Walter Sellew’s Why Not? Is it Really a Defense of Women’s Ministry?

Walter Sellew

From 1911-1974 Free Methodist women who entered ministry had three approved tracks: evangelist, deaconess, or deacon. While these ministry paths opened numerous doors at the local level, decisions at the denominational level still largely excluded women, as they could only be elected as lay delegates to general conference. The result being, decisions affecting the entire denomination were still largely being decided by men. Since men could be elected as both lay and ministerial delegates to general conference it was almost a guarantee that more men would secure delegate spots and maintain the majority vote for denominational decisions. Leaders such as Free Methodist Bishop Walter Sellew argued that male dominance in church governance was what women wanted. In his pamphlet Why Not? Why Not? A Plea for Those Women God Has Called to Preach the Gospel Sellew acknowledged women were the majority of members in local societies, but contended women “willingly delegates her power” to men. Sellew explained that only when a suitable man could not be found would women step up as an annual or general conference delegate.[i]

Why Not? had first been published in 1894, and was published again in 1914 with a new forward. In the book, Sellew is very clear that he is supportive of women in ministry, but women’s ordination should stop at the level of a deacon, as he saw no Biblical precedent to ordain them as elders.

Sellew’s views on women in ministry reflect changing rhetorical tactics denominational leaders took in the years following Roberts’ death. The debate changes from are women capable of serving in ministry to what level of power should women be given within the denomination. There was an intentional effort to restrict women to secondary ministry roles that would leave governance in the hands of their male contemporaries.

As a bishop, Sellew had tremendous influence and Why Not? was promoted to readers of  The Free Methodist as an important book for those wishing to understand women’s role in ministry. Years ago when I first skimmed Why Not? I thought it was somewhat comparable to Roberts’ book Ordaining Women. Both men were Free Methodists who advocated for women’s inclusion in ministry. However, as I sat down to work on my book and chronicle what happened at the 1907 and 1911 General Conference, I took a closer look at Why Not? and realized Sellew’s arguments are actually counter to what Roberts’ was proposing in Ordaining Women.

Unlike Roberts, Sellew makes no attempt in Why Not? to establish Biblical precedent for complete gender equality. In fact, Sellew dismisses such concerns. Citing the strict guidelines in place for those serving as district elder or bishop, Sellew rejects worries about women’s lack of access to those roles. “Any person with ambitions for authority would be very much dissatisfied with these positions.”[2]  Sellew never directly addresses why he believes Biblical ordination does not mean an individual also has a right to be an elder, but he does wonder why ordination as elder matters so much to women:

She now has in our church all such openings she needs, and more than she uses. Ordination for women is not asked for her benefit, but for the benefit of the church. She can as, heretofore, get on very well without it; but the time has come when the church demands it both for the thing itself and for the consistency of our position before the world and before God.[3]

The inconsistency of his arguments was lost on Sellew, but the difference between his interpretation of women’s ministry roles and Roberts’ is stark. In Ordaining Women, Roberts laid out an argument not only for complete Biblical equality, but also for social equality for women. While he acknowledged that church elders govern, Roberts did not believe there was a Biblical precedent limiting the ordination of elders by gender. Citing passages in Acts where women work alongside men in the Apostolic Church, both serving equally in governance and in preaching,[4] Roberts bluntly stated:

The church has no right to forbid the free exercise of abilities to do good which God has given. To do so is usurpation and tyranny. Men had better busy themselves in building up the temple of God, instead employing their time in pushing from the scaffold their sisters, who are both able and willing to work with them side by side.[5]

Regarding Sellew’s objection that women have no desire to govern and are satisfied picking qualified men to fill governance positions, Roberts argued that the ability to recognize the character of others is exactly why women are fit to govern in the church. Good leaders are good judges of character and good leaders know when to delegate authority.[6]

Additionally, Ordaining Women took a very different interpretation of a deaconess’ role than Free Methodist leadership did at the 1907 General Conference. Unlike the Free Methodist Discipline, which noted a deaconess does not preach and is not to be seen as a substitute for a minister, Roberts provided New Testament examples where the terms deacon and deaconess are used. Arguing that a deaconess is simply a female deacon with no distinction in duties, he summarized the modern church’s interpretation of a deaconess as only a lay worker:

It is giving a stone to those who called for bread. It is conferring a shadow and withholding the substance; its bestowing a name and keeping back that which is implied in the name. In short it is a stupendous sham, of which any body of men claiming common honesty should be ashamed. It is an insult to womankind and should be resented by them as such.[7]

Limiting the main ministry of a deaconess order to service, Roberts argued, was a disgrace. “Why give to the deacons the dignity and to the deaconess the drudgery?” The difference between the two roles was a differentiation based on sex alone. [8]

I have a feeling if Roberts’ had lived to attend the 1907 General Conference he would have been very opposed to the establishment of the deaconess order, as it was nothing more than a way to place women into a secondary ministry role that involved some of the most difficult types of ministry —hospital care, nursing the sick, taking care of orphans etc.

If you’d like to read Why Not? for yourself here is a link to a PDF version I uploaded:

Why Not


[1] Benjamin Titus Roberts, Ordaining Women, (Rochester, NY: Earnest Christian Publishing House, 1891).

[2]   Sellew, Why Not? 11.

[3]  Ibid, 12.

[4]  Roberts, Ordaining Women, 139-141.

[5] Ibid, 148-149.

[6]  Ibid, 108-110.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s