This is justified among other things with a statement of Paul to Timothy, when Paul writes: “A woman learns in silence in all subordination. On the other hand, I do not allow a woman to teach”. Because of such texts, women are barred from church leadership, and as pastors, women are not even allowed to appear. The idea behind this is: God wants to distribute spiritual leadership tasks to men only. The view is unfortunately still widespread. Seen from today’s perspective, this is exceedingly strange. What did Paul mean? What are we to do with such a text? It’s in the Bible, isn’t it?

It is about an ideology

The idea that women are not allowed to do everything in the community is so out of step with our times. For some believers, however, this is precisely the proof that their own interpretation of the Bible is correct. Because: Zeitgeist is evil, Bible is good. Of course, this is somewhat exaggerated, but this is a point that deserves closer consideration. The assumptions of the interpretation play a big role in the assessment. So let’s talk in this post about both the assumptions (and ideologies behind them) and the corresponding biblical texts.

In communities that think this way, women in the church are not allowed to teach, preach, hold public office, or be part of a church leadership. In contrast, women should “submit” and stay quietly at home. The understanding can still be quickly applied to marriage with a reference to Ephesians 5:22 (leaving the verse out a bit beforehand). This is about a Christian self-understanding, about a certain Christian culture, in which this is seen as such.

This view is an interpretation. The Bible speaks of something else. More about that in a moment. First, however, a brief word about the impact on communities that think this way.

Male-dominated societies

Many communities are dominated by men. This does not refer to the church members, but to the church leadership. The pastor is supposed to be a man. Not only that, he is usually expected to be married, have children, and have everything in order. That, he said, is his mission and that is reflected in the community.

There are not a few Christian communities where people think in such kitschy terms. It is a certain understanding and a distinct subculture. Not infrequently, this is encouraged by a dubious piety, wherein even women advocate “submissiveness.” Nothing could be said against that, were it not for the fact that men and women both have to think this way for subcultures like this to exist.

In the national churches, “women in office” have long been a matter of course. Long ago? No, not really. There are right new changes in our society. In many regional churches, these questions have been dealt with intensively for some time. Upheaval does not happen everywhere at the same time. While such processes have been going on for some time in traditional churches (depending on denomination and country), primarily in free churches and some other groups one still finds church leadership as a “male domain”.

Gradually, however, a change in thinking is taking place. This can take decades. There are changes in society, in politics and also in the church. For example, it took a long time for women’s suffrage to be introduced everywhere in Switzerland. This did not happen in Switzerland for the canton of Appenzell-Ausserrhoden by Landsgemeinde resolution until 1989, and for Appenzell-Innerrhoden until a superordinate federal resolution at the end of 1990). Such developments are processes. Changes take time. Achievements in our society are often not as old as one would think. While good achievements are quickly accepted and soon perceived as “normal”. However, such changes are never a matter of course. There was a struggle for it.

Ideas about women in office today are not universal. A teacher in the school is fine. In contrast, a woman teacher is often not wanted in a free community. That’s a discrepancy. It is justified with “spirituality”. For spiritual training, men are needed, because “women are not allowed to do that according to the Bible.”

But it is far from being just about the position of women. Hand in hand with these ideas, other ideas appear: A pastor may not be divorced, or whoever is divorced may no longer fulfill a task in the congregation. Countless other issues are tolerated “here” and vehemently rejected “there” as a result of community expectations, pressures and specifications. Thus, ideologies become guardrails for the community. It is not healthy. I mention this here because it is not just about the interpretation of some biblical passages, but about a hodgepodge of ideas for which biblical texts are used as justification. This paper is about women in leadership positions in the Christian community, but the subject matter and issues are to be understood much more broadly.

Once you let go of this male-dominated and one-sided view, the community can heal. Mixed teams work better in my experience. Why would anyone want to do without it?

Man and woman are equal in the community

I have been in circles over and over again where the “subordination of women” was taught, even though Paul clearly states, ” submitting yourselves to one another in the fear of Christ” (Eph. 5:21).

Before God, man and woman are absolutely equal. Paul wrote:

“For all of you who have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
Gal 3:27-28

This was a mind-blowing message in Paul’s day. The point was namely that there were just very big differences between Jews and Greeks, between slaves and free, male and female. His message was radical at the time. In the community, the differences should just no longer apply. Christ changed all that.

