(including Letters to the N. Ireland Press)
On 25 December, 2007, “Rev.” Christina Bradley of Armagh Road (Portadown) Church did not preach in First Portadown Church. First Portadown’s minister, Rev. Stafford Carson, (rightly) refused his “colleague” in the Presbyterian Church in Ireland (PCI) ministry permission to preach in his congregation. PCI moderator, Dr. John Finlay, stepped in to seek to “resolve” the issue of women ministers in his denomination: “We have to accommodate both points of view” (Belfast Telegraph, 29 December, 2007). Though this recent scene took place in N. Ireland, such incidents have occurred, are occurring and will occur in departing churches all around the world.
What saith the Scriptures? “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church” (I Cor. 14:34-35). The head of the church declares women preaching “shameful”—for the woman herself, her husband and family, and the congregation and denomination. Yet the PCI dishonoured the Lord Jesus by allowing women ministers as early as 1973—the voting was not even close, with 18 Presbyteries for it, 3 against and 1 undecided—and ordaining its first woman minister as early as 1976! Also an order of deaconesses was formed in 1909 and women elders were allowed in 1926! Yet the PCI moderator says that such a disgrace must be “accommodated.”
Regarding the role of women vis-à-vis special offices in His instituted church, Christ proclaims, through His apostle Paul, “I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” (I Tim. 2:12). The Lord Jesus does not permit women as ministers, elders or deacons (church offices with “authority”); the church’s king calls this unlawful “usurpation”—never mind the compromises and fudges of the PCI and its “evangelical” moderator. The seriousness of appointing office-bearers (including all women office-bearers) not called by Jesus Christ is well stated by John Owen: “it is the prerogative of God to call whom he pleaseth … For any to set up such in office as he hath not gifted for it, nor called unto it, is to sit in the temple of God, and to show themselves to be God” (Hebrews, vol. 5, p. 362). This is the apostolic rule: “We ought to obey God rather than men [or women or feminists or political correctness or the apostate or departing churches]” (Acts 5:29).
Among the qualifications of elders (teaching or ruling), we find the following: “A bishop must be … the husband of one wife” (3:2)—an impossible qualification for women. Similarly, “Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife” (12), and “their wives [must] be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things” (11). Belgic Confession 30 states that things are “carried on in the church with good order and decency, when faithful men are chosen according to the rule prescribed by St. Paul in his epistle to Timothy.” This teaching of God’s Word in the first pastoral epistle (I Timothy) forbidding women office-bearers is an intrinsic part of godly behaviour “in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (3:15). Any church or denomination that disobeys is not holding up the truths of Scripture’s absolute authority, biblical church government or Christ’s headship; it is acting as a “pillar and ground of the lie.” All ministers (and office-bearers) are solemnly charged “in the sight of God” and “before Christ Jesus” to “keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ” (6:13-14). In this (as in many other areas, including higher criticism, evolutionism, liberalism, Arminianism, false ecumenism, etc.), the PCI, and other departing churches in N. Ireland and elsewhere, are unfaithful to Christ and His Word. They have been “spotted” by the worldly philosophy of feminism and so they must be “rebuked.” How terrible it will be on the last day when Christ Himself rebukes women office-bearers and false churches for despising His Word!
All women office-bearers (as well as all unfaithful male office-bearers) fall under Scripture’s condemnation as hirelings and false shepherds, those who run without being sent by Christ. The administration of the sacraments and the preaching of women ministers are not means of grace, and baptisms dispensed by them are invalid, because such women are not “lawfully called”—an indispensable qualification for those who preach, baptize and administer the Lord’s Supper (cf. Presbyterianism’s Westminster Confession 27:4; 28:2; David Engelsma, “Invalid Baptism by Women“).
