AN EVALUATION OF WOMEN'S ORDINATION IN SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION

AN EVALUATION OF WOMEN’S ORDINATION IN SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION Damilola Abraham, MA, Biblical and Pastoral Theology Liverpool Hope University, Liverpool UK [email protected] Introduction Ordaining women as ministers, preachers, elders and leaders in ecclesial communities has been one issue fraught with controversies over the years. It has resulted in crisis and schisms among many church traditions. Quite a number of church traditions such as Church of England, Anglican Church of South Africa, and Episcopal Church in the United State have embraced women’s ordination.1 On the contrary, ecclesial communities such as the Catholic Church have refused to ordain women. The Vatican’s 1976 Declaration on the Question of Admitting Women to Priesthood justifies the church’s exclusion of women from the priesthood on the grounds that the female body does not resemble the male body of Christ;2 and that Jesus did not call any woman to become part of the twelve.3 Interestingly, scriptural backing has been advanced by both camps for their positions, thus raising concerns about biblical interpretation of some feminine texts. It also throws up concerns about sexuality, gender of God, and gender equality.4 This research focuses on the debate within the context of The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) in the United States of America by examining the following questions. What is the position of the Southern Baptist Convention on women ordination? How do Southern Baptists generally view women in leadership positions? How have Southern Baptists made use of scriptures in making a decision on women ordination? Is there any role of the local church Karen Jo Torjesen, When Women Were Priests: Women’s Leadership in the Early Church & the Scandal of their Subordination in the Rise of Christianity (New York: Harper San Francisco, 1993) p. 1-2. 2 Torjesen, When Women Were Priests p. 3. 3 Daphne Hampson, Theology and Feminism (Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers 1990), p. 13. 4 Letty M. Russell, Feminist Interpretation of the Bible (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1985), p. 25. 1 1 in the ordination of women? The methodology employed is by surveying the history of the debate in the denomination via historical documents and accounts, confessional statements, policy statements, scholarly articles and books on the debate. Specifically, statements of faith and practice of the convention vis-a-vis their beliefs and understanding of scripture, and the relevant scriptures used in arriving at their conclusion on women’s ordination were critically examined. It then culminates with an evaluation of this position. Brief Introduction of Southern Baptist Convention and their Beliefs The Southern Baptist Convention was formed in 1845 in Augusta Georgia.5 It is the largest and strongest church denominations in the United State of America.6 Southern Baptists have been categorized in various ways; they are seen as orthodox7, radicals and dissenters,8 and even more as a group that tends towards fundamentalism.9 Southern Baptists and Baptists generally were on the cutting edge of radical changes in Protestant faith and practice of the seventeenth century.10 In sum, Southern Baptist Convention is deeply conservative in their beliefs and actions. The core or central beliefs of Southern Baptists are contained in their confessional statement termed the Baptist Faith and Message (BF&M).11 E. Y Mullins, a foremost Baptist theologian was the chair of the committee that presented the first Baptist Faith and Message to Bruce L. Shelley, ‘Baptist Churches in USA,’ in Daniel G. Reid, Robert D. Linder, Bruce L Shelley & Harry S. Stout, eds., Dictionary of Christianity in America (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1990), pp 110-113, p. 111. 6 Jurgen Werber, ‘Baptists’ in Kocku von Stuckrad , ed., The Brill Dictionary of Religion (Leiden: Brill Publishers, 2007), pp. 162-165: 164. 7 Charles S. Kelley Jr., Richard Land & R. Albert Mohler Jr., The Baptist Faith and Message (Nashville, Tennessee: LifeWay Press, 2007), p. 5. 8 Susan M. Shaw, God Speaks to Us, Too: Southern Baptist Women in Church, Home and Society (Louisville, Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky, 2008), p. 4. 9 Werber, ‘Baptists,’ p. 164. 10 Susan, God Speaks to Us, p. 4 11 http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/. It is important to note that Southern Baptists are not acreedal people. Churches and individual members are not required to embrace a standardized set of beliefs but rather they hold to some confessions which represent their doctrines and identity. 