Of course, this is also understood where today they teach the subordination of women and want to reintroduce differences. Therefore, an artifice is used: Paul is supposed to have said this only to those “in Christ”, which would be equivalent to a spiritual position. So before God we would be equal (a “spiritual reality”), but in everyday practice (“in the Lord”) there would be great differences between men and women, especially with regard to church order.

Of course, this is not true. If this reasoning were true, the same reasoning would have to be applied in context to slaves and freemen, as well as to Jews and Greeks. Suddenly, equality should be revoked for these groups in the community? Don’t! Of course, there were such differences in the world of that time, but this is not everyday life in the community. Especially in the community, such differences should no longer apply.

Now to the actual texts, which thus seem to be transverse to the previous ones.

The background for Paul’s statement

“A woman learns in silence in all subordination. On the other hand, I do not allow a woman to teach, nor to treat the man in a self-important way, but to restrain herself in silence. For Adam was formed first, and then Eve.”
1Tim 2:11-13

Some read here that (because of the reference after Adam and Eve) it is a kind of “creation order” that is supposed to apply to people in general. The search is then on for reasons as to why and where this is expressed. However, I think that this is not Paul’s statement.

To the letter

This is a personal letter to Timothy. It is not a church letter with church teaching, but a letter in which Paul wants to support Timothy in his situation. We may keep this in mind because it is not a typical teaching letter.

To the receiver

Timothy was on friendly terms with Paul, and Paul called him “my true child in the faith” (1 Tim. 1:2; 1 Cor. 4:17). Timothy was still quite young: “Let no one despise your youth, but become an example to the believers in word, in conduct, in love, in faith, in uprightness” (1 Tim. 4:12). Paul, on the other hand, was much older. He writes to Timothy from his experience and responds to challenges Timothy faced. Timothy was a co-worker of Paul (Rom 16:21). He preached like Paul (2 Cor. 1:19) and was also a “slave of Christ Jesus” (Phil. 1:1). He had already been appointed to the church in Thessalonica (today’s Thessalonica) (1Th 3:2; 1Th 3:6). Specifically, however, Timothy was asked by Paul to stay in Ephesus (1Tim 1:3). This is what Paul writes in the first verses of the letter, where a little later it is written that women should learn “in silence”. Ephesus is Timothy’s environment when Paul writes to him. We should hold on to that.

About the situation

Paul knew Ephesus. He was there himself for a long time, working in Ephesus and always sending co-workers there. The apostle was familiar with the situation in Ephesus and could therefore answer Timothy precisely. We ourselves are not familiar with the situation at that time, which is not surprising after 2000 years. However, in order for us to understand this personal letter and the statements in it, we need to get a picture of this situation. Every letter has a background that is not described in detail in the letter, but is assumed to be known by the recipient. We need to reconstruct this background as best we can if we want to correctly classify the meaning and scope of the statements. Otherwise, we provoke short-circuits when we infer from our time to the situation at that time.

Timothy was sent to Ephesus by Paul. According to tradition, he also became a bishop there and fulfilled an important task in the community. Timothy is even said to have died a martyr’s death in Ephesus. He is therefore also called “Timothy of Ephesus” for these various reasons.

Timothy in Ephesus

Ephesus was a city dominated by religion. Here stood the temple of the Greek goddess Artemis (Acts 19:24-35). This shaped the city and society. In this environment Timothy fulfilled his task.

The temple in Ephesus was dedicated to a goddess and the women in Ephesus had a special status. While religion was almost everywhere a matter for men, this looked different in Ephesus. In Ephesus, women set the tone. There was a religiously based matriarchy, not a patriarchy. This was an extraordinary situation. Of course, this had an effect on the attitude of the people in Ephesus and therefore also on the reactions within the church there.

This could be the background for Paul’s instructions. The apostle is concerned in all churches that all are equal in Christ. Men and women are equal and each person fulfills a unique task of their own in the church as God’s Spirit assigns it. Such spiritual gifts are not assigned to men only, but to church members in general. This can be read in 1 Corinthians (1Cor 12 and 1Cor 14). There is no reason that women should not teach in the church or take on leadership roles.

