1 Timothy 5:9-10

Vers. 9, 10. Very few parts of this epistle have given rise to greater diversity of opinion than the instruction contained in these verses; and from the scantiness of our information respecting the domestic economy of the churches in the earliest times, it may be difficult to present a view of the passage which shall appear free from all appearance of strangeness or uncertainty. It is the more important, however, that we adhere strictly to the natural meaning of the words, and refrain from attempting, as has too often been done, to impose on them a sense derived from what belonged, or is supposed to have belonged, to a much later period. Let a widow be enrolled so the verb καταλέγειν properly signifies: put on the list or register. The question is, what list? and for what specific purpose were names inserted in it? Was the list simply a catalogue of those who were formally recognised as widows of the church, and, as such, were held entitled to special oversight and support? Or was it as widows qualified and admitted to a kind of official position and service in the church?

These questions have been differently answered; and not a few, judging chiefly from the specifications afterwards given by the apostle as to age and character, have supposed that the list in question was composed of persons designated to a place of honour and responsibility either that of deaconesses, or of trusted female ministrants, who were charged with much the same kind of oversight in respect to children and the members of their own sex, that was exercised by the elders over other portions of the community. This view has been held in its stronger form by the opponents of the genuineness of the epistle (Schleiermacher, De Wette, Baur, etc.), who would find here a class of female ecclesiastics of whom some partial and obscure notices occur in the third and fourth centuries, (Tertullian, de Vel. Virg. c. 9: “Ad quam sedem [viduarum] praeter annos LX. non tantum univirae, i.e. nuptae aliquando, eliguntur, sed et matres et quidem educatores filiorum.” Laodic. Concil. can. xi.: “Mulieres quae apud Graecos presbyterae appellantur, apud nos autem viduae seniores, univirae, et matriculariae nominantur, in ecclesia tanquam ordinatos constitui non deb ere.” Epiphanius, adv. Haer. L. iii. c. 79, § 4.: Παρατηρητι ́ ον δε ́, ἀ ́ ρχι διακονισσῶν το ̀ ἐκκλησιαστικο ̀ ν ἐπεδεη ́ θη τα ́ γμα, χη ́ ρας τε ὠνο ́ μαζε, και ̀ του ́ των τα ̀ ς γραοτε ́ ρας πρεσβυ ́ τιδας, spoken, however, simply of deaconesses, some of whom were sometimes called widows, whether they really were such or not. Chrysostom, vol. iii. p. 273, Paris, ed. Gaume, speaks of there being anciently bands of widows, χηρῶν χοροι ́, as latterly of virgins; but he says nothing of consecration to office, or official wor k in the church.) but a class (the writers conceive) of too artificial a nature and too much associated with ascetic notions of excellence to have had a place in the apostolic church. There are others who reject the idea in this form, yet so far adopt it, that they regard the widows spoken of by the apostle as even in his time formed into a kind of distinct order, with the view of performing certain ministrations for the good of the church; so, for example, Mosheim, Wieseler, Conybeare and Howson, Huther, Alford, Ellicott. We may take as a specimen of this mode of representation the note of Conybeare and Howson, one of the most temperate of its kind: “We suppose that the list here mentioned was that of all the widows who were officially recognised as supported by the church; but was not confined to such persons, but included also richer widows, who were willing to devote themselves to the offices assigned to the proper widows. It has been argued that we cannot suppose that needy widows who did not satisfy the conditions of 1 Timothy 5:9 would be excluded from the benefit of the fund; nor need we suppose this. But since all could scarcely be supported, certain conditions were prescribed which must be satisfied before any one could be considered as officially entitled to a place on the hst. From the class of widows thus formed the subsequent order of widows (τάγμα χηρῶν) would naturally result.”

