Women, Men and Authority

What Genesis, Jesus and Paul really teach on gender and leadership

In many sections of the Church, there continues to be significantly more women than men in congregations, although, if reports are to be believed, Gen Z males (18-24) are upending years of this pattern, attending church in greater numbers than their female counterparts.

Organisations like Christian Vision for Men have spent years working to equip men to support each other in faith and reach out and share the gospel in ways that engage them.

There is a real need for this kind of outreach, as Rev Campbell Campbell-Jack argues in his article last week, because, as he makes clear, churches often appeal more to women than men, with many focusing more on emotional expression and healing than strength, authority and courage. I would add that when the main social time at the close of the service consists purely of chats over tea and coffee, this also, in general, is going to have greater appeal to women than men. 

Male/female stereotype

It is obvious that women and men are biologically very different, and this is generally true in regard to emotional traits, but not universally. There is a significant overlap and variation within each group.

Many people fit naturally into the male/female stereotype. Women, in general, make better caregivers, making them the natural choice to care for young children at home.

They also tend to be more intuitive in their emotional understanding of others. Men tend to prefer being active, and, being significantly stronger physically, are often at their best in a protective role, also relishing challenge in life. 

However, many people simply do not fit into this typical pattern – in some couples, for example, the woman turns out to be the more able provider, and the man proves to be the better caregiver for the children.

I would say that true complementarity involves both men and women in leadership. This, I believe to be especially true in the Church, as part of God’s original design.

Because one size doesn’t fit all, I don’t think that only men are called to lead – nor that women should only lead if men don’t step up to the mark. I would say that true complementarity involves both men and women in leadership. This, I believe to be especially true in the Church, as part of God’s original design.

Transformational gospel

I have spent some time grappling with this over the years. I was brought up in a church and family that honoured women, but which viewed men and women in different roles, with eldership and teaching reserved for men – what is known as the complementarian approach. Having felt called to train as a Methodist Local Preacher, I really wanted to get to grips with what was potentially a stumbling block in this sense. And I really wanted my conclusion to be based almost entirely on Scripture, not on secular arguments. 

To help me grapple with the Scripture, I sat down with an open mind to read two books (both by women, incidentally), presenting opposing views, which had both been recently released. I started with the one on complementarianism. I really struggled to finish it. It didn’t dig deeply into Scripture and didn’t speak in a way that I could tally either with my experience or my understanding of womanhood, even if I was a mostly stay-at-home mum at the time. 

The book by Katia Adams, Equal, What the Bible says about Women, Men, and Authority, however, not only helped me come to an understanding on this subject, but also altered my view of the gospel in a profound way, helping me to understand how totally transformational the good news of Jesus was in society, especially in regard to gender. Quite a few of the following points come from Adams’ book (which I would recommend for a clearer understanding¹).

Adam and Eve

Essentially, the gospel message brought back the true equality that was intended by God at the very beginning. Consider Genesis 1. This chapter gives us the overarching pattern of creation, before homing in on how Adam and Eve were created. Verses 27 and 28 say: 

“So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.’”

Note that God blessed them both, and said to both “… fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over …. every living creature…”. Both were given the mandate to rule, not just Adam.

The gospel message brought back the true equality that was intended by God at the very beginning.

The picture drawn in Genesis 2 is how Adam was formed first – crucially it was only he who was given the direction to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God allowed Adam to see how he needed someone else, then formed Eve as ‘helper’. It seems to me entirely mistaken to think of ‘helper’ as being in any way a subordinate role. Jesus used a similar word to describe Holy Spirit – who is our helper. In all cases in the Old Testament, the word ‘ezer’, used in Genesis of Eve, is of an equal (an ally, for example) or even as a superior – God being Israel’s ‘ezer’, or protector (e.g., Psalm 33:20). 

Man on his own was described as ‘not good’ (Genesis 2:18) – but together with his ally, his help, his partner, they, and all creation, were described as ‘very good’ (Genesis 1:31).  

