Headship language

Some feedback on the article, ‘What heads are supposed to do’ is called for (4 March 2016). This otherwise helpful article by Hannah Ploegstra disappoints in one important respect: headship in Paul’s letters is applied to husbands, to Christ and to God—never (in my reading of him) to other kinds of ‘leadership’, such as pastors. The nuances of various roles are lost when we make generalizations from the distinctive specialized uses of headship (there are two different uses tied together in Ephesians 1:22, 4:15 and 5:23) and apply it more broadly to other roles, such as ministry leadership, where Paul avoids headship language. Will doing this not obscure the truth, rather than clarify it?

I have two linked concerns with this use of headship language: firstly, it claims to be biblical when scriptural terms are not being used accurately, and secondly, it further confuses people’s understanding of ministry roles. Put another way, it sidesteps the implications for ministry of Christ being the head of the church (Eph 5:23). What are we then saying if we identify pastors as head(s) of the church? The parallels between leadership in church and home in 1 Timothy 3 need to be understood without importing language that Paul reserves for a different purpose.

Furthermore, it is not helpful to reinforce a stereotype of male leadership not supported by Paul’s nuanced instructions. I suspect that some women (for instance) are unnecessarily excluded from some ministry roles on account of it. My point is not mere pedantry, because the wrong application of headship distorts one’s understanding of important roles and relationships. It is a vital understanding that pastors stand with/beside/among the people (as part of the body) under the head, who is Christ, ministering in such a way as to point (‘lead’) the body to its only head. Then we might ask who might do that, and how.

I do not mean to single out this author for criticism, for her use of headship language is widespread. But we do not want to damage gospel work by fostering confusion. When we send mixed messages about biblical teaching on ministry, it confuses those who are struggling to understand what we believe and it encourages (especially in the case of headship) misconceptions among those who are sceptical about what we believe on the subject. Gospel work does not need opposition generated by misunderstandings we create ourselves.

Most of all, we want to apply the clearest understanding of ministry leadership that can be gleaned from Paul and the Bible generally. To do that, we need to use the Bible as carefully and as accurately as we can.   

Hannah Ploegstra responds

Dear David,

Thank you for your feedback on my article. I understand what you are saying and appreciate your concern for accuracy and for the refining of my language that you have called for. You are right (and I agree) that Paul does avoid headship language in his discussions of church leadership. I also agree with your concern that women are often unnecessarily excluded from leadership in the church because of this common misuse of the concept, and have suffered myself from such over-application.

My original intention in the article was to show the function of ‘headship’ in general, not in a theological sense exclusively, but also as it pertains to any relationship in which there is a leader who thinks for and makes decisions for the whole group and a group that carries out the action of that decision. Originally I even used examples such as those in the military or government; in families with children in which the ‘head’ is both the husband (father) and wife (mother) functioning as one head together; and even in less critical situations, like a sports team or a drama group. (My intention, as I'm sure you gathered, was not to argue for who is a head, but rather to observe the functions of a head, regardless of who.) But I realized quickly that that would badly confuse the issue, because those are not ‘heads’ in the same sense that the husband is the head of his wife or that Christ is the head of the church—and they are certainly not called ‘heads’ by Paul in Scripture. Still, there are many ways in which the head/body analogy can help leaders of all kinds to be Christlike in their position. I left in the examples of pastors not because I think they are official ‘heads’ of the church, but because they do have some degree of authority over Christ's body as under-shepherds (in my understanding).

All that is to say that I do agree, in the end, with your assessment of who is a true biblical head (husbands, Christ, God) and who is more of an overseer on behalf of the head (pastors). I apologize for confusing the issue in my article and for contributing to the common misunderstanding that has needlessly crippled many congregations from including women in biblical ways of ministering. Please accept my apology and my thanks for your clear rebuttal.

In the Lord,
Hannah Ploegstra