No longer silent

A Bible study on 1 Corinthians 14.34-35 and Galatians 3.28

Elsa Tamez 

The female theologian, pastor or teacher of theology lives a paradox: she promotes the integration and training of women in theological work and priesthood and, at the same time, she feels perplexed because when women follow this vocation, they find a social, ecclesiastical and professional reality which does not offer them a satisfactory environment in which to carry out their task and to accomplish the mission for which they have prepared themselves. These women, as with those who already hold leadership positions within the church or in theological education, usually devote a lot of energy in discussions which, to a certain degree, are related to their "status" as women. Highly qualified women have to resign themselves to quite insignificant tasks. And it is regrettable that owing to the marginal position of women, the church, the theology and the seminars are loosing the valuable contributions of this sector of humanity. As a general rule, one overlooks the fact that women not only have the required training but also a new cosmo-vision and creativity with regard to many new subjects concerning the theological, biblical, liturgical and pedagogical recreation.

To address this paradox, we, as women who promote the integration of other women in the fields of theology, priesthood and theological education must remember this reality and at the same time, fight to change it. This concern must be motivated not only to open more rewarding horizons for women in their work, but also because we are convinced that women's full participation enriches theology, biblical hermeneutics, church, liturgy, theological education and other related fields.

Therefore, our fight is twofold and must be undertaken in different fields: to promote women's participation in the church and theology and, simultaneously, in practice, to fight for more opportunities for women in churches, seminars, centres for theological research and so on.

Biblical hermeneutics is one of these important fields. We know that the Bible, interpreted from an androcentric and patriarchal point of view, has been used as a source for legitimizing the marginalisation of women in the church and theology. To read the Bible with a liberating outlook for women is not easy. We find texts which proclaim positive situations for women (Galatians 3:28), while in others women are explicitly marginalized (1 Corinthians 14:34-35.) How should these texts be interpreted? What can we do with them? Both questions echo in the church and make their members lose their bearings. We should appeal to a hermeneutics where women's points of view prevail and one exegesis which clarifies the situation within the text and the context.

In this short article we will study the contradictory affirmations expressed in Galatians 3:28 (Gal.) and 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (1 Cor.). Furthermore, we will try to offer some hermeneutical guidelines which enlighten a biblical rereading that is liberating for women. 

The incompatibility between Galatians 3:28 and 1 Corinthians 14:34-35

Reading the epistle to the Gal. and the epistle to the Corinthians we find a problem of hermeneutics: Gal. 3:28 speaks of equal privileges between male and female, whereas, 1 Cor. 14:34-35 speaks of submission of women to men. And the writer is the same person - Paul of Tarsus. The understanding of this incompatibility requires an exegesis which takes into account the letters as a whole, the context of the texts referred to, and the social, economic and cultural context of the writings.

It must be noted that we are trying to understand the disagreement and not to harmonize the writer's position. Therefore, we need to start by recognizing that some of the affirmations in 1 Cor. are prejudicial to women, either by the direct impact of the text or the interpretations made which are even more prejudicial to women. Nevertheless, this contradiction is not absolute but relative.

Paul has his reasons to stand by both positions. However, the degree of meaning or importance are very different. In Gal. 3:28, he is absolutely right concerning equal status between male and female. This pre-Pauline baptismal formula is a universal statement for all times. But in 1 Cor. 14:34-35, Paul's statement is very relative and understandable to a certain extent due to his pastoral concern in relation to the community as a whole, particularly its new members. His goal is that in worship assemblies all things be done decently and according to the cultural patterns in order to avoid a scandal (compare to 1 Cor. 14:40). This second position is debatable and perhaps Paul himself could accept it like that, as well as in the case of women who must cover their heads to pray (1 Cor. 11.16).

