In church leadership
1 Timothy 2:8-15 | Therefore, I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or argument. Also, the women are to dress themselves in modest clothing, with decency and good sense, not with elaborate hairstyles, gold, pearls, or expensive apparel, but with good works, as is proper for women who affirm that they worship God. A woman should learn in silence with full submission. I do not allow a woman to teach or to have authority [authentein] over a man; instead, she is to be silent. For Adam was created first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and transgressed. But she will be saved through childbearing, if she continues in faith, love, and holiness, with good judgment.
Paul does not have faulty logic here; He is not deceived. His appeal to the Old Testament is not “poor exegesis”—since it is God himself who is making this connection through Paul (2Tm 3:16), and thus this passage is not for our enslavement, but for our good.
Though Paul gives directions to men that apply to both genders (prayer), and gives directions to women that apply to both genders (modest dress, with a few indicative examples), yet he also gives commands specifically to women that are not general—that are not reciprocal, since he details the female role as it interacts with the male role (v. 11); they are “not to have authority over a man.” Women are to learn in silence with full submission. This is not a command given to men. The word for silence here, hesuchia, means “quietness, stillness, tranquility, or peacefulness.” It differs from sige, which refers to speechlessness (Thus, in 1 Thessalonians 3:12, for example, hesuchia is translated, “work in quiet fashion”). Paul affirms that women are to maintain a peaceful, submissive demeanor in the presence of male leadership. (Interestingly enough, the two prohibitions for women here, teaching and authoritative leadership, are two things required of church elders that are not required of church deacons. See 1Tm 3:2,5; 5:17; Ti 1:9; Ac 20:28).
It is also argued that the word authentein means “assume or usurp authority [wrongly]” as opposed to the simple exercise of authority—thus, Paul would only be prohibiting women from taking authority for themselves. This argument presents problems, however. First, it is doubtful that this is what the word means, partly since this meaning is derived from looking at two separate parts of the Greek word (try looking at the two separate parts of ‘butterfly’ to make a conclusion as to what the word means), and also since similar Greek word usage around that time doesn’t seem to indicate that nuance. Second, even if the word were to mean that, it would be an argument from silence, since it quietly assumes that Paul was okay with women being granted authority. In actuality, with straight-faced honesty to the context, might not Paul have considered all female authority here, whether “taken” or “granted”, to be usurpation?
It is true that there was false teaching occurring at Ephesus (1Tm 1:4-6; 6:4-5), and that women were being deceived by this false teaching (1Tm 5:15; 2Tm 3:6-7). Some might argue that because of this, Paul’s prohibition only applies to the women in this particular church, since they were tainted in some way or another by false teaching. But Paul never gives this as a reason. Paul lays down this ordinance with an appeal to creation, not the current winds of culture. We find further evidence that this is not a church-specific command in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthian church:
1 Corinthians 14:33b-36 | As in all the churches of the saints, the women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, they should ask their own husbands at home, for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church meeting. Or did the word of God originate from you, or did it come to you only?
This passage speaks so strongly against an evangelical feminist view that many commentators have simply opted to call it an interpolation—or an editorial addition that was not part of the inspired text. While it is true that this section is found in different places in the original manuscripts (for example, after verse 40), this argument conveniently forgets to mention one rather potent fact: Not a single known manuscript omits this text. Every single manuscript that we have repeats Paul’s directive here to women. If there were such a manuscript with the omission, rest assured we would hear about it.
It is also argued that the text up to verse 35 is simply a quote or saying of the Corinthian church that Paul refutes in verse 36 with: “Or [or what!] did the word of God originate from you, or did it come to you only?” The first problem with this argument is that it is extremely volatile and dangerous. Might, then, anybody just argue that anything they don’t like in Paul’s letters is simply a “quote” which Paul then disproves? Regardless, the participle used for “or” here, é, does not disprove what comes before it, but simply offers another thing for the reader to consider, should they deny the first part (for example, 1 Corinthians 6:8-9: “you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers and sisters. Or [i.e., if you deny the truth of that], do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God?”).
Paul (and therefore God) is sincerely promoting this teaching. What type of silence are the women to observe? The words translated “silent” in this passage, sigato, mean “to keep silent, to hold one’s peace.” Additionally, we read that the women “are not permitted to speak.” How are the women to hold their peace? Is all “audible participation” (for lack of a better term) prohibited?
