THE SERVICE OF MAN AND WOMAN IN THE ASSEMBLY
[p. 247] THE SERVICE OF MAN AND WOMAN IN THE ASSEMBLY
1 Corinthians 11:11 - 12; Romans 16:3 - 4; Luke 2:25 - 38
These scriptures treat of “the man” and “the woman”, and that is why I have read them, wishing to show the relative positions and functions of the sexes in the assembly; and not only to apply these scriptures in a literal sense, but also to enlarge a little on what is conveyed spiritually in the man and in the woman respectively. The first scripture is selected from a chapter which treats somewhat fully of the relative positions of the man and the woman, and it is not without signification that the chapter also introduces and develops the assembly in the exercise of its functions in a locality, which, rightly understood, makes room for Christ as the full representation of the man, as the assembly is the full representation of the woman; and makes room also for the universal position of the assembly as the one great thought and idea and object of Christ in the current dispensation. That is to say, the chapter in introducing the Lord’s supper prefaces it by instruction that leads on to the apprehension of the Lord Jesus as Head of the assembly.
I make a few remarks first as to what belongs to the man, introducing them from the reference to Christ in Revelation 12 as the “man child”. The better translation gives, “a male son”, which seems tautological, but spiritually is full of meaning. A son of course would be a male, but the additional word “male” calls attention to the idea, as absolutely presented in Christ in relation to rule, for it goes on immediately to say, “who shall shepherd all the nations with an iron rod”(Revelation 12:5); that is to say, it is to be rule in an absolute sense. He “shall shepherd all the nations”, and shepherding is ruling [p. 248] with skill and with feeling, not arbitrarily, but it is in the “male son” — the word is “son” not “child”. The idea as seen in Christ is necessarily to be taken on in all relations in which rule or government is required.
In Judges 4 we have a woman taking the lead in the service of God in relation to a man: Deborah being the woman, and Barak the man. We are told in a footnote, that Deborah is said to be “a woman prophetess”. Of course, the word “prophetess” means that she is a woman who prophesied, but in the original the feminine idea is stressed. So that if circumstances amongst the people of God require a sister to take any kind of prominence in the testimony, she never loses her feminineness, she is always a woman; she never takes on the masculine character; wherever that appears, you may be sure the flesh is active. But if weak conditions require that a sister should become prominent, she never loses her sisterly character; she always has “power” on her head, as the chapter I read from in 1 Corinthians teaches; and that goes forward into the assembly normally; she never loses her relative position and function, she is always herself.
Now in speaking thus, I may say that I am impressed that sisters are not functioning as the Lord would have them to, and correspondingly the meetings are wanting in increase. It is no question of alleging that of this meeting, or of any particular meeting, but generally. I believe the Lord would call upon the sisters amongst the people of God to take their part, and as they do, the idea of the assembly will come more into evidence. I believe the idea of the assembly coming into evidence, not theoretically or doctrinally, but practically, is largely dependent on the sisters functioning according to their true relations; and, if they do, the brothers will not be eclipsed or detracted from in any way, they will the rather be enhanced. Deborah never lost her relative position, she calls upon Barak to act, but the Spirit of God makes it plain that the initiative was with her.
[p. 249] And she evidently discerned, what perhaps we should not have known, were it not that the Holy Spirit tells us hundreds of years later, that Barak had faith. The Spirit of God in Hebrews 11, calls attention to the faith of Barak and says nothing about Deborah. She would, I am sure, accept that as right: she would say, ‘I have more prominence than I should have had. Had Barak more energy, I should have less prominence, and that would not have grieved me at all’.
