Revisiting Women's Role in the Church and in the Family

Women.

Sadly, the church has been on the side of oppressing women and telling their daughters, “You can be anything but not a preacher or a leader in the church.” “Be confident. Work hard. But make sure that you always do what your husband says.” Even in our town, these views are still prevalent. And you may think that view is the right one, but let me give you a different perspective today.

So today’s message is going to be a little different than one where I motivate you to change. It’s going to be much more of a study and explanation of women’s role in the church and in the home. But this truth can be more liberating than any motivational sermon if lived out.

Wrapped up in this issue is part of how we interpret the Bible. Do we take one verse and run with it or do we understand it in the context of the whole?

Proponents of both sides of the issue like to explain away passages that disagree with their viewpoint. But there is something to be said in reading the Bible in context and in light of the overarching themes of the rest of the Bible. There are also special contextual issues to consider when reading Paul’s writings since he is writing to address specific issues in specific churches, of which we can only surmise the context because we only have Paul’s reply. This understating and appreciation of what Paul is doing makes the application for us more refined than simply reading and then doing.

So let’s start at the beginning. In Genesis 1 and 2, man and woman were equal in God’s sight and complimented one another. In fact, the woman is called a “helper” (ezer) – the same word used in the Psalms to describe divine help. One would have a difficult time casting God as a subordinate.

So in the first chapter of Genesis, we have women created to be a helper just as God’s help given to us is described in the Psalms. But only a chapter later, things change – there is a division between man and woman as a result of sin entering the world, but we must note that this is the result of sin, not the desired relationship that God had in mind. The effects of the fall have impacted cultural perceptions and expectations between men and women negatively ever since. From the treatment of women as second class citizens, to a view of women as property, to a denial of certain rights to women, varying cultures have diminished the value of women ever since. These were not God’s intention but a result of sin among us and the fall having happened.

If we view the role of women through the idea of the kingdom of God, we see that God is restoring all things. So God’s original intention as described in Genesis 1-2, not in the post-fall Genesis 3, is the ideal of the relationship between men and women in God’s kingdom. And through the ministry of Jesus, God is now restoring all things to their intended purpose through the church. The church should be an example of God’s restored purpose for humanity as much as we can possibly make it. Not an example of the fallen world.

In addition, Paul restates this same idea to the church in Galatia:

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28 ESV).”

Paul echoes this sentiment in In 1 Corinthians 12 where he states that we are one body with many members and each performs different functions. There is no delineation between men and women – no assigning the teaching or leading duties to men while relegating women to other duties.

But Paul is also the source of the two difficult passages where women should be silent and where women should not teach or have authority over a man. Throughout his writings, Paul describes a unity and equality that exists between the spiritually reborn living in God’s restored kingdom. On the other hand, Paul backs off and defers to cultural norms in these instances.

The clearest mention of a woman in leadership is at the end of Romans where Phoebe is called a deaconess/servant/minister (diakonos). Granted, this word can mean all of those things in the Greek, but in Paul’s writings when he is speaking of the office of “deacon” he uses this word. When he speaks of servants he uses other words (doulos, oiketes, pais, etc.). We have Priscilla and Aquilla, and word order was used in Greek language to show prominence, making Priscilla the prominent teacher in this couple. You even have an apostle named Junia.

So when Paul gave his lists that people use to exclude women, Paul was not providing a comprehensive list of qualifications but a general understanding of what would make a good leader. This list is used so legalistically at times that it fails to see the point -- leaders should have leadership qualities and be actual leaders. Gender, if the practice of the early church as seen in Scripture is to be given weight, is not one. The same book that commands women to be silent (1 Cor. 14:33-35) gives instructions for women praying and prophesying in the public assembly (1 Cor. 11:2-16). This role of prophet and praying in public indicates some level of authority and leadership in the church given to women, even over men.

The notion that men have the corner market on wisdom, knowledge and teaching ability is pure arrogance. And relegating women to teaching only children and other women is not only demeaning but fails to see the fulfillment of the Kingdom. Yes, women can be homemakers – my family life is a testament to the idea that I like that concept - but so can men. In the same way men can lead the church, but so can women. Only by working together, making up for one another’s deficiencies, and carrying one another’s burdens do we see the Kingdom come.

As for qualifications of leaders, obviously we don’t want some hot headed drunk leading the church. But as I mentioned, I think these are general principles based on observation, experience, and wisdom as opposed to clearly delineated “qualifications.” The two lists in the two different letters of Paul’s where he mentions it aren’t even the same. In other words, each candidate should be evaluated individually. Maybe the person is divorced because the spouse had an affair and left him or her. Maybe the person brought their child up in the church and did all he or she could but the child still is wayward. Perhaps the recovering alcoholic has controlled the addiction. The point is that I don’t think that a candidate should be dismissed out of hand because he or she doesn’t meet the qualifications without examining the reasons behind their circumstances. And I don’t think they should be disqualified for something that happened in their lives fifteen years ago. Again, this reasoning is based on my understanding that Paul offers a general list of leadership qualities, not a law of leadership qualifications.

