Other Books at Freedom's Ring

Chapter 4

Teachings and Practices

of the Churches of Christ

Though this study will be dealing with the practices of the Churches of Christ, by and large, many of the same basic arguments will be found in some form in most other churches which still keep women in subjection to the men of the church. It will deal with those which forbid women to participate or limit their participation in the specific traditional male roles in the public life of the church.

In most churches, women have not been allowed to preach, teach, lead singing, lead prayer, or read scriptures in public worship services. They have not been allowed to preside at the communion table or to serve communion to the audience. They have not even been permitted to serve as ushers, collect attendance cards, pass collection baskets, or make announcements from the pulpit area. Women cannot lead prayer in Bible classes, which we label private, if a baptized man is present, nor can she be the "official" teacher of a Bible class if a baptized man is present. She cannot serve as a deacon or an elder, or serve on most committees doing church work, let alone chair one. She is not permitted to ask questions in public worship services, nor publicly baptize penitent believers. There are other subtle and overt ways in which she is kept "silent" and in "subjection" to men who rule the church.

We allow our women, however, to sing congregationally, pray in unison with men, read in unison with men, read responsively with men, and lead songs from the pew. A man usually stands up front while she leads sitting in the pew, signifying man's authority over her. She may prepare communion and wash the communion containers after it has been served, but she cannot "wait" on the table nor serve the congregation. She can teach younger children, other women, and unbelievers - men or women. She may read, make comments, and even argue her point of view in adult Bible classes. She may knock doors on evangelistic campaigns, cook and serve meals in her home and in church, wash the dishes, and tend the nursery. She may show hospitality, greet visitors and members during a public service, and she may make overlooked announcements from her pew in most church services, even on Sunday mornings in smaller churches, and practically all churches on Sunday nights, at prayer meetings, and in all classes. She can sign for the deaf in most churches, even if there is a capable male signer present. In some churches she is allowed to interpret orally when a deaf preacher is signing.

Does it not seem strange that we will allow a woman to translate the local preacher's sermon for the deaf or on mission visits from the local language to English to male and female attendants, but we will not allow the same women to translate Paul, Peter, or Christ to these same people?

Women are permitted to sing alone and together on certain lyrics or the chorus of many songs, while the men remain silent. In these songs, a woman may praise God, pray to Him, and give thanks to Him, while all the men, including the leader, remain silent.

If it is a special worship service, such as an afternoon singing, a lectureship, or a camp meeting, she may sing leads as a part of a quartet or sextet of women, or in a mixed choral group. She may also participate in women's glee clubs without any man even being involved. If she represents a school, college, university, camp, Bible Chair or children's home, her group can render hymns before the church, usually in a choir made up of men and women. In these songs of worship, she may sing a solo with or without other voices singing in the background. Sometimes she sings a solo while the rest of the choral group hums. At the same time, men may also sing solos, using the same songs that the church sings in other worship services. The same women, in some choral group, can sing in most churches on Sunday evening and at prayer meetings, or on other nights of the week. Sometimes they are allowed to do so only after the "official" worship service is closed with a prayer. They are allowed because we reason that a closing prayer officially dismisses God from the assembly, even though the same audience is meeting in the same auditorium.

Occasionally, churches will have a business meeting with the entire church present, and even during a Sunday worship service. Women are usually allowed to ask questions in such meetings. They are permitted sometimes to meet privately with the elders if they have proposals, questions, or even objections regarding church life. They are sometimes appointed to do visitations, benevolence, and janitorial work.

However, in the main they are not allowed to function in the pulpit area. Microphones are almost exclusively used by men. Only men are allowed to lead the singing, preach, lead prayers, serve communion, read aloud and make announcements from the platform. The pulpit area remains the domain of men. As they view it, it is a place of leadership, authority and control. Since women don't have any authority and are forbidden to lead, they must stay away from the pulpit. One reviewer of this manuscript calls pulpit roles, "spotlight roles," reserved for men. Women can paint it, vacuum it, carry communion trays to or from it, but beyond that it is for the most part male-controlled territory.

