-
8/12/2019 1999 Issue 6 - Covenant Voting - Counsel of Chalcedon
1/8
Introdnction
The purpose ofthis article is
to set forth the Biblical and
Confessional argumeljt for
restricting congregational voting
to male heads of
households.
Though an admittedly unpopular
position, it is the official position
of the Reformed Presbyterian
Church In The United States
(RPCUS). We believe this
limitation is consistent with the
teachings of God's Word on
church government, and that it
may be deduced by good and
necessary consequence
from the system of truth
set forth in the Westminster
Confession
of
Faith and its
Directories. Clear infer-
ences are as binding upon
Before we proceed with our
biblical argumentation, we need
to emphasize that the RPCUS
position is not chauvinistic. We
are not anti-woman. The Scrip
ture teaches that women are to
be honored as fellow heirs of the
grace
of
life (I Peter 3 :7). The
new covenant opens up many
privileges to
~ o m n
that were
not granted to her for various
reasons under the old. These
privileges largely concerned the
sacraments of the church. In
the old covenant church, the two
sacraments were that of circum-
The new covenant extends
comparatively greater partiCipa
tion to women in its rites and
ceremonies. We are told in
Galatians 3:26,27 that there is no
longer any distinction between
male and female pertaining to
entrance into the covenant
community: For you are all
sons of God through faith in
Christ Jesus. For all of you who
were baptized into Christ have
clothed yourselves with 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
CovenantVoting in Christ Jesus.
In
the sacrament
of
the
justification a the
RPCUS
practice
o
estricting
congregational votin to male heads ofhouleholds Lord s Supper, the new
us, according to our Con
fession, as the foundational
doctrines that are explicitly
spelled out. We read in chapter
I section VI of the Westminster
Confession Of Faith, The
whole counsel of God, concern
ing all things necessary for his
own glory, man's salvation, faith,
and life, is either expressly set
down in scripture, or by good
and necessary consequence may
be deduced from scripture ...
John Otis
Icovenant opens participa-
L =
tion up to the women in the
In his exposition
of
the Westmin
ster Confession of Faith, Robert
Shaw said the following con
cerning this portiod of the
Confession:
... it
we hold that
couclusions fairly deduced from
the declarations of the Word of
God are as truly parts
of
divine
revelation as
if
they were
expressly taught in the Sacred
Volume. We shall demonstrate
from,the Standards and its proof
texts that the Scripture does
restrict congregational voting to
only male heads of households.
The Principle
of
Male
Headship
in the Old Covenant
cision and the Passover meal. In
these two old covenant sacra
ments, women did not personally
participate. Only males received
the sign of the covenant through
circumcision, and only adult
circumcised males partook of the
Passover meaL By their non
participation, did this e ~ that
women did not share in the
blessings of the covenant? No,
women fully shared in the
blessings of the covenant
through their male representa
tives. When Abraham believed
in the promises of God by faith
and then was circumcised, his
wife Sarah was obviously
included in this covenant through
her husband. Unmarried women
~ ~ r
represented through their
tathers and elder brothers if
there was no father in the
household. Likewise, in the
. Passover meal, both women and
children were represented via
the'male head of household.
The New Covenant
Inclusion of Women
28 - THE COUNSELofChalcedon - October/November, 1999
covenant community. In I
Corinthians 11 Paul is address-
. ing the church as
it
is gathered
for worship and explaining the.
proper observance off the Lord's
Supper; In the Passover meal,
only male heads partook of the
meal; but now, in
theLord s
Supper, women and some chil
dren could partake of the meal.
We read in I Corinthians 11 :28:
But let a man examine himself,
and so let him eat ofthe bread
and drink
of
the cup:' The word
for man in this passage is the
Greek word, anthropos. This
is the generic word used for
man; it would include women
and children. When a New
Testament writer wanted to
distinguish the sexes, aner was
typically used. In the context of
I Corinthians
11;
the word aner
is exc1usivelyused,until verse
28. In all the references prior to
verse 28, the word aner is
referring to a male
as
opposed to
a female. If Paul had wanted to
restrict the sacrament of the
Lord's Supperto males, he would
have
used
the word aner.