5 2 the convention in 1925.12 This was counter-reaction to the emergent liberal views within Baptist life and the larger culture of that era.13 By the early 1960s, another controversy on the nature and authority of scripture propelled SBC to revise the 1925 edition.14 The Herschel Hobbs led committee presented their report and was accepted in 1963.15 The latest edition was adopted in Orlando, Florida, in 2000 as presented by Adrian Rogers, the chairman of the review committee.16 Each revision of the Baptist Faith and Message was an expansion and a further explanation of previous versions to address new challenges and theological concerns.17 By implication, the editions and revisions of the Baptist Faith and Message reveal and highlight the positions of the convention on religious and theological issues prevalent in those periods. They also became guidelines for policies and decisions of SBC. Statement of Faith on Scriptures Southern Baptists are known as the people of the book (the Bible), and they acknowledged the Bible as God’s written revelation of Himself to mankind.18 This notion is reflected in their statement of faith on scriptures as contained in the confessional statement of the Convention, the Baptist Faith and Message. In the 2000 edition, the Convention’s statement of faith on scriptures is as follows: The Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is God's revelation of Himself to man.19 It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter. Therefore, all Scripture is totally true and trustworthy. It reveals the principles by which God judges us, and therefore is, and will remain to the end of the world, the true center of Christian union, and the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinions 12 Kelley Jr., Land & Mohler Jr., The Baptist, p. 5. Kelley Jr., Land & Mohler Jr., The Baptist, p. 5. 14 Kelley Jr., Land & Mohler Jr., The Baptist, p. 5-6. 15 Kelley Jr., Land & Mohler Jr., The Baptist, p. 6. 16 Kelley Jr., Land & Mohler Jr., The Baptist, p. 6. 17 http://www.sbc.net/bfm2000/bfmcomparison.asp accessed on 24th January 2016 by 2:05pm. 18 Kelley Jr., Land & Mohler Jr., The Baptist, p. 8. 19 This was a revision from the 1963 version that says, the Bible is the record of God’s revelation of himself to man. The word record was removed from the 2000 version as they believe the Bible is not just a record of revelation, but it is revelation itself. 13 3 should be tried. All Scripture is a testimony to Christ, who is Himself the focus of divine revelation.20 Several scriptural texts undergird the above statement.21 The SBC statement of faith on scriptures as stated above indicates that the convention upholds the doctrine of full inspiration of the Bible, inerrancy and full authority. Dynamic and dictation theories of inspiration were seen as false theories of inspiration and were rejected altogether.22 They subscribed to the conclusion of Verbal Plenary theory of inspiration that “the Bible as a whole is the Word of God, so that in every part of Scripture there is both infallible truth and divine authority.”23 According to Albert Mohler, Jr, the President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, the leading theological institution of the Southern Baptists, “Southern Baptists will not retreat from the high ground of biblical authority and theological integrity. In adopting the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message, Southern Baptists are determined to face the future from the high ground of biblical faithfulness.”24 This high ground of biblical authority is what underpins all activities of SBC; their organs, departments and their theological institutions. History of the Debate of Women’s Ordination in Southern Baptist Convention The question of women’s role was a major stir within Baptists in the South from its very beginning.25 From that period, they have been averse to the practice of women in leadership roles and women’s ordination.26 Historical plots, articles and data from eminent twentieth 20 Kelley Jr., Land & Mohler Jr., The Baptist, p. 7. Exodus 24:4; Deuteronomy 4:1-2; 17:19; Joshua 8:34; Psalms 19:7-10; 119:11,89,105,140; Isaiah 34:16; 40:8; Jeremiah 15:16; 36; Matthew 5:17-18; 22:29; Luke 21:33; 24:44-46; John 5:39; 16:13-15; 17:17; Acts 2:16ff.; 17:11; Romans 15:4; 16:25-26; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Hebrews 1:1-2; 4:12; 1 Peter 1:25; 2 Peter 1:19-21. See Kelley Jr., Land & Mohler Jr., The Baptist, p. 7. 22 Kelley Jr., Land & Mohler Jr., The Baptist, p. 10. 23 Kelley Jr., Land & Mohler Jr., The Baptist, p. 10. 24 Albert Mohler, Jr, An Exposition from the Faculty of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary on The Baptist Faith and Message 2000 Produced by The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2001, p. 2. 