The writers of Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood try to explain how the women found in the Bible fit in the complementarian worldview, but it causes some unexpected problems.
Contradiction # 2: Deacons
Schreiner and Knight are in disagreement whether the women mentioned in 1 Tim 3 were deacons or the wives of deacons.
Find it in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
Schreiner: p 220, 504
Schreiner: p 220, 504
Knight: p 353
Regarding
women deacons, Schreiner writes that we do not need to come to a firm decision,
for deacons did not teach or govern the church,[1] yet Schreiner favors the existence of women deacons
in his comment found in the footnotes.
Another
argument in favor of woman deacons is that Paul says nothing about the wives of
elders in 1Timothy 3:1-7. Such an omission is hard to explain if he is speaking
of the wives of deacons in Timothy 3:11. One would expect that higher
qualifications would be demanded of wives of elders than of wives of deacons.
But if Paul is referring to women who were deacons, then the omission of women
among elders is because women could not be elders, although they could be
deacons. Of course, those who argue for full inclusion of women do not use this
particular argument because it would exclude women from being elders, even
though they could be deacons.[2]
Incidentally, Knight disagrees with Schreiner for he sees the role of the deacons as one of leadership, which is also the Catholic position.
Most
Christians and churches who have made the application to “elders” have done so
also for “deacons,” noting that they, too, are designated in masculine terms (1
Timothy 3:12; also Acts 6.3, where the Greek word used for “men” [aner] is the
word used to distinguish men from women rather than one used for men as mankind
whether male or female [anthropos].) They have noted furthermore that the role
of deacons is still one of leadership, even if the leadership is in the area of
service. At the same time it should be noted that women (or wives) are referred
to in this section of deacons (1 Timothy 3:11). This has led to two
understandings. The first is that the text distinguishes them from the deacons
(who are males), does not designate them as deacons, but mentions them because
they serve with and alongside the deacons in diaconal service. It is my
judgment that this view understands the passage correctly and furthermore that
it is the wives of deacons who are in view.[3]
As with Junia, if deacons are part of leadership, the women in 1 Timothy 3:11 are wives; if deacons are not part of leadership, the women are deacons.
The same grammatical construction used of deacons in 1 Timothy 3:8-13 is found in 1 Corinthians 7:12-14.
But to the rest I, not the Lord, say: If any brother has a wife who does not believe,
and she is willing to live with him, let him not divorce her. 13 And a woman who has a husband who does not
believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him. 14 For the
unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified
by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are
holy.
Polycarp, the disciple of John the Apostle, applied all of the qualifications found in 1 Timothy 3:8-12 to deacons in general.
Knowing, then, that “God is not mocked,” we ought to
walk worthy of His commandment and glory. In like manner should the deacons be
blameless before the face of His righteousness, as being the servants of God and Christ, and not of men. They must
not be slanderers (F), double-tongued (M), or lovers of money (M), but
temperate (F) in all things, compassionate, industrious, walking according to
the truth of the Lord, who was the servant of all.[4]
Scimus
enim quae cunque de feminis diaconis in altera ad Timotheum praestantissimus
docet Paulus
We also
know about the directions about women deacons which are given by the noble Paul
in his second letter to Timothy.[5]
Some have thought that this is said of women generally,
but it is not so, for why should he introduce anything about women to interfere
with his subject? He is speaking of those who hold the rank of Deaconesses. “Let the Deacons be husbands of one wife.”
This must be understood therefore to relate to Deaconesses. For that order
is necessary and useful and honorable in the Church. Observe how he requires
the same virtue from the Deacons, as from the Bishops, for though they were not
of equal rank, they must equally be blameless; equally pure.[6]
Schreiner is once again doubtful about the identity of a woman with an official title, for he writes that “one cannot be sure” whether Phoebe was a deacon. [8]
But Chrysostom recognized Phoebe as an office-holding deaconess.
Wishing
then that they should feel on easy terms, and be in honor, he addressed each of
them, setting forth their praise to the best advantage he might. For one he
calls beloved another kinsman, another both, another fellow-prisoner, another
fellow-worker, another approved, another elect. And of the women one he
addresses by her title, for he does not
call her servant of the Church in an undefined way (because if this were so
he would have given Tryphena and Persis this name too), but this one as having the office of deaconess, and another as
helper and assistant, another as mother, another from the labors she underwent,
and some he addresses from the house they belonged to, some by the name of
Brethren, some by the appellation of Saints. And some he honors by the mere
fact of addressing them, and some by addressing them by name, and some by
calling them first-fruits, and some by their precedence in time, but more than
all, Priscilla and Aquila.[9]
No comments:
Post a Comment