all the errors of the age. March in the forefront, and grant us grace to follow thy footsteps. May each of us, conscious of his own responsibility, labour with thee for the good of all; and thus, by universal efforts, may truth, life, morality, peace and liberty, triumph among the nations!

ART. VIII.—The Silence of Women in the Churches.

BY REV. A. HASTINGS ROSS, SPRINGFIELD, OHIO.*

THE HE true sphere of women we hold to be indicated in the Scriptures; and their place, both in the state and in the church, will ultimately be determined by the principles disclosed in those scriptures. For he who created man male and female, instituted the laws of their relationship, and indicated those laws in his revelation to us for our guidance. If, therefore, we can attain unto a just apprehension of these laws in some, or in all, of their bearings, we can determine so far forth the will of God respecting the relation of the sexes in those particulars.

We propose, therefore, to examine the Scriptures-which we hold to be our only infallible rule of faith and practice in such matters-respecting the growing practice in the churches of our land of inviting women to take an active part in the public worship of God, and even of allowing them, in some instances, to become ministers of the gospel of Jesus Christ. We shall assume the inspiration and the textual correctness of the passages to which appeal will be made in this discussion, while we search, with all thoroughness and candour, after their exact teaching respecting the silence of women in the churches.

I. A positive limitation of some sort is put by the Scriptures upon women.

In the curse pronounced upon Eve for the first transgression, it is said: "And thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee" (Gen. iii. 16). The law of the whole animal kingdom-namely, that the males surpass the females in strength; the former being constituted thereby the natural protectors of the latter-is expressly affirmed of the human race. Sadly has the history of mankind, in all lands and centuries, proved the physical superiority of man to woman. For the woman has never been able, on an extended scale, to rule over the man, and to subject him to such bondage and wrongs as he, in most lands and ages, has inflicted upon her.

*Bibliotheca Sacra, April 1870.

Sphere of Woman Divinely Limited.

601

Also, under the law as given by the hand of Moses, a restriction was placed upon the wife, which did not hold in regard to the husband. That restriction was extended even into matters of religion; and it found expression in such language as this: "Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may establish it, or her husband may make it void (Num. xxx. 13). Here, in the gravest of all matters, the husband was armed with authority to confirm or revoke a religious vow and oath of his wife. In the new and final dispensation, it is still further declared, that "the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God" 1 (Cor. xi. 3.) "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church. . . Therefore, as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything" (Eph. v. 23, 24).

To these general statements of the relation of the woman to the man, there are certain specific prohibitions added: "Let your women keep silence in the churches; for it is not permitted unto them to speak; for it is a shame for a woman to speak in the church" 1 (Cor. xiv. 34, 35). "Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence" 1 (Tim. ii. 11, 12).

It would seem, from these general and specific declarations of Scripture, that a limitation of some sort has been placed by the Creator upon the sphere of woman; and that her sphere, in consequence, if co-ordinate, is not co-extensive, with man's. Her sphere seems to have limitations which his has not.

It is worthy of notice, also, that this limitation is distinctly applied to woman in contradistinction from man. In every passage which we have quoted, as in others also, which we might have quoted, the contrast is expressly made between the male and the female, the husband and the wife, the men and the women; thereby proving that the relative position of the sexes was in the mind of the inspired penman at the time.

In correcting abuses in the church at Corinth, Paul, in the fourteenth chapter of the first Epistle, tells the Corinthians who may take part in their worship; also, how and when they may take part in it. He allowed the "prophets" to speak in the assembly, in turn, "by two, or at the most by three." He allowed those who had the gift of tongues to speak in the same order, provided there were present an interpreter; but, if there were present no interpreter to make known their utterances to the assembly, the speaker in an unknown tongue was prohibited from taking any active part in the worship. Then Paul, in contrast with these, forbids, without qualification,

VOL. XIX.-NO. LXXIII.

L

the women to speak in the assembly. Of course, then, those who were allowed to speak in order, "by two, or at the most by three," were men; in contrast with whom the women are commanded to "keep silence in the churches." The contrast in the other passage )1 Tim. ii. 8-12), is still more pointed: "I will, therefore, that men [avogas, excluding expressly the women pray everywhere. . . . . . În like manner, also, that women [yuvaiwas, excluding men] adorn themselves in modest apparel. . . . Let the woman [7, without the article, hence woman generically learn in silence, with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, . . . . but to be in silence." Men are to take part in the prayers and instruction of the congregation, "as distinguished from the women, who are to join in the worship in silence, and in modesty of dress and behaviour." The contrast could not have been made stronger than it is here found to be. The limitation already pointed out is therefore expressly applied to women, without regard to age, or learning, or position, as women, in contradistinction from men.

II. This limitation of whatever nature and extent it may hereafter be found to be, is not founded, as some other apostolic directions are, either on some present exigency, or social custom, or changing propriety; but it is founded on something as permanent as the relation of the sexes, and the fact of the first transgression.