25 Carolyn DeArmond Blevins, ‘Patterns of Ministry among Southern Baptist Women,’ in Baptist History and Heritage, 22, 3 (July 1987), pp. 41-50: 41. 26 Norman H. Letsinger, ‘The Status of Women in the Southern Baptist Convention in Historical Perspective’ in Baptist History and Heritage, 12, 1 (January 1977), pp. 37-44: 37. Letsinger’s historical perspective on the role and status of women in SBC was focused on the period 1860-1920. 21 4 century Baptist’s scholars such as Barnes, Spain and McBeth show unanimity of an antipathy position by Southern Baptists concerning the role and ordination of women. W. W Barnes in his explanation of the nineteenth-century attitudes of the SBC towards women’s ordination writes that: “Southern Baptists, in particular, were ultra-conservative on the question of women taking any part in church life, especially in the matter of women speaking before mixed audiences. The social objection was strongly buttressed by theological argument.”27 Not much has changed in SBC’s attitude to women even in the twenty first century. Rufus B Spain, after examining post-civil war articles from the Southern Baptists also points out that many Southern Baptists were opposed to women’s right.28 They held that God created women different (and inferior to) men, and any effort made to elevate women to the level of man was contrary to God’s will.29 Certainly the idea of women’s ordination in that era was a taboo. Leon Mcbeth in his historical plot of the debate of women’s ordination among Southern Baptists also documents the following: A brief survey of nineteenth-century Southern Baptist literature confirms that ordination was restricted to men. Women were not forbidden to be ordained; the subject simply did not come up, and ordination almost always was set in a context of masculine pronouns. Typical is the Dover Association of Virginia, which in 1844 explained that “the church, by her united suffrage, calls a brother to ordination” and “by imposition of hands and prayer”… welcomes him into the sacred office.30 The point Mcbeth strikes is that, for Southern Baptists in the nineteenth century, women’s ordination was a non-existent issue; it was not even a subject of consideration. Ordination’s terms and procedure were crafted with the men in mind. 27 W.W Barnes, The Southern Baptist Convention, 1845-1953 (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1954), p. 140 quoted in Norman H. Letsinger, ‘The Status of Women in the Southern Baptist Convention in Historical Perspective’ in Baptist History and Heritage, 12, 1 (January 1977), pp. 37-44: 37. 28 Rufus B. Spain, ‘At Ease in Zion: Social History of Southern Baptists’ (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1967), p 166 in Norman H. Letsinger, ‘The Status of Women in the Southern Baptist Convention in Historical Perspective’ Baptist History and Heritage, 12, 1 (January 1977), pp. 37-44: 37. 29 Spain, ‘At Ease in Zion: Social History of Southern Baptists,’ p. 37. 30 Leon McBeth, ‘The Ordination of Women’ in Review and Expositor, 78, 4, (fall 1981), pp. 515-530: 515. 5 Coming to the twentieth century, two major Southern Baptist confessions of faith adopted at Memphis in 1925 and Kansas City in 1963, both deal with ministry and ordination, but neither mentions the possibility of women in that role.31 In this era, Pamela Durso details the reaction of Southern Baptists to the first female ordination. According to her, Addie Davis was the first woman to be ordained within the fold of Southern Baptists on August 9, 1964 by Watts Street Baptist Church in Durham, North Carolina.32 This action provoked serious opposition from Southern Baptists all over the country. Davis was called “a child of the devil” and was instructed to renounce her ordination.33 The pressure forced her to leave the Southern Baptists for the American Baptist Association where she continued her pastoral ministry until her death in 2005.34 The negative reaction to Davis ordination was an evidence of serious aversion to the practice among Southern Baptist people. In 1984, the Southern Baptists restated their opposition to the ordination of women in a resolution titled “On Ordination and the Role of Women in Ministry.”35 Also in 2000, the Baptist Faith and Message was revised by the Southern Baptist Convention. While the statement affirms a form of complementarianism which equates men and women, it subordinates women by differentiating their roles in church and family.36 A part of the statement read thus: “While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of the pastor is limited to men as qualified by scripture.37 Clearly, and in similar tones with previous editions, this latest confessional statement denounced women’s ordination and prohibits their service as pastors. By 2003, a committee of the SBC raise a recommendation to 31 McBeth, The Ordination of Women, p. 516. Pamela R. Durso, ‘She-Preachers, Bossy Women, and Children of the Devil: Women Ministers in the Baptist Tradition, 1609-2012’ in Review and Expositor, 110, 1 (Winter 2013), pp. 33-47: 38-39. 