Women and Worship at Corinth, by Lucy Peppiatt (Book Review analysis of 1 Corinthians)

Do you read fiction or non-fiction?

I read both!

I read fiction to get a feel for how to write fiction.

I read non-fiction to portray my historical fictional settings and characters more realistically.

Christian nonfiction frames Christian fiction. Egalitarian scholarship enlightens how to portray women in the bible in ministry & leadership.

Below are a few of the books I read this spring. This post is about Women and Worship at Corinth. In this book, Lucy Peppiatt examines the controversial passages on gender in 1 Corinthians 11 and 14. She examines Paul's rhetorical arguments in 1 Corinthians. A rhetorical argument presents a reasonable and logical claim using evidence and exclamations to persuade an audience to a particular viewpoint. Instead of providing abstract truth, rhetorical arguments provide practical reasons for specific choices. Peppiatt proposes that Paul uses rhetorical arguments in his letter to 1 Corinthians, quoting incorrect, pagan beliefs of the Corinthians, and Paul refutes or overturns them.

Five recent reads

Book Review: Women and Worship at Corinth: Paul's Rhetorical Arguments in 1 Corinthians

Author: Dr. Lucy Peppiatt has been a Principal at Westminster Theological Centre since 2013. She has degrees in English, Theology, and Systematic Theology from King's College, London, and a PhD from the University of Otago in New Zealand, and she worships in the Anglican church.

Publisher: Wipf & Stock, 160 pages, 2015

Genres: Non-fiction, Bible and Sacred Texts, Christian Commentaries, Gender and Religion.

Why I Chose It:

My historical fiction will likely include scenes from Corinth and include Apostle Paul interacting with women whom he commends for their work for the church in Romans 16. Does he trust women like Phoebe and Priscilla to speak, and compliment women like Junia and Mary in Rome, and then tell women to be silent? Why does Paul tell women how to dress and behave while speaking and prophesying before the congregation, and then tell women to be silent? I looked to Dr Lucy Peppiatt to explain these seeming inconsistencies.

Purpose of Paul's Letter to Corinth

Paul is responding to a letter from Chloe's people informing Paul of divisions in the church (1 Corinthians 1:11). Chloe's people were likely acting on Chloe's instructions when she asked them to take her report to Paul in Ephesus. Chloe is an influential woman and head of her own household. Chloe's people could have been servants, slaves, employees, or members of her family or of her home-church.

Theresa Doyle-Nelson states that Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (1 Corinthians 16:17) were “Chloe’s people” who brought Chloe's report and returned to Corinth to deliver Paul's letter to the Corinthian Christians.[1] She explains that Corinth was a large and diverse city, likely with numerous house churches of differing loyalties and attitudes, competing for superiority. Paul addresses these divisions by stressing the need for unity, being one body of Christ, benefiting from one another's gifts, and above all, loving one another (1 Corinthians 13).

It is possible that Chloe was a patron or host of a home church in Corinth. She is not a quarrelsome Christian, but is a Christian leader seeking Apostle Paul's advice because she is concerned about divisions among Christians. Marg Mowczko suggests that Chloe was well known to the Corinthian Christians, a wealthy and powerful woman, possibly a prominent female minister in Corinth like Phoebe or Priscilla. [2]

Lucy Peppiatt's Introduction

Peppiatt begins by explaining the problems with traditional interpretations, how they involve believing Paul was confused, unclear, or changed his mind inconsistently. She proposes that Paul's accepted strategy of quoting and refuting the Corinthians in other parts of the letter is also a strategy he uses in 1 Corinthians 11 and 14.

