You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
Few issues divide contemporary Christianity more sharply than gender and sexuality. The AQA specification frames this topic around biblical criticism and contested passages (notably 1 Timothy 2:8–15); the debate over female ordination (the Church of England's decision of 1994 and developments since); the contrast between Daphne Hampson's post-Christian feminism and Rosemary Radford Ruether's reformist feminism (with her reconception of the maleness of Christ); and Christian views on marriage, homosexuality and transgender questions. The unifying issue is hermeneutical: how to read an ancient, culturally embedded text in a changed moral world — whether its contested passages bind all ages, address a specific first-century situation, or must be re-read against the deeper trajectory of the Gospel. This lesson sets out the key texts and named thinkers precisely, weighs the arguments on each side, and reaches a substantiated judgement.
The whole debate turns on how a handful of biblical texts are read, so the topic is, at root, an exercise in biblical criticism — the disciplined study of a text's authorship, context, genre and purpose.
The specification names this passage, and it is the text most often cited against women's leadership. It must be quoted and handled carefully:
Key term: Biblical criticism is the scholarly analysis of biblical texts — asking who wrote them, when, to whom, in what genre and for what purpose — in order to interpret them responsibly rather than merely citing them. Applied here, it asks whether 1 Timothy 2 lays down a universal rule or addresses a specific first-century situation.
The traditionalist (complementarian) reading takes the passage as a permanent ordinance: the prohibition is grounded not in local circumstance but in the order of creation ("Adam was formed first") and the Fall ("the woman was deceived"), so it transcends culture. The egalitarian reading mounts several critical responses. First, authorship: many scholars judge the Pastoral Epistles (1–2 Timothy, Titus) to be deutero-Pauline — written in Paul's name by a later hand addressing later church order — which, if correct, lowers the weight of the passage relative to the undisputed Paul of Galatians 3:28. Second, context: the letter combats false teaching in Ephesus (1 Timothy 1:3–7), and the instruction may target specific women spreading or being deceived by it, not women as such. Third, the notoriously difficult "saved through childbearing" (2:15) shows the passage is doing something more local and obscure than stating timeless doctrine — no one treats that verse as a universal soteriology, which warns against treating verse 12 as a universal church order. Fourth, the rest of the New Testament cuts the other way (see below). The point for the exam is that one's doctrine of Scripture and one's critical conclusions together drive the reading, which is why equally serious Christians divide.
The Bible supplies texts pulling in both directions, which is precisely why it cannot settle the question by simple citation.
| Text | What It Says | How It Is Used |
|---|---|---|
| Genesis 1:27 | "God created humankind in his image... male and female he created them" | Both men and women are created in God's image — the foundation of equality |
| Genesis 2:18–23 | Woman is created from man's rib as a "helper" (ezer) | Traditionalists: woman was created second and for man's benefit. Egalitarians: ezer implies strength, not subordination (the same word is used of God in Psalm 121:2) |
| Genesis 3:16 | After the Fall: "Your husband... shall rule over you" | Traditionalists: a divinely ordered hierarchy. Egalitarians: a description of the fallen world, not God's intention |
| Galatians 3:28 | "There is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus" | The strongest egalitarian text in Paul: in Christ, the distinctions that divide humanity are transcended |
| 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 | "Women should be silent in the churches" | Traditionalists: Paul prohibits women from speaking in church. Egalitarians: this may be a later interpolation, or it may address a specific local problem (disorderly behaviour in Corinth) |
| 1 Timothy 2:11–15 | "I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man" | The most frequently cited text against women's ordination. Egalitarians note that 1 Timothy may not be by Paul himself, and that the instruction may reflect a specific pastoral situation |
| Romans 16:1–7 | Phoebe is called a diakonos (deacon/minister); Junia is described as "prominent among the apostles" | Evidence that women held leadership roles in the earliest churches |
| Argument | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Galatians 3:28 | In Christ there is no male or female — gender should be irrelevant to ministry |
| The example of Jesus | Jesus treated women with remarkable respect for his time: he taught women (Mary of Bethany, Luke 10:39), appeared first to women after the resurrection (Mary Magdalene, John 20:11–18) |
| Early Church practice | Women served as deacons, prophets, and leaders in the earliest churches (Phoebe, Junia, Priscilla) |
| The Spirit gives gifts regardless of gender | If God calls and gifts women for ministry, the Church has no right to refuse |
| Justice | Excluding women from leadership reinforces patriarchal structures and is a form of discrimination |
| Argument | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Jesus chose twelve male apostles | This was not merely a cultural accommodation but a deliberate choice with theological significance |
| 1 Timothy 2:11–15 | Paul's instruction against women teaching or exercising authority over men |
| Tradition | The Church has ordained only men for two thousand years; changing this requires extraordinary justification |
| In persona Christi | In the Catholic understanding, the priest acts "in the person of Christ" at the altar; since Christ was male, the priest must also be male (Pope John Paul II, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, 1994) |
| Complementarity | Men and women have different but equal roles — leadership in the Church is the man's role, not because women are inferior but because they have different callings |
| Denomination | Women's Ordination |
|---|---|
| Roman Catholic | No — Pope John Paul II declared this question "definitively" closed (1994) |
| Eastern Orthodox | No — though there are discussions about restoring the female diaconate |
| Church of England | Yes — women priests since 1994; women bishops since 2015 |
| Methodist | Yes — since 1974 in Britain |
| Baptist | Varies by congregation — some ordain women, many do not |
| Pentecostal | Varies — many women serve as pastors and leaders, especially in the Global South |
The specification highlights the Church of England's journey, which illustrates the whole debate in miniature. After decades of argument, the General Synod voted in November 1992 — by just two votes over the required two-thirds majority — to permit the ordination of women to the priesthood, and the first 32 women were ordained at Bristol Cathedral on 12 March 1994. The compromise that secured the vote allowed parishes opposed in conscience to receive alternative episcopal oversight (the "flying bishops" of provincial episcopal visitors) and passed measures to accommodate those who could not accept the change — an attempt to keep the two integrities within one church. The question of women bishops then reopened the argument, since a woman bishop would ordain and have authority over clergy who rejected her orders; after a failed vote in 2012, the Synod approved women bishops in November 2014, and Libby Lane became the first, consecrated as Bishop of Stockport in January 2015. The Church of England thus moved, within a generation, from excluding women from the priesthood to admitting them to its highest office — a concrete case of a major church judging that its tradition on this point could and should be reformed, while straining to hold together those who disagreed.