33 Durso, She-Preachers, Bossy Women, and Children of the Devil p. 38-39. 34 Durso, She-Preachers, Bossy Women, and Children of the Devil p. 39. 35 Durso, She-Preachers, Bossy Women, and Children of the Devil p. 43. 36 Carl, L. Kell, The Exiled Generation: Legacies of the Southern Baptist Convention Holy War (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 2014), p. xxv. 37 Durso, She-Preachers, Bossy Women, and Children of the Devil p. 43. 32 6 the convention that they should disaffiliate from the Baptist World Alliance because of the latter’s continued emphasis on women as pastors.38 The rejection of women’s ordination by SBC did not go without an opposition. Seth Dowland affirms that it was a major conflict between two groups of the convention; the conservatives and moderates.39 Elizabeth H, Flowers in her book Into the Pulpit: Southern Baptist Women and Power since World War II echoes Dowland’s views by noting that the decision to ordain women was a serious contest between two groups in the SBC: the conservatives and the moderates.40 Susan Shaw designates the Southern conservatives as the fundamentalists.41 These two groups struggle for the control of the convention on most issues, including women’s roles and ordination.42 The conservatives (or fundamentalists) constitute the majority in SBC,43 and they saw a growing influence of women in the convention as proof of theological liberalism.44 By 1979, the conservatives took full control of the convention and its organs: theological institutions, boards, publishing houses and agencies.45 The conservatives subscribe to inerrancy of scriptures and theological conservative orthodoxy;46 their policies and statements affirm male leadership and reject women’s ordination.47 The moderates on the other hand were open to a reading of scriptures through the lens of modern science and historical criticisms.48 In 1990, the moderates broke away to form alternative organizations and Susan M. Shaw, ‘Gracious Submission: Southern Baptists Fundamentalists and Women’ in NWSA Journal, 20, 1 (Spring 2008), pp. 51-57: 68. 39 Seth Dowland, ‘A New Kind of Patriarchy: Inerrancy and Masculinity in the Southern Baptist Convention, 1979–2000,’ in Craig Thompson Friend, ed., Southern Masculinity: Perspectives on Manhood in the South since Reconstruction (London: University of Georgia Press, 2009), pp. 246-268: 247. 40 Elizabeth H. Flowers, Into the Pulpit: Southern Baptist Women and Power since World War II (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 2012), p. 102. 41 Shaw, Gracious Submission p. 51 42 Dowland, ‘A New Kind of Patriarchy’ p. 247. 43 Dowland, ‘A New Kind of Patriarchy’ p. 247. 44 Shaw, Gracious Submission p. 52. 45 Shaw, Gracious Submission p. 51. 46 Dowland, ‘A New Kind of Patriarchy’ p. 248. 47 Dowland, ‘A New Kind of Patriarchy’ p. 248. 48 Dowland, ‘A New Kind of Patriarchy’ p. 249-250. 38 7 fellowships such as Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF).49 While the moderates were not as rigid as the conservatives in their beliefs, but they cannot be categorized entirely as liberal. Succinctly put, SBC as a body is opposed to ordination of women. However, due to the Baptist’s practice of congregational polity in which final human authority rests with the local or particular congregation in decision-making,50 local Baptist churches under SBC have the prerogative to decide whether they want to ordain women or not.51 Hence, women ordination in SBC is entirely a local church policy.52 The autonomous and self-governed nature of local congregations has therefore made the ordination of some women possible within the SBC fold. Although, Sarah Anders notes that the majority of ordained women ministers are restricted in their scope of service to chaplaincy, church staff roles, children or youth work, and institutional roles other than the lead pastorate.53 One of the few exceptions was Julie Pennington-Russell. She was elected as the Senior Pastor of First Baptist Church of Decatur, Georgia, (the largest church associated with the Southern Baptist Convention or the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship to hire a woman as senior pastor).54 Scriptural Backing for SBC Position The Southern Baptist Convention’s rejection of women’s ordination is predicated on scriptures. Many Southern Baptists have insisted that it is not scriptural for women to lead men no matter 49 Susan, God Speaks to Us, p. 4 James Leo Garret, An Affirmation of Congregational Polity in Journal for Baptist Theology and Ministry Volume 3, No 1 (Spring 2005), pp. 38-55: 38. See also William J, Whalen, What do Southern Baptists Believe? U.S Catholic, 58, 9 (Sept., 1993), pp. 22-27: 27. 