# Women Leading Singing of Psalms, Hymns, Spiritual Songs



## Romans922 (Apr 5, 2007)

Is it ok for women to lead this part of worship?

Biblical reasons why or why not?


----------



## CDM (Apr 5, 2007)

Romans922 said:


> Is it ok for women to *lead* this part of worship?
> 
> Biblical reasons why or why not?



Women do not *lead* the men and the congregation.


----------



## matt01 (Apr 5, 2007)

I suppose it depends on what you are referring to by "lead". If you have a female piano player, then a female is leading the congregation in the singing.


----------



## Romans922 (Apr 5, 2007)

how about sometimes a woman stands before congregation and physically leads them,

sometimes a woman is playing piano, but singing at same time


----------



## Ginny Dohms (Apr 5, 2007)

I believe that if women are leading in any capacity in the worship service, then that is a violation of the following Scriptures. Even if one is only leading the congregation in singing, it is still exercising leadership over the men.

I Cor 14:34-35 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: *for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.*

I Tim 2:11-14 *Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.* But I suffer not a woman to teach, *nor to usurp authority over the man,* but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

I Cor 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; *and the head of the woman is the man;* and the head of Christ is God.


----------



## Davidius (Apr 5, 2007)

I've heard of some RPCNA congregations having women as precenters (person who sings the first line of a psalm and keeps time) and I'm not sure how comfortable I feel with that. Even if she's not speaking, there's just something about having a woman standing alone in front of the congregation during worship that makes me uneasy.


----------



## elnwood (Apr 5, 2007)

1 Corinthians 11:4-6 implies that women were allowed to prophesy in the congregation, and obviously they're allowed to sing, so I don't think that silence is absolute.

I think the issue is more of women exercising teaching and oversight authority, and as a "worship leader" at my church, I don't think I really exercise authority. That is reserved for elders, and I see my function more as a worship facilitator than a worship leader.


----------



## CDM (Apr 5, 2007)

lead·er
n.
1. One that leads or guides.
2. One who is in charge or in command of others.


----------



## jolivetti (Apr 5, 2007)

Re: Women precenting (leading a capella singing)...I don't think we need to have a problem with this, though I'm willing to be corrected. Wouldn't a woman singing loudly be "leading" the people around her?


----------



## jaybird0827 (Apr 5, 2007)

Romans922 said:


> Is it ok for women to lead this part of worship?
> 
> Biblical reasons why or why not?


 
I think the answer to the question is clearer if the question is rephrased, "Is there a Biblical warrant for women to lead the singing worship of the congregation?"

I agree with especially with Chris, Dave and Ginny ... no biblical warrant.


----------



## KMK (Apr 5, 2007)

There are only a few Biblical warrants for males leading singing. How much of singing needs 'leadership'? Is the leader the one who picks the songs? Or the one who goes 'uh-one, and-uh-two...'? Or is it the one who is loudest? I have been in situations where song seemed to break out spontaneously without any leadership.


----------



## Davidius (Apr 5, 2007)

jolivetti said:


> Re: Women precenting (leading a capella singing)...I don't think we need to have a problem with this, though I'm willing to be corrected. Wouldn't a woman singing loudly be "leading" the people around her?



Well, I think there's a problem if one woman feels the need to sing more loudly than everyone around her to begin with. That goes for anyone; it need not be a woman.

And welcome to the Puritan Board from a fellow RP!  I don't think I had gotten the chance to say hello yet.


----------



## Davidius (Apr 5, 2007)

elnwood said:


> 1 Corinthians 11:4-6 implies that women were allowed to prophesy in the congregation, and obviously they're allowed to sing, so I don't think that silence is absolute.



I've had some trouble understanding why Paul seems to imply that women were allowed to pray and prophesy in the congregation in 1 Cor 11 and then goes on three chapters later that they should be silent (I also understand that this doesn't mean _absolute_ silence.). Prophecy in the congregational meeting also doesn't square with his instruction in 1 Tim 2 that women should not teach or have authority. Someone relaying the divine word of God to the people is definitely exhibiting authority and instructing. Perhaps Paul has something different in mind when he says "praying and prophesying. I know some have interpreted it to mean their taking part in worship in general. I'll admit it's a somewhat uncomfortable interpretation in the immediate context but, again, Paul is very clear in other places that women shouldn't be speaking or exhibiting authority in any way.


