ON ST. PHOEBE, DEACONESS AT CENCHREAE NEAR CORINTH, AT CENCHREAE NEAR CORINTH,
After the middle of the first century.
HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.
Phoebe, deaconess at Cenchreae near Corinth (St.)
BY J. P.
§ I. The place, the cult, the eulogy; the Saint was not the wife of St. Paul the apostle.
Cenchreae, otherwise Cenchrae, the harbor and town near Corinth, that most celebrated city in the Peloponnese, are mentioned by Strabo bk. 8 p., Cenchrae, harbor and town near Corinth: the Saint's cult: 380 of the Paris edition of the year 1620, in these words: Of the sea-coasts on either side of Corinth the beginnings are, of the one Lechaeum, of the other the village and harbor of Cenchreae, distant from the city seventy stades: which harbor they use for the Asiatic trade; Lechaeum for the Italian. Cellarius in his Notitia Orbis antiqui bk. 2, ch. 13 p. 755 observes that the harbor of Cenchreae is the more famous, and that its Greek name is variously written. In Pomponius Mela de Situ Orbis bk. 2, ch. 3 there is reported the town of Cenchreae, a shrine of Neptune: famous for the games which they call Isthmian. In Theodoret, vol. 3, on chapter 16 of the Epistle to the Romans, Cenchreae is called a certain very large village … of Corinth. In that same place St. Phoebe discharged her ministry in the church and exercised the virtues suited to her office, and therefore I have just now announced her there, even though I do not know whether it was at Cenchreae, or at Corinth, or elsewhere that she passed over to blessed immortality. Of her public veneration, however, there is certain evidence. I shall recall only a few out of the many Martyrologies which mention this Saint. Ado, the first, so far as I know, weaves her thus into the Festivals of the Apostles on this day: The birthday of St. Phoebe, of whom the blessed Apostle writes to the Romans: “I commend to you Phoebe our sister” etc.; of which I shall speak presently. Following Ado, Usuard, the sacred words being omitted, writes this: The birthday of St. Phoebe, of whom the blessed Apostle writes to the Romans. Add our Ms. Florarium. But the Roman Martyrology also announces her, with the place, Corinth, added: The birthday of St. Phoebe, of whom the blessed Apostle Paul makes mention in writing to the Romans. So much for the cult.
[2] She is praised, moreover, by the Apostle in the epistle already named, ch. 16, she is praised by St. Paul the apostle; ℣ 1 & 2, in these words: I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is in the ministry of the church which is at Cenchreae: that you receive her in the Lord worthily of the Saints, and that you assist her in whatever business she may have need of you: for she also has assisted many, and myself as well. Toletus sets out some of the circumstances of this passage, indicating that Phoebe, setting out for the city of Rome on the business of some affair, was commended by Paul to the Romans, and was called by him our sister, that is, a sister in common, because, namely, she was bound by the common bond of faith and Religion: for Christians are brothers and sisters in Christ. Menochius here says sister, that is, in religion, that is to say, a Christian woman. But this name, as Toletus goes on, is a kind of tacit exhortation to accept the commendation: to which perhaps some weight accrued on the part of this holy Woman, if, as is reported, she herself carried the Apostle's letter to Rome: Anselm (or Herveus), says Toletus, says that Phoebe was the letter-carrier of this epistle, though doubtfully, because the matter is not certain. Further, from the few words of the Doctor of the gentiles, in which he touches upon the great praises of this Woman, it is gathered that she was conspicuous for solid faith, for piety toward God, and for the practice of many good works.
[3] whose husband some have made him There have been some who made her the wife of St. Paul; but he never had a wife: Certain more recent writers, says Toletus here, affirm that this Phoebe was the wife of Paul, and they hold that she was called his sister for this reason, that he did not use the right of marriage, but lived celibate. The opinion of these men is improbable, both because its foundation is weak; for she was not called sister on the ground that she was a celibate wife: but because in the Lord all men are called brothers, and women sisters. James 2: “If a brother and sister be naked”. And Matthew 12: “He is my brother and sister”. And also, because none of the ancient expositors interpreted it so. And finally, because it can scarcely be maintained that Paul was a married man: for there are Fathers of the greatest weight opposed to this opinion. Let St. Jerome lead their column, in his Epistle to Eustochium 18, otherwise 22, On the Guarding of virginity, in vol. 4 of the Works edited by Martianay, part 2, column 36, where he writes thus: “Concerning virgins,” says the Apostle, “I have no commandment of the Lord”. Why? Because that he himself should be a virgin was not a matter of command, but of his own will. Nor indeed are those to be listened to who invent that he had a wife, since, discoursing on continence and urging perpetual chastity, he added: “But I wish all to be as myself”. And below: “But I say to the unmarried and to widows: It is good for them if they so remain, even as I”.
