Worship which is Fitting and Orderly

1 Corinthians 14:33b-40

As in all the congregations of the saints, 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.

Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.

Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

L

ynda and I were seated together at a breakfast table with the pastoral staff of a Calgary church while in attendance at the Banff Pastor’s and Spouse Conference one morning several years ago. We were astonished at the arrogance of that staff. They ridiculed the people they served, laughing repeatedly at their ignorance and making rude comments on their Christian character.

I was not greatly surprised some months later while reading an article reporting the ordination of the first woman pastor for North American Baptist churches in Alberta to note that the same staff was featured. The title of that article speaks more pointedly to the truth than the editors might have imagined: In Step With the Spirit of the Age.[1] The article detailed how that pastor engineered the acceptance of a woman for ordination, dismissively ignoring Scripture in the process.

The article permits that pastor and the woman he sponsored to explain why Scripture does not apply to their situation. In fact, when asked about a number of Scriptures (including 1 Corinthians 14:34), the woman in question, not surprisingly, dismisses them as “those pesky verses.” She asserts that those particular texts only apply to women who were poorly educated in apostolic days, but with proper education, those Scriptures no longer apply. She says women’s ordination is a “murky issue.” Is it?

The issue confronting that denomination, and the issue confronting us as a church, is less an issue of applying Scripture than it is an issue of whether we will accommodate culture. The issue of the ordination of women is no longer an issue situated on the fringe of evangelical Christendom, it is a major issue confronting every denomination. Consider the information excerpted from an article on “Women Preachers.”

Statistics from 1994 revealed almost 4,000 licensed and ordained women in the Assemblies of God. The United Methodist Church has ordained women since 1956 and by 1994 had 4,743 women “clergy.” The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) had 2,419 female leaders. In 1979, the United Presbyterian Church (forerunner of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)) adopted a resolution requiring the congregations to elect women elders. This politically correct denomination also voted to ban the ordination of any man who opposed women clergy and gave such men ten years to change their minds or get out.

Again, in 1994 the United Church of Christ in the United States had 1,803 female leaders. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America had 1,358 ordained women. As of 1992, 15 of the 30 independent Anglican communions around the world had approved ordination of women priests. The Church of Scotland approved the ordination of women in 1968 and in 1994 had 100 female ministers. In 1991, Queen Elizabeth showed her approval of women ministers by appointing a woman as one of her royal chaplains in Scotland.

The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod, began to allow women to preach in regular worship services within the past decade. Leaders of Youth With a Mission (YWAM) appointed their first female national director in March, 1994, to oversee a 200-member staff in Switzerland. At a conference in 1993, Loren Cunningham spoke out against what he called a “cultural bias” against women. Cunningham also warned that God’s blessing might be removed if YWAM did not commission female leaders in an interview with a charismatic magazine.

By 1994, women comprised at least a third of the student population at the leading interdenominational divinity schools; at Yale and Harvard, they comprised more than one-half of the enrolment. U.S. women ordained to full-time ministry in 1986 increased to 20,730 from 10,470 in 1977, and represented 7.9% of all U.S. clergy, according to a study by the National Council of Churches. That survey showed that 84 of 166 denominations ordained women to full ministry at that time.[2]

There is no question but that women are entering the ministry and that there are significant changes to the faces of the churches as result of breaking down Scriptural injunctions. A 1998 study from Hartford Seminary states:

The experience and sense of calling among clergy women in the 1990s shows that clergywomen are not merely survivors, nor are they breaking down old barriers simply to get into a vocation shaped and still dominated by male perspectives. Rather, clergywomen are reinventing ministry for the future. Clergywomen are expanding the very essence of Christian ministry and guiding the whole church to rethink and renew its leadership and membership.[3]

The issue is not whether women clergy will be represented among the churches of this day—they are! The issue you must decide is whether the Word of God approves this action. If this Word is only a book dealing with ancient issues relating to cultures long since dead, why should we obey anything which it presents in this day? If, on the other hand, this is the Word of God, we dismiss the instruction presented by the Book at our own peril. I invite you to once again focus your attention on the Word of God. As it speaks to our hearts, may we find courage to affirm this Word and resist the world.

The Prohibition Delivered — In the text, Paul prohibits women from speaking. Whatever is intended by this ban, he appeals to the universal practise of the churches in the day in which he wrote [verse 33b] and to the Law [verse 34]. To emphasise this point, he insists that he also spoke on behalf of the Lord Christ Himself [verse 37].

