Notes
The Pauline Epistles
Ignatius1 letters) argue convincingly that the inhospitality of Diotrephes described in 3 John includes not only his unwelcoming attitude toward travellers, but also his exclusion of certain community members from the local meeting. They observe that Diotrephes' exclusion and reception of members is best explained if he was the host of a house church. This insight helps to explain why it was important for the community that bishops be hospitable: its viability probably depended to a great extent on the willingness of bishops to receive members into their homes.
Further, it is notable that management (προί<ττασθαι/προστήναι) of the bishop's own household is linked with management of the church (1 Tim. 3:4-5). It seems likely that proper management of the household is linked with successful oversight of the house church because both overlap; the host is not only householder but also bishop and the success in one occupation has direct implications for success in the other.121
Summary This brief review of the Pauline evidence indicates that the Graeco-Roman household played a central part in the establishment, growth, and leadership of the early church. The evidence for leadership by house-church hosts is more direct in the genuine epistles, but even in the pseudonymous letters, where it is more circumstantial, a similar pattern emerges. During Paul's lifetime and after it, the household shaped the identity and governance of communities established by him. There were, of course, patterns of leadership other than the type offered by householders. But it is probable that such patrons carried out important administrative tasks which contributed to them prevailing over other possible patterns. The host who possessed the wealth and initiative to invite the church into his or her own home had important leadership responsibilities, probably occasioned by the patronage he or she offered. This discussion provides a general setting in which to place the social descriptions and assumptions of the documents treated in subsequent chapters.
Notes 1 See Kümmel, 1975, pp. 250-387 for discussion of dating and authorship problems of the various books ascribed to Paul. We will assume this list as a datum of New
Testament scholarship, recognizing that these topics continue to be debated.
2 Rowland, 1985, pp. 109ff, 75f.; similarly, Nickelsburg, 1985, pp. 73-91.
3 Meeks, 1983, pp. 84ff ; idem., 1972, pp. 44-72 with reference to the Johanning community; Tidball, 1983, pp. 106f.
4 Scroggs, 1975, pp. 1-23.
5 Elliott, 1981, pp. 73f; MacDonald, 1986, pp. 46fF.; also Esler, 1984, pp. 83-108, who employs Wilson's sect typology in his analysis of Luke-Acts; Wilde, 1978, pp.
47-70, who employs it (in an unsatisfactory way) in his discussion of Mark.
6 Wilson, 1961, p. 1; Elliott, 1981, p. 75; see also Wilson, 1982, pp. 89ff. for a more detailed discussion, 7 Meeks, 1983,pp.85f.
8 Elliott, 1981, pp. 76f.; MacDonald, 1986, pp. 49, 54f.; cf. also Meeks, 1983, pp. 85,
169.
9 Wilson, 1973, p. 22.
The Social Setting of the Ministry 10 Wilson, 1982, p. 105.
11 MacDonald, 1986, pp. 54f.
12 Theissen, 1982, pp. 121-43, esp. 129f. For criticism see Malherbe, 1983, pp. 79f, but he agrees (p. 84) that social status probably exacerbated problems within the Corinthian community.
13 There is a plethora of material on this topic. What follows is a list of the chief works in which attention is devoted to New Testament house churches: Afanassieff, 1974; Banks, 1980; Brown, 1982; Elliott, 1982; Filson, 1939; Fiorenza,1983;
Gielen, 1986; Gnilka, 1982; Gülzow, 1974; Hainz, 1972; Holmberg, 1980a; idem., 1980; Jaubert, 1974; Judge, 1960a; 1960b; 1966; Klauck, 1981a; 1981b; Lemaire,
1974; Lieu, 1986; Ltihrmann, 1981; Malherbe, 1983; Meeks, 1983; Petersen, 1985; Rordorf, 1964; Stambaugh and Balch, 1986; Stuhlmacher, 1975; Theissen, 1982;
Verner, 1983; Wagner, 1949; White, 1985/86; Wiefel, 1970.