----------



## Founded on the Rock (Apr 5, 2007)

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> Prophecy in the congregational meeting also doesn't square with his instruction in 1 Tim 2 that women should not teach or have authority. Someone relaying the divine word of God to the people is definitely exhibiting authority and instructing. Perhaps Paul has something different in mind when he says "praying and prophesying. I know some have interpreted it to mean their taking part in worship in general. I'll admit it's a somewhat uncomfortable interpretation in the immediate context but, again, Paul is very clear in other places that women shouldn't be speaking or exhibiting authority in any way.



I think that assumes the interpretation though. Occasionally, women (like Lydia) are considered the head of their household. Priscilla actually taught Apollos. I think it can be argued that there were deaconessess in the church.

You need to view the various statements in there contexts. Obviosuly Paul is not saying women should not be involved in worship. What he IS saying is that women are not allowed to be elders in the church. They ought to not have that authority because of Creation, as Paul argues. However to say women are to have no part in the service (leading worship, reading Scripture, etc.,) is, In my humble opinion, to misunderstand Paul.


----------



## Coram Deo (Apr 5, 2007)

I agree, I have trouble with some saying that the context is worship because of praying and prophesying because woman are to be silent in church..

I believe the context is more general for life and the Early Church father Tertullian, and some others plus some reformers agree with me here...

I also agree that woman should NOT lead at all during Worship including the singing.....

Michael (Still in pain and haze from Meds)




CarolinaCalvinist said:


> I've had some trouble understanding why Paul seems to imply that women were allowed to pray and prophesy in the congregation in 1 Cor 11 and then goes on three chapters later that they should be silent (I also understand that this doesn't mean _absolute_ silence.). Prophecy in the congregational meeting also doesn't square with his instruction in 1 Tim 2 that women should not teach or have authority. Someone relaying the divine word of God to the people is definitely exhibiting authority and instructing. Perhaps Paul has something different in mind when he says "praying and prophesying. I know some have interpreted it to mean their taking part in worship in general. I'll admit it's a somewhat uncomfortable interpretation in the immediate context but, again, Paul is very clear in other places that women shouldn't be speaking or exhibiting authority in any way.


----------



## Davidius (Apr 5, 2007)

Founded on the Rock said:


> I think that assumes the interpretation though. Occasionally, women (like Lydia) are considered the head of their household. Priscilla actually taught Apollos. I think it can be argued that there were deaconessess in the church.
> 
> You need to view the various statements in there contexts. Obviosuly Paul is not saying women should not be involved in worship. What he IS saying is that women are not allowed to be elders in the church. They ought to not have that authority because of Creation, as Paul argues. However to say women are to have no part in the service (leading worship, reading Scripture, etc.,) is, In my humble opinion, to misunderstand Paul.



Actually, your statements about Priscilla and Lydia are what are out of context. Priscilla's instruction of Apollos was _definitely_ not in congregational worship, and she was with her husband. Lydia was the head of her household _before_ she became a believer. We have no idea what her history was or what happened after she converted so that has no bearing on what leadership in the home should look like (I _really_ hope you weren't implying that Lydia is proof that women should be allowed to be heads of households). These things have absolutely no bearing on the texts I mentioned and the quandry I raised. 

1 Cor 11-14 are all about certain elements of public worship and rules to which they were supposed to conform. To say that it's merely all about women not being allowed to be elders is fallacious.


----------



## Romans922 (Apr 5, 2007)

Many people think that 1 Cor. 11 passage says that it is permissible for a woman to do that (read Scripture in communal worship or speak). But this isn't what Paul is getting at in this passage. Context is KING! The main point of the passage is verse 3: "But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God." Is Paul talking about public or private worship here? Well, doesn't really matter, because the Context has set up that the verse you are referencing of women prophesying is written by Paul for the mere fact that: 1) Paul knew there were problems of women asking questions/talking in the church at the time of public worship, but Paul doesn't address it here; 2) Here he is merely illustrating the roles of Christ, Husbands, and Wives --> See Ephesians 5 for more reference. 

