Brooks, Noel. Scriptural Holiness. Advocate Press, 1967. 70p. Rooted in the Holiness Movement, the IPHC treasured the teachings of Biblical and cultural holiness as it grew in the post Azusa Street years. Pentecostalism was a global event being experienced in Europe, South America, and Australia from an early day. So in 1954 when Noel Brooks (1914-2007), pastor, scholar, biographer and campaign manager of the early revivalist George Jeffreys, joined the IPHC, an author of academic depth and spirituality enriched the denomination. The book emerged from lectures in the King Memorial Lecture series at Emmanuel College in Franklin Springs, Georgia.

The contents of the lectures addressed: Holiness in the Progress of Revelations -1(Old Testament), Holiness in the Progress of Revelation – II (New Testament), Holiness in the Order of Salvation – I (Sanctification as Process), and Holiness in the Order of Salvation - II (Sanctification as Crisis). Brooks notes in his travel he had seen a great hunger for understanding scriptural holiness and the need for people to move more confidently into that level of devotion to God, yet he also was aware that there are both positive and negative aspects to the search for holiness (legalism and works). 

Brooks skillfully leads the reader through the Bible to uncover the logical and scriptural holiness that God wants us to live for God. “Our time, our strength, our money, our possessions, our all, continually used up in the service of the Lord” (pg. 67), that, for Noel Brooks encapsulated the purpose and meaning of true “Scriptural Holiness.” -- Marilyn A. Hudson, MLIS

Note: Advocate Press is now Life Springs. Copies of the book, Scriptural Holiness may be ordered from them


Download Open Bible "Heritage and Horizons"

"R. Bryant Mitchell, one of the founders of Open Bible Churches, documents the history of the Open Bible movement from its beginnings in 1935 to the Golden Anniversary of 1982. More than a history, Heritage & Horizons records the dynamics which are so much a part of Kingdom work – calling, obedience, joy, discouragement, miracles, sacrifice, laughter, tears, achievement…. Heritage & Horizons is a book about people responding to God, to needs … to the Holy Spirit. "   

The work is currently out of print but it can be downloaded as a .pdf file:

Other works are available as well in print copies: Heritage and Harvest  and the biographical history of the OB Heart for the Harvest.    A quick history is here.


Notice - New web address!

Please adjust any links or bookmarks to reflect the new address.  "Pentecostal Research" is growing to become more than it was as it searches out history from across the Pentecostal and Charismatic (and related groups) experiences.

Before Stone's Folly: Early Incidences of Pentecost

On January 1,1901 in a Kansas mansion (called Stone's Folly by locals) turned into a Bible school, a young woman in prayer experienced the baptism of the Holy spirit, accompanied by speaking in tongues.   This, for many, marked the birth of the modern Pentecostal movement and the 'century of Pentecost.'    There are records of events prior to that date in which the experience of the Pentecostal blessing were reported.

1896 - Farmers in the area of Grafton, North Dakota, gathered for three days of prayer and revival under the direction of an itinerant lay preacher, C.M. Hanson.  One of those in prayer began to speak with other tongues and after investigating the scriptures those present agreed, "This must be that which was spoken by the prophet Joel."
--Carlson, G. Raymond.  "When Pentecost Came to the Upper Midwest." A/G Heritage, Spring 1984, pg. 3

Carl Brumback in his Suddenly...from Heaven: A History of the Assemblies of God ( Gospel Publishing House, 1961) also mentions Hanson, but also notes events dating from 1873 in Maine, in Rhode Island in 1875, Arkansas in 1879, and others.  Mary Woodsworth Etter recounted such activity from 1876 in one of her revivals.  Daniel Awrey claimed it in 1890 in the area of Beniah, Tennessee.  A revival swept through the northern plains from Minnesota to North Dakota in the 1890's and included speaking in tongues.  In that same decade reports were coming from Cherokee County, NC. 



Lights and Shadows of the Life in Canaan by Mrs. Mary Mabbette Anderson.

The forward to this work was written by the Rev. Edward D. Reeves, pastor of the The First Pentecostal Holiness Church, No. 8, Robert Street, Toronto, Canada.  It read: "Seeing the great need for light on the doctrine of sanctification of heart, this pamphlet is being sent forth trusting that it may be made a blessing to all who are seeking a closer walk with God.  We realize however, there is no reference made to the recent outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the latter rain, and that the writing is lacking the added illumination on the baptism of the Holy Ghost as revealed in this great visitation, on account of antedating this event, yet we believe it to contain much valuable truth on the vital subject of holiness which shall bring rich blessings to all of God's children, especially those just entering their spiritual Canaan.   May He who said:"Cast they bread upon the waters" bless its going forth until distant lands shall have heard its simple story." 

The work was originally published in 1904 or 1906 (sources differ) and was reprinted at least twice by two different groups.  No definitive biographical information on Mary Mabbette Anderson was found for this entry.   Contextually it is clear she was a church worker, a wife, mother, a Presbyterian with Methodist and Holiness friends.

Written as a series of letters each chapter bears a title: Earlier Christian Experiences; Deepening life; Crossing over; Heavenly Joy;  The Convict Home; Trying experiences; Fruit, with Tribulation; Pressing on; Consuming Fire; Christ likeness; "Deeper Yet"; Needed Light; The Careful Husbandman;  "I Keep My Body Under"; God's Glory the Test"; Naked faith; A Second Glance at Self; "I Am Nothing"; Foot-hills and peaks; a Land of "Milk and Honey"; Closing words.  It is softbound, 94 pages, triple-staple bound.


Little has been found so far on this individual other than he was possible from Alberta, Canada, was associated with the Assemblies of God and may have pastored in Great Falls, Montana in 1916 (A/G Heritage, Spring 1984, pg. 5). 

The undated 16 page pamphlet was printed by The Tribune Printing Company, Great Falls, Montana.  The title of the work is Is The Baptism with the Holy Spirit Scriptural?  Sub-headings through the work include: Old Testament Prophecy, New Testament Fulfillment; Pentecost; Appointed Time; Preparation; For All Believers; Prophecy; Prophecy Fulfilled; What Profit are Tongues? ; The Qualification.

The U.S. Federal Census for Great Falls lists in 1920 and 1930 a Joseph (born about 1869 in Ohio) and wife Rosina Lantz with children Jessee, Reuben and Ida.


