I really like what you say in your last paragraph; that this entire male/female leadership dichotomy is outdated, and we need to be looking beyond traditional gender roles to see who will abuse power and who will not. But it felt to me that in the rest of the article you were still talking from within those old frameworks instead of moving beyond them. For example, the statement that "many pastors are looking to women and 'type b' men who can help them learn new ways of functioning" seemed to equate women with type B personalities, which is not always the case, and is a gender based assumption.

I'm having trouble with the implications that the church has "moved beyond" 1 Timothy 3, if that is indeed what is being implied. As our "post Christian" Western countries resemble more and more the world the New Testament, Paul's gender counsel seems more applicable then ever. NT churches were to be led by Christlike men.

In Romans 16 Paul highly recommmends several women as leaders in the church. Phoebe was a deacon. While the bias of Modern English translators have translated "diakonos" as servant or helper. The female noun was not used of her but the male indicating that she was indeed a deacon or leader of the church. Even the word for "helper," as translated by some, actually means "leader, governor, ruler or patron. Priscilla's name was mentioned before her husbands four out of six times they were mentioned. This was highly irregular in an ancient text unless there was a good reason -- she was a leader in their home church.
Junius was really Junia (female) in the earlier manuscripts but improperly transcribed as a male in the thirteenth century because of bias.
Junia was an Apostle. Paul also mentioned serveral other women in Romans 16 with nouns and verbs used exclusively of persons in official church leadership. So the leadership of the churches was not just Christlike men but also Christlike women as attested by history and grave markers from the first century. Proper Hermeneutical interpreatation considering Literary context, Words and grammar, culture at the time the scripture was written as opposed to our Western culture, normative texts of timeless truth, historical records and restricted regulations correcting problems at the time it was written -- are revealing an interesting truth that for many is difficult to receive. God not only redeemed us from sin and its hold but it redeeming us from the consequences of the fall. He desires to restore His original plan for men and women to be one -- a team that completes and brings out the best in each other in marriage and in ministry. Galatians 3:23-26 reminds us that "In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Thank you for mentioning the consequences of the fall. I sometimes wonder if I am the only one to notice that the first time that the supposed 'inferiority' of women is mentioned in the Bible is as part of the curse of The Fall. Whether this is intended to still hold true in the lives of Christians or it is an aspect of a fallen world that should be shunned when possible, I defiantly do not believe it is a beautiful truth to celebrate.

Let's be real,Jesus is coming back. And God's plan is going to be carried out no matter what. If all we have to do is wander if women are men is to be preaching the word of God we are going to miss the mark. The word was made for us to live by. Its our job to make sure we help save the lost. Rather it's being preached from a women/men God has given us authority to do so. Its not time to get caught up on gender. Time is at hand people. We are living in a lost and dying world. Use the gifts that God has stirred up in all of us and spread the good news to God's people. Let's not be the one without oil in your lamp when he come back. By being focus on the wrong things. We are all God's children and he uses all of us according to his purpose.

I agree as Christians are not to judge any one so whether the word is preached by a woman or man in this day an age is irrelevate all God is concerned about is the Word reaching everyone and to repent change their ways to satisfy Heavenly Father

Sally wrote: "At a recent workshop on collaborative leadership, one leader admitted, 'I’ve never had a problem figuring out the game plan all by myself. I just find that, increasingly, I’m playing the game and no one else is remotely interested.'"

This single comment is the heartbreaking ego-driven reality many of us have encountered in ministry. That there is a quiet revolution against playing games by these bully rules is not a surprise.

Maybe because the church isn't a game - and maybe because the body was designed to function in mutually-supportive community.

Janice, The problem is that we have been missing the mark for a very long time. Souls are dying and going to hell because the army of God has been apportioned instead of increased and empowered to go forward to reap the harvest. We can put our head in the sand and pretend it isn't a problem; but it is -- all over the world. God's plan is not being fulfilled because some of his children are not being acknowledged, supported, encouraged or even permitted to believe that God could use them in their giftings. While this hasn't happened with me personally I've seen and heard it happening all around me in the body of Christ.
We are all born in sin filled with the same shame that Adam and Eve experienced when they hid in the garden. But the woman has experienced double shame because mankind sees her as less than God originally designed -- someone to be ruled. That mandate has caused women to be squashed, abused physically, emotionally, sexually, mentally and spiritually, and invalidated as a gender. We don't see it as much in America as in other nations so we don't think it's that bad. Shame keeps people hiding their gifts and talents for fear of rejection. Many denominations have women's hands tied to hospitality or children's ministries when God has called them to be leaders, prophets, teachers, pastors, etc.
The body of Christ is limping when it should be marching forward. But I believe Sally is trying to help us see that the kind of ministry that is needed today doesn't call for licensing, ordination or approval of another man or woman -- it calls for us to arise to the passion and heart of God with the gifts and talents He has given us within our design -- intuitive, relating, emotional, nurturing. When we see and feel a need we need to mother someone into the kingdom, nurture them one on one, share the life of Christ wherever God has placed us -- in the marketplace, in the mall shopping, at the restaurant, in a college classroom, on the internet, anywhere and everywhere.
I agree with you that the time is short and we need to redeem the time. Don't worry about what someone will think, obey the voice of God and be "His hand extended" not matter what your gender. God will make room for His gifts and power -- He will be two steps before us leading the way.

Such an interesting conversation - provoked by yet another brilliant post, Sally. What stuns me is how easy it is for us, particularly as women, to quickly move from the gender conversation to so many other topics.

