A Biblical View of Women in the Ministry Part 4: The Ministry of Women in the Apostolic and Postapostolic Periods

By H. Wayne House

[Assistant Professor of Systematic Theology, Dallas Theological Seminary]

The Role of Women in Paul’s Ministry

The attitude of Paul toward women was notedly different from that of others trained in rabbinic traditions, both in the social and religious realm. Socially Paul recognized the intrinsic worth of woman as equal to that of man. Arriving in Philippi and finding no synagogue there, he quite comfortably preached to a crowd of women (Acts 16:13). Lydia’s invitation for him to stay at her house was accepted by the apostle apparently without the slightest qualm (v. 15). Whereas in rabbinic usage a woman was mentioned only as the wife of a given man, Paul in Romans greeted women by name. Furthermore, Paul called Phoebe, who delivered the Epistle to the Romans, a sister (Rom 16:1).

In proclaiming the gospel and giving biblical admonitions, the apostle made no distinctions between men and women. The first gospel appeal in Europe, as stated, was made to the women by the river at Philippi. In his epistles he directed his teachings to both men and women, as in 1 Timothy 3:11, where he referred to the work and character of deacons and deaconesses (or the wives of the deacons). Men and women alike were urged to be sober, patient, and holy (Titus 2:2–3). Men and women were equally condemned for their wickedness (Rom 1:26–32). And he wrote that husbands and wives have reciprocal conjugal rights in marriage (1 Cor 7:1–5), which was not the normal perspective in Paul’s day.[1]

Women are portrayed as being of considerable value to Paul in his ministry, supporting him and laboring with him. At Thessalonica many leading women in the city were attracted to Paul’s teaching (Acts 17:4), and if Holzner is correct, they became the chief support of the church founded there by Paul and Silas.[2] The same may have been the case at Berea (v. 12). In addition to the financial work of high-born Greek women, there is the clear statement in Philippians 4:2–3 that two women were colaborers with Paul in the work of the gospel, though their specific work is unknown. Phoebe is specially commended for her work in the ministry (Rom 16:1–2). Priscilla, along with her husband, is seen as a fellow worker with the apostle (v. 3). Also, women were commended for their Christian service even though not specifically with Paul (vv. 6, 12–13, 15).

The Position of Deaconess

The office or ministry of deaconess clearly existed in the postapostolic age, as will be demonstrated shortly, but it is poorly attested in the New Testament.[3] Only two passages might suggest the office of deaconess, but both are obscure. The word διάκονος occurs only once in reference to a woman (Phoebe, Rom 16:1). It certainly is intended as a title of respect and commendation, says Leonard, and may have been used “because she distributed relief to the sick and the poor as he and Barnabas had done when they, as deacons, distributed the relief money to the famine sufferers in Jerusalem (Acts 11:29; 12:25).”[4] Should one, however, understand something more? Scanzoni and Hardesty argue that one should take the word διάκονος and the word προστάτις to indicate that Phoebe had the office of deacon (Rom 16:1–2). Though Phoebe’s title διάκονος might simply indicate a servant, the term προστάτις (“helper”) refers, Scanzoni and Hardesty believe, to one who presides or rules over another.[5] They are inaccurate on two accounts. First, this is a misunderstanding of the office of deacon in the New Testament. In the New Testament deacons were not in a position of rule as were elders.

Though the word for “servant” is the same as is used for deacon…it is also used to denote the person performing any type of ministry. If Phoebe ministered to the saints, as is evident from verse 2, then she would be a servant of the church and there is neither need nor warrant to suppose that she occupied or exercised what amounted to an ecclesiastical office comparable to that of the diaconate. The services performed were similar to those devolving upon deacons. Their ministry is one of mercy to the poor, the sick, and the desolate. This is an area in which women likewise exercise their functions and graces. But there is no more warrant to posit an office than in the case of widows, who prior to their becoming the care of the church, must have borne the features mentioned in 1 Timothy 5:9, 10.[6]

Second, the feminine word προστάτις, related to the masculine προστάτης, “a guardian or defender,” is not used of Phoebe as one who rules. In Jewish literature the masculine word took on the meaning of the feminine, which meant patroness or helper.[7] Moulton and Milligan find no instance of προστάτις in the papyri but list προστάτης as meaning leader, or chief man.[8] The idea of leader or patroness, however, for the προστάτις in Romans 16:1 is foreign to the context. The meaning of one who presides or is leader simply will not fit. Murray elucidates this:

