Phoebe

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.

The 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.

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.