A story from Brazil

Leciane Goulart Duque Estrada

I have been a member of the Independent Presbyterian Church of Brazil (IPIB) since my childhood and have shared in the church's life together with my family. In 1998 I graduated as a Bachelor of Theology of the Theological Seminary of Fortaleza. I am married to a seminary student and together with him I hope to be able to develop my pastoral ministry, a plan that we can now put into practice, as the IPIB has just approved the ordination of women as elders and pastors.

This article tries to set out briefly the history of women's struggle to be ordained to the ministry of word and sacrament in Brazil, particularly in the IPIB. I shall illustrate that process - an old struggle in other Protestant denominations too, going back to the first half of the twentieth century - by presenting the positions adopted historically both for and against it and by using biblical texts, published testimonies and reports in O Estandarte, the official journal of the IPIB. In addition, this article seeks to understand women's participation in the church's life and mission, in the structural work of the institution - and their contributions and challenges.

The historical development of the struggle

In Brazil the ordination of women to the ministry of word and sacrament is already a reality in various churches. Since 1922 the Salvation Army, through ordained male and female ministries, has had a great impact in the churches. In the Protestant churches discussion regarding the ordination of women goes back to the 30s. As a result we find that in 1958 the Church of the Foursquare Gospel (Iglesia del Evangelio Cuadroangular) ordained the first Brazilian women ministers, and in 1970 the General Council of the Methodist Church approved the ordination of women. Some deaconesses were promptly ordained as elders. The Church of the Lutheran Confession also began to ordain women around the same period. The Episcopal Church of Brazil struggled for the ordination of women and achieved it in the 80s.¹

As to the Presbyterian churches in Brazil in particular, until this year only the United Presbyterian Church had agreed to ordain women, and it already has at least four ordained women pastors. The Independent Presbyterian Church of Brazil discussed the subject for a number of years, till in February 1999 the Supreme Council approved a constitutional reform in which the ordination of women as elders and pastors was accepted. The new articles of the Constitution read as follows:

Art. 33: The minister is an official set apart by the church to devote himself [or herself] normally to carrying out his [or her] ecclesiastical functions.

1) men or women may be ordained to carry out the ministries essential for the church's life.

Art. 62: The elder is the immediate representative of church members, and is elected by the congregation; among its members men or women may be elected and together with the pastors take responsibility for supervision of the spiritual interests of the church to which they belong, and govern and discipline it, watching over the interests of the entire church community.²

The struggle for women's ordination in the IPIB is of long standing. Since 1972, when it was first called for, the subject has been constantly debated.³ The request for constitutional reform was submitted three times to the highest body of the IPIB - the Supreme Council - and was rejected by the majority of Presbyteries. But after more than twenty years of struggle many women and men have joined the ranks of those calling for the recognition of ordained women ministers. Today they can commemorate the victory. They recognize, however, that there is still a long way to go till everyone can accept and support the recognition of the ordained ministry of women.

One may describe the history of this struggle as a building whose foundations were well laid. Little by little women were mobilized, winning ground and making their voices heard. The Group for Reflection on Women Ministers was created. In it, ordained women pastors from other denominations were invited to teach and testify to their experiences.⁴ This group for reflection arose out of the concerns of some women seminary students and has the support of some women professors, pastors and elders. In certain churches a forum was also opened for discussion and debate, in addition to the articles and resource materials published in O Estandarte. There were also women's meetings for popularizing and discussing the subject from the biblical angle, stressing the role of woman in church and society. In these meetings strategies for action were worked out, with an eye to approval of the ordination of women to the ministry.⁵

The IPIB was present at the first AIPRAL Women's Encounter, which brought together women from twelve Latin American countries.⁶ This dealt with themes such as denominational identity, the Reformed tradition, and the image of woman on the basis of the theology of the church as the "Body of Christ", in which unity was emphasized.⁷

Throughout the years women who have been increasingly involved in the churches, and constitute the present majority, were acquiring and winning advantageous positions. Thus it came about that some women were elected as elders in local congregations, although they knew that they were not in conformity with the rules of the IPIB, as a protest and in recognition of the work, ministry, calling and vocation of women. These events were widely disseminated and awakened both admiration and rejection.⁸