Traditional readings are often based on the assumption that there is a problem with rebellious women and that Paul is correcting the women. What if Paul is actually addressing problems with rebellious men? Perhaps Chloe is reporting trouble that she is facing, largely from powerful men dominating her home church. Perhaps Paul is quoting these Corinthian men and correcting them, telling them (and us) to empower women. Peppiatt writes:

I question, however, whether it really is easier to imagine a group of wild and rebellious women who are so uncontrollable that they need the intervention of the apostle than it is to imagine the existence of a group of spiritually gifted and highly articulate male teachers who were both overbearing and divisive men. I propose that in a relentlessly patriarchal society, it is more plausible to believe the latter might be the case, that under the men’s influential leadership, certain oppressive practices had been implemented, and other destructive and selfish practices had remained unchallenged. (Introduction)

It may have been that these divisions personally inhibited Chloe's ministry and concerned her to such an extent that she incurred the expense of sending her people on a long journey to deliver her report to Apostle Paul. If we examine more closely the idea that Paul might be correcting men, it would reveal the following possible problems in Corinth:

1. Were the men coercing the women to wear veils when praying or prophesying?

2. Were the men behaving selfishly or greedily at the Lord's Supper?

3. Were Corinthians (mainly Corinthian men) domineering while exercising their spiritual gifts, preventing others from taking part or sharing prophetic words, hymns, or revelations to the gathering?

4. Were those with the gift of speaking in tongues, or pretending to have that gift, babbling loudly at the same time as each other, thinking it was a powerful witness?

5. Is it possible that the male leaders in Corinth were requiring married women to remain silent?

If male Christian leaders in Corinth were behaving as above, the letter of 1 Corinthians addresses and corrects these behaviours, telling them to be kind, considerate, and respectful of others. Paul builds to the "more excellent way" of love (1 Corinthians 13).

Peppiatt concludes that while the traditional understanding is that Paul endorses repressive practices in relation to women, it is possible that Paul is actually endorsing the opposite.

The community that loves one another as Christ loves, honors women, and gives a voice to the lowest and the least. If we accept a rhetorical reading of these passages it would then mean that Paul begins and ends his section on public worship by addressing the oppression of women, and coming out as strongly as possible against it. (Introduction)

If we understand the controversial passages in 1 Corinthians 11 and 14 in this way, then all the inconsistencies with Paul's other letters fall away. Suddenly, his commendation of women in Romans and in Acts, his statements of gender equality in Galatians and Colossians, all become consistent with Paul's quote and refute statements in 1 Corinthians.

Flaws in Traditional Readings

Lucy Peppiatt reveals the flaws in the traditional interpretations of 1 Corinthians 11 and 14 in this 2015 work. The problems:

• First, Paul says women can pray and prophesy aloud in public worship, and then he says they should be silent.

• First, he says they need a head covering, and then he says there's no policy on that.

• First, he says the gifts of tongues benefit unbelievers, then he says it benefits believers.

These are just a few examples showing that the traditional interpretations may leave us thinking Paul's thinking is muddled or conflicted with itself.

What is God trying to tell us in this passage? How could we understand this passage while eliminating the apparent inconsistencies? If Paul quoted the Corinthians, wouldn't it be obvious by the punctuation?

The original Greek New Testament does not have punctuation, but was written with continuous capital letters and no periods, commas, or quotation marks. Scribes added these centuries later, based on their interpretations.

Lucy Peppiatt takes an academic approach and shows how the problems are resolved by reading these as Paul quoting the Corinthian people and refuting their words. Other passages within 1 Corinthians are widely thought to be Paul quoting the letter he received from Chloe's people describing what she faces in the church in Corinth.

Uncontested Instances of Quote and Refute in 1 Corinthians

In the book, Peppiatt quotes Douglas Campbell, Professor of New Testament, Duke Divinity School, who wrote, “It is worth noting that it is widely if not universally conceded that Paul behaves in essentially this fashion—quoting the positions of others, often unannounced—in the rest of his letters” and that there are “uncontested instances” of this in 1 Corinthians... In sum, it seems that Paul does quote texts from others when composing his letters, and that he does not always signal those overtly with written cues . . .”

