Women functioned as religious leaders throughout the Roman Empire. In Greek and Roman religions women were in a position to participate as leaders, and even in Judaism women functioned as leaders. Similarly, women served as leaders in the New Testament. The first two hundred years of the early church had a positive view of women. The social norm was for women to participate in the private sphere. In the religions of the Roman Empire, we do see exceptions to this rule. However, the church was a religion that functioned in the private sphere. Christians did not assemble in public, but in houses, which were the domain of the private sphere. As such, there was no cultural problem for women to be leaders in the church. Given the early positive view of women and while the church remained in the private sphere, women served as leaders. However, largely due to the influence of Tertullian and perhaps also due to the involvement of many women in the leadership of various heresies, women were eventually kept from taking leadership positions, especially when the church moved from the private sphere into the public sphere. After that, the general view regarding women became very negative, and women were no longer permitted to participate in leadership roles that they had in the New Testament.
Showing posts with label Books. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Books. Show all posts
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Early Church Research Paper - Conclusion
Here is the conclusion to my research paper:
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Early Church Research Paper - Source 7
Coming to the end of the research, we should comb through the collection of the Apostolic Father's writings to see if we can find anything else that might illumine our topic. Michael Holmes Greek-English version, The Apostolic Fathers: Greek texts and english translations, will be suitable for the task.
The Letter of the Romans to the Corinthians (1 Clement), late first century
The Letter of Ignatius to Polycarp, early second century
The Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians, early second century
Women were not spoken of in a negative way by the apostolic fathers. Rather, they were exhorted to love Christ, to love their husbands and to love everyone in purity. It was not until later into the late second and early third century that women began to be spoken of negatively, which was when the church began to move from the private sphere to the public sphere in the Roman Empire.
The Letter of the Romans to the Corinthians (1 Clement), late first century
1.3 - ". . . you charged the women to perform all their duties with a blameless, reverent, and pure conscience, cherishing their own husbands, as is right; and you taught them to abide by the rule of obedience, and to manage the affairs of their household with dignity and all discretion" (pp. 29, 31).
21.6-7 - ". . . Let us guide our women toward that which is good: let them reveal a disposition to purity worthy of admiration; let them exhibit a sincere desire to be gentle; let them demonstrate by their silence the moderation of their tongue; let them show their love, without partiality and in holiness, equally toward all those who fear God" (p. 55).
The Letter of Ignatius to Polycarp, early second century
5.1 - ". . . Tell my sisters to love the Lord and to be content with their husbands physically and spiritually. In the same way command my brothers in the name of Jesus Christ to love their wives, as the Lord loves the church" (p. 197).
The Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians, early second century
4.2 - "Then instruct your wives to continue in the faith delivered to them and in love and purity, cherishing their own husbands in all fidelity and loving all others equally in all chastity, and to instruct the children with instruction that leads to the fear of God" (p. 211).
4.3 - "The widows must think soberly about the faith of the Lord and pray unceasingly for everyone and stay far away from all malicious talk, slander, false testimony, love of money, and any kind of evil, knowing that they are God's altar, and that all sacrifices are carefully inspected and nothing escapes him, whether thoughts or intentions or 'secrets of the heart'" (p. 211).
5.3 - ". . . The young women must maintain a pure and blameless conscience" (p. 213).
Women were not spoken of in a negative way by the apostolic fathers. Rather, they were exhorted to love Christ, to love their husbands and to love everyone in purity. It was not until later into the late second and early third century that women began to be spoken of negatively, which was when the church began to move from the private sphere to the public sphere in the Roman Empire.
Early Church Research Paper - Source 6
We have seen that women were indeed oppressed but not exactly as we thought during the time of Jesus and during the time of the New Testament, but as attitudes and opinions began to harden in the late first and second century, those most influential people in the church brought the Christian religion from the private sphere to the public sphere, as is evident in Tertullian's writings. This movement from the private to the public brought about the oppression of women that kept them from serving as leaders in the church. Elizabeth Clark's Women in the Early Church in the Message of the Fathers of the Church series will help to further demonstrate the general attitude regarding women by the church fathers.
Clark quotes Irenaeus' Against Heresies where it contrasts Eve with Mary (III, 22, 4, p. 38). This contrast is made during the late second century. It is important to note that at the late second century there is not a virulent disposition regarding women in leadership. Irenaeus shows no contempt or disregard for women in general in this passage. In fact, he concludes that what Eve brought upon humanity Mary has loosed (Against Heresies, III, 22, 4, p. 38). Although a woman has entered all of humanity into sin, Irenaeus argues that it was another woman who reversed its effects. No other church father quoted in Women in the Early Church has this understanding. Instead, as does Augustine (Literal Commentary on Genesis, XI, 42, pp. 40-1), Chrysostom (Homily 26 on 1 Corinthians, 2, p. 42) and Ambrose (On Paradise, IV, 24, pp. 29-30), for example, they only see as far as the failure of Eve and utilize that fact to teach the submission of women in the church. Clark suggests that the trend became a harsh oppression against women leadership because heresies had large involvements of women leadership under whom many were led astray (p. 160). Since women were known for leading Christians astray, the church fathers oppressed women leadership in general.
Clark quotes Irenaeus' Against Heresies where it contrasts Eve with Mary (III, 22, 4, p. 38). This contrast is made during the late second century. It is important to note that at the late second century there is not a virulent disposition regarding women in leadership. Irenaeus shows no contempt or disregard for women in general in this passage. In fact, he concludes that what Eve brought upon humanity Mary has loosed (Against Heresies, III, 22, 4, p. 38). Although a woman has entered all of humanity into sin, Irenaeus argues that it was another woman who reversed its effects. No other church father quoted in Women in the Early Church has this understanding. Instead, as does Augustine (Literal Commentary on Genesis, XI, 42, pp. 40-1), Chrysostom (Homily 26 on 1 Corinthians, 2, p. 42) and Ambrose (On Paradise, IV, 24, pp. 29-30), for example, they only see as far as the failure of Eve and utilize that fact to teach the submission of women in the church. Clark suggests that the trend became a harsh oppression against women leadership because heresies had large involvements of women leadership under whom many were led astray (p. 160). Since women were known for leading Christians astray, the church fathers oppressed women leadership in general.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Early Church Research Paper - Source 5
In all of the research I have done so far, it looks like I am going to write my research paper as a historical description of how women served in the early church and compare it to how women served in the New Testament and around the Roman Empire during the first century.
In the Roman Empire women were religious leaders. In the areas by Palestine, such as Alexandria, during the first century there was a great allowance for women to take part as leaders in religion, so much so that they were seen as equals with males. The general ideal was for women to function in the private sphere, but all throughout the Roman Empire there were indeed exceptions to this ideal, even in Judaism, where women served various religions as leaders and had rather important roles.
We have seen in the New Testament that there were several women who were leaders in the church. Outside of the New Testament we do have records of some women being very influential as leaders in the very early stages of the early church. However, the church fathers took on a very dim perception about the women's involvement in church leadership. Let's further explore the roles of women in the early church as well as the time of the early church as described by the early church documents that we have. For such documents we are now turning to When Women Were Priests: Women's leadership in the Early Church & the scandal of their subordination in the rise of Christianity by Karen Torjesen.
Torjesen's argument concerning the church and the private sphere is helpful. She writes that for the first two hundred years of the church Christianity belonged to the private sphere (p. 37). Christians did not assemble in large congregations, but rather, in house churches. Torjesen writes, ". . . Christianity was essentially a religion of the private sphere, practiced in the private space of the household rather than the public space of a temple. Its concerns were the domestic life of its community rather than the political life of the city" (p. 37). Since it belonged to the private sphere, it makes sense that women would have a prominent role as leaders throughout the church up to the middle of the third century, which was when the church began taking the form of a public religion (p. 37). As it began entering the public sphere, women leaders were forced into "the same subjugation of women in the churches as prevailed in Greco-Roman society at large" (p. 38).
The idea here is that during the time of Jesus and following women were expected to function in the private sphere, although there were exceptions in which women did lead throughout the Roman Empire, and with the Cult of Isis they were thought as equals with men. When Christianity came along women did serve as leaders, since Christianity functioned in the private sphere, and we have evidence for women as leaders in and outside the New Testament to show for this function. However, when the Church began to go public, practices changed, and women were kept from leadership roles. We noted before that during the majority of the first century women were not oppressed, but in the late first century and following women began to be oppressed. It seems that Christianity was able to accept women's leadership during the second century since it functioned in the private sphere, although there was still opposition and negative opinion regarding their leadership even in the private sphere, but in the middle of the third century, the involvement of women as church leaders was destroyed. It seems as though the change was like a flip of a switch.
In regards to how house churches ran (we are going back to understand more of the private sphere in which the church existed in for two centuries), Torjesen is helpful. Church leadership was modeled after household management, which "required experience in the management of people as well as of goods" (pp. 76-7). Torjesen writes the following paragraph:
In regards to the transition of leadership in the church, Torjesen writes this paragraph:
Tertullian was quite hostile against women leadership in the church, but through his writings bearing such hostility we find that the church communities he was familiar with had women who taught, baptized, exorcised and healed (p. 158). Indeed, Tertullian was the first to argue Christianity in judicial or political terms when he articulated his understanding of Christianity through the language, metaphors and paradigms from the public sphere of the Roman Empire (p. 160). His rejection of women's leadership in the church was a reflection of Roman society's values that women belong to the private sphere (p. 160).