From these remarks you will see why I read the two verses in the first scripture, which say, “For man is not of woman, but woman of man. For also man was not created for the sake of the woman, but woman for the sake of the man”. But then, it goes on, “However, neither is woman without man, nor man without woman, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, so also is the man by the woman, but all things of God”. So that we have set out in the chapter a beautiful order of things. God is regarded as the supreme Head, an appellation first ascribed to Him by David. David says, “Jehovah ... thou art exalted as Head above all”, 1 Chronicles 29:11. It awaited the Lord Jesus to come in to set out this wonderful truth, for in Him, in Jesus, it is not only that He said things, but He exemplified them. One who contents himself with merely saying things will never be a model: if I show a thing, it is established in the mind. The Lord Jesus set out this great principle of God-Headship, as I might call it, in His life here — “The head of Christ is God”, and “Christ is the head of every man, but woman’s head is the man”, “but all things of God”. There is a beautiful position set out for us in the passage, which is to be seen in every phase of life, in the household, and everywhere; wherever men and women are together according to God, this great truth will be seen, and God is pleased and glorified in it. If there is one thing one cherishes more than another, it is to afford a little bit of pleasure for God. In the life of Jesus it was [p. 250] constant, and now in the assembly this great thought of graded headship set out in any way is highly pleasing to God. It is the order that He has ordained and it is pleasing to Him as He sees it; and the angels see it too, it is a spectacle for heaven, leading to that remarkable statement in Ephesians, that “the all-various wisdom of God” is to be seen now in the assembly by the “principalities and authorities in the heavenlies”(Ephesians 3:10). What moral victory there is for God in His people as His thoughts are in any little way expressed in them!
I wish now to show how it is worked out in a man and his wife, for scripture affords us concrete examples of its teaching. As I said, things are not only told to us, but shown to us. Here we have it in a man and his wife, Aquila and Priscilla: this couple has a unique place in scripture in several respects, but in particular, that they are never mentioned apart, they are always seen together. I need not say that there is some suggestion of Christ and the assembly in that: were we to understand the position we should see that Christ, normally being its Head is always seen in relation to the assembly. Of course He has His place and glories as in the Deity in which the creature can have no part, but as Man in heaven, having effected redemption, the assembly is His body, His wife indeed, and in this sense He and she are inseparable. This marks the present time and gives a special character to the dispensation. In the future too it will appear. Aquila and Priscilla are mentioned six times, always together. The suggestion fits in with Paul’s ministry, this man and his wife being specially identified with the apostle. First of all, they are introduced to us as in Corinth, they were of a certain craft; apparently both occupied in the same craft — tent makers. It seems that they worked together, and Paul joined them — not because they were Christians, it does not say that; but “because they were of the same craft”(Acts 18:3). All this comes in where the great thought of the assembly is worked out locally, that is Corinth.
[p. 251] Aquila and Priscilla are mentioned three times together in Acts 18. The idea of wisdom would be there; the first epistle to the Corinthians shows that the idea of divine wisdom was prominent in Paul’s service there, and Priscilla would not fail to suggest that “the wisdom of women buildeth their house”, (Proverbs 14:1). Wisdom is a feminine word; the feminine idea in this sense leads to the assembly. “The wisdom of women buildeth their house; but folly plucketh it down with her hands”, Proverbs 14:1. So that you can understand how that thought would be present, at least to the mind of Paul, as to Priscilla — what a fine sister she was! Now I am speaking of her because of the way she is mentioned in these different references. Her name appears first as often as Aquila’s does. You will find, “Aquila and Priscilla”, and then “Priscilla and Aquila”, and then you find “Aquila and Priscilla”, and then again “Priscilla and Aquila”; is that accidental? No, it is educational: that is to call attention to what is possible, and what is possible should always be aimed at; it should never be regarded as impossible. If it were possible in these two, it is possible in any two, and it is possible in Christ and in the assembly as His body. So that we find these two, as I said, interchangeably having precedence one of the other. Not that Priscilla would ever take precedence of her husband: were we to enter their house — and we are told that there was an assembly in their house — that assembly would be adorned, as I may say, by the seemliness and the grace of this sister, Priscilla. She would never becloud, she would never stand in the light of her husband: he would the rather shine in her graces, for the woman is of the man.
