From misogyny to acceptance: women’s place in the ministry
Published:
IN MAY 1968, the Church of Scotland’s General Assembly made the historic decision to permit the ordination of women to the ministry. This year’s assembly, which opens on May 15, will celebrate the 40th anniversary of that decision, which was made amid great controversy.
It’s worth looking at the background to the passionate debates at the time. There were threats of schism, although they failed to materialise. One of the key points made by opponents was that such ordinations would go against the “plain meaning of scripture”. For instance, in the First Epistle to Timothy, Chapter Two, verses 11 and 12, we read words attributed to Paul, saying: “Women should listen and learn quietly and submissively. I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly.”
Well, well.
The critical question Churches have always had to face is whether texts like this should be regarded as temporary culture-bound admonitions, or rules for all time. For example, the scriptures clearly forbid usury, but churches nowadays quietly invest money in the stock exchange to pay for pension funds and so on.
More than 200 years ago, there were equally passionate debates about slavery. Those who wanted to keep the institution of slavery quoted the words of St Paul: “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as you obey Christ; not only while being watched, and in order to please them, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart.”
Those opposed to slavery quoted New Testament verses which suggest that bond and free, male and female are equal in the eyes of God. Those texts didn’t actually oppose the institution of slavery; the fact is that the Church, in its wisdom, built on these statements of human equality while the pro-slavery texts were quietly passed over and forgotten. Nowadays, no one would seriously suggest that slavery should be reintroduced in this country. Mind you, the modern trafficking of women and children is a form of slavery.
Over centuries, scriptural practices such as polygamy, the use of concubines and the stoning of disobedient children have ended up in history’s dustbin. Jesus Himself was a radical innovator – “Ye have heard it was said . . . but I say unto you” – and He told his disciples that He had many things to say to them that they were not yet ready to hear. He promised to send them the spirit of truth to guide them. Scriptural texts are not set in stone; in understanding them, the cultural situation of the time has to be understood.
Back to the argument about the ordination of women. Some early theologians had very dodgy attitudes to women. The Catholic Church’s greatest mediaeval theologian, St Thomas Aquinas, commented: “As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten.”
It was taught that women were the source of temptation, and monks were instructed to look at the ground when a woman approached, lest they be overcome with lustful thoughts.
The great Samuel Johnson said: “Sir, a woman preaching is like a dog’s walking on his hinder legs. It is not done well, but you are surprised to find it done at all.”
This misogyny is by no means old history. At the time of the Church of England’s debate over the ordination of women, I heard, with astonishment, one vicar say: “We’ll be ordaining monkeys next.”
You can hardly believe that this was an intelligent human being speaking.
The Church of England has since passed legislation permitting the ordination of female bishops. The Roman Catholic Church remains firmly opposed to the ordination of women, and insists on celibacy for priests and bishops. It’s interesting that the Letter of Timothy I quoted earlier says that a bishop should be “the husband of one wife”.
Back to the Kirk’s debate. After several years of study and discussion, the first woman elders in the Church of Scotland were ordained in 1966.
The following year, six prominent women who believed that they had been called to the ministry of word and sacraments wrote to the General Assembly of the Kirk arguing that the time had come for the Church of Scotland to take a decision on the question.
They went on: “We believe that the theological principle at issue is quite simply the following: that God can and does call women to the ordained ministry of His Church. We do not intend to argue the theological case here: that has been done many times before, and there would appear to be an increasing consensus of opinion in the Churches that there is no valid theological reason against the admission of women to the ministry.
“If we are in error, show us our error. But if our belief is sound, then we ask that the Church should take steps to remove the barrier, in order that the call may be tested of any women who may present themselves to the Church as candidates for the ministry.”
Once presbyteries up and down the land had considered the matter, the Kirk in its wisdom uttered a decisive, historic “Yes”. The first woman to be ordained in the Church of Scotland was Catherine McConnachie in Aberdeen in 1969.
In the course of the past four decades, many women have been ordained, either as elders or as parish ministers. The Church of Scotland now has more than 200 women ministers serving in a range of parishes and roles across Scotland. In that time, the gifts of women in ministry have been widely recognised and appreciated.
Women have risen to positions of authority in convenerships and in the administration; four years ago, Dr Alison Elliot, an ordained elder, became the Kirk’s first female Moderator, and the current Moderator is the Rev Sheilagh Kesting.
Although a small minority of ministers and elders in the Kirk still oppose the ordination of women – the Presbytery of Lewis, for instance has still to have a female minister – the old battles are past history.
I am glad to say that, for the Church of Scotland, there is no going back.
Readers' Comments