The three marks of the church—faithful preaching, proper sacramental administration and biblical church discipline—are subverted through women office-bearers and especially women ministers. This is very serious since a true church is recognized by these marks and a false church is discerned by their corruption. The false church, including a denomination with women ministers, “ascribes more power and authority to herself and her ordinances than to the Word of God, and will not submit herself to the yoke of Christ. Neither does she administer the sacraments as appointed by Christ in his Word, but adds to and takes from them, as she thinks proper; she relieth more upon men than upon Christ; and persecutes those, who live holily according to the Word of God, and rebuke her for her errors, covetousness, and idolatry” (Belgic Confession 29).
The holy God—whom alone the church is to serve—warns that unbiblical teaching tolerated in a church spreads like gangrene (II Tim. 2:17), and “a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump” (I Cor. 5:6; Gal. 5:9). Denominations, congregations and church members who appoint or accept women office-bearers grieve the Holy Spirit; disobey and dishonour Jesus Christ, the head of the church; and further the development of the false church. Irish Presbyterianism is following modern feminism and political correctness and not its Westminster Standards and the God-breathed Scriptures. “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isa. 8:20).
If John Knox, the father of Scottish (and Irish) Presbyterianism, were alive today, he might well write another book, The Second Trumpet Blast Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women Office-bearers in the PCI! Rev. Stewart
Letters to the N. Ireland Press
(1) Belfast Telegraph and News Letter (3 January, 2008)
Regarding the role of women vis-à-vis special offices in His instituted church, the Lord Jesus declares, through His apostle Paul, “I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man” (I Tim. 2:12). Christ does not permit women as ministers, elders or deacons (church offices with “authority”); the church’s King calls this unlawful “usurpation”—never mind the compromises and fudges of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland and its moderator.
Therefore all women office-bearers (as well as all unfaithful male office-bearers) fall under Scripture’s condemnation as hirelings and false shepherds, those who run without being sent by Christ. Thus the administration of the sacraments and the preaching of women ministers are not means of grace, and baptisms dispensed by women are invalid because they are not lawfully called. The three marks of the church—faithful preaching, proper sacramental administration and church discipline according to the Word of God—are subverted through women office-bearers and especially women ministers. This is very serious since a true church is recognised by these marks and a false church is discerned by their corruption. The Triune God warns that unbiblical teaching tolerated in a church spreads like gangrene (II Tim. 2:17) and “a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump” (I Cor. 5:6; Gal. 5:9). Denominations, congregations and church members who appoint or accept women office-bearers grieve the Holy Spirit; disobey and dishonour Jesus Christ, the head of the church; and further the development of the false church.
Irish Presbyterianism should stop following modern feminism and political correctness and return to its Westminster Standards and the God-breathed Scriptures. “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isa. 8:20). Rev. Angus Stewart
(2) News Letter (c. 9 January, 2008)
Rev. Carson, minister in Portadown was right to bar Mrs. Bradley from his pulpit, but he is wrong to “welcome the diversity of views” in his denomination (22 December). Only one voice may be obeyed in Christ’s church: the Lord’s, as He speaks through Holy Scripture. Paul’s writings, far from being culturally conditioned and his own opinion (22 December), are the inspired words of God. That a church tolerates a “cleric” who disparages the inspired Scriptures in this manner is nothing short of scandalous (cf. I Cor. 14:37).
