BAYLOR UNIVERSITY

GEORGE W. TRUETT THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

WOMEN IN MINISTRY IN 1 CORINTHIANS

AN ANALYSIS OF A PAULINE TENSION

SUBMITTED TO:

DR. TODD D. STILL

FOR THE COURSE:

THEOLOGY 7375-01: PAUL FOR PILGRIMS

BY

ELI GUTIERREZ
 Introduction

One question that is very controversial among Christians is about women in ministry. Some

Christians affirm the leadership of women in all areas of ministry, whereas others reject it or

relegate women to only some areas of leadership. Both groups ground their views on Scripture

and both think they have the right interpretation of different passages. In this paper two of those

Bible sections are going to be examined. Both are in Paul’s letter 1 Corinthians. The first text is 1

Corinthians 11:2-16, in which the participation of women in worship is affirmed and regulated.

The second is 1 Corinthians 14:33b-36, in which Paul commands women to remain silent in the

worship setting. From the outset, these sections seem to be in tension at best, and in outright

contradiction at worst. In order to understand such tension, it is important to read them in light of

the whole testimony of Scripture in general and the evidences in the Pauline corpus. Paul affirms

that in Christ there is no male and female (Gal 3:28). And the evidences in his letters show that

there are indeed women participating actively in the leadership of the Pauline churches. Women

as Phoebe, Priscila, Junias, and others are mentioned as deaconesses, co-workers, apostles, and

companions in the ministry of the gospel. Therefore, passages as 1 Corinthians 14:33b-36 should

be read in conversation with the big picture. That is precisely what this paper is intending to do,

to put in conversation two passages in 1 Corinthians regarding the participation of women in the

worship setting. Also, it is important to read these Pauline commands in their own particular

context. This paper would argue that they are not universal commands for all times and spaces

but, rather, practical instructions for very specific contexts. Therefore, their correct application in

our context would not be the imposition of head coverings for women in the worship setting

neither their silencing, but a more thoughtful application of the principles behind Paul’s

concerns.
 1 Corinthians 11:2-16

To grasp the meaning of this passage requires more than a superficial reading. While Paul

and his readers know exactly what he is talking about, there remain some uncertainties for us.

From the distance there are some difficulties for us as readers of this letter. The question is what

exactly is the head covering and why was Paul concerned about its use. However, there is also

some certainties that can serve as a starting point to look at this passage. It is clear that Paul is

talking about the worship setting. In chapter 10 he has dealt with the Lord’s supper and the

freedom of the Christian. Naturally, from that discussion come some issues related to the

worship setting and the misuse of the Christian freedom in it. In 11:2-16 Paul is going to correct

some practices in the Corinthian worship. It seems that some women are prophesying and

praying in an improper manner. But before dealing with the question of what that practice

specifically entailed some considerations will be noted. First, it should be highlighted that

women are actually participating actively in the worship service. They are praying and

prophesying in the early Christian worship and Paul makes no effort to stop them. He wants

them to do it in a proper way, but he does not want them to stop. This is very important to keep

in mind as we read 1 Corinthians 14:33b-36. Second, Paul starts in verse 2 by praising the

Corinthians for remembering him and keeping the traditions he handed them. This might be a

rhetorical device in order to convince them to follow his subsequent instruction. But it is

illustrative. It shows that whatever the Corinthian women are not doing right is not a matter at

the heart of the gospel. Otherwise, Paul had not begun by praising them. In another letter Paul

starts by rebuking the Galatians because they had been led astray in a matter central to the gospel

(Galatians 1:6; 3:1). But here, it seems to be a practical matter.

 Verlyn Verbrugge affirms that this is one of the most difficult passages to interpret in the

whole Bible for various reasons.1 For example, the ambiguity of the Greek words for man and

woman, which could also mean husband and wife respectively. Moreover, the reference to the

head covering is also ambiguous, it has been interpreted both as long hair and as a veil.

