Distinctives (2): Complementary Roles of Men and Women

Église Connexion

Sermon • Submitted 5 years ago

0 ratings

· 5 views

Notes

Transcript

Sermon Tone Analysis

Emotion

Language

Social

View more →

We’re in the second week of our series on our theological distinctives: those points of doctrine which are of secondary importance, but which we feel are important enough to affirm and teach for the life of our church.

This week we’re going to be talking about probably the most divisive point on our list: the complementary roles of men and women in the church and in the home.

Now this is no secret to anyone who’s been in the church for a long time. We’ve talked about this before, and at some length.

But if you’ve joined us more recently, you may not have heard us talk about this topic quite so much, because we’ve been in Luke for almost two years, and Luke doesn’t really address it. So chances are, if you have heard us talk about it, it’s been in the context of the home—either through our short series last year on sex, our marriage prep classes, or if you’ve attended any weddings I’ve preached at.

So let me ask you this: hold your anger until we’re done, because it’s probably not what you think it is.

So chances are, if you have heard us talk about it, it’s been in the context of the home—either through our series on sex, our marriage prep classes, or if you’ve attended any weddings I’ve preached at.

Nous croyons que l'homme et la femme ont été créés avec une valeur et une dignité identiques devant Dieu, mais que Dieu leur a donné des rôles différents dans le contexte du mariage et de l'église. Dieu a ordonné que l'église établisse des hommes qualifiés en tant qu'anciens pour diriger spirituellement la communauté des croyants, alors que dans tous les autres ministères de l'église, nous avons une grande liberté — hommes et femmes sont appelés à servir l'église selon les dons qui leur sont donnés. Dans le contexte du mariage, l'homme et la femme sont appelés à présenter au monde une image de l'évangile : Dieu donne à l'époux la responsabilité d'être « la tête » de sa famille, aimant sa femme comme Christ a aimé l'église, se sacrifiant pour elle et pourvoyant à ses besoins et à son progrès dans la foi. Dieu donne à l'épouse la responsabilité de se soumettre à son mari en l'aidant à accomplir sa responsabilité devant Dieu de manière réfléchie, intelligente et respectueuse. La soumission de la femme à son mari ne signifie pas l'obéissance en tous points (puisque son Maître n'est pas son mari, mais Jésus-Christ), ni le silence face à l'opinion de son mari, mais plutôt le respect de la charge que porte son mari et une attitude de sacrifice et d'assistance sans laquelle son mari ne pourra pleinement accomplir cette charge. Tout homme qui a une attitude autoritaire, abusive ou négligente envers sa femme échoue gravement dans sa responsabilité devant Dieu, puisque ce n'est pas ainsi que Jésus-Christ a accompli sa responsabilité d'aimer et de se sacrifier pour l'église. Ces différences de rôles sont basées non pas sur des circonstances culturelles ou temporelles spécifiques, mais sur la responsabilité que Dieu a donné à l'homme et à la femme lors de leur création initiale.

So today we’re going to focus more on how this plays out in the life of our church. (If you want to know more about how this plays out in the home, go to our website: we’ve done lots of teaching on the subject.)

Like last week, I’m going to briefly explain what we mean when we talk about complementary roles of men and women; then we’re going to go to Scripture, and there I’d like to re-examine some blind spots we may have developed because of things we haven’t said about this subject; and then we’ll see how we try to work this out in the life of our church.

If you’re wondering what we mean by “complentary roles of men and women,” the basic position held by many Christians goes something like this:

Men and women were both created in the image of God, equal in value and dignity. But we were created different: we have been given roles and responsibilities which are not interchangeable.

In the home, God calls men to sacrificially take the initiative to lead their families for their good; and he calls women to lovingly and respectfully recognize the responsibility of their husbands, and to help him fulfill that responsibility.

In the church, God calls certain, qualified men to serve the church as elders (or pastors), and gives us freedom in every other domain for men and women to serve.

That’s basically how it goes.

Let’s be clear: we believe that, and we affirm that, and we’ll go into some aspects of why we do later on.

The problems come when you stop at that definition.

In that basic definition, there are a lot of things missing, and if we don’t fill in the blanks, what we don’t say shapes the life of the church as much as what we do say.

There is a kind of “boys’ club”mentality that can form in the life of the church, where every young man feels he has an almost inherent right to leadership, and where women feel they are pushed off to the sidelines because the pastors are men.

