Category Archives: Topics

March 5, 2019

Should Women Serve as Elders, Deacons, or Pastors?

By Clarke Morledge

An introduction to a multi-part series.

Here I go. Stepping into the quagmire.

Perhaps one of the most difficult “agree to disagree” type of issues facing the evangelical church today is that of whether or not women should serve as elders, deacons, and/or pastors. Passions run high as Christians debate how to interpret certain biblical passages.

Nevertheless, there are Christians for whom the whole discussion seems pointless, and already settled. Why is this even an “agree to disagree” issue? After all, the Bible is clear on the matter. Some can cite their prooftext, and simply move on.

The objective of this series is to show that while the Bible is clear on many things, the varieties of Scriptural interpretation among godly, Bible-loving believers on this issue actually runs the gamut. It is a lot more difficult than you think to gain a clear idea as to whether or not women can serve as elders, deacons, and/or pastors.

At the same time, getting this issue right is of utmost importance. The consequences of getting this wrong are arguably highly significant, and for some, downright scary, if handled incorrectly. The question of “women in ministry” requires concentrated effort to read and study the Bible, and be in conversation with one another. Trusting in the work of Holy Spirit is crucial. Prayer is paramount. Avoiding extremes is difficult, but necessary. In the words of Robertson McQuilkin, “It seems easier to go to a consistent extreme than to stay at the center of biblical tension.”

I will keep this blog page updated as the series moves along. First, here are the additional blog posts in this series::

The above linked blog posts make up the original series that I wrote back in 2019. Also, I will note some previous Veracity blog posts that address particular background issues related to the topic:

UPDATE 2023: Below is a list of other blog posts published after that initial series came out in the spring of 2019:

 

By the end of the original blog series in 2019, you will get an idea of where I am coming from. So, if you are going to read any of these blog posts, please READ ALL OF THEM IN THE INTIAL SERIES BEFORE making a final judgment on what I am saying (I do welcome your comments below). The punch line will come in the last one or two posts, but to get the full sense of it, you should read all of the preceding posts in the series…. and, yes, you might want to keep your Bible handy, as I will be going to God’s Word quite often (or you can just follow the hyperlinks in the blog posts, instead).

The blog posts that came out since 2019 (linked above) have helped me to refine my thinking. I stopped blogging in-depth about this topic in 2023.  I might make a few additional blog posts in the future, as there are newer books to come out that address this topic that does not seem to go away, from both the complementarian and egalitarian sides of the discussion. It just seems like this debate will never end, and life is too short to keep focusing on this.

I will say up front, that in giving my view, I could be wrong. Utterly wrong. Or more likely, perhaps a few points wrong, here and there. My perspective has shifted over the years, and it could shift again. But what I do hope is that folks can take this seriously, and treat it is an important perspective in the ongoing discussion. It is a plea for unity, but it is also a plea to pursue truth, and never abandon the pursuit of truth.

 

3 Comments   |  tags: , , | posted in Topics

March 2, 2019

Can “Charismatic” and “Liturgical” Christians Worship Together?

By Clarke Morledge

The debate over the “gifts of the Spirit” divides evangelical Christians. The debate over the ancient liturgy of the church divides as well. Is it possible to heal the divides by bringing the charismatic and the liturgical together?

Consider the “gifts of the Spirit.” On one side are those who believe that the supernatural gifts of tongues, prophecy, etc. continue on today in the church (the continuationist, or charismatic position). On the other side are those who believe that those very same gifts ceased to exist at the end of the apostolic age, in the first century of the church (the cessationist, on non-charismatic position).

Walk into just about any “typical” evangelical church today, and the antenna of any first time visitor goes up. How many people during worship are raising their hands during the singing? Is the person sitting next to you uttering some undecipherable words, just above a whisper (or louder), during the corporate prayer time? If things get really scary, you might be asking yourself, “Is that barking I hear, or is that simply the drummer hitting the snare drum, making a really odd sound?”

Depending upon your theological background, the answers to these questions might encourage you to stick around, and inquire positively of the pastor, or they might encourage you to quietly sneak out the door, never to return!

Spirit and Sacrament: An Invitation to Eucharismatic Worship, by Andrew Wilson, is probably the best written case for defending the union and expression of charismatic and liturgical worship in the church. Plus, the book is short and exceptionally well written.