It is true that the masculine προστάτης can mean “ruler,” “leader,” “president” and corresponding verbs προστατεύω and προστατέω have similar meaning. But προστάτης can also mean “patron” or “helper.” The feminine προστάτις can have the same meaning. Besides, the meaning “president” does not suit in the clause in question. Paul says that Phoebe “became a προστάτις of many and of me myself.” Are we to suppose that she exercised rule over the apostle? What she was to the others she was to the apostle. The rendering that Prohl adopts “She was made a superintendent of many by me myself” is wholly unwarranted. Furthermore, the believers at Rome are enjoined to “stand by” or “help” Phoebe (παραστῆτε αὐτῇ) and the last clause in verse 2 is given as a reason to enforce this exhortation. “She herself was a helper of many and of me myself.” There is exact correspondence between the service to Phoebe enjoined upon the church and the service she herself bestowed upon others. The thought of presidency is alien to this parallel.[9]

The passage in 1 Timothy 3:11 is more problematic. The Staggs think the reference to the γυναῖκας is to wives of deacons, because women are not permitted by Paul to teach or have authority over men.[10] On the other hand Brown says that deaconesses is the more likely meaning, since γυναῖκας occurs in the discussion of the qualities desired for a deacon, the word διάκονος occurring before and after verse 11.[11] Since the deaconesses do not necessarily need to exercise authority over men in the congregation, the Staggs’ argument loses much of its force. Others say the question cannot be settled with certainty.[12]

Though the passage is not perfectly clear, Alford gives several good reasons for rejecting the view that it refers to wives of deacons and for favoring the view that it refers to the office of deaconess. Since there is no direct reference to the deacons, such as might be seen by αὐτῶν or τάς, Alford says that one should not understand wives but deaconesses. The use of the expression ὡσαύτως (v. 11), the same word by which the deacons were introduced in verse 8, before the mention of these women, suggests a new ecclesiastical class. In verse 12 the wives of the deacons are mentioned (ἔστωσαν μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρες) as a new subject, which would hardly happen if their wives were mentioned before. Alford also believes that the mention of Phoebe as a deaconess in Romans 16:1 adds weight to his argument,[13] though this writer disagrees.

The office of deaconess is not certain in the New Testament church, but the preponderance of evidence suggests that women had this ministry, for it is certainly seen in the postapostolic period.

The Ministerial Role of Women in the Second and Third Centuries

In the second and third centuries of the Christian era an ecclesiastical structure developed that differed from that established by the apostles of the first century. Changes were not at the same rate throughout the empire in which the Christian movement was making its presence known, nor were the Fathers of the church in unanimity about church polity and doctrine. The role of women in the ministry of the church became a practical concern, though it did not rate the attention given to Christological controversies nor to the apologetical demands of the time. Nevertheless several documents produced in this 200-year period and the writings of several Fathers of the church do include information that gives insight on attitudes toward the role of women in the church.[14]

General Attitude toward Women

In the early years of the church the Christian faith attracted many women, so much so that the critics of Christianity satirically claimed that it was “a religion of widows and wives.”[15] The high estate to which Christianity generally brought women in the ancient Mediterranean world brought criticism. Tatian (A.D. 110-172), second-century apologist, in a special treatise to the Greeks in defense of Christianity, referred to the statues the Greeks raised to women who, almost without exception, were morally corrupt. He wrote, “And I was willing to speak of these women in order that it might not be regarded by you as strange when considering what we practice and comparing the statues you see with your eyes, you might not mock the women who pursue philosophy among us.”[16]

Similarly Clement of Alexandria (153–217) wrote of women positively in a clause reminiscent of Galatians 3:28: “For the one whose life is like ours is, may philosophize without learning, whether barbarian, whether Greek, whether slave—whether an old man, or a boy, or a woman.”[17] He revealed the same view of women evidenced in Galatians 3:28 and Genesis 1:27.

