Ordaining women to offices of minister, bishop, elder, pastor, etc.

[Soloist]

It seems the point of the veiling is so women can speak prophetically and pray in the assembly...no?

Wife: I would say it’s in general or else it would contradict first Corinthians 14. This would include when responding to random people on Mennonnet (unless it’s in the funnies section). Obviously, there had to be some spot though, for Philip’s daughters to prophesy.

Regarding Sunday school, I have noticed at BMA churches, the ladies are more likely to talk during Sunday school. More conservative Mennonite (not sure about all of them, like I don’t know about Bethel, but pilgrim/eastern nationwide and several western Fellowship) would either have split up Sunday schools or the adult women would be silent in the adult Sunday school, and it would feel awkward if a female did say something (although no one would likely tell them to be quiet). Business meetings are the same unless it’s something pertaining to the ladies side. prayer service, reading, verses, and testimony time would not be on unusual for women to speak.

[Soloist]

Wife: I found it kind of odd when my daughter started occasionally having morning devotions for her class. Upper grade doesn’t do that, and I assumed none of them did that for the girls, although it is useful for them to know how to do it if they become a school teacher, etc.. Besides, the non-Christian children have to do devotions as well once they get into the older classes.

May or may not be helpful, but in my view, school isn't church. We don't do communions, baptisms, weddings, or funerals. So women voicing inspirational thoughts, prophetic words from scripture, etc...seems appropriate to me and pretty much noncontroversial outside of a church context?

Wife: We joked about her standing up and reading the verse, and then sitting down, but we figured it was good for her to learn, and there was nothing wrong with it. It’s sort of like how the conservative end of the spectrum has male teachers for the upper grades and for youth Sunday schools. Also, for all I know, the devotions thing might have been one specific teacher not wanting to have the girls do that, but they did do stories or poems.

[joshuabgood]

It seems the point of the veiling is so women can speak prophetically and pray in the assembly...no?

Wife: I would say it’s in general or else it would contradict first Corinthians 14. This would include when responding to random people on Mennonnet (unless it’s in the funnies section). Obviously, there had to be some spot though, for Philip’s daughters to prophesy.

Regarding Sunday school, I have noticed at BMA churches, the ladies are more likely to talk during Sunday school. More conservative Mennonite (not sure about all of them, like I don’t know about Bethel, but pilgrim/eastern nationwide and several western Fellowship) would either have split up Sunday schools or the adult women would be silent in the adult Sunday school, and it would feel awkward if a female did say something (although no one would likely tell them to be quiet). Business meetings are the same unless it’s something pertaining to the ladies side. prayer service, reading, verses, and testimony time would not be on unusual for women to speak.

Thanks...that basically resonates with my experience.

As far as Corinthians 14, some would feel that Corinthians 11, is the lens through which to interpret chapter 14. And bc of 11, it becomes clear that Paul didn't mean an absolute prohibition on speech/singing/praying/prophecying etc. But was responding to a specific set of concerns in that setting regarding out of control talking during the assembly.

[ken_sylvania]

Personally, I like the term, "nonhierarchical-complementarianism." Awkward I know...but scratches the itch. Jesus didn't promote hierarchy. He came not to be served but to serve. Men are not called to subordinate their wives but to do like Christ, lay down their lives. Christ never coerces us. His Kingship is not an authority like the scribes. It's upside down. But the term above, acknowledges there are general biological differences between men and women, as opposed to radical egalitarianism which defines womanhood out of existence, methinks.

Yea, that term is kind of awkward. Something to think about - one of the other things Jesus didn't promote is the idea of fancy labels for the very practical things that he taught. I'm not disagreeing with your viewpoint on the matter under discussion.

[joshuabgood]

Also, some people - I think Finny Kuruvilla? - have recently argued that the point of the veiling is so that women can speak and pray prophetically OUTSIDE the assembly, seemingly trying to maintain a literal view of total silence for women in the assembly - as if the first half of the chapter has nothing to do with the gathered assembly. My impression was that that argument was too cute by half and seems like a novel view.

I am quite familiar with the rationale behind this thinking as well...and have discussed with Finny and Matthew. But, while they articulate it as well as it can be done, I don't find it compelling either. And would agree with your assessment.

Their practice also to me feels like legalism. Not saying it is...just strikes me that way. In the assembly (in a house) women must be silent. However when the assembly is formally *over* the women participate at will in all spiritual/theological conversations. With all the same people in the same space...

[barnhart]

Also, some people - I think Finny Kuruvilla? - have recently argued that the point of the veiling is so that women can speak and pray prophetically OUTSIDE the assembly, seemingly trying to maintain a literal view of total silence for women in the assembly - as if the first half of the chapter has nothing to do with the gathered assembly. My impression was that that argument was too cute by half and seems like a novel view.

I am quite familiar with the rationale behind this thinking as well...and have discussed with Finny and Matthew. But, while they articulate it as well as it can be done, I don't find it compelling either. And would agree with your assessment.

Their practice also to me feels like legalism. Not saying it is...just strikes me that way. In the assembly (in a house) women must be silent. However when the assembly is formally *over* the women participate at will in all spiritual/theological conversations. With all the same people in the same space...

I suppose one could say we practice that as well as long as the official service is defined as preaching only.

[joshuabgood]

Also, some people - I think Finny Kuruvilla? - have recently argued that the point of the veiling is so that women can speak and pray prophetically OUTSIDE the assembly, seemingly trying to maintain a literal view of total silence for women in the assembly - as if the first half of the chapter has nothing to do with the gathered assembly. My impression was that that argument was too cute by half and seems like a novel view.

