Colleen, I probably tow a somewhat softer line than you would, but my post here is not meant to
promote anything necessarily. I am simply answering the question is it SINFUL for a woman to hold a job which involves authority over men.
For the record, I do not believe women should be seminary teachers, in any subject.
That said I believe there is a large amount of conservative teaching about the roles of men and women, particularly in society at large as opposed to within the church and marriage, that is merely that – conservative, as opposed to truly biblical.
Regarding women with ‘careers’ and in authority over men in the workplace, my thoughts are substantially similar to what Rich wrote in this other thread:
Can women teach or have authority over men?
Some additional thoughts:
1. On women in authority
All because Paul refers to creation when barring women from teaching and holding authority in the church does not mean the application of that creation principle must be as wide and far reaching as possible. The application is whatever God says it is, and Paul words in 1 Timothy 2 are primarily directed at a church setting 1 Tim 3:14-15.
Beyond that, we can see in scripture examples of Godly women exercising authority over men.
a. Godly women exercised authority over male servants: 1 Sam 25:18-19, 2 Kings 4:22-24.
(Some will say that they did so under the authority of their husbands, which would not be wrong, but if it were a sin for women to have authority over male servants per se, then these arguments would also allow women to have authority in church so long as the head Pastor agreed.)
b. Godly women exercised authority over sons: Gen 27:8, Prov 1:8, 6:20, 31:1-2, Eph 6:1
c. Godly women are described as heads of households in the bible, which obviously implies their authority over those in them.
Lydia (Acts 16) is described as the head of her household; it was her household (v15) and her house (v40). And when all this was happening, she was, in the opinion of the Holy Spirit, not some horrible pagan idolator, but a worshipper of God (v14).
John’s Elect Lady (2 John) is likewise described as the head of her house since John writes to her, and charges her with the responsibility to keep heretics out of
her house (v10).
d. Godly women exercised even some form of civil authority as with Deborah (Judges 4:4) and Esther.
Now I believe the idea of women in civil authority is not an exact parallel to employment (ie to prove that a woman can be in authority over servants does not mean Christians should go out and vote for a woman at the next elections), however, my point with these examples was that God does not have some moral standard where it is a great and horrible abomination to him if a woman is in authority over a man. A view I have seen from some is to see that God has barred women from authority in church and marriage then to assume it must apply in general society as well, and finally to write of examples like Deborah as special exceptions that God made. I believe the more correct approach is to see that God is silent in those spheres beyond church and marriage and see the examples like Deborah as indicating it is not sinful per se for women to have authority in them. Just as a note, my focus here has been women’s authority in employment, so I was not making any comment on the desirability of female magistrates, though I would say it do not see them as being absolutely sinful in any and every situation.
2. On women in the workplace
Regarding women and careers, my position is simple. A (married) women’s priorities are, in order, husband, children, home. If she is fulfilling those duties she can work beyond that. Obviously her ability to fulfill all these duties will depend on circumstances (number of children, ability to afford ‘servants’) and her husband’s preferences so not every woman will be able to work outside the home. However, that does not mean it is, in principle, sinful or biblically undesirable per se. While the bible does exalt a woman’s domestic role I do not believe it does so in a way that is incompatible with a job outside the home.
a. Proverbs 31:16 and 31:24 are usually the two verses that get argued over in discussions like this, the issue normally being if what the virtuous woman did in those verses can be compared to the modern idea of women in the office. I would answer by saying first of all that I do not believe those verses to be setting out exactly and specifically what women can do, anymore than verse 22 is intended to tell them what material and color of clothing they can wear. These two verses teach us a general principle of the virtuous woman’s industriousness, and the fact that she under took activities to bring financial gain to the household.
That said, I would say that in v16, where does she consider a field? Is it in the home or out? And if she was considering a good field to buy, did she just put down cash for the first one she saw? Or did she also consider and reject other fields? Next, she plants a
vineyard. That is, for all intents and purposes a commercial project to produce wine to sell, not simply digging about in her garden. She saw a good field, purchased it, and used it to plant a vineyard, the general principle being, I believe, she under took projects – projects which would have brought her out of the home – to produce financial gain for her family.
Verse 24 says “She maketh fine linen, and selleth it”. She makes these fine linen
in order to sell them. Again, a project she under took for the purpose of producing financial gain for the family. The principle I get from this verse and verse 16 is there will (or there possibly will) come a time when a Christian woman can be done with the duties of home and family and turn her attention and energy to other pursuits. It is a conservative error to assume that the work at home is never done and any leaving of the home for outside employment must, by definition entail a neglect of the home or family. Obviously, as I said before, the circumstances of each family will vary. A woman with young children will generally have to stay home full time. But a woman to whom the Lord has not yet chosen to give children, or whose children have all grown and gotten married, will have more flexibility. Likewise the amount of care of the house needs will be a mixture of prudence and liberty. The care of the home may be done completely by the wife or some of it can be given to servants to perform (Pr 31:15). The couples’ financial situation, and the husband’s preference will combine to determine this, but there is a extent to which it is a couple’s individual choice, and not something others can force upon them with the bible.
Finally, we should note that the fact that the virtuous woman had these projects or jobs was part of what made her a woman to be praised. It was not only financial necessity that made her need to undertake these pursuits, but just as diligent work for a master is a noble endeavor for Christian men, so it is for women as well, if it can be done without neglecting the family or home. The point of those verses being as well, that it
is, sometimes, possible to do both.
b.
There are women in the bible who are described as having vocations or professions. Lydia from Acts 16 is described as being both a worshipper of God and a ‘seller of purple’. That phrase, coming immediately after her name when she is introduced, describes for us her job or profession, not her hobby. Her selling of purple was an important enough part of her life that the bible uses it as one of the three descriptive features of her given when we meet her. The Holy Spirit could have taken that phrase out and instead told us she was the ‘Daughter of XXX’ or the ‘Widow of XXX’, but it did not.
When Paul meets Aquila and Priscilla in Acts 18 we learn “And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers.” It says he abode with THEM and wrought, and by THEIR occupation they were tentmakers. Both Aquila and Priscilla had the occupation of tentmakers. It doesn’t say that Aquila was a tentmaker and Priscilla kept his home. Off course, if Priscilla was the godly woman she is presented to be by the NT, we can assume she did keep his home as well, but the point is, tentmaking was an important enough part of her life, that the Holy Spirit describes her as a tent-maker, and does not see there being an necessary conflict between that and her domestic roles.
c.
I have heard some people claim that this whole phenomenon of women working only began after World War II (in America at least). But when I read the Old Testament, I see on almost every third page this group of women which are called
maidservants, so what in the world were they doing? Their existence in Israelite society is presumed even by the Fourth and Tenth Commandments. Yes, I know the vast majority of them were slaves, but this was system that God never condemned. He even had many rules in the Law to regulate the relationships between Masters and Servants, and this relationship is presumed to continue in the New Testament, and is addressed at least five times in the Epistles. However, as a general principle again, that state of affairs in Mosaic Israelite society seems to me to show that God does not consider it a sin, or even undesirable per se for women to work outside of their homes, or for a man other than their husband or father.
Linear Mode