51 Bill Stancil, ‘Divergent Views and Practices of Ordination among Southern Baptists since 1945,’ in Baptist History and Heritage, 23, 3 (July 1988), pp. 42-49: 42. 52 Sarah Francis Anders, ‘Woman’s Role in the Southern Baptist Convention and its Churches as Compared with Selected other Denominations’ in Review and Expositor, 72, 1 (Winter 1975), pp. 31-39: 33. 53 Anders, Woman’s Role, p. 33. See also Durso, ‘She-Preachers, Bossy Women, and Children of the Devil,’ p. 42. Also, Eileen Campbell-Reed, ‘Baptists in Tension: The Status of Women’s Leadership and Ministry’ in Review and Expositor, 110, 1 (Winter 2013), pp. 49-63: 54. 54 Hannah Elliot, ‘Woman Called to Pastor Large Southern Baptist Convention Church,’ in The Christian Century, 124, 14 (July 10, 2007), pp. 14-15: 14. 50 8 how gifted the women may be.55 In their resolution titled “On Ordination and the Role of Women in Ministry” made in Kansas City, 1984, Southern Baptists agreed and resolved that “the New Testament does not mandate that all who are divinely called to ministry be ordained.”56 The document further affirmed that women should not assume in public worship a role of authority over men and that women are excluded from pastoral leadership in order to preserve a submission God requires because the man was first in creation and the woman was first in the Edenic fall.57 Similarly, a Southern Baptist Convention’s Position statement on Women in Ministry states thus: Women participate equally with men in the priesthood of all believers. Their role is crucial, their wisdom, grace and commitment exemplary. Women are an integral part of our Southern Baptist boards, faculties, mission teams, writer pools, and professional staffs. We affirm and celebrate their Great Commission impact. While Scripture teaches that a woman’s role is not identical to that of men in every respect, and that pastoral leadership is assigned to men, it also teaches that women are equal in value to men.58 SBC references to scripture in the above statement were based on some of Pauline’s NT texts such as 1 Cor. 14:33-36 and 1 Tim. 2:8-15 which prohibit women from exercising teaching, preaching and leadership roles in the church. An acceptance of this position throws up serious hermeneutical conundrum. Was Paul’s instructions on the place of women to the Corinthians and to Timothy meant to be a timeless or universal one? Were they supposed to be followed by churches of all age or were they limited to the context of the original audience/churches? Or was Paul a misogynist as suggested by some feminist scholars? Evaluation of the Position As seen from this study, the SBC had used a number of scriptural inferences and allusion in barring women from being ordained. However, it is important to recognise the complex nature Blevins, ‘Patterns of Ministry among Southern Baptist Women’ p 45. Stancil, Divergent Views and Practices, p. 46 57 Stancil, ‘Divergent Views and Practices,’ p. 46. 58 http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/positionstatements.asp/assessed on 21st January 2016 by 17:15pm. 55 56 9 of this decision and the underlining reasons. Feminists of all persuasion59 acknowledge the patriarchy nature of the Bible and that the Bible in some parts bar women from certain roles in the family and in the church (e.g. Eph 5:22-33; I Tim 2:11-15).60 Marie-Theres Wacker posits that in the history of Christianity, women have always suffered from particular gender-specific limitations, indeed discriminations, which have been based upon the Holy Scriptures.61 Admittedly, the patriarchal social structure and cultural milieu of the Bible cannot be denied. Nevertheless, Phyllis Trible, a foremost feminist critic contends that the actual problem is not the text but the traditional history of interpretation which shows more misogynist tendencies than does the actual text.62 The argument of Trible seems logical because many modern interpreters, commentators or readers of scriptural texts were neither the original author nor recipients. For instance, Trible correctly points out that Paul’s injunction against women teaching is directed at specific women and to them only. This should not be expanded to include all women, which is a misinterpretation.63 Trible is right in her analysis above as the historical context and situational undertones of these scriptures have been overtly ignored by Southern Baptists and other opponents of women’s leadership and ordination. Specifically, I Tim. 2:12, where Pauls says, I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent was used as the basis for the 1984 resolution of SBC which prohibits women’s ordination and leadership roles in the church. The verse is simply taking out of context; and this is a violation of contextual and 59 Klein, Blomberg and Hubbard Jr classified feminist movements into non-evangelical Christian feminism and evangelical feminism. The former is adjudged to have produced by far the largest quantity of feminist biblical scholarship. William, W Klein, Craig L Blomberg, and Hubbard Jr, Robert L., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, Revised and Updated, (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, Inc, 2004), p. 97. 