Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
(1 Cor. 14:34-35, KJV)
There are several reactions and interpretations to the verses above, ranging from absolute dismissal to extreme applications. In order to be approved of God, we must “rightly divide the word of truth.” If there are portions of the Scripture that may be dismissed as impertinent today or received with limited adherence, we must do so on sound Biblical basis.
Some people have attempted to dismiss 1 Cor. 14:34-35 with the opinion that Apostle Paul was only addressing a cultural problem peculiar with Corinth. But with the repetition of this command in First Timothy, that notion can no longer hold.
Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
(1 Tim. 2:11-14)
A similar dismission mechanism applied on the command is the notion that the Apostle was only stating his personal opinion. However, the clause “they are commanded...” in 1 Corinthians quoted above connotes anything but personal preference on the part of the Apostle. In addition, his words “I suffer not...” in the First Timothy passage is authoritative. He is clearly speaking with his apostolic authority rather than expressing mere personal sentiments. In fact, he did invoke this apostolic authority on this very command, and stated that those who wouldn’t receive it are simply ignorant (1 Cor.14:37-38):
If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
Don’t Speak at All?
With only a surface reading of First Corinthians 14:34-35, one would make the conclusion that, according to the Scriptures, women are not permitted so much as to even sing or greet in a church setting; they must stay hushed until they return home.
Of course this is absurd, as women spoke quite vibrantly in the Lord’s meetings, and neither the Lord Jesus nor His Apostles shunned them for speaking (cons. Luke 11:27; 10:40). In fact, the public attention that the Lord gave to women during His earthly ministry was so counter-cultural that even His own Apostles marvelled (cons. Jn. 4:7-27).
Second, Apostle Paul had previously indicated that women could pray and prophesy (1 Cor. 11:5). The women in the “upper room” on the day of Pentecost did pray and speak with tongues (Acts 1:14; 2:4). Moreover, in the early church, women did prophesy (Acts 21:9) in church.
Therefore there is certainly a particular context of “speaking” concerning which the Apostle Paul is giving this command.
They should not Judge Prophecies?
An explanation by some scholars says that Apostle Paul meant that women should not be involved in “judging” of prophecies. The whole chapter of 1 Cor. 14 actually deals with how the gifts of tongues and prophecy should operate in a local church. Concerning prophecy, the Apostle says in verses 29-33:
Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
Then he segues into warning women in verses 34 and 35, and concludes his subject thereafter.
It may well be that the injunction for women to keep silence in the church commanded in this passage is in connection with the instructions for prophecies. There seems to be good reason to believe so. For one thing, the passage is about tongues and prophecies.
But if women are permitted to prophesy, isn’t it rather weird that they are forbidden to participate in another aspect of prophecy, namely, “judging” another person’s prophecy? Well, there may be some truth in it but it doesn’t square perfectly, as it lacks definitive explanation. Therefore the prohibition for women to speak pertains to something more than discerning people’s prophecies and critiquing them in the church.
Apostle Paul proceeds to say that “they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law” (v. 34). The question is: What portion of the Law, probably the Pentateuch in particular, is the Apostle referring to? Where in the Law are women “commanded to be under obedience” – and under obedience to whom?
Apostle gave same charge to his protégée Timothy, and actually did some expatiation on the matter. Perhaps flipping over to that volume would give us insight.
Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
(1 Tim. 2:11-14)
In this passage, Paul was not addressing the operation of the gifts of the Spirit as in First Corinthian. So the prohibition is beyond judging of prophecies in the church.
The first thing one may notice here is that Apostle Paul spoke of “the woman” – singular noun with definite article (v. 11). And even in verse 12 where he said “a woman” (with an indefinite article), it is used in conjunction with “the man” – singular noun with definite article.
This shows that the Apostle is specifically referring to certain women, namely, those whose husbands were leaders (deacons and bishops). This is true because:
It was these men that the two epistles were principally addressing
It was these men that exercised authority in the Churches by way of expounding and establishing the teachings of the Lord
Men Received the Epistles
As in most Epistles, the first recipients of the First Corinthians and First Timothy were church leaders – who were men. These are the same men that the Apostle asked to “pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting,” just as the first Apostles whose chief duty consisted of teaching the word of God and praying (Acts 6:2, 4).