It is guardedly put, and yet in one leading point it seems to go beyond what there is any distinct warrant for in the passage itself; namely, in its speaking of “the offices assigned to the proper widows.” Of such offices the text makes no mention; and the existence of them can only be regarded as matter of more or less probable presumption and inference, from the conditions attached to the reception of individuals into the widow list. Yet a conclusion drawn from such premises must obviously be very uncertain, especially if the requisite characteristics be only such as respectable elderly females in a Christian community might be expected generally to possess. For, in that case, why might they not have been prescribed as a necessary safeguard against the abuse of the church's benefactions? a security that those whom it sought to embrace and cherish as its peculiar charge from the Lord, were really worthy of the honour? And nothing more than this apparently is either indicated in the apostle's language, or needed to explicate its meaning. It is certain, first of all, that here, and in all he says respecting widows, such as he calls widows indeed, it is simply what the church is called to do for them, not anything it might exact of them, that he brings formally into notice: they are contemplated throughout as the fitting objects or recipients of a special kind of beneficent treatment from the religious community. It is certain, also, that from the commencement of the church, and pre-eminently in that mother church which in such things crave the tone and impulse to the other churches, widows merely as such were brought prominently into view; and that not only was adequate provision made for the relief of their necessities, but a special class of officers also appointed to see that the provision was properly administered: so far from being required to do anything like deacon work, they were themselves the subjects in whose behalf such work was called into operation. Further, it is undoubted that all the earlier commentators understood the apostle's description of widows merely as the almswomen of the church (Chrysostom, Jerome, Theodoret, Œc., and Theophylact): the conditions specified for enrolment were viewed by them merely as the traits of character which qualified those who possessed them for being the accredited pensioners of the church's bounty. And in a matter of this sort, which touches upon the general sense and usage of the church, the concurrent testimony of those ancient expositors is entitled to the greatest weight, and is far more than sufficient to counterbalance some obscure allusions or stray usages appearing in particular localities. Finally, the age at which the enrolment of widows was to be made not under sixty, a period of life in such a district as Asia Minor relatively much higher than in our cooler and healthier climate confirms the supposition that, as a rule, no active labour was expected of them. They were already of the aged and infirm class; and if they were expected to serve the interests of the church, it must have been chiefly by the more contemplative and quiet exercises of piety “by supplications and prayers night and day.” These were, no doubt, important services, and are the only ones in the least hinted at by the apostle; but they were such as belonged to the private sphere of the Christian life, and required no ecclesiastical consecration or official standing to authorize and sanction them. (Such, also, was the view taken by Neander: “Since Paul only distinguished them (i.e. the widows in question) as persons supported by the church, without mentioning any active service as devolving on them; since he represents them as persons who, as suited their age and condition, were removed from all occupation with earthly concerns, and dedicated their few remaining days to devotion and prayer; and since, on the contrary, the office of deaconess certainly involved much active employment, we have no ground whatever for finding in this passage deaconesses, or females out of whose number deaconesses were chosen.” Planting of Christian Church, B. iii. c. 5.) In short, from the whole tenor of the apostle's description, viewed in connection with what is known of the circumstances of the time, there seems no reason for supposing any other class of persons to have been meant under the designation of enrolled widows, than those commonly known by the name of widows; yet only such of that class as from their advanced age and approved character were deemed worthy of the church's affectionate care and support. After the lapse of some centuries, notices occur of a particular dress, and a separate place in the church, being assigned to such widows; but Scripture and the earlier church records know nothing of this, nor of any specific work of a diaconal or presbyteral kind, having been by the church generally required of them. Younger widows, we have good grounds for believing, were not unfrequently accepted to the office of deaconess; but there is no proper evidence whatever to show that such widows as those here mentioned by the apostle were invested with any sort of office, or were called to do anything but such pious and free-will service as their own hearts might prompt, and their limited opportunities might enable them to perform. (In this I state merely the general result, and consider it unnecessary to examine the few passages in detail which are relied on by those who hold another view, but which are far too vague and general for their purpose.)

In regard now to the particular qualifications indicated by the apostle for the widows who were to be put on the list, it is to be borne in mind that, while the persons possessing them were alone to have the full recognition and enjoyment of what was due to the church's almswomen, there is nothing in his instructions to warrant the supposition that widows who in some respects fell short of them might not be admitted to occasional relief, and receive all proper ministrations of kindness. Such, for example, as were comparatively young far from having reached the age of sixty might for a time require very great sympathy and liberal support; but it would have been a misfortune, rather than a benefit for them, if an apostolic injunction had been issued, giving them something like an abiding claim on the church's beneficence, and entitling them henceforth to rank among its objects of charity. That would have only served to paralyze personal exertion, and relax the ties of family relationships. The regular widow list the list of such as were really desolate, infirm, and helpless was wisely associated with a comparatively advanced age. As to the construction, the γεγονυῖα should undoubtedly be connected with what precedes: who is, or has become, not less than sixty years old; comp. Luke 2:42. Our translators, after Jerome, Luther, Calvin, etc., joined it with what follows.