1 Corinthians 14 is somewhat different though. Clearly this is referring to Public Worship, and Clearly this is talking about Prophesying and Tongues and the actual administration of these gifts in churches --> THAT THEY SHOULD BE DONE IN AN ORDERLY MANNER (v. 40). No where in this passage does it say that women prophesy. No where in this passage does it even hint at it. Paul is writing concerning the right way to worship in Church. Obviously the church at Corinth had a problem here. The big context of Corinthians shows us this. The church thought that they had already arrived in full consummation, and so everyone believed they had all the spiritual gifts and all were somewhat HOLY or holy art thou kind of thing! See 1 Cor. 1:12, everyone has been arguing over who is better and who knows who, so to speak. 

Anyway, speaking of tongues, Paul says, 'If there is no one to interpret, *let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God.*" 

Then Paul moves on to Prophecies and the problems of prophecies being made in the Corinthian Church just as he has done for Tongues:

"Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent." WHY? BECAUSE --> "For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets." WHY? Because of v. 40 and --> "For God is not a God of confusion but of peace." It sure is sounding like a lot of people have to remain silent in church during certain parts, let me give another example of who should be silent...An EXAMPLE? --> "As in all the churches of the saints, *the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak*, but should be in submission, as the Law also says." What are the Women to do then? --> "If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church." Off this tangent, Paul returns to his main argument to prove that worship should be orderly.

Context of Chapter 11: Paul calls the church to be imitators of him and deals with the Corinthian problem of their understanding of the roles of Christ, Husband, Wife.
Context of Chapter 14: Paul deals with the Problems in the Corinthian church as it has to do with Prophecy and Tongues.




CarolinaCalvinist said:


> I've had some trouble understanding why Paul seems to imply that women were allowed to pray and prophesy in the congregation in 1 Cor 11 and then goes on three chapters later that they should be silent (I also understand that this doesn't mean _absolute_ silence.). Prophecy in the congregational meeting also doesn't square with his instruction in 1 Tim 2 that women should not teach or have authority. Someone relaying the divine word of God to the people is definitely exhibiting authority and instructing. Perhaps Paul has something different in mind when he says "praying and prophesying. I know some have interpreted it to mean their taking part in worship in general. I'll admit it's a somewhat uncomfortable interpretation in the immediate context but, again, Paul is very clear in other places that women shouldn't be speaking or exhibiting authority in any way.


----------



## Davidius (Apr 5, 2007)

Thanks for that thorough contribution, Andrew. I'm digesting.

Question: I've heard people mention (correctly) that there _are_ prophetesses spoken of in the New Testament. Who were these women and where/how did they use their gifts? Some have pointed to them to say that Paul really _is_ allowing for _certain_ women to speak and teach during public meetings and that the regulations in 1 Cor 14 and 1 Tim 2 only apply to "women who do not have the gift of prophecy." It seems absurd to me and I prefer other explanations of 1 Cor 11. So what should we say about the prophetesses?


----------



## satz (Apr 9, 2007)

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> Thanks for that thorough contribution, Andrew. I'm digesting.
> 
> Question: I've heard people mention (correctly) that there _are_ prophetesses spoken of in the New Testament. Who were these women and where/how did they use their gifts? Some have pointed to them to say that Paul really _is_ allowing for _certain_ women to speak and teach during public meetings and that the regulations in 1 Cor 14 and 1 Tim 2 only apply to "women who do not have the gift of prophecy." It seems absurd to me and I prefer other explanations of 1 Cor 11. So what should we say about the prophetesses?



I guess I don’t see why it would be so absurd. The commandment for women to be silent obviously includes exceptions, or they could not even sing or greet another church member. One obvious exception is singing (Eph 5:19, Col 3:16) and so is inspired prophecy by the Spirit of God. How can a woman be usurping authority over men when it is actually God’s Spirit speaking though her? 

The Old Testament gives us examples of Prophetesses who exercised their gifts in the presence of men (Ex 15:20, Judges 4:4, 2 Kings 22:14, Micah 6:4). 

In the New Testament Anna dwelt in the Temple and spoke to all about the Lord (Luke 2:36-38). Joel foretold that the times after the resurrection of Christ would be marked by increased prophetic activity of both men and women (Joel 2:28-32, Acts 2:14-21, Acts 21:9).