It is easy to see that the men spoken about in these Corinthian and Timothy passages were the leaders because:
Corinthian was written directly to church leaders and elders
Timothy was written to a leader of leaders (namely, Timothy) for the purpose of guiding those subordinate leaders aright
So the authority of the local church was vested on these men who taught the word of God, as with the first Apostles. These men – called bishops, elders, pastors, overseers, and apostles – who taught the word of God were the leaders of the churches.
These Men who Taught Wielded Authority
It is well-known that the pivotal criteria to be ordained as a bishop include being “apt to teach” and being “able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince” (1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:9). They are in this regard very similar to the priests in the Old Covenant: “The priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts” (Mal. 2:7).
And these men were mostly married – “husband of one wife” (1 Tim. 3:2, 12; Tit. 1:6).
When men are ordained as deacons, pastors, bishops, or such (whose main duty is teaching the word of God, and by that wielded the authority of the church), it is easy for their wives to consider themselves as having equal status with their men in this regard. They think they can teach (and hence have authority) as their husbands. It is this very notion that Apostle Paul definitively rejected.
No, the wives of church leaders don’t have nor share same status as their husbands, says he. They couldn’t teach as their husbands. He says that such behaviour is an arrogation and a disgrace (1 Tim. 2:12; 1 Cor. 14:35).
As also Saith the Law
Furthermore, besides the phrases “the woman” and “the man” in 1 Timothy 2, another thing that demonstrates that the command is specifically to the wives of leaders is Apostle Paul’s submission that it has precedent in the Law (“as also saith the law” – 1 Cor. 14:34). That portion of the law has to do with our first parents, Adam and Eve. This reference to Adam and Eve establishes that the command is for wives of church leaders.
In Genesis, God says to our first mother, “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” (Gen. 3:16). Similar thing was said to Cain when God admonished him against sin: “Sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shall rule over him” (Gen. 4:7). So as sin is subject to Cain, so should the woman be to her husband, no matter her desire and potentials for her husband’s spiritual status.
Arguing from this portion of Genesis, Apostle Paul states that wives of ministers “are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law” (1 Cor. 4:34). They should not consider themselves of equal status with their husbands in church matters.
So the main point is about leaders’ wives acting as leaders themselves. And one way they could do this was by teaching just as their husbands did, as teaching was a thing of authority in the early church (1 Tim. 2: 12).
It is principally a matter of teaching authority.
The dynamics of church leadership and authority have so changed today that a woman preaching in the church is not necessarily considered as having similar authority as her husband the pastor of the church. Teaching has largely been divested of its connotation of authority in the church. We can therefore admit that a woman who is teaching in a church under the authority of her husband and the church leaders is not really violating the Scripture. She does not “usurp authority,” but rather is under authority, obedient to her husband and to the church leadership.
Ordained Women
If these Scriptures are speaking particularly to wives of leaders (and they are), one may ask, are unmarried women who are ordained bishops and pastors then free to teach and wield authority in the church?
From Scripture, the answer to this question is obviously in the negative. First of all, women were not ordained pastors, or bishops, or leaders. They came close to these positions only by marriage, that is, by becoming wives of pastors, overseers, or bishops. This is why the command was directed to the wives of those ministers, for they were the ones who had the predilection for such behaviour.
For the bachelorette, it was taken for granted that such proclivity for teaching (and hence assuming a leader’s authority) was far from them; hence the reason they were not addressed. Such problem could not arise from them.
So the strong point to note is that women were never ordained in the early church into those positions. The Lord Jesus Christ did not have a woman among His Apostles. Elders, bishops, and pastors were designated to men, and not women (1 Tim. 3:1; Tit. 1:5; Acts 6:3). And if these men were married, they must have only one wife (1 Tim. 3:2; 12; Tit. 1:5-6). Women were precluded from such positions. Hence, in lieu of New Testament data, today’s practice of having female pastors and bishops is an aberration.
Phoebe, Priscilla, and Junia
Some people argue that Phoebe, Priscilla, and Junia mentioned in Romans 16:1, 3, 7 were all women who were probably bishops, elders, or even apostles.
However, this surmise is farfetched in the face of certain facts. For one thing, it would be in contradiction to the command given by the same author in 1 Cor. 14:34 and 1 Tim. 2:12. Does the Apostle Paul then have double standards? Or is he forgetful of his teachings elsewhere? Neither. He said he does not vacillate in his words, as an Apostle of Christ (2 Cor. 1:18-19).