Verbrugge concludes that Paul is primarily referring to a veil or at least to some sort of covering

that women put on their heads.2 Nevertheless, what is crucial is not the specific identification of

the head coverings but why is it important for Paul that women do not participate in worship

without them. David Garland notes that the heart of the problem is that women are praying to

God uncovered.3 He argues that while Paul oscillates with parallel statements about men and

women in this section, in verse 13 there is a question about women praying with their head

uncovered that has no parallel. Moreover, Paul is trying to bring the Corinthians back to the

common teaching and practice in the Pauline churches. For some reasons, he sees that the proper

way for women to be in the worship setting is with head coverings and that is the common

practice in the other Christian communities under Paul’s influence.

Whatever is the immediate context of this Pauline instruction, it is clear the apostle considers

that the issue is about shame and dishonor. Women praying with their heads uncovered are

bringing shame to themselves and to the community. It is helpful to consider this is an honor-

shame culture. While it may seem odd to postmodern western eyes to make such a big deal of the

head covering, this is the way in which their culture worked and in which they made sense of the

world. To avoid shame and to add honor were essential issues for them and Paul considered that

1
Verlyn D. Verbrugge, “1 Corinthians” in Tremper III Longman and David E Garland (general editors) The
Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Revised Edition. Romans-Galatians (Grand Rapids, MI; Zondervan, 2008), 350
2
Verbrugge, 351
3
Garland, David E. 1 Corinthians (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008) 507
the practice of participating in worship without head covering was being dishonorable. 4

Verbrugge suggests that Paul is implying that with the use of a veil a woman has more control

over the situations taking place in the worship setting. Not only regarding other men, but also

concerning to her own reputation and the honor of her family. Culturally, some sort of head

covering was appropriate in public spaces and in mixed company. In ancient Greco-Roman

culture, head covering was intended to hide female attractiveness in order to avoid male lust.

Immerse in this context, Paul is here affirming that the worship setting is not the time to focus on

male-female attractiveness, but a time to worship God. Thus, the women who did not use head

covering when the church met were not honoring their cultural place.

The question now is why some women are praying with their head uncovered. Paul Sampley

reconstructs the situation in the following terms. Some women in the church had stopped

covering their heads in the worship setting because they considered themselves in line with

Paul’s embrace of equality of the sexes in Christ (Galatians 3:28). 5 Paul’s critique of

accommodation to the culture (1 Corinthians 6), and Paul’s welcoming of women into active

participation in worship and leadership made them think the head coverings were no longer

needed. Another possibility is what Verbrugges argues, that women were not using head

coverings because of the ambiguity of the worship setting. He calls the attention to the fact that

the early Christian worship did not happen in church buildings but in the houses of believers.

Normally, women would be unveiled in their own houses and in houses with other women. On

the one hand the worship took place in a house, a private space. But, on the other hand, the

worship was a time when men and women gathered and, therefore, a public time. Thus, the

4
Paul J. Sampley, “1 & 2 Corinthians” in Keck, Leander E. The New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary. Volume IX.
Acts. Introduction to Epistolary Literature. Romans. 1 & 2 Corinthians. Galatians. (Nashville; Abingdon Press,
2015), 798
5
Sampley, 798
worship setting became an ambiguous time-space. Perhaps, those women were not sure about the

nature of the worship setting and that is why some were not using head coverings. Or perhaps, as

Sampley noted, on the basis of Paul’s own preaching they were arguing that in Christ it is not

needed to follow those cultural norms.