At the same time, many articles, resource materials and debates appeared, condemning and disagreeing with the ordination of women. This opposition was kept up for years. We find testimonies from pastors, elders, active members of local congregations and even women who were against the ordination of women. It was a very serious matter. In 1986 the theme was dealt with harshly,⁹ to the point where those who were against the ordination of women threatened to leave the IPIB should it be accepted.¹⁰

Arguments against ordination

Those arguing against the ordination of women declare that there is no New Testament basis to support it. Moreover, they allege that since women's work is confined to the household there ought not to be ordination simply because women are now winning more elbow-room in society. They add that by their absence from the home, working outside, women have in large measure contributed to the increase in juvenile delinquency, child prostitution and even increased involvement of children and young people with drugs.¹¹

One can sum up the stances that have traditionally been against the ordination of women in the following arguments, based on the Pauline texts in 1 Cor 11.3-16; 14.26 and 2 Tim 2.1-15:¹²

God established an order in Creation. Therefore before the Fall different roles were allotted to man and woman. Man was made the head of the woman and in that case his main role is to lead. God also established functions for woman, giving her responsibility over the children and the household (Gen 3.15). Various biblical texts show the relation between woman, the home and her responsibility for the education of the children (Prov 14.1; 31.10 ff.; Is 49.15).¹³

The apostle Paul confirms this teaching when he mentions the use of the veil (1 Cor 11.10) as a recognition of male authority (the head) to which woman must be subject. Moreover, Paul argues that woman is the glory of man because she was created from him: that clearly shows that woman cannot exercise ecclesiastical authority or teach man operating as a pastoral minister.

According to this second argument the Pauline principle is not simply a cultural expression or teaching guided by the local circumstances in the city and church of Corinth. Instead it is taken as a supracultural theological principle that assumes different forms in space and time. Therefore the veil is simply a cultural form of a principle that transcends culture.¹⁴

Another argument against the ordination of women rejects as incorrect the exegesis of Gal 3.28 which supports the ordination of women ministers on the basis of the principle of equality. Those who argue against it maintain that the text refers to salvation and not to church organization. They add that despite the value Jesus attached to women he did not choose any to be among the twelve apostles.¹⁵ They continue to declare that we do not find a clear (literal) reference to a woman exercising an elder's duties (Acts 14.23; 15.4; 16.4; 21.17-18) or the pastoral ministry, while on the other hand we do clearly find two recommendations for men (Eph 4.11; 1 Pet 5.14).¹⁶

Arguments in favour of ordination

In opposition to this we find a huge number of arguments defending the ordination of women to the ministry. In addition to biblical theological arguments, we find one that claims attention and that we think is highly relevant. It relates the subject to the right of all Brazilian citizens which appears in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Brazil, safeguarding the right to equality and to elect and be elected¹⁷. This argument was championed by an active communicant member who was tired of hearing talk of equality without the least respect being given to the rights of women as citizens.¹⁸

The reasoning stems from the principle that the IPIB has in its communicant members a source of power,¹⁹ defined by the vote, since they can vote and be elected. They have the responsibility, among others, to take an active part in church life, a participation that involves preparation. In the Constitution there are no differences between active communicant members; privileges and responsibilities are equal. However, though it is not explicit, one cannot vote in the church on any subject that is contrary to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Brazil - which is the higher law, since the IPIB is registered by notary, and thus accepts its conformity with the country's legislation.

We may highlight some fundamental rights and guarantees, such as equality before the law, without distinction of any kind, the right to life, liberty, private property, work, education and health (social rights). The country's law is quick to punish those who discriminate against women and those who oppose the idea that women and men have equal rights and duties.²⁰

In this way active communicant members, both men and women, prompted by their responsibilities and knowing that there is no difference between them, try to prepare themselves to participate in church life. Thus both are suited to filling official roles (preaching, teaching, ruling, disciplining, acting in diaconal roles, administering the sacraments etc.) - all of that so that the church can proclaim the gospel, seek perfection in the Christian life and promote the kingdom of God among human beings. The church tries for quantitative and qualitative growth and counts on the responsibility of its active communicant members. In fact the Constitution makes no difference as to sex, race, age or civil status among its active communicant members.²¹

A woman, however, after receiving her degree as Bachelor of Theology, was not able to be presented to a Presbytery (which she herself had helped to elect!) to further her training and preparation through her year of practical training. Hindering her fulfilling this practical year also prevented her from being presented for ordination, and thus ran counter to the principle of voting and being elected, although she was being prepared for the post.