IPHC Mission Outreach

This small 30 page book was published in ca 1970 by the Department of Foreign Missions (later renamed the Department of World Missions), in the Pentecostal Holiness Church (now the IPHC), the editor was J. Floyd Williams.  Williams would go on to become a presiding Bishop of the denomination. The collection, complete with tips for teaching, was written by  Marguerite Howard.

It was a collection of story based lessons for the primary and junior department focusing on youth from India.  

Stories for children of foreign mission work, lives of missionaries, and lessons exploring other lands were highly popular in the 1960's and 1970's in many educational programs across evangelical and Pentecostal groups.

'The Magazine That Wants A Million Bible Reader'

In May 1910 this issue of "Daily Bread" was published ( X:5) by the evangelical World's Morning Watch, a group with association with the Y.M.C.A.  It was published monthly ten times . It has 26 pgs (number sequentially through the volume).  Ads include one for the " Underwood Standard Typewriter."    Another full page ad offered "The Sunday School Teacher's Library That Costs A Dollar".   The resources, usually about 40 pages,  included "Sunday School Advance" addressing method and equipment and prepared by Franklin D. Elmer; James H. Hodges', "Securing and Holding Attention";  "Manual Methods of Sunday School Methods", by Richard Morse Hodge; "Picture -Work" by Walter L. Hervey because "literature  is full of pictures and the Bible is a treasure house of masterpieces.  This little book deals with these story pictures and the art of presenting them to the juvenile mind" ; W. Walter Smith's "Complete Handbook of Religious Pictures."


Small book, 26 pages, no date, but the Falcon Publishing Co., Falcon, NC was thought to be  in operation in that location before 1919.  The price was five cents.  G.F. Taylor was a  member and leader in the early days of the  Pentecostal Holiness Church  (now the IPHC).

Pentecostal Pulpit :(1:4) First Quarter 1949

Editor for this issue was G.H. Montgomery

This small journal was subtitled "By Pentecostal Preachers for Pentecostal Preachers".  The table of contents lists some interesting classifications: "Didactics" which in this issue included articles on the Minister as teacher ( Paul F. Beacham), the Use of Christian Literature as an Aid to the Minister's Work (W.H. Turner), Strength of the trained warrior (Harold Paul), a Lyric of lovingkindness ( Stanley H. Frodsham). "Pastoral Theology" was The Pastor in the Preliminaries (Dan T. Muse).  'Evangelism' contained articles A Passion for Souls (George Byus); The Place of Prayer in Pentecostal Evangelism ( Hubert T. Spence); Pentecostal and World Missions (A. Noseworthy).  "Ethics" included a tongue in cheek work Good Habits for Ministers (R.O. Corvin); The Breastplate of Righteousness (George Byus).  Under "Homiletics" Good Pulpit Conduct (J. Vinson Ellenberg).

Missionary Author - William Henry Turner (1895-1971)

In the preface to the small book The Finished Work of Calvary or the Second Blessing - Which? by missionary, evangelist, and pastor, W.H. Turner  is a short biography.  Elsewhere he is identified as an "author, publisher, and distributor of quarter million books and tracts in Chinese."

"Reverend William Henry Turner was born in the Blue Mountains of North Carolina fifty-two years ago."   Editorial note: this would have been about 1895 as the work was published in 1947.

It continues: "Was born of the Spirit at the age of six, fell away but was restored, brought into Pentecost and called to preach in 1910 when fifteen years of age.

Having been denied early educational advantages and realizing the necessity for preparation for so great a calling he entered Altamont, now Holmes Bible College, in 1912, Falcon 1916, Emory University in 1918, Oskaloosa College, University of California and finally the University of Georgia.

Rev. Turner is the author of twenty-three books and four tracts in English and 18 books and bookslets in Chinese and for over twenty years has written for many magazines, newspapers, and periodicals.  Sent to China in 1919 as a missioanry by the P.H. Church he has spent the best part of twenty-seven years there.  Was in China when on July 7, 1937 war broke out between China and Japan and between American and Japan in 1941.   Was therefore in the war over six years, more than five of these in the fighting zones. Was taken prisoner with Mrs. Turner by the Japs in 1941 and held until the end of 1943, seven months of this time in a concentration camp.  He is well a known evangelist and camp meeting preacher and is currently supertendent of the P.H. Missions in China to which field he will soon return."

In the early early 1950's he served as editor of the "Pentecostal Pulpit" , published out of Franklin Springs, Georgia.  The contributing editors included well known Pentecostal names from around the globe: Rev. H.W. Greenway, Elim Evangel editor, London;  Rev. Charles W. Conn, Church of God Publishing House, Cleveland, TN;  Rev. Frank M. Boyd, Assemblies of God, Springfield, MO; Rev. Donald Gee, editor Pentecost, Bedford, England; Rev. David duPlessis, secretary of the World Pentecostal Fellowship, Glenbrook, Conn.; J. Nelson Parr, Cheshire, England; and more.

All the books found to date are roughly the same size and page count (paper;  7x5; average 26 - 60 pgs.).  All bear the imprint of the seal of the Pentecostal Holiness Publishing House (round circle with two laurel branches, an open book, a lighted torch and the initials "PCH" (in that order) across the book pages.  This publishing house was located in Franklin Springs, Georgia and later became "Advocate Press" and more recently "LIfe Springs Resources".

Some of the other titles include:

Pentecostal Manifestations (1947)
Is Pentecost Scriptural? ( 1947)
Pentecost and Tongues
What the Churches Say About Sanctification as a Second Blessing (1947)
Why are not all healed?
Is It The Will of God to Heal All Who Are Sick?
Six Thousand Years of Tithing
Pioneering in China (Illustrated) (1928)
What must I do to be Healed?
I Was A Prisoner of the Japanese
I Was Exchanged for a Jap

For additional biographical information on this man see Profiles of Faith by Charles E. Bradshaw (Advocate, 1984).



The author of Incidents in the life of J.W. Buckalew was a  Church of God Evangelist. He was born John W. Buckalew in Trion, GA, on 23 July 1870 and he died  24 Jan 1918, 47 yrs old.  He was the son of an ordained deacon in the missionary Baptist church in Trion who strayed from that fold into gambling, drink, running from the local law, and other diversions before finally being saved.    