[4] that she was not, is proved from the Fathers St. Ambrose in his Commentaries on the first Epistle to the Corinthians, explaining the Apostle's words in chapter 7, ℣ 8, in vol. 2 column 133 of the Benedictine Paris edition, likewise removes marriage very far from him, in these words: He would not say, it is good for the unmarried that they be as I am, unless he were whole in body. Nor would he say: “I wished all men to be as myself”; for if he had had a wife, and said this, he would not have wished them to be virgins. But far be it: for from boyhood he so served God that he had no inclination to this thing; seeing that as a young man he was anticipated by the grace of God. The same was asserted by St. Epiphanius against the Valesians, heresy 38 or 58, where, treating of the three kinds of eunuchs, he puts in the third place those who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. Among these he places the monastic order, which has attained the palm of virginity: Such, he says, as we read Elias was in the old Testament, and thereafter Paul, who said: “But I say to the unmarried, that it is good for them if they remain as I” etc. And from these things it is plain that the judgment of the Fathers cited is so concordant and so perspicuous in this controversy that it does not seem capable of being wrested to another sense. But since the contrary opinion has had its patrons too, let us weigh the reasons that can be brought forward for it.
[5] There was first of all put forward that most ancient and most holy writer St. Ignatius, bishop of Antioch and martyr, against others, whose Acts and writings we illustrated in vol. 1 of February, on the 1st day of that month, p. 13 and following, who, they said, had handed down the opinion opposed to ours in his epistle to the Philadelphians, one of the seven which, as we said in that same place p. 21, are most certainly known to have been composed by St. Ignatius. (The same Remigius Ceillier vindicates against certain hypercritics in his General History of sacred and ecclesiastical authors vol. 1, ch. 11, art. 2.) For, as the spurious and corrupted epistle to the Philadelphians stands, these words are imputed to St. Ignatius: I do not disparage … the other Blessed who were joined in marriage. For I desire, being worthy of God, to be found at their footsteps in his kingdom, like Abraham, and Isaac and Jacob .. and the other prophets; like Peter and Paul and the rest of the Apostles, who were joined in marriage, who had wives not for the sake of lust, but for the sake of raising up posterity. But in the Acts designated, §6, num. 50, mention having been made of the interpolations wrongly thrust into the Ignatian Epistles from elsewhere, we said that they are absent from the Florentine codex, and that so many blemishes are elsewhere gathered into the epistle to the Philadelphians alone, rightly to be struck out, that it has been made larger by one part of itself.
[6] Next, that fabricated fragment concerning the marriage of Paul and of the Apostles is there corrected thus: who from the epistle of St. Ignatius, bishop and M., All of which had been inserted by the fraud of marriage-seeking Greek clerics, who, when they began to retain wives along with the priesthood, took Paul and the rest of the Apostles as their associates in defense of their own incontinence, as Baronius, Massutius, and others cited above have observed. After these, other interpolations in the same epistle are pointed out and corrected. Hence I conclude that the argument drawn from the corrupted epistle of St. Ignatius, bishop and martyr, is of no force for proving St. Paul's marriage, and consequently that St. Phoebe was not his wife. Ussher in the Dissertations which he prefixes to the epistles of St. Polycarp and St. Ignatius published by him, ch. 17, discussing the passage on the marriage of Paul and the Apostles in what he calls the additions to the epistle to the Philadelphians, so greatly assailed by Catholics, collected many things against Catholic writers, by which he strives to prove that mention of Paul and the rest of the Apostles is made among the married in ancient copies of the epistles of St. Ignatius. But what then? Granted indeed that it is so read in them; does it follow from that, that it ought so to be read, and that it was so read in the original copies? How then did the holy Fathers, who handed down the contrary, not see those things? How did Ussher himself not see that this passage is of untrustworthy authority, he who concludes his Dissertation with these words: That Paul lived a celibate I am sufficiently persuaded from that profession of his own, 1 Cor. 7, 7, 8: “I wish all men to be as myself”. And: “I say to the unmarried and to widows, that it is good for them if they so remain, even as I”.*
[7] & from Clement of Alexandria they wish this; The other argument which was brought forward for the marriage of the Apostle just named rests on the testimony of Clement of Alexandria, bk. 3 of the Stromata, p. 210 of the edition of the year 1592: Peter, they say, and Philip begot children. Philip moreover gave his daughters also to husbands. And Paul indeed certainly does not scruple in a certain epistle to call his own consort her whom he did not carry about with him, because he had no great need of her service. And so he says in a certain epistle: “Have we not power to lead about a sister, a woman, as also the rest of the Apostles”? But these men indeed, as was consonant with a ministry that could not be torn asunder, attending, namely, to preaching, led women about not as wives, but as sisters, who were to minister together with them among the women who kept the houses; through whom also the teaching of the Lord could enter into the women's quarters without any reproach or evil suspicion. Thus Clement of Alexandria.
