DOES SCRIPTURE FORBID A WOMAN FROM TEACHING OR RULING A CHURCH CONGREGATION?
By Ezekiel Kimosop
INTRODUCTION
Before the turn of the 19th Century this question was perhaps not even contemplated in the Christian traditions because churches across all denominations were unquestioningly led by men at the time. Today the ecclesial topologies have radically changed so that even among orthodox or conservative churches such as Anglicans and Presbyterians, women have been ordained as church ministers.
Some Evangelical traditions have been cautious on female ordination while others have flatly rejected the clamor for reforms to this end. I am aware that the issue of female ordination or church rule is quite divisive. I intend to approach my answer to the above question purely on what I can discern from my study of the Scriptures.
I seek to champion a healthy and balanced conversation on this matter. I will
therefore leave it to the conscience of the reader to chose what they perceive as resonating with their discernment of truth from their study of Scripture. I wish to further post a caveat that it is not my intention to discriminate any gender in my evaluation of this question. I simply seek to exposit the word of God on this issue.
BIBLICAL ANALYSIS
Let us begin by examining the passage that holds the crux of the debate.
1Timothy 2:12 states (NKJV) "And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence." The NAB translation is similar to the NKJV but concludes with an emphatic "....she must be quiet." The Young Literal Translation which is one of the most literal translations contextualizes the teaching to a marriage setting, saying "and a woman I do not suffer [permit] to teach or to rule a husband, but to be in quietness."
My view is that there are two objective grounds that appear to govern the interpretation of this scripture. It is either that Scripture does not permit women believers to teach or rule church congregations or that married women should not teach or rule if their husbands are present with them in the congregation.
Some consider the latter position as a basis for excluding single or widowed women from the restriction.
One cardinal rule of Scripture interpretation is to examine the context of the Scripture passage in which the text is identified. Our passage of context lies in 1Timothy 2:1-15 where Paul was giving instructions regarding order in worship. A brief survey through this passage would therefore be appropriate.
Paul first addressed the basis for prayer (1Tim 2:1-5) saying that prayer was required for all men generally and specifically for those in authority (1Tim 2:2). He then marks out the centrality of Christ as the mediator [High Priest] between man and God. The ultimate purpose of prayer is to connect or reconcile sinful man to a holy God (1 Tim. 2:5-6). Paul identifies that this mediation resonates with his calling as an apostle to the Gentiles (1 Tim. 2:7). Notice the several offices that Paul occupied as preacher, apostle and teacher.
One may perhaps consider the opening statement as Paul's justification for the "controversial" teaching that he was about to make while another may view it as a defense of his apostolic authority that some had doubted or questioned. Both persuasions are valid.
The mention of two heretics in the concluding passage of 1 Tim. 1:19-20 is perhaps instructive. It appears that Hymenaeus and Alexander taught that the resurrection of believers had already taken place (2 Tim. 2:17). Alexander [if he was the same man mentioned in both scriptures] had resisted Paul's ministry on another occasion (2 Tim. 4:14). Both were excommunicated by Paul.
My view is that there are two objective grounds that appear to govern the interpretation of this scripture. It is either that Scripture does not permit women believers to teach or rule church congregations or that married women should not teach or rule if their husbands are present with them in the congregation.
Some consider the latter position as a basis for excluding single or widowed women from the restriction.
One cardinal rule of Scripture interpretation is to examine the context of the Scripture passage in which the text is identified. Our passage of context lies in 1Timothy 2:1-15 where Paul was giving instructions regarding order in worship. A brief survey through this passage would therefore be appropriate.
Paul first addressed the basis for prayer (1Tim 2:1-5) saying that prayer was required for all men generally and specifically for those in authority (1Tim 2:2). He then marks out the centrality of Christ as the mediator [High Priest] between man and God. The ultimate purpose of prayer is to connect or reconcile sinful man to a holy God (1 Tim. 2:5-6). Paul identifies that this mediation resonates with his calling as an apostle to the Gentiles (1 Tim. 2:7). Notice the several offices that Paul occupied as preacher, apostle and teacher.
