WOMAN'S PLACE IN THE CHURCH.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LX, Issue 16949, 10 April 1917, Page 2

WOMAN'S PLACE IN THE CHURCH.

By EDITH PICTON-TURBERVILL

In The London Daily News

(In view of the discussion on "The Emfty Pulp-t," Miss PictonTurbervill's views, which have recently -attracted much, attention, will be read with particular interest.) A naval officer, having spent most of the past year at sea, was dming the other night with some friends in Lon don. At the dinner table someone referred to the Eisliop of London's action jn first sanctioning and then prohibiting women from speaking in churcnes during the National Mission. The officer was evidently quite ignorant of the whole affair, and asked rather naively, "But why shouldn't women speak in church?" There was a pause, for to the very readl astonish ment of everyone present not a. single person was ready with an answer to that very simple question. Everyona seemed genuinely taken aback thai; this was the case. Eventually someona said, rather lamely, " Oh, but it .3 never done." It sounded, however, strangely unconvincing, and the conversation speedily passed to another subject. I>oes not the naval officer, with his simple query, practically represent th» position of the* general public, and those at the dinner table, who, to their own astonishment, were unable-to givo a satisfactory reply, represent the position of those who are opposed towoman ever speaking within the walls of a consecrated building? .# ■ * * Tradition and ecclesiastical history may on the whole not countenance the idea. The word "may" is emphasised, for there is si growing belief that hitherto unexplored historical material will, when studied, yield somewhat startling results on this question. The ancient ordus, i.e., ordination service, show us that the diaconal ordination for women was exactly the same as that for men. Deaconesses "catechized, baptized, nad administered the Comjflunion to women, carried the Host to the absent, chanted the Gospel and read the homily," as tve are told m an able article dealing with the historical aspect of the subject in the December "Nineteenth Century." Whether this is correct or not, there is no doubt that the prophetic office, i.e., preaching, of women is counterbalanced in both Old and New Testament. In the Apostolic Constitutions deacons, and deconesses are spoken of together, their duties are alike, and it is not until later that the deacon begins to assume higher rank. It is perfectly clear that in the primitive Church woman has a far more responsible share in the ministry of the Church than she has to-day, and it calls for no surprise. The primitive • Church was certainly historically, ana surely spiritually nearer to the life of Christ than is the Church to-day — nearer to tke Life of Him who never uttered a word that can be interpreted as. implying any superiority of the one sex over the other. St. Paul's ir..tructions under, special conditions to one special Church, even if it implies what it is generally supposed to imply w,hich it probably does not, cannot .be taken as a principle for all time. ■' . * * * I History is of interest, tradition not to be ignored, yet it cannot be taken as the final standard for all future movements. We as a nation would become stultified, and dead indeed, were we to admit for one moment that it could be. New conditions call for new methods. The spirit of God can guide us now as in years gone by, and to-be continually looking back to ihe past for final guidance is almost to deny that God liv9s and guides His children to-day. My life has brought me in close touch with the religious ministry of women. The first small share I had in it was with Mrs. Garnett, who surely was an apostle, to navvies, for ska certainly was aj sent one. Her name is still reverenced amongst thousands of navvies ' to-day, 'ihough nearly twenty years ago, I remember now a living message of God's love and power with which one Sunday she had enthralled for a whole hour — no light test —Hundreds of navvies, many of the roughest kind. That night those men had a vision of the power of the spirit which lifted them into another world and transformed many lives. For several years I watched the effect of ii er ministry upon their lives, and there are men living now who I know would say, without a moment's hesitation, that they owe the happiness of their lives, their whole insight into the Kingdom of God, humanly speaking, to the ministrations of tnat one woman.

During the National Mission a woman was asked to preach in a certain parish. She did so on a Sunday morning. The congregation met for the' morning service, and trailed out of the church io the schoolorom to, hear the sermon she delivered. Is not one who is considered worthy to givej-jpd's message, worthy to stand in His house? I have spent years in India in very close touch with the work of women missionaries. Apart from their work the Christian Church would not be is sti-ong in India as it is to-day. We give the gospel message to the Mohammedans and Hindus, we tell them of the sacredness of woma,nhood, how Christ for all time raised women, that there is no inferiority, m\sn and women in the Christian faith equally precious in the sight of God, equally recipients of His Holy Spirit. Yet in spite of what we teach they are quick to noi-<j that though-the Chrstian woman may speak and give her message in the zenana and schools, she must not, even ii au ordained deaconess, speak or minister within the holy walls of a consecrated building, a holy place. That Mohammedans should exclude women from ministry m the mosque calls for no surprise, when the teaching of Mohammed concerning women is taken into ponsideration. That the Christian Church, in spite of the Master's whole attitude to women, should practically exclude them from ministry within the Church suggests the mournful reflection that we have failed to interpret the full Christian message.

Is this to continue? A general consciousness has arisen that the Church needs a message, and that possibly it may be women who have a living message to give in these dark days of trial and sorrow. Is the thought to be encouraged, or will the Church once again drive from it what may be a regenerative power ? We hope not. We can but hope. There is, as far as 1 know, not a. single woman who in tnis matter desires to force the hands of those in authority. It is perhaps to be regretted that many of the Bishops— and possibly Nonconformist ministers in like manner though in a different way —find refuge in taking no action, when facedrwith a situation that calls for fearlessness, by saying that nothing can be done except by the united action of the Episcopate. Bishops have acted independently in the past.. Tiw Bishop of London mu9t have felt it

right to act independently of the Episcopate when he made his tirst pronouncement ou tho subject permitting women to speak in the churches. If in this matter one Bishop only was sufficiently convinced of the righteousness of the act, and sufficiently courageous to do it, he would license some qualified woman to preach m ins diocese. Many churches would immediately be open tc her, for clergymen are to be found of every school of thought in sympathy with the move/'ient.