1

The Ordination of Women in the American Church

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

By Nicholas Miller, Ph.D., JD

Associate Professor of Church History
Seventh-day Adventist Seminary
Andrews University
Table of Contents

12

Introduction 19th century foundations of a 20th century issue

13

I.

Historical overview

14

A.

The Great Awakenings 18th and early 19th centuries

15

B.

First womens rights movement - mid 19th century

16

C.

Fundamentalism and liberalism - early 20th century

17

D.

The Second Womens Rights Movement 1960s/70s

13

18

E.

The New Civil Rights: 1980s to the Present

14

19

F.

Four Historical Views

15

20

II. Church Groupings

17

21

A.

Group 1 Historically Biblically Unorthodox Churches

17

22

B.

Group 2 Sacramental and High Churches

18

23

C.

Group 3 Calvinist/Reformed Churches

20

24

D.

Group 4 Methodism/Holiness/Pentecostal

24

25

E.

Group 5 Restorationist Churches

28

26
27
28

Conclusion - Lessons for Seventh-day Adventists

APPENDIX

U.S. Churches That Ordain Women

30
32

29

Introduction

30

In 1853, Antoinette Brown became the first woman ordained as a Christian

31

minister in a major American denomination. Brown was ordained by a small

32

Congregational church in South Butler, New York. Even before this, she had already

33

achieved some significant firsts. She was one of the first women to obtain a degree

34

from a co-educational college, the progressive Oberlin College, run by the Arminian-

35

tinged New School Presbyterians, which had begun admitting women around 1840.

36

Believing she was called to ministerial work, Brown was not content with the literary

37

course prescribed for women. She petitioned the faculty to allow her to take the

38

advanced theological course, which was limited to men. Eventually, the faculty relented

39

and allowed her to take the course-work. She was the first woman to do so, but the

40

faculty refused to award her the actual degree.1

41

Undaunted, Brown entered the field, and looked for a ministerial opportunity,

42

lecturing in the meantime on temperance, slavery, and literary topics. Her acceptance

43

and eventual ordination by the Congregational church in New York was a satisfying and

44

symbolic moment, celebrated with a fiery sermon by a Wesleyan Methodist preacher.

45

Not only did Brown achieve her goal of ordination, but it was within a church that in

46

many ways represented the most distinguished religious heritage of the countrythe

47

Congregational church being the most direct ecclesiastical heir of the venerable New

48

England Puritans.

49

This first ordination, however, did not really represent the decisive beginning of

50

a new era of womens leadership in American Christianity. The Congregational church,

51

due to its localized leadership structure, had the capacity to make unique decisions

52

without having to wrestle with difficult questions on a denominational-wide basis. The

53

fact that one, small, socially-progressive church in New York would decide to have a

54

female pastor said little about the denomination as a whole. (Though, as the local

55

conference did need to approve such appointments, it says something about at least a

56

certain region of New York at the time.)

Barbara Brown Zikmund, Womens Ministries Within the United Church of Christ, in
Catherine Wessinger, ed., Religious Institutions and Womens Leadership: New Roles Inside
the Mainstream (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1996), 67-68.
1

57

But over thirty-five years later, in 1889, the national Congregational yearbook

58

listed only four ordained women ministers. Like Brown, they served as, quite literally,

59

the exceptions that proved the general rule of male ministerial leadership. As one local

60

conference put it, while we do not approve of the ordination of women to the Eldership

61

of the church, as a general rule, yet as Sister Melissa Timmons has been set forward to

62

that position at the request of her church . . . we send her credential letters of an

63

ordained minister.2

64

By that time, however, Brown herself was no longer in the Congregational

65

ministry. Indeed, within a handful of years of her ordination, she encountered health

66

difficulties, and doctrinal doubts, and resigned from the pastorate. She spent several

67

years lecturing and speaking, until in 1878 she joined the Unitarian church. There, she

68

was recognized as an ordained Unitarian minister.

69

Browns challenging experiences as a pastor are unsurprising, given the tenor

70

and climate of her culture and times, and her role as trailblazer. But her pathway, from

71

the gender-conservative Presbyterians, to a more flexible group of Congregationalists,

72

who allowed the Methodist preacher at her ordination, and her later move to the

73

broad-minded Unitarians, illustrates in a single life the complexity of views that

74

existed in mid-19th century America on womens ministry. It is this varied religious

75

background that is the foundation from which 20th century developments in womens

76

ministry and ordination must be understood, as the first Protestant churches to ordain

77

women did so in the United States.3

78

A book could be written for each denominations experience of grappling with

79

the ordination question. Fortunately, one book has been written based on a detailed

80

study of the reaction of the 100 largest American denominations to the issue of
Ibid., 68.
Some suggest that some of the early European Anabaptists ordained women, but the
evidence of this is thin and does not seem to be supported by the early primary sources.
See Dennis Bollinger, First-Generation Anabaptist Ecclesiology, 1525-1561 (Lewiston, NY:
The Edwin Mellen Press, 2008), 169, fn. 533. Whether such groups did ordain at some
early point, by the time of the 17th and 18th centuries there is no record of them
continuing to do so. Hence, the history of the church in America is central to
understanding the dynamics of how womens ordination entered modern Protestantism,
and became an issue for the Adventist church.
2
3

81

womens ordination. Entitled Ordaining Women: Culture and Conflict in Religious

82

Organizations, the author, sociologist Mark Chaves, looks at both internal church

83

factors, including theology and organization, and external societal pressures, such as

84

womens rights movements and political pressures, to understand how various

85

American churches dealt with the ordination question.4

86

Chavess book is a valuable resource, but his questions as a sociologist differ

87

somewhat from my concerns as a historian and theologian. I tend to give more weight

88

and attention to theological matters. His work provides a framework and some data for

89

this paper. Most notable is his breakdown of the 44 denominations that have chosen to

90

ordain women, including the dates they made the decision, and the reason for the

91

decision.5 I have added to Chavess list, by attempting to both bring it up to date, as well

92

as adding information about church population and growth, as well as the attitude of

93

these denominations towards homosexuality.

94

Both sides on the ordination discussion in the Adventist church have made

95

various claims about the impact of ordaining women on both church growth, as well as

96

on the likelihood womens ordination leading to biblical liberalism, including the

97

acceptance of homosexual behavior within the church. I wanted to test these claims by

98

looking at the experience of other denominations. I have included my expanded version

99

of his list in the Appendix to this paper.

100

Due to space limitations and manageability, for purposes of my analysis I have

101

chosen to group Chavess list of churches into five categories based on historical

102

affiliations and theological connections. These groups are as follows: 1. Biblically

103

Unorthodox (Quakers, Universalists, Unitarians, Christian Science, Mormons); 2.

104

Sacramental (Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, High Lutheran); 3. Calvinist/Reformed

105

(Presbyterian, Congregational, Particular Baptists), 4. Methodist/Wesleyan/Pentecostal

106

5. Restorationists (Christians, Adventists, Baptists, Mennonites).

107

The groupings themselves do not indicate whether womens ordination will be

108

accepted or rejected. But the groupings do indicate a pattern of similar experiences and

109

questions that are involved in dealing with gender and ordination. The experiences of
4
5

(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997.)

Ibid.,16-17.
4

110

many of these groups will be helpful as Adventists consider their options in relation to

111

the ordination issue.

112

Before the experiences of these groups are considered, a brief historical sketch

113

will be provided of the moments in American history when womens ministry and

114

ordination became issues of important concern. This history will be told, with some

115

exception, without reference to the particular groups, as all groups essentially

116

experienced and were subject to the same social and historical forces produced by

117

these larger historical events. After the historical sketch, each of the five groups will be

118

considered in turn, with a focus on the experiences that might be relevant for our own

119

church. The paper will conclude with some observations on how this history may help

120

us chart our future.

121
122

A.

Historical overview

Questions of gender and ministry are not a constant concern of churches, but

123

arise from time to time in relation to both internal church developments and to events

124

in society. The five moments when the issue of women and ministry came to the

125

foreground in American religion are as follows: 1. The Great Awakenings of the mid

126

18th and early 19th centuries; 2. the first womens rights movement of the mid-to-late

127

19th century; 3. the spread of fundamentalism and liberalism in the early 20th century;

128

4. the second womens rights movements of the 1960s and 1970s, and; 5. the ascent of

129

total equality as the central American legal and social doctrine at the end of the 20th

130

century. This overview will provide the context in which the experiences of the various

131

denominational groups can be understood.

132
133
134

A.

The Great Awakenings Women Prophesyers and Exhorters

While Antoinette Brown may have been the first American woman ordained to

135

the gospel ministry, she was certainly not the first woman preacher. Catherine Breckus

136

has masterfully documented and recorded the extensive history of female public

137

prophesying, as preaching was often called, in the century and more prior to Browns

138

appointment.6 Womens involvement in public preaching and exhorting clustered

139

around the two great revival events in American history, the First and Second Great

140

Awakenings. Both events challenged social and cultural conventions in ways that

141

opened doors for minorities, including blacks and women, to play roles of public

142

leadership that had previously been denied them.