Probably not. It seems likely that instead there are specific things, or areas in which women are not to speak. Attempting to let Scripture interpret itself, we read in 1 Corinthians 11:5 that not all “audible participation” is prohibited for women; rather prophesy and prayer are valid options. Another helpful verse in which sigato is used is verse 28: “But if there is no interpreter, that person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God.” Here, the prophet is also told to keep silent and not to speak, but one could hardly suggest that he was never to make verbal noise in church (singing, praying, etc.), since in verse 27, speaking was a viable option for him. Rather, we understand that he was to keep silent about that particular thing of which he was going to speak; he was to keep silent in a particular area.
And this is the question we ask of women as well: In what area are they not to speak? What types of speech are prohibited?
First, in verse 34, Paul directly contrasts “they are not permitted to speak” with “but should be submissive”, indicating that women are not to speak in a manner that jeopardizes their own submission; i.e., by speaking in the authoritative arena. Secondly, in verse 35, they are not to speak with the raising of objections or questions, but rather to learn with a spirit of stillness. This affirms 1 Timothy 2:11: “A woman should learn in silence with full submission.” In opposition to much feminist scholarship, Paul does not promote male headship out of a belief that women are unintelligent or uneducated; rather he affirms the intelligence and learning ability of women, but along with that, holds that the women are to learn in a manner becoming to them—in a manner that graces them, not disgraces them.
In familial leadership
Perhaps the clearest, most eloquent text on male-leadership in the home is found in Paul’s letter to the church at Ephesus:
Ephesians 5:21-33 | Submit [hypotasso] to one another in the fear of Christ. Wives, submit [hypotasso] to your own husbands as to the Lord, for the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church. He is the Savior of the body. Now as the church submits to Christ, so wives are to submit to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her to make her holy, cleansing her with the washing of water by the word. He did this to present the church to Himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or anything like that, but holy and blameless. In the same way, husbands are to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hates his own flesh but provides and cares for it, just as Christ does for the church, since we are members of His body. “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” This mystery is profound, but I am talking about Christ and the church. To sum up, each one of you is to love his wife as himself, and the wife is to respect her husband.
Paul’s general command of submission among the body of Christ (cf. Php 2:3-4) does not negate the unique command he gives to women. In a similar fashion, Paul commands young men to be subject to elders: “In the same way, you younger men, be subject to the elders. And all of you clothe yourselves with humility toward one another” (1Pt 5:5). We understand that young men are to be subject to the elders in a way in which the elders do not reciprocate, even though all are to act humbly toward one another.
Likewise, wives are to submit to their husbands in a way that husbands do not reciprocate. Of the word hypotasso, Wayne Grudem says: “the term ... always implies a relationship of submission to an authority. It is used elsewhere in the New Testament of the submission of Jesus to the authority of His parents (Luke 2:51); of demons being subject to the disciples (Luke 10:17-clearly the meaning “act in love, be considerate” cannot fit here); of citizens being subject to governing authorities (Romans 13:1, 5; Titus 3:1; 1 Peter 2:13); of the universe being subject to Christ (1 Corinthians 15:27; Ephesians 1:22); of unseen spiritual powers being subject to Christ (1 Peter 3:22); of Christ being subject to God the Father (1 Corinthians 15:28); of church members being subject to church leaders (1 Corinthians 16:15-16 [with 1 Clement 42:4]; 1 Peter 5:5); of wives being subject to their husbands (Colossians 3:18; Titus 2:5; 1 Peter 3:5; cf. Ephesians 5:22-24); of the church being subject to Christ (Ephesians 5:24); of servants being subject to their masters (Titus 2:9; 1 Peter 2:18); and of Christians being subject to God (Hebrews 12:9; James 4:7). Note that none of these relationships is ever reversed; that is, husbands are never told to be subject to wives, nor government to citizens, masters to servants, disciples to demons, etc. In fact, the term is used outside the New Testament to describe the submission and obedience of soldiers in an army to those of superior rank” (emphasis mine).
Wives are commanded to “submit themselves.” Men are not called to make women submit. We were not created for that. We were created to love women and to lead them to spiritual holiness. Again, the analogy between the relationship of a husband and wife and that of Christ and the church is undeniable; and again, this analogy displays that the commandments Paul is laying out here are not just cultural compromises but universal principles based on divine relationship structures. Christ is clearly in authority over the church, and Christ just as clearly loves the church with His whole being, since He “gave Himself for her to make her holy.”
