Creeds define the essential doctrines of the faith, but non-essential doctrines can cause division even within churches unified on the essentials. In contemporary Christianity, women in authority roles constitutes one such divisive issue, even though most scholars classify this issue as “secondary.” Secondary issues still are given different levels of importance, which affects how one applies the Apostle Paul’s instructions on handling secondary issues. This paper will compare prohibiting women in authority roles to food prohibitions in Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8-10. It will argue that the biblical parallels between food prohibitions and prohibitions of women in authority warrant treating the later as a lower tier secondary issue on a doctrinal taxonomy. Ranking secondary issues is inherently subjective, but this argument provides additional biblical data to consider.
This thesis will be supported by examining how Paul applies the Jerusalem council’s prohibitions on idol food in First Corinthians and Romans (if Romans 14 indeed refers to food sacrificed to idols). Paul’s instructions to the churches adopt a less restrictive reading of that idol food prohibition. Paul’s own prohibition of women in authority in 1 Timothy 2:12 can be read in an analogous way because his personal practice of placing women in authority roles is less restrictive. If this paper’s thesis is correct, then it adds another piece of evidence that Paul’s prohibition of women in authority is contextually conditioned–an argument ably made by several scholars. Contextual considerations have limits, as 1 Corinthians 10 demonstrates, but the biblical parallels between these two prohibitions argue for treating women in authority as a lower tier secondary issue on one’s doctrinal taxonomy.
A shorter final section will suggest how treating women in authority as a lower tier secondary issue (akin to eating idol food) would look in contemporary practice. The Apostle Paul recommends prioritizing building up faith, unity, and advancing the church’s witness over non-essential doctrines. However, consistently applying Paul’s approach to secondary issues raises institutional and cultural concerns for both egalitarians and complementarians. Nevertheless, treating women in authority as a lower tier secondary issue frames the discussion in important ways that affect church practices.