The unintended result of all this is that neither gender flourishes in the life of the church: men are handicapped by the idea that they can be elders because they are men (which is false), and women are handicapped by the idea that because elders in the church are men, the church doesn’t want women to serve in any leadership capacity (which is also false).

So I’d like to spend a good deal of time today talking about those things which are usually left unsaid—things which, when left unsaid, form the life of the church in unhealthy ways.

And to do that, I’ll ask you to go to the book of Genesis, in chapter 2.

Man and Woman at Creation ()

Let’s remember the context. tells the story of creation from a wide-angle perspective: it goes through the seven days of creation, and what God did on a global scale.

So God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them.

tells the same story, but this time telling it from a ground-level perspective, going into much more detail on the subject of human life.

In v. 7, we read:

God creates the world, creates all the animals of the world, and then in v. 7, we read:

...the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.

Then in v. 15:

Anon, 2016. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version, Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.

15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

18 Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” 19 Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him. 21 So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. 22 And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. 23 Then the man said,

“This at last is bone of my bones

and flesh of my flesh;

she shall be called Woman,

because she was taken out of Man.”

There’s a lot to see there, but for today’s purposes, we need to mainly see one thing.

Anon, 2016. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version, Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.

God creates Adam (the name “Adam” means “man”), and gives him a job to do: he puts him in the garden to work it and keep it. And the first thing God says after giving the man this job is that he can’t do it alone. He needs a helper “fit for him” (or “corresponding to him”).

Why? Because the man isn’t complete in himself—this word “helper” means someone who gives strength in an area that those helped are lacking. (This word is most commonly used to refer to God himself, in the way God helps his people. So it is most definitely not a term to designate inferiority—God is not inferior to his people. It’s a term of honor.)

The ESV Study Bible Chapter 2

“Helper” (Hb. ‘ezer) is one who supplies strength in the area that is lacking in “the helped.”

So God brings all the animals to Adam, and the first job Adam is given as intendant of creation is the task of naming the animals. So he names all the animals (not “Fluffy” or “Bob”—he names the difference species).

But of course, there is no animal there that “corresponds to” Adam: none of them are like him.

Of course this isn’t a surprise to God—I’m speculating here, but I suspect that God made Adam name the animals first so that he, Adam, would realize just how alone he was here: that no animal on this planet could be the helper he needed.

So God puts Adam to sleep, and takes out one of his ribs, and from the rib, God creates a woman.

Some people have used this verse to say that the woman God creates out of the rib is somehow less than the man, because as Adam says, “she was taken out of Man” (v. 23). They’re missing the point entirely.

The point is that this new creature God creates is a part of the man. She is not something else, something “other,” like the animals. She is made of “the same stuff” as man.

God takes the rib and creates the woman, and then brings her to the man. And Adam, when he sees her, gives this beautiful poetic refrain praising the goodness of the woman, and in this refrain he emphasizes exactly the same point: she is “bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh”—she is made of the same stuff as me; she is like me; she corresponds to me.

This is why earlier, in chapter 1 verse 27, we read:

So God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them.

God creates man (“man” in the collective sense of “humanity”) in his image, and he creates humanity male and female. Both in his image. Both like one another. There is a distinction, which is first and foremost anatomical—he creates them male and female. But the fundamental characteristic of both man and woman is that they are created in the image of God.

So there is one idea that runs through this entire text, and I want us to see it very, very clearly.

The first word of the Bible on the subject of men and women is not one of distinction, but one of sameness. The very first thing the Bible teaches us about men and women is not how they are different, but how they are the same.

Men and women are more alike than they are different. There are differences between us, of course; but we are first and foremost human beings, made in the image of God. Our differences have to come in second place, under that reality.

So God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them.

What About the New Testament?

Anon, 2016. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version, Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.

God creates man (“man” in the collective sense of “humanity”) in his image, and he creates humanity male and female. Both in his image. Both like one another. There is a distinction—male and female—but the fundamental definition of both is that they are created in God’s own image.

Now, I know what some of you are going to say. All this celebration of our sameness sounds great…but it’s . This is before the fall, before sin.

After this, in the Old Testament, we seem to see women thrown to the sidelines. There are a lot of reasons for that—coming from questions of culture, and the curse of sin—but the Old Testament is sometimes brutal, so we kind of expect it.

In the New Testament, we think, it will surely be better.

But, according to many people, things don’t actually change that much, because in the New Testament, we have the apostle Paul.

and in the New Testament, we have the apostle Paul.

