As always, however, our question is not what the practice the modern Pentecostals is, but what is the practice of the Early Church is. Can we determine this from their writings?
In St. Ignatius of Antioch’s Epistle to the Philadelphians, he makes the following statement:
Since, according to your prayers, and the compassion which ye feel in Christ Jesus, it is reported to me that the Church which is at Antioch in Syria possesses peace, it will become you, as a Church of God, to elect a bishop to act as the ambassador of God [for you] to [the brethren] there, that it may be granted them to meet together, and to glorify the name of God. Blessed is he in Christ Jesus, who shall be deemed worthy of such a ministry; and if ye be zealous [in this matter], ye shall receive glory in Christ. [ANF 1: 85; ch. X]
The implication here is that the person elected bishop was going to be a man because “blessed is he” not “blessed is she” or “blessed is that person.” While this may not seem very weighty to some, it is worth noting that there are no examples of women bishops (or priests or deacons) in the whole period of the Early Church except in heretical sects.
Tertullian broaches this subject in his treatise On Baptism.
But the woman of pertness, who has usurped the power to teach, will of course not give birth for herself likewise to a right of baptizing, unless some new beast shall arise like the former; so that, just as the one abolished baptism, so some other should in her own right confer it! But if the writings which wrongly go under Paul’s name, claim Thecla’s example as a licence for women’s teaching and baptizing, let them know that, in Asia, the presbyter who composed that writing, as if he were augmenting Paul’s fame from his own store, after being convicted, and confessing that he had done it from love of Paul, was removed from his office. For how credible would it seem, that he who has not permitted a woman even to learn with over-boldness, should give a female the power of teaching and of baptizing! “Let them be silent,” he says, “and at home consult their own husbands.” [ANF 3: 677; ch. XVII]
There can be no doubt about Tertullian’s sentiments on the subject. What makes this even more relevant is the fact that later in his life Tertullian joined a heretical group that had two women prophets in its leadership. Tertullian explicates his position in On the Veiling of Virgins.
It is not permitted to a woman to speak in the church; but neither (is it permitted her) to teach, nor to baptize, nor to offer, nor to claim to herself a lot in any manly function, not to say (in any) sacerdotal office. [ANF 4: 33; ch. IX]
The pseudononymous work known as The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles gives us a very clear statement of the practice of the Early Church.
We do not permit our “women to teach in the Church,” but only to pray and hear those that teach; for our Master and Lord, Jesus Himself, when He sent us the twelve to make disciples of the people and of the nations, did nowhere send out women to preach, although He did not want such. For there were with us the mother of our Lord and His sisters; also Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Martha and Mary the sisters of Lazarus; Salome, and certain others. For, had it been necessary for women to teach, He Himself had first commanded these also to instruct the people with us. For “if the head of the wife be the man,” it is not reasonable that the rest of the body should govern the head. [ANF 7: 427-8; bk. III; sect. I; par. VI]
Far from denigrating women, these writings attempt to give them their proper place as assigned by the head of the Church Himself. One of the most honored persons in the early Church was a woman---Mary the Mother of God.
The words of St. John Chrysostom in Treatise Concerning the Christian Priesthood present an unequivocal statement on church leadership.
For those things which I have already mentioned might easily be performed by many even of those who are under authority, women as well as men; but when one is required to preside over the Church, and to be entrusted with the care of so many souls, the whole female sex must retire before the magnitude of the task, and the majority of men also… [ANF 1-09: 40; bk. II; sect. 2]
Canon XI of the Council of Laodicea (held in 364) states the position of the Church clearly.
PRESBYTIDES, as they are called, or female presidents, are not to be appointed in the Church. [from http://reluctant-messenger.com/council-of-laodicea.htm]
St. Ephiphanius of Salamis writes very powerfully on this subject in Against Heresies.
"Certain women there in Arabia [the Collyridians] have introduced this absurd teaching from Thracia: how they offer up a sacrifice of bread rolls in the name of the Ever Virginal [Mary] and hold their meetings in that very name and how they undertake something that far exceeds proper measure in the name of the Holy Virgin. In an unlawful and blasphemous ceremony they ordain women, through whom they offer up the sacrifice in the name of Mary. This means that the entire proceeding is godless and sacrilegious, a perversion of the message of the Holy Spirit; in fact, the whole thing is diabolical and a teaching of the impure spirit" [78:13 from http://web.archive.org/web/20060619122055/http://www.catholicapologetics.net/25.htm).
Also,
"If women were to be charged by God with entering the priesthood or with assuming ecclesiastical office, then in the New Covenant it would have devolved upon no one more than Mary to fulfill a priestly function. She was invested with so great an honor as to be allowed to provide a dwelling in her womb for the heavenly God and King of all things, the Son of God. . . . But he did not find this [the conferring of priesthood on her] good" (79:3 from http://web.archive.org/web/20060619122055/http://www.catholicapologetics.net/25.htm).
It is clear from the writings of the Early Church that the concept of women priests was accepted and applauded among the heathen. Priestesses were quite common. This was not the case among the Christians. As I stated earlier, only among the heretical sects (Montanist for instance) do we find any indication of women in priestly roles. While the concepts behind the women in ministry groups may be commendable, we are forced to ask why they are willing to go against the tradition of the Church in order to satisfy the desires of our modern church?
