Scholars, ancient and modern, conservative and progressive and moderate and liberal, struggle to understand what Paul says about widows in 1 Timothy 5.
(1Ti 5:3-16 ESV) 3 Honor widows who are truly widows. 4 But if a widow has children or grandchildren, let them first learn to show godliness to their own household and to make some return to their parents, for this is pleasing in the sight of God. 5 She who is truly a widow, left all alone, has set her hope on God and continues in supplications and prayers night and day, 6 but she who is self-indulgent is dead even while she lives. 7 Command these things as well, so that they may be without reproach. 8 But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
9 Let a widow be enrolled if she is not less than sixty years of age, having been the wife of one husband, 10 and having a reputation for good works: if she has brought up children, has shown hospitality, has washed the feet of the saints, has cared for the afflicted, and has devoted herself to every good work. 11 But refuse to enroll younger widows, for when their passions draw them away from Christ, they desire to marry 12 and so incur condemnation for having abandoned their former faith. 13 Besides that, they learn to be idlers, going about from house to house, and not only idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying what they should not. 14 So I would have younger widows marry, bear children, manage their households, and give the adversary no occasion for slander. 15 For some have already strayed after Satan.
16 If any believing woman has relatives who are widows, let her care for them. Let the church not be burdened, so that it may care for those who are truly widows.
Verses 3-8 and 16 are pretty clearly about the support of needy widows who can’t support themselves or, in that culture, readily remarry (“truly widows”). But do verses 9 – 15 refer to an order of widows who would serve as servants of the church (“enrolled widows”)? Many think so — Paul changes subjects, some scholars say, and there is certainly evidence in the early church fathers for an order of widows. Thus, those who are truly widows seem to differ from those who are enrolled widows.
Verse 10 plainly requires that those enrolled have a history of service, which wouldn’t be requirement for supporting a widow truly in need. After all, she might be a new convert, have no history of service, and yet be very much in need. These verses sure seem to be about widows who have a special service role — you can tell from the qualifications list.
The fact that Paul doesn’t say just what they are to do doesn’t change the result — he also doesn’t say what deacons are supposed to do!
This much is clear —
1. The church should care for widows, but the widows’ families have the primary obligation.
V. 8 rarely gets preached in this age of governmental welfare. The nation is filled with widows abandoned by their children and left to the state and charities to care for — which is sin. And when was the last time you heard this preached?
I’m not opposed to Social Security. But I do object to widows having to get handouts from churches and other charities just to live when their children are doing very well and could help if they just cared to.
2. Our older members should become servants of the church. Verse 10 plainly describes widows who have a heart for service. All our women (and men) should be known for washing the feet of the saints (metaphorically).
But we live in a culture where retirees often expect to be served. They prefer that the church cater to their tastes in music and room temperature while they live a self-indulgent lifestyle. Obviously, there are many, many exceptions, but we in church have largely bought the American assumption that someone who retires should enjoy a life of leisure and be served, even though, as long as their health holds out, retirees have the resources, wisdom, and experience to be fulltime, highly effective servants of Christ.
I’m 57 and hope to one day retire to full-time service. What could be more fun? Why travel to see the world when I can see Jesus right here? I don’t know … I just can’t image spending year after year playing golf with a bunch of old people, with my most significant accomplishment being lowering my handicap. Surely, if God gives me a retirement, it will be for nobler purposes.
Why isn’t this a standard expectation? Why isn’t this the retirement we are all working toward? The Christian retirement plan comes long after worldly retirement, and worldly retirement should be seen as a time given us by God to be busy serving in the Kingdom with all our might. Our rest comes later —
(Heb 4:9-11 ESV) 9 So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, 10 for whoever has entered God’s rest has also rested from his works as God did from his. 11 Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by the same sort of disobedience.
But, you see, rather than reading 1 Timothy 5 for the lessons that are there for us, we content ourselves with the intellectual exercise of figuring what the passage meant for Paul, and then we decide that times have changed, the passage is irrelevant, and move on. Hence, most of our members have never even heard a lesson on 1 Timothy 5, much less been challenged by the text to change their lives. Imagine how the church would be different if we took the passages seriously enough exegete it, apply a sound hermeneutic to it, and preach it!
That’s the result of a rules-based hermeneutic. It ignores God’s purposes and so produces a seriously flawed interpretation of his Scriptures. A rules-based hermeneutic lessens the impact of the Scriptures.
Jay…Carroll Osburn also mentions that older widows were designated “servants” to the church… Women in the Church…pg 146… I’d be interested in more discussion on this as its not readily apparent to me but apparently it is to those that are experts in NT Greek… Or perhaps it is not… If you have any additional resources that you could share it would be greatly appreciated…
Thank you for bringing up something dear to my heart! A deacon once told me someone once came to him asking help for his aged mother. The deacon replied, “What are you doing for her?” The man responded, “Why don’t you help her, and then I’ll see what I can do.” The deacon then said, quite rightly, “You’ve got it backwards. YOU do what you can first, and then if there is still a need, the church will help!”