I am quite familiar with the rationale behind this thinking as well...and have discussed with Finny and Matthew. But, while they articulate it as well as it can be done, I don't find it compelling either. And would agree with your assessment.

Their practice also to me feels like legalism. Not saying it is...just strikes me that way. In the assembly (in a house) women must be silent. However when the assembly is formally *over* the women participate at will in all spiritual/theological conversations. With all the same people in the same space...

I suppose one could say we practice that as well as long as the official service is defined as preaching only.

Preaching by men that is...

I recall an elderly dear sister, from the early days when I was there, who formerly I think used to preach in Jamaica prior to moving to NYC and attending FJMC, that during *testimony time,* often had some good prophetic words and scripture exegesis =). I remember smiling as I could hear it breaking out =).

Seriously though, is there a place for a veiled woman to bring a prophetic word from scripture to a group of Christians (notice I didn't say assembly to avoid that) of mixed genders and the men can be edified from said prophetic word and the from the Lord through her word? I think yes...per Corinthians 11. Bringing a prophetic word is not by definition church leadership or eldership whatever one thinks. And a long "sermon" itself is questionable with regard to that being a "main part" of the service if one examines early church models. I think sometimes our mental modes around "church" need to be leaned on.

[Ernie]

Most Plain Anabaptists expect complete silence from women in the church. (Probably about 90%)
It is the conservatives that allow women to speak sometimes in the church.

Note:
"Silence" is defined by Paul as "forbidden to speak" and "not permitted to teach" and "not to exercise authority over men". Paul does not forbid singing in the assembly.

Do these sort of churches tend to not have testimony times? I’ve seen reading through the Sunday school passage with women and testimony permitted. I’m assuming you are thinking the non Sunday school plain conservatives?

This is a thread to discuss ordaining women to offices of minister, bishop, elder, deacon, pastor, and so forth.

Amongst Anabaptists, conservative Anabaptists generally do not think the Bible teaches women should be ordained to such offices. However, a wife of a deacon, bishop, or minister does tend to co-labour alongside him.

Progressive / liberal / mainline Anabaptists tend to be much more comfortable ordaining women. Some might not ordain them to specific positions such as a bishop, elder, senior pastor, and so forth, but would to pretty much any other position.

Conservative / plain Anabaptists are generally quite comfortable with women holding offices such as teaching Sunday school to children, conducting vacation Bible school, overseeing a sewing committee, and so on. There would be a variety of practices regarding "women speaking in church"; generally complete silence is not expected.

Most Plain Anabaptists expect complete silence from women in the church. (Probably about 90%)
It is the conservatives that allow women to speak sometimes in the church.

Note:
"Silence" is defined by Paul as "forbidden to speak" and "not permitted to teach" and "not to exercise authority over men". Paul does not forbid singing in the assembly.

You're experience is broader than mine, but this feels like an overstatement to me. At least if one considers SS church, and members meetings church, and testimony time. Every Moderate and Fundamentalist Anabaptist Church I have ever been in did not require silence from women in SS, testimony, or members meetings.

It seems the point of the veiling is so women can speak prophetically and pray in the assembly...no?

I'm just pointing out that conservatives are about 10% of plain people. About 90% are Old Order and take the silence directive quite literally.

Ultra-conservatives allow women to speak in Sunday school in women's classes taught by men. But no testimonies.
Intermediate-conservatives and beyond allow testimonies and speaking in Sunday School.

Some intermediates and beyond allow women Sunday school teachers for women. This is an example of a setting that I consider acceptable for women to prophesy and pray aloud. It seems unlikely to me that Paul was saying that women could speak and pray aloud in a mixed setting if he says they must remain silent and if they have any questions to ask their husbands at home.

When Paul says "prophesying", it could mean...
1. In private conversations.
2. In settings with women only.
3. In mixed settings outside of the gathered assembly.
4. In mixed gathered assemblies.

In light of other things Paul writes, I suspect he was not including number 4, but I am not sure enough about this to make a big deal about it.

For the record, I "principlelize" the instruction about women keeping silent and only apply the "teaching" and "not exercising authority" and am ok with women giving testimony, confessing, and praying aloud in the assembly.

With no more clarity than what we have, I think the Lord must be ok with some diversity as long as we are trying to find a fitting application to the N.T. instructions.

[Ernie]

Also, some people - I think Finny Kuruvilla? - have recently argued that the point of the veiling is so that women can speak and pray prophetically OUTSIDE the assembly, seemingly trying to maintain a literal view of total silence for women in the assembly - as if the first half of the chapter has nothing to do with the gathered assembly. My impression was that that argument was too cute by half and seems like a novel view.

I am quite familiar with the rationale behind this thinking as well...and have discussed with Finny and Matthew. But, while they articulate it as well as it can be done, I don't find it compelling either. And would agree with your assessment.

Their practice also to me feels like legalism. Not saying it is...just strikes me that way. In the assembly (in a house) women must be silent. However when the assembly is formally *over* the women participate at will in all spiritual/theological conversations. With all the same people in the same space...

I suppose one could say we practice that as well as long as the official service is defined as preaching only.

The River Brethen have a pre-service and a service. Once the "service" as started, women are not free to speak.

[ohio jones]

With no more clarity than what we have, I think the Lord must be ok with some diversity as long as we are trying to find a fitting application to the N.T. instructions.

Wright; with most things I can appreciate someone who looks at scripture and finds a way to apply it, even if it differs significantly from my interpretation and practice. What I am not comfortable with is ignoring or explaining away the text.