The
following composition is an exegetical paper written in partial fulfillment of
the New Testament requirement at Candler School of Theology. The primary
focus of the passage is that of caring for the widow, and many feminist
"scholars"have attempted to suggest Paul's comments to be that of an
oppressor, and reflective of the detestable patriarchal society out of which he
was writing. Unfortunately, the Holy Word of God does not seem concerned
with such an approach, and I certainly am not. Therefore, the aim of this
paper is to defend a wonderful practice implemented in early Pauline churches.
It is one that should be honored, imitated, and incorporated as it not
only provides care for those in need but places responsibility upon children to
honor their parents. With the generation of degenerates I have grown up
with, it is sad to say that this may be a dying approach. "Wish I was in
Dixie".
Introduction
The biblical
understanding of the term “widow” is that of a woman who is without a husband,
and is therefore void of financial certainty, security, and protection. Furthermore, if a widow is without male
heirs, this insecurity would be amplified, and the widow would be located even
further along the fringes of society.
This is true of both the Old and New Testaments, and considering the
Pauline community to which the letter of 1 Timothy is written, an understanding
of the former and an expression of the latter would have been operative. The recipients of this letter would not only
have been familiar with Jewish law concerning the care for widows, but also
with the New Testament movement to do the same.
However, in 1 Timothy 5:3-16, stipulations are given concerning which
widows are to receive financial help from the church. This is not an effort to deny security for
those who do not make the list, but to delegate limited financial resources to
those most in need. By so doing, the
community provides care for those who have no other alternatives, but also
places the burden of care for those with families upon the relatives. In the context of 1 Timothy, the task of
caring for widows would have been seen as not only a family obligation, but a
religious duty as well. Therefore the
list being composed must necessarily exclude those who have living relatives as
to not remove the burden placed upon the widow’s family. Recognizing this dynamic of family
responsibility as a religious duty within the context of 1 Timothy allows the
modern reader to apply this responsibility to the modern context and identify
and care for the marginalized closest to us.
Meaning
for First Century Christians
Beginning with the
purpose of this portion of the letter, it seems quite clear that providing for
widows was of the utmost importance in early Christianity. This priority is attested to by New Testament
texts such as Acts 6, in which a program to meet the needs of Hellenistic
widows precipitates the spread of the Gospel, and James 1:27 which suggests
that religion can only be genuine before God if orphans and widows are cared
for. With concern for widows being of
such importance, this letter attempts to identify the best way of assisting
widows within the community.
Consequently, restrictions are put in place, which only allow provisions
for women who are without children or grandchildren (v. 4) and are above the
age of sixty (v. 9). An additional
requirement of godliness is presented (vv. 9-15), and together these make up
the criteria for what the text says are “really widows” (v. 3). Therefore, assuming the qualifications of
godliness, the criteria of age and lack of living relatives implies a heavy
burden of family responsibility which takes precedent over the church’s role of
caring for widows, and takes quite seriously the commandment to, “Honor your
father and mother” (Deut. 5:16).
Several
times throughout the text of 1 Timothy 5:3-16 is this dynamic of family
responsibility reflected. First, in
verse 4 the author lays down the restriction of widows with children or
grandchildren from the list. The
“repayment” given to the widow suggests financial support in acknowledgement of
the financial support the child or grandchild has undoubtedly received from the
widow (or at least her husband).
However, this is not simply a kind gesture of recognition and gratitude,
but a “religious duty” which is “pleasing in God’s sight”. There is therefore a strong religious
component to caring for one’s parents and grandparents, a notion that resonates
strongly with Old Testament notions such as the aforementioned commandment of
Deuteronomy 5:16.
Moving
to verse 8, this notion of caring for one’s parents or grandparents is expanded
to “relatives” and “family members”, this time focusing less on the religious
responsibility of caring for one’s kin, but rather the consequences of neglect.