One may perhaps consider the opening statement as Paul's justification for the "controversial" teaching that he was about to make while another may view it as a defense of his apostolic authority that some had doubted or questioned. Both persuasions are valid.
The mention of two heretics in the concluding passage of 1 Tim. 1:19-20 is perhaps instructive. It appears that Hymenaeus and Alexander taught that the resurrection of believers had already taken place (2 Tim. 2:17). Alexander [if he was the same man mentioned in both scriptures] had resisted Paul's ministry on another occasion (2 Tim. 4:14). Both were excommunicated by Paul.
1 Timothy 2:12 therefore lies at the heart of Paul's doctrine on the role of women in a Christian congregation gathering.
Now back to our passage of context.
The next part of the Scripture passage provides specific guidelines on worship in the New Testament church (1Tim. 2:8-12). This is consistent with Paul's various instructions on the appointment of church leaders which he later outlines in greater detail (1Tim 3:1-13).
By raising holy hands, men are to worship God with purity of hearts and in faith (1Tim 2:9). The word "everywhere" suggests that all congregations in Ephesus or all churches in Paul's apostolic oversight were contemplated. There is little doubt that this context applied to all New Testament churches. This is perhaps a hint to the universality of the application of the teachings of this passage.
The next address is directed to women. This teaching concludes the passage (1Tim 2:9-12). Women are instructed on modest or seemly dressing (1Tim 2:9-10). The negations are spelt out in detail. Bible scholars say that temple prostitutes dedicated to the worship of goddess Diana (Greek Artemis) in Ephesus dressed expensively to attract men and there was fear that Christian women should would be sending confusing signals to men if they adopted the pattern.
This "dress-code" instructions have been cited by some in support of local application of the teaching. It would perhaps be too soon to draw a conclusion at this stage.
The second instruction to women is perhaps the most controversial of all Paul's teachings (1Tim 2:11-12). Paul instructs that the believing woman should learn in silence or quietness and with all subjection or obedience. No distinction is drawn on the status of the woman at this point. However, a cross reference to the Corinthian instructions reveals that married women were contemplated in both contexts.
The next verse carries the famous prohibition on women from teaching or ruling a man but to be in quietness. Some have tried to circumvent this text by arguing that only Christian husbands were intended and that not all male believers were contemplated in this context. They cite 1Peter 3:1-7 as evidence of the marriage context.
My view is that it matters little whether we translate the Greek word "aner" as a man or husband. The context of this address clearly reveals that both sets of believers are in view in either case.
LOCAL VERSUS UNIVERSAL APPLICATION
This scripture passage raises fundamental questions. Did Paul intend a local or universal application for his teaching?
Now back to our passage of context.
The next part of the Scripture passage provides specific guidelines on worship in the New Testament church (1Tim. 2:8-12). This is consistent with Paul's various instructions on the appointment of church leaders which he later outlines in greater detail (1Tim 3:1-13).
By raising holy hands, men are to worship God with purity of hearts and in faith (1Tim 2:9). The word "everywhere" suggests that all congregations in Ephesus or all churches in Paul's apostolic oversight were contemplated. There is little doubt that this context applied to all New Testament churches. This is perhaps a hint to the universality of the application of the teachings of this passage.
The next address is directed to women. This teaching concludes the passage (1Tim 2:9-12). Women are instructed on modest or seemly dressing (1Tim 2:9-10). The negations are spelt out in detail. Bible scholars say that temple prostitutes dedicated to the worship of goddess Diana (Greek Artemis) in Ephesus dressed expensively to attract men and there was fear that Christian women should would be sending confusing signals to men if they adopted the pattern.
This "dress-code" instructions have been cited by some in support of local application of the teaching. It would perhaps be too soon to draw a conclusion at this stage.