He  was married to Mattie Hines (1868-1941) on 11 Aug 1889 and had a son Jessie (1890- 1890); son Collie Belton Buckalew (1891- ) and a daughter named Grace (Truman Chandler, 1893-1955).

He lived in many locations across Alabama and before 1909 was receiving training at the Pentecostal Tabernacle in Nashville, TN.

Church of God Evangel; 14 July 1975, article "Rough and Ready" by Douglas LeRoy: "Most people concede that...J. W. Buckalew...was the most colorful figure in the history of the Church of God..., affectionately called "Rough and Ready" because of his brusque manner and stormy temperament."

"Like a Mighty Army," by Dr. Charles W. Conn: "He was then forty years of age, a swarthy, hulking man with stooped shoulders and unusually long arms. Yet, when Buckalew took the pulpit he was a complete master, and one of the most effective evangelists in Pentecostal history, who had great revivals and established sound churches with his roughshod preaching. During the day he picked cotton and did some other migrant work in order to support his family, and at night he preached the gospel."

The preface indicates the purpose for penning the memoir: "I have noticed that the lives and testimonies of men and women who have been saved from lives of sin in its deepest hue have been a channel through which the Lord touched the hearts of scores of people, and with this idea in view this book has been written. As the divine blessings has come to the author he is desirous of passing it on to others through the pages of this book. May the Lord send it forth and make it blessing to many tired sin-sick souls. Amen."

Early Work on Entire Sanctification

A Religious Controversy by Charles E. Orr (Guthrie, OK: Faith Publishing House, ca. 1911).  

Structured as a series of conversations (with speaking parts suitable for a reader's theater) discussing various challenges and views of Christian life and practice.  Its theological view appears to be in the "entire sanctification" arena and the holiness movement.

The copy shown here has a stamp on the back indicating it had been owned by the "Radio Program" of Capitol Hill Church of God, "Station KLPR 1140 on your dial" in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

A website has a digital version broken into conversations available for download.  For more on the history of this Oklahoma congregation see Mystorical.


The Queen’s Message to the World’s Evangelical Alliance Exhibition, Westminster, 1951

I am most happy to send my good wishes for the success of the Exhibition which the World’s Evangelical Alliance has arranged for this Festival Year, together with my congratulations on maintaining the vision and enterprise which have been a characteristic of the Alliance for more than 100 yeaRs, and which find a worthy expression today.

That cherished inheritance which wE call the British way of life has its source and inspiration in the great ideals of Christianity.  It is fitting, indeed, that we should take this opportunity of showing how the life of our Nation has long been influenced by our faith, and moudled by the Bible.

I can truly say that the King and I long to see the Bible back, where it ought to be, as a guide and comfort in the homes and lives of our people. From our own experience, we know what the Bible can mean for personal life.

I hope this Exhibition will help our Nation to be Christian in fact as well as in name, and so to play its full part in leading the world towards righteousness and peace.



New Book Soon Available

Noel Brooks: A Life Shining and Burning, 1914-2006 by Marilyn A. Hudson will be available in a matter of weeks. The work includes biographical information, explores some of his work, and analyzes his role and legacy in Pentecostalism . Read some quotes of this remarkable man here.    A CreateSpace publication of a Whorl Books title.

The Reverend Noel Brooks (1914-2006) was an English clergy, educator, and author who ministered in the Wesleyan Methodist, the Elim Pentecostal Church, The Bible Pattern Fellowship (and wrote a biography of the leader and well known revivalist, George Jeffreys) and in the Pentecostal Holiness Church in both Great Britain and North America. 

Using letters, personal papers, unpublished manuscripts, interviews, examinations of numerous resources and analysis of the published writings of Brooks, the author presents an introduction to his life, work and the influences, which shaped his theology. This simple work seeks to examine some of the influences and explores, in their historical and social contexts, some of the major activities in the life of this man. 

A scholar whose life of spirituality, sacrifice, and insight left a lasting impression on all who had the privilege to know the man or read his work.

List Price: $15.00
5.06" x 7.81" (12.852 x 19.837 cm) 
Black & White on White paper
230 pages
ISBN-13: 978-1468025095 (CreateSpace-Assigned)
ISBN-10: 1468025090
BISAC: Biography & Autobiography / Religious

Author Marilyn A. Hudson has degrees in history and library and information studies from the University of Oklahoma. 


Notable for Their Absence. Marilyn A. Hudson, 'Those Pesky Verses of Paul'


It does not take long for someone engaged in research to quickly note that in the scores of volumes written to comment, illustrate, explain, or defend Christian thought, there is a an absence.  Through the pages of many of these noble tomes women are often totally missing.  Sections of scripture focusing on a woman are often not explored, frequently ignored, and cultural biases are interjected into translations and exegesis.
It becomes clear that the same issues, biases, and presuppositions already explored continue into the way the Church has often interpreted and applied scriptures.
 Seeking to note the types of commentary on Biblical women such as Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, Anna, and the unnamed women of 1 Corinthians 11, would be informative as to how influences on popular doctrine and theology.  What was found revealed that these commentaries often exhibited extreme biases, sexism, and disregard of anything related to women. In examining these works, and tracing their theological pedigrees, common roots may be uncovered.  In that discovery may also come a curative to error.

Miriam (Exodus 15)
Miriam was the stated sister of Aaron, and the presumed sister of Moses, (v.20) and many legends have spun around her: she was the sister who watched the baby Moses, she was the one who went to find the boy’s mother, and as some recent (and questionable)  theories claim, she was a priestess in Egypt. 
            This is an academic discussion that, unfortunately, has found its way into the writings of some religious leaders who wish to limit women's leadership or have some other agenda. Some writers have suggested that the dancing led by Miriam was a "rebellion" or "revolt" and that it displayed elements of the worship of the Egyptian Goddess and her son Horus. Those who hold a loose understanding of scriptural inspiration will likely accept this as a possibility. Those who view scripture as more divinely directed, inspired, or preserved will not. The truth, as is so often the case, may rest somewhere in the middle.
            The problem is in reading back into an ancient text what is believed by some people today and thinking the same beliefs prevailed then. Divine truth does not change - Human social constructions do and frequently. The perceived limitations of woman are often read into a text by people with an agenda of limitation or restriction. A situation with one individual is then used to blanket all other individuals and limit their participation.
            If it is believed that early Hebrews did not have women leaders and prophets, then the evidence that they did serve in religious roles is twisted or ignored. If the current view is that women cannot be in those roles they must have always been excluded.