143

The First Great Awakening began in the 1740s with the preaching of Jonathan

144

Edwards, George Whitfield and the Wesley brothers. The emphasis on individual,

145

public conversion, the importance of both mind and emotion, and the equality of

146

believers before God, led to a challenge of social mores. Wives rebuked husbands for

147

their lack of piety; children evangelized their parents; the clergy undermined one

148

another; lay men became exhorters; and even women refused to keep silent in church . .

149

. .7 Many new light leaders, as the revivalist preachers were called, allowed women

150

to share their testimonies of conversion in public meetings.

151

Many of the early Baptist and Methodist meetings were out of doors, and this

152

female preaching was thus less offensive to traditional sensibilities than if it had taken

153

place in churches. Women acted as prayer leaders, exhorters, and finally preachers, but

154

as most meetings were held outdoors . . . the objections of those who might have been

155

offended if a women stood behind the pulpit were eased.8 Inside the church, women

156

were still not allowed to formally preach from the pulpit, but the Baptists, Methodists,

157

and the new light, Separate Congregationalists allowed women to function as

158

exhorters in meetings, sharing testimonies and information scriptural messages from

159

the pews. Again, this openness to prophesying and exhorting should not be confused

160

with women being ordained as elders or pastors.9

161
162

The role of women in speaking and exhorting in public generally diminished as

the revivals subsided. Periods of dynamic charisma and growth turn into times of
Catherine Brekus, Female Preaching in America: Strangers and Pilgrims 1740-1845
(Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1998).
7 Ibid., 34.
8 Wolff, Joseph, women, ordination of, in Encyclopedia of Protestantism (Gordon Melton,
2005), found at protestantism.enacademic.com/642/women, ordination of (accessed on
5/28/2013.)
9 Breckus, 48-51.
6

163

consolidation and institution building, where traditional roles reassert themselves.

164

Ironically, the revolutionary war period was a time of conventional gender roles even in

165

the new light churches. It was not until the beginnings of the Second Great

166

Awakening in the 1790s and early 1800s that women once again began to make an

167

appearance as exhorters and preachers.10

168

The Second Great Awakening saw even greater female involvement in both

169

exhorting and preaching than the First. Breckus documents about one hundred

170

evangelical women who preached in the revivals of late 18th and early 19th century

171

America, among a broad range of religious groups. The Christian Connection, the

172

Freewill Baptists, the Methodists, the African Methodists, and the Millerites allowed

173

women exhorters and preachers to address mixed crowds of men and women. At

174

times these were in outdoor and prayer meeting settings, but it also included the

175

preaching of sermons from pulpits.11

176

These religious groups existed on the edge of the social margins, and part of

177

their dissent against the establishment was in their willingness to allow a wider range

178

of religious voices, including womens, to be heard. Yet certain women preachers came

179

from, and preached to, more respectable audiences. Harriet Livermore was a gifted

180

evangelist and speaker, and was from a well-to-do family, the daughter and

181

granddaughter of U.S. Congressmen. She was invited to preach to overflow crowds in

182

the U.S. House of Representatives on four separate occasions between 1827 and 1843. 12

183

Breckus acknowledges, however, that these evangelical preachers from the

184

awakenings were biblical rather than secular feminists. Their arguments in favor of

185

women preaching were based on the Bible, rather than natural rights, and they believed

186

in what might be called a complementerian division of labor and authority. They never

187

asked for permission to baptize or give the Lords Supper. Nor did they broach the

188

forbidden topic of female ordination. As Livermore herself described her view of the

189

Bibles teaching on ordination, I conclude that it belongs only to the male sex. Though
Stanley J. Grenz, Women in the Church: A Biblical Theology of Women in Ministry
(Downers Gove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1995), 44-47.
11 Breckus, 7-11.
12 Breckus, 1, 12, 18.
10

190

she lived for another two decades after the Seneca Falls womens rights convention of

191

1848, she never demanded full leadership equality with men.13

192
193
194

B.

195

First Womens Rights Movement Mid-to-Late 19th Century

As the revivals of the Second Great Awakening waned, a movement for womens

196

political and social equality began to ferment in circles that had worked for slavery

197

abolition and temperance reform. Scholars point to the 1848 Seneca Falls convention

198

as the beginning of modern feminism in the United States. There were certainly

199

precursors to this event in England and Europe, and two distinct influences helped

200

instigate the movement, one religious, the other rooted in the egalitarian skepticism of

201

the French revolution.

202

Feminist scholars have recognized the important influence of evangelists Charles

203

Finneys practice of allowing men and women to pray aloud and exhort in public

204

religious gatherings.14 This religious heritage was seen at Seneca Falls in the active role

205

that religious Quaker women, such as Lucretia Mott, and the location itself, a Wesleyan

206

Methodist Chapel.15

207

But the other strand of skeptical influence was also well established by this time.

208

This strand harkened back to the likes of British author Mary Wollstonecraft, who

209

defended the French Revolution, lived in basically an open marriage, and wrote the

210

feminist touchstone, A Vindication of the Rights of Women.16 This secular approach to

211

the rights of women was well represented at Seneca Falls by the skeptical Elizabeth

212

Cady Stanton, who was later responsible for the provocative and revisionist The

213

Womens Bible. Published in the 1890s, this work viewed the Genesis creation account

214

as myth and fable, applauded the independence and natural curiosity of Eve, and

Breckus, 7.
Janet Wilson James, Women in American Religious History: An Overview, in Women
in American Religion (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1980), 7.
15 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seneca_Falls_Convention#Reform_movement
16 Bonnie Anderson, Joyous Greetings: The First International Womens Movement 18301860 (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000), 54-55.
13
14

215

advocated praying to the trinity of a heavenly Mother, Father, and Son.17

216

These religious and secular strands of the womens liberation movement existed

217

in uneasy tension for a time, until the secularist wing, led by Stanton as well as agnostic

218

Susan B. Anthony became the predominant influences in the 1880s and 90s. It was the

219

influence of these secular feminists that kept the biblical feminists like Harriet

220

Livermore and Ellen White at arms length from this movement, despite their shared

221

concerns on issues of slavery and temperance.

222

It is important to recognize that churches of this period were contending with at

223

least two versions of feminism. One took seriously scriptural teaching regarding the

224

roles of men and women, but felt that the roles had been too narrowly understood, in

225

preventing women from speaking and acting in public, whether in the church or in

226

society. This group still upheld male headship in the home, and often in the church as

227

well, generally retaining the role of ordained elder and pastor for men. This position is

228

often described as complementarianism.

229

The other kind of feminism proceeded from essentially philosophical

230

commitments to abstract notions of equality, and sought to treat men and women as

231

essentially interchangeable entities with little or no role differential. This position

232

would describe those egalitarians who reject male headship even in the home, as well

233

as the more extreme versions identified as secular or liberal feminism.

234

Depending on their biblical and social orientations, churches reacted similarly or

235

differently to both versions. In embracing a biblical feminism, allowing women

236

complementarian roles in teaching, preaching, and evangelism, a church may still have

237

rejected the secular version, which tended to call for equality in all areas of

238

leadership. A certain historical confusion has been created by an oversight of these

239

important distinctions.

240
241

C.

242

The late 19th century rise of fundamentalism and liberalism

The rise of the first womens rights movement was one symptom of an
Ibid., 168-172; New York Times, March 7, 1896, Mrs. W. Winslow Crannell. Her View of
the "Woman's Bible."; What a Correspondent Says of Objections: Offered to Work.
(viewed on June 9, 2013).
17

243

underlying ideological challenge to social, cultural and religious authority that also

244

provoked the religious responses that historians call fundamentalism and liberalism.

245

These two opposing, yet philosophically connected, religious responses impacted

246

basically all religious groups in America, and indeed in the West.18

247

Fundamentalism is typically associated with the biblical conservative and

248

socially insular reactions against evolution and Biblical higher criticism of the early 20th

249

century. Such reactions are seen in the 1878 Niagara Bible Conference Creed, the

250

Scopes Monkey Trial, where evolution was put on trial, and the twelve-volume set of

251

The Fundamentals, a defense of the Bible against higher criticism published between

252

1910 and 1915.19

253

Historians of fundamentalism have placed the core of fundamentalism, however,

254

a bit earlier than these events, when the doctrine of Biblical verbal inerrancy was

255

formulated in the sophisticated environs of Princeton University in the mid-19th

256

century.20 This occurred under the guidance of Professor Charles Hodge in the 1840s

257

and 50s, and then under his son Archibald Hodge, and his sons colleague Benjamin

258

Warfield, in the 1870s to the turn of the century.21 The Hodges and Warfield insisted on

259

verbal, dictation type of inspiration that was not part of historic Protestantism. Rather,

260

it was an innovation to meet the new scientific standards of objectivity required in the

261

minds of many in the modern age.

