lesson eight
Have women been forbidden for all time to ‘teach in Church’?

• read the narration column first
• then do the exercises

Exercise 1

Check how 1 Timothy 2,11 -15 is translated in whatever versions are available to you.

Do you find the differences significant?

1. Not allowed to teach means not allowed to be a leader

The Jewish culture that Jesus inherited left no room for women to be teachers. Only men were allowed to read out the Scriptures in the synagogues. Only men could preach or be religious leaders.

The Congregation for Doctrine maintains that Paul excluded women from teaching and presiding in the assembly. By this he established a permanent norm.

Jesus read the Scriptures and preached in synagogues, as he did in his home town Nazareth (Luke 4,16). Women listened, in a special section, usually in a gallery behind the men.

The prohibition “I do not allow women to teach in church, etc.” is found in 1 Timothy 2,11-15 and 1 Corinthians 14,34-35.

The letters to Timothy are no longer attributed by scriptural scholars to Paul himself, but to one of his disciples (end of 1st century AD). The verses in 1 Corinthians 14,34-35 are a later addition [a gloss] to Paul’s original letter. The gloss too was added at about the same time (end of 1st century AD). This does not mean that these texts are not inspired. But it does make a difference in our interpretation, since we have to understand the context for analysing the inspired message.

The idea that women are not allowed to ‘teach in Church’ greatly influenced the ban on women priests. Theologians and church lawyers argued: “If women are not even allowed to preach, how could they ever be priests?” Study the following examples:

• The prohibition to teach featured in the earliest collection of church law, the Decree of Gratian (1024 AD) which persisted until 1916, and even in the new code of law of 1917.
• It became an argument against women’s ordination with such theologians as Richard of Middleton (13th cent.) see esp. §9, John Duns Scotus (1266 - 1308 AD) see § 19 and 20, and Durandus a Saint-Pourçain (1270 - 1334 AD) see his § no 4.

Exercise 2

Is it correct to say that 1 Corinthians 14, 34-35, though a later gloss by a Pauline disciple, is still part of the inspired text?
Why or why not?

Exercise 3

Find your own examples of women preachers and theologians from the 20 th century who have inspired and encouraged you.

2. The extent of the prohibition

Since the prohibition “I do not allow women to teach in church, etc.” is found in two New Testament passages, viz. 1 Timothy 2,11-15 and 1 Corinthians 14,34-35, everything depends on what prohibition was meant.

An analysis of the two texts shows that it does not imply an absolute, lasting, permanent probition for women to teach in a Christian assembly.

This we can deduce from studying the texts themselves:

• 1 Timothy 2,11-15
  Examination of the text shows that the author was concerned about the influence which Gnostic teachers had on the Christian community, and especially on women. The prohibition for women to teach was a local counter-measure. It did not express church legislation to be valid for all places and for all time to come.
  Study a verse-by-verse analysis here.
  
  
• 1 Corinthians 14,34-35
  These verses, which were later added to the letter, demand that women be silent and rely on their husband for guidance. The context is more or less the same as that in 1 Timothy. Whatever the merit of the injunction for the time, it cannot be a permanently binding norm for all Christians in times to come.
  For a detailed explanation click here.

Conclusion

The crucial principle of interpretation for both scripture texts is the author’s ‘intended scope’.

The prohibition for women to teach in their communities was a temporary and local prescription. To say that it established a permanent norm is to go well beyond the intention of the inspired authors.