A New Look at the New Covenant and the role of women in the church.

We have a document called the New Testament. Not everything in the New Testament is related to the New Covenant. In fact, there is some material that is the finest of the Old Covenant, even though it is in the New Testament, or the New Covenant Books.

For example, consider the question that the rich young man asked Jesus. "Teacher," he asked," what good thing must I do to receive eternal life?" The answer of Jesus was: "Keep the commandments if you want to enter life." (Mt 19:1 6-1 7) What else could Jesus say at this point? This was the best of Judaism. There are other statements that Jesus made that are examples of the finest in Judaism. What are the two great commandments?
His answer reflects the accepted view of Judaism that we love God with all our hearts and our neighbors as ourselves.

Something happened that made the greatest difference in the question of how to have eternal life. That happening was the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. This is the before and after of Jewish-Christian history. In the death event of Jesus there came into being something that is fairly well accepted in people's thinking, but at the same time has been sadly neglected in theological literature. I refer to the words of Jesus at the last supper. There He instituted the New Covenant. Jeremiah the prophet had proclaimed a new covenant to come.

"The time is coming when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. It will not be like the old covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand and led them out of Egypt. Although I was like a husband to them, they did not keep that covenant. The new covenant that I will make with the people of Israel will be this: I will put my law within them and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. None of them will have to teach his fellow countryman to know the Lord, because all will know me, from the least to the greatest. I will forgive their sins and I will no longer remember their wrongs. I the Lord have spoken." (31:31-34)

At the last Supper, Jesus took the bread and wine, and spoke the words, "This cup is God's new covenant sealed with my blood, which is poured out for you." (Luke 22:20) The New Covenant begins with Jesus' own life being poured out in contrast to the founding of the first covenant with Abraham in which blood of animals was used. (Gen.1 5:9-1 8). It is only after the New Covenant begins in the death and resurrection of Jesus that a different answer
to the question," what must I do to have eternal life?" comes forth. The contrast can be seen in the question of the jailer of Philippi who asked: Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" The answer was not to fulfill the law, but "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved-you and your family." (Acts. 16:30-31)

These two different answers make sense only when we recognize the centrality of the death and resurrection of Jesus, and the New Covenant proceeding out of these events. Otherwise, the two contrasting answers of Jesus and Paul cannot be reconciled with one another. We cannot combine the best of the Old Testament with the New Covenant. However, the Roman Catholic tradition seeks to do this and that is why there is a large emphasis on religious works rather than grace alone. The Reformation traditions emphasized the grace of God and the importance of being justified by faith, not works. If we are to be really Christian in our interpreting the New Testament, we must realize the differences that exist in the Gospels and Epistles concerning the Old and the New Covenants. Just as there are elements of the best of Judaism in the teachings of Jesus, there are also elements of Judaism reflected in some of the comments that Paul and Peter made in their letters.

Not all issues regarding Christian living were worked out in the first century. In many matters the practice of the early church was slow to catch up with its theology. The issue of slavery was such a matter. The Old Testament allowed slavery, but limited it to 7 years, though under certain circumstances longer periods were allowed.

Under the New Covenant, the advice to the Christians comes within a changed concept of theology. It took a while for the theology to influence the practice. Until it did, the Christian slaves were to be obedient to their masters. But Galatians 3:28 sets forth a theology for the elimination of slavery. Gal. 3:28 declares that there is no difference in Christ between slave and free. To Philemon, Paul counsels that Onesimus should be taken back as a brother, no longer a slave. The theology is there to destroy slavery in the Christian framework. It took time to do it and even Christians were blinded by economic reasons to the theology of the New Covenant of Grace concerning slavery. The theology of the New Covenant is that God has broken down all walls (Eph.2:14)and redeems people whoever they are and makes them fellow-heirs with Christ. Here we can see, in the case of slavery, cultural practices being carried over into the Christian era, practices that were basically contradictory to the theology of grace and equality in Christ.