It was with Tertullian that the church became a legal entity that was unified by a common law and a common discipline (pp. 162-3). It was Tertullian who modeled clergy after the ruling senatorial class, so that the honor and authority of the church was represented by the clergy, which in turn made it imperative for the clergy to exemplify the moral discipline of the church (p. 163). By being clergy, members of that office held particular rights according to Tertullian, such as the right to baptize, teach, offer the Eucharist, and restore to fellowship after penance, so that what had originally been ministered had now become legal rights and privileges (p. 163). Since Tertullian said that women cannot baptize, we know he forbade women to be in the clergy and even the laity, which was a leadership group of the church being subject to the clergy and had fewer rights and privileges (p. 164). The argument that around the third century the church exited functioning in the private sphere and entered functioning in the public sphere is evident in Tertullian's argument in On the Veiling of Virgins. Torjesen gives us Tertullian's argument with the following words:
Thanks to Tertullian at the beginning of the third century the church shifted from the private to the public sphere, which resulted in women no longer being allowed to function as leaders in the church.
In the Roman Empire women were religious leaders. In the areas by Palestine, such as Alexandria, during the first century there was a great allowance for women to take part as leaders in religion, so much so that they were seen as equals with males. The general ideal was for women to function in the private sphere, but all throughout the Roman Empire there were indeed exceptions to this ideal, even in Judaism, where women served various religions as leaders and had rather important roles.
We have seen in the New Testament that there were several women who were leaders in the church. Outside of the New Testament we do have records of some women being very influential as leaders in the very early stages of the early church. However, the church fathers took on a very dim perception about the women's involvement in church leadership. Let's further explore the roles of women in the early church as well as the time of the early church as described by the early church documents that we have. For such documents we are now turning to When Women Were Priests: Women's leadership in the Early Church & the scandal of their subordination in the rise of Christianity by Karen Torjesen.
Torjesen's argument concerning the church and the private sphere is helpful. She writes that for the first two hundred years of the church Christianity belonged to the private sphere (p. 37). Christians did not assemble in large congregations, but rather, in house churches. Torjesen writes, ". . . Christianity was essentially a religion of the private sphere, practiced in the private space of the household rather than the public space of a temple. Its concerns were the domestic life of its community rather than the political life of the city" (p. 37). Since it belonged to the private sphere, it makes sense that women would have a prominent role as leaders throughout the church up to the middle of the third century, which was when the church began taking the form of a public religion (p. 37). As it began entering the public sphere, women leaders were forced into "the same subjugation of women in the churches as prevailed in Greco-Roman society at large" (p. 38).
The idea here is that during the time of Jesus and following women were expected to function in the private sphere, although there were exceptions in which women did lead throughout the Roman Empire, and with the Cult of Isis they were thought as equals with men. When Christianity came along women did serve as leaders, since Christianity functioned in the private sphere, and we have evidence for women as leaders in and outside the New Testament to show for this function. However, when the Church began to go public, practices changed, and women were kept from leadership roles. We noted before that during the majority of the first century women were not oppressed, but in the late first century and following women began to be oppressed. It seems that Christianity was able to accept women's leadership during the second century since it functioned in the private sphere, although there was still opposition and negative opinion regarding their leadership even in the private sphere, but in the middle of the third century, the involvement of women as church leaders was destroyed. It seems as though the change was like a flip of a switch.
In regards to how house churches ran (we are going back to understand more of the private sphere in which the church existed in for two centuries), Torjesen is helpful. Church leadership was modeled after household management, which "required experience in the management of people as well as of goods" (pp. 76-7). Torjesen writes the following paragraph:
So long as church leadership continued to model itself on the familiar role of household manager, there was no cultural barrier to women assuming leadership roles. First- and second-century Christians, familiar with the authority and leadership role of the female head of household, would have perceived women's leadership within the church as not only acceptable but natural. The early church's specific leadership functions posed no barriers to woemen, whose skills and experiences as managers amply prepared them to assume the duties of teaching, disciplining, nurturing, and administrating material resources. This would have been the case as long as Christian communities remained closely identified with the social structures of the private sphere. (p. 82)
In regards to the transition of leadership in the church, Torjesen writes this paragraph:
As the architectural space in which Christians worshiped became a more public space, and as the models for leadership were drawn increasingly from public life, women's leadership become more controversial. Because the public-versus-private gender ideology restricted women's activities in public life, the new leaders of the church were not as comfortable with women's leadership in the churches. (p. 157)
Tertullian was quite hostile against women leadership in the church, but through his writings bearing such hostility we find that the church communities he was familiar with had women who taught, baptized, exorcised and healed (p. 158). Indeed, Tertullian was the first to argue Christianity in judicial or political terms when he articulated his understanding of Christianity through the language, metaphors and paradigms from the public sphere of the Roman Empire (p. 160). His rejection of women's leadership in the church was a reflection of Roman society's values that women belong to the private sphere (p. 160).
It was with Tertullian that the church became a legal entity that was unified by a common law and a common discipline (pp. 162-3). It was Tertullian who modeled clergy after the ruling senatorial class, so that the honor and authority of the church was represented by the clergy, which in turn made it imperative for the clergy to exemplify the moral discipline of the church (p. 163). By being clergy, members of that office held particular rights according to Tertullian, such as the right to baptize, teach, offer the Eucharist, and restore to fellowship after penance, so that what had originally been ministered had now become legal rights and privileges (p. 163). Since Tertullian said that women cannot baptize, we know he forbade women to be in the clergy and even the laity, which was a leadership group of the church being subject to the clergy and had fewer rights and privileges (p. 164). The argument that around the third century the church exited functioning in the private sphere and entered functioning in the public sphere is evident in Tertullian's argument in On the Veiling of Virgins. Torjesen gives us Tertullian's argument with the following words:
"Young women," he scolded, "you wear your veils out on the streets, so you should wear them in the church, you wear them when you are among strangers, then wear them among your brothers (13, p. 165)Torjesen tops off the quote with another: "If you won't wear your veils in church, then I challenge you to go around in public without them" (On the Veiling of Virgins, 14, pp. 165-6). These quotations indicate that Tertullian was arguing that the time of the private sphere for the church was over and that the church was now "no different from the marketplace" as part of the public sphere (p. 166).
Thanks to Tertullian at the beginning of the third century the church shifted from the private to the public sphere, which resulted in women no longer being allowed to function as leaders in the church.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Early Church Research Paper - Source 4
Now that I have seen that women did in fact fill religious leadership roles throughout the Roman Empire, including in the the church during the New Testament times, despite the negative opinions of women, I want to look at some primary sources for the views of the early church fathers regarding women. Eventually I will compare what the primary sources reveal with what the New Testament reports and draw some conclusions. But first, to the primary resources.
Patricia Miller has combined a large series of primary sources in Women in Early Christianity: Translations from Greek texts that deal with the views of women in the early church. I am going to use this book to reference the writings of the early church fathers.
Miller does acknowledge that when ancient writers wrote of women, they mostly wrote in regards to "women's roles as teachers, prophets, martyrs, widows, deaconesses, ascetics, virgins, patrons, wives, mothers and sisters, and metaphors" either positively or negatively (p. 1). Let's limit our scope to religious roles.
Miller notes that public teaching by women was not permitted in the early church, and women who attempted to take such positions were labeled as heretics (p. 17). In Against Heresies (1.25.6), Irenaeus looked down upon Marcellina--a woman teacher whom he claimed to have "caused the downfall of many" (p. 17). Miller reports that Marcellina apparently taught a form of Christianity that upheld equality among men and women along with some other ideas that went against conventional standards (p. 17). It is from this backdrop that Irenaeus makes his negative remark. Marcellina and Irenaeus were from the second century. In the first century women did function in leadership roles throughout the Roman Empire--especially in the church during the time of the New Testament. By the time the second century rolled around, things seem to have changed.
Although women were not permitted to teach publicly in the early church, they were able to and they did establish and teach monastic communities for women. Melania the Younger and her husband Pinian built monasteries on the Mount of Olives, and she was a noted teacher around the time of the fifth century (p. 19). In the fourth century Macrina founded a monastery for women and was noted for her teaching (pp. 22-3). Gregory of Nyssa, one of the Cappadocian fathers and one of the great church fathers called Macrina, who was in fact his sister, his teacher (cf. p. 23, On the Soul and the Resurrection, "Dialogue about grief and death," for example).
Evidence and opinion is mixed. Women were not permitted to teach in public, and yet they did teach in monasteries in the early church. Even the views of the church fathers are mixed. Some thought highly of women as teachers and others were upset by the thought.
It is true that the typical view of the church fathers was not favorable, however. In the third century Origen quoted 1 Cor. 14:35 ("It is shameful for a woman to speak in church"), saying that anything and everything she might say is shameful--even if what she is good--"because it comes from the mouth of a woman" (Commentary on 1 Corinthians, fragment 74, p. 29). John Chrysostom, who taught around the late fourth and early fifth centuries, wrote in his discourse on Genesis 1 that Eve wrongfully used her authority and so was punished to a state of subordination (Discourse 4 on Genesis 1, p. 30). He looked to Paul's words in 1 Tim. 2:11 ("Let the woman learn in silence, in all subjection"), asking, "Do you see how he, too, submits the woman to the man?" (Ibid., p. 30). He said that Paul instructed women to not teach a man because Eve taught Adam poorly once and for all (Ibid., p. 30). Therefore, he thought that Paul taught that women should be "in silence" because of their inability to properly teach as was evident in Genesis 3 (p. 30). The Didascalia apostolorum, a third century document, speaks against women as teachers, ending the argument with these words: "For if it were required that women should teach, our Master himself would have commanded these to give instruction with us" (3.6, p. 31).
Women as teachers for the church fathers was generally looked down upon because of the perception of women as being the deceived ones and the initial ones to commit sin, and also because Jesus never commanded for women to teach.