As it was Paul’s custom he offers some arguments to support his instruction. His point is that

women praying with their heads uncovered bring shame to themselves and the church. But when

he tries to explain why this is so he offers some arguments that lead him to complicated

ramifications. In verse 7 Paul refers to the account of creation in Genesis in a way than seems to

affirm men are prior not only chronologically but also in importance. Thus, Pail immediately

pushes back. He has already affirmed in this letter and elsewhere that in Christ there are no

gender hierarchies (Galatians 3:28). In chapter 7 he had already reconstructed the relationships

between men and women, or husband and wife, counterculturally as one of equality and

mutuality.6 However, in his attempt to bring women into conformity with the practice of the

Pauline churches Paul seems to subordinate women to men. So, he pushes back to the logical

implications of his argument. Sampley states that “in the process of writing 11:2-16, Paul

discovers that two of his own values are in conflict.” 7 Therefore, he interrupts his argument

affirming the equality of the sexes saying “nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of

man or man independent of woman. For just as woman came from man, so man comes through

woman; but all things come from God.” (11:11-12 NRSV). Thus, while in order to affirm the

practice of head-covering Paul argues that women dishonor their head, he also states that men

come from women and, ultimately, all comes from God.

6
Sampley, 799
7
Sampley, 799
 Paul’s biblical argument leads to a hierarchical view of the relationship between men and

women and it is interrupted by his theological conviction that in Christ there is neither male nor

female. Paul affirms that women came from men because it served the point he was trying to

make. But he recognizes that the opposite is also true. Paul himself seems to be critical of the

implication of his own argument.8 Thus, he is not establishing a universal hierarchy in the

relationship between men and women, but he is making a particular point in favor of a specific

argument, namely, the use of head-covering in the worship setting. Paul struggles because he

does not want to imply that women are inferior to men. That is why next he brings the argument

of nature. In this case he is referring to the nature of things, the normal custom in their culture.

Sampley notes that another issue to consider in this passage is the relationship between

believers and culture. While in some places Paul affirms the distinction between the community

of believers and the surrounding culture, he also seems to recognize that a complete separation

from culture is impractical and he leaves room for interaction. Paul even takes some of the

cultural assumptions of his time as guidelines for Christian behavior. However, Paul himself

does not ground his argument solely on accommodation to cultural values. He offers a

theological ground for the practice of head-covering in the worship setting; nevertheless, in

doing so he realizes that the logical ramification of his argument leads to a position that was

problematic even to himself. Paul’s interest is to bring women in the Corinthian congregation

back to the practice of all Pauline churches. Perhaps, his sole command would have sufficed.

However, as he often does, Paul tried to support his command with reasoned arguments.

Nevertheless, as Verbrugge argues, Paul seems to realize that his arguments were not completely

8
Sempley, 799
convincing and that is why he ends with a final argument based only on the practice of all the

churches. It was him saying “do this because I say so, and this is the practice of all churches.”9

In conclusion, Paul is calling both men and women to show modesty and honor according to

the sensibilities of their own time and context. In order to apply this text to our context, the

question is not whether women are permitted to use a veil or not, nor is it whether people are

permitted to use long hair or not, the question is what are the cultural sensibilities of our time. As

long as it does not conflict with matters at the heart of the gospel, Christians are to show respect

for the cultural practice of their own time and space. We should not our Christian freedom to

cause us behave improperly in the eyes of our space-time. The following discussion would be

best understood noting this consideration.

1 Corinthians 14:33-36

This section is one of the most difficult to interpret for today’s Christians. For some people it

precludes women to participate in roles of leadership in the church and, more specifically, in the

worship setting. However, before coming to such hasty conclusions it is crucial to note some

important considerations. First, as 1 Corinthians 11 showed, it is clear that women are actually

praying and prophesying in the worship setting. Paul does not forbid this practice, he sees it as

proper but he only wants women to wear head covering while doing it. Moreover, the evidence

shows that women were actually leading and participating in the Pauline churches and the early

church. There are female deaconesses (Romans 16:1), prophetesses (Acts 21:9), and perhaps

even apostles (Romans 16:7). Therefore, it is clear that what we have in 1 Corinthians 14:33b-36

is not a prohibition for all women in all times to remain silent in the worship setting. At worst, it

9
Verbrugge, 352
is a commandment to hold in tension with other portions of Scripture and at best, there has been

offered a number of different interpretations.