-
8/12/2019 1999 Issue 6 - Covenant Voting - Counsel of Chalcedon
2/8
In the light of this expansion,
the following argument is antici
pated: since there is an expan
sion ofprivileges in the new
covenant to incorporate women
in church sacraments, this should
extend to voting privileges.
However, there is no explicit
reference in the New Testament
to justify this position, and there
is no example of this or a related
practice occurring
in
the days of
the apostles from which we
could support the practice of
female voting by good and
necessalY consequence.
Hermeneutics
and
Female Voting
t is crucial that we grasp a
key principle in Bible interpreta
tion. Since there is
an
overarching unity to the Bible,
we must assume that a law or a
regulation of the old covenant is
still operative unless the new
covenant nullifies it What was
true in the old covenant is true in
the new covenant unless there is
an explicit statement in the new
covenant that sets it aside, or if
one can exegetically deduce
from Scripture that something
has changed. For example,
opponents of the Reformed
doctrine of infant baptism have
argned that since there is no
explicit reference
in
the New
Testament that instructs
us
to
baptize infants, then this practice
must be unbiblicaL These
opponents have said that refer
ences to household baptisms do
not specifically point to infant
baptism. On the other hand,
Reformed theology has con
tended that the lack of any
explicit reference to infant
baptism in the New Testament
does not imply that such didn't
occur. The argument for infant
baptism is that God commanded
His old covenant people to
circumcise their male children as
the sign and seal of His covenant
promises to Israel. We would
assume that circumcision would
still be operative in the new
covenant
if there was no explicit
or properly deduced argument to
indicate otherwise. In the light
of
an explicit biblical command,
the lack of an explicit command
for infant baptism and examples
of it is not a valid argument
against infant baptism.
In a similar way, those who
disagree with the RPCUS
position ofprohibiting women
and children from congregational
voting might argue, There is no
explicit statement in the West
minster Standards that forbids
them. Such an argument is on
as
shaky exegetical and theologi
cal ground as those who deny
infant baptism. Where is the
explicit statement in the West
minster Standards forbidding
women from holding the church
offices of elder and deacon?
Does this mean that women can
hold these offices? We will see
that the Westminster Standards
clearly imply by good and neces
sary deduction that women are
not to hold church office by
examining primarily the proof
texts given to support the
Standard's statements. Like
wise, this applies to the prohibi
tion against women having a
congregational vote.
The Biblical rgument for
Covenant Voting
Introduction
How shall we build our
biblical argument that prohibits
women from congregational
voting? First, we shall establish
the fact that in the Old Testa
ment , the term whole congre
gation or whole assembly does .
not always include everyone
without exception, such as men,
women, and children. We will
demonstrate that the term
whole congregation can be
legitimately restricted to male
heads of households. We will
establish that adult males repre
sented their respective house
holds in the old covenant sacra
ment
of
the Passover meal. We
will establish the fact that male
heads of households often
represented the whole congre
gation not only in public worship
but also
in
civil government.
Generally, we will e ~ t b l i s h the
principle of male representation
in the old covenant and that this
principle carries fOlward in the
new covenant organization of the
church.
The Westminster Divines on
hurch
overnment
In The Form of Church
Government dealing with the
section on Pastors, comment is
made that the public reading of
the Scriptures belongs to the
office of pastor. Appealing to
the church in the Old Testament
makes justification for this. The
section reads, That the priests
and Levites in the Jewish church
were trusted with the public
reading of the word is proved.
In the section entitled, Other
Church Governors, The Form
of Church Government states,
As there were in the Jewish
church elders of the people
joined with the priests and
Levites in the government of the
church; so Christ who hath
instituted government, and
governors ecclesiastical in the
church, hath furnished some in
his church, beside the ministers
of the word, with gifts for
government ... Which officers
reformed churches commonly
call Elders. t is evident that a
continuity is seen between the
Old Testament church structure
and the New Testament.