Paul gets a lot of flack on this subject, because complementarian roles in the church come directly from his letters. And in those letters, he says some things that, at least superficially, trouble a lot us (namely women, and men who love women).

So let’s look at some examples from Paul’s letters, case by case, to see if that’s really true.

First of all, where do we get the idea that elders in the church should be “certain qualified men”?

1 Timothy 3.1-7

Go to . We’re going to read two verses in a minute, but just to set the context, in chapter 2 Paul has been speaking about the way Christians are to conduct themselves in their regular gatherings.

In that section, he speaks about teaching with authority—basically, the job of the pastor or elder: preaching the Bible in view of leading the church. We’ll come back to that part of chapter 2 in just a minute, but for now, we just need to know that Paul reserves this authoritative teaching to men.

(We don’t have time to go into great detail here, but we did an entire series on 1 Timothy a couple years ago, in which we go through the entire letter at great length. The series is on the church’s website if you want to know more.)

That’s a pretty shocking idea taken alone, but in chapter 3, Paul tells us what kind of man is qualified to receive this responsibility of authority in the church (we’re just going to read v. 1-2):

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach…

…and so on. Paul goes on to describe more qualifications for elders in v. 3-7.

So he’s very clear: those who are given the authority of overseeing and teaching the church are certain qualified men. Not all men, but certain qualified men, who fit certain criteria. Not all men who meet these criteria will find themselves in this role of elder, but all elders must meet the criteria.

That’s why, when Paul and Arnaud were elected elders, we spent a year assessing their character and assessing their abilities, as well as training them to hone those abilities—we wanted to make sure they were qualified.

(I know what many of you may be thinking: plenty of women would meet these criteria for eldership as well. And that’s true. But as we saw, God did create us different—he created us male and female. And behind that distinction, he had greater goals in mind than the ability to have babies. He meant for leadership roles to reflect his leadership roles: in the church, he wants the elder to reflect the Father’s paternal leadership of his people; and in the home, he wants the husband to reflect Christ’s husbandly leadership of the church. These distinctions never suggest that men are somehow more capable than women, but rather exist to reflect a greater truth we need to learn.)

That said, what does Paul do with women?

Let’s look more closely at :

11 Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.

Now before we get angry, we should notice the first half of v. 11—already, in those words “Let a woman learn”, we have an idea of where his mind is, if we know a bit about the historical context.

The idea that a woman should “learn” shattered ancient stereotypes. Women were considered second-class citizens at this time and place; they were not educated; they weren’t supposed to “learn” anything. (In the Jerusalem Talmud, Sotah 3:4, 19a, we see this horrible phrase: “Better to burn the Torah than to teach it to a woman.”)

So Paul’s insistence that women should learn is already a massive departure from the norm.

Women, he says, have a responsibility to learn God’s Word—he expects women in the church to be biblically literate.

But what about his insistence that women learn “quiely, with all submissiveness”?

Well, the context of Timothy’s church, the church in Ephesus, is important, and we see it in Paul’s letter. Some women in the church in Ephesus were, Paul says, “going about from house to house…[being] gossips and busybodies, saying what they should not.”

So Paul is insisting that women in the church not be like that: they should have a quiet disposition when learning about the Bible, just like everyone else. As Thomas Lea and Hayne Griffin point out, “Paul was not demanding physical silence but a teachable spirit.” And he is intentionally singling out women here because many women in Timothy’s church were struggling with this teachability in a particular way.

Now here’s the thing we need to remember: if we read the rest of the Bible, we clearly see that this is true for men as well. Every Christian in the church, man or woman, who sits under the authority of the elders, should learn in this same way; we should all be teachable and respectful of the preaching of the Word. (Myself included: when Paul or Arnaud preach the Word as elders, I learn under their authority as elders.)

Paul calls out women here because many women in the church in Ephesus had particular struggles in this area.

So here we have a negative prohibition—women, don’t behave like this. Do we have any positive examples from Paul?

Do we have any positive examples from Paul?

As a matter of fact, we do—one great example is found at the end of his letter to the Romans.

At the end of Romans, Paul includes (as he often does) greetings to specific members of the church. But what is interesting about this list is the sheer number of women he includes, and the way in which he speaks about them.

He specifically greets Prisca, Mary, Junia, Tryphaena, Tryphosa, Persis, Rufus’s mother, Julia, and Nereus’s sister.

