An Authentic Calling: Representing Christ and His Kingdom through the Church

164

An Authent i c Ca l l i ng: Represent i ng Chr i s t and Hi s Ki ngdom through the Chur ch

The Role of Women in Ministry, continued

responsibility and authority within the home. For instance, the particular Greek term in the highly debated passage in 1 Tim. 2.12, andros, which has often times been translated “man,” may also be translated “husband.” With such a translation, then, the teaching would be that a wife ought not to rule over her husband. This doctrine of a woman who, in choosing to marry, makes herself voluntarily submissive to “line up under” her husband is entirely consistent with the gist of the NT teaching on the role of authority in the Christian home. The Greek word hupotasso, which means to “line up under” refers to a wife’s voluntary submission to her own husband (cf. Eph. 5.22, 23; Col. 3.18; Titus 2.5; 1 Pet. 3.1). This has nothing to do with any supposed superior status or capacity of the husband; rather, this refers to God’s design of godly headship, authority which is given for comfort, protection, and care, not for destruction or domination (cf. Gen. 2.15-17; 3.16; 1 Cor. 11.3). Indeed, that this headship is interpreted in light of Christ’s headship over the church signifies the kind of godly headship that must be given, that sense of tireless care, service, and protection required from godly leadership. Of course, such an admonition for a wife to submit to a husband would not in any way rule out that women be involved in a teaching ministry (e.g., Titus 2.4), but, rather, that in the particular case of married women, that their own ministries would come under the protection and direction of their respective husbands (Acts 18.26). This would assert that a married woman’s ministry in the church would be given serving, protective oversight by her husband, not due to any notion of inferior capacity or defective spirituality, but for the sake of, as one commentator has put it, “avoiding confusion and maintaining orderliness” (cf. 1 Cor. 14.40). In both Corinth and Ephesus (which represent the contested Corinthian and Timothy epistolary comments), it appears that Paul’s restriction upon women’s participation was prompted by occasional happenings, issues which grew particularly out of these contexts, and therefore are meant to be understood in those lights. For instance, the hotly contested test of a women’s “silence” in the church (see both 1 Cor. 14 and 1 Tim. 2) does not appear in any way to undermine the prominent role women played in the