For various reasons verses 33b-35 have been considered by many scholars as an

interpolation. Longenecker and Still maintain that this section could be an interpolation pointing

to the fact that in some manuscripts these verses come after verse 40 instead of 33. The

placement of the same phrases in different places often signals that those verses originated not in

the text itself but in the margins.10 Thus, it is possible that a scribe wrote them as a note to the

text and later scribes copied the note into the text in different places. Sampley also considers the

possibility of interpolation here. He notes that this section “is singular when weighed against the

picture and roles of women in all of the other undisputed Pauline letters.” 11 Thus, it is possible

that a different writer than Paul added these verses to the letter in order to give authority to some

particular views about the role of women in the worship setting. 12 Sampley sees a trajectory of

development in relation to the role of women in the early decades of Christianity that is reflected

in the writings of the New Testament. For him, Paul represents the earliest stage with the

affirmation of active participation of women in the worship setting. Then, Ephesians and

Colossians, written a number of years later, represent accommodation to the social customs and

cultural practices, in which wives are to submit to their husbands. Finally, the Pastoral Epistles

represent further accommodation to culture. For Sampley, 1 Corinthians 14:33b-36 fits better in

the later stage of development.

Indeed, these verses seem out of context or as an addition after Paul’s concluding remarks in

33a. Paul just ended a section in which he called the Corinthians to an orderly worship gathering.

And reading verse 36 immediately after 33b seems easy and natural. Moreover, as it has been

10
Longenecker, Bruce W. and Todd D. Still, Thinking through Paul (Grand Rapids, MI; Zondervan, 2014), 129
11
Sampley, 834
12
Sampley, 834
already noted, verses 33b-36 might be interpreted in a way that contradicts other Pauline sections

and the practice of women involved in church leadership that is evident in the Pauline

communities. However, the interpolation view is not completely certain. Although in some

manuscripts these verses are placed after verse 40, there are no manuscripts in which this section

is not present, and there is not a scholarly consensus about it being an interpolation. Actually,

Longenecker and Still affirm that it is best to read this section against the backdrop of culture

rather than as an interpolation. And Sampley recognizes that it cannot be affirmed with complete

certainty that this section is an interpolation and, as we shall see, he also offers interpretations

assuming it was written by Paul.

Another suggestion that scholars have offered to interpret this passage is that Paul is quoting

the Corinthians. In this view, verses 34-35 are not Paul’s words but the Corinthian’s words in

one of their letters to Paul or, perhaps, in the reports he has received about them. While it is

appealing, this view has not reached scholarly acceptance and it lacks the support of evidences in

the text. The attempts to affirm Paul is not the author of verses 34-35 are right to point to the

tension between them and Paul’s teachings and the actual practice in the Pauline churches.

Nevertheless, it is impossible to affirm with complete certainty either the interpolation view or

the quotation view. Besides, regardless who is its author or its place, this section is in our New

Testament and Christians are to make sense of it. Thus, the following analysis is going to assume

that Paul is the author of verses 34-35 because it is not only a possibility but the natural

presupposition until some evidence shows more convincingly that he is not.

The first part of verse 33 is a conclusion of the previous section in which Paul has offered a

number of regulations for worship, namely, the orderly practice of the gifts of prophecy and

tongues. Here Paul offers a theological reason for the order in worship, that it reflects the
character of God. Following this conclusion, Paul goes to a specific area in which the Corinthian

church has shown disorder. Verbrugge calls it a “tangent” section. 13 It is a final comment that

illustrates practically what Paul has just dealt with.