Let us consider something that is really important for the Gospel:. The practical, but theological conclusion brought about because of the death of Christ is the statement of Paul in Gal. 3:26-28.
"It is through faith that all of you are God's sons in union with Christ Jesus. You were baptized into union with Christ, and now you are clothed, so to speak, with the life of Christ himself. So there is no difference between Jews and Gentiles, between slaves and free men, between men and women; you are all one in union with Christ Jesus." The Book of Ephesians repeats this theology with greater detail. Ephesians 2 talks about being brought into union with Christ; Christ has made Jew and Gentile one people. "you Gentiles are not foreigners or strangers any longer; you are now fellow citizens with God's people and members of the family of God." Fellow citizens does not sound like second class citizens. We are warned in Scripture to avoid the return to Judaism, as in Galatians, and we are warned against continuing to live like the heathen. (Eph 4:17) The new way is that of union with Christ and equality of all believers, including women.

Moreover, He abolished the Jewish Law with its commandments and its rules, in order to create out of the two races one new people in union with himself....by his death he united both races into one body and brought them back to God... you Gentiles are now fellow citizens and members of the family of God." (Eph. 2:18-19) One has to remember the great contrast the Jewish tradition held concerning the terrible position of the Gentiles.

As always, when a new thought or procedure is introduced there are those who are slow to receive it, still retaining their commitment to the old ideas. It is interesting to note that Paul criticized Peter for giving in to the Jewish influences as he records in Gal. 2:11. That criticism was important for it involved the place of faith and grace in contrast to the Law and ritualism of Judaism. Yet in spite of the fact that Paul condemned Peter on this issue and went on to write and teach so eloquently in defense of the New Covenant, he, himself, resorted to Judaism in an effort to solve some practical problems arising from the culture of his time. Consider the advice to the churches concerning the place and activity of women.

He told the church at Corinth (I Cor. 14:33-34) that "women are not
allowed to speak, as the Jewish Law says, they must not be in charge....It is a disgraceful thing for a woman to speak in a church meeting." (Good News Translation) One may ask what the Jewish law has to do with the Gospel of grace of the New Covenant. It would appear that Paul is guilty of the same thing he accused Peter of, but in a different way. The synagogue was the only model that existed for the early Christian community and it had a time-honored history, but it was not consistent with the theology of the New Covenant. Paul resorted to a practical solution to deal with a minor problem, not a theological solution, which puts him in the rather awkward position of returning to the law waffling on his own teaching on theological matters.

Other examples can be viewed in the same way. The advice given to Timothy (1 Tim.2:9-1 5) is that women should learn in silence. They are not to teach or have authority over men; it was the woman who was deceived and broke God's law. What are we to make of such a comment? It is not consistent with the theology of Galatians 3:28. Moreover, it is theologically irrelevant since the theology of the fall is related to Adam, not Eve. Romans 5:12 states that sin came into the world through one man, not one woman. In fact, in this extremely important passage, (Rom. 5:12) there is not a single reference to Eve, only Adam. If the Timothy passage is to be used in the issue of the place of women, it puts God in the unusual situation of holding a grudge against woman, and being unforgiving toward her, but not toward man. Such a conclusion would negate all the important statements of grace as reflected in the New Covenant.

This may sound rather critical of Paul, but we must remember his statement that he became all things to all people. To the Jews he lived like the Jews and to the Gentiles he lived in the grace of God and its freedom. Hence, for him to draw on his heritage to solve a practical problem would not be unusual. But it is not consistent with his theological position of the equality we have in Christ.

Peter gives us a similar situation in his first epistle. Wives were to submit to their husbands as Sarah did to Abraham. Submissive wives become her "daughters" now if they do good deeds. We must admit that the New Testament reflect the very beginnings of Christianity and role models are difficult to come by so early. But the equality of the Gospel of Christ cannot go back to an Old Covenant model, as good as it may have been. (There are some negative aspects of that model, namely, giving your husband your concubine if you can't have children.)

The book of Hebrews develops other implications of the New Covenant. We are told that "if there had been nothing wrong with the first covenant, there would have been no need for a second one. (Heb. 8:7) Moreover, "by speaking of a new covenant. God has made the first one old; and anything that becomes old and worn out will soon disappear." (8:13) In Heb. 10:1 we are told that the "Jewish Law is not a full and faithful model of the real things; it is only a faint outline of the good things to come."

