John Granger Cook, «1 Cor 9,5: The Women of the Apostles», Vol. 89 (2008) 352-368
The women of the apostles in 1 Cor 9,5 have posed a riddle in the history of interpretation. With few exceptions commentators over the last one hundred years have identified them as wives and dismissed the text in a few lines. Recent research on the role of women in early Christian mission has brought a fresh assessment, concluding that the women were missionary assistants to the apostles. This essay develops an extended argument to solidify the thesis using the history of interpretation, the nature of missionary partnerships in the Pauline epistles, semantics, some important parallels from the Greco-Roman world, and the nature of ancient households.
1 Cor 9,5: The Women of the Apostles 361
equivalent of “sister†in 9,5 (43). In addition, the “sister-wife/womanâ€
was “not necessarily the conjugal mate of one’s pre-conversion lifeâ€
according to Margaret MacDonald (44). She notes that one cannot be
certain about the relationship since gunhv can mean “woman†and not
“wife†(45).
In the case of 1 Cor 1,1 Sosthenes is “the brotherâ€. Timothy is “the
brother†in 2 Cor 1,1 and Phlm 1,1. It is clear that Timothy was a fellow
worker with Paul (Rom 16,21 oJ sunergov" — to take only one
example). Presumably Sosthenes was also. These brothers are
“assistants in missionâ€. The more difficult question is: Can the word
itself bear that meaning? It is undisputed that it can mean fellow
Christians (as in Rom 1,13 etc.) (46). In the cases mentioned above it
could have the sense “brother†(as a sort of title), but may refer to an
individual who is a missionary assistant (47). Only the larger context
makes the reference certain.
The use of “sister†in Rom 16,1 is of equal importance. The context
indicates that she is a “diakonos†(diavkonon) of the church in Cenchrae
and helper or benefactor of Paul (Rom 16,2 prostavti"). Since Paul is
willing to use the same word (diakonos) for himself (1 Cor 3,5; 2 Cor
3,6; 6,4; 11,23) and even for Christ (Rom 15,8), it seems unnecessary
to restrict Phoebe’s role to “material support†of the church in
Cenchrae. Again it is the context that shows that the reference of
“sister†in Phoebe’s case is to a missionary assistant of Paul.
MacDonald notes that Phoebe (Rom 16,1-2) was clearly a benefactor
of Paul himself, and that the title “sister†in her case is the same as that
used for missionary partners in 1 Cor 9,5 (48). On the other hand, the use
of “sister†in Phlm 2 for Apphia may be “sister as fellow Christianâ€.
(43) D’ANGELO, “Women Partnersâ€, 74, 79.
(44) MACDONALD, “Was Celsus Right?â€, 163.
(45) M.Y. MACDONALD, “Reading Real Women through the Undisputed
Letters of Paulâ€, Women & Christian Origins (eds. R.S. KRAEMER and M.R.
D’ANGELO) (New York – Oxford 1999) 199-220, esp. 202.
(46) BAGD s.v. § 2.
(47) See BALDINGER, Semantic Theory, 3-7, 246 for the distinction between
sense and reference (using similar terminology). The classic example is: “evening
star†and “morning star†have different senses but the same reference. In 1 Thess
3,2 (“brotherâ€) Timothy is “our fellow worker in the gospel of Christâ€.
(48) MACDONALD, “Was Celsus Right?â€, 166. She compares the usage to
“brother†for Paul’s partner Timothy in 2 Cor 1,1; Phlm 1, and 1 Thess 3,2. See
also her discussion of “sister†for a missionary partner in “Readingâ€, 206 (and the
partnership in Rom 16,15).