To understand the meaning of this section it is necessary to attempt to reconstruct the

situation Paul is addressing. While it is impossible to know for sure what was exactly happening,

there are some key considerations to point. First, it is clear that Paul is addressing a situation that

occurs in the worship setting of the Corinthian church. Second, as Garland notes, it is probable

that Paul is addressing a situation between husbands and wives. 14 As it has been said already, the

Greek terms for man and woman could refer to husband and wife too. Third, whatever was

happening it was bringing shame to the church. Considering the character of the honor-shame

culture of the ancient world this is particularly important. And fourth, Paul affirms that wives

must submit to their husbands as the law says. Probably, some of the people causing disorder in

church were using the Law as an excuse. Therefore, Paul uses the interpretation of the Law to

bring them back to order and honor.

One possibility is that certain women in the Corinthian church were disrupting the service by

chattering among them. In this case, Paul is addressing some particular women in a very specific

situation. As Longenecker and Still note, if that is the case we might wish Paul had been more

specific.15 Verbrugge’s attempt to reconstruct the situation argues that whatever these wives were

speaking it was in conflict with what their husbands were speaking. 16 That is why Paul says “it is

shameful for a woman to speak in church” (1 Cor 14:35 NRSV). In this honor-shame culture, to

go against the cultural norm of wives submitting to their husbands was shameful. Since men and

13
Verbrugge, 387
14
Garland, 379
15
Longenecker, 130
16
Verbrugge, 388
women were prophesying it is possible that wives’ prophecies were contradicting their husbands’

prophecies and that caused a family conflict and a problematic witness to both the church and

unbelievers. Verbrugge’s view makes sense considering Paul’s instruction to women to ask their

husbands at home. Perhaps, the husbands were being interrupted by their wives while they were

prophesying. Thus, Paul calls the wives to ask their husbands at home and let them prophesy

orderly in the worship setting, because the disorder was bringing shame to themselves and to the

community.

Sampley calls the attention to the fact that this passage in which Paul calls women to be

silent is in a series of instructions in which Paul calls different groups of people to be silent in the

church in order not to interrupt the worship of others. First, Paul calls those who speak in

tongues to remain in silence if there is no one to interpret them in the meeting (14:28). Second,

Paul calls to silence the one speaking if another one receives a revelation (14:30). Thus, Sampley

considers verses 34-35 as the third instance in a series of callings to silence for the sake of order

and for the edification of the congregation. 17 In that sense, Paul’s instruction to wives is a

practical suggestion for the well-being of the community.

Longenecker and Still note that Paul has already called the Corinthians to let go some of

their “freedoms” in order to benefit someone else or the gospel (1 Cor 9:8; 10:32). 18 For

example, he called the Corinthian believers to regulate their eating practices in order not to

offend others (8-10). Also, as we have seen already in chapter 11, Paul called women to not let

their freedom in Christ cause them to act without propriety. Moreover, Paul wants to respect

cultural sensitivities because the Christian meeting is to be a witness to the non-Christian

community (14:24-25). He wants things to be done orderly in the worship setting for the sake of

17
Sampley, 835
18
Longenecker 130
unbelievers but also for the edification of the church (14:26). Thus, Longenecker and Still argues

that it is possible that Paul’s concerns in his instruction in 14:34-35 has to do with his desire to

eliminate any obstacle in the promulgation of the gospel. Thus, the church is to minimize

unnecessary offenses such as the one the Corinthian wives’ speaking was causing.

Another possible situation Paul is addressing, as Longenecker and Still put it, is one of

charismatic excess.19 As it has been repeatedly noted, Paul’s main concern in chapter 14 is the

order in the worship setting for practical, cultural, evangelistic, and theological reasons. It seems

that the Corinth church had some issues with order due to this Charismatic enthusiasm. And,

probably, women in Corinth were particularly vulnerable to it and that was causing disorder in

the church gathering. Thus, for the sake of unbelievers and their cultural sensitivities, it was

better for wives to remain in silence.