Wife of one man. The proper determination of the term widow, as here used by the apostle, may be said to carry along with it a corresponding explanation also of this expression to establish for it a freer, in opposition to the more stringent, sense sometimes put on it. For nearly all the arguments and authorities which are adduced in favour of its being understood of absolute monogamy, proceed on the supposition that the class of persons referred to were not simply widows of advanced age, but of ecclesiastical rank, invested with a measure of sacerdotal dignity, and hence called to a somewhat peculiar sanctity. We have already seen that this notion rests on no solid ground, that the persons in question were merely the desolate and helpless widows whom God's providence had thrown on the bounty of the faithful the aged almswomen of the church. And of such persons, surely the whole that could justly be required, either by the dictates of reason or by the great principles of Scripture on the subject of marriage, was that they should be chargeable with no indecency in their married life, and never stood related to but one living husband. This much was necessary to their occupying the position of exemplary widows; but one cannot say more, whether the matter is viewed with respect to the law of God or to the known usages of society. The correct sense, therefore, I believe to be that given by Theodoret: (Και ̀ ἐντεῦθεν δῆλον, ὡς οὐ τη ̀ ν διγαμι ́ αν ἐκβαλλει, ἀλλα ̀ το ̀ σωφρο ́ νως ἐν γα ́ μῳ βιοῦν νομοθετεῖ. Οὐ γα ̀ ρ ἀ ́ νω το ̀ ν δευ ́ τερπον γα ́ μον νομοθετη ́ σας σωματικῆς ἀπολαῦσαι θεραπει ́ ας ἐκωλυσε τη ̀ ν δευτε ́ ροις ὁμιλη ́ σασειν γα ́ μοις, ὁ ́ ς γε το ̀ ἀγαθο ̀ ν ποιεῖν προ ̀ ς πα ́ ντας διαγορευ ́ ει.) “It is hence manifest that he (the apostle) does not reject second marriages, but ordains that they live chastely in matrimony; for, having before established the lawfulness of a second marriage, he did not prohibit her that had entered into a second marriage from enjoying her bodily nurture he, namely, who clearly exhibits what is good for all.” And Chrysostom, though, from a misapprehension as to the position and duties of those designated widows, he supposed the expression before us intended to exclude second marriages of any kind, yet did so only on the ground of affording leisure for increased spiritual activity: (Δια ̀ τι ́ γἀρ, εἰπε ́ μοι, δευτε ́ ρος οὐχ ὁμιλῆσαι γα ́ μοις προτρε ́ πει; Ἁ ́ ρα κατε ́ γων τοῦ πρα ́ γματος; Οὐδαμῶς· τοῦτο γα ̀ ρ αἱρετικῶν· ἀλλʼ ἀπησχολῆσθαι βουλο ́ μενος λοιπο ̀ ν αυʼτη ̀ ν ἐν τοῖς πνευματικοῖς, και ̀ προ ̀ ς τη ̀ ν ἀρετη ̀ ν μεταταξασθαι· ου ̓ γα ̀ ρ ἀκαθαρσι ́ ας ἀλλα ̀ ἀσχολι ́ ας ὁ γα ́ μος.) “Why, I ask, does he not permit second marriages to be contracted? Is it because he disapproved of the thing? By no means. For to do that was the part of heretics; but that the widow might be able to devote herself to spiritual things, and be occupied with virtue: for it is not impurity, but want of leisure, which marriage brings along with it.”

It is needless to go into any detailed proof on the subject; for what is said here in respect to widows is but another aspect of the same question which has already been discussed at some length in respect to ministers at 1 Timothy 3:2, and much of the proof which was advanced there is à fortiori applicable here. A considerable show of proof for the opposite view can no doubt be produced, and has been produced, in particular by Vitringa ( Synag. Vet. L. iii. P. i. c. 4), and others who have followed in the same line. But the passages chiefly relied on are greatly more numerous than cogent. One large class of them the one most directly bearing on the point originated in the heretical asceticism of the second century, and owes its ecclesiastical form and prevalence mainly to the vigorous Montanism of Tertullian. All passages of that class should be put entirely aside. Then the rest, being those which celebrate the superior merit of women who were univirae, and as such were alone deemed fit for performing certain rites in the Cerealia, passages chiefly relating to earlier Roman feeling and usage, have respect to an essentially different sphere from that which concerns the constitution and government of the church of Christ. They relate partly to the conscious worth, sometimes proud self-assertion, of Roman matrons, grounding itself on the strength and constancy of attachment to a loved and honoured spouse, and partly to the conviction of special honour and felicity belonging to such as had enjoyed an unbroken conjugal relationship. As more peculiarly favoured by the gods, ceremonies performed by these were naturally supposed to be more acceptably and auspiciously done than by others. But for the time and region in connection with which the apostle here wrote, for the class of persons in respect to whom he wrote, and the interests he had more immediately in view, for all this there is no proof that can justly be said to bear upon the point at issue; none, that is, tending to show that second marriages by women were per se, and apart from anything illegal and indecent in the mode of contracting them, deemed so questionable in their relation to female honour and virtue, as to debar the persons who contracted them from a title, in their old age, to the respect, and sympathy, and beneficence of the better portion of society. In the absence of all proof of this description, and on the great principle set forth by the apostle himself here and in other parts of his writings, we hold that the specification, wife of one man, should be taken as expressive simply of a chaste and faithful spouse one true to her marriage vow while the person to whom it was made lived, whether that vow might be taken once merely, or again.

The other qualifications are: well reported of in respect to good works, if she brought up children, if she entertained strangers, if she washed the feet of saints, if she relieved the distressed, if she followed after every good work. The things mentioned call for no particular explanation or defence; they are the prominent characteristics of an exemplary Christian matron, partly under the distinctive forms suited to those ancient times, but in spirit applicable to all times. The verbs are all in the indefinite past implying if at any time a widow has so acted if her past conduct has been of such a kind! The bringing up of children must refer to the members of her own family, and, of course, could only be intended as a qualification in the cases where such a family existed not excluding those who might in all other respects have maintained the most blameless deportment, but wanted the opportunity of proving themselves to be good nurses and trainers of children. Viewed generally, the things required of those who in old age and dependent circumstances were to receive the esteem and support of the church, were such as gave evidence of a faithful, kindly, maternal disposition amid the ordinary duties of domestic life.