            There is no good, logical, or factual reason to suppose that ancient woman did not fully participate in worship and rituals of the God of Abraham. Indeed a close reading of several portions of Genesis, Exodus, and other early writings show women doing just that. Even into the histories of Samuel, Kings, and the prophetic book of Isaiah reveal the presence of women. Some, just like their male counterparts, are good and some are sinful. They are, however, clearly there. It is only later, as commentators and preachers from a culture of limitation and exclusion began to formalize those views, that women were truly excluded.
            Was Miriam a false prophet? The scriptures clearly show that she was used of God, she responded as a prophet, interacted with God as a prophet, and was recognized for that authority with respect. She is later the only woman prophet to be named outside the story that introduced her originally and when so named by Micah it is an honorific coupling her with both Moses and Aaron.
            If Moses was the Deliverer ( a type of the Christ-Messiah), Aaron was the First Priest, than most clearly Miriam must assume the role of the First Prophet. Moses demonstrated the beauty of a close relationship with God, Aaron's line became the means to keep the people close to God, and Miriam the first of a long line of prophets who would call to repentance, recall the words of the Lord, and encourage the people to live as a people of the one God
What is clear is that she is labeled as “prophet” and subsequent references to her affirm that she was a prophet in the same manner as her male counterparts. Micah 6 includes her in a listing of the major prophetic leaders in Israel revealing that to ancient Judaism she was venerated as a spiritual guide.

Beacon Bible Commentary, vol. 1. Kansas City, Missouri, 1969, pg. 223f.  Largely associated with the Church of the Nazarene, BBC was a select resource for numerous people with holiness backgrounds. It notes Miriam was the first woman prophet.  It further reflects the cultural biases of an earlier time in holiness groups in assuring readers that this dance, rather than a spontaneous peon of righteous praise and joy, was instead a “stately and solemn dance.”

Calvin, John and Charles William Bingham.  Calvin’s Commentaries.  Baker, 1984, vol. 2, pg. 262.  “…although Moses honors his sister by the title of “prophetess,”  Calvin stresses Miriam does not say that “she assumed to herself the office of public teaching, but only that she was a leader and the directress of others in praising God.”

Guthrie, Donald and J.A.,Motyer, ed.  The New Bible Commentary, revised. Eerdmans,  1970, pg. 129.  Based on the Revised Standard Version, and originally published in 1953 in Britain by Inter Varsity Fellowship.   Although, Miriam is acknowledged as a prophetess, there is ample assurance that she was a leader of women and that here she lead them in a “solemn but spontaneous dance of joy.”

The Interpreter’s Bible. Volume 1. Abingdon, 1952, pg. 945.  In this version of the well known work, the rationale for Miriam being called a prophetess is simply that she leads women in a victory song and dance. When given the opportunity to discuss her role (the function and implication of a woman as a prophet), the editors chose to discuss the weighty question of whether or not she had been a full or step sister to Moses.

The Wesleyan Bible Commentary, vol. 1.    Peabody, Massachusetts, 1979, pg. 213-214.  The fact of Miriam as prophet is minimized to be succumbed into a simple spontaneous chorus.  The text of the praise reveals inspired, spontaneous and outstanding poetic quality. The women’s sacred dance was, however, minimized because while it was impressive, the real “genius” was the chorus lead by Moses in the preceding chapter.

Deborah (Judges 4)

In a time labeled as one highlighted by lawlessness and rebellion against God, Deborah is revealed as a woman who was a wise and spiritual leader for the people.  Her status was clear; when she sent for Barack he came from his far northern abode to her location. Her summons was obviously not one to ignore. She was a prophet, by one of the standard definitions of the term and was a judge who settled disputes, dispensed justice, and oversaw communal life where she served.
            Deborah was a prophet and judge in the Ephraim hill country of ancient Israel, between Ramah and Bethel. Israel was living in a tense time under the oppression of a Canaanite named Sisera for some twenty years. Judges 4:3 says the people "cried unto the Lord". She is presented in Judges as prophetically directing a battle to drive out opposing Canaanite forces. Note several things about this Judges story:
            1) She was accessible. Deborah sat beneath a palm tree and people sought her out for her guidance and decisions. This may have been a landmark since it is believed such palms were rare in the land in the time period under discussion. It may have developed as a rest stop, a place of meeting and commerce. It was probably an accessible place for travelers to find and inquire of the prophet.
            2) She was respected. She sent for Barack. For many years I had read that and heard it stated without understanding the significance. Barack was not nearby but was in Kedesh in Nephtali, at the far northern reach of Israel. This, coupled with the fact Barek calls on soldiers from other regions, indicates Deborah was a "major judge" rather than a minor one (as found in Judges 10) whose sphere of influence was limited.
            3) She was administrative. Barack came when bidden by Deborah indicating her stature and the respect of the people for the prophet and Judge. Prophets were seen as the link between the world of God and the world of Humans and judges were the keepers of the law, the records, and the administrative tasks of the same. They also served a military leaders. Deborah was, as a major judge in Israel, a ''commander-in-chief" of the military.

            4) She was spiritual. A capable woman of many talents to lead, plan, supervise, direct, and adjure, Deborah was also the spiritual link between God and the people. She was blessed by God to see what would happen, to know that the victory was theirs, and that the outcome would be in a specific manner. The "Song of Deborah" is a song poem thought to be one of the oldest writings of ancient Israel celebrating the victory given by God.

            God sent Hornets into the land is a phrase from this time frame. In three O.T. passages there are references to strange ‘hornets’ sent into the land to prepare the way for the Children of Moses to proceed into their promised land. It is assumed that anything ranging from a plague of hornets to a military tactic was used. There is, however, another possibility. The Hornets might have been guerrilla warriors sent into disable and terrify the populace. Since there is mention of clean food and water maybe they used some form of artifice to convince the population that leprosy or some other problem had emerged and they must flee.
            Now, fast forward to the Judges where a woman known as “Deborah” sat at the tree of judgment serving as prophet and judge of the people. Why did she become a Judge? How was she a leader, aside from her role as a prophet? Her name has been interpreted as “Bee”….and the root words, according to some sources, for Bee and Hornet appear to be related. It has been suggested that such a group of women warriors did exist as an honor guard before the wilderness tabernacle. Did they also serve in other ways as well? Had she achieved her place of respect and honor because she had been a small Hornet…a bee…a woman warrior used to helping drive the occupants from the land?
            When Deborah called the soldier to her from his mountain home...his readiness to come and his eagerness for her to come with him....make incredible and sudden sense. She had been a warrior, she knew the way of the soldier and the tactics employed, and had great experience in battle. Coupled with her prophetic skills, this experienced warrior woman would have been greatly respected, honored, and followed. No wonder she rose to the position of a Judge in the land...and no wonder the land had peace for forty years.....