Ephesus, however, was a special case. Ephesus had a very particular and extraordinary character. This was thanks to the local cult. Women could afford to do things in Ephesus that would be unthinkable elsewhere. Apparently there were women who stood out unpleasantly and did not behave decently in the community. This is the grievance that Paul addresses. If this background is correct, then a very different context emerges than advocates for the “subordination of women” indicate. Paul corrects the inequality so that all are equal again. For this, the women of Ephesus should take a back seat, as would suit many a man today. Paul’s point is not to introduce inequality, but to restore equality. The situation in Ephesus is well known and there are many texts about it on the internet.

To me the view for this background seems plausible, because on the one hand it can be classified from the career of Timothy, and on the other hand the references in Paul’s letter make sense in such a context. If one thinks of the letters to the Corinthians or Galatians, for example, there are no such references there – because the respective situation was different than in Ephesus. There is much to suggest that Paul was emphasizing some things specifically for the church at Ephesus. However, it makes no sense that women – contrary to the equality of men and women – would not be equal. Check again the spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 and discover that all the tasks are mentioned without gender-specific assignment.

So if you want to downgrade a woman, as still happens in some groups, you have to justify it with a text like this one from First Timothy. Otherwise it does not work. Here, however, it can be shown that Paul was not concerned with an inequality, but precisely with an equalization of man and woman, with a practically lived equality in the congregation – in clear contrast to the spirit of the times. So one can only take note in astonishment that today the spirit of the times (of equality) is to give way to inequality (through defective interpretation of the Bible). The biblical testimonies seem to me more modern than many an interpretation. This is especially true for the position of women in the community.

The concern of Paul

All letters are statements and answers in a specific context. Reconstructing the initial situation is always crucial for a good understanding of the text. Such a reconstruction was attempted here above. The concern of the apostle in his letter then gets a different color, a different orientation. What was Paul getting at?

Paul saw Timothy confronted with a certain form of matriarchy, and corrected that in his letter so that within the church men and women would be equal. Those who have stood up to men out of previous habits (out of the cult) should be a little calmer for once. An inequality should result in equality again and thus peace should enter the community. Paul had already emphasized this in his letter (1Tim 2,2).

Christians have often defined this passage about women as a general teaching for all women of all times, so that equality again becomes inequality. This enforces patriarchy and commits an injustice against women. A rethink is needed. Does this automatically make all women suitable for all tasks? Of course not, just as all men are not suitable for all tasks. Not gender, but aptitude should be considered and promoted – regardless of gender.

In a comparison, one could also think of the reality of slavery. In Christ, slave and free are equal. This has already been pointed out. However, the reality in society was that slaves were part of the social order. However, Paul did not stop at this reality. Not only were slaves and free equal “in Christ,” that is, in the church and in one another, but he also encouraged slaves to become free when the opportunity presented itself (1 Cor. 7:21). In his letter to Philemon, Paul intercedes for the runaway slave Onesimus so that Philemon would accept Onesimus again, but differently, better: “no longer as a slave, but more than a slave, as a beloved brother” (Philemon 1:16). If this comparison is true, then this would be a good approach on how man could counter the unequal treatment of women.

Deepening

• This article has not mentioned all the biblical passages that could be quoted on the subject. There are countless studies that start with Adam and Eve and justify why man and woman are equal and yet not the same. This is, of course, a truism, but especially in light of the municipal code, this should not be an issue. Paul had made a detailed and reasoned case for all being equal and equal in the church. We do well to take his words seriously.
• One problem with these issues, of course, is that for some women, inequality represents pious religious behavior. Subordination is sought instead of responsible equality. So there are also psychological factors why some want inequality. However, in my opinion, Paul never spoke out for inequality, but always for equality.
• Check out the terms “misogyny” and “male chauvinism.” Discuss.
• For Paul, neither patriarchy nor matriarchy applies. What is in front of his eyes?
• What does the apostle mean when he writes that the women (in Ephesus) should not “treat men self-importantly”(1 Tim. 2:11-13)? Is this what is meant by “submissiveness”? What was Paul getting at?