Not all of us will be elders or teachers. Each of us performs different functions and roles within the body. But that does not disqualify women from fulfilling these functions. Nowhere in Paul’s discussion on giftedness does he single out men for the “leadership” type gifts or roles. I agree that not every woman should be a leader in the church. Just like every man should not be one. I have heard dynamite women teachers and awful male ones (and vice versa). We are who God empowers us to be, regardless of gender. And the only sin here is if we don’t operate in our giftedness or don’t allow others to operate in their giftedness.

What it comes down to in the Kingdom of God is to be a community that rises above the “-isms” that have plagued our society and churches. It is time to do away with chauvinism, feminism, racism and return to seeing each other as created equally loved in God’s sight and empowered differently but living unified to do the work of the Kingdom.

Now, that is church life. But I think if we go to the same passages regarding family life with the same attitude and understanding the same principles, we will see a similar stance.

A study was released a while back that described three types of families. One happy, termed cohesive. Two unhappy, termed disengaged and enmeshed.

“Typically cohesive families are characterized by harmonious interactions, emotional warmth, and firm but flexible roles for parents and children. "Think the Cosby family," says Sturge-Apple, offering an example from the popular TV series about the affable Huxtable family.

Enmeshed families, by contrast, appears to be emotionally involved and display modest amounts of warmth, but they struggle with high levels of hostility, destructive meddling, and a limited sense of the family as a team. Sturge-Apple points to the emotionally messy Barone family in the family sitcom Everybody Loves Raymond as a good example of an enmeshed family.

Finally, disengaged families, as the name implies, are marked by cold, controlling, and withdrawn relationships. [With help from my Facebook friends, think All In The Family, Married With Children, or National Lampoons Christmas Vacation. ] The seemingly pleasant suburban family in the movie Ordinary People provides a classic illustration of a disengaged family, as per the authors. Reacting to the death of their oldest son, the parents in the film retreat emotionally, creating a barren home environment in which feelings cannot be discussed.”
https://psychcentral.com/news/2010/07/16/family-problems-harm-young-children/15684.html

What we see in Paul's passage on the household in Colossians on how to have the family God desires is similar to what the scientists in the studies mentioned earlier would describe as a cohesive family. Paul wrapped up telling us about the new self with instruction about the household. The new self should permeate every area of our lives. The old self is lying, wrath, malice, slander, and obscene talk while the new self is compassionate hearts, kindness, humility, meekness, patience, thankfulness, forgiveness, and love. But then he follows this with explicit instructions on family life (see Colossians 3:12-14).

“Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and do not be harsh with them. Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord. Fathers, do not provoke your children, lest they become discouraged. Slaves, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not by way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord. Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ. For the wrongdoer will be paid back for the wrong he has done, and there is no partiality. Masters, treat your slaves justly and fairly, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven (Colossians 3:18-4:1 ESV).”

Now, let’s deal with the elephant in the room first. The big, hot button issue is that first sentence.

"Wives, submit to your husbands."

An exercise that is useful in discovering the meaning of a word is to examine what it meant in the original language through a Greek word study. One of the biggest mistakes typically done is to just look the word up in an English dictionary and call it good from there. The problem with our understanding "hupotasso" is that we don't use the word "submit" much in our normal conversations. The only places I hear it is in wrestling/mma and in a classroom environment where a student submits a paper to their teacher. In doing a word study, we can see how the word was used in other sections of Scripture. So let's look at some of those verses.

“And he went down with them and came to Nazareth and was submissive (hupotasso) to them. And his mother treasured up all these things in her heart (Luke 2:51 ESV).”

Jesus was hupotasso to his parents.

“Let every person be subject (hupotasso) to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God ( Romans 13:1 ESV).”

We need to hupotasso governing authorities.

“Now I urge you, brothers—you know that the household of Stephanas were the first converts in Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves to the service of the saints—be subject (hupotasso) to such as these, and to every fellow worker and laborer (1 Corinthians 16:15-16 ESV).”

We need to hupotasso to every fellow worker and laborer like those of the household of Stephanas.

“Submit (hupotasso) yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you (James 4:7 ESV).”

We need to hupotasso to God.

“And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit, addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart, giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, submitting (hupotasso) to one another out of reverence for Christ (Ephesians 5:18-21 ESV).”

We need to hupotasso to one another as brothers and sisters in Jesus.

We could get a grand and deeply authoritarian view of submission from the verses that teach us to submit to governing authorities and God, but there are uses of "submit" that throw a kink into that definition. We see that submitting to one another is something that we are all called to do as believers to each other.

So the word "submit" has to fit these passages. And sadly, the concept, especially in regards to the role of a woman with her husband when viewed as a subordinate role, has been misunderstood and doesn’t fit. This teaching of womanly submission has tragically been abused by the patriarchal society of the past and is still being abused in sexist settings today, to the detriment of everyone involved. I have heard of tragic stories of abuse in which a woman has been told to submit to her husband and remain in an abusive relationship. I have heard stories of women having to go along with things they seriously disagree with. That is not what this verse in Colossians is implying.