October/November, 1999 -THE COUNSEL ofChalcedon - 29
-
8/12/2019 1999 Issue 6 - Covenant Voting - Counsel of Chalcedon
3/8
Lessons
from
the Passover
In the observance of the
Passover meal, male heads of
households
are
said to 'represent
their own households, but also
collectively they are said to
represent
the
congregation or
whole assembly of thecongrega
tion. We read in Exodus 12:3,4
that' God said to Moses and
Aaron, Speak to all the congre
gation ofIsrael, saying
'On
the
tenth
of
this month they are each
one to take a lamb for them
selves, according to their fa
thers' households, a lamb for
each household. Now if the
household is too small for a lamb,
then
he
and his neighbor nearest
to his house are to take one
according to the number
of
persons in them; according to
what each man should eat, you
are to divide the lamb.
How do we know that only
adult males ate the Passover
meal, representing their entire
household
of
women and chil
dren? The words each one
that are found in verses 3 and 4
are the Hebrew
word,
eesh.
This Hebrew word is used more
than two thousand times in the
Old Testament. The word is
usually used to refer to men
as
individuals rather than as man
kind in general, although it can
be used generically. The basic
idea conveyed by eesh is
maleness as opposed to female
ness.
Exodus 12:6 says, And you
shall keep it until the fourteenth
day of the same month, then the
whole assembly
of
the congrega
tion ofIsrael is
to
kill it at
twilight.;' A very significant point
is that adult male heads of
households
are
collectively said
to be all the congregation and
the whole assembly of the
congregation. Here is the
principle ofmale representation
clearly set forth. Only the adult
males
ate
the Passoyer meal.
The mechanics
of
how the
Passover meal wast\> be ob
served is seen in Exodus 12:21,
Then Moses called for all the
elders
of
Israel, and said to
them, go and take for yourselves
lambs, according to your families,
and slay the Passover lamb.
The term elder is the Hebrew:,
word, zagen, which often
refers to old aged men. Some
times it is used to refer to a civil
ruling body
of
men who render
judicial decisions in the gates
of
the city. In Exodus 12:21 the
elders would refer to the old men
of
extended families such as the
heads
oftribes.
These patri- '
archs of the tribes would take
lambs for each
of
their families.
In other words, these elders
would give a lamb to each male
head
of
household in their tribes.
In Exodus 12:22 we read,
and you shall tal
-
8/12/2019 1999 Issue 6 - Covenant Voting - Counsel of Chalcedon
4/8
offering, ... So they took what
Moses had commanded to the
front
of
the tent
of
meeting, and
the whole congregation came
near and stood before the Lord."
Kiel and Delitzsch in their Old
Testament commentary make
this observation abont this
passage, "To this end Aaron and
his sons were to bring to the
front
of
the Tabernacle a yonng
calf as a sin offering ... , and the
people were to bring through
their elders a he-goat for a sin
offering" (Kiel and Delitzsch,
Commentary on the Old Testa
ment, Vol. I, p.345). Leviticus
9:5 emphasized that the "whole
congregation" came near and
stood before the Lord. Concern
ing this phrase, Kiel and
Delitzsch say, " ... and the con
gregation (in the persons of its
elders) were
to
stand before
Jehovah" (Ibid.).
The Selection
o
Elders n
the Old Covenant
We
noted earlier that the
Westminster framers saw a
pattern in the Old Testament
church for having ruling elders in
the New Testament church.
How were these elders
of
Israel
chosen? In Exodus
18
Moses'
father-in-law, Jethro, tells Moses
that he needs to delegate most
of
the necessary judicial decisions
to other people. Jethro says in
Exodus
18
:21 - "Furthermore,
you shall select out
of
all the
people able men who fear God,
men
of
truth, those who hate
dishonest gain; and you shall
place these over them,
as
leaders
of
thousands,
of
fifties
and
of
tens."
