First, in missions today just over 60% of those who work overseas are women. Whether this is a good or bad thing, opinions vary. Many single women have gone.


From the early church on until now women played a large role in acts of mercy and charity. If we define missions marrowly by a definition of "preaching the Gospel only", which many mistakenly do, then some will say that there can be no women missionaries. If missions encompasses everything we do to take the Gospel to a people then missions is broader than merely preaching.


But it appears the evangelism and missions and preaching the Gospel are related but not the same. Missions and evangelism are broader than merely doing what ordained men do. It need not be in a pulput, it need not be done by elders or pastors. In the NT and the early church and ever since, women have gone abroad, engaged in works of mercy and charity, told people about Christ and have had people saved under their efforts, whether this would be called "ministry" or not.

How DO we classify the above? How DO we define misions?


Does not a large part of missions involve works of mercy and charity in which women often have a better heart to do than men?

Or is missions work and evangelism the same as preaching and thus to be relegated to men?

And if we define it thus, than we have narrowed the place for social efforts, helping the poor, tending to the sick and dying, etc, all vital ways in which Christ's love has been spread abroad. No more mission health clinics, literacy schools, aviation, translations unless done by elders...etc.




Historically there are many female missionary "heroes": Mary Slessor, Lottie Moon, Amy Carmicheal, Helen Rosevere, Joy Ridderhof....

Do we praise God for these women, or do we condemn them as being out of their place?



In the NT there were no women elders or pastors, but there were women laborers and workers.

Some think of missionaries as needing to be pastors. Certainly, if they must be elders to be missionaries then there can be no such thing as a woman missionary (or no men missionaries either that are not elder-qualified). But one need not preach the Gospel to spread news of Christ or labor in the mission field as part of a larger group effort.


Some agencies distinguish between church planting missionaries and "support workers" such as teachers, pilots, etc. How do we even define a "missionary" that is a HUGE question?

Very often church planting teams or translation teams are formed and different experts come together (translators, nurses, teachers, computer geeks, community development people, literacy experts, etc) and live near one another for the larger work of planting a church. Only one person out of that whole group needs to lead the church and the others all do vital roles that do not require being an elder-qualified man to do. Thus preaching by an elder is just one aspect of the larger effort.

Could it be that church-planters might need to be elder-qualified and thus men, but support workers such as teachers, nurses, etc need only to have a desire to take part in these efforts.

Bible translation is a huge need...and often women are better educated and more studious than men and they make the best translators.




A broader question related to the role of women in missions is the role of all unordained men in missions.

Should un-ordained men be missionaries or should missionaries only be elder-qualified men? The answer is pivotal as to how we treat women on the field. Or all of our support workers, pilots, teachers who are men, etc.


If a man must be an elder to serve overseas as a missioanry than about 80% of all missionaries need to come home, all the women who are not missionary wives and all non-elder-qualified men too.

Do you agree or diagree and assert that there is a place for others besides elders and pastors overseas?

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone