Saturday, June 28, 2014

A Clear and Present Word

Bishop Tim Harris is in fine form as he continues to reflect exegetically on the matter of women, Scripture and roles. In a post specifically titled to connect with the Diocese of Sydney he tackles 1 Timothy 2:11-15:

"6. The most significant interpretive crux in understanding 1 Tim. 2:11-15 is located in the rationale contained in verse 14: ‘and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.’ This key verse is too often overlooked, and unless it refers to a female gullibility, it is most cogently understood with reference to women being targeted by the false teachers in Ephesus.
In brief, if the ‘creational order’ emperor is not entirely naked in 1 Tim. 2:11-15, he is certainly light on in the clothing department, especially if it reduces male-female relationships to gender hierarchy and male authority.
Beyond the catch-phrases
One of the frustrations is in the adopting of ‘catch-phrases’ that do little to clarify the distinctive features of various positions. I am very happy that women are ‘equal but different’. Egalitarians are just as ready to affirm that males and females complement one another in the created scheme of things. Where we differ is in perceptions of a gender related hierarchy of authority, and in role-delineated asymmetry of relationships."

I am with +Tim. There is a symmetry in the treatment of women in the Bible which is under appreciated by 'complementarian' approaches.


Father Ron Smith said...

Sorry, folks, Made my comment on the wrong article. Hurrah for Bishop Tim!

Tim said...

Adds interesting insight into the interpretation of this passage....

Father Ron Smith said...

Peter, I've noticed that very few of your correspondents who would quite normally agree with Bishop Tim on many things, don't seem very disposed to support him in this, his latest understanding of the place of Women in the ministry of the Church.

Could it possibly be that they do not approve of his post-Moore Coll. acceptance of women's ordination?

Peter Carrell said...

Hi Ron
I don't think you can draw that conclusion at all. I assume many readers are well beyond the kind of debate that Bishop Tim feels the need to engage in within his context and feel no need to comment as they would simply be saying, I agree!

Father Ron Smith said...

I'm Sure Bishop Tim, having worked in the Nelson Diocese at one time, would have been heartened by reading of his support by some of your most out-spoken contributors on ADU.

But maybe you're right. Women's subordination is perhaps no longer a problem in ACANZP, and therefore unremarkable for anyone here.

Jean said...

I am not sure about the others or whether I am outspoken but I enjoyed the light Tim shares on the issue. I also to
'agree' with the validity of women's preaching.

Blessings Jean

NB: the comment above Peter aka from Tim was posted by me not sure how that happened but just in case Tim has different views : ) ...