The 21st century is a fascinating time to be alive. I suppose that's always been true, but this is the only time I'm alive, so I'm wrapped up in the present. We all are. What's interesting is the way we read history through our present value system. We've often cast aside context, and much is lost in doing so. I always wonder it is about our present society that people will look back upon in 50-100 years and mock us for what we believed about certain things -- we do this to people from 100 years ago, but we forget that as time advances, values change. It's wise for us to hold onto some humility and recognize this.
When we first read Paul's words, they don't quite fit with modern thinking, do they? But we can dive in and think about the situation he was writing to, and we can recognize that perhaps they don't mean quite what we might assume them to read.
For example, what if Paul was arguing for something quite countercultural, that women should be allowed to learn and to study, and shouldn't simply be focused on appearance? If parts of society were opposed to that, it would be rather radical for Paul to advocate for their inclusion in studying religion, wouldn't it? Let's remember that women are recorded as the first witnesses to the resurrection, and that's because the Gospels record the women as the most faithful disciples, the ones who went to the tomb when the male disciples were fleeing for their lives. If the goal of early Christianity was to be fiercely patriarchal, don't you think they would have changed that and shown the men as the first to the tomb?
And what if Paul was writing to Timothy in Ephesus, as some suppose, and the dominant religion/temple in Ephesus was a female-only cult, where women ruled the show and kept men in their place? What if Paul is warning against this, and trying to cultivate an atmosphere where men and women are both encouraged to have the space to learn and study and lead in whatever ways are appropriate in a newly-forming congregation? What if Paul is trying to build up women and men to free them from cultural and historical norms to develop a faithful listening to the Holy Spirit that they may each develop their gifts as they see fit? Remember, Paul wrote in Galatians that there is no male or female in Christ, which isn't exactly a phrase you'd see penned by someone interested in championing a male-dominated religion.
And as for the part about child-bearing, what if Paul is simply trying to help people see that as a blessing, not some cursed part of a woman's life that is filled with uncleanliness that might separate her from the community, as perhaps it had been previously thought?
Much of this is from N.T. Wright's commentary on Paul's pastoral letters. For some of the more difficult passages in Scripture, it's helpful to find some resources to help you think about what they might have meant then, for what may seem outdated now was often revolutionary then. The early church was radically level, for rich and poor, male and female. That's worth celebrating, and can help us examine our own current times with a critical eye, to see how we might grow into a more equal church.
No comments:
Post a Comment