We usually define the assembly as the regular worship service, which is held in the church auditorium. It may be Sunday morning, Sunday night, Wednesday night, a lectureship, or a revival series. We usually do not refer to the auditorium as a sanctuary. But we treat it as such, where only sanctified men do the leading and performing. We make a distinction between the assembly when the whole church comes together and when part of the church assembles.

How did the church arrive at these kinds of distinctions which make it wrong for a woman to participate in the regular worship services, based on her posture or her location in the assembly?

These restrictions start with a premise that the women are usurping authority over men if they ascend to the pulpit (holy hill) reserved for ministers (clergy), or other men appointed to lead in worship. Upon that premise, the argument is built that Paul also declares in I Corinthians 14:23,26,34 and 35 that when the whole church is "assembled together" that "women are to be silent," that they are "not permitted to speak," and if they need to speak up and "learn anything," then it should be done by "asking their own husbands at home." We also quote the King James version of I Timothy 2:11, which tells women to learn in silence, and also says they are not permitted to teach, and are not to "usurp authority over men." Therefore, anything that is conducted in the pulpit area by a woman is automatically regarded as usurpation of authority or a violation of the silence rule.

We have made the pulpit area sacred ground, reserved only for men. The New Testament nowhere mentions a pulpit area where men in authority alone may operate.

Let's examine the actual practices of the church on silence. First, let's be honest about it. We do not believe that women should be silent, nor do we force women to be silent. We permit them to sing. But someone will quote Paul's command to sing, in Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16. They claim the "whole" church is commanded to sing. Not so! He has said for women to "keep silence." If they are to keep silent, the singing command is for men only. Note: We've also argued that this was congregational singing only. However, Paul says, "Teach and admonish one another." This certainly suggests that individuals are to teach and admonish other individuals, or perhaps a group of individuals, through psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. It is obviously reciprocal, rather than congregational. He did not say, "speak with one another," but "one to another in psalms, hymns and spiritual songs."

The context of both of the passages has to do with relationships and attitudes of daily living, and does not once suggest the instruction applies to any assembly or even a class. These relationships and attitudes are applicable to worship and classes, certainly, but these passages are not about public worship.

These passages are more suggestive of individuals singing to the group or to other individuals than congregational singing. Certainly soloists, quartets, and choral groups could sing, teach and admonish the whole church. But, usually, we rule out such groups in the regular assemblies.

It is interesting that Paul instructed the Colossian Church to read his letter and to have the letter to the Laodiceans read to them. We take the command to sing and apply it to men and women alike, and allow women only to sing some lyrics, in violation of our claimed interpretation of Paul's instructions on silence in I Corinthians 14 and in I Timothy 2. If women must be silent, then they can't sing. However, we never allow women to read the scriptures alone and aloud in the regular services in obedience to the command to read. 

We reason that the singing command was for women and men, but that the reading was for men only. Why? Not because the scriptures say so, but only because our tradition says so.

There have been a few small sects in history that would not even allow women to sing in worship services. The First Congregational Church organized in New Jersey refused to allow women to sing, in order to be in compliance with Paul's instruction on silence in I Corinthians and I Timothy. Even if their interpretation of these passages was wrong, they were at least consistent. We are not.

When Paul says to teach and admonish in song, whether it is done congregationally, with solos or special groups, women are not silent! They are speaking! They are teaching! They are admonishing! And, obviously, if teaching is being done, others (men and women) are also learning and being admonished by women. Yet, Paul tells us in I Timothy 2 they are not to teach, but to be in silence (King James). Something is obviously wrong with both our interpretation and application.

Does teaching with the use of musical notes differ from teaching without them? Our songs consist of praise, prayer, encouragement, admonition and instruction. Many are written so that sopranos and/or altos sing the lyrics, and these women are often joined by the tenor and the bass singers on the chorus. Some song leaders will ask the congregation to sing the first four verses of some songs by voices: sopranos on the first verse, altos on the second, tenors on the third, basses on the fourth, and four-part harmony on the fifth. I have never known anyone who would try to twist logic and scripture to condemn such a practice. In fact, most people enjoy and appreciate the experience and the change.

