{"id":38729,"date":"2025-12-30T18:56:02","date_gmt":"2025-12-30T16:56:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kernbeisser.ch\/are-women-allowed-to-teach-in-the-church\/"},"modified":"2025-12-31T11:23:44","modified_gmt":"2025-12-31T09:23:44","slug":"are-women-allowed-to-teach-in-the-church","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kernbeisser.ch\/en\/are-women-allowed-to-teach-in-the-church\/","title":{"rendered":"Are women allowed to teach and lead in the church?"},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row][vc_column width=”1\/1″][vc_column_text text_lead=”yes” uncode_shortcode_id=”158568″]In the New Testament, men and women are basically equal. Nevertheless, there are still views in many places that men<\/em> should be slightly more equal than women.<\/em>[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”253537″]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”<\/em>. 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. From today’s perspective, this is extremely strange. What did Paul mean? What are we to do with such a text? It’s in the Bible, isn’t it?[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”621288″]<\/p>\n

It is about an ideology<\/h3>\n

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.[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row row_height_percent=”0″ back_color=”color-731465″ overlay_alpha=”50″ gutter_size=”3″ column_width_percent=”100″ shift_y=”0″ z_index=”0″ content_parallax=”0″ uncode_shortcode_id=”207300″ back_color_type=”uncode-palette”][vc_column width=”1\/1″][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”103549″]<\/p>\n

Understanding thought processes<\/h4>\n

If you want to understand why some limit the role of women in the church, it helps to understand the context. This refers to the view of the Bible. It leads to assumptions, as briefly outlined here above. Some accept that the Bible is at odds with today’s understanding of life. Why is that?<\/p>\n

The intention is commendable. Let this be said first. One wants to stay as close as possible to the Word of God, to the Bible. Everything that is written in the Bible is “true” and remains – so the idea – “timelessly valid”. One wants to believe correctly. In practice, this means knowing what you are allowed to do and what you are not allowed to do. In my experience, without exception, it’s all about legal, rule- and line-following thinking. Today, the idea is most likely to be found where people want to “think true to the Bible<\/a>“. One’s own view is “faithful to the Bible<\/a>,” while any dissenting opinion carries the danger of apostasy. Such black-and-white thinking makes it difficult to get out of these ideas. This becomes concrete, for example, in the idea that women have no place in church leadership. They are ossified guiding principles – as ideologies can be described.<\/p>\n

The reference to the Bible<\/h4>\n

By referring to the Bible, the ideas about the role of women receive something like a divine seal of truth. On the one hand, this way of looking at things leads to a false sense of security (“I believe exactly what I read and it turns out to be exactly what God wants”).<\/em> On the other hand, this is often not reflected, neither in the context of the Bible nor in the context of the question or topic. Again and again I have encountered the opinion that today’s insights are by definition influenced by the “evil” spirit of the age and therefore “cross” to biblical truth. As a result, one comes to terms with the church, in which everything is “biblical”, while one locates the evil world outside. These are sure signs of sectarian imprinting.<\/p>\n

The perfect circular argument<\/h4>\n

The result is the perfect circular argument: “I am right in my understanding, therefore I am right in my understanding”. It is obvious that this is a deceptive security.<\/p>\n

The way out<\/h4>\n

I myself once stood in that place. But I no longer stand there. My understanding has changed. The reason for this change is not “the evil spirit of the times” or “liberal thinking”, but – on the contrary – an intensive and honest, open-ended examination of the Bible itself. In the process, I have discovered step by step that my understanding and the biblical statements are not congruent. The more I got to grips with what the Bible says, the more I had to say goodbye to old patterns and interpretations. This is a challenging shift in thinking. My understanding “biblical thinking is so and so” had to be transformed to “the Bible tells, and I try to understand.”<\/p>\n

Instead of doctrines, today I rather advocate learning processes. In it, you can try to clarify what you can take from the text, what you can’t, and where interpretations go their own ways.[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1\/1″][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”207360″]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-image, about a certain Christian culture in which it is seen in this way.<\/p>\n

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.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”119405″]<\/p>\n

Male-dominated societies<\/h3>\n

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 is his task, and it is reflected in the community.<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

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”.<\/p>\n

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 very long time for women’s suffrage to be introduced everywhere in Switzerland<\/a>. 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.<\/p>\n

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.”<\/p>\n

But it is far from being just<\/strong> 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.<\/p>\n

Once you let go of this male-dominated and one-sided view, the community can become healthy. Mixed teams work better in my experience. Why would anyone want to do without it?[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”186366″]<\/p>\n

