In Paul’s letters, he not only discusses theology and ethics but also very practical matters for the churches to which he writes. One of these more practical matters appears in 1 Corinthians 14, where Paul discusses ten ways in which the church can and should conduct itself in order to maintain ‘decency and order’. Much of what he says is straight-forward, and perhaps the only section that has caused some confusion is what Paul says about women in this chapter. In this brief article, I will offer my explanation of the verses, but the main purpose for writing it to highlight the fact that the whole chapter is about practical ways in which the congregation might put into practice the principle of doing all things in decency and in order.
The first check on disorderly worship is that it should not be for someone’s personal, religious experience but for building up, encouraging, and consoling others in the church. For this reason, prophecy is preferred over the speaking of mysteries in some message in tongues that only builds up the individual (14.1-12). Crucially, note that Paul does not establish order by suppressing prophecy and speaking in tongues. Words of prophecy are put in check by making sure that they serve the entire gathering.
The second check on disorderly worship is that it should be understandable. Words spoken in tongues require an interpretation of tongues so that others may understand what is said, and therefore one speaking in tongues in the congregation should pray for an interpretation (14.13-19). Paul quotes Isaiah to make his point: ‘In the law it is written, “By people of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord”’(1 Corinthians 14.21, Isaiah 28.11, 12). Isaiah was speaking of God’s teaching Israel a lesson through the punishment that would come through the foreign armies of Assyria. Paul’s use of the text is at the level of implication: a lesson in a foreign tongue does not bring about obedience. That is, a lesson in an unknown language does not lead to reform when it is not understandable. Thus, Christian worship can only lead unbelievers to conviction and repentance if they understand what is being said.
The third and fourth checks for orderly worship are that messages in tongues should be limited to two or three and they should be delivered in turn, not all at once (14.27). Paul does not, notably, establish order by limiting participation to a select person or to select persons. He encourages participation: ‘When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation’ (14.26). Already in chapter 12, Paul affirmed a diversity of gifts from the Spirit in the church.
The fifth check on worship to maintain order is that, if there is no one to interpret a message in tongues, a person with such a message should keep silent (14.28). This principle of keeping silent so as to keep order will arise again in reference to women.
The sixth check for orderly worship is in reference to prophecy, which can itself be problematic in that a prophet can claim to deliver a message from God but may in fact not be inspired to do so. A prophet may come up with his or her own message and even use the mode of prophetic speaking for self-gain. This was a problem already noted in the Old Testament as there were false prophets. Jesus had warned against false prophets, too (Matthew 7). People were wary of prophecy, and Paul felt a need to warn against quenching the Spirit and despising prophecy (1 Thessalonians 5.19-20). Rather, the Church should ‘test everything’ (5.21). Likewise, John says, ‘Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world’ (1 John 4.1). To the Corinthian church, Paul says, ‘Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said’ (14.29).
The seventh check on worship so that order is maintained is that no one person should dominate. Paul says, ‘ If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. 31 For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged’ (14.30-31).
The eighth check is that prophetic inspiration is not, shall we say, ecstatic, in the sense that one cannot say that one is unable to contain or control the message. Paul says, ‘the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets’ (14.32). Paul explains that ‘God is not a God of confusion but of peace’ (14.33). This principle of ‘peace’ runs deep in Paul’s thinking about the church. Based on it, he allowed Christians to divorce non-Christian spouses if the latter did not wish to remain in the marriage (1 Corinthians 7.16). Paul’s entire letter to the Ephesian church was a letter explaining how the reign of Christ brought peace into the various relationships of believers and resulted in their unity. Ecstatic prophecy—which was known in Asia Minor especially in the cult of the goddess Cybele—was not Christian. The spirits of prophets were subject to the prophets.
The ninth check on worship that would keep it decent and orderly had to do with women. Paul says that the women are to remain silent and not speak in the church (14.34). We know that this does not exclude ordered speech in the congregation, since women did pray out loud and prophecy (1 Corinthians 11.5). Women who did so, Paul insists, were to do so with their heads covered, which was a culturally appropriate way of acknowledging household order. That is, it was a way of recognizing that they were under their husbands’ authority, and to pray or prophesy without their heads covered would be to challenge the household’s order. One might discuss how to apply this in other cultures, but Paul’s purpose in saying this is to keep order and to avoid introducing disorder in the church gatherings.
To return to what he says in chapter 14, we therefore note that women keeping silent is not about their not saying anything but must be about their not disrupting the service. Paul says that women should be in submission (14.34) and ‘If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home’ (14.35). Speaking appears to have to do with questioning what was being taught in the church, either for a lack of understanding or to challenge the speaker’s interpretation. (Even today, congregations listen quietly to the preacher in a service without turning the sermon into a lecture followed by questions and answers or debate.) The particular speaking in the service that Paul has in mind is a speaking that would render a disruption of order. The cultural context is important to appreciate as we may be confused why women speaking in a meeting might be taken as indecent and disorderly. Women in the Greek context more than in the Roman were confined to the home. This was in part for their protection, but women out in the streets may be thought to be loose and wanton. Of course, women might go out to the marketplace or attend a theatre, so they were not prisoners in their homes. Their presence in the business of the city, was by and large a matter of stepping into the domain of men. Coupled with this, we might further need to appreciate, was the fact that education was normally for men. A few centuries earlier, Socrates thought it unusual that the women of Crete and Sparta, the most ancient of the Greek states, allowed women to learn philosophy. He said that they in fact excelled in it, and women prided themselves in their education (Plato, Protagoras 342d). Thus, women wanting to participate in the teaching in a service by asking questions would prove disruptive for their lack of education. Paul is not opposed to their learning, but that learning should take place at home. Their husbands could answer their questions. (It goes without saying that this passage has nothing to do with women in the ministry, preaching, teaching, or being ordained. It has to do with women creating disorder by speaking in a public service in 1st century Greece.)
The tenth check that Paul mentions, and with this he concludes, is that those independently minded for thinking themselves prophets or spiritual in their own right do not have the right to assert their own views. Rather, if they really are prophets and spiritual, they should agree with him. He does not say this because he is an apostle, although he might have done so. Rather, they should agree that this is a command of the Lord (14.37). In this point, Paul is saying that nobody has the right to private interpretation along with claims of authority (v. 36). Rather, people should come to agreement about things not through private interpretations but through obedience to what the Lord says to the Church.
The verse that concludes the chapter is where we find the language of ‘in decency and in order’—the theme of the whole chapter. Paul says, ‘So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But all things should be done decently and in order’ (14.39-40). Paul could not cover every topic facing churches in his time, let alone in subsequent centuries after him. However, the principle of ‘in decency and in order’ is one that should still apply. We need to appreciate that this does not exclude spiritual gifts but regulates their use according to their purposes and the nature of congregational worship. The principle might apply in different ways at different times, as I have suggested in regard to women’s silence. Finally, we are reminded that private interpretations cannot be legitimated on the grounds that one claims to be a prophet or spiritual. This is an important point in our time, when innovative and revisionist interpretations in liberal denominations have undermined orthodoxy and when prophetic voices in certain charismatic churches (and notably in Africa) give prominence to individual prophets seeking attention and power rather than seeking to promote the upbuilding of the church.
English (US) · 