Why do we not object to women teaching men in song? I have interviewed over five hundred church members representing a broad spectrum of preachers, college Bible professors, elders, teachers, and college students from our entire brotherhood, and I have not had one suggest that such teaching through a singing arrangement was unscriptural.

I ask the next logical question: Can the women sing the entire song alone? If they can sing lyrics alone, the first verse or two verses alone, the same scripture and logic would permit them to sing the first song, and the men to sing the second song and the whole congregation to sing the third song together. Nothing would prohibit this.

The next logical question would be: If there were only one soprano present, could she sing a solo, or could an alto sing a solo? Of course, she could. The same logic and scripture applies.

The next logical question arises: If it were a small church and it had only one woman, could she be allowed to sing alone? Of course, she could. The same logic and the same scripture would apply.

So, we would let a woman sing alone on the same scriptural and logical basis as we let two or twenty or two hundred sing together in any regular service, while the men remain silent.

If that song happened to be a prayer, then we would let women pray alone while the others remained silent. If the song was praise, we would let the woman sing praises alone, based on the same logic and the same scripture. If the song taught and admonished, we would let a woman teach and admonish alone with the same logic and the same scriptural basis.

Yet, without the music, many churches will not allow her to do any of the above things alone because of our traditional interpretation of a half dozen verses of scripture out of the entire Bible on silence, women teaching, and submission. Does God allow women to praise, pray, admonish, and teach in violation of our proof texts as long as the praise, prayer, admonition and teaching are done with music, and condemn the same if it is simply spoken?

If we follow our traditional reasoning on Paul's instruction regarding women's silence and teaching roles in the regular services of the church, then our position is as follows:

1. They don't have to be silent in song.
2. They may teach in song.
3. They may admonish in song.
4. They may praise in song.
5. They may pray in song.
6. They may sing with other women while the male voices are silent.
7. They may sing a solo while the men are silent.
8. But they cannot, for the purpose of teaching, admonition, praise or prayer, speak the same words of these songs to the congregation without music.

Why? Not because God commanded them not to, but because of our traditions and our faulty reasoning. Thus, we approve women or a woman singing alone, but would not allow her to read alone in an assembly, even though Paul commanded the church to "sing" and "read" in the same letter. If a woman can teach and admonish in a solo in a small church, the same scripture and logic would allow it in a big church. It would also allow her to read in any church.

Announcements During the Regular Services

Announcements may include nearly anything of interest to the whole church, or to any individual in the group. We announce special services, classes and meetings. We announce weddings, funerals, and sickness. We announce birthdays, anniversaries, baptisms, showers. We announce budgets, contributions, and work days. Those who make announcements from the pulpit area are men only. Yet, very often the male announcer in charge will ask, "Are there any other announcements which we have overlooked?" That means, "Does anyone in the whole congregation have something that we all need to be aware of?" During this period, women often speak up and announce a sickness, a bereavement, or a special need. They announce ladies' Bible classes, baby showers, bridal showers, and the like. No one, to my knowledge, has ever placed a prohibition on such announcements by women or charged that they violate our silence or submission rules. The smaller the church, the more apt we are to have women making such announcements from the pews. No one feels ill at ease if they do it when sitting down. But, if she stands up to do so, red flags wave and we become concerned. If she should go to the front of the auditorium to make her announcement, many would find reason to object. If she walked to the podium and used the microphone, some would split a church over it. Now, honestly, where in logic or in scripture can any person find any reason that an announcement by a woman sitting in a pew is approved by God and by scripture, while one made at the podium is unscriptural and is not approved by God? Does God really concern himself with auditorium positions or posture? Is it really scriptural for a woman in God's sight to violate the silence rule of I Corinthians 14:34 while sitting down, but unscriptural if she stands up front?

