Women in Ministry

Two separate questions sit in one short verse, and they are worth keeping apart. The first is the name. The Greek accusative Iouniancould be a woman named Junia or a man named Junias. The ASV prints the masculine. Junia is a common Roman woman’s name in the ancient record, and the masculine form is otherwise unattested in antiquity, which is why the fathers read a woman and most modern versions have returned to that.

The second question is the phrase. “Of note among the apostles” can mean counted among them or well known to them. Michael Burer and Daniel B. Wallace argued for the second reading in a 2001 article; critics answer that the parallels they offer do not carry the sense they need. Chrysostom, a native Greek speaker, read it the first way without hesitation.

On this reading Paul is stating a lasting order for the gathered church, not managing a local mess. The weight of the case rests on his own stated reason: he goes to Genesis, not to Ephesus. Adam was formed first, and 1 Corinthians 14:34 appeals to the law in the same way, so the two passages are read as reinforcing each other rather than as two separate local judgments.

The Greek argument is serious and is not a cover for tradition. Andreas Kostenberger argues from the construction joining the two verbs in 1 Timothy 2:12 that both must carry the same moral weight; since teaching is a good thing everywhere else in the Pastoral letters, the second verb must mean holding legitimate authority rather than abusing it. That case is made in full in Kostenberger and Schreiner, eds., Women in the Church, 3rd ed. (2016), with S. M. Baugh, Denny Burk and Albert Wolters on background, application and lexicography. John Piper and Wayne Grudem, eds., Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (1991), is the broader statement of the same position, and R. C. Sproul held it within a Reformed Presbyterian frame.

Worth noticing: the older commentators who hold the restriction rarely hold it as broadly as it is repeated today. Gill says women may teach in private and are to be teachers of good things. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown say a woman might teach, and cite Priscilla with Apollos as their example, while holding that the public assembly is a different setting. The line these readings draw is around the public teaching office, not around a woman’s speech as such.

On this reading both passages answer real trouble in two real congregations. First Timothy says in its opening lines why it was written: false teaching had got into the church at Ephesus. Craig Keener argues in Paul, Women, and Wives(1992) that the Corinthian problem was untimely questions from women who had never been taught, and that Paul’s answer is short range, stop interrupting, and long range, get them taught. Linda Belleville, Women Leaders and the Church (2000), and Ben Witherington III, Women in the Earliest Churches (1988), read the Ephesian restriction the same way, as an answer to that crisis.

The lexical case belongs here too. The verb in 1 Timothy 2:12 occurs once in the whole New Testament, so its meaning has to be settled from Greek outside the Bible. Philip Payne argues in Man and Woman, One in Christ(2009) that the instances near Paul’s own era carry a negative sense, closer to domineering than to holding office, and that the neutral sense is not securely attested for centuries afterward. Adam Clarke, three hundred years ago, reached for the same kind of explanation from a different direction: he read the Corinthian silence as a Jewish ordinance and the Ephesian restriction against the Roman laws that barred women from public office.

Gordon Fee argues in The First Epistle to the Corinthians(NICNT) that verses 34 and 35 were never Paul’s, but a marginal note copied into the text at two different places by two scribal traditions. His grounds are the interruption of the argument, the clash with 11:5, and vocabulary he judges unlike Paul. The standing objection is the one stated above: every manuscript has the verses somewhere, and interpolations normally leave some trace of omission. The critical Greek text keeps them in place.

Kirk MacGregor argues instead that Paul is quoting the Corinthian position in verses 34 and 35 and answering it in verse 36, where the two sharp questions land. Philip Payne has answered MacGregor directly, holding that the passage lacks the formal marks Paul’s other quotation and refutation passages carry. The disagreement runs even between two scholars who agree the silence is not Paul’s last word.

A popular version of the situational reading says the church at Ephesus faced a female dominated Artemis cult teaching that Eve came before Adam, and that Paul is correcting that specific myth. Catherine and Richard Kroeger made this case in I Suffer Not a Woman(1992). It has been challenged hard on the primary sources. S. M. Baugh’s research on first-century Ephesus concludes the city was not marked by matriarchy of any sort, and other critics say the reconstruction goes well beyond the evidence. It is reported here because it is widely repeated, and it is flagged because the evidence does not carry it.