Can Women Be Elders or Pastors? 1 Timothy 3
Can only men be overseers, pastors, or elders in the church? Some certainly think so, and they often turn to 1 Timothy 3 to show that only men were doing so. I certainly saw this as one of the most convincing passages that excluded women from leadership in the Church when I was a complementarian. However, a closer look at the Greek text indicates that translations have been unfair. These mistranslations have induced errors in our interpretation. It is about time we reform our understanding of this passage.
Let us look at the NIV translation:
3 Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect. 5 (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7 He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.
8 In the same way, deacons are to be worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9 They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.
11 In the same way, the women are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
12 A deacon must be faithful to his wife and must manage his children and his household well. 13 Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus.
(1 Tim 3:1-13)
No male pronouns
Some argue from 1 Timothy 3 that overseers are described as being male and that this excludes women from being overseers. Our English translations definitely seem to indicate so. Most translations have numerous male pronouns in the text: “He must manage his own family,” “He must not be a recent convert,” “He must also have a good reputation,” etc. We do not use “he” to refer to women in English; it only refers to a man. The message is clear; an overseer must be a man.
I was shocked to discover that no such male pronouns are used in the original Greek text! Paul uses the indefinite pronoun tis, meaning anyone: “Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task.” Do you hear that? Whoever! Anyone! This includes women; if a woman desires to be an overseer, she desires a noble task. All the male pronouns that are in our English translations are not in the Greek text. Paul even seems to go out of his way not to include any male identifiers to exclude women. He could have used the male pronoun autos for “he,” but he didn’t. He could have said, “if any manaspires to be an overseer…”, but he didn’t. He could have said, “the overseer is to be a man above reproach…”, but he didn’t.
We cannot look to all the male pronouns in the English translations to justify that only men can be overseers; they are just not there in the Greek text. It would be better translated with the pronoun “they”: “They must not be a recent convert.” This would be more faithful to the Greek text, even if it is plural; we can use “they” to refer to one individual on occasion.
Women were at least deacons
As Paul describes the character traits that elders and deacons should possess, he mentions how the women ought to compose themselves. He wrote, “In the same way, the women are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything ” (1 Tim 3:11). Which women? The elders? Or Deacons? Paul doesn’t specify. It is right in the middle of the section on deacons (1 Tim 3:8-13), so it at least refers to women deacons, if not elders.
Some have argued that Paul is actually referring to deacons’ wives (the Greek word guné means woman or wife). Although, as it doesn’t say “Their wives,” I find this unlikely[1]. It doesn’t seem to make much sense in this context. Especially when we know that women were deacons: think “Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae” (Rom 16:1).
What does this mean? What is it to be a deacon? The Greek word diakonos/deacon was used to talk about a servant or one who serves. And some may brush this aside, saying that women were just servants, that there is no leadership or teaching involved, and that it is more about providing assistance (Acts 6:2). However, we now use the term “deacon” to describe a specific office in the church: a title, a job description. Suppose this is what we understand a deacon to be, then women are allowed access to this office by Paul. However, if we think it simply refers to a servant, we need to recognize that Paul is giving a high standard for how a deacon or servant is to behave. Not just anyone could be a servant of the church; they have to be worthy of respect and trustworthy. It is a high calling, a great responsibility.
Additionally, Paul uses this term to describe his own ministry and that of others of note (1 Co 3:5-6; 2 Co 6:4; Ep 3:7; Ep 6:21; Ph 1:1; Col 1:7; Col 1:23-25). Paul’s ministry is undoubtedly impressive, yet he uses the word “servant” to describe it. We cannot limit the importance of women’s service and ministry to the church by saying that women were just servants (diakonos) without diminishing Paul’s ministry.
Must overseers be married?
Another objection to women being overseers or elders from this text is that Paul says an elder must be faithful to his wife. There you have it! An overseer must be a man to have a wife. Again, our modern English translations do not get to the nuance here. In Greek it is simply said that an overseer must be a mias gunaikos andra, a man of one wife/woman.
Paul is excluding adulterers and those engaged in polygamous relations. That this refers only to men is not clear. For example, later in verse 12, he says that deacons must be faithful to their wives (mias gunaikos andra), yet we know that women can be deacons (1 Tim 3:11, Rom 16:1). This phrasing cannot be used to exclude women overseers in this context.
Furthermore, must overseers be married? Of course not! Paul and Timothy were single; this would exclude them from their ministry. The phrasing “faithful to his wife” is not a requirement that one be married or a man; it excludes those who are not faithful to their wife or spouse[2]. It does not exclude those who do not have a spouse and therefore cannot be unfaithful to a spouse they do not have. If this phrasing cannot exclude unmarried men, it cannot be used to exclude women.
A woman also managed the household according to Paul
Another objection may be that Paul says that an overseer “must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him.” For those who believe that men are to be the head of their family, this would be another indication that an overseer had to be male to manage his own family. However, women are also instructed to manage their homes (1 Tim 5:14). Additionally, we know that children should obey and honor their father and mother (Ep 6:1-3). Therefore, this phrasing cannot rule out women. I also do not believe it excludes people who do not have children from being elders; Paul and Timothy had no children of their own, yet their ministry was significant and blessed by God. Paul actually encouraged believers to remain single for the Lord. He saw that as ideal for being whole heartily serving God without the earthly distractions of caring for a spouse and children (1 Co 7:25-40).
No women overseers?
One last issue is that Paul did not specifically mention women overseers as he did with women deacons. You could argue that is because Paul did not envision the possibility that women would be overseers. This is not necessarily the case. Perhaps there were no women overseers in Ephesus, and so Paul did not see the need to address women overseers in this particular letter. Or perhaps Paul was concerned about specific women spreading myths at this particular church and did not want them to feel justified to continue spreading these ideas (1 Tim 1:3-7). However, Paul’s language in 1 Timothy 3 is very inclusive of both genders; it does not exclude women. To exclude women from being overseers because Paul did not specifically mention women is based on speculation.
Conclusion
On closer look, we do not find anything that would prevent a woman from being a servant in the church, either as an overseer, elder, deacon, or any other ministry. There are no male descriptions, no male pronouns, no statement that only men can be elders in this passage. Paul said that anyone who desires to be an overseer desires a good thing, and I believe him. I cannot think it would be a good thing for a man but an evil thing for a woman to want to be an overseer. The English translations have misled us, but we are not bound to the English text. The Greek text is authoritative and accessible to us and can clarify our understanding of the Bible.
[1] Joe. “Elders, deacons, and gender: are women prohibited in 1 Timothy and Titus?” Walking With A Limp. January17, 2020. https://www.walkingwithalimp.net/2020/01/17/elders-deacons-and-gender-are-women-prohibited-in-1-timothy-and-titus/
[2] Payne, Philip Barton. “1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-9: May Women be Overseers and Deacons.” In Man and Woman, One in Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Paul’s Letters. (p. 445). Zondervan. Kindle Edition.
Does “One-Woman Man” in 1 Timothy 3:2 Require that All Overseers be Male?
