THE PROPHESYING OF WOMEN VOLUME I, DIVISION I: REVIEW OF THE BOOK BY GEORGE FRANCIS WILKIN ON THE PROPHESYING OF WOMEN!!!

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION TO THE ISSUE AT HAND.

<<" The daughters shall prophesy" (Joel ii:28).

"Let the women keep silence in the churches" (I Cor., xiv: 34). >>

<<TO MY WIFE

THIS VOLUME IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED
AS A TESTIMONY

TO THE

REVERENT LOYALTY TO GOD'S WORD

WITH WHICH SHE EVER SEEKS TO EMPLOY HER EMINENT PROPHETIC AND TEACHING GIFTS.

"Her husband * * * praiseth her, saying, Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all " (Prov. , xxxi: 28, 29).

>>

EXTRA TERRITORIUM JUS DICENDI NON PARETUR IMPUNE

No man shall be obeyed with impunity that exercises jurisdiction outside of the limits of his domain of investiture.

In the first 90 pages of his book, George Francis Wilkin argues that the INHERENT and INALIENABLE right of women to prophesy or speak in public in mixed assemblies for religious purposes is permanent and universal.

He eventually makes a distinction between the INSTITUTIONAL assembly and the VOLUNTARY assembly.

§1. GEORGE FRANCIS WILKIN’S THESIS:

George Francis Wilkins’s whole thesis is that the public speech of women be permanently and universally granted to all women in all promiscuous public assemblies EXCEPT the regular church meeting. He claims that there is something UNIQUE about the church meeting and its whole reason for existence that makes it inherently and essentially incompatible with the due subjection of woman to man for any woman to publicly speak for any reason at all. On the surface, his explanation makes more common sense than all other explanations that I have heard of.

His entire theory is based on the following distinction:

Institutional Assembly ----

~The vital organic principle is the duty of the church members to obey the command of God to assemble for worship at His stated regular times and observe His Divine Office of Worship the way He ordained it

~Because of the duty this imposes on the hearers to pay attention to those who have a recognized right to speak in such assemblies, the hearer is subject to the speakers

~For a woman to speak would be to subject all the men to her authority, contrary to the Male headship law which forbids this sort of thing

CONCLUSION: it is MALUM in SE {inherently wrong} to allow women to speak, even if it hadn’t been for the statutes given in 1 Corinthians 14:34/35, 1 Timothy 2:11/12.

Voluntary Assembly ----

~The vital organic principle is not the duty of the church members to obey the command of God to assemble for worship at His stated regular times and observe His Divine Office of Worship the way He ordained it, but on the contrary, the right of the people to attend just because they please

~The speakers are subject to the pleasure of the hearers

~It would no longer be an exercise of authority or jurisdiction for her to speak

CONCLUSION: 1 Corinthians 14:34/35 & 1 Timothy 2:11/12 do not apply to voluntary assemblies.

At face value, this rationale seems extremely plausible. Therefore the burden of proof is on those who deny it.

However, I intend to eventually prove that there is a deep flaw in one of his premises. It is about the “authority” of the speaker over the hearers.