Guthrie, Donald and J.A.,Motyer, ed.  The New Bible Commentary, revised. Eerdmans, 1970,p. 261.  Here Deborah is swamped,  buried beneath  pointless discussions of the nature and role of the oasis where she sat, the flooding patterns of the area, and just about everyone else other than the prophet herself.  Discussions of the terms “a mother in Israel” as a possible title, the nature of her judgments, the authority of her role, the non limitations of her gender, and her gifting as a prophet are never discussed.  We do learn, however, that Jael had the mallet and tent peg nearby because “pitching the tent was a woman’s work.”

Huldah (2 Kings 22 & 2 Chronicles 34)

Huldah was a prophet whose area of work was in a space near the temple where probable instruction and ministry took place.  She had lived and worked there for many years, perhaps even staying in place as guardian, during the Diaspora.  She was one of a larger group of prophets who guided and inspired the spiritual life of Israel: the prophetic books of the Old Testament do not reflect all the active prophets in Israel. 

            A combination of history, culture, and male domination have buried Huldah over the decades. The gate area where it is thought that she could be found as a prophet-in-residence of the temple mount area were probably known as the "first" or "old gates" indicating their antiquity.
            At some point, just when is unclear, but perhaps at the time after the prophets, the tradition of calling these the "Huldah Gates" settled into culture. When the Ottoman Empire took over Jerusalem, they built a mosque and in the process they closed off, bricked up, and totally hide most of the old, first or Huldah gates. In essence they were hidden.
            She resided in an area adjacent to the temple, in a western section called the "Second Quarter" which in some older translations is called "the college." It may be inferred that she was one of the group that had been found to be true to God since the king had spent several years ridding the land of pagan priests, temples, groves, and idols. She, along with Hilkiah the High Priest, and unnamed others, can be considered to have passed the test as King Josiah cleansed the land.
            Some scholars understand that the prophets had areas where they worked: some roamed, some were rural, and some were city. Some, like Huldah, were part of the daily working of the temple. People would have come to her to do as King Josiah ordered his ambassadors to do and "Go, inquire of the Lord for me." (2 Chron. 34.21).
            Male biases about the role of women further eroded her presence from the pages of scripture and scholarly books and thus from church sermons. Many men made the decision that women could not be prophets, leaders, or teachers and thus blinded themselves to the examples shown through out scriptures of women doing just those things! Jesus recognized this trait when he talked about those who "had ears to hear" or "eyes to see".

Barker, Kenneth, ed. The NIV study Bible. Grand Rapid, Zondervan, 1995. See pg. 560 in reference to 2 Kings 22.  The note on 22.14 reads bluntly 'why the delegation sought out Huldah rather than Jeremiah or Zephaniah is not known. Perhaps it was merely a matter of her accessibility in Jerusalem."  That she may have been a exactly what she is represented as, a well respected prophet of Israel, is apparently not a consideration.

Cogan, Mordechai and Hayim Tadmor. The Anchor Bible. II Kings, volume 11.  Doubleday, 1988, pg.283.  This work provides a good overview of the need to rationalize Huldah’s validity as a prophet: she has mention because she was related to the Major Prophets, her husband was related to someone more important, and other similar rationalizations to explain why this woman would be a valued prophet.

Hastings, James, ed. The Speakers Bible. Vol. 11, Baker, 1971.  Seeking to find additional insights into the story of the prophet Huldah, it was surprising to find that the work did not even address the event in Chronicles 2.

Guthrie, Donald and J.A.,Motyer, ed.  The New Bible Commentary, revised. Eerdmans, 1970, pg. 365. The authors note “scholars are inclined to accept this as an accurate record, for it is extraordinary to have a woman speak for Yahweh.”  Given the heritage of Miriam, Deborah, and others why was it extraordinary unless the writers of the commentary had come to the work with their own biases?

Anna (Luke 2)

Despite a belief among many at the time and by many of the commentators that prophecy ended with the last of the ‘major prophets’, it is clear that in the interim between the writings of the Hebrew scriptures and the Christian New Testament that prophecy remained.  Once again it is the non-exclusive understanding of the work of a prophet that can be identified in this portion of scripture. 
            When the infant Jesus was brought to the Temple to fulfill the obligations of the Mosaic law, he was acknowledged by two prophets. One was an old man who came to the Temple. The other was an old widow who lived at the Temple.
            What can this scene communicate to us? Anna is role model for any man or woman of God. She lived at the Temple and devoted herself to a life of prayer and fasting. She constantly sought the face of God. Her prophecy would have been given to any and to all who came to the Temple fulfilling the numerous rituals of the Jewish faith. How many words of encouragement did she share?   
            How many warnings did she give? How many tiny fires of hope did she fan to stronger life? How many small grief’s and fleeting joys did she witness over the years? How many nights did she cry out to God on behalf of some soul in distress, on behalf of some national threat, or on behalf of some person's deep grief?
            Are we living at the Temple? Are we giving our self constantly to a life of intercession? Are we listening for the voice of God? Are we bearing one another's burdens, loving each other as Christ commanded, or strengthening up the feeble hands all around us?  Look to Anna, the prophet, who lived at the place where God and Creation commune.

Clarke, Adam. The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Volume 1. Abingdon, n.d., pg. 375-376.  Clarke reveals his limited understanding of the role of the prophet in Jewish society when he concludes that Anna was not a prophet, since she could not foretell events. She was instead a “holy woman” capable of instructing others and those others, however, he limits to women.  Although noting the text says she did not leave the temple area (v. 37) Clarke asserts “it is probable she went from house to house, testifying the grace of God” based on verse 38.

Guthrie, Donald and J.A. Motyer, ed.  The New Bible Commentary, revised. Eerdmans, 1970, pg.895.  Anna, as representative of the prophetic office and woman as prophet in the span between the testaments, is los.  In sparse comments the only remarks are meaningless queries as to how to count the years of her widowhood and if she left the temple or not.