The woman does not have one human nature, and the man manifest another, but the same: so also with virtue. If, then, a self-restraint and righteousness, and whatever qualities are considered as following them, is the virtue only of the male, it does belong to the male alone to be virtuous, and to the woman to be licentious and unrighteous. But it is offensive even to say this.[18]

Likewise concerning the learning of male and female and with identification of both as equally man, Clement is liberal:

For the virtue of man and woman is the same….”For in this world,” he [Jesus] says, “they marry, and are given in marriage,” in which alone the female is distinguished from the male; “but in that world it is so no more.” There the rewards of this social and holy life, which is based on conjugal union, are laid up, not for male and female, but for man, the sexual desire which divides humanity being removed. Common therefore, too, to men and women, is the name of man.[19]

Tatian and Clement spoke in reasonably favorable terms about women, but others among the Fathers, in their opposition to women occupying offices in the church, became guilty at times of making statements that were biblically unsupportable. For example Epiphanius said that women were easily seduced and lacked wisdom.[20]

The author of the Pseudo-Clementine “Homilies” (200–250) also presents a low view of women: “And what need is there to say more? The male is wholly truth, the female wholly falsehood. But he who is born of the male and female, in some things speaks truth, in some falsehood. For the female…leads the greater part into fornication, and thus deprives them [male and female] of the coming excellent Bridegroom.”[21]

Tertullian (145–220) had some of the harshest words against women. At one place he accused all women of being the epitome of Eve:

And do you not know that you are (each) an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the devil’s gateway: you are the unsealer of that (forbidden) tree: you are the first deserter of the divine law: you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God’s image, man. On account of your desert—that is, death—even the Son of God had to die.[22]

Prohibitions against Leadership for Women

There was considerable unanimity among the Fathers, except for the heterodox, on the position of women in the church. Different church leaders at various locations and times allowed for service roles for women but not the right of women to teach and exercise authority over men. In harmony with the Fathers are the various “church orders,” a genre of literature begun in the Pastoral Epistles of the first century.[23]

Tertullian, even after he became a Montanist, often spoke against the participation of women in worship services. In De Anima he wrote of a young girl who had a vision but who waited until after the service to tell him about it.24 Moreover, he wrote, referring to the teachings of Paul,

when prescribing on women silence in the church, that they speak not for the mere purpose of learning [teaching, discendi] (though he [Paul] has already shown that even they have the right to prophesy, when he insists that the woman who prophesies must be covered with a veil), it is from the law that he draws his sanction that woman should be under obedience.[25]

References to Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy are not restricted to Tertullian.[26] Origen, as well, relies on the words of the Apostle Paul in his instructions to women: “He does not allow women to teach or lord it over man. He does desire women to be adept at teaching, so as to urge chastity upon young women, not upon young men. It is indeed unbecoming for a woman to be a teacher of men. But women should urge young women to be chaste and to love their husbands and children.”[27]

Some Greek fragments of the Didascalia Apostolorum reflect the same perspective as the previous Fathers and writings:

[It is] not, [then, right] either that women be teachers, [especial]ly touching the name of the Lord and [His redemp]tive passion. For ye have not been appointed, O women, [in order] to teach, and [especial]ly widows, [but only to importune] God. [For the Teacher Himself when] He sent us [the twelve] to disciple the Peo[ple and] the Gentiles, having along with [us chosen out] also [female] dis[ciples]—Mary [Magdal]ene and M[ary of] James and Salo[me]—He did not send them forth with [us] to disciple or save the world. [For if it were] needful that women should [teach], our Teacher [Himself] would have bidden these along with us to teach.[28]

One may readily see from these few examples that in the orthodox community—in the West, and in Egypt and Syria—women were not given opportunity to occupy positions of leadership in the church. Certainly the case was different with heterodox groups.