[8] but wrongly: since St. Ambrose and holy But I answer that it is not sufficiently clear to me what can be made out of the testimony of Paul adduced, 1 to the Corinthians, ch. 9, ℣ 5, in favor of wives, concerning whom we spoke above, since the Apostle there by no means speaks of wives, but of women who, out of a pious affection for religion and love of the faith, followed the Apostles, and supplied them with expenses and services. And this interpretation is that of the holy Fathers. Let St. Ambrose be heard on the passage of the Apostle just cited: Women, he says, out of desire for the Lord's teaching, and eager for the virtues, followed the Apostles, ministering to them both expenses and services, just as they also followed the Savior, ministering to him out of their own means. To this Doctor of the Church add St. Jerome in his Commentaries on chapter 27 of Matthew, ℣ 55, on these words, And there were there many women etc., writing thus: It was a Jewish custom, and by the ancient usage of that people it was not reckoned a fault, that women should furnish their teachers with food and clothing out of their own substance. Because this could cause scandal among the nations, Paul records that he put it away. For he himself says: “Have we not power to lead about sisters, women, as the other Apostles do”?
[9] The same holy Father, in book 1 against Jovinian, vol. 4 of his Works edited by Martianay, Jerome column 167, says: But if he should urge this against us to prove that all the Apostles had wives, “Have we not power to lead about women, or wives”? (because γυνὴ among the Greeks signifies both) as the other Apostles and Cephas, and the brethren of the Lord; let him join also that which is in the Greek codices: “Have we not power to lead about sisters, women or wives”? From which it appears that he spoke of other holy women, who according to the Jewish custom ministered to their teachers out of their own substance, as we read was done for the Lord himself. For the very order of the words signifies this: “Have we not power to eat and to drink, or to lead about sisters, women”? Where, since eating and drinking, and the supplying of expenses, come first, and sisters, women, are brought in afterward, it is plain that not wives ought to be understood, but those, as we have said, who ministered out of their own substance.
[10] to that opinion. Which also is written in the old law of that Shunammite woman, who used to receive Elisha, and to set for him a table, and bread and a candlestick, and the rest. Or certainly if we take γυναῖκας as WIVES, not WOMEN, that which is added, SISTERS, takes away WIVES, and shows that they were sisters in the spirit, not consorts. Although, with the exception of the Apostle Peter, it is not manifestly related of the other Apostles that they had wives: and since it is written of one, and passed over in silence concerning the rest, we ought to understand that those were without wives of whom Scripture signifies nothing of the kind. Rightly therefore does Theodoret call our Saint the minister of St. Paul, and her renowned and celebrated; but by no means his consort.
AnnotataThe Vulgate, omnes vos*.
§ II. The Saint's virtues, the office of deaconess, her praises from St. John Chrysostom; whether she was a widow or a virgin, the time of her life.