14 Malherbe, 1983, pp. 60-91, esp. p. 60.
15 Filson, 1939, p. 109.
16 Riddle, 1938, pp. 141-54; this position echoes earlier opinions: e.g., Hatch, 1888, pp. 430-46; Harnack, 1904, Vol. 1, pp. 219f.
17 For a discussion of Luke-Acts as a writing with its own theological interests and composed c. A.D. 80-100 see Barrett, 1961, p. 62; Esler, 1984; Haenchen, 1971, p.
164; juel, 1983, p. 119; Maddox, 1982, p. 9; Martin, 1986, pp. 95-112; O'Neill, 1961, p. 173; Tiede, 1980, p. 120.
18 Hock, 1980, pp. 26ff., and 1978, pp. 555ff. argues that Paul supported himself by means of his trade and used the workshop as his mission venue (e.g., the workshop of Prisca and Aquila — Acts 18:3) but he ignores the evidence of Paul in the household of patrons. It seems more likely that the apostle adapted his mission to suit the needs of the church; if Acts 19:9 is historically accurate, he may also have made use of a "lecture hall" (σχολή).
19 For προστάτις as patrona see Kearsley, 1985, pp. 124-30; Fiorenza, 1983, pp.
48-49; Meeks, 1983, pp. 60,79; Judge, 1960b, pp. 128f.
20 Theissen, 1982, pp. 27-67, esp. 46f.
21 It is unsatisfactory, as Strobel attempts to do (1965, pp. 91-100), to decide the question of what the terms οϊκος/οικία refer to by appeal to contemporary legal definitions. Gaudemet, 1969, pp. 312f., points out the nonuniformity in legal sources at this time, as does Theissen, 1982, pp. 83-87. Each case must be assessed separately. See also Weigandt, 1963, pp. 49-74.
22 White, 1985/86, pp. 97-127; cf. MacMuIlen, 1984, pp. 37f. (but he overemphasizes the role of daily contacts among the poor and ignores the evidence of movement from upper ranks downward in Christian writings contemporary with the later New Testament documents).
23 Judge, 1960b, pp. 59f.; cf. Meeks, 1983, p. 30.
24 White, 1985/86, p. 119.
25 Meeks, 1982, pp. 57-58; Malherbe, 1983, p. 77 (for Gaius and Crispus).
26 Filson, 1939, p. 110.
27 Ibid., p. 105; Meeks, 1983, p. 76; Klauck, 1981a.
28 A less ambiguous scenario of divisions between household conventicles is the description by Paul of the separation in Antioch of Jewish Christians from Gentiles for a common meal (Gal. 2:1 If.). Jewish and Genrile Christians probably met in separate households for their common meal or eucharist, but gathered together for other communal events; for a similar interpretation see Holmberg, 1980a, pp.
32f. Such divisions may have occurred in some communities even in the second
The Pauline Epistles
century (cf. Dialogue 66» where Justin alludes to Jewish-Christians who do not offer hospitality to their Gentile brethren).
29 Theissen, 1982, pp. 35f.; Grelot, 1974, p. 43; Holmberg, 1980a, pp. 70-72; cf. also
Stark, 1969, Vol. 4, p. 84.
30 Fiorenza, 1983, pp. 181f; Klauck, 1981. p. 30; Gülzow, 1974, pp. 201-202.
31 E.g., Klauck, 1981, p. 33; Holmberg, 1980a, pp. 103f.; Theissen, 1982, pp. 104f;
Meeks, 1983, pp. 75,76.
32 Klauck, 1981a, pp. 27f 33 The majority of scholars contend for a plurality of meetings (Banks, 1980, p. 38;
Gnilka, 1982, p. 25; Hainz, 1972, pp. 195, 346; Judge, 1960b, p. 37; Klauck, 1981a, pp. 35f.; Meeks, 1983, p. 75; Stuhlmacher, 1975, p. 71; Wagner, 1949, pp.