That great principle is set out in Genesis 2: how often it is spoken of at our marriage meetings, and rightly! I do not say Adam suffered, but certainly he had an extraordinary experience, and that is a deep sleep, not an ordinary sleep, but a deep one; the allusion,
[p. 252] of course, is to the death of our Lord Jesus Christ. And Jehovah takes a rib, and out of that rib He builds a woman. That word “built” is a remarkable word, it is the first time it is used in scripture. It is not applied to the universe; the word “framed” is used there. Building implies special skill, and belongs to the woman. This was one of the items of the work of the sixth day, the greatest work-day of all — and God presents her to the man. What will the man say about it? He was asleep when it was done apparently, but he knew, he could name all the other creatures, and he named this one. And there it is: as one remarked elsewhere, ‘He lost a rib, but it is given back to him a thousandfold’; he lost nothing, he gained. But then, this gain should not be merely theoretical, it should be practical in the assembly — in the household, of course, in every sphere of life, but in the assembly. In the highest thought of it, it is a question of what the assembly is to Christ, but then it should be seen surely in the practical working out of the assembly, in the sisters in relation to the brothers.
Now I want to show briefly how all this is foreseen in the gospels, for the gospels are generally to support what we have in the Acts and the epistles. So Luke gives us two at the beginning; as the Lord Jesus is brought to Jerusalem to the temple, these two persons are there. The early chapters in this gospel should be studied in relation to our subject. Luke, only, mentions these two persons, and I believe no brother is in the assembly save as he understands what is presented in Simeon, and that no sister is in the assembly save as she understands and moves according to what is seen in Anna — they are models. First of all, as regards Simeon, you have the word “Behold” — “Behold, there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon”. He is not an ordinary man, but one distinguished as spiritual. He looked for Christ, he was a man of hope, a man who counted on what God had said; he expected [p. 253] God to do what He had said. But then he was a man in Jerusalem: now that is not an ordinary circumstance; the preposition “in” there means more than simply circumstance; it is characteristic, and it enters into the position of the brothers in the assembly. He is not only local. Of course Jerusalem is a locality, but it had a place that no other earthly city ever had or ever will have; it had a metropolitan position, it was the divine centre. “A man in Jerusalem” was in the very centre of what God was doing — that is the point. The facts mentioned show it applied characteristically. I speak thus, dear brethren, so that we might become less local and more general. That is, that we may be in the very centre of things, our position is there; we are concerned about everything that concerns God, whether it be general or local, whether it be fifteen thousand miles away or local — we are in the centre of things. There is very little of this attitude amongst us. Were there more of it, we should support what is general in every way we may.
I need not now enter into the many ways in which we may support what God is doing, say in China or in New Zealand or Australia; for China is not in principle anymore to God than New Zealand is — let us not forget that; God is no respecter of persons. He never intends the promotion of what is popularly called “missionary”. What is missionary properly means persons sent out by the Holy Spirit on whom the hands of the assembly are placed; they are released, let go by the saints, and they are “sent forth by the Holy Spirit”, and then they go. It does not say where they were sent; what follows in Acts 13 is the record of where they went, they went down to Cyprus, through the island, etc., etc. I say that by the way, that we may not take on the characteristics of what is around us, that we may be able to stand against what is current religiously. We are so prone to take it on. There are those who would give a hundred pounds with a view to [p. 254] Chinamen being converted, who would not give a cent for the conversion of Englishmen! I say that advisedly. I would desire to be in full sympathy with all that God is doing: a man in Jerusalem is concerned about what God is doing wherever it is.
