|
The UK Bible Students Website Christian Biblical Studies
|
WOMAN IN SOCIETY AND CHURCH
By W. Resume
Scripture citations are to the New International Version, UK edition of 1984, unless stated otherwise.
Eighth Instalment
In this final instalment we conclude our analysis of 1 Corinthians 11: 1-16, a controversial passage, in which the Apostle Paul directs that though a man may go bare-headed in congregational worship, a woman ought to cover her hair. The practise is not intended to denigrate her, but rather to portray the appropriate, subsidiary relationship of the Church (the Body) to Christ (her Head). This allegory was in force not only in Paul’s day but applies to our own. We also examine Paul’s assertions that a woman should be ‘silent’ in the congregation and ask if she is right to aspire to be a teacher or pastor in the Church.
_________________________________________________
1 Corinthians 11
10 For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have authority on her head.
IF THE WOMAN’S hair is a natural, glorious covering, why wear an artificial one? For the same reason that a new believer is baptised before onlookers, or a monarch recites a coronation oath in public: as a witness of his or her commitment to a godly undertaking. The principle of witness is at the heart of covenant theology. The mission of the Christian Church includes the command to preach as ‘witnesses . . . to the ends of the earth’ (Acts 1: 8). Similarly, the woman wears on her head a sign of her voluntary subjection to Christ’s authority. But this is a hard saying, and does not go down well with all Christian women.
What is meant by, ‘because of the angels’? What part do angels play in this tableau?
In both Old and New Testaments, the word usually means spirit beings heavenly messengers or announcers and Paul uses it several times this way. For example: 1 Corinthians 6: 3 – ‘. . . we will judge angels. How much more the things of this life’, the contrast showing that spirit beings are referred to. Hebrews 1: 4, 5 distinguishes between the spirit beings and Christ Jesus: ‘to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son . . .”.’ .
The corresponding Hebrew and Greek words used of spirit beings are also employed to denote persons on an errand. They are variously described as messengers, kings, envoys, or spies. For example: 1 Samuel 11: 9; 2 Samuel 11: 1; 2 Kings 14: 4; Malachi 3: 1; Matthew 11: 10 (repeated in Mark 1: 2 and Luke 7: 27 ); Luke 7: 24; 9: 52; 2 Corinthians 12: 7; James 2: 25.
As Lord, Christ addresses the general Church through His appointed mouthpieces. During the founding years of the Christian Church, these were the Apostles; later, the reformers and teaching elders of the Gospel Age. Paul addressed the Corinthian church as one of twelve Apostles, whose pronouncements were inspired. In their verbal and written teachings, the Apostles constitute the twelve foundations of the Church (Revelation 21: 14).
As the one being taught, the Church is represented in the
female. The covering on her hair is the sign of her position in relation to her
head, Christ. Thus she witnesses to the authority of Christ and His ministry as
it is relayed through His appointed mouthpieces throughout all periods of
Church history. By so doing, the woman in the ecclesia demonstrates the
deference and submission of the Body to the Head. And as the Church may not
usurp the teaching role of Christ, so the woman may not take over the teaching
role of the man within the congregation.[fn1]
_____________________
1 Corinthians 11
11. In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman.12. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God.
THESE VERSES SEEM to be a parenthesis, as though Paul is eager to avoid giving the wrong impression. Women are not in their personhood inferior to men. For although the male-female distinction is necessary in the worship setting, when it comes to one’s spiritual status there is no inferiority as regards the sex, for each is dependent on the other, and both together are dependent on God, their Maker.
St. Paul returns to the touchy subject of the head
coverings:
13 Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?
14. Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him,15. but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering.
In appealing to ‘the very nature of things’, he once again draws on the phenomenon of the created order, incidentally confirming that sexual differences still count in some areas. Setting aside artificial coiffure, the male naturally has hair different in both length and style from that of the female. After all, it is women not men whose interests have determined fashions in hair and decoration. The ‘long’ hair of v. 15 suggests ‘tresses’, a predominantly feminine style.
The Apostle concludes:
16 If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice nor do the churches of God.
Given the revolutionary tendencies of the congregation at
Corinth, the Apostle naturally expects some to contest his instructions.
Forestalling the attempt, he reminds them that other congregations under his
pastoral care already agree with his instructions in this and other matters. See
1 Corinthians 4: 17 (‘ . . . I teach everywhere in every church.’); 7: 17 (‘. .
. rule I lay down in all the churches.’); 14: 36 (‘. . . are you the only
people [the word] has reached?’).[fn2]
_____________________
1 Corinthians 12
27. Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. 28. And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues.