2ff.; among these, Klauck (p. 38) argues explicitly that in Corinth only one common eucharist was celebrated.
34 Klauck, 1981a, p. 21.
35 Gielen, 1986, pp. 109ff 36 For Romans 16 as addressed to the Roman church see Klauck, 1981a, pp. 24f.
Donfried, 1977, pp. 50ff., also presents a strong case for its inclusion in Paul's
Roman epistle. The objection that Paul's greetings reveal an acquaintance with Christians he could not possibly have had were they at Rome (since he had not yet been there), does not recognize the mobility of early Christians (especially Prisca and Aquila!). Even if he did not know those whom he greeted personally, such greetings would have had the effect of marshalling support for him among the Roman brethren. The textual evidence for a fifteen-chapter form is relatively weak and the inclusion of the sixteenth chapter provides the greetings typical of the ancient letter. For a highly speculative discussion of the emergence of the Roman church from a Jewish synagogal milieu to a setting of various house churches see
Wiefel, 1970, esp. pp. 75-81 and Judge and Thomas, 1966, pp. 81 ff., esp. p. 91.
37 For a discussion of the earlier literature see Countryman, 1980, pp. 1-18, who argues for the presence of the wealthy among the early Christians. Kautsky, 1925, p. 9 presents the traditional interpretation, but there were exceptions to this consensus: see e.g., Knopf, 1900, pp. 325-47, who argued for a minority of well-to-do
Christians in Paul's churches. Some scholars still insist incorrectly that all early
Christians were impecunious: e.g. Gager, 1975, pp. 93ff.; Lee, 1972, p. 126. The following is a select list of major scholars who argue that some members were relatively wealthy: Banks, 1980; Elliott, 1981, pp. 189f.; Grant, 1977, pp. 88, passim;
Gülzow, 1974, pp. 195f.; Hengel, 1974, pp. 60ff.; Holmberg, 1980a, pp. 103£; Judge, 1960b, pp. 49ff.; Kee, 1980, pp. 96-97; Klauck, 1981a; Malherbe, 1983, pp.
60ff.; Meeks, 1983, pp. 51ff.; Theissen, 1982, pp. 69ff.; Tidball, 1983, pp. 90ff.
38 Theissen, 1982, pp. 73f.
39 For the reliability of Acts concerning Crispus1 status see Malherbe, 1983, p. 73, n.
27.
40 See Theissen, pp. 73-75, for further discussion of the prosperity of synagogue rulers in this period.
41 Malherbe, 1983, pp. 73f., esp. n. 27.
42 Meeks, 1983, pp. 57-58.
43 See Bartchy, 1973, for detailed discussion and a similar conclusion.
44 Theissen, 1982, pp. 107-108; cf. Troeltsch, 1931, pp. 69-89; also Hengel, 1974, pp.
61 f.
45 Theissen, 1982, pp. 121-144, esp. p. 139.
46 Ibid., pp. 145-174, esp. p. 164.
47 Filson, 1939,p. Ill;also,Lemaire, 1974,pp. 65f.; Holmberg, 1980a,pp. 105f.
The Social Setting of the Ministry 48 Cited and numbered by Holmberg, 1980a, p. 101.
49 Ibid., pp. 101-102.
50 Elliott, 1981, pp. 189-90.
51 Brockhaus, 1975, pp. 7-94, summarizes the discussion in German scholarship of the last one hundred years and speaks of a consensus in regard to this. Contemporary examples of this interpretation can be found in von Campenhausen, 1969, pp.
55-76, esp. 58£, 70£; Greeven, 1952/53, pp. Iff.; Käsemann, 1971 and 1969; Schweizer, 1961, pp. 89-104, (7a-7o), esp. 102 (7m). For further literature and discussion cf. Holmberg, 1980b, pp. 192f. and Chapter Four below. The chief criticism of the interpretation of the problems mentioned in 1 Cor. 12 and 14 as indicative of a Pauline church order is that it overlooks the occasional purpose of these chapters. For further discussion see Brockhaus, 1975, pp. 210-18; Holmberg,
1980a, pp. 120f.