I believe this gift was prophecy was part of the special revelatory gifts that operated in first days of the church because the church did not yet have a New Testament. So yes, I believe that women got up in worship and ‘preached’ by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost – the gift of prophecy – in the first century. After the bible came together that gift went away and we do not have this phenomenon anymore, so the general rule Paul set out in 1 Cor 14 and 1 Tim 2 applies absolutely today.

It seems to me 1 Cor 11 is clearly regulating the practice of inspired prayer and prophecy in the church, and Paul explains how the headship principles requires different treatments of the physical head when engaged in prayer and prophecy. It does not make sense to say Paul is regulating something (ie women prophesying) in chapter 11 only to completely condemn it in chapter 14, and I disagree with Calvin and others who hold to that view.

I really don’t understand why some seem to think that to say Paul allowed INSPIRED women to speak in public assemblies is somehow violating or compromising the headship principle. There are many examples in the bible where a general principle is laid out then exceptions given. Remember also that certain parts of the scriptures were initially spoken by women yet they continue to teach and hold authority over men.


----------



## eternallifeinchrist (Apr 10, 2007)

*Sola*

I have a little different question. Looking at the quote "As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says." I would like for someone to point me to Scripture/s that Paul is referring to as "the Law "that outlines this principle. Would we have to look in the books by Moses? I do not think that the text link in most Bibles as the Genesis 3 explanation is really on the mark. Has anyone found another Scripture to check this Scripture with? Thanks!



Romans922 said:


> Many people think that 1 Cor. 11 passage says that it is permissible for a woman to do that (read Scripture in communal worship or speak). But this isn't what Paul is getting at in this passage. Context is KING! The main point of the passage is verse 3: "But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God." Is Paul talking about public or private worship here? Well, doesn't really matter, because the Context has set up that the verse you are referencing of women prophesying is written by Paul for the mere fact that: 1) Paul knew there were problems of women asking questions/talking in the church at the time of public worship, but Paul doesn't address it here; 2) Here he is merely illustrating the roles of Christ, Husbands, and Wives --> See Ephesians 5 for more reference.
> 
> 1 Corinthians 14 is somewhat different though. Clearly this is referring to Public Worship, and Clearly this is talking about Prophesying and Tongues and the actual administration of these gifts in churches --> THAT THEY SHOULD BE DONE IN AN ORDERLY MANNER (v. 40). No where in this passage does it say that women prophesy. No where in this passage does it even hint at it. Paul is writing concerning the right way to worship in Church. Obviously the church at Corinth had a problem here. The big context of Corinthians shows us this. The church thought that they had already arrived in full consummation, and so everyone believed they had all the spiritual gifts and all were somewhat HOLY or holy art thou kind of thing! See 1 Cor. 1:12, everyone has been arguing over who is better and who knows who, so to speak.
> 
> ...


----------



## Davidius (Apr 10, 2007)

satz said:


> I guess I don’t see why it would be so absurd. The commandment for women to be silent obviously includes exceptions, or they could not even sing or greet another church member. One obvious exception is singing (Eph 5:19, Col 3:16) and so is inspired prophecy by the Spirit of God. How can a woman be usurping authority over men when it is actually God’s Spirit speaking though her?
> 
> The Old Testament gives us examples of Prophetesses who exercised their gifts in the presence of men (Ex 15:20, Judges 4:4, 2 Kings 22:14, Micah 6:4).
> 
> ...



It seems like you're interpreting didactic by narrative instead of narrative by didactic.

Why wouldn't Paul have ever written in exceptions to his rules about women utilizing gifts of prophecy _in public worship_ (which I believe is different from the examples you've provided) when he was making statements such as those found in 1 Cor 14 and 1 Tim 2? If Paul was really saying that women should be prophesying during worship services, it seems like he would have saved what he said in 1 Cor 11 for 1 Cor 14 when he was actually giving specific instructions for how prophesying was to be done. Instead, he didactically affirms there, as in other places, that women are to be silent and not teach.


----------



## satz (Apr 11, 2007)

As 2 Tim 2:15 tells us, we need to be rightly dividing the word of truth. Hence not all verses are used in the same way nor can the correct answer to a particular bible question be arrived at by using the same logical formula all the time, since different questions have different relevant verses. Sometimes didactic teaching should be taken as supreme and narrative should submit to it. Yet at other times narrative is there to help us understand and flesh out the didactic teaching. 