Peter’s Mother-in-Law (Mark 1.29)

            In this brief scene of Jesus’ healing of the mother-in-law of Peter, Jesus reveals several important things that say much about his attitudes.  Chief among them is the fact that women were important to him and worthy of being healed. 

The Anchor Bible. Matthew. Volume 26. Doubleday, 1971.  The healing of Peter’s mother is merely lumped with other general “healings” (pg. 93).

Guthrie, Donald and J.A.,Motyer, ed.  The New Bible Commentary, revised. Eerdmans, 1970, pg. 856. Peter is the focus of the discussion up to the moment it becomes clear that the woman was healed enough to “serve them.”  Once she was restored to this role there is a loss of interest.

Jamieson, Faucett, and Brown. A Commentary, critical, experimental, and practical in the Old and New Testaments. Eerdmans, 1948.  Regarding Matt 8 (pg. 53) little  serious treatment but  there was a great concern over if the healing was of a “little fever” or a “big fever.”

Tasker, R.V.G. The Gospel according to St. Matthew.  Eerdmans, 1981.   Despite the fact that in the healing of Peter’s mother Jesus breaks social and religious rules of touching a woman and values her enough to heal her, the only thing the commentator can say is the section is “interesting.”  The source of this interest is because of the evidence Peter had a house (pg. 89).

Unnamed Women (1 Corinthians 11)

Barrett, C.K. First Epistle to the Corinthians. Harper & Row, 1968.  While saying woman is downtrodden in Christianity, the author continues by saying woman “was brought forth from man, and was intended from the beginning.

Bromiley, Geoffrey W.  Theological dictionary of the New Testament. Eerdmans 1985.  Simply notes the word “Gyne” and stresses that Judaism viewed women as “greedy, inquisitive, vain, and frivolous” (pg. 135).

Carter, Charles W. 1 Corinthians and Ephesians. Wesleyan Bible Commentary. Eerdmans, 1965.  “The superior position of man due to the face that he was first created…in the image of God…the highest of all creatures.  Woman was…made from man, and is thus subservient to him…”(pg. 189).  Then goes on to do some fancy footwork with Paul to affirm there really was no domination in Christianity.

Dods, Marcus. Expositor’s Greek Testament. Vol. 1. Eerdmans, n.d.  Laconically writes the section of scripture is “not interesting for anything said” (pg. 140-141).

Elwell, Walter A.  Encyclopedia of the Bible. Baker, 1988.  The order of creation and Eve’s sin and the subordination of woman “are universal principles rather than cultural norms” and as such are not open to interpretation (pg. 2158).

The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. Romans-Galatians. Zondervan, 1976.  In reference to the eleventh chapter of 1 Corinthians, notes that although God created Adam and Eve and gave them dominion, Paul’s argument is based solely on ‘man’s prior creation.’  Yet, “lest he be misunderstood”…Paul argues that man and woman are equal in the Lord and mutually dependent (pg. 255b).

Findlay, G.G. The Expositor’s Greek New Testament.  Eerdmans, n.d.  In reference to 1 Cor. 11.7-16, the interpretation  places “man as the direct reflexion (sic) of God, woman as derived and auxiliary.” In comments on verse 7 later, however, he contradicts this saying she is not his reflection but rather his “counterpart.”

Genesuis, William, et al. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford, 1955.   The authors focus interpretation on a selection of what can be called controlling or power based words: “rule, dominion, realm.”  The choices made in which words to emphasis and are notable revealing an application of the concept of dominion, ‘rule of heavenly bodies” as in Gen. 1.16, to other texts (pg. 606).

Guthrie, Donald and J.A.,Motyer, ed.  The New Bible Commentary, revised. Eerdmans, 1970, pg. 1066. The discussion is focused solely on the issue of veiling.  Women are acknowledged to “pray” but the “prophesying” phrase is totally absent. The section examined is rife with sweeping assumptions of the meaning and interpretation by 1st century society of being unveiled. Phrases such as “a woman’s hair is distinctly longer than a man’s” is blatantly biases and illogical. It is totally without recognition of the cultural context of that statement. Why is woman’s hair longer? Does a man’s hair simply stop growing above his ears? No, this is a reflection of the cultural bias and assumptions of the writers of the commentary. It is also clear preference for the mistranslation of v.16 (and the changing of “no such custom” to read “no other custom.”  There is little logic in holding  to the inference that Paul was teaching there is a commonly held belief among the churches on the subject, when instead it says there is none.

The Interpreter’s Bible.  Vol. X. Abingdon, 1953. This section notes the author’s assertion of a probable rabbinic source as an explanation for the emphasis on the male focused creation.  The author then later contradicts this idea in v. 11 (pg. 125-126).

Metz, Donald S. 1 Corinthians. Beacon Bible Commentary, volume 8. Beacon Hill Press, 1968.  Metz argues ‘man and woman are equal’ though for ‘administrative purposes the woman is subordinate to the man.’   This is followed, rather contradictorily, by “so all the ranks and all levels disappear in His grace and service’ (pg. 416).  Woman, when all is said and done, was created a servile helpmeet to the man, who was created in “the image of God” (pg. 415).

Nelson’s expository dictionary of the Old Testament.  Nelson, 1980.   Again a preoccupation with the power words for interpretation: “To rule, reign or have dominion” as the sun and moon in Genesis 1.18, 3,16; 24.2 (pg. 341).

Parker, Joseph. Preaching through the Bible. Baker, 1971. In reference to 1 Cor. 11.14 and the discussion of women and the church the comments are succinct. They can also be rather insulting if a woman is the one reading the commentary. “The apostle is speaking about a subject” we are informed, “…of no interest to us…”  He does underscore that the principle, one can assume subordination and being dominated, “is of perpetual value and application” (pg. 261).

Spence and Ezell. Pulpit Commentary, vol. 19. Eerdmans, 1978.  Again, the argument includes a presentation of the now well used heresy that woman was the image of man: “woman is not directly the glory of God…she is the glory of the man directly…man is the sun, woman the moon” (pg. 378).

Wilson, William. Wilson’s Old Testament Word Studies. McClean, Virginia: McDonald Pub., n. d.  The author focuses solely on defining limitation for women and not mutuality.  Instead of collaborating in the gospel task by sharing the work, there is emphasis by the commentator on the familiar power based words:  “to rule, to have dominion” (pg. 363).