52 For these members as defined groups see Greeven, 1952/53, pp. 3-31.
53 The appearance of one article with the three participles κοπιώντες, προϊστάμενοι, and νουθεχουντες in 1 Thes. 5:12 probably indicates that these terms refer to various functions of the same role; see Meeks, 1983, p. 134;
Greeven, 1952/53, p. 33.
54 The term appears in a triad indicating roles of material. The term appears in a triad indicating roles of material helper; cf. Meeks, 1983, p. 135 (see also the footnote, p.
234) who translates the triad ό μεχαδιδούς... ό προϊστάμενος ... ό έλεών as "the donor," "the patron," and "the one who shows mercy." This triad also echoes to a certain extent the pair άντιλήμψεις — κυβερνήσεις in 1 Cor. 12:28, where "helps" probably implies material succour, Holmberg, 1980a, p. 100.
55 See Meeks, 1983, p. 234, n. 75 for further discussion and literature; also Brockhaus, 1975. p. 107.
56 It should be clear from this discussion that Greeven, 1952/53, p. 37 and Kertelge,
1972, pp. 125f. are incorrect to infer from 1 Cor. 12:28 that the reference to governance refers exclusively to prophets; prophets probably had some role in the guidance of the community, but in the daily life of the group individuals such as patrons and patronesses also had an important leadership role. For criticism of Greeven see Holmberg, 1980a, pp. 113-14, n. 90.
57 Meeks, 1983, p. 134; also, Rowland, 1985, p. 258; Petersen, 1985, pp. 296£ 58 1980a, p. 116.
59 Moberg, 1962, pp. lOOff. This model is also used by Tidball, 1983, pp. 123f.
60 Moberg, p. 119.
61 Ibid., pp. 119-20.
62 Holmberg, 1980a, p. 116; MacDonald, 1986, pp. 62ff.; cf. also Pesch, 1971, p. 446;
Martin, 1972, pp. 29f.; Schürmann, 1968, p. 331, n. 120; Goppelt, 1970, p. 92. We shall return to a fuller discussion of this in our treatment of 1 Clement.
63 For the final point see MacDonald's (1986, pp. 74f.) description of the variety of activities members such as Stephanas (1 Cor. 16:15,17) and Epaphroditus (Phil.
2:25-30; 4:18) undertake. One may add Prisca and Aquila who appear in different places at different times (1 Cor. 16:19; Rom. 1 6:3), but continue to invite the church into their homes. Gnilka, 1969, pp. 96ff., adduces Phil. 1:1 as evidence that by the end of Paul's life a collegium of bishops had already developed (cf. also
Martin, 1972, p. 26). But it is not clear that Philippians is one of Paul's later letters.
For further criticism see Brockhaus, 1975, p. 80.
64 Luke portrays Paul as appointing leaders (Acts 14:23), but it is probable that he is reading his contemporary church structure back into the earlier period; thus, e.g.,
Haenchen, 1971, p. 436; Käsemann, 1965, p. 86; Martin, 1986, p. 161.
The Pauline Epistles
65 Barrett, 1968, p. 395; Goppelt, 1970, p. 197; Roloflf, 1965, p. 134; Martin, 1972, pp.
27f.; Pesch, 1971, p. 444 argue against appointment by Paul; Ellis, 1971, p. 451;
Grelot, 1971, pp. 457Γ.; Hainz, 1972, p. 46 argue for appointment; Gnilka, 1968, p.
34 states that the question must be left open.
66 The interaction between Paul, willing individuals, and recognition by the wider community is discussed by Lemaire, 1974, pp. 67-68; cf. also Holmberg, 1980a, pp. 106-109.