Let's look at the "uncontested instances" of Paul quoting and refuting Corinthian thinking (NRSVUE):

Quote: What I mean is that each of you says, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apollos,” or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.” (1 Corinthians 11:12)

Refute: "Has Christ been divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" (1 Corinthians 11:13)

Quote: "For when one says, “I belong to Paul,” and another, “I belong to Apollos,” are you not all too human? (1 Corinthians 3:4)

Refute: "What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you came to believe, as the Lord assigned to each." (1 Corinthians 3:5)

Quote: “All things are permitted for me,” but not all things are beneficial. “All things are permitted for me,”  (1 Corinthians 6:12)

Refute: "but I will not be dominated by anything." (1 Corinthians 6:12)

Quote: “Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food,” [a euphemism for sex being made for the body, and the body made for sex] (1 Corinthians 6:13)

Refute: God will destroy both one and the other. The body is meant not for sexual immorality but for the Lord and the Lord for the body. And God raised the Lord and will also raise us by his power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Should I therefore take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! (1 Corinthians 6:13-15)

Quote: Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” (1 Corinthians 7:1)

Refute: But because of cases of sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife what is due her and likewise the wife to her husband (1 Corinthians 7:2-3)

Quote: Now concerning food sacrificed to idols: we know that “all of us possess knowledge.” (1 Corinthians 8:1)

Refute: Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. Anyone who claims to know something does not yet have the necessary knowledge, but anyone who loves God is known by him. (1 Corinthians 8:1-3)

Quote: “All things are permitted,”

Refute: "but not all things are beneficial (1 Corinthians 10:23)

Quote: “All things are permitted,”

Refute: "but not all things build up. Do not seek your own advantage but that of the other (1 Corinthians 10:23-24)

Quote and Refute Pattern to Bring Clarity and Consistency to 1 Corinthians 11 and 14

What if these confusing passages are simply longer quotes from the delegation Chloe sent from her church? What if Paul quotes the Corinthian men's incorrect thinking and corrects it? What if we extend the quote and refute from earlier parts of the letter to this part of the letter?

Quote: And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Refute: What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? (1 Corinthians 14:35-36 KJV)

Quote: Now I want you to know that Christ is the head of all men, and a man is the head of a woman.

Refute: But God is the head of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:3 CEV)

Quote: "... any man who prays or prophesies with something on his head brings shame to his head. But any woman who prays or prophesies without something on her head brings shame to her head (v. 4-6). "Isn't it unnatural and disgraceful for men to have long hair? (v. 14).

Refute:  "In fact, she may as well shave her head." Paul ridicules them that if it is a disgrace for a woman to uncover her head, she may as well shave it all off, a sign of shame, possibly because a shaved head was a punishment for adultery or because a shaved head made a woman look like a man. (1 Corinthians 11:4-6 CEV). Paul says long hair is an acceptable, even beautiful way for a woman to cover her head (v. 14).

Quote: "Men were created to be like God and to bring honor to God. This means a man should not wear anything on his head. Women were created to bring honor to men. It was the woman who was made from a man, and not the man who was made from a woman. He wasn't created for her. She was created for him. (1 Corinthians 11:7-9).

Refute:  As far as the Lord is concerned, men and women need each other. It is true that the first woman came from a man, but all other men have been given birth by women. Yet God is the one who created everything. (1 Corinthians 11:11-12). Paul explains that God is above both women and men, that men and women depend on one another, and both women and men glorify God.

Don’t, by the way, read too much into the differences here between men and women. Neither man nor woman can go it alone or claim priority. Man was created first, as a beautiful shining reflection of God—that is true. But the head on a woman’s body clearly outshines in beauty the head of her “head,” her husband. The first woman came from man, true—but ever since then, every man comes from a woman! And since virtually everything comes from God anyway, let’s quit going through these “who’s first” routines. (1 Corinthians 11:10-12 MSG, The Message)

How assumptions can impact translation:

a) authority/power on her head

The following statement from 1 Corinthians 11:10 seems unclear and is translated in various ways. Theologians debate whether this chapter is discussing hair, veils, or hats. If we read 1 Corinthians 11 with the assumption that the rebellious women need correcting, the item on the head could symbolize that the woman is under a man's authority.

