§ 13 Instructions for Widows ( 1 Tim. 5:3–16 )
§13 Instructions for Widows (1 Tim. 5:3–16)
The next two large sections, on widows and elders, now bring into specific focus instructions on how Timothy is to deal with the two problem elements in the church—the younger widows and the erring elders (probably the false teachers). Therefore, although the material is new, the letter has been moving toward these instructions right along. It will conclude, following these guidelines on the handling of specific cases, with a final, ringing exposure and condemnation of the false teachers (6:3–10) and a final exhortation to Timothy (6:11–16, 20–21).
This section on widows has long been one of the puzzling items in the letter. The problems are intrinsic. It begins and ends with concern about the care of widows. Yet in verse 9 widows are to “be enrolled” (RSV), and the description that follows in verse 10 has caused many to believe that there existed an order of widows who had prescribed duties and who in return were cared for by the church.
The greater urgency of the section, however, does not seem to be with the enrollment and duties of the older widows at all, but with the reprehensible activities of some younger ones. Indeed, the whole section basically presents two concerns: how to identify “real widows” (RSV) so that the church may care for them, and why the younger widows are not to be “enrolled” as real widows but should marry a second time.
A careful analysis of the whole indicates that the second matter is the more urgent. It is true that there is genuine concern that the “real widow” be cared for. The first paragraph begins and ends on that note (vv. 3–4 and 8), and it is brought up again at the end (v. 16). But the descriptions of these “real widows” in verses 5–7 and 9–10 stand in sharp contrast to the activities of the younger ones (vv. 11–15). Thus the real widow seems to be set up as an ideal in contrast to the young widows in much the same way that Timothy is in contrast to the false teachers (4:6–16; 6:11–16).
We have already suggested (see disc. on 2:8–15) that the probable reason for this concern about the younger widows lies with their relationship to the false teachers. If we are correct in identifying them with the “weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires” of 2 Timothy 3:6–7, then the unusual emphases of this section make good sense, not to mention its inordinate length compared with anything else in the letter.
5:3 / The section begins with the concern that the church give proper recognition to those widows who are really in need (lit., “honor widows who truly are widows”). The imperative give proper recognition to is not easy to translate, because in verse 17 the same noun implies some sort of remuneration, whereas in 6:1 it means simply “respect.” But the context of the whole section, finally clarified in verse 16, suggests that give proper recognition to in the sense of “caring for” is what is in view. Whether they are also to be recognized because they serve the church in some way is not so clear, but the commendation for good deeds in verse 10 would certainly allow it.
It must be noted that, even though this section has ultimately been shaped by the activities of the younger widows, the care of genuine widows is indeed a real concern. Such concern has deep roots in the OT (e.g., Exod. 22:22; Deut. 24:17, 19–21; Job 29:13; Ps. 68:5; Isa. 1:17) and very early found a place in the church as well (Acts 6:1–6; 9:36, 39, 41; James 1:27). The urgency here, however, is not to exhort the church to care for widows but to give guidelines to determine who qualifies for such care.
It is likewise too restricting to translate “who truly are widows” (repeated in vv. 5 and 16) as who are really in need. The addition of the qualifier “left alone” in verse 5 and the argument of verses 4–8 make it clear that her being a true widow means at least that she is all alone and in need, that is, that she has no family to support her. But it is equally clear that the “real widow” is one who is godly, given to prayer.
In the final analysis there are two classes of widows who do not qualify: those who have family and friends to care for them (vv. 4–5, 8, 16) and the younger widows of verses 11–15.
5:4 / This sentence gives the first qualification for identifying who are not “real widows,” namely, those who have children or grandchildren. This verse, as well as verse 8, is directed toward widows’ families, to remind them that caring for parents is their first order of business. Such care for parents and grandparents is eusebein (see disc. on 2:2; 3:16; 4:7–8): It is to put their religion (“godliness”) into practice. As with the overseers and deacons (3:4–5, 12), so with the community as a whole; genuine Christian behavior begins at home with their own family (oikos, “household,” as in 3:4–5, 12, 15).
The next clause, and so repaying their parents and grandparents, refers of course to a widowed mother or grandmother. This clause itself stands as a kind of appositive to the preceding one, so that it spells out how the children are to put their religion into practice—by repaying the earlier care they themselves have received. Such “repayment” of a parent or grandparent is pleasing to God, which is almost certainly a reflection on the fifth commandment.