Miller notes that women did function as prophets in two movements during the second century (p. 31). With the disciples of Marcus, a man who was identified and condemned as "gnostic" by his opponents, women prophesied or at least they thought they were prophesying (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1.13.1-3, p. 32-3). With the Montanists, several oracles of the women prophets were recorded by their opponents Eusebius and Epiphanius. Eusebius records an oracle given by a woman, Maximilla (Ecclesiastical History, 5.16.17, p. 34). Epiphanius records oracles from Maximilla and Priscilla or Quintilla (Panarion, 48.2.4, 48.12.4, 48.13.1, and 49.1, pp. 34-35). Hippolytus indicates that Priscilla and Maximmilla were perceived by the Montanists as prophetesses (Refutation of All Heresies, 8.19, p. 35).
Miller notes that women did hold the office of widows (p. 49). By the time the third century came, this office had specific qualifications (p. 50) and particular duties (p. 51). Widows were to fast frequently and pray (Hippolytus, The Apostolic Tradition 11; 25; 27, p. 51). Some of their other functions and qualifications included, but was not limited to, the following: they were to be of a particular age; they were to assist the younger women; they were to be meek, quiet and gentle; they were not to teach or gossip; and they were to be disciplined (Didascalia apostolurm, 3.1-11; 4.5-8, pp. 51-61).
Miller notes that women held the office of deaconess by the third century (p. 62). Women were appointed as deaconesses--the honorary office of female helpers for the bishop--to serve other women (Didascalia apostolorum, 2.26; 3.12, p. 62). They had a specific function to teach and instruct the newly baptized women (Ibid., p. 62).
Women were not permitted to perform many of the ecclesiastical duties (p. 65). They could not baptize, since, it was argued, Jesus was not baptized by a woman (Didascalia apostolorum, 3.9, p. 65). Epiphanius said that women could not even offer the gospel throughout the world because this task was given to the apostles and bishops who were all males, and no woman could ever take the episcopate or presbyterate offices since no woman was ever appointed as one in the New Testament (Panarion, 79.2,3-4,1, p. 67).
These documents indicate that women did take leadership roles during the time of the early church, but when they did they were usually declared to be heretics, or they were looked down upon. The second century onward church fathers' general view was for women to be silent, and if they were to serve they were only to serve other women.
Patricia Miller has combined a large series of primary sources in Women in Early Christianity: Translations from Greek texts that deal with the views of women in the early church. I am going to use this book to reference the writings of the early church fathers.
Miller does acknowledge that when ancient writers wrote of women, they mostly wrote in regards to "women's roles as teachers, prophets, martyrs, widows, deaconesses, ascetics, virgins, patrons, wives, mothers and sisters, and metaphors" either positively or negatively (p. 1). Let's limit our scope to religious roles.
Miller notes that public teaching by women was not permitted in the early church, and women who attempted to take such positions were labeled as heretics (p. 17). In Against Heresies (1.25.6), Irenaeus looked down upon Marcellina--a woman teacher whom he claimed to have "caused the downfall of many" (p. 17). Miller reports that Marcellina apparently taught a form of Christianity that upheld equality among men and women along with some other ideas that went against conventional standards (p. 17). It is from this backdrop that Irenaeus makes his negative remark. Marcellina and Irenaeus were from the second century. In the first century women did function in leadership roles throughout the Roman Empire--especially in the church during the time of the New Testament. By the time the second century rolled around, things seem to have changed.
Although women were not permitted to teach publicly in the early church, they were able to and they did establish and teach monastic communities for women. Melania the Younger and her husband Pinian built monasteries on the Mount of Olives, and she was a noted teacher around the time of the fifth century (p. 19). In the fourth century Macrina founded a monastery for women and was noted for her teaching (pp. 22-3). Gregory of Nyssa, one of the Cappadocian fathers and one of the great church fathers called Macrina, who was in fact his sister, his teacher (cf. p. 23, On the Soul and the Resurrection, "Dialogue about grief and death," for example).
Evidence and opinion is mixed. Women were not permitted to teach in public, and yet they did teach in monasteries in the early church. Even the views of the church fathers are mixed. Some thought highly of women as teachers and others were upset by the thought.
It is true that the typical view of the church fathers was not favorable, however. In the third century Origen quoted 1 Cor. 14:35 ("It is shameful for a woman to speak in church"), saying that anything and everything she might say is shameful--even if what she is good--"because it comes from the mouth of a woman" (Commentary on 1 Corinthians, fragment 74, p. 29). John Chrysostom, who taught around the late fourth and early fifth centuries, wrote in his discourse on Genesis 1 that Eve wrongfully used her authority and so was punished to a state of subordination (Discourse 4 on Genesis 1, p. 30). He looked to Paul's words in 1 Tim. 2:11 ("Let the woman learn in silence, in all subjection"), asking, "Do you see how he, too, submits the woman to the man?" (Ibid., p. 30). He said that Paul instructed women to not teach a man because Eve taught Adam poorly once and for all (Ibid., p. 30). Therefore, he thought that Paul taught that women should be "in silence" because of their inability to properly teach as was evident in Genesis 3 (p. 30). The Didascalia apostolorum, a third century document, speaks against women as teachers, ending the argument with these words: "For if it were required that women should teach, our Master himself would have commanded these to give instruction with us" (3.6, p. 31).
Women as teachers for the church fathers was generally looked down upon because of the perception of women as being the deceived ones and the initial ones to commit sin, and also because Jesus never commanded for women to teach.
Miller notes that women did function as prophets in two movements during the second century (p. 31). With the disciples of Marcus, a man who was identified and condemned as "gnostic" by his opponents, women prophesied or at least they thought they were prophesying (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1.13.1-3, p. 32-3). With the Montanists, several oracles of the women prophets were recorded by their opponents Eusebius and Epiphanius. Eusebius records an oracle given by a woman, Maximilla (Ecclesiastical History, 5.16.17, p. 34). Epiphanius records oracles from Maximilla and Priscilla or Quintilla (Panarion, 48.2.4, 48.12.4, 48.13.1, and 49.1, pp. 34-35). Hippolytus indicates that Priscilla and Maximmilla were perceived by the Montanists as prophetesses (Refutation of All Heresies, 8.19, p. 35).
Miller notes that women did hold the office of widows (p. 49). By the time the third century came, this office had specific qualifications (p. 50) and particular duties (p. 51). Widows were to fast frequently and pray (Hippolytus, The Apostolic Tradition 11; 25; 27, p. 51). Some of their other functions and qualifications included, but was not limited to, the following: they were to be of a particular age; they were to assist the younger women; they were to be meek, quiet and gentle; they were not to teach or gossip; and they were to be disciplined (Didascalia apostolurm, 3.1-11; 4.5-8, pp. 51-61).
Miller notes that women held the office of deaconess by the third century (p. 62). Women were appointed as deaconesses--the honorary office of female helpers for the bishop--to serve other women (Didascalia apostolorum, 2.26; 3.12, p. 62). They had a specific function to teach and instruct the newly baptized women (Ibid., p. 62).
Women were not permitted to perform many of the ecclesiastical duties (p. 65). They could not baptize, since, it was argued, Jesus was not baptized by a woman (Didascalia apostolorum, 3.9, p. 65). Epiphanius said that women could not even offer the gospel throughout the world because this task was given to the apostles and bishops who were all males, and no woman could ever take the episcopate or presbyterate offices since no woman was ever appointed as one in the New Testament (Panarion, 79.2,3-4,1, p. 67).
These documents indicate that women did take leadership roles during the time of the early church, but when they did they were usually declared to be heretics, or they were looked down upon. The second century onward church fathers' general view was for women to be silent, and if they were to serve they were only to serve other women.
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Early Church Research Paper - Source 3b
Continuing on in my reading from Women Leaders and the Church (cf. Source 3a), I want to see how women functioned in the New Testament. The New Testament is a first century document. Although it is not considered to be part of the early church as a historical period, it is what precedes the early church and must be taken into consideration.
So far we have considered the opinions regarding women in the first century and in the general view or expectation of women in the late church fathers, and we have also considered the role of women throughout the Roman Empire in Jewish, Greek and Roman religions. We will now turn to the role of women in the New Testament.
Belleville identifies that women functioned as patrons--financial supporters--of the house churches (p. 50). It is likely that in their role as patrons they provided a meeting place, their homes, for the church to assemble at, which follows suit with the patronage practices of the Roman Empire (p. 52). There are six accounts of patrons in the New Testament--five of which are women or at least couples, which are Acts 12:12; 16:14-15; Rom. 16:3-5; 1 Cor. 16:19; Col. 4:15; and Philem. 2 (p. 52). When a patrons opened their homes for the group to assemble in, they were charged with the leadership of that group, including their legal liability (p. 52). Noteworthy in the New Testament is the first two verses in Philemon: "Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother, to Philemon our dear friend and fellow-worker, to Apphia our sister, to Archippus our fellow-soldier and to the church that meets in your home" (Philemon 1-2). Apphia is listed as one of the recipients of this letter, which means that she was a leader of the church at Colossae (p. 53). Paul addresses the "church in your home." Your is plural, indicating that the three recipients mentioned are the leaders of that church (p. 53). Belleville notes that women were also apostles, at least in the sense of possessors of the gift of apostleship and church planters (p. 54). Women were also prophets (p. 56). As women prophets, they would have served to convict sin, to instruct, to exhort, to encourage, and to guide in the decision-making process (p. 56). The gift of prophecy was "a recognized leadership role in the church" since it was tied with revelation (p. 57). It is significant that Paul places the prophetic role of women on par with the prophetic role of men so that "[w]omen functioned in a highly visible leadership capacity" (p. 57). Women also served as teachers (p. 58). Teaching in the New Testament was not an authoritative role and it was not referenced in terms of public and private spheres (p. 58). In fact, the entire congregation of the church in Colossae was exhorted to teach each other (Col. 3:16; p. 58). The author of Hebrews expected that his recipients should have all been teachers in the faith (Heb. 5:12; p. 58). However, teaching for women was limited by culture. Belleville notes, "Both women learners and teachers were a rarity" (p. 58). There were relatively few women teachers during the time of the New Testament (p. 59). Yet, no female or male is specifically given the title of teacher in the New Testament (p. 59). Furthermore, teaching was associated with the prophets, but women were prophets in the same way that men were except for their attire (pp. 57, 59). In the time of the New Testament, there was no such thing as an informal and private or formal and public sphere of teaching, so any attempt to appeal to such spheres in regards to women as teaching in their role as prophets is, as Belleville states, "anachronistic" (p. 59). Women were also evangelists or missionaries (p. 59). The role of evangelists was at least a leadership role in Philippi where Euodia and Syntyche are identified as the leaders of the church and are called evangelists (p. 60). Women also served as deacons (p. 61). Belleville says that to be a deacon is to possess the gift of service or serving, and women, such as Phoebe, functioned as deacons for the church (p. 61). Women were also worship leaders as people of prayer in cooperation with the community of which they were a part of (pp. 64-5). They were also ministering widows that functioned to support various needs in the church (pp. 65-7). Women were sometimes multigifted and were able to fill multiple leadership roles in the church, like Priscilla who was a teacher, patron, evangelist and perhaps also an overseer (p. 68).
