Since women preachers can be just as good as men, doesn't that mean they are called to preach?

1 Corinthians 14 is clear that the woman is not to speak at all in the assembly. In our present chapter it is shown that teaching is not for her, whether in the assembly or elsewhere, if any public character of things is involved. At least, if men are present, it is not the woman's place to teach. The instructing of women or of children in less public circumstances could hardly come under the same restriction, but the woman must be careful that her teaching in any case does not put her in a place of any kind of prominence. It is in fact her glory to be in quietness. The reason for this given here is to be closely observed! Adam was first formed, then Eve. It is-simply order in God's creation, with no question of moral superiority or inferiority involved at all, nor any question of ability. It is God's order, and any infraction thereof is disorder.

But there is more here. "I permit not a woman to teach, nor to exercise authority over a man, but to be in quietness." This clearly is not limited to the assembly; as the apostle traces the ground of it in the constitution and natural character of woman. "For Adam was first formed, then Eve." Her subsequent formation out of the man is never to be forgotten by such as fear God and believe His word. All other thoughts are presumptuous theory in forgetfulness of the truth which goes up to the beginning. An individual woman may be comparatively able and well-instructed; but under no circumstances is leave given for a woman to teach or to have dominion over a man; she is to be in quietness. Thus absolutely does the apostle guard against any reaction from the abject place of women in ancient times, specially among the heathen; or any imitation of the peculiar prominence given to her sometimes in oracular matters, as among the Greeks and especially the Germans of old.

Had then women no seemly or suited, no good and useful, place in Christianity? None can deny that they have, who see how honoured were some of them in caring for the Lord Himself in His ministry (Luke 8:1-3), who know how He vindicated Mary that anointed Him when the apostles found fault under evil influence. Certainly He put no slight on Mary of Magdala, if His resurrection interrupted the plan of those who brought their spices and ointments after His death. Not otherwise do we find the action of the Holy Ghost when the Lord went to heaven. Mary the mother of John Mark gives her house for the gathering together of many to pray; and the four daughters of Philip were not forbidden to prophesy at home, though even there authority could not be rightly exercised over a man. Lydia is a beautiful example of Christian simple-heartedness and zeal; her house too has honour put on it for the truth's sake. Nor was Priscilla out of place when she with her husband helped the learned Alexandrian, mighty in the scriptures, to know the way of God more thoroughly. Romans 16 pays no passing honour to many a sister, from Phoebe who served the church at Cenchreae, commended to the saints in Rome as a succourer of many and of Paul himself. Prisca or Priscilla again is coupled with her husband as his fellow-workers in Christ, who not only for his life laid down their own necks, but wherever they went opened their house for the assembly. But need we dwell on all the cases and the beautifully discriminating notice taken of them?

Man was first formed and is God's representative and head and should maintain his rightful position as leader and teacher. Because Eve took the lead in transgressing and was deceived by Satan (manifesting that she was a poor leader), in God's government women are barred from taking the place of authority and teaching. They are to learn in silence and subjection. A woman, then, is never to take a public place as a recognized teacher of God's Word or to teach in the Assembly or anywhere in mixed audiences where she takes a place of equality with or is set over men, for then she is usurping authority over man.

255 I do not accept a woman's going out to evangelise. I never saw a woman meddle in teaching and church matters, but she brought mischief upon herself and everyone else. If she sits down with a company before her to teach them, she has got out of her place altogether. We read of Tryphena and Tryphosa, who laboured in the Lord, and the beloved Persis too - each in her own place of service. You find all honour done to women in the Gospels; but the Lord never sent out a woman to preach; neither did a man ever go and anoint Christ for His burial. The women's prophesying was not preaching. There came an inspired teaching, to which they gave utterance. I believe it was in an extraordinary way, as Philip's daughters. Women can be used, as Mary Magdalene was sent by Christ to His disciples. If Christ sent a woman to carry a message, the best she could do would be to go and carry it. It was a mere message; it is no place of teaching; no matter what the message is, it is but a message. Suppose it was written down and was special instruction, the teaching then was in the message, not in Mary Magdalene's place. Scripture says, "I suffer not a woman to teach." She was not to teach at all. She can lead on those who are converted without setting up to be a teacher. Teaching is expounding to people put under you to receive certain doctrines.

p153 [J Workman] MY DEAR BROTHER, - All depends on its being a private meeting or a public one. It is clear they must not teach, and in the assembly keep silence, and if they have a question ask at home. (1 Tim. 2:12; 1 Cor. 14:34.) I believe sisters have a very honourable place in scripture. They clung to the Lord when the disciples deserted Him; in death and resurrection they, not the apostles, are found, and in life ministering to Him; and the apostle in the end of Romans bears them the highest testimony. But the Lord never sends them out to teach or preach. And then the apostle is peremptory in forbidding them the same as to authority. Everything is beautiful in its place. If therefore it was quietly helping each other among themselves, I see nothing to hinder; or explaining scripture for the gospel to poor ignorant and unconverted women, even if several were together; but a teaching meeting even among themselves seem to me contrary to scripture. Its being in the room makes no difference really, but in circumstances it does: it is a teaching place, and you cannot separate the thought. Whatever puts them into the place of teaching, puts them into mischief, and is not of God. "The ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price," is what honours them.