Again, true biblical headship does not give men a free, easy pass. Paul spends more time commanding the men to love than he does the women to submit! In sum, Paul identifies the unique facets of the marriage relationship: The man is to sacrificially love his wife as Christ loved the church, and the woman is to respectfully submit to her husband as the church respects Christ. This summation Paul affirms in Colossians:
Colossians 3:18-19 | Wives, be submissive to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives and don’t be bitter toward them.
Paul was not the only apostle who affirmed the holiness of female submission and male leadership:
1 Peter 3:1-7 | In the same way, wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, even if some disobey the Christian message, they may be won over without a message by the way their wives live when they observe your pure, reverent lives. Your beauty should not consist of outward things like elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold ornaments or fine clothes. Instead, it should consist of what is inside the heart with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very valuable in God’s eyes. For in the past, the holy women who put their hope in God also beautified themselves in this way, submitting to their own husbands, just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. You have become her children when you do what is good and are not frightened by anything alarming. Husbands, in the same way, live with your wives with an understanding of their weaker nature yet showing them honor as coheirs of the grace of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered.
In verse 1, Peter says “in the same way.” In the same way as what? In verses 13-14 of the previous chapter, we are told “Submit to every human authority because of the Lord, whether to the Emperor as the supreme authority or to governors as those sent out by him to punish those who do what is evil and to praise those who do what is good,” and in verses 18-19: “Household slaves, submit with all fear to your masters, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel. For it brings favor if, mindful of God’s will, someone endures grief from suffering unjustly.” The question is raised: If the church does not tell slaves to submit to their masters today, why should we tell wives to submit to their husbands today? But this negates the broader context of the issue: Paul and the other writers of the New Testament didn’t assume that the institution of slavery was good, but only gave instructions to individuals on how to act in and among the institution of slavery.
Paul and the other New Testament writers, however, do assume that the institution of marriage is very good. In fact, it has its roots in creation, while slavery does not. It is instructive to note that the word used for “in the same way,” or “likewise,” is not kathos, which means “just, or exactly as”, but homoiós, which means “in a similar manner.” Paul, after giving instruction on individual submission in one institution—that of slavery—then starts in on a related (in some aspects but very different in others) matter: submission in marriage.
Far from only being applicable in the New Testament era, this passage answers many questions pertinent in today’s world about male headship:
- Is male-headship just a guise to force all women to have to obey anything any man says? No, wives are to submit “to your own husbands.”
- Is female submission in marriage based on a belief that men are spiritually superior to women? No, wives are to submit, “even if some disobey the Christian message.”
- Isn’t telling women to live in a quiet manner shutting off their opportunity to be a witness? No, rather, speech is not always to most effective way to evangelize: “they may be won over without a message by the way their wives live when they observe your pure, reverent lives.”
- Doesn’t submission make women ugly and undesirable? No. In our culture today, most female beauty “consists of outward things like elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold ornaments or fine clothes.” But this beauty is false. True beauty “consists of what is inside the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very valuable in God’s eyes.” The example of Sarah is very pertinent—Peter knew what he was doing when he picked her as an example: Sarah evidently had physical beauty, to say the least, attracting the eye of a king (Gn 20:2) and arousing Abraham’s fear multiple times that he would be killed by men who desired her. Yet it is revealing that Peter does not refer to this beauty. Rather, he says that her beauty came from her submissive spirit—from the way she submitted to her husband.
- Doesn’t submission make women wimps? No, rather “you have become her children when you do what is good and are not frightened by anything alarming.”
Again, male-headship requires men to act honorably as well. Husbands are to “live with your wives with an understanding of their weaker nature.” The woman’s weaker nature is evident in that they are placed in a disadvantageous position: The husband can more easily domineer the wife than the wife can domineer the husband—first, because she is often physically weaker than he is, and secondly, because his position of authority can be more easily abused towards domineering than hers can.
Additionlly, Paul makes sure to mention that even though women have a functional role difference with men, yet they are ontologically equal with men—they are “coheirs of the grace of life” (7). The parallels between this verse and Galatians 3:28-29 are strong:
Galatians 3:28-29 | There is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, heirs according to the promise.
When it comes to ontological worth and equality, neither gender is more than the other. Just because the husband has a position of real authority over his wife does not mean that he can treat her as a lesser Christian—as somehow less in God’s eyes. Rather, he must show her honor as a joint heir of salvation. The door to salvation is open to her just as it is open to him. In fact, you don’t have to be Jew, you don’t have to be Greek, you don’t have to be male, you don’t have to be female, you don’t have to be a slave, and you don’t have to be free. All receive salvation as joint heirs equally.
0 comments:
Post a Comment