And look at the way he describes them: he calls Prisca a “fellow worker in Christ Jesus” (v. 3). He uses the term “to work,” or “to labor” to speak of how Mary (v. 6), Tryphaena, Tryphosa, and Persis (v. 12) served the church. While Prisca is mentioned as a “fellow worker” along with her husband Aquila, these other mentions of “labor” and “hard work” are only used for women.

So we can conclude that these women were vitally involved in the hard work of ministry to the church.

In addition, before that, in v. 1-2, he mentions Phoebe. Phoebe was, he says, “a deacon of the church at Cenchreae”—she served in an official capacity as deacon of her church, and is the only person in this list to receive such a title. Clearly Paul thinks very highly of her: he commends her heartily, instructing the church in Rome to “welcome her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints” (v. 2).

We’ll stop there, but these are not the only places we see Paul speaking of women in this way. The accusation that Paul, or any of the New Testament writers, viewed women as second-class members simply does not hold up to careful study of the text.

Women were held in honor in the early church, and worked diligently in the ministry of the gospel, just like their brothers.

Distinctions in the Church

Somewhere along the line, Christians who hold to complementarian theology have forgotten this.

Much of that forgetfulness comes from what has happened in much of church life over the last fifty or sixty years.

Much of the way complementarian theology is framed today has been in response to the rise of third-wave feminism in the West. This more radical brand of feminism, rather than simply seeking equality and dignity for women, sought to blur all the distinctions between men and women; and of course the Bible doesn’t allow us to do that.

So the church responded to this effort by not just affirming the distinctions between men and women, but by blaring them out with a megaphone.

As Jen Wilkin put it, the church perceived an enemy to the left, and so spoke to the left; but in doing so, we completely missed an enemy to the right which has been sneaking up on us.

And because we have so long hammered on what is different about us, the church has been shaped largely by those distinctions. We’ve put the men over here, and the women over here. Men do these things, and women do…well, we’re not really sure what women do, so we’ll just gently push them to the back and let them fend for themselves.

We’ve put the men over here, and the women over here. Men do these things, and women do…well, we’re not really sure what women do, so we’ll just gently push them to the back and let them fend for themselves.

So you see the problem. When we keep the genders so radically separate from one another, and lean too strongly on their differences, we alienate and objectify both genders.

It has c

But if we look at the picture we are given in Genesis, we see no hint of this separatism. The woman isn’t a curious problem for the man to solve; she is his necessary ally in fulfilling the creation mandate.

Look at Genesis 1, verse 28:

And God blessed them. And God said to THEM, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Often people have divided these two things—“be fruitful and multiply” is the woman’s job, and “have dominion” over the world is the man’s job. But the text says nothing of the sort: the woman can’t “multiply” on her own (obviously), and the man can’t have dominion over the earth on his own (that’s why the woman was created in the first place—he needed help!). The creation mandate is the job God gave to both the man and the woman.

The same is true for the church.

What About the New Testament?

Now, I know what some of you are going to say. That all sounds great…but it’s . This is before the fall, before sin. After this, we seem to see women thrown to the sidelines, and in the New Testament, we have the apostle Paul.

The apostle Paul gets a lot of flack on this subject, because complementarian roles in the church come directly from his letters. And in those letters, he says some things that trouble a lot us (namely, women and men who love women).

So let’s look at a couple of things (we don’t have time to see them all, but a couple examples) case by case to see if that’s really true.

First of all, where do we get the idea that elders should be certain, qualified men?

Go to . We’re going to read two verses in a minute, but just to set the context, Paul has been speaking about the way Christians are to conduct themselves in their regular gatherings. He addresses specific ways that men often diverge from this correct behavior (anger or quarreling), and some ways women diverge from this correct behavior (basically, dolling up their external beauty to be seen by others).

And in that discussion, in chapter 2, verse 12, he speaks about teaching with authority. We’ll come back to this verse in a minute, but we need to see that Paul reserves this teaching with authority to men.

And in chapter 3, he tells us what kind of man should be given this responsibility of authority in the church (we’re just going to read v. 1-2):

; we’re just going to read v. 1-2:

Anon, 2016. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version, Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.

…and so on. Paul goes on to describe more qualifications for elders in v. 3-7.

So he’s very clear: those who are given the authority of leading and teaching the church are certain, qualified men. Not all men, but certain, qualified men.

If that were all we had to go on, we would be stretching our interpretation a bit (only a bit, but a bit).

That being said, what does Paul do with women?

Let’s look more closely at :

11 Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.