We allow her to violate our silence rule and then reason that she should not come to the front and make the same announcement because she would somehow be usurping authority over men. But if a man from the audience comes forward to make an announcement while an elder or preacher presides, he is not presumed to be usurping authority over them. Why would the woman be usurping authority over men if the men give her permission to make her announcement up front? No one assumes that a 12-year old boy who makes an announcement from the pulpit is exercising dominion. Why would it be true if a woman did? Why do we think this is unscriptural? Only because of our tradition! It has nothing to do with scripture - or logic! One's posture or position in the assembly when making an announcement is nowhere addressed by any New Testament writer. For men to bind such a rule is "binding where God has not bound!"

I have worshipped with many small churches in living rooms in homes and on mission fields. Usually brethren form a circle; there is no pulpit area - no front, no back. In this arrangement, everyone is free to make announcements, and they do so. Never have I seen a woman challenged for "usurping authority" in such a setting. In all honesty I ask, "What is the Biblical difference in this setting and one in a big metropolitan church?" There is none. The only problem is our tradition!

Would anyone really try to argue that as long as a woman is sitting facing the pulpit she may scripturally make an announcement? But, if she is up front making the same announcement, she is violating the scripture? Surely, no one would be so illogical.

Communion Services

Traditionally, we have allowed any male baptized believer, who is faithful, willing and able, to preside over and serve the communion. In many Protestant and Catholic churches, only the clergy presides. Protestants usually use male ushers in passing the communion trays. In the Churches of Christ, we do not "officially" make the clergy-laity distinction, so any man may preside over and serve the Lord's supper. But, we clearly make a distinction between male and female roles. Men may lead the communion prayer; women are to remain silent. Men may wait on the table while standing in front facing the audience; women must sit in the pews facing the pulpit. Men then start at the front of the building and pass the communion from the front pews and proceed to the back pews. In larger churches, male ushers may start from the back and move forward while the ushers in the front are moving from the front to the back. But one thing is clear: the presiding over and passing the Lord's Supper up and down the aisles are a man's domain. It's a "spotlight" role.

Why? Not because of scripture, but because of tradition. The New Testament nowhere mentions "waiting on the table," neither does it allude to it. Some dominant personality, years ago, must have decided it was God's will. We allow women to pass the Lord's Supper right to left and left to right along the pew. We allow them to pass it forward or backward at the end of the pew if no male usher is present. They may take the communion tray from one end of the pew to the other end of the pew with no problem. We will even allow them to pass it across the aisle if an usher is not handy. We allow them to prepare it, deliver it to the Lord's table before services, and clean up after it. But women can't serve it from the front. Why? Because we, by our traditions, have assumed that this would be usurpation or that they would not be in submission. There is no logic nor scripture to back up such reasoning.

In fact, if you wanted to really prove that women should remain in their place, in subjection to men, the men should be seated and the women should serve them! They serve meals at home and in fellowship halls. Why not serve the communion in the assembly? Who serves or passes a communion tray has nothing to do with silence, usurping authority or submission rules. However, it would have something to do with usurpation or submission if the elders of the church asked able women to serve and they refused. That would be a failure to be in submission to the elders of the church. If a woman or a group of women forced a "men only rule" to serve in the so-called leadership roles of the church, that would be usurpation. But, more on usurpation later.

Some probably believe that serving the Lord's Supper is a place of male duty or honor and that, therefore, those places in Christian worship rightfully belong to men. That, too, is neither supported by scripture nor logic. God did not call men to positions of honor and women to positions of dishonor; He calls both to positions of service. 

We will not even let women pass the collection plate from the front to the back or up and down the aisle. We will not even allow women to pick up or pass out attendance cards, or announcement sheets, or church bulletins.

We must honestly ask ourselves, "What does serving communion, passing collection baskets, or picking up attendance cards have to do with God's plan for men and women in the life and worship of the church?" Nowhere does God say or even imply that women can pass trays, baskets, or attendance cards right to left, or down the pew, but not up or down the aisle. Such a conclusion has no Biblical basis! This man-made creed is heresy.

We have reasoned that the silence rule applies only to individuals reading, preaching, leading in prayer, making formal announcements, or leading singing from the front in public. But, we have further reasoned that a woman is in submission if she reads, announces, or leads songs from her pew, and that in such cases the silence and submission rules do not apply. Women are also in submission as long as the contribution basket, communion trays, and attendance cards are passed right to left, left to right, or to the pew in front, or to the pew in back, as long as they are seated. But, if they stand and walk up and down the aisle, they are usurping male authority. Biblical? Logical? Neither, just faulty reasoning!