In Matt 12:4, Mark 2:26 and Luke 6:4 the Lord Jesus gives us at least an example of narrative being used to flesh out what a didactic commandment actually means when he used the example of David eating the shewbread to justify his disciples for plucking grains on the Sabbath. In a very similar situation to the one we are discussing, the Sabbath law was originally given with no exceptions – it said no work is to be done. The Pharisees did not have the benefit of the WCF to teach them about works of mercy and works of necessity, but Jesus told them they ought to have figured it out just by reading about the example of David. 

Also, if you take ‘to be silent’ completely literally, than women should not sing in church since singing is teaching and admonishing (Col 3:16). In fact, the language of 1 Cor 14 is absolute – they are not permitted to speak, so they ought not to greet other church members or say ‘excuse me’. Unless you believe that is how those verses should be interpreted, a sense needs to be put on those words to include all the exceptions that the Holy Spirit allows. In 1 Cor 14:28 Paul has already commanded another category of persons to ‘keep silence in the churches’ – a person with the gift of tongues but no interpreter. There is no reason to believe Paul means such a person is to keep silent altogether, rather he is to keep silent in a particular way – the use of his gift of tongues. Hence, from the very context of Paul’s usage of the phrase ‘keep silence’ in 1 Cor 14, there is no reason to assume it is an absolute rule with no possibility of exceptions. 

As regards didactic teaching, I believe 1 Cor 11 provides an adequate example of this, though I guess many will disagree. I believe the context of the chapter is public worship by comparing verse 2 and verse 17, and seeing Paul’s use of the phrase ‘Now I praise you brethren…’ vs ‘Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not’. The thing Paul is addressing after verse 2 is similar in nature to the Lord’s Supper, which is addressed after verse 17. Also, from verse 2, Paul is now addressing ‘the ordinances’ which he delivered to them, which is indicative of public worship. While the word may possibly indicate general Christian teaching and rules, if that was the case there is no reason for Paul to suddenly mention it here, as what he has covered in the previous ten chapters would qualify as ordinances under that expanded definition. I believe Paul is moving toward addressing public worship in the next four chapters. 

In verse 3 Paul sets out principles of headship, then in verses 4 and 5 shows how those principles result in different treatment of the head when praying and prophesying. Men ought not to cover, while women should. Verse 5 “But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven” can, In my humble opinion, lead to a very obvious conclusion that a woman who prays and prophesies with her head _covered_ does not dishonor her head. To say Paul here tells women prophesying to cover their heads then later condemns the practice altogether in 1 Cor 14 is an extremely forced reading, in my opinion. I remember one other member of this board (and I don’t know if he still holds to the view ) comparing it to Paul telling Christians to be sure to pay taxes on any drug deals they conducted in one chapter than three chapters later telling them oh yeah, those deals are forbidden anyway.

Finally, regarding why did Paul not mention exceptions to his rule in 1 Cor 14 or 1 Tim 2, or why did he not group the instructions on prophesy in Chapter 11 with the other instructions on prophecy in 1 Cor 14… maybe because he knew that to get to chapter 14 readers would have had to get though chapter 11 so the exception there would be understood ?  No… in all honesty, I don’t know. I do not believe it is a big problem for the analysis I have put forward though. For whatever reason, God did not write the bible as simply as we would like. Why are the instructions on marriage scattered though many different epistles instead of being all grouped together for our easy reference? Why isn’t the book of proverbs arranged according to topic? I don’t know, but it often means we have to look all over the bible to see the full picture of what God intends, instead of using one particular verse as a sound bite. 

Also, many a times the bible makes statements and does not mention the exceptions because we are supposed to infer them ourselves, either from context or from reading other places in scripture. Consider the Lord Jesus’ example of not resisting evil or not swearing from the Sermon on the Mount that have caused so much controversy in Christianity because of the lack of explicit modifiers. Consider also his condemnation of planning from Matt 6:31-34. Does he mean any and all planning and care for the future is evil? Or must his words , though sounding absolute, be read in context of the rest of the bible (Prov 6:6-8 etc etc)? And these examples could be multiplied over and over again.


----------