Rev. Carson needs to push for true biblical Reformation and resist all compromise. He and his allies have no hope of success, however. The decision to ordain women occurred as early as the 1970’s. Every year, more women are being ordained, and these women have voting rights at the General Assembly (GA) of the PCI. Only if the Lord brings these women (and their compromising male supporters) to repentance can such an blatantly unbiblical decision be overturned. This is not happening in the PCI. Rather, the denomination continues to depart from the biblically Reformed faith, as God in His wrath gives her over to worse sins. Witness the PCI’s compromise with homosexuality at last year’s GA! History shows that when Liberals are allowed to gain ascendancy in the church they persecute the Conservatives. Rev. Carson and his allies will find out sooner or later that their (biblical) views are intolerable to the Liberals who “tolerate” everything except the truth. The Liberals in the PCI are beginning to turn the screw on the Evangelicals. They have the man (and woman) power to do it. Christina Bradley, the woman at the centre of this row, will most likely succeed if she brings her protest to the General Assembly: former decisions set a precedent and the PCI’s Code favours her. The question is, what will the Evangelicals accomplish? If previous trends are any indication, nothing. Martyn McGeown
(3) Belfast Telegraph
The heart of Rev. Neilly rightly “aches” (1 January) when he sees women ordained to the position of teaching and ruling elder in the Presbyterian Church in Ireland (PCI). He should grieve because the denomination of which he is member and minister has disobeyed Christ, who does not permit women to preach, as Rev. Neilly quoted from I Timothy 2:11-12. However, the conservatives in the PCI need to do more than grieve. They need to push for true biblical Reformation.
Rev. Neilly and his allies have no hope of success, however. The decision to ordain women occurred as early as the 1970’s. Every year, more women are being ordained, and these women have voting rights at the General Assembly (GA) of the PCI. Only if the Lord brings these women (and their compromising male supporters) to repentance can such an blatantly unbiblical decision be overturned. This is not happening in the PCI. Rather, the denomination continues to depart from the biblically Reformed faith, as God in His wrath gives her over to worse sins. Witness the PCI’s compromise with homosexuality at last year’s GA (cf. “The Presbyterian Church in Ireland and Sodomy”)! Instead of a strong biblical stand, the Moderator speaks of “squaring circles,” “accommodating points of view” and “reconciling schools of thought” (29 December). Even the two Portadown congregations in their “joint statement” are seeking a “compromise” (24 December). What of the non-negotiable authority of Holy Scripture?
The Liberals in the PCI are beginning to turn the screw on the Evangelicals. They have the man (and woman) power to do it. Christina Bradley, the woman at the centre of this row, will most likely succeed if she brings her protest to the General Assembly: former decisions set a precedent and the PCI’s Code favours her. The question is, what will the Evangelicals accomplish? If previous trends are any indication, nothing. Martyn McGeown
(4) News Letter (11 January, 2008)
I was glad to read that Rev. Professor J. R. Patterson finds my letter opposing women office-bearers in Christ’s church “for the most part … excellent” (7 January).
As for the differences, (1) the “office” of deacon assuredly requires and evinces authority in the church in collecting and distributing benevolence to the poor and needy. Thus deacons are to be elected and ordained according to the biblical qualifications, as part of proper behaviour in “the house of God,” “the pillar and ground of the truth” (Acts 6:1-7; I Tim. 3:8-16). The apostles ordained qualified men only (Acts 6:3-6), one qualification being (if a deacon has a wife and children) a well-ordered home (I Tim. 3:11-12). Phoebe, a godly Christian lady, was not a deacon but a “servant” of the church at Cenchrea (Romans 16:1), this being an instance of the usual, non-technical sense of the Greek diakonos. For example, the New Testament calls Christ, civil magistrates, Christians and domestics “servants” (from diakonos), as those who serve God and others.
(2) Presbyterianism’s Westminster Larger Catechism, Q. & A. 158, rightly opposes all lay preaching (male or female): “The word of God is to be preached only by such as are sufficiently gifted, and also duly approved and called to that office.” Non church office-bearers are not allowed to administer the sacraments; why should they preach God’s Word (a greater thing)? As for prophets and prophetesses, this was an extraordinary, temporal office in the apostolic age which has passed away now that the foundation of the church has been laid (Ephesians 2:20). All men and women in the office of believer are called as witnesses (not preachers) of the Word of God, including the biblical testimony concerning Christ’s requirement of qualified men (not women) as pastors, elders and deacons in His church. Rev. Angus Stewart
(5) Belfast Telegraph
Humanist, Mr. Burns, correctly states the Christian position: “whatever Paul teaches is God’s holy writ and must be obeyed” (15 January), which includes Christ’s prohibition of women office-bearers in His church (I Cor. 14:34-35; I Tim. 2:12), over against the unfaithfulness of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland. Paul, whom the Son of God appointed as His apostle and used to pen half the books of the New Testament, writes, “let [all] acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord” (I Cor. 14:37).