The Feminine Role in Heterodox Sects

Many of the heretical sects in the early church honored women similar to the way priestesses and vestal virgins were honored by the Greeks and Romans. Nearly every founder of a sect had a woman to assist him (e.g., Simon Magnus had Helene, Montanus had Maximilla).[29] One sect of special note is a Montanist sect known as the Quintiliani, the Pepuziani, or the Priscilliani. The adherents of this sect gave special recognition to Eve for eating first of the tree of knowledge, and they lauded Miriam and the daughters of Philip who publicly expressed the right of women to prophesy. This sect allowed women to hold the offices of bishops, elders, and deacons, appealing to Paul’s word in Galatians 3:28 for support. It was perhaps because of this group Tertullian spoke with such zeal against women.[30]

A chief characteristic of Montanism was prophecy. Prophecy was practiced in the Christian church at the turn of the first century, as witnessed in the Didache (“Let the prophets give thanks as they will”[31] ), but it began to fall away and to be held in disrepute. Such persons as Montanus, no doubt, moved it toward that end. Montanus himself claimed to be the Paraclete of God. Those women with him also claimed to speak forth prophecies:

Next to Montanus, yea, soon above him, stood the two prophetesses Prisca and Maximilla. Eusebius makes report of a Montanistic prophetess named Ammia, and Epiphanius mentions a Quintilla. Firmilian knows of a Montanistic prophetess in Asia Minor who was a cleric, who baptized and who administered the Eucharist. Also Didymus reports that women taught and prophesied in the congregational assemblies of the Montanists.[32]

When commenting on the question of women teaching in his interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14:34–35, Origen at length attacked the Montanist prophetesses:

Although all speak and are allowed to speak when they are granted a revelation, “the women,” he says, “should keep silence in the churches.” They in no way fulfill this command, those disciples of women, who chose as their master Priscilla and Maximilla, not Christ, the Spouse of the Bride. But, let us be good-natured players, and cope with the arguments which they judge convincing. The Evangelist Philip, they say, had four daughters, and all prophesied. If they prophesied, what is strange, they ask, if our own prophetesses—as they are called—also prophesy? Let us then resolve this difficulty. First, since you say: “Our women prophesied,” show in them the signs of prophesy [sic]. Second, if the daughters of Philip prophesied, at least they did not speak in the assemblies; for we do not find this fact in the Acts of the Apostles. Much less in the Old Testament. It is said that Deborah was a prophetess. Mary, the sister of Aaron, tambourine in hand, led the choir of women. There is no evidence that Deborah delivered speeches to the people, as did Jeremias and Isaias. Hulda, who was a prophetess, did not speak to the people, but only to a man, who consulted her at home. The Gospel itself mentions a prophetess, Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser; but she did not speak publicly. Even if it is granted to a woman to prophesy and show the sign of prophecy, she is nevertheless not permitted to speak in an assembly. When Mary, the prophetess, spoke, she was leading a choir of women. For: “It is improper for a woman to raise her voice at meetings,” and: “I am not giving permission for a woman to teach” and even less “to tell a man what to do.” Although those given above say more categorically that a woman does not have the right by her word to guide a man, I shall further prove this position from another text. “Bid the old women to behave themselves as befits holy women, teaching what is good, in order to form young women in wisdom,” and not simply “Let them teach.” Certainly, women should also “teach what is good,” but men should not sit and listen to a woman, as if there were no man capable of communicating the word of God. “If they have any question to ask, they should ask their husbands at home: it does not seem right for a woman to raise her voice at meetings.”[33]

Montanism’s emphasis in its early period on the eschatological and the charismatic led to indifference toward distinctions established in action. In later Eastern Montanism the eschatological emphasis waned, and though the sect maintained charismatic and rigorous moral instruction, in the area of prophesying and the question of women it fell more in line with the church in general.[34]

Another major sect of the second and third centuries was Gnosticism, in which the role of women was especially important as seen in Gnostic literature. Women such as Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, Martha, Salome, and others received prominent attention.[35] The Nicolaitans read a work supposedly written by Noria, the assumed wife of Noah. The Naassenes said they received their doctrines from a certain Marianne, who they said received them from James, the brother of the Lord. The Acts of Philip presents Marianne as the sister of James working closely with him. Moreover The Acts of Paul associates Thecla with the work of Paul and names many other prophetesses, including Theonoe, Stratonica, Eubulla, Artemilla, Nympha, and Phila.[36]

Acts of Paul and Thecla (part of a larger corpus The Acts of Paul) tells of Thecla, a young girl from Iconium, who had been converted by the Apostle Paul, broke her engagement, and joined Paul in missionary work. Eventually Paul sent her back home to teach the Word of God. The extant text does not indicate that she baptized others, though she did baptize herself in the amphitheater by throwing herself into a ditch full of water,[37] but Tertullian referred to an earlier form of the text where Thecla taught and baptized.[38]

