The Blue Parakeet, 2nd

by Scot McKnight

  At some level Phoebe was a “minister.” She was also significant. When Paul asks the church at Rome to “receive her,” he surely has in mind that they are to roll out a red carpet of hospitality—the way they do for “saints.” But it is also possible that Phoebe, a benefactor or wealthy patron of Paul’s ministry of bringing the gospel to the Roman Empire, was responsible for getting this letter to the right people. Most today think Phoebe was Paul’s courier for the letter to the Romans. Since couriers were charged with taking responsibility for their letters, Phoebe probably read (performed is a better word) the letter aloud and answered questions the Roman Christians may have had. (If today’s Christians, who struggle to make sense of this dense treatise called Romans, are any indication, then Phoebe may have spent days explaining this letter to the Roman churches.) Phoebe, to put this graphically, can be seen as the first “commentator” on the letter to the Romans.9 We can say this too: there are probably six or so house churches in Rome (see Romans 16:1–16), which means Phoebe almost certainly read that letter aloud at least six times! One more point. A recent exhaustive commentary on Romans by Robert Jewett contends that Phoebe is not just a “benefactor” in an ordinary sense but that she is the patron for Paul’s strategic plan to preach the gospel from Rome to Spain.10 We cannot be sure that Phoebe’s role is that defined, but there are enough hints here to suggest that Phoebe was an important part of Paul’s letter to the Romans as well as his missionary strategy. One of her most important contributions was providing funds. It is worth noting that in the fourth century, in an inscription found on Jerusalem’s Mount of Olives, a woman named Sophia was called the “new Phoebe” or the “second Phoebe” because of her financial support for Christian ministries.11

  What Did Women Do?

  What did women do? Another way of asking this question is this: What did women do if we read the New Testament as Story? How do we see the King and His Kingdom Story with its redemptive oneness theme begin to take shape in the story of the New Testament?

  Mary was influential with Jesus and James and gave to Luke crucial information for writing his gospel. Junia was an apostle who was involved in missionary work. Priscilla taught Bible and theology alongside her husband. Phoebe financially supported the apostle Paul in his ministry, carried the letter to Rome, and helped to explain its contents as Paul prepared for his Spanish mission. What did women do (WDWD)? They were influential, they were a source for stories about Jesus, they were church planters, they were teachers, they were benefactors and interpreters of Paul’s letters.

  We learn a little more about each: Junia and Priscilla were married, Mary became a widow, and Phoebe may well have been single. There is no indication that women could teach and lead only if they were connected to a man who was also a leader. And to tie these four women into the story of the Bible, each of these women exhibits the mutuality (or oneness) theme that begins in creation, is threatened by the fall, and begins to become more and more a reality in Christ.

  If women did all this, why does Paul speak of silencing women in public assemblies? How does such silencing fit within the theme of oneness—of God’s work of redemption, restoring men and women into unity in Christ? This is where reading the Bible as Story, asking WDWD, becomes important. Though we may read the Bible through tradition (where women are silenced), we are at times called to challenge the tradition, which we will do in the next chapter.

  CHAPTER 17

  SILENCING THE BLUE PARAKEET (1)

  Women in Church Ministries 4

  In one of my classes I asked students to read 1 Timothy 2:8–15 and isolate the commands. (I list the seven basic commands below.) Then I asked them to discern whether they thought we should or should not practice that command today. Finally, I asked them to state why they thought the way they did. Here is the passage; you can do the same assignment with us:

  Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

  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. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

  We break the passage into seven basic commands. You can tick off the ones you think are “for today” as stated by Paul.

  1. Males should pray with their hands lifted up (2:8).

  No students thought men had to lift their hands when they prayed.

  2. Males should pray without anger or disputing (2:8).

  Every student in the class thought men should pray without getting themselves into angry moods and arguments.

  3. Women should dress modestly (2:9).

  Two students balked at what “modestly” means in verse 9. They didn’t think braiding hair, wearing gold and pearls, or dressing up in expensive clothes is how we define modesty today. But both students thought modesty was a good thing. In short, they had a “that was then, but this is now” approach to this passage, and they thought modesty’s meaning differs from culture to culture. I asked the females to comment on what “immodest” means today. One commented that a low top was immodest while another said that a top baring one’s belly was immodest. Most seemed to agree. I asked males to comment on “immodest” for males. A one-word comment from the back of the class said it all: “Spandex!” We moved to the next point. Since those days clothing has in some cases become more immodest and so modesty perceptions have changed accordingly.

  4. Women should not have elaborate hairstyles or wear gold or pearls or expensive clothing (2:9).

  The class was divided: twenty-five thought these commands were for today but nineteen thought they were not. Most students thought women should not overdress, but not all were convinced Paul’s specific commands were transferable to our world.