Further, it is not certain in what exact sense or capacity Phoebe was “a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea” (v. 1). Second, that Priscilla (and Aquila her husband) was Paul’s “helper in Christ Jesus” (v. 3) does not mean that she occupied a clerical position. Third, it is still uncertain if Junia was truly a woman or a man; and the ambiguous interpretation of “who are of note among the apostles” (v. 7) makes it difficult to establish beyond doubts that the fellow was a leader.
Anna
Some people may point to Anna in Luke 2:36-38 as an example of female clergy, for she, being “a prophetess, spake of him [Jesus Christ] to all them that look for redemption in Jerusalem.”
Well, first of all, this has nothing to do with leadership in the church. We’ve already stated that women could prophesy in the church. And, this woman, being so elderly in age and in faith, would earn herself a respectable recognition if she were in a New Testament church. Such is truly deserving of honour from the saints. This is probably the kind of person to whom Apostle John wrote his second epistle, calling her “the elect lady” (v. 2 Jn. 1). And much like her, in the Old Testament, Huldah was an elderly woman who prophesied to King Josiah and all Israel (2 Kgs. 22:14-20).
Nevertheless, all these do not mean that she could become a pastor, bishop, or hold such a post in the church; at least not among adult men.
Are Church Women Nonentities?
From the foregoing, someone might ask, are women therefore of no relevance in the church? Far from it, they are not. As we can see in the ministry of the Lord, in Acts of Apostles, and in other Bible passages, there were women who were of spiritual prominence.
Timothy, for example, was brought up in the faith by his mother Eunice and grandmother Lois (2 Tim. 1:5). Apostle Paul acknowledged that.
Priscilla (together with her husband) mentored Apollos (Acts 18:24-25) and the couple perhaps founded the church in their house (Rom. 16:4-6).
Furthermore, Apostle Paul actually instructed that experienced women should “teach the young women” (Tit. 2:3-5). Thus, it is permissible for women to be teachers (or overseers) to other women, children, and perhaps young people. Yet we must know that even this prerogative is still subject to the general leadership of the church.
We observe this structure in the triad leadership of Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. Although Miriam was a prophetess and was used by God alongside Moses (Amos 6:4), her sphere of influence was with the womenfolk (cons. Exo. 15:20-21). When she attempted to function in equal capacity as Moses, she was severely punished by God (Num. 12:1-15).
Deborah
Deborah (of Judges 4) seems to be the only viable contradiction to the rule, for not only was she a prophetess, the Scripture says that “she judged Israel at that time.” And “the children of Israel came up to her for judgement” (v. 4-5).
This instance, however, is justified by the circumstance that then existed. The Scripture says in verse 1, “And the children of Israel again did evil in the sight of the Lord, when Ehud was dead.” That is to say, there were no capable men in Israel then; they were in “evil” and immature and could not be used by God. They were lost and blind. God could use only the available vessel, namely, the prophetess Deborah. So she kept on doing the much she could until there seemed to be a capable man, Barak. She sent for him and commissioned him to lead God’s army.
This deed by Deborah is in concord with the Law (that is Gen. 3:16, as expounded by Paul) and consolidates the teaching of Apostle Paul on the matter, as well as the practice of the early church.
When Barak considered himself to be incapable for the task unless Deborah went with him, the prophetess obliged him lest the purpose of the Lord failed, but not without informing him that her sharing of leadership with him was an anomaly (v. 9).
So, from this instance, we can safely conclude that female leadership of pastoral echelon can be granted in a situation where a capable man is absent.
To function in equal capacity as Barak, Deborah had to be authorised by the man – a man who was more or less her protégée and who admitted to be incompetent by himself. Thus, this example is in concord, not in contradiction, with the command of Apostle Paul regarding church leadership.
Conclusion
Women cannot be ordained as church ministers.
Wives of ministers do not have same ministerial status as their husbands.
Women are not to exercise authority over men in the church. Thus, they can’t be pastors, bishops, or such.
Seeing that teaching does not necessarily carry the connotation of authority today as it did in the early church, women can sometimes teach but must do so under the authority of the leaders.
Experienced women can lead and teach fellow women, children, and perhaps young people, just as did Miriam, Priscilla, Lois, Eunice, etc.
In rare circumstances, women can be leaders of a church where a capable man is absent. And she should hand over authority once a capable man arrives or is groomed, as with Deborah and Barak.
Comments
Post a Comment