5:5–6 / The next two verses give the second qualification for the “real widow”—she must herself be a godly woman. Although the sentences are descriptive, they are also clearly directed toward the widows themselves. Verse 5 begins, “Now the real widow” (NIV, the widow who is really in need), “being one who has been left all alone.” It thus ties what is about to be said to verses 3 and 4. The “Now [Gk. de] the real widow” picks up the words of the opening imperative (v. 3); the phrase “being one who has been left all alone,” meaning to be left without family at the death of her husband, reflects the widow whose case does not fit verse 4.
But such a widow must also be a woman who puts her hope in God. This language is obviously appropriate to widowhood, but more, it reflects the language of the psalms, where the poor (which includes widows) place their trust and hope in God. In this case her hope in God is found as she continues night and day to pray and to ask God for help. The words to pray and to ask for appear in 2:1 as the first two in that list. The words night and day, which reflect the Jewish understanding of the day (cf. Gen. 1; 1 Thess. 2:9), reinforce the concept of praying continually. The remarkable way this passage coincides with the description of Anna in Luke 2:36–38 leaves one with the distinct impression that what is given here is a kind of ideal for widowhood, similar to the ideal for Christian womanhood in 2:9–15.
Such an impression is strengthened by the contrast in verse 6. The true widow is a trusting, prayerful woman, who, contrariwise, does not live for pleasure. This verb, found also in James 5:5, regularly implies self-indulgence of all kinds and seems to fit the further description of the younger widows in verses 11–13. A woman such as these, Paul says, is dead (i.e., spiritually) even while she lives (the precise opposite of John 11:25).
5:7 / The urgency of the situation brought on by the behavior of the younger widows causes Paul at this point, immediately following verse 6, to exhort Timothy to give the people these instructions. The following purpose clause, so that no one may be open to blame, seems to limit these instructions to what has been said to the widows in verses 5–6, not to the families in verse 4. This is further supported by the fact that it occurs here, not after verse 8, and that the word “blameless” (NIV, not open to blame; the same word that began the list of overseers’ qualifications, 3:2) refers to the kind of behavior spoken to in verses 5–6. An even stronger word of judgment to the families will follow in verse 8.
Thus, even though the thrust of the whole paragraph (vv. 4–8) is to define “genuine widows,” who are to be “recognized” by the church, this sudden imperative to Timothy to “charge” (same word as in 1:3, 5, 18) the widows with these instructions so that they might be “blameless” suggests very strongly that the problem lies here. Compare the similar urgency and the solemn interruption in 5:21.
5:8 / Before continuing these instructions for the widows themselves, however, Paul returns once more to the children and grandchildren of verse 4—this time to pronounce judgment on anyone who fails to provide for his relatives. In so doing, he has created a chiastic (ab ba; see note on 3:16) structure in this first paragraph:
a words to the relatives (v. 4)
b words to the widows (v. 5)
b′ judgment on disobedient widows (vv. 6–7)
a′ judgment on disobedient relatives (v. 8)
Thus the “but” that begins this verse in the Greek text goes back to verse 4.
The combination his relatives, and especially for his immediate family (lit., “his own household”) is particularly emphatic about family members living under one’s own roof. It perhaps suggests that someone in the believing community (cf. v. 16) was neglecting or turning over to the church the care of a widowed mother or grandmother. Such dereliction is tantamount to having denied the faith. One is hardly prepared for such a strong word of judgment for this kind of behavioral lapse. However, the next words, and is worse than an unbeliever, gives us the clue. It fits with the concern expressed throughout the letter (see 2:2; 3:1–7; 5:14; 6:1) that Christian behavior be circumspect before the outsider and therefore at least be ethically equal to theirs—although obviously more is expected as well. Paul is not condemning unbelievers; on the contrary, he is saying that they do in fact take care of their own widows. To do less is therefore to be less than an unbeliever; it equals a denial of the faith, since it is to act worse than a person who makes no profession of faith.
The second paragraph (vv. 9–16) of this section adds a new dimension to what has been said, and at the same time also helps to clarify some of the items in verses 4–8. Here we learn that a “genuine widow” is to be put on the list of widows, provided she has met further qualifications of godly living (vv. 9–10). Then the widow given to self-indulgent living (v. 6) is exposed in detail (vv. 11–13), with instructions for her to remarry (v. 14). Verse 15 makes it clear that all of this was very existential for the church and therefore is not a “church manual” on “what to do with widows in the ongoing church.” A final word is added (v. 16) to bring the other urgent matter—genuine concern for widows—into focus also.
5:9–10 / The language of this sentence is what has generated much of the debate over this material. First, Paul speaks of putting a widow on the list of widows. The verb put on the list may be a general term (“count among”) or a more technical term for “enrolling” or “enlisting” in some kind of official list. Second, Paul gives three qualifications: she must be over sixty, have been faithful to her husband, and be well known for her good deeds, five (or four) of which are then appended.