Some commentators would relegate the opening clause to the preceding sentence. If they are correct, it would mean that Paul was speaking of God’s peace in the churches. It should be obvious that this clearly is not his intent. While it is true that God is a God of peace in all the churches, such a statement is needlessly redundant, speaking as it does of God’s character even as it restricts that character to an expression among the churches. The words—as in all the congregations of the saints—have a close logical arrangement with verse 36: Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached?

Many evangelical feminist commentators consider this text an ad hoc statement. These contemporary theologians argue that whatever Paul says here applied only to the Corinthians and not to us in this day. They are convinced that Paul was dealing with a problem in that one church only.[4] The introductory clause belies the intent of such doubters. Whatever the Apostle speaks of was the universal practise among the churches.

The obvious intent of Paul’s words is that the Corinthians were not to be so proud in their interpretation and application of Christian truth as to suppose they might operate in conflict with the rest of the Christian world. Paul clearly thought it vital that all Christians conform to certain Christian practises [cf. 1 Corinthians 11:16; 1 Timothy 2:8]. To think that the prohibitions Paul gave applied only to the Corinthians is out of harmony with Paul’s appeal that they conform to the rest of the Christian church. The idea that today one may frivolously go against the last two thousand years of Christian teaching (but for heretical movements) on the subject of women, because of the current Zeitgeist may be tantamount to holding the attitude found among the Corinthians.[5]

Paul also refers to the Law as supporting his teaching. While there are varied thoughts which are possible on what is meant by the Law in verse thirty-four, it seems most likely that Paul is using the entire teaching of the Torah as the basis for what he is here teaching, with the Creation narrative being the divinely ordained starting point.[6] Regardless of how you may view the Old Testament foundation on which the Apostle formed his argument, one point should be clear. Paul was not unconsciously parroting Jewish tradition. He saw his teaching as Christian teaching, though it was backed by the Law. He affirmed in verse 37 that all he had written was a command of the Lord.

Tragically, there are also individuals who attempt to deal with this passage by denying that Paul wrote verses 34 and 35. Though a minority, such individuals are cited with approval by theologians who wish to avoid the apostolic teaching which challenges women in pastoral leadership.[7] A few manuscripts, mainly later, western texts with a narrow geographical distribution, relocate these same verses. It is postulated that these variants were prepared because scribes believed these verses should follow verse 40.[8] However, the oldest and best manuscripts place them as they occur in our Bibles today.

Having dealt with a number of introductory issues, what is the prohibition? Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission… 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 [verses 34, 35]. Paul presents two strict prohibitions—women are to be silent and they are to be submissive—and he provides clarification for the manner in which the issues raised should properly be addressed.

First, women should remain silent in the churches. Either we must accept that Paul here contradicts himself or that there is another purpose in the instructions he provides. You will recall that when we studied 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 that Paul expressly encouraged women to pray and to prophesy in church. The sole proviso what that they were to recognise and demonstrate that they accepted male leadership within the church. That previous passage which we studied should be interpreted in light of this text, for with this proscription Paul is providing insight into the exercise of spiritual gifts. In keeping with the instruction we saw in our study last week, Paul is saying something very much akin to what he said in that passage [1 Timothy 2:11-14] which argues against women occupying a church-recognised teaching authority over men.[9]

The eleventh chapter of this letter began the focus on worship and this fourteenth chapter draws that focus to a conclusion. Throughout this entire instruction, the Apostle has emphasised the superiority of prophecy as contrasted to speaking in other languages. More particularly, the Apostle focuses on the parameters of prophecy as part of worship beginning with verse 26. Paul is not encouraging speaking in other languages, but he is rather providing order to the worship among the saints. No more than a maximum of three people may speak in another language and that only if there is an interpreter present. Otherwise, there is to be no speaking in other languages [verses 27, 28].

On the other hand, all can prophesy, provided each person speaks in turn and courteously permits others to speak as they are impelled by the Spirit [verses 29-33a]. After two or three individuals have “prophesied”, the remainder of the prophets is to weigh carefully what is said. What is prohibited in this instance is women weighing the prophetic utterances of others. Should they judge the accuracy of the prophecies, they would be sitting in a position of authority—which would violate the spirit of his instruction in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and would negate the instruction of 1 Timothy 2:13.