Is this not discrimination in terms of the general principles of the Republic's Constitution? Will it turn out that as citizens we have the right to practise such a discriminatory act in the name of prejudices and traditional ideas? Shall we not thus be living set apart from society?²² These enquiries reflect the inconsistency between the preaching and the witness of those who call themselves "servants of the Lord" and are at the same time struggling against women's ordination and in favour of discrimination.

Discrimination is not only against the law, it is also contrary to the values and principles of the kingdom of God. Here the interpretation of the baptismal formula in Gal 3.28 holds good. According to the text, each human being, regardless of race, sex or ethnic group, has the right to enjoy the same dignity and privileges in the sight of God and society. This is a principle present in the gospel. Paul affirms the charismatic equality of women and men in the Christian community. Both women and men are prophets and leaders of the community's worship; both have mutual rights and duties, also in the sphere of marriage.²³ Unjust inequalities between men and women, blacks, Indians, mestizos (half-castes) and whites, poor and rich, are the consequences of sin and as such must be combated.²⁴ Therefore we can state that Gal 3.28, contrary to the argument presented by those opposing women's ordination, is a fundamental declaration that gives an overall idea of the context of the new creation in Christ, with reference to the dignity of human beings. This affirmation counters any other institutional or personal standpoint that marginalizes women.

1 Cor 14.34-35 points out to us indirectly that the new creation is experienced in specific human history, where many aspects interpose themselves against that new creation and where it is necessary to have wisdom and judgment when freedom in Christ is exercised. A false interpretation of that text may conceal discrimination. This passage, understood in its context, also encourages us to be looking always for the spirit of discernment in order to be capable of exercising in the best possible way the freedom and equality which the Holy Spirit offers us, as we keep in mind love and understanding for others and the growth of the whole community.²⁵ Therefore,

there are two sides to Paul's impact on women's leadership in the Christian missionary movement. On the one hand, he affirms Christian equality and liberty. He opens a new, independent way of life for women. On the other hand, he makes women's behaviour in marriage and in worship subordinate to the interests of Christian mission²⁶

Thus we may conclude that Gal 3.28 is a text that sets the standard while 1 Cor 14.34f. applies to specific circumstances.

Furthermore, we may identify some other clues in Paul's writings which favour women's ordination. From the study of some problems in Pauline literature we conclude that:

Paul used terms relating to ministry or pastoral work to talk about women's work. In Rom 16.1f. he refers to Phoebe and uses the word diakonos, which can have three senses: serving tables, diaconal work, and the work of the minister or pastor. The two former interpretations do not present much of a problem. The big difficulty appears when we use the third sense - pastoral work - and give Phoebe the role of a pastor or minister of the church. The use of this term is clear when Paul refers to Tychicus as a minister (Eph 3.7; 6.21; Col 4.7), to introduce Epaphras and to talk about deacons (1 Tim 3.8-12).²⁷ To indicate Phoebe's work Paul uses the word prostatis (one who helps, protects or guides), a term whose meaning indicates a type of leader with economic potential and the capacity to guide or direct. Therefore the term prostatis compels us to translate diakonos with reference to Phoebe as minister or pastor.²⁸

In Rom 16 we find the names of four women: Mary (verse 6), Tryphaena, Tryphosa and Persis (verse 12) associated with the verb kopiao which means to work hard and struggle. Paul used the same verb in talking about the pastoral work of apostles (1 Cor 15.50; Gal 4.11; Col 1.29). The most interesting fact follows - when in verse 7 he praises Andronicus and Junias as apostles - and doubt arises whether Junia was a man or a woman. Scholars understand that Junia came to be seen as a man in the Middle Ages because in that age it was very difficult to believe and accept the idea of a woman apostle.²⁹

The Pauline texts that refer to woman's submission to man (Eph 5.22; Col 3.18) require to be understood from the fuller context of the passages. For instance, Eph 5.21 mentions the fact that we all have to be subject to each other. The idea is the same as in Phil 2.1-11. Thus woman's submission is the same as the church's submission to the Lord - which had to be given as the response to the spouse's love - a perfect love like Christ's love.³⁰