As regards slavery, it is neither commended nor required for Christians. In this fallen world, social structures are marred by sin, including slavery. Ephesians 6:5, which Mr. Burns quotes, requires a Christian who is a slave to obey his master and not rebel, as Romans 13 commands believers to submit to civil government, even if it is tyrannical, like that of Antichristian Emperor Nero.
The apostle Paul teaches in I Corinthians 7:21-23 that a Christian slave should not fret over his lowly position and if he may be made free he should use his liberty to serve his Father. A Christian slave is free in Christ from sin’s condemnation (the greatest liberty) and a Christian freeman is Christ’s slave (the most noble service). Rev. Angus Stewart
(6) News Letter (19 January, 2008)
In order to reject the clear teaching of God’s Word forbidding women in church office, three letters (15 January) seek to drive a wedge between Christ and His apostle Paul, whom He commissioned on the Damascus Road and whom He used to pen half the books of the New Testament. Thus proponents of women in church office reveal their modernist doctrine of Scripture. This “suspicion of Paul’s writings” (“Confused and Questioning”) and wish to “modify” and “reinterpret” them (H. T. Martin) is a denial of the apostolicity of the church, namely, its being built upon the foundation of apostolic doctrine (Ephesians 2:20). M. S. rightly states that Paul and the other New Testament writers “had to be very careful that false doctrine would not creep in and that the true foundation would be laid down.” Yet this “true foundation” includes the apostolic opposition to the “false doctrine” of allowing women office-bearers! Those who advocate or appoint women office-bearers (contrary to Christ’s Word) depart from the apostolic foundation laid once and for all and build some other structure than the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church on some other, non-apostolic foundation. They are the ones who “make new doctrines” (M. S.) by following modern politically-correct feminism contrary to Christ’s commands and the church’s history for almost 2,000 years. M. S. echoes Scripture when she says of those who teach false doctrine “let them be anathema!”
“Confused and Questioning” should note that immediately before God’s Word forbids women preaching (I Cor. 14:34-35), it states, “God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints” (33), and continues, “If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord,” before adding ominously, “But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant” (37-38)! There are none so blind as those who refuse to see! It is not what man reckons (cf. M. S.’s “I think”) that matters, but what God thinks. The “simple solution,” which H. T. Martin says he desires, is that Christ’s church is to be governed by Christ’s Word. Rev. Angus Stewart
(7) News Letter (26 January)
EM (21 January) argues that women have the right to speak the gospel since the message of Christ’s resurrection was first announced to a woman. I would like to respond to this.
First, no one is denying that women have the right to speak the gospel. The issue is whether or not women may speak the gospel officially as those called by Christ and ordained by His church. The issue is one of authority, not equality. I enjoy equal citizenship in the UK, but I don’t have the authority to put handcuffs on a burglar. That belongs to a police officer. The issue is one of authority, not equality.
Second, those women referred to by EM who received the message of the resurrection remained part of the company of the apostles. However, in Acts 1 Jesus commissioned the apostles and not the women to be his official witnesses. The women were part of the apostolic band, but they were not commissioned. So, EM, to be consistent, would need to find fault with the risen Lord as well as the apostle Paul!
Regarding I Timothy 2:12 and its prohibition of women in church office, EM seeks to discredit the passage on the basis of verse 15. He/she argues verse 15 “could be taken to mean that all women who have not experienced childbirth are heading straight to hell.”