Continue reading

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , | posted in Topics

February 11, 2019

What is an “Elder” of a Church?

By Clarke Morledge

How can we think of the question of eldership more like a dance…. instead of a brawl???

Calling someone an elder doesn’t make them an elder… so writes British pastor, Andrew Wilson, in his excellent blog essay, “A Theology of Eldership.”

Wilson begins his essay with a famous, Abraham Lincoln anecdote:

Abraham Lincoln was fond of asking people: if we call a tail a leg, then how many legs does a dog have? “Five,” his audience would invariably answer. “No,” came his standard reply, “the correct answer is four. Calling something a leg doesn’t make it a leg.”

When I look around at how different churches implement spiritual authority, I observe that rarely is there a clear, biblically-driven understanding of what it means to be an “elder” of a church. At the risk of being overly too-brief and simplistic, an “elder” is an office in the church, and as Wilson argues in his essay, the primary function of an “elder” is to act as a type of shepherd, or pastor of a flock, to borrow from the Bible’s teaching related to tending after sheep. To shepherd or pastor is to protect the sheep from physical harm. Likewise, an “elder” is someone who serves the community of faith by protecting them from spiritual harm. An “elder” is a type of guardian, making sure that the people are grounded upon solid, Bible doctrine.

But no matter how wonderful or effective they might be, how many “elders” in churches really function like that?  For example, there are churches where a pastor or pastors of the church, who preach on Sunday morning, do not serve as “elders.” Furthermore, there are “elders” who think of themselves, not as spiritual guardians or shepherds, but rather as “members of the board” of the church, like in a business corporation. That may work for a Fortune 500 company, but is it appropriate for a local church?

In other words, such “elders” are primarily tasked with administration of the church, handling financial matters, etc., but it is not altogether clear as to what type of spiritual authority they exercise, if any, in terms of shepherding or pastoring the flock. Perhaps, much of these administrative tasks might more properly be viewed in terms of “waiting on tables,” as in Acts 6:2, and not something that should distract the “elders” from their more pressing duty, of faithfully expounding the Scriptures to the community of believers. So, here you have a case of pastors, who act like “elders,” but they are not “elders,” and “elders,” who do not necessarily act like “elders,” because the pastors are already acting as “elders.”

How much sense does this really make?

My concern is that such a fluid understanding of what defines an “elder” is terribly confusing.

Calling someone an elder doesn’t make them an elder.

Unless you have been living under a rock for most of your Christian life, the subject of “women and elders” has been a hot-button issue in evangelical churches for a long, long time. Some believe that the Bible does not permit women to serve as elders. Others believe that the Bible does allow women to serve as elders. Some see this, not as a question of superiority or inferiority of a particular gender, but rather as an issue of proper spiritual authority. Others see this, not as “caving into the culture,” but rather as an issue of encouraging the full use of gifts for ministry, for both men and women, as well as an issue of justice, in a world where women are marginalized and abused, who need to know about and experience the liberating power of the Gospel. Some see male-only eldership as part of the historically ordained, orthodox principle of church structure, in keeping with the New Testament, and not to be tampered with, whereas others see a male-female joint eldership as an inevitable reality that all churches must eventually accept…. it is just a matter of time.

Unlike other controversial issues in the church, like the use of alcohol, age of the earth, different views of the End Times, etc., the “women and elders” issue is simultaneously public, profound, and pervasive. It is public, because while others may never know about your use or non-use of alcohol, a woman in the pulpit is hard to ignore. It is profound, because unlike the dispute over the millennium or the timing of the “Rapture,” Christians can exist for years in our churches, without a decided view on the End Times, but how we think about gender, and its relationship to spiritual authority, is something that touches on the core of every person’s being. It is pervasive, because while not all Christians are highly scientifically minded and motivated, to understand the age of the earth, gender-based issues impact just about every area of life.