  5. Women should have good deeds (2:10).

  Every student agreed with Paul.

  6. Women should be silent and quiet (2:11–12).

  Not one student in the class stated that he or she agreed with Paul on this command. I suspect a few students did agree with this command of Paul’s but did not want to endure stares and glares. The same result and observation applies for the last one.

  7. Women should not teach or have authority (2:12).

  Whether these numbers of no-silence-for-women are precise or not, the overwhelming majority of the students in this class thought there should be no such restrictions on women today. We could get into a number of issues here, including whether or not this class is typical, but we are not striving for a scientific poll or for accurate numbers. What these students reveal is not at all unusual today; many don’t think some of these inspired words of Paul are for today.

  But many others do. They think women should be silent. We enter now into a minefield of debate. It is impossible for me to discuss each issue, so I will streamline this discussion as a positive explanation of why I think this passage teaches silence only for women who have not yet been taught. Once these untaught women are taught, they can sing like the other blue parakeets in the Bible.

  A Troubling Irony

  We have already sketched some passages in the story of the Bible where we discover the presence of women in leadership and public ministries. I have called these passages the WDWD passages. Now for a theoretical point with enormous significance for women in ministry: some believe the silencing passages should control the WDWD passages. Such persons give any number of reasons, but the point needs to be made clear: such persons believe the silencing passages are permanent and there is no place in the local church today for women prophets, apostles, or leaders or for women to perform any kind of teaching
ministry.

  There is a troubling irony in this approach, and it concerns whether we Christians are to live under the conditions of the fall or under the conditions of the new creation, whether we are to emphasize otherness or oneness. To explain this, I want to remind you again of the words in Genesis 3:16: “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” These words are not an ironclad rule for the rest of history.

  Sadly, some think Genesis 3:16 is a prescription for the relationship of women and men for all time. Instead of a prescription, these two lines are a prediction of the fallen desire of fallen women and fallen men in a fallen condition in a fallen world. Fallen women yearn to dominate men, and fallen men yearn to dominate women.1 The desire to dominate is a broken desire. The redeemed desire is to love in mutuality. This verse in Genesis 3, in other words, predicts a struggle of fallen wills; they don’t prescribe how we are supposed to live.

  Genesis 3:16 speaks of fallen humans seeking to control other people. But the fall is not the last word in the Bible, and surely the Song of Songs is a profound example of Israelites finding a better way than what is found in Genesis 3:16. For the Christian we have to factor in new creation, the day God began to renew all things in Jesus Christ, and in the gift of the Holy Spirit.

  Here is the most important verse in the Bible about new creation: “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!” (2 Corinthians 5:17). Christian men and women are to live a life that moves beyond the fall, beyond the battle of wills. If new creation does anything, it unleashes the power to undo the fall in our world. I cannot emphasize this enough: the story of the Bible is the story of new creation in Christ. The words of Genesis 3:16, to put the matter directly, are overcome in new creation. These words in Genesis 3:16 are not words for anyone other than unredeemed, fallen women and men. Newly created followers of Christ can find a better way in mutuality. Paul teaches that we are all “one in Christ” and that in Christ “nor is there male and female” (Galatians 3:28).

  Now for the troubling irony: seeking to control or limit the applicability of the WDWD passages by appealing to the silencing passages illustrates the fall, not the new creation. When men seek to control women by silencing them permanently in the church, we stand face-to-face with a contradiction of the very thing the new creation is designed to accomplish: to undo the fall. What we see in this desire to silence women is the desire to rule over women, a desire that pertains to the fall, not to the new creation. What the Spirit does when the Spirit is present is to release and liberate humans from their fallen condition so that God’s will can be completely done. The Spirit creates mutuality. Always.

  A Brief Reminder

  So, when we come upon the two silencing passages, we need to learn to read them out of the story of the Bible. We need to remind ourselves of this:

  • Women in the Old Testament exercised leadership.

  • Women in the Old Testament spoke for God as prophets.

  • Women in the New Testament era were gifted by God’s Spirit for such things as teaching and leading.

  • New creation begins to undo the fall, which means that men and women are drawn back into being “one” in Christ.

  Even if the Bible’s WDWD actions by women were exceptional instead of the norm, God has always raised up women with such gifts. I do think someone could explain the Old Testament WDWD passage as exceptions to the norm, but there’s more going on than exceptions in the New Testament. Something new is happening with women in the New Testament.