Let me answer EM’s difficulty. The verse refers to Eve in the first instance. Eve sinned and as a consequence God declared she would experience sorrow in childbearing (Gen. 3:16). But the Lord also redeems motherhood and so Eve would experience the grace of God in the way of obedience to her God-given calling, and not in the way of “usurping authority over the man” (I Tim. 2:12). The same holds true for every Christian mother. As for the childless woman, she does not experience the sorrows (pain) of childbearing, so she is saved in her role as a wife or single woman. The Bible is speaking about obedience in our roles here; not about inequality in salvation. Philip Rainey
(8) News Letter (29 January)
A frequent objection against the clear teaching of God’s Word forbidding women in church office is “That’s just what Paul thought!” Apostolic and inspired Scripture in I Corinthians 14 has already addressed this evasion.
Christ’s faithful servant Paul states, “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church” (34-35).
Then, as if anticipating modern liberal claims, the apostle continues, “If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord” (37), before adding ominously, “But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant” (38)! There are none so blind as those who refuse to see!
Contrary to the muddle and compromise of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland and others, this same passage forbidding women preaching declares, “God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints” (33) and commands, “Let all things be done decently and in order” (40)—the order required by Christ, the church’s head, in His Word. Rev. Angus Stewart
(9) Ballymena Guardian and Ballymena Times (30 January & 5 February)
Liberal clergymen who advocate or permit women in church office are, like Satan in the Garden of Eden, enemies of women who tempt them to doubt and disobey God’s infallible Word.
Thus some women are led to seize for themselves the preaching of the gospel, the administration of the sacraments and the government of the church, contrary to Christ’s declaration, through His apostle Paul, “I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” (I Tim. 2:12). Since the Lord Jesus does not contradict His Word, not only does He not call women to the church offices of pastor, elder and deacon, but also He does not sustain them in these offices by His grace. Such poor women are left high and dry in the difficult role of public leadership in a congregation, running without being sent by God and labouring without being equipped by Christ. Women in church office are in an unenviable position: over a congregation contrary to Scripture and under God’s judgment against hirelings, with a bad conscience (unless it is “seared with a hot iron;” I Tim. 4:2) and without the assistance of the Holy Spirit (who alone can enable a true office-bearer to do his work).
Feminist clergymen, by countenancing female preaching, would also bring women into the “shame” which accompanies this sin—shame for the woman herself, her husband and family, and the congregation and denomination. Listen to Christ, the head of His church: “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church” (I Cor. 14:34-35).
Those who seek the spiritual and eternal welfare of Christian women, as well as the growth of strong marriages, godly homes and faithful churches, encourage believing sisters to love and submit to Christ and His Word and to exercise their holy graces and rich gifts in their calling in the office of believer—the true beauty and dignity of liberated daughters of Sarah, free from the bondage of sin and the vain glory and philosophies of the world. Rev. Angus Stewart
(10) News Letter
Rev. Professor J. R. Patterson’s view of church office-bearers, that “they obtain their authority from the people” (23 January), is contrary to the biblical and Reformed idea of office. Pastors, elders and deacons receive spiritual, ministerial authority from the risen and ascended Christ, to whom God gave all authority in heaven and in earth (Matt. 28:18). In the post-apostolic age, Christ appoints church office-bearers through the election of the congregation, and requires them to teach and govern and distribute alms, according to His Word alone (cf. Matt. 28:20).
Professor Patterson’s denial that the diaconate is an office contradicts I Timothy 3 which lists the qualifications for “the office of a deacon” after those of “the office of a bishop” or elder—an office Prof. Patterson admits is an office! The deacons are likewise joined with their fellow office-bearers, the elders, in the apostolic greeting of Philippians 1:1. To this office, deacons were elected by the saints and ordained by the apostles in Acts 6:1-6.
Professor Patterson also advocates lay preaching, contrary to Presbyterianism’s Westminster Larger Catechism, Q. & A. 158. Given Christ’s provision of pastors as His ambassadors for the official preaching of His Word (cf. Rom. 10:15; Eph. 4:11; Heb. 5:4; cf. “Against Lay Preaching“), the “gospelling” of the scattered saints (Acts 8:4) was either their personal witnessing in the office of believer (cf. I Peter 3:15) or their preaching through the evangelists and elders, like Philip in the next verse (Acts 8:5, 12).
