Luther on gender relations—just one reading of Genesis?

Subordination

Against the background of these deeply held beliefs, the third and widely known aspect of Luther's conclusions from Genesis 1-3 with regard to gender relations is not surprising: subordination (to use a New Testament term: 1 Tim 2:11; 1 Cor 14:34; Eph 5:21f.; 1 Pet 3:1). Curiously, in his sermons on Genesis this aspect is not even counterbalanced by the aspect of mutual love as it is, for example, in Ephesians. Luther misses no opportunity to stress the primacy of the male partner. Why did God give Adam the commandment not to eat from the tree of knowledge even before Eve had been created (Gen 2:17)? This shows that a woman should not receive the Word of God without mediation; rather Eve was to learn it from Adam. Thus, Luther concludes, "even before the fall the ruling power and governance was with the male person." It is therefore not fully convincing when it is claimed that according to Luther "women would have remained equal to men in all respects" if Eve had not sinned. (11) Why is the Hebrew designation 'issa (woman) derived from 'is (man) in Gen 2:23? This shows that the woman owes her name to the man and that, again, "he retains the ruling power." Why does God ask in the singular, "Adam, where are you?" (Gen 3:9)? This shows "that God confers the office of ruling, teaching, and preaching to the male person." Similarly on Gen 3:20 with a reference to 1 Pet 3:7. Is this really what the biblical text is about? (12)

From the perspective of biblical studies, it appears that Luther's view of women is embedded in a reception of the biblical tradition that culminates in a convenient assertion of certain preconceptions. I doubt whether today we would call these anything but discrimination against women--notwithstanding Luther's claim to scriptural support forhis views. Historians may argue about whether or not the Reformation had a liberating effect for women. But if one studies the core concept as it is developed in biblical interpretation, any sense of freedom for women seems to have been eclipsed.

Even where the concept of priesthood in the Catholic Church is replaced by the concept of ministry in the Protestant setting, women are excluded from "teaching and preaching." While this position may follow from texts such as 1 Timothy 2, there is no reason why it should also be anchored in Genesis 1-3. An inquiry into Luther's reading of Genesis thus makes us aware of the contrast between what he accepted and propounded as normative Christian teaching and what has become common sense today. The concept of gender relations as it was developed during the Reformation has become part of the history of ideas (13) just as have traditional, biblically based assumptions about the age and the origin of the earth.

The Bible's authority

I do not here address the issue of the significance of the Reformation for the emergence of modem biblical criticism. However, I would like to balance my critique of Luther's use of the Bible for defining gender relations with acknowledging two fundamental points where reference to his work remains a great stimulus for contemporary exegesis. The first is Luther's insistence on the authority of Scripture. It should not be denied that the biblical tradition is the proper standard for Christian theological thought, even if we have come to realize that God does not dwell within the words of the Scriptures in the way the Reformers and their successors for many generations saw it. Second is Luther's unambiguous orientation towards the gospel and faith. It remains a central tenet in Christian theology and church life that God is perceived with the eyes of a faith that entails justification. However, we have come to realize that there is greater freedom to develop a variety of distinctive ways of life in family and s ociety than the Reformers would have admitted. Luther's preoccupation with monastic vows and other similar issues of his day prevented him from fully realizing the consequences of what even he himself points out in some passages of his exposition of 1 Corinthians 7. (14) We should therefore not look for guidance where we meet with inconsiderate and prejudiced views on gender relations in Luther's reading of Genesis, but instead we should sharpen our sense for the Bible's contribution to protecting human dignity.