262

This attempt to completely objectify the Bible conflated the standards used in

263

the separate fields of empirical science and historical inquiry. It tried to hold Christian

264

belief to standards the Bible itself did not envision, and that science itself could not

For a discussion of how liberalism and fundamentalism actually draw on the same,
non-biblical, philosophical foundationalism, see Miller, Nicholas, Divided by Visions of
the Truth: The Bible, Epistemology, and the Adventist Community, Andrews University
Seminary Studies, Vol. 47, No. 2, 241-262 (2009).
19 Ernest R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism: British and American Millenerianism,
1800-1930 (Grand Rapids, MI: 1970), 140-141, 273-277.
20 Sandeen, 114-121; George Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture: The
Shaping of Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism 1870-1925 (New York, NY: Oxford
University Press, 1980), 5.
21 Mark Noll ed., The Princeton Theology: 1812-1921 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic,
1983, 2001), 30-33, 165-166, 218-220.
18

10

265

actually meet. This did not, however, deter the determined dogmatists.22 In their goal

266

to adhere to an objective and scientific model, the Princeton theologians developed a

267

biblical system that was rigid, inflexible, and socially conservative.

268

Charles Hodge wrote in defense of slavery, and in opposition to any public role

269

for women in the church, or in society at large for that matter. Not only was Hodge

270

opposed to womens ordination, but also to female preaching, and even womens

271

involvement in the reform and benevolence societies of the day.23 A few years later in

272

the 1880s, Benjamin Warfield supported the revival of the New Testament order of

273

deaconesses, so as to relieve the embarrassments we have had to stop [women] from

274

preaching in the Presbyterian churches. Warfield believed that Pauls injunctions

275

against women speaking in the churches were precise, absolute, and all inclusive.24

276

Not all biblically conservative churches held either to the verbal, dictation model

277

of scripture, nor to the Princetonians rigidly defined view of gender limitations. As we

278

have already discussed, a number of biblically conservative churches allowed for

279

womens public praying, exhortation, and even preaching. But as the strife between

280

liberals and fundamentalists began to heat up, more and more biblically conservative

281

denominations were influenced by both concepts of verbal inspiration, as well as

282

narrower gender roles.

283

An important point to recognize is that, as there were at least two types of

284

feminism in the 19th century, so there were at least two different views of gender roles

285

in most biblically-conservative churches. The Princetonian view, which worked its way

286

more broadly into fundamentalism and churches affected by it, had a very narrow and

287

circumscribed view of women in ministry. They forbade not just ordination, but also

288

women teaching and preaching in church, as well as taking other kinds of active, public

289

roles in mixed-gender settings.

290
291

This rigid and limited view of the womens role in the church and society is often
referred to as patriarchy (though this modern, fundamentalist model should not be
Sandeen, 116-118.
Margaret Lamberts Bendroth, Fundamentlism and Gender: 1875 to the Present (New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993), 35.
24 Ibid., 36.
22
23

11

292

identified with the Bibles description of the patriarchs). This fundamentalist

293

patriarchy stands in contrast to the practices of other biblically conservative churches

294

which, while not often accepting womens ordination to presiding elder or pastor, did

295

allow for a much more extensive role for women in preaching, evangelism, teaching,

296

and other kinds of leadership. This more flexible view has, as we earlier noted, been

297

referred to as complementarianism. (As we discuss below, a few biblically conservative

298

churches in this period did appear to accept, at least in theory, an egalitarianism, which

299

made no gender distinction in relation to church office.) As with the case of biblical

300

versus secular feminism, the failure to distinguish between patriarchal and

301

complementarian positions has also been the cause of much historical confusion. Our

302

Adventist pioneers were not, on the whole patriarchal, but defended the ability of

303

women to preach and evangelize in church, though they did not extend full pastoral

304

ordination to women. Thus, they held a classic complementarian position.

305

In the 1910s and 1920s, as fundamentalism spread, many churches that had

306

been complementarian in nature, with very active womens reformist, missionary, and

307

benevolence societies, became more patriarchal. These womens groups were often

308

placed under the oversight of committees controlled by men, or discontinued

309

altogether. This was often triggered as a reaction against liberal churches and factions

310

that advocated for the kind of full and total equality, or sameness of role and function, in

311

church that the secular feminists were calling for in civil society.25

312

This spread of liberal theology, with the movement to read Old Testament

313

stories as myths, and to view the New Testament as being heavily influenced by culture

314

in relation gender teachings, that opened up many of the mainline churches to full

315

gender equality, including all forms of ministry, preaching and ordination. As Chaves

316

notes, the first womens liberation movement dissipated by the 1920s. It did not

317

resurge until the late 1960s and 1970s.26 Yet ten major denominations implemented

318

womens ordination in the period from the late 1940s to the early 1960s, including

319

Reformed/Presbyterian churches and various Methodists.27

Bendroth, 55-60.
Chaves, 160-161.
27 Chaves, 16-17.
25
26

12

320

Some of this change can be attributed to the social upheavals caused by World

321

War II. But the leavening of the mainline denominations by higher Biblical criticism is

322

also an important part of the story. The spread of this liberal approach to the Bible was

323

enhanced by the rise of the ecumenical movement in the 1950s and 1960s, as a focus on

324

social justice, and a move away from strong biblical positions, made for a greater

325

possibility of unity among various branches of Protestantism.

326

But again, a distinction needs to be made between those churches, generally

327

mainline Protestant, that embraced a biblically liberal, feminist agenda, and those that

328

accepted egalitarian arguments from an essentially biblically conservative view, such as

329

Pentecostal, Weslyan Holiness churches, and African Methodist churches. Some

330

churches that allow for womens ordination, such as the Conservative

331

Congregationalists, are strongly opposed to any interfaith activity. As we will see in our

332

discussion of the various groups below, womens ordination did not necessarily go

333

hand-in-hand with biblical liberalism. While a correlation exists between biblically-

334

liberal denominations and womens ordination, to conflate the two would be a

335

historical mistake. We will take a closer look at these connections in our discussion of

336

the various groups below.

337
338

D. The Second Womens Rights Movement 1960s to 1970s

339

Unsurprisingly, the rise of a secular feminism in the mid-to-late 1960s and early

340

1970s produced a new wave of denominations adopting womens ordination, including

341

Presbyterians, many Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans, and Mennonites.28 This flurry of

342

changes ended in 1979, and with the rise of the conservative Reagan years, no more

343

major denominations made the switch throughout the 1980s or most of the 1990s.

344

Indeed, at least one major denomination, the Southern Baptists, reversed their position

345

on ordaining women pastors in the 1990s.29 It was during this second round of

346

womens rights advocacy that the issue of womens ordination became a significant one

347

for the Adventist church.

Chaves, 17.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Baptist_Convention#cite_ref-women_57-0
(viewed on 6/10/2013).
28
29

13

348

While another paper is being presented on Adventism and womens ordination,

349

it is worth noting here that it is quite apparent that Adventism during the early to mid

350

20th century had been influenced by fundamentalism, and moved from the

351

complementarian camp, into the patriarchal camp. This was evidenced by the almost

352

complete lack of female leadership in many church circles in the mid 20th century,

353

including the absence of women evangelists and preachers that were far more

354

common in the pioneer days.30 It was also shown by an unequal pay scale, contrary to

355

the counsels of Ellen White, which was afforded female employees. The Church

356

suffered an embarrassing legal defeat at the hands of a book editor, Merikay Silver,

357

during the 1970s, that helped begin to nudge it out of its patriarchal ways, and back

358

towards its complementarian roots.31

359
360

F. The New Civil Rights: Equality as Sameness - 1980s to the Present.

361

The second womens rights movement was one symptom of a larger cultural

362

shift in America that impacted a wide array of social issues in the late 60s and early 70s.

363

The turbulence of the anti-war demonstrations, the rise of a protest culture, the

364

outbreak of the sexual revolution, and the questioning of all gender rolesin short the

365

quest to break down all societal distinctions in the name of a broad-based notion of

366

equalityled to what has become almost a permanent cultural divide in our country

367

that has left no institution, public or private, untouched. The Stonewall Riots in

368

Greenwich Village, New York, in 1969 announced the beginnings of another kind of

369

gender revolutiongay rights.

370
371

This movement rapidly morphed from simply trying to remove criminal

penalties and the stigma of mental illness, to one that sought acceptance, legal and
This shift can be graphically seen on the wall outside the office of the Treasurer in the
General Conference building where pictures of all the GC Treasurers are hung. In
observing that wall, I noticed that in the first thirty years of the office during the late 19th
century, no less than three women served as GC Treasurer. Since the beginning of the
20th century, no women have served in that position. The influence of Fundamentalism
on Adventism in the 1920s and 30s, especially in terms of a rigid view of inspiration, has
been well documented by George Knight in his A Search for Identity: The Development of
Seventh-day Adventist Beliefs (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2000), 128-138.
31 http://www.vfa.us/MERIKAY%20McLEOD.htm (accessed on 6/10/2013).
30

14

372

social equality, and in more recent years, full marriage rights for LGBT couples.