We
are told in
Deuteronomy 1:13-15 how this
counsel was carried ont. Moses
told Israel the following: "
Choose wise and discerning and
experienced men from your
tribes, and I will appoint them as
your heads. And.yon answered
me and said, 'The thing which
you have said to do is good.' So
I took the heads
of
your tribes,
wise and experienced men, and
appointed them heads over you,
leaders
of
thousands, and
of
hundreds, of fifties and of tens,
and officers for your tribes."
The people chose their represen
tatives, and Moses appointed
them as judges. Would women
have voted for their representa
tives? No Women in the old
covenant did not receive the sign
of
the covenant. They did not
partake of the Passover. They
did not present their sacrificial
offerings to the priests. Women
had no part in the detennination
of civil officials. Women were
represented through their male
heads
of
households.
The Meaning Qf All the
Congregation
There are several places in
the Old Testament that demon
strate that the term "all the
congregation" is often restricted
to male heads
of
households. In
Numbers I :2,3 we read where
God commands Moses to: "Take
a census of all the congregation
of
the sons
of
Israel by their
families, by their father's honse
holds, according to the nnmber
of names, every male, head by
head from twenty years old and
npward, ... " Obvionsly, male
heads of families are said to
constitute "all the congregation
of
the sons
of
Israel."
In Nnmbers I I 10 there is an
incident where Israel was
complaining that it had only
manna to eat and no meat. In
verse 10 Moses heard the people
weeping thronghout their fami
lies. Each
Inan
eesh, was
weeping at the doorway
of
his
tent.
We
learn that the "eesh"
represented their respective
households, which constitnted
the phrase, "the people."
In Nnmbers
13
we are told
that twelve spies were chosen to
give a reconnaissance report
of
the land
of
Canaan. These spies
were the heads of the twelve
tribes
of
Israel.
We
learn that
ten spies gave a bad report in .
that they enconraged Israel not
to fight against the inhabitants
of
Canaan. These spies said that it
would be virtual suicide to
attempt to fight against giants
and fortified cities. Only Joshua
and Caleb gave a good report
rooted in faith in the promise
of
God. We are told in Numbers
14:1-3 - "Then all the congrega
tion lifted their voices and cried,
and the people wept that night.
And all the sons
of
Israel
grumbled against Moses and
Aaron; and the whole congrega
tion said to them, 'Would that we
had died in the land
of
Egypt Or
would that we had died in this
wilderness And why is the
Lord bringing us into this land, to
fall by the sword? Our wives
and our little ones will become
plunder; would it not be better
for us to return to Egypt?" The
phrase "the whole congregation"
in verse 2 is limited to male
heads because in verse 3 these
male heads told Moses and
Aaron that their wives and little
ones would become plunder.
Hence, male heads of house
holds are said to be the whole
congregation.
In Numbers 16:1,2 we read
that Korah, Dathan, Abiram, and
On, together with 250 leaders of
the congregation who were
chosen by the Assembly rebelled
against Moses and Aaron. We
are told in Numbers 16:19
"Thus Korah assembled all the
congregation against them at the
doorway
of
the tent of meeting.
October/November, 1999 - THE COUNSEL ofChalcedon - 31
-
8/12/2019 1999 Issue 6 - Covenant Voting - Counsel of Chalcedon
5/8
And the glory of the Lord
of
refuge to which he fled; ...
The Place
of
Women
n
the
appeared to all the congrega-
Who is the congregation? Ac-
Government of the
tion. t is evident from the
cording to Joshua 20:4, the
New Covenant Church
passage
that the phrase, all the
judges in the cities
of
refuge
The governing principle in the
congregat ion was restricted to were the elders
of
the city, for
New Testament pertaining to
only the male heads that are
we read - Andhe shall flee to
mentioned in Numbers 6:
1 2. one
of
these cities, and shall
women is that they are to keep
We are told that these rebellious
stand at the entrauce
of
the gate
silent in the churches and be
submissive to their own hus-
men represented their entire
of
the city
and
state his case in
bands. We read in I Corinthians
households, which included their
the hearing of the elders of that
wives
and
children. God com-
city; and they shall take him
into
14:34,35 - Let the women keep
manded Moses to instruct the
the city to them and give him a
silent in the churches; for they
rest of the congregation to
place, so that he may dwell
are not permitted to speak, but
depart from the tents of the
among them.