Women served leadership functions in the times of the New Testament. In terms of religion we can say that women had a significant leadership role in the church during the first century. Likewise, women had a significant role in religions throughout the Roman Empire during the first century. Religiously speaking, therefore, women in the first century could serve in leadership positions.
So far we have considered the opinions regarding women in the first century and in the general view or expectation of women in the late church fathers, and we have also considered the role of women throughout the Roman Empire in Jewish, Greek and Roman religions. We will now turn to the role of women in the New Testament.
Belleville identifies that women functioned as patrons--financial supporters--of the house churches (p. 50). It is likely that in their role as patrons they provided a meeting place, their homes, for the church to assemble at, which follows suit with the patronage practices of the Roman Empire (p. 52). There are six accounts of patrons in the New Testament--five of which are women or at least couples, which are Acts 12:12; 16:14-15; Rom. 16:3-5; 1 Cor. 16:19; Col. 4:15; and Philem. 2 (p. 52). When a patrons opened their homes for the group to assemble in, they were charged with the leadership of that group, including their legal liability (p. 52). Noteworthy in the New Testament is the first two verses in Philemon: "Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother, to Philemon our dear friend and fellow-worker, to Apphia our sister, to Archippus our fellow-soldier and to the church that meets in your home" (Philemon 1-2). Apphia is listed as one of the recipients of this letter, which means that she was a leader of the church at Colossae (p. 53). Paul addresses the "church in your home." Your is plural, indicating that the three recipients mentioned are the leaders of that church (p. 53). Belleville notes that women were also apostles, at least in the sense of possessors of the gift of apostleship and church planters (p. 54). Women were also prophets (p. 56). As women prophets, they would have served to convict sin, to instruct, to exhort, to encourage, and to guide in the decision-making process (p. 56). The gift of prophecy was "a recognized leadership role in the church" since it was tied with revelation (p. 57). It is significant that Paul places the prophetic role of women on par with the prophetic role of men so that "[w]omen functioned in a highly visible leadership capacity" (p. 57). Women also served as teachers (p. 58). Teaching in the New Testament was not an authoritative role and it was not referenced in terms of public and private spheres (p. 58). In fact, the entire congregation of the church in Colossae was exhorted to teach each other (Col. 3:16; p. 58). The author of Hebrews expected that his recipients should have all been teachers in the faith (Heb. 5:12; p. 58). However, teaching for women was limited by culture. Belleville notes, "Both women learners and teachers were a rarity" (p. 58). There were relatively few women teachers during the time of the New Testament (p. 59). Yet, no female or male is specifically given the title of teacher in the New Testament (p. 59). Furthermore, teaching was associated with the prophets, but women were prophets in the same way that men were except for their attire (pp. 57, 59). In the time of the New Testament, there was no such thing as an informal and private or formal and public sphere of teaching, so any attempt to appeal to such spheres in regards to women as teaching in their role as prophets is, as Belleville states, "anachronistic" (p. 59). Women were also evangelists or missionaries (p. 59). The role of evangelists was at least a leadership role in Philippi where Euodia and Syntyche are identified as the leaders of the church and are called evangelists (p. 60). Women also served as deacons (p. 61). Belleville says that to be a deacon is to possess the gift of service or serving, and women, such as Phoebe, functioned as deacons for the church (p. 61). Women were also worship leaders as people of prayer in cooperation with the community of which they were a part of (pp. 64-5). They were also ministering widows that functioned to support various needs in the church (pp. 65-7). Women were sometimes multigifted and were able to fill multiple leadership roles in the church, like Priscilla who was a teacher, patron, evangelist and perhaps also an overseer (p. 68).
Women served leadership functions in the times of the New Testament. In terms of religion we can say that women had a significant leadership role in the church during the first century. Likewise, women had a significant role in religions throughout the Roman Empire during the first century. Religiously speaking, therefore, women in the first century could serve in leadership positions.
Early Church Research Paper - Source 3a
It seems to me that the early church had no problem at all with women in leadership, but over time the church adopted the cultural mindset regarding women--probably unintentionally through enculturation. I want to look at the views of women in general from the first through sixth centuries and see if that informs my thesis or denies my thesis (And if it does, I have a lot of changing to do!).
Linda Belleville's book, Women Leaders and the Church: Three crucial questions, gives information on the understanding of women in Judaism, and Greek and Roman society. Understanding how women were perceived in these areas or cultures of the ancient world will help us to understand what kind of thought environment the early church existed in.
Even though women had less religious involvement than Greek or Roman women in general, there were still opportunities or at least the possibility for women to serve their communities as leaders (p. 20). Women were expected to function in the private, not public, realm of society, but outside of Palestine Jewish women had more opportunities to serve as leaders (p. 20). Belleville reports that there are "synagogue records, burial markers, inscriptions, and works of art" that show a significant number of Jewish women who had a significant role in their congregations (pp. 20-1). She also reports that during the late first century women began seeing less of a role in the public sphere (p. 21). It was during that time that their societal and religious roles became more limited (p. 21). She boldly states that it is quite difficult to find any Jewish texts that forbid women to teach during the first century (p. 21). Her statements demonstrate that for Judaism around the late first century (the social-historical context for the beginning of the early church) women were beginning to be taken out of the public sphere and limited to the private, but it was not actually prohibited for women to teach or have authority. In fact, Belleville notes that women were technically "qualified to function in virtually every way men functioned" (p. 22). However, as Belleville also notes, being qualified does not mean they were encouraged (p. 22). Even though they were able, opinions were expressed, stating that women should not be permitted to publicly read Scripture (p. 22).
Yet, women in Judaism functioned in leadership roles such as financial donors of local synagogues (p. 23). Records demonstrate that women who supported the synagogues rose to significant status in their communities (pp. 23-4). Women could also be heads of synagogues and even elders in Judaism (pp. 24-5). Belleville notes that it was a distinct privilege to be named the head of a synagogue, which was the equivalent to third in command next to scholars and "great ones of the congregation," respectively (pp. 24-5). However, the responsibilities of the synagogue ruler included the upkeep of the synagogue building, the donors and the synagogue ruler were frequently connected (p. 25). To be a donor would be an authority at least in part alongside of the synagogue ruler. The synagogue ruler was also in charge of planning and leading the worship service (p. 25). If a woman was a synagogue ruler, then she would have had the charge of directing the worship service in the synagogue. The synagogue ruler was also responsible for, it seems, "keeping the congregation faithful to the law" according to Luke 13:10-17 (p. 25). In terms of women leading as elders, there are seven tomb inscriptions that identify women as elders (p. 25). The word, elder, refers to a particular ruling group that had particular leadership roles, which included ruling on legal matters of the welfare for the community and functioning as the town council (pp. 25-6). The elders' primary function was community leader in Judaism (p. 26). Women could also function as priestesses (p. 27). Precisely what this means is unclear, but we do know that women could serve priestly functions without ever being given the title of priestess in the Old Testament, so it is possible that women were given the title of priestess to note their liturgical contributions (p. 27). If a women came from a priestly lineage, it is possible that she would have been given the opportunity to read Scripture for the worship service in synagogues out of respect (p. 28). Women were given the title of mother of the synagogue as well (p. 28). It is unclear what the mothers (and fathers) of the synagogue did as leaders, but the father of the synagogue did have a higher rank than a "high-ranking official of the local Jewish ruling council" (p. 29). Other than that, we know very little about how this father or mother of the synagogue leadership role functioned. Although it was not to the same degree as men, Jewish women were capable of functioning as leaders and they sometimes did.
In Greek and Roman society, women were expected to be actively involved in the local and religious communities (p. 31). The distinction between the public and privates spheres was not as well-defined in Greek and Roman society, so, though the persuasion of wealthy women, women gained a growing popularity on par with men in religion (p. 31). Women served as priestesses in the cults throughout the Roman Empire, which meant that they were, alongside priests, responsible for the sanctuary rituals and ceremonies, its maintenance, and its protection (p. 33). Liturgically, Belleville states that they were also responsible for ritual sacrifices, pronouncing the prayers, and presiding at the festivals of the deity (p. 33). In some cases, women were identified as high priestesses, which is particularly important since the leadership role of high priest was only given to one male leader in a single city (p. 33). In terms of modern categories of leadership, women served administrative, benefactory and ministerial roles throughout the pagan cults of the Roman Empire (p. 34). Wealth and office were tied together for women in the Roman Empire (p. 34). Belleville notes that it was expected for the top priestly offices to have the financial resources to cover civic and religious events (p. 34). Women served in the social, political, and financial services of the Roman Empire alongside of their male counterparts (p. 35). Therefore, women were in a position to be in power in the Roman Empire (p. 35). Keeping this information in mind alongside of the role of women in the cult of Isis in which they were equal to men, we must realize that in the first century women were not as religiously limited as we sometimes think (p. 37). In other words, as Belleville puts it, "[I]n the first century A.D. the religious cults led the way in modeling male and female parity" (p. 38).