This understanding is strengthened through the further provision that women are to be in submission [verse 34]. Here is that same position which is met repeatedly throughout the Word of God that men are to assume responsibility for leadership and women are responsible to exercise an attitude of submission in the church and in the home. Again, I emphasise that this is not addressed to the world at large, but it is addressed specifically to the churches. Within each church, male leadership is the expected norm—as in all the congregations of the saints. Women have a role, but that role does not include authoritative leadership nor does it entail an authoritative teaching role. Consequently, there is no warrant for female pastoral leadership within the church; and if there is no warrant for female pastoral leadership, there is no requirement for female ordination, as ordination is generally understood among the churches of our Lord.

I should point out that if the same writer has written both this first Corinthian letter and the first letter to Timothy, we should expect that similar subject matter would reflect the identical position. In fact, Paul did write both letters and not surprisingly, we are given parallel information. Place your finger here at 1 Corinthians 14:33b-40 in your Bible and then open your Bible to 1 Timothy 2:11-15. Note the parallels.

In 1 Corinthians 14:34 we read that women are not allowed to speak. The apostolic injunction in 1 Timothy 2:12 is I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man.

In the Corinthian passage women must be in submission [1 Corinthians 14:34]. Timothy is instructed that women must be silent [1 Timothy 2:12].

For women, the Corinthians letter encourages, if they want to inquire about something [1 Corinthians 14:35]. Timothy is told that a woman should learn [1 Timothy 2:11].

[Women] should ask their own husbands at home [1 Corinthians 14:35] is contrasted to in quietness and full submission [1 Timothy 2:11].

As the Law says [1 Corinthians 14:34] corresponds to Adam and Eve in creation and the sin of our first parents [1 Timothy 2:14, 15].

It is certain that 1 Corinthians 14:33b-35 lends no support to the notion of women preachers. A sexually integrated female preaching ministry is not sanctioned anywhere in the Scriptures, least of all here. Instead, the passage before us agrees with those which we have studied to this point in forbidding women pastors.

The Prohibition Defended — In verses 36-38, the Apostle defends the prohibition against women preachers. Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.

No doubt, some of you are confused. You have heard people, even good people, defend the ordination of women. You have witnessed good people promote women to positions of authoritative leadership. There was a nagging question in the back of your mind whenever you read what some have dismissed as “those pesky verses,” but you were assured that they could be explained away. Now listen carefully to the Apostle.

Paul has presented a great deal of information concerning worship to the Corinthians (and consequently, to us). He has instructed them on the general attitude of men and women at worship, which permitted him to move to the issue of the attitude with which we partake of the Lord’s Table. Then he provided instruction for the universal way in which the Spirit works in each Christian. From that point, he was able to focus on the motive underlying the actions of the Corinthian saints in the name of worship. This at last permitted him to specifically contrast their actions with what he wished they would do. He instructed them to treat one another with respect and dignity, to seek always to build up others instead of focusing on making oneself feel good. It is significant that he begins and ends with a discussion of gender roles, since that was the point of greatest conflict then—and perhaps now.

In their arrogance, the Corinthians had ignored the forms of worship among all the churches. They had presumed that they were free to do as they wished. They did not need to conform to any specific model—they were free! So the Apostle scathingly asks, did the Word of God originate with you? Are you the only people it has reached? It is as though he asked, “Are you the mother church? Are you the only church?”

While we do not bow to tradition as superior to Scripture, neither may we ignore tradition. If the history of the church demonstrates that except for heterodox cults the practise of the churches has been to exclude women from positions of authoritative leadership, especially excluding them from pastoral office, we exhibit incredible arrogance if we now attempt to elevate them to that which is prohibited in the Word.

Paul could as easily have addressed the churches of this day in asking those same scathing questions. Did the Word of God originate with you? In other words, who has given us authority to do as we will? Who has permitted us to ignore what God has clearly said? Are you the only people [the Word of God] has reached? Can we really dismiss in such a casual manner nineteen centuries of Christian witness and understanding simply because our culture expects us to do so? If you did not write Scripture, then obey it. If you are not the sole receivers of God’s Word, then accept it as Christians everywhere are obliged to do. No one has a right to overrule, ignore, alter or disobey God’s Word. Those who attempt to do so seek to place themselves above God’s Word.

Paul makes the test easy. If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that which I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. Those who wish to reinterpret Scripture to make it conform to their peculiar views must confront this verse. Such people refuse to say that the Apostle wrote what he meant and that this is the will of God, therefore they must explain it away. However, you can read. What does the Word say? Will you accept what God says, or do you actually wish to explain it away? Am I now interpreting the Word for you, or am I challenging you to read it for yourself?