Moreover, we
let them subject themselves, just
wicked men. Numbers 16:27
are told in Joshua 20:6- And
as the Law says.
And
if they
states: So they got back from
he shall dwell in that city until he
desire to learn anything, let them
around the dwellings ofKorah,
stands before the congregation
ask their own husbands at home;
Dathan and Abiram; and Dathan
for judgment until the death
of
for it is improper for a woman to
and Abiram came and stood at
the one who is high priest in
speak in church.
The contrast
the doorway
of
their tents, along those days
...
t
is evident that is clear in the passage - for
with their wives
and
their sons
the phrase, the congregation is
they are not permitted to speak,
and their little ones. When God
represented by the elders of the
but let them subject them-
judged these
men
for their
city.
selves ...
rebellion, the Scripture states in
Summary
of
rgument from
I Timothy 2: 11-14 gives a
Numbers 16:32: and the earth
the ld Covenant
similar admonition as the
opened its mouth and swallowed
The Old Testament clearly
Corinthian passage: Let a
them up, and their households, all
woman quietly receive instruc-
the men who belonged to Korah,
establishes the principle
of
tion with entire submissiveness.
with
their possessions. t was
household representation via
But I do not allow a woman to
the male heads who rebelled
male heads of households in
teach
or
exercise authority over
private and public worship and in
before God; however, by virtue
civil government. As we move
a man, but to remain quiet. For
of
the principle
of
male headship
into the New Testament we need
it was Adam who was fIrst
representation, the wives
and
to remember our basic herme-
created, and then Eve. And it
children of these households
neutic principle:
Old Testament
was not Adam who was de-
perished with their heads.
patterns are assumed to be still
ceived, but the woman being
In Numbers 35, we see cities
operative unless the New Testa-
quite deceived, fell into trans-
of
refuge established in Israel
ment explicitly nullifIes it, or if
gression. In public worship, a
for those who have unintention-
one can clearly deduce from the
woman is not allowed to teach or
ally killed their countrymen.
Scripture that it is no longer
exercise authority over a man in
Numbers 35:12 says, And
the
binding. With regard tothe
any capacity. She is to remain
cities shall be to
you
as a refuge
government of the church, there
quiet; thereby showing willing
from the avenger, so that the is nothing in the
New
Testament submission to her covenant
manslayer may not die until he
that would nUllify the principle
of
representative. This prohibition
stands before the congregation
male headship in the government
is not a cultural phenomenon that
for trial. Numbers 35:24,25
of the church. In fact, there is
has given way to a more enlight-
says: then the congregation
additional
New
Testament
ened modern age where women
shall judge between the slayer documentation that only male
have more dignity. The Timothy
and the blood avenger according heads of households are permit-
passage is very clear in stating
to these ordinances. And the ted to participate in the govern-
why women must keep silent in
congregation shall deliver the ment
of
the church. This would
publ ic worship: 1) Adam was
manslayer from the hand of the mean that women and children created fIrst.
When God created
blood avenger, and the congrega-
would be prohibited from con-
human society, he gave a struc-
tion shall restore him
to
his city gregational voting. ture
of
authority. I Corinthians
3 - THE COUNSELof Chalcedon - October/November, 1999
-
8/12/2019 1999 Issue 6 - Covenant Voting - Counsel of Chalcedon
6/8
:3
is very explicit in stating this
fact, for we read - "But I want
you to understand that Christ is
the head
of
every man, and the
man is the head ofwoman, and
God is the head of Christ."
Wives are to be subject to their
husbands because
of
their
husband's priority in creation. 2)
The woman was deceived, not
the man.