373

Churches that had accepted womens ordination in the mid-to-late 20th century began

374

to experience pressure to normalize homosexual behavior, and even to ordain

375

practicing gays. Beginning in the 1980s, a number of churches, mostly mainline, liberal

376

denominations began to do so. This trend has continued into the 2000s, with the

377

Episcopal and the American Lutheran Church voting to ordain practicing gays in 2009.

378

However, a number of biblically conservative churches that ordain women have

379

resisted the acceptance of homosexuality.

380

These groups include the historically black African Methodist churches,

381

conservative Congregational churches, Pentecostal churches, and churches arising from

382

the Weslyan holiness tradition, including the Salvation Army. Thus, it is not historically

383

true to say that all churches that embrace womens ordination are also likely to

384

embrace homosexual practice. Much is dependent on the theological context and

385

reasons they use to move forward on ordination. There is some evidence, though, that

386

at least some of these conservative churches are facing greater internal challenges on

387

the issue of homosexuality than is faced in churchs that have not accepted womens

388

ordination. These issues will be looked at more closely as we examine the various

389

groups in the section below.

390
391

F. Four Historical Views

392

In telling the above history, at least four different approaches to gender and

393

leadership emerge. Understanding these four groups will help us understand the

394

evolving and shifting approaches of the various churches that we examine below. The

395

four approaches, just roughly outlined, are as follows:32

This chart is my own creation, though I draw on existing terminology for the four
categories. But in defining these categories, I draw from my reading of the history of the
various denominations and their differing approaches. These are rough historical
typologies, and there will be disagreement over how the elements of each category are
defined, and whether there other categories between these listed categories. But this
crude overview will give a general sense of how various churches have shifted over time.
32

15

396
View
Pre-Fall

Post-Fall

Home

Patriarchal/
Fundamentalist
Male headship;
Adam had
authority over
Eve
Male headship
intensified and
extended to all
elements of
church and
society
Man in charge of
spiritual and
temporal affairs;
women confined
to home matters

Church

Men in charge;
womens role
limited to
teaching
children and
other women

Society

Women should
not have public
roles

Complementary/
Evangelical
Male leadership &
representation;
each authority in
own roles, but no
authority over
Male headship
created; man is
primary leader of
family and
spiritual leader in
church
Man provides
oversight, but
woman in charge
of many things in
home; man first
among equal
partners
Men have primary
ecclesiastical
authority, but
women can teach,
preach, and
evangelize to all
audiences
Woman may have
public roles,
balanced with
domestic roles

Egalitarian/
Evangelical
gender roles;
but no
overall
leadership

Liberal/
Feminist
Roles entirely
based on
individual
capacities apart
from gender
Male
Male headship
headship
purely
results from
descriptive
fall; but only result of sin;
in family, not roles not gender
in church
related
Man provides Equal
oversight,
partnership
but woman
with roles based
in charge of
on skills and
many things; gifts, not gender
aim for equal
partnership
No gender
No gender roles
roles in
in relation to
relation to
any church
any church
offices or
offices or
positions
positions.
Gender
Gender makes
makes no
no difference
difference for for public life
public life

397
398

In discussing the various church groupings, we will discover that there is not only

399

a variety of the above views within a single grouping, but also that individual churches

400

move among several of the views over periods of time. Some churches have embraced all

401

four views, though usually at different times. A strong embrace by large factions of a

402

single denomination of differing views at the same time has usually led to schism.

403
404
405
16

406

II.

407

Church Groupings

A. Group 1 Historically Biblically Unorthodox Churches

408

The name of this group is not a subjective evaluation of the non-scriptural nature

409

of the groups teachings. Rather it is an assessment of the formal position the group holds

410

to the authority of the scriptures. So, this group includes those churches that have

411

historically rejected the divine or ultimate authority of the scriptures, such as: the

412

Unitarian/Universalists, theosophists, and spiritualists; groups that place the inner light

413

above scripture, such as the Quakers; or groups that place their own revelation as

414

superior to scripture, such as the Christian Scientists or Mormons. I do not include those

415

groups that have embraced biblical higher criticism, and have placed secular reason over

416

scripture, as most of these churches historically had higher commitments to scripture,

417

and will thus be discussed as part of the groups to which they originally belonged.33

418

The historically unorthodox group will not require much attention, as they are

419

least like the Adventist church. This group as a whole usually embraced womens

420

ordination early on, but has members that continue to oppose it, including the Mormons.

421

The LDS church lives on the border between the Patriarchal and Complementary views.

422

The reality is, that as most of the denominations within this group do not take the Bible as

423

supremely authoritative, when secular society or culture begins to press another way,

424

they rather readily follow. Thus, most of this group embraced womens ordained

425

leadership during the first round of womens rights in the late 19th century.

426

While this biblically unorthodox group that supports ordination exists, it is not the

427

direct historical impetus, template, or example that caused more biblically conservative

428

churchs to consider, and at times adopt, womens ordination. Indeed, most conservative

429

evangelical churches were openly critical of all these unorthodox groups. That these

430

groups were among the first to ordain women would have made most of the evangelical

431

churches less likely, not more, to adopt it themselves. Thus, it is not correct that the

432

womens equality movement came into the biblically-conservative Christian churches

For an overview of a number of various unorthodox, outsider groups in relation to
female leadership, see Bednarowski, Mary Farrell, Outside the Mainstream: Womens
Religion and Women Religious Leaders in Nineteenth-Century America, Journal of the
American Academy of Religion, XLVIII/2, 207-231.
33

17

433

primarily or even secondarily through spiritualism or mysticism, as some at times argue.

434

Any such influence will be very indirect, tenuous, and peripheral, if it can be shown to

435

exist at all.

436

B. Group 2 Sacramental and High Churches

437

Another group far removed from Adventism in history and theology is the

438

churches that embrace some form of sacramentalism in their theology and ritual. This

439

group, made up mostly of Catholics and Eastern Orthodox, also includes some high

440

church Protestants, such as Anglo-Catholics and some conservative Lutherans. Churches

441

that are sacramental believe that the ordinances, such as communion and baptism, are

442

means of physically transferring the grace and presence of God to the participating

443

believer, rather than just being a symbol of an underlying spiritual reality.34

444

In the sacramental churches, the form and manner of the performance of the ritual

445

is a key part of the function, and the manner can extend to the identity of the priest or

446

officiant, which includes his gender. The priest is understood to be iconic of Christ, and

447

as his agent, must resemble him in various ways, including his maleness. As Chaves

448

notes, by this logic, it is literally impossible for a woman to be a priest; the sacrament if

449

performed by a woman, would not be valid.35 Those churches that embrace

450

sacramentalism also have a strong regard for the authoritative role of tradition. The

451

tradition of male-priesthood, and of arguments like the iconic argument, which it rooted

452

in tradition rather than the New Testament, are given very strong weight in these

453

denominations. It would appear to be this tradition, as much as, if not more than, the

454

logic of sacramentalism, that causes them to persist with male-only ordination.

455

Because of the strength of this sacramental tradition, very few historically

456

sacramental churches have considered the womens ordination option. The few that have

457

are those that represent a broad outlook on the sacraments within their denominations.

458

For instance, the Anglican and Episcopal churches are well known for being home to a

459

wide range of theological persuasions, from evangelical, to moderate, to high church. It

460

turns out that the two opposite wings, the biblically conservative evangelical wing, and

461

the high church, Anglo-Catholic wing, both oppose womens ordination, though for
34
35

Chaves, Ordaining Women, 84-85, fn. 2.

Ibid., 86.
18

462

different reasonsthe high church group for reasons relating to sacrament and tradition,

463

the evangelical wing for reasons relating to biblical teaching. The moderate middle,

464

which had a lower view of both scripture and tradition, quite overwhelmingly favored the

465

ordination of women at nearly 72% clergy support.36

466

As the moderate, biblically-liberal middle group expanded, and the pressure from

467

the second womens equality movement of the 1960s and 1970s increased, resistance to

468

ordination was overcome, especially in those countries where church tradition and

469

history was not strong, such as the English-speaking countries outside of Britain. The

470

American and Canadian Anglican/Episcopal Churches approved ordination in 1976,

471

followed by New Zealand in 1977. In 1992, the Church of England did so, followed by

472

many other Anglican/Episcopal churches around the world.37 Currently, most of these

473

churches are expanding womens leadership role to include bishop and higher. At the

474

same time, ordination is also being opened to actively gay priests and bishops

475

Adventism is historically neither sacramental nor iconic in its understanding of

476

communion or baptism. The underlying temptation to reify and sacralize symbols and

477

signs is a temptation for all believers, including Adventists, and we need to be careful not

478

to endow any religious ritual or practice or person with more spiritual authority and

479

power than is biblically appropriate. But as a historical matter, the sacramental and

480

traditional arguments for male leadership in the church are not those that have

481

historically caused the Adventist church to ordain only men to the gospel ministry.

482

Rather, Adventists have far more in common with the evangelical wing of Anglicanism,

483

which has centrally biblical concerns about the issue.