The in persona Christi argument deserves a closer look, since it is the most theologically serious objection and the one Ruether's Christology directly targets. The Roman Catholic case, set out in Inter Insigniores (1976) and reaffirmed by Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (1994), is that the priest at the altar acts in the person of Christ the bridegroom, and that there must be a "natural resemblance" between the sign (the priest) and the thing signified (the male Christ); a woman, on this view, cannot image the bridegroom. Critics reply that what the priest represents is Christ's humanity and self-gift, not his maleness — if the saviour's sex were essential to the sign, then by the patristic principle "what is not assumed is not healed," Christ's maleness would mean only men were redeemed, which the Church denies. This is precisely where Ruether's claim that "the maleness of Jesus has no ultimate significance" does its work, turning the in persona Christi argument on its head.
Feminist theology analyses the patriarchal structures, language and assumptions of Christianity and asks whether they can be reformed. The specification frames the debate through two contrasting responses — the reformist and the post-Christian — and names two thinkers who exemplify them.
Key term: Patriarchy (from the Greek patria, father, and archē, rule) is a social system in which men hold primary power and authority. Feminist theologians argue that patriarchy has shaped Christian theology, language, institutions and practice in ways that marginalise women — the question is whether this is essential to Christianity or an accidental corruption that can be removed.
Ruether is the leading reformist voice: she holds that patriarchy is not intrinsic to Christianity but has been imposed on it, and that the faith contains its own resources for self-correction. In Sexism and God-Talk (1983) she argues that the prophetic-liberating tradition within the Bible — the same impulse that condemns injustice and oppression — provides the critical principle by which Christianity can judge and reject its own sexism. Her watchword is that "whatever diminishes or denies the full humanity of women must be presumed not to reflect the divine."
Her Christology is the part most directly relevant to the specification's note about the maleness of Christ. Ruether's guiding question is "Can a male saviour save women?" Her answer is that the maleness of Jesus has "no ultimate significance": what saves is Christ's redemptive humanity, his solidarity with the poor and outcast and his self-emptying of domination, not his male body. She therefore reconceives Christ as the pattern of a new, inclusive humanity — Christ as "redemptive person and Word of God" who is "not encapsulated 'once-for-all' in the historical Jesus" but continues in the redeemed community, women and men alike. On this view the risen Christ is not bound to maleness, which removes the in persona Christi argument against women's priesthood at its root. (Ruether also pressed for inclusive God-language, exploring terms such as "God/ess" to loosen the grip of exclusively male imagery.)
Hampson represents the opposite, post-Christian conclusion, and she is the specification's named foil to Ruether. Once an Anglican who campaigned for women's ordination, Hampson came to hold that Christianity is irredeemably patriarchal and must be left behind. In Theology and Feminism (1990) she argues that Christianity is a historical religion — it stakes everything on the claim that God acted uniquely in a particular first-century man, Jesus, within a patriarchal culture — and that this particularity cannot be reformed away: to be a Christian is to be bound to that male-centred history and its texts. She contends that the religion "cannot, by definition, come to terms with the equality of women," because its very structure privileges a male saviour, male imagery for God, and authoritative texts shaped by patriarchy. For Hampson the honest course is therefore not to reform Christianity but to move beyond it to a post-Christian spirituality that can conceive the divine without the inherited male scaffolding. (She and Ruether set out their disagreement directly in the jointly authored exchange Is There a Place for Feminists in a Christian Church?, 1987.)
| Issue | Ruether (reformist) | Hampson (post-Christian) |
|---|---|---|
| Is patriarchy essential to Christianity? | No — it is an imposed corruption | Yes — it is built into a historical, male-centred faith |
| The maleness of Christ | Has "no ultimate significance"; redemptive humanity, not maleness, saves | Decisive: a religion centred on a male saviour cannot deliver women's equality |
| The way forward | Reform from within, using the prophetic tradition | Leave Christianity for a post-Christian spirituality |
| Status | Remains a (radical) Christian theologian | Post-Christian |
The moral status of homosexuality is one of the most divisive issues in contemporary Christianity. The debate centres on the interpretation of a small number of biblical texts and on broader questions about the nature of Christian ethics.
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 10 lessons in this course.