As we continue this study, we will need a large dose of old-fashioned honesty and humility! If we continue our traditional practices, we will:

1. Allow only men up front in the worship services to preach, lead prayer, read, lead songs, make announcements, and baptize.
2. Allow only men to be ushers, servers, and presiders.
3. Allow women to make announcements, pass trays, contribution baskets, and attendance cards in a sitting position facing a pulpit, while restricting pulpit positions of power, authority, and honor to men only.
4. Allow women to pray audibly in song, give thanks in song, teach and admonish in song, but will not allow the same women to read, pray, teach, or give thanks audibly without music, unless she does it in unison with men.

Other Traditional Exceptions on the Silence Rule

Every church allows and expects a new convert to make a public confession of faith before baptism. We do not apply the silence rule in this case. Why? We argue that the confession is to be made before men. Therefore, it is all right, even mandatory, to make it before the church. But, we argue that women are to keep silence when the whole church comes together. If they are to be silent in the worship assembly, they cannot make public confession in the assembly, but they must make it elsewhere. Nor can they confess faults or solicit prayers, or speak to their husbands, children, or neighbors. They cannot say, "Amen." Common courtesy remarks such as, "Excuse me," "Thank you," "Please," or "I'm sorry" could not be uttered. If Paul meant "mute" in all the churches, then mute (silent) women must be! Who gave any man or group of men the authority to pick and choose? We want to "have our cake and eat it, too."

We have "reasoned" that a woman can violate the silence and the submission rules of Paul any way that our traditions and culture permit. We do not have a logical, let alone scriptural, argument for allowing women to do some things, in some ways, at some times, in some places, and in some positions, but not in others.

If we allow men, dominant men, or sometimes dominant wives, to pick and choose when the silence rule is enforced or can be violated, then the Bible is not our guide; the opinions of men and women become our guide. No one believes that silent means mute, except where it is applied by man-made tradition! More enlightening, no two churches have the exact same rules in allowing or disallowing women to speak. Each develops its own written or unwritten creed. It has nothing to do with clear or absolute Biblical teaching.

Special Rules for Special Worship Services

No one objects to a woman's singing a solo in a wedding. The bride may quote the words of Ruth, the preacher quotes Christ and Paul, a wedding sermon is preached, special religious songs are sung, God's laws are enjoined, prayers are offered, the bride says her vows, and she may even speak a special tribute to her husband. The bride and groom may pray in unison. The entire ceremony is conducted as a worship service, usually in a church building.

Wives and daughters do, on occasion, read poems or tributes to deceased loved ones at funerals. Words of faith, comfort, praise, and hope are spoken and sung. Music groups sing to comfort and give hope to those who are mourning.

Seldom have we heard a complaint that suggests these participating ladies are violating I Corinthians 14 or I Timothy 2. Yet, these experiences are definitely ones of worship. And, for certain, the Bible makes no distinction in different forms of worship. Some would dare call weddings and funerals private types of worship, so the silence rule would not be applicable.

However, if speaking by women in Sunday worship is both an act of exercising dominion and a violation of the silence rule, why would speaking at weddings or funerals be any different? If only men can speak, and women are not permitted to speak in a worship service, where does the Bible make exceptions for weddings and funerals? Worship is still worship, and it is usually held in the church building with the church assembled.

Yet, Paul said, "As in all the churches of the saints, let women keep silence in the churches." He did not say, except in classes, weddings, funerals, prayer meetings, singing, reading in unison, praying in unison, greeting visitors, etc. Men have established all exceptions by common consent, without a single verse of Biblical instruction to do so. So clearly we have tried to have it both ways: silence on the part of women where tradition permits, and speaking where tradition permits, while claiming to have Biblical authority for both.

The truth is, we have no explicit Biblical authority or even inferences for such distinctions. Human reasoning prevails. Whose reasoning will we use as authoritative?