The first thing we should note is the first half of v. 11—already there we have an idea of where his mind is, if we know a bit about the context.

The idea that a woman should “learn” shattered ancient stereotypes. Women were considered second-class citizens; they were not educated; they weren’t supposed to “learn” anything. (In the Jerusalem Talmud, Sotah 3:4, 19a, we see this troubling phrase: “Better to burn the Torah than to teach it to a woman.”)

So Paul’s insistence that women should learn is already a massive departure from the norm. Women, he says, have the responsibility of learning God’s Word—he expects women in the church to be biblically literate.

What about his insistence that women learn “quiely, with all submissiveness”? Well, the context of the church in Ephesus, where Timothy taught, is important, and we see it in Paul’s letter to Timothy. Some women in the church in Ephesus were, Paul says, “going about from house to house…[being] gossips and busybodies, saying what they should not.”

So Paul is insisting that the women in Ephesus not be like that: they should have a quiet disposition when learning about the Bible, like everyone else. As Thomas Lea and Hayne Griffin point out, “Paul was not demanding physical silence but a teachable spirit.”

In this passage, we see a negative prohibition against a certain kind of disruptive woman in the church.

Do we have any positive examples from Paul?

As a matter of fact, we do—at the end of his letter to the Romans.

He specifically greets Prisca, Mary, Junia, Tryphaena, Tryphosa, Persis, Rufus’s mother, Julia, and Nereus’s sister.

And look at the way he describes them: he calls Prisca a “fellow worker in Christ Jesus” (v. 3). He uses the term “to work,” or “to labor” to speak of Mary (v. 6), Tryphaena, Tryphosa, and Persis (v. 12). While Prisca is mentioned as a “fellow worker” along with her husband Aquila, these other mentions of “labor” and “hard work” are only used for women. So these women were vitally involved in the hard work of ministry to the church.

In addition, before that, in v. 1-2, he mentions Phoebe. Phoebe was, he says, “a deacon of the church at Cenchreae”—she served in an official capacity as deacon of her church, and is the only person in this list to receive such a title (incidentally, seems to indicate women as deacons as well). Clearly Paul thinks very highly of her: he commends her heartily, instructing the church in Rome to “welcome her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints” (v. 2).

Women were held in the same honor, and held the same roles and responsibiities, as any man in the church who didn’t hold the office of elder.

In everything God gives us to do as a body, as the church, men and women are both necessary partners in this work, because we are both created in God’s image.

So in everything God gives us to do as a body, as the church, men and women are both necessary partners in this work.

That’s

So the big question is, how can we honor this sameness we see in , and at the same time affirm and celebrate the distinctions which God created between us?

It’s a very complex question, and there are lots of ways to answer it. But we can begin by having an appropriate vision for service in the church, and an appropriate vision for discipleship in the family of God.

We could speak about the answer to that question all day; but we need to start by developing a appropriate vision of service in the church, and an appropriate vision of discipleship in the church.

But last year he wrote an article on why in the theological institute he founded, there are no female professors. He has theologic

Service in the Church

As we’ve said, the elders in our church are qualified men who have been observed and approved as qualified—myself, Paul and Arnaud. We do it this way because we believe that the Bible is inarguably clear that this is the way elders in the church should be chosen.

In every other possible capacity, we have lots of freedom.

Deacons in our church are both qualified men and women (qualified according to the criteria in ).

During our weekly church service, all members actively participate—not just those who come up front and speak into a microphone.

Men and women serve on the welcome teams, obviously; both men and women serve in children’s church; both men and women lead worship under the supervision of the elders. Every role is open except those of preaching the Word and administering Communion (tasks which fall under the responsibility of the elders, because they are commonly viewed as authoritative acts).

In addition, we have men and women leading Bible studies and discussions around the Bible.

Both men and women lead worship on Sundays, preparing songs and Scripture readings and introductions. These are done under the supervision of the elders.

Both men and women lead our home group discussions; and in gender-specific contexts, women lead the Women’s Bible studies, and men—not just the elders—lead the Men’s Bible Studies. (In addition, the men and women who lead these studies are called to seek out and train other men and women to know their Bibles and to lead future studies.)

We have men and women leading Bible studies—women lead the Women’s Bible studies, and men (not just the elders) lead the Men’s Bible Studies.

Mixed-gender teaching environments, such as our marriage prep classes or our members’ classes, can either led by an elder, by a man and a woman together, or both. (Loanne recently co-taught a marriage prep class along with me.)