Consequently, if we take these texts out of their contexts, as has been done so many times, the gap between Gal. 3:28 and 1 Cor. 14:34 is extremely contradictory. On the other hand, if we understand each text in its particular context, we not only find that the contradiction is only relative and transitory but also that Paul is not trying to limit the rights that women acquired according to the Gospel (compare to 1 Cor. 11:11) nor make a statement of a dogmatic nature, valid at all times and in all places. To read 1 Cor. 14:34-35 as a universal statement for all women in all times means going against Christ's gospel. It even goes against the very spirit of the apostle Paul's letters, as this writer, more than any other, makes reference to women's active participation in the first Christian communities.

Why this disparity in Paul's text? How can we understand 1 Cor. 14:34-35? We will try to answer these questions in the following paragraphs. 

Galatians 3:28

Let's start with the epistle to the Galatians, probably written, before those to the Corinthians, between the years 50-55. In this epistle we find strong theological tensions between the way Paul conceives the Gospel, and the way of other judaizing Christians who promote compulsory circumcision and bondage of the law for all Christians. This is a fundamental debate about the understanding of the Gospel and the way it is experienced. The central axis which moves the letter is freedom from slavery. It is freedom from any kind of slavery, not only concerning the law, even though the law, in this case the Jewish law, is Paul's starting point. Remember that Paul is talking about a social and economic situation sustained by a system of slavery and an unjust legal system.¹

The apostle Paul sees in the churches of Galatia an imminent danger of falling prey to other forces which could obstruct the freedom that Christians have gained by faith. If with the coming of faith they have been liberated from cosmic powers (Gal. 4:8 ff.), now they were in danger of falling under the bondage of law.² That is why in this letter Paul speaks passionately about the freedom obtained in Christ. To Paul, law and circumcision were two elements which enslave and discriminate against other people. Faith, by contrast, liberates one from any slavery and marginalisation. "Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery" insists Paul. (Gal. 5:1)

Therefore, the faith "which should afterwards be revealed" (Gal. 3:23), that is to say Christ, is freed from legal bondage and one passes from the category of servant or child with tutor (Gal. 4:1) to that of son, free and without any kind of distinction, marginalisation or oppression (Gal. 3:28). Through faith we enter into a new stage of life. First, all privileges previously offered to those who possessed the law are abolished. Circumcision, a visible mark on the flesh, excludes women, whereas faith does not make any distinction between people.

The justification by faith and freedom are similar experiences. Being justified by faith, the way to freedom is open, independent of the law, in order that men and women may be fulfilled. This is an area of freedom where exclusion and discrimination are abolished and justice reigns. Even though Paul starts the discussion about justification by faith by saying that the Gentiles are also a part of the plan of salvation of God, the logic of his thinking when he speaks about freedom conducted him to transcend not only the barriers of ethnicity but also to affirm the social and sexual justice emerging in this new creation in Christ.³

It is in this way that Paul includes Gal. 3:28 which the apostle takes and interprets according to his vision of the new creation: "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:28) According to Denis R. MacDonald the step from law to faith "breaks down the walls protected by the elite - (either the Jews for their submission to the Torah or "free" individuals due to their legal status or even males due to the xx chromosomes) who exclude or put at a disadvantage Gentiles, slaves and women".⁴ There is no rhetoric in Gal. 3:28 if we put it in the social, economic and cultural context of the Roman Empire. The phrase in Gal. 4:7 "no longer a slave, but a child" is deeply powerful when understood in the context of that time of monarchy where only the aristocracy had the possibility to accede to the power and prestige reserved to the free heir and child.