Because of this minimalist tendency, woman’s role in scripture has been obscured and three distinct ideological camps become immediately apparent.  Their theological descendents have formed influences which are still in play in modern Christian culture in the west.
There is the clear anti-woman view espoused by such early writers as Tertullian, Origen, and Augustine and ratified by later writers such as Calvin and his theological descendents.  Some, in the manner of the slave owners in the American south seek to rationalize their views by promoting an awkward “separate-but-equal” view.  Others however, call for the recognition of women as unrestricted fellow workers in Christian service.


‘The Ministry of Women in the Church’ – Noel Brooks; annotations by Marilyn A. Hudson (2011)
I. Scripture shows that women have a place in the ministry of the church
OT. Ex 15: 20; Judges 4 and 5; 2 Kings 22:14; 2 Chron. 34:22-25; cf. Neh.6:14; Isa. 8:3. Give special attention to Joel 2:28, 29 which points forward to the Messianic age.
NT. John 20:10; Matt 28:10; Acts 2:17,18l 21:9l Rom. 16:1,3,6,12,15; 1 Cor.11:5; Gals. 3:28.

II. It is clear, however, that Scripture place some restrictions on the ministry of women.
1 Cor. 11:3-16 – Implies that women engaged in ministry must not exercise authority above men; see below for  explanation.
1 Cor. 14:34-40 – on the surface this appears to command the total silence of women in Christian assemblies. But see below for discussion.
1 Tim. 2:11-12- this supports I Cor. 11:3-16, but limits the silence to teaching. This also is discussed below.
III. Can these two aspects of biblical revelation be reconciled?
(A) Historically and traditionally it has been assumed that women are almost automatically excluded from what might be called “Clerical “ positions in the church, leaving open to them various voluntary ministries such as Sunday School teaching, women’s meetings, and in some cases missionary work.
(B) At the other extreme, in fairly recent years, some claim that the silencing of women was a cultural practice binding only on women in apostolic days similar to the wearing of the head-covering or the holy kiss or foot-washing. Thus, the prohibitions and restrictions on women’s ministry are not binding on the church in a western culture.  Appeal is made to Gal. 3:28 –“there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither free nor free, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”  If Paul’s statement here is accepted in the sense as a (even the) fundamental principle in this matter, it would put an end to the argument. The principle would stand in the same relationship as the question of slavery. Slavery was accepted in the apostolic church it was also accepted that in Christ slavery was abolished. It would take many hundreds of years for the ideal to become actual.  It could be argued that it is the case also with the roles of men and women in the church.  In Christ, the distinction is abolished.  The same privileges  belong to both. In Christ, the distinction is abolished. Yet Paul, who annunciated the principle of oneness in Galatians 3:28, in other passages [ text is missing in original document; following page has “ment, this would be a concession on Paul’s part similar to the slavery question.”]
Only with the passing of the centuries would women’s equality with men be acceptable, which time has now come.  Hence, the adoption in many Christian denominations of women’s ordination, while other churches continue to agonize over it, and some even still resist or reject it. However, it is not quite clear that Paul’s principle of “all one in Christ Jesus” does apply to Christian ministry.  Certainly, in context Paul is thinking only of the blessings of salvation.  There is no suggestion that he would apply the same principle to ministry.  And in the passages which restrict the ministry of women he gives no hint that the restrictions were meant only for the early church. I myself feel unable to concede that the principle of all “one in Christ Jesus” extends to all aspects of life and of Christian ministry. The restrictive passages should be taken seriously. Just as in the natural roles and functions of men and women there are plain differences confined to one or the other, even though men and women are equal in worth and dignity, so, accordingly to the Pauline restrictive passages, there are forms of Christian ministry which are reserved for men, yet women are not de-valued or demeaned in any way by the restriction, any more than they are de-valued or demeaned by their sexual differentiations.
(C ) There is, however, a middle way of looking at this question
This focus on 1 Corinthians 11:3-16, a passage which preserves both the rights of women to engage in Christian ministry, and the principle of restriction on that ministry. According to this middle way Christian women are free to participate in all forms of Christian ministry provided the headship of man is preserved.  The problem is discussed in some length by John Stott in the section “Women, Men, and God” in his book Issues Facing Christians Today (pages 252-254).  His practical conclusion is that “it is biblically permissible for women (to minister) provided that the content of their teaching is biblical, its context a team, and its style humble.  For in such a situation they may be exercising their gift without claiming a “headship” which is not theirs” (page 253).
It is clear that in 1 Cor. 11:2-5 Paul taught that women may pray and prophesy in Christian services.  It cannot be denied that these ministries are among the foremost which may be exercised.  In the 14th chapter he plainly rates prophesy as supreme among the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and in view of his many exhortations and encouragements to pray it cannot be denied that he viewed prayer at least as important. Yet, a woman may do both in the services of the church. However, Paul also insists that in the performance of these….[text missing? Next page begins “… wearing a head-covering…..”]
The typed text picks up….
“….wearing a head-covering. If she does “she dishonors her head.”  The meaning of this is debated (Gordon Fee has a long , involved discussion on the passage in his scholarly commentary on First Corinthians in the New International Commentary of the New Testament , pages 498-530). Some claim that the term “head” here means Christ, others that it means husband or man in general, in this context gifted men in the church service. In either case according to Paul not to wear a head covering meant the dishonoring of that head. Is this a universal rule for the church today, or was it a cultural practice for apostolic times only? Some cling to the former opinion and insist that women in Christian assemblies, especially if they pray or prophesy or engage in any other form of public ministry should wear a head covering of some kind.  Other, however, (for example John Stott) make a distinction between a universal principle which abides forever, namely, respect for male head ship in the church, and the cultural practice of head-covering. Stott says, “The practice of ‘cultural transposition’ seeks to cloth the unchanged essence of revelation in new and appropriate cultural dress.   In the first century masculine headship was expressed in the requirement of female head coverings and in the prohibition of women teaching men could it not be expressed today, in a way that is faithful to Scripture and relevance to the twentieth century, in terms of female participation in team ministries of which men are leaders?” (ibid, page 253).
Wayne Grudem, in an excellent study The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today, discusses the subject of “Women and Prophecy” in chapter 11.  He says: “In 1 Cor. 11 Paul affirms one temporary expression (head coverings) of an eternal, created difference (role differences between men and women).  He sees head coverings as outward expressions of the difference between men and women, outward expressions which were commonly recognized in that society at that time.  But there is no good reason for us to think that such an expression as style of head-covering (or style of clothing generally) was intended to be a rule for all societies for all time…What is abiding is the eternal relationship between men and women which Paul depends on to support his teachings on the head coverings, the temporary expression.”
Thus, in 1 Cor. 11:2-5, Paul recognizes the right and freedom of Christian women to engage in Christian ministries, but insists that they must do so under the headship of male leadership.  The modern type of team ministry  provides for this. [Note: this may be a clue to dating this document. Team ministries emerged in Pentecostal circles in the late 1970’s and 1980’s]
A similar idea underlies the regulations of 1 Cor. 34:34-27 where Paul says, in the KJV, “Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says.”  In order to weaken this command some focus on the Greek verb laleo, claiming that the word means “to chatter”, thus bringing disruption to the services. What are the facts concerning this word?