And it goes further than that.

On top of all of that, we have some good news not everyone may have heard yet.

Let me just take a minute to talk about Debs (she’s not here, so she won’t have to be embarrassed by my praising her a bit).

Deborah Prisk will be joining our staff in the fall, working part-time to train women in the church in discipleship. Let me just take a minute to talk about Debs (she’s not here, so she won’t have to be embarrassed by my praising her a bit).

Deborah is an incredible Bible teacher, theologian and disciple of Christ. Loanne and I have known her for longer than we’ve known any of you, because we actually worked together at our sister church in Lagny-sur-Marne while interning there.

She spent over ten years in that church training women to be disciples of Christ who make and train other disciples of Christ, and now she is free to come serve us, because the women in Lagny have learned under her care how to reproduce what they’ve learned. And she’ll be doing the same thing with us.

Debs fully agrees with this view of complementarian roles in the church: she will serve under the authority of the elders.

But it would be a wild mistake to think that we will be planning out her tasks for her, or that her service in the church will only be limited to women.

She knows far more about practical discipleship than I do, and she’s a better theologian than I am. She has knowledge I need to learn, as you all do. I’m thrilled that I’m going to have the opportunity to learn from her, and I hope that all of you—men and women—are as well. She will be regularly interacting with our elder team and the other deacons, to help us see how we can better live out the gospel in the church.

And THAT is the point.

Men and women are not competitors in the work of the gospel; we are ALLIES in the work of the gospel, even when it comes to leadership in the church.

Male eldership

If discussions of church life are relegated only to men, what we will essentially end up having is a single-parent family, with only father figures (the elders) free to influence. And if we do that, we deprive ourselves of the kind of motherly influence that we all need. Men and women are not interchangeable; we need both.

That’s how it works in terms of leadership roles in the church.

But we need to go a little further than that if we are going to do justice to the subject, because Paul told us in that God gave leaders to the church—why? :

…to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ.

In other words, it is not the sole responsibility of church leaders to build up the body of Christ. My job as pastor is to equip you to build up the body.

And just as we need both men and women to participate in roles of responsibility, you need each other—brothers and sisters—to build up the body, as disciples of Christ.

Discipleship in the Family of God

We use the word “discipleship” a lot in the church; what do we mean when we say it?

Discipleship is very simply when one disciple of Christ helps another disciple of Christ to better understand the Word of God, and to better live that Word out in practice.

Historically, discipleship is something that we have segregated—men disciple men, and women disciple women.

And there’s wisdom in that: that’s why in our church we don’t have mixed-gender discipleship groups. There are things you share in some contexts which would be inappropriate in a mixed-gender environment—things could get very confusing very quickly.

There is wisdom in that: there are things you share in some contexts that would be inappropriate in a mixed-gender environment, and things could get confusing very quickly.

But if you’re only discipling each other when you meet with your groups, then—I’m sorry—you’re doing it wrong; discipleship should be happening every minute of every day.

We see one easy example in . Apollos was a Jewish itinerant minister who was eloquent in the Scriptures, and who was a very good teacher of Christ. But apparently he was a little confused about baptism. So what happened? A married couple, Priscilla and Aquila heard him speak, and we see in :

He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately.

So they had a solid, wise framework for discipleship—they were both present, so there couldn’t be any confusion between Apollos and Priscilla about what exactly was going on here—but they were both involved. Apollos was discipled by this man and this woman.

Brothers, your sisters need you to disciple them. Sisters, your brothers need you to disciple them.

Two of the people in our church who most consistently and helpfully call my attention to potential misunderstandings—or even things I’ve overlooked—in my theology are women: Loanne and Debs. And thank God for their theological minds!

And this “everyday discipleship” should not only happen with members of the same sex.

The idea that you should only do theology or live out discipleship with people of the same sex is ridiculous, because God created us, men and women, to be allies in this work. He created us all in the image of God, so it's crazy to imagine I shouldn't learn from a fellow image-bearer of God just because she happens to be a woman.

Think of Priscilla and Aquila discipling Apollos in . There was a wise framework in place (Aquila was there, so there could be no confusion about what was going on between Priscilla and Apollos), but both he and she were involved in discipling this brother.

Guys, your sisters may well be better at this than your brothers.

It’s so important, because particularly for men, we can often get this idea that somehow men are just naturally better at theology, because elders are men. They’d never say that aloud, but that’s where they’d naturally drift. And it’s just baldly untrue.