When we consider the negative opinions regarding women in Judaism and also the frowning of men on women for breaking out of the private sphere, we first think that women were oppressed in the first century. However, despite negative thought-trains, women still functioned as leaders of varying kinds in both Jewish, Greek and Roman religions. Yet, the ideal was for women to remain in the private sphere (p. 47).
Linda Belleville's book, Women Leaders and the Church: Three crucial questions, gives information on the understanding of women in Judaism, and Greek and Roman society. Understanding how women were perceived in these areas or cultures of the ancient world will help us to understand what kind of thought environment the early church existed in.
Even though women had less religious involvement than Greek or Roman women in general, there were still opportunities or at least the possibility for women to serve their communities as leaders (p. 20). Women were expected to function in the private, not public, realm of society, but outside of Palestine Jewish women had more opportunities to serve as leaders (p. 20). Belleville reports that there are "synagogue records, burial markers, inscriptions, and works of art" that show a significant number of Jewish women who had a significant role in their congregations (pp. 20-1). She also reports that during the late first century women began seeing less of a role in the public sphere (p. 21). It was during that time that their societal and religious roles became more limited (p. 21). She boldly states that it is quite difficult to find any Jewish texts that forbid women to teach during the first century (p. 21). Her statements demonstrate that for Judaism around the late first century (the social-historical context for the beginning of the early church) women were beginning to be taken out of the public sphere and limited to the private, but it was not actually prohibited for women to teach or have authority. In fact, Belleville notes that women were technically "qualified to function in virtually every way men functioned" (p. 22). However, as Belleville also notes, being qualified does not mean they were encouraged (p. 22). Even though they were able, opinions were expressed, stating that women should not be permitted to publicly read Scripture (p. 22).
Yet, women in Judaism functioned in leadership roles such as financial donors of local synagogues (p. 23). Records demonstrate that women who supported the synagogues rose to significant status in their communities (pp. 23-4). Women could also be heads of synagogues and even elders in Judaism (pp. 24-5). Belleville notes that it was a distinct privilege to be named the head of a synagogue, which was the equivalent to third in command next to scholars and "great ones of the congregation," respectively (pp. 24-5). However, the responsibilities of the synagogue ruler included the upkeep of the synagogue building, the donors and the synagogue ruler were frequently connected (p. 25). To be a donor would be an authority at least in part alongside of the synagogue ruler. The synagogue ruler was also in charge of planning and leading the worship service (p. 25). If a woman was a synagogue ruler, then she would have had the charge of directing the worship service in the synagogue. The synagogue ruler was also responsible for, it seems, "keeping the congregation faithful to the law" according to Luke 13:10-17 (p. 25). In terms of women leading as elders, there are seven tomb inscriptions that identify women as elders (p. 25). The word, elder, refers to a particular ruling group that had particular leadership roles, which included ruling on legal matters of the welfare for the community and functioning as the town council (pp. 25-6). The elders' primary function was community leader in Judaism (p. 26). Women could also function as priestesses (p. 27). Precisely what this means is unclear, but we do know that women could serve priestly functions without ever being given the title of priestess in the Old Testament, so it is possible that women were given the title of priestess to note their liturgical contributions (p. 27). If a women came from a priestly lineage, it is possible that she would have been given the opportunity to read Scripture for the worship service in synagogues out of respect (p. 28). Women were given the title of mother of the synagogue as well (p. 28). It is unclear what the mothers (and fathers) of the synagogue did as leaders, but the father of the synagogue did have a higher rank than a "high-ranking official of the local Jewish ruling council" (p. 29). Other than that, we know very little about how this father or mother of the synagogue leadership role functioned. Although it was not to the same degree as men, Jewish women were capable of functioning as leaders and they sometimes did.
In Greek and Roman society, women were expected to be actively involved in the local and religious communities (p. 31). The distinction between the public and privates spheres was not as well-defined in Greek and Roman society, so, though the persuasion of wealthy women, women gained a growing popularity on par with men in religion (p. 31). Women served as priestesses in the cults throughout the Roman Empire, which meant that they were, alongside priests, responsible for the sanctuary rituals and ceremonies, its maintenance, and its protection (p. 33). Liturgically, Belleville states that they were also responsible for ritual sacrifices, pronouncing the prayers, and presiding at the festivals of the deity (p. 33). In some cases, women were identified as high priestesses, which is particularly important since the leadership role of high priest was only given to one male leader in a single city (p. 33). In terms of modern categories of leadership, women served administrative, benefactory and ministerial roles throughout the pagan cults of the Roman Empire (p. 34). Wealth and office were tied together for women in the Roman Empire (p. 34). Belleville notes that it was expected for the top priestly offices to have the financial resources to cover civic and religious events (p. 34). Women served in the social, political, and financial services of the Roman Empire alongside of their male counterparts (p. 35). Therefore, women were in a position to be in power in the Roman Empire (p. 35). Keeping this information in mind alongside of the role of women in the cult of Isis in which they were equal to men, we must realize that in the first century women were not as religiously limited as we sometimes think (p. 37). In other words, as Belleville puts it, "[I]n the first century A.D. the religious cults led the way in modeling male and female parity" (p. 38).
When we consider the negative opinions regarding women in Judaism and also the frowning of men on women for breaking out of the private sphere, we first think that women were oppressed in the first century. However, despite negative thought-trains, women still functioned as leaders of varying kinds in both Jewish, Greek and Roman religions. Yet, the ideal was for women to remain in the private sphere (p. 47).
Early Church Research Paper - Source 2
What I am finding is women were originally allowed to serve as leaders in the church at the onset of Christianity. So how did we get to a point in Christianity that women are not allowed to serve as leaders in the church? I think it is because of the institutionalization of the church, which modeled itself after 2nd, 3rd and 4th century culture. During that time women were not held in favorable view in general. Now I am continuing the reading process to test to see if this theory is true, false, close, or way off.
Ruth Tucker's chapter in Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity without Hierarchy, "The Changing Roles of Women in Ministry: The early church through the 18th century," identifies a very important train of thought on the part of the early church fathers--woman was tempted by Satan and was the first to sin, and as such she has no place talking about theology (p. 26). This line of argumentation was used primarily among the later church fathers, although there is some negative thought-trains from the second century as well, but not as profuse. However, it was not unheard of for women to be knowledgeable in such matters as the Bible and theology. In fact, Tucker notes that in the fourth century Jerome actually referred arguments to Marcella, a women known for her understanding of the Bible, so that she could judge those situations while he was away and unable to deal with them (p. 26). The early church contained a tension between the thought-train against women discussing theology and women discussing theology anyway.
Tucker's chapter demonstrates the tension that existed for women in the early church. Although they could function as leaders, they were primarily thought to have no business being in leadership. But this train of thought was not from the earliest records of the church. This thought-train developed over time and was firmly in place by the end of the early church. Tucker's chapter will suffice to show that what was said by the fathers throughout the early church did not serve as an absolute rule, for women still discussed theology, learned the Bible, and held authoritative positions, although few and far between.
Ruth Tucker's chapter in Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity without Hierarchy, "The Changing Roles of Women in Ministry: The early church through the 18th century," identifies a very important train of thought on the part of the early church fathers--woman was tempted by Satan and was the first to sin, and as such she has no place talking about theology (p. 26). This line of argumentation was used primarily among the later church fathers, although there is some negative thought-trains from the second century as well, but not as profuse. However, it was not unheard of for women to be knowledgeable in such matters as the Bible and theology. In fact, Tucker notes that in the fourth century Jerome actually referred arguments to Marcella, a women known for her understanding of the Bible, so that she could judge those situations while he was away and unable to deal with them (p. 26). The early church contained a tension between the thought-train against women discussing theology and women discussing theology anyway.
Tucker's chapter demonstrates the tension that existed for women in the early church. Although they could function as leaders, they were primarily thought to have no business being in leadership. But this train of thought was not from the earliest records of the church. This thought-train developed over time and was firmly in place by the end of the early church. Tucker's chapter will suffice to show that what was said by the fathers throughout the early church did not serve as an absolute rule, for women still discussed theology, learned the Bible, and held authoritative positions, although few and far between.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Early Church Research Paper - Source 1
The Early Church was not a formal institution like Judaism until some time after the ascension of Jesus Christ. I am setting out to research the development of the institutionalization of the church and how women functioned in its development. One of the sources I am referring to is Daughters of the Church: Women and ministry from New Testament times to the present by Ruth Tucker and Walter Liefeld.
Daughters of the Church (DC) identifies that there is archaeological evidence that women did hold church offices in the first several centuries of the church (p. 91). There are two instances where a woman is called a diakonos (p. 91). However, what is not made clear in DC is whether or not the use of diakonos was actually the feminine form and they had given the lexical form in the book or if it was actually the masculine form as indicated in the book. It is likely that the former is the case since at the end of the paragraph DC indicates that diakonos is used in Romans 16:1 (p. 92), but the feminine form is not what is used in that particular instance.
At any rate, it is significant that a woman would be called a diakonos. Was it even possible for women to have any sort of leadership role in the early church? This book demonstrates that there were those opinions that thought women to be capable of leadership roles, such as managing a household, which was the view of Clement of Rome (p. 92). Additionally, women were thought highly of by the early church fathers such as Clement of Rome, Polycarp and Ignatius (pp. 92-3). Their admiration came out with the most force when speaking of those women who were martyred. Martyrdom was not merely dying, but it was testifying (p. 93). In relation to martyrdom, Pliny, the governor of Bithynia, and his correspondence to Trajan in the year 111 identifies two women as deaconesses, and he thought it necessary to torture them in order to extract information from them (p. 94). What is the point of torturing these deaconesses? Did Pliny believe these two women were actual leaders and thus possessors of valuable information? Were these two women the only leaders he was aware of? The questions abound, but we should bear in mind that women were known as deaconesses early on in the church.