60 Klein, Blomberg, & Hubbard J., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, p. 96. 61 Marie-Theres Wacker ‘Feminist Criticism and Related Aspects’ in J.W. Rogerson & Judieth M. Lieu, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), pp. 634-654: 635. 62 Danna Nolan Fewell, ‘Reading the Bible Ideologically: Feminist Criticism’, in Steven L. Mckenzie & Haynes Stephen R., eds., An Introduction to Each Biblical Criticisms and their Application: To Each Its Own Meaning (Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox, 1999), pp. 268-282: 270-271. 63 Stanley E. Porter, ed., Dictionary of Biblical Criticism and Interpretation (London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2007), p. 107. 10 historical hermeneutical principle. Also, Philp Towner correctly posits that Paul gave this instruction because of the unusual situation of the Ephesian context where some women were usurping, misappropriating and dominating the men.64 Again scholarly studies reveal that Paul’s instruction in I Cor 14:33-36 is not to be taking as a ban on speaking by all women in all instances but as one aimed at resolving a particular problem in the Corinthian church.65 Scholars such as Schmeidel, Weiss, Conzelmann, Klauck, Fee, Hays etc have gone further by categorizing this text as a non-Pauline interpolation;66 though their submission remains a speculation. Again, SBC is wrong in voting against women’s ordination and leadership roles in the church based on some isolated scriptural texts mentioned above. Doing this amounts to error of proof-texting. The entire scriptures affirm both men and women in leadership roles. In the OT, women occupies different spiritual roles. Mariam was a prophetess (Exodus 15:1); Deborah was both a prophetess and judge in a male dominated Israelite’s culture (Judges 4:6) and she provided spiritual, political and even military leadership for the people of God in that era; a woman named Huldah was also a prophetess in the monarchical era (2 Chro. 34:14-33). Coming to the New Testament, Jesus had so many female disciples who ministered to his needs; Luke 8:2-3 mention a few of them (Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Sussana). A woman was the first to witness and testify of his resurrection.67 Also, an aggregate of Paul’s teachings, based on historical critical analysis, shows he was not averse to women’s ordination or leadership as upheld by SBC. He also had many female ministry companions and referred to some as co-labourers and fellow workers: in Rom. 16:2, Phoebe was a servant diakonos and a 64 Philip H. Towner, 1-2 Timothy & Titus: The IVP New Testament Commentary Series Grant R. Osborne, D Stuart Briscoe, & Haddon Robinson, eds., (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1994), p. 77. 65 Robert Scot Nash, Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary: I Corinthians (Macon, Georgia: Smyth & Helwys Publishing Incorporated, 2009), p. 380-381. 66 Anthony C Thiselton, The First Epistles to the Corinthians: The New International Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), p. 1150. 67 Luke 8:3; Luke 24:1ff 11 helper prostatis in the church in Cenchreae.68 C. S. Keener and Jerome Murphy-O’Connor suggest that the term prostasis refers to patron in antiquity;69 apparently she was one with administrative responsibility.70 Paul commends Prisca (Known as Priscilla) in Rom. 16:3. Some scholars suggest that possibly, her higher social status was responsible for her being mentioned before her husband.71 Andronicus and his wife, Junia were described by Paul as those prominent among the apostles in Rom. 16:7. There were others like Mary, Tryphaena, Tryphosa and Persis in Rom. 16: 6, 12; and Euodia and Syntyche in Phil. 4:2-3. In Galatians 3:28, Paul says that in Christ there is no male or female, slave or free. Clearly, sound biblical hermeneutics will not exclude women with leadership abilities or limit them from ordination. Furthermore, the stance of SBC on women’s ordination is not plausible on the ground of theological inconsistency in the beliefs and doctrines of the church. Some cardinal beliefs or distinctive of Southern Baptists and Baptists generally are priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:5-9), individual soul liberty or soul competence. In Baptist ecclesiology, all believers are priests and can exercise priestly rites of praying for others, comforting the afflicted, or proclaiming the gospel.72 Baptists subscribe to complete liberty of conscience.73 Rejection of women’s ordination will be in contradistinction to, and a jeopardy of their distinctive doctrines of priesthood of all believers, individual soul competency. It is inconceivable to uphold some of these beliefs and at the same time oppose women’s right, leadership and ordination. C. S. Keener, ‘Man and Woman’ in Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, & Daniel G. Reid eds., Dictionary of Paul and His Letters (Downers Grove, Illinois, Intervarsity Press, 1993), pp. 583-592: 589. 