The position occupied by Thecla was not unusual in Gnosticism. Gryson comments on the influence of Gnostic women:

The Gnostics certainly tended to listen to prophetesses, such as Jezabel, probably symbolically named, who according to the Apocalypse, was doing her evil work in the church of Thyatira trying to win the faithful to the Nicolaitan doctrines. Some of the great Gnostic teachers had a prophetess at their side. The literature concerning Simon Magus associated with him a woman named Helena, whom he presented as “the first thought of his mind”; in the same way that Simon himself was worshipped by members of the sect as Jupiter, she was adored as Minerva. According to St. Jerome, Marcion, before going to Rome to try his chance, had sent ahead a woman envoy to prepare the people to receive his errors. Apelles, a former disciple of Marcion, although then on bad terms with him, strongly supported the influence of a prophetess named Philoumene and wrote her revelations. In his Adversus haereses, St. Irenaeus speaks at length of a Gnostic of the Valentinian school, called Marcu, who seduced many women in the region of Lyons.[39]

The tension between the orthodox and heterodox views on the roles of women is evidenced in Pistis Sophia, in which Mary Magdalene, representing women’s activity, is found in a struggle with Peter, representing the orthodox. Pagels describes the scene:

Peter complains that Mary is dominating the conversation with Jesus and displacing the rightful priority of Peter and his brother apostles. He urges Jesus to silence her and is quickly rebuked. Later, however, Mary admits to Jesus that she hardly dares speak to him freely, because, in her words, “Peter makes me hesitate; I am afraid of him, because he hates the female race.” Jesus replies that whoever the Spirit inspires is divinely ordained to speak, whether man or woman.[40]

In the various Gnostic branches women functioned in all positions normally held only by men. The Valentian Marcus trained his feminine followers to be prophetesses and they were even able to speak the prayers at the celebration of the Lord’s supper and to distribute the wine.[41] Tertullian severely rebuked a prophetess of Marcion whom he had allowed to teach. “These heretical women—how audacious they are! They have no modesty; they are bold enough to teach, to engage in argument, to enact exorcisms, to undertake cures, and, it may be, even to baptize.”[42]

The reason for this liberal view of women in the church possibly may be accounted for by the androgynous view the Gnostics had of God. Valentinus perceived of God as Mother and Father. Members of this Gnostic group prayed, “From Thee, Father, and through Thee, Mother, the two immortal names, Parents of the divine being, and thou, dweller in heaven, humanity, of the mighty name.”[43]

Other texts indicate that their authors had wondered to whom a single, masculine God proposed, “Let us make man [adam] in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26). Since the Genesis account goes on to say that humanity was created “male and female” (1:27), some concluded that the God in whose image we are made must also be both masculine and feminine—both Father and Mother.[44]

In Gnosticism the divine Mother was described as the Holy Spirit. The Apocryphon of John states that when John left the scene of Jesus’ crucifixion with “great grief” he had a vision of the Trinity, in which he saw the heavens opened and a light with three forms. John was addressed with these words: “John, Jo[h]n, why do you doubt, and why are you afraid?…I am the one who [is with you (pl.)] for ever. I [am the Father], I am the Mother, I am the Son.”45 Pagels says of this text:

This gnostic description of God—as Father, Mother and Son—may startle us at first, but on reflection, we can recognize it as another version of the Trinity. The Greek terminology for the Trinity, which includes the neuter term for spirit (pneuma) virtually requires that the third “Person” of the Trinity be asexual. But the author of the Secret Book has in mind the Hebrew term for spirit, ruah, a feminine word; and so concludes that the feminine “Person” conjoined with Father and Son must be Mother.[46]

A similar theme is found in the Gospel of Thomas, in which Jesus is said to have contrasted His earthly mother with the true Mother (the Holy Spirit) who gives Him life. “And whoever does [not] love his father and his mother as I do cannot become a [disciple] to Me.

For My mother [gave me falsehood], but [My] true [Mother] gave Me life.”[47]

Viewing God as being androgynous may help explain why the Gnostics allowed women to take leadership roles in ministry; but as Pagels points out, three heretical groups—the Marcionites, the Montanists, and the Carpocratians—viewed God in masculine terms but had women who took positions of leadership.[48] So one’s view of God does not, ipso facto, dictate a certain perspective on feminine roles.