67 Laub, 1976, pp. 34-35 speaks of "eine orginäre Unterund Uberordnung,"
68 Institutionalization will be discussed more fully in Chapter Four.
69 For further discussion of these variables see Budillon, 1971, p. 486; Martin, 1972, pp. 29, 33-34, 45; Grelot, 1971, pp. 454, 461-62; Pesch, 1971, pp. 444£; Gnilka,
1969, p. 103; Goppelt, 1970, p. 187; Barrett, 1968, pp. 24-25.
70 There is evidence that teachers had a permanent role in the local community (Gal.
6:6). But Acts 18:24-26, where house-church patrons are presented in a teaching role, suggests that the boundaries between these two groups may not always have been distinct.
71 Pesch, 1971, p. 446 comments on this basis that the function of members described as προϊστάμενοι (1 Thes. 5:12; Rom. 12:8) and carrying out functions of κυβέρνησις (1 Cor. 12:28) were the first to be subject to institutionalization; cf. also Hainz, 1972, p. 345-46; Brockhaus, 1975, pp. 107f.
72 For the appropriation of apostolic functions and authority by local leaders as time passed, see Hainz, 1972, pp. 349£; Jaubert, 1974, p. 27; Ellis, 1971, pp. 440£ and 1974, pp. 139-40. Note for example the use of συνεργός to describe the household leadership of Philemon (v. 1), Stephanas (1 Cor. 16:16), and Prisca and Aquila (Rom. 16:3), and the root κοπused to describe the contribution of Stephanas and his household (1 Cor. 16:16; cf. 1 Thes. 5:12) and Paul's missionary labour (1 Cor. 15:10; Gal. 4:11; Phil. 2:16).
73 Guthrie's (1963, pp. 282-94) arguments against pseudepigraphy in the New Testament are unconvincing; a more balanced treatment is provided by Kiley, 1986, pp.
17-35.
74 For Colossians as pseudonymous: von Campenhausen, 1969, pp. 53f.; Kertelge, 1972, pp. 132f; Kiley, 1986; Lohse, 1971; Lührmann, 1981, pp. 83-97 (argues on the basis of the Haustafeln); Meeks, 1983, p. 125; Schweizer, 1982. For Colossians as genuine: Bruce, 1984, pp. 28-33; Cannon, 1983, pp. 175ff.; Kümmel, 1975, pp. 340-46; Martin, 1974, pp. 32-41; Scott, 1958.
75 Kiley, 1986, pp. 38-73 summarizes the arguments; cf. also Lohse, 1971, pp. 177-83;
Schweizer, 1982, pp. 15-24.
76 Which document borrows from which has been debated but most accept the priority of Colossians; for further discussion cf. Goodspeed, 1933; Mitton, 1976, pp.
11 f.; Kiley, 1986, pp. 37f.
77 For Ephesians as genuine: Barth, 1974, pp. 36-50; Bruce, 1984, pp. 229-33; Scott,
1958, pp. 119-23. For Ephesians as pseudonymous: Goodspeed, 1933; Kümmel, 1975, pp. 357-63; Meeks, 1983, p. 126; Mitton, 1951; 1976, pp. 2-11; Sampley,
1971.
78 Thus, Schweizer, 1982, pp. 24-6; Meeks, 1983, p. 125.
79 Thus Goodspeed, 1933; Mitton, 1976, pp. 25f. Many who argue for Pauline authorship also argue for the "encyclical" nature of the letter: e.g., Bruce, 1984, pp.250-51.
80 For parallels between Ignatius's Eph. and New Testament Eph. see Schoedel, 1985, p. 37. For Ephesian origin see Goodspeed, 1933; Mitton, 1976, pp. 40£;
Barth's (1974, p. 51) view that it originated in Rome is unconvincing.
The Social Setting of the Ministry 81 Mitton, 1976, pp. 24-25; similarly, Kümmel, 1975, p. 366.
82 For a description and critique of scholars who argue for this position see Crouch,
1972, pp. 9-31, 83 Verner, 1983, p. 91; cf. also Crouch, 1972, pp. 144-45. A detailed discussion of this debate falls outside the scope of this thesis. For further discussion see Balch,
1981; Cannon, 1983, pp. 95-131; Crouch, 1972; Elliott, 1981, pp. 208-20; Sampley, 1971, pp. 17-28; Verner, 1983, pp. 83-125.