  Another Silenced Blue Parakeet Passage

  One of the most significant passages about women in church ministries is often completely ignored, and I’m asking you to drink in what this text says. The plot in the Bible’s story reveals that the messianic era would release the Spirit so that women would also be gifted to exercise prophecy and leadership in the churches. Just pick up your Bible and open it to Acts 2. When the Spirit fell upon the Pentecostal assembly, including Mary and other women, Peter said:

  This is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:

  In the last days, God says,

  I will pour out my Spirit on all people.

  Your sons and daughters will prophesy,

  your young men will see visions,

  your old men will dream dreams.

  Even on my servants, both men and women,

  I will pour out my Spirit in those days,

  and they will prophesy. (Acts 2:16–18, emphasis added)

  Pentecost was the day the music of the cracked Eikons died and the day new creation music began to be sung. It doesn’t take but a lazy reading of Acts 2 to see that something big and something new was happening, and that bigness and that newness included women. Pentecost, so the Bible tells us, leads us to think of an increase in women’s capacities to minister, not a decrease. Women’s ministries expand as the Bible’s plot moves forward; they do not shrink. Many today have shrunk the role of women in ministries; this flat-out contradicts the direction of the Bible’s plot.

  We must return to the point made in the previous chapters. We must ask WDWD, what did women do? We must ask about how the Story moves forward in the Bible. This kind of Bible reading means that when we read about women being silenced in Paul, you and I are drawn into a decision. Either we see Paul contradicting the way God has used women in the Story or we are being asked to see the silence as a special kind of silence. That is the point we will sketch out for both 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 and 1 Timothy 2:8–15.

  Silencing Women at Corinth

  The reason some believe in silencing women begins with 1 Corinthians 14:34–35.2 Here are the words as recorded in 1 Corinthians. That might sound a bit odd so let me say up front that there is much discussion among the experts on whether Paul even wrote these words, and Appendix 3 sketches that discussion. There are, one must say now, good reasons not to think Paul wrote these words. One observation before I quote the words: if one concludes (as I do) that Paul did not write these words, what they say is said more forcefully in 1 Timothy 2 than here so nothing is gained for any side in this debate. Again, see Appendix 3. Now to 1 Corinthians 14:34–35:

  Women 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.

  Knowing what we know from our WDWD reading about the role of women in the early churches, we are surprised that Paul would say, “Women should remain silent in the churches.” Paul himself gives instructions on women prophesying in the churches in this same letter to the Corinthians. One can’t prophesy (or pray) in public and remain completely silent; prophesying means talking in public! In 1 Corinthians 11:5, Paul says this about women in public church gatherings: “But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved” (emphasis added). And we know from the book of Acts that women exercised the gift of prophecy in the churches. Peter saw this as a fulfillment of the prophet Joel (Acts 2:17–18; 21:9).

  So, yes, we are surprised by the sudden appearance of a command for silence for women. Many of us, when reading these words about silence after we have absorbed the King and His Kingdom Story and have learned that redemption includes “nor is there male and female” in Galatians 3:28, ask this: If women did what we have already seen they did (WDWDs) and if Paul offers clear directions on how women should exercise their gift of prophecy in public gatherings, how can he suddenly say women should “remain silent”? Has he not contradicted himself? A shallow reading of the Story points a long finger at Paul’s inconsistency. Reading the Bible as Story, however, discerns what Paul was saying in a very specific circumstance. So how do we explain 1 Corinthians 14:34–35?

  Many today believe that Paul’s silencing of women is a special kind of silencing. Paul is not totally silencing women; that would c
ontradict his own teaching and the WDWDs of the Bible. We are not sure what kind of special silence he has in mind, so let me sketch three options. Some think Paul prohibits women from evaluating prophesies. Others think Paul is asking women to be silent when it comes to speaking in or interpreting tongues, another special concern in this passage. The third option comes from Craig Keener, an expert scholar on the historical background to the New Testament, who keenly observes that Paul’s own words clarify this best. Paul silences women in regard to asking questions: “If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands [if they are married] at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak [inquire about something they don’t yet understand] in the church.”3 I think Keener gets this one right, and even more can be said that clarifies what is being said in 1 Corinthians 14 (again, to back up, if Paul wrote these words).

  Why would Paul restrict the asking of questions? The best answer is because these women were not yet educated theologically or biblically as well as the men. (We will learn more about this in our next section on 1 Timothy 2.) When these women heard what was being said, they had questions. Paul thinks those sorts of questions should be asked elsewhere, probably because questions interrupted the service. This conclusion has significant implications. Paul’s silencing of women at Corinth is then only a temporary silencing. Once the women with questions had been educated, they would be permitted to ask questions in the gatherings of Christians or, better yet, would have no need to ask questions.