[ ] The Saint's ministry among the people of Cenchreae St. Paul, in the epistle to the Romans cited above, says of our Saint: who is in the ministry of the church which is at Cenchreae: where you see that her office is not concealed by him, so that from this too he may make his commendation more acceptable to the Romans. But what was this pious Woman's ministry of the church, that is, among the congregation of faithful Christians which was at Cenchreae? I judge it to have been that, namely, of which the same Doctor of the gentiles makes mention in the first epistle to Timothy, ch. 5, ℣ 10, where, writing of widows, he speaks thus: If she has received guests, if she has washed the feet of the Saints, if she has ministered to those suffering tribulation, if she has followed after every good work. Theodoret, bishop of Cyrus, on that passage of the Apostle just adduced, If she has washed the feet of the Saints, notes this: For this they did of old. So also Lydia (Acts 16) received the Apostle himself, and those who were with him. So also he said of Phoebe: “She has assisted many, and myself as well”. And this the same Theodoret declares at greater length, and confirms with a notable eulogy of this holy Woman, writing on chapter 16 of the Epistle to the Romans, and transmitting her good works to posterity with full mouth: Cenchreae, he says, was a very large village of Corinth. It is right, therefore, to admire the power of the preaching (of St. Paul). For in a short time it filled with piety not only the cities but also the villages, and so great was the congregation at Cenchreae that it even had a woman as minister, and one renowned and celebrated.
[12] For she had such wealth of good deeds, distinguished by various virtues: that she gathered praises of this sort from the Apostolic tongue. For she also has assisted many, and myself as well. And he said "assisted," as I think, because she was hospitable toward him, and took care of him. And he repays her with manifold praises. For she, as is likely, had received him into a single house, and for a brief time, that, namely, in which he stayed at Corinth. But he opened to her the whole circle of lands, and the Woman has been made celebrated over the whole earth and sea, nor have the Romans and Greeks alone come to know her, but all the barbarians too. This from Theodoret concerning the ministry of St. Phoebe, and the praises bestowed on her for it by the Apostle. Let us now consider whether, from St. Paul's expression indicating that she was engaged in the ministry of the church, other things in the same office may not be considered from the Greek text.
[13] to which more probably That text has οὖσαν διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας; and on the word διάκονον Toletus, cited before, has noted not a few things. On p. 660 and the next following he reports this: Origen and Chrysostom affirm that it pertains to a certain dignity, which (our Saint) exercised by the authority of the Apostles. For the explaining of which matter it must be noted that there was formerly a certain order of deaconesses, as is evident from Clement of Rome, as he is called, and from other ancient Doctors, of whom no use now appears to exist in the Church. Their ministry Clement explains in various places: for in bk. 8 of the Apostolic Constitutions (which are circulated under that name), ch. 28, he has this: “A deaconess does not bless, nor does she do any of those things which presbyters or deacons do, except that she guards the doors, and ministers to the presbyters when women are baptized, and that for the sake of decency and propriety”. So Clement. And in bk. 2, ch. 26: “Let no woman,” he says, “approach the bishop or a deacon without a deaconess”. Bk. 3, ch. 15. These deaconesses were sent by the bishop or by a deacon to the houses of women, to avoid the scandal of the gentiles, and they were employed in the baptism of women for the uncovering of their bodies and for anointing them. But St. Epiphanius in his Exposition of the Catholic faith, vol. 1 of the Works edited by Petavius, p. 1104, restricts the office of deaconesses to a single use; but he perhaps names this one wishing it to be understood as the chief one. Here is his text: Deaconesses are employed for this one use, that they may be attendants for the sake of women's decency and propriety, if perchance that should be necessary, whether while they are to be initiated by baptism, or while their bodies must be examined.
[14] office Let us return to Toletus, who from the author of the Apostolic Constitutions adds this: In bk. 3, ch. 19, he says on p. 661, they served women who were sick. Of this kind were the ministries of these deaconesses; concerning whom Ignatius in epistle 12, which is to the Antiochenes — wrongly, as others affirm, ascribed to Ignatius: “I salute,” he says, “the guardians of the sacred vestibules, the deaconesses in Christ”. For women were, at the time of the Sacrifice, shut off in certain places, separated from the men, and the vestibules and doors of these places the deaconesses watched. That Phoebe obtained this ministry is probable, and Origen and Chrysostom signify it: for women of this kind were chosen by the Apostles or by bishops, whose qualities Clement also describes. Theodoret on 1 Timothy 5 explains this ministry, as we have said in the commentary; see what was said at the beginning of this paragraph. And perhaps this was joined to that ministry: for on both accounts she was called a minister. Thus far Toletus: whose opinion concerning the twofold ministry joined in St. Phoebe — the one, namely, by which she exercised the virtues described above from St. Paul, 1 Timothy 5, ℣ 10; the other, by which she discharged the office of deaconess — is as thoroughly probable as it is honorable to the Saint.