484

Both the conservatives and the progressives need to be cautious about over-

485

using the sacramental churches as an example or foil for their respective positions. It is

486

simply not true, as some progressives propose, that Adventists that oppose womens

487

ordination are drawing on, either explicitly or implicitly, sacramental or traditionally

488

iconic arguments. Indeed, conservatives are more likely to be influenced away from
Nason-Clark, Nancy, Ordaining Women as Priests: Religious vs. Sexist Explanations for
Clerical Attitudes, Sociological Analysis 1987, 48, 3:264-65, 268.
37http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordination_of_women_in_the_Anglican_Communion#Firs
t_ordinations (viewed on 6/25/2013).
36

19

489

these arguments precisely because they clash with underlying commitments to the

490

authority of scripture and the priesthood of believers.

491

On the other hand, conservatives need to be cautious in using the Anglicans move

492

to ordaining homosexuals as a logical outcome of the arguments for ordination in

493

Adventism. Anglicans embrace of female ordination had to do with the rejection of

494

certain sacramental arguments based on tradition rather than scripture. The underlying

495

theological center of the Anglican Church has been, for the last century or so, quite far on

496

the liberal end. Notwithstanding the Anglican evangelical wing, ennobled by such names

497

as C.S. Lewis and John Stott, the Churchs conservative cultural practices were the result

498

of the weight of social establishment inertia rather than meaningful scriptural

499

commitment.

500

This lack of a scriptural anchor allowed the church to go, in a few short years, from

501

a relatively extreme patriarchy, to a feminist liberalism, leaping entirely over the

502

evangelical options of complementarianism and egalitarianism in between. Without a

503

commitment to the biblical teaching, as the social forces of the 60s and 70s undermined

504

the social establishment, so the Churchs commitments were undermined with it, leading

505

on into the gay rights revolution of the 1990s and 2000s, with a similar result for the

506

church.38

507

The Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox, some conservative Lutherans, and various

508

breakaway Anglican groups show that commitment to the traditions of sacramentalism,

509

apart from a high view of scripture, can continue to hold at bay both womens ordination

510

and gay rights. But these successes should not cause us to aspire to a sacramental

511

theology; neither should their failures cause us to immediately accuse those with

512

conservative biblical arguments for womens ordination of following in the biblically-

513

liberal sacramentarians inevitable slide into acceptance of homosexuality. While the

514

sacramenterians may provide some lesson for both sides, we are following very different

515

theological pathways from them, and should be very careful in over-applying any lessons

516

from their stories.

517
38http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordination_of_women_in_the_Anglican_Communion#Firs

t_woman_bishop_and_primate (viewed on 6/25/2013.)

20

518
519

C. Group 3 Calvinist/Reformed Churches

Somewhat closer to the Adventist heritage, but still a step or two removed, is that

520

part of the magisterial reformation represented by the churches associated with the

521

Calvinist/Reformed tradition. With a high view of Gods sovereignty and power, and a

522

low view of human nature and natural ability, representative churches from this tradition

523

include Presbyterians, Congregationalists (the denomination of the early American

524

Puritans), and the particular Baptists. Their view of scripture is particularly interesting,

525

as they have tended, as a group, to oscillate between extremes, moving at times from a

526

rigid biblical fideism to an extreme liberal view of scripture.

527

After the period of the First Great Awakening in the mid-18th century, and partially

528

responding to the civilly enforced biblical conservatism of the New England

529

Congregationalists, certain pastors within that denomination began pushing back, and

530

experimenting with theories of universalism and Unitarianism. Eventually, they

531

developed both the Unitarian and Universalist denominations, and also contributed to the

532

theologically liberal, panentheist, transcendentalist movement of the early 19th century.

533

These were among the first groups to embrace womens ordination.

534

The biblically conservative reformed churches tended to embrace a rather

535

extreme patriarchal outlook, forbidding not only womens ordination, but also opposing

536

women preaching or teaching in mixed public settings. That Antoinette Brown, the first

537

woman ordained in America, was a Congregationalist minister says much more about the

538

polity of the church than its theology. Due to its congregational organization, a local,

539

liberal church, could take ordain a woman, but as a whole, Congregationalists were quite

540

opposed to womens ministry.

541

Indeed, as we discussed in the historical section, the extreme biblical conservatism

542

of the Congregational theologians at Princeton, where verbal inerrancy was developed,

543

went hand-in-hand with a social conservatism that forbade women from teaching,

544

preaching, and other public roles. This combination of Biblical rigidity and social

545

conservatism was bequeathed to the larger fundamentalists movement, which was

546

looking for weapons with which to push back against the liberal higher Biblical criticism

547

coming over from Germany in the late 19th century.

548

The Princetonian verbal inerrancy provided one response to the liberal assault.
21

549

But many denominations did not see the liabilities that came with it: an artificially rigid

550

view of scripture, a socially conservative outlook, and a strongly patriarchal view of the

551

role of women. As we will see below, many non-reformed denominations that were at

552

least complementarian in their orientation in the mid-to-late 19th century, including, as

553

earlier discussed, Seventh-day Adventists, moved over into a version of patriarchy in the

554

early 20th century, because of the influence of the new fundamentalistic outlook.

555

The Presbyterians and Congregationalists themselves were quite impacted by

556

their own extreme positions. The dogmatism and inflexibility of the conservatives led to

557

a schism, with the most conservative group starting their own seminary and church. This

558

conservative breakaway survived, but did not flourish. With only moderates and liberals

559

remaining in the main Presbyterian Church, the balance of power shifted towards the

560

liberal side of the church. It is this that explains the eventual acceptance of womens

561

ordination by most Presbyterians in 1956.39

562

The mid-20th century was an unusual time for a gender change, as it fell between

563

womens rights movements, the first of which dissipated by the 1920s, the second of

564

which did not ramp up until the late 1960s and 1970s. The timing is explained by the

565

growing influence of biblically liberal theology, which by the 1950s had gained sufficient

566

traction to implement liberal values. Similar things were happening with some of the

567

other mainline denominations, including the Reformed Church (1948) and the

568

Methodists (1956), as the results of the fundamentalist/liberal split continued to play

569

itself out in the American churches. These same churches have, in the period of equality

570

since the 1990s, also accepted the gay rights movement.

571

A number of conservative reformed churches split off, and continued with a

572

conservative Biblical outlook, but there numbers are quite small (50,000) compared with

573

the main Presbyterian churches (1.9 million.) It is worth noting that, while they are quite

574

small, the conservative reformed churches are growing, whereas the main Presbyterian
A good discussion of the process from the progressive view can be found at Carson,
Mary & Price, James, The Ordination of Women and the Function of the Bible, Journal of
Presbyterian History, 59:2 (Summer, 1981), 250-256, and the conservative view of the
story can be found at Smith, Frank, Petticoat Presbyterianism: A Century of Debate in
American Presbyterianism on the Issue of the Ordination of Women, Westminster
Theological Journal 51: (1989), 51-76.
39

22

575

churches are rather rapidly dwindling. The conservative reformed churches have also

576

generally accepted the possibility of womens ordination, though leave it up to the local

577

church, the vast majority of which have not chosen to implement it. These conservative

578

Presbyterian churches, however, despite being open to womens ordination, have

579

continued to strongly resist the gay rights movement. Given their limited size and

580

history, however, their continued viability as a major conservative denomination is in

581

question.40

582

While there exist distinct theological differences between Adventists and the

583

reformed churches, their experiences hold deeply important lessons for all Adventists.

584

We have in one church an illustration of the danger of both strongly conservative,

585

patriarchal positions, and liberal, feminist positions. It can be tempting sometimes, for

586

conservatives to believe that inflexibility will prevent us from heading down a slippery

587

slope. But at times, it is that very inflexibility that actually provokes a strong opposite

588

reaction, leading to the very consequences one hoped to avoid.

589

The Biblical rigidity and conservatism of the reformed movement lead, at least in

590

part, to both the universalist/Unitarian excesses of the early 19th century, and to the

591

liberal excesses of the 20th century. It was the reformed theologians and leaders of the

592

19th century that most fiercely defended an artificially rigid view of scriptural inspiration

593

and an overly patriarchal view of gender roles. The result of their efforts were, as a

594

historical matter, the very liberal mainline reformed liberalism of the mid-to-late 20th

595

century. It is true that extreme can easily produce extremes. Like the sacramental

596

churches, the reformed churches tended to go from a conservative patriarchy to a liberal

597

feminism, to the extent of embracing gay rights, in a matter of a few decades, largely

598

jumping over the middle-ground positions of complementarianism or egalitarianism.

599

There are some exceptions within the reformed tradition, but these conservative

600

churches tend to be quite few in number and unable to speak for the denomination as a

601

whole, or even in major part.