84 MacDonald, 1986, pp. 185-86; similarly, Klauck, 1981a, p. 96.
85 Kümmel, 1975, dates it c. 90-95 A.D.; Elliott, 1981, p. 87, places it between 73 and 92 A.D.
86 Elliott, 1981, p. 200.
87 Similarly, Klauck, 1981a, p. 66.
88 For MSS differences see Bruce, 1984, pp. 182-83; Lohse, 1971, p. 174; Schweizer,
1982, p. 241, who argue that the feminine form may have been changed by a later scribe.
89 Banks, 1980, p. 127-28; for further discussion see Fiorenza 1983, pp. 51, 177-78; for females in public secular office in this period see Kearsley, 1985, pp. 124ff;
Thraede, "Frau," MC, 297-69.
90 A plurality of meetings is assumed by several scholars: Bruce, 1984, p. 183; Lohse,
1971, p. 174; Schweizer, 1982, pp. 241-42 (admits possibility of whole community meeting in Nympha's house); Scott, 1958, p. 93; cf. also Klauck, 1981a, p. 46 who argues for different uses of the term εκκλησία in Colossians.
91 Malherbe, 1983, pp. 111-12, argues that the household setting probably assumed by the writer of 3 John, a letter roughly contemporary with Colossians and Ephesians, may also have been constituted by relatively informal house-church cells; also in favour of a more fluid, informal conception of house churches in this period is Wagner, 1949.
92 MacDonald, 1986, pp. 172ff.
93 MacDonald borrows the phrase from Brown and Meier's (1983, p. 72), description of Matthew's community.
94 Ibid., pp. 181f. This seems to be the result of allowing Brown and Meier's description of Matthew's community to shape her treatment of leadership in Ephesians unduly. She also overlooks the possibility of the reference to "pastors" and "teachers" referring to the same function (thus, Bruce, 1984, p. 348); the functions of bishop and teacher are combined in 1 Tim. 3:2.
95 Elliott, 1981, pp. 272f. arrives at a similar conclusion with respect to Silvanus (1
Pet. 5:12), whom he argues was a co-worker or delegate of Peter.
96 I am inclined to the former; MacDonald, 1986, pp. 175f, to the latter; decisions on this point rest on whether the similarities between Colossians and the greeting list in Philemon are purely the result of borrowing (thus, Lohse, 1971, pp. 176-77).
97 This is, in our opinion, the most one can claim for the position of delegates. The theory of Dix, 1946, pp. 255-74, that the office of apostle was subsumed by the episcopate, exceeds the constraints of the evidence. The strongest evidence which he puts forward for this is the reference to Timothy and Titus in the Pastorals, whom he asserts (p. 263) formed a "regional apostolate." But it is more likely that these two delegates, along with the rest of the persons mentioned in the greetings, are referred to as part of the pseudonymous fiction. This is a better interpretation than that which suggests that the references to Timothy and Titus represent a living recollection of arrangements in the seventies; Paul calls Timothy and Titus, together with other fellow-workers, to join him (2 Tim. 4:11, 13, 21; Tit.
3:12) — how "regional" could they have been? See also n. 105 below.
The Pauline Epistles
98 Cf. Ezekiel 34:7ff. For further discussion see Schnackenburg» 1977, pp. 418-41;
Nauck, 1957, pp. 201-9.
99 Mitton, 1976, pp. 15-17 notes parallels between Eph, and Acts 20.
100 For house-church hosts as administrators in 1 Peter, see Elliott, 1981, pp. 189Γ., passim. For the origins of the term έπίσκοπος and connotations of patronage and oversight in the Graeco-Roman world see Porter, 1939, pp. 103-12, esp. p. 105.