69 Keener, ‘Man and Woman’ p. 589. Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, St Paul, Promoter of the Ministry of Women in Priests and People, 6, (1992), pp. 307-311: 310. 70 Keener, ‘Man and Woman’ p. 589. 71 Keener, ‘Man and Woman’ p. 589. 72 Curtis W. Freeman, James Wm. McClendon Jr., and C. Rosalee Velloso Ewell, Baptist Roots: A Reader in the Theology of a Christian People (Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1999), p. 8 73 Susan, God Speaks to Us, p. 4. 68 12 At present, discussions are ongoing on this debate in other ecclesia communities such as the Roman Catholic Church with similar views as SBC on women’s ordination. Writing on the debate of women’s ordination within the Roman Catholic tradition, Craig L. Nessan in his article Re-Invoking the Spirit of Vatican II: The Questions of Married Priests and Women’s Ordination cites four dogmatic arguments advanced by Georg Kraus, a retired Professor of Dogmatics at the University of Bamberg in support of women’s ordination within the Catholic tradition.74 Kraus correctly argues that, first, men and women were created as equals by God and in God’s image and both are redeemed by Christ’s saving work on the cross. Second, the priesthood of all believers gives men and women equal access to God. Third, both men and women are belongs to Christ’s new creation and are representatives of Christ in the world. Fourth, both genders were filled with the Holy Spirit in line with Joel’s prophecy.75 Hence both men and women are endued with the spirit of Christ to bear public testimony to the Gospel.76 These arguments by Kraus represent better theological and biblical interpretation on women and ordained ministry than that of SBC. Conclusion This study has focused on the debate of Women and ordained ministry in the context of Southern Baptist Convention. SBC as a body is against the ordination of women based on their interpretation of some scriptural texts, particularly some Pauline directives to the church in Corinth and Ephesus. Though, SBC allowed local churches their inalienable rights to ordain women if they so decide. Allowing local churches to ordain women is commendable to an extent, however, the denomination as a body needs to re-evaluate their stand on women and ordained ministry. Their interpretation of scriptures on the subject is faulty as it is more of a Craig L. Nessan, ‘Re-Invoking the Spirit of Vatican II: The Questions of Married Priests and Women’s Ordination’ in Journal of Theology, 52, 1, (Spring, March 2013), pp. 4-6: 6. 75 Nessan, ‘Re-Invoking the Spirit of Vatican II,’ p. 6. 76 Nessan, ‘Re-Invoking the Spirit of Vatican II,’ p. 6. 74 13 proof-text than an overall consideration of scriptural teachings on the debate. Thus, SBC should jettison their anachronistic position on women and ordained ministry which as it is relegates and suppresses the spiritual and ministry gifts of Southern Baptist’s women. Gifted women within the denomination should be given more opportunities to make use of their gifts in the service of the Lord. Those with the gifts of pastoral ministry should not in any way be restricted by ordination. 14 Bibliography Anders, Sarah F., ‘Woman’s Role in the Southern Baptist Convention and its Churches as Compared with selected other Denominations’, in Review and Expositor, 72, 1 (Winter 1975), pp. 31-39. Barnes, W.W. The Southern Baptist Convention, 1845-1953 (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1954). Campbell-Reed, Eileen, ‘Baptists in Tension: The Status of Women’s Leadership and Ministry’, in Review and Expositor, 110, no 1 (Winter 2013), pp. 49-63. Dowland, Seth, ‘A New Kind of Patriarchy: Inerrancy and Masculinity in the Southern Baptist Convention, 1979–2000,’ in Craig Thompson Friend, ed., Southern Masculinity: Perspectives on Manhood in the South since Reconstruction (London: University of Georgia Press, 2009), pp. 246-268. Durso, Pamela R., ‘She-Preachers, Bossy Women, and Children of the Devil: Women Ministers in the Baptist Tradition, 1609-2012’, in Review and Expositor, 110, 1 (Winter 2013), pp. 33-47. Elliot, Hannah, ‘Woman Called to Pastor Large Southern Baptist Convention Church’, in The Christian Century, 124, 14 (July 10, 