I am asked, from time to time, about the matter of women being allowed to teach, or to teach men, in a church setting. As a senior pastor of over 55 years, I suggest the following as a working foundation.
(1) Women played a significant role in the Bible as teachers. There were several prophetesses: Huldah – II Kings 22:14-20, Deborah – Judges 4:4, the four daughters of Philip who prophesied -Acts 21:9, etc. There is also the promise, in Peter’s pentecostal sermon — speaking of the new dispensation of the Holy Spirit — our dispensation — that “…your daughters shall prophesy.” (Acts 2:17) Corinthian women were both praying and prophesying in public (I Cor. 5:11) and were not admonished to cease, but to do so decorously. It is, obviously, very difficult to prophesy in private.
(2) Paul says in II Tim 2:11-12, “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.” (a) Paul knew a woman could properly prophesy (he had himself allowed it in Corinth), so he surely wasn’t saying she couldn’t minister publicly. (b) “Silence” (vss 11-12) is the Greek word esukia, which, first, means “quietness,” or “with a quiet or tranquil spirit,” and, secondly, “silent.” (See Thayer, Bagster, et al.) (c) Paul’s concern here is to state clearly that a woman must not usurp authority to do a thing which, under authority, she may properly do. (The word “usurp” refers to “an autocrat, a self-doer, one who domineers.”) (d) Paul would have, consistent with all the NT materials, held that a woman should not serve as a pastor, and “teach” here may refer to the pastoral/teaching office. ( It is well known that, in both Jewish and Roman culture, a woman could speak in public, but could not contend, dispute, argue, or interrupt — all of which a man could do. She was expected to ask her husband, in private any questions she might have. That might be what Paul has in mind in this passage. In any case, Paul does not allow a woman to “usurp authority.”)
(3) I Cor. 14:34 says a woman should keep silence (sigaoo) in the churches. The Greek word does mean, principally, to be silent, as Paul goes on to say in v35 (women should ask of their husbands at home what was spoken in the church), but it is to be remembered that this passage is, very obviously, in the context of speaking in tongues in Corinth, and the apostle might be saying, only, that a woman should not speak in tongues publicly at all.
My personal position is that a woman may teach in a church setting if she does so with the blessing of both pastor and church, and if she remains under such authority. She should not serve as a pastor, since the NT knows nothing about such an event. (That obviously has nothing to do with ability, experience, giftedness, or effective service elsewhere; it emanates from the apparent divine order for church life.) I also think, even in the very best of such long-term situations where she is teaching men, it is not the ideal. God’s NT design for the church is, manifestly — gladly confessing all the rich blessings of ministry by women and the need for the church to benefit from the special spiritual sensitivity God has given many of them — that men should lead it.
The question has arisen recently in Southern Baptist settings, as to whether it is proper for a woman to teach men in a seminary setting. SBC seminary presidents have taken varying positions on the subject.
The mission fields have their own special concerns and considerations about the issue, since a disproportionate number of missionaries are female.
As a footnote: I have never met a godly woman who was not happy to serve her Lord faithfully regardless of whatever titles might or might not have been given to her.