In the Greek, the term ἰδίων, translated relatives, literally means
“own”, whereas the term οἰκείων, translated family members, literally means
“household”[1]. This suggests that the responsibility of
caring for widows is not simply the job of the widow’s children or grandchildren,
but the responsibility of anyone in her family, especially those with whom she
lived. Furthermore, one who would not
provide care for the widow within his or her household has “denied the faith”
and “is worse than an “unbeliever”. Not
only is caring for one’s relatives who have become widows a religious duty, but
neglecting this duty is tantamount to denying the faith around which the
community to which the letter is written has been formed.
In
verse 14 the instruction is given for younger widows to remarry and bear
children. While the modern community
might view this instruction as oppressive and dictatorial, within the context
of 1 Timothy this approach would have been an outlet security, a survival
mechanism that provided the widow with a support system, both financially and
personally. The Old Testament story of
Ruth attests to this endeavor, and the community of 1 Timothy knows full well
that for a woman to survive in a patriarchal society she must secure the protection
of others. Additionally, this effort
creates the atmosphere out of which family responsibility can operate. It would be difficult for a woman to depend
on a family if no such family existed, but in remarrying and bearing children a
widow could create the family whose care would not only sustain her, but also
provide the outlet for fulfilling the religious duty previously discussed. Therefore, remarriage should not be seen
simply as a survival mechanism in the secular world, but as a deeply religious
effort that results in the family unit that is so vital to the early Christian
community.
Finally,
verse 16 places the burden of the family upon the shoulders of believing
women. Considering the patriarchal
society out of which this letter comes, the inclusion of women in the responsibilities
of caring for widows illustrates the vitality of women to the family unit. The believing woman is not simply a wife or a
mother, but one who is required to care for widows in the same manner as her
husband or sons would have been required to. Again, this is the fulfillment of a religious
duty and the importance of women fulfilling their religious obligations is
prioritized in the same manner as the man’s duty. So it is that both men and women receive the
burden of fulfilling their religious duty through caring for widows within
their own families.
Before
modern day appropriations of 1 Timothy 5:3-16 can be made, an understanding of
the religious dynamics within the text must be acquired. One the one hand, caring for widows is an
expression of love and care that resonates with both Old and New Testament
approaches to those who are on the margins of society. At the same time, the text of 1 Timothy
suggests a deeper layer of religious duty that makes this exercise more than a
caring gesture. Therefore the role one
plays within this dynamic must be recognized, and the violation thereof must be
avoided. What the church is attempting
to do in this context is provide care for those who have no other alternatives. The example of Jesus’ mother and the disciple
whom He loved in John 19:26-27 illustrates this dynamic perfectly. Still, this early institution of the church
caring for widows is a last resort. It
is only after Jesus’ death that the responsibility of caring for His mother is
passed on to the disciple. Prior to
that, Mary would have been the responsibility of Jesus Himself, as is reflected
in her constant proximity to her Son throughout the gospel records. With the text of 1 Timothy, an approach is
taken which allows the Christian community to care for the widows in their
midst. However, this effort does not
violate or infringe upon the responsibility of the family, as is reflected in
the criteria for inclusion, and thereby preserves the outlet though which one
not only fulfills family responsibilities, but also exercises religious duty
and obligation to God.
Meaning
for Twenty-First Century Christians
Having
considered the religious duty of caring for widows within one’s own family
within the context of 1 Timothy 5:3-16, modern application of such an
understanding must also be discussed.
Understanding the religious component of caring for family yields two
practical implications for the modern context.
On the one hand, such an understanding requires individual believers to
take very seriously the responsibilities they hold within their own
families. Caring for relatives who are
in need is not simply a societal norm, but also a religious imperative. At the same time, the church itself functions
as a family of believers, and the imperative of the local congregation to care
for their parishioners is also operative.
However, the role of the church must be to fill in where the individual
cannot, and great care must be taken as to not usurp the religious duty of the
individual believer.