As regards the office of deacon, his speculations about some “ad-hoc committee” in Acts 6, and lay preaching, I would refer Professor Patterson (and indeed the whole Presbyterian Church in Ireland [PCI] with their women in church office) to both the Westminster Assembly’s The Form of Presbyterial Church-Government and a fine book by Thomas Witherow, another Professor from Londonderry in a more faithful age of Irish Presbyterianism, entitled The Apostolic Church: Which Is It? The question of this title is a very good one in a day when the PCI is drifting ever further from Presbyterian church government, as well as from Presbyterian doctrine, sacraments, discipline and worship. Sadly, Prof. Patterson’s “unPresbyterian” view of deacons, women deacons and lay preaching will render his opposition to women ministers and elders no effective barrier against further usurpation by women office-bearers in the PCI. Rev. Angus Stewart
(11) Ballymena Guardian and Ballymena Times
Those in the Presbyterian Church in Ireland in favour of women ministers, and who now even proposed a woman moderator (Dr. Ruth Patterson), twist, slight or simply ignore the clear, scriptural passages which specifically address (and forbid) women in the special, permanent church offices of pastor, elder and deacon (I Cor. 14:34-40; I Tim. 2:11-3:16). Instead, they argue from examples not pertaining to the issue in hand.
Huldah (II Kings 22:14-20) and Philip’s daughters (Acts 21:8-9) occupied the extraordinary, temporary office of prophetess in Old Testament and apostolic days, respectively. Today, in the post-apostolic era, there are no prophets or prophetesses receiving extraordinary calls and direct revelation, for the foundation of Christ’s church has been laid in the all-sufficient apostolic and prophetic Scriptures (Eph. 2:20; II Tim. 3:16-17). Even in the apostolic age when there was direct revelation, unlike the prophets (I Cor. 14:29-33), the prophetesses were “not permitted … to speak” in public worship services: “Let your women keep silence in the churches … for it is a shame for them to speak in the church” (34-35).
Whereas the prophetesses had an extraordinary, temporary office, the women at Christ’s empty tomb who announced His resurrection to the despairing disciples were godly, witnessing believers.
None of these are examples of women called and ordained to the special, permanent church offices of pastor, elder or deacon, nor did these ladies preach officially in the churches or administer the sacraments—the things which the advocates of women in church office would need to prove and which Christ specifically forbids in His Word, as the Christian church has rightly understood for some two millennia. Rev. Angus Stewart
(12) Belfast Telegraph and News Letter (11 & 12 February, 2009)
Commenting on Scripture’s prohibition of women in church office (pastor, elder or deacon): “I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man” (I Timothy 2:12), John Calvin, the chief formulator of historic Presbyterianism, denounces women in the ministry as “monstrous.”
Tragically, in 2009, the 500th anniversary of Calvin’s birth, those in the Presbyterian Church in Ireland (PCI), like Rev. Stafford Carson, who oppose women office-bearers are in a “minority,” as the newly elected moderator himself admitted. This monstrosity (to use Calvin’s terminology) is now the majority position of a denomination whose roots lie in the Calvin Reformation. The teaching of the Genevan Reformer and, even more importantly, the Word of Christ regarding church office is rejected. Not “truce” (Rev. Carson) or “muddle” or “fudge” (Alf McCreary) but “monstrous” (Calvin’s word) best describes the unfaithfulness of the PCI. Rev. Angus Stewart
*The letters appear here in somewhat expanded form.
(1) Rev. Stewart’s BBC Radio Ulster’s interview on women in church office with David Dunseith and Rev. Ken Newell can be listened to on-line.
(2) Rev. Stewart’s BBC Radio Ulster’s interview on women in church office with David Dunseith and Christina Rees can be listened to on-line.