Allowing women in Gnosticism to occupy leadership roles may be related to the Gnostic view of creation. Rejecting God’s order for man and woman as seen in creation was also true of Montanism and is true even of contemporary feminist apologists:

Why is it that especially in Gnosticism the foreground is occupied very much by women and the New Testament directives concerning the “subjection” of woman are obviously ignored? Our examination of New Testament passages revealed that the command which requires women to be in “subjection” and to “keep silence in the churches” is found in creation. This fact, however, is not properly appreciated in Gnosticism. The pronounced dualism in Gnosticism leads in the various gnostic sects either to asceticism or to libertinism, and thus to the dissolution of marriage. The relation of the sexes toward each other, anchored in creation, is leveled in Gnosticism, and this leveling process destroys understanding or appreciation of the Scriptural directive that women be excluded from the public office of teaching in the churches. The relation between creation and redemption was unilaterally dissolved when Gnosticism located the dualism in God Himself and when it declared that the God of creation was the false god of the Jews (Marcion).[49]

The ministry of women as virgins, widows, and deaconesses in the second and third centuries will be discussed in the final article in this series.

Notes

1. Eugenia Leonard, “St. Paul on the Status of Women,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 12 (July 1950): 312. An exception is found in Musonius Rufus, who advocated that girls should receive the same education as boys, and that husbands and wives are to care for each other in sickness (S. H. Cook, F. E. Adcock, M. P. Charlesworth, eds., The Cambridge Ancient History, vol. 2: The Imperial Peace, A.D. 70-192 (Cambridge: University Press, 1936), p. 694.
2. Joseph Holzner, Paul of Tarsus (St. Louis: Herder Book Co., 1945), p. 239.
3. In a letter to Trajan at the beginning of the second century concerning the Christians at Pontus, Pliny wrote, “I have judged it necessary to obtain information by torture from two serving women (ancillae) called by them ‘deaconesses’ (ministrae),” the latter term being probably a translation of διάκονος (Jean Daniélou, The Ministry of Women in the Early Church, trans. Glyn Simon [Leighton Buzzard: Faith Press, 1961], p. 15).
4. Leonard, “St. Paul on the Status of Women,” p. 316.
5. Letha Scanzoni and Nancy Hardesty, All We’re Meant to Be (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1974), p. 62.
6. John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1965), 2:226.
7. Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 726.
8. James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1930), p. 551.
9. Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, 2:227, n. 1.
10. Evelyn and Frank Stagg, Women in the World of Jesus (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1978), p. 202.
11. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, s.v. “Woman,” by Colin Brown, 3:1065.
12. Martin Dibelius and Hans Conzelmann, The Pastoral Epistles, Hermeneia Series (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972), p. 58.
13. Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (reprint, Chicago: Moody Press, 1958), 3:327.
14. Attitudes toward women varied, and since the world was primarily a man’s world the shining personalities of noble women of this era are hidden from view. The exceptions are the women martyrs such as the slave girl Blandina at Lyons and the noble Perpetua with the slave girl Felicitas. There are various references to women occupying positions like virgin, widow, or deaconess in the literature of the church but only in terms of class, not as individuals (Everett Ferguson, Early Christians Speak [Austin, TX: Sweet Publishing Co., 1971], p. 232). Donaldson reacts to this situation rather sarcastically: “Every honour was heaped after death on the women who thus suffered for Christ’s sake, and their ashes and other relics were supposed to exercise a sanctifying and miraculous influence; but during their lives it was their duty to stay home and manage the affairs of their household and not meddle in teaching or any spiritual function” (James Donaldson, Woman: Her Position and Influence in Ancient Greece and Rome, and among the Early Christians [New York: Gordon Press, 1973], p. 157).
15. Fritz Zerbst, The Office of Women in the Church (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1955, p. 82.
16. Tatian To the Greeks 33. 13–15.