I recently heard someone say this, and it is so true: I have learned more about theology from my wife than from any class I've taken or any book I've read. Not just through conversations we've had together or with other people—though that is true too—but especially through watching her live out the practical implications of the gospel.

I was a very immature Christian when we met, and she grew in her faith more quickly than I did. So during the early years of our marriage, I was watching someone a little further down the road from me figure out what becoming like Christ and living like Christ looks like.

Male and female leaders (find a better word…?)

That is discipleship, and it should be happening with all of us. We should be learning these things from our brothers and sisters.

The idea that you should only do theology with people of the same sex is ridiculous, because God created us, men and women, to be allies in the creation mandate. He created us all in the image of God, so it's crazy to imagine I shouldn't learn from a fellow image-bearer of God just because she happens to be a woman.

Now…I almost hesitate to say that. The cynic in me is saying, “Okay, do you realize what you just did? These guys going to take what you just said and run with it. It’s going to be open season on the ladies.”

I’m going to address the men for a moment just for the sake of clarity, but what I’ll say holds true for women as well.

Men, I’m trusting you—no, I’m sorry, I don’t trust you; I’m trusting God—that you’ll hear me right. (If I hear of any of you playing games with our sisters because you heard me say that “We should do discipleship with the girls,” we’re going to have a big problem.)

But no matter the risk, it needs to be said.

if I hear of any of you playing games with any of my sisters because you heard me say that “We should do discipleship with the girls,” we’re going to have a very painful conversation.)

Of course there need to be safeguards put up to protect us from temptation, from ambiguity, from (God forbid) potential abuse.

I’m going to address the men for a moment just for the sake of clarity, but what I’ll say holds true for women as well.

Brothers, you need to be very wise and very careful about how and where and when you have conversations with your sisters, single or married. It’s not going to be the same as it is with the guys, because again—we don’t want to lean so heavily on the sameness of men and women that we forget our differences.

So you need to make sure you do this in a group, not one-on-one; that you’re not creating a false sense of intimacy with any of your sisters; that there is not even the possibility of any ambiguity, or potential for temptation.

These safeguards, and others like them, are vitally important and wise.

But we’ve gone from putting up wise safeguards to making outright prohibitions on discipleship with our sisters, and that’s not wise either, nor is it biblical. We need safeguards, but we can’t stop there.

All of us need to go deeper. We need to work on our hearts and ask ourselves, How do I see this man or this woman in front of me?

If we are a

Because seeing our sisters as sisters, and our brothers as brothers—seeing each other as the family of God, the family all of us need—is the surest safeguard we can find.

And it is absolutely necessary if we are to live out the gospel in a way that honors the way God created us—in his image.

I’ll never forget a conversation Loanne and I were having with a young couple fairly recently. We were talking about marriage, and Loanne said something that completely floored me.

She said (of the two of us), “The most fundamental relationship of our lives is not our relationship of husband and wife, but of brother and sister.”

I had never thought of that, or at least I’d never framed it so clearly.

Loanne will be my wife until one of us dies; but she will be my sister for all eternity.

That’s what it really means to be the family of God. Every family relationship we have today is a temporary picture of that eternal reality.

Guys, when you look at your sisters, and ladies, when you look at your brothers, you need to see it: you are FAMILY. You must not primarily see the men and women around you as potential spouses.

Brothers, you need your sisters. Sisters, you need your brothers.

They are your brothers. They are your sisters.

If we are acting in love for our brothers or sisters, safeguards are unnecessary.

However, we are sinners; we need safeguards of wisdom to keep us from hurting one another.

Freedom in other roles

You are a family.

But we can’t stop at safeguards, we need to work on our hearts: how do I see this man or this woman in front of me?

The most fundamental relationship of our lives is not that of husband/wife but brother/sister.

Loanne will be my wife until one of us dies; but she will be my sister for all eternity.

And how dysfunctional is the family which lives a segregated life, in which the brothers only have meaningful, influential relationships with their brothers, and not their sisters?

The call of the Bible is that we live as brothers and sisters—the family dynamic.

This family dynamic is eternal.

Men, you cannot do discipleship or theology well without your sisters. Women, you cannot do theology or discipleship well without your brothers.

We need each other, and we are responsible for one another. So we are called to take care of each other, and learn from each other.