THE PRINCIPAL EXPOSITIONAL offices in the Church distil down to Apostles, Prophets and Teachers (or Pastors), the subsidiary functions being listed after these three. Compare with Ephesians 4: 11).
There were never at any time more than twelve Apostles, hand-picked by Jesus, and all male. Through these twelve came the inspired teachings which form the infallible core of the New Testament. Any attempt to skirt this fundamental truth by enlisting others into their select company male or female tampers with Scripture.[fn3]
The second office is that of (New Testament) Prophets. This does not refer to the charismatic prophesying mentioned in 1 Corinthians 11: 4, 5, which was a manifestation of the supernatural gifts of the spirit a transitory phenomenon. After the charismatic gifts faded, the Church still needed to be taught by exposition and exegesis. The Prophets were the non-Apostolic instructors to the Church at large: men such as Apollos and Barnabas (of the early Christian period), and the various male leaders and reformers, such as Wessel and Luther, who during the Gospel Age gave advancing Truth to the general Church through their writings, translations, and so on. These men reiterated and expanded upon the Apostolic teachings, defending them against the errors which subsequently crept in (Revelation 1: 19, 20; ‘what will take place later . . . seven stars are the angels [messengers] of the seven churches’).
The third office, Teachers (or Pastors), denotes men prominent and active in the local churches throughout the Gospel Age to the present day. These teachers clarify received Truth by discourses and various means of edification and instruction.
In all these instances, the male represents Christ speaking to His people. At no time is Christ represented by a female. For the woman in the congregation to cover her head as a sign of submission to the male head, rules out her intention to be the head herself.
Through his rhetorical questions, Paul reveals that no one male or female should presume to have an equal chance at elevation to whatever spiritual office he or she longs for:
29. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30. Do all have the gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?
Ability alone is not the determining factor in ‘promotion’. This passage is a useful reminder that one’s personal preferences and ambitions do not determine Church arrangements. Were a (male) Teacher to assert the right to be promoted to the post of a (male) Apostle, or a tongues-speaker to the position of a healer, such an attitude would run counter to humility and the spirit of contentment. Likewise with the woman usurping the role of the man in the Church. Rather, says Paul (v. 30), ‘eagerly desire the greater gifts’. He then proceeds to enumerate the graces and fruits of the spirit (1 Corinthians 13: 1-13).
_____________________
1 Corinthians 14
33. . . . As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they want to enquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
IN BLUNT FASHION, the
Apostle Paul once again delivers instructions regarded as controversial, then
and today. In 1 Corinthians 14: 33-35, he seems to refer to married women. He
does not here address whether a woman married or not has the right to teach
in the congregation. Nor does he deny her privilege of engaging in ‘praying or
prophesying’; he has already permitted that (1 Corinthians 11: 5). Rather, he
condemns the querulous habit the verbal assault on others who have the floor
or carrying on noisy arguments with one another. His expression, ‘as the Law
says’, may refer to customary rules of polite behaviour, for no one appreciates
a ‘quarrelsome wife’ (Proverbs 21: 9; ‘brawling woman’, KJV).
_____________________
1 Timothy 2
11. A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.
PAUL’S INSTRUCTIONS TO Timothy perhaps addressed matters which had arisen in the church at Ephesus, where Timothy was situated. This fatherly epistle consists largely of admonitions and encouragement, answering questions about church organization, which Timothy had raised with his mentor. See 1: 3, 4; 3: 14; 4: 6.
Apparently some women were unruly in the meetings. Perhaps they heckled other speakers on points of doctrine, engaging in loud arguments, possibly with Timothy himself, for he was young, and they may not have taken him seriously (1 Timothy 4: 12; ‘not . . . look down on you’). This interpretation appears to be borne out by Paul’s directions that when in church the women ought to be demure, not showy in either apparel or conduct (vs. 9, 10):
9. I also want women to dress . . . not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10. but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.
Paul’s statement in v. 12. that he does not permit in the
congregation a woman ‘to teach or to have authority over a man may be a
double lock against the ambition. To justify his argument the Apostle again
invokes the created order Adam first, Eve second. Nothing that he writes
seems to preclude rational mixed-sex discussion in the meetings. His statement
in v. 15. about the Christian woman being ‘saved through childbirth’ is obscure
and outside the scope of this article.