Man and woman are equal in the community<\/h3>\n

I have repeatedly been in circles where the \u201csubordination of women\u201d was taught, even though Paul clearly states: \u201csubmitting to one another<\/strong> in the fear of Christ\u201d<\/em> (Eph 5:21).<\/p>\n

Before God, man and woman are absolutely equal. Paul wrote:<\/p>\n

“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.”<\/em>
\nGal 3:27-28<\/p>\n

That was a stunning message in Paul’s day. The point was that there were great differences between Jews and Greeks, between slaves and free, male and female in society at that time. His message was radical in his time. In the community, the differences should just no longer apply.<\/strong> Christ changed all that, but it had to be proclaimed before this idea with all its consequences reached the church. Paul shared a groundbreaking new message whose explosive core (all are equal in Christ) was preached out of grace and stood in direct contrast to the ways of society.<\/p>\n

Today it’s the other way around. Equality has largely arrived in society. On the other hand, some communities insist on reintroducing inequality as God’s order. Of course, this is also understood in places where women<\/em> are taught to be submissive<\/em> today. That is why a trick is used: Paul was merely describing a spiritual reality, something that we have “in Christ”. That would be tantamount to a spiritual position. So before God, man and woman would be equal. But that’s not the whole story. This should be contrasted with an everyday practice that is described with the expression “in the Lord”. Equality between men and women only applies spiritually, in Christ, but differences apply in everyday life, in our way of life, in the Lord. Et voil\u00e0, the gradations are back, but this time within the municipality.<\/p>\n

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? It’s not like that! 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.<\/strong> The community is the place where inequality should no longer apply.<\/p>\n

Now to the actual texts, which thus seem to be transverse to the previous ones.[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row row_height_percent=”0″ back_color=”color-731465″ overlay_alpha=”50″ gutter_size=”3″ column_width_percent=”100″ shift_y=”0″ z_index=”0″ content_parallax=”0″ uncode_shortcode_id=”621354″ back_color_type=”uncode-palette”][vc_column width=”1\/1″][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”372466″]<\/p>\n

The background for Paul’s statement<\/h3>\n

“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.”<\/em>
\n1Tim 2:11-13<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

To the letter<\/h4>\n

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.<\/p>\n

To the receiver<\/h4>\n

Timothy was on friendly terms with Paul, and Paul called him “my true child in the faith”<\/em> (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”<\/em> (1 Tim. 4:12). Paul, on the other hand, was much older. He writes to Timothy from his own experience and responds to the challenges Timothy was facing. 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”<\/em> (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.<\/p>\n

About the situation<\/h4>\n

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.<\/p>\n

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.[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1\/1″][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”353475″]<\/p>\n

Timothy in Ephesus<\/h3>\n

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.<\/p>\n

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 almost something like a religiously based matriarchy, not a continuous patriarchy. This was an extraordinary situation. Women had an extraordinary number of rights in Ephesus. Of course, this had an effect on the attitude of the people in Ephesus and therefore also on the reactions within the church there.<\/p>\n

This could be the background for Paul’s instructions. The apostle’s concern in all churches is that all are equal in Christ.<\/strong> Men and women are of equal value, and each person fulfills a unique task 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.<\/p>\n

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. There were obviously women who were unpleasantly conspicuous and did not behave decently in the community. This is the grievance that Paul addresses. If this background is correct, then a completely different context emerges than advocates of the “subordination of women” claim. 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.<\/p>\n

Paul’s point is not to introduce inequality, but to restore equality.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

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 you look at the letters to the Thessalonians or Galatians, for example, you will not find any such references – because the situation in each case was different from that 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.<\/p>\n

At this point it should be noted that there is more than one passage in the New Testament that deals with these questions. However, we must not succumb to the temptation to play one place off against another in order to avoid the connections mentioned here. In this article we look at the well-known statements in the letter to Timothy. In other articles, other positions are evaluated in detail. The only question about this biblical passage here in the letter to Timothy is: What is written here and why does it apply?<\/em><\/p>\n

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 the first letter to 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 more modern to me than some interpretations. This is especially true for the position of women in the community.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”949360″]<\/p>\n

Paul’s concern<\/h3>\n

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 apostle’s concern in his letter then takes on a different color, a different direction. What was Paul getting at?<\/p>\n

Paul saw Timothy confronted with a certain outgrowth of his very special situation and corrected this in his letter so that men and women<\/strong> are equal within the church<\/strong>. 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).<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

By way of 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).<\/p>\n

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”<\/em> (Philemon 1:16). If this comparison is correct, then this would be a good approach to tackling the unequal treatment of women.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”101293″]<\/p>\n

Deepening<\/h4>\n