If we are to take the words of Jesus seriously about the establishment of a new covenant, as well as the theology of Paul, and the very plain comments of Hebrews, we must live as people of the New Covenant, and be very careful about relapsing into the Old Covenant. Much of Christendom's preaching today is based on the Old Covenant. The Gospel may be proclaimed in contrast to the Law concerning how to be saved, but once a person has committed to Christ, the instruction proceeds more out of the Old Covenant than the New Covenant in some cases. The attitude that the Church has had toward women illustrates this sad point.

If we fail to take the position of women seriously as these doctrinal statements do, we are in danger of adopting either the Old Testament, or pagan ways of viewing women, thus nullifying the new covenant. Eph. 4:20-24 states, "that was not what you learned in Christ. You certainly heard about him, and as his followers you were taught the truth that is in Jesus. So get rid of your old self, which made you live as you used to--the old self that was being destroyed by its deceitful desires. Your hearts and minds must be made completely new, and you must put on the new self, which is created in God's likeness and reveals itself in the true life that is upright and holy ." How ironic and self-contradictory to claim renewal of one's heart and mind, and yet regard women as unequal as many do. The new beginning for us in Christ is for both male and female.

What are the implications of this for women?
1. Marriage. Christian marriage must be related to the New Covenant and the equality we have in Christ. Not only is this the implication of the New Covenant, but it is an application of the nature of love. Love seeks equality. If there is not equality in love, there can never be more than a master/servant relationship. The greatest example of love is that God became an equal with man, even a servant. The wonder of the Incarnation is that the Infinite God should assume a level of humans, to be equal with us and redeem us at the same time. If I really love my wife, I want to do things for her, rather than have her as a servant for me. It is the nature of love to be giving, not demanding. Eph. 5:21 speaks of mutual submission, and this is an outgrowth of love. Male domination is a rejection of the equality we have in Christ as well as a misunderstanding of what love is. Forceful domination of any kind is contrary to the example of Christ. Many cultures of the past and present regard women as subordinate to man. In the Muslim culture women's place now and in Paradise is subordinate to the male. In the Hindu culture women do not have the same rights as men. No such subordination exists concerning the place of women when we talk about union with Christ. Jesus indicated that there is neither marriage nor giving in marriage in heaven. Cultural marriages always want to make the woman subordinate and cater to man's ego. The New Covenant concept is that union with Christ brings spiritual equality and unity in Christ. Such shall be the situation in heaven, but it is to begin with the New Covenant of grace on earth.

When we consider some normal application of the New Covenant to statements of the epistles we cannot understand them in any normal way without the concept of equality of the sexes in Christ. Phil 2:2b tells us: "be humble toward one another, always considering others better than yourself." Are we to think only in terms of men to men and women to women? No such distinction is possible in the Philippian church where Paul wrote: "Having the same thoughts, sharing the same love, and being one in soul and mind" is only possible in Christ where all are one in union with Him.
.
2. Economics. Equal pay for equal work reflects the implication of the New Covenant. The inequity of pay reflects a master/servant mentality. It also keeps women in a role of dependency on men. It rejects the idea of equality in Christ. Secular society may not want to live up to the ideal of Christian equality, but the Christian community should certainly hold to that model. Without equality in pay, women are always going to be suffering at the hands of men. In many societies a divorced woman is forced into prostitution for economic survival. In our society she is often forced into the dead end of welfare and her children suffer with her.