[15] of deaconess was joined. It is well to bring the Fathers in here. Origen on the epistle to the Romans, ch. 16, ℣ 1: This passage teaches by apostolic authority that women too are appointed to the ministry of the church. In which office Paul, with great praise and commendation, follows out Phoebe as placed in the church which is at Cenchreae, enumerating also her illustrious deeds, and saying: That she so far assisted all — that is, was at hand in their necessities — that she assisted even me myself in my necessities and Apostolic labors with the whole devotion of her mind. And he called her work like the hospitality of Lot, who, while he always received guests, deserved at last to receive angels as guests. Likewise Abraham too, while he always ran to meet guests, deserved that the Lord also with angels should turn aside to his tent. So this religious Phoebe too, while she assists all and serves them, deserved to assist and serve the Apostle as well. And therefore this passage teaches two things alike: both that women are held (as we have said) to be ministers in the church, and that such women ought to be taken into the ministry as have assisted many, and through good offices have deserved to attain even to Apostolic praise. St. John Chrysostom in his Homily on the epistle to the Romans here seems to attribute to the holy Woman the dignity or office of deaconess. See, he says, how greatly the Doctor of the gentiles honors her: for he mentions her before all others, and called her sister.. He adds a dignity also, calling her minister.
[16] The remaining things which the Apostle adds concerning St. Phoebe, in order to press upon the Romans a still greater commendation of her, St. John Chrysostom her outstanding endowments St. John Chrysostom expounds thus in the same place: “That you receive her in the Lord, as becomes Saints”. That is, for the Lord's sake, that she may enjoy honor among you. For he who receives for the Lord's sake, even if he receive one who is not great, receives him with solicitude. But since she was holy, consider with what regard she was worthy to be treated. Therefore he adds, “as becomes Saints”: such as it behooves us to receive. And on a twofold ground she is worthy to be cared for by you, both that she is received for the Lord's sake, and that she is holy. “And that you assist her in whatever business she may have need of you”. Do you see how careful he is not to be burdensome? For he did not say, that you set her free; but that you bring what shall be in your power, and stretch out a hand, and in those things wherein she has need of your help — not in whatever condition she may be, but in those things wherein she has needed your service; if she is in need in those things wherein you can help. Then an unspeakable praise follows: “For she also has assisted many, and myself as well”. Do you see his prudence? First praises, then in the middle the exhortation, afterward again praises he has set, enclosing on both sides the offices to be rendered with praises of the blessed Woman.
[17] adorns her with a splendid eulogy, as does Menochius also. For how is she not blessed, who is celebrated by so great a testimony of Paul, who was able to help him who corrected the whole world? For this was the crowning point of her virtues: and therefore he set this last, saying, “and myself as well”. What is that, “and myself as well”? To the Preacher of the World, to him who suffered so many and so great things, who suffices for men without number. Let us therefore, both men and women, imitate that Saint. Menochius, from these words she has assisted many, in Greek προστάτις ἐγενήθη, she was a PATRONESS or SUPPORTER, gathers that Phoebe was of no contemptible authority in her own country: of which a conjecture can also be taken from this, that she was setting out for Rome on the business of affairs: for this seems too great a thing to suit a woman of low estate. Some teach that those were formerly called προστάτας who were chosen to receive men into the hospitality of their house and into their protection, and that the same were also called προξένους, such as it is highly probable there once were among Christians. Phoebe may have been of this number, to whom that saying of the Apostle would apply, “If she has received guests, if she has washed the feet of the saints”.
[18] Whether she was a widow or a virgin: the time of her death. It seems to me more likely, however, that this holy Woman was a widow than a virgin. For although the way to the office of deaconess lay open to virgins also, I nevertheless believe that this happened more rarely under those first beginnings of the newborn Church, in which that saying of St. Paul the apostle was still so recent, 1 Timothy 5, ℣ 9: Let a widow be chosen not less than sixty years old, who has been the wife of one husband. In what year St. Phoebe died is hidden from me. I read indeed that the epistle to the Romans was written in the year 57 or 58: whence it follows that the Saint was then certainly alive; but whether and how long she afterward survived I have not ascertained; and for that reason I have placed her death after the middle of the first century. On the occasion, moreover, of this holy Deaconess there is prefixed to this Volume a historical Dissertation on the deaconesses of the Church, in which I have attempted to gather and elucidate, for the benefit of the curious reader, what may be desired on this subject.