The pplication
o
Covenant
Headship t Specific Church
Government Issues
Many denominations have
correctly understood the I
Timothy 2 passage as a prohibi
tion against women officers
(teaching and ruling elders and
deacons) and as a prohibition
against women teaching men in
the church. The problem
is
that
these denominations have fallen
short in the proper application of
the Scripture, for they permit
women to serve on pulpit com
mittees and vote in congrega
tional meetings. A congrega
tional vote is an exercise of
government or rule in the
church.
t
is an exercise of
ecclesiastical power. One of the
foremost responsibilities of a
congregational meeting is the
selection of church officers,
from the pastor to ruling elders
and deacons. This selection has
tremendous long-term effects
upon the ministry of any particu
lar church. This selection of
officers is probably the most
important decision in the life of
any church. Since it is not
unusual for women
to
constitute
a greater number of communing
or voting members in a church,
this means that women can out
vote the male members and
determine who is to be church
officers. t is not uncommon for
pulpit committees (this is a
committee that is selected by the
congregation to locate prospec
tive pastors, interview them, and
bring recommendations to the
congregation) to be comprised
of
at least one woman, which
means that her vote carries even
more power, seeing that the
pulpit committee is not that
large. The ability to select one
man over another
as
a church
officer is an exercise of author
ity or rule in the church. One
facet of government is the
placing of men in power and the
ability to remove them. For
women to have this kind of
power is totally out of accord
with the Scripture's admonition
to them to be submissive to male
headship.
Someone might argue that
forbidding women to vote in
congregational meetings disen
franchises her from the privi
leges of being co-heirs of the
promises
of
God that is clearly
taught in the New Testament
(Galatians 3:28 and I Peter 3:7).
This is not the case for a woman
is represented in the government
of the church through her hus
band, father, or elder.
What about single women in
the church? The Scripture is
clear that a single woman is
always under the authority of her
father until she is married (see I
Corinthians 7:36-38). In the
case of a widowed or divorced
woman, with or without children,
and who is the head of her own
household, she would be repre
sented by an elder of the church
who is appointed by the session
to provide spiritual counsel and
oversight to her household.
Unmarried women, who are
heads of their own households,
are not exempt from the clear
prohibition of Scripture. A
woman, regardless of her marital
position, cannot teach or
authority over any man in the
church. She is to be silent.
Covenant Voting and
the Westminster
Confession o Faith
Some might argue that the
RPCUS has digressed from its
own strict adherence to the
Westminster Standards
by
prohibiting women from congre
gational voting, for the Standards
do not explicitly state such a
prohibition. First, this argument
proves too much. Where do the
Standards explicitly teach that a
woman cannot hold a church
office? t doesn't; therefore,
does this mean that a woman
can hold church office?
f
course not
We
can implicitly
build a case for these prohibi
tions through the Scriptural proof
texts given at various points.
For example, in The Form of
Presbyterial Church Government
dealing with the section on
pastors, we find the following
comments concerning the public
reading of the Scriptures: "That
the priests and Levites in the
Jewish church were entrusted
with the public reading of the
word is proved. That the minis
ters of the gospel have an ample
charge and commission to
dispense the word, as well as
other ordinances, as the priests
and Levites had under the law,
proved, Isa Lxvi. 21. Matt.
Xxiii. 34 where our Saviour
entitleth the officers of the New
Testament, who he will send
forth, by the same names of the
teachers of the Old." t is clear
from this statement that a
parallel is being drawn between
priests and Levites of the Old
Testament with ministers of the
gospel in the New Testament.
Obviously, there are dissimilari
ties between the two groups, but
there are similarities as well.
October/November 1999 - THE COUNSEL ofChalcedon - 33
-
8/12/2019 1999 Issue 6 - Covenant Voting - Counsel of Chalcedon
7/8
The similarities are addressed in
the proof texts. Deuteronomy
31:9-11
and 1 Timothy
3:2
are
cited. In these two proof texts,
we
find that Moses wrote the
law, giving it to the priests, the
sons ofLevi for them to publicly
read
to the congregation
of
Israel.
We
are told in I Timothy
3:2 that one of the qualifications
for an elder is that, i he is
married, he is to be the husband
of one wife. Hence, we see that
the Westminster Standards do
implicitly teach from their
proof
texts that only males are to hold
church office.