Submit (hupotasso) is voluntarily placing ourselves under someone in order to support them and help them achieve the dreams they have. When Paul wrote that a wife should submit to her husband he was stating that a wife needs to be a person who is voluntarily supportive of their husband, but that is nothing more than what Paul said we need to be to one another as brothers and sisters in Jesus. It is nothing more than the husband should also be to the wife.

Submitting does not mean that we don’t speak up, that we don’t ever disobey. It does not mean that we endure torture or abuse under another. It means that we know the dreams of the other person, we put ourselves voluntarily under them to help them achieve those dreams. We become a support to lift them up and help them achieve their goals.

A domineering man might then ask, "What does authority matter if it does not mean blind obedience by those under authority?" It’s mean Christian authority. If you are over someone in Christ, then you are their servant leader. Jesus does not force His will to be done through taking away free will. He leads out of submission and love. We are to do likewise.

Jesus taught:

"You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many (Matthew 20:25-28 ESV).”

Jesus also taught that leadership in the church and in Christian relationships is upside-down.

“The greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted (Matthew 23:11-12 ESV).”

Servant leadership is what Christian leadership is all about. As a pastor, I am in this position to serve the people – you - in this church, the community around here, and world abroad. The other leaders in a church are there to do likewise. If you are living out the life of Jesus in your workplace, then you should be about serving those around you. Christian leadership, whether it is the role of a husband in the house, parents to their children, a teacher to their students, a law enforcement officer to the citizens, is one of sacrifice and service when done well.

We all know in the core of our being what good leadership is. What kind of cowardly father would flee if his family was endangered? What kind of corrupt politician would seek to gain personally from their position as a representative of the people? What kind of shameful law enforcement officer would abandon people in need of help? And that is what Paul is laying out here because, so often, men can create a destructive family environment from their unhealthy leadership. The leadership trap for a husband, as Paul warns, is to become harsh with their wives and provoke and discourage their children.  

But a healthy family is not one of selfish and personal ambition. It’s one of compassion, patience, meekness, humility, forgiveness, and love. It is the new self lived out in unison one with another. A healthy family is the most basic example of the love of Jesus lived in community. The family is designed to be a place where people are encouraged and built up to be who Jesus wants them to be rather than a place of manipulation and selfish ambition.

In the healthy family, telling a wife that she is to submit to her husband, as long as we are using it with the biblical idea of hupataso, is also proclaiming that the husband must serve his wife. We must never separate a wife submitting with the love of the husband that is alsoconnected with that command to submit.

Submit does not mean that someone should be silent, obedient at all times, or a slave. Actually, if submit means to support someone to achieve their dreams, then speaking up and telling the other person where they need to improve would be needed at times. So submit, in Paul's command for a wife to submit to her husband, just means that the woman will help the man achieve the dreams he is trying to achieve. She will be his support. From other verses, we see that a man should be just as supportive of his wife. It’s the same concept we are to do to one another.

The main crux of the argument, as Paul described the way the household should function is that the man should no longer abuse his position. At the time this letter was written to church in Colossae, the man was very domineering over the family in that culture. Paul gave three warnings to the man. One, he is not to be harsh with his wife. Two, he is not to provoke and discourage their children. And three, he is to treat his slaves justly and fairly. This was a radical teaching that would be liberating to wives, children, and slaves at that time.

The Roman society was patriarchal and vicious. Babies would be presented to the father after birth at which he could decide to let the baby not enter the family by forcing the baby to just be abandoned and die from exposure. No property was allowed to be owned in a Roman family except for the father owning it; this even included grown men. All children were to be under the authority of their father until his passing.

Like modern sitcoms jokingly show the faults in the American family, Roman theater did the same for their audience. And we can see in the family comedies of Plautus and Terrence that the Roman family could devolve into manipulation and greed. With such a patriarchal structure, the wife, children, and slaves would all try to manipulate the father to get their will done. Paul's writings were a direct assault on the Roman family structure and would have transformed a Roman family that lived selfishly into one that would be a witness for Jesus. The Christian family is to be a model of God’s plan for us in right relationship with each other. The church is to be the same.

If the man is the head of the house, it is not as a domineering head. Christian leadership is the exact opposite of being domineering. If anyone is the head of anything in Christian thinking, then that person is to be the servant of those he is the head of. True Christian leadership is serving, not domineering. We will wrongly take the headship idea that we get from the Bible and then apply a worldly definition to it, but it is to be viewed through the lens of a sacrificial Jesus who, as the head, gave up his life so that those like you and me – under him – could live.

In Genesis, humanity fell and there were consequences:

“To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you (Genesis 3:16 ESV).”

That’s the fall. That’s what Jesus came to reverse. That’s not the reality we are called to live in.

As Paul explains it:

“For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 5:19-21 ESV).”

In the perfect world before the fall, women were not ruled over by men; that was a consequence of sin. As Christians, if we are forgiven of our sins and are striving to live in perfection, then we should treat women as they were treated before the punishment of sin. As much as is possible by us, we should live as the restored people of God, letting the kingdom be realized as much as it possibly can in the here and now through us. That would include women not being ruled over by men, both in the home and in the church, but being treated as equals as they were before the fall.

Let’s live in God’s restored kingdom reality.