To return to Simeon a certain thing was revealed to him “by the Spirit”; that is to say, he recognised the Spirit; he is dependent on the Spirit for his understanding of things. “It was divinely communicated to him by the Holy Spirit, that he should not see death before he should see the Lord’s Christ”: until he had seen the Man who should do everything for God: he was expecting Him, and he went by the Spirit into the temple, and the Child is brought in and he takes Him in his arms. The facts are known to us: l am only referring to them now to draw attention to this brother brought forward by Luke, as I verily believe, to show us that our setting is not simply in our houses or our businesses, but, so to speak, in Jerusalem, it is a spiritual position. I am in it spiritually, and I come into the temple spiritually, and in the temple I receive Christ. His being brought is characteristic; there is always someone to bring Him in. The thought is, of course, that I should bring Him in. Here He was brought in by His parents, which, of course, is literal and historical. It may be that a brother just converted has some little thought of Christ, and a spiritual man takes this little thought — I say “little” because the Lord Jesus here is just a babe — and magnifies it, he makes it of use universally. What a service that is! And how beautifully he speaks: he says, “Lord, now thou lettest thy bondman go, according to thy word” — He is regulated by the word: it is no mere sentimental thought, as often expressed by people who say they want to die, and the like: it is a question of the word of God, the mind of God for each of us — “for mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples; a light for revelation of the gentiles and the glory of thy people Israel”. That is the brother! He is able to take up any thought of Christ that comes into the assembly by whosoever, and give it its proper setting, give it, perhaps, a universal bearing; here it is a question of the light of God concerning the gentiles, and the glory of His people Israel. How the whole scene was lit up with Simeon’s remarks! There never was such a time before in the temple as that.
Then, without going into detail: Anna came in at the same hour, that is to say, the sister is not absent, she is there, and this has the significance of being an example for us. How beautifully Anna comes in and shines! She does not take the Child in her arms, that had already been done. Hers is another part in the service. He is in the proper position in the arms of Simeon. She comes in at the same hour: she praises God. The Spirit of God does not give us Simeon’s age, but He gives us a clue as to Anna’s age, and I do not think any of us will lose anything if we try to work out how old she was. Every moment of this woman’s life is spiritually interesting. I should like to be such as that, that the brethren, if they have to talk of me at all, can talk of me from the beginnings of my history. What can they say about the beginnings? And then the middle life? and the late life? When God writes up His people. He goes back to their birth. Psalm 87. Anna “lived with her husband seven years from her virginity” and she was “a widow up to eighty-four years”. If the Spirit of God wished us to know definitely how old she was to the minute, as we say. He could have told us how old she was, but He wishes us to have an insight of her whole life. She might have been 106 — one might figure it out that way: but every moment of that woman’s life was spiritually interesting. And now at the end she does not miss the greatest privilege that the temple of God had afforded, nor can any one of us afford to miss it. One great secret of the spiritual poverty amongst us is that [p. 256] we do miss such occasions, and we do not feel we miss them. We cannot afford to miss what goes on in the assembly. The assembly is a place of wonders; the Spirit of God is in it. If we have spiritual eyes to see and ears to hear we shall see and hear wondrous things, as Manoah and his wife saw the angel do wondrously, Judges 13. Anna did not miss the presence of Christ in the temple, she came in then and she “gave praise to the Lord”; and the Spirit of God tells us she did not depart from the temple, serving night and day with fastings and prayers. And now, when the great moment arrives, she is present and makes the most of it, adds to it, and “spoke of Him to all those who waited for redemption in Jerusalem”. Jerusalem, as I said, represents the centre of the whole realm of God’s interests. How wide her outlook was! We are told whose daughter she was, she was the daughter of Phanuel, and to what tribe of Israel she belonged, that is Asher. These are points of great interest. Asher was to be possessed of sons: although she was a daughter she was spiritually a son; she was marked by the dignity and liberty spiritually that belongs to sonship. His bolts were to be iron and brass — there was strength and compactness about her, and her feet were dipped in oil, Deuteronomy 33:24 - 25. We have often heard these things, but they are very apropos to what is before us now — that the sisters should be marked by the features seen in Anna. She came in contact in some way with all those who looked for redemption in Jerusalem. She spake of Him — she was no gossip, no idler; she was a son of Asher engaged in the temple service and in speaking of Christ to all who looked for redemption in Jerusalem.
May God bless the word.
Pages 257 - 291 “Authority in Doctrine and Fellowship”, Readings, Birmingham 1933 (Volume 115).