I also greatly appreciate your call for retirement to be time of service in the kingdom. Where did we ever get the idea that we, who are servants of God, ever retire from that service? Yet, I have a dear friend who retired as an elder so he could be free to travel, take cruises, etc.
Jerry
It will be interesting to see what kind of comments this post generates!
An order of widows would certainly have plenty of work to do besides praying all of the time. For example, I could see such a woman serving a young family whose mother died leaving her husband and children without a mother in the home. She could be a grandmotherly housekeeper – where it would be totally inappropriate for a young woman to move into the home to care for the children there (unless she married into the family!)
Jerry
Jay wrote:
That’s not “the result of a rules-based hermeneutic.” Rather it’s the result of a hermeneutic that discards commands that are unfamiliar or uncomfortable in our modern culture… if it is a command at all.
If all the newly converted widows were given a pension from the church, we’d have a lot more “converts.” I doubt that’s what God wants. As I read it, the qualifications are there to ensure that those who receive full support from the church have first demonstrated their devotion to the Lord. And it serves as motivation to younger women live a devoted life.
To me this passage is not a useful example for discussing the question of cultural commands. For that purpose we need a clear command, one that we all understand what it meant in the first century context, and yet it is often discarded today. Head coverings would be a much better example… or women speaking in church. Or, women being busy at home. Or, if a man will not work he shall not eat. Or, sexual immorality. Or homosexuality. I think you get the idea. Some folks just don’t want the church to be *that* much different from the surrounding culture.
I see this situation every day in my community – a classic upper middle class American area.
People buy into the rat race. They drive their kids to every event available instead of limiting the events (“my kids love to be busy”). When the kids graduate high school, the parents breathe a big sigh of relief, ship the kids off to a far away college (often a Christian, i.e. expensive, college) and retire from “church.”
They wore themselves out for 20 years and now deserve a break.
Hence, I see the problem with retiring from church as one of running in the rat race. Elders everywhere, teach your flocks to avoid running with the rats and self-induced “burn out.”
As 2Pe 3:16 says some of Paul’s writings is hard to understand, but I believe we can understand Paul and why he writes as he does if we take the time to read about Paul, instead of only read Paul. I find St. Paul and Thecla, intresting and informative.
The idea here of providing for widows who serve is not unlike paying an elder who works hard in teaching. This dynamic does not begin with the checkbook but with the person. When such servanthood is visible, the church should not make a person go hungry for the privilege of serving. This is not a jobs program, but more plain sense than anything else.
I am reminded of John Wimber, who led a large congregation and was occasionally asked to give ordination papers for people to go into ministry. His position was, “Before we give out any papers, we like to see the puppies.”
Jay said, “That’s the result of a rules-based hermeneutic. It ignores God’s purposes and so produces a seriously flawed interpretation of his Scriptures. A rules-based hermeneutic lessens the impact of the Scriptures.”
I think this is exactly what Jesus was telling the Pharisees in Mark 7.
We were visiting the Church at Brook Hills in Birmingham the Sunday David Platt preached “The Family of God” which included teaching on this passage and their church family’s dedication to support widows and enlist them in service. Here is a link to their webpage on caring for widows http://www.brookhills.org/local/adults/care-for-widows.html Here is the link to the sermon for that day http://www.brookhills.org/media/series/first-timothy-the-household-of-god/ The lesson entitled “Family of God” is the one which addresses this passage if anyone is interested.
I really, really liked this post, Jay! Especially this one:
And Alan is right as well:
Taking both together we can just put aside this “cultural” idea, and start reading scripture again!
And the ECF! You know, since Paul does not go into much detail about the service of widows, we simply have to look at these churches that had this order of widows, at churches founded and instructed by the Apostles. Let me share some quotes:
I should add that the “order of widows” was also open to those who chose to remain virgins (both male and female), which BTW opens a new window on our discussion whether an elder needs to have children (or even to be married). We have a too limited vision of service in the church of Christ – while those who chose to be single for the Kingdom’s sake have a hard time finding a significant place to serve. But there is more to service than becoming an elder. Imagine, these widows worked closely with the church leaders! They are named alongside the deacons and presbyters! No, they are not teachers, not preachers, not the leaders of the church – but they obviously had an important part in the church, a place of honor (see also Tit 2:3-5).
For those who like to listen to a good speech on this this subject:
D.Bercot: The Widows and Virgins: Their Ministry in the Early Church
Alexander
Price,
Paul does not use DIAKONOS in 1 Tim 5 at all — either the noun or verb form. I don’t read Osburn to say otherwise. Rather, he simply points out that Paul appears to be putting the women on a list for the purpose of service — which is certainly true.
It’s not at all obvious the enrolled widows in 1 Tim 5 are the same as the “women/wives” Paul refers to in his list of qualities of a deacon, but some of the early church fathers made that interpretation. But the information we get from the ECFs is very unclear and incomplete. Alexander’s comment gives much of the early evidence, and the evidence is clear that some churches had female deacons or deaconesses and that some had enrolled widows, and it appears that they might have been the same thing in some churches.
