Women's Role Controversy: May Women Serve the Lord's Supper in Church Assemblies?

Churches today face increasing pressure to expand female leadership roles. This trend affects various denominational groups, as well as some churches of Christ, and is accelerating through the influence of modern culture.

Three views on women’s leadership have emerged:

Leadership is divinely ordained for males, based on biblical patterns from creation and confirmed by apostolic authority.
Biblical limitations on female leadership were merely cultural preferences and can be discarded.
New Testament teaching should generally be followed, but female leadership roles not explicitly condemned are matters of opinion, not law.

This third view is gaining popularity through a selective approach to scripture. This article addresses two specific questions within this middle ground:

Do the Scriptures authorize women to serve communion as long as they remain silent?
May women publicly lead in non-worship activities, like making announcements?

Common Justifications and Biblical Responses

Some who support expanding women’s leadership roles often propose the following first steps.

Women Serving Communion: Proponents often argue that women serving communion is merely “passing a plate” and therefore permissible as long as they don’t speak. Others suggest it’s a matter of opinion within eldership authority.

These arguments misunderstand biblical authority. We must not ask, “What do the Scriptures prohibit?” but “What does God’s Word authorize?” Whatever is authorized (expressly or implied) is authorized. Whatever is not authorized is prohibited, whether explicitly condemned or not.

How does the Bible authorize? Through explicit commands, divinely sanctioned examples or patterns, and necessary implications.

The question before us is this: does God’s Word authorize females to serve as leaders in the Lord’s Supper as long as they do not speak?

The analogy is frequently made between simply passing a tray in the pew and standing before the congregation in an administering role; however, the analogy is false. It overlooks the consistent pattern from creation through Revelation, where male leadership was dominant in the following settings:

Religious assemblies: temple priests and Levites were exclusively male. This pattern is later replicated in the synagogue assemblies.

Social/civil assemblies: city gate proceedings, weddings, community gatherings—all male leadership, again also reflected in later developments like the Sanhedrin council.

Household authority: fathers are heads of their households and leaders in the physical, spiritual, and emotional well-being of their families.

This pattern wasn’t merely cultural but rooted in divine design from creation (Gen. 2:18, 21–23; 1 Cor. 11:3, 7–9; 1 Tim. 2:13) and intensified after Eve’s transgression in Eden (Gen. 3:16; 1 Tim. 2:14).

Response: Leadership Isn’t Just Audible Speech

Standing before the assembly carries implied authority, whether speaking or not. Paul instructs us to do all in the name of the Lord in word or deed (Col. 3:17). Actions require the same degree of authority as that which is spoken.

Consider these biblical terms for leadership:

Teach (didasko): Includes exhortation, admonishment, and even non-verbal demonstration of authority. When Jesus cast out a demon, Jews recognized this action as “new teaching didache” (Mk. 1:27). Women are forbidden from doing this in mixed-gender assemblies (1 Cor. 14:34; 1 Tim. 2:12).

Lead, manage, rule (proistēmi): Literally means “to stand before.” In Greek literature, the word picture of “standing before” a group demonstrated command authority in military, civil, and religious proceedings—speaking or not. In the New Testament, only men “stand before” in authority (1 Thes. 5:12; 1 Tim. 3:4–5, 12; 5:17; cf. Rom. 12:8 where leadership is to be diligently pursued by those to whom it was given).

The secondary meaning, “to engage in” or “be devoted to,” is not used in leadership contexts in the New Testament, but rather in a general sense of dedication all Christians must pursue (Tit. 3:8, 14). See below for additional comments.

Have dominion (authenteō): First Timothy 2:12 explicitly prohibits women from exercising dominion over men in formal capacities—verbal or non-verbal. This prohibition isn’t just about women who usurp authority, as some translations indicate. Dominion over man is explicitly forbidden, whether or not elders consent.

While women participate in private conversations (e.g., Priscilla in Acts 18:26), this is not comparable to public leadership roles. Even in Priscilla’s case, we must not read more into the text than what is explicitly stated.

Response: Eldership Authority Is Limited

Some argue that elders have the final say to decide these matters. This misstates and overstates their role. Elders are sub-shepherds serving under the Chief Shepherd (1 Pet. 5:2–4). They may only implement practices that are authorized by God’s Word. Again, we must emphasize this point: where there is no authority, there is no right to innovate (as did Jeroboam) and call it an expediency.

Elders don’t determine what is right. God’s Word defines righteousness (Jn. 17:17; 2 Tim. 3:16–17; 1 Cor. 4:6; 14:37). The eldership’s responsibility is to understand biblical provisions and limitations and then lead the congregation in obedience.

What About Women Making Announcements?

Arguing that women may make announcements because announcements aren’t one of “the five acts of worship” creates an irrelevant distinction.

When we think about the true nature of announcements, they are: encouragements to pray for the sick, admonitions toward love and fellowship, exhortations to evangelize, etc. Though some may trivialize these “non-worship” acts, they are integral to the body of Christ, under the scope of its divinely appointed leadership (Acts 20:28).

The announcer speaks on behalf of the leadership. Separating the announcements from “worship” doesn’t address the true nature of these activities, and it misleads people into adopting female leadership roles that the Scriptures explicitly prohibit (1 Tim. 2:12).

The Biblical Pattern of Leadership

Let’s revisit the Greek term proistēmi (“to stand before”). This word picture reveals the essence of this issue.

In the New Testament, this term appears eight times—twice referring to general Christian service, but primarily designating male leadership roles. Standing before the congregation in any formal capacity carries implicit authority.

In any assembly, the person standing before the audience addresses the audience with some degree of authority (i.e., exercising dominion [1 Tim. 2:12]). Set in contrast to this action is Paul’s apostolic restriction in this verse that women must be quiet. This is not a demand for absolute silence, but silence relative to acting with authority over man.

Whether her actions are verbal or non-verbal, any role in which she stands before the congregation in authority is a violation of this explicit prohibition.

Finally, consider this. If there is no difference between passing a tray in the pew and administering communion by standing before the assembly, we would have no basis to restrict anyone from serving—including non-Christians or those with significant ongoing sin problems. Yet we recognize that these service roles carry spiritual and leadership significance.

Again, we emphasize that the Scriptures consistently establish the male leadership pattern, not as a concession to culture but as a reflection of the divine design. This pattern began at creation, where man was created first and woman as his helper (Gen. 2:18). It was reinforced after Eve’s transgression (3:16) and confirmed throughout the New Testament (1 Cor. 11:3–10; 1 Tim. 2:11–14).

Conclusion

Standing before the congregation in any leadership capacity—speaking or not—is an authority role that scripture reserves only for men. Attempts to create exceptions for women serving communion or making announcements rely on false analogies and artificial distinctions.

The issue isn’t women’s capabilities but biblical authorization.

As we face increasing cultural pressure, we must remember that biblical authority isn’t based on culture, convenience, or avoiding controversy, but on Christ’s will revealed through the apostles and documented in God’s Word.

Elders must maintain the divine order as faithful stewards, not as lawmakers. The church must stand firm on biblical authority rather than yielding to cultural innovations that undermine God’s established pattern.

To maintain unity and purity, we must reorient our thinking from “I can’t think of any scripture that condemns it” to “What does the Bible authorize us to practice?” We must have positive authorization, not the absence of an explicit prohibition.