Of course, this all went wrong with the Fall, when sin was introduced – and we see the change in relationship between man and woman. “… Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”

The teaching of Jesus

Jesus came to reverse all of the effects of the Fall. First and foremost, he paid the price for our sin – restoring our relationship with the Father. He promised Holy Spirit as our ‘helper’. But, He also began the process of restoring equality between rich and poor, slave and free, between different ethnicities, and, crucially for this topic, between men and women. 

He also began the process of restoring equality between rich and poor, slave and free, between different ethnicities, and, crucially for this topic, between men and women. 

Only men were chosen as the first Twelve – this was to reflect the Twelve tribes of Israel. But He chose His women followers as the first witnesses to His resurrection – Mary Magdalene ran to tell the other disciples of the disappearance of Jesus’ body; He later first appeared to her. Being the first witness to the resurrection, Mary has been called by some ‘the apostle to the apostles’. 

Throughout His ministry, Jesus engaged with women in a way unthinkable at the time. John 12:1-8 shows how He allowed a woman to anoint Him – not only an act of beautiful worship, but a priestly act, ministering to Him. In John’s gospel, the first time Jesus claimed to be the Messiah was to a Samaritan woman, who proceeded to be the first recorded evangelist. Jesus not only allowed, but encouraged Mary to sit at His feet – a position adopted by disciples to their rabbi – despite opposition. Essentially, Jesus treated women as equal to men – healing, empowering and challenging them, just as He did men. 

Early Church testimony

Women in those days had much less education than men, and as such, had significant disadvantages; despite this, in the early Church, there existed women of significant prominence and leadership. Paul commends many of these in his letters, such as Phoebe, a deacon (Rom 16:1); Priscilla, a leader alongside her husband Aquila, who also shared in teaching Apollos; Junia, to whom he refers as “prominent among the apostles” (Rom 16:7), and therefore arguably an apostle; and co-workers such as Euodia and Syntyche (Phil 4:2-3).  

We can also learn from history how both men and women were persecuted in the times of Nero, Diocletian and others. It was the church leaders in particular – men and women alike – who bore the brunt of the brutal executions.  There are a good number of references to female elders (presbyters) in the first centuries of Christianity, and the hugely successful Celtic Church in Anglo-Saxon Britain (5th-11th centuries AD) had prominent women leaders; St Hild being the most well-known, who was abbess of the monastery at Whitby – an abbey for both men and women.

The hugely successful Celtic Church in Anglo-Saxon Britain (5th-11th centuries AD) had prominent women leaders; St Hild being the most well-known, who was abbess of the monastery at Whitby – an abbey for both men and women.

Some of the most prominent and most important revivals and movements in UK history empowered women to preach and hold all offices in the church: the Salvation Army under William and Catherine Booth; Smith Wigglesworth supported women in ministry; and John Wesley became convinced of it by Mary Bosanquet Fletcher, and allowed women to preach – something that changed in various Methodist denominations after his death. 

Paul’s letters: 1 Cor 14

The complementarian position – having only men as leaders in the Church – is often based on a few well-known passages in Paul’s letters, despite these passages seeming to contradict Paul’s teachings elsewhere. Why, for example, should Paul tell women to be silent, yet include both men and women in the instructions to prophesy in the very same chapter (1 Corinthians 14)? 

In this case, it may well have been that a group of women were being particularly disruptive, as it is clear that the whole passage is about orderly worship. Also possible is that Paul was quoting someone else in verses 34-35, and then directly contradicting it after, as he seems genuinely quite indignant after these verses. He also refers to ‘the law’, without saying what part of the law he is referring to, something that he does not do elsewhere, which suggests that these are not his own thoughts. “They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says” (v34). There is nowhere obvious in the Torah to which he could be clearly referring. 

Paul’s letters: 1 Timothy 2

1 Timothy 2 is a chapter frequently quoted in this context, in particular verses 11-12: “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet”.  The context of this verse is particularly helpful in interpreting it. We see that the part before is all about living peaceably – men to lift up holy hands without anger or disputing” (v8). Prayers are to be offered so that we can live peaceful and quiet lives (v1-2). 

