Yesterday, I spoke on Junia and Phoebe in our Heroines of the Faith series. Here is a summary and some additional thoughts on the topic.
Junia and Phoebe
If you were to look at the Bible and ask, “Who are the most significant women in building the New Testament Church?” what do you think the answer would be? Mary Magdalene? Mary, Mother of Jesus? Philip’s daughters?
In a way, all of them would be good choices. However, were I the one who answered the question, I’d be tempted to say “Junia and Phoebe.”
Who are they, and where are they mentioned in the Bible? That’s a good question. They barely show up. In fact of the entire New Testament, their collective presence takes up about 3 verses. But what is written in those verses reveal a lot when we know the ancient world.
Phoebe is a deacon in the church of Cenchrea
Paul calls Phoebe a deacon of Cenchrea. While it is true that the concepts of deacon we now have in Western churches are most likely the result of 2000 years of Christian social evolution, 2 things remain clear from Scripture. 1. Deacons were selected by leaders to help take care of administrative things (think the 7 deacons selected in Acts). 2. There were character requirements for anyone wanting to be a deacon. This means that whatever role deacons played in the early church, it was more than a mere volunteer position. It required godly character and being filled with the Holy Spirit. And though it didn’t presuppose the ability to teach, some were (as we see with Stephan).
There are other deacons mentioned in the Bible. In some instances the Greek term is translated “servant” while in others it is translated “minister.” A few examples are: deacon is mentioned alongside “overseers” in Phil 1:1, leading us to the conclusion that a deacon is an office in the church, not just someone who serves in general, which lines up with Acts. Epaphroditus is called a “deacon” in Phil 2:25. Epaphras is a “deacon” in Col. 1:7. Tychicus is a “deacon” in Col. 4:7. Phoebe is a “deacon” in Rom. 16:1-2.
The hang up is that some English version refer to Epaphroditus, Epaphras, and Tychicus as “ministers” and then refer to Phoebe as a “servant,” even though it is the exact same word in Greek. For all intents and purposes, to be faithful to the original language, (keeping Acts 7 and Phil. 1:1 in mind, “deacon” is used more intently as an office in the church than it is as a general term. Phoebe held the office of deacon in Cencrea.
Phoebe is the letter-bearer of Paul to Rome
Paul sent Phoebe to Rome as his emissary. She held an administrative position in the church at Cenchrea and was selected by Paul, above even the men of the church, to travel to Rome (a 7-day 1-way trip) to help them prepare for his coming. He gives the church her credentials along with instructions to care for her as they would any of his other emissaries. The language he uses is similar to the language used to instruct churches to deal with his other emissaries, like Timothy and Titus. There was something about Phoebe that qualified her above all others at Cenchrea which resulted in Paul sending her to Rome.
Phoebe was a “sponsor” to many
When Paul is listing Phoebe’s credentials, he refers to her as a “helper.” Some translations call her a “sponsor.” The term Paul used was that of a legal aid. In the non-Christian world of Rome, the term was used for those who advocated for foreigners. They were the ones petitioning the authorities for the well-being of foreigners. This was a position very similar to lawyers in our day. Phoebe had clout, administrative abilities, and a desire to help others succeed.
Some believe Phoebe was sent by Paul to organize a fundraiser either for Jerusalem relief or to prepare his launch into Spain. Phoebe had a unique set of administrative and leadership skills that Paul needed to come to the Roman church.
Junia was a well-known female apostle
A brief reading of the benedictions is Romans does not leave us with much regarding Junia. The language used is “Greet Andronicus and Junia, who are of note among the apostles.” It has been stated that the language allows for 2 types of readings: 1. Junia and Andronicus are well-known to the apostles (but not apostles themselves). 2. Junia and Andronicus are apostles and notably recognized as so. If we stayed on the linguistic level, we find ourselves at an impasse.
However, we have the testimony of John Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople at the end of the 4th century. Chrysostom, who lived in a clearly male-dominated church structure, said, “”Oh, how great is the devotion of this woman, that she should be counted worthy even to be called an apostle.”
Why is this important? Because Chrysostom was a native Greek speaker who was only removed from the source material by about 250 years. For us to call into question Chrysostom’s male-centered marvelling of a female apostle, we would have to seriously call into question our own ability to understand the words of both the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution. If Chrysostom was willing to admit a woman apostle existed in the early church, that is a powerful testimony to its reality.
Junia’s conversion to Christianity predated Paul
Junia could very likely have been among the 500 who saw Jesus resurrected (1 Cor. 15). They predated Paul, who converted shortly after the event. It would make sense that Junia and Andronicus would have been eye witnesses and therefore fit the criteria for apostleship. They were Jews (Paul calls them kinsmen), who may have been directly related to Paul. Their presence made a serious impact on the early church, as they were highly regarded by other apostles.
Junia was not Junias
Sadly, there are some English speaking theologians who so ardently held to their theological views over what is really scripture that they actively changed the gender of Junia to male by changing her name to Junias. This is evident in several English bible translations that were made in the early 20th century. The original Greek manuscripts and all earlier bibles, including Calvin’s Geneva Bible and the KJV retain the female spelling.
Yet, because the idea of a female apostle fit so far outside the interpretive constraints of 19th and 20th century theologians, they straight up changed Junia’s gender to fit their model. Since then, it has come out in greater research that nowhere in the history of the Greek and Latin language (outside Christian reference to Junia), has Junia ever been used as an abbreviated form for the male name Junias. In fact, if I remember correctly, Junias isn’t even a real name in the Roman world.
So that is a brief summary on the details regarding 2 of the most influential women of the New Testament. Their stories are limited to 3 verses at the end of Romans. However, their presence there leaves us with a bigger vision of what God’s church is up to and how divergent and radical it is from the world it was written in.
I’m curious to hear your thoughts. Let me know in the comments below.