2007), pp. 14-15. Fewell, Danna Nolan, ‘Reading the Bible Ideologically: Feminist Criticism’, in Steven L. Mckenzie & Haynes Stephen R., eds., An Introduction to Each Biblical Criticisms and their Application: To Each Its Own Meaning (Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox, 1999), pp. 268-282. Flowers, Elizabeth H., Into the Pulpit: Southern Baptist Women and Power since World War II (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 2012). Freeman, Curtis W., James Wm. McClendon Jr., and C. Rosalee Velloso Ewell, Baptist Roots: A Reader in the Theology of a Christian People (Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1999). Garret, James Leo, ‘An Affirmation of Congregational Polity’, in Journal for Baptist Theology and Ministry, 3, 1 (Spring 2005), pp. 38-55. Hampson, Daphne, Theology and Feminism (Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers 1990). Keener, C. S., ‘Man and Woman’ in Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, & Daniel G. Reid eds., Dictionary of Paul and His Letters (Downers Grove, Illinois, Intervarsity Press, 1993), pp 583-592. Kell, Carl, L., The Exiled Generation: Legacies of the Southern Baptist Convention Holy War (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 2014). Kelley Jr. S. Charles, Richard Land & Mohler Jr., R. Albert, The Baptist Faith and Message (Nashville, Tennessee: LifeWay Press, 2007). Klein, W William, Craig L Blomberg, and Hubbard Jr, Robert L., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation Revised and Updated, (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, Inc, 2004). 15 Letsinger, Norman H., ‘The Status of Women in the Southern Baptist Convention in Historical Perspective’, in Baptist History and Heritage, 12, 1 (January 1977), pp. 37-44. McBeth, Leon, ‘The Ordination of Women’, in Review and Expositor, 78, 4 (Fall 1981), pp. 515-530. Mohler, Jr, Albert, An Exposition from the Faculty of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary on The Baptist Faith and Message 2000 Produced by The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2001. Murphy-O’Connor, Jerome, ‘St Paul, Promoter of the Ministry of Women’, in Priests and People, 6, (1992), pp. 307-311. Nash, Robert Scot, Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary: I Corinthians (Macon, Georgia: Smyth & Helwys Publishing Incorporated, 2009). Nessan, Craig L., ‘Re-Invoking the Spirit of Vatican II: The Questions of Married Priests and Women’s Ordination’, in Journal of Theology, 52, 1 (Spring, March 2013), pp. 4-6. Porter, Stanley E., (editor) Dictionary of Biblical Criticism and Interpretation (London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2007). Russell, Letty M., Feminist Interpretation of the Bible (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1985). Susan M. Shaw, God Speaks to Us, Too: Southern Baptist Women in Church, Home and Society (Louisville, Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky, 2008). _____________ ‘Gracious Submission: Southern Baptists Fundamentalists and Women’, in NWSA Journal, 20, 1 (Spring 2008, pp. 51-57. Shelley, Bruce L., ‘Baptist Churches in USA,’ Daniel G. Reid, Robert D. Linder, Bruce L Shelley & Harry S. Stout, eds., Dictionary of Christianity in America (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1990), pp.110-113. Spain, Rufus B., At Ease in Zion: Social History of Southern Baptists (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1967). Stancil, Bill, ‘Divergent Views and Practices of Ordination among Southern Baptists since 1945’, in Baptist History and Heritage, 23, 3 (July 1988), pp. 42-49. Thiselton, Anthony C., The First Epistles to the Corinthians: The New International Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000). Torjesen Karen Jo, When Women Were Priests: Women’s Leadership in the Early Church & the Scandal of their Subordination in the Rise of Christianity (New York: Harper San Francisco, 1993). Towner, Philip H., 1-2 Timothy & Titus: The IVP New Testament Commentary Series Grant R. Osborne, D Stuart Briscoe, & Haddon Robinson, eds., (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1994). 16 Wacker Marie-Theres ‘Feminist Criticism and Related Aspects’ in J.W. Rogerson & Judieth M. Lieu, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), pp. 634-654. Werber, Jurgen, ‘Baptists’ in Kocku von Stuckrad ed., The Brill Dictionary of Religion (Leiden: Brill Publishers, 2007), pp. 162-165. Whalen, William J., ‘What do Southern Baptists Believe?’, in U.S Catholic, 58, 9 (Sept., 1993) pp. 22-27. http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/positionstatements.asp/assessed on 21st January 2016 by 17:15pm. Comparison of 1925, 1963 and 2000 Baptist Faith and Message http://www.sbc.net/bfm2000/bfmcomparison.asp accessed on 24th January 2016 by 2:05pm 17