602
603

The lesson for Adventists does not require much explication. Indulging a strong
patriarchy will not protect the church from a slippery slide into liberalism, but rather
See the descriptions in the attached Appendix of the Presbyterian and Reformed
Churches.
40

23

604

could be the kind of push that would hasten that in some parts of the church. We need to

605

carefully understand our complementarian roots, and affirm womens ministry and

606

leadership, even as we look for biblically appropriate and faithful ways to do so. A

607

defense of the patriarchal status quo, as the history of the reformed churches shows, will

608

be an inadequate, and even harmful, response to the present crisis over gender and

609

leadership in our church.

610

D. Group 4 Methodism - Holiness/Pentecostal/Black Churches

611

A closer step still to Adventism are the constellation of churches growing out of

612

the Methodist/Wesleyian tradition, from which many of our pioneers came, including

613

Ellen White. These churches are characterized by an Arminian/free will orientation, an

614

emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit in a changed life of the believer, and, at least

615

historically, a high view of scriptural authority, all elements that characterize Adventism.

616

Examples of this group include the various Methodist churches, the Wesleyans

617

holiness churches, and the various Pentecostal churches, which had their roots in the

618

holiness movement. The historically black American denominations are almost all

619

connected historically with Methodism, as shown by the Methodist and/or Episcopal

620

labels that often appear in their names. This is the hardest group to make generalizations

621

about, as the various sub-groups handled the gender and leadership quite differently.

622

The mainstream Methodists tended to be true to their sacramentally-influenced Anglican

623

roots. Early on Wesley and other Methodist leaders allowed for women preachers and

624

exhorters under extraordinary circumstances, but they did not ordain women to the

625

pastoral role until the liberalizing of their theology in the 1950s and 1960s.41

626

The Wesleyan holiness and Pentecostal churches, with their emphasis on the

627

importance of the influence and gifts of the Holy Spirit, tended to minimize role

628

differentials, and elevate the importance of the unction of the Holy Spirit in choosing

629

whomever it would. The holiness churches and the Pentecostals were among the earliest
John Wesley cautiously supported at least some women preachers as an
extraordinary call of God to a position generally reserved for men. Jacqueline FieldBibb, Women Towards Priesthood (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 1013. But such an extraordinary call did not extend to the actual office of pastor. As one
early Methodist leader put it, but in this extraordinary call I do not consider any female
strictly and fully called to the pastoral office . . . Ibid., 13-14.
41

24

630

biblically conservative denominations to ordain women as preachers, pastors and elders.

631

The Salvation Army began ordaining women in 1870, the Wesleyan Methodist Church in

632

1891, and various Pentecostal churches in the early 1900s.

633

Progressives like to emphasize the apparently egalitarian position of the

634

holiness/Pentecostal churches, a position they held along with a generally conservative

635

approach to scripture, and a rejection of higher biblical criticism. But this is not the

636

whole story. These churches tended to be a combination of complementarian and

637

egalitarian, upholding women in various kinds of ministry, but also holding to the

638

doctrine of male headship, especially in the home. Thus, the Salvation Army, despite

639

ordaining both men and women, never allowed a woman to outrank her husband, and

640

considered the wife the ministerial assistant of the husband, subject to his oversight.42

641

Similarly, nearly all of the Pentecostal groups drew a distinction between

642

prophetic and priestly leadership. The former had to do with preaching and teaching, the

643

latter with church administration and administrative oversight. All Pentecostal groups

644

were united, at least at their beginnings, in allowing women the prophetic role of

645

preaching and evangelism. But most of them reserved roles of administrative oversight

646

within the church for men. These groups followed the model of having two tracks of

647

ministry: licensed ministers, which could include women, who could preach, teach and

648

evangelize; and ordained ministers, limited to men, who could baptize, organize churches,

649

and ordain elders and pastors.43

650

Historians and scholars of the modern gender debate often overlook these

651

meaningful gender distinctions in the holiness and Pentecostal groups.44 They report on
Stanley, Susie, The Promise Fulfilled: Womens Ministries in the Wesleyan/Holiness
Movement, in Religious Institutions and Womens Leadership: New Roles Inside the
Mainstream, ed. Wessinger, Catherine (Columbia, SC: South Carolina Press, 1996), 148.
43 Barfoot, Charles & Sheppard, Gerald, Prophetic vs. Priestly Religion: The Changing role
of Women Clergy in Classical Pentecostal Churches, Review of Religious Research, Vol. 22,
No. 1 (September), 10-12.
44 For example, while he accepts that a number of holiness churches were
complementarian, Chaves simply states that the Salvation Army starting ordaining
women in 1870, and had granted full formal equality to women from its beginning.
Chaves, 98, 114-115. But this is to overlook the public women limitations a women
experience in the Salvation Army if she was married. See, Stanley, Susie, The Promise
Fulfilled, 148.
42

25

652

the acceptance of women preaching and teaching and working in a pastoral role, and

653

assume or imply that full equality was the rule or norm. When this is deviated from

654

among these groups, it is often blamed on external fundamentalist influences that began

655

to impact all biblically conservative denominations from the early 1900s forward. But

656

this is simply not the case, as most of the holiness and Pentecostal churches had these

657

distinctions from their early days.

658

As one scholar has noted, early on, with the exception of the Church of the

659

Foursquare Gospel, the Pentecostal denominations prevented women from performing a

660

minimal, negotiated set of priestly functions.45 Some groups moved towards full

661

equality, and then as quickly moved back again, as they emphasized first the prophetic,

662

then priestly aspects of ministry. It seems that biblically conservative groups, such as the

663

pentecostals, are at most ambivalent and conflicted over a purely egalitarian position, and

664

frequently move back toward a complementarian view, either in theory, or in practice, or

665

both.46

666

It is true that as fundamentalism began to impact American conservative

667

Christianity more broadly, that Pentecostal and holiness groups were impacted by its

668

inherent patriarchy, as were the Adventists. These groups not only moved away from

669

women licensed ministers, but even away from allowing women public positions of

670

leadership at all, and even limited their preaching and teaching.47 Still, these groups had

671

a much higher percentage of female participation in leadership than other groups.

672

Though whether this was from choice or necessity, or some combination of the two, is

673

uncertain. Pentecostal churches had a percentage of women membership about 10%

674

higher than other denominations. In the 1920s and 30s, this meant that women made up

675

nearly 2/3 of the Pentecostal denominations, whereas in other denominations, they

Barfoot & Sheppard, Prophetic vs. Priestly Religion, 5.
Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture (Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 2001), 170-176; as one women scholar put it, males founded
Pentecostalism, and males dominate the leadership roles in Pentecostalism . . . [and]
generally dominate the public and political aspects of Pentecostalism. Elaine Lawless,
No So Different a Story After All: Pentecostal Women in the Pulpit, in Womens
Leadership in Marginal Religions, ed. Wessinger, Catherine (Chicago, IL: University of
Illinois Press, 1993), 41.
47Chaves, 109-113; Stanley, Susie, The Promise Fulfilled, 148-150.
45
46

26

676

accounted for a little more than half.48

677

While not embracing an explicitly patriarchal position, in practice many churches,

678

including the Adventists,49 in the 1920s and 30s moved to a semi-patriarchal position.

679

Male ministers and preachers became strongly preferred over women. But the influence

680

of this creeping patriarchy, baleful as it was, should not be allowed to obscure the fact

681

that many holiness/Pentecostal churches were originally, as the early Adventist church

682

was, much more complementarian in their outlook and practices, rather than being

683

purely egalitarian, as they are at times portrayed today.

684

The African American churches have their own story, shaped by their rise from the

685

conditions of slavery, and from the continuing discrimination found in the white churches

686

they initially entered. Resistance to the abusive hierarchy that constantly surrounded

687

them tended to make black Americans suspicious of any hierarchy or hint of

688

discrimination. From early days, they welcomed women as exhorters and prophesiers,

689

and at least one of the major denominations, the African Methodist Episcopal Zion

690

Church, ordained women pastors as early as 1898. A number of the others followed in

691

the 1950s and 1960s, including the AME Church and the CME Church.50 All of these

692

churches, however, have remained strongly resistant to homosexual practices.

693

It is important to note, though, that while the black churches have been supportive

694

of black female leadership in theory, in practice these biblically conservative

695

denominations show a preference at the local level for male pastors. In most of the

696

historically black churches, despite accepting female equality for a half to a full century,

697

female pastors typically represent about 3% of the pastorate.51 There are, it seems, a

698

higher percentage of ordained women elders in these churches. But it is interesting also

699

to note that while most evangelical churches are at about 60% to 2/3rds women, black

Wacker, Heaven Below, 161.

See Supra, p. 13.
50 Chaves records the AME Church as accepting women pastors in 1960 (Chaves, 17), but
Jualynne Dodson, in a scholarly article on the AME Church, gives the date as 1948.
Dodson, Jualynne, Womens Ministries and the African Methodist Episcopal Tradition,
in Religious Institutions and Womens Leadership: New Roles Inside the Mainstream, ed.,
Wessinger, Catherine (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1996), 124-125.
51 See Appendix description of the AME churches.
48
49

27

700

churches are generally about 75% female to 25% male.52 Whether this gender disparity

701

necessitates a greater allowance of women leadership, or whether female leadership is

702

somehow partly causative of the disparity, are interesting questions that would require

703

further study to resolve.