_____________________
God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
1 Corinthians 14: 33
THE SUFFRAGE MOVEMENT was a natural and legitimate response to the widespread suppression of female rights in Society. It was hugely successful in altering the status quo, especially in the west, rebalancing the female-male relationship, to the benefit of both sexes. The parallel subaltern status of the woman in the ecclesiastical sphere is viewed as an anachronism, a lingering injustice, a vestige of a hierarchy imposed on religious women by priggish men.
In the social arena, constitutional and parliamentary edicts either expressly denied woman’s equality or else omitted to expressly declare them. Within the Church, the constitutional barrier is the Bible. To bypass its traditional interpretations on the subject, its edicts must either be redefined by reinterpreting biblical texts in light of modern culture, or by denying their veracity an increasingly popular approach. Those aspects of the Word of God which especially address behaviour or notions of the Self, are thus regarded as flexible, and may be bent to fit the changed times or disposed of.
Re-interpretation of biblical texts has a long and honourable history and is necessary in peeling back layers of hidden meanings. But revisionism is often spurred by the changing mores of the world in which we live, rather than by a finely-honed analysis of theology. Of what value is membership or leadership in any church that is not ruled at its core by biblical principles?
Perhaps God forgot to address the matter of female apostles, prophets, teachers and bishops? Or maybe the Apostles themselves denounced, persecuted and killed for their perceived radical beliefs were not sufficiently radical to discard their male prejudice, despite having the power to ‘bind and loose’ (Matthew 18: 18)? And if a vision from heaven could remove the Apostle Peter’s inbred dislike of Gentiles, could not God have made a similar pronouncement in favour of the equal leadership qualities of church women? And what of Jesus? Was He, too, reluctant to endorse the leadership of women too timid to express Himself on the topic?
The
assertion that a woman should not occupy the pulpit in a teaching or pastoral
position does not mean that she cannot engage in the work of an evangelist, a
Sunday School instructor, a Bible class leader, or in numerous other aspects of
Christian service too many to catalogue. The essential worth and dignity and
relative merit of either the male or female gender is not the issue in the
biblical texts we have examined. In Society both man and woman are generally
equal and competitive, their roles often interchangeable. But once inside the
Christian congregation the role that each sex takes on is governed by biblical
mandate. It is not a place in which to compete or experiment with equal
opportunities. The Church ought not to be another battleground on which the
ongoing war for feminist rights is fought.
The End
________________
NOTES
[fn1] Angels: Commentators divide over this. Some maintain that spirit beings, as attendants at the creation and guardians of the Church are present at Christian meetings, as witnesses and inquirers into religious questions, and that deference is due them. That only the women should make a display of humility by veiling their heads casts doubt on this assertion, for both men and women were made a ‘little lower than the angels’ (Hebrews 2: 7; compare Psalm 8: 5 – ‘heavenly beings’). That the angels are keen observers of humanity is shown in 1 Corinthians 4: 9; 1 Peter 1: 10-12; and they are ‘ministering spirits’ (Hebrews 1: 14).
In his commentary, on 1 Corinthians 11: 10, Adam Clarke observes that, ‘There are few portions in the sacred writings that have given rise to such a variety of conjectures and explanations, and are less understood, than this verse’. He notes that the translators of the King James (Authorised) Version ‘were puzzled with it; and have inserted here one of the largest marginal readings found any where in their work; but this is only on the words power on her head . . .’.
In his paraphrase of the New Testament (2003), Eugene H. Peterson renders v. 3, ‘Don’t you agree there is something naturally powerful in the symbolism a woman, her beautiful hair reminiscent of angels . . . ?’
In
Roman Wives, Roman Widows (Eerdmans; 2003, p.
89), Bruce W. Winter concludes that the angels are (human) spies,
messengers who infiltrate the congregation and as talebearers carry away
uncomplimentary reports about the sect to the authorities. See 1
Corinthians 14: 23 (‘unbelievers come in . . . say that you are out of your
mind . . .’); compare with Galatians 2: 4 (‘false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus . ..’).