Some see this as indicating that there was by this time in the church an official “order of widows,” who were expected to perform the “duties” of verse 10 and would in return be cared for by the church. But that seems to ask too much of what is actually said in the text, as well as to read far too much into the second-century evidence called in for support (see note). Furthermore, it seems to miss the greater concern of the paragraph, namely, verses 11–15.
More likely what is happening here reflects Paul’s twofold concern: to establish further who shall be “counted among” the “genuine widows” to be cared for by the church; and to set these women in contrast to the younger widows who follow. In so doing, he is not so much setting up duties in verse 10—indeed, the Greek text hardly allows such an interpretation—as he is arguing that she must already (probably before as well as after her husband’s death) be well known for her good deeds.
That she must be over sixty probably reflects the cultural norm both for “old age” as well as for the age beyond which remarriage would have been out of the question. The Greek construction translated by the NIV as has been faithful to her husband was translated as the husband of but one wife at 3:2. Although the former is certainly included, here the latter idea may be more appropriate. The cultural ideal of a widow who “has been married only once” is amply illustrated from literature and epitaphs (cf. Luke 2:36–37). Surely this ideal would include having been faithful to her husband, but for a widow such faithfulness would extend to exclude a second marriage. The fact that younger widows are counseled against this ideal hardly speaks against this interpretation (as Hanson), since they are already, for several reasons, being excluded from among the genuine widows.
Her reputation (lit., “having had witness born of her”) for good deeds includes four specific items, plus a generalizing conclusion (devoting herself to all kinds of good deeds; NAB, “In a word, has she been eager to do every possible good work?”). This last item suggests that the list is merely representative of her godliness, not definitive of her duties.
Included are: (1) A woman who has brought up children. That this should be included as a good deed reflects both a cultural and a biblical ideal for womanhood (see disc. on 2:15). (2) A woman who has shown hospitality. As with the overseer (3:2) and all other Christians (Rom. 12:13), she must also have a reputation for practicing hospitality. (3) A woman who has washed the feet of the saints (cf. 1 Sam. 25:41). As in John 13:17, it is not clear whether footwashing is intended literally or figuratively. Part of the difficulty is a general lack of knowledge of local customs. At any event it certainly would be the kind of thing that if done literally, as seems very likely, would also be an example of her humble servanthood. (4) A woman who has helped those in trouble. There is no way to know to what specifically this might refer. But it should be noted that these last three all reflect a woman of a generous and serving spirit. Such widows, alone in the world and full of good deeds, should be cared for by the church.
5:11–12 / But it is otherwise with younger widows; do not put them on such a list, basically for two reasons: They become wanton and do not wish to remain as widows (vv. 11–12); and, as widows, they do not live according to the model of godly widows (v. 13).
Although some of the details of this sentence (vv. 11–12) are difficult, the point seems clear enough. The younger widows are not to be “counted among” the “real widows,” first of all, because they will not remain as widows—their sensual desires make them want to marry. And despite verse 14, it seems equally clear that this desire to remarry is seen as a judgment against them. This is quite in keeping with the perspective of 1 Corinthians 7:8–9, 39–40, where remaining a widow is called for but remarriage is conceded, although without the rather harsh verdict of this passage. The greater problem here is to reconcile the apparent harshness of this sentence about remarriage with the unequivocal desire of verse 14 that they do remarry.
The clue seems to lie in two places: First, Paul really does see widowhood as a high honor. He would, with Luke, certainly applaud Anna, as he does the widows of verses 9–10. But secondly, he says that when their sensual desires overcome their dedication to Christ, they want to marry. One often tends to read verse 11 in light of a certain understanding of verse 12 that implies that their very wish to remarry is tantamount to abandoning the faith in some way. But what is actually said is that their desire to remarry tends to outweigh their devotion to Christ, to the point that they will allow sensual desire to supersede that devotion.
Although Paul does not say so here, one wonders whether the problem is not related to what he says in 1 Corinthians 7:39, where he concedes remarriage to Christian widows. She is free to remarry, he says, only “he must belong to the Lord” (GNB, “but only if he is a Christian”). What seems to be envisioned in the present passage is a remarriage that includes abandoning her faith in Christ; that is, her sensual desire is more important than her faith in Christ to the point that she would marry a nonbeliever in order to fulfill that desire.
