"Widow" as a public office in the early church

Widows in the History of the Church

Download

Are the “Widows” in 1 Timothy 5 Leaders, Needers, or Both?

One of my students, Corinne Samuelson, has spent the summer investigating what’s happening with “widows” in 1 Timothy 5. At first glance, one might think Paul was simply instructing Timothy about how to handle the many hungry older women in the Ephesian church (1:3). But on closer exploration we see a description of what might look like an office. That's a challenging question. As Corinne notes, “While Timothy would have surely understood Paul’s instructions about widows in the Ephesian Church, 1 Timothy 5:3–16 leaves today’s readers with many questions.” Each of the questions below (most of which she crafted) are worth considering when making interpretive decisions about this passage:

• Meaning of “to honor” (τίμα, v. 3) – (“Give proper honor to those widows who are really in need.”) Does “to honor” imply interpersonal respect, financial support, or both? Is this a parallel to granting “double honor” to elders who teach (v. 17)? 
• Placement of need/pleasure contrast (v. 5–6) – (“The widow who is really in need and left all alone puts her hope in God and continues night and day to pray and to ask God for help. But the widow who lives for pleasure is dead even while she lives.”) Is the reference to need/praying a Pauline tangent, further description of the “real” widow, or a prerequisite for enrollment? 
• Meaning of “to enroll” (καταλεγέσθω, v. 9) – (“No widow may be enrolled unless she is over sixty, has been faithful to her husband, and is well known for her good deeds, such as bringing up children, showing hospitality, washing the feet of the Lord’s people, helping those in trouble and devoting herself to all kinds of good deeds.”) What are the implications of “to enroll”? Did Paul simply describe a name being added to a charity list or is he implying accompanying duties for the person placed on a list? If the former, do we refuse food to hungry older women who have not done these things? The description parallels in many ways the description of an elder in 3:2–7 (faithful to his wife/faithful to her husband). Speaking of which…
•  Meaning of “faithful to her husband” (ἑνός ἀνδρὸς γυνή , v. 9) – Was Paul referring to a woman who was married once only or is the emphasis on being a one-man kind of woman?
• List of qualifications/duties (v. 10) – “Raised children, practiced hospitality, washed the feet of the saints, helped those in distress”: does this list describe the past character of the widow in view, or was Paul outlining ongoing responsibilities of an enrolled widow?
• Meaning of “a widow who is really a widow” (τάς ὄντως χήρας; vv. 3, 5, 16) – What’s the difference between a “widow” and an “actual” or “real” widow? Her lack of family members, her devotion to God, the characteristics listed in vv. 3–10? All of the above? A few people roughly contemporary with Paul (e.g.,  Philo  QE 2.3,  Ignatius13.1) speak of “widows who are virgins”—suggesting the word was used to mean a “without-a-man woman.” So are there “widows” and then “actual widows”? And if so, did one include older single woman never married vs. those bereft of husbands?
• Different kinds of widows? – Are the widows in verse 9 and verses 3, 5, 16 one and the same, or was Paul referring to two types of widows (a “real widow” and “an enrolled widow”)? 
• Meaning of “their first pledge” (τήν πρώτην πίστιν, v. 12) – What is the meaning of “pledge” (πίστιν)? The first wedding vow? Or a vow of office? Perhaps a vow of commitment to celibacy? 
• Harsh language –(“being led away from Christ,” v. 11; “wandering after Satan,” v. 15) What actions did Paul have in mind here?
• Bad behavior – (“idlers, going house to house, talking nonsense,” v. 13) Was Paul insinuating young widows were spreading heresy, participating in witchcraft, or committing social faux pas? Can we gather from “going around from house to house” that these women were conducting bad house visits which were a part of their duties as enrolled widows? Does “house to house” refer to going from house church to house church?  
• Overall purpose – Why did Paul give this instruction about enrolling widows and the qualifications? Did he provide here some requirements for selective charity, or was he talking about widows being enrolled into an order/office? Is there an overlap between the two? He wrote quite a bit about church organization in this letter to Timothy. Is it possible he had more in mind here than food distribution? 
• Contradictory advice? – Is it problematic that Paul lists qualifications for widow enrollment for those who married once (v. 9), but instructs younger widows to remarry (v. 14)? Why would he give different advice to women in differing age groups? Is he taking into account Roman civil marriage laws that apply to younger but not older women?  
• Background information – What pertinent background information about women and widows is helpful in understanding Paul’s instructions?