*
* * * *
[fn2] Paul’s rulings: Some commentators construe the Apostle’s words in v. 16 to mean the opposite; that is, ‘if you don’t agree with what I say, that’s your choice’. But such an interpretation adds insufficient weight to the fact that Paul felt obliged to address the question in the first place. Indeed, this entire epistle to the Corinthians covers pressing matters of doctrine and conduct, from sectarianism to marriage to the gifts of the spirit, all of them essential not only to good order but also to sound theology. To insist that Paul’s exhortations on the matter of the veil are prejudicial, temporary, or open to dispute, is to undermine the force of his apostolic injunctions on this and other matters throughout the epistle. If a matter was optional, the Apostle would make the fact clear to his readers. See 1 Corinthians 7: 6 (‘I say this as a concession, not as a command.’), 12 (‘. . . I say this (I, not the Lord) . . .’), 25 (‘I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment . . .’). When he was writing under inspiration, he said so. See 1 Corinthians 7: 10 (‘ . . . I give this command (not I, but the Lord)’). And in 1 Corinthians 14: 37, in another context, Paul exhorts the brethren to ‘acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command’.
* * * * *
[fn3] Apostles: In Romans 16: 7, Paul sends felicitations to ‘Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was’. It is reasonable to assume that Andronicus and Junias were husband and wife. Like the husband-wife team of Aquilla and Priscilla, cited in v. 3, they were active in evangelical missionary work to a degree that brought them fame among the Apostles, which is why Paul mentions them. Some commentators read Romans 16: 7 to mean that Junias was an ‘extra’ apostle, and possibly a teacher in the Church. Such a claim could also be made for Priscilla, who in v. 3 is mentioned before her husband. But had Junias or Priscilla been apostles in the special meaning of the term, it would have been unnecessary for Paul to note that fact. Whatever work these couples engaged in, it did not replicate nor rival the office and work of the (Twelve) Apostles. With her husband, Junias like Priscilla was a missionary, messenger, servant (the import is similar in the Greek). That is, she was a generic apostle, one despatched to promulgate the news of the heavenly kingdom, probably converting many. Romans 16: 7 contains no robust evidence to negate Paul’s sanction against women teachers in the Church. Note that Christ is also called an Apostle (Hebrews 3: 1). And Epaphroditus is described as the messenger of the Philippian church or ‘your apostolos [apostle]’ (Philippians 2: 25).
Romans 16: 7 –
Various readings: ‘. . . well known among the apostles’ (Lamsa, 1940); ‘. . . who are among the apostles’ (Tischendorf [Tauchnite edn. of 1870]); ‘distinguished apostles’ (RSV, footnote); ‘. . . who are of note among the apostles’ (KJV).
Matthew Henry: ‘Some take [Andronicus and Junias] for a man and his wife, and the original will well enough bear it; and considering the name of the latter, that is more probable than that they should be two men, as others think, and brethren. . . . They were of note among the apostles; not so much, perhaps, because they were persons of estate and quality in the world, as because they were eminent for knowledge, and gifts, and graces, which made them famous among the apostles, who were competent judges of those things, and were endued with a spirit of discerning not only the sincerity, but the eminency, of Christians.’
Eerdmans Bible Commentary: ‘[Andronicus and Junias] were of note among the apostles, i.e., outstanding apostles themselves in the wider sense of mission-preachers . . . .’
Resources for further study
Printed Articles (oldest to latest date of publication)
Leslie W. Jones (ed.), What Pastor Russell Said (hats as head coverings; 1906) (Chicago, 1917), pp. 322, 323.
Zion’s Watch Tower, ‘Man and Woman in God’s Order’ (Allegheny; July 1893), pp. 200-207; contrasts with Zion’s Watch Tower, ‘Woman’s Rights and Wrongs’ (Allegheny; July 1906), pp. 237-243.
The New Creation (Brooklyn: International Bible Students Association; 1913), p. 272.
Commentary on 1 Cor. 11: 3, 7, 10, from ‘Hard Sayings of the Bible’ (Illinois; InterVarsity Press: 1996), pp. 599-608.
Mary Evans, ‘Bible Translation As A Non-Neutral Activity’ , The Bible In Transmission (Summer 2004), pp. 1-4.
Articles On the Web (alphabetically; various points of view)
All URLs retrieved 13 May 2013
Christians for Biblical Equality
Douglas Moo, ‘What Does It Mean Not to Teach or Have Authority Over Men (1 Timothy 2:11-15)?’
<http://bible.org/seriespage/what-does-it-mean-not-teach-or-have-authority-over-men-1-timothy 211-15>
N.T. Wright, ‘Women’s Service in the Church: The Biblical Basis’
<http://ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Women_Service_Church.htm>
_______________
Copyright May 2013 ukbiblestudents.co.uk
You are free to reproduce any or all of this article, but please let us know if you do so.