Aside from this point regarding women, DC demonstrates that the majority of the church fathers had negative views of women in terms of leadership roles. For example, DC includes a quote from Origen that clearly identifies his unfavorable view of women teaching men (p. 106). So, although there was some early opinion for positive thinking regarding women, most of the writings concerning them were of a negative sort.
This book helps identify two things. First, women were called diakonos in the early church. Few times were women identified as such, but they were identified nonetheless. Second, the major opinion regarding women of the church fathers was quite negative. The earliest ones had positive views, but the majority had negative views.
Perhaps the next book I look at will help shed some light on why the majority had negative views.
Daughters of the Church (DC) identifies that there is archaeological evidence that women did hold church offices in the first several centuries of the church (p. 91). There are two instances where a woman is called a diakonos (p. 91). However, what is not made clear in DC is whether or not the use of diakonos was actually the feminine form and they had given the lexical form in the book or if it was actually the masculine form as indicated in the book. It is likely that the former is the case since at the end of the paragraph DC indicates that diakonos is used in Romans 16:1 (p. 92), but the feminine form is not what is used in that particular instance.
At any rate, it is significant that a woman would be called a diakonos. Was it even possible for women to have any sort of leadership role in the early church? This book demonstrates that there were those opinions that thought women to be capable of leadership roles, such as managing a household, which was the view of Clement of Rome (p. 92). Additionally, women were thought highly of by the early church fathers such as Clement of Rome, Polycarp and Ignatius (pp. 92-3). Their admiration came out with the most force when speaking of those women who were martyred. Martyrdom was not merely dying, but it was testifying (p. 93). In relation to martyrdom, Pliny, the governor of Bithynia, and his correspondence to Trajan in the year 111 identifies two women as deaconesses, and he thought it necessary to torture them in order to extract information from them (p. 94). What is the point of torturing these deaconesses? Did Pliny believe these two women were actual leaders and thus possessors of valuable information? Were these two women the only leaders he was aware of? The questions abound, but we should bear in mind that women were known as deaconesses early on in the church.
Aside from this point regarding women, DC demonstrates that the majority of the church fathers had negative views of women in terms of leadership roles. For example, DC includes a quote from Origen that clearly identifies his unfavorable view of women teaching men (p. 106). So, although there was some early opinion for positive thinking regarding women, most of the writings concerning them were of a negative sort.
This book helps identify two things. First, women were called diakonos in the early church. Few times were women identified as such, but they were identified nonetheless. Second, the major opinion regarding women of the church fathers was quite negative. The earliest ones had positive views, but the majority had negative views.
Perhaps the next book I look at will help shed some light on why the majority had negative views.
Monday, October 8, 2007
Critique of Stanton's Jesus and Gospels
When it comes to studying the New Testament, examining the four gospels and the life of Jesus is of utmost importance. Graham Stanton’s book, The Gospels and Jesus, provides New Testament students and Christians alike with the ability to study this important topic. A short summary of Stanton’s book will help us to see the various areas involved in this kind of study, that is, in studying Jesus and the gospels. By briefly summarizing The Gospels and Jesus we will be able to see some of the book’s strengths, which include, but are not limited to, Stanton’s right understanding of a dual perspective of the authors of the gospels, his delightful treatment of determining what is a gospel and how we are to understand and study the four gospels of the New Testament, his intriguing though serious study of the Gospel of Thomas, and his perception on parables in the gospels. To a short summary of The Gospels and Jesus we now turn.
In the first of two parts in the book Stanton addresses the four gospels of the New Testament. In the first chapter he introduces this study by briefly examining how the understanding and knowledge of Jesus came to us through the gospels. In this chapter he shows the difficulties that are involved in this particular study by making an example of the Lord’s prayer (pp. 6-12). In the second chapter he examines what is a gospel, which is an essential study in order to understand what the gospels are trying to communicate or accomplish. Using the categories listed by Stanton, are the gospels biographies, history, proclamation, or stories? Stanton argues that the authors of the gospels were attempting to not only tell the story but also the significance of Jesus, so gospels are a blend of biography, history, proclamation and story (p. 36). He reviews source criticism, form criticism, redaction criticism and literary criticism in this chapter, which are different scholarly approaches to reading, studying and interpreting or understanding the gospels. After examining introductory matters regarding the gospels, Stanton turns to each individual gospel.
Stanton’s next four chapters examine the gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, respectively. He pays careful attention to the traditions, redaction and sources of all four gospels. He emphasizes that Matthew and Luke both formed their own versions of the gospel according to the tradition of Mark, which they reshaped for their own purposes (pp. 38-9). He pays special attention to the way of Jesus and discipleship in Mark, the way of righteousness in Matthew, salvation history or how God’s way triumphs in Luke, and Jesus as the way in John. He seeks out the relationship between John’s gospel and the synoptic gospels. Stanton also looks at the purpose and provenance of each gospel as well, although he admits that we do not know such things for certain regarding the four gospels of the New Testament. Now that he has looked at the four gospels of the New Testament, Stanton evaluates why there are only four gospels.
In the seventh chapter other texts considered to be gospels are examined to determine why they were not included in the New Testament. Such texts considered are the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Peter. In regards to the Gospel of Peter, Stanton quickly concludes that the gospel is valueless due to its legendary fashion (pp. 131-2). Stanton also briefly examines the Egerton Gospel, partial or fragmentary gospels, and infancy gospels before giving his own conclusions to the four gospels of the New Testament. Now that he has looked at the distinctive theological and literary features of each of the gospels and has looked at the broader topics and issues concerning them, Stanton moves on to the second part of his book.
A study of Jesus in the gospel traditions comprises the second part of The Gospels and Jesus. In the eighth chapter Stanton looks at the knowledge that we have concerning Jesus. It is here that he answers the question, “Did Jesus exist?” He examines Josephus, the Dead Sea Scrolls and other ancient texts and evidence to show that there is support for the existence of Jesus. In the ninth chapter, Stanton assesses this evidence. He argues that historians generally agree that Jesus existed but they disagree on who Jesus was. Stanton seeks to find and utilize criteria for examining the gospels of the New Testament to find authentic traditions concerning Jesus. He argues that anything in the gospel traditions that would have been an embarrassment to the followers of Jesus would have been authentic, and anything that links Jesus traditions to Jewish contexts would have been authentic too. In the tenth chapter Stanton looks at John the Baptist and compares him to Jesus. John the Baptist was “the witness” of the Gospel of John, noting that he is not called “John the Baptist” in that gospel, because his primary role is to bear witness and not to baptize in that tradition (pp. 178-9). Then he looks at John the Baptist in the synoptic gospels. After looking at John the Baptist in all of the gospels, he seeks to determine what we know of this character. He resorts particularly to Josephus to find historical information on John the Baptist just as he did for Jesus. All of this information is given in an effort by Stanton to provide the context for the life of Jesus. The next couple of things that Stanton does is to consider Jesus as a prophet-teacher and look at his teaching on the kingdom of God.
In the eleventh chapter Stanton examines the prophet-teacher role of Jesus. He posits that Jesus functioned in a dual role--both as a prophet and a teacher. These two roles are similar but they are not the same according to Stanton (p. 190). He notes that the evangelists refer to Jesus both as a prophet and a teacher; therefore, we must understand Jesus in light of these references, especially when looking at the prophetic sayings and actions of Jesus in the gospels and also when coming to an understanding of the way he taught his disciples and how they interacted with him. In the twelfth chapter Stanton looks at the frequent teaching of Jesus on the kingdom of God. He notes that Jesus gives no clear explanation of what he means by “the kingdom of God” (p. 204). He wants to know whether the kingdom is temporal or spatial, and he concludes that it is mostly temporal but it is used both ways by Jesus. He concludes that what Jesus means by the kingdom sayings is God’s kingly rule in the time and place where God’s power and will have control (p. 214). Next, Stanton looks at how Jesus taught using parables and aphorisms and he looks at the miracles of Jesus.
In the thirteenth chapter Stanton looks at parables and aphorisms. Leslie Houlden’s book, Jesus: the complete guide, also includes articles on the teachings and parables of Jesus, so it seems that Stanton is following good scholarship throughout his book by adhering to particular categories to study the life of Jesus. Stanton says parables are primarily comparisons typically done in a story form and aphorisms are short and pithy sayings. He notes that the evangelists give us many parables. Aphorisms are closely related to parables, although they are not the same (p. 229). In the fourteenth chapter Stanton examines the miracles and exorcisms of Jesus. He looks at how the evangelists portray Jesus and the miracle traditions, which he says are not unique to the gospels of the New Testament, and he also asks whether or not Jesus did in fact perform miracles. After concluding that historians generally agree that Jesus did perform miracles, he asks another question--why did Jesus perform them? Stanton determines that Jesus performed such things in his ministry because they were the kingdom of God in operation (p. 239). From here, Stanton looks at how Jesus understood himself--whether as Messiah, Son of God or Son of Man.
No book on the life of Jesus can escape the task of determining who Jesus thought of himself by examining the titles or names of Jesus, such as the Son of Man or the Son of God, and in a similar fashion with other books on Jesus, such as Jesus: the complete guide, by Leslie Houlden, Stanton spends the fifteenth chapter examining who Jesus thought of himself. Did Jesus think of himself as the Messiah? Did Jesus refer to himself as the Son of God? Or were these titles designed and attributed to Jesus by the post-resurrection church? Stanton concludes that it is difficult to determine which titles or claims were created by the church and which ones were used by Jesus himself (p. 252). Interestingly and intriguing enough, he thinks that Jesus probably did not refer to himself as Messiah (p. 252). Although it is likely that he did not call himself the Son of God, Jesus did refer to God as the Father, so it is easy to see that it could be that the church created and attributed this title to Jesus (p. 252). The title “Son of Man” became a messianic title over time as the church developed and attributed it to Jesus, although Jesus did use it indirectly of himself (p. 252). Now Stanton looks at the conflict involved in the ministry of Jesus.