Just as it is true that whoever knows God listens to us [1 John 4:6], so those who are spiritual must acknowledge that what Paul has written is the Lord’s command. Conversely, those who fail to exhibit the Spirit—those who are unspiritual—will endeavour to explain away what Paul has written because they do not wish to receive it as the Lord’s command. If you accept what the Apostle has written—concerning headship, concerning the Lord’s Table, concerning spiritual gifts, concerning the exercise of love, concerning building one another up through orderly worship—then you must also accept that what he has written prohibiting women from spiritual leadership is also the Lord’s command.

What if some ignore this? What if some professed Christians in effect say, “I don’t care what Paul writes. I will do what I please.”? How should the church respond? If [someone] ignores this, he himself will be ignored. That individual who wilfully ignores what is written and arrogantly argues for the promotion of women to positions of leadership within the church do not merit the Apostle’s time or attention. Where the evidence of any truth is abundant and has been clearly presented, those who reject it should be left to act on their own responsibility. Further disputation can do no good.[10]

I am not harsh or cruel when I say that you are not obligated to heed anyone as a servant of God who ignores what is written in the Word. Those who reject the apostolic teaching are to be rejected as legitimate servants of God. Because it was the revelation of God as Scripture, Paul’s teaching in this instance was absolutely authoritative.[11] In fact, I stand on rather solid ground when I caution you against following after anyone with a novel interpretation or anyone who explains away what the Apostle has here written.

There is another chilling aspect to this apostolic warning which should sober those who rush to introduce novel reinterpretation of Scripture at variance with the accepted practise of all the churches. It is quite possible that the Apostle is warning that if anyone ignores this divine command, they will discover that they themselves are ignored at the return of Christ. In other words, it is entirely possible that they do not even know the Lord, and that is why they fail to recognise His command. Certainly, the translation before us supports that view, looking to some future event as it does.

Whenever anyone casts doubt on that which God has approved as His revealed Word, you should reject him or her as a teacher. Should an individual question the Word on the basis of novel discoveries which have lain dormant for centuries and only recently been revealed, hold fast to the Word and refuse to follow them. The bottom line for the people of God is that the Word of God is complete and is provided to instruct us in what is pleasing to the Living God. Paul has written some things that are hard to understand and it is unfortunately true that there are ignorant and unstable people [who] distort those difficult truths to their own destruction [2 Peter 3:15, 16]. However, it is also true that each Christian has received an anointing and can therefore understand what God means when He has spoken [see 1 John 2:26, 27]. If the clear sense makes good sense, seek no other sense.

The Prohibition Defined — Verses thirty-nine and forty summarise the issues Paul has addressed in chapters eleven through fourteen, but especially the teaching of chapter fourteen. Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way. Paul’s purpose in writing was to equip the church to function harmoniously and in an orderly fashion. The concern is that the people did not offend against propriety.

Eagerly seek to build one another. Prophecy will build through strengthening, through encouraging, through comforting [see 1 Corinthians 14:3]. If someone thinks he is gifted to speak in other languages, don’t stop him. However, ensure that the exercise of that gift is conducted according to the apostolic rules which limit those seeking to engage in that practise to no more than three and then only if there is an interpreter present. Consequently, note that though provision is made for women to pray and/or prophesy there is no specific provision for women to speak in tongues. The purpose of all these instructions is to ensure that our worship honours God through reflecting the ethical beauty of the Body of Christ and through a spirit of submissive orderliness.

That word which is translated fitting [eujschmovnw"] expresses the ethical beauty of variety in unity.[12] The word is powerfully descriptive of the attitude of seeking the welfare of one another through building one another up. Contrasted to that deliberate choice, the Apostle unites the word orderly [kata; tavxin]. Tavxi" is a military term used metaphorically here. It speaks of the battle array or of the order of battle or even of the structure of an army. The impact of the Apostle’s choice is the teaching that the church should be beautiful in its attitude and orderly as it embraces the will of God. There should be no exaltation of mere opinion against the revealed will of God. Instead, there should be a spirit of submission to Him and a spirit of acceptance of His will. We are responsible to review our worship to ensure that we obey Him and submit to His will.