Then Paul encourages women to learn – in itself something that went against common culture, as women in general weren’t taught in other contexts. They were to learn in quietness and submission (surely the best way for all to learn!); this suggests that some women were being argumentative. Paul then goes on to point out that it was because Eve hadn’t been properly taught by Adam that she was deceived in the first place – hence women needed to be given equal teaching.

A significant question arises as to why Paul uses the word ‘authentein’,  here translated as 'authority', which is used nowhere else in scripture. Grammatically, Paul’s statement, “I do not permit a woman to teach or assume authority”, is actually, “I am not permitting…”, which suggests that this may have been a temporary ban for a specific time or place – because of issues Timothy was facing in his church – rather than an instruction for all time.  One of those issues may have indeed been to do with gender roles, as the worship of the great mother goddess Artemis in Ephesus subverted the dynamic between men and women in that place. 

If understood this way, it would mean that Paul was correcting a heresy, as he often did in his letters, not giving an utterly illogical reason why women may not lead or teach men. 

One popular heresy was that Eve was created first, and she breathed life into Adam’s lifeless body. She also brought him enlightenment by giving him the forbidden fruit. Therefore, a very plausible explanation of this passage is that, unsurprisingly, some women were keen to promote this idea, so they needed to submit to correction, and learn the truth. ‘Authentein’ has the connotation of originating or initiating something – compare our word ‘authentic’ – and the preposition is not ‘over’ (a man), it is ‘of.’

Therefore, what Paul appears to be saying is “I do not permit a woman to teach that she is the originator (or source) of man. She is to be silent [on this issue, because it isn’t true] – for Adam was formed first!” And the woman was deceived, not the man. If understood this way, it would mean that Paul was correcting a heresy, as he often did in his letters, not giving an utterly illogical reason why women may not lead or teach men. 

Paul’s letters: 1 Corinthians 11

Other statements of Paul appear at first sight to be contradictory. In 1 Corinthians 11, the main discussion is on head coverings, but it is used to also assert the subordination of women. We have a whole section where it seems that man is the head of woman (and Christ the head of man), then a discussion on head coverings, followed by an assertion that “man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.”

Then we get what appears to be the opposite, “Nevertheless, in the Lord, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God.” (v11-12).

Is Paul really contradicting himself? It seems much more likely that, as he does elsewhere, Paul sets out an argument that he has heard, whether a local quote, or assertions certain people in the church are making, then proceeds to show how it makes no sense. He then, crucially, states, “Nevertheless, in the Lord…” and says what the real answer is – in the Lord, neither man nor women are independent of each other, both come from each other, and, most importantly, both come from the Lord. This tallies with Paul’s world-transforming statement in Galatians 3:28: “ There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

Summing up

There is much more that could be said on this topic, this is only a quick overview. But essentially, what I am arguing is that authority was given by Jesus to men and women on an equal basis. Since the Church’s early days, we have misinterpreted Paul’s teachings, and, tragically, by imposing a hierarchical understanding of authority, have reverted to the post-Fall position of men dominating women. 

The two genders are indeed different, but then, each woman is different from every other woman,  and each man is different from every other man, because we are all unique.

The Church will flourish best if we allow God to use each one of us in the way He wishes to.

What is needed in the Church is strong leadership by both men and women, in a way that utilises the skills and abilities of each individual, and according to God's calling. The Church will flourish best if we allow God to use each one of us in the way He wishes to: “Each of you should use whatever gift you have received to serve others, as faithful stewards of God’s grace in its various forms.” (1 Pet 4:10). 

We all have failings and weaknesses, whether related to our gender in general, or entirely unrelated. And we all, men and women, work best, whether in the Church or in marriage, or even at work or in friendship, when we make efforts to help each other to shine in the areas of our giftings, and give support in those areas where another may struggle. “Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfil the law of Christ.” Gal 6:2. 

Notes
1. Another highly recommended book on this topic is ‘Why not Women?’, by Loren Cunningham and David Joel Hamilton