Both sides in the “women and elders” controversy can make some powerful arguments. (… and yes, you can find extremes on both sides, too, those who view gender categories as completely interchangeable, making no mention of spiritual authority, and those on the other side who devalue the competence or performance of women, decapitating one-half of the Body of Christ, from the service of Christ’s Kingdom. I am ignoring these extremes here…)

The difficulty is that when churches wrestle with these issues, we do our congregations a disservice when we fail to adequately define what constitutes an “elder,” so that at least everyone is on the same page. For example, if a church allows women to serve as deacons, but the so-called “elders” in the church are largely performing the office of being deacons, to prohibit women to serve as such “elders” is completely nonsensical, thus offending the conscience of those who seek, in obedience to God, to celebrate the full gifting of men and women. But if you allow women to serve as such “elders,” railing against the conscience of those who believe that the Bible does not allow women to serve as elders, for the sake of upholding biblical, spiritual authority, what is the point? This is particularly confusing, when it is, to a large part, non-“elder” pastors of the church, who are mainly fulfilling the task of being “elders.” What then, is the positive, edifying purpose you are really serving?

This all seems like a recipe for madness, to me, an excuse for those passionate on both sides to vote with their feet…. and unnecessarily so, as it neglects laying the proper groundwork to achieve a common vocabulary, which is necessary to gain a proper understanding of the issues.

Here is my practical suggestion. I might be wrong, so I would appreciate correction, if needed. If a church is considering the “women as elders” issue, it might be useful to consider limiting the office of elder, for men only, to actually that of pastoring and shepherding, as much as possible, and greatly expanding, as much as possible, the role of deacon, including men and women, to serve the community, and thus empowering all, male and female, to fully use their God-given gifts. It will not make everyone happy, but it might be a good step forward to promote peace.

Might I humbly suggest that churches should consider crafting a clear understanding of what constitutes an “elder,” before engaging in discussions, about whether or not women should or could serve in such a capacity?

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , | posted in Topics

February 2, 2019

Supporting Vaccination: Loving Our Non-Believing Neighbors

By Clarke Morledge

Many of you have been hearing about recent measles outbreaks across the country. What is so sad about this situation is that vaccination is probably the most effective means of preventing the spread of measles. But when we learn that many of the “anti-vaccination” people are evangelical Christians, the story gets even more distressing.

Folks, many Christians are divided over many things, including how we should be thinking biblically about science. But this is one issue where Christians should be united, if not for the sake of our own families, but also for the sake of our witness to our non-believing neighbors.

Consider this, of the three primary creationist positions, regarding faith/science issues facing the church today (Young Earth Creation, Old Earth Creation, and Evolutionary Creation), all three have leading ministries endorsing the use of vaccines, such as Creation Ministries International, Reasons to Believe, and Biologos, respectively. The fact that all three of these groups, which differ in so many other respects, speak of one mind regarding the effectiveness and safety of vaccines, is a remarkable testimony.

Unfortunately, too many people make the step of drawing from statements, by evangelists like Gloria Copeland (below), that you do not need vaccines (flu, in Copeland’s case), and that we can simply trust in Jesus.  Yes, we should trust in Jesus, but this does not mean that we should not take prudent steps to protect our health and the health of others around us. Nothing in life is risk free, but Christians should stop passing on debunked stories as to the supposed link between autism and vaccines. The benefits of vaccines outweigh the risks.

In an era when so many non-Christians have such suspicions towards evangelical Christians, it would greatly speak for the Gospel if Christians can take the step of making sure we approve of vaccinations, in word and deed, as an expression of love towards our non-believing neighbor.

3 Comments   |  tags: , , , , | posted in Topics

February 1, 2019

Which Books of the Bible Do Churches Tend to Ignore?

By Clarke Morledge

Found this of interest recently: Have you ever wondered why churches will preach from certain parts of the Bible more than others? Did you know that the Book of Jonah gets preached on more than any other book in the Old Testament, whereas 1 & 2 Chronicles are typically down at the bottom of the list (At least in the UK)?

In the UK, someone did some preliminary research to figure out how often churches will preach from one book of the Bible as opposed to another book of the Bible. Apparently, in the UK, the Book of Ephesians tops the list of most often preached upon, whereas when it comes to the New Testament, 2nd and 3rd John are near the bottom of the list. Surprisingly, Haggai is #2 for Old Testament books, but is still behind most other New Testament books, except for, surprisingly again, the Book of Revelation.  Poor Ezekiel, with his flying chariot wheels, is only just above Chronicles, at the very bottom slot. Of the four, Mark is the most neglected Gospel, whereas Luke ranks at the top.

If someone could do this for the United States, that would be very eye-opening.  (HT Andrew Wilson)

Leave a comment   |  tags: | posted in Topics