Read: Question #33, p. 132-136, in Banned Questions about the Bible by Christian Piatt.
It’s easier to make a case that women are considered as valuable and worthy as men in the New Testament if we stop with the Gospels. Jesus reached out to both men and women and included women in his ministry. Not only did women support Jesus’ ministry, but they were the first witnesses to the resurrection. Maybe that’s not as direct as declaring, “Women should be treated as equal to men,” but neither does Jesus say, “Women should remain silent in church” or “A woman’s place is in the kitchen” (see Jesus’ interaction with Mary and Martha in Luke 10:38-42).
But then we come to Paul’s letters. On one hand, he commends a number of women for their roles in building up the church in Romans 16. He called Phoebe a deacon in the church (Rom. 16:1), worked with both Priscilla and her husband (Rom. 16:3; Acts 18), referred to Junia as “outstanding among the apostles” (Rom. 16:7; there’s disagreement on whether the original text used Junia, the feminine form of the name, or Junias, the masculine form), and praised other women for their hard work in the church. Add to that this passage from Galatians, which makes the case that, in Jesus, the distinctions between men and women, Jew and Gentile, master and slave no longer matter:
So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:26-28)
On the other hand, there are these passages in Paul’s letters:
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. (1 Corinthians 14:34-35)
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. (1 Timothy 2:11-15)
But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved…. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. (1 Corinthians 11:5-9).
I won’t go into Paul’s writings on marriage (Ephesians 5:21-33; Colossians 3:18-25) here but you can find a good discussion on that in the previous post. Instead, let’s focus on the passages above.
What are we supposed to make of this? If Paul truly valued the contributions of women in his ministry, why would he write that they should not teach but remain silent and not assume authority over men? Was he trying to have it both ways? Did he change his mind over time?
Some of the responses in Banned Questions… note that some things, such as his advice in 1 Corinthians 11, may have been focused on a particular circumstance that doesn’t lend itself to universal interpretation. Some of his advice may have been intended to keep the new church from standing out in a Roman society that was known to persecute them.
Other responses suggest that some of the more controversial passages may have been written by someone other than Paul or may have been later additions inserted after Paul. A lot of people have studied Paul’s letters and had more than a little debate about what was authentic and what was not. I don’t pretend to be an expert on it, so I’m relying on what the responses say (and I’m sure that someone who wants to argue differently would be able to cite different experts). Several responses in Banned Questions… note that scholars believe that texts such as Galatians 3 and Romans 16 are authentic but other texts attributed to Paul may have been added later by others to tone down the message of equality.
I tend to value actions over words, and find it hard to believe that Paul would commend so many women for their work in the early church if he didn’t want them to be in leadership roles. However, others point to the passages above to argue that it’s clear Paul meant that women have no role as leaders in the church. Why would these contradictions remain enshrined in the Bible? How do we sort this out?
Please click on “Comments” below to share your thoughts and to read what others are saying. Come back often to continue the conversation!
I like a note in the New Oxford RSV Bible. It's in the introduction to "The Letter of Paul to Philemon" and has to do with slavery. It reads, "When it is realized that in the ancient world slavery was regarded as a legitimate and necessary segment of the social order, and that severe laws punished those who interfered with the rights of slave-owners, it is not surprising that neither Jesus nor any of the apostles attacked the institution of slavery as such. At the same time Jesus' teaching of the essential worth of every human soul ... and the church's recognition of the brotherhood of all Christian believers (Gal.3.28; Eph.6.5-9; Col.3:11) were destined to reorganize society.
ReplyDeletePerhaps we can look at the issue of the place of women in the same way. We see in scripture evidence of the social patterns of the time, but also powerful seeds of change in the message of Jesus and passages from the letters of Paul.
There are none among us who would condone slavery. We may someday also reach the point where there will be no question of the equality of women with men, in our churches and in society.
oops... I need quotation marks to close the passage from the RSV at the end of the first paragraph.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Judy. The Inductive Approach to Bible study of Observation, Interpretation, Application suggests Interpretation must consider context of the passage. One aspect of context is the historical context. Since Paul wrote about specific issues of concern in the early church, maybe these writings on women address those kinds of concerns. I must review what the Inductive Approach has to say about Application, i.e how the passage relates to us today. But the motto of the Reformed movement, "Once reformed, Always reforming" comes to mind.
ReplyDeleteI also find Leslie Weatherhead's thinking in his book "The Will of God" helpful. He separates the Will of God into three aspects: Intentional, Circumstantial, and Ultimate. He distinguishes Circumstantial Will as what God desires in specific situations where humans might foil his Intentional Will. In the end, God's Ultimate Will triumphs totally aligned with His original Intentional Will.
ReplyDeleteIf you view the Bible as a static book rather than a living document, then it's easier to point to Paul's written passages and argue against equality between men and women (or, as some Christians did in the past, against the abolition of slavery or against desegregation). Interestingly, not only do more conservative Christians hold this argument, but so do atheists who point out the flaws in Christianity.
ReplyDeleteBut if you see the Bible as part of an ongoing conversation between God and God's people - a conversation that spans time and cultures - then I think we have to consider the way Jesus interacted with women as well as the way Paul worked with women in the early church, particularly in context of the times. And, in that context, it seems that Jesus transcended the prevailing male-dominated view of women in society.
Jesus told his disciples that he had so much more to teach them but they weren't yet ready. Instead, Jesus said that the Spirit would teach us all things (John 14). I happen to believe that not only is the Spirit still at work among us, but that the Spirit works through women as well as men.