1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (Women in Church)

Apologetics
1

Women[f] should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

This is a pretty controversial topic, but I’m curious what other people think of it. As a person of the 21st century, I admit, this attitude feels kind of outdated … I don’t consider myself a “progressive” in the sense that biblical teaching should “get with the times” … but at the same time, I don’t understand what to make of this teaching.

There are female speakers at the church I attend that sometimes do the liturgical readings … it would be kind of awkward if this specific passage was in the reading that day.

PS. I also noticed that sometimes there was a female altar server. I didn’t know that was actually allowed :thinking:

2

I found an extensive discussion of this on the Biblical Hermenuetics Stack Exchange (https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/41432/which-law-was-paul-referring-to-in-1-corinthians-1434). A few points that people raised:

  1. Paul referred to the law, but neither the Torah nor the Talmud requires women to be silent in church.
  2. Galatians 3:28 says that in Christ there is neither male nor female.
  3. Paul may have been replying to a question from the Corinthians and we are hearing only half of the conversation.

Catholic Answers says that whether to allow girls as altar servers has been up to the bishops since 1994. The objection I sometimes hear is that seminarians are former altar boys; girls are not going to be priests; therefore girls should not be altar servers. If allowing girls to be altar servers were keeping boys from doing so, I could see possible merit in that argument.

3

This would fall under what we call a discipline of the Church. Disciplines, unlike doctrines of faith & morals, can be changed.

When it comes to matters of submission, these are often related to discipline. Another example of a discipline that relates to submission, woman braiding their hair and veiling in Church for example was a discipline of the Church.

Both men and women are called to be subservient (obedient) in different ways; and what these ways look like change throughout various customs and ages in History.

It is more about being subservient and not being full of pride, or putting oneself above God and others.

Speaking and conduct is a great responsibility. The Bible warns about causing individuals to stumble and it is a very serious warning:

“Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.” — Matthew 18:6; see also Luke 17:2 & Mark 9:42

Much like women serving in the Military. Woman are capable of fighting wars, but we don’t really want women dying in wars.

I want to first talk about a related issue that comes up from time to time.

Feminists, who want to change the Church’s teaching on ordaining women (which is not only theologically problematic, it is also driven by pride or perceived justice), will often point out that there were women deaconesses in the Bible (namely Phoebe in Romans 16:1). However, some translations use the term servant. This role was not likely referring to the Office of Deacon as we know it Today.

The verses leading up to 1 Timothy 3:11 speak about the character of deacons and how they ought to conduct themselves, then verse 11 speaks of women and how they “similarly” ought to behave. Some speculate (as I do) that these women could be referring to the Wives of deacons, since the verse following this one talks about deacons being allowed to be Married (only once) and how their children ought to behave.

Or it could be referring to females who serve in the Church, but not as ordained Ministers like the Office of Deacon and Presbyter, but rather in a less formal capacity if that makes sense.

So, were/are women capable of teaching and speaking, sure. Were there female deacons (as we define the Office of the Deaconate today), highly unlikely. If a feminist wants so badly to be a Deacon or, God forbid, a Priest then they are welcome to go join the Lutheran (ELCA), Episcopalian, or “Divided” Methodist Church," but theologically, there cannot be women Priests truly.

Furthermore, the teaching of a male Priesthood is definitive doctrine and cannot be changed.

Oh, and you mentioned girl altar servers. Most Dioceses allow female altar servers, but my personal view is that this should be reserved for boys and young men who are discerning the Priesthood. Every Catholic Priest I have personally asked if they were an altar server growing up, one hundred percent of them answered “yes.” This does not mean that girls are not capable of serving at the Divine Liturgy (Holy Mass), but I believe this discourages Godly young men from serving. We see this in the Military as well. There has been a steady decline in the number of men joining the armed forces in recent years since allowing women and trąns to serve. It could be that the culture as a whole has become both less concerned about matters of Faith and of defending what is good, true & beautiful. Or perhaps it is the scandals in the Church and unjust wars that politicians have been waging. But, that is another topic for another day : )

4

That’s very interesting!

I wonder if it’s also applicable to Paul’s statement about women having long hair and men having short hair being the “natural order” of things. I can’t help but think it’s more of a cultural thing because there are literally millions of women incapable of having long hair (many Africans for example), due to genes. One wonders how it could be a universal law if for so many it’s impossible through no fault of their own.

5

Thanks for the reply.

I’ve thought about that before. How strange it seems that that seems to be the case for most if not all of Paul’s letters. We are always only hearing “half the conversation”, since he’s addressing issues as he was made aware of them (do we ever get letters written TO Paul instead of vica versa?).