In the Form of Church
Government pertaining to the
section
on
ordination, we read,
Ordination is the solemn setting
apart of a person to some
publick church office. The
proof
text given for this point is
Numbers 8:10-22. In verses 9
and
0 we read, So you shall
present the Levites before the
tent ofmeeting. You shall also
assemble the whole congregation
of
the sons
of
Israel, and present
the Levites before the Lord; and
the sons of Israel shall lay their.
hands on the Levites. Thus, we
see male representatives setting
apart other males for religious
service. The phrase, the whole
congregation of the sons of
Israel, is expressed in terms of
male heads who laid hands on
other male representatives. The
Westminster Standards. implicitly
teach through its proof texts the
principle ofrepresentation by
male heads of households.
In The Fortn of Church
Government under the section
dealing with the ordination of
ministers we read, He that is to
be ordained, being either nomi
nated by the people, or otherwise
commended to the presbytery ...
Was this nomination by the
people inclusive ofwomen? We
have no reason to think that
women voted for the minister
just because it says that the
nomination was by the people.
Elsewhere in the Form
of
Church Government regarding
church governors (ruling elders)
we noted that the Jewish church
is referenced as a guide. Our
earlier exegesis concerning the
phrase, the people, demon
strated that the Jewish church
model did not include women in
the selection of these elders.
Under the section for the exami
nation ofministers in The Form
of Church Government, one of
the requirements is that the
candidate is to be sent to a
particular church where the
congregation can discern his
gifts and examine his godly life.
The presbytery is to exhort this
church
as
follows: a competent
number of the members of that
congregation, nominated by
themselves, shall appear before
the presbytery, to give their
consentand approbation to such
a man to be their minister. ..
We would not expect women to
have participated in this action
either.
Summation o the Confessional
Argument
or
Covenant oting
The major thesis of this
article is that the Old Testament
established the principle ofmale .
heads of households who served
as representatives for the whole
congregation. This principle is
not abrogated in the New Testa
ment, but i t is actually magnified
in several explicit references in I
Corinthians 14 and I Timothy 2.
In The Directory For Family
Worship men are seen as the
heads or masters of their fami
lies who are not only responsible
for leading family worship, but
they are responsible to have their
34 -
THE COUNSEL
of Chalcedon - October/November 999
families in worship on the Lord's
Day. We read, The master of
the family ought to take care that
all within his charge repair to the
public worship, that he and they
may join with the rest of the
congregation .. The Westmin
ster Standards is accustomed to
thinking of a congregation not
as
a group of individuals, but as
fainilies where there was a male
head who represented the
family.
Covenant oting Supported by
Reformed Church History A
Powerful Testimony
The major thrust ofthis
article has been to carefully give
exegetical argumentation for
prohibiting women from congre
gational voting. The Bible is our
sole standard for determining
church practices. While the
Bible remains as our foundation;
nonetheless, we can find useful
testimony in church history.
While this author did
D ot
have
the time to
do
much historical
research, he did come across an
interesting letter written by
Thomas McCrie in
1822.
This
letter was made into a pamphlet
entitled, On The Right of
Females
To
Vote In The Election
ofMinisters and Elders pub
lished by Still Waters Revival
Books in Edmonton, Alberta,
Canada.
McCrie comments that while
women constitute the invisible
church equally as men,
But
as
to the organic state and integrity
of the Church, women do not so
constitute it, as that the power of
rule and jurisdiction belongs to
them either
as
to its common
exercise, whether by votes and
declaration of opinions ... or by
scrutiny, or by holding up the
hand, or by vocal and outward
acclamation; or as to its special
exercise, which belongs to the
-
8/12/2019 1999 Issue 6 - Covenant Voting - Counsel of Chalcedon
8/8
ministers only and the Presby
tery, not to the Christian people."
