “And as for you the anointing which ye received of Him abideth in you and ye need not that any one teach you” . . . . but “His anointing teacheth you concerning all things and is true.”

Yet some would argue that anyone, male or female, can hold office as long as he or she has the talents for it, (as if talents negate scriptural advice). In Numbers 16, Korah, Dathan and Abiram along with 250 princes thought that they were just as qualified for office as Moses and Aaron. But God thought differently. Judah’s King Uzziah was an able king. He apparently thought he had the gifts for the priesthood, but when he tried to burn incense unto the Lord, the Lord struck him with leprosy.

Today a few outspoken women maintain, in spite of the words of the Bible, that they feel called of the Lord to serve as deacon, elder, or pastor. But Christians, let us never dare to subjugate the Lord’s Word to human feelings. The prophet Balaam (Numbers 22–24) was a good enough public speaker who felt the urge to prophesy and wanted to accept Balak’s offer. But the Lord did not like what he was up to.

What does all of this mean? When we open the pages of the Bible and find God’s explicit prescriptions regarding office bearers, we are duty-bound to obey and accept them as decisive regardless of human reason or feeling.

Therefore, to those who argue in favor of a new understanding of office in contrast to the Bible’s “It is written,” we have to say: “We plead with you. Stop leading God’s people astray. Stop trying to teach them that disobedience to God’s Word is acceptable. Stop letting your feelings override what God has written. Certainly His Holy Spirit was not mistaken! We plead with you; stop deceiving God’s people!”

Some think that it is only a matter of time; that if the arguments are presented persistently enough, or politely enough, or persuasively enough, sooner or later they will succeed in getting the members of our denomination to think that this “slight” change is acceptable. However, it will never be acceptable. For it is not merely a matter of one opinion pitted against the other. It is simply a matter of obedience. Will we obey God ‘s Word as “it is written,” or will we disobey and spinelessly be fashioned according to this world.

The choice is simple. Do we obey or do we disobey?

Let it be declared by all who truly love their Lord. We will obey God’s Word; if that means we shall be unpopular, so let it be. (Neither Jesus nor the apostle Paul have always been popular.) If that means we shall suffer for it, then so let it be. If that means we shall be ridiculed, harangued, and denounced for it, then so let it be. Even if we should have to sign our signatures in blood or die for it, so let it be.

We would rather obey God’s Word than live.

Fellow Christians: It is a time to be strong. Let us, like Luther, say, “I cannot do otherwise. Here I stand, so help me God.”

God on the Side of the Poor

“It is the great misunderstanding of this time that ‘God stands on the side of the poor.’ God does not stand unconditionally on the side of the poor, or of the rich, of the black or of the white, of the oppressed or of the oppressors . . . ! People who say this seriously misrepresent the Bible. It plainly teaches that God stands on the side of all who sincerely love Him, poor, rich, black, white, oppressed, and also of authorities if they serve Him. Only by way of recognizing this can genuine social improvement come.” P.D.J.

Note: This is a free translation from the Dutch Feb. 4, 1984 Reformatie’s quotation of the concluding editorial of Dr. A. Zeegers in the now defunct periodical Called to Freedom.

God Doesn’t Call Us To Do What He Forbids

Sandra Heynen Sioux Center, Iowa

As the debate about women in office goes on, a certain pattern of argument has been voiced repeatedly, especially by women who aspire to the pastorate. It goes like this: I have the gifts necessary for a minister; many others have recognized my gifts. It is wrong not to use the gifts God has given. Therefore, God must be calling me to this office and it must be wrong for the Christian Reformed Church to forbid me to follow this call because I’m a woman. When put this way it all sounds very logical. This line of reasoning appeared a couple of years ago in an issue of Insight. “Ren and Jan” strongly encouraged a confused young woman to prepare to become a preacher, concluding that if she had the necessary talents and felt a desire to enter the ministry, then there was no doubt that God was calling her to do so. (What the Bible says about it or what her Church teaches is apparently irrelevent!)

There is a dangerous thing about logic. You can reach a very logical yet totally erroneous conclusion if you start with a faulty premise, one that ignores some crutial information. A person who is given directions in an unfamiliar town, if he starts from the wrong intersection, although he follows the directions perfectly, will still end up in the wrong neighborhood.

As Christians trying to live our lives in obedience to God’s will, we can safely begin in only one place. We can not begin with ourselves—what we have, what we feel, etc. We must begin at the revealed, written Word of God. It is the only infallible , unchanging, objective guide by which we can evaluate our varying experiences and direct our desires into correct avenues of service. The Lord has assured us that the Bible is true, reliable and unchanging (ll Tim. 3:15–17, Matt. 5:17–18, II Peter 3:14–16, I Cor. 14:37, 38, Rev. 22:18–19 , etc.) Therefore, if the Bible forbids something, it just isn’t possible that God will ever “call” someone to do that! For example, the Bible says “Flee fornication” (I Cor. 6:18 KJV). Despite the prevailing modern attitude influenced by situation ethics, it will never be “OK” for any of us to linger at the door of sexual temptation. We are still supposed to hurry away from a compromising situation, no matter how silly and inhibited that makes us look to our society. In the same way, since the Bible plainly states that women are to remain silent in the churches (I Cor. 14:33–34) and may not hold authority over men (I Tim. 2:11–12), we must unavoidably conclude that God will never call a woman to be a minister!

It really seems sad and narrow-minded to assume that these valuable gifts which could be used well in the ministry by men, can not be used just as wonderfully in other ways by women. Speaking ability, upright character, insight into biblical truth, scholastic ability, empathy with peoples’ problems—all these gifts and more-could be profitably used in all kinds of careers and kingdom endeavors other than church offices. As Reformed Christians we should be aware that our God can be served and glorified in any occupation—unless it is one that God has forbidden us to pursue.