In the sixteenth chapter Stanton looks at the conflict Jesus had with other leaders. He looks at how the gospels portray the conflicts and then he looks at the various competitors, namely the Essenes, Sadducees, “zealots,” scribes, and Pharisees over issues of Sabbath, purity and divorce. He notes in the last section of this chapter that Jesus did not intend to abolish the laws of the Old Testament, but he did mean to interpret them differently than what was commonly taught and understood during his time. Next, Stanton looks at the passion narratives.
In the seventeenth chapter Stanton looks at the last days of Jesus through the perspective of the four gospels of the New Testament. He examines the passion narratives, especially the last supper and compares it to the Jewish Passover seder (p. 277). Then he considers several reasons to determine why Jesus was put to death; he also examines the accusations against Jesus that lead to his demise. He also looks at Jesus as the crucified Messiah-King and the resurrection, questioning whether or not it actually happened. From here Stanton asks, “Who was Jesus of Nazareth?
In the last and final chapter of the book Stanton reviews the content of the book and considers who Jesus was. He proposes that the only way to know anything about Jesus is to start with the gospels and critically examine them and take into account the position of the evangelists and “the modifications they have introduced” (p. 293). He argues further that we must understand Jesus in the context of first-century Judaism (p. 293). He also argues that there are traditions in the gospels that can in fact be considered trustworthy and reliable information; he appeals to traditions that would have been an embarrassment to the followers of Jesus as being authentic, because no one would make it up unless it was true due to the effect it would have (p. 295). He concludes that although we cannot reconstruct the exact and entire life of Jesus, we do know a good deal about him (p. 295).
Now that we have briefly summarized The Gospels and Jesus, we can look at three strengths of this book. We will look at the following points: first, Stanton’s right understanding of a dual perspective of the authors of the gospels; second, his intriguing though serious study of the Gospel of Thomas; and third, his perception on parables in the gospels.
Stanton takes a good position regarding the nature of the gospels. He does well by saying that we should understand the gospels in light of the evangelists’ dual perspective when writing them. He argues that the evangelists intertwined story and significance, which means that they were writing both about the life of Jesus and also what his life meant for their readers and themselves (p. 5). They were not specifically looking to write a biography, history, novel or theological treatise; they were looking to tell the story of Jesus and what it means for the world by using biographical, historical, narrative and theological features. This fact is rightly noted by Stanton, and it is certainly one of the strengths of this book.
Stanton takes the Gospel of Thomas seriously and does not pass over it as a waste of time, which is a strong point of the book. Many scholars have thought highly of this gospel, so it is necessary for Stanton to take it seriously if he is to gain good repute on a wide scale. He notes that the Gospel of Thomas comes from a considerably later date than that of the four gospels of the New Testament, and it sounds quite different from them as well. He determines that this document does not provide what its positive critics claim--a new royal path back to the historical Jesus--but he takes this document seriously and critically analyzes the text and submits that five of its sayings (or logia, to be precise) might actually be authentic, meaning that they might come from the mouth of the historical Jesus (p. 129). Stanton’s ability to critically examine the Gospel of Thomas and take it seriously is certainly one of the strengths of this book.
Stanton’s treatment of parables and aphorisms is a strength of the book. He rightly states that parables must interpret the student’s understanding and the student’s understanding must not interpret the parables. What Stanton means is that the parables have to be understood in the context of the First Century A.D. We should not import our own understanding into the parables, but allow the parables to speak to us and shape and mold our understanding (p. 227). This point is a particularly good one and is certainly a strength of the book as it stands as a good hermeneutic not only for studying parables but the Bible as a whole.
Stanton’s book, The Gospels and Jesus, is a great book as it enables New Testament students to gain a good grasp of Jesus in the gospels. Stanton’s book stands out for its good perception on parables, for its fair critique and serious treatment of the Gospel of Thomas, and its right understanding of the dual-perception of the evangelists through which we must understand the gospels. Any student of the New Testament must certainly read and come to terms with the content of this book as it is generally filled with helpful, delightful and invaluable information regarding Jesus and the gospels.
Monday, September 3, 2007
Currently Reading: The Gospels and Jesus
I am currently reading Stanton's The Gospels and Jesus in an effort to get ahead of the game for my New Testament class that will be starting in a few weeks. I have to read this book and give a critique of it later. It is my hope that I will finish this book by the end of the next weekend and then write the critique early next week and have it completed. When I complete the critique I will post it up on here.
Friday, August 3, 2007
Currently Reading
New Religions and the Theological Imagination in America is quite the good and informative book. I have enjoyed reading it and am nearly done with it. It is looking at, although it is not really critiquing, Mormonism, Unificationism, Christian Science, Scientology, Theosophy and New Age religions. If you are looking to learn more about these religions in a way that doesn't point out their every fault but actually teaches how they perceive the world, this book will serve you well.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Currently Reading
I am nearly finished with this book for my Christian Worldview philosophy class for Fuller. It is old with the majority of the essays written in it coming from around the 1920s. The arguments for God are looked upon as a joke and the author's treatment of Jesus according to the Gospels is quite misleading. This book is good to show that one cannot prove nor disprove God exists; however, it is rather annoying that it makes firm statements about Jesus on the basis of poor exegesis. (The author, Bertrand Russell, is not a theologian, but a philosopher, and as such it is not expected that he should have anything but poor exegesis, although he should be well informed.) If you want to know what the arguments for and against Christianity were like back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, buy this book. It very well may be helpful for understanding today's arguments for and against Christianity, since this book was apparently very influential not only in its time but also in forming today's arguments too according to Dr. Richard Mouw, the professor of my philosophy class.
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
Currently Reading
I have not made much progress on this book as I have only began to read it for about one hour. However, it seems to be pregnant with information--with theology that is much overlooked in standard commentaries. The focus of this book is to bring out the theology of Hebrews, which is often neglected by most people who write about this letter. It is only about 130 pages, so why not give it a shot?
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Currently Reading
I am currently reading Encountering the Book of Hebrews for the Hebrews class I start tomorrow as a two-week intensive course. I am about half-way done with this book, and although it is somewhat entry level or for the student without a knowledge of Greek, it is quite helpful and insightful. If you would like to study Hebrews in a step beyond what study Bibles or Matthew Henry has to say about the letter, purchase Donald Hagner's commentary.
The Problem of God
This book, The Problem of God, written by John Murray, a Catholic, gives a good historical account of the problem of God throughout history. It recognizes that the problem of God is everybody's problem--if God doesn't exist, then no person has the right to say that he does, but if he does exist, no person has the right to say that he doesn't. This book looks at the way the Bible reveals this problem and how humans through history have dealt with and attempted to solve this problem, i.e., it is historical-descriptive. The Problem of God is lucid and suitable for anyone wanting to engage the problem of God through the lens of history.
Friday, September 22, 2006
First Impressions of a Highly Acclaimed Book
The Five Books of Miriam, by Ellen Frankel, seems to be a highly acclaimed book as a commentary on the Torah--the Book of Moses; the Pentateuch; Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Here are my first impressions as I have begun reading this book for my Pentateuch class at Fuller Theological Seminary Sacramento.
I think that this book has some good points. However, it is not documented! No sources are shown! Therefore, this is not a real commentary or at least it is not a scholarly commentary, but nothing more than the author's thoughts and opinions about the text. Clearly the author's presuppositions dominate the way she reads and interprets the text, and especially the way she reads between the lines.
Overall, I think I am not going to like this book so much in terms of its "scholarliness." However, it will most certainly envoke controversy within me, and therefore get me to think quite a bit about the Torah; and for that I can be greatful that I am reading this book.
I think that this book has some good points. However, it is not documented! No sources are shown! Therefore, this is not a real commentary or at least it is not a scholarly commentary, but nothing more than the author's thoughts and opinions about the text. Clearly the author's presuppositions dominate the way she reads and interprets the text, and especially the way she reads between the lines.
Overall, I think I am not going to like this book so much in terms of its "scholarliness." However, it will most certainly envoke controversy within me, and therefore get me to think quite a bit about the Torah; and for that I can be greatful that I am reading this book.
Friday, June 23, 2006
The Case for Christ: A Review
Lee Strobel's best-seller book, The Case for Christ: a journalist's personal investigation of the evidence for Jesus, is admittedly one of the best books that I have ever read. Strobel uses his law background to put Jesus on trial. One must understand that Strobel used to be an atheist, but when his wife became a Christian, he decided that he would take a closer look at Christianity, mainly Christ. However, he decided to do it in a logical and courtroom systematic way. He applied several tests to his investigation about Jesus, the central figure of the religion, which are applied in the courts to determine validity of arguments, statements, evidence, and witnesses. Moreover, he interviews a dozen top-notch scholars who help give him the evidence that he used in his investigation, which are as follows:
- Eyewitness Evidence
- Documentary Evidence
- Corroborating Evidence
- Scientific Evidence
- Rebuttal Evidence
- Identity Evidence
- Psychological Evidence
- Profile Evidence
- Fingerprint Evidence
- Medical Evidence
- Circumstantial Evidence
Throughout his investigation, Lee remained a skeptical atheist. It was not until afterwards that he sat down as an unbiased juror and came to a conclusion beyond reasonable--not conceivable--doubt. He found that he had more evidence in support of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, and for his deity than some in court had, but were sent to death row! In other words, the evidence is very powerful, being both sound and valid, able to stand up to questions, tests, and cross-examinations, so powerful that it lead Strobel to become a Christian. As a result, Strobel's entire life changed for the better, so much so that his own daughter told her mother that she wanted God to do the same thing to her that he did to her dad (p. 269). Thus, one more piece of evidence comes to play: experiential evidence. Strobel's life stood in the foreground as proof of the work of Jesus, which confirmed the facts of the aforementioned objective evidences. Let's briefly take a look at these.