By thus abandoning Christ in their wish to marry, they have broken their first pledge (lit., “incurring judgment because they have set aside the first faith”). Three options have been suggested for the meaning of this difficult clause: that the word pistis (“faith”) means “pledge” and has to do with her pledge to widowhood (like a vow of “celibacy” in joining the “order”; cf. Hanson), which she nullifies by wanting to remarry; that the word pistis means “pledge” but has to do with her “faithfulness” to her first husband and thus reflects her abandoning the ideal of being married only once (v. 9); or that the word pistis, as it does elsewhere in these letters, means “faith in Christ” or “the faith,” and her judgment comes in a kind of remarriage that has inherent in it an abandoning of Christ himself.
The first two options see the judgment in remarriage itself. Of these, the second is more easily reconciled with verse 14. Their desire to remarry is only one among other things (v. 13) that shows the younger widows to be going after Satan (v. 15). But Paul will in fact concede remarriage (v. 14) as the way of finally redeeming them, by thus allowing them to become women who will be well known for their good works, as the true widows have been. But all told, the third is probably the best option. Not only does it fit with the interpretation of verse 11, but it recognizes that the whole paragraph is concerned with redeeming these women for the “faith”—because some have already abandoned faith—rather than with simply getting them to see the fault in desiring to remarry.
5:13 / The second reason (hama de kai: “along with that they also”) for not counting the younger widows among true widows is that in their present singleness they are not doing what they should be doing (prayer, v. 5, and the good works of vv. 9–10), and they are doing things they should not.
First, they get into the habit of being idle (lit., “they are learning to be idlers”) and going about from house to house. This stands in direct contradiction to the good works of the real widows, whose activities are primarily centered in their own homes. Given the existence of house-churches and the nature of the problems in Ephesus, one wonders whether the problem here is simply that of wasting their own time, and that of others as well, or whether perhaps it involves a disrupting of the various worshiping communities.
Such a possibility seems to be supported by what is said next. And not only do they become idlers implies that not only are they doing nothing constructive but their activities are actually destructive. They have become gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to. The translation gossips (phlyaroi) is quite misleading, suggesting on the basis of “going from house to house” that they are involved in “idle talk about the affairs of others.” The Greek word, however, means to talk nonsense, or foolishness, and is used most often in contexts of speaking something foolish or absurd in comparison to truth. Thus, the young widows are described in terms very much like the false teachers, whose talk is foolish (1:6) and empty (6:20), and who are also saying things they ought not to (cf. 1:6–7; 4:7; 6:3–4). It is probably as the “idle” purveyors of the false teachings that they are busybodies, and thus this becomes one of the reasons they are to be in all submissiveness and not to teach (2:11–12).
5:14 / The activities of the younger widows in promoting the false teaching is also the best explanation for what now appears as contradictory to verses 11–12. Precisely because the behavior described in verse 13 stands in contradiction to the godly behavior described in verses 9–10 (so, “therefore,” in view of v. 13, perhaps also 11 and 12), the younger widows are now encouraged to emulate the good works of the older ones. But to do so they must marry, so that they may have children and manage their homes (cf. v. 10). The verb have children is the same word as in 2:15, by which the problem in 2:9–15 is finally resolved. Paul’s point is that by their giving attention to their true task, the satanically induced problems of the Ephesian church would tend to be brought to an end.
But does this in fact contradict verses 11–12? Not really. In verses 11–13, Paul was giving reasons why they should not be counted among the real widows—basically because they fail to meet the qualifications given in verses 9–10. Now he advises what young widows should do, since they are rejected as being “true widows.”
Nor does this contradict 1 Corinthians 7:39–40. There Paul said she is free to remarry (a believer), but it is better to remain single. Here he still holds that it is better to be single (5:9, 12), but the situation in Ephesus has now caused him to advise remarriage (again, as vv. 11–12 imply, to a believer).
As so often in this letter (see disc. on 2:2; 3:6; 5:8), the behavior encouraged by Paul in contrast to the false teachings is to give the enemy (or “adversary”) no opportunity for slander. Most likely this refers to Satan, although of course the slander is carried out through human instrumentality.
5:15 / The emphatic word order in fact already of this sentence indicates that we have now come to the urgency that called most of this section forth. This sentence also makes it clear that verses 11–13 are not simply hypothetical, as though Paul were saying, “This is what will most likely happen to young widows; therefore do not add them to the list.”
The problem is existential—and urgent. Some have in fact already turned away to follow Satan. As noted earlier (see disc. on 1:6), the language turned away recurs in 1 and 2 Timothy to reflect the situation there, both of the teachers and of those whom they have deceived. To describe such turning away as to follow Satan reflects what was said in 4:1–2 and what was implied of the women in 2:14.
5:16 / Having now dealt with the urgent problem of the defection of some of the younger widows, Paul returns a final time to the concern with which the section started—the care of the genuine widows. This sentence clarifies what was only hinted at before, that the church is to help those widows who are really in need (“the true widows”). In so doing he also repeats the substance of verses 4 and 8, that relatives should help widows in their own family so the church will not be burdened with them.