The second instruction to women is perhaps the most controversial of all Paul's teachings (1Tim 2:11-12). Paul instructs that the believing woman should learn in silence or quietness and with all subjection or obedience. No distinction is drawn on the status of the woman at this point. However, a cross reference to the Corinthian instructions reveals that married women were contemplated in both contexts.
The next verse carries the famous prohibition on women from teaching or ruling a man but to be in quietness. Some have tried to circumvent this text by arguing that only Christian husbands were intended and that not all male believers were contemplated in this context. They cite 1Peter 3:1-7 as evidence of the marriage context.
My view is that it matters little whether we translate the Greek word "aner" as a man or husband. The context of this address clearly reveals that both sets of believers are in view in either case.
LOCAL VERSUS UNIVERSAL APPLICATION
This scripture passage raises fundamental questions. Did Paul intend a local or universal application for his teaching?
Those who argue that a local context was intended say that Paul was simply dealing with a "disorder" problem in Ephesus and did not intend that the restrictions apply to all churches in all ages. They further argue that the Ephesus problem was similar in some respects to the "disorder" in Corinth. 1Cor. 14:34 says, "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." (KJV)
There are three complications arising from the above text when read together with 1Corinthians11:1-16.
First, Paul appeals to the law, indicating that the instruction was divinely binding on the church. The man is head over the woman in the same way that Christ is head over the church (1Corinthians 11:3). This is express biblical truth.
The second issue arises from Paul's reference to the creation order in 1Corinthians 11:8-9. Notice that this is the same teaching by which Paul concluded our passage of context of 1Timothy 2:13 saying "For Adam was formed then Eve" when Paul speaks of creation order, the argument in favor of local application is further weakened! Paul goes a step further to appeal to the order of the fall of man saying "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in transgression" (1Timothy 2:14). This is a second blow to local application view. The ramifications of the fall of Adam and Eve universal in scope.
The third and final issue raised by Paul is found in 1Corinthians 11:16 where he argues that it was a universal custom in all churches that women are to be subject to male authority. The teaching on covering the hair was simply a confirmation of God's order of rule. It is further evident in 1Timothy 3:1-13 that women were excluded from church leadership. This was also amplified in Titus 1:6-9.
Why was Paul drawing an exclusive rule on male authority? Was he being true to God's divine order or was he prejudicial to women as some claim?
CONCLUSION
So how do we conclude on this question? Does the Bible forbid women to teach and rule a church congregation?
From our analysis of Scripture, we can address our question as follows:
1) Should women ever rule the church?
My view is that a church congregation ought to be ruled by spiritually mature male believers. Novices or recent converts are not permitted to exercise spiritual authority in the church (1Timothy 3:6). However, if no mature male believers are available, or those present are unwilling to lead, my view is that gifted mature women may hold brief until such a time that the incapacity is rectified. They should disciple men and equip them to lead. This is a noble cause.
This is of course an extremely rare situation to arise today.
Some have describe the approach as the Deborah principle because Deborah, the only female judge and prophetess, was compelled to step into battle when Barak was reluctant to lead Israel to battle without Deborah accompanying him (Judges 4:8-9).
2) Should women ever speak or preach in church?
My view is that since women can prophesy in the same way that men do, there is nothing that prevents a woman from speaking in a church congregation or even exercising her spiritual gifts provided that she does not rule the congregation. This interpretation has been accepted by some Evangelical traditions as a compromise by which women can serve in churches without violating 1 Timothy 1:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9 and other relevant passages of Scripture.
I am further persuaded that gifted women should serve in the church provided that they are under male spiritual authority and have the permission of the church elders. My view is that this caveat should attach to the appointment of women into the pastorate. In this way, a female pastors will be functioning Biblically without violating the teaching of Scripture. I am aware that some conservative Evangelical traditions will sharply disagree with this position.
3) Should women be ordained as overseers or bishops of a church congregation or communion?