Now, why do we do it this way? Some faithful, biblical churches whom we love prefer to keep any kind of mixed-gender environment free from mixed-gender leadership, to avoid any kind of confusion. (For example, they won’t have women leading the time of worship.) While I love these brothers dearly, and I absolutely see their point, that’s not what we choose to do here. Why is that?

Conclusion

(Not functioning as a single-parent family, neglecting the “motherly influence” which is so often lacking in the church.)

Now before we close, let me speak real quickly to anyone here who is not a believer. What should you take away from all of this?

Deacons/présidences

I hope, at minimum, that you’ve seen that church isn’t the unwelcoming, exclusive boys’ club some people say it is.

But I hope that’s not all you see.

Men/Women’s Bible Study

The big takeaway here, for all of us, is that God created us to be his people. We were separated from him because of our rebellion against him, so he sent his Son to take our place, to take our rebellion on himself, and to be punished so that we wouldn’t have to. On the cross, Christ paid the penalty for our sin, and gave us the perfect life he had lived, so that we could be reconciled to God.

And because of his work, we have been adopted into his family as brothers and sisters.

I don’t know what kind of a family life you have, or had growing up. But no matter if it was good or bad, it’s temporary. Every family lasts only as long as its members are alive, or as long as they don’t leave.

But God created families too. And he created the family unit—mom, dad, sister, brother—to reflect THE family he created us to be a part of: this family, the family of God, united in Christ. This family is not temporary; this family will be family for all eternity.

So here’s the question we all need to ask:

How good must Christ be, to save us into a family in which the ones we love will never die, and our Father will never leave?

God created all of us to see and enjoy his glory together, and because of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, he invites all men and women to come to him in faith, and to be adopted into his family.

So if you don’t know Jesus this morning, place your faith in him; repent of your rebellion; and rest in the knowledge that Christ will not turn away anyone who comes to him in faith. Be adopted by the Father, and know that your family will be your family forever.

She adheres to this complementarian vision—will serve under the leadership of the elders—but has served the church in Lagny in massively concrete ways.

Ministry to women, but certainly not limited to women

She has things I myself want to learn about discipleship, and I’m excited about the opportunity to learn from her.

Women have to be involved in the discussions around how the church lives out the gospel—what kind of sense does it make to make decisions around how men and women should live out the gospel if men and women aren’t both involved in that discussion?!

I recently heard someone say this, and it is so true: I have learned more about theology from my wife than any class I've taken or any book I've read. Not just through conversations we've had together or with other people—though that is true too—but especially through watching her live out the practical implications of her theology.

I was a very immature Christian when we met—she grew in her faith much more quickly than I did—so for a good part of the early years of our marriage, I was watching someone a little further down the road from me figure out what becoming like Christ and living like Christ looked like.

What happened with me in a very intense way with Loanne (because we were married) needs to happen with our brothers and sisters in Christ as well.

Of course there need to be safeguards put up to protect us from temptation, from ambiguity, from (God forbid) potential abuse. But we've gone from wise safeguards to outright interdictions that are not necessary, wise or helpful.

Brothers, you need your sisters. Sisters, you need your brothers.

Not difference, but SAMENESS.

The framework of wisdom in male/female discipleship: When we isolate the genders and lean too strongly on their differences, we alienate and objectify both genders.

If we are acting in love for our brothers or sisters, safeguards are unnecessary.

However, we are sinners; we need safeguards of wisdom to keep us from hurting one another.

We need safeguards of wisdom to keep us from hurting one another. But rather than simply putting up safeguards, we need to work on our hearts: how do I see this man or this woman in front of me?

But we can’t stop at safeguards, we need to work on our hearts: how do I see this man or this woman in front of me?

The most fundamental relationship of our lives is not that of husband/wife but brother/sister.

Loanne will be my wife until one of us dies; but she will be my sister for all eternity.

The call of the Bible is that we live as brothers and sisters—the family dynamic.

This family dynamic is eternal.

Men, you cannot do discipleship or theology well without your sisters. Women, you cannot do theology or discipleship well without your brothers.

The two people in our church who most frequently call my attention to potential misunderstandings—or even things I’ve overlooked—in my theology are both women. And thank God for their theological minds!

Complementarian: Discipleship/theology in community

What happened with me in a very intense way with Loanne (because we were married) needs to happen with our brothers and sisters in Christ as well.

Brothers, you need your sisters. Sisters, you need your brothers.

Practice: How does this work?

Teaching with authority: elders.

Teaching in other contexts: under the elders’ responsibility and guidance.

Related Media

Related Sermons