Then, before giving hasty conclusions, it is necessary to look at some important

considerations about the cultural context. While Paul’s instruction to women to remain in silence

seems harsh and even offensive for our modern sensitivities, it is crucial to measure the text

against its own context. It would be a methodological mistake to interpret the text beginning with

our context and imposing on it foreign questions and concerns. Thus, it is to be considered that in

the ancient context women did not usually participate in leadership positions or in learning

activities. In that sense, the early Christian church, beginning with the Jesus group, was a

countercultural community. As it has been already noted, the evidence shows that women had an

active participation in leadership roles in the early church. Actually, it is likely that one of the

reasons Paul instructed women to remain in silence was to avoid unnecessary offenses to the

cultural sensitivities of unbelievers that did not see as proper for women to speak in public or

19
Longenecker, 131
lead at all. Paul affirms women are learning in the Christian community, although in that

particular context sometimes it would be better for them to do it in the private space.

Thus, to apply this text today the question is not whether it commands women to be silent in

church, but how is our context now and what are the cultural sensibilities of our time. Along

those lines, Longenecker and Still argue that silencing women would be offensive now rather

than their speaking.20 Behind Paul’s concern is not a hierarchical relation between men and

women but, rather, the intention to proclaim the gospel without hindrance. If offending cultural

sensitivities represents a problem for the communication of the gospel then the Christian

community can use their Christian freedom in other to avoid unnecessary offenses. Of course, as

long as it does not conflict with matters at the heart of the gospel.

Conclusions

Without any doubt, there is a tension between these two passages. They are in the same

document and they seem to establish two seemingly contradictory instructions. As was shown

above, scholars have attempted to explain this tension. However, it seems impossible to avoid

the tension and perhaps that is precisely as it should be. Nevertheless, the examination of this

passages has shed light to its interpretation in a way that it is possible to apply them faithfully in

spite of their tension. Both passages deal with issues of their own culture. In that sense,

Christians are called to respect cultural sensibilities as long as they are not in conflict with the

heart of the gospel. Paul calls the Corinthians to behave in accordance to what is considered

honorable in their own culture. Some Christians were using their Christian freedom in a way that

compromised their honor according to the cultural standards. Therefore, Paul brings them back

to proper behavior. It is clear that these are not universal commandments based on theological
20
Longenecker, 131
matters at the heart of the gospel. These are practical instructions for the church in a particular

cultural context. Thus, to apply these texts in our own culture Christians are to know their own

specific context, and speak to it in its own terms for the sake of the gospel and the honor of the

Christian community. Our Christian freedom is not to be used to bring shame to the church. In

different contexts that could mean different things, but it is always a matter of faithfulness to

Scripture. Now, regarding women in ministry, it is clear that none of these texts precludes their

participation universally. Actually, it is affirmed the involvement of women in the worship

setting. Any reading that prohibit women to speak in church is to be rejected. And it is to be

affirmed the Pauline principle that in Christ there is no male and female and, at the same time, it

is to be held the principle of avoiding unnecessary offenses to true cultural sensitivities of our

time. The church is to be a discerning community that faithfully and prayerfully reads Scripture,

interprets it thoughtfully, and applies in it to the different contexts in which the church lives.

Bibliography
Bruce Winter, “1 Corinthians” in D. A. Carson, R. T France, J. A. Motyer, and G. J. Wenham
(consulting editors). New Bible Commentary. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994

Garland, David E. 1 Corinthians. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008

Longenecker, Bruce W. and Todd D. Still, Thinking through Paul. Grand Rapids, MI;
Zondervan, 2014

Sampley, J. Paul. “1 & 2 Corinthians” in Keck, Leander E. The New Interpreter’s Bible
Commentary. Volume IX. Acts. Introduction to Epistolary Literature. Romans. 1 & 2
Corinthians. Galatians. Nashville; Abingdon Press, 2015

Verbrugge, Verlyn D. “1 Corinthians” in Tremper III Longman and David E Garland (general
editors). The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Revised Edition. Romans-Galatians. Grand
Rapids, MI; Zondervan, 2008