Eyewitness Evidence (p. 259)
- The gospels are superb witnesses and are to be considered reliable and trustworthy.
- The gospels are not the product of spiritual propaganda and legend.
- The gospels stand up to scrutiny, passing the eight evidential tests for determining the validity of eyewitness evidence with flying colors.
Documentary Evidence (p. 260)
- The New Testament is unparalleled in its being preserved throughout time.
- The New Testament today is 99.5% free of textual discrepancies, and none of the discrepancies that exist bring any major Christian doctrine into doubt.
- The New Testament that we have today is very much the same documents that were written in the first century.
Corroborating Evidence (p. 260)
- There is a good deal of credible evidence for Jesus outside of the gospels.
- Outside biblical sources we find mention of Jesus as a worker of miracles and as the Christ who was crucified, and even though he died a most grotesque death, his disciples, believing that he was still alive, worshiped him as God.
- One scholar was able to document "thirty-nine ancient sources that corroborate more than one hundred facts concerning Jesus' life, teachings, crucifixion, and resurrection."
Scientific Evidence (pp. 260-61)
- Archaeology confirms the New Testament's credibility rather than debunk it.
- No archaeological discovery has ever disproved a biblical reference.
Rebuttal Evidence (p. 261)
- The Jesus Seminar studies Jesus with huge presuppositions, such as the impossibility of miracles, it utilized questionable criteria for its methodological approach to studying the gospels, and some of the members of the Seminar have tried to sell mythologized "documents of extremely dubious quality."
- We can confidently claim that "the Jesus of faith is the same as the Jesus of history."
Identity Evidence (p. 261)
- Jesus did believe and know that he was the Son of God.
- Jesus did believe and know that he was the Son of Man.
- Jesus did believe and know that he was the Christ, the Messiah.
- Jesus did believe and know that he was the only Savior of the world.
Psychological Evidence (pp. 261-62)
- Jesus was not crazy or mentally ill.
- Jesus backed up his claim to deity by performing miracles, demonstrating power over nature, unparalleled teaching, and also "with his own resurrection, which was the final authentication of his identity."
Profile Evidence (p. 262)
- Jesus fulfilled the attributes of God: omniscience; omnipresence; omnipotence; eternality; and immutability.
- The New Testament is clear "that Jesus ultimately possessed every qualification of deity."
Fingerprint Evidence (p. 262)
- The odds of Jesus fulfilling the Old Testament prophecies were one in a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion.
- Jesus is the only one who fulfilled the prophecies written several centuries before he was born.
Medical Evidence (pp. 262-63)
- Jesus did not survive the crucifixion, and he died on the cross.
- Jesus did not faint and merely wake up earlier while in the tomb.
- Roman executioners were extremely efficient killers, because they would face death if their victims ever came off the cross alive, so it is highly improbable for Jesus to come down the cross alive.
Circumstantial Evidence (p. 263-64)
- Jesus' "disciples were in a unique position to know whether the Resurrection happened, and they went to their deaths proclaiming it was true. Nobody knowingly and willingly dies for a lie."
- Aside from the Resurrection, "there's no good reason why skeptics like Paul and James would have been converted and would have died for their faith."
- After a matter of weeks after the Crucifixion, "thousands of Jews began abandoning key social practices that had critical sociological and religious importance for centuries. They believed they risked damnation if they were wrong."
- Both Communion and baptism affirm Jesus' resurrection and deity.
- The emergence of the Church in the face of brutal Roman opposition and persecution demands an explanation that only the Resurrection can provide.
Now that we have looked at the basic facts of the evidence, let's look at their implications.
Strobel wrote the following on pages 266 and 67:
- If Jesus is the Son of God, his teachings are more than just good ideas from a wise teacher; they are divine insights on which I can confidently build my life.
- If Jesus sets the standard for morality, I can now have an unwavering foundation for my choices and decisions, rather than basing them on the ever-shifting sands of expediency and self-centeredness.
- If Jesus did rise from the dead, he's still alive today and available for me to encounter on a personal basis.
- If Jesus conquered death, he can open the door of eternal life for me, too.
- If Jesus has divine power, he has the supernatural ability to guide me and help me and transform me as I follow him.
- If Jesus personally knows the pain of loss and suffering, he can comfort and encourage me in the midst of the turbulence that he himself warned is inevitable in a world corrupted by sin.
- If Jesus loves me as he says, he has my best interests at heart. That means I have nothing to lose and everything to gain by committing myself to him and his purposes.
- If Jesus is who he claims to be (and remember, no leader of any other major religion has even pretended to be God), as my Creator he rightfully deserves my allegiance, obedience, and worship.
To that I must say, "Amen."
Strobel, Lee. 1998. The Case for Christ: a journalist's personal investigation of the evidence for Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Strobel, Lee. 1998. The Case for Christ: a journalist's personal investigation of the evidence for Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Comic Books and Christianity
H. Michael Brewer wrote a superb book relating Christian theology to comic books entitled, Who Needs a Superhero? Finding Virtue, Vice, and What's Holy in the Comics. This book is fantastic in my opinion. If you are a fan of comic books and would like to learn about Christianity, or if you would like to see Christianity from a fun and fresh perspective, then I would recommend that you buy this book and read it as it has a lot to offer.
I would like to give you a heads up by sharing some of my notes that I took on each chapter. I have summed up each chapter in a sentence, and so I will share that with you.
- Chapter 1: Superman as Jesus Christ
- Chapter 2: The Hulk as sin
- Chapter 3: Batman as the rich young ruler and as Paul who was formerly Saul
- Chapter 4: Iron Man as David
- Chapter 5: Superman as Jesus Christ revisited
- Chapter 6: Wonder Woman as Truth
- Chapter 7: Thor as sanctification
- Chapter 8: Spider-Man as servant hood
- Chapter 9: Daredevil as spiritual alertness
- Chapter 10: The X-Men as the Church in relation to the world
- Chapter 11: The Fantastic Four as the Church in relation to itself
- Chapter 12: The Punisher versus Green Arrow as prevailing views about God in pop-culture
- Chapter 13: Captain America as protection in suffering
- Chapter 14: The Spirit as Christian discipleship and as Christ’s death/resurrection
This book helps people to understand Christian ideas and principles by using comic book characters as analogies for them. Brewer uses these caped crusaders as good examples for important truths about Christianity and about life. Who knew that comic book characters could be used to help all people learn about what God is like, or about what the gospel is all about, or what truth is, or what the purpose of the Church is? This book helps to demonstrate answers to these questions by going through several fictional comic book examples and then drawing the bridge into reality where these theological principles exist. By going through the history of many of the popular comic book characters and revealing what their stories are and what they are all about, Brewer connects with his readers in an engaging way and brings home the fundamental truths about Christianity with a pow.
My challenge to you, if you do not read the book, is to review my synopsis of the book in the list aforementioned and try to figure out how the superheroes might relate to Christianity. How could Superman be used to talk about Jesus Christ? How could Thor be used to explain sanctification? Why would the Hulk be used to teach about sin? See if you can come up with the analogies yourself; otherwise, if it intrigues you enough, buy the book and see it for yourself! It will be well worth your time, a fun read, and a growing experience.
Monday, March 20, 2006
Song of Solomon: God's guide to love, sex, and relationships
Honestly, until this last weekend, the Old Testament book of Song of Solomon was unfamiliar territory for me. Although I am still no expert on the book, I now have a better grasp of the text after having gone through a commentary on it, called, Solomon on Sex, by Joseph C. Dillow. This book goes through each verse of Song of Solomon and explains the poetic imagery involved, unveiling the meanings behind the highly figurative language, but then applying the text in a meaningful and practical way for both men and women, whether married or in the beginning stages of a relationship.
Song of Solomon is God's perspective on love, sex, and relationships through the poetic wisdom of Solomon. This commentary helps to unpack all that there is to this guide on healthy marriages, thus making this highly neglected portion of Scripture immensely invaluable to all who are involved with another person. This book shows the beauty of marriage and sex within its proper place, as is to be expected, but it also shows that there are problems within marriage, yet there are ways to overcome them. Dealing with love, sex, problems, and solutions, whether it be while dating, engaged, or married, Song of Solomon has everything necessary for all couples.
Truthfully, this book is far better than the marriage counseling workbook I recently went through. It has far more value to me because it is straight-talk from the Bible, but very practical. The commentary helps to not only break down the text verse by verse, but also shows the literary development, works through translation difficulties, and brings it all home in a practical fashion so that it becomes relevant to the modern-day reader. This book was quite humorous as well, thus drawing me in all the more, and it was quite entertaining and fulfilling to read. It was more practical than that workbook, far less time-consuming, and way more informative.
I would suggest this book for any couple thinking about getting engaged or getting married. I would even suggest that this book be used as the main text for a marriage counseling book. It talks about everything from working out problems and "the little things" before marriage, how to cope with change afterwards, sex-tips for the wedding night, and practical solutions to sexual dysfunction, and all of which stem from the Bible itself. Essentially, this book suggests that the Bible--Song of Solomon--is really the only book on love, sex, and relationships (marriage) that you will ever need. Other workbooks, textbooks, and articles are not going to be of the same caliber as Song of Solomon, and this books does a good job of showing why, after all, God inspired it!
If you want to know God's perspective on love, sex, and relationships, then check out Song of Solomon. If you want to come to terms with what's inside of the text, words, and imagery in Song of Solomon, then check out Solomon on Sex. It will help walk you through God's guide to love, sex, and relationships.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