101 For presentations of these arguments see von Campenhausen, 1969, pp. 107£F.;
Easton, 1948; Gealy and Noyer, 1955; Grayston and Herdan, 1959-1960; Hanson, 1982; Harrison, 1921; idem., 1956; Karris, 1979; Kertelge, 1972; Kümmel, 1975, pp. 370£T; Metzger, 1958; Schweizer, 1961, pp. 77f.; Scott, 1957. Kelly, 1963, presents an unconvincing amanuensis hypothesis to defend Pauline authorship.
Guthrie, 1957, and Michaelis, 1930, also argue for Pauline authorship.
102 Von Campenhausen, 1951; Hoffmann, 1984, pp. 281 f.
103 For parallels see Schoedel, 1967, passim.
104 Thus, e.g., Harrison, 1936; von Campenhausen, 1951, p. 5; Hoffmann, 1984, ρ,
284; for criticism see Kümmel, 1975, p. 370.
105 For dating around 150 A.D. see von Campenhausen, 1951, p. 12; Gealy and Noyer, 1955, p. 349. These scholars argue that Timothy and Titus are reflections of monarchical bishops or metropolitans, but the fact that Timothy is spoken of as returning to Paul (2 Tim. 4:13) makes this interpretation unlikely; it is better to see references to them as fulfilling a more general function in the fiction of the writings; see Stenger, 1974, pp. 253f. for Timothy and Titus as literary symbols of the transmission of the tradition from the apostle to the contemporary community.
106 Easton, 1948, p. 20 (95-105); Hanson, 1982, p. 13 (100-105); Harrison, 1921, p. 81
(between 95 and 145); Kertelge, 1972, p. 141 (100); MacDonald, 1983, p. 54
(100-140); Scott, 1957, p. xxiv (100-25).
107 Verner, 1983, pp. 9Iff.
108 MacDonald, 1983, pp. 59f., puts forward a good case for a connection between the opponents described in the Pastorals and the oral traditions which the author of the Acts of Peter may have used; in the latter document the household is central to the identity and practice of the community. (Passages are listed in the chapter on Ignatius.) 109 A precise description of the organization of and interrelationship between overseers, deacons, and presbyters falls outside the scope of our discussion of this material. We shall address these issues in subsequent chapters. We are assuming that this community was organized along lines similar to that presented in the Shepherd and 1 Clement. This is consonant with Dibelius' and Conzelmann's
(1972, pp. 54f.) description of the community as led by a number of presbyterbishops with deacons as assistants — ail drawn from a pool of presbyters who were of higher status within the community, but not necessarily "official" leaders. We disagree with them, however, in their contention that the title πρεσβύτερος is derived primarily from contemporary Judaism. In our view, the presbyter-bishops were the hosts of the various house churches which constituted the local Christian community.
110 Verner, 1983, p. 151.
111 Ibid.,p. 133.
112 MacDonald, 1983, pp. 71 f.
113 Countryman, 1980, p. 181, n. 42.
114 Ibid., p. 167.
115 Dibelius and Conzelmann, 1972, pp. 8f., 39f.
The Social Setting of the Ministry 116 Ibid., pp. 40-41.
117 Ibid., p. 141.
118 For further discussion see Elliott, 1981, pp. 145f 119 Hatch, 1888, pp. 42-48 notes with reference to 1 Tim. 3:2 and Tit. 1:8 that the term "hospitality" refers to care for the homeless such as orphans, widows, and the poor with common funds, but he generalizes too much from later evidence to the earlier situation and he does not recognize the evidence which suggests that bishops were the church's more prosperous members. We agree that hospitality probably included these more particular acts of care, but we would add that it also involved the more general welcoming of the community into the home — a virtue which the wealthier householders were in a position to practise.
120 For wealthy women as patrons who invited members of the community into their homes see Padgett, 1987, pp. 19ff.; MacDonald, 1983, pp. 50f., 73f. argues convincingly for conventicles of widows residing in the homes of well-to-do women.
121 MacDonald, 1986, pp. 290f. comes to similar conclusions.