To reiterate, Titus 2:3-5 does not refer to spiritual gifting, but rather to the responsibility of all elder women. We do not see any example in the New Testament of a believing woman teaching the Word or having the gift to do so. The Lord will not give women gifts that He does not permit them to exercise.

Exercised according to the word of God, ministry is an invaluable means of helping souls and keeping things straight. But the true principle, it must be repeated, is this: whatever gift Christ gives, He has given for use. If it be asked on this, — What is to become of gifted women; for surely some of them have such power in the Spirit? I answer that undoubtedly they have gifts, and ought to use them too. It is not intended for a woman, more than a man, to put the light under the bushel. The Lord holds us responsible to profit by and use His gifts. Only we must remember that the woman, not being a man, is to act as becomes a Christian woman. We must not forget that it is no question of privileges in Christ, where there is no difference, but of public action in His name, where we must have His warrant. Now there is a propriety in this, and very strongly is this insisted on, and by true-hearted intelligent souls recognised as in the Bible. Never there do we hear of a woman preaching the gospel. In the East, for women to go forth publicly to proclaim the glad tidings in the crowd would seem utterly wanting in decorum. In the West, men do not require such severe seclusion in females; yet is there a wide gap between the happy liberty they enjoy and the forgetfulness that they belong to a sex whose best place is the home circle, or that which approximates to it in visiting the sick and poor, the young and old.

The public ministry of women is an example of this. In evangelizing publicly the world, in teaching the Church, in leading the assembly in prayer, or in discharging the office of an elder, men were recognised in the early Church as qualified for and called to such service. Not that every man was qualified and called to such work; but it was everywhere owned to be the work of the men. Were women ever acknowledged and sanctioned if engaging in such service? Throughout the Acts and the Epistles there is not a hint of a woman being sent of God to preach to the world, or of hands being laid on her to have fellowship in such work. Gaius (3 John) shewed hospitality to those who went forth to preach, taking nothing of the Gentiles [or, as some would read, heathen], but those labourers are described as men. The language in which the elect lady is addressed (2 John) leads to the conclusion that men only were in contemplation; and Jude, who speaks of the apostasy, speaks clearly only of male teachers. (Ver. 4.)

As in Christ all, both men and women, shared in the outpouring of the Holy Ghost. As in the Church all were to be in subjection to the Head. Both men and women were endowed with the spirit of prophecy. Agabus and others amongst men, the four daughters of Philip the evangelist amongst women, are illustrations of this sovereign favour of God. But the possession of a gift, and the right use of it, are different things. The manifestation of the Spirit was given to every man to profit withal; and to each the Holy Ghost divided severally as He would. It was sovereign favour at the outset to receive any manifestation of the Spirit; and, received by those in union with the risen Head, each was to be regulated, in the assembly at least, by the commands of the Lord. It has been observed that women were employed as the first heralds to announce the Lord’s resurrection. Granted. But they were never commissioned to preach to the world about it. We know that Mary was sent by the Lord to tell His disciples of His approaching ascension. We know that the women were commissioned by the angel to advise the eleven of the empty tomb. We know that they discharged their mission faithfully. (Luke 24:23.) We know that the Lord appeared to them on their way to the city, and entrusted them with a message to His brethren. (Matt. 28:9-10.) Yet we receive not the authoritative announcement of that wonderful event on the word of women. It was gracious that, since Eve was the first who gave ear to the serpent, women should be the first to announce the Lord’s victory over death; but in 1 Cor. 15 all mention of their testimony is omitted, and the proof of His resurrection is made to rest on what Cephas, James, others, and, last of all, Paul saw. Is not this silence about the women expressive? Was it forgetfulness on the part of Paul, or design on the part of the Spirit of God?

Another means of letting us into the ways of God among His people is found at Caesarea. "We entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven." We cannot well have forgotten his labours in earlier days at Samaria, and round about. But we are told here what we had not learnt then, that "the same man had four daughters." As unmarried, they were remaining in their father's house; and they prophesied. There is no reason why a woman should not have this or most other gifts as much as a man. I do not say the same kind of gift always. Surely God is wise and gives suited gifts whether to men or women, or, it may be, I was going to say, to children. The Lord is sovereign and knows how, as putting all who now believe in the body of Christ, so also to give them a work suitable to the purposes of His own grace. Certainly He did clothe these four daughters of Philip with a very special spiritual power. They had one of the highest characters of spiritual gift — they prophesied. And if they were invested with this power, certainly it was not to be put under a bushel but to be exercised: the only question is how.

It leaves room for very happy, blessed service. Would there were more of it! But it clearly does not include ministry in the assembly, or public testimony before a mixed audience of men and women. If it did, Scripture would contradict itself. If the Holy Ghost led women to such service, He would lead them to violate Scripture given by the same Holy Ghost, which would be unthinkable.