Preaching today continues one aspect of the prophetic office, but it does so by continuing the work of weighing, discerning, evaluating, exegeting, and declaring. Preachers today are not inspired in the same way that Isaiah, Jeremiah, Agabus, or Philip’s daughters were. Because the grace of direct inspiration or utterance has been discontinued, what we now have is the written record of prophetic utterances. The task of the preacher today is that of sifting, studying, and declaring the results with authority, and this is the one aspect of the prophetic office that women were excluded from even back in the day when some of the women present were in fact prophetesses. As we will see in greater detail in the next section, women did in fact participate in the giving of inspired revelation. Because the day of such gifted utterance had not yet passed, they were vehicles of the Spirit’s communication to His Church. They participated in that grace, right along with the men. Everyone knew that because they were dealing with divine revelation, God was teaching them directly and the sex of the messenger did not matter. God spoke through Balaam’s ass too, and it does not follow from this that donkeys ought to be admitted to seminary—although I hear that some seminaries are now considering it. But even in these days of inspiration, once the revelatory gift was complete, the women were not permitted to join in the rule of the church, or the teaching of men.
At the same time, we don’t want to assume that any position that ticks feminists off must be biblical. That can’t be right—it is far too easy to do. And, as with so many issues, we have to distinguish different levels and layers. If, as have noted, our holy fathers used to listen to wise women in ancient times, this is scarcely an argument for us to listen to silly women now. I might have no problem with Queen Arwen sitting by the fountain, singing a song of Valinor, and yet have a great deal of trouble with a feminist theologian writing with furrowed brow about the privileged hierarchies of rape culture, with the attendant observation that any coitus whatever is inherently colonial, racist, and abusive, especially if both parties have a good time.
There are three basic offices for the people of God, and all of them find their ultimate fulfillment in the Lord Jesus. He is our prophet, priest, and king. Before His Incarnation, the offices held by His people looked forward typologically to His fulfillment of them all, and, after His Ascension, we now hold and discharge our offices as ministerial deputies, as partakers of His gifts and office. In all this, we are to follow His instructions carefully, without any a priori commitments that we gleaned from unbelievers, and let Him sort out the consequences of our obedience.
As shown earlier, the biblical faith knows nothing of priestesses, but we find quite a few prophetesses, women who were inspired by the Spirit to speak words from God. Miriam was a prophetess (Ex. 15:20), as was Deborah (Judg. 4:4). Huldah was a prophetess (2 Kings 22:14; 2 Chron. 34:22). Isaiah’s wife was probably gifted with prophesy in her own right (Is. 8:3). This was not limited to the times of the Old Testament. In the book of Luke, Anna is identified as a prophetess (Luke 2:36), and Philip the evangelist had four virgin daughters who were prophetesses (Acts 21:9). A woman identified as Jezebel falsely claimed this office (Rev. 2:20). As Paul gives instruction to the Corinthians, he presupposes that certain women in that church had the gift of prophecy (1 Cor. 11:4-5), and he instructs them on how to discharge that office in a Christian worship service in a way that does not dishonor their husbands. One of the features of the new covenant was that the Spirit was to be poured out even more abundantly than in the time of the older covenant, and this expansiveness would include the women. Our daughters will prophesy, it says (Acts 2:17), as will our handmaidens (Acts 2:18). Elizabeth was not called a prophetess, but she spoke words that were inspired by the Holy Spirit, and which are part of Holy Scripture (Luke 1:41-45). And our Lord’s mother is in the same position—not called a prophetess, but she was certainly one who fulfilled that office faithfully (Luke 1: 46-55).
Any theology of men’s and women’s roles in the church which does not take this widespread scriptural testimony into full account is a deficient theology. Our task is not to be traditional, or reactionary, but biblical. The pastoral office is one which relies heavily on the prophetic tradition, and so if we have prophetesses, then why not pastoresses? The answer to this question, not surprisingly, is linked to what we have come to expect from men in the ministry. We have found it too easy to drift into a situation where we just train fussy scribes who shuffle when they walk (Matt. 7: 29), and we refuse to have anything to do with men who are real sons of thunder. Then, having established an all-boys-club with no authority, we try to keep the women out of it. But why? Who cares anymore?
The issue is prophecy, not women. The thing that Scripture so plainly describes women doing (declaring inspired words from God) is something that we don’t find men doing today either. Women are not excluded from this while the men keep right on going. The Scriptures are now complete, and what only men could do in the first century is what only men can do now (From Why Ministers Must Be Men).