Though your point is clearly that we are moving into an age in which long-subdued and silenced aspects of female gender are now sitting at the table in powerful, (and sometimes), even acknowledged ways, we are often the first to defeat that very progress by stepping out of gender-talk - a conversation that must continue. Understandably: it's difficult. But it's also SO important.

The reality is, as you have so clearly articulated Sally, we cannot truly move into mutuality, collaboration, or even reconciliation and redemption without out-loud acknowledging the role that women can and MUST play in a church described as a "radical dispersion...a context of deconstruction, chaos, and uncertainty..."

Here is my hope: it is into these realms that women can move powerfully - and naturally - as these are the realms in which women have always moved - in chaos and uncertainty - not by choice, but because they have been afforded few other options.

Sally: you invite us to wade into deep waters; ones we'd clearly rather avoid, but also ones in which we've not been allowed to swim before. It's worth getting wet because we actually can! Thanks for not only building bridges over the water, but for taking off your shoes and jumping in. I know the water's been cold. May many of us join you!

However with all the discussion going on over gender equalit etc, the fact remains that if male-seervant-headship is in place in everything that has to do in human endeavor, true gender equality has been achieved as Christ himself portrait himself as the husband v the Church his bride. With all the women leadership that is promoted beyond true motherhood, why is it that the American homes are ever faster disintegrating even whithin the Christian Community? There is really nothing more pleasing to Satan than for more and more home disasters. Besides, true fatherhood, what is that anymore even within the Christian Communities?

I don't quite understand all that H.D. Schmidt is trying to say, but it is typical of certain people to blame society's woes on women. In fact, it's been done all through history. There are many, many factors that combined have weakened the family. Satan wants women powerless and voiceless because he fears the power we wield.

"male-seervant-headship is in place in everything that has to do in human endeavor"

That is not biblical. While the "headship" of a man is biblically portrayed in marriage and church leadership structure, it is nowhere in the bible mandated that men should exclusively lead in every area of human endeavor. This is just another misguided effort to push women out of positions of leadership and to silence their voices in society at large.

The implication that the ONLY appropriate role for a woman is "true motherhood" is preposterous and also not biblical. The bible is full of examples of women leading outside of motherhood. Read Proverbs 31, if nothing else. And what about women who do not have children? What are they supposed to do?

What about "Type A" women who are not afraid of taking authority? I am a female senior pastor in a mainline denomination. This is what I am called and gifted to do. I am also an evangelical, committed to Biblical equality. I am very concerned that your article, while supportive of women in ministry (as I always count on you to be), still leaves them in a gender hierarchy, and insinuates that women are "soft and unassertive." I am tired of hearing the comment, "Wow, Abril. You really know how to play with the 'big boys,'" simply because I am unafraid to assume a leadership role. When do we stop asking women to be second class citizens simply because of their femaleness?

Even before sin entered the world, God created mankind male AND female. He made Adam first, and created Eve to be his helper. Sin came along and distorted that relationship. The answer is not to deny the fact that God created men and women differently, but to learn how to use our God given abilities and spiritual gifts while respecting that fact.

Yes, there were women involved in the early church, but that doesn't mean they "put the men in their place" so to speak. (And you can easily find discussion that counters all of Angela's arguments - not to say you are wrong Angela, just that there are two sides to every argument).

Ladies - please do not be too quick to dismiss what God designed because of how sin has twisted it!

Bible clearly states all equal different rolls the reason bible says women are not to be over men is because woman came from man not man from woman for that reason she is supposed to be in subjection. I know that Jezebel spirit does not like that.You girls sound just like the feminist girls of the world that have torn down and destroyed the family.

Victor, if you truly make Jesus Christ your Lord and accept him into your heart, he will heal you of your mean spiritedness and your need to misquote Scripture to boost your self-esteem. Paul did not want the women to lead at that particular time because they did not have knowledge because their culture did not allowed them to learn. Paul's command that they must learn was very pro-female.

This three part series has been good to read (thanks, Sally, for making it well-written).

I think sometimes experience helps us put a check on our interpretations of the Bible. And in this area of women in leadership and ministry and the shift in thinking in our culture, it is prudent to give pause to our older interpretations of Scripture.

James' comment above reference 1 Tim 3 is a typical case. Many do not notice that Jesus and Paul would be disqualified from being an elder in the church (unmarried and childless). And some scholars believe those qualifications were given to a church in serious trouble anyway. So the historical context may be very different from our average church today experiencing the opposite crisis as the Artemis worshipers in Ephesus.

Victor's comment also shows this. The Bible hasn't always been 'clear' (that word irks me when one position is trying to decry the other) about women being equal in value to men. It wasn't until 1977 did 'equal in value but different in role' even get codified as a concept by hierarchalists. So it isn't clear in that way. It takes hard work to see it. And its the same hard work to see that if a woman is equally human, then she can be equally gifted. Gender roles become arbitrary (and God starts to sound arbitrary). And the 1 Cor 11 passage reference, also contains the phrase that men come from woman. Playing at proof-texting is neither safe nor good.

In order for an ongoing discussion to take place in the Western church at large, we have to start reading opposing points of view and base them on their own merit. I cringe when some allow postmodernism or mere cultural needs to define the Scripture. Yet I refuse to let modernism do so either. We need all of history to help (and the guidance of the Holy Spirit and common sense goes without saying).

As a man in full-time leadership ministry, I'm delighted to see women in leadership. My own wife is an example of a very capable one. And more than anything, I'd like to see men and women in co-leadership together, neither one over the other. As Walter Leifeld says, "If we believe in complementarity, let's have it all the way up!" Yeah, that includes the highest leadership with men and women as co-leaders with co-voices.

Yes, I do think your opinion is righteous. (So do lots of people). Luckily majority of people are intelligent :).