3. Ministry. If we are equal in Christ, who can forbid that women engage in ministry in any form they are capable of doing. The advice given to Timothy about Bishops and Deacons is related to men. Obviously, it is modeled on the synagogue where the men were the leaders. The men were allowed to study the Law and be educated, but the women were not. The men were the teachers and the women were not. So for the immediate situation, trained leaders were sought out. This is a pragmatic solution. Is it a theological one? Absolutely not!
If we are going to be followers of the New covenant, we have to say that we are equal in Christ and that there is no difference between male and female in God's eyes. God therefore calls people to serve in all kinds of ways. Ministry is one of those ways. There is nothing magical about ordination, and one can recognize the gifts and abilities of women as well as men. There are lots of men who should not be in the ministry. On the positive side, women have talent, intelligence, and capability that should be developed for the benefit of mankind. There is a tremendous loss, and we cannot fathom what has been lost, in the neglected talents, minds, and abilities of women who have been kept from using what God has given to them.
It must be observed that the only institutional model in the beginning of Christianity was the synagogue. In that case the only possible leader would be a man according to the culture and the Old Theology. Even today in Orthodox and Conservative synagogues have a position on women that is reflected in their meetings. There may be 200 women present and only 5 men. There are certain prayers that cannot be said without a minyan (quorum) of ten men. This subordinate position has been around for centuries.
The theology of the Gospel was not carried forward in application to the organization of the church. There are some interesting issues at hand, but they are subordinate to the main issue of a new covenant. It may be that women were not educated, not allowed to study the Torah, not allowed to teach or whatever. All of this was true, but not a sufficient reason for these Old Testament applications in the early church. What must become important is that there is a theology of equality in Christ regardless of whether one is male or female. Equality would make it possible, even necessary, to study, to develop one's mind, to make positive contributions.
The theology is there. The church has traveled at a snail's pace in bringing its practices in line with the New Covenant.

4. Opportunities. Consider the terrible situation of a father saying to his brilliant daughter, I am sorry but you cannot be anything you want to be. You have to ignore your talents and be submissive to a man who may not be your equal in intelligence, abilities, or talents, but who is superior by virtue of being a man. This is the status of hundreds of millions of women around the world. But more particularly, it goes on in Christian communities because they are yet living in the Old Covenant, not the New. Consider the case of a bright, intelligent daughter who excelled in Greek and other studies wanting to go into the ministry. However, her father told her that no church (of their denomination) would accept her. She could never be called to a church. Women have a perspective on issues that men do not, but need. Only in recent times in Christian areas have we seen the gradual freedom of women. Hundreds of millions of women are denied education, opportunity to develop themselves, and their minds are lost to the benefit of humanity.

5. Rights. It has been customary in many societies to deny women the right to inherit. One rationale is that women are married into another family and wealth they may receive would be taken out of the family. This is one more way of saying that women do not count for anything. While these things occur in Hindu, Muslim, Chinese, or whatever culture, there is no basis for this in the New Covenant. Equality in Christ means equality. There are no hedges, no perimeters, no caveats. and no exceptions. Whatever the world may do without Christ, the Christian must not conform to the world, "but let God transform you inwardly by a complete change of your mind." (Rom. 12:2)

We have one of the most dynamic ideas in the Scripture from the lips of Jesus. A new covenant that begins afresh in all our relationships, our ideas, our standards. The Christian church has not done very well in giving even lip service to these words. These are words that relate to all of us. If we fail to observe these words, we will revert to the Old Covenant in dealing with women and probably everyone else and all social problems.

In many cultures women have few options, either submit or be exploited in prostitution for economic survival. In Indian culture, women whose husbands have died are left with few options. The deceased husband's family does not want her, her own family does not want her. She is an economic liability. It is for this reason that in the recent episode suttee ( the wife throwing herself on the burning funeral pyre of her husband) the young wife who did so, was exalted to the status of a heroine. In non-Christian cultures the low status of women is lamentable. But in the Christian community where the status of women is declared as "fellow-heirs" in Christ, there is no excuse for keeping women subordinated. It is to surrender to a culture that is not Christian in doctrine or practice.

There are about 1 billion Muslims around the world and about 1 billion Hindus. It is a tragic fact that a half billion Muslim women and a half billion Hindu women are denied the use of their minds and abilities while both cultures are denying themselves a potential that cannot be fathomed or imagined. It is lamentable that equality of women has come only from two great sources in today's world, Christianity and Communism. Communism elevated women primarily for economic reasons. Christianity has the potential, indeed, the obligation, to elevate women for intrinsic reasons: she is one with man in union with Christ.

If we are really people of the New Covenant, we must put New Covenant theology into practice and cast off the standards of the world culture regardless of whether they came from the Old Covenant or from pagan practices. If we take Gal 3:28 seriously, we can never treat women in any other fashion that being our equal in Christ.