For the faithful, the exclusion from privileges is nearing its end with Christ. Even more so, through this new dimension of faith, Paul rationalises even the ecclesiastic leadership because when he refers to it he underlines that "God shows no partiality." (Gal. 2:6)

The inclusion of women in this Pauline reflection, even if it comes from a pre-Pauline (judeo-hellenistic) baptismal confession, has had vital consequences for women, mainly the female slaves and poor of the first century. Access to faith and to the baptismal water shows no partiality and even more so, puts at the same level, with the same rights and duties, men and women, slaves and "free", Jews and Gentiles. This is the basis of the Christian movement in this new relationship with Jesus.⁵

From the Galatians to the Corinthians

The letter to the Corinthians reflects a community totally different to that of the Galatians. The conflictual situation of the Galatians concerning faith and law allows Paul to write a systematic theological speech which develops his thinking in the letter to the Romans further. This is not the case in the letter to the Corinthians. Except some versicles (1 Cor. 1:17-31, 7:1-6, 12:4-28, 13, 15, etc.) the problems addressed are very precise, such as incest (1 Cor. 5:1), adultery (1 Cor. 6:16), pagan courts, marriage and virginity (1 Cor. 7:1-40), the flesh offered to idols (1 Cor. 8:7-13) and others.

Paul writes the letter to the Corinthians from Ephesus between the years 53 and 56. Thus the letter to the Galatians in which he underlines the gospel of freedom was written previously. Maybe, the Corinthian community members had already received the message of freedom in Christ.⁶ This fact can be observed in the freedom of those who ate flesh offered to idols, or in the active participation of women in the church who lived free of any cultural bondage, such as the use of the veil, or in those who were filled with the Spirit and practised glossolalia.

For Paul, this behaviour was negative when the freedom of Spirit was assumed without observing cultural traditions or customs. As a result, scandals arose and the attitudes ensuing from the freedom having its source in the Gospel paradoxically became an obstacle for other people. Paul's proposed that the promotion of the community be privileged even if it meant slightly limiting the freedom obtained by the gospel.

Paul was possibly quite right. Nevertheless, the consequences of his position, interpreted and enlarged upon, first by his followers (compare Ephesians 5:22-24 and 1 Timothy 2:11-14) and later by the tradition of the church, was damaging to women. The equality of privilege for all human beings proclaimed in the Galatians remains obscure. 

1 Corinthians 14:34-35

As 1 Cor. 14:34-35 has been used thousands of times to restrict women's participation in the churches, let us consider the text in detail. These passages have been studied in depth and several hypothesis have been proposed in order to try and understand Paul's harsh words against the active participation of women in the congregation.

One of the widely accepted observations is the fact that 1 Cor. 34-35 is probably an interpolation included later or as a marginal note made by a reader at the end of the first century. This conclusion arises from the fact that in 1 Cor. 11:5, women's participation in assemblies is mentioned, while in 14:34 it is asked that women keep silent in the churches. Furthermore, according to the context, the link between verses 35 and 36 is strange. Verse 33a fits better with verse 36.⁷ This hypothesis could be right. However, the fact that the affirmations do not come from Paul himself do not solve the problem as, in any case, they appear in the final version of the letter that we keep in the canon.

In order to understand Paul's restriction concerning women other solutions have been proposed as follows:

-Paul fears that due to enthusiastic women's participation, the Christian community might be likened to some hellenistic religions with orgiastic tendencies where women were leaders. The associations devoted to the goddess Iris, for instance, have also made equal the power of men and women. Slaves and women could participate in worship without any distinction.⁸

-Attempts have been made to interpret the meaning of lalein (speak) as a verb with particular connotations. Some believe that it means "to interrupt" the right development of the order of worship. The women wishing to learn disturbed with their questions. That is why they were ordered to keep silence and ask their husbands at home.⁹

-When Paul referred to gunaikes (women) he was not talking about all women but only married women.¹⁰ In the Corinthian community there were single women (cp.c.7). The Greek word gunaikes could also be translated as "wives". This is apparent in 1 Cor. 14:35 "If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church."