17. Clement of Alexandria Stromata 4.8.29-31.
18. Ibid., 4.8.33-38.
19. Clement of Alexandria “Paedagogus” 1.4, The Ante-Nicene Fathers [Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962], 2:211). Elsewhere Clement wrote, “‘Man’ here is a common noun not restricted to male or female. The very name ‘mankind’ is a name common to both men and women” (cited by Zerbst, The Office of Women in the Church, p. 93). Cf. L. Zscharnack, Der Dienst der Frau in den ersten Jahrhunderten der christlichen Kirche (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1902), p. 13.
20. Zerbst, The Office of Women in the Church, p. 93.
21. Pseudo-Clementine Homilies 1.27, trans. Thomas Smith, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 8:243.
22. Tertullian On the Apparel of Women 1.1, trans. S. Thelwall, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 4:14. A balanced view of Tertullian is found in F. F. Church, “Sex and Salvation in Tertullian,” Harvard Theological Review 68 (April 1975): 83-101.
23. Examples of these are the Didache, the Didascalia Apostolorum, the Apostolic Tradition, the Apostolic Church Order, and the late-fourth-century Apostolic Constitutions.
24. Tertullian De Anima 9, trans. Peter Holmes, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 3:188.
25. Tertullian Adversus Marcion 5.8.11, ed. and trans. Ernest Evans, Oxford Early Christian Texts (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972), p. 560.
26. Cf. Daniélou, The Ministry of Women in the Early Church, p. 11.
27. Origen Jes. hom. 6, cited by Zerbst, The Office of Women in the Church, p. 90.
28. J. V. Bartlet, “Fragments of the Didascalia Apostolorum in Greek,” Journal of Theological Studies 18 (July 1917): 307. This fragment corresponds to the later Apostolic Constitutions 3.5.6-6.4. Cf. the a fortiori argument regarding teaching and the priesthood: “But if we have not permitted them [women] to teach, how will any one allow them, contrary to nature, to perform the office of a priest? For this is one of the ignorant practices of the atheism of the Greeks (Gentiles) to appoint priestesses to the female deities” (Apostolic Constitutions 3.100.9, cited by Donaldson, Woman: Her Position and Influence, p. 163). Tertullian expressed a similar sentiment, “It is not permitted to a woman to speak in the church; but neither to teach, nor to baptize, nor to offer, nor to claim to herself any manly office, not to mention the sacerdotal office” (De virginibus velandis 9.2). Also in De Baptismo, he reiterated this theme: “How are we to believe that he [Paul] gave to a female the power to teach and baptize when he did not permit a woman even to learn with over-boldness [constanter]. ‘Let them be silent,’ he says, ‘and at home consult their own husbands’“ (De Baptismo 17.26–29).
29. Donaldson, Woman: Her Position and Influence, p. 165.
30. Ibid.
31. Didache 10.7. This text connects prophecy and thanks.
32. Zerbst, p. 85.
33. Origen Fragments on 1 Corinthians 14, cited by Roger Gryson, The Ministry of Women in the Early Church, trans. Jean Laporte and Mary Louise Hall (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1976), pp. 28-29. Cf. C. H. Turner, “Notes on the Text of Origen’s Commentary on 1 Corinthians,” Journal of Theological Studies 10 (1909): 270-76.
34. Zerbst, The Office of Women in the Church, p. 86.
35. Gryson, The Ministry of Women in the Early Church, p. 15.
36. Ibid.
37. Gryson, The Ministry of Women in the Church, pp. 18-19.
38. Philip Carrington, The Early Christian Church, vol. 2: The Second Christian Century (Cambridge: University Press, 1957), p. 188.
39. Gryson, The Ministry of Women in the Church, pp. 15-16.
40. Elaine Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels (New York: Random House, 1979), p. 65.
41. Zerbst, The Office of Women in the Church, p. 84.
42. Tertullian De Praescr. 41, cited by Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels, p. 60.
43. Hippolytus Ref. 5.6, cited by Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels, p. 49.
44. Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels, pp. 49-50.
45. The Apocryphon of John2.1–2, trans. Frederik Wisse, The Nag Hammadi Library, gen. ed. James Robinson (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1977), p. 99.
46. Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels, pp. 51-52.
47. The Gospel of Thomas 2.49, 35–50, 1, trans. Thomas O. Lambdin, The Nag Hammadi Library, pp. 128-29.
48. Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels, pp. 60-61.
49. Zerbst, The Office of Women in the Church, p. 85.