The text of 1 Tim 2.9-15 which deals with the woman's silence has to be seen as a special teaching for a [particular] church. Otherwise, how could we accept woman's silence when the same Paul refers to women prophesying and praying (1 Cor 11)?³¹

In dealing with the ordination of women, we nevertheless need to understand that the texts referring to the story of creation cannot be used as a basis to establish a difference between man and woman, since here we find that both were created in the image of God (Gen 1.27). The order established in verse 28 does not refer to submission, nor does it indicate different functions, but speaks of an arrangement entrusted to both for looking after the Creation. The differences are therefore solely biological. The other differences were created and learned in a cultural context. In the second creation story (Gen 2.18ff.) we come across the expression "a helper as his partner" with reference to the woman. The argument generally runs that someone who helps is of lesser rank than the person aided. However, we find passages such as Ps 30.10, Heb 13.6 and Is 41.10 where God is presented, or presents himself as our helper and aid. As such he cannot be regarded as inferior nor as having to be subject to human beings.³²

When we hear arguments against women's ordination based on some isolated Pauline texts, we wonder where the full message of the New Testament is still to be found. We detect that the Gospels have been forgotten in the determination to show what stands in the way of women's ordination to the ministry of word and sacrament. The Synoptic Gospels show Jesus teaching, talking and healing women with the same love as he has for men. In the Synoptics, offensive language is not used against women although the culture permitted use and abuse of women. On the other hand the Gospels show Jesus sharing with the Samaritan woman, the Syro-Phoenician woman, and Martha and Mary.³³

Perhaps the Gospels are not quoted by those rejecting the ordination of women because Jesus condemns one person ruling and lording it over another (Mk 10.42f.; Jn 13.1-20). In contrast, Jesus indicates the path of service. In the light of that, we can affirm that the church's government is not a matter of power or authority but of service. The Scriptures do not recognize the idea of authority in the church as the power to give people a subordinate status. They simply talk about servants of either sex.³⁴ Hence to carry on any of the ministries God has given makes us not superior but servants of one another. It is not the exercise of power but of service.³⁵

In accordance with the theology of ministries, the Holy Spirit distributes gifts as he pleases (1 Cor 12). One recognizes that not all ministries lead to clerical ordination, although a number of them do. How is it that we are so bold as to limit the action of the Spirit by hindering the ordination of women? This would be to accept that they cannot receive certain gifts that are strictly for men. That kind of statement at once comes into conflict with biblical teaching relating to gifts as instruments for building up the body of Christ and establishing the kingdom of God.³⁶

Therefore when we are faced with the subject of women's ordination to the pastoral ministry we must look to Jesus Christ as the real and true "pioneer and perfecter of our faith". He is the backbone of the gospel. We must consult his thoughts and teachings,³⁷ instead of our cultural traditions. I consider the arguments used against the ordination of women are merely cultural, as we do not find a basis for such standpoints in the Bible.³⁸ On the contrary, the teaching in various biblical texts is that there must not be a distinction between men and women, because all are equal in the sight of God. Consequently the problem is not the lack of biblical foundations favouring women's ordination but rather the structure of the church - its hierarchical organization, which prevents women's participation in certain specific roles.³⁹

Conclusion

We realize that to ascribe responsibility for the reluctance to open the door to the ordination of women simply to social prejudices, such as those listed above, would be to offer an extremely simplistic analysis of the present situation. It would be to ignore socio-economic factors, technological advances, dangerous ideologies, the increasing exploitation of human beings by their own kind, the shameful dependence on capital and its consequences. In any case, are not elders and pastors, husbands and fathers, men with responsibilities in the home which they ought to direct towards their children, male and female? The good witness of countless women pastors and elders already ordained refutes many of the arguments against ordination,⁴⁰ and, despite the traumas and challenges faced,⁴¹ they are fully carrying out their ministries.

The approval of women's ordination by the Independent Presbyterian Church of Brazil puts an end to decades of struggle and suffering because of discrimination. We have the beginnings of a new approach for Christian maturity, and a step in the direction of God's plans for his church. Finally, scope is created for the action of the Holy Spirit in the undifferentiated allocation of gifts for everyone.

Leciane Goulart Duque Estrada is a member of the Independent Presbyterian Church of Brazil and a recent graduate in theology.

Notes