As
revealed through the 1 Timothy text, caring for one’s family is a religious
duty that, if neglected, yields the status of an unbeliever. Not only is caring for one’s family pleasing
to God, but the neglect thereof is a denial of the Christian faith as well. By encouraging remarriage, the author
recognizes the strength of the family unit and by including women within the
role of this responsibility, the author acknowledges this religious duty as one
pertaining to all believers. Individuals
must therefore receive this burden of responsibility and act accordingly. While it could be argued that some
individuals are in no place to receive such a burden, as they may not have the
financial resources themselves to do so, the text of 1 Timothy makes no
concessions and neither should modern churches.
Believers must exercise their religious duties, and if care for one’s
own family falls into that category (as has been argued), then every effort
must be made to do so. This approach not
only has the potential to assist the church in its mission to care for the
needy, but also to strengthen the family dynamic by recognizing one’s
obligation to one’s relatives.
At
the same time, the church must recognize its own role as a family of
believers. Christian believers are to
recognize those in their midst as mother, father, brother, and sister. When this occurs, the same religious duties
imposed upon biological relatives are imposed upon those who are united as
family in Christ Jesus. The mere fact
the Pauline community is willing to financially support those who have no
living relatives affirms this dynamic, and those placed upon the list of widows
are welcomed into the local congregation as mothers to the church. It should therefore be no surprise that the
order of widows develops within early Christianity, and the same respect
yielded to one’s biological mother is adopted by churches towards widows. Again, it could be argued that some churches
are incapable of caring for the widows in their midst due to lack of resources,
but this excuse seems to be absent in the text of 1 Timothy and must therefore
be dismissed. Of course the realities of
minimal resources cannot be ignored, but must not be used as an excuse to
neglect those in need. To quote a sermon
from Dr. Fred Craddock, “[the church] must continue to give money to others,
even when the paint is peeling in the sanctuary.”[2] Such an approach may infringe upon the
comfort and stability of the church itself, but is nonetheless a religious
imperative that must be received and applied.
Perhaps
the most difficult application of this text is the balance between the
individual believer and the church family.
As noted, caring for widows is a religious duty, and one that must not
be infringed upon. It is the obligation
of the family member to exercise this religious duty and care for one’s own
biological relatives. At the same time,
when relatives are absent, either in the sense of a widow having no living
relatives or in the case where living relatives are in no way present in the
life of the widow, the church must take upon the role of the family
member. This concession, that a widow
can have living relatives who are not present and still receive support from
the church, is one that can be made due to the distinctions in societal
constructions between the context of the Pauline community and the modern
church. It is far more common in the
modern context for family members to relocated, thereby leaving widows alone
even though living relatives still exist.
When family is present, pressure must be applied by religious leaders to
fulfill the religious duty of caring for one’s family, and when family is
absent, the church must fill the role as the family of believers. Both approaches place an emphasis upon the
importance of family as not only a societal construction but as a vessel
through which one pleases God.
Conclusion
Appropriately
applying biblical texts can be difficult within the modern context,
particularly when dealing with issues of women operating within the patriarchal
construct of first century society.
However, the criteria presented concerning widows is not so much a
reflection of oppression, or a rejection of certain women deemed unfit, as it
is an imperative to family members to care for the widows in their midst. Furthermore, by assuming any role whatsoever,
the Pauline community is taking upon itself the role of family when family
seems to be absent. When applied to the
modern context, the instructions of this passage not only meet a great need, but
also strengthen the family unit by recognizing care for the needy within one’s
household as a religious duty. So it is
that in caring for family as an individual or taking on the role of family when
family is absent as a church, modern day believers are able to exercise the
same religious duty and please the God whom they serve.
Bibliography
Craddock, Fred. “The
Last Temptation of the Church.”
Princeton Theological Seminary.
Princeton, New Jersey, May 1989.
Gingrich, Wilbur F. Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament. Second Edition. Rev.
Frederick W. Danker. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1983.
[1]
Wilbur F. Gingrich, Shorter Lexicon of
the Greek New Testament, Second Edition, revised by Frederick W. Danker
(Chicago, Illinois: The University of
Chicago Press, 1983), p. 92, 137.
[2]
Fred Craddock, “The Last Temptation of the Church,” Princeton Theological
Seminary, Princeton, New Jersey, May 1989.