On one occasion (1 Cor. vii. 1-10, 26-28), Paul advises against marriage: but, in doing so, he is careful of two things: First, not to give a positive command against marrying, saying: "It is good for a man to remain unmarried; . . . . Yet, if their desires do not allow them to remain contented in this state, let them marry":* Secondly, he is careful to limit his advice against marriage to the distress then present, or nigh at hand, saying, "I think, then, it is best, by reason of the trials which are nigh at hand, for all to be unmarried; [so that I would say to each]: If thou art bound to a wife, seek not separation; but if thou art free, seek not marriage; yet if thou wilt marry, thou mayest do so without sin."* Should any one quote Paul's advice against marriage in order to support some socialistic theory, it could be conclusively replied, that Paul limited his advice to the distress then nigh at hand, and that, even then, he did not prohibit, but expressly allowed, marriage to those who desired it.

Now, if Paul had in like manner founded his positive command, that women should keep silence in the churches, upon either existing customs, or some present exigency, or some

* Cony beare and Howson's Translation.

Apostolic Reasons for the Silence of Women. 603

other transient foundation, we could rightly argue, that, with a change in the reason of the command, the command itself is abolished; but, even then, the change in the reason of the command must be so great as wholly to destroy the force of the command. But we look in vain for any such transient reasons in the passages under consideration. On the contrary, the reasons given, the foundations laid, are as extensive, both in space and in time, as the existence of the human family, and as permanent as the law of the sexes. Addressing a church made disorderly through the Grecian fondness for speaking, which affected the women, as well as the men, Paul secures order by commanding the men to speak in turn for the edification of the church, and by prohibiting positively, expressly, repeatedly, and unqualifiedly, the women from speaking at all. He does not confine the prohibition to a particular church or country, present custom, or other temporary thing. The command, like the reason of it, is universal: "As in all churches of the saints, let your women keep silence in the churches, as also saith the law."* Silence in the churches is a part of woman's obedience or subjection, announced in the curse uttered at the gate of Eden by God upon woman. This reason, to which Paul refers, is as permanent and extensive as the race itself. Customs change, nations rise and fall; but so long as man is made male and female, the reason of the prohibition exists unimpaired, and of course the prohibition itself abides in full force.

Again, Paul, writing to a minister of the new and better covenant, instructs him how he ought to behave himself "in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." In his directions to this pastor, he gives, as the reason why women should not be allowed to speak or teach in the churches: "For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived; but the woman, being deceived, was in the transgression" (1 Tim. ii. 13, 14). The priority of Adam in the creation, and the fact that Eve was deceived, and was first in the transgression, are reasons, however explained, which no times, or dispensations, or anything else, can change. Manifestly, they are permanent and universal. They have nothing to do with usages, or customs, or times.

Let those who would remove this limitation of silence from women grapple with the reasons given for it by the inspired apostle. To avoid them, and to talk-however learnedly and truly-about changes in the customs of the age and the countries in which Paul lived and laboured, is as relevant as

* 1 Cor. xiv. 33, 34, correctly punctuated.

to talk about the changes of the moon, and not a whit more SO. It avails nothing to discant upon changes in something, upon which something nothing whatever has been founded. The prohibition of the apostle is not built upon the sand of custom, shifted hither and thither by the waves of time; but on the rock of man's creation and fall, which nothing can change or destroy. It is, then, not only idle, but silly in the extreme, to say that the sand has shifted since Paul founded his prohibition upon the rock.

III. The parts of public worship respecting which silence is enjoined upon women.

Is it not a little remarkable that the words usually translated in the New Testament "to preach" (ngórow," primarily, to officiate as a herald, to teach publicly, to preach," used sixty-one times, translated "to preach fifty-four times; sayyaki, "to bring good news, to announce glad tidings," used fifty-five times, translated "to preach" forty-eight times; and zarayyah," to bring word down to any one, to announce, to set forth," used seventeen times, translated " to preach" ten times), is it not strange, if preaching alone be prohibited, that neither of these words, which are used by the sacred writers, in almost every instance, to describe the act of preaching, are used in either passage where silence is enjoined upon women? Instead of these, words far more general and comprehensive are employed, including preaching as the genus includes its species.

In the passage in 1st Timothy, Paul uses a word which is never translated "to preach," but whose true signification is given in the authorised version, "to teach"; namely, didá, "to teach, to instruct," used ninety-seven times, and in every instance translated "to teach"; while in 1st Corinthians Paul makes the prohibition as sweeping as it is possible to make it, by employing a word (haw, to talk, chatter, babble"), which includes all kinds of speaking. It is translated “to preach" only six times out of two hundred and ninety-four times in which it is employed in the New Testament. Twice, in this passage, he uses the widest, most comprehensive of all terms, in enjoining silence upon women. It is certain, then, if anything can be made certain by the use of words, that teaching and speaking by women in the churches are expressly forbidden. But these include preaching, as the greater includes the less, the genus the species; therefore preaching is also forbidden to women.*

* Should it be said that aaai, in 1 Cor. xiv. 34, 35, retains somewhat of its original signification, and that Paul, therefore, meant to forbid only all babbling and bawling, while seemly discourse was allowed to the women in