While each denomination has its set of regulations by which they run their churches, my view is that ordaining a woman as bishop or overseer would be unbiblical. This appears to violate several passages of Scripture (cf. 1Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 5:23; 1Timothy 2:12-14: Titus 1:6-9).
4) Can a woman serve as a church elder?
The Bible expressly disqualifies a Christian woman from serving as church elders (Titus 1:6-7; 1Timothy 3:1-13). Some churches consider the wives of elders as deaconesses because they minister to elders. Such a discretion appears to violate the restriction outlined in 1 Timothy 3:8-13.
Shalom
© Ezekiel Kimosop 2018
There are three complications arising from the above text when read together with 1Corinthians11:1-16.
First, Paul appeals to the law, indicating that the instruction was divinely binding on the church. The man is head over the woman in the same way that Christ is head over the church (1Corinthians 11:3). This is express biblical truth.
The second issue arises from Paul's reference to the creation order in 1Corinthians 11:8-9. Notice that this is the same teaching by which Paul concluded our passage of context of 1Timothy 2:13 saying "For Adam was formed then Eve" when Paul speaks of creation order, the argument in favor of local application is further weakened! Paul goes a step further to appeal to the order of the fall of man saying "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in transgression" (1Timothy 2:14). This is a second blow to local application view. The ramifications of the fall of Adam and Eve universal in scope.
The third and final issue raised by Paul is found in 1Corinthians 11:16 where he argues that it was a universal custom in all churches that women are to be subject to male authority. The teaching on covering the hair was simply a confirmation of God's order of rule. It is further evident in 1Timothy 3:1-13 that women were excluded from church leadership. This was also amplified in Titus 1:6-9.
Why was Paul drawing an exclusive rule on male authority? Was he being true to God's divine order or was he prejudicial to women as some claim?
CONCLUSION
So how do we conclude on this question? Does the Bible forbid women to teach and rule a church congregation?
From our analysis of Scripture, we can address our question as follows:
1) Should women ever rule the church?
My view is that a church congregation ought to be ruled by spiritually mature male believers. Novices or recent converts are not permitted to exercise spiritual authority in the church (1Timothy 3:6). However, if no mature male believers are available, or those present are unwilling to lead, my view is that gifted mature women may hold brief until such a time that the incapacity is rectified. They should disciple men and equip them to lead. This is a noble cause.
This is of course an extremely rare situation to arise today.
Some have describe the approach as the Deborah principle because Deborah, the only female judge and prophetess, was compelled to step into battle when Barak was reluctant to lead Israel to battle without Deborah accompanying him (Judges 4:8-9).
2) Should women ever speak or preach in church?
My view is that since women can prophesy in the same way that men do, there is nothing that prevents a woman from speaking in a church congregation or even exercising her spiritual gifts provided that she does not rule the congregation. This interpretation has been accepted by some Evangelical traditions as a compromise by which women can serve in churches without violating 1 Timothy 1:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9 and other relevant passages of Scripture.
I am further persuaded that gifted women should serve in the church provided that they are under male spiritual authority and have the permission of the church elders. My view is that this caveat should attach to the appointment of women into the pastorate. In this way, a female pastors will be functioning Biblically without violating the teaching of Scripture. I am aware that some conservative Evangelical traditions will sharply disagree with this position.
3) Should women be ordained as overseers or bishops of a church congregation or communion?
While each denomination has its set of regulations by which they run their churches, my view is that ordaining a woman as bishop or overseer would be unbiblical. This appears to violate several passages of Scripture (cf. 1Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 5:23; 1Timothy 2:12-14: Titus 1:6-9).
4) Can a woman serve as a church elder?
The Bible expressly disqualifies a Christian woman from serving as church elders (Titus 1:6-7; 1Timothy 3:1-13). Some churches consider the wives of elders as deaconesses because they minister to elders. Such a discretion appears to violate the restriction outlined in 1 Timothy 3:8-13.
Shalom
© Ezekiel Kimosop 2018