-To the previous conclusions, others add that Paul refers only to Christian women, as they are those who wish to learn (manthanein). It is also possible that in the preceding versicles (1 Cor. 14:20-33) Paul refers only to wives whose husbands are present in worship and especially to prophets' wives. Their participation could include a judgement about what their prophet husbands were saying. These women's attitudes put their husbands ill at ease in public and this was an embarrassing fact at that time. Following this line of interpretation, Earle Ellis paraphrases the text as follows: " Prophets, that your women with gifts keep silence in assemblies as they are not allowed to speak in exchanges between prophets."¹¹ To speak (lalein) here makes reference to the spiritual gifts.

These hypothesis are useful and indicate that these texts couldn't be used to keep women silent in the churches and refuse them a significant participation in all ministries, including that of ordination. These exegetic proposals also contribute to understanding Paul's position in a specific and very particular community.

Nevertheless, even with what has been said up to now about 1 Cor. 14:34-35, we have found limiting elements for women which reflect the patriarchal situation not yet overcome even when trying to live a new creation according to the Gospel. Even worse is the position with regard to women in some post-Pauline letters, as stated above. That is why we affirm that the exegesis from a women's point of view is insufficient. Another step is required. A hermeneutic leap is required. 

The hermeneutical leap

A liberating reading for women needs a bold hermeneutic which goes beyond "academic prudence". In many cases this so called "academic prudence" becomes the synonym for a masculine interpretation. This criticism is not meant to reject academic rigor. On the contrary, one studies and takes into consideration those exegetical data which enlighten feminist rereading.

But this reading from a woman's point of view is not enough. Enriched by its exegesis, she takes a hermeneutical leap, over and above the canon of the written word and clings to the Spirit of judgement. The Spirit, according to Paul, leads to justice, life, freedom peace and respect of human dignity. The "canon of the written word" is overtaken not to leave it behind but to follow it more faithfully; as it is precisely this canon, in other words, the spirit of the canon as a whole, which serves as a criterion of judgment in order to identify more clearly the true spirit of the text.

Therefore, an exegetical approach from a woman's point of view keeps in mind, simultaneously, several principles of interpretation in order to receive the message with a certain amount of "hermeneutical maturity" which is reached when the Spirit of freedom and judgement rises over and above any writing which enslaves.

Among these principles of interpretation we propose the following:

1. Firmly believe that:

a.according to the Gospel, each human being, without exception of race, gender or ethnic group, should enjoy the same dignity and privileges before God and society;

b.unjust inequalities between male and female, blacks, indians, crossbreeds and whites, poor and rich, arise from sin and consequently must be fought against;

c.in human history, where these unjust inequalities and inhuman conflicts are experienced, God, by his grace and mercy, always sides with the weak, the oppressed, and those who are discriminated against and those who suffer. God sides with women as they are discriminated against by their gender.

2.Recognize and see clearly that the Bible, which reveals God's word to us, consists in a series of writings, testimonies of life belonging to a people and individuals, collected in different times and places. Therefore they reflect a patriarchal culture inherent to Jews, Greeks and Romans.

3.Taking into account the two previous points, we should recognise that any text which suggests or requests slavery, exploitation, submission or discrimination goes against God's own will and, therefore, couldn't be normative.

Gal. 3:28 is a fundamental statement which gives a global idea about the content of the new creation in Christ concerning the dignity of all human beings. This affirmation contradicts any institutional or personal position which marginalises women. 1 Cor. 14:34-35 advise us indirectly that the new creation is experienced in specific human history where many elements intervene against this new creation and where it is necessary to have wisdom and judgement when exercising freedom in Christ. A wrong interpretation of this text could hide discrimination. 1 Cor. 14:23-35, understood in its own context, also encourages us to search at all times for the spirit of judgement in order to be able to exercise, in the best possible way, the freedom and equality which the Gospel offers us, keeping in mind in a solitary way: love and understanding for fellow human beings and building up the majority of the community. Gal. 3:28 and 1 Cor. 14:34-35 are not at the same level. Gal. 3.28 is a normative text, whereas 1 Cor. 14:34-35 is circumstantial. But we can also learn from circumstantial contributions.

Notes