He further states, " ...regards the
calling or electing
of
chnrch -
officers as part
of
ecclesiastical
jurisdiction
.. In
choosing office
bearers, the people seem neces
sarily to exercise a species
of
power, and their call seem, in so
far, to have an authority over the
individuals who are its objects,
and to constitute in part what
goes in ordinary cases to deter
mine the call
of
God ... In my
opinion, and so far as I have
attended to the subject, the
exclusion
of
women from an
explicit choice
or
formal vote
(for their consent
or
dissent must
always be supposed, and there
are many ways in which it may
be ascertained or declared) rests
on the apostolic prohibition, I
Cor. 14:34,35; I Tim. : 11,12;
taken in connection with the
grounds and reasons of it, which
are laid down in these places,
and in I Cor. 11:3-16."
Concerning the practice
of
women voting in church,
McCrie states, "The silence
of
Scriptnre, and
of
ecclesiastical
history, respecting the exercise
of any such right in primitive
times, is, in my opinion,
of
considerable weight .. That the
woman should call or elect
ministers
of
the Word, neither
the Word
of
God, nor the order
of the Reformed Churches,
permit." McCrie refers to
another writer who said that
women were not allowed to vote
in Holland even in the parishes
where election was most popular
and free. t was noted that in the
dispute between the Orthodox
and the Arminians, the
Arminians resorted to women
votes to get their ministers into
various parishes.
McCrie continues - Even
among the sober part
of
the
Independents, Brownists, and
Anabaptists in the 17th century,
women were not admitted to
vote; as you may see stated in
"Gillespie's Misc. Questions,"
p.24. Dr. Owen, when, speaking
on this subj ect, very frequently,
and evidently
in
the
way of
restriction, employs the
word
"fraternity."
t
will not be
pleaded, I snppose, that it was a
practice for women to vote in
the best times of the Chnrch of
Scotland. "
Conclusion
Why should we prohibit
women from congregation
voting? Is it because
we
are
chanvinistic? No t is because
we
adhere to the anthority
of
Scripture alone as onr gnide for
all chnrch practices. Why do so
many churches in so many
different denominations, espe
cially self-confessed Reformed
Presbyterian churches, allow the
female vote in congregational
meetings? The church has
always had a tendency to
be
subject to the "spirit
of
the
times" in its culture. With the
passage
of
the 19th Amendment
to the U.S. Constitution, which
was ratified in 1920, women
gained the right to vote in civil
affairs. Since then, the practice
of
women voting even
in
chnrch
affairs escalated. The idea is,
How
can
we
deprive women
the right to vote in the church
if
we allow them to vote in civil
affairs?" Evangelical chnrches
cannot escape
"the spirit
of
the
times." As far as liberal
churches are concerned, the
issue of debating the legitimacy
of women voting in congrega
tional meetings is a moot point.
These chnrches do not believe in
the sole authority of Scripture.
This is why there are ordained
ministers, elders,
and
deacons
who are women in these
churches.
We must
remain
true to the
Word
of
God. We must not
allow pragmatism
or
cultural
acceptability to dictate matters
of
policy and
procedure
to the
church
of Jesus Chris t. We
must have the courage to stand
firm
on
the rock that does
not
move. Let us allow
our
Chris
tian women to fulfill thei r God
given roles as
mandated
from
God - "Older
women
likewise
are to be reverent in their
behavior, not malicious gossips,
nor enslaved to much wine,
teaching what is good,
that they
may encourage the
young
women to love their husbands, to
love their children, to be sensible,
pnre, workers at home, kind,
being subject to their own
husbands, that the word
of
God
may
not
be dishonored" (Titus
2:3-5). Let's not burden our
women with fnrther responsibil
ity that was
never
intended for
them, such
as
exercising author
ity in the chnrch. The godly
woman is more
than happy
to
yield such authority to men, for
she recognizes that this is the
will
of God her King and
Savior,
that God has equipped
men
to
govern in the church,
and
that he
has graciously
given
her numer
ous responsibilities in spheres
best suited to the wonderful gifts
bestowed upon
her by her
Creator.
October/November 1999 - THE COUNSEL ofChalcedon - 35