Two Ways to Approach the Women's Roles Discussion

Women's Roles Part 1

I have a 2,300 word article in my drafts on 1 Corinthians 14 and the role of women in the Christian community. It’s an expanded version of what I’ve written on and discussed before, and it is based on sound research from other authors includes James McClendon, Scot McKnight, and Lucy Peppiatt.

It’s been through my rigorous proofing process (editing while writing, reading it aloud once, and sending it to a couple of friends/ this is a joke; I could do better), but I’ve yet to publish it.

Why?

Because I just don’t know how effective my approach is.

You see, there are two ways to approach this discussion (and obviously more). These two ways represent two approaches to Scripture. The first way assumes that 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 were both written to the church at Corinth and have immediate application to us today as a universal command issued by Paul. The second way questions the assumptions of the first in that it totally accepts the authority of Paul as an apostle and the inspiration of his writings, but it rejects the automatic assumption that 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 must be a universal command.

In my tradition, the second option is rarely applied, except when talking about the rich young ruler’s call to sell everything and the supremacy of celibacy in 1 Corinthians 7 (also a joke, but kinda not), so I opted for the first option and attempted to, exegetically, demonstrate that this passage does not command any woman at any time to be silent in church because these were the words, not of Paul, but of his opponents quoted in the letter for the purpose of rebuttal (see 1 Corinthians 14:21-23 for an immediate example of this).

But as I thought about this method, which I do see as valid to an extent, I thought that it might establish a bad precedent. If we accept the assumption of option one without any question or protest, then how might that factor into discussions of other passages or ideas?

Wouldn’t it be better to write an article explaining the two approaches and then publish the article so that my protests are at least made known?

So, let me say it this way:

The letters to the Corinthians were written to a specific group of Christians dealing with particular issues within a particular context. In fact, Paul was writing to answer some questions they had (1 Corinthians 7:1). Not everything Paul wrote about in this letter, then, is universally applicable. While some of what Paul wrote was from the Lord, some of the writing was specifically not from the Lord but an opinion or recommendation of Paul.

Notice the following passage for an example:

To the married I give this command—not I but the Lord—that the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does separate, let her remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband) and that the husband should not divorce his wife. To the rest I say—I and not the Lord—that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. 1 Corinthians 7:10–12

We must use wisdom when reading the letters of the New Testament before applying everything equally to the universal church across all time.

With this in mind, one could argue that whether or not the women, or maybe specifically the wives, were allowed to ask questions in the assembly doesn’t have any bearing on whether or not a modern woman, or wife, can ask questions in modern assemblies. Or you might even say that this prohibition on Corinthian women may not place any restriction on Roman women.

However, I do think that there is a reason to conclude from the Scripture, regardless of its scope, that 1 Corinthians 14 does not prevent any woman, who presents her song, prayer, prophecy, or even her question in an orderly way from participating fully and publicly in every activity of the Christian assembly.

And with that being said, I invite you to read the second article. As a thank you to my paid subscribers, it will be open to free subscribers a week from now.