Celibacy came to the early church fairly quickly, and so younger, celibate women were sometimes classified as “widows” — so they could serve alongside the older women.
http://books.google.com/books?id=UBVt_ddjEbwC&pg=PA41&lpg=PA41&dq=deaconesses+tertullian+pliny&source=bl&ots=3ZvV_GBFdB&sig=cerGe61WHkyYNrmXg8VSOhmzVfU&hl=en&ei=mXOKTuf3MdK3twe_3OS8Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBwQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=deaconesses%20tertullian%20pliny&f=false beginning on page 4 has a decent summary of the evidence.
It appears that deaconesses appear only in the East (although there are early ambiguous references in the West). The Eastern churches used women to assist in baptism of women, because they baptized in the nude. (A tradition, based on being “born again” that hasn’t stayed with us, but our traditions come via the much colder realms of northern Europe and England — and we do like to pick and choose which early church teachings to bind.)
When infant baptism became the norm, the role of the deaconess died out.
There is also evidence of an order of widows, sometimes seemingly the same as the deaconesses, sometimes evidently an order committed to prayer.
It’s just really hard to sort it all out. The early church did not have a uniform practice. But this much is clear — the family is supposed to care for its own widows first, the church nonetheless has an obligation to help widows who have no family support, and widows are expected to be of service to the Kingdom.
All About Him,
Thanks very much for the links. Interesting that the congregations wants to help support widows, not just put them to work. Amen.
There was a tendency, seen even in the New Testament, to want to demand celibacy (see Matthew 19:10; 1 Corinthians 7:1; and even Paul’s instruction that it is better to remain single because of the present distress found throughout 1 Corinthians 7).
In the ECF, this tendency quickly turned to exalting celibacy as the preferred state – leading to the requirement for celibacy in the clergy and, as Alexander pointed out, “I should add that the “order of widows” was also open to those who chose to remain virgins (both male and female), ”
Thus, the “order of widows” morphed into the various orders of nuns and the bishop being the husband of one wife became the celibate clergy.
I remember Cline Paden, early missionary to Italy after WWII, talking about sometimes shocking people when he was in Italy by saying his father was a bishop. They were not surprised the bishop would have a son – but that the son would admit it.
I’m not sure how much faith we should put in the ECF as the interpreters of Scripture. Yes, they are a witness – but their witness is that of fallible human being like ourselves. And, in some ways, we may be better off than they were. You see, we have the whole canon of Scripture while they were still in the process of gathering it together….
Jerry
Jay, in your opinion, is it important that Paul doesn’t use the term diakonos with the widow women but describes their duty to serve ? Seems “6 one, half-dozen” to me… Especially given that the first deacon’s job was to pass out food… Not sure when or why the females began to be rejected as servants and when “deacon” became Deacon …
Alexander brings us the historical conceptual basis for the institution of convents and nuns which later arose in the church. Again, here is a principle (chastity and service) which took on a different form in the culture that surrounded it. I wonder if Protestants such as we have an appreciation for the institution that grew from this priniciple. Could Protestants ever have room for their own “Sisters of Mercy”?
Charles,
Good observation and question!
Price,
I agree with you and Campbell that the deacons were appointed to distribute food to widows — “probably” being the operative word. The idea of appointing deacons as department heads is foreign to the scripture. And it makes sense that men (or women) charged to handle church funds to feed unmarried women had to be men of the highest integrity. It’s doesn’t make sense that you have to meet a list of qualifications to cut the grass or open the building.
I’m no patternist. I don’t think we need to call anyone “deacon” to be scripturally organized. If we did, we’d have to have enrolled widows and “truly widows” to be scripturally organized, too. Not many of our churches support widows. More should.
We have even less information as to what the enrolled widows did, if anything. But this just shows how we’ve misread the passages. We went looking for a pattern of organization to rigidly follow. We didn’t care to support widows (many years ago) and so we conveniently ignored 1 Tim 5. The passage ceased to exist in the Church of Christ consciousness.
Put patternism out of your mind and look for the underlying principles, and the passages speak loudly. It’s important that widows be cared for. It’s important that those cared for be of service. And it’s important that the retired continue to do Kingdom work. And these are important, timely lessons.
These discussions on hermeneutics are some of the best I’ve seen on your blog Jay. Thank you so much!
I wish my dad could read these and follow along on your daily blog. I’m afraid that if I tell him about this site and others like it that he will be scared off before he understands the mindset that drives the direction of these discussions. And then I will be labeled “liberal” and never listened to again.
Perhaps he is reading and learning . . . in secret. I’m just gonna have to tell him to log on and prepare for light.
This blog and comments were great. I have long recognized that Paul spoke of something like an order of widows in the churches, but was completely blindsided to learn that it was such an important part of the early church, and that it developed into the order of Nuns. A eureka moment for me. Thanks