Laleo occurs about 300 times in the NT in many different contexts, and was frequently in a good sense, describing rational and informal discourse, including the words spoken by Jesus, by the Holy Spirit, by the Apostles, and by Christian people in general.  For example Hebrews 1:1,2 :” God, who at various times and in different ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son…”   Did God chatter in this self-disclosure?  Surely not!  In Cor. 14 itself the word occurs 14 times, mainly in a good sense.
The remarks of Thayer and those of Bauer, Ardnt, and Gingrich should settle this question.
Thayer: The primary meaning of lalein, to utter ones’ self, enables us to undertand its very frequent use in the sacred writers to denote the utterances by which God indicates or gives proof of his min and will, whether immediately  or through the instrumentality if his messages or heralds.  (Perhaps this may account for the fact that, the classical Greek lalein is the term for light and familiar speech, and so assumes readily a disparaging notion, in biblical Greek it is nearly if not quiet, free from such suggestion)” (Greek-English Lexicon to the New Testament, page 368).[1]
Bauer, Ardnt, and Gingrich: In the Greek-English Lexicon…..on the noun Lalia which occurs only four times in the NT. “Mostly (in classical writers) in an unfavorable sense gossip or common talk; in our (that is biblical ) literature, always in a good sense” (page 464).  Thus, while there is a faint possibility that Paul is forbidding the Corinthian women to chatter during church services, it would seem that it is rather a desperate attempt to rob Paul’s command of real meaning.  The overwhelming evidence if Scripture favors a good meaning for the word and thus previous evidence for the view that in the NT certain restrictions are placed on the ministry of women. Paul is not telling women they must not chatter during church services, but that they should not take part in the ministry which is going on.
But what was the precise nature of this forbidden ministry?
In the light of 1 Cor. 11:2-5 it cannot refer to praying or prophesying, or indeed to any other kind of charismatic ministry. It does not appear to be only a repetition of 1 Cor. 11:5, namely, to speaking without a head-covering, meaning, assuming the headship God gave to man at the creation and which still stands. Wayne Grudem makes a good case for his view that Paul is thinking of judging of prophecies which he had just described  in verses 29-33. He writes, “On this view, Paul would be saying, ‘Let the others (that is the rest of the congregation) weigh what is said (by the prophets….but) ‘the women should keep silence in the churches.’   In other words, women could not give spoken criticism of the prophecies which were made during a church service.  This rule would not prevent them from silently evaluating the prophecies in their own minds (v.29 implies that they should do so) but it would mean that they would not voice those evaluations in the assembled congregations” (The Gift of Prophecy, pages 220, 221).
For women to sit in judgment of the prophecies would violate his command in 1 Cor. 11:5.  Grudem concludes:” The woman should keep silence during the evaluation of prophecies” (page 224).   The issue arises once again in 1 Tim. 2:11-15. Paul says, “Let the woman learn in silence in all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence” (NKJV).  Probably this prohibition should be interpreted in light of 1 Cor. 11:2-5. That is, that Paul was not forbidding all teaching by women but ministry which sought to override the ministry of the male leadership. This is supported by the expression, “to have authority over a man.”  Stott asks : “Is it possible that the demand for female silence was not an absolute prohibition of women teaching men, but rather a prohibition of teaching which infringes the principle of male headship” (Issues Facing Christians Today, page 252).[2]
Grudem similarly writes: “Paul is arguing from a larger conviction about an abiding distinction between the roles appropriate to males and to females in the church…this distinction comes to focus in the prohibition of women from exercising doctrinal and ethical governance, even from time to time, over the congregation” (page 24).
Paul goes on to show that the ground for male headship was laid at the creation when God made man first, and women afterwards.[3] In a similar way Jesus had claimed that the union of one man with one woman in marriage was grounded in the creation (Matthew 19:1-6).[4]
Thus, Paul teaches, the respective roles of man and woman in the human family were divinely planned from the creation. Both have their roles to play and both roles are equal in value, dignity and importance, yet they are different in order, man being the head, the woman fulfilling her roles in submission to her husband/head[5].  It must be stressed, however, that the husband’s leadership does not consist in harsh and unloving domination but in loving and gracious leadership, as Paul teaches in Ephesians 5:22-23.[6]
Though Paul does not plainly say so, the implication is that the same is true of men and women in the church. Indeed, his reason for making the reference to the headship of the man in the family is in order to justify his rules for men and women in the church.

[1] Actually, this is dependent on an assumption of knowledge on how Paul was using the term.
[2] This explanation disregards the fact of female prophets functioning in the Old Testament and in other places in the New Testament. Nowhere is there any evidence that female prophets had to wait for a male to interpret their words.  Miriam is described clearly as a prophet, her brother Aaron the High Priest, but he does not speak for her as she prophesies nor does he interpret her words.  Huldah, likewise, was seen as a prophet who spoke authoritatively as the prophet of the city of Jerusalem who was also a scholar in the temple school.
[3] This disregards the second creation account which indicates God created ‘humans’ in both male and female form as a single event.
[4] This does not, however, support the idea of headship but merely committed relationship, which was the purpose of the text and the words of Jesus.
[5] This is an argument often expressed in the idea that since women are designed to be wives and mothers that is the only function they can perform.  This is similar to arguing that because a man is capable of being a father he can only be a father.
[6] It has been argued that anytime there is superior vs. inferior order there is the potential for domination, control, and denigration.