A Biblical Perspective on Women & the Pastoral Office

A Biblical and Pastoral Perspective on Women and the Pastoral Office

A Word Before You Read - The subject addressed in this article is one that sincere believers have discussed, debated, and wrestled with for generations. I approach it neither casually nor combatively, but as a pastor who believes the church is healthiest when it is shaped by Scripture rather than cultural pressure—whether from the left or the right.

This position has been formed through prayerful study, pastoral experience, and engagement with the broader theological conversation. While I recognize that faithful Christians may disagree on this issue, my aim here is not to provoke controversy, but to clearly state where I stand and why, grounded in the authority of God’s Word.

This article is offered in a spirit of conviction with charity, clarity with humility, and truth spoken in love.

The question of whether women may serve as pastors is one of the most discussed—and often most emotionally charged—issues in the modern church. While cultural pressures and contemporary expectations frequently shape the conversation, the church must ultimately return to Scripture and ask what God has revealed concerning His design for leadership within the gathered body of believers.

This article represents my considered position on this subject, formed through prayerful study, pastoral reflection, and engagement with the broader theological discussion.

The following theological summary is drawn from and influenced by the biblical research and arguments of Caleb Corneloup. While the wording and presentation here are my own, I am grateful for his careful work on this subject, even where I do not always agree with his tone or conclusions in every respect.
 
Paul’s Instruction in 1 Timothy 2: A Theological Foundation

In 1 Timothy 2:11–14, the Apostle Paul addresses the issue of teaching and authority within the gathered church. Rather than appealing to local customs, social conditions, or educational limitations, Paul grounds his instruction in two foundational realities: creation order and the fall.

By rooting his argument in Genesis, Paul signals that his teaching is not merely situational, but theological. His reasoning reaches back before culture, before institutions, and even before sin itself. This suggests that the instruction concerns God’s design rather than temporary circumstances.

 
Creation Order as Design, Not Diminishment

Paul’s reference to Adam being formed first and Eve being created as a helper reflects intentional design. Scripture affirms without hesitation that men and women are equal in value, dignity, and worth as image-bearers of God. Distinction of role does not imply inequality of essence.

Throughout Scripture, God uses order to establish responsibility. Paul appeals to creation order elsewhere when discussing marriage and church life, treating Genesis not as a mere origin story, but as a theological blueprint. Leadership in the home and in the church flows from this design, not from social hierarchy or personal gifting alone.

 
The Fall and the Need for Ordered Leadership

Paul’s reference to the fall in 1 Timothy 2 is often misunderstood. It is not an indictment of women, nor a claim of moral inferiority. Rather, it acknowledges that sin disrupted God’s original design and introduced disorder into human relationships.

The church, therefore, is not called to reflect fallen dynamics, but redeemed order. Paul’s instruction serves to guard the church from institutionalizing the distortions introduced by sin and instead calls it back to God’s creational intent.

 
Addressing Common Objections with Care

Several objections are frequently raised in discussions of this issue. While often sincere, they do not ultimately overturn the apostolic teaching.

Deborah as a counterexample - Deborah served as a judge during a unique and chaotic period in Israel’s history. Judges were civil and military leaders, not pastors or elders in the New Testament sense. Her role represents an exception during national decline, not a normative model for church leadership.

Educational and cultural arguments - Claims that Paul restricted women from teaching due to lack of education or local religious practices are speculative. Paul does not cite these factors. Instead, he encourages women to learn and grounds his instruction explicitly in Genesis.

Linguistic arguments about authority - Attempts to limit Paul’s prohibition to abusive or illegitimate authority do not adequately account for the language or the congregational context of the passage. Paul addresses teaching and authority within public worship, not merely domestic relationships.

 
The Flow from 1 Timothy 2 to 1 Timothy 3

Paul’s teaching continues seamlessly into chapter 3, where he outlines qualifications for elders and overseers. The pastoral office is described using male-specific language and framed within the same theological assumptions already established.

This progression is intentional. Paul first addresses who is not permitted to teach or exercise authority over men in the gathered church, and then describes which men are qualified to do so. The structure reflects a coherent and unified argument.

 
Design, Not Oppression

Concerns about restriction or unfairness are understandable in a cultural climate that often equates authority with value. Scripture presents a different vision. Authority and submission, when ordered rightly, are not oppressive but life-giving.

Christ submits to the Father.
The church submits to Christ.
Believers submit to spiritual leadership.

These patterns reflect harmony, not hierarchy for its own sake. God’s design for the church is marked by clarity, order, and mutual flourishing.

The question of women serving as pastors is ultimately not a matter of preference, personality, or cultural alignment, but of faithfulness to Scripture. When the biblical data are considered together—creation order, the fall, apostolic instruction, linguistic context, and pastoral qualifications—a consistent picture emerges.

This position does not deny the gifting, calling, intelligence, or indispensable contributions of women in the life of the church. Rather, it affirms that God, in His wisdom, has established distinct roles within His redemptive design, for His glory and the good of His people.

I remain grateful for the research and biblical engagement of Caleb Corneloup on this subject. While I do not adopt every aspect of his tone or approach, his work has contributed meaningfully to the ongoing theological conversation and deserves thoughtful consideration.

Closing Summary

My position is simple and settled: the Word of God cannot mean today what it never meant when it was written. Scripture affirms that the pastoral and elder office is reserved for qualified men, based on biblical teaching rather than shifting cultural trends.

The Apostle Paul grounds his instruction in creation order and theological design, not in temporary or local conditions. His appeal reaches beyond culture to God’s original intent for the life and leadership of the church.

Men and women are affirmed throughout Scripture as equal in value and dignity, while serving in distinct and complementary roles within the body of Christ.

Common objections—appeals to Deborah, cultural context, or linguistic reinterpretations—do not overturn the consistent and coherent flow of apostolic teaching.

This view is rooted not in restriction, but in trust that God’s design for leadership is wise, purposeful, and good.

Faithfulness to Scripture sometimes requires us to stand quietly where God has already spoken, trusting that His design is both good and sufficient.

“Walk in faith, rest in grace, and trust the One who walks beside you."

In His love and grace,

ray mileur

‘Helping believers walk closer to Jesus, one day at a time.’
www.raymileurministries.com”