I have of necessity covered a broad array of topics in this message. I acknowledge that, but there are some truths which immediately touch us. We are obligated to submit to the will of God. This means that we are responsible to discover what pleases Him and then boldly do that which He has revealed through His Word. Clearly, if a practise is universal, we dare not exalt our own opinion against that which is readily embraced by the saints of God. The idea that we may disregard two thousand years of Christian teaching on the subject of women pastors because of contemporary social norms is tantamount to having the attitude of the Corinthians which merited an apostolic rebuke. We should proceed with extreme caution when we are being told that we should quickly promote women to positions of leadership within the church.

The practise of the churches with respect to female leadership was fortified through appeal to the Law. The Apostle was quite clear in pointing to the unity of the Old Testament in demonstrating this truth. Just so, we must be cautious in reinterpreting Scripture to fit modern, western ideas of egalitarianism.

The churches the Apostle established and which He served, agreed on these points: women are to be silent (sigavtwsan) at church meetings; women are not to speak (lalei`n); women are to submit themselves (uJpotassevsqwsan). This is consistent with the teaching that women are not to exercise authority over a man, but rather that they honour God by exhibiting a submissive spirit. They, as is also true for men, are to rejoice in their gender and in the role which attends their gender. Men are to assume the role of leadership and women are to assume a role of building up children and other women, just as we have seen in this series of messages on the apostolic teaching.

These apostolic injunctions are not merely a personal whim either of Paul or of the churches, nor are they based on custom from that ancient day. Instead, Paul says that these injunctions are in agreement with the Scriptures (kaqw;" kai; oJ novmo" levgei) and that they are the Lord’s command (kurivou ejsti;n ejntolhv).

Shall we do what we think best, or shall we obey the Lord? Shall we ignore the revealed will of God, or shall we submit to that will? Shall we judge our practise by the spirit of this dying age, or shall we resist the spirit of this age? It is not merely through obedience that we demonstrate the presence of the Spirit of God, but it is in attitude. If we reluctantly do what is right, though harbouring the thought that given the opportunity we will change things, we demonstrate that nothing has really changed with us. I call on the people of God to do nothing less than joyfully embrace the will of God that He may bless us with His presence and with His power.

Specifically, I call on the men of this church to accept the responsibility to be manly and to direct the affairs of the church. I call on the men to repent of the attitude which permits us to remain uninvolved in oversight and direction both of the church and in our homes. I urge the women of this church to encourage their husbands and the men to assume their appointed roles. You ladies can do this through refusing to push for leadership and through demonstrating a submissive spirit. Should you demand your “rights,” the church must be prepared to accept all that goes with those “rights,” including the displeasure of the Lord. Let us each determine that we will cease to be thoroughly modern in the church and in the home, instead seeking to honour God through a spirit which demonstrates that we accept His divine plan for our lives and for our service. Amen.

----

[1] In Step with the Spirit of the Age, Alberta Report (Vol. 26, June 21 1999), http://albertareport.com/volume26/990621/story2.html

[2] Women Preachers, http://208.230.129.90/CRN/WomenPreachers.html

[3] B. B. Zikmund, A. T. Lummis, P. M. Y. Chang, “Clergy Women: An Uphill Calling,” Hartford Seminary, Hartford CT, in “Women clergy in Orthodox and Protestant Christianity, and other religions,” http://www.religioustolerance.org/femclrg4.htm

[4] Note discussion in Craig S. Keener, Paul, Women & Wives (Hendrickson: Peabody MA Ó1992) pp 74-75; note also Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (United Bible Societies: NY, Ó1971) pg. 565

[5] H. Wayne House, “A Biblical View of Women in the Ministry, Part 3: The Speaking of Women and the Prohibition of the Law,” (Bibliotheca Sacra Vol. 145, July 1988) pg. 302

[6] R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians (Augsburg Publishing House: Minneapolis, Ó1963) pg. 616

[7] e.g. G. M. M. Pelser, “Women and ecclesiastical ministries in Paul,” (Neotestamentica Vol. 10, 1976) pp. 92-109, cited in Keener, pg. 74

[8] Metzger, pg. 565

[9] D. A. Carson, “’Silent in the Churches’: On the Role of Women in 1 Corinthians 14:33b-36,” in John Piper and Wayne Grudem, Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood (Crossway Books: Wheaton, IL Ó1991) pg. 152

[10] Charles Hodge, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Eerdmans: Grand Rapids MI n.d.) pg. 307

[11] John MacArthur, Jr., The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: 1 Corinthians (Moody: Chicago IL Ó1984) pg. 394

[12] Thomas Charles Edwards, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Klock & Klock Christian Publishers: Minneapolis MN Ó1885) pg. 384