• So a woman should wear a covering on her head as a sign that she is under man’s authority (TLB The Living Bible)

However, if we read 1 Corinthians 11 without any assumptions, it says a woman ought to have authority over her head. Just as wearing a crown symbolizes a king's authority, wearing something on one's head signifies one's own authority. Wearing a crown never signifies being under the authority of someone else.

Paul corrects the Corinthians who seem to be telling women what to wear, and Paul tells them that a woman ought to have authority over her own head:

• And so, because of this, and also because of the angels, a woman ought to wear something on her head, as a sign of her authority. (CEV, Contemporary English Version

• For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. (KJV, King James Version)

• For this reason, a woman ought to have authority over her head, because of the angels (NRSVUE)

b) because of the angels

There are a few theories about this reference to angels.

• It refers to angels (human messengers or spies) who might damage the church's reputation

• It refers to angels (sons of God) who might come down and take women to satisfy their lusts (as in Genesis 6:1-2)

The above assumes a woman must wear something on her head to protect her virtue or the church's reputation.

• It refers to the angels that male and female believers will be in a position to judge. Do you not know that we are to judge angels, to say nothing of ordinary matters?  (1 Corinthians 6:3).

This view assumes that Paul is referencing his own letter, explaining that since women and men in Christ are capable of judging angels, a woman is certainly able to make her own judgment on what to wear on her head.

c) this is how it's done

Similarly, there are wide differences in 1 Corinthians 11:16. Some translations build in their assumptions and state that all the churches have a policy of a woman wearing something on her head.

• This is how things are done in all of God's churches, and this is why none of you should argue about what I have said (CEV)

• But if anyone wants to argue about this, all I can say is that we never teach anything else than this—that a woman should wear a covering when prophesying or praying publicly in the church, and all the churches feel the same way about it. (TLB)

However, most of today's Christians, even those who take the Bible literally, do not insist on women wearing something on their heads. Other translations do not build in assumptions and state that none of the churches have a policy on women and head coverings.

• But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God (KJV)

• But if anyone is disposed to be contentious—we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God. (NRSVUE)

  
  

Conclusion

This book is a refreshing and affirming look at understanding these problematic passages. It turns out Paul may be telling men to stop limiting women. I highly recommend this book.

I have written four other articles on Apostle Paul:

1. Is Apostle Paul Misunderstood?

2. Was Paul a Misogynist?

3. Was Paul is misquoted!

4. Did the Church Misconstrue Paul's Writing?

I have made an egalitarian and affirming examination of 1 Corinthians here.

---

Elaine Ricker Kelly Author is empowering women with historical fiction about women in the Bible and early church and Christian blogs about women in leadership, church history and doctrine. Her books include:

• Forgotten Followers from Broken to Bold, Book 1, A Novel (2022)

• The Sword: A Fun Way to Engage in Healthy Debate on What the Bible Says About a Woman's Role (2023)

• Because She Was Called from Broken to Bold, Book 2, A Novel of the Early Church (2024)

• Walk with Mara on Her Healing Journey: 21 Steps to Emotional Resilience (2024)

• Finding Her Voice from Broken to Bold, Book 3, Acts of Early Female Apostles: A Novel (2025)

---

[1] Theresa Doyle-Nelson, "Chloe and the Corinthians", January 6, 2012, Catholic Exchange, https://catholicexchange.com/chloe-and-the-corinthians/

[2] Marg Mowczko, "Who was Chloe of Corinth?" April 26, 2015, Marg Mowczko, https://margmowczko.com/who-was-chloe-of-corinth/