704

E. Group 5 Restorationist Churches Anabaptist, Baptist, Adventist

705

In the final group are those churches that are least dependent, at least overtly, on

706

tradition and creed, and most open to overturning practices that are not established on

707

the Bible. The Restorationist movement in early 19th century America included groups

708

coming out of a variety of churches and identifying themselves simply as the Christians,

709

or the Christian Connection. These were the roots of some of the Churches of God, as

710

well as some segments of the Disciples of Christ. Joseph Bates and James White were

711

affiliated with the Christian Connection before they became Adventists, bringing the non-

712

creedal spirit with them.

713

These Restorationist groups had a very similar outlook and approach as another

714

group that started at the beginnings of the Protestant Reformation, the evangelical

715

Anabaptists. This group of radical Protestants had a high view of scripture, and a desire

716

to build the church from scratch, completely apart from the civil state. The heirs of this

717

early group include the Mennonites, Brethren, and the Baptists.53 I have thus included

718

these and their related denominations in the Restorationist group.

719

Despite feeling entirely free, and even opposed to, social convention, at least

720

where it differed from biblical teachings, the Restorationist groups were generally

721

complementarian in their gender outlooks. The Baptists, for instance, early on had a good

722

number of women preachers and evangelists, but did not ordain them as presiding elders.

723

In fact, it was the Baptists who began the practice in America of licensing women

724

preachers, rather than ordaining them, in 1815.54 Baptists typically have a highly
The Pew Forum U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, May 8 to Aug., 13, 2007.
Baptists are divided into Calvinist/Predestinarian and free-will groups, and a number
of the Calvinist Baptist groups are probably best thought of as part of the
Calvinist/Reformed group discussed above.
54 Blevins, Carolyn DeArmond, Women and the Baptist Experience, Religious Institutions
and Womens Leadership: New Roles Inside the Mainstream, ed. Wessinger, Catherine
(Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1966), 172-173.
52
53

28

725

congregational polity, and it is not uncommon for individual congregations to move

726

ahead on certain issues without full denominational support. Thus, various Baptist

727

churches appear on the list of ordaining women pastors from the 1890s through the

728

1920s.55

729

The reality was, though, that the vast majority of Baptists churches were not

730

ordaining women, but rather opposed the idea. This changed somewhat in 1964, when

731

the largest Baptist group, the Southern Baptist Convention, voted to ordain women. In

732

the following years, however, the SBC reconsidered its action, and in the 1980s and

733

1990s, rolled that decision back. While some local congregations persist, the SBC has

734

made the family and male headship a fundamental belief, and some churches are

735

disciplined if they choose to ordain female pastors.56

736

Another major restorationist church is the Disciples of Christ, tracing their

737

heritage to the movements shepherded by Barton Stone and the father and son

738

Campbells. In their early days, these groups were complementarian, but in the late

739

1880s, the relatively large and successful Disciples of Christ chose to ordain women. The

740

movement continued to flourish into the 1920s and 30s, but it went the way of the

741

mainline Protestant denominations, being leavened by higher biblical criticism, and

742

becoming active in the ecumenical movement. After the 1950s, it experiences a rather

743

precipitous decline, going from more than 2 million members, to somewhere around

744

600,000 today. The church has also become open to homosexual practices, with various

745

regions and localities of the church opening up to membership for openly practicing gays

746

and lesbians.57

747

A group very close to the Seventh-day Adventist church is the Advent Christian

748

churches. These came out of the Great Disappointment, and did not adopt the Sabbath or

749

the Sanctuary, but continued on preaching the Advent. This group adopted womens

750

ordination in 1860, one of the first churches to do so on a denominational basis. This

751

group has generally decided Biblically conservative, I can find no evidences of meaningful
See Appendix.
See Appendix.
57http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Church_%28Disciples_of_Christ%29#Members
hip_trends; http://www.gladalliance.org/open-affirming/directory (viewed on July 3,
2013.)
55
56

29

752

connections to gay rights issues. But if there is anything that characterizes the church as

753

a whole, it is utter stagnation.

754

The Advent Christians numbered about 25,000 in 1850, when the Seventh-day

755

Adventists numbered about 5,000. In 1925, the Advent Christians still numbered about

756

25,000, whereas the SDAs had grown to more than 110,000.58 Today, when SDAs are

757

around 1 million in America and 17 million worldwide, the Advent Christians still

758

number about 25,000 in North America, with only an additional 100,000 claimed

759

overseas.59

760

It would not be historically sound to blame the stagnation of the Advent Christians

761

on their approach to issues of gender and leadership. But it is fair to point out that

762

groups with similar roots to Adventism have not found a purely egalitarian approach to

763

issues of gender and leadership to be a church-growth enhancer. Indeed, the consistent

764

pattern within the Restorationist group is that the churches that are the fastest growing,

765

the Southern Baptists and the Seventh-day Adventists, have pursued a complementarian,

766

and at times quasi-patriarchal model. On the other hand, the churches that were earliest

767

and first to embrace egalitarianism have generally either experienced no growth over the

768

last century, such as the Adventists or the American Baptists Churches, or had precipitous

769

decline, as seen by the Disciples of Christ.

770

One of the few exceptions to the decline or stagnation in progressive gender

771

denominations seems to be the Mennonite Church USA, though they cannot be fairly be

772

called early adopters. It was not until 1973 that they allowed for womens ordination, but

773

since that time they have continued to grow at a moderate pace. The Mennonite Church

774

USA, however, is of relatively small size, about 105,000 in 2009, so its experience may be

775

hard to generalize from. It also seems that, while formally opposing homosexual practice,

776

that there has been significant internal agitation in the Mennonite Church USA to change

777

its stance on sexual practices. (See the appendix.)

778

Conclusion
http://www.thearda.com/Denoms/D_1108.asp;
http://www.thearda.com/Denoms/D_1101.asp (viewed on 7/3/2013.)
59 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advent_Christian_Church#Statistics (viewed on
7/3/2013.)
58

30

779

The above stories challenge aspects of both the liberal and conservative telling of

780

history in relation to gender, leadership, and the Church. It is simply not true that only

781

biblically liberal churches have accepted womens ordination, or that ordaining women

782

necessarily leads to more liberal biblical views, such as the embrace of higher criticism or

783

homosexuality. But it is true that churches that liberalize their theology do almost

784

inevitably embrace womens ordination, and then many do continue on to embrace

785

homosexuality. And it also appears to be true that biblically conservative churches that

786

ordain women do face greater internal agitation on the question of homosexual practice.

787

But, as we can see especially from the history of the Presbyteriansthe

788

originators of views of verbal inspiration and inerrancy and promoters of patriarchy

789

taking extreme defensive positions in relation to gender and leadership actually can have

790

the opposite effect, and result in pushing major portions of the church towards the

791

opposite extreme of liberal, feminist, often pro-gay, equality. On the other hand,

792

ordaining women to stay up with the times and to remain culturally relevant appears also

793

to have the opposite effect. There is greater correlation between embrace of gender

794

equality in leadership and membership stagnation or even decline.

795

Ultimately, the appropriate approach to gender and leadership within the church

796

must be decided by reference to Biblical teaching, and not by the lessons of culture or

797

history. But an understanding of history and culture can help us understand the range of

798

possible biblical approaches. It can also open our minds to the truth that certain readings

799

of the Bible are driven more by the influence of either tradition (in the case of the

800

patriarchal camp) or culture (in the matter of the liberal feminist camp). It can reveal

801

that even the more moderate complementarian and egalitarian groups are haunted and

802

somewhat shaped by those two extremes. Whatever dtente or concord is reached

803

within the Adventist church between the two moderate camps, all needs to be sensitive to

804

and guard against the pitfalls found on either extremeand open to the importance of

805

achieving a biblically-faithful balance between gender roles and the principle of gender

806

fairness, both of which are taught in Scripture.

807

31

Appendix
U.S. Churches that Ordain Women, Their Stance Towards Homosexuality,
and Their Growth Patterns
Church1

Ordain Women

United Church of
Christ (Mainline
Congregationalists)

Yes 1853
(though not
widespread until
the 1920s)
Some Left to local
church.