The options for translating and interpreting this passage are numerous. Considering that compared to fifty years ago we have a lot more social-background information (e.g., Roman civil laws) available to us, this passage is certainly due a closer look. 

Water: The Movie

I just watched Deepa Mehta's 2005 OSCAR-nominated film "Water." (Released nine years ago. I know. Don't judge. I was getting an advanced degree.)

After her husband dies of an illness, eight-year-old—yes, eight—Chuyia is forced to live out the rest of her days in a temple for Hindu widows, sharing life with fourteen other women and a cold-blooded headmistress. Through the trials of another widow, a prostitute named Kalyani (Lisa Ray) who's being courted chastely by a man from a higher caste (John Abraham), Chuyia learns the true restrictions of widowhood. The story of Ghandi is woven in, grounding this film in a historical setting. Those with special interest in women's advocacy will appreciate this story. Beautifully told and highly recommended. 117 minutes.

Manhood vs. Grama?

It's my day to post on Tapestry today. Here's what I said:

In the thirty-three years since I said “I do,” I’ve heardmany messages and read lots of books on marriage. And if I’ve heard and readone thing about the job of the husband, it’s that “provider” is one of his keyroles.

The proof-text for this has been, without exception, 1Timothy 5:8—“If a man does not provide for his own, especially his own family,he has denied the faith, and he is worse than an infidel.” Five male pronounsmake it clear: providing is his job. I’ve even heard some say that a wife whoseincome exceeds that of her husband’s threatens his sense of manhood. (Suchfragile manhood these people think men have!)

Here’s the problem. When I took Greek, I discovered that 1Timothy 5:8 contains allgender-neutral pronouns. It goes more like this: If someone does not providefor one’s own, especially one's own family, that person has denied the faithand is worse than an unbeliever.”

Once I made that revealing observation, I took a closer lookat the passage. And to my astonishment, I discovered it was weighted towardchildren and grandchildren, and even more so toward women. The context is not marriage or manhood or leadership, butcaring for widows. And at the end of the passage, the author says this:  “If a believing woman has widows….” In aworld with no nurses or nursing homes, the most natural person to bathe andfeed an infirm matron would have been her daughter, granddaughter, and/ordaughter-in-law. With this in mind, read the passage again:

1 Tim. 5:3 Honor widows who are truly in need. 5:4 But if awidow has children or grandchildren, they should first learn to fulfill theirduty toward their own household and so repay their parents what is owed them.For this is what pleases God. 5:5 But the widow who is truly in need, andcompletely on her own, has set her hope on God and continues in her pleas andprayers night and day… 5:8 But if someone does not provide for one’s own,especially one’s own family, that person has denied the faith and is worse thanan unbeliever…. 5:16 If a believing woman has widows in her family, let herhelp them. The church should not be burdened, so that it may help the widowswho are truly in need. 

After traveling outside of the US, I made a furtherdiscovery. Only in a context of relative wealth would anyone interpret 1Timothy 5:8 as telling a woman to guard her husband’s manhood in the provisiondepartment. In a poor, agrarian society, if her chicken sales exceed his beefsales, the Christian family rejoices over God’s provision. The husband evenpraises her as a P-31 kind of woman!

As I learned more about the Industrial Revolution and therise of the middle class, I saw the roots of our misguided interpretation. Whena man went off to the factory, it became the mark of success to leave behind astay-at-home wife. Her presence at home became cause for respect. And for mostfamilies that set-up worked best as the ideal (though most did not obtain it).But it crept into our thinking as the “biblical” ideal.

We need to rethink this one. The goal of marriage isoneness, not conformity to the standard of a materialistic culture.

At the school where I teach, couples often decide that shewill work and provide health insurance benefits for her family while he studiesfull-time, gets the kids to school, and makes dinner. Two people mutuallydecide how they can best use their resources to glorify the Lord. What men andwomen of God!

We can discuss whether God calls husbands to be the primaryproviders for their families over a lifetime. But let’s quit using 1 Timothy5:8 as our proof-text. In viewing these words of Paul as gender-specific advicefor husbands, we miss an essential application for men, women, children andgrandchildren alike: do the holy work of honoring our aged family members. Incaring for them we prove that we believe, and in the process, we take a loadoff the church and free up resources to aid those who are alone in the world.