The surprising element in the sentence is the subject, if any woman who is a believer, rather than, “if anyone” (as in v. 8). So surprising is this term that some early copyists altered the text (thinking they were correcting it) to read “any believing man or believing woman.”
It is this kind of surprise that reminds one of how immediate the historical situation and the substance of the letter would have been for its original recipient(s) and how far we are removed from it, which leads to so many of our uncertainties (as is true in so many places in the NT Epistles). Possibly this feminine subject tells us that the problem behind verses 4 and 8 was a specific case of a younger widow of means rejecting the care of a widowed mother and/or grandmother. She would then be the “anyone” in verse 8. If so, then even the concern for the care of “genuine widows” was prompted by the activities of one of the younger ones.
The alternative would be that a wealthy Christian woman such as Lydia (Acts 16:14–15) or Chloe (1 Cor. 1:11) had already taken in widows as a part of her household (the words in her family are not in the Greek text). Paul would then be encouraging this to continue, so that the widows who need care by the church (as defined in vv. 4–10) would not need to include such widows already receiving care.
5:6 / A nearly identical expression about being dead while living occurs in Philo (On Flight and Finding 55) and is used by some as evidence of Philonic influence on the alleged pseudepigrapher. But such an idea is certainly not substantively Philonic. Indeed, it is found also in Rev. 3:1.
5:7 / The placing of this charge at such a point in the argument creates difficulties for those who deny Pauline authorship. Thus they must see it either as “a rather feeble connecting sentence” (Hanson) or simply fail to comment on it altogether (D-C). But like 5:21, the charge is such an urgent interruption, one wonders how a pseudepigrapher could have created it.
5:9–10 / It has sometimes been argued (e.g., Bernard) that vv. 3–8 and 9–10 refer to two groups: widows who are the recipients of charity and others who have official duties. The argument is that “the Church would not limit her charity to the needy by strict conditions like those of vv. 9, 10” (p. 81). But this argument misses the point of the whole section as well as puts too much weight on what is not certain—that an “order of widows” ministered in the church.
Kelly (p. 112) argues from statements in Ignatius (Smyrnaeans 13.1; Polycarp 4.1), Polycarp (Philippians 4.3), and Tertullian (On the Veiling of Virgins 9) that a ministering order of widows was fully developed in the second century. But none of these statements remotely suggests such a ministering order. To the contrary, the passages allude to their existence as a recognizable entity and reflect concern for their care, as does a similar passage in Justin (First Apology 1.67). Cf. the more cautious approach of Barrett (p. 74) and Lock (p. 56).
For a literary reference praising women who were married only once, see Seneca, On Marriage 72–77 (translated in J. P. V. D. Balsdon, Roman Women [Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1962], p. 208); for epitaphs, see M. Lightman and W. Ziesel, “Univira: An Example of Continuity and Change in Roman Society.”
Some (e.g., Kelly; cf. Hanson) want the term bringing up children to be a broader idea reflecting her duties, thus suggesting that it be translated “looking after children” and refer to caring for orphans. Likewise showing hospitality is argued to refer to a duty, “alongside the overseers (cf. 3:2), in the reception and entertainment of itinerant evangelists, preachers,” etc. (Kelly, p. 117). But that is to let the idea of “duties” determine the meaning of the text, and it fails to take seriously enough that this list reflects a reputation already gained through these kinds of good deeds.
The question of whether “foot-washing” had become a rite cannot be concluded one way or the other on the basis of the evidence available. The first clear reference to such a rite is found in Augustine, Letters 55.33.
5:13 / Both Kelly and Hanson point out that the word for busybodies is used in the neuter plural in Acts 19:19 as a euphemism for “spells” or “magic arts.” They make the interesting, but improbable, suggestion that this word is “discreetly veiled language” (Kelly, p. 118) for such incantations, and thus to talk of things they ought not to reflects the use of such formulas. Barrett’s and D-C’s suggestion, seeing this as reflecting the ideas of 2 Thess. 3:11, seems much closer to the mark.
5:16 / Despite the fact that the reading “the believing woman” is clearly the more difficult and better attested, the NEB, Moffatt, and Easton prefer the reading “Christian man or woman” (NEB). Such a choice assumes the words pistos ē (“Christian man or”) dropped out because a scribe’s eye jumped over these words to the similar pistē (“believing woman”). But the evidence for pistē is so early and so diverse that one would almost have to argue for such a phenomenon to have occurred more than once, which seems highly unlikely.