Conservative
Congregational
Christian Conf.
Advent Christian
Church
Universalist
Church of America
Christian Church
(General
Convention)
Salvation Army

American
Unitarian
Association

Accept
Homosexual
Practice?
Since 1985,
generally, yes.3
No

Yes - 1860

No

Yes 1863

Yes

Yes - 1867

Yes since 1985 as

merged with UCC
in 1957
No

Yes 1870 (though

women serve in
positions subject to
husband)
Yes - 1871

Yes 1984

Growth North
America2
About 1 million
and declining 2
million at time of
merger in 19574
About 50,000 and
growing split
from Mainline in
1945
About 25,000 and
static since 1925
About 160,000
Part of UCC
400,000 in U.S.; 1.4
million worldwide
regular growth
About 215,000
decline from about
500,000 in 1970s

The listed churches are based on the list found in Chavez, Ordaining Women, 16-17.
Accept where otherwise noted, church size statistics taken from The Association of
Religious Date Archives at http://www.thearda.com/Denoms/D_1425.asp
3http://www.ucc.org/lgbt/;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denomi
national_positions_on_homosexuality#United_Church_of_Christ
4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Church_of_Christ#Membership (viewed on
6/2013)
1
2

Church of God
(Anderson)

Yes 1885

Disciples of Christ

Yes 1888

Church of the
United Brethren in
Christ

Yes - 1889

Weslyan Methodist
Church

Yes 1891

Methodist
Protestant Church

Yes 1892

National Baptist
Convention, USA
(historically black)

Yes - 1895

Pentecostal
Holiness Church

Yes 1895,
preaching and
teaching, but
women not to hold
all leadership
positions
1897 - preaching

Pilgrim Holiness

No5

About 250,000,
steady growth
except last 10
years
Some - Decided
About 660,000;
regionally and ,
declining from a
locally6
high of nearly 2
million in 1950s
Not church wide,
23,000 no
but a number of
meaningful growth
congregations
over last century
endorse7
or so.
Formally, no, but
Some growth;
practice appears to
merger in 1968
vary with locality.8
with Wesleyan
Church
Formally, no, but Merged into United
practice appears to Methodist Church
vary with locality.9
declined by
nearly 50% in last
50 years
10
Generally not
5 million mostly
steady growth
through 20th
century
No.
330, 000 in U.S.;
3.4 million
worldwide
steady growth
No.

About 32,000

5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominational_positions_on_hom

osexuality#Summary_of_denominational_positions_in_North_America_and_Europe
6 http://www.accsd.org/site/page/christian-church-disciples-of-christ
7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominational_positions_on_hom
osexuality#Mennonite_Churches
8 http://www.unitedmethodistreporter.com/2012/08/conferences-react-to-umcstance-on-gay-issues/
9 http://www.unitedmethodistreporter.com/2012/08/conferences-react-to-umcstance-on-gay-issues/
10 http://www.nbc12.com/story/19809729/baptist-church-ordains-gay-manasked-to-leave-baptist-group
2

Church

AME Zion Church

Friends United
Northern Baptist
Convention aka
American Baptist
Churches in USA
Church of the
Nazarene
(Pentecostal)
Baptist General
Conference
Cumberland
Presbyterian
Church
Churches of God,
General

and teaching, but

women not to hold
all leadership
positions
1898 formally,
yes, but in practice,
very limited, less
than 3% female
clergy in
historically Black
churches
1902

when merged with

Wesleyan Church
in 1968
No.

1.4 million
dramatic growth
through 20th
century, but
decline over last
decade

Generally
Opposed11

About 35,000,
decline of 50%
since early 1900s
1.3 million
declined by
200,000 over the
last fifty years.
640,000 in US;
steady growth

190712 - Mixed,
decided locally

No13

1908

No

1918 mixed,
decided locally
1921

No
Generally
Opposed14

1923

195,000; steady
growth
About 65,000; 40%
decline over last 40
years.
32,000; stagnation
over last century

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Quakerism#North_America
http://www.abc-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/ordain.pdf
13 http://www.abc-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/homosexuality.pdf
14 http://johnvest.com/2010/07/26/what-the-pcusa-could-learn-fromcumberland-presbyterians/
11
12

Conference
Community
Churches, Int.
Council
General
Association of
General Baptists
International
Church of the
Foursquare Gospel
Assemblies of God

Open Bible
Standard Churches
(Pentecostal)
Evangelical and
Reformed Church
aka United Church
of Christ
Presbyterian
Church in the USA
(North)

15

1923

Yes15

1925 - Mixed,
decided locally
About 8% in
200216
1927

Generally Not17

193519

No20

1935

No

1948

Yes

1956

Yes.

No18

69,000; decline of
60% over last 30
years.
45,000; decline of
40% in last 20
years
350,000 in U.S.; 8
million worldwide;
dramatic growth
About 3 million in
the U.S.; 65 million
worldwide;
dramatic growth
45,000 steady
growth
About 1 million
and declining 2
million at time of
merger in 195721
Part of
Presbyterian
Church, USA 2.7

http://www.holierthanthou.info/denominations/community.html

16http://www.christianethicstoday.com/cetart/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.main

&ArtID=777
17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominational_positions_on_hom
osexuality#Baptists
18 http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/stances-of-faiths-on-lgbt-issuespentecostals
19http://ag.org/top/Beliefs/Position_Papers/pp_downloads/PP_The_Role_of_Wome
n_in_Ministry.pdf
20 http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/stances-of-faiths-on-lgbt-issuespentecostals
21 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Church_of_Christ#Membership
4

Methodist Church

1956

Church of the
Brethren

1958 formally,
but in practice
limited. 15%
women by 2000
1958

United
Presbyterian
Church, North
America
AME Episcopal

Christian
Congregation

Presbyterian
Church, US (South)

Officially not, but

there is meaningful
division in
American
Methodism22
Not formally, but
some exceptions.23
Yes.

1960 - formally,
yes, but in practice,
very limited, less
than 3% female
clergy in Black
churches
1961

No24

1964

Yes

No

million and
dramatically
declining
7.7 million
United Methodist
Church dramatic
decline of 50% in
40 years
About 125,000
70% decline in 40
years
Part of
Presbyterian
Church, USA 1.9
million and
dramatic decline
2.5 million
decline of 1/3 in
last 20 years

About 1 million
and declining 2
million at time of
merger in 1957
with United
Church of Christ25
Part of
Presbyterian
Church, USA 1.9
million and
declining

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/06/nyregion/caught-in-methodisms-splitover-same-sex-marriage.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
23 http://www.brethren.org/news/2011/committee-announces-decisions-for2012-annual-conference.html;
http://www.peacecob.org/aboutourchurchpastor.html
24 http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/stances-of-faiths-on-lgbt-issues-africanmethodist-episcopal-church
25 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Church_of_Christ#Membership
22

Southern Baptist
Convention

1964, but reversed

in 1990s

No

Christian
Methodist
Episcopal Church

1966 - formally,
yes, but in practice,
very limited, less
than 3% female
clergy in black
churches
1968

No26

Evangelical United
Brethren Church
American Lutheran
Church aka
Evangelical
Lutheran Church
since 1987

1970

Lutheran Church in
America aka
Evangelical
Lutheran Church
since 1987

1970

16 million;
dramatic growth in
20th century,
stagnation over
last 10 years
850,000;
strong growth,
though stagnant in
last decade

Officially not, but

Merged with
there is meaningful United Methodists
division in
in 1968
27
Methodism
Yes formally
In 1987 Became
adopted ordination
Evangelical
of openly gay
Lutheran Church in
clergy in 200928
America with
about 5.2 million
members rapid
loss with about 4
million recently
Yes formally
In 1987 became
adopted ordination Evangelical
of openly gay
Lutheran Church in
clergy in 200929
America - 4 million
members- but
rapid loss with a
decline of 500,000
since 2009

http://www.christianpost.com/news/african-methodist-episcopal-churchrejects-gay-147-marriage-148-blessing-rights-2783/
27 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/06/nyregion/caught-in-methodisms-splitover-same-sex-marriage.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelical_Lutheran_Church_in_America#Ordinati
on_of_lesbian.2C_gay.2C_bisexual.2C_and_transgendered_clergy
29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelical_Lutheran_Church_in_America#Ordinati
on_of_lesbian.2C_gay.2C_bisexual.2C_and_transgendered_clergy
26

Mennonite Church

1973

Free Methodist
Church, North
America
Evangelical
Covenant Church
(Swedish
Lutheran)
Episcopal Church

1974

Generally opposed,
but some variation
allowed in local
congregations and
conferences.30
No31

1976

No.

About 114,000
general growth
since the 1920s

1976 may ordain

1994 may oppose
1997 may not
oppose, ordination
of women is
mandatory

Yes in 2000,
ordination in 2009

About 2 million,
down from a high
of 3.5 million in the
1960s

1979
1980 conscience
clause for those
not wanting to
participate
2012 conscience
clause stricken
Yes 2006, after
giving up Sabbath
in 199533

No, but official

recognition of
division within
church32

240,000 and
declining down
from a high of
380,00- in the
1960s, but still at
about 350,000 in
1979
38,000 worldwide
- dramatically
declining in recent
years

Reformed Church
in America

Worldwide Church
of God aka Grace
Communion
International

No

About 105,000
stagnant for the
last 30 years
75,000 stagnant
for last 30 years

30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mennonite#Sexuality.2C_marriage.2C_and_family_m

ores;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominational_positions_on_h
omosexuality#Mennonite_Churches
31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Methodism#Free_Methodist_C
hurch
32 https://www.rca.org/sslpage.aspx?pid=492
33 https://www.gci.org/church/ministry/women11.
7